Replies

You are going to have to be prepared to dump all the PC stuff the mainstream Conservatives are saddled with.

...

You up to that Peter?

...

otherwise

what’s the point...just more losing strategy

You've wacked the nail on the head... precisely.

That is the point.

Now, I've remembered some "basics" about gettin' things done; this is not nearly as bad as it might at first appear.

"You're crazy Pieter". No way, it's possible.

Easy: minority conservatives. Remember them ? What we're for is the truth - free enterprise is colorblind.

You don't have to make relationships with every single person in town. You just need to start making relationships, one at a time. Those people become the leaders in their town. Think about it - every city and town across the whole nation - has small businesses and small business owners, and more than a few will agree with the worldview of basic Judeo-Christian Western Civilization. They do not like lazy people mooching their tax dollars from the government, or unnecessary regulation shakedowns, or corruption, or crime, or sending tax dollars overseas to foment revolution, or one-world government, or high property taxes, or not being able to defend their shops and stores, etc.

A big opponent will be unions, as well as the radical left. Big time.

But we're a think tank. Our journal of white papers will be sold by subscription - to those who want to read it. Our papers will be written in a scholarly manner, not in a vulgar manner. They need to be researched so they present data, facts, analysis and perhaps hypotheses. We're seeking to convince intellectuals with them. As far as marketing campaigns or symposiums, marketing is not developed to turn people off, but to convince them to agree. I envision seminars or symposiums, but they will be business get togethers where you have to pay a few bucks to get in. I frankly see no issues there. People listen to the speakers, clap at the end and then discuss. I can think of dozens of ways to go with that in terms of gaining interest and generating revenue while we're at it.

Other groups that agree with our viewpoint or mission may have relationships with us. Well, if we find some, and they can use policy and strategy consulting or offer some service to us - great. They may be doing more active advocacy, like say organizing rallies. They might see confrontations, but a think tank is "thinky-work", we won't.

Perhaps you're concerned about having a website shut down, or getting sued over it ? The public site is only going to have the "convincing" marketing (the journal in it's entireity would be pay-only). Take the idea of welfare "victimhood". The argument there is made that welfare is actually hurting it's recipients, as well as the rest of society, and our papers lay out the case for helping everyone. We would not be saying anything nasty about the recipients, but the government and it's backroom influencers that foist addiction to counter-productive behavior. And most every small business (insert researched percentages here) pays for that with higher taxes. That gets passed on to consumers. And high prices hurt people more the poorer they are. Good business is good for everyone. Efficient and effective government is good for everyone - and by definition (since government's only revenue source is a burden on everyone either directly or through higher prices) that means the smallest government that can deliver what it needs to. (By government I mean government and it's law book).

Perhaps it's a bucket of ice cold water in the face, but it's well-written, matter-of-fact analytical tone.

Perhaps you're thinking of the possibility of watered-down principles showing up in the white papers ? I have some good starter ideas on selecting an editorial committee and thorough review process for papers to be accepted for publishing. If some contributors can't seem to get papers accepted by the committe they get dropped. Ownership will be only staunch supporters of pure, radical small business free-market principles. Large corps, politicians - and other potentially conflicted supporters - would only be "subscription-only" members and pay a nominal subscription fee. This and other restrictions will prevent any conflicted interests from having any influence on the organization.

This is a very high-level effort, very long-term, with a very broad scope of effect. It starts out having no influence on anything. It gets built into a well-known and respected brand that 1/3 the population says yuck to but another 1/3 loves. My vision is investigative research second to none in terms of subject matter, accuracy, truth and integrity which will eventually turn the group into the premier source for policy analysis and advocacy relating to free enterprise. Long term this will effect hearts and minds in business, schools, universities, churches and other segments of society (of course, some of the group's white papers will deal with bringing about such effects). The organization is not so much a solution, but a solution to generating and then disseminating solutions. I know New Jersey has a lot of people who would love to see the economy spruce up - it is in the cr@pper. Many people would like to get something going and they're willing to listen - especially those whose income would double or more (back to where it was) if things perked up. Many politicians who may not have the stomach for conservatism would have some big ears open if things could improve on their watch. If things work, suddenly everybody agrees with them. The whole point of this group is to explain the arithmetic of why most of our wacky liberal laws are working directly against us economically and need to be completely gone, not just moderated.

It gets built into a well-known and respected brand that 1/3 the population says yuck to but another 1/3 loves.

Your understanding that we do not have to appeal to all--the all things to all people fallacy--is the right one. After all, only 1/3 of the American people actually supported the successful Revolution.

But when you talk about an intellectual effort--as opposed to a form of mass appeal, in today's dumbed down intellectual climate--you cannot really target anything like a third, even of the small business community you seek to revitalize. The key is reaching & arming (intellectually) an articulate minority. In this, we may even learn something from the hard-core enemy playbook. Lenin took over Russia with 40,000 Bolsheviks working in concert at the end of 1917; but the force that actually built up to that, numbered only about 10,000, a year & a half earlier.

Just focus on what, say 50,000 articulate & informed Americans, working cohesively & persistently, to counter the prevailing economic & social fallacies, could accomplish. The broader sampling would more likely be several million Americans who loved the effort of that working group; several million who hated them; and 200 million, totally indifferent, watching their entertainment TV, and wondering (in moments of idle curiosity) what the future might hold.

I used to refer to the latter, in drawing historic parallels to the destruction of our heritage, as "cottage gawkers" in olden times, wondering what the invading army marching into their valley might mean for them, when trying to motivate student groups, etc.

William Flax