Quoth Jon:

-----
It amazes me how some members of this list cling to the proposition
that the deletion of most of the Platform was an act of deliberation.
-----

There are two possible explanations for the deletion of most of the
platform:

1) The deletion of most of the platform represented the clearly
expressed intent of the majority of delegates; or

2) Some large portion of the delegates failed to discharge their
responsibilities AS delegates.

Your explanation indicates that it was the latter:

-----
Conference organizers neglected to print copies of the Platform and
distribute them with the conference packet. ... Attendees weren't
going to vote for what they didn't have in writing in their hands.
-----

I'm about to engage in some reasonable speculation here. If you find
any of the factual assertions I'm about to make unreasonable, I guess
I'll have to research the delegate lists to prove or disprove them.

1. I assert that most of the delegates to the national convention were
not new members of the LP who had never seen the platform.

2. I assert that a large percentage, and perhaps a majority, of the
delegates to the national convention were not first-time delegates,
and had in fact, to varying degrees, helped craft, and ratified the
planks of, the platform in PREVIOUS conventions.

3. I assert that a large percentage, and perhaps a majority, of the
delegates to the national convention were people who have run for
public office on the Libertarian ballot line before and/or worked on
the campaigns of candidates running for public office on the
Libertarian ballot line, and/or held leadership positions in their
local or state LPs or in the national organization -- people, in other
words, who have had to know the platform (if for no other reason to
defend themselves against the attacks based on it that the LRC loves
to yell about).

I have to conclude that the idea that this particular group of people
voted to delete sections of the platform -- a platform which they had
CREATED, AMENDED and REPEATEDLY RATIFIED over a number of previous
national conventions (I am absolutely certain that some of the
delegates there have been delegates to every, or nearly every,
national convention since 1972) -- because they didn't know what was
in there, is absurd.

I just don't find it believable that someone who was willing to spend
hundreds, perhaps thousands, of dollars to get to Portland, rent a
hotel room, etc., in order to participate in the convention would
think of "I didn't get a free copy of the platform printed at the
party's expense" as a reason to tear down 34 years of their own
parliamentary work.

In fact, if that was a factor at all, I think it would go the other
way: "I don't have the platform in front of me, but I know that it has
been built over the course of 16 previous national conventions, some
of which I participated in myself. Without the text in front of me, I
am not going to just start ripping into it -- I'd rather leave it as
it is than change it without knowing for certain the nature and impact
of the changes I'd be making."

Or a third way: "Bill, you have your laptop, right? Could you get
online, pull up the platform and print out a few copies so that our
delegation can see what it is we're voting on here?"

Now, I agree with you that there was not some secret, evil conspiracy
responsible for what happened. One of the factions involved was quite
up-front about what they wanted to do (and they got some of it done,
and didn't get some of it done). Others agree with them on some
things, disagreed with them on others, etc. No secret, evil conspiracy
was necessary (there may have been one or more, but I don't see any
real evidence of that in this particular case).

My conclusion is that the majority of delegates expressed their REAL
preferences in an imperfect but workable parliamentary environment.
Where individual or factional preferences coincided to produce
majorities for deletion, planks were deleted. Where individual or
factional preferences coincided to produce majorities for retention,
planks were retained. Yes, it came out looking like a mess to a lot of
us, but that often happens in parliamentary actions.

Regards,
Tom Knapp






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