Green Liberty

Where Green Goals and Libertarian Principles intersect.

Green Goal #8 -- Respect for Diversity

Green Goal #8 -- Respect for Diversity: We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across these lines. We believe the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We acknowledge and encourage respect for other life forms and the preservation of biodiversity.

by Thomas L. Knapp, Managing Editor, Free-Market.net

"Respect for diversity" is an oft-stated goal, but not always well defined either in the green or libertarian movements. Rightly understood, it is one on which both groups should find themselves in substantial agreement.

Diversity is both a practical and esthetic value; tolerance of diversity is, furthermore, a moral value.

Diversity is Practical

On the practical level, diversity makes evolutionary sense. A multiplicity of cultural and individual practices offer the testing ground for humanity's advancement. Each acting entity is, in a sense, a laboratory: When an individual or a group tries something a certain way, it works better, or as well, or not as well as the approach of another individual or group did or will.

It is in best interest of all to foster an attitude that encourages as many "laboratories" as possible, churning out solutions that are continually closer to optimum. It may be that the survival of the human species and the earth's ecosystem will depend on these solutions. Why deny ourselves the opportunity to engage in the whole broad array of possible cultural permutations?

Diversity is Beautiful

Esthetically, diversity is a joy that we should not deny ourselves, either. There was a time when individuals went from cradle to grave immersed in a single community -- its songs, its literature, its food. Today, it is not unusual for an American to have a bagel or chirizo for breakfast, listen to the latest Afro-pop band while perusing a translated Russian novel over take-out Chinese at lunch, and settle in for a heavy Italian dinner and a French film that evening. The interplay between various cultures enriches our lives.

Respect for Diversity is a Moral Issue

The most profound case for respecting diversity, however, is moral, and rooted in the libertarian principle of non-aggression. It is my right, and yours, to dislike Ethiopian food -- to be discomfited by public displays of affection between individuals whose sexual orientation differs from our own -- to loathe Proust. The non-aggression principle, however, dictates that our dislike, discomfort, or loathing is inadequate justification for the use of force to impose one's preference on others.

This, of course, is the key issue. Respect for diversity does not require one to become a devotee of every conceivable alternative or culture. It requires only that one abstain from the use of force -- of the individual type, or through the proxy of government -- to enjoin others from doing so.

Disrespecting Diversity

It's not always easy to respect diversity when it comes to politics and philosophy. Both greens and libertarians are guilty of disrespect for diversity when such diversity manifests itself in forms that contradict non-core values of our respective philosophies. In particular, we often take potshots at each other.

"A Socialist Libertarian? Couldn't be!"

I have been caught up in very ugly debates with fellow libertarians concerning the nature of capitalism and whether a libertarian could conceivably be a socialist. The libertarian error has been conflating the idea of laissez faire (economic freedom) with the idea of capitalism (a particular mode of economic organization). A correct understanding of laissez faire is as a corollary of the non-aggression principle: that people must be free to organize themselves into cooperatives, communes or any other form of voluntarily constructed economic organization.

"Green Capitalism? No such thing!"

In a similar vein, I have been told by some fellow Greens that any mode of economic organization not rooted in collective ownership is contrary to their principles. Oddly enough, I can't find any conflict between the green key values and private ownership, structured under rules agreed to by all participants in the process. The Green error has been to extend the ideas of grassroots democracy and consensus to pre-conceived ends. Any group should be free to structure itself as it chooses, provided that the structure is agreed to by all participants. In the end, a lack of unanimous consent must be resolved not by "majority rule," but by respect for individual choice -- which makes private, individual endeavor, with private, individual responsibility and benefit, the default state. This may only be trumped by invocation of the non-aggression principle when such endeavor constitutes an initiation of force against others.

Respect for diversity can be not only a key value, but the key strength of our movements. It's time for libertarians to logically apply the non-aggression principle to their views on economic organization, and for greens to logically apply their key value to all forms of non-coercive diversity. This way, we can learn to respect each other- for our similarities, and for our differences.

Green and Libertarian resources