BarryDonegan
11-30-2008, 12:26 PM
IMO, libertarianism includes Libertarian party guys, paleolibertarians, constitution party/john birchers, buchanan brigaders, and on the far extreme, the fiscal conservative republican types(giuliani, romney supporters)
we didn't have these guys during the primary because we had a neocon president, but we can use these ones on the far end to our aid on certain issues, so we should'nt count them out on every issue.
remember, politics is not as simple as electing a perfect candidate. its about pressuring politicians, getting them to accept planks, pushing certain legislation, etc, and we need allies.
also, as the government gets more tyrannical, those other groups will be forced to join us, the most noteable freedom fighters.
in my view, the best thing we can do is to have 3 tiers of guys, and everyone sortof decides on what they are, and sticks with it.
the paleolibertarian republican is one. this is the guy who straight up has libertarian views, but looks and has a lifestyle like B.J. Lawson. This type of guy should generally be involved as a republican and work hard for libertarian values from the inside. if the RP does not heed his warning, he would threaten voting LP as a way to cause pain, but would remain a valuable grassroots asset for republicans.
the big L Libertarian paleorepublican. This is the more hardcore radical libertarians, the type who will make war on drugs a primary issue and stuff like that, who will generally vote libertarian, however, will make it known that a republican who is pleasing to the paleolibertarians might get his vote. there would be an outright admission that the republican party CAN get his vote, and that if it does not seek it, he will do whatever he can to make their campaigns more expensive and to steal votes. This type of activism is pretty much leveraging political pain, the Falwell groups do it every year in the primary to push the candidate their way.
the activist/protester. This person should also make it clear what would get his or her vote, but should focus their efforts on protest and more antisocial concerns. bear in mind that if this is your way of doing things, you are somewhat of a political liability, so do not do stuff that associates you too much with candidates. you would bet he libertarian version of guys like Bill Ayers and the communist community organizer scene, so you would not want to associate too heavily with candidates, although it would be good to create some sort of a website where you make it clear if a candidate is someone you are considering, so when they are doing the political math they can keep your concerns in mind. A lot of 911 truthers fit this category, and while a lot of people in the RP movement are offended by these guys, you have to bear in mind that a lot of more antisocial, countercultural types have a natural skepticism and that this is a large voter group that we need to maintain. generally, they are doing something that we actually DO need, because, whether 911 was an inside job or not, it doesn't hurt to have a group of people who aren't scared to ask wildly unpopular questions, just we need to have a more concerted effort in dividing the public view of these people from the mainstream types (this is something that happens on the left... like By Any Means Necessary being a mainstream front for a violent radical communist group).
Basically, the trick here is to pick one of these sortof archetypes and to build a sortof set of guidelines for maximum efficiency.
we need the pundits and political analysts and campaign directors to know that this group is organized, fights tooth and nail on every issue, has networks, etc.
this also allows us to cultivate the libertarian party and influence in the republican party at the same time. this way when the republican party goes rogue we can go all in on the LP to show them what our numbers are, and when the RP acts right, we are able to influence it and keep it sane.
for this reason i think all of us should promote the LP and the RP. unfortunately, I am of the belief that, despite this years election cycle being complicated, we need to consider absorbing the Constitution Party into the Libertarian Party, as that division is unneccessary.
do we really need to divide the parties up over the issues of porn and drugs? can't we all agree that those are local issues and when we run a primary we will let our local LP figure out what were gonna do?
Im a staunch libertarian, but i am ok with having to have a battle of ideas in a primary about prostitution and drugs as long as were debating how to deal with it on the most local of levels.
the moral of the story is, for all the ideas we have for the future of the movement, we need an ALL OF THE ABOVE approach. We need a political party with growing levels of organization as an escape hatch, and we also need to take over the RP. We know that not everyone in our movement has a personality that is suited to each job, so lets divide it up based on what is most suitable to the individual. We also need the guys who aren't scared to go out and accuse the politicians of criminality and create an environment of skepticism. bear in mind that stuff that passes as conspiracy theory was legitimate political rhetoric between 1776-1812. Let's just divide up our public images into the right categories and get it done.
our opponents do this... Council on Foreign Relations is their mainstream arm... the Communist Party is their escape hatch party... the By Any Means Necessary, Students for Democratic Society, etc, are their protest arms.
we didn't have these guys during the primary because we had a neocon president, but we can use these ones on the far end to our aid on certain issues, so we should'nt count them out on every issue.
remember, politics is not as simple as electing a perfect candidate. its about pressuring politicians, getting them to accept planks, pushing certain legislation, etc, and we need allies.
also, as the government gets more tyrannical, those other groups will be forced to join us, the most noteable freedom fighters.
in my view, the best thing we can do is to have 3 tiers of guys, and everyone sortof decides on what they are, and sticks with it.
the paleolibertarian republican is one. this is the guy who straight up has libertarian views, but looks and has a lifestyle like B.J. Lawson. This type of guy should generally be involved as a republican and work hard for libertarian values from the inside. if the RP does not heed his warning, he would threaten voting LP as a way to cause pain, but would remain a valuable grassroots asset for republicans.
the big L Libertarian paleorepublican. This is the more hardcore radical libertarians, the type who will make war on drugs a primary issue and stuff like that, who will generally vote libertarian, however, will make it known that a republican who is pleasing to the paleolibertarians might get his vote. there would be an outright admission that the republican party CAN get his vote, and that if it does not seek it, he will do whatever he can to make their campaigns more expensive and to steal votes. This type of activism is pretty much leveraging political pain, the Falwell groups do it every year in the primary to push the candidate their way.
the activist/protester. This person should also make it clear what would get his or her vote, but should focus their efforts on protest and more antisocial concerns. bear in mind that if this is your way of doing things, you are somewhat of a political liability, so do not do stuff that associates you too much with candidates. you would bet he libertarian version of guys like Bill Ayers and the communist community organizer scene, so you would not want to associate too heavily with candidates, although it would be good to create some sort of a website where you make it clear if a candidate is someone you are considering, so when they are doing the political math they can keep your concerns in mind. A lot of 911 truthers fit this category, and while a lot of people in the RP movement are offended by these guys, you have to bear in mind that a lot of more antisocial, countercultural types have a natural skepticism and that this is a large voter group that we need to maintain. generally, they are doing something that we actually DO need, because, whether 911 was an inside job or not, it doesn't hurt to have a group of people who aren't scared to ask wildly unpopular questions, just we need to have a more concerted effort in dividing the public view of these people from the mainstream types (this is something that happens on the left... like By Any Means Necessary being a mainstream front for a violent radical communist group).
Basically, the trick here is to pick one of these sortof archetypes and to build a sortof set of guidelines for maximum efficiency.
we need the pundits and political analysts and campaign directors to know that this group is organized, fights tooth and nail on every issue, has networks, etc.
this also allows us to cultivate the libertarian party and influence in the republican party at the same time. this way when the republican party goes rogue we can go all in on the LP to show them what our numbers are, and when the RP acts right, we are able to influence it and keep it sane.
for this reason i think all of us should promote the LP and the RP. unfortunately, I am of the belief that, despite this years election cycle being complicated, we need to consider absorbing the Constitution Party into the Libertarian Party, as that division is unneccessary.
do we really need to divide the parties up over the issues of porn and drugs? can't we all agree that those are local issues and when we run a primary we will let our local LP figure out what were gonna do?
Im a staunch libertarian, but i am ok with having to have a battle of ideas in a primary about prostitution and drugs as long as were debating how to deal with it on the most local of levels.
the moral of the story is, for all the ideas we have for the future of the movement, we need an ALL OF THE ABOVE approach. We need a political party with growing levels of organization as an escape hatch, and we also need to take over the RP. We know that not everyone in our movement has a personality that is suited to each job, so lets divide it up based on what is most suitable to the individual. We also need the guys who aren't scared to go out and accuse the politicians of criminality and create an environment of skepticism. bear in mind that stuff that passes as conspiracy theory was legitimate political rhetoric between 1776-1812. Let's just divide up our public images into the right categories and get it done.
our opponents do this... Council on Foreign Relations is their mainstream arm... the Communist Party is their escape hatch party... the By Any Means Necessary, Students for Democratic Society, etc, are their protest arms.