Scott F: Became Individualist feminist.
Became Individualist feminist.
How does that happen?
CrazyCoot: A few questions for the members of this forum; please feel free to answer all or none of them. 1) For those of who did not start off your life as libertarians please say a little bit about your evolution. Personally I was first a moderate Democrat due to family tradition, then what be best described as a somewhat hawkish 'libertarian' (P.J. O'Rourke style Republican) then I realized that the contradictions were too glaring. 2) Is a provisional dictatorship necessary to undo the damage?
A few questions for the members of this forum; please feel free to answer all or none of them.
1) For those of who did not start off your life as libertarians please say a little bit about your evolution. Personally I was first a moderate Democrat due to family tradition, then what be best described as a somewhat hawkish 'libertarian' (P.J. O'Rourke style Republican) then I realized that the contradictions were too glaring.
2) Is a provisional dictatorship necessary to undo the damage?
Of course not. It's like saying we need to bulldoze New Orleans in totality after Katrina so we can rebuild it.
3) Would the collapse of society as we know it be necessary for libertarianism to get a full hearing?
I think history shows that people become more anti-libertarian during social crises. The best route to liberty is evolutionary not revolutionary. Unfortunately, that means that a lot of obvious improvements to freedom will come very, very slowly.
4) Is focusing on education and changing people's minds an approach that is fast enough to keep enough with government growth?
I think now that we've entered the digital age, the government is pretty much screwed in its attempts to control information. The nature of widely-available, strong cryptography means that it's pretty much always possible, one way or another, to transmit prohibited speech no matter what measures the authorities take. For example, Canada really rattled the cage recently when they started forcing people to reveal their passwords in customs on penalty of blacklisting. People, of course, complied. But there are so many ways around it that it is a futile effort. To keep your data safe, just upload it as an encrypted file and remove it from your computer, travel to Canada, then access the file once inside Canada. Reverse the process before you leave. There's no measure Canada could possibly take to prevent this from happening.
5) Given the anti-intellectual nature of capitalism, i.e. they're not paid as much as they'd like, how do you establish a broader base of support for libertarianism among academics given the ability of the state to use tax dollars to bribe them?
This question doesn't make any sense. If you mean, "how do you defeat the arguments of bribed intellectuals", the answer is that you defeat them in the same way you defeat anyone who is wrong... with reasons and evidence.
6) Are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future in terms of liberty?
Pessimistic short-term (especially in the US), optimistic long-term, especially everywhere except the US. Liberty really is inevitable. Even blood-pacts cannot prevent the inexorable grind of competition for opportunities for voluntary exchange. Sooner or later, the state - as we know it - will be ground to pieces by the machinery of freedom.
Clayton -
1) My father is libertarian though we didn't talk about it till I grew up more, all my immediate family members are basically libertarians through the influence of my father and I. I grew up watching Stossel, and I have always disliked and found authority disturbing, so I would say at the core I have always been libertarian even if I didn't identify as it. Before 2001 I was sort of nationalistic. After that, I turned towards libertarianism, though more of the socialist brand of it. Since then I have always been anti war, and pro human rights. I have always seen law as more restrictive. I saw myself as between limited government and none at all. Later I turned against socialism, and sought a place between capitalism and socialism. At some point I read Malcolm X's autobiography and Thoreau's Walden and Civil Disobedience. I would say those two books are the biggest influence on me politically and philosophically, they taught me simplicity, independence, peace between people is possible, free will, change is always possible whether personal or as a collective, being positive, and not to give in to evil. Slowly I opened up towards the free market, and found anarchocapitalism interesting, though not looking into it too far. I still cared about issues, but other things were keeping my mind busy (I always like researching something). More recently, the Ron Paul based movement got me more interested into free market libertarian ideas, I liked him purely based on his libertarian beliefs. I only read into Rothbard and Mises within the last year though. I'd describe myself as something between an anarchocapitalist or minarchist, but I prefer the libertarian label.
2) Seems like a bad idea. How can you undo the damage of unjust authority with more of it? That's socialism.
3) Hell no. Revolution is necessary, but society does not need to collapse, neither need it be violent. I oppose violent revolution, it seems to create a power vacuum for more government to seep through.
4) I would say it is the most effective general way to do it, people tend to go with the times, and popular opinion. This is the only way to strike at the root. I do think other action can help though.
5) Simple, take government control away from the government. Continuing what I was saying in the last post, I do believe that we can become part of the media, and part of the government. I believe the only way to find a solution is from inside the government and media itself.
6) Purely optimistic, I feel condemned to optimism, because pessimism only condemns the possibility of liberty.
Marko: Scott F: Became Individualist feminist. How does that happen?
Freedom has always been the only route to progress.
CrazyCoot: 6) Are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future in terms of liberty?
At the moment, I feel as if the circus is in town. I can't help shake it when I analyze current events or the world. I also am perplexed that people are driving drunk down the foggy road to serfdom. My only question is, "how long can they keep this up, with impunity, before driving off the cliff?"
To 1), a dose of Hoppe and Rand disabused me of any idiotic views on the world. Hallowed be their names.
Anti-parasitic/-things-that-no-one-wants you mean. There will be intellectual produce, just not suited to some disconnected elite.
And yes, anarcho-capitalism/-propertarianism/voluntaryism requires a revolution in how we conceptualise society, because it is revolutionary to be 100% consistent in our beliefs. ;)
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
Libertyandlife: Marko: Scott F: Became Individualist feminist. How does that happen? Individualist feminism came out as a reaction against current anti-male feminism. It is very strange how the movement to stop limits against women can create hatred for men.
