In a way, we're a lot like the liberals...

[sevin]

Well, not exactly, but I've noticed a lot of Obama supporters' main complaint is that the rich businessmen are hoarding all the money and taking advantage of them. They feel their bosses treat them unfairly and that their bosses don't pay them what they should, so they want to "spread the wealth around."

Though many of them are lazy and wrong to criticize wealthy businessmen, they're right about the idea that they're being robbed. Unfortunately, they don't realize who is robbing them; namely, the government and the wealthy banksters who control the federal reserve.

A better way to approach them would be to suggest that wealthy bankers are screwing them out of their money, and that if they want more money and a better standard of living, they should focus on ending the Federal Reserve.

It seems this would be a Much better way to approach these people and get them on our side. Suggestions?

[zadrock]

Well, not exactly, but I've noticed a lot of Obama supporters' main complaint is that the rich businessmen are hoarding all the money and taking advantage of them. They feel their bosses treat them unfairly and that their bosses don't pay them what they should, so they want to "spread the wealth around."

Though many of them are lazy and wrong to criticize wealthy businessmen, they're right about the idea that they're being robbed. Unfortunately, they don't realize who is robbing them; namely, the government and the wealthy banksters who control the federal reserve.

A better way to approach them would be to suggest that wealthy bankers are screwing them out of their money, and that if they want more money and a better standard of living, they should focus on ending the Federal Reserve.

It seems this would be a Much better way to approach these people and get them on our side. Suggestions?

It's absolutely imperative that we educated the Left on monetary policy and the Fed. We CAN get them on our side. (I hope.)

Z

[tremendoustie]

Well, not exactly, but I've noticed a lot of Obama supporters' main complaint is that the rich businessmen are hoarding all the money and taking advantage of them. They feel their bosses treat them unfairly and that their bosses don't pay them what they should, so they want to "spread the wealth around."

Though many of them are lazy and wrong to criticize wealthy businessmen, they're right about the idea that they're being robbed. Unfortunately, they don't realize who is robbing them; namely, the government and the wealthy banksters who control the federal reserve.

A better way to approach them would be to suggest that wealthy bankers are screwing them out of their money, and that if they want more money and a better standard of living, they should focus on ending the Federal Reserve.

It seems this would be a Much better way to approach these people and get them on our side. Suggestions?

Give that man a cigar!! One must approach people from perspectives they are comfortable with. For Liberals, that means emphasizing less war, and more civil liberties, and emphasizing how the government screws the little guy -- and that that's always how it's going to be if government has the power -- since money buys influence. The constitution, one can tell them (correctly), was set up to protect the little guy's rights against government corporatism and abuse. We don't need redistribution of wealth, we just need big business and banking to stop using the government to steal reams of money from us, and we'll be fine.

To a conservative, one can talk about how one has a right to economic liberty -- the republican party has traditionally believed in much smaller government, no department of education, etc. But in order to have economic liberty, we must stop occupying the world! We simply can't afford to have troops in 130 countries, and expect that people will be free economically. Also, we must protect people against "big government" (good word to use with conservatives) which uses supposed economic, political, and social crises to take our civil and economic rights away. We should let people be free do make their own decisions (free from big government!), and restore more power to local and state government.

At least that's the kind of approach that works for me.

[sevin]

Give that man a cigar!! One must approach people from perspectives they are comfortable with. For Liberals, that means emphasizing less war, and more civil liberties, and emphasizing how the government screws the little guy -- and that that's always how it's going to be if government has the power -- since money buys influence. The constitution, one can tell them (correctly), was set up to protect the little guy's rights against government corporatism and abuse. We don't need redistribution of wealth, we just need big business and banking to stop using the government to steal reams of money from us, and we'll be fine.

To a conservative, one can talk about how one has a right to economic liberty -- the republican party has traditionally believed in much smaller government, no department of education, etc. But in order to have economic liberty, we must stop occupying the world! We simply can't afford to have troops in 130 countries, and expect that people will be free economically. Also, we must protect people against "big government" (good word to use with conservatives) which uses supposed economic, political, and social crises to take our civil and economic rights away. We should let people be free do make their own decisions (free from big government!), and restore more power to local and state government.

At least that's the kind of approach that works for me.

This is what I'm talking about! A new approach to reaching people on the left and the right without alienating ourselves.

[Kludge]

With the left, we occupy those nations in a humanitarian peace-keeping effort. "Change", "Hope"

With the right, we occupy them to kill terrorists. "Country First"


With the left, we infringe on freedoms to ensure that the hopeless are protected.

With the right, we infringe on freedoms to ensure that the defenseless are protected.


The left are already on our side when our views are aligned -- as are the right. Most people simply don't know what they are ideologically. They never defined themselves nor justified their beliefs. They are the politically homeless and the most dangerous political foe against libertarianism.


It doesn't matter how we skew our message, the masses want a personality cult as they enviously attack our movement as one.

[berrybunches]

This is my approach, works wonders, much better than insulting people like I have heard a lot of people do.
Like the other day someone mentioned teh bailout money, I said "well actually they don't have that money they can just legally print it out of thin air whenever they want and that's what causes inflation, so you end up working your job the same amout of hours for less money this way" and I went to use words such as "rich elitist bastards", "corporatism" "greedy bankers" and so on giving it that populist, emotional, they are out to get you, feel like the left does with issues.

These were far left people, I planted a seed. I do this often.

[Conza88]

With the left, we occupy those nations in a humanitarian peace-keeping effort. "Change", "Hope"

With the right, we occupy them to kill terrorists. "Country First"

With the left, we infringe on freedoms to ensure that the hopeless are protected.

With the right, we infringe on freedoms to ensure that the defenseless are protected.

The left are already on our side when our views are aligned -- as are the right. Most people simply don't know what they are ideologically. They never defined themselves nor justified their beliefs. They are the politically homeless and the most dangerous political foe against libertarianism.

It doesn't matter how we skew our message, the masses want a personality cult as they enviously attack our movement as one.

Well said.

For the thread:

How to Sell Liberty (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_shEnY_lcQI) (3 part series)

I plan to join the debating thingo at Uni... yet to go, but I am guessing many marxists spouting pure bullshit.

If I was to address them, I'd go after what the left supports...

Anti-War, Pro-Civil Liberties, etc etc..

If you are Anti-War, you HAVE to be pro Gold Standard. i.e No central bank, fiat currency, fractional reserve.

Pro-Civil Liberties - anti-state... etc :)