Sorry Jim, the last part was not meant for you, The " you' was meant as a general statement to those who say the LP is holding them back.-- - In [email protected], Jim Syler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Mar 27, 2006, at 11:43 PM, terry12622000 wrote: > > > I'm not so worried about regular members but yes those that run for > > political office or hold office in the LP even as a county chair need > > to follow the party line or get out, > > I thought the "party line" was defined by the party members? > > It constantly amazes me that libertarians, who profess a deep belief in > intellectual freedom, allow absolutely NONE of it in organizations they > control, or would like to control. > > > plain and simple, get out of the > > party, go where you are welcomed, > > And...where would that be? > > > the LP still can work with you on > > some issues maybe most issues but you clearly do not belong in the > > LP. It is best to keep a check on politicans because they will have > > power if they win, power that can easily be abused, if no other party > > is willing to tell their politicans that they are the hired help of > > the people not the boss the LP must be the party to do it. If you are > > running for office and you can't deal with that then get out of the > > LP, run with another party, run as an indepedent, don't let the LP > > stop you. > > > You say you know how to get votes then stop talking about > > it and blaming the LP, do it. > > I never said any such damn thing. > > j > > > --- In [email protected], Jim > > Syler <Calion@> wrote: > >> > >> On Mar 27, 2006, at 6:15 PM, mark robert wrote: > >> > >>> Elitism, dogmatism, oppression and terror are things Libertarians > >>> are fighting against. Curious how you twist that around to mean > >>> if they fight those things too well, they become them. > >> > >> I'm confused by this sentence. Are you claiming that the purists > > are > >> not elitist, dogmatic, and as far as membership (or leadership) in > > the > >> LP is concerned, oppressive? > >> > >>> While it might be true that Libertarianism will never become > >>> universal, that is no reason to compromise the philosophy. BTW, > >>> Libertarians do not exclude votes from "impure" Libertarians. > >> > >> Don't they? Don't they, by loudly proclaiming that "you're not one > > of > >> us" if you don't agree with the purists 100% of the time on 100% of > > the > >> issues, effectively do just that? > >> > >>> It is true that one has to separate reality from principle, but > >>> in a reverse fashion from your inclination. Allow the purist to > >>> be the movers. Don't criticize them for being too idealistic, > >>> especially when you agree with their principles. Don't blame them > >>> for the status quo or the ignorance of others. Instead, respect > >>> the movers for their goals. If you blame them for the fact that > >>> their goals are less than met, you reason circular. There will > >>> always be plenty who will compromise; you do not have to promote > >>> it for it to happen; the "the goal of compromise" is not only NOT > >>> a respectable goal, it is an oxymoron. > >> > >> This idea doesn't bother me. Only rarely have I heard anyone of a > >> moderate libertarian bent suggest purging the "purists" from the > > party, > >> and that only because of frustration because of the constant push > > by > >> the purists to get everyone else out of the Party, or at least the > >> leadership. > >> > >> Which is the point, and the problem. If we could all work together > >> toward liberty, using the "libertarian train" metaphor, that would > > be > >> great. But that's not how it works. The purists (admittedly, not > > all of > >> them, but I don't hear the ones that don't chastising the ones who > > do) > >> do everything within their power to move all others out of the > > Party, > >> by ridicule, by condemnation, by calling them "not libertarians," > > by > >> loudly trying to exclude them from leadership positions, from > > trying to > >> stymie every move in any direction if they are in leadership > > positions, > >> ad nauseam. > >> > >> I would love to work together. I really would. There have been > > those > >> NAPsters (Ken Prazak comes to mind) that I respect immensely, for > > their > >> honesty, their dedication, and their contributions to liberty. But > > as > >> long as they don't believe that moderates like me belong in the > > Party > >> or its leadership, working together is impossible. > >> > >> j > >> > >> -- > >> "I used to think romantic love was a neurosis shared by two, a > > supreme > >> foolishness. I no longer think that. There's nothing foolish in > > loving > >> anyone. Thinking you'll be loved in return is what's foolish." > >> --Rita Mae Brown > >> > >> > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - -- > "Question Authority and the Authorities will question You" > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Darwin) > Comment: Protect your email! Download PGP at <http://www.pgpi.org/download/>. > > iD8DBQFEKWHfu57Eduk011URAiTWAKCBMwWtDZhxKhGPD3hf3p+F5d9DzQCfWZD2 > WsxYYNrI0Qzy4BxX1RCfyQQ= > =PWLT > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
