Response-ability

A libertarian manifesto for the world we are living in

We often discuss liberty as a political goal or an economic framework. But as we navigate a world that feels increasingly fragmented and unpredictable, I have come to believe that the most vital frontier is the territory of our own agency. I want to share a perspective on what it means to be a libertarian in the world today, not merely as a set of policy positions, but as a way of living grounded in our ability to respond, or as some may refer to “response-ability.”

The Foundation: Agency

The greatest threat we face is not merely the encroachment of the state, but the cognitive, social, and moral decay that stems from powerlessness. When we feel we have no choice, we begin to seek comfort from heroes, strongmen, or savior.

The antidote is not a futile attempt to control the world, but a radical ownership of how we interpret and respond to it.

We are solely responsible for the models we use to make sense of our experiences. When those models fail, the responsibility to correct them is ours. This is not a burden; it is the foundation of every possibility we seek to create. To own our responses is to believe that we are not fixed that a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world around us can reveal options that were previously invisible.

To thrive in this landscape, I propose we ground our advocacy in three essential capacities:

• Adaptability: Opting for flexibility over rigid, long-term planning. In a world of constant change, the ability to pivot is more valuable than the ability to predict.

• Optionality: Focusing on arrangements that preserve and expand our ability to exit. Freedom is the presence of alternatives; if a system doesn’t allow for a “Plan B,” it does not truly serve a free person.

• Scalability: Highly scalable ideas can have profound impacts, but theorizing without testing is a dangerous form of self-indulgence. Complex models are seductive because they offer the illusion of understanding without the “friction” of reality. To remain honest, we must validate our ideas in small, modular forms within the messy reality of daily life before attempting to commit to them at a societal scale.

In domains like economics and politics, where changes are often chaotic, we must bind ourselves against our own future rationalizations. This means specifying in advance what would count as a disconfirmation of an idea and closing the “escape routes” we often use to rescue failing hypotheses.

The Anchors: Values

Ultimately, why do we fight for freedom? I do not pursue agency for its own sake. I pursue it because agency allows me to provide joyful, secure, and flourishing outcomes for those I love.

Love is empathy taken to its extreme, the aspiration to feel what another feels so completely that the boundary between minds dissolves. This is not sentimentality; it is the deepest form of understanding and the very thing that makes human cooperation possible. We are not isolated optimizers; we are individuals capable of shared empathy and non-zero sum coordination.

Anything diminishes our capacity to love, to empathize, or to build a shared life, then it has become parasitic and must be cut away. This is the test for our actions and our thoughts.

Finally, three timeless principles should guide how we think and act:

1. Be Real: Reality does not negotiate. We must have the courage to discard a belief when evidence contradicts it, treating our models as provisional tools rather than sacred texts. Congruence with reality must always take precedence over social approval or the comfort of a familiar narrative.

2. Be Open: There are always unknowns to be discovered. Hubris blinds us to what is possible and limits our potential. Openness is not about accepting everything as valid, but about leaving room for the possibility that our views, models, and understanding are limited or even invalid.

3. Be Kind: Kindness is the acceptance of imperfection. Instead of moral condemnation, which rarely changes hearts, we should analyze systems. When things go wrong, we must ask: “What structure or incentive created this outcome?” Systems can be improved; character flaws are rarely the most useful unit of analysis. We must also practice “tactical empathy.” This is the discipline of entering another’s frame of reference to understand their worldview before offering an alternative. A position that appears foolish from the outside is often a rational response to a problem we do not yet understand. We should seek to understand the “why” before we challenge the “what.”

Only through genuine interactions between high-agency individuals, through voluntary exchange (the market), and free associations (civil society) can we hope for new possibilities. Humanity progresses not through heroes, strongmen, or saviors, but through the gradual evolution of how people see the world and the discovery of previously unknown factors. The ability to alter and relax constraints is how freedom creates the conditions for personal growth and human flourishing.