The Mission Advancement Framework - A new site initiative!

[r3volution 3.0]

I think we can all agree that both anarchists and minarchists need to be made welcome?

We need every hand on deck on if we're going to have a chance of success.

Differences of opinion need to be acknowledged, but we have to be willing to agree to disagree and work toward common goals.

 

[idiom]

Straw man. In fact, many who promote non-participation or who simply do not promote the electoral process do not make this argument at all, and even discredit this as a valid argument against voting.

But if you want to alienate anti-statists over your own biases, feel free. I'm sure that helped Rand tons, too.

What ever the argument is, promotion of non-participation results in .... less participation.

I think we can all agree that both anarchists and minarchists need to be made welcome?

We need every hand on deck on if we're going to have a chance of success.

Differences of opinion need to be acknowledged, but we have to be willing to agree to disagree and work toward common goals.

Those common goals likely need to be a lot simpler than any of us would like.

There are several participants on this forum who would like to execute people for collecting firewood during an arbitrary 24 period each week.

The big tent is pretty damn big.

 

[Cabal]

What ever the argument is, promotion of non-participation results in .... less participation.

Less participation in an election? Maybe, though I'm not even sure that's the case. As far as I can tell, Rand's abysmal showing wasn't the result of a massive upswell in promotion of non-participation, which, if anything, has subsided substantially since 2012 seeing as how a large contingent of this forum's anti-statist demographic is no longer active here, thanks, at least in part, to attitudes like your own.

But even if it is, resources are finite. Promotion of non-participation in an election isn't promotion of non-participation in general. I'd even hazard to say that those who might not promote electoral participation would probably still promote primary participation for a candidate that they could feel good about getting behind, if only to elevate them to nominee status, or whatever their personal reasons may be. This was very much the case with Ron Paul, it seems.

 

[Bryan]

I think setting up a definition of liberty as hardcore anarchism will be the end of this project.

It won't. As r3volution 3.0 suggest, it will be open to all schools of thought. Key bedrock parts should be strictly objective however.

It needs to be embedded somewhere that our goals are to utilize democracy, improve the democratic process

I would consider these points to be in-scope to our defined Mission Statement. Consider that democracy is just a group of people seeking common ground.

Rothbardian libertarianism is just the most recent and not the only philosophical base for it. Don't make it the only faction that counts.

It won't be.

Thanks! Good input.

 

[Bryan]

Also there are subjects that liberty lovers are still divided on, the major one, abortion.

Other factions have used this topic to fracture and derail our movement.

I wonder if the best path is to suss out the final stance on this, or put it on the back burner untill more basic concepts are accepted and defined.

The most important effort on issues such as abortion is to develop logical arguments for all viewpoints and present them. From there we can characterize ways the issues can be practically managed within society and discuss the benefits and consequences of any course of action.

Thanks!

 

[The Northbreather]

The concept of sovereignty over ones consciousness is also fundamental and I believe it precedes many of the other "rights".

It would be easier imho to discuss ideas if everyone could recognize that one has complete ownership and Freedom in ones thoughts and emotions.

Every person is free to think about or believe it what he or she may without restriction.

A person has complete control of their state of mind,chemically enhanced or not, COMPLETE sovereignty.

 

[idiom]

On topics like Abortion the Ron Paul platform worked by giving it a huge PASS.

Ron Paul had a very definite personal position, but the political one was "Leave it to the States". Passing the buck on this and many issues maybe isn't as philosophically satisfying, but its better governance in the main.

If anything this devolution and decentralization of federal power is a more achievable and unifying goal than coming up with makes-everybody-happy objectives for the Federal government.

 

[idiom]

The concept of sovereignty over ones consciousness is also fundamental and I believe it precedes many of the other "rights".

It would be easier imho to discuss ideas if everyone could recognize that one has complete ownership and Freedom in ones thoughts and emotions.

Every person is free to think about or believe it what he or she may without restriction.

A person has complete control of their state of mind,chemically enhanced or not, COMPLETE sovereignty.

So no jail?

 

[The Northbreather]

So no jail?

No policing of thoughts or consciousness or altered consciousness?

 

[Peace&Freedom]

On topics like Abortion the Ron Paul platform worked by giving it a huge PASS.

Ron Paul had a very definite personal position, but the political one was "Leave it to the States". Passing the buck on this and many issues maybe isn't as philosophically satisfying, but its better governance in the main.

If anything this devolution and decentralization of federal power is a more achievable and unifying goal than coming up with makes-everybody-happy objectives for the Federal government.

"Leave it to the states" is not passing the buck on abortion, it's restoring the issue back to where it belongs. Removing an issue as a centralizing concern is an excellent counter to the statist impulse. This devolution away from federalizing everything is indeed more unifying than the one-size-fits-all policymaking of monolithic philosophers.

 

[idiom]

No policing of thoughts or consciousness or altered consciousness?

If the altered consciousness comes from physical inducements rather than say serious meditation, then you want personal physical sovereignty.

 

[HVACTech]

I think we can all agree that both anarchists and minarchists need to be made welcome?

We need every hand on deck on if we're going to have a chance of success.

Differences of opinion need to be acknowledged, but we have to be willing to agree to disagree and work toward common goals.

I am going to have to disagree here. lets define our terms.

"anarchism (i.e., no state) versus minarchism (i.e., a minimal state)"

you are a smart guy. is it REALLY possible, for anarchy to stop. a "state" (government) from forming?
are the terms "state" and "government" synonyms? yes. they are.
since the "state" is in fact, the main threat to Liberty... how do anarchists propose to stop people from forming them? both now and in the future?

the answer to this question. belongs in the foundational knowledgebase. eh?

 

[idiom]

I am going to have to disagree here. lets define our terms.

"anarchism (i.e., no state) versus minarchism (i.e., a minimal state)"

you are a smart guy. is it REALLY possible, for anarchy to stop. a "state" (government) from forming?
are the terms "state" and "government" synonyms? yes. they are.
since the "state" is in fact, the main threat to Liberty... how do anarchists propose to stop people from forming them? both now and in the future?

the answer to this question. belongs in the foundational knowledgebase. eh?

This is exactly what we need to rope in. I think the An-cap theory base has huge holes, but if they want to make the federal government very very small and I want the same, then we need to be able to agree on that without the why of it blowing us apart.


However a bottom up local then state approach, which I think will be most effective, needs a more fleshed out platform, at least initially and can't pass the buck up to the Fed.

Does anybody here not support Devolution? Can we safely leave the execution of gays and babies to the states?

Second one up, does anyone not support increase representation at the state level? i.e. 1 state assembly person to 30,000 represented?

Both of these are structural reform ideas designed to decentralize power. That should make everyone here happy I hope.

 

[VIDEODROME]

Would it be simpler to pick an existing Political Party to get behind and just adopt their platform? Just a thought this could save you time from trying to reinvent the wheel. This place could just align with the Libertarian Party or perhaps the Constitution Party.

Unless this will be about more than just backing candidates, but almost a research foundation? Or how to achieve Liberty outside of politics like going 'Off Grid'?

 

[Dr.3D]

I am going to have to disagree here. lets define our terms.

"anarchism (i.e., no state) versus minarchism (i.e., a minimal state)"

you are a smart guy. is it REALLY possible, for anarchy to stop. a "state" (government) from forming?
are the terms "state" and "government" synonyms? yes. they are.
since the "state" is in fact, the main threat to Liberty... how do anarchists propose to stop people from forming them? both now and in the future?

the answer to this question. belongs in the foundational knowledgebase. eh?

Maybe the problem isn't as big as one might think it is.
Why don't you post a poll and ask what ideology those remaining here have? Should be interesting to see what percentage of folks here are "anarchists."

 

[Bryan]

Would it be simpler to pick an existing Political Party to get behind and just adopt their platform? Just a thought this could save you time from trying to reinvent the wheel. This place could just align with the Libertarian Party or perhaps the Constitution Party.

Backing a political party is a personal decision and it's not something that can be collectively pushed for. As well, the Mission of the site does not align with providing wholesale support to any party however we certainly do support members getting involved in parties.

The wheel that is being defined here has not been invented to within anything that I have ever seen (per outlined requirements and value). Scoping out a party platform is an entirely different effort with different objectives than the stated goals of this initiative. We can certainly learn from the platforms however.

Unless this will be about more than just backing candidates, but almost a research foundation? Or how to achieve Liberty outside of politics like going 'Off Grid'?

The three goals of this initiative are more about research to develop something as stated in the OP. There will be no bias to being inside or outside of politics, there is room for all sides.

Thanks! Good input.

 

[Bryan]

the answer to this question. belongs in the foundational knowledgebase. eh?

Exactly. Establishing a linguistics basis will be critical. We'll also have to make sure we state when words have been used to have different meaning outside of our scope.

 

[idiom]

Would it be simpler to pick an existing Political Party to get behind and just adopt their platform? Just a thought this could save you time from trying to reinvent the wheel. This place could just align with the Libertarian Party or perhaps the Constitution Party.

Unless this will be about more than just backing candidates, but almost a research foundation? Or how to achieve Liberty outside of politics like going 'Off Grid'?

The machinery of 'democracy' in the US is heavily anti-third parties. The second problem is peoples experience getting thrashed as third party has left them burnt out, so even if it was easy a lot would not go over.

I suggest that by winning at the state level we can change the machinery a lot at the local level. Make it easy for small interests to get in and hard for big interest to corral.

1. Devolution > Power transferred to the states
2. Increased representation > target of 30-60k constituents per rep
3. De-embed party machinery. > States stop regulating primaries, remove voter party registration, ease ballot access for third parties and independents, remove Gop and Dem perks/funding

These are not platform items, they are keys to liberty. They weaken the shackles of government.

 

[HVACTech]

Maybe the problem isn't as big as one might think it is.
Why don't you post a poll and ask what ideology those remaining here have? Should be interesting to see what percentage of folks here are "anarchists."

we are heading in a new direction. and seeking truth.
in the grand scheme of things. anarchists are a very small demographic.

"Liberty dies, when it is undefended"
HVACTech.

if anarchy cannot propose a way to defend Liberty..
then it needs to be discarded as a viable approach. it is an anachronism.
that is the reason our founders discarded it. eh?

 

[Dr.3D]

we are heading in a new direction. and seeking truth.
in the grand scheme of things. anarchists are a very small demographic.

"Liberty dies, when it is undefended"
HVACTech.

if anarchy cannot propose a way to defend Liberty..
then it needs to be discarded as a viable approach. it is an anachronism.
that is the reason our founders discarded it. eh?

I anxiously await your POLL. I know there are others here who would like to see the results.