Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 [13]   Go Down

Author Topic: Drugs in the FSP  (Read 44597 times)

thrivetacobell

  • FSP Participant
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #180 on: March 13, 2004, 07:32:03 pm »

Actually, I couldn't give two shits one way or the other. I'm thinking merely of the fact that if I had children (which is not my plan in life) and a family, or a little sister,  I would hope people had the courtesy to show them a little respect for where they are at in life and not act like a moron for the sake of acting like a moron.

Look at it this way-

We exist, and insomuch are we subject to the fact of that little thing called reality. No matter where we are to move, we are still a part of society, with all the families and children and elderly found therein.

How many FSP members have families? If they worry for their children, should we revole their membership? They want exactly what we want- which I hope is not the demise of basic deceny.

Do you think our politics will have half a chance if we disregard this? C'mon, man, have some sense.
Logged
"There is only one success - to be able to spend your life in your own way."
                       Chistopher Morley

rdeacon

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1874
  • Six Years Into a Ten Year Sojourn
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #181 on: March 14, 2004, 11:45:15 am »

I believe our tent is made smaller when we tell people what aspects of liberty are not acceptable for FSP members to care about and/or pursue.The beauty of the FSP, which is really the beauty of libertarianism, is that it allows different people with different values and priorities to find common ground in a general pursuit of increased liberty. Some of us care most about gun rights, some of us care most about taxes, some of us care most about drugs--I'm sure there are dozens of different priorities represented in the FSP.
It's not that such pursuits are not "acceptable", but rather that such pursuits are not and should not be priorities.  Right now American culture is one that thinks on a societal scale.  We need to push the issues from a societal, not individual angle.  The "war on nudity" does nothing to hurt society.  There are no naked ghettos or nudity bandits.  I talk about pushing drug reform not because I think I should have the right to do drugs, that won't fly with the electorate.  I push drug reform because I have evidence that the war on drugs creates crime, causes medical harm, and increases our drug problem.  I push gun reform not because I believe in the 2nd Amendment, but because victim disarmament puts people in danger.  These are the angles that we need to emphesize if we are to gain influence - there is no such argument to be made for public nudity.

One day, down the road, when we actually have made an effect on the way people think about their role in society, we will be in a position to say "I should have the right to do something just because it does not harm your life, liberty, and property", but it's simply too early to say that.  For every person we recruit through that logic, we alienate a hundred people who simply are not accustomed to thinking like that but are open to libertarian ideas as solutions to their problems.

Nudity, for all that it is natural and should not be persecuted, creates no societal problem through its prohibition.  And, 99% of the population would probably not want their child exposed to nudity on public streets.  Do I agree with their logic?  No.  But when you're talking about 99% of the population, the soundness of their logic doesn't matter.  Public nudity is a third rail issue, don't set yourself up to get fried.  Considering our plans to pursue public office, I hope that our potential candidates fully understand the need for discretion and a moderate agenda.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2004, 03:46:51 pm by rdeacon »
Logged

Terry 1956

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2889
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #182 on: March 17, 2004, 12:38:09 pm »

I believe our tent is made smaller when we tell people what aspects of liberty are not acceptable for FSP members to care about and/or pursue.The beauty of the FSP, which is really the beauty of libertarianism, is that it allows different people with different values and priorities to find common ground in a general pursuit of increased liberty. Some of us care most about gun rights, some of us care most about taxes, some of us care most about drugs--I'm sure there are dozens of different priorities represented in the FSP.
It's not that such pursuits are not "acceptable", but rather that such pursuits are not and should not be priorities.  Right now American culture is one that thinks on a societal scale.  We need to push the issues from a societal, not individual angle.  The "war on nudity" does nothing to hurt society.  There are no naked ghettos or nudity bandits.  I talk about pushing drug reform not because I think I should have the right to do drugs, that won't fly with the electorate.  I push drug reform because I have evidence that the war on drugs creates crime, causes medical harm, and increases our drug problem.  I push gun reform not because I believe in the 2nd Amendment, but because victim disarmament puts people in danger.  These are the angles that we need to emphesize if we are to gain influence - there is no such argument to be made for public nudity.

One day, down the road, when we actually have made an effect on the way people think about their role in society, we will be in a position to say "I should have the right to do something just because it does not harm your life, liberty, and property", but it's simply too early to say that.  For every person we recruit through that logic, we alienate a hundred people who simply are not accustomed to thinking like that but are open to libertarian ideas as solutions to their problems.

Nudity, for all that it is natural and should not be persecuted, creates no societal problem through its prohibition.  And, 99% of the population would probably not want their child exposed to nudity on public streets.  Do I agree with their logic?  No.  But when you're talking about 99% of the population, the soundness of their logic doesn't matter.  Public nudity is a third rail issue, don't set yourself up to get fried.  Considering our plans to pursue public office, I hope that our potential candidates fully understand the need for discretion and a moderate agenda.
Actually people think on an individual and family scale with an out look on issues  and community that affects their lives, show them how society and the state aren't the same and how much the state is actually costing them. Don't pander to state falsehoods, its a loser.
Logged

rdeacon

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1874
  • Six Years Into a Ten Year Sojourn
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #183 on: March 17, 2004, 07:57:17 pm »

Actually people think on an individual and family scale with an out look on issues  and community that affects their lives, show them how society and the state aren't the same and how much the state is actually costing them. Don't pander to state falsehoods, its a loser.
Of course people think on an individual and family scale when they think of issues, but they consider themselves to be part of a society, the existance of which they subconsciously value very greatly. We've all heard the old adage that change is feared by the masses, well it is quite true.  It takes a rare set of circumstances for a population to rebel against an oppressive regime, especially when the oppression is not overt and violent.  America simply does not fit into this mold, otherwise we'd have 99% voter turnouts and much more protest.

There is a proven political malaise in this country, and that malaise intellectually manifests itself in the form of subconscious respect for the status quo - a fear of change.  In order to break the average person of this, we cannot yell at them about how the status quo isn't supposed to exist (or how its morally wrong for the status quo to exist), especially when our pop culture encourages conformity and brands anybody with a radical opinion as a freak or an outsider.

Right now our status quo is an entitlement complex.  Americans need to hear from politicians how those politicians will solve their problems.  Thats why they turn off libertarianism when libertarianism says "you don't have a right social security/medicare/welfare/minimum wage/police/fire/emergency services".  What they want to hear from libertarians is "how can I solve your problems?"  Gary Nolan speaks a lot about this approach, but unfortunately he still falls back on extremist policy which undercuts his message.  
Logged

Terry 1956

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2889
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #184 on: March 22, 2004, 04:58:37 pm »

Actually people think on an individual and family scale with an out look on issues  and community that affects their lives, show them how society and the state aren't the same and how much the state is actually costing them. Don't pander to state falsehoods, its a loser.
Of course people think on an individual and family scale when they think of issues, but they consider themselves to be part of a society, the existance of which they subconsciously value very greatly. We've all heard the old adage that change is feared by the masses, well it is quite true.  It takes a rare set of circumstances for a population to rebel against an oppressive regime, especially when the oppression is not overt and violent.  America simply does not fit into this mold, otherwise we'd have 99% voter turnouts and much more protest.

There is a proven political malaise in this country, and that malaise intellectually manifests itself in the form of subconscious respect for the status quo - a fear of change.  In order to break the average person of this, we cannot yell at them about how the status quo isn't supposed to exist (or how its morally wrong for the status quo to exist), especially when our pop culture encourages conformity and brands anybody with a radical opinion as a freak or an outsider.

Right now our status quo is an entitlement complex.  Americans need to hear from politicians how those politicians will solve their problems.  Thats why they turn off libertarianism when libertarianism says "you don't have a right social security/medicare/welfare/minimum wage/police/fire/emergency services".  What they want to hear from libertarians is "how can I solve your problems?"  Gary Nolan speaks a lot about this approach, but unfortunately he still falls back on extremist policy which undercuts his message.  
                                                                               
      I agree with you they don't offer enough solutions, people don't want to here the standard " We want stop someone from helping anyone and talking about charity just puts people in mind of  Good Will and soup kitchens. On the other hand those solutions should not include saving the federal social security and medicare program or  mandated contributions to a  private retirement fund or revenue neutral tax ideas. Cut taxes and spending a lot, show people how they can get better  less costly service by moving social security, health care subsidies and other saftey nets away from the federal and state governments towards voluntary associations, community, family, private firms and private institutions Social programs  are 70% of government spending and very ineffective at a federal and state level. Remember also there are a variety of ideas that can work and we have thousands of labortories in the US, (you have more than a thousand in NH) don't limit it to one or even 50.
Logged

Terry 1956

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2889
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #185 on: March 22, 2004, 05:04:26 pm »

Actually people think on an individual and family scale with an out look on issues  and community that affects their lives, show them how society and the state aren't the same and how much the state is actually costing them. Don't pander to state falsehoods, its a loser.
Of course people think on an individual and family scale when they think of issues, but they consider themselves to be part of a society, the existance of which they subconsciously value very greatly. We've all heard the old adage that change is feared by the masses, well it is quite true.  It takes a rare set of circumstances for a population to rebel against an oppressive regime, especially when the oppression is not overt and violent.  America simply does not fit into this mold, otherwise we'd have 99% voter turnouts and much more protest.

There is a proven political malaise in this country, and that malaise intellectually manifests itself in the form of subconscious respect for the status quo - a fear of change.  In order to break the average person of this, we cannot yell at them about how the status quo isn't supposed to exist (or how its morally wrong for the status quo to exist), especially when our pop culture encourages conformity and brands anybody with a radical opinion as a freak or an outsider.

Right now our status quo is an entitlement complex.  Americans need to hear from politicians how those politicians will solve their problems.  Thats why they turn off libertarianism when libertarianism says "you don't have a right social security/medicare/welfare/minimum wage/police/fire/emergency services".  What they want to hear from libertarians is "how can I solve your problems?"  Gary Nolan speaks a lot about this approach, but unfortunately he still falls back on extremist policy which undercuts his message.  
                                                                             
 Actually Nolan doesn't go far enough but there is a limit to what a presidential candidate can do any way, if it runs up to a million dollars or more its probally a waste of money unless he can make a lot of good lasting impressions.
Logged

rdeacon

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1874
  • Six Years Into a Ten Year Sojourn
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #186 on: March 22, 2004, 07:53:46 pm »

I agree with you they don't offer enough solutions, people don't want to here the standard " We want stop someone from helping anyone and talking about charity just puts people in mind of  Good Will and soup kitchens. On the other hand those solutions should not include saving the federal social security and medicare program or  mandated contributions to a  private retirement fund or revenue neutral tax ideas. Cut taxes and spending a lot, show people how they can get better  less costly service by moving social security, health care subsidies and other saftey nets away from the federal and state governments towards voluntary associations, community, family, private firms and private institutions Social programs  are 70% of government spending and very ineffective at a federal and state level. Remember also there are a variety of ideas that can work and we have thousands of labortories in the US, (you have more than a thousand in NH) don't limit it to one or even 50.
It's not as easy as you make it sound.  You can't cut taxes until AFTER you cut spending.  Fail at this and you run a deficit.  You can't remove safeguards until after you flatten the private sector power structure.  Fail at this and we'll end up in a Robocop-style corporate tyranny.  We can't just come out and say "government doesn't work", because Joe Voter won't believe us.  We can throw a ton of rhetoric at him and it won't matter, because for all the evidence that we produce, the authoritarians have their own.  What matters is marketing, branding, advertising, and appearance.  Lets face it, the American political market has no soul.  We have to stop pretending that people will welcome liberty with open arms.  It's going to be a painful battle - as Thomas Jefferson said "the ground of liberty will be gained in inches".
Logged

rdeacon

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1874
  • Six Years Into a Ten Year Sojourn
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #187 on: March 22, 2004, 07:55:37 pm »

Actually Nolan doesn't go far enough but there is a limit to what a presidential candidate can do any way, if it runs up to a million dollars or more its probally a waste of money unless he can make a lot of good lasting impressions.
I doubt he'll make a lasting impression, because he doesn't resonate with the average citizen.  People are frightened by radical change.  I've posted elsewhere on these boards about our collective fear of sudden change.
Logged

retr0spectiv

  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
Re:Drugs in the FSP
« Reply #188 on: July 25, 2005, 06:55:45 am »

The whole "I don't want my kids seeing that!" argument is a line of crap.

YOU are responsible for YOUR children, not your neighbors, not the government and not anyone else.

You don't want your kids seeing some certain act or words or whatever, than YOU need to take steps to see to it they don't.  Know where you are taking them, who owns the property and what the rules are of the property owners.

Your decision to procreate does not in any way restrict the rights of your neighbors. 

here here!  :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 [13]   Go Up
 

anything