Good article on the state of the libertarian movement.

[farmerbyron]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/10/magazine/has-the-libertarian-moment-finally-arrived.html?_r=4&referrer=

A bit long to post up here but it was a really interesting look at the libertarian party and movement. It highlights some of the tripping points over the years and how the libertarian movement is becoming more mainstream among millennials. I was particularly impressed with Rand Pauls maturity and approach to critics of his for not being a "purist". He seems to understand that you have to walk before you run. I.E. MJ legalization is a no go nationally but reduced sentences for minor drug offenses is a step in the right direction.


I like what I read about Rand Paul. He seems to "get it". We can't make the changes necessary overnight but we need to at least start pointing in the right direction.


Rand Paul quotes in red.

Still, the anti-abortion and border-security-advocating Amash is hardly a radical libertarian. For the most part, his views are inseparable from those of Rand Paul. And so I asked him, “Given how leaders in your party have reacted to your legislative proposals, how do you think they’re going to react if Paul runs for president?”

“I believe very strongly that he could be the nominee,” Amash said. “He just needs to get his message out there and push back against the caricature that some of the political establishment will make of Senator Paul. They’re doing it because they’re afraid of him.”

“Why?”

Because, Amash said, Paul shared his ability to appeal to all kinds of people, not just big donors and not just entrenched Republicans. “He destroys their system,” he said with a thin smile.

“I think the war on drugs has had a disproportionate racial outcome,” Rand Paul said as he stood in his cowboy boots before a small gathering of Rotary Club members in Shelbyville, Ky. “Three out of four people in prison are black or brown. White people do drugs too, but either they don’t get caught or they have better attorneys or they don’t live in poverty. It’s an inadvertent outcome, and we ought to do something about it. As a Christian, I believe in redemption. I believe in a second chance. I think drugs are bad. I think even marijuana is deleterious. However, a 20-year-old kid who does make this mistake ought to get his right to vote back, ought not to be locked up in jail for 10 or 15 years.”

It was not the kind of message that a Republican presidential aspirant typically delivers to an all-white audience. But as he continued with his off-the-cuff remarks, I began to see what the Kentucky senator was up to. After observing, “We’re a pro-coal state, and I’m a pro-coal senator,” Paul then told the attendees, “but I’m not for no regulations on coal,” even going so far as to suggest that today’s environment was better than a century ago “and some of that’s through government regulation.” He assured the audience that he was all for affordable health care, just not the Affordable Care Act - “it’s really about freedom versus coercion.” And as his bedrock economic principle, Paul said, “We can grow as a country, but government needs to be minimized and the private market needs to be maximized.” But he was careful to say, “That doesn’t mean no government.”

Despite Amash’s claim that Paul “destroys their system,” nothing about his rhetoric sounded remotely worrisome to the Republican establishment. At the same time, the political artfulness of his oratory was hard to miss. Rand Paul was road-testing a kinder, gentler libertarianism to a mass market - in effect triangulating (to use the term associated with Bill Clinton, whose moral lapses Paul frequently cites) Republicans, Democrats and libertarians. It is a maneuver that, if successful, could amount to a considerable triumph for the movement. By calling for significantly reduced sentences for drug offenders, Paul has slyly redefined the terms of the marijuana debate with a libertarian tilt. Though a self-proclaimed “traditionalist” on marriage, his seeming contentment with judicial trends on the subject is far more in keeping with Democrats than with others in the G.O.P. presidential field. And if Paul’s foreign-policy addresses have more in common with the realism espoused by Robert Gates, a former defense secretary, than with his father’s laissez-faire approach to the outside world, his worldview nonetheless marks a clear break from the hawkishness that still predominates within the Republican Party..........

Last month I dropped by the Russell Senate Office Building to talk to Paul about his libertarian-Republican tightrope walk. Paul, 51 and a native Texan, possesses a supple mind and is a preternaturally confident speaker for someone who has held office for only four years. At the same time, Paul is not particularly enthusiastic about the glad-handing niceties that come with the job. “Good to see you,” he mumbled, then flopped down into a chair in his office’s conference room and fixed me with an impatient stare. I got to the point. Were we living in a libertarian “moment,” or was that wishful thinking on the part of Nick Gillespie and others?

“I think a plurality of Americans don’t consider themselves to be either Republicans or Democrats,” Paul said, citing young people and Silicon Valley entrepreneurs in particular. “I also think there was a time, maybe 30 years ago, when ‘libertarian’ was a term that scared people. Now I think it seems more like a moderate point of view. So I think the term is something that is definitely attracting, not repelling people.”

Paul qualified that observation by noting that the word itself encompassed a spectrum of positions. “What I try to point out when people say, ‘Oh, you’re an isolationist,’ I say, ‘No, there’s two poles: One is that we’re nowhere any of the time, the other is we’re everywhere all the time.’ Right now we’re much closer to the latter extreme pole - and that’s also coming from my party, the neoconservatives. So, really, libertarianism might be more like foreign-policy realism. There may be some libertarians who say, ‘By golly, we’re not going anywhere unless they attack us.’ I think I consider myself to be more moderate on the foreign-policy spectrum.”

“Do you think some political forces in Washington, like big defense contractors, hear your views on the defense budget and regard you as an existential threat?” I asked.

“I don’t think you should ever make a decision on what weapons systems we use based on the bottom line of those who make the weapons systems,” he said. “That makes some people fearful.” Grinning, he added, “But it should make other people feel hopeful.”

During our conversation, Paul made a point of characterizing libertarianism as being “moderate” rather than liberal on social issues. Movement leaders would likely object, but Paul’s preoccupation is with swaying the center-right.

“The party can’t become the opposite of what it is,” he told me. “If you tell people from Alabama, Mississippi or Georgia, ‘You know what, guys, we’ve been wrong, and we’re gonna be the pro-gay-marriage party,’ they’re either gonna stay home or - I mean, many of these people joined the Republican Party because of these social issues. So I don’t think we can completely flip. But can we become, to use the overused term, a bigger tent? I think we can and can agree to disagree on a lot of these issues. I think the party will evolve. It’ll either continue to lose, or it’ll become a bigger place where there’s a mixture of opinions.”

In effect, Paul was saying that the way for Republicans to win was to become more libertarian - though only up to a point. Purity was the movement’s game, not his. Paul reminded me that he worked on his father’s 1988 Libertarian Party presidential campaign and felt a great deal of sympathy for anyone trying to take on the major parties. “I also gathered signatures to get him on the ballot,” he said. “I know what a thankless job that is. Anybody who stands in a parking lot is thought to be an extremist.”

But later, with an irritated edge to his voice, Paul added: “Some people are purists, and I get grief all the time - all these libertarian websites hating on me because I’m not as pure as my dad. And I’m putting restrictions on foreign aid instead of eliminating foreign aid altogether. And I’m like: ‘Look, guys, I’m having trouble putting these restrictions on, much less eliminating them! So give me a break!’ ”

 

[Lurker66]

First let me point out a couple of words and phrases that sets the tone for his audience and readers.

Cowboy boots...nothing substantial/footwear isnt Libertarian
Rotary Club....good ol boy club
Christian.....because thats important. Not.
Pro Coal.....what does pro coal even mean???
Anti Obamacare.....it aint gettin repealed, the votes aint there, but sounds good.
Moderate....rand paul a moderate....lawl and im ronald reagan.
Agree to disagree on including gays.....status quo. They aint gonna get accepted by GOP.
Im trying but give me a break.....yep him n cruz n bachman cant do it by themselves.

Its not that I wouldnt vote for Rand Paul but his voting record and who he throws his hat in with......naaa. Hes politicking for the nomination of the GOP not the Libertarians.

 

[crrcboatz]

First let me point out a couple of words and phrases that sets the tone for his audience and readers.

Cowboy boots...nothing substantial/footwear isnt Libertarian
Rotary Club....good ol boy club
Christian.....because thats important. Not.
Pro Coal.....what does pro coal even mean???
Anti Obamacare.....it aint gettin repealed, the votes aint there, but sounds good.
Moderate....rand paul a moderate....lawl and im ronald reagan.
Agree to disagree on including gays.....status quo. They aint gonna get accepted by GOP.
Im trying but give me a break.....yep him n cruz n bachman cant do it by themselves.

Its not that I wouldnt vote for Rand Paul but his voting record and who he throws his hat in with......naaa. Hes politicking for the nomination of the GOP not the Libertarians.

Home Run again. I like what he says about some things BUT is he genuine????

 

[farmerbyron]

First let me point out a couple of words and phrases that sets the tone for his audience and readers.

