Authors
Abstract
This paper critiques the growing tendency among some libertarians, particularly those influenced by national-conservatism, to treat individual liberty and property rights as culturally contingent “Western” values unsuitable for export beyond the West. The authors argue that libertarianism is inherently cosmopolitan: it posits universal, inalienable rights of self-ownership and property that apply to all individuals regardless of nationality, culture, or tradition.
Drawing on FA Hayek, the paper rejects the nation-state’s claim to collective “self-determination” through majoritarian legislation, favouring instead universal rules of just conduct (cosmos) over particularistic commands (taxis). National-conservative critiques – that libertarianism undermines tradition, community, and non-Western values – are countered by showing that libertarian principles accommodate voluntary associations, intermediary institutions, and cultural diversity, while requiring only that no group impose its vision on others.
The authors advocate reviving Hayek’s vision of an interstate (international) federal libertarianism. Such a federation would promote free trade and movement, diffuse economic power, limit central planning through heterogeneity, and empower individuals and minorities via easier exit options and polycentric governance. Far from centralising authority, it would enforce decentralisation and constrain tyrannical policies at both federal and state levels.
The paper defends a “muscular” libertarianism against charges of “imperialism.” It argues that refusing tyrants the right to oppress – enforcing liberty where possible, including through measured intervention – is not imperialism but a consistent application of libertarian principles. Historical examples, especially the British Empire’s role in abolishing slavery, spreading rule of law, property rights, and free trade, illustrate how empires can advance liberty when guided by cosmopolitan ideals. Sustainable multi-state federations, by necessity, tend toward tolerance and decentralisation to manage diversity.
In conclusion, libertarians should reject reflexive chauvinism and confidently insist that, to tyrants, the answer is “no.” A cosmopolitan interstate federation best aligns with libertarian universalism, offering a framework for maximal voluntary experimentation within a protected sphere of individual rights. Libertarianism’s decline stems not from its ideas’ failure, but from a loss of confidence in their universal applicability. Reviving muscular, cosmopolitan libertarianism is essential to counter authoritarian resurgence.