Bob, nobody is saying the Dallas Accord is "binding" in the sense of a Bylaw. An accord can be useful without being technically binding.
Paulie, I don't agree with Tom Knapp if he claims that the DA prevented anarchists from campaigning as such. The only support I've ever heard for that interpretation is from Less Antman, but I don't see how it could possibly follow from the core terms that everybody agrees constituted the accord. This sounds to me like confusion between what the LP may say and what candidates may say.
You ask why a smallarchist should defend the legitimacy of minimal government when there is so much maximal government to dismantle. In American politics, it seems to me the case for shrinking government is self-marginalized when it is made dependent on the premise that all government is illegitimate. If I thought that advocating anarchism was some kind of Jedi mind trick that could shrink government, I'd be out campaigning for anarchism and telling voters these are not the droids they're looking for. However, for thirty years the LP offered a detailed recipe for implementing anarchism. Take a look at the size of the nanny state and tell us: how well did that work out?
Thomas Sipos, if you as a "minarchist" support a platform calling for personal secession and immediate non-enforcement of all tax laws, then you're nevertheless an anarchist -- just a confused one. You're also confused in thinking that any Libertarian supports "empire".
empire n. a major political unit having a territory of great extent or a number of territories or peoples under a single sovereign authority
Gary, feel free to introduce a resolution against a "standing army" at any state or national LP convention, and report back to us the results.
My thesis remains as follows: the Dallas Accord when combined with a 2000-word platform (like 1972 or now) is a fair compromise for anarchists and smallarchists alike; however, when the DA is combined with a 14,000-word recipe for abolishing every aspect of government, it's a bad deal for the smallarchists -- a deal that no LP radical tries to defend.
Restore04-style radicals want the Platform to clearly imply that one side of the anarchy/smallarchy debate is wrong. They should be careful what they wish for.