Talk:Mises Caucus

"radical" versus "paleolibertarian" in intro
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)
 * WP:NPOV does NOT mean we whitewash information to make all sides of an external debate equally satisfied. It means we reflect the sources without adding our own spin. The Reason article does not call the caucus paleo, it says Tom Woods defended Rothbard's use of the term. It does, however, make clear that the caucus considers itself more radical:
 * 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." ― Tartan357  Talk 02:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * it also emphasizes repeatedly opposition to "woke", including quotes from the caucus's own members saying that's a focus for them. it is also much more what they are known for. If paleo isn't sufficiently supported the source, the source plainly does place equal or greater emphasis on anti-woke. It belongs in the intro given their own emphasis on it and the emphasis on it placed by all the relevant sources. 108.18.105.63 (talk) 05:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That isn't in conflict with my position. I have no problem with including their culture war stance. ― Tartan357  Talk 22:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The correct term for them is "kremlintarians" and the correct pronoun for their Caucus is "Kremlin Caucus". They have nothing in common with Ludwig Von Mises who has been a vocal critic of Russian imperialism. Unlike Kremlin Caucus who are justifying and legitimizing Putin's expansionism. They were even booing citation from Ludwig Von Mises during 2022 event in Reno. Which only illustrates further the point that Ludwig Von Mises is an alien person to them. They been condemned by Polish libertarian party Libertarianie, Russian Libertarian Party and Spanish libertarians. They are pariahs of libertarian movement. Liberty enthusiast (talk) 04:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

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)


 * See https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/kremlintarians-russia-s-war-on-ukraine-exposes-great-libertarian-divide-20221006-p5bnp9.html Liberty enthusiast (talk) 05:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)