Above: Augustus Invictus, Ryan Ramsey and friends.
Found by way of pingback on a previous IPR article. Posted at Libertarians United Against Fascism:
This post is saved on archive.is and archive.org. Contact details, addresses and other personal info for the profiled individuals are listed on Ghostbin [archive].
Introduction
On Friday April 7th, the Libertarian Party of Florida issued a press release retracting a statement made by the Executive Committee (EC) in Oct. 2015. This statement denounced the fascist lawyer and former Libertarian Party of Florida Senate candidate Augustus Invictus’ for his advocacy of eugenics and state-sponsored murder. Invictus had recently threatened to sue the party for defamation if it would not issue a retraction. Faced with potential legal costs exceeding the party’s budget, the EC voted to accept mediation by their party gubernatorial candidate, Randy Wiseman, who decided in favor of Invictus. Char-Lez Braden, the LPF Chair, issued the retraction.
Every single Committee member but one voted in favor in favor of mediation. Paul Stanton, the Region 7 Representative, was the only dissenting voice.
On May 5th-7th, the Libertarian Party of Florida will be holding it’s state convention at the International Palms Resort & Conference Center in Cocoa Beach. They hope to sweep this matter under the rug and move along with business as usual. This includes reelecting Invictus’ allies on the EC.
There will be no business as usual. Because unless the LPF bars all the named individuals from their organization, there will be no convention. We’re going to shut it down.
Yes, He is Still a Fascist
Let’s make things perfectly clear. Invictus indeed claims to have rejected the state eugenics policies he advocated in law school [archive]. This rejection is purely one of application. He has not abandoned eugenics because it is disgusting, immoral, depraved, racist and violent. Indeed, he still confirms as of March 24th that he believes the “strong and intelligent should breed – and the weak and stupid should not”. He simply no longer believes that government planned eugenics would be practical. Although his original paper disavowed any selection on the basis of race or ethnicity, when viewed in light of his repeat moaning about higher non-white immigrant birth rates, people he characterized as “parasites” in the above letter, some reading between the lines is not unreasonable.
As to his comments in favor of “state-sponsored murder”, the LFP’s excuse that this is ambiguous is laughable. We are talking about a man that proudly declares the solution to the radical Islam is a “Reconquista”. Who openly talks about murdering leftists one minute and then tries to play it off as an exaggeration the next. Who stated in 2013 [archive] that “I have prophesied for years that I was born for a Great War; that if I did not witness the coming of the Second American Civil War I would begin it myself”.
He still talks about this. His website, the Revolutionary Conservative, openly proclaims an intention to spark a right-wing insurrection, as he does again and again in his Fireside Chats and Guerrilla Radio podcasts. Aside from all that, Invictus supports a border wall, an escalation of ICE raids and travel bans to keep immigrants from freely moving about and living where they wish. He supports these policies both in the United States and in Europe as defense of a decaying Western civilization. The scale of violence needed to achieve this, and to remove the millions already living in these societies, is nothing short of state-sponsored ethnic cleansing.
Oh, and we seem to recall this beacon of free speech and civil debate issuing defamation lawsuits to people saying things about him he didn’t like. Not just toward the LPF, but also to the woman who broke the story alleging a history of domestic violence, rape and kidnapping. He has since descended into victim blaming conspiracy theories involving the victim, Paul Stanton, former LPF chair Adrian Wyllie, the FBI, and others.
The Only Choice Left for the
“Party of Principle”
Libertarian Party of Florida, if you are not able to recognize fascism even when it comes wrapped in fascist tattoos and calls itself an “American fascist” then you are worse than useless. If you are not capable of defeating even one individual fascist, how do you expect to defeat an entire state’s worth? How do you expect anyone to believe you when you state an intention to end political authoritarianism in Florida and the United States?
You let this get out of hand by allowing this creep and others like him to infiltrate your organization and use it to their own ends. All of this could have been avoided, if only you had taken a stand against their inclusion. You either allowed it, or were powerless to prevent it. Either way, you are unfit to exist.
Records of your internal communications indicate that you saw no way to afford the estimated $10,000-30,000 it would take to settle this case. The LPF would collapse and have to be dissolved. Well guess what? Destruction is preferable to becoming a de facto fascist front group. If that is the only option available to you, then there is no question what you need to do.
We also understand from anonymous sources that some of you may fear violent reprisals against yourselves and your families from Invictus’ followers and allies. If this is true, then we have your back . . . but you still need to do something. This is your responsibility as libertarians. You can help bring these fascists down. You can reach out to us anonymously and share information, help us coordinate, or do the same to other trusted members of other parties now moving to pressure Florida. But if you do not fear for your life, then you have no excuse not to obstruct them in every way possible. Not while Paul Stanton is already doing so and you are hanging him out to dry.
If you have to replace your entire Executive Committee and change the bylaws, now is your opportunity. If you have to bankrupt and ultimately dissolve the party fighting to kick the fascists out, do it. No concessions, no collaboration. Burn everything to the ground. Clear the way for a replacement organization that will have learned from your mistakes.
At present, the Libertarian Party of Nevada and several other state parties are moving to disassociate with the LPF over the appeasement. According to some Nevada party members, that state affiliate will ask the national organization to disaffiliate Florida at the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) meeting in Pittsburgh April 15th-16th. This is a step in the right direction. If the LPF is not going to fix its hostile fascist infiltration then the next step should be total dissociation and isolation. The sooner this happens, the better.
As for the rest of us, we’re not going to wait. We’re individualist anarchists who believe in direct action and consumer pressure. We’re going to expose Invictus and his collaborators and circulate this as widely as possible. Then we’re going to shut down your state convention. Perhaps if Florida libertarians are not ashamed of being used by fascists, then the rest of the world can help them discover that feeling. We’re going to peacefully burn your house to the ground with all the fascists inside. You can try to rescue them, or you can get started building a new house.
Call to Action
The Libertarian Party of Florida will be holding its annual state Convention May 5th-7th. There will be a number of speaker meals, as well as ongoing business meeting on Saturday and the election of Region Representatives on Sunday. Speaker meals cost, but attendance to the business meetings is free.
Before that begins, we recommend getting in touch with LNC members before April 15th and asking them to excommunicate Florida. We also recommend getting in touch with the LPF Executive Committee members and the Convention organizer, Marc Tancer, and letting them know how you feel about harboring fascists.
But we especially recommend contacting the venue, to inform them that the LPF is hosting known fascists on their property. These individuals are: Augustus Invictus, Raquel Okyay, Ryan Ramsey and Brandi Hicks. Let them know that Invictus and Okyay were responsible for similar outrage and cancellation of the Mid Atlantic Liberty Festival in Harrisburg Pennsylvania on April 1st. Direct them to photos if you can. Ramsey’s tattoos really stand out.
To any state Libertarian parties and to LNC members, denounce and dissociate from these fools until either the fascists or the LPF itself are gone.
Convention Venue
International Palms Resort & Conference Center Cocoa Beach FL
1300 N Atlantic Ave, Cocoa Beach, FL 32931
Toll Free: +1 877-953-2374
Local: +1 321-783-2271
Facebook
Yelp
Convention Organizer
Marc Tancer: convention@lpf.org
Marc’s Facebook
Libertarian National Committee
1444 Duke St, Alexandria, VA 22314-3403
Phone: +1 800-353-2887
Email: info@lp.orgMember Contacts
Libertarian Party of Florida
1-855-FLA FREE (855-352-3733)
518 Hunter Lane, Bradenton, FL 34212
Email Contact Form
Officers
Char-Lez Braden: chair@lpf.org
Omar Recuero: vicechair@lpf.org
James Morris: treasurer@lpf.org
Suzanne Gilmore: secretary@lpf.org
Directors-at-Large
Alison Foxall: atlarge1@lpf.org
Russ Wood: atlarge2@lpf.org
Marc Tancer: atlarge3@lpf.org
Region Representatives
James Campbell: region1@lpf.org
Anna Morris: region2@lpf.org
Joshua Folsom: region3@lpf.org
Ryan Ramsey: region4@lpf.org
James Chipman: region5@lpf.org
Raquel Okyay: region6@lpf.org
Paul Stanton: region7@lpf.org
Stacey Selleck: region8@lpf.org
George Lebovitz: region9@lpf.org
Darlene Underwood: region10@lpf.org
Audrey Capozzi: region11@lpf.org
Robert Enright: region12@lpf.org
Karl Dickey: region13@lpf.org
Steven Nekhaila: region14@lpf.org
Profiles in Infiltrators
Aside from Paul Stanton and the other EC members, there are at least two Regional Representatives that are close friends and collaborators with Invictus outside the LPF. These are Ryan Ramsey and Raquel Okyay. Both these two are editors of the Revolutionary Conservative. Ramsey is the Region 4 Representative and Okyay the Region 6. Both were appointed by the Chair to fill vacancies, not elected. Both are seeking election at the state party Convention.
Augustus Sol Invictus
(formerly Austin Gillespie)
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram [archive]
The center of this controversy, Invictus’ fascist politics have be so extensively documented over the years that they don’t bear repeating. See here for his history with the Libertarian Party, here and here for more recent and detailed accounts.
Because so many of his defenders’ pleas hinge on framing these as relics of a distant past and no longer indicative of his present stances, here is a list of things he has done or been discovered to have done in the past month:
- A police report appeared alleging multiple incidents of domestic violence, sexual assault, kidnapping and death threats toward his ex-fiancée over the course of their 15-month relationship.
- Threatened to put former Libertarian Presidential candidate Vermin Supreme and others in the hospital in self-defense after they made jokes about throwing pies at him.
- A Fireside Chat on the destruction of Western civilization by Muslim immigrants titled “On Reconquista”.
- A Fireside Chat on “White Genocide”.
- Continued promoting and fundraising for “Operations Leonidas”, his upcoming documentary about the destruction of Europe by refugees, diversity and “cultural Marxism”.
- Reposted his racist “Letter to the People of Europe” from Jan. 2016, claiming it was still relevant.
- Held a podcast discussion with alt-right author Christopher Robertson, author of the book “In Defense of Hatred”, to which Invictus wrote the foreword.
- Interviewed Keith Preston of Attack the System on his pan-secessionist politics. Preston is an infamous fascist who presented at Richard Spencer’s 2015 National Policy Institute conference.
