I was thinking a similar thing... his response to Nick asking what do you say to the 300 or so people who voted against you? "Standing in defiance before a landslide could be dangerous."
I'm sure 250 of the 300 that voted for other candidates liked Angela, but just preferred the other candidates they supported instead. I wanted Angela to win, but i think the others that were running for the position had their own strengths and good ideas as well. We can't abandon our principles and our macro goals because of little political battles and personality clashes.
That's because those in power have the media and WANT you to believe the popular is unpopular. THe stupid MSM do it all the time and it's full of so many bad-faith "actors".
I left the libertarian party because they were more concerned about not being offensive than fighting for liberty. The Mises Caucus may be offensive but they fight for liberty and they make me want to return.
So the “fighting for liberty” is to make your priority “owning the libs” in the culture war? Anyway, the party has mostly been incredibly ineffectual during its entire history, and remains so under new management.
@_____ Dude, it is ahistorical nonsense to state that somehow people are more offended today than they were a hundred years or two hundred years ago by controversial issues. Since at least the advent of early mass culture with coffee houses in England, etc. people have found offense and been loud about such. Indeed, it’s one of the fucking cornerstones of a free society. Compare and contrast with autocratic societies like Russia where taking offense is made illegal.
Not so much the party itself - but most self-proclaimed Libertarians now seem to be archo-capitalists. I'm for small gov - not no gov. And liking the free market doesn't mean that I think corporations are saints. (Most corporations aren't fans of the free market - they prefer regulatory capture.)
"If you give people freedom they might use it in undesirable ways!" - critics. The movement should be about what's true and what's libertarian. Make your appeal to the people based on the ethics of liberty as they apply today instead of bending libertarianism to feel "progressive" or "conservative" to try to gain appeal.
Its frustrating to me that people seem unable to base their political ideas on their core values, and instead base it on cultural identity. Libertarianism isn't for 'progressives' or 'conservatives', its for people that care about liberty. The fundamental rights to autonomy, private ownership, non-aggression, etc. Everything else ought to be secondary.
When we have people like Vaush calling himself a libertarian, there is something deeply wrong to notice around what constitutes the core principles of libertarianism
A friend once told me, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.” In other words, it doesn’t matter who controls the LP, they’re still going to keep losing 99.99% of all the elections they enter. The LP has a solid, 50-year track record.
@@zntepicvids yeah for real your not allowed to tell jokes anymore. It's edge lording like come on, people are attracted to this kind of humor. We can pull more people in with jokes and a welcoming light hearted atmosphere. Not an atmosphere were people feel like they are walking on egg shells.
@@zntepicvids I actually thought it was very fair to him. Someone might wonder why there is a perception that the MC are edgelords or someone may only know Kauffman for those tweets. Nick gave him an opportunity to address specific controversial tweets himself. For those who hear those tweets and think they aren't a big deal, they now know what kinds of things supposedly make the MC edgelords and they can dismiss that charge. For those who hear them and think they are very bad tweets, they have now heard from Kauffman what he was trying to convey.
It was pretty down the middle. I love the MC, and I watch Reason quite often. Good job on both ends. Unlike typical politicians, difficult questions were rarely deflected, but actually answered well. If only the corporatism politicians operated this way.
I'm a Mises Caucus co-founder. Overall, not bad (grading on a curve that includes being called nazis over the years). Not a hatchet job, but with a few pieces missing. I'll try to fill some gaps. 1:35 There is an omission. We are perfectly comfortable reaching out to those on the left who have been rendered politically homeless by radicals on their own side: people like Tim Pool, Dave Reuben, anti war progressives like Jimmy Dore, or anti surveillance state people like Glen Greenwald. Mike Heise and some of our champions like Dave Smith have had friendly dialogue with these people. Our difference re: Trump supporters is that we are open to conversation with them, take their concerns seriously, and do not shun them as abhorrent monsters. 1:40 Source? We named ourselves after Mises because we promote Austrian economics of which Mises is the most univerally beloved scholar, because Mises inspired Ron Paul who inspired us, and he was an active optimist in the face of impossible odds. We explicitly did not want to brand ourselves a strict anarchist caucus- in 2017 the Radical Caucus already filled that niche. Look at our planks. None are anarchist per se. Anarchists and minarchists can both accept them. 2:15 Dave has quipped that the only problem with conservatives is that they are all Progressives [always adopting yesterday's progressive agenda] 20:45 We solicited Spike to help us craft replacement language that maintained the spirit of the original plank without the fuzzy undefined word "bigot" which is used purely as a cudgel; Affirming the entire platform is not in the membership pledge so it's not like it would stop a committed racist from joining the party anyway. 22:00 Amash modified all those quotes from "liberal" to "libertarian" and these are not the same. It is indeed true that liberals were not anarchists; but we are not liberals, and the LP is the Libertarian Party not the (Classical) Liberal Party. Mises also held views that would probably make Mr. Amash uncomfortable. Mises is his own man. Nobody owns him. Nobody can imitate him. We all respect him. Last: Critics fixated on NH, over a tweet it deleted anyway, but there were 36 other states unmentioned. If the MC were a nonstop scandal machine, there would be a cornucopia of examples. There is not, because we are making these affiliates healthier, and that's the real story.
Fantastic job. You even did a good job of avoiding all the stupidity and gotcha nonsense they fired at Mises people. Somebody really should make that post too though; Nick is *so oily.*
What's so great about these soft and careful Libertarians when the regime is tearing up our Civil Liberties in front of us? If nobody gets elected, at least i can be proud to call myself a Libertarian and actually cheer during a debate. Instead of cringing and weeping into my hands watching blunder after blunder and concession after concession. I came for the truth and stayed for the FREEDOM!
Well, if the libertarian party is run by a bunch of crypto fascists, it's not very freedom or liberty focused party, is it? Well maybe it is, if God created you straight and white.
Its a joke that Reason even cared to quote somebody mentioning the alt-right as a way to discredit any direction that doesnt go left. It was mostly a left wing talking point to say that anything to the right of Marx was extremist. Or any "conservative/republican" that doesnt side with the left on social issues, is extremist. So the Libertarian Party might align more with the right at the moment, and thats bad because then it might become extremist because to the left everything on the right is extremist. Heck, centrists are extremist. I am repeating myself but the point is, stop pandering to the left. It is making a joke of the party. This new direction is great, not because it might align closer to the conservatives, but because it gets back to the roots of the ideology, and lets them set their own path instead of a path controlled by the liberal narrative.
The removed sentence was replaced with a POSITIVE statement about what we support, instead of an ill-defined one about what we "condemn". It is like saying "we are pro-peace, not anti-war"
Yes, I think that's a good change, as well as removing the abortion plank because that was always a divisive issue for libertarians where policy must weigh the rights of the woman against that of the unborn child. But I think the libertarian position on immigration is clearly to reduce the power and influence of state as much as possible, meaning open borders.
@@perfectlyGoodInk I won't be pro open borders until the taxpayer is respected and there is no welfare state. To me that order is not negotiable. However I do agree that if welfare is removed and property rights are strengthened, then open borders would be a net positive.
@@Weirdomanification Sounds like we agree on both removing the welfare state and immigration restrictions, and it's just a quibble over priority. Me, I personally prioritize open borders because I view restricting movement as more onerous to an individual's freedom than taxes. Furthermore, the Cato Institute has reported, "Overall, immigrants are less likely to consume welfare benefits and, when they do, they generally consume a lower dollar value of benefits than native-born Americans" (I tried to link the report, but my comment kept getting deleted when I did). In terms of cutting spending (and thus taxes), I think there are higher priorities than welfare, as defense spending cuts and entitlement reform would save far more taxpayer dollars.
Just a reminder that Nick Sarwark said he would support Dick Cheney as the LP candidate if he was the candidate that would get the most votes. I'm glad the libertarians are taking over the libertarian party.
@@dashrirprock Noamchomsky is a genocide denier. Everyone outside of America despises him and considers him a degenerate, for actively denying eastern european genocides and being a complete tanky.
I was brought into the LP by Ron Paul's 1988 campaign and have been a dedicated, plumbline Libertarian since. The more recent pre-Reno LP was an absolute embrassment. The Mises Caucus represents new blood and a reorienting of the LP into an actual pro-liberty organization, not one that ponders to the authoritarian left wing.
So excited to see this. Any move toward sound economic policies, and away from pointless social/political agendas, is always a good move. Let people decide for themselves how they want to live. And make the government stop destroying our economy.
It would do a lot of good for the libertarian party speak to moderates in a way that doesn't promote a zealous oversight of what makes a monopoly. If you legalize syndicates, you're going to get that and then you're going to get a government from that. Currently the libertarian party still sounds Pro Monopoly but with good feel hopes and wishes. I think this can get fixed by crafting laws that defend competitive capitalism and counters hypercapitalism
Libertarianism is not about bringing down the state. That's anarchism. Libertarianism is about limiting the state. Sarwark is correct Mises Caucus is neither libertarian nor Misesian. Ludwig von Mises was a liberal
@@TheRishijoesanu Rothbard, an anarchist and known as the "father of libertarianism," was one of the founders of the Libertarian Party. Anarchists are the most consistent libertarians.
@@TheRishijoesanu Libertarianism is a term that encompasses both classical liberal ideology and most forms of market-based anarchism. There's no conflict with that at all, it's just a hierarchy of terms.
@@nichtsistkostenlos6565 Anarcho capitalism doesn't represent entirety of libertarianism. I don't know what Ancaps anything to do with LP in the first place
By the way quick note to the libertarian party members who may read this: Ron Paul is the real champion of libertarianism not because of his passion but because he explained liberty and economics well. He understood things at a fundamental level and explained it to others so they can as well. Yes there are people in the party that think similarly, but the way they explain it is either non existent or extremely flammatory/unprofessional
After watching the PBD Podcast with Dave Smith, Spike Cohen and Larry Sharpe, I totally disagree. They did a great job, unlike Jorgensen when she was there before.
Pure libertarianism is a religion. You can’t evangelize with catechisms and liturgies. You have to make bridges to common ground, and let them convert themselves.
@@selbstbestimmt Near complete failure to be relevant. Lacking virtually any real political power. Yeah sure, was going fine. Just another few decades. lol
Ron Paul would have clearly left numerous oppressive state actions and laws in place so long as they were “local” or fit his view of how others should live. He’s a conservative, especially when it comes to issues related to sexuality and race.
"By our fruits you will know us" says the guy that personally nominated a registered sex offender and Rudy Giuliani's "key witness" at the Four Seasons total landscaping news conference to run for governor of Pennsylvania. Angela McArdle was the Los Angeles county LP chair and didn't bother running any candidates in any races. We have seen their fruits already, and they have no business running a national party.
The truth is, by their droppings we will see how Trump backers infiltrated and neutralized America's only honest party. Rebooting to the original platform is an option.
Listen, I have loved Reason magazine since I was in my 20's. I'm in my 40's now and still appreciate them. I have always appreciated and looked up to Nick Gillespie--heck I even interviewed him for over an hour (for an MBA college assignment). He was and always will be Mr. Cool. Uncle Nick. I must admit that I don't like what has happened to the Libertarian party. They've been sliding into oblivion for years...as if by design. It's fucking weird. Now granted, the Mises Caucus can be a little rough around the edges--but they're libertarian through and through. Not watered down. Not half-ass. Not pathetically playing nice with DC. I think it's time for a more hardcore approach. The left isn't playing nice. The right seems weak as shit and the federal government is completely out of control. For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. The Mises Caucus exists for a reason. Rather than condemn or talk shit about them...we should be supporting. Guiding. North-Star this thing. Will they win the presidency? No, of course not...but if they play their hand correctly they can make a pretty big splash. Show America what the fuck is going on. Reel in the overreach. Roll back the state. End the wars. Stop locking people for victimless crimes. Of course racism is stupid...of course hating gays because they're gay is stupid. Yes there are some bad fringe actors who hold these views...but those guys are kooks. Losers. Weirdos. Fuck those assholes. We need to focus on freedom. It's slipping away and shit is getting crazy. Ron Paul 2.0? Bring it on.
@First name Last name How does the MC compare to the paleo strategy? Paleo strategy was all about giving up on the LP. MC is achieving precisely what the paleos could no do: gather supporters to stand for libertarian principles within the libertarian party confronting the sophists.
@Down with Corporate Amerika I'll riddle you this...Mothers in the USA do not have to be back at work 10 days after birth. That's simply not true and there are plenty of laws protecting maternity leave. 12 weeks is the standard in the USA. Even part-time workers are protected. Also, there are numerous anti-discrimination laws on the books protecting pregnant women in the workplace. With regards to Finland...nothing is free. There's no such thing as "no medical expenses". That's absurd. Everything has value. Who makes the medical equipment? Who makes the medicines and therapies? Who builds the hospital and pays the electricity bill? Who pays the doctors, nurses, janitors, etc.? Nothing is free. Everything has value and must be purchased and/or compensated somehow. People use their physical and mental abilities to perform jobs and they must somehow be paid for services rendered. It's not just some magical place where things are free. Other people are paying for it whether they want to or not. Socialism is not nice. It is theft. Pretending like it's some kind of benevolent ideology is childlike and absurd. The government uses the threat of violence to take money from people so that there are nO mEdiCaL eXpEnSeS. Now, I'll admit the medical industrial complex in the USA is highly corrupt--filled with cronyism and the government has made it terrible, expensive and retarded. Anyhow... Bottom line is this: if you get pregnant, nobody OWES YOU ANYTHING. You make a personal choice and must be prepared to bring a life into the world. Expecting everyone else to pay for your baby is a shitty mindset. Fuck Finland and fuck the USA's corrupt bullshit. Hopefully that cleared things up for you.
Even though the NAP is a dumb and flawed principle, it begs the question, is it against the NAP for a mother of a newborn child to force their kid to eat if they refuse to eat? I have heard people who support the NAP fanatically say it is. So, by that stance, they argue that a newborn child should die of starvation because no person (not even the kid's mother) should use force or aggression on another and, in this sense, keep the child alive and not die of malnutrition and starvation.
@@mstevens94 A key thing to realize about the NAP is that it doesn't say that every violation of property rights warrants the same response. The response/recompense has to be proportional to the violation.
@@mstevens94 you understand that there are degrees of aggression right? A child doesn't even have full agency. Let's say I cut In line that's a violation of the NAP but it's not the same as sucker punching the person in front of me and taking their spot. Our society already operates on NAP a minor violation is deemed negative but not justifying correction. In other words it's deamed rude or impolite. Something being a violation of the NAP doesn't mean it cannot be allowed necessarily but that it is not desirable. The NAP can be universally applied but it's not absolute.
Its "Libertarian Party" focus should be on the liberty. In the world that you are called a bigot if you lose weight because that would be fat phobic, the word has lost all of its value.
I've said it elsewhere on here but that doesn't mean you'll see it. The dictionary definition of a bigot is someone who is intolerant of those who hold different opinions to them. That's Sawark and Co; to a tee.
@Down with Corporate Amerika What are your sources that government butting in helps protect average people from exploitation? I can find plenty of sources that prove otherwise.
"We don't need outrageous statements and edge-lording just to get attention." - Justin Amash. Ok, Justin, but the LP never says anything to get attention. Can you think of one quote from them that was memorable? They are bland AF and they need some edge. No one knows who you are. People have heard of Ron Paul and Dave Smith. I can think of many edgy and great quotes from Dave Smith ("Bernie Bros said no more war, Biden/Harris said we will give you female bomber pilots," "The CIA didn't hate Trump because of his mean tweets.") I can't think of a single thing you or JoJo or Gary Johnson said that is memorable. You are all like insurance salesmen.
Quote: “We further support the repeal of all laws restricting voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days.” 1972-1976
I live in Los Angeles County, of which Angela McArdle was the local party chair. They ran no candidates at all on the June 7th jungle primary city or state wide.
Agreed. That’s part of the reason I never even bothered with them. I figured if I’m gonna spend my time doing anything, I’ll do it trying to get a Liberty candidate in the GOP, not banging my head against the wall with the LP. This unexpected turn of events has me reconsidering.
@@MultiTexMex My analysis is that while good things are happening, the LP is nowhere near there yet. And at the same time, there's an ascendant Liberty caucus within many State Republican organizations. A bunch of the more serious libertarians who are ahead of the game are working within the Rep parties, and they wield an order of magnitude more potential to affect good, freedom-based change, than those who stayed outside in the LP. Maybe in time, the LP can get back where it should be. In the meantime, the most pressing concern is out-maneuvering the wokeists before they destroy everything.
I think this is a good thing for the libertarians as a national party. I quit being involved as I saw years ago the LP was just getting kookier and kookier. Being for liberty doesn't have to mean detaching from reality to make purist ideological policies. I just might consider getting more involved again, now.
I was considering joining the Libertarian Party, but after seeing the guy strip naked on stage, and that they were pushing the same woke talking points that the Democrats were pushing, I changed my mind. Now I'm seriously considering joining.
@@jdavis8970 I wouldn't get your hopes up. From the sounds of it they basically have an anarchist rather than a minarchist consensus (as was revealed when they booed Von Mises quotes), so while they won't be woke anymore on enforcing race and trans issues with the state, they are still likely to strip naked on stage and argue you should be allowed to give krokodil to five year olds.
As a long time libertarian, this is a good thing. Frankly the LP has been an embaresment in recent years with terrible candidates and terrible leadership. Am glad the MC stepped up and got rid of these people. What was worse was their horrible shennanigans with many local parties. That, to me, showed their true colors that they had no business being in charge.
What, you mean Johnson/Weld chasing Bernie Bros yelling, "FREE WEED" and James Weeks' strip-tease wasn't strategically smart? I'm a lot less sympathetic regarding Libertarians after getting called a "babykiller" on Reason for having been in the military.
@@emcarp1234 because we were living the reality of the South Park episode with the world's biggest Douche and world's biggest Turd Sandwich as the 2 choices
Sarwark could not have been kicked out any faster... Making libertarianism and libertarian politics irrelevant was his guiding ethos, and making it a very non-confrontational, soft, non-intrusive, third-tier political movement was what he and his cohorts were all about. The slander thrown at the Mises caucus is/was hilarious and desperate. The party is not the "Democrat Party alternative" and it's not the "Republican Party alternative"; this is the Liberty alternative to a rampantly coercive and money-hungry state. Good absolute riddance.
I'm not a fan of Sarwark, but people with his way of seeing things exist in the pretty and all through society. He has a place in the liberty movement. His fruits showed leading the party was not the right place. I hope the new leaders will find a way of uniting us liberty lovers so that Sarwark and others of varying viewpoints can find places within the party to help attack the corruption and threats to our rights coming from gov't, particularly the 2-party establishment.
@@dustinabc This is where you and I differ; Sarwark doesn't belong in a libertarian party. His thoughts, actions, mindset, and framing of his first principles bely a lack of libertarian ontology. They appear to be more libertine and lightly less mixed economy-focused than a Republican - a lot like Gary. He could go both ways, so I see him as a left-centrist or a right-moderate with a cloying need to virtue signal mainstream opinions and talking points. He treats the inherent openness and tolerance of libertarian thought as if it's not self-explanatory, let alone the party tenants. It's embarrassing to virtue signal and go on the defensive. Anyone with doubts about the the party's legitimacy about tolerance in liberty, need be answered cogently and plainly, not told how they "think just like you". "Trans rights are humans right, guys! C'mon! We're acceptable! We're with it!". That doesn't need to happen and shouldn't happen.
It sounds like the Mises Caucus is actually trying to appeal to people like me. Elements in the party's platform, such as being pro-abortion and supporting open borders kept me from ever voting Libertarian. As John Burk stated, they were doing too much "gatekeeping." Now, the platform is something I can support. I stand for everybody's rights, regardless of identity. However, I do not support pandering to the "squeakiest wheel."
You can’t be a libertarian and argue for a massive state apparatus to enforces border controls. They are like oil and water. If you’re a conservative you’ve got the Republican Party to look too.
@@ggunnelspct and that type of thinking is why, even with the internet making your message available to the public, the LP has yet to win a national election.
@@matthewwhite3444 Yes, it’s not a terribly popular idea with a lot of people because a lot of people are prone to various biases that lend themselves to xenophobia - be it in immigration or trade. Bryan Caplan has an entire book about these biases.
@@matthewwhite3444 The LP won’t win a national election because of Durverger’s law. Well, I mean at least until the system of elections is changed that is. Which won’t happen because it favors the two incumbent parties.
"Appeal to middle" for decades meant just be ineffectively hang around, being 3rd place in 2 man race. It might have been something useful in the 90s, but its 2022.
People need to stop thinking politics is this straight line where the LP consists of centrists in the middle; the political spectrum is a circle, and the LP is on the complete opposite side of both Republicans and Democrats. They want a giant State. We want to set people free.
@@soundtracktothefuture226 A good percentage of Republicans are legitimate conservatives--not fiscal, not social, but cultural--that most respect limited government and would prefer a return to smaller, more localized political governance. Libertarianism can flourish under this larger circle of governance. No such space exists under Democrats. Libertarianism is completely opposite of the Democrat platform, but it's only sort of wiggled sideways to the Republican one. Hence why currently so many Libertarians will not consider themselves such until the Democrat/Progressive/Left menace is pushed back at least to the point where they're not an ongoing threat to the West, to Christendom, and the U.S. Constitution.
@@23wtb I’m not sure if you’ve seen the animated graphic showing the change/success of Constitutional Carry across the country in the last few decades, but that’s a good indication of the Libertarian model the Mises Caucus is invoking: we can win local elections, even House seats, and possibly some state senators or a governor… then people will start to say “hey, that one state has all these foundational ideas of human liberty, I want to be around that.” We all remember the one state who took the strongest stance against the COVID regime. Sometimes all it takes is one area to just say no, go their own way, and everyone will notice. Other states will follow, and soon you’ll be looking at something that looks pretty darn close to a Constitutional Republic again. But in order to do that, you need to start advocating for complete human liberty; and unfortunately, Republicans are still too much of warhawks and spend too much money to be considered conservative at this point. I don’t fault you for wanting to outnumber the progressive regime, but we really do need a liberty movement. And it’ll start with bringing people over to these principles locally.
@@23wtb Being libertarian means being anti-statist. Being libertarian means wanting liberty, not a special kind of governance for people who want liberty. Read Spooner's essay No Treason, and you will understand the constitution.
The only thing I concluded from Justin’s interview is that the he thinks the LP would be best served with some sort of Mitt Romney like presentation to the American public. George W Bush wasn’t enough for Justin to leave the Republican Party, nor was John McCain, nor was Mitt Romney but Trump was too much to for him to handle.
This video is better than Brian Doherty's shitty article at Reason, which was a disgrace. This was a bit more balanced, the fact remains that the biggest and most influential minds of libertarianism in the past 15 years have had nothing to do with the Libertarian party. As a libertarian myself I wanted nothing to do with the party, it was basically a bunch of Democrats that learned some economics. Now, with the Mises Caucus, as a libertarian, I feel I have a political home. Something that can actually put forward the ideas of Mises, Rothbard, Ron Paul, Tom Woods and the like... Ya know, the libertarians that libertarians actually care about. EDIT: Few things I would like to say, Nick comes off like a CNN interviewer here, notice those high school looking kids he interviews who are calling the Mises Caucus "bigots" and that "Lew Rockwell is behind all this" (like that even would be a bad thing), how he gives them no pushback, nor asks them to provide any proof at all, absolutely nothing. Contrast that with how he talks to the one guy who just managed the twitter of ONE State's party, who posted a tweet, then deleted it from pressure from the Mises Caucus, and Nick grills that dude longer than anyone in the entire video. In order to say what about the Mises Caucus? This isn't balance, CNN reporters do the same when they interview Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and the like versus how they treated Ron Paul and others -- their bias comes through with who they choose to push back against, and Nick's bias bleeds through here. Also notice how he decides to speak for Tom Woods regarding who was with him at the very beginning of the league of the South (a bunch of mainstream southern historians mind you) and we don't get to hear Tom explain it. As far as Justin Amash goes, he makes an elementary error with Mises -- Mises was not an anarcho-capitalist, but in that quote when he mentions "anarchists" he's talking about communists. And Mises never said the word "libertarian" or would've called himself one, he would've said liberal. So Amash is unintentionally misrepresenting Mises in that quote while ironically thinking he's making a slam dunk, Mises was comparing Liberalism (basically libertarianism at the time) to Anarchism (small "c" communism at the time). I like Justin Amash, but he's too milquetoast and not the guy to be the presidential nominee in 2024, he won't inspire many to rally around the cause. As far as taking out a thought crime from the platform, yes that was a good thing, because we are here to resist the State. No one likes bigots, but guess what, you can be a political libertarian and still have personal unsavory views, maybe you won't be culturally libertarian, but if you oppose the state and want to fight to end wars, then that's a beautiful thing. Notice how much more worried Amash and Gillespie are about removing those words from the platform and how that may hurt the prospects for the party in the future, than any Clinton, Bush, Romney, Mccain, Pelosi, Biden, and Graham ever felt about starting wars and how much that would hurt theirs -- the latter feeling none. This exact cuckery is why the Libertarian party has been a joke for so long, both Gillespie and Amash have done great work, but keep them as far away from central messaging as much as possible.
Same always loved Ron Paul. Even when I was a Democrat and then Green Party. I left the Democratic Party because I didn’t believe what they believed anymore. Then during Covid I saw the authoritarian in Green. And I’ve been voting Libertarian and they are finally sounding like the party I want to vote for. 😁 I just want a party that says stuff that makes sense for a change.
I just joined the LP after the Mises Caucus took over after watching disappointingly from a distance for almost a decade. I feel the same as you, I can actually feel at home with this party now.
I'm super excited for the changes. But to be fair- Jorgensen and Johnson were completely adequate candidates, and far superior to their competition, from the liberty perspective. When you're fighting against the 2-party establishment nothing is going to be easy and they will make the best people look horrible. I do expect things will go much better now however, as the political landscape shifts with boomers losing power, social media and Internet access to info taking over establishment controlled media, and the fiat economy collapsing. And a #LIBERTARIAN party not afraid to stand out, and stand up for liberty.
@Steve L What are you trying to say? Is this word salad from a homo sapien or a bot? If a homo sapien, try again, filling in the gaps between what you wrote and what you were thinking.
@@cortecz If you look at the comments, it is true that Reason seems to hate Mises caucus, but the video is still promoting them, oops lol Reason must be so embarassed that their side has been killing the party but they cant accept it. I hated the direction of the party over the last decade or so. I am glad to see where it can go now. It needs something fresh anyway.
The point of the Mises Caucus isn't to make the LP angrier nor to make it more trumpish or bigot, au contraire, it is to make it more principled. Sarwack's analysis is pretty off.
Woke language has been a very effective political tool for the Left, I LOVE the direction of the LP now. Thank you Reason for making as unbiased of a video as y'all can.
Language is powerful, there's a reason they keep manipulating it to their benefit. Only a fool would allow them to continue twisting it to their advantage.
@@TheRishijoesanu LOL, yes, please continue to crusade that Libertarianism is really about a nanny state that stops people from being mean to each other, and does nothing but obsess about race and seek "equity" through State coercion. You must follow the European "Libertarian" model that puts people in jail for 'racist' whatsapp posts.
I've never been deeper into libertarian thinkers than I was in 2018-2020. When I heard Jo Jorgensen was running I wanted to tell my daughter that was who I was voting for. When I watched her and other libertarians push or be naively cowtowed into a "woke" agenda I was disgusted. I want all social ideology out of politics, as far as possible and an emphasis on natural law. I still veiw myself as essentially libertarian but globalist libertarians and leftist ideologies in the party are ridiculous. Global libertarianism is as likely as global communism. National libertarianism with a reasoned sense of international trade and diplomacy is the birth right of every American. I was libertarian naturally as a kid, I loved the American founding, I was once radicalized to the left and Ron Paul helped to bring me back. Respect the legacy of the founders and people like Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell and Paul and maybe, just maybe people like me won't think of voting for the LP as a bad joke. The market rules so develop a better product.
@@terdragontra8900 because Japanese libertarian nationalism is the birthright of every Japanese person. The commenter is not saying Americans have more rights than others,to the contrary he's saying that they have a right as anyone does to self determination.
'Sacrifice your morals to run a candidate that will absolutely lose anyway." has been the policy of the libertarian party for as long as I can remember. If you're gonna go out, *do it with style* Fuck all this fitting in rigamarole Edit: After watching to the end of the video I respect the idea people have that the libertarian party could suck in dems and reps and get big and become a third player of some sort...but..... those people will leave once their parties shape back to their interests. They have no real love for the LP, they just don't have what they want in their party right now. Instead of sucking out these people who don't really care, find the people in there that have ALWAYS been dissatisfied, reach out and find the people who, once you latch on, will NEVER leave the party. That's how you build for the future.
Agreed. If you only chase the vote from dissatisfied centrists, they will be gone before you know it. Changing hearts and minds to the true north star of liberty will keep people for generations.
I'm not a libertarian, but I found the arguments being made against the Mises Caucus to be really annoying, because they were all coming from a left-liberal frame. The libertarian argument against bigotry is that government shouldn't pass any laws against this race or that race, but it's axiomatic to the nature of private property that someone can deny whoever they like from using what they control. Asking libertarians to take a stance on what people can do with their property or else they're bad and evil is basically just asking them to be progressives. The Mises Caucus should point out that these criticisms don't fundamentally make any sense.
I am a libertarian and I support this. It is stupid to brag that you got 3.5% of the national vote while trying to appease woke and liberal people. Far better to forget the national percentage and focus on a more pure libertarian message and go for local control, for example winning towns, counties, and cities and then nullifying federal laws we don't like. The LP in the past few election cycles was weak (Bill Weld, anyone?). And part-woke. For example why couldn't they stick up more strongly against lockdowns and masks?
The LP exists to repeal cruel laws and minimize the initiation of force. The original platform had us growing 12% per year before anarcho fascist infiltration stepped in. Libertariantranslator
Been a card carrying member since 1988. I’m tired of seeing the party borrow another product and badging it as it’s own like Johnson/Weld. I’d rather see the party develop its own grassroots base into candidates who are in fact libertarian. Fiscally conservative/socially liberal is just fine; doing whatever (compromising fundamental principles) just for the sake of winning by getting a good looking & great sounding politician elected is pointless. I’d rather see the party operate as a Cato-style think tank on issues for the other two parties to borrow and ultimately implement than simply putting lipstick on a pig.
