Skip to main content

A Message For Libertarians: A Reader Comment


A reader, Graham, recently left a comment on my article entitled, "Time For A Third Party? Problems With America's Two Party System." I enjoyed reading it and I think that it's definitely worth sharing with you:

A very pertinent set of observations...but one which I fear is lost on most people.

I am currently trying to find out if there is a third party that I can join, since I have concluded that the Democratic Party and the GOP are a waste of space in terms of modern governance. However, I have to say that most of what I have discovered in the third party zone is in some cases more frightening than either of the two major parties. So far I have read mostly mean-spirited and pompous bloviating that starts from the premise that anybody who does not agree with you 100% is (insert moronic broad-brush insult here).

I am not going to join forces with mean-spirited intolerant wankers, folks. Whatever their manifest faults, neither the Democratic or Republican parties generally start from the premise that prospective members are idiotic sheep needing a good dose of libertarianism. They learned a long time ago that you are more likely to capture members if you are nice to them.

Blunt summary to a lot of people in the US calling themselves libertarians: you do not meet my definition of pleasant people. If you want me to join your party, you had better start by dropping the pompous pretence to total knowledge, put down the stereotypical broad-brushes (if I hear another person describe me as a socialist I will laugh so effing loud that the walls of the house will cave in), and start, you know, actively trying to recruit me. The way that you really build organizations.

Thanks, Graham! I appreciate your willingness to challenge me and this site's readers, and your ability to do so in a way that is at once cutting and edgy, and a very genuine invitation to dialogue and self-reflection about the libertarian movement.

Let me clarify that I am not personally a registered member of the Libertarian party (or of any party) and that I consider myself to be a "libertarian" in terms of my political ideology rather than electoral party- so as Milton Friedman said, I am "a libertarian with a lower-case 'l'."

This is itself, only a matter of expediency, because most people would get confused and misunderstand if I called myself by the label that I really find most suitable for someone with my political views: a liberal.

As for this article, I do think it deserves an update, because there may be some hope yet for the Republican party and I want to clarify exactly what I mean by that. I also have hopes for a possible wave of independents over the next few election cycles. It's probably a pipe-dream, but we'll see what happens.

Most of all, I think the best, most lasting, most real way to drive change, is to change hearts and minds with the power of ideas and the power of love. As I concluded in the article, if we could just get people to understand the concept that their political understanding has been crammed into "a line" that makes no sense whatsoever, if we could just shatter this sloppy framework for thinking about government- it would be a great leap forward in establishing a truly civil and free society.

Popular posts from this blog

Occupy Mordor or Destroy the Ring?

There has been mixed responses to Occupy Wall Street by libertarians. Some see the movement as a positive, while others see them as little more than lazy hipsters. But libertarians must be sensitive to why people feel the way they do about issues. The occupiers point out a legitimate concern that "the 1%" control vastly more power and wealth than "the 99%", and corporations have accumulated more power and privilege than is healthy for an open society. Some other concerns and demands are absurd, but the heart of the matter is on track. The question is why has this happened? While many on the left are quick to blame a nebulous thing called "greed", or lack of regulation, the matter is more complicated than that. This calls for a Lord of the Rings metaphor. Let's say that Sauron, the big cheese bad guy of Lord of the Rings, is the corporate hegemony. The 1%. Most people in Middle Earth agree that this is a problem, but there are a few differ...

I've Been an Outspoken Critic of Censoring Conservatives, But I'm Not Leaving Patreon Over Sargon of Akkad's Ridiculous Remarks

By: Wes Messamore The Humble Libertarian Photo: Gage Skidmore

US war-murdered 20-30 million since WW2: arrest today’s War Criminals

I always wondered how many folks have died as a result of U.S. foreign policy, exclusive of WW I and WW II which are well documented. US covert and overt criminal Wars of Aggression caused 20-30 million deaths of human beings since World War 2, according to the outstanding documentation of James Lucas of Countercurrents.org. The US use/support of armed attacks is documented in 37 countries, and in direct violation of treaties after both world wars (Kellogg-Briand and UN Charter) to forever end armed attacks unless first attacked by another nation’s government. The end of this gruesome and psychopathic history of armed attacks and war-murders in the Orwellian names of unalienable rights and freedom will end upon the demand of enough in the 99% to arrest the obvious current War Criminals. What will you think, say, and do at this historic moment in US history? What would make your family and you most proud, with consideration of your relatives who sacrificed dearly in wars? Re...
–––As Featured On–––