Ron Paul and the Singularity

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
What you're essentially saying is that you're not interested in moving towards AC'ism.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it? That's weird because that doesn't seem like something I would say. I'm pretty sure I'm saying that voting for Ron Paul isn't a move towards ACism but is in fact tilting at windmills at best and (more likely) a huge step backward for ACism at worst

[Vagos]

[ QUOTE ]
Then spread the message! Arguing that some politicians are ok and some taxes aren't that bad and the two party system can spawn a good choice sometimes isn't spreading that message.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's the problem. Feel like they are helping. If they feel that Ron Paul is part of the solution then they are less likely to do the things that actually are part of the solution it's not enough to talk about your convictions you have to live them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am fairly confident that anyone who has already endlessly debated the finer points of politics and philosophy to have reached ACism in the first place, has no problem doing this the way we do it on this forum and perhaps in discussions with our friends and family. Voting for Ron Paul is in addition to all that, not in place of it.

Finally, you and I probably don't like it, but the fact is that there is a HUGE portion of the population in this country that doesn't care enough to discuss politics and philosophy at the dinner table or around the water cooler. All these people do is watch CNN, read the local metro paper and then go vote. If you ever want free markets and liberty to gain serious steam, you have to reach these people any way that you can. Getting a guy like Ron Paul a lot of publicity helps this.

[phantomlimb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then spread the message! Arguing that some politicians are ok and some taxes aren't that bad and the two party system can spawn a good choice sometimes isn't spreading that message.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's the problem. Feel like they are helping. If they feel that Ron Paul is part of the solution then they are less likely to do the things that actually are part of the solution it's not enough to talk about your convictions you have to live them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am fairly confident that anyone who has already endlessly debated the finer points of politics and philosophy to have reached ACism in the first place, has no problem doing this the way we do it on this forum and perhaps in discussions with our friends and family. Voting for Ron Paul is in addition to all that, not in place of it.

Finally, you and I probably don't like it, but the fact is that there is a HUGE portion of the population in this country that doesn't care enough to discuss politics and philosophy at the dinner table or around the water cooler. All these people do is watch CNN, read the local metro paper and then go vote. If you ever want free markets and liberty to gain serious steam, you have to reach these people any way that you can. Getting a guy like Ron Paul a lot of publicity helps this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoah, come on now. I used to do political polling and over 50% of the people don't even know the politicans names. Over like 5 months I encountered maybe 4 people who sounded leigimately interested or knoweldgeable enough to have an opinion.

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then spread the message! Arguing that some politicians are ok and some taxes aren't that bad and the two party system can spawn a good choice sometimes isn't spreading that message.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That's the problem. Feel like they are helping. If they feel that Ron Paul is part of the solution then they are less likely to do the things that actually are part of the solution it's not enough to talk about your convictions you have to live them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am fairly confident that anyone who has already endlessly debated the finer points of politics and philosophy to have reached ACism in the first place, has no problem doing this the way we do it on this forum and perhaps in discussions with our friends and family. Voting for Ron Paul is in addition to all that, not in place of it.

Finally, you and I probably don't like it, but the fact is that there is a HUGE portion of the population in this country that doesn't care enough to discuss politics and philosophy at the dinner table or around the water cooler. All these people do is watch CNN, read the local metro paper and then go vote. If you ever want free markets and liberty to gain serious steam, you have to reach these people any way that you can. Getting a guy like Ron Paul a lot of publicity helps this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really honestly don't think it does. Now find a way to get ACism or more importantly principle of non-violence or the idea that taxation is theft and theft is wrong in all circumstances onto CNN or in the Metro and I'll not only vote for it I'll fund it out of my own pocket. Ron Paul doesn't do that. He says that fundamentally some level of governmental aggression is ok. In fact he goes further to say that some level is morally good.

[Vagos]

[ QUOTE ]
Whoah, come on now. I used to do political polling and over 50% of the people don't even know the politicans names. Over like 5 months I encountered maybe 4 people who sounded leigimately interested or knoweldgeable enough to have an opinion.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes...I believe that was my point. Unless you think I gave them too much credit for reading the paper and watching CNN? I'm talking about getting to the people who do those things but still don't REALLY ever care to discuss politics/philosophy in a very in-depth manner.

You're talking about people who know absolutely NOTHING. Either way, it only helps to further strengthen my point. These people will not wake up one day and decide to be anarchocapitalists. Small progress is necessary at first.

[DVaut1]

I'm with tomd here -- there seems to be an *apparent* tension between consequentialism and deontology in the ACist camp; if ACists are to whole-heartedly embrace Ron Paul (and it sure seems like that's happening on this forum), then it would seem to imply that the normative moral and ethical claims ACists are fond of making are at least somewhat meaningless, given how readily they abandon them if it means "a step in the right direction" or some face time on CNN or whatever other justification is used for supporting Paul.

