Reactions to the Mises Caucus' Takeover Show Why the LP Has Been Failing
Now that the LPMC's Reno Reset is over, Lolberts have spared no effort to reassert their insanity.
While I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party, I've kept up with the endeavors of the LP Mises Caucus over the past year. Seeing as Dave Smith, a prominent LPMC figure, influenced my absolute rejection of the state, I've been rooting for the caucus to take over LP National. Changing the failed messaging of the party has been long overdue as it’s been a roadblock in getting through to those who are politically homeless or willing to have a genuine conversation about liberty.
And this past weekend, the Libertarian National Convention in Reno (documented well by Timcast) saw the first steps in what could potentially mean a great advancement of the liberty movement—LPMC-endorsed candidates now hold positions throughout the LNC. And as predicted, alongside their Reno Reset came a freak out from the so-called Loser Brigade, or Lolberts, of the LP.
Most of the outrage came with the changing of the party's planks. Delegated attendees voted to make the LP neutral on the issue of abortion; they also (and seemingly more important to the Lolberts) removed a prescriptive condemnation of bigotry that originally stated: “We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant.” The new language reads: “We uphold and defend the rights of every person, regardless of their race, ethnicity, or any other aspect of their identity.” The latter statement was introduced by former LP Vice Presidential Candidate, Spike Cohen, who explained that he preferred the original language, but knew it would get removed. He called the new wording a “compromise” yet LPMC members seemingly have no issue with it. Podcaster Reed Coverdale even called it an “upgrade” in a reply to Cohen's tweet.
For those wondering, the problems with the original wording were that: 1) the term “bigot” is used in political rhetoric to not only describe irrationally prejudiced people, but also to demean those who may simply challenge an idea related to social justice, and 2) the Mises Caucus believes the LP should be setting planks that align with the non-aggression principle rather than arbitrarily choosing what counts as a thoughtcrime.
But the intent didn’t matter; the Loser Brigade refused to consider these points. Instead, they've attempted to defame the caucus. I even witnessed this happening firsthand in a group chat, though I won't go calling out random individuals for bashing the MC in bad faith or saying that they're leaving the LP over this.
I will, however, call out people like former LNC Chair, Joe Bishop-Henchman, who made what was, in my opinion, a mentally unwell comparison of the Mises Caucus and its members to Nazis in a status update he originally posted on Facebook.
And the lunacy did not stop there.
Aaron Ross Powell, the founder of Libertarianism.org, had this to say on Twitter:
There’s also Brianna Coyle, who blocked me on Twitter for mocking her statement that “[p]arents don’t have a right to control what information students receive.” She jumped ship to the US Pirate Party (pun intended) and has been criticizing the LPMC for rejecting pro-sex work messaging.
But what made many (myself included) laugh most was a video of former LNC Chair, Nicholas Sarwark, pretending to get assaulted in an attempt to cause a commotion at the convention. For context, this was after he instructed others to take note of the members voting on a platform plank, according to a tweet from the North Carolina LPMC.
To those that did not anticipate such a meltdown, I suggest you reference the wise words of Michael Malice:
The Lolberts have sullied the term “Libertarian” with their cringe-inducing, woke, and hedonistic rhetoric. Similar to Coyle, state and national-level LP social media accounts have posted messages such as “sex work is work” and “trans rights are human rights,” as well as stating that they want open borders without providing the sort of context and framing that the Mises Caucus has generally been able to.
There’s also this 2020 tweet from the LP that Angela McArdle, the newly elected LNC Chair, pointed to when saying that the party is “UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT,” further proving that messaging will be different under the LPMC:
Based on the last 50 years, all the LP Swamp and Loser Brigade have to show for themselves is their unmatched ability to prevent the general public from embracing anti-statism. Founder and leader of the LP Mises Caucus, Michael Heise, has been awake to the fact that hoping to sell a culture of property rights while simultaneously appealing to the state or distancing the party from its core audience is self-defeating.
His discontent with people such as William Weld or Sarwark is comparable to the disapproval that libertarian thinkers Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard held over 30 years ago. This feeling was displayed in Rothbard's 1990 article entitled “Farewell Speeches to the Alabama LP.” In this piece, the writer addresses his afterthoughts on a convention in Birmingham by the Alabama Libertarian Party.
At the time, the Alabama and Georgia LPs had a similar idea of reclaiming LP National, to which Rothbard responded that he was “all for it and wished such efforts well,” but that he had already been fighting for the LP for 17 years and was fed up of trying to pry it out of the hands of a group that celebrated pentecostal-like demonstrators such as Ron Crickenberger, who claimed to have been converted by Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.
Rothbard wrote that “[t]hose members who don't mind being fleeced, those who join the Libertarian Party for some kind of psychic therapy, those who embrace the Party as a cult of losers, those who constitute what an old friend of mine once called ‘the nation's biggest outpatient clinic,’ this overwhelming majority of members are welcome to the LP. They can have it. As for Lew Rockwell and myself, we're cutting out.”
Below is a video edit made by Dave Casey of the Delaware Mises Caucus that shows Lew Rockwell addressing the type of Libertarian that appeals to the Establishment, the Regime Libertarian:
The Regime Libertarian has continually attempted to appeal to the acceptable narratives—the “current thing”—while failing to capture the attention of those who feel most disaffected and are in search of options.
One of the most notable things Dave Smith has pointed out about the LP is its tendency to miss opportunities when it comes to capitalizing on crucial moments such as the Ron Paul Revolution or the COVID tyranny. Instead, the party has opted to ignore its optimal target audience. It’s as if the LP never wanted to succeed.
Since 2004, the Libertarian Party didn’t even have the right to secession in its platform. This plank was reinstated at this year’s convention, so one can hope that the Mises Caucus can take part in leveraging radical ideas to inspire the people of America and subvert the interests of the state. There are valid questions surrounding whether this is a good use of time and resources, but even many in the post-libertarian space, who argue that it is a waste, wish them luck.
As for myself, I’ll continue spreading ideas through content and conversation.
 | A guest post by
|
Thank you Ahmed! Very interesting, please do a follow up as election time nears as to any progress/regress on this!