Libertarian Democrat News

Following up on the article at Cato Unbound by DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas, check out the following links:

Hammer of Truth still says that Markos is not a libertarian. Of course, they tend to exclude anyone who isn't in the Libertarian Party.

ZenPolitics has perhaps the best quote in response:

His post/essay basically says “Look, ‘new’ Democrats and libertarians have a lot in common, except that you need government instead of the market to do this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this.”

Exactly. Democrats are never going to be able to reach out to libertarians and win them over unless they stop telling us that they were right all along about the need for government to replace the free market in a host of areas.

The Club for Growth also has a good reply, pointing out:

Kos rails against Republicans because they support Big Business (i.e. Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big Tobacco). But instead of supporting smaller government by reducing the subsidies to these corporate interests, Kos merely wants to shift the money to Big Education, Big Environment, and Big Research Grants to Study Things He Deems Important. There's nothing libertarian and everything Democrat about that.

A libertarian Democrat, which I believe is possible, should focus more on ending subsidies to Big Business instead of just shifting those subsidies elsewhere. Pick up a copy (or print one out) of Dean Baker's "The Conservative Nanny State" for ideas on how to go after the corporate welfare side of big government.

Mona at Inactivist seems to be one of the libertarians open to an alliance, or fusion, with liberalism. Noting that libertarians didn't get everything they wanted when they allied with conservatives in the past, and that today's Republican Party is too authoritarian to handle, the Democrats are the only option left for a major party home to libertarians. Anything that could make the home more hospitable is welcoming.

Ryan Sager, author of a new book on the authoritarian shift of the Republican Party, takes notice as well.

Your thoughts?

If any party wants to attract libertarians, they just have to follow a simple recipie: "Stop the government from doing bad things".

They can define "bad" however they want to.

From the libertarian side, we need to point out all of the "bad" things that the government does ("bad" being defined by our audience), and more fundamentally, convince them that the bigger that the government is, the harder it is to influence it to do good things and avoid bad things.

But I think it would be hard than it seems. you ru into a lot of subjectivity. But don't let that stop you. I'd love to read it.

Your recipie is almost there, just simplify it a little more to "Stop the government"

Stranahan said:
They take 'goverment is bad' as a starting axiom and then move on from there until they get into debates about how best to end goverment ownership of the roads or how to fund the government with no taxes. They get so far from reality as to be totally useless.

Yes, there are many idealogues that take this position, but they are the (vocal) minority of those with a libertarian mindset. Most of us would agree that government is a necessary evil that needs to be constrained as much as possible. There are very few things that we need for the federal government to do, National Security, International commerce, and Immigration.

In my experience as a former Libertarian and Objectivist, the biggest hurdle is going to be overcoming the blind faith ideological position that many libertarians have, They take 'goverment is bad' as a starting axiom and then move on from there until they get into debates about how best to end goverment ownership of the roads or how to fund the government with no taxes. They get so far from reality as to be totally useless.

"Thus, quite independent of Kos, something has been afoot among many libertarians that his invitation meets, but does not generate."

This quote from the Inactivist post you linked sums it up well, as does something I think you said the last time this came up -- Kos doesn't nail the 'libertarian democrat', but he may represent the leftmost flank of that spectrum. With him on the left and Blue Dogs on the right, we have a path between them to move forward.

I think Hans Herman-Hoppe summed up the difference between libertarians and most other political perspectives in America. Libertarians view government with a skeptical eye and see it as a necessary evil. Everyone else tends to see government as an existential end unto itself.

Libertarians are not committed to the idea of democracy, so as much as we are interested in individual freedom and non-interference in personal affairs. The notion of libertarianism in the abstract can be quite transcendental and Marxist. Populists, liberals and conservatives, on the other hand, see the government as a tool to mold citizenry and solve perceived "problems" in society.

The problem is that while you have on the one hand Hans Herman-Hoppe, Murray Rothbard, and a host of "anarcho-capitalists" that argue that government is at most a necessary evil, and often unecessary, you also have individuals like Milton Friedman who have a strong degree of influence over "libertarianism" but justified the existence of a state and ofter in positive terms--he sees an important role for the state in protection of rights and the creation of a stable monetary system.

You have two currents, one "statist" and in the classical liberal tradition, the other "anti-statist" and in the anarchist tradition. Both have come together in American libertarianism.

My thoughts were exactly the same as ZenPolitics. It boils down to the progressive mindsight "use the awesome power of government for the common good" being incompatible with the libertarian mindsight "allow the truly awesome power of the individual to do as it chooses, and an even greater good will be achieved at one tenth the cost." The starting point for Democrats trying to attract true libertarians should be to stand strong on individual liberty and put an end to corporate subsidies...but that won't happen since the labor unions need their employers to be well protected.

adam - i'm a big fan of your angle. but again, progressives will be unlikely to point the finger at government as being bad.

Thoughts? Simple. If there are no elected libertarian Democrats serving anywhere in office in the United States how can one claim that there's a "rising libertarian movement in the Democrat Party."

The only Libertarian Party member elected to office as a Democrat in the last decade was Steven Villaincourt to the New Hampshire Legislature in 1998. But ironically, a year after being in office Villaincourt jumped ship to the GOP.

This in comparison to 20 to 30 libertarians currently serving in state legislatures nationwide, most of whom are former or current members of the LP, or close friends of the Libertarian Party. Folks like Alaska Rep. Vic Korhing, WA Rep. Toby Nixon, CA Sen. Tom McClintock, MI Rep. Leon Drolet, and ME Rep. Ken Lindell.

This year no less than 5 (!!) Libertarian Party members have secured the Republican nomination for Vermont State House, and are likely to win their elections. Libertarian Party hero Don Gorman is running on the GOP ticket this year for NH State House and is expected to easily win.

Butch Otter is running for Governor of Idaho as a "libertarian Repubican" (recently featured in REASON MAGAZINE), and is polling way ahead. Sarah Palin, Republican nominee for Governor in Alaska is expected to win, and she's a close friend of the Alaska Libertarian Party. Charlie Crist, the Florida GOP's candidate for Governor, also running ahead, just appointed libertarian Repubilcan Rep. Kattnopp as his running mate.

Meanwhile, we hear of only one single "libertarian Democrat" running for office in the entire United States; Frank Gonzales in Florida who has zero chance of winning.

Do the math: Over 30 libertarian Republicans elected to state legislatures around the nation, and zero "libertarian Dems." Five to Six libertarian Republicans now serving in Congress; Ron Paul, Jeff Flake, Butch Otter, Tom Feeney, and Dana Rohrabacher; again zero "libertarian Democrats."

Tons of Libertarian Party members, current and former about to win seats in state legisalatures and for local office as Republicans, and zero as "libertarian Democrats."