Tactical Libertarianism

"In this case we are not really speaking about a merger, we are speaking about a period of cooperation between the Paleo-Conservatives, and the Paleo-Libertarians." - Paul Gottfried

Written by John Lawson, find more of his content on 𝕏 @JohnLawson_TNO

I recently read an article written by Tim Matheson for Noticer.news describing the complete incompatibility of nationalist politics and Australia’s Libertarian Party. In nearly any context on earth Tim’s article would be uncontroversial, after all, libertarian political theory has it’s roots in wildly different first principles than nationalism and as you would expect leads to radically different outcomes.

I would agree in almost any context on earth, the sole exception being Australia. I do not contest Tim’s argument that libertarianism as an ideology has few safeguards against the mass multicultural immigration that is destroying Australia, and I am virulently opposed to Ruddick’s suggested local government policy of approving every development request that comes across his desk. Nonetheless, Australia possesses a unique set of circumstances that makes the deployment of ‘tactical libertarianism’ politically expedient and could even offer potential opportunities.

Those factors are:

1. The splintered Right-wing vote

2. The Libertarian’s nationalist policies

3. The Libertarian Party’s candidates and leadership

1. Uniting the Right

Australia’s fractured right-wing minor party ecosystem has long been a source of frustration for those with right-wing critiques of the establishment Coalition. One Nation and Pauline Hanson, who at their entry into politics in 1997 offered a genuine nationalist alternative to the mainstream conservative parties, has long since made itself redundant. Despite this, many still believe One Nation to be a preferable or viable vehicle for nationalist politics - a delusion that can easily be dispelled by a brief examination of the party’s track record.

One Nation’s candidates barely mention the founding impetus for the party nowadays, that being opposition to mass multicultural immigration. The party has been unable to retain any of its talent; Craig Kelly is the most recent example but I would argue Mark Latham’s departure from the party was the single greatest loss the party has suffered in a long time. Hanson rules the party with total top-down discretion and any member or candidate who appears to outshine herself or James Ashby promptly receives the sack, a fate they are helpless to resist owing to the total lack of members-rights within the One Nation party structure. It is common knowledge that the greatest impediment to the rise of genuinely nationalist parties in Western countries is the existence of a strong mainstream conservative party - of which, with the inclusion of One Nation, Australia has three. The combination of all these factors means to me that any force that can knock One Nation off its perch (potentially opening the field for a better option) should be embraced by ideological nationalists.

The Libertarian Party, under the leadership of John Ruddick, have demonstrated a clear interest in working with the other minor parties in order to consolidate the independent right-wing vote or failing this, working against them. An effective right-wing party exerting the same influence over the Coalition the Greens have over Labor would be extremely beneficial, especially in light of some of the policy positions the Libertarians appear to be representing.

2. Nationalist Policy Positions

Within Tim’s article is included the concession that the Libertarians are the most effective barrier to the wildly damaging and censorious Misinformation bill being forwarded by the Albanese government. I do not believe enough weight is placed on this fact.

Without the ability to communicate freely, all meaningful dissent against the government is dead in the water and any attempt to organise alternative political options becomes borderline impossible in the age of the internet. The Libertarian Party is one of the few bastions of opposition to this disastrous policy and should be commended for the fact.

On the other hand, I have to strongly disagree with Tim’s assessment that the Libertarians will be defacto supporters of mass immigration and ‘big Australia.’ Although we are still awaiting the official publication of the Libertarian Party’s immigration policy I have seen enough positive signals to outweigh my fear of Ruddick building Megacity One on top of a national park.

Under the leadership of John Ruddick, the Libertarian Party appears to be adopting what some might describe as a ‘National Libertarian’ position, Ruddick himself calling for a 5-year moratorium on all immigration.

All of these signals regarding immigration have been further boosted during my private and public discussions with members and leaders within the Libertarian Party all of whom have agreed that the party’s policy will be more restrictionist than the Coalition’s.

Another recent example of a position both nationalists and libertarians can unite in support of is the right to freedom of association, a position on which Ruddick has spoken in support of in the strongest possible terms - going so far as to support the overturning of civil rights legislation that has for generations forced undesired assimilation on the populace and consequently facilitated the breakdown of White communities across the Western world.

We must also remember the Libertarian Party stood opposed to the Voice to Parliament, which though in retrospect appears to have been a safe position, was not so at the outset of Albanese’s all-out campaign.

This is no claim or guarantee that Nationalists will always align with the Party’s policies, but insofar as they are pushing in the same direction as us, we must not make the perfect the enemy of the good.

3. Candidates and leadership

I commented a few months ago that my position on Libertarians vs One Nation is that I will take autists over bogans any day of the week, I don’t believe this comment is entirely fair. The Libertarians, contrary to their stereotype, have done an effective job of attracting high-quality, practical-minded members & candidates.

Ruddick is clearly an extremely pragmatic political operator and is has worked hard to expand the Libertarian vote, this has led him to court the vote of the broader non-mainstream right meaning and in the process shedding many of the ideological failures of libertarianism. I know that among its membership the Party counts avowed non-libertarian Rob McMullan, who has joined up because the Libertarians are more competent and afford far more members rights than any of the other right-wing minor parties.

This is also true of candidates, some of whom have made comments that would see them excommunicated from the Liberal Party until the end of time. Burchell Wilson, former ACCI Chief Economist, who has made many politically incorrect remarks about various protected minorities and openly remarked on the relation between crime and ethnicity on his X account (before it was deleted), was supported in his run as a candidate for the Libertarians and continues to play an active role within the Party today.

Lachlan Lade is another nationalist, anti-immigration candidate running for Senate on the QLD Libertarian ticket who regularly attends events hosted in conjunction with the British Australian Community and Australian Natives Association - both of which unapologetically stand to represent White Australians.

Then of course there is John Ruddick himself who defected to the Libertarian Party from a leadership role within the Liberal Party right-faction, and has only grown more right-wing since. Under his leadership, the Libertarians have openly stated that he is willing to work with even some of the most controversial elements of the Australian right-wing, an offer we would be remiss of us to refuse.

Ruddick’s relationship with Dr David Adler is concerning, but the Liberal Party has Mark Leibler and Pauline Hanson is known to sport an Israel-flag scarf from time to time. Australia-first nationalists aren’t exactly spoiled for choice.

Conclusion

Insofar as the Libertarian Party is pulling the Liberal Party to the right while coaxing their voters away, building order out of the chaos that is the right-wing minor party ecosystem, running nationalist candidates and holding a hardline position in favour of immigration restriction I will lend them my conditional support and encourage any nationalist uninterested in practising entryism within the Liberal Party to join the Libertarian Party. Should any one of these factors change, however, it would no longer consider the party a viable vehicle for our politics. Put simply: I support tactical libertarianism.