Hey Marcy - Yeah, I don't think the plight of the small business owner has the same 'sex appeal' politically. Seriously though, even the Stalinist seem to be okay with small businesses, at least in a relative sense to large co's like Walmart. - cobblers, grocers, family farmers. So I'm curious as well how support for them has related to neocons in the past.
Granted sex workers are small business owners, but I doubt they would want to be associated with 'small business' for PR reasons (sorry, couldn't resist 
David
Hi David,
I believe you are entirely correct in questioning the relationship
between small business advocacy and neo-con conservatism. I personally
do not see any relationship. And, absolutely, sex workers are small
business people (or at least the independent ones); although in San
Francisco at present they are part of the underground economy, which
makes it difficult in my view to advocate for them as traditional
small business folks.
Marcy
Hey Marcy - Yeah, I don't think the plight of the small business
owner has the same 'sex appeal' politically. Seriously though, even
the Stalinist seem to be okay with small businesses, at least in a
relative sense to large co's like Walmart. - cobblers, grocers, family
farmers. So I'm curious as well how support for them has related
to neocons in the past.
Granted sex workers are small business owners, but I doubt they
would want to be associated with 'small business' for PR reasons
(sorry, couldn't resist
David
From: Amarcy D. Berry <amarcyb@...>
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 9:13:23 PM
Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: Gotopless.orgHi again, Mike,
Yes, you are correct, there was a half-hearted effort to outreach
small business (as you say, "stillborn") . Regarding the perception
that LP is right wing, well, that is another story! I think it depends
on what side of the LP's personality split the entity expressing its
perception is most familiar!Marcy
--- In lpsf-discuss@ yahoogroups. com, "Acree, Michael" <acreem@> wrote:
>
> There actually was, as you probably recall, a stillborn program
from the
> national office at outreach to small business, as part of a "branding"
> effort. As important as outreach to small business is, I was less
> enthusiastic about that target myself, out of concern that it would
> enhance the existing public perception of the LP as right-wing.
>
> ____________ _________ _________ __
>
> From: lpsf-discuss@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:lpsf-discuss@
yahoogroups. com]
> On Behalf Of Amarcy D. Berry
> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:14 PM
> To: lpsf-discuss@ yahoogroups. com
> Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: Gotopless.org
>
>
>
> Dear Mike,
>
> If it is any consolation to you, the LP (or LPSF) has not done a bang
> up job of outreaching to the small-business community either, a
> constituency which in my personal opinion is infinitely more "obvious"
> than the nudist folks, or the sex workers for that matter.
>
> Marcy
>
> --- In lpsf-discuss@ yahoogroups. com
> <mailto:lpsf- discuss%40yahoog roups.com> , "Acree, Michael" <acreem@>
> wrote:
> >
> > It's interesting that the LP has never, to my knowledge, made any
> > outreach to nudists, though they would be an obvious constituency.
> > Given that nudist organizations have judged that any legal progress
> > depends on their maintaining a puritanical stance in relation to
> > sexuality, however (The slogan of The Naturist Society is "Nude
is not
Yes. Hopefully we will do outreach both to small business people and to people in the underground economy. One frequent shortcoming I've noticed in Libertarian outreach is that even when we talk about issues important to people in the underground economy, there is a tendency to address our message to the "mainstream" rather than speaking to them directly and letting them know we're on their side.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))