Thursday, November 07, 2019

Are Content Providers Free to DePlatform?

In the last few years, we have heard many stories of alternative viewpoints -- including Libertarian ones -- being "deplatformed" and "unpublished".

Some Libertarians are excusing this behavior by claiming those content providers are private property, and they can decide for themselves what they provide a platform for.

I fully understand the argument.  However...

That position is, at best, naive, and at worst, willfully ignorant.

It has become abundantly clear: Content providers are not really private companies any longer.

1) They get a huge government subsidy in the form of "artificial personhood".

2) All of the major platforms including Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube are subscribers to the "services" of a spook-run "non-government organization" called the "Atlantic Council"

3) Most of the spooks "advising" the oligarchs as to who to deplatform and what to censor are Obama-era players.

4) Dragging Zuck before congress wasn't meant to elicit information. It was a horse's head in the beds of the content oligarchs.

5) All of the content providers claim to be platforms and thus not liable for their content -- in public. However, in court, they claim the opposite
Content carriers need to decide if they are publishers or platforms, and duck the hell out of gaming the system.

6) There have been multiple instances of spookish government bureaucrats visiting the C suites of all of the tech titans. Of course the records of what these spooks say to the execs is not made public, but here's a guess: "My, Mr Chairman, that's a beautiful twelve year old daughter you have there. It would be a shame if someone from our office visited her tonight."

7) The takedown of and the bankrupting of its principals in order to prevent them from hiring sufficient legal counsel was another horse's head.

No. The oligarchic providers have been captured by Leviathan. They are now functioning as management arms of the police state.  Almost all of the internet content providers are now deeply compromised.
No corporation should be regulating political speech; and certainly no corporation -- which gets the government subsidy of artificial personhood -- should attempt to meddle in American elections in this manner.

It isn't the Russians who are interfering in our elections.

It's tech oligarchs, the mainstream media, and the military-industrial-spook complex.

The fix for this is to reduce government employment at all levels by 99% across-the-board, and shut down government agencies -- including the national-security-spy-state complex.

Hopefully the few thousand remaining government bureaucrats will be able to concentrate on activities that actually protect the individual rights of Americans. rather than violating them.

The elimination of corporate personhood and requiring businesses to bear the full cost and responsibility for their own actions that violate individual rights is also required.

Vote Libertarian.

Additional reading:

1.  Your taxpayer dollars are funding the Atlantic Council -- the organization "advising" Facebook on which viewpoints to censor.

2.  Facebook submits various content to an Atlantic Council lab that "detects" unacceptable opinions.

3.  More to come!

Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Written by Marc Montoni <>, November, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Thursday, October 31, 2019

Halle Shootings Prove The Gun-Control Fraud is Over

In the media recently (October 9), two people were killed in a planned rampage murder in Halle, Germany on 9 October, 2019. Two more people were seriously injured
and rushed to the hospital. The attack was originally planned to massacre Jews at a local synagogue, by a 27 year old national Socialist.

What has been left out of most of the media accounts, however, is that the weapons and ammunition used were all HOME-MADE.  Check out the story on Ammoland; or see the story by Mike Landsay upon which the Ammoland story was based.

The firearms were homemade, the ammunition was homemade, the explosives were homemade.

He killed two innocent people and injured others even with his crude ammunition and makeshift firearms.

This part of the story has been largely supressed because it reveals an inconvenient truth: The genie is out of the bag.

There are far more machine tools in the US than there are in Germany, and far more mechanics who can use them.

The designs for firearms and ammunition are well-known and documented extensively.

Besides the homebrew angle, the same corruptocrats who can't keep drugs from crossing the border aren't going to be any better at keeping guns from crossing the border.

The only thing that will change as legal guns and ammunition are further restricted, is that more and more criminals will get into the lucrative business of building, smuggling and selling them. Prices will go up, more cops will be corrupted (eg, Mexican police guns are used in almost all cartel shoot-em-ups), and violence over trading turf will increase.

The Left is going to have to come to terms with the fact that guns are in the wild, and from this point on, they always will be. It will need to acknowledge all of the following:

- Gun control doesn’t stop a madman with murderous intent.

- It isn’t the object but rather the person using it that is the problem.

- You cannot legislate your way to safety by assuming the guilt of every citizen.

- Gun control has failed.

All gun control is unconstitutional. It is also ineffective and counterproductive. And, most importantly, it infringes upon the right of all individuals to freely acquire, own, and bear any property they wish -- including property related to supporting their right of self defense.

If someone truly cannot be trusted to own or carry firearms, then they should not be free to roam at all -- they should be in prison.

End the war gun owners.  Defend the right of individuals to defend themselves from criminal individuals and criminal governments.   Repeal all federal, state, and local gun laws.  Stop meddling in the private and voluntary affairs of free individuals.

Vote Libertarian.

Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Written by Marc Montoni <>, October, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Monday, October 21, 2019

Libertarians: Decriminalize Sex Work

Larimer County Cops?
In Larimer County, CO, this year, over 300 men have been arrested for attempting to have voluntary sex.  Here's what the cops and their media parrots said about one week's haul: "An operation to help reduce the demand for human trafficking in Larimer County led to the arrest of eight men who are accused of patronizing prostitutes."

But yet there's no "war on men" going on.

So the cops [and parrots] equate having voluntary, contractual sex to "human trafficking".

Ummm..  No.  Sorry, Charlie, but prostitution is not trafficking.

Public schools and caging human beings by police might resemble human trafficking, but prostitution does not.

Besides, no actual humans were trafficked, much less prostituted -- all of the "prostitutes" were cops hiding behind a computer.

The grand total of confirmed "sex trafficking" cases in Colorado -- you know, where someone *was* forced into sex by someone else -- for 2017 was: 14.  And they were rightfully prosecuted.

In 2017, nationwide, there were 467 confirmed cases of sex trafficking, of which 14 were minors.  There is *no* "epidemic" of human trafficking.  If anything, there are fewer human beings trafficked now than there ever have been (at least in the United States).

Well, except cops tend to have an increasing problem with screwing teenaged girls (and boys), and passing them around to their buddies.  Which *is* trafficking.

And put it in perspective: In 2017, there WERE 393,980 reported serious domestic violence cases, and over 1,237,960 reported violent rapes and sexual assaults.

So perhaps we ought to "end the demand for marriage"?

All the stats are available from the FBI pages - and links can be found on Libertarian Norma Jean Almodovar's website (2017 stats are the latest until October of this year when the 2018 stats are available).

The Libertarian Party believes you own yourself.  If you choose to marry a millionaire because you like the bank account, or if you pay $75 for a handy (like police victim Robert Kraft), you're having voluntary sex.  Voluntary sex is not trafficking, and no form of voluntary sex should be prohibited.

The Libertarian Party's platform position on sex work spells it out:

2.10 Sex Work - The Libertarian Party supports the decriminalization of prostitution. We assert the right of consenting adults to provide sexual services to clients for compensation, and the right of clients to purchase sexual services from consenting sex workers.

The Libertarian Party Radical Caucus platform describes the Libertarian position on sexual rights even more thoroughly:

1.9 Sexual Rights - Consenting individuals have the right to private choice in sexual activity.  We support the repeal of all laws and policies which are intended to condemn, affirm, encourage, or deny sexual lifestyles or any attitudes about such lifestyles. Further, we oppose any government attempts to dictate, prohibit, control, or encourage any private lifestyle, living arrangement, or contractual relationship.  Who or how many somebody loves is none of the government's business.  We support separation of marriage and state. Government marriage license regimes were introduced as tools of control like any other license, and therefore we call for their immediate abolition. No free individual should be expected to obtain a "permission slip" from the state in order to marry.  We support the repeal of all laws prohibiting or regulating sex work including prostitution, whether practiced by individuals or in the form of businesses such as those operating brothels, massage parlors, or other facilities.

End the wars on men, women, and sex workers of both genders.  Repeal the prohibition on sex work.  Stop meddling in the private and voluntary affairs of free individuals.

Vote Libertarian.

Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Written by Marc Montoni <>, October, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons License
For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Tuesday, October 15, 2019

Running Safety for Women... And Men

In a discussion in a running group today, the topic turned to the safety of female runners.  Of course, someone chimed in with a totally useful and unique comment: "Here's a tip: Men stop harassing women.".

Brilliance.  Why hasn't anyone else ever thought of that?

But let's get serious.

Scolding all men (eg "Men stop harassing women") is not a solution to the problem of harassment (or of assault, or bias).

Men who harass/assault women are a small fraction of the male population, and the rest of us "men" do our damnedest to suppress them.

The police officers who arrest the worst of them; the majority of prosecutors, judges, and other justice officials who put them in jail; and the jailers who keep them there -- they are overwhelmingly MEN.

Even before an arrest happens,  when citizens stop a criminal by tackling them or otherwise restraining them, those citizens are almost always MEN.

So let's give "men" some credit:

The vast majority of men love women, and love their wives, daughters, girlfriends, and friends, and will never hurt any of them much less a stranger.

The best way to make women's outdoor activities like running safer is to acknowledge that safety is partnership that requires both men and women to look out for one another. A lot of us guys on the trail are doing our best to do just that -- without your admonishment.

I have a personal story that illustrates the point.

A few years ago, a very frightened elderly woman who had passed me on her bicycle a few minutes prior came back down the trail towards me, and stopped to ask if she could drop in behind me and follow because there was a suspicious-acting man on the trail ahead.  I was running armed just for reasons like him.  I had seen him earlier that day myself and thought he looked like trouble.

So of course I agreed and told her to tuck in behind me and to one side me until we passed him.  I was careful to keep my body between him and her.  Thankfully nothing happened, and she went safely on her way after we were out of sight.

