Libertarianism

Some Supplemental Reason Reading (and Viewing) on ‘The Libertarian Moment’

|

THE SMEAR CAMPAIGN CONTINUES! |||

As mentioned earlier, the New York Times Magazine has just published a long and entertaining feature titled "Has the 'Libertarian Moment' Finally Arrived?" Reason and its staffers have been chewing on that subject for several years now. A partial reading list:

* In November 2007, as the Ron Paul rEVOLution was first catching fire, Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch were asked by the Washington Post (and after, its readers) to explain what this whole libertarian business was all about. Excerpt from that:

When a fierce Republican foe of the wars on drugs and terrorism is able, without really trying, to pull in a record haul of campaign cash on a day dedicated to an attempted regicide, it's clear that a new and potentially transformative force is growing in American politics.

That force is less about Paul than about the movement that has erupted around him—and the much larger subset of Americans who are increasingly disillusioned with the two major political parties' soft consensus on making government ever more intrusive at all levels, whether it's listening to phone calls without a warrant, imposing fines of half a million dollars for broadcast "obscenities" or jailing grandmothers for buying prescribed marijuana from legal dispensaries.

It's the glasses. |||

* In December 2008, as the world was descending into a financial hell replete with statist over-reaction, Gillespie/Welch doubled down with "The Libertarian Moment: Despite all leading indicators to the contrary, America is poised to enter a new age of freedom." Contentious claim:

As in 1971, there is no shortage of reasons to grumble about the state of American liberty at the end of 2008. As this issue went to press, Congress had passed the economic equivalent of the PATRIOT Act, a nearly trillion-dollar bailout of the financial industry, involving whole-scale nationalization of the mortgage lending business [….] Despite (or perhaps because of) eight years of a president who has increased regulatory spending by more than 61 percent in real terms, "deregulation" has become a concept even more panic-inducing than Janet Jackson's nipple. Whether in international security, the financial world, or the cultural arena, the answer to everything seems to be a new clampdown. It is nearly impossible to cross a North American border without showing a passport, revealing biomedical information, and being entered into a database for decades. Every day across this great country some city council is finding a new private activity to ban, whether it's selling food cooked with trans fats, using a cell phone behind the wheel, or smoking a cigarette outdoors. And the two major-party candidates for president are trying to out-populist one another with Oliver Stone–level attacks on Wall Street "greed," while advancing economic plans filled with centralized industrial policy and extravagant promises that would undoubtedly burst the federal government's already near-broken budget.

Yet if 1971 contained a few flickers of light in the authoritarian darkness, 2008 is chock full of halogen-bright beacons shouting "This way!" Turn away from the overhyped prize of the Oval Office and all the dreary, government expanding policies and politics that go with it, and the picture is not merely one of plausible happy endings to our current sob stories of mortgage-finance meltdowns and ever-lengthening war, but something far more radical, more game-changing, than all that we've grown to expect.

Did we mention that we wrote a book? |||

* From that essay (which you can watch Gillespie talk about at a February 2009 International Students for Liberty conference) sprang a 2011 book, called The Declaration of Independents: How Libertarian Politics Can Fix What's Wrong With America (Public Affairs). Some contentious claims from that, culled from an August 2011 Reason excerpt:

Where will the next political smart mob, the next online swarm, come from? Look wherever there is too broad a gap between the two major political parties and their bases. One good short-term bet is the issue of rolling back the drug war, which professional Democrats from the president on down openly mock while a growing number of Republicans (such as presidential candidates Ron Paul and Gary Johnson) gain surprising support by uttering the unspeakable. Other swarms will likely be much more hostile to libertarian policy aims…but each new wave will succeed at doing to two-party politics what technology has done to the rest of the economy: undermine the gatekeepers who want to control your life.

Political independence has individual virtues as well. Thinking for yourself requires much more work than setting your compass by the direction of the tribe, but, oh, the liberation. Suddenly the political bully boys look a good deal more ridiculous, tawdry, and intellectually beatable. There are other hyphenated weirdos, just over there, who have genuinely interesting things to say. Voters free from the affiliation of party membership are more inclined to view political claims with the skepticism they richly deserve, to hear the atavistic dog whistle of partisan politics as a deliberate attack on the senses rather than a rousing call to productive action. By refusing to confer legitimacy on the two accepted forms of political organization and discourse, independents (especially of the libertarian flavor) hint strongly that another form—something unpredictable, fantastical, liberating—is gathering to take their place.

(Speaking of Lou Reed, you can read another Declaration of Independents chapter, on the globally liberating effects of rock music, here.) More bibliography, after the jump.

* In June 2012, a year after their Dec'l o' Indies-inspired "Ask a Libertarian" YouTube marathon, the Glimmer Glower Twins were made to answer the question, so where's that damned libertarian moment you promised us?

* Various Reason TV interview subjects have also chewed on the libertarian moment, from Glenn Reynolds to Peter Thiel to Matt Kibbe to Norm Singleton to David Boaz to Rand Paul.

Buy it! |||

* By August 2013, Gillespie was ready to raise the bar: "Can We Start Talking About the Libertarian *Era* Already?"

* In May of this year, Gillespie updated the manifesto with "Libertarianism 3.0: The Koch Brothers, the GOP, and What Comes Next."

