Call To Action: Open Opposition to the Mises Caucus

It's Time To Take Our Party Back

Oct 20, 2022

(Author’s note: If you agree with the point of view expressed in this piece, or at least think it deserves to be part of the dialogue surrounding the Mises Caucus, please share this article anywhere that you think appropriate. The easy-to-remember domain stopmises.today redirects to this piece.)

(Another note: I have also written a follow up to this piece. I recommend reading this piece first and then the follow up.)

I believe the Libertarian Party is in a dire place where its continued existence in any meaningful form is not a foregone conclusion. This piece will outline the situation as I see it and what I think is the only meaningful course of action. It’s possible that this is too little too late, and it definitely will be if these words go unheeded, but I consider this my attempt to rally those members of the party sincerely committed to its success in the hopes of restoring the party to its proper state.

My hope with this piece is to reach two kinds of people. The first are those members of the Mises Caucus who can sense something is amiss about the organization they have chosen to join, and which may have been what brought them into the party. The second are those party members who are not in the Mises Caucus, and may even dislike said caucus, but are still unwilling to stop cooperating with their membership as a whole.

State of the Party

Before I offer a diagnosis, I want to offer a brief summation of the state of the party, irrespective of caucus, so that the reader can understand how dire this situation is.

At the national level, the party is in disarray. Donors are fleeing and the party is actively losing money at a rapid pace [1]. Media coverage from outside the party now mostly consists of shining a light on the various alt-right elements that have started to take hold within [2]. State affiliates are either dissolving or disaffiliating [3]. Candidates have opted to leave the party [4]. Party social media controlled by the Mises Caucus, including the @LPNational Twitter account, now peddle right-wing conspiracies, engage in blatant culture warring, and distribute debunked Russian propaganda [5].

The current LNC (national-level leadership for the newbies), rather than showing any sincere interest in remedying any of the above problems, is more interested in fanning the flames of culture war. Appealing to them will not solve this problem.

Note: Please see the Appendix for relevant, specific data points.

The Diagnosis

It’s almost comical to outline a diagnosis as though I have some special insight and found something everyone else missed when the problem is obvious to anyone who cares to look with an honest eye. The issue is the Mises Caucus.

The Mises Caucus was formed in the wake of the 2016 presidential election. Their stated mission was to make the Libertarian Party the party of the Ron Paul Revolution, an informal name attached to the largely libertarian activism campaign to support Ron Paul’s presidential runs in 2008 and 2012. They were upset at the direction of the party, which they saw as being too focused on appealing to mainstream Republicans and Democrats, and in particular were incensed by the behavior of Nick Sarwark as chairman and the selection of Bill Weld as the Vice President candidate in 2016.

I personally showed some interest in the Mises Caucus around 2019, when they were still fairly new and growing. I myself had some concerns about the direction of the party, and Sarwark in particular, so they piqued my interest. I never joined the caucus but I did join one of their Facebook groups to get some idea of what they are all about and to engage in conversation.

It became apparent very quickly that they were not merely “Ron Paul libertarians”. Many of the topics discussed focused on culture war stuff, but more disturbing to me were the occasions where someone would make openly nationalistic or racist statements and I would be the only one critiquing their behavior. Lest I be dismissed as a woke crank, I am using these words accurately, and can remember one specific instance of someone claiming that this should be a white Christian country. This was what initially made me wary.

Over the following months and years, I witnessed this organization evolve, though I can’t say to what extent this evolution was organic and to what extent it was intentional. As they pulled people into the party, it became more and more apparent that they were recruiting primarily from libertarian-leaning (sometimes not even that) MAGA Republicans and the alt-right, a term I use here to refer to that broad collection of various far right individuals and groups that oppose both the left and the center-right establishment conservatism of people like Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro.

It also became clear that this caucus was not operating like a healthy organization. Caucuses are nothing new to the Libertarian Party, and neither are argumentative people or disagreement. We’re a famously brash and disagreeable bunch. That said, the character of what was happening with this new organization was not in line with the disagreements of old.

The Cult

The use of the word cult is sure to cause some to immediately paint me as hysterical, but I ask that you hear me out. We tend to think of “cult” as a binary thing, where an organization either is or isn’t a cult. It’s more accurate to say that “cult” is more of a spectrum, and that organizations can be more or less “culty” depending on how many, and to what degree, of the characteristics of a cult they have.

I believe at this point that it is fair to identify the Mises Caucus as being closer to the “cult” side of the spectrum. To be sure, it is not equivalent to an organization like Scientology, which has done far more harm and exhibits far more overt cult-like behavior, but neither is it equivalent to your local bowling league, the Libertarian Party itself, or any number of other organizations that do not operate like a cult.

