>> coming up next, a discussion about modern libertarianism. after that, live coverage of the iowa state republican party convention in des moines with bobby jindal and rand paul. later, president obama delivering the commencement address at the university of california irvine. next, a discussion about libertarianism and today's politics, and how the move was influenced by barry goldwater. one of the speakers include an historian who as a little boy interviewed mr. goldwater in 1969, a reporter who follow the campaign of ronald paul -- of ron paul. this is one hour. and now it is my great pleasure to introduce our moderator, mr. brahm resnik.

[applause] brahm resnik is an anchor and reporter for 12 news, the nbc .ffiliate in phoenix he has reported on politics and government at the local, state, and federal levels, and has covered every policy issue of consequence in arizona from education to immigration. please give him a very warm welcome. [applause] >> great to be here. welcome to you all. can you hear me in back? everything working fine? good. let's start with introducing the panel. robert robb became an editorial columnist for the "arizona in 1999 and his columns generally appear three times a week. he also serves as a

distinguished associate for the su.rison institute at a robert robb. [applause] weigel,enter, david political reporter for slate. for most of his career, starting at "reason" magazine, he covered the conservative movement, and was one of the first reporters to embed with ron paul's residential campaign. >> yes. >> shout out to ron paul. a few of those tonight. [laughter] the rallyorted from in 2009. david weigel. [applause] >> to my far right, historian michael rubinoff has been an asu andlty member for 18 years first interviewed barry goldwater as a little boy in

1969. -- they met several more times including one of the final interviews goldwater granted before is a time in 1986. michael rubinoff. [applause] guys, a few these questions for you folks -- how many people in the audience voted for barry goldwater at least once? [laughter] ok. did anyone vote for him in 1964? any family members in the audience? barryd very junior -- junior was out of town. he was here yesterday. we can say whatever we want. [laughter] having awe are libertarian moment.

rand paul is being taken seriously as a presidential candidate. libertarians on the right and on the left see eye to eye on marijuana. is this a moment that there is -- is this a moment that barry goldwater help to create? >> i do not think there is any question about that. the historically important barry goldwater who wrote "conscious for conservative" and ran governor, established a liberal -- libertarian viewpoint on limited government, and a proper sense of federalism. the later barry goldwater and his reaction against the religious right help to lead the way to libertarianism on social

issues, which has formed, sort that does appeal to younger audiences, and also to what has been, historically, one of the swing votes in american politics -- people who are economically conservative, but socially progressive. >> david, i mentioned rand paul at the outset. i would like to hear your thoughts on that. who do you think that the capital today is the real air of barry goldwater? >> i do think rand paul is. he brings his politics in similar ways to his detriment and his advantage. more to his advantage because unlike barry goldwater, paul always expresses his version of libertarianism, privacy rights, restricting government, as a way to reach out to voters. he never calls it extremism. that theyepublicans have shrunk the party and the only way to reach out to young people is to move away from

social conservatism and things you were talking about. he repeats some of the mistakes because if you go back to his intimates -- i guess it was still the biggest mistake he made in politics -- when he stumbled about whether he voted -- would vote for the civil rights act, he made the same goldwater did as discredited something he would not oppose morally, but he had it because he did not want to force people to do the right thing. that is how goldwater put it in the argument was made that the civil rights act was unconstitutional. in a positiveir way. he is quotable. a lot of the politics goldwater mastered, he has mastered. he makes some of the same the stakes were he comes to the edge of libertarianism where he can not -- he cannot quite tell a

voter who is curious and not quite sure what they believe, that he will protect their rights. >> is that his political stance? is that what he really believes? >> i think it is. i have talked to him a lot. i talked to him on the 2007, 2008 campaign trail, and it is a utopian, libertarian view of the world than it is more popular than ever, more popular than when goldwater ran. the foreign policy site is so much easier for rand paul than it was for barry goldwater. he believes, as goldwater believed, that if you give people freedom, they will create a more perfect, more fair society. he has not made a ton of mistakes like the civil rights mistake since then. he learned in being aggressive to reach out to groups. also, he still believes that he

is personally convincing and those ideas are convincing. some of the same mistakes, more of the positive lessons have been imbued in rand paul. would walk goldwater the halls of the capitol today, what would you make of the place? [laughter] >> he would be disappointed. i think his problems would be stemming from the extreme partisan nature of today's senate, and gone was the collegiality that he had known when he came in in 1963. i remember having a meeting related to goldwater with george 1986,rn, and this was in and he said to me that the goldwater who came back to washington after 1969 was far different than the goldwater who had been the crusading conservative senator and presidential candidate.

he said he was once the most partisan of men, but he said after 1964, something happened, and he simply became different. that is probably, maybe where goldwater would differ with things today because he wanted to get things done when he went back to washington for his last three terms. today, he would say they not getting anything done. >> dig deeper on that. the common wisdom is carl hayden was the workhorse, barry goldwater was the show horse. i did not see too many legislative accomplishments you could link to very well -- barry goldwater. i could be wrong. correct me. what was it that changed him -- the loss, the defeat, or something else going on, and what about the legislative piece? >> goldwater biographer's, and a number of them, lee edwards, john judas, richard goldberg,

they have noticed the presidential campaign where people trashed him beyond belief , where he said if everyone had said these things to me and i believe that, i would believe i was not. s.think when he -- nuty i think when he went back to , he said to people that i went into politics to pay the rent. he legislative did do that -- legislatively did that with the change of the control structure of the pentagon with the nichols-goldwater fact that he and that change things in the pentagon for that it is moving mobley -- more smoothly to integrate all of the armed services as opposed to where it stood before 1986. >> let's stay in the present. we'll go back to the past and a moment. everyone will have a chance to ask questions later on in the

discussion. today, barry goldwater has become almost a utterly hero to cuddily -- connolly -- hero to liberals. they like his stance on abortion, gay rights. do they have it all wrong? [laughter] >> there are three distinct phases of goldwater as a public figure and as a politician. the historically important barry ofdwater, the author "conscious of a conservative," the presidential candidate in very much a hard-right, libertarian conservative. he advocated eliminating the federal role in agriculture and in education and general social welfare programs.

he also was an insurgent. wroteke scornfully and scornfully about me too republicanism. even though he supported eisenhower over taft, he referred to eisenhower's warmed .ver new deal-ism he was hard right and an insurgent. he ultimately became an establishment republican figure, probably best illustrated by his and/or smit of gerald ford over by hisreagan -- endorsement of gerald ford over ronald reagan. then, in his senatorial career, in reaction to the rise of the social right -- roe v wade was not until 1973. the u.s. supreme court decision

striking down school prayer was in 1962. so, the historically important barry goldwater did not really deal with those issues, and in 1980 actually ran as a pro-life candidate. it was not until the latter part that he developed this antagonism toward the social right and its influence on the republican party. then, the third phase of his career, rather than cuddily, i would say an iconic curmudgeon. cuddilyerly -- curmudgeon. >> he was an historically important figure, and the american people, over time, developed an affection for those iconic characters, those important historical figures,

even if they were busy denouncing them at the time that actually had some degree of political importance. >> so they are remembering the .eriod -- the later period michael, you follow these closely. you agree with the? -- with that? >> i think he nailed it. there are several phases. if there is something i can pick saying,at david was with rand paul, barry goldwater could speak with incredible self-righteousness which was noted in "the making of the president" in 1964, where he sounded like an old testament-type of profit, and if anyone comes closest to that in a homing time -- call me and

g kind ofay -- calmin way it would be rand paul. people thought barry goldwater was far right, and for this time that is probably where it was. mainstream, it is a very meandering stream. i think rand paul is a refinement of that. it is a different age with, you done, whereasing goldwater, he was not as exposed until the media got on him in 1964 and then bingo, we had all sorts of earthquakes. >> is senator paul the kinder face of libertarianism, and also, how does he handle the social issues? goldwater interpreted

this, socialism did not exist in the beginning of his career swayed -- roe v .ade and then until the 1970's rand paul is able to exist when the opposite has happened, and the momentum, poll number results, all of the factors that sade social conservative limited to gay marriage and abortion, all of that made it a winning issue for the party, and rand paul won elections in 2010, and since then he has seen support for gay marriage surging. he has gone to states that might decide whether to vote for him as president in a relative -- republican primary and say up to the media happens to like that.

