I have been contemplating a question for some time. The answer has, thus far, eluded me, so I am hoping some light can be shed here.
There seems to be two primary camps in the libertarian world. One camp applauds any step toward liberty. It wants to see the end of the state, it wants to see an end to the oppression and injustice created by federal authorities. It wants an AnCap, Voluntarist society, but it believes that no matter how much we yell for it to exist now, a voluntary society will not spring up overnight. So, it chooses to accept what it sees as a current reality, and to move towards liberty one issue at a time.
The second also sees AnCap voluntarism as the end goal. However, it sees any interim step as a half step, it sees anything short of absolute abolition of the state as a betrayal of the cause. Those who either advocate or welcome interim steps are statists and traitors. Incremental achievements are either simply propping up the state or utterly inadequate.
The first group is frequently denounced by the second as traitorous, statist, worthy of absolute contempt. This sentiment is, quite often, stated in absolutely clear terms. While the first is also guilty of name calling and ad hominem attacks, it appears to me that blatant contempt is most often conveyed by the second group towards the first. The exchanges quite often degenerate into vicious, personal attacks by both sides.
The position of the two groups is perfectly clear. The route towards liberty, as laid out by the first group, is relatively clear (incremental steps towards liberty until we reach the end goal). But I don’t see the route seen by the second group. What is the path to the AnCap, voluntarist society as envisioned by the second group? How do we get there from here? Do they simply plan on, at some point, a revolution which overthrows the current order in one grand event? If not, then what steps are acceptable, not seen as compromising or half measures? The second group, clearly, MUST have an understood path to an AnCap, voluntary society as no rational person expects something to happen from nothing, but what is the route?
What, then, is the path forward if not step by step? I have been unable to grasp how group two thinks we get there from here but would very much like to understand. Is the second group counting on revolution? If not, then what interim steps are deemed acceptable? To be absolutely clear, since writing can seem ambiguous, this is not some setup. I am not trolling for an argument. I am honestly seeking understanding here, as I have been unable to comprehend a realistic or rational route (other than incremental) on my own.
Many thanks in advance for your input.