pull down to refresh

I prefer to focus on particular issues. People generally get really hung up on labels and aren’t very philosophical, so I stick to why state policies won’t work or will have really bad side effects.
but that's kind of utilitarian argument, I prefer to go more on by principle. But in the end people don't care about principles.
reply
You can still bring in principles when discussing issues. The point is to not waste time talking about abstract labels like "libertarian", "capitalist", "socialist", etc, but simply address each issue on their own with concrete discussions about the policies and their effects.
reply
I agree, but maybe talking about the NAP as most people are leftists that think they are protecting the weak and opressed. Then why not start with the non-agression principle.
reply
Because their idea of oppression doesn’t map cleanly onto the NAP.
They are perfectly fine with forced redistribution of resources and abstract rights concepts just don’t land with them.
reply
I honestly don't understand that. It's like when they're against gun ownership because of violence and will exercise violence to enforce laws against guns, totally retarded.
reply
Ever heard the saying, "If you're under 40 and a conservative, you don't have a heart. If you're over 40 and a liberal, you don't have a brain."
You might be interested in some work on the different fundamental perspectives held by political tribes.
I wrote about a post relating it to bitcoin a while ago: #653982.
Most people aren't principled. Most people in my experience are very utilitarian though they would not admit that because our culture likes to pretend that it thinks principles are important.
reply
Exactly. We’re very unusual for being interested in the ideas.
If you want to talk to people, it’s best to meet them where they are.
reply
Wise words as usual. Listen to this person. Relationships are way more valuable than intellectual purity. I can honestly say I have influenced a number of people towards liberty but not through argumentation but rather relationships.
reply