The Party of Principle

The Libertarian Party prides itself on being "the party of principle". What does this mean? Apparently, one thing this means is that in order to pass muster with the LP, any ideas expressed by an advocate of individual freedom must have (1) been expressed by a founding father prior to 1800, and (2) have been made aware to LP members when they were in the 7th Grade. No post-1800 legal, political, or economic concepts are acceptable, and even pre-1800 concepts are unacceptable if they do not comply with the aforementioned requirements. To the LP member, political evolution, if not technological and cultural evolution, stopped in 1800.

The Initiation of Force (Nonaggression axiom) and Private Property

The cornerstone of radical libertarian thinking is the idea that private property does not initiate force. Consequently, the radical libertarian believes that he or she can simultaneously believe in private property while opposing the initiation of force. But since private property does in fact initiate force, radical libertarianism must either be rejected or at least be grounded on some other principle.

Nancy Pelosi favors "trickle down" economics

One interesting revelation of the recent banking crisis is that Nancy Pelosi and most Congressional Democrats favor "trickle down" economics. Ronald Reagan believed that the good fortune of Wall Street "trickled down" to Main Street. Similarly, Nancy Pelosi and most Congressional Democrats warn us that the bad fortune of Wall Street will "trickle down" to Main Street.

Radical Libertarianism: Another Fatal Conceit?

Friedrich Hayek called belief in socialism the “fatal conceit” because it supposes that all wisdom and knowledge about how society should be ordered can be known all at one time and apply to all eras. Radical libertarians believe the same thing. So can radical libertarianism be considered another “fatal conceit”?

Ron Paul: Not Eligible for an LP Candidacy

On May 7, 2008, in a speech before the American Conservative Defense Alliance, Ron Paul stated: "My goal is to try to get people to accept the transition gradually and gracefully - cut back, balanced budget. . . Quite frankly, I think its going to be very, very difficult." Gradually and gracefully? The task will be "very, very difficult?" Needless to say, Ron Paul would certainly not get the LP's nomination for any candidacy after saying things like that!

Doing Business with Radical Libertarians

Radical libertarians are very headstrong, certain people. So they can be very difficult to associate with. I do not recommend that you enter into a business relationship with a radical libertarian. After a few months, a dispute will develop. If you sue him for breach of contract, he will accuse you of "initiating force". He will reason that he, being perfect, could not possibly be in breach of contract. Therefore, he is right and you are wrong. So by bringing suit, you are "initiating force".

May LP Members Kill Government Employees?

The Libertarian Party, through it oath or pledge, takes the position that the initiation of force is bad, but the use of force to retaliate or defend is good. But what does this mean? The LP has yet to explain. What if an LP member enters a federal building and kills several employees of the Internal Revenue Service? If the oath or pledge means that the LP rejects political violence, then the act can be condemned and the the perpetrator expelled from the party. But if the oath or pledge means that violence is permissible to retaliate or defend against another who has initiated force, then the LP would have to defend the actions of the perpetrator. After all, the IRS initiates force when it enforces the collection of the income tax and other taxes. So the perpetrator is engaging in retaliatory or defensive action whey he kills the IRS employees. Please note: the two aforementioned interpretations of the oath are not complementary; they are diametrically opposed to one another. Yet LP members claim that political action and personal action can be judged according to the same principle.