319 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 69 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing Summarizing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

The Secret Life of Howie Rich and Ed Crane

By       (Page 2 of 3 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   No comments

Melinda Pillsbury-Foster
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Melinda Pillsbury-Foster
Become a Fan

On the illegality issue, Howie and friends might have acted illegally, if not in refusing to report the source of their donations but in other ways. Some are saying they violated statutes on money laundering, though that remains for a court to determine. How do Libertarians view such actions? Are they allowable as a means of self defense?

On the argument of acting in their own defense did they have a right to meddle in the affairs of states where they do not live? Would these actions have been allowable by our standards if Howie had spent the money in New York? Since Libertarians tend to believe that self defense does not include harm to innocent parties any actions that resulted in such harm to those in the states targeted would not be defensible.

The facts indicate that they have acted covertly with intention to deceive. Those they deceived were those signing petitions who did not understand the proposed statutes. The PBS story mentions that multiple petitions for more than one initiative were offered deceptively.

They have undoubtedly caused to be created Astroturf organizations in around 24 states that have placed initiatives on the ballots in those states. They have worked to have it appear that those initiatives had local support when they did not in most cases. In each case where they worked to create an illusion of grass roots and encountered the argument of disclosure they repeated, like parrots, that they were following the law and had no obligation to disclose the origin of the funds used.

From that I deduce that the source is not Howie Rich, but someone with far deeper pockets, maybe even someone mentioned in the ditty above. But that is just me.

The core of the issue Libertarians need to consider is very different from those above, however. It is the same issue that caused Crane and Howie to run into opposition in the LP.

Are the actions of Howie and Friends forwarding or hindering the cause of libertarianism?

I think they are harmful, here is why.

America's structure of government is now fascist. To mount an effective opposition we need to focus on enabling local people to organize effectively and as far as possible, we need to enable local people to keep their money. Through mandates and taxation, direct and through the regulatory abuse of the nasty combination of government and quasi-governmental corporations, Americans are being bled dry. Debt is rising, 40% of American mortgages are now held by Chinese, and many states are nearly bankrupt, causing them to put additional squeeze on those living there.

We may need to fight a war. Americans today lack organization and resources.

Any effective resistance necessitates an alternative infrastructure for maintaining life while that resistance can work.

As was true in 1775, with the Powder Revolt, we need to ensure we have what is needed to do what must be done. Without supplies any army starves. Independent local organizations, cooperation, communication, and trust are essential to effective action. Building out that alternative infrastructure in the communities across the United States should be at the top of the agenda. But that is exactly what Howie and Friends have opposed, both historically and with their present actions.

Their strategy is flawed. This may be simple stupidity or lack of strategic savvy but their actions lend themselves to another less appetizing interpretation.

They appear to be living well, most of them within six blocks of a golf course. Most of them appear to be employed running these Initiatives, many of which have pulled in money from libertarians in addition to being funded by the corporations who traditionally fund Cato. For them as individuals this has been lucrative. Crane pulls down a half a million as Cato president every year not counting his other sources of income, for instance serving on various boards.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Melinda Pillsbury-Foster Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Melinda Pillsbury-Foster is the author of GREED: The NeoConning of America and A Tour of Old Yosemite. The former is a novel about the lives of the NeoCons with a strong autobiographical component. The latter is a non-fiction book about her father (more...)
 
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter

Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Sociopaths - They Prey on All of Us

Restore the Constitution; Indict Thomas Anderle.

Phyllis Schlafly's career as a NeoCon

The Octopus, Promis, and their offspring, molding the future of America

Mitt Romney Desperate to Hide Truth - Debate to take place

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend