The Republic does Weber - An ideal type for....Libertarianism

'Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to become the means by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of other men. Blood, whips and guns or dollars. Take your pick' Ayn Rand

When I began this blog, I had an idea for an ongoing series of posts looking at political ideologies and trying to present speculative and discursive ideal types for each of them. I am a fan of the ideal type, considering its heuristic use and its conciseness. And given the contested nature of the terminology of politics, I believe that giving clear but reflective meanings to such terms allow debate to move on. Thus we can see the continuities of such ideas over history and thus their essence and just as importantly, see the breaks, the changes, the evolution of ideas.

Part 1 on Conservatism to be found here
http://thesocialrepublic.blogspot.com/2008/07/conservatism-mit-added-weber.html

Whilst in fallen, decadent Old Europe, loud and proud Libertarianism is now a minority pastime, east of the Elbe and west of the Azores, this ideology of maximum liberty is a current and vibrant strand of political thought. One might class it as true or classic Liberalism updated for 21st century Richmond, VA. or Gdansk or some sub set of the New right or Conservatism in general or even anarchism in pin stripe. I certainly would not argue that Libertarianism (or to save my ash speckled keyboard, LB) is unconnected to these other bodies of thought. Rather, LB has become self contained, whilst remaining inter-connected with older and more established ideas. It is a synthesis, like much of 20th century political schemas, conjoining bits and pieces and creating a new logic, narrative and coda from the fragments.

Here goes:-

'A utopian attempt to revolutionise society and mankind itself by investing self interest with cultural particular virtue and removing any barriers on either macro or micro scale to the pursuit of that interest and replacing social interaction with litigation. This, paradoxically, recreates a caricature like gemienschaft of early Liberal societies'

'A Utopian attempt' - LBs seek a utopia albeit one dressed up as the natural state of things. Theirs, as will be mentioned at greater length later, is a world that harks back to a time were state was minimal. Yet this is utopian for their past idyll was a place were the state was increasingly required to intervene and grow. The great period of British Liberalism, the 1850-60s, when Laissez Faire was doctrinal, the state was bigger and more invasive that it had been ever before. Calls to regulate weights and measures, prisons, the behaviour of the poor, the nature of local politics, public carnivals and norms fell on the state. This was no halcyon steady state. In post civil war America, during its great period of breakneck industrialisation, of maximum liberty, a large part of the nation was under military occupation and nationalistic public ritual was introduced en masse from above. If LB claims, as it does, that post some golden age the state suddenly became malignant, it is utopia to believe that via return similar advances of their nemesis might not arise again. If the market can fix almost anything, why did it not the first time round? Why was the state needed at all?

'....to revolutionise society....' - Lest we forget, a society as complex and messy as ours must be revolutionised to become one driven solely by rational self interest. Institutions that do so, such as PLCs, have been labeled by better men that I as systemically sociopathic. Sociopathic is a fairly good definition of most revolutionary movements. Indeed one might call it their common characteristic.

'...and mankind itself....' - If society has to change and become an arena of pure and rational self interest, then its componants need to as well. Mankind is ill suited to such ruthless game theory, being too sloppy, lazy, fat, too kindly to sloth and sob stories. Mankind must be steeled, made hardy and hard. To master a LB modernity, LB man and woman mustact like that ruthless rational actor, no flabby softness.

'...by investing self interest with culturally particular virtue....' - Libertarians are united by the partiality of their individual version of liberties. Some seek an atheistic paradise, others a new realm of piety, some seek an ethnic inclusiveness or soft soaped racism, whilst other maintain a hankering for institutions directly born out of the state as some precious exception. Localism too is a common lens through which to consider liberty. Few have the strength of conviction in holy liberty to leave these pre-conditions or prejudices aside. It is one of the major differences between LB and anarcho-capitalism, that celebration of a Hobbesian freedom. LB seek liberty as a route towards their preconceived utopias, one that must be managed to ensure that there is no diversions.

'...removing any barriers on either macro or micro scale to the pursuit of that interest and replacing social interaction with litigation...' - LBs makes out the state or a coy mythical version of it, is the source of all and every evil. Not only that. Human foibles that get in the way of maximising liberty must be eradicated too, either in the journey to liberty of in the process of dog eat dog.There is a telling contradiction here as well. Having abandoned coercion via regulation and a variable degree of criminal law, the social guarantee against pure anarchy becomes the flaming sword of litigation.

Every social interaction is defined by the possibility of legal action. Be it residents suing the local paper mill over pollution or impurities in your tomato sauce or employers swindling you on your wages, all can only be rectified by legal means. No a priori regulation and thus no coercive agency as a short cut, no arbiting body. No, each case must start from basics, mus be personally actioned from papers to judgement. The coercive state thus is replaced by a truly vast legal frameworks of 24 hour courts which have to shape every single human action time and again. Social life ceases to exist ambiently but must be acted out on the courtroom floor. This legalistic extremism would give birth to a monstrous invasive apparatus, one where money and thus legal expertise is central.

Some LBs have realised this impasse and seek a replacement form of social mediation and arbitration, but then they are on a course out of LB altogether. Rather then embrace the Randian solution of money as the key to human interaction or pure anarchy, the litigation mania allows LBs to protect their virtuous 'no-place' from the pure uncertaincy of hobbesian chaos

'This, paradoxically, recreates the caricature like gemienschaft of early Liberal societies....' - Here the contradictions, the partial prejudices and the inevitable legal leviathan, and the rose tinted glasses quack history of LB come together. They seek a past that never existed. Further the societies that this myth is based swiftly moved away from the tenets of their creed. They seek no understanding of why the ideal of Manchesterismus begat the Nation state economy, with welfare, regulation of trade and central government and why it did so willingly. They seek a static pastishe of a society that was by its very nature hurtling towards their bete noire with open arms

Ta, And please discuss, disagree, call me a liar and a cad etc.

Next time, the Big Red, Socialism