After seeing people put this label on themselves repeatedly on this board, I have to ask - does anyone know what that means?
Is it a conservative? an ultra-conservative? or something else?
The Official Website of the Libertarian Party is www.lp.org. How does that fit in with the beliefs of a small “l” libertarian?
The poster who used this term replied once with a very good answer. I don’t understand why you would pursue this. I am about as Republican as they come, but I have a lot of differences with the party line regarding some issues. There is nothing unusual there, and I don’t even use a little r. I use the big one.
my understanding of a libertarian is someone who favors a little government involvement in our lives as possible. My favorite is the guy who ran for our county commisioner a couple of years ago - “if elected, I will do everything in my power to eliminate this position”
Art’s a Republican! I’m shocked, I never would have guessed!
lol
This is a good read - it tells me all I need to know
http://www.zompist.com/libertos.html
Who do we know that fits this description?
"Libertarianism is essentially the morality of a thug. It’s a worship of the already successful, privileging money and property above everything else-- love, humanity, justice. And let’s not forget that lurid fascination with firepower.
It’s also the philosophy of a snotty teen, someone who’s read too much Heinlein, absorbed the sordid notion that an intellectual elite should rule the subhuman masses, and convinced himself that reading a few bad novels qualifies him as a member of the elite."
Yeah, guess I am busted.
I interpret libertarian with a small “L” as referring to libertarian ideology rather than Libertarian Party affiliation.
There really is a distinction to be made there when most Americans confuse the two.
Libertarian ideology is closely in line with Jefferson, that is the rights of the individual and self-determination reigning over the collective rights of the people and the intervention of government.
This ideology is very much in line with the GOP before the Neo-con takeover.
One can hardly consider the current administration as a proponent of such an ideology.
Dubya makes a $hitty big brother.
The Libertarian Party is another animal, just a party that goes by that name, full of quacks mostly, but always good material for political humorists.
That was a telling description, thanks for the info.
(I liked this trait the best: “Libertarians love abtract, fact-free arguments.”)
Using a lower case letter to refer to an ideology generally refers to a bastardization of the term; people often use it to denote an extension or alteration of the original idea. For example, the term “Liberalism” originally refered to majority rule, minority rights, and strong limits on the power of the government. Promoted most influnetially by Locke, “Liberalism” refered to a specific set of ideas; it was a proper noun. Later, T.H. Green came along and set the groundwork for Roosevelt’s New Deal and an increasingly socialist society. Since Green’s ideas were different than classical Liberals such as Locke, he used the term “liberalism” as an adjective to describe his ideas, not as a proper noun. Green’s philosophy was like Liberalism, but it was not soley defined by it.
If I had to guess, I would say that “libertarianism” is *like *“Libertarianism”. It’s proponents have likely extended the traditional Libertarian ideology beyond its original definition, causing them to use the term to describe rather than directly define.
As to what exactly they are trying to define, I have no clue. If you want to know what “Libertarianism” is reading Nozik is a good place to start.
Caleb
That is an interesting twist on the libertarian point of view, but it is one person’s opinion.
I consider myself as having libertarian ideals, and have said before that, yeah, I like Ayn Rand a lot. The thing of it is that if you think about the ideals of libertarianism, they really aren’t that outlandish. However, the question is, “How can we implement these ideals practically?” And that, of course, is where it gets tricky, just as it does for both the Democrats and the Republicans.
yeah, I like Ayn Rand a lot.
Do you like Ayn enough to join her cult?
I won’t be a part of any organization that tells me how or what to think. I merely recognize when someone else’s ideas resonate very strongly with my own beliefs. In the case of Ayn Rand, reading Atlas Shrugged, Anthem, and The Fountainhead was like drinking a cold glass of water on a summer afternoon.
But no, I am not a member of Lyceum(or whatever.)
