BarrHQ.com

Is a libertarian a “true conservative?”   Rep. Barr sometimes suggests that this is true.   Is he correct?  Well, yes…  but.. no….  Libertarian might better be described as “true” liberal.   But, probably it is best to understand libertarian as being neither left nor right.. neither conservative nor liberal.

Is a libertarian a type of conservative?     Perhaps.   The modern libertarian movement came out of the conservative movement during the late sixties.   Most of those libertarians were active participants in Barry Goldwater’s 1964 Presidential campaign. 

Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater is generally considered an important conservative politician, whose unsuccessful 1964 campaign laid the groundwork for President Reagan’s 1980 victory.  Goldwater’s conservatism emphasized individual liberty and limited government.  His famous quotation, “Liberty in the defense of liberty is no vice,” appeals to every libertarian.

Further, many of those involved in the founding of the modern libertarian movement were active in Young Americans for Freedom.   Founded by William F. Buckley, this conservative youth organization included a large “libertarian” caucus.   Many local chapters had libertarian majorities, and so, elected libertarian leaders.   Looking back to that era, the “libertarians,” formed one wing of the conservative movement, working with, and competing against, the “traditionalists.”

In 1969, much of the libertarian caucus left the Young Americans for Freedom.   The key issue was libertarian opposition to the draft.   However, there was much more skepticism among the libertarians regarding the Vietnam War.  And, the libertarian caucus was also critical of marijuana prohibition.   After a showdown at the 1969 YAF convention, many of the young libertarians abandoned the Young Americans for Freedom, and abandoned the “conservative” label, leaving it to the traditionalists.  

The trail that they blazed has been periodically followed by a series of waves of betrayed Republicans.   In 1971, Nixon imposed wage and price controls and, soon after, broke the last tie between the dollar and gold.  The Libertarian Party was founded.   Remember the Brady bill?   A flock of Republicans discovered that libertarians really supported the 2nd amendment.   The first President Bush didn’t mean it when he promised “No New Taxes.”   Another wave of new Libertarians.   The second Bush administration, with its out of control spending, failed Iraq war, and theory that President Bush stands above the Constitution is poised to drive away many people who think of themselves as “conservatives,” but who are again seeing how many conservatives aren’t especially interested in limited government or individual liberty.

However, there is more to the story.   During the breakup of YAF, radical libertarian theorist, Murray Rothbard wrote an essay, “Left and Right the Prospects for Liberty.”    While Rothbard’s purpose was to persuade libertarians to work with the new left against the Vietnam War, he reviewed some important intellectual history.  

The libertarian perspective developed in the 17th and 18th centuries as a call for change against the “old regime” in Europe.  Those who defended the status quo of pro-business regulation, an established church, and world empire, were called conservatives.   Those who proposed a vision of a free market economy, personal liberty, and peace, came to be called “liberals.”   The liberal position was well stated by Thomas Jefferson, founder of the Democratic Party, “all men are created equal,” and all individuals have the rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  That the word “libertarian” and the word “liberal” both begin with “liber” is no accident.  Libertarian is another word for liberal.

What happened?  During the 19th century, socialism was introduced.   Private property and private enterprise were very important parts of the “old regime.”   Libertarian economists argued that by deregulation, a free market economy, free trade, and free enterprise would transform the economy, increasing total production and real incomes.   While good for everyone, those with the greatest material needs, the poor, would benefit the most.  

Socialists, however, demanded a more rapid eradication of poverty.  They claimed that a new kind of society, where private property and private enterprise were more or less eradicated, would allow a rapid improvement in living standards for the majority.   While the exact plan was usually a bit vague, something like democratic politics was to directly control every aspect of society.  

Many socialists derided the “bourgeois” liberty championed by the libertarians (then called “liberals.”)    Being free from government interference was not enough.  Only with the advent of socialism, would true liberty be possible.  The poor man is free to live under a bridge?   What kind of freedom is that?

Sadly, the vast majority of liberals were persuaded by the socialist critique of the free market.    Most liberals began to champion activist government to defend new “welfare” rights–a right to a job, an education, health care, decent housing and so on.   On another front, the traditional support for freedom of contract and competition was rejected on the grounds that the poor had too little bargaining power.   Government regulation of prices, the quality of goods, wages, and working conditions were all demanded by most liberals.  

A small remnant of liberal thinkers rejected activist government.   They argued that building a welfare state to provide “free” services to much of the population in order to make sure the poor were served would result in poor services for most people.   Further, government regulations of price and quality would largely be counterproductive for the poor.   They continued to maintain that the well being of everyone, including the poor, is best served by a growing economy–the prosperity that results from allowing entrepreneurs to invest and innovate in a free market system.   This small remnant called themselves “classical liberals” to distinguish themselves from the modern, “big government” liberals.

After the disaster of the Great Depression, the numbers of both traditional conservatives and classical liberals were greatly reduced.   Modern liberalism was so dominant, that the conventional wisdom became that all of those who opposed the “progressive” vision of an ever bigger welfare state and more extensive regulation were backwards conservatives.    

The common ground of support for private property rights and enterprise soon resulted in “classical” liberal economists dominating “conservative” proposals in economic policy.    While the practice of many conservative politicians continued to include pro-business special interest policies, the rhetoric was dominated by arguments developed by classical liberal economists like Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek.   The mainstream media, reflecting their modern liberal bias, always described them as “conservative” economists.

During the 1950’s, a few classical liberals began to realize that modifying the word “liberal” with the term “classical” was not an effective way to distinguish their views from what everyone was simply calling “liberalism.”  So, the term “libertarian” was adopted by many.   A growth spurt of classical liberal thinking, especially among young people influenced by the novels of Ayn Rand, resulted in that “libertarian” caucus in the Young Americans for Freedom. 

Rothbard’s essay, combined with the bad feelings created by the break-up in the Young American’s for Freedom resulted in a libertarian movement that was more than ready to claim a complete break from conservatism.  

Perhaps more influential over the long term was the introduction of the Nolan chart.   David Nolan, who founded the Libertarian Party, proposed replacing the one-dimensional left-right political spectrum with two dimensional spectrum.    His approach was very much tied to the late sixties and early seventies.   The young liberals who helped George McGovern win the Democratic nomination in 1972 were clearly against the draft and the Vietnam War.  But there was also the drug culture and “the summer of love.”   Government policies aimed at promoting traditional moral values were highly unpopular with these liberals.   And, of course, the rhetoric of the conservative movement was dominated by “libertarian” themes on economic policy.  

Nolan described libertarians as favoring economic freedom and personal freedom.   Liberals, of course, were the modern liberals favoring an ever expanding welfare state and anti-business regulation.  But, at least they were in favor of personal freedom, according to Nolan.  Conservatives, then, agreed with libertarians on economic issues.  But the conflict was, as exemplified by the fight at Young Americans for Freedom, over personal liberty.

That, I believe, remains the dominant view among libertarians.   Many conservative Republicans do support individual liberty and limited government on some issues.   But there are many issues where most conservative Republicans support extensive and increasing government intervention.   Many liberal Democrats support individual liberty and limits on government on some issues.     But again, most liberal Democrats support massive and ever increasing government intervention in many areas.

Libertarians, then, are neither left nor right.   They are neither liberal nor conservative.  They favor the political philosophy of America’s founding fathers.   They apply the philosophy of individual liberty and limited government to all issues.

Polling shows that between 10% and 20% of American voters already have no interest in increasing the size of government in any area.   They are ready for smaller government, pretty much across the board.   Many pollsters describe these voters as “libertarian” and contrast them with “conservatives” who are more statisfied with Republican social policies, as well as liberals, who agree with Democratic economic policy.

However, only 2% of American votes describe themselves as “libertarian.”   So 80% to 90% of libertarian voters call themselves something else.   And, we know perfectly well that there are many people who think of themselves as “conservative” Republicans.. even “true” conservative Republicans, who are committed to individual liberty and limited government.

I believe that it is good for Bob Barr to reach out to libertarian voters who still think of themselves as conservatives.    Further, the Barr campaign, like any campaign, should welcome the support of any voter or contributor.   And while a political campaign should focus on the issues and not intellectual history, there is no way to sweep under the rug the long standing differences between the “traditionalists” and the “libertarians.”