Subject:
|
Re: LP Demographics
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 19 Jun 2001 20:54:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
339 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> - is aware of the LP (this rules out a pretty fair number)
> - understands what the LP is advocating (this rules out a large number, I think)
> - doesn't see the current campaign imbrogios as stoppers. (this is a small
> number but a significant fraction of the remainder after the first two
> filters do drop away... given the mess, I wonder if I am in this fraction,
> actually... Harry Brown kind of annoys me)
> - either agrees or doesn't, but does so on an informed basis
Yup. Most simply don't have a clue as to what the Libertarian Party is about.
>
> What demographics that fraction would be, I cannot say. I do think it
> already skews in the more educated, more well off direction. That's not
> meant as a slam, just as an acknowledgement of reality.
Almost every Libertarian I met is fairly-well educated.
>
> But I do agree that from THAT fraction, to the next smaller one, that is,
> the group that is not only aware and understands but *also* agrees... there
> is a shift in demo even more radical in skew toward white male.
>
> As I said in another post, I'm not sure what to do about that. I'm not sure
> anything CAN be done.
>
> Here's the problem... Unlike the majors which respin things all the time,
> since they are unprincipled, the LP can change the delivery, it can change
> the order of things advocated but since it's the "party of principle" it
> can't change the fundamental tenets that were used to derive the message or
> the platform. If it changes the message to be more appealing, it's not the
> LP any more, is it?
Essentially. One can view that as being bound by one's principles, or
trapped by them, depending on your viewpoint. But then, I'm not sure that
all Libertarians are trying to be practical: they are simply placing an
ideal out there. I think it's something that Libertarians may want to pin
down, but pinning down long-range goals, strategy, and tactics in any group
is difficult. They will probably continue as before. And maybe they are
right to do it that way. I wouldn't want to do it that way, but that's me.
I'm not sure the message should simply be changed to one that's more
appealing, so much as the practical ramifications of the philosophy should
be examined closer.
>
> To get the LP to change message you either have to show that derivations are
> incorrect, or you have to convince the LP not to be the LP any more... that
> is, convince them to renounce the noninitiation of force. If the LP changes
> away from that, I'm not interested in it any more.
>
> So maybe the LP is fundamentally doomed, being pure of idea in a pragmatic
> world, to never be influential. Still, it fills some of my goals in that
> it's a source of ideas. But then so does the Cato Institute and the Reason
> Foundation and the Austrian School. etc.
>
> The world *is* moving in a more libertarian direction. If that continues to
> happen even without the LP, that's OK with me. I can accept living in a
> world that isn't as perfect as it could be.
>
> ++Lar
Don't have anything to add. My criticisms of the Libertarian Party are of
the pragmatic nature - I'm not a purist. Libertarians usually are. Anyway,
all good observations above.
Bruce
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | LP Demographics
|
| I have to echo Duane on this... GREAT analysis, Dave! While I am not sure that there might have been a few categories missed I don't see that as at the crux... the point is that there are filters you can apply I think you could apply your filters (...) (23 years ago, 19-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
50 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
