Eric,
        Yeah, there is the Libertarian party, and they get a lot of
   electoral votes. In fact, I think that our next president will be Harry
   Browne. Our work is done. Let's go get a drink.

        Seriously, what we are discussing here is the feasibility of
   establishing a credible power base for a third party. I don't think
   (and maybe you disagree with me here) that the Libertarian party has
   achieved this at all. I don't think that the current Libertarian party
   CAN establish this kind of voter confidence. The current presidential
   candidate for the Libertarian party, Harry Browne, has done little to
   gain voter enthusiasm with such bold and impractical claims as the
   statement that his first action in office would be granting executive
   pardon to drug offenders.

        I am familiar with the Libertarian party, to the extent that I was
   a member for the past several years, and have attended several state
   and national Libertarian party conventions, and spoken with
   Congress-people as a representative of Libertarian interests. The fact
   of the matter is, in a discussion of strong representation of issues
   within a viable Washington D.C. power movement, you can only be
   bringing up the Libertarian party as either an example of failure in
   the third party strategy or a recommendation for a third party to
   endorse.

        As for the possible assertion that the Libertarian party is an
   example of a failure to succeed at activism outside of the two-party
   arena, I think that any failure (perceived or real) may in fact be due
   to the outrageous demands of the LP (as an activist, I have been
   embarrassed by them many times), and the complete stubborn demand for
   overnight change without compromise. These facets of the party may be
   sexy to guys like you and I, but don't engender the public, or
   establish a foothold in Washington.

        As to the possible recommendation of the Libertarian party as a
   viable alternative to the two party system, I just don't see how that
   answers my question. Sure, the Libertarian party seems to be fairly
   interested in privacy and personal freedom. That still doesn't tell me
   whether you think it would be easier to get the Libertarian party
   enough power to actually protect our interests, or convince existing
   partisan powers to take up the cause.

        In short, thanks for the info, but you've answered nothing.

   ok,
   Rush Carskadden

   -----Original Message-----
   From: Eric Murray [[1]mailto:ericm@lne.com]
   Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 12:11 PM
   To: Carskadden, Rush
   Cc: 'cypherpunks@algebra.com'
   Subject: Re: Parties

   On Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 11:09:40AM -0500, Carskadden, Rush wrote:
   > Scott and I have been discussing (from a theoretical standpoint) the
   > possibility of a third party that focuses on privacy and personal
   freedom,

   There already is one.
   It's called the Libertarian party.  www.lp.org.

   --
     Eric Murray           Consulting Security Architect
   SecureDesign LLC
     [2]http://www.securedesignllc.com                            PGP
   keyid:E03F65E5

References

   1. mailto:ericm@lne.com
   2. http://www.securedesignllc.com/