More on the Rally

September 4, 2008

Lew Rockwell had nothing to say about ghostwriting of the Ron Paul Newsletter.

As I was heading out Wednesday, I met a foursome of men who had driven out of Ohio – 15 hours one way – to see Paul.  One of them said (and I paraphrase) “I’m tired of talk.  I want some action.”

That got me to thinking – what action was this rally supposed to encourage?  For the doctrinaire libertarian, the prospect of actually going out and joining the political process is supposed to give them screaming Albanian hives.  It leads to four-flushers like the Contract for America group, which actually increased the budgets of 95 of the programs they were supposed to eliminate.  It leads to careerists in government. It stands against “pure” Agorism, Anarcho-Capitalism (just to name a couple) which states voting itself is an act of aggression, and to participate in the State’s process is to give the State your sanction. It leads you to either hide or water down your opinions in order to earn the vote of someone the characters of Idiocracy might consider stupid.

Yet, the Libertarian Party (and I’m aware that Libertarians and libertarians can be two sorts of animals) can’t seem to elect anybody (except for Paul, apparently) to any sort of power.  Paul himself is being listened to, sure – but he’s served a damn long time in Congress, and he worked through the nominal channels as a Republican to get to the place where he could address a rally like this. I also realize that I might have been in the minority at the Rally, being one of those doctrinaire libertarians I just wrote about.

Does this mean that Libertarianism itself is a failed means to freedom? Is the real hope for freedom of any sort to be the acceptance, however minimal, of the State in our lives?

%d bloggers like this: