It will not make any creative political history in Washington or in any other political venue as long as it is contending for control of the very monopoly that is the nemesis of all its grand ideas. This is not to say that libertarian sentiments are unimportant or irrelevant. It is that they are basically apolitical. As such, they are more appropriately the basis for a league of non-voters. So when they are politicized, they are corrupted and merely add to the blizzard of campaign clich to become lost to meaning either by eclipse or hypocritical mimicry.
Libertarianism is a social movement whereas politics, whatever ideology is embraced, is antisocial.
As they say, you can t make a silk purse out of a sow s ear. In the twilight of participatory politics hypothetically brought on by widespread abstention, some might fear the rise of a breed of human that has a strong stomach for violence. While such an outcome is possible, it would be wise to recall that such Twentieth Century scourges as Lenin, Mussolini, Roosevelt and Hitler rode to power on a plebiscitary wave. By contrast, the government of Washington, Adams and Jefferson had only a minuscule of popular support. The latter had little need of such inasmuch as they were resigned to play a minuscule role in the affairs of their fellows.