Why was the Libertarian Party of the US not more successful (1972-1996)? A platform combining economic and cultural libertarianism with foreign policy non-interventionism sounds like it would be popular in those times, particularly the 90s.
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Libertarians have always been a joke
This. A perfect illustration of this imo is the description of the 1987 Libertarian Party Convention in the book "Ron Paul's Revolution" by Brian Doherty. Paul was absolutely stunned by the fact that he almost lost the 1988 nomination to an American Indian domestic terrorist Russell Means.
1. Third parties have always done poorly in U.S. elections.
2. The Libertarian Party is full of, and run by, people who want to smoke weed, jerk off to extreme porn, and not pay taxes. In practice, this leads to letting corporations run our lives, which results in social degeneracy.
Third parties have a huge structural disadvantage in a first past the post electoral system, because there's never any incentive to vote for anybody other than the top two candidates.
Also, libertarianism is moronic from a policy standpoint, because you're basically saying to return to the economic policy and foreign policy of the 1920s, despite the fact that that led to the Great Depression and WW2 the last time we tried it.
>Also, libertarianism is moronic from a policy standpoint, because you're basically saying to return to the economic policy and foreign policy of the 1920s, despite the fact that that led to the Great Depression and WW2 the last time we tried it.
gave yourself away, LBJgay
> LBJgay
obsessed
Anon, no Republican president has wanted to return to the 1920s either.
Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush all tacitly agreed that some elements of New Deal policy were politically and practically indispensable. Not to mention the fact that the GOP hate communists with a passion and libertarian's answer to global communism is just to go nothing.
Both major parties have very valid reasons to dislike libertarians.
>Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush all tacitly agreed that some elements of New Deal policy were politically and practically indispensable
Was not it a Democrat president Bill Clinton that did abolish the Glass-Steagle Act?
Yeah, but every postwar president
>kept social security
>kept an interventionist monetary policy
>kept a federal government that was much, much larger as a percentage of GDP than before FDR
Even further than that, when LBJ passed Medicare and Medicaid, the Republicans quickly decided that those were unassailable.
Very disingenuous, there were 90 New Deal programs created by FDR and dozens more proposed. Only 7 exist today
The size and scope of the government ballooned a frickload more under LBJ and Nixon.
You mean under LBJ's Great Society? Which was basically just a revival of FDR's pork barrel politics?
Yeah, but no postwar president has ever seriously considered returning to what US government was like before the New Deal.
Even under GOP administrations, government spending as a percentage of GDP stays static or even rises.
Libertarians represent something that has been a fringe view in American politics since the 1940s.
Other than a few things like Social Security and Federal unemployment insurance there's not a lot let of the New Deal policies today.
I believe Federal farm subsidies? Those should definitely go and Reagan is to my knowledge the only president who ever proposed it.
Yeah, but the libertarian platform is to restore government spending as a percentage of GDP to minarchist levels, which is something that the US has never done at any point since the New Deal.
And what's wrong with that? The system has quite a few freeloaders
and?
Do our government need to be a giant pated piece of shit? leftists are delusional they see a a giant unwieldy inhuman system that they themselves decry as oppressive, yet they are seemingly convinced the solution is to expand, change, control and otherwise regulate the monstrosity into submission (to them in particular) rather than starving it of it's life blood.
The government can only be as corrupt and wasteful as it is opaque, wealthy, and massive
Government is the only thing keeping you from being exploited by corporations, dude.
>no postwar president has ever seriously considered returning to what US government was like before the New Deal.
>93% of all new deal programs have been deleted
>93% of all new deal programs have been deleted
The bullshit that LBJ and Nixon created however...I have yet to see anyone call for abolishing the EPA and all the other shit they made.
>EPA
>new deal program
You're really reaching homosexual
>Was not it a Democrat president Bill Clinton that did abolish the Glass-Steagle Act?
It was an act of a veto-proof congress
>Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush all tacitly agreed that some elements of New Deal policy were politically indispensable
"Politically indispensable" is a far cry from "economically viable", also you're talking out your ass because both Nixon and Reagan were harsh critics of New Deal policy, which was basically just progressive era pork barrel politics.
