By: Allan Wallace
Politicians wrongly believe that they can make an old and distrusted political philosophy more acceptable by marrying it to a more trusted and benign concept.
For Example:
“Democratic Socialism” – Socialist politicians know that socialism is hard to swallow because it requires giving up Liberty to the state and they know it often (always, actually) leads to a more oppressive reality called communism -OR- to complete failure of social government (due to the inevitable greed and power-lust of its leaders). So, they try to sugar-coat the anti-Liberty medicine of socialism by adding the sweeter word “Democratic”, as if holding a one-party Vote for top leaders makes all the difference (which is exactly what happens in communist countries that even bother with elections).
NOTE: Holding a vote is NOT democratic if the choice is limited to one candidate. The FEWER the choices the LESS democratic an election is.
“Libertarian Nationalism” – Nationalists know that nationalism is hard to swallow because it requires giving up Liberty to the state and they know it often (always) leads to a more oppressive reality called fascism. So, they try to sweeten the anti-Liberty medicine of nationalism by adding the word “Libertarian” as if that cancels nationalism’s ill effects. But the two concepts cannot be more at odds with each other.
Both of these abominable combinations qualify as Oxymorons.
Real Libertarianism, by itself, can make all the difference and set right the ill effects of both of these bastardized forms of governance. As Libertarians say, they want to get into power so they can make the government stop messing in and messing up our lives.
Both of these bastardizations represent a government that has grown so huge and powerful that it simply can no longer protect or defend our individual Liberties but strives toward perfecting control over its citizens. And speaking as one of those they want to control, I say “NO!”
Daniel webster once said, “There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”
The Nationalism of the right and the Socialism of the left are both different flavors of Populism. And Populism is an anti-liberty philosophy that represents the worst in both of the old parties. Our strict two-party system nurtures and amplifies their power and control. This is how the worst parts of human nature ruin the good in us and destroy Liberty a bit at a time.
The monstrosity created on both ends of the political spectrum by the “Two-Party System” is gaining strength and pushing out the more rational moderates. As the duopoly does this, the uncommitted majority grows.
That is why Andrew Yang’s Forward Party is growing because he is trying to organize all that growing center-left energy. Even some from the center-right are attracted to his message. Also, Libertarians perform best when they target this vast, growing, and politically homeless majority.
If we had a truly representative multi-party system, everyone would be represented better and there would be no need to beat the drum against these anti-liberty mindsets gaining strength. There would be too many different voices to allow them the level of conceit necessary to maintain the lie that they control half or more of US Voters.
The best thing about a multi-party system is that to get anything done, the parties would NEED to work together, build issue-driven coalitions to pass any legislation because no single party would be able to keep a majority, and coalitions could more easily break down requiring the partners to work harder toward an acceptable compromise.
But until we can free ourselves from our anti-liberty two-party system, we need to resist these intrusive, fringe philosophies in their efforts to take over each party and grab the controls of government.
Two hundred and Fifty years ago, people came to this land seeking Liberty. If they loved security and safety they would have stayed where they were under a government that had grown too oppressive and too expensive (taxation) to pursue their own interests, to be free. Patrick Henry in a speech prior to attending the Continental Congress that signed the Declaration of Independence, “Give me Liberty, or give me death!
That is the spirit that founded this country. And it seems as if we have lost it in favor of the hope of feeling safe and secure. And yes, Liberty is much more important than false security and a feeling of safety.
At this writing, Trumpian Nationalism has solidified control of the Republican Party over the last six years, and the Sanders-“Squad” Socialists seem to be calling the shots in the Biden Presidency and the Democrat Party. Luckily there seem to be cracks in the control of their respective sides.
Until we can grow past the “duopoly” mentality, we must remain vigilant (as the founders said) if we want to keep our Liberty.
The graphic is a quote from the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE). The quote talks about the motivators that work in a society being self-interest and force. They did not mention altruism, probably because it is too poor of a motivator on such a large scale as a country, but it works very well at the level of a community organization or church.
Silver Libertarian 