[Lnc-business] Decentralization and Deinstitutionalization (was Re: Jul Membership Report)

Caryn Ann Harlos carynannharlos at gmail.com
Sat Aug 12 13:18:42 EDT 2017


Starchild,

I think David's plan is more suited to that.  A political party is a
specific organ- to work in the political arena.  Part of our problem is the
extremes.  Some who act as if winning in name only is success - principles
are nice but disposable (when I say Principles I mean that with a capital
P- our Party principles which we know- those who disagree are not
unprincipled - but they stop short of the Principles) and the other extreme
that actual political action is unnecessary and a Principled win would be
dirty.

The Party was founded on neither extreme.  Fortunately the delegates saw
through the (in my opinion) attempt by one extreme to insert a lopsided
mission in contravention to the existing purposes.

But the other extreme - that the "political" part is completely tangential
and should not be upfront and part of a dual prong is also foreign.

The pendulum tends to go back and forth - and it would be healthy if it
just stopped in dead center.  So much useless fighting and division.  I
think in CO we've achieved a very good balance of that and what happens is
that both extremes vanish.  Everyone has a place and voice and not at the
expense or bullying of another - which sadly occurs way too much in our
community.

I think if we stuck to that founding grounding balance we would change the
world.

-Caryn Ann


On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 3:50 AM Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> David,
>
> Yes. I believe our energy is better spent focusing on trying to do what is
> right in bringing about libertarian change, than on the bean-counting
> approach of trying to monitor metrics to measure success. If we are
> inspiring people by challenging the status quo and communicating the
> libertarian message in a bold, inspirational way, I believe the supporters,
> money, and votes will follow. Our natural constituency wants to see that we
> are fighting *for freedom*, *not* *for our organization to become bigger
> and wealthier*.
>
> I also think Joshua is right about the trope of younger people not being
> "joiners" as much. And I think that is actually a *healthy reaction* on
> their part to the excessive power of institutions in society – governments
> being the biggest and worst offenders, but other institutions also
> contributing to the manipulation and disempowerment of individuals, in part
> by allying themselves with governments and contributing to a tightening
> overall web of control.
>
> A short New York Times piece from 2012 summarizes the trend of decline in
> trust in institutions in this country:
>
>
> https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/losing-faith-in-american-institutions/
>
> So why is this good? What's wrong with big institutions from a libertarian
> perspective? A page on the website *mutualist.org <http://mutualist.org> *offers
> some rough notes on a "working outline" of organizational behavior (
> http://members.tripod.com/kevin_carson/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/organizationaltheoryoutline.pdf),
> and describes some effects on this behavior under the heading "Systemic
> effects of (State) intervention":
>
> *...subsidies to centralized technology make **decentralized,
> non-professionalized, individually controlled technology less useable **(e.g.,
> transportation subsidies, by expanding distance, make feet, bikes, etc.,
> less **useable; subsidies to costly, high tech medicine, cartel
> "standards of practice" **centering on such costly methods, make even
> basic medical care unaffordable for **many; "safety" code restrictions
> against self-built or unconventional housing, **aesthetic restrictions on
> trailers, etc., increase dependence on expensive housing). **Lower-cost,
> human-scale alternatives are crowded out. It becomes less and less **possible
> to translate one's own labor and skills, one's own common-sense **understanding,
> into use-value. Paul Goodman on the increasing impossibility of **decent
> poverty; the cost of basic subsistence is driven upward. *
>
>
> *"Paul Goodman [on the] "crowding out" of decentralist alternatives,
> described in People or Personnel. The organizational culture of the large
> corporation and large government agency becomes the hegemonic norm; it
> contaminates even non-profit and cooperative enterprises: inflated
> management staff, excessive professionalization and credentialing, prestige
> salaries, management theory jargon (mission statements, ad nauseam...),
> etc. Duggar on "hollowing out" of civil society." *
>
>
> In the face of such ancillary effects of statism, a couple important
> questions for libertarian groups like the LP are:
>
> (1) What can we do to decentralize power in society, to carve out space
> for decentralized forms of organization that empower people to live more
> cooperatively outside the reach of the State and other large institutions
> infected by its authoritarian culture; and
>
> (2) What can we do to minimize the impact of this State-spawned
> organizational culture of the large corporation and large government agency
> within our own organization? (In other words how, in a climate of
> rightfully declining trust in institutions, can we become less of a
> conventional and untrustworthy institution ourselves?)
>
> Another essay on the mutualist.org site, "A 'Political' Program for
> Anarchists" penned in 2002 by Kevin Carson (
> http://www.mutualist.org/id5.html) quotes the LP's own Karl Hess among
> others and discusses why anarchists *should* participate in the political
> process, though as a secondary strategy to building non-statist social
> infrastructure at the grassroots level (in line with party co-founder David
> Nolan's vision for the LP, which he saw as mostly about exposing people to
> libertarian ideas and only incidentally about winning elections). Carson
> recommends the approach of "broad-based, ad hoc coalitions, formed on an
> issue-by-issue basis":
>
> *"The Internet has opened up exhilirating possibilities for forms of
> opposition based on large, decentralized associations of affinity groups.
> The potential for such organization is alarming to those in power. A 1998
> Rand study by David Ronfeldt (The Zapatists "Social Netwar" in Mexico,
> MR-994-A) warned that internet-based coalitions like the pro-Zapatista
> support network could overwhelm the government with popular demands and
> render society 'ungovernable.'... Such forms of organization make it
> possible to throw together ad hoc coalitions of thousands of affinity
> groups in a very short time; they can organize mass demonstrations, issue
> press releases in thousands of venues, and "swarm" the government and press
> with mass mailings, phone calls and emails. This resembles the 'excess of
> democracy' and 'crisis of governability' that Samuel Huntington warned of
> in the 1970s – but an order of magnitude beyond anything he could have
> imagined then."*
>
>
> Instead of primarily seeking to bring about change using our own (the
> LP's) activists and resources, the party might take on more of a role as a
> kind of coordinating agency within the freedom movement, seeking to
> mobilize large coalitions of many organizations around specific issues. A
> kind of rapid-response network capable of reacting to and mobilizing
> against the most significant moves in the direction of tyranny and
> supporting/amplifying mass movements that arise to challenge State
> policies, so that, as Carson puts it, *"Every time the State puts in its
> toe to test the water, it needs to be badly scalded by public opinion."*
>
> Love & Liberty,
>
>                                   ((( starchild )))
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>                         RealReform at earthlink.net
>                                 (415) 625-FREE
>                                   @StarchildSF
>
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2017, at 8:54 AM, David Demarest wrote:
>
> I tend to agree Joshua's point that national membership is important but
> is far from being the best measure of LP/LNC success. I can think of at
> least 10 metrics listed below, many of which admittedly would be difficult
> to measure, but nevertheless are more important than electoral, voter
> registration and membership success.
>
> In the mad rush toward party empire building, let's not forget that the
> real LP mission is to reduce the size of government in order to achieve the
> fundamental Libertarian goal of freedom, nothing more, nothing less.
>
> 1. Empowered LP/LNC member non-institutional projects
> 2. Social services moved back into private sector
> 3. Regulatory reform successes
> 4. Entitlement expenditure reductions
> 5. Tax/GDP ratio reductions
> 6. Cash-basis healthcare clinic increases
> 7. Entitlement expenditure reductions
> 8. Non-violent offense incarceration reductions
> 9. Free-market education institution increases
> 10. Non-defensive foreign and domestic military base and expenditure
> reductions
>
> Thoughts?
>
> On Aug 11, 2017 10:55 AM, "Daniel Hayes" <danielehayes at icloud.com> wrote:
>
>> Patrick,
>>
>> I am amused that I JUST got this from the NAP(National Association of
>> Parliamentarians).
>>
>> <image2.JPG>
>>
>> Daniel Hayes
>> LNC At Large Member
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 9:38 AM, Daniel Hayes <danielehayes at icloud.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Caryn Ann,
>>
>> Either Patrick or George Phillies brought this up on the ASC call last
>> night.  I said many of the same things you did Caryn Ann. I brought up two
>> people's name from this board as being particularly focused on this. Guess
>> which two? It was suggested I not be so defensive.  Like you, maybe I see
>> and know more of what's going on.  Just yesterday while I was trying to
>> prep for two conference calls, to my ADHD chagrin, Robert, gave me the
>> first TEST access to Raiser's Edge. You and I both have our own
>> personalized donation links.
>> David pointed out that more Libertarians outside of the board need to
>> look in the mirror and take responsibility. I agree, but I think this board
>> needs to set the example.   I think I declared a $5000 give or get to the
>> LNC which I have blown through.
>>
>> On a note, when I brought up the great work that Lauren is doing l, the
>> ASC agreed on that.
>>
>> It was brought up that there has been growth in membership following some
>> elections. I didn't ask the question of how much was being spent to gain
>> each of those members.  I know at some point in our history we were
>> spending $400/ member.
>>
>> I am not saying and don't think this is where Patrick is coming from, but
>> I KNOW a lot of this rhetoric is coming from people positioning themselves
>> for LNC runs. There is this inevitable thing that happens where everyone
>> screams about what an awful job the LNC is doing.  Guess what that probably
>> does?  Cuts into membership.
>> Instead of this tactic of saying how awful of a job we are doing, I wish
>> everyone instead would simply point out how they could do better. But J can
>> only control me.
>>
>> Another thing though. IF a state affiliate has grown but National has
>> slipped, who is that on? Do we want National competing with Affiliates for
>> the almighty $25?
>>
>> In any event I have about 3 reports I have to work on.  We can discuss
>> this at the meeting.
>>
>>
>> Daniel Hayes
>> LNC At Large Member
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Aug 11, 2017, at 8:21 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I think fundraising a much more important metric, and you raise excellent
>> points Joshua.  Would everyone be amenable to a roundtable on this topic?
>>
>> -Caryn Ann
