PDA

View Full Version : Key mistake you are making when recruiting newcomers




mediahasyou
06-23-2009, 08:57 PM
"Protecting the constitution", "Restoring the Republic", "Federal Reserve Transparency"...what does that even mean?

People dont know what those libertarian slogans mean. However, people do understand benefits.

Example: "Letting you say what you want" would be a benefit of "protecting the constitution".
"Keeping more money in your wallet" would be a benefit of "restoring the republic".
"Cheaper prices" would be a benefit of "Federal Reserve Transparency".

The statists are already doing this! Think about it. A statist guarantees a benefit: I will create 5,000,000 more jobs or I will build 8,000,000 new schools. Sounds good right? They worry about how they do it later. It works! People like the benefits more than all the political jargon.


There's logic behind this. You dont care if the constitution is restored. You care about the benefits of the constitution-----free speech, freedom of religion, gun owning.

micahnelson
06-23-2009, 09:07 PM
Lead with reptillians. Bring up monetary policy when they seem ready.

Brassmouth
06-23-2009, 09:16 PM
Lead with reptillians. Bring up monetary policy when they seem ready.

Hahaha. ;)



(...you are joking right? o.O)

nayjevin
06-23-2009, 09:36 PM
"Protecting the constitution", "Restoring the Republic", "Federal Reserve Transparency"...what does that even mean?

People dont know what those libertarian slogans mean. However, people do understand benefits.

Example: "Letting you say what you want" would be a benefit of "protecting the constitution".
"Keeping more money in your wallet" would be a benefit of "restoring the republic".
"Cheaper prices" would be a benefit of "Federal Reserve Transparency".

The statists are already doing this! Think about it. A statist guarantees a benefit: I will create 5,000,000 more jobs or I will build 8,000,000 new schools. Sounds good right? They worry about how they do it later. It works! People like the benefits more than all the political jargon.


There's logic behind this. You dont care if the constitution is restored. You care about the benefits of the constitution-----free speech, freedom of religion, gun owning.

These are good, thanks.

Instead of 'protect the constitution',

'stop government from imprisoning people who haven't done anything. everybody's a terrorist these days!'

speciallyblend
06-23-2009, 10:11 PM
a key mistake when talking about ron paul is mentioning the word republican

DapperDan
06-24-2009, 12:16 AM
"Protecting the constitution", "Restoring the Republic", "Federal Reserve Transparency"...what does that even mean?

People dont know what those libertarian slogans mean. However, people do understand benefits.

Example: "Letting you say what you want" would be a benefit of "protecting the constitution".
"Keeping more money in your wallet" would be a benefit of "restoring the republic".
"Cheaper prices" would be a benefit of "Federal Reserve Transparency".

The statists are already doing this! Think about it. A statist guarantees a benefit: I will create 5,000,000 more jobs or I will build 8,000,000 new schools. Sounds good right? They worry about how they do it later. It works! People like the benefits more than all the political jargon.


There's logic behind this. You dont care if the constitution is restored. You care about the benefits of the constitution-----free speech, freedom of religion, gun owning.

I like that. I guess it would depend on the person you talk to if you already know them as well. I know I have to talk differently to certain friends/family who are not on the bus with RP yet.

Kraig
06-24-2009, 07:45 AM
I just try to convince people that the government fails at every turn and isn't needed, I rarely mention the constitution.

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 07:50 AM
I just try to convince people that the government fails at every turn and isn't needed, I rarely mention the constitution.

Yeah, that's the ticket... :rolleyes:

I don't start with the Constitution and such slogans. I try to build a foundation to understand them. Set out the problem, show how the Constitution was designed to protect us from that problem, and show a little outrage that this rule of law is being ignored by the lawmakers and they're generally right there with you. Kind of a switchup of the government problem>reaction>solution bit:

Problem>preexisting solution>reaction to the short-circuiting of the preexisting solution (outrage).

max
06-24-2009, 07:54 AM
You have to catch them with emotionalism and SIMPLICITY>

Lead with a brief video clip of the IMPOSSIBLE collapse of building 7...

it's so simple that even a retard can see it....from there, leading them down the rabbit hole is EASY!

Forget monetary policy and foreign affairs etc....I cant tell you how many people I've INSTANTLY hooked with this video....100% of 911 truthers will eventually arrive at Ron Paul's doorstep ON THEIR OWN...without having to even be led there.....

Once one sees how evil and corrupt the ruling elite are...there's no other place to go but us

Unless you talking to a reasonably intelligent and curious person that likes to read....Austrian economics and the constitution are a waste of time.


WTC7 - This is an Orange (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3898962504721899003)

Kraig
06-24-2009, 08:02 AM
Yeah, that's the ticket... :rolleyes:

I don't start with the Constitution and such slogans. I try to build a foundation to understand them. Set out the problem, show how the Constitution was designed to protect us from that problem, and show a little outrage that this rule of law is being ignored by the lawmakers and they're generally right there with you. Kind of a switchup of the government problem>reaction>solution bit:

Problem>preexisting solution>reaction to the short-circuiting of the preexisting solution (outrage).

Yeah it works really well actually, consistency goes a long way. It's hard for people take you seriously when you aren't consistent, and I find the constitutional position to be highly inconsistent. One thing I am surprised of is how many people I talk to already agree with me. I talked to a guy yesterday who doesn't vote, doesn't trust the government for anything, and wants to stay as far away from it as possible. He hadn't even begun to consider it in the terms of "anarchy". When I brought up the word he admitted that he has a hard time seeing how that wouldn't be best, but at the same time it does "sound" awful and chaotic when you bring it up in conversation.

It could be the different people that I'm talking to, but I get quite a bit LESS flack when bringing this up than I did trying to convince people that a return to the constitution was needed. It's hard to convince people that you know were to magically draw the line between private free markets and government markets controlled by force, having an inconsistent position on this is basically saying you (or the founding fathers) are smarter than everyone else and therefore know where to place that line.

However with a consistent position, you don't have to rely on someone's extreme intelligence or benevolence. You can simply say, this is right (or wrong) and always will be. :)

Master
06-24-2009, 08:05 AM
People seem so used to something that's been implemented and part of our society. My friends freak out on me when I say we should end unemployment insurance and minimum wage laws.

Kraig
06-24-2009, 08:11 AM
People seem so used to something that's been implemented and part of our society. My friends freak out on me when I say we should end unemployment insurance and minimum wage laws.

You should ask him if it wouldn't make sense, and be far more fair, if unemployment insurance was handled privately like most other forms of insurance. That way you pay for it if you want it, while you're not paying for it if you feel like it's not something you need.

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 08:12 AM
However with a consistent position, you don't have to rely on someone's extreme intelligence or benevolence. You can simply say, this is right (or wrong) and always will be. :)

And when you do encounter someone intelligent and benevolent, it still pays. We in America consider liberty to be the moral position because it is good for people and because it works! The examples of socialism failing are thick on the ground; the advantages of liberty are as well. So, let the moral position be the default position--when in doubt, err on the side of liberty--and when the day is done the concrete reasons why liberty works best will reveal themselves in the clarity of hindsight. And you will have saved yourself a whole bushelful of headaches along the way!

Kraig
06-24-2009, 08:25 AM
And when you do encounter someone intelligent and benevolent, it still pays. We in America consider liberty to be the moral position because it is good for people and because it works! The examples of socialism failing are thick on the ground; the advantages of liberty are as well. So, let the moral position be the default position--when in doubt, err on the side of liberty--and when the day is done the concrete reasons why liberty works best will reveal themselves in the clarity of hindsight. And you will have saved yourself a whole bushelful of headaches along the way!

You consider liberty the moral position? Don't you also consider taxes the moral position?

Master
06-24-2009, 08:31 AM
You should ask him if it wouldn't make sense, and be far more fair, if unemployment insurance was handled privately like most other forms of insurance. That way you pay for it if you want it, while you're not paying for it if you feel like it's not something you need.

Or just eliminate the income tax and have that extra income saved for when/if you lose your job. :D

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 08:34 AM
You consider liberty the moral position? Don't you also consider taxes the moral position?

Thirteen thousand posts later and you need to ask me if I consider liberty the moral position?

People should be free to establish structures answerable to themselves to handle certain select utilities which tend to be monopolistic out of practical necessity--and to see to the funding of the same provided they don't use the tyranny of the majority to levy those burdens unfairly. Liberty is moral. Taxation can be done fairly or can be done otherwise, and the morality of it depends on this. With or without a govenmental structure and taxation, due diligence will still be necessary. No escaping that.


