Celebration and Action!
This has been a great week, and it’s only going to get better. First this week, Pete Eyre and Jay Talley of Motorhome Diaries showed up in Keene to begin their new project of the same name, and were welcomed by over 25 liberty activists at Social Sunday at Vendettas. Our once meager and less populous gatherings are becoming a thing of the past, as more and more activists make their way to the liberty activist hot spot, Keene, New Hampshire. That said, these two newly arrived activists are a juggernaut to be reckoned with in their badass Motorhome and powerful message of Liberty. No greenhorns to the movement, their experience can only serve to attract more and more of the talent and dedication we need to push back against the every encroaching tyranny of the State.
Now that said, I’d like to address some recent city politics and what I feel will be the appropriate response.
Last Thursday, the Keene City Council passed a… piece of legislation… wherein they gave 5,000 dollars to a group so they can do a “feasibility” study for a local co-op. Now, of course there is nothing wrong with a co-op by its own nature; they’re a great resource for individuals to attain healthy, local food. However, the price is not worth it. 5,000 dollars hijacked from citizens and individuals who may never even pick up fruit from this venture, 5,000 dollars stolen from the neighbors of these leeches. As much as I try to be unsurprised by the actions of the State, they reasoning here is just mind-blowing– take money that isn’t theirs for a project they’re not even sure will pan out for an idea they insist will be “good” for the community when they don’t even have the data to support that!
So, I’m going to go out to Central Square of Keene this weekend to prove a point– that you don’t need to use government money (that is, stolen money) to make a great project for the community come to realization. I plan on working from sun up to sun down on the grounds of Central Square, tilling the land and planting seeds for a community-accesible garden on public land. No cost will be incurred by the city or the locals, and the garden will be open to all who want to add their own labor or donate to defray the costs of my labor.
I don’t have much to add to this, because I think it all speaks for itself. Government is doing something stupid, something inefficient, and I’m going to demonstrate how you can do these things right in front of their offices, how this all works without incurring costs onto an unwilling populace.
Addendum– I will be doing this on which ever day is nicer, and if it turns out that it is raining both days, I plan on doing this the first day that it is not raining following this weekend.
Comments
60 Comments on Celebration and Action!
If “asked” to stop by some men in costumes, will you continue until you are forcibly removed from the area?
I will continue until the hoe is ripped from my laboring hands and I’m dragged from the soil I’ve expended my labor into.
go Jesse!
Sun up, or 8 o’clock. Whichever feels better 
Swords into ploughshares!
Pick a spot that’s not garish, ok? I mean, you’re trying to accomplish something, not destroy something, so I wouldn’t put the vegetable garden right in the middle of a nice big green piece of grass.
Maybe there’s a spot out of the way, next to a flower bed or something 
Most of Central Square is actually muddied up and without grass, so any work I do will definitely be an improvement.
What if there were 10 people gardening along with you? How many people would they be willing to arrest for gardening with out a permit?
Wouldn’t be the first time the police ripped a hoe from Jesse’s hands…hehe. Couldn’t resist. This ought to be intersesting.
If 10 people want to participate with me, that’d be great. It would make a point that you have people willing to help out, without a gun pointed at them.
But if no one wants to get dirty, I’d appreciate some water or sustenance to keep me going. I plan on working non-stop if I can help it.
“…take money that isn’t theirs for a project they’re not even sure will pan out for an idea they insist will be ‘good’ for the community when they don’t even have the data to support that!”
Well said, to drive home in plain terms exactly what’s going on, without the sugar-coated facade of “for the public good” that the govt. disguises their actions with.
I completely support your effort (though I won’t be able to get to Keene this weekend to help), but I have a suggestion. Actually, it’s more of a point in case you haven’t already considered it.
You’re going to point out that govt. doesn’t need to steal money to find out if a co-op garden will work and is wanted. Great. But you’re going to do it by *also* destroying public property. WAIT! Don’t respond yet! I do *not* agree that public property should exist! I’m just saying that it will likely be an argument used against you. Even non-govt. people who *want* a free co-op vegetable garden might be offended that you’re changing the appearance of central square. No, they don’t have a right to demand that it be maintained in any given way, as it’s public land (and, even deeper, that it’s land that’s stolen from at least one private owner). But this *may* be an argument used against you.
That said, I wish you success! This is ballsy and charitable and fun!
“don’t rip mah hoe!”
I wouldn’t qualify planting a garden “destroying public property”. Seems more like improving it. If people want to be outraged, they should be outraged at the tragedy of the commons, not that someone tilled the land.
I don’t think anyone will be able to use that argument if the plot Jesse is tilling is just dirt. I think it should be out in the open, just as long as he isn’t ploughing up grass or flowers or something.
Great idea Jesse
That’s exactly my point, Ian. The tragedy of the commons dictates that “improvement” or “destruction” of “public” land is subjective. Someone will think Central Square looks fine as it is and, since it already exists, changing it by planting a garden will be, to them, destroying it. It is an ignorance of the tragedy of the commons that is indeed the problem. I’m referring to people in general, but I have no faith that a person working for govt (e.g., cops who might arrest Jesse, judges that might convict him) will know or care about it, either.
I also want to stress to Jesse that I think it’s a great idea. Good job!
Why not saw some cannabis plants while you at it…
From one gorilla gardener to the next, let me offer you some advice:
1) you might want to find out what kind of soil you’re working with. The United States Department of Agriculture has this office known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service. They are the authorities on soil quality. You’re going to need to obtain a soil sample and sent it off to them for testing – they’ll let you know if you have good soil for growing, or not.
2) you might want to find out of there are any known toxins on the site. The NRCS can help you with that, too. Or, if it’s a really big toxin, the United States Environmental Protection Agency keeps a list of brownfields sites. Keene is an old milltown with a lot of history, so you never know what you’re gonna get when you put a shovel in the ground.
3) speaking of putting shovels in the ground, you might want to call and find out if you have any electric lines in the ground you are working on. That would be a real pain! I think the City’s Department of Public Works can help you with that.
4) You might also want to know if anyone has had success growing there in the past – seeing as how it is shaded for most of the day because of the tall buildings surrounding it on three sides – the City of Keene Library might be a good place to conduct your research, as they have a slew of historical records for the City, free and available to any resident of Keene to use.
5) You might also want to see if anyone else – maybe a distant relative of yours – could lay claim to that land. I believe the Cheshire County registry of Deeds keeps a record of all property transactions in the county, a record that goes back to the colonial period.
6) You might also like to speak with members of the business community in Keene to find out how much money they have spent on fertilizer and grass down there on Central Square, in concert with the City, because you might want to know of you have heavily fertilized soil that might only need a few inputs. You have to be strategic about your growing season – since you won’t be making any money until the harvest comes.
