Onion: Libertarian Reluctantly Calls Fire Department

This article is currently topping the charts at the popular site Reddit (1,585 upvotes, 588 downvotes)...

CHEYENNE, WY—After attempting to contain a living-room blaze started by a cigarette, card-carrying Libertarian Trent Jacobs reluctantly called the Cheyenne Fire Department Monday. "Although the community would do better to rely on an efficient, free-market fire-fighting service, the fact is that expensive, unnecessary public fire departments do exist," Jacobs said. "Also, my house was burning down." Jacobs did not offer to pay firefighters for their service

Here's my response in the comments...

 

 

Russian Anti-Communist Reluctantly Enters Bread Line

LENINGRAD—After attempting to feed himself on his own, anti-communist Peter Sergeyev reluctantly entered a state bread line on Monday. "Although the community would do better to rely on an efficient, free market in food, the fact is that there are no jobs, and if I don't get in this bread line I'll starve," Sergeyev said." Sergeyev did not offer to pay the Bureau of Sustenance for its service.

What an inconsistent jerk right?

 

 

Libertarianism desperately needs a rebranding campaign.

Stranger:

Libertarianism desperately needs a rebranding campaign.

Until libertarians start to create their own brands, there will be no rebranding campaign.  Reddit and Digg are gamed by certain constituencies.  If libertarians were smart, they would follow the model of the Campaign for Liberty and Mises.org and create prominent homes for their ideas and philosophy.

Sadly, there is only one Mises.org and only one Campaign for Liberty.  The lefties are working on the C4SS, but at any given time, it's just complaining about the sorts of people found at Mises.org and Campaign for Liberty.

One more thing to remember is that the people with the most time to advocate, are likely anarcho-syndicalists rather than anarcho-capitalists, just by the nature of their philosophy (see mr1001nights).

I suspect next year the state will seriously start trying to police and control the web, and the smear campaigns against C4L and Mises.org will pick up again. So far there have been too many gains, too fast, too easily online.  TPTB won't let that go on indefinitely without a challenge.

liberty student:

Sadly, there is only one Mises.org and only one Campaign for Liberty.  The lefties are working on the C4SS, but at any given time, it's just complaining about the sorts of people found at Mises.org and Campaign for Liberty.

The problem is that Libertarians do not agree on what their strategy to win is, and really they don't even agree on what it is they want to win. Leftists are pretty clear on that: they want to put leftists into positions of power and keep them there.

The most Libertarians have said about strategy is that people need education. Nobody knows what to do once people have been educated.

Stranger:

liberty student:

Sadly, there is only one Mises.org and only one Campaign for Liberty.  The lefties are working on the C4SS, but at any given time, it's just complaining about the sorts of people found at Mises.org and Campaign for Liberty.

The problem is that Libertarians do not agree on what their strategy to win is, and really they don't even agree on what it is they want to win. Leftists are pretty clear on that: they want to put leftists into positions of power and keep them there.

The most Libertarians have said about strategy is that people need education. Nobody knows what to do once people have been educated.

I think once people are educated, there's nothing left for us to really do, other than letting the seeds of liberty grow.

Perhaps our biggest flaw has not been a lack of education per se, but our mode of education.

Freiheit:

I think once people are educated, there's nothing left for us to really do, other than letting the seeds of liberty grow.

 

There's a meme going around called the underpants gnomes that typifies this kind of belief. So it goes:

1. Educate the people

2. ...

3. Liberty!

The fact that Libertarians don't realize that the power-mongers will fight back against their campaign shows how shallow their education is.

Libertarianism will only work when there's no other choice than to think for oneself.  Right now, there are still others happy to unburden us of this need, by promising to solve our problems for us if only we give up just a little more of our liberty.  Of course, these promises are all bullshit.  It's just going to take a really long time, and alot of pain on everyone's part, before this fact is reluctantly accepted.  Then, sullen and downtrodden, the people will turn to reality.

I expect to be long dead by then.

The Rev

Stranger:

Freiheit:

I think once people are educated, there's nothing left for us to really do, other than letting the seeds of liberty grow.

 

There's a meme going around called the underpants gnomes that typifies this kind of belief. So it goes:

1. Educate the people

2. ...

3. Liberty!

The fact that Libertarians don't realize that the power-mongers will fight back against their campaign shows how shallow their education is.

What else, other than more education, could we possibly do to those whom we are educating, after we have already educated them as thoroughly as we can?

Why can't Step #2 simply be "Give them space to mull it over for themselves"?

Stranger:

The fact that Libertarians don't realize that the power-mongers will fight back against their campaign shows how shallow their education is.

I think the infancy of the "movement" (for lack of a better term, I really don't like the word) has a lot of shortcomings.  But nothing that cannot be overcome.

I always wonder, if you could task out jobs for liberty to libertarians, would you be able to find the people to do the grunt work?

For example, let's say I live in Yahoo County.  And my libertarian goal is to reduce voter turnout by 50% in 10 years.  Are there libertarians willing to perform what might seem to be small, unsexy long view tasks to push back, or is it a bunch of all or nothing folks who will stand on a street corner with Ron Paul signs (disregarding talking to their neighbors) and voting in CNN Online polls?

Definitely missing are

• Libertarians Mariners For Peace
• The National LIbertarian Small Busines Alliance
• The Brotherhood of Libertarian Carpenters
• The Council of Libertarian Home Owners
• and such

Still in it's infancy.  Still missing out on so many opportunities for organization, identification and collaboration.  And please ignore the "anti-hierarchy" nuts.  They are going nowhere because they reject the division of labour (h/t corktageous).

Freiheit:

What else, other than more education, could we possibly do to those whom we are educating, after we have already educated them as thoroughly as we can?

Why can't Step #2 simply be "Give them space to mull it over for themselves"?

The first problem with this statement is that education is not something you do to someone, it is something you give them.

liberty student:

For example, let's say I live in Yahoo County.  And my libertarian goal is to reduce voter turnout by 50% in 10 years.  Are there libertarians willing to perform what might seem to be small, unsexy long view tasks to push back, or is it a bunch of all or nothing folks who will stand on a street corner with Ron Paul signs (disregarding talking to their neighbors) and voting in CNN Online polls?

The problem with this is that you have to convince those all or nothing folks that reducing voter turnout is something they will benefit from, and that's really not clear to me.

In other words, we need to provide them with actions and choices.

Stranger:

Freiheit:

What else, other than more education, could we possibly do to those whom we are educating, after we have already educated them as thoroughly as we can?

Why can't Step #2 simply be "Give them space to mull it over for themselves"?

The first problem with this statement is that education is not something you do to someone, it is something you give them.

Educating someone = not doing anything to them?

Education really isn't that helpful.

People are more use when they're pissed off than when they're educated.

Freiheit:

Educating someone = not doing anything to them?

That is an abuse of mathematical symbols.

GilesStratton:

People are more use when they're pissed off than when they're educated.

Only for a single use.

Made me lol nice one Daniel

Daniel J. Sanchez:

Russian Anti-Communist Reluctantly Enters Bread Line

LENINGRAD—After attempting to feed himself on his own, anti-communist Peter Sergeyev reluctantly entered a state bread line on Monday. "Although the community would do better to rely on an efficient, free market in food, the fact is that there are no jobs, and if I don't get in this bread line I'll starve," Sergeyev said." Sergeyev did not offer to pay the Bureau of Sustenance for its service.

What an inconsistent jerk right?

Good response. Also, don't forget that using the fire department is just getting restitution for all the crimes committed against you by the government.

Stranger:

In other words, we need to provide them with actions and choices.

I hear what you're saying, that we need plans toward physically halting state criminality, but keep in mind that words are actions.  Words change minds; minds move bodies. 

Daniel J. Sanchez:

Stranger:

In other words, we need to provide them with actions and choices.

...words are actions.  Words change minds; minds move bodies.

Despite the comfort of that statement, where I could easily rationalize to myself on what little I do is somehow changing things, when I have no real way of being certain, I have to disagree.

If words are action, then by now, all the blogs in the world should be leading us straight to freedom.

Online is a great arena FOR NOW, but it will cease to be in the future, if anyone will bother listening to Lawarence Lessig's important work & his warning of The State (not by that name, but more or less he refers to The State)'s possible (& ever more likely) trump card of an "online" version of 9/11.

The increasing sabre-rattling of cyberspace becoming more of a territory rather than an abstract environment should send shivers down everyone's spine, most of all us, but even more disheartening is the somewhat valid claims this is derived from: where is the infrastructure required for the existence of the Internet located?

It is not all in one territory, and even if it were somehow designated in a neutral territory somewhere on earth or in space, the required defense necessary to fend off Statist conquering might not be there.

The bastardized claims of territorial monopoly are being applied ever second to an abstract environment of information (such as an The Internet), & by proxy, this conquest will eventually result in an exponential amount of bureaucracy & regulation.

Forget about the traditional argument of "too much regulation into our daily lives"; it will eventually become (if not already), an argument of too much regulation into our daily thoughts & information.   

The Internet is an excellent resource, but libertarians & anti-statist's should stop being complacent in it's existence.  The first step towards providing the bridge of online action & words into tangible offline actions & options would be to make privatized infrastructure for separate Internets.

The internet has already proven to be the most (so far...) anarcho-capitalist (I hate to use that term, but most here know what I mean by it's use in context) friendly method of providing the vital means of organizing not only a space for us, but the very basis for groups of people to be able to branch off & create, essentially, their own social worlds, cultures, & possibly eventually, states, based on the ease of use the Internet both as a concept, & possibly more importantly, as a means of mediation, calculation, & market action.

If the Gadsen Flag once represented a symbol for the movement (& still does for many) than The Internet can thought of both the digital & physical culmination of technology as a symbol for freedom.

Money bombs, infiltrating blogspot with material until whenever google decides to censor stuff on their servers, submitting stuff to reddit, & other forms of online promotion are all good & well, but what would be more impressive is a Gadesen Online, or a Gadesen / FSP Internet.

Even better would be the fact that initially, such services would cost too much for ideological outsiders to bother with, but overtime, the growth of both infrastructure to maintain such net's would reduce costs, & allow fully competent oversight to ensure that there is no easy hanging fruit for The statist's to come in & shut it down (i.e. oversight concerning possible things the state would leverage to raid, such as child pornography, etc.).  

I'm sure the anti-hierarchy types might bitch about it, but they can try to do their own thing too, possibly via some sort of Tor like network on their own servers (this is tangential, but a realistic concern nonetheless).  This goes without saying regarding competition in the markets, anyways.   

Such under-taking would have those involved having an intuitive understanding of the connection between micro & macro scale growth.  For example, service plans ranging from the most primative (but most built in saftey wise, possibly) uses of sub-par 56k for just information & minimal media, to the most exhubrent (T1, etc., possibly even from paid pipe from comcast etc.) for libertarian and/or an-cap buisnesses.  

The earlier would be easier to provide intinally, but would eventually fall in line with exponential growth.  The latter would attract those cannot stand slower internet (which might be the majority of the those who do not agree with the aims of a libertarian or privatized internet), especially if it was priced competitivley with other services, or at least as competitivley as possible.  I could go more into the nuance of it all, but it's too big of a tangent.   

Back on point, I would argue that the Internet finally provided us with an infrastructure that is the most amoral, unbiased reflection of individual trade & actions (again, thus far), & hence, a better reflection of free-market action between individuals. 

To be fair, it could also become a better reflection of totalitarian control, which is why I see privatized internet, privatized informational services, storage, & creation, to be more important than ever as we head off into the Brave New World, albiet, with the half-assed slant that comes with reality & bureaucrats.    

I suppose it figures that this useful finally tool comes along , & most seem more interested in exploiting it as a commons (at times, myself included, lol...) while they can (even as a liberty minded individual, it wouldn't be uncalled for to call this a mild form of parasitism, or at least laziness), rather than further evolving it beyond "one Internet to rule them all", or doing something more tangential besides either reformism via regulation (Lessig is probably the most successful example of this, but it includes the EFF & others as well), or reactionary outrage that eventually devolves into passive acceptance (it would be hard pressed to find anyone immune to such, even the most noble & tireless ideaological fighter).   

Granted, Internet2 is being developed, & will be far more controlling & regulated, but it would be unforgivably arrogant to think that the 1st Internet would be left behind by The Statist's, to let us lowly masses take advantage of it & challenge oligarchy, in favor of another internet, simply because it is more shiny than the last.

I apologize for the rambling, but as much as I like looking at my own blog & desperately trying to find time to post up words on the Internet for people to read, I don't make it a priority primarily because when it comes down to it, my blog probably matters little outside the peanut gallery, even if I promoted it, etc.

If the FSP or any other libertarians start getting smart about arming themselves to protect their own servers that allow privatized cyberspace with minimal next to no immediate interference from The Statist's, I would say then we are making good progress.

At this point, I'm beginning to see that the creation, liberation, & defending of agnostic (i.e. non regulated) information is far more important than the creation of arguments & the growth of, yet still somewhat closed, circles of interested people.

While many would argue that our words may eventually help grow a majority at some point to tip the arguments into our favor, & to some extent I can see that occurring, it would take far too much time to do this.

I find it further interesting that while the arguments for spreading the word are widespread, the possibility of a possible biological strategy, such as breeding with libertarians or anti-statists in an effort to ensure future generational resistance (voluntary eugenics, I suppose you could call it, or counter-economical eugenics) is rarley heard of.

Although, I see the secession movement of the FSP being a possible pre-cursor to such, however, despite that obviously not being a primary nor spoken of goal of the FSP, but would probably occur to some extent in the more liberty minded population interacting, living & breeding with one another.

In that sense, it makes me further confident that libertarianism as both a genetical & memetical culture, may be one of the best long-term strategies we can utilize the eventually arrive at one, if not the, primary goal(s):  to show that the concept of coercion is not valid. 

The fight continues, I'm afraid.

Good post, I don't have the technical knowledge to really add much to it. But I'll say this: in the next ten years, the state will grow beyond recognition.

 

Stranger:

liberty student:

Sadly, there is only one Mises.org and only one Campaign for Liberty.  The lefties are working on the C4SS, but at any given time, it's just complaining about the sorts of people found at Mises.org and Campaign for Liberty.

The problem is that Libertarians do not agree on what their strategy to win is, and really they don't even agree on what it is they want to win. Leftists are pretty clear on that: they want to put leftists into positions of power and keep them there.

The most Libertarians have said about strategy is that people need education. Nobody knows what to do once people have been educated.

I posted a plan in "Blame Me For Trying."  The logic being that in order to move the people to action, you must give them property.  Currently, we have debt, and what we don't owe to a creditor is owed to the government in taxes, and anything left over is ruined by inflation.   The last 100 years of this have destroyed almost 100% of the value of our money, causing macro-poverty only disguised by tax "cuts" and easy money.  If we can restore the value of money, we can break the fight down to arguing about privacy, torture, and war-- at which point we're home free.  However, as long as America's one-party can keep us poor, they're home free.  Poverty breeds anger, ignorance, and fear -- at which point they willingly sacrifice their rights and trust the economy to the "professionals.

marcbragh:

If we can restore the value of money, we can break the fight down to arguing about privacy, torture, and war-- at which point we're home free.

Sure, but the power to inflate is the blood of the state.  You can't cut out one piece while continuing to acknowledge the balance of the state without facing the state's violence.

 

EDIT: This wasn't very clear.  The state will kill you before you steal it's lifeblood.  Don't be fooled by the success of HR1207.  The state has not begun to fight back to defend the FED yet.

liberty student:

The state has not begun to fight back to defend the FED yet.

This is so true, especially considering the case of the Second Bank of the United States.  Bank president Nicholas Biddle at first seemed like a mild-mannered civil servant.  Yet when his bureaucratic cradle was rocked, Biddle morphed into Machiavellian monster who bribed Congressmen and brought the economy to its knees in order to preserve his precious bank.  It took Andrew Jackson, a wildly popular, enormously resourceful, and intensely strong-willed sitting President everything he had to bring down the bank, and even so, only just barely.  The Fed is much more powerful than the SBOTUS was, and those who benefit by it even more interested and unscrupulous.

That's part of the reason why education is so important.  A band of activists and politicians won't be able to kill the thing.  "Atlas" himself (the productive members of society) will have to shake it off.  But first he needs to be convinced he should.  And that will require hundreds of trillions of words.  But I believe the right trillions will only be spoken and written in response to the hundreds of millions written in the Austrian ambit.  So believe it or not, the words being written on this and similar sites are hugely important.

liberty student:

marcbragh:

If we can restore the value of money, we can break the fight down to arguing about privacy, torture, and war-- at which point we're home free.

Sure, but the power to inflate is the blood of the state.  You can't cut out one piece while continuing to acknowledge the balance of the state without facing the state's violence.

 

EDIT: This wasn't very clear.  The state will kill you before you steal it's lifeblood.  Don't be fooled by the success of HR1207.  The state has not begun to fight back to defend the FED yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAVaOe2zV3w  <-- just look at ben bernanke's bring-it-on attitude, haha.  "i certainly would resist any attempts to dictate to the federal reserve how to make monetary policy."  (Even though congress delegated the responsibility to the Fed in 1913 and has the right to completely overrule any "resistance.")  But yeah, it does look like they're still just laughing off the bill and haven't muscled up yet.

But if we campaign it simply as, "we have the choice of living without inflation and taxes -- here's how."  I guarantee you that  the state would spend more time scrambling to save face than opposing anything we do.  They have to worry about elections and keeping their paycheck first. 

You know, there are shows like the Daily Show that record clips of c-span all day.  Stewart may be a liberal, but we're not necessarily the enemy of the liberals.  It's in their best interest to be nice to us as it is usually our vote that puts the republicans in or out of office.  Plus, we agree with them on many social issues.  (we just disagree on where the right to make individual lifestyle choices comes from).  The liberals biggest probelm is that they're blamed for taxes and deficits, if we can take care of that for them & we already agree on personal liberty and sort of agree with them on foreign policy, then we'd  have much more pull than we would fighting indepently or together with the conservatives.  We could reduce the argument to their merits of a non-tax based welfare system -- which basically means we've won.

If Nader can make random speeches before congress and get things done, then so can we.  Look at how much he got done without being an elected official.  There's no reason we can't do this, we just need to be vocal and consistent.  We need coverage and it's completely possible. 

Stranger:

liberty student:

Sadly, there is only one Mises.org and only one Campaign for Liberty.  The lefties are working on the C4SS, but at any given time, it's just complaining about the sorts of people found at Mises.org and Campaign for Liberty.

The problem is that Libertarians do not agree on what their strategy to win is, and really they don't even agree on what it is they want to win. Leftists are pretty clear on that: they want to put leftists into positions of power and keep them there.

Leftists therefore have the advantage of doing something that most people do which is go along with the State.  It's not an uphill battle.  Leftists already have a momentum to harvest from.  Most people incline momentum towards the State and that's a huge load off the backs of Leftists.  They don't have to energize from near zero to go a whole other direction as Libertarians do.  So they can drop their ideas on this momentum and watch it grow.

Stranger:

The most Libertarians have said about strategy is that people need education. Nobody knows what to do once people have been educated.

Well the "to do" part is working from near zero.  The inertia is towards the State so Libertarians not only would need to have a tremendous amount of redirection power in some way, but also drop their ideas.  Leftists only need to drop their ideas.  Leftists have it easier.

To get a rolling 10 ton boulder to somehow shift its' direction as it rolls downhill is difficult indeed.

 

wilderness:

Well the "to do" part is working from near zero.  The inertia is towards the State so Libertarians not only would need to have a tremendous amount of redirection power in some way, but also drop their ideas.  Leftists only need to drop their ideas.  Leftists have it easier.

To get a rolling 10 ton boulder to somehow shift its' direction as it rolls downhill is difficult indeed.

I would say that maintaining a power structure is a lot more difficult than destroying one. Libertarians only need to give the boulder a push and it'll start rolling downhill.

Problem is Libertarians haven't figured out which way downhill is, so they're pushing in every direction.

Stranger:

wilderness:

Well the "to do" part is working from near zero.  The inertia is towards the State so Libertarians not only would need to have a tremendous amount of redirection power in some way, but also drop their ideas.  Leftists only need to drop their ideas.  Leftists have it easier.

To get a rolling 10 ton boulder to somehow shift its' direction as it rolls downhill is difficult indeed.

I would say that maintaining a power structure is a lot more difficult than destroying one. Libertarians only need to give the boulder a push and it'll start rolling downhill.

Problem is Libertarians haven't figured out which way downhill is, so they're pushing in every direction.

    If by difficult you mean the State needs to throw in, say in the U.S., trillions of dollars on keeping the status quo, then yes and no.  They already have the structure and legitimacy in place to go ahead and do these things.  Focusing on people's actions from day to day they consistently prop up the State.  So much so that it's unconscious for the most part now, for example, taxes on products aren't even readily known as to what those taxes even pay for.  Gas tax goes to maintaining roads.  Sales tax goes to what? This county I currently live in has a "Real Estate County Tax", but in other counties I've lived in there isn't such a tax and what's it for, i don't know I just pay it, etc.., etc...  Then the routine habits of going to vote for less than half the population, and it continues to go on.

