Since you have decided to quote Wikipedia, of all sources, allow me to point you back to the paragraph directly below the one you have quoted:

"This equality and freedom would be achieved through the abolition of authoritarian institutions that own and control productive means as private property, in order that direct control of these means of production and resources will be shared by society as a whole."

and,from an Overview:

"As Noam Chomsky put it, a consistent libertarian "must oppose private ownership of the means of production and the wage slavery which is a component of this system, as incompatible with the principle that labor must be freely undertaken and under the control of the producer.""

in that same article, below, in Criticism:

"Other libertarian philosophers (often referred to as liberals, in the classical sense) such as Frederic Bastiat, Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and Hans-Hermann Hoppe, stress that liberty is a state of affairs in which one is free from the unjustified aggression of others, and that any understanding of liberty must be grounded in natural rights – and especially property rights. Thus, they argue that absolute freedom for all is not a contradiction, and that the abolition of natural rights (including property rights) would, by definition, also be the abolition of liberty. As Ludwig von Mises, an Austrian economist, put it, "The continued existence of society depends upon private property.""


Now, you see, that the Libertarian Socialism can not allow me to have private property, or as they put it a "property not in possession". What this means is that Libertarian Socialists, not different than any other socialists, must use physical force to take such property away.

How else are you going to take and use my property, which, to illustrate the conflict, is the means of production? I am not giving it up.

Right there, just as Rothbard and Mises pointed out, lies the dirty truth that such a system affords no liberty.

Further, if workers are the ones that are going to own the means of production, then who is going to take economic risk organizing the enterprise? If you think that workers themselves would, then you are sadly mistaken. For this is the whole reason that entrepreneurs own the means of production, since they are the ones creating them in the first place.


There was a reason I have asked you the question I knew you won't be able to answer. There is no way to use the force without using it. Similarly, there is no way to insure that nobody owns means of production "unfairly", without an ability to take them away.

Such a system, if ever created, will stagnate into shortages first, then erupt in violent redistributions, then allow itself to be converted to state Socialism.

If you are looking for a system that is better than a state capitalism, then you should look for "individualist anarchism" for example (Rothbard), where there is a guaranty of freedom from state coercion.

And what is the meaning of the word? I suppose I shall look for a Marxist interpretation? But, I don't want to put words in your mouth. Why don't you show me the meaning of the word, O.K.?

The rest of your response, I think you will agree, has meaning only if the meaning of the word "exploitation" agrees with your point.

i hope and pray America give Obama the chance George Bush wasn't given by the far left hateful handful.this fabricated reasoning and speech only breads hateful dissension and divides a country with its unfounded debatable rhetoric.although George Bush has made his share of mistakes. every president in history during wartime has also.the only difference is the American people had a pride in America and wanted America to win and didn't celebrate in our defeats and mistakes.is this gorge bushes war ?yes it is its Hillary Clinton's war. John Kerry's war AL Gores are along with the majority of the democrats who voted on it who saw the same intelligence President Bush did. I amfor one am in a large part of the population that feels it is a righteous war. I also believe there were tactical mistakes made, the biggest in believing the ones who voted for it would stand by there vote and see the war through which was never said to be a instant success. I can debate the the casualties compared to other wars lasting far shorter than this one. I can debate that Clinton did very little to combat terrorism after being hit several times on his watch, but that would go on deaf ears. For hatred never sees positive things or the truth, so I will leave with this, I am proud we have had a President who wasn't afraid to make the hard decisions that have to be made with an enemy like radical terrorists. If you hate bush for winning a war? What would you do, if he had lost? Time will only tell what history writes about him. But I pray they include the hatred and hope for his failure that has existed all through his Presidency. Of course, you can cut my grammar and spelling to death, but I write my own stuff.

Actually, I didn't quote it from there...Whatever though. I never claimed to be an expert anyway. I guess you are though... It's obvious libertarian socialism is a pretty broad term. I'm looking at it from a voluntary angle. I'm pretty sure I mentioned that before. Are you missing that on purpose?

I think you just like to argue for the sake of arguing.

There are alternatives to using force. Have you ever heard of education?

Nogames you are a joke...All you wish to do is argue semantics. I think it's a safe bet that we won't come to agreement.

We are not out of this yet. Let us see what Obama does. He did not back down, and maybe he won't. Maybe he will continue the restructuring of Iraq. The division of the USSR, every Russian, Romanian, and Czechoslovakian that I have met love the US and remain grateful to have the opportunity to be here. Every Indian, every Hispanic legal or no wish to live here and they will tell you so. They are happy to be free of oppression, and I have heard the stories from their lips and what they endured. And no man, woman, or child would I wish that upon, ever!!!!! The United States Of America will not bow its head and walk away from the genocide committed under Hussein. It was absolute genocide and villainous efforts rule through terror and torture of fellow human beings. Disgusting and completely immoral!!! The United States started by our ancestors each and every blessed soul the English, the Irish, the German, Italians, Greeks and Asians every new generation brings forth more nationalities and identities that are defining a future for this nation and shall rise up into control of the future a myriad of nations moving forth as one.
And if you are against this war, then you should have been against WWI & WWII - my grandfather was a Seabee and rushed the shores, his wife my grandmother worked on the Manhattan Project, my grandfather fought in Korea where he met my grandmother married her and gave birth to five children, my father Marine Corp. and my uncle Marine Corp. Reverend, My cousin RIP shot down during desert storm while on mission. I will tell you this not one man on my list gave their time in vain!!