SoylentNews

aristarchus [soylentnews.org] writes:

From Merion West [merionwest.com], which is a Hard Center Journal.

There has recently been a swath of commentary [thedailybeast.com] noting the strange connection between those who initially identify as “classical liberals” or “libertarians”—particularly in online forums—and a gradual transition of these individuals toward holding alt-rights views. Sometimes called “the classical liberal pivot [thebaffler.com],” the conflation of classical liberalism and libertarianism with alt-right positions has naturally drawn the ire of many who identify with the former two. And as I shall explain, apologists are correct to contend that critics are making a serious error when they conflate classical liberalism and libertarian theory with the positions of the alt-right. Nevertheless, it is worth examining why many who do adopt this labels do paradoxically seem to gravitate towards post-modern conservative reactionary positions. This includes figures like Stefan Molyneux, who originally identified with libertarianism before going on to peddle white nationalist and misogynistic rhetoric, and Paul Joseph Watson, who also made the shift towards putting forward far-right conspiracy theories. The issue has become serious enough that classical liberal and libertarian leaning organizations such as the Foundation for Economic Education and the magazine Reason have admirably sought to distance themselves from the alt-right.

Of course, with a picture of Ayn (Paul) Rand (Corp.) in the heading, well, why is the libertarian left always anti-social right?

In this essay, I will contend that the roots of this inclination lie in the two ways that individuals tend to interpret classical liberalism and libertarianism. The first is truer to the roots of liberal thought in stressing the moral equality of all individuals. These figures, who are often highly critical of the alt-right [nytimes.com], associate with classical liberalism and libertarianism because they fundamentally believe that all human beings should be free to live as they choose without being subject to coercion by political authorities. The second way individuals tend to interpret classical liberalism and libertarianism is as an ideology which is strictly inegalitarian. They tend to support it because they see society as a competitive association, where superior individuals will rise to the top due to their merits and efforts. While they identify as classical liberals and libertarians, these individuals tend to limit themselves to desiring a capitalist marketplace to discriminate between the superior and inferior by allocating rewards and honors according to economic contributions. But if these individuals come to believe the system increasingly rewards the unworthy, they can be inspired to radicalize and move further to the extremes offered by alt-right doctrines.

The author has a task cut out for him! Read the fine article to see if he succeeds.

Original Submission