<div dir="ltr">Dear Ms. Harlos,<div><br>Thank you for your question. I hope you won't mind my giving a thorough answer to this serious question.</div><div><br></div><div>In such a serious issue, I would certainly consider the rationale. If the root of the issue is that I am insufficiently nice to government school teachers and users, or to members of the federal governemnt's army, then I will do my best to explain that part of our job is to fight for value hierarchies that make sense. Those who use government schools, charter schools, or other forms of tax-funded education, for example, should not be seen as equal to those who use homeschooling or private schooling, any more than those who use welfare should be seen as equal to those who have jobs, or those who have sex without consent should be seen as equal to those who have sex with consent. Fighting for value hierarchies is a major part of politics. I would argue it's the most important part of politics. It has been a part of politics for every political movement that I know of. I know that the "nice at all costs" approach disagrees with that, but sometimes integrity does involve denigrating what should be denigrated. Welfarism should be knocked off of any pedestal it somehow manages to approach.</div><div><br></div><div>The fact that today's LP, in part due to the strategies of our 2016 ticket, is has a few people who don't understand liberty, or are actively working against it. The 2016 campaign literally advertised outside of military bases - not "Leave NATO" billboards, just the usual soldier worship that has been so damaging to America. The result of that, and other strategies, is that many of those in the LP believe that we are the party of "Not Trump or Hillary", rather than the party of "Not Government." Part of our responsibility is to educate these people as well as we can about liberty, with gentle words when that's enough, and with a metaphorical smack in the nose when it's not enough.</div><div><br></div><div>More likely, if such a request came this week, it would be about my view on consent laws, which I continue to believe are both flawed in their fundamental nature, and abused in their practice. I don't think one size fits all. I don't think putting teenagers on sex offender registries for sexting each other, privately, consensually, is okay.</div><div><br></div><div>I understand and accept that you and I disagree about the nature of readiness and consent. I believe that consent readiness is individual, best determined by families and culture, and should not involve the government at all. I also believe that readiness is readiness. If someone understands sex well enough to be able to give informed and active consent to a 16 year old, they can give informed and active consent to a 60 year old. Each person's preferences are different; as long as no one is using force or fraud, I don't have a problem. You and I disagree on this issue. I respect your view, and hope to continue to learn from it. Behind some of the vitriol within your posts, I have discovered the nuanced and thoughtful analyses I generally have seen from you. I have found your perspectives educational, and I do believe that your views will influence my own path of consideration of these issues.</div><div><br></div><div>I know that you and I also disagree on the nature of Libertarian leadership itself. You view it as a primarily representative role. I understand that position and respect it. I view it as a moral calling. The central part of that calling, in my view, is political courage and moral steadfastness.</div><div><br></div><div>Let me draw a parallel. You and I agree in ending the drug war. Now let's say that someone on drugs does something heinous, and it's all over the news. The social tide swings the other way, with many people, including Libertarians, demanding support for the drug war. It may sound impossible, but do remember that today many Libertarians support government schools, which is the least Libertarian position possible. Also note that our own 2008 presidential candidate supported the drug war, and our 2016 candidate was mostly silent on the topic (past marijuana). Now suppose that Libertarians become pro-drug war. You speak out against the drug war. Libertarians tell you, correctly, that in this new political climate, that view is politically damaging.</div><div><br></div><div>If you look at your role as purely representative, your response should be to shut up or resign, in that case. But I believe that there is more to political leadership than being a yes man or yes woman to prevailing moods. When those moods are a first emotional response to a highly controversial subject, there is even more importance to being more than a yes man or yes woman.</div><div><br></div><div>In 2016, I could not vote for you, since I wasn't in your region. But I would have, and not because I suspected that we agree on many issues. I voted for, and supported, Chair Sarwark, despite knowing for certain that we disagree on some major issues. </div><div><br></div><div>When I vote, I'm not voting for a lever. Anyone can be a lever, who votes by counting votes rather than by conscience. A computer program or excel spreadsheet can do that. When I vote for someone, I'm voting for more than that. I'm voting for someone of backbone and substance, who will stand up for what is right even if I myself waver. I want someone who will debate the issues that matter in LNC meetings or in public. I want someone who might persuade me.</div><div><br></div><div>When I was elected in 2016, I took that responsibility seriously. I deeply believe that responsibility includes standing up for what is right, engaging the debates that matter, and certainly not preemptively giving up on an issue just because I'm on the less popular side.