BC Libertarian Anderson in first election

Anderson joins Cowichan Valley race as Libertarian candidate - News - Robert Barron, Cowichan Valley Citizen:

February 1, 2017 - "The Libertarian Party has a candidate running in the Cowichan Valley for the provincial election in May.

"James Anderson, a plumber and gas fitter who lives and works in the Valley, said this is his first time running in an election campaign.

"Anderson, 35, said he decided to throw his hat in the ring because he’s growing increasingly concerned about how the government is treating its citizens.... 'People’s liberties and personal freedoms like free speech are under attack, public spending is out of control, and I think it’s time something is done about these issues,' Anderson said.

"'I’m a firm believer in the philosophy that says if you’re not harming anyone, you should feel free to live your life as you see fit and not be dictated to by government bureaucrats.'

"Anderson said the Libertarian Party is the only viable option for people looking to take back control from the traditional political parties.

"He said he and the party are committed to lowering taxes by reducing the unnecessarily large size of government, reducing the amount of red tape associated with running a business and limiting government control over how people live their lives and use their own property.

"'The party promotes the values that I hold,' Anderson said.

"'I want to be a voice of reason in a crowded room full of people trying to decide how you should live your life.'"

http://www.cowichanvalleycitizen.com/news/412346083.html
'via Blog this'

FEC handled debates challenge 'contrary to law' judge rules

Federal Judge Issues Blistering Ruling Against the FEC - IVN.us:

February 3, 2017 - "In blunt and highly critical language, a federal judge on Wednesday blasted the Federal Election Commission (FEC).... In her 28-page decision, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan said that, in rejecting a complaint by Level the Playing Field, a group seeking to change the rules for participation in the final fall debates, the FEC had acted in a manner that was 'contrary to law.'

"The FEC was the defendant in the case, but the real villain in the story is the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), a private organization that is dominated by Democratic and Republican party stalwarts.

"The CPD’s rules – mainly the 15% threshold late in the election cycle for admission — have effectively excluded independent candidates from participating in the September and October debates, thus denying them the chance to become president — even though polls clearly show Americans want that choice.

"The lawsuit by Level the Playing Field (LPF) provided evidence that the CPD’s board members, contrary to the law, were acting as partisans through donations, fundraisers, and public pronouncements. The suit also offered studies by experts that showed that it was practically impossible for independents to meet the threshold set by the CPD for inclusion in the debates....

"The FEC blithely dismissed challenges and recommendations by LPF, so the non-profit, founded by scholar-businessman Peter Ackerman, member of the executive committee of Atlantic Council’s board of directors and the former chairman of Freedom House, filed a lawsuit in September 2014. The suit was later joined by the Libertarian and Green parties....

"The judge concluded by ordering the FEC to 'reconsider the evidence and allegations and issue a new decision consistent with this Opinion within 30 days.' Otherwise, she wrote, the plaintiffs 'may bring…a civil action to remedy the violation involved in the original complaint.'

She also ordered the FEC to 'reconsider the Petition for Rulemaking' that the plaintiffs had requested and 'issue a new decision consistent with this Opinion within sixty days'....

"She blasted the FEC for its 'refusal to engage in thoughtful, reasoned decision-making in either enforcement or rulemaking in this case.' She called the FEC’s factual and legal analyses “threadbare,” and she said that ... in this case, 'the court cannot defer to the FEC’s analysis and further concludes that the FEC acted arbitrarily and capriciously and contrary to law when it determined that the CPD did not endorse, support, or oppose political parties in the 2012 election.'"

