An Open Message to Monadnock Students

Hey Monadnock students (& others) – I hope to see you at the Keene Starbucks at noon this Saturday, March 31st!

On December 13th I went to Monadnock Regional High School with the intention of offering Who Owns You? cards to students exiting the building. Most present were receptive or indifferent, though a handful of individuals – those ostensibly seen to be “educators” – were a bit hostile.*

As I noted in the video I later published from our exchange: “I just want to share ideas. And I would hope that you and your colleagues, being in the field of education, would support that.” The response I received: “Well in general we do.” Really?

Merriam-Webster includes as a definition for the root of “educators” (educate): “to provide with information.” Not only did this educator, by his own actions, fail provide information, but he actively tried to prevent the free exchange of information between consenting individuals. That sets a terrible precedent.

Eventually some students – who are likely well-intentioned but motivated to some extent by the tacit support received from vocal school employees – formed the “Remain Respectfully Silent” crew. In addition to hanging posters in school that encouraged their classmates not to “remain respectfully silent”**, they literally stood in (mostly) silent opposition to outreach activities. Cool, that’s their choice, but their actions coupled with those of school employees chilled the receptiveness of others probably on the fence. I  concluded continued visits to Monadnock to do outreach weren’t the best use of my time.

Others returned, unabated. Their actions violated neither (arbitrary) man’s law or natural law, and I think the end-goal (sharing ideas/education) worthy, but I personally didn’t think the tactic the most-effective due to the pushback***. That itself isn’t insurmountable (in fact it’s vital for a healthy, productive conversation), but it is very difficult to overcome in such short window – seconds or at most minutes. I advocated instead for a different approach****.

At one point I spoke on the phone with a Monadnock student. He asked if I’d be interested in sitting-down with him and the school employees depicted on my video. I said that’d be fine, but encouraged him instead to ask if those same school employees would be willing to have a conversation/discussion with me (and a friend or two if that’d make it more palatable) in front of students (perhaps during school or after school for extra credit). I was told the question would be posed and that I would get a response but unfortunately I never heard anything back on that front despite follow-up.

I was hopeful that perhaps a proactive Monadnock student would, through their organization or class, request that such a forum occur. That too has yet to transpire.

Hence, my video invitation to meet with anyone who wants to sit-down and have a conversation. I’ll be at the Keene Starbucks at noon this Saturday, March 31st and again at the same time each Saturday in April.

 

*which honestly isn’t too surprising. The knee-jerk reaction to censor and block as students walk by is probably done not out of spite or ill-will but to erring on the side of “protecting” the students. While that’s an admirable goal it only reinforces the idea that one person has the right to censor information from another person. That’s just not right. Perhaps this essay,  this video, and this concept will help shed light on what’s really going on?

**aka don’t be receptive to ideas that a third person (school employee) claims must first be approved by a fourth person (another school employee)

***after visiting Monadnock a couple more times (on Jan. 6the & Feb. 3rd) one friend was detained. The week prior police had visited his residence. Think about that: men with guns visited the residence of an individual because he dared to peacefully share ideas. That’s the bad precedent set. Fortunately bad ideas can be replaced with better ideas. Information – ideas – is meant to be free and unhindered.

Books won’t stay banned. They won’t burn. Ideas won’t go to jail. In the long run of history, the censor and the inquisitor have always lost. The only sure weapon against bad ideas is better ideas.
-A. Whitney Griswold

****and yes, we’ve all spoken about this issue numerous times so this post/vid isn’t a surprise. And while I decided it wasn’t my preferred use of time, I obviously support my friends who’s actions are aligned with their conscience and again, don’t cause any harm to person/property

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


73 Comments

  1. Wow. Thanks, Pete. No, I haven't watched the video, yet, so, after I do, I may have to

    post a correction of my own………………

    But, for now, let me say, "So far so good, Bro"…"Keep up the good work!"…

    It's too bad the rest of the FREEWEENIES at "FREAK-KEENE don't seem

    to have your ability to fairly self-analyze, and re-adjust your strategy and tactics,

    to changing situations and circumstances….

    See, Monadnock, like most ALL High Schools, *DOES* have a

    …"literature distribution policy"…& a *School Board*…

    …if you guys had just followed the normal procedure in place, I am sure you would have had much more success, and the "armed thugs & goons" would NOT

    have made a *HOME*VISIT*….

    How does the School know that you guys are *NOT* there for some nefarious purpose…

    And, if I am supposed to be just fine, dandy, and ducky with *YOU* doing

    ***OPEN*CARRY*** on MARV, and the streets of Keene, why are YOU GUYS

    so *TWEAKY*&*TWITCHY* when "THEY" show up in uniform, to do *THERE*

    …***OPEN***CARRY***OUTREACH***…???… 🙁 ~tKoK.

  2. I have seen this argument before, the Freekeene hippies seem to be well known in Keene. If they are there for "nefarious purposees" then arrest and chage.

    Some years ago I went to my high school to obtain my transcripts. The anxiety exhibited by the office staff was unsetling. That was twenty five years ago, in todays fear based society I shudder to think what kind of reception I would get.

    Again if there is cause to suspect nefarious intent arrest and charge, if not leave them alone. The Freekeene people do seem ready and willing to show school administrators there literature and I suspect would be open to an after school presentation in the auditorium if invited. This would alow the foolishness on both sides to stop. But no body seems willing to cooperate.

  3. visitor, you noted:

    "The Freekeene people do seem ready and willing to show school administrators there literature and I suspect would be open to an after school presentation in the auditorium if invited. This would alow the foolishness on both sides to stop. But no body seems willing to cooperate."

    Just a point of clarification – I have advocated and worked toward the latter, but nothing yet has panned out. My next-best idea was just to establish a time/place where I'd be to have conversations for those so-inclined.

    Re the former: I can't speak for others, but I personally would not agree to getting "permission" from a third, totally removed party, before consensually interacting with someone else. Why grant anyone else such authority over you?

  4. "Merriam"-Webster.

  5. Re odd comment about not wanting permission: It's because most of them are under 18, dude. You know, a minor!

  6. Dear 9th grade 13 year old children, meet me in the parking lot. I'll buy you coffee and sweets and give you a tour of my RV. Be receptive to new ideas, just not the ideas that involve rules myself and my friends don't like. Cool? Great.

    Signed,

    FreeKeene Minister of Propaganda, Youth Division

    Unterscharfuhrer Peter Voluntaryist Freeman Eyre

    Hey Peter, want to "teach" the children? Start a private school. Otherwise, keep your indoctrinating conversation to your friends and like minded adults and stay the fuck away from kids. Especially that driveling drooling cat fucking BUFFOON david.

  7. Dead Elvis, appreciate the correction – it's now fixed.

    Ann, initially I attempted to share a flyer with students. I'm now attempting to sit-down and have a conversation with those interested. Neither activity is age-contingent in my view, though I recognize that you or someone else may reach a different conclusion.

    Do you really want the next generation exposed only to ideas from one person or group of people? Why not maximize exposure to ideas so that each person can think critically (for themselves) and decide what best-aligns with their logic and conscience?

  8. good point matthew. how dare he offer those kids the chance to hear a perspective that the school actively prevents them from learning about!

    the information contained in their DOE-approved textbooks is more than enough for the drones and worker-bees of the future.

    go back to your wheel of fortune now buddy.

  9. "Think about that: men with guns visited the residence of an individual because he dared to peacefully share ideas. That’s the bad precedent set. Fortunately bad ideas can be replaced with better ideas. Information – ideas – is meant to be free and unhindered"

    Yeah unless you've been asleep at the wheel you MORON, the world isn't chock full of "peaceful people". I both want and expect school administrators to keep tabs on the goings on of the grounds in which our children are in attendance. Since you have all made it very clear you have no comprehension of boundaries, how is any parent to know you're not a supporter of free and unhindered groups such as NAMBLA…I mean shit, every one of you guys are single and unemployed with a distrust of the very people who can dole out consequences, so what assurance does any parent have that you're not trying to have more than conversation and an exchange of "ideas"? They don't. None at all. So – if you're interested in children, go mate with a consenting adult and make your own. GOOD LUCK.

  10. snuffelsuf, you penned:

    "Hey Peter, want to “teach” the children? Start a private school. Otherwise, keep your indoctrinating conversation to your friends and like minded adults and stay the fuck away from kids."

    Unless I missed something you're saying that you're ok if people choose to pay me to educate but that it's not ok for people to meet me for a conversation?

    If you don't like this tactic ignore it or offer constructive feedback. But I have to say, such an aggressive tone isn't warranted or appreciated.

  11. snuffelsuf, per your most-recent comment, I encourage you to meet me on Sat., have a convo, and conclude for yourself if you think your statement is at all valid.

    The motivation for the convo is to share ideas. There's nothing nefarious about that at all.

  12. "If you don’t like this tactic ignore it or offer constructive feedback. But I have to say, such an aggressive tone isn’t warranted or appreciated."

    Really. You mean like when FreeKeene was screaming at 10 year old middle school kids that "School Sucks" on their way home at the end of the day? That kind of "aggressive". I do know it certainly wasn't warranted or appreciated either, but I don't think FreeKeene gave a shit.

    When Derrick gallantly strode into the school parking lot the last time he did "outreach" and the Principal tried to have a conversation with him for the thousandth time to which Derrick rudely brushed past and ignored him….think that was warranted or appreciated? Probably not.

    So….your message is….respect us, don't hurt our precious feelings in the process, and all will be well. GOT IT. You are actually making a video, asking school children to come and meet you off campus and that they don't need anyone's permission. You can defend that all you want, but – I am quite certain parents will not appreciate that. I wonder….will you care?

    Chase – yeah you pretty much summed it up. Finally you got something right. Thank you. Now take your captain hat off and go to sleep; david and fluffy have a surprise for you. Idiot.

  13. snufflesuff/ "matthew", is showing his extreme level of paranoia and fear of the world around him.

    this is a common characteristic among folks who worship the state. "the world is chock full of baddies and thats why we need gubmint to protect us from them!"

    dont you get it MORANS?? everyone is OUT TO GET YOU. now say the pledge ten times in a row while tapping your red slippers together and you'll be SAFE!

  14. Look Pete, I get it….my tone is abrasive. Fine. I concede. But hey, I've been watching you guys run amok around here for a long time. I wouldn't have a conversation with you if my life depended on it – I have a totally different outlook on how things operate than you; we would get absolutely nowhere. I happen to LIKE my roads, and sewer, and water, and traffic lights, and firemen and cops and blah blah blah. You don't. I get it. I've heard your script on theft by taxation and aggression against peaceful people bit a thousand times. You've put the idea out there on your ideology TEN fold…..everyone knows about it. Everyone knows where the "KAC" is. If kids are going to go about life disliking the same shit you do, they will find you. All I am saying is……you're treading dangerous waters inviting young adults and indeed children, to come and meet with you. I know you're not a perv….I get it – and I know your intentions are honest and you are simply passionate about your ideas. That much I know. But I don't know about some of the others quite honestly, and for that reason, I will always support school admins keeping creepy crazy acting people off campus. No offense. JMO. And this would include ANY organization. If the civil air patrol wanted to recruit kids for their stuff…even they would go about it using the proper procedures….you know….us nutty parents DO tend to worry about outside influences we do not involves ourselves in. I think you know what I mean. HELLO?

  15. Chase – whatever. You're irrelevant.You try so hard to interject yourself in the major leagues of trolldom but you're still just a waterboy…occasionally allowed to pinch hit. You're singing the same sad song from the 70's, except you're still using a record player. But thanks for playing the sheeple song for me; I haven't heard it in a day or two. DERRRRRRR. What's next….going to speculate I work for the government too? Haven't heard that one in a few weeks.

    Again….IDIOT.

  16. "mommy can i please please pretty please have your permission to go to starbucks????"

    "NO! are you crazy? we live in Keene, the compton of new england. MATT lives in this city for chrissakes!"

    "no? i cant go? okay well let me know when it's bath-time! can i have bubbles tonight???"

  17. Chase, you are exactly what I am talking about. You probably think it's okay for a 13 year old to consent too, don't you? You know…"don't tell mommy or daddy okay, it will be our secret".

    Check behind the curtains on your next date pedo….Chris Hanson might be hiding behind one of them.

    Idiot x 3 tonight. Keep trying to strike home; you're a long way off. It's kind of cute how hard you try though. Give fluffy a scratch for me.

  18. are you referring to sex? it's hard to tell from your ambiguous post, because unlike yourself matthew-snuff, not all of us have pedophilia at the forefront of our minds at every second of the day. you're assuming your audience shares your twisted brain, that's just poor form.

    POP FLY TO LEFT FIELD!

  19. Are you sure you can see over the railing of the dugout Chase? Of COURSE that is what I am saying ya DOLT. Are you seriously this stupid? Damn man. Try to keep up. SOMEONE has to worry about that crap dummy….and it is usually parents. Try to sow your seeds in a receptacle (not fluffy, or david, or your hand) that can make a live human being, then get back to me on how lovey dovey the world is….including Keene.

    There is a big difference between "mommy and daddy can I go to starbucks" then….going to starbucks to meet a grown ass man to exchange "ideas". If you can't decipher the difference, then you truly MUST be david. Or fluffy. Whichever.

    Now….wake up Chase….Chaaaase. Wake up honey…the game is over, you fell asleep…it's time to go home now.

  20. "…Re odd comment about not wanting permission: It’s because most of them are under 18, dude. You know, a minor!"

    ————————–

    Yeah, so what? What of it? Does there exist some overarching legal principle in the common law and statutes of our society that dictates that as a matter of routine course in all situations, except solely where they have sought prior permission, adults cannot verbally interact with minors? If a minor is walking down the street, is it illegal for an adult to otherwise say hello, or express their political viewpoints to people on the street (which just may incidentally include minors)? The answer is a resounding, no.

    It sounds to me like you are pandering for some kind of exception to the normal rule which generally does not prohibit that at all. Or worse yet, it sounds like you actually buy into the idea that minors should be afforded some kind of blanket protection from adult speech.

    Aside from the repulsive presumption of guilt by default that such a policy would entail, because it assumes that all such interactions should be legally enjoined and preempted simply because somebody "could" do say something "out of line", I question if it is even a remotely pragmatic analysis. These kids more than likely pick up far more obnoxious and deleterious habits from each other than they will do from most adults. Quite frankly, these kids would probably benefit from listening a little less to other kids, and listening more to people who are wiser than they (which does not imply any particular group). Maybe they will grow up just a little bit faster that way, instead of being restrained by an institutional framework which treats them like children for far too many years when they are essentially very much adults, or nearly so… insulating them from the outside world, and in doing so, deleteriously socially retarding their progress into adulthood. But either way, preempting such speech (or most other liberties) on the grounds that somebody could theoretically abuse that relationship is just not conducive to how law should ever work in an ostensibly free country.

  21. alex, reason and evidence are not legal tender here in the FK comments.

    it comes down to this, as has been well expressed by matthew-snuff:

    "i am paranoid (ostensibly due to some childhood neuroses), viewing everyone as a suspect, and i demand you be the same way. otherwise i look like a lunatic by comparison."

    STEEEEEERIKE!

  22. snuffelsuf, in one comment you mentioned things done by "FreeKeene." In another comment you generalized actions to "you guys."

    FreeKeene.com is a decentralized site. As I noted in the vid, the actions of someone else – a friend, colleague, relative, etc. – doesn't speak for me and vice versa.

    Actions are done by individuals, not by a collective. The actor alone is responsible.

    I support much of the outreach done by individuals associated with FreeKeene.com but I don't unquestionably support all actions done by such people.

  23. Cause NO perverts would ever work at a school, right Mr. Troll?

    lol

    Thanks for doing this, Pete. It's a great idea.

  24. Ian,

    I must question your use of the word "troll." I mean, its the pot calling the kettle black. I guess when your you have a degree in trolling society, you have this compelling force to relate others to you. But why give us such a "high" title? You guys (e.i. Derrick J. Hortonhearsanobody, Adam, Kelly and a few others) truly hold your profession well. Unfortunately its a profession that grants no positive change whatsoever.

    Now you quipped, "Cause NO perverts would ever work at a school, right Mr. Troll?" One would think that this is an argument against your own cause. Basically what one can get from your illogical input is that we should be more careful to limit our children's exchange with teachers and strangers. Basically your saying it should be harder for people who want to work for the school and the SCHOOL BOARD *hint hint kinda like you hint hint* or people who want to willingly give out information, or in your case propaganda, to our children.

    you seem to be losing your touch as a demean-strator and a full time act-up-tivist.

    You see, even though we state the very basic logic you continue to relate us to you (being a troll).

  25. But your totally right. We need to make it much harder for strange people with questionable motives like you to interact with our children. Glad to see that your trying to keep the kids safe from yourself.

    As for snuffelsuf, I've been a big fan of your extremely sensible input and your use of sarcasm. I mean, hell, the best defense against stupidity is sarcasm right?

  26. If anyone didn't know "snuffelsuf" use to be matt….then he went on a Koo Koo binge and changed his name because of me……and now he's mad at me…..lol and fixated on me………… that about breaks it down right matt/snuffelsuf

    🙂

  27. I don't know why matt changed his name to snuffelsuf……..maybe because he admitted he was on welfare with the other name … and then thought that was a mistake ..but that's just a guess……

    🙂

  28. Ian,

    I would love your opinion one one issue and it's a simple yes or no.

    Do you or dont you favor the (legal entrapment) techniques used by law enforcement to catch sex offenders. More specifically child predators.

    i.e. police posing as teenage girls to attract child molestors online?

    a yes or no will suffice! Please?

  29. David,

    You misersable puke!

    He changed his name to snufflesuf after the night ya moms rocked his world..Now its all he can mutter!!

  30. If you see any if these free keene activists at you schook, or around children, it is highly critical that anyone calls 911 immediately as to there is not telling what is on the mind of these perverts especially, Ian Freeman and Pete Eyre that they need to be taken off the streets.

  31. School

  32. Like flies to honey. Bada Bing Bada Boom….well hello there Ian, and Pete and…oh, hi david. David….your cat isn't liking that….put him down. You remind me of Rubrick played by Steve Martin in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels. Put your pots down. Good God….still stuck on the old reversal ploy eh….saying that I'M on welfare… Kind of amusing seeing a degenerate Brighton High School drop out say *others* are on welfare that clearly are not. But if it makes your cat hot, hey….go for it. I've nothing to lose here. You're still a Rubrick.

    Chase – still trying…..still not quite getting it though. So…do I say Ball 4 now? Stop overplaying. Patience Captain Crunch. Patience.

    Ian – clearly, judging by the comments, I'm not the only one with the concern. Sorry buddy boy, maybe you can come out from your shell and answer the question. You do like dialogue and exchanging of ideas, right? Conversation? Or do you operate under the assumption with your answers that "less is more". The issue isn't about teachers being pervs….pitiful and expected deflection…..what's the click word of the week on the Shire Society…?…oh yeah…a red herring. The issue is a total stranger, inviting children to meet in a place off school grounds. No surprise you would think it a great idea…..just like all the nutjobs on To Catch a Predator thought meeting was a good idea. Actually….ya know what, don't even bother answering the question, it will be the same scripted, lame, tired and overcooked beef stew you usually serve. Go back to drawing signs in crayon, I'll go to Market Basket and buy a can of stew with more flavor.

    Alex – do you have kids? Would you mind if doofus david invited them someplace to exchange ideas – if you didn't know who he was….or his history….or what it is he wanted to talk about? Naturally, you're going to defend yourself and say oh hell yeah sure great idea….but the reality is, you wouldn't.

  33. Ademo cooks spaghetti dinner tonight. No event so tell ya friends

    I am SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO there!

  34. I''l bring the gyros and trainwrecks! Good times!

  35. An open message to all parents everywhere:

    They couldn't sell their jive to adults, they couldn't sell it to the courts, they couldn't sell it to the police or the schoolboard. So who is left to try and sell it to?

    The children!!

    Becareful anyone who may try and approach a child off of school grounds!! You are coming close to that line!! It's getting serious!!

  36. Snuffelsuf,

    " I happen to LIKE my roads, and sewer, and water, and traffic lights, and firemen and cops and blah blah blah. You don’t."

    No, this isn't correct. The Liberty Movement is not about getting rid of these services. It's about removing aggression from society.

    There's an example here:

    http://www.freemanch.com/the-woodlands-a-city-wit

    though a free city would go farther, and there would be much more diversity in the options available.

  37. Okay. Doing some number crunching here. Since FreeKeene has received a total of $20 in contributions for fiscal year 2012, plus the $200 total for 2011, that should pay for two wheel barrow fulls of pavement for a couple of pot holes. AND….if our little society can get people like the two lovebirds in Manchester or Concord or wherever who don't even like to pay RENT…..we can pretend to have a neutral third party determine who has to peaceably pay or eat costs. And then there is poor david….who is going to send him a check each month to buy his spaghetti o's?

    Appreciate the link – I looked at it. But, it won't work around here. Ever. Hey, what can I say, I'm a glass half empty kind of guy.

  38. Hey snowdog, here's a great idea. Move to Woodlands Texas. Bring all your freestate/freekeene buddies. david too. Everybody wins. You get no government, and we get no you. And Woodlands Texas? Well…

  39. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    poor Woodlands, Texas. What hath we wrought?

  40. It's funny, I'm seventeen and appear to be more mature than some of the people bickering on this post. Just have an intelligent conversation for once, all people do is argue with insults and anger. I was one of the students who created the group "Remain Respectfully silent" as it were. Pete you bring up some very good points, and i respect your opinion. It's refreshing to see a post from one of the people involved in the "outreach" that isn't so negative. Honestly it wasn't the "literature" being passed out that a lot of the students had a problem with, personally i think some of free keene's viewpoints are valid. But as of late the attempts at "outreach" and the videos posted of them were in very bad taste and disrespectful to our principal who has more than earned our respect, and a majority of the student body. And with regard to the arms crossed thing. It had been brought up as an idea, but I had pointed out the same thing you did to them and they agreed. unfortunately, some still did it and it made us look like a joke. Anyways, i think i will make it a point to take you up on the offer to have a respectful and intelligent conversation over some over priced coffee

  41. Right on Concerned student – appreciate the feedback and interesting to learn more of the background and your own. Looking forward to talking.

  42. Philosophically speaking, "voluntaryism" is a road to nowhere, and does nothing but create a vacuum lined with a billion and a half questions without answers. Like most aspects of right-libertarianism, it seems far more like a means of justifying capitalist tyranny and certain forms of authority rather than critiquing authority. As well, most "voluntaryists" rely on ideological abstractions (such as giving examples featuring an individual who is contextless, situationless, cultureless, etc.) in order to "prove" why their philosophy has moral clout, when it really has none.

    For example, let's say my plane crashes in the middle of a desert, leaving me stranded without any means of surviving. All of a sudden a man roles along in his vehicle, sees me, and agrees to save me. However, he tells me that he'll only rescue me if I agree to be his sex slave for a month right afterwards. Now, this scenario is extremely coercive, however most voluntaryists would say, "Hey, you voluntarily agreed to it, therefore it's okay-dokay in our book," without giving much regard to my overall situation which lead me to sign away my dignity in that example.

    What a lot of right-libertarians ("an"-caps, Ron Paulbots, etc.) don't understand is that anarchists (as in, libertarian socialists) are technically voluntaryists as well, since we believe and have always believed in free association. However, unlike right-libertarians, we are anti-authoritarians first. This means our rejection of hierarchical relationships and systems (i.e. statism, capitalism, bosses, landlords, usurers/bankers, organized religion, patriarchy, racism, homophobia, transphobia) comes before simple "voluntary" agreements. We oppose inequalities of power and having a society based around those kinds of inequalities.

    Thankfully, I've noticed that when voluntaryists take their philosophy to its logical conclusion, they end up becoming libertarian socialists.

    My website: http://propagandalalaland.blogspot.com/

  43. That's Nice.

  44. "… and disrespectful to our principal who has more than earned our respect, and a majority of the student body…"

    —————-

    Perhaps you could outline the specific actions that constituted disrespect and offer your definition of respect for us. What specific obligations does this respect entail, and to whom does it apply, and under what circumstances does it apply?

    "Respect" and "disrespect" are among the more vague and amorphous ethical concepts (even though all ethical language suffers from this as a matter of common usage), and so whenever throws around that term it just sends up a big red flag to me in that it's usage in common language generally is no more substantive than as an expression of umbrage which tends to be rooted more out of loyalty which demands an obligation upon others which simply may not exist.

    The fact that Principal has earned your respect does not imply that that duty therefore applies to others who must now show respect, simply because you do.

    Furthermore, I would argue that the mere fact that the Principal has earned your respect does not then bind you to some obligation to come to their defense against others who do not show what you deem respect. To do such a thing is a classic example of misguided loyalty and demonstrates that the person probably does not really have a handle on the substantive nature of respect and obligations.

    To simply rally behind people because they have your respect is both an insufficient reason, and is misguided. It is only appropriate to come to Party B's defense in circumstances where Party C is not showing "respect," if and only if a duty of C to B exists which demands this respect. Party B must earn the respect of Party C before any notion of duty can come into force. It does not arise ex nihilo, binding everyone else, at the time your duty was created. Absent that preexisting duty of C to B, your attempt to come to B's defense amounts to a form of bulling C into submission by imposing an obligation that simply may not exist.

