The Means and the Ends of Liberty

For those not familiar with Reddit, I can't recommend it enough. It is a social news website where users can post links to items on the web. All of the other users can vote the item up or down and comment on it. The discussions and content can become offensive at times, but for the most part, Redditors are very funny, very intellectual people.

There are many "subreddits" or sections where items are posted on only a certain topic. Naturally, I subscribe to the Libertarian subreddit (reddit.com/r/Libertarian) where I get my daily affirmation of my political beliefs. After following this subreddit for about a year, I have noticed a trend. A large percentage of the posts have this format: "How would x work in a libertarian society?"

I suppose it's only natural. In a society that has an almost infantile reliance on government, people simply cannot imagine how we could possibly get by without it. Who would provide the roads, the utilities, the common defense? Who would regulate food and drugs? Who would protect us from Wall Street and credit card companies and predatory lenders? Who would provide welfare and health care and retirement funds?

People in general aren't going to argue that freedom is bad. People know freedom is a good thing. As a libertarian, I never have to argue from a deontological standpoint. That's not the problem. The problem is that people just don't know how freedom would work. Without government, chaos would ensue, right? So, I always get this statement from opponents: "Liberty is all well and good, but...." Suddenly they become consequentialists!

I always think of Nineteen Eighty-Four when encountering such statements. In George Orwell's dystopian future, "doublethink" is defined as "[t]he power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them...." You ask people if they agree with the statement "the ends justify the means" and most people will not. In fact, most people feel a sort of moral repugnance for such a notion; however, in the very next breath, you can get them to admit that they think it's okay to infringe someone's liberty as long as some benefit is derived from it. Doublethink.

So, I have found myself scouring world history for successful examples of freedom working pragmatically. I discovered the "golden age" of American liberty in the 1800s, the successful anarchy of Iceland from the 10th to the 13th centuries, the stateless "Free Territory" of Ukraine in the early 1900s--I've actually compiled quite a list. And you know what? None of it convinced anyone. It was as if an atheist demanded to see God, so God showed up and said, "Here I am." Will the atheist suddenly believe? No, he will demand magic tricks to prove that this person is indeed God. And if God successfully completes the magic tricks, the atheist will explain them as mere illusions that any magician could perform. You just can't win.

Never mind that economic freedom has been proven to reduce poverty and promote wage equality. Never mind that drug legalization has been proven to reduce drug use and violent crime. Never mind that eliminating speed limits actually decreases the number of fatal accidents. Never mind that free societies are historically responsible for incredible economic and technological advancement while communist countries inevitably crumble to pieces.

But let's say that liberty didn't work, that allowing the individual to be free was found to result mostly in negative results. Would I abandon it then? No! As noted philosopher Karl Popper said, "It is wrong to think that belief in freedom always leads to victory; we must always be prepared for it to lead to defeat. If we choose freedom, then we must be prepared to perish along with it."

Will freedom yield a perfect, utopian society? No! When human beings co-exist, there will always be problems. It is natural. It is to be expected. However, as Thomas Jefferson declared, "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it."

Thankfully, as a libertarian, I have an excellent position to argue from. From a deontological standpoint, liberty is always the right thing to do, even if it has negative results; and, from a consequentialist standpoint, liberty has been shown to be the most successful economic and social system the world has ever known. I think I can sleep well tonight.