The Triumphant Return of Libertarianism

Epicurus

Reasonable
Conservative Libertarianism's Comeback
By David Paul Kuhn

The philosophical casualty of the Great Recession was supposed to be libertarianism. But signs to the contrary are thriving.

Americans are increasingly opposed to activist government programs. The most significant social movement of 2009, the Tea Party protests, grew out of that opposition. Libertarian heroine Ayn Rand is as popular today as ever. Rand's brilliant and radical laissez faire novel "Atlas Shrugged," sold roughly 300,000 copies last year, according to BookScan, twice its sales in 2008 and roughly triple annual sales in recent decades.

We are witnessing a conservative libertarian comeback. It's an oppositional advance, a response to all manners of active-state liberalism since the financial crisis. It's a pervasive feeling of invasiveness. The factional bastions of traditional libertarianism, like Washington think tank Cato, now have an intangible and awkward alliance with a broad swath of the American electorate.

Half the public believes there is "too much" government regulation of "business and industry," an 11-point rise in one year, according to a December CNN poll. Nearly a third of the public, in contrast, said there was "too little" regulation.

As David Boaz, Cato's executive vice president, put it, "because Obama is advancing a big government agenda, it's the small government constituency in America that is energized."

There is no wide-ranging call for government to withdraw from social issues however. A rebirth of traditional libertarianism this is not. It's a more limited libertarianism that it is on the march.

Every year, since the early 1990s, the Gallup poll has sought to measure the degree of libertarianism in the American mind. First question: does the public believe the government is "trying to do too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses?" Fifty-seven percent said yes last August, the highest level since 1998.

Gallup's second question asks whether Americans believe "government should promote traditional values in our society" or "not favor any particular set of values." A traditional libertarian would side with the latter point. But 53 percent favored the state promoting "traditional values" in 2009, a five-point rise since 2008.

Those who believe government is doing "too many things" and should also not favor any moral value system sum to slightly more than a fifth of U.S. adults in recent years. This is the loose libertarian bloc of American politics. Today, roughly another third of the electorate allies with this bloc on issues regarding government's reach into private industry.

Significantly, Gallup finds, 63 percent of independents believe the government is "trying to do too many things" while only 33 percent said government should "do more to solve our country's problems."

This limited libertarian resurgence has haunted Obama's domestic agenda. The fundamental mistake of the Obama administration in 2009 was underestimating the American public's ongoing tension with active-state liberalism, a fact visible from the outset and one only belatedly confronted by Obama.

The irony is that the stock market collapse began this revival of active-state liberalism. The drumbeat of rising anti-government sentiment grew from the financial bailouts that followed. And yet this libertarian resurgence fractures on one issue, and that's Wall Street. Support for regulating the financial sector has grown, even amid the growth of conservative libertarianism.

Six in 10 Americans believe "big financial institutions" have "too much influence over decisions made by the Obama administration," CNN found. Asked if there is "too much, too little, or about the right amount of government regulation of the stock market and financial institutions," 45 percent of Americans said "too little," while 29 percent said "too much" and 23 percent said "about right."

Sweeping financial reform remains elusive. Meanwhile, health care reform has proven unable to escape the rising anti-government sentiment. Nearly half of the public generally opposes Congressional proposals to overhaul the health care system, while little more than a third support it, according to the Pew Research Center. The chief reason cited by the legislation's opponents: "too much government involvement in health care."

For the first time this decade, more Americans, 50 percent, said providing health care for everyone was not the government's responsibility according to Gallup. Three years earlier, 69 percent said it was the government's responsibility to provide universal health care.

Nick Gillespie, editor of the libertarian publication Reason, sees a straight line between the unpopular financial bailouts, started under the Bush administration, and Democrats' unpopular health care bill today.

"It's the rule of the few at the expense of the many," Gillespie said.

Indeed. Today's limited libertarian revival is a response to a sense of overreaching elite technocrats as well as fear of an intrusive bureaucracy. Responsiveness is the core impulse. Rand's radical libertarianism, where man is an ends in himself and the welfare state is fundamentally immoral, was a response to the radically invasive Soviet state that weaned her as a girl. On a drastically less extreme scale, one side of this American debate could not exist without the other. The Obama administration brought with it ambitions of a resurgence of FDR and LBJ's active-state liberalism. And with it, Obama has revived the enduring American challenge to the state.
 
Libertarians are as wrong as anyone can be. They will continue to be wrong, even if they reached 100% in the polls and plunged America into a permanent dark age.
 
Sweeping financial reform remains elusive. Meanwhile, health care reform has proven unable to escape the rising anti-government sentiment. Nearly half of the public generally opposes Congressional proposals to overhaul the health care system, while little more than a third support it, according to the Pew Research Center. The chief reason cited by the legislation's opponents: "too much government involvement in health care."

People who oppose universal healthcare are murderers. Why should murderers be included in any poll? Who regulates these things?
 
You mean self delusion don't you? Libertarianism is about as viable as openly gay Sunday school teachers. Ya'll are guilty of just bull shitting your selves and hearing just what you want to.

You're turning into the next Midcan on your anti-libertarian kick. Maybe you've just been talking to the wrong libertarians, but your impression that we're all a bunch of fundamentalists trying to convert the country to libertarianism is wrong.

