|
One-Minute Liberty Tips
|
| Got a minute? Then read any one of the
liberty tips below. These communication tips are designed to be quickly
read and quickly put to use. Pick your favorites and then go out and use
them to further the cause of liberty. ENJOY -- and please
share your success stories
with us! New tips are added every two weeks. These tips were originally published in The Liberator Online -- the world's largest-circulation libertarian publication. We invite you to subscribe for free. Contents: Answering the "Utopian" Criticism Word Choice: The Grandchild Tax The Daddy and Mommy Metaphor Using the Card Version of the Quiz Word Choice: "Consensual Vs. "Victimless" "Legal" Vs. "Moral" Word Choice: "Capitalistic Acts between Consenting Adults" Be a Name-Dropper for Liberty Word Choice: Separation of SCHOOL and State Add Quiz Animation to Your Web Site Word Choice: "Government Schools," Not "Public Schools" Word Choice: Re-Privatization The Power of Repetition Word Choice: Instead of "Isolationism" The Myth of the "Atomistic Individual" Don't Begin with an Apology Overcoming Fear of Public Speaking Word Choice: Instead of "Capitalism" A "Good Neighbor" Policy The Power of Saying "I Don't Know" "What's a libertarian?" "Cross Dressing" for Liberty Making Libertarianism a Brand Name Listen Up! The Benefits of Listening Give Specific, Concrete Examples It's Kosher! Seals of Approval Brand Names Instead of an Argument Taking YES for an Answer When to Take NO for an Answer They're Listening to the Radio One Simple Step To A More Productive Meeting Become a Great Public Speaker! "You" Instead of "I" Sunday School When Libertarians Should Call for Raising the Minimum Wage Success with Soundbites The Power of Questions The Libertarian Denominator Is there an echo in here? (The power of effective listening) Word Choice: Instead of "Abolish" Word Choice: "Abundance" Word Choice: "Re-Legalization" About the Author Answering the "Utopian" Criticism Sometimes libertarians are dismissed as being
unrealistic utopians. Impractical drea That's because we advocate a society in which force or fraud are not acceptable. Such a society has never existed and will never come about, critics say. So, calling for it is utopian, silly, and hopeless. Libertarianism is thus not serious or realistic. How do you deal with this criticism? It may be helpful to use a comparison to show that this criticism is not fair. Point out to your listener that there's nothing utopian, or impractical, about spelling out and advocating an ideal. Take the issue of murder. Murder has plagued human society forever. Yet virtually everyone is against murder. All of us want to live in a society where murder does not occur. We do not believe that an occasional murder or two is acceptable and should be tolerated. We don't believe murder is sometimes all right, if it is used to achieve one's personal goals. We are, all of us, absolutists on this issue. Yet no one considers this 100% anti-murder position wildly impractical or utopian -- just the opposite. Being against murder -- all murder -- obviously does not mean that you think that all murder can be banished from human society. Rather, our common belief that all murder is wrong is the statement of an ideal, a goal, that lets us plan steps to move in that direction. In the same way, it is not utopian or unrealistic to advocate a libertarian society, a society in which force and fraud are outlawed, a society in which all people are free to live as they choose as long as they don't interfere with the lives or property of others. Indeed, defining such a society, and advocating this ideal, is a necessary step in building a freer world. This vision becomes our map, our blueprint, our North Star -- a necessary guide to make sure our political efforts are moving in the right direction. It is also a measuring stick we can use to judge our present society. Thus, having a political vision is not at all utopian. It's as practical and necessary as having a map for a journey, or a blueprint for constructing a building. Our vision will guide us accurately to an ever-freer world. What could be more practical than that? Of course, you still have to convince your listener that a more libertarian world is a desirable goal. But this handles the objection that your commitment to that goal is somehow utopian and therefore self-obviously absurd.
One of the most successful rhetorical victories in politics in recent years was the renaming of the "Estate Tax" to the "Death Tax." At the recent Libertarian Party national convention,
presidential aspirant George Phillies
Phillies called for an end to "the Grandchild Tax." What is the Grandchild Tax? Phillies describes it as "the most heinous of all taxes, the Grandchild Tax, which hides under the name 'National Debt.'" Why call the National Debt the Grandchild Tax? Phillies explains: "The National Debt is the ultimate in taxation without representation. We spend the money. Our grandkids get the bill, labeled 'interest on the national debt.' The Grandchild Tax is a terrible gift for our grandchildren and others yet unborn. We should end the Grandchild Tax and pay our own bills." The phrase "Grandchild Tax" has many strengths. It graphically and dramatically tells who pays the National Debt. It pulls at our emotions. It demands responsibility of us. It paints a vivid picture. When we think of "National Debt," the only picture that pops in our minds may be a graph or chart. But when we hear "Grandchild Tax," we see something far more real: innocent children being robbed of their future. Taxation without representation. And we may feel the need to stop that robbery. Too many people learned in school that the National
Debt is okay because "we owe it to ourselves." Using the term Grandchild
Tax helps wipe out that fallacy and awakens us to the intergenerational
unfairness of the National Debt.
An old libertarian joke provides a quick, funny and
persuasive look at the difference between conservatives, liberals, and
libertarians:
As Ron Paul recently noted in the Congressional Record, the World's Smallest Political Quiz is "one of the freedom movement's most recognized and effective outreach tools." You've probably seen the World's Smallest Political Quiz on the Web. But have you seen the original -- and still wildly popular -- card version? That little card has become the single most popular libertarian outreach tool. No libertarian should leave home without it! The most popular version is the size of a small index card. It fits perfectly in your shirt pocket or your daily planner. It has a handsome, eye-catching design -- and it is packed with information. On the front of the card is the famous Diamond Chart,
the ten Quiz questions, instructions for t On the back are quotes from the Washington Post and USAtoday.com, attesting to the validity of the Quiz. Under that is a brief description of what the Quiz is, and why it was created. That is followed by links to sites where users can discover more about the Quiz, libertarian ideas, and related matters. In short, the Quiz is an eye-catching, fun, enlightening, self-contained outreach package -- all on a single pocket-sized card! People love to take the Quiz. Once they see it, they just *have* to find out how they score. And then they're eager to talk about it. There's no trickery, no deception. The scores the Quiz produces are remarkably accurate. That accuracy is a big part of what makes the Quiz so valuable and so effective. So put this tested, proven and inexpensive little tool to work for you. Keep some handy with you at all times. Hand them out to friends, family members, and others. Pop them in your letters. Use them in political campaigns. Leave stacks of them where people can see them. Use them at literature tables, or as handouts after speeches. Send copies to local newspaper columnists -- it will open their minds and many times has resulted in news stories. The opportunities are endless. Former Advocates president Carole Ann Rand says she never begins a serious political conversation without first asking the person she's talking with to take the Quiz. It quickly elevates the conversation to a whole new level. Advocates supporter Jon Osborne, who has distributed thousands of Quizzes, says: "The Quiz is a tremendous tool for me. I always carry Quizzes with me. I've discovered that whenever I want to explain what libertarianism is, I can do it in about 30 seconds with the Quiz --- and on top of that, I can identify people who are libertarians. This is highly effective outreach!" The Quiz is a great tool to quickly and easily explain the ideas of libertarianism - and to stretch minds and stir up new political thinking. You can see the Quiz, and
purchase Quizzes, at our
online Liberty Store: Word Choice: "Consensual Crime Laws" instead of "Victimless Crime Laws" Libertarians believe people should be free to live in any peaceful way they choose, as long as they don't initiate force or fraud against others. Libertarians thus oppose laws that forcibly prevent people from engaging in activities that don't harm anyone (except possibly those who choose to engage in them). Examples are laws against gambling, prostitution, pornography, and drug use. Such laws are most often called "victimless crime" laws, because, although the acts are illegal, there is no victim. This term distinguishes them from crimes that do have victims, such as robbery, fraud, murder, and rape. Often, however, using the term
"victimless crime" can get you into a silly, tedious and seemingly
A way to avoid that useless argument -- or to get out of it if you find yourself caught in it -- is to use the phrase "consensual crime laws" instead of "victimless crime laws". I first heard this phrase from the late bestselling libertarian author Peter McWilliams. McWilliams defined a consensual crime in this way: "Any activity -- currently illegal -- in which we, as adults, choose to participate that does not physically harm the person or property of a nonconsenting other." The phrase "consensual crime laws," coupled with a plain definition like that, clarifies what you are talking about. And it doesn't automatically raise the knee-jerk response "there are no truly victimless crimes." Peter McWilliams discussed the issue of consensual crimes in his wonderful book Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in Our Free Society. There is much wisdom in that book, and it
is available free online at:
Defending liberty sometimes means defending the rights of people to do things you, and many other people, may personally consider immoral, reprehensible, stupid, and self-destructive. The great 19th century libertarian Lysander Spooner put the libertarian view succinctly: "Vices are not crimes." Libertarians defend the rights of people to engage in activities such as prostitution, pornography, and drugs. Libertarians defend the free-speech rights of bigots to spread their hatred in their publications. All of this is vital, and even heroic. Many important battles for liberty are fought on these issues. But in doing this, it's important to remind many audiences of one key point: just because libertarians believe an activity should be *legal* does not mean we necessarily think it is *moral* or wise.
For some audiences it is crucial that you make this
distinction very clear. You should also be careful not to leave yourself
open to the charge that you *support* a controversial activity you
believe should be legal, if in fact, you do not.
Sometimes, in our passion to defend the rights of individuals engaged in such activities, we may fall into the trap of sounding too much like we are *advocating* those activities. We may unintentionally sound like "libertines" instead of "libertarians." This can turn some audiences away from our ideas. The ringing defense of free speech often attributed to Voltaire -- "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -- is a good guideline for libertarians. We are on the side of freedom, even for activities we may personally disagree with. Christian libertarians can agree with non-Christians that prostitution should be legal. Opponents of drug use can support drug relegalization. Anti-racists can defend the free-speech rights of the Ku Klux Klan. Saying something should be legal is not the same as saying it is moral or wise. By making this clear, you can build rapport with your audiences -- and win them to your side.
Libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick was one the most respected and influential philosophers of the past century.
"The trouble with government regulation of the market is that it prohibits capitalistic acts between consenting adults." That's a wonderful phrase: "capitalistic acts between consenting adults." It can be very useful in discussing free market ideas with our friends on the left. Many on the left say they believe any acts "between consenting adults" should be legal. They are referring to such activities as drugs, sex, prostitution, pornography, and so on. Here they agree with libertarians. Adding "capitalistic acts" to the commonly-used phrase "between consenting adults" is a marvelous twist -- and can potentially expand our areas of agreement. The resulting phrase is eye-opening, thought-provoking, paradigm-shifting. At the very least it can help those on the left better understand what libertarians believe. And it may win them over to our side on some issues. You could also point out that such activities as prostitution, pornography, and drug use all have strong economic components. One could hardly purchase drugs if they were not manufactured and sold, for example. A useful variation on Nozick's phrase might be something like this: "I believe that all voluntary, consensual, non-violent economic exchanges between adults should be legal." That puts the onus on your opponents to justify and defend the use of government force to interfere in the peaceful and personal choices of adults -- a position many will find uncomfortable. Learn Robert Nozick's little phrase and put it in your communication toolbox! (PS: Let me take a moment to point out, as most of you already know, that just because libertarians believe an activity should be *legal* does not mean we necessarily think it is *moral* or wise.) Soft drink commercials use them. So do lobbying groups. And you should, too. I'm referring to celebrity endorsements. Celebrity endorsements are extremely powerful, especially when targeted to an appreciative and appropriate audience. That's why businesses use celebrities to sell their products -- and why successful political movements use celebrities to advance their agendas. You can do this for libertarian ideas. The Advocates has made it easy! We have a "Libertarian Celebrities and VIPs" Web site.
There you'll find hundreds of prominent people --
including some
You can easily and effectively put this to use. Instead of just saying "I'm a libertarian," you can say to your movie-fan friend: "I agree with Clint Eastwood: people should be free to live their lives in any peaceful way they wish." To your conservative or economics-minded friend: "Like Milton Friedman, I believe the War on Drugs is a failure on both moral and economic grounds." Our list is extensive. We have authors, movie and TV stars, rock stars, syndicated columnists, and more. Share them with your friends. Sprinkle their names in your conversations. Use their quotes in letters to the editor and speeches. Rightly or not, people care about what famous people say and do and think. Its not that people will become libertarian simply because Clint Eastwood is one. But quoting a celebrity gets your foot in the door. People know that celebrities rely on their good names to maintain their position as celebrities. So prominent public figures wont endorse a product (or an idea) unless they truly believe that product or idea is legitimate and wont discredit the spokesman. In this way, a celebrity endorse lends credibility and believability. Thus, a person hearing about libertarianism for the first time will be far less suspicious of the label if its already been tried out by someone who is putting their reputation on the line. There's a reason why soft-drink and sneaker companies have celebrity spokespersons as do endless numbers of political groups. It works. So why not put that proven strategy to work advancing freedom? Go ahead -- be a name-dropper for liberty! Word Choice: Separation of SCHOOL and State There are lots of ways to describe the libertarian position on education. Parental choice in education. Privatization of education. Getting government out of education. One of the most powerful ways to state this is to use the phrase "separation of school and state." Everyone is familiar with the phrase "separation of *church* and state." It is a bedrock principle of a free society. It has very positive connotations for most listeners. "Separation of *school* and state" has the same ringing sound. It is clear and bold. Using the phrase will grab your listeners' attention.
You can then tell them you favor this for exactly
You can then, of course, add to your argument the many other reasons why private education is far superior to government education. An additional benefit is that the phrase has grown enormously in popularity. In 1994, when Advocates Founder Marshall Fritz first created an organization called the Alliance for the Separation of School and State, the phrase was obscure. Now, however, it is beginning to be widely used. It represents a growing national movement. A Google search finds nearly 27,000 entries for the term. "Separation of school and state" is one of those magic phrases that win attention, open minds, and provide listeners an instant "aha!" insight. It isn't appropriate for all times and audiences. No phrase is. But it packs a powerful punch in the right circumstances. (To learn more arguments for the separation of school
and state, visit: Add the Eye-Catching Animated Quiz Graphic to Your Web Site Put our eye-catching animated Quiz
graphic at you Web site, blog, or online journal --
It's easy and it only takes seconds. Just
visit this page: ... and right-click on the animated Quiz GIF to download it. Then place the Quiz GIF at your Web site. That's all there is to it! Your visitors can then click on it and take the Quiz -- and also, if they wish, learn about the ideas of liberty from the great resources we've assembled. Use the amazing power of the world's most popular libertarian outreach tool to help spread the ideas of liberty. Whether you have a several visitors a day or several thousand, the cumulative effect of thousands of links to the Quiz brings the libertarian message to vast numbers of people around the world. Over 13,000 sites already link to the Quiz -- ranging from small sites to huge ones. They are all making a difference. Make *your* Web site part of this exciting outreach!
I still remember the first time I heard someone use the term "government schools" instead of "public schools." It stunned me. Wow! What an immediate and powerful insight! And how true it is. So-called "public schools" are
actually government schools.
With government ownership comes, inevitably, a host of evils: repeated failures, lack of innovation, coercion, lack of accountability, political manipulation, indoctrination, hostility to many deeply-help personal or religious convictions... and much more. Most people know this to some degree nowadays. The increasing failure of government schools has opened them to more criticism in recent years than ever before. However, we have grown up in a society where state-controlled schools are the norm, are known by the misleading label "public schools," and are constantly praised (usually even when criticized). Using the term "government schools" blasts through this, and can open your listeners' minds and leave them wanting to learn more. Once people wake up to the fact that "public" schools
are actually *government* schools, and understand the full consequences
of that, they will be far more open to considering alternatives. A great source for such information is the Alliance for the Separation of School and State, which was founded by Advocates Founder Marshall Fritz.
Several years ago my friend Jim Cox, author of the great book The Concise Guide to Economics, introduced me to a word I'd never heard before: "re-privatization." What a useful word! Libertarians, of course, have long advocated privatization of government services, and privatization has become a familiar notion to the public. Some listeners and audiences respond very positively to the concept of privatization. When speaking to such listeners, using the words "re-privatization" or "re-privatize" gives you the opportunity to create a mind-opening "Aha!" moment for them. Here's why. Many services that the government currently monopolizes or dominates have been provided very effectively in the past by the free market. To name just a few: public utilities, education, care for the poor and needy, currency, retirement savings, health care, many licensing and inspection services, roads, passenger trains... the list is almost endless. However, because of decades of government monopoly, many people now think these services can only be provided by government, or, at the least, have never before been provided by the market. Saying you favor the "re-privatization" of a service gives your listener an immediate and valuable insight. They are instantly made aware that, sometime in the past, the market has actually provided the particular service you're referring to. Of course, you must then be ready to back that up -- to show how and when the private sector did provide the particular service you want to "re-privatize." And you must be able to tell your listener that not only is the "re-privatization" you advocate possible, but that it is desirable -- that they will be better off. But the word "re-privatization" is a great way to get that conversation started. Thanks, Jim!
While speaking for liberty, have you ever worried that you might sound like a broken record -- saying the same things over and over again? It's a common concern of many people who have the opportunity to speak out for liberty -- whether it's for a candidate, for an initiative or referendum, against a tax increase or stadium bond, or appearing before the city council. We might think that we always need fresh material, new things to say. In fact, it's best to say the same old thing! (That
is, if your "same old thing" is a tried and true soundbite for liberty.
Learn how to develop your soundbites here: Once you're comfortable with your soundbite and able to deliver it persuasively and with conviction, the key is to say it over and over and over again. There are two reasons to do this: 1. People are listening who have never heard it before. If you've gotten your point down to your best shot, you want as many people as possible to hear it. 2. For those who've already heard it, the repetition
reinforces the messages and makes it more likely that the listeners will
remember it. People may even start quoting you!
The late great Harry Browne was an expert at this. Some libertarians complained "I've heard him say that same sentence before," but those critics didn't realize the two points above. Harry was able to greatly multiply the effectiveness of his well-developed points by repeating them to as many people as possible. If you follow the Ron Paul campaign, you'll notice that Congressman Paul does the same thing -- driving home his key points, time and time again. So, go ahead -- sound like a broken record. It's sweet music to liberty-loving ears!
Ron Paul, like most libertarians, favors a foreign policy of peaceful non-intervention in the internal affairs of other nations. Unfortunately, this is too often described as "isolationism." Ron Paul vigorously disagrees that this term describes his views. And, although some libertarians still use that word, I believe Paul is right to reject it. "Isolationism" has many negatives. For decades in
America, "isolationism" has been a smear word. And in fact, many U.S. isolationists in the past weren't just for political non-intervention. They wanted to restrict trade and travel. To build a "wall" around America, creating a so-called "Fortress America." Some even felt America should be totally self-sufficient: trading with no one. None of that, of course, has anything to do with libertarian foreign policy views. Libertarians favor free trade, the freedom to travel, diplomacy, and lively and ongoing cultural interaction with people worldwide. A far better word for this is "non-intervention." Libertarians are "non-interventionists." That's still a clumsy word, unfortunately, and it is better understood when coupled with a short description of what it means, such as I gave two paragraphs ago. It's also sometimes helpful to describe this as "America's original foreign policy" or "the Founder's foreign policy," and to quote the classic Jefferson line: "peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none." Some wit once said that the difference between "isolationists" and "non-interventionists" is that the former are hermits, while the latter are gentlemen. Ron Paul has put it very well: "Non-interventionism is not isolationism. Non-intervention simply means America does not interfere militarily, financially, or covertly in the internal affairs of other nations. It does not mean that we isolate ourselves; on the contrary, our founders advocated open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations." (More by Ron Paul on non-intervention: Finally, it is sometimes useful to point out that the current U.S. foreign policy of endless intervention in the affairs of other nations, U.S. troops and military bases in almost every nation, sanctions, trade barriers, travel restrictions, and aid to tyrants and dictators is increasingly isolating America from the rest of the world. In this sense, the true "isolationists" actually are the interventionists. When someone labels libertarians as isolationists, they are knowingly or unknowingly smearing us and misrepresenting our views. This should be corrected, in a friendly and persuasive way, so our true ideas can be understood and embraced.
