Gosh, well I suppose I could go on about how everyone is equal and stuff, but I think I'll just be happy that you've finally made some concession about possibly caring about your fellow man and what happens to them.

Baby steps. ;)

btw, about your story in your previous post. Do you think the way the party treated you has anything to do with why you feel the way you do about collective responsibility?

Then, in what sense are they a 'party' ?

Not at all. The Libertarian Party was built around individualism. This is why the LP is often accused of trying to herd cats. Libertarians all hold individualism very highly and all think they know what's best for the party.

Libertarian is also based on two core beliefs. I have been accused by the Republicans in the party of being a "small tent" libertarian. The truth is I am a big tent libertarian. I just want everyone in the Libertarian tent to actually be a libertarian. In other words, they must subscribe to the core values of the libertarian philosophy.

The 2 core values of libertarianism are...

1) We own ourselves. No other person or group of people regardless of their number has any legitimate claim to our body or the fruits of our labor.

2) The N.A.P. (Sometimes called Z.A.P.) for Non-Aggression Principle or Zero Aggression Principle. This means libertarians are against the INITIATION of non-defensive force, especially for political gain or social engineering. This is true regardless of whether the force is physical, legislative, or comes in the form of threats or coercion.

Unlike other political parties, the L.P. actually has a pledge to join. Well they did for decades. I'm not sure if they do anymore because it made the Republicans feel uncomfortable. They don't want to pledge not to use force or coercion because they support those things. They don't think it's fair that we demand an adherence to principles because they gave up any principles they might have had long ago.

Did we ever go over why David Nolan wrote the pledge to read the way it does?

They have meetings where they follow Roberts Rules of Order, they work together on trying to block bad legislation, they do outreach and information booths, and they vote for libertarian candidates....oh and they ask for donations a lot.

I don't think we ever discussed that. I actually know David Nolan and he's backed me up when I was attacked by the Republitarians, so that might be fun.

lol. Sectarianism. Gotta love it. The world is truly the same over, we just paint it a little differently from place to place.

Please don't think I am mocking you with that Radar....or at least, if I am mocking you, I am also mocking myself :P

I was going to say, that's not a party thats a pressure group but then you added the bit about donations :P

True enough. I am not in the party to be a councillor, I am a councillor to further the party's political aims and because I believe in the Labour movement and the place of the Labour Party within that movement.

Nolan wrote the pledge to indicate to the feds, and to the joiners, that the organization did not intend to become one of the radical groups at the time, such as the Black Panthers and Weather Underground, bent on carrying out domestic terrorism.

I knew he added the pledge so the feds would know the LP wasn't intent on a violent overthrow of the government, though in my eyes, I would see a violent overthrow of our government as an exercise of our unalienable rights described in the Declaration of Independence and also it wouldn't be the initiation of force, but rather using defensive force against those who are already using force against us.

I don't consider taking over the American government and forcing it to return to the one described in the Constitution by eliminating everything not specifically enumerated to be terrorism. I consider it to be patriotism.

The Black Panthers and the Weather Underground killed innocent people and wanted to dismantle the government without rebuilding it.

The pledge was more than just what David had originally intended though. It became a litmus test for members. It held people to a higher standard and laid out expectations. This way if someone runs as a Libertarian and says we need to kill babies to make soilent green, we can kick them out of the party and say their views don't mesh with ours.

So, basically, "original intent" in this context means absolutely nothing to you.

The original intent for the pledge in a political party I don't belong to means less to me than the original intent of our founders when they created the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.

So, "we" in your context means "everybody except me".

The term "we" applies all people within the group being described including the person making the description.

For instance the use of the phrase "We" here:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

I love how you change the rules of interpretation to suit your own needs/wants/points...whatever.

By all means show me where I've changed anything.

Looking back on the sentence in question, I can see how it could be confusing. I wrote it quickly. Perhaps by rephrasing the sentence and adding some punctuation, I can eliminate any confusion with regard to my "original intent". :)

The pledge was more than just what David had originally intended though. It became a litmus test for members. It held people to a higher standard and laid out expectations. This way if someone runs as a Libertarian and says "We need to kill babies to make soilent green", the members of the Libertarian Party can kick them out of the party and say the views of the candidate don't mesh with libertarian philosophy or those of other party members.

It is not worth the time nor the effort. Suffice it to say that your "interpretation of one thing is "to the letter" and of others, you define what is implied by the text.

Give me a break man. The Constitution was written by a room full of guys over the period of months where each word and punctuation mark were scrutinized to the point of physical fights. This can and should be taken to the letter.

I wrote it in 10 seconds while I was thinking of it. This should be taken as I meant it.

whatever - I stand by what I said already - not worth a fihgt nor a bunch of negativity -


peace.

That's my kind of woman! Cheers! :3eye:

There should be more like us. ;)

*Grins* I just received a letter from the Group Whip.

A written warning. lol. Either they couldn't throw the book at me without also throwing at the other councillor who rebelled (historically a friend of theirs and our longest serving councillor).....or, they know they're on very thin ice with the deal they struck and daren't do anything which would provoke me into contesting it through region. I did make it clear to the whip that if the whip was withdrawn I would appeal it. Alternatively they realise that any attempt to suspend us from the group would undoubtedly find its way into the local press (not via me) and may damage them.

Either way.....good result for my colleague and I.

Come on man! poke him with the stick! It fun to watch his head explode! :D

Is there anything more visually satisfying than an exploding head?

Rarely.

I'd rather see naked people than exploding heads.

...especially if they are women

Well of course.:D