A new site vision; a new era

[Natural Citizen]

I'm very effective at getting Bernie Supporters to our way of thinking.. so my activism has been mostly focused there.

Hm. Me, too. It's interesting that you bring that up. But even before Bernie came along. I've found that a lot of young people accept the label of "liberal" or "socialist"without really understanding what it means. And so many of them really do like Ron Paul particularly, I've found. Of course, that's without even getting into discussion on a deeper level. Seems like you have to kind of help them to better understand what it is that they already know and want but in a way that leads them to accept that they've done so on their own. Maybe you know what I mean by that. Is weird, really. Tough to explain.

Democracy is an interesing term that a lot of them just don't understand yet have been kind of trained to use and forward onto others. Is simple coercion but so many young people (and even older folks, I suppose) kind of get sucked into becoming robots. Of course, most don't understand coercion either. Although they have been trained to participate in it. So, then, that's a small task to help them figure out on their own, too.

 

[Bryan]

I'll tell you something, osan. I read most of your postings. I don't disagree with you too often. But they're too damn wordy. So is Bryan. In fact, I'm still wading through the fundamental knowledgebase stuff. Between the two of you in the same thread yuns give me a headache sometimes.

As I've said, much of the knowledgebase material is just setting up the framework, it's not the actual content (and a bit dry). More content is coming. Otherwise, yes, when osan and I get after it, it's not going to be easy reading.

To your other points, you're right that we need to talk a language that others understand, and some people are really good at that. For others, they fit in better with the deep philosophy material. It's good to be able to do both.

 

[Bryan]

Great idea! I hope it works out!

However, I personally think the time for Liberty is past and we as a nation are far beyond repair. It was a good run guys but I think our time should now be spent trying to survive what's to come.

One can argue that liberty has past us as nation, but the real question is, has it past your heart? If it has not, the only question is how you will fight. If you think it has past us as a nation and it is beyond repair, spread liberty outside of politics, don't bother with elections and such. Such an effort will always been necessary, and when done right, will always bear fruit.

Otherwise, per my OP, I do agree that it's good to plan for hard time that may come to pass. Let's hope they don't, but there can still be room to do more.

 

[Bryan]

Great thread Bryan. This almost makes me feel like I want to be back and involved...

Thanks, great to hear from you.... so what will it take to remove that "almost"?

I know the liberty movement is very right leaning, I also know it was not always the case. I will always claim that you need liberty minded liberals to bring perspective and passion.

Agreed, we do need liberty minded liberals. In a certain sense, we learn some to the right, but we also lean in other ways too.

Everyone has their input about what...caused some of all this... I don't know how it started, but seeing things written on this board like "I think Left wing political positions of any kind should be banned" was a nice, firm, and 'point taken' sorta ending for me.

I'm not aware of that ever being a site policy, it all depends on the situation and what someone brings to the table.

I'm very effective at getting Bernie Supporters to our way of thinking.. so my activism has been mostly focused there.

Society will never be ruled by one reality.

Nice, agreed with the point. Could you start a new thread and talk about your experiences with Bernie supporters? What motivates them? How educated are they? Etc, etc, etc...

Thanks!

 

[Natural Citizen]

As I've said, much of the knowledgebase material is just setting up the framework, it's not the actual content (and a bit dry). More content is coming. Otherwise, yes, when osan and I get after it, it's not going to be easy reading.

To your other points, you're right that we need to talk a language that others understand, and some people are really good at that. For others, they fit in better with the deep philosophy material. It's good to be able to do both.

Yeah, I know. On both points. But I'm glad that you didn't take that the wrong way. As I'd mentioned, my thought there wasn't meant to be critical of anyone. I agree that it's good to be of the means to do both depending on the circumstance. But, again, this is a forum. Which means that there is a lot of debate. Disagreement. Intellectual contests more often than not these days. And that's where it tends to get freaking Einsteinian. You know? No way that isn't intimidating to new people trying to blend in and whatnot. Of course, the platform itself and the vision you've introduced are two different beasts. I get that. My thoughts on it were geared more toward the former, I suppose.

