Declared 2012 Libertarian Party presidential hopeful Tom Knapp writes today:
[…] There are lines and limits to be drawn if the Libertarian Party’s “purists” and “pragmatists” are going to work together […]. What set of fundamental beliefs is common to the Libertarian Party’s fundamentalists and to those whom the LP hopes to lure into a “bigger tent”? […] Brian Holtz has proposed a “St. Louis Accord” which implicitly addresses that question. It’s a proposal I can endorse as is, but I’m going to tinker with it a bit:
The Party’s purpose role is to implement and give voice to the its Statement of Principles by uniting voters who want more personal and economic liberty behind the electoral choices and policy proposals that will most which move public policy in a libertarian direction. The Party’s ultimate goal is to banish force initiation and fraud from human relationships. The Party does not claim to know how close our society can come to this ideal, but we are united in our conviction that governments must never add to the amount of aggression in the world. Principled libertarians can disagree about how best to reduce aggression or even about what can count as aggression, but we are united in defending the full rights of each person to his body, labor, peaceful production, and voluntary exchanges. Principled libertarians can disagree about whether every function of government can be performed by the free market, but we are united in opposing government’s growth beyond the protection of the rights of every individual to her life, liberty and property and in supporting reduction of the size, scope and power of government to bring it within those boundaries. Principled libertarians can disagree about how best we may each serve the cause of freedom, but we are determined to build a Party that welcomes and unites all those who want more personal and economic liberty. We defenders of freedom are too few, and the enemies of freedom are too many, for us to indulge in seeking heretics in our midst, rather than awakening allies across this freedom-loving land.
Separately, Holtz (this reporter) wrote yesterday:
Factional tensions unfortunately make the LP institutionally incapable of writing detailed official party statements about specific policy issues. […] The good news is: the LP doesn’t need to write its own detailed policy proposals. The freedom movement is bountifully blessed with a dozen think tanks
that specialize in writing policy proposals for a variety of audiences. Below I link to thousands of pages of position statements that our candidates can choose from. […]