“Market Voluntaryism”

Near the top of this blog I have a little description including the phrase “market voluntaryism,” which, when I decided on that phrase, a Google search turned up no references to that phrase. I decided on that because I don’t like some of the other phrases that describe the same thing.

Two of the other phrases are “market anarchist,” as used on Strike the Root, and “anarcho-capitalism,” as has been used to describe the philosophy of LewRockwell.com.

I don’t like the words “anarchy,” “anarchist,” and “capitalist” and “capitalism” (anymore), mainly because of the connotations associated with those words. “Anarchy” means “no ruler.” Each individual has a natural human right to rule one’s own life. And Sheldon Richman has addressed the origin, history and real meaning of the word “capitalism” many times now in the past year or two (see here, here, and here). Unless “capitalism” is preceded by “free market,” then to me, now, “capitalism” really refers to “State capitalism,” not free markets.

And regarding the word “anarchy,” I addressed that here:

This morning on his radio show, Glenn Beck was talking about being accused by Media Matters of either being an anarchist or suggesting that the Founding Fathers were themselves anarchists. He did say that he had stated that he and/or the Founders were “two steps above” an anarchist. But in his perhaps too-lengthy clarification of that, he was describing “anarchy” as (paraphrasing) “turning over cars and setting them on fire and shooting the police,” etc.

Beck is not correct on the real meaning of “anarchy.” It literally means “no ruler.” In the more modern era, we can say that anarchy is the absence of a State, or a formal government, or maybe even more precisely, an absence of a formal, organized compulsory government. Theoretically (and in some areas of the world, they have existed), communities can make their own governments, but not make them compulsory, only voluntary organizations. In my view, that does not make a State, because I (personally) define a “State” as a compulsory government that usurps control over all those within a particular territorial area.

When Beck describes “anarchy” as “turning over cars and setting fire to them and shooting the police,” that says nothing as far as whether or not there is an absence of government, compulsory government or a “ruler.” More accurately, “turning over cars and setting fire to them and shooting the police” is criminality. Destruction of property and harming of human life is criminality. Criminals, psychopaths, aggressors and property invaders and intruders do those things, irrespective of whether there exists a State, or compulsory government, or a “ruler.” However, we have seen that the State as it exists today and especially for the past century, and its agents have been the most egregious violators of life, liberty and property ever in World History. And that’s a fact.

My main problems with “anarchy” and “capitalism” are their connotations. To most people, “anarchy” means violent, chaotic lawlessness, because of which we need the State. But the truth is, it is because of the State, which is institutionalized violence, that we have widespread violence, chaos, and lawlessness.

People are going to have to some day face the fact that the State is an illegitimate institution that exists on compulsion, artificial, man-made monopoly by force, and relieves its agents from abiding by the rule of law and enables them to be above the law, allowing them to commit acts of physical aggression against others, theft, fraud and trespass with impunity.

This is not the way a civilized society can remain civilized, not when it institutionalizes uncivilized behavior to be committed by agents of the State. The State is the way to de-civilize society, and that is what has been happening.

The only way for a society to remain civilized is for it to be a voluntary society, in which no one may be permitted to commit acts of physical aggression (except in self-defense), theft or trespass, and the rule of law applies to everyone. No forced monopolies, no privileges granted to anyone at the expense of someone else at gunpoint.

And people’s right to trade with others will not be infringed. Voluntary markets and a voluntary society. And there don’t seem to be any negative connotations associated with those words, so that is why I am using the phrase “market voluntaryism.”

When Obama confiscates all the guns away from the people, and turns the military’s guns on the people, as is the case with central planning that leads to totalitarianism, then maybe people will finally understand the truly inherently criminal nature of the State, and why market voluntaryism is the way to a free, civilized society.