We need our own state.

[crazyfingers]

Only a couple of problems. First of all it is surrounded by several states. Secondly, judging by the elections, it is very pro-war. Thirdly, it has a fairly large population-per-square-mile ratio.

1. What state is not "surrounded by several states" and why does this matter?
2. It is not pro-war. It is the only state to vote for Bush in 2000 and against him in 2004. Both Republican Congressman were kicked out in 2006 largely on the war issue. Granted McCain is an exception, but most people are grossly misinformed of his actual beliefs (this isn't exclusive to NH unfortunately).
3. I'm not really sure what you mean by this, but NH has a fairly small population. At least small enough where a large group of commited activists can make a big difference. The north country is very sparsely populated if that is your thing.

Edit: This was already discussed and debated for many months by the FSP people. I'm not saying people here should just accept it at face value, but instead that they should give serious consideration to the many reasons why NH was chosen. No location will ever please everyone, or even a majority of people. But if this is going to work there needs to be compromise -- which I know is tough for libertarians!

 

[EastWindRain]

Why doesn't somebody make a poll similar to below?

Which state do you feel would be the ideal location for separation?

1. Texas
2. Vermont/New Hampshire
3. Washington State

 

[LibertiORDeth]

Let me clarrify why I am proposing Brewster and Presidio counties in SW Texas. Again, we need to get a couple of counties to secede and then form our own state. (I use the word "state" more in the sense of "nation" here.)

Ideally, those counties should be:

1. Very low popluation deonsity (these 2 counties have less than 10 people per square mile.)
2. Be on the border. (These 2 are on the border with Mexico.)
3. Be ideally suited for defense or evasion. (These 2 counties looks like ideal terrain for those purposes. Bordered by a foreign nation on three sides, very mountainous terrain.)
4. Have an existing population that is not totally ideologically dissimilar from ours.

With an existing population of only 15,000, we just need 15-20,000 people to move in, and we will have something we've only ever dreamed of since the socialists took ours away--a country of our own!

Nobody would take a county seriously.

 

[burningfur]

If all else fails we could go buy an island, sovereign nation.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

http://www.privateislandsonline.com/boipeba-island.htm

$2,463 per acre. Also it is in South America.

 

[tpreitzel]

We're not going to take over jack. Look at how much of a failure the NH free state project was. Best thing we can do is find a place that we'd rather be when the coming collapse or dictatorship comes.


Myself, I'm looking for wide open space/wilderness to hide out in. A place where caves, lakes, and rivers abound.


[edit] BTW. I love hot weather. I want to move back to San Diego. I don't want to live in MT but I'm looking to survive the SHTF scenerio that is coming. Therefore, It's MT for me.

Montana has quite the history of disaffected people moving there, e.g. FreeMen, etc. The climate is tolerable and the topography is quite varied since it includes the Continental Divide. Psychologically, regardless of what the majority here want and for the aforementioned reason, your average American will think MONTANA when the going gets really rough. Under dire conditions, the influx into Montana is going to happen regardless of the preferences stated here. The key is to recognize this fact and get ahead of the rush.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

6.56 square miles off the coast of Brazil for only $10.35 million.

http://www.privateislandsonline.com/boipeba-island.htm

This is the right size. If everyone gets 2 acres we have room for 2100 families--a population of 8-10,000! If we get 2100 people commited, that would be just $4,928 a piece. Then buidling costs...Not bad!

I posted this too, before I read yours

 

[burningfur]

http://www.privateislandsonline.com/boipeba-island.htm

$2,463 per acre. Also it is in South America.

If we can raise $20 million, we should be able to moneybomb a 500 acre island.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

Here is an even larger Brazilian Island for sale. 11.6 square miles for just $4.25 million.

At 2 acres per settler that works out to only $1146 each for 3707 families.

http://islands.glo-con.com/property.php?property_no=AD29_8574

Furnished:No Dishwasher:No
Alarm System:No Washing Machine:No
Hotwater:No Office Room:No
Linnen Supplied:No Pet Friendly:No
Tennis Court:No Balcony:No
Gym/Sauna:No Terrace:No
Telephone: No Garage:No
CableTV/Sat:No Ocean View:Yes
Lake View:No Mountain View:No
Ocean Front:Yes Lake Front:No
Cellars:No Swimming Pool:[Private:No Public:No]
Garden:[ Private:Yes Public:No] Parking:[ Private:Yes Public:No]



I don't see the price though...

 

[ams5995]

new hampshire

went there for ron paul, learned about the free state project and think it is doable. im all for it if others will go.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

I agree.

I have heard no compelling argument for buying an island other than the novelty of it.

And the fact that we most likely will not face an invasion, like a succeeding state would? *cough* Abraham Lincoln *cough*

 

[tpreitzel]

If we can raise $20 million, we should be able to moneybomb a 500 acre island.

A nice, easy target ... I'll pass. Your name complements my thoughts, unfortunately. Although, starting anew in a small, confined place with a new government would be easier, the target is also much easier.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

As bad as I hate to say it, anywhere in the continental US you are a willing target. They will steamroll us, propodandize us well beyond what the Davidians incurred. Make no mistake folks, WE are the ENEMY and they have us tracked, logged and numbered already.

Well said.

 

[burningfur]

The main problem would be developing infrastructure and having enough of a variety of skill sets, enough carpenters, lumberjacks, doctors, etc.

The good thing would be that it would herald back to the Jefferson revolution of 1820 where people relied not on government, but on other people. Bartering for goods. Doctor treating fishermen for fish, etc.

 

[LibertiORDeth]

Condoning is approving. Condemning is disapproving.

Yes, misread it

 

[amy31416]

Hey Kiddies! Just a quick note from the Grammar Nazi:

Succeed: To achieve your goals.
Secede: To detach a piece of land from a federal union.

Carry on!

(MONTANA!)

 

[LibertiORDeth]

NH blew it? You guys aren't making sense. Have you read the 101 reasons? Why it will be MUCH easier to take over that state? Have you read about NH's Constitution? The districts? The town meetings? The transparency in govt? We still have work to do but we aren't starting from scratch there. The framework is there for us to work within. If your decision about where to go is based on how Paul did there, well, we may as well all sit right where we are and debate each other until we're all safely placed in fema camp where we can debate irl about what we should have done.

And now you're talking about an island? Sure, that's safe. Planes certainly wouldn't want to drop bombs on an island. If I were a neocon it would be my dream to get all of us stuck on an island somewhere. They wouldn't even have to bomb us. They could just drop some bombs off the coast and have a tsumami take care of us.

Just a few hippies living off the land?

 

[burningfur]

No one has the guts to actually secede from the Union. No state, I'm sorry, but Montana and New Hampshire just don't have it in them. Especially not when the media will paint them as white bigots and smear them to no end.

Maybe when the economy collapses people will be desperate enough to do something that drastic, but until then, the American sheeple continue walking toward the thousand foot drop.

 

[tpreitzel]

I'd rather not start from scratch on a small island. I'd rather take over a state.

Right... for a variety of reasons...

 

[LibertiORDeth]

We definitely have to go with the island idea.