Fore more urdu books visit www.4Urdu.com

More oxford books @ www.OxfordeBook.comFore more urdu books visit www.4Urdu.comIT USUALLY BEGINS WITH AYN RAND 255University delegation. Berle Hubbard, the mastermind of security forthe Libertarian Caucus, queried a friend about For the New Intellectual:“Could you dig it? Or was it too heavy for you?” Rand was far from theonly source of libertarianism in YAF; others mentioned Robert LeFevre,Milton Friedman and his son David, the novelist Robert Heinlein, andLudwig von Mises as key influences. But she was an essential part of thelibertarian stew. 18In 1969 this combustible mixture of anarchism, Objectivism, andtraditionalist conservatism erupted in full display at the YAF annualconference in St. Louis. 19 The Libertarian Caucus brought an ambitiousprogram to the convention. Their goals included making all seats on thenational board elective, developing a resolution on YAF’s direction inthe 1970s, and amending the Sharon Statement, YAF’s founding credo.Libertarians wanted to remove the Sharon Statement’s opening referenceto “young conservatives” and add domestic statism to internationalCommunism as a “twin menace” to liberty. In short, they were proposingmajor changes to the YAF’s governance, goals, and values. 20 It wasa bold agenda for the three hundred activists in a population of morethan a thousand delegates. Not surprisingly, most of their alternativeplanks were soundly rejected by the convention, including those thatadvocated draft resistance, an immediate withdrawal from Vietnam,and the legalization of marijuana.On the third day of the conference libertarian frustration bubbledover when their antidraft resolution went down to defeat. Not onlydid the convention reject the libertarian plank, but in the plank thatpassed they included a pointed clause condemning draft resistance andthe burning of draft cards. The convention’s decision to endorse abolitionof the draft, but not resistance to it, was critical. It signaled thatthere were definite limits to YAF’s antistatism. The organization wouldremain firmly within the political establishment. Rhetorical support oflimited government was fine, but anarchism and radical libertarianismwere beyond the pale. 21In the face of this insult, the libertarians could no longer resist theirinnate impulse to challenge authority. A small pack of students gatheredin a conspiratorial knot. One of the group had a facsimile of hisdraft card. (Apparently the conservative within him lived still, for hewas unwilling to sacrifice the actual card.) Another dissident seized a