This really has to stop. Walter demonstrates once again that he cannot read or comprehend Hoppe, or he just doesn’t understand libertarianism.
The issue is well-known amongst libertarians – both friendly to (as Walter is) and opposed to (as many are) Hoppe’s position. Everyone knows well – and many turn into a meme – Hoppe’s quote:
They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society.
Walter includes this quote, within a longer paragraph that makes completely clear the context of Hoppe’s statement. I reproduce the entire quote – as presented by Walter. So you don’t miss the context, I have highlighted the key portions – hopefully you don’t miss these due to my subtlety:
“As soon as mature members of society habitually express acceptance or even advocate egalitarian sentiments, whether in the form of democracy (majority rule) or of communism, it becomes essential that other members, and in particular the natural social elites, be prepared to act decisively and, in the case of continued nonconformity, exclude and ultimately expel these members from society. In a covenant concluded among proprietor and community tenants for the purpose of protecting their private property, no such thing as a right to free (unlimited) speech exists, not even to unlimited speech on one’s own tenant-property. One may say innumerable things and promote almost any idea under the sun, but naturally no one is permitted to advocate ideas contrary to the very purpose of the covenant of preserving and protecting private property, such as democracy and communism. There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society. Likewise, in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal. They—the advocates of alternative, non-family and kin-centered lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism—will have to be physically removed from society, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order.”
Walter’s blog post is entitled: “Homosexuality and Libertarianism Are Indeed Compatible, Contrary to Hans Hoppe.”
Libertarianism rests on private property; property owners are free to regulate their property in any manner they see fit – else what is the point of either property or libertarianism.
I have said it many times before: libertarian communities will not look libertarian to many on the outside. The property owners will establish rules designed to maintain much more than “don’t hit first; don’t take my stuff.” It is a juvenile understanding of libertarianism. Property owners will come together and will design rules intended to protect liberty as they want to live it.
Walter seems to understand this point, when he writes:
If Hans had said these folks, democrats, commies, gays, hedonists, etc., should physically be removed from condominiums which are dedicated to a different life-style, that would be fine and good. After all, free association is one of the very bed-rocks of a civilized (e.g., libertarian) order.
Walter, read the sections that I have highlighted. This is exactly the context that Hoppe offers. Such a covenant does not have to be limited to a “condominium.” It is perfectly applicable to a homeowners’ association, amusement park, hotel, larger community, etc.
A word like “society” requires definition and context. Hoppe has offered it directly in the quoted passage. Walter is hung up on the word “society,” because he has in mind what this means – anything other than a condominium. Yet Hoppe gives the precise context in which he is using the term. Walter chooses to ignore this.
Enough is enough.
There is much more I can write about this blog post, including the original letter written to Walter, where the gay son understands better the shortcomings of the NAP than does the libertarian father, who offers to his son his vision of a future, libertarian world:
“I imagine a Black Nationalist living on my right, a Born Again behind me, a Bleeding Liberal on the other side, and a couple of lesbians across the street. We’d wave to each other, help shovel out each other’s driveways after a bad storm, and maybe even have civil conversations about our different opinions, but otherwise we’d just leave each other alone.”
My son didn’t think such a thing was possible, believing as he does that NAP is not enough of a glue for society.
Libertarianism is not sufficient for liberty. Hoppe understands this, the son understands this. Walter and the father do not.
NB: please don't turn the comments into personal attacks of Walter; I consider him a friend, else I wouldn't waste my time writing this post. So Just stick to the issues.