Learning from those libertarian weirdoes.

AuthorGillespie, Nick
PositionEditor's Note - Editorial

BACK IN MARCH, the New York Post--the newspaper started by Alexander Hamilton some 200 years ago and infamous for headlines such as "Headless Body in Topless Bar"--gave an upbeat, though slightly bemused, review of Choice: The Best of Reason, our recent anthology.

"If Jane Fonda and Alan Greenspan ever decided to go into business together and start a kick-ass, no-holds-barred political magazine, it might look a little something like Reason," suggested the review, which also appreciated our "weird, cross-wired political views."

There's little question that Fonda and Greenspan could learn a lot from each other. The Oscar-winning actress and lefty activist clearly could pick up a few pointers about market economics from the Federal Reserve Board chairman. And there seems to be equally little doubt that Greenspan might benefit from the aerobics program that Fonda marketed so successfully during the 1980s.

reason's politics appear "cross-wired" if you conceive of politics in terms of increasingly tired notions of right-wingers vs. left-wingers. Since 1968 we've worked to present a uniquely libertarian perspective on politics and culture, one that makes a case for individual freedom in all areas of human activity and reframes debate in terms of choice vs. control.

That's why liberals can root with us on some issues (censorship, say, and gay marriage) and conservatives on others (guns and most economic regulation). Such "cross-wired" views also explain why we're likely the only magazine that has drawn kudos from Rush Limbaugh (he's called us a "good, good magazine") and the ACLU ("a valued ally" and "a principled, passionate defender of free speech").

But does...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT