Libertarianism & Derrida

Wondering what to write about next I gave myself a challenge, to write an essay linking libertarianism and Derrida. I got the idea while reading a book review about the history of libertarianism and while thinking about deconstructionism and its author, Jacques Derrida. My thinking this way may have originated from my mental state, of perhaps being both a liberal and a deconstructionist.

My idea to link these two seemingly unrelated subjects also comes from my tendency of wanting to connect things. In the past I have written essays connecting such odd subjects as Hegel and thermodynamics, Hegel and Ayn Rand, Freddy Laker and Karl Marx, and democracy and capitalism. Each time I think I was successful in make the connections. But with libertarianism and Derrida I'm not so sure. So it will be interesting to see what I come up with.

One thing I understand about Jacques Derrida is that he introduced – no – invented the philosophy of deconstructionism. However, I don't understand much else about his philosophy although I have tried. I thought Hegel was hard to comprehend. At least Hegel had a worldview and his ideas immediately caught my imagination. Derrida has not captured my imagination unless my dwelling on him in order to understand him means he has captured me. I understand from others that the term deconstructionism has defied definition and Derrida himself avoided defining it. Nevertheless, as a verb the term is closely associated to the process of analytical philosophy, of undoing ideas –taking them apart, and putting them back together, to perhaps discover an alternative truth.

Libertarianism is most associated with the writings and philosophy of Ayn Rand. She championed libertarianism, as the means to combat the collectivism that she saw was gain grounding in America. America, she argued, was not founded on collectivism, but on libertarianism and the free spirit of individualism. She had as much contempt for collectivism as she did for communism. Her contempt for collectivism was also a reference to the growth of government and its insinuation on the American way of life. She saw collectivism not only threatening the liberty of individuals and their ability to be self-reliant and responsible but in so doing also smothering their potential to be great and innovative.

“Language, Derrida said, is inadequate to provide a clear and unambiguous view of reality. In other words, the fixed meaning of an essay, a book, a personal letter, a scientific treatise or a recipe dissolves when hidden ambiguities and contradictions are revealed. These contradictions, inevitable in every piece of writing, he said, reveal deep fissures in the foundation of the Western world's civilizations, cultures and creations.”

That passage makes it sound as though the world is constructed on and by language. But the world is constructed more on human behavior, actions and conduct. Language is used to convey our behavior, actions and conduct. The way I hear it, Derrida seems to say that if our language was different or interpreted differently our behavior, actions and conduct would be different; the world would be different. But I think that Derrida understood that language alone could not change our behavior, attitudes or the world for the better. Thus, I think Derrida's ultimate aim, like that of many philosophers before him, was to transform his philosophy of deconstructionism from the text into the real world of human actions in order to make it a conscious and working life force. Deconstruction in this context is the reexamination of our lives and behavior so as to improve it by being more open and accommodating. The world, like civilization and humankind, is always changing, deconstructing and reinventing itself. This is a natural process. Derrida, I believe, thought human behavior and attitude should mirror those changes and should be a constant re-construction of those changes.

Imagine my surprise when I read in a review of Derrida's life that he was view as a political libertarian. A libertarian, the dictionary defines, is a person who advocates liberty, esp. with regard to thought or conduct. Imagine, Derrida is also a libertarian like Rand is but with a difference. Derrida is a libertarian of the left while Rand is of the right. Rand thought more along the lines of economic liberty and Derrida along those of political liberty.

What is the difference between a libertarian of the right, a conservative, and a libertarian of the left, a socialist? (Sounds like the opening for a deconstructionist joke.) I can think of one, in economics. A libertarian of the left would think that personal liberty should include the entitlement of a job, the inherent right to employment. A libertarian of Rand's persuasion would think a job is not an entitlement but only if is capable and worthy of one. As a Frenchman T think Derrida was a socialist libertarian, thinking not only of the liberty aspect of it but also of fraternity and equality. I wonder, then, if that kind of French libertarian thinking was the basis for a clause in the European Constitution - a constitution that never passed - a clause that guaranteed the right to employment, for any one wanted a job.

In conclusion, I wasn't wrong to think of those two seemingly unrelated subjects. I discovered two forms of libertarianism. These two libertarianisms counterbalance and challenge each other in the development of the best possible social/political world. As the French would say, viva la differance.