I found this an excellent video. It's still sad that there is some bullying in there now and then, but overall, the message and discovery is great, and the last (and largest part) of the video is calm, considerate, powerful.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z-fhCFkISM

I think he has an excellent point re personalizing the argument from morality.
his point that the only reason he minds Ron Paul's candidacy is because it makes it possible for people to tell themselves they're 'there' already rather than continue on to do the difficult work of freeing yourself (in your personal life) is nonsense. Virtually all an-cappers were minarchists before and being an an-capper in no way makes it less likely that you'll work on your personal life.
also, Stef and all the others don't seem too happy at all, so why take them as examples?

Nielsio, do you agree that as a libertarian it is hypocritical not to get all the people out of your life who are statists?

I started this thread because I was interested in what I learned, not what I already knew.

I don't get it. Can you answer my question?

I think it is hypocritical to have dogs in one's life (unless one is a statist, of course). Cats are honorable, creative, individualistic creatures, but DOGS!!! are just co-dependent pack slaves and sycophants.

(I hope this helps propel this conversation along nicely... :-)

- NonE

I have mixed feelings about this idea of getting statists out of your life. I've broken with all my friends myself. I wasn't sacrificing good relationships to show integrity. They just annoyed the hell out me with their frequent talk about how the government needs to do more, and they wouldn't have a real discussion about ethics. They'd just dismiss me as selfish.

We're surrounded by statists whatever we do. If you enjoy hanging out with some of them, why shouldn't you? This is not hypocrisy. Associating with people who support aggression is not an act of aggression. Anyway, I doubt statists will perceive avoiding them as showing integrity. Perhaps they'll think anarcho-capitalists are hypersensitive freaks who can't tolerate any disagreement. That's how my former friends think of me.

What pisses me off is the absurd assumption that I think Ron Paul is going to grant me total freedom. I think that if Ron Paul wins, the aggression against me, and everyone else in America, by the state will be reduced considerably, and we will have more freedom to advance our very important ideas without fear of imprisonment. The state will not dissapear until the majority hold individual rights and voluntarism as their highest values. If the state collapses tomorrow, a new state will rise, bathed in blood, in it's place. A transition is our only hope, and as people who support peace and abhor violence, we should seek the least violent path to liberty. I support Ron Paul because it's a parallel mission, I can achieve personl liberty and have excellent relationships (believe me, I do, I do the work Stef talks about, I'm in the thick of it with my mother right now)in my own life, while also simultaneously using the tools provided me by the state to reduce it's intrusion into my life. I don't see hypocracy or a contradiction. I'm very realistic about our prospects for a political solution. But, it wont help my chances for freedom if I stick my fingers in my ears and ignore the prison being errected around me. The reality is, I live in a world where political realities effect my daily life, and if I have any chance of defending myself, of reducing the violence, I'll take it. I can work on my personl life too. It's not either or, it's not all or nothing.

Bottom Line:

Stefan Molynuex sets up a false dichotomy in this podcast, and in his entire position against Ron Paul and political action.