at first I was detesting the fallacy of his chart-shift equation. maybe he's right though. does anyone from the land of asses and pachyderms ever put ideology over job security? NOPE.
However, Mr. Smith errs in blaming "clever-Libertarians" as he calls them. it's not Libertarians. it's crackheads like Sullivan who sell their own purported principles to "punish" the "other guy". I used to be guilty of it. In 2000 I voted for Bush. Compared to '96, he was better than Clinton or Dole, but that's not hard. And he was DEFINITELY better than Gore. Gore would have been WORSE than Clinton. So I didn't so much vote for Bush as vote to protect myself from Gore, from a third Clintonian term.
By 2004 I grew up. Ideals don't mean anything if you're willing to sell them whenever it suits you. How many voted for Kerry not because of anything good they could see in him but because he "wasn't Bush" and they "hated Bush" and wanted to "beat Bush"? W's first term in office didn't win me over, but I sure as hell wasn't going to vote for John Kerry. The problem lies with people who perpetuate the diarchy that is our system and vote for one evil just to not allow another. We don't NEED more choices, we HAVE them. Too many people are easily talked out of them.
A TRUE Libertarian would have voted for Badnarik, failing that, for Peroutka, failing that, for Bush.
Principles, principles, PRINCIPLES. While it's true you need to win to change things your way, what good is winning if you have to sell your soul bit by bit to get there? By the time you get where you want to be you've become what you hated. We have a population minority that even bother to vote, and of those, the majority see government as strictly win/lose like it's the fucking Super Bowl. THAT'S what we've become. This isn't some reality show; what happens every other November actually MATTERS. Sullivan and Smith are BOTH idiots. Between the two of them they might stand a chance at a clue.
I totally agree with you on the issue of political ideals. The main point from that article that I liked, and something that I believe is true, is the role of the "clever libertarian"
You find so many, that because the republican party has not stuck to the roots of small government like it should (and trust me, that pisses me off as much as anyone) think they should vote democratic in order to "punish" the republican party.
I have no problem with the "true" libertarians that vote 3rd party, but to vote for the left, because the right isnt far enough to the right is insanse, and sadly, many so called libertarians have done that recently.
And, while I think we can both agree with the fact that his scale example is not how governemtn SHOULD work. However, it currently is how it DOES work. We can either sit back and complain, we can try and change it, or we can work within that system by, as he says, changing the thoughts of the general population.
The last two have to actually be done together if you want to change anything. You have to attempt to change the system by working within the system, otherwise nothing short of a revolution is going to lead to any meaningful change. And by working within the system, I dont mean that we should be content with the current system, I am just saying that we can't hope to have a major overhaul overnight. Its going to take years of changing how the general electorate think, getting people who are more steadfast in their ideals into office, and keeping the "Sellouts" out of office.
You talk about Sullivan being a crackhead as if he is a one-off case. The fact is, he is not. Whether you consider them true libertarians, or call them crackheads, there are a significant number of people out there that voted under the same logic that Sullivan preached.
Whether you consider them true libertarians, or call them crackheads, there are a significant number of people out there that voted under the same logic that Sullivan preached.
at first I was detesting the fallacy of his chart-shift equation. maybe he's right though. does anyone from the land of asses and pachyderms ever put ideology over job security? NOPE.
However, Mr. Smith errs in blaming "clever-Libertarians" as he calls them. it's not Libertarians. it's crackheads like Sullivan who sell their own purported principles to "punish" the "other guy". I used to be guilty of it. In 2000 I voted for Bush. Compared to '96, he was better than Clinton or Dole, but that's not hard. And he was DEFINITELY better than Gore. Gore would have been WORSE than Clinton. So I didn't so much vote for Bush as vote to protect myself from Gore, from a third Clintonian term.
By 2004 I grew up. Ideals don't mean anything if you're willing to sell them whenever it suits you. How many voted for Kerry not because of anything good they could see in him but because he "wasn't Bush" and they "hated Bush" and wanted to "beat Bush"? W's first term in office didn't win me over, but I sure as hell wasn't going to vote for John Kerry. The problem lies with people who perpetuate the diarchy that is our system and vote for one evil just to not allow another. We don't NEED more choices, we HAVE them. Too many people are easily talked out of them.
A TRUE Libertarian would have voted for Badnarik, failing that, for Peroutka, failing that, for Bush.
Principles, principles, PRINCIPLES. While it's true you need to win to change things your way, what good is winning if you have to sell your soul bit by bit to get there? By the time you get where you want to be you've become what you hated. We have a population minority that even bother to vote, and of those, the majority see government as strictly win/lose like it's the fucking Super Bowl. THAT'S what we've become. This isn't some reality show; what happens every other November actually MATTERS. Sullivan and Smith are BOTH idiots. Between the two of them they might stand a chance at a clue.
Reply
You find so many, that because the republican party has not stuck to the roots of small government like it should (and trust me, that pisses me off as much as anyone) think they should vote democratic in order to "punish" the republican party.
I have no problem with the "true" libertarians that vote 3rd party, but to vote for the left, because the right isnt far enough to the right is insanse, and sadly, many so called libertarians have done that recently.
And, while I think we can both agree with the fact that his scale example is not how governemtn SHOULD work. However, it currently is how it DOES work. We can either sit back and complain, we can try and change it, or we can work within that system by, as he says, changing the thoughts of the general population.
The last two have to actually be done together if you want to change anything. You have to attempt to change the system by working within the system, otherwise nothing short of a revolution is going to lead to any meaningful change. And by working within the system, I dont mean that we should be content with the current system, I am just saying that we can't hope to have a major overhaul overnight. Its going to take years of changing how the general electorate think, getting people who are more steadfast in their ideals into office, and keeping the "Sellouts" out of office.
You talk about Sullivan being a crackhead as if he is a one-off case. The fact is, he is not. Whether you consider them true libertarians, or call them crackheads, there are a significant number of people out there that voted under the same logic that Sullivan preached.
Reply
Do you have any support for this?
Reply
Leave a comment