Category Archives: Libertarianism

Glenn Beck. Photograph: Getty Images

In a bizarre story of unrequited love, American conservative political commentator Glenn Beck has written a heartfelt open letter to Muse frontman, Matt Bellamy.

The Fox News pundit, famous for his sharp tongue, was responding to recent comments made by the singer in an interview with the Observer on Sunday, in which Bellamy revealed that the band had repeatedly denied the use of the track Uprising for American political campaigns, calling its popularity among the farright weird.

In the US, the conspiracy theory subculture has been hijacked by the right to try to take down people like Obama and put forward rightwing libertarianism, he said, before going on to describe himself as a leftleaning libertarian.

Muse and Glenn Beck have a history: Beck previously endorsed Muses 2009 album The Resistance on his radio show and even likened their lyrical content to his own brand of republicanism, prompting drummer Dom Howard to label Beck a crazy rightwinger.

As uncomfortable as it might be for you, I will still play your songs loudly, the letter reads. To me your songs are anthems that beg for choruses of unity and pose the fundamental question facing the world today can man rule himself?

Beck then goes on (and on) to suggest that Bellamys own ideology isnt far off his own principles: in the Venn Diagram of American politics, where the circles of crimson and blue overlap, theres a place where you and I meet.

The rest of the letter then protractedly explains why he believes in Libertarianism before puzzlingly quoting lyrics from their fourth album and wishing them the best of luck on their new record.

Experience the madness, in full, below:

Dear Matthew, I read your comments in the Guardian via Rolling Stone last week and feel like with a little work we could better understand each other.

Continue reading here:
Glenn Beck's extraordinary open letter to Muse

[This essay is based on a paper presented at the April 1979 national meeting of the Philadelphia Society in Chicago. The theme of the meeting was "Conservatism and Libertarianism."]

Libertarianism is the fastest growing political creed in America today. Before judging and evaluating libertarianism, it is vitally important to find out precisely what that doctrine is, and, more particularly, what it is not. It is especially important to clear up a number of misconceptions about libertarianism that are held by most people, and particularly by conservatives. In this essay I shall enumerate and critically analyze the most common myths that are held about libertarianism. When these are cleared away, people will then be able to discuss libertarianism free of egregious myths and misconceptions, and to deal with it as it should be on its very own merits or demerits.

This is a common charge, but a highly puzzling one. In a lifetime of reading libertarian and classical-liberal literature, I have not come across a single theorist or writer who holds anything like this position.

The only possible exception is the fanatical Max Stirner, a mid-19th-century German individualist who, however, has had minimal influence upon libertarianism in his time and since. Moreover, Stirner's explicit "might makes right" philosophy and his repudiation of all moral principles including individual rights as "spooks in the head," scarcely qualifies him as a libertarian in any sense. Apart from Stirner, however, there is no body of opinion even remotely resembling this common indictment.

Libertarians are methodological and political individualists, to be sure. They believe that only individuals think, value, act, and choose. They believe that each individual has the right to own his own body, free of coercive interference. But no individualist denies that people are influencing each other all the time in their goals, values, pursuits, and occupations.

As F.A. Hayek pointed out in his notable article, "The Non Sequitur of the 'Dependence Effect,'" John Kenneth Galbraith's assault upon free-market economics in his best-selling The Affluent Society rested on this proposition: economics assumes that every individual arrives at his scale of values totally on his own, without being subject to influence by anyone else. On the contrary, as Hayek replied, everyone knows that most people do not originate their own values, but are influenced to adopt them by other people.[1]

No individualist or libertarian denies that people influence each other all the time, and surely there is nothing wrong with this inevitable process. What libertarians are opposed to is not voluntary persuasion, but the coercive imposition of values by the use of force and police power. Libertarians are in no way opposed to the voluntary cooperation and collaboration between individuals: only to the compulsory pseudo-"cooperation" imposed by the state.

This myth has recently been propounded by Irving Kristol, who identifies the libertarian ethic with the "hedonistic" and asserts that libertarians "worship the Sears Roebuck catalogue and all the 'alternative life styles' that capitalist affluence permits the individual to choose from."[2]

The fact is that libertarianism is not and does not pretend to be a complete moral or aesthetic theory; it is only a political theory, that is, the important subset of moral theory that deals with the proper role of violence in social life.

"What a person does with his or her life is vital and important, but is simply irrelevant to libertarianism."

Go here to see the original:
Myth and Truth About Libertarianism

Jason Brennan, an outstanding libertarian political philosopher who teaches at Georgetown University, has written Libertarianism as an introductory guide, and much of the material in it will be familiar to readers of the Mises Daily; but it deserves careful study by anyone interested in its subject. Brennan has a talent for explaining libertarian views in striking and effective ways. The book consists of 105 questions about libertarianism and Brennan's responses to them.

