Hoppeanism

From Polcompball Wiki
Revision as of 22:57, 31 July 2021 by Alesjif (talk | contribs) (Editing a gallery)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Template:Shocking


Hoppeanism or rather Conservative Anarcho-Capitalism is a Culturally right-wing tendency within Anarcho-Capitalism which is putting emphasis on the importance of exclusionary behaviour (ostracism), communitarianism and the opposition to Democracy.[1]

Despite being named after the German economist Hans-Hermann Hoppe, the ideology itself can be said to have started before Hoppe with the founder of Anarcho-Capitalism, Murray Rothbard, as well as Lew Rockwell in the form of the Paleolibertarian movement (although generally distinguished from the wider movement by being fundamentally Anarcho-Capitalist, instead of just generally), Hoppe having done some changes, although these few changes were also recognized by Rothbard, making it tricky to call Hoppeanism an ideology of its own due to the fact that it overlaps with Rothbardian Anarcho-Capitalism almost entirely.

The ideology is prominent within and associated with the think tank Mises Institute (as such it's represented by it's symbol). Due to memes regarding the helicopters the ideology is associated with Neo-Pinochetism, although it is important to note that, despite this meme being quite popular among political communities, Hoppe and most thinkers associated do not actually favour throwing File:Soc.png Socialists out of helicopters merely favouring ostracism and/or exclusion from the property of the residents of certain "covenant community" (As he calls private communities).[2]

Beliefs

Argumentation Ethics

One of the inputs which Hoppe made to Anarcho-Capitalism, although also recognized by Anarcho-Capitalism's creator, Murray Rothbard as "a dazzling breakthrough for political philosophy in general and for libertarianism in particular"[3] is argumentation ethics, which could, in short, be defined as proof provided by Hoppe for the ethics of right-libertarian conception of property rights developed in 1988. It aims to prove that arguing against the right-libertarian interpretation of self-ownership (which extends the concept to include control of private property as part of the self) is not logically coherent. Although this, at first, could sound like something that would come to be a widely popular theory within Libertarian circles, the reception was mixed.[4]

To explain it briefly, Hoppe takes note that, to have an argument, one must presupose self-ownership and thus certain norms, such as, and being the main one, non-violence among the participants; these norms were named "a priori of argumentation" (APoA) by Hoppe.
Hoppe then says that, to argue against Anarcho-Capitalism, which he considers as the most pure expression of self-ownership, is to argue against self-ownership, thus one's proposition must be denying the fundamental presupposed propositions of argumentation denying their own self-ownership. Thus, if one argues against self-ownership then they're involved in a performative contradiction whith empties the argument of its meaning.[5]

Private Law Society

Following the teachings of Murray Rothbard, Hoppe uses Austrian economic theory to analyze the behavior of the state. He defines the state as the "monopoly over jurisdiction and tax collection within a territory" and assumes that it's only the personal interest of the functionaries of the state the reason why they utilize their monopolical privileges to maximize their own power and wealth.

To Hoppe, and many other Libertarians, especially within the Austrian tradition, a monopoly doesn't imply a big participation on certain market exercised by a corporation, but when there is lack of business freedom to enter certain market and produce certain good or service, as we can currently see with services such as law. Under this perspective, monopolies can't appear, at least by definition, on a completely free market since they're always the result of some state policy which bans the competition on a market or subsidizes competitors within certain markets.
Coercive monopolies are detrimental to consumers since prices tend to go up and quality tends to go down to those that could be found on a completely free market. Similar to Rothbard, Hoppe has conjectured that if the services now provided by the government could be provided by the free market, private insurances and law agencies would provide a better protection and more peaceful disputes resolution than the ones currently under the monopoly of the state.[6]

Among other things he has theorized in favor of secession of small city-states or microstates as being favorable to individual liberty, as a transition towards definitive privatization, which is to say, a society of private law, as Hoppe calls it, or Anarcho-Capitalism. He's also established which would be the criteria of contracts in a society of private right, especially regarding externalities and insurance/indemnities.

Monarchy over Democracy

In his book, titled as "Monarchy, Democracy and Natural Order," Hoppe contrasts and compares western Dynastic Monarchies against Democratic Republics. To Hoppe, a dynastic monarch (a king or queen) is technically the owner of the country, at least on their eyes, since property is passed generationally; on the other hand a president elected democratically is like a "caretaker" or a "lessee." Both the king and the president have incentives to exploit the country that they are in charge of in their self-gain, whether it's power, wealth, or both. The difference resides in the fact that the same way the owner of a house has inherent interest in maintaining the house's "capital value" (contrasting with the tenant), in a democracy, due to being temporal rulers, functionaries democratically elected have all the incentives to sack the wealth of the productive citizens as soon and as fast as they're able to, without caring of anything that might happen to the country as a whole, much less caring about what might happen after they're period in office is up.

In June 2005, Hoppe gave an interview to the German newspaper "Junge Freiheit," where he qualified monarchy, although he's not a monarchist himself, as a lesser evil compared to democracy, and said "Liberty over Democracy!". In the same interview, Hoppe also condemned the French revolution and said it belonged in "the same group of vile revolutions such as the Bolshevik Revolution or the Nazi Revolution" since they all had provoked "regicide, egalitarianism, democracy, socialism, hatred for religion, terrorist measures, mass looting, rapes, homicides, conscription, and an ideological and total war."[7]

Immigration

The opinion of Hans-Hermann Hoppe on immigration[8][9] has been controversial, to say the least, among Libertarian circles, since, traditionally, Libertarians defend liberty of movement as a key component of civil liberty and economic freedom. Hoppe has responded to these opinions by his critics, especially on the Left-Libertarian sphere, commenting in his book "Natural Order, The State, and The Immigration problem."

Another motive for the enthusiasm for open borders among modern Left-Libertarians is their egalitarianism. What got them into Libertarianism when they were young were the ideas of "anti-authoritarianism" and the aparent "tolerance" in particular towards "alternative" ways of life (non-bourgeois). Nevertheless, they have ended up stagnant in that phase of mental development once reached adulthood. They express special "sensibility" for any kind of discrimination as they find convenient, Left-Libertarians are living at the expense of others. They indulge in their "alternative" lifestyles without having to pay the usual price for such conduct, namely discrimination and exclusion. To legitimize such actions, they insist all lifestyles are equally acceptable. This leads first to multiculturalism, then to cultural relativism, and finally to “open borders”.[10]

This critique of Hoppe is based on the right of private property, by which legitimate residents of certain community have the right to exclude others from their property as they wish convenient, exercising their right to private property. It is clear, thus, that Hoppe, as many other Libertarians, understand that freedom is only able to exist if there is private property to carry it out.

Exclusionism

Related to the last point about property owners being able to discriminate against certain kinds of people as they deem convenient, Hoppe regarded exclusion towards certain kinds of people, whom he regarded as "undesirables," such as File:Soc.png Communists and Democracy advocators, as a positive. He regarded these previously mentioned groups as a direct threat to liberty and property, especially in the long run.

This can be understood in 2 different ways. One is more contractual and formal while the other is non-contractual.

The contractual way is the creation of a "signable social contract" and the creation of a formal restrictive covenant (That is, the community/town as a legal entity in on itself) of some sort to be a viable way of keeping certain groups out of the community. A community might establish some terms for the entry into said community and thus not let in those who do not agree with the terms. For example, by contract, in certain community, socialists may be excluded. However, Anarcho-Capitalist writer, Walter Block, has critiqued this conception of exclusionism saying that "It is entirely possible that some areas of the country, parts of Gotham and San Francisco for example, will require this practice, and ban, entirely, heterosexuality. If this is done through contract, private property rights, restrictive covenants, it will be entirely compatible with the libertarian legal code",[11] in short saying that this, what Hoppe proposes, can backfire and end up in the exclusion of things which Hoppe defends, such as traditional ways of life, for example, thus making Anarcho-Capitalism neither (culturally) left-wing nor right-wing, since it can lead to either.

The non-contractual way, however, is much more simple. It is as simple as that in a community the residents can simply mutually agree to ostracize certain groups of people, leading to the "peaceful relocation of them" (due to them, the excluded group, preferring to leave the community rather than living in a community which purposefully excludes them).

Anarcho-Capitalism

It is important to remember that Hoppeanism is first and foremost a rebranded version of Anarcho-Capitalism and is not separable from it. Nonetheless, Hoppe is controversial within Anarcho-Capitalist and Libertarian circles. With resentment of Hoppe (and Hoppe specifically) being in some cases so aggressive that it caused Murray Rothbard to coin the term 'Hoppephobia'.[12]

How to Draw

Flag of Hoppeanism
  1. Draw a Ball.
  2. Draw the AnCap Flag.
  3. Draw the Von Mises Coat of Arms.
    1. Draw a 4 quarter Shield.
    2. Make Top-Right and Bottom Left quarters Light Blue and the other two light Grey.
    3. Through the Grey quarters draw a thick red line.
    4. (Optional) Draw an opened Bible in bottom left corner and a Caduceus in the top right
  4. Draw the eyes, and you're done.

