Conservative?
I'm concerned about a subtitle I recently read under a Libertarian heading entitled, "True Conservatives turn to the Libertarian Party" since I've never seen a comparable article that says, "True Liberals turn to the Libertarian Party".
There seems to be a disturbing trend in the Libertarian Party to equate only conservatism with libertarianism, and this trend is showing up in the party leadership.This bias ignores the historical, and classical connection of liberalism to libertarianism. As a result, it implies that only conservatives would be interested in the movement despite the fact that there is only one short period in American history (during the 1930's) when conservatism (then known as "isolationism") was consistently, and truly equated with free market principles, and individual rights.Even the Reagan era gave only lip service to libertarian values with little real support in terms of the issues of that time.True Libertarianism, by definition, shows very clearly that libertarians are in a separate category from both conservatives and liberals. They are philosophically no closer to one than the other. Why then, is the Libertarian Party acting as if all conservatives are potential good guys ie."recruits", while liberals are always the bad guys to be "reviled" and ignored as potential recruits?
This, to me, is a very disturbing bias, and if it continues unabated, may very well result in the Libertarian Party turning into the "new" Conservative Party and away from its real purpose, that which is truly "liberal", and is the distinguishing point between it and the rest of them, which is "legalizing freedom".
If it succeeds at this it will lose its reason for being, and even more importantly-it will lose me.
The Revolution will not be televised.
There seems to be a disturbing trend in the Libertarian Party to equate only conservatism with libertarianism, and this trend is showing up in the party leadership.This bias ignores the historical, and classical connection of liberalism to libertarianism. As a result, it implies that only conservatives would be interested in the movement despite the fact that there is only one short period in American history (during the 1930's) when conservatism (then known as "isolationism") was consistently, and truly equated with free market principles, and individual rights.Even the Reagan era gave only lip service to libertarian values with little real support in terms of the issues of that time.True Libertarianism, by definition, shows very clearly that libertarians are in a separate category from both conservatives and liberals. They are philosophically no closer to one than the other. Why then, is the Libertarian Party acting as if all conservatives are potential good guys ie."recruits", while liberals are always the bad guys to be "reviled" and ignored as potential recruits?
This, to me, is a very disturbing bias, and if it continues unabated, may very well result in the Libertarian Party turning into the "new" Conservative Party and away from its real purpose, that which is truly "liberal", and is the distinguishing point between it and the rest of them, which is "legalizing freedom".
If it succeeds at this it will lose its reason for being, and even more importantly-it will lose me.
The Revolution will not be televised.
posted by theoldsage @ 8:56 AM
2 Comments:
At 10:51 AM ,
RightWingRocker said...
I disagree, Sage.
Though by the standards of the 18th Century, when our Nation originated, those with what we today call "conservative" beliefs were called "liberal". Since then, those who today call themselves liberal (and are by no means so by any 18th century definition) have overtaken the label, and those who do fit the 18th century definition and don't want to be called "conservative" needed to go with the new term "Libertarian".
Well, duh. I know you already know that, Sage.
However, though Libertarians agree with some of the basic goals of the liberals, they do so for different reasons and behind a very different philosophy. This does beg the question, "Why would the reason or philosophy be important as long as the goal is reached?
The answer is simple. The reason for most liberals' position on matters is to get the government MORE involved in people's lives, while for Libertarians, it's to get the government LESS involved. The philosophy you choose will determine which "slippery slope" you wish to slide down.
On the line of political positions, the Libertarians are clearly to the right of us Federalists, and even more clearly to the right of Republicans in general. All of us are to the right of the Donks. They're so far to the left they're about to fall off the edge.
And that absolutely CANNOT happen too soon.
RWR
At 11:38 AM ,
theoldsage said...
disagree, Rocker,
There are well meaning people in all parties with useful ideals that would be attracted to libertarianism if they understood it. In fact, many already have expressed their discontent in that they no longer vote at the polls on election day because they no longer feel that anyone represents them.Those who vote for "liberalism" don't always advocate more government,they just don't think they have any other choice- and they certainly don't see what passes for "conservatism" today as a viable option. I believe that if the LP is ever to truly make a difference, and I do believe they can, they need to reach out to all philosophies, and parties, and all who truly wish to "legalize freedom".
You said you wanted to see me critisize the LP, well, there you have it!!!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home