Why Libertarians Don't Win Elections
And when that might change
Conor Sanderson of the Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank, wrote a short article yesterday on why libertarians haven’t enjoyed much presidential electoral success. He concluded that libertarians struggle because of:
A lack of big-money backers because they all go to the two big parties
A lack of exposure from the media because they only focus on the two big parties
An association with the “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” viewpoint that turns off a lot of voters.
I think he’s basically on the right path here, but it’s not a big surprise to see third parties underperforming in a two-party system. That outcome is preordained.
To me, the far more interesting question is why libertarianism as a political philosophy isn’t more popular. You can see this in the utter lack of libertarian-leaning politicians throughout the two parties. Besides Ron and Rand Paul and maybe Thomas Massie, can you name any libertarian-leaning politician? Probably not, and that’s a problem for a party and ideology that wants to be a major player.
The reason for this weakness is that libertarianism is inherently unsellable to a broader electorate. Liberals can campaign on taking down the billionaires and the mega corporations. Conservatives can pitch people on protecting you from the dirty illegal immigrants who are stealing your jobs and houses. What can libertarians, who build their philosophy on personal agency, campaign on? A fair chance to work hard and reach your potential? Nobody cares about that in 2024.
And that’s because things are already pretty good. When things are going well, they don’t want politicians to tell them that it’s now up to them to make things even better. No, what they want to hear are sexy promises. Conservatives and liberals have them. Libertarians do not.
On a deeper level, libertarianism also suffers from a lack of an enemy. People are drawn to tribes. “Us vs Them”. Conservatives have that in the woke deep state and illegal immigrants. Liberals have it in the billionaires and deplorables. Libertarians, by its “mind your own business” nature, do not.
As a political philosophy without entitlements or enemies, libertarianism is even more fundamentally alien to people than communism. At least communism promises you something and has an enemy. Thus, because libertarianism is a massive change, and people become more receptive to change as things deteriorate, it would take a massive collapse for libertarianism to gain widespread popularity. Revolutions aren’t born in good times.
I think this revolution could come in the 2030s. The flight of both parties to populism is destined to end in ruin, as the welfare Ponzi can not exist without a growing population. And, in our age of declining fertility, that is only possible with widespread immigration, something that populists on both sides oppose. Put simply, because the populists refuse to cut entitlements or increase immigration, the current system is doomed. It is from the ashes that libertarianism will rise.
Put visually:
Now, just because the changing of the guard isn’t going to happen until the 2030s doesn’t mean that the libertarians have to be sidelined until then. There are things that can be done to improve our position.
But that’s a discussion for another day.