On its Facebook page, REASON Magazine posed the question: "Do you agree?"
My answer: Yes.
Certainly, the GOP for decades had become shot through with intellectual dead weight and outright traitors alike (a.k.a. RINOs.) But there are two key points that need to be taken into immediate consideration, aside from the obvious one that a vote for a "third party" is, inescapably, a conscious vote for the Democrat-Totalitarian Party:
1. Parties are brand names. If a major brand's product-quality slides significantly even as it retains a huge, loyal customer base, an attempted supplanting of that brand by the equivalent of a garage start-up (whose "sales," or election-return percentages, have rarely risen above the single digits and won't for decades to come,) is the exact same ineffectual pipe dream it's been for decades.
The logical course of action is to return the sliding quality of the major brand's product to excellence, via the heavy lifting of working within that "company," not flitting off on a fanciful, feelgood, inconsequential daydream at the expense of that quality-restoration's success. It's perhaps not a perfect analogy, but I trust the point is clear. The practice among some "big-L" Libertarians of splitting the vote, particularly in narrow contests, has been profoundly damaging to liberty, ironically enough. But someone always gets a warm, fuzzy feeling out of chasing after the "perfect" rather than voting for what is merely the "good." It's the behavior of a petulant child, from where I sit.
2. Something exists today that did not exist five years ago in American politics. It's called the Tea Party.
The Tea Party arose spontaneously on the impetus of two powerful motives: a.) A backlash against the snowballing corporatism sponsored by Bush, Paulson, Bernanke and Obama in the wake of the '90s-era economic sabotage of Dodd and Frank [see Woods' "Meltdown" for details,] and b.) the recognition of the need to draw a full, final, clear distinction, within the Republican Party, between the principled rank-and-file core and the RINO traitors who'd run it into the dirt. This is a distinction that had never before been made, certainly not on as explicit a level as the Tea Party has done.
Certainly too, within the Tea Party itself there exists factions and conflicts on specific issues (immigration, which seemingly everybody but Dr. Reisman and Dr. Binswanger is getting wrong; national defense vs. nation-building vs. retread pacifism; religion in politics, etc.)
But we have indeed made that vital distinction - clearly, openly, and successfully. The first tangible "harvest" of that distinction was the dramatic ouster of Democrat-Socialists and RINOs alike from Congress in 2010. We stand poised to continue that vital housecleaning next week - if indeed we still retain the right to vote, given the daily reports of increasing voter fraud and machine "calibration errors" that oddly favor Democrats.
Wise libertarians - upper or lower as the "case" may be - will do what the Tea Party Republican mainstream have been doing since the 2010 election season: Diving into their voter guides; meticulously researching the ideological pedigrees of every candidate on the roster from Senators to Judges to County Aldermen; choosing, campaigning and voting only for those candidates who are free of the corruption of principles-betrayal - and strictly within the Republican Party umbrella. This last not out of some juvenile turf war mentality, but on the rational acknowledgement of the simple mechanics of the two-Party system.
To wit: Either you are voting for the worthy Republican, or you are casting a vote for the totalitarian Marxist / UN Agenda 21 "Green" / Islamofascist sympathizer axis of the Democrat Party.
It is really that simple.
This is not a kids' game. Our lives are at stake, and every vote for a third-party-fantasy spoiler, which hands a narrow contest to a Democrat-Totalitarian, is a conscious aiding and abetting of that destruction.
So go park Rocinante at the rail and leave the grandiose dreams of supplanting the GOP to some future time when we're not staring an Asimovian millennium of barbarism square in the face, 'K?