Serious Ideas Done Right

When in Washington, D.C. a few weeks ago I did something that no other normal human being would have done: I spent an afternoon visiting a think tank. There was no tour group, and it wasn't one of the sessions at the conference I was attending. No, I did this for fun. And yes, I had tons of fun.

The think tank in question was the Cato Institute.Cato is a libertarian organization. A quick (ridiculously oversimplified) overview of libertarian thought goes as follows: Libertarians are committed to freedom in all aspects of life; limited government is their mantra (though in the most radical sectors the word "anarchy" is spoken in whispers); government involvement is almost always bad; anything that takes away your right to do what you wish must be eliminated.

For about two and a half hours a student relations manager (no, I'm not a student, but I don't think they knew who else to send out to deal with a guy in town who just wanted to talk politics) and I sat and talked about their ideas and philosophy. Please keep in mind that there is no one authoritative voice on libertarian thought, but here's a short list of the things that came out of our conversation:

• Though I am not a libertarian, I respect their ideas deeply
• They hold the Constitution in high regard, often going so far as to physically hold it up in mid-argument to make a point
• Because they hold the Constitution so highly, they find judicial activism highly suspect, which endears them to me a great deal
• They have a firm grasp of their position in society and do not expect to gain any ground in the political system
• Therefore they focus on winning arguments and trying to move people one step at a time closer to their ideals
• Many of them don't vote
• Those that do vote (those who don't vote for the Libertarian party) find conservative thought more appealing than liberal thought, though not always
• As with any set of overarching ideas, there is no single authoritative source, and therefore there is vigorous debate as to how to best achieve the most liberty for the most people
• They love the free market--especially the free market of ideas

Like I said, I am not a libertarian. I am a conservative. Libertarians are very socially liberal. Though I disagree with them in this realm, I find their arguments in this area quite reasonable, unlike the arguments that come from traditional social liberals.

One thing the Cato Representative told me was quite interesting: someone did a study of university professors regarding their political philosophy. Though it has long been known that college professors are by-and-large a bunch of bleeding hearts, this study delved into specific issues of policy. One of the findings was quite astonishing: of the profs who claimed to be "liberal", their answers on specific policy questions lined up almost perfectly with the Democratic party's platform. However, of those professors who called themselves "conservative", and who vote Republican, there was a great deal of diversity in the responses to policy questions. The way the Cato rep summarized it to me went like this:

When looking at conservatives and liberals within the political system, liberals typically all toe the same line. Even though they talk about 'diversity', their ideas are basically homogeneous. However, when conservatives or Republicans talk about having a 'big-tent', it seems like they mean it.

The majority of libertarians who vote (and who don't vote for the Libertarian Party) vote Republican, in large part, because their ideas are welcome within the tent, even if only to a limited degree.

Let me bottom line for you why I deeply respect the Cato Institute: they are rational and reasonable, even when their ideas are so extreme as to be completely untenable. For example, I was trying to find articles to put together a pro-con piece on welfare when I came across an article from Cato. The conclusion: end welfare all together. I laughed out loud, not because the idea was crazy--to the contrary, the article was cool-headed, thoughful, intelligent, and well-written--but because that is quite obviously a political non-starter. That is what is excellent about their organization. They do not put out empassioned, emotional PR pieces. They do not have to (and don't want to) win the votes of Joe American. They want to convince. They want to persuade. They want to move people one step closer to their goal of a more free America. Democrats and Republicans can't do this.

Imagine if they could, though. America would be a much more civil, much more intelligent, much more pleasant place.

Even if we reject their ideas, may we act, talk, and reason like these people.