Anarchos to Minarchists:
A Brief Taxonomy of Libertarians

There once was a time when the political dividing line ran from Left to Right. Now, we’re all just different flavors of libertarian. From reluctant minarchists to the anarcho-capitalists, libertarians are everywhere. The Internet, especially the blogosphere, is infested with them which makes it difficult to distinguish the Christian libertarian crowd from the Howard Roark wannabes.
Fortunately, the Libertarian Purity Test can help us create a taxonomy of libertarian pundits. Taking Steve Bainbridge’s suggestion, I’ve tallied up some of the scores and put from around the blogosphere. For now I’ve chosen to use the test’s own descriptions until I can come up with more accurate labels:

Continue reading

Anarchos to Minarchists:
A Brief Taxonomy of Libertarians

Is Josh Claybourn falling for the “Nader Delusion”

Several day ago, Josh Claybourn, wrote about how as a “libertarian-minded conservative” he was having doubts about Bush being the “best option” available. He adds:
“Of course most, if not all, of the Democratic candidates are just as far from my ideal position. But they are not the only people running, and silently trudging down the wrong path does nothing to correct the course. That’s why I’m officially an “undecided” voter.”
Though he doesn’t exactly say what course of action he will take, he does imply that he will be voting. If this is the case, he is left with three options:
a) Vote for the Republican candidate (Bush)
b) Vote for the Democratic candidate (Dean, most likely)
c) Vote for a Third Party candidate
Since he outlines some of the criteria that will influence his decision (racial preferences, pro-life leadership, state’s rights) he must believe that either option (b) or (c) is preferable to Bush. Claybourn appears politically astute enough to know that none of the potential Democrats will be any closer, in aggregate terms, to his view, so I assume that he believes there is a third party candidate that fit’s the bill.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter.
Though Claybourn agrees that the “voting isn’t worth your time” argument is bankrupt, he nevertheles seems to be falling under the “Nader Delusion” – the belief that by wasting your vote on a third party candidate you are participating in a legitimate form of political protest.

Continue reading Is Josh Claybourn falling for the “Nader Delusion”