I wouldn’t expect Kos’s posts on this to be of much interest to libertarians in terms of adopting his viewpoints. His posts are more meaningful (although still flawed) in terms of moving Democrats in a more libertarian direction.

As you note there remains a vast difference between true libertarianism and what Kos envisions which is why I would prefer to call this a varient of liberalism closer to classical liberalism as opposed to calling it libertariansism. Of course over the years I’ve seen so many viewpoints which have been called libertarian I wouldn’t worry too much about the labels.

From my perspective, the Democrats at the moment are the only major party alternative to Bush and the current GOP leadership. At the moment restoring the checks and balances of a two party system is top priority. From there we have the question of whether Democrats will continue with showing interest in civil liberties, opposition to the war, and opposition to the religious right, and a more fiscally conservative outlook as opposed to more big government liberalism. While Kos’s article certainly has many flaws, if it helps push Democrats in a more libertarian direction I see that as a good thing.

Similarly there is a wide variation among liberals. There are liberals who are more concerned with social welfare programs, and these obviously would not have much in common with any type of libertarian. There are also liberals who are more interested in civil liberties and social issues who would have more in common with some libertarians.

A problem with labels is that they lump some people together who have quite different beliefs, and separate others who may be close in many areas, Kos is right in flinding that there are some liberals and some libertarians who wind up close to each other. I’m differing a bit in consider such people closer to classical liberalism than libertarians, but the labels which are used is not the important factor.

I don’t see Kos as suggesting that libertarians accept self-contradiction as much as he is pushing Democrats in a more libertarian direction (even if not totally libertarian).

This is just another variation on the idea of Starbucks Republicans voting Democratic, or Southpark Refugees which I have written about in other posts. There’s a growing number of voters who are liberal on social issues while conservative on many economic issues. As we’ve discussed above, Kos is not a “big thinker.” The way in which he expresses this leaves him open ot easy criticism, but the overall trend I mentioned is of significance.

Huh?:

1) How many versions of one political theory can coexist coherently?

2) Is Republican ideological self-contradiction a good thing? No? Then why should libertarianism accept self-contradiction as Kos is clearly suggesting?

I read his essay, too, and although Markos is not a “big thinker”, I think he made some valid points. The deafening silence from the Republicans when the Detainee Bill passed tells you everything you need to know about the death of Libertarianism in the GOP party. It’s up to the Democrats to take advantage of this power vaccuum and reclaim it, albeit in a less rigid way as the real Libertarians, and capture those votes.