The subtitle of this book by Jason Brennan is “What Everyone Needs to Know.” For those unfamiliar with this web site, I refer to myself as a “part-time Libertarian,” and I was interested in comparing my views to those that are presented as the Libertarian by the author. I often, but not always, agreed with what was presented as the Libertarian position. The first sentence of the Introduction is a good place to start. “Libertarians believe so long as we do not violate others’ rights, we should each be free to live as we choose.” What isn’t included in that sentence is that an ever-expanding government is the greatest risk to our freedom to live as we chose.
The book presents a subject for discussion by asking a question and then answering and analyzing. There are 105 questions, and the author uses those to economically discuss many difficult issues. Question number 5 reveals that libertarians often don’t agree with one another. It is said that they are divided into “(1) classical liberals (which does not include “left liberals” who call themselves “progressives”), (2) hard libertarians, and (3) neoclassical liberals.” The first category includes many of the people who would be considered the “famous libertarians,” to include Adam Smith, Bastiat, Hayek, and Milton Friedman. Adam Smith famously “…changed economics forever when he argued that the wealth of nations is measured not by the size of the king’s treasury but by the fullness of the common man’s stomach and by the opportunities available to his children.”
Classical liberals advocate tolerant societies, strong civil rights, open-market economies and oppose war and imperialism. They oppose government control of the economy, corporate welfare, and “…crony capitalism.” Hard libertarians think even taxes that provide minimal public goods, welfare programs, and social services are “…morally equivalent to theft.” The neoclassical liberals share many of the beliefs of classical liberals but advocate that social institutions must work to the benefit of even the least advantages and most vulnerable members of society. Milton Friedman advocated replacing most welfare programs with a “negative income tax” that would give the poor cash grants to bring them up to a minimal level.
All libertarians distrust government because government often behaves incompetently and creates unintended consequences that make problems worse. A strong government also often tends to attract those who want to exploit power.
Left liberals and conservatives come under pointed criticism. According to the author, conservatives talk about limited government and then take actions that help large corporations. They often favor subsidies to domestic companies, restrict immigration, impose trade barriers and tarrifs, and seize private property for public works projects. They favor the war on drugs which has imprisoned more citizens than any other country in the world. They support wars to maintain American dominance. They were willing to erode personal liberties with the “War on Terror.” They favor religious values that result in “moral virtue,” even if those values interfere with individual rights to make very personal decisions (read “abortion.”)
Left liberals are said by the author to believe government should be responsible for “social justice.” They “…advocate economic liberty only to the extent that it helps the poor (and) promotes other goals of social justice.” Left liberals want government to control corporations, but then bail out those corporations if they are at risk of failing. For anyone who has been watching, the left liberals under President Obama have accepted many of the policies that they railed against when George W. Bush was President. The War on Terror has moved toward more intrusive government actions against anyone deemed to be an enemy combatant. President Obama even authorized military actions in Libya that most constitutional scholars declared to have been illegal. Private communications of American citizens continue to be monitored aggressively. The prisons are still filled to overflowing by drug arrests.
The book presents compelling discussions about the value of liberty and freedom. “The civil liberties include the right to free speech, right of free assembly, right of association, freedom of conscience, right of bodily integrity, freedom from abuse and assault, freedom of lifestyle choice, rights to protest,…and freedom of sexual choice.”
The war on drugs comes under harsh criticism. Strict drug laws have resulted in jailing one in ten African Americans. There are more African Americans in prison today than there were slaves in 1850, “The United States imprisons more people than China, though china has four times the US population.” The war on drugs has turned black neighborhoods into ghettos, destroyed families, increased violent crime and impoverished children. The book admits that legalizing drugs would destroy the lives of people who chose to use them. However, many more lives are being destroyed by the war on drugs. Milton Friedman once joked that, “The role of government is to protect the drug cartel.”
There is an interesting argument that people should be allowed to sell organs if they freely agree to that sale. Parents of a child dying of renal failure are prevented to pay someone for a kidney. Laws prevent the sale of the organ, and advocates of the laws feel good about that outcome. They would say the idea of selling an organ is repulsive and they support that the government intervenes to stop the sale. “Better you die than I feel disgust.”
The recent real estate collapse is a wonderful example of unintended consequences of government actions. President Carter passed the Community Reinvestment Act to assure that people in poor neighborhoods were not prevented from obtaining home loans. President Clinton strengthened the act and banks had to make loans to people who couldn’t repay them. The banks didn’t want to hold the loans, so they sold them. The market collapsed and the government passed laws to punish the banks. Only large banks could possibly have enough resources to comply with the complex laws that were passed as a consequence.
We think of the United States as being quite free, but the book lists five countries, led by New Zealand, that have economies that are freer and less corrupt.
The author presents a strong case for open immigration, which would boost the economy. Opponents say that free immigration would cause high crime, but the author counters by saying that “…first generation Mexican immigrants are only about half as likely to commit violent crimes as third generation Americans (of any nationality).”
The book, which I recommend, includes many thought-provoking discussions. I didn’t always agree with what the author advocates, not an unusual result for anyone who calls themselves a libertarian, but the author does a good job of presenting his ideas.