DaProle Posted February 3, 2013 Posted February 3, 2013 If we are successful in raising kids peacefully as well as in drawing people away from political process, the rest of the crowd will still be controlling the machinery of the state including propaganda. Isn’t this a catch 22: we take people away from politics and therefore losing the voting battle to the violent and increasingly influential state control freaks? Wouldn’t this only solidify the state?
MrCapitalism Posted February 3, 2013 Posted February 3, 2013 It would solidify the state into the minds of fewer people, who command less respect in the rest of society. The struggle against the state isn't waged in election results, but in election turnout.
DaProle Posted February 4, 2013 Author Posted February 4, 2013 Election turnout matters only if there is threshold written in the law for election to be considered legitimate. Even if it is on the books, the participating violent majority would easily change it. As far as I know, there is no such threshold neither in the US or Canada at this point. So how the election turnout would solve the problem I described in the original post? It seems to me that as long as the violent voting majority (aka the actual minority in the society) controls levers of the state, we'll be screwed.
Mcattack Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 I'd be interested in knowing the numbers of people who would willingly do violence vs the numbers who just vote in support of it. I think once people in a given area outnumber the police with a moral theory their days are numbered.
MrCapitalism Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 Election turnout matters only if there is threshold written in the law for election to be considered legitimate. It won't matter because the government itself will no longer be considered legitimate. The laws will be on the books, there may be officials still in office (not the actual buildings, just the legal position), but it'll be like a small social club.
DaProle Posted February 6, 2013 Author Posted February 6, 2013 The problem is that the state will not just sit there idly. I already mentioned propaganda. They also have all the guns; they can simply enforce anything and for that they don't have to have half of population in the police or army. Do you realize that Toronto, for example, has only 2,500 police officers? That's roughly only 0.1% of population. Does it mean that we already won and they became irrelevant and cannot enforce anything? Of course not. It seems to me that the state will always be able to sustain the minimum level of compliance - it is a matter of survival for it. Our withdrawal from politics will help with that since they'll vote into laws mandatory public schooling, total gun ban, high taxation, mandatory CBC programming etc. while we... will be singing kumbaya? I guess my basic argument is that at the end of the day there has to be somebody who should go into the state legislatures and vote the statist shit down until the state's total dissolution. I understand the corruptubility argument but let's not forget that the voting base (us) would be different therefore the control over representatives could be more effective. Please note that I'm not advocating for "either or" solution, I'm advocating for more of an "and" solution e.i. Stafan's route on personal level AND political action which does have educational component as well. Majority of libertarians/ancaps I know got into libertarianism because of Ron Paul and his presidential campaigns and not because of Stef (sorry, Stefan!) even though I think Stef's message and ideas delivery is way more powerful. I'd be interested in knowing the numbers of people who would willingly do violence vs the numbers who just vote in support of it. I think once people in a given area outnumber the police with a moral theory their days are numbered.
johnnyj Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 I think the Path to Freedom is through spreading the basic ideas of philosophy and individual rights and the truth of the world we live in. As Stef says the internet is the Guntenburg Press of our times. The more people helping to spread the ideas the better. Blogging, commenting, discussing while being rational all helps. Creating your own videos and books for those with the desire and talent to do so. The focus should be on the young. The next generations who have not been beaten down by life yet. Who are disillusioned and angry but don't know why. Who can still be woken up from their Matrix before they become entrenched in maintaining the status quo. Ideas are like viruses. If they spread far enough and wide enough they will gain a life of their own. Then in the future there will arise great writers or thinkers or artists or activists (dare I say even politicians?) who will believe in the concepts of freedom, individual rights and the free market. It could only take one or two or a few of these future RED PILLED people to bring about major changes in society. Our job is to start spreading the virus.
Recommended Posts