Libertarian Party

Larry Sharpe, Libertarian Candidate for Governor of New York, Quits the Party's National Committee

Controversy over LNC Vice-Chair Arvin Vohra's comments on veterans, age of consent laws makes Sharpe realize he doesn't belong on the national party's governing board.


Larry Sharpe, who came in a close second in the vote for vice presidential nominee at the Libertarian Party's 2016 convention, was recently lauded by Politico as a "rarity…a serious Libertarian candidate" in his current race to be governor of New York. (Sharpe is also the subject of a feature interview in the February Reason, conducted by Matt Welch.)

Larry Sharpe for New York Facebook

Last week Sharpe resigned from his position as an alternate representative for region 8 on the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) after that committee failed to suspend its vice-chair, Arvin Vohra.

Vohra had generated a ton of social networking controversy for some remarks on Facebook. A sampling:

If a 14 year old has a kid, I would prefer the other person to be an adult, with a job….Statist Logic: "Teenagers cannot consent to sex." "It is totally okay to force teenagers into useless government schools against their wills." Government schools do a thousand timesmore damage to teenagers than consensually dating adults ever possibly could. Nonconsensual brainwashing masquerading as education is far more damaging than, for example, young marriage….

Should a man be allowed to have sex with another man? Only the two men in question should have a say. Should an adult be allowed to have sex with a teenager? Only the adult, the teenager, and their families/culture should have a say. There is no reason to bring government into it.

Vohra also condemned all soldiers as paid killers and all public school teachers as supervisors of indoctrination camps.

As the suspension motion stated, some LNC and party members believed that:

Vice Chair Arvin Vohra's public discourse has repeatedly included inflammatory and insulting remarks which bring the Party, its candidates, and its principles into disrepute;…Mr. Vohra's remarks have destructively stereotyped party members and large segments of the population, a behavior completely at odds with our Party's philosophy of recognizing and treating people as individuals; and…Mr. Vohra's comments have caused wide-spread offense, and the result is that the LNC, its committees, and Party affiliates are distracted from productive activities…

The party's special counsel, Oliver Hall, conducted an investigation of Vohra's comportment and statements. The investigation concluded that "despite the controversial nature of the content of some of his ideas, Mr. Vohra generally communicated them in a manner that is professional and respectful" and, further, that nothing he said rose to the level of the accused "collective deprecation" based on "sex, race, color, national origin, disability, age, religion or any other protected category."

That decision vindicating Vohra came down on January 25; motions to censure and suspend him were voted on in a video meeting of the LNC on February 2. The suspension vote failed, 8–8. (Two-thirds of the LNC would have had to vote "yes" according to bylaws for the suspension vote to pass.) The censure vote passed, 9–7. (Vohra was permitted to vote against his own censure, and did.)

"The recent reaction from the LNC," Sharpe wrote in his public resignation letter, regarding the suspension vote, "has clarified for me that Arvin does fit on the LNC. Clearly, the one who does not belong is me."

Sharpe said in a phone interview this week, "In any other organization in this country if an officer who represented that organization had made statements way Arvin did, in some way shape or form members of that board would say, 'hey, stop.'" To Sharpe, the failure to suspend Vohra is an organizational failure that he does not wish to be associated with.

Sharpe is "still a proud lifetime member of the Libertarian Party," he stresses, and still a candidate for governor of New York. He sees his resignation as, among other things, a necessary move as a candidate to make it clear he's distancing himself from Vohra's statements, including Vohra saying that he would "probably" not personally have sex with a 14-year-old.

Someone in Vohra's position, Sharpe thinks, should have the "empathy to know that if someone asks you if you would have sex with a 14-year-old, you don't answer 'probably not.' It's common sense to just say no."

Sharpe says he's been making motions to have Vohra removed for months before last week's vote, but didn't want to make a huge public cause out of it. At this point, though, he believes the LNC is "not prepared to be like a professional organization." And though "they have every right to not be like that," he thinks it's not good for either side for him to stay a part of the LNC. (As an alternate, he didn't have the power to actually vote in last week's censure or suspension votes.)

Some have written off the importance of anything Vohra says on Facebook as an internal controversy that no one outside narrow L.P. social orbits would even be aware of, something that ought to have nearly zero effect on L.P. candidates. Sharpe disagrees, noting first that in modern politics social networking is terribly important; "Donald Trump won because of Twitter. Social media matters."

Sharpe grants that the vast majority of Libertarian candidates don't even make enough waves for major-party foes to bother attacking them, but says "I'm a long-term thinker, I'm not worried about the next election but this party is going to get bigger, and people are going to bring this stuff back to hit us. Part of the dirt will be things the LNC has done and not done. Candidates becoming serious need to be prepared to handle it, and I handled it by in writing calling for Vohra to step down twice and then resigning myself."

Sharpe also worries that recruiting of serious people to run with the Libertarian Party will be harmed by people who see Vohra's style and say, "I don't want to touch this, this is a disaster." He also worries that failing to boot Vohra will lead to fundraising being harder down the line, with "people saying I give you guys money and you make mistakes [like this] and shoot yourself in the foot? Why should I give you more money?"

Others on the LNC were worried about launching endless social media–driven witch-hunts against any thoughts they'd express. Sharpe's response: "We are responsible to [party members]. Let them come after us" if they think what LNC members say or do is bad for the party's image.

While Sharpe disagrees with Vohra's view on age of consent laws and his opinion that everyone in the military should be seen as an immoral hired killer, he does not want him driven from the L.P. or the movement; he even grants that were Vohra running for public office, "I would vote for him. I do know he's a real libertarian, that's for sure. I would avoid his campaign like the plague, because it would be a dumpster fire, but when it comes to Election Day, my vote goes to Vohra."

But he doesn't think someone like Vohra should be a party official. "I'm not mad at him," he says. "I'm mad at us. We should have acted. Being mad at Arvin is like being mad at a dog for barking."

He also believes from his communication with other party members outside the LNC that the vote to not suspend Vohra from his position was "not what the [general Libertarian] public wanted, 100 percent no."

Vohra, in a written statement prior to the vote, defended himself, saying:

My "crimes" so far include failing to sufficiently worship those who carry out the foreign and educational policies I find ineffective and morally abhorrent. I know that the prevailing attitude among the less sophisticated parts of America is that the federal government's soldiers and government school teachers are "heroes", against the evidence of their actual actions. I consider it part of my responsibility to work to change that.

My other "crime": daring to suggest that age of consent laws should not exist, at least in their current form. As a believer in individual self determination, and a very open anarchist, this position should hardly be surprising. I don't think government should have any involvement in sex, period. I also don't think government should exist at all.

Joshua Katz, an at-large representative on the LNC, argues that voting against suspending Vohra was not the same as thinking his comments were wise or correct. "We must tread carefully in policing the speech of LNC members when not using Party resources," he writes in an email. "It sets a dangerous precedent and can lead to endless factional infighting. This party needs a board that devises workable strategies for political success and safeguards its assets, not one that spends its time arguing about what its members say and do. For that reason, I was cautious on censure, and opposed suspension."

In Katz's view, suspension would be warranted only by things like "breaches of fiduciary duty, such as misuse of party assets. While I disagree wholeheartedly with Mr. Vohra's statements, and do not think they are reflective of any libertarianism with which I am familiar, or of which I would be a part, I do not think that Mr. Vohra's personal social media speech is part of his fiduciary function."

Katz isn't very worried that an average voter moving forward will note nor remember anything Arvin Vohra wrote on Facebook. "Even the amount of time and energy spent on the question of what our Vice Chair says on social media, in my view, demonstrates our excessive internal focus, and lack of focus the things that matter," he says.

If the party's membership at large disagrees with Vohra's statements and style as much as Katz does, he says, they should express their opinions via "board elections at the convention. I respect the fact that others disagree on the scope of where suspension is appropriate."

Whitney Bilyeu, LNC representative for Region 7, agrees that it should be up to members voting at the convention to judge whether Vohra's comments were or were not something party members wanted representing them. "I asked for, and considered, the input from members and candidates in my Region representing both sides of the votes," she says via email. "The vast majority either were indifferent, or thought censure was more appropriate. However, there were some who called for removal of Vohra. It was a difficult decision, in light of the circumstances, but I hope that my decision will serve to protect current and future members from a dangerous precedent, overreaching authority by the LNC."

LNC representative for Region 1 Caryn Ann Harlos voted for Vohra's suspension. Except for the age of consent stuff, she agrees with most of Vohra's views about issues such as war (though not his apparent personal enmity toward veterans), public schools, and legalization of all drugs. Her vote to suspend him, she says, was not about his opinions; it was about "professionalism and empathy." She says the majority of state chairs from her nine-state region agreed with her votes to suspend and censure.

While Harlos isn't confident there will be any trouble for candidates down the line based on things Vohra wrote, she does think it better to sell libertarian ideas in a "relatable, kind, human" way that doesn't go out of its way to offend or insult state employees or non-libertarians in general. She thinks Libertarians need to remember we were all non-Libertarians once and to retain a sense that even those we strongly disagree with deserve to be treated with dignity as fellow humans. If Libertarians are to convince the world that, for example, private charity can meet needs government currently meets, it might be best to have a public face with "empathy and sympathy" and not the style of an "edgelord on Facebook…who would believe a society of [that type] will take care of people?" Despite voting against him, Harlos says she's angry at people who have tried to personalize a philosophical discussion about age of consent laws to state or imply Vohra is a pedophile.

Vohra responded via Facebook video to the vote result. Pleased that he was still vice chair, he doubled down on the importance of his particular communication content and strategy. He thinks, for example, that not enough Americans understand that the proper Libertarian position is to be against the existence of public schools, and that Libertarian messaging fails to be "blunt enough, brutal enough" to make that clear at all times.

