Why do Libertarians vote for Republican candidates?

Great Debates
41

I don’t think there’s much point in continuing this debate, but I couldn’t ignore this little bit of nonsense (from a Moderator, no less)

I didn’t say that. I said that modern liberalism evolved from Marxism.

Okay, I take it you disagree? Then how do you rectify the constant attacks on free speech from liberals with their alleged support of it?

Again, please explain how this isn’t true.

No, I didn’t say that. I said liberalim is an inherently fanatical belief system. All utopian belief systems are inherently fanatical. Libertarianism included.

I never said anything like that. I merely pointed out that liberalism is evolved from Marxism, is inherently fanatical, and is not compatable with the notions of free speech or personal responsibilty. But if that’s what you choose to believe, more power to you.

The fact that you exagerated and misrepresented what I said in this manner would seem to lend credence to what I said about liberals being intolerant of differing belief systems. Somehow I doubt you’ll see it that way. Clearly I’m the ignorant and intolerant one here. :rolleyes:

42

Well, you’ve said it; you haven’t really made any arguments in support of it. Since libertarianism has some features in common with anarchism, obviously libertarianism evolved from anarchism.

I don’t attack free speech. Lots of other self-identified liberals don’t attack free speech; in fact, many liberals are ardent defenders of free speech.

There are those on what is conventionally identified as the political “left” who do attack free speech. At least some of those people would contemptuously reject the label “liberal”, but I suppose some would not.

I could probably dig up some quote by some newly converted follower of Ayn Rand about how awful “compassion” is. Since Objectivists are more or less libertarians (therefore, libertarians are more or less Objectivists–oh wait, it doesn’t work that way, does it?), I could therefore say “libertarianism is incompatible with the notion of compassion”.

Since liberals disagree with you about some of the proper roles of individuals, voluntary associations, and the state, they therefore categorically reject the notion of personal responsibility.

Since libertarians disagree with conservatives about the proper role of the state in upholding the values of society, libertarians categorically reject the notion of morality. Right?

So, you’re a fanatic, too? And of course all the major Western religions are fanatical. If everyone is a fanatic, then what do we call, well, actual fanatics? You know, people who commit terrorism in the name of their political, ideological, or religious beliefs; establish opressive dictatorships; seek to eliminate their opponents by force, that sort of thing.

It’s not my disagreements with what you believe that sparks the “intolerance”, it’s the misrepresentation and strawman arguments about what other people believe. If I said “Libertarianism is evolved from anarchism, is inherently fanatical [hey, you said it yourself], and is not compatible with the notions of compassion or morality”, I imagine many libertarians might get a little testy about that. Then, when they did, I could yell “Help! I’m being repressed!”

43

Is this view shared by many or most libertatians, or is this the isolated view of Max_Castle?

If it is an isolated view, then there is no reason to waste time debating it. If it is a widely held view then

  1. that would be pathetic
  2. there might be some gain from debating it.
44

I’ve a question for any economists, as well as Libertarians here- I understand and will concede that you probably pay less in taxes under Republican administrations. However, the size of government does not seem to be shrinking, nor does spending seem to decrease. Where does deficit spending fit into your ideology? And if the government can enact freedom-defeating policies and fund them without raising your taxes (so called ‘emergency funding’) how does this impact your argument?

45

I wonder, myself, whether some of those who claim to be “libertarian” really understand what the term means. IME, many so-called “libertarians” are actually just anti-tax, pro-business folks who don’t feel comfortable aligning themselves with traditional conservatives.

Some years ago, I attended a conference put on by a libertarian think-tank, the Institute for Humane Studies. The attendees were a fairly intelligent, IMHO, group of college students, most of whom whom were in some kind of business degree. I was the odd one out, a historian who was interested in the social aspects of libertarianism and how it affected individual freedoms. It became clear to me that most, if not almost all of my colleagues didn’t seem to be interested in anything other than “economic liberty.” In one faculty-led discussion on the Supreme Court, the leader was surprised to find that everyone in the group but me argued that abortion should be illegal! Several students suggested to me that the problem with (traditional conservatives) was that they weren’t conservative enough for them, especially on social issues.

I still nominally consider myself a libertarian, but I will vote Democrat this year. I will never vote for an administration who has someone like John Ashcroft in charge of the Justice Administration. Call me crazy, but I’ll take restricted economic freedom over restricted personal freedom any day. You can have enough money, but can you ever have enough personal freedom?

46

I tend to label myself as a libertarian (small “l”). I believe in limited government, individual freedom, and individual responsibility. Since the OP asked in general terms why libertarians vote one way or another, my post will contain some sweeping generalizations, with all the flaws inherent to such statements.

Neither of the major parties is fiscally responsible. They both want to spend way too much; they just disagree over what the proper recipient of overspending is. Neither party gets points from me on this score.

Neither extreme conservatives nor extreme liberals do well in terms of free speech. (Please note the use of the word “extreme.”) Extreme conservatives tend to be very vocal in their attempts to squelch speech that they see as undermining Christianity, patriotism, or traditional values. Extreme liberals tend to be just as vocal at attempting to supress any expression of ideas that is not Politically Correct. However, the average Republican or Democrat does passably well with free speech.

Separation of church and state: This issue pushes me toward Democratic candidates in most cases. Although there are plenty of vocally religious Democrats who scare me just as much as their counterparts do, Democrats in general tend to cast their vote for separation more often than Republicans do.

Individual freedom: Again, the Democrats tend to have a better track record on this one, although the lines aren’t as clear as they are for the church & state issue. The Patriot Act frightens me deeply, for example. However, while it is clearly a Republican sponsored nightmare, it received broad support on both sides of the aisle when it was passed.

Individual responsibility: Entitlement and social welfare programs, if they become too broad, undermine the responsibility we each have to take care of ourselves. I have no problem helping to take care of those who can’t support themselves. I do have a problem helping those who won’t help themselves. The latter category tends to get bigger as social programs bloat. Democrats more often favor the expansion of such programs than do Repulicans.

Also, my view on crime is significantly influenced by my views on individual responsibility. I believe in broad freedoms, but those who abuse those freedoms and victimize other people deserve to be dealt with very, very, very harshly. In my experience, Repulican politicians tend to be a bit tougher on crime in their voting habits than do Democrats.

The end result? I hate voting. I vote for major party candidates for President because I believe that it is better to influence which of the two distasteful but viable candidates will reach office. If there is a good third-party candidate for other offices, I tend to vote that way, even though they have poor chances of success. Over time, my split between Democrat and Republican tends to be about 50/50, although that does not necessarily hold true in any single election.

47

Hi, my name is Paladud and I’m an alcoh… err, libertarian. I agree with most of Ayn Rand’s ideals, and if that makes me batshit crazy in your eyes, then consider me just that.

In the upcoming election, the notion of voting for Bush nauseates me. Ditto for Kerry. It’s hard to say which is worse: Kerry represents most of what I abhor, whereas Bush stands for consistent halfassing and acts wrongly (though in ways that are irrelevant to me personally) as a sycophant to the religious right. If Lieberman somehow won among the Dems, I probably would vote for him. As things are, my vote’s going to Nolan.

Anyhow, the good points for me:

Economy:

Republicans:
Lower taxes
Less regulation
Less protectionism
Less inclined toward social spending

Democrats:
Historically less inclined to run a huge budget deficit

Social:

Republicans:
For harsher criminal punishments / death penalty
Generally against affirmative action
Against welfare
Pro-gun

Democrats:
For (in some cases) legalization of drugs
Stronger protection of most basic civil liberties

Foreign policy:

Utter failure from both parties.
I feel that the government’s duty should be to protect a nation against external threats, to punish those who infringe on the freedom of others within its borders, and to provide some sort of patent/copyright protection. There should also be some sort of safeguards in the political system to prevent the people from voting themselves bread and circuses again in the future.

48

I believe you are mistaken. I think we can anticipate a lot of turnover in the Supreme Court in the next few years. Right now the court is delicately balanced between left and right, with a slight rightward tilt.

If a Republican president is elected, you can expect appointees much more apt to overturn Roe v. Wade, and generally much less protective of civil liberties. The Court could keep that makeup for a generation.

It is absolutely critical (IMO) to elect a Democratic president this time around, to keep us from being stuck with a Supreme Court that is reluctant to enforce the Bill of Rights in any meaningful way (and which, in particular, may be inclined to ignore the 9th Amendment)

49

I am a libertarian, but I am more worried about my civil liberties, and the agenda of the religious fundementalists/hypocrites at this moment than a few hundred dollars.

