[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
Elizabeth Van Horn
elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
Tue Aug 14 15:01:31 EDT 2018
We have a platform that states what we stand for, and you were the
platform committee chair for 2018. I was on that committee, as were
several other members of this board.
Did we not do our duty? Did we leave the platform to be ambiguous and
confusing? I don't think so.
Our wonderful LP platform speaks for the LP, and tells prospective
members where we stand. We educate from that document, and I know that
you understand this, as you were instrumental in doing platform plank
posts on social media. You know that the platform speaks for us on
issues of property rights.
---
Elizabeth Van Horn
On 2018-08-14 14:55, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
> It is quite problematic that stating the Party's foundational Principles is controversial or thought to need a platform change.
>
> We have gone far from our roots.
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
>> I also would have supported the first effort (with my language changes)
>> as it was a clear support of capitalism. Too bad that wasn't embraced.
>>
>> On this list I've seen multiple times someone talk about past actions as
>> a reason, (we denounced that, so why not this?) the more times I see,
>> the more this looks like a grudge match.
>>
>> As the players in this drama, and yes it's a big drama on social media,
>> are ones that have had an ongoing war-of-words with the targets of this
>> suggested resolution. Only, some of the players also happen to be on
>> the LNC, and are now using that position to escalate.
>>
>> I was willing to support a resolution that embraced capitalism, as I
>> live my life as a capitalist. It is my economic system of choice, and I
>> make an effort to teach this to others.
>>
>> Too bad this isn't about championing the wonderful economic system of
>> capitalism, but instead is about targeting a few noisy LP members.
>>
>> ---
>> Elizabeth Van Horn
>>
>> On 2018-08-14 14:26, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business wrote:
>>> This is not the same language as was presented and discussed earlier.
>>> Just to clarify for people who may just be skimming.
>>> I probably would have gone along with the first. This one is toxic
>>> and
>>> the language clearly meant to be be a purge.
>>> If it was just a supporting of property rights I would absolutely
>>> support it. This is far more than that, and honestly far exceeds
>>> the
>>> scope of the duties of this body. It is a direct change to policy
>>> seriously impacts current members and activists.
>>> If you want a platform change take it to Austin. That is not our
>>> job.
>>> I will be voting no on this, and urge everyone else to seriously
>>> consider whether they support a precedent of purging groups. Not to
>>> mention how many of you during the JC discussion were treading very
>>> carefully about not exceeding our scope, a point that was well taken
>>> after reflection, will you be consistent here?
>>> John Phillips
>>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>>> Cell [1]217-412-5973
>>>
>>> ------ Original message------
>>> From: Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business
>>> Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 10:50 AM
>>> To: LNC-Business List;
>>> Cc: Steven Nekhaila;
>>> Subject:[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to
>>> Re-Affirm
>>> The LP's Stance For Property Rights
>>> Dear Colleagues,
>>>
>>> I invite you to co-sponsor the following resolution which disavows
>>> socialist & communist policies and re-affirms the Libertarian Party
>>> position on championing property rights.
>>>
>>> Co-Sponsors: Joshua Smith, Justin O'Donnel, and Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>
>>> WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party supports the free market and therefore
>>> the right of privatization of property as an extension of the
>>> individual;
>>>
>>> WHEREAS, the Statement of Principles of The Libertarian Party
>>> explicitly
>>> supports the right to private property ownership, including the right
>>> to
>>> do business utilizing that property as capital;
>>>
>>> WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party strongly supports the rights of
>>> individuals to own private property including land, structures, natural
>>> resources and other private space through homesteading, purchase, and
>>> other lawful libertarian means;
>>>
>>> WHEREAS, ownership of private property, including but not limited to
>>> land and housing, does not require continual or personal use to exist
>>> as
>>> justly owned property unless otherwise abandoned;
>>>
>>> WHEREAS, these have been part of the principles of the Libertarian
>>> Party
>>> since its inception;
>>>
>>> THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that socialist and communist property
>>> ownership schemes, including the collectivization of property, unlawful
>>> usurpation of property, and incorrect characterizations of private
>>> property, unless otherwise voluntarily agreed by all parties, are
>>> incompatible with the philosophy of the Libertarian Party.
