As I describe in my new memoir, A Life for Liberty: The Making of an American Originalist, I have identified as a libertarian since I was a junior in college. I still do. But for at least the past 10-15 years, I have felt that libertarianism as a political theory needed to be updated. In that same time period, I have noticed a growing schism among libertarians along lines that is difficult to define precisely. In recent years, many of those on one side of that schism, some of whom I have known since they were students, have started to avoid that label. I think that is premature. I believe libertarianism, with its core emphasis on individual freedom, remains a viable political philosophy that is superior to what is on offer from either progressives or conservatives, most of which is not systematic. As "national conservatives" have perceived, it is also at the core of those whose conservatism is based on liberty.
On Law & Liberty, I have a short essay entitled, Libertarianism Updated, discussing five possible areas where libertarianism could use some further development. I plan to develop these ideas into a future book. But because I write books, first and foremost, to discover what I think about ideas, these thoughts are still highly tentative–and I list them in descending level of confidence. That is, I feel more confident about the earlier points than the later.
This is from the beginning:
