[H]ayek is right that a condition of liberty can only be constructed by organically evolutionary (common) law of property. Hoppe is right that institutions can replace monopoly bureaucracy.
However, Hayek has no solution to making such a condition universally preferable; and Hoppe has no solution to the provision of the commons, nor for constructing a condition of liberty. Neither address the influence of the family or the intergenerational means of reproductive production or the entry of women’s socialistic biases into the sphere of politics – and neither addresses the problem of the conflict between the reproductive interests of the classes. Neither solves the problem of a heterogeneous post-agrarian, and possibly post familial, institutional system. Yet that is the set of conditions that we find ourselves in.
I think I have persuasively argued that over the long term (anyone can benefit from implementing technology that was invented by others in the sort term), high velocity economies are only possible under liberty, and that liberty is only possible under high trust, and that only law under universal standing can construct high trust and liberty, and that those most interested in maintaining this structure are those in the lower middle class and upper proletariat, who are willing to fight to un-constrain their superiors, so that they can gain the privileges of the group with the best leaders. This is why the working classes are conservatively biased – they will fall in status and material possession without the advantages given them by support – the enablement – of their elites.
So we can look at the successes of philosophers but also look at their failures. Hoppe tries to both preserve cosmopolitan separatism and reconstruct the hanseatic league. But this is not possible without the use of violence, exclusion, and the taking of territory sufficiently advantageous to produce the incentives to join such a polity, nor the economic advantage necessary to see it persist.
Hoppe’s solution of starting a clean polity isn’t a solution at all. It’s the equivalent of communism for libertines.
Territory is obtained, held, informal institutions constructed, formal institutions implemented, and monuments built, by the use of violence to do so by those desirous of obtaining advantage for themselves and their people.
Peace, is not an intrinsic good. The intrinsic good is the perpetuation of your family, tribe, and people in competition with other families tribes and peoples.
Everything else is just a better way of getting there.
And the alternative is conquest and suicide. Both of which we are victims of.
The Propertarian Institute