Joe, it is
a very tall order to change the world. You are not the only one
that has felt despair. Remember, the great economist Ludwig von
Mises wrote:
Occasionally
I entertained the hope that my writings would bear practical fruit
and show the way for policy. Constantly I have been looking for
evidence of a change in ideology. But...I have come to realize
that my theories explain the degeneration of a great civilization;
they do not prevent it. I set out to be a reformer, but only became
the historian of decline.
But as Mises
taught, the world is a very complex place, and in the sphere of
political and social change it is very difficult to understand
how all factors will play out. Strong men willing to advance the
ideas of liberty can have an impact. Murray Rothbard, Lew Rockwell
and Ron Paul through their consistent advocacy of liberty have
beyond question delivered the message of the importance of liberty
to a far greater audience than could have ever been imagined just
40 years ago.
That said,
as you point out, the overwhelming majority are clueless and easily
swayed by demagogues. Thus, it would be foolish to think that
the battle for liberty is anywhere close to being won. In fact,
it is downright scary as to what direction the masses may be led
and what this will mean for our freedoms.
Frustration
at being unable to convert all the boobsie overnight is a sign
of looking at the battle in the wrong way. The battle should be
fun and exciting. Just like a good chess game or a one-on-one
basketball game can be fun. Two of the greatest promoters of liberty,
Rothbard and H.L. Mencken had fun poking at the interventionists.
It is not
difficult to imagine the twinkle in the eye of Mencken when he
wrote:
And we must
never forget the famous Rothbard laugh. I personally remember
him chuckling when he relayed the story of a report in the news
that some NYC government agency wanted to make NYC prettier by
banning hot dog carts.
And think
of the fun Rothbard must have had by infiltrating
the Maoist wing of a Leninist-Trotskyite party:
Rothbard
was a battler. He never stopped. Read his writings in The
Libertarian Forum and The
Rothbard Rockwell Report. I am guessing, he loved the
battle, itself. He loved to bash the enemy. Indeed, what Rothbard
wrote about Mencken most assuredly applied to Rothbard himself:
Any man who is an individualist and a libertarian in this day
and age has a difficult row to hoe. He finds himself in a world
marked, if not dominated, by folly, fraud, and tyranny. He has,
if he is a reflecting man, three possible courses of action open
to him: (1) he may retire from the social and political world
into his private occupation: in the case of Mencken's early partner,
George Jean Nathan, he can retire into a world of purely esthetic
contemplation; (2) he can set about to try to change the world
for the better, or at least to formulate and propagate his views
with such an ultimate hope in mind; or, (3) he can stay in the
world, enjoying himself immensely at this spectacle of folly.
To take this third route requires a special type of personality
with a special type of judgment about the world. He must, on the
one hand, be an individualist with a serene and unquenchable sense
of self-confidence; he must be supremely "inner-directed"
with no inner shame or quaking at going against the judgment of
the herd. He must, secondly, have a supreme zest for enjoying
life and the spectacle it affords; he must be an individualist
who cares deeply about liberty and individual excellence, but
who can from that same dedication to truth and liberty
enjoy and lampoon a society that has turned its back on
the best that it can achieve. And he must, thirdly, be deeply
pessimistic about any possibility of changing and reforming the
ideas and actions of the vast majority of his fellow-men. He must
believe that boobus Americanus is doomed to be boobus Americanus
forevermore....A serene and confident individualist, dedicated
to competence and excellence and deeply devoted to liberty, but
convinced that the bulk of his fellows were beyond repair, Mencken
carved out a role unique in American history: he sailed joyously
into the fray, slashing and cutting happily into the buncombe
and folly he saw all around him, puncturing the balloons of pomposity,
gaily cleansing the Augean stables of cant, hypocrisy, absurdity,
and cliché, "heaving," as he once put it, "the
dead cat into the temple" to show bemused worshippers of
the inane that he would not be struck dead on the spot. And in
the course of this task, rarely undertaken in any age, a task
performed purely for his own enjoyment, he exercised an enormous
liberating force upon the best minds of a whole generation.
On a personal
level when we discuss economics, politics and philosophy, we must
seek to tie our opponents up in knots. Don't battle them with
long oratory. If they are thinkers, give them a book. But if they
are boobs, counter them with questions. If they are in favor of
the minimum wage, ask them why it shouldn't be at $500 per hour
then? Ask them why they think the laws of supply and demand don't
work for wages? If they are against gold as money because "You
can't eat gold," ask them if eating money is something that
should be essential to a money.
The Socratic
method is very powerful against the unthinking masses. They haven't
thought out their positions, so the right questions can cause
them to get so backed into a corner that they may even realize
the absurdity of their position. Naturally, the more you practice
the Socratic method, the better you get at. It is truly fencing
against an unarmed man.
On an even
more personal level, the more you know about how the economy works
and what the future may hold, the better off you are.
To know that
accelerating price inflation may be coming, that the Federal Reserve
causes the business cycle by its money manipulations, that the
ever growing police state may result in serious infringements
on our liberties is all very valuable knowledge. It means we can
prepare for what is coming. Ignorance of these possibilities is
not bliss, it is extremely dangerous.
Jews in Germany
and Austria died because they were ignorant of the political situation
developing around them. Sigmund Freud and Ludwig von Mises, because
they were not ignorant of the environment, were able to flee and
survive.
The more
you know and correctly understand the developing situation the
better off you are. Knowledge is power. Ignorance is mental blindness.