I have been somewhat active over the years within the LPO.
For a short time I was Secretary to the local party.
I protested the war in IraQ, I gathered signatures for an Inititive (that did not pass)
that would have allowed Oregonians to grow Pot in their back yards,
and this year I am hosting another StoptheDrugWarParty.

“I do not support the initiation of force (or fraud) to achieve social or political goals.”

I want to assure you that the issues that the LPO are facing have been years in the making and have little to do at this point with philosophical differences or one group trying to grab power.

A decade ago, a group of republican refugees got together and created a caucus,
They quickly took control of the LPO and have done whatever it took to keep control.

The leaders of the LPO have engaged in repeated fraudulent and illegal acts which includes the recent mis-handling of recent recall election.

The Reformers within the local party simply want the Party of Principle to once again have leaders that represent the ideal, and all people who share our values, regardless of income level, or personal style.

Anyone interested in joining this fight please contact me THIS WEEK.
(today is January 29) SUBJECT LINE: Ron I want to vote them out

Ron L. Boozell
ron_l_boozell@yahoo.com

Both terrorism and dictatorship arise when there is a substantial minority that is extremely dissatisfied with the results of the democratic process and see little chance for redress within that process.

Plurality-take-all elections allow a strong faction to run the show without sufficient checks. Parliamentary systems with coalitions forming a government also disenfranchise minority factions.

Range voting does not always satisfy the majority criterion, but I consider this a feature, vs. a bug. If a majority in a nation are racists, then majority rule can lead to very evil results. Better to have rule by a government that is a bit less pleasing to the racists while reducing the injustice to the despised minority.

Sunni Arabs are not going to be well served by a democratic Iraq. Lebanese Christians are not well served by a truly democratic Lebanon.

However, it is possible—though not guaranteed—that such minorities could have sufficient influence in a range-voting system to prevent the worst abuses by the majority faction. In a range voting system a successful strategy can be one of being a not bad choice for members of the majority faction while being a MUCH better choice for the minority than the favorite of the majority.

For those who think that terrorism is a Muslim phenomenon, vs. a weakness in democracy, consider Northern Ireland.

Also, being schooled on the rules would make the emerging party candidates better lawmakers if and when they are elected to the legislature.

That being said, Carl, I’d hate to assume that terrorism and dictatorship are direct results of not having range voting. That’s a leap.

If the LP wants to reduce its tendency to fission, it needs to adopt Range Voting internally. (see www.rangevoting.org) This worked quite well for the Strategic Planning Team. It worked well for the LRC when applied (and has just now been reimplemented at a higher fidelity level).

Range voting minimizes “Bayesian Regret,” i.e., the total overall dissatisfaction with the result of a vote. Plurality voting minimizes regret only for the strongest faction, weaker factions be damned. In organizations, high Bayesian regret translates into factionalism and fission. In countries, it translates into terrorism and/or dictatorship.

Hopefully the National Committee will not recycle their Arizona error by trying to dictate a setlement in a state dispute.

HA! Since when? That’s the sum total of most of my personal first hand experience in the the LP - ‘not as libertarian as me , so go join some other party.’

but I’ve been treated very well in person with 4 or 5 exceptions. It mostly seems to be internet blood sport.