And as you would expect, it does so spontaneously.
During our encounter with Actual Anarchy, this blog received inspiration to create an image contrasting those who historically had called themselves "liberals" but whose philosophy logically tends towards a natural law order without Weberian states - what we somewhat loosely refer to as actual anarchy - perhaps most notably Ludwig von Mises, with those who today call themselves "anarchists" but whose philosophy, which we must gather from their actions since their leading philosophers can only be said to include such luminaries as contra-logical feminist anti-music performers, must inevitably lead to the rise of a Leviathan state managed by the very followers of Satan.
Yes, as we've asserted before, we believe that if libertarianism is going to be successful it will be of necessity a thick libertarianism.
This image, which we will revisit, leads to many insights. Not least of which is that, since man is inherently non-omniscient, a la Hayek and Catholic theology, it is easy for us to become too narrowly focused on some particulars to the overlooking of others. While this seeming problem is actually its own solution when the beauty of an order based on private property rights and individual responsibility is delineated, this tendency also explains why many arguments you have with your friends may only be semantic. That is to say, while the logical content of your arguments are actually the same, because different words are used to identify the one and same concrete realities, and/or the same word is used by each party to identify two very different realities an apparent conflict exists where there is none. Because groups are no more than the aggregation of behavior of individuals, the entire history of thought becomes mired in the same problem.
Total Freedom: Towards a Dialectical Libertarianism, calls "the art of context keeping."
Who are the real anarchists? Who are the real liberals? What is anarchism? What is liberalism?
Or, as we have asked before, which way actual anarchy?
Then, our Ignatian discernment made everything clear. Our image was missing the synthesis of the thesis and anti-thesis of Anarchy-Liberal tension.
As we have argued before, the Austrian economists are the rightful heirs to the long Catholic natural law tradition. Even Murray Rothbard admits as much in his Economic Thought Before Adam Smith. When the Catholic Church recovers from Her current miseries She will discover the same.
And thus, the image is completed. (Click image for full size.)
*By "Catholic Church" we should be clear that we are referring to the
former part of the Church that still self-identifies as Catholic but has
substantially abandoned all or integral parts of Her doctrine. Obviously the Church, per se, is preserved from all corruption, even if Her human participants are not.