Daily Anarchist Forum
October 16, 2021, 07:26:26 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Daily Anarchist Forum!
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
  Print  
Author Topic: The most important strategy  (Read 35948 times)
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: January 10, 2012, 09:06:42 AM »

I'm not completely against using social welfare to bleed the state dry, but I probably couldn't do it myself with the thought in the back of my mind that is was someone else's hard earned money that was stolen from them.

Most of the money now is coming from printing money in many countries.  I doubt as an individual you can get enough from the government to offset the theft of the value of what you already have.  

You are forgetting the the idea is to avoid taxation, entirely if possible. Though that is probably impossible Tongue. So any money taken would be extra money. It would be pretentious to state that I could spend money in a way that better serves another individual then that individual could himself. But I'm pretty confident I can do a better job then the state at least.....

I'm talking about monetary inflation, not taxation. 
Logged

Freya
Tranarchist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: January 10, 2012, 10:01:23 AM »

Inflation on my silver and bitcoins? I don't think government has control over that.
Logged
JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: January 10, 2012, 10:02:18 AM »

Historically, the state has also grown through political action despite the libertarian dissenters.

And? Your point is?
My point was to illustrate that there was no point in your statement "historically, the State has only been reduced through political action and revolution." If you took revolution out of that sentence, you would see it's true strength.

Quote
You ignore all the evidence in front of you that libertarian dissenters have slowed state expansion through the political means, particularly classical liberal parties.
No, I'm not ignoring the evidence. In my previous post I questioned the causal relationship you have proposed, but you did not address that part of my post.

Quote
They stopped the spread of fascism and even reduced the State in many cases.
Again, epiphenomenal.

Quote
And they weren't the pure, modern Libertarians that we are. And...Our political movement is relatively new, so you're not giving us a chance.
If classical liberal political parties failed to maintain a classical liberal order, I don't see why we should expect market anarchist parties to fare any better. Being more rigid and less compromising will only hurt your chances in the political world.

Quote
Political action can only do something when we've achieved some numbers....at which point we would have "purer" options anyways.

I disagree. Political means and education would still be the #1 means of abolishing the State. (If every gov. office was filled with an AnCap, Mr. State wouldn't exist). Even with numbers, black market efforts could still get crushed, and would do hardly anything to beat the State.
Education is #1, yes. But the rest isn't very convincing. With numbers, black market efforts wouldn't get crushed (see Italy). With numbers, any method will work, so why make it politics? If every government office was anarchist, then almost all of us are anarchist, so we have ignored the state out of existence long before we "voted."

Quote
But for the effort, just about anything beats politics.

I disagree. Lew Rockwell's and Rothbard's political efforts have accomplished far more that anything else, I think. (As well as the education they provided, of course).
When I think of Rothbard's achievements, his dabbling in politics is not what comes to mind. In fact, the futility of his efforts there is a lesson learned for me. His legacy is in his writings. That's what mattered.
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #33 on: January 10, 2012, 10:56:37 AM »

Inflation on my silver and bitcoins? I don't think government has control over that.

Do you own no property?  No car, no home, no stocks?  Their value won't adjust fast enough to keep up with the monetary inflation were seeing right now.  Do you not get paid anything in cash?  If your on someones payroll, your income won't scale with monetary inflation.  

They may be able to inflate silver.  Look for any government that holds silver reserves.  I bet someone can inflate it.

I know I will be charged property tax, and they will want to take payroll tax, sales tax, fuel tax, capital gains tax and any other tax they can think of.  Monetary inflation will just make all those go up as well.  
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 11:02:02 AM by Syock » Logged

Freya
Tranarchist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 353



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: January 10, 2012, 11:02:13 AM »

Inflation on my silver and bitcoins? I don't think government has control over that.

Do you own no property?  No car, no home, no stocks?  Their value won't adjust fast enough to keep up with the monetary inflation were seeing right now.  Do you not get paid anything in cash?  If your on someones payroll, your income won't scale with monetary inflation.  

They may be able to inflate silver.  Look for any government that holds silver reserves.  I bet someone can inflate it.

I know I will be charged property tax, and they will want to take payroll tax, sales tax, capital gains tax and any other tax they can think of. 

The point is to avoid as much of that as possible. IE getting paid in bitcoins by your employers. Accepting bitcoins for purchases.

The more people that do it the easier it gets. You will never be able to completely dodge taxes/inflation though, I agree.
Logged
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: January 10, 2012, 02:20:01 PM »

BTW, neither Lew nor Murray ever bothered to vote. I asked Lew myself in person.

This is actually the MOST baffling course of action to me. Not promoting agorism, promoting voting, but not voting. That makes no sense.

Do as I say, not as I do?

I've never seen an article by either actually advocating that people go vote. I do believe Rothbard is misinterpreted when he's cited as advocating political means. I think that he was simply saying it is most effective to meet people where they are. For philosophical discussion, this unfortunately means the political arena. As an example of someone who's never been effective politically but has been effective philosophically, you could look at Ron Paul. Ron stands alone tho due to his unusual dedication over an unusually long period of time.

Being in Alaska I have met many of the "effective" movers and shakers from the early Libertarian Party movement of the late 70s and early 80s. People you all have never heard of like Dick Randolph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Randolph). That movement (specifically the one in Alaska) fell apart in a comedically tragic way that would warrant a post of its own. I have an at-length play by play of how it all went down in my email archives from one of the guys who was very active in it. Short story is that some people were hard line to the philosophy while others tried to "sell out around the edges" to become more relevant. The already small movement tore itself in half and became irrelevant. Oh, and the more proactive members of the ideological half all ended up in jail for several years due to tax protest activities (with the cleverest one actually successfully winning his case and causing a fundamental change in state policy as a result).

