Why is the libertarian vote up for grabs?
Clive Crook at the National Journal wrote one of many recent articles by pundits about "The Neglect of Libertarians".
It's a decent article, if not earth-shattering. Following is an email I sent Mr. Crook in response to his article:
Dear Mr. Crook,
I'm a libertarian-leaning Republican blogger (more libertarian than Republican) and have been writing along the lines of your article today for quite a while at my blog (www.rossputin.com).
One sentence in your article really stood out for me: "Although it is true that the libertarian vote is up for grabs, in other ways it is a tactically unappealing target, because it will always be up for grabs."
It's not that I disagree with you but rather that I wonder what this really means about our political parties. Well, maybe I don't wonder...I know: It means that it is nearly impossible that either of our current dominant political parties will ever govern on principles of limited government, liberty, and low taxes.
The reason the libertarian vote may indeed always be up for grabs is not because we libertarians are fickle but rather because we have no political party which makes even an attempt to govern based on the principles of our founders and founding documents. The libertarian vote could be reliable if the GOP returned to being the party that Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan would be proud to be a member of. (I don't think there's any hope, ever, for the Democrats.)
Best regards,
Ross Kaminsky
| Print article | This entry was posted by Rossputin on 10/29/06 at 04:00:55 am . Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. |
Yours truly
-
Following Obama's Economic Policies
Facebook NetworkedBlogs
XML Feeds
10/29/06 @ 06:24:32 pm
Ross,
I share your concerns about the current state of the parties, but not your despondancy for the future. Sad to say, both parties are currently aligned in a classically liberal position, the debate being about tactics rather than truly differing policies.
In Colorado, the Democrats want government to get bigger to assume a greater role in people's lives to take care of things like health care & child care. Some Republicans also want government to get bigger to assume a larger role in business-oriented spending like building infrastructure.
None of these are "bad" things for a society to have more of. It's just that when government is the provider-allocator, it does a slow, expensive, & poor job of allocating resources. Worst of all, government never allocates its own resources. It's always coerced from us, and those taxed rarely get their money's worth. That's where I heartily agree with you, but there's a silver lining in this ugly story.
Sometimes it takes a gentle nudge to get people to listen, but since we're talking about politicians here, maybe a swift kick in the butt is needed. If polls are to be believed, Republicans are about to get that swift kick, and it may be just the jolt they need to return to their core beliefs of low taxes, limited gov't, & minimal intrusions in citizen's lives that made them the majority in the first place. If that happens, Republicans will again earn the respect & loyalty of many libertarians in Colorado and may rightly resume the title "majority party". Unfortunately, Republicans may first have to remain back benchers a while longer. In the meantime, an old saying applies... "In a democracy, the people ultimately get exactly the government they deserve, and sometimes they get it good and hard."