« Friday Night is Music Night (Etta Edition) | Main | Good Food News »

Libertarians Have To Be Deniers - Monbiot - End of Argument.

Why libertarians must deny climate change, in one short take | George Monbiot | Environment | guardian.co.uk

....the procedural justice account of property rights. In brief, this means that if the process by which property was acquired was just, those who have acquired it should be free to use it as they wish, without social restraints or obligations to other people.

Their property rights are absolute and cannot be intruded upon by the state or by anyone else. Any interference with, or damage to, the value of their property without their consent – even by taxation – is an unwarranted infringement. This, with local variations, is the basic philosophy of the Republican candidates, the Tea Party movement, the lobby groups that call themselves "free market thinktanks" and much of the new right in the UK.

It is a pitiless, one-sided, mechanical view of the world, which elevates the rights of property over everything else, meaning that those who possess the most property end up with great power over others. Dressed up as freedom, it is a formula for oppression and bondage. It does nothing to address inequality, hardship or social exclusion. A transparently self-serving vision, it seeks to justify the greedy and selfish behaviour of those with wealth and power......

So here we have a simple and coherent explanation of why libertarianism is so often associated with climate change denial, and the playing down or dismissal of other environmental issues. It would be impossible for the owner of a power station, steel plant, quarry, farm or any large enterprise to obtain consent for all the trespasses he commits against other people's property – including their bodies.

This is the point at which libertarianism smacks into the wall of gritty reality and crumples like a Coke can. Any honest and thorough application of this philosophy would run counter to its aim: which is to allow the owners of capital to expand their interests without taxation, regulation or recognition of the rights of other people.

Libertarianism becomes self-defeating as soon as it recognises the existence of environmental issues. So they must be denied.

I'm not sure what George has given up for his New Year's resolution but I suggests he starts back on a medicinal dose of it ASAP.

I think his beef is with people recognising property rights. They are the most unfashionable rights to campaign for. There is no think-tank declaring their importance, though there should be. They are the one true foundation of prosperity and happiness. I beg no forgiveness for standing up for them. And that includes the right to demand compensation from anyone who harms my property in any way.
Isn't that what you want George?

Comments

Just try trespassing on, altering, or taxing Monbiot's property, and see what he says then.

"....the procedural justice account of property rights. In brief, this means that if the process by which property was acquired was just, those who have acquired it should be free to use it as they wish, without social restraints or obligations to other people."

Private property rights come with an obligation to respect the property rights of other people. Libertarianism is quite compatible with environmentalism provided the damage being done is provable and the culprit is identifiable. With environmental alarmism there are two problems - the first is proof, which when it comes to CO2 induced warming terror, is lacking. The second is who is the wronged party? Environmentalist and governments have set themselves up as guardians of mother earth, watch keepers for future generations, etc. They/that is not an actual constituency that is capable of appointing a proxy or a representative. They might as well claim to be representing God or ghosts.

Post a comment