he is riding a wave that goldwater really did not get to ride. now, with the media, it is pretty similar. the media coverage of goldwater, in the 1990's was always from the frame of one republican telling it like it was, the same way rand paul is able to handle it. the difference is rand paul is on the ascent and republican party that worries that if it is that hard right on social issues they cannot win. >> let's bring up foreign policy because there's some -- seems to be a distinct difference between goldwater and paul. talk about that and how paul interprets it. correct he rejects -- >> he rejects the term isolationist. as well, rejected it and there's a lot of video if he runs as president really freely

associated -- freely associating why we intervene, etc.. it happens that he has really taken off, again, on the right, since people turned against the war in afghanistan, against the surveillance state, development basically from 2009 and 2013. drone warfare, when he started talking about it, not terribly unpopular, not terribly known. he managed to describe, as a --oretical opposition to it many americans might have been vaguely aware that spying was happening, that jones were being were being used. he put it in a framework that -- if you were a republican at that time trying to come up with the best message for the party, you would probably come up with are

doing with americans that they should worry that they will be targeted or spied on by this technology, but it has become quite popular. i have been in a lot of republican meetings and i have found republican meetings, conventions, conferences, things like that, attacking the nsa as an applause line, the approach to afghanistan as an applause line, and in the mississippi election, i would go to tea party meetings where they were trying to overthrow a conservative senator, and at the meetings they would speak about how america should not send people into a mission like afghanistan again erie it paul -- again. emerge --appened to goldwater was running for president before we escalated vietnam. on theul is emerging scene after 13 years of greater intervention in the world, greater fatigue with that at home, and putting it in a way that makes sense immediately to

libertarianism -- libertarians. to the surprise of a lot of people, it is more effective. >> what would have barry goldwater made of drones, the national security state that we seem to be living in? difficult to discern or predict. back to where the natural libertarian position is, isolationism -- is not isolationism if you support free trade and integration, which most libertarians do. but there was an interruption. that is sort of a natural ground for libertarians and the canada u.s. role in the world, that we should turn to the founders vision of being a peaceful trading nation.

core libertarian conservatives in the 1960's until the collapse of the soviet union in the late-19 80's, and early-19 90's, was that this was a different threat. that expansionary communism was just different, and it required an aggressive u.s. response, and in fact, barry goldwater and libertarian conservatives of the time objected to the bipartisan foreign-policy of containment to try to keep the soviet union from expanding so that it would collapse naturally from its own internal contradictions. instead, they advocated a where wen approach, should actively be trying to undermine and liberate, particularly the captive nations, in eastern europe. row --was very much a anti-communist

guy, and probably facing that constantsld have fairly aggressive surveillance, including internally, but without that overwhelming threat, my guess is that his instinctive belief in individual freedom, privacy, in chesterton's praise our right to selves, that today he would be rand paul. threat, hesecurity felt were serious enough, and many conservatives feel that is true of terrorism, he might come to a different conclusion. >> we will go back in time, and part of the fun in preparing for this is i read "conscience of a conservative" for the first time and i found this headline from his election to the senate in

1952 when he defeated ernest mcfarland, a democrat. this is the headline from "the washington post." --stler tops politician,kind of fast talking, modern in the air , 1952. one of the achievements was bringing us the republican party that we have today to an extent, it isn't it michael? yes, it was not an age when people in arizona were inclined to vote for women governors, which shows just how far we have come.

[laughter] when he ran for u.s. senate in 1952. one thing that a lot of people do not probably realize is goldwater was already well-known from his grand canyon camping movie that he did in color. he had shown it right around -- all around the state before world war ii so that when he ran in 1952, people had known the barry goldwater. arizona was a small population back then. he seemed to be very tacky, and we know his hobbies of ham radio and flying jet aircraft, that way "thelly a very apt washington post characterized them at an early time. he was 43 years old. >> talk about his influence on the republican party. what did they see here, what do

they do to make the republican party the force that it is becoming? backgrounds family was that his uncle was a democrat in the arizona legislature, but goldwater went through a transition as he became a young man, goes into world war ii, and comes out. when the phoenix city charter was redone after the war, he joined on the team and is andted to the city council through a very interesting way of noting the fact that phoenix had been run rather corrupt, and they also said made it very efficient, and they did with low taxes and creating a more climate, andiness along with people like eugene, bob's free and current boss, and publisher of "the republic" ways back, and people that had vision -- developers, among others -- who had this vision for a

