This is an old question, but one that needs to be periodically revisited.
The Dallas Accord, a compromise between anarchists and minarchists, to
allow both to work together within the Libertarian Party (LP), also
needs to be revisited.
While I find many if not most anarchists charming people, socially, with
whom I enjoy debating principles, I also find that they really don't
belong in the LP, or any other party, and wonder why they participate.
Their presence in the LP is the main factor that holds it back from
being more successful in elections. LP candidates would get more votes
without them. While one always wants to maximize the numbers of the
members of a political movement if those members are assets, it is an
illusion that strength is found in adding liabilities.
I repeatedly ask anarchists, "Why do you support candidates for
governmental positions, and not just 'none of the above' for all
offices?" To support a candidate other than 'none of the above" for any
office is to accept the legitimacy of the duties of that office, and
therefore of the constitution of government that defines that office.
Indeed, it would seem to be incompatible with an anarchist position to
accept voting itself and to participate in it, because every election or
referendum is an exercise in mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon.
I respectfully suggest that all anarchists leave the Libertarian Party,
and not form another, but just join the ranks of those who don't vote or
participate in the political process. We can still meet over a beer once
in a while, and have a good debate, but there are two conflicting
concepts of society involved, and only one of them belongs in a
political party:
Anarchists want to believe that it is possible and desirable to
reduce coercion to zero. A society is regarded as a truce, with no
duty of mutual protection.
Constitutionalists recognize that the goal is to protect rights and
reduce the restriction of them, and that to do that a society must
seek an optimum level of coercion, mutually agreed upon, that
balances the conflicts of rights that inevitably arise in social and
economic interaction, and that protect members from threats,
especially predators, whether foreign or domestic. A society is
regarded as a mutual defense pact, with duties as well as benefits.
Anarchist positions and statements are a turn-off to the vast majority
of people, who regard such as either hopelessly naïve, misguided, or
even dangerous. They have a constitutionalist view of society, even if
not always a constitutionalist commitment to limited government. We need
to decide whether to include persons that make us look like kooks to
most of those whose votes we seek.
-- Jon
----------------------------------------------------------------
Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757
512/299-5001 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------
