Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Argentum]

The main reason I can never join the FSP has to do with FK.  And it's not really about what the Free Keeners do.  It's true that I find their childish and sometimes crude and offense antics like chalking, public nudity, pretending to drink alcohol at town meetings, etc. to be counterproductive.  My main objection is the lack of criticism and even outright denunciation by other members of the NH liberty community.  Maybe it's  because I don't live in NH, but the only major criticism I've seen is by Dave Ridley in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPgqn3BXWHQ&list=UUE_3GcvLERTeS9XFZPtRsIA.  In particular, their leader, Ian Bernard, has some objectionable, and non-libertarian, views about the age of consent.  But I see and hear nothing but tolerance from other libertarians.  It reminds me of black political movements from the past.  It seems like solidarity trumps basic morals.  Malcolm X was a great exception to this.  Because he was an honest man, he called out his own mentor, Elijah Muhammad, for immoral behavior.  If FTL is going to be the "face" of the NH liberty movement, then it is doomed to failure.

[elkingrey]

The FSP probably isn't for you.

[Argentum]

The FSP probably isn't for you.

Could you expand on that thought?  Are you a member?  Do you support FK?

[elkingrey]

I'm an early mover. I don't live anywhere near Keene or subscribe to Free Keene's tactics. But you may be a little too uptight for the FSP if you're more concerned about badmouthing their tactics than you are the most murderous, rapingest, thievingest, kidnappingest organization on the planet... the State.

[Argentum]

I'm an early mover. I don't live anywhere near Keene or subscribe to Free Keene's tactics. But you may be a little too uptight for the FSP if you're more concerned about badmouthing their tactics than you are the most murderous, rapingest, thievingest, kidnappingest organization on the planet... the State.

Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.  I've been an anarchist since about 1992.  Influence by Rothbard, Szasz, Means, Chodorov and many others.  If I think certain tactics are counterproductive to the goal of achieving liberty, isn't it incumbent on me to say so?

[elkingrey]

The thing is, if "we" ever achieve a "free society" there are going to be naked people in "public" and people chalking, etc.

You're not going to get to a "free society" by obeying all of the norms and customs of statists and then one day, voilla, those norms are gone and people are living "free."

You have to be the change you want to see in the world. And if that means statists are going to be offended, so be it.

[Eric Freerock]

No one is forcing you to do that type of activism.  People come to NH and do the activism that they want to.  You can criticize other people's tactics all you want, you also don't have to hang out with them.  When was the last time you were in a group of 1,000 people and all 1,000 people like each other, every last one of them? Never.  FSP is just a bus to get liberty activists to NH.  Once you're here do what you feel you need to do.

[Argentum]

The thing is, if "we" ever achieve a "free society" there are going to be naked people in "public" and people chalking, etc.

You're not going to get to a "free society" by obeying all of the norms and customs of statists and then one day, voilla, those norms are gone and people are living "free."

You have to be the change you want to see in the world. And if that means statists are going to be offended, so be it.

If there is ever a free society, there will be no public.  There will only be private property.  Have you noticed that much of the FK silliness takes place on "public property"?  A private property society will be more restrictive in my opinion.  It seems like the Free Keeners are doing things on public property that wouldn't be tolerated on private property.  Of course, it makes them look rebellious and trendy for "breaking the rules". 

I also disagree that all of these norms and customs are the handiwork of statists.  I believe that many cultural norms and customs are the outgrowth of the market.  Public nudity isn't frowned upon because some statist is trying to keep us down.  Of course, if you characterize everything as political, then you are going to have that view.

By all means, if you have to, you are going to offend statists.  But you should be offended them on their political views.  Not on their non-political culture and customs. 

[Argentum]

No one is forcing you to do that type of activism.  People come to NH and do the activism that they want to.  You can criticize other people's tactics all you want, you also don't have to hang out with them.  When was the last time you were in a group of 1,000 people and all 1,000 people like each other, every last one of them? Never.  FSP is just a bus to get liberty activists to NH.  Once you're here do what you feel you need to do.

I agree and fully understand your point.  However, I think that if some people are a detriment to the liberty movement, either because they are turning off more people than they are turning on to the movement, or because they are doing things that are anti-liberty, they must be criticized. 

[freedomroad]

public nudity

Never happened. Topless women happened a few times. As far as I recall, not a single free Keene blogger did that. It's mostly famous for a person that lived in Manchester at the time. Though, you might also know about it from someone from the Concord area or a native that was born 30 minutes from Keene.

pretending to drink alcohol at town meetings

This happened what, once or twice?

My main objection is the lack of criticism and even outright denunciation by other members of the NH liberty community.

I have asked FreeKeene to shut down. I've publicly said things would be better off without Free Keene.
 

Ian Bernard 

His name is Ian Freeman. You are correct in that he does own FreeKeene.com

It seems like solidarity trumps basic morals.

What has Ian done recently that most would consider so bad that he should be jailed for?

[Auspicious Aspect]

The main reason I can never join the FSP has to do with FK.  And it's not really about what the Free Keeners do.  It's true that I find their childish and sometimes crude and offense antics like chalking, public nudity, pretending to drink alcohol at town meetings, etc. to be counterproductive.  My main objection is the lack of criticism and even outright denunciation by other members of the NH liberty community.  Maybe it's  because I don't live in NH, but the only major criticism I've seen is by Dave Ridley in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPgqn3BXWHQ&list=UUE_3GcvLERTeS9XFZPtRsIA.  In particular, their leader, Ian Bernard, has some objectionable, and non-libertarian, views about the age of consent.  But I see and hear nothing but tolerance from other libertarians.  It reminds me of black political movements from the past.  It seems like solidarity trumps basic morals.  Malcolm X was a great exception to this.  Because he was an honest man, he called out his own mentor, Elijah Muhammad, for immoral behavior.  If FTL is going to be the "face" of the NH liberty movement, then it is doomed to failure.

