« Ford Rollover Case Update | Main | Why Can't I Gekt A Freain' Laser Here? »
March 22, 2005
Libertarians: Huh? Part 4
Randy Barnett comments on some interesting psychological analization of Libertarians from Liberty Unbound.
Michael Acree writes,
Returning, in any event, to Nozick's question, I think one reason why (a thoroughgoing) libertarianism doesn't appeal even to many who call themselves libertarian, is that it doesn't leave anyone in charge — to keep ourselves and others forcibly in line with ascetic codes we still believe are necessary. More and more Americans in the last century have been willing to abandon the idea of Someone up in the sky who is in charge of everything — so long as there is somebody running everything from Washington. Everyone, not just libertarians, will resist the hell out of authority wherever it asserts itself — but, like adolescents, we still want it there to rebel against.People have a harder time reaching libertarianism from the Left, just because they are giving up on a model of the state as a good, nurturing parent. But once they do, they appear more likely than those coming from the Right to go all the way to anarchism. Conservative libertarians retain the family model of the state; they are merely looking for a better parent. But that is not the same thing as growing up.
Barnett writes
Apart from the end of this passage seeming to be internally in conflict with its beginning, it fails to explain why libertarians are more willing to be perceived as deviant, and why we should think that they are more or less so than political activists of the right or the left. More importantly, this and the other characteristics he associates with libertarians--such as their approach to knowledge--are not grounded in the same basic psychological processes as his analyses of liberals and conservatives. To me, at least, something was missing here, though to be fair to Acree his topic was why libertarianism was not more appealing to liberals or conservatives so assessing their psychology was more germaine.
One of the main reasons that I am not a Libertarian is that I realize there needs to be someone in charge of some things that Libertarians do not think are government responsibilities. Someone has to set rules that are often abitrary or even minorly unjust for society to function and for other more fundamental rights to be protected. This does not mean that I think our government should not be dramatically reduced in size (about a third of its current size would be fine with me), but it means I will never be a Libertarian.
The other reason that I am not a Libertarian Party member is that Libertarians are often nuts and care more about winning arguments and ideological purity than actually changing policies in the real world. See these posts here, here, and here for more details.
Posted by Pete at March 22, 2005 06:19 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.petetheelder.com/mt-tb.cgi/414