MENU

Reason Editor Errs on What Libertarianism Entails

By Walter Block

March 29, 2026

SUBSCRIBE TO SAVVY STREET (It's Free)

 

When I first became a libertarian in the dark ages of the early 1960s, we were typically ignored by the mainstream media. When mentioned at all, the word for this philosophy was usually mangled and the viewpoint was misunderstood. We were sometimes described as libertines, confused with librarians and dismissed as “libertoonians.” We have come a long way since them thar old days, thanks in part to people such as Katherine Mangu-Ward (KMW), Editor-in-Chief at Reason dot com. My libertarian colleague has recently published an important essay in the New York Times (they spelled the L-word correctly throughout). Congratulations are due to her. With that megaphone, she will be spreading our philosophy even further.

She speaks not for all libertarians. Rather, she represents what might be called the extreme left perspective thereof.

Her message is that we libertarians warned you all about the depredations of one Donald J. Trump, but you guys didn’t listen to us. For the most part, KMW is quite correct, from a libertarian point of view, in castigating the present president of the United States. However, in so doing as severely as she does, she speaks not for all libertarians. Rather, she represents what might be called the extreme left perspective thereof. I now offer a different libertarian viewpoint.

Here is how she starts off her indictment of the president: “Masked federal officials are swarming areas far from the border, shooting American citizens and whisking away children in the name of immigration enforcement.”

She does not ask why they were “masked” in the first place.

However, she does not ask why they were “masked” in the first place. After all, most law enforcement offers do no such thing. It cannot be denied that this is due to the fact that their very lives are in danger and those of their families. Why, pray tell? This is because there are hordes of unhinged leftists who would kill them and their loved ones had they but the chance to do so. Those masks are a defensive reaction to these threats, something libertarians should support, not denigrate. Unhappily there is no worry about the safety of these officers emanating from KMW.

Further, one gets the impression from her op-ed (“whisking away children”) that ICE is breaking up families, separating them from their parents. That is a bit of a low blow. The law requires that illegal immigrants of all ages be deported.

She avers that “Armed National Guardsmen walk the streets of several cities under the banner of vague emergency mandates to maintain law and order.” There is nothing “vague” about the fact that under the senile-Biden Administration, millions of people broke our immigration laws, and an all too significant number of them are rapists and murderers.

Yes, the proper anarcho-capitalist position is open borders, but therein private defense agencies would ensure that no such undesirables would cross our borders. Under limited-government libertarianism or classical liberalism, self-defense mitigates against this appalling situation, courtesy of the Democrats. ICE, then, is protecting personal and private property rights, KMW to the contrary notwithstanding.

ICE, then, is protecting personal and private property rights.

On the plus side, she is quite right to castigate Trump’s tariffs and taking on ownership positions in TikTok, Intel, and US Steel. This is creeping communism.

My learned libertarian colleague is also exactly on point welcoming a reduction in the size of government. She states: “abolish unaccountable federal agencies, scale back the administrative state, cut spending.” Does she give Trump credit for firing massive numbers of bureaucrats, something the Left opposed with clenched teeth? She does not.

However, I give her full credit for supporting Jimmy Kimmel vis-à-vis the FCC, Trevor Noah, and rejecting the strengthening of libel laws.  She also bashes the Biden Administration for its own poor speech record regarding Covid critics and “misinformation.”

But this libertarian errs when she writes “The libertarian prescription, now and always, is to scale back the size and scope of the federal government. Devolve power to states. . . . And rebalance power away from the executive branch.”

The proper libertarian position is to promote liberty wherever, and at whatever level of government it appears.

No, the proper libertarian position is to promote liberty wherever, and at whatever level of government it appears. Yes, when the federales deviate from our principles, support the states, counties and cities. For example, Oregon, a blue state, for a time legalized cocaine; that is in the libertarian playbook. However, there are times when the local levels are in the wrong, and the central government is in the right. For example, President Ronald Reagan once threatened New York City over its rent-control provisions. If President Donald Trump were to do so against Mayor Zohran Mamdani and this unjust and totally imbecilic housing law, or his intention to raise the minimum wage to $30 by 2030, he would be entirely justified on libertarian grounds. No one can say that governmental decentralization is always more freedom oriented; this knee jerk reaction must be avoided.