You seem confused; this is the FSP forum, not the Freekeene forum or the FTL forum. You should probably direct your complaints to the people actually involved in whatever activities you find objectionable.

[Argentum]

The main reason I can never join the FSP has to do with FK.  And it's not really about what the Free Keeners do.  It's true that I find their childish and sometimes crude and offense antics like chalking, public nudity, pretending to drink alcohol at town meetings, etc. to be counterproductive.  My main objection is the lack of criticism and even outright denunciation by other members of the NH liberty community.  Maybe it's  because I don't live in NH, but the only major criticism I've seen is by Dave Ridley in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPgqn3BXWHQ&list=UUE_3GcvLERTeS9XFZPtRsIA.  In particular, their leader, Ian Bernard, has some objectionable, and non-libertarian, views about the age of consent.  But I see and hear nothing but tolerance from other libertarians.  It reminds me of black political movements from the past.  It seems like solidarity trumps basic morals.  Malcolm X was a great exception to this.  Because he was an honest man, he called out his own mentor, Elijah Muhammad, for immoral behavior.  If FTL is going to be the "face" of the NH liberty movement, then it is doomed to failure.

You seem confused; this is the FSP forum, not the Freekeene forum or the FTL forum. You should probably direct your complaints to the people actually involved in whatever activities you find objectionable.

Are the aforementioned people and organizations not associated with the FSP?  If you read my original post, my objections aren't so much with FK or FTL, but with the lack of criticism of them by other libertarians.  I'm not in NH so I don't have the pulse of the liberty movement there.  I know there are non-libertarians who hate and are disgusted by FK.  But the Ridley video I posted was the only major criticism I've seen.  As Dave said in the video, they are so strident, so shrill. I would add self-righteous and condescending.

[dalebert]

You seem confused; this is the FSP forum, not the Freekeene forum or the FTL forum. You should probably direct your complaints to the people actually involved in whatever activities you find objectionable.

They've received quite a lot of criticism for their tactics and lack of concern for public relations from other free-staters, myself included. I've tried to make sure it was constructive and tactful. Mark himself, Ian's closest cohort, has tried. Some have been far less tactful in their criticism than us. Denis Goddard comes to mind. We've all mostly exhausted ourselves trying to convince them to change. You're welcome to try. They are unresponsive to criticism whether it's tactful and constructive or otherwise. Scream at them 'til you're hoarse if you want. You'll eventually get exhausted as well and they will continue to do activism the way they think is effective.

[Argentum]

Thanks Dalebert,

Like I said, I'm not in NH so I don't know what's going on on the ground.  I'm sure the FSP forum is just a slice of the opinions that are out there.  But for non-Free Staters, this seems to be a major website for information. Can you recommend others?

[MaineShark]

In particular, their leader, Ian Bernard, has some objectionable, and non-libertarian, views about the age of consent.

Pretty serious charge.  Care to back that up?

All I've ever heard from him is that there is no such thing as an age of consent, which is the correct libertarian position.  No libertarian (and especially not someone like yourself who claims to be an anarchist) could possibly support a single, State-mandated age of consent for all individuals.

Sex absent consent is rape, regardless of whether that consent is lacking due to direct force, chemical incapacitation, lack of maturity, or whatever other reason might prevent it.  There's no single age at which all individuals gain the maturity to consent to sex.  Fifteen years and three-hundred-sixty-four days, and sex is a crime, but sixteen years and zero days, it is not?  There's nothing even vaguely libertarian about such nonsense.  Some individuals may be able to consent earlier than that.  Some might not even be able to consent at seventeen or eighteen years, or more.

The libertarian position is that for a charge of rape to stick, it must be proved that there was not actual consent.  Lack of consent (for any possible reason) is an element of the crime that must be proven by the accuser.  In cases where lack of maturity actually prevents consent, there will be zero problem convincing an arbitrator, jury, or whatever that there was no consent.

Any State-mandated single age for anything is anti-libertarian.  It is evil both in terms of false convictions of individuals who have not actually harmed anyone, and in lending formal authorization to acts which, objectively-speaking, were violations of someone's rights.

So, do you have evidence of him supporting any sort of anti-libertarian position on "age of consent," like (for example) that there is such a thing?

If there is ever a free society, there will be no public.  There will only be private property.

Technically true, but that does not mean that there will not be areas open to the public, and preserved for that purpose, by those who own those areas.

I also disagree that all of these norms and customs are the handiwork of statists.  I believe that many cultural norms and customs are the outgrowth of the market.  Public nudity isn't frowned upon because some statist is trying to keep us down.

Actually, yes, it is.  Public nudity was common, and did not destroy society, until the Puritans pushed their nonsense by political means.

On the western bank of the Connecticut River (ie, in Vermont), I can walk around bare naked all I want, and the world does not end.  Take one step into New Hampshire, and that becomes illegal.  Are you claiming that moving a matter of a few feet means that I'm somehow in an entirely-different culture with entirely-different norms and customs?  Nope, the only difference is political.