phoenix in a streamlined, postwar setting. spirit.r caught that it meant get government off of our backs. lean and mean. i do not know if that was libertarian or conservative. goldwater would prefer to use conservatives. he transforms the republican party as a version of himself. then these others get elected behind him. it is like a small club which basically chose its officials rooms.forth in the three the rumor barry goldwater was baptized in 1909 -- the room where barry goldwater was baptized in 1909. >> one of john rose's favorite coming was about barry

in to try to talk them into running for congress, and as john would relate the story, he told them but i do not want to go to washington, and they said do not worry about it, john, you will not win. [laughter] and what of the interesting things of that period, the post-war period, phoenix almost doubled in size. all of those new residents became republicans. >> not really. >> did they plant a seed there? >> they definitely planted a seed. barry goldwater did rewrite the history, but republicans did not gain more registrants than democrats in arizona until the , so arizona was

voting republican far quicker than it actually became registered republican as the plurality party. >> i want to take a closer look at his politics and start with the book "conscience of a conservative," and sat with the word conservatives and -- conservatives -- conservatives. a bunch oft republicans getting together to put him on the national stage. >> in those days, libertarian and conservative were nearly synonymous. the conservatism that was concocted in the hallways, the editorial rooms of "national review," had a very libertarian orientation with a belief that a airitual life was key to successful politics, and the conscious of -- and in "conscience of a conservative,"

goldwater echoed that sentiment. dissents an atheistic from that, but it was very much a minority. it was not until the development of social is use -- social issues that the split between libertarians and conservatives became pronounced and the terms ceased to be almost synonymous. >> here is the interesting thing in reading "conscience of a conservative." i thought if you tore the cover off the book, give it to me and told me -- without telling me who wrote it, i would say except for the military part it reads like a tea party manifesto, almost word for word what we hear today from t partiers. am i wrong on that? >> not at all, and the notion that barry goldwater did not

leave the republican party, the barryican party left goldwater ignores the historically important barry goldwater who advocated getting the government out of education, agriculture, welfare. in "conscience of a conservative " he expressed the point of view that what the constitution means is not just up to the u.s. supreme court to decide, which is one of the beliefs of the tea party that is routinely denounced to show how out of touch they are. so, i think the historically important barry goldwater has been lost in the remembrances of the iconic curmudgeon that he became later on in life. >> would you think about that? is the tea party the true heir of barry goldwater? mentioning lessons learned, and in a negative way, in the imagination of a

conservative activist, the the back ofn broke rockefeller republicans. and never quite built up that power again. the way george will always put it is goldwater won the election, but it took 15 years to count the votes. mention the things that do not exist because they did not exist yet because barry goldwater had not run and led a theslide that brought in democrats they give us medicare, medicaid, all of the urban programs, and a larger government that even reagan and george bush who did not try quite as hard as reagan, were not able to undermine. the one thing the tea party took from goldwater was that if you take over the party structure, and they can do that easier than ever with the way money and

politics work now, the way you can win a primary with reaching out to outside groups, and you will be proven right in the end even if you lose a couple of victories. i think they made that mistake again in 2009 by opposing obamacare completely, hoping they could grind down the senate . they made that mistake, and other actions have been lost -- other elections have been lost. more than that, the complete resistance to growing government, on the one hand they have shifted the debate to the right. on the other, they made this a mistake that was made in 1964, where you put -- i hate using these metaphors, but you go all in, and then you lose. you say to voters that 2011 is a referendum on obamacare. if we win, we will repeal it. you do not win, you do not repeal it. the ratchet effect of the growth of the state was not halted by a goldwater-state -- style campaign and it is not been

halted by a tea party-style campaign. >> i want to go to some of the troubling parts of his record. goldwater fell in with john birchers. at one point he said i need them politically. opposed the civil rights act. did not agree with brown versus the board of education. what does that tell us about the mark --hael question michael? >> i was at the gerald ford library doing research on ronald reagan in 2002 and i found a note that barry goldwater had handwritten to gerald ford in the fall of 1975 and it was very short and it said "i worry about some of the people backing reagan. some of them are absolutely nuts , and i know that because they were backing me in 1964." [laughter] so, he at least could take a of who his supporters

