Why are libertarians associated with the right?

[Slander and/or Libel]

Because American libertarianism is a marketing strategy by the right to try to appeal to people who are putatively social issues, but also won't be affected at all by any particular resolution of social issues. Straight people in favor of gay marriage, but with no stake in whether gay marriage remains legal, that kind of thing.

[Slander and/or Libel]

This is very interesting, angus. Thanks for going into detail on it.

I'd say that in my experience, even though the libertarians show up as very far to the "left" on their social scores, they tend to prioritize economic issues far more than social issues when it comes to advocacy and voting.

[Slander and/or Libel]

This is very interesting, angus. Thanks for going into detail on it.

I'd say that in my experience, even though the libertarians show up as very far to the "left" on their social scores, they tend to prioritize economic issues far more than social issues when it comes to advocacy and voting.

I don't know, it may lean one way or the other, but it's certainly very close.  I'd guess it actually leans more on the social side than the economic side, but I maybe biased a bit.  Gay marriage, guns and pot are just as important as free trade and less regulation.  Everything flows from the mindset that people should be able to (generally) do what they want as long as they ain't hurting nobody that doesn't want to be hurt.  It doesn't matter if that happens in the bedroom or the boardroom.

I just checked Reason Magazine's last few dozen articles linked to from Facebook.  There certainly isn't an economic bias there.  Lots of making fun of Trump and over sensitive college students.  A little Johnson, a little climate change (is that social or economic?), a little weed.  A little economics too sure, but it was countered by a little cop bashing.  I'm certainly more in the weed, guns and whores side, it's a lot more fun than the side discussing TPP and zoning.

For sure, there are outlets that have pretty broad focus on all sides. Radley Balko is a prominent libertarian, but he's almost exclusively on the police abuse beat, and he's pretty indispensable in that world.

But it's rather telling that the Libertarian party is running two former Republican governors this year. That they've run Ron Paul, a Republican congressman, in years past. Now I know that Libertarian=/=libertarian, and that's no small point. But there's some correlation.

I wonder if maybe we're saying/seeing the same thing, but through different lenses. What might look to me like libertarians prioritizing economic over social issues might look to libertarians like saying Republicans agree with them on economics more than Democrats agree with them on social issues, not that they don't care about social issues.

A real part of the issue here is that the system just doesn't give libertarians the opportunity or responsibility to put their money where their mouth is as far as enacting their preferred policies, so the ones who want their votes to have an electoral impact have to make a choice between left and right, and it seems like disproportionately they feel loosely attached to the right rather than to the left.

[Slander and/or Libel]

A real part of the issue here is that the system just doesn't give libertarians the opportunity or responsibility to put their money where their mouth is as far as enacting their preferred policies, so the ones who want their votes to have an electoral impact have to make a choice between left and right, and it seems like disproportionately they feel loosely attached to the right rather than to the left.

Libertarians might not be getting elected, but "libertarian" policy does pass from time to time.  Gay marriage, guns and weed are all important issues (at least they are to libertarians) heading in a libertarian direction.

I mean, insofar as libertarians have some overlap with the left and right, then sure, "libertarian" policy gets passed fairly often. But we don't govern in a libertarian direction, and it doesn't seem credible to give libertarians credit for something that they were incidental to, in terms of standing at the levers of power to make happen.