Libertarians can learn something from the UFC

The following analogy isn’t perfect by any means, but I hope to illustrate an important point. Political parties, just like businesses, can turn themselves around for the better. Walmart, despite its faulty reputation driven by anti-business activists, continues to trek on, expand, and even shows us that it isn’t an evil monster after all. On to the UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship)…

Early UFC events were eight- or sixteen-man tournaments wherein participants were required to beat three opponents in a single evening to be crowned Ultimate Fighting Champion. Fighters were typically skilled in one discipline only, e.g. boxing, Judo, Jiu Jitsu etc. and had little experience in battling against opponents with different skills of their own. With no weight classes, fighters could find themselves facing opponents who were significantly larger and taller than themselves…These factors combined led to a trend of short, violent fights. This was very much in line with the way the UFC was being marketed at the time. "There are no rules!" said the famous tagline. Although not strictly true, the UFC did operate with a limited set of rules; techniques such as hair pulling and groin strikes were frowned upon, but valid.

The brutal nature of the burgeoning sport quickly drew the attention of the authorities and UFC events were banned in almost all American states. To survive, the UFC redesigned its rules to remove the less palatable elements of fights, whilst still retaining the core elements of striking and grappling. Five minute rounds, Referee stoppages, weight classes and limitations on permissible striking areas gradually found the UFC being rebranded as a sport rather than a violent circus attraction. As the sport evolved, so did its fans and fighters…

The failure of the Libertarian Party to gain any substantial foothold in American politics has never been because of its core ideology…individual liberty & personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, and peace. Scratch that, that’s actually what the libertarian Cato Institute stands for. The Libertarian Party has mostly been a debate club ever since its inception. It was created primarily out of a frustration with the rising state. As such, you had many in the party that were simply anti-fill-in-the-blank. It became the perfect home created for anarchists, purists, and the like. It was early UFC, "There are no rules!".

The Clark campaign, which was the most successful in LP history, was the high watermark for the Libertarian Party. But respectable names such as David Boaz, Ed Crane, and Ed Koch left the LP to form The Cato Institute. The party split into factions and the LP lost much of its monetary backing. The libertarian movement took a big hit, and just like any other business would have done, struggled to stay afloat.

The UFC was in the same predicament, but managed to get out of its hole as a result of several savvy businessmen. The UFC turned itself around by changing management and establishing a necessary & effective set of rules and general safety on which to proceed from. In short, they paved the way for increased legitimacy and growth. They turned their fortune around, packaged the product nicely, and gave life to what I think is one of the most entertaining sports around today.

I guess I’m writing this more for those that have given up hope on what seems to be at many times a futile effort. Hell, I think every libertarian has thought the same at some point. I just don’t think the product, namely liberty, has yet to be packaged and marketed to the people in the right way. If it means new management within the LP so be it, if it means tightening up our agenda for the forseeable future, so be it. The shock and awe approach has simply got to go.

Fortunately, I’ve stuck with the party long enough to know that its leaders ARE changing their tune and they have tried to engage in real world politics as of late. But it can't do it without your help or mine.

Rogier responds...

I'd like to give a big thanks to Rogier for taking the time to respond to my original email. Since he already posted parts of our conversation via email on his site, I'm thinking any additional comments and/or dialogue should go there. He has much more readers than I. :o)

FYI: I contacted Doug Stanhope a while back and he responded to my email to him as well.

To be honest, whenever I write to someone like this I tend not to get my hopes up for a thoughtful response let alone a response at all. But I've been proven wrong time and again, and that's a good thing. It shows me that people still care. It shows me that they still have some hope, no matter how grim things get.

We need to continue opening up the lines of communication if we plan on getting anything accomplished in the future.

Opening the lines of communication - Rogier van Bakel

I just sent this email off to Rogier van Bakel. My hope is to gain some insight into the minds of some other prominent libertarian bloggers and activists within the libertarian movement. If we're not on the same page with those who could help give the LP the boost that it needs, what hope do we have in gaining some real momentum (i.e. - non-libertarians) ?

Hey Rogier,

I guess I’ll start off by saying I’m a fairly regular reader of your blog. I came to understand and appreciate libertarianism through Peter McWilliams book “Ain’t Nobody’s Business…” as well. Peter actually called me a long time ago, at the height of his books popularity. He had a mailing list (not sure if you were ever on it) and he asked to see his readership at one point in time. So I sent him a picture of myself, and to my surprise about 2 days later I got a call in my home in NJ. I was shocked to tell you the truth…I was only about 18, 19 at the time, and here is a man who I truly admired, calling me personally. Needless to say to this day, I’ve been inspired to try to get the word out about libertarianism and let people know of another political option.

I’ve followed the LP pretty much since Peter’s book and only joined it until recently, after they put out their “Iraq Exit Strategy”. While admitting that the LP has been much of a failure in the 30 years of its existence, I take issue with the conventional reasons offered for its failure. Rather than placing all the blame squarely on the LP, I’m inclined to think that if those people (who gave the party more credibility) hadn’t left the party, the LP would be in a much better position today. What’s done is done though, and you can’t harp on the past. So what’s in store for the future? Do we continue to try and function with all these numerous libertarian organizations and separate efforts, or do we suck it up and realize that the LP, CAN BE the party we make of it. When do we stop running from frustration from lack of success? Frustration for those who left the party just seems to have been diverted to accepting the fact that we will constantly be mislabeled, ignored, and marginalized.