Or just eliminate the income tax and have that extra income saved for when/if you lose your job. :D

No doubt!! We the govenment commission billion-dollar studies to see just how much we can tax you--the immorality of taxation for the sake of taxation--then we claim you need us because you have no cushion built up in case of a layoff. Say what? You don't think I can save if you give me enough access to my own money to have a few pennies left over?!

Pericles
06-24-2009, 08:38 AM
Things are neither moral or immoral, good or evil, of themselves - it is the use we make of them that is either good or bad. A hammer used to assist in building a house is used for a good purpose, used to commit vandalism is a bad purpose. The hammer is a mere tool. Guns used for the protection of life and property are being used for a good purpose, those used for the purpose of murder, rape, and robbery are being used for a bad purpose. Good and bad are properties independent of the thing itself. Government used to defend and promote liberty is good, government used to impose tyranny and invade other countries is bad.

We are a group of people who see liberty as good, not only for ethical reasons, but because it also does best at a material improvement in the human condition.

RCA
06-24-2009, 08:41 AM
Lead with reptillians. Bring up monetary policy when they seem ready.

lol

Kraig
06-24-2009, 08:49 AM
Thirteen thousand posts later and you need to ask me if I consider liberty the moral position?

Haha I already knew you considered liberty the moral position, I was trying to ask how that lines up with your belief in taxes. Taxes that are not agreed upon are not moral, however I don't see why one would call them taxes if they were agreed upon, they would be called payments. There is no tax and there is no government structure that makes it moral for you to tax me at any rate or amount.

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 09:07 AM
There is no tax and there is no government structure that makes it moral for you to tax me at any rate or amount.

What's immoral is enjoying all the benefits your community provides without contributing your share. If there were some magic way to convince everyone to stop trying to get something for nothing, that would be great. But, you know, not everyone is as perfect as you.

At least with liberty you can live elsewhere if you so choose...

We're getting awfully close to hijacking this thread, so I'm not answering any more questions along these lines. Maybe when we get a thread about how to recruit anarchists...

Kraig
06-24-2009, 09:12 AM
What's immoral is enjoying all the benefits your community provides without contributing your share. If there were some magic way to convince everyone to stop trying to get something for nothing, that would be great. But, you know, not everyone is as perfect as you.

At least with liberty you can live elsewhere if you so choose...

Without contributing my share? That's why I advocate privatization of everything! So I (or anyone else) would not be able to enjoy anything without paying for it. You talking about a magic way to get something from nothing, that is what government promises at every turn. From healthcare to public school, to defense and security. So it sounds like we agree, no? Not everyone is as perfect as me? Is that some kind of insult directed at me? Why are you always so antagonistic with me? It really does seem that we agree, although I'm still not *quite* sure if you want to tax me or not, maybe your point about "contributing your share" is a jab at me not wanting to pay taxes?

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 09:15 AM
Not everyone is as perfect as me? Is that some kind of insult directed at me? Why are you always so antagonistic with me?

Try taking it at face value, instead of being paranoid, and see if it makes more sense. I wasn't talking about you at all, but about people (and there are a lot of them) who do indeed try to get something for nothing...

Is this burning in your mind so much we need to ask to have this aside moved to another thread? Because I like this thread very much and am very, very anxious to stop hijacking it. Please.

Kraig
06-24-2009, 09:19 AM
Just asking, no paranoia.

Theocrat
06-24-2009, 09:26 AM
"Protecting the constitution", "Restoring the Republic", "Federal Reserve Transparency"...what does that even mean?

People dont know what those libertarian slogans mean. However, people do understand benefits.

Example: "Letting you say what you want" would be a benefit of "protecting the constitution".
"Keeping more money in your wallet" would be a benefit of "restoring the republic".
"Cheaper prices" would be a benefit of "Federal Reserve Transparency".

The statists are already doing this! Think about it. A statist guarantees a benefit: I will create 5,000,000 more jobs or I will build 8,000,000 new schools. Sounds good right? They worry about how they do it later. It works! People like the benefits more than all the political jargon.


There's logic behind this. You dont care if the constitution is restored. You care about the benefits of the constitution-----free speech, freedom of religion, gun owning.

Those slogans are much better than "Abolish the Government!" and "Privatize Everything!" and "Rothbard was Right!" That is what scares people more, and it is utter foolishness to more intelligent minds.

Kraig
06-24-2009, 09:30 AM
Those slogans are much better than "Abolish the Government!" and "Privatize Everything!" and "Rothbard was Right!" That is what scares people more, and it is utter foolishness to more intelligent minds.

Coming from you that means next to nothing. You can't even debate the issue you just bring out insults and "god says so" thinking you're making a point. Do you have the right to tax me? I got my dick sucked by my guy friend this morning, are you ready to kill me?

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 09:34 AM
I got my dick sucked...

The morality of the question aside, and speaking strictly as a practical matter, we lose our rights when we abuse them. Gun control would never be an issue if it weren't for robbers and murderers. Traffic laws would never happen if it weren't for reckless drivers. And those who are prone to offer way, way TMI play into the hands of those who would limit speech...

The biggest problem we face in selling our message is that no one trusts everyone else to exercise their freedoms responsibly. One of the biggest advantages we can give ourselves is to show everyone a good example of using the liberties we have left well and for more than just our own personal benefit.

Kraig
06-24-2009, 09:41 AM
The morality of the question aside, and speaking strictly as a practical matter, we lose our rights when we abuse them. Gun control would never be an issue if it weren't for robbers and murderers. Traffic laws would never happen if it weren't for reckless drivers. And those who are prone to offer way, way TMI play into the hands of those who would limit speech...

I disagree, those issues are brought up because people with a power agenda use them to manipulate people for their own end. Talking about gun control, all research I have done shows that gun violence only goes up the more control is enforced.

As far as free speech, I don't think speaking openly is an abuse, but I was being facetious to back theo into a corner of wanting to kill me. Same why I try to back you and others into a corner of wanting to tax me.



The biggest problem we face in selling our message is that no one trusts everyone else to exercise their freedoms responsibly. One of the biggest advantages we can give ourselves is to show everyone a good example of using the liberties we have left well and for more than just our own personal benefit.

Same problem I have convincing statists that anarchy is good, they think they have to trust people to be good for it to work.

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 09:42 AM
I disagree, those issues are brought up because people with a power agenda use them to manipulate people for their own end. Talking about gun control, all research I have done shows that gun violence only goes up the more control is enforced.

As far as free speech, I don't think speaking openly is an abuse, but I was being facetious to back theo into a corner of wanting to kill me. Same why I try to back you and others into a corner of wanting to tax me.

Good. Now get back on topic and explain how to recruit us.

Kraig
06-24-2009, 09:50 AM
Good. Now get back on topic and explain how to recruit us.

You first. ;)

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 09:56 AM
The statists are already doing this! Think about it. A statist guarantees a benefit: I will create 5,000,000 more jobs or I will build 8,000,000 new schools. Sounds good right? They worry about how they do it later. It works! People like the benefits more than all the political jargon.

Um, been there done that, Kraig. But I did think of a little more that actually contributes to the conversation at hand.

Enough people have been down the credit card overload road to understand how this defecit spending will catch up to us. Well, not how exactly; they don't understand the mechanism of how it will destroy the currency (and soon). If they have the capacity to grasp it, they do appreciate being let in on this 'secret'. But it goes to show where one of our greatest strengths lies--people aren't just motivated by what they will get out of the deal but by what their children and grandchildren will get out of the deal. And since the Ruling Elite only thinks in the short term, this latter field is wide open to us.

I find it handy to keep that in the back of my mind when I recruit.

Theocrat
06-24-2009, 10:14 AM
Coming from you that means next to nothing. You can't even debate the issue you just bring out insults and "god says so" thinking you're making a point. Do you have the right to tax me? I got my dick sucked by my guy friend this morning, are you ready to kill me?

Rarely do I insult people on these forums to prove any of my points, and I certainly take the task of explaining my positions as thoroughly as I can than merely saying "God says so."

I do not have the right to tax you, but our government does. It gets that authority from God because God is the One Who grants us our rights and establishes governments. I would share some of your sentiments that some taxes are unjust, but not all taxes are. We are a republic, a government of representatives under the rule of law. That is what our country is all about, and it has lead us to becoming the most successful republic in history.

Anarchy is nonsense, and it will not work. We can't even get people to live by the rule of law, and yet, you Rothbardians think no government is going to fare better? The key mistake anarchists make is undermining human nature by wishing for a society which is humanly impossible. There is no way individuals like myself are going to allow America to degenerate into an anarchy. You're going to have to kill us if you wish to succeed.

As far as you mocking my views on the punishment of homosexuality, it is not my place to execute civil punishment upon gays. That is the government's business. All I can do is pray for their repentance and love them as human beings.

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 10:18 AM
It gets that authority from God because God is the One Who grants us our rights and establishes governments...

I don't know about all that, Theo. I don't even think there's anything even in Romans (written by Paul knowing that the letter could be spied upon) that gives any heavenly authority to Kim Jong Il...

Seems like among our God-given rights is the freedom of association. Parents--even the capital-P Parent--do know that making mistakes is among the most effective of learning processes.

Kraig
06-24-2009, 11:16 AM
Um, been there done that, Kraig. But I did think of a little more that actually contributes to the conversation at hand.

lol me again?

Kraig
06-24-2009, 11:21 AM
Rarely do I insult people on these forums to prove any of my points, and I certainly take the task of explaining my positions as thoroughly as I can than merely saying "God says so."

Rarely? You never prove a point by insulting people on the forums, because that has nothing to do with proof. However your *attempts* at doing so don't seem to be quite so rare, you did it in this very thread with "That is what scares people more, and it is utter foolishness to more intelligent minds." You pull that kind of stuff all the time, anyone can say this or that is utter foolishness, but who can back it up with logical argument? You certainly don't seem to be able to.

So *you* don't have the right to tax me, but god said the government does? Who then decides who is in the government, and therefore who does have the right to tax me? You think passing it off to god washes your hands enough to leave you guilt free from robbing me? It's still men that are doing it.

acptulsa
06-24-2009, 11:26 AM
Oh, and two more recruitment tips come to mind for some reason:

Don't argue for argument's sake, unless you know the person you're talking to loves it as much as you do, and...

Don't change the subject.

Bossobass
06-24-2009, 12:47 PM
Yeah, and never, ever, ever, ever, ever try to talk to them when American Idol is on.

Bosso

Kraig
06-24-2009, 12:48 PM
Yeah, and never, ever, ever, ever, ever try to talk to them when American Idol is on.

Bosso

lol don't even go near them if that is the case :p

nayjevin
06-26-2009, 03:41 AM
when dimes were made of real silver, you could buy about a gallon of gas with them. you still can, because silver doesn't lose value.

that's why the constitution and the Bible call for intrinsic value in currency.

Ron Paul has been saying this for decades. Check out http://www.libertyforest.com

Warrior_of_Freedom
06-26-2009, 04:05 AM
We are recruiting people now? What are we, the cult of liberty? :s

nayjevin
06-26-2009, 08:25 PM
We are recruiting people now? What are we, the cult of liberty? :s

'recruit' is a poor choice of words. so is 'cult of liberty.'

CCTelander
06-26-2009, 08:46 PM
Rarely do I insult people on these forums to prove any of my points, and I certainly take the task of explaining my positions as thoroughly as I can than merely saying "God says so."

I do not have the right to tax you, but our government does. It gets that authority from God because God is the One Who grants us our rights and establishes governments. I would share some of your sentiments that some taxes are unjust, but not all taxes are. We are a republic, a government of representatives under the rule of law. That is what our country is all about, and it has lead us to becoming the most successful republic in history.

Anarchy is nonsense, and it will not work. We can't even get people to live by the rule of law, and yet, you Rothbardians think no government is going to fare better? The key mistake anarchists make is undermining human nature by wishing for a society which is humanly impossible. There is no way individuals like myself are going to allow America to degenerate into an anarchy. You're going to have to kill us if you wish to succeed.

As far as you mocking my views on the punishment of homosexuality, it is not my place to execute civil punishment upon gays. That is the government's business. All I can do is pray for their repentance and love them as human beings.

I'm just curious Theo, would you agree that we have a government of delegated powers, since, as most state constitutions and most of the Founders agreed, all political power is inherent in the people?

Charlie41
06-27-2009, 09:24 AM
If you really want people to sign up.

Tease them with tid bits of info, and encourage them to look things up for them selves.

Give them just enough to be curious.

Let them know where some of the answers are. Do not point this forum out as the answers they are looking for, they will find it on there own.

If you want an army of people, what kind do you want?
Intelligent, or just sheeple that have been hurded?

I would prefer intelligent people, to help fight the corruption.