Brian’s Column: Proposal of a Common Sense Coalition Third Party

What stands in the way?
By Brian R. Wright

As a longtime tilter at windmills, with little success at toppling any, I feel I’m a natural authority on the subject of what doesn’t work politically. The second paragraph of my recent ‘white paper’ suggesting such a coalition 3d party presented to assembled Libertarian Party of Michigan (LPM) leadership on December 8, 2018, reads:

In the recent 2018 mid-term elections, the LPM candidate for governor, Bill Gelineau—in the writer’s opinion the best-ever candidate for major office in terms of competence, understanding the workings of state government, personability, and practical application of principles of freedom to extant problems (and running a robust though part-time campaign)—received a paltry 1.33% of the popular vote.

The paper continues with the basic logic…

Core Proposal and Argument

Create a third party named Independents[1]—for Michigan, other states, and nationally—by uniting the four major existing 3d parties in the country {LP, Green, Constitution (US Taxpayers, UST), and Natural Law (NL)} around a minimalist platform of securing American First Principles’[2] individual freedom en masse… against corrupt public officials and their state-privileged cartel bosses.[3]

Qua national entity, the Independents’ Party stands for the secular-libertarian aphorism: “peace, civil liberties, and a noninterventionist foreign policy,” generically Þ “socially liberal, fiscally conservative.” In other words, common-sense, small-government individualistic humanism Þ zero-privilege, full-cost capitalism. Note that studies have shown 20-25% of Americans self-identify with this spectrum location.

Thus out of the chute, based on current election stats such a party will appeal to roughly 5% of the electorate, with an immediate upside of ~25% due to its popular branding—provided a candidate for a given office is informed, properly motivated, and of high quality. No more ‘wasted vote’ impediment, esp. w/ ranked choice voting.

Ranked Choice Voting

This is a procedure where, in more than two-candidate races, the voter’s second (and subsequent ordered choices) roll up upon no candidate receiving greater than 50% of the vote. An example here applying to the fear, such as, “Gotta vote for the airhead Democrat, because Goosestepping Nazi, Bill Schuette, might win if I vote for Libertarian Bill Gelineau:”

  • Initial tally: 44% Whitmer, 46% Schuette, 10% Gelineau. Assuming 2 million total votes Þ 880K, 920K, 200K.
  • Second tally, Gelineau is off list, then say, of 200K second preference votes, 150K go to Whitmer, 50K go to Schuette.
  • Final result: 1,030K Whitmer, 970K Schuette, or 51.5% vs. 48.5%. Much more reflective of the overall popular will.

Thus, with RCV, the wasted vote argument is no longer an excuse to not vote for the candidate you like best as your first choice.

In such way, via a common-sense, consensus Independents’ party, the entrenched, centrally corporate-corrupted Republican/Democrat duopoly will likely be toppled imminently, coincident with the people rising to expel all vestiges of bad governance. [At that stage, for those of the anarchist bent, it’s a short step to purely market-based ‘government’… by contract or each individual’s personal choice.][4]

The Program

As I stated, any successful 3d party will need to have a minimalist platform or program that makes sense to the general public. This is the issue: what I’ve put together, unfortunately, though simple, is proving difficult for most people to understand. From the paper…

Independents’ Party Starter 10-Point Minimalist Program/Platform

We, the conscientious and caring members/candidates of the Independents’ Party, in accordance with the nonviolation principle, advocate the following policies, committing to their realization in society ASARA (as soon as reasonably achievable):

Economic Justice:

  1. End legal privilege, esp. for corporations, and develop ‘cooperative’ alternatives.
  2. Prudently free ourselves from the central-state monopoly money and credit system.
    1. Assess what the intact system has expropriated, distribute to its victims.
    2. Transition to money and credit institutions based on user freedom of choice.
  3. Humanely phase out forced wealth-transfer public institutions.
  4. Apply market incentives/disincentives to use/management of public property.
  5. Remove all restrictions and covert suppression of voluntary production and trade.

Political Justice:

  1. Any individual may NOW invoke protection from corrupt public officials via grand jury of peers.[5]
  2. Any individual may NOW invoke grand jury investigation of corrupt public officials and cohorts.[6]
  3. For high-crime assaults on the people, set up special federal grand juries, paid well from public funds, to investigate and indict public officials and accomplices for First Principles’ violations.[7]
  4. Eviscerate civil asset forfeiture (CAF) from our lives, impose decades-long prison for enablers.[8]
  5. Immediately release all prisoners—and expunge records—for nonaggressive felonies.

