Welcome to LibertarianPartyUSA!

Lily Wu is the only Libertarian Mayor of a top 100 US City. I discovered her by accident when I saw this Press Conference on the DC Plane Crash. She's very eloquent and well-spoken. It's really cool to see a mayor representing the Libertarian Party so professionally and excellently! I hope we see more mayors from the LP in coming years!

Upon further research, Lily Wu assumed office the beginning of 2024, so she's only 1 year into her role. It also appears Lily Wu was not backed by the Libertarian Party of Kansas, partially because she never sought the nomination, and partially because her funding and primary support came from non-Libertarian, and perhaps more conservative, sources. It also sounds like some of her views were also not completely in line with the Libertarian platform, for example, regarding increasing police funding. She did not need any official nomination, however, because the mayoral race was nonpartisan. Further, she did not promote herself as a Libertarian during her race, instead focusing on what she brought to the table as an individual, rather than a member of a particular political party. Regardless the nuances and details, I think it's pretty cool to have her in office!

Reason magazine did an excellent write-up and interview with Lily Wu here.

One of the big narratives being pushed right now in light of the DC airplane crash is that it was a result of cutting too many regulations and firing too many FAA employees. I personally think arguments like this are usually well intentioned but they ignore the fact that safety can usually only be obtained at the expense of freedom and even if every precaution is taken, accidents can still happen anyway. I think the libertarian position is that each individual should be responsible for however safe they want to make themselves but that shouldn't extend to others. As Thomas Jefferson once said, "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery".

Thoughts?

I usually see the libertarian position as being to get rid of all government benefits but I personally would disagree with that. I think that the libertarian position is if people want to voluntarily pay for social programs through the government such as Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, Social Security, UBI, etc. that they should be able to do so. I personally do receive some government benefits currently and my biggest problem with them is that they are funded by forced taxation rather than voluntary taxation (ideally I wouldn't want to be dependent on the government for anything at all but my current circumstances kind of require it).

Thoughts?

Societal standards are one thing that I definitely do think that American society is getting more libertarian on, most people really seem to just keep to themselves these days as long as other people aren't being too raucous and in their way. I believe that the libertarian position on them is to be against any and all of them since society is inherently a collectivist institution and the libertarian position is to support individualism over collectivism. With that being said I do think if individuals want to collectively stigmatize behavior that I would personally describe as uncouth such as public masturbation that they should be able to but if the person who is doing said behavior wants to justify doing it anyway I do think that they should be able to do so since each individual should be responsible for their own agency even if I personally might disagree with how that agency is being used.

Thoughts?

If you want to make this happen:

Email entire.lnc@lp.org

Tell them that you would like to see Justin Amash as the new LNC Chair

When doing so, please be clear, but polite. Most of the members of the LNC have the best interests of our party at heart, but they are being subjected to some pretty rough tactics right now: Several of those who oppose the outgoing Chair's secret and undisclosed self-dealing have been harassed, excommunicated, and isolated from the people they thought were their friends. So tell them you appreciate all their hard work and that you're looking forward to keeping the LP relevant with Justin Amash at the helm.

The Mises Caucus is currently asking their members to email in support of Michael Heise.

In honor of Robert Burns' birthday today, January 25, his poem about tax collectors.

The Deil's Awa Wi' Th' Exciseman

Chorus The Deil's awa, the Deil's awa, The Deil's awa wi' th' Exciseman! He's danc'd awa, he's danc'd awa, He's danc'd awa wi' th' Exciseman! 1. The Deil cam fiddlin thro' the town, And danc'd awa wi' th' Exciseman! And ilka wife cries: -'Auld Mahoun, I wish ye luck o' the prize, man! 2. ' We'll mak our maut, and we'll brew our drink, We'll laugh, sing, and rejoice, man, And monie braw thanks to the meikle black Deil, That danc'd awa wi' th' Exciseman! 3. ' There's threesome reels, there's foursome reels, There's hornpipes and strathspeys, man, But the ae best dance ere cam to the land Was The Deil's Awa wi' th' Exciseman!'

Members of the Libertarian National Committee are currently voting on a motion to terminate a contract between the party and a voter outreach company used during the 2024 election cycle. This comes after a party member recently produced documentation alleging ties between the company and the partner of the party's chair. [Article link]

In case you have been living under a rock for the last couple of days you are probably aware that Reddit is in the midst of what is almost certainly an absolutely massive astroturfing campaign to remove all links to X/Twitter after it's owner Elon Musk's supposed "Nazi salute". Googling astroturfing brings up the following definition, "the deceptive practice of presenting an orchestrated marketing or public relations campaign in the guise of unsolicited comments from members of the public." I personally think that the libertarian perspective on this should be same as the one for Citizens United, in which even bad faith corporate speech still qualifies as free speech even if I personally do view it as unethical.

Thoughts?

I cannot stand how many in the Libertarian Party (Mises caucus members) are hailing the Ross Ulbricht pardon as the "Libertarian Party’s greatest accomplishment ever" and claiming this was worth not supporting the actual nominated Libertarian candidate, Chase Oliver. So let this post be a definitive guide to those who call themselves Libertarian but support Trump. Feel free to link them this post. The following are linked examples of Trumps positions/actions that are exactly the opposite of clear Libertarian positions either directly noted in the party platform or widely agreed upon:

1. He is anti-free speech, specifically anti-freedom of the press.

2. He is anti-free trade, loves tariffs and obsesses over trade deficits.

3. He did not shrink the size of government and continued to deficit spend throughout his first term even before COVID-19.

