Another message to the nihlists

Lew Rockwell recently wrote a column on his website critizing the Libertarian Party for changing or "watering down" their party platform. In his view, the LP has sold out to try and win elections or at least get more votes. He says the LP would be better off being a party of perpetual opposition and perpetual criticism to the Powers that Be.

Maybe the LP won't increase their share of the vote as Rockwell claims or maybe they will, who knows? But at least they're trying to do something to shake up a moribund party. They would be no worse off anyway. You can't win anything unless you aim to and a party that doesn't at least try is nothing more than a professional bitiching society nobody is going to take seriously.

Freepers often refered to Rockwell as "Loser Rockwell" and now I see their point. First he tells people that voting itself is pointless act and that no one should bother to do so to try deligitimize the system itself. Then he tells LP members to continuously waste their time in losing campaigns because they are somehow "better" than the electorate deserves. Well, they're getting their wish I guess.

Here's the brutal reality to Lew and the Rockwellians: 1). The system doesn't care if you vote or not. All they need is a single vote, for or against, to make them legitimate. 2). You cannot influence or even be a part of the debate unless you try. Nobody pays attention to losers, especially those who lose on purpose. Why would think a strategy of trying to avoid victory would make you any more influential? Would you tell Ron Paul this?

This is the same kind of debate I engaged with CP members a month ago. Those who want to avoid any kind of success in politics should not even bother with it. Why waste your time, energy and fortune? You're better off with doing good work with think tanks like the Von Mieses Institute or websites like Lew Rockwell.com, which both do good work every day, than worrying about campaigns you don't plan on winning. I understand their feelings that politics is fundementally corrupt, that absolute power corrupts and that abandoning principle is a fundemental part of politics. Often cases that's true. But it often times depends on the person involved as to how corrupted they are. Would anyone call Ron Paul corrupted because he's a politican and runs for office every two years? There are always exceptions and if one presents and defends a large framework for one's policies, one can compromise on the small details.

That's what the LP is trying to do, be broader rather than narrower. I've looked at summaries of the LP's new platform and I don't think they've sold out their basic principles. They've just decided to take out the kooky language and special emphasis on drug legalization that's become a drag on their fortunes in recent years. They want to win or at least have some influence on the process and if that means the Starchilds or Chief Wana Dubies of the party are left out, so much the better. Libertarians are tired of being left of out the national debate and they cannot take on the Powers that Be unless people take them and their ideas seriously. If Rockwell and other purists have a problem with that, then the best they can do, as I told dissident CP members, is foreswear politics altogether. There's no point getting involved when you don't really want to be. There're other venues one can be a part of other than elections to frame the debate or educate voters. That's what they should focus on.