Governor Hassan & Executive Council: Free Rich Paul Immediately

Rich Paul remains incarcerated for exercising his right to have a peaceful revolution against unjust laws.  “Unjust laws” in my humble opinion are those laws that are unsupported by science, immoral, and completely unchangeable by democracy.

I find this completely unacceptable.

I (like everyone else) have the right to ignore RSA 311:7‘s oh-so-mysterious “commonly” reference (wink, wink) if it means peacefully practicing law in court to reform the government.  The law belongs to The People…  not a private monopoly organization beholden to the government and centered on control and profit.

Rich Paul is a good man who has been following the direction given him in Part I, Article 10 of the New Hampshire Constitution.  He has been doing it even though he has never sworn an oath to the document.

If I’m not mistaken… all of you all have.

I demand the NH Constitution be followed and Rich be released by 05/13/13.  If Rich does not walk free, I will be taking on his appeal.  Pardon him, commute his sentence, leave the back door unlocked, let a bird fly up to his window with a key…  it really doesn’t matter to me.

Let him go.

  • Pingback: Governor Hassan & Executive Council: Free Rich Paul Immediately | OccuWorld()

  • Alisa Beck

    This is a very educational post from Mr. Jardis. It shows how far libertarians have to go in their understanding of the benefits of private property.

    Notice that Mr. Jardis sounds just like a communist when he says, “The law belongs to The People… not a private monopoly…” I’m sure Mr. Jardis would have no problem declaring that his house is his own private monopoly, and does not belong to that imaginary fantasy called “The People.” But somehow what works for the real estate upon which Jardis lives doesn’t work for the law.

    Dear Mr. Jardis: before you publicly demonstrate how completely brainwashed are are with worship for “Democracy” I strongly recommend you read this book: “Democracy: The God That Failed.”

    https://mises.org/store/Democracy-The-God-That-Failed-P240.aspx

    You can read it for free online. The author’s surprising analysis is that the 20-century transition from monarchy to democracy was a massive step backwards for freedom. Why? Because under monarchy, the government is private property with an owner (called the king). The owner can sell his property, or leave it to his children. That owner has an incentive to maintain the value of his private property. Democracy is nothing more than subjecting the government to the tragedy of the commons. Under democracy, the rulers are not the owners, and therefore have an incentive to consume the property as completely as possible before their term of office ends.

    After hundreds of years of monarchy, the public’s tax burden was only about ten percent. After only a few generations of democracy it is fifty percent and higher. When kings have wars, the goal is land and the end of the campaign is easy to see. When democracies have wars, the goal is “hearts and minds,” in other words there is no end. The author makes other valuable comparisons: the king has an incentive to avoid massive government debt, because it is his personal debt: democratic bureaucrats have an incentive to make the government debt as large as possible. On and on. Read the book.

    Perhaps the most surprising observation in this book is the response to the common complaint about monarchy: namely that monarchy is bad because there’s nothing to stop a tyrant from being born into power. History shows otherwise: the king is not the sole ruler: rather the family dynasty is the ruler, and throughout history when tyrants have come to power it is usually a close family member who assassinates that tyrant to project the family property.

    On the other hand, there is also a chance that the king will be wise and gentle. Under democracy that is not possible. Under democracy, you are guaranteed to to be ruled by the biggest, most capable liars society has to offer.

    What does this have to do with Rich Paul? Maybe not much. I agree with Jardis that Rich Paul should be freed immediately. What I’m taking issue with is Jardis’ rhetoric. “The law belongs to The People… not a private monopoly.” By adopting this talking point of the collectivists who are currently sitting in positions of power, Jardis is only furthering the tyrannical system that is oppressing Rich Paul right now.

    • MaineShark

      Jardis isn’t a libertarian, so your post is something of a non sequitor…

    • Alisa Beck

      I thought this was a libertarian blog. Is FreeKeene really that hard up for writers? Can we look forward to some submissions from Julia Riber Pitt?

    • PaulSevere

      Now that I read your whole post, I see what you’re saying. But Jardis is referring to the situation we have with the laws, intended to serve all the people fairly, becoming the sole province of the British Accredited Registry.

    • Alisa Beck

      I have never seen any evidence that Jardis believes in the crackpot B.A.R. conspiracy theory.

    • http://www.facebook.com/fst.sqr Fst Sqr

      Even Von Mises and Rothbard believed in democracy.

      The problem with Hoppes theory is it requires the “perfect elite man”, thats never existed, to carry out and build a society intolerant of deviations, thats never existed.
      Hoppe is outstanding at identifying problems, but his solutions aren’t very “libertine” and in my opinion are more science fiction, that feasible.

