Luigi Mangione

[Captain Red Eye]

This town isn't the town of Grafton, NH. It's a different town in the county of Grafton, NH
There is a town of Grafton NH, and a county of Grafton, NH, but this picture is inaccurate.

That should leave you to ponder what else is inaccurate in this entire poorly researched article?

Of course, maybe you will vote the inaccuracies in the article to be true, since you seem to like democracy when it delivers what you want, but not when it delivers what you dislike.

Not lying about the wrong town in the picture either. I think it may be Bethlehem, NH, but I'm not 100% on that. I know it ISN'T the town of Grafton, NH though.

Edit - It looks a little like Wolfeboro. NH, but it looks nothing like the town of Grafton, NH.

 

[Eltitoguay]

Grafton, New Hampshire - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Free Town Project :​

In 2004, Grafton became the focus for Libertarians as part of the Free Town Project (a single-town version of the Free State Project). One of the goals was to advocate for legal changes.[13] Grafton's appeal as a favorable destination was due to its absence of zoning laws and a then-low property tax rate.[14][13] John Babiarz, a Grafton resident and prominent member of the Libertarian Party, encouraged libertarian people to move there.[15][16]

During this time, the town's population grew by about 200 people (about 20%); nearly all of the newcomers were men.[14] Project participants did not find themselves as welcome as they had hoped, but they voted in changes including a 30% reduction in the town's already small budget.[14] This resulted in eliminating funding to the county's senior-citizens council, town offices going unheated during the winter, poorly maintained roads filled with potholes, and the Grafton Police Department being reduced to one officer (the police chief), who said he was unable to answer calls for service as the town had no money to repair the one police vehicle left.[17] Other issues were inconsistent basic public services, such as trash collection.[15][14] The libertarian newcomers additionally increased the town's costs by filing lawsuits against it in attempts to set various legal precedents.[14]

Example of a bear-resistant trash container, with an American black bear climbing on top of it. Some libertarian newcomers to Grafton refused to buy bear-resistant containers.

The project has been associated with an increase in the number and aggressiveness of black bears in town, including entering homes, mauling people, and eating pets.[14] A single, definitive cause for the abnormal behavior of the bears has not been proven, but it may be due to libertarian residents who refuse to buy and use bear-resistant containers, who do not dispose of waste materials (such as feces) safely, or who deliberately put out food to attract the bears to their own yards, without caring how this affected other people.[14]

After a rash of lawsuits from Free Towners, an influx of sex offenders, an increase of crime, problems with bold local bears, and the first murders in the town's history, the Libertarian project ended in 2016.[13][14][18]

 

[Captain Red Eye]

Oh look it's a picture of Robinson Crusoe and his man servant Friday floating across the Pacific ocean on their raft crafted out of native vinyl and aluminum trees!

Look carefully at their 17th century muskets they 3d printed to ward off zombies and water grizzlies trying to eat the shit right out of their assholes!

 

[Microbeman]

Even if there were no such thing as fiat money / forcibly controlled money, value systems approximating
"money" emerge.

In jail, one person might value the bag of greasy chips that comes with the jail lunch, more than his orange,
Another prisoner might value the orange more than his bag of chips.
A mutual trade where nobody is forced can then happen and both parties get what they want.

It's one way to get your vitamin c even when in jail.

I hope the voice text works out for you!

Just so you know, I'm in favor of homeless people homesteading so-called government open land.

So no poor people or poor people?

 

[Captain Red Eye]

@Eltitoguay

Hey look another picture that isn't what it says it is.

That man isn't that kid's dad. I know who both of them are and aren't.

Also, the Valley News paper is strongly biased against Libertarians, gee, that wouldn't taint the perspective would it?

Keep going though. I may not be able to keep replying, since I'm fighting off bears trying to eat my ass.

 

[Captain Red Eye]

So no poor people or poor people?

The difficulty most of us face is we are mired in systems that none of us created. Most of the "allowed solutions" don't permit systemic change.

Present paradigm system isn't designed to foster peace or protect equal rights.
it's designed to consolidate power and pits people against each other. I think you might already know that, but it's worth mentioning.