KMW complains that “DOGE didn’t save much money” and for being impermanent. But was this not a step in the correct libertarian direction?

She is obviously correct that the US Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to declare war. But this Reason editor declares: “Mr. Trump’s interference in Venezuela (and Iran. . .) is already the stuff of isolationist nightmares. . . .”

But libertarians are by no means wedded to this document; our principles are based on justice, not that document. Further, isolationism might have been the best policy several centuries ago (no “entangling alliances”) from a freedom perspective. This by no means establishes it is true in the modern world. Instead of asking whether presidential acts are constitutional or not, the libertarian must inquire as to whether or not they are pro-liberty.

A strong libertarian case can be made on behalf of both US interventions.

A strong libertarian case can be made on behalf of both US interventions. Maduro had been abusing his people for years; emptying out his jails of hardened criminals and sending them northward to our shores. Some one-third of Venezuelan citizens had fled from this country, a pattern reminiscent of East and West Germany, North and South Korea.

As for Iran, they have killed numerous Americans. In 1979, they invaded actual US territory (our embassy in Tehran) and took hundreds of our citizens hostage. We should take seriously people who yell “Death to America” and call us the “Big Satan.” These statements emanate not only from the street, but from the highest reaches of this malevolent regime. Do libertarians no longer believe in the right of self-defense?

As for Iran, they have killed numerous Americans.

Moreover, Israel is perhaps our most important and effective ally. It has the fourth most powerful military on the planet. If the Martians or other Aliens ever invade the earth, its comparative advantage in high tech may well prove decisive. It is being well employed at present in Iran. There is nothing in the annals of libertarianism that prevents defensive alliances. Iran and its HHH proxies are a threat to this all-important ally of ours.

I asked my libertarian colleague if she supported Donald Trump or Kamala Harris in the most recent presidential election. She replied that she didn’t vote for either. I expect that she supported the Libertarian Party, as did I. Her bashing of Mr. Trump is all well and good from our freedom perspective. He is no libertarian. But Harris would have been far worse, a puppet of Obama and Biden. She never in a million years would have pardoned Ross Ulbricht. We libertarians should keep this in mind when we pile on President Trump. Would she have castigated Columbia, Harvard, MIT for their anti-Semitism; for the leftward bias of their faculty? No, she would have favored university wokeism, even enhanced it. As for more Affirmative Action, the bashing of straight white males, there can be little doubt.

I asked this author who she supported, not voted for, in the 2024 election. She did not reply.

My advice to libertarians in the last election was to vote LP in strong blue states where the Republicans would lose big, and in red states where they would strongly prevail; Mr. Trump didn’t need our ballots there. But in the purple states where the election would be close, then, abandon the LP and support him.

 

Pegs:

Katherine Mangu-Ward. 2026. “Libertarians: We Told You So.” February 9; https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/09/opinion/libertarians-trump-limit-power.html

Have there been any death threats against ICE officers and their families? Yes. https://www.bing.com/search?pglt=43&q=Have+there+been+any+death+threats+against+ICE+officers+and+their+families%3F&cvid=0d483089f5d84cdc94b22b0867bc0326&gs_lcrp=EgRlZGdlKgYIABBFGDkyBggAEEUYOTIICAEQ6QcY_FUyBwgCEOsHGEDSAQgxNzg2ajBqMagCCLACAQ&FORM=ANSAB1&PC=SCOODB

Fourth most powerful army: Staff, Toi. 2023. “Israel ranks among 10 most powerful countries in annual list; 4th strongest military.” January; https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-among-10-most-powerful-countries-in-the-world-in-annual-list/

 

(Visited 206 times, 1 visits today)