When President Regan spoke of “trust, but verified” he meant the relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union. The President could just as easily have been referencing the relationship between libertarians and Republicans. Some libertarians in the GOP feel very often like President Eisenhower, when in the run up to the 1952 presidential campaign, he was forced to align himself with Senator William Jenner, and after having to embrace him during a campaign event, remarked afterward to a confidant: “I felt dirty from the touch of the man” (Boller 52).
There has existed a “Cold War” of sorts between libertarians and Republicans through the decades. At times, these icy relations have thawed in the name of political expediency. The inception of the RLC, or, The Republican Liberty Caucus, has helped to bridge some of the more common divides between the philosophy of liberty and the Republican ideology.
This is not to say that the extremely uneasy alliance hasn’t had its drawbacks and stumbles. One suspects often times that libertarians and Republicans agree on core principles more often than not. Paradoxically, one realizes members of both respective governing philosophies are more often than not very reticent to concede this reality. Republicans often declare that they do not “need” libertarians to advance their political agenda. Libertarians sometimes declare that the Republicans do not reflect their values and are poorly conceived impersonators of true libertarian ideals.
In the Republican glory days of the 1990’s and through the early part of the twenty-first century, when they firmly controlled both chambers of Congress, Republicans might have been right. Those were heady times for the Republican Party. It seemed to Americans, and analysts alike, that the American people were secure in the cradling arms of Republican governance for the foreseeable future. There was no divided government for the Republicans to be concerned about. They had the House, the Senate, and even The White House in 2000.
Dawn has broken over a very different Republican Party. The gains achieved since the 1990’s were for all intensive purposes washed away by the Democrat Tsunami of 2006. Many liberty-minded and moderate individuals abandoned the Republican Party when the party of supposed limited government and fiscal responsibility began increasing the government’s size and scope. The Republican Party oversaw the greatest expansion of government since The Great Society (Goldberg). Add to this stormy mix an immigration policy that made liberty-minded individuals uncomfortable, and many saw a political alliance shattered by irreconcilable differences.
Turning to the minor Libertarian Party, the politically homeless former GOP members were confronted by an unacceptably radical utopian platform and a mandatory pledge that disavowed the use of force for political or social gain, in any circumstance. In a political climate such as the one America finds herself in now, where approval ratings are remarkably low for both Major Parties, the 2008 presidential election cycle would seemed to have been the opportunity that Libertarians should have seized upon to raise the prominence of the nation’s third largest political party, and welcome a disheartened electorate. The dualopoly of the U.S. electoral system dooms any minor party however, and the ‘party of principle’ is no exception. Thirty-five plus years of electoral drought will almost certainly continue on for the foreseeable future.
During the early appearances of his 1952 presidential bid, General Eisenhower attempted to strike a moderate tone. According to Paul F. Boller, Jr. in Presidential Campaigns: “He took the ‘middle road’ and, although attacking centralized powers in Washington, accepted the social gains of the Roosevelt era as ‘solid floors’ on which private enterprise could build a better life for people.”
By the Fall of that same year, however, General Eisenhower, a warrior by trade, was forced to make peace with the more right-wing elements of the GOP. Eisenhower met with Senators Taft (R-Ohio), Jenner (R-Indiana) and McCarthy (R-Wisconsin). Eisenhower remained privately embarrassed by these individuals and the right wing they represented of the Party, and perceived them as unprincipled and smear artists (Boller 283). Eisenhower’s embarrassment over those he had politically aligned himself with only increased when Senator McCarthy declared General George C. Marshall “a front man for traitors” (Boller 283). Eisenhower was close friends with General Marshall for thirty-five years, and was planning to defend his friend in a speech, when he quashed the particular portion of his speech defending Marshall, at the behest of Republican leaders.
The Republican Party needs libertarians more now than ever, and perhaps libertarians need the Republican Party if they are ever to find a successful vehicle in which to advance their ideals. Republicans can no longer afford to take Independents for granted, nor dismiss libertarians and their strongly held beliefs. In his piece “Libertarians and the Republican Party: Irreconcilable Differences, attorney Glenn Greenwald, wrote:
There are no more vibrant libertarian components left of the Bush movement. Libertarians (in the small "l" sense of that word) have either abandoned the Bush-led Republicans based on the recognition -- catalyzed by the Schiavo travesty -- that there are no movements more antithetical to a restrained government than an unchecked Republican Party in its current composition. Or, like Reynolds, they have relinquished their libertarian impulses and beliefs completely as the price for being embraced as a full-fledged, unfailingly loyal member of the Bush-led Republican Party.
In his article Keeping Libertarians Inside The Tent, which appeared in The National Review, constitutional attorney Randy Barnett wrote of political compromise between Republicans and libertarians:
Stop making snide gratuitous remarks about libertarians. Nothing turns off libertarians more than the sort of wholly gratuitous snide remarks about libertarians in conservative publications. By gratuitous I mean they show up even in articles about policies with which libertarians and conservatives agree. The more libertarians feel unwelcome in the coalition that is the Republican party, the more they will vote Libertarian…
[However], The Republican coalition is, after all, a coalition and libertarians if they are inside the tent cannot be expected to call all the shots.
If both chambers of Congress are to be taken back by Republicans in the foreseeable future, they will need the full-fledged support of the libertarian movement within the Republican Party. Moreover, if the Republican Party wishes to hold the White House in the upcoming Presidential Election, the GOP can do so only by nurturing and cultivating its alliance with libertarians. Senator McCain might be just the right maverick standard bearer to accomplish this task, or he might not.
There are some common ideals that libertarians and Republicans could agree upon. However, if political compromise is to be possible, one, or both sides, cannot feel like President Eisenhower in the 1952 presidential election. That is to say, being able to compromise politically without surrendering their principles in the process. Only in this way, may it be possible for libertarians and the GOP to build a foundation from which a better, stronger and more trustful relationship is forged.
By Ryan Christiano.
There has existed a “Cold War” of sorts between libertarians and Republicans through the decades. At times, these icy relations have thawed in the name of political expediency. The inception of the RLC, or, The Republican Liberty Caucus, has helped to bridge some of the more common divides between the philosophy of liberty and the Republican ideology.
This is not to say that the extremely uneasy alliance hasn’t had its drawbacks and stumbles. One suspects often times that libertarians and Republicans agree on core principles more often than not. Paradoxically, one realizes members of both respective governing philosophies are more often than not very reticent to concede this reality. Republicans often declare that they do not “need” libertarians to advance their political agenda. Libertarians sometimes declare that the Republicans do not reflect their values and are poorly conceived impersonators of true libertarian ideals.
In the Republican glory days of the 1990’s and through the early part of the twenty-first century, when they firmly controlled both chambers of Congress, Republicans might have been right. Those were heady times for the Republican Party. It seemed to Americans, and analysts alike, that the American people were secure in the cradling arms of Republican governance for the foreseeable future. There was no divided government for the Republicans to be concerned about. They had the House, the Senate, and even The White House in 2000.
Dawn has broken over a very different Republican Party. The gains achieved since the 1990’s were for all intensive purposes washed away by the Democrat Tsunami of 2006. Many liberty-minded and moderate individuals abandoned the Republican Party when the party of supposed limited government and fiscal responsibility began increasing the government’s size and scope. The Republican Party oversaw the greatest expansion of government since The Great Society (Goldberg). Add to this stormy mix an immigration policy that made liberty-minded individuals uncomfortable, and many saw a political alliance shattered by irreconcilable differences.
Turning to the minor Libertarian Party, the politically homeless former GOP members were confronted by an unacceptably radical utopian platform and a mandatory pledge that disavowed the use of force for political or social gain, in any circumstance. In a political climate such as the one America finds herself in now, where approval ratings are remarkably low for both Major Parties, the 2008 presidential election cycle would seemed to have been the opportunity that Libertarians should have seized upon to raise the prominence of the nation’s third largest political party, and welcome a disheartened electorate. The dualopoly of the U.S. electoral system dooms any minor party however, and the ‘party of principle’ is no exception. Thirty-five plus years of electoral drought will almost certainly continue on for the foreseeable future.
During the early appearances of his 1952 presidential bid, General Eisenhower attempted to strike a moderate tone. According to Paul F. Boller, Jr. in Presidential Campaigns: “He took the ‘middle road’ and, although attacking centralized powers in Washington, accepted the social gains of the Roosevelt era as ‘solid floors’ on which private enterprise could build a better life for people.”
By the Fall of that same year, however, General Eisenhower, a warrior by trade, was forced to make peace with the more right-wing elements of the GOP. Eisenhower met with Senators Taft (R-Ohio), Jenner (R-Indiana) and McCarthy (R-Wisconsin). Eisenhower remained privately embarrassed by these individuals and the right wing they represented of the Party, and perceived them as unprincipled and smear artists (Boller 283). Eisenhower’s embarrassment over those he had politically aligned himself with only increased when Senator McCarthy declared General George C. Marshall “a front man for traitors” (Boller 283). Eisenhower was close friends with General Marshall for thirty-five years, and was planning to defend his friend in a speech, when he quashed the particular portion of his speech defending Marshall, at the behest of Republican leaders.
The Republican Party needs libertarians more now than ever, and perhaps libertarians need the Republican Party if they are ever to find a successful vehicle in which to advance their ideals. Republicans can no longer afford to take Independents for granted, nor dismiss libertarians and their strongly held beliefs. In his piece “Libertarians and the Republican Party: Irreconcilable Differences, attorney Glenn Greenwald, wrote:
There are no more vibrant libertarian components left of the Bush movement. Libertarians (in the small "l" sense of that word) have either abandoned the Bush-led Republicans based on the recognition -- catalyzed by the Schiavo travesty -- that there are no movements more antithetical to a restrained government than an unchecked Republican Party in its current composition. Or, like Reynolds, they have relinquished their libertarian impulses and beliefs completely as the price for being embraced as a full-fledged, unfailingly loyal member of the Bush-led Republican Party.
In his article Keeping Libertarians Inside The Tent, which appeared in The National Review, constitutional attorney Randy Barnett wrote of political compromise between Republicans and libertarians:
Stop making snide gratuitous remarks about libertarians. Nothing turns off libertarians more than the sort of wholly gratuitous snide remarks about libertarians in conservative publications. By gratuitous I mean they show up even in articles about policies with which libertarians and conservatives agree. The more libertarians feel unwelcome in the coalition that is the Republican party, the more they will vote Libertarian…
[However], The Republican coalition is, after all, a coalition and libertarians if they are inside the tent cannot be expected to call all the shots.
If both chambers of Congress are to be taken back by Republicans in the foreseeable future, they will need the full-fledged support of the libertarian movement within the Republican Party. Moreover, if the Republican Party wishes to hold the White House in the upcoming Presidential Election, the GOP can do so only by nurturing and cultivating its alliance with libertarians. Senator McCain might be just the right maverick standard bearer to accomplish this task, or he might not.
There are some common ideals that libertarians and Republicans could agree upon. However, if political compromise is to be possible, one, or both sides, cannot feel like President Eisenhower in the 1952 presidential election. That is to say, being able to compromise politically without surrendering their principles in the process. Only in this way, may it be possible for libertarians and the GOP to build a foundation from which a better, stronger and more trustful relationship is forged.
By Ryan Christiano.
Boller, Paul F. Jr. Presidential Campaigns. Oxford University Press Inc 1984.
No comments:
Post a Comment