L. Neil Smith's
THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 92, October 2, 2000
Happy 21st, Jon!
Based upon the following e-mail which I have received from the Harry Browne presidential campaign, I am requesting that I be removed from The Libertarian Enterprise mailing list.
Since it appears that some of the people in the Arizona Libertarian Party are more interested in their own issues than in following the wishes of the majority of the members of the party in Arizona as well as the national convention, and that L. Neil Smith and Vin Suprynowicz are more interested in boosting their own egos than in strengthening the national debate against increased state power, I am requesting that I be removed from your mailing list.
(I thought the idiots were clustering in the Reform Party this year - it's sad to see them running to the Libertarian Party in Arizona. It's sadder still to see L. Neil Smith, an author whose works I've enjoyed, aiding and abetting same.)
Fredrik V. Coulter, CPA
(Selected portion of Liberty Wire follows:)
Ballot Status in Arizona
The Libertarian Party has completed the requirements to be on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC. Unfortunately, Harry Browne's name will not appear on the ballot in Arizona. The reasons for this are hard to explain and very disturbing.
Arizona Libertarians have been engaged in a "civil war" for several years now. It is impossible to explain this dispute intelligently for several reasons: 1) It's extremely complicated; 2) I don't understand it; 3) No one has been able to explain it to me in a way that makes sense; 4) The story changes constantly; 5) Any attempt to explain the dispute results in cries of misrepresentation from one side or the other. It's that bad.
Suffice it to say that the Arizona Libertarian Party has for a long time been split in two, and the State of Arizona has decreed that the LP's ballot status is controlled by the faction that isn't currently affiliated with the Libertarian National Committee (LNC).
And that group has decided to ignore the Arizona presidential primary that gave Harry Browne 77% of the Libertarian vote, and to ignore the LP's choice at the national convention. Instead, they have placed on the ballot the names of L. Neil Smith for President and Vin Suprynowicz for Vice-President -- both of whom have agreed to have their names used.
It's up to the people involved to explain why they want to defeat the efforts of Libertarians all over America -- who have worked so hard to get the Libertarian nominee on every state ballot for the third presidential election in a row. I can't explain why in the world any Libertarian would intentionally subvert the efforts of other Libertarians -- and thereby earn the hatred of most other Libertarians -- and I won't even try.
Fred Coulter firstname.lastname@example.org
What's the real reason that the Arizona LP has split from the NLP, I don't recall Harry Browne making any comment to use the coercive power of government to enforce anything unconstitutional. Also as James J. Odle in TLE #91 said, "I thought Neil wasn't running for Prez since he didn't receive his million signatures.", and I thought L. Niel was a Libertarian, what are the specific things that convinced him Browne and the NLP, weren't?
Why has the Arizona Libertarian Party chosen, in it's greater wisdom, to ignore the majority of Libertarian voters in their state. Perry Willis, Campaign Manager Browne for President says,
"And that group has decided to ignore the Arizona presidential primary that gave Harry Browne 77% of the Libertarian vote, and to ignore the LP's choice at the national convention. Instead, they have placed on the ballot the names of L. Neil Smith for President and Vin Suprynowicz for Vice-President -- both of whom have agreed to have their names used."
Well, even though the ALP seems to have had a major brain fart, this is what the Brown campaign says,
"Pulling together may require swallowing some pride and ignoring long-standing animosities, but it's the only way we can succeed. Imagine the additional energy, time, and other resources that could go into building the party if there were a moratorium on intramural hostility.
I have read some of L. Neil's Commentary throughout the years and I believe he would be a great Libertarian president, I also have read Vin Suprinowicz's "Send in The Waco Killers" and "The Libertarian" and I believe he would be an even better Libertarian president, that said, I still find it hard to understand why two otherwise highly intelligent people would carry the banner for this mistake that the leadership of the ALP has chosen to take part in! I guess a couple a thousand suggestions was enough for Mr. Smith to want to go to Washington and help screw up an otherwise unanimous decision of the Libertarian majority to have Harry Browne as their candidate.
If you guys really think the Libertarian Party has abandoned it's principles and you can't change the party back then why would you steal the party away from the 77% of Libertarian Arizonans who believe otherwise? Start a new party, call it the Arizona Anarchy Party and get on with your lives!
Kevin J. Tull email@example.com
Who is the most immediate danger to the country if he were to be elected president? Comrade Ban The Car Al gore, green on the outside and communist red on the inside;
or G W Bush who is a cryptosocialist, possible statist & possible new world orderist but, has signed a CCW bill and proposes tax relief and other freedom concepts?
