I had supposed my recent newspaper column about why I can't be a conservative would draw fire, especially considering the local audience. I got nothing but silence.
I didn't think any liberals would even see the next column about why I can't be a liberal, so it was no surprise that I got zero reaction to that one.
For a reaction, I had to wait for my column about why I can't be a Libertarian. That one was specifically about the Libertarian Party (LP). I'm not even saying I hate them or would fight against them-- just that I can't support them. Because I don't consider them particularly libertarian.
People are very defensive of the LP. That must be good news to them. If that passion translated into v*tes they'd be sure to win at the political power game. That they don't must be (additional) evidence that the game is rigged.
I actually started getting the latest batch of emails in defense of the LP several weeks ago when a "Big L" Libertarian reader of my newspaper column was confused that I was using the word "libertarian" while not endorsing the "libertarianism" of the LP. My first clue that we were discussing completely different topics was that he always capitalized the word "Libertarian". He was especially upset that I spoke out against the mask (and "vaccine") dictates, insisting that Libertarians would see that not wearing masks during a pandemic is aggression, and that people can't be trusted to do "the right thing", so they need to be controlled by The State.
So, this isn't exactly new.
About this latest column, another respondent was also confused over capitalization; about why I capitalized "Libertarian" when discussing the Libertarian Party, but not "conservative" or "liberal" (when NOT discussing a "Conservative Party" or "Liberal Party"), apparently missing all the times I wrote "libertarian" in my column and in my replies to them. And this was happening in a conversation in response to a column about the LP vs libertarianism where I carefully spelled out the difference in capitalization due to the other guy's confusion.
Others had other objections, with one thread running through them all: people seem to feel trapped. In various ways, they told me (or hinted) that they feel they are left with no choice but to engage in politics because everyone else is doing it, thus the LP.
One told me that withdrawing consent will not work in our current world, so you have to use the political means.
This was in response to my quoting of Étienne de La Boétie: “Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces.”
If you imagine Colossus is a specific political criminal you might see v*ting for his opponent as "supporting him no longer". If, however, you realize that Colossus is the entire idea of political government, no matter who makes it up, you'll have a different response.
Something I wish the LP supporters understood is pointed out in this quote from Bill St. Clair: "Many complain that in anarchy, warlords will take over. I've got news for them. We already live in anarchy. It's been that way since God gave free will to Adam. And warlords have already taken over. They run for election, and wear badges. The secret is realizing this truth, so that, even though you obey when you must, to avoid being kidnapped or killed by the warlords, you know what they are. They rely on the fact that most people think their authority is valid. Once that stops, and people stop obeying them en masse, there will be nothing they can do about it."
No one is ever going to v*te their way out of this mess. Hating on those who know this fact won't make it any less true.
