Libertarians Look for a State to Call Their Own. (Free State Project)

The Everett Herald (WA) | 2/23/2003 | reprint from the Baltimore Sun

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

Plans are under way for an invasion of New Hampshire. Or Wyoming. Or maybe Delaware, Montana or Alaska. Sparsely populated and independent in spirit, they're all attractive targets for a certain bloodless coup in the making.

Within the next several years, according to the plan, 20,000 Libertarians would move to a single state and begin infiltrating. They'd get jobs, join civic groups, get elected and take a hatchet to taxes and laws. In this utopia called the Free State Project, schools would be severed from the state, gun-control laws abolished, drugs legalized, health and social services privatized, and most federal aid rejected. Government's only job would be to protect against "force and fraud."

[sd-joe]

"What would they work together on? Eliminating the income tax? LOL, the Republicans opposed that."

An old philosophical statement: "The perfect is the enemy of the good." The point being, that if you always hold out for the perfect, you often lose to the bad, and do not get the good.

The Libs, too often, think everyone else is bad (The Dems and the Repubs are the same, attitude). They don't see that some other positions are closer to theirs than others, and try to work to incrementally go in the direction that they want to go.

I don't know anything about the proposal in Mass. Sometimes laws are opposed because the details are bad. I just don't know this specific case.

Instead of always playing up the differences, the Libs should look for areas where they COULD work together.

[Protagoras]

I love comedy.

If you like comedy, this thread is the right place to be. Up is down, free is slave, 2+2=3, people who oppose the welfare state are freeloaders, Jonestown was a free society,,,,,and the beat goes on. You need a special sense of humor though.

[ActionNewsBill]

I was thinking they'd be happy in the UP, if they'd secede. It's also big enough to divide into four or more substates once they start squabbling among themselves.

Bring it on. Lot's of independent, self sufficient types up here. There was some semi-serious discussion a few years ago about the Yoo Pee seceeding from Michigan and renaming the new state "Superior". Haven't heard anything more for a while.

But, this would be an ideal place for a free state experiment. With 20,000 people, you could wield a lot of political influence, especially since the the total U.P. population is around 317,000 or so.

Except for the snow, cold and a 10 month-long winter, it's a great place.

It's not quite that bad...if you're a skier, snoboarder or snowmobiler, it's ideal. But the cold and snow do tend to keep the riff-raff away. Not much major crime around these parts.

[Roscoe]

If they had gone for a 50% reduction instead of 100% cut in the state income tax they probably would have won.

[Dead Corpse]

Same thing as now, only we wouldn't pay the 1000% mark-up most public projects cost. We also wouldn't have to pay for some free-loader in another State to fix THEIR roads. It also probably wouldn't take ten years to get additional lanes added as they wouldn't have half a million bureacratic hurddles to jump over. Not to mention all the pork that would fail to get added to a government hiway funding bill.

Does that answer your curiosity? I know you didn't really want an answer, but I'll play your silly game.

[Roscoe]

Same thing as now

Really? Where did you get that?

[Protagoras]

the Libs should look for areas where they COULD work together.

Maybe the Republicans could use that advice.

The ballot inititive was simple, eliminate the income tax in Mass.

A huge number of people there of all stripes voted for it. The Republicans opposed it. Maybe if they had stayed true to THEIR OWN so called principles of low taxes and small government they would have supported it, and it would have passed.

They didn't try for perfect, they tried to make government smaller and taxes lower, the Republicans opposed it. They would have been welcomed as allies. In fact, libertarians join with Republicans all the time when they are on the same side, but the reverse is rarely true.

[Cultural Jihad]

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, 1809-1865

French socialist-anarchist. To his own question, "What is property?", Proudhon answered famously, "Property is theft!" Proudhon called for a complete reorganization of modern society that abolished most of its trappings - including money and the state itself. He advocated communitarianism as the form of reorganization of society. He argued that "goodwill" would emerge naturally once these "social constructs" were gone.

[ActionNewsBill]

George: What you represent to them is freedom.

Billy:What the hell's wrong with freedom, man? That's what it's all about.

George:Oh yeah, that's right, that's what it's all about, all right. But talkin' about it and bein' it - that's two different things. I mean, it's real hard to be free when you are bought and sold in the marketplace.

'Course, don't ever tell anybody that they're not free 'cause then they're gonna get real busy killin' and maimin' to prove to you that they are.

George: "Oh yeah, they're gonna talk to you, and talk to you, and talk to you about individual freedom, but they see a free individual, it's gonna scare 'em.

Billy: Mmmm, well, that don't make 'em runnin' scared.

George: No, it makes 'em dangerous

[Protagoras]

If they had gone for a 50% reduction instead of 100% cut in the state income tax they probably would have won.

LOL, that's rich. The Republicans opposed it and made no proposal of their own. They didn't see the bet and lower it, they didn't give it any merit at all. They are not supportive of it at all. If they had supported it, it probably would have passed without any change whatsoever.

But the Republican governor wanted the money so he could gain control of the favor passing concession.

[Dead Corpse]

What do you think will happen to the public roads?

This was your question. My answer deliniated the key differences between paying for roads directly vs. paying through the public works slush fund.

If you had followed even one of the thousands of links to info on libertarian solutions that have been posted on threads like these, you would not have needed to ask such a question.

No. Your only purpose here is to disrupt these threads. Kudos on hijacking yet another thread. It wouldn't suprise me a bit to find out you are a paid democrat shill or somone working in government.

[Catspaw]

Fine idea about the UP--of course, secession of the UP and a few northern counties of Wisconsin has been tried in the past. It would've worked, too, if the secessionists hadn't run smack dab into Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution. You do know what that says, don't you?

[Petronski]

I just can't get enough of this picture. Always makes me laugh out loud:

ROFLMAOAPIMP!

[Catspaw]

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

Oh, foo. I thought you said "Paul Prudomme" and I got hungry.

[Protagoras]

Nice try. The only ones who try to sell that elementary school attempt to equate anarchy with freedom are those who's real agenda is a police state.

Libertarians embrace a government which defends rights. But nice try, you tricked all the fifth graders.

[Roscoe]

Socialism: Property is theft.

Libertarian socialism: Property and taxation is theft.

Libertarianism: Public property and taxation is theft.

Three fatuous philosophies.

[Roscoe]

What happens to the public roads? The ones that actually exist.

[Cultural Jihad]

You raised an interesting point. Where will the victims of self-inflicted diseases go to for medical care? Certainly not within Liberterria.

[ActionNewsBill]

You appear to have ready access to pictures of naked men.

Just for "research" I suppose?

[Roscoe]

Remember the smoos? Better tasting than smurfs.