Skip to main content

Thinking Differently About The Libertarian National Committee

Much has been made of the pending railroading of Angela Keaton (and the likely ascent of M Carling and Alicia Mattson into LNC seats they couldn't win through the popular vote process).

Much has been made of the dodgy alleged LNC financial statements leaked through other web sites.

Yes, this Brigade of Buffoons targeting Keaton (a friend of mine) is a group of morons. Yes, they are incompetent. And yes, they couldn't find an electoral victory if you handcuffed it to their right arms.

Which is why I am going to ask each Libertarian to Think Differently (with apologies to Apple) for a moment.

In what areas is the LNC truly instrumental?

What things would cease to happen if the LNC was to shrivel up and die? (Besides all the negative and time-wasting stuff that's been its hallmark for years now).

I asked myself these questions and the answer came back as a stark "nothing."

Ballot access is easily achieved through well-funded PACs with the intention of nothing more than ballot access. George Phillies' Liberty Ballot Access PAC has been a great resource, and, absent the giant sucking sound of the LNC, would probably be able to get us on 49, perhaps 50 state ballots, rather than the paltry 45 we ended up with.

The Watergate Building would lose a tenant, but then again, with no elected representatives in DC, why does the LP need an expensive DC office?

And the job of public and media relations have been abandoned to the grass roots (who do a better job than the paid staff). Outright Libertarians, of which I am a board member, got mention of local, state and federal LP campaigns in a host of local LGBT news sources, the primary national LGBT news magazine, and radio and television talk shows including Sirius Radio and CBS. The LNC itself was absent on gay issues in the election.

Angela Keaton and her AntiWar.com colleagues attracted huge amounts of media support and coverage on the war, while the LNC sat and did nothing.

Downsize DC and the Independent Institute targeted government waste, even as the LNC created bureaucratic waste of its own.

The Munger campaign generated tremendous coverage and awareness in North Carolina without a peep of support from the LNC.

In fact, the LNC had NO meaningful media strategy this year.

(Well, to be fair, the national office did get a YouTube video featuring the chair of our national party being interviewed by a guy in a bunny suit).

So by my count, the LNC has failed in every facet of its mission. In a true free market, it would go out of business and disappear. And that's the course of action I recommend.

The future of the Libertarian Party will be built in places like Dover, Wilmington, Newark, Philadelphia, West Chester, North Carolina.

The LNC can continue to cast out popularly supported members, and put its own inner circle of Starr-chamber sycophants (and "licensed parliamentarians") into office.

It's already irrelevant.

The sooner we acknowledge that fact and get on with the business of liberty in our own backyards, the sooner we can build something meaningful and long-lasting as a movement.

Some intriguing new possibilities are already on the horizon, and I will blog more about them as the LNC continues to self-immolate.

Comments

Ross Levin said…
Great post. From the minute I knew what the LNC was, I knew there was no point to it. It only makes the LP look bad by being petty and full of itself (on the whole).
Brian Miller said…
I didn't stumble on this idea by design... actually, it was one of my radical counterparts in the LP telling me that "if this continues, the LNC could go out of business -- and think of what would happen!"

At which point I sorta stammered "ummm... well, what *would* happen?"

Sorta stunned her to think it through as well. ;)

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...