Why I am not a "libertarian"

Here are two examples of libertarian articles that help illustrate why I consider myself a “classical liberal” and have many problems with the self-identified libertarian movement.

In one article that many of my libertarian Facebook friends have shared, If Only Conservatives Were More Like Libertarians, the author attacks social conservatives with rhetoric like:

How is it that same government can be the ultimate authority on how we live our lives, whom we can marry, how we raise our children, where we worship, what we inhale and ingest, and what we do behind closed doors?

Later she repeats the charge:

Typically, conservatives line up in support of family values (what if the family is dysfunctional?), a strong military and national defense, the right to bear arms, the death penalty and school prayer. They oppose embryonic stem-cell research, abortion, divorce, gay marriage, gay adoption and euthanasia. It’s the conservative version of a cradle-to-grave model, all spelled out in great detail.

These are both over-the-top passages.  I know many social conservatives that advocate for strong military, against legalized abortion, and for family values.   But I’ve yet to meet anyone who thinks the “government is the ultimate authority” or supports laws dictate where we worship or how we raise our children.  I don’t think that by-and-large conservatives “oppose divorce”—unless “oppose” means they think it is bad to get divorced, rather than they want to make it illegal.  The conservative agenda was to oppose federal funding of new lines of embryonic stem-cell research—something every libertarian would agree with.  And yes, conservatives generally oppose giving government marriage licenses to same sex couples—but I’m not convinced that government licensing of same-sex marriage is a libertarian solution.

Clearly, this is a criticism of a straw-man conservative, not a real-life, intelligent social conservative who can articulate why strong families lead to smaller government. 

The second piece which raised my ire was even more mean-spirited in discussing the shooting at the Family Research Council:

The Family Research Council will no doubt appreciate how some guy with a gun and bag full of Chick-fil-A sandwiches will feed its narrative they are the actual victims of oppression, not the gays.

Not only does it imply horribly that conservatives are happy that a security guard got shot, but that their end game is oppression of gays.

If these were just two ill-conceived essays, that would be one thing.  But from my observations, happens far too often amongst many “libertarians”.  They use over-the-top demagoguery, seek to claim a “holier-than-though” moral position, and go out of their way to alienate potential allies.  Libertarians—including friends of mine at the Cato Institute and Reason Magazine—need to spend more time understanding conservatives,and finding ways for working with them on areas of common ground in the spirit of fusionism.

For a good discussion of the role of libertarians in the conservative movement and fusionsim, check out the first half of this Reason piece - a discussion between Matt Welch and Jonah Goldberg.