Why I am a Libertarian and Anarchist, by definition

Written by Jeffrey Hann Category: Article Op ed Published: Thursday, 05 January 2017 11:38 Hits: 2491

 

 

Recently on Facebook I saw a question being asked by Being Libertarian to their audience in which they posted “A question for former liberals: what made you a libertarian?”. This gave me a chuckle (see below) and got me thinking as to what made me a libertarian and anarchist, and the path I took to get here…

 

I grew up throughout the 80’s and 90’s going through public school in Central Florida, scary, right?  When I was in grade school I was diagnosed with a learning disorder, Dyslexia, which caused me to have extensive trouble with grammar as a whole, so needless to say I hated all English and language courses I had during middle and high school. Over one summer during middle or high school (I forget) I spent time at a Sylvan Learning Center which helped me get caught up to passable, not saying much. Throughout the years, I avoided writing and any language as best I could. Many of the days and classes were skipped.

 

It wasn’t until I reached college Freshmen Comp I (B) and II (A) that I started to learn the technical and logical aspect of English and grammar that I never understood before. Since this time, I have focused a good deal of my time on improving my skills at writing and the technical structure of grammar. This was one a big step towards becoming a libertarian and anarchist.

 

My political views when growing up reflected mostly the product of my environment, center leaning “Republican” (air quotes). Even then nothing ever seemed correct or right with either choices I was told about, Democrats (the Left) or “Republicans” (the Right). Little did I know my education and grammar, on top of my issues, were tainted with misinformation by hundreds of years of work at the hands of sophists. I do feel like I was set up for failure, thanks government… This is still a reality for many.

 


 

A democrat is someone who follows democracy which is to rule or govern the common people by power and authority through division.

 

Democracy is where the majority make slaves out of the minority

– Jeffrey Hann

 

  • Democrat (n.) – 1790, "adherent of democracy," with reference to France, from French démocrate (18c., opposed to aristocrate), back-formation from démocratie (see democracy).
  • Democracy (n.) – 1570s, from Middle French démocratie (14c.), from Medieval Latin democratia (13c.), from Greek demokratia "popular government," from demos "common people," originally "district" (see demotic), + kratos "rule, strength" (see -cracy).
  • Demotic (adj.) – 1822, from Greek demotikos "of or for the common people, in common use," from demos "common people," originally "district," from PIE *da-mo- "division," from root *da- "to divide."
  • -cracy – word-forming element forming nouns meaning "rule or government by," from French -cratie or directly from Medieval Latin -cratia, from Greek -kratia "power, might; rule, sway; power over; a power, authority."

 


 

I was never a "liberal" (air quotes) or Democrat, the left are not liberals by definition, and the far right religious fanatics, those who were violent or spewed hate horrified me. Even if I couldn’t understand it I knew, and had a sense, that rights were being violated. Both sides wanted to control more than the other, us vs. them. The untold number of logical fallacies both sides displayed baffled me as a child even before I knew what the words logical fallacy meant.

 

  • Liberal (adj.) – directly from Latin liberalis "noble, gracious, munificent, generous," literally "of freedom, pertaining to or befitting a free person," from liber "free, unrestricted, unimpeded; unbridled, unchecked, licentious."

 

You cannot be a liberal while being liberal with someone’s money. When goods (product of your labor) is taken by force, that is theft and why taxation is theft. Taxes are taken by force and is a robbery of your liberty.

 

  • Theft (n.) – mid-13c., from Old English þeofð (West Saxon þiefð) "theft," from Proto-Germanic *theubitho (source also of Old Frisian thiufthe, Old Norse þyfð), from *theubaz "thief" (see thief) + abstract formative suffix *-itha (cognate with Latin -itatem; see -th (2)).
  • Thief (n.) – Old English þeof "thief, robber," from Proto-Germanic *theubaz
  • -th (2) – suffix forming nouns of action, state, or quality from verbs or adjectives (such as depth, strength, truth), Latin -tati-, as in libertatem "liberty" from liber "free").
  • Robber (n.) – late 12c., from Anglo-French robbere, Old French robeor, agent noun from rober (see rob).
  • Rob (v.) – late 12c., from Old French rober "rob, steal, pillage, ransack, rape," from West Germanic *rauba "booty" (source also of Old High German roubon "to rob," roub "spoil, plunder."
  • Plunder (n.) – "goods taken by force; act of plundering" 1640s.

 


 

Most who claim to be republicans are really not “republicans” (air quotes). A republican is someone who focuses on the state and happiness of the public which is shared by all, not someone who wants a government to control that state and happiness while excluding specific people who shares the public with them.

 

  • Republican (adj.) – 1712, "belonging to a republic, of the nature of a republic, consonant to the principles of a republic," from republic + -an.
  • Republic (n.) – from Latin respublica (ablative republica) "the common weal, a commonwealth, state, republic," literally res publica "public interest, the state."
  • -an – word-forming element meaning "pertaining to," from Latin -anus
  • Common (adj.) – from Latin communis "in common, public, shared by all or many; general, not specific; familiar, not pretentious."
  • Wealth (n.) – mid-13c., "happiness," also "prosperity in abundance of possessions or riches."
  • State (n.2) – from Latin phrases such as status rei publicæ "condition (or existence) of the republic." Note: does not mean government
  • Government (n.) – from Old French governement "control, direction, administration."

 


 

Before I can go over what made me a libertarian and anarchist we need to determine what those words actually mean.

 

Out of those who call themselves libertarians most are “libertarians” (air quotes). If they push for government in any way, then they are not libertarians, by definition. A libertarian is someone who holds the doctrine that each individual should be free from law and judgment and has the power to determine their purpose without a master and absolute ruler controlling them. Someone advocating for the control of others’ rights are not libertarians.

 

  • Libertarian (n.) – 1789, "one who holds the doctrine of free will" (especially in extreme forms; opposed to necessitarian), from liberty (q.v.) on model of unitarian, etc. Political sense of "person advocating the greatest possible liberty in thought and conduct" is from 1878.
  • Liberty (n.) – from Latin libertatem (nominative libertas) "civil or political freedom, condition of a free man; absence of restraint; permission," from liber "free" (see liberal (adj.)).
  • Freedom (n.) – Old English freodom "power of self-determination, state of free will; emancipation from slavery, deliverance;" see free (adj.) + -dom. Meaning "exemption from arbitrary or despotic control, civil liberty" is from late 14c.
  • Free (adj.) – Old English freo "free, exempt from, not in bondage, acting of one's own will," also "noble; joyful." Meaning "clear of obstruction" is from mid-13c.; sense of "unrestrained in movement" is from c. 1300.
  • -dom – abstract suffix of state, from Old English dom "statute, judgment" (see doom (n.)).
  • Doom (n.) – Old English dom "law, judgment, condemnation."
  • Will (n.) – Old English will, willa "mind, determination, purpose; desire, wish, request; joy, delight."

 


 

Nature’s default is anarchy and any deviation from anarchism is the product of the environment. In Nature, there is not one ruler as each species forms differently, e.g. wolves and dolphins.

 

Anarchism is a philosophy that advocates a state of people without rulers based around voluntary exchange and the idea that everyone is born with inalienable rights.

 

  • Anarchy (n.) – 1530s, from French anarchie or directly from Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek anarkhia "lack of a leader, the state of people without a government" (in Athens, used of the Year of Thirty Tyrants, 404 B.C., when there was no archon), abstract noun from anarkhos "rulerless," from an- "without" + arkhos "leader" (see archon).
  • An- (1) – privative prefix, from Greek an-, "not, without."
  • Archon (n.) – from Greek arkhon "ruler."
  • -ism – word-forming element making nouns implying a practice, system, doctrine, etc., from French -isme or directly from Latin -isma, -ismus (source also of Italian, Spanish -ismo, Dutch, German -ismus), from Greek -ismos, noun ending signifying the practice or teaching of a thing.

 


 

Rights should be protected regardless of where an individual comes from. If no crime has been committed, we should speak out against rights violations.

 

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

- Martin Niemöller

 

Side note: Recently, several prominent “libertarians” (air quotes) and “anarchists” (air quotes) have advocated for closed borders (cough, Liberty Hangout, cough) when you are in a welfare state (government forced welfare). Their claim is that you do not have a right to the freedom of movement, ever, so to maintain the government forced welfare borders must be closed.  If you notice above, the root definition of free has “unrestrained in movement” as part of the root definition. Freedom of movement is a right that all life gets after the right to life is established. You control your movements. Open borders do not violate this basic right (in a future article I will focus on rights in detail).

 

If someone advocates for violating the freedom of movement of the innocent, they are not a libertarian or anarchist, by definition. No victim no crime, right? If a crime has not been committed and someone is violating a right, then that person is a criminal. If someone advocates the violation of rights of the innocent they are no better than a government or statists.

 

Remember, there is no law too small that the government will not kill you over.

 

Being killed for traveling across an imaginary line, not laid out through maintained private property, is a massive violation of rights.

 


 

Now you might be asking where am I going with this. Well it has been my quest for a long part of my life to fix my learning disability and to be in the right. Who doesn’t want to be right all the time? So, what made me a libertarian and anarchist, by definition? It was the desire to fix myself and learning the Trivium Method of Critical Thinking, which is a way of thinking by focusing on grammar, logic, rhetoric, in that order. This process showed me how my grammar was and had been incorrect creating numerous logical fallacies (we all have them), throughout my logic.

 

Words can have multiple meanings, subjective, but if that is the case how can we interact without issues? We cannot since semantics gets in the way of understanding each other during communication. This leads to the conflicts we see today. Objective words, root definitions, provide factual evidence and a base of understanding when communicating with others. Objective words bring clarity to reality while subjective words cloud it.

 

Once I discovered this massive gap in knowledge I had, and the understanding that this was purposely taken away from the common folk, I quickly became a libertarian and anarchist using root definitions to words that you find above. By following this process, I can fix my logic, by removing the inherent contradictions whenever they are found, helping provide you the reader better logical and factual rhetoric.

 

Don’t be fooled by the faux labels people wear, it is not their nature but demeanor. Hold people accountable for the words they use, do not let them continue this pattern created by sophists.

 

This is why I am a libertarian and anarchist, by definition.