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 7:19 AM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to add a suggestion here in a different direction.  Do we
>>> care?  This term, we have not adopted goals, but we did last term - and
>>> increasing or maintaining memberships wasn't on the list.  I'm not being
>>> sarcastic here, I'm being serious - maybe memberships is not a metric we
>>> find all that illuminating.  Sure, we need funds, and paid memberships are
>>> one way of obtaining funds, but only one way.  They're a way that
>>> non-profits, seemingly across the board, have found to be declining in
>>> importance and value.  Maybe that's part (I think most things that happen
>>> are over-determined and we should look for patterns, not 1-1 relationships)
>>> of what this declining number is telling us.
>>>
>>> I agree we should not simply expect a drop in support following the
>>> Presidential year.  A drop in paid memberships?  Maybe.  People have many
>>> reasons to become members, and if those are temporary reasons (attending
>>> convention, considering running for LNC) they might not renew when those
>>> reasons no longer apply.
>>>
>>> It's become a trope that "millennials don't join things."  If that's
>>> true, then we should start now to plan what our organization can look like
>>> in 10 years with a different model.  Personally, I think that regardless of
>>> what millennials do, we should be making those plans, because a membership
>>> model is a temporary solution, not one that will always be best once we've
>>> attained a certain size and level of success.
>>>
>>> I don't know that membership is a useful thing to watch while driving,
>>> so to speak.  I'm much more interested in races won, registered voters in
>>> places where that can happen, contested nominations, and similar markers.
>>> Those too are long-range indicators, though, and I suspect that the sorts
>>> of solutions we are likely to come up with regarding membership, will drive
>>> those as well.
>>>
>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Patrick McKnight <
>>> patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Caryn Ann,
>>>>
>>>> Being defensive and mischaracterizing my statements is also not helpful.
>>>>
>>>> I only need a few minutes to present my proposal.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Patrick McKnight
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 11, 2017 9:02 AM, "Caryn Ann Harlos" <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And here is another reason- to say no plans is simply not accurate.
>>>>> Perhaps I just see more of what is happening since I interact with staff
>>>>> more than usual and am on the APRC (which means I see every single piece of
>>>>> output).  The staff effort is amazing.  Lauren, Jess, and Andy are bringing
>>>>> us to a new level of professionalism and thus attractiveness.  There has
>>>>> been several years of branding and infrastructure building.  The press
>>>>> secretary position will add another dimension. Nurturing relationships with
>>>>> larger donors (we have to have funds to do anything) is from what I can see
>>>>> better than ever.
>>>>>
>>>>> You get much more support by realistically assessing what we are doing
>>>>> well, and what can be a lot better otherwise it is basically just scolding
>>>>> people and ignoring what we have done.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Larry would tell us that's not how to motivate to greatness.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some of the things done have been stunning.  Others not so much so.
>>>>>
>>>>> But a circular firing squad never does.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's come to the table with more ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> How long should we put on the Agenda Patrick?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:50 AM Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's not defensive- it's tired of talk and this same speech.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doing is better than talking.  I support your email idea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was wondering what everyone did since last meeting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yelling at the rest of the LNC isn't helpful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:46 AM Patrick McKnight <
>>>>>> patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jason,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's fantastic! Congratulations! Do you have some best practices
>>>>>>> you can share? NJ registered voters are also exploding, but we haven't been
>>>>>>> able to convert that into national memberships which is what's at issue.
>>>>>>> Have you also experienced that in Nevada?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Caryn Ann, thank you as always for your hard work. But I'm not sure
>>>>>>> why you are getting so defensive, with all due respect this isn't about
>>>>>>> "you". This is about the fact we are a national organizations without a
>>>>>>> national strategy to stop losing members. Is our national strategy for LNC
>>>>>>> members to call people in their free time? That's a nice gesture but I
>>>>>>> don't see that as a solution. I suspect there is something wrong with our
>>>>>>> brand and the way we are messaging our principles. But at this point I
>>>>>>> don't think anyone really knows because we haven't asked our members for
>>>>>>> their feedback.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have made a suggestion that we do a survey of our members to
>>>>>>> gather this information. Then we can use this data to construct a strategy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Patrick McKnight
>>>>>>> LNC Region 8
>>>>>>> Chair, NJLP
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How many LNC members took me up on my challenge to call lapsed
