Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [FSP] The problem with no platform.

Expand Messages
  • Tim Condon
    ... I have seen posts in the Christian FSP email list worrying that the FSP is going too libertarian, IIRC. There are libertarian-conservatives in the FSP, I
    Message 1 of 27 , Apr 30 9:50 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      > > Tim chimes in: In fact, some Porcupines do *not* want to abolish
      > > what some of us call "victimless crime laws."
      >
      >Really? Do you think so? I haven't seen anyone like that. There's one
      >guy on the forum who opposes legalizing heroin, but he's not a member.

      I have seen posts in the Christian FSP email list worrying that
      the FSP is going "too libertarian," IIRC. There are
      libertarian-conservatives in the FSP, I believe, who would not agree with
      legalizing "all" recreational drugs. --Tim C.
    • Gary Snyder
      ... (and then...) ... ultimate ... case). That IS a platform . And if the members of the FSP don t agree on HOW to reduce govt size by 2/3 (meaning, WHICH
      Message 2 of 27 , Apr 30 10:53 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Tim wrote:
        >
        > And we don't need a "platform" because we're not a
        > "political" organization.

        (and then...)

        > All you have to do to comport with the
        > goals of the FSP is believe in individual freedom and support the
        ultimate
        > reduction in size of state government by 2/3 or more (more, in my
        case).

        That IS a "platform".

        And if the members of the FSP don't agree on HOW to reduce govt size
        by 2/3 (meaning, WHICH govt programs to eliminate) this "platform"
        is useless and this project destined to fail miserably.

        If this isn't already clear: if some of us want to end victimless
        crimes, and some don't; if some want to eliminate govt schools, and
        some don't; if some want to eliminate govt welfare, and some don't,
        etc., this simply will not work.

        > In fact, some Porcupines do *not* want to abolish
        > what some of us call "victimless crime laws."

        If this is the case (and "some" number more than a couple) then I AM
        in the wrong organization. (I'd feel no different if you told me
        that some Porcupines do not want to reduce taxes drastically.)

        > I am a "conservative libertarian".

        How, exactly, do you distinguish between a conservative libertarian
        and a libertarian?

        Gary
      • delcomico
        ... From: Tim Condon [mailto:tcondon@freestateproject.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 11:50 PM To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FSP] The
        Message 3 of 27 , May 1, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          -----Original Message-----
          From: Tim Condon [mailto:tcondon@...]
          Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 11:50 PM
          To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: RE: [FSP] The problem with no platform.


          > > Tim chimes in: In fact, some Porcupines do *not* want to
          abolish
          > > what some of us call "victimless crime laws."
          >
          >Really? Do you think so? I haven't seen anyone like that. There's
          one
          >guy on the forum who opposes legalizing heroin, but he's not a member.

          I have seen posts in the Christian FSP email list worrying that

          the FSP is going "too libertarian," IIRC. There are
          libertarian-conservatives in the FSP, I believe, who would not agree
          with
          legalizing "all" recreational drugs. --Tim C.


          I'm a libertarian-conservative and I favor legalizing all recreational
          drugs. It shouldn't be implemented overnight, but there could be a
          definite move to deconstruct the War On Drugs. We could start by
          decriminalizing marijuana (in all contexts, not just for chronically ill
          medical patients).

          --Kev




          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          freestateproject-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        • delcomico
          ... From: Gary Snyder [mailto:gary@garysnyder.org] Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 12:54 AM To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [FSP] The problem
          Message 4 of 27 , May 1, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            -----Original Message-----
            From: Gary Snyder [mailto:gary@...]
            Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 12:54 AM
            To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [FSP] The problem with no platform.

            Tim wrote:
            >
            > And we don't need a "platform" because we're not a
            > "political" organization.

            (and then...)

            > All you have to do to comport with the
            > goals of the FSP is believe in individual freedom and support the
            ultimate
            > reduction in size of state government by 2/3 or more (more, in my
            case).

            That IS a "platform".>

            Yes, it is--it's just a very unclear and nebulous one. I think we need
            one that is more specific.


            <And if the members of the FSP don't agree on HOW to reduce govt size
            by 2/3 (meaning, WHICH govt programs to eliminate) this "platform"
            is useless and this project destined to fail miserably.

            If this isn't already clear: if some of us want to end victimless
            crimes, and some don't; if some want to eliminate govt schools, and
            some don't; if some want to eliminate govt welfare, and some don't,
            etc., this simply will not work.>>

            Well, it CAN work if we develop our political ideas (including
            compromises in position) into a solid base. That's one reason we need a
            real platform. Because we seem to have one camp that thinks almost ANY
            limitations on human behavior are tyranny, and we have another camp that
            is afraid to even refer to the Free State Project as a "political
            organization".

            If we don't know who we are and what we stand for, how will we effect
            change with others..? What do we stand for?

            And just saying "Liberty" is not a valid answer, in my opinion. Everyone
            in the political spectrum, from Ralph Nader to Jerry Falwell, will say
            that he stands for Liberty. George W. Bush and John Ashcroft say that
            they stand for Freedom and Liberty.

            --Kev
          • Gary Snyder
            ... and a ... government; I ... chance for ... say); I ... national ... against ... religion; and ... board; I ... respect to ... notion of ... hah? Of ...
            Message 5 of 27 , May 1, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              Tim wrote:
              >
              >>> I am a "conservative libertarian".
              >>
              >> How, exactly, do you distinguish between a conservative libertarian
              and a
              >> libertarian?
              >> Gary
              >
              > I'm not an anarchist, I believe in a small, limited
              government; I
              > am quite patriotic, and believe that America is the last, best
              chance for
              > the world to show how to have widespread freedom and justice (the
              > "original" America, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, I should
              say); I
              > support a very strong, but light and fast-moving military for
              national
              > defense; I believe that the nuclear family is the main bulwark
              against
              > unhinged statism; I believe strongly in religion, particularly the
              > Christian religion, and am very pro-church and pro-organized-
              religion; and
              > I am very much in favor of individualism and capitalism across the
              board; I
              > abhor those who advocate violence to achieve political ends with
              respect to
              > the struggle for freedom in America, and I explicitly reject the
              notion of
              > secession, as does the Free Sttate Project. Pretty conservative,
              hah? Of
              > course I hold all the other standard libertarian positions, but I
              mention
              > those above to distinguish me from the anarchists and
              > left-libertarians. --Tim Condon

              Not all libertarians are anarchists. You sound pretty mainstream
              libertarian to me.

              Gary

              P.S. My take is that the FSP does not explicitly reject the notion of
              secession, but sees it as a last resort.
            • delcomico
              Even the word libertarian can cover a lot of territory. Consider that we have two famous talk show hosts---Neal Boortz and Bill Maher--who call themselves
              Message 6 of 27 , May 1, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Even the word "libertarian" can cover a lot of territory. Consider that
                we have two famous talk show hosts---Neal Boortz and Bill Maher--who
                call themselves 'libertarians', and they are both cogs of the Republican
                and Democratic parties, respectively. Boortz is a flag-waving Bushie.
                Maher is a gun control advocate who has attended Democratic fundraisers.
                How very liberty-oriented.

                That's why--regardless of whether or not we wear the 'LIBERTARIAN'
                label--I feel we do need a statement of political goals and objectives.
                We will soon determine the state that is chosen--are we going to wait
                until that point to discuss, in detail, what our political objectives
                are going to be? If ever?

                Is it even fair to those who will sacrifice their homes to this
                movement, to sell the sizzle ("Liberty in our lifetime!") when there is
                no steak..?

                --Kev



                -----Original Message-----
                From: Tim Condon [mailto:tcondon@...]
                Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 4:39 PM
                To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [FSP] The problem with no platform.


                > > I am a "conservative libertarian".
                >
                >How, exactly, do you distinguish between a conservative libertarian and
                a
                >libertarian?
                >Gary

                I'm not an anarchist, I believe in a small, limited government;
                I
                am quite patriotic, and believe that America is the last, best chance
                for
                the world to show how to have widespread freedom and justice (the
                "original" America, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, I should
                say); I
                support a very strong, but light and fast-moving military for national
                defense; I believe that the nuclear family is the main bulwark against
                unhinged statism; I believe strongly in religion, particularly the
                Christian religion, and am very pro-church and pro-organized-religion;
                and
                I am very much in favor of individualism and capitalism across the
                board; I
                abhor those who advocate violence to achieve political ends with respect
                to
                the struggle for freedom in America, and I explicitly reject the notion
                of
                secession, as does the Free Sttate Project. Pretty conservative, hah? Of

                course I hold all the other standard libertarian positions, but I
                mention
                those above to distinguish me from the anarchists and
                left-libertarians. --Tim Condon




                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                freestateproject-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              • Tim Condon
                ... I m not an anarchist, I believe in a small, limited government; I am quite patriotic, and believe that America is the last, best chance for the world to
                Message 7 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  > > I am a "conservative libertarian".
                  >
                  >How, exactly, do you distinguish between a conservative libertarian and a
                  >libertarian?
                  >Gary

                  I'm not an anarchist, I believe in a small, limited government; I
                  am quite patriotic, and believe that America is the last, best chance for
                  the world to show how to have widespread freedom and justice (the
                  "original" America, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, I should say); I
                  support a very strong, but light and fast-moving military for national
                  defense; I believe that the nuclear family is the main bulwark against
                  unhinged statism; I believe strongly in religion, particularly the
                  Christian religion, and am very pro-church and pro-organized-religion; and
                  I am very much in favor of individualism and capitalism across the board; I
                  abhor those who advocate violence to achieve political ends with respect to
                  the struggle for freedom in America, and I explicitly reject the notion of
                  secession, as does the Free Sttate Project. Pretty conservative, hah? Of
                  course I hold all the other standard libertarian positions, but I mention
                  those above to distinguish me from the anarchists and
                  left-libertarians. --Tim Condon
                • Kelly Setzer
                  ... Yes, it is fair. I don t like steak, I d much prefer a hamburger. Most of all, don t try to make me eat something I don t like. I will move to wherever
                  Message 8 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 04:13:47PM -0500, delcomico wrote:
                    >
                    > Is it even fair to those who will sacrifice their homes to this
                    > movement, to sell the sizzle ("Liberty in our lifetime!") when there is
                    > no steak..?
                    >

                    Yes, it is fair. I don't like steak, I'd much prefer a hamburger.
                    Most of all, don't try to make me eat something I don't like. I will
                    move to wherever for some sizzle so long as I'm left alone to grill my
                    own hamburger.

                    In recruiting "liberty minded" individuals, all the FSP asks is that
                    you attend the barbecue. If the FSP suddenly changes course and
                    starts enumerating a political platform, I believe that it will have a
                    negative impact on recruitment efforts and may cause a rift among the
                    current FSP agreement signatories.

                    Kelly
                    --
                    Res ipsa loquitur - the affair speaks for itself.
                  • delcomico
                    No kidding! Anything to make me a liar, it seems. Good to hear. ;-) --Kev ... From: Tim Condon [mailto:tcondon@freestateproject.org] Sent: Thursday, May 01,
                    Message 9 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      No kidding! Anything to make me a liar, it seems. Good to hear. ;-)

                      --Kev

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Tim Condon [mailto:tcondon@...]
                      Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 10:02 PM
                      To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: RE: [FSP] The problem with no platform.

