Radley Balko: "Rather Fond of Bob Barr"

Radley Balko, a former policy wonk at the CATO Institute, currently a columnist for FoxNews.com, and a blogger and Senior Editor for Reason Magazine, praises Bob Barr‘s coronation as the presidential nominee at the Libertarian Party’s Denver convention. The nomination, which took place hours prior to the conclusion of the convention, has shaken up the entire libertarian movement, including many purists, anarchists, and “free marketeers” who are throwing a fit over the delegates (which have been reportedly made up a number of Barr and Wayne Allyn Root supporters, with only some Steve Kubby and Mary Ruwart supporters).

Balko opined on his The Agitator blog with the following:

It’s the first time the LP has nominated a serious candidate in a long time. I’ve become rather fond of Barr over his 5-year conversion to libertarianism. Second place went to nutjob Mary Ruwart, who would have continued the party’s long history of kook-ism.

Barr has the potential to win more votes than any LP nominee in history. If he helps the GOP learn that it’s time to boot the neocons and pay more attention to its limited government wing, all the better.

This is a good thing.

Notice what Balko said in the beginning of the third sentence in the first paragraph:

Second place went to nutjob Mary Ruwart….

Mary Ruwart, a long-time libertarian activist and author of Healing Our World in an Age of Aggression and Short Answers to the Tough Questions, is a “nutjob”? I see. So, in Balkoland, being a principled candidate makes you a “nutjob.” How about Wayne Allyn Root, while he was running as an LP presidential candidate, throwing his support to John McCain little over a month prior to getting the VP nomination at the Denver convention this past weekend? (But then, that was before LP stalwarts Tom Knapp, Barry Hess, Ernie Hancock, and a number of “bought-and-paid-for” sell-outs got all starstruck over Barr’s nomination.) Doesn’t that make him a nutjob? Yet, you haven’t heard a single condemnation from the national LP or even the party base for Root for pledging his support to McCain. Where was Balko when that claptrap happened?

Supporting Barr is “a good thing”? How can a candidate who has flip-flopped on the issues so many times and has assumed the role of a “I-wanna-pretend-to-be-a-Libertarian-so-I-make-money-off-the-base-and-the-party-and-just-get-a-few-more-votes-tarian” collectivist be “a good thing”? This is coming from a self-deluded “I’m-libertarian-when-I-want-to-be” libertarian, not a true-blue libertarian. That’s exactly what Balko is and anything he says should be suspect.

Sure, he’s great on the War on Drugs issue, but isn’t he undermining his “opposition” to the War on Drugs by supporting a Drug Warrior who has more of a problem shedding his past image than adopting his new “let’s-pretend-to-be-for-freedom” image? Isn’t that really the matter? And sure, he’s great on a few other social issues, but then again that’s not saying much. Of course, Balko was FOR the war in Iraq initially. Once again, that doesn’t say much in the grand scheme of things.

Sure, Barr may “[have] the potential to win more votes than any LP nominee in history,” but so what? What is the likelihood that he will win the presidency? How much of a realistic shot does he have? Ron Paul didn’t have a realistic shot, but his campaign was purely educational. Barr doesn’t have a realistic shot, but his campaign is purely political, a 180-degree turn from Paul. Plus, his positions on immigration, the war in Afghanistan, his support for the Fair Tax, and spending are seriously suspect. Why should any third party and average voters support him over McCain, Obama, and Clinton?

Besides, what is so great about Barr? Even Wayne Allyn Root? I mean, seriously! What makes him the best candidate for the party? Because he WAS a congressman? Big deal! Captain Kangaroo and Bozo the Clown, on a political ticket, would have more success than Barr and Root would ever have.

The collectivists in the LP are thinking about power and votes and lining their pockets with money to make names for themselves in the media. It’s a power play for the cameras. They want to look as if they are trying to accomplish something “positive” for the libertarian movement. But many of us who reject Barr and Root know better.

Balko is a collectivist, a statist, and a shmuck. His waffling on his libertarianism shows how much of a hypocrite he is when it comes to the libertarian philosophy. His support for Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root makes as much sense as a Democrat supporting Pervez Musharraf and Hugo Chavez, who both look like vile and pathetic candidates for the LP ticket for 2012.

It’s time to write off these sell-outs for good. Balko gets a bigger write-off because he wasn’t libertarian in the first place. That should tell people something.

[H/T to Wendy McElroy for reporting this on her website. Same goes to long-time (although briefly retired) libertarian writer and blogger Skip Oliva who privately emailed Wendy on Balko’s antics.]

Update: The only reason Balko did attack Ruwart by calling her a “nutjob” because of the recent kiddie porn scandal that was the subject of great discussion at the Third Party Watch blog (before Stephen Gordon sold it off to Barr crony Richard Viguerie). Considering Balko never bothered to hear Mary’s clarification of her answers on the Steve Kubby Show on Blog Talk Radio or even my Liberty Cap Talk Live spin-off show Liberty Cap Talk Live: The Special Edition Show prior to the Denver convention or even read her Short Answers to the Tough Questions book (which contains the offending answers to the “Childrens’ Rights” question), of course he would level an attack against her as well.

It’s interesting that Balko would do this, considering that Mary has never initiated force against anyone, stolen, taken bribes, or called for the power of the state to arrest anyone for drug possession or on the claim that the U.S. Patriot Act and the REAL ID Act are laws that will “protect our freedoms.” Yet Balko praises a washed-up ex-congressman who has a history of supporting anti-freedom, pro-violent legislation against people, especially with regards to peaceful, non-violent drug use, even if it’s done for recreational or medicinal purposes or both.

The Radical Center

I confess that I do not know quite where I fit in within the current known factions of the Libertarian Party. There seems to be a one-dimensional spectrum from Radical to Reformist, and I do not fall anywhere along it. (Perhaps we need a Nolan Chart for internal LP politics.) I find myself most sympathetic to those in the Radical camp, largely because Mary Ruwart’s “Healing Our World” spoke to me as no other libertarian text has. While I think I’m a fairly bright fellow, I have never had a head for political theory or philosophy, but Dr. Ruwart’s arguments made sense to me.

That said, I am no anarchist, and dare I say it, in many respects I am a statist. Nearly three years ago, I penned an essay on “Big Government” libertarianism. I no longer agree with some of the ideas I had then — my political thinking, like my religious thinking, is in constant evolution — but I do still sympathize with the person I was then, who joined the LP to seek the protection and multiplication of rights while eschewing a total reduction of government.

I sympathize with the Radicals because their camp is the one most focused on the issues I care most about — the renewal of civil liberties, the ending of the War on Drugs, the right to make one’s own decisions about education, the ending of marriage apartheid, and so on. However, on economic matters I am more moderate, and rather un-libertarian by most measures. I fully agree with the philosophical arguments against taxation, and have made some of them myself (especially in a Liberzine piece from 2000 that equated taxation with theft of the creative impulse, an essay sadly lost to the ages), but these matters don’t burn me up the way so-called “social” issues do.

My Libertarianism is generally instinctual. I remember when I was about 12 years old, our small town imposed mandatory recycling requirements, and I loudly protested to my mother that the government had no right to tell us what to do with our garbage. She started at me like I was nuts. I don’t remember how I first heard of the LP, but I was aware of it long before I could even vote. I did not and have not read Rothbard, Mises, Spooner, etc. — perhaps if I did so, I would not be “wishy-washy” on monetary issues. It just made sense to me.

The Death of the Libertarian Party Part 1

The death of the Libertarian Party has not come to a complete surprise, although it has been a sad yet disappointing outcome at the conclusion of the convention’s presidential nomination process. I must say that I am not surprised with the final results, but it is yet disturbing that the political party with which I once supported (considering it was the Party of Principle) has completed its transformation into the Party of Opportunism, Compromise, Personalities, Infighting, and Pro-Big Government.

The events of the last 24 to 48 hours at the Denver convention have greatly proven to me that the political process is unworkable, especially within the confines of the Libertarian Party and the third party movement in general. This even goes for the process to “reform” the federal government, especially when and if your goal is to push for petitions at the federal level, join a caucus within the GOP or Democratic parties, or even run as a major party candidate or even work within the one of the two major parties (the Democrats and the Republicans).