Read more: https://ivn.us/2017/02/03/federal-judge-issues-blistering-ruling-fec/ 'via Blog this'

Trump era is libertarians' opportunity

Donald Trump and the Libertarian Future - Hit & Run : Reason.com - Nick Gillespie & Veronique de Rugy:

January 20, 2017 - "Donald Trump is nobody's idea of a libertarian but his presidency provides a tremendous opportunity to advance libertarian policies, outcomes, and aspirations in our politics and broader culture. Those of us who believe in reducing the size, scope, and spending of the federal government and expanding the autonomy, opportunities, and ability of people to live however they choose should welcome the Trump era. That's not because of the new president's agenda but because he enters office as the man who will inevitably close out a failing 20th-century model of governance....

"Trump enters the White House with historically low approval ratings. This is not merely his fault by any stretch. His Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, was similarly distrusted, a reflection of broad loss of faith not in this or that candidate but the entire political system and especially the two major parties, Congress, and most parts of the federal government. Our declining faith and confidence in government are direct results of failures in government to deliver what it promises and, as a majority has long believed, a belief that it is trying to do too much. Trump is coming after not just eight years of an imperial presidency but 16 years of such behavior. For the entirety of the 21st century, the White House has been occupied by men who consistently arrogated more and more power to themselves, often only advancing their complex and self-serving legal arguments in secret or amongst their own advisers.

"Trump's bullying personality, seemingly boundless egotism, and personal vindictiveness simply pour gasoline on the fire that is already lit. Serious conservatives and, at least temporarily, many conventional liberals have a heightened appreciation of limiting government power, especially in the executive branch. From secret kill lists to limitless surveillance to an endless list of presidential orders on everything from workplace rules to immigration, Obama 'leaves a loaded gun in the Oval Office' for his successor....

"Washington is broke, unpopular, and dysfunctional. The only important question is what will come next. Clearly, we need a government that spends less and does less but also appeals to most Americans of whatever ideological persuasion. We know what sort of operating system has improved our commercial, cultural, and personal lives: It's one that flows directly from libertarian ideas about maximizing options for individuals and the groups they form.... The trick, of course, is to translate that live-and-let live ethos, the cornucopia model into politics and government, which by definition precludes exit. Here, Trump's brashness and divisiveness is forcing all of us to realize government isn't and can't be all things to all people without endless conflict....

"By a two-to-one margin (60 percent to 30 percent), Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, a dread that was energized by the two main choices for president offered us in 2016.... A future in which government is disrupted and diminished — and individuals are empowered and enlivened — is possible, but only if we make it happen." "

Read more: http://reason.com/blog/2017/01/20/donald-trump-and-the-libertarian-future
'via Blog this'

Alt.right or SJW? No.

No One Wins in the Alt-Right vs. SJW Conflict - Being Libertarian - Remso W. Martinez:

January 29, 2017 - "We often fall into the trap of binary thinking which forces us to make a decision as to who we side with, buying into something wholesale for the sake of avoiding being excluded. Trump or Clinton? Nationalist or Globalist (two very undefined terms even the people throwing them around can’t properly define)? Social Justice Warriors or Alt-Right? This rationalization takes away individualism from people and stirs up antipathy with communities that otherwise could have a proper discussion.

"The Alt-Right is an ill-tempered movement of people that feel victimized, ignored, abused, and are fighting for attention. Their tactics include shaming, bullying, and ruthlessness that they justify with a sense of moral righteousness.

"Social Justice Warriors are an ill-tempered movement of people that feel victimized, ignored, abused, and are fighting for attention. Their tactics include shaming, bullying, and ruthlessness that they justify with a sense of moral righteousness.

"Do you see a difference in either description? If you did, go back and read it over and over again. There is no moral relativist claim to make though; both side’s arguments aren’t null. Just because I criticize one more than the other doesn’t mean the other is less problematic or occupies the moral high ground....

"Everyone spends so much time combating each other, no one spends time on anything substantial. Milo Yiannopoulis is popular because he brings up controversy, and sometimes controversy is necessary to bring attention to things no one talks about, but there is a fine line between trying to be a reformer and being a jerk just for the sake of it. Yeah, Milo never punched anyone, but his behavior has caused more polarization than anything.

