The Prospects of Neo-Feudalism (getting from here to there)

Economics, Politics, Philosophy, History and Culture
Forum rules
Always add something of value to the discussion and have fun. Mind your language, no porn, no libel, no trolling and no personal attacks.

Please note, views expressed on the forum do not necessarily represent the views of Mises UK. the Mises UK Council, Mises UK Faculty or Mises UK members. Membership of this forum is open to anyone world wide who is interested in civil discussion.
Post Reply
Millennial TM
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:36 am

The Prospects of Neo-Feudalism (getting from here to there)

Post by Millennial TM » Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:23 am

While this forum is ostensibly a libertarian hang out, I think it’s fair to say that most folks associated with “us” belong to a sort of ‘post-libertarian’ tendency (an ugly term that I don’t endorse). Call it neo-feudalism, neo-reaction, formalism, Hoppe-ianism, propertarianism, Tory anarchism,the Mises centre under Deist...basically Rothbard and Mises taken to their logical conclusion, all terrain is owned and arranged in a patchwork-like manner, with a complete absence of democracy and politics, with property ownership and absolute sovereignty intertwined, with the critiques of “soulless” beltway libertarianism from alt-righters and communitarians taken into consideration.

But where do we go from here? Is there any way that we can push the idea of “less federalism, more feudalism?” We are obviously so far off our mark that the battle is still an ideological one, but I don’t see how we can introduce these ideas into broader circles and beyond these very informative and interesting but otherwise unpractical conversations.

There is this idea of pan-secessionism that Keith Preston coined. This idea is that all secessionist and decentralise movements should ally together for the freedom to organise their own communities. While it lacks a propertarian ethos I do like this approach. The biggest secessionist movement in the US is the League of the South. Mimicking Keith’s method, I think our biggest comparable movement is The Celtic League. However, from what I know about this group and their allies (Cornish nationalists etc) is that their politics are very progressive and democratic. This of course also applies to the SNP, Plaid Cymru, Irish republicans, Catalonians etc.

There is also the English Democrats and the Campaign for an English Parliament. These are more right-wing but still very democratic and parliamentary. It seems like Rothbard has a similar situation in the 70s (60s?) with the anti-war movements. However, I don’t know that it worked and we can probably save time by learning from his mistakes. The far left groups he aligned himself with were of course not willing to stop at third world autonomy. Similarly KP has begun to disassociate himself from the various ethnic separatist movements he once supported as they have become more of a hindrance than an aid. My impression is that these leftist decentralisation type movements wouldn’t even be willing to work with us greedy capitalists and snobby pro-elitists.

Beyond this I’m rather lost. Beyond talk with “our” circles on forums and conferences, what’s the next step to actually create the changes that we want to see? I doubt a return to feudalism will even happen in my time, but still there must be something that can be done to steer the conve station in that direction.
"And be it indeed that I have erred, my error remaineth with myself"

User avatar
Physiocrat
Site Admin
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:25 am

Re: The Prospects of Neo-Feudalism (getting from here to there)

Post by Physiocrat » Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:27 pm

Whilst I'm not a supporter of absolute sovereignty of anyone in a geographical area (since under such a view an accidental trespasser could be legitimately shot and killed in daylight even if the owner knows he's no danger to him) I would certainly be in the camp you describe.

I think at least at the moment we can't form a proper grouping amongst secessionists for the reasons you state above - Keith Preston has had a hard time selling pan-secessionism. The C4SS think he's somekind of Nazi :roll:

Rather we just focus on perpetuating an idea that smaller groups can better solve their own problems even if they decide to go anarcho-syndalicalist. The Catalan secessionists would probably denounce us but we should still support them at least in regards secession. We want this idea to be in the air when another crisis comes as this is when people look for new ideas.

As an aside, we need to provide a theoretical solution to alledged global warming as this is one of the major issues that people think need to be solved an a global level. Defence services are in a sense a much easier conceptual sell.
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.

Yours sincerely,

Physiocrat

User avatar
Jon Irenicus
Posts: 162
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:36 pm

Re: The Prospects of Neo-Feudalism (getting from here to there)

Post by Jon Irenicus » Sun Sep 02, 2018 5:02 pm

I'm not post-libertarian, and agree with your descriptions of the term; at at the same time I have very little problem with neo-feudalism, and I also see a general move towards secession as a vital means towards working to an ideological paradigm shift. In a way, it is good for progressive groups to initiate the act of secession and detach themselves from relatively more conservative or otherwise right wing territories, particularly so in democratic states. This would be a boon to the US, for example. They may not be friendly to more capitalist territories but the harm they can do is limited, whereas in a democratic state it is magnified several times their actual strength.
Former overlord of the original Mises forum.

