The Tea Partiers feel something is wrong, our Libertarian Party knows what is right: Never force anyone to do anything! On Saturday, May 29, 2010, Douglass Gaking (Chair, Boston Tea Party National Committee) started his opening remarks on the main floor of their convention with, “Good evening, fellow Libertarians!”
Some of our more ambitious members did a very radical thing—they went to some of their meetings! Here is a group of people that seem to be irritated by being forced to do things against their will by both the old parties—our kind of people. After some commiseration, an invitation to join us was given—genius in its simplicity.
We had to move our meeting place to accommodate more Tea Partiers attending. Most seem to learn our meaning of freedom, and start to view both old parties as corrupt. A little patience should bring us many good members. The fact that so many Libertarians have already done the difficult task of forming a functioning political party is a great draw to people like the Tea Partiers who want REAL improvements now.
Unions mean getting together voluntarily. People have been uniting to teach their skills to the next generation for millenniums. Its members gain by associating with others of common interests. One tool they have is to refuse to work (go out on strike), which is an enormous power in the marketplace, and has caused improvements for our economy.
While the freedom to associate is important for people to live happy lives, the freedom to NOT associate is just as important. It is wrong when the old parties allow anyone to start the use of force—or worse yet—when they force people to do anything. Freedom of the individual is the check-and-balance for the great forces in our society. Our efforts should be focused on stopping our elected leaders from taxing us, so they finally will be subject to market forces.
Saying the old parties should not invade other countries is only the first part of the answer. Americans like to trade with people outside our nation, and their safety is beneficial to us. We Libertarian politicians can act—not just repeal bad laws.
Fortunately since 1776, many other countries have followed the United States’ (US) lead and have embraced constitutional republics as the way to organize them. It is time now to unite with them just like the American colonies united to combat their common enemies.
The United Nations (UN) can be improved by making it a constitutional republic, and temporarily removing those “countries” that are less than republics. If this is not workable, a UN2 is advisable with the US again taking the lead. We can finance it with contract insurance, which would safeguard international trade. And elections would be guaranteed with international observer groups.
The UN or UN2 constitution must embrace the Libertarian principle of never forcing anyone to do anything, which recognizes the revolutionary advances in politics. We would present a united front against those who want to hurt others.
About sixty million elect our president out of about 300 million—that is only one out of five! Congress is even lower percentages. All we need is to persuade about 20% of Americans to abolish taxes and we can go on with our lives without interference.
We should never confuse a “majority of voters” with “half of our neighbors.” When the media says 51% voted to elect . . . we should understand what it means: Some people are interested enough to register to vote; fewer choose to vote in an election; and still fewer vote for a candidate!
The last third party to make it to the big leagues was Republican with their abolition of slavery slogan. When we get a winner like the abolition of taxes, we may earn many votes and get some free press.
War is unprotected wealth. Bad people are excited by access to good people’s property. We must continue to maintain a strong defense both intellectually, as well as materially, to protect us from those who want to initiate the use of force.
People need their money to live. Take their money, they die. This is not rocket science. There is one thing worse than taking money: Giving money—and calling it welfare (wel=better + fare=journey).
The psychological destruction of “telling” people they can’t survive by their own effort; they can’t create a value to trade with others; they are not capable of living, etc. should cause us all to not only oppose it—but run from it in horror!