I recently wrote on Jeff Deist’s talk at PFS, regarding the Zeitgeist Libertarians. The more I think about it, the more I realize the importance to emphasizing his core point: mainstream libertarians disagree with statist means, but they are distinct from us paleo-libertarians in that they embrace the Dominant Social Themes; that is, they often speak of social goals in terms of the same leftist ends as the run of the mill establishment liberal.

But libertarianism doesn’t imply that we have to assent to the leftist themes— and its amazing that even so-called Republicans are often so leftist in their thinking. Left-libertarians often say that the democrats are agreeable in their social liberalism and republicans are despicable in their social conservatism; therefore, we should take the social liberalism of the democrats and combine it with the economic conservatism of the Republicans.

But actually, Republicans are almost nearly just as bad on Dominant Social Themes, especially relating to the meta-view of recent social progress.

Contra popular opinion:

    Diversity is not per se our strength (but neither is racial uniformity for its own sake)
    Voting is neither a right nor is it a boon for liberty
    Democracy is the enemy of justice, social harmony, and human progress
    Immigration is not inherently good, and is in fact often a tool by those who anticipate that immigrants will benefit their political aspirations.
    All cultures are not equal in their morality or contribution to civilization’s advancement
    The social classes do not owe one another as a matter of justice
    Europeans were the great benefactors of western civilization in their emphasis on private property-based justice, increasingly low time-preferences, praise of capital investment, individual and family oriented social arrangements where dissent was allowed and fostered over against the mob. This does not mean Europeans are better; it means that all individuals should appreciate their contribution to society instead of working against them, as a racial class, in order to promote more barbarous cultures.
    Reality, truth are objective and can be known, argued for, and used to judge emotional thinking.
    Our struggle is not against “rugged individualism,” but against collectivism and group-think
    We don’t need to get money out of politics, we need to get government out of business. Poor candidates that have no corporate backing are not necessarily better even though we live in the unjust and economically detrimental system of corporatism (or crony capitalism)– in fact, often poor candidates merely push for a different kind of socialism: a socialism based on conflict against the rich and strife against the capitalists (without whom we’d all live in poverty).
    A nation is strong to the extent that it is made up of voluntarily individuals and families, with strong cultural ties, a common language, common interests, and common values— all of these indicate that a breakup of the Union is important and vital for social peace and the alleviation of current social tensions, almost all of which are caused by the state’s political grasp over our lives. Indeed, unity in spite of all our vast differences, interests, cultures, preferences, lifestyles, and so forth indicate that such unity is utopian and will be necessarily authoritarian.
    An increasing number of women and minority legislators is not per se progress because progress is defined by the ideas assented to and promoted, not the group identity from which a person comes. The sex and race of the leadership is meaningless compared to the ideas held.
    Forcing diversity on a people group ends in misery, despair, and conflict. Democracy is the enemy of progress and civilization and mandated diversity fuels the flames of destruction.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *