http://talley.tv/manchester-free-stater-vs-free-stater/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=manchester-free-stater-vs-free-stater
Pretty awesome. Given that one of the candidates is an AnCap. He cites Hulsmann on private defense on his website :P
How perfect! Now they can claim to be for liberty while actively running for political office. Oh god libertarians are awesome!
This is the story of almost every libertarian I've met on campus. The YAL chapter here is full of people who are trying to work on campaigns and run for office themselves someday...
I cannot wrap my head around why someone would be all "pro liberty" then desire to themselves run the state. They are just as managerial as the statists...
"O' joyous liberty! How art thou statists!!"
Rothbard himself was pro-political action as a means of achieving libertarian goals. That was what his refute of Agorism was all about.
I wouldn't be where I'm at right now if it wasn't for Ron Paul.
Rothbard himself was pro-political action
Look at who he associated himself with in the name of that strategy (racialists, David Duke and white "voluntary" segregationists). He helped polemicise the movement in this regard.
Ron Paul
1:320,000,000
...and even he didn't have the spick and span record that is necessary to combat the Establishment propaganda forces.
...and even he didn't have any effectual political reforms.
Working "in the system" will demand compromises (Rand Paul for instance) that will water down the most important aspects of the movement.
@ Astrophanes
"Look at who he associated himself with in the name of that strategy (radicalists, David Duke and white "voluntary" segregationists). He helped polemicise the movement in this regard."
Holy crap, I had no idea.
"Working "in the system" will demand compromises (Rand Paul for instance) that will water down the most important aspects of the movement."
Okay, so how are we supposed to spread the liberty movement? Civil disobediance? Revolution? I've heard stuff all across the board here. There doesn't seem to be a generally accepted plan of action among libertarians. The only reasonable one I've heard is seasteading.
radicalists
Not raDicalists...RaCialists
(I don't know why you changed what I wrote...)
Civil disobediance?
Yes. In the vein of Thoureau (don't pay taxes!!!!!!) and Malcom X (Don't swear off the V-word).
I've heard stuff all across the board here. There doesn't seem to be a generally accepted plan of action among libertarians.
Nope. Hopefully a little bit of all of it will help...
The only reasonable one I've heard is seasteading.
I don't really see this as realistic. It is more realistic to appeal to states to allow them to create city-states that can be free of laws. Seasteading is utopian in my eyes. It is also hopelessly expensive (have you played BioShock? Because that's where I'd imagine that seasteads would end up).
Oh come on! Big Daddys are SOOOOOOOOOOO KEWWWWWWWWWWL
Nothin will change.
Im such a pessimist.
The only way to bring about change is through the tip of the bayonet, the bank account of the entrepeneur, or the critical thoughts of ones mind.
“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
"The only way to bring about change is through the tip of the bayonet"
...
Dude, you got that straight from the dear leader.
"The way to peace is on the end of a bayonet." - Kim Il-Sung
I actually do believe that.
If we want to abolish the government, 1 of the various ways is to just kill the bastards.
I used to be one who promoted Che-style revolution as a means of obtaining libertarian ideals, but is that really what we want? Freedom obtained through blood and gore? War? The very thing that we libertarians oppose?
First of all, I'd refrain from saying things like "just kill the bastards."
abolish the government
Second, the abolition of the state is forcing your values on people who want the state. You should simply demand that you be "let out."
Exactly.
Seriously, "just kill the bastards" reminds me of some overly-stylized Italian macaroni war film. Plus it sounds horrible.
And they demand that i be forced in.
Just kill the bastards
Fair enough.
Re educate them.
"I don't really see this as realistic. It is more realistic to appeal to states to allow them to create city-states that can be free of laws. Seasteading is utopian in my eyes. It is also hopelessly expensive"
Queue Anenome, change of topic, and further derailment of the thread.
What's so bad about thread derailment? This topic is going somewhere interesting.
SkepticalMetal: Okay, so how are we supposed to spread the liberty movement? Civil disobediance? Revolution? I've heard stuff all across the board here. There doesn't seem to be a generally accepted plan of action among libertarians. The only reasonable one I've heard is seasteading.
There doesn't need to be 'one plan'. Lots of people won't be able to join a seastead even if it exists for various reasons, mainly employment and family. Lots of people come to libertarianism late in life after many commitments.
But, for those like you and me, we can take more radical steps and make the others envious :)
If NH abolishes speed limits, I'll be envious. If they cut the police budget 75%, I'd be jealous. Plenty can be done in politics. You don't pull the rug out with one big sweep. Too many people on it, won't work. You could set it on fire and piss them off. But it's much easier to roll it up, and then just toss it over the balcony. You actually have to experience freedom before you can embrace it. Talk is cheap, and that's all anyone here seems to be willing to do.
SkepticalMetal:I wouldn't be where I'm at right now if it wasn't for Ron Paul.
Conversely, you wouldn't be here right now if it weren't for some white people enslaving and/or slaughtering a bunch of brown people and conquering the world. I'm not sure where I was going with that...there's probably a lesson in there somewhere.
HabbaBabba:Talk is cheap, and that's all anyone here seems to be willing to do.
And yet, talk is everything; ideas rule the world. I'm always amazed by people who say "get off your ass and do something about it!" Often, they're the same people who are always begging government to "do something about it!" We need to stop demanding solutions based on violence. At any rate, you don't reform the mafia from within—and government is infinitely, I dare say imaginably blacker than the mafia. I'd go as far as to doubt that any of us here, with our combined knowledge, can fathom the full extent of the horrors people within and around the power centers of government partake in or else are aware of.
"Conversely, you wouldn't be here right now if it weren't for some white people enslaving and/or slaughtering a bunch of brown people and conquering the world. I'm not sure where I was going with that...there's probably a lesson in there somewhere."
No, I really don't think that there is.
"Conversely, you wouldn't be here right now if it weren't for some white people enslaving and/or slaughtering a bunch of brown people and conquering the world. I'm not sure where I was going with that...there's probably a lesson in there somewhere." No, I really don't think that there is.
I think there is.
We wouldn't have blues, jazz or anything that stems from them if it wasn't for slavery...what are we willing to give up to correct some of our mistakes? Or are there alternative paths to the same thinhgs?
Your profile pic startled me.
Whoa there Saul Alinsky. Never mentioned violence. In fact, basically implied against it. However isn't it awfully convenient your solutions don't involve getting off the computer?
Or are there alternative paths to the same thinhgs?
I think a sign of intelligence is the creativity to imagine what you call "alternative paths to the same things", while being willing to admit that there has been only one path—and we'd do well to learn why that path triumphed over every imaginable alternative.
However isn't it awfully convenient your solutions don't involve getting off the computer?
I'm not sure you know what you're talking about. I certainly don't. Where have I said I only support the spread of ideas through sitting at a computer???
So far, it's talk and imagination that are going to save the world. Maybe you aren't so talented, but I really don't even need to move at all for either of those. You're right, I apologize. You can sit anywhere and accomplish these tasks.
"I think there is.
We wouldn't have blues, jazz or anything that stems from them if it wasn't for slavery...what are we willing to give up to correct some of our mistakes? Or are there alternative paths to the same thinhgs?"
Except that being a politician is a legitimate means of achieving liberty, and Ron Paul made a legitimate effort to attempt to spread the message of libertarianism, therefore the negative context which you're giving it is irrelevant.
You dont know that.
HabbaBabba:So far, it's talk and imagination that are going to save the world.
No, that's just you making things up.
HabbaBabba:Plenty can be done in politics.
Because human farming is better than liberty. Ya, seems legit.
Kevin Silva:You don't know that.
Do go on...
Ron Paul made a legitimate effort
I don't discount him. I merely stated that he is one out of 320 million.
therefore the negative context which you're giving it is irrelevant.
What?
Alright Spongebob, I'm some hillbilly statist. Why should I listen to you, exactly? What leaderly qualities do you possess that I must concede to believe in your imaginative speech?
"I don't discount him. I merely stated that he is one out of 320 million."
Then what is your point?
"What?"
Ron Paul's actions were being compared to the effects of slavery. This would imply that the intended interpretation would be that the existence of something negative may indirectly lead to something positive and that this concept should be forwarded on to the actions of Paul. Well, where is the connection that makes what Ron Paul has done negative and people like Skeptic positive indirect affects of his actions?
Alright Spongebob
Going out strong. Admirable.
Why should I listen to you, exactly?
Who cares what reason you have to listen to me? You're talking about the virtues of politics, that's what's silly in this conversation. At least I'm acknowledging that, although hegemony has been a necessary step on the path toward liberty, it isn't necessarily true that it must be.
"I don't discount him. I merely stated that he is one out of 320 million." Then what is your point?
The point is obvious.
See: THIS (I couldn't find it on youtube)
ahahaaaahahah
Don't mix up other people's points with mine. I said nothing even close to this. My comments regarding hashem's point was merely a thought. And it was completely unrelated to my thoughts on Ron Paul.
What's silly is someone basically admitting there's no reason to listen to them advocating communication as a means to advance their ideas.
I'm listening to "Can't Buy Me Love" and "Jingle Jangle Jingle" while reading this thread. It actually lightens the mood up here.
The discussion was directly related to Ron Paul. If you didn't want your viewpoints mixed up then you shouldn't enter into a conversation in such a way that your statement directly implies the position that you do not hold.
Also,
1400th post.
Oh great. A brony.