Essentially, it’s news and views about the Libertarian Party. Lead story: Johnson under-reported campaign debt.
Available below:
http://libertyforamerica.com/201304.pdf
18 Comments
Comments are closed.
June 5, 2026
Your Premier Source on Third Parties and Independent Candidates Since 2008
Essentially, it’s news and views about the Libertarian Party. Lead story: Johnson under-reported campaign debt.
Available below:
http://libertyforamerica.com/201304.pdf
I've been a contributor for IPR since January 2013. I consider myself to be a paleoconservative. I'm also the founder of American Third Party Report. Email me at [email protected].
Comments are closed.
The various little socialist parties have kept splintering anyway, as have others on the far right, and so on.
I mostly agree with you @17, though.
Maybe the difference between us is: where Wes sees sinners who need to be punished, I see sins that need to be corrected.
Freedom has too few advocates for me to want to find enemies among those who advocate freedom.
The only bright line I see among freedom advocates is between 1) those who draw bright lines among freedom advocates, and 2) those who don’t.
SK @14
Goldwater represented a large % of the libertarian faction … faction does not equal party… though parties align on factions.
When goldwater failed, that plus a number of other issues, cause a large part of the libertarian faction to create the libertarian party.
The libertarian party was an amalgamation of a few different factions… and it was contentious… (see Dallas accord) ….
Ultimately most of the branches of libertarian factions are able and willing to work productively with each other.
The infighting is not a result of political disagreement… it is about the methods and fraud and force used by one social clique in the party who is trying to assert authoritarian control outside consensus generation.
An excellent example of how this causes division is say Brian Holtz…. I do not think he is aligned with that faction (and have no evidence of alignment, which makes me think he is not aligned), but he hates some of the things that were done in fighting that faction in Oregon and acts accordingly.
Outside of that dispute, Brian and I share a very large overlap in actual agreement on political ideology — and where we differ, I respect his right to promote those differences in opinion.
I personally think he is also a condescending arrogant SOB … but that would never rise to the level where it would result in internecine combat and although we probably would not collaborate alot just due to personality conflicts, neither of us would spend our time destroying each other’s work and/or accomplishments.
There is, however, one faction/clique that has proven to be aggressive and fraudulent that predates my involvement with the LP that almost everyone who isn’t “one of them” seems to run into having themselves attacked, undermined, and assaulted with “rules for thee but not for me” style political aggression in their attempts to assert control of the party through force rather than consensus.
That is the root cause of the conflicts.
@12 see http://libertarianmajority.net/socialist-party-of-america-1928-platform
Goldwater was before the LP. Many of the former LP members have gone over to Reagan Republicanism, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Tea Parties and so on, however. And vice versa.
SK
Most the absorbtion occurred in the early 20th century. The movements have yet to recover due to corruption and other issues.
The attempt to absurd the lp into the GOP by goldwater and his war vs the religions fundamentalist faction of the GOP failed.
We may see round 2 sometime soon.
The Democrats absorbed the fractions of and implemented the positions of parties like the Socialist Workers Party, Progressive Labor Party, Workers World Party, etc? News to me.
You may as well say that the Republicans absorbed most of the Libertarians and adopted Libertarian positions and implemented them.
SK
Yes but they mostly got sucked up into the Democratic party and became a faction of that organization.
When a major party adopts your positions and implements them… that is called victory.
Socialist Parties had their ideological principles too.
SK
Those parties had no philosophically consistent moral core. Except maybe BTP but they were too small and their founders had serious issues.
The situation is different … as we have been proving in oregon where we have emerged healthier than the point at which we started.
You’re right! Fighting each other’s internal party factions has worked wonders for the Boston Tea Party, the various little socialist parties, the Reform Party, etc, etc. That is absolutely where your focus should be if you would like to become as successful in the future as they are today.
WC@6
And now you understand the nature of the conflict against the politico/statist/parliamenrary-perversion/kleptocrat factions of the lp and why some of us consider why fighting them is a higher priority than short term attempts at electoral success.
We do not want to put into power people with the same ethics as the ones we are trying to replace AND they can’t win anyway because the average person understands what hypocrits they are.
Wes Wagner makes a great point. The best way to build the Libertarian Party up is by tearing it down! And no, I’m not being sarcastic.
We will be trusted by the public to hold politicians accountable when we prove we have the ethics to do it to ourselves.
The idea, as I understand it, is to examine ways in which Libertarians hold ourselves back from being able to effectively bring the message of liberty to America.
Some would say it does a fine job, others that it is itself the prime example of that.
@2
Muckraking for America?
Why is it called “Liberty for America”? I read the whole newsletter and did not see a single criticism of government, of statism, or even of American foreign policy of intervention.
The main focus of the newsletter seems to be attacking other members of The Libertarian Party. Perhaps it needs a name that better reflects its focus.
Let’s say the lead story is true…. is there anyone in LP leadership who understands the moral necessity of ‘payback’ in order to self regulate an anarchistic society?