Libertarian doctrine varies dramatically within the confines
of Libertarianism (part of Libertarianism I guess, being as Libertarian as you
care to be), but in its purest form, it is a Utopia of strict objectivism that
appeases the prevailing left with a staunch adherence to personal liberty and
does the same to the right with a likewise laissez-faire attitude toward
business. The ruling elite in a Libertarian paradise cedes all questions of
personal behavior to the citizenry, as it should be, but in devil’s trade for
that, the personal behavior of commerce becomes likewise unregulated, and
that’s a problem. It seems to me to be a bit of a self-assigned hall pass to
rapacious mercantilists whose personal appetites veer from churchly ways.
It’s Republicans with bongs. It’s feeling bad about cutting
school lunches. The core Libertarian message is that if things get bad enough,
the people for whom it is bad will pool resources and correct the problem. The
inferred corollary is, “and if they don’t, screw ‘em.” Whatever the attitude
toward social safety nets, when it comes to infrastructure and public services,
systems are required, and they need to be consistent and maintained to good
health, and under the fat-trimming knives of Libertarian leadership, everything
from pothole repairs to hospitals to soup kitchens falls under the butcher’s
gimlet eye.
There is a strong advocacy of Libertarianism within certain
elements of the tech sector, notably the highest echelons of management and
ownership, one that suffers from a myopia that relates significantly to Obama’s
both celebrated and reviled utterance, “You didn’t build that.” It’s the tech
wealthy becoming wealthier, perceived as due reward for their pioneering
individualism, conveniently forgetting that the technology their new technology
hitchhikes on was developed through government research. The same is true of
pharmacology, space exploration and many other fields that have more and more
come into the realm of private commercial ventures. After a few decades of
Libertarianism, all of that seed research dries up and you’re left with a
passel of cutthroat entrepreneurs fighting over the last leftovers from the
final sustained periods of pure research.
The first thing Libertarians will tell you is that they are fiscally
conservative but socially liberal. Social liberalism requires funding though,
and until you square with that, you’re not socially liberal. That’s just the
way it is sold in the marketing materials, not as Randian feudalism, but rather
ultimate freedom. It’s a second-rate philosophy popularized by a third-rate
novelist whose big idea should have died right along with her.
Libertarians are refugees from the Republican Party for whom
financial and environmental deregulation was proceeding too slowly. Or maybe in
Johnson and Weld’s cases they were sick of being on the B-List and smelled
blood in the water so they decided to make some hay while the election was
unstable. The driving precept of Libertarianism remains unfettered capitalism,
which wouldn’t annoy me quite so much except that it is always sold under a
predictive model of spontaneous social cohesion that holds no historical model.
The Libertarian concept of a free market is flawed at its
core because we no longer club each other to steal wildebeest meat, which is
the beginning and the end of pure free markets. Anything more than that is
influenced by structure. The restructuring of these “free” markets according to
the whims of Libertarianism as pertains to patents, contracts, property, monopoly
and enforcement (and these are the economic pillars that truly matter) are
always going to be to the advantage of an elite that knows better, a kind of
presumptive benevolent monarchy of the smug. The trick for hardcore
Libertarians is to get as close to the clubs and wildebeest model as possible
while keeping the lottery mentality afloat in the minds of a trusting public. I
prefer an accountable democracy.
The Libertarian political philosophy you describe here is, interestingly, the diametric opposite of the post-WWII social vision launched by the Attlee Labor government. Our healthcare was free and excellent. My university education was completely free (we were poor) and our city and its infrastructure received heavy investments of public funds. National Insurance ensured a decent retirement. Not a perfect place to be sure but definitely a place where the solidarity was palpable.
ReplyDeleteI have rarely been so jealous of a paragraph as this one:
ReplyDelete"The first thing Libertarians will tell you is that they are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Social liberalism requires funding though, and until you square with that, you’re not socially liberal. That’s just the way it is sold in the marketing materials, not as Randian feudalism, but rather ultimate freedom. It’s a second-rate philosophy popularized by a third-rate novelist whose big idea should have died right along with her."
Ye Gods, yes.