Minority Outreach and the Libertarian Party

…worst of all was that there was ONE black person in attendance. So the LP practiced a perverse form of affirmative action itself by making this race traitor its candidate for governor–a figurehead for a bogus “civil rights amendment” that would ban affirmative action (the ballot initiative was sponsored by avowed white supremacist groups which the LP has no problems getting in bed with). This guy was the only candidate–of more than 20–not dressed in a business suit, and his acceptance speech was inarticulate and brief. His lt. governor running mate did all of the talking. It was sick.

So this is my LP’s attempt at minority outreach. Align with avowedly racist groups and put an inordinate focus on something small and signficiant that only potentially affects white males (woe is me!), but nominate a clearly unqualified black man as governor while having his running mate do all the talking.

Perhaps with Mr. Gorond’s new position, things may begin to change at the national level.

Since it has been me who has been pushing for outreach, I better get the ball rolling. Obviously there are others here who feel the same way I do. I am going to start a group this week that will start the process of recruiting minorities into the movement if not the party. This is well overdue. I am sick of being the only black person to show up at my state convention-and Illinois is not a small state. If you are interested e-mail me at blacknight_80751@yahoo.com My goal is to recruit a member of a minority into the movement a week.

That’s an aggressive goal, Chris. Good luck!

It seems to me that blacks are very willing to listen and even learn, but much like conservatives, they will continue to throw themselves under the bus for the party they always vote for.

I just don’t see anything changing here, which is a shame because blacks have, as a group, the most to gain from libertarian solutions than any whites do.

When I was petitioning in Chicago to put the Libertarian Party on the ballot in Illinois in 2004 I got the best responses from black people and from young punks (mostly white, age 18-20s, many rode skateboards and had tatoos body piercings). The white yuppies in Chicago were the worst for signing petitions.

I think that the LP speaking up about the “war” on drugs could be a great method of into reaching out to minority groups for their support of limited government. The facts are on the side of libertarianism, not authoritarianism.

The LP Platform as it stands now, does not reach out to minority voters.

The part about the War on Drugs could mention the racial disparity in drug arrests, for example.

A platform change in that regard, could gain national attention, in my opinion.

I think you all might enjoy this vid I came across at the FTL forums…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GSINQK3Y28

Very talented kid if he did the video editing as well.

Here’s the original thread:
http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=6799.0

We definitely need to reach out more to minorities. Liberty and justice, FOR ALL.

My forays into the black political community have been overwhelmingly positive.

Our local LP was strong in protesting a case of drug raid brutality against two elderly folks a few years back, which made us partners with the local NAACP. So few whites of any political persuasion actually cross racial lines when it comes time to show up that when we do we are heroes, big time.

Black churches are generally very open to political speakers and far more conservative than you might think. Another place where not being afraid to show up scores big.

My easiest petitioning is at my home precinct, about half older blacks and half Duke freshmen. Both groups rememeber being denied the vote like it was yesterday and are eager to do anything that has to do with voting.

Black legislators are very open to ballot access lobbying because in the back of their minds many of them dream of a black 3rd party.

And everybody understands taxes.

I must confess here that I have twice in my bids for US Congress in Missouri’s 1st District not followed up on my belief that I should reach out to the black constituency re: the drug war. Frankly, it wouldn’t have made a difference in the race, with the Clay dynasty presiding (Lacey is actually not a bad CongressCritter), but it’s a natural place and issue for libertarian outreach. When I was running for US Senate in ’98 blacks were first starting to express major dissatisfaction with the Dem Party here in Missouri, and they still feel the same way. What we need, I think, are introductions, ways to get in front of groups of people to speak. I would have loved the opportunity but didn’t know how to make it happen.

If Chris and the group he’s coalescing can begin to make some connections for us, I think that getting libertarians in front of groups (even small gatherings in people’s homes) will definitely result in more voters and some activists. Go, Chris, and tell me how to help!

Right Watch, I think you’re my brother from another mother.

In another post I mentioned that transportation issues were important to a number of different demographic groups especially blacks. here is a quote from a federal gov. study on transportation “Nearly 40% of central city black African-American households were without access to an automobile, compared to fewer that one out of five white central city households“. This is an issue i try to bring up with people when the oportunity is available and might be a wedge issue to use with the black community.
Also it is worth noting that the sociologist William Julius Wilson in his book “When work disappears” noted the lack of transportation is a major problem for inner city African-Americans.
BTW there was an article in the NYT about a year ago that noted that young black people were often inclined to refer to themselves as “libertarian”. Wish I had saved it.
M.W.

