| Jumpin said: American Libertarianism is not libertarianism, it's more like a redneck version neo-liberalism. Also, in an Anerican style electoral system, voting for a third party IS a waste of a vote. Only votes for the top two parties count, because they're the only two who are contesting. In other words, if you are interested in stopping Republicans, you vote for Democrats. If you vote for another party, that is a vote that is going to a lower party instead of going against the republicans. |
The intellectual founders of American libertarianism were mostly urban-born, lower-middle class Jewish men (Murray Rothbard, Milton Friedman, etc.) I don't know where you got the redneck conotation from, but most non-Americans don't even know what a redneck is anyway, so I am not surprised. Anyway, they took a bunch of ideas from American classical liberals and expanded upon them with a combination of modern economics (mostly monetarist and/or austrian with some neoclassical.) Economics is generally the divide among American libertarians, but ethics is another divide (consequentualist/utilitarian vs. deontological.) It is a bit more specific though than "neoliberal" which is an umbrella term which includes many non-libertarians.
As for the etymology of the word libertarian, syndicalists/social anarchists did not originate the word nor did they solely use it ever. That was a myth perpetuated by Noam Chomsky (among other syndicalists.) Here you go:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=libertarian
1789, "one who holds the doctrine of free will" (opposed to necessitarian), from liberty (q.v.) on model of unitarian, etc. Political sense of "person advocating liberty in thought and conduct" is from 1878. As an adjective by 1882. U.S. Libertarian Party founded in Colorado, 1971.
None of the second paragraph addresses the points I made in the OP. Winning is not the only value of votes.
