Ask a Libertarian: Should we work within the two-party system?

Welcome to Ask a Libertarian with Reason's Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch. They are the authors of the new book The Declaration of Independents: How Libertarian Politics Can Fix What's Wrong With America. 

Go to http://declaration2011.com to purchase, read reviews, find event dates, and more.

On June 15, 2011 Gillespie and Welch used short, rapid-fire videos to answer dozens of reader questions submitted via email, Twitter, Facebook, and Reason.com. In this episode, they answer the question:

"What do you think is best course of action for libertarian minded people, working through the 2 major parties or pushing to advance a 3rd party (the Libertarian Party)?"

For the complete series, go to http://reason.com/archives/2011/06/10/ask-a-libertarian and Reason.tv's YouTube Channel at http://youtube.com/reasontv

Produced by Meredith Bragg, Jim Epstein, Josh Swain, with help from Katie Hooks, Kyle Blaine and Jack Gillespie.

Comments

[hazeeran]

Seems like libertarians working through the Republican party (Paul & Johnson) have made more people aware of libertarian ideas than the 3rd party strategy.

[Joe M]

Definitely. They've gotten more attention and moved the ideas forward more from 2008-12 than the LP did in decades.

[-]

Should we work within the two-party system?

Only if you want to be relevant.

[creech]

Hey, it's gotten Ann Coulter's attention and now our ideas are "cowardly."

[hazeeran]

She was on the local libertarian's radio show yesterday; I couldn't bear to listen, let alone guess why he wanted her on.

[-]

She's flogging a new book, and most radio-show hosts are craven. They'll book their mother's rapist if it boosts ad revenues.

[free2booze]

You're right. If we don't reward libertarian leaning candidates with our support, then we won't see more of them step up in the future.

[Just like...]

our rewarding of Ronald Reagan gave us George Bush!

Face it...we ain't gonna change them.

[Jerry]

I'm a bit worried the GOP might coopt the libertarian label like how the Democrats coopted the liberal label.

[MWG]

This. As a former conservative a healthy amount of cynicism is in order when considering the republican party some sort of cousin to the libertarian movement.

[free2booze]

Absolutely, even if that means limiting that involvement to the primary process.

There is no reason to think that libertarians can't have the same level of influence in the GOP, as the SoCons currently maintain. I think ever the religious right realizes this, which is why they take every opportunity to demonize libertarians.

The GOP will never become the libertarian party. But, libertarians can influence which issues are at the top of the party platform.

[Joe M]

I used to be a dues-paying member of the LP, but they can't get any traction, and Bob Barr was pretty embarrassing. A decent-sized segment of the GOP is pretty libertarian these days, I think, so maybe there's hope there.

[hazeeran]

I hope newfound reticence on the part of some GOPers from staying in Afghanistan for too much longer is a result of this and not being out of power.

[Applederry]

I don't know what methods are best, but we should always keep in mind the goal is to instill in people a desire for liberty.

The most prescient thing that George Bush never said: "The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper!"

It doesn't matter how many restrictions or rules you put into place to try and contain the government, it will find a way around them, usually through the people themselves. If the people of a nation are not culturally libertarian then the government will not be and simply cannot be libertarian.

[hazeeran]

Exactly. Constitutions aren't self-enforcing.

[Bobby Hawk]

Ah but you forget the original document, the one they do not want you to focus upon, the one that gives the power to we the people, the Declaration of independence. Within that document are the powers enumerated to the people. And the constitution is more than a piece of paper, its the rules for how this country operates. True enough its be hijacked by the stoics. However if be ban together as we the people, then we can take it back form the Stoics and end their rule in Washington DC. Its up to the people and not the government to push the reset button. Its long overdue and we know it. And no I am not talking about civil war. We are over 300 million strong in this United States and they are but a few. The US military will stand down for the reconvening of the continental congress, who could officially take action as directed by We the people. As frightening as that may sound a life of Stoic socialism or communism is much worse.

[FSA Footsoldier]

instill in people a desire for liberty

WTF are you talking about?

[John C. Randolph]

The way the deck is stacked in this country, we're not going to reform the government without reforming at least one of the franchises of the Ruling Party first. Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Justin Amash are the start of that reform.

-jcr

[-]

Infiltrating the beast and destroying it from within can work. It all depends on how much the infiltrators are willing to compromise and how well they choose their battles. Also on their real and genuine grasp of capitalism (the only viable political-economic system).

[Fist of Etiquette]

The libertarians will get no joy from the Democratic Party (as it stands today) because of their resolute belief in government solutions to any given problem. And they are not anti-war, as the sudden silence of the left on the matter has proven. No give from the left's drug warriors, either.

Republicans? Greater possibility of selling it to them.

[John C. Randolph]

The Republican rank and file are open to liberty-based arguments. The party leadership of course, are a pack of shysters.

-jcr

[Episiarch]

I see that the GOP apologists are out in force today. The GOP has shown itself to be just as hostile to libertarians as the Dems, but all the GOP fanboys are drooling over the prospect of suckering the libertarians back into their previous "I only beat you because I love you, honey" relationship with the GOP.

