Liberteryenizm

What Everyone Needs to Know

by Jason Brennan, Atilla Yayla (translator)

Historically, Americans have seen libertarians as far outside the mainstream, but with the rise of the Tea Party movement, libertarian principles have risen to the forefront of Republican politics. But libertarianism is more than the philosophy of individual freedom and unfettered markets that Republicans have embraced. Indeed, as Jason Brennan points out, libertarianism is a quite different--and far richer--system of thought than most of us suspect.
In this timely new entry in Oxford's acclaimed series What Everyone Needs to Know, Brennan offers a nuanced portrait of libertarianism, proceeding through a series of questions to illuminate the essential elements of libertarianism and the problems the philosophy addresses, including such topics as the Value of Liberty, Human Nature and Ethics, Economic Liberty, Civil Rights, Social Justice and the Poor, Government and Democracy, and Contemporary Politics. Brennan asks the most fundamental and challenging questions: What do Libertarians think liberty is? Do libertarians think everyone should be selfish? Are libertarians just out to protect the interests of big business? What do libertarians think we should do about racial injustice? What would libertarians do about pollution? Are Tea Party activists true libertarians? As he sheds light on libertarian beliefs, Brennan overturns numerous misconceptions. Libertarianism is not about simple-minded paranoia about government, he writes. Rather, it celebrates the ideal of peaceful cooperation among free and equal people. Libertarians believe that the rich always capture political power; they want to minimize the power available to them in order to protect the weak. Brennan argues that libertarians are, in fact, animated by benevolence and a deep concern for the poor.
Clear, concise, and incisively written, this volume explains a vitally important philosophy in American history--and a potent force in contemporary politics.

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, Nonfiction, Economics, History

285 pages, Paperback

First published September 14, 2012

About the author

Jason Brennan is the Robert J. and Elizabeth Flanagan Family Professor of Strategy, Economics, Ethics, and Public Policy at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. His books include Against Democracy and The Ethics of Voting.

Reviews

[Miles]

In Libertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know, Jason Brennan offers a clear, straightforward, and readable introduction to the libertarian political perspective, carefully acknowledging along the way the range of differing opinions held by libertarians on key issues (with an exception, see below). The book is written in an easily referenceable question-and-answer format, and is divided by topic. The chapters and even individual questions can be consulted in any order, independently of the rest of the book. To this end, in the course of answering a particular question, Brennan helpfully cites other places in the book that give a more in-depth look at something perhaps only briefly mentioned. The author can be commended as well for often introducing anti-libertarian perspectives or objections without providing any direct libertarian rebuttal. In this way, the book serves to familiarize the reader with both the libertarian viewpoint on various political, social, and economic topics as well as common rejoinders or alternative takes from non- or anti-libertarians. Brennan deftly wields thought experiments and examples to illustrate how otherwise abstract ideas can be practically applied. On the negative side, I would like to have seen footnotes with explicit references included throughout the book. For example, Brennan cites many studies, statistics, and ideas directly, and although he sometimes gives the reader enough information to go off of in their own search, the sheer number of such instances leaves this reader desiring the inclusion of footnotes to assist in locating these. However, Brennan provides an excellent selection of texts and articles for further reading at the end of the book, divided into specific subcategories. Additionally, a helpful glossary of terms often employed in political philosophy can be found at the back of the book. The only critique I might give content-wise has to do with the matter-of-fact way that Brennan writes of libertarians as advocates for women's abortion rights. As I understand it, libertarians are nearly as divided as the country as a whole on the issue of abortion choice. In any case, at least a passing mention of a broadly "pro-life" libertarian perspective (cf. the website "Libertarians for Life" at l4l.org) could have been included. Despite this little nitpick of mine, the book is a solid presentation of libertarianism, and one that is much needed given the typical straw-manning that occurs in both ordinary and even professional political discourse. Thus, Brennan's distinction between classical liberal, hard libertarian, and neoclassical liberal perspectives is useful in addition to his general way of dispensing with caricatures along the way. I would highly recommend this book to any non-libertarians who are interested in truly understanding the position as well as anyone who has newly identified themselves with libertarianism.

