What are the best pieces of literature critiquing/refuting Libertarianism/AnCaps?

What are the best pieces of literature critiquing/refuting Libertarianism/AnCaps?

Other urls found in this thread:

web.archive.org/web/20140909105226/http://www.mises.org/journals/lf/1969/1969_06_15.aspx#3
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

There's nothing to refute, just take it to the ultimate conclusion:

"Suppose, for example, that A steals B’s horse. Then C comes along and takes the horse from A. Can C be called a thief? Certainly not, for we cannot call a man a criminal for stealing goods from a thief. On the contrary, C is performing a virtuous act of confiscation, for he is depriving thief A of the fruits of his crime of aggression, and he is at least returning the horse to the innocent "private" sector and out of the "criminal" sector. C has done a noble act and should be applauded. Of course, it would be still better if he returned the horse to B, the original victim. But even if he does not, the horse is far more justly in C’s hands than it is in the hands of A, the thief and criminal.

Let us now apply our libertarian theory of property to the case of property in the hands of, or derived from, the State apparatus. The libertarian sees the State as a giant gang of organized criminals, who live off the theft called "taxation" and use the proceeds to kill, enslave, and generally push people around. Therefore, any property in the hands of the State is in the hands of thieves, and should be liberated as quickly as possible. Any person or group who liberates such property, who confiscates or appropriates it from the State, is performing a virtuous act and a signal service to the cause of liberty. [!] Often, the most practical method of de-statizing is simply to grant the moral right of ownership on the person or group who seizes the property from the State."

[…]

"But how then do we go about destatizing the entire mass of government property, as well as the "private property" of General Dynamics [accused of profiting from war and government subsidies]? All this needs detailed thought and inquiry on the part of libertarians. One method would be to turn over ownership to the homesteading workers in the particular plants; another to turn over pro-rata ownership to the individual taxpayers. But we must face the fact that it might prove the most practical route to first nationalize the property as a prelude to redistribution. Thus, how could the ownership of General Dynamics be transferred to the deserving taxpayers without first being nationalized enroute? And, further more, even if the government should decide to nationalize General Dynamics (without compensation, of course) per se and not as a prelude to redistribution to the taxpayers, this is not immoral or something to be combatted. For it would only mean that one gang of thieves (the government) would be confiscating property from another previously cooperating gang, the corporation that has lived off the government."

Of course, given his positions on slavery reparations and corporations that profit from state intervention and state violence, it's surprising that he does not take the final step and declare that, in fact, ALL property previously accumulated, having been immorally appropriated through force and theft under a corrupt and criminal government, bought and sold in a market plagued and distorted by government intervention and monopolies, the whole system enforced by state brutality and unequal rights throughout history, ALL PROPERTY then, is illegimate and should be redistributed. He decided to stop short of this, probably because he realized his program would be indistinguishable from that of every hardline communist organization if he hadn't.

But he still makes it very clear that it is morally justified under libertarian values:

"Alan Milchman, in the days when he was a brilliant young libertarian activist, first pointed out that libertarians had misled themselves by making their main dichotomy "government" vs. "private" with the former bad and the latter good. Government, he pointed out, is after all not a mystical entity but a group of individuals, "private" individuals if you will, acting in the manner of an organized criminal gang. But this means that there may also be "private" criminals as well as people directly affiliated with the government. What we libertarians object to, then, is not government per se but crime. It is justice vs. injustice, innocence vs. criminality that must be our major libertarian focus."

Ah shit, I forgot the passage on serfs and slaves in the middle, before he starts talking about nationalizing General Dynamics

"One of the tragic aspects of the emancipation of the serfs in Russia in 1861 was that while the serfs gained their personal freedom, the land -their means of production and of life, their land was retained under the ownership of their feudal masters. The land should have gone to the serfs themselves, for under the homestead principle they had tilled the land and deserved its title. Furthermore, the serfs were entitled to a host of reparations from their masters for the centuries of oppression and exploitation. The fact that the land remained in the hands of the lords paved the way inexorably for the Bolshevik Revolution, since the revolution that had freed the serfs remained unfinished.

The same is true of the abolition of slavery in the United States. The slaves gained their freedom, it is true, but the land, the plantations that they had tilled and therefore deserved to own under the homestead principle, remained in the hands of their former masters. Furthermore, no reparations were granted the slaves for their oppression out of the hides of their masters. Hence the abolition of slavery remained unfinished, and the seeds of a new revolt have remained to intensify to the present day. Hence, the great importance of the shift in Negro demands from greater welfare handouts to "reparations", reparations for the years of slavery and exploitation and for the failure to grant the Negroes their land, the failure to heed the Radical abolitionist's call for "40 acres and a mule" to the former slaves. In many cases, moreover, the old plantations and the heirs and descendants of the former slaves can be identified, and the reparations can become highly specific indeed."

Anything written by Ayn Rand

The Ego and Its Own
Debt: the first 5000 Years
The Art of Loving

This is unironically the best attack against Rothbard's creation of property myth and muh human nature

But what if you can decide who will be your boss?

...

Just tell them that they are standing on the recognized sovereign territory of X country, and the conditions of occupying it are the payment of taxes. If they don’t like it they can go somewhere else, and thus as long as they voluntarily stay here they are voluntarily paying taxes.

A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years

t. Lysander Spooner

just apply this to bosses