Recovering Political Activist Podcast - Stef is wrong! (imho)

[DaProle]

With all due respect Stef, 99% of libertarians I know or heard about, got into libertarianism thru Ron Paul's campaign. In fact, I think majority of your listeners got to you via the same route. I love your work and I'm totally into ancap stuff, but let's be real: you are a second step on a ladder where Ron Paul's POLICITAL campaings were the first step. You are harvesting his seeds.

Non-participation in political action is just ingoring our chance to wake people up. Your philosophy is an advanced level of libertarianism. To get to the average citizen, the most effective way is to get a jolt of truth via political campaing because this is the only time people pay attention to these things. Get them to google things, discover more. Ultimately, they'll come to you, but political action is a necessary -- albeit politically futile -- step. We don't have to choose one or the other. We can have both.

[J-William]

 

With all due respect Stef, 99% of libertarians I know or heard about, got into libertarianism thru Ron Paul's campaign. In fact, I think majority of your listeners got to you via the same route. I love your work and I'm totally into ancap stuff, but let's be real: you are a second step on a ladder where Ron Paul's POLICITAL campaings were the first step. You are harvesting his seeds.

Non-participation in political action is just ingoring our chance to wake people up. Your philosophy is an advanced level of libertarianism. To get to the average citizen, the most effective way is to get a jolt of truth via political campaing because this is the only time people pay attention to these things. Get them to google things, discover more. Ultimately, they'll come to you, but political action is a necessary -- albeit politically futile -- step. We don't have to choose one or the other. We can have both.

 

With all due respect DaProle, 99% of libertarians I know or heard about, got into libertarianism thru Ayn Rand...

I personally know zero people who came in through Ron Paul. 

[Guest darkskyabove]

Yep. Rand it was. Rather ironic in that she wanted no part of libertarianism. Don't remember the specifics, but seem to recall it had to due with the LP not founding itself on principles. Rand was a stickler for principle.

Of course, let's not forget Murray Rothbard. Though he never acquired a "political" following, he probably planted more viable seeds than any other, some of which took years to sprout.

Ron Paul is merely the newest phenom on the political chopping block. It only took thirty years for people to "suddenly" recognize what he stood for.

[NateForLiberty]

While I did come to libertarian ideas through Ron Paul, I know quite a few people (mainly my extended family) who would never consider those ideas because of Ron Paul. But once I dropped the politics, they accepted libertarian ideas more easily. Pretty fascinating what packaging does for people :-/

[kusok]

<--- thru Ron Paul.

 

I wonder, in a purely fantasy situation, if Ron Paul was one vote away from winning the presidency, and everyone voted except Stef. Would Stef take a walk down to his local public school and vote for Ron Paul? 

 

 

[Agalloch]

 

<--- thru Ron Paul.

 

I wonder, in a purely fantasy situation, if Ron Paul was one vote away from winning the presidency, and everyone voted except Stef. Would Stef take a walk down to his local public school and vote for Ron Paul? 

 

 

 

No.

1. That would violate his principles. This is a no brainer, voting for Ron Paul is a validation of the State, and is an action hee has explicitly stated he is opposition to.

2. And this is so important, so obvious and has been repeated so often it's no funny. There is no link between Ron Pauls election and Libertarianism being achieved through the State. The first hurdle is the difference between his stated goals and actions. Maybe nothing as obvious as Obama saying he would shut down Guantanamo and then not doing, but suddenly there are practical hurdles, or Political obsticles etc. Then there's the fact that the President has no power over the State. We're talking about a monopoly on violence that has no reason to do as anybody says. The mechanism of the State is designed to and will successfully prevent and rollback of any statist institution. Every single major institution that is closed will result in massive Strikes, violence and resistance.

3. Because of 2, Libertarianism would be demonised further and be unpalatable to the majority of people for another 100 or so years, setting back Libertarianism further. See Margaret Thatcher effect upon "capitalism" and "free market" in the UK.

Also, a couple of technicalities.

0. It's not really a point for the position, but it's always worth
pointing out that a hypothetical is meaningless if it could never
happen.

1. Stef is Canadian, he can't vote in U.S. elections.

2. Voting doesn't decide who is President of America, the electoral college is in place with the explicit intention of making sure the electorate don't make a "mistake", for example voting for Ron Paul, and would not elect him. This is a case of people within the system being blind to it's reality. Nobody in the west believes Middle Eastern (e.g. Iran/Afghanistan) elections are genuine, and the idea that America elections have any link between voting and who is elected is a joke outside America.

3. You don't know the current results of an election before you vote.

[kusok]

^^^ Agalloch, 

I agree of course, but a couple of notes:

 

1. It can be argued that voting for Ron Paul is a protest and a move against the state, not a validation of it. Paul is an admitted anarchist, he is simply taking small steps to it, since he is afraid of scaring the brainwashed population who are afraid of the word anarchy. 

 

2. Paul does have a record of being honest, if anything more honest than other politicians. Thus there is a chance he will order troops back as a commander in chief can etc. Given the ever increased powers of the executive branch of government, Paul would have an effect more so than a simple ornament on a hood of a car. 

 

3. ok.

 

Technicalities:

0. I know, just wondering. 

1. I know...

2. I know...

3. I know...

 

 

[mikrob]

 Voting for Ron Paul might make some things better...bringing back the troops, for example. But it also might lead to civil unrest due to cutbacks. And I don't think anyone can solve the debt problem. Voting for Ron Paul might be good intentions but I am sure he'd be frustrated throughout his term in office. There is no saviour.