    • Alisa Beck

      Von Mises and Rothbard also believed in liberalism, but of course not according to the contemporary meaning of that word.

      I am aware Von MIses (or at least his translator) supported democracy in the sense of the right of political self-determination in the context of a regime that permits unlimited secession, even by individuals. That’s very different from the more usual meaning of subjecting minorities to majority rule in the context of an coerced association. Without knowing the specific passage(s) to which you refer, I cannot comment further.

      As far as Rothbard goes, I am completely unaware that he ever “believed” in democracy, but I am willing to learn.

      As far as whether Hoppe’s theory requires the “perfect elite man,” I don’t know if that is a direct quote from him, from someone else, or your use of quotes is intended to convey some other meaning. In any event, I cannot deny that your assertion may be the conclusion of a valid chain of reasoning, but bereft of both the premises and logic from which you have reached that conclusion all I can do is to let you know that I disagree and to invite you to change my mind.

    • http://www.facebook.com/fst.sqr Fst Sqr

      I’d be interested in your opinion on this quote from Professor Hoppe…

      _____________________________________

      “Every piece of land…is owned by private owners or firms. No…”open frontier” exists.

      First and foremost, there is no such thing as “freedom of migration” in a natural order. People
      cannot move about as they please. Wherever a person moves, he moves on private property…”

      — Hans Hermann Hoppe

      http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/hermann-hoppe3.html
      _____________________________________

      You don’t think Hoppes vision of eliminating the freedom to travel sounds like a nightmare?

      Every square inch of earth would be subject to a toll, a checkpoint, a permission request; One would likely need several hundred permissions and/or passports from all the various corporations and land owners just to travel a few hundred miles. Not to mention all the species of animals that require migration routes.

      Thats why I call Hoppes unworkable plan “science fiction”. Hoppe World would make for a great dystopian future Hollywood movie though. ;-)

    • Alisa Beck

      I am going to assume you are being serious.

      No, I do not think that Hoppe’s vision sounds like a nightmare; I think it sounds infinitely preferable to the mess we have now. I don’t know what your idea of “heavily restricted” is, but the situation you describe is what we have now. Crossing most international borders requires permission slips (which expire), interrogation, time and expense, and you can be refused, denied, or even imprisoned unexpectedly. Travelling domestically in the US is heavily restricted; you cannot get on an airplane without you and your property being violated, and just driving down the public road is an invitation for abuse by the state’s pirates.

      You talk about tolls as if they are bad thing. Yet you pay a “toll” to go to see movie, don’t you? To stay in a hotel, to rent a car. What’s wrong with tolls? I would rather pay market rates for access to property than have our current massive parasitical state sucking off most the wealth of society and using it to kill people and destroy property.

      You say that, “One would likely need several hundred costly permissions and/or passports from all the various corporations and land owners just to travel a few hundred miles.” If you arrived at this conclusion based on some kind of calculation or evidence I would love to hear it, but it sounds like anti-market speculation to me. Again, your use of the vague term “costly” is only meaningful when compared to the system we have now, which I cannot imagine anyone denying is way way way more than just costly.

      Now, in light of the fact that this thread started with my complaint about Mr. Jardis’ collectivist language, and has now reached the point where I am responding to your verbose expression of the “but what about the roads” argument, I must ask:

      can anyone refer me to a good blog site where I can get into an economic discussion with some libertarians?

  • PaulSevere

    .Well, that’s fantastic news. About Maggie Hassan and the Executive
    Council directing the release of Rich Paul. But somehow I think that’s
    not it, the editors just need to learn what a colon means.

  • FTL Ian

    Hoepfully Rich Paul will be sentenced to 81 years in maximum security.. Next should be Graham Colson….take that you communists

    • PabloKOh

      $60,000 per year in maximum security x 81 years = $4,860,000. All this fuss over a plant that is less dangerous than tap water. Can anyone else see that the bureaucrats don’t care about you or the money you are forced to hand over to them?

  • Karen shepherd

    Oh lord……robin hooders…..I remember back in the 70s and 80s at long sands york beach me. there was a meter man who would come up to an about to be expired or expired meter and he would announce to everyone below on the beach that he was about to ticket the car. Well…he was awesome! He’d give everyone a chance to save themselves a ticket . Even if it wasn’t your meter, you would run up and throw in a quarter and save the day. We would shake his hand and he’d be on his way to the next “lucky victim;).” Everyone looked forward to him coming toward their meter…….thanks meter guy……you were a great guy and we have a sweet memory to share. Go robin hooders but don’t harass the meter guys……..they’re not harassing you…….

  • Pingback: Rich Paul, targeted for political associations, faces 81-years in a cage for victimless actions | Cop Block()