"you poison the well for the rest of us"

[dalebert]

What he said.  Except I did make the Poisoning the Well statement, and meant it.  Your media exposure/savvy puts you well beyond David, and others, and even beyond Ridley, Lauren or Russell.  If you come off as 'wacko', it _does_ hurt the rest of us far more.

This seems like quite a contradiction to me! You start by talking about his media exposure/savvy and I would agree. He was pretty much a self-made celebrity who clawed his way up from nothing and now FTL keeps getting affiliates and still seems to be on the upswing, and then you end it with "if you come off as a wacko". Huh? The proof is in the pudding, isn't it? Is that the right expression? I mean, Ian's success ought to speak for itself, to a large extent at least. And since he's a radio host who talks about freedom and what it really means to him, and in pretty blunt terms, his success seems to in fact be built on what he says and how he's been saying it.

Nothing wrong with expressing your opinion and making suggestions, of course, but you're using some pretty strong language that implies that Ian is somehow harming you with his free speech. Worse yet, it seems like you want something from Ian, to ride on his coattails, so to speak, and you want to have it your way. It's all very distasteful. I think we can continue the discussion of tactics but we really ought to tone down that sort of rhetoric.

[FTL_Ian]

IMHO, Mark is a good antidote for Ian's "poisoning of the well" on FTL.  Mark is the voice of reason in most cases when Ian goes into rant mode.

Don't be so sure of yourself.  Mark has been spending hours nearly every day with some hard-core anarchists recently.  You ought to hear the ideas he spouting off nowadays.   

[FTL_Ian]

Don't be so sure of yourself.  Mark has been spending hours nearly every day with some hard-core anarchists recently.  You ought to hear the ideas he spouting off nowadays.   

I particularly like the ones that involve not paying property taxes and seceding from the town of Westmoreland.   

If he did that, would he poison the well, too, Seth?

[memenode]

First off, I am still a noob here. But the title of the topic attracted my attention for some reason. From what I understand this little "skirmish" if I can call it that is a result from an ongoing disagreement about the methods to be used to "convert" this state to freedom, the choice being between political, market and disobedience, right?

If someone could clarify to me, in a few brief sentences what does "poisoning the well" refer to, I'd be thankful.

Overall though I tend to agree with ReverendRyan. I would say that as libertarians or anarcho-capitalists we should seek to apply our ideologies to our situation regardless of the fact that we're not yet living in a libertarian or anarcho-capitalist country. But I might be stating the obvious. What *might* not seem obvious though, is that applying our ideology does not necessarily mean "civil disobedience all the way" or adopting any of the other two methods 100%.

I am anarcho-capitalist so I fundamentally believe in self-ownership, liberty and property which is threaded by voluntarysm. This means that whatever method I use to improve my life, expand my liberty and my property in this world believing it to be the right method given the circumstances, it IS the right method, as long as it does not deny other the same freedom (as long as I don't initiate force or fraud). This perfectly validates all three strategies (political, market and disobedience). It's just a matter of each of us individually assessing our situation, capabilities, risks and benefits and then deciding, based on rational self interest, how to proceed. And rational self interest is in essence what brought us all together here. Let's not make it a thing that creates rifts between us now.

I personally am still evaluating the exact way to proceed. I am still in Croatia, a socio-liberal democracy and in a rather peculiar, if not unique, situation regarding my own business. However, what I usually favor is market activism - starting businesses which operate on free market principles and simultaneously as it produces a certain kind of value to people, spread the idea of liberty. In a way, Ian's show is an example of direct market activism where his product IS the show and it directly spreads the idea of liberty in a powerful way. Another example could be a social networking site for liberty lovers, a computer vendor selling computers under a brand that refers to liberty and perhaps even software that is Free from restrictions on how you use that computer (like GNU/Linux) etc. There are many ways to tie spreading the idea of liberty with producing and selling a particular value as part of a business.

Cheers

[David]

IMHO, Mark is a good antidote for Ian's "poisoning of the well" on FTL.  Mark is the voice of reason in most cases when Ian goes into rant mode.

Don't be so sure of yourself.  Mark has been spending hours nearly every day with some hard-core anarchists recently.  You ought to hear the ideas he spouting off nowadays.  

#in the voice of star wars emporor# Yes, Mark is turning to the dark side.   

Welcome gu3st, from Croatia.  The stress level here has been unusually high lately.  The tone of the forum is harsher than normal.  Don't let that drive you away. 
The phrase 'poisoning the well' is in reference to the image that New hampshire natives have of the Free Staters.  Some people believe that those that practice civil disobediance are giving the rest of the freestaters a bad image. 

[memenode]

No worries David, I wont be driven away. Diversity is good and when people are brought together by such a general common goal as is freedom and non-coercion there are bound to be people coming in from all directions.

In fact, diversity might be one of our strengths as it breeds more inventiveness and open mindedness.

