To the Editor:
I finally got around to reading (and re-reading) your critique of libertarianism [“Libertarianism vs. Radical Capitalism”]. It is, by far, the most effective and persuasive critique of libertarianism that I’ve ever encountered. I was particularly impressed with these five features of your critique:
- You stuck to rigorous facts and logic without the insults and viciousness I have encountered in most Objectivist critiques of libertarianism. That’s a much more persuasive method of critique.
- You immediately established the relevance of the critique to follow by first providing summary examples of how commonly accepted but flawed philosophies undercut simplistic assertions of individual liberty.
- You then progressed through the supporting philosophical layers in reverse order, beginning at the immediate and upper most layer of political theory and progressing logically down through supporting philosophical principles in ethics, epistemology and metaphysics. I say “reverse” order because it is the reverse of how many Objectivist communicators proceed from metaphysical principles, etc. Your “reverse” method is most effective because it engages the reader or listener with relevance at the outset and helps him or her to understand why your analysis is relevant at each level.
- Having explained the logical, philosophical support of the cause of individual liberty, you then provided unusually clear and rigorous examples of how the lack of a rigorous conceptual underpinning of the cause of individual liberty ultimately renders libertarianism indefensible. I especially appreciated the discussion of why valid economic arguments in favor capitalism fail to defeat the enemies of capitalism.
- You explained the proper role of government and went on to critique the flawed libertarian aversion to a righteous assertion of government force to defend the rights of citizens against common domestic criminality, as well as threats from international armies and gangs.
Aliso Viejo, California