[ehk2]

Ideologically the book deserves not more than one star; but its presentation is accessible -containing some of its critics. I've also a few like-minded opinions with them (though maybe not a result of a common source: mine are more like anarchism-inspired) e.g. mistrust toward politicians, gun ownership, dislike of nationalism, indifference toward religions, etc. On theory, libertarianism has a few positive aspects but on practice -looking to American libertarians- these quickly disappear. In real life, this ideology is so ALIEN to the social world and actual problems rooted in history (masked with ideological confrontations and arena of delicate power relations) and realistic solution alternatives to them. It might only good for a super-rational Martian ignorant of Earthly issues.

The problem might be that it ignores the communitarian aspects of human life (which conservatives or Marxists -but also, most liberals and republicanist theorists- shall be quick to stress.

[Eric_W]

Labels have become the bane of our political existence. If you don't want to read this book I highly recommend Brian Lamb's interview with the author which explains a great deal about the origins of Libertarianism (from the classic liberal) to what we now know as the "hard" libertarian.

I doubt if any of the explanation will make any difference given our propensity for assigning everyone to little niches and categories where they can be shunted aside, but it might help focus one's own thinking about where each of us falls on the political spectrum.

http://www.c-span.org/Events/QampA-wi...

[Robert]

This book is a good introduction to the philosophy that Brennan talks about. It's comprehensive, and written as question-and-answer (so it's easily read and digested), and does not get too technical. It's a scratch of the surface, and the "Further Reading" section in the back is extensive.

Brennan identifies three broad categories of people that constitute libertarians today, classical liberals, hard libertarians, and neoclassical liberals - of which Brennan identifies himself as the last one. I am sure other people would come up with different categories, but Brennan's are still useful.

[Jen]

In a question-with-an-answer format, to read this is to take Libertarianism 101. Great at giving you the facts...but since it's Libertarianism 101, it reads a lot like a textbook. It's the stuff that's good for you in order to understand the basics of your discipline so you can get to the more exciting and specialized reads.

[Bookworm]

What it says on the cover. After reading a basic foundational book about the system of US government I thought this might be a good compliment to that and to better understand libertarianism. If you're familiar with this series you'll know that it's done in a question and answer format roughly divided into various topics and that is the format here.

The author covers everything from the origins of libertarianism, what libertarians do/don't believe regarding government, the economy, social justice and the like. Some questions are probably ones you would expect (what to libertarians think about say immigration) and some that maybe wouldn't occur to you unless in specific circumstances or by coming across this book. Overall it felt like a good overview without delving too deeply into the weeds.

That said, there were times where I was downright skeptical. For example, he discusses views on campaign finance/money in politics and in the text he mentions how there is relatively little money involved in politics vs. the size of the US budget. Although it can depend on one's perspective, I couldn't help but feel the author wasn't looking at the impact that that money has had and is having. As another review notes, there are certainly some positives regarding libertarian views and theory, but in execution it becomes a rather different matter.

Still, it challenged my views, made me think of people/politicians who claim to be libertarian and how well they stack up to the author's definitions. It helped me understand it a little better although like others I also found the text to be really dry. I've read other books in this series and have had the same problem. The author states outright he repeats himself since he assumes a reader may not read in the order of the text or may skip questions/sections entirely.

So, your mileage may vary when it comes to this book. If you have questions and want something to introduce you to something a bit more than the basics then this might be a good pickup. But don't expect it to answer everything or to answer everything you want to know in the detail you want/need. This was a good library borrow but for someone who needs it as a reference this might be a good pickup.

[Mike Cheng]

An easy to read, longform Question & Answer about libertarian philosophy. The book opens with basic premises, including which values libertarianism has in common with conservatism (e.g., property rights, less government regulation) and progressivism (e.g., civil rights, a woman’s right to choose) as well as how they differ from one another (which was even more interesting - especially in regard to distinctions from conservatism). The book is also enlightening in how it distinguishes libertarians from three separate factions: Classical Liberals (whose philosophy is aligned with that of Adam Smith, David Hume, John Locke, etc.); the more radical Hard Libertarians (the most famous include Ayn Rand and Robert Nozick); and Neoclassical Liberals (aka “bleeding heart libertarians” who attempt to balance free markets with social justice). The book also responds to fair criticisms of libertarianism: e.g., equality not being a priority, whether human beings are or should be inherently selfish, the ineptitude of the Libertarian Party. One point that I especially enjoyed was how author Jason Brennan disabused the notion that free markets are a panacea - to the contrary, libertarians recognize that markets are imperfect but how such is superior to government central planning is that a free market incentivizes people to be accountable for their choices. In similar fashion, F.A. Hayek posited that a functioning economy needs three things: (1) Information - a signal (prices) to guide the individual; (2) Incentive - something must induce the individual to act on that information (private property); and (3) Learning - the individual must have the knowledge and reinforcement to learn from his/her mistakes in order to become better at responding to information and incentives (profits and losses). The book’s summation of libertarian doctrines is as follows: radical tolerance - i.e., mind your own business unless and until some else actually infringes upon your rights; nobody should be forced to adopt someone else’s vision of a good life; all human interactions should be based on consent; rejection of the notion that individuals are cells of a greater social organism; and personal responsibility.

