The Anti-War, Anti-IRS Coalition (or lack thereof)

Chuck Baldwin writes,

If personal liberty is to prevail, if any of our historic American liberties are to last much beyond this generation, it will only be because those constitutionalists who are left are able to put aside individual differences and work together (as did our Founding Fathers) for the restoration of our constitutional republic!

We need a combined effort, a determined effort, a focused effort, and an indefatigable effort to do one thing: restore constitutional government to our land!
[...]
Some are foolishly (and futilely) trying to "save" the GOP. Some are trying to do the same thing with the Donkeys. Some have divided themselves up into several minor parties, including the aforementioned Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party, or the Reform Party. Some are registered simply as Independents or as something else.

Furthermore, a majority of these "independents" would probably agree on the basic premise that the two major parties are thoroughly corrupt, totally dominated by big money interests, and wholly given to globalism. They would also likely agree that the restoration of the U.S. Constitution is primary to our nation's survival. In addition, people registered as independents (in their various consortiums) outnumber both Democrats and Republicans!

Again, the question is, can conservative constitutionalists put aside individual differences and reach a working consensus that would allow them to combine their energies and resources for the accomplishment of the goal of restoring constitutional government? I truly do not know the answer to that question. However, one thing I do know: if constitutional government is not restored soon, America is toast!

I think what Baldwin is referring to is that group, from both left and right, who are for both non-intervention and economic freedom. I think this anti-war, anti-IRS coalition would be a powerful force, and a Contitution-based political agenda would go a long way to advancing libertarian goals, even though constitutionalism isn't the same as libertarianism.

There are three obstacles: abortion, immigration, and trade.

Abortion: Many Constitution Party activists will simply not accept any bending of their anti-abortion plank; indeed, without it the CP barely has a reason to exist. But others of a more anarchist bent in the Libertarian Party would strongly resist this. I would hope that a compromise would be possible, which would be a position in favor of returning the question to the states. Other questions of federal interference (such as God in the classroom) could also be returned to the states; Congress should simply limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts over these matters.

Immigration: This may be an even tougher nut to crack. Shared principles should begin with total opposition to handouts of any kind to illegal immigrants. Beefed up border security of some form could be a potential area of common agreement. On the other hand, as William Norman Grigg often says, "While we must gain control over our borders, we would gain nothing, and lose practically everything, if we have secure borders around our country, and a police state within." In a free country, somebody should be able to pay somebody for a day's work in cash, without having to file paperwork or demanding proof of citizenship.

Trade: Most thoughtful libertarians are aware that "free trade agreements" like NAFTA and CAFTA are farces. They can stand in agreement with Reform Party members and CPers of a more economic nationalist bent to resist state-enforced globalization. But libertarians still favor real free, open trade while paleoconservatives are open to revenue tariffs and even protective tariffs. One advantage of tariffs is that, while Americans pay the tax in higher prices, their freedom and dignity is not subject to a tax code. In that sense, it is a "less bad" tax. Perhaps, when the federal government is shrunk to its Constitutional limits, a uniform and fairly low revenue tariff will be sufficient to fund it.

These differences are significant, but I don't think they're insurmountable. The continued existence of the Democratic and Republican Parties, despite tremendous ideological differences within both, demonstrate that people can swallow some parts of their agenda in order to advance others. In order to prevail, advocates of non-intervention, economic freedom, and privacy must do the same.