6 ms·

When politicians say "small government" they really mean "low taxes", and when they say "liberty" that is measured as 100% minus the top marginal tax rate. Rest

When politicians say "small government" they really mean "low taxes", and when they say "liberty" that is measured as 100% minus the top marginal tax rate. Restrictions on people's behavior or privacy aren't really part of the discussion. When they say "spending" you can safely suffix that with "on someone other than me". Seriously though, the Republican party isn't a libertarian organization and never has been. They've been marketing themselves that way lately, since they are a bit closer to the libertarian ideal than the Democrats (I guess not in this case though!).

mwfunk 13y ago
Historically the Republican party has been libertarianish, at least in the sense that the guiding principles were minimizing the size and reach of government, keeping the government out of people's lives, and legislating at the most local levels possible (don't make a state law if a local law will do, and don't make a federal law if a state law will do). This changed in the '60s- Democratic support for the civil rights movement caused a massive shift in the south, in which a huge number of voters (evangelical, socially conservative voters who had supported the Democrats since the end of the Civil War) switched allegiances from Democrats to Republicans. That period also saw the rise of Barry Goldwater, who also wasn't a traditional Republican- he was more of a demagogue who engaged in a lot of flag waving and and emotional oratory to get people riled up. Ever since then there's been a cognitive dissonance within the GOP- the old-school libertarianesque beliefs wedded to the social conservatives and demagogues of the Religious Right (who aren't traditionally right-wing (or left-wing) at all, they've just latched on to the Republican party as being more amenable to being bent to their will). This cognitive dissonance has reached epic proportions in the last 10 years, in some cases leading to polarization in the party (fiscal conservative/social liberals vs. those who are completely driven by religion and social conservatism). In other cases it leads to politicians who somehow try to appeal to both the libertarians and the Religious Right (Ron Paul being a prime example), and I just don't know what to make of that. The views of the world embodied by those two groups could not be more different, and seems impossible to reconcile in any intellectually honest way.
dmix 13y ago
Anecdotally I've seen a notable upswing in the self-identification of republicans as "libertarian" in the last 6 months (when that's clearly not the reality).
- astrodust 13y ago
  "Libertarians" are just hipster Republicans.
  - dmix 13y ago
    And "anarcho-capitalists" are hipster libertarians?
    - homosaur 13y ago
      Those are just first year liberal arts students frustrated by party politics. Also punks.
      - dmix 13y ago
        Huh? Liberal arts students = capitalists? I'd personally guess they'd lean more anarcho-syndicalist/socialist. But definitely agree about punks. Or punks with jobs. Also cypherpunks, crypto-anarchists, etc.
        javert 13y ago
        > Liberal arts students = capitalists Anarcho-capitalists are _not_ capitalists. So liberal liberal arts students can be anarcho-capitalists, despite not being capitalists. Actually, the term "anarcho-capitalism" is completely invalid. It's like "blue-reddish" or "big-smallism."
        burtonlang 13y ago
        Well, "blue-reddish" might be a bad example; that'd be magenta.
mtgx 13y ago
If you're talking about the "old Republicans" who may pretend right now that they are also libertarians (like Glenn Beck is doing for example), then I agree. But since the "Ron Paul movement" a lot of true libertarian people entered the Republican party and are still trying to take over it. The "real" Republicans are actually fighting them, though, because besides lower taxes they have almost nothing in common. Also if you were thinking about Rand Paul, in a way he's his father's son, and unlike others who just pay lip service for liberty and such, he's actually fought hard against the Patriot Act, FISA, NDAA, drones and so on. He filibustered them for many hours, introduced amendments (which obviously got rejected), etc. However, he also seems to play way too much towards the overly religious base in the Republican party, and in that way he's also much like the "old" Republicans, which is a shame, and I think it makes even libertarians have second thoughts about him. The "always lower taxes" attitude at least could work on most libertarians, but the very religious side of him, kind of ruins it for libertarians, too.
- socialist_coder 13y ago
  Yeah, it is a shame that Rand Paul still is in bed with the Religious / Conservative right. You nailed it.
- aclevernickname 13y ago
  Rand Paul is nothing like his father. While Ron Paul fought hard against FISA, NDAA, PATRIOT, and Drones, his son follows the party line, but gives enough lip service to not turn off his father's supporters.
  - wyclif 13y ago
    Sorry, but that's incorrect. Rand Paul fought hard against CISPA, FISA, the Patriot Act, and drones.
    - aclevernickname 13y ago
      Rand Paul wasn't in office during PATRIOT's passing, so I suspect a troll.

