Can we move beyond politics now?

[inibo]

I have not been here for quite some time and I see, if I remember correctly, that the wording of the mission statement has changed. In the past, again, if I remember correctly, the mission centered around electing Ron Paul. The implication being that to argue electoral politics is at best a waste of time, at worst immoral, would be violating the mission. At least that's how I read it.

That is one of the reasons I am no longer a regular. After the 2008 campaign, once my anger and depression abated, I moved on to pursue Ron Paul's ideas, rather than his election. Consequently, having absorbed a great deal of Austrian School thought--mainly Murray Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe--I have come to the conclusion that the very idea of the state as it is currently understood--a territorial monopoly on dispute resolution and taxation--is antithetical to the very idea of liberty. Not wanting to be disruptive I found myself less and less inclined to participate here because I cannot be silent about my principles and the ideas that animate them and I did not want to be disruptive or to violate the mission statement I acknowledged when I joined the forums.

Now, as I said, the mission statement appears to have been modified and there is nothing I read in it that says the focus is to be elections. So, I am wondering, can we move beyond politics now? Is okay to talk about voluntarism, anarchocaptialism and agorism now? I do not see where the intent of the mission statement would be violated, but I also don't want to stir up stuff just to be stirring it up.

[Anti Federalist]

You'd still stir things up, but, I, for one, would be glad to have you back.

Far too many have fallen/drifted off/been banned and the forum is in danger of becoming soporific and boring.

[Crystallas]

Campaign for Liberty

[sailingaway]

Those things were always in political philosophy section, they never went away. This particular subforum is about Ron, and his views, so some stuff might be moved, but it goes beyond elections, certainly, although with Ron a certified write in in some states and available as protest elsewhere, you'll still see that too.

[mport1]

Go to see another person moving on to voluntaryism. Politics will not help us achieve liberty on its own. There are much better ways to advance liberty.

[RickyJ]

I'm sure we can move beyond politics, but most here aren't going to do that right now.

[Keith and stuff]

Beyond politics as in more than politics? Yes. Beyond politics as in no politics? No.

I thought people were always allowed to occasionally discussion various types of theoretical governmental systems here? At the very least, there are the off topic and hot topic areas. Maybe talk about that stuff in a few sections but it wouldn't make any sense in grassroots central. IMO, that would be trolling but I'm not gonna turn you in because I don't mind the occasional trolling :)

[angelatc]

Now, as I said, the mission statement appears to have been modified and there is nothing I read in it that says the focus is to be elections. So, I am wondering, can we move beyond politics now? Is okay to talk about voluntarism, anarchocaptialism and agorism now? I do not see where the intent of the mission statement would be violated, but I also don't want to stir up stuff just to be stirring it up.

Welcome back!

Philosophy subforum exists for just that reason.

[Indy Vidual]

I have not been here for quite some time and I see, if I remember correctly, that the wording of the mission statement has changed. In the past, again, if I remember correctly, the mission centered around electing Ron Paul. The implication being that to argue electoral politics is at best a waste of time, at worst immoral, would be violating the mission. At least that's how I read it.

That is one of the reasons I am no longer a regular. After the 2008 campaign, once my anger and depression abated, I moved on to pursue Ron Paul's ideas, rather than his election. Consequently, having absorbed a great deal of Austrian School thought--mainly Murray Rothbard and Hans-Hermann Hoppe--I have come to the conclusion that the very idea of the state as it is currently understood--a territorial monopoly on dispute resolution and taxation--is antithetical to the very idea of liberty. Not wanting to be disruptive I found myself less and less inclined to participate here because I cannot be silent about my principles and the ideas that animate them and I did not want to be disruptive or to violate the mission statement I acknowledged when I joined the forums.

Now, as I said, the mission statement appears to have been modified and there is nothing I read in it that says the focus is to be elections. So, I am wondering, can we move beyond politics now? Is okay to talk about voluntarism, anarchocaptialism and agorism now? I do not see where the intent of the mission statement would be violated, but I also don't want to stir up stuff just to be stirring it up.

Welcome back inibo, we have Hope for America. :)