Article Image
IPFS News Link • Politics: Libertarian Campaigns

Take Back the LP


The state of the party

Some libertarians say that the party is not what it was ten years ago. They're right.

While some state and local parties have held to a principled libertarian message, the party as a whole has lost its way. A watered-down platform, combined with leaders and candidates who are increasingly indistinguishable from marginally pro-freedom Republicans, is not a party worthy of the support of those who seek freedom.

Some activists have been driven to the conclusion that hardcore libertarians should abandon the LP and let it fade away. We disagree. America needs a libertarian political party now more than ever, and we believe the LP can be that party again.

It's worth saving...

4 Comments in Response to

Comment by Morey Straus (27832)
Entered on:

You wouldn't be the only radical in the LP who feels that way. I know of one who recently ran a campaign with a tagline of "Don't vote for me!"

Comment by Shepard Humphries (23067)
Entered on:

I am one of the couple thousand Don mentioned ... unfortunately I think he generously inflated our numbers.  :)  I used to be a Paul/Reagan/Goldwater person, but have now moved away from politics into philosophy. 

 I suggest that my philosophy of anarcho-capitalism is the Royal Flush in this debate.  The GOP has a Pair, the watered down LP folks a Straight and the "Radical Libertarians" Four of a kind.  All of these are better than a High Card, but they are not the best. 

I am concerned about suggesting to the masses that the evil we call government be "fixed" by electing through a government process a different person to rule.  I can appreciate many's (me to) need to "take action" in political spheres, but I think it discredits the philosophy of liberty.  Because I know that millions of individuals in our geographic area want more liberty than the Republicrats offer, I can appreciate those people wanting to support LESS evil.  I choose to suggest NO evil.

How can we preach non-aggression and then ask that WE be elected to be a kinder and gentler aggressor?

Comment by Morey Straus (27832)
Entered on:

Don, thank you for your thoughtful comments. If the MA elections are any indicator, the tea parties are a farce. They bypassed the moderate libertarian, and chose the big government candidate. Even if the LP continues down the path of expedience and populism that you favor, it makes no difference in an immediate sense. We are the protest choice, and we should capitalize on our strength, which is one of igniting a deeper understanding of economics and philosophy to every person within our reach.

Comment by Don Wills (14843)
Entered on:

The LP radicals, anarchists, Rothbardians, whatever they call themselves have no interest in the LP being a political party. They just want a platform to spew their anarchist idiocy which is the belief that government should be abolished. It's pure fantasy which the American electorate will never embrace.

*** Here's what LP anarchists believe (from the FAQ at the link in this article):

Q: LP candidates rarely get elected! Doesn't that mean its been a failure?
A: No, getting elected was not the main idea.

Q: Shouldn't political parties exist to win office? Think tanks are a better vehicle for education.
A: We disagree...


Question: who in their right mind would join a political party that doesn't desire to win elections?

Answer: nobody

The only hope for the future of the LP is to re-brand itself as a party advocating principles of limited government and state sovereignty, principles that are at the heart of the Tea Party movement, principles that are acceptable to tens of millions of Americans; it's time for the LP to move away from the principles of anarchism which are acceptable to only a few thousand of Americans.