Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 42

Thread: Murray Rothbard’s Practical Politics

  1. #1

    Murray Rothbard’s Practical Politics

    By JACK HUNTER • July 31, 2012

    I see no other conceivable strategy for the achievement of liberty than political action. Religious or philosophical conversion of each man and woman is simply not going to work; that strategy ignores the problem of power, the fact that millions of people have a vested interest in statism and are not likely to give it up…. Education in liberty is of course vital, but it is not enough; action must also be taken to roll back the State… -- Murray Rothbard
    Politics is about making alliances, building coalitions, and marketing your message in a way that the masses can understand, digest, and embrace. If your purpose, intentionally or unintentionally, is to repulse or reject the masses, then there is no purpose to being in politics. If you’re not trying to make your ideas mainstream, then philosophy becomes a mere academic note.
    Wrote Rothbard in 1987:

    But here we face an inner problem and a paradox not only for libertarians, but for any radical, minority ideological movement. For marginal movements attract marginal people. Such movements are filled with what Germans call luftmenschen, people with no steady jobs, incomes, or visible means of support; the sort of people who instinctively alienate the mainstream bourgeois Americans, not so much by the content of their ideas, but by their style, lack of moorings, and “counterculture.”
    Rothbard also observed how such movement types might react if presented with the possibility of tangible mainstream success:

    If a serious opportunity should arise… for the movement to make a great leap into Middle America, into genuine influence in our society, that Libertarian luftmenschen will react not with enthusiasm but in fear and trembling. For far greater than their professed love of liberty is their hostility to bourgeois America.

    Rothbard noted:

    As one critical observer of the party has harshly charged: ‘they want the Party to be a social club for crazies.’
    read more...
    http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ical-politics/
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    This should make heads explode lolz
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  4. #3
    The anarchist wing of the libertarian movement want nothing to do with politics because they realized politics seldomly advances the principles of liberty. Even with all that Ron Paul have achieved, not much had changed politically in favor of liberty. Rand Paul will make concessions to advance his role in politics, maybe that will move liberty a step forward, but multiple steps backwards will have been taken along the way.

    But the only thing that ever truly advances the principles of liberty, I believe, is technological innovations that compete with government monopoly. We can see that with recent innovations like Uber, Airbnb, and mutual aid societies. And among those innovations, there are quite a few tech leaders with libertarians point of view at the heart of it.

    So, while politics continue to affect society for the worse, someone somewhere out there are inventing things that will revolutionize and out compete the statism illusion.
    Last edited by Nolan; 10-12-2014 at 07:29 PM.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    The anarchist wing of the libertarian movement want nothing to do with politics because they realized politics seldomly advances the principles of liberty.
    Because it hasn't been implemented properly before. Politics is the ONLY thing that can change the government because the government is run off of politics.

    Read the book Confrontational Politics and Rules for Radicals to understand how the progressive/statists have grown the government to the size it is today.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    Even with all that Ron Paul have achieved, not much had changed politically in favor of liberty.
    Incorrect... the drones, the NSA, the anti-war Republicans, the drug war, etc are all things that are beginning to be major issues, especially for Republicans, because of Ron.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    But the only thing that ever truly advances the principles of liberty, I believe, is technological innovations that compete with government monopoly. We can see that with recent innovations like Uber, Airbnb, and mutual aid societies. And among those innovations, there are quite a few tech leaders with libertarians point of view at the heart of it.

    So, while politics continue to affect society for the worse, someone somewhere out there are inventing things that will revolutionize and out compete the statism illusion.
    Politics is neutral. Its who uses it and how it is used is what matters.

    I do agree that we should indeed strive for technological innovation at every opportunity to advance the cause of liberty. But there will always be a political front that must be fought too, otherwise the government will just simply outlaw the technology. Here is a good place to start with that: https://www.eff.org/
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Because it hasn't been implemented properly before. Politics is the ONLY thing that can change the government because the government is run off of politics.

    Read the book Confrontational Politics and Rules for Radicals to understand how the progressive/statists have grown the government to the size it is today.
    "It hasn't been implemented properly" is also what socialists say about collectivism. I'm not accusing you of one, but tell me when was the last time politics changed government to make it smaller?

