Can a Libertarian Support a Democracy?

When it comes to the compatibility of libertarian beliefs and democracy, the answer largely hinges on the concept of consent. As libertarians are deeply committed to the principle of self-ownership, the core idea is whether one can willingly and explicitly consent to participate in a democratic system without their autonomy being compromised. This article explores the intersection of libertarianism and democracy, focusing on the role of consent and self-ownership.

The Importance of Self-Ownership

Libertarians believe in the primacy of self-ownership. This means that every individual, at their core, owns their own body, labor, associations, properties, and wealth. This fundamental belief is not just an ideological stance but a philosophical and ethical principle that serves as the bedrock of libertarian thought. The concept of self-ownership entails that an individual's well-being and freedom should be prioritized over external interference.

Deriving from Self-Ownership

From the concept of self-ownership, libertarians derive several other important principles. For instance, your labor, whether you decide to work alone or in collaboration with others, is your property. Your associations, whether friendships or commercial partnerships, also belong to you. Anything you create through your labor, such as wealth and property, falls under your control. However, this principle comes with a caveat: one must not violate the self-ownership of others. We view anything that infringes on the rights of others as a form of slavery.

Types of Slavery and Violations

This broader meaning of slavery can manifest in various forms. Chained labor, rape, scams, and even large-scale wage slavery in democracies can be seen as violations of the principle of self-ownership. Large groups of individuals who assume the role of rulers, whether through monarchies, representative republics, or democracies, can also serve as violators if they force their will upon others without explicit consent. Libertarians and libertarian ethical scholars would oppose such situations.

Consent as a Key to Democracy

So, can a libertarian support a democracy? Yes, but only if it is consensual. For a democracy to be compatible with libertarian principles, it must be a consensual democracy. By this, we mean a system where individuals choose to participate voluntarily and explicitly. Nobody, not even a majority, can impose their will on others without their consent. The autonomy and self-ownership of each individual must remain intact.

Voluntary vs Involuntary Communities

The distinction between voluntary and involuntary communities is crucial. A voluntary community is defined by the active consent of its members. Individuals come together based on mutual benefits, and all decisions are made through a process of voluntary association and agreement. This type of community recognizes and respects the autonomy and self-ownership of each individual.

In contrast, an involuntary community, or what libertarians refer to as a prison camp, involves the forced conformity of individuals. These are entities where one is commanded to act against their will, and refusal often leads to harm. Such systems are fundamentally different from voluntary organizations and are inherently unethical.

Examples of Involuntary Communities

Examples of involuntary communities include dictatorships, oligarchies, and even large-scale democracies that function without the explicit consent of all members. In these systems, rules and decisions are imposed without the consent of the governed, which fundamentally violates the principle of self-ownership. Libertarians would vehemently oppose such systems because they undermine individual freedom.

Consensual Democracies: A Form of Ethical Democracy

A consensual democracy, on the other hand, adheres to the principle of self-ownership and respects individual choice. Under such a system, individuals come together to form communities, and agreements are reached through a process of voluntary consent. For instance, a group of individuals might decide to form a democratic organization or a political system that they all agree to follow. This can involve setting thresholds, such as a majority or supermajority, for making decisions, but the crucial aspect is that all members are fully aware and agree to the rules and processes.

Libertarians would support such a system because it aligns with the ideals of self-ownership and voluntary association. However, they would also advise caution, recognizing that certain decisions, even in a consensual democracy, might be imprudent from a broader societal perspective. While libertarians focus primarily on ensuring that individuals retain their autonomy, they understand that offering constructive feedback can be beneficial and nonviolent.

Non-consensual Democracies: An Ethical Violation

However, a non-consensual democracy is fundamentally different. Here, individuals are coerced into participating in a system that they did not join voluntarily. A thug comes to a person's door to inform them that they, along with a subset of people, are part of a "democracy" to which they never explicitly agreed. The group enforces rules and decisions without the consent of all members, and any resistance is met with force. This type of democracy is fundamentally unethical.

In such a scenario, the principle of self-ownership is violated, and individuals are forced to conform against their will. If a small group imposes rules and enforces them through violence, it becomes a dystopian scenario akin to a prison camp. Libertarians would strongly oppose such systems and advocate for the eradication of involuntary, nonconsensual communities.

The Role of Violence in Protection of Self-Ownership

An interesting aspect of libertarian thought is their stance on violence. While they are famously against the initiation of violence, they allow for self-defense when one's self-ownership is being violated. In a non-consensual democracy, if one's autonomy is being compromised, the use of force as a means to protect oneself is ethically permissible. The protection of one's self-ownership from such violations is a fundamental principle.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a libertarian can support a democracy, but only if it is consensual. Consent, not democracy itself, is the ethical benchmark. A consensual democracy respects the self-ownership and freedom of individuals, whereas a non-consensual democracy violates these principles. Libertarians prioritize individual autonomy and voluntary association, and these values guide their perspective on democratic systems.