Should the Libertarian Party concentrate on professional messaging or bold messaging? This question, while important, misses the mark. The real issue at hand is why the party isn’t prioritizing candidate-focused messaging.
If we view the Libertarian Party as a business, our candidates should be seen as the product, with the LP itself representing the brand. Often, our efforts are centered on promoting the brand rather than highlighting the individuals who embody it. To improve our outreach and impact, we need to seize every opportunity to showcase our candidates—not just those running for President, but also those running at the local level.
In politics, local issues often resonate most strongly with voters. By drilling down into these issues, we can leverage quotes, audio, and video clips of our candidates to effectively communicate their positions and ideas. Our candidates can also play a crucial role in this process by creating and sharing content, tagging or sending it to relevant affiliates.
The key takeaway is that when we shift our focus to candidate messaging, we highlight what truly matters to the party. This approach not only promotes individual candidates but also strengthens the overall appeal and effectiveness of the Libertarian Party.
Presently, the LNC or any committee has the authority to convene an Executive Session for the following purposes:
• Personnel matters
• Contractual negotiations
• Pending or potential litigation
• Political strategy requiring confidentiality
During these sessions, the Secretary is responsible for recording session occurrence, which are subsequently made available to the public.
However, I believe that a current practice is in breach of the Bylaws and the LNC Policy Manual (https://lpedia.org/w/images/c/c3/LNC_Policy_Manual-Adopted_thru_2024-02-04.pdf) regarding how many LP Committees operate. If you visit the committee’s page on LP.org (https://www.lp.org/lp-committees/), you’ll notice that numerous committees carry a disclaimer stating, “This is a confidential committee that does not have a public email discussion list.” Although this practice isn’t explicitly outlined in the LNC Policy Manual, I’ve been informed that operating as a confidential committee implies perpetual operation under Executive Session conditions. This extends beyond the usual topics for which the Executive Committee convenes Executive Sessions, and there seems to be no documented procedure for transitioning out of this confidentiality. Consequently, by simply carrying out their duties, I argue that each committee member may inadvertently breach this confidentiality.
To rectify this situation, I propose a change in our approach. Committees should only enter Executive Session when it’s necessary to maintain confidentiality. Additionally, committees should occasionally hold public sessions to facilitate public feedback. This adjustment would strike a better balance between confidentiality when required and transparency when it’s not.
In recent discussions, I’ve been asked about my vision for the Libertarian Party. However, it’s important to clarify that my current focus lies in vying for the position of Representative of Region 7 within the Libertarian National Convention. As an individual member, my influence is inherently constrained, yet there are pressing matters that I deem essential.
Foremost among these priorities is the imperative to reunite the Libertarian Party. Despite our modest size, we find ourselves fractured, with splinter groups or entirely separate parties emerging in states like Michigan, New Mexico, Virginia, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania. Distressingly, rumblings of discontent echo from approximately five additional states, hinting at potential departures from the national party if grievances remain unaddressed. Currently, the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) inadvertently exacerbates discord, offering more trouble than value to many state affiliates. To mend these rifts, we must set aside pride and extend a conciliatory hand to estranged affiliates, fostering dialogue and facilitating reconciliation. In Michigan, for instance, it’s imperative to cease litigious pursuits that only deepen existing schisms and instead earnestly tackle underlying issues. To preempt further disaffiliation, we must establish transparent communication channels devoid of punitive measures, allowing for a constructive exchange of concerns and needs.
A second pivotal objective hinges on the democratic mandate conferred by the National Convention’s electorate. It is incumbent upon us to elect officers who authentically represent the diverse spectrum of our party. Subsequently, we must cultivate a culture of professionalism and mutual respect within the LNC. Despite shared ideological leanings, the current committee has been marred by internal divisiveness, a pattern not unfamiliar to its predecessors. Moving forward, we must commit to civil discourse, acknowledging that disagreement can coexist with camaraderie. By embracing inclusivity, even amid ideological variance, we fortify our collective resilience. This ethos extends to our state affiliates, where occasional discordance with the LNC’s direction necessitates empathetic engagement rather than exacerbating division.
Lastly, we must realign with the foundational objectives of the Libertarian Party. Our raison d’être encompasses the election of candidates, safeguarding and attaining ballot access, and disseminating the principles of Libertarianism to the public. Regrettably, recent endeavors have veered off course, diverting resources from these primary objectives. Streamlining our focus entails devolving certain responsibilities to state entities while rededicating ourselves to our core mandates. By recalibrating our priorities, we ensure a more judicious allocation of resources, optimizing our efficacy in advancing the party’s agenda.
In the realm of American politics, the Libertarian Party stands as a beacon of individual liberty, limited government, and personal responsibility. However, recent years have witnessed internal strife and division that threaten to undermine the very foundation upon which the party was built. The rise of the Mises Caucus as the dominant faction within the Libertarian Party has led to a troubling trend of infighting and exclusion, ultimately jeopardizing the party’s future viability.
The Mises Caucus, while advocating for a principled libertarian approach rooted in Austrian economics and paleolibertarianism, has pursued a strategy of dominance rather than unity. This approach, marked by a quest for control over all other factions, has alienated many within the party and contributed to a sense of disillusionment among members. The consequences of this power struggle have been dire, with the party experiencing a decline in both membership and influence.
Inexperience and internal discord have further exacerbated the Libertarian Party’s predicament since the Mises Caucus takeover. The lack of effective leadership capable of fostering cooperation and dialogue among various factions has only served to deepen existing rifts. As a result, state affiliates have splintered off, further fragmenting the party and weakening its collective voice in the political arena.
To reverse this downward spiral, immediate action is imperative. The Libertarian Party must embark on a path of reconciliation and inclusivity, welcoming back all members who have been marginalized or sidelined. This requires a concerted effort to engage in meaningful dialogue and bridge the divides that have torn the party asunder.
Leadership within the Libertarian Party must take proactive steps to reach out to state affiliates and initiate discussions aimed at reunification. Rather than perpetuating a culture of exclusion, efforts should be made to collaborations between disparate factions. By fostering a spirit of unity and cooperation, the party can begin to rebuild its strength and relevance in the political landscape.
Moreover, the Libertarian Party must reaffirm its commitment to its core principles while embracing diversity of thought within its ranks. A pluralistic approach that respects differing perspectives and values individual autonomy is essential to revitalizing the party and attracting a broader base of support.
In conclusion, the future of the Libertarian Party hinges on its ability to unite and overcome the divisions that threaten to tear it apart. The Mises Caucus, while influential, must recognize the importance of collaboration and compromise in building a resilient and enduring political movement. Only through a concerted effort to heal internal rifts and embrace inclusivity can the Libertarian Party reclaim its position as a potent force for liberty and limited government. Failure to do so will only hasten its decline and eventual demise as a viable political entity. It’s time for the Libertarian Party to come together as one, or risk fading into obscurity.