>>>
>>>
>>> In Liberty,
>>>
>>> Steven Nekhaila
>>> Region 2 Representative
>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>
>>> Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
>>> "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
>>>
>>> References
>>>
>>> 1. tel:217-412-5973
> --
>
> --
>
> IN LIBERTY,
> CARYN ANN HARLOS
> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>
> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
> _We defend your rights_
> _And oppose the use of force_
> _Taxation is theft_
-------------- next part --------------
We have a platform that states what we stand for, and you were the
platform committee chair for 2018. I was on that committee, as were
several other members of this board.
Did we not do our duty? Did we leave the platform to be ambiguous and
confusing? I don't think so.
Our wonderful LP platform speaks for the LP, and tells prospective
members where we stand. We educate from that document, and I know
that you understand this, as you were instrumental in doing platform
plank posts on social media. You know that the platform speaks for us
on issues of property rights.
---
Elizabeth Van Horn
On 2018-08-14 14:55, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
It is quite problematic that stating the Party's foundational
Principles is controversial or thought to need a platform change.
We have gone far from our roots.
-Caryn Ann
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
<[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
I also would have supported the first effort (with my language
changes)
as it was a clear support of capitalism. Too bad that wasn't
embraced.
On this list I've seen multiple times someone talk about past
actions as
a reason, (we denounced that, so why not this?) the more times I
see,
the more this looks like a grudge match.
As the players in this drama, and yes it's a big drama on social
media,
are ones that have had an ongoing war-of-words with the targets of
this
suggested resolution. Only, some of the players also happen to be
on
the LNC, and are now using that position to escalate.
I was willing to support a resolution that embraced capitalism, as I
live my life as a capitalist. It is my economic system of choice,
and I
make an effort to teach this to others.
Too bad this isn't about championing the wonderful economic system
of
capitalism, but instead is about targeting a few noisy LP members.
---
Elizabeth Van Horn
On 2018-08-14 14:26, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business wrote:
> This is not the same language as was presented and discussed
earlier.
> Just to clarify for people who may just be skimming.
> I probably would have gone along with the first. This one is
toxic
> and
> the language clearly meant to be be a purge.
> If it was just a supporting of property rights I would
absolutely
> support it. This is far more than that, and honestly far
exceeds
> the
> scope of the duties of this body. It is a direct change to
policy
> seriously impacts current members and activists.
> If you want a platform change take it to Austin. That is not
our
> job.
> I will be voting no on this, and urge everyone else to
seriously
> consider whether they support a precedent of purging groups.
Not to
> mention how many of you during the JC discussion were treading
very
> carefully about not exceeding our scope, a point that was well
taken
> after reflection, will you be consistent here?
> John Phillips
> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
> Cell [1]217-412-5973
>
> ------ Original message------
> From: Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business
> Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 10:50 AM
> To: LNC-Business List;
> Cc: Steven Nekhaila;
> Subject:[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to
> Re-Affirm
> The LP's Stance For Property Rights
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> I invite you to co-sponsor the following resolution which disavows
> socialist & communist policies and re-affirms the Libertarian
Party
> position on championing property rights.
>
> Co-Sponsors: Joshua Smith, Justin O'Donnel, and Caryn Ann Harlos
>
> WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party supports the free market and
therefore
> the right of privatization of property as an extension of the
> individual;
>
> WHEREAS, the Statement of Principles of The Libertarian Party
> explicitly
> supports the right to private property ownership, including the
right
> to
> do business utilizing that property as capital;
>
> WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party strongly supports the rights of
> individuals to own private property including land, structures,
natural
> resources and other private space through homesteading, purchase,
and
> other lawful libertarian means;
>
> WHEREAS, ownership of private property, including but not limited
to
> land and housing, does not require continual or personal use to
exist
> as
> justly owned property unless otherwise abandoned;
>
> WHEREAS, these have been part of the principles of the Libertarian
> Party
> since its inception;
>
> THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that socialist and communist property
> ownership schemes, including the collectivization of property,
unlawful
> usurpation of property, and incorrect characterizations of private
> property, unless otherwise voluntarily agreed by all parties, are
> incompatible with the philosophy of the Libertarian Party.
>
>
> In Liberty,
>
> Steven Nekhaila
> Region 2 Representative
> Libertarian National Committee
>
> Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
> "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
>
> References
>
> 1. tel:217-412-5973
--
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
- [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
We defend your rights
And oppose the use of force
Taxation is theft
References
1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list