Dr. Tom Stevens, the former vice-chair of the Boston Tea Party who abused his position of power to unilaterally delete a motion put forward by Tom Knapp, is on the ballot in Colorado as the presidential nominee of the Objectivist Party. Alden Link — who as a candidate for the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination received as many votes as the equally libertarian Robert Milnes (zero) — is the party’s candidate for vice president.
The Objectivist Party’s Web site says it was founded on February 2 — Ayn Rand’s birthday — of 2008, and that its candidates were nominated on June 14. Stevens, who was at one point seeking the BTP’s presidential nomination, resigned as vice chair on June 7.
The new party’s platform says “the crucial political issue of our age is: capitalism vs. socialism, or freedom vs. statism.”
Perhaps VP nominee Alden Link has undergone an ideological makeover. In Denver, he mocked opposition to the Federal Reserve System and fiat-money central banking. His main issue was “energy socialism” — a massive, centrally planned energy policy to achieve energy autarky. In keeping with (philosophical, non-partisan) Objectivists — who mocked Ron Paul for his dovishness — Link did vocally support an pro-war, Islamophobic foreign policy.
The Objectivist Party also has a Facebook group, which as of this posting, had 85 members.
I did not realize that I was such a terrible person.
My attempt to solve the economic problems in the USA were not complicated. We send $700 billion a year out of the country to pay for energy. That is more than $2 thousand dollars for every man woman and child in the Country. If we were to build 500 nuclear power plants in this country we would save that money, clean the air,and stop funding the people who hate us.
And I’m sure Dr. Stevens would agree with all of what you’ve said Tom, or perhaps we should get his side of the story? Hmmm?
That’s okay, you and the BTP and Dr. Stevens just keep on draining the LP swamp. Pretty soon a bumper crop could grow.
This is a mighty fun little adventure.
“Schism” is an inaccurately strong term for what happened. There was no ideological divide involved, nor any significant number of actual individuals on Dr. Stevens’s side of the moral divide.
Rather, there was an attempt by Dr. Stevens to pack the party’s national committee with cronies, create fake “affiliates” which only existed in Stevens’s mind, etc., apparently with a view toward hijacking its presidential nomination … although for the life of me I can’t figure out why he thought such a small (at this point) prize was worth that much trouble.
Even as small as the BTP is, that he and a few friends were sent packing is no more a “schism” than it would be a “schism” in the LP if one of the national committee members was caught with his hand in LPHQ’s petty cash box and encouraged to resign rather than impeached.
Dr. Stevens’s “Objectivist Party” was allegedly founded in February, well in advance of his attempt to subvert the BTP, so it would be rather odd to attribute its creation to the fallout from said attempt.
Once again the solution is a fusion candidacy.
My God, the BTP has barely become a party yet and already have their first schism. Congrats!
I’m sure there will be more to come. After all, what the old saying, “Unifying Libertarians is like herding cats?” Well, I’m sure there’s a lot of feline in “pure” Libertarians.
JimDavidson // Jul 13, 2008 at 5:55 pm
“It will be interesting to see how the Objectivists like a political party in their name. Some Objectivists have quite a bit of money.”
Peikoff has been known to throw around the “lawsuit” rhetoric regarding the “Objectivist” name. I would not be surprised if this party isn’t sued over the name.
“I’m not white enough for their club.”
I’m sure they’d be happy to have you if you weren’t so “uppity”, Chris. It would help further their “cosmopolitan” image.
Truth is: African-Americans would be very susceptible to the message of TRUE libertarianism, as exemplified by people like Chris Bennett, if the cosmotarian statists would get out of the way. As the perennial victims of the state, I don’t think the average black man or woman is interested in the watered down brand of Redpathianism.
The LP doesn’t need me and it has been already shown by the assholes like Starr, Lieberman, Cohen, Carling, Redpath and their ilk. I guess I’m not white enough for their club.
Stick around, Chris Bennett. The LP needs you.
If you let the Reformers drive you out, they win.
The LP was fine until the “retard caucus, warmongers and Barr bigots” infiltrated it. If the LP wants to sacrifice principles just short term electoral success..then the LP is not for me. I’m not willing to put my principles behind while supporting a party that has becoming more unprincipled!
And the splintering continues. Those who want to congratulate themselves on their purity have several ways to massage their ego: BTP, Objectivists, Phillies ballot line hijacking, Paul write-ins (as if that’s a vote for purity). Those looking for a political party that is both devoted to liberty and has a record and commitment to actually affecting elections know where to find the LP.
I think it would have more appropriately been named the Tom Stevens Party. He is, afterall, the founder, chair, and presidential nominee of the party.
I looked around the site. It looks like they have four affiliates (FL, NJ, NY, PA). I wonder if he has learned his lesson from the BTP incidents and if the affiliates are actually run by residents of those states.
Victor Hugo’s character Inspector Javert in that play inspired the term “Javertism” for his constant harping on “the law’s the law” as though he were exculpated from ethical considerations about the law now that someone else had created it. It is a fine play with much to think about.
It will be interesting to see how the Objectivists like a political party in their name. Some Objectivists have quite a bit of money.
Ah, I was wondering how Captain Link was doing.
Let’s pull out the old Link campaign video.
Comments are closed.