Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
RC Cola and the Libertarian Party RC Cola and the Libertarian Party have a lot in common. Should we just grab ourselves a Moonpie and be happy with our niche?by EJ Moosa
(libertarian)
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
RC Cola and the Libertarian Party have a lot in common. Both run a distant third to the mainstays of their markets. Coca-Cola and Pepsi have dominated the cola markets for years, and there is no reason to believe this will change. RC Cola has brought new and innovative products to the market, but the major players soon copy those innovative products and then continue on as before. If RC Cola comes out with a brand new product, as they did in 1958 with the first diet cola, the others will see the success and copy it.
The Libertarian Party appears to suffer the same fate. If there is an up swell in support for a Libertarian concept, the major parties merely copy it and add it to their platform. It's a great duopoly shared by the Democrats and the Republicans and it allows them to keep the Libertarians and any other third parties at a good, safe, distance.
Yes, there are markets where RC dominates the big boys, just as there are areas where Libertarians win elections. Yet no one believes that this is evidence that RC Cola is on the verge of a major breakout in sales. RC Cola will not be the Official Soft Drink of the 2012 Olympics, and no one really believes we are close to having a Libertarian President, Senate, or Congress.
So we should not fool ourselves that our Libertarian success in some areas of the country position us for major success in the 2012 election cycle. We may even be at the peak of our ability to appeal to the masses. Very few recognize the peak when they are there. Each unsuccessful election cycle reinforces the concept that the Libertarian movement will not fly at the national level.
The Libertarians in this movement of 2008 are the most educated, the most internet savvy, and the most connected of any movement in history. This is as good as it gets. We cannot blame the mass media for not getting our message out. We all have all the bandwidth available on the internet. We can send emails free of charge and quickly as often as we desire. We can use websites such as this to reach a large number of sympathizers in a relatively short time frame. Yet we can get no further than where we are today. Do you think we will be more connected, more educated, or more successful in 2012?
RC Cola could spend millions and millions of dollars to try and claw its way to the top of the beverage industry. Coca-Cola and Pepsi control 95% of the market for carbonated beverages. That leaves RC Cola and the rest of the smaller beverage makers 5% of the market. So even if RC Cola grew by 400%, they would still fall far short of overtaking either Coke or Pepsi. How much would they have to spend just to double their sales once?
The Libertarian Party could likewise grow by 400% and they would also fall far short of having the necessary support to be a contender in the political wars. To get to that 400% would require a lot more money than anyone has shown the ability to raise so far. Ron Paul's internet millions netted little in real return for the Libertarian movement. And of course, he is not even Libertarian. Those dollars raised count towards the Republican movement.
Does anyone not think for a moment that had Ron Paul left the Republican Party, rejoined the Libertarians, and then secured the Libertarian nomination, that the 2008 election would look a lot different than it does now? Instead, I have emails from Bob Barr's campaign begging me for even $5, when Ron Paul would have never had to do such a pathetic plea for support. What would Ron Paul's polling numbers be today had he secured the Libertarian nomination?
Maybe we need to reevaluate how we declare success or failure with our movement. We are a niche belief, and we have the potential to be successful in niche areas. RC Cola dominates a few markets, and must be breaking even or making a profit. They seem to be willing to live with that level of success.
RC Cola would be a very miserable place to work if the only way to evaluate their success was in comparison to Coca-Cola and Pepsi. For me today, the Libertarian Party is not a great place to be, for the comparisons we make only lend ourselves to feeling like we have come up flat.
Is it time to abandon the pursuit of the Libertarian Party at the Presidential level, and focus instead on the niche areas where we are successful? Would we raise more money and awareness in the long term if we were to support and fund the Libertarian efforts where the niche is growing and seems to have a shot at success? Should we be devoting all of our efforts to the Free State Project, for instance? Or other efforts such as GeorgiaCarry.Org, which is getting a lot done on our Second Amendment rights while only having 2200 members?
Maybe we are battling for the wrong prize. Perhaps the goal is wrong. RC and Moonpies may always be around, just as the Libertarian Party may be.
But for me, that isn't good enough. I need another solution.
What are your thoughts?
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 17 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of EJ Moosa only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. EJ Moosa is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-08-20 05:25:05
It's always amazing to me how the issue is always described as building from the top down vs building from the bottom up. While I myself have taken aim at the LP's pattern of building from the top down, I want to qualify that by saying that it's not a limited choice between one or the other. Instead, what is needed is both.
The reason the party needs to partially think in terms of building from the top down is that having a presidential candidate is an essential ingredient in gaining voter respect at the local levels. People simply don't take a candidate seriously who runs at the local level under a third party label unless that label has a presidential candidate. Even then, it's still hard to win, but at least it doesn't border on impossible.
That being said, the main focus of the LP should be building from the bottom up, and its failure to do so is one of the main reasons I find myself moving away from the party...or more precisely it's why I find that the party has been moving away from me.
