There is no reason to think that the state will be a responsible steward of our culture. Our cultural history gives us every reason to believe that capitalism will continue to provide the diversity and quality of forms that we have come to take for granted.
Whether arising from the direct reduction of violence through the state’s capacity as the keeper of order, or as an accidental adaptation built on a tendency for the strong to exploit the weak, the rise of the state is associated a reduction in violence and increase in conditions that are favorable for trade and growth. At a time when the milk of human morality was only reserved for one’s closest kin, the reduction in violence brought on by the brute force of the state allowed for the development of commerce and culture that has since made the state irrelevant.
Despite its popularity, the theory of patriarchy leaves much to be desired in explaining gender relations and outcomes. It is not hard to look at society and see how culture exploits women. What is more concealed, and in many ways, more interesting, is considering how culture exploits both men and women. The trade-offs that led to this dual exploitation was ultimately for the good of both groups.
The concept of demographic privilege is quickly gaining traction on college campuses as the prevailing paradigm through which race and class scholars analyze social inequality. This philosophy has had an interesting, and concerning, effect on its adherents’ styles of discussing ideas and considering alternative points of view.
The perennial problem of the male-skewed gender ratio within the libertarian movement may not be as perplexing or as unique as it first appears. To understand why so few women identify as libertarian, we need to understand the social trade-offs that they face when publicly supporting any radical ideology. Fortunately, this is one problem that is probably solving itself.