This editorial begins by mentioning the Dallas Accord, an agreement made in 1974 between the minarchists and anarchists within the Libertarian Party.
It sounds like it was meant to shut-up the annoying anarchists who just really didn't like anything at all about government. Apparently the majority on both sides ended up thinking that if they could just stop arguing about that, for just a little while, then both groups could work together and focus on growing the Party itself.
And once that growth happened, and government became smaller as a result, THEN a discussion on government itself, and how to get rid of it, could occur.
I can almost hear the snickers of the minarchists in this situation, can't you?
Please note, I'm not making fun of the anarchists here, it's just that I can now see how different the goals are for the two groups.
Anyway, the authors' biggest concern continues to be the time and energy wasted inside the party by those who have figured out that there is no moral legitimacy in government.
This excerpt probably says it best:
"Voluntaryists believe that anarchists have important contributions to make in strategy as well as in theory. We believe in the potential of nonviolent anarchist organizations to challenge State power on a level impossible for political parties. The basic theory is there, awaiting development. The strategic insights are there, awaiting implementation. Where, then are the anarchists? Many of them, including those of the highest caliber, are stuck in a regressive and increasingly bureaucratic political party, soliciting votes like common political hacks, engagins in vendettas, and fighting delaying actions against Party conservatism which approaches with the inevitability of death."