Bryan Caplan’s views are here. I summarize and add some points below:
1. Violent revolution. Bad idea. Besides the moral problem aggression is to libertarians, who knows on which side of the canon you will be when revolution occurs? The long-run effect of revolution on freedom is normally negative.
2. Persuasion. The idea is that as the world goes the way of Greece, the effectiveness of persuasion goes way up, as people start looking for radical solutions to their radical problems. That’s if we stay friendly in our communication. Caplan thinks persuasion is useful at the margin, but for radical change, he thinks it’s a long shot even in the long-run.
3. Infilitration. Critique: See persuasion.
4. Capitalist propaganda. Pool resources with like-minded individuals to buy up media companies and spread your radical libertarian ideology through propogranda.
5. Agorism. What if a new invention/business model that makes it impossible to collect taxes is created? You get the idea.
6. Club. Create a national/worldwide fraternity only open to liberty-lovers for them to exchange exclusive information, services, arbitration, solidarity, job offers. It creates a parallel society where being a free man has more material and emotional benefits. Duplicates the effect of #3, #4 and #5.
7. Coordinated movement to change the median voter – e.g. the Free State Project. Might work, but the private cost of moving to another country/constituency is very high for most people.
8. Create your own society. “Start your own country” projects almost always fail. Charter cities and seasteading have some logistical and diplomatic advantages over playing Crusoe, but most people don’t want to move to a new city in a weird country, and almost no one wants to take to the high seas.
9. Strategic fertility. Standard twin methods find that political philosophy and issue views (though not party labels) are at least moderately heritable. But wait, there’s more: Since there’s strong assortative mating for political agreement, standard methods seriously understate the heritability of politics. The upshot is that if libertarians can get and keep their birth rates well above average, liberty will actually be popular in a century or two. And even if this plan to free the world fails, it will still create a bunch of awesome people. And even if I’m wrong about the power of nurture, having one extra child is probably easier than moving to New Hampshire, and certainly easier than moving to a seastead. Admittedly, if you want radical libertarian change in your lifetime, strategic fertility isn’t much help.
What is your opinion about these points? Do you have other ideas? Please post a comment below!