| From | Message |
Cavalier
Guest
5/28/2002
18:31:42
|
 Subject: The Problem of Libertarianism
IP: Logged
Message:
As an Englishman, I find the problem that we face as Conservatives today is surely of distinguishing ourselves from Libertarians. This is a problem in my country, and by default, I find it becoming a problem in yours.
Both the Libertarian and Conservative movements encompass anti-statist and free-market beliefs, but (especially within the British Conservative Party, of which I am a member), as the two groups work together on these issues, this leads to a danger of diluting the Conservative message. Many Libertarians exist in both the Republican and Conservative Parties (see www.connectweb.org/, for an example of how easily this can happen), and are subverting the movement from within using arguments of electoral utility - "appear tolerant and socially liberal in order to gain further support" - to change policy and the nature of the movement.
Another reason that this is made so easy for many Libertarians to subvert Conservatism (in my country, prominent Conservatives are found arguing for narcotics legalisation and Gay marriage - such as Michael Portillo) is that they argue that Conservatism is no different from Classical Liberalism - Conservatism's old enemy that found it's re-birth in the neo-conservatism of the 1980's - this lets them argue that social liberal policies are the natural ground of the Conservative movement.
The only way we are to make sure that Conservatism aviods becomig just a mirror image of the old Liberalism is to return to our Traditionalist Conservative roots - a task that I am finding greatly eased thanks to your excellent site.
Let us stay vigilant, lest we let the enemy in through the back-door.
Cheers and God Bless,
The Cavalier.
|
Jim Kalb
Administrator
5/29/2002
05:39:11
| RE: The Problem of Libertarianism
IP: Logged
Message:
The immmediate practical problem posed by ideological libertarianism is I think less acute in the United States. Anti-statism has always been common ground on the right here so there's less tendency to think that it requires getting rid of traditional police powers and support for social institutions like the family, or that there's something horrible about national borders. Also, conservatives rely on votes from the religious right which keeps them from going to extremes in a libertarian direction.
I do think it's very important to know how and why one differs from the libertarians. It's a problem in America as I think elsewhere that the rhetoric of individual freedom as the political summum bonum seems to most people the only alternative to a basically socialistic approach. You can't defend what you can't explain, so unless that can be changed I do think in the long run the problem you point to is the same here.
|
Cavalier
Guest
6/05/2002
18:21:01
| RE: The Problem of Libertarianism
IP: Logged
Message:
Message:
It seems that the crypto-Libertarian movement that seems to have taken over American Conservatism (in the way that Libertarians are taking over British Conservatism) is the "Neo-Conservative" movement - who have become so prevalent since the 1980's - and seem to be fiscal conservatives who have largely accepted the shibboleths of Politically Correct Cultural Leftism.
Your stabilising influence is however, as you said, your "religious right", something that we desperately need to become more pervasive in the British Conservative Party. This is an improving situation thanks to the Conservative Christian Fellowship - http://ccfwebsite.com/
We must however, have an intelectual movement to show open opposition to the politically correct shibboleths of Libertarianism and Neo-Conservatism, in order that they do not dilute, and thus adversely effect Conservative principle and practice in the long term...
|
Jim Kalb
Administrator
6/05/2002
19:04:01
| RE: The Problem of Libertarianism
IP: Logged
Message:
An interesting comment. I had never thought of the neocons as crypto-libertarians - most of them have no special dislike of the modern omnicompetent administrative state - but you're right that especially in recent years they have tended more and more to support a "fiscally conservative socially liberal" approach that can be viewed as a sort of mainstream approximation to libertarianism.
I certainly agree that an explicit intellectual movement in opposition to the tendencies of thought that inevitably lead to PC is necessary, and that such a movement will inevitably be at odds with both neoconservatism and ideological liberalism. It seems to me that once self-defining liberty becomes the political summum bonum the game is over in principle, so what's necessary is to make room for substantive goods as final political goals.
|
John
Guest
6/09/2002
20:39:31
| RE: The Problem of Libertarianism
IP: Logged
Message:
Here's an idea:
Neocons and Libertarians as simply divided between their means to an end. While both the neocons & most libertarians realize that without a state the "freedom project" in the West is doomed, the neocons want to spread it by force and economic pressure to the whole globe. Libertarians, meanwhile, focus on their homes and would pursue an isolationist foreign policy (the fringes would dissolve the state, of course).
They would be the Trotskites and Stalinists of "liberty" of the right-liberal (free market) variety.
Does this make sense, or does it simply sound clever? :)
|
Jim Kalb
Administrator
6/10/2002
13:52:42
| RE: The Problem of Libertarianism
IP: Logged
Message:
I'm not sure the Trot/Stalinoid analogy works.
Both ideological libertarians and neocons are philosophical liberals - they make satisfaction of human desires the highest good. The libertarians tend to view contract as the sole sufficient way of achieving that good while the neocons think a more coercive structure is needed to guarantee security and to achieve certain social goals like equal opportunity. So that far you are right.
My main comment is that the scheme can easily be extended to comprehend standard contemporary liberals. After all, they have the same summum bonum - getting what one wants - but simply interpret the government's role in achieving that summum bonum in a more comprehensive way than even the neocons. In addition to equal opportunity they think government should get involved in bringing about equal results and should act more vigorously in dismantling social institutions like sex roles and ethnic ties that interfere with the equality of individuals. The ultimate goal, though, is still the same.
|
Jason Eubanks
Guest
6/12/2002
04:39:49
| RE: The Problem of Libertarianism
IP: Logged
Message:
The most apt description of neocons and their rise to power I've yet seen:
http://www.originaldissent.com/shpak040902
|