Sunday, July 13, 2008

Astounding: A Post in Libertarian Republican that I can actually recommend reading....

....although, sorry to say, Eric, you didn't write it.

I'm referring to Kevin Tracy's Libertarian Bob Barr will have an enormous impact on the Republican Party for years to come, even if he loses the race for the Presidency. {FYI, Kevin, got to cut down those titles].

This post is intriguing in that it parallels a Jeremy Lott argument about which I posted back in early June. There Lott argued that Ralph Nader's 2000 success in crippling Al Gore's campaign essentially forced the Democratic Party to spend the next eight years moving closer to his beliefs.

Tracy is essentially saying the same thing about the Barr candidacy: assuming that McCain loses and Barr is attributed with at least some major share of his defeat, the GOP is going to have to move in the direction of trying to win back the Libertarian wing it has shit on in favor of the social conservatives for the past decade or so.

This, in itself, is interesting, but the true value of Tracy's post may lie in a single sentence:

Well, believe it or not, most of the world doesn’t live under a “two-party system.”

By world Tracy means democratic nations, and his prime example is India:

In India, for example, there are countless political parties divided along political, ethnic, regional, and ideological lines.

As a result of the complex multi-party system, it is absolutely impossible for any single political party to take control of the government. So in order to accomplish anything, political parties have to come together, compromise, negotiate, and find a solid solution to whatever problem they are trying to solve.

At the same time, Indian politics still very much resemble ours. That’s because the largest political parties have organized “coalitions.”

This raises an interesting question: if Tracy is right, and in the aftermath of a McCain loss the GOP comes calling on Libertarians, wouldn't the most innovative response be: OK, you want us? Fine, but this time we're retaining our own party structure as a coalition partner.

What would happen if the Libertarian Party said to the GOP: we'll caucus with you in Congress, but the price is that you have to agree that in the following ten House districts you won't support a Republican against our Libertarian candidate.

Well, we all know what would happen. Still, it would be nice to see Karl Rove with an aneurism, don't you think?


Waldo Lydecker's Journal said...

The flip side of India is, of course, Italy and Israel, where the multiplicity of parties breeds weak coalitions that break down after a coupe of years.

Anonymous said...

Only problem is that Barr isn't a Libertarian, so if he makes McCain lose, the GOP will just have to get closer to itself...

Since Barr isn't running on anything that the LP has wanted in it's stands for years (Barr has plenty of evidence of support for foreign invasions BTW) so the GOP doesn't have any reason to move in our direction to get the Barroids to support them... (All they have to do is run a candidate that is less of a reject than McCain...)

LP Presidential Elector, NOT voting for Barr!