It doesn't matter if one is elected to office, if ones ideals are adopted.
Dear Phil,
Now, how did I know that would be your reply? I guess I will never get
used to the Libertarian Party being a non-political party Party!
Marcy
It doesn't matter if one is elected to office, if ones ideals are
adopted.
From: Amarcy D. Berry
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 9:51 AM
Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: GOP Group Cancels Straw Poll After Ron
Paul Supporters Pour In
Were any of those who participated elected to office?
Marcy
>
> Was The Boston Tea Party uneffective?
> From: Amarcy D. Berry
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2007 12:19 PM
> Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: GOP Group Cancels Straw Poll After Ron
Paul Supporters Pour In
>
>
> No, Starchild, I would not have participated in the Boston Tea Party
> either!
>
> I completely agree with you that the establishment's hostility
against
> libertarianism (not just against Ron Paul) requires a struggle to
> overcome. We just disagree on whether some forms of struggle are
> effective.
>
> Marcy
>
> >
> > Marcy,
> >
> > I meant "raising a clamor for justice" metaphorically, not
> > necessarily literally -- although literally is one way to do it.
I do
> > consider the political establishment's hostility to Ron Paul to
be a
> > real problem, not just an "everyday difference" but a serious
> > obstacle that requires a struggle to overcome.
> >
> > What do you think you would have said in 1773 to the idea of the
> > Boston Tea Party?
> >
> > Love & Liberty,
> > ((( starchild )))
> >
> >
> >
> > > Dear Starchild,
> > >
> > > You might be entirely correct! However, you have known me long
enough
> > > to have anticipated my feelings toward radicalization of
anything! I
> > > have consistently appealed to our groups to solve everyday
differences
> > > amicably. Save the shouting for a *real* problem!
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Marcy
> > >
> > > --- In lpsf-discuss@...m, Starchild <sfdreamer@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Marcy,
> > > >
> > > > That's my bottom line as well. But I do believe that the most
> > > > effective response to an injustice occurring, if our aim is to
> > > > advance the cause, is to raise a clamor for justice.
Radicalizing
> > > and
> > > > motivating the people on our own side is probably even more
key to
> > > > our success than drawing the maximum amount of public
sympathy.
> > > >
> > > > Love & Liberty,
> > > > ((( starchild )))
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Dear Phil,
> > > > >
> > > > > Bottom line is always (IMHO) whether the actions we take
> > > further our
> > > > > cause or not. It's a tough call.
> > > > >
> > > > > Marcy
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Philip Berg"
<philip@>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sometimes verbal protest is called for. What were we
supposed to
> > > > > do. Just take it like sheep and quietly walk out?
> > > > > > From: Amarcy D. Berry
> > > > > > To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 5:43 PM
> > > > > > Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: GOP Group Cancels Straw Poll
> > > After Ron
> > > > > Paul Supporters Pour In
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you, Phil. I agree with you. As an aside, I
personally
> > > believe
> > > > > > such melee hurts the libertarian cause.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Marcy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Philip Berg"
<philip@>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It was her party. She owns the organization which is not
> > > > > affiliated
> > > > > > with the GOP. It was classless, and fraudalent, and
> > > > > inconsiderate, but
> > > > > > it's her thing.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > No state action is warrented.
> > > > > > > From: Kurt Ferber
> > > > > > > To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > > > Cc: Dr. Michael R. Edelstein ; Ron Paul San Francisco
Meetup
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 10:52 AM
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] GOP Group Cancels Straw
Poll
> > > After Ron
> > > > > > Paul Supporters Pour In
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would like to file a complaint with the FEC.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Could someone versed in law draft a complaint template
> > > > > > > based on the FEC guidelines here
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Help for candidates and committees | FEC
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kurt
> > > > > > > NYC
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- Starchild <sfdreamer@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I just posted this comment on the blog:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The organizer, or at least the contact person for the
> > > event, was
> > > > > > Gail
> > > > > > > > Neira -- she can be reached at (415) 820~1430 or
(415)
> > > 821~4452.
