US Libertarians demonstrate why they are unelectable
An article titled The Left-Libertarian vs. Right-Libertarian Controversy is a clear example the kind nitpicking that makes the US libertarian movement marginal.
Libertarianism is generally defined as individualism, with clear property rights and minimal (but not zero) government - and is clearly an antonym of authoritarianism. A pretty simple definition. Getting into the line between left and right libertarianism gets a little pendantic. The mentioned article has sterling quotes like:
The reoccuring theme of the right-libertarians appears to reduce to a total indifferance to or denial of the degree to which the status quo of the economy is warped and exploitative in its nature.
And
What is most strange about the matter, however, is that the left-libertarians are generally actually being consistant with Murray Rothbard, while the right-libertarians are not (or by the very least, they clearly selectively draw from Rothbard’s later, more conservative years).
While I believe that the article is intended for a very specific (and navel gazing) audience, its mere existence provides fodder to show that libertarians can’t get their act together and provide a coherent and, most importantly, simple philosophy. Unless libertarians can avoid public schism, the movement (if there is A movement) with be marginalized.
I do like the fact the Libertarian Party of Canada has a pretty clear philosophy and seems to have been relatively free of schisms. I’m thinking I should join, but sometimes I think that in a few years it’ll be the equivalent of being a commie with McCarthy running around…
Anything here rankle you? Feeling overly perturbed or elated? Leave a comment below. or subscribe to the Sauce Captain feed.
Comments
No comments yet.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.