• The abortion non-issue
• A new kind of surge
• Congrats Cap'n!
• Game over, man!
• Regarding Education
• Trivia Question of the Day
• What Right to Privacy?
• John McCain is 72 years old! [laughter, applause]
• Bug Braaaaaaaaaains!
• Sarah Palin
• Reich's advice to Democrats
• Women's Lib
• On Barak Obama and Joe Biden
• Late Night Punchline Imbalance: the details undermine the headline
• Better questions about climate change

• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005

« Email Exchange on Islamic Fundamentalism | Main | Gym Thoughts »

The Direction of the Democrats

I like this Henry Payne cartoon because it is a reminder that each party has its left wing and its right wing keeping it aloft. Libertarians and others in the United States are dissatisfied with the current two-party system. But the LP will never get off the ground with the narrow orthodoxy it currently espouses. I sometimes wish for system of proportional representation, with a smörgåsbord of political parties. Of course, to some degree we already have that, since the two viable parties are themselves coalitions of narrow interests. And it is healthy to keep in mind that those interests will jump party if it serves their interests - most voters care for their pet issues much more than loyalty to a particular party, especially if they do not see that the party is loyal to them.

Any thoughts on the future of the Democratic Party without Joe Lieberman? What level of loyalty will he have to the DNC if he is elected this fall as an independent? What is his future if he does not win the election?

10:20 Update: Ironically, McQ is also discussing libertarian orthodoxy today.

As with most purges, the attempt isn't to make the tent bigger, but instead smaller. Any indication of impurity is grounds for ouster, even though, as you'll see, a claim of "tolerance" will be made at a later point. In reality, those who possess "the truth" have little patience or tolerance with others who don't toe their line.

I would agree with McQ completely, if I didn't follow his link to this article and actually read what it says. But I did, and Mona does have a point, which is that calling oneself "libertarian" does not make it so. I mean, I guess xrlq is free to call himself neolibertarian, but from what I have seen of him, he is a small-government Republican. His calling himself otherwise doesn't change my judgment. The same for Noam Chomsky, who is a socialist... not a "socialist libertarian".

Unfortunately, Mona is one of the most divisive regulars at QandO, and she probably couldn't call the sky blue without many of the regular commenters jumping her case - and they are true to form today.

It reminds me a little bit of an old friend who was a member of the Gay Republicans. Most Republicans felt that he wasn't really a Republican, since he was openly gay and atheist. But the fact is, there are two simple GOP litmus tests; one formal and one informal but no less real. He passes the formal test - he was in fact a Republican, as evidenced by his voter registration card. He would not, however, pass the informal test of getting support from other Republicans if he ran for office. He was not a real Republican in that sense.

The libertarians are such a politically disorganized group that we do not have any effective litmus test, though we have some strong indicator issues.

Is Mona wrong to ask the questions;

1. Should any of these be ostracized and shunned from the libertarian ranks?

2. On the basis of what litmus test(s)?

How ironic that she should be ostracized for even asking. My answer is that there are some self-identified libertarians who should be called out. Maybe not ostracized from discourse, but I certainly won't claim them all as my ideological brethren. And daring to ask questions is not my litmus test.