- Held a live show in Harrisburg, PA with Dave Martel of the alt-right conspiracy theory site “Mad American News” and made a recorded appearance at the State Capitol, challenging antifa to come fight him in the presence of police. Dave Martel Seig Heil-ed at the end of the video.
- Interviewed the anarcho-capitalist turned fascist Christopher Cantwell on Hoppeanism, monarchy and race realism.
- Complained about the Vatican hosting an Islamic prayer in 2014.
- Complained about a march against racism in London.
- Complained about finding Qurans at a gas station in rural North Carolina.
- A video came to light by way of Adrian Wyllie in the Florida Libertarian Facebook group. It is an hour-long talk from a group called the “Sunshine Fascists” featuring Augustus Sol Invictus. They discuss killing Muslims, Jews and gay people (It has since been taken down from YouTube but uploaded here.)
Raquel Maria Okyay
Facebook
Twitter
Linkedin
Okyay is the Region 6 Representative on the Executive Committee since June 2016. She is a prolific writer and either a member, manager or founder of numerous conservative and libertarian organizations, lobbies and media outlets. She prioritizes anti-corruption, anti-abortion and anti-gun control activism. In the context of Florida, Okay is also the managing editor of The Quill, the official LPF newsletter. Like Ramsey, she is an editor of the Revolutionary Conservative, as well as its press secretary.
Okyay was slated to speak at the Mid Atlantic Freedom festival along with Invictus before an antifa pressure campaign shut it down. Her stances on a range of issues are more consistent with paleolibertarianism than outright fascism. However, as Invictus’s former campaign manager and ongoing media functionary, she helps advance his political career and presence in the party. She has defended him from accusations of fascism and violence since 2015, both personally and through official campaign and Revolutionary Conservative press releases.
Her friendships and political alliances include Ramsey and Hicks, as well as other far-right and alt-right figures. She certainly has no problem associating with the fascist swamp that is and has accumulated around Invictus. Her actions over the past two years in Florida are a cut above the spineless passivity of the rest of the Executive Committee. They are active collaboration.
Ryan Russell Ramsey
Facebook
Other Facebook
Linkedin
Ryan Ramsey is the Bradford County Chairman for the Libertarian Party of Florida and Region 4 Representative on the Executive Committee. He is romantically involved with Brandi Hicks and they live together. He blogs at Libertarian Heathen [archive] and is an editor and contributor to the Revolutionary Conservative.
Ramsey has either founded or runs a number of political groups. These include Jacksonville Open Carry and Florida Carry Inc. He is the founder and Director of the Florida Liberty Project, an ostensibly normal grassroots outreach group that he uses as a personal platform. He also sits on the National Council of The Sons and Daughters of Liberty as well as the being Vice-Chair for the American Guard, a militant right-wing street group of self-described “Constitutional Nationalists” that makes heavy use of 19th century nativist and modern white nationalist iconography. He hosts both the SDL and the more explicitly fascist Global Dissident Voice radio shows on the SDL Radio Network.
The Bradford Country LP facebook page and YouTube channel function as another set of vehicles to Ramsey. He frequently posts articles from his own blog and from the Revolutionary Conservative. He also uses these to network with other alt-right libertarians.
From 1995-1999 he was US Navy serviceman stationed about the USS Underwood, FFG-36 and at NAS Jax. Among other roles he conducted drug interdiction in the Gulf of Mexico. He also used to work for the Titan Electric Group in Jacksonville. From 2009-2014 he owned a business called Landser Group LLC that specialized in security systems installation and training, which he ran from home. The name is a reference to a low-ranking German soldier (as well as a famous neo-Nazi rock band). His outdated resume is available here [archive].
Ramsey is friends and associates with numerous white nationalists, fascists and alt-right figures, including Keith Preston, Shane Trejo (a student responsible for trying to bring Richard Spencer to the International Students for Liberty Conference), and Kyle Chapman (aka “basedstickman”, the armed Trump supporter from Berkeley) .
He also plays in the band Lovecrime with his partner, Brandi Hicks. They made an appearance at the 2016 LPF Convention. They were also slated to play at the Mid Atlanic Liberty Festival in Harrisburg on April 1st.
Ramsey sports a number of tattoos of fascist iconography. On the right side of his head he has a Celtic Cross symbol, as well as a Valknut on his neck and an Iron Cross on his right shoulder. He frequently wears a Mjolnir pendant, a heathen (Norse pagan) icon. Ramsey tries to play these off as simply an expression of his Nordic/Celtic heritage and neo-pagan religion, but taken together in the context of his politics and the people he collaborates with, this wehraboo is obviously just evading.
In numerous photos he can be seen wearing a vest with, among other symbols, an SS insignia and a Confederate Battle Flag.
Ramsey openly describes himself as a nationalist. He contends that nationalism has a bad reputation of association with state power. He proposes instead a revival of pre-state tribal structures, in which closed kin and ethnic groups provide the social support, legal and security functions usurped by rise of the state.
This kind of organic anti-state nationalism is not new; many interwar fascists envisioned a future in which heightened racial consciousness would render the corporate state form unnecessary. In more recent decades this type of decentralist fascism has been associated with the European New Right and with national-anarchism, a political philosophy coined by British neo-Nazi Troy Southgate; and the pan-secessionist ideas of Keith Preston (one of Ramsey’s friends). These currents in modern fascism attempt to sanitize bigotry and “Blood and Soil” attachments by recasting them as cultural preservation achieved through voluntary segregation into intentional communities. They appeal to politically decentralist tendencies on both the left and right to unite against the principal enemy of liberty, the Leviathan state itself, and settle any issues of disagreement in the aftermath by segregating. Able to present themselves as anti-state and compliant with the Non-Aggression Principle, proponents have long attempted entry into libertarian circles. Ramsey’s own activism involves a similar kind of ecumenicism, compromised by a more violence-tinged anti-leftism typical of the alt-right.
We should not have to say that this kind of proposal is total anathema to libertarianism, which is a cosmopolitan ideal of universal rights and freedom for all people. It is an alter-globalism, not an anti-globalism. It promotes individual self-determination, not the right of communities or local authorities to constrain their members in order to protect some collective fiction from outside influence. Opposing the existing state is not enough when they just intend to replace it with smaller Volkisch analogues that intensify all the worst effects of statism. Their vision of self-segregating tribal enclaves is nothing more than the Mad Max strawman of anarchy. It will not lead to the peace, mobility, freedom of association and exchange of ideas we value. It is incompatible with defense of a freed-market and an open society. When goods and people cannot cross borders, armies will. Even if those armies are Vikings LARPers with Kalashnikovs.
Lest we give too much credit to Ramsey’s word, these ideas can never be taken at face value anyway. They invariably serve as a pretext to legitimize state violence against non-white minorities and political opponents as the next best option to excluding them from Naziville. True to form, Ramsey, like Invictus, also supports the violent barring and deportation of migrants coming to the US and to European societies, even when he knows it would result in their deaths.
Ramsey also regularly threatens violence against antifascist protesters and those who disagree with him. He recently threatened one LPF member named Mateo Marchetti (aka Mattia Malamento) over Marchetti’s sharing of the police report alleging domestic violence by Invictus. He denies this was his intention, but the evidence suggests otherwise:
More than anyone else on this list, Ramsey has ferociously attacked detractors of Augustus Invictus’ inclusion in the Florida LP. He characterizes Invictus as an innocent man persecuted for his choice of friends (these being other fascists), and his religion; as if opposition to his use of the Roman fasces (the symbol of Italian Fascism) has anything to do with Roman paganism. He recently wrote a long tirade of incomprehensible drivel and evasion of the known facts, while indulging in victim blaming conspiracy theories involving a plot by antifa, Adrian Wyllie, Paul Stanton and pedophile rings to destroy the LPF. He dismisses the recent police report alleging domestic violence, kidnapping, sexual assault and death threats on Invictus’ part as slander by a “drug addicted prostitute”.
As for the pedophile claim, he cites a fake antifa honeypot run by fascists and a libertarian radio host from New Hampshire that was exposed early last year and has nothing to do with anything happening in Florida.
For someone so concerned about pedophiles, Ramsey does not seem bothered by the fact that Augustus Invictus was in his early 30’s when he started dating his then 17 year old ex-fiancée that he is alleged to have abused. She was still in high school at the time.
IPR Note: The article goes on to also profile Ryan Ramsey’s partner Brandi Hicks. See the original linked at the top to read that section.
Tuma: You skipped his advocacy for compulsory Christian prayer in the public schools.
I am offended!
I translated the name “Tumamaesputa” and it’s Spanish for “your mother is a whore.”
Unacceptable!
Regarding Rothbard supposed advocation for not let any power of the state to aument in his article “A Paleo Strategy:a Right-Wing Populist program” he clearly advocates for letting the police to administrate instant punishment for thieves, violent criminals etc… (clarifing that must be subject to responsibility when they’re wrong) is stupid to say that the state eliminating the laws that forbidden assasinations and steals is a victory for private property rights and the right to life even if your ideal is a stateless society, I also reccomend he’s article “A Descomposition of the Nation-State:Nations by Consent” having a very interesting reflections about borders, inmigration, nations and communitarism
Keith Preston is a national-anarchist not a fascist
I cannot agree that there can ever be a right to an abortion, nor do I agree that there is an absolute right for people who do support and practice abortion to live peacefully with others. I do agree that among causi belli for a just war includes putting an end to abominations which are socially approved, like abortion and cannibalism. Now, a just cause is not sufficient for starting a just war; there must be no practical alternative to end the grave violation of rights, and there must be reasonable hope of ending the violation of rights without inflicting worse harm to the innocent. To that end, I submit that a city state where abortion was approved or even celebrated could be legitimately conquered by its pro-life neighbors and its inhabitants forcibly subjected to laws prohibiting abortion, under pain of imprisonment, exile or death, and any property held by those refusing to submit to the law shall be forfeit to the victors, as reparations for the cost of undertaking the war effort. No nation can legitimately legalize the violation of the rights of any person or group of persons, and any government or society that does enact such pretended legislation forfeits its right to exist as such. That said, even a just war may produce massive costs in both blood and treasure to the side fighting for justice, and collateral damage may be extreme as well. Any revolutionary or foreign power considering launching a war of liberation must first count the cost of doing so, as well as the probability of succeeding, and undertake such a war only if they can reasonably expect to succeed at liberating the victims without inflicting greater harm to human rights.
No, that would be absurd sophistry. I am confident in my interpretation.
“Yes, that makes it clear that it’s a metaphor, not meant to be literally burning down any houses much less killing anyone.”
Perhaps; or perhaps the author believes that he’s not initiating force as long as he doesn’t actually touch anyone, a la Matt Breunig’s definition of the term:
“Suppose I [burn down a house of hotel on] some piece of ground that a libertarian claims ownership over. Suppose I contend that people cannot own pieces of ground because nobody makes them. In my [burning down the house of hotel], I do not touch the libertarian or threaten to touch him in any way. Nonetheless, the libertarian proceeds to initiate force against me or calls the police to get them to initiate force against me. Libertarians are fine doing this and therefore libertarians are huge fans of initiating force. The initiation of force or the threat to initiate force is the mechanism that underlies all private property claims. ”
http://www.demos.org/blog/11/17/13/libertarians-are-huge-fans-initiating-force
Yes, that makes it clear that it’s a metaphor, not meant to be literally burning down any houses much less killing anyone.
“No, the article explicitly rejects the initiation of violence or force and says any and all means used will be peaceful, several times.”
True: “We’re going to peacefully burn your house to the ground with all the fascists inside.” does say “peacefully”.
I would expect there would be something LPF can do about it. The question might be who would be ultimately liable. “nice hotel you got there, be a shame if anything happened to it” is a charectarization you made that may or may not have anything to do with reality and may depend on the personal knowledge you say you have of who is personally involved. The same phone call may have very different implications if it came from, say, me (that is not to say that I would place such a call – as I said, my inclination is to agree with you that such a tactic would be counterproductive) or from one of my second or third cousins where, yeah, if they made a call like that it would be very reasonable to interpret it that way, due to their alleged involvement with a Siberian Brotherhood/Syndicate that some people think actually exists.
I’ve had occasion to look over a contract this week — United Airlines’ “contract of carriage.” The question that came up in my mind in that case was “is a contract that includes offhand language that, if paid attention to, translates to ‘oh, by the way, we might just defraud you’ really a valid contract?”
It seems to me that the purpose of out clauses in contracts is to provide for legitimate contingencies, not to cover one party’s ass if it decides to defraud the other party.
But you may be right. If the hotel uses some “nice hotel you got there, be a shame if anything happened to it” phone calls as an excuse to defraud LPF, there might not be anything LPF can do about it.
If the calls they receive are from thugs that is actionable both on the part of the hotel and the regime. But the characterization that there is any thuggery involved is yours. Like I said you know more about LUAF than I do. Taking them by their word alone I see no thuggery, only peaceful persuasion. My opinion may change if I knew that there were people who are willing and able (and especially have a record of) carrying out violence behind those words.
My guess is that the out clause will not specify why the hotel backs out, only what they need to do in case they do.
Paulie,
I would be surprised if the contract didn’t have an out clause for e.g. hurricanes, nuclear war, and other acts of God or whatever.
I would be surprised if that clause covered “we got phone calls from thugs and decided to screw you.”
TLK, you lost me. Presumably, LPF signed a contract with the hotel, as did a representative of the hotel that covers the contingency of the hotel not delivering on its end of the bargain. I would guess it also covers the LPF cancelling for whatever reason and what they would need to do to make it right with the hotel should that happen. Do you have a contract voluntarily signed by both sides with someone as to what they should do to make it right if they murder you or what you should do to make it right if you murder them?
Paulie,
Fine, you win. Murder isn’t initiation of force. After all, there’s a statute covering it, right?
Really? Even if there is a clause in the contract covering that? If the hotel gets flooded in the week before the convention and can’t fulfill its end of the contract, and compensates according to the contract terms, is that an initiation of force?
I haven’t seen any.
I’m surprised that you didn’t deduce that the picture was someone from LUAF.Are you really still going on about the photo which has long since had a caption? I am willing to take an indefinite break from posting articles, since I suck at it so bad, and let you take up the slack. Just say the word.
Is there any sign that these people, whoever they are, whose photographs we are apparently not seeing, is doing anything other than talking?
” I have no idea how you drew such an inference. Libertarians United Against Fascism is the source of the article, not the subject.”
I imagine it’s related to the way I see an article about Starchild, his response to something, and a photograph, and therefore infer that the photograph is Starchild. I realize this is a very subtle and obscure logical path.
DL – “Hmm, I would say your statement is a good demonstration why many libertarians consider the LP(or any LP) a pariah to libertarianism.”
Well, I would say reply yours is a good demonstration of exactly why I pay little attention to the advice of anti-Libertarians: if you consider ‘any LP’ to be ‘a pariah to libertarianism,’ your criticisms are not motivated by any desire to help it.
Hmm, I would say your statement is a good demonstration why many libertarians consider the LP(or any LP) a pariah to libertarianism.
“If the hotel does break its contract, presumably there is a clause in that contract that covers cancellation and what happens if the hotel cancels, and presumably the hotel will follow that clause. If there is no such clause that’s a badly negotiated contract, and if the hotel fails to do whatever it is supposed to do in case of cancellation that is initiation of force on the part of the hotel”
Um, no. Breaking the contract is initiation of force. The contract entitles LPF to X, meaning that X is LPF’s property. If the hotel willfully fails to deliver X, it is stealing LPF’s property.
Sure, there’s probably a clause in the contract that covers what happens if the hotel steals what LPF bought from it. That doesn’t make it not stealing any more than the fact that the existence of a statute laying out penalties for murder makes murder not an initiation of force.
“not on the part of anyone who persuaded a hotel do dissociate from a planned event. Is this not obvious?”
I suppose you could be right. Conspiracy does not necessarily imply intimidation.
paulie: ” they have subsequently said they are not party members and by implication not interested in joining.”
Indeed; and that’s something that causes me to discount them up front.
Where do non-Libertarians, even anti-Libertarians, get the idea that they’re entitled to tell the Libertarian Party how it should be organized, or how its business should be conducted? Why do they expect any Libertarian to care what they’re saying?
(Rhetorical questions, of course; AFAICS, the answer is because they’re “libertarian libertarians”, those whose only argument is “I’m more libertarian than the Libertarian Party”- an illogical appeal to an imaginary authority.)
“Now, I’ve hinted that you know who LUAF is, so maybe you know something I don’t.”
That sentence makes no sense at all.
I know to near certainty who one of them is. That person is not in Florida, so far as I know not even in the US at this time, and not a member of the LP either nationally or any of its state affiliates.
I’m fairly confident of the identity of a second person, who is not in Florida but is involved in the LP.
I don’t expect to see either of those two in Cocoa Beach.
I can plausibly infer the existence of at least a third and possibly a fourth person since the two most recent LUAF posts were clearly written by different people (the author of the most recent one understands where and where not to use an apostrophe; the author of the one before that doesn’t), at least one and probably both of whom are neither of the first two mentioned.
I’m not sure how I feel about “allowing” people “in” the LPF. I’m not big on e.g. purges. But I would oppose election of a known member of LUAF to the party’s executive committee or an officer position for the same reason I would oppose election of Augustus Invictus to either. I don’t like authoritarian thugs and don’t want them running my party.
Intimidating the hotel into breaking its contract would be initiation of force. Persuading them to do so would not be, which is a separate question from whether it’s a good idea or not. If the hotel does break its contract, presumably there is a clause in that contract that covers cancellation and what happens if the hotel cancels, and presumably the hotel will follow that clause. If there is no such clause that’s a badly negotiated contract, and if the hotel fails to do whatever it is supposed to do in case of cancellation that is initiation of force on the part of the hotel, not on the part of anyone who persuaded a hotel do dissociate from a planned event. Is this not obvious?
I don’t doubt its veracity one bit. When I said puffing up your chest I did not mean puffery, I meany balling up your fists and all the things you do to prepare for combat. What I pointed out is that no one has suggested any course of action that would lead to anyone standing between you and the convention hall, so all that warning about kicking asses, no matter how many asses you would kick and how hard if it did come to that, is sadly wasted. The tactics being discussed would just not involve anything like that scenario, regardless of what you think of them. As for the “other” group of thugs, I also don’t expect any thuggery from them at the LP event being discussed; they are doing just fine using entryism and have no need to use force at this juncture.
So, TLK, the bottom line is that you are not being physically challenged, so your ability to kick ass, shoot guns, or anything of that nature is simply not relevant. You also seem to think that I approve of the tactic they are discussing. I haven’t said I approve of it, and I don’t think I do. Despite my revulsion at what is happening to the LPF and my pessimism about the LPF kicking out the entryists I think it should be given the opportunity to do so. So it’s not accurate to say that I have thrown in with any group of thugs, just because I don’t see a group of thugs where you do.
Now, I’ve hinted that you know who LUAF is, so maybe you know something I don’t. But then again you also said something about not allowing them in the LPF and they have subsequently said they are not party members and by implication not interested in joining.
Andy: ” . . . .This is a slimeball tactic. . . . . ”
I needed a laugh today. The ultimate slimeball is upset and slimeball tactics!
Tony: “Why does this irrelevant fascist keep getting coverage?
Beats me. I’ve done my best to keep his name off my blog. Today is the 2nd time I’ve had to mention him; the other one being when he lost the nomination fight for Senate candidate.
I hope that’s it: 3 mentions, and I’ll have to give him a topic heading. 🙁
“no one is trying to deny Libertarians the right to freedom of association. The hotel has freedom of association too”
The hotel exercised that freedom of association when it contracted with LPF to provide convention facilities and when it rented rooms to individuals for the specifically understood purpose of them using those convention facilities to meet.
Is attempting to intimidate the hotel into breaching its contract initiation of force, or merely inciting initiation of force?
I’m surprised you think my statement that I will defend myself against thugs to be some kind of puffery. Have you ever seen such a statement from me before? Do you doubt its veracity? Did you not notice that it is directed at both groups of thugs, not just the group of thugs you seem to have thrown in with?
Calling a hotel to try to stop a person from speaking is a chickenshit thing to do. This reminds me of the people who make false complaints against petition circulators as an attempt to get them kicked out of locations that carry foot traffic, so they can’t get any signatures. This tactic has been used by enemies of liberty to keep Libertarian Party candidates, and pro-liberty initiatives, referendums, and recalls off of the ballot on many occasions. This is a slimeball tactic.
