Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
clarus

Free State Initiative

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Hi. I'm curious to know what the thoughts are of the people in this forum about the Free State Project (www.freestateproject.org). Please endulge me.

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I am against the Libertarian backing of this project, obviously I’d prefer an Objectivist backed Free State, I think, if everything goes well, New Hampshire will boom considerably. Any place that becomes freer will prosper. I would even consider moving there someday. This could very well turn out to be a very large step in the right direction, although keep in mind that this is what our founding fathers had in mind when the started this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As per your antagonizsm to its libertarian supporters (it is not a Libertarian organization as such), please see my other thread in the political philosophy section of this forum.

I'm glad to see you'd consider moving there someday...should I take this to mean you are willing to help in the creation of this free society by signing the statement of intent (https://freestateproject.org/members/join.jsp) or second-hand after all the work is done?

-Rich

P.S. I should have stated by bias earlier..I have signed the statement of intent and will be moving to NH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether it’s a true Libertarian organization or not is irrelevant. What really matters is that this free society that is being created will not contain the rational ethical background required to sustain its existence as a free state. This is why I compared it to the USA, look at what this country was intended to be and look at where it is now, then look at which direction it is headed. This being said the USA is still the freest country in the world. So what I really think is that New Hampshire will become, if everything goes well, the freest state in the union and that is why I would consider moving there, but I will wait until it is to really consider it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and you will not work to instill in this society the "rational ethical background" you think it needs? You will sit by and do nothing and let this opportunity pass you by (and/or fail, as you think it will)? That doesn't sound like something John Galt would do.

Galt talked the talk and walked the walk, that's what made him awesome. I hear a lot of talk from Objectivists, but rarely, if ever, have I seen them walk the walk.

I imagine that's pretty comfortable.

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said I would consider moving there someday and if I do it will be because it is the freest place to live, enough said. John Galt did what he did because the world was in an unbearable state. Personally I do not think we are in the world of Atlas Shrugged quite yet. If I am free to build my life then that’s what I’ll do, once that freedom is gone so am I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CF - exactly. The project is just a blank-check support of an undefined and unidentified political platform that mouths vague platitudes about achieving 'liberty' - but without providing any intellectual basis (or even definition) for that liberty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I said I would consider moving there someday and if I do it will be because it is the freest place to live, enough said.  John Galt did what he did because the world was in an unbearable state.  Personally I do not think we are in the world of Atlas Shrugged quite yet.  If I am free to build my life then that’s what I’ll do, once that freedom is gone so am I.

I know that is what you said, but it strikes me as un-objectivist. You will be second-handing the state we build, not by the point in time you were born, which you cannot help, but by conscious choice.

And you are going to wait until that point so that everything has to be rebuilt and billions of people die instead of getting involved now?

Not quiet yet, but look around...is this the United States you wish to support?

Do not go gently into that good night...Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Build your life in NH and help build a Free State.

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Signing a libertarian-sponsored statement is not something John Galt would do either.

It is not libertarian sponsored, but please enlighten me as to what is so contrary to Objectivism in the following statement:

I hereby state my solemn intent to move to the state of New Hampshire. Once there, I will exert the fullest practical effort toward the creation of a society in which the maximum role of civil government is the protection of life, liberty, and property.

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CF - exactly.  The project is just a blank-check support of an undefined and unidentified political platform that mouths vague platitudes about achieving 'liberty' - but without providing any intellectual basis (or even definition) for that liberty.

Its as well defined as the Objectivist political philosophy of Capitalism (care to argue this one?)

It is justifiably presumed that people have the intellectual basis for liberty or else people wouldn't be pissed off or motiviated enough to move. A dare say you should come to a Free State Project meeting in your area and meet some of us.

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are getting ridiculous. What will I be stealing from you and the others who start this “Free State”, if I chose to move there sometime in distant future? If this state is created, when I move there, after the fact, what will I have taken that does not belong to me?

“And you are going to wait until that point so that everything has to be rebuilt and billions of people die instead of getting involved now?”

Yes, I only worry about me.

“is this the United States you wish to support”

I don’t have to support it to live here.

“Do not go gently into that good night...Rage, rage against the dying of the light”

Instead of starting another political system lacking an ethical base, I am advocating the spread of one that contains a perfectly sound and explicitly defined ethical system and will not fail once it is in place.

“I hereby state my solemn intent to move to the state of New Hampshire. Once there, I will exert the fullest practical effort toward the creation of a society in which the maximum role of civil government is the protection of life, liberty, and property” (but has no foundation because it has not defined, just as the libertarians have not, the purpose for its liberty).