had been. [laughter] if you do read his comments on the john birch society from the 1960's, he was reluctant from jet -- to just throw them aside. one of his closest friends was an active member of the john burke society. will back that he away from the mass of the presidential campaign. it seemed as if the john burke society was in one direction and barry goldwater was in another. it might have been that he needed them in the caucuses that helped to get his nomination, but they also discover -- discarded him for other heroes after 1964. george wallace would loom big in 1968 and beyond. i think that was the parting of the ways, along with the fact that you mentioned the civil rights bill that he opposed

unconstitutional grounds. i do not know if history has proven him right or wrong. he might have been on the losing edge, but he was on the right edge of so many other things that i do not think we should begrudge him on this. i actually had a student wants when i was talking about goldwater who said a professor told her that barry goldwater was a segregationist, and i said i'm her, and i one of the few people that knew barry goldwater that you will ever meet and he was an integrationist, and his record was on supporting african-americans, and that is something that got lost. >> there was the political, the votes that he took, and there was a school here that he supported -- and correct me if i am wrong, it was one of the first two integrate. >> george washington carver. it is still used as a district

office. he competed -- contribute it to the urban league. he was an international guard. phoenix had a long segregated history. people do not realize that. goldwater was at the cutting edge of the end of world war ii. >> i think we're getting close to the time for audience questions. am i right, tonya? >> 10 more minutes. >> 10 moreutes -- minutes. [laughter] don't worry, a lot more where that came from. let's put barry goldwater in arizona in 2010, 1 of the experiments tonight, as b-10 70, where would barry goldwater have come down on that? again, the immigration issue developed in the 1990's and in

the 2000's there was bipartisan support for the 1986 immigration reform led by ronald reagan. alan simpson was one of the co-authors of it. i do not enqueue can project where goldwater would have -- i do not think you can project where goldwater would have been on it. my suspicion is he would have been on the side of arizona as a welcoming place, embracing its and would bege troubled about that, but on the other hand i do not know that he would be in different to -- in different to the effects of illegal immigration on local governments, and his strong sense of federalism would have rejected, or at least argued against the notion that this is problem,ly a federal which local governments are

powerless to do anything about. i think there are crosscurrents. >> michael, what you think about that? >> i would have to agree. i think barry goldwater would have said we should be welcoming, but he also would have said the state has its own rights, which i think he felt very deeply about. i think he would have been badly conflicted, as i think with a lot of issues, although i have to say, looking at things nationally, i think you would have thought that obamacare -- he would say god-awful. i think if you look at state issues, he would be tortured back and forth, and certainly on immigration, i think, he probably would have had some notethy -- you have to that he was very proud of his family's pioneering background from europe. i think he would say we have to be a welcoming society, not exclusion is. exclusionistss --

. heone of his legacies is helped to give republicans the southern strategy that helped turn the south republican. is he responsible for that? is lyndon johnson responsible for that in a backhanded way? >> actually, republicans were in in 1964. for anti-catholic reasons, republicans were able to crack the south. it was really nixon that was able to run -- campaign in 1966, run in 1968 as a centrist republican correction to goldwater. perfected the outreach to the south that appealed to what goldwater -- i do not think was appealing to.

goldwater had constitutional arguments that he asked for, .eiterated, believe in he believes and state rights without as many connotations. the nixon people understood the connotations and they really turned it read -- red. i think it was really republicans who saw how rapidly the south had fallen away and took advantage of successive cycles. you were talking about the way goldwater actually felt. he was replaced by strategists who lacked some of those better intentions. >> let's do a ron paul -- rand paul one surround. this is guy have a chance if he decides to run for president? he might be an election cycle or two premature. is abelieve that there growing sense of government's

demonstrated incompetence on a wide number of avenues. the social security disability fund will run out of iou's to reading, and the congress will have to decide what to do about that, and if nothing happens, social security disability benefits will be reduced. come face-to-face, with the in 2016, inadequate financing of the modern welfare state. the medicare hospital insurance trust fund will face the same 2020's, sothe early the country will have to face this moment, which will open the

door for someone who has a more radical view of the extent to which we need to cut back the size and the scope of government , and the march of time, i think, would stand well for acceptance of his noninterventionist foreign policy, and for his more socially progressive views within a republican primary. is he is premature 2020, 2024, someone with his set of views, and i think he is skillful at articulating them from particularly compared to his father -- [laughter] has a chance to see that month -- seize that moment. confront.me things to i think rand paul is in a good position shortage of it a direction that might be attractive over the course of