I do find it ironic that anyone involved in austro-libertarianism (Murray or otherwise) would be interpreted as saying that the actions of an individual are of no consequence relative to the actions of some abstract "social aggregate" like a body politic. This goes directly against the most fundamental bases of Praxeology.

I think there are two mistakes "libertarians" of assorted stripes make, but these aren't axiomatic or anything, just my opinion.
1) Trying to get other people to do what you do or adopt your strategy
2) Choosing a course of action solely based on perceived future effectiveness

By chasing goal 1) we exclude other possible strategies and thus weaken the activism/advocacy gene pool by creating a philosophical mono culture. Further, we don't have the knowledge to know if 2) is even close to being true and if we succeeded at 1), we would never have any means of comparing the effectiveness of other strategies (empirical means tho they may be).

From this, I would say that THE RIGHT STRATEGY ( Wink ) is to do what you're most effective at and what seems "right" to you. This will be the most satisfying course of action anyway, so who gives a **** about anything else. Life is about doing what you enjoy and maximizing every experience. After all, as creatures bound by sensory perception, subjective experience forms our entire reality (STOE). Enjoy it (or don't if you derive greater subjective utility from sensory deprivation, which would then still technically be enjoyment).

Cheesy Cool Tongue

These are my sentiments as well. In New Hampshire there are big riffs between in system and out of system activism. But I don't let it bother me if other anarchists choose to vote or run for office. I'm not fully convinced that I'm right(that they shouldn't) and by trying to nag at them to do what I do will only cause unnecessary conflict. In places like Alaska, where there were too few people, a riff in strategy caused so much internal strife that the movement tore apart. FORTUNATELY, New Hampshire has SO many activists with so many different strategies, that even though there ARE internal riffs, it hasn't torn apart the movement, THANK GOD.

The REAL debate for me is whether or not you believe the state is legitimate. Once you've converted to anarchism, debating strategy is really a battle of subjectives.
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
Rothbardian
Radical Libertarian
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 272


Abolish the State!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #36 on: January 10, 2012, 07:48:59 PM »

Maybe it would be good if the movement was torn apart. Anti-political anarchists are extremely annoying and I think detrimental to carrying forward Our Cause. It's almost more important to convert Anarcho-Capitalists to being political than to convert Minarchists.

I'll look at responding to some of your posts later, but right now I just feel sick of the anti-politcal, irrational, annoying arguments. But I'll take a look at them later.


Hey, Giessel, I live in Alaska too! Grin

Logged

Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: January 10, 2012, 07:52:51 PM »

Maybe it would be good if the movement was torn apart. Anti-political anarchists are extremely annoying and I think detrimental to carrying forward Our Cause. It's almost more important to convert Anarcho-Capitalists to being political than to convert Minarchists.

I'll look at responding to some of your posts later, but right now I just feel sick of the anti-politcal, irrational, annoying arguments. But I'll take a look at them later.


Hey, Giessel, I live in Alaska too! Grin



A hardliner! Ha! I never thought I'd consider myself a MODERATE!  Cheesy
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
Rothbardian
Radical Libertarian
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 272


Abolish the State!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #38 on: January 10, 2012, 08:29:24 PM »

Yeah, I was thinking about when Rothbard split the more Cato-type libertarians and the more Mises-type libertarians in his political actions. (A good thing). I'm honestly thinking I might be willing to do the same thing between the politicals and anti-politicals. I also really want to write an essay for political anarchism. Rothbard has political remarks interspersed throughout all his works, but it seems that there is lacking an essay strictly concerning this subject.
Logged

Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #39 on: January 10, 2012, 08:30:41 PM »

When are you moving to New Hampshire? Or are you going to tough it out in Alaska?
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
Rothbardian
Radical Libertarian
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 272


Abolish the State!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: January 10, 2012, 08:34:39 PM »

Haha, I wasn't planning on moving to NH. Grin

It would be pretty cool, even though I'm not sure if it's strategically beneficial. (I'd have to put some more analysis into the subject).
Logged

Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: January 10, 2012, 08:36:41 PM »

There are a lot of anarcho-capitalists who have worked their way into the statehouse. And it grows every election, too. New Hampshire was the only state in the nation to decrease its annual budget, and it did so by 12%. Things to consider.
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
Rothbardian
Radical Libertarian
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 272


Abolish the State!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #42 on: January 10, 2012, 08:41:07 PM »

Wow, 12% is pretty damn radical, especially for being the only state to decrease its budget. I like it.

Very interesting, thanks for giving me this train of thought.

Logged

Will
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: January 10, 2012, 10:19:55 PM »

The reason I'm probably not going to bother voting is because I adhere to Rothbard's "style," so to speak. But if I did vote, it would be perfectly moral and meritorious to vote for a Libertarian candidate like RP.

I'm not familiar with Rothbards style of politics, could you expound? I mean if your not going to vote what is there left to do? Run for office?

I don't vote for a number of reasons, but mainly because in my state it's pretty pointless.
Logged
Rothbardian
Radical Libertarian
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 272


Abolish the State!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: January 10, 2012, 10:41:40 PM »

I'm talking about the style of staying in the political background and encouraging others to vote/run for office. i.e., the intellectual political anarchist behind the movement. Rothbard took to heart the concept of the political cadre; it is this style of being a proffesional revolutionary, intellectual, and political organizer/motivator that was embodied by Rothbard. 

When you are a leader, and you get thousands to vote for radical political change, the vote of all theirs is the spiritual vote of your own. That's why you don't have to physically vote yourself. 

Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!