Pragmatism Inevitably Depends on a Principled Voter Base

I’m sorry. I was not going to post any more of these libertarian political strategy diatribes. However, I had an epiphany I feel must be shared. Ultimately, no amount of pragmatic political strategy will work until there is a solid libertarian voter block that cannot be swayed. The only way to build such a base is to convert more people to libertarianism.

In order to convert people to libertarianism, you must reflect on what it took to become a libertarian yourself. The true core of libertarianism is a deep desire to learn more and share that knowledge. You are not recruiting people to a political party. You are not recruiting people to an ideology. You are recruiting people to a lifetime of learning, discovery, and developing a better understanding of how the world works and people relate to one another and how we could improve human relationships without violence. Continue reading


While I would rather not comment on the absurdity that political discourse has become, I cannot stand by when the phrase “there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch” [TANSTAAFL] is being used to attack political opponents. The main purpose of TANSTAAFL is to remind people  to think outside the box and consider the entire picture.

TANSTAAFL is used by economists to discuss opportunity costs and how there are costs associated with even products or services that are advertised as free. The term is also used by scientists when discussing biological systems and energy systems. There is even a No Free Lunch Theorem in Machine Learning Systems.

In most instances, TANSTAAFL is used to encourage people to consider the consequences of decisions and how they affect the world around them. In Machine Learning, TANSTAAFL is used to remind programmers there is no perfect system. It is a reminder to avoid developing tunnel vision and consider other possibilities.

The Real Aleppo Gaffe

This isn’t about politics. This is about cognition and the societal biases that interfere with asking questions, and learning from mistakes. Yes, Gary Johnson made an error of thought. However, asking for clarification should not be frowned upon. The gaffe was not made by Johnson but by everyone who judged him for doing what we should all strive to do: seek better understanding. Continue reading

Make that 9%

According to the New York Times, only 9% of Americans voted for Hillary and Trump. Check out their interactive presentation.

Why should 9% of the population dictate to the rest of us that we must pick between these 2 candidates? That seems a bit absurd, especially when the approval ratings for these 2 candidates are so low. Rather, the stipulation should be placed on all of America to take the time to research 3rd party candidates and take them into consideration as well.