5 ms·

Libertarians Are Politically Homeless in the Trump Era

27 points by devy 9y ago

squozzer 9y ago
I doubt many libertarians harbored illusions that things would get better after 2016, no matter who won. Too many negative things for libertarians going on, both politically and socially. But, I prefer to look at the bright side (feel free to whistle the tune.) So here goes - Trump's election in itself proved the shabbiness of the "(S)he'll never win" argument. Now, Trump broke a lot of political rules, and ran as a Republican, so it's not likely that a libertarian could achieve the same success acting like Trump. BUT, at least the "can't win" argument - more psychological manipulation than argument - can be shelved for the next 20 years. AG Sessions somewhat weasely stance on pot stores - given how Trump acts, the AG could have gone full stormtrooper on pot and probably succeeded at some political cost. The recent six-month budget that provided zero funds for prosecuting pot stores. So, admittedly three political crumbs washed down with a shot of wishful thinking, but we can at least say that the Trump administration does not have carte blanche to enforce a narrow political viewpoint.
- drak0n1c 9y ago
  President Trump is cutting regulations and despite all the hysteria to the contrary he is actually reducing the administrative powers of the executive branch and shrinking the size of many agencies. All of this makes libertarians happy - at least for those who care about bite over bark. In spoiling the veneration many people hold for the imperial office, and reminding them to be wary of its powers, you could interpret the bark as also good for libertarianism.
  - Accipitriform 9y ago
    "President Trump is cutting regulations and despite all the hysteria to the contrary he is actually reducing the administrative powers of the executive branch and shrinking the size of many agencies." Indeed. President Trump's judicial appointments are also great compared to what we would have had with a HRC victory. Leftists are all about curtailing personal freedom and eroding the Bill of Rights. I have mostly libertarian positions on things, but I'm pro-military and want border enforcement. I'm generally happy with Trump's policies (note: not so much his behavior). If Republicans can gain seats in the midterms, and personally I think there's a high probability they will, there's a good chance some real reform will occur in Washington - which is of course the real reason for most of the hysteria regarding President Trump. By the way, did you happen to see that his overall approval rating hit 50% today...? ;-)
    - mullingitover 9y ago
      > If Republicans can gain seats in the midterms, and personally I think there's a high probability they will Bless your heart. Election history, with regard to the party holding the White House, strongly predicts the Republicans will have a bad time. > By the way, did you happen to see that his overall approval rating hit 50% today...? ;-) Yes, with the hilariously biased Rasmussen polls. Who the hell uses landlines in 2018? Not the average voter.
      - Accipitriform 9y ago
        "Bless your heart. Election history, with regard to the party holding the White House, strongly predicts the Republicans will have a bad time." 'Past performance doesn't guarantee future results...' Trump has confounded observers quite a few times now, just sit back, relax, and enjoy... ;-) "Yes, with the hilariously biased Rasmussen polls. Who the hell uses landlines in 2018? Not the average voter." Rasmussen also polls those without landlines. One difference from other polls is that Rasmussen polls "likely voters" instead of "adults" like Gallup...
    - ataturk 9y ago
      I think one of the greatest mistakes by libertarian thinkers was open borders. The very idea that you can have a political system without political boundaries is ludicrous. Someone has to enforce those boundaries somehow. My other thought lately is that a free and open society has a fatal flaw in that outsiders who wish to destroy it are allowed to enter and mess with it at will and there is very little opposition to doing so.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > I doubt many libertarians harbored illusions that things would get better after 2016, no matter who won. I know some big-L Libertarians were predicting Trump would produce or accelerate a collapse of the Republican Party which would leave the LP as its successor as a major party. > Trump's election in itself proved the shabbiness of the "(S)he'll never win" argument. Not really for libertarians; the LP, after all, did run a candidate, and despite the two weakest major party candidates by most measures in the post-WWII era, still didn't do much.
pc2g4d 9y ago
The two parties are striving to use the power of the state to ram their ideologies down the throats of their fellow Americans. So no, there's not a lot of room for libertarians right now. On the other hand, the heavy-handedness may cause a backlash hunger for some individual freedoms. In the meantime, there's EconTalk :-P
TheCoelacanth 9y ago
Libertarians (except for the lower taxes über alles variety, who aren't real libertarians) have been politically homeless since the 60s or 70s. The war on drugs and the rise to power of the "Moral Majority" are completely antithetical to the idea of liberty.
cko 9y ago
Question about libertarianism: what is the view on taxes and the large part of society that’s been dealt shitty cards? Is there a common solution that addresses this? The impression I get when I think libertarian is “every man for himself” and “survival of the fittest.” Now, I hate paying taxes but I acknowledge that I’ve been dealt a good hand (a quicker mind). Am I getting the wrong impression?
- sharemywin 9y ago
  Ya, I kind of got that impression too. Let's model people as psychopaths when they're bargaining with trinkets. Oh that went pretty well...let's use it to run society...what could go wrong.
- vorhuts 9y ago
  I personally consider myself a libertarian / MinAnarchist (gov should only be courts, police, military) hybrid and I don't think there should be public welfare at all. There will always be private welfare/charity. The government is one of the worst run charities. For individuals such as myself and yourself, personal donation and charity will always be better to the end recipient than a government run charity (welfare).
- OscarCunningham 9y ago
  The official "solution" is that people voluntarily give to charity. But I doubt that people would give as much as they are currently forced to (they could probably do more good with less money by giving to efficient charities like givewell.org, but most people won't do that either). On the other hand if you are going to take money from the rich and give it to the poor, why not give it to the people in Africa who it will help most, rather than to Americans who won't be helped as much? If your answer is "Because Americans wouldn't vote for that" then what you're doing looks a lot less like charity and a lot more like theft. If you were being charitable you would want to do as much with your money as possible. (EDIT: *their money)
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

