There are various different definitions we can and could use of the “hard right”. Goosestepping through Nuremberg, or even desiring to, would be one useful enough such definition. Scrapbooks with detailed plans for invading Poland perhaps another. Advocating that consenting adults should be allowed to ingest as they wish, bonk as they wish and partake in voluntary exchange as they wish isn’t really a useful definition of that hard right.
Except it’s the one that is being used:
Former Tory MP Nick Boles, who quit the party over his colleagues’ failure to compromise on Brexit, tweeted: “The hard right has taken over the Conservative Party. Thatcherites, libertarians and No Deal Brexiters control it top to bottom.”
The hard right has taken over the Conservative Party. Thatcherites, libertarians and No Deal Brexiters control it top to bottom. Liberal One Nation Conservatives have been ruthlessly culled. Only a few neutered captives are being kept on as window dressing. 1/
— Nick Boles MP (@NickBoles) July 24, 2019
That from a self described progressive conservative which shows how confused Yer Man is.
Quite why libertarians are described as hard right is difficult to work out. They – we perhaps – are only a shading of classical liberals who historically have always been on the left. Just the left that hasn’t made the centralising, planning, mistake. The point being that markets work, they deliver those traditional liberal goals of greater freedom, greater liberty, make the poor rich and all that. The difference between classical liberals and progressive liberals really being that the former – us again – advocate policies which actually work, progressives not so much.
Certainly that’s how I see myself, as someone on the left. Just someone who argues for the policies which actually do deliver. Think on it a moment. The average inhabitant of a place which has been roughly capitalist and roughly free market for more than a couple of decades is very much better off than an inhabitant of a place which has never been either or both. We’ve also never had any form of governance which is other than roughly capitalist and roughly free market which has achieved that goal of making the average person that better off.
Thus, logically, if we share that traditionally lefty goal of making the average person better off then we must be roughly capitalist and roughly free market. It’s simple empiricism, isn’t it?
And quite why that makes us hard right I don’t know. I mean I’ve been to Russia and it’s really not worth invading.