    People on a daily basis perform one type of action or another that props up the State.  How many actions, other than words-in-action, are performed each day that very clear distinguishable enclaves are in place for social activities to take place without State interference?  

    I'm not saying we aren't getting anywhere.  I know we are.  I know.  But the momentum for State propping is already rolling downhill and socialists just merely need to add their pet project ideas on this gravy train.  They aren't sitting around talking about what ways they need to get some structure developed outside of the internet before the internet falls into the hands of their opponents amongst other things discussed in this thread.  They already have the buildings, process, and personnel performing real-time tasks.  People in this thread are talking about action that can be taken.  The State is way past that point.  They have actions that have been taken for centuries.  The free market is under the carpet and alive and well, yet, the inertia is stronger to embrace the State and their actions and structures have already been established.  I can't be saying anything new to you surely.

    As to libertarians pushing in every direction, I don't know what you mean.

 

I think education is what is important.  However, I agree that more action is needed.  In other words, libertarians need to start PROSELYTIZING!  Until we get out and start knocking on doors and making converts, we probably will not make much of an impact.  We need to find those that are inclined towards liberty and get them converted!

Anyways that is my thoughts.

First post.

 

Lots of very interesting thoughts in this thread.  I'll try to keep this quick.

- Developing new technologies and businesses that are resistant to the state is a great idea.  I don't know how to help and I don't have the money to invest in infrastructure right now.  Perhaps the first order of business would be for professionals to form a company or association.  In general though we do need practical things we can do besides campaign.

- Education is extremely important.  Even though right now the Statist train is thundering ahead, at the same time it's wheels are showing signs of coming off.  The economic future is very uncertain for the USA, and Obama has made things even more precarious.  If there is another major political/economic event, there will be a choice for the people:  totalitarianism or freedom.  Will people reject the failed Federal Government, or dissolve any semblance of States for perceived security?  More people today know about Ron Paul, the Fed, Progressivism, the constitution.  The more people that are educated about liberty the better chance it has during a pivotal point.  So to suggest that somehow education "isn't working" is a bit too shortsighted and you might be kicking yourself when real opportunities for change emerge.  Especially when these ideas are currently gaining ground, not losing it.

- Assuming that totalitarianism did win out, though, I have to agree with another poster that eventually it will fall of its own weight.  Each human being that is born possesses natural rights; you can stamp it out in one human being but there will always be another.

 

 

kurlare:

First post.

Welcome, kurlare.

wilderness:

I'm not saying we aren't getting anywhere.  I know we are.  I know.

If you know, then tell us, where are we?

That's what I meant when I said Libertarians are pushing in every direction. They don't know where they ought to go.

Stranger:

wilderness:

I'm not saying we aren't getting anywhere.  I know we are.  I know.

If you know, then tell us, where are we?

That's what I meant when I said Libertarians are pushing in every direction. They don't know where they ought to go.

I know due to nothing really profound or much of a breakthrough, but I know cause I've come across a lot of people that view the government in a very different light than I would have come across some years ago.  Other people introduced me to view of what the U.S. Constitution is all about, first, in a way that I never was taught, then secondly with the help of others have been awakened to how the government perverts the law, fixes the economy, and screws people left and right.  I knew much of this already, but didn't have the specific details of the data.  But this is nothing but education so I wasn't trying to say anything that shocking.

As to where we ought to go, I see what you mean now.  Maybe now that many people have awakened the next step as in any new learning process is after we learn enough eventually we'll understand what we need to do.  Maybe it's a numbers game, I'm waiting for critical mass of "knowers", and just the right moment to make the strategic impact.  I think we all are pushing, but without enough strength of our own which sometimes means we just need more people, cause this statist boulder is huge and moving fast.  A small number of people aren't going to push it significantly enough to move it a millimeter or maybe we have.  If I don't know, and you don't know, is there anybody that knows?  If they know, then we can learn from them.  I hold out for a long term strategy and I don't want to play my cards to early and waste a potentially good hand.  

 

I agree with wilderness.  If you build up the ranks of "knowers" then there is a real an ability to effectuate change when a real opportunity arises. 