27 points by devy 9y ago

I doubt many libertarians harbored illusions that things would get better after 2016, no matter who won. Too many negative things for libertarians going on, both politically and socially. But, I prefer to look at the bright side (feel free to whistle the tune.) So here goes - Trump's election in itself proved the shabbiness of the "(S)he'll never win" argument. Now, Trump broke a lot of political rules, and ran as a Republican, so it's not likely that a libertarian could achieve the same success acting like Trump. BUT, at least the "can't win" argument - more psychological manipulation than argument - can be shelved for the next 20 years. AG Sessions somewhat weasely stance on pot stores - given how Trump acts, the AG could have gone full stormtrooper on pot and probably succeeded at some political cost. The recent six-month budget that provided zero funds for prosecuting pot stores. So, admittedly three political crumbs washed down with a shot of wishful thinking, but we can at least say that the Trump administration does not have carte blanche to enforce a narrow political viewpoint.

drak0n1c 9y ago
President Trump is cutting regulations and despite all the hysteria to the contrary he is actually reducing the administrative powers of the executive branch and shrinking the size of many agencies. All of this makes libertarians happy - at least for those who care about bite over bark. In spoiling the veneration many people hold for the imperial office, and reminding them to be wary of its powers, you could interpret the bark as also good for libertarianism.
- Accipitriform 9y ago
  "President Trump is cutting regulations and despite all the hysteria to the contrary he is actually reducing the administrative powers of the executive branch and shrinking the size of many agencies." Indeed. President Trump's judicial appointments are also great compared to what we would have had with a HRC victory. Leftists are all about curtailing personal freedom and eroding the Bill of Rights. I have mostly libertarian positions on things, but I'm pro-military and want border enforcement. I'm generally happy with Trump's policies (note: not so much his behavior). If Republicans can gain seats in the midterms, and personally I think there's a high probability they will, there's a good chance some real reform will occur in Washington - which is of course the real reason for most of the hysteria regarding President Trump. By the way, did you happen to see that his overall approval rating hit 50% today...? ;-)
  - mullingitover 9y ago
    > If Republicans can gain seats in the midterms, and personally I think there's a high probability they will Bless your heart. Election history, with regard to the party holding the White House, strongly predicts the Republicans will have a bad time. > By the way, did you happen to see that his overall approval rating hit 50% today...? ;-) Yes, with the hilariously biased Rasmussen polls. Who the hell uses landlines in 2018? Not the average voter.
    - Accipitriform 9y ago
      "Bless your heart. Election history, with regard to the party holding the White House, strongly predicts the Republicans will have a bad time." 'Past performance doesn't guarantee future results...' Trump has confounded observers quite a few times now, just sit back, relax, and enjoy... ;-) "Yes, with the hilariously biased Rasmussen polls. Who the hell uses landlines in 2018? Not the average voter." Rasmussen also polls those without landlines. One difference from other polls is that Rasmussen polls "likely voters" instead of "adults" like Gallup...
  - ataturk 9y ago
    I think one of the greatest mistakes by libertarian thinkers was open borders. The very idea that you can have a political system without political boundaries is ludicrous. Someone has to enforce those boundaries somehow. My other thought lately is that a free and open society has a fatal flaw in that outsiders who wish to destroy it are allowed to enter and mess with it at will and there is very little opposition to doing so.
dragonwriter 9y ago
> I doubt many libertarians harbored illusions that things would get better after 2016, no matter who won. I know some big-L Libertarians were predicting Trump would produce or accelerate a collapse of the Republican Party which would leave the LP as its successor as a major party. > Trump's election in itself proved the shabbiness of the "(S)he'll never win" argument. Not really for libertarians; the LP, after all, did run a candidate, and despite the two weakest major party candidates by most measures in the post-WWII era, still didn't do much.

pc2g4d 9y ago

The two parties are striving to use the power of the state to ram their ideologies down the throats of their fellow Americans. So no, there's not a lot of room for libertarians right now. On the other hand, the heavy-handedness may cause a backlash hunger for some individual freedoms. In the meantime, there's EconTalk :-P

TheCoelacanth 9y ago

Libertarians (except for the lower taxes über alles variety, who aren't real libertarians) have been politically homeless since the 60s or 70s. The war on drugs and the rise to power of the "Moral Majority" are completely antithetical to the idea of liberty.

cko 9y ago

Question about libertarianism: what is the view on taxes and the large part of society that’s been dealt shitty cards? Is there a common solution that addresses this? The impression I get when I think libertarian is “every man for himself” and “survival of the fittest.” Now, I hate paying taxes but I acknowledge that I’ve been dealt a good hand (a quicker mind). Am I getting the wrong impression?

sharemywin 9y ago
Ya, I kind of got that impression too. Let's model people as psychopaths when they're bargaining with trinkets. Oh that went pretty well...let's use it to run society...what could go wrong.
vorhuts 9y ago
I personally consider myself a libertarian / MinAnarchist (gov should only be courts, police, military) hybrid and I don't think there should be public welfare at all. There will always be private welfare/charity. The government is one of the worst run charities. For individuals such as myself and yourself, personal donation and charity will always be better to the end recipient than a government run charity (welfare).
OscarCunningham 9y ago
The official "solution" is that people voluntarily give to charity. But I doubt that people would give as much as they are currently forced to (they could probably do more good with less money by giving to efficient charities like givewell.org, but most people won't do that either). On the other hand if you are going to take money from the rich and give it to the poor, why not give it to the people in Africa who it will help most, rather than to Americans who won't be helped as much? If your answer is "Because Americans wouldn't vote for that" then what you're doing looks a lot less like charity and a lot more like theft. If you were being charitable you would want to do as much with your money as possible. (EDIT: *their money)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]