Liberals, Conservatives Say The "Libertarian Moment" Is Far From Happening

[TeleKat]

As my colleague and co-author Matt Welch has noted, The New York Times Magazine has had the temerity to ask, "Has the 'Libertarian Moment' Finally Arrived?" (the first time it waded into such territory was in 1971, when Stan Lehr and Louis Rossetto (the latter of whom would go on to co-found Wired magazine in the early '90s) touted libertarianism as the next big youth movement). Robert Draper's article is a rollicking, essential read—and not simply because he quotes Matt, his Fox Business Independents co-host Kennedy, Reason's polling director Emily Ekins, and yours truly at length (“If we can have 20 different types of Pop-Tarts, maybe we can have more than two types of political identification"). It's because something new and different is in the air. You can see it in the bizarre, black-swan cashiering of politicians as varied as former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and the sitting Democratic governor of Hawaii (who just lost his primary). You can see it in historically low ratings not just for Congress as an institution but in the way people feel about their own representatives. Mostly, though, you can see it in the way people are living their lives beyond the puny, zero-sum scrum of politics, where people as different as Glenn Beck and Glenn Greenwald are building new forms of media and storytelling and community. Whatever else you can say about politics as bloodsport, Obama sucking even worse than Bush, etc., this much is true: People are also getting on with their lives and building new businessess, communities, and worlds in ways that are pretty damn amazing.

Which doesn't mean anything to folks deeply invested in maintaining the conventional left-right, liberal-conservative status quo. The Times' Paul Krugman, who doesn't even pretend to read people with whom he disagrees, writes off the idea that interest in "free minds and free markets" is growing as just more "libertarian fantasies." Because he can only conceive of things in the narrowest, dumbest ways, he writes that "libertarianism is a crusade against problems we don’t have," as if the drug war, a continually failing foreign policy, legal discrimination against gays, immigration policy that punishes people yearning to be free, a rapidly increasing national debt, dead-broke entitlement programs, and so much more aren't really problems. Now that he has a no-show job at CUNY[*], does he even get out of his house anymore? There's nothing short of a revolution in how people conceive of work as a form of self-expression going on all around him. Over at places such as National Review, even conservatives who are themselves essentially libertarian pooh-pooh the idea that anything much can or will be done to reduce the size, scope, and spending of government. "Rand Paul can't win" is the essence of this formulation by Kevin Williamson and others there, again reducing complex shifts in cultural, social, economic, and political dynamics to electoral outcomes that threaten a dying post-war coalition of special interests. Gallup finds something like just 25 percent of Americans copping to being Republicans. That number will only decline if the GOP insists on doing the same thing it's been doing since the Gingrich Revolution. Which is to say: Spend, regulate, carp, and grow the size of the state even as it claims to be anti-government and pro-freedom. I have no idea who will be the next president of the United States, but I'm certain that the outcome of that contest will matter far less than the broad currents in American society that are clearly moving in the direction of greater social tolerance and fiscal responsibility. That's one of the main trends that Reason picked up in its poll of Millennials—not some self-congratulatory discovery that the kids today are junior-varsity libertarians—and folks who don't want to grapple with that and all its implications will have less and less relevant to say about politics, culture, and ideas. That won't make a difference to the Krugmans of the world and the pols who are in truly safe districts, but it will to the rest of us who are keenly interested not just in seeing what the future holds but also in helping to create it in the first place.

UPDATED 8/11!: Liberals, Conservatives Say The "Libertarian Moment" Is So Far From Happening That It's Not Even Funny, Man. - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Hmmm, thoughts?

 

[zgoldsmith23]

Thoughts? Let's hope they're wrong.

 

[PoS]

No one can predict the future but the fact that liberals like Krugman are speaking out against libertarians means they are awfully worried that it might happen. And thats a good thing.

 

[Summerwind]

UPDATED 8/11!: Liberals, Conservatives Say The "Libertarian Moment" Is So Far From Happening That It's Not Even Funny, Man. - Hit & Run : Reason.com

Hmmm, thoughts?

I think the Libertarian Party, and libertarians aren't getting anywhere in this country without a party, was looking promising right up until the Tea Party movement, and the subsequent extreme right wing and willfully ignorant have tried to claim "libertarianism" and ruined it for real libertarians by bringing in racism, sexism, homophobia, and similar that are entirely contrary to what libertarianism was before the Tea Party screwed up Libertarianism.

 

[ecofarm]

Fringe nutters like Ron Paul are holding the movement back.

I think the Libertarian Party, and libertarians aren't getting anywhere in this country without a party, was looking promising right up until the Tea Party movement, and the subsequent extreme right wing and willfully ignorant have tried to claim "libertarianism" and ruined it for real libertarians by bringing in racism, sexism, homophobia, and similar that are entirely contrary to what libertarianism was before the Tea Party screwed up Libertarianism.

The Tea Party was libertarian for perhaps a minute or two. It should have supported the Fair Tax.

 

[Cryptic]

Hmmm, thoughts?

I would say extreme libertarianism (right wing anarchy imho) is far from happening. As for moderate libertarianism, it seems to be on the rise.

Though I am not a libertarian, the number of democratic politicians directly advocating entitlement programs as a means to solve social problems is declining. Likewise the number of Republican politicians directly advocating that laws be enacted in accordance with Judeao Christian theology is declining as well.

The only Republican hold out position seems to be abortion. And if one concludes that the fetus is a person and not a "parasite", then it is entirely permissable to be pro life and be a secular libertarian.

 

[Summerwind]

Fringe nutters like Ron Paul are holding the movement back.





The Tea Party was libertarian for perhaps a minute or two. It should have supported the Fair Tax.

I think Rand Paul is a bigger threat than his father, though I suppose he's still claiming Republican, isn't he?

 

[TeleKat]

I think the Libertarian Party, and libertarians aren't getting anywhere in this country without a party, was looking promising right up until the Tea Party movement, and the subsequent extreme right wing and willfully ignorant have tried to claim "libertarianism" and ruined it for real libertarians by bringing in racism, sexism, homophobia, and similar that are entirely contrary to what libertarianism was before the Tea Party screwed up Libertarianism.

Hey Summer :2wave:

Bear in mind that the "Tea Party" is, in no way, affiliated with the Libertarian Party or libertarianism...nor have they claimed to be. The media pins the label on them, but popular Tea Partiers like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz have implicitly stated that they are not libertarians and do not wish to be associated with the term. They are "constitutional conservatives."

 

[Summerwind]

Hey Summer :2wave:

Bear in mind that the "Tea Party" is, in no way, affiliated with the Libertarian Party or libertarianism...nor have they claimed to be. The media pins the label on them, but popular Tea Partiers like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz have implicitly stated that they are not libertarians and do not wish to be associated with the term. They are "constitutional conservatives."

True, but many that one might normally call themselves TP, seem to instead choose "Libertarian" these days as it seems (and is) more rational. Just look at some of the "libertarians" on DP,... they sure post like TPers. I didn't know Rand Paul had disavowed his father's party. Interesting.

And I'm glad you put "constitutional conservatives" in quotes, because it seems that they haven't a clue how the government works much less the constitution.

 

[ecofarm]

I think Rand Paul is a bigger threat than his father, though I suppose he's still claiming Republican, isn't he?

If he's the front-runner for libertarians, the movement is just as dead as it always has been.

 

[Henrin]

Fringe nutters like Ron Paul are holding the movement back.

That is completely retarded. Ron Paul has probably brought in more people to the libertarian movement than anyone else in recent history. I know someone will mention he isn't a libertarian, but that doesn't really matter to my point. He introduced the idea to many people that went forth and explored the ideas of libertarianism.

 

[Summerwind]

If he's the front-runner for libertarians, the movement is just as dead as it always has been.

Telekat has corrected me, apparently Rand has disavowed libertarianism and claims Teapartyism, I haven't confirmed this on my own, but Telekat seems to date to one that is trustworthy about what she types even if I sometimes disagree with her perspective.

 

[ecofarm]

That is completely retarded.

I don't appreciate pejoratives against disabled people. Good day.

 

[Henrin]

I don't appreciate pejoratives against disabled people. Good day.

You do realize words have more than one definition, right? Why not go back and review the context that the word was used in and perhaps you can discover it's meaning.

 

[ecofarm]

Telekat has corrected me, apparently Rand has disavowed libertarianism and claims Teapartyism, I haven't confirmed this on my own, but Telekat seems to date to one that is trustworthy about what she types even if I sometimes disagree with her perspective.

