Archive for the ‘Libertarian’ Category

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. challenges Donald Trump to debate at Libertarian Convention – The Associated Press

  1. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. challenges Donald Trump to debate at Libertarian Convention  The Associated Press
  2. R.F.K. Jr., Invited to Libertarian Convention, Seeks Trump Debate  The New York Times
  3. RFK Jr. challenges Trump to debate at Libertarian Party convention  The Hill

Here is the original post:
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. challenges Donald Trump to debate at Libertarian Convention - The Associated Press

The Libertarian Party Crackup – by Tyler Groenendal – The Bulwark

(Photo by Gary Hershorn/Getty Images)

THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY, the largest third party in the United States and the self-described party of principle, announced last week that former President Donald Trump will be speaking at its national convention on May 25.

In the announcement, the chair of the Libertarian National Committee, Angela McArdle, bills the move as an incredible opportunity to advance the message of liberty, and to make an impact on the policy positions of a past, and possibly future, president.

Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has a different take, saying, If Libertarians join me and the Republican Party, where we have many Libertarian views, the election wont even be close. We cannot have another four years of death, destruction, and incompetence. WE WILL WORK TOGETHER AND WIN!

Despite Trumps rhetoric, Trumpism has little in common with libertarianism. His hostility to free trade, support for qualified immunity, continuation of overseas military action and drone strikes, and unilateral banning of bump stocks stand in direct opposition to both libertarian principles and the partys platform.

Share

Trump isnt the only non-Libertarian candidate the party is courting. Independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. spoke at the California Libertarian Partys convention; back in March he wasreportedly even mulling running as a Libertarian following discussions with McArdle and party leadership, although it is unclear if he is still considering that possibility. Like Trump, Kennedy is no libertarian, though he appeals to certain populist and conspiratorial elements within the party.

Despite his lack of libertarian policy beliefs, Trump has a clear incentive to siphon votes away from the eventual Libertariannominee. In the 2020 election, the Libertarian vote share covered the spread between Trump and Biden in several key states, including Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsinall of which broke for Biden. The opportunity to speak at the partys convention provides Trump a prime opportunity to stop a repeat of 2020 in its tracks.

Ostensibly, the opportunity to speak is a neutral one that was offered to all major candidates (including RFK Jr. and President Biden), though the rabid enthusiasm with which activists and party leadership greeted the news of Trumps speech calls this into question. Almost immediately after the announcement, the Libertarian National Committee was selling official t-shirts with a silhouette of Trumps head alongside such libertarian catchphrases as End the Fed and Taxation is Theft. (These products have since been removed from the website.)

As McArdle put it, My loyalty has to be to the Libertarian party . . . but Donald Trump is a much better person and president than Joe Biden. Theres no contest. Her clear admiration for Trump in spite of his platform and his promises to be a Day One dictator signal that the years-long transformation of the Libertarian party is now complete.

IN 2016, THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY was handed a ripe opportunity for unprecedented success. With two widely disliked major-party candidates, many Americans were desperate for a viable alternative. Enter Gary Johnson, former Republican governor of New Mexico turned Libertarian and the 2012 Libertarian presidential nominee. He selected the former Republican governor of Massachusetts, Bill Weld, as his running mate, despite Welds lack of history with the party and concerns from some members about his political beliefs.

Some early polls suggested the campaign was not far from the elusive 5 percent electoral threshold that would trigger automatic ballot access in subsequent elections in many states. But missteps, from Johnson forgetting the name of the Syrian city where a fierce battle was causing mass atrocities (What is Aleppo?) to Welds near-endorsement of Hillary Clinton (Im not sure anyones more qualified to be president of the United States than Hillary Clinton) diminished libertarians enthusiasm for Johnson.

Still, the Johnson/Weld campaign by far was the most successful Libertarian ticket in history, earning 4.5 million votes (3.3 percent of the total votes cast). For the first time since 2000, the ticket was on the ballot in all fifty states. The future of the party looked bright.

LIKE ANY POLITICAL PARTY, the Libertarian party has always been fraught with division. Whether on particular policy issues like abortion and immigration or tactical questions of messaging and political strategy, intraparty conflict has long been the norm.

Broadly speaking, the party can be divided between two branches: pragmatists and radicals. Pragmatists focus on marginal movements toward liberty and winning elections. Radicals yearn for the libertarian revolution, and see the party as a vehicle for promoting libertarianism even to the detriment of the partys electoral chances.

