>

Tuesday, November 6, 2018

The High Intellectual Battle vs. Voting

The masses
By Robert Wenzel

My preference is for a private property society where there would be no voting, do what you want on your property that is all.

That said, in the world of realpolitik, we are far from such a society.

There are real evil bastards all around us who want to control us on our properties. They have instituted voting to allow minor differences at the margins and thus keep the masses subdued by thinking they have a real say.

The real battle is always at the high intellectual level. Mises,  Hayek, Rothbard, Rand and even Keynes understood this.

That said, occasionally a marginal point or individual on the ballot can make a difference. Consider Proposition 10 in California which would free up the ability of local governments to impose more aggressive rent controls. It needs to be shot down. It is a horror and I have written about it: The Proposition That is on the Ballot in November That Could Destroy California.

But my one tiny little vote is not going to change that or anything else and I hate waiting in lines and hate the voting concept. I will not be voting. It's mostly like a scammy flu shot.

But on another level, I love the intellectual game and I will be putting out the message, to those who believe that voting is a "civic duty," to vote at the margins in favor of liberty in the small cases where that is possible. It's a low level intellectual skirmish but still a part of the battle.

We need to eventually get the #PPS point across to the masses, but as long as they are still voting--baby steps to freedom need to be introduced to them.

I won't be voting but I will, now and forever, work the crowd, the masses, a tiny sliver of them, who do vote, and explain to them why they should vote for freedom. I can think of a few voters I have influenced. I won't miss voting when it is gone, but in the meantime, I am going to love the battle without ever walking into a voting booth.

Robert Wenzel is Editor & Publisher of

6 comments:

  1. Still dont see how a private property society is any more realistic than "real socialism" as the socialists say. Your private property was stolen from the people who first used the land then partitioned and certain parcels sold. In other words, without the government you wouldnt have ever had it. And even if you did, how are you going to defend it from the mobs of other people who think they can justly take it from you? Jump up and down and tell them they are violating the NAP? The big reason people dont vote for libertarians is their unrealistic views if such things, but it does serve the purpose to help shift the tide towards a certain direction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The points you raise are all discussed in my book.

      http://bit.ly/2trbeDb

      Delete
    2. Well, Im a poor student at the moment, but I do plan on buying your book some time in the future. Maybe youll persuade me, maybe not, but its always good to look at things in new ways.

      Delete
    3. Ask your library to get the book.

      Delete
  2. Well I went to vote against government bond issues. Not that it would do any good, but it was a 1/4 billion dollars of local bonds all together. I see it as putting up a fight in self defense even if futile.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is only reason I vote: to push back against more government theft.

      Delete