How Gen Z is Influencing U.S. Food & Beverage Trends

A month or two ago, I was emailing with the ever-gifted Mary Harrington about her recent book (reviewed here in The Hub) and noted that I enjoyed how many of the problems she addressed in the book fit into an old-school "left-wing" political model. Her response was illuminating. She continued: "I don't have a problem with being recognised as a leftist in some respects; it's true, and besides I'm not sure the terms really apply anymore, as the split these days is more human vs posthuman."This, I believe, is exactly where we need to be with education. Another term for cruel is inhumane. Both the Left and the Right are acting like barbarians, pushing a vision of education that is destroying our shared history and the reflections of humans attempting to make sense of the world. It needs to stop. It's time for a more humanistic, human-scale approach to education. However, humanists of all political persuasions must work together to attain this goal.Brian Dijkema is Cardus' President for Canada and Senior Editor of Comment. He frequently consults with municipal, provincial, and federal governments, as well as civil personnel, on a variety of policy topics. He advises extensively with industry, business, labor, and civil society organizations. He is called upon to give presentations onIn these pages last year, Ken Boessenkool explained his view of libertarians:Libertarians do not only want smaller government; they want virtually no government. They don't just want lower taxes; they see taxation as confiscation at gunpoint. And they don't just want free trade; they want unlimited commerce.

Libertarians are more concerned. 

with the costs of policy than with its outcomes. When their center-left opponents co-opt their mainstream ideas, conservatives may be left with libertarianism as their political programming.To put it simply, I do not recognize myself here, nor would most libertarians. (Off the top of my mind, we oppose the draft, even if it is cheaper.) However, it is consistent with the mainstream conception of libertarianism. Nonetheless, Boessenkool is a seasoned conservative strategist who has collaborated with libertarians for decades. How did he come to have the same reductive, unfavorable view as people who have long considered themselves libertarianism's political opponents?Matt Zwolinski and John Tomasi's Individualists, an intellectual history of libertarianism, can help make sense not only of libertarians but also of an increasingly complicated political scene.Zwolinski and Tomasi contend that libertarian commitments shared from their origins around 1850 have generated various interpretations of what follows from such commitments, depending on the persons who held them and the political circumstances in which they lived.Libertarianism's key commitments—private property, distrust of authority, free marketsspontaneous order, individualism, and negative liberty—can stand up to more than Boessenkool's simplified definition. The Individualists investigates how these "political markers" have become a common thread in political systems that provide starkly different answers to problems concerning the size and scope of government, large business, and responses to poverty, racial injustice, and global justice.

Against socialismThe Individualists gives various examples. 

of how "the full libertarian position did not come into its own until it had something to push against". State socialism was the first and most durable opposition to libertarianism.Libertarianism radicalized classical liberalism in reaction to the advent of state socialism around 1850. In Britain and France, this gave many of the first libertarians a conservative bent, with mostly economic goals that appear familiar. However, libertarian-conservative fusionism, which opposed Roosevelt's New Deal and then the Cold War, is likely to shape how most people conceive of libertarianism today. Libertarianism sat on the political Right of fusionism, advocating for less government than conservatives in general did. This was a relatively productive political partnership, however there was disagreement not only within the alliance, but also within libertarianism.Among "strict libertarians" (defined in The Individualists as those who view their policy commitments coming logically from their philosophical ideas), Murray Rothbard and Ayn Rand's fiery personalities fought over topics such as how to handle business and when to support war. Strict libertarians also clashed with "broad libertarians" (defined as libertarians because they are members of the broader liberty movement), such as Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek, who were chastised for their insufficiently radical beliefs.It's tempting to chuckle at the great drama of little stakes, but that would be a mistake. During the height of fusionism, libertarianism held significant power. Consider Ronald Reagan reading The Freeman (a publication of one of America's oldest libertarian groups, the Foundation for Economic Education), or Margaret Thatcher slamming down a copy of Hayek's Constitution of Liberty. While libertarians were far from homogeneous (few political movements are), that did not imply political influence.

Libertarians were also influential academically.

The Individualists informs us that Harvard philosopher Robert Nozick credits a lengthy chat with Murray Rothbard with influencing his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Ludwig von Mises and F.A. Hayek, libertarian economists, were key voices on the market side in the economic calculation dispute over whether state socialism could outperform a market economy.The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 was a triumph for human liberty and dignity. It also marked the end of Cold War fusionism and the political relevance of libertarians' most important arguments over the previous half-century. Where will we go from hereLibertarianism appears pared down and adrift, in part because libertarians, like conservatives, are looking for new political homes and shedding the baggage of previous political contexts.Looking back at libertarianism's history, we can better anticipate where it might go without the prospect of state socialism unifying it or uniting it with conservatism. Libertarians have identified themselves against more than just socialism.Early American libertarians were frequently referred to as socialists or anarchists. These libertarians opposed slavery and the illegitimacy of the social compact, as well as the government it indicated. In this tradition, libertarian heroes are less like Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman and more like Lysander Spooner, who established an illegal post office to attack the concept of state monopolies, or even John Brown, who led a failed insurgency to eliminate slavery.