It’s a huge responsibility, planting a garden, good thing to know that you are clearly in it for the purpose of growing food and feeding people. Without a doubt
“The United States Department of Agriculture has this office known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service. They are the authorities on soil quality. You’re going to need to obtain a soil sample and sent it off to them for testing – they’ll let you know if you have good soil for growing, or not.”
“you might want to find out of there are any known toxins on the site. The NRCS can help you with that, too. Or, if it’s a really big toxin, the United States Environmental Protection Agency keeps a list of brownfields sites.”
“You might also want to know if anyone has had success growing there in the past”
How about he just plants some stuff and finds out?
“you might want to call and find out if you have any electric lines in the ground you are working. City’s Department of Public Works can help you with that!”
If he accidently digs that deep with a damned hoe he is a fucking man beast.
“You might also want to see if anyone else – maybe a distant relative of yours – could lay claim to that land.”
Nah. Just homestead it.
All you have to do to get permission to be productive and procure sustenance for you and your friends is fill out the appropriate government paperwork and send them to their corresponding bureaucracies. Surely JESSE knew THAT.
Thanks for the love Jesse! Jason and I are super-pumped to have finally made it to NH. There’s already an energetic band of entrepreneurial activists here in Keene and we look forward to adding to the ranks as we travel the country and interact with other freedom fighters.
What if I prefer the grass and mud on central square? What gives you the right to do what YOU like with it? Now you are unfairly taking away my right to enjoy grass and mud on public land. Perhaps we should vote on it before you go ruining what is partly my property?
“What if I prefer the grass and mud on central square? What gives you the right to do what YOU like with it? Now you are unfairly taking away my right to enjoy grass and mud on public land. Perhaps we should vote on it before you go ruining what is partly my property?”
Voila.
What if I prefer the grass and mud on central square? What gives you the right to do what YOU like with it? Now you are unfairly taking away my right to enjoy grass and mud on public land. Perhaps we should vote on it before you go ruining what is partly my property?
Meh. Nobody really owns it at all. No one has acquired it through legitimate means. A gang making claims to it with money they stole from you doesn’t make it yours or theirs. However, Jesse’s act of working the land to make it productive would really make it his. I certainly couldn’t think of anyone who could show more right to it than him. Yes, someone will most likely gripe, and there is a good chance that Jesse will go to jail. However, I find it more likely to be because of some code violation rather than someone wanting to keep muddy grass.
Anyone want to take a bet on the following scenario?:
The sad adolescent starts tearing up the grass at Central Square.
The police tell him to stop; said adolescent, who has all sorts of unresolved anger issues and sees any form of governmental authority as symbolic of when his parents demanded he clean his room, refuses, and grandly.
Church bells all around Keene start tolling the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” as the ineffectual pup is dragged away. Echo chamber made up of small band of Freakeeners applauds; the anachronistic one has made his bones by standing up to “the man”, or as the group would reasonably call them, “genocidal murderers”.
Pea-brain is booked and given a court date. This provides fodder for weeks and weeks of recreational blogging, posting and calling in to local radio talk shows. Freakers are thrilled, because, well, they are suffering from status deprivation.
Many contentious and useless hearings later, judge finally blows his/her stack and has little Napoleon hauled off to the mini-slammer. More blogs, posts and calls, all of them paeans to the utter courage of this latter-day Jesus, with many bemoaning the incredible human toll he and his loved ones are suffering.
The mindless one asserts that he will not bend in his determination to fight the vicious landscape protection forces of this fair city.
Twenty-four hours later, he apologizes to the judge, and promises not to do something this idiotic again.
Once back home in his filthy garret, he assures everyone that “he didn’t give in”, that he “didn’t have any choice”, that “up is down” and that “The Reichstag fire was started by Teddy Roosevelt”.
C’mon, who wants to lay a hundred bucks on the table on this one?
Or how about this scenario: someone who doesn’t believe people should be free – or who believes it but doesn’t have the courage to exchange anything to make it happen – wastes their time (by their own definition) telling people who do work toward freedom that they’re doing a bad job. He continues reading their blogs and forum posts even though they are something he disagrees with and thinks will fail. He continues telling the “freakeeners” that they are stupid and their efforts are pointless, even though he knows his efforts are pointless and that the “freakeeners” are at the very least happy doing what they love with their friends, if not also educating people about liberty and making change in the world towards more peace and liberty. When he’s not hurling insults, he goes back to his life, his family and friends, his job, and grumbles under his breath or out loud that the govt takes too much of his money or that they spend it in ways he thinks are inappropriate or that he hates going through the TSA checkpoint when he flies, and doesn’t understand that those things all happen because of him, not in spite of him. He is unhappy (or else why would he bother insulting a complete stranger).
I think anamazedreader is absolutely right and this might be the safest bet of my life.
I think free-staters are selfish. What if the majority of the town doesn’t want a garden on central square? How presumptuous to assume that you know what’s best for us. Who’s the dictator here? If I try to protect the mud and grass, will you harass me or cause me bodily harm? Will I receive nasty threatening emails? I feel confident that the police will be fair, read me my rights, and not cause me harm. I am entirely unsure about your group’s actions. Let’s take a fair vote before you rip up our mud and grass (the mud dries up and the grass is green in the summer and it’s where I enjoy my lunch).
Also, if you plan on volunteering in the future you should consider being helpful and not making more work for people who actually benefit the community. It’s one thing to give the police a hard time, but an organization that feeds homeless people?
You should be disgusted with yourselves.
Whine all you want, but this is how you have represented yourselves and how the community views you. To accomplish any of your goals you need to do some serious damage control. I’m sure some of you are nice community-minded people, but this is not what the group as a whole has projected.
Bring on the vulgar language following my post…
What if the majority of the town doesn’t want a garden on central square?
$100, you’re so close to actually thinking, instead of just repeating what you’ve been told all your life! The question I quoted above is the only part of your post that is on the right track, that actually glimpses the true idea at stake here. If we reword your question slightly to “what if I don’t want a garden on public property?” then you can start to see the entire problem that Jesse is trying to address: public property! If everyone own something, then no one owns it.
It’s called Tragedy of the Commons, and I recommend you learn about it. Try the Wikipedia article here.
Another fallacy you’re expressing is “the majority.” The majority doesn’t matter in a free society, except when every “voting” member has voluntarily agreed to participate in the voting and accept the results. We don’t live in a free society by any stretch of the imagination, but if you proceed to say that our society does vote and so people who do not voluntarily accept the system forced upon them must take what everyone else gives them, then you are the very thug that govt is.
