tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post1991980485423841623..comments2024-03-28T06:00:18.802-07:00Comments on bionic mosquito: Tucker’s Apologia IIbionic mosquitohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-677453953673099942015-09-24T19:06:05.837-07:002015-09-24T19:06:05.837-07:00Thanks to you both.Thanks to you both.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-61206980805057926642015-09-24T18:28:02.351-07:002015-09-24T18:28:02.351-07:00i thought it was very good too.i thought it was very good too.Heathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15417060063126394938noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-72481192948372476242015-09-24T13:14:34.043-07:002015-09-24T13:14:34.043-07:00Modern libertarianism as a political movement has ...Modern libertarianism as a political movement has been around since 1972 when John Hospers was the candidate for the Libertarian Party. To date that's a period of 43 years. As a political philosophy it's been around a bit longer. How long after the publication of Marx's Communist Manifesto in 1848 did socialism start to gain a foothold in parliaments around the world? 1890's perhaps? How long had German nationalism been around as an ideal before the Nazis exploited it to storm into power in 1933? About as long? It seems to me that Libertarianism has now undergone a long enough gestation period that it too has embedded itself into people's consciousness especially with the proliferation of libertarian blogs and web sites. Ron Paul left politics with a support of 15%, and Rand started with 17%. <br /><br />The failure of government intervention on all fronts has left voters disillusioned and desperate for something new. I think that Rand's 17% base could have been leveraged enormously, especially with young voters trapped with huge school loan debts in a no growth economy. It's no secret that for the last eight years Ron Paul's energetic young supporters have been burrowing into the Republican party at the grassroots level and probably have party power in their hands well beyond what their numbers would suggest. This would have been a huge plus for Rand if he had continued to steer ahead on his father's libertarian course. And yet he threw it all away in order to curry favor with neocons who still despise him and his father.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-85201896309218657802015-09-24T03:42:41.937-07:002015-09-24T03:42:41.937-07:00Right! Rand Paul's presidential campaign fails...Right! Rand Paul's presidential campaign fails according to its own standards.Matt@Occidentalism.orghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02395220402283030311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-28847507805566691402015-09-23T19:34:31.428-07:002015-09-23T19:34:31.428-07:00Bionic,
Love the blog and read it daily, but, I ...Bionic, <br /><br />Love the blog and read it daily, but, I have a minor quibble about this particular post. Very minor, actually.<br /><br />I believe Ron Paul would have outlasted Romney had the PTB not cheated. The way you have it phrased makes it sound, to me, like Romney alone is what outdid Ron Paul.<br /><br />Carry on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-27223160560195583222015-09-23T18:58:23.414-07:002015-09-23T18:58:23.414-07:00Zee, in the end we are both speculating on what an...Zee, in the end we are both speculating on what an alternative strategy might have accomplished; who really knows. <br /><br />In any case, the main reason I wrote this post was to deal with Tucker's arguments. They aren't very logical, in my opinion.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-75054025469384411992015-09-23T18:11:01.018-07:002015-09-23T18:11:01.018-07:00I agree it is his time and energy, which is why I ...I agree it is his time and energy, which is why I don't want to criticize him much unless I run for office one day.<br /><br />3. I think there is a practical upper ceiling in the shot term. Conversions of philosophy that you have held your whole life takes a long time, and I don't think it is reasonable to expect people to change overnight. That's what I mean by the upper ceiling. The difference between the 1% you expected and the 6-7% libertarians Ron got was due to people who had never really heard about libertarianism before, including myself. But at this point, most people have atleast heard of this philosophy. That is the upper limit I was talking about. Of course, after hearing about it for a short period of time, it takes many peopel longer to actually understand the philosophy, which would result in another upper limit which may be much higher.<br /><br />4. Yes, Rand's strategy has turned out horrible, but I don't mean his strategy necessarily, I just mean out of the collection of non libertarian strategies, one of them would work better in the short term to get more votes than the pure libertarian one. Not necessarily the one Rand chose.<br /><br />Of course all of this assumes Rand is actually a libertarian at heart, which I don't know one way or the other.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-57198291880910414892015-09-23T15:35:32.241-07:002015-09-23T15:35:32.241-07:00By item:
2) Tucker introduced the data, I didn...By item:<br /><br />2) Tucker introduced the data, I didn't. Take your objections up with him.<br /><br />3) Before 2008, I thought the upper ceiling was 1%. The laugh was on me. I don't think claiming to know an upper ceiling is credible.<br /><br />4) Shows what good that idea was - Rand has done far worse than Ron. A politically bankrupt strategy. He convinced libertarians he is a war monger and he never convinced neocons that he was a war monger.<br /><br />Anyway, it was his time and energy to spend.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-17933405138210152592015-09-23T15:19:23.438-07:002015-09-23T15:19:23.438-07:00I don't know if I necessarily agree completely...I don't know if I necessarily agree completely with your argument against Tucker. To me the following seems true:<br />1. Ron spent a lifetime building a base and greatly expanded it during the 2 election cycles.<br />2. Many of those who voted for him are not necessarily his base, but voted for him. Those votes were not necessarily Rand's for the taking. I believe the 6-7% were Rand's for the taking, and the other 10% were leaning towards Rand but not really libertarian. <br />3. I think Tucker is correct that in the short term, libertarianism has a upper ceiling. Our philosophy of peace and non-aggression is so far removed from the mainstream that people will not likely convert overnight unless someone comes up with some genius strategy, which doesn't seem likely to me.<br />4. Therefore, if Rand wants to win in the short term, he will have to essentially not be a libertarian in his positions. He could certainly tell people he was a libertarian and deep down wants to cut the govt to virtually or completely nothing. But that can't be his platform to win.<br />5. However, whatever platform he takes won't be a libertarian one, and he won't really be converting people to libertarianism through his campaign. The numbers of hardcore non-aggressionites won't really grow if the goal is to win in the short term.<br />6. He can't run on a non libertarian platform and end up changing in office. he would lose all credibility on any issue and won't get anything that he wants done, whether libertarian or not.<br />7. The only way to actually convert people to libertarianism is to run on libertarian principles. As Tom Woods says, he's not going to trick people into a libertarian foreign policy.<br /><br />So I see elements of truth to both your and Tucker's arguments.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-40024792505192997412015-09-23T14:42:49.461-07:002015-09-23T14:42:49.461-07:00Yes. Exactly.Yes. Exactly.VirtualAlaskanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15669445908177529235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-48334810961690744102015-09-23T12:25:57.581-07:002015-09-23T12:25:57.581-07:00Thanks, NickThanks, Nickbionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-27104703906043733562015-09-23T12:05:04.663-07:002015-09-23T12:05:04.663-07:00Excellent write up!Excellent write up!Nick Badalamentihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14015961786370759940noreply@blogger.com