Politics (like religion, sports, financial markets, etc) is a major topic of human communication (as well as a tool for human domination, but most don't view it that way). Changing minds requires communicating with people at their current level of understanding. Jumping right to anarchy for all and taxation is theft is useless for most people at this point. They need to be brought gently into reality with tools like the Mirror, Freedom, Rothbard, The philosophy of liberty, The Most Dangerous Superstition, etc. Dr. Paul demonstrated how using the political stage can actually help people along their journey to freedom because it gets them communicating and thinking. It's not a full conversion tool, just an introduction to possibility.

I financially supported the Mirror because I think it will be one of the best tools out there. Until then, I'm fine with supporting any other tools which don't violate the NAP. Since I believe no action can validate rulership, I have no fear or some people participating in the ritual of voting for voluntaryists instead of statists as part of their journey to eventually never vote for rulers. I don't see why anarchists would vote, but if statists are going to vote anyway, why not get them thinking about voting for a candidate which will help them, over time, realize the pointlessness of voting for a ruler?

I agree with you here, Larken, and I think you should remain principled by calling out what you disagree with.

I also think some people should ignore you and try changing minds in every arena possible, not out of impatience, but out of the recognition that people are caged and dying daily. If something can be done without violating the NAP, I believe it should be done. I love how conversations like this are happening because it's a further refinement of ideas and even a demonstration of disagreement without any need for force. People can disagree and still work together to increase freedom in the world. If they are smart enough, they can even disagree while increasing respect for each other.

If the end result of all political action is more people believing voting is legitimate, then yes, that's clearly the wrong direction. If a version of it can be used to free more minds (as I believe Ron Paul did), then I'll support that action, though I may not even directly participate in it myself.