What does the Libertarian party have to offer the United States?

Question

I am tired of the Democrats and Republicans. I have done a fair amount of research on the Libertarian party. I am in favor of their hands off government aproach. What is your opinion of the party? Do you believe it is time for a new way to govern? Do you beleive this party is a feasbale answer to this countries problems?

I am in favor of a MORE hands off government. I do not beleive it is the federal government's responsibility to supply me with roads and public schools. That should fall under state authority. The federal government is however responsible for the safety of the country as a whole as in providing a military so the FBI, FDA, military branches and so on would stay uder the fed.

The country was built on the primise of a week federal government and a strong state and local government somewhere over the past 231 years we have swapped it.

Answer 1

they've got the right ideas, I won't dispute that. However, our country is specifically set up to encourage only two parties, and those two parties are going to adapt to changes in policy rather than let a third party rise up.

For example, Ross Perot in 1992 ran on a platform of balancing the budget. It cost the Republicans their victory. By 1996, both the Republicans and Democrats were addressing the budget, and Ross Perot was a non-issue in that election.

Unless one of the political parties experiences a catastrophic collapse, it is unlikely that the Libertarian Party will ever gain more traction than it has at the present.

Unfortunately, if you wanted to instigate change, you would be facing opposition from both political parties and an army of lawyers and special interest groups in Washington, making your chances exceedingly remote.

The best bet is to encourage politicians that are within the system to encourage change. Ron Paul ran for President in 1988 and received 800,000 votes, which was about 0.3% of the popular vote. Now, running as a Republican, he is bringing in closer to 8% of the Republican voters, and made more money in a single day than he did during his entire '88 campaign. I think people would be more receptive to Libertarians if they thought that there was a realistic chance of them winning.

It's understandably difficult; as most Republicans are thoroughly entrenched in neo-con philosophy, and the Democrats still cling to 20th century welfare statism. I see two methods of change,

1) elect Ron Paul as president

2) elect a democrat to force the Republicans to discredit neo-con philosophy and return their party to its Goldwater/Reagan/Gingrich roots of fiscal responsibility and non-interventionism.

Remember that in 2000, Bush ran on a policy of reducing government spending of the Clinton-era, as well as an elimination of the policy of nation-building, and fostering bipartisan cooperation to instigate meaningful change (obviously, Bush has done a complete 180 since then.) So neo-conphilosophy is a relatively recent phenomenon, only gaining traction in the wake of 9/11. In the months after 9/11, Bush's approval rating was close to 90%, which means most democrats actually approved of what he was doing! (even though they would be loathe to admit it today.) After 7 years of neo-con rule, Bush's approval rating is in the 20's, and the Democrats seem poised to retake the presidency as most of the Republican front runners do not express any sort of disinclination to continue Bush's neo-con philosophy, a philosophy that is rapidly crumbling.

Provided that the Republican party does not collapse, I don't see the LP as being feasible, which is unfortunate.

Answer 2

I personally believe they are lunatics without sense of reality. It is like they watch the world with a sense of a computer game with reset button and a chance of a replay.


You are in favor of their hands off government approach? Then forget about roads, FBI, CIA, public schools, FDA ...


Basically say goodbye to any government service! Think about it - all of it !!!


Ok, so you are a Libertarian on Federal level and ??? Democrat/Republican on state level ? Do not you think it is funny? Would you be able to drive through two states then? One has roads - the other has babkas ... think about it.

Answer 3

I have no problem with Libertarians, but they really should just stop trying.

So should the green party, socialist and communists parties, the prohibition and other minor parties that will never be implented into power. Aren't they just wasting their time and money?

This country will always have two parties: Democrats and Republicans.

Answer 4

Libertarianism is watered down anarchy. Not anarchy in the "masked WTO protester" variety, but anarchy in the academic sense. They would lower taxes to nil, legalize drugs and prostitiution, and the more extreme Libertarians would possibly make steps toward privitizing the police.

Answer 5

They have a few good ideas.. but they also take the part of both parties I don't like and use them in their platform. So they aren't for me... but I DO hope they catch on and gain in power... because a strong 3rd party will force bipartisan teamwork to get things done in this nation.

Answer 6

mys well give then a shot to fix it cause for the past 8 years rep havnt dune any thing yet to fix our problems