Douthat defines “libertarian populism” as a political orientation that “sees the cause of limited government as a means not only to safeguarding liberty, but to unwinding webs of privilege and rent-seeking and enabling true equality of opportunity as well.” Wilkinson doubts it will catch on:
I see two problems. First, right-wing populism in America has always amounted to white identity politics, which is why the only notable libertarian-leaning politicians to generate real excitement among conservative voters have risen to prominence through alliances with racist and nativist movements. Ron Paul’s racist newsletters were not incidental to his later success, and it comes as little surprise that a man styling himself a “Southern Avenger” numbers among Rand Paul’s top aides. This is what actually-existing right-wing libertarian populism looks like, and that’s what it needs to look like if it is to remain popular, or right-wing. Second, political parties are coalitions of interests, and the Republican Party is the party of the rich, as well as the ideological champion of big business. A principled anti-corporatist, pro-working-class agenda stands as much chance in the GOP as a principled anti-public-sector-union stance in the Democratic Party. It simply makes no sense.
Douthat defends the movement:
[T]he idea of “an effort to make the GOP no longer the party of the rich, in both reality and perception,” as [Tim] Carney puts it, doesn’t seem impossibly far fetched right now. Not because it wouldn’t be wrenching in various ways (it would), not because it wouldn’t cut against the party’s historical identity (it would), but because parties want to win elections, and it isn’t obvious what other course a G.O.P. that hopes to win again should take.
Obama’s second term crash with non-college whites could create an opening, I suppose. And Larison adds that libertarian populism is “virtually the only alternative on offer arguing that there is something fundamentally wrong with the party’s current economic agenda”:
Parties are coalitions of interests, and Republicans rely on the votes of a lot of people whose interests are currently neglected by the party’s policy agenda. One reason that the GOP can be “the party of the rich” while relying on the votes of working- and middle-class voters is that it portrays its reliable support for corporate interests as a defense of free markets, entrepreneurship, and small businesses. One virtue of a libertarian populist agenda is that it exposes this fraud and presents an alternative that is still potentially palatable to a conservative electorate.
The Dish 