[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> > >I like it too. Although ANY tax is an infringement of the rights
> > of liberty and property.
> > >
> > >
> > Which means that this new oath would prohibit all taxation.
>
> Yes which is why it is better although still ambiguous in some 
> aspects. But, we can not quite get to a libertarian society yet. There 
> is an inertia to society. So far ours is towards more government power 
> and less power to individuals. We would need to move society in small 
> steps to keep it from breaking. (Consider a car that stops very quick 
> and there are no seat belts in use.) Movement must be done with care 
> and with caution. The oath should reflect this in some way.


Glad to see you think Libertopia is not attainable immediately.  It's 
helpful to have shared premises when discussing a topic.  I also believe 
Libertopia is not attainable immediately.  (I should live so long that 
it becomes a practical question.)

Given that the vast majority of those who want to see government get 
smaller and more decentralized do not think Libertopia is attainable at 
all, do you think it is practical for a political party that wants to 
reduce and decentralize government as much as possible to insist that 
its members see Libertopia as a requirement?  In other words, should the 
LP even have an oath requirement which excludes everyone who is not an 
anarchist?

If the answer to that is "yes", what political party should those who 
want smaller government support, if they are not anarchists?  The 
Democrats and Republicans deliver the exact opposite after all, and just 
about every other political party -- Green, Communist, Reform, etc. -- 
would make government larger, if they could get elected.  Those 
non-anarchists shouldn't join or support the Libertarian Party, 
obviously, if the oath remains.

Libertarians wouldn't mind if a new political party were to form for 
those people, right?

This could be an important question, because if the oath is written in 
clearer language and clearly excludes non-anarchists as some insist it 
should, there may be quite a few on the LP's convention floor this 
summer who suddenly discover they need a different political party.  
(Which is why some people would rather the oath remain unclear, IMO.)

Of course, the same situation occurs -- but with different people -- if 
the oath is rewritten so that it clearly does not exclude 
non-anarchists.  (Which is why some people would rather the oath remain 
unclear, IMO.)   -Eric

-- 
Eric S. Harris

If this address ever fails, try visiting http://www.returnpath.net






------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Great things are happening at Yahoo! Groups.  See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/yHUd1C/hOaOAA/cUmLAA/KlSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

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/
 


Reply via email to