Those Crazy Libertarians!

The New York Press takes a predictably mocking look at the recent Manhattan Libertarian Party Convention, where I gave an after-dinner speech on "voodoo pharmacology" and the war on drugs. The reporter did not stick around for my presentation (perhaps just as well, given his treatment of the other speakers), but he did mention it, which gave him an opportunity to misspell my name. Twice. I shouldn't complain, I suppose: In a pre-convention article, he mistakenly charged one of the other speakers with homicide.

[Thanks to Thomas B. Cox for the link.]

Comments

[Jean Bart]

I agree; five hours with libertarians would be get tiresome. 🙂

[Sam I Was]

Misspellings aren't the writer's only bit of sloppiness. His narrative also lurches wildly in tense -- from present to past and back and forth again and again. I got to a few paragraphs past the first subhed and just gave up reading; my head was getting dizzy.

I couldn't care less what the guy thinks about a libertarian convention. But I'm continually astounded by the fact that so many professional writers can't actually write.

[tom wright]

Dobrian should be immediately fired for his comments to a member of the press.

They were worse than amateurish, they were downright stupid. We already have a reputation for being a party of right wing racist extremists populated by propeller headed misanthropes. He just re-inforced that image.

[WLC]

Given the media attitude toward Libertarianism in particular (The Peoria Journal Star hinted we may be "communists") and incompetence in general, I wonder if Dobrian's comment was even made.

[Native NYer]

If you were ever at a Manhatten LP meeting (and I've been at three) you'd know he's probably the best of the bunch. There's a few guys who are good organizers, especially Jak, but most of the folks who run for office are either polisci majors doing it for extra credit, or folks with one big issue, who don;t have opinions on other issues.

However, I'm sorry I'm not on their mailing list anymore, I would have gone to hear Sullum.

[nobody]

But should anyone REALLY care what what this sophomoric hack has to say? Better to give him the attention he is due: none.

[Jim Lesczynski]

> However, I'm sorry I'm not on their mailing
> list anymore, I would have gone to hear Sullum.

That can be easily arranged. 🙂

Seriously, just send an email to [e-mail], and we'll be happy to add you to our low-volume (2-3 messages per month) announcement list.

Jim Lesczynski
"pudgy middle-class" chairman,
Manhattan Libertarian Party

[Innocent Bystander]

"...marijuana decriminalization activists like the Libertarian drug stance, but probably don't support relaxing gun laws."

Nope, we support relaxing gun laws. We innocent bystanders should be entitled to defend ourselves from task forces who come in with guns a'blazin based on "info" from some crack head, street rat informant with no credibility what-so-ever and looking for a free pass for his next fix or staying out of jail.

[Sir Real]

Isn't the New York Press a step below the New York Post?

If so, who cares what they wrote?

[Tommy_Grand]

Ok - Adam Bulger sounds like an asshole.

But assuming Bulger didn't invent the bathroom anecdote, can somebody tell that Dobrian dude to eschew the N-word when representing Libertarianism? Or even, you know, all the time?

[joe]

Maybe they'd get less "crazy libertarian" press if they didn't invite people like Bernard Goetz to speak. The man saw one of the people he'd shot lying on the floor, said "You don't look so bad, here's another" and shot him again, putting him in a wheelchair for life.

[Spur]

It isn't the first time Dobrain has spewed about the N term before -- typical libertarian macho flash -- screw political correctness even if it means looking like a jerk.

Too bad the NYC chapter is run by folks who would come off better if they were in Nebraska or some other god-awful place...Hey fellows -- you heard of the free-state project. The white mountains of NH aer calling your name...

[shane]

Sam I Was: "But I'm continually astounded by the fact that so many professional writers can't actually write."

...or editors. 😉

[thoreau]

The stuff about cities being magnets for people who need gov't services is also rather annoying. Fact is, in addition to their lamentably large public sectors, cities are also centers of commerce, industry, arts, and innovation. There are plenty of reasons to live in a city that have nothing to do with gov't dependence, and I'm tired of the libertarians who bash city-dwellers.

It's especially tiresome if it comes from the Manhattan LP. Gee, guys, why are you still in the city if you think its only hook is public services? Surely there must be some other virtue to living in a big city, something that compensates for the public sector.

Anyway, I guess all I'm trying to say is that most city dwellers are part of something that is very very good despite the public sector: Major centers of commerce, industry, arts, and innovation. This is not to say that rural people aren't hard-working, artistic, or innovative. You'll find high-caliber people everywhere, but there are benefits to having a lot of them in one place to exchange ideas and products. It's called the free market.

[Dan]

"...marijuana decriminalization activists like the Libertarian drug stance, but probably don?t support relaxing gun laws."

Nope, we support relaxing gun laws.

Oh do "we". That should come as a surprise to Ralph Nader, the Green Party, and the ACLU, all of which support both gun control laws and marijuana decriminalization.

[JD Weiner]

WLC: Dobrian did say that; he confirmed it on the mailing list later. I don't think - and I doubt too many people seriously do - that he's a racist or anything, as the comment seemed pretty clearly intended to convey his impression of what Bloomy thinks of smokers. It's just going to resonate with people who see the N-word and flip out, context be damned, but oh well...we probably weren't going to win the election anyway, eh?

And for all non NYers hearing about the NYPress for the first time - yes, all of their writing and editing is pretty much like that. Their articles are usually more about how big a bug the author has up his ass than they are about their supposed "subject". That said, I still like them better than supposedly "impartial" papers like the Times.

[Spur]

"It's just going to resonate with people who see the N-word and flip out, context be damned, but oh well...we probably weren't going to win the election anyway, eh?"

Winning elections is one thing, though last I checks there are a few hundred libertarians in office (none of them used the N word or their press officers to a member of the media or in general -- I'm pretty sure). Having libertarian ideas taken seriously by people in general is very possible, even if they don't agree all the time, but that means following certain rules in media relations and personl decroum -- having white guys refrain from using the N word (to the press or anyone really) is one of them -- it isn't very hard to do really, its not like saying -- 'hey don't use adjectives' or something -- sometimes I go years without uttering the word and not even realize it...

[Dan]

[Goetz] saw one of the people he'd shot lying on the floor, said "You don't look so bad, here's another" and shot him again, putting him in a wheelchair for life.

And this is bad because...?

I have little doubt in my mind that Gladys Richardson -- the pregnant 19-year-old later beaten, robbed, and anally raped by Goetz "victim" James Ramseur -- wishes Goetz had given Ramseur the "here's another" treatment too. I know that I do. Unfortunately, Ramseur survived his encounter with Goetz, and all our lives are that much worse for it.

What Goetz did was illegal, certainly, but it's perfectly defendable on ethical and moral grounds. He shot violent criminals who had attempted to mug him; the only tragedy is that all four of the muggers survived the experience, and only one was crippled. The other three all went on to commit violent crimes against new, unarmed, victims.

The real reason why the Libertarian Party shouldn't invite Goetz to speak is that he's a really shitty public speaker.

[SteveInClearwater]

Dobrian's comment was flip, but likely he expected the journalist to be aware that it was parody for an actual quote from Tricky Dick Nixon, who told Joe Haldeman that an amped-up drug war, especially marijuana, was neccesary since it was 'the only way we can control the niggers'.

[SteveInClearwater]

Referenced quote from RMN actually concluded with, "....the niggers and the hippies'.

A likely sentiment from current D.C. administration as well...though I couldn't tell ya about Bloomberg...

[JD Weiner]

Native NYer, are you still in the city? I get what you're saying about the city being friendly to certain types of freedom - I was surprised when I lived in Phoenix for a while and realized just how gay-unfriendly much of the city was, at least compared to NYC. (OTOH, if a NYC politician said some of the things I heard regular, normal Phoenicians say, he'd be hounded by the gay organizations until he resigned.) But the city is certainly not now the way you describe it. People have been getting tickets for the sins of sitting on milk crates, or taking up two seats on the subway (in an empty car!), and arrested for crimes like having an ashtray in their office, and the police patrol some buildings with guns drawn. (And if they happen to shoot some innocent, they act all high and mighty about it - "There's nothing wrong with what we did! Don't you know it's dangerous here?" Yeah, partly because of you trigger-happy clowns...) Surveillance cameras are proliferating here. I've seen public phones that carry warnings that "for your safety", conversations made on them may be monitored. Meanwhile, Bloomberg seems determined to sell the entire city to the highest bidder - Times Square looks like a damn mall now, and the West Side stadium idea just won't stay dead.

There's some liberty here in a practical sense, simply because you can't effectively monitor nine million people, but this is not a liberty-friendly town. (Fortunately, members of Aerosmith can still get pistol permits here.)

[SteveInClearwater]

NATIVE: In the early 80s, pot was legal in NYC

SinC: Perhaps unintended wording on your part, but pot has never been legal in NYC, or anywhere in the U.S. for that matter, since 1937.

That being said, NYC, like all of NY State following 1977 decrim of marijuana possession by Rockefeller drug laws, did follow the law which stated that under 4 ounces pot should be a civil misdemeanor.

This pattern held up until the early 90s Giuliani reign. In 1992 less than 1000 people were arresteed in NYC for pot possession.

Under Giuliani and continuing today under Bloomberg, over 1000 people a week are arrested.

The law has not changed, so the drill is like this. Offenders are arrested, their pot seized and they are transported to Rikers. At arraignment, the volume of pot in question is defined and when it's less than four ounces, they are ROR'd if they want a trial and can post the relevant fine amount as bond. Or released totally if they plead guilty and immediately pay the fine. Those that have no money will usually plead guilty and sit the fine out over a few days in city jail.

It's a horrid abuse of power by police who fully know that most such offenses could be simply ticketed on the street, but part of the 'broken window' law enforcement philosophy was that police should cause the offender as much pain as possible, with intent being that people would be deterred from doing it in the first place.

[thoreau]

JD-

The city government may not be liberty-friendly, but what government is? Even in the tiniest small town, odds are good that the politicians are nosier than the average resident.

My point above was that the people in the city, as opposed to the politicians, are not as anti-freedom as some like to claim.

