Is Lew Rockwell Harming The Liberty Movement With His Constant Use of Hyperbole?

[mczerone]

As anarchism was the natural state of man, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.

I get your point, but two critiques: (1) pre-historical anarchy did not have a mission statement that sought to preserve rights and defend against tyranny, while the U.S. Constitution did have such a stated purpose, and (2) any modern hypothetical anarchy would be based in voluntary institutions that function nothing like a "state of nature" anarchy.

[Pericles]

I get your point, but two critiques: (1) pre-historical anarchy did not have a mission statement that sought to preserve rights and defend against tyranny, while the U.S. Constitution did have such a stated purpose, and (2) any modern hypothetical anarchy would be based in voluntary institutions that function nothing like a "state of nature" anarchy.

Fair enough, but this is the type of discussion that needs to take place, but doesn't. (1) There is no claim that the US Constitution is self enforcing. It is a tool to be used by the citizens to control government - too many citizens have failed to perform the duties of a citizen. (2) In terms of general principles, such an organization has a good chance of maximizing individual liberty and wealth - the risk is in protecting that liberty and wealth from external displacement - not that it wouldn't work as a closed system,

[Vessol]

As anarchism was the natural state of man, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.

Market Anarchism=/=Pre-State "Anarchism"

Nice try though.

Fair enough, but this is the type of discussion that needs to take place, but doesn't. (1) There is no claim that the US Constitution is self enforcing. It is a tool to be used by the citizens to control government - too many citizens have failed to perform the duties of a citizen. (2) In terms of general principles, such an organization has a good chance of maximizing individual liberty and wealth - the risk is in protecting that liberty and wealth from external displacement - not that it wouldn't work as a closed system,

I only use that quotation as a nice simple catch-all critique of the Constitution. The U.S Constitution was badly written and left major holes for the Federal government to rapidly expand. I wouldn't even call them holes, as holes are often mistakes. The Federalists wanted a large and powerful Federal government. You could argue into your face is blue about the duties of the citizens, but have citizens ever done their "duty"? The State exploded in size as soon as it was created.

[Anti Federalist]

Everyone runs here to whine about how they hate being associated with everyone else here. Well, liberty isn't pretty. Makes for strange bedfellows.

In fact, the only thing uglier than liberty is the lack of it.

That ^^^

[jmdrake]

Should Lew Rockwell tone done his rhetoric some? He seems like the libertarian version of Michael Savage except without the yelling.

No. He's not hurting the liberty movement and neither is Alex Jones for that matter. And more and more Michael Savage is sounding like a libertarian. (Now he's against the Iraq, Afghan and Libyan wars. He talks about how Bush helped rob the country blind for the bankers etc.)

Here's the deal. The neocons don't wring there hands about whether or not people like Michelle Malkin and Bill O'Reilly hurt their movement. Liberals don't worry if Keith Olberman or Rachel Maddow hurt their movement. That's because they've been doing this longer and have a better idea of how the system, especially segmented media, works. Someone who would be turned off by Lew Rockwell to the point of not voting for someone just because Lew speaks well of him (Ron Paul) is so for gone they won't vote for Dr. Paul anyway. Lew helps energize the people that read and like him. Those who don't like him will tune him out.

Why do you think the Michael Moores of the world have been so successful? Why do you think movements aligned with people like Moore have had some success despite the bankruptcy of their ideas? It's because they understand psychology and the average liberty person does not. Once you wrap your mind around the fact that this is an information/propaganda war and not some popularity contest you will sleep better and night and the movement will be more successful.

[doodle]

Bit of passion is good, Rockwell is a good writer from articles I have read.