The Libertarian Party was assembled in 1971 and has proven throughout its history to be a resoundingly-unsuccessful third-party venture in American politics. While libertarians are outspoken in their advocacy for individual liberties, limited government, and free markets, their presidential candidates have proven largely unsuccessful throughout history.
Why have they not experienced greater success in the face of confronting what has become two ideological extremes? Further, if a “protest vote” for the libertarian candidate isn’t sitting well with you, which party is more aligned to libertarian policies?
Libertarians face an eternal uphill battle in the face of American politics. As it stands, third party campaigns are almost entirely funded by grass-root donations, which pale in comparison to the millions of dollars that special interest groups and corporate donors pour into Democratic and Republican campaigns.
Mainstream media tends to focus on the two major parties; hence, very little exposure and airtime is given to third party candidates.
Even though libertarianism primarily focuses on individual freedoms of its citizens, most voters have associated the party with the “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” views. This allows for common ground to alienate voters on both sides of the perceived party lines.
No matter the reasoning, it’s undeniable that a Libertarian candidate for president is a pipe dream. As a libertarian who considers the reality we face, which party is most aligned with our shared values?
The Republican leans more towards libertarianism than the Democratic party. Here’s how:
Republicans have traditionally garnered the mantle of limited government spending and limited levels of taxation. The most were during the Reagan era and, therefore, it appealed to libertarians. Though this line is blurred more and more as each day passes, Republicans still hold the torch in this arena.
Free market economics is another plane where traditional Republicans have shown their affinity with libertarians, though this interventionism has been tempered in the cases of healthcare, education, monetary policy, and the military.
In many cases, Republicans oppose excesses of regulation by the government—a general reflection of the libertarian disdain of a creeping bureaucracy.
Caveats apply, though: Republicans are more socially conservative than libertarians, and the agendas inherently clash with each other. Republicans have also frequently supported military intervention and “national security” over the libertarian principle of non-interventionism.
In the end, the winning combination of libertarian candidates is to rise above both structural and ideological obstacles. While the Republican Party is part libertarian when it comes to economic and fiscal issues—having manifested itself in this way—its social conservatism and an interventionist attitude in some aspects create a dichotomous relationship between the two ideologies.
Ultimately, however, libertarians will have to moderate their message and otherwise change stratagems to capture more mainstream voters, or else find places to build coalitions with other, like-minded organizations interested in making their policy preferences a reality.
