http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=650
This dissusion has developed into a discussion about "pragmatic" libertarianism, vs. mainstreme libertarianism and anarchy. It's also about the Free State Project.
So if anybody wants to help out in the discussion, to help promote the Free State Project, or join in the discusion about libertarian vs. neo-lib or anarchy, any help would be apreciated.
I kind of dropped the ball, and said I didn't want Neo-Libs to come to NH. (Because I'm not sure that they wouldn't be just as statist if not more so, then current people in power.) But Rocketman was trying to promote the FSP there, and I kind of stepped on his toes. I've made a few replies to try to smooth things over -- with-out compromising my oppinions, but I'm not the most tactfull person, and would apreciate any help on any front in this discussion.
Tracy
So what is a neo-libertarian?
Another label?
Quote from: russellkanning on April 05, 2005, 04:26 PM NHFT
So what is a neo-libertarian?
I'm sure it was discussed somewhere else on this forum, but, a search did not find it.? Maybe the other forum.? You're not one, Russell.
Go to Tracy's link, above.
They're libertarians who seem to have it in for "mainstream" libertarians, because we're too pure, and therefore completely ineffective. So, they spend half of their time critizing the efforts of "pure" libertarians all the while telling themselves they're "helping libertarianism" by making it more "palitable to the masses." As such, they spend the other half of their time defending U.S. interference in foreign afairs.
Tracy
ahhh
See, Russell, I told ya. Your not one of them. 8)
I was hoping I was neo-? ....not just old-?
No Russell...you're just OLD! :o
good work over there tracy!
Hey folks,
Finally made my way to the Underground. ?Some of you will remember me from my visit in December (tall, bearded guy, currently in Kentucky). ?Before I get into this topic, let me just give you all in NH a quick "attaboy" for all the great work you're already doing, paving the way for others to follow.
QuoteThey're libertarians who seem to have it in for "mainstream" libertarians, because we're too pure, and therefore completely ineffective. So, they spend half of their time critizing the efforts of "pure" libertarians all the while telling themselves they're "helping libertarianism" by making it more "palitable to the masses." As such, they spend the other half of their time defending U.S. interference in foreign afairs.
Could be you're painting with a rather large brush, Tracy.? I'd say "neolibertarianism" has barely established itself as a term. ?I think lots of libertarians are tempted to begin using it simply because they are disillusioned with the LP, and have one or more significant disagreements with the LP platform (usually defense). ?Neolibertarians seem typically (and to me, annoyingly) pro-war, but at least moderately libertarian on other stuff and sometimes really libertarian. ?
The major premise of neolibertarianism, as explained on the website Tracy mentions, is that extreme libertarian political action will always be largely unsuccessful because the masses will always demand big government and get it. ?This is understandable perception, especially if a person spends much time observing mainstream political debate; some libertarian ideas are already quite palatable to the masses, whereas others (lets sell all the national parks to private interests) currently sound like a bunch of bananas to 99% of the population. ?
Neolibertarians simply seem to be less concerned with pure libertarian philosophy and more concerned with reducing government, even if change is very gradual. ?They currently focus on issues that seem politically viable, and ignore (temporarily, I hope) issues that might damage their credibility. ?My hunch is that, if they move to NH and become part of the action, they will realize more fully the extent to which freedom CAN be restored. ?Yeah, I've got a soft spot for uncompromising, principled "extremists," but I'm all for recruiting neolibertarians to NH if they can agree to the Statement of Intent. ?Their current approach has its merits, I think, but we all know that playing rhetorical defense against big government on the national level can only achieve so much. ?I think a lot of moderate, CNN-watching neolibertarians would become more aggressive if they could be convinced the FSP is a viable instrument for regaining lost freedom, and in fact, the only one.
So please, be patient with the incrementalists!? It could be they just don't know any better! ;D
See y'all this summer.
Matt
QuoteCould be you're painting with a rather large brush, Tracy.
YEs, It's certainly possible. I believe many of them are probably simply pessimistic libertarians. In which case, all we need to do is give them hope and show them libertarianism IS possible.
But many of them are hawks. I'm carrying on private discussions with several of them over e-mail now, and WOW, one of them I'm sure would be opposing our activism in the name of "being practical."
Anyway, I hope I salvaged some of your efforts over their Rocketman. Honestly, I didn't mean to step on anybody's toes.
However, I do worry that some of them would do more harm then good to our movement.
Anyway,
Tracy
Quote from: Scott Roth on April 06, 2005, 04:15 PM NHFT
No Russell...you're just OLD! :o
Russell's not Old, shit Scott, you're not even Old!
Welcome Matt!
Tracy, ?
Again, no harm done. ?It has never been my intention to recruit statists, and I wouldn't want them to come to NH either. ?It's just that I remember how I felt before I began to believe the FSP could work. ?I could rail against the state almost as consistently as Russell ?>:D, but the real challenge was making libertarian ideas palatable to "regular" people, and LP candidates rarely seemed to demonstrate much political savvy. ?Since I've been teaching college English for six years, this has given me a lot of practice discussing politics with a mainstream audience, most of whom are recent govschool graduates. ?It has definitely taught me to be patient even with statists, many of whom simply don't know any better but are quite capable of seeing the light if one can find the right approach.? Often, all it takes is for a person to understand one issue fom a libertarian perspective, then apply that analysis to other issues to finally comprehend how government really operates and what government really is.
QuoteI believe many of them are probably simply pessimistic libertarians. In which case, all we need to do is give them hope and show them libertarianism IS possible.
Yes, that's exactly what I think we should be trying to do. ?Let's keep at it.
Hiya Kat!? Thanks for the welcome!
Was reading about this and it's the age old problem of who are your allies and who are your enemies?
At CNHT we have learned to work with those with whom we agree on things to make those things better. If we have other ideas that some individuals do not like, it's too bad. Take us or leave us.
For libertarians to mount a campaign to discredit 'neolibs' would seem to me to be counterproductive and not looking at the 'big' picture.
For isn't true libertarianism's belief that others should be left alone to have their beliefs?
Otherwise it's hypocrisy. If someone wants to come here to work on reducing the laws in any way they can within the system, what's the fuss?
As for being hawks, my take is that you can support the soldiers without supporting war in general and thus not necessarily be a hawk, but since war is happening why undermine the morale of the soldiers who are already there? Each situation is different and the government DOES have the constitutional mandate to protect our shores, even though we may not know to what extent we are being threatened (because I don't believe we are told everything either.)
Just my 2 cents worth, having come from the 'conservative' camp....as many others I know who are working from within the system toward more liberty.
Quote from: Rocketman on April 07, 2005, 09:47 AM NHFT
Tracy, ?
Again, no harm done. ?It has never been my intention to recruit statists, and I wouldn't want them to come to NH either. ?It's just that I remember how I felt before I began to believe the FSP could work. ?I could rail against the state almost as consistently as Russell ?>:D, but the real challenge was making libertarian ideas palatable to "regular" people, and LP candidates rarely seemed to demonstrate much political savvy. ?Since I've been teaching college English for six years, this has given me a lot of practice discussing politics with a mainstream audience, most of whom are recent govschool graduates. ?It has definitely taught me to be patient even with statists, many of whom simply don't know any better but are quite capable of seeing the light if one can find the right approach.? Often, all it takes is for a person to understand one issue fom a libertarian perspective, then apply that analysis to other issues to finally comprehend how government really operates and what government really is.
QuoteI believe many of them are probably simply pessimistic libertarians. In which case, all we need to do is give them hope and show them libertarianism IS possible.
Yes, that's exactly what I think we should be trying to do. ?Let's keep at it.
Hiya Kat!? Thanks for the welcome!
Good insights. In order to achieve our goals we are going to have to find those people who can think. Trying the one issue perspective can have success IMO. It worked with me. ;) #1, it opens people to possibilities, instead of locking their minds away, thinking we are just "kooks" or fringe thinkers. #2, we make strides towards freedom issue by issue.
I don't mind working with people who might be called "neolibertarians" if they want to move slowly...that sure seems better than not at all. :)
Sometimes I get tired of people who want to debate or even rail against the government, but are too afraid to rock the boat even a little bit. We don't have to agree on everything to want more liberty. :)
Quote from: russellkanning on April 08, 2005, 05:47 PM NHFT
We don't have to agree on everything to want more liberty. :)
...amen