How to Spread Libertarian Ideas

[nexalacer]

One of the biggest failures of spreading libertarian thought is that people try to argue from economic efficiency. All the economic data in the world will not convince a socialist that it is bad to "provide free health care for all" because this person believes it is a moral imperative that all people receive health care.

If you want to convert people to libertarian thought, you must approach from a moral point of view, the argument from morality.

Stefan Molyneux (http://www.freedomainradio.com) has written some excellent articles over at LRC (http://www.lewrockwell.com/molyneux/molyneux-arch.html) about this argument. If you're having problems converting some of your friends to Dr. Paul's point of view, or if you have some concerns yourself, I highly recommend these articles:

Forget The Argument From Efficiency (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/molyneux6.html)

The Argument From Morality (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/molyneux7.html)

Proving The Argument From Morality (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/molyneux8.html)

Universal Morality (http://www.lewrockwell.com/molyneux/molyneux34.html)

There are more real examples of libertarian morality in action, in terms of health care, abortion, the welfare state, and other hot button topics that you can find in his archives. But the articles I posted are the basics of the argument. Once you have the basics, it is much easier to turn people towards our point of view.

[Wilkero]

Awesome post! This is the kind of material I've been searching for. Unfortunately (for me) a lot of people in my area don't care about efficiency, so you have to find another angle to argue for freedom. My wife is actually one of those people. In her opinion, she doesn't mind paying high taxes and making others do so because it provides a "safety net" for those less fortunate. All the efficiency arguments in the world aren't going to change her mind.

[nexalacer]

The funny thing is, even if the argument from efficiency changes their mind, they won't feel as compelled to do anything about it as they would if it's argued from morality.

This is an absolutely necessary fundamental change that must occur in our conversations with people if we freedom lovers want this movement to succeed. It's been failing for 200 years and it's about time we turn the ship around!

[Matt Collins]

We don't need to spread libertarian ideals at the moment. We can do that later.
ALL WE NEED TO DO IS GET VOTERS TO COMMIT TO RON PAUL!!!


See this thread for more info:
http://ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=25536

[nexalacer]

How will they commit if they disagree with his fundamental point of view? Your idea is great, but selling libertarianism is as important as Ron Paul name recognition.

A more important question to me is why do you feel the need to shit on my idea? Is selling libertarianism a threat to you in some way?

[nexalacer]

Bump!

[angelatc]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=30483

If you merge these, we can lose the "FUCK" in the title of DJLoti's.

[nexalacer]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=30483

If you merge these, we can lose the "FUCK" in the title of DJLoti's.

Eh? What does this post have to do with intercourse with TIME magazine? I'm confused :confused:

[MS0453]

I agree wholeheartedly. I've always had a difficult time convincing people of the merits of liberty via utilitarian explanations. They always seemed to have a response. The best solution really is to just dig your heels in and say that non-interventionism (meaning economic and social non-interventionism) is morally correct and interventionism is wrong.

Of course, it's also important to know why it's correct and to have enough info to back it. :D

[murrayrothbard]

Please everyone note that Molyneux's arguments from morality are arguments for anarchy... ;)

[nexalacer]

Please everyone note that Molyneux's arguments from morality are arguments for anarchy... ;)

Actually, the arguments from morality are for... morality. The end result of a consistent, rational morality is market anarchism, but that does not mean the arguments are FOR anarchy. They are, in the truest sense of the term, libertarian values. They are what Ron Paul talks about, to an extent, although he does not appear to follow them through to their logical endpoint.

[nexalacer]

Bump for new comers to the forums!