Commentary: Libertarianism’s the antidote to liberalism, conservatism

If you think about it, all people (except psychopaths) live their lives with the libertarian values of persuasion instead of coercion.

That is to say we cannot force people to like us or socialize with us. Instead, we either have a fulfilling social life with friends and acquaintances based on the persuasion of our personality, character and integrity or we don’t.

Obviously, if we try to force people to like us we will not be successful. And the same is true in the business world, which is also based on the persuasions of value and merit, not coercion.

So why should we be any more successful in using coercion or force in our political world? When it comes down to it, the elites in political life use government coercion to push their political values on others. Why should this be any more successful or even appropriate?

To explain this approach in matters of finances and money, Democrats (or so-called liberals) use the coercion of government in an effort to tax people who they decide have too much money to provide for people or causes they decide do not have enough.

And Republicans (or so-called conservatives) use the coercion of government in an attempt to prohibit people socially from doing things that they do not approve of, like various private sexual activities and drug use.

On the other hand, libertarians are consistent in attempting to use persuasion, just like in their personal lives.

Which approach do you believe works better?

For example, just because the government would not coerce people into making provisions for food, clothing and shelter for the poor does not at all mean that the poor will be unfed, naked or sleeping outside. For many years private charities, religious organizations and individuals on their own have made provisions for the poor.

But every time the government takes one step forward in preempting this work, those charitable people and institutions take two steps back. And yet private individuals and charities do the job much more efficiently and relationally than does the government. So when it comes down to it, coercion doesn’t work any better in our political world than it does in our social world.

And from a social perspective, how successful have the so-called conservatives been in prohibiting private sexual activities or illicit drug usage? All that approach has done is fill our courtrooms and jails and added to people’s consternation, while the “prohibited” conduct still remains widespread.

Don’t get me wrong. I was in the Peace Corps — I care about people — and I will compare my love-of-neighbor to that of anyone.

But having said that, the arguments are basically true. If we try to enforce our values through the government coercion of prohibitory laws, tax regulations and legions of administrative codes, they will inescapably give us a huge, unwieldy and expensive bureaucracy on the one hand and far from satisfactory results on the other. In the meantime, of course, the politicians who espouse those views will continue to get elected and re-elected by misleading the voters with promises of wonderful — but never-obtained — results.

Although Henry Ford is not my favorite person in history from a social standpoint, one of his comments should be remembered by every caring member of our society. Ford said that anyone who thinks he can prosper by relying upon the help of the government should first talk to the American Indians. Look what that reliance has done for the Native Americans for the past 230 years.

Economist Milton Friedman said no society in history has ever raised itself out of poverty except through a system of free enterprise and private property rights. The People’s Republic of China is just the most recent example.

So think about joining the functional libertarian approach of making the government the last resort by engaging more in persuasion when it comes to societal values instead of coercion by force. That approach has worked exceptionally well in the United States with regard to religions. We have been free of religious strife and wars in our country precisely because we have left those critical decisions to persuasion instead of coercion.

Newport Beach resident JAMES P. GRAY is a retired Orange County Superior Court judge, the 2012 Libertarian candidate for vice president and the author of “A Voter’s Handbook: Effective Solutions to America’s Problems” (The Forum Press, 2010).