[Peter Curtiss]

Well formatted and accessible exposition of the political philosophy of libertarianism, as well as many of their views. The overriding principle is that people, providing they’re not hurting others, should be free to do what they want. The way that this manifests is in a “live and let live” type of thinking. An oversimplified way of thinking about it is that libertarians are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Some examples:
.
Socially, libertarians believe in abortion rights, gay marriage, ending the war on drugs (and legalizing), etc. Perhaps one of their more striking views is their pro-immigration stance. There are two main arguments, one moral, one practical. Morally they believe that freedom of movement is a basic human right and that what country one happens to be born in is largely arbitrary - because of this the “burden of proof” is on the person wanting to deny immigration. Second, as believers in free markets, they believe that preventing laborers from reaching employers who want to hire them is tremendously inefficient.
.
Fiscally, libertarians believe in free markets. While they acknowledge that there are market failures (ie, a company does not pay the true cost of their pollution, instead the price is paid by society), they generally believe that people who are thinking economically fail to appreciate that there are government failures as well (the libertarian view being that they tend to be larger than market failures).
.
Furthermore, they believe that a lot of government attempts to decrease market failures only hurt, and contribute to crony capitalism. They argue that, in practice, giving governments more power over corporations allows the corporations to lobby the government (ie, corrupt officials) and ensure that that power is exercised in a way that is favorable to them - either helping them through subsidies, or by disproportionately cracking down on a firm’s competitors. An example that is cited in the book is how big business ends up getting protected by regulation because of economies of scale and how small businesses have to spend a disproportionately larger portion of their revenue in order to be in compliance.

[Cary]

So, this series ("What Everyone Needs to Know") is the Oxford University Press's answer to the "Very Short Introductions". It's less short (so, I guess merely "short" as opposed to "very short") and the format (at least in this book) was a Q&A/FAQ organized by topic (economics, social justice, criminal justice, etc.). The book is designed such that you don't need to read it linearly with the consequence that some of the information is repeated, often word-for-word, in multiple questions. Mildly annoying, but given the format, the repetition at least is unavoidable. There is also some handy cross-referencing between questions.

Overall, I found the book quite informative. My knowledge of libertarianism is hit-and-miss-- similar to my knowledge of anarchism but, as I discovered, was less accurate and more based on the 'hard libertarian' stereotype that is generally used when attacking libertarians. I'd always known a lot of my politics, especially socially/societally, were libertarian: free speech, freedom to marry whom you wish, reproductive rights, killing the War on Drugs, decriminalizing (most) drug use and prostitution. (Less face it, one doesn't have to look too deeply at history to see that criminalizing vice doesn't work and far from protecting those who engage in vice, tends to hurt them.)

If you, like I did, view most libertarians as wacky Ayn Rand types, definitely give this a read. You'll find it a welcome recalibration.

Note: too lazy to proofread, apologies for any typos.

[Addison Mills]

This entire book was a really long "trust me bro" with several references thrown in for a healthy measure of legitimacy. No footnotes, no in-body citations, no references appendix in the rear. For a book published by Oxford University Press, I am severely disappointed. After completion, it strikes me that this book in the OUP line of "What Everyone Needs To Know" books is probably meant for a less academic, more public-consumption general audience. So be it. I did enjoy it becuase it did make me think. It compelled me to consider my own social, economic and cultural positions. So, it wasn't totally devoid of tangible value.
On a bleak note, the writing was often simplistic and redundant - if not overtly repetitive. And the author's use of "she/her" pronouns in place of the traditional "he/him" when referencing a non-descript avatar felt performative rather than natural. Still, a SUPER easy read if you're looking for a general, non-academic, sit-around-the-bar style of introduction to Libertarianism.

