The Trump supporter as ally (#2 in LLS)

I have changed the title in the series a bit to shorten the length of the title and to be more specific. Also, I wanted to get Donald Trump’s name in the title since he is the biggest name in politics at the moment. Last post I mentioned “good guys” and “bad guys” and even some others. Today let us look at the Trump supporter and see what we can do with this bunch. Can we find allies to fight for liberty and freedom?

I think the “Trump People” are potential allies just like the supporters of Ron Paul were in the election cycles of 2008 and 2012. Some of the Trump supporters are actual libertarians. For example, Walter Block and his “Libertarians for Trump” movement are certainly libertarian. Note that Dr. Block was a close associate of Murray Rothbard and is often thought of as the leading Rothbardian in this country. So, some “Trump People” are libertarians or even anarchists. These people already “hate the state” and are on our side.

It appears that many of the “rank and file” of the Republican Party are backing Trump. These people are all over the board on their defense of liberty. Some are fooled into thinking we really should have our military stationed all over the world — for our “defense” they say. Many of them are four square in favor of the horrific drug war that is an absolute failure. I think these groups can be reached by the tactic of explaining how their goals might be laudable but the results have proven to be counter productive. We need to educate them on the horrors of American Foreign Policy and on the horrors of the Drug War.

I readily concede that many Trump supporters are nowhere close to Ron Paul on foreign policy or anything else for that matter. For many libertarians, our philosophy would reject military interventionism on its face. The same goes with making what a person chooses to ingest a crime. But often the philosophical approach does not go well, so, we should try to point out the utter failure of what we are doing now: how it hurts our society and how it makes us and our children less safe. I think many of the Trump people will already agree with us on this or be an easy convert. After all, the candidate they are supporting has attacked the US foreign policy in the middle east and the goading of Russia, plus he does not seem to be a drug warrior at all.

Walter Block said of Trump that, “he could get along with Putin; that he wanted to end NATO; that we were mistaken to get into the Middle East; that US soldiers should leave Korea, German, Japan, etc.  He said of dictators Saddam Hussain and Muammar Ghadafi, sure, they were monsters, but at least they fought the far-worse ISIL type terrorists!” In other words, Trump was against American foreign policy as it has been for at least the last 30 years. His followers would listen to us as we point out that military interventions are the worst part of the Empires’ evils.

Many of the Trump people have flocked to back Trump based on his protectionist polices. Those of us who understand economics (Austrian Economics of course) know that his protectionist policies are wrong on many levels, but compared to military interventionism this is a policy that we can hammer on at a later time.

When put in this way, it is clear that The Donald is the most congruent with our perspective. This is true, mainly because of foreign policy. And, of the three, foreign policy, economic policy and person liberties, the former is the most important. As Murray Rothbard and Bob Higgs have demonstrated over and over again, US foreign policy determines what occurs in economics and in the field of personal liberties. Foreign policy is the dog that wags the other two tails. ~ Walter Block

Trump supporters and Trump himself have been decent at least on personal liberties. Trump is no prude who wants to get into everyone’s personal life. I suspect that his broad coalition of people who are mad as hell at the ruling elite have no special desire to enforce any particular behavior codes other than “live and let live”.

I think we can attempt to get the Trump followers to understand that it is the state itself that they are rebelling against. I have seen many of them indicate that they are in favor of the style of government that this country was founded upon. That would be a belief in Classical Liberalism even if they don’t know that is what they believe.

“Classical liberalism” is the term used to designate the ideology advocating private property, an unhampered market economy, the rule of law, constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion and of the press, and international peace based on free trade. Up until around 1900, this ideology was generally known simply as liberalism. The qualifying “classical” is now usually necessary, in English-speaking countries at least (but not, for instance, in France), because liberalism has come to be associated with wide-ranging interferences with private property and the market on behalf of egalitarian goals. This version of liberalism — if such it can still be called — is sometimes designated as “social,” or (erroneously) “modern” or the “new,” liberalism. Here we shall use liberalism to signify the classical variety.  ~ Ralph Raico

As an anarcho-capialist, I think that the Classical Liberals were wrong in that they believed that some government was needed and they could keep the state constrained by a constitution. But we now see that the government they founded just kept growing until it swamped the original liberals and is now the police state we live under. But if the first step toward finding a way to dispatch the state, or to put magic chains around the beast until it is no longer a threat, then working with other groups towards a minimal state is fine with me.

