Since joining FOX and beyond his departure from the station, Glenn Beck has reexamined his views on a variety of matters. Lately he has taken to referring to himself as a libertarian. This has caused a “more-libertarian-than-thou” backlash, with people stating Beck cannot possibly be a libertarian because of X or Y.

As a long-time Glenn Beck listener, I have witnessed how Beck’s views have shifted over the years. Once a supporter of the PATRIOT Act and foreign aid, he now admonishes the police state and even believes in cutting foreign aid to Israel. Glenn Beck stated that he wants the government out of marriage entirely. He has gone so far as to mention that the government should stop jailing people for marijuana offenses since there are more important issues to worry about. Beck even did a segment recommending the works of Hayek and Rand. This was long before Glenn Beck ever uttered the “l word”.

At the 2013 International Students for Liberty Conference, Alexander McCobin mocked the idea of Glenn Beck being a libertarian. In response, Beck used the words “Nazi”, “fascist”, and suggested that McCobin thinks he’s “God”. Beck was probably referring to the Nazi-esque element of libertarians asserting themselves as superior to others, the fascist-esque aspect of libertarians promoting an all-or-nothing ideology, and the “God”-like omniscience many libertarians hold as if they are the sole determiners of who is a libertarian and who is not.

In his rebuttal, McCobin stated that libertarianism is not related to economic conservatism or social conservatism. What is anti-libertarian about allowing for people to conserve their money and conserve their values, free from government interference? There is nothing anti-libertarian about believing the government is the biggest threat to the traditional way of life. Conservatives and libertarians both agree that the government is the enemy.

This back-and-forth has culminated in Glenn Beck inviting Jack Hunter and Zak Slayback to speak on his Blaze show. As a gesture of gratitude, Beck provided access to The Blaze so that Young Americans for Liberty members could listen to his discussion. Hunter and Beck dominated the conversation with an actual dialogue about the proper role of government. Meanwhile, Slayback interjected to say that conservatism and libertarianism are two entirely contrasting philosophies (Slayback even audibly sighed at one point). Though unable to articulate exactly where conservatism and libertarianism diverge other than a few strawmen, Slayback seemed content to state that libertarianism and conservatism are not alike.

Insulting individuals who are interested in becoming more libertarian, saying they need to repent for all of their past sins and worship at the altar of the One True Libertarian, is not a way to grow a movement. Oddly enough, Slayback and the Students for Liberty crowd have spent a lot of time appealing to the leftists, striving for a left-libertarian alliance. Rather than appealing to conservatives—probably because they don’t have the sexy beliefs to attract the “student” movement—Slayback and others have attempted to build an impossible bridge connecting the economic ignorance of liberals with libertarianism. Instead of realizing that conservatives share values with libertarians, and admitting conservatives generally tend to vote in more pro-liberty manners than liberals, the libertarian movement has decided to kick conservatives out of the secret, exclusive club. Some of the zealots in the witch-hunt against conservatives have even gone so far as to disown Rand Paul for endorsing Mitt Romney, attack Ron Paul for being a pro-life Christian, and smear Lew Rockwell for the paleo-conservative strategy. A man who literally came up with a strategy to get libertarians more viability has come under fire for attempting to give the movement prominence. Why? Because he has conservative beliefs and understood libertarians should align with conservatives.

Not only do the people in the libertarian movement need a major attitude readjustment, but they need to realize the survival of libertarianism and conservatism are intrinsically linked. Without a libertarian government, conservatism’s institutions cannot exist. Without conservatives in office, libertarianism does not stand a chance on the national stage. Libertarians and conservatives agree on the general philosophy of reducing the size and scope of the government. Libertarians and conservatives realize the economic problems that America faces are real. Libertarianism and conservatives understand that the government is the biggest threat to their liberty. Libertarians and conservatives both want the government to let them be in their affairs.

