Dr. Ruwart is correct that an encroaching attitude of elitism may be contributing to a decline in interest in the Libertarian Party. The ironic part is that the quest for contributions is perhaps the reason. Before Angela Keaton self-censored her Anarchist Bitch blog, I left a comment on one of the posts also describing this trend of the LNC in regards to my own experience. As I cannot find that post or a reasonable copy, I'll re-hash the basics and add some other notes after the jump.
Perhaps the loss of Mary Ruwart as the nominee can be reconciled by her election to the LNC. I do find it difficult to just send money when so much of my actual time is given freely, often at the expense of my own self-employed billable hours. After spending close to 15K on my own campaign in 2006, it wasn't that I was unable to donate, but money was tighter for a bit. I was able to offer my time and willingness in regards to fund raising as an LNC member, but between LPHQ staff and the volunteer coordinator no opportunities really arose. But perhaps there was more to it . . .
In November 2006 at the LNC meeting in Alexandria, Target America, pitched the committee with its service. After a pair of corporate slicksters gave a less than motivating (at least for me - I've been to dozens of Intel Channel Conferences and I have only stayed once for the raffle) stump about the secrets of fund raising (neither could reconcile the concept of selling the invisible and our own difference from laudable non-profits and the successful hoards of those who choose to enter the pluralism of the American system which strictly plays with the Blue & Red) we actually heard from the CEO who was a self-professed Republican hoping for a better choice in the future.
Despite a series of reasonable assurances that the company was not violating any real aspect of privacy due to the nature and dearth of public information, it still had a funny smell. After Aaron Starr preened about his success in fund raising so far and Angela Keaton shared her own experiences, I was perfectly willing to give it shot if this slicksterware was worth its salt. We were told that the volunteer coordinator would contact us and make all the pertinent arrangements. I told Dan Karlan and Hardy Machia that I'd be more than happy to work the NYC and Boston circuit. Both agreed to go along on any such foray and we all seemed satisfied with the possibilities and tentative arrangements. When I saw Hardy up at the Liberty Forum in NH that February, neither of us had been contacted about any such actual meetings. There seemed to be at least one call, perhaps in December and it seemed like the result of which was an agreement to start up after the holidays.
At least some portion of that conversation related to the ease of finding potential donors in California. Starr and Keaton had an advantage in so much that more or most of the donors tracked there. Of course my hope was that being equidistant between Boston and NYC would allow a similar opportunity to do well for the committee, especially in comparison to those who might not have immediate access to a fertile pool of potential donors.
Of course by Spring, my days are consumed with the prospect of good weather and outdoor activity. I'm not apt to pine away over all those missed donor meetings. To be sure, when asked about my goals for fund raising, I had no qualms or reservations about saying that two million was my goal. Just get me some donors . . .
By the July 2007 meeting in Pittsburgh, it was clear there was a problem with the program. Even Bob Barr mumbled that the follow-up from the volunteer coordinator was not forthcoming. This time listening to Starr coo about his own success and urging everyone to try a little harder was more annoying than Alexandria (I missed the Florida meeting in the Spring) but slightly less than absurd than his obnoxious insistence that our former Presidential nominee needed to 'get a job' in order to satisfy the outstanding eighty five hundred debt his Congressional committee owed the LNC. After handing out a ballot for the platform nominees who in fact 'followed instructions' rather than some seemingly other horrific method to seek the position, my regard for Starr was diminished. Perhaps he was a good bean counter, but hardly the inspirational beacon of Liberty leadership that our little pirate ship needed.
My last pitch was to Cory and one of the LPHQ staffers, perhaps Andrew Davis, it's hard to recall. After our group photo or perhaps the news conference attended by a corps of two of Pittsburgh's finest, I made further plea to get a donor. Outlining my real business and sales experience, I implored both for something between Boston and NYC. There's only so much a fella can do or say at that point.
Sure enough, a conflict arose with the Regional Rep (Machia) that created a last minute (the day before) opportunity for me to give it a try. Of course it required some re-scheduling on my part, but after waiting over a year, it was looking like this might work. Apparently some old codger at a moving company in Yonkers was willing to talk to us. Another guy was right by and killing two birds with one stone looked possible. After setting up the meeting, the coordinator gave me the phone numbers and I tried to confirm the night before. Apparently this wasn't quite protocol, but shifting circumstances and adjustments are normal for me. While I was able to confirm with the second fellow, the mover guy was only given a message and I was told to try again the next day.
From my initial talk with the coordinator this guy was supposed to be quite a character, open, charming, the whole lot. But when I finally did reach him on my way down the next day, it was clear almost immediately that giving money wasn't in the cards for him. After agreeing our time was indeed mutually valuable, I wished him luck on some unpublished book he was pushing and whatever followers he was seeking at the same time. Pure unadulterated whack job at the end of his days . . . some real vetting should have been occurring at this point.
I had a pleasant enough lunch with the next guy and we shared some ideas about the electorate and politics. He was in favor of the war and there was some warning (they gave me a short data sheet) about his stance on abortion, but I couldn't gather which side he was on. Turns out he thought the LP was too tepid about asserting reproduction rights (my position too), but it took almost the whole lunch before I could ascertain it. He agreed to donate and never did. Part of it seemed to be the practical New Yorker thing. He thought Giuliani's health care seemed reasonable and we both acknowledged that privacy was certainly an issue with regard to how the LNC was conducting these donor meetings.
I write this as a critique of the program and some of the prevailing attitude, not so much in the air of anger, but disappointment. As a self described anarchist I know its hard for most to contemplate the possibility that other real world core competencies are present on a day to day basis within such a soul. But they do exist, despite my all too often misgivings and ruminations about the relevancy or legitimacy of the 'state'. While I wasn't contemplating a dismissal of principle at any point, it would have been nice to be given more options and opportunities in this arena. I was willing to play the game for the sake of going and getting along.
I share Dr. Ruwart's ruminations about the program and the dismay over the flagrant and ostentatious display of crass money totals for LNC representatives on the website. If anything it suggests a bush league quality, let alone totals. Terry McCuliffe or Roger Stone would have a field day with the pathetic aspects of it, if there was any possibility that the LP threatened them. After I agreed to be the Alternate for Region 7 in Portland, I was quite surprised when Pat Dixon presented an envelope to me asking for a donation at the closing dinner. Many at the table expressed an ability and interest to do so, as I embarrassingly shelled out the last twenty in my pocket. An opportunity was missed by not asking others and focusing solely on the new members of the star chamber.
Chuck Moulton couldn't figure out why I might resign over the letter Aaron Starr authorized last winter urging members to donate based on a call for Ron Paul to seek our nomination. At the time I thought it was fraudulent and misleading and nobody seemed to care. It was then I realized that acting as a wallflower on the LNC and not making any waves was the goal and purpose of the reforming attitude in the leadership, put up or shut up you anarchist babies! As I listened to Platform Committee members grumble about 'credibility' in their potential Presidential candidates (at the Vegas LSLA) and was grateful that I dodged that inevitable aneurysm had I stayed, it came as no surprise to me that so many were enamored by the prospect of a infomercial bookie as their standard bearer.
Money is important in politics. But it's not the end all in a quirky third party traditionally hung up on everything involving Liberty. While I'm not out to declare the end of the LP and appreciate all the money spent by the LNC on the the recent LPNY petition drive, it would be nice to see a convergence of both the possibility of financial success and the advocacy for freedom. Purging the anarchist flank is not smart politics within the party. Ardent and enthusiastic activists are not easy to come by. If the 'leadership' is adversely affected by a credibility gap generated by a false rating, this is problematic. Viciously slurring fellow members as povertarians in a quest for some silly presumption that victory is possible or necessary is not a solution. It's emotional cue to a certain clique to be sure, I'm happy a stalwart and respected member of the party is speaking out so intelligently in that matter.
It occurs to me to mention two things.
First, the people who go to the national conventions of the two major parties, the Demolishers and the Repugnants, are very wealthy on average. These are elite power parties of the well-connected, wealthy, and vested interested. So, it is possible to run a party on such an elitist basis. But, where is the party for the rest of us, who aren't especially well off, or thoroughly wealthy? I think the average Repugnant delegate to the RNC makes on the order of $500K per year, and the average Demolisher delegate on the order of $400K per year, but these are based on figures from 1992 inflation adjusted in my mind. Possibly some news organisation can get the accurate numbers and supply them for this controversy.
Second, it is very clear that Ron Paul raised on the order of $30 million from on the order of 300,000 or so contributors providing about $100 each. (300 000 * 100 = 30 000 000) So, it is possible for someone who is regarded as having high integrity to appeal to a very broad base of support. It evidently doesn't take a lot of money to make a $100 contribution, as Dr. Paul's donors were from all walks of life. Many are students, and the international symbol for poverty is an icon of a student.
I'm not saying that Ron Paul is a libertarian, though he once represented the LP as its candidate. Nor am I suggesting that he be nominated by the LP ever again. What I am saying is that he has provided a case study in what can be done with a broad base of support from "povertarians" amongst others.
In my own view, I think the integrity thing really matters. Which is, of course, why people like Redpath or Starr would have to write off this approach, given their behavior over the last two years as I see it. They may well be right in thinking that their only option is to sleaze it up with the elitists they can find.
But that doesn't mean that libertarians have to be rich to have influence. In about ten or twelve days, Ron Paul's enthusiasts are going to meet in Minnesota at their big rally. Evidently, quite a few of them are still contributing to his cause. Maybe libertarians can draw the right lessons from his campaign for liberty?
This weekend, I have the honor of asking the national committee of The Boston Tea Party to approve our eleventh state affiliate, in California. Our voter's guide now lists 21 candidates for public office, most of them members of the LP.
The Boston Tea Party is experimenting with a national party organisation that has no money. Our bylaws prevent us from raising any. Tom Knapp's insights include the thought that all the ballot access and political recognition takes place at the state level, so why create another national group with a big (if a few million dollars may be regarded as big) budget to corrupt things? I'm not sure we'll be successful, but it is a heck of an experiment.
Perhaps the LP can be the corrupt elitist political party that some in its leadership seek. I know that doesn't sit well with many Libertarian Party stalwarts. And I wish y'all well in fixing your party, returning it to its roots of principle and decency. Good luck.
Eric,
They are just trying to psych us out.
What does a rich attractive member of the Reform Caucus have in common with a unicorn? Yeah.
Keaton/Shinghal '08
http://ladyliberty.wordpress.com/2008/05/28/home-from-denver-and-rested/.
Jim, it will be at least 14 days before the pics.