If you had 500,000 Libertarians who would do any one thing that you asked them to do, what would it be? Why?
I will have each one of them opening a topic in revleft.com about how great libertarianism and capitalism are until the amount of posts bring their server down
Gather them all in one place and challenge the state to a fight.
They would have to back down.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
I would tell them to act however they felt.
Why?
The answer is obvious :)
"A man’s time is always scarce." - Murray N. Rothbard
Never mind Mises money clips! Where are the Mises wheelbarrows?
MatthewF: If you had 500,000 Libertarians who would do any one thing that you asked them to do, what would it be? Why?
Form ranks.
But seriously, it would much better to have 500,000 land owning libertarian activists, then micro-secession will be a real possibility. 500,000 living-in-their-moms basement libertarian activists wont accomplish much.
Move to Montana as fast as possible.
The Libertarian Party has a Free State Project. After discussions and a poll they selected New Hampshire (pop 1.3 million). After the get 20,000 libertarians to sign up and commit to move to NH, they will be able to elect a libertarian legislature and governor and seceed from the Union.
However, I choose Montana instead. (The winters are just as cold.) Montana has only 600,000+ pop, and many of them are already independents, and most belong to the NRA. This would be an easier state to convert and can be done much faster.
Given a choice I'd want members of the Constitutional Party instead, but I'll take any opportunity.
Please see http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94331 . I haven't found a link to the actual document, but if this is really truy, it is really Treason.
sicsempertyrannis: MatthewF: If you had 500,000 Libertarians who would do any one thing that you asked them to do, what would it be? Why? Form ranks. But seriously, it would much better to have 500,000 land owning libertarian activists, then micro-secession will be a real possibility. 500,000 living-in-their-moms basement libertarian activists wont accomplish much.
If you have 500,000 people you don't need to own land, you can take over any city in the world. Iraq was conquered by less than 500,000 people.
I agree with Stranger, but more specific I would build a guerilla army of 500,000. The federal troops would have to give up after a year or maybe five.
(Actually I wouldn't really do that, I would just tell them to go home)
Tell them to move to NYC and start a free state project, and privatize everything in manhattan
do we get free cheezeburger in socielism?
My place of birth!
IIRC, Ron Paul did especially well in ol' Montana. A good sign.
Felipe: I will have each one of them opening a topic in revleft.com about how great libertarianism and capitalism are until the amount of posts bring their server down
My head hurts after looking at that site. Seems likes a sort of Stormfront for commies (complete with an 'opposing ideologies' forum).
Cork: My place of birth! IIRC, Ron Paul did especially well in ol' Montana. A good sign.
He had 25% in the Montana primaries if I recall correctly. Highest number in all states, I think.Montana is exactly my kind of place from what I've heard about it. A job opportunity there would be super-sweet.
The reason I asked is that I've always thought: If only I could convince 500,000 people to vote for a Libertarian Governor. We could start tearing this thing down
I just realized the other day that with that many supporters you could do so much more... Thanks go out to Sage in the "voting philosophy" thread for starting the wheels in my head turning.
Sphairon: Cork: My place of birth! IIRC, Ron Paul did especially well in ol' Montana. A good sign. He had 25% in the Montana primaries if I recall correctly. Highest number in all states, I think.Montana is exactly my kind of place from what I've heard about it. A job opportunity there would be super-sweet.
That's the trouble. There isnt much in the way of jobs there.
Other than Montana, there are a few other states I would say have a libertarian bent to them - Alaska, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina.
sicsempertyrannis:That's the trouble. There isnt much in the way of jobs there.
You could do a lot of entrepreneurship in a place like Montana, I am thinking specifically digital entrepreneurship.
Also, there has been some sort of state by state push for allowing states to transact in gold. Montana is one of these states considering it. The first state to take gold is going to see a massive influx of global investment. It will be a boom opportunity. Every time I hear Peter Schiff go on about the Perth Mint, I think geez, what a boon to the city of Perth. You have this fairly unique mint enterprise that has little global competition, in a growing and (I consider) stable niche. Brilliant.
liberty student: sicsempertyrannis:That's the trouble. There isnt much in the way of jobs there. You could do a lot of entrepreneurship in a place like Montana, I am thinking specifically digital entrepreneurship. Also, there has been some sort of state by state push for allowing states to transact in gold. Montana is one of these states considering it. The first state to take gold is going to see a massive influx of global investment. It will be a boom opportunity. Every time I hear Peter Schiff go on about the Perth Mint, I think geez, what a boon to the city of Perth. You have this fairly unique mint enterprise that has little global competition, in a growing and (I consider) stable niche. Brilliant.
I hate to admit it, but I think I agree in part with the theory that a higher population and more industrialization leads to more statism. It would be a sad trade off.
sicsempertyrannis:I hate to admit it, but I think I agree in part with the theory that a higher population and more industrialization leads to more statism. It would be a sad trade off.
I agree with the trade off, but I don't see it as sad.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
GilesStratton: sicsempertyrannis:I hate to admit it, but I think I agree in part with the theory that a higher population and more industrialization leads to more statism. It would be a sad trade off. I agree with the trade off, but I don't see it as sad.
I dont know, personally I find the idea of a Montana with New York style government sad. At least in consideration of how the state is now.
I'd rather have 500,000 well trained, physically fit, obedient and nearly brain dead soldiers than 500,000 (or even millions, for that matter) libertarians, who tend not to be physical fit, well trained or obedient.
good point
libertystudent:You could do a lot of entrepreneurship in a place like Montana, I am thinking specifically digital entrepreneurship.
Capitalism comes first. The Boston Tea Party was first. Then came the Republic several years later. So first we need 100% gold backed money in banking. Montana mines gold and large quantities of silver.There's job possibilities there. I think a policy of pushing other countries to become democracies first is backwards. We should be helping them to become capitalists first.
Yes, 500,000 people can be spread out over many state and accomplish much. But I think one state at a time with a very good probability of results is far better than the scatter approach which lowers the probabilty of success anywhere. And if 500,000 people commit to move, how many do you think really will. If just one state does it and suceeds economically, others will follow quickly. But that first state is going to cause an uproar in the rest of the country and in D.C. There may be serious danger. You will need a strongly committed community as tightly interwoven as possible. (We'll need a lot of internet communications with back-up server farms.)
Montana has a huge wind resource. Environmentalists could set up wind farms galore and with so much open space they could research ecological communities forever.
Libertarians naturally want to be entreprenures. Learn a skill in addition to your job. Baking, shoemaking, butchering, greenhouse flower growing, software and internet should do well, just about any skill will suceed.
I agree that lower populations tend to be more desirous of freedom. I think our history shows that. And our founders understood that when they set up a bicameral Congress, so that, in a pure democracy, the densely populated areas could not always out-vote the sparse ones.
sicsempertyrannis: I dont know, personally I find the idea of a Montana with New York style government sad. At least in consideration of how the state is now.
Montana even has its own "gun lobby", the Montana Shooting Sports Association. Makes you hope that even with a growing population, it won't turn into another Big Apple too soon.
During France's revolutionary period whenever people wanted to topple the government they would set up barricades in the major cities to stop government agents from going around, essentially bringing the state to a grinding halt. Then one of two things would happen, the government would cave and grant the revolutionaries what they want, or an army unit would be sent in to blow away the barricades using cannons.
500,000 people means 10,000 in every American state. 10,000 cars in each state capital can set up the ultimate nation-wide traffic jam-spontaneous roadside barbecue event, bringing all government functions to a complete stop.
All that's needed is an organization and the relevant demands.
Stranger: During France's revolutionary period whenever people wanted to topple the government they would set up barricades in the major cities to stop government agents from going around, essentially bringing the state to a grinding halt. Then one of two things would happen, the government would cave and grant the revolutionaries what they want, or an army unit would be sent in to blow away the barricades using cannons. 500,000 people means 10,000 in every American state. 10,000 cars in each state capital can set up the ultimate nation-wide traffic jam-spontaneous roadside barbecue event, bringing all government functions to a complete stop. All that's needed is an organization and the relevant demands.
That's such a great idea....does anyone think that there might be 500,000 libertarian activists or close to it between here and Ron Paul and the tea parties and other places?
MatthewF: what would it be? Why?
One thing?
Stop participating in banking! Since banking is inflationary, a large contraction of a large group of folks would also cause a contraction in the money supply. Fractional reserve central banking, is theft against it's consumers. If you participate in current-banking, then you are condoning a violation of property rights.
Good day.
Individualism Rocks
Invade a completely hopeless, run down, and destitute country and then proceed to free its economy. Freeing Haiti, for example, could finally bring it around to a modern economy. In fact, freeing Haiti would be enormously beneficial in showing that a black nation can lead the world in economic growth and prosperity as long as it follows free market principles. That and it would be a useful tax haven for Americans and Europeans.
Political Atheists Blog