Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘politics’

Reason magazine recently hosted a debate in its pages over “where do libertarians belong?” The question was really whether libertarians ought to continue a tactical alliance with Republicans and the right, embark on a “liberaltarian” project, or disassociate themselves from both sides. The Cato Institute’s Brink Lindsey had previously argued in favor of the “liberaltarian” course (indeed coining the term), but after lack of constructive response from the left and the record of the Democratic Party in power has come to the view that libertarians should see themselves as occupying the center of the political spectrum, occasionally throwing their support to one side or the other. Jonah Goldberg argues in favor of the traditional libertarian-conservative alliance, while Matt Kibbe wants libertarians on board with the Tea Party.

The main critique of Lindsey’s argument is that the U.S. political system simply does not allow libertarians to be represented in office as such. To get elected, libertarians will have to don either the Democratic or Republican label. Moreover, the “center” of the political spectrum is really not libertarian, but a David Brooks-ish, pragmatist mish-mash (Pileus on Brooks).

My response to the whole debate is, Why do we have to choose? Libertarianism is by its very nature a diverse, nonhierarchical, individualistic movement. We can retain a concept of ourselves as a movement while nevertheless working both sides of the aisle. I know elected libertarian state legislators (on whose campaigns I worked, no less) who are both Democrats and Republicans. Now, the Democrats come under much more pressure from party leadership to compromise their principles. It’s a harder row to hoe. But the Democrats have a history in this country of being something of a catch-all party, and their electorate still reflects that to some extent. There are lots of “weak Democrats” out there who are very much open to liberty-based solutions.

At the state and local level, at least in smaller states where state politics has not been professionalized, it’s particularly easy to work within both parties, because the primary campaigns are less high-profile and ideological and more centered around name recognition. Libertarian political activists need to think outside the LP box, start holding their noses, and get involved in their local Republican or Democratic parties. At the federal level, of course, the only constant is that things keep getting worse. Every time you think that there can be nothing worse than the federal Democratic Party, the Republicans take over and prove you wrong, and vice versa. The best we can hope for there is gridlock and widespread disillusionment and mistrust of incumbents. We have no interest in defending virtually any incumbents at that level. (There are a few people I would make an exception for, like Ron Paul and Tom McClintock.)

Where do libertarians belong? Everywhere!

Read Full Post »

Fivethirtyeight has a fascinating account of how South Africa’s electoral system led to unchallenged National Party dominance and the imposition of apartheid. It’s just a little more evidence that the worst electoral system ever devised is single-member-district plurality rule. The discussion of emigration at the end is also interesting for providing another case in which free movement of labor and capital across borders promotes liberty:

By the end of the 1970s, the white population was actually falling by nearly 20,000 a year, a pace that would more than double by the beginnings of the 1980s. While the electoral system may have made it increasingly difficult for South Africans to oust the National government with their votes, it in many cases led them to vote against its system of Apartheid with their feet.

Read Full Post »

In politics, it’s rare that one gets to say “I told you so” quite this quickly. So forgive my being a little smug after yesterday’s post about how the left is underestimating Rand Paul, when a Rasmussen poll has come out today showing Paul up 25 points over his general election opponent.

Read Full Post »

Given the focus on the recent election results, the most recent Republican sex scandal has been somewhat in the background.  Rep. Mark Souder from Indiana had an affair with a staffer and is apparently resigning.   These things are getting so common, they are becoming mundane.  Given that he didn’t disappear from the country while supposedly hiking the Appalachian Trail, he didn’t drum up the same vast media attention as previous scandals.

What makes this scandal so juicy for the Left, is that Souder is an advocate of abstinence and abstinence education and even made a video about abstinence with his lover.  Thus the affair takes on a special aura of hypocrisy.  Hypocrisy is a truly bi-partisan sin–both parties commit it and both self-righteously condemn it.

I have to admit that I’m pretty tired of hypocrisy.  More precisely, I’m tired of hypocrisy about hypocrisy.  Given that many Republicans like to preach about Christian family values, it is mind-numbing that so many of them have a problem practicing them in their own lives.  But still, are we really surprised that there are a lot of hypocrites in Washington?  Let me tell you a secret: there are hypocrites everywhere.  I am a hypocrite and, yes, you are a hypocrite, too.

By this I mean that in one way or another we all fail to practice what we preach.  If you will forgive a Biblical reference, when Jesus said, “He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone,” he was teaching not only that hypocrisy is a sin, but that we are all hypocrites.

Public officials should be held to high standards, and we naturally feel betrayed when such grievous hypocrisy is brought forth.  But whether or not someone is a hypocrite is largely irrelevant to whether one is speaking the truth. Abstinence education should be judged based on its merits, not based on the lack of self-discipline of its proponents, just as various global warming proposals should be judged on their merits and not on the fact that Al Gore has a big heated swimming pool in his spacious mansion and uses something like half the electricty consumed in his county (well, maybe not quite half, but you get the point).

Furthermore, we cannot safely infer beliefs from actions in many cases.  Souder may have genuinely believed in the correctness of his political agenda even if he did not live up to it.  We all believe in principles that we do not fully live up to.  That is called being human.  Bill Clinton probably believed a powerful employer cavorting with a lowly staffer was wrong on many levels.  Yet, he is what he is.

I’m as guilty as the next guy in laughing and pointing fingers when the mighty fall.  I shouldn’t do that.  But, as I said, I’m a hypocrite, and so are you.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 917 other followers

%d bloggers like this: