Pinellas Libertarians lead Coalitions in Florida
Best Syndication, CA -
… It must be so, as several community groups met to look at common issues in a meeting co-facilitated by the Libertarian Party of Pinellas (http://www.LPPinellas …

FLORIDA LIBERTARIAN RADIO SHOW HAS INTERNATIONAL FOLLOWING
PHXNews, AZ - Aug 3, 2005
… Molloy and Libertarian figure Michael Gilson-De Lemos (known familiarly as “MG”), it broadcasts in a guest/call-in format from the Pinellas County, Florida …

Action Taken to Improve Elections in Florida
Best Syndication, CA - Jul 15, 2005
St Petersburg, FL–An unusual coalition founded by local Libertarian, Democratic and … The Election Reform Coalition of Pinellas, a Florida county which includes …

Also cheer up with http://www.libertarian-international.org

So it is with what some libertarians might call “half-measures.” Take medicinal marajuanna. Some libertarians might say that doesn’t go far enough, and fear that if we go for that, many for whom that’s “far enough” will jump ship, and then we’re stuck with medicinal marajuanna, and don’t have total freedom where drugs are concerned. The belief is that if we get a compromise solution, the pressure the real world facts give for legalization will be allieviated, and people will no longer be looking for a solution.

Good theory, but its obvious that strategy simply does not work. Government itself is like a drug. While some can quit cold turkey, many, if not most, need a more gradual cutoff. What I think more likely is that, if we support, and successfuly implement medicinal marajuanna policies, there will be two effects.

First off, there will NOT be that amazing increase in crime and delinquincy that the hardcore anti-drug crowd predict. While they will try to say that’s because of the medical restrictions, most people will know better. The second effect is that, because of our involvement, others in the medicinal movement who were not previously libertarians will be exposed to our thinking on it in a friendly setting. They may consider that there are benefits beyond the medical uses of marajuanna to ending prohibition outright.

The statists have been nickeling and diming us to death for years. This was a natural phenomenon, since the big government people were split between the two major parties. Most who were involved in that practice really did believe they were doing the right thing (whether it be big-military Republicans or big-welfare Democrats), and though they opposed one another, because it is easier to create a law than it is to roll it back they took turns increasing every aspect of the government. Bi-partisan legislation also always seems to be aimed at increasing the power of government.

We need to nickel and dime them back. Extreme measures will never catch on. But if we manage to roll back the power of government a little bit, in an area that will benefit the largest number of voters, they’ll say, “Hmm… I like that. A little more, please?” The generation that reaches its age of influence under a smaller government will support smaller government still, so long as we’re not stupid about it.

I think there is power in being consistent and unrelenting in one’s convictions. When it comes to liberty, radical is a good, not a bad thing. Our form of government moved from being minimalist and largely free to the super-state we know now mainly because we were sold on “compromise” and “practicality” rather than standing our ground and consistently defending our convictions.

If there’s one thing the State is good at, it’s absorbing and incorporating enemies and dissidents into itself and dilluting and sterilizing their resistance. This does not mean that small steps and half-measures shouldn’t be accepted, but they should never become the goal we are aiming for. I would highly recommend reading this article by Rothbard. -

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard75.html

I think it applies to freedom lovers of all stripes and is very thought provoking.

The anarchist should come along for the ride as the Constitutionalist achieves real reductions. At some point, when the Fed is 80% smaller than it is now, I’ll jump off, having gotten what I wanted, and the Anarchists can take it from there.

But all libs ever wanna do is fight.

Thanks for your comment. I agree with you, as long as the party is advocating smaller government and more freedom I will support it with my wallet and my vote. Advocating smaller changes that have more public support certainly seems like the best way to get more support/votes for the party.

I just hope that, if reform succeeds, the LP will still advocate a return of government to its Constitutional limits as the eventual goal. I also hope that it will also discourage, or forbid, politicians from running for office under the Libertarian label if they do not agree with this as the eventual goal. My biggest overall concern is that, if we start to succeed, the party will eventually be hijacked by power hungry politicians that could care less about the ideals.

Regarding the Constitutional government/No government argument, to paraphrase Harry Browne, I think anyone arguing that is just wasting their breath. It just seems insane to me for the Constitutionalist and the Anarchist to argue. They both want government to move in the same direction!! We should be on the same team until the time comes that the government reaches the Constitution, and then we can argue about what else we can cut.

I want the LP to become THE third party in America, instead of A third party. I believe this can be done in my lifetime, either by election of libertarians or by forcing other parties to adopt our small government policies, like the Socialist USA did in the early part of the last century. As long as greater liberty and personal freedom in obtained in actual practice, there cannot be a “un-libertarian” bent to our party or the people who make it up.

We wont “sell out” our principles until the day the LP endorses more taxes and less freedom. The methods we use to obtain more of these things cannot be un libertarian as long as it results in more for what we desire.

Hope this gives you some insight on the role of the reform movement as I see it. I think anyone who wants more freedom belongs in the LP, no matter how fast or slow they want it, provided they dont block or stop the chances of the party being able to gain election of it’s candidates by undermining the conditions needed to make it happen.