Friday, September 19, 2008

Answer To Libertarianism And Virtue

Rod Dreher at Crunchy Con posted the following today:

"Libertarianism and virtue

Friday September 19, 2008

Categories: Culture, Politics (general)

Joe Carter explains why he is not a libertarian: essentially, because libertarianism conceives of freedom as an end, and therefore underestimates the need for government to keep order, given the radical imperfection of human nature. Libertarians, in Joe's view, don't properly grasp how a so-called "victimless crime" can do to the order necessary to maintain community. Writes Joe:

Libertarians, of course, are primarily from the middle to upper classes of society. They are very often shielded from such behavior precisely because the police maintain a level of order and discipline within their communities. If, however, they had to live with such activity on a day-to-day basis, they would likely revise their definitions of what is considered "arbitrary" and what is considered "spontaneous.""




Here's my response:

"There is an empirical aspect to some libertarian claims. If society is not improved by libertarian proposals, people will obviously not accept them.

For example, if decriminalizing drug laws makes things worse for society, then, obviously, drug laws will need to be strengthened.

Libertarians believe that society will be improved by having a smaller government. People will have more freedom, choice, be wealthier, etc.

Nothing is stopping people forming communities, working together to change the morals of society, shopping where they believe society would be better off, etc.

As a libertarian Democrat, I accept more government intervention than most libertarians, but that is only because I believe libertarianism can only succeed if it addresses such concerns as yours, and leads to a wealthier society where we need less government intervention. If libertarianism truly leads to a poorer and less decent society, I suppose I'll change my mind.

All libertarians believe that liberty is the most important goal, in that each person should be allowed to develop their natural abilities as best they can, as free of intervention as they can, within the bounds of not harming others or taking rights away from others. Such a society needs rules and regulations, and libertarians disagree on those rules and regulations. However, I don't know any who advocate some lawless dystopia, or don't have enough empathy to understand that others might need help, however that help is ultimately offered.

No comments: