Mediaboss Marketing

I believe that a majority of people think of libertarianism as somewhere between the middle of the left and the right. However, this is simply not the case. This is the result of a misunderstanding of terms and their classical definitions. Because what it means to be politically left or right has changed over time, people have associated the terms of conservative and liberal to have the same meaning as right and left. People who call themselves politically conservative arent actually conservative at all in the classical sense. The following message is for people on the right. But as for people on the left, I also have a message for them I will present next week.

The term conservative, in the classical sense and in a rather broad definition, refers to a support for government. Originally, it represented support for the crown and for an authoritarian form of government not of and by the people, but rather of dictators, despots, and royalty often totalitarian regimes. The modern day right presents itself as seeking out smaller and less intrusive government, more open markets, and claims ideals of freedom especially economic freedom (lower taxes and less government programs). So, for people of the right, it is in your best interest to distance yourselves from the idea of classical conservatism. I dont think it portrays the image you desire.

Beyond not recognizing that the modern right has selected the wrong term to describe itself, it also fails to recognize the disconnect it has in believing it represents seeking smaller government. Smaller government means placing the liberties of the individual above the interests of the collective. In other words, the right has its own ideas of collectivism apart from the left. The right believes itself to be anti-collectivist, but the problem is that it does not recognize many issues that it supports are collective in nature.

The right is very concerned with the loss of traditional ideals and the erosion thereof. For example, it is concerned with an erosion of the idea of traditional marriage. If one holds traditional marriage in an important regard, then the best way to protect that ideal is to ensure that you have the freedom from government intrusion into what is defined as marriage. If you believe that morals and traditional values should be held in high regard, then the best way to ensure they remain as such, is not to use government to define what those values and ideals are, but rather to ensure that a government cannot define those ideals for you. The government is a weapon that works in both directions. If you open the door to enforce a government definition of what ideals and values are good, and what morals represent good behavior, then you have opened the door to whatever is the general consensus of those ideals and values, regardless of what you believe that they are. In order to protect your ideals and values, you must protect the ideals and values of every other individual. Only by refusing government intrusion into your life, can you protect it fully.

The political right is also very concerned with safety and with threats of those who want to do harm to their nation. The only way that you can ensure true safety is to ensure that you have not sacrificed your rights in the process. Your rights, with which you were born, are far too precious to give away to a government entity, even in the name of safety. When you place your sacred rights into the hands of a government, you have also sacrificed your future safety by allowing a government to have dominion over you. If you erroneously place the government in charge of what you can do, when you can do it, and how you can do it, then you have given your safety to the government, which, by definition is not very concerned with individual safety at all.

Also, in the name of safety, the political right (although much increasingly the left as well) often deems foreign intervention and the forcible spread of western ideals into other nations as good policy to encourage greater safety. There is a certain point to this. It is better to fight a war on foreign soil than it is to fight one at home. However, the ideas can be taken too far. The key to it all is that you must understand that often in interference in the affairs of other nations, more enemies are created than destroyed. It is very difficult to discern which conflicts are necessary to actually preserve safety without creating new enemies, and which amount simply to interventionism, but it is essential to attempt this discernment. By limiting interventionism, you are also increasing your safety. And, by limiting expenditures into unnecessary interventionism, you are also decreasing taxation in terms of how much is necessary to operate the government.

There is a very serious disconnect in what it means to be conservative, even as how it is defined by the modern political right. As the right sees it, being socially conservative means supporting all the traditions and ideals as was previously mentioned. And, it sees safety as a paramount part of securing those traditions. It is extremely important for the right to understand that the social conservatism it seeks can only be achieved through limitation of government. The right needs to understand that by restricting government from defining freedoms, and restricting what government can do to guard safety, does in fact accomplish the goals the political right desires. The right, in large part, is absolutely correct in its goals. It just misunderstands how to achieve them.

This post was written by Danny Chabino.

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

Like Loading...

Originally posted here:
Red Dirt Liberty Report: A Message for the Right - Being Libertarian

Cliff Hyra has a ready answer for anyone who thinks being governor is not an entry-level job: Roughly one-fourth of the countrys current governors started their political careers that way. One of them, in fact, serves as governor of Virginia. (Whether Terry McAuliffe qualifies as an argument for gubernatorial neophytes or against them is an open question.)

