Reading Libertarian blogs, watching the fratricidal conflict between the Radical Purists and the Pragmatic Reformers, and keeping an eye on the ever-expanding role of government in what used to be private affairs, I have come to the conclusion that Libertarians need to forget about the damn platform and get to work on an agenda.
Let me explain.
First, reading Australian, British, and Canadian Libertarian blogs I have come to realize a different tone exists among our fellow travelers overseas. They perceive themselves (quite rightly, I suspect) as having already lost the war to the pervasive Nanny State, and they provide a cautionary lesson about what happens when government control reaches a certain "critical mass."
For a selection of no-so-light (as in downright depressing if occasionally quite witty) reading, try these:
Canadian Liberty will lead you through a link to Pierre Limieux's Lost Canadian Liberties, which includes 32 items such as
1) Start a private school.
12) Sell eggs or milk without the state’s permission.
18) Talk publicly about any topic (there are criminal code provisions and “human rights commissions” against certain forms of speech and certain topics).
From Great Britain, the Libertarian Alliance blog discusses the fact that the government has now moved to involuntary organ donation.
The Australian Libertarian Society blog brings us word of intrusive government censorship of the internet, "following the examples of the great liberal democracies like China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, and Burma is a promising start."
What these posts and the others you will find to complement them have in common is that Libertarians appear to have been reduced from a political force to be reckoned with to essentially impotent political and social commentators.
That's not a good place to be, and the shared perception of many American Libertarians, libertarians, and freedom-loving citizens with libertarian leanings is that we're headed down that road as well. Part of the reason that many of Ron Paul's supporters are so passionate--and at the same time so forgiving of (or blind to) his quirks and failings--is that many of them see him as a "last chance" to make a stand against encroaching statism and corporatism.
And in that context it doesn't matter a damn what the Libertarian Party Platform actually says--just like nobody is actually ever going to read the Democratic or Republican platforms, and neither final candidate is going to pay more than transient lip service to it.
What Ron Paul, Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, John McCain, John Edwards, Mike Huckabee, and all the rest have in common is an agenda, a short list of signature items that they each intend to fight for.
The Libertarian Party--except in some states where the local affiliate is an exception [Indiana comes to mind]--wouldn't know an agenda if it appeared out of a copy of Atlas Shrugged and started lecturing the faithful about objectivism.
Here's my current Libertarian agenda. I'm NOT suggesting it as a nationwide or even statewide template, but as an example of the kinds of things an agenda should include. It starts with my personal slogan:
Limited government, combined with maximum personal and economic freedom, creates the atmosphere necessary for America to thrive.
Under the rubric of Limited Government, I want to see:
A) A roll-back of Nanny State regulations that are designed to protect American citizens from the consequences of their own personal choices.
B) A return to a non-imperialistic, non-interventionist foreign policy.
C) A commitment for all governments to live within their means--spending no more than they take in, except for emergencies such as declared wars or massive natural disasters.
D) A principle of resolving inevitable (I cringe at using the word "necessary") government involvement in people's lives at the lowest (most local) level possible. Education comes to mind here.
E) Referendum and Recall at the State level.
What about Personal Freedom? There I want to see:
A) Equal protection under the law for all American citizens (especially including those who are discriminated against based on sexual orientation). Churches sanctify marriages; all the government can do is legitimatize civil unions (for anybody!).
B) A curtailment of the government's power of domestic surveillance, combined with new privacy restrictions on corporations (including health insurance companies) that block the sharing of personal information without a positive (not default) release from the citizen/consumer.
C) A change in emphasis on the use of medication in which the government serves primarily as the provider of information--both positive and negative--about medications, but leaves their actual use up to the medical opinion of our physicians and our own informed consent. Medical marijuana? Of course.
And as for Economic Freedom?
A) A massive simplification of the tax code, with a specific agenda item in that process being the elimination of tax incentives or penalties for engaging in government-approved behaviors. No social engineering!
B) A level playing field for retirement planning: if I have to be shackled with Social Security, then it ought to be good enough for my legislative representatives and all Federal employees.
C) Re-institution of the freedom to fail for corporations. No bail-outs for automobile companies, airlines, or defense contractors!
Now I change from week to week on some of these, but here's my point: candidates and political parties cannot exist without enumerated and aggressively pursued agendas that make sense in the current political milieu.
