Discussion about anarchy vs pragmatic libertarianism, and the FSP at neo-lib

[Rocketman]

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 ?, 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.

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.

Yes, that's exactly what I think we should be trying to do. ?Let's keep at it.

Hiya Kat!? Thanks for the welcome!

[CNHT]

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.

[AlanM]

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 ?, 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.

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.

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.

[Russell Kanning]

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.

[CNHT]

We don't have to agree on everything to want more liberty.

...amen