Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Free State Project

rated by 0 users
This post has 36 Replies | 4 Followers

Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285
SkepticalMetal Posted: Thu, Sep 20 2012 1:59 PM

I was wondering if anyone here would actually participate in the Free State Project. I originally thought that simply moving out of the country would be a better idea, but I think if we had a state with a bunch of like-minded people, then something like secession and what not would be too far-fetched (and New Hampshire's constitution doesn't specifically prohibit secession).

Just tell me what you think about it.

  • | Post Points: 95
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 312
Points 4,310
Chyd3nius replied on Thu, Sep 20 2012 3:18 PM

I think F4M made everyone here to hate Free State Project, which is really shame. FSP has huge potential.

-- --- English I not so well sorry I will. I'm not native speaker.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

Oh, didn't know anything about that. What's F4M?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 274
Points 5,675
My Buddy replied on Thu, Sep 20 2012 3:22 PM

A caveman with a computer.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 853
Points 17,830

I think the FSP has great potential. 

Hoppe talked about how it would accelerate a secession movement if there was a hot-button issue that could unite the people in a given area against the larger government.  The example he gave was Nevada (I think) and the issue of nuclear waste dumping.

In the absence of something like that, it's going to be a slower process.  I think a whole state is too large-scale to have any significant impact... I can't see any whole state declaring independence from the U.S. any time soon.  It would be better if secessionists would concentrate themselves even more, say into a town like Keene.  I wonder what would happen if a town of 23000 people were to declare independence and just stop sending tax money in and start ignoring government edicts.  How would the general public react?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,745
Wheylous replied on Thu, Sep 20 2012 3:41 PM

F4M was a past forum user who was a survivalist and extensively wrote on the internet why he hated technology and how humans violated the Law of Life and how civilization is collectivist.

As to the FSP, well, they have only 10k people annnnnd no influence :\

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

Wow. That's...disturbing.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 875
Points 14,180
xahrx replied on Thu, Sep 20 2012 3:56 PM

 

I wonder what would happen if a town of 23000 people were to declare independence and just stop sending tax money in and start ignoring government edicts.  How would the general public react?
 
Waco texas multiplied by 302.6315789473684.
"I was just in the bathroom getting ready to leave the house, if you must know, and a sudden wave of admiration for the cotton swab came over me." - Anonymous
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 853
Points 17,830

xahrx:

Waco texas multiplied by 302.6315789473684.

Can you explain what you mean by that?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 907
Points 14,795

Can you explain what you mean by that?

Probably that 76 people died during fire resulted from assault by federal agents in Waco, TX. Do the math...

The Voluntaryist Reader - read, comment, post your own.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 853
Points 17,830

Andris Birkmanis:

Can you explain what you mean by that?

Probably that 76 people died during fire resulted from assault by federal agents in Waco, TX. Do the math...

Ah, clever.

So do you think a mere declaration of indepedence by a town would result in a similar siege and re-assimilation?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 274
Points 5,675
My Buddy replied on Thu, Sep 20 2012 5:18 PM

Almost certainly. A state MIGHT be able to secede if it did it carefully, and even then it would be tricky.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 391
Points 6,975

I see potential for New England, minus Boston, over all. I hear that Vermont has a good number of socialists over in Vermont who are attempting something similar, albeit in an attempt to make full blown Vermont socialist. The area is beautiful, has low taxes, and is a small enough population size for a small number of people to influence it. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

Yeah, I've heard of that, I think it's called the Second Vermont Republic movement.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,288
Points 22,350

Well even if secession is impossible, at least there has been a little bit of progress:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/12892-new-hampshire-jury-nullifies-major-felony-marijuana-case

Jury nullification is probably the best (or only?) means of non-violent defence a libertarian populace has against the state.

The Voluntaryist Reader: http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com/ Libertarian forums that actually work: http://voluntaryism.freeforums.org/index.php
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 312
Points 4,310
Chyd3nius replied on Fri, Sep 21 2012 5:47 AM

I don't think that the secession is most important aspect of FSP. By simply having libertarians in one place instead of scattered in different states, it would be huge. Freedomfest is good example.

-- --- English I not so well sorry I will. I'm not native speaker.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 130
Points 2,105

First of all, the FSP itself has no opinion or policy on any particular issue. The entire purpose and goal is to get liberty-oriented people to come together, to concentrate individuals who pledge merely to work towards greater liberty. Once in New Hampshire, the FSP itself is out of the picture.

That said, the people who have come together thorugh the FSP have made the idea of simple liberty a front-page story over and over.