>>>>>>>> members?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's easy to say what others or "we" should do.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The last time you said this Patrick I took it to heart and *I* did
>>>>>>>> something.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I call lapsed members nearly every day.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's hard to get people on the phone, but when I do (do we want the
>>>>>>>> truth?) this is what I hear in order of frequency:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. Economy is bad and they lost their job
>>>>>>>> 2. They've been a member and they felt we're no longer representing
>>>>>>>> what we claim to (i.e. the last election was a missed opportunity, the
>>>>>>>> candidates did not represent a different enough liberty message)
>>>>>>>> 3. Waxing and waning interest in politics concurrent with the
>>>>>>>> election seasons
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That is what I hear.  The stories of number 1 are heartbreaking.
>>>>>>>> I've gotten my rear chewed out with stories of 2 and managed to retain some
>>>>>>>> of them by being nice and letting them yell.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My effort alone is obviously a drop in a sea. But I decided to be
>>>>>>>> part of the solution.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 6:21 AM Patrick McKnight <
>>>>>>>> patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't understand why our declining membership isn't our number
>>>>>>>>> one priority as an organization. These reports come out showing we have a
>>>>>>>>> real problem and no one seems to notice. Too often the LNC is too busy
>>>>>>>>> having pointless philosophical debates amongst ourselves while people are
>>>>>>>>> voting with their feet and leaving the party.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I would like us to do an email survey of our membership to
>>>>>>>>> determine what people like and don't like about the party. I don't accept
>>>>>>>>> this culture of failure that since our numbers went up last year they have
>>>>>>>>> to go down this year.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't pretend to have all the answers to this problem. But I
>>>>>>>>> think a good place to start is simply asking our membership. It would be
>>>>>>>>> free and we might learn something.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Interest in liberty is exploding, if our numbers don't reflect
>>>>>>>>> that we are doing something wrong.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Patrick McKnight
>>>>>>>>> LNC Region 8 Rep
>>>>>>>>> Chair, New Jersey Libertarian Party
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Robert Kraus <robert.kraus at lp.org
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Attached thank you for pointing that out!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Live Free!​​​​
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Robert*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Robert S. Kraus - Dir of Operations
>>>>>>>>>> Operations at LP.org
>>>>>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>>>>>>> Ph: 202.333.0008 x 231 <(202)%20333-0008>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Join today: https://www.lp.org/membership
>>>>>>>>>> LP FB Page: https://www.facebook.com/libertarians
>>>>>>>>>> size=3 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On
>>>>>>>>>> Behalf Of *Aaron Starr
>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 03, 2017 4:32 PM
>>>>>>>>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org; lnc-business at lp.org; 'LP-State
>>>>>>>>>> Chairs'; staff at lp.org
>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Jul Membership Report
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Robert,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For some reason the report compares July 2017 with June 2016, so
>>>>>>>>>> the prior year data point did not get updated from last month’s report.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Can you revise this report to compare July 2017 with July 2016?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Aaron Starr
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (805) 583-3308 Home
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (805) 404-8693 Mobile
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> starrcpa at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On
>>>>>>>>>> Behalf Of *Robert Kraus
>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, August 03, 2017 9:32 AM
>>>>>>>>>> *To:* lnc-business at lp.org; 'LP-State Chairs'; staff at lp.org
>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* [Lnc-business] Jul Membership Report
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jul Membership Report is attached. Open to find out who is no
>>>>>>>>>> longer tied for 10th!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Live Free!​​​​
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Robert*
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Robert S. Kraus - Dir of Operations
>>>>>>>>>> Operations at LP.org
>>>>>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>> 1444 Duke Street
>>>>>>>>>> Alexandria, VA 22314
>>>>>>>>>> Ph: 202.333.0008 x 231 <(202)%20333-0008>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Join today: https://www.lp.org/membership
>>>>>>>>>> LP FB Page: https://www.facebook.com/libertarians
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> 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
>
-- 
*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>
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee

A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
*We defend your rights*
*And oppose the use of force*
*Taxation is theft*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170812/e261f693/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list