Listing Agencies/Laws is a Slippery Slope

Stephen, the complaint that Starchild forwarded said "taking NO stance on an issue is as important a reason to object to someone as taking a stance I disagree with. Eventually I abandoned the Libertarian party, because frankly they did not even address some of the issues I care most about".

The Platform says "We oppose any form of compulsory national service."  The complainer would have no room to say he doesn't know where we stand on conscription or any steps required to implement it.

I agree the Platform should say something about agriculture, but the language available for recycling had weaknesses.  Not all of us agree that the government should not regulate agricultural practices that cause pollution or other nuisances.  I'd like the Platform to say something like this (from my Free Earth Manifesto): "Farming should be free of 1) subsidies, 2) protection from competition, 3) production restrictions motivated by concerns over price or vice, and 4) practices that impose a direct physical nuisance on neighbors or the community."

Once we start listing specific agencies and laws to abolish, we are on a slippery slope that ends with a massive list like this.  I'd rather devote any such extra text to explaining why freedom works, but that too is a slippery slope to bloat.