Here is the link to the original conversation:
https://pakpoliticaleconomy.com/?p=1774
As Jayant Bhandari and I conversed, a few others joined. Since they commented publicly, below are copied, though anonymously, what did they add.
Anonymous 1: “state fulfilling its constitutional role/responsibilities”, “Form a political party to work as an institution”. ??? How much longer can grown-ups believe in these fairy tales of a benevolent state controlled by a political process – when the reality, right before their eyes, is so different, and not in a good way?
Khalil Ahmad: I fear you miss the context of the discussion. The context is Pakistan and India, especially.
Anonymous 1: Pakistan and India – even more so. Transpose the western idea (a fairy tale, really) of a enlightened benevolent state responsive to political process inputs, and viola! – we have two examples of prosperity and peace – India and Pakistan
KA: First I didn’t talk of an “enlightened benevolent state, etc.” Second, calling something “fairy tale” makes no argument.
Anonymous 2: Here the discussion is getting technical so it is important to clearly differentiate State and Government. State is a territorial monopolist who, and through which we, can’t do any good because it’s very foundational basis, i.e., coercion, is immoral. You can’t rob peter to pay Paul. It’s failure on economic front is guaranteed because of ‘the impossibility of socialist calculation’.
Government is managing our day to day affairs, and that we can do voluntarily too. In market people govern themselves.
The goal for every Liberty lover is break-up of the State. The centralized monopolist. The goal is secession. Decentralization. The smaller the nation, the better. Since State itself is self-destructing itself, it is better to let it fall instead of giving it support by participating in its rituals like elections. Better aim at creating moral and better market alternatives. Ask people to buy Gold. Advocate home and unschooling. Tell people to read books and self-educate themselves. Go on preaching the message of Liberty without worrying for the masses to convert. When the state will come down under its own weight, we will be ready to provide better alternatives at least.
KA: Sorry for the delay.
But that’s all theory. I have moved in many a Libertarian circle, they all teach or preach that. Theory is great. Theory is fine. What Hayek suggested to Antony Fisher (Linda Whetstone), i.e. think-tanking, I practiced it for about a decade. That may be a life-style, not what we need to do, what we ought to do. First, I accepted the Atlas Network idea of Intellectual Entrepreneurship. But for certain reasons, now I advocate the idea of Political Entrepreneurship, that mainly aims at transforming ideas into political messages.
Also, while relaxing in theory, we forget where we stand, and where we want to go or reach, and to me traversing that distance involves politics, not think-tanking. I.e. how to bring and transform the theory into practice.
Anonymous 3: I sympathise with your views and don’t want to disagree. The methods you prescribe are honest and betray a belief in the inherent goodness of others. And therein lies in my opinion – your folly.
“When Asking for Help Appeal to People’s Self-Interest Never To Their Mercy or Gratitude. … Know that even the most powerful person is locked inside needs of his own, and that if you make no appeal to his self-interest, he merely sees you as desperate or, at best, a waste of time.”
Learn about >Bitcoin< and teach others about it. Please note that I am not asking anyone to invest in it even though that would also be a good idea. Those who understand it as the ultimate libertarian silver bullet and are prepared to let society evolve on its own in a Darwinian fashion will be amply rewarded. The important thing is to understand it from every angle – financial, computer science (not so much), philosophical, and political.
KA: My folly is not “inherent goodness of others” as you infer; my folly is: I believe in the moral substance of people.