Man vs the State

[W]hoever desires liberty, should understand these vital facts, viz.: 1. That every man who puts money into the hands of a “government” (so called) puts into its hands a sword which will be used against himself, to extort more money from him, and also to keep him in subjection to its arbitrary will. 2. That those who will take his money, without his consent, in the first place, will use it for his further robbery and enslavement, if he presumes to resist their demands in the future. 3. That it is a perfect absurdity to suppose that any body of men would ever take a man’s money without his consent, for any such object as they profess to take it for, viz., that of protecting him; for why should they wish to protect him, if he does not wish them to do so?… 4. If a man wants “protection,” he is competent to make his own bargains for it; and nobody has any occasion to rob him, in order to “protect” him against his will. 5. That the only security men can have for their political liberty, consists in their keeping their money in their own pockets, until they have assurances, perfectly satisfactory to themselves, that it will be used as they wish it to be used, for their benefit, and not for their injury. 6. That no government, so called, can reasonably be trusted for a moment, or reasonably be supposed to have honest purposes in view, any longer than it depends wholly upon voluntary support.

– Lysander Spooner (1808 – 1887) –

No Treason No. VI: the Constitution of No Authority (1870)


Apa itu “Libertarianisme”? (Siri 1)

(draf awal)

Seringkali didengari salah kiraan masyarakat umum pada konsep “Libertarianisme” ini. Ada yang tersilap mentafsirkannya sebagai “libertinisme“, yakni satu falsafah yang mempromosi “hedonisme” dan kebebasan sosial mutlak individu daripada kekangan langsung kod-kod etika dan moral, yang diterajui penulis-penulis abad ke-17 dan 18 seperti penyair English John Wilmot dan penyair Perancis Marquis de Sade. Ada juga yang menyalah anggapnya sebagai satu bentuk falsafah yang menolak terus undang-undang dan norma di dalam konteks kemasyarakatan, dan terbit dari itu dakwaan bahawa Libertarian adalah atomisme, kepercayaan bahawa individu itu adalah terasing terus dari individu-individu lain. Ada juga yang mengecam golongan “libertarian” sebagai apologis dan boneka bagi puak elitis dan korporatis. Sebahagian yang lain pula menganggap Libertarianisme mendokong “ateisme” dan “materialisme” dan mahu berlepas diri dari sebarang bentuk kekangan moral dan agama. Walauapapun, bagi menjernih kekeliruan yang menyasar ini, haruslah bagi kita menerangkan di sini akan konsep dan definasi sebenar falsafah “Libertarianisme” itu.

Continue reading “Apa itu “Libertarianisme”? (Siri 1)”

Aggressor vs Protector

He who attempts to control another is a governor, an aggressor, an invader; and the nature of such invasion is not changed, whether it is made by one man upon another man, after the manner of the ordinary criminal, or by one man upon all other men, after the manner of an absolute monarch, or by all other men upon one man, after the manner of a modern democracy.

On the other hand, he who resists another’s attempt to control is not an aggressor, an invader, a governor, but simply a defender, a protector; and the nature of such resistance is not changed whether it be offered by one man to another man, as when one repels a criminal’s onslaught, or by one man to all other men, as when one declines to obey an oppressive law, or by all men to one man, as when a subject people rises against a despot, or as when the members of a community voluntarily unite to restrain a criminal.”

-Benjamin R. Tucker (1881-1908)-

The Relation of the State to the Invididual