I am no scholar, I am Joe six pack, though I don’t drink. I have learned much from the Mises.org web site. Yet at this time of great crisis I feel as though most Austrians have been content to sit out of the current fight. With the exceptions of Ron Paul, Tom Woods and Peter Schiff where are the Austrians? It was to be a crisis like the one we currently face that was to open the hearts and minds of the masses. It seems to me that the main stream intellectuals are too committed to their course and perquisites to change their views. Is it time to target Joe the plumber? For even if it is true that only the intellectuals disseminate ideas, who are they disseminating them to? Ultimately it is up to the masses to ignore their masters and learn that they are all liars. Now more than ever the people need to hear the basics of why we are in this mess, what it is costing them and what it will cost them. The Joe’s do not care about the theories of liberty, they care about their wallets. You may return to your high work of this and that once Austrian economics is as well know as Marx or Ralph Raico is invited on the Oprah show, whichever comes first. Shouldn’t take too long. Was all the talk about being ready when the “revolution” came just talk? It appears to me to be the case.
Can some smart person out there tell me what every working person “owes” the Fed this year. The math goes something like this;
4+ TRILLION divided by 110 million or so working people, my calculator stopped working after the Carter Admin.
This is what people care about, tell them everyday how much they “owe” the state and ask them if they “voted” for this as they would in a market transaction.
In my most humble opinion every conversation about this mess should include what a TRILLION is. How about these figures;
A million seconds is 12 days.A billion seconds is 31 years.A trillion seconds is 31,688 years.
The line that , “ if printing money worked, we would ALL be filthy rich”, is a good one that needs to be repeated ad nauseam.
Time to get to work Austrians and convert the masses as you converted this Joe six pack.
Be responsible, ease suffering; spay or neuter your pets.
We must get them to understand that government solutions are the problem!
Mike:Ultimately it is up to the masses to ignore their masters and learn that they are all liars.
I think they learned that lesson long before Austrian economics showed up. The problem is not learning, but organization and action.
Economics and politics are very sophisticated sciences. You are not going to convert the masses simply because of how much time and effort is involved in understanding the concepts. The masses are going to sit this one out, as they have every other revolution.
As far as the masses are concerned, there is only one point that matters: what are you offering them? If we don't make this clear, they won't rally to us.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
stranger said, "As far as the masses are concerned, there is only one point that matters: what are you offering them? If we don't make this clear, they won't rally to us."
I agree - that is why "we" must hammer home the issues that do matter to "them" their wallets!! How inflation and the Feds debt is worse than any mugging.
Mike: I agree - that is why "we" must hammer home the issues that do matter to "them" their wallets!! How inflation and the Feds debt is worse than any mugging.
I don't think that's going to be enough. Hayek said once that was needed was a sort of liberal utopia, and that means not only more money in your pocket but an entire model for a better world, complete with its own clubs, artists, etc.
Only that can move the masses.
I am not sure what you expect? We can scream at the top of our lungs and no body will listen. If you go to the television or print media then they are a bunch of Progressives if not outright socialists who will do anything not to have Austrian Economic Principals being practiced in Washington or in the state houses. Japan and a majority of Euro Zone nations are worse off than the USA seems to be.
Besides it is a tough sell when you had Bush and now Obama, both of whom have the entire education and main stream media systems to shove their propaganda down the throats of the citizenry, giving away the future. On the other side you have a supposed expert on the Great Depression doing exactly the same things that the USA did in the 30s, Japan did in the 1990s, Argentina did in the 1980, Brazil did in the 1970s, etc.
What do I expect? I expect to see Rockwell, DiLorenzo, French et-al. talk to more than the choir. I have heard Woods on "neo-con" radio - of course Ron Paul has been out there, Peter Schiff and Jim Rogers also.. I hope other Austro/Libs are not too pure to be heard on neo - con radio or Fox etc.. we need to learn from the success of the statists, stay on topic, repeat, repeat and repeat.
Mike:I hope other Austro/Libs are not too pure to be heard on neo - con radio or Fox etc..
Rockwell does go on Fox, but you have to be invited to go, you can't just invite yourself.
Mike - I think it takes different things for different people to understand that we'd be better off with more liberty and less government. Some people are convinced more by the basic concept of liberty and ethics; others more because they realise it will make them wealthier. In my experience, ethical arguments can often be more effective, and they are also much simpler to explain than economic arguments... no one disagrees with the NAP, or the right to secede, in principle, once it is explained to them. Then they will get cognitive dissonance when they realise government is inherently unethical, and (hopefully) will educate themselves to try to resolve this dilemma.
On the other hand, with economic arguments, most people feel no compulsion to learn more, because they are not suffering cognitive dissonance. From their point-of-view, there are various groups of economists all saying different things. Why should they listen to one group more than any other? Only with a fairly thorough knowledge of economics/epistemology can Joe the Plumber find an answer to this question, and that's a daunting and unappealing task that few will undertake.
Ethical and economic arguments for liberty are most effective when used in combination is basically what I'm saying.
Mike:Now more than ever the people need to hear the basics of why we are in this mess, what it is costing them and what it will cost them.
I agree with this; current conditions are a great opportunity to make people aware of the ABCT. The Hayek vs Keynes video is a great attempt in my opinion at reaching a new audience and explaining the ABCT and the problems caused by the Fed to them in simple terms. What do you reckon?
Mike:This is what people care about, tell them everyday how much they “owe” the state and ask them if they “voted” for this as they would in a market transaction.
I don't think people care about this and they are just not impressed by big numbers. Telling people how much they owe the State just invokes a response of 'so what?' in my experience.
Mike:Time to get to work Austrians and convert the masses as you converted this Joe six pack.
I always enjoy hearing how people come to be Austrians/libertarians... How did you find this site? What sparked your interest? How much reading did you have to do before you realised the Austrians are talking sense and the mainstream economists talking nonsense?
Government Explained 2: The Special Piece of Paper
Law without Government
Trulib:
Thanks for the excellent reply. You make some great points. I agree that to some people liberty theory and ethics are more convincing. However I believe that busy modern people compartmentalize more than experience cognitive dissonance. And hoping for great numbers to educate themselves to resolve any dilemma is wishful thinking. To reach the average guy ( if you want to) I believe you must keep it simple and smack them in the face with quick and powerful points.
I disagree that ethical arguments are easier to make. How hard is it to explain the broken window fallacy. That was a real eye opener to me. Rockwell said it best; “why not bomb every town in the country so that we can rebuild them”. TO ME the economic is the exciting, the ethical the mundane. I believe Hayek or Mises said socialism was exciting to the youth, which gave it energy and much popularity. Of course the fact that it would give more power to the elites worked out well for them also.
From my world I really don’t see the average person caring more about the ethical or theoretical. From experience and the history of tax revolts I think people DO care about how much of their money is taken from them. They just are not aware of all the sneaky ways that it is done.
My main point is that the Austro/Lib intellectuals are not “reaching out” ( I hate that phrase) to the grass root mother who buys the milk ( didn’t Murray say they would be one of the strongest supporters of the Libertarian Ideal). The high theory and history etc. has limited appeal, until you get them interested in the simple stuff first.
Thanks for asking about my experience. We all like talking about ourselves.
I came to the site from my curiosity of the popularity of Marxism. How it could be so popular with intellectuals yet such an abysmal failure. More than 5 years ago a google search must have pointed me to a Mises daily article. At the time I would say I was a “Limbaugh conservative”, which makes me shake my head now, but also forms my opinion that it is on the right we will find more allies.
As Marx said, it is all about economics. While dropping bombs in foreign lands is horrible, I THINK, OTHERS THINK, the cost of the bomb is more important to them.
To me the MP3 downloads have been the absolute greatest thing for my learning. I am usually to busy to read much “heavy” material, regardless of what Hazlett believed. But I can listen to my MP3 player for an hour or two everyday while driving or working around the house. . I have listened to; For a new liberty more than a dozen times, it never gets old. I have listened to everything offered on the web-site. Being able to do that has prompted me to support the institution in a small way.
It was not an easy transition to accept the rationality of libertarian thought. But once you do you will never look at anything the same way again, kind of like taking the blue pill, or was it the red one?? My nationalism was the hardest thing to kill and that I still struggle with.
Mike I hear where you are coming from. I slowly started coming to these views several years ago and it's been a lot of studying and hand wringing since. One thing I and others I know who are Austr/libs believe is that we should be "salesmen" for our beliefs. Almost missionary in a way.
As I said in another post, the goal of the Austrian school and Mises is not just to debate these ideas and preach to the choir. This same argument came up in our Ron Paul meetups. There is an end goal and that is to change minds, etc. An educational goal. I mean that in a broad sense, in that we must reach the average person out there, but also in a conventional sense.
It's our job to bring our ideas out of the "fringe" and into the mainstream, and even if that goes against the grain of a lot of folks here, I think this is part of our role as "salesmen" for liberty. Tu ne Cede Malis, but advance more boldly against it. We will be ridiculed and smeared and shunned. We know this. But we keep advancing the truth because it is the right thing to do. I would love to see an Austrian Econ department or course offerings at more colleges, and once I'm rich and famous I'll set money aside to that goal, to endowments, scholarships, etc.
Mike, there are also others within this sphere who are trying to setup institutions outside the state in an attempt to surpass it and show its uselessness. The Mises institute is working hard to make that possible. You'll see it in the future if you stick around.
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
Laughing Man: Mike, there are also others within this sphere who are trying to setup institutions outside the state in an attempt to surpass it and show its uselessness. The Mises institute is working hard to make that possible. You'll see it in the future if you stick around.
Can you be any more specific as to what type of institutions are being setup? Perhaps some of us on the forum would be willing to help in the efforts.
Stranger:Economics and politics are very sophisticated sciences. You are not going to convert the masses simply because of how much time and effort is involved in understanding the concepts. The masses are going to sit this one out, as they have every other revolution.
This reminded me of a fundraiser I participated in a few years ago.The goal was to raise $1200 over a period of weeks.
The participants were told to ask for small donations ($10-50) from family, neighbors, coworkers etc... To me this sounded like a lot of time and effort.
Instead of asking for small donations, I decided to call 4 or 5 "big hitters" and ask them for $300 each. It took me all of 3 hours to collect the whole $1200. In other words, the masses sat that one out.
I'm thinking that a strategy of educating leaders (dare I say natural elites?) may bear more fruit that a campaign to educate the masses. Of course I have no idea how to do this. And it surely wouldn't have to be incompatible with an effort at rallying the masses.
I sympathise with the ends that Mike points out. I have often thought of doing a talk on money, inflation or the business cycle or something at one of my University societies, though i don't know if there is an appropriate platform, though that's a lame excuse; I should have got round to it.
I agree with Mike's point about salesmanship. I used to work and was trained as a salesperson, and I often end up introducing AE and some of its simple principles to people and strangers I often meet. It partly helps that I'm used to introducing myself and getting in to strangers whether on the train or at a cafe etc.
Indeed, I almost feel like linking up with my old boss and starting up a door to door campaign related to sound money or the benefits of the free market in the UK! I figure a such a plan needs some clear objectives however, e.g. getting people to sign up or show up for meetings etc.
What do you guys think?
"When the King is far the people are happy." Chinese proverb
For Alexander Zinoviev and the free market there is a shared delight:
"Where there are problems there is life."
MatthewF: I'm thinking that a strategy of educating leaders (dare I say natural elites?) may bear more fruit that a campaign to educate the masses. Of course I have no idea how to do this. And it surely wouldn't have to be incompatible with an effort at rallying the masses.
We have more and more of these. What we still lack is organization.