A few of the top reasons that stand out for me are as follows:

Third Parties, Even The Libertarian Party, Just Don’t Work

The first reason is pretty simple. The third party movement just doesn’t work. Third parties have electorally and politically been marginalized and the system discourages any chance for the presidential, vice presidential, and other candidates for political office to get any massive support by the masses whatsoever. More importantly, the candidates don’t even have a shot at winning the elections for which they are running. Even if the candidate(s) get more than 1 percent of the vote, so what? Rarely do third party candidates ever get noticed or even a mention from the mainstream media. Unless you’re a multimillionaire or a high-profile public figure, or, in the case of Bob Barr, a former congressman who was just coronated as the Libertarian Party’s presidential nominee, the average third party presidential candidate doesn’t stand a chance of getting beyond the 1 percent vote margin.

Even the Libertarian Party doesn’t work. The Libertarian Party, which has historically been an ideological political party, doesn’t work for quite a number of reasons. One reason that it doesn’t — and can’t — work is that it is an ideological party that, although was started by former Republican Party activist David Nolan and a bunch of pro-freedom activists, cannot work within the realm of third party politics, even in politics in general. It was initially established as an educational vehicle, but that was the problem with the methodology in the first place. Education and politics just don’t mix. They can’t exist within the same room together. Either the LP can be an educational and research think tank, or it must be a political party. Political parties, by their own nature, are formed to impose an ideology upon the public, and that imposition is done via coercion. There are no such things as political parties being “private organizations” because they are the arms of the state (although some parties are only formed at the state level).

Moreover, the Libertarian Party’s Pledge is worthless. The Pledge, which is designed to keep impure new members from joining the Party, is signed only to gain entry into the organization, not to ensure that the person who signed it really believes in the Pledge. As KN@PPSTER blogger Tom Knapp pointed out in an interview with CATO Liberty’s Radio Free Liberty talk radio show in 2006, Libertarians who have just joined the Party for the first time are either:

1. New members who signed the Pledge to join the Party, but changed their mind about the Pledge after they came on board;
2. New members who signed the Pledge to join the Party, but lied when they signed it and join up;

or

3. New members who signed the Pledge to join the Party, but didn’t really understand the Pledge when they signed it in the first place.

Third Parties, Unlike The Major Parties, Have No Internal Funding Base

The second reason is even more problematic for third party supporters. Aside from the first reason, the reason third parties can’t get anywhere politically (that is, by getting their candidates elected to public office) is that the third party movement is terribly restricted and constrained by the campaign finance rules and regulations established by the two major parties. Those campaign finance regulations make it significantly difficult — if not, almost impossible — for third parties to gain any traction financially.

Basically these machinations make it extremely difficult — if not, almost impossible — for third parties and their respective candidates to secure large financial donations from a very few wealthy donors. The reason for these regulations is that they are supposed to prohibit unethical “hard money” and “soft money” contributions by limiting the amounts so that ethical candidates are elected to Congress and the Oval Office. After all, during each election season, people eventually discover that the major parties, which have a monstrous built-in funding base, are able to funnel large, unlimited amounts of campaign finance money into their political campaigns. Third parties are not able to do that because they possess no such funding base (the same goes for their candidates). Besides, a third party candidate, even Libertarian candidates, knows that you can’t get anywhere with a $2,300 maximum campaign contribution limit.

That is why Congress, in the midst of every election season or so, and congressional and presidential candidates on both sides of the Republican and Democratic aisles push for such statist boondoggles — to make it impossible for third party candidates to get anywhere with their campaigns. As a result, third parties and their candidates resort to “softening” their messages or radically overhauling them in desperate attempts to put them on the political map and get themselves elected to power. Thus, as a result, they become permanently marginalized, never to be taken seriously as contenders for the races for which they campaign.

Part 2 will be available in the next few days.

Greetings!