 

[younglibertarian]

Maybe gear up for Adam Kokesh?

 

[Natural Citizen]

Heh. I saw that Adam was logged in here a few days ago. Folks gave him the business last time he was active here if I recall correctly.

Anyway. Maybe better to think about what we can do for and among ourselves for the moment instead of looking to follow others' plan/vision/platforms that may exist and function outside of our little circles. If Adam wants to join in, then, he knows where we are.

 

[osan]

An excellent question, which I will examine within framework of the Liberty Blueprint that I put forward.

You are correct that the high-minded philosophizing won’t get the job done, but it does serve as a foundation for all other things to come from it. The Foundational Knowledgebase, Part #1 of the Liberty Blueprint [1. Educational guide points on the definition of liberty.], will have two level of explanation, one is a short form that is easy to read and gives simple explanations of the material. The long form will get into the cutting edge of liberty thought and be geared for the die-hard high-minded philosophizing type. The simple form however is still not a tool to win people over to liberty beyond being used as an educational point for a single issue. The Foundational Knowledgebase can serve as an education system for certain analytical learning styles but the point stands, the high-minded philosophizing won’t get the job done.

To seize the moment or capture an audience, we do need as you say, something that will catch peoples imagination. This is Part #5 of the Liberty Blueprint [5. a) Outreach to connect our educational programs to new people. b) Execution of the programs], where Part a) is the development of the marketing campaign material and Part b) is the executing of the campaign. Exactly what that is, how it will look like is something that no one person can define. This is its own process and can change daily based on the news cycle. Ideally the site and the liberty movement can do better to coordinate with this.

What we have found however, is that this is not enough. In the “state of the movement” thread @presence pointed out (to which I’d agree) that a lot of the liberty movement was lost since they did not get entrenched into the liberty mindset, some were single issue voters, some just caught on to the Ron Paul campaign. This is why Part #4 of the Liberty Blueprint is important [4. Educational programs to teach what liberty is, why it’s important and how to defend it.] Once we do capture peoples imagination, then what? We can’t just send them off to the Foundational Knowledgebase and say “read all of this” – no, we need structured and well thought out educational material and pathways that will drive people to change their viewpoints on a fundamental level.

One key however is that all of the material within Part #4 and Part #5 of the Liberty Blueprint has to be philosophically sound within the Foundational Knowledgebase, Part #1. Without this, the message gets confused and obfuscated; people in our own ranks won’t even be aligned.

This also assures we have real substance to our Mission and campaigns. With lots of other movements, if you look under the hoods, they aren’t based on much substance; we are, we just have to communicate that.

So in this way there are three very separate layers of effort and material: captivate, educate and foundation. The captivate layer is very dynamic and creative. The educate layer is stable but adapts to the times, technology and learning styles. The foundation layer is left for the high-minded philosophizing and should hit a very stable state. Without all three, we get nowhere, or gains are limited. This can be seen within the Ron Paul 2008/2012 campaigns; the campaigns were part of the outreach (part #5), but we lacked in the other areas.

Another important part of #5 is that once we have someone’s attention and they are in our camp, we need a way to make sure that people progress within the education material. This can be done with having mentors, structured programs, progress tracking and monitoring and the like. This also has to be done in a palpable manner, but the point is, once someone is done with an education program the success rate that they are really onboard the movement is much higher. Putting together a successful educational system is also its own challenge. Of course there is a lot of education material out there within Part #4, it wouldn’t make sense to redevelop that, but it’s not well structured, vetted or packaged up within a system that is easy to use.

So in a nutshell, we need lots of pieces to come together. I can’t do it all, but want to structure the site to be a hub to get this done for the people who actually want to make a difference. This is where the Mission Advancement Framework (MAF) comes in, which really has a few goals:

-- Make it desirable for people to want to contribute.

-- Plan before action is taken, including setting goals, expectations and making sure efforts play a proper role within the big picture.

-- Make it easy for people to contribute by having connecting workflows between different functional needs. In this way, it’s easy to do one small thing and have that effort benefit the whole; it can be similar to an assembly line, but not exactly either.

-- Limit failure points within groups.


If someone has a better plan, great, let’s discuss it. If someone can develop a better Liberty Blueprint, I’ll be willing to debate that too.

Rather than seeing thing as being over-thought, as some here have suggested, I think the movement has done the exact opposite, these issues have been completely under-thought. We need a holistic master plan; I submit the Liberty Blueprint as being it.

OK, that's pretty good, but I must reiterate a point - not to be downer, but to be certain we are all aware of that against which we seek to move: a mindset that wants wants wants without having to work. Why do so many people want to have Bernie Sanders' babies? Because he is telling them what they want to hear. They want it all to happen on someone else's back so they can be there to reap the benefits. We are talking about a nation dangerously infested with lazy, avaricious people who have no knowledge of the basics of proper human relations, no interest in such knowledge when it conflicts with their wants or requires work to obtain, and have no moral compunction so see their desires fulfilled through the application of force against those who have that which they desire to obtain without work.

I believe the truth of this is far worse than most people realize, even in these forums. We are talking about a huge, brutishly inarticulate mob driven by unvarnished avarice, unabashed lassitude, and unwavering hatred of anything that calls them to account for themselves. Such people would watch you killed through the agency of their paid tax goons and say you deserved it. Why? Because the superior man is, in their eyes, intolerable as he is the constant sore reminder of the average man's low character, inferior attitude, and his resultant lack of ability for anything worthy of valid praise. The superior man constantly spotlights the reasons the inferior man should loathe himself. That reminder sears his weak and over-inflated buffoon's ego, prompting him to seek and accept as valid the flimsiest pretexts upon which their nemeses are sent to burn in the flesh through the agency of third party hands.

How does one compete with the likes of a Sanders or a Clinton who preach free unicorn-poo for everyone while promising death to the wealthy? They are reinforcing the base instincts that draw them inexorably in the direction of "free shit", playing upon envy, while redirecting and projecting what should be shame for one's own miserable inadequacies and translating it into blind, red-raging hatred. The question of competition is the one that needs to be answered - not how to compete, initially, but rather whether you can. I am no longer certain it is possible. Be that the case, any attempts to win such people to your cause is likely to prove fruitless, leaving you to ask whether there are enough "superior" men remaining such that one could realistically make an attempt to keep this vessel we call "America" afloat.

The task is enormously difficult because you have damned near everything against you, including the majority who would see you burned alive as soon as tell you to screw off.

Keep that in mind.

 

[younglibertarian]

Heh. I saw that Adam was logged in here a few days ago. Folks gave him the business last time he was active here if I recall correctly.

Anyway. Maybe better to think about what we can do for and among ourselves for the moment instead of looking to follow others' plan/vision/platforms that may exist and function outside of our little circles. If Adam wants to join in, then, he knows where we are.

Get him back here.

 

[osan]

I'll tell you something, osan. I read most of your postings. I don't disagree with you too often. But they're too damn wordy.

I see how this is a problem for some - many even - but consider what it is many of us are attempting to do here. We are trying to find a path toward the reestablishment of human freedom on a planet that has become a huge prison. The enormity of this task, were it realized in its fullness, would likely drive people into their living rooms to break out the beer and cocaine and just say "fuck it".

This regression to freedom, which was man's original natural state, is so radical that we cannot hope to accomplish it in any meaningful way without first establishing and understanding the philosophical basis for such a quantum shift in the way people live. We are here essentially reinventing that basis, and doing so (at least in my case) with the understanding that words matter and are devilishly tricky. In order to assemble a clear, complete, and correct philosophical "platform" upon which to base one's material efforts, precision becomes paramount and that usually requires a lot of words in order that all bases are covered sufficiently that those who play word games are put before the tallest and most unscalable barriers imaginable. Without precision in every detail covering the basic structural elements of a philosophy for freedom, especially in a world of carpet-bagger filth, the door is left ajar for those very people to ply their deceit. Just look at the hopelessly weak Constitution. It's very structure all but guaranteed the outcome to which we have been treated. It may be "small and elegant", but it is also hopelessly vague in critical areas such that even to this day "scholars" argue the precise meanings of this passage or that.

Granted, there is only so much the written word can accomplish, the rest being up to us. But if we are to take up the reins we dropped so long ago, we must understand what it means to be a governor, and that means understanding well the basic philosophical underpinnings of the nation. Without that, there is far less to stop yet another generation of filthy hippies and other useful idiot stooges to come and begin sowing the seeds of doubt in the minds of strong people. We have gone so wrong in so many ways that it makes my head hurt when the torrent-vision overwhelms my waking mind with its reality.

We do need to be "government", even if we are an anarchy... especially so. We need the attitude of a governor of ourselves, as well as that of sentinel and guardian of the rights of all men. But we also must have understanding of that which we are defending, and that requires fools such as myself get all wordy about things, such that all bases are covered and precise. I wish it were otherwise - I would have to type a whole lot less - but alas, I see no way around it, save to leave too much unspecified with insufficient clarity and detail so that evil men would be able to bend words to false meanings.

Does that make sense? Have I been too wordy, even here? Seriously.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I see how this is a problem for some - many even - but consider what it is many of us are attempting to do here. We are trying to find a path toward the reestablishment of human freedom on a planet that has become a huge prison. The enormity of this task, were it realized in its fullness, would likely drive people into their living rooms to break out the beer and cocaine and just say "$#@! it".

This regression to freedom, which was man's original natural state, is so radical that we cannot hope to accomplish it in any meaningful way without first establishing and understanding the philosophical basis for such a quantum shift in the way people live. We are here essentially reinventing that basis, and doing so (at least in my case) with the understanding that words matter and are devilishly tricky. In order to assemble a clear, complete, and correct philosophical "platform" upon which to base one's material efforts, precision becomes paramount and that usually requires a lot of words in order that all bases are covered sufficiently that those who play word games are put before the tallest and most unscalable barriers imaginable. Without precision in every detail covering the basic structural elements of a philosophy for freedom, especially in a world of carpet-bagger filth, the door is left ajar for those very people to ply their deceit. Just look at the hopelessly weak Constitution. It's very structure all but guaranteed the outcome to which we have been treated. It may be "small and elegant", but it is also hopelessly vague in critical areas such that even to this day "scholars" argue the precise meanings of this passage or that.

Granted, there is only so much the written word can accomplish, the rest being up to us. But if we are to take up the reins we dropped so long ago, we must understand what it means to be a governor, and that means understanding well the basic philosophical underpinnings of the nation. Without that, there is far less to stop yet another generation of filthy hippies and other useful idiot stooges to come and begin sowing the seeds of doubt in the minds of strong people. We have gone so wrong in so many ways that it makes my head hurt when the torrent-vision overwhelms my waking mind with its reality.

We do need to be "government", even if we are an anarchy... especially so. We need the attitude of a governor of ourselves, as well as that of sentinel and guardian of the rights of all men. But we also must have understanding of that which we are defending, and that requires fools such as myself get all wordy about things, such that all bases are covered and precise. I wish it were otherwise - I would have to type a whole lot less - but alas, I see no way around it, save to leave too much unspecified with insufficient clarity and detail so that evil men would be able to bend words to false meanings.

Does that make sense? Have I been too wordy, even here? Seriously.