time. >> do you agree with that and are there other rand paul-types? >> the paul movement, the liberty movement, with a -- what as, preferred to be known challengen there is a by a candidate north of the chamber of commerce. fight against a guy by saying he does not bring enough money to the district. there'll be people in rand paul's wake. i think it is more likely than a candidate like rand paul, when of ait the white teeth vetting process will not hold up. you have seen people very confident and successful at other levels -- rudy giuliani,

people like that, melt a little bit, when they are in the frankly, sometimes stupid barrage of questions you get is a presidential candidate, the questions about your background, associations. has talked to the john birch society. he is going further from that. they are the sorts of associations -- remember, for a moment the church barack obama went to almost took him out. no, really. there will be problems with the way he deals with certain questions. who knows what will come up that he could fumble? i revert a time when we were covering rick perry's 20 point lead in the presidential primary and he who four questions -- he blew four questions and it

destroyed him. i think there is a bigger donor class that believes in these things, and the rising millennial vote, when you are asking them if government can't hack it, they have seen government as post-9/11 and obamacare. if they are not necessarily pure republican, their vote is sympathetic to someone who makes the rand paul case. finalal cut, michael -- word, michael? >> i think the issue that will come out is rand paul has a base that he picked up from his father and it was heavily subscribed to by younger people at universities and colleges and it was reminiscent of how barry goldwater was so well-received received when the young americans for freedom were helped in the 1960's and repel him through 1964.

younger people are five more -- they do notl -- have the patience for the current republican party. when you finally hit social security, you can be chairman of the party. ron paul did this as a congressman and his son is doing it. this helped to propel goldwater, who was a minority view in the republican party, so the minority view cap should the party and became the majority. that is the plan that has to be looked at. 2016,ht be too soon and but change the time and he could make a difference. >> you just made me remember that hillary was a goldwater girl when she was in her 20's. we will keep talking with your questions. >> we now have time to take questions from all of you. there are two of us with

microphones. we are recording this. it will be on the website first thing tomorrow morning. we are asking that you say your first and last name. c-span is also here. tonya has the first question right here. >> well, it is not exactly a question. it is a statement in a way. father, he ran against barry goldwater many years ago, and one of the most striking things about goldwater was how amazing he could be so accepting of someone with opposite political views. my father was way to the left, he was way to the right. if they had these wonderful discussions. he was really a terrific man even though views were different. , all you had to

do with being -- was be a republican, sweater not know why my father decided to run. >> that is one of the more interesting parts of 9064. he was hoping to run against jack kennedy. >> goldwater and kennedy knew each other very well and they .ere friends it was a different time. it was like an extended family. the one thing that united all of these folks was the central which was thet, major activity of a bipartisan nature, and this is where goldwater was effective. he might have been a show horse but you needed that show horse.

was helping to make that thing work, and that is exactly the type of culture from which your father -- that you were describing. >> next question in the front. >> my name is roy miller, and my question has to do with the word libertarian. i am myself a libertarian, but i the wordmany years ago liberal had a free-market connotation to it and it was taken over, and now most of us that believe in small government did not like the word liberal, so i am wondering if this new word libertarian will last and you think it will be consistently be represented by a limited government viewpoint. >> i do, and to sum up -- classical liberal philosophy from john stuart mills and john locke, and others, they did carry the liberal term, and

around the rest of the world, it still does. neoliberal in most of the world describe someone who has a free-market orientation. i think libertarianism will stick as a political identifier in american politics because it represents a conservatism that from, andt distinct often in conflict with social conservatism. so, i now believe the conservative movement has split in a way that was not true during the days of the historically important barry goldwater, and therefore there is a utility in the name to describe a point of view that has some distinction. >> i would just add quickly that one of the great surprise of republican politics of the last 10 years is that it was ron paul paul who may libertarianism more popular. that was not seen by the circles i travel in in washington, the

libertarian circles, he was not seen as the best vessel to bring that forward. hs had spent 30 years funding institutes. the cato institute were worried that libertarian sounded crazy. the fact that ron paul ran for president and built a following against the iraq war and drafted countless young libertarians, that really surprised people. he is a very flawed politicians in the ways we were talking around before. ron paul built the ranks, as long as there is not an external threat like timing is that america's feeling, yes, libertarianism.

