WHY I'M NOT A LIBERTARIAN

by Rob Loggia

Saturday, December 12, 2015

When I heard the news that John McAfee would seek the nomination of the Libertarian Party, the first thing that I had to admit was that it is a natural union. If anything, McAfee's platform is a superset of the Libertarian platform - covering all of the bases and addressing additional cyber-related issues that his technology background puts him in a unique position to notice. The second thing that struck me was the need to pen an essay to members of that party.

The state of our nation and the importance of the coming election require me to be blunt. Please continue reading with the understanding that I truly do not wish to cause offense to a collection of individuals whose values mirror my own - who have been fighting the good fight. In the past, when people have asked my affiliation and I answered that I had none, a typical follow-up is to ask what party's values I most relate to. My answer for as long as I can remember has been the same: The Libertarian Party.

So why have I never joined or participated? Why have I never even made the effort to register to vote and cast my ballot for their candidate? If I believe they are fighting for the right ideals and that our country would be better off with a Libertarian president, why did I choose to stay home? Especially after I add that it always was a considered choice, and never laziness. You'll have to take my word on that.

One important part of the answer has to do with results. Or more accurately, the reaction to results and its effect on subsequent efforts. Consider the following scenario.

Imagine for a moment that you had a friend who got a large truck stuck in the mud while out for a drive with one of his buddies. When you stumble upon them you find out that they have been trying desperately for the last 2 hours to to push it out. Your friend explains that they have tried 11 times, at enormous exertion. On the last try they got it to budge an inch, but your friend injured himself and the truck settled back to its original position. He sure is glad to see you, and he asks you if you'll pick up where he left off and help his buddy push the truck out of the mud.

I don't know about you, but I would have a few reservations about trying that plan again. I would look for other options. I would want to know what else had been tried, and I would look for new solutions. I would even consider solutions that were unproven in the field, provided they made sense and held promise. Let us not forget that every innovation starts as an untested and therefore unproven idea.

Ultimately, if my friend insisted on following his plan, I would wish him well but decline to participate. I am usually among the first to volunteer to expend enormous quantities of time and energy to help a friend in need. What I will not do is knowingly waste energy and resources on their behalf. I think most of my current roster of friends understand this.

When I look at the Libertarian Party, at all so-called 3^rd parties for that matter, this is what I see. I see my friend, who has committed himself to replay the same scenario over and over while seeing no meaningful change in the outcome. I see the very definition of insanity.

My point can be partially illustrated by a visit to the candidate page for the Libertarian Party (https://www.lp.org/candidates/presidential-candidates-2016/). I took the time to visit the web pages for 9 of the 10 candidates listed there (#10 was a broken link). I must admit that some of what I found was inscrutable and in some cases incoherent. A few of the candidates had platform positions that led me to question why they were running for the Libertarian nomination and not the Republican nomination. But there are some bright spots in the roster.

To single out one noteworthy example, a click-through to Steve Kerbel's website (ED: Kerbel has since dropped out) lands you on a thoughtful essay, most of which I agree with in principle. He draws attention to the tax racket, the ethically criminal "War on Drugs", unlawful government surveillance, the Political Machine owned by the privileged, and the need for the restoration of Freedom and Liberty as a precursor to America achieving greatness in the future.

I agree with nearly everything this man said, and in brutal honesty I would not now, nor would I ever, waste my time promoting his campaign or even going to vote. And not for any reason other than this: he simply is not the one to attempt what needs to be done right now in order to win. He might make a wonderful president, but under the constraints of the current reality he cannot win, or even move the needle.

While the reader is free to arrive at a value judgment on my character because of this, the more intelligent reaction would be to consider that there are millions more that think like me among the 63% of the eligible population that does not vote on a regular and recurring basis. How does the party intend to reach a critical mass of them? Because since 1971 they have failed to do so.

Every candidate on the Libertarian Party roster has exactly one thing in common. It is that candidates that they resemble, running campaigns such as they plan to run, have never [read: Never] garnered more than 1% of the popular vote in a presidential election. This is the 3^rd party curse, and the Libertarian Party suffers under it.

The many different elements that combine to ensure this curse are beyond the scope of this essay. But we do have space to consider what it is that Libertarian Party has tangibly failed to do in presidential elections since 1972. They have failed to influence enough habitual voters to switch teams, and they have failed to convert enough non-voters into voters.

This sounds elementary until you realize that they are the only two vectors available. Taken in this light, the second point is crucial because the first is clearly a lost cause. The bulk of people in the habit of voting are spoken for - there is only a small, mushy center to fight over and it is not large enough to win an election.

A campaign is, by definition, an attempt to influence voters. Every election 3^rd parties try to out-campaign The Machine. Sure, they do registration drives and work in the margins to try and create new voters. But the primary target of their campaign is, necessarily, "responsible voters." And the election is a walkover for The Machine each and every time. They have the media, they have the money, and they have the support of the ruling class and corporate interests. They are keeping their voters, thank you.

Any party, any campaign, that wishes to thrive and even be successful in this atmosphere must first come to grips with and later have a plan for working around harsh realities. One of these is that they will have to somehow convince a large number of people that have never voted in their lives that it is now worth their time. These people will be found in that 63% of the population that stays home - the true Silent Majority. And they clearly will not move for "standard fare."

When the ballots are counted in 2016 I make one prediction at the risk of public shaming: John McAfee's tally will account for significantly more than 1% of the popular vote. I stand by this prediction regardless of what banner he runs under. In fact, only as unconventional a candidate as McAfee has any chance of achieving anything like this.

Perhaps more important than this prediction is an opinion. Were the Libertarian Party to embrace a McAfee ticket and its members to resolve to abandon their operational comfort zones and cooperate in a unified effort to act in bold new ways and achieve something great - McAfee can win. The People can win.

But before this can happen, we must all look to ourselves. For if we are not each individually strong enough to combat our own narcissism - to consent inwardly to subordinate our own drives to a larger force, thus making it stronger - we will surely fail. It takes a kind of greatness to stand up and lead others successfully. But it also takes a powerful greatness to recognize and defer to this leadership and agree to help do what is needed.

I hope that this is what will happen, because I fear for the future if a Republican or Democrat is elected. In 2016 we cannot have a repeat of previous experiences. The People must have a strong candidate. And when all of the conventions are locked down - only an unconventional candidate will do. It is as plain as the nose on my face.