What is Neolibertarianism?

What is Neolibertarianism? Frankly, it's a question we've been asking at the QandO weblog since we began popularizing it last year. Often, the idea of Libertarianism has reminded me of Justice Potter Stewart's thoughts about obscenity. "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it," he declared.

That was good enough for Justice Stewart perhaps, but he was only interpreting the Constitution. We, on the other hand, are beginning publication of a journal that we hope will begin defining the fundamental intellectual and philosophical underpinnings of Neolibertarianism. If you're going to do that, then you should probably have a clear understanding of what Neolibertarianism is.

Much of what follows will be a comparison between Neolibertarianism and the more traditional sort of libertarianism, which we call Paleolibertarianism. In the interest of brevity, I'll refer to adherents to the former as Neos and the latter as Paleos.

In fact, the first principle of the Neos-or us Neos, I guess I should say-is explicitly defined by comparison between the two types of libertarianism, and can be boiled down to a single word: pragmatism.

Dale Franks

A long read, but interesting. I can't help but believe these folks are doomed to failure. Nevertheless, their effort is probably worthwhile. What Mr. Franks is describing in this long article is the classical definition of the Republican Party. As we slouch toward socialism, the GOP has become as infected and infested with power madness as the Democrats had been for decades. In order to grab the brass ring, they have succumbed to Tyler's axiom:

A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship.

In short, the GOP decided on bread and circuses and the Republican ideal ceased to exist. Bush I poisoned it, Bush II gutted it like a dead fish. I imagine that if "neolibertarianism" gets enough public play, it will be a likely candidate to fill the void left by the (dying) GOP.

What dooms them is the very word they use to differentiate themselves from the "paleolibertarians." I'm a little surprised that this group of folks can be so unblinkingly naive in the face of the lesson voters gave the GOP and their continual knee-jerking to pragmatism. Pragmatic libertarianism cannot stop the juggernaut of this democracy's destruction. Tyler's dictator is someone who is on the political scene today. If there is to be a change of direction without a revolution, no less than a majority of paleolibertarians would have to be in the seats of power. You'll pardon me if I don't hold my breath.