                      At 04:13 PM 5/1/2003 -0500, you wrote:
                      >Even the word "libertarian" can cover a lot of territory. Consider that
                      >we have two famous talk show hosts---Neal Boortz and Bill Maher--who
                      >call themselves 'libertarians', and they are both cogs of the
                      Republican
                      >and Democratic parties, respectively. Boortz is a flag-waving Bushie.
                      >Maher is a gun control advocate who has attended Democratic
                      fundraisers.
                      >How very liberty-oriented.

                      Bill Maher is a collectivist pig, no doubt about it. But Boortz

                      *is* a libertarian, as anyone can tell if they listen to his program.
                      Incidentally, he talked about the Free State Project for about 20
                      minutes
                      today, took calls from two Porcs (including me), and outright endorsed
                      the
                      project, saying he thought it could work. "Build me a studio and I'll be

                      right there with you!" he said. ---Tim Condon




                      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      freestateproject-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                      http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    • Mike Lorrey
                      ... I would instead describe it as spreading by word of mouth that this restaurant has the best damn steak in the universe among closet meat lovers in a world
                      Message 10 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- Kelly Setzer <kelly.setzer@...> wrote:
                        > On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 04:13:47PM -0500, delcomico wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Is it even fair to those who will sacrifice their homes to this
                        > > movement, to sell the sizzle ("Liberty in our lifetime!") when
                        > > there is no steak..?
                        > >
                        >
                        > Yes, it is fair. I don't like steak, I'd much prefer a hamburger.
                        > Most of all, don't try to make me eat something I don't like. I will
                        > move to wherever for some sizzle so long as I'm left alone to grill
                        > my own hamburger.

                        I would instead describe it as spreading by word of mouth that this
                        restaurant has the best damn steak in the universe among closet meat
                        lovers in a world of vegans. The public front of the restaurant is that
                        they have an excellent vegan menu with soy based "meat" entrees. The
                        vegans have never tasted soy steak that is so great before. They don't
                        realize they are eating the real thing until it is far too late...

                        =====
                        Mike Lorrey
                        "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                        - Gen. John Stark
                        "Pacifists are Objectively Pro-Fascist." - George Orwell
                        "Treason doth never Prosper. What is the Reason?
                        For if it Prosper, none Dare call it Treason..." - Ovid

                        __________________________________
                        Do you Yahoo!?
                        The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
                        http://search.yahoo.com
                      • Tim Condon
                        ... I am too Kev, and I agree with you. But we re not going to get away from federal anti-drug statutes. All we can do in any event is abolish such laws on the
                        Message 11 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          >Tim chimes in: In fact, some Porcupines do *not* want to abolish what some
                          >of us call "victimless crime laws."

                          > >Really? Do you think so? I haven't seen anyone like that. There's one
                          > guy on the forum who opposes legalizing heroin, but he's not a member.
                          >
                          > I have seen posts in the Christian FSP email list worrying that
                          > the FSP is going "too libertarian," IIRC. There
                          > are libertarian-conservatives in the FSP, I believe, who would not agree
                          >with legalizing "all" recreational drugs. --Tim C.
                          >
                          >
                          >I'm a libertarian-conservative and I favor legalizing all recreational
                          >drugs. It shouldn't be implemented overnight, but there could be a
                          >definite move to deconstruct the War On Drugs. We could start by
                          >decriminalizing marijuana (in all contexts, not just for chronically ill
                          >medical patients).
                          >
                          >--Kev

                          I am too Kev, and I agree with you. But we're not going to get
                          away from federal anti-drug statutes. All we can do in any event is abolish
                          such laws on the state level. Which most likely will be done (since the FSP
                          isn't a political organization, it's ultimately up to the people of the
                          Freestate and their elected representatives, yes?). --Tim Condon
                        • Mike Lorrey
                          ... One of the great things about a libertarian society is that true liberty is the default state. If voluntary consensual groups of individuals wish to
                          Message 12 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- Tim Condon <tcondon@...> wrote:
                            > At 04:13 PM 5/1/2003 -0500, you wrote:
                            > >Even the word "libertarian" can cover a lot of territory. Consider
                            > >that we have two famous talk show hosts---Neal Boortz and Bill
                            > >Maher--who call themselves 'libertarians', and they are both cogs
                            > > of the Republican and Democratic parties, respectively. Boortz is
                            > > a flag-waving Bushie. Maher is a gun control advocate who has
                            > >attended Democratic fundraisers. How very liberty-oriented.
                            >
                            > Bill Maher is a collectivist pig, no doubt about it. But
                            > Boortz *is* a libertarian, as anyone can tell if they listen to his
                            > program.

