Last Wednesday, Professor of Economics Richard Adelstein gave a lecture entitled “Parties of Ideas in American Politics: Why Libertarians and Socialists Can’t Get Elected.” In this lecture, he described the difference between “parties of ideas,” like the Libertarian and Socialist parties, and “parties of politics and power,” like the Democratic and Republican parties.

According to Adelstein, the Libertarian and Socialist parties have been less successful than the Democratic and Republican Parties because they have primarily focused on abstract ideologies. The two main parties, on the other hand, have focused on achieving political influence, allowing them to play much larger roles in all aspects of American politics.

“Americans have never disagreed strongly with one another about political and economic fundamentals,” Adelstein argued. “Almost every American believes in limited democratic government and individual rights that predate the government….The only times in American history where a party of ideas have arisen are when the fundamentals of American life were up for grabs.”

Adelstein then moved from the current political situation to a discussion of the history of the classical liberalist philosophy, which constituted the majority of his lecture. He summed up the classical liberal view of government into three points.

“[First,] the government is nothing abstract, mystical or majestic,” he said. “[Second,] the government doesn’t represent a grand idea. It is merely there to protect our property rights…[third,] if the government breaches its contract, we can brush it aside and move on.”

These three points were derived from the writings of the political philosopher John Locke, which heavily influenced the ideology of the Founding Fathers. However, as the United States became industrialized, Locke’s ideas were largely replaced with those of the Romantic Nationalist writers, specifically Hegel. This shift led to the creation of what Adelstein called “the national interest.” He argued that this term has been used to exaggerate the level of support for the war.

“Congress and the White House say this war [in Iraq] is in the national interest,” he said. “There is no abstract body called the American national interest…the problem is that nobody will say the American national interest is a fiction.”

Adelstein defined himself as a classical liberal, but noted that there is a fundamental problem with this philosophy. Classical Liberalism is founded on the idea that the rights to liberty and property are given to every man by God, an argument no longer usable in today’s political arena.

“The only candidate that would say our rights come from God is Mike Huckabee, and, well, we all know he’s a jerk,” Adelstein said.

Adelstein concluded that classical liberals cannot rely on the current Libertarian Party to advocate their goals. In Adelstein’s eyes, there has been only one real left-winged libertarian in this era: Ralph Nader.