The libertarian movement has become an intellectual circle jerk in which people sit around getting off on how pure they are. Things as trivial as a person’s religious views, or being against drug usage, have become enough to disqualify someone from being a True Libertarian. Issues with absolutely no relevance to political philosophy have dominated, and personalities become more important than issues. The condescending, elitist behavior from libertarians surely proves that the students who have appointed themselves as the deciders of all things liberty have a lot of growing up to do. If libertarianism wants to succeed, the libertarian movement should welcome conservatives, especially mainstream conservative figures with large media followings, with open arms. A fighter for liberty is a fighter for liberty. Ultimately, you can’t win a war of ideas with an army of one.

Last weekend, I attended the 2013 International Students for Liberty Conference. The conference featured a taping of Stossel with opportunities for the attendees to engage the guests with questions.

The most momentous occasion at the Stossel taping was when Ann Coulter called libertarians “pussies.” As anticipated, this elicited a response of jeering. Coulter clarified, saying that libertarians spend too much time sucking up to their liberal friends instead of focusing on the real issues. She mentioned that libertarians can work with conservatives on issues that matter–such as economics–but they instead choose to focus on marijuana in order to appeal to the left. In this statement, Coulter highlighted precisely why the modern libertarian movement is failing.

Instead of creating alliances with fiscal conservatives, libertarians would rather tell people that libertarianism is about “pot and gay marriage” in order to garner the attention of the youth. The result of making libertarianism about social issues is that there are therefore people, who claim to be libertarians, that do not understand the philosophy of libertarianism in the slightest. These individuals who are duped into believing that libertarianism is only about pot and government gay marriage end up not understanding any of the foundational principles of libertarians. As a result, some self-described libertarians even rationalize greater state interventionism on behalf of egalitarianism and economic equity. Generally, no one would consider individuals who support a bigger government to be libertarians; however, these people were told they are libertarians because they like to smoke pot and think gay people are cool. These new libertarians, therefore, do not understand the non-aggression principle, do not understand the importance of voluntary action, and do not understand the power of the market. These self-proclaimed libertarians are a threat to freedom, as they say they act on behalf of liberty while they simultaneously call for greater government.

During the taping, Ann Coulter said that she does not want welfare to go towards someone who is getting high, which is a moderately justifiable reason to be against drug legalization. The audience erupted into loud noise upon hearing Coulter’s answer. Proving her point that libertarians only care about pot, the majority of the questions that followed from Stossel, as well as the audience, were about her views on marijuana. Coulter kept mentioning there are bigger concerns than marijuana, such as ending the welfare state. Libertarians and conservatives should agree that welfare should not go to individuals who use drugs. Libertarians and conservatives should agree that welfare should be abolished. However, there was no such dialogue from the audience about what should happen first. From the minute Coulter walked on stage, the audience decided to act like children and cast her as an enemy rather than someone who can be worked with. For a conference that prides itself on intellectualism, there was no intelligent discussion between the audience and Coulter.

The audience booed Coulter for stating the obvious truths about the travesty of the modern libertarian movement. To demonstrate her point, there was another high-profile guest of an entirely different political persuasion who received applause. When Dennis Kucinich entered the stage, he was applauded. When Kucinich advocated for government regulations in order to save the world from the global warming catastrophe, parts of the audience applauded. When Kucinich mentioned how evil profits were for banks and health-care corporations, parts of the audience applauded.

A woman who has done not much except write opinion columns received a vitriolic response from the audience, while a man who has spent his entire time in Congress campaigning against liberty was cheered. Dennis Kucinich has spent his time in Congress vowing for bigger government. Since Dennis Kucinich is a leftist with politically correct opinions, however, the audience at a “libertarian” conference gave him more respect than a woman who never assaulted anyone’s freedom.

As Coulter so eloquently said:

We’re living in a country that is 70-percent socialist, the government takes 60 percent of your money. They are taking care of your health care, of your pensions. They’re telling you who you can hire, what the regulations will be. And you want to suck up to your little liberal friends and say, ‘Oh, but we want to legalize pot.’ You know, if you were a little more manly you would tell the liberals what your position on employment discrimination is. How about that? But it’s always ‘We want to legalize pot.’

The libertarian movement has, indeed, made it all about kissing up to the left.