Consequentialist libertarianism refers to the view that liberty leads to favorable consequences, such as prosperity or efficiency, and for that reason should be supported, advocated, and maximized.^[1] It is contrasted to deontological libertarianism, also known as "rights-theorist libertarianism," "natural rights libertarianism," or "libertarian moralism" which considers the initiation of force and fraud to be immoral, regardless of consequences.^[2][3]

Unlike deontological libertarians, consequentialist libertarians do not necessarily see all cases of initiation of force as immoral and never see it as inherently immoral. Rather, their position is that political and economic liberty lead to the best consequences in the form of happiness and prosperity, and for that reason alone it should be supported. Unlike libertarian moralists, who limit their advocacy to that which does not constitute initiation of force, consequentialists advocate actions and institutions they believe maximize liberty regardless of whether these constitute initiation of force. For this reason, they are less likely to be anarchists than deontological libertarians.^[4][5]

Milton Friedman, David D. Friedman, Ludwig von Mises^[6] and Friedrich Hayek^[7][8][9] are consequentalist libertarians, who use utilitarian consequentialist arguments to justify libertarian philosophies.

Some libertarians may have a conception of libertarianism that is a hybrid of consequentialism and deontology.^[1]

[edit] References