Anyone who has been following me since my Rightward turn knows that one of the main strategies that I have been promoting is becoming politically active on the most local level specifically concentrating on Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s “What Must Be Done” strategy. The speech is available in print and audio. I comment on it here. In the simplest terms, Hoppe talks about getting enough people elected at the local level that you begin to the process of privatizing public services to the point where very little or nothing is government controlled/owned. He calls this his “10,000 Lichtensteins” strategy which has implications that I won’t get into here. I will mention that employing this strategy in predominantly Blue areas is near impossible at this juncture. I’m sorry. The point is, if you want an order that is not majority controlled by a monopolistic State, starting with the smallest chunk of it, the local government, makes more sense than taking on the Leviathan of the 202-area code.

Leaving the strategy of how this is done aside, the question always arises as to how the local population will respond when a small minority has technically “infiltrated” and commenced making drastic changes to the status quo. I believe 90% will “go along to get along.” History - and especially recent history - shows that the overwhelming majority of people will accept change as long as it doesn’t inconvenience them too much.

So, if 90% are on board, what about the other 10? I would wager to guess that 7% of them will take an active “wait and see” attitude. Those are the people the new leadership will keep an eye on and spend more time explaining the benefits of what they’re doing to.

That brings us to the 3%. History shows us that 3% can cause not only change, but trouble. These will be the whiners and the retarded Leftists. As an initial gesture, I would offer to pay them to relocate. If that request was denied, social pressure should be applied. Eventually the town may need to buy helicopters but hopefully that can be avoided (*winks* *shrugs shoulders*).

The point I’m trying to make here is that the overwhelming majority of people have proven to be pliable. Those who worry about how people would respond to radical change at the local level should take that into consideration. When it comes down to brass tacks, any action employed that is going to affect the populace has to consider the psyches of the individuals. The past 2.5 years should be a good indicator that most people are open to change, even change that is negative. The goal here is to radically improve their lives. We can do this.