In defending libertarianism, Brennan stands resolutely against the consensus position of his fellow political philosophers. Today, books touting the virtues of deliberative democracy are ubiquitous; but Brennan dissents.[1] Libertarians

do not regard democratic participation and deliberation as the highest form of life. Many nonlibertarians have an almost religious reverence for democracy. They love democracy so much that they wish to see democracy in every aspect of life. They want democracy to be a way of living. They want everything open to democratic deliberation and decision making. Libertarians instead want to insulate people from political control. They do not want every decision to be subject to discussion. They believe one of the greatest freedoms of all is not having to justify yourself to others. If your entire life resembles a committee meeting, you are not free. (p. 69)

Brennan's objections would apply even to a democracy of the intelligent and informed; but in practice, democracy turns out to be rule by the incompetent. Brennan in his comments suggests a reborn Mencken:

Voters not only are systematically mistaken about basic economics, but they cannot figure out which candidates know more than they do in democracy incompetent leaders with false beliefs win. Libertarians say: If the candidates seem clueless, it is because the system works. (p. 72)

Brennan displays little respect for the chief icon of the American democratic tradition. He notes that

many Americans would rate Abraham Lincoln as the greatest president. Yet Lincoln fought the civil war not to free slaves, but to force the South to remain part of the United States. In the course of war, Lincoln suppressed habeas corpus, created the first national draft, suppressed free speech, censored and punished newspaper editors who criticized his war efforts, and was at least complicit in waging total war against innocent Southern civilians. By normal standards, this makes him a monster. (If I did these things, you would regard me as a vile and despicable person.)[2] (pp. 623)

If Brennan rejects democracy, what has he to put in its place? It will come as no surprise that his answer is libertarianism, but it is a different sort of libertarianism from that which the term will suggest to many of my readers. Followers of Murray Rothbard regard each person as a self-owner. Self-owners have the right to acquire property; and although the free market that results from implementing libertarian rights leads to greater prosperity than any alternative arrangement, the principal justification for these rights does not lie in their good consequences. To the contrary, they are natural rights.

To Brennan, this is not libertarianism sans phrase, but "hard libertarianism." It is but one of three forms of libertarianism, and not the one he prefers. Indeed, he says that in "some respects, it is an aberration inside classical liberal political thought" (p. 11).

What are the other forms? First is classical liberalism. Supporters of this position, though they favor the free market,

See the original post:
What Is Neoclassical Liberalism?

By Philip Pilkington, a writer and journalist who is in the process of moving to London. You can follow him on Twitter at @pilkingtonphil

You can live in this illusion You can choose to believe You keep looking but you cant find the woods While youre hiding in the trees

Nine Inch Nails Right Where it Belongs

Many people that I meet who are vaguely interested in economics usually people in academia outside of the economics departments or working in lower tier sectors of banking and finance are enamoured with libertarianism and its economic doctrines. Meanwhile the Republican Vice Presidential nominee an Ayn Rand obsessive has channelled such ideas into a truly otherworldly budget proposal.

Libertarianism-lite has become the last refuge for the ideological conservative. The ideals of mainstream conservativism appear absurd in light of the 2008 crisis. It then became clear that the entire economic system was far from the meritocracy structured according to free entry and competition that many supposed, but instead one dominated by incestuous ties between quasi-government institutions and big corporations. And the ugly part was those collusive relationships arose as a direct result of deregulation. Less regulation allowed for large companies to exercise unbridled market power, and they channeled those profits into the political process, to further skew regulations in their favor.

However, rather than recognize that free market doctrines lead to concentrations of power, many responded to the aggressive promotion by business and economists of this ideology, leading them to move further to the right in the wake of the crisis, become antagonistic and even a little extremist toward the system as it actually exists and embrace radical aspects of the libertarian doctrine. Mainstream politicians then cherry-pick certain aspects of these doctrines and feed them back to their base.

This is, in a very real way, where we are today. No, libertarianism has not gone mainstream. But aspects of it have permeated the mainstream. And this makes some of its purer arguments interesting to consider.

Deflation and Nostalgia

The most popular aspect of the libertarian doctrine today is probably the idea that deflation is not such a bad thing indeed, it may even be a morally purifying cure. Uncomfortable like a cold shower but necessary to rid a gluttonous populace of its worst excesses.

The economic argument among actual libertarians for this view runs broadly that prices in a competitive economy should generally be tending downwards rather than upwards. The rational argument as is typical of extremist ideologies for the most part masks a more deeply embedded emotional appeal. Simply put, the argument plays to the hoarding impulse so prevalent among gold-bugs, who appear to overlap strongly with libertarians.

