Libertarians have been upset because the Republicans have joined -- co-opted? -- the "tea party" movement, but that's not the underlying conflict everyone should be thinking about.
The underlying conflict is this: do you express your political philosophy in terms of control?
Democrats and Republicans cannot express their political philosophy in terms of an individual's change of heart or change of mind.
Instead, both parties, in different ways, have to extend some kind of control over other people's lives or resources.
The less you seek to control others, the more libertarian you are.
You might desire an end to abortion; you might think drug use is dangerous and foolish; you might believe that the poor need special assistance.
The question is: How much political and legal force do you insist on obtaining to bring about those changes?
Can you really change someone's inclinations, intentions, or beliefs through force?
People used to say "you can't legislate morality." In one sense, it was a ridiculous statement -- every law, every traffic sign, is a legislation of morality.
In another sense, it was a true statement -- how can imposing on another person make him into a truly moral and ethic being?