He insisted that his comments about soldiers and teachers do not bring Libertarian candidates or causes into disrepute. They are "just stating some uncomfortable and unpleasant facts," he said. It is the proper Libertarian position that no one should join the military or work for public schools, he argued, and anyone offended by hearing such things "should be offended." Libertarians should socially "treat statism like racism" and refuse to tolerate or be friends with anyone who exhibits un-libertarian beliefs, he declared. That way, "I know we can make freedom happen, we can win federal elections, we can win the presidency, if you actually fight to change the culture."

Vohra also read and endorsed portions of a recent article by Ron Paul condemning the party's messaging with the 2016 Johnson/Weld campaign.

Vohra has certainly let party members who show up to the 2018 convention in this summer in New Orleans know exactly what they are endorsing if they choose to re-elect him.

In the big picture, the national party's finances are doing fine, with 2017's take (minus bequests and convention revenue) being 5 percent above the running previous 10-year average, and 17 percent above the previous 10-year average for odd-numbered years (which generally have less political activity of all sorts).

NEXT: L.A.'s New Trash Cartels Are Exactly the Dumpster Fire Critics Warned About

Libertarian Party Larry Sharpe

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

128 responses to “Larry Sharpe, Libertarian Candidate for Governor of New York, Quits the Party's National Committee

  1. Okay, but what’s Michael Hihn’s take?

    1. *pops popcorn and waits for % comment*
      *eats kitty litter encrusted cat turd and starts typing*/Hihn

    2. 8-10 ounces of arterial blood.

    3. Start earning $90/hourly for working online from your home for few hours each day… Get regular payment on a weekly basis… All you need is a computer, internet connection and a litte free time…

      Read more here……..

    4. Start earning $90/hourly for working online from your home for few hours each day… Get regular payment on a weekly basis… All you need is a computer, internet connection and a litte free time…

      Read more here……..

  2. What is it with some libertarians and schools? I get it, public schools suck and education in general needs to be reformed, but calm down, guys.

    1. Honestly, it sounds basically like what I say when I’m drunk. Except the Teenager thing, as I believe all teens should be cordoned off into concentration camps. Just libertarian concentration camps.

    2. Mandatory attendance at government-provisioned schooling is an abomination morally, politically, and by all measures and standards of how a free people should be governed, not to mention a disaster in practice. It should be eliminated as quickly as possible.

      1. It’s not an abomination politically, which is why saying “it should be eliminated as quickly as possible” is not terribly productive.

        1. If a system designed to pump out faithful little socialist true believers isn’t a political abomination, what is?

          You know, there’s a reason why Bernie was so huge among millennials. Public education.

          Socialist indoctrination of the youth is probably the biggest obstacle to achieving any sort of liberty we currently face.

          1. I believe the political conception of it is not abominable, and thus it’s politically poisonous to make such statements. Which ties in to Larry Sharpe’s actions, which is clearly a political distancing from remarks he fears may bite him in the ass.

          2. Public education started in the 90s?

          3. Socialist indoctrination of the youth is probably the biggest obstacle to achieving any sort of liberty we currently face.

            My experience, let them teach it the way they teach math and any liberty-loving individuals will discover it to be a crock of shit and the rest wouldn’t care about it even if you tied them to a desk for eight hours and tried to force them to care.

            1. Not to say that the system couldn’t be pared back and made more equitable. Just that I’m not sure which is more sad; that the public education system is what’s holding back libertarianism or that I’m fairly certain that even if we abolished public schools entirely, libertopia would remain just about as far away as it always has been.

              1. The Libertarian Party needs to open its own schools. Simple.

                1. Your screen name is one of the prime motivators to me going (L). That and guns. And the 4th amendment, and some other shit.

                  1. @Lawn Darts

        2. You seem to be missing something: “Also blacks were more rich 50 years ago.”

          It would make your comment a bit disturbing, out of context…

      2. I’d like someone to tell me about all this government indoctrination that got in school, because I call bullshit. It was just boring ass school where I learned some shit. This is one reason I say I’m libertarian and not Libertarian. The party is full of a lot of zealots who I want no association with. I don’t blame this dude from waving goodbye to them

        1. Really stupid children generally don’t realize they’re being preached to rather than educated.

        2. 100% agree. Zealots that sound like preachers more than reasonable people.

    3. What is it with some libertarians and schools?

      Are you sure it’s not ‘for teh chillunz!’? I think there’s a Venn diagram-style convergence of libertarian and parenting greatness in one’s own mind. Like, without schools, I imagine they picture themselves teaching their 10 yr. old partial differential equations and still having plenty of time to perfect their curve ball. When, in all likelihood, you’d end up being both the parent and the overbearing statist at home with fewer peers to actually normalize and convince them of “Dude! Not cool.” (or for them to normalize their peers, w/e).

      1. Teaching is very time-consuming, and nothing good is going to happen by exposing your children to less sources of information and perspective. All the homeschooled kids at my community college were exceedingly intelligent, and they all learned at what were functionally very small private schools where various parents would teach their expertise. One of the dudes probably could do PDEs when he was ten, and their social skills were far more developed than a kid who was locked in a room with a parent and lectured for 12 hours a day.

        Schools have a lot of issues, but they’re the best option for many parents. Teaching kids to be skeptical and inquiring is a good way to give them a raincoat for the tsunami of bullshit that they’re guaranteed to encounter in school and everywhere else in society.

      2. Just like how if you don’t want the government telling car manufacturers how many miles per gallon their vehicles must get on the highway you must want to build your own car from scratch? Nice false dilemma you fucking moron. Most parents would be happy to hire a teacher for their kid on their own terms the way they hire a plumber or a mechanic or a doctor or a lawyer or a babysitter. They imagine themselves picking a school and paying them money and then getting a service. What magical fucking thinking huh?

    4. Well, start by watching some of Jordan Peterson and Jonathan Haidt’s discussions on how publicly-funded universities have become far-left indoctrination camps, as many libertarians have been correctly predicting they would for decades.

      All it took was a basic understanding of human nature, that employees of publicly-funded schools would tend to favor bigger government over smaller government out of simple self-interest. This, iterated over many hiring cycles, would filter out all small-gov’t proponents, leaving only the most extreme big-gov’t proponents in the employ of public schools.

    5. I know its weird how some people actually give a fuck about having their money stolen from them so that the state can force their children to spend 1/3 of their lives for 13 years in a state institution learning a state approved curriculum instead of focusing on real libertarian issues like forcing Jews to bake cakes for Nazis.

      It’s good to know that a true libertarian thought leader like yourself thinks that we should get around to reforming government schools some day after we’ve made sure that every tranny can drop trou wherever they please though.

  3. “Vohra also condemned all soldiers as paid killers and all public school teachers as supervisors of indoctrination camps.”

    I like the cut of his jib.

    1. Yeah, I don’t really have a problem with the content of what he said. The manner in which he said it, though, needs a lot of work.

      1. Yeah. It’s hard to take someone seriously if they’re posting their manifestos to Facebook.

        1. You just ruined my day.

      2. ??? This dude is a council member. If dude is too dumb and undisciplined to keep his mouth shut and not spout nonsense most of the country would disagree with then he should not be a council member.

      3. I also don’t have a problem with anything quoted above. But if the LP is ever going to have a real impact on national governance they’re going to have to known as the party that wants to end the WOD, scale back regulation and licensing impediments, cease foreign wars, unravel unsustainable entitlements, devolve the police state at all levels and return peoples personal liberty to them. All of these issues have constituencies outside of the LP that can be built upon. Sex with 14 year olds is not an issue that’s likely to gain traction any time soon.
        I’m frankly impressed with the way Sharpe handled this issue. He distanced himself from a Libertarian who is probably too outspoken for party leadership without trashing him. The guy’s got class.

        1. For real, I would love to work for him. Everything he has done so far that I am aware of seems pretty fantastic.

        2. they’re going to have to known as the party that wants to end the WOD, scale back regulation and licensing impediments, cease foreign wars, unravel unsustainable entitlements, devolve the police state at all levels and return peoples personal liberty to them.

          That might be easier if their candidates didn’t endorse gun confiscation, hijab bans, a national VAT, increasing humanitarian wars and military interventions, cap and trade and forcing Jews to bake cakes for Nazis.

    2. Being a soldier is far more than being a paid killer. It’s also a very disrespectful way to frame military service.

  4. Libertarians should socially “treat statism like racism” and refuse to tolerate or be friends with anyone who exhibits un-libertarian beliefs, he declared.

    I am gonna take a wild guess here and assume that Mr. Vohra is an eligible bachelor.

    1. Libertarians are irresistible to the ladies, or so I am told.

    1. Colonel Ron Paul says “Larry Sharpe is not for sale”.

      1. So no end of winter sale?

  5. I know that the prevailing attitude among the less sophisticated parts of America is

    There we go. That’s what I needed to hate him.

    1. Yeah, that and calling me and my ilk all paid killers pretty much brought on the hate. He doesn’t believe in individual liberty. He thinks everyone should do what he says – and what he says is pretty childish, and dare I say, unsophisticated.

      Fuck you, Vohra. I was paid to keep you from getting raped as a teenager, you ungrateful simpleton.

      1. Yeah, I tire of his kind too. Some asshole pseudo intellectual who never served talking big shit about the military. Every one of them is a little pussy punk that wouldn’t dare say shit even if he had a mouth full of it if he were face to face with a live service member.

    2. Yeah other than when your candidate was calling everyone in flyover country deplorable and when your black Jesus was lecturing the bitter clingers on their backwardness you just hate elitism doncha?

  6. ” should have the “empathy to know that if someone asks you if you would have sex with a 14-year-old, you don’t answer ‘probably not.’ It’s common sense to just say no.””

    Since 14 is actually the age of consent for marriage in some US states, how is this so controversial?

    1. Well, it probably wasn’t controversial in Alabama or among Duck Dynasty fans.

      That said, the main defense for such low age of consent laws is that while we’d prefer that adults don’t date teens, trying to draw the legal line of when it’s acceptable almost always ends up cutting off some relationship that makes folks say “okay, but that should have been fine”. Highschool senior dating a freshman for example, can have an eighteen (or even nineteen) year-old dating a fourteen year-old.

