- 29 Jan 2013 16:05
#14159792
I'd say it's the other way around: if "liberals" were ideologically consistent, they'd back libertarians. The fact is that ideological consistency is not in great supply among Republicans or Democrats. In fact I had a Republican tell me once that logical consistency was a character flaw. Democrats and Republicans are about maintaining and exercising power, and they don't much care what ideology gets them there. That rank-and-file liberals and conservatives still support them is very much a mystery to me.
I have two answers to that:
1) Economic liberty is inseparable from individual liberty. This is probably why most libertarians feel the Republican Party is closer to them than the Democrats, because they at least talk the talk; Democrats can't stand the thought of economic liberty, but without it "social" liberty is meaningless.
2) We've got a Democrat President and a Democrat-led Senate, and they're expanding that reactionary, authoritarian police state.
As others have said, I think the best path for libertarianism is to influence one or both parties. But that's a very slow process. And it's just as likely to backfire, as the Tea Party's failed attempts to hold Republicans to fiscal issues proved; the GOP just co-opted the movement and kept right on pushing their social agenda.
KlassWar wrote:If libertarians were ideologically consistent, they'd back the liberals rather than the conservatives.
I'd say it's the other way around: if "liberals" were ideologically consistent, they'd back libertarians. The fact is that ideological consistency is not in great supply among Republicans or Democrats. In fact I had a Republican tell me once that logical consistency was a character flaw. Democrats and Republicans are about maintaining and exercising power, and they don't much care what ideology gets them there. That rank-and-file liberals and conservatives still support them is very much a mystery to me.
After all, the reactionary, authoritarian police State is a much bigger threat to liberty than taxation or economic regulations could ever hope to possibly be.
I have two answers to that:
1) Economic liberty is inseparable from individual liberty. This is probably why most libertarians feel the Republican Party is closer to them than the Democrats, because they at least talk the talk; Democrats can't stand the thought of economic liberty, but without it "social" liberty is meaningless.
2) We've got a Democrat President and a Democrat-led Senate, and they're expanding that reactionary, authoritarian police state.
As others have said, I think the best path for libertarianism is to influence one or both parties. But that's a very slow process. And it's just as likely to backfire, as the Tea Party's failed attempts to hold Republicans to fiscal issues proved; the GOP just co-opted the movement and kept right on pushing their social agenda.
"The first lesson of economics is scarcity: there is never enough of anything to fully satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics." - Thomas Sowell