I dunno, it's kinda gross seeing different groups use the party as a skin for their creepy agendas over the years. I just feel like this is just that, everyone who got kicked out of the Republican party for being a bit too racist. We get to be sattled with 'em until they realize they're just a new Constitution Party.
Huh... they sound like libertarian Libertarians... and their critics, at least with the criticisms they use, sound like progressive leftists. Ron Paul is the most successful Libertarian presidential candidate ever... why wouldn't the party want to emulate that success and build upon it?
Ron Paul was not the most successful Libertarian presidential candidate ever... Gary Johnson was. Ron Paul got .5% in the '88 general election. Johnson got 3.3%. We should be emulating Johnson, not Paul.
I'm a big fan of the Mises Caucus, for sure. I do worry that their reaction to their critics might turn there critics into wider enemies of liberty. Ultimately it's the critics (and each of us, really) that need to realize they have to make their own choices, and can learn to separate the few things they don't like from the many many good, important, and legitimate goals of the LPMC. But i do hope the LPMC finds the best way possible of herding libertarian cats in a way that spreads the philosophy of liberty like wild fire across America and the world. #VOLUNTARYISM
As a young Libertarian with a strong adherence to Austrian Economics (Rothbard and Mises are their inspirations), pro-life policies (the party allows both pro-life and pro-choice candidates), and free speech (they're allowing people to say racist things while not supporting racist policies), I am absolutely thrilled to see this.
They once used to care about the liberty of those that were being oppressed and not granted what the constitution, and declaration of independence guaranteed. Now they identify more with what Lysander Spooner, Emerson, Locke, and John Stuart Mill fought against.
The old heads at Reason are seething and I love it. An internet savvy, comedic and politically intriguing voice of the LP will bring in those disillusioned with the 2 party state and encourage young people like myself to get involved with the LP. Excited to keep up more with the LP as a longtime fan of Dave smith
They interview the great Tom Woods and focus on the irrelevant "League of the South" stuff? That's incredible. Then they try to make Jeremy Kauffman a nefarious character?
Alinsky's Rule 13 being applied. I've grown up around leftist here in the UK who won't acknowledge that it's ad hominem under a different name, but will cry ad hom if you play the same game with them.
I feel that libertarians should absolutely allow bigots. There are a lot of people that, right now, are bigoted. But, they are able to be changed. We shouldn’t only accept people that believe everything we want. This may be controversial but some really valuable life lessons that I’ve learned were from construction workers who were openly racist. Did I disagree with their racism, yes; but everyone has some value underneath their bigotry. People can change, let’s give them a chance to do so.
It's not a question of "allowing bigots". It's a question of defining them. What is a bigot? Besides being one letter away from the delicious Polish dish "bigos"?
I mean, the Republicans did this. And they got Charlottesville. Do you think the Libertarian Party could survive a Charlottesville? I mean, people thought the Harry Potter houses were bad. Yikes.
Perhaps those construction workers that you look down on, just didn't like it that Politicians were giving advantages, and preferences to people that didn't look like them, or more likely voted for them, and calling it justice. As a Republican I want Libertarians to remain ideologically pure and to continue with the elitism and smug superiority, and call others that they disagree with bigots, maybe call them deplorables.
@@RussellNelson Even if it WAS a question of allowing bigots, if I agree with a person on 99% of issues, but they're also a "bigot" by whatever definition, I'm still okay with having them around, and would probably vote for them if they ran for office. Too many people think that anything less than 100% ideological purity is just not good enough, and that's just not realistic. We don't have to be that simple-minded. You agree with me on abortion, gun rights, property and income taxes, and a national defense strategy that focuses more on defense and less on power projection, but we disagree on immigration policy? Hell yes, I'll vote for you. It's about prioritizing what matters - not everything can be priority 1.
Some of the members give stupid answers. Like for example "Do you accept biggots in the party" the right answer would be. Everybody is welcome as long as their ideas are libertarian in essence. That is people who defend everybodys right to defend property and their life. If you go against that idea then you are not welcome.
those werent just random members that gave those answers. they were people like Angela who is now the chair and Heise who is ceo of mises pac. and yes it is weird they’d struggle on how to respond to that simple question 🤔
You would think that Libertarians would be for the 1st Amendment and might even defend Hate Speech. Of course, The Left defines hate speech as any speech that is against preferences, set asides, and against open borders.
@@MattGPT-eh4cp You can defend their right to say that but you dont need to associate yourself volintarily with people who actively want harm for minorities or are in princiole opossed to libertarianism.
I find it rich that the same lolbertarians who made this party a laughing stock by voting for Jorgenson and Johnson are now complaining they have no power in the party anymore.
I was a big part of The Ron Paul Revolution from 2009-2012. I contend that if the establishment had not done EVERYTHING in their power to knock him out of the primaries - he'd have won the Presidential race. I went to the USF Sun Dome and met with him afterward at a small gathering. The Sun Dome was far past capacity. Hardly any room for standing. Drs, Lawyers, Mechanics, Students, Nurses, Teachers, and Unemployed were going insane cheering after each stanza of Ron Paul's speech. The place where we met was a small bar/restaurant called "The Copper Top". I was mailed a VIP Pass - but when I showed, there were HUNDREDS of people waiting outside BEFORE Dr. Paul showed up. Was incredible.
McArdle should have responded, "There is room in EVERY political party for bigots, but most lie about it." It is a slippery concept that defies measurement. Bigots include violent KKK members and racial elitists who hide their racial elitism, but who, in positions of power, act subtly to disadvantage other races. Bigots include unaware and undecided people who don't consider themselves bigots, but who manifest bigotry in their behavior. And tbh, it would include "reverse" racists who are so consumed with trying to be "anti-racist" that they end up loathing their own race. Bigotry is a matter of degree, not a black-and-white thing, and we all have some irrational prejudice in us. All we can do is to minimize its manifestations. Trying to eliminate it is a fool's errand.
Bad analogy. If the ball belongs to them, they've every right to take it home when they want. Sarwark et al have been made to realise that they don't own the ball and that pisses them off, like the UK coal miners of the 1980s.
"Open Borders" issue would be largely resolved by ending the debacle war on drugs. Also by ending the Fed and Progressive imperialism of the Third World. Also by ending the Sixteenth Amendment and removing the table that American citizens carry for immigrant labor to work under. Borders really aren't the issue, they're just another division between issues.
They rightly made the race language in the platform neutral rather than pandering to progressivism. And this makes them appealing to bigots? There's the answer right there to why the party's been a joke and needs to be reset.
I literally walked into this video with zero context as someone coming from a more center (left) side of the spectrum wanting to be Libertarian and this turned me off instantly. I have no issue with race neutral language and I even applaud it's effective use but the NH Official tweeting out black people now owe the country for the special treatment they received is bad form. Can you honestly tell me that does feel like an appeal to the worst parts of conversatism?
@@Anans1_Spyd3r Guess it depends how much weight you put on a tweet vs. an official national party platform. IMHO the context of the tweet renders it far less objectionable than what you're suggesting.
@@scott555 The language is not politically neutral and it makes it harder for someone to hang there hat and say I am associated with that. I have seen follow up videos were the current leadership has made strides to place distance from those tweets and I can respect that
@@Anans1_Spyd3r Fair enough. To be perfectly honest, though, I really hate the acquiescence to the mob, so them putting distance between themselves and the tweets of an individual isn't a feature for me.
That's why the Mises Caucus is a good thing, and although not all he said was right compared to Rothbard which most of what Rothbard said should be held true to the party's principals.
That’s very interesting - I’d like more people to know that! Where can I point people to get the key money quote on Coyle being in support of redistribution?
Jeez, considering the p!ss poor performance of the party in '16 & '20, it was way past time for a change in direction. I couldn't bring myself to vote Jo and welcome turning the party over to a new generation.
Now they’ll put better candidates in 2024, take votes away from a Republican President, and ensure 4 more years of this bullshit we’re in now. I can’t see how this is a good thing if Desantis is the nominee in 2024.
@@HVACSoldier 3% against the two most unlikable candidates in US history is still horrible. He should have been double digits against Hillary and Trump. Johnson had no energy or real message.
@@HVACSoldier wtf is 3%. Who cares. Libertarians should avoid the presidential stage. Focus on school board, congress, mayoral races, etc. All local politics.
@@mexicolaisgood We elect people locally. 3% is better than the 1/2% we were getting. The problem is convincing people that 90% of Democrat and Republican politicians are assholes that don’t give a flying fuck about the ordinary person.
It's hard to hit on actual libertarianism on an allegedly libertarian channel, even if your producers are progressive fuckwits. I mean, it looks like they tried .
@@lancehawk2220 wokeness in society should be so freaking low on the list of importance of libertarian issues. I truly do not care about what the left says on twitter or what dumb shit Robin D'Angelo says about white people. It's much more scary to see authoritarians like Ron DeSantis try to punish private companies for their opinions and create laws banning ideas in schools.
@@kelbycaplinger5367 have you studied Marxism? Ideas are very effective at destabilizing societies to prepare them for revolution. Wokeness is a neo Marxist push to undermine liberty in America. It's very important to push against
Lance Hawk I’m all for discussing the flaws and irrationalities of CRT or Marxism, but the Libertarian Party tries to win elections to effect change in government not police culture war issues. We already have two idiotic parties that take up way too much time talking about that.
Reason is disappointing me of late, but I’m excited for LPMC, and they’ve actually turned me onto the LP. Before them, I have never thought much of libertarians.
Angela ended up making things embarrassing for us and not having any significant impact on shaping policy in the GOP while significantly deterring the LPs memberships and donations by fundraising for RFK and Trump instead of her own damn candidate
I, humbly, think the best way to convert people to the movement is by start with premises shared by the average citizen and, then, showing to them why libertarian policies achieve the same goals that they want. We need to show why libertarianism is the most aproppiate to human nature.
Rekieta Law has the best take on libertarianism. It should be the baseline position when considering laws or regulations. You won't see a fully libertarian government but you can see politicians selling freedom back to the population. Freedom is Risk.
What made me become a libertarian was being shown how normie statist beliefs hamper the achievement of what most would think of as ethical, effective governance.
Yes one person "killed" aka died from being morbidly obese after an Antifa mob attacked a car. I hope the BLM riots showed everyone what happens to drivers who try to play nice with Antifa. See also the 1/6 "attack on democracy" in which the only person murdered was an unarmed protestor.
No, one person died of a heart attack because she was a fat chain smoker. But they charged some poor sap who rammed a crowd of people that were attacking him in his car for it.
A fine example of modern yellow journalism. Raising the question of whether "the party is now open to bigots" is the height of intellectual dishonesty. Miss McArdle demonstrated enormous grace and serenity listening to this drivel and respectfully answering in a polite and conciliatory way. What a formidable leader.
Eliminating the Abortion endorsement plank is the best thing that has happened to the LP in years. It perfectly demonstrates a commitment to natural rights while showing that this comes with responsibilities.
I agree as long as the stay neutral. It is a hard librarian argument. If someone was knockout and left in your home do you have a responsibility to help them... eh tough can you deny them life... again ehh hard to say since the other party has no intent
“Society feels so much freer when you know the cops will come and shoot your dog and the state will sentence you to death if you dare have this medical procedure that goes against my religion!” - a totally libertarian and not conservative at all mind
I have to laugh at "the idea of becoming a smaller, harder, more angry Republican party, is not a good one" cause what a straw man. Nick wants the Libertarian party to be closer to Republicans than Mises libertarians want. On top of that woknest is racism. You don't beat racism by embracing it, and it's insulting to think minorities can't achieve cause of the color of their skin (what woke people say). Dam that Nick dude says such absurd stuff, he's must know it's nonsense and lies. He's making me mad!
Love the Mises Caucus movement! I’d say this video was about as fair a treatment as they could expect and I even think it’s fine to ask them to respond to the loudest (albeit dumbest) criticisms.
the "bigotry" thing was a bit unfair imo...pretty sure the reason deep down was that that particular language was used to purge members of a state lp if my memory serves me correctly...nobody mentioned that
@@conner1715 it was not only unfair, it felt like a Cathy Newman moment for me. she goes on to say why you can't define a bigot and then he asks anyway, if it's ok for bigots to be in the party. her reply was a push back for nick either ignoring what she just said or an attack. the equivalent of you being fully vaccinated (including for Covid), saying you oppose vaccine mandates and getting called an "anti-vaxxer"
And this is a bad thing how..... Post-modern libertarianism ala reasontv is the most hollow and vapid conception of liberty ever produced. If flourishing and limited government is the goal, neither are achieved with reasontv. Values do matter.
Property rights include property owners having the right to gatekeep on their property. Individual liberty includes freedom of association. Being free to associate with whom you chose is the same as being free to not associate with those you dislike. Individual liberty must be enfringed upon to combat bigotry because bigotry is the right of all. Its good the anti bigotry statement was removed from the LP's mission statement. Stop worrying about bigotry and start worrying about malice and corruption.
Policing "bigotry" and "hate" is thought-policing, and should be an immediate red flag for anyone who sincerely believes in libertarian tenets and philosophy. It's such a transparent dodge too. Every governmental structure that decides that governing is just too hard--keeping the lights on, the streets clean, the roads in good repair--can just choose to focus on "combating hate." It takes the heat off them for terrible custodianship, and gets people too busy fighting each other to notice that the people in charge are incompetent fools. It creates a mess, just an enormous fighting pit, for malevolent people to politic and seek power and steal, while accomplishing literally nothing good that helps anyone.
I've attempted to get involved in the Libertarian Party twice, but in the end couldn't do it because the party was a joke. They only seemed to care about bickering over what a "pure" Libertarian is rather than actually trying to win elections. Philosophically I'm very much a libertarian, but the Libertarian Party has not earned my respect or my allegiance. It has proven it's powerless to make a difference. I don't know if the Mises caucus can change that. I'll be watching, but I won't be holding my breath. By the way, "socialist libertarian" is a contradiction in words. Socialism cannot exist without a powerful government forcing certain behavior on the citizens whether they like it or not, and I'm at a complete loss as to how that can be called libertarian.
