Libertarian Party of San Francisco monthly meeting and social!

The Libertarian Party of San Francisco holds our regular monthly meetings on the 2nd Saturday each month, from 3-5pm, followed by a dinner social from 5-6pm. Currently we are meeting at the San Francisco Main Library, at Grove and Market (see for map), in the 4th floor community meeting room. Occasionally another group will be using this room, in which case we will be in a community meeting room on the 1st floor. Everyone is welcome to come and be part of the discussion, however in order to vote on party business you must be registered to vote as a Libertarian if eligible, and become an LP member by completing a membership form. Sometimes our meetings include a guest speaker. After the meetings, those of us who want to hang out and chat over a meal head over to Ananda Fuara vegetarian restaurant at Market and Larkin streets for our social. You're welcome to come for just the social, just the meeting, or both. You can always check meeting details, or find out the latest LPSF news and happenings, on our Libertarian Party of San Francisco website ( Thanks for your commitment to freedom, and on behalf of our local chair Aubrey Freedman and the rest of our group,  we look forward to meeting you! -Starchild, LPSF Outreach Director and Meetup Group organizer

Join or login to comment.

  • A former member
    A former member

    Looking forward to discussion. Hard lines like "Libertarians are for defense and law enforcement", but against other things necessary for public order, hijack the word I have called myself my whole life. Libertarians are for liberty. The means of optimizing it in the real world, are a matter of science, not ideology.

    January 29, 2013

  • A former member
    A former member

    Recruitment - Libertarian social safety net vs. inefficient ex post facto law enforcement to fight crime - If there was empirical evidence that paying for a social safety net provides better protection from crimes than the inefficient law enforcement operations of the government, then wouldn’t it be more “Libertarian” to be for a minimal social safety net for all, rather than to take my money and waste it on inefficient law enforcement? The latter leaves me footing the bill for my own private security if I ever really need it. The same applies to national defense. If everyone was given $800 bucks a month and access to cheap drugs (no matter their income level, with a "necessary evil" consumption tax to fund it), they either could rot in their own dens and leave the rest of us alone, or do something productive, and keep the $800/month in either case. That's much cheaper than the vast prison-industrial complex that I now foot the bill for. Libertarian Party membership would skyrocket.

    January 29, 2013

    • Starchild

      Hi Eric, glad to hear you'll be joining us at the February LPSF meeting! It could well be true that a social safety net has more net positive impact on reducing crime than the expensive criminal justice system with its crime-inducing prohibition of drugs and so on. I think however that there are even better ways to reduce crime. A social safety net funded by government is still fundamentally based on aggression and violence, because governments generally get their money by robbing people, either directly through taxation (including fines, fees, and so on that people are given little choice but to pay) or indirectly via the hidden tax of inflation created by government creating more money out of thin air with nothing of real value to back it.

      January 29, 2013

    • Starchild

      One more peaceful way of providing a social safety net would be to eliminate border controls so that the poorest people in the world have more ability to relocate to where jobs and economic opportunity are.

      Another option would be to adopt Georgist or geo-libertarian ideas about land use that would treat land differently from human-produced property. With everyone legally entitled to the same amount (market value) of this natural resource, people choosing to own more land than their "share" would pay land rent into a fund to be divided proportionally among people owning less land than their share. This would not need to be coercively enforced; people who declined to pay land rents for their use of more than the average share of land would simply sacrifice any legal protection of their holdings by government, enabling others to legally squat there.

      Perhaps we can talk more about these ideas at our social after the meeting, if you wish.

      January 29, 2013

6 went

Our Sponsors


    February's honorary sponsor supports activism for police accountability!

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sometimes the best Meetup Group is the one you start

Get started Learn more

We just grab a coffee and speak French. Some people have been coming every week for months... it creates a kind of warmth to the group.

Rafaël, started French Conversation Group

Start your Meetup today

Act now and get 50% off.
Until February 1.

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy