Anonymous asked: Do you worry about the inconsistency of Ron Paul's message? Mainly that if it is unethical to initiate force and threats of violence abroad then how the f*$& does he think it's okay to force me to pay ANY tax for ANYTHING?
See my previous response to a similar question.
And here is Ron Paul giving props to Lysander Spooner.
All of us are walking contradictions. The inconsistency that the best philosophers may lack in their ideology, they make up for in their lifestyle. And the few who might be blameless in both thought and deed? Well, good luck in finding them. If you do, show me how successful they are in persuading others to follow their example. The diffusion of new ideas and values is dependent upon relationship, and relationship requires engagement. To engage the statist world without partaking in it to some degree is nearly impossible.
History shows that lasting social change occurs in incremental steps, while the most rapid and drastic changes have usually resulted in either worse or fleeting conditions. So to be preoccupied with esoteric matters or obsessed with finding fault in figures like Ron Paul who happen to be the most visible and successful proponents of peace and freedom is energy that could be better expended elsewhere.
Does this mean that radical activism is useless? Not necessarily, but we must admit that our belief in spontaneous order must invariably apply to our activism. In other words, if order cannot be perfectly planned then neither can revolution. Therefore, dogmatism on methods and strategy is unproductive. It is great to feel confident in one’s own tactics, but one’s self-confidence mustn’t become a universal measuring stick for everyone else. We all must take ownership of our impact on others, directly and indirectly, but condemning others who fall short of our expectations and abilities undermines the solidarity and fraternity vital in effectively changing the world.