Sounds like they are really, really PO’ed about something:
The libertarianism we oppose is a specific set of ideas, the essence of which is a dedicated, thoroughgoing subjectivism. Libertarianism in this sense was spearheaded by Murray Rothbard and his followers in the 1960s and 1970s. Its political expression is anarchism, or “anarcho-capitalism” as they often term it, and a foreign policy of rabid anti-Americanism (which they pass off as “non-interventionism”).
1. Can you give me a one sentence (Rothbard would use two. One for the explanation and one to point out his opponents are idiots) explanation of subjectivism? And why do they hate it so much?
2. Am I wrong to say the above sounds very NeoCon-ish?
at least a part of this arises from a misunderstanding of Mises/Rothbard. Basically, the some (looks like the ARI in this case) is viewing the economic subjectivism of Mises/Rothbard (that value is subjective) as an all encompassing view of everything: that everything is subjective. But I dont think that is what they meant at all. After all, rothbard wrote much about concepts other than pure economics, and he maintained that life and property rights and by extension other things were inherent rights in a person as human. That is certainly not subjective. To say that, in certain cases, deemed best by the whole rights can be violated like a couple instances for forced taxation and things like that, that seems to be the subjective side to me.
I dont believe so. That was simply my take on a skimming of the kinsella article. Dont take my little paragraph as gospel or anything. searching for “ayn rand rothbard subjectivism” or something like that on mises.org might get you more. you could also enter “ayn rand rothbard subjectivism site:mises.org” in google and it will just give you results from that site.