Decentralization is Libertarian: Here’s Your Sign
As you opened this article, I am sure you found yourself wondering why such an obvious statement regarding libertarianism and the concept of decentralization must be made. Regardless of what type of libertarianism you claim (minarchism, anarcho-capitalism, paleo-libertarianism, etc.)- we all allegedly understand that libertarians seek to minimize the violation of the liberties of individuals by the State. However, we may admittedly disagree on what constitutes said “liberties.” Why must I say we allegedly understand?
On Friday, June 24th, the Supreme Court overturned its decision on Roe v. Wade. Naturally, chaos ensued regarding the ruling. As expected, the right-wing rejoiced, and the left-wing wept. Misinformation abounded, and the left-wing pundits and content creators immediately perpetuated and insinuated the idea that abortion was banned countrywide. Though this is a great tactic to spread fear among their followers- we know this is not true. The Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade simply means that states now have the responsibility to decide what path they will follow regarding the issue of allowing, restricting, or not allowing abortion. Many states already had trigger laws that limit abortion, and many of these laws went into effect almost immediately after the Court’s decision. The reactions of mainstream pundits were not surprising, what was shocking was the reaction of some libertarians online. An unusual outcry poured forth from so-called libertarians regarding the Court’s decision that Friday, with many lamenting that the Court’s decision was a loss for liberty and calling anyone who celebrated the decision an enemy of libertarianism and liberty.
What about supporting a Court ruling that decentralizes an issue for the entire country is antithetical to libertarianism? Let us take a look at what prominent libertarian economists, historians, and political theorists have to say on the topic of decentralization:
“Don’t put your trust in democracy, but neither should you trust in a dictatorship. Rather, put your hope into radical political decentralization.” [1]
- Hans-Hermann Hoppe
“Pending total privatization, it is clear that our model could be approached, and conflicts minimized, by permitting secessions and local control, down to the micro-neighborhood level, and by developing contractual access rights for enclaves and exclaves. In the U.S., it becomes important, in moving toward such radical decentralization, for libertarians and classical liberals—indeed, for many other minority or dissident groups—to begin to lay the greatest stress on the forgotten Tenth Amendment and to try to decompose the role and power of the centralizing Supreme Court. Rather than trying to get people of one's own ideological persuasion on the Supreme Court, its power should be rolled back and minimized as far as possible, and its power decomposed into state, or even local, judicial bodies.” [2]
- Murray N. Rothbard
"No people and no part of a people shall be held against its will in a political association that it does not want." [3]
- Ludwig von Mises
It is clear that a variety of prominent libertarian thinkers over the decades of their work inevitably concluded that decentralization was a critical factor in minimizing the damage the State inflicts upon communities and individuals. It is quite evident that reducing the federal government's power regarding any issue is a win for liberty in general. In the week following the overturn of Roe v. Wade, several states are now facing lawsuits against their government regarding the issue of abortion. This is a sign that the fight has indeed been taken to the local level in place of the Court at the federal level. Those in favor of centralized power are now forced to take the fight to the state level rather than relying on federal control of an issue. As an example of how panicked those entrenched in the regime which relies on centralization truly are, a clip from the morning show on CBS circulated on social media this week of former Press Secretary Hillary Clinton lamenting the Court’s decision to return Roe v. Wade to the states. Clinton remarked:
“[Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas] has signaled… to lower courts, to state legislatures… the people he is speaking to [are] right-wing, very conservative, judges, justices, and state legislatures.” [4]
This event has prompted a national conversation regarding what should or should not be handled at the federal, state, and local levels.
The Supreme Court’s decision that overturned Roe v. Wade illuminated a segment of self-proclaimed “libertarians” whose priorities lie not in expanding personal liberties as they claim. Instead, some people have an allegiance not to “liberty” but to socially liberal values, which historically lead to disaster for individuals, communities, and nations. Regardless of your personal views on any issue, abortion included, returning decisions to the states so that policies are decided at the state level is decentralization. Any person, self-described libertarian or otherwise, who is proclaiming that supporting such a decision by the Court is “antithetical to libertarianism” is at best a fool and at worst someone who cannot be trusted in the fight for more free and prosperous communities. Decentralization is always a win for libertarianism. Here’s your sign.
Citations:
