Are there any differences between Conservatives and Libertarians?

1/12/03 | Sparta

[xm177e2]

No kidding, Libertarians do more to get Liberal Democrats elected than Republicans.

Thank you for using a capital L there. As long as libertarians are willing to compromise their principles and vote for Republicans, there's no harm done. I think the desire for moral purity can end up causing more harm than being willing to get your hands dirty but get something done. I think it would be best if the GOP moved more towards the libertarian (SMALL L!) position, but that's not going to happen if most of the libertarians aren't Republicans.

[Caipirabob]

I suppose all party differences are drawn along lines of morality. Judeo-Christian values defining conservatives, a lesser form of that for the Libertarians, who want little or no oversight, and the complete and total lack of any morality whatsoever for the Democrats.

[radioman]

Give it up...No matter how many times you try to explain it, those who fear the personal responsibility of liberty will just shout you down with cries of "doper" or "pervert".

[Boot Hill]

hoosierskypilot says:   "Just from what I've read on FR, I never got the idea [the Libertarian Party] were for open borders."

From Article I, section 18 (entitled: "Immigration") of the Libertarian Party Platform, adopted July 2002, Indianapolis, Indiana:

"Undocumented non-citizens should not be denied the fundamental freedom to labor and to move about unmolested."..."We therefore call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally."

The concept of nationhood is inseparable from the concept of sovereignty. And the most fundamental expression of that sovereignty by a nation, is control over their own borders. By the words of their own party platform it is plain that the Libertarian Party expressly advocates the destruction of the sovereignty of the United States by putting and end to any control over our own borders. No controls, no borders. No borders, no sovereignty. No sovereignty, no nation.

Such insanity (even after 9-11!) is why I have always seen the Libertarian Party as the Anti-Constitutional Party (despite their shrill protests to the contrary). And that is why I find myself in complete agreement with nopardons when he observes that: "Libertarians are the enemy within the Conservative Movement". I would only add that this enemy is a "fifth column" enemy masquerading as patriotic Americans that, ostensibly, only a want a return to a constitutional form of government.

Do I see every libertarian as an explicit enemy? No, some are just young, ignorant and still have some growing up left to do, some are blinded by bitterness and anger, while others have never come to grips with living in a real world which always includes some degree of subordination to power. You will hear Libertarians say that "statism" is a disease, and while true statism is such, so to is the passive-aggressive behavior of Libertarianism, also a disease.

Regards,

Boot Hill

[AFPhys]

Libertarians do more to get Liberal Democrats elected than Republicans.

Possibly so, but it would do even more damage to the quest of getting more conservative Republicans elected if concerted attempts were made to pander to the anarchist demands of the "libertarians"

[hobbes1]

Sanity.

.....Actually Pragmatism...

[PJ-Comix]

A Libertarian is a Conservative with a Water Pipe.

[Leisler]

Wow, bold HTML.

". It is ILLEGAL for anyone to sell or buy opium, laudanum, heroin, hasish, cocaine, etc. etc., etc. on the open market. I have the facts straight ; you don't. "

Bwahhhhahahah.

So, my little turnip, answer me this. If it is Illegal, how do ophthalmologists buy, use and proscribe cocaine for eye surgery? How is manufactured, as it is in the U.S. by major pharmaceuticals? Ditto opium, heroin. (Laudanum is a form of opium, so we'll leave that one on the sidelines.) So, explain how these particular drugs are illegal for anyone, yet used, bought and sold every day.

There is nothing that the government does that private enterprise cant do better and cheaper, save killing people. I don’t see anything you’ve said that makes you different from any big government, big taxes, hire my friends leftist.

[Leisler]

Oh, so you don't mean more government upon more government.

My mistake.

You meant more government intervention upon more government.

Big difference and no doubt that will effective.

(Insert sounds of crickets)

[Physicist]

One interesting fact you might notice is that the "conservatives" who are most vitriolic in their hatred for libertarians and repudiation of their principles are also the ones who go ballistic when a Republican candidate loses "because of" a Libertarian candidate.

What they're saying is, "There is no room in our party for you and your principles; in fact, we find you and your views repugnant. We will never represent you. But you owe us your vote, of course."

[krb]

we believe the government should be kept out of the question.

Federal government should be kept out of the question. I think it should be up to the states to determine the legality of abortion, and the punishments meted out for it.

[KC Burke]

Like you, I feel there should be a lot of common ground. For one of the better essay threads on the distinctions with lots of thoughtful comment compared to bashing try The Pursuit of Liberty: Libertarian and Conservative, Uneasy Cousins, which uses an article some years ago by Nisbet

[realpatriot71]

There are differences, but I suppose it depends on who you ask as you can see from 150+ posts so far.

You see, a pure libertarian utopia cannot work in a fallen world because, as I'm sure you've noticed, people suck. However, this is not an excuse to create a government that regulates every aspect of life. Men are endowed with certain God-given inalienable rights, and the position of the libertarian to me, is that government exists soley to protect the inalienable rights of the individual. Conservatives seem to be more interested in preserving a society at the exspense of personal freedom.

It all seems to really depend on where one draws his or her line.

Also, most of the libertarians I know are pro-life, and the statement that all libertarians are pro-choice is nothing but slander.

[Celtjew Libertarian]

Well, there's libertarian and Libertarian. The Libertarian Party is a rather purist form, to the point that, at least in the case of Harry Browne, they've joined the left in the Blame America First crowd.

There's small-l libertarian, which is basically a belief in the defense of individual liberty, as the primary role of government. To me, that means that there has to be some laws that state when these rights are violated, a system for sorting out differences when the there is at least apparent conflict, a defense and police force to defend individual liberty from those who would purposefully destroy it, and a low level of taxation (unfortunately) to pay for it.

The main bugaboos some conservatives seem to have with libertarians is drug laws and immigration.

On drug laws, I'm for legalization. However, I'm also for hard punishment for crimes committed while on drugs. If you can go off in a corner, smoke something, and mind your own business, it doesn't bother me. If you get high on something, go out, and start shooting up the place, you belong in jail.

On immigration, I believe in an open door: I believe that anyone who wants to come to this country and work for a living should be allowed to. I don't believe a person who should be allowed to come here for government largesse, but I see that as yet another bad side effect of the welfare state. I also think that we need strongly defended borders and strong screening processes to keep those out, who are coming in to commit criminal acts and acts of war. I believe in an open door; I also believe that anyone attempting to sneak in through a window should at least have their backside shot off.

I don't expect things to change overnight. In many cases, I don't think they should; the country has grown to emotionally dependent on certain things to give them up overnight. Socialism had its Fabian movement that didn't believe in overnight revolution, but slow change. I guess I'm a Fabian libertarian in that I believe slow change is, if not the only way, than at least the best way, for these things to happen.

The Libertarian Party leadership is so purist that it is unwilling to take what measures are necessary to defend the U.S., even after we were attacked. I will vote for them on a state and local level, but will not on a national level (President, Senator, or U.S. Representative) until that changes. I disagree with the GOP on many homosexual issues (though I do think the Boy Scouts, as a private organization, have the right to choose their leaders and members, as they wish); I'm on the fence with regard to abortion; I don't think either party does well on the drug war; and I think the left has, in the last 20 years, become more pro-censorship than the right.

Oh yeah, one more thing... When I disagree with Democrats, I often end up with them stating that they wish harm on my children, for my beliefs. I have had that occur only once in my disagreements with Republicans. For any but the purist, least practical, of libertarians, the GOP is the political party to belong to, IMO.

Interestingly, I was taking a look at the American Conservative Union ratings last night. If I had been a Senator in 2001, my ACU rating would be 96. If I had been a U.S. Representative, it would have been 80. So I guess there is a fair amount of overlap between conservatism and, at least, this libertarian.

[Kewlhand`tek]

ok ive been to my state libertian meetings for 2 years never once did we make the focus of our meetings about legalizing drugs. Mostly we discused something wacko,leftist and silly like removing the states food tax. Which we got on the ballot but the state brought out their shills and demonized anyone that didnt want to pay taxes on food, so it lost. We will try at it again. Ok they guys in our group are pro-life, abortion kinda ruins the childs right to liberty and happiness. I had a problem with the open borders issue, but it was explained to me that it didnt mean illegal immigration. I was disturbed at the lp site where H.Browne was bitching about the war with iraq. I asked the guys in our meeting they had a total opposite view they were all for the war. All of them praise George Bush even tho we all voted for harry browne. We do have issues with Bush but I may actually vote for him in 2004

[Celtjew Libertarian]

I'd been to county Libertarian meetings 5-10 years ago and drugs rarely if ever came up. However, that's the bugaboo that many conservatives have about libertarians, so that's one thing I addressed.

I'm of the impression that Harry Browne sees the LP as being first and foremost a publicity mechanism for selling his books. As someone who would like to sell his writing some day, I'm impressed with the marketing strategy. As a voter, I'm less impressed.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

Many Libertarians hold society in contempt and view any law or rule that takes into account a need for society as a whole as "socialism".

For example, a no burn law in a town.

Libertarians say "It's my home and my property, so I should be able to burn garbage, leaves, etc. as I see fit."

This is regardless for fire hazard, smoke hazard or any other hazard to the community at large. That is because, for many Libertarians, "good for society = socialism".

[Maedhros]

Actually I would say O'Reilly is more of a lying populist.