See y’all there.

oh well back to bed

You’re being altogether too subjective… let’s take a vote.

Oh, the irony.

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.

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?

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!

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.

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)