Liberty activist Michael Maresco suggests on his Facebook page that Ron Paul receive the Cato Institute’s annual “Friedman prize for advancing liberty.” Considering Cato’s tentative relationship with Ron Paul-type libertarians, and some downright vitriolic exchanges between excellent libertarian scholars from both the Mises and Cato Institues, giving the high-profile, unequivocally principled Paul the award would not only be more than justified, but helpful for mending some damaged fences.
Now, this shouldn’t (seriously) be interpreted as a knock on Cato or Catoites. I’m well aware that the “feud” between the two libertarian camps is long-standing, I respect Cato’s immense and principled contributions to liberty, and understand that they’re two sides to every story. But unless Cato’s New Year’s Resolution is to cling onto old grudges and secure Beltway cocktail party invites, they ought to reach out to give Paul the Friedman Award to reach out to the growing constituency of anti-state, anti-war, anti-PC libertarians.
Since young libertarians obviously veer in that direction, and since young people are, of course, the future, these sort of anti-establishment libertarians are going to be the ones leading any sort of future movement. But Cato scholars — we want you to be front and center in all of this fun.
We stand ready to listen and learn from your experience and expertise, as well as support you in any way we can. It’s difficult to do that, however, when Cato refuses to embrace Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Tom Dilorenzo, Stephan Kinsella, Tom Woods, and any other libertarian who may not be “cultural cosmopolitans.” (whatever that means.)
The first step to demonstrating that you’re serious about this is giving Paul the Friedman prize. This is a priceless opportunity, dudes — Don’t blow it!Published in