By Insula Qui
The libertarian philosophy is a blank state, it can only provide us with a limited amount of information as libertarianism ultimately only states that force ought not to be initiated. But this does not mean that all libertarian theory needs to reiterate this basic principle. And although it is easy to draw the conclusion that non-aggression only implies individuals trading and interacting on a decentralized and voluntary basis, this is fundamentally naive. Although such a society is a desirable fantasy for those with inherently libertarian tendencies, a fantasy does not serve well to increase our reach beyond those with our tendencies.
Most people are not drawn to this sort of individualistic organization as most people want to have larger structures of governance in society. This is demonstrated by the fact that there is any opposition to libertarianism at all. However, libertarianism is not a statement against society or governance, it only concerns itself with the non-initiation of force. This means that the real form of libertarian organization lies outside what we would conventionally consider trade and voluntary interaction and rather take the shape of metastructures. These are structures that combine individual interests and that create organizations beyond what individuals themselves do.
We cannot describe the form of the metastructures but rather need to describe the way in which they could be formed. This is to say, metastructures are not a matter of what we prescribe but can only be formed organically by the interactions that create the metastructures. In other words, people will decide the way in which they organize and we have no inherent control of this organization. The most basic form of the metastructure is the autostate, but the inquiry of metastructural organization goes much further.
And we need to concede that most of libertarian societies will have these metastructures as a fundamental form of organization, it will not be as if libertarian societies only function to create higher GDP. People will strive to form organizations that go beyond the immediately economic and personal. I have previously written sufficiently about voluntary goverance so I will refrain from reiterating those points here.
The first and most immediate relation that demonstrates the necessity of these metastructures is the fraternal organization that used to provide for the healthcare of all within a society (For more information, I would suggest the brilliant book “Reactionary Liberty”.). This form of organization was destroyed by the advance of socialized medicine but still continues to serve as an example of what voluntary metastructures can achieve. Included in this is every other form of organization that serves collective goals. We have no reason to be opposed to mutual banking, guilds, or insurance companies, they are all vital metastructures within a libertarian society. And, as many libertarians have stated, insurance goes beyond the economic aspect of it as it has an inherent incentive to ensure the defence of a society to not have to pay the costs of damage.
This means that any other form of collective organization that serves individual ends is similarly vital to libertarianism and can serve as a tool in the repertoire of anyone arguing for liberty. We can use the very structures statists venerate to defend the cause of voluntary interactions. Whenever someone states that the state ought to do something, we can simply restate that someone ought to do that, but it does not necessarily need to be the state. This allows libertarians to have an inherent position of strength.
Furthermore, there is another vital metastructure that is not inherent to voluntary governance or mutual aid, this is the militia. Many have rightfully pointed out that the militia is the reason for why western civilization exists and we need to incorporate the militia into libertarianism if we are to have a libertarian theory that can produce civilization. Accepting metastructures serves as the first step to creating the theoretical formulation of the libertarian militia.
The milita is a fundamentally republican form of organization, it uses the testimony and input of every member to make decisions. Of course, this is not done democratically but through the meritocratically highly ranked members of the militia. Furthermore, the militia manages to decentralize violence insofar as that violence is used for common ends. The militia does not concern itself with particular groups, but rather provides the tools of violence to every willing man and woman.
The militia is the greatest threat to any monopolized violence and as such is the primary metastructure in defence against the potential of tyranny within a libertarian social order. The men in a militia are the last line of defence against any ill, and this includes every issue beyond simple aggressive uses of violence. Every society needs people who have the capacity for violence, we can call this collectively the citadel. This citadel must fundamentally be a public good insofar as this citadel acts in the defence of the entire society, this is not to say that public goods are a valid argument for government.
When the citadel only consists of voluntary governance and private contractors, the citadel is woefully insufficient at personal defence and can only defend the citadel. This means that the citadel can only fundamentally provide defence whenever it itself is attacked. For example, public or private militaries are not mobilized whenever a society is threatened by multiculturalism. However, the militia is mobilized whenever there are assaults against the members of that militia, and this includes the entirety of the men in society (This is not to say that there can be no women in the militia, rather, very few women have a capacity for violence on par with average man.). So if, for example, there was a large invasion of hostile demographics, the militia would be mobilized to defend against that invasion even when it does not directly challenge the voluntary government or the private defence organizations.
This means that the militia is the final barrier to any sort of social decay, the militia ensures that the use of violence towards necessary ends is undertaken even if those necessary ends are not ones that threaten other institutions. The militia concentrates the ability for men to do what needs to be done into a formal metastructure and as such ensures that what needs to be done gets done. The militia is the ultimate form of decentralized authoritarian organization and as such is the perfect manifestation of reactionary libertarianism.
Another vital metastructure for libertarians is the altar, or the spiritual basis of the social order in Heathian terminology. A lot of libertarians exhibit atheistic tendencies so this might not be obvious, however, social cohesion requires a shared religion or another spiritual goal in art and improvement. Religious conflict leads to a complete abandonment of all libertarian principles as eternal values always defeat temporary ethical concerns. This means that a society needs to share a singular metastructure of spiritual organization. Colliding transcendental values will always create war and conflict or a deterioration of society.
Theocracy is the natural state of man, the church will always be in a position of primacy over private exchanges, the militia, and voluntary governance. Furthermore, the church itself has always functioned as an agency of mutual aid and an investor in the advancement of society. The ultimate metastructure that libertarians need to embrace is the common faith of the people in society. And although religious tolerance is the first step towards a libertarian worldview, a decentralized voluntary theocracy is the ultimate form of libertarian organization.
This should not be objectionable to right-wing atheistic libertarians as they do not find the influence of the church obtrusive. But the church is necessarily involved in the lives of the people who subscribe to a faith and to that end, the church is also in a position of primacy in personal lives. And this leads us to our final conclusion and the necessary revelation we must internalize from this libertarian theory. As libertarians, we must see through contradiction and realize that the more liberty we have, the more authority follows. An advance of libertarianism will also be an advance of metastructures and the authoritarianism of those metastructures. Libertarian philosophy will inherently include authoritarianism once we have conceded that it only serves as a blank slate.
Whenever we decrease the influence of the state, we do not desire to eliminate private influence, rather, we have proper authority take the former role of the state. If the former role of the state is undertaken by private forces, they will be more capable at serving public ends, this also means that they have more justifiable authority than the government ever did. Theocracy, militias, guilds, and so forth will manifest under libertarianism and will be in complete harmony with the libertarian worldview.