Originally posted by whodeyFortunately, I'm in a position where libertarians will not be able to take away my freedom, at least for now.
Yes, people should be allowed to CHOOSE the barbed wire and cholera and jackboots. They should be allowed to CHOOSE to forgo the nanny state and, as a result, embrace mayhem and people dying in the streets because Big Brother is not there to take care of them.
God help them all!! :'(
Really, the libertarian movement is a stark contrast from the left. ...[text shortened]... ference between the two which is that one embraces freedom and the other wants to take it away.
Originally posted by sh76In a fjord in Norway, I was stung by jellyfish while swimming in what felt like the coldest sea water on Earth.
Presumably, you were there while making the rounds with the professional poker Pro Tour.
Or maybe you had to change planes in Oslo on your way to Havana?
2 edits
Personally, I think it would be great if such experiment states appeared. From all sides of the political spectrum.
Perhaps smaller than New Hampshire, though, and starting in a less densely populated area so not a lot of people would need to leave if they disagreed with the political views of the experiment.
2 edits
Originally posted by PalynkaMaybe this sort of thing can be done on an Indian reservation. Exemption from federal laws, easy access and mobility... No danger of foreign invasion...
Personally, I think it would be great if such experiment states appeared. From all sides of the political spectrum.
Perhaps smaller than New Hampshire, though, and starting in a less densely populated area so not a lot of people would need to leave if they disagreed with the political views of the experiment.
Hmmm...
Originally posted by PalynkaThe best way to prove a particular ideology, arguably the only way, is to give it a chance.
Personally, I think it would be great if such experiment states appeared. From all sides of the political spectrum.
Perhaps smaller than New Hampshire, though, and starting in a less densely populated area so not a lot of people would need to leave if they disagreed with the political views of the experiment.
Originally posted by whodeyThere are aspects of the Libertarian agenda that I quite agree with. But when it comes to managing the education, highways, police and so forth they will not succeed.
What I am really hoping is that the Libertarian party might actually begin to win elections in New Hampshire. It might be the very thing needed to get a viable national Libertarian party up and going.
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaNo, not completely exempt, but they have a lot of self-autonomy.
Are they completely exempt from Federal laws? Didn't know that. If not completely, to what extent are they exempt?
Tribal sovereignty describes the right of federally recognized tribes to govern themselves and the existence of a government-to-government relationship with the United States. Thus a tribe is not a ward of the government, but an independent nation with the right to form its own government, adjudicate legal cases within its borders, levy taxes within its borders, establish its membership, and decide its own future fate. The federal government has a trust responsibility to protect tribal lands, assets, resources and treaty rights.
http://www.narf.org/pubs/misc/faqs.html
Originally posted by FMFI beg to differ. This Free State Project whodey is passionately promoting has certainly many commendable virtues, it aims to preserve and sustain the very principles on which American prosperity was founded. Regardless of how the american ideal has been continually corrupted and blemished throughout the ages I think it is uncontroversial to state that this project seems very promising, a much needed experiment into an alternative to the conceptions of government currently popular with the general population, on both sides of the atlantic.
Well if it's some kind of Wajomastan you're thinking of, the only kind of dream it conjures up is one with coils of barbed wire everywhere, cholera and the ubiquitous private sector jackboots 'stepping in'.
Originally posted by generalissimoWell, it is certainly an interesting idea for an real-life experiment, and I'm all for it happening except not in my back yard, but we already have 50 real-life situations in which Libertarianism could take hold and hasn't. Are the people who the state would be stocked with, any more likely to dominate without the need to form coalitions with people from other parties, and thus, compromise and water down their stance on many issues? After all, there are divides within Libertarianism on a number of issues, so coalition-building could bring horse trading on everything from abortion laws to inheritance laws.
I beg to differ. This Free State Project whodey is passionately promoting has certainly many commendable virtues, it aims to preserve and sustain the very principles on which American prosperity was founded. Regardless of how the american ideal has been continually corrupted and blemished throughout the ages I think it is uncontroversial to state that ...[text shortened]... ions of government currently popular with the general population, on both sides of the atlantic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debates_within_libertarianism
Originally posted by sh76Does anyone know whether these tribes are based on inheritance? eg can a tribe sell their state to another group of people not related to them? I see "establish its membership" in that quote.
No, not completely exempt, but they have a lot of self-autonomy.Tribal sovereignty describes the right of federally recognized tribes to govern themselves and the existence of a government-to-government relationship with the United States. Thus a tribe is not a ward of the government, but an independent nation with the right to form its own governmen ...[text shortened]... l lands, assets, resources and treaty rights.
http://www.narf.org/pubs/misc/faqs.html