Thomas DiLorenzo’s Politics

During my series commenting on Thomas DiLorenzo’s 2008 interview with Brian Lamb, it was evident that aside from claims about “court historians,” a “church of Lincoln,” and a “Lincoln cult,” Dr. DiLorenzo was interested in the political leanings of certain Lincoln scholars.  But what about his own?  After all, if DiLorenzo interprets people’s historical perspectives based upon his assessment of their political perspectives, it stands to reason that he should be subjected to like treatment.

Dr. DiLorenzo’s never made a secret of his libertarianism or his advocacy of the Austrian school of economics.  That in itself does not get us very far, although it helps highlight his concern about government action, the growth of central government, and certain policies.  But he says more than that.

For one thing, he has some very nice things to say about the League of the South, which he claims “advocates peace and prosperity in the tradition of a George Washington or a Thomas Jefferson.”  He cites with approval a book that argued against the constitutionality of Brown v. Board of Education: “The Supreme Court ‘set itself above the Constitution’ for what the majority believed was a good cause. Constitution schmonstitution.”  In 2004, he told Southern Partisan: “No one is proposing anything near constitutional government. I consider the act of voting to be treasonous to the Constitution. I’m not going to vote.”

He embraces the notion of secession, seeing it as being as the heart of the American Revolution; he believes that “secession is not only possible but necessary if any part of America is every to be considered ‘the land of the free’ in any meaningful sense.”  Libertarians, he believes, should embrace the Confederate flag.

One can read these and more opinions at this very useful compilation of DiLorenzo’s views on  Enjoy.

5 thoughts on “Thomas DiLorenzo’s Politics

  1. Lyle Smith March 6, 2011 / 9:23 am

    DiLorenzo forgets to mention the Confederate battle flag being an emblem of Jim Crow. That’s why Libertarians won’t ever embrace the Confederate battle flag.

  2. Al Mackey March 6, 2011 / 10:35 am

    This has been a great series, Brooks. Thanks for taking the time away from your other projects to do this.

    • Marc Ferguson March 6, 2011 / 11:10 am

      I agree, it’s been enlightening and enjoyable.

  3. Chuck Brown March 6, 2011 / 12:43 pm

    I’ve enjoyed reading your posts, Brooks. Thanks for taking the time to do this.

  4. ricardobensafed August 17, 2012 / 4:40 am

    Interestingly, let me add a quote from a British Libertarian, on the civil war to help to compare and contrast the perspectives of a CW Historian with other Libertarian pov. Dr. Sean Gabb, of the Libertarian Alliance wrote:” by Sean Gabb
    > I have been asked by several of my American readers to comment on their
    presidential election. I did think to ignore these requests. Having spent very
    little time there, I cannot be regarded as an expert on America. Nor am I
    particularly fond of the place. I think its war of independence was brought on
    less by the Stamp Act than by Lord Mansfield’s judgement on the illegality of
    slavery at common law. I also think its war between the states was won by the
    wrong side. It would have been better for humanity had the Union been broken up and its member states made into British satellites. Sadly, the United States
    survived, and was able to grow into the mercantilist oligarchy that took the
    most significant – because ultimately the most successful – place in the
    triumvirate, with Soviet communism and European national socialism, that ended
    the hegemony of English liberalism.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s