Lew Rockwell Visits and Endorses Keene and the FSP!

Lew Rockwell on Free Talk LiveLew Rockwell, the founder of the Mises Institute and the most popular liberty-oriented website in the world, LewRockwell.com, has endorsed Keene’s activism! In an hour-long interview on Keene’s syndicated talk radio show, Free Talk Live, Lew called Keene “The northern capital of libertarianism” and suggested it was the “epicenter” of NH liberty activism. Lew identified himself as an “enthusiastic supporter” of the Free State Project, saying, “I definitely endorse the Free State Project”. About Keene, he said “[i] especially like what you guys are doing in Keene”, adding that activists “do amazing things here”.

Thank you Lew for your visit to Keene, the great interview, and the excellent endorsements. I’m adding them to the top of our Endorsements section of the 130 Reasons to Move to Keene!

40 Comments

  1. Wohoo!!! What a guest!!!
    Damn, I missed the live cam.. :(

  2. Free Keene of libertarians

  3. come on critical mass

  4. Wow! That is incredible!

  5. Great. Another activist whack-job endorsing the action of all of you wannabe hippies. The 60's emded 50 years ago. Get a clue and get a life.

  6. To the haters:

    We freedom lovers have lived in your force-filled world for our whole lives. We have done our best to go along to get along, and are self-reliant and charitable at a higher rate than the general population. But thanks to the non-consensual system you are rallying to impose on us, we were left with no options put to try to focus our efforts in one of your political units to show the injustice and try to lay our bodies against the gears of tyranny.

    If you let us live free, we won't have any reason to demonstrate our lack of freedoms in front of you. And, if you can stand the situation that your external environment presents to you, please do something peaceful to try to change it. If you sympathize with freedom, do your own activism or political thing. If you love the policy-state, then you might want to do what these FKers are doing: focus your effort onto the population most likely to embrace your worldview. Might I suggest Albany, Sacramento, or D.C.?

    Many people here care that you are upset, and would love to help you understand why we carry the banner of the hippies, the banner of the civil rights leaders, and the banner of the abolitionists. You might find some of us that are too libertine for your tastes, but even they will support your right to live a pious, traditional lifestyle free from interference from busybodies and gangs.

    The actions of FKers are taken selflessly, consciously undertaking the wrath of the current ruling gang, in order to expand freedoms for all people, locally and globally. Gratitude would be greatly appreciated for those efforts, but even if met with disdain, free people will return love.

  7. @Dan Tanna

    Most "hippies" of past and Libertarians today still approve of using Military and Police to initiate Violence against 100% peaceful honest people.

    And I just wanted to give you a "clue" that you're so far off, you don't even truly realize who you're speaking too. But to get that answer you'll need to open your mind (not close your fist) and lose what you've been indoctrinated with…Reject and Smash any ideas that weren't taught in Government school. Good luck.

  8. Great job Keeniacs and the Leadership of Free Keene!

    What a great achievement!

    Thanks for everything you guys (and girls!) do and thanks for helping motivate us in Manchester to begin waking up this Sleeping Giant.

    We're so excited because soon we'll be able to join the Dance :) .

  9. Having been (in part) raised by hippies in the 1960s, I can assure you, Dan, and all of the other state-worshipers in Keene, that the FSP in general, and the Free Keeners in particular, are worlds away from hippies.

    Hippies believed in communal living. FSPers do not.

    Hippies were generally vegetarian, or vegan. FSPers (generally) are not.

    Hippies were (and this is surprising) generally homophobic. FSPers (generally) are not.

    Hippies (generally) believed in some flavor of Marxism (communism, leninism, maoism, etc.). FSPers are quite the exact opposite of Marxist.

    Hippies didn't carry, and were morally opposed to the existence of, guns. FSPers (as you all well know) are not.

    Hippies were (mostly) absolutely pacifistic, refraining from violence even for the purpose of protecting themselves or their loved ones. FSPers are not.

    Hippies were (generally) into new age religions. Most FSPers I have met are either Christians or are non-religious.

    Most Hippies were anti-business, seeing them as oppressive as governments. FSPers are not.

    Most Hippies did not believe that anyone had any right to own anything at all. FSPers tend to think that property ownership is the very fount from which all of our other rights originate.

    I could think of a few more differences between hippies and FSPers, but I think you get the point, don't you?

  10. Another thing, Dan. Your math is a little askew. 50 years ago, it was 1960. Is that that good old goverment school education rearing it's ugly head?

  11. 'gotta figure out a way to spend some time in Keene and contribute, you guys are awesome.

  12. The actions of FKers are taken selflessly, consciously undertaking the wrath of the current ruling gang, in order to expand freedoms for all people, locally and globally.

    Amen.

    Me quitting my job and making myself a public target for ridicule hasn’t benefited me one iota.

    I’ve done it because I truly believe in freedom… and that peaceful people should be left alone.

    This amazing endorsement is a feather in the cap for brave activists like Ian Freeman and Sam Dodson. (Two of the kindest and most principled men I’ve ever met in my life.)

    To the people in the community who think Ian and Sam are annoying, childish, or “children” … please ask yourself what is worse … someone demonstrating against institutionalized violence or someone USING/SUPPORTING institutionalized violence.

    Ian, Sam, and all the other people who live in Keene and participate in this flavor of the liberty movement only want peaceful people to be left alone.

    Peace, man.

  13. Brad,

    These guys calling us kids is a joke. Last year when we went to Leviathan Landing for Ian to pay his tax bill in ones, the clerk had the nerve to ask us “how old are you?” This was directed generally towards the group.

    I replied, “I’m 47 and have three grandchildren.” She didn’t have too many questions for us after that. She was more interested in us not bringing cameras into the Legion of Doom to “film the private business” of people doing public business.

  14. To: iawai

    That’s the most eloquent, compassionate response to Freestate Hate I’ve ever seen. Anyone who haunts online forums pertaining to the FSP should save a copy of that for when these people rear their heads. Great job!

  15. Maybe I'm wrong, but public consumption of alcoholic beverages and marijuana, and public nudity is not the way to get one's point across. People will not listen to you because you push your agenda in these socially reprehensible ways. I am concerned about kids seeing you drinking and using drugs in Central Square, and thinking it's ok for them to do it too. These are minors, not grown, informed adults. Personally I do not use alcohol, i may take a puff off a loint once every few months, but i do these things in my own home, away from kids, and without bringing attention to myself or my actions. If you want to change things, run for office, submit legislation to make the changes you want, and fight for it the way the Contsitution of The USA and New Hampshire says to fight for it. You folks are just making yourselves look like fools by doing things the way you are doing them now. No man or City or State or Country is really totally free. There have to be some laws, some way to hold people accountable for things like murder, rape, and armed robbery. Chaos and arnachy doesn't work, take a look at history and see for yourself.

  16. And I'm still wondering why you chose Keene as your place to protest? Wouldn't your actions in someplace like Manchester or Concord be noticed more by the public and the media than sleepy old Keene? I've lived here a long time and I can pretty much do whatever I want here.

  17. There have to be some laws, some

    way to hold people accountable for things like murder, rape, and armed robbery.

    If that was the limit of how things were……. I'd wager there never would have been a Free State Project.

  18. Ahhh-so you admit there need to be some laws, enforceable somehow. A step up. BTW, I was in Keene on Monday, happened to be around 4:20. Got some Fritz fries and sat around. No one toking up,no topless folks, pretty boring.

    Is there a regular schedule, or is it spur of the moment? I didn't have any chalk with me, so except for the fries and the nice park, nothing happening. Maybe I should protest about those lazy protesters, taking the day off. I hope they haven't done something drastic, like get jobs or take baths! —bil

  19. Ahhh-so you admit there need to be some laws, enforceable somehow.

    I think that the only law we need is natural law… and that it absolutely should be enforced somehow. :)

    The statement I made was referencing my belief that all these stupid victimless crimes are what spurred the creation of the FSP.

  20. IDK, I absolutely agree with laws against harming other persons or their property, and I think most people here do.

    It's other laws that are immoral — e.g, laws against you starting a business without asking the government permission.

    If you were to murder or rob someone, to use force against you would be defensive. Wheras, if you were to simply start a business without buying a license, to use force against you for that would be aggressive and immoral — extortion, really.

    Here's what I think is a good test to see whether a law is moral, or immoral: Would it be right for you act in that way yourself? That is, suppose someone had just armed a store at gunpoint. Would it be right for you stop them? Of course!

    Now suppose someone has built on their own property without paying you a fee, or has started a business without paying you a fee, or has consumed something of which you don't personally approve. Would it be right for you to use violence/force against them in these situations? Of course not. Would it be right to fund your projects by threatening to steal your neighbors' home? Of course not.

    We simply need to apply the basic standards of decency, that just about all of us live by in our personal lives, to government behavior. Immoral behavior does not magically become moral when committed by a bureaucrat or politician.

    By the way, I don't agree with all of the events in the park either — and there are far more people in NH, both natives and movers, who believe in liberty who only support some of these kind of events, or don't support any at all. Just realize, that to believe in liberty does not mean you have to endorse every kind of activism some people do.

  21. Any time there is a victimless law enforced…… it is the state doing the hurting.

  22. Bradley Jardis said "I think that the only law we need is natural law"

    So if I naturally feel that your protests are a violation of the natural laws I follow, then it is ok for me to confront, assault and kill you?

    After all each person creates their own "natural laws", and if I create a natural law for myself that says it's ok to assault or kill someone that i do not like or agree with then I have the right to do those things.

    Natural law works for animals in the wild, not in a civilized society.

  23. I don't know,

    Your name is your knowledge about natural law. You don't know what natural law is.

    Thanks for stopping by.

  24. So if I naturally feel that your protests are a violation of the natural laws I follow, then it is ok for me to confront, assault and kill you?

    I cannot change natural law and neither can you. It just is.

    Natural law works for animals in the wild, not in a civilized society.

    You call a society that uses vast amounts of institutionalized violence to solve non-violent problems "civilized?"

    Really?

  25. After all each person creates their own “natural laws”

    That's not what people mean by "natural law" at all. Another word for the "natural law" people are referring to is the non aggression principle.

    So, instead of a strong majority of society agreeing to limit their political interactions according to the constitution, we should go further and limit our political interactions to the non-agression principle.

    Every society must be based on some shared values. The point is, instead of basing our society on the shared belief that we all must obey the diktats of folks like Nanci Peloci, we should base it on the shared belief that we should follow the NAP. It's a far better, far more moral way to organize society.

  26. Abu Rayhan al-Biruni, an Islamic scholar and polymath scientist, understood natural law as the law of the jungle.

    So if i take this definition of natural law as my own, then it's ok for me to kill whatever i want to kill, steal whatever i want to steal, and mate with whomever i want to mate with.

    If you folks want people to understand what you are fighting for, then perhaps you need to define your ideas of "natural law" and present them in a way that your detractors can understand.

    Personally, I am against the use of alcohol or drugs on puclic property. The public nudity stuff is just silly, the way people are these days in this country about nude or semi nude people, it would be better for you folks to abandon that idea completely until you can get people to understand what it is that you are trying to do. The City Council Drinking Game is just silly too, and only make you look like a bunch of disruptive idiots.

    Again, by making your views and intentions known to the people at large by intellegent presentation of your ideas and opinions, you will win more folloowers than by angering them with the kid-like games you are playing now.

  27. Because a guy who insists BP isn't to blame for the disaster in the Gulf is the same guy you want endorsing your movement.

    You'll take anything you can get, won't you.

  28. @thinkliberty

    Snarky comments won't win me over to your way of thinking. Intelligent discussion and clear proof that your way is better than mine might win me over. Actual proof that natural law is better than what we have right now might win me over. Foolish drinking games and disruptive behaviors only drive people away from your group and their goals.

  29. Maybe you could look up the definition of natural law.

    Here is a link:

    http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861696705/natu

    If you don't know what you are talking about, we really can't have a discussion.

    If you don't care enough to look up the definition of a word or term we are discussing, I am not going to argue without about it.

    The drinking game gave us positive press all over the world, People generally liked the drinking game:
    http://forum.freekeene.com/index.php?topic=3749.m

    Lets do it again.

  30. Only in our dreams are we free. The rest of the time, we need wages.

  31. You have the right to the pursuit of happiness. Good luck with that.

  32. IDK, did you see my last post, and could you respond to it? It almost seems like it got missed entirely.

  33. "Natural law works for animals in the wild, not in a civilized society."

    The natural law of civilization, NO STEALING, is the founding principle of a civilized society.

  34. The members of the FSP's board of directors declared more than five years ago, on the 27th of February, 2005, that "[t]he Free State Project is an agreement among 20,000 pro-liberty activists to move to New Hampshire…". (www.freestateproject.org/about/mission.php)

    So, according to the board, the FSP already has accomplished the goal "to recruit 20,000 liberty-loving people" (www.freestateproject.org). Their own words, esp. "is", imply that they should have spent the next five years invoking the "commitment to move to the chosen free state, New Hampshire".

    Bear in mind that one needs 20,000 people in order to have an agreement among those 20,000 people. But according to FSP's counter, they have just 10,357 participants, which is the most that FSP has ever had and just not many more than there were in, say, Feb. 2005.

    Is the board's contradictory mission statement evidence of pro-liberty humor? Or are they not thinking through their own rhetoric, which means that not even they take their project very seriously? And if they aren't thinking through basic details particular to their own organization, how can it be reasonable to believe that they are taking seriously the more complicated details of statism and "constitutional federalism"?

  35. PiL, everyone's quite aware that the goal of 20K has not been reached yet. The five year period would only begin after that goal is reached. Anyone in NH already is considered an "early mover". I think you may be reading too much into the word "is".

    And, in 2005 there were only roughly 6000 participants.

  36. Candice Martin on Thu, 19th Aug 2010 10:49 am

    ——————————————————————————–

    You have the right to the pursuit of happiness. Good luck with that.

    Candice, what that means is you have the right to keep your justly acquired property. You still have to mix your labor with resources to achieve that.

    Freedom is liberating, but it ain't free…

  37. @Paul (2:25 pm):

    There were about 7500 to 7750, not "roughly 6000", "Total Participants Since Founding Date" as of Jan. 2005. The number grew hardly at all for the next two and a half years. (www.freestateproject.org/community/membership)

    Now, your objection that "everyone’s quite aware that the goal of 20K has not been reached yet" misses the point, namely, that the board isn't thinking through their own words. And if not their own words about their own project, then not likely more complicated matters, either.

    Either they had the 20,000 as of Feb. 27, 2005, or they didn't. Well, they didn't, so their mission statement is, at best, unintended humor or puffing in the manner of a PR hack.

    Finally, about your comment "I think you may be reading too much into the word 'is' ":

    Well, why do you think that? Because I refuse to interpret "is" as if it were equivalent to "is not yet"? or "will be"? The FSP, if motivated by a mature commitment to rolling back collectivism, is not the sort of project that can tolerate loose thinking according to which "is" may be correctly interpreted as "is not" or "will be" or whatever else should happen to strike the reader's fancy.

    If, however, that's the low standard you are willing to tolerate, then you should count yourself in the club of people to which Candice Martin belongs. Notice her equivocation in the meaning of the word "free" in the flippant retort that "Only in our dreams are we free. The rest of the time, we need wages." Of course, the relevant sense of the word "free" in FSP does not mean that, e.g., the laws of thermodynamics won't apply to one's body if one fails to earn enough to sustain it with food.

  38. PIL,

    So you caught a minor typo. Thanks

    [t]he Free State Project is an agreement among 20,000 pro-liberty activists to move to New Hampshire…”

    The word "is' should read "will be" to reflect what we all have understood it to mean. And at the rate of acceleration in sign ups we are seeing it will take way less time than the 1st 10K.

    Even liberty folk are not perfect.

  39. There were about 7500 to 7750, not “roughly 6000?, “Total Participants Since Founding Date” as of Jan. 2005. The number grew hardly at all for the next two and a half years. <a href="http://(www.freestateproject.org/community/membership)

    ” target=”_blank”>(www.freestateproject.org/community/membership)

    Well, this is a minor point, but according to internet archives: http://web.archive.org/web/20050131095157/www.fre

    There were 6358 participants as of January 31, 2005.

    Now, your objection that “everyone’s quite aware that the goal of 20K has not been reached yet” misses the point, namely, that the board isn’t thinking through their own words. And if not their own words about their own project, then not likely more complicated matters, either.

    Either they had the 20,000 as of Feb. 27, 2005, or they didn’t. Well, they didn’t, so their mission statement is, at best, unintended humor or puffing in the manner of a PR hack.

    Actually, it's not even necessarily incorrect.

    I could say, "The contract as it has been drawn up is an agreement between 10 individuals", if it's specifically designed for that purpose, even if all 10 individuals haven't signed yet.

    Perhaps it could be said better, but you're making a mountain out of a molehill. The signup count is right there on the front page. Nobody's trying to hide anything.

    .

    Finally, about your comment “I think you may be reading too much into the word ‘is’ “:

    Well, why do you think that? Because I refuse to interpret “is” as if it were equivalent to “is not yet”? or “will be”? The FSP, if motivated by a mature commitment to rolling back collectivism, is not the sort of project that can tolerate loose thinking according to which “is” may be correctly interpreted as “is not” or “will be” or whatever else should happen to strike the reader’s fancy.

    "The FSP" isn't a single entity. It's a number of individuals. Whoever was updating the website used a word that could be confusing. Big whoop.

    If, however, that’s the low standard you are willing to tolerate,

    Yes, that's it. Somebody on the website used grammar that doesn't meet my standards, so I give up on freedom in NH. :rollseyes

    then you should count yourself in the club of people to which Candice Martin belongs. Notice her equivocation in the meaning of the word “free” in the flippant retort that “Only in our dreams are we free. The rest of the time, we need wages.” Of course, the relevant sense of the word “free” in FSP does not mean that, e.g., the laws of thermodynamics won’t apply to one’s body if one fails to earn enough to sustain it with food.

    Yes, that is a misuse of the word "free".

Submit a Comment