Re: “Statists are not the Enemy”

(Image courtesy of XKCD.)

Recently, I was accused of not hating the state enough. I thank that person for the external validation. My goal is not to hate the state at all. In fact, I find hating in general to be counter-productive. It clouds the mind’s rational capacity. It weakens the hater. It’s self-destructive to hate. I want to purge all hate from me.

In fact, hating the state is a form of ad hominem. If you hate the state, want to be an enemy of the state and/or want to hurt state-supporters and/or state agents, your energy is illogically misdirected. You’re focusing on attacking the people. You’re not focusing on a reasoned discussion. You’re just saying things like “You suck.” or “You should be killed while you sleep.” (Yikes!)

I can’t speak for you, but my struggle is a principled one. I’m not opposed just to Obama or just to Bush. I’m not opposed just to TSA agents or just to US marshals. I’m opposed to aggression, in whatever form it may take, no matter who wields it.

– “Statists are not the Enemy” (George Donnelly)

Awhile back, a libertarian friend of mine lamented on the overuse of the term “statist,” leading to the two of us throwing around Facebook comments like “YOU’RE STATIST!” “NO U!” “YOUR FACE IS STATIST!” “YOUR MOM IS STATIST!” “YOUR MOM’S FACE IS STATIST!” (and so on and so on).  Part of it is because we were filled with great lulz and irony over Rand Paul using the term during his election campaign.  (Vote for me and I’ll save you from teh statist meanieheads!)  Part of it — for me, at least — is because using “statist” as a dig just leads in to the dogmatic, holier than thou form of libertarianism that not only eschews big government, but people who support it.  It makes me see red.

Why?

Every time I open up my Facebook account, I see libertarians (mainly of the Ron Paul variety) insisting that 2012 is the year of the Ron Paul revolution, yet according to a January 2010 study conducted by David Boaz and David Kirby, libertarian voters only make up about 14% of the US population.  If you follow that link, you’ll see that Boaz also included some information on methodology used by other researchers, which yielded the following result:

Finally, we commissioned Zogby International to ask our three ANES questions to 1,012 actual (reported) voters in the 2006 election… We asked half the sample, “Would you describe yourself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal?” We asked the other half of the respondents, “Would you describe yourself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal, also known as libertarian?”

The results surprised us. Fully 59 percent of the respondents said “yes” to the first question.

So, if Zogby poll results yielded 59% of Americans falling somewhere within the “libertarian” spectrum, then why could Boaz and Kirby only come up with a piddly 14%?  I’m sure some of the normal culprits come into play here, such as the phrasing of the questions or libertarians vs. Libertarians, but I think that a lot of it has to do with the way libertarianism is perceived and I think a lot of that blame falls on us.  (“Us” meaning members of the liberty community/movement.)

Whether you’re talking to the pro-choicer, the pothead, or the gun enthusiast, all of these people want the government to stay out of their pet issue.  Pro-choicers don’t want an abortion to be a two week process any more than the pothead wants buying an ounce of weed to be a two week process or the gun enthusiast wants buying a gun to be a two week process.  Virtually everyone has a libertarian viewpoint on at least one issue.  Screaming “STATIST” at them and treating them like crap for supporting entitlement programs, the never ending list of wars my country has begun, or wanting to put up a US-MX border fence is not going to win them over, even incrementally.

I’ve been familiar with the LP’s platform since the late 90s.  Ironically, the Libertarian Party was first suggested to me by a Democrat I used to debate with back in the days of AOL’s Abortion Debate chatroom.  She noted that I was pro-gay rights, pro-choice, and pro-guns, so she didn’t understand why I had flip-flopped between the DNC and the GOP instead of with a socially liberal, fiscally conservative political party.  I looked over the info and filed it in the back of my brain, going back to libertarian publications every few years, but never making the jump.  In 2007, I met my boyfriend.  For the first year we knew one another, I couldn’t stand him.  He was the stereotype of dogmatic Libertarian.  It wasn’t until he dropped the Libertarian trolling act, began talking to me like a person with valid viewpoints and started to explain his perspectives that I became more receptive to libertarianism.  Up until that point, my only experiences with libertarians (big or small “l”) were with dogmatic, in your face assholes who embodied every terrible stereotype attached to the political party.

I’m an intelligent woman, have been interested in politics for about fifteen years or so, and much to the chagrin of many Facebookers, I like to try to place a bit of nuance into my opinions and consider all sides of a position before committing to one point of view.  If I was turned off by Libertarian party members, then what hope does the liberty community have in converting the public on a whole?

I know, there’s a good shot you’re reading this and thinking “George is full of shit, and so is Vicki,” but the cold hard truth is this: more people need to be won over or we’ll never win this ideological battle.  It’s a lot harder to dismiss libertarians and liberty activists as nutjobs if the movement is growing exponentially, and we aren’t going to grow a movement by throwing around statements like “I don’t associate with statists.”  Why would anyone want to be a part of a movement that doesn’t help you muddle through complex issues and figure out answers to difficult questions?  These are new ideas for a lot of folks, and it would be beneficial all around if we responded with helpfulness and kind words instead of animosity and hatred of teh evul evul STATISTS!1!1one!