4. He is anti-Constitution, suggesting articles from it could be terminated due to non-existent election fraud and is now attacking the 14th amendment.

5. He is anti-immigration, spouting constant lies about migrant crime rates, and took numerous actions against legal migration as well.

6. He is anti-marijuana legalization and pro drug war, appointing people who want to roll back marijuana legalization.

7. He is pro civil asset forfeiture, bringing it back during his first term.

8. He is pro militarized police, restoring the 1033 program during his first term.

9. He is pro capital punishment, with the most federal executions by a President since FDR.

10. He is pro expanding executive branch power, issuing more executive orders and pardons, going around congress by declaring national emergencies, and wants to limit the independence of federal agencies.

11. He is pro surveillance state, supporting the renewal of Section 702 of FISA, pushed for tech companies to provide “backdoor” access to encrypted communications, and used the surveillance state to go against whistleblowers.

12. He is at least partially anti-gun, banning bump stocks during his first term until it was reversed by the Supreme Court.

13. He is anti-LGBT, more specifically anti-trans banning them from military service and effectively ended federal recognition that trans individuals even exist.

If supporting all of this, along with countless other issues with Trump (record lies, attempted election overturn, felony conviction, unpresidential behavior, impeachments, administration turnover, ethical issues, etc.) is worth it for pardoning Ross, some de-regulation, and DOGE (which already lost Vivek) I implore you to really reevaluate if you are a Libertarian or are just a MAGA Republican with a few critiques of Trump. If anyone has anything you would like to see added to this list leave a comment and I'll try to add it in.

https://x.com/Free_Ross/status/1881851923005165704

Well, looks like he's finally been let free after 11 years.

It's arguably one of the hottest topics to discuss right now so let's dive into it. I feel that if there is any topic that Reddit as a whole has done a complete 180 on since 2012 or so it has to be this one. Back then you would find tons of support on it for people like Ross Ulbricht (fingers crossed that today's the day he gets freed) who were known for their very lax standards of moderation on websites like Silk Road and who would end in trouble with the law because of it. These days the general stereotype of Reddit is that is moderated by pedantic losers (for lack of a better term) who can't go 5 minutes without censoring wrongthink. I personally find the libertarian perspective to be very much to be one of freedom of association but accountability like with most other things. As I have stated in the past I personally don't think Lester Maddox should have refused to serve people at his restaurant based on the color of their skin but I believe he should have had the freedom of association to do so if he wanted and that's very much my perspective on online content moderation. I personally don't really care for it at all with the exception of some extreme instances like CP and snuff films and I will try and call it out whenever I see it happen unfairly but I do think that private individuals should be able to justify doing whatever they want to as well as long as they aren't hurting anybody else.

Thoughts?

Hey all. I'm not a Libertarian personally, but I follow the Larry and agree with aspects. I've seen some Libertarians (Mises Caucus Libertarians) say that if Trump only frees Ross, then voting for him was worth it. I feel like that is shooting so f'ing low. Is that really all it takes for some people to justify voting for him? I think he at least needs to implement some Libertarian aligned policy to be successful in the eyes of a Libertarian - if I was one. What are your thoughts?

Social media has created a world in which the objective truth doesn't matter nearly as much as whatever the narrative is and how it is framed and spun. To give an example, I saw this article trending on Reddit recently and even though I am personally more on the pro-choice side this article frames it as if the laws regarding abortion in Texas are what killed her even if in reality it was sepsis that had absolutely nothing to do with the miscarriage at all. The libertarian position is that people should believe whatever they want to believe but at some point I think people should be asking themselves if they care more about what the narrative is than what the facts are. It's a lot like the TikTok stuff that went on over the past 24 hours. Reddit is full of comments saying, "well Trump was the one who proposed the ban in the first place, he shouldn't be seen as the one who saved it" and though I personally don't care for Trump, I do think people should be able to change their positions if they feel like it. Of course Reddit being Reddit needs to always justify that Trump is in the wrong, the man could cure cancer and Reddit would somehow find a way to spin that as a bad thing.

Thoughts?

Step 1. Call a state convention
Step 2. Notice it incorrectly
Step 3. If you lose, declare that the convention was illegal because notice was incorrect and you didn't actually lose

Michigan pulled it off. The officer responsible for providing notice refused to do so, and weaponized this to argue that the election he lost was invalid.

California almost got away with it, but vigilant members caught them, and they have been ordered by the JC to reschedule.

Now Arizona mails notices late (postmarked on the deadline, while state law requires they be received on the deadline, or postmarked 5 days before,) and is planning to hold a convention over Zoom (state law requires the convention be held in Maricopa County.)

This playbook is getting old, and members need to put a stop to it.

Elect Libertarian officers who won't resort to Marxist power grabs.

And then fix your bylaws to prevent this in the future. Eliminate vagueness, contradiction, and loopholes.

It's time to make the Libertarian Party Libertarian again.

https://lpclc.org/join/
https://discord.gg/clc