Keene Voters Enslave Their Neighbors

The Free Staters are upsetting local bureaucrats again. This time they tried to return freedom to the people by limiting the amount of money local politicians can demand from them. The politicians weren’t happy.

One of the school board members said, “We don’t need a very small minority of people in this community — that do not in any way represent the will of the people — telling us how to do our job.”

That’s an interesting statement given that, according to the same article, only 100 people out of 16,276 registered voters attended the meeting. Even if no Free Staters attended, it would still be a small minority telling the school board what to do. How do we know if they represent “the will of the people”? We don’t.

The people who attend the meeting are most likely to be the ones who have something at stake. If you’re the average taxpayer in Keene, it’s not worth your 4 hours on a Saturday morning just for a *chance* at protecting yourself against a tax increase. After all the taxes, when distributed among the population of Keene, only amounts to an increase of about $150 per person. However if you’re the average *recipient* of those taxes (like a teacher or administrator), you have thousands of dollars of incentive to show up and vote yourself a pay increase.


It’s an immoral system. No person has the right to demand your money. It does’t matter if it’s one person demanding your money, two people, or 51% of people. No one has a right to take what is yours. Conceding this is what leads to starvation and scarcity in socialist countries.

Incentives matter. When people can vote themselves the ability to take more of your money, they will do that until there’s nothing left. That is why the school board so vehemently opposed a cap on the amount they can tax. They don’t want any restrictions. They want to be able to tax you as much as they want. They don’t see a problem with this. I do. It’s unsustainable and unjust.

Here’s some video that I recorded at the school board meeting:

I talked about this on last night’s episode of Freedom Feens:

If you find Derrick J’s content valuable, please send your bitcoin donations to:


Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. Tell you what, princess: if you don’t like it, then move.

    Losers like you are present in every community, and in every community you are ignored. No one in the community cares what you or the other freetards think.

    Let me repeat that for emphasis: no one cares what any of you freetards think.

    So post your videos, whine and moan about how “unfair” the system is, and just continue to be a freetard loser that is going nowhere is life. Everyone in Keene hates your guts (as well as your buddy Bernard), so you’re never going to get anything accomplished in this town.

  2. “if you don’t like it, then move.”

    If you don’t like people disagreeing with you, then you move. Your system which demands universal obedience to your whims, is coming to an end.

  3. Oh, *now* I see how it is legitimate to take other people’s money against their will to pay for things that you support. “If you don’t like it, then move.” What a terrific argument! I can’t believe I never thought of that before. Thank you for opening my worldview with your insightful comment.

  4. We have the majority votes, princess: you and your freetard friends don’t. It’s really that simple. Maybe because you didn’t attend college you’re missing the finer points of this issue, but it is essentially the democratic process in play here. Tough shit if you don’t like it. Go find another city/town that agrees with your point of view. We don’t want you here, and you’re never going to get your way on anything in Keene.

  5. No … our system demands that the group that holds the most votes gets to decide how things should be. For every one freetard opinion there are 5 against it. We win – you lose. Tough shit if you don’t like it.

  6. If no one cares, why are you here?

  7. Wow the lynch mob is still out for you hardcore. Just remember for every hater obsessively trolling there is at least one fan even if that fan is maybe not so obsessively trolling, but is still there nonetheless, and we appreciate what you do, and the time you give to help us keep our taxes low, as is the OG New Hampshire way.

  8. careful what you wish, your system also allows for what they’re doing in Grafton: making the townspeople cry that their meetings last for several hours due to their own rules making it difficult to stifle the voices of people who live in their town. It’s coming to you too.

  9. as long as you remember, the “OUR” is also them. It’ll still be “our” when the “them” outnumber the “you” at your meetings. You won’t like “your” system then.

  10. It is time to start filming teachers, administrators and board members all the time. Their names and salaries are public info. Find them. Film them. They are stealing through threat of violence. “Robin Hood” the teachers.

  11. I won’t move because it’d be conceding to the effectiveness of your abusive language. This is not dialogue this is you being coercive. I’ll buy extra bullets and continue the political struggle

  12. please explain how the teachers themselves are stealing through the threat of violence as you put it.

  13. you need to do more research into the micro-macro dilemma

  14. “Buy extra bullets”? If you consider what you and your freetard friends are doing is tantamount to an armed political struggle, then I’m looking forward to seeing all of you go down in a hail of bullets.

  15. LoL … ok, ZZTop – you just keep thinking that.

  16. It’s time for people to start fighting back against the freetards. Harassment tactics will result in a shit storm of lawsuits and other legal actions against you morons – so bring it.

  17. To say armed political struggle is a pussys attempt at inciting the state to move against me when you won’t.

    Even the state has flesh and blood behind it and larken rose said cops are cowards

    Try again tard. Even peace advocate derrick sees the need for weapon

  18. If such a majority exists, then why bother with the bad PR of forcing people to participate at all. I mean, this majority would gladly participate in the absence of the threat to take their homes, right? So the funding would still be there and I would wager that someone with your enthusiasm would gladly give even more than was expected, no?

  19. Because we like to laugh at you douchebags…

  20. It’s interesting to me Sammy that the underlying sentiments of all of your many irrational presumptions always inevitably devolves into these three categories: the significance of institutional education, the reification of the concepts of “we” and “society”, and the insistence that those who disagree with your positions must either conform or vacate.

    To address the first category Sammy, I’m curious as to why you believe the veracity or fallaciousness of your positions are dependent only upon educational credentials? As the poor quality of your posts has frequently indicated, your devotion to the sacred institution of higher education is quite misplaced. But assuming your stance on this matter is the correct one, then wouldn’t that mean that the opinions of those with advanced degrees should hold more weight than your own?

    Secondly Sammy, it’s obvious to me that you’ve recognized the libertarian aversions to the ersatz notions of “we” and “society”. I surmise that this is precisely the reason why you elect to include these terms in your posts as regularly as you do. That being said, it’s also clear that your choice in the use of these terms is a fumbling attempt to confer legitimacy of others’ desires as being in your own interests well. In so doing, you ascribe that legitimacy to your own individual choices and conflate them, confusing them as being the choices of the majority. I wonder Sammy, are you truly this gullible?

    Finally Sammy, I’ll address the most absurd of your suggestions: that every individual has some implicit duty to conform to every and all conditions that are imposed on him (consenting or otherwise) and must vacate should they find these conditions to be unpalatable. By this logic, if I don’t like the color of my house, I should just move out and buy a new house instead of just painting it another color. The point here Sammy is that, despite your objections, consent does matter. Nobody owes you an education, a job, a home, roads, bridges, or anything else that you want to have in life. It’s your responsibility to provide these things for yourself or discover a peaceful way to create them. When individuals create things for themselves or for others, they do so either because it makes them happy or because there is something to gain. Should individuals create new things by using other people’s resources, then they must work to fulfill these desires by use of either peaceful collaboration or coercion. Your own selfishness is why you prefer the latter and it’s the reason you want those who’ve withdrawn consent to leave. Your own fecklessness forbids you to abide anyone with the audacity to tell you NO.

    It’s a shame that you’re unable grow enough in character to be able understand these things Sammy. But I suppose this is understandable. Your lack of ambition in even bothering to learn better insults is clear evidence that you lack the aspirations to learn anything else as well.

    Cheers all the same.

  21. “We” meaning one person and their VPN accounts and Tor Browser to upvote themselves.

  22. Ha ha, good luck with that dipshit. You can catch them in their cars as they leave school property. Actually, this is a great way for you free state project members who believe sex with under-age girls is totally legit to get dates. I’m sure the school and parents will have no problem with random strangers walking the halls of their schools filming people.

  23. Why is it you all think you’re the only ones with guns? Go get those extra bullets, just make sure they’re a big enough caliber and that you hit your mark. I don’t tend to miss very often.

  24. Libertarians are always asked this question. Assuming you seriously wish to know Chad, it all comes down to the notion of taxes.

    Taxes are burdens that a governing body places on its citizens with the implication that violence will befall those so burdened if they refuse to pay. These burdens are placed upon citizens without regard to their consent and regardless of the benefits they may or may not receive from them.

    For example, if I own property and someone points a gun at me and forces me to give it to him, then that person would be executing an armed robbery. If the robber tells me he’s going to use the proceeds from that property to build a swimming pool for the neighborhood, he’s still a thief. He took that property by force since I never consented.

    Now applying this same situation, this time changing the word “robber” into “tax assessor”, and you’ll see where this all leads. These distinctions, regardless of who acts them out are exactly the same. When a person without consent deprives another person of his possessions he must use force in lieu of persuasion to do so. This action is in no way different when an agent of the government does it. Calling it “taxation” does not change the fact that he is stealing, even if the agent’s intentions are claimed to be of benefit to everyone.

    Of course this fact doesn’t impede those who support the idea of taxation from proclaiming the piety of their actions to their victims. Hence the use of terms such as “tax-cheat” or “paying your fair share”. Having the desire to hold onto your own money for you own use in no way construes “cheating” except to those who want to take it from you.

    Now as you know, public school teachers and administrators benefit from their collusion with tax assessors. This is because the salaries and benefits that public school teachers and administrators receive are payed for by taxes. Also, since public education is a public service, public school employees will receive a salary regardless of the quality of the services they provide and irrespective of those who choose to use those services. If I send my child to public school, I must still pay tuition in the form of taxes. However, since there is no economic incentive for the school to provide an effective service, I have no financial leverage with them should I decide to pull my child out. The public school gets paid no matter what I do. The public school will get paid if I send my child to public school. The public school will get paid if I send my child to private school. And the public school will get paid even if I have no child in school. Forcing anyone to pay for a service they neither want nor intend to use is in no different from stealing. Associates of organized crime use a version of this scam all the time, referring to it as “protection”.

    Understanding this you can now see why the costs of public education are so high when compared with the private sector. Since public schools are guaranteed their tuition regardless of the quality of their services, they have no customer incentives to improve their services or lower costs. Instead, salaries increase, pensions increase, and ridiculous perks such as paid sabbaticals and tenure-tracks become the norm. Would you choose to pay for these things if you weren’t forced to?

  25. that had nothing to do with the question. wanna try again?

  26. That’s funny. So far none of you have given me the impression you even possess senses of humor. In fact, if your antics at the “People’s BBQ” are any indication, the lot of you seem to be a pretty dull bunch. From that observation alone I’m guessing that none of you ever get invited to any of the good parties. And I don’t think it’s just the rancid BO that’s deterring you, it’s your repugnant personalities.

  27. That’s because you didn’t read it Chad.

    I’m sorry to break this to you, but these concepts cannot efficiently be explained with one or two sentences. And frankly, the learning curve here isn’t all that steep. I was able to understand these concepts before I became a teenager. You’re a grown man. What’s your excuse? If you don’t have the intelligence or patience to read and retain even a few paragraphs, then I can’t help you. No one can.

  28. It’s for the children. …..of course they never tell you whose children !!…

  29. Pretty sure there is a lot more than “one” who thinks you people are douchebags. Don’t want to pay taxes for roads/ schools etc then move to where there isn’t any roads/ schools etc. Pretty easy huh?

  30. Not sure why your replying to me….

  31. How do you propose to provide roads and bridges for yourself?

  32. If you’d have read further, you’d have noticed the sentence referring to “peaceful collaboration”. Collaboration does not always have to mean that government needs to assert duress on its citizens in the pooling of resources to accomplish beneficial objectives. There are other ways to build bridges and roads without collecting taxes to build them.

  33. So if taxes were not “required” you would happily “give”? I doubt it.

  34. i guess i have to repeat the question for you as you stated teachers are stealing personally, and i asked how?

  35. Then I guess Chad I should simply repeat my answer. However, unlike you I’m not that lazy. I suppose I’ll just have to hold your hand and lead you there. You can start with the first sentence in the sixth paragraph of my reply where I used the word “collusion”.

  36. I addressed that question previously in my more detailed comment SPAR. Again, had you read it carefully and bothered to think about it for more than a few seconds you would have understood this and wouldn’t be asking me this question. But since you’ve been cordial, I’ll rehash the details of that discourse and give you a few more things to think about.

    But to answer your question bluntly, my answer would indeed be no. I would not give. That’s the point SPAR. To have the ability to say NO. If I’m not using the services being offered, then why would I want to pay for them? Wouldn’t you do the same? I could make a charitable contribution if I so wished, but that would be entirely my choice. Charity is virtuous because it’s a voluntary action. It can’t be considered charitable if such action can only be expedited by applying duress.

    Now I’m sure SPAR, you’ll ask “Why should anyone be opposed to taxes? Since society benefits, why would anyone want to say NO?” Of course you dismiss the unstated element to this argument which is you that can’t say NO. The answer must always be YES. Or else. And it’s that “or else” part that I object to.

    I’m also assuming that you view the tax issue from the one-sided perspective that it’s perfectly OK to threaten others with violence provided that a legitimized ruling body acts on your behalf and/or society gets whatever it wants out of it. And while it may matter to you how this ruling body goes about it (be it through popular democracy, representative democracy, or by edict), the outcome does not and no individual affected by such decisions gets to say NO once everything’s been decided. Exemptions might be granted for a favored few, but the rest are left to sink or swim.

    Blind faith in this singular perspective has also led people to ignore the bigger picture. Accountability. When your money is taken from you by force, politicians are under no obligation to spend it in the ways that you want them to. Whether you understand this or not, every penny taken from you is put into a budget and it’s POLITICIANS that decide where it’s to be spent. Not you. A portion of your taxes meant for public schools can instead be used for building NFL or MLB stadiums. Portions of taxes meant for road maintenance can be used to build casinos. The list goes on. But the point is that money meant for the services you want will always end up also funding services that you don’t want. Over time this mechanism has amplified budgets, allowing for increased spending while even further hindering accountability. For each new service that government decides to provide, even more taxes must be levied. Each new tax in turn gets added to these budgets, which then allows politicians and bureaucrats to spend even more money on things you don’t want. In short, any capital that’s allocated by force is always ultimately invested into
    those ventures that have the support of the most politicians.

