<blockquote cite="">now fuck off with your argument-by-assertion attempt

And follows up with:

<blockquote cite="">sometimes skewering people with humor and derision is the best angle

without support, making it — that's right — an assertion.

Classy, Charley.

Allow me to close with an assertion: Charley Hardman must have a tiny dick.

"Flyers depicting Jean Shaheen as the character 'The Joker' from the 'Batman' movies, which came from HATE SITE FreeKeene.com which features liberal use of the N-Word have been plastered around town, vandalizing public property."

Sigh. Of course, this is assuming anyone posts them….

Eh, people can critique other people's decisions. Some can proclaim that scare tactics are unprofessional and whatnot. They're entitled to their opinion but I find that most who talk down a particular style of propaganda usually are those who can't put something like it together. It's like the people who proclaim that sarcasm is the lowest form of the english language are those who have the hardest time interpreting it.

1. I am a supporter of many actions taken by FreeKeene. I am not here to deride or undermine the efforts of those on this site. I greatly respect the work you do and the principles you extol. Your filming of Pam Slack was excellent. Your painting of the church was generous. The Robin Hood parking meter idea is brilliant and probably very well received. And your Copwatch initiative is extremely important (if perhaps contentious to some). These projects do a very good job presenting the ideas of liberty to those who are otherwise deaf to it. I applaud you.

2. With that said – and as a future Free Stater – I am concerned that certain other tactics are not as effective, and in fact may do serious damage to the message you otherwise so genuinely present. It is unfortunate that, upon presenting this concern in a polite and reasoned manner, I receive half a dozen responses to the effect of, "if you don't like how we do things, you can get out." That phrase sounds eerily familiar.

3. My critique of the Joker tactic is not to be construed as a defense of Jean Shaheen. I despise her and those like her, and restraint for the sake of her reputation is inappropriate. She does indeed deserve such portrayal as that of The Joker, or worse. If you think I care about Jean's feelings, you miss my point entirely. I have no concern for Jean's dignity, for she is without. However, I do have concern for the dignity of this site and the Free State Project. I am not, as you claim, "demanding eloquence" for the sake of any "social altruism." I am "suggesting eloquence" for the sake of tact. Throwing darts at an effigy is fun, but others may find it unconvincing as an argument. I question how many individuals were opposed to the tyranny of George Bush because they saw a picture of him with devil horns stuck to a flagpole downtown. No doubt those who already hated him got a chuckle from the portrayal… but they are not the ones who need convincing.

4. I have no problem with people swearing. I love swearing. A well-placed curse can do wonders for effect… but it needs to be well-placed. I don't appreciate being told to "fuck off" after merely posting what seems to be a fairly non-combative comment. Hopefully the FreeKeene activists are not fostering such a culture. Like alcohol or firearms, language is best used responsibly, especially in a public forum (and by public I mean publicly visible and indeed advertised). Does FreeKeene want to actually convince people to start reducing government? If so, telling people with feedback to fuck off is inadvisable. My feelings will repair themselves after I cry a bit, but how many people will be inspired to support such adolescence with their time, money, or reputation?

5. Regarding Charley's "implied fallacious conclusion" comment, I am happy to respond. I stand by my statement that scary propaganda is one of the favorite tactics of the state, and of those who are unable to present their arguments more professionally. This does NOT mean that "all who use such tactics share the same weakness." I did not mean to imply that fallacious conclusion. It is precisely because I believe those at FreeKeene CAN present their arguments more professionally that I made my comment in the first place. My thesis is simply that propaganda tactics may be damaging to the message you're trying to promote.

6. It is true that the only attention many of these politicians deserve is that of childish insults. They deserve no better. However, the freedom movement does. Liberty activists ought to hold themselves to a higher standard of discourse if we seek to convince our neighbors to help us reduce government. I know most members on this site are of the Voluntaryist/Anarchist persuasion and advocate simply to abolish all government… but that will be difficult if we can't even convince the community to stop arresting people for holding a plant.

As the Free State Project gains momentum, the smearing that will occur against it will be immense (we got a taste of it on Kostric's Hardball interview – when Matthews tried repeatedly to link Adam with the "birthers"… Kostric did an outstanding job, by the way). If our movement resorts to the same tactics, it is doomed, for it is up against an organization that smears and derides full-time. This is already an uphill battle, don't make the hill steeper. As such staunch advocates of the right to bear arms, we should certainly understand the concept of ammunition.

It's clear that those on this site have "no problem about embarrassing and annoying a bureaucrat." I don't either. Just be sure you know who you're embarrassing. It's nice that such actions yield "a great deal of amusement," but hopefully FreeKeene's legacy will extend beyond a few giggles.

Again, thank you all sincerely for the great work you're doing. I am inspired -almost- every day by your actions. I'll read everyone's responses except Charley's, because he seems like a fucking prick.

-Erik

I appreciate that Erik has loaned his opinions to the discussion here, and that those who visit FreeKeene.com upon viewing the poster will see the discussion and see that at least some concern was expressed for the personal 'image' and dignity of Mrs. Shaheen.

I hope then those same readers will understand that while such consideration was made; that a very conscious decision was also made to intentionally desecrate that image with derision and laughter by creating a picture to mirror the character of these politicians and bureaucrats. (An idea which I borrowed from Alex Jones and InfoWars, which I thought would be far better applied on a more local scale where it's much more personal)

I hope those readers understand that there are some of us who very strongly believe that the ONLY attention these bureaucrats deserve IS that of childish insults, and "drawings of devil horns". Most politicians don't even deserve being engaged in eloquent intellectual debate.

Speaking of being deserved of engagement in intellectual debate; this brings me to your point attacking intellectual honesty. Well, I think that Charley's comment of "Fuck off" might have gone over your head Erik, becuase out of one side of your mouth you speak of intellectual honesty, but then out of the other side you speak of a necessity for eloquence. People speaking honestly and from the gut often speak in frank & adult language, and those who demand eloquence are frequently dishonest people shielding their REAL thoughts and feelings out of fear of hurting the delicate egos of others, and then develop feelings of moral superiority for their sacrificial act of social altruism. That is crap.

Make no bones about it, I have no problem with embarrassing and annoying any bureaucrat. It brings me a great deal of amusement.

I think Charley's use of "fuck off" is actually the most intellectually honest and succinct way for what Justin later tried to explain to you about doing what you suggest yourself rather than trying to control the behavior of others.

It's also a very clear way of letting someone know that you don't have a great deal of time or respect for their ideas.

Charley was quite elegant when he said "implied fallacious conclusion". You made the CHOICE to ignore that becuase of his later use of "hostile" language, and I think that fucking sucks.

Some people swear casually. I think it's childish to run from that, and to try to control others, in fact it's exactly the childish type of thought control that is attempted by churches and religion.

Get over it, some people swear, and some people draw devil horns. Some people use the word "fuck" while making an intellectual argument. Ever seen the show "Bullshit"? It's probably one of the most intellectually honest shows on television these days. I think it's time to get over programmed social mores and expectations, and communicate honestly first letting the intellectual part follow.

Emotional expression often gets more thought and attention than pure intellectual debate. Intellectual debate is useless when ignored, and expressions of emotion are generally useless unless coupled with understanding. Balance is important, and I think you've become a bit unbalanced in this.