If American (or Delawarean) Libertarians don't want to look back in a few years and realize that defenders of individual liberty have been reduced to the same social critic status as our brethren and cistern in Australia, Britain, and Canada, then they'd better sit up and take notice.
Let me explain.
First, reading Australian, British, and Canadian Libertarian blogs I have come to realize a different tone exists among our fellow travelers overseas. They perceive themselves (quite rightly, I suspect) as having already lost the war to the pervasive Nanny State, and they provide a cautionary lesson about what happens when government control reaches a certain "critical mass."
For a selection of no-so-light (as in downright depressing if occasionally quite witty) reading, try these:
Canadian Liberty will lead you through a link to Pierre Limieux's Lost Canadian Liberties, which includes 32 items such as
1) Start a private school.
12) Sell eggs or milk without the state’s permission.
18) Talk publicly about any topic (there are criminal code provisions and “human rights commissions” against certain forms of speech and certain topics).
From Great Britain, the Libertarian Alliance blog discusses the fact that the government has now moved to involuntary organ donation.
The Australian Libertarian Society blog brings us word of intrusive government censorship of the internet, "following the examples of the great liberal democracies like China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, and Burma is a promising start."
What these posts and the others you will find to complement them have in common is that Libertarians appear to have been reduced from a political force to be reckoned with to essentially impotent political and social commentators.
That's not a good place to be, and the shared perception of many American Libertarians, libertarians, and freedom-loving citizens with libertarian leanings is that we're headed down that road as well. Part of the reason that many of Ron Paul's supporters are so passionate--and at the same time so forgiving of (or blind to) his quirks and failings--is that many of them see him as a "last chance" to make a stand against encroaching statism and corporatism.
And in that context it doesn't matter a damn what the Libertarian Party Platform actually says--just like nobody is actually ever going to read the Democratic or Republican platforms, and neither final candidate is going to pay more than transient lip service to it.
What Ron Paul, Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, John McCain, John Edwards, Mike Huckabee, and all the rest have in common is an agenda, a short list of signature items that they each intend to fight for.
The Libertarian Party--except in some states where the local affiliate is an exception [Indiana comes to mind]--wouldn't know an agenda if it appeared out of a copy of Atlas Shrugged and started lecturing the faithful about objectivism.
Here's my current Libertarian agenda. I'm NOT suggesting it as a nationwide or even statewide template, but as an example of the kinds of things an agenda should include. It starts with my personal slogan:
Limited government, combined with maximum personal and economic freedom, creates the atmosphere necessary for America to thrive.
Under the rubric of Limited Government, I want to see:
A) A roll-back of Nanny State regulations that are designed to protect American citizens from the consequences of their own personal choices.
B) A return to a non-imperialistic, non-interventionist foreign policy.
C) A commitment for all governments to live within their means--spending no more than they take in, except for emergencies such as declared wars or massive natural disasters.
D) A principle of resolving inevitable (I cringe at using the word "necessary") government involvement in people's lives at the lowest (most local) level possible. Education comes to mind here.
E) Referendum and Recall at the State level.
What about Personal Freedom? There I want to see:
A) Equal protection under the law for all American citizens (especially including those who are discriminated against based on sexual orientation). Churches sanctify marriages; all the government can do is legitimatize civil unions (for anybody!).
B) A curtailment of the government's power of domestic surveillance, combined with new privacy restrictions on corporations (including health insurance companies) that block the sharing of personal information without a positive (not default) release from the citizen/consumer.
C) A change in emphasis on the use of medication in which the government serves primarily as the provider of information--both positive and negative--about medications, but leaves their actual use up to the medical opinion of our physicians and our own informed consent. Medical marijuana? Of course.
And as for Economic Freedom?
A) A massive simplification of the tax code, with a specific agenda item in that process being the elimination of tax incentives or penalties for engaging in government-approved behaviors. No social engineering!
B) A level playing field for retirement planning: if I have to be shackled with Social Security, then it ought to be good enough for my legislative representatives and all Federal employees.
C) Re-institution of the freedom to fail for corporations. No bail-outs for automobile companies, airlines, or defense contractors!
Now I change from week to week on some of these, but here's my point: candidates and political parties cannot exist without enumerated and aggressively pursued agendas that make sense in the current political milieu.
If American (or Delawarean) Libertarians don't want to look back in a few years and realize that defenders of individual liberty have been reduced to the same social critic status as our brethren and cistern in Australia, Britain, and Canada, then they'd better sit up and take notice.
Comments