Several people have asked me this question. See below for one such. Let me say the following in response.
I am a big fan of Mike Rozeff’s. I think he has made numerous, important contributions to our philosophy. But, accomplished libertarians such as he, and if I may say so, me, do not always have to agree on everything. We are dealing with a complex perspective in political economy, and that is just to be expected. Hey, Murray Rothbard is a pro choicer, Ron Paul, a pro lifer, and it would be difficult to mention two more highly accomplished libertarians than them. Mises and Hayek parted company on matters of Austrian economics. Joe Salerno has done magnificent work on the “de-homogenization” of the latter two in this regard, demonstrating this.
I’m not comparing me and my friend Mike with Rothbard, Paul, Mises, Hayek, except to say, and I’m sure Mike would agree with me on this, that he and I are mere followers of those four giants of Austro-libertarianism. I’m only saying that it should occasion no big surprise to find disagreement in our movement.
Why don’t I reply to Mike on these issues – thickism, evictionism – that divide us? There are several reasons. One, he writes so much, it would be difficult to keep up with him. Two, I think a better venue for such disputes is in the scholarly, peer-reviewed literature, which allows for thousands of words, footnotes, etc. Three, my understanding of the purpose of the LewRocwell.com blog is not to promote heavy internal debates amongst libertarians, but, rather, to keep people up with news of interest to the LRC audience, to keep the general Austro-libertarian community informed.
—–Original Message—–
From: B
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2019 6:56 AM
Subject: Thin-skinned, Thick Libertarians
Dr. Block:
I have been following with some interest the ongoing conversation among various luminaries of the libertarian movement respecting the correct parameters of the libertarian philosophy.
It seems to me that the thickees are simply thin-skinned. They wish to include some of their own moral preferences into an otherwise simple idea: the NAP and private property. They do this because they are simply intolerant people. Like you, I have no truck with intolerant people; however, I resent their ongoing attempt to justify their intolerance by demanding that the libertarian idea include their preferences.
Furthermore, this fellow who has an ongoing gripe with evictionism is way off base. I think we can safely say they he is a thickee attempting to adorn this thickness with baseless rationalizations. Evictionism is the only approach to the issue of abortion that is consistent with the NAP and private property. The rest is again a baseless attempt to cram personal moral preferences into libertarianism. I haven’t seen any response from you to any of his criticisms. Like Ayn Rand, I suppose you prefer not to be a “fly-swatter”.
You have great patience with these thickees. Mine is growing increasingly “thin”.
Best regards,
B
Dear B:
Well said. No. I take that back. Keenly said; magnificently said. Beautifully said. You hit a bull’s eye, a home run with bases loaded (except, of course, for that “fly” business and I’m sure you’re only kidding about that).
I don’t want to get into a debate with a person who really doesn’t understand what I’m saying. Mike Rozeff is a good libertarian theorist, but, this is his Achilles Heel: he just doesn’t understand evictionism and, yes, he’s a thickster.
Best regards,
Walter
4:19 am on June 9, 2019
