Diversity In Libertarianism
***UNDER CONSTRUCTION*** Part of What Is Wrong With Libertarianism.
There may be two libertarians somewhere who agree with each other about everything, but I am not one of them.
Libertarianism is like a shopping cart, full of different items. You've got libertines, gun loons, tax protesters, entrepreneurs, Austrians, Objectivists, anarcho-capitalists, Georgists, corporate shills... the list is extensive.
Libertarianism is united only by a rhetoric of liberty. Liberty is the central glittering generality of their propaganda. Liberty is vague enough to justify any atrocity. We routinely see libertarians living up to Barry Goldwater's "extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." It's not even the same liberty to all of them.
It would be nice if there was a simple dismissal of libertarianism, but there are so many different kinds that no one argument could apply.
Fundamental Philosophical Diversity
- non-Objectivist vs. Objectivist
- rationalist vs. antirationalist
- essentialist vs. pragmatist
- deontological vs. teleological
- primacy of liberty or rights
- hardcore vs soft core
- left vs. right vs. socialist
- anarcho-capitalist vs. minarchist vs paleolibertarian
Economic Theory Diversity
- Chicago School
- Virginia School (George Mason University Economics Department, Public Choice Theory)
- Austrian School
- Hayekian Weirdness
Diversity of Positions
- Libertarian Party
- LP reform
- David Friedmanites
Diversity on Issues
- abortion, for and against
- UBI, for and against
More Stuff: metaphysical (the original use) versus political normative (versus positive) theoryleft and right
4 types in "Utopia" rationalist vs. antirationalist essentialist vs. pragmatist libertarians http://www.davidbrin.com/libertarianarticle2.html "Justice For The Here And Now", Sterba distinguishes Spencerian and Lockean libertarians, based on primacy of liberty or rights. Shows how either results in requirement for basic positive rights. Rebuts Machan, Rasmussen, Hospers, Mack, and Narvesson. Basis of desires versus liberty. "Both Hayek and Rothbard maintain that, in societies like theirs, the desirable always concords with liberty (or maximal liberty). Rothbard achieved this concordance by molding his sensibilities about the desirable to fit his definition of liberty. Hayek achieved this concordance by molding his definition of liberty to fit his sensibilities about the desirable. http://www.vaz1.net/bill/anarchism/library/MereLibertarianism.html D Friedman hardcore vs soft core ideologues versus preferences (gut) http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/2008/08/two-paths-for-libertarian-party.html Right, left, and other http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/libertarianism/ Radical right libertarians -- such as Rothbard (1978, 1982) and Kirzner (1978) Lockean right-libertarians -- such as Nozick (1974) Georgist libertarianism -- as developed, for example, by George (1879, 1892) and Steiner (1977, 1980, 1981, 1994) ethical libertarianism political libertarianism philosophical libertarianism (free will) left/right/socialist (Karl Widerquist's encyclopedia article) value vs right (Narvesson) http://www.againstpolitics.com/libertarianism/ (1) that liberty is the sole value to be promoted by governments and individuals (sometimes called the "teleological" version of libertarianism) and (2) that liberty is our sole right (sometimes called "deontological" libertarianism; this is the view that the word "libertarianism", unqualified, is generally taken to stand for nowadays.) "the right" versus "the good"? rights theory, consequentialist, human flourishing http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2004_07_28.shtml#1091184329 Primary division of libertarians: consequentialists (Hume, Hayek, Epstein, Rand) natural rights (Nozick, etc.) see http://www.reason.com/9903/bk.ls.fuzzy.html LP vs non-LP LP vs LP reform Austrian vs. Chicago economics Rawlsekians http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/jul/28/00024// Rawls' liberty principle appeals to the so-called Rawlsekians, a group
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2008/jul/28/00024// Rawls' liberty principle appeals to the so-called Rawlsekians, a group of young libertarians who want to combine the views of Rawls with those of Friedrich Hayek, but Rawls himself was no Hayekian. So you can see, libertarianism can attract two types of people: 1- Those that are libertarian because they agree with the libertarian means of minimal government. 2- Those that are libertarian because they believe that libertarian means will produce the end result that they desire. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/27/15718/5328
Samuel Freeman does a good job of showing how libertarian ideas of property differ from liberal ideas in his "Illiberal Libertarians: Why Libertarianism Is Not a Liberal View" paper, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Vol. 30 n. 2. Locke is neither libertarian nor liberal on property on this account, and I think that's the right interpretation.) Classification of liberals.
Having no conception of a political society, libertarians have no conception of the common good, those basic interests of each individual that according to liberals are to be maintained for the sake of justice by the impartial exercise of public political power. (page 149; footnote omitted) "that libertarianism's resemblance to liberalism is superficial; in the end, libertarians reject essential liberal institutions. Correctly understood, libertarianism resembles a view that liberalism historically defined itself against, the doctrine of private political power that underlies feudalism. Like feudalism, libertarianism conceives of justified political power as based in a network of private contracts. It rejects the idea, essential to liberalism, that political power is a public power, to be impartially exercised for the common good."
1 classical liberals: laissez fair, but allows redistribution to preserve mkts
allow's property-owner's state (p123)
2 high liberals: philosophical liberalism and institutions 3 libertarians Locke's Second Treatise par. 73, 120, 138, 139 show government has authority to regulate, tax, and burden property for the common good. Liberalism (classical or high) has 6 institutional features (p123):
1. the public recognition and legal enforcement of basic rights and liberties equally provided for all citizens 2. some account of equality of opportunity with open careers and positions 3. a central role assigned to efficient markets in allocating productive resources 4. government's role in the production of public goods 5. government's duty to provide a social minimum 6. the public nature of political authority
"the right" versus "the good". "The right" in this sense is what Robyn Eckersley defines as "the idea that the common structure of political action should constrain and limit what elected governments may decide in the name of the state, what citizens may do in pursuit of their own conceptions of the good life and what economic actors may do in pursuit of economic gain."