Author Archives: Mark Friedman

As noted in my last post, Libertarian Philosophy in the Real World (“LPRW”) received a favorable review from Dr. Matthew Post in Interpretation: A Journal of Political Philosophy. At the risk of “looking a gift horse in the mouth,” I offer my thoughts here about his comments. As mentioned in my earlier post, this review occurs in connection with the author’s efforts to find a plausible way to justify political liberalism in face of what he regards as the formidable obstacles erected by Richard Rorty. This contemporary philosopher has offered a highly influential critique of all attempts to ground philosophical reasoning, including with respect to politics, in any underlying objective truths or “foundations,” which he regards as disguised appeals to social conventions and practices. See Post, 478-9.  Continue Reading »

I am delighted to learn that my most recent book received a quite favorable assessment by Matthew Post in his essay, “The Foundations of ‘Our Culture’: A Review of Three Works on Liberalism and Rights,” which appears in Interpretation: A Journal of Political Philosophy 42:3 (Spring 2016), 477-94. Perhaps my favorite part is this:

It would be misleading, however, to suggest that Friedman simply speaks to shared beliefs. He often offers arguments that are remarkably lucid, succinct, and thorough, and he is honest when he does not know how to solve a problem (489).

I will respond in greater depth to Professor Post’s review as soon as I am able. But for the moment I will simply say that, as may be apparent from his title, my humble defense of libertarian rights against the encroachments of the welfare/regulatory state has been swept up in Post’s search for an answer to the much more daunting question of whether it is possible to establish a foundation for liberalism “while avoiding the problems Rorty identified” (492); meaning, roughly, if we give up our traditional notions of knowledge. Thus, while perhaps I am the first philosopher to in history to say this, I am not sure that Post’s praise (although welcome) is entirely justified.

Libertarians disagree about many important things, including: whether even a minimal state is morally permissible; if so, what functions may it legitimately undertake; the morality of abortion; foreign policy; whether intellectual property rights are morally defensible, and so on. One thing we don’t disagree much about is the right of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms, and to carry and employ them for purposes of self-defense. Continue Reading »

The epithet “limousine liberal” was apparently first used in 1969 to deride those politicians, celebrities, and other affluent members of society who advocate “feel-good” policies that impose huge costs on other segments of society, but from which they are completely or largely insulated. Although we might consider updating this epithet to “Tesla liberal,”[1] it is clear that nothing else has changed since then. Below I briefly catalog the many programs enacted by our politicians and supported by affluent progressives that harm the poor, while not affecting (or even benefiting), the wealthy. The evidence showing such consequences is provided in my book, Libertarian Philosophy in the Real World (LPRW), as referenced in the citations below. Continue Reading »

I outline below a hypothetical that poses a moral dilemma for an imaginary public prosecutor.  This case vexes me, because I cannot seem to summon up a convincing argument that supports my intuitive reaction to it.  I would love to hear the perspectives of other philosophers.

Suppose you are a state’s attorney assigned to prosecute a heinous crime, say an especially horrible murder, with multiple aggravating circumstances. The defendant has been previously convicted of a number of violent felonies, so you have good cause to believe that if he is not executed or put away for life, public safely will be seriously jeopardized. Continue Reading »

I have written two previous posts on libertarianism and immigration, here and here, and devoted a section in Chapter 10 of my Libertarian Philosophy in the Real World to this subject. So, naturally, I was intrigued when Christopher Freiman and Javier Hidalgo offered a five-part blog series on this question at the Bleeding Heart Libertarians site. The first four parts argued that a commitment to open borders is an integral part of classical liberalism; the final post purported to answer objections to this view. For convenience, I reproduce it below. Continue Reading »

As outlined in the first part of this essay, the political institutions established by our constitution were the natural consequence of the framers’ classical liberalism. For them, the purpose of government was essentially, in Nozick’s words, “protecting all its citizens against violence, theft, fraud and the enforcement of contracts.” (ASU, 26). Sadly, as our society has become ever more aware of the dignity and equality of all human beings, we less and less respect the autonomy that gives rise to our special moral status.   Continue Reading »

I am among the millions of Americans disgusted by the current state of our politics and the candidates now on offer by the two major parties. Their duplicity, grotesque character flaws, and destructive policy proposals are taken here as a given. What is less appreciated, I believe, is that their rise is symptomatic of a much deeper and more serious problem; that it, the death of classical liberalism in our polity. This two-part post will constitute a brief autopsy. Continue Reading »

The most intense battle currently being fought in our ongoing culture war is the use of public rest rooms by transgender individuals. Various states have recently enacted or are considering laws requiring people to use only bathrooms that correspond to their biological sex. I argue here that there are striking parallels with our ill-advised anti-smoking laws, as in both instances there are large groups asserting incompatible, rights-based claims. And, in both matters the state has imposed its judgment rather than leave it to the marketplace to sort out. Continue Reading »

In the aftermath of the recent Belgium terrorist attack, which followed upon even more horrific Islamist violence in Paris, there have come the inevitable media finger-pointing, second-guessing, and obligatory warnings against blaming innocent Muslims. Also heard is self-congratulatory chatter about how America’s Muslim immigrants are much better integrated into our society than their European counterparts. Few have had anything perceptive to say regarding why our “home grown” terrorism is far more muted than Belgium’s or France’s. Continue Reading »