Conservatism Turned Upside Down
It is a cliché of publishing to observe, when a book appears before the public years after it was first written, that it is more relevant now than ever. But it is difficult to think of how else The Betrayal of the American Right can be described.
Murray N. Rothbard chronicles the emergence of an American right wing that gave lip service to free-market principles and "limited government," but whose first priority, for which it was willing to sacrifice anything else, was military interventionism around the world. That sounds familiar, to be sure, but as Rothbard shows, it is neither recent nor anomalous. It goes back to the very beginnings of the organized conservative movement in the 1950s. FULL ARTICLE
Comments (9)
IMHO
The 2003 Iraq war was justified on the basis of propaganda worthy of the old Pravda; that people calling themselves libertarians — who, after all, are supposed to have an eye for government propaganda — swallowed the government's case whole...
When I ask pro-war Libertarians about their position on the war and suggest that 9-11 and other terrorist attacks are the result of interventionist foreign policies--not only of the U.S., but of other Western nations as well--I am frequently told that I should forget about history, focus on the present and move on from there. :\
When I hear Libertarians who support the war say that they want limited government and relief from high taxes, I realize that there's a huge disconnect between cause and effect.
The reluctance to consider past actions and their consequences for the present is nothing new. We used to call it denial.
But now the analysis of one's past has been circumvented by the psychological community under the heading of behavioral psychology. Take an introductory course in psychology and you will receive not only a lecture on this topic, but a demonstration of the "Skinner Box" (complete with chicken).
Like the chicken, people don't question how they came to be in the box. They don't analyze past actions as they relate to events in the present. Instead, they engage in programmed behaviors intended to produce a desired result.
And so, like the chicken, people avoid the unpleasant shock produced by the lever labeled "fearmongering" by pressing the lever labeled "war".
Published: September 17, 2007 3:00 PM
Niccolò
It is so sad and pathetic that the libertarian philosophers have always attempted to align themselves with, "the right."
Pathetic and perfectly descriptive of the direction libertarians have floundered in. With their naivety and incapacity to actually fight for what is right, as opposed to bending to the will of "potential allies" in order to ease themselves INTO the status quo, the libertarian movement has fizzled in and out of action, dived head first into a sea of intellectual torment and a cesspool of pseudo-freedom, and struggled to capture any essence of rallying support.
Suffice to say, I no longer call myself a "libertarian." Its a mockery and a shameful term to call other human beings. 'Libertarian,' is the true title of incompetence and label of under achievement. The word libertarian now merely describes a paleo-conservative kiss ass, looking to fool everyone into following, "the way" by appealing to a religious document called, the Constitution.
All this I say is due to the fact that libertarians have classically attempted to align themselves with, "the right," and even continue to do so on this site by constantly referencing their precious constitution.
Good luck fizzling into thin air, paleo-con masqueraders.
/rant
Published: September 17, 2007 3:25 PM
Kevin B
Niccolò,
Out of curiosity, what do you now call yourself?
Published: September 17, 2007 3:30 PM
jeffrey
Hey, Niccolò, if you actually take time to read the book, you will find that Murray actually concluded something similar, and talks at length about the left and its merits and the disappoints therein. This is the most anti-conservative, and arguably anti-right, book to appear "on the right" ever. It is also anti-left, for that matter.
But I don't know why I'm typing this. People who would rather just shoot their mouths off rather than gain knowledge by reading are essentially beyond hope. Is there hope that you will actually read this book, Niccolò?
Published: September 17, 2007 4:09 PM
IMHO
Niccolo,
There's a world of difference between Neo-Libertarians and the paleos. And I, for one, would rather stand with the paleos than move towards socialism.
Published: September 17, 2007 5:55 PM
Anthony
I proudly call myself a paleolibertarian or anarcho-capitalist or radical liberal or whatever. "Libertarian" on its own, however, is not a term I'd use to characterize myself. I have come to view the term with a slight disdain.
Published: September 17, 2007 6:59 PM
Niccolò
Kevin, I now call myself a market anarchist, I, like Anthony also find a disdain for the term libertarian, it has only become synonymous with the sleazy constitutional-nationalists.
Jeffrey, I did not mean to imply that I read the book or disagree with Rothbard. I haven't read the book, nor do I typically disagree with Rothbard outside of tactics and strategy. I was merely commenting on conservatives in general and reiterating a position I know Rothbard has, at least to some extent.
IMHO, what exactly is the difference?
Published: September 17, 2007 8:25 PM
Jonathan Bostwick
I too like Market Anarchist. Though I do not shun away from libertarian, populist, or right-wing. If right-wing libertarians are irreverent, left-wing liberals are evil.
These silly label debates are mostly useful to people who try to legitimize minimal government. I despise all governments, of every form, for one reason: They inflict and promote violence.
I've already received my copy; only on chapter 4. I'm sure no description I could give would do justice to his insight or presentation.
Published: September 17, 2007 11:06 PM
IMHO
Niccolo,
Here's a link to a Neo-Libertarian website:
http://www.neolibertarian.net/articles/neolibertarianism.aspx
Don't confuse Neo-Libs with pro-war Libertarians who are having a knee-jerk reaction to 9-11. Neo-Libs have developed a rationale that essentially supports the toppling of regimes, nation building and the establishment of democracies in order to promote free trade.
Published: September 18, 2007 12:29 AM