Relationships

Friends

  • Anarcho-Capitalism - I miss you, Murray.
  • Paleolibertarianism - Dearest father.
  • Pinochetism - Helicopter buddy, though I don't condone his Chicago economics.
  • Minarchism- Mises was the greatest economist of all time.
  • Austrolibertarianism - The superior economic school of thought.
  • Korwinism - We have a shared appreciation for liberty, property and tradition and femboys.
  • Agorism - Counter economics is admirable. We must stop the left from acquiring further power and disobedience of the state is very much a practice to be promoted and celebrated.
  • Anarcho-Monarchism - Monarchy is a valid path to dismantling the state, and we don't need a state to have a king!
  • Anarcho-Fascism and National Anarchism - Crush the antifascist mob!
  • Panarchism - I think you might be my new best friend.
  • Capitalism - I am your logical conclusion.
  • National Libertarianism - You are very wise, and a good friend. Though why you actually like the constitution, I'll never know.
  • Technolibertarianism - The advancement of technology is the only thing that has protected standards of living despite the damage that democracy has done to society.
  • Propertarianism - Landlords are chads.
  • Hayekism - Not as good as Mises and a moderate Social Democrat[13], but still a great economist and a respected name in the Austrian school which is more than I can say about Friedman.
  • Alt-Lite - You're on the right track, just remember that liberty is as essential to culture as culture is to liberty.
  • Neo-reaction - You perfectly understand what is wrong with society, yet you still support the state.
  • Feudalism - The final step before anarchy, just please cut it out with the serfdom.
  • Reactionary Libertarianism - That's what I'm talking about also he's my dutch counterpart and pal.
  • Traditionalism- Based and redpilled, so to speak.
  • Libertarian Monarchism - Long live to Liechenstein and Hans Adam II.
  • Confederalism and Separatism - Steps forward in the right direction.

Frenemies

  • Alt-Right - Your ideology appeals way too much to mysticism over rationality, you obsess too much over the racial collective instead of the innate differences of individuals, you're also too much willing to make concessions to socialism as long it puts whites as beneficiaries, which it won't.[14] Nonetheless I appreciate that your representatives are willing to get familiar with the works of Rothbard,[15] and you're welcome to speak at my lectures. I hope I don't have to helicopter you.
  • National Capitalism - Your hatred of commies and degenerates is admirable and makes you a treasured member of the helicopter gang, but your love of the state is not. Also, cool it with the anti-Semitic remarks, Mises and Rothbard were both Jewish.
  • Kahanism - Same goes for you, the state is not the way.
  • Pink Capitalism - I don't HATE you, so to speak. Do your own thing. Live your own black, brown, feminist, Jewish, homosexual lifestyle, as long as you do it peacefully.
  • Absolute Monarchism - You're infinitely better than democracy and infinitely worse than anarchy.
  • Ba'athism and Gaddafism - One almost wishes that Saddam Hussain would be back, that Gaddafi would be back, that the Assad would regain control in Syria and so fourth.
  • Avaritionism - He doesn't believe in private property rights and he kinda scares me, but he hates the state and the left so he can't be all bad...right?
  • Objectivism - I mean... I seems like you care about freedom. But your ideology contradicts itself constantly, and Intellectual. Property. Is. Not. Real. Property.
  • Classical Liberalism - You're so bland. Tone down the statism and you'll be fine.
  • Neocameralism - Idk... he hangs out with corporatocracy too much.
  • Paleoconservatism - He used to be cool but he's gone full authoritarian in recent years. Trade restrictions? Socialized healthcare? Did FDR and Lyndon Johnson teach you nothing about the dangers of welfare?

