[Tag]

Wasington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44549-2003Sep21.html)

I'll move :D

[TallPine]

:confused:

[Henry Bowman]

Link require registration with a commie rag. What's the skinny?

[Leatherneck]

It's the ComPost's story today about the Free State elections of "Which State?"

TC
TFL Survivor

[Henry Bowman]

Ahhhh. They probably find the whole idea rather quaint. :rolleyes:

[Tag]

quaint indeed.

The national press will not know what to make of this one. Sheeple will be confused.

[C.R.Sam]

Sheeple will be confused. I think they only come two ways...
Numb or confused.

Sam

[Don Galt]

And the worst thing is that the Free State Project has no intentions of forming a free state in the state they select-- even if they get enough people.

Its goal is failure, and thus it will fail.

(This may not make sense if you haven't pierced the veil of hype on the FSP, but they have no intentions to stand up to any federal laws, and will cooperate with them, thus the FSP, even if successful, won't accomplish anything, other than distracting people. Furthermore, half the members of the FSP are non-libertarians who think they are libertarian because the democrats aren't liberal enough for them, or the republicans arent' conservative enough for them... they haven't learned what libertarianism is... and os they will move ther,e and immediately start voting for their respective parties. )

[dustind]

Don Galt: have you been to their message board? If most members are like most of the people on the board they are libertarian.

The state is going to stand up the the feds every way possible. They want to pass a state constitutional amendment requiring the feds to have written permission to do anything in the state. Right now the sheriffs must agree to anything they do. They are also planning on laws baring the enforcement of unconstitutional federal laws, and lots of things like that. I imagine the people elected to the House and Senate will be like Ron Paul.

It is down to two states pretty much. New Hampshire and Wyoming, both have a history of freedom and standing up to the feds.

[Partisan Ranger]

I just sent in my ballot for NH. I think being landlocked out west would doom the FSP to failure.

[Ian]

Don Galt - Yes, the FSP plans to operate incrementally within the political system. I agree that doing so limits its potential - real freedom cannot be achieved through an inherently anti-freedom governmening structure.

However, don't get the idea that FSP members will do nothing more than support the state FSP Party. You can bet that plenty of underground pro-freedom groups will develop to pursue freedom in a wide variety of ways (think of it as a true free market in freedom-finding :) ). The people moving aren't a single homogenous group called the Free State Project, they are thousands of pro-freedom individuals, each with their own motives, ideas, and objectives.

[Don Galt]

Except that most of the members of the FSP are NOT pro-freedom individuals.

Furthermore, from what I understand, the leadership rigged the state selection for NH. Why even vote?

Believe me, I think its a great idea... I was excited about the FSP as well until I discovered the reality of it. And the reality is, its one hell of a resume builder for Mr. Sorens, nothing more.

As to standing up to the feds, they have made it explicitly clear that they will NOT stand up to the feds. No way, no how. At least, the leadership of the FSP and Sorens have said that.

Great idea, terrible execution. Disaster in the making... its like watching a train wreck.

[Don Galt]

By the way, I hope that you will take my criticisms seriously and look into the project more critically.

If the membership of the FSP starts demanding accountability, and integrity from the leadership, they will get it. That's the best thing for me and you and the project.

I don't want to just bash the FSP (though it deserves it)... I want you guys to take it over and start driving it in the right direction with integrity.

[PeteyPete]

I wish i could get in on this...but I know i'd have problems moving anywhere outside the NYC/NJ area due to my career and family....

I hope i have the financial security in the future to move to whatever free state they decide upon.

[Ian]

Furthermore, from what I understand, the leadership rigged the state selection for NH. Ihave followed the Project fairly closely since I joined it a little over a year ago, and I've seen nothing at all to suggest that the leadership tried to rig the vote. There was certainly a vocal group of NH supporters on the forum, but as far as I could see, the leadership in general kept quite neutral. They helped organize two major events, one in MT and one in NH. Jason in particular has taken a very objective and non-partisan (so to speak) position in all the state debates I've seen him participate in.

And the reality is, its one hell of a resume builder for Mr. Sorens, nothing more. Well, not for long. He's resigning as President after the vote, and a person from our destination state will hold the position of President from here out. One would think that a person looking for recognition alone would choose a more popular cause, or at least a more politically-correct fringe.

Except that most of the members of the FSP are NOT pro-freedom individuals. Yeah, we've got a bunch of people who are libertarian on some issues and statist on others. We'll deal with them - if we can't convert such people to full-fledged libertarianism, then we've got no business trying this project at all. And besides, we've got plenty of hardcore freedom-seekers amongst the quasi-statists. Huge changes are usually precipitated by small groups. A few Claire Wolfes and Vin Suprynowiczs and Jim-March-types (I don't know if Mr March is an FSPer) can make huge changes. We already know that the major changes won't be made in the legislature...

...they have made it explicitly clear that they will NOT stand up to the feds. If you mean blocking the highways and forcibly denying Feds entrance, then you are correct. That's not something the FSP is structured to be capable of doing anyway. FSP resistance to the Feds will occur (and this is a major and publicized goal) initially in the form of rejecting Federal funding, and thereafter removing state laws imposed under threat of loss of Federal funding.

I think the biggest mistake with the FSP is to treat it like conventional political parties. The FSP is simply an organizational tool for its members - the Project has no official political position on anything. Even if it did, the FSP dissolves when we hit 20,000 members. Its goal is simply to facilitate and motivate moving libertarians to the destination state. Once they arrive, they will simply act as individuals and form whatever groups they see fit. The FSP simply won't have any monolithic voice, like political parties or advocacy groups do. Certainly there'll be some ideological chaff among the members who move - but there'll also be diamonds, and those diamonds can render all the chaff irrelevant.

In any case, I'd rather try this and fail than not try it at all.

[DigitalWarrior]

NEW HAMPSHIRE WINS

[DigitalWarrior]

Of course the FSP is not going to organize for rebellion. Rebellion is the LAST resort.

[atek3]

hey Ian when are you going to pack your bags? :)
I wonder if there are any good business schools in NH?

atek3

[Ian]

Soon as I've gotten my degree. I wonder if there are any good engineering schools in NH? :)

[Partisan Ranger]

"Sheeple will be confused"

You're right, and many will attack us. A representative of the Democratic (sic) party in NH has called us 'anarchists.' Nice, huh? Is she aware that most of us are college graduates, taxpayers, heads of families, and law-abiding citizens? We just happen to believe in this faded piece of parchment called the Constitution of the United States of America.

[Don Galt]

Yeah, if you really were anarchists, you'd have a chance of success.

Seriously, do you realize that libertarianism leads ultimately to support for anarchism? Even small states are considered "anarchy" as the term is commonly used by the media etc.

My prediction is borne out-- NH was the pre-selected state, and the balloting method successfully got it selected.

Alaska, by the way, is not a landlocked western state. In fact, its both the most western and most eastern of the states. And its the only rational choice if the FSP was intending to create a free state.

[jimpeel]

Free State Project Balloting Concludes

Libertarian-Minded Group Votes on State to Which Members Will Relocate
By Kate McCann
Associated Press
Monday, September 22, 2003; Page A07

CONCORD, N.H., Sept. 21 -- About 5,000 Americans have been holding an election, but for a state rather than a candidate, and the one they choose will be a laboratory for what they call the biggest experiment in democracy since the Revolutionary War.

Balloting will conclude Monday, and the winning state is to be announced Oct. 1. Then members of the Free State Project hope to quadruple their numbers within two years, move there and start transforming it into a national model for small government, few laws and individual liberty.

"Projects of this kind have been done before on much larger scales," says project founder Jason Sorens, 26. He cites the Pilgrims, the Mormons and the migration of liberal, back-to-the-soil types to Vermont 30 years ago.

With a Web site, www.freestateproject.org, as a forum, members last year narrowed their choices to 10 states with small populations, libertarian tendencies and other characteristics. New Hampshire and Wyoming are considered favorites, ahead of Alaska, Delaware, Idaho, Maine, Montana, Vermont, and North and South Dakota.

Supporters of New Hampshire like its relatively low dependence on federal money, lack of a general sales or income tax and its "Live Free or Die" motto. The New Hampshire constitution also guarantees the right to revolt and does not prohibit secession. Project members say secession is not their goal, but that the provision could be a useful bargaining chip.

Wyoming scores for its tiny population, low property taxes, lack of statewide land-use planning laws, and lack of "politically correct" laws such as those against hate crimes.

Strikes against New Hampshire include its lack of support for Libertarian presidential candidates and its relatively expensive political campaigns.

Though the premise of the project is that 20,000 committed individuals could be a genuine force in a small state, members bristle at the suggestion they want to "take over" a state.

"New Hampshire gets 20,000 new residents annually. So 20,000 people is not like locusts," said Elizabeth McKinstry, vice president of the project, who lives in Michigan. "And in no state that's on our list will 20,000 people be enough to come in to 'take over.' "

Henry McElroy, a retired college professor and Republican state representative from Nashua, says the biggest change in the chosen state would be getting people involved in government.

"You should be reading, you should be studying, you should be doing a better job of understanding your place in society," he said.

Some Free State Project members have ruffled feathers by questioning the need to subsidize public schools and opposing laws against "victimless behaviors" such as prostitution, gambling and marijuana use for medical purposes.

That is partly why New Hampshire Democratic Chairwoman Kathy Sullivan considers the project "sort of a very fringe group that can best be described as anarchists."

One of 150 project members who already live in New Hampshire, James Maynard of Keene, has been recruiting in Massachusetts.

"With the attitude of everyone in Massachusetts, that freedom is just to their north, that would be a great source," said Maynard, 30.

Project members are mostly men and in their twenties and thirties. About 10 percent are retirees; others are small-business owners. Not all are Libertarian Party members, but their principles are similar.

Dave Dawson, chairman of the Wyoming Libertarian Party, is a staunch project supporter. Dawson, 60, has run unsuccessfully for governor and Congress twice, and several times for the state Legislature.

"When you're a Libertarian without 20,000 liberty-oriented people in your state, it's not a race you figure on winning," he said. "But you get 20,000 people moving in here and that could change in a big hurry."

But Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal (D) "has never gotten the impression that many [Wyoming residents] would support legalizing drugs or using secession as some sort of bargaining chip," spokeswoman Lara Azar said.

Libertarian candidates haven't done well in New Hampshire. But University of New Hampshire political scientist J. Mark Wrighton said the Granite State might be fertile ground for the project anyway.

"The words 'Live Free or Die' pretty much explains a lot of what goes on in New Hampshire," Wrighton said.

© 2003 The Washington Post Company

[sch40]

NH wins! Live Free or Die!
I'm already lookin' for a job there.

[straightens tie and gets ready for the media onslaught]