THE PROBLEM WITH LIBERTARIANISM

Copyright 2008,

by Surly

I once called myself a Libertarian. I can't anymore. I loved Libertarian philosophy because of its strong, principled and well-argued position on human rights. I still do. The best, most cogent arguments for individual human rights as the best way for all humanity just can't be superseded. Everything in the Libertarian cannon, all political positions and solutions arose out of this support for human rights. No valid government could exist without the free support of its people, and its primary job was to protect and promote individual human rights. All other governments were illegitimate because they were based on some conception of coercion, or might makes right; individuals must be controlled for the good of all. Libertarianism opposed societies of status and privilege and promoted individual merit.

But things changed. I began to see supposedly Libertarian businesspeople misinterpret the freedoms that they would have under Libertarian policies as a right to unrestrained and unregulated business activity, even privileges. These people either didn't understand the importance of the foundations of human rights or else they chose to ignore them if it allowed their greed to rule. Most of them really loved the Libertarian anti-tax position. I saw little respect for individual rights, only a rampant capitalism. It was obvious that they didn't understand the personal responsibility and discipline required to be Libertarian.

Once, in the early days of the movement, I proposed to a party of Libertarians that the licensing of businesses by the state was against Libertarian principles. Business belonged solely in the private realm and must be completely disconnected from government. One shouldn't influence the other. They didn't get it. It was then that I had a whiff of the end.

Libertarianism once was radical in the best of American traditions, fostering freedom for the individual and promoting a public debate among ourselves about how we should live to achieve happiness and fulfillment. I don't hear that anymore.

Americans didn't warm to Libertarianism, demonstrating to me that they didn't understand it or felt that it was too extreme. That, in itself, made me see how irrational Americans are and how far we had fallen from the visions of the founders. After all, Libertarianism is very near the founding principles of America: freedom and democracy; it's just a logical extension of that line of thought that created this great nation.

Another problem that I began to see as the years rolled by and Libertarianism morphed into something more conservative, was that Libertarians seemed to ignore the existence of society and that a common, collective realm existed. Privatization was ever more the buzzword, to the loss of any recognition of the public "We, the People". This is their legacy they gave to the Republicans through Washington establishment think tanks, such as the Cato Institute, now considered a conservative institution. I shudder.

Libertarians just didn't understand psychology and how emotional makeup/conditioning affects political beliefs. Their psychological heroes were Objectivists Ayn Rand and Nathaniel Brandon, not the most insightful theoreticians, more ideologues. They didn't understand the roots of authoritarianism, even as they railed against it. Libertarians make a hidden assumption that rationality will prevail in their belief that there are more rational beings than non-rational at any given time. Mass human behavior seems to belie that belief.

Libertarianism is an ideal, but it is also an ideology, thus prone to the defect of all ideologies: that they are often utopian and limited in their conception of what humans are capable of being, constricting the human spirit and its unlimited possibilities. That is why I can no longer consider myself to be a Libertarian.