Millennial TM
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:36 am

Re: The Prospects of Neo-Feudalism (getting from here to there)

Post by Millennial TM » Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:26 pm

Physiocrat wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:27 pm
Whilst I'm not a supporter of absolute sovereignty of anyone in a geographical area (since under such a view an accidental trespasser could be legitimately shot and killed in daylight even if the owner knows he's no danger to him)
I'm not sure about this. Partly because I feel like any kind of center that could set such rules is an inevitably slippery slope towards federalism. I might be wrong, maybe there are some good historical examples. But the framers of the US constitution were no doubt genius, yet for all their securities the states would probably have been better off under a confederate system. Perhaps what you describe could be called confederalism, maybe that's what's needed here (and is probably easier to sell). But I think if trigger-happy murderers did own land that looks convincingly like the adjacent land (so much so that people don't realise they've crossed into a new jurisdiction), the place might gain a reputation very fast. The adjacent land is assumably open for anyone to walk through (as a lot of farmers allow for, ramblers etc) or belongs to somebody that our trespasser knows. If the guy with the gun is too stupid or cruel to demarcate his land clearly, surely the neighbors owning the adjacent land would be. I can imagine the market for "property maps" would rise fast. I can only imagine this to really affect the sort of ramblers that absolutely don't care where they go and are well aware that they might well be trespassing.
"And be it indeed that I have erred, my error remaineth with myself"

Millennial TM
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:36 am

Re: The Prospects of Neo-Feudalism (getting from here to there)

Post by Millennial TM » Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:24 am

Jon Irenicus wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 5:02 pm
I'm not post-libertarian, and agree with your descriptions of the term; at at the same time I have very little problem with neo-feudalism, and I also see a general move towards secession as a vital means towards working to an ideological paradigm shift. In a way, it is good for progressive groups to initiate the act of secession and detach themselves from relatively more conservative or otherwise right wing territories, particularly so in democratic states. This would be a boon to the US, for example. They may not be friendly to more capitalist territories but the harm they can do is limited, whereas in a democratic state it is magnified several times their actual strength.
It just seems as though progressive movements are so far from tolerating conservative or right-wing secession movements. I wouldn’t like to live in a religiously or ethnically homogenous society, but there are evidently that there are some people that would. I worry that support for progressive secessionists without reciprocity might help to strengthen the progressive, democratic worldview whilst stifling and suppressing the ideologies of various right-wing separatists.
"And be it indeed that I have erred, my error remaineth with myself"

User avatar
Physiocrat
Site Admin
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:25 am

Re: The Prospects of Neo-Feudalism (getting from here to there)

Post by Physiocrat » Tue Sep 04, 2018 9:39 am

Millennial TM wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:26 pm
Physiocrat wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:27 pm
Whilst I'm not a supporter of absolute sovereignty of anyone in a geographical area (since under such a view an accidental trespasser could be legitimately shot and killed in daylight even if the owner knows he's no danger to him)
I'm not sure about this. Partly because I feel like any kind of center that could set such rules is an inevitably slippery slope towards federalism. I might be wrong, maybe there are some good historical examples. But the framers of the US constitution were no doubt genius, yet for all their securities the states would probably have been better off under a confederate system. Perhaps what you describe could be called confederalism, maybe that's what's needed here (and is probably easier to sell).
What I have in mind is the sovereignty of the law itself - this does not necessarily imply a single centre which sets the rules, it could have multiple enforces of such a law. Historically speaking this essentially took place before any codification of law - people had an intuitive understanding of the law but needed judges to arbitrate whether the alleged offence actually took place. Secondly, the sovereignty of law is implicit in Rothbard. Radio waves from your transmitter physically trespass on other people's houses but Rothbard claims it is in many cases irrelevant since it doesn't interfere with the use of the property. Under an absolutist position you'd have to get the agreement of all property owners to transmit the signals. Also in Rothbard's vision, there are competing courts over arbitration but not over the list of legal offences and their punishments since that has been logically deduced in the Ethics of Liberty.
Millennial TM wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:26 pm
But I think if trigger-happy murderers did own land that looks convincingly like the adjacent land (so much so that people don't realise they've crossed into a new jurisdiction), the place might gain a reputation very fast. The adjacent land is assumably open for anyone to walk through (as a lot of farmers allow for, ramblers etc) or belongs to somebody that our trespasser knows. If the guy with the gun is too stupid or cruel to demarcate his land clearly, surely the neighbors owning the adjacent land would be. I can imagine the market for "property maps" would rise fast. I can only imagine this to really affect the sort of ramblers that absolutely don't care where they go and are well aware that they might well be trespassing.
That is likely to happen under absolutist sovereignty position.
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.

Yours sincerely,

Physiocrat

Post Reply