Freedom, Society, and State - Ludwig von Mises Institute

stable, or would it, as paradoxical as it may seem at
fir s t, act ua I I Y pavethe wa y for' anew totali tar ian ism?
For "It is ludicrous," warns Robert Nisbet, "to hold up
the assorted charms of individual release and emancipation
to popUlations whose burning problems are those
ar ising, today, from moral and social release. To do
s 0 i s but t 0 rna ke the wa y for the GrandInqui sit 0 r the
easier. For this is the appeal, as we have seen, of
the to tal ita ria n pro p h e t - - to' reI e a s e' rna sses 0 f
atomized individuals from their intolerable
individualism"(38)
The old laissez faire failed, Nisbet continues,
beea u s ei t focused on the abstract, imaginary, rational
individual at the expense of kinship and community.
What is needed is a "new laissez faire" which will present
an environment within which "autonomous groups may
prosper." (39)
While this analysis of contemporary society is
profound, as a criticism of libertairianism it is based
on a misunderstanding. Libertarianism is a political,
not a m0 r a lor soc i a I, phi los 0 PhY a nd assuc h con cerns
i tsel f wi th the use of force in society.(40) Its premise,
the "non-aggression axiom," is that initiated
for c e i s n ever jus t i fied • Put d ifferen t 1y, t his me a ns
that any and all peaceful activity is legitimate. Libertarians
therefore oppose coercively imposed attachments.
But if individuals do have a psychological need
for a t t a c hmen t therei s not hi ng topreve n t them from
,associat ing voluntarily. Given the requisite freedom,
David Friedman argues, not only will groups of likemin
d e d .i n d i v i d u a I s nat u r a I I Y g r a v ita t e t owa r d eac h
other, but those with conflicting values will just as
naturally migrate away from each other. The result,
accor ding to Fr i edman, would be a plethora of more or
less autonomous communities populated by like-minded
individuals, with each community subscribing to its
own, and in many cases quite unlibertarian,'laws, and
cult ivat iog its own identity, customs and
traditions.(41)
T hus, far from con f lieting wit h rna n 's need for attachment'
on closer analysis libertarianism actually
appears to offer precisely that environment which
Nisbet's community-oriented "new laissez faire"
requires.
92