by Carl Milsted
This web site is called The Free Liberal, yet you will often see the word “libertarian” on its pages. What gives? Is “free liberal” just a euphemism for “libertarian?”
In some ways, yes. For example, I just took the Enhanced Precision Political Quiz in 2D and scored 81,81, just north of the middle of the libertarian quadrant of the Nolan Chart. Most of the other writers for this site would also score somewhere in the libertarian quadrant.
That said, my beliefs are strongly at odds with the major strands of libertarian orthodoxy. I categorically reject the Libertarian Party’s membership oath; I do believe in some initiation of force for social purposes. I consider Murray Rothbard’s model of human choice to be deeply flawed, and thus his science [sic!] of praxeology invalid. Ayn Rand’s attacks on altruism make my stomach queasy. Even the CATO folks bother me at times when they lapse into corporatism. (Note that I speak for myself, only. Other writers here have different views.)
For these and other reasons, esteemed members of the libertarian establishment have declared I am not a libertarian. Some call me a statist, a socialist, and worse. Fair enough; time for a different category. Classical liberal sort of works, but it sounds so fossilized, and often gets used by conservatives. So how about free liberal?
To my mind free liberalism is that area between classical liberalism/libertarianism and modern liberalism. The word “liberal” comes from “liberty” and we add the redundant “free” to make this clear. We keep the word “liberal,” however, in order to emphasize a connection with modern liberals. We care. Speaking for myself:
1. I consider the current gap between rich and poor to be excessive, and support some measures to narrow said gap.
2. I’d rather rob from the rich than watch the poor starve.
3. This goes quadruple for the severely handicapped.
4. I think extreme corporatism to be roughly as bad as democratic socialism.
5. I think children and the senile need extra protections.
6. I even think adults could use a bit of protection from hastily made major decisions. (I support buyer’s remorse laws.)
7. I think nature is the natural right of all, and support wilderness set-asides, and protection of endangered species.
8. I favor taking action to stop global warming.
9. And more…
In other words I share many of the values of modern liberals, but not all their prescriptions. Unlike many modern liberals, I appreciate the power of markets and read economics books for fun.
Once again, I spoke for myself. Other writers on this site differ. The Free Liberal is a forum for a range of views spanning from liberal to libertarian.
That said, free liberalism as more than just a gap-filler. It is a potentially ideology on its own terms. It is about freedom broadly defined. Handicapped ramps on the sidewalks make the handicapped more free. A citizen’s dividend from ground rents gives more people the right to private property. A national park gives city dwellers the freedom to experience nature without having to buy a country estate. Even though balancing the different freedoms is tricky and imprecise, free liberalism is more emotionally consistent than libertarianism. It is more utopian, providing the advantages of classical liberalism while fixing its flaws.
It is also more practical. Liberty and a large wealth gap do not mix. When the wealth gap is huge, the poor demand more welfare and the rich demand a police a state. Libertarians should seriously consider free liberalism, because unlike the visions of Rand and Rothbard, a free liberal society could actually be achieved in our lifetime.
Carl Milsted is a senior editor for The Free Liberal.