Can you build from the bottom up while also running a presidential candidate? Of course! There's no reason why it can't be done.
The main reason that the LP fails to build from the bottom up is that the rank-and-file refuse to build together in their local areas. I know that now from direct experience, having played the role of organizer and chair of my local LP chapter. Everyone has busy lives, and once they're faced with the nitty-gritty of having to do local party building, most Libertarians flake out. You can't even get most to attend a local planning meeting to decide what exact local steps the party is going to take! Everyone in local parties has grand ideas about what needs to be done, but when it comes time to get volunteers to help make things happen, you can hear the silence so loud that a pin drop becomes loud by comparison.
Our local LP chapter also organized (under my lead) the local Ron Paul meetup group this past year. It was tough getting local LP members to even attend those meetings. A few showed up more than once, a few more showed up once. A large number never showed up at all. In fact, I was impressed by the fact that people who showed up who were anti-LP but pro-Ron Paul were slightly more willing (although not a lot more willing) to become directly involved in our local campaigning activities than our LP members were.
This brings us to the nub of the problem. Liberty takes time and energy to fight for it. It doesn't come easily or cheaply. Even the Ron Paul movement has discovered this to be the case, although they successfully delivered more volunteers in more local situations than the LP has ever succeeded in doing.
So, my answer to your question is, Yes, the party needs to build from the bottom up. And Yes, there's nothing to prevent the party from running a presidential candidate at the same time. And No, it's not likely that the party will grow from the bottom up because LP members don't generally like to get to work. For the most part they'd rather sit back and direct what other people should be doing, but they don't want to get their own hands dirty.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-08-20 05:29:21
Oh, by the way, your article reminded me of the old NRBQ (New Rhythm and Blues Quartet) song which sang, "Well a RC Cola and a Moonpie, it's all right! Don't you know it's all right!"
"The main reason that the LP fails to build from the bottom up is that the rank-and-file refuse to build together in their local areas. Everyone has busy lives, and once they're faced with the nitty-gritty of having to do local party building, most Libertarians flake out. You can't even get most to attend a local planning meeting to decide what exact local steps the party is going to take! Everyone in local parties has grand ideas about what needs to be done, but when it comes time to get volunteers to help make things happen, you can hear the silence so loud that a pin drop becomes loud by comparison."
How true. I've had the same experience.
If even 10% of the Debateatarians would roll up their sleeves and put in an honest hour of work each week to build the LP or even the freedom movement in general, we would grow by leaps and bounds and get more people elected.
It does not take much effort to affect change, but it takes more than 3-5 people carrying all the weight of an affiliate's activities. If everyone reading this who hasn't volunteered or donated to a campaign this month would simply turn off their computer and get out there and do something, we'd be off to a great start.
There are 3077 counties in the 50 states across the country(Louisiana has parishes and Alaska bouroughs, but they are counted as counties for this purpose).
There are a total of 425 elected officials that are Libertarians.
If this party needs to be build from the ground up, I believe it safe to say that it is not occurring.
If we were to elect 8 times the officials that we have today, that would give us one Libertarian per county.
What is the solution? I do not know. But this approach has certainly not been the answer.
I have worked in the Libertarian Party at the county level. I have canvassed communities, worked state fairs, and worn buttons and have had bumper stickers to support the party. I have sent hard earned money in to support ballot access.
My question to all is how much time does Liberty take? Have we not persisted longer than Washington and Adams and Jefferson in our pursuit?
I understand about the Meetup groups. I also attended and participated here in Georgia. We need an individual cause to build upon to create the unity needed. Until we identify just what that cause may be(besides the cloudy concept of liberty), we are not likely to get anywhere.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-08-21 10:43:29
Well, if you're looking for a cause, there are a lot of potential nominees. Some are sexy, some aren't. Unfortunately, the non-sexy alternatives are usually the more important ones. As an example, I give you the Federal Reserve System. No really, take it, I don't want it in my life anymore.
:-)
Seriously, though, there's really no doubt that the Federal Reserve System is the #1 driver behind all the other violations of liberty that we are suffering from. The problem, of course, is that 99.9% of the population don't even understand what the Fed does. And if you try to explain something like fractional reserve banking to someone, all you usually see is their eyes rolling up into their heads while they fall to the ground unconscious. Let's face it...the Fed is a VERY confusing, even self-contradictory topic. It's not anywhere near sexy.
The sexy issues tend to come and go in just a few years, often less, and they tend to be dominated by rhetoric that fits a left-wing or a right-wing agenda rather than fitting a liberty agenda. Examples include the ongoing occupation of Iraq, skyrocketing oil prices, and economic recessions.
Other issues are "pets" of either liberals or conservatives such as gun rights vs gun control, abortion, gay marriage (or alternatively, sanctity of marriage), global warming, etc. The problem is that none of these issues really speaks particularly directly to issues of liberty very well, and the debate is usually aimed toward liberal or conservative agendas. In order to discuss these issues via liberty, you're constantly faced with having to reframe the debate. That's not a particularly winning approach either.
