{"id":3367,"date":"2007-03-19T16:30:29","date_gmt":"2007-03-19T23:30:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2007\/03\/19\/libertarianism-and-the-war\/"},"modified":"2007-03-19T17:00:38","modified_gmt":"2007-03-20T00:00:38","slug":"libertarianism-and-the-war","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2007\/03\/19\/libertarianism-and-the-war\/","title":{"rendered":"Libertarianism and the War"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In my <a href=\"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/justin\/?articleid=10682\">review<\/a> of Brian Doherty&#8217;s <em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Radicals-Capitalism-Freewheeling-American-Libertarian\/dp\/1586483501\/antiwarbookstore\/\">Radicals for Capitalism<\/a><\/em> I mentioned the Cato Institute&#8217;s online <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cato-unbound.org\/2007\/03\/07\/brian-doherty\/libertarianism-past-and-prospects\/\">symposium<\/a>, which utilizes the book as a take-off point for a discussion about the libertarian movement in general, and I note here the posting of Virginia Postrel&#8217;s <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cato-unbound.org\/2007\/03\/18\/virginia-postrel\/an-18th-century-brain-in-a-21st-century-head\/\">contribution<\/a>, which takes the &#8220;pragmatist&#8221; line: <a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Ayn_Rand\">Rand<\/a> and <a href=\"http:\/\/www.mises.org\/content\/mnr.asp\">Rothbard<\/a> are &#8220;dogmatists,&#8221; and really, in Postrel&#8217;s view, religious rather than political activists. This is nonsense, of course, and the whole thing is really a set-up for La Postrel to wonder why most libertarians aren&#8217;t &#8220;freethinkers,&#8221; i.e. more like herself:<\/p>\n<p><em>&#8220;There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s no libertarian hierarchy to excommunicate heretics, but within libertarian organizations free thinkers do feel informal pressures to conform. It\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s safest and most rewarding to stick to a straightforward anti-government script.&#8221;<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Too bad for those who, like Postrel, yearn for another, more pro-government script. This may be a bit odd coming from a former editor of <em>Reason<\/em>, supposedly the premier libertarian magazine, and yet when you think about the one big issue on which many alleged &#8220;libertarians&#8221; have allied with the State &#8212; the Iraq war, and the larger &#8220;war on terrorism&#8221; &#8212; this longing for &#8220;complexities&#8221; and &#8220;trade-offs,&#8221; as Postrel puts it, isn&#8217;t all that hard to explain. If you&#8217;re trying to make it in the world of journalism, and selling yourself as a quasi-libertarian pundit, then you don&#8217;t want to offend the delicate sensibilities of newspaper publishers and other potential markets by all that &#8220;deductive&#8221; &#8220;dogmatism,&#8221; but you still want to somehow preserve your &#8220;libertarian&#8221; bona fides. What to do? Why, <a href=\"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=2394\">sell out<\/a> on the war, which <a href=\"http:\/\/209.85.165.104\/search?q=cache:CT7_crwljjwJ:www.antiwar.com\/justin\/j050302.html+site:antiwar.com+%22virginia+postrel%22+antiwar.com&#038;hl=en&#038;ct=clnk&#038;cd=10&#038;gl=us\">Postrel<\/a> &#8212; in the hallowed <a href=\"http:\/\/209.85.165.104\/search?q=cache:CT7_crwljjwJ:www.antiwar.com\/justin\/j050302.html+site:antiwar.com+%22virginia+postrel%22+antiwar.com&#038;hl=en&#038;ct=clnk&#038;cd=10&#038;gl=us\">tradition <\/a>of <em>Reason<\/em> magazine &#8212; has <a href=\"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/There%E2%80%99s%20no%20libertarian%20hierarchy%20to%20excommunicate%20heretics,%20but%20within%20libertarian%20organizations%20free%20thinkers%20do%20feel%20informal%20pressures%20to%20conform.%20It%E2%80%99s%20safest%20and%20most%20rewarding%20to%20stick%20to%20a%20straightforward%20anti-government%20script,\">done<\/a> with <a href=\"http:\/\/209.85.165.104\/search?q=cache:VX5DwjIl71cJ:www.antiwar.com\/justin\/j030303.html+site:antiwar.com+%22virginia+postrel%22+antiwar.com&#038;hl=en&#038;ct=clnk&#038;cd=3&#038;gl=us\">alacrity<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>After all, what are you, one of those hated &#8220;deductive&#8221; &#8220;dogmatists&#8221;? Why not be a &#8220;freethinker&#8221; and contemplate the aesthetic glories of state-sponsored mass murder?<\/p>\n<p>Come to think of it, none of the commenters on Doherty&#8217;s book so much as mention the Iraq war &#8212; and <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cato-unbound.org\/2007\/03\/08\/brink-lindsey\/libertarians-in-an-unlibertarian-world\/\">Brink Lindsey<\/a> was openly <a href=\"http:\/\/www.reason.com\/news\/show\/32065.html\">supportive<\/a> of it, as <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cato-unbound.org\/2007\/03\/14\/tom-g-palmer\/libertarianism-or-liberty\/\">Tom Palmer<\/a>, <a href=\"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=1728\">another<\/a> self-styled &#8220;moderate,&#8221; was <a href=\"http:\/\/antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=1644\">supportive<\/a> of the U.S.-installed &#8220;democratic&#8221; government, going so far as to travel to Iraq to &#8220;advise&#8221; the Iraqi parliament. Postrel cites this as an example of how &#8220;libertarians&#8221; doing meaningful political work may sometimes find themselves in the business of &#8220;state-building&#8221; &#8212; although she doesn&#8217;t mention if these &#8220;libertarians&#8221; will be working under a government contract.<\/p>\n<p>What seems truly odd, however, is that these people are discussing the past, present, and future of a movement &#8212; libertarianism &#8212; that came to prominence in the modern era largely in opposition to the Vietnam war (along with Nixon&#8217;s wage and price controls). Yet one searches, in vain, for so much as a mention of the current war in their commentaries.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In my review of Brian Doherty&#8217;s Radicals for Capitalism I mentioned the Cato Institute&#8217;s online symposium, which utilizes the book as a take-off point for a discussion about the libertarian movement in general, and I note here the posting of Virginia Postrel&#8217;s contribution, which takes the &#8220;pragmatist&#8221; line: Rand and Rothbard are &#8220;dogmatists,&#8221; and really, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[676],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-3367","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-antiwar-movement"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3367","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3367"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3367\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3367"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3367"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3367"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=3367"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}