Vol.11 No.3 ---- Summer 1997

Contents



Libertarianism



Essays and Review Essays

Freedom, Self-Ownership, and Libertarian Philosophical Diaspora
Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality
by G.A.Cohen
Real Freedom for All
by Philippe van Parijs
Justin Weinberg

Freedom, Liberty, and Property
Jonathan Wolff

Aristotelianism and Libertarianism
Liberty and Nature
by Douglas B. Rasmussen and Douglas J. Den Uyl
Richard Kraut

It Ayn't Rand
Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical
by Chris Sciabarra
David MacGregor

Does Simplicity Bring Liberty?
Simple Rules for a Complex World
by Richard Epstein
Frederick Schauer

Whats's Wrong with Libertarianism
Classical Liberalism
by David Conway
What It Means to Be a Libertarian
by Charles Murray
Libertarianism: A Primer
by David Boaz
Bringing the Market Back In
by John L. Kelley
Jeffrey Friedman







Justin Weinberg | Freedom, Self-Ownership, and Libertarian Philosophical Diaspora

In Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality, G.A. Cohen argues that libertarianism does not follow from respect for freedom, and that libertarianism cannot be grounded on self-ownership. Cohen's arguments are, for the most part, compelling. That leaves the libertarian philosopher the options of either moving leftwards--for example, along the lines of Philippe van Parij's Real Freedom for All--or embracing some form of consequentialism. Either way, the result is the abandonment of characteristically libertarian political philosophy.


Jonathan Wolfe | Freedom, Liberty, and Property

If one values freedom, what sort of regime of property should one favor: libertarianism, socialism, or something else again? Debate on this topic has been hampered by a failure to distinguish freedom and liberty, which are both of great value, but can come into conflict. Furthermore there are many similar concepts--distinct from both liberty and freedom, yet each representing something we rightly value--which may also come into conflict with each other and with freedom and liberty. Consequently the question posed above has no easy answer.


Ricjard Kraut | Arisotelianism and Libertarianism

In Liberty and Nature, Rasmussen and Den Uyl use an Aristotelian conception of the human good to provide a foundation for libertarianism. Their principle argument is that intelligence and virtue are necessary ingredients in every flourishing human life, but since these are not goods that the state can distribute to individuals, governments can play only a modest role in promoting the common good. The state best promotes the well-being of its citizens by allowing them to pursue happiness in a manner of their own choosing, and defending them against those who would invade their moral boundaries.


David MacGregor | It Ayn't Rand

Chris Sciabarra's Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical offers a novel view of the founder of Objectivism. Sciabarra contends that Rand was influenced by Hegelian and Marxist themes that dominated Rusian thought during its Silver Age, particularly the doctrine of internal relations. Yet while it is true that key Hegelian and Marxist concepts, such as the dialectics of work and the master-slave relationship, are features of Rand's radical outlook, Sciabarra fails in his major argument that Rand's dialectical method presents an alternative to that of Marx and Hegel.


Frederick Schauer | Does Simplicity Bring Liberty?

In Simple Rules for a Complex World, Richard Epstein claims to be focusing on legal simplicity, and on the link between legal simplicity and a legal system less intrusive on individual liberty. It turns out, however, that Epstein's conception of simplicity is itself soaked with the substantive idea of individual liberty. The consequences of this are that the claim that legal simplicity brings individual liberty (and legal minimalism) becomes true by definition, and that Epstein avoids taking on the important and interesting questions of whether and when legal simplicity, more conventionally understood, produces less legal intrusiveness and thus, under Epstein's own conception, more liberty.


Jeffrey Friedman | What's Wrong with Libertarianism

Libertarian arguments about the empirical benefits of capitalism are, as yet, inadequate to convince anyone who lacks libertarian philosophical convictions. Yet "philosophical" libertarianism founders on internal contradictions that render it unfit to make libertarians out of anyone who does not have strong consequentialist reasons for libertarian beliefs. The joint failure of these two approaches to libertarianism explains why they are both present in orthodox libertarianism--they hide each other's weaknessess, thereby perpetuating them. Libertarianism retains significant potential for illuminating the modern world because of its distance from mainstream intellectual assumptions. But this potential will remain unfulfilled until its ideological superstructure is dismantled.

Return to Home Page