Thanks for the kind response, Kevin.

I welcome the description "principled libertarian" as high praise.  I think
that good uses of property are most likely to be developed by private owners
(consider the "problem of the commons"), and so would agree with Mr. South
that the land at Fort Monroe should be sold to private interests.  But not
necessarily to private developers.  I might be willing to support a private
effort to keep it as a valuable history site. 

The study of history is certainly valuable in part because it contributes to
our better character, as well as because of its intrinsic interest, and this
value is enhanced by its being public in the sense of publicly available.
But this does not imply that it should be a public good in the sense that it
is paid for by taxes.  Surely one of the lessons of history is the danger of
government being in control of ideas, and censoring or outlawing those with
which it disagrees.

You write that libertarians do not concern themselves with what it takes to
sustain a thriving republic.  Actually we think that thriving is best
accomplished in a world of liberty.

The only Tocqueville I've read is his Memoir on Pauperism, but I agree that
I should read more of him.

Sam



-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 10:52 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [VA-HIST] Ft Monroe & public funds

Sam--

Thank you for a thoughtful, and thought provoking, reply.

We can agree, I hope, that the free market libertarianism represented on
this list serv by, among others, Mr. South, is intellectually coherent and
principled.

I am open to be instructed here--I am by no means an expert on the fine
details of libertarian thought.  But to my knowledge, libertarians simply do
not concern themselves with the issue of the death of the republic; that is,
they do not examine with any great care the attitudes, dispositions, and
character necessary among citizens to sustain a thriving republic.  Rather,
they assume that so long as citizens pursue their own desires and
appetites--that is, strive to maximize their own utility--the public good
will ensue.

We care about this, with regard to the topics of Virginia History, because
public (collective, governmental) support for public history can not be
justified by libertarians.  Mr. South is correct, it seems to me, that if
you are a principled libertarian, you ought to transfer the land at Fort
Monroe (and at every other state supported public history site) to private
developers, to be used as they see fit.  

The ultimate justification for public history--and one that to my eye,
public historians often lose sight of--is that it merits public support
because it produces a public good.  Why, after all, does history matter?
One of the oldest, and still to my mind most important, justifications for
the dissemination of historical knowledge is because history contributes to
the development of the character of citizens, in such a fashion as to
promote the long term stability of the republic.  

Put another way:  libertarians just assume that the republic will endure,
and that they need waste no energy in examining what conditions allow for
that stability and endurance.  But by encouraging citizens to cultivate
their baser appetites and desires, they encourage egoism.  Egoism, in turn,
undermines the conditions that permit democracy to thrive.  If you have
never done so, you really owe it to yourself to read Tocqueville, who
analyzes this issue with some depth and perception.

So--having invoked Hayek, how do you think Hayek would answer Tocqueville?
And in answering Tocqueville, how would Hayek contribute to our conversation
about government support for public history?

All best,
Kevin

Kevin R. Hardwick, Ph.D.
Department of History
James Madison University

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.2/1743 - Release Date: 10/24/2008
8:33 AM

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html