The only OTHER choice – FSP

[dharveymi]

I worry when someone makes bold claims like only, every, always, etc.  Is the FSP the only choice for more personal freedom and a smaller less intrusive government?  Is there nothing else we can do to promote freedom among our family, friends, neighbors, communities, states, and countries?  Stop sitting around.  Lets come together.  You can make a difference.  There are some real things we can do.  Lets hear what you are doing.

[sillyperson]

I understand where you're coming from, but the ad fact is, libertarian-types have been trying like mad for 30+ years to make that difference "wherever we are". And they consistently get 3% of the vote, which means they have had approzimately ZERO impact on the actual nature of government.

Much of what I think about that is summed up in this blogpost:
http://freestateblogs.net/node/145

[bushwacker]

This is just the LP though. Most libertarians (small l) don't vote for the party for various reasons. I'm "L", and have been for a year or two, but I don't know if I will renew now that there are so many Rs-in-disguise these days. I promote liberty around here (WA), but I'm seriously the only person that does anything about it. Allegedly there are other libertarians around, but they won't show themselves, and I have no idea who they are. At least one or two from my university at least *used* to listen to the show/use this BBS, but I haven't heard anything in a year now, and none ever choose to come out of the woodwork. WTF?

[Porcupine_in_MA]

So, when can we expect you in New Hampshire?

[gibson042]

dharveymi: Downsize DC is certainly not a guarantee, but I consider it to be the best hope for salvation of a federal system.  Unlike the FSP, it has broad (indeed, almost universal) appeal, and enables a kind of "sidelines" activism.  The United States have slipped into tyranny one incremental step at a time, and Downsize DC unites libertarians, conservatives, and progressives alike in its attempt to undo the damage... one incremental step at a time.

[Evil Muppet]

Its not the only choice, just the best choice. 

[mlorrey]

dharveymi: Downsize DC is certainly not a guarantee, but I consider it to be the best hope for salvation of a federal system.  Unlike the FSP, it has broad (indeed, almost universal) appeal, and enables a kind of "sidelines" activism.  The United States have slipped into tyranny one incremental step at a time, and Downsize DC unites libertarians, conservatives, and progressives alike in its attempt to undo the damage... one incremental step at a time.

Downsize DC is bailing out a sinking ship with a teaspoon. The nation would be better off if the whole beltway area just sank into a big sinkhole. There is no way to save it, rational people know when to do triage on a dying nation.

[One two three]

I agree.  I am not sure if DownsizeDC will ever make a change besides on the one on one level.  However, something like DownsizeDC on a state level in an area with lots of activists could do a lot of good.  Maybe a ShrinkConcord in the future?

[Gay_Libertarian]

Downsize DC is certainly not a guarantee, but I consider it to be the best hope for salvation of a federal system.  Unlike the FSP, it has broad (indeed, almost universal) appeal

Not really.  Some of the Downsize DC folks spammed the Outright Libertarians mailing list seeking financial support for their latest initiative and the chair Rob Power pointed out that they declined to oppose the anti-gay constitutional amendment, saying it wasn't an effort to grow Washington's power.  Of course, they were opposed to the anti-flag-burning amendment.

The problem with libertarianism isn't "we've been trying the same thing for 30 years and failing" so much as we haven't had the pride to start a real libertarian movement.  How many people who are libertarians are quick to point out that they're "small-l" libs and that they vote Republican?  How many so-called "libertarian" organizations like DownsizeDC are too afraid to stand up and argue for their values when it might irritate religious conservatives whose only interest in libertarianism is low taxation?

Until we have the wherewithal and passion to build a broad-based libertarian coalition which spans all sorts of different communities and types of people, as an independent political movement independent of the old parties, we won't succeed no matter where we go (or stay).

I'm willing to do my part, how about you?

[One two three]

Guess what Mr. Gay?  DownSizeDC is a tiny group with hardly any money.  They have never changed a national law and have very limited resources.  They cannot fail to win every single issue.

[Gay_Libertarian]

There's "not winning," and then there's "refusing to fight."

I don't have time for "libertarian" groups who are "libertarians but. . . "

If I wanted that, I'd do like you and vote for Republican conservatives who inflate the budget 9% per year and run $300 billion annual deficits.

[gibson042]

Downsize DC is certainly not a guarantee, but I consider it to be the best hope for salvation of a federal system.  Unlike the FSP, it has broad (indeed, almost universal) appeal

Not really.  Some of the Downsize DC folks spammed the Outright Libertarians mailing list seeking financial support for their latest initiative and the chair Rob Power pointed out that they declined to oppose the anti-gay constitutional amendment, saying it wasn't an effort to grow Washington's power.  Of course, they were opposed to the anti-flag-burning amendment.

The problem with libertarianism isn't "we've been trying the same thing for 30 years and failing" so much as we haven't had the pride to start a real libertarian movement.  How many people who are libertarians are quick to point out that they're "small-l" libs and that they vote Republican?  How many so-called "libertarian" organizations like DownsizeDC are too afraid to stand up and argue for their values when it might irritate religious conservatives whose only interest in libertarianism is low taxation?

That's not fair.  Downsize DC has been very explicit with their goals, and with their plan for success.  They have documented their approach, formulated for maximum effectiveness:

• Bypass partisan politics
• Bypass controversial subjects
• Focus on radical ideas

Given this, making any statement on gay marriage would directly contradict their policy because it is a very partisan, very controversial issue.  Berating them for not taking action on it is to miss the point.

Finally, it is worth noting again that Downsize DC is a transpartisan organization, aiming to garner support from Libertarians, Democrats, and Republicans alike.  Their active campaigns prove it.  The group may not be perfect, but they make it easy to educate people about a problem and simultaneously present a solution, all in a common-sense nonconfrontational way.  The game of federal politics is a current fact of life, and as far as I know, only one pro-freedom group is playing it.

[Porcupine_in_MA]

Until we have the wherewithal and passion to build a broad-based libertarian coalition which spans all sorts of different communities and types of people, as an independent political movement independent of the old parties, we won't succeed no matter where we go (or stay).

I'm willing to do my part, how about you?

That "broad base" you speak of is happening, right now, in New Hampshire. I know gay libertarians, and libertarians of various races and with various interests who are Porcupines. I think it does matter where you live because it has been proven that having a big group of folk working together in the same area gets things done. Thousands of libertarians working towards freedom in one small state where there already is a big population that is for small government, even though they're not libertarians necessarily, IS working and right now.

[Gay_Libertarian]

Given this, making any statement on gay marriage would directly contradict their policy because it is a very partisan, very controversial issue.  Berating them for not taking action on it is to miss the point.

It didn't stop them from taking a position on the flag-burning amendment, or on health care (both controversial, partisan issues).

Like I said, "downsizing" government "except in controversial areas" is bullshit.  Either go all out, or don't ask for my cash.

[gibson042]

It didn't stop them from taking a position on the flag-burning amendment, or on health care (both controversial, partisan issues).

I let this slide before, but now I'm calling bullshit.  Neither issue sounded familiar to me, and I just did a search of Downsize DC and found no mention of flag burning or an a campaign relating to health care (the closest thing was Stop FDA Censorship... tell me, did that campaign oppose Republicans or Democrats?).  If I'm wrong, show me which way they pressured Congress on these issues.  Otherwise, your claims stand refuted.

Like I said, "downsizing" government "except in controversial areas" is bullshit.  Either go all out, or don't ask for my cash.

If you read Radical vs Controversial, you will see the logic behind their approach.  They want to downsize in all areas, but refuse to exert effort where it will be useless.  Partisan and controversial issues (like abortion, gay marriage, and separation of church and state) "Divide & Conquer" people who would otherwise stand united for smaller government and cause them to vote for "the lesser of two evils".  That is what has allowed government to grow to its current size.  While I speak out personally on everything, I think it is a good idea (and in line with their goal) for them to focus only on issues where they have the support of pretty much everyone.

Now, here's the really great thing: you can participate without donating.  They have set up a fantastic system for contacting your Representative and Senators, and it's yours to use on any of their campaigns.  If you want to focus on just Read the Bills Act and ignore everything else, you can... it costs you nothing, and it leverages your ability to pressure Congress.  How is that bad?