[ExI] Call To Libertarians

[Darren Greer]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:

the AP takes no position. No position
>
> means NO POSITION. No position means being "agnostic" on EVERYTHING
> else. Individual AP members have their own views of course, but as a
> unified organization, the AP takes no position on: abortion, taxes,
> gay marriage, gun rights, defense policy, campaign finance, racial
> discrimination, immigration, terrorism, hate-speech, Israel, education
> policy, environmentalism, global warming, etc.
> Ah, yes, the question of the transition from where we are "here" to
> the glorious Llibertarian utopia "there".  This is my problem with
> libertarians -- particularly zealots-slash-purists.  They say our
> current system is crappy.  (I agree).  They say life  would be perfect
> in the Llibertarian utopia "over there".  But they .rarely seem
> willing to propose a reality-based plan for getting from "here" to
> "there"-- a plan for the transition.  And by reality-based I mean a
> plan which acknowledges that any responsible transition must be
> incremental.  They don't like the old way -- understandable, who
> outside of the kleptocratic elite does? -- but they won't dirty
> themselves with the sort of compromise with the current system that an
> orderly transition implies. This annoys me.  There's real substance to
> Llibertarian principles.  I'm looking for less bitching and moaning,
> and more progress re implementation.
>
> Which brings us back to Darren's question:  "...how do we go about
> establishing a system where the principle non-aggression is
> paramount,..."
>
> Let's talk about the US of A in the year 2011.
>
> How to begin the transition?
>
> Oddly, it seems to require only that enough people behind the curtain
> in the polling booth mark their ballot correctly. Which is to say, for
> the candidates put forth by The Accountability Party.
>
> "The Accountability Party? What's that?" you ask, puzzled, thinking
> you've missed some newsworthy "announcement". You haven't.
>
> The Accountability Party is my little fantasy, created at this most
> opportune moment, when the Dems and Repubs are both out of favor.  To
> be robustly resistant to destruction by fragmentation, The
> Accountability Party is deliberately "preconfigured" to be
> broad-based, having only two planks: Accountability and Jobs.
>
> No other issue is relevant except as relates to these two concerns.
> So, regarduing any other issue: the AP takes no position. No position
> means NO POSITION. No position means being "agnostic" on EVERYTHING
> else. Individual AP members have their own views of course, but as a
> unified organization, the AP takes no position on: abortion, taxes,
> gay marriage, gun rights, defense policy, campaign finance, racial
> discrimination, immigration, terrorism, hate-speech, Israel, education
> policy, environmentalism, global warming, etc.
>
> The two issues which the AP devotes its exclusive focus are:
> accountability: no one is above the law. Everyone, but in particular
> persons in high position who have traditionally 'enjoyed' immunity
> from prosecution, will now have their get out of jail free cards
> voided.
>
> And jobs: everyone who wants a paycheck gets a paycheck. EV-REE-ONE.
>
> Now you might well ask -- certainly others will -- "How you gonna
> implement the jobs program, and more to the point, how you gonna pay
> for it?" To which I reply, "You must always remember that the AP
> subordinates ALL OTHER ISSUES to paychecks/jobs and accountability, so
> the details of the fiscal policy behind the "JOBS" commitment is for
> the most part irrelevant. That said, the Treasury has a machine that
> prints checks, so the policy is secured, "Move right along. Nothing to
> see here." Whatever may be the details required to reconcile the jobs
> program with fiscal reality, the program itself is in stone, and
> non-negotiable. For the curious though, I would state the obvious:
> print the money, borrow the money, or tax someone. In terms of
> practical economics, it would be quite simple: The more robust the
> private sector economy, the greater the proportion of jobs it
> provides. The rest to be provided by govt, and financed,... however.
> (Personally, I like a progressive income tax, or a flat tax based on
> net worth, or a financial transaction tax, but I'll go along with
> whatever the AP figures out AFTER THE ELECTIONS HAVE BEEN WON.)
>
> A major innovation: the AP does not conduct its campaigns by
> traditional methods. No TV, no radio, no interviews with mainstream
> journalists.
>
> TV, radio, and other conventional media are corporate. They are part
> of the illegitimate "mainstream", of the illegitimate corporate
> statist ruling elite. They are part of the political opposition.  They
> are gatekeepers of the political process. If you pay them for TV and
> radio ads, you are giving material support to your political
> adversaries. The AP therefore, chooses to conduct its campaigns
> DIRECTLY with the voters, over the internet, no gatekeeper, no
> middleman -- no corporate mediation-for-profit of the political
> process. A not-for-profit political process is crucial to the
> elimination of corporate/govt corruption, and the restoration of a
> healthy society. In this way, the AP terminates the age old linkage
> between money and political power.
>
> There's more, but this is a start.
>
> Best, Jeff Davis
>
>            "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
>                                                  Ray Charles
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>



-- 
*There is no history, only biography.*
*
*
*-Ralph Waldo Emerson
*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110223/0da014a6/attachment.html>