Creating a city of non agression

[David]

This is not another free town project.  I don't care about 'taking over' any of the statists precious municiple gov'ts. 
There is no community in the whole of the US that is totally free of first strike force or fraud.  I'd like to start one.  Call it Natural Law or Anarchy if you want, but I think it can be done. 
A couple of important things to consider:
The gov't regulates everything, so much of what would go one in our agression free village would be 'illegal'. 
It would be a target for the police to shut down. 
It would also potentially strenghthen the liberty community by providing us with a base, a home.  More importantly, allies. 
It would give us something to point out to the fence sitters and say 'see it can work'. 
I am not at all interested in a violent confrontation ever, even with pushy or violent gov't persons.  I will undermine any potential violence. Violence against gov't only makes it grow. 
We must perfect peaceful resistance.  Possibly a peace brigade to block police if they try to arrest someone.  Simply a spontaneous mob with no weapons, only their bodies. 

My inspiration for this is the 'anarchy ghetto', the pockets of free trade that occurs all over, various cultures such as the jewish and gyspy culture that manages to survive amid persicution, and other 'accidental' resistance groups. 
My choices in NH are to be an activist and make myself a target in an attempt to make a better society, or, to create what I believe is close to the ideal and then repeal attempts to destroy it.
I think the latter would be easier and more effective. 

I think Natural Law, and real free trade are some of the most beutiful concepts in the world.  I would like to see them develope a base, somewhere in this world. 
The world is at a time in history where everyone believes they have a right to initiate first strike agression and fraud on others, yet at the same time has developed weapons of unimaginable destruction.  Richard Maybury called humans barbarians with lasers.  Unfortunately most people do not want what I have to sell, and thus will never change.  So, I propose we create it anyway. 
Don't like what I suggest, than cooperate on the things you agree with, and go your own way with everything else.   
We have a unique situation where we have a continual migration of people to NH, I think we should take advantage of it.  It doesn't matter at this point what happens with the fsp, or first 1000, because I believe the movement is self-sustaining. 
I welcome any debate, ect. 

[error]

It's a good idea in theory.

As a practical matter, there's very little unincorporated space in New Hampshire, and much of the space that is unincorporated is also uninhabitable. Or owned by the feds.

[Kat Kanning]

Reverse eminent domain on fedlands.

[David]

I would seek out unihabited land.  I don't see any fundamental difference between gov't control of the state or local.  There does appear to be quite a lot of land up north, outside of the fed parks.  To be honest I don't believe I will need too much land.  And any property is an easy target to asset forfiture for not paying bribe I mean taxes. 
I'll ignore fed land, they are armed, I won't be, they outnumber me, and their lawyers are better paid.   

By doing this I will head off at the beginning most of the accusatory statements such as, 'since you benifit from the gov't roads, police protection, protection from frauds, ect, you have an obligation to pay for them'. 

[Dave Ridley]

the problem is going to be numbers.  followed by infrastructure creation problems.

however you can always just move to grafton and be halfway to what you want without having to build anything. 

[David]

Grafton is probably too hostile to free staters.  Maybe time has soften it, but I doubt it. 
Infrastructure will be built by those who stand to benifit the most from them.  OR, cars with really big tires will become the norm.   
Numbers will be the biggest problem, outside of gov't meddeling.  Numbers help create demand, which will help the expensive things get built (roads, ect.).  If I can get a core of principled people involved, then invite activists of other stripes in, it might work.  The key is to get people who want to change things but have no faith in the gov't to create change.  This is particularly relevant of the 'other strips' crowd.  Example, homeschooling conservatives, and environmental liberals.  I would be in favor of encouraging working illegals to join as well.   
An important factor is that if we start it, we will better be able to influence things from the beginning rather than in the middle of some statist power grab. 

[SeanSchade]

http://65.39.85.13/google/default.htm

Go there and zoom in on New Hampshire. This is the census data hooked up to the google maps api. For instance, just North of Squam Lake and East of 93 there is a spot with a population of 318 people in a 5 mile radius. Find a somewhat ghost town, and use that for your base of operations. 

I wonder how many REALLY small towns in America operate with little intervention from the State and Federal governments? I bet there are more places than you think. 

[David]

I tend to agree. 
If successful, this will give us undeniable proof that our theories could really work.  By successful, I mean the gov't actually leaves us alone.  I could only wish for such a utopian situation.   
We know free trade and non agression work.  but we can't prove it.  I'd like to put myself in a situation that the pro gun supporters are in.  The only reason they have been able to hold off the gungrabbers, is we can prove violent crime goes down when the right to bear arms is protected.  I'd like to be able to prove it.  Argueing with people about why I have the right to my own property, or to protect myself, or to self medicate has gotten the liberty movement nowhere. 

