Press "Enter" to skip to content

Controversial Libertarian Nominee for Governor of NH Advocates Cameras in the Classroom to Fight ‘Wokeness’

Over the weekend the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire nominated controversial “organizational psychologist turned unwoke activist” Karlyn Borysenko for governor.

Borysenko quickly announced that, if elected, her first act as governor will involve putting cameras in all public school classrooms.

“I will sign an executive order mandating every school receiving government funding put a camera in every classroom to broadcast what teachers are teaching to parents of those students. No cameras, no funding,” tweeted Borysenko.

The program would presumably be to root out “wokeness” in the classroom, as the candidate has written a book called Actively Unwoke. A big fan of former president Donald Trump, Borysenko’s unusual religious beliefs drew some national attention last December when she tweeted that “everyone who died in the Holocaust chose to die in the Holocaust before they were ever born.”

The newly minted LPNH nominee also has some words for sitting Governor Chris Sununu, inviting him to… well, you can read…

About Post Author

Austin Cassidy

12 Comments

  1. Ed Johnson Ed Johnson January 31, 2022

    Hitler is in heaven? I guess they didn’t make the t in libertarian look like a burning cross by accident.

  2. MRJarrell MRJarrell January 31, 2022

    So, creating another surveillance state is Llibertarian? I’m starting to believe the LPNH does have some problems with insanity. Seriously, WTF? And the childish tweet? Looks like some needs to sort themselves out.

  3. Jared Jared January 31, 2022

    Actively Unhinged. What in hell goes on in the LPNH?

  4. Richard Winger Richard Winger January 31, 2022

    There is no party name protection in New Hampshire, and in 2008 the First Circuit uphold that policy. That is why there were two presidential nominees on the ballot in November 2008, both with the label “Libertarian”. It could happen again in 2022, with regard to either the gubernatorial or US Senate election.

  5. Jared Jared January 31, 2022

    Thanks, Richard. I was wondering about that. But did the state party in fact nominate this character? Is she running with their endorsement?

  6. Kaufmann and Borysenko were both nominated at the 2022 LPNH convention, by a vote of 55 to 5 or so. The nomination has no legal consequences.

  7. SocraticGadfly SocraticGadfly January 31, 2022

    Well, per George Phillies and contra what might be inferred from Richard Winger, she’s the “official” Libertarian candidate. And, as far as ballot listing, which is something “legal,” isn’t that a legal consequence? And, given they use the Libertarian torch in their imagery, etc., they’re the official LP in the state.

    There may be an unofficial Libertarian later, maybe?

  8. Andy Andy January 31, 2022

    “Richard Winger
    January 31, 2022 at 11:54
    There is no party name protection in New Hampshire, and in 2008 the First Circuit uphold that policy. That is why there were two presidential nominees on the ballot in November 2008, both with the label ‘Libertarian’. It could happen again in 2022, with regard to either the gubernatorial or US Senate election.”

    This is something which ought to be changed.

  9. Shawn Levasseur Shawn Levasseur February 1, 2022

    No party name protection, but the LPNH seems to be embracing this candidate… Which is madness which I did not even think the LPNH would take on,,, But that means the question of party name protection is moot.

    Though it does add fuel to the disaffiliation fire.

  10. Ed Johnson Ed Johnson February 1, 2022

    “And, as far as ballot listing, which is something “legal,” isn’t that a legal consequence? ”

    Since they are not a state recognized party with ballot access, the answer in this case is no. Their endorsed candidate has to petition for ballot access under the same rules as anyone else who may want to petition as a “Libertarian,” and the state will put anyone, more than one person, or no one on the ballot for an office as a Libertarian. It will have nothing to do with whether they are endorsed by the LNC recognized state party, only if they got enough signatures that the towns and the state deem valid by whenever the deadline will be.

  11. Jeremy Kauffman Jeremy Kauffman February 2, 2022

    The most dangerous and unaccountable public servants in America are cops and teachers. If you support cameras on one, you should support cameras on the other.

  12. Ed Johnson Ed Johnson February 3, 2022

    The reasons to support cameras on police officers is that their jobs often lead them to situations where force up to and including deadly force is used, but more often beating, chemical sprays, threatening with a weapon, physical restraints, and the use or threat of jail/prison, court fines, criminal record, and so on. This often leads to either abuse of power or on the other hand false accusations of abuse of power. Often there are no witnesses other than the officer or sometimes fellow officers and the accused / accuser / deceased.

    This is not parallel with what happens with teachers, which almost never involves deadly force, relatively rarely involved any kind of physical force or loss of freedom or criminal record, and usually involves quite a few other students and or staff as witnesses.

    Recording classrooms also records students, which curtails their freedom of expression because their parents may watch or listen or for that matter all sorts of other adults that they do or don’t know. If they are put on camera it can also lead to unwelcome attention from other kids and adults alike. This sounds like a really bad idea, and not what I would associate with libertarian. It actually sounds much more like authoritarian. Do we really want to train kids to be on camera all day every day? I hope not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.