50

Well, I am a registered member of the Libertarian Party, but I find a large number of my brethren and sistren to just a batsht loony as I find Democrats and Republicans. The far left and far right halves of each party scare the crap out of me, for a number of reasons. I get condemned by the far right for being an areligious free-thinking supporter of gay rights and a woman’s right to choose. I get condemned by the far left for being an anti-PC gun nut. Both sides want more of my money than I want them to have, and both want to do bad things with it. I generally vote Republican, because when it gets down to the nitty-gritty, I will vote gun-rights before anything else. Both parties are full of sanctimonious hypocritical whiners. A pox on both parties. We had a chance to establish a viable third party, but Perot turned out to be as batsht loony as the rest of them! :smiley:

My ideal government would be a divided Congress(leaning Republican), a centrist President, and a liberal Supreme Court. That way absolutely nothing extreme gets done…ever. It is a government that would leave me the hell alone!

51

Which just proves that you have to be crazy to go into politics…

52

I think a big part of it comes down to your view of the proper role of government in society.

Liberalism tends to see government as a big ‘problem solver’, to be applied to any issue that the public sees fit to address. Moms can’t afford daycare? Government should fund it! People get paid too little? Government should set wages! People drive cars that are too large? There should be a tax! People can get hurt on the job? Government should protect them! Etc., ad infinitem.

Conservatism tends to see government as a necessary evil, and conservatives are generally suspicious of government ‘solutions’. Conservatives prefer vouchers for education. Conservatives prefer market-oriented solutions for environmental problems. Conservatives don’t think the government has any business funding day cares or paying for everyone’s health care.

Libertarians believe that the initiation of force is wrong. Taxation is at best a necessary evil when the money goes to paying for essential services Libertarians agree with. But they find the notion of holding a gun to someone’s head and forcing them to pay for someone else’s child care to be abhorrent.

So on a basic philosophical level, Libertarians are much more in tune with conservatives.

As for drug legalization and other civil liberties, that cuts across both parties. IMO, there is almost as much support for drug legalization on the right than there is on the left (with the exception of the current crew in the white house). The National Review, possibly the most well-known conservative magazine, has supported legalization of drugs for over ten years.

But in the end, Libertarians find the biggest threat to liberty to come from the left in the form of a nanny-state morass of regulations, and high taxation that forces them to work half their lives just to pay the bills of the state. Many libertarians will point to ‘tax freedom day’ and say that the days before that are basically involuntary servitude to the state. They are disgusted by many major policies pushed by the left, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, OSHA, the heavy-handednes of the FDA and the EPA under Democratic governments. In their day-to-day lives, they are far more likely to run into laws and roadblocks erected by liberals. Want to open a business? Better get that doorway widened, and put in a handicapped bathroom. Want to hire someone? Make sure you follow affirmative action guidelines. Want to start a business making pharmaceuticals? Good luck, unless you have a billion dollars to comply with the incredible tangle of obstructions set up by the government.

Or here’s another way to look at it - I’m a Canadian, and generally Libertarian in outlook. If I was forced to move, and had to choose between the United States, where conservatives have held more power over the government, or Europe, where Liberals have had more power, I’d choose the U.S. in a heartbeat. My outlook on life is that I own my own life. I am not a slave to anyone else. Society has no right to take what I earn or restrict what I do for the benefit of others. I do not want or need to be protected from the harshness of the real world. I want the freedom to sell my goods to whoever is willing to buy them, to hire whoever is willing to accept the wages I offer, or to accept a job from someone else if I accept the terms of employment. I do not need government setting limits on my actions as long as I do not hurt others. I am willing to accept responsibility for my failures, and reap the benefits of my successes.

I do not believe the rich are evil. I find class warfare to be obnoxious bigotry. I do not believe people should be judged by the color of their skin, and therefore find affirmative action and racial pandering to be obnoxious. I believe that allowing people to fail is an important part of life, and too soft a safety blanket damages society and more importantly creates a large a dependent class.

Republicans fit my philosophical outlook much better than do Democrats. I dislike their pandering to religion and their social conservatism, but see those things as much, much smaller threats than the gradual death-of-a-thousand-cuts of the modern regulatory state.