At the post, Once Again on Secession, I continue to see arguments in favor of supporting secession under all conditions. Many of this support appears to amount to advocacy for more coercion if it brings about a smaller state, no matter how brutal the smaller state.
One commenter writes:
Yes, but if rump Spain is actually freer than Catalonia, freedom seeking current Catalonians can also vote with feet and move away.But isn't this what Democrats and Republicans tell libertarians all the time when we complain about interventions in the US, "If you don't like it leave"? The point is that when two options are available, libertarians should advocate for the one that provides the most freedom. Not demand that those who want more freedom move.
Then there is this:
Anyway, I don't deny that the Catalonian state is full of local would-be tyrants. I was simply pointing out that the only fundamental change resulting from secession is that the Spanish national state authorities would be stripped of their perceived legitimacy.And putting in its place the perceived legitimacy of a more thuggish secessionist state?
This strikes me as being little different from the argument that government police ought to continue operating because they protect the citizens from criminals. But as libertarians we know well that the state is NOT an effective protector of its subjects, and so it seems paradoxical to declare that they would be worse off as a result of the withdrawal of a state agency.No, it is not about the argument about the withdrawal of the government police agency--or a state agency in general. States agencies will operate under both options. It is about under what ruling body the operating state will bring about the least oppressive environment.
"Individuals have the right, under the NAP, to form covenant communities - even covenant communities that embrace communism. Libertarians who say "you are not free enough" are central planners; I have no other term to use to describe this situation.
For those in Catalina who do not want secession, the answer for libertarians is to support the next secession."Again, there is confusion here. Suppose there are people in a region that don't want to "embrace communism," will they be forced to because of majority rule? How can a libertarian support this move toward less freedom? It has nothing to do with further secession. Communist communities are known for their brutality in preventing dissenters and secession in their areas of rule.