Libertarianism as Iconoclasm / Would appreciate your opinion

Miscellaneous General
1

I just finished the first draft of an essay I’ve been working on. When I’m done, I want to submit it to a german libertarian magazine. Before I start revising the piece, I would really appreciate your input on the issue. As the essay is in german, I can’t just post the draft here, but I’ll try to reproduce the argument I’m making in a few bullet points.

The working title is „Libertarianism as Iconoclasm“

  • The search for a meaning in life is an essential part of mans nature

  • Originally, the Christian religion gave this meaning in the western world

  • Religion loses significance to many people, leaving a vacuum

  • Most people believe, they are just not religious anymore, but contrary to that believe I argue, that the vacuum is filled instantly by something I call „implicit religion“, because man needs purpose and meaning

  • examples of implicit religions are Marxism and Environmentalism

  • Marxism promises the end of history due to a heaven on earth

  • Environmentalism in general and global warming in particular create the image of armageddon on earth and give people purpose in a collective fight against the end of the world

  • Libertarianism puts forward a rational argument against these implicit religions. e.g. Ludwig von Mises „Socialism“ or the notion that it might be better to create more wealth and deal with the consequences of global warming if there are any, instead of starting to live in grass huts now

  • In doing that, Libertarianism tries to break peoples religious images and therefore their meaning in life (the iconoclasm part)

  • What Libertarianism fails to see, is that pure reason is not a valid replacement for peoples shattered meaning, which is why they refuse to adopt it

  • Therefore, what Libertarianism needs to do, is to show people that they can find meaning without a collective, that liberty offers them the chance to find individual purpose and meaning

  • This is exactly what Ayn Rand did very successfully with „The Fountainhead“ and „Atlas Shrugged“

  • So, while it is great that Libertarianism can appeal to the mind on a rational level, the key to success is to appeal to the heart on an emotional level. with libertarian music, art, culture. a field that we unfortunately left almost completely to socialists and environmentalists

I hope my quick summary is not too confusing and you get the idea.

I would appreciate your thoughts on the validity of the argument in general, but also anything you would add or alter. As I said, it’s just a draft so far. And thanks in advance!

2

Libertarianism is naught but a political ideology, it asserts nothing as to the meaning of life.

3

I know, and I’m not saying that it should.

I’m just saying, that people hold their political believes not because they really thought them through and because they appeal to their reason, but instead that they just needed something to replace the declining influence of religion and their loss of meaning and purpose in life.

In order to persuade these people, it’s not enough for libertarians to show them that Libertarianism is superior in logic, but also that a free society allows them to find individual meaning.

As great as Ludwig von Mises “Socialism” is, the appeal of Socialism is nothing rational, and therefore it’s futile to try to reason with people on that topic.

4

Political philosophy.

5

Why does one need libertarianism to find “individual meaning”, nor should libertarianism become a political ideology of “individual meaning”.

A political ideology is a political philosophy.

6

I don’t say you need libertarianism to find meaning and I certainly don’t want libertarianism to suggest what the individuals meaning should be.

But I do think, that whether people admit it or not, everybody wants to believe there is at least some purpose. For some people it may be explicitly religious, for some people it may be the pursuit of happiness. Whatever. But a good deal of people have found their meaning in the idea of social justice, the collective fight against global warming and so forth. It won’t be possible to take this fluffy self-righteous feeling of saving society or saving the world away from them by pure reason if the only thing you can tell them is: You’re wrong, get over it.

I’m not to big on Objectivism, but what Ayn Rand did with her novels was wonderful. She shows people, that it’s possible to live a heroic life of meaning without falling back to collective ideals. I think if we would stress this facet of libertarianism more when we try to promote it, we would appeal to more people. And a way of promoting it is especially art. It’s not a coincidence, that 90% of artists are collectivists and that collectivism appeals to many people.

7

Not a fan of it being characterized as such, particularly because it can be mistaken / mixed up with the Marxian sense of the term.