Given the current brouha over immigration wouldn’t it be equally productive to court Hispanic voters ? Libertarians are consisently in favor of ‘open’ immigration ( to a larger degree than not . . )and that issue has resonance in that demographic. Isn’t the current estimate that the Hispanic population will approach %45 by 2030 or something ?

Former LPNY chairman John Clifton, is African American. He is one of the most articulate and peaceful Libertarians I have had the pleasure to meet. His guidance brought the Weld nomination to y’all.

I also see a strong, very vocal crowd in the LP who very, very strongly associate themselves with the Republican Party and general Conservative movement. A movement that has long alienated minority voters. One thing I have noticed with the reform movement, though, is that we are beginning to see a bit of a backlash to that with more left-leaning libertarianism starting to come out. Meaning, well it may mean several differnt things, but to me meaning folks who view personal/civil liberties as being a strong focus for us. That free people will make for free markets, as opposed to the other way around, and who distrust corporations as much as the government, and are quite vocally against corporate “welfare” as much, if not more, than personal welfare. (They’re still libertarians, though, so personal=bad too, mind you.)

I think this general movement is in the kind of direction that will begin to appeal to minority voters far more than one that appeals to the members of a boardroom.

Lenny Zimmermann: ‘I also see a strong, very vocal crowd in the LP who very, very strongly associate themselves with the Republican Party and general Conservative movement.’

Would you share a few names? Who are the leading lights of this ‘crowd’?

…a real, legitimate US Senate campaign would have issues more like 1) 100% pro immigration, 2) 100% anti-war, pro-Bush impeachment, and 3) “I’m pro choice on everything”–who you love, what you do with your body, what you consume, where you send your kids to school, how you choose to defend yourself, what god you choose to worship (or none at all), etc. THAT is a libertarian message. That is a message that sets us apart from the D’s and R’s.

A couple of years back there was an LP state party executive director who said and I paraphrase ” The LP didn’t run candidates in a couple of race because the the Republican candidates were acceptable to us”. This is and has been an ongoing problem in the party and will continue until we clearly differentiate ourselves from the mercantilist party known as the GOP.
M.H.W.

undercover_anarchist: ‘And you have Badnarik, who is far more conservative than BOTH of them.’

It’s been my impression that Nolan was the most conservative of the three.

u_a: ‘I mean, you have the Ron Paul idolatry that knows no end . . .’

I’m an admirer of Ron Paul. I don’t see anything wrong with a libertarian getting elected to Congress as a Republican or a Democrat, if that’s what works. I’m not an expert on Paul’s voting record, but my impression is that it’s been _very_ libertarian.

Here’s an excellent column by Ron Paul opposing the gay marriage amendment.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul160.html

u_a: ‘Neal Boortz, for god’s sake!’

Boortz is a liar and an all-around asshole. I must admit I don’t much care with whom or how strongly he associates.

Tomlin, I’m with you. I absolutely don’t see how it’s fair to imply that Ron Paul, Aaron Russo, and Michael Badnarik are not legitimately libertarian. And the charge that Lew Rockwell and others affiliated with the Mises Institute are racists? Preposterous! I’ve read countless writings of theirs over the past 4-5 years and have NEVER encountered anything there that could fairly be labeled racist. I suspect that their support of the South’s right to secede during the War Between the States has confused some to wrongly associate them with actual racists who support the same, but for different reasons. As for the Rodney King issue, I haven’t seen said article, but I strongly suspect a similar misunderstanding.

Stephen G. is from Alabama and knows these folks quite personally, I believe. I’d like to hear his comments on these accusations.

Hold on, I’m being misunderstood and I admit, it’s my fault.

I did not mean to imply that Badnarik, Russo, or Nolan weren’t “libertarian.”

I meant that they have more conservative leanings. They come from more conservative backgrounds. They come (with the possible exception of Badnarik) Republican backgrounds.

Hence, the popular association between the GOP and LP.

That doesn’t mean that these guys are bad or shouldn’t be supported. The question, at the time, was “why do people associate the LP with the GOP?” The answer is pretty obvious.

If you want to read some of the documentation about the Rockwellians go to rightwatch@tblog.com. The column by Rockwell endorsing police beating appeared in the LA Time and libertarians at the time were furious especially since he said he was taking the position “as a libertarian” (he’s much more a conservative than a libertarian and always has been). Rockwell praised police beatings in the back of the paddywagon as a good measure to keep criminals under control — apparently thinking only “guilty” people get arrested and that there are no victimless crimes. And people don’t confuse things over secession but over their publishing white supremacists and working with them.