There are only some 12 FSP related people in the legislature here, of 435. That's not a big number, but what it has done is engage with the liberty-minded people already here to accomplish things.

For example, state spending last year decreased by 11%. This is a massive accomplishment!

Medical marijuana was sent to the governor's desk, and vetoed (by a democrat). There have been legislative hearings for such things as "No Victim No Crime", which would have put any and all victimless crimes into question.

New Hampshire, with no known FSP person on the jury, had the first explicit JURY NULLIFICATION of marijuana cultivation charges just a week or two ago. Judges are now required to explain Jury Nullificaiton to jurors.

Not much more than 1,000 people have moved, 11,000 people have signed up. Even if it stopped right here, rather than trying for 20K, and the 10K that haven't moved yet did, I think it would make a huge difference very quickly.

Seeing what 500 accomplished, and now 1,000, I would say that the FSP is already successful.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

Hmm. Assuming I stay in the states, NH might be a place to look in to.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 2
Points 40

I was initially dismissive, but then I became the state chair of a Libertarian party and saw first-hand how hopeless it was. After one year of that I decided to move, and did move within a couple weeks after the end of my term. That was in 2005, and it was one of the best decisions I ever made.

Since moving here I've participated in a whole heck of a lot more liberty activity, probably by a couple orders of magnitude. There's just so much more going on here. At first it was like "hey, there's multiple things to do each week!" (which was way more than the one or two things per month I was used to), but these days its more like "well, there's about a dozen things I could go do today but so many of them overlap that I can't possibly do more than 3 or 4".

There's all kinds of things going on, so no matter your liberty focus or favorite strategy, there's sure to be plenty going on to keep you busy and working with friendly freedom lovers.

Seriously, just move. Do it. Plan it right (i.e. don't show up here penniless and without skills) but do it.

Shire Silver - a better bullion - available now at http://ShireSilver.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, Sep 21 2012 9:37 PM

My Buddy:

A caveman with a computer.

Lmao, you win the internet today, sir ^_^

It's true, he used to rail against technology, cities, and modern diets and gen-mod foods, often talking about plans to go live off grid and eat a paleo-diet. He was also strongly muslim and made a case for islam being more libertarian friendly than other religions.

I'm sure he's off somewhere hibernating in a bear's den :P

Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, Sep 21 2012 9:43 PM

Graham Wright:

I think the FSP has great potential. 

Hoppe talked about how it would accelerate a secession movement if there was a hot-button issue that could unite the people in a given area against the larger government.  The example he gave was Nevada (I think) and the issue of nuclear waste dumping.

In the absence of something like that, it's going to be a slower process.  I think a whole state is too large-scale to have any significant impact... I can't see any whole state declaring independence from the U.S. any time soon.  It would be better if secessionists would concentrate themselves even more, say into a town like Keene.  I wonder what would happen if a town of 23000 people were to declare independence and just stop sending tax money in and start ignoring government edicts.  How would the general public react?

Personally, I'd rather move to the limits of where any state claims it has a territorial monopoly, step right outside that boundary, and setup a free society. I'm speaking of course about seasteading ;P

Rather than spend a generation fighting to secede--probably they wouldn't allow it--foot-vote right out of their jurisdiction.

Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

When would you say we would be able to do seasteading?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Fri, Sep 21 2012 10:15 PM
 
 

SkepticalMetal:
When would you say we would be able to do seasteading?

I'm planning a pilot seastead to be deployed within the decade. I'm designing dwellings now, including how to build them on the sea itself so they will never have sat in port or in any jurisdiction's waters (so that no one can claim them subject to any jurisdiction thereby).

After that, I'll start taking orders and build them at a profit for anyone who wants to join in. Probably wouldn't cost more than $10k - $20k, at a build cost of say $5-10k.

There'll be "land" based on artificial-interlocking floating dock technology that currently exists, which will also serve to tamp down wave action. The houses themselves are in the style of the monolithic-dome, only rather than a mrtr half dome they are joined to another dome underneath to serve as the hull and to displace water for flotation.

 

 
Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

Wow, sounds awesome. I think I remember from another post that you said that you'd like to build it off the coast of California. Would people be able to build their own-style homes on the seastead? For example, an entreupreneur might want to invest and build a bunch of highrise apartments, or a metrorail, or something.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,018
Points 17,760

Anemone, are you rich?

Id love to try to live in it when i turn 18+....

Skepticalmetal, have you watched the documentary?

http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/7395771/Libertopia

“Since people are concerned that ‘X’ will not be provided, ‘X’ will naturally be provided by those who are concerned by its absence."
"The sweetest of minds can harbor the harshest of men.”

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.org

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

Hell yeah. It would be like the ultimate libertarian megacenter.