Good morning to you all from Washington, D.C. Todd Andrew Barnett, whom I know solely by reputation, has kindly invited me to become a contributor to Let Liberty Ring, and I have happily accepted. Some of you may remember my political news website, Orvetti.com, which existed from 1997 through 2002 and which carried a wide array of third-party news. I tried to be fair and to treat alternative candidates with the same respect and scrutiny as those of the more established parties. (In September 2000, I interviewed Harry Browne, for example.) I was also the editor of the Web White and Blue 2000 online presidential debate, and was active in making sure alternative candidates were invited to participate.

I also briefly served as Deputy Director of Communications of the Libertarian Party in 1999 and 2000. I fear I did not acquit myself very well in the role and left abruptly. (I have since offered my apologies to my colleagues of the time. I hope I have matured somewhat in the intervening years.) I was an off-and-on LP member throughout this decade, and have recently rejoined, resolved to show a greater commitment. Hopefully my contributions here will be a part of that.

While I will have chances to write more about my reasons for rejoining in the days to come, as well as my thoughts on the LP in 2008, I do want to say one more thing this morning. Some of you know that I supported candidates other than our ultimate nominees for the presidency and vice presidency. I see no reason to rehash the intense but largely respectful campaign for the nomination here. Some committed Libertarians are not sure if they can support the 2008 national ticket, and I respect that. It is a matter of personal choice, and what could be more Libertarian than that? As for myself, I am not yet sure what I will do.

But as the heroic Steve Kubby said in Denver, “This party is not breaking apart. This is not 1983.” That year, a large segment of the LP decided to put faction ahead of future possibilities. This year, no one is doing that — Mary Ruwart and Michael Jingozian have both been elected to LNC roles, for example. The efforts toward unity in the wake of the heated contest in Denver are inspiring.

Let’s Praise Christine Smith….

….for her objections to and incendiary comments on the LP delegates who nominated a man for president who still favors the War on Drugs and happens to endorse the Fair Tax.

If anyone has a YouTube clip of her complaining to the local Denver media about her removal from the first ballot and her subsequent complaints about Bob Barr getting the nomination, please email it to me.

LP Vice Presidential Second Ballot Results from Denver: Wayne Allyn Root is the LP’s Vice Presidential Nominee

Here are the second vice presidential ballot results from yesterday’s Denver convention:

Root 289
Kubby 255
Williams 14
NOTA 6

Kubby unfortunatey lost by 35 votes, so Root won the ballot by a relatively crucial margin.

There you have! The numbnuts at the Denver convention have nominated a Barr/Root ’08 race on the Libertarian ticket.

Sixth and Final Ballot Results: Bob Barr is the Presidential Nominee

Here are the sixth and final ballot results from the Denver convention:

Bob Barr 324
Mary Ruwart 276
NOTA 4

What a sad day! The collectivists have completely hijacked and destroyed the LP. The LP has now completed its transformation from a Party of Principle to a Party of Backroom Dealing and Opportunism.

As of today, just minutes before the last results were posted, I had decided to bolt from the LP. I left a message with Susan Dickson at the LP National Headquarters, saying that I want to “revoke my membership” with the LP and that I “no longer wish to be a member.”

As of today, I have revoked the Pledge and my membership. The LP has died a long death. Goodbye, LP!

It was nice knowing you while it lasted.

All isn’t lost. The Free State Project will pick up where the LP left off. Fortunately, I am a member of that organization and will be for many years to come.

R.I.P., Libertarian Party! Rest in peace.

Fifth Ballot Results from Denver

Here are the fifth ballot results from the Denver convention:

Ruwart 229
Barr 223
Root 165
NOTA 6

Root will be dropped on the sixth and final ballot. Even though they must get a majority of the delegates to give the nomination to the nominee, “none of the above” and write-ins are welcomed. They are only two candidates left – Ruwart and Barr.

Root has just addressed the delegates and threw in his support for Bob Barr.

Fouth Ballot Results from Denver

Here are the fourth ballot results from the Denver convention:

Barr 202
Ruwart 202
Root 149
Gravel 76
NOTA 2

Gravel was just dropped from the next unprecedented fifth ballot.

Third Ballot Results from Denver

Here are the third ballot results from the Denver convention:

Barr 186
Ruwart 186
Root 146
Gravel 76
Phillies 31
NOTA 2

George Phillies was dropped from the next ballot. Interestingly enough, he didn’t endorse anyone.