Cultural vs. Political Libertarianism, Again

Jon Henke, at Megan's blog, evocatively but a little too glibly sums up the Conservative Problem with two  apparently contrasting quotes:

From Ronald Reagan:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. ... The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

To Rick Santorum:

One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a libertarianish right. ... This whole idea of personal autonomy, well I don’t think most conservatives hold that point of view. Some do. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. You know, people should do whatever they want. Well, that is not how traditional conservatives view the world and I think most conservatives understand that individuals can’t go it alone. That there is no such society that I am aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.

I am no great defender of Rick Santorum, and I am inclined to think about 'community' the way Thatcher thought about 'society', but it's obvious that what falls through the cracks in the easy contrast between Reagan's and Santorum's comments is the difference between cultural libertarianism and political libertarianism. Reagan is clearly talking about the latter; Santorum is talking about the former. There are obvious problems: Reagan says 'less centralized authority', not 'less centralized power', and Santorum says 'succeeds as a culture' but also talks openly of 'government' getting 'involved in the bedroom.' So I don't want to be too glib in the other direction and suggest it's easy in today's climate for conservatives or anyone else to neatly separate out political from cultural issues.

But I do think it's easier as a rule than it is now, and this is so because the basic general (as opposed to central) authority governing our cultural conduct has more or less unraveled, and we are trying to fill that gap through politics and, specifically, through law. This won't work, but it's a stopgap measure until the culture reconstitutes itself authoritatively. But since cultural libertarianism holds, when it comes to cultural authority, that the only rule is there are no rules, this is something of a pipe dream. And this is the main point Santorum is trying to make, even though he is the wrong messenger because he wants to put central (i.e. Federal) power to work in institutionalizing a cultural authority that can no longer stand on its own two feet. Reagan, on the other hand, is clearly speaking in political terms, speaking of conservatism as a political disposition that carries, viewed from the national level, a bias against checking cultural libertarianism with centralized political power.

I agree with this disposition and this bias. But in no way do they lead me to celebrate cultural libertarianism. In a further complication, I am a great fan of cultural pluralism or cultural federalism, seeing it as a better and more practical realization of Nozickian politics. Libertarians hate making this switch because it results, politically speaking, in more injustice toward individuals, which I care less about insofar as I am very forgiving (from a decent distance) when it comes to 'cultural injustices.' At least in America: where if you don't like it, move. We are very very fortunate to be able to do this as easily as we can and do. And no, this isn't simply a function of our oil-based economy. In covered-wagon times it worked as well. Yes, there were hardships that raised the barrier to entry. But that kind of suffering to live the way you want with like-minded Americans of your more or less choosing seems to me worth the payoff in decentralized power and decentralized authority. Sadly this may not be a popular attitude among mainstream conservatives -- or even, given their true preferences, a sustainable one.

Comments

[Stance]

"which I care less about insofar as I am very forgiving (from a decent distance) when it comes to 'cultural injustices.'"

What cultural injustices are you willing to forgive?

[cminmd]

A liberal is a person who examines their conscious, their relationship to God, the interest of their family and the good of society- then decides how to live their life.
A conservative is a person who examines their conscious, their relationship to God, the interest of their family and the good of society- then decides how you should live your life.

[Bill]

Reagan said, "The basis of conservatism is a desire for [1] less government interference or [2] less centralized authority or [3] more individual freedom."

I think your discussion treats [1] and [3] as equivalent to [2]. I'm not persuaded that's the correct reading of Reagan's statement.

Numbers [1] and [3] are consistent with cultural libertarianism but not so much with political libertarianism (or cultural federalism), since political libertarianism (as I think you define it) tolerates very unlibertarian jurisdictions within the national mix.* Even [2] is consistent with cultural libertarianism, though it offers incomplete protection for it, protections likely endorsed by [1] and [3]. This suggests to me that Reagan was indeed talking about cultural libertarianism.

*I understand you to mean the same thing here by political libertarianism and cultural federalism.

[tom hayden]

trouble with libertarianism is that with govt becoming less, and populationn increasing, living closer together etc, more issues/conflicts arise. someone/thing will fill that vacume. will that filler be a democratic authority or a boss, money interest. what is at stake is democracy.

[JB]

cminmd, that would be true if you said "classical liberal".

"Liberal" in the American sense is someone who can't keep their hands out of my pants as they grab my wallet and take everything in the cause of assuaging their guilt. They can go fly a kite.

I can always buy social freedoms with money (look at drugs as one example). But what good are social freedoms if 90% of my income is stolen by the government?

So while I hate conservatives, I really hate liberals.

[Jay]

I wouldn't say that cultural libertarians say there are no rules, just that they aren't to be imposed by the state.

Libertarians would say that everyone has a right to express their opinions. For example, a libertarian wouldn't think that the government should outlaw sodomy, but he would also say that a conservative has a right to criticize the practice. Widespread criticism can act as as brake on activity, even if it's just at the margin.

A free evolution of how to be moral would operate under its own rules much as how the evolution of how best to provide goods services (the market) and how best to communicate (language) do.

[JBC]

"A liberal is a person who examines their conscious, their relationship to God, the interest of their family and the good of society- then decides how to live their life."

... and then decides how much of your money they want to gov't to take to support them in doing so.