Strong Men and the Leviathan: The Convergence of Hoppean Theory and Dr. Jordan Peterson
Unless you’ve been metaphorically and literally living under a rock for the past few years, you’ve no doubt heard of Dr. Jordan Peterson. When a video of Dr. Peterson showed him speaking out against a bill that would have made it a hate crime to use the wrong pronouns to describe an individual was seeking passage in Canada, Dr. Peterson went from a humble professor of psychology to one of the most influential intellectuals of our generation. His uncompromising stance on free-speech, artful takedowns of the anti-intellectual Left, and focus on mentoring young men to be strong, virtuous individuals who seek to find meaning in their lives have made him a paragon for those seeking reason in a world seeking solace in the subjective horrors of post-modernism.
From the standpoint of Hoppean libertarian theory, Dr. Peterson’s ideas do find a solid amount of convergence. For the time being, I would like to focus on the relationship between the Hoppean focus on traditionalism and Dr. Peterson’s emphasis on strong men. Hoppe has never shied away from speaking on the importance that the traditionalism of the Old Right has on the foundations of his libertarian model. One of the most celebrated elements of the traditionalist framework that Hoppe has routinely praised is the power of the family unit. From Hoppe’s point of view, the traditionalist family model, or, if you prefer, the nuclear family that was a staple of 1960’s American culture, is one of the most important weapons in the fight against the State. There are two reasons for this: first, the family offers stability to each member of the unit to develop and grow mentally and physically. Second, strong families lead to a strong sense of economic and personal sufficiency that renders anything the State offers as obsolete. To better emphasize the former, think of how families with close ties in neighborhoods form and develop. The bonds that naturally form and evolve within a family are reciprocated with other family units that share similar connections. These correlations lead to friendships that, in turn, form private communal structures that offer private aid and growth.
How does this relate to Dr. Peterson’s focus on building strong men? The answer to that lies in the role of the male within the family unit. Traditionally, men have always been viewed as the leaders of the family. At a time when a family of four could live off a single income, the male was the one who went to work and provided his family with the means of survival. Along with being the breadwinner, men were also viewed as the protectors, the leaders in time of need, and for young boys, the single most mentor they can have. The latter of these attributes shouldn’t come as a surprise to many. Psychology has shown us time and time again that the single most influential figure in a child’s life is the parent that shares the same gender.
In an age where more and more young men are being raised in households without fathers, and masculinity is habitually attacked as an outdated and immoral ideal for men to strive for, it’s important for all libertarians, including those who don’t agree with Hoppe’s framework, to embrace Dr. Peterson’s fight to give young men structure in their lives. If we don’t, we will likely lose a key element in our fight to not only hinder the abuses of the State upon us but more importantly to permanently suffocate it of its power.
Articles Like This
Anarcho-Authoritarianism by lutheranarchist
Is Libertarianism Reactionary? by Andrew D. Allison
Democracy As A Revolt Against Order by Bert Grimm
A Deconstructive Repartee to Dr. Block by EndDemocracy
Security in A Statist Society by Colton Maxwell Anderson
A Strategy For Creating A Hoppean Social Order by Colton Maxwell Anderson
The Greatest Accomplices by Gravelord
The "Right to Travel" Does Not Exist by EndDemocracy
Is Libertarianism Apathetic? by Porter
A Libertarian Case For Borders by lutheranarchist
Statecraft as a Service by Gravelord