There are a variety of juicy multimedia files available on the Libertarian Alliance site, including some from Samizdatista David Carr (who is threatening to resume blogging on Samizdata when pressures of work permit).
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Various libertarian multimediaDecember 22nd, 2005 |
 6 comments to Various libertarian multimedia |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
IS there?
I thought, being uneasy about the drink driving laws and even wondering if they should be repealed, that I was in a minority of one. Rather than appearing to be a nutcase, I usually keep such mad opinions to myself.
However, the first thing I opened on the Libertarian Alliance site was a well argued case for abolishing drink driving laws.
An amazing site, and recommended.
I regret to say my heart sinks when I see a new LA press release in my in-box.
It’s not that I don’t like the people: I do.
It’s not that I disagree with them greatly: mostly I’m of one accord.
It is that LA press releases seem to be designed to shock, which I am sure is counterproductive. I imagine the idea is that the presentation of stark, well-argued arguments for “crazy” viewpoints, will wake people up and make them rethink their basic assumptions on the issues. But I believe that’s an entirely wrong understanding of how a general audience reacts.
Almost nobody forms their views because persuaded by rigorous argument. Shock most people and you startle them into total paralysis of reason. The public thinks less carefully and less well when emotive fetishes are in play. (And this is true in more specialised forums, too.)
Shock tactics are harmful to one’s cause if they purport to make any arguments at all: human beings generally cannot feel strong emotions and think at the same time, and all you will do is and up associating your arguments and views with negative feeling.
Softly, softly catchee monkey.
Guy,
I am irritatingly realistic, a trait that often does not endear me to people, particularly when I shoot down “good” ideas like lets do this, that, or the other and we will solve global warming, world hunger etc.
Maybe selling libertarianism or similar philosophies is not on such a grand scale, but whether you shock, reason with, or beg people I don’t think we have a cat in hells chance of advancing a right of centre agenda in the foreseeable future.
Look what the pathetic party are currently up too. Cameron embracing Libdems, and Letwin, of should that be leftwing?, yesterday describing the Nucons as a redistributive party. They are under no illusion, it is not possible to sell right of centre ideas to the current electorate.
Of course, come a severe financial collapse, or some other comparable crisis, then people will suddenly be clamoring for change. It might then be a straight fight between a traditional liberal, laisez faire conservative, or even libertarian faction and a new fascist authoritarian left (NuNulab?).
Or to put it more crudely, as long as people have fat bellies and an Xbox I don’t believe that any change will happen.
Guy, it is a case of different strokes for different folks. The LA has championed “shock tactics” on the grounds that it is wise, given the limited resources available, to try to get at leat 0.00001 percent of the intelligentsia on side. And such people are often attracted by bold, even outrageously bold, ideas. Quite a few LA supporters are former socialists and Tories.
The Libertarian Alliance has been enormously successful in spreading the idea that there is nothing “right-wing” in the idea of liberty, capitalism and so forth and has revived interest in Britain’s classical liberal traditions. I hope it does not lose its hard-edged characteristics in a bid to become, sigh, “respectable”.
Jonathan,
I think one does need to tailor one’s message to one’s audience in order to get heard. It is not a matter of changing content. But the medium and its users does control the message that can be conveyed.
Hard-edged is fine. One can, and should, court controversy. At length, uncompromising libertarian arguments work well. I want those arguments heard at length, not ignored. Which means I think we shoud strive to draw people into the discussion rather than invite them to shut their ears.