Toward a Cultural Shift in the Libertarian Party
Editor’s note: This is the first of many proposals for structural change that will be published in The Torch. While this proposal is not necessarily reflective of the position of anyone beyond its author and LPAlliance does not intend to endorse any element of this or any other such proposal in the near future, the intention of this series is to create dialogue between various members regarding solutions that will strengthen the Party’s commitment to principle, efficacy, and resilience to authoritarianism and corruption.
If you would like to contribute to this series or respond to a prior proposal in whole or in part, including via critique, please join the LPAlliance discord server and let us know your thoughts.
—AG
The current situation regarding Angela McArdle and the LNC acts as an explicit example justifying the need to change how the Libertarian Party is currently structured, not just on the institutional level but the cultural level. Like bacilli in an untreated wound, factionalism and demagoguery have been allowed to fester, allowing for the propagation of authoritarian elements within the Party and a profound aversion to accountability and transparency. The culture of our current political society has been replicated, allowing the Party to become less of an autonomous organization meant to act as a pocket of libertarian theory and praxis and instead a kind of cautionary tale on the corrupting influence of power and its ability to make leaders act as the back-dealing politicians of the future.
As the Alliance begins greater organization and the Mises Caucus eats away at itself and fractures, an image for the Party we wish to create must be set forward. I propose the following changes:
Institutional Amendments
The rules and structure of the national Party as it currently stands do not provide adequate enough protections against the abuse of power by those in leadership; nor do they leave us avenues from which state affiliates or other individuals can seek restitution within the Party. To remedy these shortcomings, the Party Bylaws, which outline the powers and obligations of those in charge of the Party, may be amended in some ways to allow greater accountability and ways to help in arbitration or mediation:
- Amendment of Bylaws 6.7 and 7.5 to allow recall of Officers or At-Large Members by a petition of delegates or sustaining members (such an amendment has been proposed by Brittany Kosin);
- Amendment of Bylaw Article 8 to add as a power of the national Judicial Committee the ability to act as an arbitrator and/or mediator on a matter concerning a state affiliate and violations of its bylaws, when requested by the parties affected;
- Addition to Bylaw Article 7 ensuring transparency through explicit publication of motions, actions, reports, etc. to a reliable and easily accessible space, as well as actions and discussions happening through email and not falling under the purview of executive session (Bylaw 7.15) being published to the public LNC business list;
- Addition to Article 7 to ensure that LNC members are given due process and the rights thereof in the trial procedure of the LNC, including the right to a public trial.
While not an exhaustive list, these are options that can be taken to breed accountability as well as allow for better support of state affiliates within the national bylaws.
Structural Changes
The rules governing the Party can only account for one part of the equation. Other changes needed deal with how the national leadership and state leaderships work with each other. While national and state affiliates have cooperated in the past through such initiatives as Defend the Guard, more can be done so as to create a system of mutual cooperation and assistance while still giving affiliates the necessary autonomy.
Communication between the different state affiliates should be facilitated so that they can work together on certain issues either specific to their regions or their state’s situations, as well as provide a means for affiliates to ask other affiliates for material assistance. If, say, the Libertarian Party of Hawaii needs resources that it cannot provide by itself, it can get in contact with other affiliates to ask for a helping hand alongside national; or affiliates who have similar concerns impacting the southwestern region of the U.S. could come together to make a joint initiative, or affiliates whose states are implementing similar types of laws or restrictions on freedoms. Creating these systems would move the Party away from simply being an aggregate of individual parts towards being an organic system of reciprocity and interdependence, with affiliates building each other up so that all can have greater success.
This system would also apply to local affiliates, whether within a state or between multiple states if desired. Creating a web of interlinking parts would incentivize the greater spread of knowledge regarding what issues the Party is dealing with at multiple different levels, creating a more conscious constituency alongside providing aid and support between different parts of the Party.
