America's political system works. Period.
Gasp! Shock! Horror! (I can see the hate mail coming already).
But don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily in favor of the American political process, certainly not as any sort of end. What I am saying, though, is that the person with the best strategy, the best campaign, and the most votes wins.
That, in and of itself, is generally remarkable compared to societies all over the world, and without-doubt veritably-so in often inhumane human history. Right or wrong, the best person wins from a strategic standpoint. It's time we start winning too.
I’m a small business owner - if some politicians decide to tax me even further, I am powerless to stop them if I have no political power. Even if I “educate” my colleagues, the fact of the matter is that as long as the law exists on the books, I will go to jail if I do not pay them. This constant struggle for liberty, though, deserves a much more extensive and articulate explanation than I give.
Mike Rothfeld’s explanation was the hardest lesson I’ve learned thus far in life, but it has also been the most important. The political process wins if we don’t stop it.
You may disagree with Mike ideologically but, strategically, he is right and this movement will fail if we do not heed his words and act accordingly.
Click here to read The Real Nature of Politics by Mike Rothfeld in Issue 6 of YAL’s Winning on Principle Newsletter.
Exactly when do you feel the system of a representative democracy with powers limited by a constitution (constitutional republic) has worked? Almost ten years after the signing of the constitution, this country was lost. Private interests (large industry) were chosen to be the winners by our republic's leaders (read: Hamilton vs Jefferson). The state and it's powers have continually grown since it's inception. Agora! Anarchy! Action! The sytem doesn't work. Voting doesn't work. Voluntaryism Works! Change yourself. Represent yourself. Don't waste your energy trying to change "the system" by working within the bounds of "the system". True change will come from outside the system.
Charles,
While I might agree with you in principle the truth is that whether you like it or not the coercive force of the state will, by it's nature, not allow you to exempt yourself from it influence. So you while you might want nothing more than to be left alone the state will always try to dominate you whether you are involved in it's institutions or not. Look a groups like the Branch Davidians, MOVE, the Amish, as well as other groups which have attempted to live outside the state.
You can either sit in your tower philosobating about how your system is much better, which has usually ended in violence and demonization or you can learn to use their own weapons against them.
Not allow me to exempt myself from it's influence? I exempt myself from it's influence on a daily basis via counter-economics. I take action on a daily basis in my personal life via counter-economics. I take action on a daily basis when I discuss agorism with friends. If you ask me, you are the one philosobating. When has an elected representative shrunk the size of the state? When has such a representative even been elected? I believe it to be naive to think that such a representative will be elected. Ron Paul and his fellow "consitutionally conservative" bretheren are not going to rid us of the coercive nature of the state (police, military, border patrol, courts, etc.). They are never going to get elected either. The only good that comes from such campaigns is education of quasi-free market ideals being brought to the public's eyes.
I don't seek "to be left alone". I seek to be able to voluntarily exchange with my fellow man. I seek the opposite of being "left alone". I am not for sure why you assimilate me with the branch davidians and amish. Lol. Is this suppose to be a scare tactic or something? I only seek to not be aggressed upon by a monopolistic force. I seek to be free to choose and trade. I seek to have a stronger relationship with my neighbors and their businesses. The last thing i seek is to be "left alone" like some kind of hermit or cult.
I do have response but as of now my computer is down. When i get my new one in the next day or so I'll gladly keep this debate going.
+1 Shaun!
You know who engaged in lots of political action? Murray Rothbard.
-2 for referencing rothbard. +1 to charles as a principle of distributive justice.
"You may disagree with Mike ideologically but, strategically, he is right and this movement will fail if we do not heed his words and act accordingly."
This is a little too opinionated for me. So we must do exactly as he says in order to win? I find his message a little disturbing. He may be correct about how to win elections. However, it seems to me you must compromise your true beliefs in order to follow his ideas. If that's the case, I'm not too sure that getting a libertarian elected will do anything seeing as how they will no longer be a libertarian once they get in office. They will have had to cater to special interests too much by then. That is why I agree with Charles that no political system has ever seemed to move in the direction of less government. Even the Constitution was a power grab by special interests. The entire system is designed to work, that's true. However, it is designed to work for the powerful and the wealthy. If you really want to influence the system, go make some money.
If you can' t do that, I say try to find another way than Mike Rothfeld's. I was excited about the political system until I listened to him. I could tell he was being truthful. However, the truth just unveiled to me that our government was not designed to be small. It was designed to morph with what those in power wanted it to be.
I spent most of my time rolling my eyes when I heard Mike's little rant in person. This is the path that political activists go down and then they end up being Newt Gingrich.
+1 for spelling his name correctly...mike's name. not newt.
@Anonymous: Just like Ron Paul, right?
I mean, he's just like Newt Gingrich, right? LOL - totally, because everyone who goes into politics was a libertarian then magically got converted.
The problem is that libertarians just simply don't run to win. If they win, they can be Ron Pauls.
I think we need more Ron Paul's to stop the state, not Newt Gingrich. So, methinks Mike's points stand, and you've made a trivial generalization.
-1 for slave morality/slave revolt language. +1 for brevity of expression of amusement (see LOL)
Post new comment