Tom Woods: Since We’re Losing, We Need a New Strategy

[jmdrake]

Hot damn, we have some great conversations going on here.

Indeed. Probably the most important conversation at this point. How do we actually move forward?

Yes, I agree from the perspective that I noticed Lew contradicted himself a bit in that speech. I had to go back as I was reading because I thought "wait, he just said not to do that."

One should note that this is reposted from a 2003 speech. That said I think you have to read between the lines. This is the most important part of the entire speech IMO.

What is the best means of achieving such victory? This is a subject that is rarely discussed on the free market right. Murray Rothbard pointed out that strategy is a huge part of the scholarship of the Left. Once having settled on the doctrine, the Left works very hard at honing the message and finding ways to push it. This is a major explanation for the Left’s success.

Our side, on the other hand, doesn’t discuss this subject much. But since some sort of strategy is unavoidable, let me just list a few tactics that I do not believe work. The following, I’m quite sure, will fail for various reasons:

Understand what Lew is getting at. Understand what Tom Woods and the people he was interviewing are getting at. There is a difference between tactics and strategy. Tactics are short term. Strategy is long term. What [MENTION=991]Matt Collins[/MENTION] is missing is that the short term tactic of pressuring politicians to get them to do what you want does nothing for the long term strategy of convincing enough people in the electorate to actually agree with your position. Here is an example of strategy. Colin Noir's YouTube channel where he not only breaks down gun rights in a way where everyone can understand it but he also takes anti-gun people to the shooting range so that they can have a different perspective. That's strategy.

Now, that doesn't mean that you never use tactics. If there is a bad gun bill going through congress or the state legislature, the people who are already pro second amendment need to call their congressmen. The NRA is very good at that. But how do you get more people to want to mobilize for gun rights? Note that Colin Noir used to be on NRA TV. But the NRA let NRA TV die. Colin is still doing his thing, most recently pointing out that Lil Wayne and other non-violent felons should have a path to get their gun rights back. Now tactically the NRA can't take such a position. But from a long term strategy point, advocating gun rights for a larger pool of people is how to mobilize more people to support gun rights.

I think this is where Tom Woods and some others are starting to come out of the woodworks after 2020. Some of us are realizing that turning away did us absolutely nothing. It's against our nature as libertarians to want to wield power. And that is exactly why we lose. We have to start changing this mindset, or at least start getting some libertarian leaders (those willing) to be in front for us ala Ron.

We all walked away disenfranchised. I read an article around election time from a conservative who was saying conservatives and libertarians basically hang it up and retreat to the mountains every time we lose. Instead, we need to be fighting and standing our ground. Otherwise, at some point the fight comes to the mountains anyway.

Yep and yet. It's like every 2 to 4 years we come out of hibernation. And each time there are fewer of us de-hibernating.

Part of this, I believe, is happening. Agorism is on the rise, people are finding ways to be innovative and try to live around the state. The problem that I see happening is this won't last forever. The State apparatus WILL find ways to come in and crush these so called "rebellions" of thought and freedom.
At that point, what's next? Do we continue to run and change direction? What kind of life is that? I've been pondering that last question all year...

The power of agorism is that it gives people something powerful to do besides just politics. You want a free market? Create one!

There is a reason Ron Paul will forever be known as incorruptible. He was a once in a generation type of character. And when he retired, it's like all of us just hung it up an walked away. I think from 2013-2020 proves that even libertarians need "leaders." The more I think about it, the more I realize that it's a base human tendency that must be met.

Thomas Massie is the reincarnation of Ron Paul. He's more like Ron than Rand.

Dave Smith wants to take over the Libertarian Party via the Mises Caucus. Is this something we should take more seriously? I don't know...

I don't know. But that's a minnow trying to out muscle a guppy in order to fight a shark. To really be effective we need to build something from the ground up IMO.

 

[Ender]

Indeed. Probably the most important conversation at this point. How do we actually move forward?

One should note that this is reposted from a 2003 speech. That said I think you have to read between the lines. This is the most important part of the entire speech IMO.

