[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-05: Suspension of Arvin Vohra
Joshua Katz
planning4liberty at gmail.com
Tue Apr 3 11:41:16 EDT 2018
Now that I've seen an explanation, I vote yes.
Joshua A. Katz
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Arvin Vohra <votevohra at gmail.com> wrote:
> Since some were unable to see my video response to this, here is
> something else I posted on mewe on this issue:
> As you may have heard, some on the LNC are once again working to
> suspend me from the LNC, based on an inappropriate joke I made on
> [1]mewe.com. The joke was in poor taste, and I have already apologized
> for it, and clarified my actual position (specifically, that I don't
> advocate for shooting school boards. I would have considered that
> obvious, but sometimes tone gets lost in social media).
> But it is, I have to say, interesting to see the cognitive dissonance
> that is growing within the Libertarian Party. Every day, I hear
> taxation is theft. We even have new LP t-shirts that say taxation is
> theft (they are a great way to support the LP and spread the message).
> We agree that taxation is an immoral violation of your sacred rights.
> We also have routinely argued that guns are not for hunting, they are
> for opposing government overreach. I've spoken officially on this
> issue. I've said this to cheering Libertarian and Conservative groups,
> to furious progressive groups. I know many of you have made the same
> argument.
> We talk about how wrong it is for the government to rob us and use the
> money for immoral actions like the drug war, foreign wars, and
> government schools. A few minutes later, we talk about how guns are
> necessary to block government tyranny and overreach.
> I've routinely argued against any violence against the state, since I
> consider it unlikely to work. But for all the hardcore gun supporters
> who wear taxation is theft t-shirts: what is the level of tyranny that
> would be great enough to morally justify using violence in self
> defense?
> Is being locked up in a government rape cage for a victimless crime not
> enough moral justification? Is having your son or daughter locked up in
> such a rape cage not enough justification? Is being robbed to have your
> money used to bomb people in other countries, in your name not enough?
> What level of tyranny would morally justify using the Second Amendmend
> for what it was designed for?
> Just to be clear: I am not, have not ever, and have no plans to ever
> advocate violence against the state. I consider it unnecessary. I
> believe that Dr. King and Gandhi have showed that violence is not
> needed to fight the state. I consider it unlikely to work. As long as
> the state keeps duping young men and women to join its enforcement arm,
> I can't imagine any violent revolution lasting more than a few minutes.
> As someone who trained for many years in the martial arts, I also
> consider it against my personal principles to use a greater response
> than what is needed. I believe in the doctrine of minimal force, which
> is why I work within the LP, not within a citizen militia.
> But is using a gun to defend yourself against state violence immoral?
> God no. And violence certainly includes any violation done under threat
> of violence.
> Respectfully,
> Arvin Vohra
> Vice Chair
> Libertarian Party
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Jeff Hewitt <[2]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org>
> wrote:
>
> I vote Yes. Jeff Hewitt Region 4 Representative
>
> On 2018-04-03 05:07, Sam Goldstein wrote:
>
> Yes
> ---
> Sam Goldstein
> Libertarian National Committee
> [3]317-850-0726 Cell
> On 2018-04-03 02:16, Alicia Mattson wrote:
>
> We have an electronic mail ballot.
> Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by April 12, 2018 at
> 11:59:59pm
> Pacific time.
> Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Van Horn, Katz, Hayes, Goldstein, Redpath,
> Hewitt, O'Donnell
> Motion:
> WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party holds the non-initiation of force
> as its
> cardinal principle and requires each of its members certify that
> they
> neither advocate or believe in violent means to achieve political
> or
> social goals.
> RESOLVED, that the Libertarian National Committee suspends Arvin
> Vohra
> from his position of Vice-Chair for sustained and repeated
> unacceptable
> conduct that brings the principles of the Libertarian Party into
> disrepute, including making and defending a statement advocating
> lethal
> violence against state employees who are not directly threatening
> imminent physical harm. Such action is in violation of our
> membership
> pledge. These actions further endanger the survival of our
> movement and
> the security of all of our members without their consent.
> -Alicia
>
> --
> Arvin Vohra
> [4]www.VoteVohra.com
> [5]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> (301) 320-3634
>
> References
>
> 1. http://mewe.com/
> 2. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 3. tel:317-850-0726
> 4. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 5. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
Now that I've seen an explanation, I vote yes.
Joshua A. Katz
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Arvin Vohra <[1]votevohra at gmail.com>
wrote:
Since some were unable to see my video response to this, here is
something else I posted on mewe on this issue:
As you may have heard, some on the LNC are once again working to
suspend me from the LNC, based on an inappropriate joke I made on
[1][2]mewe.com. The joke was in poor taste, and I have already
apologized
for it, and clarified my actual position (specifically, that I
don't
advocate for shooting school boards. I would have considered that
obvious, but sometimes tone gets lost in social media).
But it is, I have to say, interesting to see the cognitive
dissonance
that is growing within the Libertarian Party. Every day, I hear
taxation is theft. We even have new LP t-shirts that say taxation
is
theft (they are a great way to support the LP and spread the
message).
We agree that taxation is an immoral violation of your sacred
rights.
We also have routinely argued that guns are not for hunting, they
are
for opposing government overreach. I've spoken officially on this
issue. I've said this to cheering Libertarian and Conservative
groups,
to furious progressive groups. I know many of you have made the
same
argument.
We talk about how wrong it is for the government to rob us and
use the
money for immoral actions like the drug war, foreign wars, and
government schools. A few minutes later, we talk about how guns
are
necessary to block government tyranny and overreach.
I've routinely argued against any violence against the state,
since I
consider it unlikely to work. But for all the hardcore gun
supporters
who wear taxation is theft t-shirts: what is the level of tyranny
that
would be great enough to morally justify using violence in self
defense?
Is being locked up in a government rape cage for a victimless
crime not
enough moral justification? Is having your son or daughter locked
up in
such a rape cage not enough justification? Is being robbed to
have your
money used to bomb people in other countries, in your name not
enough?
What level of tyranny would morally justify using the Second
Amendmend
for what it was designed for?
Just to be clear: I am not, have not ever, and have no plans to
ever
advocate violence against the state. I consider it unnecessary. I
believe that Dr. King and Gandhi have showed that violence is not
needed to fight the state. I consider it unlikely to work. As
long as
the state keeps duping young men and women to join its
enforcement arm,
I can't imagine any violent revolution lasting more than a few
minutes.
As someone who trained for many years in the martial arts, I also
consider it against my personal principles to use a greater
response
than what is needed. I believe in the doctrine of minimal force,
which
is why I work within the LP, not within a citizen militia.
But is using a gun to defend yourself against state violence
immoral?
God no. And violence certainly includes any violation done under
threat
of violence.
Respectfully,
Arvin Vohra
Vice Chair
Libertarian Party
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Jeff Hewitt
<[2][3]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org>
wrote:
I vote Yes. Jeff Hewitt Region 4 Representative
On 2018-04-03 05:07, Sam Goldstein wrote:
Yes
---
Sam Goldstein
Libertarian National Committee
[3]317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-04-03 02:16, Alicia Mattson wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot.
Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by April 12, 2018 at
11:59:59pm
Pacific time.
Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Van Horn, Katz, Hayes, Goldstein,
Redpath,
Hewitt, O'Donnell
Motion:
WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party holds the non-initiation of
force
as its
cardinal principle and requires each of its members certify
that
they
neither advocate or believe in violent means to achieve
political
or
social goals.
RESOLVED, that the Libertarian National Committee suspends
Arvin
Vohra
from his position of Vice-Chair for sustained and repeated
unacceptable
conduct that brings the principles of the Libertarian Party
into
disrepute, including making and defending a statement
advocating
lethal
violence against state employees who are not directly
threatening
imminent physical harm. Such action is in violation of our
membership
pledge. These actions further endanger the survival of our
movement and
the security of all of our members without their consent.
-Alicia
--
Arvin Vohra
[4][4]www.VoteVohra.com
[5][5]VoteVohra at gmail.com
[6](301) 320-3634
References
1. [7]http://mewe.com/
2. mailto:[8]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
3. tel:[9]317-850-0726
4. [10]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
5. mailto:[11]VoteVohra at gmail.com
References
1. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
2. http://mewe.com/
3. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
4. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
5. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
6. tel:(301) 320-3634
7. http://mewe.com/
8. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
9. tel:317-850-0726
10. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
11. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list