Jonathan Rauch
 

  I’ve been out of touch for a few days. While I was gone, Harry Mitchell shook up his congressional staff, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio appears to be on his way out as the contract police chief for Guadalupe and some wacky, spring-like weather rolled into the East Valley.

   I was attending an event in San Antonio called Freedom School. Hosted by the Tribune’s parent company, Freedom Communications, this training seminar is designed to remind editors and opinion writers about the core libertarian values that guide the company and to discuss how this philosophy can be applied to current political and cultural issues.
   Two prominent speakers were Freedom School favorites, Tom Palmer, who oversees the Cato Institute’s efforts to create a libertarian movement around the world, and Timothy Sandefur, a public-interest lawyer for libertarian causes.
   But my favorite speaker was Jonathan Rauch, a columnist for National Journal and Atlantic Monthly and a guest scholar at the Brookings Institute. Rauch, raised in Paradise Valley, was invited to provide a constructive critique of modern libertarian thinking.
   Rauch said he generally likes the goals of limiting government power, promoting expansive civil liberties and protecting a bright line between church and state. But libertarians, especially activists in the Libertarian Party, have become their own worst enemies, he said.
   Libertarians don’t celebrate small victories, and demand a dramatic return to a government modeled after the 1780s or mid-1800s. Such a view is completely crazy for a world power in the 21st century, he said.
   “A philosophy that fundamentally impractical is fundamentally flawed,” Rauch said.
   Ed Crane, founder and president of the Cato Institute, tried to counter Rauch’s comments with the argument that the New Deal of the 1930s was a radical transformation of the role of American government that took place virtually overnight. Why can’t such a tidal shift take place again back toward government structure that the founding fathers originally intended?
   Rauch pointed out all governments tend to grow size and power, and they build up collections of special interests that are entrenched to keep things that way. That’s certainly is the case in this country.
   “Trimming government back to the pre-New Deal model is complete fantasyland,” Rauch said.
  Tom Palmer made a stronger case when he said people need to be presented with a strong vision of change to be motivated to act in any direction. He called it “realistic idealism.”
   “People won’t move, they won’t donate, they won’t volunteer to pursue reasonable alternatives. They are motivated by ideals,” Palmer said.
  Finally, Tibor Machan, Freedom Communications’ in-house libertarian philosopher, made an interesting point near the end of Freedom School:
   “Being libertarian doesn’t mean you are for small government, but for a government that is limited in scope.”