 |
Category: News and Politics
 Hello Freedomphiles! Do you remember the exclusive piece I wrote for The Nolan Chart about the schism in the Libertarian Party between the pragmatists and the purists? Here's a refresher:
If you are ideologically pure, it's really quite easy. You get to sit on the sidelines and bemusedly shake your head at all the people arguing over what flavor of evil they want. You get to take the high road and make bold pronouncements - while people argue over the best way to save Social Security, you can stand back and proclaim, "End Social Security altogether!" As the problem gets worse, you get to then go and say "I told you so!" to all the idiots who didn't listen to you in the first place. The only problem is, they're still not listening... ...But for the political pragmatists, this situation is untenable. For them, it isn't enough to be right - they want success for the party, to gain a larger voice, and to move the country incrementally back toward a more libertarian society. And they have a point. Last time around, the Libertarian Candidate was the ideologically pure Michael Badnarik (right), and the results were dismal, the fallout being that "an estimated 2,000 people left the LP then, and activism dropped off substantially." Running a largely purist campaign for thirty years has left the Libertarian Party with underwhelming results, with no candidate ever getting more than 2% of the popular vote. It's an interesting dilemma within the party. Now that we have nominated Bob Barr, a former anti-gay rights drug warrior and signer of The Patriot Act, the party is in a shambles.
Thomas Knapp, libertarian activist and founder of Rational Review, has launched Boston Tea Party, a libertarian alternative that is helping George Phillies, who failed to garner the LP nomination, in states where he was used as a placeholder on the ballot. You see, the national party didn't file in time in New Hampshire and Massachusetts, so Phillies is the de facto candidate.
All this is infuriating to KD Tunstall, author of The Constitutional Militant, who shared with me an advanced look at his article, which will hit the street tomorrow. Here is a relevant excerpt:
I hear those who profess that "the media" blacks us out, or that our candidates couldn't convey "the message" to the electorate, as a reason for electoral losses. Another excuse is that "the playing field isn't level." These are poor excuses at best and completely off target in reality. Though inequality certainly exists in election codes that protect the incumbent political parties, this myopic view of reality fails to grasp the fundamental issues that plague the libertarian movement...
...Now we find ourselves amidst an election for the President of the United States once more. In typical fashion, the caterwauling from the purity police has begun. The candidate "isn't a true libertarian" is their battle cry. I find myself dismayed once more. One candidate who failed to garner the nomination has decided to run an 'insurgent' campaign in an attempt to deny the rightful nominee his place on the ballot. Let us call the kettle black shall we? This is political cannibalism.
Instead of setting aside our differences and uniting behind a common cause, this faction of ideologues work in an effort to discredit not only the party's nominee, but the party itself. They demand purity while castigating and denigrating those with which they disagree, no matter how small the degree.
I have to say, he makes a pretty compelling case. I am far from sold on Barr's libertarian bone fides, but we have a unique opportunity here to get some big exposure. Bob Barr is a name. People recognize him. George Phillies is...well, George Who?
I'm a realist, and I know that neither man stands a snowball's chance in Hell of winning the presidency - especially when the two monopoly parties are offering a choice between two historical options, one of which gave us the very law (McCain-Feingold) that makes it so hard for us to compete nationally.
But a big turnout can really help the exposure of the Libertarian Party. If we can pull enough disaffected Republicans and Hillary supporters, we could really make a mark. We could be laying the groundwork for inclusion in the process, access to debates, universal ballot access.
This is not the time for division.
There is a place in this party for pragmatists and purists. The pragmatists are the ones who are going to get us election victories. The purists are the ones that will keep the pragmatists honest. We need to realize and embrace these unique and vital roles, forming a coalition that could secure the future of the Libertarian Party.
UPDATE: According to my sources in the party, this blog has stirred quite a shitstorm within the LP already, and some are considering trying to kick Phillies out of the party. I don't think that is the right move, but it's nice to know I'm being read.
2:39 AM
Powered by  | | English | | Albanian | | Arabic | | Bulgarian | | Catalan | | Chinese | | Croatian | | Czech | | Danish | | Dutch | | Estonian | | Filipino | | Finnish | | French | | Galician | | German | | Greek | | Hebrew | | Hindi | | Hungarian | | Indonesian | | Italian | | Japanese | | Korean | | Latvian | | Lithuanian | | Maltese | | Norwegian | | Polish | | Portuguese | | Romanian | | Russian | | Serbian | | Slovak | | Slovenian | | Spanish | | Swedish | | Thai | | Turkish | | Ukrainian | | Vietnamese |
|