I am getting so sick and tired of people like DD and UA ripping into other libertarians who might be more conservative than them (ie there issues are more economic than personal). They never badmouth a libertarian with left leanings. Where were they when Maryland libertarains elects someone who could be considered a socialist as their candidate for I believe the Senate who definetly wanted bigger gov’t. They were praising that but at the same time badmouthing the NY libertarians for electing Bill Weld. We are certainly going to be a tiny party if we continue to try and get rid of one-half of our party. We need to include people from both sides of the fence that want smaller gov’t, not just left leaning or right leaning, but people who want smaller gov’t both financially and personally. It seems like some people in this party just want a left leaning party (ie DD and UA) and others want just a right leaning party. I want both. I want personal as well as economic freedom.

TerryP: I want economic and personal liberty, too. The thing is that those who want to infringe on economic freedoms to benefit the less fortunate are misguided, while those who want to control my rectum, ovaries, mind or voicebox are truly EVIL. There is a big distinction.

And yes, the thread is about minority outreach. Since most minorities identify with the more “left” of the two major parties, it is appropriate to appeal to those more “left” issues if the goal is truly to grow the party in that regard.

It isn’t about abandoning the economic issues. It is about the way in which ALL issues are presented. Welfare queens are not the devil and white males are not “oppressed” by affirmative action. So long as LP icons act as if these are truths, there will never be significant growth or minority outreach. These are not appealing issues to the youth, either. We already have all of the 40-something angry white males we’re ever going to get.

A statement by Ron Paul on immigration may be found here.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul269.html

Unlike, for example, George Phillies, Ron Paul does not support immigration control on the grounds that low-wage American workers deserve protection from foreign competition. He does support them on a number of other grounds, all of which I disagree with, but none of which I would call ‘socialist’.

UA, is there a reason you expend so much verbiage on name-calling? Is it just to make you feel good, or do you think it accomplishes something?

UA, thanks for the clarification. We all should recognize that many, if not most, of us came to libertarianism from either the left or the right and tend to retain leanings toward those backgrounds. Thus, you probably place a higher priority on certain issues that appeal to the left while others, myself included, tend to focus more on issues that appeal to the right. But, I fully embrace the libertarian philosophy and find these differences among us to be inconsequential.

That said, I still think you’re being a bit harsh on Ron Paul. As for the immigration and abortion issues, those are undoubtedly the two most contentious issues amongst libertarians – cogent arguments have been made on either side. But as I understand Dr. Paul’s stance on abortion, he personally abhors the practice, but has explicitly stated that he does NOT favor the federal government forbidding it.

Robert well said in your first paragraph on #52. If the left is anything like the left in our party how in the world did they get the idea that they are tolerant. they are the most intolerant people that blog here. They continously rant about people that don’t beleive in lockstep as they do. It might make them feel good but it certainly is not helpful in bulding the party. I can’t see much difference between them and the democrats. They continually want to blame conservatives about all the problems that go on in the world. It doesn’t matter if what they are proposing calls for smaller gov’t or more freedom, if it is from a conservative or former conservative it is bad.

I have never been a conservative or a republican, but the issues that I am most passionate about are economic ones and because of that I am belittled by the left in this party. What gives? I don’t moan the fact that your passionate issues are more leftist in origin. I think it is good that we have a balance.

Mr. Mayer: I vehemently disagree with “pro-life” libertarians, although I grant them a basis for their opinion, and therefore, must begrudgingly respect it. However, there is simply no basis for being an anti-immigration libertarian. In order to be anti-immigration, more government is required. Violation of the non-initiation of force principal is required. Again, I need someone to explain how someome from Mexico coming to America is infringing on MY rights. It’s not.

Rightwatch is 100% correct.

And as for Dr. Paul’s position on abortion that it be left up to the states… Is this the old argument that predates the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments that the Constitution and Bill of Rights do not apply to the states but only to the federal government? Abortion is a human right. Someone who thinks its okay for states to infringe on human rights, just not the federal government, is a 19th century constitutionalist, not a libertarian. There’s a big difference.

For the record, I did not endorse Zeese as was insisted in an earlier post. In fact, I beleive I posted on some of those related articles when they were current condemning the nomination.

Be sure to read all the minority newspapers in your city regularly and watch for outdoor events that you can put up a booth. If the literature from nation is not acceptable writre your own. Keep it simple. 90 to 150 words is usually enough to get the word out. Schools, African_Americans favor vouchers by about 70%; transportation, serious missing service in inner city America; housing, way to expensive and Reason has an articel on too expensive housing in the most recent issue;
occupational licensing laws were part of post-Civil War Black Codes and need to be ablolished. and we can go on with other issues.
M.H.W.