Donor Matching Funds Announced!

A generous donor has offered to match all contributions dollar-for-dollar for the next $10,000 raised, doubling the impact of your donation and helping us reach our fundraising goal faster.

$13,590 of $60,000 raised

Libertarianism Must Be Exclusive

by | Jun 21, 2023

Libertarianism Must Be Exclusive

by | Jun 21, 2023

white and red no entry sign on a pole

White and red No Entry sign on a pole in a close up cropped view against a sunny blue sky

This Pride Month, like many before it, some libertarians are sharing the slogan “Liberty is Inclusive.” The slogan is meant to affirm the idea of equality, not only in the law, but also in how people treat one another outside of legal arrangements. Is this consistent with libertarian ethics?

No. Liberty is inherently exclusive, not inclusive.

The most consistent brand of libertarianism, Rothbardianism, holds that homesteading is the ultimate criterion for justice. Murray Rothbard comes to the conclusion that we own ourselves and any resources we first use or acquire voluntarily by virtue of homesteading. He expands on this theory of social ethics in his book Ethics of Liberty. Where does inclusion come into play? It doesn’t.

The principle of homesteading or first use establishes private property in oneself and property. This is an exclusive. Libertarianism thus starts from the premise of exclusion, not inclusion. Others can be legitimately included in the ownership of the resource after it is first used, but the first user must consent. If not, then the first user retains a full, exclusive right to said resource. We thus have a right to arbitrarily discriminate as to who is allowed to use our property, patron our business, and utilize our labor. We are free people, and what that means is that we are free from having our rights encroached on by others.

Does a gay couple have a right to the labor of a baker to make a wedding cake? No. Does a university have a right to silence speech that they don’t like? Of course. Should a pastor marry a gay couple? It’s up to them. To answer any of these questions to the contrary is to be opposed to liberty, but in favor of inclusion. If the inclusion fanatics were serious about inclusion, they should oppose libertarianism for that reason.

“Exclusion amounts to discrimination,” one might say. Yes, it does, but discrimination is a feature of every action one takes. You discriminate between various alternatives all the time. Should I have chocolate chip or vanilla ice cream? You discriminate when you decide on which to eat. Is there anything wrong with that? Not according to the private property ethic. The same goes for all other discrimination, regardless of what arbitrary characteristic is being used to discriminate. We may not like it, but it is completely consistent with private property and libertarian ethics. Economist Walter Block expounds upon this idea of discrimination more in his book The Case for Discrimination.

Let’s take a step back and examine what the value of inclusion means. If inclusion were our prime value, then we would affirm collective property as the necessary precondition of the world. Everyone has a right to everything and cannot be rightfully excluded from anything; however, we know this is both an economically and ethically untenable approach. Economically, it would create a tragedy of the commons. Ethically, it competes with the principle of first use that Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe have already established.

None of this is to say that inclusion should not be pursued voluntarily. As long as the includer includes others with his justly acquired property, there is no issue. But pursuing inclusion as the prime political value makes liberty instrumental; therefore, is invalid.

As libertarians, we must reject the “liberty is inclusive” mantra. It adds nothing to our political philosophy and jeopardizes private property, the real value we care about.

Benjamin Seevers

Benjamin Seevers

Benjamin Seevers is an economics PhD student at West Virginia University and holds a BA in economics from Grove City College. He was a 2023 Mises Summer Fellow. His research interests include private governance, public policy, and libertarian ethics. He blogs at Seevers Insights.

View all posts

Our Books

libertarian inst books

Related Articles

Related

Biden’s Blather and American Democracy Gone Awry

Biden’s Blather and American Democracy Gone Awry

Since late 2020, President Joe Biden has invoked “the will of the people” dozens of times to sanctify his power, including arbitrary decrees that were illegal or unconstitutional. Biden’s invocations did not prevent his re-election campaign from being terminated...

read more
A Temporary Calm in the South China Sea

A Temporary Calm in the South China Sea

After a particularly fraught period, complete with water cannons, near collisions, and an actual melee where a Filippino sailor apparently lost a thumb, things in the South China Sea look set to settle down following Manila and Beijing’s reaching of a "provisional...

read more
‘Extremist Material’

‘Extremist Material’

The South Australian police on the fourth of July arrested a thirteen-year old youth for possession of “extremist material." The content and nature of the material is unknown. The "autistic" boy was held in police custody; bail was set and his mother collected him,...

read more
TGIF: The Populist Trap

TGIF: The Populist Trap

If you care about individual freedom and general prosperity, you'll want to avoid all shades of populism like the plague. It is economic illiteracy proudly proclaimed and writ large. As an alternative to libertarianism, it is bad in its own right—freedom is not on its...

read more

Tariffs Violate Freedom

Debate goes on over who suffers from U.S. tariffs. Biden and Trump, for example, think U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods hurt China, not Americans. This is nonsense. Even if they hurt Chinese producers (who can sell their goods elsewhere), the tariffs still hurt...

read more

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This