I do think that we will continue to see less interest in non-political libertarian theory and more interest in the broad alt-right (which draws heavily from paleoconservative / paleolibertarian ideas) in the coming years, because NPLT doesn't seem to have an answer for the situation where 51% of people want nothing to do with a PPS (in reality the number seems to be closer to 99%). Rockwell, Woods, Molyneux, and many other prominent thinkers all seem to be moving in that direction in various ways.I don't understand what non-political libertarianism is. I side with Murray Rothbard on this when he said during a speech in Chicago in 1979:
The fact is that libertarianism is not and does not pretend to be a complete moral or aesthetic theory; it is only a political theory...As for an "answer for the situation," the only answer is to advance freedom. It really is silly to think you can advance freedom by limiting it even more.
Further, libertarianism is not about the number of followers. It is about advancing truth. If we were back to Murray Rothbard's living room that would be fine with me if that was the only place truth was being advanced. It has nothing to do with crowds. If you want to be a crowd follower libertarianism is not the place for you.
Here is Rothbard in a 1966 commentary titled Why Be Libertarian and written for the journal Left & Right:
Why be libertarian anyway? By this we mean: what's the point in the whole thing? Why engage in a deep and lifelong commitment to the principle and goal of individual liberty? For such a commitment in our largely unfree world, means inevitably a radical disagreement with, an alienation from, the status quo, an alienation which equally inevitably imposes many sacrifices in money and prestige. When life is short and the moment of victory far in the future, why go through all this?...
It is our view that a flourishing libertarian movement, a lifelong dedication to liberty, can only be grounded in a passion for justice....A true passion for justice...must be radical---in short, it must at least wish to attain its goals radically and instantaneously.And while I understand Rothbard's view here, my driving reason for advancing liberty is a bit different.
I thirst for truth and love the intellectual battle. The more in number I have to battle the less bored I am. If even the percentage of the general public who believed in liberty climbed to 30%, my cause would be something different. I am not a person who prefers the path well tread. I would perhaps be attempting to advance a unique take in medicine or in baseball theory. It's the battle for me.
I like the way Rothbard ended his 1966 essay, with a mention and quote from the abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison. It's a real intellectual battle quote:
Upon being reporached for habitual severity and heat of his language, Garrison retorted:"I have need to be all on fire, for I have mountains of ice about me to melt." It is this spirit that must mark the man truly dedicated to the cause of liberty.-RW