The explanation “so that the tyan’s opinion isn’t confused with the party’s official position” isn’t very clear to me. A tyan is a tyan, a party is a party, who would confuse the two? Can you break it down for me, like I’m an idiot, what the reason is?

John Griffith (response paid in the amount of 0.0025 BTC)

I have already answered once briefly about my understanding of the inner workings of the LPR. By design, a party is an organization engaged in organizing the political struggle for seats in government bodies. Those who join the party solely because of their libertarian views feel somewhat uncomfortable in it; to them, all this political struggle may even seem like utter foolishness. This creates completely unnecessary friction within the party.

Nevertheless, no bottom-up organized party can achieve success without numerous supporters who will provide funds for its activities in the background. And not so much through direct donations, but through the purchase of merchandise or tickets to public lectures. But their main task is to serve as agents for promoting libertarian ideology in society.

All these people, far removed from the political struggle, nevertheless want to know that they represent a strong and numerous community. The party, however, cannot and should not organize an entertainment program for them; that is not its task. From this, a demand naturally arises for the appearance of many diverse libertarian associations: shooting, cryptocurrency, educational—or even just small social circles without any specialization, which, for example, inevitably arise among the audience of one blogger or another.

The party, however, needs to determine whether a particular group is part of the party structure or is autonomous. And if it is autonomous, to what extent the party can afford to be associated with it. After all, it is through such associations that it is very convenient for the state to dilute the libertarian agenda. Yesterday some Enteo is smashing exhibitions, today he calls himself a libertarian, tomorrow people, hearing about libertarians, think they are all psychos like Enteo.

Hence all this party vigilance regarding whether a particular opinion leader calling themselves a libertarian is worthy of the name, and if someone says something, for example, about the ideas of one of the prominent party ideologues, whether to consider this still an intellectual discussion or already an intra-party split. Don’t judge these guys harshly; maintaining a single coordinated party position on key issues is indeed an important task for the political struggle.

But at the same time, the richer and more diverse the libertarian community is, the harder it will be for a conditional Enteo to draw attention to himself. Decentralization saves from the hijacking of control much like it saves a blockchain from fraudulent transactions. And in this case, there will no longer be a great need for a single centralized validator of publicly expressed views, such as a party, and only pure political activity will remain with it. As for now, I’d better stand aside, since my views in many ways do not coincide with the party program, so why stress good people and insist on the official status of the project? A confederative principle of interaction in our case is exactly what is needed.