The argument I would like to make to Max, Dwight, Grant, and anyone who is open to brainstorming in this direction, is that strictly speaking, I or we do not have to demand that anyone else change their ideology or convictions. We can proceed with our voluntary ways while others proceed with their coercive system. We don’t have to demand that they change it, and instead we can focus our energy on constructing our own communities.

For example, let’s say that libertarians had their own “million libertarian march” on Washington. Instead of making demands of statists, these million libertarians could all give each other a ten second shoulder massage after which they would each pay one another for said massage. Maybe the payment would be some kind of barter payment. After the march is over, all million libertarians would go home. They would have just established their own “free trade” agreement, right out in public for the world to see. There is no need to demand anything of anyone. It is all voluntary and coordinated action amongst like-minded people. The statists can still have all their laws in place. That is their business and their problem.

Now, the “million libertarian march” would be expensive for libertarians. They would have to pay for transportation, lodging, and food. Maybe this march is a good idea, and maybe it isn’t.

But this march needn’t be done in Washington. It could be done over Internet instead, and, Internationally. And then the cost would be very little. The cost would then be the time and effort of those involved. Libertarians can have a “million libertarian march” on the Internet, or something like this. They can establish their own community with other like-minded people, and this doesn’t have to entail any hostile actions or hostile demands toward others whatsoever. All statists can go about their business unharmed, and unharassed.

What kind of community might be established? How can this be best arranged so that it is easy for libertarians to do, but hard or even impossible for statists to prevent?

These are the ideas that I’m suggesting libertarians could be discussing. The idea is: what can we do? Not: what can we demand of nonlibertarians.

Liberty is not emerging because libertarians are seeing libertarianism as a program that seeks to change nonlibertarians into libertarians (by demanding that nonlibertarians change their morals, ethics, and laws). I think liberty will begin to emerge when we abandon the attempt to change the convictions of conscience of nonlibertarians, and focus instead on the beautiful forms of association that only we, as libertarians, know how to construct.

How to begin? What to construct? If libertarian minds begin to attack these problems, I think liberty might be something we begin to have, rather than something we only talk and write about.

Are you saying that coexisting societies are a reality, or that within the confines of existing State laws various creative collaborative efforts are underway?

If the the former, this would be, bar none, the most important story in the libertarian world. Regardless whether the mainstream press reported on it, in the libertarian blogosphere, this would be the number one story, every day, and we all would know about it.

My post wasn’t referring to the latter, which I think is what you are referring to.

I’m talking about coexisting societies, not the infinite possibilities within the existing legal framework.

Adam

Though as I’m reading Adam’s comment, this is already happening: WoW, Second Life, and all that. Items are traded in online communities which have real value in real life.

I’ll look for it today.

Adam