He's a clown, just like his father.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

Personally I don't think the Libertarian movement will ever overtake conservatism or liberalism in my life, it can try and be associated with one.

That being said, I do like some of the ideas that Libertarians present, and the idea that a party made to try and look out for your own liberty is nice.

Things I can agree with:

#1 A more laissez-faire oriented economy

#2 More property rights

Don't agree with:

#1 Maximizing autonomy

#2 The disorganization of the party, from anarchists (ew god no) to libertarian socialists (eh) there are just way too many different ideologies within the broad spectrum of "Libertarian"

#3 Skepticism of authority and the (some libertarians I've seen) push to minimize the state to the point where we might as well not even have one (anarchism is the extreme, but most libertarians I've known want to really minimize the state).

Anyways, like I said before, without hitching a ride on the back of the Republicans or Democrats I don't think the Libertarian party will go anywhere. What it can strive for maybe in the future is splitting the presidential election into thirds, the party doesn't have to overtake the R or D they just have to at least be equal with them. If that happens the possibility of a Libertarian president is certainly existent.

 

[ecofarm]

You do realize words have more than one definition, right? Why not go back and review the context that the word was used in and perhaps you can discover it's meaning.

You used the word retard as a pejorative. There's no debate. I said good day.

 

[Summerwind]

He's a clown, just like his father.

On that, you and I agree. It would be nice if more libertarians were like Telekat and had a clue what it really means to be libertarian. The influx of religious arguments into libertarianism (ie anti-choice in all manner of social issues... abortion, SSM, and such) has entirely ruined it, imo.

 

[Henrin]

You used the word retard as a pejorative. There's no debate. I said good day.

No, I used the word to mean stupid or idiotic.

 

[TeleKat]

True, but many that one might normally call themselves TP, seem to instead choose "Libertarian" these days as it seems (and is) more rational.

Unfortunately, very true.

Just look at some of the "libertarians" on DP,... they sure post like TPers.

Oh my, oh my. I know. I get a twitch whenever I see a "libertarian" like Empirica or LowDown post something. Or, the worst of the worst, Mosby.

I didn't know Rand Paul had disavowed his father's party.

It's a sticky situation. Rand is a slimeball politician. He has disavowed libertarianism entirely (up to and including insulting us by claiming we just want to run around naked smoking pot), but he still thinks he can dictate how libertarians should vote (see statements on 2013 VA Gubernatorial). He's a waffler.

 

[Henrin]

It's a sticky situation. Rand is a slimeball politician. He has disavowed libertarianism entirely (up to and including insulting us by claiming we just want to run around naked smoking pot), but he still thinks he can dictate how libertarians should vote (see statements on 2013 VA Gubernatorial). He's a waffler.

I wonder what people will insult libertarians with when pot is legal. That they want to do what is perfectly legal to do?

 

[Top Cat]

You do realize words have more than one definition, right? .

Just stop. We all know what you meant. Honestly, no one is being fooled here.

 

[TeleKat]

I wonder what people will insult libertarians with when pot is legal. That they want to do what is perfectly legal to do?

Sad thing is: most of 'em probably do it in secret anyway. :shrug:

 

[ecofarm]

On that, you and I agree. It would be nice if more libertarians were like Telekat and had a clue what it really means to be libertarian. The influx of religious arguments into libertarianism (ie anti-choice in all manner of social issues... abortion, SSM, and such) has entirely ruined it, imo.

I self-label as 'independent' because I disagree (mildly) with libertarians on two issues and (severely) a political realm (realms being social, economic and foreign policy). One social issue: pro-life (mild, no ban, just move the deadline back a couple/few weeks - I'm not an incrementalist). One economic issue: green (market based only, not command and control). On foreign policy I'm a hawk; I don't understand respecting the sovereignty of a dictator over the sovereignty of the people.

I'm a pro-life (mild), green (market based), hawk libertarian. Obviously, I cannot self-label libertarian without qualifications because each of those issues and an entire realm of politics get me thrown out of the club.

I also disagree with something that some libertarians consider part of the platform. I do not agree with removing programs and laws against racism. As I believe systemic racism still exists in the US, thus removing affirmative action and laws against unjust economic discrimination is racist.

 

[Henrin]

Just stop. We all know what you meant. Honestly, no one is being fooled here.

Political correctness has infected your brain.