What is the best means of achieving such victory? This is a subject that is rarely discussed on the free market right. Murray Rothbard pointed out that strategy is a huge part of the scholarship of the Left. Once having settled on the doctrine, the Left works very hard at honing the message and finding ways to push it. This is a major explanation for the Left’s success.

Our side, on the other hand, doesn’t discuss this subject much. But since some sort of strategy is unavoidable, let me just list a few tactics that I do not believe work. The following, I’m quite sure, will fail for various reasons:

Understand what Lew is getting at. Understand what Tom Woods and the people he was interviewing are getting at. There is a difference between tactics and strategy. Tactics are short term. Strategy is long term. What [MENTION=991]Matt Collins[/MENTION] is missing is that the short term tactic of pressuring politicians to get them to do what you want does nothing for the long term strategy of convincing enough people in the electorate to actually agree with your position. Here is an example of strategy. Colin Noir's YouTube channel where he not only breaks down gun rights in a way where everyone can understand it but he also takes anti-gun people to the shooting range so that they can have a different perspective. That's strategy.

Yep.

One strategy is to educate & work to build freedom locally. Many around you can be awakened to what real freedom is & the lies that are perpetrated continually around them.

My main emphasis with students I engage with is to QUESTION EVERYTHING. As they begin to do this they are shocked at The Matrix they have believed in since childhood.

If every freedom lover worked locally to wake people up, there would soon be millions to join in opposing the mind prison we are all in.

 

[Matt Collins]

Now why did you forget?

Because at that time politics was the furthest thing on my mind... I had just started a new job and was going through rigorous training so anything political was basically in one ear and out the other at the time.

I don't think he ever voted for anything bad

Actually he has... he voted for FixNICS and NoFly No Buy if I remember correctly. That was the moment he lost my support.

The problem isn't Rand. The problem is politics, especially representative politics. It's almost impossible to get anything done legislatively without compromise.

Thomas Massie proves otherwise.

You can't do a "mass mobilization of voters" on an issue like marijuana legalization by going to GOP meetings and hobnobbing with people that don't like you and/or what you stand for anyway.

There are 3 books you need to read: Rules for Radicals, Confrontational Politics, and Sun Tzu's Art of War. They give a pretty good explanation of how it's done.

And the same "mass mobilization of voters" that could be used to pressure politicians could also be used to get the exact legislation you want to get passed in the legislature on a ballot referendum.

No, it can't.

It doesn't take more than a few dozen calls to a politician most of the time to make them change their mind on a vote, if they are in a vulnerable district, it could be even less. Winning a referendum means getting 50%+1 of the entire voting populace to your side. It's much more expensive and much harder to win a referendum. Put this way... which is easier, pressuring 51 members of the legislature to vote your way, or trying to convince 1.5 million voters to vote your way?



Not only that but you don't always get your choice of language on the ballot. Lots of time the government lawyers will rewrite it in the inverse. AND if the referendum fails, especially by a large margin, then you have nearly zero chance of the legislature touching it again for 15 years.



Anyway, I hope you're doing well. Next time I'm in town we'll have to hang out!

 

[jmdrake]

Because at that time politics was the furthest thing on my mind... I had just started a new job and was going through rigorous training so anything political was basically in one ear and out the other at the time.

We're all busy. But some things are difficult to forget. Vocal support for red flag laws is one of them.

Actually he has... he voted for FixNICS and NoFly No Buy if I remember correctly. That was the moment he lost my support.

Okay.

Thomas Massie proves otherwise.

What part of "but it is almost impossible to get anything done legislatively without compromise" do you not understand?

