Mediaboss Marketing

If you speak to any political activist operating outside of the two-party mainstream, a common point mentioned is how party politics compromises principles. Republicans often sacrifice conservative principles to advance the party elite. Although individuals such as House Speaker Paul Ryan or Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are considered leaders in the Republican Party, conservative activists generally do not consider them standard bearers of their cause. Case in point is the failure to legitimately repeal Obamacare.

The same is said for many liberals and progressives in terms of the Democratic Party. Instead of nominating someone more devout to their cause such as Senator Bernie Sanders, the party elite opted for Hillary Clinton, a mistake possibly responsible for Trumps unexpected presidency. The Democratic Party seems more concerned with the party elite than advancing their principles.

So why would the Libertarian Party be any different?

Libertarian National Committee chairman Nicholas Sarwark has an active presence online, targeting individuals who stand at odds with his party. This is not unusual, as across the country, Republicans figuratively snipe at Democrats and vice versa. Even on that rare occasion there is common ground among both sides, partisanship always reigns supreme. It is a fact of life in todays political climate.

But with the last election, the Libertarian Party sought to brand itself as the sane alternate to the madness of the two-party duopoly. The problem is that the partys own chairman contradicts this own line of logic.

Sarwark has criticized libertarian icon, former Texas Congressman Ron Paul as well as his libertarian-leaning son Senator Rand Paul. More recently, he has taken aim at historian Tom Woods. The recurring theme is Sarwarks love for hurling insults at non-Libertarians, even the ones that are simply unenrolled libertarians.

Is this healthy for the cause of liberty?

The liberty movement had a very brief moment of unity in 2012 when Ron Paul ran for President, but after that, the movement splintered almost immediately. Libertarians want success for the Libertarian Party, but many Paul-aligned activists remain within the Republican Party. In a number of ways, libertarianism has fallen victim to a tug-o-war between political parties.

So where does this leave Sarwark?

The question ultimately lies where his loyalties are and to a degree, what the aim of the Libertarian Party is.

Is the Libertarian Party in existence to advance its own brand, or does it exist to advance libertarian principles? More importantly, do these goals align?

If the answer to the latter question is yes, then the Libertarian Party would support causes that advance libertarian principles. Nobody is arguing that the Ron, Rand, or Woods are perfect. With that being said, it is undeniable that these individuals have made a significant contribution to liberty. Given Sarwarks attacks, its then easy to assume that advancing the Libertarian Party and the cause of liberty are not parallel causes.

So where does that leave the Libertarian Party?

Ultimately, the Libertarian Party is a lot like the Republican Party. Candidates, activists and scattered leaders may genuinely identify with the principled cause, but the party structure works contrary to it. Political parties work contrary to principles, whether it be Republicans with conservatism or Libertarians with libertarianism.

When Sarwark attacks prominent libertarian figures simply because they dont identify with individuals such as Gary Johnson or Bill Weld, he is setting back the cause of liberty in favor of pushing his brand. This may be his job as a party chairman, but lets not operate under the assumption that he is working towards the goal of advancing liberty.

Read this article:
How The Libertarian Party's Partisan Politics Hurts Libertarianism - The Liberty Conservative

Writing in the Daily Beast, Matt Lewis suggestsa disproportionate number of alt-right leaders claim to be former libertarians. Exploring why this might be, he identifies several possibilities, and in the process gives libertarians some things to think about.

Among other things, Lewis notes that the Ron Paul campaign and movement was heavily influenced by paleo-libertarian types, such as Lew Rockwell, who have long been critical of immigration and multi-culturalism. Its worth remembering that Rockwells circle eagerly embraced Pat Buchanans first presidential run in 1992 and stayed the course even after Buchanan turned away from antiwar and anti-government themes and began stressing cultural issues. For some self-described libertarians, Buchanans embrace of the culture war was a feature, not a bug, for (in their view) one problem with big government is that it tends to help the wrong people.

Lewis also considers whether some folks who are predisposed to find libertarianism attractive are also predisposed to be seduced by the alt-right. For such folks libertarianism may lose its appeal when they discover the alt-right offers an angrier or more outrageousideology to embrace.

One factor Id add (and that weve discussed on Volokh before) is the misplaced affinity for the Confederacy among some libertarians. War tends to increase the growth of government, and some libertarians note that the federal government grew during the Civil War. This leads some to the (terribly mistaken) conclusion that the Confederacy was somehow the more libertarian side in that conflict. This idea is reinforced by revisionist historical accounts that try to claim the war was really over tariffs (a claim which used to be taught in some high schooltextbooks, especially in the South), or that President Abraham Lincoln had a particularly monstrous record on civil liberties. Neither claim is true. The South explicitly seceded over slavery, and however bad Lincolns civil liberties records was, the Souths was far worse (and was worse even when one tries to discount slavery). [For more on the problem of misplaced Confederate sympathies among libertarians, I recommend this 2013 BHL post by Jacob Levy.]

Lewis closes by suggesting that libertarians (and conservatives) become more vigilant about associations with white supremacists. Hes right. I would also suggest that conservatives and libertarians rethink their embrace of controversialists, particularly on college campuses, as this feeds the alt-right beast. Libertarianism may not be responsible for the alt-right, but its fair to ask whether enough libertarians have done enough to fight it within their own ranks.

Continue reading here:
Does libertarianism have an alt-right problem? - The Washington Post - Washington Post

Plans are in the works for a new mosque in Keene. Its a project of William Coley, a Muslim activist and former Libertarian vice-presidential candidate. He's currently based in Tennessee, but plans to move to Keene and open the mosque this fall.

He says the idea came out of conversations hes had with Ian Freeman, a fellow libertarian and a Keene resident. Freeman founded an organization called the Shire Free Church, which is donating the property for the mosque.

Coley says it will be a space not only for Muslims, but also for those of other faiths that need a place to worship. Theres more than one small religious group here in town they just dont have the funding to have their own building, he said. So we want to give back by allowing those groups to come and use our worship space.

Coley also hopes to offer space to the homeless.

Read more:
Libertarian and Muslim Activist Planning Mosque in Keene - New Hampshire Public Radio

I hope my correspondence finds you in good health and spirits. Its a little after midnight and I am sitting up with my Mac Book Pro on my lap and my beloved dog Eva Elizabeth by my side. I have been wanting to take some time and express myself in support of some things that I believe.

My name is Corey Maurice Fauconier. I am a native of Cambria Heights, Queens, New York. I reside on the South side of Richmond, Virginia. I am involved in my community with non profit organizations like Concerned Black Men (CBM), Get Involved RVA, Toastmasters International and the Richmond Crusade for Voters (RCV). I regularly attend the Richmond School Board, City Council and visit the General Assembly. I notice that not enough people are involved and working to make a difference and that frustrates me.

Back in November of 2014, my good friend and brother Regie Ford whom I met from Toastmasters International in 2007 invited me to attend an Candidates Forum hosted by the historic Richmond Crusade for Voters. The RCV was established in 1956 to educate African Americans in the Commonwealth of Virginia with regard to the referendum vote to prevent the desegregation of the public school system per Brown vs. the Board of Education. The sad thing is only fifty percent of African Americans came out to vote that year, the referendum failed to pass and as history teaches us, the Commonwealth of Virginia closed its public school system that year.

I witnessed history during that forum. Sprinkled in with the regular Democrats and Republicans were Robert Sarvis and James Carr Libertarians candidates for Senate and Congress. I remained objective. I closed my eyes and listened to Mr. Sarvis and Mr. Carr and most of what they said made absolute sense to me. They were honest. My 14 year old step son Elijah who is a freshman at Huguenot High School looked at me and said, Corey the Libertarians won, they were way better that the Democratic and Republicans.

It was historic because Robert Sarvis and James Carr were the first third party candidates to ever address the Richmond Crusade for Voters. Following the event, I went to introduced myself to Mr. Sarvis and Mr. Carr. We talked and took photographs. We exchanged contact information and something just clicked. Over the next few weeks Mr. Sarvis and Mr. Carr instead became Rob and James. Regular men who wanted to make a change in the politics of their community. They in turn introduced me to other Libertarians around the Commonwealth of Virginia. A network of people who were just like me, fighting for freedom.

Soon after, I met Carl Loser and Connie Hannigan-Frank on Twitter. Once again finding out that people in my community were just like me, working to fight for liberty.

