I Agree, I Agree!
Posted by Matt Zeitlin on December 29, 2007
I know Will Wilkinson is a “libertarian” and I’m a “liberal” and thus I’m supposed to think that he hates poor people and wants to take their malnourished bodies and convert the carbon in their bodies to diamonds to encrust his Cadillac which runs on the blood of factory workers who he ruthlessly beats while they make toys out of pure lead and so on…but I have to agree with just about everything he says in this post. Here’s the best bit:
As I’ve argued before, I think this conception of cosmopolitan liberalism almost got lost in the Cold War, during which cosmopolitan, internationalist ideals were largely ceded to the communists while liberalism rode out the red tide by tying itself defensively to nationalist feelings in those nations with a more or less liberal identity. The Cold War has been over for almost twenty years now. It is time to get back to the project of securing world peace through extending the scope of mutual cooperation. It is time to get back to the cosmopolitan ideals of liberal humanism…
So a guest-worker program would have a real short-term benefit to the U.S. in terms of increased border security, return migration, and labor market efficiency. The medium-term benefit of a large guest worker program aimed at our neighbors to the south is this: Once the program is established and has demonstrated its efficacy, it will be possible to make a persuasive case for further North American labor-market integration, pushing toward a common North American labor market. In the long term, large regional labor markets, such as the EU and a North American market (and a South African market, an African market, an Asian market, etc.) can begin to integrate, moving us toward the ultimate liberal aim of an open world of mutual cooperation.
It’s unclear if Wilkinson and Kerry Howley are the King and Queen of the new Cosmopolitan Libertarianism, but its refreshing to see self-styled libertarians who don’t think that freedom stops at the Southern border. It’s ironic that as much of the “mainstream” libertarian movement represented by Cato and Reason have become strong advocates for international labor mobility, the nativist/asshole/Old Right libertarians represented by Paul, Rockwell and their ilk are having their moment in the sun.
PS - While we’re bashing nationalism, let me just say that I hate the Patriots.
December 30, 2007 at 1:02 pm
I am in principle receptive to Wilkinson, Howley et al arguments to have a global market. But what I think is missing from this calculus, at the very least in terms of its rhetorical appeal, is the cultural costs and benefits.
By this I mean, there is more to people than a rational economic agent, and having one’s material needs met. Material needs are an essential and many times primary concern but its not the only essential concern that people have, nor do I at least think it should be.
And yet it seems like these cultural calculations are either absent or papered over in these classical liberal dialogues. I suspect that this arises from classical liberalism’s philosophical commitment to separate irreconcilable religious questions from governing a pluralistic society. While necessary and sensible in many cases, that separation doesn’t always work. Pretending that these concerns are either illegitimate or non-existent doesn’t make them go away.
December 30, 2007 at 3:54 pm
it’s refreshing to see self-styled libertarians who don’t think that freedom stops at the Southern border
Huh? I didn’t know that any libertarians believed differently. In fact, they’re usually reviled for believing in open borders. You must hang with a … different … crowd of libertarians.