That said, Thomas Massie's legislative record PROVES MY POINT!

https://www.congress.gov/member/thomas-massie/M001184?searchResultViewType=expanded

The overwhelming majority of the bills he introduced didn't even pass the house nor the senate. A couple have passed the house but are stalled in the senate. Some passed the senate but not the house. Most didn't even get out of committee. He was co sponsor of a bill that became law the "Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019." Whoopie! He was co-sponsor on a pro veteran bill! And next year he might be co-sponsor on bill to re-affirm the bald eagle as the national bird. Here's another one. "Identifying Barriers and Best Practices Study Act." Another pro veteran bill. Great! My dad's a Vietnam vet. But that hardly disproves my point. Oh, he co-sponsored the CARES Act! That passed. Wasn't that the one that he tried to get congress to show up to vote on and he was concerned about the price tag? You're telling me that Thomas Massie, the guy who spoke out against the CARES Act on both procedural and fiscal grounds, but ultimately voted for it, is your proof that it's possible to get a lot done without compromise? Do you want to rethink that position?

There are 3 books you need to read: Rules for Radicals, Confrontational Politics, and Sun Tzu's Art of War. They give a pretty good explanation of how it's done.

You need to re-read all three because you don't seem to understand the difference between tactics and strategy.

No, it can't.

It doesn't take more than a few dozen calls to a politician most of the time to make them change their mind on a vote, if they are in a vulnerable district, it could be even less. Winning a referendum means getting 50%+1 of the entire voting populace to your side. It's much more expensive and much harder to win a referendum. Put this way... which is easier, pressuring 51 members of the legislature to vote your way, or trying to convince 1.5 million voters to vote your way?

Nonsense conclusory argument. I have just given you evidence that Thomas Massie isn't the proof that you can get a lot done without compromise that you think. I pointed you to actual legislation. Now kindly point to all of these referendums that you claim got re-written by government lawyers. But the proof is in the pudding. Colorado legalized marijuana through referendum. Tennessee tried to do it through legislation and it failed. Now you want to blame the failure, without evidence, on a lack of mobilizing those voters. But those same voters could have been mobilized to vote on the referendum like what happened in Colorado.

Not only that but you don't always get your choice of language on the ballot. Lots of time the government lawyers will rewrite it in the inverse. AND if the referendum fails, especially by a large margin, then you have nearly zero chance of the legislature touching it again for 15 years.

And you pulled this 15 year number from where? All of your arguments are based on nothing but your own mind. Point to the actual referendums that support your claims. Meanwhile back to Steve Dickerson. He spent 5 years trying to pass medical marijuana in the legislature and failed. He just lost his seat. Probably that's from his not denouncing the dick move of his Republican allies trying to smear his opponent by smearing Gideon's Army over "defund the police." He lost a key LGBTQ endorsement over that. And that shows the bvllshyt that comes from relying solely on the election process. His coalition was too fractured. The same ad that might get some of his voters excited to come out to the polls pissed off some of this other voters.

Anyway, I hope you're doing well. Next time I'm in town we'll have to hang out!

Absolutely! I'd even fly with you given the opportunity. My life insurance is paid up.

 

[jmdrake]

I got motivated to check my local Campaign For Liberty contacts (Kansas).

The website onboarding is outdated. Apparently, CFL has abandoned the electoral politics model and is more directed at legislative activism. In fact, the FACL training is going on in Wichita in January. I want to go, just don't want to drive 2.5 hours for something I feel could be online.

I spoke on the phone with Blake Branson for about 45 minutes. Aside from him , the major player in KS CFL is Jon Axtell. Above that is state liaison, above that national.

From what I got from him, there's only about 6 to 10 people who actually help with the organizing. It's all done by email, and not everyone agrees on which issues are important. Blake essentially stated that "issue splintering" (e.g. some people only care about gun rights) is the primary weakness of the "activism via political power" model.

From our talk, I also get the impression that most people don't do much and don't want to do much. Even if they did, there is no real "onboarding" unless you count FACL $40 conferences. Beyond that, you are blocked by your state coordinators leadership, time and task management skills (assuming he or she will trust you enough to let you into the inner circle of doing real work).

The candidate survey I think is something we could build on. There needs to be some kind of "public record" of not only how someone voted, but why they aren't being transparent. A fusion of journalism and legislative activism. Blake and Jon have had real success even with small numbers and little money. The old CFL strategy I never agreed with. The payoff for volunteers was practically non-existent and their onboarding tasks (I tried myself to complete just the first step) would take a regular person a weeks worth of week easily, and then they still wouldn't have anything to do.

The old website was better (there was a forum and we could talk with other activists at state and county level). They scrapped that. My guess is, CFL doesn't want "truthers" and all the other riff-raff giving bad optics. Instead of investing in moderating, they just muzzled the supporters.

I DO LIKE THE LOBBYIST MODEL. I don't think the vast majority of Ron Paul supporters understand what CFL is. The website doesn't help, because they've really abandoned campaign stuff for more direct legislative activism.

However....

We need to bridge the gap of people who are ostracized because of "bad optics" and give them something to do in order to support a model like CFL. The high-level activists who participate in the actual logistics and who need to go through this training are a minority inside our minority movement. We need those people online, knocking on doors, waving signs, and all the rest.

I saw over the years, the berating coming from people crying about bad optics and truthers and all the rest. Who cares. Ron is having strokes live on TV talking conspiracies and hasn't changed a bit. He's not berating and ostracizing, but there's been a lot of that coming from people hired with money he raised an email lists compiled in his name.

Even the tactics of "intimidation" described in your first link. Did the Paulites not do that? Did we not win online polls, fax and phone legislators, hold multiple money bombs?

If legislative activism is the path, and you have my vote for that path, then the question is strategy within that. Everyone cannot and will not do that. But they can be part of the movement that does and support in other ways.

I'm all for putting people to the test. You want to help? Here's where you sign up. Here's what you can do. Here's a meeting you can to once a week or once a month. Here's people near you.



Ultimately, in light of what I said above relating to over-emphasizing legislative activism strategy, I think you and Matt are the right and left leg of a movement arguing over whose fault it is we aren't walking anywhere.

If the movement is too lost in abstraction and idealism that it can't organize or do a roll call, it isn't a movement. A movement is people working together. That involves defining two things: people in the movement, and work.

Back in the days you speak of, I actually knew who people were. I saw them in face to face meetings. Now instead of a lot of online social networking exhibitionism, it's ONLY a lot of online social networking exhibitionism.

So where to start. We got me you and Matt talking. How do we keep this going?

Hey there. Good point! Here is what we need to look at IMO. Yes there are legislative and electoral fights that have to be dealt with. Those are tactical issues. What about long term strategy? Yes, the U.S. military has great special forces that go out and fight battles. They are backed up by logistics. When it comes to societal change, winning the tactical battles aren't enough.

Take the whole "climate change" debate. Yeah..you can get congress to back off carbon trading for a while. You can get a president like Trump to pull us out of the Paris accords. But without changing the minds of massive numbers of the public at large what good will it do? To quote Alex Jones "We are in an information war" hence "infowars.com." That's what Lew Rockwell was really talking about that [MENTION=991]Matt Collins[/MENTION] seems to not get. Lew isn't saying "Don't ever do politics." At least that's not what I took from it. But don't count on that as a strategy to advance the message of liberty.

You are right. There needs to be more face to face. Even Zoom meetings would be better than the "communication through web-forums" we are currently doing. And we have to have something else to unite around besides politics. Pure politics is a recipe for burnout.

 

[osan]

Putting pressure on politicians to make them do what you want.

Start here:
https://nationalgunrights.org/about-us/strategy/

This one does not begin well... to wit:

In America, through a brilliant system of rewards and punishments, checks and balances, and diffusion of authority, we have acquired a habit and history of politics mostly without violence and excessive corruption.

Really? No, seriously... REALLY?!

The corruption of American politics is legend, and long ago begun. I'm thinking that this guy has either not read history or very greatly misinterprets what he has read.

But let us continue.

The good news for you and me is that the system works.

Actually, this is well mistaken. To be semantically more precise, the system can work. The fact that it does not is reflective upon we, the inglorious people, and not the architecture. Without the people, the "system" doesn't exist. WE are the system, the architecture a formulation - a recipe, if you will - for behavior at a very specific level of conceptual abstraction. If we comport ourselves in accord with the specification in good faith, reasonable competency, and measurable honor, things work out mostly for the good.

The sad truth is that we do not. With so vast a plurality of Americans on both sides of the aisle, so to speak, subscribing to the almost unbelievable idiocies now so openly printed on the cultural/political menu and doing so with a fervor to make any revivalist tear-up with envy, it is no wonder the system has failed. WE have failed. We have failed ourselves first and foremost. We have also failed our families, friends, colleagues, neighbors, associates, and every stranger to us in the land. We have done so with the brash certitude of the fool who knows fo' sho' that he is 100,000% right in his chosen idiocies, which he sees as the purest gospel of human virtue.

I don't give a hoot whether we speak of Democrat or Republican, these sorts are to be found in ever crack and crevice; under ever rock. The fact that Democrats are two full orders of magnitude worse than Republicans, taken on the average, makes no hay whatsoever. Why? Because when you cross the threshold of reason with a flying leap into the lap of howling thermonuclear insanity and corruption, the degrees to which you have done so become irrelevant. "Oh, I'm just a little bit pregnant... or dead". HERRO????


Let's see whether he comes to anything actually worth the reading...

[h=2]Politicians — Not Education and Not Public Opinion — Make Policy[/h]

So far as they go in that section, it is OK - but just as they write about the "mistakes", they too follow suit by no recognizing that "policy" is cancer. Policy is not Law. There should be no such thing as policy, save to obey proper Law and to comport oneself in accord therewith.

Furthermore, he fails to make the distinction between Law and statute, the two seeming the same to the untrained mind, but which have nothing fundamental to do with each other in point of actual fact. Law is demonstrably valid and addresses actual criminal behaviors and prescribes proper remedies. Statute is nothing beyond the whim and caprice of the Tyrant set to ink in formal garb and enacted such that it is enforced by men with guns. Policy goes statute ten better by furthering said whim and caprice in accord with the Tyrant's mood in any given instant in time.

Examples:

​

Law: "Thou shalt not commit murder". The validity of this as Law is prima facie obvious, but for the doubting Thomas, proper and objectively correct proofs are not difficult to produce. Any average sixth-grader should be able to produce the proof and understand its validity and truthfulness with no adult help.

Statute: "The possession, cultivation, use, and sale of any strain of cannabis shall be a felony of the first degree, punishable by life imprisonment with no possibility for parole, or death, at a presiding judge's discretion." Pure whim, devoid of any reference to an actual crime and carrying penalties that are pure evil.

Policy for Monday early morning: "You in a heap o'trubble boi and we a gwyne enfo'ce d'cannabis law to d'lettah"
Policy for Monday late morning: "We shall no longer enforce the cannabis law cuz it's bad 'n stuff."
Policy for Monday early afternoon: "You in a heap o'trubble..."​

Law is golden. Statute is cancer. Policy is cancer on steroids.

The bits on misunderstanding targets and knowledge are well taken, but in the context of their own faux pas, to my mind they lose some of their impact.

There's some good stuff on that page, but it's not nearly enough and IMO it relies too much on that which in humans has proven time and again to be unreliable. But there was one tiny nugget of gold:

The key will be for you and your grassroots activists to aggressively make politicians pay a price for their failure to pay attention to their constituents (you and your group).

The main problem with this lies in the fact that there are no practical measures in place in terms of either Law or statute (forget policy) that allows for real consequences. Joe Politick gets into office, is corrupted, and is paid off with... say, $10MM. He entered Congress wearing shoes with holes on the bottoms. He is now a millionaire after selling his sphincter to anyone willing to pay. In the process, the American people got their sphincters similarly exercised, only without consent. Maybe Joe likes being a Congressman... or perhaps he is ready to walk away, having hit the political lottery, therefore not giving a tinker's damn about whether his constituents are betrayed.

As things stand today, unless a given body of constituents is willing and able to hunt a traitor and make him bitterly rue the day his parents met, there are no teeth in the jaws of the tiger that votes Joe out of office because there are ten thousand Joes out there, ready and willing to cash-in on the power frenzy.

Until politicians are faced with not only their own destruction, but that of their families, all the grassrooting in the world is going to avail us of nothing. The same may be said for our resolve. What I mean is this: there is now so much power concentrated in so few hands, that any real threat to the hegemonic interest is readily met with very effective diversions... like, oh... I dunno... Covid-19? War In Eye-Rack. WTC.

So unless we are willing to press on in the face of true terrorism carried forth by the real enemies of all humanity (the "state"), all this talk is moot. The motherfuckers at the top of this stinking, steaming pile we call "politics" will stop at nothing to maintain their positions of power. Furthermore, they possess the means by which to keep the rest of us in line because we are become a breed of timids and milquetoasts, too afraid of the big bad wolf to drive a spear through his heart.

Why does the "left" flourish? The same reason that Steve Wynn did: he bet on human corruption and depravity. THAT is the winning bet every time and that is the reason the "left" is kicking our asses and eating our lunches while they waggle their tongues at us and their tiny penises squirt their greasy little contents on our pant legs. Appealing to everything base and shitty in the human being is the single guaranteed way of sailing to victory, and unless something truly extraordinary happens between now and 1/20/2021, we will have yet another example of how it is so, perhaps the single greatest and most overwhelming anecdotal data point in human history to date.

So my idea would be something along these lines: get up the blood lust of the otherwise good people of the right, to see the physical destruction of those who betray liberty and to see their families set to wrack and ruin as part of the consequence of betraying the public trust. That is the brand of reasoning the left uses and all one needs do is take a good gander at Seattle and Portland to be convinced that what I write is no bullshit.

And end up here:
https://facl-training.org/schools

The whole page was an ad and explained nothing. WTF?

 

[ZakCarter]

Media pushes the culture, and the culture pushes the political class - they are on the right track here! Liberals/the establishment have been all over this as long as media has existed!

I'm a true believer in the The Breitbart Doctrine - "the idea that "politics is downstream from culture" and that to change politics one must first change culture."

"to change politics you first have to change culture because politics flows from culture. If you want to change culture, you have to first understand what the units of culture are, and the people are the units of culture. So, if you want to change politics, you first have to change people to change culture.”

Comic books to video games to action movies to the text books used in k-12 to you name it - We need an all of above effort to change the media landscape!

 

[Madison320]

The only way to change government policy is through the political process.

I agree but it's not going to happen until the dollar collapses. Until then there's no incentive to move towards capitalism (liberty) because currently there's no downside to printing and borrowing. Right now socialism "seems great" because in the short run we can get as much free stuff as we want with no apparent downside.

Hopefully a healthy dose of hyperinflation during Biden's term will be the cure.

 

[Matt Collins]

I agree but it's not going to happen until the dollar collapses.

On the federal level, yeah this is probably correct.


On the state level, in many states, there is absolutely an ability to push through pro-liberty legislation.

 

[Cleaner44]

To me the strategy is very simple.

Oppose Marxist Democrats at every opportunity.

Work within the Republican party and continue to push the GOP in a more libertarian direction. Oppose liberal establishment Republicans. Primary them with more outsiders.

Don't alienate Republican allies because they aren't 100% libertarian. We can work with people that we have a ≈ 75% overlap with.

Using a 3rd party is a waste of valuable time.

 

[Matt Collins]

To me the strategy is very simple.

Oppose Marxist Democrats at every opportunity.

Work within the Republican party and continue to push the GOP in a more libertarian direction. Oppose liberal establishment Republicans. Primary them with more outsiders.

Don't alienate Republican allies because they aren't 100% libertarian. We can work with people that we have a ≈ 75% overlap with.

Using a 3rd party is a waste of valuable time.

Pretty much this.

 

[Cleaner44]

Pretty much this.

The good news is that Trump has driven many neocons back to the Democrat party. They are the ones that should leave the GOP. This one result of the last 4 years alone is a gift from Trump that is worthy of eternal thanks.

 

[Matt Collins]

The good news is that Trump has driven many neocons back to the Democrat party. They are the ones that should leave the GOP. This one result of the last 4 years alone is a gift from Trump that is worthy of eternal thanks.

Yeah Trump has a lot of flaws, but this is indeed a positive result.

