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 — ...

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 ...