A post from Daniel Windham
The Editor anticipates that this Opinion Piece will be controversial. Longer responders will better be published as Opinion Pieces, not comments, and should be sent to the Editor, George Phillies, phillies@4liberty.net. We do edit lightly for spelling and grammar.
Fusionism as the New Underlying Philosophy of the Libertarian Party: Where Do We Go From Here?
Trump won the 2024 election and if he follows through on his promises, the Chair’s risk-taking will have paid off and fusionism will be the new underlying philosophy of the Libertarian Party. I don’t say this as a threat but just an objective view of things. I believe under fusionism the LP will turn more into a lobbying group instead of a political party.
Will this new philosophy keep old Libertarians like me around?
Probably not those of us brought into Libertarianism through Ralph Nader, Ross Perot, and to some degree Pat Buchanan. We are not the kinds of people looking to cut deals with the two major party systems. We joined a third party because we don’t like the options the first two provide us, nor the undemocratic standards of fairness for elections in the United States.
Will it bring in new Republican adjacent Libertarians and hopefully steady donations?
It may attract Republican adjacent folks. If the ideology wasn’t popular within the Libertarian Party the Chair wouldn’t have won her election. This is what the majority wants in the party. One thing I learned at convention is the Chair is very popular across a large swath of Libertarians who hold very different views of what it means to be a Libertarian. But as we have seen declining membership and donations from Libertarians who despise fusionism such as myself, fusionism likely does not bode well for the Libertarian Party long-term.
Will lobbying get more Libertarian policies passed over the difficulty of getting Libertarians elected?
Yes. Lobbying is easier than campaigns. Fusionism naturally encourages lobbying over running candidates. The Republican Party should be an opposition party, but under fusionism the Libertarian Party does not oppose the corrupt two-party system but rather becomes integrated with it. However, without running candidates, many state parties will lose their ballot access. At that point the party would likely deteriorate as advocates would be encouraged to move over into the Republican Party instead.
Will it work in the long run?
This is uncharted territory and I have no idea. Trump’s election would likely put an end to any possible campaign violations between RFK and the LP so that won’t be a worry for them anymore. The NAACP essentially works as a lobbying group and has been very successful with that, as has the Heritage Foundation and the NRA. So the people who want this for the LP would probably be successful if they dedicated their time and energy there. That being said, the LP itself is not a lobbying group and as a legal entity it is still a political party. That poses serious issues for the long term sustainability and growth of the party. After all, why be a fusionist Libertarian if you can just be a Republican? And of course many Libertarians don’t want to be Republicans which is why we are Libertarians in the first place. Where will folks like us go?
What becomes of the older Libertarians as a block?
They move on to other things or continue to fight desperate rear guard actions against the MC who by the way has massive social media outreach and money coming in from the RFK fundraising agreement that no other caucus is getting. MC will soon have enough money to get all their delegates a free ride to Grand Rapids. There is no coordinated opposition when compared to how the MC is currently functioning. If you’re not big on fusionism you are probably getting rooted out. High ranking leadership from the Transparency, Classical Liberal, and the Radical Caucus are not meeting with each other on a regular basis for: fundraising, or coordinating strategy for the next convention. If you think the MC is falling apart, I would like to point out what their former leader and LNC employee Mr. Heise has said publicly: “The next convention to determine this is in May of 2026. Join and fight, fight, fight!” In addition to that another major leader is Dave Smith who although tired of party politics seems to be on top of the social hierarchy of defining what a Libertarian is and serves as a lightning rod of recruitment for like minded fusionists. The other caucus groups have no such person.
What this means is we can at best expect a repeat of 2024 and at worst have complete MC dominance. I have urged caucus leadership to understand that it is no longer a question of Anarchy vs Pragmatism. It’s fusionism libertarianism vs non-fusionism libertarianism. If the groups opposed to fusionism actually worked together and put ideology to the side they would end up in a far better position than they can possibly imagine. I remind you all that only Nixon could go to China. Both groups also need to form a Bylaws committee where they can ensure no dominant caucus can ever rule a party again. I would suggest a rule that all LNC elected members must leave any caucus group they are part of and have the Transparency caucus look at what would be required to ensure that accountability.