mwfunk 13y ago

Historically the Republican party has been libertarianish, at least in the sense that the guiding principles were minimizing the size and reach of government, keeping the government out of people's lives, and legislating at the most local levels possible (don't make a state law if a local law will do, and don't make a federal law if a state law will do). This changed in the '60s- Democratic support for the civil rights movement caused a massive shift in the south, in which a huge number of voters (evangelical, socially conservative voters who had supported the Democrats since the end of the Civil War) switched allegiances from Democrats to Republicans. That period also saw the rise of Barry Goldwater, who also wasn't a traditional Republican- he was more of a demagogue who engaged in a lot of flag waving and and emotional oratory to get people riled up. Ever since then there's been a cognitive dissonance within the GOP- the old-school libertarianesque beliefs wedded to the social conservatives and demagogues of the Religious Right (who aren't traditionally right-wing (or left-wing) at all, they've just latched on to the Republican party as being more amenable to being bent to their will). This cognitive dissonance has reached epic proportions in the last 10 years, in some cases leading to polarization in the party (fiscal conservative/social liberals vs. those who are completely driven by religion and social conservatism). In other cases it leads to politicians who somehow try to appeal to both the libertarians and the Religious Right (Ron Paul being a prime example), and I just don't know what to make of that. The views of the world embodied by those two groups could not be more different, and seems impossible to reconcile in any intellectually honest way.

dmix 13y ago

Anecdotally I've seen a notable upswing in the self-identification of republicans as "libertarian" in the last 6 months (when that's clearly not the reality).

astrodust 13y ago
"Libertarians" are just hipster Republicans.
- dmix 13y ago
  And "anarcho-capitalists" are hipster libertarians?
  - homosaur 13y ago
    Those are just first year liberal arts students frustrated by party politics. Also punks.
    - dmix 13y ago
      Huh? Liberal arts students = capitalists? I'd personally guess they'd lean more anarcho-syndicalist/socialist. But definitely agree about punks. Or punks with jobs. Also cypherpunks, crypto-anarchists, etc.
      - javert 13y ago
        > Liberal arts students = capitalists Anarcho-capitalists are _not_ capitalists. So liberal liberal arts students can be anarcho-capitalists, despite not being capitalists. Actually, the term "anarcho-capitalism" is completely invalid. It's like "blue-reddish" or "big-smallism."
        burtonlang 13y ago
        Well, "blue-reddish" might be a bad example; that'd be magenta.

mtgx 13y ago

If you're talking about the "old Republicans" who may pretend right now that they are also libertarians (like Glenn Beck is doing for example), then I agree. But since the "Ron Paul movement" a lot of true libertarian people entered the Republican party and are still trying to take over it. The "real" Republicans are actually fighting them, though, because besides lower taxes they have almost nothing in common. Also if you were thinking about Rand Paul, in a way he's his father's son, and unlike others who just pay lip service for liberty and such, he's actually fought hard against the Patriot Act, FISA, NDAA, drones and so on. He filibustered them for many hours, introduced amendments (which obviously got rejected), etc. However, he also seems to play way too much towards the overly religious base in the Republican party, and in that way he's also much like the "old" Republicans, which is a shame, and I think it makes even libertarians have second thoughts about him. The "always lower taxes" attitude at least could work on most libertarians, but the very religious side of him, kind of ruins it for libertarians, too.

socialist_coder 13y ago
Yeah, it is a shame that Rand Paul still is in bed with the Religious / Conservative right. You nailed it.
aclevernickname 13y ago
Rand Paul is nothing like his father. While Ron Paul fought hard against FISA, NDAA, PATRIOT, and Drones, his son follows the party line, but gives enough lip service to not turn off his father's supporters.
- wyclif 13y ago
  Sorry, but that's incorrect. Rand Paul fought hard against CISPA, FISA, the Patriot Act, and drones.
  - aclevernickname 13y ago
    Rand Paul wasn't in office during PATRIOT's passing, so I suspect a troll.