    Again, just because B has earned your respect does not mean than that respect has been earned by others. It is highly inappropriate for you to suggest, much less demand that others must somehow conform to this duty.

  45. Remember:

    If you see any if these free keene activists at you school, or around children, it is highly critical that anyone calls 911 immediately as to there is not telling what is on the mind of these perverts especially, Ian Freeman and Pete Eyre that they need to be taken off the streets.

  46. Concerned Student: Look at that Alex guy's response to you.

    "Furthermore, I would argue that the mere……blah blah blah"

    That is the bullshit you are going to hear all day with Pete. Such a simple word…..respect…..and instead of just understanding what you meant, which is very clear, you get a debate spin, and…..an "argument".

    IMO, you're wasting your time meeting with him and whoever else decides to accompany him and videotape it/edit it – and spin it. There is no "discussion" – no matter what your opinion is, as long as it doesn't align itself with theirs, do not expect for one minute that you see any of them concede or compromise. You'll get a "good point…..BUT". Oh sure…Pete is all relaxed and reasonable and pathetic in his video above…"my friends and I….whimper whimper 🙁 ", but he has shown time and time and time again – he has one script, he knows no other lines…he is programmed to say the only story he knows.

    Alex – do you always debate simple means of communication? The kid likes his principal. The principal attempted to have a conversation about rules he is responsible for…..Derrick and company brushed right by him….were sarcastic, rude and mocking and tried to make him look like an incompetent fool in front of his students. Umbrage….STFU.

  47. “There’s an example here:
    http://www.freemanch.com/the-woodlands-a-city-wit

    How is this different from a government?

    http://www.thewoodlands.com/living/community.html

    The funds necessary to provide these services come from taxes charged to residents according to the area in which they live and the value of their home.

    Police

    Officers of the Montgomery County Sheriff’s office regularly patrol The Woodlands with assistance available from other agencies, including Montgomery County Precinct 3 Constable personnel and the Texas Department of Public Safety. In the Town Center area, law enforcement personnel from neighboring Shenandoah and Oak Ridge assist in law enforcement and traffic control.

  48. @ Concerned Student

    Stay as far away from these free keeners especially Pete Eyre and Ian Freeman. You do not know what you are getting into. Don't even engage in a conversation with him further on here. He and the other free keeners are extremely dangerous.

  49. "…Such a simple word…..respect…..and instead of just understanding what you meant…"

    ——————-

    There really isn't anything particularly simple about the word, in question. Even if we take certain fairly common meaning of the word is still fraught with vagueness.

    There's nothing wrong with using words loosely in casual conversation, it is something every single person is guilty of. Vagueness, ambiguity, a bit of occasional hyperbole is something that is built-into the nature of language and even creeps in during more precise conversations, and far more so during casual conversations. We tend not to notice this so much because the brain is a great filter and algorithm, and it is pretty good at filling in the blanks and inferring what people meant, or otherwise just 'glossing over' what the person mean if it was not quite clear, if the consequences for failure to 100 percent understand are not particularly significant.

    When we speak, we tend to take it as a given that the other person holds a nearly identical understanding of what we mean, else the whole exercise of communicating would be fruitless if there was not a significant commonality between the two people having a conversation. And we all do generally understand what the other person means…. even if we might not agree 100 percent with that persons specific definition, or even if we aren't entirely clear of what their definition is… there's still more than enough commonality to communicate the ideas between us.

    It's not really a question of not knowing what he means. It's more of an urging to recognize that there may be times when clarity is a little more important.

    Having a casual conversation between friends probably does not necessitate we go out of our way to be overly clear. As long as the friend gets the general sentiment of what we are saying, that's probably enough in most cases. And even if the friend didn't quite "get" what we were saying, it's usually just casual conversation to pass the time, and the consequences for lack of precision understanding probably do not matter that much in the grand scheme of things. This happens more often than people realize. The brain just filters massive amounts of misunderstanding out without much cognizant thought to it, unless something is of greater importance, in which we then feel compelled to ask for clarification.

    On the other hand, there are times when a greater degree of clarity is warranted. Situations where the consequences for a lack of understanding tend to be of greater weight, would be the most notable example. When there is some kind of penalty, failure, or hardship on the line for not quite being 'on the same page,' it makes clarity kind of important, whether we're talking matters of law, ethics, or simply getting directions to the airport to pick your friend up, so he doesn't ended up stranded there.

Care to comment?