<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Dear colleagues:<br>
<br>
I hope all is well with you. Thanks to Mr. Katz for his
messages and his very kind comments concerning my work to build the
international libertarian movement. <br>
<br>
As I believe Mr. Katz' points regarding the appointment of an
LNC representative to the International Alliance of Libertarian
Parties are well taken, allow me to request that a motion be made
for an e-mail ballot to designate me as that representative. I
shall be delighted to serve as the representative if so designated;
I anticipate that I shall be able to fulfill the duties of the
position. <br>
<br>
As an aside, I consider it likely I shall make at least three
trips to Europe this fall to address European Students For Liberty
conferences. (I have already been invited to deliver the keynote
address at the upcoming ESFL conference in Sofia, Bulgaria.) I
shall endeavor to meet with representatives of libertarian parties
on each trip I undertake. <br>
<br>
Thanks for your work for liberty, and for considering my request
in this matter. I look forward to seeing you at the next LNC
meeting.<br>
<br>
Take care,<br>
Jim<br>
<br>
James W. Lark, III<br>
Advisor, The Liberty Coalition<br>
University of Virginia<br>
<br>
Region 5 Representative, Libertarian National Committee<br>
International Representative, Libertarian National Committee<br>
-----<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/22/2015 10:56 PM, Joshua Katz
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAG3paORFpv7STe25AwU87Wu=jS+q9C1rdc6sgu4NpHHugy8Vww@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>First, I'd like to thank Mr. Neale for his work to
establish this organization, and for being scrupulous to avoid
even the appearance of a conflict of interest. I do not
believe there would be a conflict, any more than there's a
conflict in a member of an organization being its chair, but I
respect Mr. Neale's belief. I also believe, as I think Mr.
Neale suggested, that most of the time, the person who builds
should not be the person to maintain. I've built and then
attempted to manage, and found it tarnished not only my
legacy, but the respect for the institution I build. I've
been far happier with the outcomes the times I built
something, made sure it was in good hands, and walked away.
Unfortunately, I never built anything I could sell for a
billion dollars and become a shark on Shark Tank, but oh well.
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
I must, respectfully, disagree with the Chair's claim about the
current situation. The Policy Manual (2.09.3) establishes a
position of International Representative, which I take as
something akin to a goodwill ambassador, but does not reference
the IALP. It does say that the role of these IRs is to maintain
good relations with our international counterparts, but that is
not the same thing as appointment as our representative to a
particular organization.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In fact, this point seems indisputable. We are allowed one
representative to the IALP, yet can appoint as many IRs as we
wish, so clearly appointment as an IR cannot carry with it
representation in the IALP. Indeed, email ballot 2014-6,
which added that section to the Policy Manual, also appointed
Mr. Neale as an IR, but email ballot 2015-2, which approved
the (draft) charter, appointed Mr. Neale as our representative
to the IALP. This seems to have been consistent with a
suggestion from the convention body. Clearly, when we did so,
we believed that these were separate. But we might think
that, once the mechanism, so to speak, is in place, the IRs
are sorts of alternates/vice-representatives/something of that
sort. First, I find no language to support that, in any
motion or policy. Second, it is illogical - suppose we had 10
IRs, which we certainly can, and the representative to the
IALP resigned. Which of those 10 is now our representative?
If we treated them as alternates, it would be first-ranked
alternate, but we don't rank our IRs. You can say it would be
the most senior, or something to that effect, but it seems to
me at that point you're just sort of playing in an imaginary
space (granted, that's part of what I do for a living, but
still.) </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The Charter, which, as I've mentioned, is also functioning
as bylaws and rules of order (highly incomplete, of course,
since the usual way to have rules of order is to adopt a
manual, not throw a few things into your charter) does not
allow for alternates, so our other IRs cannot, it seems,
replace our representative for one meeting, unless we, in
anticipation of an absence, change our representative, then
change it back.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Anyway, before I continue, I wish to emphasize that Dr.
Lark is an excellent choice for our representative to the
IALP, and that, as long as he is willing to serve, I'd urge
someone with the power to do so to move to appoint him as
such. I am raising this issue not because of any opinion
contrary to the claimed outcome, but because of the process.
I believe standing on formality and rules is important, even
if we believe we know the outcome, even if doing so is
annoying or irritating, even if it feels like we're wasting
time: if we will not do so, why should anyone believe that LP
candidates will, once elected, govern according to the rule of
law, not the rule of men? How can we believe that our elected
officials should do what is in keeping with our principles,
not just expediency, if we ourselves, the governing body of
this party, do not uphold the most basic of all principles -
that of free association, and the ability of groups of people
to work together voluntarily while binding themselves to
agreed-upon rules? You cannot have free association without
the ability to bind yourself to rules, because without that
ability, you are forced to enter into agreements without
predictable outcomes. Impassioned rhetoric aside, the point
is, I highly respect Dr. Lark and his work for freedom around
the globe. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In any event, no one disputed that, prior to Mr. Neale's
resignation, Mr. Neale was our representative - our only
representative. Mr. Neale's resignation did not change the
nature of how we appoint people to things, nor did it change
what an IR is. I also cannot make sense of the claim that Dr.
Lark is now our only representative to the IALP, when
according to the charter (which we agreed to without reading -
I hope that the LP will not endorse Downsize DC's Read the
Bills proposal) we only have one representative. Well, I can
make sense of it - if Dr. Lark were our representative, he'd
be the only one. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>To clarify what those with the endurance to make it this
far may wonder - I do not think that, in all ways, we should
govern this party as we would govern politically. There is a
difference in governing a voluntary organization and a nation,
or a town for that matter. Yet there are similarities also:
for one thing, if we want people to believe that freedom works
in governing a nation, and works better than any alternative,
it would make sense for us to govern our own organization in
such a way, both for instrumental reasons if we actually
believe that freedom works, and for PR reasons. However,
there can be problems - for instance, a spontaneous order may
require a certain size to come about, so that a small
organization cannot be run in a libertarian manner, or even a
medium-sized one. There are also strategic differences -
gridlock is often good in government because of all the
powerful interests pushing it in a less free direction,
whereas gridlock is generally bad in board governance. So
don't take my comparisons too literally or generally - they
are intended only to refer to the specific topics mentioned.</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">Joshua A. Katz
<div>Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 8:14 PM,
Nicholas Sarwark <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:chair@lp.org"
target="_blank">chair@lp.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>All,<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
I meant to forward this message at the same time as the
report on the initial founding of the IALP, but didn't
hit send this morning. With this resignation, Dr. Lark
is currently our only representative to the IALP.<br>
<br>
</div>
-Nick<br>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<SNIP>
</body>
</html>