As for a “fact-free” argument, how about the assertion that Bob Dole stated, during his 1996 presidential campaign, that “all taxes are bad.” I don’t know about you, but when I see such an obvious bald-faced lie in a screed such as this, I usually dismiss its entire content out-of-hand. Numerous misspellings don’t help either, nor does anonymity and the lack of references.
I can relate to your experiences reading her works. When I read “Anthem” as an 18 year old I felt like I had an ideological epiphany; I was ready to shave my head and change my name to Gondor. I can see how the cult took off.
While her writing is good, we need to remember that it is at last science fiction.
Definitely more entertaining than Das Kapital but inferior to Brave New World.
I agree that piece is an anonymous opinion - still, its the only thing that I’ve read on what a small “l” Libertarian is. I haven’t heard others call themselves small “d” Democrats, or small “r” Republicans (in fact, Art Franke stated above that even though he has differences with the Republican Party, he doesn’t avoid the term Republican). If that piece is off the mark, do you have any thoughts on what a small “l” Libertarian is?
I haven’t heard others call themselves small “d” Democrats, or small “r” Republicans
People do that all the time. I believe that America should function as a republic, but I’m not Republican. I believe in democratic ideals, but I’m not a Democrat.
You have it backwards, Caleb. Using a lower case letter to refer to a political ideology generally does not refer to a bastardization/adjectivalization of an original term/noun. In the realm of politics and ideas, capitalization generally represents a post hoc codification and/or appropriation of a term already in use. Typically that term refers to a school of thought that has a core set of ideas but is by no means codified. Hence the refrain, “I am a capital L Libertarian” (or capital R Republican) typically means “I am a member of the Libertarian (Republican) Party and ascribe to its codified tenents and principles.” When one says “I am a small r republican” or “small l libertarian”, on the other hand, what one typically is trying to communicate is adherence to a set of loosely arranged ideas that historically have been bundled together under that term before the term was coopted by capital R Republicans or capital L Libertarians.
You are correct that Locke, like Kant, Smith, Montesquieu and others from 17th-19th century contributed substantially to what is now called “classical liberalism” that emphasized such things as majority rule, minority rights, and strong limits on the power of the government, and that this school of thought has needed to be distinguished from the New Deal use of the term liberal to mean a proponent of big government, and the more modern use of the term as a perjorative (as in bleeding heart liberal). Here, because the technique of capitalization was not appropriate because there was not a Liberal Party, per se. Rather there was an attempt to re-assign the term to a different set of beliefs. So what people did to clarify the semantic mess was to re-term liberalism “classical liberalism” and to refer on the one hand to New Deal liberalism and on the other to bleeding heart liberalism.
Small l libertarianism (which you mistakenly call capital L Libertarian) is a school of thought like small l liberalism / classical liberalism. Its thinkers include Jefferson, Hayek, Nozick, Paine, and even aspects of Locke, Madison and Smith (one can be a liberal and a libertarian).
I think johnthesavage may have it right–someone who shares the beliefs but is not affiliated officially with the party. A lot of people consider themselves as “libertarians,” but are pragmatic enough to vote Republican.
I can think of one good, modern-day example–Milton Friedman. Friedman is a Nobel Prize-winning economist (Universtiy of Chicago professor) who served in Republican (i.e., Reagan) administrations but has some ideas that could be described as more libertarian than republican. “Free to Choose” is one of his books–written for the masses though, not for econ majors, so it is kind of simplistic.
In answer to the original post, for a pretty good example of current ideas & policies very much in the small l libertarian tradition, see Cato Institute at www.cato.org. The editorial slant of the economist is also on point. I’d imagine that some aspects of this tradition are also in the Libertarian Party platform, but they run their own kooky ship, and I am not on board.
In a grossly oversimplified nutshell I’d say the key ideas of small l libertarianism are: skepticism about power, primacy of individual rights, and the need for global peace. Take a look at David Boaz’s (VP of Cato) “The Libertarian Reader” and “Libertarianism: A Primer”.
agree, but do you have any idea what people mean when they label themselves as a small “l” Libertarian?