                            One of the great things about a libertarian society is that true
                            liberty is the default state. If voluntary consensual groups of
                            individuals wish to surrender their freedom to their respective groups
                            (i.e. form a commune) within such a society, that is their right, they
                            just can't initiate force to do so against anyone. That the reverse
                            isn't allowed to occur is indicative of which is the truly just
                            condition. Bill Maher is a collectivist, no doubt, but so, to my mind,
                            are many christian oriented libertarians who submit to a collective
                            religious dogma. There is nothing wrong with this at all, so long as it
                            is consensual for all participants.

                            This is the libertarian principle of enclavism at work.

                            > Incidentally, he talked about the Free State Project for about 20
                            > minutes today, took calls from two Porcs (including me), and outright
                            > endorsed the project, saying he thought it could work. "Build me a
                            > studio and I'll be right there with you!" he said.

                            This is great. People like this need to be recruited as spokespersons.


                            =====
                            Mike Lorrey
                            "Live Free or Die, Death is not the Worst of Evils."
                            - Gen. John Stark
                            "Pacifists are Objectively Pro-Fascist." - George Orwell
                            "Treason doth never Prosper. What is the Reason?
                            For if it Prosper, none Dare call it Treason..." - Ovid

                            __________________________________
                            Do you Yahoo!?
                            The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
                            http://search.yahoo.com
                          • Tim Condon
                            ... Yeah? Well I ll bet there are a bunch of libertarians who would disagree with you...but let s not quibble about it; we re all trying to get to the same
                            Message 13 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              >I'm not an anarchist, I believe in a small, limited government; I am quite
                              >patriotic, and believe that America is the last, best chance for the world
                              >to show how to have widespread freedom and justice (the "original"
                              >America, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, I should say); I support a
                              >very strong, but light and fast-moving military for national defense; I
                              >believe that the nuclear family is the main bulwark against unhinged
                              >statism; I believe strongly in religion, particularly the Christian
                              >religion, and am very pro-church and pro-organized-religion; and I am very
                              >much in favor of individualism and capitalism across the board; I abhor
                              >those who advocate violence to achieve political ends with
                              >respect to the struggle for freedom in America, and I explicitly reject
                              >the notion of secession, as does the Free Sttate Project. Pretty
                              >conservative, hah? Of course I hold all the other standard libertarian
                              >positions, but I mention those above to distinguish me from the anarchists
                              >and left-libertarians. --Tim Condon
                              >
                              >Not all libertarians are anarchists. You sound pretty mainstream
                              >libertarian to me.
                              >Gary

                              Yeah? Well I'll bet there are a bunch of libertarians who would
                              disagree with you...but let's not quibble about it; we're all trying to get
                              to the same place.

                              >P.S. My take is that the FSP does not explicitly reject the notion of
                              >secession, but sees it as a last resort.

                              The FSP isn't a secessionist movement, period. If things get dicey
                              years in the future, that will be for those people to deal with. However,
                              after everyone sees the extraordinary success of the Freestate, America
                              will turn around and start re-embracing the freedoms that the Founding
                              Fathers bequeathed to us, thus negating any silliness about secession now
                              or in the future. At least that's the theory.... ---Tim C.
                            • Tim Condon
                              ... Bill Maher is a collectivist pig, no doubt about it. But Boortz *is* a libertarian, as anyone can tell if they listen to his program. Incidentally, he
                              Message 14 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                At 04:13 PM 5/1/2003 -0500, you wrote:
                                >Even the word "libertarian" can cover a lot of territory. Consider that
                                >we have two famous talk show hosts---Neal Boortz and Bill Maher--who
                                >call themselves 'libertarians', and they are both cogs of the Republican
                                >and Democratic parties, respectively. Boortz is a flag-waving Bushie.
                                >Maher is a gun control advocate who has attended Democratic fundraisers.
                                >How very liberty-oriented.

                                Bill Maher is a collectivist pig, no doubt about it. But Boortz
                                *is* a libertarian, as anyone can tell if they listen to his program.
                                Incidentally, he talked about the Free State Project for about 20 minutes
                                today, took calls from two Porcs (including me), and outright endorsed the
                                project, saying he thought it could work. "Build me a studio and I'll be
                                right there with you!" he said. ---Tim Condon
                              • PJ
                                Yes. Quality libertarian activists and subtlety of thought . Influence is not an automatic gift bestowed on good people. It is earned. It falls to a
                                Message 15 of 27 , May 1, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Yes. "Quality libertarian activists" and "subtlety of thought".

                                  "Influence is not an automatic gift bestowed on good people. It is earned. It falls to a huge variety of people, most of whom consciously plan on acquiring influence." ----Hugh Hewitt







                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: Jason P Sorens
                                  To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
                                  Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 12:34 PM
                                  Subject: RE: [FSP] The problem with no platform.


                                  On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, delcomico wrote:

                                  > Again, however, IF WE:
                                  >
                                  > (A) Have no stated goals, aside from liberty platitudes, and no
                                  > platform;
                                  >
                                  > (B) Call ourselves 'libertarians';
                                  >
                                  > (C) Have, among us, many passionate and outspoken libertarians who want
                                  > to eliminate "victimless crimes" (i.e., legalize all drugs, smut, and
                                  > prostitution);

                                  Actually, "B" is not the case; we've never said that this is a
                                  "libertarian" project, though you might say that it in fact is. We've
                                  avoided applying a single ideological label to ourselves because there are
                                  a lot of libertarians out there who don't like to call themselves that.
                                  (Witness the "Voluntarism" article recently added to the website.)

                                  Eventually we want to legalize all drugs for adults. We don't have to run
                                  from that. But when we do say that, we have to make clear all the
                                  nuances and context of the libertarian position: that sequencing matters,
                                  that concomitant reforms are necessary (such as allowing property owners
                                  to discriminate against drug users), that kids are different from adults
                                  and require special protections, and that we are politically astute. In
                                  a short interview it's very difficult to state all that context, so best
                                  to leave the details a little vague, while making clear our general
                                  philosophy.

                                  As an aside, as a hardcore libertarian, if I were watching a program and a
                                  libertarian advocate simply said, "All drugs must be legalized," I would
                                  know what he meant but I would not want to join whatever he's pushing
                                  because he's not very articulate or savvy. To get quality libertarian
                                  activists (yes, even the hardcore kind), we have to show the subtlety of
                                  our thought and the ability to avoid media traps. Otherwise we're just
                                  another pack of ideologues in la-la land.

                                  ___________________________________________________________________________

                                  Jason P Sorens - jason.sorensATyale.edu - <http://pantheon.yale.edu/~jps35>

                                  <http://www.freestateproject.org> - Do you want liberty in your lifetime?



                                  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



                                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  freestateproject-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • David Mincin
                                  I find myself pretty much in agreement with our thoughts Tim. Ouch, does that mean that my next stop is a jail cell???? (smile) ... From: Tim Condon To:
                                  Message 16 of 27 , May 2, 2003
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I find myself pretty much in agreement with our thoughts Tim. Ouch, does that mean that my next stop is a jail cell???? (smile)
                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: Tim Condon
                                    To: freestateproject@yahoogroups.com
                                    Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 5:39 PM
                                    Subject: RE: [FSP] The problem with no platform.



