Sen. Guingona III a Libertarian?
- NOTE: I first posted this note as a Facebook status.
Express your strong opposition on Facebook: Oppose the Orwellian Cybercrime Law
Sen. Teofisto Guingona III calls himself a ‘libertarian.’ I categorize him as a ‘libertarian minarchist’ as opposed to libertarian anarchist or anarcho-capitalist.
The anarcho-capitalists represent the dominant Libertarian group in the United States . A libertarian minarchist is someone who believes in limited government. An anarcho-capitalist calls for the abolition of government.
I am not a libertarian.
Here’s how Guingona III voted against the controversial Cybercrime law:
Mr. President, I would like to manifest that I am voting against the bill – mainly because of the provision that defines “cybersex”, [as] I do feel it smacks, runs directly in contravention of the constitutional principle of freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
It is a prior restraint. It legislates morality. It tells us what is moral and what is not moral.
And as a libertarian, Mr. President, I feel that is not within the realm of the legislature. No one has the right to say what is moral and what is immoral and impose it and it make it a crime.
Therefore, Mr. President, I vote against this because it is a prior restraint on the principle of the freedom of expression and freedom of speech. This bill sets us back. Here we are legislating morality. Hindi po puwede ito. Mali po ito, at this is unconstitutional.
Mr. President, the Spanish inquisition has long been disbanded. I do not know why we are reviving it today.
Thank you, Mr. President.
My take on Libertarian anarcho-capitalism:
Today there’s a need to save laissez-faire capitalism not only from the utilitarian mentality and mystical morality of the conservatives, but most importantly from the perverted political ideology of the anti-freedom Libertarians. And I believe that one of the men who can save libertarianism (not the political movement or the party) and free-market capitalism is the great Austrian economist himself: Ludwig von Mises.
Anarcho-capitalists, i.e. “voluntaryists,” are all products of the ethical subjectivist philosophy. Indeed, the ethical subjectivist philosophy has, as its logical conclusion, anarcho-capitalism. An ethical subjectivist, who is able to see his philosophy in full naked form, will envision a place where every single person can be their own government. Instead of having “Sovereign Nations,” sovereignty would be taken straight down to the individual level with Person A being his own government as opposed to America or Canada being their own government (they call this “Sovereignty of the Individual”). No other person would be allowed to “dictate” to Person A what government he can live under, as his individual choice is supreme.
The best argument against anarcho-capitalism must be grounded in metaphysics, epistemology and ethics. Anarchism is a contradiction in terms; it is a floating abstraction. It is the result of the Libertarian anarchists’ failure to identify the difference between anarchy and capitalism. Anarchism is all about the abolition of government, while capitalism is a political system that recognizes individual rights- man’s rights to life, liberty, property, and his pursuit of happiness. How can we guarantee man’s rights in a society that rejects order, objective laws, and basic rational principles?
In regard to anarcho-capitalism, this is not even a system; it is a LIE! Anarcho-capitalism is incompatible with Capitalism as it is incompatible with man’s freedom. Anarchism is a prelude to everything that man should fear, such as socialism, communism, fascism, and every derivative of collectivism. A rational man cannot survive in an anarchic society where there are no rational, objective rules and principles for man. You cannot put man’s fate at the mercy or generosity of a gang of savages who either harbor evil or altruistic agenda and who have mustered enough power to rule and enslave men who don’t have the capacity to protect themselves. In a free society, we need the aid and protection of a government with limited power. This is what Ayn Rand envisions, which is against anarcho-capitalism proposed by Murray Rothbard and his fellow anarchists. What we need is a separation of state and economy. In an anarchic society, there is no protection of contracts, intellectual property rights, individual rights, and mutual agreements between parties. This social system will only lead to barbarism and social chaos wherein power is within the reach of those who have the means to use force against other men.
It’s disgusting to observe how Rothbard hijacked the von Mises circle and the Libertarian Party. A person who rejects intellectual property right is the worst defender, no, the worst enemy of capitalism. IP guarantees that you own the product of your own mind and that you exercise the right of ownership over your property. There are attributes of property, such as possidendi (poessession), utendi (use), fruendi (fruits), abutendi (consume), dispodendi (dispose), and even the destruction of one’s property. Now just because a person embraces anarcho-capitalism, he cannot claim that these things that made the United States the greatest country on earth do not exist. The rejection of IP is tantamount to the enshrinement of communism, wherein all property, inventions and discoveries are owned by the people or the communal state. The IP and patent law are the reason why most scientists and inventors like Nikola Tesla migrated to the United States, the only country in the 18th century that respected man’s right to life, liberty and property.