Archive for the ‘Libertarian’ Category

Barrie's Libertarian candidate says Ontarians have been saddled with too much debt

Darren Roskam is Barrie's voice in the political wilderness, and it looks like he will stay right there.

Roskam, 46, is the Ontario Libertarian Party candidate for Barrie in the June 12 provincial election.

But it's an uphill battle for him, and his party.

The Libertarians haven't elected an MPP in any of the last four elections. In 2011, the percentage of valid ballots cast for the Libertarians, Elections Ontario says, was 0.5%.

So why vote Libertarian?

Because our platform is the only one that provides solutions to the problems that we have, said Roskam, a self-employed graphic designer. The other parties have provided us with a great burden of debt and spending.

"Government is too big, too expensive, so big and expensive that we have to borrow money at interest to keep the whole thing going," he added.

Roskam has been a candidate before, in Barrie municipal, provincial and federal elections. He's never come close to winning.

So why vote for him?

They should vote for me because no one else is going to cut all those things (Ontario's ministries of sport, culture, tourism, TVOntario, the Ontario Wine Council), only the Libertarian, Roskam said. The rest just want to play a shell game and blame each other, and say 'look at the mess I inherited'.

Read more from the original source:
Barrie's Libertarian candidate says Ontarians have been saddled with too much debt

What Libertarians Should Learn From the Abolitionists

[A Selection from Libertarian Review, August 1978.]

If victory is indeed our given end, an end given to us by the requirements of justice, then we must strive to achieve that end as rapidly as we can.

But this means that libertarians must not adopt gradualism as part of their goal; they must wish to achieve liberty as early and as rapidly as possible. Otherwise, they would be ratifying the continuation of injustice. They must be abolitionists.

The objection is often raised that abolitionism is unrealistic, that liberty (or any other radical social goal) can be achieved only gradually. Whether or not this is true (and the existence of radical upheavals demonstrates that such is not always the case), this common charge gravely confuses the realm of principle with the realm of strategy ...

The realism of the goal can only be challenged by a critique of the goal itself, not in the problem of how to attain it. Then, after we have decided on the goal, we face the entirely separate strategic question of how to attain that goal as rapidly as possible, how to build a movement to attain it, etc.

Thus, William Lloyd Garrison was not being unrealistic when, in the 1830s, he raised the glorious standard of immediate emancipation of the slaves. His goal was the proper one, and his strategic realism came in the fact that he did not expect his goal to be quickly reached. Or, as Garrison himself distinguished,

Urge immediate abolition as earnestly as we may, it will, alas! be gradual abolition in the end. We have never said that slavery would be overthrown by a single blow; that it ought to be, we shall always contend. (The Liberator, August 13, 1831)

From a strictly strategic point of view, it is also true that if the adherents of the pure goal do not state that goal and hold it aloft, no one will do so, and the goal therefore will never be attained. Furthermore, since most people and most politicians will hold to the middle of whatever road may be offered them, the extremist, by constantly raising the ante, and by holding the pure or extreme goal aloft, will move the extremes further over, and will therefore pull the middle further over in his extreme direction. Hence, raising the ante by pulling the middle further in his direction will, in the ordinary pulling and hauling of the political process, accomplish more for that goal, even in the day-by-day short run, than any opportunistic surrender of the ultimate principle.

In her brilliant study of the strategy and tactics of the Garrison wing of the abolitionist movement, Aileen Kraditor writes,

It follows, from the abolitionists conception of his role in society, that the goal for which he agitated was not likely to be immediately realizable. Its realization must follow conversion of an enormous number of people, and the struggle must take place in the face of the hostility that inevitably met the agitator for an unpopular cause. ... The abolitionists knew as well as their later scholarly critics that immediate and unconditional emancipation could not occur for a long time. But unlike those critics they were sure it would never come unless it were agitated for during the long period in which it was impracticable. ...

See the article here:
What Libertarians Should Learn From the Abolitionists

The Koch brothers can save the Republican Party by making it more moderate

It seems hard to fathom now, but the Republican establishment once viewed the Kochs as a threat. In the late 1970s, National Review now a reliable defender of the brothers devoted a series of articles to eviscerating the libertarian movement and its angel investor, Charles Koch, whom the magazine described as a man whose wealth and devotion to privacy are straight out of the Howard Hughes legend.

Now the Koch brothers, thanks to their sprawling political and fundraising network, are the toast of the GOP, while Democrats have taken up the cause of demonizing them, even placing them at the center of their midterm election strategy. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) recently suggested that Senate Republicans should wear Koch insignias to denote their sponsorship. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, meanwhile, has rolled out a Web site proclaiming that the GOP is addicted to Koch.

