A lot of people might not remember when Markos made the case for bringing more people with libertarian tendencies into the Democratic Party. I thought reading what he wrote was interesting, given the recent discussions over Jane Hamsher's article at the Huffington Post.
Markos wrote an article for the Cato Institute back in 2006 making the case for the "libertarian Democrat":
It is the case for the libertarian Democrat that has created much discussion and not a small amount of controversy when I first introduced the notion in what was, in reality, a throwaway blog post on Daily Kos on a slow news day in early June 2006.
But that post—as coarse, raw, and incomplete as it was—touched a surprising nerve...
It generated the predictable criticism from libertarian circles (Reason and several Cato scholars piled on) as well as from conservatives who perhaps recognized their own slipping grasp of libertarian principles but were unwilling to cede any ground to a liberal. But more surprising (and unexpected) to me was the positive reaction.. Some of these were reluctant Republicans, seeking an excuse to abandon a party that has failed them. Others were reluctant Democrats, looking for a reason to fully embrace their party. And still others were stuck in the middle, despairing at their options—despondent at a two-party system in which both parties were committed to Big Government principles.
This wasn't just about inviting libertarians into the Democratic party, it was also about his "excitement at the growing ranks of Western Democrats who aren't just transforming the politics of the Mountain states, but will hopefully lead to the reformation of the Democratic Party and a new embrace of the politics of personal liberty."
He also quoted one of hekebolos' diaries at Daily Kos:
The fundamental reason that "libertarian" has become "libertarian democrat" is that corporations are becoming more powerful than governments. This fundamental fact has created a union between those with libertarian tendencies and those who believed all along that government can be a force for good.
Markos' take on being a libertarian Democratic has much more complexity than I can show in a few excerpts. But I wanted to point out that Markos was happy to have struck a chord with people "stuck in the middle, despairing at their options—despondent at a two-party system in which both parties were committed to Big Government principles". He saw an opening for the Democratic Party to reach out to those people.
In the original blog post that beget the Cato article, Markos wrote:
I am very much a Libertarian Dem, and this is exactly what my next book will be about. It's progressivism for a new century. And that's what this new breed of Democrat is building in the Mountain West and Virginia and Ohio.
As far as the more specific issue about forming alliances with groups you have fundamental ideological differences with, Markos co-signed a letter with a co-founder of RedState back in 2005 to protest legislation put forward in the House:
Mike Krempasky of Red State and I have jointly signed a letter (PDF) urging the U.S. House of Representatives to reject H.R. 4194 -- a stealth effort to regulate online political voices by pretending to defend them.
The letter was drafted by Adam B and signed by Markos Moulitsas Zúniga of DailyKos.com and Michael Krempasky of RedState.org. The first paragraph highlights why sometimes even ideological opponents find common ground.
As bloggers from the right and left, we don't often agree on much. But when it comes to free speech online, we couldn't agree more.