Go sell your shit somewhere else. Both parties are fucking scum and even if there are a few ok people within them, that doesn't change the fact that the organizations themselves are statist to the core.

[Joe M]

I don't disagree with that. I think the best chance is in the primaries. The Tea Party showed that it's possible to get non-establishment candidates into the general election and even win at that level. Seriously though, Bob Barr as a Libertarian Party candidate was pretty bad.

[Episiarch]

Don't know what to tell you, dude. I'm no LP member.

[Joe M]

Soooo... just hopeless, then?

[SugarFree]

He's not even a libertarian, he's an anarcho-capitalist. Didn't you get your score card in the mail?

[Joe M]

See this is why we need to abolish the Postal Service.

[SugarFree]

They should have used a Forever Stamp. Which sounds like the plot device for a Nicholas Sparks "novel."

[Episiarch]

Lysander Spooner agreed with you.

[Jim]

Could've used your help in the "Leviathan" thread, Epi. They were knocking ancaps.

[Episiarch]

Sorry, dude, I have a lot of work to do, and frankly, the trolls are boring me shitless. I'll do what I can.

[Jim]

Eh, it wasn't much, only a few comments. I just bristled a little at the implication that no serious person could believe this.

Then again, you and I, who may be the only two people in the world who can quote ATHF from memory, may not be the best examples of serious-mindedness.

[The Trolls]

Oh, do stay away, Epi. The site has been refreshingly clean today.

[hazeeran]

No disagreeing with that. Just describing that libertarians have about 0.00000007% more luck influencing the red team.

[T]

That and the fact that the GOP on a local level is fucking hostile to libertarians. There's still entirely too many socon nutbags in the GOP.

[Jim]

This. I've noticed that my county GOP is much, much worse than the national one. They literally only talk about economics in the abstract, sometimes, and mostly focus on outlawing abortion, kicking out illegals, and "defending marriage".

[Joe M]

That could vary depending on what part of the country you're in.

[Jim]

Collin County, the reddest of socon red in Texas (Plano, Allen, McKinney).

[Joe M]

There ya go. I'm willing to bet that some of the Rocky Mountain local action is better.

[Jim]

Oh for sure. When I was going to college in Lubbock, the LP is actually taken as a serious party out there, instead of the "oh, isn't that cute" *flick* that we get here in north Dallas.

[Bobby Hawk]

What most people are missing is that the political land scape in the USA has undergone a paradigm shift. What once was based on Christian doctrine and stood to the left and right of that doctrine has now shifted to two doctoral beliefs, Stoic and Christian, with Stoic being the majority.

The reason many in the GOP appear as Democrats is because they share the same Stoic belief. Romney and Obama are clear examples of this paradigm shift. Obama is a Zealot Stoic and Romney is a Liberal Stoic, neither are Christians all though they claim that to be the case. Obama believes in James Cone's Liberation Theology which is based on Marx & Engels version of Stoic doctrine. Romney stands behind a church system which like most organized church systems in the United States is teaching a form of Liberation theology through its tracts and prepared sermons. Therefore we have Zealot Stoicism and Liberal Stoicism. This is what makes them appear the same.

The hammer drops when these Stoics come against the American people who believe in the pure application of Christian doctrine, which is opposite Stoic doctrine on nearly all issues.

Look into the Stoic doctrine of philosophy and its dialectic method and how it is the basis for Henri Saint Simon, George Hegel, Hegel's students which include Marx & Engels, Ayn Rand, George B Shaw, Darwin and many others. The apostle Paul identified this doctrine when he came in contact with it while in Athens (Acts 17:15), he warned Christians about becoming seduced by it in Colossians 2, specifically 2:8.

[MWG]

Gonna have to agree with epi on this one. The PATRIOT Act, Drug War, Endless war abroad, all wrapped up in the Stars and Stripes is what you'll get from Team Red.

[PP-l]

Both parties are fucking scum and even if there are a few ok people within them, that doesn't change the fact that the organizations themselves are statist to the core.

Nail, meet Hammer. Maybe you could argue otherwise if Ron Paul had the faintest chance, but even if by some fluke he got the nomination I'd bet the vast majority of GOP honchos would be sitting on their hands, and more than a few would be overtly campaigning against him. After all, Paul is a far greater threat to what Republicans actually hold dear (as opposed to what they claim) than Obama could ever hope to be.

[Bobby Hawk]

Actually the draw between the libertarians the GOP is over winning in 2012. The Democratic - Marxists are betting the bank that there will be enough libertarians to inject into the races that they will split the GOP vote and provide a win for the democrat -marxists. Watch for the democrats to encourage the libertarians to enter the race in order to wash down the GOP vote. Democratic - Marxists will not vote for a libertarian nor a GOP candidate, therefore the only hope the democratic - Marxists have at winning in 2012 is to split the support for the GOP between the GOP and the Libertarians. This is already their strategy and you will see it come into full swing in 2012. Obama would be more than happy to debate candidates from both the GOP and Libertarian parties, as that will mean he has already won the election.