Enemies

  • Democracy - The God that failed.
  • Radical Democracy - The God that failed radically.
  • Bleeding-Heart Libertarianism - You hijacked Rothbard's legacy then ground it into the dirt, fuck you.
  • Antifa - CRUSH THE ANTIFASCIST MOB!
  • Globalism - The ultimate statist goal.
  • Multiculturalism - There can be peaceful coexistence of different cultures along distant, physically separated territory. But Multiculturalism - cultural heterogeneity - cannot exist in one and the same place without leading to diminishing trust, increased tension and the call for a strongman and ultimately the end of libertarian social order.
  • State Liberalism - Authoritarian, progressive AND corporatocratic? You are pure evil.
  • Neoconservatism - Stop attacking, killing and bombing people in foreign countries!
  • Neoliberalism - Same with you!
  • Neo-Libertarianism - THAT'S NOT WHAT THE HELICOPTERS ARE FOR!
  • Hive-Mind Collectivism - We're gonna need a bigger helicopter.
  • Marxism - Intellectually barren and morally bankrupt.[16]
  • File:Soc.png Socialism - Braindead authoritarianism, so to speak.
  • Anarcho-Communism - Closet tankie.
  • Anarcho-Syndicalism - Same goes for you!
  • Libertarian Marxism - AND YOU!!
  • National Socialism - You can be skeptical of the threat of Zionism without being a totalitarian mass murderer. At least you aren't as bad as Stalin or FDR.
  • State Atheism and Satanic Theocracy - All politicians promote blasphemy. The state is a sin.
  • Corporatocracy and Authoritarian Capitalism - You are not capitalists.
  • Stransserism - Even my progressive partners agree you deserve the helicopter.
  • Homonationalism - DON'T TREAD ON FEMBOYS I mean, you're openly degenerate and authoritarian, so you get the helicopter.
  • FALGSC - I...
  • File:Prog.png Progressivism - Please stop ruining society.
  • Jacobinism - The French revolution should go down in history with the rest of the terrorists whose ideas lead to the deaths of millions, like the Bolsheviks and the Nazis.
  • Democratic Socialism - Finally, someone who sees that democracy and socialism are the same thing... Wait, what do you mean "that's why I like it"?
  • Radical Feminism - It is societies dominated by men, in particular by the most successful among them, who have accumulated the greatest amount of capital goods and achieved the highest average living standards. (Also I have a kid in non-canon who is trans and you made it cry.)
  • Fascism - You've got some good ideas but your state worshipping makes you an enemy. I'm glad you have anarchist variants I can hang out with.
  • Left-Rothbardianism - Rothbard turns in his grave.

Further Information

Wikipedia

Organizations related to Hoppe

Videos

Literature

Sources

  1. ↑ Democracy, the God that Failed, Hoppe
  2. ↑ Hoppe speaks on Physical Removal - no helicopters, sorry
  3. ↑ Symposium (November 1988). "Hans-Hermannn Hoppe's Argumentation Ethics: Breakthrough or Buncombe?" (PDF). Liberty. 2 (2): 44–54.
  4. ↑ Kinsella, Stephan (March 13, 2009). "Revisiting Argumentation Ethics". Mises Economics Blog. Ludwig von Mises Institute.
  5. ↑ "The Ultimate Justification of Private Property" (PDF). Hans-Hermann Hoppe (September 1988).
  6. ↑ The Idea of a Private Law Society by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (2006).
  7. ↑ "Freiheit statt Demokratie" Der libertäre Vordenker und bekennende "Antidemokrat" Hans-Hermann Hoppe über seine provokanten Thesen / The libertarian thought leader and avowed "anti-democrat" Hans-Hermann Hoppe on his provocative theses (2005).
  8. ↑ On Free Immigration and Forced Integration by Hans-Hermann Hoppe.
  9. ↑ Natural Order, The State, and The Immigration Problem by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (2002).
  10. ↑ Natural Order, the State, and the Immigration Problem by Hans-Hermann Hoppe.
  11. ↑ Walter Block (Loyola University New Orleans), "Libertarianism is unique; it belongs neither to the right nor the left: a critique of the views of Long, Holcombe, and Baden on the left, Hoppe, Feser and Paul on the right" published at Ludwig von Mises Institute website, pp. 22–23.
  12. ↑ Hoppephobia, Rothbard
  13. ↑ Why Mises (and not Hayek)? by Hans-Hermann Hoppe; 2011
  14. ↑ Introduction to Getting Libertarianism Right, Sean Gabb
  15. ↑ Getting Libertarianism Right, Chapter 3, Hoppe
  16. ↑ Lew Rockwell, introduction to Hoppe's A Short History of Man(2015), Auburn, Mississippi: Mises Institute, p. 9

Gallery

Template:Libright Template:Libertarian Template:Anarchist Template:Caps Template:Conservative

Retrieved from "https://polcompball.wiki/wiki/Hoppeanism?oldid=14098"