Too many liberty people have a defeatist attitude:

Matt Collins

Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
47,707
Too many people in the liberty movement have a defeatist mentality which is a self-fulfilling prophecy.


I'm not "Mr. Positive" by any stretch of the imagination. Things are getting worse without a doubt, but in some respects they are also getting better.

That being said, the reason a lot of activists in the liberty movement have a defeatist attitude is
because they continue to look for a silver bullet to achieve victory.

That simply isn't how the world works most of the time be it in business, school, or bringing about liberty.

Most of the time to achieve victory it takes grueling non-stop tedious unpleasant work which quite frankly many people are unwilling to do either because they are lazy or do not have the mental capacity to understand the long term results of short term actions. It's like hoping you'll win the lottery as the best chance for success.

Running candidates doomed to fail with zero results (and one can "win" an election without achieving electoral victory), attempting to get bills passed on their merits and giving up after the first try, are morale crushing activities. Do enough of this and people become defeatists, sour on the whole idea, and then give-up and go home.

Deeper, I think a lot of it has to do with personality types of the liberty movement. Many of us are INTJs or similar, which means we are thinkers, not necessarily doers. We definitely don't like dealing with other people. That makes it hard for us to want to be leaders and build organizations by recruiting others to show up and help out. It means we are not typically outgoing, or warm and friendly.

There are exceptions to this of course, but it is the world as I see it.

In the 7 years I have been doing this I have tasted victory in both small and big ways, so I know it can be done, I've done it myself, I've seen others do it, and I've had a front row seat to some pretty successful endeavors. I've also seen a lot of failure too, most of which was due to fighting the wrong battle.

If more in the liberty movement would take every political training course they could so that they would be able to understand how to be more effective, and then if they would choose their battles more wisely, we would start to see an even greater change across the country for the cause of liberty, guaranteed.
 
Does this mean you're not going to go around saying, for example, Blue Republican outreach efforts to grow the libertarian wing of the GOP with fresh blood are a waste of time and resources? Because if so, this is a red letter day!
 
Does this mean you're not going to go around saying, for example, Blue Republican outreach efforts to grow the libertarian wing of the GOP with fresh blood are a waste of time and resources? Because if so, this is a red letter day!
For growing the GOP, that might work in urban areas.

To use it as a strategy to win elections, it is a complete waste of time.
 
FACL Seminars

If more in the liberty movement would take every political training course they could so that they would be able to understand how to be more effective, and then if they would choose their battles more wisely, we would start to see an even greater change across the country for the cause of liberty, guaranteed.

On that note....

The Foundation for Applied Conservative Leadership
mission_tbl2.png








atlanta.png




vancouver.png




facltraining.org
 
That being said, the reason a lot of activists in the liberty movement have a defeatist attitude is because they continue to look for a silver bullet to achieve victory.

Classic projection.

That's exactly what politics has always been, however - state your own problems, while placing those problems on someone (or everyone) else.
 
Nice to know our defeatist attitude is alive and well and living in you.
Not at all. You fail to understand the concept of doing things that are pretty much guaranteed to fail (such as what you described), vs not trying anything because you think that you can't win at all.
 
The irony is that we don't have to be defeated at all. Politics in a way is the ultimate free market, get your candidate money and you're dealt into the game. Out raise your opponents and out work them at the polls and you win. The Liberty Movement could be electing 10-15 House members and 1-2 Senators every election cycle if we got our head on straight.
 
The irony is that we don't have to be defeated at all. Politics in a way is the ultimate free market, get your candidate money and you're dealt into the game. Out raise your opponents and out work them at the polls and you win. The Liberty Movement could be electing 10-15 House members and 1-2 Senators every election cycle if we got our head on straight.

Have you done the math to back up that statement?
 
Matt uses the word "victory" so often in the OP as if he doesn't know what it even means. What does it mean to you? In 2014 40,000 new laws take effect across the US and you've tasted victory?
 
Matt uses the word "victory" so often in the OP as if he doesn't know what it even means. What does it mean to you? In 2014 40,000 new laws take effect across the US and you've tasted victory?

Collins reminds me of the "Naive" character in that famous "types of libertarians" cartoon.
 
Too many liberty people have a defeatist attitude

Why are you being such a defeatist?

The irony is that we don't have to be defeated at all. Politics in a way is the ultimate free market, get your candidate money and you're dealt into the game. Out raise your opponents and out work them at the polls and you win. The Liberty Movement could be electing 10-15 House members and 1-2 Senators every election cycle if we got our head on straight.

Oh, you have got to be shitting me ... :rolleyes:
 
Nice to know our defeatist attitude is alive and well and living in you.

Bingo!

I'm reminded of this shoe salesman story:

A western shoe salesman went to Africa to scout the market. He wired his manufacturer, ‘I want to come home. Nobody wears shoes in this part of Africa.’

They brought him home and sent another salesman. The new salesman hurriedly wired an order, ‘Everybody here needs shoes!”

IMO, both salesmen have valid approaches and could be good at sales provided the right salesman is in the right location. If Matt doesn't want to sell shoes in the ghetto, then great. But it is a waste of time for him to convince others not to try.
 
For growing the GOP, that might work in urban areas.

To use it as a strategy to win elections, it is a complete waste of time.

If one or one's campaign manager is easily [mis]branded as a racist mofo, how does that affect election chances? I got the sense that W Bush could get along with anybody even if he didn't get their votes. Romney.... not so much.
 
Back
Top