To Topple the Democrat-Republican Duopoly of America, the US Libertarian Party Needs to Drastically Change Its Foreign Policy Agenda.


Hey US Libertarian Party, want to get rid of the morbid system mocked by this image? Then come over to reality on foreign policy and national self-assessment!

Foreign Policy and National Self-Love are two things the US Libertarian Party needs major reform on.

I am happy to be registered to vote as a Libertarian Partier, and I am happy to score an 86 with how libertarian I am on both the Libertarian Purity Test and the iSideWith self-assessment quiz.

However, the US Libertarian Party and broader libertarian movement absolutely disgust me to the point of insanity on foreign policy. Mainstream libertarian opinion wrongly merges a severely paranoid Anti-Americanism with a naive Pacifism. A pacifism that truly believes that America will be best off if it just retreats from everywhere militarily and talks to the world through diplomacy alone.

No, I am not trying to abolish the LP, I would never allow that to happen. I know I would very much rather move to another Earth-like planet than see the LP dissolved.

Who Should the United States Respect Overseas?

Only other free societies. True friends will respect each other’s independences while also being eager to defend each other without needing such a contract as a military alliance.

Unilateralism dramatically more often demolishes other free societies’ respects for America than builds, but the LP should absolutely not promote negotiation and diplomacy with tyrannies. Instead the LP should be promoting the idea of America negotiating multilaterally with other free societies on solutions to problems caused by tyrannies.

The United Nations is an abysmal example of a multilateralism club, and the Libertarian Party is totally right to want the US to evict the UN from our dimension. However, the US Libertarian Party should absolutely not be opposing clubs like OECD and NATO, which aside from Turkey consist of nothing but free societies.

In fact, Pew Research Center finds that 77% of American voters find NATO and OECD friendships to be beneficial.

Differentiate Which Foreign Regimes are Libertarian and which ones are Statist

When this country was having its Declaration of Independence into effect in 1776, Thomas Paine had got to publishing the non-fiction book Common Sense. In this book, he noted that tyrannies will go to war out of pride in situations wherein free societies will not. He also made other notes about how peaceful free societies are as a general rule.

Perhaps my favorite example to name off is Israel. Out of all of the entire Greater Middle East, Israel is the only free society. Turkey was a free society from the start of the Digital Age to the time Erdogan took power, whereas Israel has remained a free society from its 1947 founding year to now. Arab League members, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan will go to war out of pride in situations in which Israel (and recently Tunisia) will not, by the logic of US Founding Father Thomas Paine. 54% of Americans agree with this logic-based conclusion, only 19% would disagree, so the LP needs to stop catering to the 19% and get on board with the 54% instead.

Stronger U.S. Military Means More World Peace

There is plenty of historic facts of life to point out in regard to the US military’s presence abroad being mandatory to preserving a world wherein free trade is the default tool of any free society’s foreign policy.

Remorsefully, mainstream libertarian opinion ignores these particular facts of life, in favor of impulsive and venomously feelings-obsessed calls for all troops to come home from all places. Most libertarians around this one (me) even have the naivety to call for the US military to be downsized.

When the US Military Shrinks and/or foreign Tyrannies Get Respected, Earth Gets Deadlier for Millennials Like Me to Live On

Well, this is going to be quite the element for me to explain. So basically you have the two Koreas, right? And historically the Korean War from 1950 to 1953 ended in stalemate, on one hand. But on the other hand, 28,000 US troops being stationed in South Korea has resulted in North Korea having lost interest in annexing South Korea. Therefore South Korea has emerged into a fellow free society that’s got more economic freedom with more personal liberty than most of the world around it.

US military presence overseas also allows the US military to respond in short order whenever a tyranny is propping a menace. Stationing US troops in our OECD friends’ lands (Israeli and Turkish land) allowed the US military to defeat the Saddam Hussein regime after a speedy travel in both Iraq Wars. To have to fly US troops over from US soil would have required our 500 MPH troop carrier planes to fly 7000 miles and take 840 minutes to get there. That’s compared to flying 800 miles in 96 minutes and 600 miles in 82 minutes from Turkey and Israel, respectively.

Grant you, America or any other free society should only use war for Self-Defense and Defense of Others and never as the aggressor. But when a tyranny is sponsoring terrorism or conducting genocide, US troops need to be stationed in the geographically closest free society to that tyranny. This way US troops will be ready to defeat that tyrannical regime very quickly.

Define US National Interests?

A National Interest is defined as a country’s goals and ambitions in the world, wether economic, cultural or military. I look at US Libertarian Party rhetoric echoing Thomas Jefferson’s phrase about ‘peace, commerce, and honest friendship with foreign countries and alliance with none’. And every time I do I get the impression that the USLP defines US national interests economically as free trade, culturally as honest friendships, and militarily as abstinence from alliances. So as far as I am concerned the US Libertarian Party already knows what US National Interests are.

But very regrettably, the Libertarian Party does nothing to advocate defense of these Jeffersonian-defined Interests. Instead the USLP promotes Far-left, Anti-Americanism and hatred of doing anything visibly mandatory for defending these Jeffersonian Interests.

What the USLP should do is accept the painful reality that War is frequently the only answer to attacks on the US interests of “Peace, Commerce & Honest Friendships but No Alliances”. While also reminding the American People that American military must only ever wage war to defeat tyrannies who attack the US interests of free trade and friendships with other free societies. Or threaten said interests with future attack. Regime Change, Democracy Promotion and Cultural Imperialism endanger America by blinding America to its own cultural, economic and military goals in the world. This is the argument the USLP should be making against these three behaviors, not that they harm enemy governed citizenry, not that they put foreigners at risk of senseless death. There should not be indiscriminate world policing or nation building.


This was twice as long as I wanted it to be, but I do hope I got the idea across. Thanks for reading,



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s