Freedom, Society, and State - Ludwig von Mises Institute

off r e e rna rk e t . e con om i c t heor y is based upon an outmoded
conception of the nature and function of the
state as it relates to the general welfare as well as a
serious misunderstanding of what anarchism is all
about. Addressing himself directly to these misperceptions,
David Osterfeld throws a great deal of light
upon the topic of human freedom in comtemporary times.
One of the widely held mi s per c e p t i onsat t a c ked by
Osterfeld is the mistaken notion that all anarchists
are totally opposed to the institution of private property.
The basis of that notion, most probably, is
Proudhon's notorious assertion that "property is
theft." But when Proudhon condemned private property,
hewa s not t h ink i n g 0 f goo d s prod uc e d by the wo r ke r
through his own labor which he had every moral right to
use for his own sustenance, but only those large accumulat
ions of unearned income wrestled from the worker
and pro t e c ted i nth e han d s 0 f cap ita 1 i s t s by laws
est a b 1 ish e d by the s tat e • L ike Adam Sm i t h, from wh om
mu c h 0 f his e nth u s i a s m for I a iss e z fa ire the 0 r y wa s
der ived, Proudhon had no misgivings whatever concerning
capital, if by capital is meant that necessary property
the i n d i v i d u a I· ereate s by his own ef for t s wi t hi n an
economic system characterized by unqualifIed freedom of
choice and action. What anarchists like Proudhon cond
em n i s pro per t y righ t s rna i n t a i ned inthe i n t eres t 0 f
certain privileged individuals or social classes by
force of state laws artificially imposed without regard
as to who actually produced the property in question.
With respect to political theory, Osterfeld's
position is determined in large measure by the antis
tat ism 0 f F ran z 0 p pen h e i mer and 0 ther I i ber tar ian
thinkers who see modern democratic political ideology
as the principal source of the confusion that characterizes
the quest for social justice in contemporary
soc i e t y • A Ion g with Ma r x and 0 t he r soc i a lis t s, i nd i ­
vidualist anarchist theory recognizes the enormous
contribution made by capital during the early indust
riaIre v 0 I uti 0 n tothera i sing 0 f huma n 1 i v i ng s tandar
dsan d the wid e s preadd i s t ributi 0 n 0 f the com for t s
of modern 1 i fe. Contemporary individual ist anarchist
the 0 r i s t s a Iso a c know1edgethe ce n t r a I r 0 lethat c I ass
confl iet and state power have played in bringing about
the inequitable distribution of wealth that is evident
i n mod ern soc iaIr e I a t ions • Un 1 ike bo t h the L i be r a I
and the Mar XIS t, h owe ver, the i nd i v i d uali s tanarchis t
does not look to state power as the savior of those who
are domInated and exploited by the irresponsible monop-
xii