Starchild vs. Wayne Allyn Root

MENU

Home

Books & DVDs

Liberty Quotes

Links

Blog

 


    


It's long been suspected that Neocons wish to purge the Libertarian Party of antiwar radicals. The below exchange, from the LNC listserv, is further evidence.

Carol Moore distributed this telling conversation between San Francisco libertarian activist Starchild (newly-elected to the LNC at the 2012 national convention) and Wayne Allyn Root (re-elected to the LNC at that same convention).

Starchild apparently distributed this exchange on May 12, 2012 to several listservs, which Moore then further distributed.

The exchange begins with Moore writing:

 

This of course is of interest because Root has raised so many suspicions he wants the LP to become a pro-Israel party and probably to support US military action against Iran following - or even better for - Israel.  We'll see how long it takes LNC to stop Starchild from circulating these....

See relevant quotes at http://carolmoore.net/libertarianparty/bootroot
See my blog yesterday:
http://carolmoorereport.blogspot.com/2012/05/libertarian-spring-revolution-in-lp.html

-------- Original Message --------

Subject: [lpradicals] Too good (or bad) not to pass along immediately :-(
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 10:25:35 -0700
From: Starchild <sfdreamer@earthlink.net>
Reply-To: lpradicals@yahoogroups.com
To: LP Radical Caucus <lpradicals@yahoogroups.com>, Grassroots Libertarians Caucus <GrassrootsLibertarians@yahoogroups.com>


 

"You seem to like the idea of revolution just fine when it suits your purposes -- or wasn't it you who recently wrote a book with the subtitle 'Empowering The Citizen REVOLUTION With God, Guns, Gambling Gold And Tax Cuts'? Were you talking about some other revolution than the one we're trying to work for here in the Libertarian Party?"
-Starchild (responding to a previous message from Wayne Allyn Root on LNC-discuss list)

"We are indeed talking about different revolutions...mine is called the Tea Party"
- (W.A.R. responding to the above)

I bear no malice toward W.A.R., but he really doesn't belong in our party's leadership. He doesn't believe there's room for us (and by "us" in this context I mean radicals, anarchists, Libertarians who are for opening borders, eliminating foreign aid, legalizing all drugs, etc.), any more than I think there's room for him:

"My goal is to harness the power of the Tea Party to help elect a few Libertarians over time...instead of just Republican-conservatives.
The problem the Lp has never figured out is one group so turns off the other...it's impossible to make any progress.
You can't serve 2 masters.
If you bring Tea Party people to LP which I could do by the thousands...they'd run away at the very mention of Occupy, legal heroin, open borders, or stop all aid to Israel.
And obviously your anti-war, pro drug crowd would rather sleep under a freeway overpass than hang out with pro business, pro capitalism Tea Partiers like me.
And thats why LP has achieved so little progress. We have been running in a circle for 40 years.
Running in quicksand.
Our belief that we delude ourselves with... is that we can be all things to all people.
That we can appeal to both sides.
When the two sides repel each other.
So I came along with my Barry Goldwater values...Tea Party limited govt/low tax/dramatically less spending...
But moderate, tolerant social views. I'm pro marijuana, pro gay rights, tolerant to immigrants but absolutely NOT for open borders.
Not liberal. Not radical. Tolerant.
And I have proven that Tea Partiers and conservatives will accept my tolerant social views if explained in a way that appeals to them....and they don't get lectured...and they aren't scared off by people that look like anarchists or revolutionaries."

Unfortunately it looks like we're stuck with W.A.R. for at least another two years, unless he decides his involvement is no longer serving his plan for "success" and walks away. So I plan to remain as civil with him as possible, and work together as needed. But I also plan to remain honest.

Love & Liberty,
                                 ((( starchild )))


Begin forwarded message:

From: WAYNE ROOT <wayne@rootforamerica.com>
Date: May 12, 2012 10:03:28 AM PDT
Subject: Re: [Lnc-discuss] Floor fee - starting a focused discussion - NOT CONFIDENTIAL

Starchild,

We are indeed talking about different revolutions...mine is called the Tea Party and it is about taxes and spending. It's for people that work hard and are over-taxed.

