Sometimes we are our own worst enemy...

[GunnyFreedom]

I invited my entire FB friendslist to like "Draft Jack Hunter to run for US Senate against Lindsey Graham in 2014"

Got a response from a voluntarist threatening to defriend me because he doesn't endorse electoral politics. :rolleyes:

My reply?

well, I'm trying to save our dying nation even if I myself die in that effort, and I simply do not have the time or resources to pick you out from my near 1400 FB friends in the course of fulfilling that effort, so I suggest that you do just as you threaten. Thanks!

[BuddyRey]

People like that make me embarrassed to be a Voluntaryist sometimes.

There are many different styles of activism, from politicking to agorism, and all of them have their place, IMHO.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I invited my entire FB friendslist to like "Draft Jack Hunter to run for US Senate against Lindsey Graham in 2014"

Got a response from a voluntarist threatening to defriend me because he doesn't endorse electoral politics. :rolleyes:

My reply?

well, I'm trying to save our dying nation even if I myself die in that effort, and I simply do not have the time or resources to pick you out from my near 1400 FB friends in the course of fulfilling that effort, so I suggest that you do just as you threaten. Thanks!

I wouldn't worry too much about it Gunny. I think Jack Hunter would do well in the Senate compared to Graham. I look at it as self-defense, but I would really rather not participate (but, given the choice the wise option is to vote for the most principled candidate to your position). Some disagree, and you know how freedom and liberty goes -- sometimes you just have to suck it up. :p

Keep trucking Gunny.

[Elwar]

He's an individual with his own thoughts and ideals. He does not represent anyone else.

[malkusm]

I hope the voluntaryist "I don't endorse electoral politics" types feel real good. They sure did stick it to the system! Way to accomplish something!

To me, it's akin to rolling over and taking a beating from the federal government. I find that some ancaps and voluntaryists would rather stick to their own circles and discuss how principled they are. Which is fine with me - just don't pretend like you're accomplishing anything by doing so.

Sorry if this starts a flame war, needed to vent.

[Jordan]

I hope the voluntaryist "I don't endorse electoral politics" types feel real good. They sure did stick it to the system! Way to accomplish something!

To me, it's akin to rolling over and taking a beating from the federal government. I find that some ancaps and voluntaryists would rather stick to their own circles and discuss how principled they are. Which is fine with me - just don't pretend like you're accomplishing anything by doing so.

Sorry if this starts a flame war, needed to vent.

I hope this starts a flame war. This post is pure truth.

/me picks his side. :cool:

[ronpaulhawaii]

I like to ask my principled non-voter friends if they would vote for a referendum to abolish the state...

[MRoCkEd]

I hope the voluntaryist "I don't endorse electoral politics" types feel real good. They sure did stick it to the system! Way to accomplish something!

To me, it's akin to rolling over and taking a beating from the federal government. I find that some ancaps and voluntaryists would rather stick to their own circles and discuss how principled they are. Which is fine with me - just don't pretend like you're accomplishing anything by doing so.

Sorry if this starts a flame war, needed to vent.

Just think.. would the establishment prefer their opposition support candidates and achieve positions of influence within the party structures OR avoid that altogether and just debate amongst themselves?

[malkusm]

I like to ask my principled non-voter friends if they would vote for a referendum to abolish the state...

:eek: That's an interesting question...

[Pericles]

I hope this starts a flame war. This post is pure truth.

/me picks his side. :cool:
+1

[wizardwatson]

It might be thought that the libertarian, the person committed to the “natural system of liberty” (in Adam Smith’s phrase), almost by definition holds the goal of liberty as his highest political end. But this is often not true; for many libertarians, the desire for self-expression, or for bearing witness to the truth of the excellence of liberty, frequently takes precedence over the goal of the triumph of liberty in the real world. Yet surely, as will be seen further below, the victory of liberty will never come to pass unless the goal of victory in the real world takes precedence over more esthetic and passive considerations. - Murray Rothbard / Ethics of Liberty / Chap. 30 TOWARD A THEORY OF STRATEGY FOR LIBERTY

This used to be my signature, because to me it sums up a large chunk of what's left over in the aftermath of the Ron Paul campaign.

