Good article on the state of the libertarian movement.

[Lurker66]

Are you a member of the Independent Party? Been out driving petitions and participating in Independent Party rallies and events? You guys going to get someone like George Wallace to run again?

If you are not active in Party affairs, that kinda invalidates your agreement with Rick's argument. Actually, his argument would apply even more to Independents.

No being a true Independent voter I wouldnt be affiliated with any Political Party. I know there is an "Independent" party but im not affiliated. ....im more of a Free Agent.

 

[WTJ]

No being a true Independent voter I wouldnt be affiliated with any Political Party. I know there is an "Independent" party but im not affiliated. ....im more of a Free Agent.

I guessed as much from what you said earlier. No different from most Libertarian voters you are. Good to go, but in RickN's version of the world, you are in the same boat.

 

[farmerbyron]

The Libertarian party will not be recognized in Oklahoma until it becomes a force they can not ignore. Right now they can safely ignore libertarians because there are so few of them, they are not organized, and frankly because libertarians seem to be content to just whine about things while doing nothing.

As for why it is not a majority opinion, because people always think they know better then everyone else. Even Libertarians think their ideas are the best for everyone as your question shows. Once you think you know better, most people have to try and "help" everyone. The Republicans do it, the Dims do it and if the Libertarians ever get power they will do it too.

No, not at all. The main philosophy is that you know what's best for yourself. Rather than having a govt or someone else tell you what is good for yourself. It's radical, I know.

 

[Grindstone]

No, not at all. The main philosophy is that you know what's best for yourself. Rather than having a govt or someone else tell you what is good for yourself. It's radical, I know.

I really wondering who RickN is talking about. Because nothing he's claiming matches up at all with most libertarian philosophies. Republicans and Democrats, absolutely. But not anything libertarian that I know of.

 

[Grindstone]

Keep killing them until they stop wanting to kill us.

 

[Coded-Dude]

Oklahoma Voter Registration Form: Democrat, Republican, No Party(Independent), Other(Independent)

You can't officially register as any thrid party as they are not recognized per Oklahoma Voting Laws(you can write it down on the blank line under Other, but that means little to nothing in terms of voting, you're still just independent in the eyes of the state; that means third party not american independent party). There are a great many hoops the big two put in place to make it difficult to get recognized by the state, be put on the ballot, and stay on the ballot. D & R are automaticly recognized and placed on the ballot, so they don't have to jump through any of these hoops("seperate but equal").

Some third party voters will register big two in order to influence who makes it to the primaries. Hell, even D & R voters do this. I know Republicans who register Democrat so they can decide who their "guy" will be running against in the main race(and visa versa). You can consider this being a "statist" but there are valid political reasons one why one doesn't simply register to the party in which they actually support(it's called working the system within the rules; Ron Paul tried it but the rules got changed on him on the fly - "fair and balanced").

Anywho, like I said. Those in power have/are/will make it as difficult as possible for others to take their power away. Doesn't mean it can't/won't happen, but the the uphill battle is long and arduous and many would rather work within the system available than tirelessy try fighting it to no avail. Carry on....

 

[RickN]

Oklahoma Voter Registration Form: Democrat, Republican, No Party(Independent), Other(Independent)

You can't officially register as any thrid party as they are not recognized per Oklahoma Voting Laws(you can write it down on the blank line under Other, but that means little to nothing in terms of voting, you're still just independent in the eyes of the state; that means third party not american independent party). There are a great many hoops the big two put in place to make it difficult to get recognized by the state, be put on the ballot, and stay on the ballot. D & R are automaticly recognized and placed on the ballot, so they don't have to jump through any of these hoops("seperate but equal").

Some third party voters will register big two in order to influence who makes it to the primaries. Hell, even D & R voters do this. I know Republicans who register Democrat so they can decide who their "guy" will be running against in the main race(and visa versa). You can consider this being a "statist" but there are valid political reasons one why one doesn't simply register to the party in which they actually support(it's called working the system within the rules; Ron Paul tried it but the rules got changed on him on the fly - "fair and balanced").

Anywho, like I said. Those in power have/are/will make it as difficult as possible for others to take their power away. Doesn't mean it can't/won't happen, but the the uphill battle is long and arduous and many would rather work within the system available than tirelessy try fighting it to no avail. Carry on....

And most would rather do nothing but whine. Sorry but I have been hearing this song and dance for years, started right after Ron Paul tried to run as a Libertarian and failed miserably. Then he put his tail between his legs and crawled back to the GOP. Ever since only a brave few stuck with the Libertarian party.

And while the Libertarian philosophy is that you know what's best for yourself, in real life they will be just like the Dims (for the poor and working man) and GOP (for less government and spending) They are all just people and people can not help themselves. Heck Ron Paul has proven time and time again that he will say anything to get elected while doing the same as everyone else in DC.

