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

RE: [FSP] The problem with no platform.

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 27 , May 1 1:29 PM
    • 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 2 of 27 , May 1 1:41 PM
      • 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 3 of 27 , May 1 1:41 PM
        • 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 4 of 27 , May 1 2:13 PM
          • 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 5 of 27 , May 1 2:39 PM
            • 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 6 of 27 , May 1 3:34 PM
              • 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 7 of 27 , May 1 6:54 PM
                • 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 8 of 27 , May 1 7:44 PM
                  • 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 9 of 27 , May 1 7:51 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.
                      >
                      >
                      >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 10 of 27 , May 1 7:56 PM
                      • 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 11 of 27 , May 1 7:56 PM
                        • 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 12 of 27 , May 1 8:02 PM
                          • 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 13 of 27 , May 1 10:31 PM
                            • 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 14 of 27 , May 2 6:39 AM
                              • 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 15 of 27 , May 2 4:23 PM
                                • 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 16 of 27 , May 3 10:15 PM
                                  • 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 17 of 27 , May 4 3:28 PM
                                    • 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.