Posted on 11/11/2013 10:35:15 AM PST by Kaslin
Yesterday, Derek Hunter declared that libertarianism has entirely lost its meaning, that the party has devolved into a catch-all for people who want to criticize the government without doing anything about it. He also assumed that any Republican candidate would be better than a Democrat for classical liberals.
Hunter could not be more wrong. The Libertarian Party is still the face of “individual responsibility, small government, and free markets,” but how the LP arranges those priorities is changing. The Party needs to represent its constituency, appeal to young voters who largely have experience with Ron Paul, and has to emphasize its social liberalism to appeal to the broader American public. In doing so, the Libertarian Party is sharpening its policy prescriptions while becoming more inclusive, but that doesn’t mean the philosophy is meaningless or is standing at the sidelines.
Let’s have a look at some numbers of the people who call themselves “libertarian.” A few weeks ago, a think tank called the Public Religion Research Institute released a big data report on those who describe themselves as “libertarian.” There are some big consistencies; for example, 96 percent oppose Obamacare. But what is most striking is that a majority (39 percent) consider themselves “moderates”—not conservatives or liberals.
To be sure, this report notes that most libertarians are registered Republicans (45 percent). However, more libertarians are independent (35 percent), third party (15 percent), or Democrats (five percent) when combined. It is a misinterpretation of libertarian values to assume that all would vastly prefer Republican candidates. If we were just looking at party affiliation, Republican libertarians do not represent even half of the libertarian demographic.
So when Hunter exclaims that McCain would have been better than Obama, or Cuccinelli better than Sarvis or McAuliffe, he is speaking for himself, not for all libertarians. To ask libertarians to vote Republican reinforces only one purity test: Hunters’ own. Hunter seems to think that free markets is all libertarianism is about, and he’s happy to snuggle into bed with conservatism. Libertarians are the wrong audience for his kind of policy prescriptions.
The Libertarian Party needs to build its base with young people as well. These folks are the people who have the time and energy to canvass. Above anything else, they are at the core of what will guarantee a future for the Libertarian Party of tomorrow.
Know what libertarian young people like? The young guns of the Tea Party, and even Ron Paul. No one can expect them to get behind the elders who insult their heroes as “wacko birds.” The Libertarian Party is smart to try to include Millennials as much as possible, even if celebrities popular with Millennials ignorantly give themselves the “libertarian” title, like Bill Maher (who really considers him a libertarian anyway?). In fact, I think one of the most important people teaching Millennials to question government is a self-identified liberal: Jon Stewart. We can’t give and take away the libertarian title, so we should take the positive publicity and use it to our advantage.
Millennials are, as a whole, especially socially liberal, but the rest of America is following. A majority of Americans favor legalizing marijuana. More than half of the country supports gay marriage. An additional bulk want there to be a way for illegal immigrants to stay in this country. Like it or not, social issues are the best way to attract new people to the Libertarian Party, especially if they’re young. Sure, prostitution and raw milk might not be the top of everyone’s agenda, but these ideas reach far more people than free-market fundamentalism. What is best for the Libertarian Party is to advertise how mainstream it could be. If the Libertarian Party seems more blue, that’s because it’s a reaction to what Americans prioritize.
So what’s happening here? Libertarianism is rebranding itself to be more inclusive. Now more than ever, it is accepting of LGBT people, encourages women to have a voice, and has different social media groups targeted to different minorities. Inclusivity is the best way for libertarianism to grow. Hunter’s exclusivity will only be the death of libertarianism in America.
But what of all of our think tanks and libertarian blogs and magazines? Changing hearts and minds does not happen overnight, but there are still successes everywhere. The Competitive Enterprise Institute was fundamental in blocking food labeling measures in Washington. Nick Gillespie seems to have a new editorial in a major newspaper every day. The Institute for Justice and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education fight for fiscal and civil liberties and have regular wins. Libertarians are far from doing nothing.
If anyone should be compromising on their ideals, it should be people like Hunter. He does not have the authority to determine what is and isn’t best for liberty. Libertarians are happy to leave that to individuals to decide for themselves.
I must be a Heinleinitarian...I apparently don`t hate enough to be a conservative.
I like that, Heinleinitarian!!! Imma steal it!
You cannot lose what isn’t yours in the first place. You must woo and win the libertarian and independent voters. To do that, you really do need to think and act more like Ron Paul than Mitt Romney or (gag) Juan McLame. We independents do not OWE you our votes. To get mine, you had best be offering me a PROVEN limited/small government candidate who believes, as I do, that I am grown and fully capable of deciding what to ingest, who to hang out with and how to spend my own money. You must realize that the ownership of my body and life is NOT the affair of government by any stretch of anybody’s imagination. It is between me and my God. You must realize that limiting government to its Constitutional size and duties is an idea that flies VERY well with me.
But most alleged “conservatives” on FR these days are NOT limited government types, only statists who want to control DIFFERENT areas of my life than the other brand of statists. That is why you will wind up NEVER getting either my vote or the votes of the younger folks who think as I do.
Why vote for socialism-lite when the real deal is in the Rat column?
You may have heard of this old guy named Ron Paul...? Remember him? A bunch of us got behind him and were met with all kinds of cheating, last minute rule changing and other assorted tricks by the GOP-e. Not to mention the less than warm welcome we were given by GOP media outlets. And that we were more or less told to get out and not to let the door hit us in the asses on the way out. You guys got what you wanted...we left. Now y'all are mad because we haven't come back?
No, I do not know anyone who espouses any of that-I don’t live in NYC or LA, where I suppose rich dilettantes discuss that sort of thing at cocktail parties-the most august personages we have here are a retired General and his wife, their politics are the same as everyone else’s, and there aren’t any cocktail parties around here anyway.
Here in BF Egypt, pretty much everyone wants fed government to maintain a military to defend our shores, collect tariffs from trade, and deliver the mail-and they even do that rather badly. The people I know don’t think that personal issues are for the fed, but the states to mess with if they choose, and illegals are not even welcome in most rural areas-we don’t like law breakers.
Homosexuals traveling through are ignored-they don’t live here because they are shunned and not accepted at all, since the liberals let them “out”-before that happened, they weren’t here at all, that anyone knew of.
That was sarcasm my FRiend. I was pointing out that not all LP members march in lockstep, just like the GOP has folks not toeing the party line.
Ah! My favorite bully and stalker.
You are on my mental ignore list.
You still won’t answer, how do the feds not have to make decisions regarding homosexuality and immigration, and the military, and how do states not have to in regards to divorce law and adoption?
Praise the Lord that you still have that capacity.
You presumably refer to the Cross of the Christ when you call yourself its “servant.” So tell me, when Jesus gave His followers the great Commission, just exactly where did He tell us to use the force of government to deal with sinners? Isn’t that HIS job??? Yes, fine, government exists to ensure a means of dealing with murderers, rapists, INCLUDING child rapists, thieves, and so forth. These people harm others. SINNERS are God’s business, NOT the governments. And I KNOW if you’ve studied the Bible you also know that. You are far, far worse than liberals in your desire to control other folks’ lives.
I went to a few TP rallies. I agree with your assessment. My point is that in 2010 we had republicans, independents and LP types united, and we won. I believe we can unite on fiscal issues and win again.
Or we can fight and call each other names, and lose like 2012. I try to build coalitions around common beliefs. For example, in this article, the author points out that the GOPe alienated youngsters by calling the "tea party heros" whackobirds.
Do you want to gain allies who will vote for "tea party heros" or chase them off with insults? Just asking.
Jesus didn’t address a people who made their own culture, and society, and laws, and government by the vote.
If I asked Jesus, should I vote as a social conservative and traditional American, or vote to create a Sodom and Gomorrah, I wonder what he would say, don’t vote?
Libertarians don’t support gay marriage. They believe that government should get out of the marriage business. Why? Because any government powerful enough to enact your anointed view of marriage into law is also powerful enough to push homosexual marriage on the rest of us.
Limited government is the best government.
Please learn a little bit about the Libertarian Party before posting nonsense strawmen about what you think they might stand for.
Except for the military, and immigration, the constitution does not say the fed has anything to do those other items.
Every state has its own laws regarding divorce, adoption, etc, and that is as it should be-some states are community property states, some are not, etc.
I’m not a political science major and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn last night-but I do understand the constitution, and I want to see it heeded and used.
I don’t care if it leans to the left or right, a nanny state is just that, meddling and micromanaging where it clearly should not, and using OUR money to do it...
The response is the same: Mental ignore list!
Resisting a political movement promoting abortion, open borders, drugs, porn, the homosexualizing of the military and the gay agenda, is not “insulting” them, and if it is, what do you care?
This is a conservative site, not a gay marriage forum, how can conservative political positions be the wrong ones here?
Ron Paul wasn’t the ONLY candidate that was mistreated by the GOP E and he wasn’t the only candidate that had to face all kind of rule changes and tricks.
No, I could give a rat’s ass if the Paulbots come back.
Cruz Fever...catch it.
So federal law applies to homosexuality, and so does state law, and you agree that is necessary.
Other than that, you just want to make the same general statements, and pretend that libertarianism is not pushing a leftist agenda of homosexuality, abortion, open borders and so on.
You sound just exactly like one a them whiney liberals. Whenever government is prohibited from interfering in our lives in some manner, some kinda how, that’s “forcing it down their throats.” Poor you. Learn to think for yourself for a change. Teach your kids to do the same. I promise, you’ll feel a whole lot better that way!!! Read and study your Bible, see what God has to say about trying to live others’ lives for them, then get back to me.
Yes, I'm sure it's convenient for you to ignore all the
people you have called socialist Godless faggot commies. Bitch.
Awesome little tactic you got there, call us all a bunch of dirtbags and then pretend to ignore the feedback.
You reap what you have sewn. And it ain't pretty.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.