You reserve the right to complain as the country moves away from the Constitution, but then you go and dismiss a growing movement, and a very young movement, that is among the foremost advocates for bringing back constitutional government.
 
No it's vindication. Not sterling vindication like a presidential election might be, but it's a start.
Uh yea. Well try and start by getting a Libertarian elected dog catcher. If he doesn't fuck the job up, then Libertarians will have something real to actually build on for a change. Till then. I'm not convinced.
 
You're turning into the next Midcan on your anti-libertarian kick. Maybe you've just been talking to the wrong libertarians, but your impression that we're all a bunch of fundamentalists trying to convert the country to libertarianism is wrong.

You reserve the right to complain as the country moves away from the Constitution, but then you go and dismiss a growing movement, and a very young movement, that is among the foremost advocates for bringing back constitutional government.
I'm not anti Libertarian. I'm just plain skeptical as hell about them Adam. I mean for christ sakes, "SHOW ME THE BEEF". George W. Bush is, with out a doubt, the US President most reflective and sympathetic to libertarian ideology and values in US history and we all saw first hand where that got us.

Adam, what you don't want to face and recognize is the major down fall of Libertarians. They have a credibility gap. Until Libertarians can organize themselves into an affective political force and then demonstrate that they can actually govern with out being a bunch of bumbling fuck ups, ya'll just don't have anything to sell to the American public and won't be able to over come that credibility gap.

Till then I have seen no evidence that Libertarianism is nothing more than either a self full filling prophecy for bad Government or that it is just a front for Anarchist of the Michigan Militia/Tim McVeigh variety.

You want to convince me on Libertarianism, then show me the beef.
 
Uh yea. Well try and start by getting a Libertarian elected dog catcher. If he doesn't fuck the job up, then Libertarians will have something real to actually build on for a change. Till then. I'm not convinced.

I'm pretty sure most of the libertarian and
libertarian-leaning posters on this site are not members of the third party that goes by that name.

And nor are most in the rest of politics. Freedom is a very popular institution to which more people are committing their political involvement.
 
I'm pretty sure most of the libertarian and
libertarian-leaning posters on this site are not members of the third party that goes by that name.

And nor are most in the rest of politics. Freedom is a very popular institution to which more people are committing their political involvement.
OH Adam, I thought you were beyond stating banal political platitudes. I mean that's like talking about the environment. Who isn't for a clean environment? Name one person? Who the hell isn't for freedom and liberty? Name one poster on this board that is for Tyranny and oppression?
 
I'm not anti Libertarian. I'm just plain skeptical as hell about them Adam. I mean for christ sakes, "SHOW ME THE BEEF". George W. Bush is, with out a doubt, the US President most reflective and sympathetic to libertarian ideology and values in US history and we all saw first hand where that got us.

Adam, what you don't want to face and recognize is the major down fall of Libertarians. They have a credibility gap. Until Libertarians can organize themselves into an affective political force and then demonstrate that they can actually govern with out being a bunch of bumbling fuck ups, ya'll just don't have anything to sell to the American public and won't be able to over come that credibility gap.

Till then I have seen no evidence that Libertarianism is nothing more than either a self full filling prophecy for bad Government or that it is just a front for Anarchist of the Michigan Militia/Tim McVeigh variety.

You want to convince me on Libertarianism, then show me the beef.

I'm not claiming to be an expert but I really don't think you have much understanding of libertarianism if you think W. is somehow a carrier of the cause. The obvious screaming example being Iraq. We could go on with other big government programs such as No Child Left Behind and the pill bill. Federal spending and the growth of government under Bush. We could go on but you get the point.
 
I'm not claiming to be an expert but I really don't think you have much understanding of libertarianism if you think W. is somehow a carrier of the cause. The obvious screaming example being Iraq. We could go on with other big government programs such as No Child Left Behind and the pill bill. Federal spending and the growth of government under Bush. We could go on but you get the point.
I didn't say he was. I said he was the US President most respective of their ideology.
 
I'm not claiming to be an expert but I really don't think you have much understanding of libertarianism if you think W. is somehow a carrier of the cause. The obvious screaming example being Iraq. We could go on with other big government programs such as No Child Left Behind and the pill bill. Federal spending and the growth of government under Bush. We could go on but you get the point.

Agreed. Anyone who thinks W, with his radical government expansionism, Middle Eastern imperialism and stripping of civil rights through many many programs including but far from limited to warrantless wiretapping, is the most sympathetic and reflective President to libertarianism, doesn't know what libertarianism is.
 
Agreed. Anyone who thinks W, with his radical government expansionism, Middle Eastern imperialism and stripping of civil rights through many many programs including but far from limited to warrantless wiretapping, is the most sympathetic and reflective President to libertarianism, doesn't know what libertarianism is.
That's actually a true statement on my part. It may not be saying much but it is a true statement.
 
That's actually a true statement on my part. It may not be saying much but it is a true statement.

In Hoopleville maybe. But it would be like saying that the most reflective and sympathetic politician to Vulcanism was Washington. They have nothing to do with each other.


Surely, surely you aren't trying to stretch W inso some sort of libertarian association are you?

I sure hope not Shirley, because it invalidates your opinion.
 
Hell Bill Clinton was more libertarian than George W. You don't have to go back far to disprove that claim, Mott.
 
Back
Top