All of these things require hard work. Imagine if the time taken trying to dominate Libertarian spaces online or arguing with each other on Discord was actually used to determine and implement a good strategy and fundraising for Grand Rapids? Stop throwing down purity tests on facebook groups and start thinking about the future.
Please keep in mind this isn’t an endorsement, it is just the objective Realpolitik view of what is currently happening in the party based on my 17+ years of involvement including 3 presidential campaigns, and a history of libertarianism spanning from NC to NE. Opposition can also continue to bring National to trial until they are bankrupt but that doesn’t change the ideological battle nor the inherent weakness of LNC bylaws and state LP bylaws that allowed for hostile takeovers and for fusionism to take root. In my opinion it is not the end of the Libertarian Party but it is the end of the Libertarian Party as I knew it. One thing I have learned with the Libertarian Party is the mechanics for self-correction do not exist. No one seems interested in doing root cause analysis and ensuring the same thing doesn’t happen again 20-30 years down the road.
Libertarians think they are safe as long as “their” people are in charge. This is the same fallacy those who believe in two party politics seem to have. But really it is the bylaws and the lack of mechanics of enforcement that will always leave the doorway to fusionism open [Be it Red or Blue] and lawsuits are the only corrective action against malfeasance. All of these things need to be corrected on a macro level to have a sustainable big tent liberty party. The Libertarian Party is full of intelligent well meaning people but we lack the coordination skills to resolve these systemic problems. For those who have sworn fidelity to the party I hope I have given you some serious topics to consider as you move forward.
Thank you for reading.
Daniel Windham
Founder: Books Behind Bars
Founder: Digital Music Archive of the Midwest
Member: NAACP
Advocate: Defend The Guard
Delegate: 2024 Libertarian Party Convention
State Deputy Director Nebraska: Chase Oliver For President
Former:
Advocate: Nebraskans For Medical Marijuana
Libertarian Party of Nebraska: Volunteer, former D1 Alternate Coordinator
Libertarian Party of North Carolina: UNCG -Volunteer/ Anti-War/ Police Accountability
Ron Paul for President 2008 -Volunteer
Ron Paul for President 2012 – Volunteer
Anyway, one of the problems with fusionism is that it limits the ability of a third party to triangulate issues. This is especially true of a third party which has issues that are perceived as both liberal and conservative, such as the Libertarianian Party. By aligning itself with the Republicans on some economic issues, such as reducing taxes and spending, the party is constrained to advocate for more liberal economic issues, such as free trade and liberal immigration.
Maybe I’m being overly fussy, but it seems to me best to describe fusionism as a strategy, rather than a philosophy.
Anyway, I have always thought that the LP’S anti-fusionist policy up to now way overly restrictive. I thought that if the party had endorsed Ron Paul when he ran as a Republican, that wouldn’t be a problem.
But, virtually endorsing Donald Trump is bizarre. The guy is anti-trade and anti-immigrant. How do people who call themselves libertarians justify that?
I suppose there are those who imagine that freedom is at a premium everywhere in the world, and that the US has to seal itself off from the rest of the world to preserve what little is left here.
But, IMO, this is a recipe for failure. A defensive posture always fails in the long run. The Roman Empire started collapsing after Hadrian decided that the Empire was big enough, that expansion had reached its limits, and that walls needed to be built to keep out the barbarians. In contrast, early Christianity decided that everyone needed to be saved, and continued expanding after the collapse of the Empire that legitimized it.
Libertarians should be more like that early Christians: everyone everywhere deserves liberty.
“But, virtually endorsing Donald Trump is bizarre. The guy is anti-trade and anti-immigrant. How do people who call themselves libertarians justify that?”
Easy. Spend two plus years using Alinsky tactics against nonconformists within your own party and against one of the two major parties. Any remaining option becomes the one your team can “hold their nose and endorse”, since (not being Locked In Place via Rule 13) they are nuanced people capable of both good and bad, heroic where they are strong and capable of personal reform where they lack, instead of being a straw man ‘one-of-THOSE-people’ like the derided alternatives.
That’s my big issue with the version of Fusionism that the MC brought to the table. Libertarians are seven-steps-from-Kevin-Bacon’ed into pedos and groomers. Democrats are all conceptualized as the worst 2% pinko progressives of their coalition. There’s no wiggle room for anyone other than Republicans, so there’s no incentive for them to do better because there’s no threat of Big L supporting alternatives. You don’t need to court votes that you’ll always get, so why reform? Coupled with the LP’s sunken membership, destruction of in house mass communication, and compromising of the brand with all the “candidates I don’t like should be murdered” and “California is secretly run by a global Jewish conspiracy” messaging coming out of the MC led affiliates, and the LP doesn’t have the legitimacy or influence to incentivize the RNC to change.
A little birdy told me that there is a new party focusing in part on tracking candidates across the board on how freedom aligned they are, so membership can actually compel candidates in competitive elections to move in a pro liberty direction. I’m cautiously optimistic about that endeavor.
He’s correct; nobody has been talking to the Transparency Caucus. And they should, not because of influence, but because of message.
If you know their caucus leadership personally, please help me get them into the coalition. For every caucus that joins I’m making a donation towards our efforts.
That would be me, and if they still consider themselves, Mr. Knapp and Mr. Frankel.
Is Mr. Frankel still around? I haven’t seen or heard from him in years.
I think he was just posting on here about a week or so ago.
Yes, he occasionally comments. Presumably he occasionally checks in to read things as well.
He, Andy and a few others have devoted many years of their lives working in the heat and the cold, sun and rain. Petitioners are some of the unsung heroes. I am sure they are all quite frustrated at what is going on.
I’m around. Not really into politics any more although I can’t help catching up on reading every now and again, but I’m not active at all whether volunteer or paid. I’m off social media, remain off the voter rolls, not blogging, not petitioning, not donating, etc. If anyone wants to stay in touch despite all that text message is the only way to reliably get a hold of me except in person. I no longer travel, so if anyone goes thru bham AL, I’m here or close by. 205-534-1622 if anyone feels like texting. No set hours but lately I seem to be awake from about 2 am to about 5 pm central time, give or take.
I proudly consider myself a supporter of the Transparency Caucus, but haven’t really heard from it in a long time.
My impression is that Paulie is completely divorced from party stuff at this point, but that could be wrong. I speak with him 1) occasionally, 2) socially.
I’m not particularly “anti-fusionist” if “fusionism” is defined as e.g. a candidate being able to be on the ballot lines of both the LP and another party or parties. The bylaws do forbid that at the state level; I’d like to see that repealed, but if it’s not repealed it should be enforced.
I AM against “fusionism” in the sense of the party, particularly the national committee, acting in support of candidates of other parties who are not also on LP ballot lines.
“This is what the majority wants in the party. One thing I learned at convention is the Chair is very popular across a large swath of Libertarians who hold very different views of what it means to be a Libertarian.”
Even after a herculean convention-rigging effort to ensure the majority of the party wasn’t represented, it took McArdle two ballots to win re-election with 53.44% of the vote. That indicates neither majority desire nor notable popularity.
Correct and none of the others were exciting. Moelman was defensive. Nekailha is squishy and gives bad vibes. Rutherford needed to be lively.
Plus she never disclosed her plans which frankly is fraud by omission.
She could not even win a delegate seat in TX and is not liked there or in her old state.
The only blowout was Redpath and they are scheming to get rid of him.