[NativeNYer]

JD - Yes, I still live in the city, and you're right, things are not the way they were. There used to be 7 spots within one intersection to buy cannabus out in the open in the early 80s, when i came back from college in christmas 83 most were selling crack, two eyars later they were all gone due to the crack down on crack.

SIC - you're right, bad wording on my part, it just seemed that way. Even today, unless you're blantant or in someone's face about it you can smoke while walking down the street but the days of dealers saying "smoke?smoke?" right around city landmarks is over.

I've read about the paddy wagon approach, it was big in the mid 90s when Rudy first took office, but I personally don't know of anyone who had to go through that.

The whole scene went underground, but did anyone notice the news coverage of when Jen (the dealer above the Carneige Deli) was shot a couple of years ago? It was not "evil dealer slain in drug deal gone bad". It was "these evil guys killed this wonderful woman who gave pot away for free to cancer and AIDS patients".

That slant in coverage was a big surprise for me.

All that aside, I still would rather live in the city than the country. Semi-monthly trips to the Bronx Zoo and the Museum of Natural History is fun for me and the kids. And seeing folks living in squalor while sucking at the government's teat give me an excellent reason to keep working hard!

[Dan]

Compare that to a town where everyone knows your business, and your parent's business, and who's screwing who, and how much each person makes.

I think you have the word "anonymous" confused with the word "libertarian". A society that uses social pressure and ostracization to "police" individual behavior is still a libertarian one. It's when the government gets involved in that police work that the situation becomes non-libertarian.

Indeed, "social pressure" what most libertarians cite in response to conservative questions like "What will stop the country from going to hell in a handbasket if people are legally allowed to X?" (where "X" is "marry your own children", "sell drugs to kids", "open a deli that sells human meat", "sell yourself into slavery", etc).

[Greg Newburn]

This story, even if only partially correct, has made me even more disenchanted with the idiots in the LP. Please, morons, give up.

[dhex]

since we're on the subject of bernie and quirky new york publications, vice magazine ran a piece on goetz and his squirrel-feeding habits. the picture was priceless.

i would have liked to see mr. sullum speak, but most of the manhattan libertarian party's activities seem inane.

[Geotech]

Damn straight, Dan.

[Native NYer]

I second Thoreau's point of the city being a welcome place for those of libertarian views. I have to say my upbinging on the streets of NYC was much more libertarian than people I met in college who grew up in small towns in upstate NY.

In the early 80s, pot was legal in NYC, as was underage drinking and basically any kind of sexual perversion you could pay for. So long as you didn't hurt anyone else, cops were not going to bug you for being a experimenting kid.

Compare that to a town where everyone knows your business, and your parent's business, and who's screwing who, and how much each person makes.

Anonymity can create freedom, or at least an illusion of it.

[dhex]

of course, if you're arrested in brooklyn the same routine happens and you're sent to kings county instead, which is apparently one of the least scenic places in brooklyn. a friend was picked up for (stupidly, imo) smoking a joint out by a bar/club in williamsburg. they took his joint and he sat in kings county for about 30 hours until his appearance.

funny thing about that is he had about 2 grams of hash on him that they returned along with his stuff! maybe they didn't know what it was?

smoking in public is a dumb risk, but it still happens. i work on the upper east side and there's this old guy who hangs out around 80th st and lex who must be 70+ years old and every other time i see him he's got a joint hanging out of his mouth. no one says a word...it's sort of cute, really.

[thoreau]

Aw, Jean Bart, stop being so rational. We Americans aren't about self-control and calculated action. We're about doing what feels good. Does it feel good to invade a country that poses no threat to us? Then do it! Just say the incantation "Islamo-fascists" and Hit and Run posters will fall in line. Does it feel good to shoot at a person who's been incapacitated? Then do it again!

[Geotech]

Well Jean Bart, we can't all be as sophisticated and French as you are. Some of us awful, vulgar, provincial Americans simply believe that assaulting and robbing someone is justification for getting shot, maybe even killed.

And thoreau, if your posts get any wittier and sarcastic, I may just bust a gut!

[thoreau]

Geotech-

OK, maybe I do go overboard with sarcasm. But as to whether robbery merits assault, you're going beyond the realm of self-defense to the realm of punishment. If one believes in the concept of a republic governed by the rule of law, then punishment is to be administered by a deliberative process, while self-defense is to be done on an as-needed basis.

Shooting the guy who assaults you until he's no longer a threat is self-defense. Shooting him again is taking the law into your own hands and acting as judge, jury, and executioner.

[Jean Bart]

Dan,

One wonders what sort of "justice" system you advocate when you view some potential, unknowable "future crime" as an excuse for paralyzing someone. Indeed, there is very little that is "moral" or "ethical" about shooting an unarmed, seriously wounded person who is crawling away from you. I myself have killed people in combat and I wouldn't do what was done.

BTW, what I always found striking about the case how poor of a shot Goetz was (perhaps still is); his poor shooting is indicative of his inability to handle a firearm properly and himself. I do not trust people who use weapons and don't know what the fuck they are doing with them; its an indication of fear, sloppiness, and irrationality.