      So even if you think someone shouldn’t date teens while they’re fully adults, it’s better to low-ball the age of consent then high-ball it.

      Some states try to thread that needle with higher ages of consent but with “Romeo and Juliet” laws (where the age of consent shifts if the two are close enough in age), but frankly that just tends to confuse things and still ends up leaving someone in the “wait, so it was legal to bang yesterday, but since I just had my birthday we have to wait for your next birthday to bang again?” zone.

      Long story short? Culture and law are both conflicted in this area and no one’s really comfortable with it, but there is no perfect solution either. Hence our nation’s widely disparate ages of consent, requirements for minor marriage, “Romeo and Juliet” laws, sexting being illegal when banging is legal, and so-on.

      If you don’t like it being such a mess, blame federalism.

      1. Well, it probably wasn’t controversial in Alabama or among Duck Dynasty fans.

        Or among faggots whose incidence of pedophilia is higher than any other demographic besides Hollywood.

        1. You just keep going straight down is page and posting nonsense aren’t you?

          SOOOOO edgy. Just like a true libertarian.

    2. Because he is a 38-year-old man. If you are really having trouble understanding how this is a problem, there’s something wrong with you. I’m only 21, but the thought of shtupping a 14-year-old is repulsive.

      1. “I’m only 21, but the thought of shtupping a 14-year-old is repulsive.”

        That seems bit deranged and inappropriate, to be honest.

        1. Not wanting to pork 14 year olds?

          1. Not wanting to pork 14-year-olds because you understand the reasons why it’s a bad idea is different from finding the thought repulsive. The latter could indicate a mental health issue.

        2. Yeah, it sounds like Bongo is struggling with a monster from the id.

  7. “I do know he’s a real libertarian, that’s for sure.”

    My “crimes” so far include failing to sufficiently worship those who carry out the foreign and educational policies I find ineffective and morally abhorrent. I know that the prevailing attitude among the less sophisticated parts of America is that the federal government’s soldiers and government school teachers are “heroes”, against the evidence of their actual actions. I consider it part of my responsibility to work to change that.

    My other “crime”: daring to suggest that age of consent laws should not exist, at least in their current form.

    Checks out.

    1. Especially the complete disregard for persuading anyone who is not already in lockstep with him.

      1. Basically he’s the libertarian equivalent of a hardcore SJW.

        Seems like a real douchebag.

      2. Hahaha. The part where he called everyone “the less sophisticated parts of America.”

        This dude is so tone deaf.

  8. Thank you Larry Sharpe for taking a principled stand, even if it entails a temporary loss of power and influence. Ultimately this is the kind of behavior that will discredit government and vindicate libertarianism.

    1. Vindicate libertarianism? Maybe. I’m more likely to like and support this Sharpe guy then Libertarians that defend Vohra.

      But discredit government? How is that supposed to figure? This is an internal party matter and, unlike the Democrat and Republican parties, the government is pretty much out of the picture. This doesn’t say anything, one way or the other, about government.

      1. LOL because the whole point of government is to protect us from the nasties. Larry Sharpe will be a role model for them, at least the ones in the libertarian party, and they will become good, and then after a while you no longer need government. Voila.

        1. Yeah, you kind of skipped a number of steps between “and they will become good” and “you no longer need government”.

          1. The New Soviet Man is always just a day away…

  9. I also don’t think government should exist at all.

    Maybe you should find another party that has that on the platform, instead of the one you’re in.

    1. The LP platform leaves plenty of room for anarchists.

      1. Right, the problem is the other way. Anarchists don’t leave room for liberty/arianism.

      2. Anarchists would be happy if libertarians ruled the country. So would socialists and communists. It’s just the authoritarians that would hate it.

        1. Anarchists are and always were violent communists. Google news has tens of thousands of news articles you can search and verify that no anarchist claimed to be anything else before 1972, when with one electoral vote the LP pressured the Supreme Court to strike down Dixiecrat coathanger abortion laws.

          1. Rothbard was a communist?

  10. There is no upside for libertarians to get caught up in dogmatically splitting hairs over when sex with 14 year olds is appropriate. Rape isn’t ever okay and if someone lacks the maturity to consent then any sex with them is rape. It’s possible that some small percentage of 14 year olds have sufficient maturity, but not most. If we could successfully argue that we need to allow sex with 14 year olds, we will do far more to enable pervs to have sex with children who lack the ability to consent than we will do to protect the rights of the few uncommonly mature 14 year olds. And we cannot successfully win that argument anyways. All we can do is undermine libertarianism.

    Vorha needs to let this issue go. The LP needs to let this issue go. needs to let this issue go. Sharpe is right to distance himself from this. Let’s focus on issues where (a) we can win, and (b) winning will actually help more than harm.

    1. You’re overlooking the harm caused by enforcing age of consent laws. But you’re right?it’s an academic issue and there’s no up side to public arguments about it.

  11. This is a good article. I started reading it with some apprehension of the LNC’s actions, but finished supporting their decision not to suspend Vohra. The proper channel for eliminating him is elections.

    However, I think Sharpe makes excellent points. The platform probably seems pretty schizophrenic to newcomers. The LNC’s reps did a fine job trying to focus on how the LP has a lot of agreeable ideas, but we’re also accepting of not-so-agreeable ideas. Discourse is the whole purpose of politics.

    Libertarianism stands distinct from anarchy. “If men were angels, no government would be needed.” A lot of laymen see LP as another label for anarchists. Sharpe is dead-on when he said that this election was won by social media. Technophobe Hillary failed to enflame even her fervent young fans.

    Condemning and permitting Vohra’s actions are not mutually exclusive.

    1. A terrific quote from Madison that neatly skewers socialism through the void where it’s heart would normally be.

    2. “A lot of laymen see LP as another label for anarchists.” With good reason: it’s full of them. When sex with kids rears its ugly head, it becomes obvious. When everyone in uniform is reduced to a hired gun, it becomes obvious. When the call is to throw open the borders, and to deny that borders should even exist, it becomes obvious.

      Anarchism may not be the black heart of libertarianism, but it’s the sclerotic liver

      1. Raging anarchists are the reason I don’t claim the party, for sure. Those types are apparently too dumb to realize that transition states are not themselves a stable state of being. I guess they never got to that part of political science. Or logic, for that matter. If anarchy was stable, governments would never have existed in the first place. It’s the same flaw in socialism, if we’re being truly honest.

        1. There’s a hilariously ironic, but also terrifying, overlap between “socialists/communists” and “anarchists”. “Anarcho-communist” might sound cool, but it’s an oxymoron.

          Regardless, capitalism is the only bad thing.

          1. Not really if you adhere to the Marxist mythology that once Man achieves true communism, the state will wither away.

            1. Ah, I’d love to live in that utopia.

    3. Discourse is the whole purpose of politics.

      I agree with most of your comment except this. The only part of a ‘national committee’ that should have a damn thing to do with discourse on issues is the subcommittee that deals with the party platform and, in public, they should let the platform speak for itself re the LP stand on issues. Personality and controversy is for CANDIDATES – not LNC.

      Everything else about a national committee should be boringly organizational where the audience is ENTIRELY party members/activists. Providing info to state/local parties/candidates on organizational ‘best practices’ (nuts-and-bolts of a local chapter, a campaign, etc); raising funds that are needed for seed projects (tech,outreach,etc); organizing/running the national convention; etc.

      Every utterance of an LNC person that heads down the true Scotsman path undermines the ability of a party itself to organize as a party rather than a church or a debating society. And the reality is that according to wiki Vohra is now running for office himself. It is symptomatic of LP organizational failure that the rules don’t require him to step aside from his LNC offices for the duration of his candidacy. The mere appearance that LNC activities end up being diverted to a particular election/candidacy is a conflict of interest and riven with all the foot-in-mouth problems that candidates bring on themselves but that the LNC/LP always needs to pre-vaccinate against.

      1. For that matter, Larry Sharpe too should have resigned from LNC – because he is apparently an active candidate for office – not because he and another candidate for a different office are having a true Scotsman pissing contest.

  12. Sharpe wants to put out some honey to attract voters. Vorha is indiscrimately slinging around a full open firehose worth of vinegar.

    He needs to remember that the electorate are not doctrinaire anarchists, they need to be persuaded, not harangued.

    1. Both Sharpe and Vorha would be worth more to us as members of the CPUSA, Dem, GOP or Tea Party. The Dems and GOP are frantic to get rid of the LP, now that we either write their platforms or make them lose to each other in ways their math cannot handle. Injecting whack jobs into the LP can do for them what infiltrating Peter Schwartz into The Intellectual Activist did to that publication. I would do the same sort of sabotage to them, given the chance. The Prohibition Party–fixated on the Comstock law that STILL survives in today’s customs and asset-forfeiture regulations–dominates God’s Own Prohibitionists the way watermelon Econazis control the Dems. Once voters find out the LP exists–not an easy task–their game is over with.

  13. The thing is that age of consent laws, while arbitrary, are more or less there because under a certain age it’s thought that ‘consent’ simply isn’t informed enough to be valid. As an example, would you say that a seven year old can consent to sex? A three year old? Probably not.

    So while you might disagree with the particular age of consent the notion itself is still more or less legitimate. At least in our culture. I suppose if we had open borders our laws involving sex with children and blood relatives might be relaxed.

    1. Makes me think of the old joke attributed to Churchill.

      He’s drunk at some party and approaches a beautiful woman. He propositions her thusly: “Ma’am, would have sex with me for ?1,000,000?”

      She acts bashful and responds “Well, I don’t know. I suppose I might.”

      He then asks again: “Would you have sex with me for ?1?”

      She gets huffy and offended. “Well I never! What kind of woman do you think I am?”

      He snarks: “We already answered that, now we’re just dickering over the price.”

      1. Winston Churchill? Don’t believe everything you hear.

        1. Don’t skip words when you read.

  14. I know that the prevailing attitude among the less sophisticated parts of America is that the federal government’s soldiers and government school teachers are “heroes”

    as opposed to the sophisticated parts of America that believe they are scoundrels but want to throw millions of dollars at them anyway?

  15. As long as the US has a two-party system, the LP will continue to attract only fanatics and lightweights, because success-oriented people go where they can be successful. The solution is to enable a multi-party system, which requires changing the voting method, e.g. to Approval Voting.

    1. The US doesn’t have a two-party system. In most places, we have a one-party system where two parties agree to ‘divvy up territory’ in a duopolistic cartel. Dems own all the governance in places XYZ and GOP owns it in ABC. Nationally that produces the appearance of a two-party system. But it is in fact a cartel – and cartels are inherently unstable/weak.

      The reality is that opens up a huge opportunity for a third-party or even fourth-party to exploit that and undermine the cartel by not going along with those agreements. By actually COMPETING in those places where competition does not currently exist. Roughly, to challenge Dems in cities and to challenge GOP in burbs/rural for actual office. And to challenge all the ‘areas of bipartisan agreement/cartelization’ (eg gerrymandering/districting, legislature size, election laws, etc).

      The only difficulty that presents to a third-party is presenting some coherence to what that would mean in a truly ‘national’ election. But there is only ONE national election in the US – President. And I’ve never seen an election where the candidate for that office is ‘limited’ by some voter notion that confuses ‘party’ with ‘candidate’.

      1. Good post! Well thought out.

  16. Gee, I wonder why this Libertarian never signed up for that party? The only value of a third party is to stand by an issue as the 2 majors move with the wind to garner votes and wins (i.e. NYS Republicans who didn’t have a win without the NYS Conservative Party). But being part of a party is also a way to move that party to back an issue. And 3rd parties almost never win but by putting a major party on their line they get listed on the ballot the next time around, so what is the best strategy? Republicans are almost a non existent party in NYS now, it would be nice to see Sharpe run for both the Republican and the Libertarian lines in NYS.

  17. As a public school teacher… I find Vorha’s statement stupid and lame. I am an anarchist. Not the flaming idiot kind. I just can’t morally justify a state. I believe people should be free. I believe the state causes more harm and more violations of rights than anything else. And because I decided to go into the lion’s den and take a position away from a statist I can protect, at least for a year, over 100 people from brainwashing. That is WHY I’m a teacher. Libertarians are dumb to claim the ed system is WHY we have what we have yet refuse to jump into the system and break it. We need MORE liberty minded teachers. I told a college advisor after graduating and getting a job that the reason I teach at a public school is so that one day we won’t have them anymore.
    Heck… just yesterday I spent an entire hour discussing my beliefs as a guest speaker to someone else’s class. The students AND that teacher were amazed at what an anarchist actually is and why we believe the way we do. Never would have happened if we let statists run brainwashing camps unhindered.

    And I feel no qualms about it. I didn’t make the state but I am forced to live under it. It’s the Walter Block view of working for the state. If it’s going to exist for the time being, It is better to be manned with good people until such time as it can be dismantled.

    1. I am an anarchist. Not the flaming idiot kind.


      [dons sunglasses]

      …an oxymoron then?

    2. Someone inform the “anarchist” brainwasher of youth on government payroll that the Communist Party USA website is on a different server. That’s a big 404 error, good buddy comrade tovarich.

    3. So you would be open to abolishing your own teacher’s union, and letting non-union teachers and support staff work in your district’s schools?

      1. Yes… abolish the teachers union. Open more private schools. End state licensing for teachers. Let non-union non-district people teach. I’m not a public school teacher because I love public schools. I’m a public school teacher because I hate them. More libertarians and minarchists and even conservatives should enter education in various forms, but especially in classrooms, If we ever want to have a free thinking society. Why do we keep letting the state operate unopposed in its power systems? Those systems will, in today’s environment, keep on chugging. Avoiding them doesn’t hurt them, It allows the state to brainwash children. Take that job from a statist and offer a free thinking education to the future instead.

        1. It’s a wise strategy. Look at what the leftists have done by taking over the education system!

    4. Good on you.

      I always say that if education has been “taken over by liberals”, it’s largely because no one else is interested in teaching.

  18. I can see the argument for voting Vohra out of office at the party convention, but removing him at this point for comments he made on his personal account is uncalled for. The fringe members push the envelope to widen the window of acceptable ideas, and the moderate members make us more presentable. Moderate members belong in the leadership positions.

    In related news, French leaders have been working on writing their first age of consent laws. Perhaps Mardi Gras in France this year will be the Mardi Gras of a lifetime.

    Oh … and a 15 year old girl died of carbon monoxide poisoning in Russia when her 22 year old boyfriend had sex with her in a car in the garage. The car was running to keep them warm. The age of consent there is 16. Maybe she would be alive today if they had a safe place for sex. People who shoot up drugs get needle exchanges. I prefer to keep age of consent laws, but there is a strong argument against them.

  19. I am glad Sharpe resigned, and look forward to Vohra doing the same. Vohra is sounding like the perp responsible for the “Child Molesters Plank” inserted into the 1982 LP platform. I am also curious to know whose idea it was to give Socialists the idea that the LP wants vigilantes and mercenaries–not These State governments–to execute murderers. There is another really dumb plank we could lose and not miss. Since the Republicans are still crying for the coathanger abortion Amendment the Prohibition Party drafted in 1976–after the 1972 LP plank became Roe v. Wade–we could use the saved ink to plunk for the “freedom of production and trade” Amendment at the end of Atlas Shrugged.

  20. Trump won because his party did not offer to ban electric power plants. The two pro-energy parties got exactly half the popular vote. Econazi planks cost the Dems the election, as infiltrators in 2016, and as spoilers (alongside Tennessee) in 2000. Twits do not read party platforms and The Don has the GOP platform (some of which copies ours) memorized.

  21. . . . Vohra also condemned all soldiers as paid killers

    Well, we are.

    Very well paid, educated, trained, disciplined, and equipped killers – but paid to kill people nonetheless.

    1. Yep. When you accept the fact that you have a professional military and that they are paid to do that job…you have mercenaries. Its weird that we think that word is so wrong given that there are have been numerous instances where professional military forces have done some real good like Executive Outcomes did in Sierra Leone in the ’90s.

  22. Libertarian Party insiders know that although donations have stayed relatively steady, the membership roles have plummeted due to vice chair Arvin’s prognostications on the benefits and merits of older men sexually predating on children. The LP leadership also knows that the Ron Paul classical liberals that had bolstered the party numbers are abandoning the LP ship faster than the rats can. The LP leadership is banking on (much like the broadcast media) the ignorance of the masses so that they can get away with people like Arvin, Sarwalk, Harlos, Ruwart and Katz. Their hope is that the noble people that want to join up with a ‘third way’ won’t figure out that the entire history of the LP is riddled with pro-pedophile stances, pronouncements and platform. Yes, please go read the platform and realize that when Arvin says that there should be ‘no age of consent laws’ he literally is repeating the actual Libertarian Party platform. The reality is that Mr Vorha has done small ‘l’ libertarians a great service because now they can go straight to another minor party such as the Independent, Constitution, America First, and save themselves the trouble of wasting their time, effort and resources on a party that was founded, built and operates on the intellectual dishonest philosophy of ‘social anarchism’.

  23. Don’t trust me on the situation in the LP. Read it for yourself right here:!forum/lncvotes The entire story of the LP implosion, which has been playing out in slow motion since it was formed, is one of deception, cult thought reform methods and otherwise intelligent people that subscribe to a good ideal but wind up in a destructive group instead. The irony of the Libertarian Party is that it is not libertarian at all.

    1. It has become just another Progressive Plantation (Marxist Utopia) hiding as Libertarian, same as the Progressives from 100 years ago hid mostly under the Liberal Democrats and some under the Conservative Republicans. We already see the Progressives gaining more and more control like they have with the Democrat Party and Republican establishment.

      1. The Cosmotarian branch is certainly not at all what I’VE ever gotten out of libertarian ideas. They support things that don’t explicitly have to be defended on libertarian principles, but are totally harming liberty in the real world. And they’d just a bunch of smug douche bags that have more in common with Hillary Clinton in a lot of instances than Thomas Jefferson or Ron Paul or anybody awesome.

  24. This guy Vohra sounds like a Progressive Libertarian, not much different than his Progressive Democrat & Republican tovarisch.

  25. Sharpe, is an example of how libertarians can be successful.

    Vohra, is an example of why Libertarians will NOT be successful.

  26. Imagine being a “libertarian ” and thinking that anarchists don’t belong in the LP, which would be nothing without Rothbard (an anarchist).

    P.S. Larry Sharpe rules

  27. Generally, Libertarians don’t believe in teaching sexual abstinence to young teens because teens will do it anyway so might as well teach them how to do it “responsibly”.

    Though I fail to see how “responsibly” includes having sex when you are ill-prepared for the consequences.

    Either teenagers are adults and capable of handling the consequences of sexual activity and should be afforded the same liberties as 18+ (pursuit of a paying job, renting an apartment, medical decisions, consent, etc) or they aren’t . So which is it?

    If they aren’t capable of the responsibilities of being an adult, then perhaps rethinking the views on sex education might be in order.

  28. I get why somebody like this is a BAD person to have in a place of power in an organization. That said, I don’t disagree with all his views. I think it’s a bit harsh to rail on vets. Most of them signed up when they were young and dumb, doing something they thought was good. The fact that they were tools for the military industrial complex doesn’t make them detestable themselves.

    On the other stuff, not that I read anything beyond this article, I mostly agree. I could see MAYBE age of consent laws being set at like 12 or something, but what they are in the western world nowadays is retarded. But on principle they should exist, at least with parental consent.

    So people that think he should be canned for being a bad representative, I get it, but people who PERSONALLY disagree to the extreme are a bit dumb.

    1. One of the problems with age of consent laws being set low with parental consent is the propensity for abuse by groups like polygamist cults. NAMBLA would also be ready to take advantage.

Comments are closed.