After all we don't recognize the legitimacy of the state and none of its aparatus, including the legislative branch. So should we support publically or even privately politicians who suggest or pass libertarian or anti-authoritarian laws?
Suppose Ron Paul was the president. Would you gather behind him, or would you just stay completely neutral and even criticize him for choosing to go into politics instead of protesting privately as people like Stephan Molenaux or Jeffrey Tucker do?
Your opinion?
Suppose for a moment, in 8 years, the country has taken a major libertarian course, due to the horrible job both parties have done. Congress, Senate, and the Presidency is all under the control of libertarians. We libertarians rejoice, victory is ours, and as a result the country starts to recover. 25 years pass and libertarian influence declines since the country has now fully recovered, many young people don't even remember how badly things got because of government intervention, besides the government saved the country, right? Sure it was a libertarian government, but a government either way, besides it proves that the right politicians can get the job done, right? Before you know it people will drift back into zealous Statism.
Short Term - Supporting libertarian politicians is a good idea. If we managed to gain considerable influence then it would provide temporary relief from the Statist hell hole we live in.
Long Term - Our argument that government is always inefficient will be severly damaged since (real) Libertarian politicians like Ron Paul would do a better job than the non-Libertarian politicians. People would still respect authority, after all, in the scenario it was politicians that saved them from a terrible fate. More people would come to the conclusion that government is needed to solve problems.
Should Anarchists support people like Ron Paul? Well do you care more about the short term or the long term?
Can you name one time this has ever happened in history? Libertarians becoming the dominant ideology of a country?
Medival Iceland?
Only ron paul.
Why not talk aobut politics?
You as an anacrhist can ramble on and on about how illegitimate the government is. Thats political talk right there.
“Since people are concerned that ‘X’ will not be provided, ‘X’ will naturally be provided by those who are concerned by its absence.""The sweetest of minds can harbor the harshest of men.”
http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.org
Here are two opposite opinions about this:
1. Adam Kokesh: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKZTUDrPzqs
2. Stephan Molenaux: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-j9LBCmM3c
I think there is also the important question of whether it is even consistent with NAP getting a government job at all, that is using tax payers money as your salary.
@ Malachi,
(applause)
I would write LOL but I despise it.
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.
Yours sincerely,
Physiocrat
Luminar: Can you name one time this has ever happened in history? Libertarians becoming the dominant ideology of a country?
Desperate people do desperate things. But it was just a hypothetical meant to show the outcomes of Libertarian politicians being successful.
If liberterians can get into politics to educate people, I think that is a good idea. But liberterian politicians should realize that the demands of a political office corrupt.
Schools are labour camps.