The Myth of Libertarian Vs Authoritarian

Many have long described variation in political opinion in terms of two key dimensions, described either as economic freedom and personal freedom, or via rotated axes as left vs right and libertarian vs authoritarian. 2.5 years ago I posted on The Myth Of Left And Right, a book correctly arguing that while abstract thinkers have often proposed coherent concepts of what could be meant by left vs right, and political parties who are out of power sometimes embrace such concepts, political parties that hold substantial power use such labels with far less coherence. As a result, the positions widely seen as left or right have varied so randomly across space and time that the labels “left” and “right” offer little predictive power for the positions of future parties in other times and places.

It occurs to me that a similar situation likely also holds for the other libertarian vs authoritarian distinction. While abstract thinkers have often proposed coherent concepts of what this could mean, and while political parties out of power sometimes embrace such concepts, political parties that hold substantial power probably have positions that are far less predictable or coherent in terms of such abstract ideological concepts.

The modern world often sees itself as “liberal” and “tolerant” in the sense that some choices and areas of life are considered out of bounds for governments, firms, and widely shared social norms to intrude on, while other more “foundational” issues are seen as more appropriate for such collective choices. Initially it was just particulars of Christian religion that were seen as out of bounds, but over time freedoms in other areas have been variously seen as central to the “liberal” concept.

However, for the actual political parties in power and their policies, we have seen wide variations which which are the choices and areas for which we are to be tolerant, and which are the other areas where it is okay for a majority to impose its views and wills on minorities. We should expect to continue to see such variations, re both of the key dimensions of variation in political opinion. Abstract thinkers will continue to paint their clean pictures of principles that could organize policy positions, while people actually in power will more opportunistically do what they want, sometimes justifying those choices in terms of such abstract principles as convenient.