There Has Never Been a Left-Libertarian Government Worldwide - Here’s Why

Why Blockchain Now Makes It Possible for the First Time

Left-libertarianism, which combines a commitment to individual freedom with a strong emphasis on social equality and communal ownership of resources, has never been fully implemented as the governing philosophy of any nation. Despite its theoretical appeal, the absence of purely left-libertarian governments can be attributed to a range of practical, philosophical, and political challenges.

Compounding these challenges is the reality that anyone who believes in libertarian values often finds themselves having to accept right-wing politics in other areas. This conundrum has been particularly evident in the rise of populist leaders like Trump, who are gaining ground in the Bitcoin arena. The libertarian aspects of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies often align more closely with right-wing politicians, leaving left-libertarians without a coherent political home.

However, advancements in blockchain technology, particularly through the use of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), now offer innovative solutions that could make the realization of left-libertarian governance more feasible than ever before. This essay explores the reasons behind the historical absence of left-libertarian governments and examines how blockchain technology can address these challenges, paving the way for a potential left-libertarian future.

As a bitcoiner how has your position on social justice, LGBT+ rights, reproductive rights, gender equality, environmental issues, changed since 2019? You think everything is “woke” because right populist leaders need to create that division within you in order to buy your vote.

Do all humans deserve a fair shot at life? Bitcoin thinks so… but Bitcoiners currently have no other options than the right. You’re being weaponized by populists who ultimately only care about keeping themselves rich and will do anything they can to create the illusion of freedom to maintain their power vice grip on a suffocating planet.

Bitcoin should bring us together but instead it’s political positioning is being poisoned by the right because there’s no legitimate option on the other side.

With no opposition do you know where the right ends up? It’s certainly not a redistribution of wealth I can tell you that much.

Trump has done a 180 on Bitcoin once, he’s changed his view because it helps him. What do you think happens when it’s no longer useful for him? Bitcoin has no part in Project 2025 or Agenda47.

The idea of a left-libertarian government is not a simple solution, but I believe it’s one few have considered. It has historically been plagued by ambiguity and impracticality… but that was before Bitcoin and blockchain as a wider concept.

Complexity of Implementation

One of the most significant practical challenges of implementing left-libertarianism lies in the complexity of balancing individual freedoms with egalitarian distribution of natural resources. Left-libertarianism advocates for full self-ownership, where individuals have absolute rights over themselves and their labor. Simultaneously, it calls for an egalitarian approach to natural resources, which are seen as either collectively owned or unowned and available for all to use.

This dual commitment requires intricate systems to manage resource distribution equitably while respecting individual autonomy. Achieving such a balance is not only theoretically complex but also practically challenging. It involves creating robust frameworks for communal decision-making, conflict resolution, and resource management, which can be difficult to establish and maintain in practice.

Economic and Social Structures

Modern economies and social structures are deeply entrenched in systems of private property and capitalism. Transitioning to a left-libertarian system would necessitate a radical overhaul of these structures, posing significant risks of instability and resistance from established interests. Existing economic systems are designed around the principles of private ownership, profit maximization, and market competition. Moving towards a system where resources are collectively owned and managed would require dismantling these entrenched institutions and replacing them with new, untested mechanisms.

The potential for social and economic disruption during such a transition is substantial. There could be resistance from powerful stakeholders who benefit from the current system, and the process of building new institutions to support a left-libertarian framework would be fraught with challenges. Ensuring social stability and continuity of essential services during this transition would be a daunting task.

Philosophical Challenges

Left-libertarianism faces internal philosophical tensions, particularly in reconciling the principles of self-ownership with egalitarian resource distribution. Self-ownership implies that individuals have absolute rights over their bodies and labor, while egalitarianism demands that natural resources be distributed in a manner that ensures equal access and benefits for all. Balancing these two principles can be challenging, as they may sometimes appear to be in conflict.

Critics argue that these internal inconsistencies make it difficult to develop a coherent and practical policy framework. For example, how can a system ensure equal access to natural resources without infringing on the rights of individuals to use and benefit from those resources as they see fit? This tension between individual autonomy and collective ownership is a significant philosophical hurdle for left-libertarianism.

