Neo-Reactionary Libertarianism (NrL) is a 
Libertarian Right and 
Culturally Reactionary ideology which puts emphasis on the necessity of strong social institutions such as family, church, or natural elites for society to function.
Likewise, being a 
catholic virtue ethicist, it considers that traditional Christian moral virtues are paramount in a well-functioning community, and likewise disregarded in a dysfunctional one (like most of the modern West).[Note 3]
It aims to synthesize elements of 
Libertarianism with 
Reactionary sociological views, as well as catholic ethics.
It remains associated with libertarianism in its support of private property rights as natural, inalienable rights, but may be considered "Post-Anarchist" (as a parallel to 
Neo-Reactionarism's "Post-Libertarianism") in its rejection of it; despite advocating for the abolishment of the "weberian state" (identified as an illegitimate monopolist of power, as opposed to a legitimate monopolist of power; [Note 4]) insofar as it isn't systematically "anti-hierarchy", as 
Anarchism semantically is, thus ceasing to be associated with the term.
As formerly stated, the elements that make this ideology libertarian is its belief in property rights as natural rights. On the other hand, that which makes it "Neo-Reactionary" is its undemocratic and anti-egalitarian sentiments, and embracement of Neo-Reactionary concepts such as 'the cathedral' and the 'total state' - which distances it from many Libertarians, for whom the state is the sole promoter of 
statism -, and such.
Beliefs
Natural Law and Natural Rights
For NrL, there is a great difference between "natural law" as a statement on human nature, and "natural law" as a set of legal principles which binds humanity by virtue of our nature as rational animals.
The former includes anything that goes against human nature; namely, every sinful action, thought and speech; being thus a moral category of what is right and wrong, and which can be grasped through natural revelation (as we can see in the like of Aristotle), and reinforced by divine revelation (divine law). Under this conception, there's no such a right to do evil, even if such an evil doesn't affect others (for instance, drug consumption).
On the other hand, the latter, which may be characterized instead as natural rights[Note 5], refers to matters of human legality and political order, and aren't concerned with what one should or shouldn't do, but with what acts are legally permissible, and which aren't (and are, thereby, justified ground for retaliation). They are determined by reason (for example, through 
argumentation ethics), and are derived from the nature of norms, argumentation, and human action.[Note 6]
Private Communities
Based on its beliefs on natural rights (
private property rights), it is led to the conclusion that the weberian state is an unjust and unrightful institution, which isn't born from natural right but rather positivistic right.
This form of social organization is based on the principle that property owners are 
sovereigns over their property, and private law governs their basic relations vis-a-vis other people, who are not in any other agreement which impose any other set of legal norms. So it may also be expressed as nothing more than the decentralization of sovereignty from public states to rightful private estates.
The disbandment of the state would lead to a 
network of private owners and communities (which may in turn form confederations) based on private law. Sovereigns may in turn impose their own rules, applicable only onto their property, which those that enter must abide by. This may apply to a household owner (typically the father/patriarch) imposing his norms onto his family,[Note 7] but also to owners of a larger areas, such as a neighborhood or town.
These rules, particular to certain owners and communities (not universal, as natural rights are) would be enforced by ostracism or eviction from the community. [Note 8]
Pragmatic considerations
The former section was focused on that which was ideal; a stateless society ruled by private law. However, insofar as essentially all modern societies are statist societies, so is it just as relevant to know what is better and what is worse.
It is clear, from the fact of time-preference, that 
democracy does not bring political order closer to the natural order, and likewise 
large states (geographically speaking) lead to lack of competition and thus bigger - less libertarian - states.
From these two propositions, it is possible to argue that the direction one ought to move politics is toward 
anti-democratic government 
, and radical political decentralization. Thus, in terms of political alliance, it favors a 
radical right-wing alliance over a 
left-right libertarian alliance.
Aristocracy
NrL adopts a profoundly anti-egalitarian sociological mindset; while not in regards such as legality. It sees societies as profoundly and inherently unequal and hierarchical, for it is only natural for there to be weak and strong, fool and wise, and it is likewise natural for those below to seek support of those above.
From this reality; unhampered by the state, which monopolizes the role that institutions such as the 
aristocracy used to possess, [Note 9] a natural elite would flourish from the fact of human inequality and social hierarchy.
It is, therefore, not hard to envision a community where everyone is legally equal yet the best [Note 10] are awarded particular respect, social authority, and even loyalty by their peers; in other words, a first among equals.
Notes
- ↑ Kind of
- ↑ Certain elements of it
- ↑ These values have been subverted in modernity by modifying their meaning. The only way to solve this is to live virtuously ourselves, and influence others to do the same.
- ↑ For instance, an owner is the monopolist of power over his property
- ↑ Which may also be called private law, to avoid confussion
- ↑ Behaviors such as homosexuality, while sinful; therefore breaking natural law (from one to human nature); don't break natural rights, which are intersubjective (from one person to another).
- ↑ Such as not allowing the consumption of certain substances.
- ↑ In the case the ostracized individual is an owner he may not be evicted from his own property, but if he were to live in quality of tenant of a landlord - as sole or main owner of a community - he may be 'exiled' from it.
- ↑ The state, seeking to expand its power and command loyalty above from every other social institution, weakens the like of the family, church, and community, as well as the traditional role of the local nobility in favor of the central government;
the crown in the beginning, and 
the "nation" now.
This is a particularly Neo-Reactionary standpoint, which can be found in "Total State" by
Auron MacIntyre.
- ↑ Be it the wisest, strongest, most virtuous, and such, depending on the given culture and context.