Sounds good but just make sure you dig a hole off to the side deep enough for the government to throw some money into it. Without the government throwing someone else’s money into a hole in the ground, they’ll feel ineffective and get cranky.
Mike,
I don’t know what you are proposing, besides chaos. I am familiar with the tragedy of the commons and I have read Animal Farm.
I’m just not sure what gives anyone the right to decide what should be done with central square. You say that if it is public property, then everyone owns it and no one owns it. If Jesse doesn’t own it, then he has no right to dig it up. Can’t he be peaceful and plant a garden on his own land? I know you don’t believe in the majority, but isn’t it the most practical way to keep the most peace? If the majority of people living in Keene want to eat lunch on the grass in central square and one man wants to plant a garden that excludes all the people who want to sit on the grass….how is Jesse anything but a dictator?
Don’t believe in the majority- fine. But propose something that can work in practice in the world we all live in. Take human nature into account, because it’s a reality. At least the police tell me their rules and stick to them. My impression of the free-staters is that they are violent, selfish, vindictive, impulsive, and sometimes vulgar and the only way you could ever win me over is by force and fear. You are becoming the people you most hate. Again- take it or leave it, but that is the impression you have made on this community.
Comment by AnAmazedReader
April 9, 2009 @ 2:09 am
Anyone want to take a bet on the following scenario?:
The sad adolescent starts tearing up the grass at Central Square.
- Reality bends to your will because you call a capable, intelligent adult a child? What is wrong with you? You’ve invested a lot of your time in debates on this site. I am curious as to just what else you have “invested” here. Just what is your “stake” in maintaining a lousy status quo and just how much do you enjoy the sound of the rattling of your chains?
The police tell him to stop; said adolescent, who has all sorts of unresolved anger issues and sees any form of governmental authority as symbolic of when his parents demanded he clean his room, refuses, and grandly.
- You are not even able to try to prove that he has any “anger issues”. Of course you haven’t let the truth stand in the way of you slandering the character of people you never took the time to know, before. Obviously it hasn’t slowed you down this time either.
Pea-brain is booked and given a court date. This provides fodder for weeks and weeks of recreational blogging, posting and calling in to local radio talk shows. Freakers are thrilled, because, well, they are suffering from status deprivation.
- Do you really think this is about status or lack of it? It is only your ego that has been put in the forefront. Calling others what you are is a tired old ploy that didn’t work back then, still is just as ineffective now. Things are changing for the better in one of the last (slightly) free places in the US. It appears that you are unable to handle good people working for freedom, it attacks your strange little sense of complacency. I know it makes you want to throw your absued little hissy fits and spew from your keyboard every time you attempt to get comfortable in your slavery, yet can’t.
YOU are the one that is going to have to at least act more adult, drop your goofy lies about people you never even tried to know, and pay attention to what is really going on, lest you make yourself look even more foolish with your silly posts. Freedom and Liberty are not a popularity contest where you can “vote” for what is right and ignore the consequences of how it actually harms the lives and fortunes of those who are lacking in it.
it is the thousands of numerous encroachments against our freedoms that have motivated us “Free People” to peacefully work for change in our environment. I’m most certainly no “kid”. I’m 47 years old with grown children of my own and even three grandkids. I am ready to soon leave behind an entire life I made just to move to New Hampshire, and not look back. Do you honsetly believe that I would leave all this just to have a chance to show my ass in public? Is that how your thought processes really work?
Many contentious and useless hearings later, judge finally blows his/her stack and has little Napoleon hauled off to the mini-slammer. More blogs, posts and calls, all of them paeans to the utter courage of this latter-day Jesus, with many bemoaning the incredible human toll he and his loved ones are suffering.
- And you feel that you get to decide if what he or anyone does is somehow “valid” in your limited view of the world. You’re quite authoritarian once the gloves come off. You must have some stake in the system to rant so loudly without actually defending your position. Take heart that once the state withers away you’ll be able to offer something to the betterment of your fellow human beings, that is unless you are totally unable to compete in the free marketplace. You do have something to offer and are not just a welfare recipient, politician, cop, or court bailiff, aren’t you? I doubt that you’d have the integrity to answer honestly even if you were part of the moocher class.
I feel such pity for you and all your little hissy fits you throw to cover your intense anger at yourself for not having the guts to oppose what you know down deep to be wrong. You are a slave to the tiny little stake you have in the system as it currently is. How utterly sad for you. You will never know the joy of True Liberty or be able to delight in having it, even on the day when it will come to be.
I just cannot imagine a more painful self imposed agony that that. I truly hope that you find inner peace for your sake.
Dan
Jasmine: What if I prefer the grass and mud on central square? What gives you the right to do what YOU like with it? Now you are unfairly taking away my right to enjoy grass and mud on public land. Perhaps we should vote on it before you go ruining what is partly my property?
The problem here is, it’s just as much my property, and that means I have an absolute claim to it. This is all the tragedy of the commons. Besides, I’m not taking anything away– I’m only doing a 19X19 garden to improve the land, which leaves plenty of grass around for the various protesters to use as they typically do and citizens of Keene to relax on on warm summer days.
Additionally, I think you’re missing the point here– I’m doing something to help the community (this isn’t just for me or other FreeKeene folks), and I’m doing so on unused and essentially valueless land. Moreover, I’m doing this to demonstrate the model inefficiency that the City Council has stuck to in regards to this “feasibility study”. Simply by being there and working the land, I’ve won this battle, having demonstrated you only need 60 bucks (privately acquired!) and some elbow grease to make a great community project come to life.
If you have any qualms about people being unfair in terms of property, I suggest you write the Councilors and ask that they don’t spend money that isn’t theirs to begin with so wantonly.
AnAmazedReader: Anyone want to take a bet on the following scenario?:
The sad adolescent starts tearing up the grass at Central Square.
No, I’ll be cutting a 19X19 plot of the mud. I won’t be tearing up the ground willy-nilly; that’s just too much work for what I want to do. But let me get this clear before we go on– you don’t want a great resource available to the community at such a low cost?
The police tell him to stop; said adolescent, who has all sorts of unresolved anger issues and sees any form of governmental authority as symbolic of when his parents demanded he clean his room, refuses, and grandly.
Had you a decent enough education or an interest in being reasonable, you’d a.) understand that you’re in no position to actually judge my psychological state (you’d need to have dozens of discussions with me in person) and b.) realize that this doesn’t actually disprove any of what I’m doing. Playing arm-chair psychologist and using ad hominem attacks makes you the adolescent one here, not me.
Church bells all around Keene start tolling the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” as the ineffectual pup is dragged away.
Dixie would be better. But let us be serious about those with ineffectual impotence– you’re the one flailing out like a child on an internet discussion forum over a proposed community garden that is being spearheaded and forwarded by a private source. I’m doing what drives movements best– acting.
I see an injustice and stupidity, and I’m acting on to demonstrate how it can be rectified.
Echo chamber made up of small band of Freakeeners applauds; the anachronistic one has made his bones by standing up to “the man”, or as the group would reasonably call them, “genocidal murderers”.
Pea-brain is booked and given a court date. This provides fodder for weeks and weeks of recreational blogging, posting and calling in to local radio talk shows. Freakers are thrilled, because, well, they are suffering from status deprivation.
We’re not looking for “status”– we’re looking to abolish it. We’re looking to abolish privilege, abolish an institution that hands out monetary favors to private institutions at the expense of tax-payers.
Many contentious and useless hearings later, judge finally blows his/her stack and has little Napoleon hauled off to the mini-slammer. More blogs, posts and calls, all of them paeans to the utter courage of this latter-day Jesus, with many bemoaning the incredible human toll he and his loved ones are suffering.
Based on what evidence are you making this claim? Because my only trial to date was precisely the opposite of this– I even had the presiding judge tell me I did a great job defending myself. So, unless you have clairvoyance or a crystal ball…
The mindless one asserts that he will not bend in his determination to fight the vicious landscape protection forces of this fair city.
But they’re not “landscape protection forces”– they’re preventing people from using perfectly good land that they’re just as entitled to. They’re creating an artificial economic condition and trying to “solve” it by handing out 5,000 dollars.
Twenty-four hours later, he apologizes to the judge, and promises not to do something this idiotic again.
I would never apologize for trying to make a community garden work without seeking handouts from the government. Never.
Once back home in his filthy garret, he assures everyone that “he didn’t give in”, that he “didn’t have any choice”, that “up is down” and that “The Reichstag fire was started by Teddy Roosevelt”.
C’mon, who wants to lay a hundred bucks on the table on this one?
You’re on. It’ll defray the costs of the community garden, and even give me some more money to expand it.
$100: I think anamazedreader is absolutely right and this might be the safest bet of my life.
I think free-staters are selfish.
Let’s try a thought game here– pick which one sounds selfish to you:
1. Group A approaches the government for a hand-out, under the guise that “it will be good for the community” when they don’t have the data to back that up, and will be using said money to confirm or deny their assertion. Group A has ties to several dozen private ventures who are known for their money-making capabilities, but have decided to include the unwillingly, unknowing, and generally uninformed populace of City K in their venture, externalizing the risk that would normally come with an entrepreneurial venture. Incidentally, citizens of City K wouldn’t actually hold any shares in the venture, which was in fact paid for in part with their money.
2. Individual B decides that he wants to make an easily accessible, community oriented garden, and decides to invest his own time, labor, and capital into the project. He makes no effort to externalize the cost of this venture onto his neighbors, but does offer them shares to defray the costs that they can opt into at a later date if they decide it is right for them. He plans the garden in what is easily accessible by most citizens of City K, and looks to improve what is otherwise unused land, adding value to it that wasn’t previously there.
What if the majority of the town doesn’t want a garden on central square?
First, I’m going to have to reject the premise that “the majority” has any validity. An appeal to an ambiguous collective can’t make for a rationally sound argument.
Second, how do we know the town wanted the city hall to drop 5,000 dollars on a private venture? Will the city continue to give 5,000 dollar handouts to other businesses that open in the future? I’m hoping you understand the precedent that is set here, as well as the generally bad economics.
Finally, the property on Central Square is “public”, no? There for the public consumption and use? Is it not mine just as much as anyone else’s? So here, again, we hit the tragedy of the commons. By denying me use of the land, you’re denying me my right to the land.
How presumptuous to assume that you know what’s best for us. Who’s the dictator here?
Actually, I haven’t said that, and never did I think I did. In fact, my actions have been “I don’t know what’s best for you, and would prefer to leave that up to you” the entire time, because I’m not using taxpayer money or unjustly acquired resources to fund this venture.
I’m not forcing you to participate– unlike the city, who has roped you into this “Keene Co-Op” scheme.
If I try to protect the mud and grass, will you harass me or cause me bodily harm?
If you’re going to protect it by simply standing there, I’ll work around you, or try and work it out with you. Face to face discussions often help mutual accord and understanding become realized.
If you’re going to protect it by threatening me with violence or acting with the intent to hurt me, I’ll respond in kind.
Will I receive nasty threatening emails? I feel confident that the police will be fair, read me my rights, and not cause me harm.
I wouldn’t e-mail you, and maybe the police will be “fair”– but what is fair? Is it fair that they’re denying people land that could be used for public consumption, denying people cheap access to food?
I am entirely unsure about your group’s actions.
It’s actually only me this Saturday. I’m the only one that can be held accountable for my actions, and I think that the community will stand behind me on this one when I demonstrate how inefficient and costly the city’s decision has been for them.
Let’s take a fair vote before you rip up our mud and grass (the mud dries up and the grass is green in the summer and it’s where I enjoy my lunch).
What’s a fair vote? Why should I put my property up for grabs? No, I think I’ll pass on a vote. But, I will comment that I do enjoy protesting under the shade there during the summer, and think it could make for a nice picnic place, but just think how great it would be if you pick a few fresh tomatoes off the vine for that sandwich you’re about to consume for what could be no cost (it’ll only cost you if you decide to donate)! Consider what it would be like to have a beautiful garden teeming with life and green to look at while you have your lunch!
Again, I’m not destroying anything. I’m improving the value of the land.
Also, if you plan on volunteering in the future you should consider being helpful and not making more work for people who actually benefit the community. It’s one thing to give the police a hard time, but an organization that feeds homeless people?
You should be disgusted with yourselves.
I don’t understand what you’re talking about– the excess crop and donations that don’t cover the costs of upkeep here are going to feed people with low incomes or the community kitchen.
Whine all you want, but this is how you have represented yourselves and how the community views you.
This seems to fly in the face of other interactions I’ve had with “the community”, but whatever. I’m not interested in trading anecdotal evidence with you.
To accomplish any of your goals you need to do some serious damage control. I’m sure some of you are nice community-minded people, but this is not what the group as a whole has projected.
I don’t understand– by being generally good neighbors and refusing to be bootlickers, we’ve sullied our name? If that’s wrong, I don’t want to be right.
Bring on the vulgar language following my post…
I actually laughed when I read this– none of this has been vulgar, and the only post that I would think qualifies as offensive is AnAmazedReaders. He/She used baseless attacks on my character and worldview in an effort to tell me “whats what” instead of actually discussing the merits of my actions in contrast to city hall’s.
