After reading Leonard E. Read's essay "How to Advance Liberty" I felt dazzled. According to Read, spreading the ideas of liberty is "a learning, not a selling, problem".
Throughout the text Read emphasizes on how masses are the ones who defines the course of society, and how the approach of the libertarian to the masses should be. For the libertarian thinkers tend to be close minded and omnipotent, their ideas can't be shared successfully. Pretending to be "Know it alls" can be a really dangerous weapon when sharing ideas.
Leonard Read mentions it's not a matter of marketing or a matter of getting into people minds like conquering someone's perspective.
That is what we got to discuss today with Alexander Mccobin, founder of Students for Liberty.
Alexander commented he thinks he disagrees with Read because he believes that marketing is necessary to let the ideas of liberty be known. Alejo disagreed. The dialogue flowed interestingly since that.
Quotes like this went to the table:
"I wish to repeat that the strategy of achieving a free market economy -- or, the same thing, advancing liberty -- does not require "selling the masses," that is, bringing the "hosts of common men," or what Keynes called "practical men," into a state of comprehension. Were that the problem, I would have given up the ghost long ago.
So Read considers that one, by attracting others, can share authentically the ideas of liberty. I wonder if it is possible in a society where most of the people stand willful in nonage and are not willing to get out of that. Is isolation the best option?
Mccobin emphasized on how selling as Amazon.com could be one great example or analogy of how the ideas of liberty should be spread. I agree with that. When talking of the ideas, it would be more kind of a conversation. Out of that, one can invite the other to learn more about the ideas. The thing is, to shine one's own light. That sounds like Emerson.
"The fact that only one in hundreds of individuals encountered shows any interest in or aptitude for the free market or libertarian philosophy should be no cause for discouragement. This is simply a common blindness; there is yet no eye to see the subject; the blindness is the problem! Keep in mind self improvement and the related fact that the art of becoming is composed of acts of overcoming. The blindness, be it recognized, is an obstacle to overcome -- a stimulus to self-improvement. Reflect, for instance, on subterranean animals and those committed to the depths of the ocean -- living in utter darkness. They have no eye to see. What brings forth the eye? Why, light itself brings forth the eye!"
Throughout the text Read emphasizes on how masses are the ones who defines the course of society, and how the approach of the libertarian to the masses should be. For the libertarian thinkers tend to be close minded and omnipotent, their ideas can't be shared successfully. Pretending to be "Know it alls" can be a really dangerous weapon when sharing ideas.
Leonard Read mentions it's not a matter of marketing or a matter of getting into people minds like conquering someone's perspective.
That is what we got to discuss today with Alexander Mccobin, founder of Students for Liberty.
Alexander commented he thinks he disagrees with Read because he believes that marketing is necessary to let the ideas of liberty be known. Alejo disagreed. The dialogue flowed interestingly since that.
Quotes like this went to the table:
"I wish to repeat that the strategy of achieving a free market economy -- or, the same thing, advancing liberty -- does not require "selling the masses," that is, bringing the "hosts of common men," or what Keynes called "practical men," into a state of comprehension. Were that the problem, I would have given up the ghost long ago.
So Read considers that one, by attracting others, can share authentically the ideas of liberty. I wonder if it is possible in a society where most of the people stand willful in nonage and are not willing to get out of that. Is isolation the best option?
Mccobin emphasized on how selling as Amazon.com could be one great example or analogy of how the ideas of liberty should be spread. I agree with that. When talking of the ideas, it would be more kind of a conversation. Out of that, one can invite the other to learn more about the ideas. The thing is, to shine one's own light. That sounds like Emerson.
"The fact that only one in hundreds of individuals encountered shows any interest in or aptitude for the free market or libertarian philosophy should be no cause for discouragement. This is simply a common blindness; there is yet no eye to see the subject; the blindness is the problem! Keep in mind self improvement and the related fact that the art of becoming is composed of acts of overcoming. The blindness, be it recognized, is an obstacle to overcome -- a stimulus to self-improvement. Reflect, for instance, on subterranean animals and those committed to the depths of the ocean -- living in utter darkness. They have no eye to see. What brings forth the eye? Why, light itself brings forth the eye!"
Besides, the dialogue went pretty well. We got to genuinely discuss and people was committed to the rubric. It was a wonderful experience!
RSS Feed