[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
john.phillips at lp.org
john.phillips at lp.org
Wed Aug 15 02:30:38 EDT 2018
I have already answered that question in detail many places Ms Harlos, and your attempt to "gotcha" me is quite sad really.
Since you asked though, I will very clearly explain it, in detail, and at length. Plus I will include some extras.
I believe that the resolution violates the SPIRIT of the party. I also believe that while TECHNICALLY it is what the party holds, it is phrased poorly.
Not just poorly, but intentionally so. In a way to attack current membership, for you to draw attention to yourself, and for you and others to get even for previous slights, real and perceived.
Honestly I think that given the personal history KNOWN between at least 3 of the sponsors of this motion and the targets of it that at the very least you and Mr Smith should have recused yourselves from all discussion of it, sponsorship of it, and voting on it. I think it is clear from your rhetoric here and elsewhere that you can not separate your personal feelings on the matter. Nor is this the first time in just the month since I came onto the LNC.
I think the actions and rhetoric on this disturbingly resemble fascism.
I think your claims of not being a "purge" are disingenous at best. I believe that a person of your, and the other authors, high intelligence should understand the parallels between your words and other historical idealogue purges, and that your claim otherwise proves your being blinded by other things and my thought that you should recuse yourself from any vote or discussion on the matter.
I find it amusing that you and others feel oh so threatened by an idea that we all know won't work and was so obviously rejected in NOLA. Maybe I should call Senator McCarthy in.
Yet at the same time find it very sad that you have so little faith in the ideals of liberty, capitalism, and libertarianism to overcome these other silly ideas you are so frightened of. I am also saddened by the apparent lack of attention you have given others replies on the subject given your poor grasp of their meaning, as evidenced by your asking this question.
I am not angry with you, I am sad for you, and a bit frustrated because I thought far more highly of you.
I am a die hard capitalist. I have lived in the small business realm for far too many years to be otherwise.
I am also anti purge, because of the lessons history has taught us.
Lastly, and maybe most importantly, I am anti wasting time with crap when we have far more important things to do, people are dieing, and candidates and affiliates looking for support.
I am secure enough that the ideals of liberty and free capitalism are strong enough to overcome.
I believe that the reason our party has such potential, and our country grew so strong, is the free exchange of ideas, NOT hiding in echo chambers.
I do not think I can make that any clearer.
John Phillips
Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
Cell 217-412-5973
------ Original message------From: Caryn Ann HarlosDate: Wed, Aug 15, 2018 12:23 AMTo: lnc-business at hq.lp.org;Cc: john.phillips at lp.org;Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
So are you claiming John that resolution is NOT what the Party holds?
Be specific where. Because that is truly troubling.
-Caryn Ann
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 11:21 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
That statement of Nolan has conditions attached. NON-AGRESSION which depends on property rights.
Do I need to find for you the huge number of times he condemned socialism?
In LPNEWS ISSUE NUMBER 1 he denounced left economics.
-Caryn Ann
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 10:39 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
Well said sir
John Phillips
Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
Cell [1]217-412-5973
------ Original message------
From: Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business
Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 5:08 PM
To: [2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
Cc: Jeff Lyons;
Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to
Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
Good Afternoon,
There are a bunch of different threads on this whole property
rights vs. libsoc thing. I don't get where these discussions are going,
I'm not going to go through it and as an Alternate my vote won't decide
anything anyways. I just think this is a completely fruitless effort, a
waste of time, and of brainpower.
Some Libertarians have good ideas, some have bad ideas. The answer
is MORE speech, more dialogue, more ideas, and the good ideas will
always win eventually. People are smart enough to decide for themselves
if socialism can be voluntary or if property should be personally /
privately owned. Let them debate it all they want. I don't think
anyone who can't make a serious case for whatever their ideology is will
last long before they learn something new and inevitably evolve their
position. Libertarians don't have to agree on everything and I don't
think we should bother trying to force them to get along. The people
will figure it out on their own, through their discussions.
I respectfully disagree there is even a need for US to have this
discussion and vote no on whatever the resolution is because I don't
think we really need one. At all. Ever. That's not our job.
--
In Liberty,
Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate
(Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA
Membership Director
[3]http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor
Campaign Manager
[4]http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
On [5]2018-08-14 15:37, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business wrote:
> BS.
> (all about brevity ; )
>
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
>
> On [6]2018-08-14 15:34, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> The brevity caucus keeps the exegesis of our Platform out.
>
>
>
> It becomes necessary to apply and explicate.
>
>
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:29 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
> <[1[7]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
> Then why not a resolution saying that the LNC stands in support of
> our
> LP platform? Because, I think it's pretty obvious that we do.
> (Although, I know that the Radical caucus, Mises caucus, and
> libsocs,
> all have their *own* platforms. I support our LP platform, and
> that's a
> founding point of the caucus I'm in, that we don't have a separate
> platform, we instead embrace the LP platform.
> Do all the board members in various caucuses want to come out in
> favor
> of the *LP Platform*? I like to see that resolution.
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
> On [8]2018-08-14 15:07, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business wrote:
> > This resolution is an affirmation of that platform and it's
> underlying
> > principles. It serves simply to acknowledge rhetoric contrary to
> our
> > platform and affirm that the Libertarian Party stands by the
> messaging
> > and platform adopted by it's delegates in convention, as opposed
> to
> > those who would argue otherwise. It does not purge anyone, but
> simply
> > distances the LP from their economic views. They are members,
> and
> many
> > will remain so, but the resolution is to affirm that their
> outspoken
> > beliefs do not represent the party as a whole. Some of these
> > individual members are even candidates in profiled races, where
> they
> > are espousing ideas contrary to our platform, and it is
> incumbent
> upon
> > this body to recognize that this is a risk to the integrity of
> our
> > messaging. An individual or a candidate may proclaim whatever
> platform
> > they wish, but when they claim that it is representative of
> > Libertarian Ideology when it is clearly contrary to our platform
> and
> > statement of principles, it requires an acknowledgement from the
> LNC.
> >
> > ---
> > 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][9]www.odonnell2018.org
> >
> > On [10]2018-08-14 15:01, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business wrote:
> >> 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 [11]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][3[12]]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 [13]2018-08-14 14:26, [14]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][15]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:[16]217-412-5973
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> --
> >> In Liberty,
> >> Caryn Ann Harlos
> >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
> Secretary
> >> - [2][17]Caryn.Ann.[18] Harlos at LP.org or[19] Secretary at LP.org.
> >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[20] 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:[4[21]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> >> 2. mailto:[5[22]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> --
>
> --
> In Liberty,
> Caryn Ann Harlos
> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
> - [6][23]Caryn.Ann.[24] Harlos at LP.org or[25] Secretary at LP.org.
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[26] 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[27]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 2. [28]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
> 3. mailto[29]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 4. mailto[30]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 5. mailto[31]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 6. mailto[32]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
References
1. tel:217-412-5973
2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
3. http://www.lpmass.org/join
4. http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com/
5. tel:2018-08-14 15
6. tel:2018-08-14 15
7. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
8. tel:2018-08-14 15
9. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
10. tel:2018-08-14 15
11. tel:2018-08-14 14
12. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
13. tel:2018-08-14 14
14. http://john.ph/
15. tel:217-412-5973
16. tel:217-412-5973
17. http://Caryn.An/
18. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
19. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
20. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
21. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
22. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
23. http://Caryn.An/
24. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
25. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
26. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
27. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
28. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
29. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
30. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
31. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
32. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
--
--
In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosLibertarian 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 rightsAnd oppose the use of forceTaxation is theft
--
--
In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosLibertarian 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 rightsAnd oppose the use of forceTaxation is theft
-------------- next part --------------
I have already answered that question in detail many places Ms Harlos,
and your attempt to "gotcha" me is quite sad really.
Since you asked though, I will very clearly explain it, in detail, and
at length. Plus I will include some extras.
I believe that the resolution violates the SPIRIT of the party. I also
believe that while TECHNICALLY it is what the party holds, it is
phrased poorly.
Not just poorly, but intentionally so. In a way to attack current
membership, for you to draw attention to yourself, and for you and
others to get even for previous slights, real and perceived.
Honestly I think that given the personal history KNOWN between at least
3 of the sponsors of this motion and the targets of it that at the very
least you and Mr Smith should have recused yourselves from all
discussion of it, sponsorship of it, and voting on it. I think it is
clear from your rhetoric here and elsewhere that you can not separate
your personal feelings on the matter. Nor is this the first time in
just the month since I came onto the LNC.
I think the actions and rhetoric on this disturbingly resemble fascism.
I think your claims of not being a "purge" are disingenous at best. I
believe that a person of your, and the other authors, high intelligence
should understand the parallels between your words and other historical
idealogue purges, and that your claim otherwise proves your being
blinded by other things and my thought that you should recuse yourself
from any vote or discussion on the matter.
I find it amusing that you and others feel oh so threatened by an idea
that we all know won't work and was so obviously rejected in NOLA.
Maybe I should call Senator McCarthy in.
Yet at the same time find it very sad that you have so little faith in
the ideals of liberty, capitalism, and libertarianism to overcome these
other silly ideas you are so frightened of. I am also saddened by the
apparent lack of attention you have given others replies on the subject
given your poor grasp of their meaning, as evidenced by your asking
this question.
I am not angry with you, I am sad for you, and a bit frustrated because
I thought far more highly of you.
I am a die hard capitalist. I have lived in the small business realm
for far too many years to be otherwise.
I am also anti purge, because of the lessons history has taught us.
Lastly, and maybe most importantly, I am anti wasting time with crap
when we have far more important things to do, people are dieing, and
candidates and affiliates looking for support.
I am secure enough that the ideals of liberty and free capitalism are
strong enough to overcome.
I believe that the reason our party has such potential, and our country
grew so strong, is the free exchange of ideas, NOT hiding in echo
chambers.
I do not think I can make that any clearer.
John Phillips
Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
Cell [1]217-412-5973
------ Original message------
From: Caryn Ann Harlos
Date: Wed, Aug 15, 2018 12:23 AM
To: [2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
Cc: [3]john.phillips at lp.org;
Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to
Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
So are you claiming John that resolution is NOT what the Party holds?
Be specific where. Because that is truly troubling.
-Caryn Ann
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 11:21 PM Caryn Ann Harlos
<[4]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
That statement of Nolan has conditions attached. NON-AGRESSION which
depends on property rights.
Do I need to find for you the huge number of times he condemned
socialism?
In LPNEWS ISSUE NUMBER 1 he denounced left economics.
-Caryn Ann
On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 10:39 PM [5]john.phillips--- via Lnc-business
<[6]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
Well said sir
John Phillips
Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
Cell [1][7]217-412-5973
------ Original message------
From: Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business
Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 5:08 PM
To: [2][8]lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
Cc: Jeff Lyons;
Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to
Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
Good Afternoon,
There are a bunch of different threads on this whole property
rights vs. libsoc thing. I don't get where these discussions are
going,
I'm not going to go through it and as an Alternate my vote won't
decide
anything anyways. I just think this is a completely fruitless
effort, a
waste of time, and of brainpower.
Some Libertarians have good ideas, some have bad ideas. The
answer
is MORE speech, more dialogue, more ideas, and the good ideas will
always win eventually. People are smart enough to decide for
themselves
if socialism can be voluntary or if property should be personally /
privately owned. Let them debate it all they want. I don't think
anyone who can't make a serious case for whatever their ideology is
will
last long before they learn something new and inevitably evolve
their
position. Libertarians don't have to agree on everything and I
don't
think we should bother trying to force them to get along. The
people
will figure it out on their own, through their discussions.
I respectfully disagree there is even a need for US to have
this
discussion and vote no on whatever the resolution is because I don't
think we really need one. At all. Ever. That's not our job.
--
In Liberty,
Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate
(Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA
Membership Director
[3][9]http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor
Campaign Manager
[4][10]http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
On [5][11]2018-08-14 15:37, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
wrote:
> BS.
> (all about brevity ; )
>
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
>
> On [6][12]2018-08-14 15:34, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> The brevity caucus keeps the exegesis of our Platform out.
>
>
>
> It becomes necessary to apply and explicate.
>
>
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:29 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via
Lnc-business
> <[1[7]][13]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
> Then why not a resolution saying that the LNC stands in
support of
> our
> LP platform? Because, I think it's pretty obvious that we
do.
> (Although, I know that the Radical caucus, Mises caucus, and
> libsocs,
> all have their *own* platforms. I support our LP platform,
and
> that's a
> founding point of the caucus I'm in, that we don't have a
separate
> platform, we instead embrace the LP platform.
> Do all the board members in various caucuses want to come out
in
> favor
> of the *LP Platform*? I like to see that resolution.
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
> On [8][14]2018-08-14 15:07, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business
wrote:
> > This resolution is an affirmation of that platform and it's
> underlying
> > principles. It serves simply to acknowledge rhetoric
contrary to
> our
> > platform and affirm that the Libertarian Party stands by
the
> messaging
> > and platform adopted by it's delegates in convention, as
opposed
> to
> > those who would argue otherwise. It does not purge anyone,
but
> simply
> > distances the LP from their economic views. They are
members,
> and
> many
> > will remain so, but the resolution is to affirm that their
> outspoken
> > beliefs do not represent the party as a whole. Some of
these
> > individual members are even candidates in profiled races,
where
> they
> > are espousing ideas contrary to our platform, and it is
> incumbent
> upon
> > this body to recognize that this is a risk to the integrity
of
> our
> > messaging. An individual or a candidate may proclaim
whatever
> platform
> > they wish, but when they claim that it is representative of
> > Libertarian Ideology when it is clearly contrary to our
platform
> and
> > statement of principles, it requires an acknowledgement
from the
> LNC.
> >
> > ---
> > 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][9][15]www.odonnell2018.org
> >
> > On [10][16]2018-08-14 15:01, Elizabeth Van Horn via
Lnc-business wrote:
> >> 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 [11][17]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][3[12]][18]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 [13][19]2018-08-14 14:26, [14][20]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][15][21]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:[16][22]217-412-5973
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> --
> >> In Liberty,
> >> Caryn Ann Harlos
> >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
> Secretary
> >> - [2][17][23]Caryn.Ann.[18][24] Harlos at LP.org
or[19][25] Secretary at LP.org.
> >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[20][26]
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:[4[21]][27]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> >> 2. mailto:[5[22][28]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> --
>
> --
> In Liberty,
> Caryn Ann Harlos
> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
> - [6][23][29]Caryn.Ann.[24][30] Harlos at LP.org or[25][31]
Secretary at LP.org.
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[26][32]
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[27]:[33]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 2. [28][34]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
> 3. mailto[29]:[35]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 4. mailto[30]:[36]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 5. mailto[31][37]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 6. mailto[32][38]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
References
1. tel:[39]217-412-5973
2. mailto:[40]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
3. [41]http://www.lpmass.org/join
4. [42]http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com/
5. tel:[43]2018-08-14 15
6. tel:[44]2018-08-14 15
7. mailto:][45]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
8. tel:[46]2018-08-14 15
9. [47]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
10. tel:[48]2018-08-14 15
11. tel:[49]2018-08-14 14
12. mailto:][50]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
13. tel:[51]2018-08-14 14
14. [52]http://john.ph/
15. tel:[53]217-412-5973
16. tel:[54]217-412-5973
17. [55]http://Caryn.An/
18. mailto:[56] Harlos at LP.org
19. mailto:[57] Secretary at LP.org.
20. mailto:[58] LPedia at LP.org
21. mailto:][59]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
22. mailto:[60]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
23. [61]http://Caryn.An/
24. mailto:[62] Harlos at LP.org
25. mailto:[63] Secretary at LP.org.
26. mailto:[64] LPedia at LP.org
27. mailto::[65]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
28. [66]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
29. mailto::[67]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
30. mailto::[68]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
31. mailto:[69]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
32. mailto:[70]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
--
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
- [71]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or[72] Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[73] LPedia at LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
We defend your rights
And oppose the use of force
Taxation is theft
--
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
- [74]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or[75] Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[76] 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. tel:217-412-5973
2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
3. mailto:john.phillips at lp.org
4. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
5. http://john.ph/
6. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
7. tel:217-412-5973
8. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
9. http://www.lpmass.org/join
10. http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com/
11. tel:2018-08-14 15
12. tel:2018-08-14 15
13. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
14. tel:2018-08-14 15
15. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
16. tel:2018-08-14 15
17. tel:2018-08-14 14
18. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
19. tel:2018-08-14 14
20. http://john.ph/
21. tel:217-412-5973
22. tel:217-412-5973
23. http://Caryn.An/
24. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
25. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
26. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
27. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
28. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
29. http://Caryn.An/
30. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
31. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
32. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
33. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
34. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
35. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
36. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
37. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
38. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
39. tel:217-412-5973
40. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
41. http://www.lpmass.org/join
42. http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com/
43. tel:2018-08-14 15
44. tel:2018-08-14 15
45. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
46. tel:2018-08-14 15
47. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
48. tel:2018-08-14 15
49. tel:2018-08-14 14
50. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
51. tel:2018-08-14 14
52. http://john.ph/
53. tel:217-412-5973
54. tel:217-412-5973
55. http://Caryn.An/
56. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
57. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
58. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
59. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
60. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
61. http://Caryn.An/
62. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
63. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
64. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
65. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
66. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
67. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
68. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
69. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
70. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
71. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
72. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
73. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
74. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
75. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
76. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list