Why we can't cede the libertarian movement to authoritarian pretenders
Today, I want to talk about why it is important that we, the people who actually believe in freedom, win the battle for the soul of libertarianism. After all, I've said repeatedly that labels don't matter all that much, that political philosophy is not the way to build a coalition to fight against extremism, that most ordinary middle class people probably don't care about political philosophy, and so on. Yet, I still believe that it is very important that true believers in freedom win the battle for the soul of libertarianism over so-called paleo-libertarians who pander to paleoconservatives, to the extent of sacrificing both civil liberties and free trade, 'beltway libertarians' who have no problem with neoconservative interventionism, neoreaction-adjacent pseudo-libertarian authoritarians who discredit us all, as well as AnCap-adjacent extremists.
The reason why we must win the battle for the soul of libertarianism is because it is simply the battle to define what freedom means, at least in the Western political context. Libertarianism is the only movement in the Western political landscape that consistently says it is for freedom first and foremost, and consistently speaks the language of freedom. If we cede the libertarian movement to people who don't actually put freedom first, or believe in freedom in a truly universal way, or else use libertarianism to justify their extreme agendas that have nothing to do with practical personal freedom, we will lose the language of freedom to people who don't actually believe in freedom, and will use it to justify its opposite. This will be a real tragedy, with serious implications across society, including implications on civil liberties, free speech and even world peace or lack thereof.
Another thing we need to recognize is that libertarianism has become the way it is because of deliberate actions by forces from certain factions of the ruling class, acting on the small movement in the form of big sums of money over various periods of history, in order to promote their broader agendas. This, in my opinion, is what has pulled libertarianism into an unjustifiably close association with the political right, to the extent that the movement is now in danger of being swallowed by right-wing populism. First, it was the 'taxation is theft' but civil liberties and wars don't matter people. Later, it was the Tea Party people. Lately, it has been people from the populist right looking for anti-establishment credentials. All these people are not true believers in freedom, and we must not let them define the libertarian agenda going forward. I think remaining committed to a meaning of freedom that makes sense for ordinary people is the key to seeing through these schemes.
To defend libertarianism from all the aforementioned forces, I believe we need to call out those who say they are freedom but are not really for freedom in any ordinarily meaningful sense of the word. We also need to continue to think about what freedom means, and the conditions under which it is achievable or not. I think that if we have a firm sense of this, we will not get tricked by the pretenders so easily.
This Anti-Woke Activist is Taking a Stand Against Trump's Anti-DEI Madness
We cannot be complicit in authoritarian action with real world harms
Before I go any further, I have to say that I have long been against what is commonly known as 'wokeness', as in the genre of social and political activism that seeks to apply postmodern critical theory and adjacent identity theories to the real world. Identity-based critical theories divide society into oppressor vs oppressed groups, while postmodernism fundamentally has a problem with the objective truth. These philosophies logically lead to divisive and anti-objective-reality approaches to social problems, as well as anti-free speech phenomenon like de-platforming and cancel culture. This is why I have long argued that postmodern critical theory is a threat to the future of Western civilization, and must be confronted and defeated for the sake of our future. I also recognize that, while woke activism seems to have superficially calmed down in recent years, the underlying attitudes and worldviews are actually more deeply entrenched than ever among a significant section of society. This means that we need to keep arguing against postmodern critical theory, and keep trying to win people back over to the old-school liberal side. It is actually for this reason why Trump's anti-DEI 'counterrevolution' is making me feel very uneasy.
For a long time, I have argued that anti-wokeness shouldn't be anti-social justice, but rather provide a better, more liberal version of social justice, to compete against wokeness. Ideally, the anti-woke liberal cares deeply about social justice, that minorities have equal opportunity in society, and that people receive the help and accommodation they need so they can live their best lives. However, the anti-woke liberal is also committed to liberal values, including core classical liberal values like free speech, freedom of conscience and individual merit or guilt, because they believe that these values are what will promote wellbeing for all, especially in the long run. This means that the anti-woke liberal can't accept the worldview that society is made up of interlocking systems of oppression that must be dismantled, or that speech and discourse are fundamentally about power dynamics, or that universal tolerance of all ideas and speech is 'oppressive' and 'repressive' as Herbert Marcuse famously asserted. I am an anti-woke liberal in the aforementioned sense. I really am a 'bleeding heart liberal' (or 'bleeding heart libertarian', depending on which aspects of my political philosophy you want to focus on), as the saying goes, and I really care about social justice, in the old-school liberal sense. Indeed, a big reason why I came to be anti-woke was because I believe that woke activism and postmodern critical theory is incompatible with real social justice as I understand it.
This is where I vehemently disagree with Trump's sweeping anti-DEI executive orders. While I disagree with affirmative action, and I am also quite skeptical about contemporary 'DEI' efforts, what Trump is doing goes way too far, and is effectively throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Trump is using the excuse of DEI to rip apart long-standing programs, initiatives and arrangements, and I believe there are things in there that aren't actually 'woke', and are actually helping people in the real world. Taking all that away in the name of fighting 'DEI' is not only unjustified, it is actually despicable, especially when there are clearly other ways to rid the DEI programs of their postmodern critical theory influence. It is still too early to assess exactly what damage has been done, but I'm sure we're going to hear all the stories over the next few months, and it won't be pretty at all. To the extent of what is happening, I really can't help but begin to agree with the analysis that anti-DEI hysteria is being deliberately kicked up by the reactionary right so that they can dismantle vital civil rights protections, and regress society back 100 years or so. To the extent that Trump and the right succeeds in doing this kind of damage, they will be condemned by history, and very rightfully so…
Read the full article at my second Substack
TaraElla is a singer-songwriter and author, who is the author of the Moral Libertarian Manifesto and the Moral Libertarian book series, which argue that liberalism is still the most moral and effective value system for the West.
She is also the author of The Trans Case Against Queer Theory and The TaraElla Story (her autobiography).
Both your recent pieces struck a similar chord: while you're against the extremism and authoritarian notion of wokeism. Im wondering, that its what the idea of any kind of group issue as prejudicial yes? I'm only guessing, so please correct me. But it seems you feel that it's a distraction from the bigger picture of freedom. More importantly, I feel pain. I feel your insult, and I feel it as well.
I have felt it myself in many ways in just trying to bring forth the idea of true freedom. By far, when you speak against wokeism, you are hardly speaking against being transgender - quite the opposite. You smartly express the limitations, if not dangers, for all the isms, peoples, and religions. I get it. In the all of us, not the groups of us. And I truly think freedom can happen. I've seen it. (and read about it occasionally). It works. Ps im about to post the entire response on my site but its just way to long to put here.. lol Peace- Nick - im gonna link your name on it a