Smith tells the story of how a disagreement with Roy Childs over the ideas of Irving Kristol resulted in a serious argument.
George H. Smith begins his series on neoconservatism by exploring some of its fundamental differences with libertarianism.
Roy Childs finds the most formidable of neo-conservative intellectuals “at once exciting and disturbing.”
“Inasmuch as Kristol does not advertise himself as a libertarian, I wonder why Grinder gets steamed up when Kristol doesn’t pass all the libertarian litmus tests.”
Abbott identifies the third-wave of Whiggery, Neo-conservatives.
Smith explores the ideas of Irving Kristol and Robert Bork on culture. He begins with a discussion of the anti-jazz crusade of the 1920s.
“What is the significance of their ascendancy? Are they friend or foe in the struggle for liberty?”
“We alone have the wisdom and honesty to…declare that the only way to reduce the size of government is to cut back on its functions.”
“If liberty is our first political value, tolerance must be our second.”
“One ought to say bluntly that the neoconservatives themselves are part of the problem here.”
“In short, the Open Society is not enough.”
Kelley defines ‘modernity’ as the rational culture of the Enlightenment, then stresses that the philosophy is under assault from both the right and the left.
In this criticism of Naomi Klein’s “The Shock Doctrine”, Johan Norberg identifies common misconceptions about the nature of Milton Friedman’s libertarianism.
“In recalling [classical liberalism] from what had sometimes seemed an irrecoverable oblivion, Hayek’s work is a hopeful augury for an uncertain future.”
The great John Hospers surveys the most productive century in the history of ethics as a field of study.