C’mon you apes, you want to ping forever?
Kvetching about the social issues of a Christine O’Donnell while ignoring the economic liberties that Mike Castle would have assuredly stripped had he had his way makes no sense. How on earth can a true Libertarian even worry about such irrelevance?Because "true Libertarians" aren't really "Libertarians" at all. They're more like a crop of pedantic Librarians, out to score debating points in front of an audience of 3 teachers and 3 students on a rainy Wednesday night in their empty high school gymnasium.
So if Libertarians are irrelevant why do you waste ink analyzing them, sweetheart?
The smell of victory is in the air, and the squabbling over the spoils has already begun.
If having principles and standards makes one worthless then I’m worthless.
“I read Doug Mataconis’ piece about why Libertarians are still disenchanted even with the best electoral hope in a generation presents itself. I feel absolute disgust”
I feel agreement. Not that I vote Libertarian. But come on. Do we really believe a handfull of apparently small-government Republicans will change anything? What did ‘94 accomplish, in the long run? Or Reagan, for that matter?
Obamas will not disappear, and it’s only a matter of time before another Bush comes along. That’s all I’m saying. Which is to say nothing of the irreversible trend of central government expansion that has been with us since, when, exactly? Certainly the New Deal, perhaps the Progressive Era. Since the Civil War, even? Nevermind where you pinpoint the beginning. The Servile State, or socialism, or fascism, or the Capitalist State, or whatever you want to call it is here to stay.
I would like to have some libertarian explain to me any aspect of social conservatism that is anti-liberty. Conservatives ask for everyone to have an equal right to representation on how issues of life, sexuality, etc… are dealt with in public. It is the federal court that has ruled to dictate that innocent life can be murdered and that no law can be made to stop it, and it the alliance between the progressives and the libertarians that claim that all types of sexual behavior must be specially protected by the government and any opposition to that must be punished. That is hardly a pro-liberty position.
For being so irrelevant, they sure are being talked about a lot these days. Especially here on FR.
I rather doubt that the Libertarians will ever take over via the ballot box.
Yawn, the usual claptrap from people who don’t understand small ‘l’ libertarianism at all.
Well, we certainly need smaller government. I think we can all agree on that. Not just a pause in spending, but take down the Department of Education and a half dozen others to start with. Defund public radio. And so forth.
But libertarians are the ones who are constantly pulling back and refusing to cooperate—not social conservatives.
Two points. First, in order to WIN we need a coalition of conservatives, including small government and social conservatives. No hope of winning without the social conservatives, who are the larger group and who will refuse to vote if the basic principles are not kept up by the party.
Second, while it would be nice to think that freedom means doing whatever you want, without government or other interference, that just ain’t POSSIBLE. You cannot have a free country unless people are willing to discipline themselves and work for the benefit of others—family, neighbors—as well as themselves individually.
You can afford a few loose cannons living sinful and disordered lives around the edges of society, but you cannot afford a society where everyone wants to be a loose cannon. It won’t work. And if people refuse to discipline themselves, then the police and the KGB will step in and do it for them.
America has been a free country because, while people have done what they choose to do, they also have stayed within certain boundaries, taken care of their families, raised their children, and the rest. For that, most people—not all, but most—need a decent religion and a decent moral education in school. Most people are no longer getting that.
That’s a large part of the problem.
As things stand, it’s sometimes very difficult to tell a conservative libertarian from a hippie libertarian, because both of them may be chiefly concerned to do whatever the hell they want. That won’t work, not if everyone wants to do it. Not if a critical mass of people want to do it.
How many socialists have ever been elected to high public office in the United States? And how many of their beliefs have been publicly instituted?
I can appreciate the sentiments in the story. While many of us (Libertarians), have genuine concerns and beliefs, the Party has become more and more removed from any serious standing in America today. The issues are serious, not sure the same thing can be said about our party. A party that never seems to miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. I wonder sometimes could the LP sell ice water in Hell.
There are many changes going on in politics today and a true third party may materialize soon. It will have many of the beliefs of libertarians but, it will not be the Libertarian party.
The Libertarian party is to the GOP, what the Green party is to Democrats.
And they have until 2012 to produce results (in terms of cutting back government interference), or they END.
The electorate figured that out a long time ago.