I'm still hopeful for a way forward out of this, but it's hard not to be pessimistic about all the ego-masturbation that pervades not just this site but 90% of the internet.

[Danke]

I like to ask my principled non-voter friends if they would vote for a referendum to abolish the state...

Do I have to claim corporate citizenship to vote in your referendum?

[paulitics]

Just think.. would the establishment prefer their opposition support candidates and achieve positions of influence within the party structures OR avoid that altogether and just debate amongst themselves?

The opposition would want us to roll over, and convince others in the movement to roll over. It's even better though when the rolling over is done with a smug attitude.

[wizardwatson]

Well Rothbard called this "Left Sectarianism" when people claim they aren't doing something because it conflicts with their "ideals", even when it moves them toward their supposed higher goal.

I think its more fundamental than that though. Humans are simply prone to laziness in my opinion. We're overfed, overstimulated, and in America overpaid compared to 80% of the world. This is the land of the lazy, and we use our knowledge to rationalize our inaction constantly.

[ronpaulhawaii]

Do I have to claim corporate citizenship to vote in your referendum?

Hypothetically, this could be a key vote in the long march towards a voluntary society. One could assume that the evil of corporatism would already have been addressed for such a vote to come up, but that is not necessary for the purpose of this exercise...

In light of that, perhaps we should look at the worst case scenario and that you would have to claim corporate citizenship for the vote. ISTM this is inconsequential as a win for voluntarism would abolish the apparatus necessary for corporate citizenship to exist...

[erowe1]

I'm not taking the voluntarist's side. I got the invitation, joined the group, and would gladly support Jack Hunter for elected office.

However, I also think that we (myself included) often put too much emphasis in political action as the most important way to get from where we are to where we want to be, when that isn't always the case. Rush Limbaugh has more of an affect on our government right now than he would if he were a senator. Granted, Hunter is not anywhere close to where Limbaugh is. But he's performing and important function, and his career is moving in the right direction. And there are tons of other important, and not just important, but positively vital roles we need people to play aside from political ones, both in the way of educating the public and in the way of opening doors to greater freedom by working to lighten the state's shackles from the outside.

I think the overemphasis on politics is a symptom of the mindset that plagues our movement of thinking that each election is our very last chance and we have to win this time or it's all over. So we put all our efforts into a short-term hail Mary, knowing the odds are against us, rather making long-term investments that will pay off with improving our odds in future attempts to make political change. One lesson we should take from 2008 is that the public needs to be educated, and an honest appraisal of the educational need should lead us to believe that it has to be a decades long process. I hope that for every young person Ron Paul inspired to run for office, there's another one he inspired to get a PhD in economics, or some other investment like that whose dividends won't begin to pay our movement until years from now.

And the truth is, even if we don't have that much time before some major societal upheaval, there's no telling what society will look like on the other side of that, and we have to assume that these long term investments in cultivating freedom will pay off then as well.

So if the voluntarists want to eschew politics and emphasize other things, we don't need to discourage them. There's more than enough need to go around with plenty of apolitical roles we need them to fill.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I hope the voluntaryist "I don't endorse electoral politics" types feel real good. They sure did stick it to the system! Way to accomplish something!

To me, it's akin to rolling over and taking a beating from the federal government. I find that some ancaps and voluntaryists would rather stick to their own circles and discuss how principled they are. Which is fine with me - just don't pretend like you're accomplishing anything by doing so.

Sorry if this starts a flame war, needed to vent.

Something tells me Ian Freeman and the others in Keene are showing everyone how non-cooperation, civil disobedience, and other forms of outside electoral politics contributes to the increase of liberty, by actually engaging in such activities. It seems absurd to me to assume that electoral politics are the best answer. There is nothing that says you can't vote to defend yourself, and believe that the best course of action is non-cooperation & civil disobedience.

It is exactly the opposite to your assertion that those doing that are "rolling over" or even those who don't vote and do CD and N-C are "rolling over and taking it" is a LAUGHINGSTOCK of a comment. They are taking it, taking the brunt of actual action and all the consequences that come along with that.

Personally, I think working outside the system is not only the most sustainable method (agorism, market solutions, re-investing money into profitable liberty endeavors, etc.), but ultimately the most promising area to further liberty (That isn't to say I don't also vote, GOTV, etc. for libertarian candidates, but it isn't exactly my #1 priority, but more as self-defense). So, let's just say I will disagree with you.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Just think.. would the establishment prefer their opposition support candidates and achieve positions of influence within the party structures OR avoid that altogether and just debate amongst themselves?

I'm pretty sure the last thing the establishment wants is thousands and thousands flaunting their immoral, and illegal laws. I am also pretty sure that the establishment wants you guys to devote all your effort and stamina into the electoral realm because its so rigged, that the amount of resources and time, materials, etc. you spend will have to be so astronomical just to get elected and have the power to legislate away the last 100 years, that....well it's grim and bleek to say the least (the realist inside of me). So, no I don't think the establishment is having a party for joy because the status-quo will be maintained by the KEENIACS. LOL!

[ronpaulhawaii]

I applaud voluntarist activism until it crosses the line and encourages others not to vote. I find such a position hypocritical and counter-productive. I agree that we need to come at the statist pricks from every angle imaginable.

Personally, I've found that issue based activism is MUCH more pleasant than electoral activism. Sadly, I suspect this is a motivating factor for many who eschew electoral politics and their choice has little to do with "principles"

[awake]

I hate to take the other side, but not voting in an election is just as much as a valid choice as voting for a candidate. Both decisions reflect the same desire - a departure. One wishes to use democratic means to effect change to a better governemnt; the other is a vote on democracy itself that is always ignored by the lovers of 'one man one vote'.

Democracy, as Ludwig Von Mises meant it, was individual succession if so desired. We have nothing close to that. Mises also defined non action as purposeful action.

A voluntarists may look like a fly in the ointment so to speak, but they are not obstructing anything. They are acting their way toward liberty just the same.

[Chieppa1]

I liked it.

[GunnyFreedom]

I hate to take the other side, but not voting in an election is just as much as a valid choice as voting for a candidate. Both decisions reflect the same desire - a departure. One wishes to use democratic means to effect change to a better governemnt; the other is a vote on democracy itself that is always ignored by the lovers of 'one man one vote'.

Democracy, as Ludwig Von Mises meant it, was individual succession if so desired. We have nothing close to that. Mises also defined non action as purposeful action.

A voluntarists may look like a fly in the ointment so to speak, but they are not obstructing anything. They are acting their way toward liberty just the same.

I certainly do not begrudge the voluntaryist's choice -- but my point is that I send out large invites like that twice....maybe three times a year? It's a lot easier for him to click "ignore" on an invite to such a group twice a year than it is for me to parse 1400 FB friends and pick out which ones "don't participate'"

I get messages and invites from people every day that I have to click ignore on and I don't get the least bit upset or threaten them to "stop or I'll defriend you."

And I surely do not have this "holier than thou" attitude to boot.

You don't participate? Fine, that's your prerogative. We do still (for the moment) live in a free country.

The only problem I have with voluntaryists, is that some of them have this huge arrogant "I am better than you" attitude. I said SOME of them because a lot of them do not have that attitude problem. AED and dannno are good examples of voluntaryists who do their own thing and share their philosophy without trying to make the rest of us feel like scum for actually trying to break the system by using the system.

If I were to try and accommodate all the people like the fella I mentioned in the OP, it would hamstring me. When it's so easy to click "ignore," IMHO there's no call for that.