Book Review: The Conscience of a Libertarian by Wayne Allyn Root
Stuart Nachbar
July 21, 2009
Excerpts of The Conscience of a Libertarian should make their way into the syllabuses of political theory or political philosophy classes, not necessarily because this is a great book, but because Libertarianism is shamefully under-reported and worthy of debate.
The author, Wayne Allyn Root, a former vice presidential candidate on the 2008 Libertarian ticket-former Congressman Bob Barr (R-Ga) was the presidential nominee-as well as an extremely successful author and small businessman in the gaming industry has written a well-organized volume on what it means to be a Libertarian. Root also adds some ideas worthy of debate, for example, a larger Congress of citizen-politicians term-limited to a single six-year term as well as tax cuts targeted around citizens age 55 and higher to aid retirement planning.
On the surface Libertarianism has much to recommend it: low taxation, limited government, school choice and tolerance (meaning left leaning)on social issue positions that do not involve a decision by a businessperson (for example: abortion and gay marriage). It is also quite possible that I, as a self-employed person, would benefit financially from a Libertarian government.
Root says that he takes much of his philosophy from Barry Goldwater, so I bought and read Goldwater's The Conscience of a Conservative to fill in some blanks. According to Goldwater, a true conservative, like the Libertarian, believes in low taxation, limited government, individual freedom and state's rights. Root, like Goldwater, believes that business people create wealth and jobs, so they should not be overtaxed.
While Root does not go into specifics about what government should "do," Goldwater did. He believed, and I quote him, that "maintaining internal order, keeping foreign foes at bay, administering justice and removing obstacles to the free exchange of goods" were the only legitimate functions of a federal government.
However, fifty years ago, Goldwater believed that civil rights enforcement should be left to the states. He also believed, as Root does, that there should be no federal role in education, even when the federal government is asking schools to reach higher standards.
It could be argued that most of our forefathers had libertarian views. They backed a war because the English king imposed new taxes. They did not want a new government to compromise their financial interests and neither did the white male property owners who voted them into office.
If we assume that our forefathers had libertarian leanings then we have to consider how history changed American government. We have civil rights laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety rules, consumer protection statutes, minimum wage laws, trade commissions and the like because the voters wanted them. However, I was left to assume that Root believes that a federal government should not have bothered to act on behalf of its citizens on these matters.
Root presents no alternative to the existing avenues of citizen participation: the ballot, the courts, and Congress for citizen redress against a state, the federal government, the military or a multinational corporation. Instead, he rants against legislators and government workers alike saying that they have no incentive to work on behalf of the people because they have guaranteed incomes and pensions for life.
While this viewpoint has its supporters among Libertarians and Republicans it sells government short, and wrongly so. Even if we were to eliminate agencies and outsource functions of government to the private sector, as we have done with covert military operations, dispute mediation boards, schools and public highways, we would still demand accountability for the actions of the service providers. And each branch of government would be working to facilitate that demand.
Stuart Nachbar blogs on education and politics at www.EducatedQuest.com. Read more about his new novel, Defending College Heights, at www.DefendingCollegeHeights.com
The author, Wayne Allyn Root, a former vice presidential candidate on the 2008 Libertarian ticket-former Congressman Bob Barr (R-Ga) was the presidential nominee-as well as an extremely successful author and small businessman in the gaming industry has written a well-organized volume on what it means to be a Libertarian. Root also adds some ideas worthy of debate, for example, a larger Congress of citizen-politicians term-limited to a single six-year term as well as tax cuts targeted around citizens age 55 and higher to aid retirement planning.
On the surface Libertarianism has much to recommend it: low taxation, limited government, school choice and tolerance (meaning left leaning)on social issue positions that do not involve a decision by a businessperson (for example: abortion and gay marriage). It is also quite possible that I, as a self-employed person, would benefit financially from a Libertarian government.
Root says that he takes much of his philosophy from Barry Goldwater, so I bought and read Goldwater's The Conscience of a Conservative to fill in some blanks. According to Goldwater, a true conservative, like the Libertarian, believes in low taxation, limited government, individual freedom and state's rights. Root, like Goldwater, believes that business people create wealth and jobs, so they should not be overtaxed.
While Root does not go into specifics about what government should "do," Goldwater did. He believed, and I quote him, that "maintaining internal order, keeping foreign foes at bay, administering justice and removing obstacles to the free exchange of goods" were the only legitimate functions of a federal government.
However, fifty years ago, Goldwater believed that civil rights enforcement should be left to the states. He also believed, as Root does, that there should be no federal role in education, even when the federal government is asking schools to reach higher standards.
It could be argued that most of our forefathers had libertarian views. They backed a war because the English king imposed new taxes. They did not want a new government to compromise their financial interests and neither did the white male property owners who voted them into office.
If we assume that our forefathers had libertarian leanings then we have to consider how history changed American government. We have civil rights laws, environmental regulations, workplace safety rules, consumer protection statutes, minimum wage laws, trade commissions and the like because the voters wanted them. However, I was left to assume that Root believes that a federal government should not have bothered to act on behalf of its citizens on these matters.
Root presents no alternative to the existing avenues of citizen participation: the ballot, the courts, and Congress for citizen redress against a state, the federal government, the military or a multinational corporation. Instead, he rants against legislators and government workers alike saying that they have no incentive to work on behalf of the people because they have guaranteed incomes and pensions for life.
While this viewpoint has its supporters among Libertarians and Republicans it sells government short, and wrongly so. Even if we were to eliminate agencies and outsource functions of government to the private sector, as we have done with covert military operations, dispute mediation boards, schools and public highways, we would still demand accountability for the actions of the service providers. And each branch of government would be working to facilitate that demand.
Stuart Nachbar blogs on education and politics at www.EducatedQuest.com. Read more about his new novel, Defending College Heights, at www.DefendingCollegeHeights.com
Print
Email
