pull down to refresh
13 sats \ 8 replies \ @Undisciplined 21 May \ parent \ on: What can we do to push libertarianism NOW? libertarian
I think they chose the wrong location. NH is too surrounded by enemy ideologies. If they succeed in making NH better it will get flooded by the surrounding commie statists, rather than more libertarians.
They should have chosen Alaska or Montana, where there's no surrounding hostile population to contend with.
I still think voting with your feet is the right approach. I'm glad you found somewhere even freer than NH.
I'm actually not convinced its a blue state / red state problem. New Hampshire is a red state, hell even most of massachusetts is... Like most states, there's just a few densely populated cities where gangsters can rig elections to flip it.
You'd want the average old yankee in the granite state in charge of the government over the free-staters, the closer I got to it the more it seemed like a psyop to make Libertarians look like ineffective clowns and legitimize elections- seems to have worked.
There's only one issue Libertarians should care about at this point, other than fixing the money, and that's returning to a land-ownership-based electorate.
Edit: I actually moved to a surrounding area, NH is surrounded by friendlies despite the Bank of London entrenchment that persists in Boston. I did this not to vote with my feet, but because its where I had the most leverage to make myself free, which is different and personal for everyone.
reply
We may be using the term differently, but that's exactly what I mean by "voting with your feet".
the closer I got to it the more it seemed like a psyop to make Libertarians look like ineffective clowns and legitimize elections
Might it be that many libertarians also happen to be weirdos?
reply
That's fair use then, I meant in contrast to the thesis of the FSP, which attempted to to DoS local elections as opposed to leading others from a position of strength.
Might it be that many libertarians also happen to be weirdos?
Most Bitcoiners are Libertarians and weird, so it's not that... It may have simply been the cohort of people without ties elsewhere. As a native New England'er it was an inconsequential move for me.
I saw that it recently changed leadership and tone, so it wasn't just me that was put off by it. In hindsight it just seems like it was a bad idea from the start.
reply
it was a bad idea from the start.
There was a top-down central planning flavor to it that's quite at odds with libertarians and libertarianism. I think it was just an attempt at bottom-up coordination, but that doesn't seem like the way it played out.
I prefer the more organic approach of people just being really conscientious about where they choose to live. Jurisdictions compete for residents, so favorable policies will emerge from our residency choices.
reply
Yep, the fact that it even needed a change in leadership says it all
May as well just find your niche and join the bigger fight, which is global and spiritual
reply
I've been around so long that I was following FSP when they still hadn't decided which state. It kind of came down to Wyoming and NH. I sort of lost interest after they chose NH.
reply
I'm pretty sure I voted in those polls. I know I signed the pledge to relocate, which I have yet to follow through on (sorry).
I definitely recall being disappointed by the final location choices.
reply
deleted by author