Wisely, Hyra the Libertarian Partys candidate for governor of Virginia this year does not bring up another example of a novice: Donald Trump, who holds the most important elected position in the world without any prior political experience. Trumps approval ratings in Virginia continue to dangle below 40 percent.

But Trump does neuter arguments Libertarians often confront, such as the notion that people will not vote for a political outsider. And the criticism that Libertarian candidates are ill-prepared for office a stereotype Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson reinforced last year with his infamous Aleppo Moment. That was embarrassing, but Trump makes Johnson look like a walking encyclopedia.

The Trump era also confounds other received wisdom, such as the supposed immutability of ideological groups. A recent Cato Institute study on The 5 Types of Trump Voters finds that almost 20 percent hold essentially progressive views on economic and social issues. Some of the fiercest Trump critics, on the other hand, are traditional conservatives of the National Review variety. Never-Trump Republicans make up a significant segment of the political populace.

This has led to a fair amount of speculation about a potential re-alignment of Americas political parties. Libertarians, who generally sound like Republicans on economics and Democrats on social issues, should be able to benefit from such a realignment by forming a coalition from both parties who favor limited government across a broad swath of issues.

Nice theory, anyway. It hasnt worked out so well in practice. (Just like libertarianism itself! cackle Statler and Waldorf from the Muppet Show balcony.) Even in elections where Libertarians have had a chance to break into the big leagues because the two major-party candidates turned off so many voters, they have come up short.

It happened last year, when Johnson a former Republican and two-time governor received only 3 percent of the vote. And it happened four years ago, when Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Robert Sarvis won 6.5 percent of the vote for governor of Virginia against McAuliffe and the GOPs Ken Cuccinelli.

If Libertarians cant break 10 percent (or even 5) in elections like those, its hard to see how they can make a bigger splash any other time. Which isnt to say the party is doomed to irrelevance. New Hampshire now has three sitting Libertarians in the state legislature. And even candidates who have no chance of winning can still make an impact by steering public discourse down different avenues. Just ask Bernie Sanders.

Yet Sanders was no neophyte. He was an established politician offering an alternative to dissatisfied party loyalists. Virginians already have had two of those this year: Tom Perriello on the left and Corey Stewart on the right. Periello carried the Sanders flag in the Democratic primary and got trounced. Stewart, a Trumpian to the core, carried the Confederate flag in the GOP primary and almost won.

That is bad news for the Virginia GOP, but it could be worse news for Hyra who, on his campaign website, describes himself as socially inclusive. In his acceptance speech at the Libertarian Party nominating event, Hyra also stressed the virtues of unlimted freedom and please note respect.

Social inclusion and respect were not exactly high among Stewarts campaign themes. And Republicans who are turned off by the Stewart wing of the party can simply vote for their establishment nominee, Ed Gillespie.

Still, Hyra is performing a signal service simply by running. Like Sarvis before him, he is palpably smart, with an undergrad degree in aerospace engineering and a career as an intellectual-property lawyer.

He is straight-laced, which can only do good for the Libertarian Partys image. And he thinks people are tired of partisan rancor, and therefore might be open to someone who focuses on ideas, not teams or tribal affiliation. He is not an ideologue by an means, he says. Incrementalism is sort of my calling card. ... I dont worry about privatizing the roads. If a policy works, then we should be open to it.

Hyra has crafted a platform tailored to promote innovation and economic growth: End the states BPOL tax, which applies to the first dollar of business revenue, rather than the first dollar of profit. Repeal certain occupational licensing requirements. Cut personal income taxes. Expand charter schools. Repeal the Certificate of Public Need regime in health care. Legalize marijuana. Roll back regulations that hinder the growth of the food and beverage industry.

And focus on respect. Respect is at the heart of libertarianism, he said in an interview on Wednesday: Just because you think someone else is wrong doesnt mean you should impose your will on them. Its important, Hyra says, to have respect for people no matter how different they are.

Thats a message Virginians probably respect in turn. Whether the regard translates into votes, however, could be a different story.

