[Lnc-business] Member feedback on proposed resolution
Caryn Ann Harlos
caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Tue Aug 14 22:31:54 EDT 2018
Our platform appears in a context - a historical context. Georgism has
never been a part of our Platform. Georgists have always been welcome. It
is a mistake to think it is a personal affront if someone doesn’t agree
100% with our Platform. I don’t. But if the LNC were to be considering a
resolution my personal disagreement is irrelevant.
The Party is opposed to all taxation in principle. That includes a land
tax.
-Caryn Ann
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 8:12 PM Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> Ms Mason,
>
> I believe that it is further clarified in Platform Plank 2.0 Economic
> Liberty, we state "Each person has the right to offer goods and services
> to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the
> economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and
> provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All
> efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage
> trade, are improper in a free society."
>
> I draw your attention specifically to the exclamation that "all efforts
> by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are
> improper in a free society." The collectivization and redistribution of
> property and business assets as described in recent rhetoric from
> self-proclaimed socialists is entirely within the scope of what is
> considered "improper in a free society" by our platform.
>
> Also, Platform Plank 2.1 Property and Contract, we explicitly state "As
> respect for property rights is fundamental to maintaining a free and
> prosperous society, it follows that the freedom to contract to obtain,
> retain, profit from, manage, or dispose of one’s property must also be
> upheld." Reaffirming one's right to profit from one's property, which
> according to the promoted Rhetoric "Rent is Theft" is in contradiction
> with the principles of socialist property views. Furthermore, our
> implied support of one's right to make a profit in this plank, is
> actually in blatant contradiction to most socialist learning and
> teachings, that disparity of wealth and profit motives are inherently
> wrong.
>
> Furthermore, Platform Plank 2.11, Labor Markets states "Employment and
> compensation agreements between private employers and employees are
> outside the scope of government, and these contracts should not be
> encumbered by government-mandated benefits or social engineering. We
> support the right of private employers and employees to choose whether
> or not to bargain with each other through a labor union. Bargaining
> should be free of government interference, such as compulsory
> arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain" whereas self-professed
> Libertarian socialists advocate for a complete surrender of these rights
> from the employer/property owner on behalf of solely the employee.
>
> So while the definition of Justly acquired property might be up for
> debate, the rights of property owners and business owners are not. And
> that is what this resolution addresses- a systematic perversion of
> Libertarian philosophy to accommodate philosophical leanings that
> dispell the rights of property and business owners. To be short, a
> socialist philosophy.
>
> ---
> Yours in Liberty,
>
> Justin O'Donnell
> LNC Region 8 Representative
> LPNH Alternate- LNC Platform Committee
> Chair- LPNH Platform Committee
> Candidate for US Congress, NH-2
> www.odonnell2018.org
>
> On 2018-08-14 21:52, Jacqueline Mason wrote:
> > Dear LNC,
> >
> > The Libertarian Party platform is very specific in that it qualifies
> > its defense of property rights as applying to "justly acquired"
> > property. Delegates are VERY picky about how things are worded. That
> > qualifier was not just thrown in for shits and giggles.
> >
> > Georgists, LibSocs, and others differ in what counts as "justly
> > acquired." What is "just" is a long-standing moral, philosophical, and
> > economic debate in which we can disagree yet still be ideologically
> > libertarian.
> >
> > A resolution that ignores that libertarians can have legitimate
> > philosophical differences over this does not just reaffirm the
> > platform, it goes beyond it in an effort to silence and drive out
> > left-libertarians of all stripes.
> >
> > I urge you to vote no.
> >
> > Love,
> > Jackie
>
--
--
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <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 --------------
Our platform appears in a context - a historical context. Georgism has
never been a part of our Platform. Georgists have always been
welcome. It is a mistake to think it is a personal affront if someone
doesn’t agree 100% with our Platform. I don’t. But if the LNC were to
be considering a resolution my personal disagreement is irrelevant.
The Party is opposed to all taxation in principle. That includes a
land tax.
-Caryn Ann
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 8:12 PM Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business
<[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
Ms Mason,
I believe that it is further clarified in Platform Plank 2.0
Economic
Liberty, we state "Each person has the right to offer goods and
services
to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in
the
economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes,
and
provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All
efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or
manage
trade, are improper in a free society."
I draw your attention specifically to the exclamation that "all
efforts
by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade,
are
improper in a free society." The collectivization and redistribution
of
property and business assets as described in recent rhetoric from
self-proclaimed socialists is entirely within the scope of what is
considered "improper in a free society" by our platform.
Also, Platform Plank 2.1 Property and Contract, we explicitly state
"As
respect for property rights is fundamental to maintaining a free and
prosperous society, it follows that the freedom to contract to
obtain,
retain, profit from, manage, or dispose of one’s property must also
be
upheld." Reaffirming one's right to profit from one's property,
which
according to the promoted Rhetoric "Rent is Theft" is in
contradiction
with the principles of socialist property views. Furthermore, our
implied support of one's right to make a profit in this plank, is
actually in blatant contradiction to most socialist learning and
teachings, that disparity of wealth and profit motives are
inherently
wrong.
Furthermore, Platform Plank 2.11, Labor Markets states "Employment
and
compensation agreements between private employers and employees are
outside the scope of government, and these contracts should not be
encumbered by government-mandated benefits or social engineering. We
support the right of private employers and employees to choose
whether
or not to bargain with each other through a labor union. Bargaining
should be free of government interference, such as compulsory
arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain" whereas
self-professed
Libertarian socialists advocate for a complete surrender of these
rights
from the employer/property owner on behalf of solely the employee.
So while the definition of Justly acquired property might be up for
debate, the rights of property owners and business owners are not.
And
that is what this resolution addresses- a systematic perversion of
Libertarian philosophy to accommodate philosophical leanings that
dispell the rights of property and business owners. To be short, a
socialist philosophy.
---
Yours in Liberty,
Justin O'Donnell
LNC Region 8 Representative
LPNH Alternate- LNC Platform Committee
Chair- LPNH Platform Committee
Candidate for US Congress, NH-2
[2]www.odonnell2018.org
On 2018-08-14 21:52, Jacqueline Mason wrote:
> Dear LNC,
>
> The Libertarian Party platform is very specific in that it
qualifies
> its defense of property rights as applying to "justly acquired"
> property. Delegates are VERY picky about how things are worded.
That
> qualifier was not just thrown in for shits and giggles.
>
> Georgists, LibSocs, and others differ in what counts as "justly
> acquired." What is "just" is a long-standing moral, philosophical,
and
> economic debate in which we can disagree yet still be
ideologically
> libertarian.
>
> A resolution that ignores that libertarians can have legitimate
> philosophical differences over this does not just reaffirm the
> platform, it goes beyond it in an effort to silence and drive out
> left-libertarians of all stripes.
>
> I urge you to vote no.
>
> Love,
> Jackie
--
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
- [3]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. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
3. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list