On Testicular Fortitude
Voter: Really, I’m a Libertarian at heart.
David Bergland: Well, when it reaches your balls, give me a call.
That's from a post at Positive Liberty by Jim Babka of Downsize DC. Best. LP. Quote. Ever.
Yeah, I know what you're thinking: Knapp's gonna give Babka what for over his treatment of the Boston Tea Party and Charles Jay's excoriation of Barr.
Nope. I want to talk about that, but not in precisely the way you might think.
It's true that I've sworn off my support for the Barr campaign, and that I've described Barr's candidacy as Dixiecrat 2008, and I stand by that characterization. Having already rhetorically positioned Barr alongside Strom Thurmond, George Wallace and Lester Maddox, I didn't feel any great need to weigh in on his Jesse Helms eulogy. Coals to Newcastle and all that.
And I do want to respond briefly to Babka on two points, so let's get that out of the way:
I don't know if this party will have their candidate on a single ballot. They appear to exist entirely for unherdable cats, hell-bent on criticizing the LP.
As it happens, the Boston Tea Party's presidential ticket is on the ballot in Colorado, will be on the ballot in Florida and Guam, and will likely manage several other states (we're looking at possibles in Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee and New Jersey). We've got nine state affiliates with more organizing right now. We got started too late this year to run down-ticket slates of our own, but we're endorsing and aiding a number of independents and candidates of other parties who in turn endorse our platform. One prospective endorsee, an LP candidate, just emailed me to mention that she had received a campaign contribution just from asking for our endorsement.
Ultimately, we're not anti-Libertarian Party ... we're pro-libertarian. Conditions are such that that may be less than perfectly clear to all right now, but we'll get there.
I'm not going to apologize for Charles Jay's critique. He said some things that needed to be said -- not just because they're true, but because at this point in its existence, the Boston Tea Party very much needs to explain itself to the rest of the freedom movement. We need our fellow libertarians to understand why we're doing what we're doing.
Nonetheless, I don't think that Jim's criticism is entirely unjustified. So far, the BTP's existence and career as a party has been closely tied to various critiques of the LP. That's just a fact. There's no disputing it and I'm not going to try.
Babka refers to the BTP as a "spin-off" -- but I think maybe he's giving us too much credit. We haven't really spun off yet. Rather, we've remained, to a large degree, in the LP's orbit. Our criticisms have so far largely been leveled at the LP and its presidential candidate rather than at the status quo parties and their candidates. On the positive side, we've been happy to endorse LP candidates who meet our standards.
This election cycle is the adolescence of the Boston Tea Party.
In our infancy (from 2006 to earlier this year) we were half-in, half-out of the LP. I offered a resolution at the BTP's organizational convention which would have constituted it as an internal caucus of the LP. That resolution was rejected by the members, but we didn't go in the opposite direction that year, either.
This year, we've decided to start doing the things a "real" political party does. We've nominated candidates for office and we're working to put those candidates on the ballot. We're chartering state affiliates so that we can hit the ground running in 2010 with congressional and state legislative slates. We're establishing recruitment efforts that stand on their own and don't rely on the internal LP "dissatisfaction grapevine."
Between now and 2012, I expect that the BTP will grow into young adulthood, establish itself as a proven, permanent third party ... and of course make its best attempt to do better than other third parties have done and break into "the big leagues."
The reality is that there are now two libertarian political parties on America's electoral landscape, and that (in certain respects at least) the newer one is coming up fast in the older one's rearview mirror.
Breaking up is hard to do ... but perhaps it needn't be as painful as we're making it. Can we just be friends? OK, well, maybe not, at least for the three months and change while the LP conducts its "great experiment" and the BTP embarks on its "maiden voyage." But ...
Odds are that there will always be cross-traffic between the LP and the BTP as angry or discontented libertarians of one seek expression in the other (or, as is now the case, participate in both). It's a safe bet that the two parties will bring different approaches to the longstanding and vexing problem of electing candidates to office. Hopefully as time goes on, the two parties will learn to, well, learn, from each others' mistakes and from each others' successes instead of just going at each other.
I'm not going to promise to go easy on Bob Barr. The LP made that bed, and now it (we -- I'm still an LP member and candidate) gets to lie in it. But I can, and do, promise you that I'll do my best as a member of the Boston Tea Party to make that party about more than internecine freedom movement conflicts. We have bigger game to hunt, and we're just now getting our boots on.




Comments
michelle l:
Here is my comment on the Positive Liberty blog-still awaiting moderation:
As someone who is, shall we say, testicularly challenged, I must make do with only my brain as far a decision-making processes.
And my brain tells me that the Boston Tea Party, far from being simply an outlet for Barr-bashing, is a fast growing party that has tapped into some of the very real discontect with the Republican takeover of the Libertarian Party.
Mr. Barr's comments did nothing more than add fuel to many former (as well as present) Libertarians that Mr. Barr is not only sympathetic to the Republican party's intolerant and statist ideals, but in fact is willing to throw the principals that founded the Party of Principals under the bus to further his political/neocon goals.
I for one would like to see Mr. Barr spend at least as much time furthering liberty and personal freedom as he has spent underminding the Constitution with his homophobic and drug-warrior legislation before trying to run for president. Actions really do speak louder than words.
As far as the Boston Tea Party existing merely to criticizing the LP, I think of it more along the lines of a Venn Diagram-with the inner circle being freedom and personal liberties and the Libertarian Party (if not necessarily their candidates) and the Boston Tea Party as the inner connected outer rings.
planetaryjim:
Below are the comments I wrote on Babka's page. They may never appear there, of course, because his site is moderated.
Yes, Colorado and Florida are both going to have Boston Tea Party’s candidate Charles Jay on the ballot. We expect to be on the ballot in about ten or twelve states, and we have candidates registering as write-in candidates in states where that is required. As well, the Boston Tea Party is endorsing candidates from other parties (mostly LP so far) who agree with our smaller government platform.
We are hell bent on criticising both the government and the Libertarian Party where criticism is appropriate. In the case of the LP, we direct almost all of our criticisms at the national party organisation which has attempted to silence LNC member Angela Keaton for daring to ask questions about how the LP is spending money, which has attacked candidates in the pre-convention process as far back as 1996, and which has used national headquarters staff and resources to preferentially benefit campaigns as recently as this year. Many committed libertarians are concerned with the LP in all cases where it acts corruptly, negligently, or mistakenly.