When
I first heard the term “libertarianism” in the early
1950s, I mentioned it to Ayn Rand as a possible name for our political
philosophy. She was suspicious of the term and inclined to dismiss
it as a neologism. “It’s a mouthful,” she remarked. “And
it sounds too much like a made-up word.”
I answered maybe
so, but what alternative did we have? She said, “We’re
advocates of laissez-faire capitalism.” I answered, sure, but
that’s kind of a mouthful too—it’s not a one-word
name—and besides, it puts the whole emphasis on economics and
politics and we stand for something wider and more comprehensive:
we’re champions of individual rights. We’re advocates
of a non-coercive society.
I suggested that “libertarianism” could
convey all that by means of a single word—especially if we
were to define “libertarianism” as
a social system that (a) barred the initiation of force from all
human relationships and (b) was based on the inviolability of individual
rights.
Ayn considered this suggestion briefly, then shook her head
and said, “No,
it sounds too much like a made-up word.”
Later, when many
advocates of laissez-faire took up the word, and some of them were
anarchists (notably Murray Rothbard), Ayn felt
vindicated at rejecting a term broad enough to include Objectivist
advocates of pure capitalism, on the one hand, and “anarcho-capitalists,” on
the other. She did not realize that the majority of people who
called themselves “libertarians” were advocates not
of anarchism but of constitutionally limited government (in essence,
the Objectivist
model), and that she could have fought for her interpretation of
the term just as she fought for her interpretation of the word “selfish.” There
was no good reason to surrender a much-needed word to the opposition.
Later
still, when she saw that libertarians often supported their position
with aspects of her philosophy, without necessarily subscribing
to the total of Objectivism, she became angrier still and decided
that all libertarians were “whim-worshipping subjectivists.”
Being
a more balanced and reality-oriented teacher of Objectivism than
Leonard Peikoff, David Kelley addressed libertarian groups
with the aim of persuading them that Objectivism was the best possible
foundation for their political beliefs. For this he was denounced
by Peikoff as a traitor to Objectivism. Poor Leonard.
In any event,
today libertarianism is part of our language and is commonly understood
to mean the advocacy of minimal government.
Ayn
Rand is commonly referred to as “a libertarian philosopher.” Folks,
we are all libertarians now. Might as well get used to it.
About
ten years ago, I came across a saying from the Talmud that impressed
me profoundly. I have not been able to stop thinking
about it. I have often wondered what might have happened if I’d
had the chance to discuss the idea with Ayn—if there would
have been any way to break through. Who knows what might have been
different
in the years that followed?
The line that so impressed me was: “A
hero is one who knows how to make a friend out of an enemy.”
|