Will the real libertarian please stand up?

November 1, 3:39 PMDallas Libertarian ExaminerGarry Reed

Previous Next

9 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Dallas Libertarian Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

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?