Nicholas Sarwark: Open Letter to Muslim Republicans

sarwark

December 15, 2015

Dear Muslim Republicans,

I share your outrage and hurt at Donald Trump’s recent comments and policy suggestions about Muslims. I share your outrage and hurt that he still is polling well among Republicans. I share your outrage and hurt that we should even have to discuss such matters. But obviously we do.

Freedom of religion is one of our most sacred American values, protected by our Constitution. Never should someone be disparaged, profiled, or have their rights infringed upon because of their religious faith. Republicans like to talk a good game about our Constitution but, clearly, many are making an exception when it comes to religious liberty. This is quite sad and it is this kind of double standard that has caused so many liberty-loving people to leave the Republican Party and find a better home in the Libertarian Party.

If you have not previously considered the Libertarian Party, I encourage you to do so now. We are an extremely diverse group of people who are passionate about liberty…about all rights, of all people, all the time. We do not denigrate or disparage any group. We respect the humanity of all people and their rights to make their own decisions about their lives. Simply put: Libertarianism is the idea that every person has the right to pursue happiness in any way they wish as long as it doesn’t hurt people or take their stuff.

I know many of your families have fled repressive regimes abroad in search of peace, prosperity, and liberty in the United States. I hope you have found good things here. No country is perfect and recent weeks have reminded us of that. But I maintain that, despite our imperfections, the United States is one of the best places on the planet for liberty-loving people. Our Constitution does protect your rights, and it will continue to. And Libertarians nationwide always will stand with you also, advocating your rights and the rights of all people to live freely.

Friend, if you find that the Republican Party continues to disparage you, please consider a home in the Libertarian Party where we respect all rights, of all people, all the time.

Nicholas Sarwark
Chair, Libertarian National Committee


Paid for by the Libertarian National Committee
1444 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314
Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee
.

30 thoughts on “Nicholas Sarwark: Open Letter to Muslim Republicans

  1. Caryn Ann Harlos

    There are interesting responses/reactions to this by Lieberman and Katz in the LNC votes list.

  2. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I knew there would be! That’s why I posted this many places. 😉

    I love this piece, especially coming out on the day of the debate.

  3. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    They’re okay for me. I’ll re-post them when I get to my office in about half an hour. Maybe the images will work better from a different browser.

  4. Robert Capozzi

    ns: Republicans like to talk a good game about our Constitution but, clearly, many are making an exception when it comes to religious liberty.

    me: Not the only exception, sadly.

  5. georgephillies

    On a similar note

    An open letter to the people of Massachusetts, from George Phillies, Chair, Libertarian Party of Massachusetts:

    Editor:

    Eight decades ago, the Germans launched a war on Judaism. Synagogues were destroyed. Jewish newspapers were silenced. Jews had special ID cards.

    Now Republican Presidential candidates want to move forward to the past. Marco Rubio would close mosques, cafes, and internet sites. Ben Carson wants government spies in mosques, schools, press corps, and churches. Donald Trump asks Americans to spy on their neighbors. Ted Cruz would ban Moslem immigration. Trump and Carson call for torture via waterboarding.

    Trump, Carson, Rubio, and Cruz are four of a kind. They reject our Constitution. They campaign against our Bill of Rights.

    It is time for good Republicans to flee their party. Republicans: Your party’s Presidential candidates are not the party of Eisenhower, Goldwater, Romney, or the first George Bush. You have only one patriotic road to take. Abandon ship! Abandon ship now! Find or form a different political party, a party true to our country’s traditions. Please consider the Libertarians. We stand for peace, freedom, prosperity, and Massachusetts social tolerance.

    George Phillies
    Worcester, MA

    –30–

    George Phillies
    Chair, Libertarian Party of Massachusetts
    48 Hancock Hill Drive
    Worcester MA 01609
    508 754 1859
    phillies@4liberty.net

    The Libertarian Party of Massachusetts is Massachusetts’ oldest and largest third party. Founded in 1972, the Libertarian Party stands for social tolerance, small government, the whole Bill of Rights, and an end to foreign wars of intervention. For more information: http://LPMASS.org

  6. Matt Cholko

    I’ve gotta say, the rhetoric among most of the Republican POTUS candidates, and many Rs at all levels, is really disturbing. I can’t think of any time in my life where the racism and hatred has been so blatant, among major political figures. I’m disgusted.

  7. Andy Craig

    Muslim Americans used to be a Republican constituency. Bush made a targeted outreach effort to them in 2000, and won a majority of them, as did his father and Reagan. It wasn’t until the post-9/11 rise of popular Islamophobia that Muslims were driven away from the GOP. They aren’t as small in number as people assume, either. In 20 states, Islam is the largest non-Christian religious affiliation. They are, give or take, about as numerous as America’s Jewish population.

    You also see this shift away from the GOP with Arab-Americans, most of whom are Christian and not Muslim. John Sununu. Justin Amash. Darrel Issa. There are lot of famous (non-Muslim, mostly) Arab-American Republicans. But as a voting demographic, they too went from lean-Republican to lean-Democrat over the past decade and a half. To a lesser degree, this also happened with Latinos. They didn’t lean Republican, but they were much more evenly divided with Bush get 40% vs. McCain/Romney’s ~15%.

    It’s a demographic reality on the presidential level, that the GOP’s base keeps getting whiter and more Christian in a country that isn’t. Romney and Reagan both won the same ~60% of white voters. Reagan won all but one state, Romney lost. It’s as simple as that. Not that I see this as even remotely a bad thing. It’s the main reason I’m not too worried about Trump (or any of the other potential GOP nominees, really) winning the general election 2016. Case in point against the crypto-racists who plead that preserving white Americans voting majority is necessary for “liberty”– by which is really just meant “tend to vote Republican.”

    Jesse Jackson’s “Rainbow Coalition” might have become a bit of a joke, a by-word for his antics in general, but as a strategy it was really ahead of its time and very prescient. It’s the only way the Democrats have won presidential elections since then, as a genuinely trans-racial coalition of white liberals and minorities, and the only two the Republicans have won have been when they managed a halfway-decent attempt to pull of their own version of it. Bush was only elected on a coalition that manged to keep him over 40% of the non-black minority vote. The bean-counters in the GOP know this, too, but they can’t do anything about it when their candidates have to run in a primary where dog-whistle appeals, if not outright white-identity politics, seems to be the only way to compete.

  8. Derrick Michael Reid

    Trump
    He is not hard to figure out.
    He is honest and courageous.
    He exudes confidence and use to command and control.
    He exhibits his psych qualities in a bombastic manner, in line with republican (as well and democrat) pandering, pushing hot buttons, to garner support.
    Cruz though out does trump when it comes to meaningless pander.

    Trump to date has indicated:
    1) deport all illegal immigrants (which necessary mean untold inhumane misery to millions)
    2) bomb ISIS (when he does not know if ISIS is a Saudi mercenary army, under Israel influence, assisted by Turkey, to further US desires to oust Shia Assad, so that the Sunnie oil production can flow to syria, capturing more production in Iraq, in competition with Russia, the neocon arch enemy of imagination)
    3) ban Muslims (when the vast majority of them are tolerant and peaceful)
    4) Negotiate with Putin (when its not about the price of a bag of potatoes, but rather a clash between Russian territorial imperialism and US Military-Industrial-banking-transnational complex desire to penetrate and exploit foreign markets and peoples, that is, its embedded cultural tensions, and not a mere negotiated price, as Trump apparently has no clue how to effectively deal with the Russians)

    I have concluded, as predicted in June 2015, that Trump should not be the president based upon a defective psych profile and lack of intellectual flexibility in dealing with complex cultural, social, military and economic interconnected issues, both domestically and internationally, but he would make a good sec of commerce, that is, put the right man in the right job, for max results.

    The memo this day from LP National was spot on.
    Nickolas Sarwark did an excellent job for LP National. Well Done.
    Here is my response, for whats it worth.

    commentary:

    There is then the problem becoming focused. On one hand, Trump is fear mongering to pander republicans who believe that Muslim immigration should be halted to protect the homeland. The Libertarian Party embraces all people, regardless of national origin or creed, two of the equal protection aspects in the US Constitution. It is true that the Koran, written 1000 years ago, was based upon the spread of Islam by the sword of Mohamed. Muslims do have in a tiny percentage a brutal ideology towards Jihad and Infidels and the spread of Islam, while the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful and tolerant of others. The United Sates is a melting pot. All new comers should assimilate into Americana, of liberty, democracy and free speech. The goal is not to ban Muslims, but to assimilate them, as good citizens, for those who want to come to the US, into Americana culture, so as to teach Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, to make Muslims love America for what it is, a land of liberty. Trump bombastic pronouncements do not solve problems, but are counter-productive to solving ethic and religious problems, and are inherently divisive, pandering and fear mongering, sowing seeds of social strife. The better approach is to screen violent persons, but welcome, teach and assimilate those who want to live in the land of freedom and liberty.

    Very Truly Yours, in Liberty and Freedom,
    Derrick Michael Reid B.S.E.E., J.D.,
    2016 Presidential Candidate, Libertarian Party,
    Engineer, Patent Lawyer, Military Scientist,
    Market Analyst, and Geopolitical Analyst.
    Email: Libereens@yahoo.com
    http://www.totalitariandemocracy.com/

  9. Derrick Michael Reid

    oh, forgot. Trump said he would have everybody saying merry christmas. of course, he spelled out no plan to do just that, but, like Cruz, pushes the religious hot button for the pander that it is. These guys are so obvious, once you understand the DEM/REP pander game, and then you can expose them for the farcical show that they are, and just pick em apart. Cruz has cute kids, a darling wife, prays solemnly, pledges patriotically, and shoots straight. If that guy could kiss a couple thousand babies, the White House is a lock!!

    If you understand their methods, you can understand them for the clowns they truly are.

    You think about this
    20T$ in debt, 50m hungry, 100m unemployed, markets rigged, constitution bastardized, republic dead, money a con job, corruption in congress, all for wealth transfer to top 1%.
    The mismanagement of the country’s affairs is absolutely astounding.
    Now honestly, should not trump fire them all in DC?

  10. langa

    All this recent Muslim-bashing is really just the flip side of the political correctness that we have discussed here on other threads. As I’ve said, they are both examples of trying to scapegoat a particular demographic group, in order to draw attention away from the real issues.

    Left Wing Culture Warrior: “Oh, no, the problem isn’t the laws and institutional biases that protect and encourage police brutality. Nope. It’s those damn white people. They’re all a bunch of hate-filled bigots who want to go back to the days of slavery! That’s the problem!”

    Right Wing Culture Warrior: “Oh, no, the problem isn’t all the bombing and constant meddling that causes blowback. Nope. It’s those damn Muslims. They’re all a bunch of fanatical zealots who are out to establish a global caliphate, and kill all of us infidels! That’s the real problem!”

    Unfortunately, people on both sides of the “culture war” absolutely eat up this kind of drivel.

  11. Derrick Michael Reid

    There is an extreme element in Islam, the extent to which it actually exists is debatable of course. All Muslims I have personally known, are stand up folks. US may be playing Islam, the Jihad, Sharia law, Shia-Sunnie feud, as a ploy to weaken Russia, the supposed global bad guy. We just dont know, what intel BHO gets, the presentation of it from a biased security perspective, and how he reacts to it. There are legitimate concerns about terrorism and sedition against the US Constitution, just as there are legitimate concerns about ignoble foreign policy and mass invasion of constitutional rights. It all plays together in the intel minds. Again, the problem is lack of clarity at state and intelligent police actions.

    This Muslim Terrorism concern is real to some extent, and can not be dismissed totally. While Trump’s ban has a basis, it lacks intelligent methods of accomplishing desired results, ie protecting the home land, and insults 600m world wide and trample on domestic rights and immigrations channels. This issue raises the NSA concern, and their drag net across America, data mining, for example, the phone record collection process violating peoples rights of privacy as an unwarranted intrusion. While I certainly do not know the full extent of current collection technology capabilities, it can be quickly determined, and probable cause safe guards injected, through technology algorithms, so as to minimize invasions of privacy.

    The communications network is vast, comprising of mail, phone, email, FB, twitter, googlesites, inter alia. This network can be quantized and mapped upon a population of 300m in the states as potential communications nodes. Bad guys identified can be monitored for extraordinary communications, which spreads into the US communications space, providing by recurrence, a weighted communications nodal map, for isolating and identifying domestic threats, with sufficient probable cause, yet minimize gross privacy invasions, yet provide a technology communications means of identifying real threats in the US. The engineering mind, applied to politics, in view of legal concepts of legitimate police actions can fashion reasonable technology monitoring means of providing domestic protection, yet minimizes privacy invasions.

    The problem is the mind set of DC, from one perspective, that is, seeking protection at all costs, on one hand, but without a constant regard to constitutional rights, on the other hand, but what else would you expect from a totalitarian socialistic fascist government that sits in DC enslaving us all as tax mules, perpetual debtor and state dependents, so as to enrich the top 1%?

  12. Shane

    That letter just made the LP sound like the apex of political correctness.

    We “respect” the rights of everyone on everything? The fuck we do. We tolerate.

    Islam doesn’t respect much of anything aside from SOME Muslims. Everyone else are Infidels. Their religion AND system of government (twofer with Islam) is at total odds with libertarian philosophy. It’s the ultimate statist religion.

    Regardless, the letter published above is just dumb as it will do absolutely nothing for the party aside from making the LP look like a bunch of pandering clowns.

    If you want media attention, talk about relevant and current issues. Come up with better solutions and play the media game by bashing candidates with quotes that are entertaining and will be picked up.

    Only Jeb is willing to take on Trump which leaves a HUGE vacuum of critics and the media would love to see someone brave enough to step forward and throw barbs.

    Trump is leading because he’s a circus. He’s entertaining. So the LP needs to do the same while not looking like tin-foil wearing wierdos that pander to anyone that’s politically homeless — which is sadly the truth.

  13. Derrick Michael Reid

    if I may.

    There are basically 4 tiers of personal association.

    Tolerance, to act towards another without hostility (no gay bashing for example)
    Respect, to act toward another with civility (good morning, greetings, best of luck)
    Acceptance, to allow another into a personal friendly relation (freedom of association)
    Approval, a mental state approving of the conduct of another. (freedom of thought)

    Our constitution mandates or attempts to achieve between citizens tolerance and respect towards one another to insure “domestic tranquility”, which is civil discourse.

    Tolerance and Respect for others is key to the Libertarian Party platform, rightly so.

    Acceptance and Approval are individual aspects that should not be attempted to achieve by intolerance and disrespect of others, the my-way-or-highway approach, that leads to social strife, not “domestic tranquility”.

    Citizens of different faiths, races, gender, sexual orientation, etc, can be tolerant and respectful of each other without being required to accept or approve, yet provide “domestic tranquility”.

    Political panderers push hot buttons to mobilize bases for votes upon unconstitutional grounds, to cement political power, usually under presupposed rights that are not, using various constituencies as mere tools, to achieve their ends, which results in social strife and conflict, contrary to the purpose of the constitution.

  14. paulie

    Tina Kelly told me last night this letter got 3 new activists for the Oklahoma LP already.

    Great job Nick, keep up the good work!

  15. Shane

    “Political panderers push hot buttons to mobilize bases for votes upon unconstitutional ground”?!?

    Unconstitutional grounds? Seriously? Do you just write things without thinking of the meaning of your words?

    People who campaign mobilize bases around issues or personalities. That’s politics. Whine all you want about the process and you’ll be left with a bucket of whines and nothing else.

    Judging by your site, you’re just another half-whacked nerd that unfortunately will be allowed on stage at the convention despite clearly being mental. Another Imperato, Jingozian, etc. — but with a few more turns to the left on the screw head.

    Annnnd . . . back to candidate recruitment. When is the LNC going to form a committee distanced from the operations of the body that will recruit a few decent presidential candidates?

    Otherwise we’ll get stuck with these dudes walking out of their grandma’s basement who think they’re going to be the next POTUS.

    Back at the old Watergate office, homeless people would wander into the office asking for an application to be president. The crazy ones would call in.

    If I had handed those people over to the LNC, half would have ended up at convention running for the nomination.

    The chair should call up Derrick and did what I did which was ask, “Dude, are you insane? No, that’s a serious question . . . What makes you think you’re qualified to run for president? Do you have $40m burning a whole in your pocket?”

    The response: stutter, stutter, bumble, mumble, click.

    Just as the letter above, the party and its leaders have become too PC to tell it like it is. That’s pathetic. We’re libertarians and it’s time to start acting like libertarians.

    If a nut-nerd like Derrick wants to run, fine but at least put the dude to the test with a bit of confrontation.

  16. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Shane said: “tin-foil wearing wierdos that pander to anyone that’s politically homeless” (referring to the LP).

    Clearly you’ve been under a rock somewhere and haven’t heard how utterly over-the-top and downright horrifying the fear-mongering and hatred directed toward Muslims has been. The people doing the hating rarely stop to distinguish between the small percent of extremists and everyone else who is Muslim. I believe Sarwark’s letter was appropriate and well-timed. If I was a Muslim Republican, you bet I’d be looking for a new political party. Outreach is one of our main purposes, in my view.

  17. Shane

    And Jill, you’ve been stuck in the insignificant world of the LP far too long to know how party dynamics work with the GOP and DNC.

    Party cheerleaders regardless of their personal demographic find a way to justify the words of their favorite candidates and others don’t put the words of the “rogue” candidates on the party apparatus. They look to Jeb or another establishment candidate who don’t use the extreme language and support them.

    Why jump to the LP when others in their own party give them reason to stay?

    All of the candidates agree that radical Muslims are the once killing people. And that’s true. Only a handful apply bias toward all of Islam. Trump who is not the establishment candidate is the worst offender and why internally the RNC is scrambling to get rid of him.

    Keep on acting like a blind republican in your defense of the LP and you’ll actually be worse than them because you don’t have a clue on how to build support and win elections.

    If an open letter read by few is your idea of effort, keep up the work because it’s exactly what the two parties need from you to keep them in power.

  18. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Shane said: “Keep on acting like a blind republican in your defense of the LP”

    This is the most nonsensical phrase of the day so far. Congrats!

    Also,”if an open letter read by few is your idea of effort”

    You say that as if it’s the LP’s only effort. That, of course, is wrong.

  19. Robert Capozzi

    shane: Islam doesn’t respect much of anything aside from SOME Muslims. Everyone else are Infidels. Their religion AND system of government (twofer with Islam) is at total odds with libertarian philosophy. It’s the ultimate statist religion.

    me: Very disappointing statement. One can cherry-pick statements in the Koran (and the Bible, for that matter) and come to some dysfunctional conclusions about any faith.

    The fact is that most Muslims don’t practice this idea that all non-Muslims are “infidels” deserving beheadings or other extreme results, just as most Christians and Jews don’t stone to death adulterers or gays. That’s a fact.

    Personally, I respect everyone’s beliefs, but I don’t accept dysfunctional, aggressive behavior. I don’t “tolerate,” which has a condemnatory tone that doesn’t work for me.

    In a time when the GOP has candidates who are quite openly hostile to certain minority groups, it makes great sense to offer members of those groups an alternative political home.

    My guess, though, is that virtually none of the Muslim Rs who are being reached out to care to challenge the cult of the omnipotent state, since there is no such thing. Still, maybe some lessarchists can find a more inviting political home.

  20. Shane

    “One can cherry-pick statements in the Koran (and the Bible, for that matter) and come to some dysfunctional conclusions about any faith.” — absolutely.

    And one can find certain groups that would act or at least talk about acting out their beliefs — Westboro for instance.

    But the reality is that “radicalized” versions of Islam exist and they’re quiet large, armed and organized against the people they see as infidels. And they’re killing people all over the world.

    Is Trump correct to temporarily ban all Muslims from entering? No, his statement was dumb.

    It comes down to a deeper border question.

    Open borders in theory works in a secure world without a welfare state. Would Americans have issue with people freely crossing the border with no intent to harm or take from us? Some would of course but most would not.

    But yet another theoretical situation.

    Our reality is far more complex and a libertarian solution can be offered rather than a feel good open letter saying “we won’t call you names like the other guys.”

    A letter explaining why immigration is not currently working would be a far more intelligent letter. America – Welfare State – Foreign Intervention + Immigration = Good Times

    You’re playing the shame game and generalizing statements by candidates (aside from Trump) who are succinct in their words against radicalized elements of a religion.

    The people who see it that way as well already have a home with the democrats especially with Obama and Clinton refusing to call a spade a spade and avoiding the term “radical Islam.”

    The Boston Bombers, and the couple in San Bernardino weren’t upset and shooting up the place because they lost the lottery. The Boston Boys killed in retaliation to Muslims being killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The CA Couple were just going about a Jihad. Nidal Hasan (Fort Hood) killed 13 and shot 32 to defend the Taliban. The list goes on and on, even to the LAX shooter after 9/11.

    Again, reality is complex and there’s no real way to put the genie back in the bottle that I know of. So it’s a matter of taking the appropriate paths going forward — which no candidate running with the GOP can see that far down the road.

    The LP can offer a solution rather than pandering to a base — I can’t say that anyone will listen.

  21. Chuck Moulton

    Robert Capozzi wrote:

    Personally, I respect everyone’s beliefs, but I don’t accept dysfunctional, aggressive behavior. I don’t “tolerate,” which has a condemnatory tone that doesn’t work for me.

    Well said! You’ve put your finger on why I think “fiscally responsible, socially tolerant” is not a great way to describe libertarianism or position the Libertarian Party.

  22. Robert Capozzi

    s: But the reality is that “radicalized” versions of Islam exist and they’re quiet large, armed and organized against the people they see as infidels. And they’re killing people all over the world.

    me: Yes, I completely agree. That’s quite different your absolute statement about Islam that I called out.

    s: Open borders in theory works in a secure world without a welfare state. Would Americans have issue with people freely crossing the border with no intent to harm or take from us? Some would of course but most would not.

    me: OK, I agree with that as well. NS’s letter doesn’t call for open borders that I can see.

    s: A letter explaining why immigration is not currently working would be a far more intelligent letter. America – Welfare State – Foreign Intervention + Immigration = Good Times

    me: As a general matter, OK. But NS’s letter reads to me like a recruitment letter. A tease, if you will, targeting 0.5% of the population.

    s: You’re playing the shame game and generalizing statements by candidates (aside from Trump) who are succinct in their words against radicalized elements of a religion.

    me: How do you arrive at this conclusion about NS’s words? His argument is that a) Trump spewed the haterade; b) Trump still leads in the polls; c) Therefore, many Rs are haters. Sounds like solid analysis to me.

    s: The people who see it that way as well already have a home with the democrats especially with Obama and Clinton refusing to call a spade a spade and avoiding the term “radical Islam.”

    me: I don’t use that term, either. I use “jihadist,” which seems more accurate and less impugning of non-jihadist Muslims.

    s: The LP can offer a solution rather than pandering to a base — I can’t say that anyone will listen.

    me: Here we certainly agree. The LP as constituted takes extreme right-ish and extreme left-ish positions simultaneously, alienating righties, lefties, and the vast middle.

    This NS letter, however, seems timely, benign, and tonally about right to me. Given how small the target audience is, I don’t expect that the LP will swell in the short term because of this letter.

    There are gay Republicans and Republicans who’ve had abortions, too, after all.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *