Not logged in |
Welcome
|
|
|
Important External Links |
|
Link Trade |
|
|
 |
 |
We Can Turn the TideTurning the tide from tyranny towards liberty is easier than most libertarians realize. Suppose we classify legislators according to the Nolan Chart below. The center of this chart is at the status quo. Anyone who wants less government regulation of the economy and more personal freedom is in the libertarian quadrant in this model. (note the small-l for “libertarian”) 
A typical legislature consists of a mix of liberals, conservatives, libertarians and authoritarians, with authoritarians outnumbering libertarians. 
Under these conditions, the authoritarians team up with liberals and conservatives to incrementally create bigger, and more intrusive government. All we need to do to turn this evil tide is to add a few more libertarians to the mix: 
With just a few more libertarians added, the tide turns from bigger government to more liberty! Note how we don't have to outnumber either the liberals or the conservatives. All we have to do is outnumber the authoritarians plus the difference between liberals and conservatives. Note also that the “libertarians” described just have to be more libertarian than the status quo. Radicalism is not necessary, which is good thing because... Extremism LosesTime for a cold splash of reality: we do not live in a country with proportional representation. Winning 5% of the vote overall wins zero seats! To gain seats in a legislature requires winning somewhere. A radical libertarian loses even in a libertarian-leaning district with only one opponent. 
A bit of moderation can win the day: 
Note that our “moderate libertarian” is still is pretty radical by some standards. He can still call for significant changes from the status quo and still be moderate enough to win in a libertarian-leaning district. A good approach would be to offer planks that are atomic; that is, planks that stand on their own. There are also some polling stats that could prove useful. True, moderation is not enough to ensure victory. One must still be serious about playing politics. Moderation is usually necessary, but not sufficient. Some radical libertarians have problems running as moderates, thinking it dishonest. This is not true if one keeps in mind that a politician is a representative. Political promises are a balance between what the politician wants and what the voters want. Honesty consists of keeping promises made. (A radical can up the ante when running for re-election by making new promises.) Time for a Real Libertarian PartyWe, the members of the Libertarian Reform Caucus, believe it's time for a real libertarian party, one designed to elect libertarians to public office, and begin turning the tide now. The question is: is The Libertarian Party such a real party? It is, according to its mission statement. It is also true that the LP is targeting a block of voters big enough to win some elections when it uses the World's Smallest Political Quiz to recruit members. 
There are enough people in the libertarian block in the chart above to make a formidable coalition. Unfortunately, the LP's membership pledge uses a different definition of libertarian: 
Using these two very different definitions of the word “libertarian” constitutes a dishonest bait and switch. The result is a deeply divided party, legendary for its infighting. We believe it is time for the Libertarian Party to ditch the pledge and fully embrace the first definition of the word "libertarian." The Lesser of Two Evils DilemmaFor two-way races, a large base, good organization, and a reasonably moderate message are enough to win. For three-way races, there is an additional challenge. If the Libertarian candidate is positioned closer to the Republican than the Democrat (or vice versa), then the LP candidate falls prey to the Lesser of Two Evils Dilemma. The Libertarian's base has a tendency cop out at the last minute and vote for the better major party candidate. Survival depends on triangulation, on differentiating the LP from both the Republican and Democratic Party positions. One obvious possibility is to use the Nolan Chart:
An LP which occupies more of the upper corner of the Nolan Chart has potential. However, some us have found that this positioning leaves the LP closer to the Republicans in the minds of the majority. Another possible triangulation would be: 
Such a leftward positioning is controversial, even within the Caucus, and debate is ongoing. But it is not a new idea; even Murray Rothbard believed that libertarians should be part of the political left. Science fiction author David Brin has pointed out that historically, aristocrats have been a bigger enemy to free enterprise than socialists.
|
| |||||||