Free State Wyoming Forum
Prospective Free State Wyoming (FSW) Members and Interested Parties => Prospective Free State Wyoming (FSW) Members and Interested Parties => Topic started by: valleyglen on December 06, 2010, 10:32:42 PM
-
Hello FSW and all the FSW'ers. I am currently living in West Virginia and hating it. I became interested in Wyoming through an episode of "Lock Down" that showcased Wyoming Department of Corrections Officers. I am a retired U.S. Army NCO and have worked in corrections for about 5 and a half years here in WV. The current regime at our prison is getting to be too much to work for and decided that a pay raise and location change might be nice. When you are forced to live on a credit card to make ends meet, something must happen!
So I am applying to the Department of Corrections in Wyoming and hopefully within the next eight months I will change my truck tags to one that has a cowboy and bucking bronco!
If there is anyone working for the DOC in Wyoming and is a member, I would appreciate some information on where the best chances are to get hired. I am currently the recreation yard supervisor at the state's maximum security prison so I could pretty much work anywhere in the state.
Thanks for any help and I am really looking forward to hearing from any and all who would like to give me a little advice. It will really be nice to live in a state that has people that don't want to live off the state's dime, as that seems to be the prevailing train of thought around here.
-
Welcome to FSW.
They are always looking for new people in Rawlins... Good reason for that too. in my opinion Rawlins was made just for the prision. It is cold and windy and freezing and windy and dry and did I say windy??
Read this:
http://doc.state.wy.us/about/annual_report.html
It will tell you alot. Rawlins is the place we recomend to the people who we want to leave. :D
By the way I grew up near there and it is a miserable place.
-
It will tell you alot. Rawlins is the place we recomend to the people who we want to leave. :D
I agree with crappiewy. I was driving across WY and stopped in Rawlins for gasoline. When I opened my car door it almost flew out of my hand. It is WINDY as a Tornado in Rawlins. I did take the time to drive around the town itself, and it was not bad - except that I found the "locals" gas staion was 12 cents less per gallon than the one I filled up right off the hoghway exit in Rawlins.
I suggest that if Rawlins is the only prison in WY, that you consider another line of work. Unless you visit Rawlins before you make the move (which I suggest) it would be a shame that you left one job to go to a place that you may hate. I suggest that you DRIVE (yes, drive - so that you can see the stark difference once you cross the Missouri River) out to WY (during your next vacation) and stop by Rawlins for yourself to check it out and possibly speak to some of the CO's.
Then take your time an drive all around WY.
BTW, I got a buddy who work for corrections in NJ, and he is counting the days till he can retire and move to WY.
Good luck!
-
Yeah...some of us refer to Rawlins as the "armpit" of Wyoming.... ;D and yes, it is windy as all get out! However, it is likely still better than where you are...as far as statism goes... :)
-
Rawlins isnt the only prison anymore. Wyoming Medium Correctional Institution
(http://doc.state.wy.us/institutions/wmci/index.html) Torrington is a little nicer than Rawlins, so thats a plus, and its only medium security.
-
Don't forget the Honor Farm in Riverton.
-
Or the (private?) youth facility in Newcastle.
-
Don't overlook one of the 23 County Jails too...pull up the county websites & grab the sheriff's phone number...always good to have some respectful liberty-oriented gaolers ;)
MANUMIT
-
valleyglen wrote:
It will really be nice to live in a state that has people that don't want to live off the state's dime, as that seems to be the prevailing train of thought around here.
Excuse me for pointing out the obvious, but aren't YOU looking to live off the state's dime as a state employee? Other than wanting to leave W. VA, I don't see anything here espousing our generally shared principles.
Just sayin'.
Comments?
Mac
-
Excuse me for pointing out the obvious, but aren't YOU looking to live off the state's dime as a state employee?
I have always been curious about this sentiment. I take it that working a "government job" is as bad or worse in many of your opinions as living off welfare?
-
I used to jump into these "purist" arguments...now I just don't care...though there is a difference from actually working in the system vs. getting gub'mint handouts. However, I'm not sure which is worse...one you get subsistence wages to do nothing, the other you get paid well/good benie's/pension AND do very little.
Anyways, get into Wyoming work wherever for whomever and use your position/pay to help build liberty for yourself and those around you in any way that you can/want.
IMnsHOoc.
MANUMIT
-
Anyways, get into Wyoming work wherever for whomever and use your position/pay to help build liberty for yourself and those around you in any way that you can/want.
IMnsHOoc.
MANUMIT
Do what you can to get to Wyoming and then you can find a job not working for the government.
-
Well, FWIW I worked for the Census this year; and you may rest assured we did not get paid well nor did we have any benefits/pension. As I saw it, somebody was going to be working those jobs, and it might as well be me who could do it somewhat efficiently/intelligently and with a critical eye. I know ML will tell me we don't want our government to be efficient >:D but they could either pay me the $9.00/hour or pay it to several loafing idiots (and we had plenty of those in my office) to accomplish the same thing.
BTW, welcome valleyglen.
-
Interesting question that Mac brought up. Whenever one does 'wake up' there
is going to be some kind of jagged line before bringing physical reality
in line with beliefs. And yet, I couldn't care less whether it's Lisa that gets paid for
collecting an integers worth of information from every door.
I'll go with Harry from Harry Met Sally and skip/dodge the details:
"When you know you want to spend the rest of your life with somebody, you want
the rest of your life to begin as soon as possible".
Terence
-
-----
As I saw it, somebody was going to be working those jobs, and it might as well be me who could do it somewhat efficiently/intelligently and with a critical eye. I know ML will tell me we don't want our government to be efficient >:D but they could either pay me the $9.00/hour or pay it to several loafing idiots (and we had plenty of those in my office) to accomplish the same thing.
This sounds remotely familiar to a theoretical discussion between two guys and a German death camp.
Hans: I don't know how you can live with yourself working as a guard there bashing the heads of Jewish children!
Fritz: As I saw it, somebody was going to be doing that job, and it might as well be me!
OK, OK, it's not nearly the same thing. I'm just pushing the scenario to the extreme.
There are a lot of good people that work for the government. My original post was mainly in response to NOT hearing anything other than "I want a job in Wyoming working for the state so I can get out of here."
That didn't strike me as being terribly freedom or liberty minded. But then again, I'm not the gatekeeper to WY. I'm just sharing MY opinion.
Mac
-
Well, I had a bit of trouble with the government type jobs (my mom works for Washakie County Assessor's office...we do get into mild discussions on occasion, but my hubby and I do keep her on the liberty-minded side...) I think we have more influence on that local gov't - as far as planting seeds go, than if we weren't related to the staff ;)
You are who associate with...which can both ways. You're living in a statist environment now and would like to be in a less statist environment. As long as those who come to Wyoming keep their associations with us liberty-minded folk - I think they will be just fine, regardless of their occupation. My guess is the longer you associate with us "free-er" people - it'll be hard to keep your convictions about your job...but hey, getting here is half the battle. You can change occupations later... ;D ;D ;D
Welcome to the forum, BTW! :)
-
Some other possible food for thought:
So simple, so disturbing http://www.libertyforall.net/?p=5169 (http://www.libertyforall.net/?p=5169)
By Larken Rose
1) Can you delegate to someone else a right which you don’t have? For
example, if you don’t have the right to punch me in the nose (just for
fun), can you GIVE the right to do so to someone else?
The answer is self-evident: no, you can’t. If it’s bad for you to do it,
you can’t make it good for someone else to do it, whether it be murder,
assault, theft, vandalism, etc. If it’s immoral for YOU to do something,
how could you possibly have the ability to make it moral for someone
ELSE to do it?
-
Larken's TMDS posts were what originally got me looking into the ideas of liberty. I thought he was a crazy nut job when I first read his stuff and come to find out, I'm just as much of a crazy nut job.
-
SIGH. I'm about ready to go back to lurking on this site. I try to contribute, but I certainly didn't come here to be compared to a Nazi death camp guard.
-
SIGH. I'm about ready to go back to lurking on this site. I try to contribute, but I certainly didn't come here to be compared to a Nazi death camp guard.
Was I being too subtle, Lisa? I'm glad you were the one who got paid to
collect the number of people in each house. Roll the dice in a different year
and I might have been your co-worker. How much closer to a constitutional
job can you get?
Terence
-
SIGH. I'm about ready to go back to lurking on this site. I try to contribute, but I certainly didn't come here to be compared to a Nazi death camp guard.
I don't think that the word "compare" implies the word "equate". The post clearly stated that this was a reductio ad absurdium.
If ONE post from ONE member makes you think that you are unwelcome here, I feel sorry for your loss. For there will be many future postings that you will disagree with, from many other people. So what?! Please let me repeat louder. SO WHAT?! People will disagree about things and people will miscommunicate and think there is disagreement when there is not.
Such emotion over trifles. To prove and satisfy the point, I invite others to compare me with a Nazi death camp guard. Feel free to use your imagination. And we shall see if I can survive the emotional anguish. :)
-
Yes I understand it was a simile and not meant to be taken literally. That still doesn't mean it made me jump for joy to read it.
I don't think I'm explicitly "unwelcome" here. I just don't see why I should spend my time being compared, jokingly or not, to a death camp guard? That isn't what I came to this forum for. I was simply trying to point out that working for the government is NOT the same as getting welfare.
-
I was simply trying to point out that working for the government is NOT the same as getting welfare.
I agree 100%! And I apologize if my comments made you feel uncomfortable or unwelcomed. That was not my intent.
I was only trying to point out that the mindset of "somebody's got to do the government job and it might as well be me with the paycheck" can lead to awful situations when taken down the road a little bit.
---------
Now as far as that dirty commie rat rhodges is concerned . . . Doesn't "hodges" mean "death camp guard" in German? I'm sure it does!
>:D
Mac
-
Now as far as that dirty commie rat rhodges is concerned . . . Doesn't "hodges" mean "death camp guard" in German? I'm sure it does!
>:D
Mac
Don't know about that, but Chertov does mean Son of the Devil in Russian >:D
-
Don't know about that, but Chertov does mean Son of the Devil in Russian >:D
It's true.
But do you know what Obama means in Swahili? "Hodges." The connection probably has something to do with when the Germans colonized Africa...
-
You guys are good... :)
-
Some other possible food for thought:
So simple, so disturbing http://www.libertyforall.net/?p=5169 (http://www.libertyforall.net/?p=5169)
By Larken Rose
1) Can you delegate to someone else a right which you don’t have? For
example, if you don’t have the right to punch me in the nose (just for
fun), can you GIVE the right to do so to someone else?
The answer is self-evident: no, you can’t. If it’s bad for you to do it,
you can’t make it good for someone else to do it, whether it be murder,
assault, theft, vandalism, etc. If it’s immoral for YOU to do something,
how could you possibly have the ability to make it moral for someone
ELSE to do it?
Yes... we should release ALL PRISONERS into the General Public... That will solve EVERYTHING! ::)
(SARCASM INTENDED)
Please. Yes I will admit there are people in prison who dont belong there. But there are many people in there who you would not want to be walking free to become a danger to you and your loved ones.
-
SIGH. I'm about ready to go back to lurking on this site. I try to contribute, but I certainly didn't come here to be compared to a Nazi death camp guard.
That was a bit rough in my opinion. :-\
I think the problem is too many people here have a fantasy that somehow liberty can exist without government. The fact is, without some sort of government,...all your liberties will simply be robbed away by extreme poverty, rampant crime, constant warfare, and the occasional warlord who suddenly wants to fill the "power vacuum". See: Somalia.
But some foolish people actually DREAM about America being like Somalia. ::)
Thats like admiring a career violent criminal who has gone to jail for rape, murder, theft, and who has never had an honest, stable, job in it's entire life. Somalia is nothing to be admired or held up as any kind of model.... unless you suffer from a SEVERE mental problem.
-
Don't think anyone here is talking about "no government." Most of us want voluntary self government (voluntary association and cooperation) rather than tyranny. I don't see the present government doing a whole lot to prevent poverty, crime (them being the greatest criminals) or constant warfare. Which "government" do you see preventing all this, AR?
And Somalia has problems because the ordinary people are unarmed and unable to defend themselves, not because they have no "government." I'm sure they are quite able to govern their own families, tribes and land if so many outside GOVERNMENTS were not fighting tooth and nail to enslave them.
-
Don't think anyone here is talking about "no government." Most of us want voluntary self government (voluntary association and cooperation) rather than tyranny.
"voluntary self government" is an oxymoron. The word "government" implies the use of coercive force. The phrase "voluntary association" implies the absence of the use of coercive force. The obvious way to tell the difference between the two is to stop paying your taxes (the government term) or donations (the voluntary association term). If it's a voluntary association, you'll live happily ever after. If it's a government, you'll find yourself looking into the barrel of a gun pointed at you by the police who will shoot you if you don't comply with paying their taxes, and resist imprisonment and property confiscation.
So yes, anarchists here at the FSW forums, and in person, do talk about and hope for a Wyoming with "no government", notwithstanding the fact that it is completely unrealistic. To pretend otherwise is less than honest.
-
Self - government = self control. Voluntary association of those who self govern. I see no inconsistency here at all. People all over the planet live this way every single day and always have. Not everyone, of course, and not always.
Or do you require someone to FORCE you to brush your teeth?
-
Ah semantics.
"government" Does that bring to mind the idea of an individual? Not to me. How about jack booted thugs? Yep - that's what I think of when the word "government" is used.
"self government" Yep, that phrase brings up the idea of an individual being able to control one's impulses.
The point is that the phrase "self government" has very little connection to the word "government" as the word was used in the first several posts of this thread, that is until ML changed the discussion.
Bottom line: I'm all for self-government, as are anarchists. But that's not what we were talking about. The discussion was about whether or not FSWers think there should be "no government", which is obviously a reference to the governments that control us - the government named the United States of America and the government named the State of Wyoming. And yes, there are many FSWers who do talk about and hope for a Wyoming with no government.
-
Don't think anyone here is talking about "no government." Most of us want voluntary self government (voluntary association and cooperation) rather than tyranny. I don't see the present government doing a whole lot to prevent poverty, crime (them being the greatest criminals) or constant warfare. Which "government" do you see preventing all this, AR?
And Somalia has problems because the ordinary people are unarmed and unable to defend themselves, not because they have no "government." I'm sure they are quite able to govern their own families, tribes and land if so many outside GOVERNMENTS were not fighting tooth and nail to enslave them.
"Voluntary self government" and "Self government". Yes... no government outside of the individual. ::) That's still "NO GOVERNMENT" in the practical sense. Your just playing around with meaningless semantics.
Murderers, Rapists, and Child molestors aren't suddenly going to spring up into productive members of society and turn away from their evil behaviour, simply because a government doesn't exist. When the government goes away, leaving only "self government", they aren't going to suddenly start regulating themselves. If anything, they will most likely become WORSE...
As for alternatives to government, like local militias, warlords, and private insurance company/security firm conglomerates? If you don't think any of those things will eventually evolve into a government, you have a very VERY poor understanding of history.
-
Don't think anyone here is talking about "no government." Most of us want voluntary self government (voluntary association and cooperation) rather than tyranny. I don't see the present government doing a whole lot to prevent poverty, crime (them being the greatest criminals) or constant warfare. Which "government" do you see preventing all this, AR?
And Somalia has problems because the ordinary people are unarmed and unable to defend themselves, not because they have no "government." I'm sure they are quite able to govern their own families, tribes and land if so many outside GOVERNMENTS were not fighting tooth and nail to enslave them.
Government doesn't eliminate ALL crime, ALL poverty, and ALL warfare... it only mitigates it to a manageable level. What your arguing, that since the government doesn't eliminate ALL Crime, then it's useless. That's a ridiculous argument.
Owning guns isn't some kind of "protective amulet against evil". It's a tool. Sure it ups your chances, but there are MANY circumstances where a gun simply can't help you... We all need to sleep, and we are all human so we can't be on guard 100% of the time. So just because guns aren't 100% effective in preventing crimes being committed against us... does that mean we should just give up firearms ownership because it doesn't protect us ALL The time?
-
Self - government = self control. Voluntary association of those who self govern. I see no inconsistency here at all. People all over the planet live this way every single day and always have. Not everyone, of course, and not always.
Or do you require someone to FORCE you to brush your teeth?
Wow what a jump!
From a government simply policing the streets for predators and thugs and throwing them in prison... to a government forcing us to brush our teeth at night.
-
Ah semantics.
"government" Does that bring to mind the idea of an individual? Not to me. How about jack booted thugs? Yep - that's what I think of when the word "government" is used.
"self government" Yep, that phrase brings up the idea of an individual being able to control one's impulses.
The point is that the phrase "self government" has very little connection to the word "government" as the word was used in the first several posts of this thread, that is until ML changed the discussion.
Bottom line: I'm all for self-government, as are anarchists. But that's not what we were talking about. The discussion was about whether or not FSWers think there should be "no government", which is obviously a reference to the governments that control us - the government named the United States of America and the government named the State of Wyoming. And yes, there are many FSWers who do talk about and hope for a Wyoming with no government.
And the things that they plan to replace government with, will eventually turn into the defacto government.... so you'll be back at square one. Since anarchy will ultimately result in a state forming up again, why not skip the whole anarchy stage and the obvious (to sane people) problems that occur with it.... and simply push for a more restricted government?
-
America being like Somalia
The thing is, you are comparing apples and oranges. Somalies are millions of years behind the curve in evolution! They've never so much as invented a language or the wheel. They must sort themselves out through warfare. A lot of it. And that doesn't mean it will work before they go extinct. I've comtemplated what it would take to fix Oakland for instance. If you armed them and they organized to fight the criminals and drug gangs they would only rise so far as...Mogadishu. Warlords would rule.
The reason that we have race problems here in America or anywhere is that life is inherintly a struggle. Can't be avoided. People are tribal. And sophisticated warlords have banded together and been named Bilderbergers or whatever, and they figured out that you can destabilize an area by diversifying it. The people naturally do what people do. These rascals use these means to upset the country that is in the way or whose resources they covet. A crises has been created and eventually, a nation divided against itself can be destroyed, looted, ruled over. It's patriots who just want freedom under their old constitution can be declared terrorists and eliminated, because look! They are rascists. Or extremists. Or intolerant. Or you name it. And then the have-nots can say "Yeah! It's the white male's fault that we never rose above Mogadishu!"
I say that if you don't like being manipulated by government then you have to stop taking their lies as truth. And since many are so invested in these lies or too cowardly to question them, we have a real problem. A problem that can only be sorted out through very unpleasent means.
Or some sort of separation. And the cycle begins again. If folks don't like the socialist hell they are fleeing by going to Wyoming, they had better be prepared to look at some hard truths. Or our children will have to sort it out. Just like we now have to make the choices we face. With what's on the horizon I figure that if I survive the next two decades it's all gravy anyway. But hey! Life is still good. I've found friends and cammeraderie that I haven't seen since the Marine Corps. I'm excited. Whatever the future holds I pledge to stand by your side and face it. Grim? Only if you've no plan, or friends, or grit. Now God help me when I hit Post. I have a feeling some folks will be horrified.
-
Some seem to want a "government" with at least some monopoly on force, from which (I gather) nobody will be allowed to withdraw or opt out. And they seem to think they can control this thing and keep it limited.
Has never happened in the history of the world, that I know of.
It will be interesting to see how you work that.
-
Some seem to want a "government" with at least some monopoly on force, from which (I gather) nobody will be allowed to withdraw or opt out. And they seem to think they can control this thing and keep it limited.
Has never happened in the history of the world, that I know of.
True. But there is one special feature of the USA that is also unique in history. The basic idea that our governments' powers are those powers that individuals possess (either having been granted by God or by our own humanity, whichever belief system one embraces), having been delegated to the states, some powers of which were then delegated to the feds, is what is unique in the history of mankind. It may be that such uniqueness in the sovereignty aspect of government is what will save us from being yet another government that ends in tyranny. I'm old enough so I'll probably not see an answer to that question in my lifetime, but I'm hoping that our unique ability to alter our government through non-violent means saves us from the slippery slope to tyranny. That's the assumption I'm working on when I spend much of the time of my remaining years focused advancing liberty through the electoral process. It would make me sad to find out that ML is right. :(
-
Back in April of this year, in a wonderfully friendly discussion thread, I posted a couple of articles that addressed some of the “anarchy” concerns. Rather than repeat them, here are the links: (they are all in the same discussion thread, scroll to the top for the full context):
http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php?topic=8428.msg99186#msg99186 (http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php?topic=8428.msg99186#msg99186)
“Anarchy doesn't mean no rules, it means no rulers.”
Then in response to Danl posting at
http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php?topic=8428.msg99248#msg99248 (http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php?topic=8428.msg99248#msg99248)
I posted Security and Justice without government
http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php?topic=8428.msg99301#msg99301 (http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php?topic=8428.msg99301#msg99301)
Perhaps they can shed a different light on the issue, or at least address some points that are often overlooked.
Best regards
Dennis
-
So yes, anarchists here at the FSW forums, and in person, do talk about and hope for a Wyoming with "no government", notwithstanding the fact that it is completely unrealistic. To pretend otherwise is less than honest.
I don't recall actually hearing anyone say or write anything like this (not to say it didn't happen, just that I don't remember it). Perhaps you can give a citation, Don?
Most anarchists, myself included, do not really have plans for Wyoming government. We'd just be happy if they decide (for whatever reason) to leave us alone.
So, also, this is an answer to PatriotAR15. See, we have no aims with regard to the government YOU wish to live under. We don't even bother to vote, or run for office, or campaign, so how could we affect that? All we are concerned with is people using aggression against ourselves. We don't like it, and wish to escape it. You write, The fact is, without some sort of government,...all your liberties will simply be robbed away by extreme poverty, rampant crime, constant warfare, and the occasional warlord who suddenly wants to fill the "power vacuum".
Why should that concern you at all? Other than having the joy of saying "I told you so" if it turns out to work that way? You should have no problem with letting anarchists try anarchy, as it is really none of your business - in exactly the same way the government you live under is none of ours (if it does in fact leave us alone).
-
So yes, anarchists here at the FSW forums, and in person, do talk about and hope for a Wyoming with "no government", notwithstanding the fact that it is completely unrealistic. To pretend otherwise is less than honest.
I don't recall actually hearing anyone say or write anything like this (not to say it didn't happen, just that I don't remember it). Perhaps you can give a citation, Don?
Search the forums for the word "anarchist" and you get 7 pages of results. Search the forums for the word "anarchism" and you get another 2 pages of results.
Most anarchists, myself included, do not really have plans for Wyoming government. We'd just be happy if they decide (for whatever reason) to leave us alone.
Hah! Ain't gonna happen.
...
You should have no problem with letting anarchists try anarchy, as it is really none of your business...
Go for it! ... And how exactly do you propose to get from here to there???
Please, dear reader, do not for one minute believe that folks who are not anarchists are therefore supporters of government. Some might be, but not me. I don't like government, and I wish I lived in some alternate universe where there was only "self government". But that's not reality. The reality is government exists. So, IMO, the question becomes how can government be controlled so as to limit its damage to individuals' liberty. You can either help in the effort to limit government, or you can decide to stay completely out of the fight. Each must decide what is best for himself, and I respect those who just want to be left alone and don't want to lift a finger to help fight against tyranny. However, we who are fighting the fight to try to limit government sure could use some help.
-
Each must decide what is best for himself, and I respect those who just want to be left alone and don't want to lift a finger to help fight against tyranny. However, we who are fighting the fight to try to limit government sure could use some help.
Perhaps the best way to "fight" government is to let it bankrupt itself (clearly underway right now) and to give it no reason to exist. As long as government can point to enemies, it can "justify" taking whatever measures it deems necessary to fight them and "protect" all of its sheep. Without identifiable enemies, government programs become the source of ridicule and discontent, even among the sheep. Go to any airport for evidence. http://tinyurl.com/American-Sheep (http://tinyurl.com/American-Sheep)
Étienne de La Boétie addressed that issue in his essay Ending Tyranny Without Violence Link: http://tinyurl.com/LaBoetie (http://tinyurl.com/LaBoetie)
- Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces.
Ayn Rand addressed the same issue in Atlas Shrugged.
Shades of Atlas Shrugging-->A similar approach is taken by An Open Conspiracy: The Bartleby Project (http://atlasshruggedcelebrationday.com/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=173.0)
- An everyday application of Étienne de La Boétie: Ending Tyranny Without Violence
"I would prefer not to take your test."
The principle has applicability far beyond mere test taking...
Jefferson Mack had some interesting advice in DON'T RUN FOR THE HILLS TO FIGHT FOR FREEDOM* Link: http://tinyurl.com/2b46tl7 (http://tinyurl.com/2b46tl7)
- Frankly, freedom fighters in the hills haven’t been very successful at winning liberty in [the 20th] century.
Never forget that invisible resistance to tyranny is not a strategy for taking over the government.
*Excerpted from pp.89-92, Invisible Resistance to Tyranny: How to Lead a Secret Life of Insurgency in an Increasingly Unfree World, by Jefferson Mack, Paladin Press, 2002.
And last (for this brief list) but not least,
Personal Secession – The Way to Freedom (http://dennisleewilson.com/simplemachinesforum/index.php?topic=580.0)
- PRIMACY OF THE RIGHT TO SECEDE
Personal secession allows for multiple visions of life and living.
Instead of condemning us for not "lifting a finger" and pleading that you "could use some help", perhaps you should consider that WE are waiting for YOU to read some history and the essays above and wake up to the futility and counter-productivity of your aggressive methodology.
Best regards,
Dennis
-
Each must decide what is best for himself, and I respect those who just want to be left alone and don't want to lift a finger to help fight against tyranny. However, we who are fighting the fight to try to limit government sure could use some help.
Perhaps the best way to "fight" government is to let it bankrupt itself (clearly underway right now) and to give it no reason to exist.
I can guarantee you that, if the dollar ceases to have value, the successor government that governs the lands of Wyoming will be far less amenable to individual liberty than that which exists now.
That said, in a previous post I posed the question about how to get to a government-less societyGo for it! ... And how exactly do you propose to get from here to there???
and I take it that your answer to my question is (ta-da) DO NOTHING! If that's your preferred solution to stopping the slide to tyranny, we're all toast.
-
See, you think we are doing nothing. Just like Gandi did nothing. ::)
Well, we have two different prescriptions for dealing with the problem. Neither one has historically been completely successful, and both have had some partial success. I don't necessarily think its a bad thing to have two separate approaches. All it takes is for those who "control" government, including you Don when you finally manage it (good luck, and I mean that sincerely) to leave us anarchists alone.
Hah! Ain't gonna happen.
I could say the same about your campaign to control government. We shall see.
Government is not some alien monster, but just people who face incentives to do things and refrain from doing other things. Perhaps some day the set of incentives they face will include those of not messing with anarchist communities, because it hurts too much, one way or another, when they try. This is more a problem of concentrating anarchists in a community, than anything else.
Search the forums for the word "anarchist" and you get 7 pages of results.
Yes, there are anarchists here. That's not what I was saying. You claimed anarchists 'talk about and hope for a Wyoming with "no government"', as if we want to take over the state and eliminate all government in it. Perhaps there is some talk about generally wanting a place in Wyoming with no government, but I doubt you can find anarchists wanting to eliminate all government from Wyoming, mostly because it makes little sense and is not really anarchist to do so (as we cannot force people who want government to not have it). Since you made the claim, it seems you should be the one to search through those 7 pages to prove what you said.
-
I agree with you Paul except in the part about any new government in Wyoming being worse. It would probably be better and much smaller. The thing about Wyoming is that it is large with a small population. Everyone knows everyone. Your neighbor might be your rep or sherrif. If and when the gloves come off there is no place for people aspiring to power to hide. Like you said. Government is composed of people. People who do things for different reasons. Today they have little fear from the population. But if and when there is a crash of some sorts they will be more afraid for their lives and much less willing to do things that are anti populace.
-
I agree. Except Don said the part about any new government in Wyoming being worse, not me. :)
-
I agree with you Paul except in the part about any new government in Wyoming being worse. It would probably be better and much smaller.
Note that I didn't say "Wyoming government". I said "the successor government that governs the lands of Wyoming". I expect that will be some type of fascist tyranny with headquarters in Washington DC that pretends to still follow the Constitution but doesn't (oops, that's what we have now ;) ).
After the collapse of the dollar, martial law will be declared and jackbooted thugs, possibly with blue hats, will be our "protectors" in Wyoming. Secession would be a good thing in that environment, but the powerful on Wall Street and in Washington, DC recognize that the energy resources in Wyoming and surrounding states are invaluable, so they aren't going to let us go our own way without a fight. Think Sherman's March to the Sea. And that will be the darkest day for the white man in the lands of North America, even darker than 1861-1865. Maybe a better government will arise out of the ashes after the conflagration, as it is the normal cycle of things to get better at some point. However, I doubt that any group of power brokers who control the JBTs would ever again embrace and attempt to implement the idealism of Jefferson, et al. The idea that man is sovereign, and that government is subservient to the rights of man, is a one-time experiment folks, and we'd better work to fix it and hold onto it as tight as we can.
-
And how exactly do you propose to get from here to there??? and I take it that your answer to my question is (ta-da) DO NOTHING! If that's your preferred solution to stopping the slide to tyranny, we're all toast.
OBVIOUSLY you have not bothered to read any of the articles. Invisible resistance to tyranny certainly does NOT consist of doing nothing.
Attempting to CONTROL government means that--in L Neil Smith's famous phrase--"the only way to control the government is to become the government". Some victory over tyranny that is. Meet the new controllers, same as the old controllers. Where is the plan to control the new controllers? Why all the emphasis on controlling other people? That is like waging war in order to end war.
If you want to end war, stop fighting. If you want to end controls, stop trying to control the actions of other people. If you want to end government controls, stop supporting government.
Dennis
P.S. Do NOT make the mistake of thinking that this is a "pacifist" position. Armed resistance in self defense against initiated acts of aggression is justified and should be expected.
-
With ever-increasing budgets and the force of "law" arrayed against you through the
education indoctrination of the "majority," any attempt to restore/protect the rights and sovereignty of individuals outside personal spheres of influence is tilting at windmills.
This fact proves itself everyday both here on the forum and in the meat-world.
Heck "liberty-seeking" folks around these forums won't even agree to the principle that an individual has a right to be left alone (read voluntary involvement) in the next iteration of CON-stitional "do-what-i-say-cause-i-got-a-piece-of-paper" gun-vernment. :-\
I wonder why....and the only answer I come up with is because standing by that basic principle removes the moral high-ground to establish ANY central authority at ANY level to coerce action and accumulate power making an evermore "efficient" system of compliance.
Fix what we currently reside under? Hell no...it was broken in 1789 and all we are seeing today is the final results of the 2nd American Revolution...the constitutional convention.
One-time experiment in the sovereignty of the individual? Nope...the real experiments happen everyday outside of any hall of power or legislature and Don, as you point out, when their fiction of authority and power ultimately collapses, the results will speak for themselves in the hearts of individuals shown through their individual actions on both sides.
Spending time working to fix a broken system, does nothing but waste time you should be using to shore up individual relationships and skills. IMNSHOoc
-
Spending time working to fix a broken system, does nothing but waste time you should be using to shore up individual relationships and skills.
And what "individual relationships" or "skills" should I be working on? FYI, I'm, a 61 year old, overweight, divorced white guy whose eyesight isn't all that hot, and whose children and grand-children live in Illinois and won't leave. What do you suggest?
That was a rhetorical question - thanks but no thanks for your guidance. I'll be ignoring the suggestions you give to me for how I should lead my life.
Instead, I'll be working to change the political power structure in Wyoming, which might possibly help avoid a giant bloodbath in the calamity that will most surely follow the collapse of the dollar. It might not, but neither one of us knows whether what I'm working on will make a difference in a dollar collapse scenario.
To be more specific, here are some examples of the things I hope to have come to reality in the next decade in Wyoming:
1. The ability to legally use precious metals for commerce within the state of Wyoming, along with a bank, either state or privately owned, to facilitate such commerce
2. Weaning Wyoming off of the federal teat - no more child left behind, healthcare mandates, drinking age edicts, land management, etc.
3. Make it legal to manufacture and sell in Wyoming: 100 watt light bulbs, toilets that flush 4+ gallons per flush, shower heads that use lots of water, fully automatic guns, etc.
4. Return control of abortion to the state legislature, as the Constitution says decisions about such affairs are the province of the states, not the feds
5. Return control of drug laws to the state legislature, for the same reason as 4.
6. A state takeover of all NFS and BLM land in Wyoming, along with mineral property rights. The state should then sell off the land to private interests.
These are all things that are doable by a sufficiently independent legislature. Yes, some things (e.g. point 6) will be very much harder than others. So what! Are these things worth trying to accomplish? You betcha!
So, should I learn to shoot a rifle better, or try to accomplish points 1 through 6? As I said before, I've already made my decision, but the reader may now understand my reasoning better.
-
Spending time working to fix a broken system, does nothing but waste time you my time which I am should be using to shore up individual relationships and skills.
Fixed for apparent sensitivities...however good point, since I never pretend to speak for any one but myself, I have clarified my opinion :-\
Getting control of Cheyenne to dictate all your points down to the unwashed masses is your plan...good luck. In the meantime, I will be working to get the unwashed masses (one-by-one) to realize they don't need Cheyenne anymore than Washington DC, and perhaps we'll meet in the middle someday... 8)
Important, necessary skills and relationships reach far beyond just 500 yards of BLM-owned ground...
MANUMIT
-
Spending time working to fix a broken system, does nothing but waste time you should be using to shore up individual relationships and skills.
And what "individual relationships" or "skills" should I be working on? FYI, I'm, a 61 year old, overweight, divorced white guy whose eyesight isn't all that hot, and whose children and grand-children live in Illinois and won't leave. What do you suggest?
That was a rhetorical question - thanks but no thanks for your guidance. I'll be ignoring the suggestions you give to me for how I should lead my life.
Instead, I'll be working to change the political power structure in Wyoming, which might possibly help avoid a giant bloodbath in the calamity that will most surely follow the collapse of the dollar. It might not, but neither one of us knows whether what I'm working on will make a difference in a dollar collapse scenario.
To be more specific, here are some examples of the things I hope to have come to reality in the next decade in Wyoming:
1. The ability to legally use precious metals for commerce within the state of Wyoming, along with a bank, either state or privately owned, to facilitate such commerce
2. Weaning Wyoming off of the federal teat - no more child left behind, healthcare mandates, drinking age edicts, land management, etc.
3. Make it legal to manufacture and sell in Wyoming: 100 watt light bulbs, toilets that flush 4+ gallons per flush, shower heads that use lots of water, fully automatic guns, etc.
4. Return control of abortion to the state legislature, as the Constitution says decisions about such affairs are the province of the states, not the feds
5. Return control of drug laws to the state legislature, for the same reason as 4.
6. A state takeover of all NFS and BLM land in Wyoming, along with mineral property rights. The state should then sell off the land to private interests.
These are all things that are doable by a sufficiently independent legislature. Yes, some things (e.g. point 6) will be very much harder than others. So what! Are these things worth trying to accomplish? You betcha!
So, should I learn to shoot a rifle better, or try to accomplish points 1 through 6? As I said before, I've already made my decision, but the reader may now understand my reasoning better.
What you want to do is just a drop in the bucket compaired to what needs to be done. ANd when you are done will be screwed up just as bad.
Do you honestly believe that the Feds will just let us go? At best instead of oweing the Feds our future we will owe the state. Not much of a trade off there.
-
There's a state women's prison at Lusk, one county south of Weston where several of those of us of the FSW call home [Hi ML!]
I can't tell you what working conditions are like but one pal of mine applied for a position there and I've not yet heard any complaints from him.
I've got my fingers in a project that might keep 10- a dozen of us employed and housed for a few months to a half year, certainly long enough to get relocated and maybe find something else to move on to once the project ends. I try not to count chickens before they hatch, but it looks at least 50-50 possible at this point. Developing.
-
There's a state women's prison at Lusk, one county south of Weston where several of those of us of the FSW call home [Hi ML!]
I can't tell you what working conditions are like but one pal of mine applied for a position there and I've not yet heard any complaints from him.
I've got my fingers in a project that might keep 10- a dozen of us employed and housed for a few months to a half year, certainly long enough to get relocated and maybe find something else to move on to once the project ends. I try not to count chickens before they hatch, but it looks at least 50-50 possible at this point. Developing.
I'm dying to learn more. Are you saying it's going to take 10 or a dozen of us to guard you at the women's prison at Lusk - a few months to a year? Verrrry interesting... :P ::) >:D :-*
-
I'm dying to learn more. Are you saying it's going to take 10 or a dozen of us to guard you at the women's prison at Lusk - a few months to a year? Verrrry interesting... :P ::) >:D :-*
Nah. A pal of mine who has been doing physical rehab work with disabled veterans needs a break and wants to head west, though it's uncertain yet whether he'll eventually light in Wyoming or North Dakota, both place of which he's got applications and opportunities for.
But I've got something a little different in mind, and it doesn't involve either the women's state pen at Lusk nor any kind of Wyoming governmental contracts. More about this as it develops.
-
More about this as it develops.
The coffee's always on and I'm all ears. :)
-
Don, the only problem I see with your plan is incentive. The legislators have no incentive to go along.
I was thinking of giving them some with the Wyoming Liberty Index. Specifically I was hoping to use it to get some opposition running against the worst legislators at the bottom of the list It never happened, and often those legislators would "serve" ::) from year to year drawing no opposition at all.
If you can't put up a credible threat you can't change their behavior.
I'm not saying it can't be done, but it takes more than I was able to bring to the table. Wyoming Liberty Group has the index now, and maybe you can work with them to try unseating these liberty-haters. I was thinking a little publicity would be nice, e.g find the "most liberty-hostile" guy on the list, go into his district, and publicize that he was the worst on the list, and also publicize that you are looking for someone to unseat him.
I am guessing if two or three were unseated via publicity of the Index, all the rest would suddenly become a lot more reasonable.
-
Paul,
There is only one thing that motivates elected officials: getting re-elected.
To get re-elected, a politician needs money and love - money, lots of it, to advertise and spread around, and love in the form of fawning letters to the editor, endorsements by MSM and VIPs, and talk show hosts who lob softballs.
Both money and love are reduced when a politician takes a stand on an issue, any issue, because some portion of the electorate will disagree with his position. So the most expedient approach for all politicians IS TO DO NOTHING. Don't offend anyone. Don't take any position on controversial issues. Few politicians break these cardinal rules of getting re-elected.
My point is that the Wyoming Liberty Index is a wonderful tool to sort out the good guys from the bad guys. Unfortunately, by itself, the Wyoming Liberty Index is not sufficient to get them voted out of office. Easy ballot access is another important part of the puzzle, and that's what the Wyoming Country Party will address. The hardest part is to find good candidates to take on the bad guys. Most who would be successful candidates disdain politics and will not run. It's only an occasional person who steps up to challenge the RINO status quo. In Wyoming, good guys who run against the bad guys in the Republican primary invariably lose. ALL GOP incumbents for state legislature won their primary elections in 2010.
To actually defeat a RINO, you need a good candidate with lots of money. But more than that, you need to increase voters' negative opinions of the incumbent RINO but exposing the RINO's voting record, shady dealing, moral turpitude, or whatever. Yep, it's negative politics, but that's just the way it is, and always has been. If you're not willing to get your hands dirty, you don't belong in politics, and you won't ever have an impact. If you are interested, let's continue this discussion in a new thread in Politics forum titled "The Real Nature of Politics and Politicians".
-
Sounds like that what Don is aiming for is in line with agorist goals... just that they don't go as far. Rather than pooh-pooh it, I'd rather find a way to leverage his efforts toward my goals. His success would make Wyoming a better place for us anarchists, too. After all, it's what he's passionate and dedicated to, and so long as what somebody is passionate about and dedicated to isn't harming me, I'm not going to try to pressure him out of it.
Don, the agorist "do nothing" approach (in case you're not familiar, agorism is basically anarcho-capitalist goals combined with economic rather than political or violent means) is not doing nothing, it is focusing on that which we have direct control over - ourselves. To the extent it looks at "smashing the state", it is by starving it of access to our resources, but more importantly, its about producing and keeping our own resources regardless of the wider socio-political consequences. Could a financial crisis bring a fascist strongman to power? Sure, maybe, but we can't predict every possible outcome from billions of concrete factors, all we have to go on is principle, on taking the long view and trusting that doing what is right will be more likely to lead to beneficial outcomes than not doing what is right would. And if the fascist dictator is the inevitable outcome of a financial crisis, then we'd better get ready for one, because the government is past the point of no return in creating one all by itself, without our help.
-
Sounds like that what Don is aiming for is in line with agorist goals... just that they don't go as far.
Nope. Not at all the same goals. IMO, agorism/voluntarism/anarchism is the polar opposite of the ideals of Jefferson, et al. Constitutionalists and agorists/anarchists agree on only one minor point: they both want less government. Beyond that minor agreement, they have nothing in common.
His success would make Wyoming a better place for us anarchists, too.
True, but would you feel guilty of getting a free ride on the back of those who will have worked hard to limit government power through political action?
Each individual makes his/her own decision as to whether or not to join the battle to shrink government. I respect your absolute right to do as you please and not join the battle, but I am disheartened by each such decision, particularly by folks associated with a freedom movement such as the FSW.
Let's continue this discussion over in the new thread in the Politics forum - http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php?topic=11503.0 (http://www.fundamentalsoffreedom.com/fswforum/index.php?topic=11503.0)