                                    > > I am a "conservative libertarian".
                                    >
                                    >How, exactly, do you distinguish between a conservative libertarian and a
                                    >libertarian?
                                    >Gary

                                    I'm not an anarchist, I believe in a small, limited government; I
                                    am quite patriotic, and believe that America is the last, best chance for
                                    the world to show how to have widespread freedom and justice (the
                                    "original" America, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, I should say); I
                                    support a very strong, but light and fast-moving military for national
                                    defense; I believe that the nuclear family is the main bulwark against
                                    unhinged statism; I believe strongly in religion, particularly the
                                    Christian religion, and am very pro-church and pro-organized-religion; and
                                    I am very much in favor of individualism and capitalism across the board; I
                                    abhor those who advocate violence to achieve political ends with respect to
                                    the struggle for freedom in America, and I explicitly reject the notion of
                                    secession, as does the Free Sttate Project. Pretty conservative, hah? Of
                                    course I hold all the other standard libertarian positions, but I mention
                                    those above to distinguish me from the anarchists and
                                    left-libertarians. --Tim Condon



                                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



                                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    freestateproject-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  • Zack Bass
                                    [Moderator Note: I m letting this through because the last bit peripherally has to do with our communication strategy, but discussion of drug policy is
                                    Message 17 of 27 , May 2, 2003
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      [Moderator Note: I'm letting this through because the last bit peripherally has to do with our communication strategy, but discussion of drug policy is off-topic, so if you want to discuss victimless crime policy, please respond on crackerbarrel. Thanks!]

                                      --- In freestateproject@yahoogroups.com, Tim Condon <tcondon@f...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > .... In fact, some Porcupines do *not* want to abolish
                                      > what some of us call "victimless crime laws." Why? Because they
                                      > disagree that such crimes are "victimless."
                                      >

                                      Who do they think is the Victim? And whom do they propose to punish?

                                      The term "Victimless" is shorthand; it also implies a Perpetrator.
                                      You cannot make a Criminal Law against something without stating whom
                                      you will punish. The Perpetrator cannot also be the Victim. Saying
                                      that a whore or a drug user is a Victim does not justify punishing him.

                                      People who pretend that Victimless Crimes actually have Victims are
                                      simply liars who want to pretend to accept the notion of a Victimless
                                      Act and yet punish people they don't like anyhow.

                                      I believe that Porcupines who do this may be convinced by pointing out
                                      to them their error. I do not believe that the Statists in the place
                                      we intend to move to will ever be so convinced though.
                                    • Amanda Phillips
                                      ... am an ... lot of people ... I m happy that ... State because I ... ever get to the ... not we should ... what I d call ... are plenty of ... the FSP. To
                                      Message 18 of 27 , May 3, 2003
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        >>Kevin said: (B) Call ourselves 'libertarians';
                                        >>
                                        >>Amanda said: But we don't call ourselves 'libertarians.' I
                                        am an
                                        >>anarchist. I think Tim C is a Republican. And there are a
                                        lot of people
                                        >>who consider themselves libertarian. That's OK with me...
                                        I'm happy that
                                        >>you Republicans and Libertarians will be moving to my Free
                                        State because I
                                        >>think you want most of the same things that I want. If we
                                        ever get to the
                                        >>point where we're arguing amongst ourselves about whether or
                                        not we should
                                        >>privatize the police force, I'll be a happy little anarchist.
                                        >
                                        > Tim chimes in: Yep, I'm a registered Republican, and
                                        what I'd call
                                        >a "conservative libertarian." It's worth noting that there
                                        are plenty of
                                        >freedom-loving *non*-libertarians, both in the world and in
                                        the FSP. To
                                        >coin a phrase, we have a "big tent." All you have to do to
                                        comport with the
                                        >goals of the FSP is believe in individual freedom and support
                                        the ultimate
                                        >reduction in size of state government by 2/3 or more (more,
                                        in my case).

                                        Excellent! How about reducing the state government by 3/3?

                                        >>Amanda said: Since I take issue with A, B, and C, I don't
                                        need to tell you
                                        >>that I think D is wrong. Also, I *hate* the word "invade."
                                        We want
                                        >>freedom, not an invasion.
                                        >>Peace,
                                        >>Amanda
                                        >
                                        > Tim chimes in: Agree strongly with Amanda, even
                                        though she's a
                                        >dangerous anarchist. (joak, joak!)

                                        Not nearly as dangerous as you statists! :) But I will work
                                        with you statists as long as you're moving in my direction...
                                        even though you are ultimately misguided! (joak, joak!)

                                        Peace,

                                        Amanda
                                        http://amanda42.livejournal.com
                                      • Jim
                                        This IS a big tent. I have never seen an anarchist Republic in history. Can anybody think of one? I m a Conservative /Libertarian /Southern Nationalist if it
                                        Message 19 of 27 , May 4, 2003
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          This IS a big tent. I have never seen an anarchist Republic in
                                          history. Can anybody think of one? I'm a
                                          Conservative /Libertarian /Southern Nationalist if it comes to
                                          definitions. I'm a registered Repub because I don't want to dis-
                                          enfranchise myself. I vote Repub. mostly in local elections. One of
                                          our own SN's is looking like he's going to run in the Republican
                                          Primaries in theb Southern States against GW. His main point is to
                                          get the intrusive Federal Government into the public debate. Rev.
                                          John Thomas Cripps looks like he he will be going after the
                                          Governorship of Mississippi. He was one of the main players in the
                                          Mississippi flag fight and got the thing out to be voted on by the
                                          people. The entire States Rights and the concept of a "Republic of
                                          Republics" is what I'm about.

                                          Jim




                                          --- In freestateproject@yahoogroups.com, Amanda Phillips
                                          <amanda42@r...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > >>Kevin said: (B) Call ourselves 'libertarians';
                                          > >>
                                          > >>Amanda said: But we don't call ourselves 'libertarians.' I
                                          > am an
                                          > >>anarchist. I think Tim C is a Republican. And there are a
                                          > lot of people
                                          > >>who consider themselves libertarian. That's OK with me...
                                          > I'm happy that
                                          > >>you Republicans and Libertarians will be moving to my Free
                                          > State because I
                                          > >>think you want most of the same things that I want. If we
                                          > ever get to the
                                          > >>point where we're arguing amongst ourselves about whether or
                                          > not we should
                                          > >>privatize the police force, I'll be a happy little anarchist.
                                          > >
                                          > > Tim chimes in: Yep, I'm a registered Republican, and
                                          > what I'd call
                                          > >a "conservative libertarian." It's worth noting that there
                                          > are plenty of
                                          > >freedom-loving *non*-libertarians, both in the world and in
                                          > the FSP. To
                                          > >coin a phrase, we have a "big tent." All you have to do to
                                          > comport with the
                                          > >goals of the FSP is believe in individual freedom and support
                                          > the ultimate
                                          > >reduction in size of state government by 2/3 or more (more,
                                          > in my case).
                                          >
                                          > Excellent! How about reducing the state government by 3/3?
                                          >
                                          > >>Amanda said: Since I take issue with A, B, and C, I don't
                                          > need to tell you
                                          > >>that I think D is wrong. Also, I *hate* the word "invade."
                                          > We want
                                          > >>freedom, not an invasion.
                                          > >>Peace,
                                          > >>Amanda
                                          > >
                                          > > Tim chimes in: Agree strongly with Amanda, even
                                          > though she's a
                                          > >dangerous anarchist. (joak, joak!)
                                          >
                                          > Not nearly as dangerous as you statists! :) But I will work
                                          > with you statists as long as you're moving in my direction...
                                          > even though you are ultimately misguided! (joak, joak!)
                                          >
                                          > Peace,
                                          >
                                          > Amanda
                                          > http://amanda42.livejournal.com
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.