Kudos to you for seeing through Perot from the start. Almost everyone I know, of any political persuasion, has told me they briefly backed Perot that first time around (though he only hit 40% in the polls, so obviously not everyone did). It’s like that Simpsons episode: “Someone else! Someone else!” “I’M someone else!” “Hey, he’s right!”

1st. I think most people who identify themselves as libertarian have evolved to their belief; either through a sense of dis-satisfaction with the majors or through a process of thoughtful change.

2nd I don’t feel that it’s an effective strategy to use our presidential candidate to “educate” the public about libertarianism. He should present libertarian views in a manner in which the “uninformed” libertarian leaning voters can handle.
3rd. In doing the above, many people who hear his/her views will begin to identify with the LP and a percentage will feel strongly enough to join the LP. A fraction of those who join will be willing to contribute financially. Finally, a fraction of the new financial supporters will contribute significant amounts to the party and its candidates as well as contributing time and resources. Eventually the LP gains credibility with the voters and our candidates are elected.
That is how a sustainable party is built.

Me, for example.

I’m not that old. 2004 seems like a LONG time ago to me. In that time, I’ve gone back to and graduated from college, changed careers, started several businesses, and had a child. My life has changed a lot more in non-political areas than it has in political matters.

Editor’s Note: Although the letter is co-signed by Mr. Austin Wilkes and Ms. Shana Kluck, Ms.Kluck has expressed her intent to stay in the Libertarian Party. Many of the statements in the letter use the singular “I” pronoun, despite it being signed by two individuals.

At one time or another, I’ve been a member of four political parties — both majors, the LP, and the Socialists. (I have a certain respect for the Socialist Party, which is more practical and less prone to using stilted leftospeak in its public pronouncements than its peers on the far left.) I also supported Perot for about three days in 1992 — but who didn’t?

You = Working to expand the party

Them = Not.

The pledge says what it says. If you interpret it to mean something other than what it literally says, then that’s on you.

The pledge does not hold one to anarchism. It just opposes coercive taxation. I believe that libertarianism, the philosophy, is limited to those who believe in no government and those who believe in a minimal government extending not beyond the provision of police, national defense, and court services; voluntarily funded by user fees or charity. That does not mean I do not welcome camaraderie with liberty-minded fellows such as you, so don’t twist my words to say that’s what I’m saying.

G.E. – What on earth are you talking about, with the “framers” vs. the “ratifiers”. The core of the Constitution was ratified almost immediately after it was written, and there’s not any evidence of all the States saying, “We interpret this 180-degrees opposite from what those at the convention have to say about it.” If you interpret the LP pledge as being an axiom which requires all members to be anarchists, then hurray for you and your own personal “ratification” there. However, that is YOUR personal ratification… and is neither mine nor the founders who wrote it… so don’t try to hold it over others’ heads as a litmus test.

I don’t think it’s appropriate or honorable to pledge something you don’t believe, just to give the impression you’re not a terrorist.

This report is sad. It is unfortunate those assisting Bob Barr will leave the movement after the election ends in November. Talk about fair weather friends!

Bob Barr is our nominee and we should get behind and support the campaign. We should vote for him.

Having said that I will admit I am not feeling the mo jo.

The party pledge requires members to say they don’t support the initiation of force to achieve social or political goals. Conservatism is incompatible with this credo, as are Barr’s calls for drug prohibition at the state level, a national sales tax, etc.

You’ve been with the LP for less than one campaign cycle, G.E., so I’ll cut you some slack on your historical error here. As none less than Party founder David Nolan has repeated on NUMEROUS occasions, the Pledge is intended to differentiate the LP from terrorist organizations. I know that sounds a little weird, even post-9/11, but go do some reading on the kinds of political and student organizations that were springing up right and left back in 1972… and it makes a little more sense.

The idea of the pledge being a core “maxim”… from which all libertarian philosophy derives, and which requires one to ultimately become either an anarchist or a “pledge-breaker”… did not come along until years later. The waters have been so muddied at this point, most new members today don’t even know that this “litmus test” thing is a retrofit that wasn’t intended. Of course, don’t take my word for it… shoot an email to Nolan.

Argue your positions on their merits. Focus on what makes them GOOD, rather than opposing positions BAD. Stop pointing fingers at others and telling them they “don’t belong”, or “aren’t real libertarians”, on account of a pledge you don’t know enough about. Start doing these things, and you guys may find your way back to the driver’s seat again, rather than griping from the back 24/7 about our driving.

We don’t see eye to eye on a number of issues. Ron Paul is closer to my ideal. However, McCain and Obama and likely whoever the two majors are going to run up the flagpole in 2012 and beyond are MUCH worse options. The thing is, Ron Paul has supporters (even a lot of people who didn’t want to “waste their vote” and therefore voted for one of the other GOP’ers or declined to leave the Democratic Party) and Bob Barr is close enough in idealogy to Ron Paul to attract a lot of those people.

Mike Schneider on Bloomberg got it right when he said there were a lot of people beginning to take notice of libertarianism. I think people are going to start seeing momentum. As much as I liked the hardcore libertarians like Steve Kubby and Mary Ruwart, I can see that Barr has the best chance of shattering the 1.1 percent LP record for Presidential votes. Of course a win is the goal, but even if we achieve 5% that would be huge in showing a swell of support.

At that point we would have to work twice as hard to capitalize on it so the next time we achieve double digits. People like Barr, Ruwart, Kubby, Phillies, Nolan, and the increasing number of respected libertarians of all stripes are going to all be needed in that effort. If some people leave because the next candidate isn’t Bob Barr specifically or maybe because they’re pro-life or some such thing, that’s okay, we’ll be pulling in others to take their places.

And as far as the horrible problem of little “L” libertarians returning to the GOP, just what effect do you think that will have on the GOP besides help form them into a libertarian-leaning conservative party? I was tabling for my local Libertarian Party a while back and someone came up to me and said, “You know what’s gonna happen if the LP ever starts becoming a threat… the other parties are just gonna co-opt your platform.” I replied, “At which point we will have won.” The point isn’t about who embraces liberty as long as it is a LOT of people, especially those in office, no matter what letter is in parentheses before the state they represent.