Dr Peter Wilhelm firstname.lastname@example.org
In plain English, a thing that will, when zonked by a laser, stop a car in its tracks. Mr. Gabbard says it is fool-proof, for use only by police, et cetera.
Heh. I wouldn't be too concerned, Ms. Renata. Malfunctions aside, such a gizmo can easily be circumvented with a little bit of black electrical tape to cover the sensor.
John Hoffman email@example.com
Hi J C,
Before I rant, I would like to thank you for printing my comments, unvarnished, month on month. It feels good to be heard!
Now we all know the true meaning of "National Emergency", at least in the Administration's opinion. In a classic election year move, Five percent of our strategic oil reserves have been thrown on the open market. But will it really have an effect just on prices?
That it will have an effect on OPEC, there is no doubt. They've gone into a panic, because they figured USgov would never touch the stuff in the first place. The first OPEC meeting in 25 years will be about increasing production so more reserves never be released. But that aint' all. The other big subject at the meeting will be: 4 Gore years coming soon. As one, they are smacking their lips. A couple more "emergencies" and our reserves will be gone, too. Along with a little more freedom. It is poetic that an Administration that wants its' people disarmed victims would piss away vital reserves to win elections, at the expense of the freedom from OPEC in a real crisis. For a footnote in a history book, The President has mortgaged our freedom, again.
Clinton may have cemented the election with this move, at a hell of a price. Sam Donaldson stated (and I hate to agree) that if the American people are kept "fat, dumb, and happy" Gore will have a lock on the vote. Such may be the case, because the American voter likes class warfare, wants a piece of someone else's bank account, enjoys lawyers feeding on the carcasses of the big companies, is pleased to let the police have all the guns, and most of all wants to be fat, dumb, and happy.
Naturally the oil prices in question will not drop fast on the retail side, not as fast as they rose. This will not stop the media touts from bragging about how the winter will be better for those poor voter souls in the pivotal Northeast. Am I mortified! (Repeat a lie often enough....)
The cries of "Election ploy!" go unheard by the great unwashed again. Dubayah Bush has let loose such a lame cry that it hasn't even gotten shrift on the morning news! No other candidate's comments have been repeated at all. Few talking heads have questioned that a price rise in a free marketplace is not a NATIONAL EMERGENCY.
If the USgov was really concerned about rising oil prices, strike down the federal tax! Giving the people a break on costs of living is not really the point of the exercise, is it? I thought not.
Jack Jerome firstname.lastname@example.org
To the Editor:
Scott Cattanach's letter quoting the Energy.com article regarding "tyranny of freedom" reminded me of the old Devo song: "Freedom of choice/Is what you got/Freedom from choice/Is what you want".
Messers. Mothersbaugh and Company had a point 20 years ago which is still just as relevant today and which, in its own way, points out one of the leading problems with the libertarian movement: The average voter has been conditioned to desire choice, but only between a narrow set of alternatives.
This pervades society as a whole, in terms of consumer goods, services and even employment.
Consumer goods: Take automobiles, for example. I drive a 1971 Mercedes-Benz and I'm renovating a '61 Mercedes. If I wanted to, I could buy a new car, but what's the fun in driving a 2001 Waterbug? On the other hand, I'd cheerfully go into hock at the prospect of buying a factory-fresh 1957 Chevy BelAir.
Services: The variety of services available today are touted as being immense, but they generally fall into only a few limited categories: cooking, cleaning, delivery, repair or watching the kids. Oh, and making entertaining noises, in which categories both clowns and politicians fall.
Employment: Is anyone going to tell me that assembling a Ford is substantially different from assembling a Chevy? Or that pounding a keyboard on the Stock Exchange is substantially different from pounding a keyboard in a hospital? Or that sweeping up in front of McDonald's is substantially different from sweeping up in front of the Ritz?
It's not so much a matter of choice causing depression as it is the choices being offered. And given some of the choices offered, small wonder people are opting out.
To go out with another 80's song lyric, let's look at Rush's (the band, not the talkshow) song, "Free Will":
"If you choose not to decide/You still have made a choice".
M. Mitchell Marmel
Police mistake heart monitor for gun holster
Just wanted to point out how far Canada has gone. Your rights and freedoms ARE in jeopardy... the US is following our country's appalling lead.
J. Friesen email@example.com
If you've never seen it, segfault.org is a hilarious source of fake computer news. This morning, the following article appeared at http://www.segfault.org/story.phtml?mode=2&id=39d354dd-00aaaaa0:
DOJ Cracking Down on Freedom to Innovate
William Stone, III firstname.lastname@example.org