Posts Tagged ‘Libertarian Party’

PetitionI was at a small, but very lively gathering of local libertarians this past week, and at the end, I was asked by one of the attendees if I would like to sign his petition to repeal the Firearms Act.

I asked if he meant the whole thing, including licensing and handguns. He said the whole thing. I told him I’d have to think about it some more and get back to him.

For not wanting to sign his petition, he said: “You’re not much of a libertarian.”

It’s my choice to sign the petition, and I don’t vote for any party that wants to increase gun regulations, and I won’t personally take your guns from you, so how does that make me not much of a libertarian?

If you have a petition to end all public funding for abortions except for saving the life of the mother, I’m with you, and if you have a petition to end the public school teachers’ monopoly, I’m with you, and if you have a petition to end all redistributive pork barrel spending in the “public interest” like the $5.8 million video game research grant, I’m with you.

But if you want to end all gun regulations in one stroke, I’m not with you, because it’s politically tone-deaf, and it’s a reason why most Libertarian Party candidates only get hundreds of votes instead of tens of thousands.

This is Canada, after all, with no history of violent revolution, no history of slavery, no bloody civil war and no Second Amendment, and if the United States has gun licensing, it’s political fantasy to push for an all-out, single-stroke repeal of all gun regulations in Canada.

If the petition is to change licensing from may issue to shall issue, I’m with you. But I’m not with you if you want to strike down legislation that could suddenly legally allow machine guns in the hands of the mentally ill, or of non-residents who aren’t liable for any of the responsibilities of citizenship or residency, as a possible and likely consequence of suddenly repealing the entire Firearms Act.

Read Full Post »

Obverse of the Series 2006 $20 bill

Three prominent hard money advocates have endorsed the temporary issuance of fiat money, with two of them particularly endorsing interest-free fiat money.

On September 18, 2011, Nelson Hultberg of the Conservative American Party outlined one of the party’s primary planks, to “enact Milton Friedman’s 4% auto-expansion plan for the Fed.

On August 17, 2011, monetary reform activist Kirk Mackenzie outlined his transition period of issuing interest-free fiat money, in moving toward a free market monetary system.

On October 2, 2008, Michael Badnarik, 2004 Libertarian presidential candidate said with regard to issuing interest-free fiat money like Lincoln did: “That’d be a step in the right direction.

Gary North, prominent writer for LewRockwell.com, has curiously stayed quiet by not smoking out these individuals as alleged false-flag infiltrators according to the same standards he used for taking exception with Ellen Brown advocating (interest-free) fiat money. Could it be that Ellen Brown was an easy target, not having any connections into the social circles he travels in, unlike these three other individuals?

Read Full Post »

In this 2009 debate with 2004 Libertarian Party presidential candidate Michael Badnarik, Stefan Molyneux, an advocate of voluntaryism, made a statement that I find very worthy of further examination.

Namely, that the most free societies produce such prosperity that they become the most tyrannical. His argument is that immense political and economic freedom bring extraordinary economic prosperity, and the corresponding wealth generated is used to control government and use it as a tool for profit and a weapon against political enemies.

Read Full Post »