Then there are issues like the Patriot Act, FISA, wiretapping, etc. which are definitely liberty issues, but around which most Libertarians aren't terribly interested in rallying via hard work (although they're happy to voice their opinions on these issues to anyone who will listen).
The problem of what to focus on is really a misnomer compared to the much bigger question: can you name any one issue that Libertarians are willing to work on as a local organizing tool? As I said in my prior comment, people lead busy lives. They're loathe to take time out of their busy schedules to work on something that most feel is a pipe dream that's not going to happen in their lifetimes.
There's the rub.
That's why I think that the real answer is not to try to organize politically...yet. Instead, we must "be the media." We must use vehicles like the Nolan Chart, like American Libery TV, like Break The Matrix, like the Campaign For Liberty to do everything possible to educate the public about the realities of these issues, to reframe the debate, to bring a new take into old realms of debate. Then, if the day can come when large numbers of people really start to understand the issues, and the consequences of buying into liberal or conservative agendas, then, and only then, will it become politically profitable to organize at the local level.
In other words, we have to create a large population of people who understand the liberty issues and why they're vitally important. Then, organizing at the local level will become viable.
I am not a well spoken person, so I feel kind of odd posting in this blog with the eloquent posters who have already left comments. I would like to post a few comments and issues that I have with the Libertarian party.
When I first read the headline, I wasn't thinking clearly, and I thought it was going to be a comparison Dr. Pepper and the Libertarian party. They both have 23 flavors and as the W.W. Clements the former CEO said, you can't describe what it tastes like.
There are so many views inside and outside of the LP as to what it is. When others who are not familiar with it see it, they think of the extremist anarchist who wants no government, no taxes and all the pot you can smoke. Then you have the conservative who really just wants to be left alone to mind his own business without someone telling him what to do. Then, there are always the Reagan republicans who could not find a home within the reformed Republican Party.
Talk about diversity! Americans are all about diversity, it is part of what makes this a great country, but it doesn’t help in a party when each sect wants to control it. The leadership of the LP needs to decide what direction the party should take. It’s a hard challenge because there are so many levels of each issue.
The other challenge facing the LP is the desire or need to go more centrist to be able to pick up votes. Lets face it to win an election, we cannot continue to be far outside of this box and collect enough votes to show support. The LP has to make a platform that begins with minor steps from the center toward the Libertarian ways. There are only so many votes which are up for grabs from the extreme points of view and do we really want extremists running the country?
Don’t get me wrong, I fully support anybody’s view or prerogative to chose the extreme Libertarian views, but to be an valid growing party, some have to realize that we cannot change everything overnight. We have to take small steps to get to where we want to be.
Some members of this party and especially some of the more vocal voices on the internet are radicals who don’t seem to have a grasp on reality. (present company excluded of course) We cannot win people over with the extremist views anymore than John McCain or Obama would be able to win a general election with their most extreme opinions on abortion or war. The people representing the LP and being vocal about it need to ensure that the party sounds legitimate.
This is why I like Bob Barr as a candidate. He is emphasizing the opinions which can grow. Ron Paul did the same thing. He made his points about liberty but he focuses his attention on the economy and finance and the war in Iraq. Things that are changeable. We cannot continue to run about talking about personal liberty and freedom without quantifying our goals. I mean really, if you have total liberty and freedom, we wouldn’t need prisons because people would be able to do what they want without punishment. This doesn’t work.
So, if you want me to go out campaigning for the LP party, it needs to come back to earth and realize it cannot achieve its ultimate goals instantaneously. Its easy to be a third party, sit back and complain about everything that happens, because your opinions were left out but you have to make a stand first.
To me, it reminds me of Obama who brags about not voting for the Iraq war. (he wasn’t in the Senate at the time of the vote, so it’s easy to second guess everyone else who actually had to put their name on paper) (and no, I’m not for the war, but based on the deceiving information at the time of the vote, can you really hold them responsible for believing the lies?)
Before the LP can be a viable party, it needs to know what it stands for, what the people representing it stand for, and an agenda (not a platform, platform is a long term goal) on how it wants to operate and what it is going to stand for during each election cycle.
Because the debates and media focus so much on issues that we as libertarians do not values as the most important issues, they are important to some of the voters that decide the election. We cannot continuly preach about liberty and freedom without having discussions about these other issues.
Which brings us to the current delimna. The libertarians are usually split on these "headline" issues. We don't hold these issues as our core beliefs, so we have various opinions on those issues.
Part of the libertarian belief is that nobody should be taxed, but to democrats, the rich and businesses need to be taxed more. The republicans feel that everyone should be taxed. How do you take a stand against that? Regardless of the pipe dream of abolishing the income tax, this is not going to happen because the mainstream believe it is neccessary and it is. How do we pay for the defense of our country without it? How do we fix our streets, run our streetlights and local governments without a revenue of some kind.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