Debates on Property Rights

Within left-libertarianism, there is significant debate regarding the nature of property rights, especially concerning natural resources. Some left-libertarians support collective ownership, where resources are managed and used for the benefit of all. Others advocate for private property with conditions, where individuals can own resources but must adhere to principles of fairness and sustainability.

These differing views on property rights create challenges in forming a unified approach. The lack of consensus on how resources should be owned and managed can hinder the development of consistent policies and practices. This internal debate further complicates the task of implementing left-libertarian principles in a practical and coherent manner.

Lack of Political Power

Left-libertarianism has not gained significant political traction or power in any country. Without substantial political influence, implementing left-libertarian policies on a national scale remains impractical. Political systems are often dominated by parties and ideologies that support either traditional leftist principles of state intervention and welfare or right-libertarian principles of minimal government and free markets. Left-libertarianism, which seeks to combine elements of both, struggles to find a foothold in this polarized political landscape.

The lack of political power means that left-libertarians have limited opportunities to influence policy and legislation. Without representation in government, it is challenging to implement and test left-libertarian ideas on a large scale. This lack of political influence also makes it difficult to build the necessary support and infrastructure for a left-libertarian system.

Electoral Politics

Left-libertarians often eschew traditional electoral politics, preferring grassroots and decentralized approaches. This aversion to working within existing political systems further limits their ability to enact widespread change. Traditional electoral politics involves engaging with established institutions, forming political parties, and participating in elections. Many left-libertarians view these processes as inherently hierarchical and incompatible with their principles of decentralization and direct democracy.

While grassroots movements and decentralized approaches can be effective in local contexts, they face significant challenges in scaling up to the national level. Without participation in electoral politics, left-libertarians struggle to gain the visibility and support needed to implement their ideas on a larger scale.

Criticism from Right-Libertarians

Right-libertarians often criticize left-libertarianism for its egalitarian constraints, arguing that these constraints undermine the principles of self-ownership and free markets. They contend that imposing restrictions on resource use to ensure equal access violates individual property rights and freedom of contract. Right-libertarians believe that a system of unrestricted private property and voluntary exchange is the best way to ensure individual freedom and prosperity.

This criticism highlights the tension between the left-libertarian commitment to equality and the right-libertarian emphasis on individual liberty. The divergent views on property rights and resource distribution make it challenging to find common ground between these two strands of libertarian thought.

Criticism from Liberal-Egalitarians

Some liberal-egalitarians argue that left-libertarianism, when fully realized, either collapses into a more conventional form of egalitarianism or becomes incoherent due to its reliance on the thesis of full self-ownership. They suggest that the egalitarian constraints of left-libertarianism are inconsistent with the principles of self-ownership, leading to contradictions and impracticalities.

Liberal-egalitarians typically advocate for state intervention to ensure social justice and equality, which they believe left-libertarianism lacks. They argue that a purely decentralized and non-hierarchical approach is insufficient to address systemic inequalities and provide the necessary support for disadvantaged individuals.

How Blockchain Can Enable Left-Libertarian Governance

Decentralized Governance and Collective Decision-Making

Blockchain technology, particularly through the use of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), offers innovative solutions that could make left-libertarian governance more feasible. Bitcoin settled DAOs leverage blockchain technology to enable decentralized decision-making without a central authority. Members participate in governance by holding tokens that grant voting rights, ensuring democratic and transparent management of resources. I am a Bitcoiner but any chain can act as the settlement layer, I prefer Bitcoin due to it’s inherent censorship resistance and decentralization.

DAOs provide a platform for collective ownership and management of resources, aligning with left-libertarian principles of decentralization and direct democracy. By using smart contracts, DAOs can automate governance processes, reduce the risk of corruption, and ensure that decisions are made transparently and democratically.

Transparency and Accountability

Blockchain Transparency

Blockchain technology provides an immutable and decentralized ledger where all transactions and decisions are recorded. This ensures that all actions are publicly accessible and verifiable, reducing the risk of corruption and mismanagement. For natural resources, this transparency can help track the use and distribution of resources, ensuring they are managed sustainably and equitably.

