Author Topic: Μέτωπο Αναρχοκαπιταλιστικού Πολέμου  (Read 535 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.


  • Guest
Whereas greed, pride and arrogance are at the base of unjust discrimination, the driving motor of the egalitarian and identitarian trends is envy, jealousy2 and fear. “Nature” (i.e., the absence of human intervention) is anything but egalitarian; if we want to establish a complete plain we have to blast the mountains away and fill the valleys; equality thus presupposes the continuous intervention of force which, as a principle, is opposed to freedom. Liberty and equality are in essence contradictory.

Of all political labels none have been more frequently misused than the terms “liberal” and “democratic.” A liberal is a man or a woman who is interested in having people enjoy the greatest reasonable amount of liberty—and this regardless of the juridical type of government they are living under. It is true that the affinities between liberty and the various political forms are not identical; it is also true that while some political establishments show marked liberal trends they harbour nevertheless (through their dialectics) the danger of far-reaching enslavement. The fact remains that the true liberal is not pledged to any specific constitution, but would subordinate his choice to the desire to see himself and his fellow-citizens enjoying a maximum of liberty. If he thinks that a monarchy would grant greater liberty than a republic, he would choose the former; under certain circumstances he might even prefer the actual restrictions of a military dictatorship to the potential evolutions of a democracy. Thus any liberal accepting Plato’s evaluation of democracy (Republic, Book viii) would reject this form of government because, according to this philosopher, it is fatally doomed to develop into tyranny. In this whole discussion of liberty it should never be forgotten that the highest liberty—which is at one and the same time inalienable—is ascetic liberty.