firefox
05-13-2008, 03:30 AM
Here's an interesting article about the ongoing internal conflict between anarchists and minarchists w/in the LP:
URL: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/antman1.html
Here Lies the Dallas Accord
Born: 1974 Died: 2008
A few days before the Denver convention to nominate the Libertarian Party presidential candidate for 2008, it appears that the frequently-mentioned (though not necessarily understood) Dallas Accord of 1974 is dead. Whether a purging of the anarchists occurs or a new and improved understanding replaces it is yet to be seen. In the hopes of the latter, I want to offer my thoughts.
At the LP Convention in Dallas, Texas in 1974, disagreement on whether police, courts, and large-scale defense ought to remain government functions or be provided on the free market threatened to derail hopes for libertarian anarchists and minarchists to work together. Apparently at the behest of members of the platform committee representing both viewpoints, an informal agreement was made that, for the purpose of developing the platform and party activities in general, the question of the ultimate legitimacy of government need not be settled. Since then, the Dallas Accord has frequently been cited to silence discussion of these issues, even internally.
From a peak that may have been above 30%, the percentage of LP members identifying themselves as anarchists has been dropping steadily, and most guesses place the anarchist proportion of the LP at between 10% and 15% today. Among non-political libertarians, though, market anarchists may dominate, and it is definitely true that the Libertarian Party is unrepresentative of self-described libertarian authors and bloggers, who are mostly anarchists. Frankly, it is frustrating to be one of the party anarchists and to have one presidential candidate (who wasn't even an LP member at the convention in 2006, let alone 1974) speak about "anarchists and us libertarians," and to have a respected long-time libertarian minarchist casually comment on the "incoherence" of anarchism without feeling the need to elaborate. (If I may be permitted my own rebuttal, the theory behind limited government libertarianism is that free market capitalism is best protected by a centrally-planned socialist monopoly, which seems to me to have a coherence dilemma of its own.)
Even sillier, a prominent member of the platform committee talks constantly about anarchists controlling the platform prior to the Portland Massacre of 2006 that deleted 80% of it, when it is quite clear that the pre-demolition platform was a product of more than 30 years of voting by delegates who were ALWAYS primarily minarchists. This has led to a suspicion that some would like to see the anarchists leave the LP completely, and I don't believe that is either healthy for the libertarian movement nor the intent of most minarchists, let alone anarchists, in the party...
My 2 cents on this is that my one and only party convention was the "Portland Purge" of 2006, at which I unsuccessfully argued for the retention and minor modification/consolidation of the existing platform planks. Needless to say, I have not renewed my membership in the state or national party, and have instead turned to grass-roots activism such as the Free State Project (http://www.freestateproject.org/). I still vote for LP candidates, and may give them donations on occasion, but I don't think they are worth much more effort, especially in light of resent events.
For libertarians: How does this make you feel?
For everyone else: If you were actively involved in your party, did you ever see a similar falling-out take place? If so, what were its causes and consequenses?
URL: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig9/antman1.html
Here Lies the Dallas Accord
Born: 1974 Died: 2008
A few days before the Denver convention to nominate the Libertarian Party presidential candidate for 2008, it appears that the frequently-mentioned (though not necessarily understood) Dallas Accord of 1974 is dead. Whether a purging of the anarchists occurs or a new and improved understanding replaces it is yet to be seen. In the hopes of the latter, I want to offer my thoughts.
At the LP Convention in Dallas, Texas in 1974, disagreement on whether police, courts, and large-scale defense ought to remain government functions or be provided on the free market threatened to derail hopes for libertarian anarchists and minarchists to work together. Apparently at the behest of members of the platform committee representing both viewpoints, an informal agreement was made that, for the purpose of developing the platform and party activities in general, the question of the ultimate legitimacy of government need not be settled. Since then, the Dallas Accord has frequently been cited to silence discussion of these issues, even internally.
From a peak that may have been above 30%, the percentage of LP members identifying themselves as anarchists has been dropping steadily, and most guesses place the anarchist proportion of the LP at between 10% and 15% today. Among non-political libertarians, though, market anarchists may dominate, and it is definitely true that the Libertarian Party is unrepresentative of self-described libertarian authors and bloggers, who are mostly anarchists. Frankly, it is frustrating to be one of the party anarchists and to have one presidential candidate (who wasn't even an LP member at the convention in 2006, let alone 1974) speak about "anarchists and us libertarians," and to have a respected long-time libertarian minarchist casually comment on the "incoherence" of anarchism without feeling the need to elaborate. (If I may be permitted my own rebuttal, the theory behind limited government libertarianism is that free market capitalism is best protected by a centrally-planned socialist monopoly, which seems to me to have a coherence dilemma of its own.)
Even sillier, a prominent member of the platform committee talks constantly about anarchists controlling the platform prior to the Portland Massacre of 2006 that deleted 80% of it, when it is quite clear that the pre-demolition platform was a product of more than 30 years of voting by delegates who were ALWAYS primarily minarchists. This has led to a suspicion that some would like to see the anarchists leave the LP completely, and I don't believe that is either healthy for the libertarian movement nor the intent of most minarchists, let alone anarchists, in the party...
My 2 cents on this is that my one and only party convention was the "Portland Purge" of 2006, at which I unsuccessfully argued for the retention and minor modification/consolidation of the existing platform planks. Needless to say, I have not renewed my membership in the state or national party, and have instead turned to grass-roots activism such as the Free State Project (http://www.freestateproject.org/). I still vote for LP candidates, and may give them donations on occasion, but I don't think they are worth much more effort, especially in light of resent events.
For libertarians: How does this make you feel?
For everyone else: If you were actively involved in your party, did you ever see a similar falling-out take place? If so, what were its causes and consequenses?