This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mises Caucus article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The source in the Reason article talks about "paleolibertarian" and that is the more widely used description, and the link to paleolibertarian is much more relevant in explaining the ideas associated with LPMC, while the generic "radical politics" article link has nothing to do with the particular ideas here. Radical is also not NPOV, because much of the criticism of LPMC is that it is less radical than other libertarians and the current Libertarian Party platform on some issues. 108.18.105.63 ( talk) 02:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
― Tartan357 Talk 02:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
- In doing so, the nation's third-largest political party swatted down what was supposed to be the most contentious challenge at its biennial national convention—to a leadership that was considered by various critics to be too operationally incremental, too ideologically tepid, and too (in the words of Ludwig von Mises Institute Senior Fellow and popular podcaster Tom Woods at a nearby New Orleans rally Saturday) "SJW-friendly."
A more recent Reason article indicates that while some people say the Mises Caucus represents a more radical vision, others claim that they water their libertarianism down to appeal to the right. Given this dispute, describing them as radical in the introduction would present NPOV problems: https://reason.com/2022/05/29/mises-caucus-takes-control-of-libertarian-party/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:B431:A900:48F3:F86D:3684:6CF3 ( talk) 05:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mises Caucus article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The source in the Reason article talks about "paleolibertarian" and that is the more widely used description, and the link to paleolibertarian is much more relevant in explaining the ideas associated with LPMC, while the generic "radical politics" article link has nothing to do with the particular ideas here. Radical is also not NPOV, because much of the criticism of LPMC is that it is less radical than other libertarians and the current Libertarian Party platform on some issues. 108.18.105.63 ( talk) 02:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
― Tartan357 Talk 02:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
- In doing so, the nation's third-largest political party swatted down what was supposed to be the most contentious challenge at its biennial national convention—to a leadership that was considered by various critics to be too operationally incremental, too ideologically tepid, and too (in the words of Ludwig von Mises Institute Senior Fellow and popular podcaster Tom Woods at a nearby New Orleans rally Saturday) "SJW-friendly."
A more recent Reason article indicates that while some people say the Mises Caucus represents a more radical vision, others claim that they water their libertarianism down to appeal to the right. Given this dispute, describing them as radical in the introduction would present NPOV problems: https://reason.com/2022/05/29/mises-caucus-takes-control-of-libertarian-party/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:B431:A900:48F3:F86D:3684:6CF3 ( talk) 05:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)