"The Alt-Right and the SJW’s want you to pick sides, and I for one pick neither because both are full of crap. They both want you to conform to their thoughts and feelings and if you don’t they will slander, attack, and villainize you for the crime of being an individual. This isn’t a binary option; you can be a reformer without being a fire thrower or internet troll.

"Violence breeds violence, agitation brings out the worst in everyone, and in this cultural conflict there is no winner as long as everyone just wants to roll over each other."

Read more: https://beinglibertarian.com/no-one-wins-alt-right-vs-sjw-conflict/
'via Blog this'

Tenants may have sold drugs, so gov't seizes rental units from owner

John Robson: Ontario’s brutal assault on a good couple, which it never even bothered to accuse of a crime | National Post:

January 10, 2017 - "Canadians have rights, don’t they? We love our Charter and the robust, even convoluted, legal system that surrounds it. Yet increasingly we live in a fools’ paradise because one of the worst things that can happen to us is to be sucked into precisely the elaborate legal system we think protects us.

"This point was driven home for me, horribly, at a Canadian Constitution Foundation conference on Law and Freedom in Toronto last weekend. I was there to talk about the surprisingly encouraging 'Comeau' court ruling that we can buy beer and take it home even from (ugh) another province.... But this matter, or the apparently endless procedural wrangling in the CCF challenge to B.C.’s restrictive health-care law, is nothing to a tragic case described at the conference that, I confess, I was not aware of.

"It concerns the Reillys, a couple dedicated to helping the unfortunate who tailored two of their Orillia rental properties to low-income people with often chaotic lives. The Reillys were the sort of landlords who would personally drive carless tenants to the grocery store and to addiction counselling sessions.

"So in 2008 the police alleged drug-dealing at these two properties. Furthermore, they said some rent was paid from drug profits. And under Ontario’s soothingly named Civil Forfeiture Act, the “Director of Asset Management” seized the Reilly’s two properties as the 'proceeds' and possibly 'instruments' of crime.

"The Reillys were never charged with anything. It was never suggested that they were involved in drug trafficking. Moreover, despite deep sympathy for their tenants’ sometimes disorderly lives they had evicted more than 50 for dangerous behaviour and tried without success to have others evicted for drug use....

"No tenant was even arrested in connection with this seizure. The state never proved that the Reillys ignored any crime, let alone condoned or quietly profited from it. It just swooped because what Juggernaut wants, Juggernaut takes, casually crushing the Reillys in the process.

"They sold all their other properties to pay legal bills and mortgaged their home. Their marriage broke down. They are elderly and their lives are destroyed. And the case is far from over. Indeed the contested properties, badly dilapidated in the tender claws of the state, are being sold without any pettifogging determination whether the seizure was lawful."

Read more: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/john-robson-ontarios-brutal-assault-on-a-good-couple-which-it-never-even-bothered-to-accuse-of-a-crime
'via Blog this'

Ayn Rand and altruism

What Rand Meant by Altruism | Foundation for Economic Education - Gary M. Galles:

January 31, 2017 - "February 2 is best known as Groundhog Day. But it also marks the birth of one of the most praised and criticized thinkers of the past century – Ayn Rand. Rand sold more than 30 million books. Atlas Shrugged has been ranked behind only the Bible as an influence on readers’ lives. She has also been stridently attacked for issues such as her militant atheism. But perhaps least understood has been her full-bore rejection of altruism....

"Altruism has commonly been held up as the standard for moral behavior. But Rand rejected it, asserting it was 'incompatible with freedom, with capitalism, and with individual rights,' and therefore "the basic evil behind today’s ugliest phenomena.'

"That head-on collision arises from French philosopher Auguste Comte, coiner of the term altruism. The altruists.org website says he believed 'the only moral acts were those intended to promote the happiness of others.' Comte’s Catechisme Positiviste asserts that altruism 'gives a direct sanction exclusively to our instincts of benevolence,' and, therefore, 'cannot tolerate the notion of rights, for such a notion rests on individualism.'

"In Comte’s view, any act performed for any reason beyond solely that of advancing someone else’s well-being is not morally justified. That implies taking a tax deduction for a charitable act strips it of its morality.... Something as seemingly innocuous as feeling good about doing good also fails Comte’s joyless standards. Even 'love your neighbor as yourself' fails his unlimited duty of altruism....

Rand’s 'virtue of selfishness' was a response to Comte’s demand for complete selflessness. Not only is a requirement for everyone to completely disregard themselves an unattainable ideal, it is self-contradictory. You cannot possibly sacrifice yourself fully for me, while I am also sacrificing myself fully for you. And if no one has any intrinsic value, why would the results, even if possible, be meritorious? With Comte as a starting point, more attention to people’s own well-being – more selfishness, in Rand’s terminology – is the only way to move toward recognizing value in each individual and significance in each life.

"Comte’s conception of altruism is also inconsistent with liberty, which was Ayn Rand’s focus. The duty to put others first at all times and in all circumstances denies self-ownership and the power to choose that derives from it. Everyone else maintains never-ending presumptive claims on every individual, overriding any rights they may have. In contrast, benevolence involves voluntary choices to benefit others of one’s own choosing, in ways and to the extent individuals choose for themselves.... The key distinction is between benevolence’s individual discretion, which recognizes our rights over ourselves and our resources, and altruism’s unconditional requirement to always sacrifice for others.

"An omnipresent duty of self-sacrifice also makes people vulnerable to manipulation by those who disguise power over others as 'really' a means to attain some noble goal. The desire to sacrifice for the good of others can be transformed into the requirement to sacrifice to the desires of leaders."

Read more: https://fee.org/articles/no-ayn-rand-did-not-want-us-to-be-selfish/?utm_medium=push&utm_source=push_notification
'via Blog this'

Tennessee Libertarians against gas tax hike

Libertarians against gas tax - Omar Yusuf, Jackson Sun:

January 30, 2017 - "Libertarian Party of Madison County chair Corbin Brown was confused when he heard about Gov. Bill Haslam’s gas tax proposal.

"Brown said the state’s $800 million-plus surplus makes the proposal unnecessary.

"'This is one more way for the government to take which does not belong to them,' Brown said. 'It’s our money they are taking away from us.'

"Earlier this month, Haslam proposed a 7-cents-per-gallon increase on gasoline to the state’s gas tax and a 12-cents-per-gallon increase on diesel. If approved, it would be the first time since 1989 Tennessee has raised its gas tax....

"The Libertarian Party was founded in 1971. According to their party platform, Libertarians strongly oppose any government interference into personal, family and business decisions. They believe all Americans should be free to live their lives and pursue their interests as long as they do not harm one another.

"Libertarian Gary Johnson ran for president of the United States in 2012 and 2016. Johnson received more than four million votes in the 2016 election.

"Tennessee has two Libertarian elected officials. Wallace Redd in Clarksville City Council, Ward 4, and Mike Sexton, Union County Commissioner in District 6.... Jesse Fullington is running as a Libertarian for state representative in the 79th District....

"'When you’re driving, spending more money at the pump, it costs more money to move things around,' Fullington said. 'Can you name one thing not transported without fuel? By the nature of raising transportation costs, it’s going to raise the value of the product. So groceries might be cheaper tax wise, but they will be more expensive. It either balances out and hits zero or the increase in the value of the product is going to be more than what the tax was to begin with'....

"If the Libertarian Party does not get at least 34,000 signatures in the state of Tennessee before the summer of 2018, all their Tennessee candidates, including Fullington, will have to run as independents during the 2018 midterm elections."

Read more: http://www.jacksonsun.com/story/news/politics/2017/01/30/libertarians-against-gas-tax/97253266/
'via Blog this'