If they put their words into action and stick to the principles they are expressing then this will be a step up for the libertarian party. Also, a more fired up libertarian party is better than libertarians walking around with a defeated mentality. Libertarians don’t owe republicans or democrats anything and certainly not progressives. This isn’t the progressive party. This isn’t the party of trump either. It’s ok to offer an olive branch to both. Libertarians don’t have to aim to be as politically divided as republicans and democrats, but libertarians shouldnt abandon libertarian view points to appease either side. Stop chasing progressives, conservatives, liberals, and make them chase libertarians. Your the third largest party. There’s still room to grow. There’s a lot of independents and moderates out there that can still be won over. There’s democrats not happy with the Democratic Party. There’s republicans not happy with republicans. Instead of just sitting back and letting them switch sides, maybe the libertarian party should try and show them a new side. This country is in desperate need of a third option. It’s not easy to take ground from republicans and democrats. They’ll play dirty, keep libertarians off the debate stage, maybe even pass laws that hurt libertarians, or even find or create loopholes to have libertarians arrested. They’ll probably call an attempt to vote in a 3rd party an attempted coup, even if it’s peacefully don’t through a democratic process, the media will spin it. You already get gaslit endlessly online for supporting 3rd parties. Oh it’s a wasted vote. 3rd parties hurt democracy. Your really supporting the other side. A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for trump. Or a vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Hillary. I’m sure we’ve all been given all types of crazy excuses to attempt to keep us in line and force us to vote Republican or democrat. That’ll only get worse as libertarians gain more influence. Anyways, I would certainly vote for a member of this caucus over another Pelosi or McConnell. Libertarian policies would be good for the country. And libertarians might actually get things done. Because if a libertarian manages to reach office, they got something to prove so people can gain confidence in the libertarian party. And if they do become do nothing libertarians maybe they won’t last long. They need to get out there on the streets and online and campaign , buy up advertising space and more. Don’t just focus on the presidency. Endorse and give recognition to libertarians on the state and local levels. Legislative branches and judicial. Libertarians might not be allowed on the debate stage or receive coverage from the corporate press. But, they can certainly get their faces out there, on the internet, or show up to public gatherings. But, the system as it is now is going to kill this country, and kill our Democratic system, and destroy the Republic. There needs to be other voices in government and elsewhere. Not just the two. You need an alternative populist movement that challenges Trumpers and progressives/Bernie types. I mean Bernie is a sell out, And really trump was overhyped. But, ultimately the establishment has controlled this country long enough.
@@libertariantranslator1929 Hitler lite, lol, bruh, if you deducted anything nationally socialist from the MC's stances, then you're the one who's not a true libertarian buddy.
Exactly, woke has held the LP for too long, they do not belong in the party as much as as an elephant belongs at a banquet. Call yourselves something else, Mises himself would disagree with the woke obviously, the trans libertarian soft nonsense, as well as almost all other founders of the libertarian movement.
"Removing it makes some kind of statement about where you're values are" Exactly a statement about how anyone can hold their own opinions even if you or society at large disagrees with them.
I think a good compromise would be to keep an anti-bigotry statement but actually include the dictionary definition of bigotry. From what I took from this video is 'bigot' like 'nazi', 'racist', 'transphobe' etc. have became these cringe buzzwords that are so commonly wrongly used and not in line with their actual definitions. Just used as insults by wokeists trying to virtue signal and raise their own status/lower the other person's.
"I think Change is good. Progress is good." This is not a libertarian, This is a progressive. Change is not the value. The reason a thing changes is to achieve a higher value or to better achieve your goals, not simply because change is good. That is language of the progressives. If a system is working very well, it does not require change until that change can be proven to have better results that the existing model. I have never been persuaded by the progressives because they have always been stuck on the mantra that change is good. Change is inevitable, but that does not mean it is good.
Sources familiar with their thinking might even be saying that they're racists, transphobes, and huge bigots. People are saying! Yeah Nick Gillespie is a trash-fire.
Haha when nick talks about bigotry to mcardle. She 100% right, saying we reject racism and bigotry is a nothing statement. HELL even Ben Shapiro says the same thing. Saying BLACK Lives Matter is like saying " ice cream is cold" We all know this
The Mises Caucus appeals to conservatism, Conservatism has always been the status quo of this country, therefore the LP is definitely part of the status quo.
Real libertarian are back … guard rails and gating speech rules is pathetic . I love this direction:) harumpf we don’t need to wage a hearts and mind campaign for the next generation… let’s fight over collectivist leftist ideas while the party collapses and do what’s failed since the beginning as our ideas die with us ???
I gave up on the LP and politics in general, I came back solely because of the Mises Caucus. Justin Amash is great, but he's just slumming it in the LP until he gets called back to the big leagues in the GOP, and seeing Sarwark on here makes me puke, he's 50% of the reason I left the LP, glad to see he's been tossed to the curb.
Amash is persona non grata, in the Republican Party. The Republican Party is a “Trump Party” for the foreseeable future. Donald Trump 2024, Don Trump Jr. 2028, Eric Trump 2032 or 2036. The Trump’s will milk it as long as they have followers.
@@HVACSoldier yes, but persona non grata lasts only until they need you, Ted Cruz went after Trump until they needed him now they're best buddies. If Amash kisses the ring he'll be back. My distrust of Amash comes from him embracing the FBI & CIA as soon as he thought they were going to be able to remove Trump. Dude was loud and proud Libertarian but became a statist real quick when he thought he could get some gain out of it.
@@OmegaSupremeWCheese Amash voted to impeach Trump. That is an “unforgivable sin” in the eyes of the GOP. The Trump family will control the GOP for the next 20 or 30 years, the same way the Clinton’s controlled the Democratic Party for 25 years. I give it about 2040, when people start ignoring the Trump family, the same way people are ignoring Hillary after 2016.
As a person with extremely Libertarian beliefs for 30 years, and a Mises institute follower, maybe I'll actually register as Libertarian. Now that the Tinfoil-hat crowd is failing, as it should, it would be nice if it mattered for a change.
I believe in the Libertarian way of living but it is so easily attacked I don't think it can stand the pressure from those around us. People become offended, then the crying starts and we all know how that affects people. Then someone says: there ought to be a law.
Self-ownership is the fundamental ethical bedrock of libertarianism. Everything else is derived from that one value. Authoritarianism is based ultimately on the belief that instead rulers own us, able to commandeer our bodies, our labors, our associations, and our products through their laws and regulations. And so, the most basic political question is: "Do you own your own body." Because if you say, "Of course!", you may be so brainwashed that you will have a difficult time being consistent and universal with that belief, but you are a libertarian.
I became a libertarian in the late 1970's in the aftermath of Watergate. I was active, dedicated, and involved; and even ran for congress as a lib in 1988. That's when I met Ron Paul, who was running for president at the time. Since then, I've drifted away from the political side of things and am now more of a theoretical, "small-l" type libertarian. I'm not even a party member any more and don't follow their activities closely, so this clip was news to me. But it does demonstrate an important principle: all political parties evolve over time. The major parties remain major parties by adapting and modifying ideas from each other and from the minor parties. The Socialist party in its various incarnations never won a nationwide election, but almost everything they wanted in their 1928 platform has been adopted over the years by the major parties as the ideas became popular: TVA, Social Security, Child Labor Laws, the 40-hour work week with overtime, etc. I've often said that if a democrat or a republican were time-warped from the 1930's, the 1960's, or even the 1980's to the present, they would hardly recognize their party today. There are also more immediate shifts in direction, for example the catharsis of the democrats with Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in 2016; or the republicans with Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford in 1976. Obviously the libertarian party is not immune and all of the above applies to them, too..
Would you say as an old timer of the movement. That ron paul libetarianism was perhaps a bygone era? As in complete free market capitalism borderline anarcho capitalism isn't a working model? Or you think that the night watchmen goverment/state or the disolvement of the government is still necessary?
"Anarchism would only work in an world of angels and saints." - Justin Amash. Actually, it did work for 1,000 years (far longer than our modern nation-states will last) and it was called Medieval Ireland. Plus, I think statism would only work if people were angels and saints, and that is why it DOESN'T.
I guess you missed the part where he was quoting that from Mises. It's from Mises' _Liberalism: In The Classical Tradition_ Chapter 1 (The Foundations of Liberal Policy) Section 7 (State and Government). The book he had there was probably a printing of the 1985 translation from Ralph Raico. The entire first chapter is freely available on the Mises Institute website as an article, or the whole book is available there in several forms.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Winner getting 70% doesn't exactly indicate "division" to me
I was thinking a similar thing... his response to Nick asking what do you say to the 300 or so people who voted against you? "Standing in defiance before a landslide could be dangerous."
I'm sure 250 of the 300 that voted for other candidates liked Angela, but just preferred the other candidates they supported instead.
I wanted Angela to win, but i think the others that were running for the position had their own strengths and good ideas as well.
We can't abandon our principles and our macro goals because of little political battles and personality clashes.
@@dustinabc you’d be wrong 🙃
I'm already panning to attend the next one.
That's because those in power have the media and WANT you to believe the popular is unpopular. THe stupid MSM do it all the time and it's full of so many bad-faith "actors".
I left the libertarian party because they were more concerned about not being offensive than fighting for liberty. The Mises Caucus may be offensive but they fight for liberty and they make me want to return.
So the “fighting for liberty” is to make your priority “owning the libs” in the culture war? Anyway, the party has mostly been incredibly ineffectual during its entire history, and remains so under new management.
@_____ Dude, it is ahistorical nonsense to state that somehow people are more offended today than they were a hundred years or two hundred years ago by controversial issues. Since at least the advent of early mass culture with coffee houses in England, etc. people have found offense and been loud about such. Indeed, it’s one of the fucking cornerstones of a free society. Compare and contrast with autocratic societies like Russia where taking offense is made illegal.
Come on back!
Not so much the party itself - but most self-proclaimed Libertarians now seem to be archo-capitalists. I'm for small gov - not no gov. And liking the free market doesn't mean that I think corporations are saints. (Most corporations aren't fans of the free market - they prefer regulatory capture.)
@@DarthRadical I’m just a good old fashioned classical liberal. Libertarianism is just to fringe an ideology for me to take seriously.
"If you give people freedom they might use it in undesirable ways!" - critics. The movement should be about what's true and what's libertarian. Make your appeal to the people based on the ethics of liberty as they apply today instead of bending libertarianism to feel "progressive" or "conservative" to try to gain appeal.
Its frustrating to me that people seem unable to base their political ideas on their core values, and instead base it on cultural identity.
Libertarianism isn't for 'progressives' or 'conservatives', its for people that care about liberty. The fundamental rights to autonomy, private ownership, non-aggression, etc. Everything else ought to be secondary.
When we have people like Vaush calling himself a libertarian, there is something deeply wrong to notice around what constitutes the core principles of libertarianism
@@rafaelmusacchio5257 to be fair, he ain’t libertarian
@@rafaelmusacchio5257 lefties like Vaush think that disliking the government for not giving them enough handouts makes them libertarian
A friend once told me, “You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.”
In other words, it doesn’t matter who controls the LP, they’re still going to keep losing 99.99% of all the elections they enter.
The LP has a solid, 50-year track record.
I know Reason is generally considered to be part of the opposition to the MC within the LP, so I appreciate how fair this video was overall.
Except towards Jeremy Kauffman lol
@@zntepicvids yeah for real your not allowed to tell jokes anymore. It's edge lording like come on, people are attracted to this kind of humor. We can pull more people in with jokes and a welcoming light hearted atmosphere. Not an atmosphere were people feel like they are walking on egg shells.
@@zntepicvids I actually thought it was very fair to him. Someone might wonder why there is a perception that the MC are edgelords or someone may only know Kauffman for those tweets. Nick gave him an opportunity to address specific controversial tweets himself. For those who hear those tweets and think they aren't a big deal, they now know what kinds of things supposedly make the MC edgelords and they can dismiss that charge. For those who hear them and think they are very bad tweets, they have now heard from Kauffman what he was trying to convey.
Because they had to save face after that pathetic smear piece they wrote after the convention.
It was pretty down the middle. I love the MC, and I watch Reason quite often. Good job on both ends. Unlike typical politicians, difficult questions were rarely deflected, but actually answered well. If only the corporatism politicians operated this way.
I'm a Mises Caucus co-founder. Overall, not bad (grading on a curve that includes being called nazis over the years). Not a hatchet job, but with a few pieces missing. I'll try to fill some gaps.
1:35 There is an omission. We are perfectly comfortable reaching out to those on the left who have been rendered politically homeless by radicals on their own side: people like Tim Pool, Dave Reuben, anti war progressives like Jimmy Dore, or anti surveillance state people like Glen Greenwald. Mike Heise and some of our champions like Dave Smith have had friendly dialogue with these people. Our difference re: Trump supporters is that we are open to conversation with them, take their concerns seriously, and do not shun them as abhorrent monsters.
1:40 Source? We named ourselves after Mises because we promote Austrian economics of which Mises is the most univerally beloved scholar, because Mises inspired Ron Paul who inspired us, and he was an active optimist in the face of impossible odds. We explicitly did not want to brand ourselves a strict anarchist caucus- in 2017 the Radical Caucus already filled that niche. Look at our planks. None are anarchist per se. Anarchists and minarchists can both accept them.
2:15 Dave has quipped that the only problem with conservatives is that they are all Progressives [always adopting yesterday's progressive agenda]
20:45 We solicited Spike to help us craft replacement language that maintained the spirit of the original plank without the fuzzy undefined word "bigot" which is used purely as a cudgel; Affirming the entire platform is not in the membership pledge so it's not like it would stop a committed racist from joining the party anyway.
22:00 Amash modified all those quotes from "liberal" to "libertarian" and these are not the same. It is indeed true that liberals were not anarchists; but we are not liberals, and the LP is the Libertarian Party not the (Classical) Liberal Party. Mises also held views that would probably make Mr. Amash uncomfortable. Mises is his own man. Nobody owns him. Nobody can imitate him. We all respect him.
Last: Critics fixated on NH, over a tweet it deleted anyway, but there were 36 other states unmentioned. If the MC were a nonstop scandal machine, there would be a cornucopia of examples. There is not, because we are making these affiliates healthier, and that's the real story.
Great post!
Based. How come Reason didn’t ask Sarwark why he said he’d endorse Cheney or Hitler on the libertarian ticket though ?
Fantastic job. You even did a good job of avoiding all the stupidity and gotcha nonsense they fired at Mises people. Somebody really should make that post too though; Nick is *so oily.*
Thanks for the clarification!
You are aware that Mises was a classical liberal and that libertarianism has its roots based in liberalism, right?
What's so great about these soft and careful Libertarians when the regime is tearing up our Civil Liberties in front of us? If nobody gets elected, at least i can be proud to call myself a Libertarian and actually cheer during a debate. Instead of cringing and weeping into my hands watching blunder after blunder and concession after concession. I came for the truth and stayed for the FREEDOM!
Well, if the libertarian party is run by a bunch of crypto fascists, it's not very freedom or liberty focused party, is it? Well maybe it is, if God created you straight and white.
Repealing bad laws with Libertarian spoiler vote clout is winning. The Kleptocracy knows this.
Its a joke that Reason even cared to quote somebody mentioning the alt-right as a way to discredit any direction that doesnt go left.
It was mostly a left wing talking point to say that anything to the right of Marx was extremist. Or any "conservative/republican" that doesnt side with the left on social issues, is extremist.
So the Libertarian Party might align more with the right at the moment, and thats bad because then it might become extremist because to the left everything on the right is extremist. Heck, centrists are extremist.
I am repeating myself but the point is, stop pandering to the left. It is making a joke of the party. This new direction is great, not because it might align closer to the conservatives, but because it gets back to the roots of the ideology, and lets them set their own path instead of a path controlled by the liberal narrative.
Learn about spoiler vote clout. Libertariantranslator
Austria cheered Hitler's Anschluss
The removed sentence was replaced with a POSITIVE statement about what we support, instead of an ill-defined one about what we "condemn". It is like saying "we are pro-peace, not anti-war"
Yes, I think that's a good change, as well as removing the abortion plank because that was always a divisive issue for libertarians where policy must weigh the rights of the woman against that of the unborn child.