    Then how can you hold politicians accountable, SPAR? By voting? If a mugger holds a knife to your throat and steals your wallet do you
    think he’ll agree not to spend his ill begotten wares on whiskey and
    whores? What if if you ask him politely? Do you think that will work? Probably not. Politicians also can’t be held accountable by asking them nicely. Their primary responsibility is to secure the backing of lobbyists and special interests. You and your vote is last in line. Politicians don’t need you. They can rally many more voters to their cause using lobbyists. And compared to what lobbyists bring to the table, your one vote is pretty much nothing.

    I hope this will give you something to think about.


  37. you outlined how they benefit from taxes but not how they are personally involved in the collecting as stated. I’ll even post the comment. please read his comment and read my reply. you have failed to prove anything against what i asked.

    2 days ago

    It is time to start filming teachers, administrators and board
    members all the time. Their names and salaries are public info. Find
    them. Film them. They are stealing through threat of violence. “Robin
    Hood” the teachers.

  38. I did read your other response, I stopped reading this one when you said you wouldn’t pay. Guess you don’t use roads and bridges. Cheers.

  39. The fact that they’re benefiting from the collection of taxes was precisely my point, Chad. That was the purpose in my selection of the word “collusion”.

    Consider the inner workings of organized crime. When the crime boss collects tribute from from his underlings’ criminal endeavors, the boss is guilty of criminal conspiracy, just as if he committed the crimes himself. Should the beneficiaries of taxation be considered any less guilty simply because they didn’t collect the taxes themselves?

  40. I apologize for mistyping your acronym previously, SPAT, but your response (snarky as it was) does not derive from logical reasoning.

    Why is it your position that I should not be allowed to avail myself the use of roads and bridges that I believe should be provided through other means? Is it because you believe that my own principles should in some way take precedence? I would argue that I am more than justified in using said services, especially since I’ve been forced to pay for them against my will.

  41. Oh, I’m absolutely sure there’s more than one person that hates us. But there’s pretty much only one who seems to dedicate a huge portion of their life to commenting here. You can change IP addresses, but you can’t change other identifiable traits.

  42. a benefit from taxes was not the addressed wording, but the claim that they personally are involved. there is a difference and you have shown they benefit from taxes but chose to defend his comments and have failed to do so in that aspect.. it is obvious that you can not actually defend what was said and are wrong and trying to deflect. again you fail. even i posted the question that involves the teachers themselves committing the act but you either don’t want to see that so you can rant, or missed it and don’t want to admit your mistake.

  43. What traits are those? Never posted here before..

  44. I use VPN too, as do a lot of people. So what? I’m not Sammy or anyone else here. Believe what you want, but more people are much more pissed at your antics than you think.

  45. “Finally Sammy, I’ll address the most absurd of your suggestions: that every individual has some implicit duty to conform to every and all conditions that are imposed on him (consenting or otherwise) and must vacate should they find these conditions to be unpalatable.”

    I bet you like to hear yourself speak as well. To your point, I don’t expect or demand you or any of the other cultists leave. I just want “you” to shut the fuck up when “you” are arrested, tried and convicted for what “you” know and acknowledge are existing laws. Go ahead and break them, just stop being surprised at the result and bitching about it.

  46. Jay is an “Internet Expert”. Apparently he thinks that only one person has figured out how to use a VPN or Tor. He’s probably just jealous because he hasn’t figured it out for himself yet.

  47. That’s the thing with the freetards: they all talk tough, but it ends there.

  48. Does your Mom know what you do down in her basement all day?

  49. “These burdens are placed upon citizens without regard to their consent and regardless of the benefits they may or may not receive from them.”

    But they are consenting, otherwise they would choose not to purchase real estate knowing what the obligations and requirements are for doing so up front.

    You own property, you pay taxes on it; that’s how our society works. You’re welcome to seek out an alternative arrangement in some other location if you like, but in this country you will not find one.

  50. LoL. I just realized something – actually – I knew it all along: you’re a complete fucking moron, and all of your pompous blustering amounts to a whole lot of nothing.

    Our society is what it is, and you and people like you are never, ever going to change that.

    Surely you must realize this for yourself, right? Oh sure, you no doubt love to hear yourself talk and probably re-read the boring missives you inflict upon all of us again and again, but the reality is that you’re pissing into the wind and have convinced yourself that it’s rain.

Care to comment?