The point is, most men do care.  Most of us will do our damnedest to help when needed.

In the meantime, don't be afraid to run armed, regardless of whether you're a man or a woman. Many runners do it because they also run in areas where help may be too far away when it's needed, either for help from a human predator or from a big cat or someone's vicious dog.

Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Written by Marc Montoni <>, October, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Friday, September 27, 2019

The Two-Minutes Hate on Vaping

In the news this past few weeks has been a good example of a manufactured "crisis".

Media outlets have breathlessly fixated on the "dangers" of vaping (aka "
e-cigarettes").  I guess this is the assigned Two-Minute Hate for the last half of September.

But let's go over a few actual facts that don't fit well into the mainstream crisis narrative.

First: Tobacco is a legal plant that many individuals want to enjoy.  If it is prohibited, then we will simply have yet another war on a plant that will be as effective as the war on poppies, marijuana, coca, khat, and many others.

Standard, over-the-counter nicotine "vape juice" carries basically the same risk of long-term health effects as cigarettes.

Keep in mind that e-cigarettes, like cigarettes, is simply a "delivery device".  When different kinds of "delivery devices" are developed, different people are going to try them, and use them, if they wish to.  There are already cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, cigarillos, dissolvables (such as lozenges, strips, or sticks), smokeless (chewing tobacco and moist snuff), waterpipes ("Hookah"), and now e-cigarettes.

There are already millions of vapers.
The mainstream media has generally (with a few notable exceptions) failed to make clear that the current "crisis" among vapers is not caused by vape juice, but rather, by a subset of vapers who are putting THC oils (and vitamin E oil, and other crap) in their e-cigarettes.  And probably a lot of other substances, according to investigative articles in the Washington Post and Wisconsin State Journal.

One of the more interesting aspects of vaping is the possibility that vape juice can be rather easily tailored, and there is already some evidence that the trend among longer-term users of e-cigarettes is to choose smaller nicotine content juice cartridges over time.

If the vaping market were left alone, there is reason to believe that trend (of lower nicotine content vape choices) would continue and/or accelerate: One thing that a free market always does is it tends to mitigate negatives and accentuate positives.

The black market (
Prohibition) means adulterated drugs, which means death for more than a few users (especially youthful, inexperienced ones who don't know what to look for).  Which is what we are right now seeing with the current "Vaping Crisis".

Then consider what the free market has delivered in comparison to Prohibition: We now have light beer and non-alcoholic beer, whereas under Alcohol Prohibition the trend was toward harder and harder, more potent varieties of hooch.

In a legal market, and with steady Education and Persuasion campaigns, kids trying drugs will find pure (and ever-safer) prepackaged versions of them at Rite Aid and Wal-Mart, with instructions on safe use.

They won't get that from the local gang-banger who is filling vape cartridges with THC oil.

Over time, then, it stands to reason that it would be better for there to be a less-harmful alternative to cigarettes to be encouraged and available so people who have to put something in their mouths will be able to choose something less harmful rather than more harmful.

If vaping is made illegal, it will simply go underground.  The technology for vape pens is widely known and easy to replicate, and prohibiting it will simply open up a new market for organized criminals to supply.

As an interesting side note, Colorado is not having anywhere near the problem with this that other states are -- because marijuana is legal, and people therefore tend to use traditional marijuana delivery methods.

The THC oil vaping problem would likely resolve itself in a legal market.  If CVS and Walgreens were selling vape juice with THC in it, they would have to find ways to make it as safe as possible, or they would find themselves with a lot of liability claims.  Drug traffickers who are illegally filling vape cartridges have neither the will nor the ability to figure out how to do that -- they're just supplying a product that people want, and they aren't going to be hauled into court if their product hurts someone.

Libertarian Party articles about vaping bans:

1.  What do Libertarians think of Trump’s vaping regulation?

2.  Libertarians, vaping industry condemn Trump vaping ban

3.  I Vape I Vote Membership Promotion

Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
Written by Marc Montoni <>, May, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Saturday, September 14, 2019

The Power of One Libertarian


Roy Scherer is only one man, but he accomplished some rather incredible things.  Medical marijuana was just one of Roy's signature accomplishments: Virginia was the first state with it!

Roy convinced enough members of the Virginia General Assembly to liberalize the law in the late seventies -- long before the California initiative that addressed the issue there in the nineties. Virginia's MedMar reform passed quietly into law mostly due to Roy's patient, quiet persuasion.  Unfortunately, it wasn't a self-executing law, and remained mostly unused.


A little-known secret is that the only doctors in Virginia who could legally suggest it without the DEA raiding their house, shooting their kids and dog, and revoking their medical license, were those at the V.A. hospitals.  If I recall, most of the couple of dozen legal federal users of the late seventies and eighties were residents of Virginia, and, several of them were VA patients.

Some cracks in the wall eventually appeared in the rest of the country: The federal government finally said in 2010 that patients treated at Veterans Affairs hospitals and clinics will be able to use medical marijuana in the then-14 states where had been legalized.  Read more about this here.

Another example of Roy's handiwork is the historically-lenient Virginia possession law (under, again going from memory, 1/4 ounce is (or was) a rather cheap misdemeanor fine, rather than a jail-able offense).

And Roy has been exceptionally successful in stopping bad legislation in committees by pointing out flaws even the sponsors had to agree with.

Yes, more would get done with numbers, but no one should be quick to dismiss the incredible success Roy has had as a single lobbyist.  So many times it can be just a matter of remembering that lawmakers are human (or at least resemble them), and having an interested citizen around to do a "second reading" from a hands-off starting point often shows legislators where their ideas smash up against reality.

It often takes only takes one or two Libertarians in the right place at the right time to get what can be huge reforms enacted.  For instance, the only time in U.S. history that a state income tax was abolished happened to coincide with the terms of just two Libertarian Party legislators -- Dick Randolph and Ken Fanning -- in the Alaska state legislature.  It was the Libertarians who introduced the repeal bill, and persuaded their 18th century holdout political opponents to support it.

[NOTE: This article was first published in Old Dominion Liberty Letter Issue #39 on Monday, 26 July 2010.  Old Dominion Liberty Letter was an email newsletter that was periodically sent to Libertarian Party members and prospects in Virginia.  This author served as the editor of the publication for most of its run.]

Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
Written by Marc Montoni <>, May, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Tuesday, September 10, 2019

Abolish Marriage Licensure - And Stop Collecting Data

In the continuing saga of the state sticking its nose into marriage, three couples in Virginia are suing the state government because the state refused to issue them marriage licenses -- because the plaintiffs refused to state their races on their license application.

Instead of fighting it in court, the Commonwealth should make the suit moot by immediately eliminating the marriage license system and all associated requirements, benefits, restrictions, and regulations.

Every state, not just Virginia, collects demographic information for marriage licenses.  Even if they don't ask directly on the form, all states require a state-issued ID at some point in the process, and those demographic entries are either shown in the clear on the ID itself or it's behind it on the DMV database -- which means that the state marriage license database has all of that as well.

Libertarians support marriage equality -- because we favor the immediate abolition of marriage licensure, for all of the same reasons we favor the elimination of all other forms of state permission slips.  Libertarians regard licensure as the government taking away a right all individuals have, and then selling them that right back as a privilege.

Americans have been fighting this battle over the details of how government permission slips are issued and to whom for decades now.  It's time to bring that battle to a close by eliminating all marriage license laws.

Interestingly, Republicans have picked up the idea from Libertarians, and have recently eliminated marriage licensure in Alabama and introduced repeal bills in other states.

Who or how many somebody loves is none of the government's business.

Libertarians support separation of marriage and state. Government marriage license regimes were introduced as tools of control like any other license, and therefore we call for their immediate abolition.  No free individual should be expected to obtain a "permission slip" from the state in order to marry.

Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
Written by Marc Montoni <>, May, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Monday, September 09, 2019

Allegedly Gouging

Price Gouging: It may not fare well in the court of public opinion, but increased prices in the face of high demand and low supply is the market's way of conserving a resource.

If a hurricane blows through and I'm the first one to the store, I'm going to buy a dozen cases at $3 each and there will be none left for you.

If the price goes up to $25 a case, I'm going to buy 2 and the will be some available to you when you get there, albeit at a higher price point.

Here's a story about a guy named Chris. Just a regular working guy. He doesn't worry about stocking up on bottled water. Because Chris is smart. Before the hurricane blows through, he fills up containers from his tap water. And he also fills his bath tub full of water. It's not rocket science.

The fact that people are hysterical and idiotic should cost them money.

Every business owner is "price gouging" at all times. That is, they are all charging the highest price they can currently get for their product. All that changes in this scenario is the price that people are willing to pay. You aren't going to buy anything today that hasn't been prices at the highest price the provider thinks they can get the largest amount of people to pay.

Eliminating price gouging means fewer and fewer stores will bother sending employees to make emergency supply runs to stores further away from endangered areas so they can have product to sell.

So more "out of stock" signs.

That must be a good thing.


Libertarians aren't here to placate the ignorant voter.

We're here to speak to the exceptional voters who know the bullshit ignorant voters vote for is... bullshit.

Stop trying to kowtow to children, economic illiterates, moral relativists, and thieves -- all of whom were vaccinated to be that way by 12 years of government's coercion-funded forced- indoctrination penal colonies.

Monday, August 19, 2019

New College Major: "Useless Studies"

You know what those "_________ Studies" college major courses are?

They don't exist because they impart any useful skills for the demands of life after graduation.  Unless of course you can figure out a way to make ginned-up outrage into a paying occupation.

They exist for two reasons:

1) To enable the institution to meet hiring and student quotas. They serve perfectly to meet the ever-multiplying affirmative action laws and regulations (both in the faculty and student populations).


2) To revenue farm, because universities are among the largest of our society's welfare queens (roughly a $100 billion cash sink at the federal level, a similar amount comes from states and localities). Think about it: Weak faculty members, and weak students, were once a market universities were neither interested in nor were they a market the university was able to tap.

Enter federal and state welfare (as well as donors who wanted to do a bit of cash virtue signaling). Now that the tap was turned on, administrators have become dependent upon the growth lathered on by debt-addled students who could never get into a rigorous program, hence never get into university.

And now we're going to "free" college for everyone.

Keep it up, y'all. Break that bank.

The sooner the country goes bankrupt, the sooner you'll crash the entire scam.

Wednesday, May 29, 2019

Is Student Lobbying Expoitation?

I did not say they were being "exploited"; however, now that you mention it, that's probably an accurate word.

The school district, with the above Mr Ferguson's full support, steals my money, and gives it primarily to teachers who have a vested interest in perpetuating the system. The students are thus trained not to question whether the theft-based system should exist or not, they are instead trained to assume the theft-based system must be continued, the only question is how much privately-owned wealth must be stolen -- and of course, they are trained to always believe that more is always better.

The school district, which has *never* asked students to thoroughly explore the question of whether it is moral to allow government schools to continue to exist; much less whether it is moral for it to exist with stolen money, then encourages those same students who it has not taught to question the prevailing wisdom, to then become lobbyists for "more, more, more".

So you have a massive bureaucracy that both fails to teach students to actively question what they've been given, but on the other hand successfully teaches them to refuse to question it -- yet at the same time, in so many other areas of their lives, school system employees treat students like babies and violate their agency.

In essence, educrats regard students as incompetent to make decisions about their own lives -- smoking, drugs, profanity, sex, speech, academic performance, the list goes on -- and yet, when the educracy wants more money, they push those same students to lobby adults when the truth is those students have no idea what they are lobbying for actually costs others.

That is an exploitive relationship: Using someone you have purposefully withheld information from, to speak for you.

-- end --

Sunday, May 12, 2019

Speaking for NOTA

Sometimes it's not easy speaking up for NOTA at a Libertarian meeting.

Personally, I like injecting a bit of humor into a meeting, because the theatrics caucus that tries to make everyone angry and hurls insults and invective at undeserving other activists can make those meetings into a decidedly inhospitable place.

At this year's LP of Colorado state convention, I felt somewhat uninspired to speak for NOTA as I traditionally do.

At the same event in 2018, one participant made it a point to mumble under his breath at me that it was a waste of everyone's time for anyone to speak for NOTA.

Added to that taunt, there was a lot of low-IQ nastiness that had been the rule for several weeks prior to this event.  It was really so disheartening to see Libertarians chiding their own so viciously.  The convention this year was a bitter disappointment for many reasons, and the hostility in the air was palpable.

Several members did ask me to speak for NOTA -- which helped me break out of my funk.  So, once we finally got to our elections, I started writing a few NOTA points for each race.

Here they are:


- Nobody will invoke the purity test.
- We don't need no stinkin' meetings to run anyway.

Vice Chair

- Nobody will bother running meetings in the Chair's absence.
- Nobody is the only real Libertarian.
- Nobody will be there to vote.


- Nobody will cook our books so we don't get thrown in jail.
- Nobody will be able to tell us how much money we have for our projects.


- Who needs notes, anyway?
- Why do we need to have records of things that happened last week?


- Nobody will speak to the press -- and we don't want them to know what we're up to, anyway.


- We don't need no stinkin' members anyway.
- NOTA takes exception to the previous accusation about nobody, because until now NOTA has taken any position at all.


- We want to keep Libertarianism to ourselves.
- Nobody will grow the LP.
- Nobody will bother outgoing Outreach Director Kevin Gulbranson in response to his offer to coach or mentor the new Director.

Affiliate Development Director

- Nobody will visit local affiliates.

Campaigns Director

- We don't need any candidates.  We're just a debating society.
- Nobody will run for office.
- NOTA will leave politics to those other guys who want to run your life.  And isn't that what we all really want?


Anyway, feel free to use them at your own state convention or other meetings.

If nothing else, providing a few moments' humorous diversion about voting for None of the Above at least reminds Libertarians that they can vote against all candidates in any internal Party election, if they don't like any of the candidates.

Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
Written by Marc Montoni <>, May, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Friday, May 03, 2019

The Noob and The Quest

Back in 2014, I ran the Virginia Libertarian Party's Facebook page. Over the preceding four or five years, I and a few other activists -- but mostly me) had built up the page following by putting up regular articles with consistent Libertarian "abolitionist" messages.

At one point, someone new came along and promptly got herself appointed to the Communications Committee, and began complaining immediately about how the page was turning away potential Libertarians because of that abolitionist message.

Without irony, too -- why it was increasing steadily in likes, then, I guess is a mystery.
From her newly-won position on the Committee, she immediately set about trying to freeze me out of the management of the page; hurling invective pretty much non-stop as soon as she scratched her way into leadership.
Upon her ascension to leadership in the Virginia LP, she also sought and won appointment to the national LP's Platform Committee as an LNC appointee in 2015.

So in the space of just a few months, she went from being some entirely new to someone who would influence the message of both the national and state party.  Never mind ideology, as long as the pitiably desperate "Please Like Me!" caucus within the LP thinks you'll be useful as far as making the LP look harmless, you too can jump right in to making decisions over those who genuinely know what Libertarianism is about.

But back to the immediate issue.

Right before she joined us, the state Party was 4th in terms of membership compared to the other 50 states.

Well, as most of my friends know, I left LPVA behind as of November 2016.

Two years later, the state Party I worked to build for many years has fallen by ~75 members and to 7th place nationally.

Even more irony: the person who had invited her to attend her first meeting of our governing board and introduced her to everyone...

Was me.

Which just goes to show that sometimes, the person you personally welcomed into the family will turn into one who merely contributes to the family's stagnation.

Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
Written by Marc Montoni <>, May, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .

Saturday, January 12, 2019

A Libertarian Response to The Fat-State Address by Jared Polis, 2019

In his first "state of the state" address, new Colorado governor Jared Polis proved something: Namely, he is just another in a long line of tax-spend-regulate-subsidize-suppress-penalize political hacks who think they have any moral right to govern the affairs of private individuals.

Libertarians in Colorado listened, where we could stay awake, to Polis' comments with same understanding we have had with every other new governor:
  • Taxes will go up
  • Spending will fatten
  • Regulations will suppress more and more entrepreneurs
  • More individual rights will be trampled upon
  • Transparency will fade further
  • More citizens will be killed by police enforcing ever more new laws
  • The war on the recreational choices of individuals will rage on and expand
  • Health care will be further taken over by the state
  • Bureaucrats will expand their drive to choose economic winners and losers
  • Colorado will continue to become the exclusive playground of the upper classes
In short, Polis will do all of the same things that every other governor has done.

Some Libertarian reactions to Polis' fat-state policy desires:


POLIS: "Our economy is strong. From agriculture and outdoor recreation to aerospace, bioscience, energy, and cannabis, we've watched industries succeed and create jobs."

LIBERTARIANS: Meanwhile, the political class, including Polis, have endeavored mightily to destroy and marginalize industries they don't like, ruining the jobs those sectors supported.

Libertarians call for a free, unfettered market economy and elimination of regulations that stifle growth and eliminate hobs.


POLIS: "We've become a model for how we can put politics aside and work together."

LIBERTARIANS: That's what everyone is afraid of.  Thinking individuals know that whenever politicians agree with one another, your right, liberties, and property are at risk.  Gridlock preserves liberty to some degree.

The only reason that statesmen should put aside differences and work together is to repeal and eliminate the Byzantine layers of law and bureaucracy in Colorado.  The state code could be halved, and no one would die and everyone would benefit.


POLIS: "Despite all of our progress, far too many people are either barely getting by, or falling behind."

LIBERTARIANS: Well, when you increase the tax and regulatory load on taxpayers, some of them break and can no longer keep up.

The cure for that is to eliminate the load on the taxpayer by eliminating taxes.


POLIS: Seeks local government takeover of broadband internet.

LIBERTARIANS: Competing with the private sector is never a good idea.

And what happens when "communities" decide they can disconnect or deplatform individuals or groups who wish to freely exercise their right to freedom of speech or religion?

It's bad enough that private-sector entities sometimes refuse to allow uncensored speech (much of that so-called "private sector" censorship, by the way, is driven by government pressure).

It will be much worse if there is only the government monopoly provider and no other outlet for free speech.  And cost per user will skyrocket, same as with everything else bureaucrats take over.


POLIS: "We [must] address the inequities in our criminal justice system. That means tackling discriminatory practices that make people of color, individuals living with mental illness, and Coloradans experiencing poverty more likely to face incarceration. And it means working to make sure Coloradans who do serve prison or jail time are able to live a dignified and fulfilling life after they've paid their debt to society."

LIBERTARIANS: The biggest single issue looming over criminal justice is the number of nonviolent drug offenders who go through the system.

Libertarians suggest the one reform that would eliminate much of the injustice of our current syustem is to fully decriminalize all victimless crimes, including all recreational drugs, sex work, and gambling.  It's time to end our national experiment with the Progressive Era's national socialist legacy of Prohibition.  Prohibition has been a disaster, costly in both human lives and in expense.  It has decimated several generations of young men in minority communities -- which were revenue-farming targets for law enforcement for decades prior to Prohibition.

Private, consensual behavior is none of the government's business. 

Ending state prosecution of drug and other victimless offenses will eliminate the need for many drug warrior jobs, allowing government employed individuals currently fighting that utterly unwinnable war to seek productive work in the wealth-producing private sector.


POLIS: "[We will introduce] state-funded early childhood education."

LIBERTARIANS: Hasn't government done enough to our children?  In Colorado the average public school spends a little over $10,000 for each child already, and the results are sub-par.  Meanwhile, homeschoolers and private schools continue to outstrip their government indoctrination centers' results.  The real reason for the push to get kids into the government's indoctrination system earlier and earlier is... well, to increase the amount of time the state has to indoctrinate.

The same kind of bureaucrats who can't seem to deliver mail or keep violent criminals locked up should not be trusted around children.


LIBERTARIANS: Polis' budget package coming up on the 15th includes a formal request to provide paid parental leave for all state employees.

He also wants to force the private sector to establish a paid family and medical leave program.

So he's going to make it more expensive for the private sector to pay their own employees, and then he's going make sure they pay for his patronage of Colorado bureaucrats too.

Where does he think that money is going to come from?

Libertarians call for government to stop regulating everything in life.  Whether one's employer provides leave or not is a private matter that should be left to negotiation by employers and employees.

As for leave for government employees, it would cost a lot less if government employees simply left.


POLIS: Wants to lower "the outrageous cost of health care".

LIBERTARIANS: The only way to do that is to get the fickle fingers of bureaucrats completely out of the health care pie.  A good start would be to eliminate the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, end all government funding of or subsidies to the health care industry, and begin eliminating state licensure so that private certification can take over.Perhaps the most laughable of Polis' demands is his proposed "Office of Saving People Money on Health Care".

Maybe this will buck the trend of government agencies being created for a purpose but then having the exact opposite effect in reality (and growing to gargantuan proportions in the process), but that's probably a pipe dream.


POLIS: Wants to "address the appalling costs of prescription drugs", and cites the factoid that "Canada has the same drugs from the same manufacturing plants that we have here in the United States; but often at one-half, one-third, yes, even one-quarter of the cost."

LIBERTARIANS: And the reason for that is Canada's government lets those manufacturers sell their drugs there only at the prices the government sets -- edicts which do not take into account drug development costs.  So when Colorado and other states start buying drugs from Canada and elsewhere at regulated prices, and re-importing them here, expect the pipeline of new life-saving drugs to start drying up.

Polis is just like every other politician in that respect: They are too shallow and ignorant to look for the real reasons why things are the way they are.


POLIS: Wants "good-paying jobs in the clean-energy sector that can never be outsourced."

LIBERTARIANS: This is an example of politicians thinking they have any moral right, or the authority, to pick winners and losers.

What the green energy sector needs is for the government to get completely out of meddling in any kind of energy -- green or not.  Eliminate the subsidies, eliminate the penalties, and protect property rights, and the markets will gravitate towards clean energy just fine and without government help.
Perhaps the most ironic part of Polis' state of the state speech was his twin arguments for spending billions and writing impossible-to-comply-with regulations to mitigate climate change, and forcing a changeover to electric vehicles on the one hand, but then building more and bigger highways.

If Polis really wishes to reduce emissions, then he should be working towards eliminating land-use regulation by localities that force builders to spread out developments further and further away from city centers.  He should also be looking at privatizing infrastructure so that users pay the full cost of building and maintaining it.

In the meantime, one of the methods Polis and populist politicians like him use to "help" get electric vehicles into use is by penalizing the use of fossil fuels.  Libertarians suggest instead getting government out of the way: Don't subsidize or penalize **any** form of energy.

It is also ironic that Polis cited the all-solar coffee shop and windmill plant in his address.  Politicians like Polis, by making mining the minerals needed to build windmills, solar panels, and other tech either impossible or costly.  Which means that mining such minerals goes overseas, where slave and child labor is used and where environmental oversight is lax or nonexistent.

Polis says he wants to "help" businesses of all kinds start, grow, thrive, and create good-paying jobs.  Once again, this means he will attempt to pick economic winners and losers, when the only thing he needs to do is to get government out of the way by eliminating taxes, fees, licenses, permits, and regulations.  This is clearly not what he intends.  He wants to protect the "right" of communities:

"to have a voice when it comes to industrial activities within their borders. It's time for us to take meaningful action to address the conflicts between oil-and-gas drilling operations and the neighborhoods they impact, and to make sure that all of our communities have clean air and water."

"Communities" don't have rights.  Governments don't have rights.  Only individuals do, and only by protecting the right of individuals to do what they wish with their own honestly-acquired property will liberty be preserved.  If a company damages neighboring properties, the solution is to allow those damages to be addressed in court.


POLIS: Wants to "make our tax code more fair, so that we can reduce rates for Colorado families and small businesses. Our tax code gives too much power to the special interests who can afford expensive lobbyists, while forcing ordinary families to pay more. As legislators, I know that many of you find these tax giveaways offensive."

LIBERTARIANS:  Again, this is because previous iterations of Polis have tried to pick winners and losers using the tax code.  Rather than continuing to trifle with who gets the better deal at tax time, the Libertarian Party suggests making all taxpayers the winners by eliminating taxes for all and allowing the private sector to provide better services at lower cost -- and without the free rider problem.

Polis referred to alleged "tax breaks" for this or that group as "tax expenditures".  In other words he assumes every penny of your money actually belongs to government, and if the government deems you worthy of keeping some of it, that's "spending" by the government.  That is a disease just about every politician suffers from.  A name for it might be "Grabitis".

Libertarians think you and everyone else in the private sector own every penny you have earned, saved, and invested; while the leeches of government should not expect a penny.

So yes, Jared -- let's modify the tax code.

By eliminating it.


POLIS: "90 percent of the retailers in our state are small businesses. It's time to cap the vendor fee, which is a giveaway to the largest and most profitable retailers in the nation, and use the savings to lower rates, which will benefit small businesses and millions of working Coloradans."

LIBERTARIANS: Again, Polis wants to use the tax code to pick winners and losers.  But the only way to level the playing field is to abolish the vendor fee (tax) altogether.

POLIS: Wants to implement "true tax reform that reduces taxes for hardworking Coloradans instead of giving breaks to special interests while forcing families to pay more."

Families pay all taxes.  No corporation pays one cent of tax -- because taxes for corporations are just one more expense of doing business.  If you buy a loaf of bread one day for $1.00, and the next day a new $1.00 per loaf tax takes effect, that family will then have to pay $2.00 for the same loaf of bread.

Libertarians want an "economy where Coloradans from all walks of life don't just get by, but thrive," same as Polis said he wants.

But the difference between Polis and Libertarians is Polis wants you to believe he can wave his wand and do that by saddling Coloradans with higher taxes and more regulation; while Libertarians would eliminate barriers to producing wealth and improving one's lot in life.


POLIS: He says he "will work tirelessly to make our state work better for you - so that you can earn a good living and share in our special way of life. And I know that this Legislature will do the same, because every single one of us wants to see every single Coloradoan succeed. A Colorado for all."

LIBERTARIANS: What he doesn't say:
  • Except oil workers, whose industry is slowly being restricted into oblivion.
  • Except the poor, who are being displaced rapidly from their homes due to escalating real estate taxes.
  • Except gun owners, who are being threatened with confiscation.
  • Except for antique car hobbyists, who are being regulated and harassed out of working on their own cars.
  • Except for Republicans, Libertarians, Constitutionalists, and other political minorities.
  • Except for the victims of police shootings and beatings.
  • Except for those who believe Freedom of Association is an inalienable right.
  • Except for those who say unpopular things.
  • Except for people in alternative relationships, like polyamory.
  • Except for singles.
Polis asked a few rhetorical questions.

Which, unfortunately for him, are easy to answer.

POLIS: "Will our ideas be good for Colorado?"

LIBERTARIANS: Nope.  His ideas will mean more job security for bureaucrats, and more looting from taxpayers.

POLIS: "Will they reduce health care costs?"

LIBERTARIANS: No.  Polis' "solution" for health-care costs are no different than any other worshiper of state meddling.  They will increase costs and make the health-care system even more difficult for patients to navigate.

POLIS: "Will they improve our schools and help our kids get a strong start?"

LIBERTARIANS: No.  Schools will continue to deteriorate and leave students further behind homeschoolers, private schools, and the rest of the world.

POLIS: "We all agree that every child deserves a great education, so let's start there."
LP: Excellent idea.  A terrific start would be to begin transitioning government indioctrination centers by selling them to parents.

POLIS: [Detailed a long laundry lists of things he wants to burp forth using other people's money.]

: Sigh.

In summary, Polis is just another in a long line of tax-spend-regulate-subsidize-suppress-penalize political hacks who think they have any moral right to govern the affairs of private individuals.

Libertarians suggest an alternative to politics-as-usual:

  • Get government out of the way.
  • Eliminate taxes.
  • Stop allowing localities within the state to violate individual rights; including property rights.
  • Slash spending.
  • Eliminate government jobs.
  • Abolish regulation.
  • Repeal all all unconstitutional regulation of freedom of speech, conscience, religion, expression, and Freedom of Association.
  • Privatize government functions.
  • Allow the private sector to work.
  • Leave people free to improve their own station in life, and don't penalize them for doing so.
  • Get government out of education.
  • Cease all regulation of private, consensual behavior.
  • Eliminate all state laws that compromise citizens' rights as protected by the Bill of Rights; particularly the 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments.
And leave us the hell alone.
Vote Libertarian * 800-ELECT-US *
Creative Commons License------------------------------------------------------------
Written by Marc Montoni <>, January, 2019.  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
For more information about the Radical Caucus, see or see the Facebook group  .