I Am a Libertarian

I am a libertarian. I used to be a Libertarian (that is, a member of the Libertarian Party) but since 2000 I have just been a libertarian. It's difficult being a libertarian in American society, and I am far from ideologically pure.

What does it mean to be a libertarian? The basis for the policies of the Libertarian Party is the Principle of Non-Aggression. When a person joins the Libertarian Party, they must sign a pledge disavowing the use of force and fraud to achieve social goals. On its surface, it sounds very difficult to argue against. Its power is in its simplicity. And yet, it has such far-reaching implications towards government policy that most people simply don't feel they can stay on for the entire ride.

There are different kinds of libertarians. The most common type is the minarchist. They advocate small and limited government, so as to maximize personal freedom and liberty. Usually, they use the US Constitution as their guide, since as government structural documents go, it is one of the most liberal in the world, and it is extremely difficult to modify, thereby making it an enduring touchstone. Minarchists will usually start any political discussion by asking, "Is it in the Constitution? Then you can't do it." They're usually fairly open-minded when it comes to social policies. If it doesn't hurt anyone, then the government can't ban it.

Another kind of libertarian is the anarcho-capitalist. They take the Non-Aggression Principle one step further by claiming that the government, being only based on force, cannot be permitted to exist, which is okay because anything the government does can also be done by the Free Market. While the theory is logically consistent, I don't subscribe to this school of thought because it kinda assumes people are inherently good, which I don't believe to be the case. Many of their proposals are trotted out by non-libertarians as proof that libertarians are crazy and should never be elected, with ideas such as privatizing the police and such. A short story by sci-fi author Vernor Vinge, "The Ungoverned", from his collection True Names, actually does a good job of describing some aspects of anarcho-capitalism.

Another, better known strain is the Objectivist. These folks usually cite the system of thought advocated by political philosopher Ayn Rand, also called Objectivism, that proposes that personal self-interest should motivate people's actions, and it includes an inherent mistrust of altruism. The idea seems to be that all self-interest is enlightened self-interest, and that individuals should be left free to pursue that interest. Rand's ideas are mainly articulated in two novels, The Fountainhead (1943) and the world-famous Atlas Shrugged (1957), which near the end features an extended, embedded essay on Objectivism presented as a speech broadcast by the book's secondary character John Galt. It should be noted that while Objectivism and libertarianism have much overlap, and because many Objectivists claim to be libertarians and vice versa, the two political philosophies are not the same, and one is not necessariy representative of the other.

Some political positions are similar to libertarianism without being libertarian per se. Fiscal conservatives, sometimes referred to as paleo-conservatives, are frequently labeled "libertarian", especially if they do not espouse the conservative Christian social policies of Neo-Conservatism. This is the case with many prominent economists, such as Milton Freedman, and a handful of politicians, such as Texas congressman Ron Paul***, former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson, and to a lesser extend former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura. Many fiscal conservatives are concerned primarily with the level of governmental spending and its undue influence on capitalistic systems, and seldom take interest in social policies beyond that.

On the other side we have left-libertarians, the vast majority of which are anti-Drug-War activists. They champion individual rights as epitomized in the Bill of Rights, and generally sympathize with anti-Federal ideas, but have a deep distrust of organizational power, especially corporate power, and so usually cannot bring themselves to be thorough-going fiscal conservatives. They will champion many positions that assume the primacy of the individual, such as legalization of drugs, prostitution, sexual activity, and religious rights, but see use of economic force as interchangeable with government force. Many self-identify as Liberal but will not usually involve themselves with traditionally liberal positions such as poverty assistance or workers' rights.

Who isn't a libertarian? In a nutshell, anyone who insists that the government must do something to assist some segment of society, or to take positive action to achieve a societal goal, cannot be considered a libertarian. Taxation is one of the biggest bugaboos in libertarianism, alongside regulation of business activities and regulation of consensual activities on moral grounds. I would not say it is inherently bad to take a political position that is Liberal or Conservative, but from my perspective I find a lot of people holding those views to willfully ignore the undesirable consequences or side effects of those positions. There tends to be a lot of emotion imbued in most political positions.

Libertarianism is unemotional to a fault. For so many positions, any given position is the result of a cold calculus. To be a moderate libertarian -- a phrase many people believe to be an oxymoron -- one must recognize that we did not get to where we are now overnight, and to attempt to get to where we wish to be overnight would be needlessly destructive. One must recognize that other people take their political positions earnestly. They usually aren't stupid or evil or powermongering. They may not even be ignorant, the next most common conclusion. They may simply disagree with the Non-Aggression principle, or see shades of grey where libertarians see black and white. One must accept that only incremental persuasion, followed by proof of non-destructive results, will create a more libertarian society.

A society where individual freedom and personal responsibility continues to demonstrate why America is the nation that people around the rest of the world aspire to emulating.

David V


*** While it is true that Ron Paul is a social conservative by personal belief, his voting record in Congress has been mostly libertarian, which is why so many pro-choice supporters overlook his personal beliefs in supporting him, and why so many Libertarians felt betrayed when he endorsed Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate (a strongly Neo-Conservative political party) in 2008.