Libertarian debate
There has been quite an outbreak of debate in libertarian circles as disenchantment with the Administration and the Republican Party has increased. Some links:
Arguing reducing government is still worth fighting for. Why partial success is always worth fighting for and about not giving mere recency too much importance. (World’s smallest political quiz rates me as libertarian.) Being hopeful about libertarianism’s future even without clear political representation. Particularly if one concentrates on liberty rather than libertarianism. And don’t over-concentrate on recent events or fall for the all-or-nothing error. And consider the shift in the culture.
Arguing that increasing wealth must surely, at some stage, make the welfare state unnecessary. About why safety nets are a good idea.
The common problem of people commentating on libertarianism/economic liberalism who don’t have any background in, or understanding of the tradition they are commenting on. (It is endemic in much of academe.)
Identifying two cultural and two intellectual strains that make up American libertarianism and considering how to deal with contemporary challenges to liberty.
Why conservatism and classical liberalism/libertarianism do best with each other: The paradox at the heart of pure conservatism is that, thanks to its scepticism of the power of rational understanding, it concedes the future to the judgements and objectives of other, less humble, men … The conservative paradox is a problem with a great variety of solutions as it can be solved by combining conservatism with a belief in some other doctrine.
Arguing that government has moved to new “commanding heights” and these are still worth fighting over.
Arguing reducing government is still worth fighting for. Why partial success is always worth fighting for and about not giving mere recency too much importance. (World’s smallest political quiz rates me as libertarian.) Being hopeful about libertarianism’s future even without clear political representation. Particularly if one concentrates on liberty rather than libertarianism. And don’t over-concentrate on recent events or fall for the all-or-nothing error. And consider the shift in the culture.
Arguing that increasing wealth must surely, at some stage, make the welfare state unnecessary. About why safety nets are a good idea.
The common problem of people commentating on libertarianism/economic liberalism who don’t have any background in, or understanding of the tradition they are commenting on. (It is endemic in much of academe.)
Identifying two cultural and two intellectual strains that make up American libertarianism and considering how to deal with contemporary challenges to liberty.
Why conservatism and classical liberalism/libertarianism do best with each other: The paradox at the heart of pure conservatism is that, thanks to its scepticism of the power of rational understanding, it concedes the future to the judgements and objectives of other, less humble, men … The conservative paradox is a problem with a great variety of solutions as it can be solved by combining conservatism with a belief in some other doctrine.
Arguing that government has moved to new “commanding heights” and these are still worth fighting over.