That complicates how to make corrections. One thing we can do now, is to try to honor the consent of other people, it won't fix every problem, but if our default is not sanctifying the violation of each individual, we have something to build on. I am perfectly okay with people being socialists, just don't place your values on others by forcing them to be that.

Consider researching Panarchy. It's the idea that peaceful individuals should have more choices.

 

[Microbeman]

The difficulty most of us face is we are mired in systems that none of us created. Most of the "allowed solutions" don't permit systemic change.

Present paradigm system isn't designed to foster peace or protect equal rights.
it's designed to consolidate power and pits people against each other. I think you might already know that, but it's worth mentioning.

That complicates how to make corrections. One thing we can do now, is to try to honor the consent of other people, it won't fix every problem, but if our default is not sanctifying the violation of each individual, we have something to build on. I am perfectly okay with people being socialists, just don't place your values on others by forcing them to be that.

Consider researching Panarchy. It's the idea that peaceful individuals should have more choices.

Sure I get that but in what I outlined where value is placed sporadically on produce or services supplied and then according to need would we not be able to say that there would not be any poor people and would be no need to form charities to send kids to school

 

[Eltitoguay]

...And when they have disarmed you and embarrassed you dialectically (a very easy thing), close your eyes very tightly, simply and deny reality: it is not that you are going to look better; It's just that you can't give more of yourself...

COMMUNICATION FROM THE PARADISE BAND OF THE ULTRANEOLIBERAL CAPITALISM :
Given the campaign of slander about our passage (on Attila's horse) through Grafton (NH-USA), we must denounce that everything is a conspiracy and a covert operation and false campaign by supporters of the Social State...

...who dressed up as a bear to destroy based on true natural anarchy and Darwinism, our Paradise...

 

[Microbeman]

I also support the use of government land for housing and gardening etc but more than that I would suggest that there would be no such thing as vacant government land. Hempy mentioned that he was projecting that this might be something that would occur with the Trump administration, that government land would be available for homeless people housing and also for growing crops . that would be interesting if that happens. It would certainly swing my mind a little bit about Trump.

 

[Captain Red Eye]

Sure I get that but in what I outlined where value is placed sporadically on produce or services supplied and then according to need would we not be able to say that there would not be any poor people and would be no need to form charities to send kids to school

I share your concern for poor people, but some people are in bad circumstances because of the bad choices they made. I differentiate between those unable to help themselves from those unwilling to help themselves.
I SOMETIMES help people that should have known better, but I more often help people who can't help themselves.

Even if there were an absence of a money system, it's still not rightful to force one person to hand over the fruit of their labor to others simply based on the others wants and needs.

What if you worked really hard all day in your garden and I fucked off online all day refuting inaccurate articles and bloviating as I often do, but then when I got hungry I demanded you to deliver me 1/2 the produce from your garden?

Charity is a voluntary action on behalf of the person doing it. When it's forced it's a form of theft, not charity.
Nobody has the right to force other people to work on their behalf. That contains the germ of slavery.

 

[Microbeman]

I share your concern for poor people, but some people are in bad circumstances because of the bad choices they made. I differentiate between those unable to help themselves from those unwilling to help themselves.
I SOMETIMES help people that should have known better, but I more often help people who can't help themselves.

Even if there were an absence of a money system, it's still not rightful to force one person to hand over the fruit of their labor to others simply based on the others wants and needs.

What if you worked really hard all day in your garden and I fucked off online all day refuting inaccurate articles and bloviating as I often do, but then when I got hungry I demanded you to deliver me 1/2 the produce from your garden?

Charity is a voluntary action on behalf of the person doing it. When it's forced it's a form of theft, not charity.
Nobody has the right to force other people to work on their behalf. That contains the germ of slavery.

A lot of what you say is true however with what I was saying there is a possibility that there would be no poor people either with money or without money there just would be an absence of poor people and therefore no charity necessary in that regard. There have been some indigenous communities that have functioned this way. I might tell you a good story for my lunch.

 

[Captain Red Eye]

...And when they have disarmed you and embarrassed you dialectically (a very easy thing), close your eyes very tightly, simply and deny reality: it is not that you are going to look better; It's just that you can't give more of yourself...

COMMUNICATION FROM THE PARADISE BAND OF THE ULTRANEOLIBERAL CAPITALISM :
Given the campaign of slander about our passage (on Attila's horse) through Grafton (NH-USA), we must denounce that everything is a conspiracy and a covert operation and false campaign by supporters of the Social State...
View attachment 19127706
...who dressed up as a bear to destroy based on true natural anarchy and Darwinism, our Paradise...
View attachment 19127708

Sorry no time to reply. Busy fighting off bears now!!

 

[Captain Red Eye]

A lot of what you say is true however with what I was saying there is a possibility that there would be no poor people either with money or without money there just would be an absence of poor people and therefore no charity necessary in that regard. There have been some indigenous communities that have functioned this way. I might tell you a good story for my lunch.

For trade to be valid, it should be voluntary and consensual amongst all involved parties without duress or threats against disinterested people.

I will trade you an orange and half a sandwich for your story

Best I can do.

 

[Captain Red Eye]

It would certainly swing my mind a little bit about Trump.

My problem with Trump, is I've seen no evidence of him having consistent principles, which means he's just as likely to have ideas which hurt as ideas which can help.

I don't think "government land" was justly acquired, so I don't think it's land Trump can rightfully give away, since it's not his or by justice the property of the government to begin with.

Best he could do is stay out of the way and not harm people trying to build a place to homestead on unoccupied vacant land.

 

[armedoldhippy]

I don't think "government land" was justly acquired

explain this please. i'm retired, i'll wait while you gather your thoughts on the subject...

 

[Captain Red Eye]

explain this please. i'm retired, i'll wait while you gather your thoughts on the subject...

To acquire something justly requires using just means or the acquisition is not valid. Taking something that is already owned, is not a just means to use. It's theft.

In the case of land, it should be unowned already or unoccupied / unowned land without people already living there with a higher claim to the property by virtue of first use / current occupation.

I shouldn't be able to waltz into your house, call you a savage, kill you or force you to move and plant a flag in your front yard and then declare I not only own your house now, but I own the entire continent from sea to shining sea without checking to see if somebody else already owns all or some of what I'm claiming. That wouldn't be very nice to do.

If you don't believe that tell me where you live, I'll form a government and come take your house. You can keep the truck though, I already have an old one I like.

If you acquired your land justly and we made a consenting agreement, I could buy or trade for your land on terms we agreed to and acquire it that way. That would be using a just (justice related) means.

If you didn't want to sell me your land that was acquired using just means, I should mosey on down the road and leave you alone.

 

[Eltitoguay]

A lot of what you say is true ...

You're sure? ...Because strings like these, repeated ad nauseam, are totally false:
"What if you worked really hard all day in your garden and I fucked off online all day refuting inaccurate articles and bloviating as I often do, but then when I got hungry I demanded you to deliver me 1/2 the produce from your garden? "

Lies like this were long ago refuted in other threads.
In the Social State (whether social-democratic like where I live, or socialist, or socialist to comunism), "HE WHO DOES NOT WORK, WHEN ABLE TO WORK, DOES NOT EAT."

Another thing is that it is considered that the children in your care should not suffer the consequences of your actions, if these undermine their rights (to live and grow with a minimum of dignity and options for the future).

I mean, you can go to hell and starve, or go to the forest to survive: but your children are not going to lose their right to food, housing, health and education.


And I ask again: Can anyone imagine this bunch of illiterate people managing an airport or hospital system? A panda that almost destroyed a simple village with its "management"?

And they are not at all Anarchists: they are simply a bunch that follows the proclamation of some ultra-neoliberal capitalists, who heard about Darwinism, and apply it to society when they do not even understand how it works in real ecosystems: Capitalist ultraneoliberalism + social pseudo-Darwinism.

 

[Captain Red Eye]

You're sure? ...Because strings like these, repeated ad nauseam, are totally false:
"What if you worked really hard all day in your garden and I fucked off online all day refuting inaccurate articles and bloviating as I often do, but then when I got hungry I demanded you to deliver me 1/2 the produce from your garden? "

Lies like this were long ago refuted in other threads.
In the Social State (whether social-democratic like where I live, or socialist, or socialist to comunism), "HE WHO DOES NOT WORK, WHEN ABLE TO WORK, DOES NOT EAT."

View attachment 19127982

Another thing is that it is considered that the children in your care should not suffer the consequences of your actions, if these undermine their rights (to live and grow with a minimum of dignity and options for the future).

I mean, you can go to hell and starve, or go to the forest to survive: but your children are not going to lose their right to food, housing, health and education.


And I ask again: Can anyone imagine this bunch of illiterate people managing an airport or hospital system? A panda that almost destroyed a simple village with its "management"?

And they are not at all Anarchists: they are simply a bunch that follows the proclamation of some ultra-neoliberal capitalists, who heard about Darwinism, and apply it to society when they do not even understand how it works in real ecosystems: Capitalist ultraneoliberalism + social pseudo-Darwinism.

That's an exciting story and stuff, but the thing you haven't really answered is whether or not you will gain acceptance to your idea by people voluntarily adopting it or not.

Also, why would "these people" have to run an airport? Why couldn't the people that are good at running airports not keep on running airports? In my "utopia" that makes sense.

I've mentioned a few bazillion times, my ideas are voluntary human interactions are better than involuntary ones.

I don't want to tell others what they must do, with one exception which "society" has already accepted, at least for normal non godlike people " don't violate the consent of other people".
Except I'm serious about it and don't omit certain special people from that caveat.

What follows from that I don't need to paint an elaborate picture for how other people will run their own lives, nor should I. No master plans I need to force you into. Don't even care if you want to be a Commie, do care if you insist I'm a Commie with you.

Some people already know to focus on their own lives and not try to command how others must live.

So, again, what is the means you will use to gain acceptance to your Commie utopia?

Is it voluntary or mandatory? Would you please answer that simple question?

 

[Eltitoguay]

...And all those "I'll trade you a bag of potatoes for an orange", @Microbeman, are simple demagogic make-up, not to address the issue of major transactions, such as:
"If you don't have other assets/gold/money/or whatever , enough to pay what it costs in our paradise to give your children university studies, or to cure your wife of cancer... you can pay us with a kidney and a healthy cornea..." :

Remember:
"They wanted the right to (...), the trafficking of human body parts, ,the right to engage in consensual cannibalism, .... "

Utopía libertaria. Viaje al pueblo estadounidense donde se aplicó el experimento anarcocapitalista de la libertad “total”

Grafton está ubicado en New Hampshire, Estados Unidos; en 2004, alrededor de 200 militantes libertarios se mudaron allí, ante la desafiante reticencia de la población local

www.lanacion.com.ar

 

[Captain Red Eye]

...And all those "I'll trade you a bag of potatoes for an orange", @Microbeman, are simple demagogic make-up, not to address the issue of major transactions, such as: "If you don't have other assets/gold/money/or whatever , enough to pay what it costs in our paradise to give your children university studies, or to cure your wife of cancer... you can pay us with a kidney and a healthy cornea..." :

"They wanted the right to (...) the trafficking of human body parts, ,the right to engage in consensual cannibalism... "

Utopía libertaria. Viaje al pueblo estadounidense donde se aplicó el experimento anarcocapitalista de la libertad “total”

Grafton está ubicado en New Hampshire, Estados Unidos; en 2004, alrededor de 200 militantes libertarios se mudaron allí, ante la desafiante reticencia de la población local

www.lanacion.com.ar

You persistently try to herd me into being a crony capitalist for the purposes of your rant. Cool, show me another bear picture and keep avoiding the obvious difference between us.

I'm not a crony capitalist. I'm a voluntaryist that thinks you should be able to run your own life as long as you reciprocate with other people. Simple. Direct.


AGAIN, l ask you, is inclusion in your Commie utopia voluntary or mandatory?

Why are you reluctant to discuss the means you will use to achieve your goals?