>> i have a question about rights act,he civil and the recent conflict in arizona. goldwater famously voted against a 1964 act because he did not like the federal government imposing on the termination requirements on private does this, but he had supported civil rights act deviously, including in 1963. is there a tension in that? in arizona there was a bill proposed that would allow discrimination based on religious views by private atlases mrs., which resulted in a lot of conflict. is that a tension with goldwater, libertarianism? is there some way goldwater speaks to how the two w will get through those conflicts? think it represents a losing argument by libertarians. the point of view that goldwater expressed, which is there is nothing in the constitution that gives the federal government the authority to tell someone who

owns a private business whom he has to serve, and prevent him from making decisions as to whom he serves is a purebred libertarian point of view. it gets lost. commerce is universally regarded, in some respects, as public space, and that government can, indeed, regulate the kind of interactions people have in that public space, including prohibiting what is considered invidious , andimination in commerce the reaction to send it bill 1062 reflects the fact that the libertarians have simply lost that argument. >> next question in the front. >> my name is albert.

there are two big trend in the 21st century -- i think one of them is, of course, terrorism, and the other one is the massive data collection by the united data fromernment of private individuals and corporations. how do you think barry goldwater would approach these issues? >> i will jump on that. terrorism, he would say we will win the war because it was consistent with how he viewed the war against communism, which was not to contain it, but to basically defeat it as the greatest enemy on earth. he would probably say that the terrorist threat is similar. they attacked us. secondly, on the metadata collection, he would probably say the government has no beeness, and he would have but probablybably,

taking the more libertarian thread he would have said we do not need to have a government spying on you and knowing every last thing about you. that flavored his rhetoric when he was running for president, and we have that earlier goldwater who was so self-righteous and he would have felt uncomfortable with the government snooping around finding out everything there was to know about anybody, including who they were calling on a telephone. >> asked question on your overwrite. >> my name is john warren. i have been a registered republican for three decades and a voting national delegate for ron paul in 2012. given that the republican party, for the first time, is outnumbered in the state of arizona by independents, rather than asking if goldwater libertarianism is dead, i would if the republican party is dead without

libertarianism? , in some states, i think, they cannot win, basically the entire northeast i do not think a republican who is not libertarian on social issues, they should not even bother running. they are social conservatives. they cannot win. i keep mentioning the chamber of commerce because they spend a lot of money and they are a good overarching example of what you would call rockefeller republicans. they are not trying to moderate republican party. going along with libertarian demands, resolutely for the repeal of obamacare, resolutely anti-tax. the differences they have, or they are more into speaking for businesses and they always will be because they are the chamber of commerce. i do not think you are wrong.

the problem republicans have is one demographic, and in a state like this, you look at how close the senate race was on the presidential race in 2012, that , and that was because hispanic voters were turning against them in massive numbers here, colorado, states they did not think about, and people that are not socially conservative and they do not care about rent speaking. i do not disagree with you, it is just what part of the libertarianism to decide into the party. is actually blamed he thoughtes a race he could win. i do not think it is so much that he was a bad candidate, but he completely failed to reach out to people who if they always voted for republicans, they

cannot win again. stylemore to the cato libertarianism on immigration reform. better than what mitt romney ran on. it did not work for john mccain, but he did better than that is a bettere, not what -- than. that is a struggle, not what republicans ran on. >> we have time for another question, but i want to say thank you to all of the panelists for taking the time and the co-presenter arizona state university, and c-span for joining us and recording today's -- tonight's event, and lastly to all of you for coming and joining us tonight. happyour reception -- hour will start momentarily. it will be straight behind the exit sign behind you at the paddlewheel -- patio. please join us for a drink and you can speak further with our

guests. now the last question. a lot about what goldwater felt about the expansion of government and the nsa, but what about corporations? the first thing twitter asks me is where are you. that, and campaign finance donations that come in, donors will vote this way. speak to that. >> in "conscience of a in daystive," goldwater vigorously against the union movement, and actually advocates federal laws restricting union's political activities, and among the things that he says in that the is that neither unions nor corporations should be permitted to donate or participate in political activities, that they

are intended as economic organizations, and should not be exercising political rights. he also speaks approvingly of antitrust laws. now, the extent to which that was genuine or just a way to morehis antiunion he was an icon of the arizona business community before he became a politician. he was comfortable with large businesses. the general libertarian economic position is that [indiscernible] againstnt to guard trusts and restraints against trade, and are suspicious of antitrust