But I think the libertarian position on immigration is clearly to reduce the power and influence of state as much as possible, meaning open borders.
Well said. This is why I like Spike Cohen so much.
@@wesbarnhart4608 spike is the man
@@perfectlyGoodInk I won't be pro open borders until the taxpayer is respected and there is no welfare state. To me that order is not negotiable. However I do agree that if welfare is removed and property rights are strengthened, then open borders would be a net positive.
@@Weirdomanification Sounds like we agree on both removing the welfare state and immigration restrictions, and it's just a quibble over priority.
Me, I personally prioritize open borders because I view restricting movement as more onerous to an individual's freedom than taxes. Furthermore, the Cato Institute has reported, "Overall, immigrants are less likely to consume welfare benefits and, when they do, they generally consume a lower dollar value of benefits than native-born Americans" (I tried to link the report, but my comment kept getting deleted when I did).
In terms of cutting spending (and thus taxes), I think there are higher priorities than welfare, as defense spending cuts and entitlement reform would save far more taxpayer dollars.
Just a reminder that Nick Sarwark said he would support Dick Cheney as the LP candidate if he was the candidate that would get the most votes. I'm glad the libertarians are taking over the libertarian party.
That is false.
@@nsarwark Dave shut you down. Get back to blowing Bill Weld
^^^ worst LP chair ever ^^^
@@nsarwark I mean its on a public podcast, right before you got NOTA’d in New Hampshire :)
@@nsarwark BYYYYEEE BYE BYE!
Anybody who’s ever had the misfortune of encountering a “libertarian socialist” online knows exactly what happened to the party.
What does that mean? Readers of Murray Bookchin and Noam Chomsky were taking over the party?
@@dashrirprock It's an oxymoronic term....emphasis on the "moronic" part.
@@dashrirprock Noamchomsky is a genocide denier.
Everyone outside of America despises him and considers him a degenerate, for actively denying eastern european genocides and being a complete tanky.
Can confirm. 😂
Leftist libertarian is a contradictory term in itself, and there is a lot of people calling themselves that.
I was brought into the LP by Ron Paul's 1988 campaign and have been a dedicated, plumbline Libertarian since. The more recent pre-Reno LP was an absolute embrassment. The Mises Caucus represents new blood and a reorienting of the LP into an actual pro-liberty organization, not one that ponders to the authoritarian left wing.
I'm guessing you meant "panders"
Ron Paul and his boy Randal are girl-bullying Republican politicians.
I’m
Yea Sarwark and friends are actually Progressives pretending to be Libertarians.
Considering the representative for the LP supported the communist terrorist group BLM... Hard to not get more libertarian.
So excited to see this. Any move toward sound economic policies, and away from pointless social/political agendas, is always a good move. Let people decide for themselves how they want to live. And make the government stop destroying our economy.
Republican prohibitionism destroyed the economy in 1907, 1929 and 2008. See Prohibition and The Crash
Bingo
Mises Caucus Takeover of the Libertarian Party is a move toward pointless social/political agendas, and away from sound economic policies.
So... Heil MAGA?
It would do a lot of good for the libertarian party speak to moderates in a way that doesn't promote a zealous oversight of what makes a monopoly. If you legalize syndicates, you're going to get that and then you're going to get a government from that. Currently the libertarian party still sounds Pro Monopoly but with good feel hopes and wishes. I think this can get fixed by crafting laws that defend competitive capitalism and counters hypercapitalism
Notice how Angela: focused on bringing down the state and Sarwark focused on: bringing down the Mises Caucus.
Hes trying to bring down the party as he has for so long. Wheres the article on his being a fraud in feds clothing?
Libertarianism is not about bringing down the state. That's anarchism. Libertarianism is about limiting the state. Sarwark is correct
Mises Caucus is neither libertarian nor Misesian.
Ludwig von Mises was a liberal
@@TheRishijoesanu Rothbard, an anarchist and known as the "father of libertarianism," was one of the founders of the Libertarian Party. Anarchists are the most consistent libertarians.
@@TheRishijoesanu Libertarianism is a term that encompasses both classical liberal ideology and most forms of market-based anarchism. There's no conflict with that at all, it's just a hierarchy of terms.
@@nichtsistkostenlos6565 Anarcho capitalism doesn't represent entirety of libertarianism. I don't know what Ancaps anything to do with LP in the first place
By the way quick note to the libertarian party members who may read this: Ron Paul is the real champion of libertarianism not because of his passion but because he explained liberty and economics well. He understood things at a fundamental level and explained it to others so they can as well.
Yes there are people in the party that think similarly, but the way they explain it is either non existent or extremely flammatory/unprofessional
Ron Paul was the greatest president we never had.
We have what we deserve.
After watching the PBD Podcast with Dave Smith, Spike Cohen and Larry Sharpe, I totally disagree. They did a great job, unlike Jorgensen when she was there before.
Pure libertarianism is a religion. You can’t evangelize with catechisms and liturgies. You have to make bridges to common ground, and let them convert themselves.
@@selbstbestimmt Near complete failure to be relevant. Lacking virtually any real political power. Yeah sure, was going fine. Just another few decades. lol
Ron Paul would have clearly left numerous oppressive state actions and laws in place so long as they were “local” or fit his view of how others should live. He’s a conservative, especially when it comes to issues related to sexuality and race.
"By our fruits you will know us" I think that's perfectly reasonable and well thought out.
This is the first time I've honestly considered LP affiliation. This is a good change.
@@pete5108 And it's the thing that made me 100% absolutely sure that if I thought I might've leaned libertarian before, I never will now!
@@misterlich2826 well I'm glad we both got some clarity.
"By our fruits you will know us" says the guy that personally nominated a registered sex offender and Rudy Giuliani's "key witness" at the Four Seasons total landscaping news conference to run for governor of Pennsylvania. Angela McArdle was the Los Angeles county LP chair and didn't bother running any candidates in any races. We have seen their fruits already, and they have no business running a national party.
The truth is, by their droppings we will see how Trump backers infiltrated and neutralized America's only honest party. Rebooting to the original platform is an option.
Listen, I have loved Reason magazine since I was in my 20's. I'm in my 40's now and still appreciate them. I have always appreciated and looked up to Nick Gillespie--heck I even interviewed him for over an hour (for an MBA college assignment). He was and always will be Mr. Cool. Uncle Nick.
I must admit that I don't like what has happened to the Libertarian party. They've been sliding into oblivion for years...as if by design. It's fucking weird.
Now granted, the Mises Caucus can be a little rough around the edges--but they're libertarian through and through. Not watered down. Not half-ass. Not pathetically playing nice with DC. I think it's time for a more hardcore approach.
The left isn't playing nice. The right seems weak as shit and the federal government is completely out of control. For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. The Mises Caucus exists for a reason. Rather than condemn or talk shit about them...we should be supporting. Guiding. North-Star this thing. Will they win the presidency? No, of course not...but if they play their hand correctly they can make a pretty big splash. Show America what the fuck is going on. Reel in the overreach. Roll back the state. End the wars. Stop locking people for victimless crimes. Of course racism is stupid...of course hating gays because they're gay is stupid. Yes there are some bad fringe actors who hold these views...but those guys are kooks. Losers. Weirdos. Fuck those assholes.
We need to focus on freedom.
It's slipping away and shit is getting crazy.
Ron Paul 2.0?
Bring it on.
Well said, friend
Wonderfully said. Feel free to join!
@First name Last name How is Rothbard not "true free market" in your view?
@First name Last name How does the MC compare to the paleo strategy? Paleo strategy was all about giving up on the LP. MC is achieving precisely what the paleos could no do: gather supporters to stand for libertarian principles within the libertarian party confronting the sophists.
@Down with Corporate Amerika I'll riddle you this...Mothers in the USA do not have to be back at work 10 days after birth. That's simply not true and there are plenty of laws protecting maternity leave. 12 weeks is the standard in the USA. Even part-time workers are protected. Also, there are numerous anti-discrimination laws on the books protecting pregnant women in the workplace. With regards to Finland...nothing is free. There's no such thing as "no medical expenses". That's absurd. Everything has value. Who makes the medical equipment? Who makes the medicines and therapies? Who builds the hospital and pays the electricity bill? Who pays the doctors, nurses, janitors, etc.? Nothing is free. Everything has value and must be purchased and/or compensated somehow. People use their physical and mental abilities to perform jobs and they must somehow be paid for services rendered. It's not just some magical place where things are free. Other people are paying for it whether they want to or not. Socialism is not nice. It is theft. Pretending like it's some kind of benevolent ideology is childlike and absurd. The government uses the threat of violence to take money from people so that there are nO mEdiCaL eXpEnSeS. Now, I'll admit the medical industrial complex in the USA is highly corrupt--filled with cronyism and the government has made it terrible, expensive and retarded. Anyhow...
Bottom line is this: if you get pregnant, nobody OWES YOU ANYTHING. You make a personal choice and must be prepared to bring a life into the world. Expecting everyone else to pay for your baby is a shitty mindset. Fuck Finland and fuck the USA's corrupt bullshit. Hopefully that cleared things up for you.
Libertarian party that actually reaches out to libertarian-minded people? Outrageous.
yeah, right???
I'm curious about what they Will do Next
Jo Jorgensen was a joke lol
IKR? Sign me up.
Mises Caucus is not libertarian. They're paleo conservatives
The purity test for a libertarian is belief in the non-aggression principle.
Even though the NAP is a dumb and flawed principle, it begs the question, is it against the NAP for a mother of a newborn child to force their kid to eat if they refuse to eat? I have heard people who support the NAP fanatically say it is. So, by that stance, they argue that a newborn child should die of starvation because no person (not even the kid's mother) should use force or aggression on another and, in this sense, keep the child alive and not die of malnutrition and starvation.
@@mstevens94 the personhood of children (dependents) has always been a special case.
Funny how they can’t agree on who is a bigot but they can agree on who isn’t a Libertarian.
@@mstevens94 A key thing to realize about the NAP is that it doesn't say that every violation of property rights warrants the same response. The response/recompense has to be proportional to the violation.
@@mstevens94 you understand that there are degrees of aggression right? A child doesn't even have full agency. Let's say I cut In line that's a violation of the NAP but it's not the same as sucker punching the person in front of me and taking their spot. Our society already operates on NAP a minor violation is deemed negative but not justifying correction. In other words it's deamed rude or impolite. Something being a violation of the NAP doesn't mean it cannot be allowed necessarily but that it is not desirable. The NAP can be universally applied but it's not absolute.
Its "Libertarian Party" focus should be on the liberty. In the world that you are called a bigot if you lose weight because that would be fat phobic, the word has lost all of its value.
I've said it elsewhere on here but that doesn't mean you'll see it.
The dictionary definition of a bigot is someone who is intolerant of those who hold different opinions to them.
That's Sawark and Co; to a tee.
If the libertarian party was truly for liberty they'd just be anarch-capitalists.
Have minarchy isn't real freedom it's just diluted tyranny.
Learn to define freedom from coercion.
@Down with Corporate Amerika Citation needed.
@Down with Corporate Amerika What are your sources that government butting in helps protect average people from exploitation?
I can find plenty of sources that prove otherwise.
"We don't need outrageous statements and edge-lording just to get attention." - Justin Amash. Ok, Justin, but the LP never says anything to get attention. Can you think of one quote from them that was memorable? They are bland AF and they need some edge. No one knows who you are. People have heard of Ron Paul and Dave Smith. I can think of many edgy and great quotes from Dave Smith ("Bernie Bros said no more war, Biden/Harris said we will give you female bomber pilots," "The CIA didn't hate Trump because of his mean tweets.") I can't think of a single thing you or JoJo or Gary Johnson said that is memorable. You are all like insurance salesmen.
"What's next requiring a license to make toast in your own damn toaster" is pretty memorable.
Izzis the sockpuppet who defined edgelord?
Quote: “We further support the repeal of all laws restricting voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days.” 1972-1976
A fundamental rule in politics: you only insult or repeatedly offend people who you don't expect to vote or support you.
"They have no real interest in running viable candidates for office"
Probably true but that's also nothing new for the LP.
Maybe, but at least i can stand up and cheer during a debate and not put my head into my hands.
A viable candidate for office is somebody who presents ideas that appeal to the largest number of voters. We do that.
I live in Los Angeles County, of which Angela McArdle was the local party chair. They ran no candidates at all on the June 7th jungle primary city or state wide.
@@Thorbie Probably because they were too busy sucking GOP dick...
@@RussellNelson are you suggesting "freedom is popular"?
Sarwark once said that "the party belongs to those who show up."
Welp Nick. We showed up.
And you all but booted him clean out.
Good work 👏
And Libritarians don't vote.
Sarwark is a control freak who desperately needs acceptance and validation from the establishment.
Anschluss
So did Hitler's troops at the Anschluss
The LP is too woke. We need to stand for liberty, not socialist-lite.
*was
Lp.org talk w your local affiliates
Agreed. That’s part of the reason I never even bothered with them. I figured if I’m gonna spend my time doing anything, I’ll do it trying to get a Liberty candidate in the GOP, not banging my head against the wall with the LP.
This unexpected turn of events has me reconsidering.
@First name Last name Found the crazy.
@@MultiTexMex My analysis is that while good things are happening, the LP is nowhere near there yet. And at the same time, there's an ascendant Liberty caucus within many State Republican organizations. A bunch of the more serious libertarians who are ahead of the game are working within the Rep parties, and they wield an order of magnitude more potential to affect good, freedom-based change, than those who stayed outside in the LP. Maybe in time, the LP can get back where it should be. In the meantime, the most pressing concern is out-maneuvering the wokeists before they destroy everything.
I think this is a good thing for the libertarians as a national party. I quit being involved as I saw years ago the LP was just getting kookier and kookier. Being for liberty doesn't have to mean detaching from reality to make purist ideological policies. I just might consider getting more involved again, now.
I was considering joining the Libertarian Party, but after seeing the guy strip naked on stage, and that they were pushing the same woke talking points that the Democrats were pushing, I changed my mind. Now I'm seriously considering joining.
@@jdavis8970 I wouldn't get your hopes up. From the sounds of it they basically have an anarchist rather than a minarchist consensus (as was revealed when they booed Von Mises quotes), so while they won't be woke anymore on enforcing race and trans issues with the state, they are still likely to strip naked on stage and argue you should be allowed to give krokodil to five year olds.
The original 1972 platform is libertarian. The Trojan Horse Trumpanzee infiltrators aren't
The Mises Caucust is the Christian Front and Silvershirts movement remade
@@jdavis8970 I used to be in it but I don’t think I’ll consider going back. I’m happy just to be a Ron Paul type of Republican voter
As a long time libertarian, this is a good thing. Frankly the LP has been an embaresment in recent years with terrible candidates and terrible leadership. Am glad the MC stepped up and got rid of these people. What was worse was their horrible shennanigans with many local parties. That, to me, showed their true colors that they had no business being in charge.
What, you mean Johnson/Weld chasing Bernie Bros yelling, "FREE WEED" and James Weeks' strip-tease wasn't strategically smart?
I'm a lot less sympathetic regarding Libertarians after getting called a "babykiller" on Reason for having been in the military.
Except 2 of the last three elections had the greatest nominee the LP, or the US for that matter, has ever had in Gary Johnson.
