I’ve been away from the internet for a couple of days, so I didn’t realize there was actually a movement afoot to purge anarchists from the LP. So Murray Rothbard (http://mises.org/store/Betrayal-of-the-American-Right-The-P434.aspx) and Gary Chartier (http://permakent.com/2011/03/05/the-conscience-of-an-anarchist/) wouldn’t be allowed? That’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard since the Millerites sat in trees waiting for the rapture! John Jay Myers was right: the LP needs a tent that’s big enough for libertarians!

I think it’s time to recognize that there is a deliberate attempt by SOMEBODY to redefine the word “libertarian” – much like the word “liberal” was redefined in the early 20th Century. Our movement is clearly under attack, and no, it isn’t the anarchist wing that’s trying to destroy us. OTOH, it might very well be somebody who wants us to run Sarah Palin for president. We might also want to look at “leaders” who lionize other non-libertarians.

Those of us who have been in this movement for a while know what the acid test is: DO THEY FOLLOW THE NON-INTERVENTION PRINCIPLE? Or do they pick and choose, and have exceptions and other excuses?

Fincher: “JT #254: It only sounds “whiny” to you because you’re seeing typed words and not my deep, gruff voice and my 250-lb frame.

Does it sound whiny to you if I say if you don’t shut your goddamn mouth you might get your teeth crammed down your throat?

That’s what happens sometimes to people who speak when they have no idea what they are talkiung about.”

That’s a weird thing for a “libertarian” to say. You whiny little bitch

Get rid of the anarchists already please.

Im going to to go out on a completely uninformed limb and guess he was joking . when you think of it in that context , as a joke, maybe out to ruffle a few feathers , its pretty god damned funny.
I laughed out loud.

we all need to lighten up a little i think:)

You could ask him. mcarling@gmail.com

If he’s smart he will jump at the chance to claim he was speaking with dry humor.

He wrote it in response to Tom Blanton’s saying this:

The Libertarian Party Pledge – “I hereby certify that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals.”

This is such a simple statement that an idiot should be able to understand it. The general meaning is clear and thousands of words analyzing the meaning of these words don’t serve to clarify the general meaning.

The Pledge also doesn’t mention that 2 + 2 = 4, so it clearly implies that 2 + 2 doesn’t equal 4. That also seems unfortunate.

Roderick

he was joking right?”

I was thining the same thing.

lol , thats flippin ridiculous .

he was joking right?

Join the crowd, LG.

“I can take the pledge without being dishonest because I don’t consider it to have any real meaning. It is not a decision rule that unambiguously guides decisions in every situation. It is like being asked to pledge “I agree not to winglegobber the parsnatz.” Maybe that means something to somebody but it doesn’t mean anything to me. “

“The pledge clearly implies that initiation of force is bad only as a means of achieving political or social goals. In other words, the
pledge implies that initiation of force to achieve personal goals is acceptable. How very unfortunate.”

I considered that so egregiously stupid (inexcusable for a long-time LP member) that I responded to it on my personal blog:

http://www.colliething.com/2009/07/m-carling-stupid-or.html