McFreedom

Phillipe DeCroy, over at the Volokh Conspiracy, wonders why people think libertarians are identified with Republicans. I'm a basically libertarian fellow who votes Republican, so I thought perhaps I could illuminate a bit. Or at least ramble on-topic.

Why not the Libertarian Party? My most basic complaint with the LP is tactical: I am skeptical that the current Libertarian Party could win an unopposed election. Beyond that, however, I am not a "hard" libertarian. I believe that, on balance, "that government is best which governs least," but I'm willing to live with a small amount of intrusion into the private sphere in order to make all of our lives easier. I believe that, when you get bogged down in your debates on whether or not local roads (or schools!) should be paid for with taxes, you end up not talking about the really important questions. I'm especially willing to use the system our founding fathers established to let various states and municipalities experiment with ludicrous, unfree ideas as long as they are at relatively local levels. The LP is a lot more concerned with ideological purity than with making things better now. In addition, cementing my break in the past year, I disagree violently with the LP's stance on the war.

So, having left the fold, I examined the alternatives. While I'm not necessarily opposed to voting for some other third party, I'm not aware of any of them that are even remotely near me, ideologically. It is difficult for me to imagine a party I'd have less in common with than Greens. The Natural Law party are a bunch of kooks. As I stated recently, I know of no sizeable third party which supports invading Iraq.

Why not the Democratic Party? Other than the obvious one of the war, there is very little I agree with the Democrats on that they do not also agree with the Republicans on. Abortion rights would top that list. Clear separation of Church and State. The "New Democrats" have a group of issues I agree with them on, but they generally agree with the Republicans on them, too. But on the opposite side, I believe in lowering taxes (especially for the "rich," since I'd like to be rich, someday) and am a "supply-sider;" less government regulation and interference in almost every realm (especially from the Federal government); a strong position on the Middle East; and strong Second Amendment rights. I'm generally opposed to any sort of "progressive" or redistributionist approach to social problems.

Why not the Republican Party? Don't get the idea there aren't a lot of Republican Party planks I disagree with, because there are. I think their current standing on Abortion is ridiculous, and I think their current stand on therapeutic cloning is criminal - if they succeed, hundreds of thousands of Americans will die, needlessly. To the extent that they want to shove their morality down my throat - be it in my bedroom or in having my son pray in school - I disagree violently.

So, if I disagree with them on so much, why do I still vote for them? First, Republicans are the only party who agree with me on my two most important issues: The Second Amendment and the war on terrorism. Second, tactically, Republicans' bad ideas lose in court.. Stuff like the Communications Decency Act; abortion rights restrictions; blurring the line between Church and State - all of that gets shot down in the courts. The Republicans' bad ideas get overturned, while the Democrats keep shambling along long after they've been proven not to work.

Some other libertarians, no doubt, feel differently. My wife is less libertarian than I am, but feels as strongly about abortion rights as I do about gun rights; had she ever been a card-carrying Libertarian, she certainly could've broken ranks in the direction of the Democrats.

Am I perfectly happy voting Republican? No. But I've decided that the Republicans are more likely to become libertarian than the Libertarians are likely to become successful.