It is THE most successful political movement of modern history.

It not only mobilized millions of angry taxpayers...

It ELECTED an entire U.S. Congress in the biggest political landslide in modern (if not all) U.S. history in 2010.

And just when some thought it dead...it knocked off 36 year U.S. Senator Lugar in Indiana only days ago.

And it's filled with the exact audience I predicted in my book. I am 100% consistent.

I said that we need a movement to take back our country from socialists and marxists who despise wealth and want to destroy business and redistribute wealth...

And that coalition to take back America is:

Libertarians, capitalists, conservatives, Republicans, Tea Partiers, taxpayers, small business owners, gun owners and homeowners.

Thats my coalition.

It is the polar opposite of "Occupy" that is filled with union activists, communists, marxists, anarchists, government employees, and haters of wealth.

Although both share 1 or 2 Libertarian ideas- anti-crony capitalism and anti- bailouts...

Mostly they despise each other.

So far Occupy has not proven it can succeed at anything.

They have not elected ONE person.

Their movement has gone from slightly popular to reviled.

Whereas the Tea Party will make a huge difference in elections this Fall again...wanna bet? 

I'm taking all bets.

My goal is to harness the power of the Tea Party to help elect a few Libertarians over time...instead of just Republican-conservatives.

The problem the Lp has never figured out is one group so turns off the other...it's impossible to make any progress.

You can't serve 2 masters.

If you bring Tea Party people to LP which I could do by the thousands...they'd run away at the very mention of Occupy, legal heroin, open borders, or stop all aid to Israel.

And obviously your anti-war, pro drug crowd would rather sleep under a freeway overpass than hang out with pro business, pro capitalism Tea Partiers like me.

And thats why LP has achieved so little progress. We have been running in a circle for 40 years.

Running in quicksand.

Our belief that we delude ourselves with... is that we can be all things to all people.

That we can appeal to both sides.

When the two sides repel each other.

So I came along with my Barry Goldwater values...Tea Party limited govt/low tax/dramatically less spending...

But moderate, tolerant social views. I'm pro marijuana, pro gay rights, tolerant to immigrants but absolutely NOT for open borders.

Not liberal. Not radical. Tolerant.

And I have proven that Tea Partiers and conservatives will accept my tolerant social views if explained in a way that appeals to them....and they don't get lectured...and they aren't scared off by people that look like anarchists or revolutionaries.

So we can have it all.

We can have fiscal conservatism...combined with social tolerance.

Which by the way is the LP brand slogan.

Yet many in LP want radical or extreme or anarchy.

And it won't work. You can't attract both sides without repelling the other.

So we attract no one.

And that remains the difficulty.

I can bring in conservatives who can be trained to be more tolerant on social issues like marijuana or gay marriage. I prove it every day on my many media interviews.

MOST conservative talk hosts have been convinced by me...after multiple interviews with me...to admit they are somewhat Libertarian.

But the left hates capitalism and wants much BIGGER government... and cannot be trained to move to the right on fiscal issues because to them business owners are evil and must be punished.

That is the bridge that must be gapped.

No one in LP history has ever faced up to that serious problem.

Until now.

I found a way to bring conservatives over with INCREMENTAL success and moderate views on social issues that don't frighten suburban mothers and grandmothers.

As long as we don't demand extreme outcomes...we can grow.

But you keep demanding extreme outcomes.

I have no answer to bridge that gap.

Extreme radical views repel the entire right.

And I study polls 24/7/365...

Conservatives now make up 43% of all voters vs liberals only 20% or less.

And independents are majority center right.

So it makes no sense to ruin my appeal to the right.

Thats where the majority of the votes are...and 90% of the donations.

I welcome all suggestions.

Wayne

P.S. Latest study...

While all social issues are bitterly divided...

On fiscal issues...

80% of America is either conservative or moderate.

That's where we find success folks.



On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Starchild <RealReform@earthlink.net> wrote:
Wayne,

You suggest that we should model ourselves after "successful people or organizations that already successfully do what you want to do" and write that being a political party "involves finding well heeled donors...and treating them with first class service and surroundings." You claim that we "will never raise the money required to make the LP a powerful political party that elects people unless you attract wealthy donors... And those people all want to conduct meetings at nice hotels... in nice Board rooms...with fancy filet mignon dinners..." and conclude, "That is the formula. It never changes. It never will."

Perhaps you are unaware of a San Francisco-originated phenomenon that has been flourishing for over two decades in your own state of Nevada? The Burning Man festival has *always* taken place outdoors. It draws 40,000 people or more each year (as opposed to less than 1,000 to the LP convention at your favored Red Rock resort venue), most of whom pay hundreds of dollars each for their tickets (thanks to government extorting the BM organization to the tune of half a million dollars a year) *on top* of transportation, food, and other costs of traveling out to the middle of the barren Nevada desert. Many of these people spend additional hundreds or thousands of dollars on theme camps and art projects. They go and brave the elements, the dust, the heat, the cold, the wind, the rain. They use porta-potties (except those who bring in their own RVs), and many go without hot showers for a week or more. Most of these people are not poor. They include "successful" (using your materialist definition of success) entrepreneurs, business people, computer industry professionals, high profile folks, the celebrities you say you want to rub shoulders with. They have a great time:

"One of the first orders of business [for Google CEO Eric Schmidt, the world's 136th richest person with a net worth of $7 billion in 2011, according to Forbes magazine as quoted by WIkipedia] was joining his new 20-something colleagues at Burning Man, a free-form festival of artistic self-expression held in a Nevada desert lake bed. Sitting in his office shortly after his return, tanned and slightly weary, Eric Schmidt couldn't have been happier. "They're keeping me young," he declared."
-Business Week, September 29, 2003 [as quoted by Wikipedia]

We do *not* need sterile, fancy hotels with their restrictions and overhead in order to build a successful political party and attract donations! We need imagination, and the creativity and courage to start thinking outside the box. And I'm sorry, but this political party, the Libertarian Party, IS indeed about revolution! It's about a revolution of ideas, seeking a radical change in how society is governed. It's about switching from the left-right paradigm of the "successful" establishment cartel parties that you admire, to the up-down paradigm of the Nolan Chart where the question is not whether you are red or blue, conservative or liberal, but whether you want more individual liberty or more government control. You seem to like the idea of revolution just fine when it suits your purposes -- or wasn't it you who recently wrote a book with the subtitle "Empowering The Citizen REVOLUTION With God, Guns, Gambling Gold And Tax Cuts"? Were you talking about some other revolution than the one we're trying to work for here in the Libertarian Party? Where's your consistency?

Love & Liberty,
                                 ((( starchild )))


On May 12, 2012, at 8:31 AM, WAYNE ROOT wrote:

Hello Arvin,

You said: 

 I don't believe that most revolutions grew in fancy hotels. 

I think you are confusing political parties with "revolutions." This is NOT a revolution. 

You can join a revolution type organization...like "Occupy" and sleep outdoors in a tent. That's fine. That's legal. And you can do it while also being a Board member of LP.

Just as I can be keynote speaker for Tea Party events across the USA. I will be keynote speaker for a huge Tea Party event in San Diego next month.

One has nothing to do with the other.

But as far as LNC is concerned...this is a political party- with our job of electing Libertarian candidates to office.

Electing people requires money/fundraising/donations.

And the only 2 successful parties in America prove how that is done.

At nice hotels with fancy dinners and celebrity speakers.

I'm now 50 years old. I've been successful in business for 25+ years. And I will give you a shortcut to success- MODEL other successful people or organizations that already successfully do what you want to do.

It makes no sense to reinvent the wheel.

You can be creative and come up with new twists on the old strategy.

But in the end you can't re-invent the wheel.

ALL fundraising...not just political...but charity and Cancer Society and CATO and AIDS Research...

All of it involves finding well heeled donors...and treating them with first class service and surroundings.

You will never raise the money required to make the LP a powerful political party that elects people unless you attract wealthy donors...and well heeled Board members who have track records of success and know-how to get things done- raising money, building an organization, starting up businesses, etc.

And those people all want to conduct meetings at nice hotels...in nice Board rooms...with fancy filet mignon dinners...with celebrity speakers.

And they want to rub shoulders with those celebrities.

That is the formula. It never changes. It never will.

If you want to raise money to cure AIDS...solve cancer...or elect Libertarians...you will all need to give up this obsession/negativity/need to denigrate rich people.

Even the Marxist-in-Chief Mr. Obama understands that.

His propaganda is all anti-wealth.

But he will raise $1 Billion (or close to it) from wealthy donors at fancy black tie events.

And dinners that charge $40,000 per person in Hollywood.

It never changes.

Those donors have no interest in attending LP events outdoors...or in cheap Motel 6's.

They want to be treated like VIP's and celebrated and praised for their donations.

They want to sit in the front table...with the stars of the LP.

They want to mingle in cocktail parties with other well-heeled donors and be served the most exclusive food.

I completely understand where you and Starchild are coming from. 110%.

But you can join "Occupy" for that....or start up your own separate movement.

I was once a poor kid from a blue collar neighborhood and disliked rich people too.

Until my father the butcher...wearing a blood stained apron...taught me the most important lesson of my life...

He said, "Son, I'd love to hate rich people too...except no poor person has ever given me a job."

That wisdom changed my life.

In politics that wise saying could be changed to...

"I'd love to hate rich people and fancy hotels and exclusive dinners...but no poor person has ever donated enough to elect a single Libertarian."

I love all people...rich, poor, middle class. They all have an important role in the LP. But the donors are the lifeblood of any organization.

I belong to I think 7 or 8 Boards (I've lost count). All the Board meetings are held in fancy places.

That's the reward for giving your time and money to a cause.

If you took that away...no one would serve on Boards...

Correction...no one that had the know how to get things done...the contacts to raise money...the know how to build a successful organization would serve on a Board.

And no one would donate large checks.

Your suggestion and Starchild's sound nice...and "fair"...but in the real world they don't work.

They will badly damage our ability to be a successful Board or political party.

Please allow me to help you reach poor Libertarians...and please help me to attract wealthy LP donors. Lets not hurt each other.

All of my opinions are based on proven models of success.

I started the Republican Jewish Coalition of Nevada.

Our events were held at 5 star ballrooms at the $2 billion Venetian hotel.

We raised more money in one night than the entire annual LP budget!

That is the model for success for a political party.

But I agree that has nothing to do with a revolution.

So go start a revolution. Join Occupy. But don't put their standards upon the LP. Because political parties are a completely different animal.

Wayne

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Arvin Vohra <arvin@arvinvohra.com> wrote:
Hi All-

I agree with Starchild's analysis of subsidized preferences. And not to beat a dead horse, but a floor fee could be used to deter those with a lower willingness or ability to pay.

During business sessions, delegates are absolutely doing the work of the party, which requires no small amount of effort, attention to detail, etc. The actual required cost of doing this, which is basically the cost of a sound system (or megaphone?) is minimal. Everything else is just paying for ambiance. And while I support the right of anyone to pay extra for ambiance, I think it's a bit extreme to require those with no interest in ambiance to pay for it.

I believe that an LP victory will require a large scale revolution of thought, and I don't believe that most revolutions grew in fancy hotels. 

Thus, I would like to propose the following, which is similar to Mr. Neale's proposal.

1. We determine the actual necessary cost of an indoor (sorry Starchild) meeting. I believe that Starchild may have some insight.
2. That cost be paid for by membership dues.
3. Any amount in excess of that cost be borne by package holders.