Welds inclusion on the 2016 ticket, and growing internal conflict over strategy, messaging, and culture-war issues related to race and gender, led radical elements within the party to form the Mises Caucus. The caucus sought a more radical realignment of the partys strategy, messaging, and politics, and quickly began growing in numbers, money, and influence.

The caucus is named for Ludwig von Mises, a twentieth-century Austrian economist who is one of the intellectual godfathers of the modern libertarian movement. Though named for Mises, the caucus owes much of its philosophy to Ron Paul, the former Republican congressman and perennial presidential candidate (alternately as a Republican and a Libertarian).

The Mises Caucus spread like wildfire online, through celebritarian Twitter threads and promotion via the extensive network of libertarian podcasts. By the 2022 Libertarian National Convention in Reno, the Mises Caucus was on the verge of taking over the party. Growing grassroots dissatisfaction with party leadership, as well as lingering frustration over what they saw as a lackluster response to pandemic-era policies like lockdowns and mandates for mask-wearing and vaccination, catapulted the Mises Caucus to victory.

McArdle, who was a Mises Caucus board member and was endorsed by the caucus to chair the national committee, summarized the Mises-backed candidates goals: I will move heaven and earth to make this thing functional and not embarrassing for you. We are going to change the country.

In an interview with Reason shortly before she won the chairand indeed the entire slate of Mises-backed candidates won their party leadership electionsMcArdle offered more concrete goals. She was committed to better messaging from the national party, in contrast with controversial and bigoted remarks from some state parties, like the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire. She said she would seek to broaden the party to encompass the broader liberty movement, including all those at odds with what several Mises Caucus proponents described as woke and SJW elements in the previous leadership. McArdle also pledged to better manage the partys finances, and to work to grow both membership and donations.

Now, two years later, what has the leadership of the party looked like under the Mises Caucus crew? From messaging to party growth to internal management, the past two years of the Libertarian party have been an unmitigated disaster.

Share

THE FIRST AND MOST OBVIOUS CHANGE that the new crew brought about concerned the partys messaging. For many in the Mises Caucus, the question of whether the partys Twitter account was sufficiently owning the libs was more important than workaday political-organizational concerns like ballot access or running candidates.

Shortly after their victory in Reno, the Mises Caucus removed a longstanding plank of the Libertarian party platform that had said, We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. One has to wonder: What kinds of would-be Libertarians were being held back from joining the party by those wordsand, more importantly, why did the Mises Caucus want to court them?

The messaging got worse from there. Since the takeover, the official Libertarian party Twitter account has become a hotbed of conspiracy theories, inflammatory rhetoric, and scorn. State affiliates quickly followed in its wake, with the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire recently tweeting a revised version of the 14 words, a white-supremacist slogan.

The Mises Caucus faithful were thrilled by this change in the partys public stance. Still, beyond this contingent, the party struggled to make inroads to new members.

Contra McArdles stated commitment to the broader liberty movement, the Mises Caucus has always been pugnacious toward its intramural competition. One of their prime longstanding targets is regime libertarians, shorthand for nonprofits like the Cato Institute and the Reason Foundation. Those organizations perceived compromise and lack of radicalism, as well as their willingness to accept imperfect and incremental improvements towards libertarian ends, meant they deserved scorn and sanction from the party.

For example, following the publication of a Cato Institute blog post praising the COVID-19 vaccines as a triumph of globalization and international cooperation, McArdle herself wrote that the Cato Institute should be excommunicated from the liberty movement and has nothing to do with our political movement. If one of the major, long-established national centers of libertarian thought and policy wasnt aligned with the new Libertarian party, who is? (Besides, apparently, Donald Trump, who supervised the government-led effort to develop the vaccines in the first place.)

The latent hostility of the partys messaging and open hostility toward libertarians not aligned with the Mises Caucus started to drive away longtime party members. According to data compiled from publicly available information by the Classical Liberal Caucusthe main opposition to the Mises Caucus within the partysustaining memberships (denoting party members who give at least $25 to the cause each year) have significantly declined since the Mises Caucus takeover.

The new leadership has likewise alienated longtime donors, as fundraising more generally has declined alongside membership. The partys financial outlook has become bleak enough that there are plans to cease operations from the partys Alexandria headquarters in order to rent the building out instead.

This chaos has percolated from the national party to the state level, as state parties have disaffiliated (in New Mexico and Virginia), splintered (in Massachusetts and Michigan), or formed new parties outright (Pennsylvanias Keystone Party).