    Sure the progressives did grew the government, but did the conservatives like Reagan and Bushes made it smaller? No, in fact quite the opposite. The libertarians who want to participate in politics are most of the time excluded on the sideline of politics. CATO has no real impact in Washington politics whatsoever. Even Rothbard had denounced the creation he created.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Incorrect... the drones, the NSA, the anti-war Republicans, the drug war, etc are all things that are beginning to be major issues, especially for Republicans, because of Ron.
    Ron Paul changed some people minds about about those topics, but what have been done to eliminated them in the U.S congress? Nothing. Even if the Republican takes over the majority in the senate this November, would anything be done? Be honest to yourself here.

    What already have been done to fix the problem of government surveillance came from tech companies like Apple and Google. They've recently announced that they will start encrypting their users data from the federal AND local police. No bull$#@! politics needed here.

    As for the drug war, Silk Road 2.0 and multitude other darknet drug stores have been saving people from getting shot, stab, and arrested when buying their drug. Why wait for Washington politics when you can sit in your pajamas ordering your weeds, and god knows how many other types of drug, safely in the comfort of your home and assured the best quality.

    Drones? Isn't Obama still using them to kill innocent civilians around the world? Sure people knows how horrible drones killing are, but has any progress made in politics to eliminated it? Even Rand support using drones for god shake.


    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Politics is neutral. Its who uses it and how it is used is what matters.

    I do agree that we should indeed strive for technological innovation at every opportunity to advance the cause of liberty. But there will always be a political front that must be fought too, otherwise the government will just simply outlaw the technology. Here is a good place to start with that: https://www.eff.org/
    There was a personality traits study for politicians around the world, turned out narcissism and psychopathy are the most common traits for the majority of politician. So, politics is NOT the thing that will change government. The Roman's senate didn't revert Roman's dictatorial end, the British parliament didn't save the empire from wars, what make politics in the U.S any different?

    The only thing that ever changed humanity for the better are individuals creating products and services for the consumers' needs and wants. Outlawing are only useful for creating black markets. Government protectionism politics are only there to get in the way between business competitors and the consumers.

    But I'm not all totally downer about it, I accept the fact that there will always be protectionism politics. We only have to work around them. Politics is most draining to the soul anyway. I prefer looking at cats meme.
    Last edited by Nolan; 10-13-2014 at 12:57 AM.

  7. #6
    Man, do we need more people like Nolan here.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by green73 View Post
    Man, do we need more people like Nolan here.
    Indeed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  9. #8
    Dang. Nolan said it like it is, huh. Very good.

    It's a good point with regard to the functional impact of technology as it pertains to liberty as opposed to the less practical political whims of power seekers who speak very little of their position as a whole with regard to applied sciences and technologies.



    Now. This....


    Politics is about making alliances, building coalitions, and marketing your message in a way that the masses can understand, digest, and embrace. If your purpose, intentionally or unintentionally, is to repulse or reject the masses, then there is no purpose to being in politics.
    While I'm thinking of it, I'll share a link here. Although I don't agree at all with the explanation given for the phenomenon from the source which seems to be similar to the meretricious explanation quoted and specifically emphasised in the op, the data seems fair. Not only do we have narcissistic psychos establishing positions of power with regard to dictation of terms of controversy relative to our foreign and domestic policies but we have genuinely dumb narcissistic psychos seeking to establish as well as currently holding positions of power with regard to dictation of terms of controversy relative to our foreign and domestic policies. This seems to be developing into a popular political meme as of late. Excusing or attempting to explain away the incompetence, lack of depth and just plain amateurism in the way that our representatives discuss and present themselves with regard to matters of foreign and domestic policy in a way that stimulates the notion that they do so because the American people are shallow is disingenuous at most. Malfeasant at the least. We live in the Information Age.

    While I concur that that politics may be a conceivable strategy for the achievement of liberty, demonstration of competence to lead politically must be demonstrated across the board.

    Speeches from US presidents have gotten dumber over time

    Last edited by Natural Citizen; 10-13-2014 at 05:47 AM.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    "It hasn't been implemented properly" is also what socialists say about collectivism. I'm not accusing you of one, but tell me when was the last time politics changed government to make it smaller?

    Sure the progressives did grew the government, but did the conservatives like Reagan and Bushes made it smaller? No, in fact quite the opposite. The libertarians who want to participate in politics are most of the time excluded on the sideline of politics. CATO has no real impact in Washington politics whatsoever. Even Rothbard had denounced the creation he created.



    Ron Paul changed some people minds about about those topics, but what have been done to eliminated them in the U.S congress? Nothing. Even if the Republican takes over the majority in the senate this November, would anything be done? Be honest to yourself here.

    What already have been done to fix the problem of government surveillance came from tech companies like Apple and Google. They've recently announced that they will start encrypting their users data from the federal AND local police. No bull$#@! politics needed here.

    As for the drug war, Silk Road 2.0 and multitude other darknet drug stores have been saving people from getting shot, stab, and arrested when buying their drug. Why wait for Washington politics when you can sit in your pajamas ordering your weeds, and god knows how many other types of drug, safely in the comfort of your home and assured the best quality.

    Drones? Isn't Obama still using them to kill innocent civilians around the world? Sure people knows how horrible drones killing are, but has any progress made in politics to eliminated it? Even Rand support using drones for god shake.




    There was a personality traits study for politicians around the world, turned out narcissism and psychopathy are the most common traits for the majority of politician. So, politics is NOT the thing that will change government. The Roman's senate didn't revert Roman's dictatorial end, the British parliament didn't save the empire from wars, what make politics in the U.S any different?

    The only thing that ever changed humanity for the better are individuals creating products and services for the consumers' needs and wants. Outlawing are only useful for creating black markets. Government protectionism politics are only there to get in the way between business competitors and the consumers.

    But I'm not all totally downer about it, I accept the fact that there will always be protectionism politics. We only have to work around them. Politics is most draining to the soul anyway. I prefer looking at cats meme.
    Burying one's head in the sand isn't going to improve anything either. Government appreciates it though. Because then there are that many less people who are standing in the way of those who have dastardly goals. You may say, what, it hasn't been turned around yet. You're right, it hasn't. But, if not for those who have been standing in the way of those leading America off the cliff, it would have fallen off long, long ago. Imagine what might have happened, what still could happen, if those burying their heads would grow a spine.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  12. #10
    Civil rights legislation didn't advance until the American people saw brave men and women

    facing down attack dogs



    and fire hoses



    taking their message to the streets



    and willing to get arrested for daring to take a seat on a bus



    Politics always runs a step behind these kinds of things.


    The political process will never do anything as daring as these people did. The political process will always play it safe.

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    "It hasn't been implemented properly" is also what socialists say about collectivism. I'm not accusing you of one, but tell me when was the last time politics changed government to make it smaller?
    I've personally stopped bad legislation from becoming law. And I have helped good legislation which limits the government to become law.

    It happens, and it can happen, and it is happening.


    Government is like a 1000 story building but the designs only call it for it to be 50 stories tall. In order to get it back to the level where it belongs the first thing we have to do is stop building. We can't start deconstructing until we stop building. It's just that simple.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    Sure the progressives did grew the government, but did the conservatives like Reagan and Bushes made it smaller? No, in fact quite the opposite. The libertarians who want to participate in politics are most of the time excluded on the sideline of politics. CATO has no real impact in Washington politics whatsoever. Even Rothbard had denounced the creation he created.
    CATO is a think tank, and think tanks don't do anything other than churn out information. I really enjoy a lot of CATO's work, but activism is what what changes things, not reports or hot air.

    Changing peoples minds or educating the politicians or the masses etc isn't what works. The only effective measure that is guaranteed to have success over the long term is brute force political activism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    Ron Paul changed some people minds about about those topics, but what have been done to eliminated them in the U.S congress? Nothing. Even if the Republican takes over the majority in the senate this November, would anything be done? Be honest to yourself here.
    Have you not seen the difference in attitude and the criticism that these programs are taking? Amash's amendment came very close to passing, Rand's rants about drones and the NSA or causing convulsions among the MIC and establishment politicians.... the bad guys cant do much of anything expansive right now. Remember, before we go the other direction we have to slow down the "forward" momentum. That is the phase of things we are currently in.



    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    What already have been done to fix the problem of government surveillance came from tech companies like Apple and Google. They've recently announced that they will start encrypting their users data from the federal AND local police. No bull$#@! politics needed here.
    Do you not recall the outrage against CISPA and SOPA that came about over the last two years when these were about to come up for a vote?



    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    Even Rand support using drones for god shake.
    Only in limited and proper circumstances.



    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    So, politics is NOT the thing that will change government.
    Incorrect, the government is the result of politics. Politics is defined as the adjudication of power, who does and doesnt get power. The government's policies are all based upon who has the power of the government, which is the result of the political process. EVERYTHING the government does is the result of politics, good or bad.



    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    The only thing that ever changed humanity for the better are individuals creating products and services for the consumers' needs and wants. Outlawing are only useful for creating black markets. Government protectionism politics are only there to get in the way between business competitors and the consumers.
    Of course, and I agree. This is why government must be as limited as possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    Politics is most draining to the soul anyway. I prefer looking at cats meme.
    You are welcome to have a debate society or a book club, or whatever, but I will continue to actively fight for our rights and do whatever I can to return the government to where it belongs.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  14. #12
    How many times is this same article going to be posted? What is the goal?

    Rothbard was incorrect about intellectual property and children's rights. The same goes for political involvement.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by familydog View Post
    How many times is this same article going to be posted? What is the goal?

    Rothbard was incorrect about intellectual property and children's rights. The same goes for political involvement.
    Oh, I think Rothbard had many very good ideas and thoughts about strategy and how to go about obtaining a libertarian society. His thoughts, obviously, were much more sophisticated, complex, and variegated than those of certain opening posters trying to use cherry-picked Rothbard passages as a proof-texting platform for a simple-minded and frankly doltish attack on people she should see as allies, but has chosen instead to hate and go out of her way to alienate.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    This should make heads explode lolz
    This will make anti-GOPers/third partiers heads explode:

  17. #15
    Jack "Jim DeMint is a fighter for liberty" Hunter is a piece of garbage who sold his soul at his first taste of mediocre political success. Not the guy any liberty-minded person should be reading or taking seriously.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    Jack "Jim DeMint is a fighter for liberty" Hunter is a piece of garbage who sold his soul at his first taste of mediocre political success. Not the guy any liberty-minded person should be reading or taking seriously.
    /thread
    "The Patriarch"



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Natural Citizen View Post
    Rothbard: Politics is about making alliances, building coalitions, and marketing your message in a way that the masses can understand, digest, and embrace. If your purpose, intentionally or unintentionally, is to repulse or reject the masses, then there is no purpose to being in politics.
    It's ironic and sad that when he died, he was completely in alliances with none. The left nor right, nor even the Libertarian themselves. Bill Buckley, the great conservative, pissed on Rothbard grave in his obituary piece. Perhaps Rothbard was morally drained to give a rats about political actions anymore in the early 90s until his death.

    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    Civil rights legislation didn't advance until the American people saw brave men and women

    facing down attack dogs
    Civil rights legislation never ended racism in America nor improved black communities. There will be no law to stop anyone from hating anyone, that is absolute. What did changed was avocation for tolerance in culture norms. MLK did just that. He wasn't a politician, he was a noble preacher.

    What Civil rights legislation and politics did, in fact, is far more damaging to black communities ever since. Affirmative actions, that arose out of the civil rights movement, has enslaved black communities to poverty and helplessness. Opportunists like Jesse Jackson and the likes thrive on these sensitive political issues to further only their own status.

    So, there is no case for politics even in civil liberty issues. It was the preaching for tolerance and acceptance that changed the cultural views on fellow americans. Just as Gandhi did before him, MLK followed his steps. Politics added only perpetual miseries for the black communities, even now.
    Last edited by Nolan; 10-14-2014 at 03:03 AM.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    I've personally stopped bad legislation from becoming law. And I have helped good legislation which limits the government to become law.

    It happens, and it can happen, and it is happening.


    Government is like a 1000 story building but the designs only call it for it to be 50 stories tall. In order to get it back to the level where it belongs the first thing we have to do is stop building. We can't start deconstructing until we stop building. It's just that simple.
    That's great, and I encourage you continue your dedication to stop bad legislations. I'm all for it if any one has the stomach to bear the fanatics conservatives and the environmentalist left talking points.

    The problem is not good-hearted people like you Matt. It's the mass locus armies of ignoramuses. There are more of them voting for more stories to be built than there are enough people like your to stop them. And that just stopping them from building more stories, there' are still the previous 1000 stories that are still there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    CATO is a think tank, and think tanks don't do anything other than churn out information.
    Think tanks are there to help influent DC politics. What good does a think tank do if it doesn't advises politicians?


    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Changing peoples minds or educating the politicians or the masses etc isn't what works.
    Are you discrediting Ron Paul's entire career with that statement?

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    The only effective measure that is guaranteed to have success over the long term is brute force political activism.
    Well, good luck signing up masses of liberty activists. There are dozens of them, dozens!

