(Posted here)
http://libertarianintelligence.com/2008/09/why-multiple-freedom-parties-is-dumb.html
Another freedom party makes sense only if your goal is A) to displace the LP or B) to start an explicitly anarchist party. Competing with the LP to improve it makes about as much sense as Henry Waxman starting his own Democrat Party in order to replace John Dingell as the Energy And Commerce chair. Instead the Democrat caucus narrowly chose Waxman over Dingell, and then united to shove that choice down the throats of the Republicans.
The difference between a Party and a Caucus is politics 101. A Party is for uniting all the voters who cluster around a common policy goal/direction. A Party uses caucuses to settle internal disputes over strategy, tactics, or candidates -- and then comes out united and swinging. Splitting from the Party over such disputes is inane if killing the old Party isn't your goal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I don't agree with some of what's said in the earlier article linked from here, but I have to agree with what's said in this article for the most part. The notion that a new party is going to achieve what the LP has achieved without being subject to the same sorts of problems doesn't seem all that likely to me, anyway. At the end of the day, there'll always be a vocal minority (on both "sides") who would rather fight than get down to work.
Barr's nomination really unmasked some of these folks - those who'd rather post to various forums full of libertarians about how upset they were that Barr won, versus those of us who went out and tried to make the most of it and pick up the slack he left off in terms of explaining libertarianism the way we see it. In the long run, regardless of "radical", "reformer", or otherwise, the much more important distinctions are between the "talkers" and the "doers."
Have you considered that there may be value in having a "flypaper" organization to attract the characters whose ideology precludes working constructively with others?
I'm not saying that a second freedom party is all downside. :-) And I do say that there is room in our quadrant for an explicitly anarchist party. But most anarchists I know are people I'd rather have in the LP than not.
Post a Comment