Marko: Scott F: Became Individualist feminist. How does that happen? Individualist feminism came out as a reaction against current anti-male feminism. It is very strange how the movement to stop limits against women can create hatred for men.
No, I meant how does someone named Scott becomes a feminist?
CrazyCoot: 2) Is a provisional dictatorship necessary to undo the damage?
To be able to institute a Libertarian dictatorship, one should be a truly incredible human being: accomplished orator, thinker, tactician-strategist, authoritarian and lucky (basicaly a Rothbard+Lenin character). Such men are the rarest thing in history, but should one come about, we need not bother ourselves too much: he will institute a libertarian dictatorship, no mater what. We can't controll this, it shall either happen or not indipendently of our will.
CrazyCoot:3) Would the collapse of society as we know it be necessary for libertarianism to get a full hearing?
Students of collusion have a rule of thumb: when in any give market there are less than 4-5 players, collusion becomes possible. Today there are but two or three powers, hence we already live under a a World Government. There’s nowhere else to go from here, thus such a societal collapse will come about, I have not a doubt on that. Again, since we can’t influence it, we need not worry about its effects on our cause.
CrazyCoot:Is focusing on education and changing people's minds an approach that is fast enough to keep enough with government growth?
Let us not even try, you can’t beat the State at that. More than 80% of people never get reason. Assuming that those in this forum are a cross-section of society would be a grave mistake. Those that can comprehend reason and abstraction, and are lucky enough to run into well-articulate libertarian ideas, shall become libertarians, but forget about anyone else.
CrazyCoot:Given the anti-intellectual nature of capitalism, i.e. they're not paid as much as they'd like, how do you establish a broader base of support for libertarianism among academics given the ability of the state to use tax dollars to bribe them?
An even worse idea. Among the last few libertarian fables, I must say.
CrazyCoot:6) Are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future in terms of liberty?
“Brave King! Tarry awhile, because your days of travail will soon pass. Already the sun has risen behind the clouds of your misfortune, and soon it will shine forth!” The youngest of us shall have the satisfaction of shouting: “Can you see now? We’ve been telling you all along!”
Marko: Libertyandlife: Marko: Scott F: Became Individualist feminist. How does that happen? Individualist feminism came out as a reaction against current anti-male feminism. It is very strange how the movement to stop limits against women can create hatred for men. No, I meant how does someone named Scott becomes a feminist?
I reject Radical feminism,socialist/marxist feminism,Political lesbianism etc.
My feminism is Anti-state.I admit that gender roles are at very least part genetic though very likely are almost completely due to genetics.
I agree with much if not all of what Wendy Mcelroy says.I oppose legal privileges for men or women and currently we live under matriarchy not patriarchy.I support both men and women's rights as since as a libertarian I believe in all humans having rights so basically I automatically support feminism.
I'm not sure what you mean by , how could I become a feminist.
Could you clarify?
I don't really want to comment or read anything here.I have near zero in common with many of you.I may return periodically when there's something you need to know.
Near Mutualist/Libertarian Socialist.
^I'm okay with individualist feminists, cause I think it's ideas are things that most libertarians would agree with. But personally I feel in the present day feminism ingeneral has become unneccesary ideological baggage.
1) Apolitical most of my life. Marxist for a couple of months, quickly became disillusioned with the whole thing. "Ron Paul" Libertarian. Ancap now.
2) No. History tells us there have been very few dictators willing to give up their own power, or that of their Governments. I would not even trust the most ardent Libertarian in this role.
3) For me, the question is; in the event of a collapse, would we have a right to set up a national libertarian society? Or would we be better off finding like minded people, and those willing to accept our ideas, set up our own communities, and lead by example?
4) I guess it depends on how quickly you are expecting to see change. Rothbard knew it would not take place over night.
5) LaughingMan had a good answer to this one.
6) Optimistic, even the current Tea Party movement is a step in the right direction. The ideals are, at least. Although, it does not go far enough for me personally.
CrazyCoot: 1) For those of who did not start off your life as libertarians please say a little bit about your evolution. Personally I was first a moderate Democrat due to family tradition, then what be best described as a somewhat hawkish 'libertarian' (P.J. O'Rourke style Republican) then I realized that the contradictions were too glaring.
I started as a liberal democrat, much like everyone else. The search for a solution to poverty led me to study economics, which eventually led me to study Mises, then Rothbard, then eventually the economics of government with Hoppe. I consider myself a political economist.
Dictatorships are rarely provisional. What is needed is an end to the monopoly on law, which can be achieved with only a small minority of highly motivated partisans, and then an orderly bankruptcy and liquidation of the state.
CrazyCoot: 3) Would the collapse of society as we know it be necessary for libertarianism to get a full hearing?
It would make no difference whatsoever. In many places society collapsed and no one adopted libertarianism, in fact they often adopted pseudo-religions or voodoo-like cults to explain their collapse.
True reason is the province of only the elites of the elite class. They are the only ones that will give it a full hearing.
CrazyCoot:4) Is focusing on education and changing people's minds an approach that is fast enough to keep enough with government growth?
Education will never stop government growth. It will increase the number of reasonable people, but that may only result in their exclusion from power.
Only action can stop government.
CrazyCoot: 5) Given the anti-intellectual nature of capitalism, i.e. they're not paid as much as they'd like, how do you establish a broader base of support for libertarianism among academics given the ability of the state to use tax dollars to bribe them?
You cannot. You must manoeuvre around them and attack them at their core weakness.
I'm on the fence. Clearly anarchy is coming whether or not we want it, but whether or not we will enjoy more freedom or more prosperity depends on our ability to rebuild civilization.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power