As to the temporary platform of the party, there are, as
one would expeuct, some very good things init, ranging from
repeal of all crimes without victims" to abolition of the
draft to repeal of the various regulatory agencies to asserting
the right of secession and immediate withdrawal from Indochina.
There are, however, some glaring clinkers in the
platform, even conceding that these are "transitional"
demands rather than an immediate call for the full and
complete libertarian program. The major clinkers are in the
vital fields of: taxation, money, and foreign and military
In the crucial area of taxation, the party platform confines
itself to the admirable though minor call for ending the
discrimination against single persons in the income tax
system, and to a vague request for some sort of reduction of
taxation and government expenditures.

In the field of money, there is also a grave falling away
from the pure libertarian creed. While the party does look
forward to eventual abolition of the Federal Reserve System,
its concrete monetary program is disquietingly Friedmanite:
it calls, for example, for the right of private persons to own
gold. Fine, but scarcely enough for a libertarian vanguard.
Where is a plea for a return to the gold standard, or more
precisely for a return to the people of the billions of dollars
of gold that the federal government confiscated from us in
1933 as a "depression emergency"?

In Friedmanite
fashion, the Libertarian Party would leave total
control of our money supply in the hands of government and
its fiat paper currency. Similarly, in the international monetary
field, the party calls for freely fluctuating exchange
rates, again a venerable Friedmanite panacea.

Even more disquieting is the party's position on military
and foreign affairs. While it does happily advocate immediate
withdrawal from 1ndochina"and the United Nations, and an
end to foreign aid and to attempts to act as a policeman
for the world", this policy of "isolationjsm" is negated by
the party's call for continuing military alliance with the
Western "democracies." Thus, we are to keep a military
alliance with "democratic" England, whichis stillpersisting
in its age-old imperialist policy of shooting unarmed
Irishmen. Furthermore, there is no recognition in the party
platform of the evils of domestic militarism and of the
"military-industrial complex", and the party calls upon us
to retain our nuclear deterrent. There is no hint of enthusiasm
for any sort of disarmament, even for joint disarmament
with unlimited inspection. Nineteenth-century classical
liberalism was wrecked largely by its failure to break with
militarism and foreign interventionism, and the Libertarian
Party shows no real signs of fully surmounting this ageold
There are also no attempts to cope withsome of the major
problems rightly agitating millions of Americans: the crises
in welfare, education, pollution, urban affairs, etc.