It is most certainly force. I don't remember ever signing a pledge in 1985 when I joined. They just wanted my $25.00 and wanted me as a delegate to the State LP Convention to vote for their slate of candidates.
If they had tried to force me to sign a pledge, I would have never joined the LP. --- In [email protected], "Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The LP has never forced anyone to do anything. Having a requirement > to sign a pledge in order to join the party is most certainly not > force. One can refuse to sign and not join the party. If your > personal beliefs are against the pledge, it's better for everyone if > you do not join. > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "steven linnabary" > <linnabary51@> wrote: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Eric Dondero Rittberg" <ericdondero@> > > > > > Yeah, sooo. What is your point. > > > > > > Are you saying that you want to force everyone in the libertarian > > > movement to sign some silly pledge and worship at the alter or > > > gravestone of Murray Rothbard? > > > > > > > That would be ironic, to say the least, to "force" somebody to sign > a pledge > > against use of force!! > > > > And I knew Murray and considered him to be a friend of mine. But we > did not > > agree on everything. Most notably his counterproductive romance > with the > > republican party. > > > > > If the "fiscally conservative/socially tolerant" moniker were so > > > meaningless, than why is it that the Libertarian Party itself > > > invented the phrase in the 1980s? I remember LP bumper stickers > > > saying precisely that. My favorite one of all time: "Vote > > > Libertarian; We're Pro-Choice on Everything." > > > > > > > That slogan was great when it is applied to the LP and it's > candidates, and > > when voters understand that. It becomes meaningless when Kerry can > use it > > against Bush. > > > > As an aside, I ran for Columbus School Board back in '99. I wrote a > great > > libertarian speech that EVERYONE commented on and seemingly agreed with. > > Indeed, before the end of the campaign, EVERY opponent (there were 16 > > candidates) was stealing bits and pieces of it! But the best came the > > following year when the republican candidate for OH School Board used my > > entire speech, word for word, and got elected. I even voted for him > > (something about plagiarism being the greatest compliment). The > problem was > > that while my speech was very good from a libertarian perspective, Mr. > > Cochran turned out to be one of those Christian fundamentalists that > wanted > > to (and did, for a time) force "intelligent design" curricula into Ohio > > schools. > > > > In short, a slogan must be palatable to the voting public without being > > suseptible to being hijacked. > > > > And further, I don't think the "We're Pro-Choice on Everything" is > very good > > outside an LP convention hall. > > > > > Didn't say: "Vote Libertarian: We want to Abolish Government." > > > > > That slogan shouldn't be used outside a militia meeting. > > > > > I was attracted to the LP precisely because the Party was basically > > > Conservatives who were Pro-Choice, not becuase I wanted to abolish > > > government. > > > > > > > > I have NEVER referred to myself as "conservative", though friends and > > detractors have! The LP is a lot more than just "pot smoking > republicans". > > > > PEACE > > Steven R. Linnabary, Treasurer > > Franklin County Libertarian Party > > (614) 891-8841 > > P.O.Box#115; Blacklick, OH 43004-0115 > > > > "When you make peaceful revolution impossible, you make violent > revolution > > inevitable" John F. Kennedy > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "steven linnabary" > > > <linnabary51@> wrote: > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Eric Dondero Rittberg" <ericdondero@> > > > > > > > > But Steven, that is precisely the point. > > > > > > > > What are the principles? > > > > > > > > You say allegiance to some pledge hoisted upon the LP in the 1970s > > > by > > > > Rothbard, Raimondo and the Radical Caucus. > > > > > > > > I say, a basic belief in "fiscaly conservatism and social > > > tolerance." > > > > > > > > Nobody owns the term "libertarian." > > > > > > > > ### > > > > > > > > You are of course correct that nobody owns the label > > > of "libertarian". And > > > > everybody so it seems wants to be associated with libertarian > > > ideals, such > > > > as Bill Clinton's claim of being libertarian. There is even a > > > socialistic > > > > democrat (I know that is redundant) in California that is running > > > as a > > > > "libertarian democrat". Weird. > > > > > > > > Likewise, nobody "owns" the democrat or republican moniker. > > > Afterall, there > > > > is absolutely nothing democratic about the democrat party. And the > > > > republicans have to share names and ideals with such groups as > > > Irish > > > > Republican Army and the Iraq Republican Guard. > > > > > > > > And the "fiscal conservative and social tolerance" belief is > > > meaningless > > > > when you consider that Kerry could be argued to be more fiscally > > > > conservative and socially tolerant than Bush. > > > > > > > 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/