* And in June, Senior Editor Brian Doherty, in the wake of David Brat's upset primary victory over then-House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Virginia), explored the question, "Can a 'Libertarian Moment' in Politics Be Very Libertarian?"

Speaking of Doherty, there is simply no understanding of present, future, or past libertarianism without his foundational 2007 book, Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement. And coming full circle to Ron Paul, Doherty was also author of the 2012 book, Ron Paul's rEVOLution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

23 responses to “Some Supplemental Reason Reading (and Viewing) on ‘The Libertarian Moment’

  1. You know who else wrote a book expounding on their political philosophy…

    1. Sarah Palin?

    2. Elliot Rodger?

    3. Al Franken?

    4. Glenn Beck?

    5. Adolf Hitler?

  2. “”pdxtran
    Minneapolis, MN 41 minutes ago

    Libertarianism sounds good when you’re young. Imagine no foreign wars and no restrictions on fun stuff! But if you look at the countries whose governments approach the libertarian model–no government functions except the military, the police, and the courts and no restrictions on economic activity–you find that they’re all in the Third World.

    When libertarians imagine their perfect world, they see themselves as some sort of free-wheeling aristocracy within that world. They never imagine themselves as part of the majority living in shantytowns.””

    “”
    T3D
    San Francisco 42 minutes ago

    Libertarians aren’t that much different from the Tea Party, except without Koch funding or Koch-specific goals. Just another fringe group. And in case Kennedy is still uncertain about same-sex marriage, she needs to read the Bill of Rights, which, as I recollect, still guarantees equal rights and protection to EVERYONE, not just for those you like. “”

    rosa
    ca 47 minutes ago

    Thin gruel. It’s been said that Libertarians are Republicans that just want to smoke dope and get laid, that there is no ‘there’ there beyond self-centered myopia.”

    Really? Get rid of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? Yes? And what then? I’m 66 and I have never heard an answer in the last 50 years. Oh, and I just dearly love their anti-woman, anti-choice stance,

    1. Someone should tell T3D that we were the original Koch funded party.

    2. Someone should tell pdxtran that Third World countries indeed have major restrictions on economic activity. That’s why they’re so poor.

    3. Someone should tell Gilmore how to properly use the italics thing so people don’t start talking to him like he’s a 66yr old woman.

      1. As consolation, your views on abortion are just as relevant as a post-menopausal woman’s.

      2. I was confused there for a second GIL. Luckily my response to that lady is :

        You should be angry at the people who stole your money for 40+ years, not at the people who said all along that you should have been allowed to keep it, save it, and invest it for your future/retirement/healthcare. Let’s not even discuss these same “selfless” assholes you probably claim to love have virtually ruined the medical industry, advocated/white-washed the deaths of innocents, and shoveled shitboatloads of money towards the worst (one of the?) education system in the “free” world. But since they don’t overtly say that abortion bothers them, I guess all that other horrendous shit is justifiable. Do us all a favor Rosa and die selflessly (in a bathtub with a toaster) so more needful people can collect your ill-gotten benefits. &*^%

  3. Wait a second! Those guys wrote a book? In 2011? Why haven’t they mentioned it before?

    1. Also, when is Lou Reed’s next tour?! That guy is a performing dynamo.

      1. Right after the Browns win the Super Bowl. His season ticket seats are between Bea Arthur and Lucy.

    2. I think it was really some futile effort to get the book turned into a TV show. Like that’ll ever happen…

  4. TEAM BLUE is getting quite nervous about Rand Paul.

    Warning: contains comments.

    clar 28 minutes ago
    @sjackson44 Who wrote this BS, every one knows Rand and his father are racist!!! As a minority I don’t give Rand Paul a second thought!!! Republicans its your policies, one issue will not give Rand cross over appeal . He was against the Civil Rights Act now he supports it? Showing your face with racist Steve King will get you no minority votes .The once racist southern Dems. are now the racist southern republican party. Running around the country lying and bashing the president will not endear republicans to black voter. The level of disrespect republicans have shown the president is disgraceful.

    1. Maybe, but there’s still lots of time for Team Red to muck it all up. Not that I think it will be so much better if they don’t manage to muck it up, but should they not manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory the butt-hurt from Team Blue will be delicious .

    2. *As a minority I don’t give Rand Paul a second thought!!! *

      This person sounds like s/he doesn’t give a second thought to voting for anyone but a Democrat, I’d bet. Which sure saves a lot of troublesome “thinking” every couple years. Amirite?

  5. Libertarianism won’t by outvoting the Democrats, Neo-cons, etc. Govt will just go not with a bang, but a whimper. Sometimes I think Frum is right; this mag has no principles.

    1. Frum is a ‘tard. Just another asexual reproduction of Brooks and “compassionate” conservatism.

    2. What would he know about principles?

  6. I believe when the statists die who want to use government to oppress people who don’t harm others, they’ll find God grants them their wish, and removes their freedom and relegates them to hell where freedom doesn’t exist. While those who are willing to give freedom to others will be given freedom by God in heaven.

    Ann Rand was probably stunned, but that’s OK.

    If you want to go to heaven, you need to be a libertarian. After all, you can’t have freedom unless you are willing to give it to others.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.