There are many fallacies and misconceptions about libertarianism.
Unfortunately, they often prevent people from embracing liberty. What nonsense! Libertarians not only acknowledge the
existence and the necessity of society, we celebrate it, and defend any
and all peaceful, voluntary relationships. And we understand the vital role of non-business
social organizations like families, churches, charities, book clubs,
community theaters, civic groups and so on. In fact, libertarians are *the greatest defenders* of the vast network of personal and economic voluntary interactions that makes up society. Libertarians oppose, as Rothbard put it, only "the compulsory pseudo-'cooperation' imposed by the State." So the next time you hear this bizarre and bogus fallacy, correct it -- using the polite and persuasive communication techniques the Advocates teaches, of course. And maybe invite your questioner to an upcoming libertarian meeting, where they'll see lots of libertarians acting, not as atomistic individuals, but as members of a group, cooperating to defend society and create a freer world. (NOTE: For a lengthy and scholarly rebuttal of the
"atomistic individual" notion, see this excellent article by Cato's Tom
Palmer: Don't Begin with an Apology Once you've given them an honest, positive description of libertarianism they'll be able to clearly see the benefits of liberty. And if they hear negative things about libertarianism, or have concerns, they can ask you -- or, even better, they'll correct the misconceptions themselves! Overcoming Fear of Public Speaking The liberty movement needs more public speakers, and maybe you would like to be one of them. Great! But you might find yourself nervous about the idea. If so, you're not alone. You know how
deer freeze in their tracks when they see headligh It's normal to be nervous before making a speech. But don't let it stop you. Here are a few tips that will help control your nervousness: 1. The biggest thing that will set you at ease is confidence that your speech is a good one and you can deliver it effectively. To create that confidence, do these things: * Plan your speech. Outline the speech in advance. Then write out your entire speech and read it out loud to see how it sounds, before you begin learning it. * Time your speech. Know the time allotted for you, and make sure you don't go over the time limit. Allow extra time for audience response, particularly if you're using humor (because, hopefully, the audience will interrupt you with laughter!). * Practice, practice, practice. Give your speech in front of a mirror. Record your speech and play it back to yourself so you can assess your progress. * Be ready. Look forward to sharing your thoughts with others. Remember that you have something valuable to say. Remind yourself that you are prepared. 2. Right before the speech, use these techniques to get ready: * Take deep, slow breaths and relax as much as possible before it's your turn to speak. * Let your nervousness work for you. If you pay attention to the physical effects of nervousness you'll notice that they are very similar to the physical effects of excitement. Tell yourself you're not nervous -- you're excited! * Visualize yourself giving a great speech and your audience enjoying and benefiting from it. 3. Finally... take the plunge! Over and over again. Take advantage of every opportunity to speak, and give the same speech numerous times. As Tony Robbins says, "Repetition is the mother of Mastery." You'll improve each time -- and experience will prove to you that you can succeed. There are few things as satisfying as
successfully delivering a speech. It's a great feeling. Go for it! For some audiences, the word "capitalism" is a
positive word, and is fine to use. If there are liberals or liberal-leaning people or
young people in your audience, the word "capitalism" likely will not
convey your message to them, and will likely turn them off. Further, in today's world, far too much "capitalism"
is actually "state capitalism" or "crony capitalism," where big
businesses partner with the government for legislation that gives them
unfair advantages in the marketplace. And this is something libertarians
strongly oppose. (This arrangement, of course, is what produces a lot of
the negative imagery I mentioned above.)
This is one of the things that the late,
Libertarian philosopher Tibor Machan puts another spin on the same notion: "People tend to be more interested in what you have to say if they already know what kind of wine you like." It's common knowledge that people will be more likely to try a new product, or a new idea, if someone they know and respect suggests it. That's as true of political ideas as it is of restaurants or jogging shoes. So one of the best ways to help people become open to our ideas is to first let them get to know you as friendly, nice, interesting, interested, and helpful. Then, when they find out you are also a libertarian, they'll be interested in learning more. The ideas will be "vetted" because they already respect you. Yes, it's simple, it seems obvious -- but how many of
us practice this as often as we might? Be a good friend, relative,
neighbor, co-worker -- and your ideas will carry far more weight. How refreshing this will be to your audience! It's not often that people encounter this kind of honesty -- and they appreciate and respect it. You now have the opportunity to let your audience know there is a large libertarian movement, where such questions have been discussed and answered. Tell them there are dozens of libertarian think tanks and organizations, and thousands of publications from libertarians on every conceivable topic -- including this one. Let them know you will find the answer and get back to them right away. If you don't already have it, be sure to get contact information for the questioner and follow up promptly. You've turned a difficult situation into an opportunity for further contact, and you've shown yourself to be human, honest, and reliable. Congratulations!
One day, you're going to be asked: "Just what is a libertarian, anyway?" It may happen while you're calling into a talk radio show. "So tell us,", the host may ask you. "What do libertarians believe, anyway?" Or you may be running for office and a reporter gives you the opportunity to "define yourself" for his story. Your answer could be very important. It might reach thousands. Or it might reach just one person who is very important to you. Don't hope for inspiration. Instead, be prepared. Have a clear, short, persuasive and easy-to-understand definition on the tip of your tongue. I strongly suggest you *memorize* your favorite definition -- and practice delivering it -- so you don't have to even think about it when asked. That's what two of America's most successful libertarian communicators -- presidential candidates Harry Browne and David Bergland -- both told me they did. You can write your own definition. You can also use someone else's, or modify someone else's to fit your own style. Here's some definitions to try on for size: The American Heritage Dictionary: "One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state." Here's what I usually say: "Libertarianism is, as the name implies, the belief in liberty. Libertarians believe that you own your own life and property, and you have the right to make your own choices as to how you live your life -- as long as you simply respect the same right of others to do the same. We believe in individual liberty and limited government." And here's a great one from David Bergland: "Libertarianism is what you probably already believe. Libertarian values are American values. Libertarianism is America's heritage of liberty, patriotism and honest work to build a future for your family. It's the idea that being free and independent is a great way to live. That each of us is a unique individual, with great potential. That you own yourself, and that you have the right to decide what's best for you. Americans of all races and creeds built a great and prosperous country with these libertarian ideals. Let's use them to build America's future." Find more great short definitions.
"Cross-Dressing" For Liberty You'll likely get nowhere talking with the conservative about civil liberties and the right of an individual to decide what goes into his body. And you may scare the liberal half to death if you start talking about bearing arms. There's a better way. Dubbed "political cross-dressing" by persuasion coach and author Michael Cloud, it dramatically increases your chances of changing someone's mind. (And no, it doesn't require changing your clothes.) The key is to tailor your message to your audience. Think about the specific concerns of the person you're talking to. Conservatives are typically concerned about law and order and about economic issues. Liberals are typically concerned about civil rights and taking care of those less fortunate. Fortunately, libertarian solutions address ALL of these concerns. To the conservative, talk about the tremendous cost of the drug war, the fact that it actually causes more crime, that it diverts law enforcement resources away from fighting violent crime, and that it actually makes drugs more available to children. To the liberal, present the idea that guns can -- and often do -- protect the weakest among us. Talk about guns being "equalizers" for women, give examples of totalitarian governments disarming citizens, show gun ownership as a civil liberty. So lead with your strong suit! You'll start out on the same page as
your listeners, and they'll be much more open to seeing the issue from a
different perspective.
