Popular Posts

Sunday, May 29, 2016

Libertarians, don't feel obligated to vote for Gary Johnson

As a Gary Johnson supporter, I have been on the edge of my seat all weekend to see whether or not he would be elected as the 2016 Libertarian Party presidential nominee. I had been legitimately scared that a certain candidate would be nominated instead, and as a result, the public would become even more alienated with the Libertarian message. (Besides that, I have some statist blood flowing through my veins - contrary to the purist message many LP candidates peddle.) The point being is that if the LP nominated someone I did not like, I would not vote for them.

One of the various photos I have taken with Gary Johnson

Now that my favorite candidate has been nominated, I cannot expect myself to convince people who dislike Gary Johnson, for one reason or another, to support or vote for him in the presidential primary. It would make me a hypocrite if I did not respect their reasoning (whether or not I agree with it), but it is more than just not wanting to be labeled as a hypocrite.

Some people do not like Johnson's stances on certain issues. Others do not think he has the skills or charisma to take on the establishment, which makes me sad to think about since he was much better in 2012. Regardless of their rationale, they are not willing to compromise.

A few weeks ago, I half-joked on Facebook with:


I did this to illustrate the hypocrisy of some libertarians when it comes to drawing a line between principles and partisanship. I guess you could argue that there's a difference between personal and party principles, but if you are a part of the LP because you agree with its principles, you are not obligated to vote for their candidates if you believe they go against what the LP stands for. By "compromising" (versus actual compromise) to take votes from other candidates or to create a false image of party allegiance only ensures that our current political system is kept in power. Nobody should have to be guilted into supporting a candidate, party, or legislation. If you change your mind of your own accord, great. Otherwise, it is just political bullying.

(I should add that it is not wrong to support the LP if you not not believe in everything they stand for. I don't. Whether you are a former Republican or Democrat, or believe in a different form of libertarianism, you understand that the LP holds certain values, that for the most part, should not be swayed by the minority in the party. If you do hold other values, you can support the candidates who most align with them - it's a radical notion called "people over parties." Not to be mistaken when only saying it if it appeals to your personal agenda.)

Now I am going to delve into why I, as a Gary Johnson supporter, have no qualms about Libertarians refusing to vote for him. If you know me at all or have come across some of my other work, I denounce libertarian puritanism, partially because like I mentioned earlier, I am by no means the "perfect" libertarian. Most importantly to me is that the public needs a guiding hand to libertarian philosophy. Yelling about that "TAXATION IS THEFT!" or "Crystal meth needs to be legalized!" will only turn off potential supporters.

That is not to say that we should not talk about "radical" drug policy or other issues. What we should be doing is introducing people to libertarianism before they have a chance to label us as "nutty". That means we need to work on messaging. And Gary Johnson is just the person for that. I followed his campaign in 2012, and I know he has what it takes to do it. Also as a former two-term governor, I know people will be able to take him more seriously as a candidate. As someone who has actually held office, I can trust him if he takes office again.

I have seen many libertarians refer to Johnson as a moderate in a negative manner. More specifically, a liberal moderate. Tactically speaking, this is gold for the LP. A former Republican governor who has liberal views? Makes it easier to get votes on both sides of the conservative-liberal spectrum. Besides, I see many libertarians praise conservative-branded politicians and views. I do not see why this has to only be applied to conservatives.

Any slack by Johnson being unable to pick up certain libertarians can be made up by disenfranchised newcomers to the LP from the right, left, and anywhere outside or between the spectrum. I would go so far to say that it is thanks to Johnson's moderate views that many nonlibertarians come to "see the light" with libertarianism. For that, I welcome the sacrifice of libertarian purists.