Libertarianismul is probably the best and most well represented by creating an intellectual ideology from Romania. The immediate question is: why is this not reflected in political life? The answer is simple: political parties in Romania have not yet assumed an ideological identity, other than the purely declarative. Liberal ideologies, social-democratic, Christian-democratic, etc. they suffered the slur, the lack of substance and irrelevance, being offered the electorate rather than as brandnames intellectual constructions explicit and systematic. From the Western ideological debate were taken some values, some ideas, attitudes and opinions, those not integrated the disparate functional ideology itself. And their bearers were never polled seriously lax policy on competitiveness, allowing loyalty and false.
Comparison between libertarianism and liberalism aborigine is why here.  Exercise has suffered because of the difficulty of a comparison between, on the one hand, a well defined ideology and clearly structured in theory (libertarianismul) and a corpus of amorphous ideas by chance meeting (penelismul). Despite the difficulties, however, the approach needs to be done, but the reader will need a lot of imagination and kindness to and applied it to form or agree with any synthesis of second term compare. Any doctrine of politics has three logical components: a historical element, a component and a political aspect explicativa/actional. A look at the last two deep asymmetry between confirm libertarianism and liberalism.
Explicativa structure (from which derives the normative oriented study of understanding, semnificatiilor and Outlook events) constitute the core of any hard doctrines or ideologies. This is the point where the local synthesis of doctrinal liberalism, insofar as this process is undertaken by the NATIONAL LIBERAL PARTY, does not take place. The claim of the interwar traditions is not only just means and complexatoare, but also purely declarative. The Governing Programme, as well as other programmatic documents, for example, are made by specialized committees which bring together party members in their respective fields. The principle is as follows: 1) members of the NLP are Liberals, 2) the product of the interaction of some Liberals is liberal, so 3) program governance and programmatic documents such results are liberal. In addition to possible distortions in the case, even if the premise 1 liberal inclinations if all members of the NLP would manifest in the discussions in question (which does happen), they could not produce a coherent liberal result, because the discussions are not operational informed an ideological debate at a substantial level, which produce a general agreement around a structured ideology. The need for operational monitoring of products on the part of the ideological debate of depth lies in the need to handle and intercoordonare. in his/her absence, the result is one that can be expected when you gather a group with the task of solving concrete problems: the lack of an agreement on principles, results in a mix of targets and measures which varies throughout the political spectrum. Notable exceptions, but isolated from this rule, led a group of socially-liberal orientation, classical liberal or conservative, indistinct in the same boat. For example, in support of the single tax, took place at the same time as initiating or indorsement, in the process of governance, the ultraetatiste measures as strengthening bureaucratic caste, and "carpirea" health, education or retirement system.
From this point of view, libertarianismul seems to be the exact opposite. Developed in academic environments, consistency and coherence of its superior explicativa are probably all contemporary doctrines. Libertarianismul call freedom at the center of politics, being based on a full confidence in the ability of individuals to cooperate and to govern himself, in the absence of any tutele, matched only by the belief that any monopoly is an invitation to abuse-including a monopoly of legitimate force. Appropriate wikipedia era libertarianismul offers a full paradigm of social and technological dynamics, performing it as an unprecedented increase of freedom of choice and that including the promise of a similar political space transformations.
regarding the appearance of doctrinaire actional (politically), libertarianismul oppose the freedom of choice of the trend of power in the hands of the State, by increasing its powers and resources, increase taxes, bureaucracy or by illegitimate laws that would inhibit the freedom of individual, mascand actually allocating power towards a well-defined interest groups, at the expense of those dispersed. Intense debates inside the libertarianismului generates relative ease with consistent political solutions. asked "what do we put in place this world?", a libertarian might respond quite easily. The same thing can be said about contemporary liberalism, lost in the generosity of surreal of any purposes could be considered "good".
At the normative level, libertarianismul means a return to the origins of classical liberalism and the explanatory level and actional, an update to them so that they respond appropriately to the challenges of high and credible, meanwhile, of the modern age. The relationship between libertarianism and closest variant is, so far, one for information, of which the last one has not just won. Libertarianismul brings the blast of ideological renewal in which Liberals can be found on the whole satisfied. This movement, so far only intellectual, has the inevitable destiny to become politically relevant, sooner or later, by force of its power and coherence to explain the world we live in and i definitely see it zenith. To what extent will succeed but NLP to overcome obscurantismul "penelismului" libertariana movement and to integrate into a large Federation of right-wing, on the model of other large Western parties, is another discussion.