[RonPaulalways]

I want to add our party platform to the official Party Platform thread. Before I do, I'd like to ask for feedback on this proposed change:

I'd like to amend this:

Free Trade and Migration

We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property.

to this:

Free Trade and Migration

We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of financial capital across national borders. However, we support regulating immigration in order to maintain security and a national polity that upholds the principles of a free society. We call for immigration requirements that give entry to those who not only have skills that add to the material wealth of the nation, but also the character that adds to its culture of liberty, as a liberty loving people is the basic building block of a free and prosperous society.

I'd also like to add the following:

Local Government

We support the right of States and local communities to create policies tailored to their regional needs. A national government should provide only the basic foundation of law and security, and give regions the freedom to choose their own economic, social and tax policies. We support the right of all citizens to move and trade across State lines unimpeded.

[ingliz]

For a "Party of Principle" it amusing too see how your principles dance to gain electoral advantage.

[RonPaulalways]

Which principle am I compromising for electoral advantage?

[ingliz]

Freedom of movement, a negative liberty I think.

[RonPaulalways]

Libertarians believe in negative liberty.

[Attica]

nice design work btw, Suska.

[ingliz]

Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of financial capital across national borders. However, we support regulating immigration

[Suska]

nice design work btw, Suska.

thanks attica

we support regulating immigration

ingliz, the Libertarian Party and therefore the Liberty Caucus is not in the business of forcing ideal policies onto a real world. Our principles allow us our pragmatism even if they don't allow us to ignore our ultimate goals (as is routinely done in the name of political compromise). Immigration is by far not the biggest issue we have to deal with and as it involves other nations we cannot ignore the effects it may have. Ron Paul himself is in favor of a proper immigration system. If the world at large was at least Libertarian-leaning a system of open borders would be preferred. In the real world it may constitute a national weakness and the matter needs to be assessed on those grounds.

[ingliz]

The Liberty Caucus - A Pragmatic Party, I can see why you went with the focus group on this one: "Principles" are so much easier to sell to a gullible electorate.

[canadiancapitalist]

I don't mind selling out a little bit if it means we can keep smelly foreigners out!

[Attica]

I find the call from libertarians for free trade hilarious if they don't also support free movement...

[canadiancapitalist]

Okay this is getting divisive. Let's cool it off for a bit and talk about school vouchers and abortion!

[Dr House]

I don't mind selling out a little bit if it means we can keep smelly foreigners out!

That's a weird position for an ancap to take...

[Dave]

I find the call from libertarians for free trade hilarious if they don't also support free movement...

Not really. PoFo-landia is a democracy, so letting in a bunch of foreigners who hate freedom wouldn't really work.

[Attica]

You don't think properly, Dave.

[canadiancapitalist]

It should be a republic. If we can keep it.

[RonPaulalways]

Ingliz, Attica,

Not allowing unlimited immigration is necessary to maintain a free society, as the majority of the world's population votes center or center-left. There's no point in eliminating immigration controls if that will result in the nation losing all its liberties within a year. In light of this, regulating immigration is consistent with the principle of striving to maximize liberty.

Notice in the platform position, I justify immigration controls on the grounds of maintaining liberty:

However, we support regulating immigration in order to maintain security and a national polity that upholds the principles of a free society. We call for immigration requirements that give entry to those who not only have skills that add to the material wealth of the nation, but also the character that adds to its culture of liberty, as a liberty loving people is the basic building block of a free and prosperous society.

Any way, I've gotten a couple OKs on the proposed amendment to the immigration policy. Any others LCers have an opinion on this and the emphasis-on-local-government policy? If I don't get any objections I will submit our platform to the Official Platform Thread.

[canadiancapitalist]

Guys I say we hop in bed with the centre-right coalition. Then when the moment is right we pull the old red-bait and switch and throw in with the anarcho-syndicalists. It's all part of my expert strategy, trust me.

[Suska]

>.>

its not looking good for you cc, on the other hand, as i'd hoped RPA seems to have his shit together. Run with it man.

[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

I think RPA should be the leader of this party, he's easily the most charismatic and pragmatic of the lot of you.