[Lnc-business] Enough pussyfooting. Time for a fearless platform.
Joshua Katz
planning4liberty at gmail.com
Tue Jan 3 11:36:40 EST 2017
Finally, someone gets it.
Joshua A. Katz
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Daniel Hayes <danielehayes at icloud.com>
wrote:
> I like fried Bologna sandwiches on Bunny brand Plantation loaf white bread
> with yellow mustard.
>
>
>
> Daniel Hayes
> LNC At Large Member
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 8:21 AM, David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
> wrote:
>
> Has anyone tried to figure out why this acrimonious discussion continues
> to go in circles? Has either side moved beyond the “what” of their
> arguments to the “why” of how their principles can be scientifically tied
> to human behavior?
>
>
>
> For example, have we stopped to consider why Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand”
> theory has been so widely accepted? Was that acceptance due to Smith’s
> ability to connect the success of free-markets to human behavior? Have we
> seriously considered the implications of Smith’s contention that free
> market success is due to the “unintended consequence of *everyone acting
> in their self-interest in competition for scarce resources*”? Did Ludwig
> von Mises capture the wisdom of Adam Smith when he coined the term
> “Praxeology”, the *science of human decision making* as the central tenet
> of Austrian Economics?
>
>
>
> Can Smith’s wisdom be extended to all human interactions when we examine
> human behavior in the light of the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP)? Have we
> fallen into the trap of putting the cart before the horse by focusing
> exclusively on the “what” of how we apply the NAP to specific actions? Do
> we first need to follow Smith’s successful example by *scientifically
> tying the NAP to human behavior*?
>
>
>
> Will we continue these fruitless arguments or will we work smarter not
> harder by taking a step back and examine the “why” behind our
> disagreements? Who is going to be the next Adam Smith or Ludwig von Mises
> among us to break this impasse by doing the necessary deep-dive root-cause
> analysis to determine to how the NAP can be scientifically tied to *genetically
> inherent human behavior*?
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
> Region 6 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (IA, IL, MN, MO,
> ND, NE, WI)
>
>
>
> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org
> <lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org>] *On Behalf Of *Caryn Ann Harlos
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 03, 2017 7:19 AM
> *To:* Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>
> *Cc:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Enough pussyfooting. Time for a fearless
> platform.
>
>
>
> Starchild I am not sure where you are thinking we don't.
>
>
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 6:15 AM Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Words and containers may not be magical, but they are not uniform either,
> and for good reason – some containers are better suited to certain purposes
> than others. Of course there is a learning curve. With most of us there is
> a learning curve for libertarianism in general. But it will take longer for
> people to get up that curve if we don't share our insights. When we
> recognize that particular language we are using is reinforcing the
> dominance of the violence-based State, and that alternative phrasing is
> available, we should be bold enough to adopt new terms and get out in front
> in terms of helping shift a harmful paradigm, wouldn't you agree?
>
>
>
> Love & Liberty,
>
> ((( starchild )))
>
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> (415) 625-FREE
>
> @StarchildSF
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 4:36 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
>
>
> I had this discussion yesterday with former Chair Dasbach who brought up
> your same point very well.
>
>
>
> But there is a learning curve so terminology *communicates*
>
>
>
> Words aren't magical - they are mere containers for meaning.
>
>
>
> As long as our containers are understood, we are doing our job.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *In Liberty,*
>
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 5:32 AM Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> I'll say again that just as we shouldn't back away from libertarian ideas
> when they are unpopular, neither should we back away from better
> libertarian terminology just because it is not (yet) widespread. What I am
> describing are public schools that are not owned or operated by government,
> and that is completely consistent with the Separation of School and State.
> The fact that most people may still refer to them as "private" schools –
> terminology that has served to make people more accepting of the State as
> supposedly acting on behalf of the public – shouldn't stop us from using a
> more appropriate description, again so long as we provide the context to
> ensure that people generally understand what we mean.
