[Lpk-execomm] Email motion: LNC Censure

[Ken Moellman]

With the motion seconded on-list, it is now open for discussion.  I 
understood the intent of the motion to be the LPKY Executive Committee 
considering the passage a resolution, speaking on behalf of the state 
party, which requires a majority vote.

I oppose this motion for several reasons:

1. It drags LPKY into the dispute. We don't need to be involved in this.

2. It is my understanding that this proposed LNC action stems from a 
meme published by LPNH on social media -- which depicted an airline 
pilot with a star of David on their captain's hat, seated in an 
airplane, with the caption "We did it!" with a 9 placed in front of an 
image of the twin towers forming an "11" -- that can reasonably be 
interpreted by others, both inside and (especially) outside of the 
party, as blaming "the Jews" for 9/11.

3. I strongly oppose any collectivist messaging that infers that any 
group ("the _____s") is responsible for the actions of a handful of 
individual people who either (a) participated in an action or (b) 
specifically enabled or endorsed it. Collectivism is inherently 
anti-libertarian and contradicts our national party platform.

4. LPNH has a pattern of intentionally expressing things in overtly 
racist terms; with racism being the lowest-IQ form of collectivism (as 
stated by many libertarian thought leaders, including Ayn Rand and Ron 
Paul). This is not the first incident. I believe members of their 
current board and/or social media team were kicked out of a caucus for 
similar messaging in the past.

5. LPNH is intentionally inflammatory, and a censure is essentially the 
natural reaction to that intentionally-inflammatory rhetoric within an 
organization. If there's an argument to be made against censure, it is, 
IMO, that it is giving attention to the kid who regularly throws a 
tantrum in the grocery store for attention.

6. It is my opinion that it is within the rights of the LNC to make such 
a motion, and to pass a censure based on such behavior.

7. A censure simply is a statement of disapproval of an action, and 
carries no actual teeth. It can sometimes be a prelude to actions with 
teeth, but censure itself is not. It is a statement of disapproval of 
behavior.  That is why censure only requires a majority vote, while 
other disciplinary actions require two-thirds.

I am voting no.

---
Ken C. Moellman, Jr.

Libertarian Party of Kentucky
State Party Executive Committee Chair

On 2025-09-19 17:11, Robert Lodder wrote:

> Second.
> 
> Robert A. Lodder, Ph.D.
> Chief Executive Officer
> 
> Phone: (301) 476-0705
> Email: rlodder at biospherics.net
> 
> This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by 
> the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or 
> confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this 
> e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
> copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly 
> prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify me 
> by replying to this message and permanently delete the original and any 
> copy of this e-mail and any printout thereof.
> 
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2025, 4:21 PM Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org> 
> wrote:
> 
> I have just fixed the excom mailing list. I am cc'ing the list to move 
> this conversation there.  This motion requires a second.
> 
> ---
> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
> 
> Libertarian Party of Kentucky
> State Party Executive Committee Chair
> 
> On 2025-09-19 16:13, Andrew Roberts wrote:
> 
> All,
> 
> I'd like to make a motion for us to adopt the following statement.
> 
> Mr. Chair,
> 
> Please let me know if this is out of order or I should rephrase the 
> above motion.
> 
> Thanks!
> Andrew Roberts
> 
> Statement of the Libertarian Party of Kentucky on the Libertarian 
> National Committee's Selective Censure of the Libertarian Party of New 
> Hampshire
> 
> The Libertarian Party of Kentucky (LPKY) strongly opposes the motion by 
> the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) to censure the Libertarian 
> Party of New Hampshire (LPNH) over social media activities that the LNC 
> claims violate party standards. This action is not only inconsistent 
> but also undermines the principle of affiliate autonomy.
> 
> The LNC has selectively targeted LPNH while failing to address similar 
> issues within other state affiliates that promote ideologies--such as 
> "group rights" or other collectivist approaches--that are fundamentally 
> incompatible with the core principles of individual liberty, free 
> markets, and limited government. This selective enforcement undermines 
> the credibility of the LNC and creates a double standard that is 
> unacceptable within a party that claims to uphold fairness and the 
> nonaggression principle.
> 
> While LPKY does not endorse every aspect of LPNH's social media 
> strategy, we affirm the right of all state affiliates to express their 
> views in line with the Party's Statement of Principles. The LNC's focus 
> on this issue appears to stem more from internal factional disputes 
> than from any legitimate concern for the Party's values, diverting 
> attention and resources away from critical priorities such as 
> membership growth, candidate support, and ballot access.
> 
> The Libertarian Party's strength lies in its unity and commitment to 
> liberty, not in divisive and unproductive internal disputes. We urge 
> the LNC to withdraw its censure motion against LPNH and refocus on the 
> Party's true mission of advancing individual liberty, supporting 
> affiliates, and building a stronger movement.