There is an Australian political party worth voting for! I have recently joined as a financial member. Some principles, some policies. Not bad at all. I think their taxation policy places too much of a burden on the taxpayer, but it is still preferable to the progressive status quo.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
16 comments to At last |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Sorry James, but these guys have fallen for the human rights trap.
Under NeuArbeit in the UK all sorts of human rights are now statutory and enforceable. Problem is, the more rights granted the more freedoms lost.
Brits now have the statutory ‘right’ to marry whomsoever they wish, with a whole government human rights apparatus to ensure it can happen, whereas they used to have the freedom to do so, without any government involvement.
Rights and freedoms so often are in conflict. TB can stuff his rights, give us back our freedoms.
whereas they used to have the freedom to do so, without any government involvement.
I think if you read their policies, this is what the party is advocating.
I think the LDP is a good start for those of us in Australia, and in a few years may graduate from a party of protest against big government to a parliamentary party.
From their policies:
Tee hee. Their stance on ‘victimless crime’ is slightly curious, though. In general, they look pretty sane. I’d be interested to know how they are regarded in Australia by the general public.
James
Who runs the party? Is it a libertarian group?
I just joined last weekend. It’ll be nice to vote for someone who doesn’t make you vomit
I should join up too this week. They are by far, the most sane political party around. Everyone else is well within the social-democratic camp.
Does anyone know how many members the LDP have so far ? Will we be able to vote for them in the next federal election ?
Who runs the party? Is it a libertarian group?
A lot of the members of the LDP are associated with the Australian Libertarians Society and their blog Thoughts on Freedom, as well as a another blogCatallaxy Files.
I’m not a member myself, not sure what their policy is on non-resident members who have been struck from the electoral role for failing to vote at one measley federal election.
Chris –
What human rights trap? Why do you assume they’re referring to the so-called “progressive” definition of human rights, which aren’t actually human rights at all; they’re just entitlements that pander to various interest groups at the expense of other individuals.
When the LDP mentions human rights on their “Principles” page, I think it safe to consider they’re utilising the liberal interpretation of human rights – that is, the right to life, liberty and property and nothing else.
J – the general public haven’t heard of them. The LDP have an uphill battle to fight – the concept of liberalism (using the proper definition) is pretty weak in Australia. There is not much that could be described as a “liberal heritage” here.
As you say, James … “at last”! After years of leaving my ballot paper blank (I always turn up to get my name checked) I may actually have the opportunity to make a mark on it (assuming, of course, someone stands down here in Mandurah, WA). Even if I can’t vote for ’em, a start may have been made …
When the LDP mentions human rights on their “Principles” page, I think it safe to consider they’re utilising the liberal interpretation of human rights
You may be right, but I’ve been kicked in the teeth by my assumptions too often. However, how about I do the right thing here, they seem sound so give them the benefit of the doubt for the time being and join in, arguing from the inside that they should drop that bit.
I’ll find out if they want a Gold Coast branch. After all, about ten years ago I was the sole member of the Streatham branch of UKIP. Let history repeat.
John: If you live in Mandurah and would like to stand, please get in contact with us. We are currently completing Federal Registration and our next task is to look for Candidates for the next Federal Election.
info@ldp.org.au
Sam Ward
Perth Member
Yobbo
Is there a Sydney contact?
Looks very interesting. The UK desperately needs this type of party but Howard seems too popular on the Right to make much of an impact, especially as he is now finally cutting taxes.
We have members in Sydney pommy. Send an email to the above address.
A flat rate 30% income tax looks very high – but remember there is no “National Insurance” (American Social Security tax) in Australia – so tax under the Australian Liberal Demcrats would be a lot lower than it is in Britain.
There were some important free market economists in Australia in the 19th century (see the second volume of Murry Rothbard’s history of economics).
In the 20th century Colin Clarke spent most of his life in Australia (do not hold his being a friend of Keynes against him) and there were others.
Also people should remember that Australian taxes and government spending used to be, by modern standards, very low – below 25% of the G.D.P. even as late as the 1960’s.
Some of the small government condition of Australia was accidential – for example, till the time R.M. the Australian government (Federal and mostly State to) refused to subsidize church schools and the Catholic church in Australia had (for various historical reasons) a much worse relationship with the State schools than the Catholic Church in either Britain or the United States (not that relationship in the United States was exactly friendly in the 19th century). So most Catholic children went to private church schools that were not subsidzed by the government – till R.M.’s time anyway.
Another interesting thing is that statism is more honest in Australia. I know that sounds odd (indeed demented) but consider this – in America the Constitution was “interpreted” to allow the government to do various things it has no power to do (for example the PURPOSE of the powers granted to Congress “the common defence and general welfare” has been “interpreted” as a “general welfare power” in-its-self for the government to spend money on just about anything).
In Australia when certain people wanted the government to have the power to (for example) set up a Commonwealth government pension scheme (and so on) there was a referendum to change the 1901 Constitution – not to pretend it meant something different.
I do not think Australians would go alone with the sort of “black is white, 1 +1 = 36” type of government language and rule that has gone on for so long in the United States.
I believe there is a lower tolerance for bullshit.