Except that, at least if you read the “call for action” literally, no one is trying to deny Libertarians the right to freedom of association. The hotel has freedom of association too, and they have the right not to associate with libertarians if libertarians will associate with fascists. Whether that is a legit tactic or justified is a separate question. But again it’s lovely to puff up your chest and get all righteous about how you will come armed and defend yourself against thugs who will try to keep you from getting in the door when there will be no such thugs, just a phone call or two or ten to the hotel that – as far as we know – will not involve any threats much less the willingness or ability to carry out violence. How will you defend yourself against such “violence”?
“If someone tries to stop me from attending my party’s convention, I don’t give a rat’s ass if it’s one of Invictus’s openly avowed fascists or one of LUF’s fascists branding themselves as anti-fascists. I’ll meet violence with violence either way.”
Real Libertarians understand they have the right to defend themselves from anyone who would deny their right to Freedom of Association.
Fair enough. I should have just pointed out the fact that NO ONE is in charge of the “libertarian movement.”
But look what that statement that I quoted does. It conflates the LP with the libertarian movement, and prevents the clear-eyed choice of options that you properly point out.
This is just a political party. Wherefrom that mindset comes that paralyzes the thought process of an LNC member, thinking they are speaking for the entire Libertarian movement, is a discussion that should be had.
“The Libertarian National Committee is not in charge of the libertarian movement, just the Libertarian Party.”
It’s in charge of neither. It’s in charge only of itself. Its bylaws specifically require it to respect the autonomy of the affiliate parties. As far as the internal management of those affiliate parties is concerned, the LNC has precisely two legitimate options:
1) Disaffiliate; or
2) Shut the fuck up.
Why do Libertarians fall prey to this idea that the internal management of a private organization is “central planning?” Libertarians, of all people.
“The Libertarian National Committee generally refrains from getting involved in the internal politics of state affiliate parties, and for good reason; as you yourselves allude to, a centrally planned libertarian movement is inimical to liberty.”
The Libertarian National Committee is not in charge of the libertarian movement, just the Libertarian Party.
“The Libertarian National Committee generally refrains from getting involved in the internal politics of state affiliate parties”
As well it should. That’s why I’m against any weird resolutions trying to tell LPF what to do.
Let LPF do what it is going to do. If LPF chooses to continue acting as a host and vector for authoritarian nationalists (or if the LNC feels it has already crossed the line in its decisions to do so), disaffiliate/disassociate and be done with it. No “central planning” or attempts to dictate internal politics needed.
The controversy has now reached the LNC list. My own positions is somewhere between Starchild’s and LUAF’s:
That is my understanding of how it is now. The only thing that changed recently is that FL said those national parties have to be recognized as such by the FEC, which the LP is.
That sounds absolutely nothing like the Nevada LP I know.
He would be doing a very good job of hiding it if that were the case. I travelled with him for years. He has his own room now but we are at the moment again riding around together and I have seen no evidence at all of anything like that. Sadly, I do think he is doing their work for them without getting paid in a misguided belief that this anti-migrant drivel advances liberty. They really should pay him, though.
If you really want to talk about hitting the nail on the head see dL 2017/04/13 at 1:15 am.
More like hits himself and anyone who watches on the head with a nail, repeatedly.
“Andy agrees with you.”
Remaining on the track that Andy is likely COINTELPRO or some other variety of saboteur/provocateur, I have to assume that his agreement with rational libertarians on the matter of William Weld is camouflage to enhance his credibility.
And as already explained on many prior threads:
Calling Rothbard Mr. Libertarian is a stretch. Over the course of his life he supported Strom Thurmond, Joe McCarthy, Richard Nixon, Pat Buchanan and David Duke. His disciples now stump for Trump.
What’s more, Rothbard did not agree with you. He argued for limiting naturalization of citizens, not for immigration restrictions.
Even more interesting, he was the one who wrote about “no particular orderism,” meaning that one pro-liberty policy should never be held hostage to another one. Holding migration freedom hostage to ending welfare is a prime example of that, and Rothbard wrote about the fallacy of such thinking.
It’s totally racist trash.
And you should read that entire JLS issue. The pro-migration freedom articles are by far the more logical and convincing ones.
Andy agrees with you.
As already pointed out to Andy on how many threads now?
Andy, regarding that inane and embarrassing selection from Rothbard in his declining years:
From another old thread. I did not find a link back to the article.
Governor Weld is beyond the pale for any libertarian possessed of both an IQ greater than 40 and a gram of self-respect (my assumption is that it was mostly the latter which was deficient in Orlando).
So do they also get to vote on who has children, how many and when?
So does modern day birth. So to be consistent you’ll have to join Augustus Invictus and call for eugenics. And, so does modern day “immigration” between states, cities, counties, etc. To be consistent you would have to call for immigration quotas, travel permits and border checkpoints between all of them. Wanna go there?
Yes, when regime thugs cross property lines to enforce immigration edicts they are not peaceful.
How many of the people being born in the US are libertarians? How many people crossing state, county and city borders are libertarians? That’s an absurd standard.
This type of idiotic misinterpretation is why that sentence needs to be taken out of the immigration plank.
Except for all the surveys you have been shown in past threads that show otherwise. But suppose you are correct; you can also say the same thing for various racial and ethnic groups that are already US citizens. Are you or are you not planning to carry out mass forced sterilization? Please answer the question and explain why or why not. You could also find that people who move from e.g. some states to others or from cities to formerly rural areas also have similar effects on votes in various places. So are you willing to extend your “logic” to regulating those kinds of moves in the same way you want to regulate moves between “nation” level regime gang turf lines?
You have been shown lots of surveys and stats in multiple past threads that show the exact opposite yet you keep repeating this lie.
It takes a seriously warped mind to see undocumented workers as an invading army. Although the way you phrase it there I don’t think is limited to undocumented workers only, but includes legal immigrants as well. I guess you really do believe I should have been kept from coming to the US, since my parents are Democrats as is my sister now (she was LP briefly).
Modern day immigration *control* is being used as a weapon by *statist regime thugs* to destroy what is left of the having any semblance of a government that is constrained by the US Constitution. Fixed, free of charge.
He’s been defending The Animal Dismemberer from Day One. But Governor Weld is beyond the pale for him.
Very disappointing. In a thread where a fascist masquerading as a libertarian posts lies about me that Andy is in a personal position to refute, he instead chooses to use his comments to agree with and amplify the fascist’s immigration position.
Correction: That requirement didn’t exist in 2012, either, when the Peace and Freedom Party ran Roseanne Barr.
“If dissolved, and the LPF re-constituted, that would trigger a state requirement for ‘new parties’ to need a petition of I think 300,000 signatures for a Presidential candidate (from zero now).”
I’d be interested in seeing Richard Winger or Darcy Richardson weigh in on that claim. If that requirement exists now, it came into existence very recently. At least as late as 2008, the requirement for presidential ballot access was that a party be affiliated with a national organization and submit an elector slate. No signatures involved.
Tony,
I wouldn’t consider it particularly ironic. Veteran activists (and at least one former drug dealer) tell me that the undercover cop in any group is almost invariably the guy who makes the most noise about the possibility of there being an undercover cop in the group. Sort of a variant on the phenomenon of the most vociferous homophobe in a group being somewhat more likely than anyone else in the group to be gay and in the closet.
Wouldn’t that be irony – the nutjob who accuses everyone of being a government paid troll actually being a nutjob who IS a government paid troll?
This looks like another phoney-baloney conflict to try and dissolve the LPF by a ‘fight’ of the extreme-right faction in charge since 2008 and the phony ‘fascist’ opposition. Note the current leaders used a state law to purge thousands in 2009 on including honorary member David Nolan, and never sequestered their monies into a trust as mandated by their Conventions, leaving the money intentionally vulnerable to lawsuits. NOW they want us to oppose their fascist pals? Right.
If dissolved, and the LPF re-constituted, that would trigger a state requirement for ‘new parties’ to need a petition of I think 300,000 signatures for a Presidential candidate (from zero now). That statute was pushed by pretend ‘ LPF and LP founder’ John Wayne Smith and his allies in the GOP and now in charge at LPF. That would screw up the 2020 campaign and be one even more serious lawsuit. That’s the real objective here.
LNC is to blame for doing nothing for years. Unsurprisingly, it’s the Nevada LP that wants to dissolve LPF. NV LP was taken over in 2008 IMHO. This gang has been messing up several successful state parties for years.
They’re following the exact playbook that hindered the LPF in the mid-70’s, then again in early eighties and again in the nineties. Each time the LPF had to re-organize wasting valuable time and assets. The only difference is Smith and allies got rid of the minutes and records first this time.
From what I can tell.
“[Andy’s] obtuse monotony is quite boring.”
Yes, it is, to people who pay ongoing attention.
But coupled with his past expressed obsessions, it’s pretty obvious that his intent is to catch newcomers to the liberty movement/Libertarian Party and turn them off to it; and probably also to provide a plausible media basis for accusing the Libertarian Party and libertarian movement of being a bunch of nutjobs.
He always picks an issue that’s trending or sensitive to obsess on, and he always picks the fuck-silliest possible position on that issue.
Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action. And I can think of four without even trying (9/11 “inside job” nuttery, school shooting “false flag” nuttery, marriage apartheid and immigration).
At this point, my only real question is whether Andy works for a government agency or for one of the authoritarian parties. That he’s intentionally working to discredit the libertarian movement in general and the Libertarian Party in particular is pretty much established beyond any reasonable doubt on my part, and he’s consistent and persistent enough in that effort that it’s doubtful he’s an unaffiliated freelance volunteer.
And for the umpteenth time, the open borders position is not the right to trespass on private property. The closed border position is the one that relies on an explicit right to trespass in order to enforce the policy.
http://www.npr.org/2017/02/23/516895052/landowners-likely-to-bring-more-lawsuits-as-trump-moves-on-border-wall
And this has been discussed/debated ad nauseam. Your obtuse monotony is quite boring.
(i) The American taxpayer doesn’t own anything. (ii) Taxpayer is not even an exclusionary status. As soon as you buy a stick of gum or a gallon of gas, you are a taxpayer. I don’t know who you think you are excluding. The only potential excluded group would be small children too young to buy stuff or pay taxes. So, I suppose in AndyLand, those too young to pay taxes would be forbidden to travel outside the old house until they’re old enough to buy something or pay taxes. Or maybe in AndyLand, you have a minimum age requirement of 35 to buy anything in order to enforce Hoppean property utopia[sic]..