I have been trying to coordinate an anti fusionist coalition and in the process we’ve been trying to think through how we can ensure we never have a uni-party in the LNC again. These ideas seem to be agreed upon by most libertarians I’ve spoken to. However, this is my first time ever getting involved in organizing people, and nobody knows who I am, so I can understand people being skeptical. In the coming weeks I’m trying to establish a political action committee(trying to find a lawyer now) where a representative of each caucus will have a boardmember seat. These boardmembers will then work together and strategize on how to spend our coalitions funds to retake states. With the ultimate goal of going to national together as a coalition all supporting people running from each others caucuses such that we have a truely representative LNC.
To be clear I don’t want to be on the board at all, I definetly dont want a LNC position, I just want caucus leaders to work together so I can have a political home again. Ive always stayed on the outside of intraparty politics because i never really understood why id want to fight with people I agree with 98% of their positions, even if they are in a completly different faction. Things have changed. There is one faction, this unifaction fusionist kingmaker LNC that I now will devote my free time and free money towards ending.
Idk if this will get people on board, but what I will say is, for every boardmember position filled(each representing a different caucus) I will donate $200 up to 2k. I’m willing to donate time and money and I don’t want any position of power or decision making. I just want to contribute, as what just happened in 2024 cannot be the way we let the libertarian party die.
I want to run these fucks out for good. So I can go back to just existing as a libertarian proud to tell people my party affiliation
Everyone else can go back to arguing about the 2% they disagree on while they work together to grow the party and court back long time activists who have been abused till they left.
discord.gg/refocusLNC
#Tarandfeather2026
Phil
Get with Phillies and get postcards out regularly. There are Mises defectors and those lurking that can rule out ones not to bother. Go back years. I know people with those lists.
Get McAddled’s ego bruising statements about Trump
TO Trump. You can’t fight dirty with clean.
Connect me with those lists. I have people on board who have skills with graphic design and hopefully George or others would be willing to help tailor the written portions of said mailers. I will start researching companies that can do all the printing/mailing to price out what it will cost, unless someone already has these connections.
I paid for a discord to be developed to get this going but getting people in there when they don’t know me is going to be the largest hurdle. What I think needs to happen is big names in the history of the party need to join up and promote this coalition.(or a different one if it’s already established. But it does feel from my POV that no-one has done it yet. Two of us within the coalition paid for the discord to be at its maximum level so we have a permanent custom link so it could be easily shared, we just need people to start passing that link around. http://www.discord.gg/refocusLNC
Sharing of the lists, strategies and goals for the coalition while valuable here(extremely so if we can act on this info) feels like it needs to be in one place so all collaborators can add their input and expertise.
A quick visit to your discord site indicate that you have 26 people signed up, 12 of which are online on this Saturday evening.
I did not click to enter, because I am not a member of your party anymore and do not want to be considered a spy for any outside organizations (Reminder: Liberal Party USA convention is this weekend!).
I do need to point out though, that you have a trademarked LP image on the splash page. McAddled might sue you…
I dont care if you are from an outside third party, as long as your goal isnt to destroy our efforts of reforming the LNC. From what I can tell, the liberal party is made up of people that I agree with on most things. And I’m sure you all have strategy on how to stop infiltration of bad actors which we would find valuable.
If they want to spend what little money they have to send a cease and desist notice, then I will remove it and make a new version using AI. It will waste their time and money and I will change it by wasting almost no time and money when they send the request. If they do this, it will just be more ammunition against their absurd actions and waste of the dwindling donors funds.
Get me an email- put it in Discord. I know folks who can you info but would do so anon. As far as public delegate lists with addresses, Harlos can get you those. You will need to weed out Meeesus.
Phil please feel free to reachout to me. I have some experiance with organizing (but not enough for a national deal). I am also well known in CO as being un-caucused. I have never and will never join one. I do this for my own neutrality in the party and many who know me will tell you I don’t play teams or favorites.
Mr Phiies would you be so kind as to send Phil my E-mail? If not I understand and will post one for him to reach out to but I want to avoid releasing my email publicly too much.