[Jim]

I'm with you on this, Epi. This newfound so-called "libertarianism" in the GOP is just to 1) try and ride/control the TP movement, and 2) conveniently only appeared when they were forced out of power. The GOP is Ike Turner, and like a good girl, we keep going back to get slapped around some more.

[Joe M]

I'll be voting Paul/Johnson in the primary, but if neither of them is the candidate, I'll be voting LP in the general like I always have.

[Jim]

I'm pretty much in the same boat.

[Brett L]

I'd have to register as a Republican to do so, and frankly, fuck those guys. I'll vote against the incumbent for every position in the general as usual.

[Joe M]

In Texas, you don't have to be registered as a Republican. Unfortunately for me, after I voted for Paul in the last primary, I got a ton of mail from the GOP. Some of the mail was surveys, which I sent back, telling them they needed to drop the socon crap.

[johnl]

As always.

[Kristen]

As a childless person, I would happily pay (and pay way more than I am now through taxes) for other people's children to go to school....through reputable charities and private scholarship funds. The government is neither reputable nor a charity.

[Kristen]

Goddammit. Wrong thread.

[Spiny Norman]

It's okay. Nobody reads down this far anyway.

[Justin Cases]

I do

[NAL]

I don't.

[free2booze]

I do like the Tea Party analogy. If libertarians ever organized in the same way as the Tea Party has, then we could have a solid impact.

If it were to be done, the organization would probably have to be limited to a small number of issues, so a consensus could be reached. I also think it's a bad idea to remain limited to one party. Instead, publicly state that the organization will support any candidate is strong on the limited number of issues the group was formed around.

[CE]

Definitely. If the USA has 5 percent libertarians, we won't win anything as a third party. Five percent is enough to dominate in the primaries of either major party, since voter turnout is so much lower. Nominate a libertarian-leaning candidate in the primaries, and most people will vote for him or her out of habit, based on the D or R label.

[Troy]

No.

[Bobby Hawk]

Nick Gillespie is on the right subject concerning the two party system. he simply has the wrong reasoning concerning why its failing in the USA.  The reason Americans don't care for politicians on either side of the isle, is because most politicians believe in some version of Stoic doctrine.  No matter if its claimed as (Socialism or Communism or Progressivism or Objectivism or even Liberation Theology), politicians believe in a doctrine which is counter to the doctrine of the people of the United States.  This political belief in stoic doctrine is the result of intense soviet subversion of our higher education systems as well as our political systems.  Why does Romney appear as Obama light?  Thats because both Romney and Obama believe in the Stoic doctrine of philosophy.  Obama is a Zealot believer in the doctrine and Romney is a liberal believer however, both believe in Marx & Engels version of the doctrine and its dialectic of materialism. 

This is the beef between American citizens and their politicians.  Its not just spending, its the assimilation of a nation religious system, one based on Stoic doctrine.  Its ideas such as the use of Taxation of the wealthy simply to spread the wealth to the poor, which have Americans up in arms.  You see, this is based on Marx & Engels version of Stoic doctrine and its dialectic of materialism.  This action stands firmly against Christian doctrine which clearly states "Thou shalt not covet" and "thou shalt not steal".  The Marx & Engels, stoic based doctrine, forces the people to break both these commandments by allowing the coveting of what belongs to the wealthy and the theft of that covertness via the US tax code. 

The expansion of massive social justice programs are another widely unpopular item with Americans, which is again based on versions of Stoic doctrine.  Americans want social issues left in the hands of Americans and their faith based systems, not the government, and especially not government defined Stoic doctrine based systems (Socialism, Communism, Progressivism, Objectivism, and Liberation Theology).  The political machine in Washington and around the world assumes that a single doctrine will allow world peace to come into play.  The idea is to move all nations into some basis of Stoic doctrine, for most Socialism has been chosen (Henri Saint Simons version of Stoic doctrine).  Americans want no part in a world social order, or a single global government.  Americans want their individual sovereignty and a government who is restricted to those items enumerated in the constution.  If the political parties in the United Staes don't receive this message loud and clear.  Then the two party system and all its lobbyists will be disassembled by the people and the political landscape in Washington refreshed.  Politicians in Washing should remember the main document of the United States, the declaration of independence which makes it the individual responsibility of the citizens of these United States to throw off government which has become tyrannical and ineffective.   The single doctoral base political machine in Washington (Stoic based), fits the bill of this tyrannical, despot government as defined in the declaration.  The Tea party may well be the end road to the reset button for the American political system, based on the declaration of independence. 

[Bobby Hawk]

Personally, I would support the elimination of all party affiliation and have men stand simply on their principals and beliefs. Then let the people decide if the candidate they would like to choose without party affiliation.

Imagine for a moment an American where the politicians did not have a party affiliation. Where there were no political lobbyists, Where all social issues were returned to the people and the faith based systems, the senators of the United States were appointed by the State congress, and where no politician could serve in any one body more then two consecutive terms, with a minimum time out of at least 7 years between any consecutive terms served.

[scarpe Nike Store]

is good