@@emcarp1234 because we were living the reality of the South Park episode with the world's biggest Douche and world's biggest Turd Sandwich as the 2 choices
So a terrible platform is the solution?
Spelling errors make it easier to understand how someone can prefer fascist infiltrators to communist infiltrators. Neither were in the 1972 LP
Sarwark could not have been kicked out any faster... Making libertarianism and libertarian politics irrelevant was his guiding ethos, and making it a very non-confrontational, soft, non-intrusive, third-tier political movement was what he and his cohorts were all about. The slander thrown at the Mises caucus is/was hilarious and desperate.
The party is not the "Democrat Party alternative" and it's not the "Republican Party alternative"; this is the Liberty alternative to a rampantly coercive and money-hungry state. Good absolute riddance.
Sarwark is currently in the comments lying. He's such a clown.
I'm not a fan of Sarwark, but people with his way of seeing things exist in the pretty and all through society. He has a place in the liberty movement. His fruits showed leading the party was not the right place.
I hope the new leaders will find a way of uniting us liberty lovers so that Sarwark and others of varying viewpoints can find places within the party to help attack the corruption and threats to our rights coming from gov't, particularly the 2-party establishment.
@@dustinabc This is where you and I differ; Sarwark doesn't belong in a libertarian party. His thoughts, actions, mindset, and framing of his first principles bely a lack of libertarian ontology. They appear to be more libertine and lightly less mixed economy-focused than a Republican - a lot like Gary. He could go both ways, so I see him as a left-centrist or a right-moderate with a cloying need to virtue signal mainstream opinions and talking points.
He treats the inherent openness and tolerance of libertarian thought as if it's not self-explanatory, let alone the party tenants. It's embarrassing to virtue signal and go on the defensive. Anyone with doubts about the the party's legitimacy about tolerance in liberty, need be answered cogently and plainly, not told how they "think just like you". "Trans rights are humans right, guys! C'mon! We're acceptable! We're with it!". That doesn't need to happen and shouldn't happen.
@@acetate909 Where is he? I wanna give him a piece of my British working class, pro-Rothbard mind.
@@Si_Mondo
Someone called "Willags" left a comment that has 20 replies. Nick is the first response. The entire thread is roasting him.
It sounds like the Mises Caucus is actually trying to appeal to people like me. Elements in the party's platform, such as being pro-abortion and supporting open borders kept me from ever voting Libertarian. As John Burk stated, they were doing too much "gatekeeping." Now, the platform is something I can support. I stand for everybody's rights, regardless of identity. However, I do not support pandering to the "squeakiest wheel."
You can’t be a libertarian and argue for a massive state apparatus to enforces border controls. They are like oil and water. If you’re a conservative you’ve got the Republican Party to look too.
@@ggunnelspct and that type of thinking is why, even with the internet making your message available to the public, the LP has yet to win a national election.
The way you put that... "will not pander to the squeakiest wheel" was so well put
@@matthewwhite3444 Yes, it’s not a terribly popular idea with a lot of people because a lot of people are prone to various biases that lend themselves to xenophobia - be it in immigration or trade. Bryan Caplan has an entire book about these biases.
@@matthewwhite3444 The LP won’t win a national election because of Durverger’s law. Well, I mean at least until the system of elections is changed that is. Which won’t happen because it favors the two incumbent parties.
"Appeal to middle" for decades meant just be ineffectively hang around, being 3rd place in 2 man race. It might have been something useful in the 90s, but its 2022.
"Radical Centrist" is an oxymoron and always will be.
People need to stop thinking politics is this straight line where the LP consists of centrists in the middle; the political spectrum is a circle, and the LP is on the complete opposite side of both Republicans and Democrats. They want a giant State. We want to set people free.
@@soundtracktothefuture226 A good percentage of Republicans are legitimate conservatives--not fiscal, not social, but cultural--that most respect limited government and would prefer a return to smaller, more localized political governance. Libertarianism can flourish under this larger circle of governance. No such space exists under Democrats. Libertarianism is completely opposite of the Democrat platform, but it's only sort of wiggled sideways to the Republican one. Hence why currently so many Libertarians will not consider themselves such until the Democrat/Progressive/Left menace is pushed back at least to the point where they're not an ongoing threat to the West, to Christendom, and the U.S. Constitution.
@@23wtb I’m not sure if you’ve seen the animated graphic showing the change/success of Constitutional Carry across the country in the last few decades, but that’s a good indication of the Libertarian model the Mises Caucus is invoking: we can win local elections, even House seats, and possibly some state senators or a governor… then people will start to say “hey, that one state has all these foundational ideas of human liberty, I want to be around that.” We all remember the one state who took the strongest stance against the COVID regime. Sometimes all it takes is one area to just say no, go their own way, and everyone will notice. Other states will follow, and soon you’ll be looking at something that looks pretty darn close to a Constitutional Republic again. But in order to do that, you need to start advocating for complete human liberty; and unfortunately, Republicans are still too much of warhawks and spend too much money to be considered conservative at this point. I don’t fault you for wanting to outnumber the progressive regime, but we really do need a liberty movement. And it’ll start with bringing people over to these principles locally.
@@23wtb Being libertarian means being anti-statist. Being libertarian means wanting liberty, not a special kind of governance for people who want liberty. Read Spooner's essay No Treason, and you will understand the constitution.
The only thing I concluded from Justin’s interview is that the he thinks the LP would be best served with some sort of Mitt Romney like presentation to the American public. George W Bush wasn’t enough for Justin to leave the Republican Party, nor was John McCain, nor was Mitt Romney but Trump was too much to for him to handle.
This shows that Amash is, in his core, a statist.
This video is better than Brian Doherty's shitty article at Reason, which was a disgrace. This was a bit more balanced, the fact remains that the biggest and most influential minds of libertarianism in the past 15 years have had nothing to do with the Libertarian party. As a libertarian myself I wanted nothing to do with the party, it was basically a bunch of Democrats that learned some economics.
Now, with the Mises Caucus, as a libertarian, I feel I have a political home. Something that can actually put forward the ideas of Mises, Rothbard, Ron Paul, Tom Woods and the like...
Ya know, the libertarians that libertarians actually care about.
EDIT: Few things I would like to say, Nick comes off like a CNN interviewer here, notice those high school looking kids he interviews who are calling the Mises Caucus "bigots" and that "Lew Rockwell is behind all this" (like that even would be a bad thing), how he gives them no pushback, nor asks them to provide any proof at all, absolutely nothing. Contrast that with how he talks to the one guy who just managed the twitter of ONE State's party, who posted a tweet, then deleted it from pressure from the Mises Caucus, and Nick grills that dude longer than anyone in the entire video. In order to say what about the Mises Caucus? This isn't balance, CNN reporters do the same when they interview Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and the like versus how they treated Ron Paul and others -- their bias comes through with who they choose to push back against, and Nick's bias bleeds through here. Also notice how he decides to speak for Tom Woods regarding who was with him at the very beginning of the league of the South (a bunch of mainstream southern historians mind you) and we don't get to hear Tom explain it.
As far as Justin Amash goes, he makes an elementary error with Mises -- Mises was not an anarcho-capitalist, but in that quote when he mentions "anarchists" he's talking about communists. And Mises never said the word "libertarian" or would've called himself one, he would've said liberal. So Amash is unintentionally misrepresenting Mises in that quote while ironically thinking he's making a slam dunk, Mises was comparing Liberalism (basically libertarianism at the time) to Anarchism (small "c" communism at the time). I like Justin Amash, but he's too milquetoast and not the guy to be the presidential nominee in 2024, he won't inspire many to rally around the cause. As far as taking out a thought crime from the platform, yes that was a good thing, because we are here to resist the State. No one likes bigots, but guess what, you can be a political libertarian and still have personal unsavory views, maybe you won't be culturally libertarian, but if you oppose the state and want to fight to end wars, then that's a beautiful thing. Notice how much more worried Amash and Gillespie are about removing those words from the platform and how that may hurt the prospects for the party in the future, than any Clinton, Bush, Romney, Mccain, Pelosi, Biden, and Graham ever felt about starting wars and how much that would hurt theirs -- the latter feeling none. This exact cuckery is why the Libertarian party has been a joke for so long, both Gillespie and Amash have done great work, but keep them as far away from central messaging as much as possible.
So you're not an ancap like me?
Same always loved Ron Paul. Even when I was a Democrat and then Green Party. I left the Democratic Party because I didn’t believe what they believed anymore. Then during Covid I saw the authoritarian in Green. And I’ve been voting Libertarian and they are finally sounding like the party I want to vote for. 😁 I just want a party that says stuff that makes sense for a change.
I just joined the LP after the Mises Caucus took over after watching disappointingly from a distance for almost a decade. I feel the same as you, I can actually feel at home with this party now.
@First name Last name Are we talking about the same Tom Woods?
@First name Last name He didn't create it, you can't even get the basic facts right. Go troll somewhere else sweetheart
Oh my gosh, it might be worth while to vote for a Libertarian again as a signal. Last two presidential candidates didn't serve that purpose.
I'm super excited for the changes. But to be fair- Jorgensen and Johnson were completely adequate candidates, and far superior to their competition, from the liberty perspective.
When you're fighting against the 2-party establishment nothing is going to be easy and they will make the best people look horrible.
I do expect things will go much better now however, as the political landscape shifts with boomers losing power, social media and Internet access to info taking over establishment controlled media, and the fiat economy collapsing.
And a #LIBERTARIAN party not afraid to stand out, and stand up for liberty.
@Steve L What are you trying to say? Is this word salad from a homo sapien or a bot? If a homo sapien, try again, filling in the gaps between what you wrote and what you were thinking.
One commie anarchist ruins any campaign
17:22 The 'Charlottesville massacre?' WTF is he talking about? One person died.
I caught that too. It’s like January 6th being called an insurrection. Word games.
@@ARUSApacecarHAMPTON "Mostly peaceful riots"
...off a stroke or an apparent similar medical condition.
A Commie Cow!!! 🐄 🚗
A Fat 35 year old died from a heart attack.
NOT THE CAR
Never got into libertarian politics but this promotional video for Mises caucus is interesting.
I'm not sure it was intended to 'promote' the MC, but find it interesting you saw it that way.
doesn’t seem promotional
@@cortecz If you look at the comments, it is true that Reason seems to hate Mises caucus, but the video is still promoting them, oops lol
Reason must be so embarassed that their side has been killing the party but they cant accept it.
I hated the direction of the party over the last decade or so. I am glad to see where it can go now. It needs something fresh anyway.
So like Triumph Of The Will...
@@cortecz I think the fact that it obviously wasn't intended on being one almost made it more into one. lol
Calling it a "smaller angrier Republican party" seems like a dumb smear to me.
The truth hurts, doesn't it, sockpuppet.
The truth hurts. Libertariantranslator
The point of the Mises Caucus isn't to make the LP angrier nor to make it more trumpish or bigot, au contraire, it is to make it more principled. Sarwack's analysis is pretty off.
@@FrankHarwald Make it what it used to be.
Sounds accurate to me
Woke language has been a very effective political tool for the Left, I LOVE the direction of the LP now. Thank you Reason for making as unbiased of a video as y'all can.
Nick is pretty legit.
Language is powerful, there's a reason they keep manipulating it to their benefit. Only a fool would allow them to continue twisting it to their advantage.
Libertarianism is inherently woke
I wish people would actually read Mises
@@TheRishijoesanu no, it’s not “inherently” anything, except anti-State.
@@TheRishijoesanu LOL, yes, please continue to crusade that Libertarianism is really about a nanny state that stops people from being mean to each other, and does nothing but obsess about race and seek "equity" through State coercion. You must follow the European "Libertarian" model that puts people in jail for 'racist' whatsapp posts.
I've never been deeper into libertarian thinkers than I was in 2018-2020. When I heard Jo Jorgensen was running I wanted to tell my daughter that was who I was voting for. When I watched her and other libertarians push or be naively cowtowed into a "woke" agenda I was disgusted. I want all social ideology out of politics, as far as possible and an emphasis on natural law. I still veiw myself as essentially libertarian but globalist libertarians and leftist ideologies in the party are ridiculous. Global libertarianism is as likely as global communism. National libertarianism with a reasoned sense of international trade and diplomacy is the birth right of every American. I was libertarian naturally as a kid, I loved the American founding, I was once radicalized to the left and Ron Paul helped to bring me back. Respect the legacy of the founders and people like Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell and Paul and maybe, just maybe people like me won't think of voting for the LP as a bad joke. The market rules so develop a better product.
I don't understand why Americans have birth rights that people born elsewhere do not. You don't choose where you are born.
@@terdragontra8900 The United States taxpayer does not owe the world a living.
@@Weirdomanification But an Oregon taxpayer *does* owe a Mississipian a living?
@@terdragontra8900 because Japanese libertarian nationalism is the birthright of every Japanese person. The commenter is not saying Americans have more rights than others,to the contrary he's saying that they have a right as anyone does to self determination.
@@terdragontra8900 Birthright to what? Check your premises.
'Sacrifice your morals to run a candidate that will absolutely lose anyway." has been the policy of the libertarian party for as long as I can remember.
If you're gonna go out, *do it with style* Fuck all this fitting in rigamarole
Edit: After watching to the end of the video I respect the idea people have that the libertarian party could suck in dems and reps and get big and become a third player of some sort...but..... those people will leave once their parties shape back to their interests. They have no real love for the LP, they just don't have what they want in their party right now. Instead of sucking out these people who don't really care, find the people in there that have ALWAYS been dissatisfied, reach out and find the people who, once you latch on, will NEVER leave the party. That's how you build for the future.
Agreed. If you only chase the vote from dissatisfied centrists, they will be gone before you know it. Changing hearts and minds to the true north star of liberty will keep people for generations.
Sockpuppets never learn the first thing about "law-changing spoiler vote clout."
Learn the difference between spoiler vote winning and being duped by the Kleptocracy
Meaning 2020?
Sockie does not remember the first platform, 12% growth per annum.
I'm not a libertarian, but I found the arguments being made against the Mises Caucus to be really annoying, because they were all coming from a left-liberal frame. The libertarian argument against bigotry is that government shouldn't pass any laws against this race or that race, but it's axiomatic to the nature of private property that someone can deny whoever they like from using what they control. Asking libertarians to take a stance on what people can do with their property or else they're bad and evil is basically just asking them to be progressives. The Mises Caucus should point out that these criticisms don't fundamentally make any sense.
National socialists have always hated being contradicted by libertarians
I am a libertarian and I support this. It is stupid to brag that you got 3.5% of the national vote while trying to appease woke and liberal people. Far better to forget the national percentage and focus on a more pure libertarian message and go for local control, for example winning towns, counties, and cities and then nullifying federal laws we don't like. The LP in the past few election cycles was weak (Bill Weld, anyone?). And part-woke. For example why couldn't they stick up more strongly against lockdowns and masks?
The LP exists to repeal cruel laws and minimize the initiation of force. The original platform had us growing 12% per year before anarcho fascist infiltration stepped in. Libertariantranslator
Learn about spoiler vote clout, sockie.
Lifetime GOP girl-bullier sockpuppet cross-dresses as libertarian
YAY! As a Rothbardian I am very happy with this! I may rejoin the party that I left in disgust some time ago. Rothbardians are not bigots.
Lp.org come on in, the Liberty is just getting warm again
I dunno. I'm Rothbardian and I'm bigotted against statists.
Hans Herman Hoppe definitely was a bigot
Rothbard was a crypto bigot
Murry Rottbutt anarco-communism lives.
Been a card carrying member since 1988. I’m tired of seeing the party borrow another product and badging it as it’s own like Johnson/Weld. I’d rather see the party develop its own grassroots base into candidates who are in fact libertarian. Fiscally conservative/socially liberal is just fine; doing whatever (compromising fundamental principles) just for the sake of winning by getting a good looking & great sounding politician elected is pointless. I’d rather see the party operate as a Cato-style think tank on issues for the other two parties to borrow and ultimately implement than simply putting lipstick on a pig.
I dunno, it's kinda gross seeing different groups use the party as a skin for their creepy agendas over the years. I just feel like this is just that, everyone who got kicked out of the Republican party for being a bit too racist. We get to be sattled with 'em until they realize they're just a new Constitution Party.
Cato is a farce of a libertarian organization. Overtaken by neoconservatives
So if you're advocating for Cato, and indifferent to the existence of the Libertarian Party.
CATO is just one more arm of the state in 2022, on the Corporatist side. The Mises Institute is a better one to mention.
Where's my socially conservative/fiscally liberal society? I don't want to see others that aren't like me.
Huh... they sound like libertarian Libertarians... and their critics, at least with the criticisms they use, sound like progressive leftists. Ron Paul is the most successful Libertarian presidential candidate ever... why wouldn't the party want to emulate that success and build upon it?
Yeah the critics throwing around "racist" and "bigot" is exactly a woke leftist move
@@divinecomedian2 yes. It is. It's typically unfounded (at least according to traditional definitions) and used to shut down conversation.
IKR? Reason is trying to take the LP left faster than Nascar.
Ron Paul was not the most successful Libertarian presidential candidate ever... Gary Johnson was. Ron Paul got .5% in the '88 general election. Johnson got 3.3%. We should be emulating Johnson, not Paul.
@@divinecomedian2 You know that you're over the target when leftists are calling you a homophobic racist bigot.
Dave Smith and the mises caucus is saving the LP
I'm a big fan of the Mises Caucus, for sure. I do worry that their reaction to their critics might turn there critics into wider enemies of liberty.
Ultimately it's the critics (and each of us, really) that need to realize they have to make their own choices, and can learn to separate the few things they don't like from the many many good, important, and legitimate goals of the LPMC.
But i do hope the LPMC finds the best way possible of herding libertarian cats in a way that spreads the philosophy of liberty like wild fire across America and the world.
#VOLUNTARYISM
@@dustinabc Spelt like a true Trumpanzee
@@libertariantranslator1929that is true. Those traitors voted for Trump.
This takeover made me join the LP
Cheers! Love your content too. Keep up the good work!
You misspelled Tea Party
I may actually pay my dues again for the first time in over a decade.
Ah, another Trumpanzee shill sockpuppet puts in an appearance
As a young Libertarian with a strong adherence to Austrian Economics (Rothbard and Mises are their inspirations), pro-life policies (the party allows both pro-life and pro-choice candidates), and free speech (they're allowing people to say racist things while not supporting racist policies), I am absolutely thrilled to see this.
Alternativ für Deutschland is the new Bund!
Idk, Mises caucus sounds pretty sweet. I love Ron Paul!
Ron is in Trump's party
Hitler was also into forcing girls to reproduce
MAGAts found a second home.
Imagine. Libertarians that believe in Liberty. What a radical concept
It is radical. They only belive in liberty for themselves but want The State to oppressive their opposition.
Bullying Jews or girls is freedom? bit.ly/3eZWA0e
They once used to care about the liberty of those that were being oppressed and not granted what the constitution, and declaration of independence guaranteed. Now they identify more with what Lysander Spooner, Emerson, Locke, and John Stuart Mill fought against.
Freedom from coercion does not mean coercing pregnant individuals
The old heads at Reason are seething and I love it. An internet savvy, comedic and politically intriguing voice of the LP will bring in those disillusioned with the 2 party state and encourage young people like myself to get involved with the LP. Excited to keep up more with the LP as a longtime fan of Dave smith
So Lazarus is going to revive the corpse by sewing into it the exhumed superstitions of the Tea Party bigots. Libertariantranslator
They interview the great Tom Woods and focus on the irrelevant "League of the South" stuff? That's incredible. Then they try to make Jeremy Kauffman a nefarious character?
One key requirement of the woke is that you must continually apologize for past misdeeds forever.
Alinsky's Rule 13 being applied.
I've grown up around leftist here in the UK who won't acknowledge that it's ad hominem under a different name, but will cry ad hom if you play the same game with them.
Yeah I don’t get how people are saying this was fair and balanced lol
At least they gave Tom and Jeremy a chance to address the critics and explain their perspectives on the controversies that keep coming up.
@@carolhpratt They "keep coming up" because every time they talk to Tom Woods (which is seldom) they ask him the same damn questions.
I feel that libertarians should absolutely allow bigots. There are a lot of people that, right now, are bigoted. But, they are able to be changed. We shouldn’t only accept people that believe everything we want.
This may be controversial but some really valuable life lessons that I’ve learned were from construction workers who were openly racist. Did I disagree with their racism, yes; but everyone has some value underneath their bigotry. People can change, let’s give them a chance to do so.
It's not a question of "allowing bigots". It's a question of defining them. What is a bigot? Besides being one letter away from the delicious Polish dish "bigos"?
@@RussellNelson yeah, if you're a liberal then everyone who disagrees with you is a bigot. The word has lost all meaning.
I mean, the Republicans did this. And they got Charlottesville. Do you think the Libertarian Party could survive a Charlottesville?
I mean, people thought the Harry Potter houses were bad. Yikes.
Perhaps those construction workers that you look down on, just didn't like it that Politicians were giving advantages, and preferences to people that didn't look like them, or more likely voted for them, and calling it justice. As a Republican I want Libertarians to remain ideologically pure and to continue with the elitism and smug superiority, and call others that they disagree with bigots, maybe call them deplorables.
@@RussellNelson Even if it WAS a question of allowing bigots, if I agree with a person on 99% of issues, but they're also a "bigot" by whatever definition, I'm still okay with having them around, and would probably vote for them if they ran for office.
Too many people think that anything less than 100% ideological purity is just not good enough, and that's just not realistic. We don't have to be that simple-minded. You agree with me on abortion, gun rights, property and income taxes, and a national defense strategy that focuses more on defense and less on power projection, but we disagree on immigration policy? Hell yes, I'll vote for you.
It's about prioritizing what matters - not everything can be priority 1.
Some of the members give stupid answers. Like for example "Do you accept biggots in the party" the right answer would be. Everybody is welcome as long as their ideas are libertarian in essence. That is people who defend everybodys right to defend property and their life. If you go against that idea then you are not welcome.
Ding ding ding! +10 points.
those werent just random members that gave those answers. they were people like Angela who is now the chair and Heise who is ceo of mises pac. and yes it is weird they’d struggle on how to respond to that simple question 🤔
You would think that Libertarians would be for the 1st Amendment and might even defend Hate Speech. Of course, The Left defines hate speech as any speech that is against preferences, set asides, and against open borders.
@@MattGPT-eh4cp You can defend their right to say that but you dont need to associate yourself volintarily with people who actively want harm for minorities or are in princiole opossed to libertarianism.
@@jsealejandro06 This. Being bigoted is a personal belief, and we believe everyone has the right to their beliefs. We do not support bigoted POLICIES.
If she wont advocate that you have to be actively "anti-racist" like Jo that would be a step in a genuine direction.
From Jo's "actively anti-racist" to Angela's "We welcome bigots" is a helluva swing.
I find it rich that the same lolbertarians who made this party a laughing stock by voting for Jorgenson and Johnson are now complaining they have no power in the party anymore.
I was a big part of The Ron Paul Revolution from 2009-2012. I contend that if the establishment had not done EVERYTHING in their power to knock him out of the primaries - he'd have won the Presidential race. I went to the USF Sun Dome and met with him afterward at a small gathering. The Sun Dome was far past capacity. Hardly any room for standing. Drs, Lawyers, Mechanics, Students, Nurses, Teachers, and Unemployed were going insane cheering after each stanza of Ron Paul's speech.
The place where we met was a small bar/restaurant called "The Copper Top". I was mailed a VIP Pass - but when I showed, there were HUNDREDS of people waiting outside BEFORE Dr. Paul showed up. Was incredible.
Replacing the bigotry wording to upholding the rights of everyone, if you see a problem with it you should not call yourself a libertarian lmao
Yeah...I don't think the replacement text will satisfy bigots.
McArdle should have responded, "There is room in EVERY political party for bigots, but most lie about it." It is a slippery concept that defies measurement. Bigots include violent KKK members and racial elitists who hide their racial elitism, but who, in positions of power, act subtly to disadvantage other races. Bigots include unaware and undecided people who don't consider themselves bigots, but who manifest bigotry in their behavior. And tbh, it would include "reverse" racists who are so consumed with trying to be "anti-racist" that they end up loathing their own race. Bigotry is a matter of degree, not a black-and-white thing, and we all have some irrational prejudice in us. All we can do is to minimize its manifestations. Trying to eliminate it is a fool's errand.
Yer boot's on crooked.
So those who’s side lost basically said, “I’m taking my ball and going home”? No wonder they have been a joke for so long
Worse than that. They said "You're racist so I'm taking my ball and going to give it to some marginalized people"
Sarwark is a fed.
The previous regime was more interested in being a social club than a political party
Bad analogy. If the ball belongs to them, they've every right to take it home when they want.
Sarwark et al have been made to realise that they don't own the ball and that pisses them off, like the UK coal miners of the 1980s.
Infiltrators infiltrate. It's part of competing with looter Kleptocracy parties
I get "I'm afraid of offending Twitter mods" vibes from this video.
"Open Borders" issue would be largely resolved by ending the debacle war on drugs. Also by ending the Fed and Progressive imperialism of the Third World. Also by ending the Sixteenth Amendment and removing the table that American citizens carry for immigrant labor to work under. Borders really aren't the issue, they're just another division between issues.
Prohibition did cause The Crash
They rightly made the race language in the platform neutral rather than pandering to progressivism. And this makes them appealing to bigots? There's the answer right there to why the party's been a joke and needs to be reset.
I literally walked into this video with zero context as someone coming from a more center (left) side of the spectrum wanting to be Libertarian and this turned me off instantly. I have no issue with race neutral language and I even applaud it's effective use but the NH Official tweeting out black people now owe the country for the special treatment they received is bad form. Can you honestly tell me that does feel like an appeal to the worst parts of conversatism?
@@Anans1_Spyd3r Guess it depends how much weight you put on a tweet vs. an official national party platform. IMHO the context of the tweet renders it far less objectionable than what you're suggesting.
@@scott555 The language is not politically neutral and it makes it harder for someone to hang there hat and say I am associated with that. I have seen follow up videos were the current leadership has made strides to place distance from those tweets and I can respect that
@@Anans1_Spyd3r Fair enough. To be perfectly honest, though, I really hate the acquiescence to the mob, so them putting distance between themselves and the tweets of an individual isn't a feature for me.
That's why the Mises Caucus is a good thing, and although not all he said was right compared to Rothbard which most of what Rothbard said should be held true to the party's principals.
Brianna Coyle supports wealth distribution and cries about purity of libertarianism😂
That’s very interesting - I’d like more people to know that! Where can I point people to get the key money quote on Coyle being in support of redistribution?
"I get called a Communist." Well love, you've got the sort of resting bitch face that suggests *exactly that* .
Thank God in heaven she’s gone.
she seemed like a wolf in sheep's clothing from what i heard... so that makes a lot of sense
Jeez, considering the p!ss poor performance of the party in '16 & '20, it was way past time for a change in direction. I couldn't bring myself to vote Jo and welcome turning the party over to a new generation.
Now they’ll put better candidates in 2024, take votes away from a Republican President, and ensure 4 more years of this bullshit we’re in now. I can’t see how this is a good thing if Desantis is the nominee in 2024.
Gary Johnson picked up 3% of the vote, in 2016. That is better than any other candidate.
@@HVACSoldier 3% against the two most unlikable candidates in US history is still horrible. He should have been double digits against Hillary and Trump. Johnson had no energy or real message.
@@HVACSoldier wtf is 3%. Who cares. Libertarians should avoid the presidential stage. Focus on school board, congress, mayoral races, etc. All local politics.
@@mexicolaisgood We elect people locally. 3% is better than the 1/2% we were getting. The problem is convincing people that 90% of Democrat and Republican politicians are assholes that don’t give a flying fuck about the ordinary person.
I’m legitimately surprised this wasn’t a hit piece. You surprise me sometimes, Reason, kudos!
It was surprisingly fair. They surely see the writing on the wall: woke has gotta go
It's hard to hit on actual libertarianism on an allegedly libertarian channel, even if your producers are progressive fuckwits. I mean, it looks like they tried .
@@lancehawk2220 wokeness in society should be so freaking low on the list of importance of libertarian issues. I truly do not care about what the left says on twitter or what dumb shit Robin D'Angelo says about white people. It's much more scary to see authoritarians like Ron DeSantis try to punish private companies for their opinions and create laws banning ideas in schools.
@@kelbycaplinger5367 have you studied Marxism? Ideas are very effective at destabilizing societies to prepare them for revolution. Wokeness is a neo Marxist push to undermine liberty in America. It's very important to push against
Lance Hawk I’m all for discussing the flaws and irrationalities of CRT or Marxism, but the Libertarian Party tries to win elections to effect change in government not police culture war issues. We already have two idiotic parties that take up way too much time talking about that.
Reason is disappointing me of late, but I’m excited for LPMC, and they’ve actually turned me onto the LP. Before them, I have never thought much of libertarians.
Shills and sockpuppets agree
Angela ended up making things embarrassing for us and not having any significant impact on shaping policy in the GOP while significantly deterring the LPs memberships and donations by fundraising for RFK and Trump instead of her own damn candidate
I, humbly, think the best way to convert people to the movement is by start with premises shared by the average citizen and, then, showing to them why libertarian policies achieve the same goals that they want. We need to show why libertarianism is the most aproppiate to human nature.
Rekieta Law has the best take on libertarianism. It should be the baseline position when considering laws or regulations.
You won't see a fully libertarian government but you can see politicians selling freedom back to the population.
Freedom is Risk.
The average citizen does not want men with guns declaring pregnant women unpersons and enslaving them. Try the FLDS
What made me become a libertarian was being shown how normie statist beliefs hamper the achievement of what most would think of as ethical, effective governance.
The average person understands that women are individuals, not chattel
"after the Charlottesville Massacre"
Wasn't it one person killed? I am not saying that's not horrible, but like, "massacre?"
Yes one person "killed" aka died from being morbidly obese after an Antifa mob attacked a car. I hope the BLM riots showed everyone what happens to drivers who try to play nice with Antifa. See also the 1/6 "attack on democracy" in which the only person murdered was an unarmed protestor.
To be fair by weight it was at least three people.
No, one person died of a heart attack because she was a fat chain smoker. But they charged some poor sap who rammed a crowd of people that were attacking him in his car for it.
