Sunday, November 8, 2020

Further Comments About the Walter Block Libertarian Voting Rule

Walter Block

There are some comments left at the post, The Socialist Disaster That May Result Because of Libertarian Party Members in Georgia, that I want to address.

As background, you need to know that Walter Block's Libertarian Voting Rule is that in close races you vote for the major party candidate that is less evil. In races that aren't close, you cast a protest vote for the Libertarian Party candidate.

Here are the comments.

The Contractor writes:

Two counterpoints.

1. By what method would these Libertarian voters have known the race would be so contested? Polling shows a wide disparity of outcomes and accuracies in every race. Without being able to objectively quantify IN ADVANCE what is a close race, this is an exercise in hindsight. Furthermore, without an objective metric to use as a benchmark, literally any race could be claimed likely close enough that libertarians need to vote R (or D or whatever is least evil that week.

2. The only people responsible for the outcome of an elected candidate's position are the voters of THAT candidate. This is a logical outgrowth of point 1, that it can't be the responsibility of the non-supporting voters to game the system.

RW response:

As for point 1, that is easy. 

You don't vote for the Libertarian candidate unless it is completely clear that the lesser evils have no chance. For example, in California, Trump had no chance of winning, so a protest Libertarian presidential vote makes sense for those who vote. In San Francisco, Republican candidates, except in obvious rare instances, have no chance, so the Libertarian protest vote applies as well. 

If there is any doubt, you don't vote Libertarian, you vote for the lesser of two evils.

As for point 2.

This is looking at democracy as some sort of natural god. If it is merely recognized for what it is, mob rule, and that a vote can be cast on tactical grounds to eliminate greater evil, it is not about "gaming the system" but simply trying to limit the evil.

Donoxon writes:
"Vote republican to avoid socialism" is sime kind of stupid. The big danger of the coming years is the reascendance of the neo-cons and the expansion of the wars.

RW response:

Again, voting is nothing but mob rule. If a tactical vote for Republican senators can stop some of the extreme left agenda, it doesn't sound as "some kind of stupid" to me. As for the big danger of neo-cons and the expansion of wars, how would voting for Democratic senators, improve the situation over voting for Republican senators?

Remember, such a vote is a tactical vote, to simply lessen evil, not eliminate it. Republican senators may be as bad on war as Democratic senators, but Republican senators are at least better on social justice madness so you would vote for them because that is the lesser of the two evils--though they are both evil.

MrLiberty writes:
The Libertarian Party began because of POS presidents like Nixon, and his final severing of the gold standard. The GOP continues to run on small government claims yet govern like democrats. They continue to run completely horrible candidates at all levels, who increase government power, spending, taxing, etc. Were the GOP what they actually claimed, the Libertarian party would have little to no support. Want to blame anyone for the large numbers the Libertarian Party receives.....BLAME THE REPUBLICANS!!!!
RW response:

Once again, I see nothing holy about voting. It is mob rule. 

To the degree it makes sense to participate at all, it is only on tactical grounds.

No one is saying the Republican Party is better than the Libertarian Party. It is simply considering voting as a tool that might limit some government oppresion.

Voting to help achieve a majority Republican Senate during a Biden administration can put a logjam in many Democratic desires. This year, it makes tactical sense, for those who do vote and are libertarians, to vote for Republican senators where the race outcome is unclear.

Bloomberg reporter Steve Dennis points out that a Republican majority with a Biden presidency would be able to block:
Some major climate change policies
Save ACA+Public option+Medicare 60
Universal gun background checks
Tax hikes on wealthy/corps
Minimum wage
Equality Act
Voting rights
Union rights
BIG stimulus

That is serious logjam.


1 comment:

  1. RW,

    Thank you for the response. So how many elections actually fit your criteria as obvious throw aways, by percentage? What does this mean for a libertarian party (or any other) trying to effectively plan its use of resources?

    This all seems very unscientific and unprincipled to me. I wouldnt be caught dead voting, but what if where I live there happens to be a close election with a possible evil result? Aren't I just as guilty by your criteria as the person who votes 3rd party?

    David B.