The author makes a big deal of confronting moral degeneracy, and assumes that ending the welfare state will accomplish this. This may be true to a degree, as the welfare state is sort of a 'no questions asked' subsidy for the destructive activity which often characterizes the dependents. Private charity is more likely to demand certain behavioral standards for its benefits.
There is a conundrum of conservatism, which is that economic liberty tends to degrade the culture. There is a strong profit motive for titillation, cheap thrills,'pushing the envelope', and a destructive aesthetic of 'cool' over quality. Not to mention the profit motive for exploitation, cheating, etc.
The ultimate check on this is a moral code and self-restraint of individuals in the face of perverse incentives. A cultural environment which discourages bad behavior can also serve this end, but it's somewhat at odds with the 'live and let live' ethos of libertarianism.
Ultimately, I don't think this libertarian offers a compelling answer to the cultural rot that seems to be his primary concern.
Precisely. What is conservative about Viacom teaching your daughter to dress like Britney Spears ? What is conservative about its open sympathy for the sodomite cause ? MTV has done more for sodomite rights than any politician ever did.
During the 60's this was called the Cultural Contradiction of Capitalism. That mass media advertising inevitably destroyed the "Poor Richard's Almanac", 1750 Scottish Presbyterian values that had nurtured capitalism in the first place. Consumer capitalism devours the moral consensus that a libertarian society would need.
Agreed. but keep in mind that while libertarians can as individuals have a strong part in reducing as well as eliminating cultural rot. But as libertarians, they cannot even optionally help in such reduction or elimination, as libertarianism has nothing direct to say about it.