A fine example of modern yellow journalism. Raising the question of whether "the party is now open to bigots" is the height of intellectual dishonesty. Miss McArdle demonstrated enormous grace and serenity listening to this drivel and respectfully answering in a polite and conciliatory way. What a formidable leader.
No such thing was in the original platform. But individual rights for women were. Libertariantranslator
Truth hurts.
17:20 There was no "charlottesville massacre" One woman does not a massacre make.
Eliminating the Abortion endorsement plank is the best thing that has happened to the LP in years. It perfectly demonstrates a commitment to natural rights while showing that this comes with responsibilities.
I agree as long as the stay neutral. It is a hard librarian argument. If someone was knockout and left in your home do you have a responsibility to help them... eh tough can you deny them life... again ehh hard to say since the other party has no intent
“Society feels so much freer when you know the cops will come and shoot your dog and the state will sentence you to death if you dare have this medical procedure that goes against my religion!” - a totally libertarian and not conservative at all mind
Return of Comstockism, chain gang for speech or writings, race suicide eugenic coercion, wheeee
Lebensborn and Hitlerjugend?
"Alt-right adjacent elements"? What the hell does that even mean.
It literally means, "not an actual marxist."
Bund, Silvershirts, NSDAP, Klan, Wallace, Nixon
@@libertariantranslator1929 lol you think Richard Nixon was alt-Right
@@CountArtha Girl-bullying mystical prohibitionists are all alike to me.
@@libertariantranslator1929 Well, isn't that open-minded of you.
Lost a lot of respect for Nick Gillespie with this one... Reason magazine is a woke joke now. Dave Smith and Mises caucus are a good change.
If Goering was a good change, Smif'll do as his Army of God stand-in.
Lol talking to Neocon Sarwark about libertarian purism is rich.
I have to laugh at "the idea of becoming a smaller, harder, more angry Republican party, is not a good one" cause what a straw man. Nick wants the Libertarian party to be closer to Republicans than Mises libertarians want. On top of that woknest is racism. You don't beat racism by embracing it, and it's insulting to think minorities can't achieve cause of the color of their skin (what woke people say). Dam that Nick dude says such absurd stuff, he's must know it's nonsense and lies. He's making me mad!
Ron Paul doesn't assume people are too stupid to take care of themselves... This sets him apart from many politicians.. He isn't condescending.
It's so weird to see people in the Libertarian party not only set goals, but meet them as well! The LP: the world's saddest country club no more!
Zero vote share was a goal?
Love the Mises Caucus movement! I’d say this video was about as fair a treatment as they could expect and I even think it’s fine to ask them to respond to the loudest (albeit dumbest) criticisms.
the "bigotry" thing was a bit unfair imo...pretty sure the reason deep down was that that particular language was used to purge members of a state lp if my memory serves me correctly...nobody mentioned that
@@conner1715 I think terms like that have been so overused they lost all meaningful value anymore and just sound like pandering.
@@conner1715 it was not only unfair, it felt like a Cathy Newman moment for me. she goes on to say why you can't define a bigot and then he asks anyway, if it's ok for bigots to be in the party. her reply was a push back for nick either ignoring what she just said or an attack. the equivalent of you being fully vaccinated (including for Covid), saying you oppose vaccine mandates and getting called an "anti-vaxxer"
And this is a bad thing how..... Post-modern libertarianism ala reasontv is the most hollow and vapid conception of liberty ever produced. If flourishing and limited government is the goal, neither are achieved with reasontv. Values do matter.
Well said
Property rights include property owners having the right to gatekeep on their property. Individual liberty includes freedom of association. Being free to associate with whom you chose is the same as being free to not associate with those you dislike. Individual liberty must be enfringed upon to combat bigotry because bigotry is the right of all. Its good the anti bigotry statement was removed from the LP's mission statement. Stop worrying about bigotry and start worrying about malice and corruption.
Policing "bigotry" and "hate" is thought-policing, and should be an immediate red flag for anyone who sincerely believes in libertarian tenets and philosophy.
It's such a transparent dodge too. Every governmental structure that decides that governing is just too hard--keeping the lights on, the streets clean, the roads in good repair--can just choose to focus on "combating hate." It takes the heat off them for terrible custodianship, and gets people too busy fighting each other to notice that the people in charge are incompetent fools. It creates a mess, just an enormous fighting pit, for malevolent people to politic and seek power and steal, while accomplishing literally nothing good that helps anyone.
I've attempted to get involved in the Libertarian Party twice, but in the end couldn't do it because the party was a joke. They only seemed to care about bickering over what a "pure" Libertarian is rather than actually trying to win elections.
Philosophically I'm very much a libertarian, but the Libertarian Party has not earned my respect or my allegiance. It has proven it's powerless to make a difference. I don't know if the Mises caucus can change that. I'll be watching, but I won't be holding my breath.
By the way, "socialist libertarian" is a contradiction in words. Socialism cannot exist without a powerful government forcing certain behavior on the citizens whether they like it or not, and I'm at a complete loss as to how that can be called libertarian.
You will probably enjoy the LP now with the Mises people at the helm.
@@FEVERDREAM889 Not holding my breath.
Learn about spoiler vote clout
@@libertariantranslator1929 How about you tell me about spoiler vote clout? Don't just hand down assignments to me.
Correct. These 'social libertarian' types were the ones ousted by the Mises caucus. Now it's libertarians full stop.
If they put their words into action and stick to the principles they are expressing then this will be a step up for the libertarian party. Also, a more fired up libertarian party is better than libertarians walking around with a defeated mentality. Libertarians don’t owe republicans or democrats anything and certainly not progressives. This isn’t the progressive party. This isn’t the party of trump either. It’s ok to offer an olive branch to both. Libertarians don’t have to aim to be as politically divided as republicans and democrats, but libertarians shouldnt abandon libertarian view points to appease either side. Stop chasing progressives, conservatives, liberals, and make them chase libertarians. Your the third largest party. There’s still room to grow. There’s a lot of independents and moderates out there that can still be won over. There’s democrats not happy with the Democratic Party. There’s republicans not happy with republicans. Instead of just sitting back and letting them switch sides, maybe the libertarian party should try and show them a new side. This country is in desperate need of a third option. It’s not easy to take ground from republicans and democrats. They’ll play dirty, keep libertarians off the debate stage, maybe even pass laws that hurt libertarians, or even find or create loopholes to have libertarians arrested. They’ll probably call an attempt to vote in a 3rd party an attempted coup, even if it’s peacefully don’t through a democratic process, the media will spin it. You already get gaslit endlessly online for supporting 3rd parties. Oh it’s a wasted vote. 3rd parties hurt democracy. Your really supporting the other side. A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for trump. Or a vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Hillary. I’m sure we’ve all been given all types of crazy excuses to attempt to keep us in line and force us to vote Republican or democrat. That’ll only get worse as libertarians gain more influence. Anyways, I would certainly vote for a member of this caucus over another Pelosi or McConnell. Libertarian policies would be good for the country. And libertarians might actually get things done. Because if a libertarian manages to reach office, they got something to prove so people can gain confidence in the libertarian party. And if they do become do nothing libertarians maybe they won’t last long. They need to get out there on the streets and online and campaign , buy up advertising space and more. Don’t just focus on the presidency. Endorse and give recognition to libertarians on the state and local levels. Legislative branches and judicial. Libertarians might not be allowed on the debate stage or receive coverage from the corporate press. But, they can certainly get their faces out there, on the internet, or show up to public gatherings. But, the system as it is now is going to kill this country, and kill our Democratic system, and destroy the Republic. There needs to be other voices in government and elsewhere. Not just the two. You need an alternative populist movement that challenges Trumpers and progressives/Bernie types. I mean Bernie is a sell out, And really trump was overhyped. But, ultimately the establishment has controlled this country long enough.
It will be a relief to have a Libertarian party run by libertarians. I also want to see the vote counts up, but not by becoming Democrat-Lite.
So Hitler light is the alternative?
@@libertariantranslator1929 Hitler lite, lol, bruh, if you deducted anything nationally socialist from the MC's stances, then you're the one who's not a true libertarian buddy.
Exactly, woke has held the LP for too long, they do not belong in the party as much as as an elephant belongs at a banquet. Call yourselves something else, Mises himself would disagree with the woke obviously, the trans libertarian soft nonsense, as well as almost all other founders of the libertarian movement.
@@ancapgrandscribe9546 Masked no-data sockpuppets see: A Shrewdness of Trumpanzees and comment there
@@ancapgrandscribe9546 Ultra's channel doesn't have any content 😂
"Removing it makes some kind of statement about where you're values are" Exactly a statement about how anyone can hold their own opinions even if you or society at large disagrees with them.
I think a good compromise would be to keep an anti-bigotry statement but actually include the dictionary definition of bigotry. From what I took from this video is 'bigot' like 'nazi', 'racist', 'transphobe' etc. have became these cringe buzzwords that are so commonly wrongly used and not in line with their actual definitions. Just used as insults by wokeists trying to virtue signal and raise their own status/lower the other person's.
Unless you’re a socialist, then you need to be “physically removed” to preserve the “libertarian order”…?
"I think Change is good. Progress is good."
This is not a libertarian, This is a progressive. Change is not the value. The reason a thing changes is to achieve a higher value or to better achieve your goals, not simply because change is good. That is language of the progressives. If a system is working very well, it does not require change until that change can be proven to have better results that the existing model. I have never been persuaded by the progressives because they have always been stuck on the mantra that change is good. Change is inevitable, but that does not mean it is good.
Nick Sarwark calling Charlottesville a massacre… ಠ_ಠ
I'm so encouraged by this change in the Libertarian Party.
"Reason magazine, liberty at heart but some claim to them to be pedophiles" ..... This is the framing of this video, not quite fair huh
Sources familiar with their thinking might even be saying that they're racists, transphobes, and huge bigots. People are saying! Yeah Nick Gillespie is a trash-fire.
The LP was infiltrated by pedos in the late 80s. Now its fascisti
Haha when nick talks about bigotry to mcardle. She 100% right, saying we reject racism and bigotry is a nothing statement.
HELL even Ben Shapiro says the same thing.
Saying BLACK Lives Matter is like saying " ice cream is cold"
We all know this
Read the 1972 platform
The Mises Caucus appeals to conservatism, Conservatism has always been the status quo of this country, therefore the LP is definitely part of the status quo.
Not Gillespie's best work. "Do they do enough to oppose racism" is a brain-dead framing of the crisis facing both the LP and the country.
Real libertarian are back … guard rails and gating speech rules is pathetic . I love this direction:) harumpf we don’t need to wage a hearts and mind campaign for the next generation… let’s fight over collectivist leftist ideas while the party collapses and do what’s failed since the beginning as our ideas die with us ???
I gave up on the LP and politics in general, I came back solely because of the Mises Caucus. Justin Amash is great, but he's just slumming it in the LP until he gets called back to the big leagues in the GOP, and seeing Sarwark on here makes me puke, he's 50% of the reason I left the LP, glad to see he's been tossed to the curb.
Amash is persona non grata, in the Republican Party. The Republican Party is a “Trump Party” for the foreseeable future. Donald Trump 2024, Don Trump Jr. 2028, Eric Trump 2032 or 2036. The Trump’s will milk it as long as they have followers.
@@HVACSoldier yes, but persona non grata lasts only until they need you, Ted Cruz went after Trump until they needed him now they're best buddies. If Amash kisses the ring he'll be back. My distrust of Amash comes from him embracing the FBI & CIA as soon as he thought they were going to be able to remove Trump. Dude was loud and proud Libertarian but became a statist real quick when he thought he could get some gain out of it.
@@OmegaSupremeWCheese Amash voted to impeach Trump. That is an “unforgivable sin” in the eyes of the GOP. The Trump family will control the GOP for the next 20 or 30 years, the same way the Clinton’s controlled the Democratic Party for 25 years. I give it about 2040, when people start ignoring the Trump family, the same way people are ignoring Hillary after 2016.
As a person with extremely Libertarian beliefs for 30 years, and a Mises institute follower, maybe I'll actually register as Libertarian. Now that the Tinfoil-hat crowd is failing, as it should, it would be nice if it mattered for a change.
this is the tinfoil hat crowd
@@AnonymousGamer-ut5nzno, not really
I believe in the Libertarian way of living but it is so easily attacked I don't think it can stand the pressure from those around us. People become offended, then the crying starts and we all know how that affects people. Then someone says: there ought to be a law.
Wow, some good news. I may have to give the LP another chance.
Do it. Now is the time.
I stopped voting in 2016. I went full ancap in 2019/2020.
lol they showed only one tweet that was worried about the party becoming an shitposting edgelord mess
Self-ownership is the fundamental ethical bedrock of libertarianism. Everything else is derived from that one value. Authoritarianism is based ultimately on the belief that instead rulers own us, able to commandeer our bodies, our labors, our associations, and our products through their laws and regulations. And so, the most basic political question is: "Do you own your own body." Because if you say, "Of course!", you may be so brainwashed that you will have a difficult time being consistent and universal with that belief, but you are a libertarian.
Maeces Dave says women who had sex are not individuals
I became a libertarian in the late 1970's in the aftermath of Watergate. I was active, dedicated, and involved; and even ran for congress as a lib in 1988. That's when I met Ron Paul, who was running for president at the time.
Since then, I've drifted away from the political side of things and am now more of a theoretical, "small-l" type libertarian. I'm not even a party member any more and don't follow their activities closely, so this clip was news to me.
But it does demonstrate an important principle: all political parties evolve over time. The major parties remain major parties by adapting and modifying ideas from each other and from the minor parties. The Socialist party in its various incarnations never won a nationwide election, but almost everything they wanted in their 1928 platform has been adopted over the years by the major parties as the ideas became popular: TVA, Social Security, Child Labor Laws, the 40-hour work week with overtime, etc. I've often said that if a democrat or a republican were time-warped from the 1930's, the 1960's, or even the 1980's to the present, they would hardly recognize their party today.
There are also more immediate shifts in direction, for example the catharsis of the democrats with Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders in 2016; or the republicans with Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford in 1976.
Obviously the libertarian party is not immune and all of the above applies to them, too..
Would you say as an old timer of the movement. That ron paul libetarianism was perhaps a bygone era? As in complete free market capitalism borderline anarcho capitalism isn't a working model? Or you think that the night watchmen goverment/state or the disolvement of the government is still necessary?
I’m glad they are the LP of the Ron Paul Revolution again. Maybe finally people will begin to wake up instead of being put to sleep.
Did Sarwark actually call Charlottesville a Massacre?
"Anarchism would only work in an world of angels and saints." - Justin Amash. Actually, it did work for 1,000 years (far longer than our modern nation-states will last) and it was called Medieval Ireland. Plus, I think statism would only work if people were angels and saints, and that is why it DOESN'T.
I guess you missed the part where he was quoting that from Mises. It's from Mises' _Liberalism: In The Classical Tradition_ Chapter 1 (The Foundations of Liberal Policy) Section 7 (State and Government). The book he had there was probably a printing of the 1985 translation from Ralph Raico. The entire first chapter is freely available on the Mises Institute website as an article, or the whole book is available there in several forms.
The only person who is mad about Mises is that clown Nicholas Sarwark
And voters, and donors... Illiterate rednecks are thrilled.