Carte Blanche: On The State Of The Party

Yifei Fang/Libertarian Party

For the first time in 9 years, I didn’t vote. I’ve voted for the libertarian candidate in the two previous presidential elections, and have swayed between republicans and democrats in local elections. This year, it just didn’t seem worth the hassle. I’ve found myself in a sort of political limbo that led me to reevaluate the place of the party I’ve been registered to for 7 years: the Libertarian Party.

For the second election in a row, a record number of voters sought an alternative to the options supplied by the two party system. Those willing to grant their vote to a candidate without the promise, or even hint of, winning have found solace within the Libertarian Party.

In the 2016 presidential election, the Libertarian candidate won 4,368,411 votes, or 3.28% of the vote. In this year's election, the Libertarian candidate won a still impressive 1,500,000 and counting at the time of writing. Millions of Americans casting their vote against the status quo is no small feat. Nonetheless, 3% of the national vote is a far cry from winning a presidential election, and therefore succumbs the party to a mere quasi state in terms of legitimacy as a competitor.

The party's lack of influence isn’t due to a lack of enthusiasm or belief in the cause. Every member of the Libertarian Party I have met (and that’s many), envisions a day with a serious Libertarian presidential candidate. The very large network of libertarians throughout the country work hard to grow the party's presence, and they aren’t putting their time and energy into the to only spread the philosophy of liberty. They’re striving for real results. Further, the party is gravely lacking finances and resources, so most active party members aren’t receiving compensation for the work they put in. Their incentive is purely a desire for representation.

However, the party is infamous for dropping the ball when given the chance to be taken seriously as a political entity. Most famously in 2016, when the media displayed an uncharacteristic eagerness to cover the Libertarian Party after then presidential candidate Gary Johnson’s interview on MSNBC’s Morning Joe. During which Johnson tripped up, asking ‘what is Aleppo?’

These ignominious attempts at gaining legitimacy lead one to question if the party will ever be taken seriously, and there’s no simple answer. I find it’s much easier to trace things back a bit. Perhaps we must first ask, was the party ever meant for a more formal structure and presence?

I’ve come across many people who are quick to answer no. Most of them garnish their argument with a more elementary understanding of libertarianism that views the party as a group of stateless anarchists, suggesting that a libertarian politician is a sort of oxymoron. They aren’t necessarily wrong. Libertarianism is a wide ranging philosophy and many anarchists find a home within the party. Though a quick look into the history of the party as a political entity proves otherwise.

The party was born on December 11th, 1971. Fueled by an opposition to Richard Nixon’s proclamation to impose wage and price controls alongside an end to the gold standard, a group of libertarians in Colorado, led by David Nolan, wanted a real chance of electing officials that held true libertarian values.

Among the notable founders of the party was economist Murray Rothbard, who felt betrayed by a president who claimed to value liberty. Rothbard referred to Nixon’s New Economic Policy as “fascism” and “authoritarianism” in The New York Times. He called the move “the end of the free price system and therefore of the entire system of free enterprise and free markets that have been the heart of the American economy.”

Perhaps more importantly, Rothbard made clear that he felt no consolation with any existing political entity: “The worst part of our leap into fascism is that no on and no group, left, right, or center, Democrat or Republican, businessman, journalist or economic, has attacked the principle of the move itself.” It was up to Rothbard and his peers to erect a defense for these libertarian principles.

When considered from this angle, it is clear that the party itself developed with the goal of confronting policy; a serious endeavor indeed. It was a series of envisioned policies, or a desire to negate those in place, that led the already libertarian-at-heart Americans to that living room that day. This is still the case today, as thousands of full-time students, full-time parents, and full-time employees offer their scarce free time to help elect libertarian candidates.

Today the party sees small victories. In Wyoming, Libertarian candidate Marshall Burt defeated Democratic incumbent Stan Blake for a seat in the state legislature. There have also been wins announced in states like California and Florida, where LP candidates have won seats in their respective city councils. Nonetheless, a few small wins probably isn’t what Nolan and his liberty warriors envisioned for the future of the party.

On the other hand, there is an obvious political awakening taking place throughout the nation. Between the panic and dismay over the handling of the pandemic, to a national examination of police brutality, and other abuses of power, those who once remained in a state of political apathy have awoken. I have hope that the liberty-minded sentiments brought to the fore will transfer into support for the party

The party has two paths from here. One is to remain in a deadlock with little change. The party could continue to win a few local elections, and members could continue to rendezvous and relish in their mutual hatred for the Federal Reserve. The other option is for Justin Amash to run for president in 2024. Amash, the only Congressmen from the Libertarian Party, is the greatest hope for the party in terms of gaining legitimacy. Amash is professional, sensible, and most important of all, he’s proven himself. As the masses awaken themselves to liberty they will seek out leadership, and Amash could very well serve as that leader of a party reinvigorated.

Veterans of the Libertarian Party can intimidate newcomers, and joining a third party can be unwieldy for those who have only ever voted within the two party system. However, Amash’s kindness and compassion could alleviate discomfort and direct the current party towards a more friendly welcoming approach.

Best of all, this idea isn’t far-fetched. Amash already teased us in April with his announcement to launch an exploratory committee for the LP presidential nominee, an action he unfortunately soon after dismissed. Though perhaps the results of the election will prove to Amash that the majority of this country both need and want him. The country voted out a president that valued protectionism and closed immigration above all else. Best of all, people voted to reform failed drug laws, suggesting that voters are becoming open to the idea that government is not the solution to our problems.

Amash’s potential platform fits the bill. His love for our country pairs with his awareness of governmental abuse. Thus we could expect to see a platform that supports free trade, aims to halt national debt, and lower taxes, while also terminating policies that bar immigration, end civil asset forfeiture, and focus on criminal justice reform.

Libertarianism is new for most, and actually joining the party even newer, but Amash is seasoned to the world of politics. There is potential that Amash and the Libertarian Party could become a vessel for change. A political charge led by him would be by the people, for the people. After all, that’s what is at the heart of libertarianism.