    Al Gore bused 400,000! paid activists to Wallstreet to protest about some end of the world issues. Libertarians couldn't even get a few couple of seats at the table of Congress.


    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    ...the bad guys cant do much of anything expansive right now...
    How much more expansive can the NSA really grow when it already has everything about you stored permanently?

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    CISPA and SOPA...
    Looking back with the NSA revelations, who gives a rats what the legalization of surveillance does when the NSA already does it illegally?

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Only in limited and proper circumstances.
    Obama also said the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    You are welcome to have a debate society or a book club, or whatever, but I will continue to actively fight for our rights and do whatever I can to return the government to where it belongs.
    I'm not the one racking up post counts preaching to the choir here. I spend most of my time now looking at square brackets and curly braces (programmatically speaking). And also boring stuff like neural network interface.

    But I'm not discouraging you from doing what you do best. Continue what you can do for your community and country. But do heed what Ron Paul himself said about politics, people who are aspire to be in politics are the red flags.
    Last edited by Nolan; 10-14-2014 at 05:24 AM.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    The problem is not good-hearted people like you Matt. It's the mass locus armies of ignoramuses. There are more of them voting for more stories to be built than there are enough people like your to stop them. And that just stopping them from building more stories, there' are still the previous 1000 stories that are still there.
    No, politics is decided by a very few people. You dont need the masses, you just need a few well placed and trained activists with lists that can mobilize those who care about that specific issue.


    Read this and watch this to better understand it:


    http://www.facltraining.org/facl2/info.htm







    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    Think tanks are there to help influent DC politics. What good does a think tank do if it doesn't advises politicians?
    Because most of the time politicians don't vote based on what is good or bad, they vote based on political forces beating down upon them.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    Are you discrediting Ron Paul's entire career with that statement?
    Ron got lucky, right place at the right time. But he didn't accomplish anything legislatively. Rand on the other hand is making legislative accomplishments.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  23. #20
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    1,489
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Quote Originally Posted by sgt150 View Post
    Jack "Jim DeMint is a fighter for liberty" Hunter is a piece of garbage who sold his soul at his first taste of mediocre political success. Not the guy any liberty-minded person should be reading or taking seriously.
    You're wrong.

    Look, it's a shame Jack Hunter lacked judgement for his own apparent personal benefit and joined Rand's campaign, when he had such a non-PC past. It's a shame he tried and failed to effectively defend an endorsement of Mitt Romney on RonPaul2012.com, while getting paychecks from funds from grassroots supporters' donations that were given to a campaign to get Ron Paul the nomination.

    I mean knowing the mess that the newsletters were for Ron's 2012 campaign when the media started on them, you would THINK a Ron Paul 2012 staffer would have known that anything of THAT sort of past would be a no go for a potential 2016 candidate. But, Jack apparently learned quickly, that it is BETTER to make a dime being involved in politics, even at someone else's expense, than to be giving a dime. It's something I hope we have all learned after 2008 and 2012. In politics, it is better to get, than to give. Always keep your receipts. Always bill the campaigns. DO NOTHING FOR FREE. These are important lessons we can learn, and remember moving forward.

    But, the following portion is 100% wrong, and probably why it was emphasized:
    "Politics is about making alliances, building coalitions, and marketing your message in a way that the masses can understand, digest, and embrace. If your purpose, intentionally or unintentionally, is to repulse or reject the masses, then there is no purpose to being in politics."

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post

    The problem is not good-hearted people like you Matt.
    It is very polite of you to say so, Nolan, and perhaps you are correct in your assessment. But what you will surely find most notable about Collins is his invariable ability to look clear, concise and logical arguments right in the face and proceed to post the same damned thing he posts over and over again, as he did in his response to this well written post of yours.

    In Matt's mind, changing minds doesn't matter; votes, signatures and lists are the key to fighting the enemy of human liberty.

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    It is very polite of you to say so, Nolan, and perhaps you are correct in your assessment. But what you will surely find most notable about Collins is his invariable ability to look clear, concise and logical arguments right in the face and proceed to post the same damned thing he posts over and over again, as he did in his response to this well written post of yours.

