The best course for libertarianism

Let's look at our competing arguments: "His main strategy is infiltration…." – Sieben More accurately my plan would be to infiltrate an existing party, and by use of effective persuasion and marketing permeate both the party and political positions throughout the country at a local, state and federal level. I'm not going to candy coat this, but rather libertarians should bluntly use existing tools in our system; tools needed in order to attain libertarian goals within the confines of personal ethics and existing legal limitations. I actually gave examples of how this has been done in the past, and done effectively. Sieben dismisses those examples, but not with legitimate objections. Sieben somehow believes that I am comparing libertarianism to those goals of the KKK?! Of course that's not my point, but rather there are examples of extremists who have taken control of a political system and party, and affected actual policy as a result. – I point to this as an example of what can be done as a matter of process, not content. The current political system is not simply the result of an ever growing government without any encouragement, but rather a deliberate design to do such. My opponent believes that this is the result of special interest groups and the nature of government. Perhaps a little bit but a very comprehensive history of the current state of the New Democratic party and the total impact on government and society can be seen as not a result of "special interest groups" as my opponent explains, but rather exactly the path that I propose (sourced):[1] Sieben's approach is to find a place. That seems to be the all that is needed to the plan and libertarianism will flourish. So the plan is to find a place on the ocean that will be independent of external forces that will detract from the ideals of libertarianism. Within Sieben's plan he explains that the libertarian message must be an intellectual one, and the average person couldn't grasp the implications and nuanced ideals within such a political philosophy. I would argue that if kept solely at an intellectual level it will fail. With Sieben's plan this floating island of libertarianism will be filled solely with those who have the intellectual capacity to understand the variances within competing economic systems, and could drone on and on about intellectual property rights, but who would fix your toilet? Although this is not a debate about the inherent flaws of pure libertarianism, a debate that I would welcome at a future time; it is imperative to put this component into the Sieben plan [2 ]. Sieben essentially believes that the masses are asses, but I don't hold such a dim view. Although they may not be intellectually at the standard that Sieben and his other brand of libertarian might like to have in his community, the voters are not fools, but do indeed follow certain party loyalty and predictable trends [3]. I believe that my friend who looks toward his libertarianism as an exclusive and wholly independent club afloat the ocean blue is grasping on a fantasy. - I honestly don't think that he understands the power of persuasion, marketing and a motivated citizenry. There is great power in the message of freedom, individual liberty and private property. This is an established ideal that goes to the heart of every voter until new information is brought into the mix. As an established base of principle and even value there is great advantage for those who wish to expand upon it [4]. It needn't be some overly intellectualized message, and it will prevail in any rhetorical contest if presented with the correct passion and effect that is currently lacking in my libertarian brethren. There are fundamentals of libertarianism that is not intellectual, but basic, and will appeal to all who value freedom. It is the messenger that you should be disappointed with not those hearing the message[5]. My strategy does depend upon a consistent and effective message, but what it also depends on the success of the ideology in practical application. If it does not provide the success that libertarianism promises those who live in the society will most likely abandon it, and if it is successful in providing both material and other more philosophical satisfaction then the society will wish to promote and protect what they have. In other words, in keeping with the ideals of libertarianism, it will only succeed if it earns its success and if it fails then libertarianism of this kind deserves to fail. – that is the libertarian way. I ask the voters to consider the two paths libertarianism could take, and which would be the most realistic fruitful and effective. Also thanks to Sieben for a good debate. http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.amconmag.com... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.rci.rutgers.edu... http://www.reasontofreedom.com...