PDA

View Full Version : Why Do Libertarians Lose?




helmuth_hubener
04-12-2017, 09:07 AM
One practical problem it seems like we run into:


https://i1.wp.com/nxx14.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/chyx-1lveaiviex.jpg

William Tell
04-12-2017, 09:17 AM
One practical problem it seems like we run into:


https://i1.wp.com/nxx14.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/chyx-1lveaiviex.jpg


Open Borders? Voting? All of it?

helmuth_hubener
04-12-2017, 09:32 AM
All of it?

Strength does seem like a prerequisite for victory. And weakness to rule it out. So the applicability is pretty broad.

It's a bit of a dilemma.

jmdrake
04-12-2017, 09:39 AM
One practical problem it seems like we run into:


https://i1.wp.com/nxx14.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/chyx-1lveaiviex.jpg

Funny. But here's another reason why libertarians loose. We fight other people's battles for them. Trump this, Trump that. A libertarian just lost a special congressional election and there's not been a single story about him period. I know. I just checked.

Natural Citizen
04-12-2017, 09:59 AM
Not a lot of libertarians in libertarianism these days.

Ender
04-12-2017, 10:08 AM
Why Do Libertarians Lose?

Because people haven't got a clue what real Liberty means any more.

Natural Citizen
04-12-2017, 10:14 AM
Ender. HellOoooOooo. I just said that.

Ya copycat. :mad:

Natural Citizen
04-12-2017, 10:20 AM
Okay wait, hode up, hode up, hode up. Let's figure on a good meaning of libertarian while we're here. A good simple, universal, one. And then we can see amongst ourselves if we all on the same page. Ready?

Here's what I think it means in its most simple and functional of meaning. And, of course, we're talking about it from the perspective of the traditional philosophy of governance in America only. We're not talking about Plato here.

To be libertarian means...oh..I say that it fundamentally means to be against government-over-man. Naw?

So, then, say for instance a guy actually does believe in government-over-man. For instance he wants the guy in charge to be the one who wants to send men with guns from the government to force Individuals and groups of Individuals to relinquish their property to other Individuals or other groups of Individuals at the ends of their barrels. Now, that guy wouldn't be a libertartian. Right? Because everyone knows that property rights are the principal support for the bery rights to life and liberty themselves. In fact, the latter is aggressive toward the very foundation of Individual Liberty. This person would be its most dangerous aggressor.

So, yeah. I say libertarianism aligns with the former. To be against government-over-man. Not the latter. Which is patenetly pro- government-over-man.

euphemia
04-12-2017, 10:27 AM
Why Do Libertarians Lose?

Because people haven't got a clue what real Liberty means any more.

And they don't know how to distill the message down to logical talking points. Plus, they can't get along. If they could be a little more unified on core principles, they would accomplish much more. Playing to the fringes isn't helping.

Ender
04-12-2017, 10:39 AM
And they don't know how to distill the message down to logical talking points. Plus, they can't get along. If they could be a little more unified on core principles, they would accomplish much more. Playing to the fringes isn't helping.

Liberty should not be a "fringe" subject. Everyone in this country should have a clear idea what that means.

Unfortunately, few do.

undergroundrr
04-12-2017, 10:55 AM
Meh. We win some, we lose some.

We tend to be male, self-absorbed and weird and proud of it. As a result, we don't attract the pretty people needed to fuel a sustained social trend upward. Libertarianism would have to take on a whole new MBTI if it wanted to be a big tent movement.

On the day that libertarianism becomes extroverted, inclusive, compassionate and sexy it will gain currency at an alarming rate.

Anti Federalist
04-12-2017, 11:10 AM
Why Do Libertarians Lose?

Because freedom is not popular.

Never has been.

euphemia
04-12-2017, 11:35 AM
Liberty should not be a "fringe" subject. Everyone in this country should have a clear idea what that means.

Unfortunately, few do.

Re-read. I didn't say liberty was a fringe subject. I said if libertarians could agree on the core issues and talk about them logically, they would make more progress. People think libertarians are all about cannabis for a reason. The discussion needs to elevate quite bit for libertarians to get people thinking about how little liberty they have.

Ender
04-12-2017, 11:45 AM
Re-read. I didn't say liberty was a fringe subject. I said if libertarians could agree on the core issues and talk about them logically, they would make more progress. People think libertarians are all about cannabis for a reason. The discussion needs to elevate quite bit for libertarians to get people thinking about how little liberty they have.

Who is this "they" you speak of?

fedupinmo
04-12-2017, 12:06 PM
Because it can't promise free shit to the weak and the useless.

euphemia
04-12-2017, 12:16 PM
Who is this "they" you speak of?

Non-libertarians.

This, right here, is exactly what I'm talking about. Every discussion does not have to be an argument.

shakey1
04-12-2017, 01:04 PM
Meh. We win some, we lose some.

We tend to be male, self-absorbed and weird and proud of it. As a result, we don't attract the pretty people needed to fuel a sustained social trend upward. Libertarianism would have to take on a whole new MBTI if it wanted to be a big tent movement.

On the day that libertarianism becomes extroverted, inclusive, compassionate and sexy it will gain currency at an alarming rate.

... on the other hand... https://steemit.com/anarchism/@capopalinuro/the-top-16-most-beautiful-libertarian-women-of-2016 ;)

Feeding the Abscess
04-12-2017, 03:24 PM
Not a lot of libertarians in libertarianism these days.

This is true, but even including those who claim to be libertarians but jump off board on the first exit (whether conservative or liberal in slant), there aren't more than a million of them.

The first step in diagnosing political success, or the lack thereof as it pertains to libertarianism, is to understand and accept this.

undergroundrr
04-12-2017, 04:05 PM
This is true, but even including those who claim to be libertarians but jump off board on the first exit (whether conservative or liberal in slant), there aren't more than a million of them.

The first step in diagnosing political success, or the lack thereof as it pertains to libertarianism, is to understand and accept this.

As of Reuters polling April 2015:


One in five Americans consider themselves libertarian, with younger adults being the most likely to adopt the label. Among adults aged 18 to 29, 32 percent consider themselves libertarian. Just 12 percent of Americans age 60 or older consider themselves libertarian.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/30/19-of-americans-self-identify-as-liberta

Brian4Liberty
04-12-2017, 07:14 PM
Funny. But here's another reason why libertarians loose. We fight other people's battles for them. Trump this, Trump that. A libertarian just lost a special congressional election and there's not been a single story about him period. I know. I just checked.

Is that the one that CPUd posted about?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?509667-KS-04-special-election-results

Matt Collins
04-12-2017, 08:01 PM
People who love liberty lose because they don't take the time and effort to learn how to win.

Natural Citizen
04-12-2017, 08:27 PM
People who love liberty lose because they don't take the time and effort to learn how to win.

Matt, that ship has sailed. At least for the moment. I commend you for what you've done in that regard. And even now, there are a couple people here whom I know are working on the down-lo to try to grab some senate seats.

Respectfully, though, I just don't like the way that some of you in the 'education' end of it have tried to teach the processs to new (even experienced) people. What happens is you get a guy who is really dedicated to his cause and wants to learn the process in order to further his personal cause, and then when he goes to somebody to teach him how to become involved, he ends up spending all of his time committing himself to some other guy's right to work cause or something. And then he forgets his own reasons for wanting to become involved. He never gets a chance to do what he wanted.

I know a little bit about these programs you're talking about, Matt. I've been to em. :)

To a large extent, what they're doing is sucking up all of the people who want to make change and using them for little minions in someone elses personal projects which have nothing to do with why the guy wanted to learn how to do it in the first place.

You know that I'm right.


That said, we'd do well to focus on the other kind of education. Daniel mentioned that to you a few months back right here on these very forums. Most people here are likely in that camp. Granted, preaching to the choir is like pissing into the wind but people have to spread out.

Personally, I'm done with 'learning' the political process from the self-professed uppercrust within the group.

ThePaleoLibertarian
04-12-2017, 08:27 PM
Simple: libertarians do not study power, and therefore do not understand how to get it. The entire movement is trapped between heady concepts that sell very poorly and weird lifestylist libertines. There's also an engineering problem inherent in the structure of government. Separations of power, constitutions, these things don't engineer liberty. Everything about libertarianism needs to be rethought, or it won't survive as a philosophy.

Matt Collins
04-12-2017, 09:44 PM
Simple: libertarians do not study power, and therefore do not understand how to get it. Bingo

Matt Collins
04-12-2017, 09:47 PM
What happens is you get a guy who is really dedicated to his cause and wants to learn the process in order to further his personal cause, and then when he goes to somebody to teach him how to become involved, he ends up spending all of his time committing himself to some other guy's right to work cause or something. And then he forgets his own reasons for wanting to become involved. He never gets a chance to do what he wanted.huh wut? Why would learning the ropes in a political fight hurt one's ability to do other things? On the job training is actually very helpful.



To a large extent, what they're doing is sucking up all of the people who want to make change and using them for little minions in someone elses personal projects which have nothing to do with why the guy wanted to learn how to do it in the first place.Uh everything is voluntary, except for taxes of course.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything.


But if you are referring to RTW, you have to understand that it is a very functional model, and unions are the largest single supporter of progressive causes. Remove their warchest and you remove their power.


Regardless though, tactics and strategy are ideologically neutral, so it doesn't really matter the cause if one is learning the foundations the technique.


Personally, I'm done with 'learning' the political process from the self-professed uppercrust within the group.You are confusing several things together that are not actually together.

jmdrake
04-13-2017, 06:06 AM
Is that the one that CPUd posted about?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?509667-KS-04-special-election-results

Yep. That's it. And the entire thread is about the democrat vs republican horserace. Bernie Sanders, who wasn't a candidate, got mentioned, but the libertarian candidate didn't get mentioned by name (he's there on a graphic) until just now (I posted his name). It's like a reverse Ron Paul blackout. The media covered the libertarian candidate more than we did. :( Folks what the hell are we doing? End the Trump obsession pro or con. He's draining all of our energy.

jmdrake
04-13-2017, 06:07 AM
People who love liberty lose because they don't take the time and effort to learn how to win.

Oh libertarians have found how to "win." Hook yourself to a winner and declare him to be good enough and attack anyone who disagrees as a "purist." MAGA!

Edit: Even co-op the term "3D chess" and apply it liberally to your new pro-libertarian, orange skinned, toupee wearing kinda-sorta liberty "champion." Yes winning is everything!...until it's not

merkelstan
04-13-2017, 06:46 AM
Oh libertarians have found how to "win." Hook yourself to a winner and declare him to be good enough and attack anyone who disagrees as a "purist." MAGA!

Edit: Even co-op the term "3D chess" and apply it liberally to your new pro-libertarian, orange skinned, toupee wearing kinda-sorta liberty "champion." Yes winning is everything!...until it's not

I grant your point that some portion of libertarian-leaning people have a high-inertia emotional investment in Trump. It's not completely unwarranted, because this election cycle was a rare event, where the deep state had a strong preference for one candidate over another, and the underdog won.

That does not mean everyone who engaged in the political effort to elect Trump believed that US Presidents wield arbitrary executive power, or sets policy independnt of the rest of the government. That also doesn't mean we believed Trump's policy stands completely align with their own. Many of US saw a coming US/Russia confrontation - the most dangerous thing in the world - and decided we had to take any possible action against it.

The most enlightened and effective ideological purist is the one who also acts as a tactical realist.

Ender
04-13-2017, 06:48 AM
Oh libertarians have found how to "win." Hook yourself to a winner and declare him to be good enough and attack anyone who disagrees as a "purist." MAGA!

Edit: Even co-op the term "3D chess" and apply it liberally to your new pro-libertarian, orange skinned, toupee wearing kinda-sorta liberty "champion." Yes winning is everything!...until it's not

LOL

Not sure I'd call the above "libertarians". ;)

jmdrake
04-13-2017, 06:51 AM
The most enlightened and effective ideological purist is the one who also acts as a tactical realist.

Okay. So how well did that work out with Trump?

https://universeofcomic.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/1834.jpg

(Evil robot)

merkelstan
04-13-2017, 07:11 AM
Okay. So how well did that work out with Trump?


Very poorly - the bureaucracy showed the voters who is in charge. Did this result surprise you. Did you imagine he'd wave his hand and make the bad guys go away? (Many supporters apparently believed that would be a battle he could win.)

H. E. Panqui
04-13-2017, 07:12 AM
:cool:

...geekers i don't really know but could it have something to do with the republicrats having a thousand times more federal reserve notes to employ...

...the only 'libertarians' :rolleyes: anyone has heard in my neck of the woods are an old republican radio dummy named neil boortz and the agent orange provocateur, stinking alex jones...seems the stinking republicans inc. have bought out the libertarians inc. lock stock and barrel...and junked the party...

jmdrake
04-13-2017, 07:13 AM
Very poorly. Did this result surprise you. Did you imagine he'd wave his hand and make the bad guys go away?

HE'S ONE OF THE BAD GUYS! Seriously, go back and read his book "The America We Deserve" and get back with us.

Galileo Galilei
04-13-2017, 09:31 AM
Libertarians are up against the Law of the Jungle. If you believe in evolution instead of Noah's Ark, you know what I am talking about.

Natural Citizen
04-13-2017, 10:45 AM
Libertarians are up against the Law of the Jungle. If you believe in evolution instead of Noah's Ark, you know what I am talking about.

Libertine is not libertarian.

But your point should be commended as it goes straight to the heart of the matter. Which is the primary foundation for moral code with which our nation was founded upon, an which guide the fundamental principles of proper man-to-man, and consequently government-to-man relations.



Wait for it...

Natural Citizen
04-13-2017, 10:54 AM
Here's a great history lesson which outlines the primary foundation for moral code; the fundamental principle which underlies the traditional American philosophy.

Have a nice day.




". . . all men are created . . . endowed by their Creator . . ." (Declaration of Independence (http://www.lexrex.com/informed/foundingdocuments/declaration.htm))



The Principle

1. The fundamental principle underlying the traditional American philosophy is that the Spiritual is supreme--that Man is of Divine origin and his spiritual, or religious, nature is of supreme value and importance compared with things material.



Religious Nature

2. This governmental philosophy is, therefore, essentially religious in nature. It is uniquely American; no other people in all history have ever made this principle the basis of their governmental philosophy. The spiritual brotherhood of men under the common fatherhood of God is a concept which is basic to this American philosophy. It expresses the spiritual relationship of God to Man and, in the light thereof, of Man to Man. To forget these truths is a most heinous offense against the spirit of traditional America because the greatest sin is the lost consciousness of sin.

The fundamentally religious basis of this philosophy is the foundation of its moral code, which contemplates The Individual's moral duty as being created by God's Law: the Natural Law. The Individual's duty requires obedience to this Higher Law; while knowledge of this duty comes from conscience, which the religious-minded and morally-aware Individual feels duty-bound to heed. This philosophy asserts that there are moral absolutes: truths, such as those mentioned above, which are binding upon all Individuals at all times under all circumstances. This indicates some of the spiritual and moral values which are inherent in its concept of Individual Liberty-Responsibility.




An Indivisible Whole

3. The American philosophy, based upon this principle, is an indivisible whole and must be accepted or rejected as such. It cannot be treated piece-meal. Its fundamentals and its implicit meanings and obligations must be accepted together with its benefits.



The Individual's Self-respect

4. The concept of Man's spiritual nature, and the resulting concept of the supreme dignity and value of each Individual, provide the fundamental basis for each Individual's self-respect and the consequent mutual respect among Individual's. This self-respect as well as this mutual respect are the outgrowth of, and evidenced by, The Individual's maintenance of his God-given, unalienable rights. They are maintained by requiring that government and other Individuals respect them, as well as by his dedication to his own unceasing growth toward realization of his highest potential--spiritually, morally, intellectually, in every aspect of life. This is in order that he may merit maximum respect by self and by others.



Some Things Excluded

5. This concept of Man's spiritual nature excludes any idea of intrusion by government into this Man-to-Man spiritual relationship. It excludes the anti-moral precept that the end justifies the means and the related idea that the means can be separated from the end when judging them morally. This concept therefore excludes necessarily any idea of attempting to do good by force--for instance, through coercion of Man by Government, whether or not claimed to be for his own good or for the so-called common good or general welfare.

It excludes disbelief in--even doubt as to the existence of--God as the Creator of Man: and therefore excludes all ideas, theories and schools of thought--however ethical and lofty in intentions--which reject affirmative and positive belief in God as Man's Creator.



The Truly American Concept

6. Only those ideas, programs and practices, regarding things governmental, which are consistent with the concept that "The Spiritual is supreme" can justly be claimed to be truly American traditionally. Anything and everything governmental, which is in conflict with this concept, is non-American--judged by traditional belief.

This applies particularly to that which is agnostic, or atheistic--neutral about, or hostile to, positive and affirmative belief in this concept based upon belief in God as Man's Creator. There is not room for doubt, much less disbelief, in this regard from the standpoint of the traditional American philosophy. Its indivisible nature makes this inescapably true. This pertains, of course, to the realm of ideas and not to any person; it is the conflicting idea which is classified as non-American, according to this philosophy.



America a Haven For All Religions

7. The traditional American philosophy teaches that belief in God is the fundamental link which unites the adherents of all religions in a spiritual brotherhood. This philosophy allows for no differentiation between them in this unifying conviction: ". . . all men are created . . . endowed by their Creator . . ." This philosophy is all inclusive as to believers in God. Although America was originally colonized predominantly by adherents of the Christian religion, and principally by Protestants, the Founding Fathers steadfastly conformed to this all-embracing character of the approach of the American philosophy to religion. This was expressly and affirmatively indicated in the proclamation of 1776 of the fundamental American philosophy, of its basic principles, in the Declaration of Independence (http://www.lexrex.com/informed/foundingdocuments/declaration.htm). This was further indicated, negatively, in 1787-1788 by the Framers and Ratifiers of the Constitution (http://www.lexrex.com/informed/foundingdocuments/ConstBillAmend.htm)--as a "blueprint" for the structure of the then proposed Federal government, with strictly limited powers--by not permitting it to possess any power with regard to religion. This implied prohibition against the Federal government was reinforced by the addition of the First Amendment expressly prohibiting it, through the Congress, from making any law "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."--the words "an establishment of religion" being intended to mean, specifically and only, a church or religious organization which is established, supported and preferred by the government, like the Church of England establishments then existing in some of the States.




The Conclusion

8. Belief in Man's Divine origin is the foundation of the fundamental American principle which controls his relationship to government: that Man--The Individual--is of supreme dignity and value because of his spiritual nature.






Lesson source for new students who may wish to seek to understand the primary foundation for moral code as well as the fundamental principles of Individual Liberty:




https://www.amazon.com/American-ideal-1776-twelve-principles/dp/0911668020/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1492102542&sr=8-1&keywords=The+American+Ideal+of+1776%3A+The+Twelve+ Basic+American+Principles

There are those who claim that if the civil government acknowledges God, it is practicing "religion" which is prohibited by the First Amendment's establishment clause, which allegedly requires the "separation of church and state." This view ignores the legal documents that articulate the American philosophy of government. A governmental philosophy that presupposes the existence of the Creator is essential to fundamental legal concepts such as equal protection under the law, due process, and unalienable rights. The Declaration of Independence, the legal covenant that brought the United States of America into existence, specifically declared the philosophy of government upon which our nation was to be built. "All men are created equal, ... they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights." The political philosophy that presupposes the existence of the Creator God is no more "religion" than a political philosophy that presupposes no Creator God (socialism and communism). In the classic book, The American Ideal of 1776, the author documents and explains 12 fundamental principles that are central to the philosophy of government of the United States.





Read my sig. :)

Superfluous Man
04-13-2017, 10:59 AM
This is precisely why you can never trust atheists when they pretend to support religious freedom.

euphemia
04-13-2017, 11:04 AM
Libertarians do not believe in getting power. They believe that liberty empowers everyone.

Natural Citizen
04-13-2017, 11:10 AM
Osan, where you at, muh brotha? May as well toss in the old Cardinal Postulate while we're at it.

Just paste it or whatever. Let's get this stuff straightened out.

afwjam
04-13-2017, 11:21 AM
I disagree with the premise. Libertarians are to busy living their real lives to get cought up in a power struggle that accomplishes nothing good, or at least not in recent memory. If more people just lived their lives, ignored the establishment, we might get somewhere. Unfortunately they have convinced a majority that they have to participate in the bull shit, so the violence continues. We need to be educated, we need to be thinking, we need to live our own lives with principle. As old Timothy said: "tune in, turn on, drop out."

euphemia
04-13-2017, 12:07 PM
The other problem would be the candidates Libertarians put forth. Case in point: Gary Johnson. Not a libertarian.

Matt Collins
04-13-2017, 12:10 PM
Libertarians do not believe in getting power. They believe that liberty empowers everyone.There is nothing wrong with having power just like there is nothing wrong with having money. It depends on how you get it and what you use it for when you have it.

Natural Citizen
04-13-2017, 12:16 PM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by euphemia http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=6453241#post6453241)

Libertarians do not believe in getting power. They believe that liberty empowers everyone.




There is nothing wrong with having power just like there is nothing wrong with having money. It depends on how you get it and what you use it for when you have it.

That's precisely what she said, Matt. Don't you read good?

And, to be clear, when you say that it depends on how you get it and what you use it for when you have it, all that does is echo the definition of the word Libertarian (which euphemia specifically referenced).To be libertarian demands a specific foundation for moral code. It's what makes an Individual a libertarian in the true sense of the term.

HellooOooOooo...

Natural Citizen
04-13-2017, 12:29 PM
Matter of fact. That reminds me of something else. These little stalking horse ventures that pop up and suck the able bodies out of any practical education effort by fooling a bunch of over-anxious, short-sighted, young people into leaving the revolution to pay for a seat to play the role of useful idiot for somebody elses pet peeve cash cow. That's another reason libertarians lose.

Jesse James
04-13-2017, 03:54 PM
We don't control education.

Occam's Banana
04-13-2017, 05:21 PM
Why Do Libertarians Lose?

Lose what?



(Possibly related question: Can one meaningfully be said to "lose" something one did not already have?)