For your consideration, I offer the following observable characteristics of the Mises Caucus as evidence of my claim:

Groupthink and lack of toleration for disagreement. They object to this claim of course, and insist that they engage in heated and sincere debate in private where nobody else can witness it. In reality, this is how cults ensure ideological conformity; by keeping debate to a scope where it can be controlled by those nearer to the top of their internal hierarchy and by ensuring that every debate always reaches the “right” conclusion.
Discouraging members from interacting with those outside of the group. To be sure, members of the Mises Caucus do interact with the party at large, especially when in leadership, but they also operate a completely parallel infrastructure to the party where only their members are allowed to participate, where narratives can be shaped and controlled, and where all the other fun means of social control can be exercised without the interference of outsiders.
Flagrant dishonesty and gaslighting from their membership. More than once, I’ve witnessed a member of the Mises Caucus say something that contradicted both our direct experience and on issues where there is little to no room for honest disagreement. Gaslighting is a tool used to throw people mentally off balance and make them question their own sense of reality in order to establish control over them.
Coordinated behavior that has no clear origin in anything observable to anyone outside of the caucus. This indicates that plans are formed in private by the organization and members are expected to behave in lockstep with those plans, and indeed largely do so.
Vicious public attacks on anyone who is a former member that criticizes any of the above. Anyone who has done this can no doubt tell you about the harassment campaigns that would follow. The Mises Caucus itself will of course deny that the harassers, almost always anonymous, are part of their membership or that they did anything to cultivate this kind of reaction.
Primary appeal to young disaffected men. This is not the same as saying “only young men are members”, or a critique of young men as a group, but a common tactic for some harmful cult organizations (Islamist groups, street gangs, white nationalist groups, etc.) is to appeal primarily to men who are still trying to find their place in the world and perhaps did not have a good father figure to help them set a proper course for their life. The cult offers them an enemy that they can blame for their own frustrations in life, and a story where they are a brave hero saving the day. In doing so, it exploits natural aspects of masculinity that, in healthier contexts, are good rather than bad.

The Implications of a Cult Infiltrating the Party

A cult is not a normal organization, and cult members do not behave as you’d expect rational people to. Much harm has come to the party from party members, in good faith and with the best of intentions, continuing to engage cult members as normal party members, taking their statements as being honest and forthright, and interpreting their pleasant behavior as evidence that they are “good people.”

Members of a cult tend to be on a spectrum, where one side of the spectrum consists of those cynical members who are explicitly aware that they are operating a cult, lie openly and intentionally when needed, etc. The other side consists of the true believers; these are the foot soldiers that really believe the lies, and really think they are doing the right thing and supporting a moral and just cause.

Most members are not going to be all the way on one side or the other of this spectrum; indeed, as one becomes more fanatically committed to the goals of the cult, a common outcome is a strong sense of “us” vs “them” and a belief that anything done to “them” is fair and morally just. It’s an ironic abandonment of all morality fueled by excessive moral self-righteousness.

The true believers, while being the members least likely to cause open and obvious problems, more likely to have pleasant conversation with you, etc. are also the most dangerous members, because it is their sincerity that disarms people. When they tell you they think the Mises Caucus isn’t here to just push out everyone else, and genuinely wants a stronger and more effective Libertarian Party, they believe it, and to anyone who hasn’t diagnosed the Mises Caucus as a cult, this would seem to be a data point against “the haters”.

It’s important to remember though that they behave in lockstep. The current leadership, which is in the process of causing the party to collapse, were elected by all of them, supported by all of them, and will be reelected by all of them. These individuals, even if sincerely duped and well-meaning, are still dangerous.

Broader Cultural Origins

I don’t think I need to tell anyone that American culture (and perhaps Western culture more broadly) is in a bit of a situation at the moment. Division and fear are the highest that I’ve ever seen in my 40 years of being alive as a native-born American citizen. While the facts on the ground are of course more complex than this, we’ve seen a culture war evolve out of what some would call the “woke left” and what some would call the “alt-right”, though naturally these terms, and their exact boundaries, are often in dispute.

The right-wing populism that has taken hold, often called MAGA and sometimes called the “alt-right”, is a broader cultural problem that is much larger than the Libertarian Party. To a great extent, the Mises Caucus represents the forceful entry of this broader cultural movement into the party, and like a small ship in the ocean during a storm, it’s all we can do to stay afloat amidst something far too large for us to control.

This is important to understand because it has implications for how the situation should be handled. There’s no fixing the root issue within the Libertarian Party, though of course libertarians can be among the voices to bring our culture back to a place of sanity. We must instead focus on staying afloat and minimizing the damage until the storm passes.

My Proposed Solution

I know it is bold of me to claim to know how to fix a problem this large and this pervasive within the party. While I will speak with the tone of someone convinced of his own point of view, consider this piece an entry into what I hope will be a broader dialogue that will produce something better than I alone could create.

It may already be too late, but if it is not, I only see one path forward; complete, total, and open ostracization of the Mises Caucus and its entire membership from every member of the party possible.

What does this entail?

Explicit and open condemnation of the caucus and of individuals for being members, including and especially from those in leadership positions, where under normal circumstances they would be expected to be neutral on such matters. These are not normal circumstances, and party leadership has, in my view, a duty to put the future of the party first when an existential threat arises.
Block voting against every member of the Mises Caucus when they try to take on any role within the party. No nominations, no candidates, no leadership positions. If they are Mises Caucus, vote no, announce that you’re voting no, advise others to vote no, and say their caucus membership is the reason openly.
Holding their feet to the fire every time they attempt to skirt bylaws or not follow procedure. They will brazenly violate rules and ignore bylaws, and while we can’t prevent every bad outcome, we can at least prevent the ones we can and make them have to work for it regardless. This also has the added benefit of exposing their behavior to a wider audience.
Disassociating with caucus members except in conversations to help them leave the cult. Refusing to engage in debate when they want to argue against us, since they only want to debate in order to gaslight us and weaken our resolve. This will be easier to do if you accept that you’re dealing with cult members, not people in their right mind.
Offering a sympathetic ear to cult members who are beginning to question the cult. Engaging them in private conversations, hearing them out, and offering alternative perspectives in a non-hostile way. We should be careful, though, to make sure we only do this when they are engaging us in good faith, and we should always be looking for signs that they are just leading us on or otherwise trying to weaken our resolve.

What does this not entail?

Violating bylaws, dishonesty, or anything else that is either illegal or unethical. The intent is to remove the enemy, not to become no better than them.
Harassment campaigns against individuals, though this should be implied by the first bullet point.
Ceasing all other party work. At the very least, the basic infrastructure of the party must be maintained. A ship has to be intact to remain afloat.

The Backup Plan

This is where things get grim. This section of the piece is intended for those that are sold on the above. The unfortunate but likely outcome is that most party members will not take the matter as seriously as they need to or disregard the above out of a belief that it is hyperbolic nonsense. If this happens, the Mises Caucus will finish installing members of leadership in those states (including my home state of Texas) to ensure complete control of the party in 2024. If this happens, the party is effectively no more, assuming it even manages to limp along to the next convention.

I am writing this in October 2022. If, in a few months, there does not seem to be any change in the winds along the lines that they need to be, we need to start considering forming new organizations and simply leaving the decaying husk of the Libertarian Party behind. We’re all deeply committed to a free world, and achieving that goal does not have to be through a specific organization.

This has already, to an extent, started to happen [6]. A competing organization to the existing national Libertarian Party, named the Association of Liberty State Parties, has formed to take on affiliates that leave the national party. In places like Pennsylvania and Virginia, alternative parties (Keystone Party and Liberty Party respectively) have formed to continue the good work that was formerly done under the banner of the Libertarian Party.

State parties that are not controlled by the Mises Caucus, in the event that this backup plan is necessary, should do the following:

Formally disaffiliate from the Libertarian Party. This can be a complex process but should essentially involve building out a new set of bylaws and holding a vote to disaffiliate. The specifics will depend on your state party’s existing bylaws.
Rename to something that does not include “the Libertarian Party” in the name, both to avoid possible trademark issues and also to ensure that there is no confusion about whether the party is still associated with those they have chosen to disassociate from. “Liberty Party” is probably a good substitute in most cases.
Join the Association of Liberty State Parties or a similar organization if one is gaining steam. This is primarily just to run presidential candidates, since most other party business can just be handled at the state and local level.

Rebutting Counterarguments

In this final section, I want to address some of the counterarguments I expect to get in response to this piece. Having had many conversations over the last few months, I think I have some sense of the objections party members are likely to have.

You’ll Just Give Them An Enemy To Rally Around

The primary and most important counter to this is simple empirical evidence. The party is in the state it is now precisely because we did not give them that enemy. To be sure, some people were and are openly critical, but party members and leadership, myself included, still “played ball” with them, electing “the good ones” to positions of power, working with them on projects, etc. We live in the failure of this approach.

The second counter to this is that they have an enemy and it’s not even within the party. Being part of the broader right-wing populism movement, their enemy is “woke people”, “the left”, “warmongers” (apparently defined as anyone that doesn’t parrot Russian state propaganda uncritically), etc. The culture has produced a variety of enemies for them to rally around even after the party is completely under their thumb.

Mises Caucus Members Don’t Deserve Total Ostracization

Cults are parasitic; apart from a handful of people at the top, members do not benefit from being in the cult but are, in fact, being exploited. We do cult members no service by making it easy and comfortable for them to remain cult members, much the same way that it does a drug addict no service to enable him in his addiction.

If someone you care about has become a member, by all means, attempt to reach out to them in private and have heartfelt conversations with them. But also be honest with them, and what it means for how you will vote if they remain a member of that organization. Leaving the cult is their only option if they want your support within the party.

You’re Exaggerating/Being Hyperbolic/Etc.

In terms of direct response to this critique, all I can offer is the empirical data points that bolster my case. I won’t attempt to litigate the entire case here but will instead direct you above to the State of the Party section of this piece and the footnotes in the Appendix at the end of this piece.

Indirectly, though, I would ask that you honestly consider just the possibility that I am right, and then look at your own experiences through that lens to see if things line up. In particular, be wary of normalcy bias, which is the human tendency to respond to threat warnings with disbelief or minimization. I’m susceptible to this myself, and indeed, I may have penned this months ago had I not been.

I’m Scared

This is less a counterargument I’m expecting to see and more something I expect people to feel. Following through with my proposals will involve actively engaging in opposition to openly hostile people who harass and intimidate others. It may mean sometimes being one of the only voices of reason in a hostile crowd.

I will never ask someone to put their genuine physical safety at risk, but I think in most cases, that is not a genuine concern. The real fear is the fear that comes from being social creatures; being insulted, attacked, and booed at from a crowd of people is extremely emotionally painful. Normal people will and should feel negative emotions from this and find it difficult to willingly endure.

If this is how you feel, I’ll share something wise my dad used to tell me when I was a kid. He would tell me that courage isn’t not being afraid; courage is being afraid and then doing the right thing anyway. I’m afraid, too, and I am going to do the right thing anyway and I hope you will too.

We will never have a world free in our lifetimes if we can’t step up and have the courage to stand against this. We need to be made of stronger stuff than that to win. And you will have me and everyone else fighting for a respectable and functional Libertarian Party behind you. In those moments where you feel alone in a sea of hostile people, remember that, then after the meeting or event is over, come join us for a beer to vent and relax.

Appendix

1. Libertarian Party Financial Woes

From the Libertarian Party August 2022 Financial Report. Note that, if LPNational continues to have a net loss of $77,999.44 every month, the account will be empty in 13 months.

2. Negative Media Coverage

The Daily Beast: This Right-Wing Faction Is Waging Civil War Inside the Libertarian Party
Daily Bulletin: Edgier group grabs control of Libertarians
The Hill: The Libertarian Party is collapsing. Here’s why
The Orange County Register: Just when they’re needed, libertarians take detour
Southern Poverty Law Center: Mises Caucus: Could It Sway the Libertarian Party to the Hard Right?
Southern Poverty Law Center: Libertarian Party Loses State Parties, Donors After Hard-right Turn

3. State Parties/Other Organizations Disaffiliating or Dissolving

Independent Political Report: Libertarian Party of New Mexico Disaffiliates!
Outright USA: Formerly Outright Libertarians. A statement from Outright USA.
Reason: Libertarian Party Faces State Rebellions
Virginia Mercury: Libertarian Party of Virginia dissolving after national party’s ‘bigoted’ turn, ex-chair says

4. Candidates Leaving Party

Idaho Press: Idaho Libertarian congressional candidate withdraws, amid party upheaval
Twitter: Candidate Martha Bueno Explains Why She Left The Libertarian Party
Twitter: Former Candidate Jonathan Howe Explains Why He Left The Libertarian Party
Twitter: Candidate Will McVay offers his diagnosis of the party he used to call home.

5. Posts From Mises Caucus-Controlled Party Social Media Accounts

Note: This is far from an exhaustive list; documenting every example would be a project unto itself. This section just aims to provide enough examples to prove the point. Some links will be to articles or posts discussing the original post, since in many cases, the original post was eventually deleted.

6. Alternative Organizations Forming

Association of Liberty State Parties
Libertarian Association of Massachusetts
Libertarian Party of New Mexico: The Libertarian Party of New Mexico (LPNM) Responds to Letter from LNC
Non-Partisan Delaware
WGAL8: Keystone Party of Pennsylvania hopes to attract voters who want to see change

License

This article may be redistributed by any person or group at no cost as long as it is presented in its entirety, with the text unmodified, and with proper credit given to Shawn Huckabay as the original author.