Cancel Register Now Reset Password?
Advocates for Self Government Logo

1010 N Tennessee St
Suite 215
Cartersville, GA
30120-8528

Phone

(770) 386-8372

Fax

(770) 386-8373

Orders & Donations

(800) 932-1776

Quick Contact

info@theadvocates.org

Sign up for our Liberator Online Newsletter

The Liberator Online is full of expert tips and libertarian discussion. It’s the best way to stay current on breaking libertarian news.





Feed_icon_large

"Cross-Dressing" For Liberty

Published January 03, 2012 in Talking Points by Sharon Harris

What if you want to convince a conservative friend that the War on Drugs should end? Suppose you want to persuade a liberal relative that anti-gun laws are a bad idea?

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.


Showing 10 Comments

Pubilshed January 05, 2012 by Brian from Texas

Gravatar I actually know some Liberals who are pro-Second Amendment here in Dallas. One of them is even a concealed handgun instructor.

Pubilshed January 09, 2012 by Liberteric

Gravatar One of my Libertarian friends and I have been debating for several months the issue of abortion. I suppose it's the same issue that everyone has. As a Libertarian, I believe it's the governments right to protect the innocent and I believe an unborn child is as innocent as a child born six to nine months later. He believes it's an issue related to the mother's right to do as she wishes with her body, with no regard to the unborn baby. What is the position for "most" libertarians regarding this issue?

Pubilshed January 09, 2012 by Renny Arnold

Gravatar The government does not have rights

Pubilshed January 09, 2012 by NM

Gravatar GAG ME. Most liberals would not like hearing that guns are "equalizers" for women. That comment screams that women aren't equal to men in the first place. Strong women want to be "equal" on their own. Take a self-defense class -> that will give you an upper hand. Or just build a life in which everyone is on equal footing.

Pubilshed January 14, 2012 by Mary

Gravatar I consider myself to be a Libertarian and consider the idea that it is the governments right to protect the innocent to be the most obsurd statement I have every heard. I do NOT go around suggesting abortion as a solution to anyone!! I Never Would...But...If the government ever went into the business of protecting the innocent they would need to require individuals to be licensed before allowing them to breed. Why? think about the term innocent and you CAN NOT include only those being aborted. More children than I care to think about are abused, born addicted, unwanted, by mothers unequipped to raise them, not to mention those living in poverty, lacking housing...yes children are homeless, even in America children go to bed hungry, come home to empty houses because mom's at work and can't afford day care. Maybe instead of abortions you would like to take all of the children of unplanned, unwanted pregnancy... children who exist in EVERY community in America and start taking care of them... and I don't mean shuffling them around into foster homes. Our Goverment Can't Protect Them and YOU THINK putting abortions back into back alleys is the right directon for us to move our country. Whenever we make dictatates on the personal freedoms as basic as the right to our own bodies, we give others the right to make dictates on our personal freedoms. I'm not ready or willing to hand over my gun, that has never taken any life, I don't live in a violent neighborhood, I've never been attacked or seen anyone being attacked. I think most Libertarians view this issue as an arguement that the church needs to make, Not the government!!

Pubilshed January 15, 2012 by Luis

Gravatar Liberteric this is one of those libertarian issues where there isn't really a consensus. While I've heard people argue for both under the auspices of the right to life and the right to choose, I think the libertarian congressman from Texas has my favorite solution to this problem. Dr. Paul advocates leaving this issue to the states, while either camp could be upset that their "side" isn't the end all be all on the situation EVERYONE can be happy that the "tyranny" as it were is localized. By taking the issue to the local level the residents of the respective states can make their own choice on abortion, fight the local legislature to change (much easier than changing federal law), or move (vote with their feet). In Liberty, Luis

Pubilshed January 18, 2012 by Brandi

Gravatar Luis, I totally agree. But this is the way all issues should be. The Constitution tells us what the federal government CANT do to us and the states...not what the STATES cant do....What the States cant do is defined by the state constitution and people should be making a move on the state level before moving on the federal level. I have found that if you do not like the policies where you live you can move as it was meant by the founders. Abortion is wrong in my opinion based on my Christian values but God gave all of us free choice and I am not about to say that my choice to follow Him is more important than anyone else's right to chose. We all have to face the consequences.

Pubilshed January 18, 2012 by Guest

Gravatar Mary, I dont understand the hostility in your reply. Liberteric, you're right when you say it's the same issue that everyone has. Libertarians are no different. Some don't consider the fetus to be a human being and others do. Most of those that do are probably pro-life and those that don't are probably pro-choice. As for Mary. She's obviously an extremist. You can tell by how angry she gets by you suggesting that a fetus is innocent. I take it you're pro-life so if you are, the logical conclusion would be that it's the government's job to protect the fetus just as they protect others from what you would consider murder. If you aren't, it would be unfair to force the mother to carry a blob of tissue for nine months. I hope that helps.

Pubilshed January 18, 2012 by David Montané

Gravatar I think this is the only issue on which I disagree with Ron Paul. Not even the states should have the right to force a woman to suffer an unwanted pregnancy and birth a child. I like what Walter Block has written about this issue, which to summarize is that, from a private property rights standpoint, the woman's senior rights to evict a parasite from her body takes precedence over the junior rights of the fetus. However, if the pro-lifers were to develop technology that saves the fetus and cares for it in some other way that does not require the pregnant adult to come to full term and give birth, the woman should cooperate in this eviction process rather than to abort.

Pubilshed February 03, 2012 by Tim

Gravatar I'm in the middle on this. There's a point during the development of a fetus where it grows a brain and body. Before that point, is it really human? As a libertarian, I don't want to force my opinion on someone else and don't want others to force their opinion on me of exactly when that is.

Add Comment

You commenting as a guest Sign in

Get your own Gravatar

Advocates for Self-Government 1010 N Tennessee St Suite 215 Cartersville, GA 30120-8528 Phone (770) 386-8372 Fax (770) 386-8373 Orders & Donations (800) 932-1776

Contents copyrighted © The Advocates for Self-Government, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) educational organization. Donations tax-deductible in U.S. All rights reserved.

Powered by Blacksnow Media