Making
Libertarianism a Brand Name These companies want you to think of *their* stores and *their* products when you are ready to buy. And they want you to come back. Again and again. For the same reason, when you are talking or writing about libertarian ideas, use the words "libertarian" or "libertarianism." This accomplishes two vital things. 1) It helps people become aware of those words. It helps them
understand that
2) Unless you brand your idea as libertarian, your letter to the
editor or your conversation may become an "ad" for conservatism or
liberalism instead of libertarianism. Listen Up! The Benefits of Listening One of the most important -- and frequently overlooked, and
surprisingly difficult -- secrets of truly successful communication is
LISTENING. |
mers. 
used
a brilliant phrase that is just as powerful -- on a more important
issue. 
rals want the government to be your Mommy. Conservatives want
government to be your Daddy. Libertarians want the government to treat
you like an adult."
guilt-ridden, wildly overly-protective Mommy who, in order to protect
you from any conceivable harm or error, constantly and severely
restricts your freedom. This authoritarian Mommy also wants to force you
to be "generous" to others. Should you disobey, this Mommy will punish
you just as severely as her authoritarian conservative Daddy
counterpart. 
aking the Quiz, and an
explanation of what your score means. 
endless semantical argument. Someone will invariably tell you that there
really is no such thing as a "victimless crime" and that gambling, drug
use, and other vices are NOT victimless crimes. There are victims, you
will be told. These victims include unhappy, hurt or embarrassed friends
and family members; people who are offended by the very existence of
gamblers, drug users and prostitutes; damage to the moral structure of
society; and so on. 
Libertarianism is a political philosophy. It argues
that drug use and prostitution and so forth should be legal; it does not
tell us whether these activities are wise or moral. 
In his 1974 masterpiece
Anarchy, State
and Utopia, he wrote this: 
of the most famous celebrities in the world -- who are
proud libertarians. You'll also find quotes in which they declare their
enthusiasm for libertarianism. 
the same reason you
favor separation of church and state: because education -- the molding
of the minds and souls of our children and citizens -- is far too
important to put into the hands of government. And far too easy for the
government to abuse. Government education is as dangerous and as
inappropriate as government religion. 
and it will work for
liberty, 24 hours a day! 
They are owned and operated by government.
Every employee is a government employee. The textbooks and lesson plans
are dictated by the government. 
In many circles it is associated with hostility towards foreign nations
and cultures, nativism, and ignorance. 
detached from all others, totally
autonomous, completely self-reliant and self-sufficient. That
libertarians want a dog-eat-dog world devoid of human relationships,
cooperation, or social interactions -- a world without society. 
honest!"
ts?
Well, rumor has it that it's not because they're afraid of cars -- it's
because they think the light is a spotlight and they're expected to give
a speech! 
elching poisons and destroying the environment. They may
actually picture ugly, greedy men smoking huge cigars! For many the word
evokes anger, resentment and fear. 
great Karl
Hess -- one of the most influential libertarians of the past century --
often talked about: the importance of being a "good neighbor." In his
West Virginia rural community, Hess pitched in and helped his neighbors
build barns and do other chores. As a result, they liked this friendly,
helpful neighbor -- and they respected his out-of-mainstream libertarian
ideas. 
ome
point in your conversations about liberty with friends, or in speeches
about freedom to the public, you're probably going to be asked a
question you don't know the answer to.
Speaking of our libertarianism.com site, keep that URL in mind! It's
very useful to be able to add, after your definition: "If you want to
learn more about libertarianism, there's a Web site that can answer your
questions: 
libertarianism is a distinctive political philosophy --
a political "brand." 