From: J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: Do Pragmatic Libertarians Belong in LP or RLC? (was Re: Party line)
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 07:59:14 PST

In <C1FKAC.BwA@encore.com>, Roger Collins writes:

>In article <1k1i0aINNae4@srvr1.engin.umich.edu>, jwh@citi.umich.edu (Jim Howe)
>|> In article <YAMAUCHI.93Jan25134701@yuggoth.ces.cwru.edu>, yamauchi@ces.cwru.
>|> |> This raises an interesting question -- do pragmatic libertarians
>|> |> belong in Libertarian Party or the Republican Liberty Caucus?  I
>|> |> define a pragmatic libertarian to be anyone who falls in the
>|> |> libertarian quadrant (supporting civil liberties and free enterprise)
>|> |> but who is not a non-coercion absolutist.

>Regarding LP vs. RLC, it is not an either/or question most of the time.
>Not many RLCers were challenged by LPers.  And some successful RLCers
>were endorsed by LPers (unofficially, I guess).  I would vote for
>whichever candidate I thought the most competent.

There was one prominent race in which the LP played a major part.  The LP was
able to leverage its 3% (at the polls) into a huge and all-important voting
bloc.  It happened just this last November.

I'm referring to the Georgia Senate race.  Incumbent Democrat Wyche Fowler and
the GOP challenger named Coverdell had a very close race--around 48% each in
November--and the LP candidate had 3%.  In Georgia, if no candidate gets 50%,
the top two vote-getters go into a runoff.  Well, in such a race, that 3% is
extremely important, and both candidates tried to show the LP candidate that
they were more libertarian than the other.  The Republican candidate was
more libertarian than Fowler, and so the LP candidate endorsed Coverdell.
The Coverdell campaign, sensing a gold mine, paid for the next run of the
Georgia LP newsletter to make sure that all LPers heard the endorsement.

All Georgia LP members and registered Libertarians then were informed that the
LP and its candidate endorsed Coverdell.  In the runoff, Coverdell won...by 3%!

>|> I suppose this depends on whether the LP represents the libertarian
>|> quadrant, or simply a libertarian point (100/100 on the Nolan chart).
>|> At the present time, the LP seems to represent the views of those who
>|> are at or near the 100/100 point.  They don't seem to care about those
>|> who fall in the rest of the quadrant.  I personally would like to
>|> see the LP 'moderate' its views so that it encompasses more of those
>|> in the libertarian quadrant.

>Do you think all Republicans support the ban of all abortions even in
>cases of rape and incest?  It was in their platform.  Don't get caught
>up in the purist vs.  moderate mentality.  I say we're at about 50%
>self-government right now.  If you want to go to 90%, join the only
>group who's first and only priority is to reduce government in all
>areas: libertarians.  At 90%, if you think there is too much
>self-government, join the republicrats to balance things out.  I don't
>think we'll be at a point for you to worry about too much
>self-government for a couple decades.

I agree somewhat.  I'm probably about an 80/80 on the Nolan charts.  We're
nowhere near 80/80, and if the LP ever did become very influential and had
its policies enacted, I'd jump ship if they reached 80/80 and continued to try
making us 100/100.  The point is, though, I joined the LP without fear because
we still have a *long* way to go in order to achieve the 80/80 which I favor.

Personally, I find the advocacy of 100/100 libertarianism (on the Nolan chart
again) to be an act of pure mental masturbation.  As good as it sounds in
theory, I don't see it as being practical in today's world.  Most people don't,
and that's why the platform (currently geared toward the 100/100 hard-core
libertarian) scares away most people.  I'm far closer to a pure libertarian
than most people are, and even I see the current LP platform as extreme.  How-
ever, I see the LP as the only party taking us back into a more libertarian
direction.  The other two parties sure aren't doing it.  That is reason enough
to currently support the LP--even as it currently is.


Tim Irvin
*****************************************************************************
This .sig meets Greenpeace standards by using over 25% recycled pixels.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.libertarian