No, I understand your points clearly and perfectly. Thanks for following up on what I'd mentioned. And I do agree with you in large part there. It is vague, for sure. And its shortcomings have certainly been used against Individual liberty more so than in its favor. And some warned of the outcome upon our framing. So, yeah. That's where we are. Is what it is, I suppose. Of course, the nature of man and in terms with freedom is complex. What's your view on that, osan? Specifically that. Where does it come from? Man's natural state of freedom, that is. We live in a very secular society or culture. A secular civilization even. Very worldly.

Where, in your view, does freedom come from, osan? That's a good of a place to start as any. What is man's natural state? I'd like to better understand your view of what surmises a truly "natural citizen".

 

[osan]

Of course, the nature of man and in terms with feedom is complex.

Actually, I see it as eminently and elegantly simple. The complexities arise as part and parcel of the nature, but of its perversion.

The reason things get complicated is because some people want that to which they are not entitled. "I want my interstate highways, and by GOD I will have them, dammit!" When that is one of your positions, complexity has been artificially injected into the broader issues of free living because interstates do no build themselves. They require great resources and if you are going to have them built, those resources do not simply fall from Jed Clampett's butt, ready to assemble themselves into ready-made highways. If the resources are not available for the free taking, then they must be acquired from... well, YOU. Now add the presumed fact that John Dough has no interest in superhighways. All righteousness would then say "leave Mr. Dough alone". But that leads to shortfalls, which leads to no highways, and by GOD you will have them. That leads irrevocably to force and robbery, which are of course complexities in that they are conceptually disguised and called "taxation" and justified as "one's fair share". I now want to spit obscenities for where all this leads my mind.

And so it goes, issue upon issue arises where people want that to which they have no ability to obtain on their own or even in voluntary cooperation with others. But by GOD they will have them, and so they confound and pervert the good with the evil that is their avarice and the will to engage in whatever steps are deemed necessary to get what they want. Everyone knows this is evil, which is precisely why they contort words, turning murder into love-making. It is classic 1984 tactics that have been used for thousands of years since Empire arose out of the lowest and most rank muck of the mind of someone who by all rights should have been eaten by a wild predator when still a child for the sake of humanity's better fate.

F.A.I.L. has gotten the better of us, and has become so deeply normalized that most people are now incapable of seeing it in their own most basic perceptive assumptions. They don't see taxation as robbery, because the tired and clapped-out "fair share" and "roads" assumptions are so deeply entrenched in their psyches that they are incapable of realizing that these are not absolute, universal truths applicable in even the farthest observable galaxies. Therefore, it is a literal impossibility for such people to see beyond the superficial conflicts of interest between individuals on such matter, which leads to "complexity" in their minds. They cannot - WILL not - accept an alternative viewpoint on what for them are basic truths of the universe, and are thereby hamstrung by the prison their own minds have erected for them and the world becomes complex.

What's your view on that, osan? Specifically that. Where does it come from? Man's natural state of freedom, that is.

We live in a very secular society or culture. A secular civilization even. Very worldly.

Where, in your view, does freedom come from, osan? That's a good of a place to start as any. What is man's natural state? I'd like to better understand your view of what surmises a truly "natural citizen".

Try this on for starters: What is "Freedom"?

Then this: Degrees of Freedom

Somewhat tangential, but still relevant: A Few More Reasons Why Humanity's State Of Inheren...

And finally, this - a work still in progress, methinks: The Canon of Proper Human Relations

When one's eyes fix upon the correct context and assumption, the inherent nature of mens' freedom becomes obvious such that it shouts itself at you. One of the problems for so many people such that they confuse freedom with horror and slavery with freedom, is that true and proper human freedom demands things of the individual that a vast plurality of humanity is no longer willing to provide.

Freedom provides itself as a benefit - something most people appear to want. In return, it demands of the individual both accountability and courage - something about three people on the planet are willing to give in return. If you are to be free, you must have the spheres to assume the risks of being free. Few are willing to do this in the fullest measure. They may be willing to ski off an 80' high cornice, but they are not willing to risk allowing their fellows to carry firearms. True freedom demands both, and much more, of the individual. The same man who will ski off that cornice, rather than accepting his fate when his impact on the snow below sets off a huge avalanche, demands others risk their lives bailing his sorry hide out of the mess he's gotten himself into. The thrill of extreme skiiing was all the rage for him until he found himself buried under 9 feet of snow. All of a sudden he wants mommy to come make the booboo all better. This is not a free man. This is a cowering, whiny, self-important, entitled little poseur whose tune changes from his strong, if hollow, C-Major Freedom March to a cacophonous, ear-splitting symphony of diminished fourths (malum in musica).

IOW, people want all the benefits of freedom without having to pay any of the costs of having it. They are unaccepting of the universal reality that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch (TANSTAAFL). They simply reject it out of hand in a manner tightly analogous to a situation where they stand on a heavy rail line, denying the 125-car freight train that is bearing down on them at 70 miles per hour, now only 1/4 of a mile distant saying, "it will not harm me, I shall not move". Okee dokee.

Proper human freedom is terrifying to the Meaner. He relabels it as "insanity", usually plastering "Anarchy" on the notion. As a MereCog, he is heavily vested in his flavor of pretty-slavery/pretty-tyranny. He wants wants wants, but refuses to pay pay pay. Therefore, he steals steals, steals through the agency of his well-armed tax-goons and sleeps well at night because he has justified it all in his mind by any number of phony baloney pretexts including the aforementioned "fair share" doctrine. Freedom means nothing to such men, wanting only to get what they can at the lowest possible cost (zero, ideally) to themselves. It's that sweet-spot for which they strive because to go any further is usually either unfeasible or too costly. So they settle for their miserable little brass-washed cages, lying to themselves that they are made actually of gold.

This is the reality to which humanity has been so thoroughly trained. The prospect of breaking them of this addiction to corruption in favor of Jefferson's "animating contest" are just this side of zero. And that is why I am so doubtful that free status for even meager populations will be unattainable without very serious bloodshed; we are talking about thrusting huge masses of people of the most timid and corrupt character into an environment so depthlessly terrifying to them that they will sell what remains of their souls to the devil in a heartbeat in return for his lie that everything will remain the same. Such people would see you and your children killed in ways that would leave even the most demented ISIS "warrior" on his side, quaking and vomiting in shock and disgust, before allowing themselves to be dragged into the horror of actual freedom. There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that at least 150 million Americans would allow it. They would whine like banshees for men with guns to save them from what for them is a fate far worse than death. And those men would come to their aid and the rest of us would be faced with a very real and immediate choice to fight to the death or lay down and become nothing worthy of so much as contempt.

That is the barrier that we here face, and it is truly daunting.

 

[Bryan]

OK, that's pretty good, but I must reiterate a point - not to be downer, but

Pointing out reality isn't a downer.

How does one compete with the likes of a Sanders or a Clinton who preach free unicorn-poo for everyone while promising death to the wealthy? They are reinforcing the base instincts that draw them inexorably in the direction of "free shit", playing upon envy, while redirecting and projecting what should be shame for one's own miserable inadequacies and translating it into blind, red-raging hatred. The question of competition is the one that needs to be answered - not how to compete, initially, but rather whether you can. I am no longer certain it is possible. Be that the case, any attempts to win such people to your cause is likely to prove fruitless, leaving you to ask whether there are enough "superior" men remaining such that one could realistically make an attempt to keep this vessel we call "America" afloat.

All IMO... for some people, you can't complete. Most others aren't going to turn on a dime, it can nominally take around six months or more for someone to go from getting a seed of liberty and turning it into a new world outlook. Within that six months there is a lot of person reflection, withdraw from past ties, leaning new things and then starting to articulate new views. One key is to recognize when you are just planning seeds that you need to accept that you are doing just that, don't expect the quick change. Otherwise, there are a lot of do's and don'ts to this; another major topic. These things are doable for most people, and it's the people that are important, the vessel comes after that.