[Vagos]

[ QUOTE ]
I really honestly don't think it does. Now find a way to get ACism or more importantly principle of non-violence or the idea that taxation is theft and theft is wrong in all circumstances onto CNN or in the Metro and I'll not only vote for it I'll fund it out of my own pocket. Ron Paul doesn't do that. He says that fundamentally some level of governmental aggression is ok. In fact he goes further to say that some level is morally good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's only saying these things to reach a wider audience in order to get out the big picture(freedom/free markets). But who knows, we can't read his mind. The fact is that the total lack of the state is an EXTREMELY fringe position and finding that being taken seriously on CNN or the New York Times is a no-shot.

I don't want to keep going on this so this is probably the last point I'll make and it's just reitterating what I said earlier. A lot of ACists were once small government libertarians. We once thought that taxes were morally ok for some things. So you just have to give people the benefit of the doubt in that they have to travel the same path that most of us did. It's only natural. There is just no way that you can make most Americans accept ACism without first taking them down the libertarian, "small government=good" path. I think you need to appreciate that and understand it when anarchists decide to vote for Ron Paul as part of the method in spreading the word about free markets and individual liberty.

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I really honestly don't think it does. Now find a way to get ACism or more importantly principle of non-violence or the idea that taxation is theft and theft is wrong in all circumstances onto CNN or in the Metro and I'll not only vote for it I'll fund it out of my own pocket. Ron Paul doesn't do that. He says that fundamentally some level of governmental aggression is ok. In fact he goes further to say that some level is morally good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he's only saying these things to reach a wider audience in order to get out the big picture(freedom/free markets). But who knows, we can't read his mind. The fact is that the total lack of the state is an EXTREMELY fringe position and finding that being taken seriously on CNN or the New York Times is a no-shot.

I don't want to keep going on this so this is probably the last point I'll make and it's just reitterating what I said earlier. A lot of ACists were once small government libertarians. We once thought that taxes were morally ok for some things. So you just have to give people the benefit of the doubt in that they have to travel the same path that most of us did. It's only natural. There is just no way that you can make most Americans accept ACism without first taking them down the libertarian, "small government=good" path. I think you need to appreciate that and understand it when anarchists decide to vote for Ron Paul as part of the method in spreading the word about free markets and individual liberty.

[/ QUOTE ]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Another point is that if the general public no nothing of our position I don't want their first contact with the true ideas of freedom to be a guy who wants to use taxation, the police and the threat of violence to forcefully evict hundreds of thousands of people from their homes. Sending mixed messages on a first impression is much worse than sending no message at all. Once people get the idea the Ron Paul is what all freedom loving people aspire to getting that image out of their head will be very difficult.

You went through the minarchist progression but you just said you have the propensity to argue and debate intelligently (and above all logically) about politics. If people aren't prepared to do that all I want them to hear from freedom lovers is violence is evil taxation is violence. Lets not confuse them.

[Vagos]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm with tomd here -- there seems to be an *apparent* tension between consequentialism and deontology in the ACist camp; if ACists are to whole-heartedly embrace Ron Paul (and it sure seems like that's happening on this forum), then it would seem to imply that the normative moral and ethical claims ACists are fond of making are at least somewhat meaningless, given how readily they abandon them if it means "a step in the right direction" or some face time on CNN or whatever other justification is used for supporting Paul.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not a consequentialist ACist, I'm just not going to crucify those that are. The position is so fringe as it is, why bother starting fights in our own camp? That's why I said the last post was "probably" my last of the thread (though I knew it wouldn't be)- because I was tired of going on the defensive for a group of people I'm not even part of (those that intend to cast a vote for Ron Paul).

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm with tomd here -- there seems to be an *apparent* tension between consequentialism and deontology in the ACist camp; if ACists are to whole-heartedly embrace Ron Paul (and it sure seems like that's happening on this forum), then it would seem to imply that the normative moral and ethical claims ACists are fond of making are at least somewhat meaningless, given how readily they abandon them if it means "a step in the right direction" or some face time on CNN or whatever other justification is used for supporting Paul.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not a consequentialist ACist, I'm just not going to crucify those that are. The position is so fringe as it is, why bother starting fights in our own camp? That's why I said the last post was "probably" my last of the thread (though I knew it wouldn't be)- because I was tired of going on the defensive for a group of people I'm not even part of (those that intend to cast a vote for Ron Paul).

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't want you to feel like you're on the defensive. We are all on the same team and what's more I don't doubt that ACers voting for Ron Paul do so for any reason other than their love of freedom, but I'd like to get them to reconsider that decision I hope this thread has been useful towards that end.