From: pas@kepler.unh.edu (Paul A Sand)
Subject: Re: Libertarian Theory and Social Tolerance
Organization: University of New Hampshire
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 03:00:42 GMT

sh: Steve Hendricks

sh: I detect a basic contradiction in many of the posts to this group
    that I would like to see addressed by those with a commitment to the
    libertarian viewpoint.

Heck, I'll take a whack at it. Disclaimer: I have a commitment to `a'
(not `the') libertarian viewpoint, which other libertarians may not
totally share. Tough darts.

sh: On the one hand, libertarians typically make a fetish of
    high-sounding assertions of tolerance toward those who live or think
    differently from the majority in a society. [...]

Fetish? That's a regrettably contumelious way to put it. Discounting
that, however, it's not inaccurate. It's far from being the whole
story, however.

sh: I assume that a libertarian utopia would be one in which many
    different views would exist and cultural diversity would be
    celebrated. So far, so good. We conventional liberals share the
    same goals.

The difference presumably being that no fetishes ar involved when
conventional liberals make *their* high-sounding assertions?  (How does
one tell that anyway? Mr. Hendricks is apparently good at detecting
fetishes, so perhaps he'll give us a few pointers.)

Anyway: a rather important quibble is that that the goal of
libertarianism is liberty, period. Seeing to it that `cultural
diversity would be celebrated' is *not* a goal. It may well be a
salubrious result, but that's not the same thing. Confusion on this
score leads to greater blunders later.

sh: If that is so, however, I fail to see how typical libertarian
    positions on education, housing, employment, and public
    accomodations support such goals. Worse than that, they seem
    designed positively to undermine them. Rather than promoting
    tolerance and cultural diversity, they appear designed to support
    group isolation, intolerance, and ultimately to promote "group
    think" rather than individualism.

sh: Take education policy as one example. I assume that the typical
    libertarian position is that religious, cultural, ethnic, and
    political groups should be encouraged (not just allowed) through
    public policy to form their own schools. [...]

Strawman. Heard him rustling a mile away.

For someone who claims to speak about `typical libertarian positions',
Mr. Hendricks jumps off the track here surprisingly early.  He
apparently can't conceive that public policy toward ethnic (etc.)
schooling might well be neutral, i.e., neither encouraging nor
discouraging. I fancy that such neutrality *is* the typical libertarian
position; I doubt that Mr. Hendricks can show otherwise.

Nevertheless, we sweep on to larger fallacies:

sh: Does anyone seriously believe that segregating children into such
    group-based training academies will lead to more tolerance for
    cultural diversity and individualist values? There is certainly
    little evidence for such a hope and plenty of evidence to the
    contrary.

No doubt. But, on the other hand, there's little evidence to support
the notion that such would arise as a result of libertarian policy, and
plenty of evidence to the contrary.

sh: Libertarian policies in housing, employment, and public
    accomodations would seem to lead in the same direction; toward
    isolation of like-minded groups and an inevitable reduction in
    experience with diversity and therefore less commitment to
    individual rights.

Discounting for the moment the likelihood that Mr. Hendricks has
similarly flawed notions of libertarian policy in these areas:  I was
unaware that `experience with diversity' had such a cause-and-effect
relationship with `commitment to individual rights.' Where's the
evidence for that?

sh: I suppose one might argue that this is a risk that must be borne to
    promote individual choice. But at the same time, libertarians would
    agree, I believe, that commitment to individualism and social
    tolerance are essential to a libertarian utopia. So how do you
    propose that that such values be promoted as libertarian policies
    are implemented? Am I missing something?

Yes. [And thanks for the straight line.] At best, Mr. Hendricks makes a
rather old argument that a libertarian polity contains the seeds of its
own destruction: that given individual liberty, society will
necessarily develop in such a way that individual liberty is
destroyed.

That may be true, but I don't think so. 
-- 
-- Paul A. Sand           | God has to have a bang path.
-- Univ. of New Hampshire | A *big bang* path.
-- pas@kepler.unh.edu     | 	(Craig Dowell, in rec.arts.books)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.theory,soc.culture.usa,alt.conspiracy,talk.politics.misc