What do some of the fellow Agorists here think about developing the FSP in a more Agorist fashion - moving to New Hampshire and organizing there?
SEK3 had a similar area in Southern California which was largely Agorist - transitioning from phase 1 to 2 - where he was able to organize a bit better, what do you guys think? Listening to FTL, I think that there’s a deep soil that’s capable of being fertilized with the seeds of Agorism.
If not New Hampshire, perhaps somewhere else? Las Vegas? Southern California? Somewhere warm?
I think you have a nice thought, however it is very improabable.
There are far too many people in these areas that are not agorists and do not want to be associated with a free state project cause. I mean, southern California, thats like San Diego, Los Angeles, and millions of other people. Any agorist population that moves there would be quite insignificant. The same applies for Las Vegas. Nice idea, but we have to keep in mind that we are a very small minority in relation to the population of Southern California and Vegas. I think that for a free state project to succeed, we (agorists) would have to move to a place where they could be a majority and beat the local governments at their own game before talking about the state. I do respect your idea, I just disagree on the locations you have mentioned. Just my thoughts.
Maybe Wyoming, or if situations change.Puerto Rico( we’d have to learn Spanish). But I think the best place would be South Carolina, because of tobbacco growth and coast. It would also have some historical signifigance
This is cross-posted from a thread I made on the FTL website.
While I support the Free State Project and love the talk of secession, I think that the chances of a state seceding without a short, bloody fight that they will lose are slim. Free cities on the other hand - that’s another story.
What if we managed to saturate a few hundred small local governments with libertarians?
If these freedom-friendly areas, scattered about the nation, stop enforcing unjust laws and fail to participate in tax extortion – that is a very realistic goal, and also a very effective one. They won’t attract nearly as much notice as a state. The fact that they are decentralized (contrary to what state warfare doctrine would have us believe) is a tactical advantage. Whereas a state has one big geographical area with a political center that can be quickly taken out, a whole lot of small areas present a completely different situation.
What would happen is that the fedgov would either try to take them on all at once, thus stretching their resources thin and making coordination difficult - making it logistically very possible for them to lose to the secessionists.
Or, they would try to take out one or a few free cities at a time - which gives the libertarians a number of options.
They could simply go to the cities which are unoccupied, making the fedgov play whack-a-mole.
They could fade out of sight, so long as their identities are not well known, maintaining a thriving underground until it is safe to resurface.
They could have massive acts of civil disobedience, which would force the fedgov either to give up, or do very, VERY unpopular things.
Combining that strategy of small-scale geographic secession with a broader movement of agorism is probably the best general strategy for liberty.
Of course, we still need to discuss the tactical details of how it might work.
To start, I would suggest trying to use the influence of the Free State Project to start working on the towns, rather than focusing on the state government. I know that’s generally the plan already, but I mean incorporating the idea of small-scale secession rather than trying to make a state secession the goal
I know theres a ton of people who have a problem with New Hampshire but that’s the state was chosen. The Free State Project isn’t going to work if every group of libertarians come up with their own place they think libertarians should move to. Splintering the project is a really bad idea. In order for the FSP to succeed people just have to come to terms with the fact that NH was chosen and WY wasn’t. I’m currently considering moving there within the next 1-3 years.
That seems to be a pretty common objection. I live in Pittsburgh though so the climate there isn’t going to be a whole lot colder than it is here.
I think a lot of libertarians are moving to Keene NH
California’s really not a good Idea. They’ve outlawed homeschooling without credentials (being appealed though) and there are huge property taxes here (these come to the top of my head though there are many more statist things they do).
Plus there’s little chance of political reform so it’s probably not very appealing to the right.
South Carolina would be good I s’pose, but I think New Hampshire’s already got a big enough movement going on that it’s better. Plus global warming will supposedly solve the “cold issue”. I plan on moving there when I’m done with school.
I like the idea. It is one reason I have been tempted to go to the next PorcFest or whatever to meet some of the folks participating and living there in NH.
The most common objection to NH by others and myself is indeed climate. I am from Maryland originally and currently reside in VA. I am used to cold winters and hot summers (I can understand why the first settlers here had such a rough time), but being that much farther north… does that significantly change the temperatures I can expect in winter or summer?
Oh… I was never suggesting that people move to California, I was just saying that in Long Beach - where SEK3 used to live - there was a large community of Agorists.