1. I tend to agree with the sceptics movement in their rigorous defence of science but I am somewhat ….can I say it…sceptical…..about their use of logical positivist arguments in tackling the question of God’s existence. In this sense my position is similar to the well known mathematics promoter and critical thinker Martin Gardiner.
2. Classical Liberalism in my opinion balances both the excesses of the left and the right very well, taking the strong points from each philosophy and rejecting the nonsense (which abounds on both sides). In short it champions valuable tradition and human freedom while making a strong argument for necessary government.
3. I was attracted to Libertarianism several years ago but ultimately rejected its narrow outlook and recourse to selfishness…like Marxism its emphasis on utopianism is dangerous. Nevertheless the contribution by Libertarian thinkers such as Friedman, Nozick, Van Mises and Hayek (who would reject the label) are critical to effective economic thinking. Ron Paul and the Cato crowd best exemplify the Libertarian tradition today but I find that their tendency to dismiss the flow of history at the expense of the wealth index problematic and not conducive to a thorough understanding of the human condition.
4. Victor Davis Hanson and George Jonas are two thinkers who characterize the Classical Liberal tradition. Both are ardent defenders of Western Civilization and have a deep understanding of the ongoing struggle against totalitarianism – whether it be socialist, Marxist, national socialist, fascist or Islamist. Others who encapsulate the Classical Liberal tradition are Charles Johnson and David Frum.
5. Classic Liberals are not to be confused with neo-conservatives. While leading neo-conservative thinkers: Leo Strauss and Scoop Jackson are off shoots of the Classic Liberal tradition they tend to be more interventionist with respect to foreign policy than are pure Classic Liberals.