re: Digest Number 40 and 41
- First, Chuck Seberg wrote:
>I'm not above stealing the Nolan chart from the Libs. I assume most of...and then Guy McLendon wrote:
>our recruits will come from the ranks of the Republican party. It would
>be an interesting exercise to chart the responses at a large Republican
>gathering, and try to snag the ones who hit the sweet spot on the
>chart. I don't expect to see any Libertarians working the same crowd. So
>any conficts over use of the chart would be minimal.
>If so, I firmly believe the RLC's effort to generate our own ... as compared...and then Adam Bernay wrote:
>to using what amounts to an industry standard ... would be
>counterproductive. The LP uses the word "Constitution" 10 times in their
>platform ... would you also like to steer clear of that term?
>No ... the benefits of using a canned solution together with the cost of
>generating public recognition of our own quiz would far, far outweight any
>benefits from 1) having our own customized quiz, or 2) avoidance of
>perceived negative associations with the LP.
If we're to use the World's Smallest Political Quiz, I recommend HIGHLY that
we use the previous version. The current one, to be quite honest, is far
too general and does what they claim they don't want to do: rig the scoring.
The older versions are much, much better.
I don't believe that the LP has any intellectual property rights to any
particular iteration of the Quiz; no doubt the observation of the
Washington Post is as good an indication as we're going to get that the
Quiz has become "mainstream."
I therefore agree with Chuck that the Quiz is an appropriate tool.
Adam's question as to which version: Bill Westmiller (or whoëver came up
with the actual language) did a masterful job of explaining why we're not
going to implode over the issue of abortion. It would hardly do us any good
to make the same mistake over the "open borders" issue. On this, I think
that the LP, to the extent it has softened its stance, is ahead of the
curve anyway. I get together for breakfast every week with some folks who
were at one point fairly straightforward Socialist/Green types; now one has
actually joined the LP, and the rest espouse libertarian POVs on various
issues. One, a member of the central committee for the Ventura County
Sierra Club, and a member of the local Air Quality Control District, has
recently begun to butt heads with the Sierra Club on all kinds of
pro-business and free-trade issues. But the one thing abut the LP platform
that was completely incomprehensible to him was the open-borders policy.
The LP was right to moderate its position on this, to any extent that it
has. If this means that the updated Quiz is "rig[ging] scoring," so much
I agree completely with Guy's remarks. And as to "avoidance of perceived
negative associations with the LP," the inquiry for me is straightforward.
Most of us are here because we want results that the LP can't get for us,
not because we disagree with their positions more than we agree with them.
Ron Paul couldn't get elected as a Libertarian; as a Republican, he did.
That didn't change his views. So: imagine an election in which a
conservative, as opposed to libertarian-leaning, Republican, is forced to
choose only between a Democrat espousing the entire Dem platform, and a
Libertarian espousing the entire LP platform. Only if we believe that the
Republican would choose the Democrat need we be concerned about such
The ones who would be scared off are probably not our target audience anyway.
If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. Theyll
have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American
wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must
not bow his neck to any dictatorial government.
--President Dwight D. Eisenhower, responding to a proposal for increased