Comments on: Markos Moulitsas is still not a libertarian

By: Homeland Stupidity Voter’s Guide - Homeland Stupidity

Homeland Stupidity Voter’s Guide - Homeland Stupidity — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 04:35:25 +0000

[...] Last week, Markos Moulitsas tried to pull one over on us by saying that the Democrats are going to be our new party of smaller, less intrusive government, while the Republicans would continue their warmongering and their construction of the American police state. (Nevermind that Bill Clinton was all for a police state.) [...]

By: Sam

Sam — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:02:52 +0000

The key phrase in your response to Moulitsas’ article is “unless you
want to compromise your libertarian principles.” Whoever said that
compromising principles was a bad idea for libertarians. This is how
coalitions are built–the small party in the coalition lends support to
the larger party who cannot go it alone, and in return gets a piece of
the pie. Democrats will never be libertarians, but that does not mean
libertarians should not vote democrat. If Republicans continue to act
as they do, Democrats will take advantage and split the coalition.
Idealogical purity is not worth losing, as smart libertarians understand.

By: Divided We Stand United We Fall

Divided We Stand United We Fall — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 21:32:03 +0000

A Marriage of Convenience….

Moulitsas was wrong then, and wrong now, when he endorses a statement that “corporations are becoming more powerful than governments.” The statement is nonsense on the face of it. There is no real need to belabor the point as several responses to his…

By: Eric Hamilton

Eric Hamilton — Sat, 07 Oct 2006 06:07:54 +0000

I believe that Utah is fairly Libertarian, compared to many other states, but Libertarians have no real power here. If you want to get inside government and actually participate fully in the legislative process, you have to align yourself with Republicans or Democrats. There’s just no getting around that in a pragmatic sense.

Judging by the current administration, I’m certainly more inclined to lean towards the comparatively moderate Democrats in my district. This year, I will vote Libertarian on most of the ballot (to help Libertarians stay on the ballot), and democrat in key races, such as Hatch vs Ashdown for U.S. Senate.

Why not vote Libertarian across the board? Because, realistically, they have little chance of winning, and I’d rather support a candidate who has a prayer of winning, and in many cases, the moderate Democrats are more closely in line with my views than the extreme Libertarians running against them.

By: Cato Unbound » Blog Archive » Best of the Blogs: State Power and Corporate Power

Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:09:44 +0000

[...] A number of libertarian bloggers have emphasized that corporate power rests on state power. Michael Hampton at Homeland Stupidty writes: Moulitsas still cites corporate power over people as a problem, and still fails to recognize that corporations gain their undue power from government. Government is the enabler, empowering corporations to step on individuals and small businesses through both regulations and subsidies. Itâ€™s only by restraining government that corporations can be held in check, and itâ€™s unfortuate that Moulitsas hasnâ€™t figured this out yet. [...]

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 03 Oct 2006 17:51:50 +0000

Should Libertarian’s vote Democratic?
No.
Libertarian’s should vote for their own party.

Mr. Moulitsas is trying to appeal to the people who know that third (and fourth, and fifth, etc.) parties never have a chance vs. the big Republicans and Democrats.

When will people learn that the world is not black and white…

By: Libertarian Democrats or Liberalism Reborn - Liberal Values - Defending Liberty and Enlightened Thought

Tue, 03 Oct 2006 04:39:55 +0000

[...] Markos Moulitsas has brought his discussion of libertarian Democrats to Cato Unbound. In doing so, Kos is transforming from a blogger purely interested in strategy while ignoring ideology to one who has some points to make on political principles, even if the arguments do become awkward at times. Kos’s version of libertarianism does vary from conventional libertarian beliefs (as sites such as QandO, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of, Homeland Stupidity, and Zen Politics discuss). However it must also not be forgotten that Republican policies differ widely from their rhetoric favoring freedom, limited government, and the free market. [...]

By: Michael Hampton

Michael Hampton — Tue, 03 Oct 2006 02:49:52 +0000

Since when do committing fraud or destroying someone’s property through pollution constitute economic liberties? You’ll find libertarians almost universally opposed to these.

Improving one’s property hardly deserves to be lumped into the same sentence, let alone the same chapter, as committing fraud or knowingly destroying the environment.

As for the lesser evil comment, I can’t accept the lesser evil and look myself in the mirror. I don’t know how the rest of the country manage to live with themselves.

By: Michael D. Bryan

Michael D. Bryan — Tue, 03 Oct 2006 00:58:07 +0000

The duality of our political system is not an assumption but historical and game-theory-based fact. Duvergerâ€™s law, which states that a single-member first past the post districting system will inevitably produce a two major coalitional parties who overwhelmingly dominate the system, describes Americans politics perfectly. So the assertion, if not GOP, then Democrat, isnâ€™t faulty at all. Libertarians have no power in American politics except by alliance with one of the major parties. Kos is simply pointing out that Libertarians will reach more of their policy goals by coming into the Democratic tent.

There is a hierachy of liberty interests. Arguably, political rights against state intrusions are superior to mere economic liberties, such as the right to pollute the commons, or defraud customers, or even to use oneâ€™s property in an unrestricted manner. You may feel differently, but history has demonstrated over and over that political rights, once lost, are much harder to restore than economic rights, and that economic rights are inevitably lost once political rights are destroyed. Kos therefore posits that Libertarians should be far more alarmed, and organize to oppose, those restrictions on political rights which the GOP is currently pursuing, even though they may disagree with some or all of the limitations on economic rights which are attendant to Democratsâ€™ desire to regulate and police free markets.

In short, Kos is asking Libertarians to accept the lesser evil.

By: Michael Hampton

Michael Hampton — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 22:19:09 +0000

I only go by what he himself has said. As another blogger put it:

First is that his post/essay basically says "Look, 'new' Democrats and libertarians have a lot in common, except that you need government instead of the market to do this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this."

Whenever anyone claims that government is needed for something, I'm highly suspicious of the claim, and for good reason: government is usually the worst way to accomplish any particular public good. When it's the only way, then fine. But for nearly anything you can think of, there's bound to be a better way, even if it's one we haven't yet discovered.