Freedom, Society, and State - Ludwig von Mises Institute

would "naturally" prevail in the absence of statist restrictions.
As Emile Durkheim noted in his Suicide,
and hewa son 1yon e 0 f man y soc i 0 log i s t s t 0 rna ke the
sam e 0 b s e r vat ion, 0 n e 0 f rna n 's rno s t fun damen t a I need s
is that of attachment, of belonging, of security.
Sin c e t his i s d iff i cui t t 0 a chi eve 0 nthe pur e rna r k e t ,
many peopl e, as Tucc ill e commented. simply prefer a
col I e c t i vis t I i f e - styIe. I s us pect. therefor e, t hat a
1 i be r tar ian 1ega lorde r wo u I d res u I t not ina so r t 0 f
universal market permeating all aspects of everyone's
life, but rather in a variety of communities, some of
wh i ch wo u 1 d no doubt es tabl ish themsel ves -- or try to
-- on collectivist or socialist principles, thereby becoming
oases for refugees, so to speak, from the market
system. So long as these were operated vo1untaristically,
I do not see what the individualist anarchist
could do about them. In fact, while libertarians might
con d e mnit asec0 n om i cal I y i r rat ionaI, therei s nore a ­
son why some propr ietary communities could not stipulate,
say, minimum wages, or even some sort of tariffs,
for their communities.
But none of this, it should be cautioned, is necessar
i Iy incompatible with the market as a coordinating
mechanism. Exchange could still take place not only
between individuals regardless of their attachments to
their communities, just as "international" trade now
takes place between individuals of two different count
r i e s, but i t c 0 u I d a Iso t a ke p I ace between c omm un i ­
ties, themsel ves, much in the "mutual istic" fashion
advocated by Proudhon.
In short, I think the lure of both individualism
and the mar k e t ten d s t 0 beexa ggera ted by rna n y libe r ­
tarians. People are more than economic atomatons; life
is more than buying and selling. Rothbard is fond of
referr ing to the market as "the natural system of liberty."
It is certainly a wonderfUl -- and indispensable
- coordinating agent, but I suspect that it is
m0 rea c cur ate tor e fer tot hemarketasone comp0 ­
nent, albei t the most important, of the natural system
of liberty. Since the only requirement of that "systern"
is the principle of voluntarism, it is potentially
compatible with any number of competing economic, and
soc i aI, 1 i f e - sty 1 e s, s om e 0 f wh i ch wou I d no doub t be
es tabl i shed.
Finally, the foregoing enables us to deal with a
persistent criticism of the individualist anarchist
mora lis t. The legal order of such a society, goes the
341