Ethics of Liberty, Chapter 30: Toward a Theory of Strategy for Liberty

In this final chapter, Rothbard describes some principles and strategies for the political success of liberty. He helpfully summarizes the principles: “that the victory of total liberty is the highest political end; that the proper groundwork for this goal is a moral passion for justice; that the end should be pursued by the speediest and most efficacious possible means; that the end must always be kept in sight and sought as rapidly as possible; and the means taken must never contradict the goal–whether by advocating gradualism, by employing or advocating any aggression against liberty, by advocating planned programs, or by failing to seize any opportunity to reduce State power or by ever increasing it in any area” (p. 264). この最終章でロスバードが自由の政治的成功のための原則と攻略を述べる。親切に原則を詰まった。「一つ、政治的に完全なる自由が最大の目的だ。一つ、正義への道徳的な情熱がその目的の適切な基礎だ。一つ、最速で一番効果的な方法で目的を追求するべきだ。一つ、目的をいつも見ながらできるだけ早く求めるべきだ。一つ、漸進主義を主張すること、自由への攻勢を主張すること、計画的な昇進を主張すること、政府の力を減らす機会を捕まないこと、又は政府の力をどんな領域でも増やすことで目的と矛盾する方法を選ばないべきだ。」(p.264)
Regarding strategy, Rothbard advocates liberty-focused education and a liberty movement (including specialists that make a profession of championing these ideas). From time to time, it may be valuable to ally with people with whom we disagree on some (or many) issues; provided we can find an issue that we can agree on. This provides a double benefit of improving our chance of success and of converting such temporary allies to our central cause. 攻略でロスバードが自由教育と専門家を含む自由運動をお勧めする。時々に多少違う人々と関係つける価値がある。同意する点があれば、ともにその点を求めることで損はない。成功の可能性を向上し、関係つけた人を自由へ治す可能性で二つの利がある。
Rothbard cautions against two strategic pitfalls: what he calls opportunism and sectarianism. Opportunists pursue results at the cost of principles; they betray their principles- in word or in deed- to boost their traction with the political class or the public at large, where they assess that the principles are not welcome. Sectarians scorn the pursuit of results as being ipso facto betrayal of principle; they advocate only the perfect realization of a complete system of liberty, and judge all other systems as equally evil- ergo, efforts to change anything are entirely wasted unless those efforts are devoted to advocating immediate establishment of their system. ロスバードが機会主義とセクト主義の二つの攻略的な地雷を注意する。機会主義者は原則を擁護するのが政治的な不利と判断してその原則を犠牲にして功績を追求する。セクト主義者は成績を追求すること自体が原則の裏切りだと非難する。完全完璧な自由の社会制度だけを主張して、それ以外の制度が等しく邪悪であると判断して、制度を進化する努力が無駄だ、と。
Rothbard also advises to keep an eye out for crises; when a crisis strikes a society, that society may open up to radical change. But a focused liberty movement needs to be prepared to guide society at that point; lacking that, the society could very well change radically for the worse. 危機を臨むことこそが機会だ、とロスバードが助言する。社会の危機にはその社会が抜本的な変更に開けるかも知らない。だが集中力のある自由運動が社会を導く必要がある。そんな自由運動がないと、社会が抜本的に悪化することになるかも知らない。
I think Rothbard’s principles leave at least one ambiguous situation. I once read a petition that proposed reducing State power in several ways, but increased it in one way. By refusing to sign this petition, did I uphold the principles by “never increasing State power in any area,” or did I fail the principles by “failing to seize an opportunity to reduce State power?” ロスバードの原則には曖昧な点がある、と拙者が思う。昔に、拙者が政府の力をいろんな点で減らす、一つの点で増やす請願を読んだ。請願を署名しないことで、政府の力を増やさなかったから原則を擁護したのか?それとも、政府の力を減らす機会を見逃したから原則を裏切ったのか?
This dovetails with the idea I have that injustice is unmeasurable, and incomparable between individuals, much like, in economics, utility is unmeasurable, and incomparable between individuals. 経済学では功利が測れないこと、それに個人間的に比較できないことと同様に、倫理学では正と不正が測れないこと、それに個人間的に比較できないことという拙者の論に関わる。

About Brian Wilton

I'm a libertarian. I prefer reading articles and books to listening to podcasts, although I hear that podcasts are more popular. Call it Picard's Syndrome.
Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply