nolanchart.com — The credibility of this movement will be determined by the public based on the unified image, philosophy, reasoning and common conclusions drawn by the participants. This means they have to stop being a movement of big-tent conglomerations of Hippies, ready to accept everything and anything that offends Democrats and Republicans. This means ...
Mar 5, 2009 View in Crawl 4
kent4jmjMar 5, 2009
It would have helped if the party had nominated a true Libertarian as a presidential candidate instead of the neo-con hack that tried to pass off as Libertarian.
peppermintpigMar 5, 2009
I vocally opposed the LP because of it. Still do.
peppermintpigMar 5, 2009
I agree. No matter what your position in life, or your views, so long as you try to let others live free, and move towards liberty, that's good enough to me. Being hostile to people doesn't help foster education and growth away from collectivism.Vigilance towards liberty, in perpetuity.I've never had a very good relationship with people who call themselves 'objectivists', actually. It may be because I've met bad examples. The disagreement boils down to certain supposed Objectivists making a priori style arguments about the nature of the universe. People have mistakenly called me an objectivist, but it's meant as a derogatory attack. Statists and socialists don't really understand that there's this whole other world of much more interesting debate and ideas: The pro-liberty ideologies are still growing and maturing! Collectivism, however, is an ideological dead end.Personally, I'm agnostic. I don't subscribe to any particular religion, but look for wisdom wherever it can be found. I support agorism, so consequently I am an individualist but I am not a humanist. I believe and support libertarian principles, but I don't believe in the existence of rights, per se. Through mutually beneficial transactions and faith in liberty/free markets, I believe we determine what good there is in the world, as no good can come from coercion. Libertarianism is about recognizing that open debate and critique is vital for liberty. When we stop talking and start to warring, there's nothing good to come of it. Life isn't perfect, which is why it is essential not to assume otherwise and force what we think is 'best' on others. No one individual could ever govern and do right by everyone else.I am the very model of a modern libertarian. :P
striker101Mar 5, 2009Submitter
And I voted for Barr only as my way of saying "none of the above", NO!There really wasn't any viable choice.
emazurMar 5, 2009
You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree. Someone wrote a pretty good article on the criticisms of Barr - you might soften up a bit after reading it:<a class="user" href="http://spectator.org/archives/2008/05/23/enemy-of-the-good">http://spectator.org/archives/2008/05/23/enemy-of- ...</a>He wasn't my first choice of LP nominee, but I voted for him and donated money to his campaign and have no regrets about doing so. I really don't like how he backed out of Ron Paul's third-party press conference and Barr shot himself in the foot as Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin. But Paul has stated he considers this to be old news and we shouldn't be looking back, and I agree.
nodakiMar 5, 2009
I voted for the party, not the man.