> > > > > > Ron
> > > > > > > > Paul supporters might wish to call and demand their
money
> > > back
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > the event if they haven't already. It also seems
possible
> > > that
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > > action somehow violated the California Republican
Assembly's
> > > > > > bylaws.
> > > > > > > > The state CRA bylaws can be found at http://
> > > > > > > > www.californiarepublicanassembly.com/bylaws ... ; I
could
> > > not
> > > > > find
> > > > > > > > any bylaws online for the SF group ( http://
> > > members.tripod.com/
> > > > > > > > ~CRA0115/SFCRA.html ). If the SFCRA does not have any
> > > bylaws,
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > would be a violation of the state CRA charter.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Love & Liberty,
> > > > > > > > ((( starchild )))
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Michael,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > That's outrageous. Did the Ron Paul supporters ask
for and
> > > > > > receive
> > > > > > > > > their money back? I think you have grounds to
demand it.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ((( starchild )))
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> December 05, 2007
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> San Francisco GOP Group Cancels Straw Poll After
Ron Paul
> > > > > > > > >> Supporters Pour In
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Posted by Eric A. Garris at December 5, 2007
12:48 AM
> > > > > > > > >> Scores of Ron Paul supporters showed up to the San
> > > Francisco
> > > > > > > > >> Republican Alliance dinner, where they were
treated to an
> > > > > > hour and
> > > > > > > > >> a half of speeches for Fred Thompson. When Ron Paul
> > > > > supporters
> > > > > > > > >> asked to speak, they were told that time had
run out
> > > and they
> > > > > > held
> > > > > > > > >> a raffle. After the raffle, the organizers
announced
Marcy,
I have faith in your ability to get used to it if you choose to. 8)
The law seeks to force us into certain categories. Corporations are allowed to make public stock offerings. Non-profit groups are not. Certain non-profits are allowed to accept tax-deductible donations; others are not. Doctors are allowed to write prescriptions. Other people are not. Lawyers are allowed to become judges; other people are not. Political parties are allowed to have their names listed on the ballot next to candidates; other non-profits, and individuals, are not.
All of these, and many other similar restrictions, would not exist in a libertarian society. Organizations could be fluid, instead of static. They would have the freedom to continually refocus and redefine their own missions as they went along, just as a person of multiple talents could choose to practice medicine one month, law the next, and sell houses the next, according to what he or she felt most enthused about (and would therefore perhaps be most effective at!) on any particular day, week, month or year. All without any special licenses or permissions.
Likewise, in a libertarian society (and with a bit of help from technology which will hopefully come down in price and make personal change easier), one could decide to be male today, female tomorrow, and an undefined androgynous gender on Tuesday. Or, delving a bit further into what is science fiction at present, change the pigment of one's skin to appear of European descent one day, African the next, then Asian, and so on, according to whim. When virtually everyone is empowered to change gender and physical appearance at will, sexism and racism will be largely outmoded. And when organizations are legally free to be whatever they want to be, it will seem similarly quaint to say of an organization whose members want something that can be gained in many different ways, like liberty, or money, or a reputation for coolness, to say "*this* and *only* this, is what we are *supposed* to do in order to achieve that goal!"
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
P.S. - In former Reason editor Virginia Postrel's book "The Future And Its Enemies," she talks about the conflict between stasis and dynamism (see http://www.friesian.com/postrel.htm ).
Hi Starchild,
I loved your scenario, especially the part that gave me hope that in
such a world I could have long, silky, blond hair! Oh well... In the
current world I need to deal with curly hair that stands on end.
Should I be working toward the day I will have silky blond hair? Sure!
But not at the expense of making the most of what I have *today*.
Same with politics.
Marcy
Marcy,
I would ask, *are* we committed to doing the most we can with the tools we have? Or are we more committed to following the rules than we are to finding out how far the limitations that others have imposed on us via law, custom, and habit, can be stretched?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))