Politics is an immoral dead-end

[srqrebel]

I work politically because I don't want to make it easy for the self selected government types to decide that good people like you are outsiders/dangerous/targets.  If everyone who believed in freedom dropped out and went pacifist I have no doubt we'd all be rounded up.  Some of us, tactically, need to stay involved to prevent deathcamps for pacifists.  Maybe Russell doesn't fear martyrdom, but I fear seeing my friends martyred.  That is why I stay connected.  Perhaps I don't have the courage of a martyr, but I don't believe in any heavenly reward, so that makes me value this life and those in it pretty highly.

Fear is precisely what keeps so many anarchists acting within the system.

Be careful -- fear is blinding.  When one is under the influence of fear, it takes colossal effort to see things from any other perspective.

Eli, I will address your questions soon... they take a little more time to formulate a response, than I have available today

[Eli]

This guy is pretty smart but I can't understand what he is saying when he names his radio show.  Can you link his site?

Eli, Stefan Molyneux's podcast is called Freedomain Radio.  Here's the link: www.freedomainradio.com.

10Q

[Eli]

Well just finished listening.  "We will not reach freedom in our lifetime..." guess he is not a freestate project endorser.

[Jacobus]

Does anyone have any actual metrics on the effectiveness of the various strategies we employ? Or is this going to neverendingly be a "my strategy is better than yours" argument with nothing but people's opinions, hopes, fears, and anecdotes to back it up?

I think that different approaches work better on different time scales.  The in-system activism (running campaigns and voting) works better for converting existing pro-liberty sentiment into less government.  The out-of-system activism (media and civdis) works better for persuading people that liberty is better than government. 

If we were all farmers trying to grow liberty, the out-of-system activists are the ones planting seeds and looking for new fields to plant in.  The in-system activists are the ones harvesting the crops. 

[Vitruvian]

Does anyone have any actual metrics on the effectiveness of the various strategies we employ? Or is this going to neverendingly be a "my strategy is better than yours" argument with nothing but people's opinions, hopes, fears, and anecdotes to back it up?

The central issue of this thread is not the "effectiveness" of political action vs. non-political action, but rather the moral divide between them.  The relative efficacy of the two methods is of secondary importance.

[J’raxis 270145]

Does anyone have any actual metrics on the effectiveness of the various strategies we employ? Or is this going to neverendingly be a "my strategy is better than yours" argument with nothing but people's opinions, hopes, fears, and anecdotes to back it up?

The central issue of this thread is not the "effectiveness" of political action vs. non-political action, but rather the moral divide between them.  The relative efficacy of the two methods is of secondary importance.

The central issue of this thread keeps getting lost when other people's comments drag it off-topic. I was responding to some of these comments (one example) in which people are merely discussing effectiveness.

[Kat Kanning]

It's the political brand activism that needs a new home.  It seems to me that we're an embarrassment/problem to the political types when they're trying to get elected or smooze with some politician.  Example:  a freestater was running for office.  I offered ad space for free for that run (this was a while back).  I was sneered at:  it was obvious the person found the Keene Free Press too politically incorrect for him to place an ad in.

For myself, I also think that political action = force, so I don't care to do anything to promote it, and don't want to engage in it.  I'm not going to be taking a magnifying glass to the forum for anything 'political' to delete.  If you want to talk about getting such and such bill passed, or so and so elected to public office, it would be better done somewhere else.  It's incompatible with what Russell and I are trying to accomplish, which is creating a voluntary society.  You aren't going to get to a free society by using unfree methods, i.e. force.  Someone posted on one of Lauren's youtube or newspaper articles, "You aren't going to force freedom on me."  It sounds funny, but it actually makes a certain amount of sense.  How can it be right to force people to have less government, if it's big government they want?  Seems to me that the only options we have, if we want a free, voluntary society, are to convince people that big government is not desirable, or to separate ourselves from those who want big government.  So far, the newspaper, civil disobedience, and demonstrations are ways we've tried of showing people that big government isn't the way to go.  I think civil disobenience is the most effective of those.  Thank goodness we have brave people like Lauren on our side!

I've never been ashamed of you, or Lauren, or Russell.  I fear for you sometimes, but I'm mighty proud of you. 

See Rochelle's latest rant about us for an example of what I mean.  It's better for the political guys to divide from us.  I don't see why they're upset about it.  They're constantly saying we're ruining it for them.  I'm glad to see that Rochelle is finally saying this stuff publically instead of behind our backs.

[MaineShark]

And last and least, the CivDis.  It gets lots of media, and while usually negative PR, sometimes any PR is good.  You've attracted new eyeballs to the FSP, and new movers, perhaps at the cost of hundreds or thousands of potential supporters.  I've personally seen multiple emails saying that Russell was the reason that someone _wasn't_ willing to move to NH.  Stupid, and I don't think that sort of person would be a good activist anyway... but it's still a result of the negative press.  But at the end of the day, did the CivDis accomplish it's goal?  No.  Not once, in any of the NH cases so far... And we can point out times it's hurt the cause.

As I've said before, neither method can possibly win, alone.

"They" are too strong for civil disobedience and other apolitical actions to defeat them.

The idea of using the methods of the State to destroy the State is just asinine.  Can't be done.

But the political methods can weaken the State to the point that the apolitical methods can take over.

In isolation, both methods will fail.  Only working in concert will they succeed.

Are Lauren's methods going to accomplish something, right now?  No.  The State is too strong.  Are they potentially going to cause some level of damage to the cause of liberty?  Yes.  But it is necessary to keep the fires of change smoldering, for the time when the will be fanned into something bigger.  If that requires some "expense" to accomplish, it is an expense that must be paid.

Joe

[David]

How can it be right to force people to have less government, if it's big government they want?  Seems to me that the only options we have, if we want a free, voluntary society, are to convince people that big government is not desirable, or to separate ourselves from those who want big government.  So far, the newspaper, civil disobedience, and demonstrations are ways we've tried of showing people that big government isn't the way to go.  I think civil disobenience is the most effective of those.  Thank goodness we have brave people like Lauren on our side!

Bingo!  Very well stated.

Yup.

[J’raxis 270145]

As I've said before, neither method can possibly win, alone.

"They" are too strong for civil disobedience and other apolitical actions to defeat them.

The idea of using the methods of the State to destroy the State is just asinine.  Can't be done.

But the political methods can weaken the State to the point that the apolitical methods can take over.

In isolation, both methods will fail.  Only working in concert will they succeed.

This.

[Eli]

Just listening to freedomainradio.com podcast 7. Argument from morality.  His first point is that there is no state, only people.

[Russell Kanning]

Russell.  You say 'strike the root' a lot.  What is your particular strategy for this.  What would you suggest (have suggested, I'll gladly read another thread) for this.  Voting doesn't do.  But what would, how would it work.  Your path from here (RW) to ther (ideal world) seems so....faith based.

I get the phrase from Civil Disobedience. I get some of my ideas of what steps to take from that essay also. I have a reading list on my wiki page, if you want to know why I am doing things and why I think they will work.
I have faith that proper steps will lead me down the right path. It is not a "leap of faith" with no concrete reasons behind it. My faith is in real things and that certain things are the right ones to do and others would be wrong.

[Vitruvian]

Just listening to freedomainradio.com podcast 7. Argument from morality.  His first point is that there is no state, only people.

This is exactly the point I and others (srqrebel, anthonyjpugh, Faber, etc.) have been arguing.  The State has no existence beyond that of the individuals who comprise it.  Molyneux calls the State, Society, etc., "conceptual frameworks": they are shorthand terms for groups of individuals, nothing more.

[Russell Kanning]

I think the most effective is the newspaper, then demonstrations, and then least, the civil disobedience.

I think the cd is the most powerful. If your message is intriguing enough, then the media will (and has) picked it up with pretty favorable coverage ... or alternative media will spread the word ... or word of mouth will kick in. It is also directly walking towards a life free from tyranny.

Demonstrations are fun and sometimes help inform people ... or change the participants. And the government will go easier on you.

The newspaper is only as effective as the news and views it passes on ... if we were not also doing things ... someone would have to or we would have nothing to report on. This one is less painful though ... and the easiest path.

It is also not a surprise why this forum is busy ..... many of the members are actually doing stuff. If it was just another debate society it would not be very popular at all. The content is all important.

[Russell Kanning]

Does anyone have any actual metrics on the effectiveness of the various strategies we employ? Or is this going to neverendingly be a "my strategy is better than yours" argument with nothing but people's opinions, hopes, fears, and anecdotes to back it up?

anecdotes work for me ... they are real
some things are also right for me to do, even if noone else follows