Where are all the Libertarians?

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Non-interventionist != Isolationist

A party platform for open borders and no tariffs is not isolationist. And any free-marketer who is turned off because the party doesn't advocate the use of a massive govt to force other nations to submit to its wishes is not a free-marketer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ayn Randians combine the absolute worst values of corporate capitalism and statist imperialism. They're not against big government. They're against government being used to help the poor. Everything else for them is permissible.

[/ QUOTE ]

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about.

[latefordinner]

Objectivism is a horrible enough philosophy to be trashed on its own merits without making up reasons to trash it - though it must be said that Randians are certainly /not/ anarchists.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Objectivism is a horrible enough philosophy to be trashed on its own merits without making up reasons to trash it - though it must be said that Randians are certainly /not/ anarchists.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know nothing about objectivism other than it's basically moral libertarianism that shuns altruism. Why they call for that I don't know.

[Jeff W]

I don't understand the idea that voting libertarian is useless. If libertarians gain a larger percentage of the vote, on the margins this should induce the democrats and republicans to co-opt libertarian policies to try and re-capture libertarian voters.

I think that the libertarian party might have better luck by appealing through practical arguments rather than ideological arguments. For example, we should end the war on drugs because it is a tremendous resource drain that does more harm than good, not because everyone's bodies are their own to do what they want. I also think it would be best to emphasize gradual, practical changes like reducing government spending instead of trumpeting the radical, wholesale changes like eliminating income tax.

[bills217]

[ QUOTE ]
not because everyone's bodies are their own to do what they want

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, because only an ideological nutcase would believe that!

[Jeffiner99]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand the idea that voting libertarian is useless. If libertarians gain a larger percentage of the vote, on the margins this should induce the democrats and republicans to co-opt libertarian policies to try and re-capture libertarian voters.

[/ QUOTE ]


I agree. If you believe in a Libertarian platform and then vote for the lesser of two evils you are voting for evil and telling the one you voted for that you approve of his ideals and message. You are also telling the rest of the establishment that you approve of that guy's policies. All votes are counted as a positive support. It is a message I will never send again.

I believe in the Libertarian position with all my heart. If I don't vote Libertarian I have no chance to get what I want. I want a Libertarian in office. So I vote Libertarian.

I can't stand the argument that "we have no chance to win, so..." Well we certainly don't with that kind of attitude. And even if we didn't win this time, if the candidate got 25% of the vote that would send a strong message to the candidates who are running and to the rest of the public who up to now hasn't even heard the Libertarian platform. Wouldn't that be great? Getting more people to hear the platform.

With all that said, the original question was Where are all the Libertarians? This forum has a huge selection bias. You can't look at the people here as a true representation of the public. So you really can't look at this forum and assume that there are that many Libertarians in the general population. After all, most of them were trained to be good little statists after 16 years of government training/education.

Right now, we Libertarians have a great opportunity. Ron Paul is running as a Republican and could have a chance. He is a true Libertarian, don't be fooled. But he can't win the presidency on that ticket. So I re-registered as a Republican to vote for him in the primary and if he doesn't win then it will just appear as if another Republican left the party and voted Libertarian. Either way it is a win for our position. Of course, all the rest of the positions I vote for will be Libertarian regardless and if they don't have a candidate then I don't vote.

Plus, it feels GREAT to actually vote for something you believe in versus voting against a guy.

[maxtower]

To the non-voters or voters of lessor evils...

Adding your one extra vote to the small libertarian count of a few hundred thousand will make a much larger impression than adding a vote for the candidates who receive millions more.

The chance that your one vote will make a difference in the 2 party race is extremely small. You might as well give an extra vote of support to your chosen party who needs it more.

If for example Libertarians ever got to 5% of the vote (I believe there are more than 5% ideological Libertarians) they would represent a swing big enough to change who wins in the 2 party race. Watch how fast those republicans would be preaching small government then.

[clowntable]

Obviousely all the ACist will not vote but will also be part of Libertarian debates and discussions.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
Watch how fast those republicans would be preaching small government then.

[/ QUOTE ]

They already do that. Doesn't mean the government is any smaller under a Repub than a Dem

[nietzreznor]

[ QUOTE ]
Ayn Randians combine the absolute worst values of corporate capitalism and statist imperialism. They're not against big government. They're against government being used to help the poor. Everything else for them is permissible. Rand said that it's moral for ANY capitalist nation to invade and overthrow ANY socialist nation. But sending poor kids to school? No way! That be violating my freedoms!

Just 5 minutes of self-criticism would be enough for any Randian to convict themselves of craven dishonesty. Objectivism isn't even a real philosophy. It's an ad-hoc mish-mash of cold-war catechisms. Ayn is a ludicrous mountebank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ayn Rand certainly has her faults, but I think you are being unfair. Like most right-libertarians, she does tend to fall prey to ' vulgar libertarianism' at times (probably more often than most), but not often enough to dismiss her entirely.

I think she tends to adopt her 'corporate' attitude most often in her nonfiction writing; her novels, by contrast, are much more consistent in denouncing both government assistance for the poor as well as government assistance to the rich/big business ('aristocracy of pull' in Atlas Shrugged, for instance).

So, I don't know, there is a lot of bad and inconsistency in Rand, but there is also lots of good (but this may just be the Aristotelian in me speaking!)--unfortunately, I'm not sure how much of the 'good' rubbed off on the rest of the Objectivist movement [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img].