Thanks for explaining the term. I can understand where the concern is coming from.. I myself would not go to certain lengths in civil disobedience (not that I wouldn't practice it at all though), but then again.. if even after expressing a concern one decides to do what I might not consider the best method, there isn't much point in converting that expression into agitation if it's just gonna be idle motion (boldly going nowhere ). We can just do our thing and see what we achieve.

A way I can see the situation about "poisoning the well" resolved is to make diversity of methods as one of our positive points when we advocate it to natives so that they realize, should they mind civil disobeyers so much, that it is just one of the methods some free staters use and that generalization is not applicable here (when is it really? ). The more they understand what we are fundamentally about and that this does not stand in way of diversity I think the more willing they'd be to accept a particular free stater on his merit alone, combined with his shared goal of liberty, not on some "common" perception of the Free State Project.

Such a perception should not exist as anything else than "a project to free a state by any non-coercive means possible".

[K. Darien Freeheart]

Don't be so sure of yourself.  Mark has been spending hours nearly every day with some hard-core anarchists recently.

Hearing Mark come from the "Strict Constitutionalist" view to what I've been hearing him chatter about in the Podcast makes me wonder too. I don't think he's there yet but it's quite obvious he's interested in more freedom that that granted by the constitution. Keep up the good work. 

[ReverendRyan]

.....he's interested in more freedom that that granted by the constitution.

The constitution doesn't "grant" any freedom at all. Its intent was to protect inherent rights.

Not wanting to debate constitutional issues, just clarifying.

[dalebert]

Hearing Mark come from the "Strict Constitutionalist" view to what I've been hearing him chatter about in the Podcast makes me wonder too. I don't think he's there yet but it's quite obvious he's interested in more freedom that that granted by the constitution. Keep up the good work. 

Actually, I'm beginning to think he may be there already, as in doesn't believe in the authority of the State anymore. He may not have abandoned political activity altogether, but he seems to be losing faith in that as well to some extent at least. Those are the natural steps of enlightenment.

[anthonybpugh]

whenever this issue comes up I am reminded of the Michael Cloud thing on the Macho Flash. 

[J’raxis 270145]

Hearing Mark come from the "Strict Constitutionalist" view to what I've been hearing him chatter about in the Podcast makes me wonder too. I don't think he's there yet but it's quite obvious he's interested in more freedom that that granted by the constitution. Keep up the good work. 

Actually, I'm beginning to think he may be there already, as in doesn't believe in the authority of the State anymore. He may not have abandoned political activity altogether, but he seems to be losing faith in that as well to some extent at least. Those are the natural steps of enlightenment.

Maybe he'll become an anarchist but still see some political activism as a useful tool against the State.

[srqrebel]

What he said.  Except I did make the Poisoning the Well statement, and meant it.  Your media exposure/savvy puts you well beyond David, and others, and even beyond Ridley, Lauren or Russell.  If you come off as 'wacko', it _does_ hurt the rest of us far more.

This seems like quite a contradiction to me! You start by talking about his media exposure/savvy and I would agree. He was pretty much a self-made celebrity who clawed his way up from nothing and now FTL keeps getting affiliates and still seems to be on the upswing, and then you end it with "if you come off as a wacko". Huh? The proof is in the pudding, isn't it? Is that the right expression? I mean, Ian's success ought to speak for itself, to a large extent at least. And since he's a radio host who talks about freedom and what it really means to him, and in pretty blunt terms, his success seems to in fact be built on what he says and how he's been saying it.

My guess is, as the civ dis crowd keeps on gaining ground and popularity, Seth will just keep on warning us from his armchair not to continue with such tactics, lest we ruin it for everyone

[SethCohn]

My guess is, as the civ dis crowd keeps on gaining ground and popularity, Seth will just keep on warning us from his armchair not to continue with such tactics, lest we ruin it for everyone

Whatever.  It's always been pointless to argue this, because nothing comes of it... the point I'm making gets lost in the noise.  Yes, it's macho flash, and worse: macho flash magnified by the close quarters of a small state.  Someone wiser than me once put it this way: If you're going to fight the state with CD/apolitical action etc, why do here in the one state where political action is the easiest and government already smaller?  Why not take it someplace where government is bigger and worse, where your actions might actually stand for something?

I give up on this thread, it's clear the people most in need of hearing this have blinders on...

[Caleb]

Because you shouldn't cooperate with evil, no matter where you are. 

What would have been the right course for someone living in Nazi Germany? In the system political activism, ("hey, maybe I could run for parliament!") Or refusal to cooperate?

At what magical point does evil become such that it is best defeated by joining it? Where is that point Seth? Not the Nazi's, but yes to the feds? How do you draw that line?

I'm trying to remain neutral here and not write a manifesto, or tell you that your way of doing things is "evil". I'm not mad at you, and I don't think you are evil. Everybody goes about things their own way, I guess. But if you don't want people telling you that your way is evil, why do you come on here and say things like that about Ian?

[FTL_Ian]

I give up on this thread, it's clear the people most in need of hearing this have blinders on...

<plugs ears>  "Lalalalalalala!"