Can you tell me roughly how many copies you expect to distribute?   While I enjoy writing, I've also found that it's important to focus my efforts in directions that maximize exposure and impact.

It would also help if you could say more about what's in this for the authors.  The guidelines make it clear that no remuneration is involved.  So other than sacrificing my time and effort for your organization, what's in it for me?

You've provided a lot of information I should have probably already known about my neighbors to the north, but I'm ashamed to say I did not.

Libertarian Parties with the only exception I see being the LibertariaNZ, tend to lack a true philosophical center (one of the many reasons I departed from the Libertarian Party here in the United Police States), as you observed. Still, I can't help wondering if there is a way to have our Objectivist cake and eat at a Libertarian Party, too (as they do in NZ)...

I look forward to your submission mvardoulis.

Canada doesn't have any electorally-popular pro-capitalist parties at all. In the province (like a state) of Ontario, there is Freedom Party of Ontario (of which I'm a member: http://www.freedomparty.on.ca), which has undergone very significant philosophical, strategic, tactical, and marketing changes since 2002 (when I was made party leader). There is a non-Objectivist (largely anti-Objectivist) "Libertarian Party of Ontario" too: http://www.libertarian.on.ca.

Federally, Freedom Party of Canada's organizational efforts were temporarily put on hold until after the Ontario provincial election of 2007 (this was because people involved with FPO were the bulk of people involved with FPC). FP Canada remains unregistered because - for reasons that would take too long to explain - remaining unregistered allows FP to take donations from any source, in any quantity, and to spend as much as it wants to spend, all without reporting to any governmental body (i.e., Elections Canada)...unless it spends during an election. There is a Libertarian Party of Canada (http://www.libertarian.ca).

Canada's Libertarian parties are different from the LibertariaNZ. Most of their members are libertarians as Peter Schwartz would conceive of them: their key feature is that they regard Rand's non-aggression principle as an axiom, and regard metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics as having nothing at all to do with electoral politics or governance. Many/most of them cannot figure out why the Libertarian and Freedom parties don't merge; some of them go so far as to believe that we're "splitting the vote"...apparently not noticing that if you added the vote totals of the two parties, you still wouldn't win any seats.

There are a host of other differences, but the key one is that the Libertarians do not understand the nature or purpose of the freedom they seek. As just one result, many (not all) of them are anarchists.

In the end: Freedom fights for reason, figuring that freedom is the logical consequence of doing so. Libertarians fight for freedom, figuring that reason is the name of a magazine.

Lie and the world lies with you.

Tell the truth, and the world lies about you.

-Oscar Wilde

I applaud what you are putting together, and agree that Ayn Rand never intended Objectivists to isolate themselves from electoral politics. I've left the U(P)S Libertarian Party, primarily for its dropping of the only rational aspect of its existence - the party platform, as well as its history of hypocritical and Machiavellian 'leadership' which has in addition to questionable financial practices allowed the unallowable (NAMBLA, etc) presence in its fringes - what would be some other problems you would have with the UPS LP?

And forgive my ignorance, but apart from the group you're a part of is there any reasonably strong politically libertarian-Objectivist movement in Canada? I should know more about my neighbors to the North, I know...

In the meantime, I'll see if some of the things I typically cook up for SOLO would fit within the guidelines of your newsletter as well, assuming you'd be interested.

Thanks personallydisinterested,

I am quite familiar with the hesitancy, among Objectivists, to get involved with politics. However, I think that hesitancy is owing largely to an under-appreciation of the facts as they stood at the time when Ayn Rand said "Above all, do not join the wrong ideological groups or movements, in order to 'do something." Many have jumped to the conclusion that she was rejecting participation in any group, and in electoral politics altogether (apparently ignoring Rand's participation in it). I remain convinced that Ms. Rand's key point was expressed at the end of her speech "What is Capitalism?":

"...the guiltiest men are not the collectivists; the guiltiest men are those who, lacking the courage to challenge mysticism or altruism, attempt to bypass the issues of reason and morality and to defend the only rational and moral system in mankind's history - capitalism - on any grounds other than rational and moral."

I agree whole-heartedly that a change in the prevailing ethical code of society must precede popular support for capitalism. However, I reject the notion that Rand somehow wanted Objectivists to be alienated from electoral politics until such a change in prevailing ethics occurred. Rather, I believe that, witnessing both the religious panderings of the Republicans, and the birth of the amoral Libertarian Party of the USA - which erroneously continues to present the non-aggression principle as though it were an axiom - Ayn Rand was warning everyone that: if you want freedom, you must advocate reason. Freedom cannot be achieved, over the long haul, by means of stealth, appeals to mysticism, appeals to altruism, etc. The successful radical for capitalism is and must be, first and foremost, a radical for reason.

'

Lie and the world lies with you.

Tell the truth, and the world lies about you.

-Oscar Wilde

You tricked me into reading this because of your scary title. 

I thought somebody wanted to see my papers comrade. 

The newsletter is a great idea Paul.  I know we don't cheer you on a whole lot, but I appreciate the work you are doing. It is extremely important for our representatives to understand our philosophy and how it should be applied to politics.