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

[tracysaboe]

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

[Russell Kanning]

So what is a neo-libertarian?

[Scott Roth]

Another label?

[Lloyd Danforth]

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.

[GT]

Another label?

We have too many labels today...

[tracysaboe]

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

[Russell Kanning]

ahhh

[Lloyd Danforth]

See, Russell, I told ya.  Your not one of them.

[Russell Kanning]

I was hoping I was neo-? ....not just old-?

[Scott Roth]

No Russell...you're just OLD!

[Dave Ridley]

good work over there tracy!

[Rocketman]

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.

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.

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!

See y'all this summer.

Matt

[tracysaboe]

Could 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

[Lloyd Danforth]

No Russell...you're just OLD!

Russell's not Old, shit Scott, you're not even Old!

[Kat Kanning]

Welcome Matt!