{"id":532306,"date":"2026-05-01T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-05-01T10:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/leregardlibre.com\/?p=532306"},"modified":"2026-05-01T12:11:33","modified_gmt":"2026-05-01T10:11:33","slug":"conservative-libertarians","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/leregardlibre.com\/en\/history\/conservative-libertarians\/","title":{"rendered":"The libertarian pact with conservatives"},"content":{"rendered":"

The American libertarian movement, led by Murray Rothbard, has moved away from dogmatic anti-statism to ally itself with the populist right. A trajectory that poses a central question for liberals: how far to ally oneself without denying oneself?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

In recent years, libertarian ideas have gained new visibility. The election of Javier Milei in Argentina, the role played by certain Silicon Valley figures and the debates sparked by Trumpism have all helped to put this current back at the heart of discussions on the future of liberalism. Yet the intellectual history of libertarianism reveals a complex evolution, marked by sometimes paradoxical political alliances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the leading thinkers in this movement is the American economist and philosopher Murray Rothbard (1926-1995). A disciple of the Austrian school of economics and one of its major theorists, the Austrian-American economist Ludwig von Mises, Rothbard radicalized the principles of the classical liberals. Where the latter defended a minimal state, limited to the regalian functions of defense, police and justice, Rothbard went one step further: he advocated the pure and simple disappearance of the state. According to this theory, often referred to as anarcho-capitalism, any public constraint constitutes an infringement of the individual's natural rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Locke's natural rights tradition<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

At the heart of this philosophy lies a central idea: the absolute sovereignty of the individual. From this perspective, private property is a fundamental right, and any form of taxation becomes spoliation. Taxation, in any form, is seen as a violation of property rights, theft pure and simple. The role of the state can therefore never be justified. This radicalization profoundly distinguishes Rothbard from the great representatives of twentieth-century liberalism.th<\/sup>\u00a0century. Authors such as Friedrich Hayek \u2013 also from the Austrian tradition \u2013 or Milton Friedman \u2013 the inspiration behind monetarism \u2013 remained committed to the idea of a minimal state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This divergence is not just about the role of the state. It also concerns the way in which capitalism is justified. Classical liberal economists often adopted a utilitarian approach: the market is preferable because it works better and produces more wealth. Rothbard, on the other hand, took his cue from the natural rights tradition inherited from John Locke. Capitalism is not only moral because it is efficient: it is also moral because it does not violate the inalienable rights of the individual.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From this vision stems what libertarians call the \u00abnon-aggression principle\u00bb: no one should suffer coercion or violence, including from the state. This idea nurtures a strong isolationist tradition within American libertarianism. War and foreign intervention are considered violations of individual rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shifting political alliances<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

While libertarian doctrine is radically coherent, its political history is much more fluid. In the 1960s, some American libertarians joined forces with the radical left. Opposition to the Vietnam War, criticism of the state and the defense of certain individual freedoms brought these activists together with protest movements, some of them far removed from traditional liberalism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rothbard himself supported a number of American radical leftists and adopted positions highly critical of US foreign policy. Hostility to military intervention was the main point of convergence. But from the 1970s onwards, the tide began to turn. Rothbard and some of the libertarians gradually broke with the left to seek alliances with the conservative right. This strategic shift was fully theorized in the 1990s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The central idea is simple: if libertarianism is to carry weight politically, it needs to break out of academic circles and appeal to the American middle classes, especially the white ones. Hayek and Mises didn't believe in an overnight shift to a liberal society, and thought they had to win the war of ideas first. Rothbard, on the other hand, opted for a \u00abpopulist\u00bb strategy, as he himself called it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n