And no, I have not watched the documentary. Not too keen about using a torrent, either.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 391
Points 6,975

Pft. Seasteading. It's space we should be homesteading. There is no income tax, no capital gains tax, and not even any desire to establish a minimum wage law in Mars. The Martian people have never found it neccessary to form a state to boot. 

@ShireSilver
 

Is it really that frustrating? At times I consider the potential of the libertarian party being of some success at the local level, but if its got no future it seems New Hampshire is better worth the energy spent into it. 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

@ Michelangelo

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,018
Points 17,760

Y not use a torrent?

Its a libertarian documentary of course u can copy it. no one will come to jail you lol.

Ive pirated tons of stuff an no cop has come to my door. no vpn no proxy.

 

“Since people are concerned that ‘X’ will not be provided, ‘X’ will naturally be provided by those who are concerned by its absence."
"The sweetest of minds can harbor the harshest of men.”

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.org

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Sat, Sep 22 2012 12:10 AM
 
 

SkepticalMetal:

Wow, sounds awesome. I think I remember from another post that you said that you'd like to build it off the coast of California. Would people be able to build their own-style homes on the seastead? For example, an entreupreneur might want to invest and build a bunch of highrise apartments, or a metrorail, or something.

Absolutely. In fact, I think businesses would love to setup various manufacturing centers and the like there, where you'd have the advantage of no red tape and no taxes, and no facility rent. Most businesses could buy a large-scale dome to equal their current facilities size for the cost of a mere few months of what they pay in rent at their current place, not even counting taxes and regulations.

Before that can happen, I think I need to prove that a permanent ocean settlement for people and families is possible, and get any potential jurisdictional challenges out of the way should the US authorities object, which I doubt they will intiially. And what better way than to live there myself.

Kelvin Silva:

Anemone, are you rich?

Unfortunately no, or I'd already have this place up and running! Obviously I can't do it alone. I may at some point start a foundation to accept donations towards this end, we'll see.

Kelvin Silva:
Id love to try to live in it when i turn 18+....

You'd certainly be welcome :)

Michelangelo:

Pft. Seasteading. It's space we should be homesteading.

I agree completely. In space they will be unable to stop libertarian ideals from specific implementation. I see seasteading as a necessary intermediary between land a space, a stage we must go through. Living on and in the water is much like living in space. You have to deal with extremes of pressure differentials, especially for those whom would live under the water.

You also have to create new conceptions of dividing property in three dimensions in the water, as also in space, rather than the current two dimensions of land. I plan to create some software to make three-dimensional property bounding possible and will setup a title company to effect it on the water.

One problem I have is how to deal with claims of homesteading the water. It's something I'm researching actively now. How do we verify homestead claims or the like, limit them in size rationally, objectively?

Beyond that, how do you allow the homesteading of an area someone wants to keep in its natural state. The labor theory of homesteading would preclude that, yet there needs to be some allowance for such a purpose. I think we have a deficient theory of homesteading generally, or perhaps I just haven't yet encountered the right ideas.

Michelangelo:
There is no income tax, no capital gains tax, and not even any desire to establish a minimum wage law in Mars. The Martian people have never found it neccessary to form a state to boot.

:)

Michelangelo:
Is it really that frustrating? At times I consider the potential of the libertarian party being of some success at the local level, but if its got no future it seems New Hampshire is better worth the energy spent into it.

If you think about the quid pro quo relationship business and unions have with the major political parties, you can see why the libertarian party would have trouble gaining any traction. Not to mention the innate contradiction of seeking public office in order to do away with the power of a public office--something an elected official doesn't have the power to do.

I've found watching politics much less frustrating after concluding, I think rightly, that relying on the political process for positive change towards liberty is going only to produce disappointment.

Have you seen the Intrade numbers on Obama? Someone's awfully sure he's going to be re-elected.

My best protest against socialized healthcare is not to fight it within the system, but rather to create an alternative. I think medicine a few miles off the coast in international waters could be an awesome end-run around the new socialized system which prevents people from paying directly for care.

I could easily see some doctors fleeing the US healthcare system and setting up shop on the water, taking customers the world over. These would probably also be the highest rated doctors who'd have had their wages cut mightily, not to mention all the red tape and centralized control, if they stayed in the system.

 
Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

Well, I for one would certainly contribute to your foundation. I mean, The Seasteading Institute sounds pretty good and all, but they seem more like minarchists, wanting "alternative governments," or something like that.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Sat, Sep 22 2012 12:39 AM
 
 

SkepticalMetal:
Well, I for one would certainly contribute to your foundation. I mean, The Seasteading Institute sounds pretty good and all, but they seem more like minarchists, wanting "alternative governments," or something like that.

Good to hear.

I like what SI is all about; they've taken concrete steps and attracted funding--that's all encouraging. Recently someone gave them a giant boat which they're renting out now.

If they hadn't started such an institute, I very well may have myself :)

But, as you say, they may not have their theory and philosophy up to snuff. That's something I'm very cognizant of myself. I really don't want to get something up and running and one day realize I was too uninformed to catch some critical aspect that dooms the venture through inner-contradictions.

Rothbard in For a New Liberty mentions the need for a libertarian legal code for a free society to rally around and relate under. I need to build such a thing somehow, or we do. So, I'm deep in a philosophical research phase right now. Autolykos has done a lot to help me get my head straight on certain things, for which I'm quite grateful, knocking hopefully the last vestiges of statism out of me :)

Seasteading is a means to end, not the end itself. The end is much broader than just focusing on seasteading. Seasteading could be equally evil if it is the statists whom get their hands on it first. I really think we live in a perfect historical epoch for getting a libertarian seastead going so that the two become associated, before any other political system can take root on the water and claim jurisdiction over the seas as states do on the land. The next 20 years will be critical.

 
Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

Yeah, in fact you just reminded me of something I've been contemplating for a while now and was even thinking of asking about here on the forum. What I am speaking of is the idea that an anarchist society would not last long if it is surrounded by statist societies. Take Somalia for example. They had anarchy for a while (I'm not saying that that is a prime example, but if I were to choose between living in pre-anarchy Somalia and anarchy Somaila, I would have definately chosen anarchy), and just look at what happened. The CIA has to come in with their transitional government, and now the place is back to where it was. That's why I think that perhaps the world must be voluntaryist and that a small anarchist society would only be temporary (the mafia sees territory ripe for the picking).

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Sat, Sep 22 2012 3:12 AM
 
 

SkepticalMetal:

Yeah, in fact you just reminded me of something I've been contemplating for a while now and was even thinking of asking about here on the forum. What I am speaking of is the idea that an anarchist society would not last long if it is surrounded by statist societies.

Maybe on land. On water it may not be so easy to destroy an free society, as it has room to grow and can disperse and reform at will, as well as go underwater. Remains to be seen.

Ultimately a free society should be at least twice as wealthy on average, since it's not siphoning off half people's income to government decision-surrogates.

Thus, a free society could spend half its income on defense if it had to :P I don't think you should worry about that too much. The prospects for liberty long term are more and more sure, as a free society should be the most just, least contentious, and most stable living system ever devised.

SkepticalMetal:
Take Somalia for example. They had anarchy for a while (I'm not saying that that is a prime example, but if I were to choose between living in pre-anarchy Somalia and anarchy Somaila, I would have definately chosen anarchy), and just look at what happened. The CIA has to come in with their transitional government, and now the place is back to where it was.

The people in a free society need to have a philosophical base of liberty to apply, then such things perhaps would be much less likely.

SkepticalMetal:
That's why I think that perhaps the world must be voluntaryist and that a small anarchist society would only be temporary (the mafia sees territory ripe for the picking).

I think you misunderstand the mafia. They're engaged in providing black market services. In a free society there would be no black markets, and therefore absolutely no profit for the mafia to exploit. There would probably be little to no mafia presence in a free society, they wouldn't want the competition.

The mafia without police and politicians to bribe and buyout is defanged. Without drug laws the circumvent, is poor too.

 
Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 312
Points 4,310
Chyd3nius replied on Sat, Sep 22 2012 8:28 AM

The Seasteading Institute sounds pretty good and all, but they seem more like minarchists, wanting "alternative governments," or something like that.

What else would anarcho-capitalism be than bunch of alternative set  of laws, or "polycentric law", when everyone can decide the law code of their backyard?

-- --- English I not so well sorry I will. I'm not native speaker.
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 1,711
Points 29,285

No no, I was talking about the government when I said "mafia."

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,258
Points 34,610
Anenome replied on Sat, Sep 22 2012 12:49 PM

I see :) Well, the libertarian legal code would need to hold voluntaryism as a fundamental way to order society.

Thing about the formation of a government, it usually has to be done all at once by the statists, in large moves. If we can limit them to trying to achieve it on a person to person basis, it will probably fail, since all attempts at statism are ultimately aggressions, and if people can foot vote away from aggressions and sue against them, should prove a great defense in a free society.

We shall see. I'm excited to finally try out such a place :)

Autarchy: rule of the self by the self; the act of self ruling.
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (37 items) | RSS