Finding the coercion advocates, and shunning them.

[David]

I have almost given up on trying to persuade people.  It only turns into an argument and to be honest, I see a side of people (my family and friends) that I would rather Not see. 
IMHO, the proper way is to be friendly, respectful, but blunt.  Label stealing, stealing.  Label semi-slavery a form of slavery.  If you want to help the poor, creat a charity.  Want to defend against foriegn attack, join or start a militia, then help make it as smooth and efficiant as possible. 
Stephan Molynuex states to the effect of that the abolitionists didn't argue about reducing slavery, or making it better, or more efficiant, but rather they thundered that it was a moral evil that must be destroyed. 
I would never advocate hostility or anger when doing it.  If someone gets angry when you say they are a cheerleader for gov't theft, than you know you pricked their conscious, even if they refuse to agree with you. 

[Braddogg]

I have almost given up on trying to persuade people.  It only turns into an argument and to be honest, I see a side of people (my family and friends) that I would rather Not see. 
IMHO, the proper way is to be friendly, respectful, but blunt.  Label stealing, stealing.  Label semi-slavery a form of slavery.  If you want to help the poor, creat a charity.  Want to defend against foriegn attack, join or start a militia, then help make it as smooth and efficiant as possible. 
Stephan Molynuex states to the effect of that the abolitionists didn't argue about reducing slavery, or making it better, or more efficiant, but rather they thundered that it was a moral evil that must be destroyed. 
I would never advocate hostility or anger when doing it.  If someone gets angry when you say they are a cheerleader for gov't theft, than you know you pricked their conscious, even if they refuse to agree with you. 

If you listen to Stefan, then you know what you're seeing in your friends and family, and you know what you should consider doing about it . . . .

[FTL_Ian]

If you listen to Stefan, then you know what you're seeing in your friends and family, and you know what you should consider doing about it . . . .

I don't have time to listen, what?

[Minsk]

If you listen to Stefan, then you know what you're seeing in your friends and family, and you know what you should consider doing about it . . . .

I don't have time to listen, what?

Basically (and putting words in his mouth), that there is nothing magically and inherently good about "the family". On the contrary, most children are raised to obey under threat of humiliation, violence, abandonment, or guilt (the last usually after the first three stop working). So treat "your family" as if they were just normal individuals, and if you don't enjoy associating with them... stop.

IIRC FDR audiocasts 89-92 are where it is first beaten to death, though 250 might be a more concise approach. For anyone not familiar with Molyneux, I'd recommend pulling at least a handful from the beginning first -- his positions might be a little traumatic even for the relatively liberty-minded.

[FTL_Ian]

Ahh, that's what Harry Browne wrote in "How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World".  I agree completely.

Family is a set of strangers you are born into.  Some may be good, some not so much.

[David]

If you listen to Stefan, then you know what you're seeing in your friends and family, and you know what you should consider doing about it . . . .

Yeah, Your right.  And I'm in the slow process of doing it. 

[Braddogg]

If you listen to Stefan, then you know what you're seeing in your friends and family, and you know what you should consider doing about it . . . .

Yeah, Your right.  And I'm in the slow process of doing it. 

+1

It's tough.  Nothing but best wishes for you, brother.

[Sweet Mercury]

I have almost given up on trying to persuade people.  It only turns into an argument and to be honest, I see a side of people (my family and friends) that I would rather Not see. 
IMHO, the proper way is to be friendly, respectful, but blunt.  Label stealing, stealing.  Label semi-slavery a form of slavery.  If you want to help the poor, creat a charity.  Want to defend against foriegn attack, join or start a militia, then help make it as smooth and efficiant as possible. 
Stephan Molynuex states to the effect of that the abolitionists didn't argue about reducing slavery, or making it better, or more efficiant, but rather they thundered that it was a moral evil that must be destroyed. 
I would never advocate hostility or anger when doing it.  If someone gets angry when you say they are a cheerleader for gov't theft, than you know you pricked their conscious, even if they refuse to agree with you.

One of the hardest parts, for me, when discussing politics with my family is that I see how blindly authoritatian they are—or to put it more simply, how beaten they are by the State.

[teknari]

I think that how the person shuns/boycotts is up to them.

The important thing, would be to get up a list of persons/businesses.  There should be some nice central place you can look up the businesses or people you should avoid.

Teknari

[slim]

I think maybe a list of Pro liberty businesses would be better then saying company x is anti liberty. Business people always say there is no such thing as bad press. Maybe someone could start a website with pro freedom businesses it could be like a yellow pages for freedom lovers. There could be different categories for different businesses and a rating on how pro-freedom they are. If a business does a anti-freedom action like supporting a smoking ban then they get taken off the list or put on a list of businesses not to visit.

[error]

This sort of thing is ideal for a wiki.

[d_goddard]

I've got an easy way for you to find the worst advocates of statism and coersion in NH, that are also most deadly efficient in making their perverse schemes into reality:
http://www.nhliberty.org/2006ReportCard

Just take all the ones marked "F" or lower. These are unabashed lovers of government-sponsored force.
Here they are, for your convenience:

Abbott, Dennis
Bleyler, Ruth
Brueggemann, Donald
Butcher, Suzanne
Butynski, William
Chase, William
Clarke, Claire
Cooney, Mary
Cote, David
Ginsburg, Ruth
Grassie, Anne
Harding, A Laurie
Lary, Bruce
Michon, Stephen
Miller, Joseph
Mitchell, Bonnie
Mulholland, Catherine
Norelli, Terie
Pappas, Christopher
Pilotte, Maurice
Potter, Frances
Rous, Emma
Shattuck, Gilman
Sullivan, Francis
Williams, Robert

Contact information for each is on the NH House Members webpage:
http://gencourt.state.nh.us/house/members/legdetailstable.asp

Don't forget the worst of the Senate: Lou D'Allesandro, who is now the vice president for finance.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/senate/members/senate20.asp

The next-worst Senator is Sylvia Larsen ... who is now President of the Senate, most powerful person in the State.

[Spencer]

The libs are doing this whole shopping and shunning thing pretty effectively over at http://www.buyblue.org

They provide info on the political contributions and political leanings of various companies, as well as other information relevant to how "progressive" the businesses are.

Here's from their mission statement:

BuyBlue.org supports businesses that share our progressive values and ideals. We believe in a triple bottom line: people, planet and profit. BuyBlue.org uses our power as consumers to vote with our wallets, supporting businesses that abide by sustainability, workers' rights, environmental standards, and corporate transparency. At the same time, BuyBlue.org focuses sharply on businesses that violate the essential values of a sustainable, fair and profitable society through their policies and the politicians they support.

[David]

Good insight Spencer.  I'm not a fan of many liberal ideas, and definately dislike their view that the force of the state can be morally used for good purposes.  But, their activism is something to be studied.  It is frequently benificial. 
Important, if we are ever able to push back the state on any meaningful level, there must be something in place to fill in the void.  The state actually does a few things that are viewed as important, and if their is no viable alternative, people will be pushed back into the states hands.  Also, the statists will never disappear, so the consequences to their violent beliefs and actions will always have to be in place. 

[lordmetroid]

If a business does a anti-freedom action like supporting a smoking ban then they get taken off the list or put on a list of businesses not to visit.

What it isn't up to the business owner to not prohibit smoking on their property or co-property without getting anti-freedom attitude?

Prohibiting smoking doesn't mean you are against freedom. It means you refuse to associate and do business to people that does smoke on your property. Banning smoking from an establishment doesn't need to be an act of anti-freedom. Just like one can refuse to do business with asian people in a free society one can refuse to do business with smoking people.

It is his loss of profit who does so. But it is his loss to do! Insane action but not necessarily an anti-freedom action! It might even be a profitable action to take if it attracts customers that doesn't want to be around smoke when doing whatever activity or it might be purely for medical reasons he doesn't want smokers in his establishment. Whatever reason it is, it doesn't need to be anti-freedom unless he accepts someone's else demand to prohibit smoking!