Michael Gerson somehow imagines that Second Life proves that libertarianism doesn't work. Ramesh Ponnuru (no libertarian) points out the flaw in his "argument" (such as it is).

2nd Link is broken.

Gerson also leaves out choice of choosing second life to begin with.

I'm glad a solid conservative found at least one flaw in Gerson's argument. It makes it easier for this free thinking centrist to point out others.

Libertarianism does not mean disorder or freedom from consequences. What libertarianism at its best does argue for is the prevention of government from aiding entrenched power centers from imposing their ideas and practices upon other people.

For example, while Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Greens, etc., might disagree on the proper way to deal with the crime of rape, nobody I've heard of calls for it to be legalized. The war on drug users, on the other hand, is a different matter. Some of us view that particular government activity as an attempt by certain powerful groups in society to impose their beliefs and practices upon others.

Similarly we all choose friends based upon a variety of bases. If I choose to associate with runners, artists and libertarian space advocates, those choices come with real world consequences.

I haven't yet signed up for Second Life. I suspect, though, that it might be a new phenomenon with all the properties of a new phenomenon. Laws and practices haven't been fully worked out as yet. My exposure at the ISDC in Dallas got me interested. Pete Worden's talk -- done partly in Second Life -- presented an interesting and attractive activity.

What is interesting in Second Life is that some organized religions now have participants in Second Life. Googling church and "Second Life" produced 850,000 hits. Two churches I do recognize -- Episcopalian and Unitarian -- do, whatever else you think of them, embrace a form of religion that is open, free and democratic in nature, not authoritarian.

Is Gerson upset that Second Life participants might create a reality that conflicts with his views of how things ought to be? Could very well be the case.