[Parker Hewitt]

I think everyone should read books written by people who strongly disagree with them. Hearing/reading the arguments straight from the horse's mouth is a great way of challenging, and I would add moderating/adding nuance, you own thinking and view of the world. This book is a great introduction to relatively modern libertarian (but also classical liberal and neoclassical liberal ) thought. Brennan is an intelligent political thinker who writes very well. The format is useful and convenient, if a little annoying because it encourages repetition. I didn't read the whole thing. I read the first hundred pages straight through and then mostly skimmed the other topics that seemed of interest to me. Great place to confirm and dispel whatever you may think of libertarians, like the idea that libertarians don't care about poor people.

[Chad]

A straight forward, clear, and concise introduction into libertarianism. Wasn't a huge fan of the Q&A format but it allows for easy navigation. You might not agree with all the arguments put forth, but that isn't the goal of this book; the goal is to provide an introduction to libertarian political philosophy.

Some of the answers were too brief, and given it was published in 2012, it'd be great to publish an update edition.

[Murat]

Çevirisi sıkıntılı. Beni baya rahatsız etti. Bunun dışında iyi bir kitap. Liberteryenizmin ne olduğu hakkında bilgi edinmek istiyorsanız okuyun. Soru ve cevap şeklinde hazırlanmış, halka yönelik yazılmış, ağır bir kitap değil.

[Batuhan Can]

kitap yüzeysel bilgiler vermesi açısından oldukça güzeldi. kitabın sonunda yazar yönerge vermiş konu üzerine gitmek isteyen okurlar için kaynak tavsiyesi şeklinde. bana kalırsa insan doğasına en uygun siyasi felsefe. bu

[vyoletkyss]

Fantastic. This book is a series of questions with short answers. Very clear, concise, and provides sources. Totally recommend this to anyone interested in not being a political sheep.

[Arup]

Good recap and easy read for a beginner.

[Eric Heinze]

Does not dive into deeper historical or philosophical background but good non-specialist introduction.

[The Federal Farmer]

It was good, but speaks as if every question it answers is correct. Brings up a lot of political questions for someone to think about. Overall, it is well written and worth reading.

[lynchculture]

Liberteryenlerin Çin'in ekonomik gelişimine yaklaşımı konusunda hem yanlış, hem de genel diye gösterilen ama çok küçük bir grup liberteryenin görüşü tüm liberteryenlerin görüşü. Yanlış bilgiler var.

[Dane]

Good to see most Libertarians have moved on from Nozick and actually find importance in social justice. Seems that a lot of political philosophy just comes to how to best achieve Rawl's difference principle, and that's an empirical question regarding to what extent wealth redistribution actually helps the disadvantaged. I suspect the high liberals are right here, but I thought this book was a great introduction to plausible libertarian thought.

[Andrew Choi]

I read this bc the author was on the CSPAN Q&A podcast. this book did a good job of explaining libertarianism in simple terms. The 100 or so questions covered most of the basic issues one might have. As a bonus, you can just skip the sections that don't really interest you.

[TheSaint]

Sometimes, I just assume that my friends share my politics. But recently, I've realized that that isn't always the case. This little Q and A style book helped me understand the basic wiring of libertarians. Props to the author was mostly unbiased.

[Sara DeSantis (Hot Reads Librarian]

I thought that this book was wonderful. This is a good introduction book about Libertarianism. The author was simple and to the point. His format was easy to follow because he asked questions and answered them. It was easy to follow his argument because you knew the question ahead of time.

[Steve]

Blessedly short intro to Libertarian thought. Attempts to be evenhanded but is basically a pro-libertarian treatise.

[Paul Sybrandy]

Decent

I was hoping to get more of an insight as to what makes a typical Libertarian tick... so to speak. It wasn't a bad read though.

[Sharad Pandian]

This is a pretty neat introduction to libertarianism, which includes both theoretical aspects and what libertarians thinks about current real world problems. The best aspect is that it always points out criticism of the libertarian position, and not not just to make its own position better but rather a genuine points of reasonable disagreement.

My one point of discomfort is how Brennan lumps classical liberals like Mill and "hard libertarians" like Nozick under the banner of "libertarianism", creating a massive tent. Moreover, or so Brennan claims, it is the classical liberal strand which is the prominent one, which would mean libertarians who might support versions of welfare (to remedy unfair distribution) are supposed to be the best representatives of this tradition. Under this taxonomy, most people who would identify as "liberal" would probably fit inside this tent snugly as long as they recognize that market solutions are often the best way to go. This seems too expansive a categorization to me, but considering that "liberal" is considered just as massive a tent, maybe this is unfair.