Is the Libertarian Party Good for Anything?

It’s been pointed out to me that I was perhaps a bit too harsh in last week’s article, What Libertarianism Is and What Libertarianism Is Not. In that article, I lambaste the Libertarian Party and its current comedy revue of a presidential ticket for being terrible exemplars of libertarianism; indeed, my pithy Facebook summary read in part "there is nothing libertarian about the Libertarian Party." I stand by every word I wrote in both article and summary; the Libertarian Party is currently miles afield of what it actually means to be a libertarian. I checked: the phrase "non-aggression principle" appears only twice on the party’s web site, once in a quote from Ron Paul describing the great Mary Ruwart’s book, Healing Our World, and once as the title of a talk to be given at the 2014 Libertarian Party of Oklahoma state convention. The fact that the core principle of the libertarian philosophy goes effectively unmentioned on the Libertarian Party’s web site speaks volumes.

All of which is not to say, however, that the Libertarian Party is completely worthless. It’s terrible at spreading libertarian ideas, to be sure, but it’s effective at attracting people who are beginning to think libertarian thoughts; in a sense, it’s sort of like a big magnet that helps to draw in what Albert Jay Nock called the "Remnant." Many people are drawn to the Libertarian Party because they’ve noticed that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans offer a single alternative to endless war, and many others because they’ve begun to realize what a cruel, inhuman farce the drug war is — at this time, those are the two major issues that push people in the libertarian direction, and the Libertarian Party is there to catch the pushees.

The trick is to realize that the Libertarian Party is not the destination — it’s merely part of the journey. Many people, myself included, find the Libertarian Party to be sort of a first stage of a long philosophical development, and it serves pretty well in that capacity. I was, long ago, a pretty conventional Republican; over the course of many years, I moved away from the Republican Party, and both the Libertarian Party itself as well as many of the connections I made while I was involved with it were vital in getting me from there to here — and, to reiterate, "here" is a position from which I write things like "there is nothing libertarian about the Libertarian Party." Were it not for my time in the Libertarian Party, it’s not at all clear to me that I’d have developed a sufficient philosophical base that I could write such a thing.

It’s especially important that we don’t become so standoffish and so elitist that we turn our noses up at the people in the Libertarian Party. We should (and do) roundly and vociferously criticize every misstep the party makes — we should never stop pointing out what a disaster the Johnson/Weld ticket is, for example — but it’s important that we don’t extend any of that venom to the rank-and-file party members, who are mostly good people at an earlier stage in their intellectual development. Until and unless mankind begins producing children who come into the world already possessed of fully-developed anarcho-capitalist philosophies — perhaps emerging from the womb clutching a copy of For a New Liberty in one hand and Economics in One Lesson in the other, both fully read and annotated — we cannot afford to reject those people who are well-intentioned and interested, but who simply need a push in the right direction. Shutting them off won’t help.

Nock points out in his above-noted essay that the "prophet" cannot find the Remnant, but that the Remnant will find him, and that remains true; it’s worth noting, however, that if the prophet can find watering-holes where the Remnant tends to congregate, he’s better served making himself noticeable there than just wandering about at random. Not everyone attracted to the Libertarian Party is inclined toward the entire libertarian program, but it does seem disproportionately likely that those people inclined toward libertarianism will find the Libertarian Party, which is highly visible and has the word "Libertarian" right there in its name. Potential prophets would do well not to drive those people away.

From that point on, of course, there’s not much we can do; keep writing, keep talking, keep developing and articulating the libertarian message. Those who aren’t interested in our ideas can’t be converted by force, to be sure, but those who want them will find them. That’s why I do what I do — I’m not writing because I have some vain dream that I’ll influence public policy in any fashion. President Trump is not going to get out of bed next April, type "bumbling bees" into Google, and then say "holy cow, the Navy is using Pokémon as a recruitment tool? I’ll put a stop to that!" No, the reason I write whatever it is you want to call this stuff is so other people who are trying to learn about liberty have one more opportunity to do so. I stood on other people’s shoulders to get where I am; the least I can do is offer my shoulders to the next generation of young libertarians.

Could this whole process take place without the Libertarian Party? Of course. That’s just how the market works: nothing is truly indispensable. We can always find alternatives. The Libertarian Party is a useful step along the way, however, and, while I am (and will continue to be) endlessly critical of its limitless deviations from true libertarianism, I’m certainly not saying I want the Libertarian Party abolished. Even in its current state, it serves a purpose.

The market’s good at that, too: once a thing’s been produced, we’ll find some use for it, however much of a mess it may be.