Chapter XIX
REASON, NEUTRALITY, AND THE FREE MARKET
[Due to the kind intervention of M. Stanton Evans, editor of
the Indianapolis News, Z was invited to appear on a panel at
the annual convention of The Philadelphia Society in 1970.
The panel was built around the topic of the debate between
traditional conservatism and anarcho-capitalism, with me tak-
ing the conservative position, Milton Friedman’s son David
taking the anarcho-capitalist position, and Evans acting as
a sort of fusionist. As you might suspect, I won the debate;
you can ask anyone who was present (except, perhaps, Milton
Friedman, the anarcho-capitalists, and the supporters of Stan
Evans, none of whom can really be considered objective).
The only thing that still bafles me is the letter I received from
an anarchist who said he thinks it is the best thing of mine he
has ever read. This annotated version of the talk appeared
in the conservative journal, Modern Age (Spring, 1971 j, and
it was reprinted in an odd, but delightful, little journal,
Schism: A Journal of Divergent American Opinions (Sum-
mer, 1971).]
The debate between traditionalists and libertarians within the
American Right has been going on for the last decade. This division,
which was implicit from the beginnings of Young Americans for
Freedom (YAF) and Intercollegiate Studies Institute (1S1), has now
broken out into open institutional warfare with the formation of the
Libertarian Alliance during the summer of 1969. Like so much of
the current intellectual strife in America, the Vietnam war issue
served as a catalyst. Pacifist libertarians who are opposed to con-
scription could no longer tolerate the implications of what they regard
as the new American imperialism. Cold War conservatives who long
ago abandoned the earlier isolationist heritage of traditional American
conservatism have not been willing to sacrifice the struggle against
international Communism ,merely for the sake of lower national
budgets and libertarian ideology. An anti-Communism that is based
on the concept of military superiority cannot easily be conformed to
the older goal of a limited State; the technology of warfare demands
too much money and too much centralized planning.
225