The state parties that remain are growing less enthusiastic about actually electing Libertarian candidates. The Libertarian Party of Colorado announced they would no longer run candidates in races that already have strong liberty minded Republicans in them. Likewise, the Libertarian Party of Montana changed its bylaws to allow endorsements of candidates of any political affiliation. In Arizona, the Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate in 2022 dropped out to endorse Republican Blake Masters.

The partys response to its own slow-moving collapse has been mixed. Publicly, McArdle is quick to blame previous leadership. In a blithe and low budgetlooking video, she likened the old Libertarian party to a car thats been driven by drunken rats that new leadership needs to fix up before it can run properly again. But never fear, she said: The era of woke regime libertarianism is never coming back.

Privately, things are not looking so good. In a leaked internal memo from 2023, McArdle acknowledged that we are in serious in trouble, no one is coming to save us, and the takeover is turning into a disaster. We need to radically change things if we are going to survive the next year, she writes.

Share

ALL THIS THRASHING FOR RELEVANCE amid internal chaos helps to explain the Libertarian partys embrace of bizarre strategies: Its leadership is desperate, out of ideas, and willing to try anything. Thats how the caucus of principle and radicalism has come to court the likes of cracked Democrat-turned-independent RFK Jr. and former Republican president Trump.

In this, the partys current leadership shows that it is willing to abandon libertarian principles built in the partys platformand to do so for the sake of visibility and influence. Theyre not minor principles, either, but core principles, such as those expressed in the partys positions on free trade and migration (Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders), industrial policy (We oppose all forms of government subsidies and bailouts to business, labor, or any other special interest), and justice (We support the abolition of qualified immunity). What would DJT or RFK Jr. have to say to a gathering of libertarians on those topics?

But in truth, the Mises Caucus abandoning principles for optics is nothing new. At the 2022 convention, Justin Amash (the first Libertarian congressman in the partys history) read a string of quotations at odds with Mises Caucus orthodoxy as part of his speech: Libertarianism is not anarchism, nor has it anything whatsoever to do with anarchism, he said, and Libertarianisms thinking is cosmopolitan and ecumenical.

In response to a chorus of boos, Amash revealed that every quotation he had just read came from Ludwig von Mises himself (although Amash replaced the word liberalism in the original quotations with libertarianism). If the Mises Caucus rejects the words and ideas of its namesake, what parts of the libertarian tradition do they support?

Whoever the eventual Libertarian nominee is this year, that person will struggle to reach the heights of 2016, or even the 1.2 percent attained by the partys 2020 presidential nominee, Jo Jorgensen. Promises that Trumps appearance will lead to valuable media attention, or that Trump will change his platform after hearing Libertarian concerns, are laughable. The only thing that he will take from Libertarians is votes, and he will give nothing in return.

The Mises Caucus, which formed predominantly in online communities with messaging and growth strategies based almost solely on provocative digital engagement, has failed spectacularly at every one of its promises to the Libertarian party since it took over. Their story is one of compromise, not principle; decline, not growth. And at the end of the month, when the Libertarian party all but endorses Trump for president, they will slide further into irrelevance.

Please take a moment to pass this article on to a friend:

Share

Tyler Groenendal is the manager of foundation relations at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

See the rest here:
The Libertarian Party Crackup - by Tyler Groenendal - The Bulwark

Trump should debate RFK Jr at the libertarian convention – Washington Examiner

Former President Donald Trump made thesurpriseannouncement last week that he will be appearing at the Libertarian National Convention later this month.

Libertarians are some of the most independent and thoughtful thinkers in our country, and I am honored to join them in Washington, D.C., later this month, Trump said. We must all work together to help advance freedom and liberty for every American, and a second Trump administration will achieve that goal.

Independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will be appearing at the convention as well, and on Tuesday, the eccentric long shot issued achallengeto the 45th president.

Lets meet at the Libertarian convention and show the American public that at least two of the major candidates arent afraid to debate each other, Kennedy said. I asked the convention organizers and they are game for us to use our time there to bring the American people the debate they deserve!

Ideally, the Libertarian Party would include either its nominee, if the nominee is decided in time, or another representative of the party in such a debate. Both former libertarian vice presidential candidateSpike Cohenand comedian and podcasterDave Smithhave offered their formidable debate skills. Whether this hypothetical debate would include a libertarian or be a one-on-one with Kennedy, Trump should accept.

