U.S. Libertarianism: Of the Left or of the Right?

Post Reply New Topic

It's pretty clear that the Tea Party is of the Right, and although the Tea Party sometimes makes claims to being libertarian, we need not make an equivalency between the two. Philosophically, does American-style libertarianism dovetail with conservatism or with liberalism? Pragmatically, do libertarians align themselves more with Republicans (i.e., the Right) or with Democrats (i.e., the Left)? A common argument from libertarians themselves is that they are neither Left nor Right; they proffer a Nolan chart to measure political views on two dimensions most relevant to them: economic deregulation vs. market regulation and personal freedom vs. authoritarianism.

Philosophically, many libertarians find roots in what they refer to as classical liberalism, a point of diversion with contemporary U.S. liberals. They feel that modern U.S. liberals abandoned their commitment to free markets and thus no longer deserve the name. Contemporary U.S. liberals have developed a subsequent intellectual tradition that in some ways brings them closer to European social democracy while emphasizing the welfare state's role in increasing individual freedom. Leftism, though, if seen as a tendency rather than a rigid set of political planks seems to be; leftism then can be seen as a commitment to level the playing field and removing unjust power. The Right would be the Left's opposition then, a reaction; the Right would attempt to justify the status quo and empower institutions that guard against societal change. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the old guard would have been the monarchy, the aristocracy, and the Church; today it might well be corporations.

Unrestrained free markets, though, definitely can bring about rapid change. In this sense, the market is not a conservative force. However, if the benefit to this change goes mostly to a select few with the risk falling on most people, is an unrestrained market necessarily a force for positive change? When competition ends up benefiting employees and consumers while providing desirable innovations, it's a boon; when it restricts freedom for most, it's a negative. In the latter case, large corporations sometimes use their clout and wealth anticompetitively, so it may be said to no longer be a free market.

Largely, I think it's what libertarians prioritize. Libertarians who are willing to sacrifice personal freedom for economic freedom cleave to the Right, and those who prioritize personal freedom tend more to the Left. Those who temperamentally align conservative and do not see a contradiction between their talk of freedom and their desire for a Christian nation definitely fall on the conservative Right.

The US Libertarian movement is generally on the right, since they tend to emphasize economic libertarianism over civil libertarianism. Most people who call themselves libertarian would tend to vote Republican instead of Democrat if they have to choose.

No, they are generally on the wrong.

I'm more civil libertarian than economic. I was economic for a bit (as was documented on here) but I've been able to read a bit more on things and I realized that would only lead down some very nasty paths for the vast majority of us.

I agree with Orwell that it's on the right. The only somewhat strong "libertarian movements" are Ron Paul voters aka "Republican Libertarians", and the Constitution Party... which to those of you not in the USA, means "Libertarians for Jesus". I have seen absolutely no Left Libertarian movements on the radar.
The actual Libertarian Party hasn't elected anyone into a major office, though they tend to score about 5% in governor elections here in Oregon...

Indeed. The market, like the government, fails. Because in the end, it's run by people, and people are always inefficient. Not to mention power play...

The important thing is the ability to adapt to what's needed and economic libertarianism doesn't allow for that and most of them would rather cut off their head rather than pop a pimple with government money.

I tend to focus my votes on economic libertarianism, even though it's social libertarianism that really ignites my passion. I believe that economic freedom is a necessary component to social freedom, and that social freedoms are more likely to "stick" if there is an economically powerful counterbalance to the government in the civilian sector. I'm not terribly orthodox in my libertarianism, I'm very practical and will back whoever I think will best advance my goals at the time. For example I'll happily use the Tea Party to un-elect a bunch of pols, then dump them as soon as something closer to what I actually want comes along.

That was not always the case. There was a time when the Democrats were not bat-sh*t crazy left wing extremists.

ruveyn

Oh, ruveyn, like the Republicans aren't right-wing extremists. Besides, the average left-winger on here is more left-wing than the average democrat in all likelihood. Just sayin'.

I also never considered the Constitution party anything but extremely right-wing. I wouldn't think of them as particularly libertarian given that they are very socially conservative.

Finally, I have no clean-cut answer to the question. I mean, I guess NeantHumain's answer can be considered valid, but, it is hard to say. I do think that libertarians are often distinct from both left and right enough that this can make the question difficult.

Well, you kind of have a point there. They're definitely not Libertarian on anything they consider "morally abhorrent"... but in most everything else they seem to be, at least. I still would never vote for them, though.

Same here. I'm a civil libertarian but economically I'm center-left.

My problem with libertarians is their definition of unjust coersion. It's too narrow. I see indirect harm/coercion as a violation of civil liberty just as much as direct harm/coercion.

Crazy left wing extremists? In what way? Clinton and his New Way Democrats moved the party squarely into the center, perhaps even center-right, and while the progressive wing may have hoped that Obama would signal their resurgence in the party, that simply hasn't happened.

I mean, the current Democratic administration has had several instances of major officials (Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emmanuel come to mind, as well as Obama himself) being dismissive of, or expressing annoyance with, liberals, indicating that the current administration is to the right of the progressive/liberal base. You see no such indication from Republican politicians that their base is farther from the center than they are, and I submit that the Republican base contains a much higher percentage of batsh*t wingnuts than the Democratic base does.

Michael Moore Democrats. Alex Baldwin Democrats. Susan Sarandin Democrats. Tim Robbins Democrats. Bahney Fwank Democrats. Democrats who want to distribute YOUR wealth to the needy.

ruveyn

Right- limited government more freedom Left- big government less freedom


Simple as that really. The neocons in the GOP were born out of leftists.

The historical record disagrees with you. The last small-government GOP president was Herbert Hoover.


No true Scotsman?

Yeah, but his Hooverville initiative was wildly popular!!