Skip to main content

Introducing The New and Improved NeoConTarian Party (tm)

It didn't take the righties who have co-opted control of the Libertarian National Committee from laying out their new agenda for the Libertarian Party, and it's headed exactly where centrists and radicals alike have been warning -- neocon talking points.

Go here and read the new LP Birthday Agenda from Bill Redpath. I'll wait for you.

The list Redpath produces looks like something from FreedomWorks -- a right-wing Republican think tank headed up by former congressman Dick Armey (where can I sign up?!?). It's all about phoney "free markets" (which haven't existed in this country for almost 100 years), some swipes at the UAW (with no swipes at AIG or other companies who have received handouts several orders of magnitude larger than the UAW has demanded in its history.

Also informative and interesting is what is missing.

The leader of the party founded largely in opposition to the Vietnam War will not oppose foreign wars of occupation. This is not a surprise -- Aaron Starr and others on the LNC who pushed Ms. Keaton out the door are outspoken proponents of foreign military interventionism. Keaton's involvement in AntiWar.com, not her free-spirited banter, were the real "unacceptable situation" to these jokers.

The leader of the party founded largely in defense of individual liberties cannot even be bothered to put in a single line about civil liberties, opposing the USA PATRIOT Act, stopping warrantless wiretaps, halting unreasonable searches and seizures motivated by race, defending the rights of individuals to speak out against the government, nor eliminating the abuse of secrecy laws.

On your individual rights, the chairman of the Libertarian Party couldn't be bothered to comment on a commitment by his National Committee to work towards the repeal of anti-gay laws, racial preference/discriminatory laws, an end to the War on Some Drugs, an end to the War on Sexual Liberties (howdy Starchild) or even hint at them.

As a national board member of perhaps the largest and most active Libertarian Party organization outside of the party structure itself, Outright Libertarians, I'm utterly mystified to see the degree to which -- despite netting positive press and fighting off the media hounds for these jokers -- our issues have been completely and utterly ignored.

I personally won't be making THAT mistake again.

I hate to say I Told You So, but, as in the Ron Paul newsletters and countless other bizarre Libertarian "close your eyes and WISH and we'll magically win" episodes, this latest incarnation of the LP is not only completely undifferentiated and boring, but it's not going to succeed. Angry white guys who hate gays and want lower taxes have the GOP. People concerned about vanishing liberties typically value ALL of them, not "just" the economic ones. And the vast majority of non-voters who represent our biggest opportunity for growth tend to be neither white nor male.

The New LP that the Glorious Organization of Republican Ex-members seeks to create is nothing more than the Republican Party with a couple of twists -- half the IQ points and twice the waistline.

It's your party. Do something about it now (and in 2010). I'm not going to anymore, I'm tired of shouting myself hoarse.

Comments

Bowly said…
"with no swipes at AIG or other companies who have received handouts several orders of magnitude larger than the UAW has demanded in its history"

They must have changed it, then, because the first item on the list now is "The Libertarian Party will never use your money to bailout private corporations".
Bowly said…
I'm with you on the heart of your argument, though.

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 — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...