The task is enormously difficult because you have damned near everything against you, including the majority who would see you burned alive as soon as tell you to screw off.

Keep that in mind.

While working towards it, I understand the scope of the problem, so it's in mind. The key however, is that it has to be planned for, and it's why we need better plans. The Liberty Blueprint is just the first layer of plans.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

The basic problem here and in the liberty movement generally is quite simple.

Ron Paul is gone.

Sometimes we don't want to talk about that, because it's an insolvable problem.

It takes ~40 years to make a Ron Paul, and we won't have another for several decades, if ever.

Ron drew in the general "anti-establishment" types.

...who are now for Trump or Bernie.

Ron drew in the hardcore, purist libertarians.

...who are now, many of them, anti-political and apathetic.

The former need libertarian education, the latter need inspiration.

There's no obvious way to do this.

Those of us who remain are the more pragmatic libertarians, but it turns out there just aren't that many of us.

So that's the problem. As for solutions, I have no thoughts at the moment.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Thing is, this isn't a "libertarian" movement. Liberty isn't owned by libertarians. The constant pronouncements on this forum by some individuals to the contrary is very off-putting to those who are not part of the "clan". Nor is it a cover for hating the country, the Constitution, our Founders, or for the unfettered illegal alien invasion of the U.S.

 

[luctor-et-emergo]

Thing is, this isn't a "libertarian" movement.

You feel very strongly about that, how come ? It's just a word, it doesn't have a whole lot of meaning without a context. I'd argue that compared to all of the other people, our movement is a libertarian-ish movement.

The constant pronouncements on this forum by some individuals to the contrary is very off-putting to those who are not part of the "clan".

Promoting an authoritarian liar on a forum that's named after the most honest and least authoritarian politician ever is off-putting to some people as well.

 

[opal]

The basic problem here and in the liberty movement generally is quite simple.

Ron Paul is gone.

Sometimes we don't want to talk about that, because it's an insolvable problem.

It takes ~40 years to make a Ron Paul, and we won't have another for several decades, if ever.

Ron drew in the general "anti-establishment" types.

...who are now for Trump or Bernie.

Ron drew in the hardcore, purist libertarians.

...who are now, many of them, anti-political and apathetic.

The former need libertarian education, the latter need inspiration.

There's no obvious way to do this.

Those of us who remain are the more pragmatic libertarians, but it turns out there just aren't that many of us.

So that's the problem. As for solutions, I have no thoughts at the moment.

dude.. really.. choose some words more carefully
how about *Ron Paul is done with politics*
or
*Ron Paul isn't on the ballot*
he's not gone.. go on youtube.. you'll find him

 

[r3volution 3.0]

dude.. really.. choose some words more carefully
how about *Ron Paul is done with politics*
or
*Ron Paul isn't on the ballot*
he's not gone.. go on youtube.. you'll find him

Of course

He's gone in the sense that he's largely retired from public life, not that he's dropped off the face of the Earth.

In any event, we've lost a major unifying force for the liberty movement.

To be clear, I'm not really pessimistic about this. It's a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

We haven't yet found the right post-Ron formula, but I'm confident that we will, sooner or later.

 

[younglibertarian]

While informational warfare is effective, it pretty much needs to be carried out through a presidential election. That is how you get publication and the like.

 

[Daveforliberty]

In reading this thread, I notice that in some of the better posts, the subject being discussed is being passively defined as "Human Freedom". I like this term, and hope you would consider it for a new name for the site. It cannot be attacked as political, cannot be attacked as arrogant: The Truth", or dare I say it, "Guide Point"; it is "big tent", and lends itself to practical forum topics such as "What is human freedom?" "Why is human freedom important?" etc.

By the way, the fact that maybe 100 people "regularly contribute" is, I think irrelevant. There are many more of us here who have been around for a very long time, who read every day, but who do not often add more words simply for the sake of adding more words.