RE: The Pure Anarcho-Capitalist Model.
(i) You assume libertarianism==anarcho capitalism. Nope. Not necessarily. Certainly not the Hoppean variety. So,
In anarcho-capitalist society…In discredited, crackpot versions of anarcho-capitalism => [insert crank conclusions here](ii) The internet renders Rothbard’s pure model DOA. The internet is a collection of (largely) wholly owned private networks that doesn’t behave anything like Rothbard’s model. The emergent property of the thing is “public network,” the default condition being pass, not trespass. Thesis debunked.
The only thing convincing from reading Rothbard and Hoppe re: Anarcho-capitalism is that there is no logical relationship between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism. Or even capitalism and anarcho-capitalism for that matter. Indeed, Hoppe’s extension of Rothbard’s paleo phase dispenses with capitalism altogether for an effective (race realistic)Amish-like propertarianism. The only practical use of the thing is for concocting crackpot arguments for increasing statist authority.
Rockwell hits the nail on the head here as well.
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal | Lew Rockwell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5wZjdEl9F8
Murray Rothbard hit the nail on the head here.
“This is from Murray Rothbard’s Nations by Consent: Decomposing the Nation-State. It was published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies in 1994.
Full quote & context below.
IV. THE PURE ANARCHO-CAPITALIST MODEL
I raise the pure anarcho-capitalist model in this paper, not so much to advocate the model per se as to propose it as a guide for settling vexed current disputes about nationality. The pure model, simply, is that no land areas, no square footage in the world, shall remain “public”; every square foot of land area, be they streets, squares, or neighborhoods, is privatized. Total privatization would help solve nationality problems, often in surprising ways, and I suggest that existing states, or classical liberal states, try to approach such a system even while some land areas remain in the governmental sphere.
Open Borders, or the Camp of-the Saints Problem
The question of open borders, or free immigration, has become an accelerating problem for classical liberals. This is first, because the welfare state increasingly subsidizes immigrants to enter and receive permanent assistance, and second, because cultural boundaries have become increasingly swamped. I began to rethink my views on immigration when, as the Soviet Union collapsed, it became clear that ethnic Russians had been encouraged to flood into Estonia and Latvia in order to destroy the cultures and languages of these peoples. Previously, it had been easy to dismiss as unrealistic Jean Raspail’s anti-immigration novel The Camp of the Saints, in which virtually the entire population of India decides to move, in small boats, into France, and the French, infected by liberal ideology, cannot summon the will to prevent economic and cultural national destruction. As cultural and welfare-state problems have intensified, it became impossible to dismiss Raspail’s concerns any longer.
However, on rethinking immigration on the basis of the anarcho-capitalist model, it became clear to me that a totally privatized country would not have “open borders” at all. If every piece of land in a country were owned by some person, group, or corporation, this would mean that no immigrant could enter there unless invited to enter and allowed to rent, or purchase, property. A totally privatized country would be as “closed” as the particular inhabitants and property owners desire. It seems clear, then, that the regime of open borders that exists de facto in the U.S. really amounts to a compulsory opening by the central state, the state in charge of all streets and public land areas, and does not genuinely reflect the wishes of the proprietors.
Under total privatization, many local conflicts and “externality” problems-not merely the immigration problem-would be neatly settled. With every locale and neighborhood owned by private firms, corporations, or contractual communities, true diversity would reign, in accordance with the preferences of each community. Some neighborhoods would be ethnically or economically diverse, while others would be ethnically or economically homogeneous. Some localities would permit pornography or prostitution or drugs or abortions, others would prohibit any or all of them. The prohibitions would not be state imposed, but would simply be requirements for residence or use of some person’s or community’s land area. While statists who have the itch to impose their values on everyone else would be disappointed, every group or interest would at least have the satisfaction of living in neighborhoods of people who share its values and preferences. While neighborhood ownership would not provide Utopia or a panacea for all conflicts, it would at least provide a “second-best” solution that most people might be willing to live with.
If you haven’t read Raspail’s “The Camp of the Saints” that Rothbard referenced, you should at least read about the book to understand what influenced him and what he was referring to:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Camp_of_the_Saints “
“dL
April 12, 2017 at 23:04
‘My border position is alot simpler, stop interventionism and the drug war and the welfare state and you remove opposition to loosening border restrictions.’
The libertarian position is that statist aggression a la interventionism, drug war and the welfare state(which flows much more to the top and middle than to the poor) does not thusly confer it a license for further aggression in the areas of freedom of movement and association. That’s a suicide pact for every single possible liberty, since apparently increased aggression confers license for further aggression.”
The actual libertarian position is that THERE IS NO RIGHT TO TRAVEL ONTO PROPERTY THAT IS OCCUPIED/OWNED by other people (the American taxpayers are the rightful owners of all of the public property/infrastructure in this country). Modern day immigration includes positive “rights”, that is “rights” that don’t exist, like “birthright” citizenship, “right” to vote, and “right” to welfare.
There is a big difference between peaceful people crossing borders and non-peaceful people crossing borders. You people who think that everyone who crosses the US border is peaceful are living in fantasy land. How many of these people are libertarians? Very few. Any who are not libertarians are BY DEFINITION, NOT peaceful people. Socialists, communists, theocrats, and non-political welfare leeches are NOT peaceful people.
Tell me what percent of foreigners entering the USA are libertarians? Every survey and analysis of voting demographics say that modern day immigrants who become “citizens” vote in SUPER-MAJORITY numbers to expand the welfare state and enact more gun control laws, at a rate higher than the native population. Every survey and statistical analysis shows that modern day immigrants (and their offspring) consume welfare at a higher rate than the native population. Yes, there are certainly exceptions to this, and I am well aware of the exceptions, but exceptions are NOT the rule.
There is obviously a serious problem with modern day immigration, which should more accurately be called statist migration, as lots of the wrong kind of people are flooding into this country, essentially an invading army of Marxists and theocrats. If would be one thing if all of these people were libertarians, but this is clearly NOT the case.
Modern day immigration is being used as a weapon by New World Order globalists to destroy what is left of the having any semblance of a government that is constrained by the US Constitution.
The libertarian position is that statist aggression a la interventionism, drug war and the welfare state(which flows much more to the top and middle than to the poor) does not thusly confer it a license for further aggression in the areas of freedom of movement and association. That’s a suicide pact for every single possible liberty, since apparently increased aggression confers license for further aggression.
Paul Stanton trounced Augustus Invictus by a 3-1 margin in the Florida Libertarian Senate Primary. Are you claiming credit for the Paul Stanton voters or merely driving the backlash libertarian response?
Claim: “Most of this is just drivel, I have spent a decade converting far right peoplle to libertarianism”
Reality: You’ve spent a decade infiltrating far reich slime into libertarianism
Claim: Matteo Marchetti is a communist ANTIFA terrorist,
Reality: I don’t know the guy, but I am an anti-communist as well as an anti-fascist and in no way whatsoever a terrorist and you have called me those same things, and he is an LP member from what I understand, so chances are you’re probably lying about him as well
Claim: he false allegations he was spreading have since been retracted.
Reality: If you are talking about Ms. Rice’s allegations about Invictus I have not seen her retract anything. If you have by all means show me the evidence and I will want to confirm it with her. Ms. Brown clarified that she did not have first hand knowledge of the facts in the case, which she never claimed to have in the first place.
Claim: The author of this article,
Reality: I am not the author of this article. I don’t even know who the author of this article is. I reposted it here for discussion, which I do with thousands of articles including many that I disagree with. My volunteer job here is to report news and introduce opinion pieces for discussion that are either about alt parties or independents or by someone involved in alt parties or independent politics. I might well repost your editorials if you asked, depending on how much time I have and whether I feel like it.
Claim: has a long criminal history.
Reality: Just that one conviction, if you want to talk about anything serious. An isolated incident when I admittedly went down the wrong path out of a long career. I have worked on hundreds of campaigns in the 16 years since then without any similar problems, all over the country. The rest of my criminal history is things like walking under the influence, trespassing (actually a bullshit charge since fundraising in front of a store is constitutionally protected activity in the state where that occurred), driving without a license … petty misdemeanors, and not even any of that in the last decade. Oh yeah, I was also held twice *without* any charges which I believe was most likely a case of mistaken identity. If you want to talk about bullshit lies people have spread or things I did when I was a kid and never got convicted for…well, whatever. Like I said you’re lucky I am not the litigious sort since you are spreading false rumors as if they were facts. Note that is different from what I have done in my articles since I always make sure to post what is a fact, what is an opinion and what is an allegation by someone else.
Claim: I have a long history of legislative and party accomplishment,
Response: Well, I’m not even going to bother whipping mine out on that one. Some people here know some of it.
Claim: Enjoy the hack journalism
Reality: Yes, your “journalism” about me certainly deserves that descriptor.
Claim: Enjoy the hack journalism and the threats on Brandi who is carrying my baby.
Reality: No one threatened her that I know of and I even took the section about her out of the article reposting out of courtesy since she is not on the LPF exec comm…although she is a county officer and former treasurer of Invictus for Senate. Also congratulations on the baby.
Ryan: “Pauli” AKA “Pauli Cannoli”
Paul: Wow, you can’t even get the name right. It’s Paul or Paulie, the i and the e are a package deal. You are about as accurate on that as on anything else in the article. And I haven’t used the cannoli nickname anywhere except FB in about 5-6 years. I haven’t figured out how to change it on there and haven’t had any compelling reason to do so.
Nice fiction piece Ryan. You’re lucky I am not the litigious sort since it is full of libel, slander, and just plain bullshit. Your headline alone is horseshit as I have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism (unlike, quite possibly, you) and don’t condone it in any way. Also, I am not “editor in chief” of IPR and in fact there is no such thing and if there was that would be Warren Redlich. That’s just your headline. Pointing out all the lies, distortions and half truths in your article may take longer than it’s worth, I may or may not get around to that.
The cover picture is from a photo shoot at a firearms manufacturer during the campiagn, thanks for picking a good one.
Most of this is just drivel, I have spent a decade converting far right peoplle to libertarianism, and the american guard and SDL are open to all races and sex orientations.
My border position is alot simpler, stop interventionism and the drug war and the welfare state and you remove opposition to loosening border restrictions.