The palpable anger of the Trump supporters towards the state is anger we love to see. They are mad as hell at our ancient enemy the state and we can find allies in the Trump camp. We will have to be careful and not attack them on all the issues that we differ on. We need to celebrate those aspects were we agree. Mostly we need to agree that the status quo is evil!

The leader of Le Pen said, “Populist parties across Europe — and beyond — have gained traction in recent years, with their alarm over immigration and attacks on the political “elite” resonating strongly with voters.” The populist supporters of Donald Trump are looking for right-wing policies. In that “right-wing” policies are those that support private property rights then we can find much in common with Trump supporters since all “human rights” are property rights as Murray Rothbard pointed out countless times.

We must build anti-government coalitions and defang the police state before it becomes a tyranny worse than the USSR ever hoped to be.



4 thoughts on “The Trump supporter as ally (#2 in LLS)

  1. “..Classical Liberals were wrong in that they believed that some government was needed and they could keep the state constrained by a constitution.” – Considering the relatively limited and slow communication tools that existed at the time (and worse before), and were still the main means until approximately 20 years ago, the belief by “Classical Liberals” that some government was/is needed is reasonable. But that is no longer the case since the Internet affords virtually everyone with the means of knowing what is taking place near and far, AND enables making their views known to others.

    The potential for far improved person-person interactions – which includes communication at the outset – is currently in the hands (or on their “laps”) of most people in most parts of the world and increasing daily. This potential, as opposed to the ruler/ruled systems – always coercion-based – that have taken place in the past, is what needs to be emphasized.

    What I see is that the majority of people, no matter their political stripe, do NOT see beyond the social ordering system into which they were born or emigrated to. Additionally, “libertarians”, “voluntaryists”, “anarchists”, etc do not present principles on which a society could actually exist and prosper, enabling each individual to work towards optimizing his/her lifetime Happiness, and all doing so at the same time. I know of only one individual thinker who has.

    While few current voting Democrats, Republicans, Independents, etc have likely concluded this lack in what is proposed by anti-Statists, they surely sense it at some gut level. And so they continue to hope that a “change” in the political party will bring them closer to the society they want, hence the continued political circuses/horrors.

    Further, I do think that the vast majority of people want to simply carry out their day to day lives without interference from others and also do not want to harm others. What most do not know is how some of their physical actions may actually harm another. For the relatively few harm-doers in a population, I think the rest want simply to get them to stop or, better, not to begin in the first place. That’s where principles of improved human interaction are essential – but are knowable, communicable, and agreeable in the sense of agreed to.

    Bastiat wrote eloquently and truthfully. But the tools available for social order at the time were limited. We – and I mean the entire human race – are no longer limited to a ruler/ruled coercion-based system, no matter the claims of “representation”. This is what needs to be slowly understood – because understanding and agreement on a paradigm shift can not occur quickly.

    • We can agree that people today can interact with each other in ways that the people of just a few decades ago could only dream of. I think the internet, if allowed to stay free, will have a big impact on human interactions. One good friend lives in Germany and one on the other side of US from me. I would have never had the pleasure of interacting with them just a scant few decades ago.

      My points are that we need to use these social media and other aspects of the internet to join forces with like minded, liberty loving people to fight against the evil state. Not everyone who can be recruited to help will have the understanding of liberty, economics, and libertarian philosophy that you have.

      I am trying to see who we can ally ourselves with for the fight and then what can we “sell” them with. I think the “old-right” or “hard-right” are easy converts since they believe in private property already. The communists, even if they say they are anarchists, are much, much further away from our position.

      I also agree that politics is no way to “cure the problem” since it is politics that got us here in the first place! But we need time, and I am deeply concerned that a Clinton administration will see war with Russia and China. We need a planet left to work with.