For example:

Suppose the cost for a large enough meeting room (accessible from a hotel) with microphone and projector is found to be $200. However, the hotel we book charges $25,000 for the meeting room. Then $200 will be paid for out of dues/donations, and the remainder would be paid for by packages or donations.

Note that there can be gravitas in deliberate austerity. For example, during the State of the Union Address, the president is announced without a microphone, which shows adherence to some kind of tradition or other. Similarly, by showing that we choose a level of austerity in our business meetings, we can show that we intend to bring that same level of austerity to the government. In other words, we can run our own organization with the same respect for every cent of membership dues, donations, and fees that we intend to show for every cent of tax revenue/donations when we get elected.

-Arvin




On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Starchild <RealReform@earthlink.net> wrote:
Geoff,

       Thanks for addressing this vital topic. However I must object to the term "freeloading" (and do I understand it's not your term) being associated with the long-standing LP practice of not having floor fees, rather than with the elitist approach that was used in Las Vegas.

       The approach used in Las Vegas effectively subsidized the preference of some members to hold our convention at an expensive hotel, by passing along a portion of the costs associated with their preference for luxury to other party members who did not necessarily share it, some of whom would have preferred to meet in a less expensive venue where there was no charge for meeting space.

       Should interns volunteering at the Libertarian Party's office be required to pay a portion of the office rent? Clearly not, in my opinion -- and neither should delegates who volunteer their time, money, and energy to attend LP conventions in order to help the party conduct its affairs be charged a fee. Any costs associated with convention business sessions should either be added to the cost of meal and event packages, the purchase of which "premiums" is totally voluntary, or they should be underwritten by the party as a whole, just as the office rent is.

Love & Liberty,
                               ((( starchild )))

TANSTAALFF! - There Ain't No Such Thing As A Legitimate Floor Fee!

P.S. - What is the difference between lnc-discuss@lp.org and lnc-discuss@hq.lp.org, if any?


On May 11, 2012, at 4:03 PM, Geoffrey Neale wrote:

> I find it VERY helpful to have separate threads for each discussion topic.  Bury five things in one, and it’s hard to follow.
>
> Therefore, I am going to queue this up, and send the opening salvo.
>
> Before we pass judgment on what we should have done, and what we should do in the future, I want us to consider how many different paradigms for the floor fee we should consider.  I want every option – every model – before we decide on what we should do in the future.  Here’s my take:
>
> Paradigm 1: How things were in the past.  We did not charge a mandatory floor fee, and the costs associated with the floor business were borne by those who paid for their packages.  This resulted in a pretty small number of people “freeloading” (not my term – I’ve just heard it floated around).
>
> Paradigm 2: How things were in Las Vegas.  TANSTAAFL!! Everyone pays.
>
> Paradigm 3: Geoff’s proposal.  Allocate a fixed amount from each member’s dues to conducting business required by the Bylaws.  Use this “fund” to pay those expenses.
>
> I’m only going to speak to my proposal.  Others should take the advocacy position for the others.
>
> The Bylaws specify that certain business occur during the two-year cycle of our party.  These include LNC meetings, Conventions, Bylaws, Platform, Credentials and Judicial Committee.  Since these are required by the members (it’s their Bylaws), it is completely reasonable (and libertarian) to presume that they support these activities.
>
> Every delegate, whether an LP member or not, serves as a proxy for a number of sustaining members – it’s how we set the delegate counts.  These delegates are executing the party’s business.
>
> I don’t know the dollar amount – it’s the concept I’m talking about.
>
> The reason I like it is because it’s principled, supportable, and totally deflects the arguments against both of the other paradigms.
>
> Are there more for us to consider?  Please – before we debate, let’s nominate more ideas.  After we close nominations on ideas, then we can debate the merits.
>
> After we figure out what are choices are, then I propose we poll the delegates and members through an online poll, and see where they stand.
>
> Geoff
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-discuss mailing list
Lnc-discuss@hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-discuss_hq.lp.org

Messages in this topic (1)