Democratization
If the Party wishes to be a symbol of libertarian spirit and principles, its practice must match its theory. That practice may be best achieved through a greater democratization of the Party, not just in its voting processes but its overall actions to allow greater participation of its members. Membership must be empowered to take action and control over their lives by being direct participants and conscious constituents in the actions and goings-on of the Party. Relegating responsibilities solely to the leadership stifles members’ drive to participate, and centralizes more power within the hands of fewer people.
Leadership has its role in creating a more democratic organization by becoming servant-leaders; that is, their goals must be first and foremost not to govern other their constituents but to act as a resource for the constituents to use so that they may be able to most effectively take action. They must also become organizers, in the understanding of Saul Alinsky, to create a sense of power and drive in their constituency so that, simply put, leaders become less needed. They act as teachers in showing how their constituents can organize and act, so that the people may have the power to create change not only in the political sphere but in the totality of their lives.
Members also hold a responsibility in that they must choose to act. They must feed the drive within themselves to take power over their own lives and take initiative to make the changes they want to see in the world. This must be done through consistent practice, acting within and beyond the Party, hand-in-hand with others so that they do not become complacent. Mutual support between members and individuals, leading to organization into groups and networks, allows for that drive and the venue to express that drive through action, thus breeding a spirit of direct democracy that continually strengthens with direct participation of constituents and the support of each other, needing less and less a hierarchical organization of leaders.
Principles
Adherence to libertarian principles, while seemingly obvious, has not been adequately assured in practice within the Party. Instead, our principles have been sacrificed for the sake of opportunism or for prejudices that align more with authoritarian ideals. It is thus required that the Party, its leadership, and its members continually affirm libertarian principles in word and in deed.
The general idea can be summarized thusly: Total freedom for all individuals, and full opposition to systems and ideas that would wish to dominate others. The standard rights to life and liberty fall under such a definition of principles, as well as all other rights attached to these. Defense of minorities also is subsumed in our principles, with libertarianism having both taken from and influenced the development of feminist, antiracist, and queer liberation movements (alongside other numerous movements and ideals that cannot all be listed here). Libertarianism prescribes no single economic system: Whether socialist or capitalist, the principles of freedom and anti-domination must be applied, allowing for a voluntary society to blossom. Thus the distinction between left and right libertarianism is a matter of preference, rather than principle. What is first and foremost is liberty. Whether the economics of liberty are right or left is only a concern when such right-leaning or left-leaning positions go against liberty’s principles.
Libertarianism thus opposes those forms of authoritarianism based on cultural issues, such as transphobia and homophobia, racism, xenophobia, etc; and economic forms of authoritarianism, whether by direct regulation from the State or in State empowerment of corporations and monopolies, and vice versa, to create an economic system that trods upon the poor and destitute while supporting the ill-gotten gains of the rich and powerful. The surveillance state, the military-industrial complex, the prison-industrial complex, and all other arms supporting the current politico-economic system of coercion and aggression, are thus our enemies.
This applies not only to the general State, but also to the specific organizations and systems within our lives, whether it be the company we work in, the neighborhood we live in, or the Party itself. Corruption, self-dealing, abuse must all be firmly opposed. Libertarianism is not simply a philosophy on a person’s relation to the State; it is a way of living with each other wherein we do not coerce each other and support each other so that all may be free and thrive.
Working With Others
Isolation is the bane of any organization wishing to do good work and improve the lot of mankind. Libertarians should not be afraid to work with those outside the Party on coalitions opposed to war, fighting against drug enforcement, defending civil liberties, so on and so forth. However, if we are to do so, direct action must be in line with libertarian principles and with the ideals of the democratic spirit. If we are to make an anti-war coalition, it should be with those who are truly against war, not simply supportive of militarization for a different side. While we may welcome those who are not firmly on one side or the other to participate, letting such actions be open to the public, let us ensure that we do not allow authoritarianism, whether it be in its fascistic or in its state-communist forms, to lead such a coalition away from the principles of liberty towards their own ideological ideal of tyranny. Freedom first and foremost, with all organizations fighting for freedom being our friend and accomplice.
