If the editor had altered those words from "are only seen" to the more reasonable "are too often seen" I could agree with every word of that sentence. But the author is absolutist who by overstating his case loses it. Everyone of the sentiments expressed in the quoted sentence above can and should be applied to the reasoning foisting prohibition upon America and, therefore, the author's complaint against libertarianism misses the mark.
I define myself as a conservative with a pesky libertarian streak so I do not presume to speak on behalf of the disciples of Ayn Rand but there are certain obvious observations to make. The author describes the libertarian vision as though it were a series of atomic particles interacting only with contractual relationships and producing a mechanical, sterile, soulless society. As alternative he offers:
There is a big difference between this society and an organic vision of society, where members resemble a family and see themselves like living cells in the context of the whole body.
The author's vision comes dangerously close to those stirrings which motivate the left. I have written many times about the feeling of integration a leftist obtains by the submersion of himself into the embracing arms of liberalism, or, more accurately, the leftist group. He becomes subsumed into the collective and, of course, produces a collectivist model for society. Collectivist models for society fail because they fail to take into account the aspirations and interests of so many divers individuals and because inevitably they degenerate into a top down tyranny.
We have seen the results of collectivism around the world and it has murdered a hundred million people. We have seen the results of moralizing on behalf of society outlined in the quoted material at the top of this reply with the tragically failed experiment of prohibition. In my view, we are reliving prohibition now with an equally tragic war on drugs. If there are victims of drug abuse beyond the abuser himself, prohibition has taught us that we only amplify the harm done by corrupting the law and enriching organized crime. We do not create an "organic society" we create a nation of scofflaws.
It does not matter whether we use the airy fairy vocabulary of this author in describing the ends sought through moralizing by legislation or we use the jargon of old-time religion, eventually we have to come to terms with the idea that salvation is a retail sale between God and man and cannot be vouchsafed to him by any legislature, no matter how well intentioned.
