So on Thursday we had the co-founder, James Chillemi (really nice guy), of Liberty Hangout on our live show to talk to us about why we should vote for Austin Petersen. I further elaborated my position on not voting with this article here. It seems that my predictions and ideas are proving themselves true in a way. This let down for those libertarians that still view politics as a political tool had me thinking as well. Where do we draw the line?
In conversations with other anarcho-capitalists that argue in favor of voting, the pragmatic argument that we must sacrifice some principles in order to save them comes up a lot. The incremental victory angle is championed as the best method for achieving individual freedom from Government. These people who view political action as a tool for incremental victory often point to how the left was able to gain so much power by this incremental method. But as I argued in my article on the matter, that’s because the lefts goals increase state power, therefore, those in control of the state are perfectly happy to let the left win. The anarcho-capitalist agenda is the abolishment of the state all together. Those in control of government that profit off of the racket are not going to let an “outsider” in that wishes to minimize, let alone abolish, its vehicle for immorally generating wealth for themselves. This was made evident by Ron Paul’s 2008 and 2012 runs along with Austin Petersen’s attempt at the LP nomination and what will be Gary Johnson’s run for president (more than likely).
But this made me think on what the anarcho-capitalists that want other anarchists to vote for Austin are thinking themselves. Their argument is that Austin, or any other LP candidate they are advocating for, does not align completely with my principles but they are the “lesser of evils” so I should vote for them for the sake of incremental victories. But if that is true, why are these people who are disappointed about Johnson getting the LP nomination upset themselves? Couldn’t the same argument be made for Johnson? Sure you wanted Austin or McAfee but Johnson aligns more with your ideals than Trump, Bernie or Hillary. So shouldn’t you now vote for Johnson now that he is the “lesser evil”? Let’s be honest though. What chance does Johnson himself have of winning the presidency? Should you vote for Trump or Hillary since one of them has the best chance of winning the presidency?
This is why I stick to my principles and convictions as an anarcho-capitalist. I’d rather be “foolish” in the eyes of those that are willing to sacrifice these principles than engage in a slippery slope argument that inevitably feeds the leviathan rather than slays it.