I partly agree and partly disagree.
The part I disagree with is that the Mises Caucus is destined to retain leadership in 2026. From what I can tell, the majority of convention delegates at any convention we’ve ever had (other than 2022) are not affiliated with any caucus. The independent delegates look at what is being offered to them and choose what seems most reasonable.
The part that I agree with is that the various caucuses in opposition to Mises are not working together, and they should.
I disagree with all those who say that the majority of members love McArdle. 1. No one good ran against her. And I have yet to see anyone volunteer next time. 2. They rigged the convention, including screwing with Michigan delegates. The convention outcome would have been very different if they didn’t purge opposition.
You are right. In the Party, not outside Republican shills, they despise her. She has NO future in this Party. Mises are mostly quiet quitting.
In relying on his experiences from the convention, the author is operating on obsolete information. I was generally pro-MC before the convention, but the crooked behavior of leadership after the convention turned me away. And I’m certainly not the only one; just look at how Hagopian and Harlos have denounced the McArdle regime. That’s 50% of the original Mises LNC officer slate, and is indicative of what has happened among the MC base.
I think a lot of McArdle/Heise’s political strategy is right, although naive in the tactics of the execution. We did not get a Libertarian in the cabinet, so that has already been a failure. And I’m excited to see RFK dismantle pharma’s hold at HHS but he’s not a registered Libertarian and certainly not a philosophical libertarian. I thought maybe we’d get Thomas Massie for Agriculture or Mike Lee for AG and then McArdle could have realistically claimed the promise was fulfilled, but that didn’t happen. That promise was broken and so on that point, McArdle and Heise failed. Let’s at least hope the promise to free Ross isn’t broken.
In any case, it’s a shame because even though I agree a lot on strategy, the nasty behavior from this LNC has turned me off and made me actively want to oppose them. I wouldn’t trust them to pick up my mail so I’m certainly not going to trust them with my funds or time.
RFK became a life member of the LP.
And that fact alone makes me glad that I took the trouble to go through the mess of making sure that my life membership was voided after I left in 2020.
Anyone associated with a party that has RFK as a member is insane.
So did Bill Weld, neither of them are libertarian. In strictest technical sense they are Libertarian. But they will not act with libertarian principles which means that no libertarian or real Libertarian is in the cabinet. Mcardle gambled her rep and the party’s resource to try and get some political momentum, but who could have projected it would backfire and trump wouldn’t follow through? Well the libertarians but the LNC doesn’t listen to them.
And I strongly questioned the Weld selection in 2016 when he was chosen as the VP candidate, as well as his alleged conversion from a Red Nose Republican.
No, you get no cabinet member. I wonder what the Vegas odds would’ve been on that happening.
“who could have projected it would backfire and trump wouldn’t follow through?”
Well, for one, I did. I publicly stated that on X on McArdle’s video endorsement thread 6 months ago:
As a longtime party member, I am EXTREMELY skeptical of any promise Trump makes to us because for decades we have seen lip service only to our issues. Talk is cheap. I’ll believe it when I see it, and only then do we give them credit.
3:32 PM · Jun 3, 2024 · 2,036 Views
(Can’t screenshot it, but it’s there)
Been in politics and the LP too long to buy what was being sold.
And exactly when did that happen? Because it certainly did not happen at the Convention; there he only became a sustaining member according to the data I saw that we had to verify for his nomination petition.
And on a related note, why has the list of life members been removed from lp.org? Just another Mises effort to bring more transparency to the party?
It’s available at https://my.lp.org/lifetime-members/ but possibly not updated. Sorting by date revealed that the most recent records from July or March depending on which of the two dates are used. I’m not sure what the difference between them is.
Either no lifetime members joined since then or the list has not been maintained and updated.
Why is this information not confidential? Would it be ok for them to post the list of basic members as well? If your answer to the two differs, why?
Just removed from the front page, I guess.
What is the point of having it be confidential? Government FEC reports contain name, location, the amount donated, and the donor’s employer. It’s all public if it is over $200, or whatever the threshold is these days.
That is not an agreement or disagreement with the FEC publishing requirements, I’m just saying that the information is already out there and compiled on sites like opensecrets.
Jim: see
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2024/11/libertarian-party-hails-kennedy-nomination-for-health-and-human-services-as-a-groundbreaking-moment-for-the-party/#comment-2742635
Excellently written. Real classical liberals & Libertarians (L) & Federalists alike who believe in free market principles are welcome here: https://www.liberalpartyusa.org/
I consider myself a real Libertarian Mr. Kraus but there isn’t room for anarchists from what I have gathered. I do however wish the party lots of luck and challenge any Liberal Party candidate to a debate for the beenfit of the electorate.
Well I’ve also came from the more Anarchist side of the L world. I find the LPUSA welcoming to everyone & agree with 95% of the values & platform. I’m also a big free market kind of guy & that’s the lens everything in the LPUSA is being seeing thru.
I might have to give them more of a look if they welcome Anarchists but I’ve been give a different impression. That being said I am always down to work with pro liberty parties.
The Liberal Party should be a big tent party. All in the liberty and freedom movement should be welcome. But the party should be clear though all are welcome the Liberal Party is not an anarchist party. In an essay published in social media someone (he) argued the Libertarian Party made a mistake when in the early days of the Libertarian Party members decided to set aside the divide between the limited government and anarchist (no government) wings of the party by not deciding what the goal of the party was e.g., limited government or no government. He felt the party should have made it clear the Libertarian Party was for limited government not no government.
He suggested if it had been made clear at the beginning the Libertarian Party was for limited government the party might have had more success. The Liberal Party should make it clear the goal is to have limited government not no government (defund the police, abolish taxpayer supported fire departments, a complete separation of church and state if it is possible – it isn’t, get rid of taxpayer public schools, no national borders, etc.
The Liberal Party should also make it clear what the party’s views are on foreign policy. It has been mentioned the foreign policy views of the party are unclear. It should stand for a non-interventionist foreign policy. Also, the views relating to the draft should be made clear. The Liberal Party should be against the draft. And the party’s views on immigration should be explained. Is the party for free and open immigration no questions asked?
By all means be a big tent party. Welcome all who are in the liberty and freedom movement should be welcome. But make it clear what you stand for.
“Real classical liberals & Libertarians (L) & Federalists…” – Robert Kraus
Federalists? Where did THAT come from?
I have a lot more insider knowledge on this and it’s just wrong. These groups are meeting and the MC is falling apart. McAddled is not popular any longer even within the MC. Your NE chair is terrible.
McAddled. Great name twist. I have talked to several people in the mises caucus who absolutely love her. It is possible that where he was sitting in the convention, everyone around him was just as delusional as the people I know.
But I can certainly see how her popularity would be dropping since the convention. She stopped disguising her intentions, and openly worked to corrupt the process of running a candidate for president.
But looking from the outside, it appears that they are trying to turn the party into something other than a party. Going to Mar-a-Lago and kissing the ring of His Holiness (Please note that I am trying to avoid calling him Der Fuhrer), could not have gone over well with many members of the party who are actual libertarians.
So many MC are quiet quitting. Most of her current “fanbase” aren’t even party members. Her targeting Harlos was large misstep coupled with her inability to control Malagoon and attacks on Haggopian. She is not likable at close resolution and is sociopathically ruthless. Heise used to well-liked but he’s changed and the minute any trouble hits, and I think it will, he will choose his family. The minute his wife understands there might be criminal issues involved here the game is up.
Controversial? I believe it is well thought out and well presented. The author presents his opinion on recent events and the likelihood of the future of his party in a very convincing manner.
I am not sure what there is in here to disagree with, and that is extremely unfortunate for anyone who actually believed in the libertarian party as a party.
A very fitting presentation for Thanksgiving day.