• vvilld@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    You’re just factually wrong. The word ‘libertarian’ was first used to describe a political ideology in 1857 by the French Anarcho-Communist philosopher Joseph Déjacque specifically to differentiate his ideology from the mutualist anarchism of Proudhon.

    The term ‘libertarian’ took off in popularity in France in the 1880s when the French government began to suppress anarchist newspapers. They just switched to using the word “libertarian” rather than “anarchist” to get around the censor. This is exemplified in the weekly newspaper founded in 1895 called The Libertarian (Le Libertaire in French).

    The anarchists in the Russian Revolution and in the Spanish Civil War called themselves interchangeably ‘anarchists’, ‘libertarians’, and ‘libertarian socialists’.

    The term didn’t come to be associated with classical liberalism and right-wing ideologies as it is today until the middle of the 20th century. It was a specific attempt by right-wing American political philosophers who held an allegiance to Locke-style 18th century classical liberalism, but felt that the term “liberal” had become too associated with left-wing (within the American context) politics.

    Here’s a quote from 1955 from the libertarian writer Dean Russell:

    Many of us call ourselves “liberals.” And it is true that the word “liberal” once described persons who respected the individual and feared the use of mass compulsions. But the leftists have now corrupted that once-proud term to identify themselves and their program of more government ownership of property and more controls over persons. As a result, those of us who believe in freedom must explain that when we call ourselves liberals, we mean liberals in the uncorrupted classical sense. At best, this is awkward and subject to misunderstanding. Here is a suggestion: Let those of us who love liberty trade-mark and reserve for our own use the good and honorable word “libertarian.”

    Here’s a quote from the libertarian writer and philosopher Murray Rothbard from the early 1970s:

    One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy. ‘Libertarians’ had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over.

    Here’s a quote from Ronald fucking Reagan in 1975:

    believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism

    Modern libertarianism in the context of American politics is synonymous with classical liberalism and conservatism (up until the MAGA movement co-opted conservatism and just made it synonymous with fascism). But in the US prior to the middle of the 20th century, and outside of the US until much more recently, libertarianism was synonymous with anarchism and was very much a leftist ideology.

    • Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      Thank you for the summary, I got in a discussion on the same point some time ago, it seems that people who grew up in the USA culture associate libertarian and right wing in a very deep way.

      Id just like to add that in french nowadays, we have two words for libertarian : Libertaire for the left-wing anarchist meaning, and Libertarien for the USA right-wing version. Libertaire is still widely used by anarchists here, so there’s no reason it could not be the case in USA, though it will be a pretty tough challenge.

    • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      Your historical analysis is nicely summarized. But words change meaning, they always have. ,"Don we now our gay apparel"used to mean festive clothing. Well I guess it still does in a different way, wtf do I know lol. Carry on.

      • dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Queer used to be a slur (and still can be) and before that it had a different meaning, but it has since changed again to be reclaimed by those it was intended to hurt. Words change, of course, but that must mean they can change back too. I’m not saying we must take the word back, mind you, I’m only suggesting it. I personally think it’s a good idea but I’m not gonna make anyone who doesn’t want to do it. I also am very aware of the challenge to reclaim it, I only brought it up because it was relevant to the thread. Penn Gillette is most likely a left-ish libertarian and doesn’t even know it, but obviously no longer associates with the term for understandable reasons. I am wishing he didn’t have to abandon the term libertarian and instead wish American society was able to comprehend left libertarianism.

      • vvilld@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’m not arguing anything about the modern meaning. I’m providing historical context as to where the word comes from, and correcting the previous commenter who was asserting ‘libertarian’ had no connection to socialist political theory.

        • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          One could argue that many modern right wing libertarians are closer to anarchism than some of their left wing equivalents. Back when I was on reddit there was much discussion of what they called watermelons - green on the outside, red on the inside. Meaning they presented themselves as anti authoritarian but in reality wanted to use the power of the state to enforce their ideal version of societal freedom. There are also differences in how the words are understood today in different places - Europe, the US, other places in the world. I did commend your historical representation btw.

          • vvilld@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            One could argue that many modern right wing libertarians are closer to anarchism than some of their left wing equivalents.

            Only if you don’t understand what right-wing libertarianism is. It is 100% reliant on the state monopoly on violence and coercive authoritarianism.

            • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              Only if you paint with broad strokes. They are more diverse than that, and some are very anti government. The same is true of those more on the Left.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      I already addressed all of that in the other branch (its cool, you probably started typing that before I posted) but, the super short version:

      As you yourself acknowledge, the “libertarian” part of that is related to the “anarchist” part of “anarcho-communism” which came out of the anarcho-capitalist movements of the era.

      And, over the past 150 years or so, modern libertarians have continued to embrace ideologies of personal liberty that align more with the anarchist movements. Whereas modern socialists have largely decided that The State needs to provide for its people (with lots of arguments as to what The State should actually be).

      Insisting that “libertarianism” should somehow be used by socialists because they came from a similar root movement is like insisting that all socialists should ACTUALLY call themselves feudalists because you can draw a line from the various philosophers back to concepts from feudalism (and beyond). It ignores WHY different philosophies and forms of government were constructed but it sounds much better, I guess?


      And if the argument is that you consider yourself a libertarian because of your pseudo-anarchist leanings and don’t like that other people ALSO consider themselves a libertarian becuase of their pseudo-anarchist leanings… tough titties?

      • vvilld@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        My argument here is that when the term ‘libertarian’ was created it was specifically used by leftists to describe a leftist political ideology and the only reason it is not still associated with leftist politics is because right-wing conservatives very specifically and intentionally “stole” the term in the middle of the 20th century.

        Further, in the right-wing context, 'libertarianism" is synonymous with classical liberalism and conservatism. The idea that right-wing libertarians embrace the ideology of personal liberty is just plain horseshit. They embrace personal liberty for one person and one person only: themself. They want 0 personal liberty for anyone other than themself, and if you tell them they are not allowed to restrict the liberties of others, they take that as an attack on their personal liberty. Modern right-wing libertarian political “philosophy” is no more developed than the political ideology of a toddler.

        I don’t have any personal attachment or desire for myself or other leftists to use the term libertarian. The petulant children can have it.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          No. Right wing politics is 100% about “personal liberty”… for them.

          It is the problem with trying to implement theoretical socioeconomic and political models in reality. Because WE can all agree “nobody should be enslaved”. But… who actually WANTS to dive into the sewers to break up the fatbergs?

          Because personal liberties inherently conflict. You want to be free to let your dog roam wherever he wants. I want to be free to let my cat out on her catio without fear of neighbor dogs attacking her. Which of us get our personal liberty respected? And so forth in terms of religion and speech and choice of labor and so forth.