The self-styled D.C. “libertarian” who urges the rest of us to abandon what Lew is doing and join his organization in “responsible, respectable, important work,” should understand what is implicit in these words. To be “responsible” is to be willing and able to bear all of the costs of one’s actions, a quality that hardly applies to anyone who wants to use state power – in whatever form or limitation – to accomplish desired ends. Only in the marketplace – and certainly not in Washington, District of Collectivism – can one meet this standard.
As for being “respectable,” this person has hit upon what I have long regarded as the Achilles-heel of so many libertarians: an inner need to be respected by intellectuals, the media, corporate leaders, and the rest of the political establishment. By proposing watered-down versions of the programs they oppose, far too many libertarians, I suspect, seek to avoid being labeled “extremists” or “kooks.” They bring to mind the words expressed to Yossarian by his commanding officers in “Catch-22”: “We just want you to like us.” Such people remind me of the words of Frank Chodorov, who criticized those “who want to clean up the whorehouse, but keep the business intact.”
What is so “important” in actions that, at best, only slow down the rate of growth of the state? Why is it “important” to have the “respect” of those who seek to gain from the use of state power, or from others who are either unaware or indifferent to the great harm caused by all political systems? At what point, in one’s thinking, is it important to take a position – no matter how much it is disrespected by others – for no other reason than to maintain the integrity of one’s principles? How does one behave “responsibly” if he or she engages in activity that is destructive of the lives of others and the society in which one lives?
9:28 pm on June 7, 2008
