In Pennsylvania the minor party candidates are almost always included in every debate from Governor on down. It doesn't make a difference. In Pennsylvania they do not hand out any public money for campaigns. It doesn't make a difference.
The public has been offered your deal and has rejected it. They don't care about the income tax. People are polled about what they consider to be the important issues of the day and taxation is never on their list. (Please, push-polling doesn't count.)
I'm not sure about the founding fathers' nobility. I would like to think they were the great people we assume they were, and not just that they got lucky. Maybe they had the remarkable insight to construct a "perfect" foundation of human rights whilst
not knowing exactly what a human was. But you can't look at history through such rose-colored glasses. There was an anti-slavery movement at the time; it started in Europe at about the same time as the American Revolution. Why didn't it start here, in the "birthplace of freedom"?
. o O o .
The question may not be whether it is right to establish a philosophically-correct but unrepresentational government, but whether it's even possible to maintain such a thing.
After all, how would one go about it?
One good way would be to gather the most freedom-oriented guys in a room, declare independence from the controlling doofuses, fight them until they tire of it. Then write a really libertarian founding document -- some would say a "perfect" document -- and set the thing in motion.
But history tells us that, after enough years of such an experiment, the people will inevitably find a way to get approximately the government they WANT, not the government that is dictated to them, no matter how hard-ass the founders are or how stringent the wording of their founding document.