Posted on 10/23/2002 1:04:07 AM PDT by Roscoe
Frustrated by the Libertarian Party's failure to make progress nationally, Jason Sorens GRD '04 decided the best course of action would be to take over Wyoming. Or maybe Alaska.
The plan, which Sorens calls "The Free State Project," is ambitious. It calls for moving 20,000 people -- including the one additional Yalie who has signed on so far -- over the next nine years to a sparsely populated state where they would take to the ballot boxes in order to repeal most drug and gun laws, eliminate the income tax, and privatize most government-run industries.
So in July 2001, he posted an essay on the project on the Internet. Within a few days, he had over 200 e-mails from people who were interested.
"The response was positively overwhelming," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at yaledailynews.com ...
Please point out where you think I appear to feel threatened. Otherwise, stop assuming things about me. Thanks. :)
You oppose the project. Rational people oppose threats. Thus, its fair to comment that you feel threatened by the idea, in some sense. Why?
The rational point that I made was that 20,000 people are very unlikely to move themselves and their families over a period of nine years to another state for the sake of political experimentation.
Silly point. -- Tell that to millions of our immigrant forefathers. And the constitutional basics of our free republic are not 'experimentation'. These basics would be followed.
Although I'd like to see the guy try, he is not going to suceed. Offer free health care (including marriage counseling and massage therapy) paid for by tax increases, however, and you'll likely see an exodus of over 100,000 (IMO). Watch Oregon if their proposition passes.
Somehow, I just can't take your word on "trying", judging from your general anti-libertarian stance. Sorry.
Be assured that I did not state that I opposed the project, nor do I now oppose the project. I stated my disbelief that it would suceed. Perhaps that is your misunderstanding. It would appear that you equate my skepticism with opposition, where it is simply untrue. However, you have convinced others that I feel threatened, even though I am not. Such is the power of the written word.
"Silly point. -- Tell that to millions of our immigrant forefathers. And the constitutional basics of our free republic are not 'experimentation'. These basics would be followed. "
Our immigrant forefathers had the fortitude to back up their convictions and principles with actions. Today's citizens (regardless of political orientation) do not. Also I never said the 'constitutional basics of our free republic' was experimentation. (your words) It is the implementation of said basics onto a populace already dependent on the federal government's teat that is the experiment. "Somehow, I just can't take your word on "trying", judging from your general anti-libertarian stance. Sorry."
Apology accepted. :) And thanks for not calling me names or sarcastically slandering my statements. (Seriously)
Ah, the heart of the issue. Although these "conservatives" claim to be for decentralization of power, they only follow through when it helps their cause.
"The oppressor no longer acts directly and with his own powers upon his victim. No, our conscience has become too sensitive for that. The tyrant and his victim are still present, but there is an intermediate person between them, which is the Government - that is, the Law itself. What can be better calculated to silence our scruples, and, which is perhaps better appreciated, to overcome all resistance? We all therefore, put in our claim, under some pretext or other, and apply to Government. We say to it, "I am dissatisfied at the proportion between my labor and my enjoyments. I should like, for the sake of restoring the desired equilibrium, to take a part of the possessions of others. But this would be dangerous. Could not you facilitate the thing for me? Could you not find me a good place? or check the industry of my competitors? or, perhaps, lend me gratuitously some capital which, you may take from its possessor? Could you not bring up my children at the public expense? or grant me some prizes? or secure me a competence when I have attained my fiftieth year? By this mean I shall gain my end with an easy conscience, for the law will have acted for me, and I shall have all the advantages of plunder, without its risk or its disgrace!" - Frederic Bastiat
Thus it follows logically:
"The state is the great fiction by which everybody tries to live at the expense of everyone else." -- Frederic Bastiat
But hey, I've done it too.
BTW, Sorens' idea is not a new one. It's been floated at LP conventions and in the LP News for the longest, at least the 18 years I've been associated with the LP.
For those who don't think it could work, ask them about the success of the Bhagwan in Oregon.
I'm unfamiliar with Bhagwan, Oregon. Do you have a link?
Silly point. -- Tell that to millions of our immigrant forefathers.
And the constitutional basics of our free republic are not 'experimentation'. These basics would be followed.
Our immigrant forefathers had the fortitude to back up their convictions and principles with actions. Today's citizens (regardless of political orientation) do not.
