An apparent paradox of libertarianism is that humans can be trusted individually but not in groups.
A democratic government consists of humans acting as a group. The government carries out the will of the group. In Rousseau's terms(I like Rousseau), it carries out not only the will of the majority, but in a sense, even of the dissenting minority, who despite their disagreement with the particular action, endorse the majority will by continuing to participate in the society.
Libertarians believe, therefore, that we are singularly inept as a group. Assuming for a moment that the proposition is true-there is some evidence for it-an enlightened libertarian might propose that the reason we are collectively incompetent is that we are individually incompetent as well.
Because things constantly change, because we are constantly dealing with a fuzzy, unknowable and changing reality, because human values are not absolutes and it sometimes require some illogic to arrive at the destinations of the heart, all human belief structures are of necessity incomplete.
I admit that Libertarians are right in that most supply and demand decisions are best made by a free marketplace. I'm a capitalist too, OK?
However, what libertarians do not realize is that there are a whole realm of decisions, mostly about the common good(back to Rousseau again)-which I define as anything which has a non-economic value to us as a group-which cannot be left to the marketplace. Some examples would be: the building of roads, creation of signs on those roads, avoidance of harmful effects of deforestation and of pollution are all matters which cannot be trusted to the marketplace. |
