- Who We Are
- Speak Up!
- Take Action
I just finished viewing the Libertarian Party's official website (again.) One thing that struck me was that no where do they allow people to register to post comments! They could certainly do this, as it looks like they are using the same software we are on this site.
I think it is a contradiction in terms for them to promote individual liberty yet not allow discussion (and possible dissent) by at the very least their own party members on their website.
We Whigs know that open discussion among us is the only way to reach genuine compromise and rational solutions.
We've had a few libertarians slip in and out of the NY Whigs. While this may seem coutnerintuitive or ironic, I have found them to be too close minded and dogmatic to be with us. but two is not a sufficient data sample, to be sure.
I agree they have a closed minded attitude toward people that don't agree with them.If you don't follow their platform or change your beliefs then they don't support you or allow you to run for any office as a Libertarian. Their motto should be it's our way or the highway. If you think and have a brain then this party isn't really for you.
Hi all. I am new to this site but have been in sympathy with the MWP for some time. I like the openness to addressing societal issues without getting heavily bogged down in ideology. Like many, I have libertarian sympathies, but no other than Alan Greenspan, historically a pretty libertarian guy and former Fed chair, has seen its limits on the horizon. When you come to the view that government can't do anything right, you are left with only one option, anarchism. However, I do think you can have a society which maximizes human liberty and provides a governmental structure with workable and fair rules of the road.
In the spirit of looking at options, I have been fascinated by something that lost its influence in the early 20th century, but I believe has value today. It is called distributism and in short, it includes various proposals to extend ownership throughout the economy to the average person, not just an elite wealthy few. Unlike typical redistributionist schemes--which seldom work over time--this allows for broad ownership without taking another person's property. The best idea I have seen in recent times comes from the Center for Economic and Social Justice at http://www.cesj.org/, in the US, and the global justice movement--not the window smashing crazies at http://globaljusticemovement.org/thirdway.htm mostly from the UK. This takes something called binary economics which sees labor and capital as part of the same bird which need to work together. One of the best examples of this are the Mondragon Cooperatives in Spain.
What I like about this is it addresses several problems in our society as it looks to the future. It spreads ownership thereby democratizing the economy in a more efficient way. It seeks to get people involved in the markets which often drive where our society goes. It has built in limits to the power of government, and balancing power is something Whigs have historically supported.It has the potential to stimulate real job creation especially at the local level. Anyway, it would be nice to start discussion about these ideas. I am not an economist, but clearly the old ways of the Dems and Repubs are not working.
While I have always been a social Libertarian, I am not, nor ever have been an economic Libertarian. That conflict precluded joining the quite rigid Libertarian Party, which is Libertarian on ALL issues. Whereas I am a Constitutional and Fiscal conservative, I am a social Libertarian, and an economic Liberal (I support federal investment in critical public infrastructure and the taxes that must exist to support such investments; businesses understand the criticality of capital investments for improved competitiveness and our government can likewise benefit. I also support public financial support of the public commons of health and education). I also support higher tax rates on investment capital, because investors reap greater returns from public investments in the public commons (healthcare, education, and public civil infrastructure, etc.) than do wage earners, and thus should justifiably pay a higher percentage for the support of such infrastructure. Instead, they currently pay a lower percentage rate.
The Democratic, Republican, and Libertarian parties essentially all support the same economic policies that benefit corporations and investment capital. In trying to describe my political beliefs on Facebook today, I determined that my beliefs mostly align with the original Whigs other than their historical engagement in social Conservatism. In googling about Whigs to explain my beliefs in my Facebook thread, I discovered the Modern Whig party. I am a Modern Whig and just did not know it yet! I am looking forward to interacting with similarly minded citizens.
Many jaded citizens, and who can blame them, think we use Whigs as some sort of marketing come on. Oh no sir, no ma'am. It is truly authentic, and we do truly borrow from much of Whig history. Not all mind you, as 150 years does change things!
Welcome to the home you, and I, and US are building for the future.
And Greg, we owe you a comment too. I recall hearing a Marxist economist speak some time ago, and I was jaded enough to make a snyde remark to a student about "dead ideologies". Yet, he used some of the binary eccnomics( which is based on Marx I would imagine ) and it does provide an explanatory model. So.... even Marx may have had some insights. Just not into human nature! :o)