Blockchain’s transparency and accountability can address some of the practical challenges of implementing left-libertarian principles. By providing a clear and verifiable record of resource use, blockchain can help ensure that resources are distributed fairly and managed responsibly.

Egalitarian Resource Management

Egalitarian Distribution

DAOs can facilitate the collective ownership and management of natural resources, ensuring that all community members have a say in their use and distribution. This aligns with left-libertarian principles of egalitarian resource management. For example, a DAO could be established to manage a community forest, where all members vote on how the forest is used, ensuring sustainable practices and equitable benefits.

By providing a platform for collective decision-making, DAOs can help ensure that resources are managed in a way that reflects the values and priorities of the community. This can help address the philosophical challenges of balancing individual autonomy with collective ownership.

Incentivizing Sustainable Practices

Smart Contracts for Sustainability

Smart contracts settled on Bitcoin using new L2s or technology like ICP’s Bitcoin cannisters can automate and enforce rules for sustainable resource management. For instance, a DAO managing a water resource could use smart contracts to ensure that water usage remains within sustainable limits, automatically adjusting allocations based on real-time data. This can help align individual incentives with collective sustainability goals, ensuring that resources are used responsibly.

Smart contracts provide a mechanism for enforcing sustainability practices without the need for centralized oversight. This can help address the practical challenges of implementing sustainable resource management in a left-libertarian system.

Real-World Examples and Applications

Real Estate DAOs

Real estate DAOs demonstrate how collective ownership and management can be applied to physical assets. Members of a real estate DAO collectively decide on property acquisitions and management, with profits distributed based on token holdings. Similar models can be applied to natural resources, where communities collectively manage and benefit from resources like land, water, and forests.

By leveraging blockchain technology, real estate DAOs provide a model for how left-libertarian principles can be implemented in practice. They offer a platform for collective ownership and management, ensuring that resources are used and distributed in a way that reflects the values and priorities of the community.

Community Resource Management

Models like the CREMA (Community Resource Management Area) in Ghana, where communities co-manage resources with the government, can be enhanced by DAOs. They provide a transparent and democratic platform for decision-making, empowering local communities. DAOs can build on these existing models by providing a platform for collective ownership and management, ensuring that all community members have a say in how resources are used and distributed.

By providing a transparent and democratic platform for resource management, DAOs can help address the practical and philosophical challenges of implementing left-libertarian principles.

Challenges and Considerations

While DAOs offer promising solutions, there are challenges to consider:

  • Regulatory Ambiguity: The legal status of DAOs is still evolving, necessitating regulatory frameworks to provide clarity and protection for participants. Governments and regulatory bodies need to develop clear guidelines for the operation and governance of DAOs to ensure their legality and legitimacy.
  • Technical Expertise: Implementing and maintaining DAOs requires significant technical expertise, particularly in developing secure smart contracts. Ensuring the security and reliability of blockchain technology is critical to the success of DAOs. This requires investment in technical education and infrastructure to support the development and maintenance of DAOs.
  • Participation and Engagement: Ensuring active participation and engagement from all members is crucial for the success of a DAO. Inactive members can disrupt decision-making processes and undermine the legitimacy of the organization. Strategies for encouraging participation and ensuring that all members have a voice in decision-making are essential for the success of DAOs.

Conclusion

The absence of purely left-libertarian countries can be attributed to practical difficulties of implementation, philosophical inconsistencies, political challenges, and criticisms from other ideological perspectives. However, blockchain technology, particularly through the use of DAOs, now offers innovative solutions for managing private property and natural resources by leveraging decentralized governance, transparency, and collective decision-making.

While challenges remain, the potential benefits for sustainable and equitable resource management are significant. Blockchain technology provides a platform for implementing left-libertarian principles in practice, addressing many of the practical and philosophical challenges that have hindered the development of left-libertarian governance in the past.

By providing transparent and democratic platforms for resource management, DAOs can help ensure that resources are used and distributed in a way that reflects the values and priorities of the community. This can help address the practical and philosophical challenges of balancing individual autonomy with collective ownership, paving the way for a potential left-libertarian future.