Don Bordeaux, from Cafe Hayek, writes some interesting thoughts on self reflection in The Freeman.
Quite frequently, I hear, “How do you justify working at a state university and holding libertarian views? That’s hypocritical!”
Many libertarians and other small government-minded people deal with this question. I, myself, meet this accusation frequently because I attended a state university and working for a sector that is funded almost entirely by the federal government. I this his answer is satisfactory:
But the State is involved, and heavily. This involvement makes it artificially difficult for private schools to thrive. So should educators and researchers who oppose such involvement as a matter of principle content themselves to teach only at the very small number of schools that get no government funds? And should those libertarian educators and researchers who can find no employment at such schools find some other occupation, even if it’s likely that they can contribute more to the cause of freedom by teaching and researching than by abandoning that career?
Although my recommendations for policy would create outcomes substantially different than what we have, would critics suggest I pretend that I’m living in that world rather than the one that actually exists? If I did so, I would not be doing work that I love, neither would I be putting myself in a position where I can attempt to change it. For libertarians, our best option is to work within the system so we can transform it. We need an evolution in the role of government, not radical revolution.
Government incentives obviously work to effect behavior, even when the people have rational expectations about the outcome (I think game theory has some interesting explanations about why this may be so). From the perspective of the liberty-minded individual:
Another consideration turns on the distinction between choosing rules and choosing how to act within a given set of rules. It would be a clearer case of unethical behavior on my part if I voted for further government involvement in higher education than if I simply accepted the reality of that involvement–a reality unlikely to be changed any time soon. I can legitimately say, “I would arrange education differently, but because that power is not mine, it’s okay for me to work for a government school even though I would prefer that such things not exist. I don’t make the rules.”
This argument, too, has some merit. But it also has a weakness: Society’s rules often are changed by persons who refuse on principle to accept what seems inevitable. “Playing by the rules” is not a free ticket to violate your ethical norms.