Dear Everyone;
A good article which touches on the recent why should I support Olivier for Governor when he is for something or against something I disagree with.
Please take the time to read the whole article and think on it first before responding. Thanks
Ron Getty
SF Libertarian
Bill Van Allen writes (on LibertyForAll.net), “If we believe in anything, it’s in each individual’s right to be what he wants to be, as long as he doesn’t commit fraud or force someone else to do his bidding against their will.”
If one accepts that this is an accurate statement, then one would have to conclude, looking at some of the positions that Libertarian Party candidates are actively running on, that we *don’t* believe in anything. For instance, many people want to be Americans. They are not committing fraud, nor are they forcing anyone else to do their bidding. Yet we have prominent LP candidates taking public stands against their becoming Americans. They do not, from what I have seen, make a point of telling the public that this anti-immigration position is their own view and does not represent the view of the Libertarian Party. They simply ignore the LP platform. And many other Libertarians ignore their ignoring it.
There’s no problem with seeking the support of people who only agree with us 80% of the time. We *should* seek their support. But it *is* a problem when we start to abandon our beliefs in order to pander to them. It *is* a problem when they are representing us as candidates for public office, and undoing the hard work that Libertarians have done in educating the public about what it means to be a libertarian, by advocating positions that clearly involve the initiation of force or fraud.
Bill says he wants us to support each other, and stop stabbing each other in the back. But some of the language he chooses to use sends quite a different message. Referring to the LP as “in the process of growing up” and condescendingly chirping “Hey, people, grow up!” speaks volumes.
Seeking to affix the strawman argument that every LP supporter must be in “100% agreement on everything” to those he is criticizing in his article, and then calling it “plain utopian bullshit” speaks volumes too.
If he wants more unity, he needs to start practicing what he preaches. Rob Power has an excellent and very modest suggestion: “a rewards system for adherence to the LP Platform. A good place to start would be the LP’s Candidate Tracker on the website. You’d get additional points for each platform plank you unequivocally support. It’s a small incentive, but an easy one to implement. And it helps on-message, on-platform candidates without hurting the others.”
That’s focusing on the positive. We *need* to start having more pride and unity in what we believe in. And stop this sniping and insulting of the members of our party who are the most committed to libertarian beliefs.
Libertarian Party members have had disagreements from day one. As noted, the idea that those of us who value a strong commitment to principles are seeking “100% agreement” is a straw man. But Bill had one thing right — “”If we believe in anything, it’s in each individual’s right to be what he wants to be, as long as he doesn’t commit fraud or force someone else to do his bidding against their will.”
Ultimately, the question on the table is, do we believe in anything? Anything other than getting elected and winning political power, that is?
Bill speaks of us holding “as fundamental the core principles of Free Markets and Individual Liberty with Personal Responsibility.” That sounds good, although not nearly as good, as encompassing, or as specific as the Non-Aggression Principle embodied in our pledge. But if we’re not going to stand by what we claim to stand for, it doesn’t really matter what it says in our platform — it’s just empty words, like the platforms of the Republicans and Democrats.
You simply cannot square the concepts of “free markets and individual liberty with personal responsibility” with a policy that restricts peaceful people from becoming American citizens.
So Bill, what do you stand for? Unequivocal support of the free markets, individual liberty, and personal responsibility that you claim should be our “fundamental” “core principles?” Or non-criticism of LP candidates who take positions that are incompatible with those ideals?