Beyond the idea of coalitions, the Party should endeavor to work with communities and neighborhoods so as to show that libertarians are a force for good. Community volunteer efforts and mutual aid put into practice libertarian theories and ideas, and provide a ripe ground for conversing and making connections in order that libertarian ideals be shared and paired with the unconscious libertarian actions that take place when we help each other—when we do good for our neighbors and for our homes. These efforts also further the popular democratic and libertarian sentiment by making people more conscious of issues, by helping them find in themselves the power to create change and influence the political and economic systems that dominate over them. Our aim in these initiatives is to help people realize that they are the power, so that they can free themselves just as we try to free ourselves and each other.
On Caucuses
The current function of caucuses within the Party has led to disastrous results. Factionalism and division have come from caucuses acting in competition with one another for control of the Party. This creates a culture whose participants aim at power first and foremost; and where one or another faction seeks to enforce a specific ideology of libertarianism rather than allow for a diversity of libertarian ideologies to cooperate and work independently. The Party thus becomes a parallel of our political system, and the caucuses act as political parties vying for power.
If caucuses are to remain in existence, their purpose must be redirected from competition to cooperation. Instead of acting as political parties, it would be better for them to act as kinds of committees, autonomously acting towards certain aims and goals while also cooperating with other groups and individuals in the Party. This paradigm shift would build a pluralistic organization within the Party, where caucuses work together on grander and general issues while specializing in certain areas. Thus, the Classical Liberal Caucus could focus on the spread of libertarian theory and messaging through the lens of classical liberal thinking and philosophy; the Mises Caucus—if it were to exist in a different form than it currently does—could work on its original mission of spreading the ideas of Austrian economics; so on and so forth. Alongside these specializations, joint work such as advocating for political decentralization could be taken up by multiple caucuses.
This would require, of course, that the caucuses be willing to share power. The inner workings of each caucus may lend to them being more hierarchical or high-control, which, if not attended to, leads to corruption and power-hunger. The previous recommendations as to upholding libertarian principles and a democratic spirit must apply to these caucuses as well, so as to temper their more unconscious authoritarian elements (which exist in all peoples) and thus facilitate cooperation. Power-sharing and cooperation between caucuses thus requires an opposition to authoritarianism, not to mention communication and understanding.
What The Alliance Can Do
Many of these changes will require much more time, work, and manpower than LPAlliance currently has. What this proposal intends is that these goals act as a long-term vision for the Alliance, a guiding star in a way. In the meantime, we can take certain actions to help bring this proposal to fruition.
- As we’re already working with different caucuses, allowing proper dialogue between leaders and members alike, to find common ground while also allowing critique toward functional improvement and greater adherence to principles, will help build cooperation, as well as hone the flaws from which any one caucus may suffer when alienated from the others.
- Organizing members of the Alliance to work on state and local levels can help achieve the goal of greater member participation within the Party. Resources can be shared to help those members find ways to communicate with their local and state affiliates and understand both how they work and what they can do within them.
- In dealing with former members of the Mises Caucus, it is best to be open yet cautious. While we must give them a chance to show the good work they can do for the Party, they must prove themselves as willing to work towards libertarian ideals and improving the Party so that corruption, domination, and abuse of power will not be allowed to occur. We shall know them by their fruits.
These are only a few steps that can be taken, and no doubt more will be laid out by others. The point is only to show what the Alliance, and the Party in general, can move towards. Improvements are sure to be made, and should be made; onwards and upwards we must improve ourselves, sharpen our thinking and our resolve, to create a truly free and just society.
To write for The Torch, please join https://discord.gg/lp-alliance and submit a pitch and/or draft (as a Word file or Google docs link) to Amanda G. via direct message.