You do realize when Reagan first entered politics in the 60s he was a Goldwater-tier libertarian who wanted to turn the clock back to 1928 and abolish Social Security, right? He only managed to become a viable presidential candidate when he moderated his stances on that stuff.
>dude when Reagan was young he worshiped FDR for employing his dad
>but when he grew up he realized his heroes were false which pushed him into politics
It's only and interesting story if you tell all of it
>Reagan first entered politics in the 60s he was a Goldwater-tier libertarian
Now describe Democrat's of the 60s and how terrible they were. If you want to be fair. Reagan was practically a saint even then.
>when he moderated his stances on that stuff.
New Deal is and was still a terrible idea that threatens to bankrupt the US. You can't argue that cocaine is good because threatening to take it away is bad.
It always seemed to me Trump was big fan of returning to 1920s isolationist foreign policy so you tell me.
Tell that to Yemen.
What?
They are poor and isolationist because they are a a fractured collection of tribes barley able to function ad a modern nation state who have been at war with the Saudis for ever
Comparing the two is pointless and softmoric
I didn't know isolationism had a 'but they suck, so it's cool' cop-out.
It always had. When usa was "isolationist" it was not involved much in europe because it was busy blowing up south america.
I am pointing out that your whole argument is backwards and it it's pointless to compare the two (USA and Yemen) saying:
>"they are they are poor and isolationist, therefore a more isolationist USA would also be poor"
isnt a good argument.
One is a content spanning nation with entrenched internal subdivisions the other is a small desert badland that has always been an impoverished backwater, who have also been at war with the Saudi's for decades.
You might as well try to make the same argument with China and the DPRK simply because they both are/were communist
>Third parties have a huge structural disadvantage in a first past the post electoral system, because there's never any incentive to vote for anybody other than the top two candidates.
Well that just means that you need your party to win more grass root and local elections in order to get people to like your ideas and spread its message. Not just decide to run for president with a literal who party that no one cares about.
>Libertarian
>iron cross tattoo
EVERYTIME
Because it's not actually libertarianism, it's anarco-capitalism. Fun fact, their first candidate was a israelite from new York who married a distant cousin
> who married a distant cousin
Nothing wrong with that.
It is when you're a israelite and you're already inbred
I feel that they didn't do themselves a favor by talking about stuff like abolishing Social Security.
dont americans love freedom?
Most people I suppose aren't against some sort of basic social safety net. However there are a lot of letter agencies that very much should be axed because they're useless/corrupt/unconstitutional.
I don't think libertarians have had a real coherent road map or vision for the country beyond a few vague remarks about legalizing weed. Ron Paul's obsession with the gold standard was dumb too.
Because most "libertarians" aren't actually libertarian, but larpers who want to use "freedom" for their gain, but without the consequences of it.
>Oh yeah! I'm totally pro-second ammendment guys! Frick gungrabbers!
>W-Wait, why does that black guy have a rocket launcher in his shoulders..?
As a result, The Republican Party is more appealing as you can just scream "states rights" instead since the state can specify the freedom more so that it's convenient to you, but not necessarily towards everyone else.
>pointlessly bringing race into this
Dropped.
>why does that black guy have a rocket launcher in his shoulders
that sounds badass
>why does that black guy have a rocket launcher in his shoulders..?
Sounds like my fricking homie
Because Republicans branded themselves as fiscal conservatives and
'libertarian-leaning" while also picking up the mantle of social/religious conservatism to appeal to evangelicals.
Just say 'abortion bad and welfare bad', and you can be as crony capitalist as much as they want to be. Because the average republican voter knows shit about anything and doesn't actually care about Austrian economics enough to vote libertarian over republican and maybe doesn't even know that the republicans are not librarians in the first place, if they could even define roughly what libertarianism is asides from 'government bad' in vague emotional descriptions.
>librarians
kek
our system makes it so that if you vote 3rd party you're actively hurting your own interests
American system doesnt allow for a 3rd party.
And libertarianism is simply unpopular.
why does looneytoonarian policy always boil down to "I want the freedom to get high and look at CP?"
IDK mang, Goldwater got shellacked at the ballot box for advocating going back to pre-New Deal times.
Lost your job? learn to code.