The “How” Matters

The Libertarian Party (LP) elected Gov. Gary Johnson and Gov. Bill Weld to carry the banner in the 2016 November Presidential election. It seeks to persuade American voters it can best represent their interests and values.

The mood at the nominating Convention in Orlando was dynamic, emotional and hopeful. After 40 years, the LP seems to have found a firm pathway to success. Delegates undertook important consensus-building dialogue and expressed some strong disagreements, not unlike other groups seeking political change. However, it managed to achieve a difficult ideological balance of its two polarities. On the one hand, there was the strident, emotional and, to be sure, righteous call to remain true to the principle of individual sovereignty. It was cogently and effectively expressed through the voice of Darryl Perry. It inspired many in attendance and gave pause to Convention participants who may have gotten comfortable in their status as system critics instead of principled activists. On the other, there was the voice of the steadfast and plodding pragmatists embodied by the voice of Gary Johnson and, his strategic pick for Vice-President, Bill Weld. They fought valiantly to find the right mix of ideas that would provide the party an effective opportunity to move, the shared values of all Libertarians, forward.

It took two ballots. The first ballot acknowledged the roots of the Libertarian Party as the Convention of Fighters for Liberty and expressed solidarity with all voices within the LP. The second ballot acknowledged the importance of a pragmatic approach to forge ahead and entrusted Gary Johnson to carry the banner. Shortly, thereafter, the Convention gave Gov. Johnson the support he requested relative to a running mate.

In retrospect, it was the best possible outcome for a Party of Americans that believe in individual sovereignty, the right to private property, privacy, self-defense, responsibility for one’s actions and respect for others, often styled, the Principle of Non-Aggression.

Now, the Johnson-Weld campaign has some important decisions to make. It must prioritize the platform in a manner that makes sense to voters. At the same time, it must signal a pragmatic and inexorable path forward to the many libertarians across the land awaiting instructions. To be sure, the campaign has already selected some excellent organizers and regional coordinators.


There is one issue that bears closer inspection. The way in which supporters organize may well determine the success or failure of the current effort to bring the LP to the mainstream of American political life.

Many of the ideas articulated by Darryl Perry, John McAfee, Austin Peterson and Gary Johnson are worthy of deeper analysis. All have a great deal to offer the LP in this key evolutionary moment. But, it was McAfee that brought the issue to a poignant moment at the Convention. He posed a simple query: Should the LP organize by race or ethnicity or religion?

Fascinatingly (for me), the Libertarian delegates did not have a ready answer. More importantly, there did not seem to be any appetite to discuss the matter more openly or more fully.

The Johnson-Weld campaign must answer this question forthrightly and signal their supporters relative to “how” to best communicate with emerging constituencies for Libertarian ideas and the Libertarian Party.

Individual is Sovereign

The Johson-Weld campaign should prioritize its message. If, for example, a key belief of the campaign is that taxation is theft, then Tax-payers for Gary makes sense, Working People for Gary makes sense, Homeowners for Gary makes sense. If it believes smaller government is better, then anarchists for Gary makes sense. Never mind what the political opposition says or does.

Moreover, once this signal is broadcast by the campaign, it must respect people’s choices relative to how to organize. However, it must exert a discipline to kindly request those that are organizing in a contrarian fashion to respect the adopted approach. A national campaign is about organizing the development of a strong constituency to achieve clear and specific goals. The examples presented here are only for illustrative purposes.

The goal, beyond the current election, is to build future constituencies for Libertarian ideas and the Libertarian Party. Thus, it behooves the banner carriers to organize constituencies around key beliefs; their platform; our platform.

Makron Academy: Your Future is Online

In the heart of a small town in West Texas, Makron Academy has opened its doors. More accurately, the Academy has unveiled its internet sites designed to provide subject matter seminars with immediate applicability to the workplace. Makron Academy was conceived as a response to the challenge issued by Jonathan Kozol in his book, Illiterate America. In his poignant narrative, Kosol identifies illiteracy as the biggest challenge facing our nation and affecting a good third of the American population and, almost, two-thirds of the Hispanic population.

Moreover, in a gargantuan and compellingly simple way, Robert Cleckler and Gary Sprunk, have developed a method, styled NuEnglish, through which they propose a potential phonetic English reading and writing strategy. “Internally consistent and sound, the approach lends itself to addressing the problem of illiteracy in a breathtakingly simple manner,” stated Makron Academy’s founder, Jaime O. Perez. He commented, “Thus, Makron Academy has positioned itself to tackle the single largest challenge facing the United States for the foreseeable future.”

Jaime O. Perez, an adult education and English-as-a-Second-Language (ESL) instructor, is convinced that adapting the Cleckler/Sprunk approach is a key to addressing the illiteracy challenge posed by Kozol’s research.

The premise of Makron Academy’s institutional curriculum is that adapting NuEnglish, as a tool to transition those learning English, provides a way to address widespread illiteracy among Hispanics. There is no doubt the effort by Cleckler and Sprunk to address the problem of illiteracy took years to refine and Perez expects their approach will bear fruit far beyond their highest expectations.

Man, the State and Empire – The Rise of Monetarchy

Man, the State and Empire – The Rise of Monetarchy – Rule by Banks

The world is coming upon a significant transformation. From villages to fiefdoms to monarchies to empires to sovereign states, the world is now poised to transition to its most significant integrative transformation since the middle of the 20th century that saw the consolidation of the nation state.

The world is moving to what President George Herbert Walker Bush referred to as a New World Order. This NWO is a Monetarchy or Rule by Banks.

Monetarchy has sucessfully implanted itself in the internal state governance of those participating in the world fiat currency markets. It has achieved sufficient integration to be rightly considered an empire (overarching entity composed of various countries and nationalities) that exercises global management of multi-state fiscal, and by extension – social, policies through a synarchic financial banking sector led by a Federal Reserve system. The Federal Reserve system is led by a Chairman who functions as the Monetarch of the transnational banking empire.

The monetarchic system is interlinked with the most powerful unipolar, devolving, constitutional and polycratic state – the United States. Polycratic refers to the exercise of the three branches of government.

Kenneth Waltz’s anarchic world order has shifted to a unipolar system supported by a fiscal matrix of fiat currency institutions. The U.S’s unipolar refers to its productive and military capacity relative to other world states. Despite enormous advances by China and Russia in developing their internal market capacity, the U.S. continues to outpace them.

Many states are in a process of nation-state devolution. Devolution is defined here as the transfer of power from the sovereign constitutions to the transnational monetarchy. This transfer of power is best illustrated by the number of technocrats filling important positions in sovereign governments. A technocrat is one that has served as a senior transnational bank official that shares the prevailing ‘equilibrium’ economics ideology, also referred to as Keynesianism.

The international system is, currently, maintained through explicit alliance among the US and a small number of strategic global state regional partners also in a state of devolution: Europe, UK-Australia-Canada, Israel, Arabia-Turkey, Pakistan-India, China, Russia, Japan, Brazil-Latin America, Indonesia-Taiwan, Africa. Importantly, those alliances are maintained through various commercial and free market agreements. These agreements are key in any effort to re-balance the relations of power in the new unipolar system.

Undergirding this emerging hierarchical system is the the fact the monetarchic empire is managed through senior banking sector technocrats sanctioned by the Federal Reserve bank.

The singular characteristic of the empire is that it has designated the US dollar as the world reserve currency and regulates its quantity. This power over the world’s reserve currency and its control of the fiscal decision process provides it with the leverage to exercise a monopoly of force through its state partner and its allies.

Technocrats from the various financial sector corporations serve interchangeably in executive branches of devolving states. Devolving states are not necessarily autocratic. Indeed, they may be democratically-elected governments. They do however share one characteristic. They are plutocracies, that is, governments increasingly composed of members of a wealthy financial class, whose role it is to enforce laws, legislate new ones and arbitrate conflicts. They are also, at least nominally, nomocracies. The legitimacy of their rule depends on the rule of law.

Plutocratic regimes ensure policies consistent with the interest of the Monetarchy because they perceive it as being in their direct financial self-interest. At the top of this empire is the Monetarch. He heads the Federal Reserve International Banking system and, although subject to pro forma oversight by the governing body of the unipolar sovereign (US), is not accountable to it.

There is are opposing dynamics within the monetarchic empire that affect its long-term viability.

On the one hand, there is the ongoing reaffirmation of constitutional democratic institutions of the unipolar sovereign state (US). This sovereign state benefits most from the empire because the Monetarchy transfers its inflation to other lesser state allies. A constitutional reaffirmation tendency can theoretically lead the polycratic state to stop the transfer of wealth from the sovereign’s citizenry to the empire’s transnational financial institutions. This implies the elimination of implicit and explicit guarantees of fiscal international trade, exchange and commercial policies.

In addition, the sudden de facto integration of various classes of global labor pools is increasing the stress within the sovereigns who are forced to rapidly reallocate labor, raw materials and other resources to the needs of the empire.

These tendencies are counterbalanced by the reserve and world currency policies supported by global sovereign governments that continually increase the military and commercial leverage of the monetarchy relative to its principal nation-state partner and other allied devolving sovereigns.

Whether the Empire is long-lived or whether the system re-balances in favor of the sovereignty of the nation state will depend on which dynamic proves stronger with its consequent policy mix.

Many despair of the economic confusion that seems to rule the news of the day as we move into 2012. They simply do not understand what is happening. Single issue micro-analysis is highly cumbersome and often confuses the reader because various complex issues and subject areas considered in isolation from the broader picture are necessarily incomplete and limited. A broader theoretical model is required.

Macro-analysis can provide a brief formal overview but has the very real danger of oversimplifying a great many complex processes. This description of a monetarchic model is an attempt to synthesize the issues in a way that is accessible to the average reader.

If you accept the theoretical framework as presented, the conclusion is fairly simple relative to what steps must be taken to restore the primacy of the nation-state. Implicit in this assertion is the normative bias toward it.

The goal here is seek and recommend prescriptions for the ailments arising from the sudden globalization tipping point experienced in 2008 not, simply, to find short-term palliatives, mitigators or superficial treatments of the global fiscal challenges.

What must be done?

To bring down an empire, the enabling sovereign nations must transform themselves from within. That means each and every American, as well as, each citizen proud of all proud national traditions have a choice to make – Restore the sovereignty of their respective nation-state or allow the continued consolidation of the monetarchic empire.

For Americans, the question is: Can we find and bring back our Washingtonian revolutionary spirit, our tea party boldness, Lincoln’s fight for unity and equality; Wilson’s hope to end all wars; Roosevelt’s affirmation of democratic values relative to the centralized party hierarchies of communism/fascism; Kennedy’s man on the moon searching the stars; Johnson’s great society, and citizen’s multiple occupy (occtupy) passions — in constructive ways that restore sovereignty to the United States?

Most importantly, can we fight to restore sovereignty without resorting to Huntingtonian bigotry?

Can we as Americans reaffirm our values of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?

It remains an open question.

National Security Policy

1. Oceans – Assign Coast Guard to secure US shores from smuggling of people, foreign military operatives and WMDs;
2. Border – Deploy National Guard to secure Canadian and Mexican threats to border residents;
3. Transportation – Transfer federal control of transportation hub security to entities that operate them;
4. Sequestration – Reduce defense cut sequestration target by 50 percent;
5. ICBM Arsenal – Reconfigure ICBM population target-centric design;
6. Preventive War – Establish new systemic evaluation for global conflicts not immediately threatening to the Republic and reassert Congressional oversight.

Personal Privacy

1. Citizens – Eliminate warrantless domestic spying and intrusion on Citizen free speech;
2. Non-Citizens – Eliminate secret prisons and torture and reinstate habeas corpus.

Social Security Policy

1. Establish an “opt-out” option for Americans wishing to end their enrollment in Social, Security, Medicare and Medicaid;
2. Establish an “opt-in” option for Americans wishing to enroll in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Foreign Policy

1. Free Trade Agreements – Secure Border through end of Free Trade Agreement with Mexico and all other countries. Free trade was meant to work through comparative advantage not through the export of capital to establish dominance of home country producers;
2. Immigration Policy – Reform immigration system to expedite application and processing procedures;
3. Labor – Establish a Liberty W Visa for foreign workers desiring to migrate to US as requested by American owned businesses located in the US;
4. Non-Citizens – Establish a Liberty V Visa for foreign visitors in the US without permission renewable on an annual basis;
5. Non-Citizen Resdients – Establish a Liberty R Visa for foreign citizens that reside in the US without permission renewable on an annual basis with an option and process that would treat them as first time applicants for US residency;

Citizenship Policy

1. Free Speech – Eliminate federal restrictions on the exercise of free speech including religious, cultural and other normative beliefs;
2. Consensual – Relations – Declare amnesty for Citizens imprisoned for consensual relations;
3. Prohibition – Declare amnesty for all Citizens imprisoned solely for use of drugs;
4. Labor Unions – Eliminate federal restrictions on workers to freely assemble into Unions;
5. Marriage – Recognize no federal restrictions on marriage;
6. Right to Bear Arms – Allow no federal restriction upon the right to bear arms;
7. Reform Justice System – Double Jeopardy and Cruel and Unusual punishment apply when individuals cannot find work because they have served time.

Technology & Education Policy

1. Mandates – Eliminate federal mandates relative to technology and education;
2. Credentialism – Eliminate federal structural barriers to employment e.g. restrictive degree requirements;
3. NASA – Transfer NASA Research and Development under the Department of Education;
4. Reform student loan programs.

Economic Policy

1. Federal Agencies – Reduce federal agency budgets not contemplated in the Constitution by 50 percent in FY 2013;
2. Bankruptcy – Expand bankruptcy laws to cover all indebtedness;
3. Federal Reserve – Eliminate the transfer of private debt to taxpayers through TARP, QE, Twist and Dollar Swap programs;
4. US Debt – Eliminate borrowing from Federal Reserve;
5. Public Infrastructure – Rebuild public infrastructure and eliminate policy of transferring public infrastructure to private sector;
6. Too Big To Fail Banks – Eliminate federal implicit and explicit default guarantees;
7. Federal Debt Limit – Cap federal debt limit to 120 percent of GDP;
8. Deficit Spending – Balance federal budget;
9. Currency – Control national currency in partnership with American owned banks;
10. Banks – Prohibit federal bank bailouts;
11. Energy – Eliminate federal auto company and auto loan guarantees;
12. Home Mortgages – Eliminate federal mortgage loan guarantees;
13. Education Loans – Eliminate federal student loan guarantees;
14. Competition – Lift federal restrictions on interstate commerce e.g. insurance providers;
15. Conflicts of Interest – Prohibit public service to those with conflicts of interest. Directors, stockholders or managerial employees of banking and financial institutions that hold federal government administrative and management positions often have conflicts of interest;
16. Dollar – Nationalize currency and control quantity of money at 50 percent of GDP.