Your pronouncements have no basis in fact. - But we shall see.
Also I never said the 'constitutional basics of our free republic' was experimentation.
- Of course you didn't.
You said that people would 'experiment'. - They would not, as they'd be bound by the 'constitutional basics of our free republic'.
Try to learn the logic of debate.
True, it's one of Libertarianism's longest running failed ideas.
You have more in common with Hillary than us.
But we agree! This is an idea whose time has come. - It may indeed be achieveable on a county wide scale in some states.
One county isn't enough. You need to take over one whole state. You got, what, 1% of the vote, that's a million people. If you got every one of those voters to go to Wyoming and strategically placed them, you may be able to do it.
Run it through the USSC and we'll see. I wouldn't mind seeing 6 more Republican senators.
Yes, and that particular Libertarian was the fellow who moved in and started building Water Wells, establishing a Judicial System, and started development of a Fishery and Fish-processing industry.
Of course, Roscoe is pleased as punch that this particular Libertarian died before he could see his dreams of establishing Water and Food resources, and a functioning Judiciary, fully realized.
Roscoe is perfectly happy to see black africans starve, as long as it means he can crow about the "failure" of a Libertarian's effort to help them develop Food and Water and the Rule of Law. After all, when one is a knee-jerk Anti-Libertarian, you don't care about irrelevant trivialities like people starving to death.
Who knows? In Roscoe's ghoulish worldview, maybe the starvation of black children is rather a happy side benefit to the "failure" of this Libertarian's efforts. A few less "useless eaters" for Roscoe's beloved State to feed.
Think about it.
Yes, eastern Europe may not be a good idea. :^)
I have a fascination with pioneers and pilgrims....I don't know if I would have been tough enough to go, but I like to think I would have.
We have chain saws now, it may not be as hard as you think. Those who would want to go would cash in their 401ks and all their untransferrable possessions into gold coinage. We could use the coinage already in existence, as long as the gold content is well known. Gold is the best form of money to use to start a new nation until at least you build up credit and power. It worked very well for the young United States. If a few successful capitalistic billionaires would want to go to get away from their home country's corporate tax structure, then foundational industrial employment may be able to be established quickly. Many corporations establish themselves on tax free islands but use the labor in other countries. If a corporate-tax free nation could be established along with a labor force, that would draw these corporations to actually manufacture their goods in the new nation. These corporations could be used to establish win-win trading partnerships with respectable countries to have some allied insurance against invasion until the new country could get on it's feet to the point of establishing it's own self-defense.
But what is scary is that I'm not sure there is any place on earth today where new pilgrims could go to start a new country..
If the earth's crust would displace and slide Antarctica up toward the equator, there'd be a place the size of North America, clean, uninhabited, moutain ranges, ready to go. Admittedly that's a long shot. :^)
..ideally with the US Constitution, and this time we add another amendment: WE MEAN IT THIS TIME!
It seems to me one of our problems lie in the fact that there is no check on the courts. The courts are legislating from the bench. Put a check on that, somehow. Also reinforce the equal-taxation clauses. In other words, sin-taxes and punitive taxes should be explicitly unconstitutional, there's just too much room for abuse there. Also make clear that the separation of chruch and state does not ban freedom of speech on public property. Finally, immigration. Immigrants must pass a test of freedom to immigrate here. It seems we've been allowing way too many socialists to immigrate here. Immigrants must have a clear idea of what freedom is.
Your idea would never work.
If homosexual "unions" are not expressly sanctioned as "marriages" by the State, then homosexual "partners" won't have a State-sanctified "Marriage Certificate" to wave in Jerry Falwell's face.
Homosexuals could freely contract Private "monogamy and property" partnerships, of course; but without a State Certificate to poke in the Christian Coalition's eye.... where's the "fun" in that??
It is precisely this kind of juvenile, naif thinking, which make Libertarians a laughingstolck and a true enemy, within , of the Conservative movement.
News Flash...
The "Free State Project" is severely behind the times. Overtaken by Events, so to speak.
In only eight years of existence, the Movimiento Libertario (Costa Rican Libertarian Party) has captured slightly over 10% of the Costa Rican National Congress... and that on a shoestring budget of $217,000.
As Drudge would say, "this Story developing hot..."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.