</div><div><br></div><div>You say that avoiding a debate would be honorable. I would consider it deeply dishonorable, and a gross dereliction of duty. I believe that at least some people voted for me hoping that I would have some moral compass and strength of character. I believe that they hoped I would stand up for my understanding of Liberty, and perhaps even persuade others. I think very few voted for me in the hope that I would preemptively give up on a discussion on a serious issue, just because I was on the unpopular side. A person who cannot fight the unpopular side certainly has no place in Libertarian leadership, but I would argue that such a person has no place in any kind of leadership.</div><div><br></div><div>The LNC and delegate certainly have the ability to remove me. I do hope they will engage in a discussion and debate on the topic first, and that I will be allowed to speak on this vital issue, but the LNC and delegates also have the right to do this entire action without any debate at all.</div><div><br></div><div>But until that is done, I will continue to serve my duties, including the most important duty of fighting for the views I consider right, even when, especially when, they are currently unpopular.</div><div><br></div><div>Respectfully,</div><div><br></div><div>Arvin Vohra</div><div>Vice Chair</div><div>Libertarian National Committee</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 4:49 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org" target="_blank">caryn.ann.harlos@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="auto">And if it can be shown, the responsible thing to do is honour the will of who we represent and not force this body into a destructive removal vote.</div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 2:28 PM Elizabeth Van Horn <<a href="mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn@lp.org" target="_blank">elizabeth.vanhorn@lp.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif">
<p>Understanding that Caryn Ann's question isn't bylaws related, but a general "ask" to another LNC member, I second the "ask". <br><br>Arvin, is there a situation whereby a percent (or number) of LP state affiliates would request you resign, and you'd do it? Because, you represent ALL the state affiliates as a Vice-Chair, and everyone of those states is your <span>constituency.</span></p>
<div>---<br>
<div class="m_4474102174939015736m_8824205560661434230pre" style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:monospace">Elizabeth Van Horn<br> LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)<br> Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana<br> Chair-LP Social Media Process Review Committee<br> Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus<br> <a href="http://www.lpcaucus.org/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.lpcaucus.org/</a></div>
</div></div><div style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif">
<p><br></p>
<p>On 2018-01-13 15:35, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:</p>
</div><div style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif"><blockquote type="cite" style="padding:0 0.4em;border-left:#1010ff 2px solid;margin:0">
<div dir="auto">Now that you have those of us who are regional representatives having to spend our long weekend on your exhibition rather than our families - I have a question.</div>
<div dir="auto"> </div>
<div dir="auto">If X number of states ask you to resign, will you? And what is that number?</div>
<div dir="auto"> </div>
<div dir="auto">Or would a no confidence statement from the affiliates mean nothing?</div>
<div dir="auto"> </div>
<div dir="auto">-Caryn Ann </div>
<div>-- </div>
<div class="m_4474102174939015736m_8824205560661434230gmail_signature">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><span style="color:#666666;font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:large"><strong>In Liberty,</strong></span></div>
<div><span style="color:#666666;font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:large"><strong>Caryn Ann Harlos</strong></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:xx-small">Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee </span><span style="font-size:x-small">(Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - <a href="mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org" target="_blank">Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org</a></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small">Communications Director, <a href="http://www.lpcolorado.org" target="_blank">Libertarian Party of Colorado</a></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small">Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee</span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small"> </span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small">A haiku to the Statement of Principles:</span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small"><em>We defend your rights</em></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small"><em>And oppose the use of force</em></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small"><em>Taxation is theft</em></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small"> </span></div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote></div><div style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif"><blockquote type="cite" style="padding:0 0.4em;border-left:#1010ff 2px solid;margin:0"><div class="m_4474102174939015736m_8824205560661434230pre" style="margin:0;padding:0;font-family:monospace">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br> Lnc-business mailing list<br> <a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br> <a href="http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/lnc-business</a></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/lnc-business</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/lnc-business</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Arvin Vohra<br><br><a href="http://www.VoteVohra.com" target="_blank">www.VoteVohra.com</a><br><a href="mailto:VoteVohra@gmail.com" target="_blank">VoteVohra@gmail.com</a><br>(301) 320-3634</div>
</div>