Oh, I agree, I feel the same way...but the majority of America simply doesn't. These are radical ideas to them and almost everyone I talk to is says that they like the Libertarians in prinicple, but that the party scares them through extremism. I'm not arguing to change the end goals in any way, I'm just saying, in order to win support, why not "ease" the majority of Americans into the ideas of the party. Start small and provide clear plans and miniaturized social experiments to prove the value and workability of the greater ideal. And if not, why not? Its not compromising your ideals, its just a matter of reaching them more slowly. But compared to the continued alienation of the majority, reaching the party goals slowly seems better than not reaching them at all.
Most members of the public are scared by what is viewed as "extremism" in the Libertarian party. "End the war on drugs" and "Abolish the IRS" are scary changes for many people to make all at once. Why does the party resist pushing a more incremental platform? Why won't the party say things like "In our first term we will legalize marijuana and marijuana only. We will closely study and follow the ramifications of this policy in terms of savings to our military and police forces, crime rates, prison overcrowding, and market factors such as pricing and tax revenues generated. At the end of x number of years we will judge the experiment and debate expanding or restricting other drugs."
The party always seems to know where it wants to go, but it is weak in explaining to the people how we will go about getting there.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I agree, I feel the same way...but the majority of America simply doesn't. These are radical ideas to them and almost everyone I talk to is says that they like the Libertarians in prinicple, but that the party scares them through extremism.
I'm not arguing to change the end goals in any way, I'm just saying, in order to win support, why not "ease" the majority of Americans into the ideas of the party. Start small and provide clear plans and miniaturized social experiments to prove the value and workability of the greater ideal.
And if not, why not? Its not compromising your ideals, its just a matter of reaching them more slowly. But compared to the continued alienation of the majority, reaching the party goals slowly seems better than not reaching them at all.
Most members of the public are scared by what is viewed as "extremism" in the Libertarian party. "End the war on drugs" and "Abolish the IRS" are scary changes for many people to make all at once. Why does the party resist pushing a more incremental platform? Why won't the party say things like "In our first term we will legalize marijuana and marijuana only. We will closely study and follow the ramifications of this policy in terms of savings to our military and police forces, crime rates, prison overcrowding, and market factors such as pricing and tax revenues generated. At the end of x number of years we will judge the experiment and debate expanding or restricting other drugs." The party always seems to know where it wants to go, but it is weak in explaining to the people how we will go about getting there.