[Jonah Goldberg 03/02 12:29 PM]Yes, some days when I'm feeling a bit saucey I call myself one. But no, I'm no libertarian. I think it was Ramesh who summarized the trouble with liberarianism most succinctly. He said something to the effect of: except for the fact that it can't respond to the challenges of children and foreign policy, it's a nearly perfect political philosophy.
But, having spent 3 years reading and writing about fascism, I will say I have become more libertarian and vastly more sympathetic to the freedom side of the freedom-virtue fusionist coin (though few would have ever confused me for a virtucrat). What may sound libertarian in my response to things Crunchy is my opposition the what scholars of fascism refer to as the sacralization of politics (note: students of Voegelin (like Caleb) will understand this doesn't merely refer to theocratic enterprises, but Progressive enterprises generally).
Religion informs values and values should inform politics, but politics should never try to replace religion. Conservatism's traditional emphasis on the transcendent understands that these spheres may interact but they should never serve as substitutes for each other. As much as a guy named Goldberg can, I've become a disciple of Augustine, at least insofar as I think the City of God and City of Man dichotomy is the right way to look at life, politics and history.