More:
A. Barton Hinkle column: Can Libertarian Cliff Hyra make a dent in ... - Richmond.com

Cliff Hyra has a ready answer for anyone who thinks being governor is not an entry-level job: Roughly one-fourth of the country's current governors started their political careers that way. One of them, in fact, serves as governor of Virginia. (Whether Terry McAuliffe qualifies as an argument for gubernatorial neophytes or against them is an open question.)

Wisely, Hyrathe Libertarian Party's candidate for governor of Virginia this yeardoes not bring up another example of a novice: Donald Trump, who holds the most important elected position in the world without any prior political experience. Trump's approval ratings in Virginia continue to dangle below 40 percent.

But Trump does neuter arguments Libertarians often confront, such as the notion that people will not vote for a political outsider. And the criticism that Libertarian candidates are ill-prepared for officea stereotype Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson reinforced last year with his infamous Aleppo Moment. That was embarrassing, but Trump makes Johnson look like a walking encyclopedia.

The Trump era also confounds other received wisdom, such as the supposed immutability of ideological groups. A recent Cato Institute study on "The 5 Types of Trump Voters" finds that almost 20 percent hold essentially progressive views on economic and social issues. Some of the fiercest Trump critics, on the other hand, are traditional conservatives of the National Review variety. "Never-Trump Republicans" make up a significant segment of the political populace.

This has led to a fair amount of speculation about a potential re-alignment of America's political parties. Libertarians, who generally sound like Republicans on economics and Democrats on social issues, should be able to benefit from such a realignment by forming a coalition from both parties who favor limited government across a broad swath of issues.

Nice theory, anyway. It hasn't worked out so well in practice. ("Just like libertarianism itself!" cackle Statler and Waldorf from the Muppet Show balcony.) Even in elections where Libertarians have had a chance to break into the big leagues because the two major-party candidates turned off so many voters, they have come up short.

It happened last year, when Johnsona former Republican and two-time governorreceived only 3 percent of the vote. And it happened four years ago, when Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Robert Sarvis won 6.5 percent of the vote for governor of Virginia against McAuliffe and the GOP's Ken Cuccinelli.

If Libertarians can't break 10 percent (or even five) in elections like those, it's hard to see how they can make a bigger splash any other time. Which isn't to say the party is doomed to irrelevance. New Hampshire now has three sitting Libertarians in the state legislature. And even candidates who have no chance of winning can still make an impact by steering public discourse down different avenues. Just ask Bernie Sanders.

Yet Sanders was no neophyte. He was an established politician offering an alternative to dissatisfied party loyalists. Virginians already have had two of those this year: Tom Perriello on the left and Corey Stewart on the right. Periello carried the Sanders flag in the Democratic primary and got trounced. Stewart, a Trumpian to the core, carried the Confederate flag in the GOP primary and almost won.

That is bad news for the Virginia GOP, but it could be worse news for Hyrawho, on his campaign website, describes himself as "socially inclusive." In his acceptance speech at the Libertarian Party nominating event, Hyra also stressed the virtues of "unlimted freedom and"please note"respect."

Social inclusion and respect were not exactly high among Stewart's campaign themes. And Republicans who are turned off by the Stewart wing of the party can simply vote for their establishment nominee, Ed Gillespie.

Still, Hyra is performing a signal service simply by running. Like Sarvis before him, he is palpably smart, with an undergrad degree in aerospace engineering and a career as an intellectual-property lawyer.

He is straight-laced, which can only do good for the Libertarian Party's image. And he thinks people are tired of partisan rancor, and therefore might be open to someone who focuses on "ideas, not teams or tribal affiliation." He is "not an ideologue by an means," he says. "Incrementalism is sort of my calling card... I don't worry about privatizing the roads." If a policy works, then "we should be open to it."

Hyra has crafted a platform tailored to promote innovation and economic growth: End the state's BPOL tax, which applies to the first dollar of business revenue, rather than the first dollar of profit. Repeal certain occupational licensing requirements. Cut personal income taxes. Expand charter schools. Repeal the Certificate of Public Need regime in health care. Legalize marijuana. Roll back regulations that hinder the growth of the food and beverage industry.

