We are not simply a democracy. Our form of government is a socialist democracy, with the type (or format) being BI-partisan. It is the type of government that determines policy. Yes, I am not an idiot, I understand reality and the fact that most of the time bi-partisanship is not a mature and harmonious pursuit of lofty ideals ... rather a model for lack of accomplishment; but it does suggest an attempt by our founders to have something beyond the worthless stalemate of a confederation that was known as the British parliament. Yet even England, after experiencing the total destruction of the British Commonwealth, Made an attempt to become a bi-partisan government back in the 1920's, under the Labour and Conservative parties. Why support additional parties and permit their lack of required representation?
Libertarian is a really a confederate form of government that is considered non-partisan. The power is is divided by areas/regions (such as the states, cities and other districts in America). A true libertarian believes that the central form of government exists only to support these areas. The problem is that under a libertarian form of government, the central (what we call federal) government is too weak to truly support it's individual areas. Aside from the fall of the British Commonwealth, look at the Confederate States of America. Confederacies (I am including libertarian governments here) can never get enough power to tax (or create wealth), so they cannot even defend themselves. Confederate nations go to war as individual states armies, instead of one national force. This is fine if you are protecting yourself from enemies within, but not from an attack outside. Look how Sana Ana conquered most of US Southwest.
I do apologize for my age, as since the 2004 elections, the courts have been kinder to 3rd-parties, but Go Guins, you claim to be older, so surely you remember Ralph Nader and his fight all the way to the US supreme court in 2000? Prior to 2004, almost no infringement by 3rd-parties was permitted ...as our courts acknowledged our nation's fundamental design. Since around 2000, liberals in the US government have sought to redistrict our courts, forcing a political dependency on our legal system that is not acceptable ..at least at the lower-levels (common pleas) where guilt or innocence is determined. The US is 10-years away from divided by court districts with the supreme court exercising law ...as opposed to determining it.
AS to the Libertarian platform, it is a vague and useless as any other, but here are some specifics they dropped in that I find un-American, unconstitutional and illegal:
1. The abolition of all banking control at any government or agency level. Although I am certainly no fan of the federal reserve, I believe in true value …so much so that want the US back on a standard (i.e.: silver). Yet is it not ironic that libertarians feel the government should provide for any financial disasters. Typical libertarian, give me services, but I owe you no taxes to pay for them.
2. Their platform added complete freedom of expression (unlimited) back in 2000, which is why Nader switched to the green party. This includes child porn and the elimination of any media rating system.
3. The abolition of the department of Energy.
4. They add a platform just last year to end operations of war, which although I do not agree with, I can respect. Then they add a ridiculous quote calling for the closure of all US military bases on foreign soil. Which I guess is fine if you feel your nation will never go to war against another nation.
5. They believe in military as a defense only and solely provided to America. Then when questioned, they agree that the US should be part of the allied league of nations. Which makes no sense.
I do realize that today a party is just a means to get elected, but people should be educated on what they vote for. Do you realize that the language in the libertarian platform actually used “Obamacare” and “Romneycare”? That’s real intellectual. They are both socialized medicine.
Don't get me wrong, I would champion many ideas in their platform, but I favor a strong central government, with distributed authority to the state and local governments.