Also, I think that now is a particularly interesting time because the GOP has discredited itself and most independents do not want bigger government.  Education is just as important as ever.  You don't need that many more blows to the US economy and public faith in politicians to reach that point where a peaceful revolution could occur.

Nitroadict:

If the FSP or any other libertarians start getting smart about arming themselves to protect their own servers that allow privatized cyberspace with minimal next to no immediate interference from The Statist's, I would say then we are making good progress.

 

Create a business plan and let people know over at FreeKeene.com, or wherever. I know many FSP movers that would be interested in helping get something like this up and running.

liberty student:

Definitely missing are

• Libertarians Mariners For Peace
• The National LIbertarian Small Busines Alliance
• The Brotherhood of Libertarian Carpenters
• The Council of Libertarian Home Owners
• and such

I think freedom is too broad an interest to base special interest groups on. If not, democracies would preserve liberty better.

Consultant:

I think freedom is too broad an interest to base special interest groups on.

I don't see any reason why Carpenters cannot organize based along the lines of being carpenters AND libertarians.

That's retarded. We live in society. Having an idea or belief does not mean that you can delude yourself of that fact. Thinking that a libertarian should not call the fire department when their house is on fire (despite the fact that there are currently no other privatized options available) is ridiculous. And its akin to saying that a Republican should not pay taxes under Obama because he does not agree with the way money is being spent or an anarchist should not follow the laws they disagree with. Until your idea and your political philosophy becomes the mainstream you have to live in the real world, and however unfortunate, follow rules and beliefs you disagree with.

tabularasa:

That's retarded. We live in society. Having an idea or belief does not mean that you can delude yourself of that fact. Thinking that a libertarian should not call the fire department when their house is on fire (despite the fact that there are currently no other privatized options available) is ridiculous. And its akin to saying that a Republican should not pay taxes under Obama because he does not agree with the way money is being spent or an anarchist should not follow the laws they disagree with. Until your idea and your political philosophy becomes the mainstream you have to live in the real world, and however unfortunate, follow rules and beliefs you disagree with.

It's the onion, it's supposed to be retarded (and humerous).  Even though I'm a Libertarian, I still thought it was funny.

liberty student:

Consultant:

I think freedom is too broad an interest to base special interest groups on.

I don't see any reason why Carpenters cannot organize based along the lines of being carpenters AND libertarians.

They could, but they have less of an incentive to. At a given point in time, free market losses (e.g. jobs via bankruptcy) are more concentrated than the wins (customers). As a result, in a democracy, it is more economical for politicians to cater to those concentrated losses (bail-outs, socialism) than to the broader population of winners.

As the message of freedom is the same across professions and social strata, there are economies of scale that make it more efficient to organize freedom initiatives on a more general level. That's why we have Campaing For Liberty while unions are organised around economic sectors. 

I am interested in your point of view. Do you reject the notion that a democracy favors socialist/corporatist special interest groups, or do you see other forces that counter this? Also, how do you explain that, in a market that does not discriminate against 'libertarian carpenters', these people have not already set up their organisation?

Consultant:

They could, but they have less of an incentive to. At a given point in time, free market losses (e.g. jobs via bankruptcy) are more concentrated than the wins (customers). As a result, in a democracy, it is more economical for politicians to cater to those concentrated losses (bail-outs, socialism) than to the broader population of winners.

We have a misunderstanding.  I am a rabid anarcho-capitalist, not a minarchist.  I have no interest in gaining any attention from politicians whatsoever.  In fact, the less they pay attention to what I would like to do, the better.

Consultant:

As the message of freedom is the same across professions and social strata, there are economies of scale that make it more efficient to organize freedom initiatives on a more general level. That's why we have Campaing For Liberty while unions are organised around economic sectors. 

I have no idea what any of this means.

Consultant:

I am interested in your point of view. Do you reject the notion that a democracy favors socialist/corporatist special interest groups, or do you see other forces that counter this?

I reject democracy outright.

Consultant:

Also, how do you explain that, in a market that does not discriminate against 'libertarian carpenters', these people have not already set up their organisation?

I thought of it first?  Or rather, as currently conceived by many, it is not able to add value to the market.  What I am proposing is different.  I am talking about engaging libertarians to declare their free market credentials throught their branding and professional/social affiliations.  And I think it can be profitable to do so, if we treat liberty as a special interest, which in this society, I would say is fairly accurate.