[David]

Kind of a Hardyville type of place.  I'd like to introduce a private legal system, silver coinage, private need based infrustructure, ect. 
To be honest, I would love to do this outside of any existing gov't claimed territory, but since every square foot of land in the world is claimed by someone, I'm out of luck. 
Of course there is always Seastead.   

[PowerPenguin]

If you do it in Portsmouth, I'll be there! If not, I don't know, as I want to move there in '08. This is tentative though, and I really have no idea. All I know is that I want ocean, some form of city infastructure, and a place that is NOT Kene for various logistics reasons.

[David]

Keene probably isn't the best area, too many statists.  Unfortunately, that is where most of the civil disobeyers are, and those are the people we need most to make it work.   

[David]

At one point I had thought it would be possible to try something like this in the middle of a large city.  I don't really think it would work, due to the fact that we will always be on 'their turf'. 
My original idea was to 'hide' out in plain sight, which can be done in large cities.  Due to the power of gov't in most cities, there would be a ready supply of gov't victims to cooperate and trade with.  In fact, in many areas, there already is a rebellious strain in existence. 
Unfortunately most would still be statist, angry only at their persecution caused by the 'other' group.  And the likelyhood of being arrested is increased.  That is possible no matter where or what I do, but in the city the risk seems to increase. 

[error]

There are "too many statists" everywhere. Don't let that stop you.

[TEBON]

This is not another free town project.  I don't care about 'taking over' any of the statists precious municiple gov'ts. 
There is no community in the whole of the US that is totally free of first strike force or fraud.  I'd like to start one.  Call it Natural Law or Anarchy if you want, but I think it can be done. 
A couple of important things to consider:
The gov't regulates everything, so much of what would go one in our agression free village would be 'illegal'. 
It would be a target for the police to shut down. 
It would also potentially strenghthen the liberty community by providing us with a base, a home.  More importantly, allies. 
It would give us something to point out to the fence sitters and say 'see it can work'. 
I am not at all interested in a violent confrontation ever, even with pushy or violent gov't persons.  I will undermine any potential violence. Violence against gov't only makes it grow. 
We must perfect peaceful resistance.  Possibly a peace brigade to block police if they try to arrest someone.  Simply a spontaneous mob with no weapons, only their bodies. 

My inspiration for this is the 'anarchy ghetto', the pockets of free trade that occurs all over, various cultures such as the jewish and gyspy culture that manages to survive amid persicution, and other 'accidental' resistance groups. 
My choices in NH are to be an activist and make myself a target in an attempt to make a better society, or, to create what I believe is close to the ideal and then repeal attempts to destroy it.
I think the latter would be easier and more effective. 

I think Natural Law, and real free trade are some of the most beutiful concepts in the world.  I would like to see them develope a base, somewhere in this world. 
The world is at a time in history where everyone believes they have a right to initiate first strike agression and fraud on others, yet at the same time has developed weapons of unimaginable destruction.  Richard Maybury called humans barbarians with lasers.  Unfortunately most people do not want what I have to sell, and thus will never change.  So, I propose we create it anyway. 
Don't like what I suggest, than cooperate on the things you agree with, and go your own way with everything else.   
We have a unique situation where we have a continual migration of people to NH, I think we should take advantage of it.  It doesn't matter at this point what happens with the fsp, or first 1000, because I believe the movement is self-sustaining. 
I welcome any debate, ect. 

I pretty much disagree. . . there will always be evil in society, there will always be people that rape and kill. . .if you don't -- hooray. .. it's awesome. . . neither do I. . . but I like the freedom of self defense. . .

I won't sit there while my wife is being raped, eating popcorn. 

I agree though, you should start such a community.  If not for yourself, the good of the world. Show us how it works.  Some of us need some proof. 

after the amish massacre, didn't it come out that the amish won't raise a hand not even in self defense?

[David]

I definately believe in the right of self defence. 
Nonviolence against gov't is a strategy, not a statement of principle.  I only believe it is wrong to Initiate violence or fraud, but every person has a right to defend him/herself from violent persons. 
Unfortunately the gov't,which is just as criminal as those in prison, is a very (relatively) organized gang.  It is downright dangerous to defend yourself against them. 
Again, I am suggesting a strategy, not a principle.