Matteo Marchetti is a communist ANTIFA terrorist, and they conveniently leave out the fact any threats were in regards to BAR censure and the cease and desist notice. The false allegations he was spreading have since been retracted.
The author of this article, who is also a convicted forger of petitions, has a long criminal history. I have a long history of legislative and party accomplishment, single handedly turning a barren region into a thriving hub of libertarianism.
Enjoy the hack journalism and the threats on Brandi who is carrying my baby.
Read up on these buffoons, “Pauli” AKA “Pauli Cannoli” is Paul Frankel:
https://libertarianheathen.com/2017/04/11/meet-paul-frankel-editor-in-chief-at-ipr-antifa-terrorist-and-former-fugitivelnc-regional-alternate/
Once again…slowly….there was no press release. The link back to the original article is right at the top of the page. There was no top of the fold image in the original article so I chose one at random. As for FB I go there a lot less than a lot of people I know. And as for Invictus I am not sure I have ever met him at all. I did see him walking around once or twice at the convention in Orlando. His image has been on multiple articles here now including several lately. Any month you feel like moving on from non-issue would be great.
“Unless they read the article where the photo appears again lower down in the body of the article in the section under Ramsey, or know what Invictus looks like, or spend any time on facebook where that photo is a famous meme. ”
Your software give no way to view two parts of an article at the same time to see if photos are similar, assuming anyone suspected that they were. Most of us are perfectly happy not to have met Invictus often enough to remember what he looks like. Seek professional help for your apparent facebook addiction.
The normal editorial schema if one is repeating a press release, for example from the “Libertarians United Against Fascism” is that the photo shows the Libertarians United Against Fascism:
I see the photo as part of doxxing campaign against AI & RR. A photo that was posted a year ago on instagram or facebook by one or the other or both.
yes, it is a strange thing to be belaboring over.
Unless they read the article where the photo appears again lower down in the body of the article in the section under Ramsey, or know what Invictus looks like, or spend any time on facebook where that photo is a famous meme. It did not occur to me that anyone would make that mistake until you were the second person to do so, whereupon I added the caption to clear up any confusion. Please explain what you are still going on about with that, because I can’t even hazard guess.
dL A reasonable reader would infer the photo shows the people who wrote the statement and are threatening the LPF convention. If you actually knew the people in the photo you might have a different opinion, but I do not know them.
I’m sorry, is someone claiming that the photo with the article is not a photo of the people who wrote the text statement? There is no way any reader would suspect this.
Like I said, they can try. good luck w/ that. Nothing else needs to be debated or rationally adduced. Carpe libertatem…
Yeah, I first became of aware Preston through the old, long defunct blog, “The Art of the Possible.” He runs a site, “Attack the System.” I’ve used it as a resource from to time. Where I first became aware of this movement, the “Alternative Right” years ago(before it b/c the alt-right). Preston writes more like a social scientist, meaning it’s usually void of the vulgar cultural judgements. In other words, it’s not like your reading stormfront or the revolutionary conservative(stuff that i would never read). I do resource views/work across the ideological spectrum.
Some of the tactics are the same as what has been previously discussed by Tom and others such as putting pressure on LPF exec comm, replacing them if they don’t change their behavior, asking LNC to disaffiliate if they continue to facilitate fascist entryism, and so on. The only tactic I am seeing that is causing a lot of controversy, and rightly so, is asking the venue to cancel the invitation and contract to host the convention. I can understand why some would think that could be taken as a threat, although at least ostensibly the article says peacefully only. I can also understand why there would be a good case to be made that it would be counterproductive even if it is not strictly an initiation of force. It’s too bad that last question can’t be reasoned through, as I would like to see both cases made on that in a logical way.
To be fair, the photo was dug up and not posted as a threat by the “Invictus gang.” The last gun battle between warring political factions in the US that I’m aware of was the KKK vs the Communist Party in NC in the late 70s. At the time, it made national and international news. There’s a history channel documentary on it. In other words, the prospect of the thing is not exactly a common expectation/occurrence.
RE: LUF. I don’t agree w/ the tactics in this instance. But they can try…
Yes, I know. I didn’t feel like nitpicking the list and I think that even without Preston it’s pretty conclusive evidence of what Invictus is about and that it is not just something from his past. Andy brought up Roger Roots but did not name him. Roger makes no secret of having at one time been a racist skin and his writings on the subject under his real name are public. It has been brought up in his campaigns for public office. He has disavowed his past views and I have seen no indication whatsoever that he still holds any racial prejudice. That’s a lot different than Invictus constantly dancing on both sides of the explicit/implicit line of racism and fascism. If Invictus really showed that he truly changed his views I would not necessarily hold them against him. I have both believed and done a lot of really dumb things in the past and don’t make a secret of that either. But from everything I have seen Invictus has NOT changed in any meaningful respect.
Paulie,
As a pan-secessionist, Preston’s argument is that all anti-state factions should work together against the state.
Naturally, that argument is going to attract the less successful factions who can’t attract support on their own merits.
It’s the same reason that LPF is attractive to the nationalist hijackers but not vice versa. While LPF may not be wildly successful in the political realm, it’s orders of magnitude more successful than Invictus and his ideas could ever be on their own.
The difference between LPF and Preston is that LPF is an organization with a reason to fight against a takeover, while Preston is an organizational theorist without a reason to drive off any dog that will hunt with him because his theory IS “don’t drive off any dog that will hunt with you.” I tend to hold Preston at arm’s length because of the company he keeps, but I understand that his decision to keep said company doesn’t necessarily reveal his personal orientation.
People have tried ignoring him. He hasn’t gone away. Appeasing him won’t work either, as he will only try to grab more. There is no choice but to fight back.
Paulie, I guess you are right that trying to disrupt an LP meeting deserves coverage. I guess that a part of me thinks that if you ignore the guy he will go away.
I a tiny way, I agree with a tiny bit of what Andy said in that it distracts from other things
Granted, Preston is the most easily disputed item on the list. He purposely networks and encourages networking with racists and fascists but I have seen no evidence other than by association of him actually being one himself.
Tony,
Yes, I understand that. George was wrong and you were a little inaccurate in your description of libertarian attitudes toward guns. I was responding to you rather than directly to George because you got to the matter before I did.
Andy the Paranoid:
Andy, sometimes an ass hole is just an ass hole.
TK: ” . . . .Posing with guns is not, in and of itself, a threat of violence at all, let alone a clear and unambiguous threat of violence. . . . ”
That was George Phillies who wrote it was a threat of violence. I was responding to it
“[Keith] Preston is an infamous fascist”
Preston is a pan-secessionist anarchist. I disagree with him quite a bit and think he doesn’t do himself any favors by being willing to speak anywhere that will have him, but calling him an “infamous fascist” is fucking dumb.
Since some people don’t read the article before commenting here are the relevant sections about Invictus’ current beliefs:
Yes, He is Still a Fascist
Let’s make things perfectly clear. Invictus indeed claims to have rejected the state eugenics policies he advocated in law school [archive]. This rejection is purely one of application. He has not abandoned eugenics because it is disgusting, immoral, depraved, racist and violent. Indeed, he still confirms as of March 24th that he believes the “strong and intelligent should breed – and the weak and stupid should not”. He simply no longer believes that government planned eugenics would be practical. Although his original paper disavowed any selection on the basis of race or ethnicity, when viewed in light of his repeat moaning about higher non-white immigrant birth rates, people he characterized as “parasites” in the above letter, some reading between the lines is not unreasonable.
As to his comments in favor of “state-sponsored murder”, the LFP’s excuse that this is ambiguous is laughable. We are talking about a man that proudly declares the solution to the radical Islam is a “Reconquista”. Who openly talks about murdering leftists one minute and then tries to play it off as an exaggeration the next. Who stated in 2013 [archive] that “I have prophesied for years that I was born for a Great War; that if I did not witness the coming of the Second American Civil War I would begin it myself”.
He still talks about this. His website, the Revolutionary Conservative, openly proclaims an intention to spark a right-wing insurrection, as he does again and again in his Fireside Chats and Guerrilla Radio podcasts. Aside from all that, Invictus supports a border wall, an escalation of ICE raids and travel bans to keep immigrants from freely moving about and living where they wish. He supports these policies both in the United States and in Europe as defense of a decaying Western civilization. The scale of violence needed to achieve this, and to remove the millions already living in these societies, is nothing short of state-sponsored ethnic cleansing.
Oh, and we seem to recall this beacon of free speech and civil debate issuing defamation lawsuits to people saying things about him he didn’t like. Not just toward the LPF, but also to the woman who broke the story alleging a history of domestic violence, rape and kidnapping. He has since descended into victim blaming conspiracy theories involving the victim, Paul Stanton, former LPF chair Adrian Wyllie, the FBI, and others.
….
Because so many of his defenders’ pleas hinge on framing these as relics of a distant past and no longer indicative of his present stances, here is a list of things he has done or been discovered to have done in the past month:
“He’s lying. Try reading the whole article above for absolute 100% positive proof on that.”
Let’s not overthink this here. Andy is trying to protect a fellow traveler on Fascist-Racist Avenue…or at least protect the message if he has to ditch the vehicle.
He smart enough to know this lowlife crew can ruin the “respectable” Xenophobia he’s trying to sell to Libertarians.
” I do not know whether or not Augustus has anything to do with the “weird stuff” to which I am referring, but some of the comments made by this Ramsey guy over the last few days sound like they came out of the government troll playbook.”
From what I have been told Invictus is making the same exact statements to a lot of people. He does not know me and as far as I can remember we never met but he is allegedly going around telling all sorts of people that I am a pedophile. He is the one who was dating a 17 year old girl and allegedly trying to hook up with other girls that age or younger while in his 30s, not me. He is the one who wrote about raping a 14 year old girl in Mexico and labelled it non fiction, not me. I have never had sex with anyone under 18 as far as I know since I have been over 18 myself. So on what basis would he call me a pedophile other than psychological projection?
He also wrote me and other people and made it sound like he had already been talking to me and making various requests whereas in fact that is the first time in my life I remember him ever addressing me anywhere about anything whatsoever. This guy is nuts, and dangerous. Read the whole article please, before commenting further. I know it’s long but read it.
“Augustus has said multiple times that he no longer supports government forced eugenics. This was something he supported years before he joined the LP.”
He’s lying. Try reading the whole article above for absolute 100% positive proof on that.
“Augustus has said multiple times that he no longer supports government forced eugenics.”
