If there is ever going to be victory against the State, then anti-Statists will have to work together in common cause. Affinity begins with reciprocal knowledge, it is not based on ideology. Socialism is used in any number of ways by a variety of people. Some socialists support State dominance of the means of production. However, public ownership of the means of production does not have to mean State ownership. I hear the cries of “tragedy of the commons” already.

The tragedy of the commons is known in non-capitalist circles as the “tragedy of the mismanaged commons,” however “managed” is not intended to suggest some sort of hierarchical control of the commons (as is the case with Statism). An alternative to having a manager is to have social sanction regulate behavior of the commons. Like everything else in life, this is not without pros and cons. When the number of people using the commons exceeds the number the human mind can have familiarity with, this gives people a measure of anonymity, which gives them the ability to abuse the commons without social sanction. This leads to the tragedy of the commons and its subsequent destruction. While it is difficult to know the exact number of individuals that the human mind can keep track of, it is generally thought that the number is between 100 and 200 persons. It’s called Dunbar’s Number.

The goal of anarchism is the peaceful coexistence of individuals within society. This implies some sort of ideological unity between people within a given society. The question of whether or not a society can exist without coercion has been asked for centuries and many models have been proposed. Even if we assume an anarchist society that doesn’t exceed the size of Dunbar’s number, and assume that social ostracism the primary means of the community to control its members, this social ostracism is still power. It’s not a question of if a sword is employed it is a simple matter of when and why. Libertarianism is about reducing conflict, but it cannot eliminate the need for violence altogether. Regardless of whether or not libertarianism is considered socialist or capitalist.

Libertarian socialists believe a wide variety of things. Some are collectivists, while others are individualists. Some advocate direct democracy (which is governance), and other’s advocate mutualism. Others are nihilists. It is simply inaccurate to lump left libertarians into one group, just as it is to assume that there is one concept of capitalism.

There are many different schools of thought within libertarian socialism. The platformists aim to make anarchist ideas central to other working class movements. The insurrectionists reject formal organizations such as labor unions, advocating small affinity group based organization. The syndicalists view unions as a strategy for workers in the current system to work toward an an alternative system with more democratic values. More recently, the post-left anarchists critique the traditional schools of thought, and their relationship with left-wing politics. Each has its merits and flaws. Learning from the struggles of others helps inform our decisions.

There are many common threads between the libertarian socialists and the anarcho-capitalists. There are individualists in both groups, and both are anti-State. Some libertarian socialists advocate markets, but distinguish it from capitalism, like the Center For a Stateless Society (C4SS). While anarcho-capitalism is ultimately at odds with libertarian socialism, this animosity need not prevent us discussing ways to end the State cooperatively. If we’re ever going to make progress we need to be willing to work with people that we don’t agree with. Before we can work with them we need to understand them.

If “libertarian socialism” is an oxymoron, so is “Libertarian Party.” It’s paradoxical to support politicians like Ron Paul. To the libertarian capitalist workplace hierarchy is tolerated as long as it’s voluntary. To the libertarian socialist “voluntary hierarchy” is an oxymoron. Ultimately “libertarian” is just a word. To some libertarianism is socialist. To others libertarianism is capitalist. The actions people take are more important than what they call themselves. All else being equal, a Voluntaryist who helps the poor is no better or worse than a Mutualist doing the same thing.

At the end of the day, the State is the common enemy. It is foolish to reject left anarchists out of hand without first learning what they advocate, and why they advocate it. Whether or not you agree with the libertarian socialist position, understanding their perspective can give you more tools to accomplish your goals. Instead of focusing on the differences between the two groups, why not focus on what they have in common? The State is the problem. What does either side gain from refusing to work together to bring it down?

And if you do not understand your ally the effectiveness of the team is lowered, or no team is ever formed. The State works through divide and conquer.

To continue progressing we must make an honest effort to understand one another’s perspective. It’s not about agreeing with each other. It’s about working effectively as a team. One thing is absolutely clear. There is a lot of work to be done. We have a very long road ahead of us.

Tags: insurrectionists, libertarianism, mutualism, platformists, Socialism, syndicalists