>
>
>
> Love & Liberty,
>
> ((( starchild )))
>
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> (415) 625-FREE
>
> @StarchildSF
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 2, 2017, at 12:31 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
>
>
> Starchild then what you are describing is privately owned schools serving
> the public.
>
>
>
> And that is not what anyone means generally.
>
>
>
> But what we favour is the complete separation of education and state- at
> least under the Statement of Principles.
>
>
>
> But put that aside - and put aside the education plank - there is this
> plank which leaves no place for public schools
>
>
>
> The protection of individual rights is the only proper purpose of
> government
>
>
>
> --
>
> *In Liberty,*
>
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:14 AM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Starchild - I love that wording on the Dallas Accord.
>
>
>
> But as I like to point out, because some re-writing of history has
> occurred, it isn't merely the Dallas Accord which some people are claiming
> is dead, it is the Statement of Principles which formalized the Dallas
> Accord at least in part. Thus anyone claiming the Dallas Accord is dead is
> completely contrary to our Bylaws.
>
>
>
> The myth of the complete informality of the Accord must die in a fire. It
> is untrue.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *In Liberty,*
>
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 1:04 AM Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> Sam,
>
>
>
> That language would be contrary to the Dallas Accord agreement that
> we should leave our wording open as to whether our ultimate goal is
> non-aggressive government, or no government at all.
>
>
>
> Love & Liberty,
>
> ((( starchild )))
>
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> (415) 625-FREE
>
> @StarchildSF
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>
> From: Sam Goldstein
>
>
> Sent: Jan 1, 2017 12:53 PM
>
>
> To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
>
> Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Enough pussyfooting. Time for a fearless
> platform.
>
>
>
>
> I will suggested my 2004 platform revision that I presented
>
> at the Platform Committee meeting prior to the Atlanta
>
> Convention:
>
>
>
> Replace the entire platform with two sentences:
>
>
>
> We don't like government. Let's get rid of it.
>
>
>
> Sam
>
>
> Sam Goldstein
>
> Libertarian National Committee
>
> Member at Large
>
> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
>
> Indianapolis IN 46260
>
> 317-850-0726 <(317)%20850-0726> Phone
>
> 317-582-1773 <(317)%20582-1773> Fax
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> AMEN!!'
>
>
>
> I make the same commitment as Arvin.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 1:36 PM Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Agreed.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Arvin Vohra <votevohra at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If 2016 showed us one thing, it's that timid positions are neither
> necessary nor effective in current politics.
>
>
>
> Our current platform is designed to technically be accurate, while not
> scaring anyone too badly. This is a losing proposition. A clear, inspiring,
> and immediately comprehensible platform is far better than the fine-print
> pretending to be marketing we have now.
>
>
>
> Take the education plank, for example:
>
> Education is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality,
> accountability and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Recognizing
> that the education of children is a parental responsibility, we would
> restore authority to parents to determine the education of their children,
> without interference from government. Parents should have control of and
> responsibility for all funds expended for their children’s education.
>
>
> What it means: Eliminate all public schools. Let people choose between
> free, world-class, online offerings, homeschooling, and private education
> in any form.
>
>
>
> Intransigent supporters of public schools won't be fooled by the current
> obfuscation. Opponents and potential opponents won't be inspired.
>
> Our job is to convince people of our positions, not to mask our positions
> and pander. In order for people to be able to be convinced of our
> positions, they first must understand what the position is.
>
>
>
> I intend to support people for platform committee who will commit to an
> honest, comprehensible, fearless platform.
>
>
>
> In Liberty,
>
>
>
> Arvin Vohra
>
> Vice Chair
>
> Libertarian National Committee
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Arvin Vohra
>
> www.VoteVohra.com
> VoteVohra at gmail.com
> (301) 320-3634
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> Lnc-business mailing list
>
>
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
>
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Lnc-business mailing list
>
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> Lnc-business mailing list
>
>
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
>
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Lnc-business mailing list
>
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <Untitled attachment 00927.txt>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170103/30c1dd92/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list