RE: Democracy: Tricking the Profoundly Gullible
What if we actually voted for "no rulers"? Wouldn't that help free more minds than just not voting at all? It's like standing up in front of the audience and telling the magician you won't pick any of his cards because the game is rigged. Couldn't that be more effective for freedom than just sitting in the crowd and not playing the rigged game?
Larken, you know I love your stuff, but when I share it with some off my friends (and yes, those friends do suffer from some Stockholm Syndrome), they see stuff like this and write you off as ridiculous:
Right now the choice is between Hitler and Stalin
You see things very black and white, but grey exists. Trump or Hillary will contribute to democide, but on orders of magnitude less than Hitler or Stalin. To suggest otherwise is stupid.
Your style of writing here is effective (and profitable) with those who already agree with you, but others don't take to being called "idiots" very well. You're probably familiar with the psychological effects at work here and how much of someone's identity is wrapped up in their political philosophy. Pushing hard against it causes them to dig in deeper, making the job of freeing minds that much harder.
But I get it, and I know you've been freeing minds for a very long time. My opinion may not be well grounded. You have more experience, and you know what works for a very large number of people. They like emotionally charged, hyperbolic statements, not facts supported by reasonable statements and empirical evidence. Politician's understand this all too well.
I'm hopeful for The Mirror because I don't think it will call the people you're trying to free idiots or use irrational hyperbolic comparisons or analogies.
Much love, Larken. I'm a big fan which is why I push back so often. The last thing you want are mindless Larkenites who agree with everything you say just because you said it. :)
Different people respond differently to different approaches. So I'm glad when other people do it a different way. However, there is a method to my madness. For example, most voters by now already feel pretty ashamed of who they are voting FOR, and the excuse they give is how bad the one they're voting AGAINST is. Guilt-tripping and ridiculing people who already, deep down inside, KNOW they're doing something stupid and bogus, can actually be effective. But again, I'm always happy to see other people trying to spread the ideas of self-ownership and non-aggression however they see fit.
(As for me comparing Hillary and Trump to Stalin and Hitler, it's because ideologically, and in personalities and mentalities, it's a pretty close match. No, there aren't similar body counts ... yet. But neither of them have been on the throne yet, either.)
If they are on the throne during a nuclear WWIII, history may agree with your comparison. Guilt tripping is powerful, but it's the tool of religious and political dogma, IMO. Lies and propaganda can also be exposed without guilt. Thanks for the reply.
For funizes, here's an example of the type of comments I get from my more philosophically minded friends when I share your stuff:
Take it for what you will. :)
Whenever we put our ideas out there we'll gather critics. At least it means people are giving up some attention to hear us out.
I don't know who wrote it, so this might be an unfair impression, but since we're trading impressions...
He sounds like one of those libertarian eggheads who is more concerned with being in the "cool" and "informed" MINORITY, so they can look down their noses at everyone else, while converting exactly NONE of the general public to the concepts of self-ownership and non-aggression. Yes, I keep the concepts simple, and write in terms that anyone can understand. This is because the FUTURE OF THE FUCKING WORLD depends on getting enough people to give up their statism, and it takes something other than thousand-page treatises on Austrian economics to do that.
Oops, I forgot to answer your first question. To participate in their stupid ritual at all, even to vote for no one, is to give credibility and legitimacy to it. If the Mafia had an election, would you go and vote, just to tell them you don't want a Mafia? I wouldn't.
I understand this, but many others do not. They look at every government on the planet as "normal" and your Mafia comparison as ridiculous, confirming their bias and decision to tune you and others out as being unrealistic.
If the Mafia was the norm everywhere, then yes, I might stand up and make a statement with "no rulers." It sends a message. Not voting also sends a message but the response is different and goes something like, "We need to have more celebrities encourage people to vote! Look at all this voter apathy!"
Voting "no rulers" doesn't show apathy.
I'd love to live in a world with no violence where everyone followed the NAP. Meanwhile, in the real world, I have to take practical steps to defend myself. Maybe tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of people voting "no rulers" could be a similar practical step? It's significantly different than voting for none of the above which implies a differently ruler would be okay.
Thanks again for replying.
i think either one of them have the potential to do and be far worse than stalin or hitler