Yes, he has. The problem with that (other than that he never should have supported government forced eugenics in the first place) is that every time he says he no longer supports government forced eugenics in one place, he gets caught supporting government forced eugenics elsewhere.
There are many problems with Invictus. One of the biggest problems with him is that he’s a lying sack of shit who can’t be trusted to tell the truth about anything at any time. When someone continually makes conflicting, mutually exclusive statements, the only safe course is to assume that the worst ones are the true ones.
“I have to wonder if this is a part of some kind of government sabotage operation that is meant to create friction in the LP, and to distract us from more serious issues… some of the comments made by this Ramsey guy over the last few days sound like they came out of the government troll playbook.”
Man, you just love your conspiracy theories, Andy.
You’d be better chalking this up to plain old white trash behavior born of a thousand insecurities.
Thomas,
You’ll get no argument from me there.
Personally, I find the photo incredibly cheesy.
I still say they are overcompensating for something. But hey, so are alcoholics and I don’t want to go back to Prohibition either.
Augustus has said multiple times that he no longer supports government forced eugenics. This was something he supported years before he joined the LP. Most LP members previously held views that were anti-liberty on a variety of issues, as most LP members did not start out life as libertarians, and there is still plenty of infighting in the party over philosophy and strategy and issue stances.
Is Augustus lying about no longer supporting government forced eugenics? Maybe he is or maybe he is not, but the same question could be asked of almost everyone else in the Libertarian Party over views they held prior to joining the LP, as most LP members did not start out as libertarians.
Augustus has basically said that he believes that a free market system, as in one with no welfare state, would naturally breed a more rugged population. This is his opinion, and as long as he is not proposing a program of government forced eugenics, which he says he is not, and which I did not see in his campaign platform, I do not see a problem.
I do not know if Augustus was ever a part of any neo-Nazi skinhead group, but I know of at least two libertarians who were, and at least one of them is an LP member (I am not sure if the other one I am thinking of has ever been an LP member or not, but they are a known small “l” libertarian activist). I do not want to stir up anymore controversy, so I am not going to mention any names, but there are posters here who probably know who both of these people are.
Having said this, given the articles and comments made by this Ramsey guy, and given all of the trolling and other weird stuff that has gone on at IPR and in the LP over the last several years (MOST POSTERS HERE DO NOT KNOW ALL OF WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT IN REGARD TO THIS STUFF, SO IF YOU THINK YOU KNOW IT ALL, CHANCES ARE GOOD THAT YOU DO NOT), I have to wonder if this is a part of some kind of government sabotage operation that is meant to create friction in the LP, and to distract us from more serious issues (like stopping Top Two Primary), and from building the party. I do not know whether or not Augustus has anything to do with the “weird stuff” to which I am referring, but some of the comments made by this Ramsey guy over the last few days sound like they came out of the government troll playbook.
Little things like successful takeover of LPF, LPF retracting its correct condemnation of him from last year under threat of malicious and frivolous litigation, shutdown of the Mid Atlantic Liberty Festival, allegations of rape and domestic violence, calls to disaffiliate LPF and now calls to shut down the LPF convention. I’d say that warrants IPR coverage.
Not all Libertarians love guns. Someone can support gun rights and still personally loathe guns. A pacifist can be a consistent libertarian. George and RTAA were confused and thought the people in the photo were LUAF, when actually they are the fascist “libertarians” that LUAF is speaking out against. The photo is correctly identified later in the article but I added a caption to prevent such confusion on the part of less careful readers. Because they skimmed the article RTAA and George missed things such as
” We’re going to peacefully burn your house to the ground with all the fascists inside. ”
Note peacefully.
“Before that begins, we recommend getting in touch with LNC members before April 15th and asking them to excommunicate Florida. We also recommend getting in touch with the LPF Executive Committee members and the Convention organizer, Marc Tancer, and letting them know how you feel about harboring fascists.
But we especially recommend contacting the venue, to inform them that the LPF is hosting known fascists on their property. These individuals are: Augustus Invictus, Raquel Okyay, Ryan Ramsey and Brandi Hicks. Let them know that Invictus and Okyay were responsible for similar outrage and cancellation of the Mid Atlantic Liberty Festival in Harrisburg Pennsylvania on April 1st. Direct them to photos if you can. Ramsey’s tattoos really stand out.
To any state Libertarian parties and to LNC members, denounce and dissociate from these fools until either the fascists or the LPF itself are gone.”
Yes, getting the venue to cancel is questionable but it’s still persuasion, not force or threat of force.
Knapp suggests he knows the people involved and that there are implicit threats in there, but I’d just have to take his word for it. If on the other hand you made the mistake, as George and RTAA did, of thinking the photo of Ramsey, Invictus et al was LUAF, combined with talk of “shutting down” the convention and read just the beginning of the post or skimmed it, then yes, I can see how it could be taken as a threat. Owning and carrying guns is one thing, showing them off in the context of getting an event cancelled would have been a different issue. But that is not what is happening here.
Anthony,
Libertarians believe in freedom, and that includes the right to carry any type of firearm on one’s own property, on public property, or on another’s private property where the owner consents.
Posing with guns is not, in and of itself, a threat of violence at all, let alone a clear and unambiguous threat of violence.
Why does this irrelevant fascist keep getting coverage? In the words of our “distinguished” leader Darth Trump, he is a “total loser.”
———————————————————————–
Jorge filipe: ” . . . . . .posing with guns is a clear and unambiguous threat of violence. . . . . . ”
Wait, I thought Libertarians loved guns and argue that citizens should be able to carry any type of firearm anywhere they want. But now you find them threatening?
I might. Looking forward to learning more myself. If you can put me in touch that would be great.
“we don’t know who is even in LUAF or if any of them are even in Florida”
You might be surprised at how much I know. And I’ll be learning more.
Well you can do that, but we don’t know who is even in LUAF or if any of them are even in Florida. Although I consider myself a libertarian antifascist, I don’t know who made or runs the website and social media accounts, and I am not in Florida either. For all we know it’s all one person and from a different state. So your motion would quite likely have no practical effect after being adopted.
I agree with the first and middle parts, but I disagree with the characterization of LUAF. You are of course free to not talk to whoever it is, but if my goals were what you say yours are I would talk to them. I will try to get some discussion on that end if I can.
Yes, LUF issues veiled threats and then disclaims “oh, we don’t mean THAT.”
It’s passive-aggressive bullshit and I’m not going to humor it.
If LUF is successful with its threats and manages to shut down the convention in advance, I’ll be asking the LPF’s executive committee for an emergency rules suspension to allow for an online convention. LPF is actually reasonably well set up for credentialing for such an event (registration as a delegate requires the member’s Florida voter ID to prove LPF registration, which can be checked online).
If LPF is disaffiliated from national without having its chance to set the ship right, I will strongly agitate for any new affiliate to explicitly exclude not just the Invictus fascists, but the LUF fascists, from membership.
LPF was horribly wrong in negotiating with the terrorist Invictus. That should be corrected — but negotiating with the terrorist LUF isn’t a correction.
No, the article explicitly rejects the initiation of violence or force and says any and all means used will be peaceful, several times.
Nice fantasy, but you’re barking up the wrong tree. No one is going to stand between you and the hall or attack or threaten to attack you. What might happen is that one person, or a small group of people, will politely call the hotel and give them reasons why it’s not in their best interest to host the event. You make a good case as to why they should not do that, and they might be more apt to listen if you didn’t come up with silly scenarios about them trying to physically bar you from the convention hall.
It’s not a press release, it’s an article and the photo is clearly of Invictus, Ramsey and friends and appears later in the article again. It appears you did not actually read the article. Maybe read the beginning or skimmed it?
I’m astounded that anyone would read it that way but you are the second person to make the mistake, so I’ll add a caption. If you follow the link back to the original, that photo does not appear at the top, only in the body of the article as it does again here. How can you read an article that *explicitly* rejects the initiation of force, and has the same photo later in the article explaining that it is Ramsey and his friends, and jump to the conclusion that the photo is of their opponents and that their opponents are threatening violence? I would attribute that to reader error, not editing error, but I want to avoid any further reader error so I’ll add a caption.
“Absolutely no one from the antifascist side has hinted at any violence.”
Absolutely all the LUF post does is “hint” at violence. “Nice convention you got there, be a shame if anything happened to it.”
Or are you admitting that LUF is not “the antifascist side?”
If practical, I will give anyone standing between me and the convention hall one warning before rolling right over them by any means necessary. I’m not “hinting” at violence. Attack or threaten to attack me and I’ll put you down like a dog.
Absolutely no one from the antifascist side has hinted at any violence. The article clearly rejects any such thing, as do I.
However, you do make a good point that shutting down the convention short-circuits the ability to use the party’s own process for treating the fascist infection.
On the other hand you also say on your blog that your estimate the chances of being able to succeed at that are low. I think you are correct. For one thing, region reps are elected by their regions so even if you could sweep the officers it’s likely that region reps like Ramsey and Okyay would still be on the next committee. And I doubt you can sweep the officers.
Procedurally, it would be good to say you gave it one last try but on the other hand they can then once again claim that you are trying to overturn a properly noticed convention afterwards.
I understand your point about the conflicting demands and the catch 22 situation. Instead of branding them as thugs, which they are not, you could try engaging anyone talking about using non-violent persuasion to have the hotel no longer host the event and seeing whether those strategic differences can be resolved.
Absolutely no one is even talking about using force to try to keep the convention from happening. At least one person or perhaps a group of people are talking about calling the hotel and persuading (not threatening) them to not host the event if fascists are using it as an opportunity to organize and consolidate control over the party. If they do succeed at that, I guess no one will stop you from being a guest of the hotel regardless.
Hopefully, whoever is talking about shutting it down is also open to reasonable discussion about whether that is the correct tactic or whether the LPF needs to be given one last chance to redeem itself. And hopefully, you are willing to engage them in such discussion.
“Pretty sure Florida does have open carry, and probably concealed carry”
Florida does not have open carry. It has concealed carry but requires a permit (my impression is that many people ignore the permit requirement, as well they should).
Interestingly, one of the leading activists for open carry in Florida is Ryan Ramsey.
My assumption is that quite a few people who come to the convention will come heavy.
Cool! If you can help us liveblog, take some photos or videos or whatnot that would be awesome.
I’ve never been turned away from being allowed to observe an LP convention in any state. I assume you can probably bring popcorn.
Probably not. Pretty sure Florida does have open carry, and probably concealed carry, but I have no idea about the hotel.
Too much is never enough.
It’s everyone make up your own accent weekend, or so I am told.
LP has issued a release. I’ve published that and similar releases from Greens and at least two splinters of Socialists, including links to local demonstration organizing (unfortunately, once again only the socialists have such links and not the LP). There was also last night’s letter from Arvin Vohra, and I’m sure there will be more coming that we will be publishing. To anyone who was trying to claim that Trump is a non-interventionist: I hate to say it, but I told you so. Wait, that’s not completely true. Getting to say I told you so is one of the few silver linings about having the Cheeto Benito as president. Still, I wish I had been wrong for the sake of everyone who will be killed, maimed, traumatized, made homeless, etc, etc.
Your suggestions are welcome. How would you suggest amplifying whatever miniscule impact we have on foreign policy?
Unfortunately, we have to deal with warmongers and fascists within the LP as well as in the real halls of power. The LP is pretty useless for fighting fascists, tyrants and warmongers if it becomes infested with a virulent strain of the same.
From my blog:
“We’re going to shut it down.”
That’s a gang calling themselves “Libertarians United Against Fascism.” What they’re threatening to shut down, unless they get their way, is the Libertarian Party of Florida’s state convention. And their two demands relating to that threat are designed to be impossible to meet.
Here’s their threat in full.
There are two demands, one implicit, one explicit.
The implicit demand is that LPF rid itself of the fascists attempting to take it over.
The explicit demand is that LPF bar those of its members deemed fascists by “Libertarians United Against Fascism” (including members of its executive committee) from the convention.
LPF cannot rid itself of the fascists on its executive committee without having its convention.
LPF cannot have a valid convention while barring members “Libertarians United Against Fascism” doesn’t like from participating.
This is not a matter of “Libertarians United Against Fascism” and LPF fighting together against the Augustus Invictus gang.
It’s a matter of “Libertarians United Against Fascism” and the Augustus Invictus gang fighting together against LPF.
I don’t intend to let either of these thug factions win. I’m coming to my party’s convention. Want to stop me? Try it and see what happens, assholes.
That would be nice, but they should also reaffirm their prior statement about Invictus and retract the retraction. Furthermore, they should not re-elect anyone who voted for the retraction. They should revoke the memberships of Invictus, Ramsey and anyone else actively involved in promoting fascist entryism into LPF, as inconsistent with their membership oaths. That seems unlikely to happen, so they should be disaffiliated as a stain on the national party.
Assuming that the photo and the rant are the same people and press release, as opposed to IPR having made a very serious editing error, writing “There will be no business as usual. Because unless the LPF bars all the named individuals from their organization, there will be no convention. We’re going to shut it down.” and posing with guns is a clear and unambiguous threat of violence.
No, it’s Ryan Ramsey, Augustus Invictus and their fellow gang of fascist “libertarians.” It’s repeated later in the article so I don’t see why you would be confused.
I have no idea how you drew such an inference. Libertarians United Against Fascism is the source of the article, not the subject.
Augustus Invictus is the guy in the chair. Ryan Ramsey is the guy with no shirt. I don’t know who the other two are but obviously friends of theirs. Not all skinheads are pro-fascist though, there are Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice (SHARPs) and other traditional skins that oppose racism and others that are non-political.
I see no reason to that nor how any reasonable person would be so confused, particularly when the same photo appears again later in the article.
“Libertarians United Against Fascism” makes demands of the LPF that can only be met at the party’s convention and that represent what some of us INTEND to get done at the party’s convention.
“Libertarians United Against Fascism” then announces its intent to make sure that the convention does not take place.
It’s not LPF and “Libertarians United Against Fascism” versus the Invictus gang, it’s “Libertarians United Against Fascism” and the Invictus gang versus the LPF, versus freedom, and versus humankind.
If someone tries to stop me from attending my party’s convention, I don’t give a rat’s ass if it’s one of Invictus’s openly avowed fascists or one of LUF’s fascists branding themselves as anti-fascists. I’ll meet violence with violence either way.
I just happen to be less than an hour away the weekend of the convention.
May non-residents observe? May I bring popcorn?
Do I have to bring an AR?
Does everyone get to speak like a Southern version of Tammany Hall or just Augustus?
Too much fun.
On another topic, Trump is trying to stir up another World War. Shouldn’t we be raising our hands and objecting or something given that both parties are cheering on an illegal use of force?
Or is dealing with the theatrics of Augustus and crew more important to Liberty?
I believe the Florida LP ought to issue a new statement declaring firmly that the Florida LP rejects the ideas of eugenics. The statement should also reject the notion that human beings should be judged by their ethnicity. The statement need not mention any particular human being.
Is the top photo of Libertarians United Against Fascism? The headline mentions that group, followed by that photo, so the implication is that the photo is of Libertarians United Against Fascism. But the guns and tattoos make them appear like skinheads (i.e., pro-Invictus), and not Libertarians United Against Fascism (anti-Invictus).
If that top photo is not Libertarians United Against Fascism. someone should either change the photo, or the name in the headline.
Mine too.
Libertarians United Against Fascism, as quoted in the article, myself, and libertarian antifascists explicitly reject such tactics, therefore I say we.
I’m not a member of any group, except in the broader sense of a group being defined as it defines itself. I am not aware that Libertarians United Against Fascism is a membership organization, but if it is I may well join. As it is I’ve “joined” in a completely informal sense, ie by self-identifying.
I’ve long considered myself an antifascist. Contrary to the bullshit smear article
https://libertarianheathen.com/2017/04/11/meet-paul-frankel-editor-in-chief-at-ipr-antifa-terrorist-and-former-fugitivelnc-regional-alternate/
I have never been a member of a group, although I did hang out with a bunch of antifascists in New York in the 1980s and physically fought fascists side by side with them. I was not patched, I did not pay dues, etc. I’ve done some sporadic online activism against fascists in the years since then but haven’t been at an antifascist demo in ages. I would go to one if it was nearby and I wasn’t busy. But that hasn’t presented itself in many years. I haven’t been in a physical fight of any kind in many years. I’m not in shape for that anymore.
What makes you think there are any meetings? My best guess would be that it’s just a webpage and some social media accounts. If there are any meetings then no, I haven’t been to them and haven’t heard of them happening. My activism against the nazis, such as it is, is online. I am guessing theirs is too.
Actually, I do, but only for cold weather wear. It’s not something I wear to conceal my identity or as a fashion statement or when the weather is above freezing.
But what makes you think that Libertarians United Against Fascism walk around in such outfits? You seem to have Libertarians United Against Fascism confused with the Black Bloc or something.
What does group membership entail? I actively and strongly oppose fascism. To the extent that there are organized groups of people who get into physical altercations with fascists, no, I have not done that in many years, and would not condone now many of the things we did then, although a lot of them I would. I get the impression that Libertarians United Against Fascism is organized very, very loosely if at all. I think there’s a good chance it is online only and a fair chance it is actually one person. My best guess would be Mike Shipley but I could be completely wrong, as I actually have no idea who it is.
Nevertheless I agree with what I have seen posted on that website and I consider myself a libertarian antifascist so I have as much right to say “we” as anyone else.
“Is there are criminal investigation”
Should read, “Is there a criminal investigation…”
“paulie Post author
April 11, 2017 at 22:25
What makes you think there will be any bomb threats? I’ve seen no one advocating bomb threats much less making them. There is also no evidence that I know of that any bomb threats were made in Harrisburg, either. The police could not guarantee the safety to the hotel based on some other things some Antifa group in the area has allegedly done in the past according to these cops. That’s a long ways from proof of an actual bomb threat, and certainly no one is calling for anything like that here”
If there was really a bomb threat made for the Mid-Atlantic Liberty Festival, that’s a criminal act, and there should be a criminal investigation going on over this, and if the person who made the bomb threat is caught, they should be charged with felonies.
Is there are criminal investigation going on over this? If not, I wager that there was no bomb threat, or if there was, it was made by government agents who were acting as provocateurs, and are being shielded from prosecution.
My guess is that there was no bomb threat. If anything happened, somebody could have told the hotel and/or the police about the protesters that showed up when Augustus Invictus was spoke at a bar in Portland, Oregon last year, and they also found out that Invictus had been blocked from traveling to Canada to speak due to fears that him speaking would lead to protests (as if he is more famous than he really is). They may have also looked at what happened recently with Antifa protesters in Washington DC during Trump inauguration, and at that event where Milo was going to speak in Berkely, and this caused the hotel management and the police to freak out and over-react.
“– in fact, we explicitly reject such tactics.’
Why do you say “we” as if you are a member of some group? I am not aware of you being a part of any Antifa group. Have you attended any of their meetings? If so, where? I have not seen you walking around in a black outfit with a black mask. Do you own such an outfit? Saying that you oppose fascism is not the same thing as being a member of one of these Antifa groups.
I am glad that I voted for Paul Stanton in the Libertarian Primary last year.
What makes you think there will be any bomb threats? I’ve seen no one advocating bomb threats much less making them. There is also no evidence that I know of that any bomb threats were made in Harrisburg, either. The police could not guarantee the safety to the hotel based on some other things some Antifa group in the area has allegedly done in the past according to these cops. That’s a long ways from proof of an actual bomb threat, and certainly no one is calling for anything like that here – in fact, we explicitly reject such tactics.
This is really getting quite ridiculous. So whose going to call in the next bomb threat to shut things down?
Taking out the trash is not fascism….
I’m aware of only one group of thugs here. Libertarians United Against Fascism are not thugs, and are not calling for violent confrontation with fascists. The article makes it clear that they are calling for peaceful persuasion of LPF exec comm amd party members, LNC members, and the hotel venue of the LPF convention venue. The last is a tactic that libertarians can legitimately question, but as long as the calls are limited to persuasion and do not involve any threats they are not initiation of force by any stretch. I don’t know how you reach the conclusion that there are two groups of thugs here. Please re-read more carefully and show me what I missed if you think any thug tactics are being advocated or threatened.
What are those guys in the first photo overcompensating for?
Oh, good, one group of thugs pursuing another.
Readers should recall that Florida has rather firm stand your ground laws, not to mention concealed carry laws, so there is some likelihood of unpleasant events wherever these various factions collide.