 

[hard@work]

The good news is that Trump has driven many neocons back to the Democrat party. They are the ones that should leave the GOP. This one result of the last 4 years alone is a gift from Trump that is worthy of eternal thanks.

I have meditated on this much. Enough to log back in for this comment.

I'm not so sure that's the good news anymore. They have proven more dedicated to militancy than to republicanism. Perhaps they were let go to easily, without a warning label attached. Watching "progressives" become corrupted by neoconservatism has not been a gentle four year experience for me, at least.

Hi everyone, hope you are well and God Bless you all. I know I'm on the right side here.

h@w

 

[Okie RP fan]

So, our stance on the LP, not so much national but even state LPs, is pretty much the same: waste of time.

Leverage the GOP and produce more liberty candidates through it? So, we get a few at the federal levels, what then?

I'm trying to decide on how much I want to support my state's LP. I'm trying to ponder how effective it would be vs. trying to stay within the traditional GOP circles...

Edit: It'd be nice if we could push out all neocons and big gov't. types out of the GOP, then that'd establish a truly second party. That would still leave two major factions within it: libertarians and conservatives. Historically, that's been a mixed bag.

This still leaves out voting manipulation as we saw in November, and things like D.C. and Puerto Rico becoming states that will heavily favor Dems. And the general fact that the entire system is broken and the empire is falling...

Which comes back to a question of: how can we politically break out of this cycle? It's very much play the game or walk away. The problem with walking away is the game is still being played behind us...

 

[Slutter McGee]

The Libertarian Party is a joke. Its all a joke honestly. You (We) can't win.

 

[devil21]

Media pushes the culture, and the culture pushes the political class - they are on the right track here! Liberals/the establishment have been all over this as long as media has existed!

I'm a true believer in the The Breitbart Doctrine - "the idea that "politics is downstream from culture" and that to change politics one must first change culture."

"to change politics you first have to change culture because politics flows from culture. If you want to change culture, you have to first understand what the units of culture are, and the people are the units of culture. So, if you want to change politics, you first have to change people to change culture.”

Comic books to video games to action movies to the text books used in k-12 to you name it - We need an all of above effort to change the media landscape!

This is a very smart post (as are all of them in this thread). Hollywood and media, but I repeat myself, set the narrative and mind-control conditioning, which then eventually gives political cover to politicians implementing preplanned changes to society. Climate change and LGBT were cited in the thread and are both perfect examples of it. Tons of "documentaries", usually biased, are promoted for mass consumption for climate change agendas. It started with Gore's bs doc and has continued ever since. It's inserted into sitcom scripts so everyone knows "how important it is". It's simply seeding of thoughts. Same with LGBT. Put it on TV constantly and it'll eventually be accepted by at least half of the population when it's turned into legislation since Hollywood/media has already slowly changed the underlying culture. Peer pressure, injecting thoughts into younger people, normalizing what's otherwise considered different or inaccurate. Anyone remember when Ellen DeGeneres, iirc, kissing another woman on tv was a pearl clutching moment that was called ground-breaking and covered ad nausem by media at the time? Or men kissing on some primetime show?

Control media (culture), control politics.

---------------------

Since the LP doesn't approach politics as a military operation, while the leadership and strategizers of the duopoly do, the LP continues to flounder. It's just very difficult to regiment a party of independent, intelligent, generally anti-authority participants into being order following foot soldiers. It's possible but extremely difficult, especially without a central uniting force (like Dr. Paul was) driving it. In the end, organized politics is little more than glorified cult-building. How does one build and control a "cult" that is full of people who aren't easily brainwashed and don't easily follow orders and then get them to recruit others into the "cult"?

 

[TheTexan]

Support your state's secession organization(s). Or just move to Texas.

 

[TheTexan]

Or create a new Free State Project. One that has balls and isn't afraid of taking over & seceding.

The FSP failed because it was too pussy to commit to anything bold.

 

[TheTexan]

Or buy a small country, from an existing country. The purchase price includes both the land and the legitimacy. This pretty much has never been tried. Closest analogue is Israel (which worked out well for them)