Was the Open Letter to Ron Paul an Ideological Declaration of War?

C. Jay Engel at Reformed Libertarian has written a thorough and thoughtful analysis of the current ideological war being waged between thick and thin libertarianism.

To give the conflict context, Engel examines the history of the dispute, particularly between the Cato Institute, the vanguard of “respectable” libertarians who are granted access to the D.C. exclusive club, and the Mises Institute that continues writing on libertarianism and Austrian economics much like their namesake, without regard to their perceived credibility, only interest in what is or isn’t true.

It essentially comes down to worldviews. Traditional libertarians seek a voluntary society where people are free to interact or not interact with others according to their dictates of their own consciences. This means that there are voluntarily separate societies organized under different social norms and rules. Progressives Thick libertarians do not want a stateless society as much as they want a unified society in which everyone shares the same values in all aspects, i.e. a voluntary communist utopia.

The problem with the thickists’ objectives are that while they are theoretically feasible, it is realistically farcical to consider them working together. Human actions contradict any theory of a single society without coercion. Thus only one can pursued with any hope of being achieved.

Which, of course, is why they spend their time harassing libertarians rather than state agents and their supporters. Writing on those who wrote the open letter to Ron Paul, Engel says they leave no room to “allow for those who disagree with him on various extra-libertarian social and moral issues.”

Engel also points out something that has eternally irritated me, people confusing “tolerance” with “acceptance.” Thick libertarianism sees any dissent on politically correct attitudes as deviationism that must be squashed.

This is a very distorted, and disturbing, view of libertarianism and liberty. It is an exchange of libertarianism as a political theory to libertarianism as a tendency of social acceptance.  It is, to be frank, a corruption of libertarianism that threatens to destroy libertarianism altogether. For if the message of libertarianism is that we must all become PC hysterics, then our war against statism is suddenly placed on the back burner as the new round of politically correct witch hunts that has in recent years been stirring by the Progressivist Mainstream Left becomes a “libertarian” issue.

The “open letter to Ron Paul,” he says, is nothing short of a declaration of open warfare on libertarians who seek to preserve their cultural, social, moral, or religious traditions while advocating the abolition of the state.

This, is the Progressive Libertarian war on the Old Guard.  We must be honest with ourselves. We must see this trend as reflective of the world in general. The new libertarian tendency sits in the context of society at large: those with traditional views on things, who are wary of the Progressivist takeover of culture, are not to be accepted in polite society. They are outcasts, not only in the libertarian world, but in the world at large.  Your religion, your views on morality, your standards of virtue have no place in Progressive Utopia. Flee or die.

If it’s a war they want, all I can say is good luck As Engel pointed out, their enemies include Lew Rockwell, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Tom Woods, Ron Paul, Andrew Napolitano, Walter Block, Robert Murphy – pretty much the intellectual bedrock of the modern libertarian movement. Before the smoke has even cleared, these fraudsters will be running back to their beloved state to kiss and make up, just as mainstream conservatives do with liberals once a libertarian speaks out against war.

This entry was posted in Central Government, federal government, free speech, libertarianism, political correctness and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Was the Open Letter to Ron Paul an Ideological Declaration of War?

  1. Pingback: Was the Open Letter to Ron Paul an Ideological Declaration of War? | Freedom's Floodgates

  2. Pingback: A Libertarian Who Returns to Their Vomit | The Anarchist Notebook | Libertarian Anarchy

  3. Pingback: Neoreactionary Libertarian | The Anarchist Notebook

  4. Pingback: The End of the Liberty Movement (For Me) | The Anarchist Notebook

  5. There are, i think, two of these PC types of libertarians. Those that are true libertarians. And those that are not. And i think we shouldn’t get too upset about either. Libertarians who support any kind of force, either by authority or by citizens under the protection of authority, will out themselves as frauds that we don’t have to take seriously (as libertarians) to begin with.
    Those who do not support force, make it even easier, we can simply IGNORE their laments about the deviations from politically correct orthodoxy. They say “What about white male privilege?”
    We say “So, what should we have for dinner tonight?” That’s the beauty of non-violence (which they proclaim to support). We can simply ignore their very existence and go about our business.


    • The Question says:

      There are, i think, two of these PC types of libertarians. Those that are true libertarians. And those that are not. And i think we shouldn’t get too upset about either.

      Where we run into trouble is when they claim these PC values are an integral part of libertarianism, or even if they don’t they do their best to avoid clarification on the matter. Their arguments don’t affect me directly, but they do impact my ability to recruit others who otherwise would be attracted to the philosophy. You and I understand the difference because we’ve done our homework, but others who are uninformed will look at the actions of the group as a whole.

      It is difficult to determine how much damage the open letter to Ron Paul, along with other bigoted statements made by these PC libertarians, has done to the movement, but I wonder if it was the last straw for a lot of people who are now supporting Trump. Seeing a great man like Paul get treated like this not just by his enemies or his political party, but by his own people, sent a clear message, whether it was intended or not.

      This is why I have zero sympathy for PC libertarians who scream about Trump after they either participated in this treatment of Paul or stood aside and said nothing in his defense.


  6. Pingback: Fashism | The Anarchist Notebook

  7. Pingback: Why Libertarianism Could Not and Will Not Ever Be a Real Movement | The Anarchist Notebook

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s