Could The Eisenhower Interstate Highway System Be Built Without Eminent Domain?

For 28 years I have been having the same Groundhog Day argument with a long time and great friend. regarding the question:

"Could The Eisenhower Interstate Highway System Be Built Without Eminent Domain?"

I stumbled upon this post titled, "Thank Government For Something: Interstate Highway System" by Postlibertarian that I thought was very interesting.  This site describes themselves as follows:

"This is a group blog providing analysis on politics, philosophy, economics, and technology. Postlibertarian means firstly that we believe generally in free markets, individual liberty, and small government, but we are not purists. We like classical liberalism because it’s got pretty good empirical results over the years. It also means we focus on areas outside of politics only tangentially related to libertarian ideas, including philosophy, cryptography, prediction markets, urbanization, rationality, game theory, and the singularity."

I like the description above because my buddy is a libertarian, but these folks seem to emphasize the pragmatic side as well.

 The post brings up both my view and my long time friend's views. First, my overall point on the logistics of building the Interstate Highway System:

"The Interstate Highway System could not have been built without vast seizures of private property under eminent domain (theft) laws. I know of one couple in their mid-60’s who were so distraught about being evicted from the home they had lived in for over 40 years (for the Capital Beltway) that they both died within months and, undoubtedly, there were thousands more. But, of course, the ‘public good’ or the ‘national interest’ or interests of the ‘masses’ is more important than the rights of a few obnoxious individuals who want to keep their homes, farms or businesses."

The point that follows in another part of the blog, "It seems hard to imagine that a similar system would have sprung up from private parties since it spans so much land and jurisdiction and requires so many resources," is my main point.   The sentence that follows above is my buddy's point:  "yet my belief in the power of markets leads me to suspect that something unpredictable and wonderful would have somehow arisen in its stead."

Below is the paragraph in its entirety. 

"But fortunately or unfortunately, all we can do is speculate about what the United States would look like today if the federal government had never created the Interstate Highway System. It seems hard to imagine that a similar system would have sprung up from private parties since it spans so much land and jurisdiction and requires so many resources, yet my belief in the power of markets leads me to suspect that something unpredictable and wonderful would have somehow arisen in its stead. At the same time, libertarians can always point out the imperfections of the status quo and theorize how things would be better off without the government. My theory can always beat your reality."

I should state I am not a fan of eminent domain for private companies as I do believe history is littered with corruption and stories of the little guy getting screwed in the name of "progress".  However, for the Eisenhower Highway System, I do believe in eminent domain.


The bottom line is that it is HARD or I would say impossible, to imagine how the 47,856 miles of the Eisenhower Interstate System would have come about in any cohesive or logical fashion without eminent domain.  Again, as the blog post states, "it seems hard to imagine that a similar system would have sprung up from private parties since it spans so much land and jurisdiction and requires so many resources."  

My good friend is always quick to point out the screw ups of government as why he is a libertarian and why we do not need government, which of course, if your "go to argument" is "government makes mistakes", then that is very easy reflex point to fall back on.

The biggest issue I have, as I always state :-), is that my buddy's hypothetical country, let's call it "TriJavaLibertarianLandia" and his theory can always beat my examples of reality.   Unfortunately, for all of us carbon based units, we live here in reality on planet earth.

The good news is that we are both in our late 50's, so we will keep up our discussion of this topic for a long, long time to come since we first started this when we were in our 20s, kept up in our 30s, talked about it even more in our 40s, and now well into our 50s.  What is important to remember, is that we can have these discussions and still be best of friends.  Which is not easy to say these days when folks differ on ideas.

If we end up at the same old folks home for "Geeks and Gearheads", I am sure the others will be saying, "would you two IDIOTS *please* talk about something else!" To which one of us will respond, "why should we stop now?" :-)