|
« Libertarian Democrats |
Main
| On Freedom »
June 14, 2006
Libertarian Democrats, Revisited
Hilzoy of Obsidian Wings has jumped on the Libertarian Democrat bandwagon, although to her credit I think she makes a much better argument in favor of voting for Democrats over Republicans. At this point in time, Democrats are definitely better than Republicans on a number of issues that matter to libertarians (and to me). The Bush administration's attempts to amass far more power in the executive than the Constitution envisioned are a serious threat to freedom, for example, and the Democrats are the only people out there really doing anything to try and scale that expansion back.
The problem we run into is that it's impossible to know how much of Democratic rhetoric is heartfelt and how much of it is simply partisan. (By this I mean that of the candidates, not party members.) Sure, Senator Reid and Rep. Pelosi are vehemently against concentrations of executive power right now, but how hard would they fight against executive overreach if the President had a D after his name rather than an R? I seem to recall much less enthusiasm for restricting government power among Democrats when President Clinton was in power, just as a lot more Republicans seemed to see the problem more clearly back then.
Fortunately, the structure of our voting system means we have an opportunity to make some progress without risking much this year, because we know that President Bush will be in office for two more years. Therefore, a Democratic House or Senate (or both) could be expected to do what it could to restrict executive power, whether its motives were partisan or pure. This is one of the reasons I will be voting Democratic this fall; it's low risk. (In my case, extremely low risk, since I can't imagine a Democrat winning in my House district, thanks to the magic of gerrymandering.)
It's a good thing that libertarianism is seen as a sufficiently large constituency that some Democrats are willing to at least repackage their rhetoric in an attempt to lure libertarians into their camp. Until one of the parties is willing to actually enact some libertarian-minded legislation, however, it seems unlikely that there will be much payoff in voting regularly for either party over the other.
Posted at June 14, 2006 04:45 PM
I apologize for only allowing authenticated commenters, but comment spam overwhelms the site if I don't use those measures to prevent it. I reserve the right to delete any comment, although generally comments will only be deleted due to use of profanity or personal attacks on people. I have no objection to vigorous argument, but when name-calling begins, I'm putting a stop to it. In the immortal words of Eugene Levy, "People, people, let's stop this before somebody says something untrue!" If you want to call people names, I recommend you get your own blog.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://andrewolmsted.com/mt/pings.cgi/1209
I'm just not sure I like this whole "freedom" thing they seem to be attaching to libertarianism. Liberal-libertarians want "freedom to be able to move around". "Freedom to get healthcare". "Freedom to insist on free tivo and melted butter on my popcorn without getting fat or risking a heart attack."
"Freedom to force you to do what I want while insisting your right to freedom ends at my delicate ears, hater."
I think I may be overstating things a wee tad, but you get the idea.
Posted by: Enrak at June 15, 2006 05:56 AM
I think my first comment got eaten again.
I think there is something to Hilzoy's argument about Democrats being people who are interested in making government policy work. But I think that is also where the problems lie. According to that philosophy, all problems can be solved if we just do enough research, enact the right policies, wonk it to death. But I don't think that is true.
Despite the fact that we now have access to incredible databases and computing power I don't think we can yet replicate the information transfer system that is the market. We can fudge it, but there is alot of noise in the data. A LOT of noise. I think there are some places where the government, despite the earnest efforts of people trying to solve the problem, will only make the situation work. Not because they don't want government to work, but because the information requirements are just too high.
On a similar note, I think Hilzoy forgets that most of the policies are actually implemented by the lifers. And the lifers are probably 80-20 Democrats. So, yes, the big picture ideas may be being crafted by Republicans, but the execution is still being done by Democrats. (Admittedly, in my area, it is being implemented by Democrats that are not on board with the overall policy, but I still think they deep down want it to succeed.)
Posted by: Enrak at June 15, 2006 06:05 AM
That has always been a conflict between liberals and libertarians. Liberals believe that freedom doesn't mean anything unless it is unconstrained freedom, as a rule (obviously, as a generalization, there will be many exceptions to that rule), while libertarians tend to refer to freedom under the more traditional definition. I don't recall who said it, but I think of the old saw about rich and poor alike are free to sleep under bridges. A libertarian says that's ok as long as they're both not being coerced, while a liberal says that you're not really free if you have to sleep under a bridge. This is probably worth a post on its own, actually.
Posted by: Andrew Olmsted at June 15, 2006 07:18 AM
I think that one group or the other is subject to Fezzik's line: "Freedom. I do not think that word means what you think it means."
But I'm not 100% sure which.
P.S. I think your blog ate my other comment, which was much longer and more erudite. Not to mention smrter.
Posted by: Enrak at June 15, 2006 10:22 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in,
.
Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
|
