Why I love the Fed. Govt (longish)

[rogervw]

I humbly express my opinions only in order to generate discussion that may educate me and possiblly change my mind  And in no way mean to disrespect others who frequently post here.

First off---
I want the most freedoms/liberty for myself as possible.
I want the most freedoms/liberty for others as possible.
I want these freedoms/liberties to be maintained for long into the future.

I think that secession of NH or any state would not further freedom/liberty ?in the long term.

Here is my Rationale.

The world is a brutish place.  There are people in the world that do not support/believe in my right to freedom/liberty.  There are people (sheep) that will allow these persons to control their resources (labor, taxes, military...).  These 2 elements will generate aggressor nations.  I want an equally large military/defensive force to protect me from these persons. 

I personally would not be able to protect myself.  The ALL Volunteer Militia of New Hampshire would not be able to protect me. 

End of Rationale.

Some Points
I feel that there needs to be a balance of freedoms with the ability to maintain these freedoms into the future (*winces inwardly*, *braces for angry responses*).

Part of my thinking is that if you support secession from the federal govt, then logically you would support the secession from the state govt,?. And on down to the secession of the individual (anarchy).  Which just weakens defensibility further.  This would happen throughout the USA. 

We have a system of govt that can be used to effect change peacefully (as opposed to so many in the world that do not).  I feel that efforts would be better focused on cutting govt size, stripping govt power, and shrinking govt spending.  I think the yoke could sit pretty light (again winces).

Thank you for taking time to read and welcome all responses.
Roger VW

(FYI Am also posting on FTL BBS for more responses)

[Russell Kanning]

Can I freely live in your dream society ..... and not want to be defended by a huge military? Is there room for me to disagree?

[Minsk]

Just let me hit the defence argument, other people will pick on the rest

Do you feel that an organized military is necessary to protect your freedoms?
Would you be willing to voluntarily pay for such an organized military?
Are there lots of people that would also be willing to pay for such an organized military?

Personally, I have three "Yes" answers.

On that basis, why do you need to force people to pay money to that military when they would pay voluntarily? And if you don't need to force people... why do you need a state to provide that military?

<edit>
And just to kill the free rider argument before it gets started:

Would you prefer to deal with people and businesses that support an organized military?
Would there be lots of other people and businesses with the same preference?

Therefore, there will be businesses that support the organized military, and they will make sure to tell you about it. Maybe they will contribute a percentage of your purchase to the military, maybe they will only hire employees that contribute...

But the point is that people do it freely, rather than being forced to pay for the military, the organizational breurocracy and the force used to make them pay!
</edit>

[Russell Kanning]

btw .... do you really love the Feds?

[rogervw]

That's the rub.
We would need your support (taxes), but how to get it?
Enforcement cost would outweigh the tax burden.
Hopefully I could convince you of the need to sacrife a small bit, to perpetuate the freedoms that we could hopefully recapture.
A small tax of some kind that would sit lightly of the shoulders.
Telethons?
Sdaly - I am not sure.

[Minsk]

We would need your support (taxes), but how to get it?

The military that ran effectively and efficient would get money because people would pay them for security. Most people buy home insurance. Don't you think there would be interest in insurance against invasion or terrorists?

Enforcement cost would outweigh the tax burden.

That's the problem today, and it's why a voluntary solution would need an awful lot less of your money to build an effective military.

<edit>And I guess I should throw this in at some point, because I'm not sure how new you are to the libertarian end of the spectrum: There are a lot of people (minarchists, for one easily-Wikipediable group) who feel very much as you do. You just got lucky in that the first two people to pick up your thread are on the anarchist end of the spectrum.</edit>

[rogervw]

Damm - thats is some fast responses.  That just makes me want to move to NH.

Anyway -

Do I love the fed govt?  I love the idea that we have a system/idea/Constitution that values life, liberty, and the pusuit of happiness.  I feel very fortunate to live in the USA.  But sadly, we have gone very astray from those ideals.  I do not love much of our Fed govt and what is done by them.

[Russell Kanning]

The US used to have small taxes .... now look.

[Russell Kanning]

Do I love the fed govt?  I love the idea that we have a system/idea/Constitution that values life, liberty, and the pusuit of happiness.

I think that the Constitution was a means to enslave people. There were people that left the convention in disgust. I would leave the next one. They created a republic like Rome .... and look we have an empire ...... wow couldn't see that one coming.

[rogervw]

I agree that individuals and business (as an extension of individuals) would pay voluntarily for a military.  However - I want to a large number to be volunteering to pay so that my milatry is larger than any other miltary that is formed through force.  And I don't think that individuals/small goups/secceded(if that is a word) states would be enough.

And yes - a smaller, more efficent milatary would suffice.  But it would still need to be large.  I feel that that is why in the constitution, a navy was supported. It was the largest, most expensive, most important tactical unit of the time.

[Russell Kanning]

Your point of wanting to be part of the group with the largest military .... basically proves the point that that is not the solution. As soon as your side has a bigger military then your enemy will have to build more or get enough allies to grow larger than you.

You have come to the base of all government ..... they will protect you from bad people. But that is the lie they teach you. You become their slave.

[Spencer]

How many countries try to invade Switzerland?

I'm not setting forth Switzerland as a model for anything.  I use it as an example of a neutral country that is left (relatively) unmolested.

Not many countries would want to invade an independent NH (other than the U.S.) -- if she avoided "entangling alliances" and left free individuals govern themselves.

[Minsk]

Scissors beat paper.
Rock beats scissors.
Nuke beats traditional military

So honestly, I don't see any reason for a huge military force other than offensive action (ala the current US foreign policy).

A rogue nation is not going to field a massive invasion force when you can a) nuke the force en-route to the US, and b) nuke the country of origin. A smaller force would simply be chewed to shreds by the military based on your shores and its supporting militias.

<edit>
Switzerland is a good example of neutrality, but the US has a huge advantage: Water. Lots and lots of water between it and any dangerous countries. Neither Canada nor Mexico is ever going to field the kind of force you are worried about...
</edit>

[rogervw]

Russel - instead of leaving the convention I would rather have you there helping to shape it.

"US used to have small taxes" and
"Now we have an empire" - only because we let it happen.

[sorry-still trying to figure out how to do quotes"

And yes I am fairly new to deciding that I'm a libertarian( but I'm swinging fast) and
I don't think anarchist is a bad word.

And again - I am all for not entagling oursleves in others concern.  My point is that I want to have the bigest stick on the block.  If someone wanted to invade Switzerland (they weren't that uneffected in WW2) they could.  I just don't want to be invaded.

[aries]

I think it'd be great if we could all go about our merry lives without having to give the slighest thought to whether the government existed or not (assuming it does), because it is so unintrusive.

But it aint that way