This is how I read it. What exactly will I be supporting here, life, liberty, and property, but by whose definition? This is the problem we face today through out America.

Finally, you are assuming that people, rational or irrational because you don’t care to ask, have an intellectual basis for liberty or else they would not have to stimulus to participate in this charade? WOW! Rethink that one. Please tell us what this intellectual base you are presuming exists in every individual involved in this project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You are getting ridiculous.  What will I be stealing from you and the others who start this “Free State”, if I chose to move there sometime in distant future?  If this state is created, when I move there, after the fact, what will I have taken that does not belong to me?

“And you are going to wait until that point so that everything has to be rebuilt and billions of people die instead of getting involved now?”

Yes, I only worry about me.

“is this the United States you wish to support”

I don’t have to support it to live here.

“Do not go gently into that good night...Rage, rage against the dying of the light”

Instead of starting another political system lacking an ethical base, I am advocating the spread of one that contains a perfectly sound and explicitly defined ethical system and will not fail once it is in place.

“I hereby state my solemn intent to move to the state of New Hampshire. Once there, I will exert the fullest practical effort toward the creation of a society in which the maximum role of civil government is the protection of life, liberty, and property” (but has no foundation because it has not defined, just as the libertarians have not, the purpose for its liberty).

This is how I read it.  What exactly will I be supporting here, life, liberty, and property, but by whose definition?  This is the problem we face today through out America.

Finally, you are assuming that people, rational or irrational because you don’t care to ask, have an intellectual basis for liberty or else they would not have to stimulus to participate in this charade?  WOW!  Rethink that one.  Please tell us what this intellectual base you are presuming exists in every individual involved in this project.

I didn't say you'd be stealing, I said you'd be second-handing. You will be reaping the benefits of the state we will have created while you have done nothing to aid us. You consume, but do not create.

I'm as selfish as you, but I guess I am not as short sighted and/or idle when an opportunity to live in and create a state for individual freedom to flourish comes knocking.

I will take that as a no.

And I have no problem with you advocating Objectivism. What I am saying is that talk is cheap. How about you and the others on this list create an Objectivist Project to get Objectivists to move to New Hampshire. Come show us up...

By your definition, since it's you who decide what to work to create. I think it's your problem that you think abstractions can be made absolute, consistent across all people, and perfectly concrete (no greys) without artificial/man-made definitions and continual acceptance by the individuals within a community. Capitalism is no more well defined than life, liberty, and property. Both are words which (can) trigger differing definitions and behavior. Rand's definition of Capitalism is one, mine is another (that it is simply an economic system whereby the means of production are owned/controlled privately), but individuals decide which they will choose to use.

Funny, Rand recognized the intrinsic characteristic of men to be free, do you? They see that they are not living in a free society where they can rise to be the best they can be and live the life they want to live, and decided to do something about it. Isn't that obvious ;)

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It is justifiably presumed that people have the intellectual basis for liberty"

The fact that someone thinks they can justify their idea of 'liberty' does NOT mean that justification is valid. As such, your presumption is false.

"Its as well defined as the Objectivist political philosophy of Capitalism"

No it is not. You demonstrate this clearly in the above statement as well as with your previous posts, including those in which you explicitly state there is no *one* standard of ethics for liberty.

--

You are taunting, goading, cajolling and mudslinging in your attempt to get others to debate you and to promote libertarianism. This site does not tolerate such behavior. You have been warned once already. If it persists, you will be removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CF - exactly.  The project is just a blank-check support of an undefined and unidentified political platform that mouths vague platitudes about achieving 'liberty' - but without providing any intellectual basis (or even definition) for that liberty.

Of course it's a blank-slate, because the Free State Project is not about a specific political platform/slate of policies. It is solely about getting 20,000 activists to support a society for the protection of life, liberty, and property to move to NH. It is up to the people that move to bring these abstract ideas into eventual existence and meaning through political activism. We do not know what the eventual Free State that is created will look like..(free) societies are chaotic systems.

So, I ask you to ask yourself, do you have in your mind what a society that protects life, liberty, and property would look like? That is your working definition. Now, how do you plan to achieve this society. I impeach you to attend a local meeting of FSPers/porcupines in your area to check your premises and see whether your hostility towards joining the FSP is justified. I think you will find your (Objectivist) vision is aided, not hindered, by us.

Because most of us don't use the label Objectivist to describe ourselves doesn't mean many of us do not follow most of, if not all of, Objectivism. I would hate for you to be getting upset (disregarding us) over semantics.

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You continue to use arguments that have been either demonstrated to you as false or have no relevance to the topic. I will no longer participate in this discussion unless you provide any new ideas on the mater or at least begin to comprehend what you have already been told by either myself or RadCap. I have said my piece on this topic, if you have any question regarding what I have said state them polite and honest manner and I will be happy to answer them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm glad to see this.  Hopefully you can help me in convincing more Objectivists (on this forum) to sign the statement of intent :)

   -Rich

I never claimed to be part of this group, or that I even support such an idea, just merely pointing out concrete evidence contrary to your statements. Also, as someone has mentioned, we have no idea if these are even true students of Objectivism, Objectivishists or just liars... the last two being nearly the same thing with the exception of errors in knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clarus,

I am curious why someone would just expect an objectivist to sign on to a blanket commitment like this. Also argument from intimidation is not going to get you anywhere on this forum.

I for one would like to live free-er but I have roots put down where I am and moving would incur a significant cost to my life in many areas. If I am going to move I want to see that its a significantly better to make those costs worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"It is justifiably presumed that people have the intellectual basis for liberty"

The fact that someone thinks they can justify their idea of 'liberty' does NOT mean that justification is valid.  As such, your presumption is false.

"Its as well defined as the Objectivist political philosophy of Capitalism"

No it is not.  You demonstrate this clearly in the above statement as well as with your previous posts, including those in which you explicitly state there is no *one* standard of ethics for liberty.

--

You are taunting, goading, cajolling and mudslinging in your attempt to get others to debate you and to promote libertarianism.  This site does not tolerate such behavior.  You have been warned once already.  If it persists, you will be removed.

First off, your warning is unjustified. I had not noticed it until you pointed it out. Please quote me where I am out of line. Read this discussion again. I did not bring Libertarianism into this discussion, others did and I have attempted to move away from it (the discussion of Objectivism and the hostility to Libertarianism, which I hope to have time to reply to also tonight, is appropriately under political philosophy). I am focusing on the Free State Project itself and why Objectivists should sign on, or at the very least, be friendly to and/or support the project. Moreover, I intentionally placed this thread under misc. becuase it is a topic that didn't fall under the other categories but was relevant to Objectivists. Your threat of removal is uncalled for.

Now, as for your preceding remarks, am I wrong, or does Rand not hold freedom to be an instrinic value/desire of man? Is this desire of freedom not a reflection of man's will or self? Moreover, is it not possible and true that different men have differing individual justifications for their freedom? Francisco wished to be free to mine copper, Rearden metal, Roark building, etc. This is my point: individuals justify their low-level specific need for liberty differently, but all fall under the heading of justifications for liberty and are valid.

Bringing this back to the FSP, we know that for men of reason to flourish and their values met, this necessitates a government for the protection of life, liberty, and property. Rand expressed this similar sentiment in the oath to enter the gulch and join the strike. That one will not live one's life for another nor ask one to live theirs for yours is an oath, just as our statement of intent is an oath. It is given meaning by the later actions of the men saying it and is only as good as their character. Moreover, while the words are different, I challenge you to show me how our statement of intent is contrary to what I presume the adherents on this forum would have taken to enter the gulch.

I will discuss how defined Objectivist Capitalism is in our other discussion.

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You continue to use arguments that have been either demonstrated to you as false or have no relevance to the topic.  I will no longer participate in this discussion unless you provide any new ideas on the mater or at least begin to comprehend what you have already been told by either myself or RadCap.  I have said my piece on this topic, if you have any question regarding what I have said state them polite and honest manner and I will be happy to answer them.

Is what I said in my earlier post an incorrect assessment? (i.e. "I didn't say you'd be stealing, I said you'd be second-handing. You will be reaping the benefits of the state we will have created while you have done nothing to aid us. You consume, but do not create.")

My point to you and this forum is that the FSP is an excellent project for Objectivists to actively become involved in. Consult the literature on the thinking behind the FSP and New Hampshire. Objectivists are just as marginalized as us activists for liberty in the shaping of laws and the culture we live in. We have so many goals and values in common (if you ever check your premises and come to a local FSP meeting). The FSP (or some more overtly Objectivist project to similarly move to NH) presents a unique opportunity for our ideas to flourish and be actively involved in the shaping of the society we live in.

Am I wrong? Is there another plan to bring Objectivism into the fore?

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was actually interested but now it seems like some secular cult.

Wow, um, can you please explain what flow of logic led you to this conclusion. I could possibly see utopians, idealists, or dreamers, but a secular cult? That I missed.

-Rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...