      If a populist candidate stopped rampant immigration and eliminated a federal agency or two (say TSA to start) then we might prove to the people the sanity of eliminating almost all (or all) of the agencies and federal power. At least we can hope.

  2. Mark, I share your deep concern about Hillary Clinton as President. She is the epitome of unscrupulous conniving politicians who will do & say anything that will get them the top position in a coercion-based system. Her actual record in the system shows the kind of physical harm-causing measures she maneuvers into being and does not hesitate to order be implemented.

    Trump’s record of using the coercion-based system has been less blood-letting but still harm-causing to the many creditors he left stranded each time he declared bankruptcy. Or the people who lost their small properties because he had wrangled a deal with the local government for area “improvements” via his company. As for politics, at this point Trump is all words; what he says he will do. He has no political record to compare with Hillary’s – probably to his political advantage.

    So which will allow more of the needed time, which you properly acknowledge is needed, for a shift in thinking by a large segment of the population away from a coercion-based society? – if we limit ourselves to these 2 only & ignore the possibility that either or both national conventions will see a mass revolt of delegates.

    I tend to lean towards a Trump presidency as providing time for such that Clinton’s likely never would. However, I have some reservations that Trump is not all he appears to be in regards to the Clinton’s, both Hillary & Bill. Also, I’m not sure the Trump that we see on social media & MSM is the real Trump. I’m not sure what/who the real Trump is!

    The biggest thing for all anti-Statists to remember is that Government/State Leaders are merely wordmongers. Without the support of a large military & many federal domestic policing agencies – meaning LOTS of young men & women willing to be Gov/State Enforcers – Presidents (and their counterparts wherever) are figureheads. The same with members of legislatures, executive and judicial bodies – creators/issuers of words. It is those who are willing to do the physical harm who are the key to entire coercion-based system; they are the coercion-doers. To the extent that current Government Enforcers can be convinced of their actual harm-doing role as enablers of the System, I say anti-Statists, “Go for it!” And support these former Government Harm-Doers in getting/doing truly productive jobs/work/trade. Those who refuse and continue their Government Enforcement roles, treat them as pariahs and encourage others to do the same, until and unless they cease. No voluntary association with them. No sales. No service. No camaraderie. Make the job of Government Enforcer, military or domestic, undesirable in the sense that others will cease being or not become friends, will deal only at arms length if at all. Support/promote neighborhood self-aid measures; police are NOT (and rarely ever were) protectors, but are rather (and have always been) Government Enforcers.

    It is only when so few are willing to be Gov/State Enforcers, both military and domestic policing agents, that the coercion-based system will be toothless. Until then, the Leaders can effectively use fear on a variety of issues to keep the system going. A mass violent uprising will only create more fear on the part of those many who are as yet unconvinced that the State is the root problem and almost certainly result in these fearful supporting “the troops”. But nibbling away at the key element, the Enforcers, while bringing the larger numbers of people to the understanding of what liberty can enable them personally has the best promise in my estimation of longterm societal success. My view of success is a society in which “each individual [is enabled via Liberty] to work towards optimizing his/her lifetime Happiness, and all doing so at the same time.” A description of the principles and conditions necessary to bring this about are within the treatise “Social Meta-Needs: A New Basis for Optimal Interaction” and its embedded links. Yours and others’ public critiques, using quotes after a reading in its entirely (snippets/scanning will not suffice for understanding), are most welcome and desired. Such discussion after a thorough “chewing” can facilitate progress away from the current coercion-based society and towards a goal one of full Liberty, a stable highly productive society of cooperative, optimally happy people.

    • “Trump’s record of using the coercion-based system has been less blood-letting but still harm-causing to the many creditors he left stranded each time he declared bankruptcy”

      Yes, we can agree he is no angel. And we agree that Clinton is much worse. Our job is to figure out ways to convince the “normal people” that libertarianism is the way to go.

      Next post is about how to get the “Trump voter” or the “rank and file Republican” on board with us. Populism is the first step I think. Anyway, working on the next post in series.

      Thanks for all the insightful comments.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s