This is the reason I’ve given the LP the benefit of the doubt, despite its many failures. Radley Balko and even CATO for that matter, continually get labeled as conservative or Republican. The problem we’ve faced has never been about legitimacy, it’s choice…and those who stick around long enough to help make it a reality. It always has been about choice. I don’t think any libertarian today, would disagree that a strong Libertarian Party would be to the benefit of ALL libertarians and our respective think tanks and organizations. Bob Barr, a former staunch Republican came out admitting this, as he threw his support behind Badnarik in 2004. What would happen if we all followed suit?

So my long, drawn out question to you is, what do you make of this all? Is writing, blogging, and screaming from the rafters all we could hope for? Or do we storm the presidential debates and demand to be heard? Do we look tirelessly for a libertarian celebrity that could circumvent the inevitable MSM blackout? While I don’t mean to demean anyone’s efforts who have the left the LP, I have to ask, why can’t our goals coincide a bit more often? All I’m doing here honestly Rogier, is trying to open the lines of communication. Just like Peter did with me. Your response would be much appreciated.

Regards,
Robert D.

FYI:
I’m going to post this email on my blog. With your permission I’d like to post your response.
My blog is here: http://thatsridonkulous.blogspot.com/

Pets rebel in NOLA

Breaking News: Pets in New Orleans rebel against the government for leaving them stranded. Cats across the city were interviewed...some highlights below.









In a stunning contrast of opinions...

"Screw Michael Brown. That bitch deserves to get fired. I had the life...now look at me!"

"We're taking back these streets. It was the best thing that happened to us. Domesticated my ass, we have these sharp ass teeth for a reason."

And then there was this distraught cat...
"I wouldn't show them my underbelly! Fuck them corrupt PO-LICE"


Sorry, I'm in a silly mood. I had the Onion on my mind when I saw this avatar.

Marketing to generate momentum

Market population, demographic of listeners/readers, and costs are the main factors we should be weighing to ensure we get the most out of a solid marketing campaign.

The Agitator and FTL are 2 such places where I think our money could be spent wisely. Granted, most of the marketing should be in places where we’re not preaching to the choir. But advertisements are needed within libertarian circles as well, especially within libertarian communities that identify with our politics but have brushed off the party itself.

We have to create a sense of belief that the party is on the move by making our presence known. Use the influx of new support to build on top of our active base. The intention is not to bring in votes, but committed individuals who understand the need for activism and the need for growth. The votes will follow.

The faith in the LP as being a potential player in politics has been severely damaged. Much of it has been from our own doing. One only needs to ask the self-described libertarians from the vast, yet distinct libertarian communities (Reason, CATO, Independent Inst., etc.) about what their opinions are of the party as of today. Our efforts need to focus on winning them back, while simultaneously reaching out to those unaware of the party.


Advertising information here.

Webtrends reports available here.

Radley on his readership:

“I would guess it's your typical cross-section of blog readers, weighted heavily toward the libertarian right. I do draw a large portion of my audience from my column with FoxNews.com.”

If we can pick up some disgruntled Republicans who routinely read Balko’s Fox column, all the better.





FTL rates for advertising can be seen here:

Market population:



<-- Click on image for full view

"What are you a lawyer?"

[My bike - '93 Honda CBR F2]

Alright, this is my first audio blog posting. The audio quality sucks but I guess it will have to do for now. The title will make sense when you hear it.

FYI...I bought a digital voice recorder so I could avoid typing in posts but it seems like its double the work. I still like it better because I have a tendency to try to revise what I write more often than I should. I'm better at expressing my thoughts verbally.

This story got me off my ass (via Stephen Gordon) to finally create my first audioblog. Most of us have had our own encounters with the pigs police, so I figured what better way to start than this?

Note: Excuse the scattered profanity. I'm Italian, nuff said.

Democrat looks to unseat Paul

Political rookie Shane Sklar kicked off his campaign Wednesday to unseat Congressman Ron Paul with a tour of the 10-county, 14th Congressional District.

Sklar aimed at the so-called Libertarian philosophy that has earned Paul, R-Surfside Beach, the nickname “Dr. No” for his constant votes against most government programs.

“Making a point is one thing, but we need someone who aims to make a difference,” said Sklar, a 29-year-old Democrat from Edna.

No, actually we have enough career politicians who think that some magical government program can cure, or better, some deeply complex societal problem. We saw what that has brought us. More bureaucracy, a boatload of debt, and practically nothing to show for it all. The people of our communities are the ones who work, who sweat, who earn, who create, who make this world a better place. Not politicians who talk up their self-importance!

What we need is MORE Dr. Ron Pauls who hold principle higher than political expediency. With all due respect, this Democrat is a naïve bastard to think that he can make a difference on the lives of a distant people who for the most part are ultimately self-sufficient.

People continually try to rail against libertarian ideas for its simplicity. Yet it is this simplicity that provokes people to respect the world of politics, to take action and be involved in their communities, and to hold liberty and responsibility in such a regard that fosters productivity, tolerance, and a sense of pride among individuals.

A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned -- this is the sum of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

155 and One Reasons

Russ Nelson tells of 155 and one reasons why the government should stay out of disaster recovery. Update 9/4: Donald Boudreaux agrees.

I'm amazed when I look at this Dis-organizational chart Organization Chart for the federal government. This is what libertarians are up against, and every other person who espouses the idea of a limited and constitutional government.

Note: Sorry for the scarce blogging as of late. Been busy with real life schtuff.