you're preaching to the choir!

As much as I enjoy Mises.org, I can't help but think that it is a rather futile effort.  This blog is used exclusively by libertarians, so I don't see how it is going to persuade anybody to join the libertarian movement.  If you want to make an impact, you are going to have to persuade liberals and conservatives.

Liberals are, by and large, a lost cause.  They are moved by emotion more than reason and espouse every kind of state interference to conform society to their image; that is a terrible combination.  If you want to share libertarianism with liberals, you will have to endure endless amounts of Newspeak and derision.

Conservatives, on the other hand, believe in economic freedom and tend to be anti-government--with several inconstistencies.  The conservative's creed is, "I belive in the free market.  I believe in small government, and I dislike government bureaucrats--except for all those really cool guys with all their guns and all their big computers who go out and fight the bad guys.  That must be fun!!!"

If you help a conservative see the contradictory and juvenile nature of that perspective, he is likely to convert to libertarianism.  I should know; I used to be a conservative.

Also, conservatives tend to be religious, so if they realize that their excessive militarism is contradictory with their faith, they will re-evaluate their views.  This book should help: http://mises.org/books/bookofpeace.pdf

There is also a book, My Country Versus Me, that tells the story of Wen Ho Lee, the Los Alamos nuclear scientist who was falsely accused of espionage and the persecution he endured.  The beauty of America is that, even with extremely powerful enemies, justice prevailed and he won his freedom.  The book will convince anyone that the Big Brother military appartatus cannot be left to its own devises, and that Constitutional guarantees are necessary to safeguard our freedom.  Conservatives, on the other hand, seem to elevate military and law enforcement to a god-like level; they are always noble and virtuous, they know more than we do, and we need them to protect us.  They must be allowed to wiretap, imprison, interrogate, and kill without judicial oversight, and most of all, must be allowed to operate in complete secrecy.

So, why don't we head over to a conservative blog, such as Townhall.com & freerepublic, and share some good libertarian insights to anyone who will listen?

If we had gotten the message out to conservatives earlier, Ron Paul would have won the Republican nomination.

Conservatives, especially neocons, are not anti-government by any strech of imagination.  Favoring corporatism over socialism is hardly libertarian.  The whole "anti-government convservative" idea is mostly a myth.

Why I Am Not A Conservative, by Frederich Hayek

Left and Right: The Prospects For Liberty, by Murray Rothbard

Could find more, but I'm too lazy right now.

Also, conservatives tend to be religious, so if they realize that their excessive militarism is contradictory with their faith, they will re-evaluate their views.  This book should help: http://mises.org/books/bookofpeace.pdf

no comment.

I don't think anyone believes that we are "converting" anyone here (although I suspect that anarchist are actively trying to convert minarchist!).  We come here more to discuss political philosophy and economic theory with like-minded people.  I know I come here to expand my knowledge of anarchism, liberty and economics and I've had a lot of view points changed over the last few months (abortion and IP laws in particular).  There is nothing that gets the creative juices flowing than a good debate with someone and that's why I'm here.

Discussing political theory--or any other subject--with like-minded people can be invigorating, but I think converting outsiders is a more rewarding endeavor.  What do you think?

While you have a certain point, I think that your analysis is flawed because "the choir" is not uniform. There are minarchists, anarcho-capitalists, mutualists, geolibertarians, paleolibertarians, Miseans, Rothbardians, Hoppeans, left-libertarians, agorists and so on. Quite often I'm most certainly not preaching to the choir here. I'm often an antagonist (on matters such as strategy, alliances, corporate personhood, immigration and religion). There is a lot of diversity within libertarian circles. I also strongly disagree with you about conservatives, who I find to be a lost cause. The same goes for the faith thing: I would actually argue that traditional judeo-christian morality may contradict the principles of liberty and not provide a particularly beneficial cultural framework for a free society.

Perhaps before libertarians can sensibly "convert" others, they need to get their own *** together in the first place.

No doubt.  But I prefer to do that face to face.  I'll go to gun shows and other places and hand out little pamphlets I write every once and I while.  I've slowly converted a guy at work from being a liberal to a limited government libertarian and I've got another guy starting to ask questions about it.

 Mises.org and its community mises.com were intended for libertarians and Austrians alike. I discovered mises.org in my junior year of high school after googling "For a New Liberty" by Murray N. Rothbard. After that, I digged deeper and came to the realization that libertarianism is the correct solution to our most urgent problems and so forth. As of now, I'm entering college, pursuing a degree in economics, and mises.org has been of huge significance to my research and continuing education in Austrian economics (As my own intellectual hobby, I unfortunately will be learning Keynesian econ in college). I can think of no greater resource than the Media and Literature section of the site. I don't see mises.org as a place to convert people, its really a place to _propel_ those already converted to better education in Austrian economics and libertarianism. Hopefully, once I get past college, I can direct my energies to the libertarian movement and start converting and educating others, but I can't see it happening now. Mises.org will hopefully accomplish spreading libertarianism indirectly as it propels more young libertarians into careers that champion the ideas of a free society and economy.

Brainpolice:

While you have a certain point, I think that your analysis is flawed because "the choir" is not uniform. There are minarchists, anarcho-capitalists, mutualists, geolibertarians, paleolibertarians Miseans, Rothbardians, Hoppeans, left-libertarians, agorists and so on. Quite often I'm most certainly not preaching to the choir here. I'm often an antagonist (on matters such as strategy, alliances, corporate personhood, immigration and religion). There is a lot of diversity within libertarian circles. I also strongly disagree with you about conservatives, who I find to be a lost cause. The same goes for the faith thing: I would actually argue that traditional judeo-christian morality may contradict the principles of liberty and not provide a particularly beneficial cultural framework for a free society.

I don't see how traditional Judeo-Chritian morality contradicts the principles of liberty.  So long as you are not trying to force your Judeo-Christian beliefs on someone you are free to hold them and live by them.

Brainpolice:

Perhaps before libertarians can sensibly "convert" others, they need to get their own *** together in the first place.

Herding cats.  That's the problem with individualist -- we all think we're right.

kingmonkey:

No doubt.  But I prefer to do that face to face.  I'll go to gun shows and other places and hand out little pamphlets I write every once and I while.  I've slowly converted a guy at work from being a liberal to a limited government libertarian and I've got another guy starting to ask questions about it.

 

You know, you could reach a wider audience on the conservative blogs.

kingmonkey:

Brainpolice:

While you have a certain point, I think that your analysis is flawed because "the choir" is not uniform. There are minarchists, anarcho-capitalists, mutualists, geolibertarians, paleolibertarians Miseans, Rothbardians, Hoppeans, left-libertarians, agorists and so on. Quite often I'm most certainly not preaching to the choir here. I'm often an antagonist (on matters such as strategy, alliances, corporate personhood, immigration and religion). There is a lot of diversity within libertarian circles. I also strongly disagree with you about conservatives, who I find to be a lost cause. The same goes for the faith thing: I would actually argue that traditional judeo-christian morality may contradict the principles of liberty and not provide a particularly beneficial cultural framework for a free society.

I don't see how traditional Judeo-Chritian morality contradicts the principles of liberty.  So long as you are not trying to force your Judeo-Christian beliefs on someone you are free to hold them and live by them.

Brainpolice:

Perhaps before libertarians can sensibly "convert" others, they need to get their own *** together in the first place.

Herding cats.  That's the problem with individualist -- we all think we're right.

 

 

Couldn't have said it better myself!

I don't see how traditional Judeo-Chritian morality contradicts the principles of liberty.  So long as you are not trying to force your Judeo-Christian beliefs on someone you are free to hold them and live by them.

I see it as being unconductive to liberty when viewed as a self-denying, self-sacrificing mindset. Sure, it might not be forced onto others. But to me it seems like a mindset that enables slavery. I think that so long as an altruistic mentality is held by the masses, and I do consider judeo-christian morality to be altruistic, the state will continue to be perpetuated because the state relies on precisely such a mentality. You are encouraged to sacrifice your life, property and values as an ethical imperative.

I didn't intend to get into this argument on this thread though.

kingmonkey:

Brainpolice:

While you have a certain point, I think that your analysis is flawed because "the choir" is not uniform. There are minarchists, anarcho-capitalists, mutualists, geolibertarians, paleolibertarians Miseans, Rothbardians, Hoppeans, left-libertarians, agorists and so on. Quite often I'm most certainly not preaching to the choir here. I'm often an antagonist (on matters such as strategy, alliances, corporate personhood, immigration and religion). There is a lot of diversity within libertarian circles. I also strongly disagree with you about conservatives, who I find to be a lost cause. The same goes for the faith thing: I would actually argue that traditional judeo-christian morality may contradict the principles of liberty and not provide a particularly beneficial cultural framework for a free society.

I don't see how traditional Judeo-Chritian morality contradicts the principles of liberty.  So long as you are not trying to force your Judeo-Christian beliefs on someone you are free to hold them and live by them.

Brainpolice:

Perhaps before libertarians can sensibly "convert" others, they need to get their own *** together in the first place.

Herding cats.  That's the problem with individualist -- we all think we're right.

 

 

I couldn't have said it better myself!

Brainpolice:

I don't see how traditional Judeo-Chritian morality contradicts the principles of liberty.  So long as you are not trying to force your Judeo-Christian beliefs on someone you are free to hold them and live by them.

I see it as being unconductive to liberty when viewed as a self-denying, self-sacrificing mindset. Sure, it might not be forced onto others. But to me it seems like a mindset that enables slavery. I think that so long as an altruistic mentality is held by the masses, and I do consider judeo-christian morality to be altruistic, the state will continue to be perpetuated because the state relies on precisely such a mentality. You are encouraged to sacrifice your life, property and values as an ethical imperative.

I didn't intend to get into this argument on this thread though.

Me neither.  Can we talk about something else?

ama gi:

You know, you could reach a wider audience on the conservative blogs.

It's not the quantity but the quality.  I've converted my fair share of people to libertarian way of thinking.  Conservatives, liberals, Marxist, the apathetic, etc.  Though I'm not against using these conservative message boards and blogs I don't prefer them.  I like talking to people in the street face to face or perhaps over a nice beer.  That's just my style is all.

 I am with him 100% on conservatives, I myself am a recovering conservative and his analysis is completely correct. We need some good libertarian film makers to make a "Sicko" without all the BS, that is dedicated to pointing out the inconsistencies of conservatives on issues like war or the war on drugs ect. and hopefully we could convert many. Liberals are mostly a lost cause because they do the whole 'theres a problem lets fix it with this solution, and not even care what the actual effects of the solution because it only matters what we want the 'solution' to do.' routine. They simply have low IQ's and probably can not be reasoned with.

I fail to see why it would be any more easy to reason with a conservative who has an irrational attachment to the military and nation, who supports economic fascism as if it was a free market, favors a surveillance apparatus and thinks that immigrants should be shot on sight. They'll probably consider you to be a communist for challenging their worldview in any significant way.