[From my Webnote series]
On why I write, why I fight, the Remnant, and the problem with libertarian activism and “waystation libertarians.”
The Irrelevance of the Impossibility of Anarcho-Libertarianism
Where are the best pracitical suggestions along those lines – if any of you know and are willing to share?
My personal view is that in the long run the only that that can work is economic literacy. Thus we need to educate people; and one way to do it is to support the Mises Institute, and to keep spreading a consistent, principled message of liberty. We can keep learning, both to improve ourselves and to improve our ability to persuade. And by improving ourselves we help present “one improved unit” to society, thus helping to win over people to our other views by the power of attraction.
I would recommend not deluding oneself that we can “win” once and for all; or that winning is all that matters. That way lies the perils of self-delusion, compromise, despair, disengagement, and activism (see my The Trouble with Libertarian Activism).
I would recommend fighting because you want to do the right thing, be on the right side, and make even incremental progress. I would suggest taking heart in Nock’s idea of “the Remnant“–“In his 1936 article “Isaiah’s Job”, which appeared in the Atlantic Monthly, Nock expressed his complete disillusionment with the idea of reforming the current system. Believing that it would be impossible to convince any large portion of the general population of the correct course and opposing any suggestion of a violent revolution, Nock instead argued that libertarians should focus on nurturing what he called “the Remnant”. The Remnant, according to Nock, consisted of a small minority who understood the nature of the state and society, and who would become influential only after the current dangerous course had become thoroughly and obviously untenable, a situation which might not occur until far into the future.”
***
Preface to Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston, Texas: Papinian Press, 2023)
***
Why I’m a Libertarian–or, Why Libertarianism is Beautiful, Mises blog (Dec. 12, 2006)
“Faculty Spotlight Interview: Stephan Kinsella” (Mises.org, 2011) https://stephankinsella.com/2021/06/faculty-spotlight-interview-stephan-kinsella-mises-org-2011/ Are there any words of wisdom you wish to pass onto the next generation of Austrian scholars?
Yes. Do not focus on short-term goals; this way discouragement lies. Have principles and integrity. Do the right thing, and fight for truth and liberty, because it is right, even if it seems to be an uphill battle. But I would say: live a good life. Enjoy it. Think hard before becoming altruistic. And as I noted in “Nock and Leonard Read on “One Improved Unit” and the Power of Attraction“, your primary task is to improve yourself–to strive for excellence in yourself. Then you become a bright light that attracts people; they see you are good, and successful, and worth emulating or listening to–so you win people over by the power of attraction. They come to you, and then you have more success spreading the ideas of liberty than if you go around being a pest.
Libertarian Answer Man: Does It Matter How Law is Made?:
I think your goal is “liberty” in the short or medium term. So you are thinking always in strategic terms. I get this, but this is the activist mentality. 2 Even I am prone to it, but I always fear it can corrupt—make you start dismissing people who are into theory, ignore the division of labor and favor only your own little area, make you start to compromise just to make a single tiny win…. so I stick to theory and understanding. I don’t care if the activists insult me with their crude, anti-intellectual chants of “what good has your fancy theorizing done” or whatever. My being libertarian does not require that I become a high-time preference anti-intellectual activist sellout. I’d rather understand and maybe advance libertarian scholarship in my own little way, or practice it in my own life. To be honest, that’s enough for me, because it has to be, because we won’t achieve perfect justice in our lifetimes (unless Bitcoin is the spark that finally starts to undermine the state).
… I view the state and its various horrible intrusions into public life as similar to a disease or natural disaster or other natural threat we need to respond to. 3 That’s my approach to it—have normal, good life, and then gird for the upcoming apocalypse; while in the meantime studying and promoting liberty and helping keep “the Remnant” alive. Libertarian activists hate when I say this. But I’m old enough and have been in this movement long enough—since 1981 or so—that … I don’t care. They stamp their feet and demand results now. I want results now too. I just don’t conflate fact and fiction. And I try not to stamp my feet like an insolent punk. I love Star Wars and Lord of the Rings but I know they are not real. I know the difference between fantasy/fiction and real life. No offense, libertarian activists. I have no problem being realistic (and I don’t care if activist libertarians sneeringly deride this as defeatist), and if being realistic, and honest, means I can’t be a good huxter exaggerating promoter that’s perfectly fine with me because I’d rather achieve my own liberty with my own money and success and live in a 62% liberty world as a man with integrity, than lie to myself and others in the vain hope of tweaking the knob from 62% to 62.1%—or, more likely, freedom is always being eroded so the 62% this year will be 61.5% next year, so I’m selling my soul and integrity in the vain hope of having a small chance at slowing down the decrement from 62% to 61.5%? I don’t play these games. I never pretend. I won’t do it. Whatever it is, it is, and if it’s bad, we need to know it and accept it, and build on that understanding of reality.
…
…
I simply want to hasten our evolution.
The choice is simple: to do something or not.
I opt to do something, but I concede there is no “right” answer.