But now all this has been said, I’ll give you nay-sayers a chance to discuss this with me like good neighbors– I’m going to have coffee later tonight at Brewbakers, around 9 P.M. Shoot me an e-mail at AnarchoJesse@gmail.com if you plan on being there. I’m taking your advice and seeking the council of my neighbors (despite the fact that I’ve now got about two dozen video interviews on file from non-Free Staters that what I’m doing is positive), and will give you a chance to discuss this with me. If you don’t show up, well, you had your chance. Best I can give you after that is a nice crop of tomatoes.
Anarchojesse,
You’re being altogether too subjective. I don’t agree that your garden is a public improvement project. Instead of stamping your dictatorial foot, let’s take a vote.
And I would never show my face to you for fear that the more violent members of your group would flood me with disgusting emails and encourage people to harass my children (as they did to Judge Burke’s children).
If you don’t recognize any of the references I’m mentioning (vulgar posts on here, giving the community kitchen a hard time in the guise of volunteering) you should acquaint yourself more with your group so you can help them make a better impression on the community.
Thanks for the comments, $100, and for the tone in which you are conversing.
I’m just not sure what gives anyone the right to decide what should be done with central square. You say that if it is public property, then everyone owns it and no one owns it. If Jesse doesn’t own it, then he has no right to dig it up.
Yes, but the reverse is also true. He does own it (along with everyone else), so if he wants to plant a garden then everyone else has no right to stop him. I think you see the contradiction, but this is inherent in what current society calls “public property.” And that is one thing I appreciate about Jesse’s action, and that I hope others will learn or at least think about for the first time.
Can’t he be peaceful and plant a garden on his own land? I know you don’t believe in the majority, but isn’t it the most practical way to keep the most peace? If the majority of people living in Keene want to eat lunch on the grass in central square and one man wants to plant a garden that excludes all the people who want to sit on the grass….how is Jesse anything but a dictator?
We’re still dealing with the same issue: when everyone owns something, no one can own it. I understand the conundrum you’re presenting, but it doesn’t make Jesse a dictator. Jesse is not using force to make anyone else do (or not do) anything. If you, as another “owner” of Central Square, would like to have grass where Jesse wants to have a garden, then you two should work it out (discuss it, come to an agreement, make a compromise, make a trade, go to arbitration, etc.). One of you may end up not happy with the result, but “Tragedy of the Commons” does begin with the word “tragedy.”
In a free society, there would be no “public” land; this kind of conflict could not exist. INstead, one person (or a group of voluntarily assenting people) would own it, and he (or they) would decide what to do with their own property. They may want to appease the majority of people in town, or they may want to plant a garden at the expense of upsetting a lot of people and being ostracized.
At least the police tell me their rules and stick to them.
I think you’re lucky to have only had that experience with the police. I think that should you ever try to live a little more freely – i.e., do something for yourself that doesn’t harm or threaten anyone else but is outside the law – you will encounter the police (and judges and govt in general) not sticking to their rules.
My impression of the free-staters is that they are violent, selfish, vindictive, impulsive, and sometimes vulgar and the only way you could ever win me over is by force and fear. …take it or leave it, but that is the impression you have made on this community.
That is unfortunate. First, I want to stress that there is no “free-stater” group. The Free State Project is an organization to entice liberty-loving individuals to move to one geographic area. Once people move here for that purpose, they aren’t in the Free State Project any more; they’re liberty loving individuals who live in NH. When the 20,000 people have moved to NH as they commit to the FSP to do, the FSP will cease to exist.
But also in a more general yet more important way, we are not a collective! We do not plant gardens and burn flags and volunteer at the Community Kitchen and perform at open-mic nights because “our leader” tells us to. Each of us does what we want. There is no leader. There is no organizer. There is no body or committee that decides what is best for “free-staters.” If you see a bunch of us doing the same thing, it’s because we each want to do that thing and we find some benefit to working together. I don’t think you’ll ever see all of us at one event, or even half of us!
But the unfortunate thing about your perception of us is how you see us: violent, selfish, vindictive, impulsive, and sometimes vulgar. I don’t think I’ve met a single one of us that’s violent, and I’ve met a couple hundred so far. Some of us are selfish, and some of us even describe “selfishness” differently than is commonly understood (check out The Virtue of Selfishness, and as a good thing. I’m sure some of us, including me, are sometimes vindictive, and it’s a trait I’m working hard to overcome. I’m also sure some of us are sometimes impulsive and vulgar, but those are not horrible traits (I personally don’t think vulgarity is an effective way to communicate, most of the time, but it’s harmless – “sticks and stones,” you know).
But then, these traits are found in most people, including statists. In fact, regarding violence, I’d say that anyone supporting the state (especially once they fully understand what the state is) is far more violent than any “free-stater” I’ve ever met.
What’s your opinion of me? Am I violent? Vulgar? Vindictive? Impulsive? (I am not asking about selfish, because I deem it to be a good thing, so our differing definitions would come to a loggerhead).
a
$100 I don’t know what you are proposing, besides chaos. I am familiar with the tragedy of the commons and I have read Animal Farm.
By fostering co=operation without a gun we’re pushing for chaos?
I’m just not sure what gives anyone the right to decide what should be done with central square. You say that if it is public property, then everyone owns it and no one owns it. If Jesse doesn’t own it, then he has no right to dig it up.
But you’re forgetting that everyone owns it at the same time. This isn’t our reasoning, of course– it’s simply the logical outcome of the doctrine of “public land”. Consider also that the land has been kept up with stolen money, and it really becomes difficult to say who owns the land.
Can’t he be peaceful and plant a garden on his own land?
Uh, I am being peaceful. I don’t see how planting a garden without stolen money for the good of the community isn’t peaceful.
I know you don’t believe in the majority, but isn’t it the most practical way to keep the most peace?
If we’re going to discuss this from a pragmatic and utilitarian basis, no, it really isn’t. One would have to ignore the underlying fact that majoritarianism isn’t premised on reason or mutual aid, but rather the threat of force against the minority.
If the majority of people living in Keene want to eat lunch on the grass in central square and one man wants to plant a garden that excludes all the people who want to sit on the grass….how is Jesse anything but a dictator?
But I’m not monopolizing the land for my use– if anything, you’re the people doing the monopolizing. What gives you the right to deny me access to land that is just as much mine?
Don’t believe in the majority- fine. But propose something that can work in practice in the world we all live in. Take human nature into account, because it’s a reality.
We do. We’re realists that reject the paradigm that only one particular organization is capable of making these decisions, and that any affliction of human nature is just as prevalent in the people who possess political power. It’s almost as if you expect us to believe that by becoming actors in government, they can magically suppress their humanity and mark themselves different from the rest of us.
That said, I’m curious to know what you would qualify “human nature” as? Can you describe it for me? Remember, it would have to apply to all humans at all times for it to be “human nature”.
At least the police tell me their rules and stick to them.
Have you ever considered the nature and origin of those rules? Or are you content to just follow?
My impression of the free-staters is that they are violent, selfish, vindictive, impulsive, and sometimes vulgar and the only way you could ever win me over is by force and fear. You are becoming the people you most hate. Again- take it or leave it, but that is the impression you have made on this community.
When have we ever been violent (we espouse non-violence), selfish (we’re not the one threatening to take away peoples homes or steal money to fund other peoples projects), vindictive, or impulsive? Vulgar really isn’t a crime or bad thing in and of itself, but it’s basis is in individual preference, so there is not point debating whether or not we may “appear” vulgar.
$100Anarchojesse,
You’re being altogether too subjective. I don’t agree that your garden is a public improvement project. Instead of stamping your dictatorial foot, let’s take a vote.
1. If my reasoning is subjective, then so is yours, logically speaking.
2. The land was of no use. Now, there is a garden which produces usable goods. There is a net gain, and thus it is improved land. Economics 101.
3. Isn’t a vote just as dictatorial?
$100: And I would never show my face to you for fear that the more violent members of your group would flood me with disgusting emails and encourage people to harass my children (as they did to Judge Burke’s children).
Then your vote is meaningless to me. Thanks for participating.
If you don’t recognize any of the references I’m mentioning (vulgar posts on here, giving the community kitchen a hard time in the guise of volunteering) you should acquaint yourself more with your group so you can help them make a better impression on the community.
ONE person did something stupid at the community kitchen, and the community kitchen isn’t holding us all accountable for the actions of one individual.
As for the “vulgar” posts, who gives a fuck? No one is forcing you to read what we write here.
And I would never show my face to you for fear that the more violent members of your group would flood me with disgusting emails and encourage people to harass my children (as they did to Judge Burke’s children).
I know of no incidents of encouragement to harass Burke’s children. Please provide some evidence.
Also, please name “the more violent members of [our] group.” I’d like to confront them and determine for myself if they’re violent. But of course, if you can provide evidence of their violence, that would be very beneficial. Can you?
If you don’t recognize any of the references I’m mentioning (vulgar posts on here, giving the community kitchen a hard time in the guise of volunteering) you should acquaint yourself more with your group so you can help them make a better impression on the community.
Perhaps you should acquaint yourself more with “facts” that you use to back your emotions. I was not at the Community Kitchen when the recent incident occurred, but I have asked questions and have now heard what happened second-hand (not as good as first-hand, granted): one person who volunteered asked a lot of legal-type questions about the Community Questions forms, and the Community Kitchen representative didn’t appreciate it and politely told him that she didn’t want him to volunteer there.
Regarding the vulgar posts here, why aren’t you using the same criteria to attack those who actually have made vulgar posts here? Have any of the people you are attacking (”free-staters”) said anything vulgar? Please provide evidence.
“And I would never show my face to you for fear that the more violent members of your group would flood me with disgusting emails and encourage people to harass my children (as they did to Judge Burke’s children).”
The fact that all you are concerned about the “more violent members” of “his group” doing is sending emails suggests that they aren’t violent at all.
But what does this have to do with Jesse? Why are you judging him based on the actions of people you don’t even know he is affiliated with?
There is another group that kidnaps, injures, robs, and kills peaceful people on a daily basis. Maybe you should be more concerned with them rather than a guy that wants to provide, for free, what this organization stole $5000 to decide if they maybe could do it
I don’t honestly see anything vulgar in “swear” words. To me, vulgar is advocating brutality and violence as a means to achieve and end. Vulgar is inducing unwillingly people into playing along in a system they want no part of.
If the majority of people living in Keene want to eat lunch on the grass in central square and one man wants to plant a garden that excludes all the people who want to sit on the grass….how is Jesse anything but a dictator?
And if the majority wants to eat lunch, and excludes Jesse from planting a garden, how are they being anything but dictatorial?
Thus the paradox of public property.
“In a free society, there would be no “public” land; this kind of conflict could not exist. INstead, one person (or a group of voluntarily assenting people) would own it, and he (or they) would decide what to do with their own property. They may want to appease the majority of people in town, or they may want to plant a garden at the expense of upsetting a lot of people and being ostracized.”
Mike…I’m just trying to make sense of this. I can’t possibly tackle all the arguments that have been thrown at me, so here’s one. Perhaps before Jesse plants his garden he should purchase the land for a fair price? Or, more simply, isn’t Keene already a group of voluntarily assenting people who have chosen to have a town common with grass and a gazebo? Are the majority of the people in Keene not appeased by the current situation?
I think we’ve found a solution!
Mike, you’re fine and I appreciate that you can have a conversation. I will not provide evidence of threatening emails or every instance of a vulgar post. The point I am making is that as a group, whether you have chosen to be a group or not, the actions of some ruin public perception for others. Anarcho is not offended by vulgar posts, but many people of the public that you should be aiming to win over do. Unless this is just a sounding board for people who are already members and there is no intent to spread your ideas…
It is a paradox so we must do our best.
We both agree that there is no perfect solution- it is impossible to please everyone. That’s why I fall back to the majority, because though it is not the best, it is better.
I personally do not believe that one man choosing to plant a garden is the best we can do.
I don’t honestly see anything vulgar in “swear” words.
I completely agree. “Fuck” is just a sound and a word. In some print media that censors, if I type “phuk” they will allow it because it’s spelled differently but means the same. In some TV shows, like BSG, “frack” is used exactly the same way “fuck” is used in today’s society (i.e., the same meaning) but the TV censors allow it. Snoop Dog started making up words to replace “vulgar” words because censorship is too stupid an idea to keep up; even though the new made-up words have the same meaning, if they become censored then new words will be made up within minutes. It’s just a word!
However, I wasn’t sure whether the use of “vulgar” above was for language or action, so I just used it generally to mean either.
Perhaps before Jesse plants his garden he should purchase the land for a fair price?
And perhaps before you eat your lunch there, you should buy it.
More people can eat lunch than enjoy a vegetable garden. My action doesn’t exclude others. Perhaps if he planted flowers I’d be won over, but not everyone prefers flowers to grass either.
Perhaps before Jesse plants his garden he should purchase the land for a fair price? Or, more simply, isn’t Keene already a group of voluntarily assenting people who have chosen to have a town common with grass and a gazebo? Are the majority of the people in Keene not appeased by the current situation?