 

[farmerbyron]

And most would rather do nothing but whine. Sorry but I have been hearing this song and dance for years, started right after Ron Paul tried to run as a Libertarian and failed miserably. Then he put his tail between his legs and crawled back to the GOP. Ever since only a brave few stuck with the Libertarian party.

And while the Libertarian philosophy is that you know what's best for yourself, in real life they will be just like the Dims (for the poor and working man) and

How do you figure that? Ls are much more of deficit hawks and anti welfare program advocates than even the Rs are. Let alone the Ds. I struggle to find a way they would be like the Ds outside of the gay marriage issue.

GOP (for less government and spending) They are all just people and people can not help themselves. Heck Ron Paul has proven time and time again that he will say anything to get elected while doing the same as everyone else in DC.

From the article.......

......Only the dead think the G.O.P. is the party of small government.”......

Rick, you really should read that article at the front of this thread. Everything you have brought up with libertarians being in the GOP or Dem parties, why they are there, what successes they have had or not had and what the future may hold.

 

[farmerbyron]

Another excerpt directed towards Ricks thoughts on libertarians in the GOP.

This is not the first moment that libertarians have claimed as their own. In 1971, The New York Times Magazine published on its cover a 5,200-word article by two young authors (one of them was Louis Rossetto Jr., later a founding publisher of Wired) who pronounced libertarianism “undoubtedly the fastest-growing movement in the country.” That same year, the Libertarian Party was formed; a year later, its 1972 presidential ticket of the philosophy professor John Hospers and the TV talk-show host Tonie Nathan received one electoral vote. Forty years later, little had changed. The Libertarian Party’s 2012 candidate, Gary Johnson, a former governor of New Mexico, spent a million dollars and received more than a million votes — a better showing than any of his party’s predecessors, but not good enough to even remotely sway either the presidential election or the terms of the national debate.

Why has the libertarian takeover not come to pass? With charming understatement, the authors of the 1971 magazine article pointed out a small complication to this otherwise-unstoppable tidal wave they predicted. “At present,” they wrote, “the only areas of disagreement within the libertarian movement are whether the movement should strive for anarchy or for limited government, and whether it should work through revolution or within the system.” That tension has not gone away. During my travels with libertarians, I met many who cheerfully identified themselves to me as “anarcho-capitalists,” and I sat in on one speech — by Bill Buppert, a blogger and the author of a book called “ZeroGov” — that featured applause lines like “any tax rate above zero percent is immoral” and “there are no good cops out there.” I also encountered Beltway libertarians who revolt at the ballot box, like Gene Healy, a Cato Institute vice president, who told me, “Usually I just vote for whoever the Libertarian Party throws up, even if it’s a guy living in his car.”

Even if libertarians willingly engage the political process, there’s little to guarantee that the process will engage them back. Each party would be only too happy to receive the libertarian vote as long as it doesn’t have to do much of anything to earn it. But not since the days of the Vietnam War and Nixon’s imperial presidency have libertarians seen much profit in an alliance with the big-government Democrats. Instead, ever since a newly inaugurated President Reagan declared, “Government is the problem,” politically practical libertarians have been more apt to cast their lot with the G.O.P.

And yet, the relationship between the libertarian movement and the Republican Party is a fraught one, to say the least. The G.O.P.'s traditional “three-legged stool” is propped up by not only libertarian advocates of free markets but also by hawks, who believe in a well-financed and forward-leaning military, and by social conservatives, who believe that the government should play a role in preserving family values. Neither of the other legs feels supported by libertarians, and with cause. It’s hard to know whether Republicans in one or both of these other camps can ever make peace with a movement that they have spent a generation deriding. In a 1997 Weekly Standard article titled “The Libertarian Temptation,” David Frum belittled its followers as feckless hedonists who “claim that snorting cocaine is some sort of fundamental human right.” When I recently asked Frum if his feelings toward libertarianism had mellowed, he assured me that they had not.

“It’s a completely closed and airless ideological system that doesn’t respond well to reality,” he said. “Libertarians are like Marxists in that they have prophets like von Mises and Hayek, and they quote from their holy scripture, and they don’t have to engage.”

In practice, whenever a Republican politician has behaved more like a libertarian than a party loyalist, the party has made him pay for it. Despite the fact that Ron Paul served nearly two decades in the House and established seniority on the Financial Services Committee, in late 2010 the incoming speaker, John Boehner, reportedly sought to deny Paul a subcommittee chairmanship (owing to Paul’s views on monetary policy) before eventually buckling to the outcries of Paul supporters. On the House floor, Paul typically sat with a fellow outcast, the antiwar Republican Walter Jones. During the G.O.P. presidential primaries of 2008 and 2012, the other candidates treated him with amused derision.

 

[Grindstone]

And most would rather do nothing but whine.

And still you have not provided anything to back that up.