Read the original here:
Philip Pilkington: The 19th Century Long Depression: How it Fostered Oligopolistic Capitalism and Serves as a Model ...

Kevin Winter / Getty Images file

By Rolling Stone

Museare unhappy with the way American right-wingers, particularly Glenn Beck, have embraced their music,The Guardianreports. In an upcoming interview with the Observer on Sunday, singer Matt Bellamy singles out Beck's affinity for the band's 2009 album "The Resistance," and criticizes the conservative radio host for using the single "Uprising" in rightwing conspiracy-theorist videos on YouTube.

Lil Wayne tops Elvis as king of Hot 100 hits

"In the U.S. the conspiracy theory subculture has been hijacked by the right to try to take down people like Obama and put forward rightwing libertarianism," said Bellamy, who describes himself as "a left-leaning libertarian-- more in the realm of Noam Chomsky." He continued, "'Uprising' was requested by so many politicians in America for use in their rallies and we turned them down on a regular basis."

Hear this: Earphone cords make cool portraits

Bellamy maintained his lyrical content is more about personal healing than espousing political sentiments. "When I dabble in watching the news and reading about current events I tend to get a future negative view and that's something I've dealt with through music," he said. "It's quite possible I'm slightly paranoid. But I'd say making music is an expression of feelings of helplessness and lack of control that I think a lot of people can relate to."

Muse's next album, "The 2nd Law," is out Oct. 2.

More from Rolling Stone:

Original post:
Muse singer rips Glenn Beck for liking his music

Muse frontman Matt Bellamy has spoken out against the use of the Brit rockers' songs by right wing politicians and media figures. In a new interview with Britain's Observer On Sunday, the singer/guitarist says, "In the U.S. the conspiracy theory subculture has been hijacked by the right to try to take down people like Obama and put forward rightwing libertarianism." He added that the band's 2009 single "Uprising "was requested by so many politicians in America for use in their rallies and we turned them down on a regular basis." Bellamy adds that "When I dabble in watching the news and reading about current events I tend to get a future negative view and that's something I've dealt with through music. It's quite possible I'm slightly paranoid. But I'd say making music is an expression of feelings of helplessness and lack of control that I think a lot of people can relate to." Muse's new album The 2nd Law is in stores next week.

Christina Aguilera has released the video for "Your Body," the lead single from her upcoming album Lotus, due out November 13. In the clip, Aguilera goes on a rampage, seducing then destroying a series of men. You can see the "Your Body" video below:

View post:
Quick Hits: Muse, Christina Aguilera, Nicki Minaj, Outasight, Interpol

In a two-part column over at Breitbarts Big Government, Kurt Schlichter practically begs libertarians to support our Constitution and vote for Mitt Romney this November in order to avoid not only the destruction of this country by way of a second Obama term, but also to avoid the destruction of libertarianism by way of the Libertarian Party becoming a pariah.

The begging will not work, especially when it comes with the usual platitudinous overtures to America and the Constitution being at stake; and the suggestion that not supporting Romney is to selfishly disregard of the Constitution in the name of ideology. No matter how you dice the logic, a committed Republican accusing libertarians of not supporting the Constitution is nothing short of laughable.

Schlichters misunderstanding of the libertarian mentality doesnt help, either. The first and most obvious mistake he makes is to conveniently overlook the fact that small-L libertarians are truly unconcerned with the Libertarian Party. Remember the Greens? he ominously asks libertarians, alluding to the fact that following the Green Partys role as spoiler in Al Gores 2000 presidential bid, the Greens died off and became a punchline.

He naively assumes libertarians actually care what happens to the party that, for years, has been mismanaged and run by glibertarians like Wayne Allyn Root, a birther who only recently realized its time to give up the act and join the GOP. For many libertarians, the party already is a punchline. And looking at this years none of the above incident at the Libertarian National Convention, can you blame them?

Schlichter makes the case that libertarians will sure-as-Hell never find a home in the Democratic Party, what with the partys free this, free that, bailouts this, bailouts that spectacle at the 2012 DNC. He rightfully points out that the Dems only occasionally make attempts to reach out to libertarians, but are happy to eliminate that support at the drop of a hat. This is probably true. But dedicated libertarians find themselves politically homeless mostly because the corrupting forces of party politics are inherently in conflict with remaining ideologically principled. For many libertarians, a functioning political party to call home is not the desired end-game.

Schlichters blind partisanship is unlikely to convince libertarians either. Whats most insulting about the column is how he lectures libertarians about how President Obama is on an unstoppable path of trampling the Constitution and Bill of Rights, one amendment at a time. He notes in terribly overwrought language that Obamas spent nearly four years trampling the First Amendment, and that the Second Amendment is just one Supreme Court vote from being snatched away. Look, its no secret that the Obama administration has a seeming disregard for the Constitution. Schlichter suggests that, therefore, libertarians who are truly dedicated to the age-old document need to support Romney and the Republican Party because they are different they will save the Constitution and end the madness.

But hey, guess what? Many of President Obamas constitutional abuses are simply extensions of the ones initiated under President George W. Bush you know, that other unsupportable Republican that we libertarians were all told to shut up and vote for in 2004.

It was the Republican Party that rammed through the PATRIOT Act that Obama reauthorized last year. It was the Republican Party that set the precedent for the use of indefinite detention, torture, executive overreach, and the crackdowns on government whistleblowers. It was the Republican Party that heightened the crackdown on medical marijuana dispensaries operating legally under their states laws. It was the Republican Party that voted for Bushs spending spree and expansion of federal powers under Medicare Part D, the No Child Left Behind Act, etc.

Schlichter points to the administrations recent rousting of the Innocence of Muslims filmmaker as an Obama First Amendment abuse. The presidents handling of this entire movie-causing-riots debacle was, indeed, frustrating to libertarians. And so we libertarians should support Romney because hes dedicated to the First Amendment, right?

Not quite. This is the same candidate who pledged to vigorously fight the scourge that is all forms of adult pornography. Oh, and under the last Republican president, we saw an increase of pointless federal prosecutions of porn-makers like John Stagliano, who film consenting adults doing consensual things you know, the kind of stuff Republicans hate when it involves sex, drugs, or gambling.

More here:
Breitbart Writer Begs Libertarians To Vote Romney — Sorry, It Ain’t Going To Work

Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson spoke Thursday in Durham about the rise in libertarianism in todays political environment. Joining him at the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University were libertarian gubernatorial candidates Barbara Howe and Brian Irving.

The Libertarian partys appearance follows on the heels of a 16 percent increase in registered Libertarian voters in the United States last month, according to Howe. She said that mostly Democrats and independents are converting to Libertarianism.

"Our country needs a new direction," Howe said. "It needs a third party to break through."

Howe conveyed her strong opinions on the passage of Amendment One, an anti-same sex marriage law, this previous May. Howe said shebelieves the passage of the amendment was a "slap on society." She said shewas so upset by the passage of this amendment that she shredded her marriage license in front of the Attorney General's office.

This is Howes third run for Governor of North Carolina, and to boost awareness of her campaign and the Libertarian party in general, she is organizing and participating in a 5K run in all 100 counties of North Carolina. She has already visited 84 counties and hosted what she said to be successful events. On Nov.4, the day before election day, Howe plans to end her tour in Wake County by completing a 5K in front of the Governor's Mansion.

The Libertarian party currently has three candidates running for the House. One of whom is Brian Irving, who gave a brief speech after Howe.

"Our country has been at war my entire life," Irving said.

He said he feels strongly abut bringing our troops home and supports an isolationist foreign policy.

"I am presenting a completely different view than twinkle-dumb and twinkle-dumber" Irving said.

Read the original here:
Gary Johnson invigorates the Libertarian vote

12-06-2012 17:04 Welcome to Ask a Libertarian 2012 with Reason's Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch. They are the authors of the book The Declaration of Independents: How Libertarian Politics Can Fix What's Wrong With America, coming out in paperback later this month. Pre-order: On June 12, 2012 Gillespie and Welch used short, rapid-fire videos to answer dozens of reader questions submitted via email, Twitter, Facebook, and Reason.com. In this episode, they answer whether recalling fixes political corruption, whether 'nudging' will create more libertarians, and whether the Tea Party as made libertarianism obsolete. Produced by Meredith Bragg, Jim Epstein, Josh Swain, and Tracy Oppenheimer with help from Katie Hooks. To watch answers from 2011's Ask a Libertarian series, go here:

Original post:

Ask a Libertarian Lightning Round: Recalls, Libertarian Paternalism,

12-06-2012 16:16 Welcome to Ask a Libertarian 2012 with Reason's Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch. They are the authors of the book The Declaration of Independents: How Libertarian Politics Can Fix What's Wrong With America, coming out in paperback later this month. Pre-order: On June 12, 2012 Gillespie and Welch used short, rapid-fire videos to answer dozens of reader questions submitted via email, Twitter, Facebook, and Reason.com. In this episode, they answer what's the most libertarian film, spotting libertarianism in pop culture, and how pop culture can liberate people even behind the Iron Curtain. Produced by Meredith Bragg, Jim Epstein, Josh Swain, and Tracy Oppenheimer with help from Katie Hooks. To watch answers from 2011's Ask a Libertarian series, go here:

Read the original here:

Ask a Libertarian Lightning Round: Libertarianism in Pop Culture