No, he shouldn’t purchase the land for a fair price. If a thief steals your TV from you, should you buy it back from him? And if the situation is such that you would, what would be a “fair” price?
No, Keene is not a group of voluntarily assenting people. That should be evident from this discussion. Jesse is part of “Keene” (as far as “Keene” is concerned) yet he is not so voluntarily. Actually, no one is! Try not paying your property tax to “Keene” voluntarily; you will soon see how voluntary it actually is.
It doesn’t matter if the majority of people are appeased (or not); it’s still “public” property, and hence Jesse still has as much right to use it as anyone else.
I will not provide evidence of threatening emails or every instance of a vulgar post.
Why not? I didn’t ask for every instance of evidence. Give me some examples. Select the worst few, or even the easiest few for you to provide evidence of. Without evidence, and with my personal first-hand experience of non-violence amongst “free-staters,” I do not believe your accusation.
The point I am making is that as a group, whether you have chosen to be a group or not, the actions of some ruin public perception for others.
I think this might be the cruz of your position: according to you, even if I am part of a group against my will, I must do as the group says. This is slavery and aggression. If you support this notion, then you are aggressive!
We both agree that there is no perfect solution- it is impossible to please everyone. That’s why I fall back to the majority, because though it is not the best, it is better.
We agree there is no perfect solution. But we disagree that falling back to the majority is better. It means that the minority are aggressed against by the majority! 51% of the population dictates what 49% will do! In a population of about 25K, roughly 12,000 people are slaves! <emThis is the better scenario, to you?
In a free society – i.e., without government – there would still be crime and conflict, etc. – but people would be free! They could still work out their conflict, they could initiate voluntary means to deal with crime, etc., but in the interim they would not have their money stolen from them constantly by govt, and they would not have their every move dictated by legislation and enforced by cops.
I think voluntary is better than slavery.
Theodorelogan, thanks for your comments. Of course I appreciate them because they coincide with my position, but they’re also so eloquent and peaceful and concise!
More people can eat lunch than enjoy a vegetable garden. My action doesn’t exclude others. Perhaps if he planted flowers I’d be won over, but not everyone prefers flowers to grass either.
Why does “more” matter? You keep bringing it up as if the fact that a majority wants to do something makes it right or just. We both know it doesn’t, so why keep mentioning it? Since when do polls determine right and wrong?
And yes, your action (eating lunch there) does exclude Jesse and others who might be interested in a garden. The spot can be used for either eating lunch or planting a garden. A simply solved problem with private property. A terrible mess with public property (since the government tells us we all own it, and if Jesse owns it, he has every right to plant a garden there)
$100, I think you make some reasonable points, but also go wrong.
I think free-staters are selfish.
You’re using a collective term here which is really inappropriate. Do you really think each and every “free-stater” is selfish? What about the ones who are sacrificing their time and money to promote liberty for everyone? I’m a free stater (who has not moved yet), has never even participated in civil disobedience (if you consider that selfish), and gives a great deal of money to charity.
Perhaps you meant that Jesse is selfish, which would be something we could discuss, although I certainly disagree. I think he is standing up for what he believes in, although it is certainly not convenient to him.
What if the majority of the town doesn’t want a garden on central square? How presumptuous to assume that you know what’s best for us. Who’s the dictator here? If I try to protect the mud and grass, will you harass me or cause me bodily harm? Will I receive nasty threatening emails? I feel confident that the police will be fair, read me my rights, and not cause me harm.
You make some good points here. I propose this:
Central square is approximately 10,000 square feet (probably a bit more). So, for each resident of Keene who likes the idea of a vegetable garden, Jesse can develop a half a square foot of land. If he can get 100 people to say they want vegetables, then, he could develop a 5ftX10ft plot. He could have a sign up sheet on central square, so those who see what he’s doing and like it, can sign up and give him more land to work with.
$100: Does this sound fair to you? Don’t you think he has a right to his part of the land, since he paid for it, and don’t you think others have a right to have their land developed by Jesse, if they want?
Jesse: Does this sound fair to you? You must admit that you have not paid for a large plot of land yourself, so you shouldn’t farm on the part of the land other people have paid for, without getting their permission first, right?
I am entirely unsure about your group’s actions.
Remember, only individuals can act. I for example, didn’t agree with the flag burning, as I know others did not, and I wasn’t the one at the community kitchen. (I’d have probably just signed and gotten to work). So, don’t you think it’s unfair to group people together like this?
Perhaps you mean you are skeptical of what Jesse wants to do, in this case?
Let’s take a fair vote before you rip up our mud and grass (the mud dries up and the grass is green in the summer and it’s where I enjoy my lunch).
The problem is, a vote ignores the rights of the minority, who also have paid for and have a right to the land. What do you think of my proposal?
For my part (I don’t live in Keene now, although I did for 18 years), I would love a vegetable garden, as long as there was still ample room left for grassy lunches 
.
Also, if you plan on volunteering in the future you should consider being helpful and not making more work for people who actually benefit the community. It’s one thing to give the police a hard time, but an organization that feeds homeless people?
Don’t you see, this was one person you are criticizing, who isn’t even here? Myself, I wouldn’t have made a big deal about the disclaimer, as that person did. Isn’t your beef with them? This is the problem with collectivist thinking.
You should be disgusted with yourselves.
Again, who are you talking to?
Whine all you want, but this is how you have represented yourselves and how the community views you.
This is how who has represented themselves? Again, most people were not involved at all in the things you discuss. Isn’t it wrong of you to lump them in with it? And how can the “community” view anything a certain way? I know there are members of the “community” who don’t think this at all. Isn’t your statement false then? Wouldn’t it be far more accurate to say, “This is how I view you”? Don’t worry, you don’t have to try to group yourself with lots of other people to matter, your rights and opinions as an individual are important .
To accomplish any of your goals you need to do some serious damage control. I’m sure some of you are nice community-minded people, but this is not what the group as a whole has projected.
Again, how can a group project anything? Individuals act, based on what they believe to be right, and it is those individuals who should be judged on those actions, don’t you agree?
Shouldn’t you accept the community-minded people, and reject the actions of those you disagree with, rather than lumping everyone together?
Bring on the vulgar language following my post…
Well, I hope not. Most individuals I’ve seen posting here are not vulgar.
Ok, let me get the statist position straight here…
It’s wrong for a person to use public property (which he is told that he owns) to build a co-op…
…but it is just fine for other individuals to take the private property (money) of the residents of Keene for the same purpose?
Has the world gone topsy turvy? It looks, to me, like it’s the park that is private property (of the people who happen to be in charge of the city) and the money of Keene residents that is public property!
A few questions…
1. Is the Co-op group refusing to pay the money back if they start the business?
2. If the group refuses to pay back the money, will the City Council use their Obamalogic, (since the Co-op is accepting money from the government) and assert authority to limit pay and control seats on the Board of Directors?
I think free-staters are selfish.
This is because you’ve been indoctrinated to believe that putting the concerns of one’s self above the masses is evil. Oddly enough, most of the things you do in life are driven by “selfishness”. Even when you give a homeless person the change out of your pocket, you are doing so out of selfishness because the act of doing so makes you feel good about yourself (often because it reduces the societal guilt put upon those who are successful producers rather than parasites i.e, “giving back to the community”). The opposite of this is called “altruism” i.e. “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one.”
While giving to the less fortunate and helping out those in need is certainly admirable, there are various political and societal collectivists (like government or religion) that use altruism as a tool for domination. They implore their followers to make sacrifices, to place the needs of others (especially the needs of the state) above their own petty needs (like liberty). Beware the man who demands that you sacrifice all while he sacrifices nothing.
“The people (the government) need a road here. We must take your property (eminent domain) in order to build one through your yard. You must make this sacrifice for the greater good and the benefit of all. Think of the children!” -Government
Then, of course, they sell the contract to build the road to their buddies.
“The business people (the people who pay us legal bribes through lobbyists) have screwed up the economy (it was us, we’re just pointing the finger elsewhere because you’ll believe us if we repeat it on all the news channels over and over)! We (you) must make sacrifices (we’ve spent all the money so we need to raise taxes) in order to fix things (we never fix anything, we just shove the problem onto another generation)” – Government
Our current economic problems in a nutshell.
Voluntaryists advocate that this is horse puckey and that every man and women has the right to do as they will with their own property (including their bodies) as they wish so long as they don’t harm/damage others. It is called being responsible for one’s own choices and the consequences thereof.
What if the majority of the town doesn’t want a garden on central square?
This is the problem with democracy (and “public” property). Someone always loses and is then at the mercy of someone else’s will. It’s mob rule.
Think about it this way… Voting requires that a majority of 51% of voters is the winner. That 2% difference is all that decides whose will is obeyed. This means that not only do the other 49% have to obey the exact thing they opposed but now so too does the 100% of non-voters who wanted nothing to do with the entire process. 149% vs 51%… There’s your real majority.
“Well then they should have voted! Screw ‘em if they didn’t!” is usually the rallying cry of the statist who wants to force others to participate in this system that is little more than two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner.
How presumptuous to assume that you know what’s best for us.
This is what I say all the time about government bureaucrats and politicians.
Who’s the dictator here?
A dictator is someone who uses force or the threat of force to make others obey their will. Jesse isn’t forcing anyone to do anything. I think you’ve got your terminology mixed up.
If I try to protect the mud and grass, will you harass me or cause me bodily harm? Will I receive nasty threatening emails?
Voluntaryists advocate peaceful activism. We don’t harm others. Statists do. That said, if you punch us, we will punch back in order to defend ourselves.
I feel confident that the police will be fair, read me my rights, and not cause me harm.
That’s your prerogative. We, on the other hand, do not need anyone to read us our rights. We already know them. And we know that more often than not, law enforcement officials tend to violate them.
I am entirely unsure about your group’s actions.
Then maybe you should do some research and try to understand where we’re coming from before you start turning us into bogeymen and making assumptions about us.
Let’s take a fair vote before you rip up our mud and grass (the mud dries up and the grass is green in the summer and it’s where I enjoy my lunch).
Voting is a waste of time and effort and solves nothing. “Public” property is the culprit here. As someone else said, if everybody owns it — nobody owns it. Ownership denotes control and responsibility over something and confers the right to do as one wishes with that property. Can you imagine 100 people “owning” your house? How about a thousand or a million? Of course not, because it would be disastrous even with the addition of democracy and voting. Someone’s not going to be happy with the results. Shrugging and saying “Too bad. Them’s the breaks.” is not an acceptable solution.
Also, if you plan on volunteering in the future you should consider being helpful and not making more work for people who actually benefit the community. It’s one thing to give the police a hard time, but an organization that feeds homeless people?
I have no idea what you’re even referring to.
You should be disgusted with yourselves.
Because you’ve let your imagination run wild and haven’t done the slightest bit of examination into what Free Staters actually believe, we should accept your verdict of guilty and hang our heads in shame? Fat chance of that.
Whine all you want, but this is how you have represented yourselves and how the community views you. To accomplish any of your goals you need to do some serious damage control. I’m sure some of you are nice community-minded people, but this is not what the group as a whole has projected.
Blaming the entire hive for the actions of a few bees makes you a collectivist. Look it up, it’s not a good thing. People do it with race, gender and politics all the time so why not with philosophy?
As Ayn Rand wrote in Atlas Shrugged: “Whenever you think that you are facing a contradiction, check your premises.”
In this case, I wouldn’t worry about contradictions. Just checking your premises would be a good start.
You’re being altogether too subjective… let’s take a vote.
Oh, the irony.
Update: It’s almost 8, but the weather still looks a bit crummy. I’m going to hold off till 10 o’clock, and if it doesn’t clear up by then, I’m going to do it tomorrow.
I’ve just checked out a detailed forecast, and I will most certainly be out there at 10.
See y’all there.
Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
Supporters of
Recent Forum Topics- Hair Salons? July 30, 2010
- "National Night Out Celebration" at KPD HQ on 8/3 July 30, 2010
- Free Minds TV July 30, 2010 July 30, 2010
- Mail-to-Jail suggestion July 30, 2010
- David K. Nashua trial Aug 12th 1:00 July 30, 2010
- Summer Chill '10 Blood Drive July 30, 2010
- Cooperate, why? July 30, 2010
- George Vreeland Hill July 30, 2010
- Public drinking/nudity arrests July 30, 2010
- Online poll for president '12 July 30, 2010
- Recent Forum Posts
- Re: Public drinking/nudity arrests July 31, 2010
- Re: two bedroom mobile home $3500! =) July 31, 2010
- Re: Public drinking/nudity arrests July 31, 2010
- Re: The Shire Society Declaration July 31, 2010
- Re: Public drinking/nudity arrests July 31, 2010
- Re: The Shire Society Declaration July 31, 2010
- Re: Public drinking/nudity arrests July 31, 2010
- Re: The Shire Society Declaration July 31, 2010
- The Shire Society Declaration July 31, 2010
- Re: L. Neil Smith has Important Shire Business July 31, 2010