Trump is clear that he wants to debate President Joe Biden. It isunlikelythat the Biden team allows its candidate within a country mile of a debate stage, considering his age andmental decline, even compared to four years ago. But Trump accepting this debate would put the pressure on the Biden camp.

It would, at least, make for a good attack ad. This debate would also offer both Trump and Kennedy the opportunity to sharpen their swords as Election Day approaches. Kennedys strength is his recall, and unlike in a four-hour Joe Rogan podcast, he wont be able to grandstand with numbers and statistics real or imagined. Trumps typical stump-style rhetoric wont work, either.

Even if a Libertarian Party representative isnt included onstage, I assume there would be competent, principled libertarians questioning the candidates Cohen and Smith would be two obvious choices and the audience wont be won over by either candidates go-to tactics.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

Lets be honest: There is no real downside for anyone involved. Kennedy gets another chance in the sun, libertarians get an opportunity to question a former president and a strong third-party challenger on the topics that matter most to liberty-loving Americans, and Trump removes Bidens he wouldnt debate DeSantis and Haley card as the 46th presidents staff attempts to shield their doddering candidate.

Even if Trump takes a beating from a libertarian candidate, the audience, or Kennedy (brain wormand all), it is still six months from Election Day. No undecided voter will go blue instead of red this November because of what happened at the Libertarian Party convention. This debate would be fun, and it would be beneficial for Americans to see the former president and the highest-polling third-party candidate in decades answer intelligent, thoughtful questions in front of a neutral, even hostile, audience.

BradyLeonard(@bradyleonard) is a musician, political strategist, and host ofThe No Gimmicks Podcast.

See original here:
Trump should debate RFK Jr at the libertarian convention - Washington Examiner

Four Obstacles Facing Libertarian Proponents of Border Controls The Future of Freedom Foundation – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Libertarian proponents of immigration controls inevitably run into four obstacles in their support of this particular statist program:

1. The non-aggression principle. This is the core principle of the libertarian philosophy. It holds that it is morally wrong to initiate force against another person. Another way of stating the non-aggression principle is this: People have the right to live their lives any way they want, so long as their conduct is peaceful that is, so long as they are not initiating force or fraud against others.

A political border is simply an artificial line that delineates different governmental jurisdictions. Most of the time, one cannot even see a border. For example, when people drive from Virginia to North Carolina and cross the border and enter North Carolina, there is not some great big red line that is the border. The only way that people know that they have crossed the border is that they see a sign that says Welcome to North Carolina.

Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

It is obvious that crossing the border into North Carolina does not involve the initiation of force or fraud against someone else. It is an entirely peaceful act. And notice something important: The border between Virginia and North Carolina does not disappear simply because people are free to cross it (in both directions). The border remains. Once people cross it and enter North Carolina, they are subject to the laws of North Carolina. Thus, North Carolina does not lose its sovereignty simply because people are free to enter North Carolina.

If someone stops a person crossing the border into North Carolina, it is the person who is doing the stopping who is initiating force. That person is the wrongdoer. Thus, if North Carolina were to erect a border station at the Virginia-North Carolina border, where border guards could stop a person traveling from Virginia to North Carolina, it would be the state of North Carolina violating the rights of travelers.

The same principles apply to an international border. A person who crosses from Mexico and enters the United States is engaged in a purely peaceful act. It is the U.S. border guards who are the ones initiating force when they stop, arrest, and incarcerate the traveler.

2. An immigration police state. Border controls come with enforcement. If there is no enforcement, then the controls are worthless, given that people will simply ignore them. The enforcement measures along the U.S.-Mexico border have converted the borderlands into an immigration police state. Warrantless searches of ranches and farms within 100 miles of the border. Highway checkpoints. Boarding of Greyhound buses to check peoples papers. Criminalization of hiring, transporting, harboring, and caring for illegal immigrants. A Berlin Wall. Concertina wire. And much more.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, a police state and a free society are opposites. Thats another way that we know for certain that border controls cannot possibly be reconciled with libertarianism.

3. Americas system of immigration controls and the immigration police state that enforces it have come with massive death, suffering, rapes, kidnapping, detention centers, separation of children from parents, misery, suffering, humiliation, and abuse.

There is no possibility that libertarianism comes with these types of things. Libertarianism is a glorious political and economic philosophy that comes with life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and harmony among people.