And focus on respect. "Respect is at the heart of libertarianism," he said in an interview on Wednesday: Just because you think someone else is wrong doesn't mean you should impose your will on them. It's important, Hyra says, to have "respect for people no matter how different they are."

That's a message Virginians probably respect in turn. Whether the regard translates into votes, however, could be a different story.

This column originally appeared in the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

Read this article:
Can Libertarian Cliff Hyra Make a Dent in the Virginia Governor's ... - Reason

Chris Powell, active in the OKLP since 2000 including a term as chairman, is seeking the state's highest office.

OKLAHOMA CITY - The Oklahoma Libertarian Partys most successful candidate to date, Chris Powell, is seeking the nomination for Governor.

Powell, of Bethany, received over 89,000 votes running for county office in 2016, besting Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnsons statewide total of 83,481. He will formally announce at the State Capitol on July 8.

Powell, active in the OKLP since 2000 including a term as chairman, contrasts his greater depth of political experience as compared to the other Libertarian candidates for the states highest office. In regard to those seeking the Republican and Democrat nominations, Powell said, My life is far more representative of the vast majority of Oklahomans than that of the members of the political establishment in those other two parties. I understand the daily problems of regular people in ways those politicians never can.

Powell said he intends to focus on empowering local school boards and teachers, elimination of special interest tax credits, state agency consolidation, criminal justice reform, and working to reduce divisions in the Legislature, all of which will he says will help address ongoing state budget problems.

Each vote I get on Nov. 6, 2018 will be a clear message to every elected state official to put aside partisan differences and enact real solutions for our state, said Powell.

Original post:
Powell enters race for Libertarian gubernatorial nomination - Miami News Record

By Charles Ashby Sunday, July 9, 2017

When the Colorado Legislature proposed and the governor later signed a bill limiting law enforcements use of civil asset forfeiture laws, police, prosecutors and even some county commissioners hit the roof.

They all said they needed the ability to keep such assets to help them fight crime.

Now, a former Libertarian Party presidential candidate who lives in Littleton wants to take that idea one step further.

Steve Kerbel, who vied to be his partys presidential nominee last year, submitted a proposed ballot measure Thursday that would prevent any Colorado governmental entity from the state on down from keeping any money they collect from fines or penalties.

Kerbels thinking is that most of those fines are not intended to dissuade people from doing bad things, but as a means to enrich governments or pad their ever-shrinking budgets.

Im not saying that every fine is for self-enrichment, but what I am saying is that we have given the government the privilege to enforce laws, and they have abused their authority, Kerbel said.

The goal here is to bring forth judicious enforcement based on the real intent of the law, rather than just taking advantage of the letter of the law.

His proposal, which if approved would be on the 2018 ballot, would not limit or do away with fines, but redirect them.

Instead of the fining agency keeping that money, it first would go to reimburse a victim for any financial losses.

If there is no victim, such as in a speeding incident, the money would go to a charity of the fine payers choice.

That way, the fines and penalties that various courts and governments assess could still be used as a deterrent. They just cant be used to fund a government agency, Kerbel said.

Its really destroyed the entire law and order purpose and perception, he said. Removing that credibility from the actions of government is damaging. With this law, the deterrent remains. The fines are still payable, but the government just cant have them.

Kerbel said what hes really trying to do is to remove a conflict of interest that governments have put upon themselves.

That conflict is inherent in any government agency trying to enforce a law, and then financially benefiting from it.

Sometimes, Kerbel says, a local governments only motivation in assessing fines and penalties is as a major funding mechanism for themselves.

He points to a small town in Colorado called Mountain View, a town in the Denver metropolitan area that is only six blocks long and two blocks wide.

It gets more than 50 percent of its revenues from traffic violations, Kerbel said.

Its highway robbery. They are openly and obviously manipulating the system.

Even though his measure still has a long way to go to qualify for the ballot, Kerbel said hes already been approached by people in other states and even Australia about the idea.

People are fed up with this pure abuse of authority, Kerbel said.

And its become more transparent as the years go by. As that transparency increases, people become even more fed up.

Excerpt from:
Libertarian wants end to governments' ability to profit from fines - Grand Junction Daily Sentinel