One of my former law professors, the brilliant and perpetually interesting John Hasnas, has written an insightful essay on what it feels like to be a libertarian. If Cassandra comes to mind (thank your teachers), you’re on the right track.
Here’s a sample:
Libertarians spend their lives accurately predicting the future effects of government policy. Their predictions are accurate because they are derived from Hayek’s insights into the limitations of human knowledge, from the recognition that the people who comprise the government respond to incentives just like anyone else and are not magically transformed to selfless agents of the good merely by accepting government employment, from the awareness that for government to provide a benefit to some, it must first take it from others, and from the knowledge that politicians cannot repeal the laws of economics. For the same reason, their predictions are usually negative and utterly inconsistent with the utopian wishful-thinking that lies at the heart of virtually all contemporary political advocacy. And because no one likes to hear that he cannot have his cake and eat it too or be told that his good intentions cannot be translated into reality either by waving a magic wand or by passing legislation, these predictions are greeted not merely with disbelief, but with derision.
It is human nature to want to shoot the messenger bearing unwelcome tidings. And so, for the sin of continually pointing out that the emperor has no clothes, libertarians are attacked as heartless bastards devoid of compassion for the less fortunate, despicable flacks for the rich or for business interests, unthinking dogmatists who place blind faith in the free market, or, at best, members of the lunatic fringe.
Cassandra’s curse was to always tell the truth about the future, but never be believed. If you add to that curse that she would be ridiculed, derided, and shunned for making her predictions, you have a pretty fair approximation of what it feels like to be a libertarian.
Being a libertarian can be more than frustrating at times, kind of like banging your head against a brick wall and expecting it to move, but progress does occur, though it is often slow and uneven.
Essay via Freedom Politics.
Read the whole thing and check out these reactions from the libertysphere:
J.D. Tuccille
And some criticism: Sunni Maravillosa
I really do appreciate what Prof. Hasnas had to say but I wish more libertarians shared the outlook by Sunni Maravillosa, including myself.Libertarians have respected think tanks, legal foundations, advocacy groups, etc but I think we could use some charitable organizations. Perhaps bringing back the model of mutual aid societies with libertarians helping libertarians first.
I agree with Sunni on this one as well
Thanks for the link, and the supportive comments here. I have more to say on the subject (it's actually been on my mind for quite some time), but not enough time to do so right now. I will say that I see a lot of potential in Jason's idea, which dovetails nicely with my efforts to build agora networks, and am interested in helping on such a project.
I agree with y’all on the necessity for voluntary alternatives and creating something positive rather than just focusing on the negative. Hasnas, who is a committed and thoughtful anarchist libertarian (see his published papers) certainly would agree with the need for those as well. I think that Sunni may be judging a little harshly here because she’s taking this one essay as the entire formulation of his political philosophy. Hasnas is not a company man by any stretch of the imagination and certainly wouldn’t advocate replacing one form of tyranny with another of his choosing. I think he’s blowing off a little steam here in a particularly insightful way and pointing out the very real frustrations that folks who struggle to show others that a free life is possible feel. Yes, this one piece focuses on the negatives and yes, we should all do the best to create our own free space regardless of what the man allows, but both are important sides to the struggle we all face. We could all just let the rest of the world go to hell while we live in a libertarian utopia (i realize that this is an exaggeration of your position), but eventually the man, as inept and bungling as the state is, and i don’t want to think what kind of lives would be possible without the vast specialization and trading opportunities made possible by a global economy. In other words, Galt’s Gulch sounds all noble and wonderful, but in reality, it couldn’t exist. Libertarians of all stripes (those who try to work revolution from within and without) are necessary.
I think that Sunni may be judging a little harshly here because she’s taking this one essay as the entire formulation of his political philosophy. Hasnas is not a company man by any stretch of the imagination and certainly wouldn’t advocate replacing one form of tyranny with another of his choosing.I knew of Hasnas long before this essay came to my attention; it was 1995 or '96 when I first read The Myth of the Rule of Law—on that ancient medium known as paper, no less! I've known about his web site and visited it intermittently for some time now, too. Thus, your assertion regarding my context isn't accurate.What I did intend was to judge that essay harshly. It seems to me that too many libertarians already cast their lot in life as full of trouble and strife. It may be, but it need not be: and each individual has a lot to say about which course he chooses. I agree, pintpundit, that both positive and negative should be faced, and considered, but it seems to me the negative gets much more time in the sun, so to speak. There is a yin and yang to the freedom philosophy, and by focusing overmuch on the dark it becomes too easy to sit at the computer desk and gripe, instead of actually doing freedom in a way that is meaningful to one.We could all just let the rest of the world go to hell while we live in a libertarian utopia (i realize that this is an exaggeration of your position) …If you are addressing this to me, that isn't simply an exaggeration of my position, it is not my position at all. I'm done with the pro-freedom central planning model. As long as people aren't initiating force or trying to defraud someone, they should do whatever the hell they want.Thanks for the opportunity to clarify my intent with my rebuttal, and to clarify my perspectve in brief. I appreciate it.
Yes, an agora network! I've been discussing a similar idea with other agorists. The only problem that I see is making a convenient list for the man to eventually use against you.One idea is to use craigslist and it's anonymizing features. Each post could be tagged #agora for easy searchability.I would however like a list of agorists that I could solicit. So glad to see you started one.
Hey Jason, I just twigged who you are—good to be in touch again! I hope you're doing well.Anyway, yes, privacy/security concerns aren't a trivial matter, but I have a pro-freedom technogeek friend who has some ideas on that. :-)
I'm not sure what you mean by the “pro-freedom central planning model”–it appears to me to be a contradiction. I am all in favor of living freely and demonstrating the cooperative solutions that free individuals can and do provide as an alternative to state actions. I appreciate that you would like to see more positive examples from libertarians, but the “movement” (i use the term very, very loosely and broadly) is a big tent. Each group and individual activist acts in the way that seems best to themselves and sometimes this is helpful; sometimes counterproductive. I don't think that the Hasnas essay falls into the latter category nor does his work taken as a whole. Certainly, some of his work is negative, but it's well-researched and written in a thoughtful way. It's also correct in many respects.Don't want to argue with you; just think we should all promote liberty in our own way and live and let live:)Peace.
I'm not wanting to argue with you either, especially since it seems we agree much more than we might disagree.just think we should all promote liberty in our own way and live and let liveThat's my position as well; anyone who tries to tell us that we need an entire system mapped out before we can start being free or we're doomed to fail is what I was labeling “pro-freedom central planning model”—and I called it that because it seems quite the oxymoron to me.Namaste.