4. Americas immigration-control system is based on the core socialist principle of central planning. Government officials centrally plan the movements of millions of people in what is one of the most complex markets in history. Socialist central planning produces what Ludwig von Mises called planned chaos, which is what we have had on the border for around 100 years. Socialism and libertarianism are opposite philosophies.

These are the four obstacles that libertarian proponents of immigration controls face in seeking to have other libertarians adopt their system. Of course, all four obstacles are insurmountable, unlike their Berlin Wall along the border.

Read the original here:
Four Obstacles Facing Libertarian Proponents of Border Controls The Future of Freedom Foundation - The Future of Freedom Foundation

Trump’s Libertarian Convention Speech a ‘Head-Scratcher’for the Libertarians – The American Conservative

Weeks before the former President Donald Trump is scheduled to accept the Republican presidential nomination for the third time, he will speak to the Libertarian National Convention, a move that has been described as a bit of a head-scratcher.

Naturally, many Libertarians are not happy about it. Some party members are allergic to anything that might increase their relevance or even the general knowledge that Libertarians exist. But it is also fair to say that Trump has moved his own party in a marginally less small-l libertarian direction, and his election in 2016 elevated conservative thinkers who would like to move it in a radically less libertarian direction.

Libertarians with and without capitalization are correct to question how much their preferred moniker applies to a GOP that mostly continues to lavish funds on the welfare-warfare state despite $1 trillion deficits.

All that throat-clearing out of the way, it is really not much of a head-scratcher as to why Trump would want to address the Libertarians. Third parties and independent candidacies are going to matter more this year than four years ago. Trump would like to ensure that this fact benefits him at least as much as it did in 2016.

Despite their best efforts at self-sabotage, the Libertarian Party is markedly better than other third parties at getting on state ballots. It has also done a better job at getting votes these past few election cycles.The LP presidential ticket received 1,247,923 votes in 2012, 4,489,233 of them in 2016, and 1,865,535 in 2020.

Keep an eye on that last number. Gary Johnson was the presidential nominee in the first two elections. The former Republican governor of New Mexico was the most senior elected official and arguably the biggest name to ever top the Libertarian ticket. While that honor is somewhat like being the tallest building in Topeka (or Santa Fe), it might explain why the party was able to break its raw vote record twice and achieve its highest percentage of the popular vote ever in 2016.

But even with the relatively obscure Jo Jorgensen as the 2020 nominee, Libertarians were once again able easily to exceed the million-vote threshold, get its second-highest number of raw votes ever, and finish third nationally. (My most viral post on X was about Jorgensen getting bitten by a bat, back in its pre-Musk iteration as Twitter.) That suggests the LPs post-Johnson breakthrough might have some staying power.

Johnson didnt get as much blame for Trumps election as the Green Partys Jill Stein, though he did receive some. But not only did he win more votes overall; he probably took more from Republicans, leaving his impact more ambiguous than Steins. (I voted for Johnson that year too, abortion misgivings aside, though I probably wouldnt have if I had known Trump had apologized to Pat Buchanan for things said during their short-lived fight for the 2000 Reform Party nomination.)

Which brings us to another reason Trump is wise to speak to the Libertarians: the rise of the Mises Caucus, which includes the sort of paleolibertarians who supported Buchanans presidential bids, especially in the 1992 and 1996 Republican primaries. Some of their votes are potentially gettable for Trump. And is Trump really less libertarian and more of a statist than Mike Gravel?

If your politics can be advanced through a major party like the GOP, they probably should be. Ron Paul accomplished more through his two Republican presidential campaigns, during which he did not get particularly close to the nomination, than he did winning the Libertarian Party nod in 1988.

Pat Robertsons 1988 GOP campaign, for which some Ron Paul 2008 and 2012 lieutenants worked, similarly boosted the organized Christian Right without the 700 Club host having much of a shot past the Iowa caucuses.

With Robert F. Kennedy Jr. making his own overtures to the Libertarian Party, Trump should want to compete for anti-establishment and right-libertarian votes. This is an election that could be decided by tens of thousands of votes in six or seven states. It was not long ago that the Libertarian Party was blamed for Republicans losing some close Senate races.

The only head-scratcher is why the Libertarian Party would want Trump to dominate the headlines coming out of their convention, during which they will presumably nominate their own presidential candidate. Some past Republican presidential candidates could probably tell the LP aspirants about Trumps ability to suck up all the oxygen in a room.

Continued here:
Trump's Libertarian Convention Speech a 'Head-Scratcher'for the Libertarians - The American Conservative