Today, I’m going to look at tolerance, particularly in the spheres of religion and politics. And I’m going to conclude that a world based on political and religious tolerance would be a far better place to live than today’s world of out of date, failing states and superstates.
This essay arose out of three recent posts at the Libertarian Alliance blog, all on or related to the subject of religious tolerance; by Keir Martland, Stephen Moriarty and Sean Gabb. For which, I thank all three; though I’m not replying specifically to any one of them. Continue reading
By Julian Rose
One knows to be on one’s guard immediately one hears that the USA and European Union are negotiating some ‘big deal’ on transatlantic trade. Sure, big deal – in trading terms – typically means big power, big money and big mess. But when one also hears that it’s all being done in secret, then one has to add ‘big scam’ too.
The designers of the trade agreements claim that they will bring greater GDP and more jobs at both ends; a view which has been widely challenged by those likely to be on the receiving end. Continue reading
On Left and Right, Libertarianism, and The Donald
By Keir Martland
20th September 2016
Permit me a long and rambling introduction. I spent much of August reading, and in some cases re-reading, the works of the distributists, particularly Hilaire Belloc [see my short essay on The Servile State]. The way distributism is often presented is as a “third way” between socialism and the current economic order. I say “the current economic order” because we don’t have laissez-faire capitalism and we are far from it. Rather, what we have is a dirty mixture somewhere between state control and state-privileged corporate control of the means of production and much else, which some call crony capitalism or corporatism. Continue reading
The Libertarian Alliance, being recognised as a charity by the tax authorities, is allowed to take, and takes, no view on any elections, in the United Kingdom or in any other country.
Therefore, if Ilana Mercer or some other person chooses to write in favour of Mr Trump’s campaign to become President of the United States, that must be regarded as a personal opinion. Its publication on this Blog is nothing more than part of our mission to encourage debate, within libertarian assumptions, on matters of public interest. The Libertarian Alliance itself remains absolutely indifferent whether Mr Trump or Mrs Clinton becomes the President in November.
This being said, and now speaking purely for myself, and not as Director of the Libertarian Alliance, if I were an American, I know which way I would vote. And I strongly hope that enough Americans will go out and vote for the only candidate even remotely likely to govern America in the interest of Americans, and to take a measured view on the nature and use of American power in the rest of the world.
I trust I have made myself clear.
The capitalist market system is defined by the strictures of wage labour relations and the regulatory mechanisms, which are the used for the valorisation of capital and the commodity production which maintains, expands and homogenises this valorisation. These are the inevitable products of capitalist exchange relations and the creation of a general equivalence in which generic commodities, produced by capital through the wage labour relation, are circulated. For the purpose of these exchanges (some of which maintain the manufacturing and production bases of the classes of capital, and others which engender the final movement of commodities into their form as consumables) markets are used as mechanisms of distribution and sale. The extent of capitalist relations becomes universalisable in such an homogenised, controlled system. States, through their capacity to regulate market transactions and mediate the class relations of wage labourers and the owners of the means of production, create regulatory apparatuses which engender the recreation and revaluation of capital through a series of metamorphoses where relations are changed, markets are restructured and the fundamental germ of capitalism, that of the dominance of capital and its control of the means of production, are maintained and even boosted. Continue reading
Migration Concepts in Depth: An Addendum to An Unchallenged Arbiter
By Chris Shaw
The major migration concepts which were defined in my recent paper An Unchallenged Arbiter have come under question. In particular, the concepts of xeno-racism, bonding and bridging capital, and the general framework of an Eriksen-defined multiculturalism have been questioned as a form of statist or academic leftism. I think it’s fair to clear up these definitions for greater clarity, and to frame them within my wider critiques of statism. Continue reading