>>89941
>As someone who's spent far too long taking the more scholarly route you describe
It doesn't even have to be scholarly. A lot of libertarian stuff is just straightforward, commonsense stuff that you don't need a massive intellect or a PhD to grasp–it's just a matter of common sense being drilled out of most people in the public schools over certain issues. Because of that, you don't need to use force to educate a fair number of people about liberty. Just look at Ron Paul and how many people he influenced, basically with speeches alone. It's been almost nine years since his last bid for the White House, and with it the last time he had major publicity, but he's still influencing people today, and all with the kind of rhetoric that you might describe as scholarly. Further, while there are people that only ever respond to force, it's safe to just ignore them. Even if you manage to convert them to our side they wouldn't actually do anything, besides tacitly supporting what they see as the "winning" side once the dust settles. They're basically dead weight one way or the other, so there's no point wasting resources trying to convert them when that time and energy can be spent discussing the merits of freedom with someone halfway competent, who could actually help the movement.