The Liberterians were not always associated with fringe causes. I’m not sure how/why they evolved that way. But Americans have ignored 3rd parties for so long that they get dominated by fringe causes when the more normal supporters give up and revert to the “2 parties” that are promoted by the MSM. Where’s the Reform Party today as an example? They gave up. Perot even tried to use the TV to reach people, with his own money, but he tried to talk sensibly to them instead of entertaining.
Excelent analysis. I actually voted for Ed Clark in 1980 when it looked like the LP might have a future as a mainstream party - at least to me.
The problem with 3rd parties is that they tend to be dominated by the most doctrinaire, with purity tests becoming more and more rigid with each election cycle since, with no real prospect for electoral success, ideological purity is really all they have to argue about. The left has experienced this forever - look at how many Socialist parties there are, each of whom passionately despise each other over issues of doctrine so obscure you need an electron microscope to find them.
The LP has gone from being mostly a bunch of devotees of Milton Friedman to mostly a gaggle of eccentrics who think you’re a hopeless statist if you don’t believe the military can and should be privatized.
Sad, really. I find most libertarians I encounter to be intelligent and interesting - and on most matters I generally agree with them. The LIbertarian Party, though, has pretty much achieved its apparent goal of total irrelevance.
Hank