Cowboy boots...nothing substantial/footwear isnt Libertarian
Rotary Club....good ol boy club
Christian.....because thats important. Not.
Pro Coal.....what does pro coal even mean???
Anti Obamacare.....it aint gettin repealed, the votes aint there, but sounds good.
Moderate....rand paul a moderate....lawl and im ronald reagan.
Agree to disagree on including gays.....status quo. They aint gonna get accepted by GOP.
Im trying but give me a break.....yep him n cruz n bachman cant do it by themselves.

Its not that I wouldnt vote for Rand Paul but his voting record and who he throws his hat in with......naaa. Hes politicking for the nomination of the GOP not the Libertarians.

As far as I know, he is the only candidate that advocates a more non interventionist approach to foreign policy and has actively opposed NSA spying. Yes, he is jockeying to be the GOP nominee but he is going about it differently than the failed approach of his father. Ron was much more of a purist and true liberty frightens the hell out of the bible thumping base of the GOP. So it looks like Rand is trying to pander to the base of the GOP and at least start to lean them towards liberty. Now he may be a capital R republican after all and disappoint libertarians but he is the most currently viable path to mainstreaming more libertarian ideals.


You've expressed support of Rubio in the past. Rand and Rubio share probably 80% of the same views with the divergences coming on foreign policy, domestic spying, and immigration reform. Oh and Rubios youth and ethnicity, which is a factor for you for some reason.

I guess I shouldn't have only put up the interesting stuff to me from Rand up here. It has taken the focus off of the rest of the article which has a larger point than just Rand.

 

[Lurker66]

As far as I know, he is the only candidate that advocates a more non interventionist approach to foreign policy and has actively opposed NSA spying. Yes, he is jockeying to be the GOP nominee but he is going about it differently than the failed approach of his father. Ron was much more of a purist and true liberty frightens the hell out of the bible thumping base of the GOP. So it looks like Rand is trying to pander to the base of the GOP and at least start to lean them towards liberty. Now he may be a capital R republican after all and disappoint libertarians but he is the most currently viable path to mainstreaming more libertarian ideals.


You've expressed support of Rubio in the past. Rand and Rubio share probably 80% of the same views with the divergences coming on foreign policy, domestic spying, and immigration reform. Oh and Rubios youth and ethnicity, which is a factor for you for some reason.

I guess I shouldn't have only put up the interesting stuff to me from Rand up here. It has taken the focus off of the rest of the article which has a larger point than just Rand.

Im not anti Rand Paul. If he beats out my guy Rubio, I will probably vote for him. I would love to see a Rubio/Rand Paul debate. I think it would serve to really unite the GOP.

And your correct, there is very little real difference in the 2.

Rubios race and youth will come into play at some point, just like Obamas did. But ITS NOT A FACTOR FOR ME rather it could be a factor.....just like being from Florida....a swing state. His race, youth and being from Florida could be a difference maker.

Now back to Rand and the article.....I just hope he doesnt let ya down, Im really looking forward to this political season.

 

[Lurker66]

Again, the way I see Rand Paul. He's either a watered down Libertarian, A right wing Tea Partier, OR a Conservative Republican. Hes trying to appease or be all 3. He reminds me if a multi tool. Doesnt do anything good but can come in handy for alot.


By pleading "give me a break", Im trying, he is effectively saying I cant do it. Thats a typical politician tactic for diverting blame for future failed governing.

I just dont see Rand Paul as being a Uniter, his ties with Cruz and Bachman and theyre ilk, says he will be divisive and polarizing.

 

[RickN]

 

[loudshirt]

They forgot to mention the reason the party is so popular among millennials is the pro marijuana pro gay marriage stance. I deal with plenty of people in that generation on a daily basis. Most of them are 18-22yrs old. They like the libertarian party because they see it as the party of "me". Most of these kids are self absorbed and worried only about themselves.

I do think if marketed correctly the libertarian party could do well. The current problem is they, like the two major parties, are too absolute.

 

[WTJ]

Funny it is, but Libertarian is still better than being a "Conservative Democrat" (what most Republicans really are) turncoat missing their collective testes.

 

[RickN]

Funny it is, but Libertarian is still better than being a "Conservative Democrat" (what most Republicans really are) turncoat missing their collective testes.

That is because they like being a liberal Republican more.