The one thing I would emphasize is the property rights of individuals. You cover it to some degree in your section on Individual Rights, but I’ve gotten into more arguments with liberals who claim that “nothing is said in the founding documents about property rights”. Which is true to the extent that nothing is specifically stated about it, but it’s the clear intention of the Founders. On the whole, though, this is an excellent summation of what we believe.

Very good — you’ve nailed some very important principles.

Conservatism and Libertarianism only slightly overlap. The instant any regulation is put on prostitution, “pron”, drugs, abortion, assisted suicide, or the necessity of military action the two sharply part ways.

Libertarian Party money contributers include p*rnography interests, legalized prostitution interests, hippie-dippy pro-legalized dope interests, White Supremicists, pro-aborts, pro-assisted suicide interests, and virulently anti-military “Troofer” rabble-rousers. Those donations were all kept by the party, which has no problem with those interests.

While I, as a Constitutional Conservative, entirely, enthusiastically agree with all of the above points in the treatise, I do not see a way back from precedents already set by the oligarchy we now serve and fund from our pockets at gun-point. Short of dissolution of the Union, or a 1775-style tax revolt by a LARGE number of motivated and fearless taxpayers, we are now, and will continue to be a socialist faux *democracy*.

You may be so ideological yourself, Cousin Dave, but my own brother, who is a dead-on stereotype of all of the Libertarians I know is exactly a “Libertine”, which is a name I have used in derision for many years when referring to Libertarians. Your own ideals are not everyone else’s ideals.

The aforementioned reasons, however, all personal opinion vacuum aside, is why Libertarians got 4% of the vote, in spite of the RINO candidate. That result, if you try it for the next hundred years, is always going to be the same, until a certain amount of regulation, by law, and of party representation is excepted.

Personal intentions mean absolutely zilch outside the vacuum of personal opinion/ideals, and will never translate into political power without broad appeal.

The vast, milling herds of sheeple that make up the majority of voters(in either party) don’t sit around reading nuanced political philosophy, and the non-hippie, non-doper, pro-life, anti-p*rn/ anti-prostitution, pro-defense minority of pointy-headed intellectuals inside the Libertarian Party visualizing it with all their might still ain’t going to make it happen. Most people start paying attention to an election about ten minutes before they drag themselves reluctantly to the polls to vote.

My comments weren’t directed at sheeples or winning elections, they were directed at understanding libertarianism — Before people begin dismissing libertarianism, they should at least understand what it is. Whether people will bother or not was not my point.

All political thought is more complex than the simplified version presented during presidential elections, and libertarianisn can be simplified to an understandable message — but first you have to understand it, before you can effectively simplify it, or correctly simplify it.

“So where will this education begin? How will it then be dispersed to the masses who must spend their vote giving the concepts(which they ultimately must understand before they believe in and vote for it) actual power politically?”

Hopefully, the same way as in the libertarian beginning of the country, through persuasion.

“There is not going to be a spontaneous combustion of energy for an arcane ideology that is ideologically apolitical…The things Libertarianism stands for are what kills it before it can be born.”

Like what?

“It is individualistic to a degree humans have never been, enmass, individualistic.”

If you mean it’s against collectivism, then, yes — if you mean libertarians are for the protection of individual rights, then, yes. Guilty.

“It is against the wielding of power, or even obtaining it to begin with, apparently.”

No, it’s not against power, per se. Most libertarians are for a limited government with limited power, as opposed to a big government with great power of coercion that violates individual rights.

“People follow power, and power begets further power.”

I can also say, people follow freedom and freedom begets further freedom. Libertarians are surely against more government power, that’s true.

“There is no apparatus for the ideas of Libertarianism to spread itself beyond the spider-webbed, dusty halls of academic institutions, or the long-haired, dope-smoking Truthers and racists that scoop out the parts of Libertarianism that serve themselves and throw the general good of society into the trash.”

Hmmm, I don’t know how to answer this. I can see this is leading nowhere fast. One method of spreading libertarian principles is through the spider web of the internet. Reducing libertarians to the whackiest radicals is as wrong as reducing conservatives to religious fanatics, racists and Timothy McVeighs. I will end here because it’s taking an ugly turn. Read Machan, Boaz, Naverson, Paine, Nozick and others if you’re interested. If not, then so be it — it’s a free country, almost.

I never advocated the Libertarian Party, and I’m not a member of the Libertarian Party. I was responding to what I thought were misguided statements concerning “libertarians”.

You are right that the Libertarian Party has little chance of victory in any major election. The persuasion of libertarian principles is the influence it has on both parties. If Republicans take the view, in earnest, that libertarian values are antithetical to the party, then I predict attrition of Republican power and the eventual collapse of the party.

So I see J David’s point about, “How do we go about combatting the leftist education establishment?” And it’s a good question. In my darker moments, I think that the only way to do it is to create a complete shadow education system, consisting of private schools at every level from preschool to post-graduate. The trouble is, it’s really hard to compete against the government, and people who fancy themseves to be arms of the government tend not to like it. That doesn’t mean that we should not continue to pursue private education, but in the short term, it isn’t going to replace the public system.

So, as far as reforming the public system, there are two things that have to be attacked: the monopoly that school districts and individual school administrators think they have over the student body, and the monopoly that teacher unions think they have over content and access to the classroom. Vouchers are one way of attacking the former; they tend to get bad press, but when you actually explain the concept to people, nearly everyone of every social class gets it and is in favor of it. Another way is to campaign for open school districts: why not let every family choose where in the district it wants its children to go to? Why should children be trapped in a non-performing school just because of what neighborhood they live in? When you explain stuff like this to people, and point out to them the bad effects that a neighborhood being stuck with a non-performing school has (not only on their child’s education but also on property values), most people tend to agree with it.

A good way of attacking the union monopolies is to press for alternate certification of teachers. Allow people with degrees in the subjects being taught to teach. This breaks up the Marxist ed-schools’ monopoly over the supply of teachers. Instructors with alternate certification are often retirees from industry, and they bring a far more realistic and practical sensibility to the classroom. And right now, alternate certification is flying under the MSM’s radar. Strike while the opportunity is there.

When i was 21 yrs. old, i wrote a socialist manifesto, so entranced with the left, i was.
i then read the fountainhead, and other works from Ayn Rand, so, i changed my philosophy to objectivism. A bit later, i got turned onto liberatian, and ever since conservative. Swung from one extreme to the other. IT has not changed in years.

Your manifesto..i agree with completely.