[It goes without saying that other violations of due process and failure to accord natural rights to a human individual of consent—as guaranteed by the Constitution—shall meet with severe penalties upon conviction of a trial jury… though unlike the current prison system, it will be humane detention, and measures will be taken to make violence to and rape of prisoners nonexistent.]

The full white paper is available at these links:
PDF file: http://bit.ly/2BEwKrm_Independents_Party_PDF_File
Word file: http://bit.ly/2BVlp7z_Independent_Party_Word_File

Deafening Silence Tells Me Something

Since providing a handout of “White Paper for a New Political Party” to roughly a dozen LPM leaders at the above gathering on December 8th, I’ve received not a single response from any of them. I also handed the paper to friends and acquaintances, including an individual with whom I discuss some political subjects at work. Same thing there. Nada. Either I didn’t write the paper very well, or it just didn’t reach the threshold of seeming important. [An exception: Dr. Kevin Barrett of False-Flag Weekly News said, “Great stuff,” and referred me forward to Robert David Steele, still no word back from Steele.]

I just think the idea merits discussion at a high level. It would be a catalyst toward a just society, based on people taking charge using two fundamental tools of American First Principles: 1) economic justice by the people reclaiming their money and credit systems (w/reparations) and 2) political justice via ubiquitous people’s independent grand juries. No meaningful reform of human society can occur without these two pillars of positive change. The question is: “Will we the people learn the truth and stand up for it in time?”

Let me know what you think. Either email or comment.

[1]  Also considering Solidarity or Independents United. Name may be up for vote, or as my basketball as founder, I may choose.

[2]  Drawn from the magic paragraph written by Thomas Jefferson—some have reasonably argued, Thomas Paine—in the Declaration of Independence beginning with these words: “We hold these truths to be self-evident….” In other words the nonaggression principle (kindergarten rules: don’t hit, don’t steal, don’t lie).

[3]  The basic means of securing rights for all individuals of consent lies in ubiquitous people’s independent grand juries, the First Principles’ foundation for which is found in Diane McGilvery’s monograph What is the Foundation?.

[4] For an interesting material for discussion on government by contract refer to the site http://CantonNation.com.

[5]  And the state system will comply in providing nonpartial grand jury of an individual’s peers (GJIPs).

[6]  File complaint to sitting grand jury, or to state’s attorney who SHALL refer to GJIPs or bring into being GJIPs, if nonexistent.

[7]  High-crime assaults is the name I have given (in The Truman Prophecy) to gross acts of public corruption for benefit of politically or economically elite clients—usually covertly done. Examples: wars of conquest, war crimes, false-flag acts of state terror (e.g. 911 attacks) and many purported or real agenda-driven mass-casualty incidents, GMOs, geoengineering (toxic skies), ‘smart’ meters and 5G networks, forced vaccinations and psych drugs, mass poisoning of water supplies, etc.

[8]  I’m emphasizing CAF at the street level in my program, both federal and state, as the premier violation of First Principles, the equivalent of a war crime where Nuremberg Principles apply—meaning anyone in their adult lives who implements, legislates, performs CAF upon another human being is guilty of a Class 1 treasonous violation of rights regardless of being ordered to do so. Sentence guideline: full restitution and 10 years minimum imprisonment without parole, and no statute of limitations. A lot of monstrous and evil public officials will be taking the place of the nonviolent prisoners we release.

This post has been read 220 times!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 thought on “Brian’s Column: Proposal of a Common Sense Coalition Third Party

  1. In my opinion, why you have not had the response you hoped for is simple.
    I believe the vast majority of the public just do not care for politics of any kind.

    I also believe that the primaries are the most important elections where there are some choices. A 35% turnout is considered huge.

    More people feel the obligation to vote in the general elections but for the most part are clueless about the candidates except for the R or D. I have no hard facts to support my belief but I believe it is close to reality.

    We have had it pretty good as a nation for a long time so people just do not put a priority on politics. Most do not see the cause/effect regardless of election outcomes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *