Why Abundance Liberalism Is a Promising Shift in Modern Politics

The rise of "abundance liberalism" stands out as one of the few encouraging political developments in recent years. This movement, championed by left-liberal thinkers such as Ezra Klein, Derek Thompson (co-authors of the movement’s most influential book), Matt Yglesias, Catherine Rampell, Kelsey Piper, Noah Smith, and Jerusalem Demsas, advocates for market-based solutions to pressing societal challenges.

Even prominent figures like Noah Smith and law professor Cass Sunstein have recently expressed newfound appreciation for libertarian principles. While this movement has internal contradictions and flaws, its growth is a promising sign—especially as it presents potential allies for libertarians and free-market advocates in an era of deepening ideological divides.

Despite my optimism about abundance liberalism, I share many of the criticisms raised by free-market advocates like Bryan Caplan, Samuel Gregg, and Richard Reinsch. Critics rightly point out that many abundance liberals inconsistently embrace market solutions: they support free markets in areas like trade and housing but resist them in others, such as healthcare and education. This inconsistency ignores the fact that the same principles justifying limited government intervention in trade and housing also apply to healthcare and education.

Bryan Caplan has also urged abundance liberals to extend their pro-market advocacy further, particularly in immigration. Still, even with these gaps, we should not dismiss the movement’s progress. Abundance liberalism has already made significant strides in critical areas, including housing, trade, immigration, and nuclear power—issues that profoundly impact the lives, liberty, and well-being of millions.

Why Abundance Liberalism’s Focus on Key Issues Matters

In a 2024 article, I outlined a framework for prioritizing issues based on three key criteria:

1. Magnitude of effects on human freedom and happiness: Issues with large-scale impacts deserve priority over those with minor consequences.
2. Ease of implementation: Problems with straightforward solutions should take precedence over those requiring complex, long-term fixes.
3. Potential for incremental progress: Issues where gradual improvements are possible should be prioritized over "all-or-nothing" battles, except in revolutionary contexts.

The issues abundance liberals champion align perfectly with these criteria. In my 2024 post, I highlighted housing and immigration restrictions as prime examples. These issues:

• Have massive effects on human freedom and welfare.
• Offer relatively simple solutions, primarily by reducing or eliminating harmful government intervention (though nuclear power presents a slightly more complex challenge).
• Allow for incremental progress, even if full reform remains elusive.

For instance, while abolishing all exclusionary zoning may be unrealistic, meaningful progress can still be achieved by chipping away at restrictive policies. This pragmatic approach makes abundance liberalism a valuable ally for free-market advocates, even amid its limitations.