Postby Shyster » Thu Sep 29, 2022 11:20 pm
I can say that the LPMC folks are definitely more hostile to "wokeness" and stuff like that, and one of their goals was to counter what they viewed as a trend of stuff like that slowly working its way into the LP platform, where it does not belong. The LP has no business telling people what they should think or believe. That's why the line about racism being repugnant was removed from the platform. It doesn't mean that the LPMC supports racism. It means that the party is disclaiming any right to tell its members what they should be thinking or believing. "But Shyster, that means that there might be racists in the LP." Yeah, it does. It's not the job of the LP to act as thought police, so long as people accept the NAP.
I closely followed the dispute between the LPMC and those folks opposing them, who had large coalesced under the banner "Libertarian Party Cathedral Caucus." I was originally neutral on the dispute. The LPCC's Facebook and Twitter feeds were full of insults and name-calling, with no substantive anything on how the LPCC would actually attract new voters or implement policy. In fact, I specifically reached out on Facebook and asked them to explain how exactly they would run the LP differently from the LPMC and what policies the LPCC would implement that the LPMC would not (or vice versa). I was told in response, basically, "We exist solely to oppose the LPMC, not explain ourselves or our policies," which I did not view as a sufficient reason to support them. Accordingly, I was not surprised in the slightest that the LPMC won literally every position at the national convention and consequently took over the LP.
In my view, and based on what I read from them, the LPCC was largely composed of left-libertarians who wanted to incorporate social-justice concepts into the LP.