Why libertarianism is not a liberal view

University Press Scholarship Online. Sign in. Not registered? Sign up. Publications Pages Publications Pages. Recently viewed 0 Save Search. Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Liberalism and Distributive Justice. Matthew J. The Supervenience Argument. Jason Turner - - Florida Philosophical Review 4 1 Defending the Case for Liberal Anationalism. Christopher Evan Franklin - - Philosophical Explorations 16 1 - Libertarianism, Luck, and Control.

Alfred R. Mele - - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 3 A Critique of Frankfurt-Libertarianism. Kevin Timpe - - Philosophia 34 2 Christopher Evan Franklin - - Mind Liberalism and Permissible Suppression of Illiberal Ideas. Christopher Evan Franklin - - Philosophical Studies 3 Added to PP index Total views 16, of 2,, Recent downloads 6 months 13 49, of 2,, How can I increase my downloads?

Sign in to use this feature. Hence, libertarians are wont to point out that being poor in a free society is much better than being poor elsewhere, that markets in general do not work to the detriment of the poor, and so on. Libertarians are highly skeptical of political authority and state legitimacy. Since people are, quite simply, independent and equal beings, with none naturally subordinated to any other, states like all other agents ought to respect the moral rights of individuals, including their rights over their persons and their legitimate possessions.

For this reason, libertarians typically require something like voluntary consent or acceptance for legitimate state authority. Unfortunately, all states fail to satisfy this requirement for many of their subjects. As a result, they use massive amounts of force in ways that are morally impermissible. States violate the rights of citizens by punishing people for self-regarding conduct e. Similarly, states violate the rights of their subjects by forcibly transferring their legitimate possessions to preferred others e.

States violate the rights of citizens when they forcibly prevent them from innocently contracting and associating with others, exercising their religion, occupy certain professions because of their ethnic background, gender, or sexual orientation, and much, much more.

In reply, libertarians typically argue that many of the effects of states are extremely negative. Moreover, many of the positive effects that states can bring about can also be obtained through voluntary mechanisms. Libertarians tend to be more hopeful about the possibility of anarchic provision of order, public goods, as well as charitable giving.

Even though libertarians are generally quite hostile to state authority, this does not mean that the state cannot permissibly undertake certain minimal activities. This includes most obviously the enforcement of individual rights and freedoms.

Some theorists, such as Hayek , argue that it can be permissible for people to be forced to pay for basic police services. But this argument seems problematic within libertarian theory. If people do not agree to their legitimate possessions being used for these purposes, it would be unjust to force them to pay for these services, even if they clearly benefit a benefit as a result.

After all, libertarians generally deny that merely receiving a benefit suffices to justify enforceable requirements to pay. Since most left-libertarians recognize enforceable duties to compensate others in proportion to the value of the natural resources they possess, the state might forcibly collect and disburse these payments.

Some hold that even various public goods can be forcibly provided, including basic police services, national defense, a basic system of roads, etc. The underlying justification here is that the provision of these public goods will increase the value of natural resources, making the taxed amounts a case of self-financing.

Vallentyne One popular argument for state authority holds that states can be legitimate if they are democratic. Libertarians tend to be very skeptical about this view. A large body of empirical findings has shown that voters tend to be radically uninformed, ignorant, and indeed biased about political issues.

And democratic deliberation does little, if anything, to improve this. Indeed, it seems like it is rational for people to remain ignorant about politics. In addition to voter ignorance, many libertarians fear the more general dynamics of state power. Thus, many government policies impose widely dispersed costs on the populace to confer localized benefits on a few, often politically well-connected elites.

Examples include the large-scale bailouts of financial companies and agricultural subsidies. The editors note that as of the January update, no content by the original author, Peter Vallentyne, remains in this entry.

So he is no longer listed as an author. Self-Ownership 2. Other Routes to Libertarianism 3. The Power to Appropriate 4. Libertarianism, Left and Right 5. Self-Ownership The family of views making up libertarianism includes many different members. Other Routes to Libertarianism Just as Nozick may have seen libertarianism as the best way to express a host of moral considerations in the realm of justice, so too many other libertarians embrace different principles as the foundation of their theories.

The Power to Appropriate Libertarian and classical liberal theories conceive of distributive justice as largely sometimes exclusively historical in nature. Libertarianism, Left and Right Libertarianism is committed to a strong guarantee of basic liberty of action. Anarchism and the Minimal State Libertarians are highly skeptical of political authority and state legitimacy.

Vallentyne One popular argument for state authority holds that states can be legitimate if they are democratic. Bibliography Barnett, R. Berkowitz ed. Brennan, J. Brennan, B. Van der Vossen, and D. Schmidtz eds. Buchanan, J. Caplan, B. Chartier, G. Cohen, G. Epstein, R. Feser, E. Freeman, S.

Fried, B. Friedman, M. Gaus, G. Gaus and C. Kukathus eds. George, H. Appleton and Company, ; reprinted by Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, Grunebaum, J. Hayek, F. Huemer, M. Locke, J. Laslett ed. Lomasky, L. Mack, E. Narveson, J. Sterba, , Are Liberty and Equality Compatible? Nozick, R. Otsuka, M. Pincione, G. Railton, P. Rasmussen, D. Rothbard, M. Russell, D. Access options available:. Illiberal Libertarians: Why Libertarianism Is Not a Liberal View Samuel Freeman bio Liberalism as a philosophical doctrine can be distinguished from liberalism as a system of social and political institutions.

Philosophical liberalism maintains that, first, there is a plurality of intrinsic goods, and that no single way of life can encompass them all. There are then different ways of living worth affirming for their own sake. Second, whatever intrinsic goods are appropriate for individuals, their having the freedom to determine and pursue their conceptions of the good is essential to their living a good life.

Finally, necessary to individuals' good is that their freely adopted conceptions of the good be consistent with justice. All have an interest in exercising their freedom so as to respect others' basic rights and other requirements of justice. While this does not mean that justice is necessarily an intrinsic good although it can be , it does mean that observing justice's demands is a normal precondition of living a good life.

Philosophical liberalism is but one way to argue for liberal institutions, including a [End Page ] liberal constitution.