But their fiercest critics on the left may be surprised to learn that the Kochs actually share a host of views with them, particularly on social issues (though emphatically not on economic ones). And now that the brothers wield significant influence within the Republican Party, they have an opportunity to push it closer to the center on issues that have caused members of many key voting blocs women, Latinos, youth to shun the GOP.

For a party undergoing an identity crisis, a Koch-style makeover may not be such a bad thing.

The brothers have achieved political notoriety for bankrolling the tea party movement, leading the charge against Obamacare , stoking skepticism about climate change and carpet-bombing the airwaves with ads targeting vulnerable Democratic lawmakers via their advocacy group Americans for Prosperity. But lesser known are the issues on which they are at odds with the conservative mainstream.

The Kochs generally disapprove of foreign military interventions and were no fans of the Iraq war. As a young man, Charles strongly opposed the Vietnam War, even though this position was highly unpopular in his home town of Wichita, headquarters of military contractors such as Beech and Cessna that supplied the war effort. His activism so angered the leadership of the conservative John Birch Society, which his father had played a role in founding and where Charles was a member, that he was forced to part ways with the group in the late 1960s after placing an antiwar ad in the local newspaper.

David has criticized U.S. drug policy and victimless-crime laws. I have friends who smoke pot. I know many homosexuals. Its ridiculous to treat them as criminals, he said in 1980. He supports same-sex marriage and abortion rights positions that risk his standing in the GOP. Charles seemingly shares these views. What a spectacle it is for the same people who preach freedom in voluntary economic activities to call for the full force of the law against voluntary sexual or other personal activities! he wrote in his 1978 jeremiad. What else can the public conclude but that the free-market rhetoric is a sham that business only cares about freedom for itself, and doesnt give a damn about freedom for the individual?

The Kochs have largely remained quiet on these issues in recent decades, but David made headlines at the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa, when he told Politico, I believe in gay marriage. His remark came just days after the GOP had officially hammered out a platform calling for a federal ban on gay marriage.

The libertarian movement, in which Charles and David Koch were leading figures, attempted to forge an alliance with the political left by highlighting the issues on which they could agree, such as robust civil liberties, a non-interventionist foreign policy, reproductive rights and the elimination of corporate subsides. It sought to demolish the two-party monopoly, as David put it when he accepted the Libertarian Partys vice-presidential nomination in 1979. But the fractious movement imploded in the wake of the 1980 election, after David and his running mate claimed 1 percent of the popular vote but came under fire from within the libertarian ranks for diluting the movements radical agenda on the campaign trail. (They had, for instance, committed the heresy of failing to call for the full eradication of the income tax.)

The Kochs ultimately abandoned the Libertarian Party, though not its core beliefs, once the futility of challenging the two-party system became clear. Thus began their three-decade climb from libertarian gadflies to Republican power brokers. The question now is what they will do with their newly acquired clout within the GOP.

Read the original here:
The Koch brothers can save the Republican Party by making it more moderate

Libertarian Party looks to field a candidate in 2014 House campaign

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. - The Staten Island Libertarian Party is looking to field a candidate in this year's House race.

West Brighton resident Richard Bell, a member of the Richmond County Tea Party Patriots, will gather petition signatures in a bid to get on the ballot.

Bell, 67, a small business owner, said he was looking to get into the race because he is concerned about the economy, particularly the national debt.

"It's affecting everything we do in our daily economy," he said, "the price of food, the price of energy. We need to start addressing the debt."

New York state has been hit particularly hard, Bell said.

"Everywhere you go, there are for-rent signs on stores," he said. "New York is like a depression."

Bell said he saw a different picture during a recent trip to Toronto.

"Toronto is like a boom town," he said.

Bell had little to say about the two major party candidates in the race, Rep. Michael Grimm (R-Staten Island/Brooklyn) and Democrat Domenic M. Recchia.

"Those two parties haven't been able to do anything about the shape we're in," he said. "The parties make a lot of promises."

View original post here:
Libertarian Party looks to field a candidate in 2014 House campaign

LIBERTARIAN ETHICS EXPLAINED IN UNDER 3 MINUTES – Video


LIBERTARIAN ETHICS EXPLAINED IN UNDER 3 MINUTES
The case for libertarian ethics in under 3 minutes by Carlos Morales of Truth Over Comfort Libertarian ethics are objective and based off the self-evident truth that you own yourself, that...

By: carlos morales

See original here:
LIBERTARIAN ETHICS EXPLAINED IN UNDER 3 MINUTES - Video