I am researching the Libertarian Party. From what I can see thus far, it seems like the right place to be for me. Researching prominent African American Libertarians Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell. I have attended many meetings with my Libertarian brothers and sisters. The Patrick Henry Supper Club, the Chesterfield County Libertarian Party and the Powhatan Libertarian Party meeting. The power of people uniting in support of positive improvement in government and in our communities.

The one thing my late parents Emma and Sylvester taught me growing up in my Caribbean American / African American section of Queens was one to remain involved in my community and to read. Two very important lessons. I will continue to read and research, I will continue do my community service with Concerned Black Men, Get Involved RVA, Toastmasters International and Richmond Crusade for Voters. I will continue to embrace my Libertarian brothers and sisters to work in our community. I welcome any assistance from any Democrat or Republican who wants to make our community a better place. We need to work together in common-unity (community) But, if I need to label myself, call me Corey Fauconier, a proud Central Virginia Libertarian. Please feel free to contact me using the information below. May I thank you in advance for your time and consideration. I pray we find all the freedoms that we are fighting to obtain.

With Respect in Search of Liberty,

Corey M. Fauconier

@CoreyMFauconier Twitter

[emailprotected]

Read the original here:
An Open Letter from an African American Libertarian - The Narrative Times (blog)

Ill confess this article is the lowest hanging, of all the low-hanging fruit Ive plucked, since writing for Being Libertarian. However, I was recently asked to state the most controversial thing I believed; I wasnt sure if the answer to the question is my belief that John Lennon was a terrible human being or if my belief that hes a terrible human being cannot be argued against.

Its a foregone conclusion that Nazism is worse than Antifa my concerns are primarily Antifa. My anecdotal impression is that the neo-Nazi movement is largely comprised of socially-awkward, intellectually-underwhelming, vocationally-challenged, attention-starved, individuals.

They cant accomplish anything in their own lives and Im expected to be concerned theyre going to take over the world? In order for Nazism to take root, a massive economic-calamity has to occur and there must be a semblance of a causal link to Judaism in the way Hitler linked Jews to their failing banking system.

Contrast that with Marxism, which only requires the wealthy to be enormously better off than the middle and lower classes (which has already occurred).

Marxism, in the West, is espoused by successful and educated individuals. Nazism has a disgusting motivation, religious and racial discrimination, while Marxism, though horrendously despotic, has a noble motivation in eradicating poverty. The chances that Marxism could take root in Western civilization are not only high; it is already taking root in Western civilization.

Marxism, in all its brutal ugliness, has taken root. The most cursory knowledge of history, in the 20th century, is the knowledge of the consequences of Marxism: of the hundred million who populate the mass graves, the enslavement of even more, the systems of religious persecution and executions, and the total economic collapse (there is a capitalist privilege of talking about economic collapse in terms of 1929 and 2008, not in terms of mass-famine).

As millions of religionists were being horribly put to death back in the U.S.S.R., John Lennon was gleefully imagining it.

Back in the U.S.S.R. and Imagineare songs that glorify the most brutal ideology of the 20th century. To think positively about that is to relinquish ones humanity.

When Marxs imagining no possessions came into fruition, its predictable (very predictable) outcome resulted in mass starvation and carried with it the annihilation of hope. Its a level of horror I can pretentiously write about, but I have no meaningful grasp on the reality of it my mind simply cannot comprehend that level of desolation.

Its one thing to live in a constant state of fear and persecution. Its quite another to die horrifically. Its a fate worse still that as you die horrifically to have millions of people joyfully singing about your demise. To even disagree with the notion that this man is a wretched, immoral, evil influence is to be in the wrong.

John Lennon is the lowest caliber of a human being.

Those who ebulliently echo his melodies while others suffered their reality are equally low-caliber. That Marx himself endorsed the mass graves, the despotism, the eradication of religion, and that John Lennon sings his praise, is a level of barbarism utterly incompatible with an ethical human being.

This post was written by Brandon Kirby.

The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions.

Brandon Kirby is a philosopher, financial adviser, a founder of a local investment club, and he hosts regular symposiums in philosophy. He is also a member of Canadas Libertarian Party.

Like Loading...

More here:
John Lennon Was a Jackass Freedom Philosophy - Being Libertarian