I’m too busy to blog right now about where I agree and where I disagree, but check out Sean Gabb’s review of Kevin Carson’s Organization Theory.
Archive | June, 2009
Minuteman at the Door of Thought
Apparently Vin Suprynowicz is one of these guys who deletes comments from his blog as soon as he realises he’s losing the argument. But you can read the unexpurgated version of his debate with Charles over immigration rights here.
Reviewing the Encyclopedia, Part 2
Check out Martin Wooster’s review of the Cato Encyclopedia.
Incidentally, I can’t agree with Wooster’s claim that “the leading thinkers among the Progressives… were generally free of racial prejudice.” Perhaps the three names he cites were; I don’t know. But racism played a large role in a great deal of Progressive thought (Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson are obvious examples). Wooster’s contrast between racism and eugenics is also puzzling, given how deeply pervaded eugenics was by racist ideas (and vice versa).
In Triumph Through Persepolis
Sheldon makes some good points about the u.s. and Iran here. It would be interesting to know how much involvement the u.s. already has in what’s going on there. The Iranian government says that foreign influences are involved – but you’d expect it to say that. The relevant foreign influences deny that they’re involved, but you’d expect them to say that too. The u.s. government certainly has an incentive to intervene covertly – though they’re also so incompetent and clueless that they actually might not have.
That Twitter delayed its downtime until nighttime in Iran in order to avoid interfering with coordination among the protesters is great, but the fact that the u.s. govt. asked them for the delay makes me wonder what else the u.s. govt. is doing? That the u.s. govt. could simply have created this situation out of whole cloth as the Iranian govt. would have us believe is ludicrous; but to what extent did the u.s. actually promote this situation and to what extent are they simply trying to exploit an independently arising situation?
The protests also seem to be coinciding with a power struggle within the Iranian leadership. (I mean the actual leadership, not the presidency.) So the same question can be posed there: to what extent did dissident factions within the ruling council actually promote this situation and to what extent are they simply trying to exploit an independently arising situation?
Ignore This Test
At the moment I can’t add comments. I’m testing to see whether I can post.
UPDATE: Problem fixed! Post away ….
Announcement of Candidacy for LPA Chair
I’m announcing my candidacy for Chair of the Libertarian Party of Alabama, as part of a slate whose overall program is summarised as follows:
A slate of candidates will be presented for election at the upcoming state party convention on June 27th 2009.
Chair: Dr. Roderick Long
Professor of Philosophy at Auburn University
http://praxeology.netVice Chair: Matthew Givens
Former LPA Vice Chair and candidate for PSC
http://politicsalabama.blogspot.comSecretary: Steve Dow
Former LPA Chair and current At-large EC memberTreasurer: Jim Albea
Current At-large EC memberThe individuals on this slate share a common vision and operating model for the LPA as follows:
1) Lean internal expenses. Dispense with maintaining an office in Birmingham and decentralize the administration of the party.
2) Focus on building and activating the membership base with less of an emphasis on fundraising.
3) Achievable 2010 electoral strategy. While not cast in stone, given the present barriers to statewide ballot access, the strategy would be to target a few local races where we have the best chance of having an impact.
The plan is to have this group of individuals and this agenda considered as a whole.
(See also this thread for some of the background issues.)
An additional part of the proposed vision is for the Chair to be concerned primarily with the formulation of policy statements and speaking to the press, rather than combining the roles of chief spokesperson and chief administrator as has been done in the past.
So, given my view that electoral politics should not be the primary focus of libertarian activism, why am I interested in this position?
Well, I’ve never bought the argument that electoral politics should play no role in political activism; quite the contrary. And in any case I don’t see the LP as being solely about electoral politics; it’s at least as much about political education and nonelectoral activism, or anyway it should be. The objection that activism via a political party will mistakenly encourage people to focus on political campaigns rather than on building alternative institutions is, I think, well-taken; but that danger has to be balanced against the party’s usefulness as a tool of education. And given that my prospective role would be centrally in the educational and vision-shaping side of the deal, I find the weights coming down in its favour; moreover, this would be a chance for me to promote libertarian ideals to an audience I don’t ordinarily reach, and to pitch them in the way I think they need to be pitched.
I’m also a longtime member of the Grassroots Libertarian Caucus, whose vision statement runs as follows:
We are a group of activists within the Libertarian Party of the United States, part of the global libertarian movement. Our caucus, founded in September 2005, exists to promote the following five key values for our party:
(I) BOTTOM-UP, NOT TOP-DOWN. We see a party that too often takes after the establishment parties and corporations rather than manifesting itself as a grassroots organization with revolutionary goals. We seek a decentralized Libertarian Party run by its members and activists rather than by a centralized clique of corporate-oriented professionals.
(II) POLITICALLY BALANCED. We see a party which has become too conservative in both style and substance. We seek to restore a balanced approach to Libertarian Party policy-making and outreach that strives to appeal to the political left as much as to the political right and emphasizes personal liberty no less than economic liberty.
(III) FUN, BOLD, AND FREE-SPIRITED. We see a party that has become too staid, timid, boring, and unimaginative. We seek a culture within the Libertarian Party that is bolder, more irreverent, more free-spirited, more creative, and more fun-loving.
(IV) RADICAL AND PROUD. We see a party that has become too ashamed of its own ideals, a place where “idealist” is too often treated as a dirty word. We seek a party in which Libertarians proudly share a sense of solidarity as radical freedom fighters in a larger movement committed to the vision of worldwide individual liberty expressed in the Preamble and Statement of Principles of the Libertarian Party’s national platform.
(V) YOUTH-FOCUSED. We see a party that is largely failing to connect with young people. We seek a Libertarian Party whose style, structure, culture, and materials speak first and foremost to the younger generations who hold the future in their hands.
Now I’m part of a slate that’s calling for a more decentralised and transparent party structure, which fits in nicely with point (I) above; and my position as Chair, as that role is envisioned in the proposed program, would allow me to promote the values outlined in points (II), (III), and (IV). The game is afoot!
Agorist Demerit Count: scale broken
