United Liberty
“True libertarians”: How Lew Rockwell is dividing the liberty movement
Tue, 09/11/2012 - 1:02pm | posted by Tom Knighton
Jeremy Kolassa seems to be a little upset. Honestly, I don’t blame him. I think most of us here at United Liberty took issue with the Trutherism that is constantly espoused by Lew Rockwell and his ilk, and even more annoyingly — at least to me — is that if you don’t buy into the Trutherism nonsense, you’re somehow mentally defective. As bad as that is, there’s something that annoys me even more, and that is that these people feel like they are the final arbiters of who is or isn’t a “true” libertarian.
I’ve always said that libertarianism is a movement that, in the best case scenario, would eventually fracture because the big picture goals would be attained and all that would be left would be the details of how little government is to little.
Unfortunately, that was probably a little niave of me. After all, it seems that some people just don’t play well with others.
The Lew Rockwell crowd, as Jeremy pointed out so well, hurts the entire movement with their own ideas of what makes someone a “real” libertarian. I’ve written before about libertarianism and libertarian purity, and I really don’t think much has changed in the grand scheme of things.
Rockwell and his followers alienate other libertarians or libertarian leaning folks. Most libertarians probably have a view on something that’s not a particularly libertarian point of view. Few of us are truly “pure” for whatever reason. However, the Rockwell crowd’s insistence on purity does more harm than good. It pushes away lukewarm libertarians who may evolve into more passionate libertarians as time rolls on. The fact that they’re essentially shown the door by a self-appointed gatekeeper like Rockwell and his acolytes pushes them away.
When coupled with their brand of crazy - and while I happen to have started a paleo diet, I find it hard to believe that it is somehow more liberatrian than any other diet (and I’m not entirely sure where that even came from) - they help to insure that the libertarian movement remains small. Without numbers, we will never accomplish much of anything. Yes, we actually need these moderate libertarians*, whether you like it or not.
The Rockwell drones need to understand a few things. While they may honestly believe that their economics are the only way to maintain a free society, right now it’s a debate topic and not much else. Until libertarianism becomes mainstream, the flavors of libertarianism are a moot point. Alienating libertarians because they’re not “true” libertarian is the surest way to make damn sure we never accomplish anything except wasting bandwidth.
*moderate libertarians doesn’t necessarily mean moderate Republicans like John McCain, or any other brand of “moderate”
Enough with the idiotic “you can’t be libertarian without being a paleo-dieter” crap. Rockwell has never said such a thing. Jeremy admitted it was a joke. If this is all you guys have, you look pathetic.
And I guess the fact that Rockwell founded the Mises Institute, where Mises himself was a classical liberal and not an anarchist, must escape all of you.
Rothbard created the Mises Institute, then he turned it into something that bears absolutely no resemblance to the ideas Mises himself believed in. They may as well call it the “Lew Rockwell-Murray Rothbard-We Love The Slaveholding Confederacy” Institute.
Doug,
Wrong and go to the back of the class! “The Ludwig von Mises Institute was established in 1982 under the direction of Margit von Mises, widow of Ludwig von Mises. She chaired the Institute’s board until her death in 1993. Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr is the founder, a former president and currently the chairman (since 2009); Douglas French is the current president.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises_Institute#Background
I am aware of those facts, Mike. My point is that Rockwell has turned the LvMI into a bastion of anarcho-capitalist neo-Conderate tripe that bears absolutely no resemblance to the work of Ludwig von Mises
My original comment was in error in that I wrote “Rothbard” went I meant to type “Rockwell.” I stand by the rest.
If you go to the Mises website and look around, you find lots of books on price theory, capital theory, monopoly theory—-you know, the kind of things you’d find on an economics website. The whole “neo-Confederate” thing is ridiculous. You sound like the New York Times. Not one article at Mises celebrates the Confederacy or any government. Criticism of Lincoln was a staple of the pre-neocon right. Lysander Spooner was critical of Lincoln, but I suppose he, too, was dividing the liberty movement.
And for goodness sake, Mises features courses on Human Action, study guides to the Misesian treatises, all kinds of lectures on Mises, and it commissioned Hulsmann’s bio of Mises, the most important ever. Did you see Bob Higgs’ review, or is he too a “neo-Confederate”? Do you ever criticize Walter Williams as a “neo-Confederate”?
James, you score a 100% on your history lesson for the day. Excellent work.
Which would be why I said that I don’t know where that came from. Nice reading comprehension.
Dear Doug,
FACT: You wrote, “Rothbard created the Mises Institute.” This is false information. Now you write, “I’m aware of those facts…”
Jeez! One would hope that most men are able to admit it when they are wrong.
Did you miss Doug writing:
Good job. Thanks for sharing.
Post new comment