Thick and thin libertarianism

Thick and thin are two approaches to libertarianism, with "thin" libertarianism being understood as "a narrowly political doctrine" and "thick" libertarianism as integrated into some broader set of social or cultural values. Libertarian thickness, therefore, measures the degree or mode of association of libertarianism with other values.
Charles W. Johnson, a left-libertarian, describes in detail philosopher Jan Narveson's comments to the 2005 Molinari Society symposium on this topic. The "thick" version of libertarianism is bundled with contexts in addition to the non-aggression principle. It promotes libertarianism with other values, and denies that libertarianism can be advocated by non-aggression alone. The "thin" version of libertarianism is solely approached to studying the non-aggression principle, without any cultural contexts bundled with it.
Johnson also opines that Walter Block and Jan Narveson as supporters for thin libertarianism, as they take the non-aggression as an axiom, not as a principle. Walter Block then replied to Johnson and presented a critique of thick libertarianism.
Left-libertarian Roderick Long has defended two objections to thick libertarianism. He insisted that even if thick libertarianism alienates potential libertarians with unrelated values, thick libertarianism may also demonstrate how its philosophy can integrate with other values, thus countering the objection. Long has refuted to another objection that thick libertarianism would deviate its ideology into promoting values incompatible to libertarianism. He countered that by denying such deviation as "unreasonable or counterproductive to pursue by nonlibertarian means." Stefan Molyneux could be considered a thick libertarian because he integrates libertarianism with perspectives including ethics, economics, psychology, relationships, philosophy.
== Areas of "thickness" ==
Johnson has identified six areas of "thickness":
;Thickness in entailment: The rejection of aggression committed other than by the state, such as in the family and certain coercive cultural practices.
;Thickness in conjunction: The application of values unrelated to libertarianism, such as being kind to children and friends.
;Thickness for application: Advocacy of other values for the proper application of the non-aggression principle.
;Strategic thickness: The endorsement of strategic reforms to make a peaceful transition to a libertarian society. Embracing voluntary anti-poverty measures, concerns about economic inequality, and promoting libertarian values of individuality, would likely sustain a free society without internal conflicts. These principles neither contradicts the non-aggression principle and implemented by voluntary measures.
;Thickness from grounds: The rejection of values in other than the non-aggression principle. It develops anti-authoritarian critiques of social hierarchy in the workplace, the traditionalism in the family, and the legitimacy of authority figures.
;Thickness from consequences: The opposition practices or outcomes that does not by themselves contradict the non-aggression principle, but by the coercion that allows these outcomes to exist. While certain business practices, for example, do not contradict the non-aggression principle, the premises—business privileges from regulatory capture—makes these businesses illegitimate.
Left-libertarian Roderick Long has provided concise definitions for the six above "thicknesses". Long recognized them as entailment thickness, conjunction thickness, application thickness, strategic thickness, grounds thickness, and consequence thickness, respectively.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu