If there is clear evidence of (1) a current Florida LP state-level official making clearly racist statements, or clear and credible threats of violence, and (2) the Florida LP leadership being aware of this and taking no action whatsoever to condemn it or distance the Florida LP from it, I think perhaps a letter of concern from the LNC would be in order. If the Florida LP leadership offered no reasonable response to such a letter and continued to not take any remedial action, especially if it became clear that this was part of a pattern of ignoring racism or serious Non-Aggression Principle violations from state leaders, then I would be ready to entertain a motion to disaffiliate.
But – and I confess I have not read all the links and background on this – I'm not sure even the first condition stated above has been met. My personal belief is that Ryan Ramsey likely does hold bigoted white supremacist type views, but while the the evidence for this may be cumulatively compelling (walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc.), it also seems to be largely circumstantial. I looked at the American Guard website for instance, and didn't find a "smoking gun" of explicitly racist material. Now I do think Ramsey's comments about LP chair Nick Sarwark are reprehensible and without merit. A sample (more at
http://archive.is/EMZPY#selection-233.0-233.110):
"Nick
Sarwark, National Chairman of the Libertarian Party, is the poster boy
for the Cultural Marxist idiocy that keeps us relegated to single digit
election returns... Any
question as to whether Mr. Sarwark was a lover of liberty, or a
Cultural Marxist attempting to hold back the advance of the Libertarian
Party, were answered when he made national news repeating lies about
Milo Yiannopoulos, subject of the violence in Berkley, when he
insinuated bloodshed to stop free speech was 'understandable'... For those who did not attend the National Convention last spring in Orlando, let me tell you how Nick Sarwark was re-elected as LP Chairman. He collected a group of loyalists
around himself to feign running as opposition. Then at the last minute,
on the Convention floor, they dropped their candidacy and threw their
support to the man trying to do the Weimar Republic over, as if the
Communists will win this time. This is why many are starting to refer
to him as 'Nazi Nick', despite his Jewish religion. His ignorance of
history is astounding, especially considering his heritage. It is an
ignorance common among the products of compulsory government education
camps, but unacceptable for anyone wishing to lead the third largest
political party in the greatest nation on the planet. The smug manner in
which the leftist infection tries to paint President Trump as Hitler is
the crowning jewel of their ignorance. It is time for a quick history
lesson on Germany prior to World War Two. Trump is not Hitler, but
people like Sarwark are ushering the next Hitler in... Behold Nick Sarwark, who claims to lead the party of individual freedom,
as he ushers his own Jewish people toward the boxcars. Nazi Nick, the
ultimate in self hatred."
Even if the rumor about Milo Yiannopoulis planning to "out" undocumented students during his speech at UC Berkeley, which Yiannopoulis ultimately did not do and denied intending to do, was false – I'm not sure it was; I wouldn't be surprised if Yiannopoulis, via associates, was the source of the rumor, even if he never intended to carry out any such action – the point is that if student protesters heard the rumor and sincerely believed it, there's an argument to be made that their use of violence to stop him from speaking arguably was, to the best of their knowledge at the time, a legitimate defensive measure designed to prevent people being forcibly kidnapped and deported by the State. I'm not sure Nick intended to go that far; the word "understandable" as he used it is somewhat ambiguous and does not necessarily imply approval.
Regardless, any LP member whose views are so badly skewed as to publish a written public article condemning as solidly libertarian a party leader as the current LP national chair as a "cultural Marxist" and among those who is "usher(ing) his own Jewish people toward the boxcars", is not somebody I personally want serving in the party leadership. Coupled with the threats that Paul Stanton and Paul Frankel report Ramsey making against them and against members of Stanton's family, and Ramsey's connections to groups like Rock Against Communism and the American Guard, if I sat on the Florida LP Executive Committee and had been voting, I believe I would have voted to remove Ramsey from that body if such action is consistent with the Florida LP's bylaws. But I don't know whether there was a bylaws issue, or why the ExCom majority voted down Paul Stanton's motion for removal. My suspicion that they may have made what I believe to be a bad decision isn't enough for me to support the LNC formally weighing in or taking action vis-a-vis the Florida LP, short of the conditions I describe in the first paragraph above being met. Short of removal, I don't know what other steps, if any, they have taken, or may yet take.
But if the LNC does not make any direct formal response to the Florida situation, this still leaves the question of what else we can do with regard to the broader issue of ethno-nationalism seeping into the Libertarian Party. It's been pointed out that the LNC has recently issued a strong statement against racism and bigotry; the value of issuing another such statement at this time seems dubious. However while we've recently addressed the "ethno" aspect of the ethno-nationalist problem, I don't think we've adequately addressed nationalism, which is much more pervasive.
Nationalism is itself, I believe, a form of bigotry akin to racism. It is an anti-individualist philosophy which, translated into government policy, results in virtually every national government in the world wrongfully discriminating against people on the basis of innate characteristics beyond their control (where they were born or who their parents were). It also tends to lead people to take un-libertarian positions, such as being willing to initiate force against immigrants, supporting protectionism, and accepting various rights violations in the name of "national security". Nationalism can also serve as a cover for racism, because nationalist and racist views often dovetail when it comes to issues like immigration, racial profiling in the name of "national security", the U.S. government killing people in other countries, etc. But despite being as repugnant as racism, nationalism has so far largely gotten a pass from society including from many (L)ibertarians. If we are serious about discouraging the sort of views that are disrupting the Florida LP, the LNC issuing a strong statement against nationalism seems like a very good idea, and I would support such a resolution. I think we should also pay more attention to how our messaging and other practices (e.g. use of the American flag) can subtly legitimize and reinforce nationalism in the party.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))