I’m beginning to think I may have landed on the wrong planet. The return of the Mother Ship cannot be too…soon.

Your manifesto..i agree with completely.

The incoming administration is going to be hostile to alternative(and superior)forms of education like we have never seen, and I expect wider revolt against gov’t subsidized propagandizing of children to end in harsher prosecution of parents, and removal of children as “abused”, and a stricter limitation on private and home schooling, as they must to keep and grow their power.

I have one niece, and three cousins who were/are home schooled, and I and three siblings were private-educated in high school, and as a result we are all well educated and well-informed, but there are still concerns that that will passed on to the next generation, and even that took parents willing to pay taxes for public schooling their children were not accessing, while also paying for private schooling. Not very many people will do that, I’m afraid.

So, as far as reforming the public system, there are two things that have to be attacked: the monopoly that school districts and individual school administrators think they have over the student body, and the monopoly that teacher unions think they have over content and access to the classroom. Vouchers are one way of attacking the former; they tend to get bad press, but when you actually explain the concept to people, nearly everyone of every social class gets it and is in favor of it. Another way is to campaign for open school districts: why not let every family choose where in the district it wants its children to go to? Why should children be trapped in a non-performing school just because of what neighborhood they live in? When you explain stuff like this to people, and point out to them the bad effects that a neighborhood being stuck with a non-performing school has (not only on their child’s education but also on property values), most people tend to agree with it.

A good way of attacking the union monopolies is to press for alternate certification of teachers. Allow people with degrees in the subjects being taught to teach. This breaks up the Marxist ed-schools’ monopoly over the supply of teachers. Instructors with alternate certification are often retirees from industry, and they bring a far more realistic and practical sensibility to the classroom. And right now, alternate certification is flying under the MSM’s radar. Strike while the opportunity is there.

You are right that the Libertarian Party has little chance of victory in any major election. The persuasion of libertarian principles is the influence it has on both parties. If Republicans take the view, in earnest, that libertarian values are antithetical to the party, then I predict attrition of Republican power and the eventual collapse of the party.

This country is not trending toward freedom, and the necessary policies to expand freedom are being destroyed, not built.

Nobody is, as far as the results of the last election show, being “persuaded” toward Libertarianism. Its support shrank.

Libertarians are against “law as a teacher” concept, and are then, in effect, against the concept of being led. It is an every-man-for- himself, vaguely anarchist(and certainly attractive to those types)form of NON-gov’t government, trusting a non-existent innate brotherhood and goodness of mankind.

One of Rush’s “35 Undeniable Truths of Life” is that “this a world governed by the aggressive use of force”. The anarchy of Libertarianism cannot, upon its philosophy and recent demonstrations of its results in Trutherism and anti-war protest, muster sufficient military force (without a gov’t enforced draft, which we will soon see from Hussein)to protect citizens. People instinctively recognize isolationism in the present world is impractical and dangerous.

I am not being purposely combative to Libertarian-in-a-vacuum ideals. I am saying that the practical realities that cannot be “visualized” away by any intentions are that I, and most other social conservatives are going to be completely repulsed by the present riff-raff that surrounds and supports the Libertarian Party. It won’t matter if I read every brilliant piece of academic philosophical thought ever written on Libertarian ideals, they are still only that.

You will NOT get but a very small, Vox Day-type pointy-head few to read reams of philosophy and then vote on it, and explain that reams of philosophy to others, and get them to vote on it. You WILL get the skimmers who will exploit the points of libertarian thought that are immediately useful to their own anti-social ends mucking-up the water and repelling any significant following of solid, producing citizenry.

The common definition of insanity these days is doing the same thing over-and-over endlessly expecting a different result each time that never happens. THAT is the Libertarian Party. That does not represent “protection” in any form, to the masses of sheeple who, as human nature dictates, want to be protected.

Hopefully, the same way as in the libertarian beginning of the country, through persuasion.

“There is not going to be a spontaneous combustion of energy for an arcane ideology that is ideologically apolitical…The things Libertarianism stands for are what kills it before it can be born.”

Like what?

“It is individualistic to a degree humans have never been, enmass, individualistic.”

If you mean it’s against collectivism, then, yes — if you mean libertarians are for the protection of individual rights, then, yes. Guilty.

“It is against the wielding of power, or even obtaining it to begin with, apparently.”

No, it’s not against power, per se. Most libertarians are for a limited government with limited power, as opposed to a big government with great power of coercion that violates individual rights.

“People follow power, and power begets further power.”

I can also say, people follow freedom and freedom begets further freedom. Libertarians are surely against more government power, that’s true.

“There is no apparatus for the ideas of Libertarianism to spread itself beyond the spider-webbed, dusty halls of academic institutions, or the long-haired, dope-smoking Truthers and racists that scoop out the parts of Libertarianism that serve themselves and throw the general good of society into the trash.”

Hmmm, I don’t know how to answer this. I can see this is leading nowhere fast. One method of spreading libertarian principles is through the spider web of the internet. Reducing libertarians to the whackiest radicals is as wrong as reducing conservatives to religious fanatics, racists and Timothy McVeighs. I will end here because it’s taking an ugly turn. Read Machan, Boaz, Naverson, Paine, Nozick and others if you’re interested. If not, then so be it — it’s a free country, almost.

All political thought is more complex than the simplified version presented during presidential elections, and libertarianisn can be simplified to an understandable message — but first you have to understand it, before you can effectively simplify it, or correctly simplify it.