As for people moving to multiple states for more liberty, it doesn't make sense to me. People have been trying that strategy for 100s of years in the US and government grows every year. It seems that the strategy is proven without any doubt to not work as of now. However, the strategy of moving to just one state is very new, and the early evidence suggests it works.
If you want to encourage people to try a failed strategy, that is your business. I'm not about encouraging people to seek failure. My understanding of the Wyoming project is that there is 1 to a few additional political activists in WY because of FSW. I know of only one additional political activist in MT because of the movement to encourage liberty activists to move to MT. Of course, if a person lives near the CA/NV and wants to stay in the CA area but also increase their freedom, by all means, move to NV. I have the same advice for the people in MN near the MN/SD border or in WA near the WA/ID border. I'm not against moving for additional liberty, but without a whole lot of other people doing it, I think it is a short term solution and will only result in a minimal gain of increased freedom.
If someone is serious about wanting to be a liberty activist or wants to do something (liberty related and) great with their life, it makes sense to move to New Hampshire. We have tried for 100s of years to create 50 free states and we keep failing at that strategy more and more every year. People have been leaving CA and NY for decades because they have so little freedom. If anything, it's helped make AZ, NM, NV, WY, MT, WA, OR, ID, VT and FL less free. The idea of the FSP has been around for around 10 years. People have implemented or copied the idea in NH, WY and MT. Early results look positive in NH. NH is the freest state with the system of government closest to the people. Keene, NH is the liberty media capital of the world. The liberty movement in NH has had more press over the last few years than the liberty movements in the 49 other states several times over. There are more libertarian legislators in NH than the rest of the US combined. By far, more legislators in NH endorsed Ron Paul than in any other state and he did
far better in NH than any of the other primary states (4.5% of the population in NH voted for Ron Paul vs. 1.7% in SC and 1.2% in MI, the next highest states) even though he had competition from 43 other candidates in NH. NH is the #2 most economically free state and it is #11 for personal freedom.
If you personally don't want to move to NH, that is fine. You don't have to move. It isn't for everyone. However, my theory is that if we keep outshining the other states for a few additional years, more and more people will get on board with the idea and move to NH. I look at it like a snowball. The better we do, the more people move. The more people move, the better we do. People in other states have already started to copy what we do. As NH becomes more and more free, I think more and more people will copy our great ideas.
You have heard of
http://paulville.org/ right? The idea is to create a new place for Ron Paul supporters. Guess what, the website is dead and has been for years. Have you heard of Grafton, NH? It's the most success community in the US when it comes to becoming a pro-liberty community. Many of the elected officials are pro-liberty. It is only a matter of time before the majority of the officials on all of the town boards are pro-liberty. If a few years, it will be similar, but far better, than what the creators of Paulville had in mind. Of course, it wasn't created from scratch. It is a real town where the voters elect Ron Paul supporting Democrats and Republicans to various town positions. In a few years, it will be the success that people dreamed of for years.
