RE: Converting Statists to Voluntaryists: The Path of Least Resistance (science and morality)
Bud. This post has to be the absolute ultimate in irony. Talk about running around Mt. Fuji. When all one has to do when getting someone to understand the "morality" centered around libertarianism/voluntaryism is attack the problem at its root:
DO YOU OWN YOUR OWN LIFE?
and "feelings" have absolutely nothing to do with this. I don't give a crap whether some thug, parasite, whore, controlFreak or other unsavory, uncivilized brute 'FEEEEEELS' like allowing me my sovereignty. It's irrelevant.
Now, we either get that person to agree, or we simply fortress off, assuming that person who ran over your toes with his car, DID IT ON PURPOSE, and be on guard for the next time you encounter him, whereas he will assuredly mow you over in an act of murder.
Do you think Adam Kokesh will be dealing with that damned sheriff in TX by appealing to his phuquin' feelings? Seriously?
Hi fundposhprincess, I'm not sure what you mean by "fortress off." Does that mean that you will not interact with that person or prepare defenses against an attack, or start a war? Maybe give me an idea of how you can use the "fortress off" approach in your neighborhood to work toward voluntaryism.
a mild combination of the first 2. No point in starting a "war" with one person. Social and economic ostracizing is usually sufficient, along with firm standing NO TRESPASSING signs. Any interaction would be at "arms length".
Disneyland "fortresses off" those who don't follow the rules. Yes? A church, synagogue or mosque does the same. This pact amongst (or against) people can be obtained on any private property in a voluntaryist "neighborhood", town, village, community, city, county, nation, state, province.
Why? Because each of us owns our own lives. I can't be FORCED to associate with those I disdain or don't trust. Yes?
I see your approach as reasonable in situations in which the threat is directly from that person or, maybe, if there is a pathway to use those methods to achieve a larger scale victory at some point.
Your mention of what churches do (and any group of like-minded people could do) is what I would usually call shunning, but I think they are about the same thing as what you said.
Each person has a different sense of what is a threat. Putting aside my unusual example of somebody running over your foot with a car, I might have more tolerance (or stubbornness) of talking with people to reach an understanding. If a person does not have the time, or patience, or skills to do that, then other options look better.
Given my background and what I know/believe about the psychological barriers to attitude change, I'll continue to try the talking approach... as long as I have the time and patience.
thx
This libertarian, having been at it since 1976, is about as "talked to death" as one can imagine. So when I come in contact with someone I perceive to show some hope (not locked into his "9 dots"), I simply work the "Do you own your own life?" angle first. If I get a resounding yes, or even "I think so...", I drive him over to "Adam Kokesh Avenue" and show him the "Freedom!" book. I tell him to finish it (or the audio file) and we'll discuss it further afterwards. Straightest path between the two points; stay away from Mt. Fuji and lots of mulberry bushes.
Couldn’t agree more . Good point .