David Boaz, writing in the Cato@Liberty blog, noted that a recent Gallup poll pegged the voting-age population of America at 23% libertarian.
He also noted that since the word "libertarian" isn't well known, pollsters divine their libertarian numbers by asking whether people are "fiscally conservative and socially liberal."
He also quotes mainstream politico Governor William Weld telling the 1992 Republican National Convention, “I want the government out of your pocketbook and out of your bedroom.” So does that make him "libertarian?"
If not, how would you define "libertarian?"
James P. Gray, writing in the Daily Pilot, an Orange County, California, coastal publication, asks himself that question and then answers it: "What is the real definition of a libertarian? Mostly it is defined as a person who believes in maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state."
But then he adds, "To say that libertarians do not believe in government is flat-out wrong."
This will come as a surprise to anarcho-capitalists (aka Ancaps) who rightly point out that all 
governments are based on coercion (aka taxes) and that therefore the only position a real libertarian can take is anarchism.
But what about a contrarian view? Libertarians are always defining collectivists. How do collectivists define libertarians?
Last summer one Matthew Yglesias, writing under the "What is Libertarianism?" heading on thinkprogressive.org, attempted an intelligent definition of libertarianism. He started like this:
"I think libertarianism is best understood as a kind of esoteric doctrine. There’s strong evidence to believe that people who overestimate their own efficacy in life wind up doing better than those with more accurate perceptions. It follows that it’s strongly desirable for society to be organized so as to bolster myths of meritocracy."
If all progressives see libertarians as unrealistic and view merit as myth there is definitely a field full of pitfalls and bear traps between us.
The website's post-a-comment respondents offer a litany of definitions, many of which libertarians have likely heard all too often before. Here's a taste from the buffoonery buffet:
- My Libertarian Manifesto: I got mine!
- Libertarianism is “I want to make all the rules.”
- My summation: free-markets, free love, and the underpants gnomes will take care of the poor.
- “What Is Libertarianism?” An infantile disorder.
- Libertarianism is Republicans who want to date liberal women.
- I thought Libertarians were old conservatives who didn’t want to be associated with Bush anymore.
- Libertarians are Republicans who smoke pot.
- Libertarianism is the creed of every five year old boy who doesn’t wish to eat their broccoli.
Maybe the problem here is that progressives have become so adept at dissing conservatives and neocons that they can't get past superficial clichés when it comes to libertarians.
On the other hand, the very last response, number 191 in fact, may hold the key to the whole disconnect between libertarians and progressives:
"When libertarians and statists debate, it is much like a debate between an atheist and a true believer, nothing much is decided in the long run because the gulf between the assumptions made by either side is too wide to bridge."
So take your best shot, libertarians. How would you summarize libertarianism to a progressive in a single, short, tersely worded sentence?
Get the latest libertarian news from the All Libertarian All The Time news source:
The Libertarian News Examiner.
Comments
The definition I've always used is El Neil's definition: A libertarian is someone who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against any other person, nor to advocate or delegate the initiation of force.
How about two words, in French, no less? "Laissez faire."
It's like trying to give a single definition to the word force. There are many different kinds and combinations of force in the world. One definition does not fit all.
I'm not a libertarian of any sort, however. I'm an individual sovereign. And yes, Linda... often rephrased as "leave us alone."
True libertarians are first of all, "self-governors" - people who understand that the coin of "liberty" has a reverse "responsibility" side. But we also have to recognize that politically, "libertarians" covers a wide range of state-skeptics that range from the minarchist, Jeffersonian position to the full-blown Anarcho-Capitalist free-market in everything types.
Ask "Eric Dondero" since he thinks he is the final judge when handing out "libertarian" credentials. ;)
The only person who should run my life is ME!!!
Yinepuhotep, I like your definition. But one question comes to mind: how to you enforce "justice" or contractual agreements without initiating some force? For example, how does society detain a suspect of a crime? Thanks for writing this succinct definition.
My personal, and undoubtedly far from perfect, definition is:
A person that believes that no individual, group, or government should initiate force against any individual, group, or government.
To be clear, I believe that the only just use of force is retaliatory in nature. What I call "preventative" law, or what many perceive as"regualtion", is nothing more than initiation of force against presently innocent people. I hold that all preferential law, or more clearly discrimiatory law, is an unjust initiation of force. The "presumption of guilt" is perhaps the largest destroyer of freedom in our society. (Other than the monopoly of counterfeiting :) )
Maria Folsom,
Sorry for cutting to the front of the line. You can't "enforce" justice by initiating force. The absolute best that any law can do is to retaliate against those who unjustly initiate force. This "threat", which is all law can really accomplish anyway, can only add arbitrary risk to those who would consider using force to compel others to act involuntarily.
As a contemporary example. Look at the debate over firearm ownership. It is "just" to retaliate against those who use a firearm to initiate force against another. It is "unjust" to attack firearm ownership on the ASSUMPTION of future guilt of those who seek to own a weapon. This is the difference between unjust initiation of force by government and the just use of retaliatory force against those who initiate force. Just try to always question whether a law is punishing someone who HAS committed a crime or if it is punishing someone who MAY commit a crime. The difference is usually quite clear.
Libertarianism is what we do when nobody is coercing us to do otherwise. We do whatever we like, as long as we aren't hurting anybody else, which includes a great deal of voluntary cooperation. When you choose to work with someone, or to donate time to your favorite cause, or to teach your neighbor's child, or to nurture your own, that's all libertarian. The opposite of libertarianism is coercion, fraud, torture, prison, murder, invasion, assault, taxation, oppression, and all other forms of statism.
I agree with the above comment,unless they are using force against me ,my family, property my neighbor . Then I have the right to use my fire arm against them all to protect my children and their livlihood and home.
Of course I do not have the right to hurt or bear down on an innocent and have all the responsibility to try a peacable approach....if there is time.
No Dr.should be forced to abort babies for fear of losing a job.Same for nurses and anyone else that has to deal with that whole mess.It is already legal so let it be your choice.Just don't expect me to pay for it and if your choice should drive you to drink or drugging ,I do not want to pay for that either.No disability for making stupid choices.AT ALL!That includes not getting at least a high school diploma.
I may well not be a libertarian.I am a conservative (which is mistaken for a republican time and again ).I don't think we have two parties anymore .I do hold our constitution dear to my heart.It stands clear
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!