 Poll
|
| Question: |
Read below, then rate this idea on a scale between 5 stars (ideal) to 1 star (awful):
| ***** |
   12 (38.7%) |
| **** |
2 (6.5%) |
| *** |
5 (16.1%) |
| ** |
5 (16.1%) |
| * |
7 (22.6%) |
|
|
| Total Voters: 25 |
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 
|
 |
|
 Author
|
Topic: Free State LandOwner Registry (Read 19681 times)
|
|
John Edward Mercier
|
In some way. By buying up adjacent land, they could form a new municipal corporation. It still wouldn't be sovereign, but much of the control we feel is at the local level as noted by those that promote specific towns.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
Not really because in NH the State is sovereign not the municipalities.
The municipalities are corporations empowered through the State by charter. Does that somehow invalidate the strategic benefit of Free Staters buying up adjacent land? In some way. By buying up adjacent land, they could form a new municipal corporation. It still wouldn't be sovereign, but much of the control we feel is at the local level as noted by those that promote specific towns. |
Would starting a FreeStater-controlled municipal corporation have any advantages in fighting state control vs unincorporated privately owned land? Full sovereignty is a long-term ivory-tower idea. Rome wasn't built in a day. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
Even though it's (initially) unpopular, this remains a very good idea - until I hear substantive arguments to the contrary.
All other strategies Free Staters can come up with seem either futile (trying to change a state with 1+ million non-libertarians and more Massholes arriving daily) or downright self-destructive!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John Edward Mercier
|
Not really because in NH the State is sovereign not the municipalities.
The municipalities are corporations empowered through the State by charter. Does that somehow invalidate the strategic benefit of Free Staters buying up adjacent land? In some way. By buying up adjacent land, they could form a new municipal corporation. It still wouldn't be sovereign, but much of the control we feel is at the local level as noted by those that promote specific towns. |
Would starting a FreeStater-controlled municipal corporation have any advantages in fighting state control vs unincorporated privately owned land? Full sovereignty is a long-term ivory-tower idea. Rome wasn't built in a day. With the right charter, yes. I figured that was the purpose of your project. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
There's really no need for one centralized charter to govern the seceding landowners, who would each govern their own property and be intertwined with a mesh of voluntary trade connections, contractual obligations, and so forth. A formal charter may be necessary only for dealing with the external agents (i.e. governments), and what comes together in my mind is more like a list of demands, but could be wordsmithed into a proper "emancipation proclamation" by better minds than mine... Those demands would include: - The right to buy privately owned real-estate without undue intervention from the state.
- The right of people owning a sufficiently large acreage of adjacent land to secede from their municipal government by unanimous consent.
- The right to peacefully exercise freedom of speech, commerce, and travel across the newly established borders between government-controlled and privately-owned (liberated) land.
- The right of the seceding territories to expand on the basis of purchase of additional land or consent from existing landowners.
- The right to refuse unwanted local / state government services, and to buy local "public" / "government-owned" (stolen) assets at fair market value.
- The right to discriminate in our business dealings and non-violently ostracize local landowners who refuse to sell at a fair market price.
- The right of a sufficiently large archipelago of seceding municipalities to progressively secede from state, federal, and multinational, and global governments.
You get the idea... |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 20, 2010, 12:51:30 am by Alex Libman »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John Edward Mercier
|
You may be trying too hard in a short period.
In NH, much of the restriction is actually the municipal corporation. And a new municipality can be formed, but its not based on a specific amount of area. Just a decision by the landowners and residents within that area. Its been done in the past, and most recently almost done.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
This is obviously a long-term pipe-dream, but it does compare very well to other pipe-dreams other Free Staters are considering. It also complements them to some degree, as a person going to jail for tax resistance will be seen as demanding the impossible - abolition of all taxes overnight. If, on the other hand, s\he presents a list of demands like those listed above then the complaint becomes a lot more reasonable. (Actually my main inspiration for this strategy is thinking about how the Zionist movement could have acted to create an Israel without violating Palestinians' rights, as it unfortunately did to great degree through decades of terrorism and blunt government force.) The common libertarian goal of making governments drastically shrink or disappear ignores the fact that, brainwashed or not, the majority of people love Mommy Government and would never accept greater liberty in its stead, or at least not from philosophical arguments alone. We cannot change the path of this train, but we can fork from it, and eventually demonstrate the empirical real-world proof that our economic engine is superior. The governments will either be forced to send in the tanks to violate our property rights, thereby losing all propaganda benefits inherited from the American Revolution, or they will be forced to compete with us as ever-more John Galts move into our gulch, thereby widening the gulch, attracting ever-more brains and capital, and perpetuating a positive feedback cycle of growth. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 20, 2010, 01:04:11 am by Alex Libman »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John Edward Mercier
|
A municipal corporation acting in a truly libertarian way could do that.
Though you have to remember you property rights are really legitimized by the State.
Much of the land here was at one time or another taken by force...
Sitting in a modern day legislative committee one will here talk of 'southern Quebec' and 'northern Massachussets' harking back to the War of Aggression... and all the ugly that goes with that.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 20, 2010, 01:05:47 am by John Edward Mercier »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
Nah....  ...disagreable......its not good to do that.. |
Why is that? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pat McCotter
|
Nah.... ...disagreable......its not good to do that.. |
Why is that? Because gragerronald is a drive-by spammer. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Visualize Whirled Peas
Give Pizza Chance
I think it's wrong that only one company makes the game Monopoly. - Steven Wright
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
(BUMP)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
(BUMP)  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
Buuuuu-u-uuump....  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Alex Libman
Guest
|
From another thread: Private Land Secession may seem like a long-shot at present, but it makes a whole lot more sense than throwing a hissy fit in the middle of Keene because the vast majority of people there like their government. In transition to a free society, places like Keene would probably become charter cities or fragment into several neighborhood associations, with most of the regulations, prohibitions, and taxes remaining in place. Such towns in New Hampshire would be among the last to be affected by intergovernmental competition's drive toward ever-freer markets, because they already are darn free compared to the rest of the world. On the other hand, when you have a sufficiently large area of rightfully owned land (or seasteads, etc) where virtually all the people refuse to accept government services, then you have a serious moral advantage. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 
|
|
|
 |
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