    In Matt's mind, changing minds doesn't matter; votes, signatures and lists are the key to fighting the enemy of human liberty.
    There has to be a line somewhere between "meh, political issues aren't moral issues and not really that big of a deal" and "all non-anarchists are anathema." I'm not quite sure where that line is.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    In Matt's mind, changing minds doesn't matter; votes, signatures and lists are the key to fighting the enemy of human liberty.
    You're getting little closer to the mark.... changing their minds about policy doesn't matter so much, changing their minds about who to vote for does matter. Voters don't really make policy most of the time, the people they elect do.


    It's much easier to convince a voter that candidate X is a bad person and not worthy of their vote, than it is to change that voter's entire worldview about American Exceptionalism or example.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFanatic View Post
    There has to be a line somewhere between "meh, political issues aren't moral issues and not really that big of a deal" and "all non-anarchists are anathema." I'm not quite sure where that line is.
    I have no problem with folks who want to carry the fight in the political world. I don't believe I've ever said otherwise here. One should focus his efforts where he feels most drawn, and adept. Speaking personally, I cannot countenance the moral consequences of even voting. Again, I have sins enough of my own to answer for, without the added burden of answering for my support and empowerment of some silver-tongued politician.

    There is a legitimate place for both the political and philosophical fight, and it is very clear that of the two, the far more relevant and important is the philosophical fight. And of course I've laid out the logic behind that assertion many times, to which Collins has many times replied with basically the same thing he posted in response to Nolan.

    I don't know the fellow from Adam but for some of his rather dull posts here at this forum, but if I had to guess it wouldn't be good-hearted. I'd guess he's a minor staffer/PAC activist, which has given him a little access that he's hoping will assuage an inferiority complex. But that's just a guess.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    You're getting little closer to the mark...
    Changing minds, in the final assessment, is truly the only thing that does matter.

    But there's no glory in that for you, is there?

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    Changing minds, in the final assessment, is truly the only thing that does matter.
    No, it's not. Changing policy is the only thing that is going to have an effect on how much liberty we have. We don't need to change the minds of the masses in order to increase our liberty.
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    No, it's not. Changing policy is the only thing that is going to have an effect on how much liberty we have.
    What policy, exactly, would that be? What is on yer list of things to change? It's a pretty simple question. I know that you avoid many of my questions so I try to keep it simple this time.

    I just want to compare my list of things that need changing compared to yours, really.
    Last edited by Natural Citizen; 10-14-2014 at 07:33 PM.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    I have no problem with folks who want to carry the fight in the political world. I don't believe I've ever said otherwise here. One should focus his efforts where he feels most drawn, and adept. Speaking personally, I cannot countenance the moral consequences of even voting. Again, I have sins enough of my own to answer for, without the added burden of answering for my support and empowerment of some silver-tongued politician.
    For curiosity, was Ron Paul an exception for you?

    There were no accusations in my post, just philosophical inquiry. I'm not sure exactly where the fine line is myself. Personally I think Rothbard was a little too pragmatic, but since he was atheist I can hardly blame him.


    There is a legitimate place for both the political and philosophical fight, and it is very clear that of the two, the far more relevant and important is the philosophical fight. And of course I've laid out the logic behind that assertion many times, to which Collins has many times replied with basically the same thing he posted in response to Nolan.

    I don't know the fellow from Adam but for some of his rather dull posts here at this forum, but if I had to guess it wouldn't be good-hearted. I'd guess he's a minor staffer/PAC activist, which has given him a little access that he's hoping will assuage an inferiority complex. But that's just a guess.
    Yes, I agree that the philosophical fight is far more important. But I still think the political fight is important. Not the left vs right Democrat v Republican fight, mind you, that's not important at all. But I do think political fights over specific issues are important.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Nolan View Post
    But do heed what Ron Paul himself said about politics, people who are aspire to be in politics are the red flags.
    Indeed. Indeed.

    Nolan, everything you have written in this thread has been brilliant. As green73 says, we sure could use more like you. Stick around!

  34. #30
    Hasn't gotten us anywhere. You can't be "practical" and expect to be a purist when it comes to philosophy and get somewhere. Ron and Rothbard both failed to be "practical"

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Murray Rothbard’s Practical Politics
    By LibertyEagle in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-25-2013, 08:43 AM
  2. Ben, what is your take on Murray Rothbard?
    By green73 in forum Ben Swann Q&A Event
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-13-2013, 07:17 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-22-2013, 06:31 PM
  4. Murray Rothbard’s Practical Politics
    By GeorgiaAvenger in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-31-2012, 11:02 PM
  5. Practical Politics?
    By RSLudlum in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-02-2008, 11:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •