John Jay Myers: My message For/To The Libertarian Party

The government incumbents and their media cheerleaders have already defined this year’s presidential debate for America. They have decided that it’s an epic throw down match between Obama and Romney, two candidates who could not possibly be any more different……yeah right.

The Libertarian Party candidates wont let the media frame the debate for them, they will not parrot the cliches, lies and platitudes of the other parties, they will not make people feel “comfortable” with the way things are, because they should not be comfortable.

This party is here because we are being hammered by the political class, their corporate sponsors, and their sycophantic media mouthpieces. They’re murdering people, spreading violence all over the world, incarcerating the non-violent, pillaging our economy, spying on us, and even taking an interest in our sex lives, all while feeding us the illusion that we are free and have a choice because we can vote for twins who “couldn’t possibly be more different”.

We’re here to say that the entire political discourse in this country is a lie manufactured by the establishment to divide us to eventually conquer us. That’s why we’re here, and we need to make sure we get it right this time.

The Libertarian Party will show America that the typical debate is completely false. People always say, “it’s about the issues”. But the problem is that the issues spoon fed to us are not the real issues.

The issue is not whether government should grant marriage licenses or civil unions. The issue is not whether government handouts should be given to insurance companies, or pharmaceutical companies instead. The issue is not what type of fuel our cars should burn, what jobs our economy should have, or who should receive the most goodies from government. The answer to these is the same – NO. These questions are bogus and they are distracting us from the real issue – and that real issue is WAR. Rigging the economy through legislation is a violent act that is no better than grabbing axes and clubs and raiding the next village for food, gold, and women. Wearing suits and giving us a “choice” does not make what our government is doing legitimate and it doesn’t make us free.

Nowhere is this more true than with our foreign policy. It’s our foreign policy that is the most sinister, hypocritical, dangerous, and corrupt, and it’s also the one that Americans have been the most blind to, even cheering on the establishment. The media asks us, “What should we do about all the Muslims planning to underwear bomb us?. Are drone attacks or secret assassination teams more effective? Is it groping your crotch or radioactive scans that are better for finding weapons of mass destruction and/or the pocket Constitutions of anti-government radicals?” These are false questions.

The real question is who will stop the violence? We should be more concerned not with who hates us, but with why do they hate us? – STOP ALL WAR!

We are not going to achieve liberty by keeping people comfortable with being hammered. We need to make them feel the chains around their necks and the government’s hand up their butts. They can’t feel it any more because it has become so normal. The other two candidates will tell them it’s ok, or that it’s not as bad as it seems, or that maybe being taken advantage of just a little bit less over here is the answer, NO, stop hammering us, how can we make that more clear?

We know that the popular political discourse is a front, a sham, a theater to keep us entertained and distracted from the real problem. The real problem is WAR. Government’s war on our economy, on our citizens, on other countries, and it’s ruining us all.

It does us no good to get more votes or win more elections if we do it on a Republican or Democratic platform. As soon as we pretend we’re okay with being manipulated and lied to, we lose all credibility. Stop all war is the message we need, and stop all war is the message that’s right.

If we want this party to grow, we must stand on that libertarian message, and let the light of our message draw people in.


This was written as a nominating speech for R. Lee Wrights at the Libertarian National Convention May, 2012, but it was too long.  Mr. Myers has allowed it to be posted here.  He is a long-time activist from Texas. 

28 thoughts on “John Jay Myers: My message For/To The Libertarian Party


    Yes it was too long, but some good points JJM.

    LNC Questions, Now that you’ve made it !

    Do I understand correctly that the MEMBERSHIP fees to join the LP are increasing soon ?

    I also try to pay attention to the Ballot Access talk. Did Redpath say he will get ALL Sigs needed for WV ?

    Is there any plan now for OK access ?

    Did anyone question Johnson about helping with ballot access ? The campaign continues to send out talking points including the 50 state access claim.

    Any help from anyone would be appreciated. THX

  2. Tom Blanton

    Too long? That is a 3 minute speech.

    And it’s all true except the part about wearing a suit doesn’t make criminals legitimate. In America, the wearing of a suit and tie makes a person totally legitimate and beyond reproach – even more so than a military or police uniform.

  3. John Jay Myers

    I have not heard about membership levels being raised, I would be against the bottom tier being raised.

    I believe Redpath is currently sorting out both WV and OK, I did not get the impression that there were insurmountable obstacles ahead, but it’s still not completely sorted out.

  4. Starchild

    My understanding is that there is a plan in place to raise the cost of life memberships in the Libertarian Party from $1000 to $2000.

    I believe that the Libertarian National Committee voted during our meeting following the convention on Sunday May 6 to postpone this change until Jan. 1, 2013, on the grounds that leaving the rate at $1000 for the present will result in more people buying life memberships and helping us with revenue this year.

    Like my LNC colleague John Jay Myers, I am opposed to increasing basic dues (currently $25/year). I am ambivalent about the plan to increase the cost of life memberships, and voted along with the rest of the body to postpone this change because I have not heard a good rationale for it.

    It is possible, however, that I misunderstood or am incorrectly stating the nature of the vote. I don’t have the materials from the meeting in front of me to review them.

    -Starchild, LNC At-Large Rep.

  5. Steven Wilson

    If the LP was worth saving and had utility it wouldn’t have revenue problems. If Libertarians want to subsidize the party during this rough patch then call it for what it is, but don’t glaze over what has been done.

    For a party of believers in the free market device, not many here understand the market. Raising prices to curb loss is a sure way to end how?

    If a business has loyal customers the firm will survive because the customers want them around.

  6. Robert Capozzi

    jjm: We’re here to say that the entire political discourse in this country is a lie manufactured by the establishment to divide us to eventually conquer us.

    me: I agree that the current discourse is not true, but if it’s been “manufactured” by the “establishment” to “conquer” “us,” I’d need a lot more evidence for an explicit cabal….

  7. John Jay Myers

    I am sorry, Starchild is correct, I must have been tired last night, we voted to kick the price increase down the road.
    But I don’t remember hearing about an increase in the basic membership, which is my concern. I really don’t mind what they charge for upper level memberships, that’s really just a matter of how much you want to donate.

  8. John Jay Myers

    What serves as evidence RC? Would the Downing Street Memos do? It’s an example of how “someone” wanted war in Iraq no matter what, so the policy was war, and the information and narrative that would be told to the public would support the policy, even though the information was not accurate.
    (In Texas we call that a lie)

    That’s a pretty straight forward example.

  9. Joe Buchman

    I believe the proposal was to increase life membership to $1,500.00 not $2,000 on July 1. I’m one of three people, according to Robert Kraus to respond to that by getting in with $1,000.00 before that deadline.

    The rationale for postponing that increase to January 2013 as presented to the new LNC, as far as I remember it, was the cost of reprinting literature and revising the website (something on the order of $15,000 or $20,000 if I remember).

    I think they made a good decision. The real price of a Life Membership, given the decrease in the real value of a dollar caused by our crazy debt levels and FED policies, has fallen. My guess is even at $1,500 it’s still, in real terms, less expensive than when the $1,000 life membership was first made available.

    One final note — given the results of this past LP convention I FEEL GREAT about being a LIFE member now. This is the direction I hoped the LP would go, and something I gave up on, more or less, after 2008. To those of you who kept up the good, Principle-Based fight (non-aggression and self-ownership based, with the “politics that easily, naturally, logically and self-evidently derives from that) especially over these past four years — THANK YOU.

  10. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Jor Buchman: “To those of you who kept up the good, Principle-Based fight (non-aggression and self-ownership based, with the “politics that easily, naturally, logically and self-evidently derives from that) especially over these past four years — THANK YOU.”

    Amen to that! I’m proud to be a Libertarian!

  11. Joe Buchman

    PS to be clear, I think both LNCs made a good decision, first in raising the Life Membership price to an equivalent (I believe) in real terms of what it was when it was first placed at $1,000 and secondly in postponing that until January to let the staff focus on the election and to use up the old literature.

    As for the basic membership, I too would like it keep it as low as possible (but not zero, that resulted in a loss of membership), but keeping in mind two things:

    1) If it’s not increased, then over time the devaluation of the dollar makes the real price go lower.

    2) Sometimes increasing a price can cause more people to purchase something — (imagine the sales of a really good perfume at “$1.00 a gallon.”) — Price serves, in part, to communicate something’s value.

    Personally I think $25.00 a year is likely to be in the ballpark of what it should be.

    Long term, I’d suggest setting that basic membership price at the sweet spot which would result in the largest number of new people signing up.

  12. Mark Hilgenberg

    What are “rules” regarding various ways to raise money for a political party?

    I have noticed that our focus is primarily memberships and donations. Is it possible to have raffles, auctions and various other ways to raise funds?

  13. Robert Capozzi

    9 jjm: Would the Downing Street Memos do?

    me: well, they might “do” for the motives behind the Iraq War. What they don’t “do” is for what you said, that the “entire political discourse in this country is a lie manufactured by the establishment to divide us to eventually conquer us.”

    “Entire”? “Manufactured”? To “conquer us”?

    This sounds like stuff one sees from the JBS. Are the Rothschilds behind this vast conspiracy to “conquer us”?

  14. John Jay Myers

    No Capozzi corporatism is. Those who already have money and power are doing everything they can to keep it and drive out competition, which is what you see with more regulations etc.

    It’s also true that 8 corporations own just about every media outlet in the United States, and since we are not allowed to know exactly what our CIA does, I find it hard not to imagine that our news isn’t just the equivalent of the Iraqi information minister during the 1st gulf war.

  15. Robert Capozzi

    15 jjm, we’re definitely watching a different movie, then. First, if 8 corporations own most traditional media, are you saying they are in cahoots to manipulate all thought? Second, even if they were, it’s also the case that the media dam broke at least a decade ago, with the Internet. If this grand corporatist conspiracy was so effective, would we even KNOW about the Downing Street Memos?

    But, let’s assume that Mel Gibson’s character in CONSPIRACY THEORY was on some level correct. “They” are out to “get us.” I maintain that comporting oneself like Gibson doesn’t do anyone any good. Raving about corporatist conspiracies only marginalizes.

  16. John Jay Myers

    I would say there are good deal of Americans, probably MOST, who believe our government is corrupt, who believe that corporations call the shots in politics.
    If you do not believe that, I would strongly suggest that puts you in a small minority.

  17. Turned me into a Newt

    JJM – any word on Neale trying to move the 2014 Convention to Texas, stealing it from Ohio?

  18. Robert Capozzi

    17 jjm, I certainly believe that the gov’t is corrupt. I certainly believe that much of the corruption is due to disproportionate influence of special interests, including corporations. I don’t, however, believe there to be a conspiracy of a few corporations dictating all policy, including CIA operations.

    I think these corporate and other special interests are just as clueless as the government is, as they often advocate measures that are ultimately not in their or anyone’s long term interest. It’s a myopic state of affairs on many, many levels.

    I don’t, however, have a problem being in a small minority. I’m a L. I would think, though, that the purpose of engaging in politics is to advance an agenda, in our case, of liberty. Engaging in Gibsonian conspiracy theorizing undermines the agenda, IMO.

    Rather than adding to the cacophony of name calling, I prefer a more transcendent, aspirational approach.

  19. John Jay Myers

    @18, we don’t want to do that, we want the 2016 convention in Dallas.

    We are L’s not sure what “Gibsonian Conspiracy theory” you are talking about, I would say letting people know that our government is corrupt, our media lies, and we are being lied to on a daily basis, might actually get people to get off their ass and vote for a different set of candidates instead of the ones that have perpetuated all of this.

  20. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    RC @ 19: Wow, what a bunch of cool words in one sentence (I notice those things.):)

  21. Robert Capozzi

    20 jjm, yes, that might work. My guess is most already know the government is corrupt, but you and I might not like the “solutions” that many/most would come up with. Sometimes, the media “lies” as we all do, but I don’t think that’s a surprise, either. You might mean that the media offers a distorted picture of the world, and here too, I agree.

    Simply pointing out the obvious, however, doesn’t give reason for people to vote FOR something, in this case, for Ls.

    When I wrote “Gibsonian conspiracy theory,” I was referring back to your statement that the “entire political discourse in this country is a lie manufactured by the establishment to divide us to eventually conquer us.” It sounds like a line uttered by Mel Gibson in the film CONSPIRACY THEORY. My feedback is such statements are overwrought and overstated. If GJ gets on MTP, I sure hope he doesn’t make such a statement, because it sounds fringy and kooky, qualities that are unattractive in candidates. IMO.

  22. Tom Blanton

    In Texas we call that a lie

    In the beltway region, a lie is called clever political rhetoric. To point out that a politician is lying is something that no polite moderate would ever consider doing. Those who engage in pointing out that lies are lies are to be labeled radical or conspiratorial and shunned by those doing real politics.

  23. John Jay Myers

    I think it all depends on the delivery, I thought it was too long, so I wrote something on the fly out on the patio outside the convention, check out the vice presidential nomination speeches on Cspan for that.

Leave a Reply

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