Suchergebnisse

'Libertarianism: A Primer' by David Boaz is reviewed.

IN "LIBERTY AND NATURE," RASMUSSEN AND DEN UYL USE AN ARISTOTELIAN CONCEPTION OF THE HUMAN GOOD TO PROVIDE A FOUNDATION FOR LIBERTARIANISM. THEIR PRINCIPAL ARGUMENT IS THAT INTELLIGENCE AND VIRTUE ARE NECESSARY INGREDIENTS IN EVERY FLOURISHING HUMAN LIFE, BUT SINCE THESE ARE NOT GOODS THAT THE STATE CAN DISTRIBUTE TO INDIVIDUALS, GOVERNMENTS CAN PLAY ONLY A MODEST ROLE IN PROMOTING THE COMMON GOOD. THE STATE BEST PROMOTES THE WELL-BEING OF ITS CITIZENS BY ALLOWING THEM TO PURSUE HAPPINESS IN A MANNER OF THEIR OWN CHOOSING, AND DEFENDING THEM AGAINST THOSE WHO WOULD INVADE THEIR MORAL BOUNDARIES.

The essay is an overview of libertarian literature. It begins dealing with lexical issues concerning the meaning of liberalism, classical liberalism, conservatism and libertarianism. There are two meanings of libertarianism: a large one, as a free market oriented liberalism, and a strict one, as an extreme classical liberalism which calls in question the State as the main enemy of liberty. Novelist Ayn Rand is one of the main sources for contemporary libertarian theory, although she never called herself libertarian. Murray N. Rothbard is the most important libertarian thinker; he was an "austrian" economist and a natural law theorist who considered free market as the social institution capable to satisfy every human need, security and justice included. In response to rothbardian society without a State, Robert Nozick exposed a minarchist position, in favour of a minimal State limited to the function of protecting individual rights. This distinction between anarchism and minarchism is a crucial one for libertarian theory. The most interesting current literature is that in rothbardian, natural law and natural rights style. There is also an italian libertarian literature, including works of political theory, philosophy of law, environmentalism and history.

LIBERTARIAN ARGUMENTS ABOUT THE EMPIRICAL BENEFITS OF CAPITALISM ARE, AS YET, INADEQUATE TO CONVINCE ANYONE WHO LACKS LIBERTARIAN PHILOSOPHICAL CONVICTION. YET "PHILOSOPHICAL" LIBERTARIANISM FOUNDERS ON INTERNAL CONTRADICTIONS THAT RENDER IT UNFIT TO MAKE LIBERTARIANS OUT OF ANYONE WHO DOES NOT HAVE STRONG CONSEQUENTIALIST REASONS FOR LIBERTARIAN BELIEF. THE JOINT FAILURE OF THESE TWO APPROACHES TO LIBERTARIANISM EXPLAINS WHY THEY ARE BOTH PRESENT IN ORTHODOX LIBERTARIANISM--THEY HIDE EACH OTHER'S WEAKNESSES, THEREBY PERPETUATING THEM. LIBERTARIANISM RETAINS SIGNIFICANT POTENTIAL FOR ILLUMINATING THE MODERN WORLD BECAUSE OF ITS DISTANCE FROM MAINSTREAM INTELLECTUAL ASSUMPTIONS. BUT THIS POTENTIAL WILL REMAIN UNFULFILLED UNTIL ITS IDEOLOGICAL SUPERSTRUCTURE IS DISMANTLED.

Willis reviews 'Libertarianism: A Primer' by David Boaz and 'What It Means to be a Libertarian: A Personal Interpretation' by Charles Murray.

LIKE JEFFREY FRIEDMAN'S PROPOSED POSTLIBERTARIANISM, MAINSTREAM LIBERTARIANISM HAS ALWAYS EMPHASIZED THE CONSEQUENCES OF ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS FOR HUMAN WELL-BEING. MAINSTREAM LIBERTARIANISM DOES, HOWEVER, SHARE SOME SIMILARITIES WITH THE RADICAL LIBERTARIANISM CRITICIZED BY FRIEDMAN, AS CAN BE SEEN BY CONSIDERING POSSIBLE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTION ALEC NOVE RECENTLY POSED FOR POSTLIBERTARIANS.