Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Free State Project

Hemos posted more than 11 years ago | from the create-your-own-nation dept.

United States 1732

Psychic Burrito writes "From their website: The Free State Project is a plan in which 20,000 or more liberty-oriented people will move to a single state of the U.S. to secure there a free society. We will accomplish this by first reforming state law, opting out of federal mandates, and finally negotiating directly with the federal government for appropriate political autonomy." Perhaps they should also read Everything: Kansas. I think Don Marti was also the one who thought the geeks should do this by moving en masse to North Dakota.

cancel ×

1732 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

gfdgsdg (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496527)

asdfasdf

Re:gfdgsdg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496544)

Is having the first post really that cool that you have to put up some crap like this...

Re:gfdgsdg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496610)

not only that, you might as well paste your manifesto or something...if you have the spotlight, you may as well make use of it.

ship 'em out (5, Funny)

mblase (200735) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496532)

I think Don Marti was also the one who thought the geeks should do this by moving en masse to North Dakota.

I thought that was intended as more of a refugee camp type of thing.

Why not (3, Funny)

Subcarrier (262294) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496664)

...ship'em all out to the Antarctica and rename it the "Land of the Frees".

Only one problem. (4, Insightful)

cosmosis (221542) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496711)

This plan would work if the 10th Ammendment actually meant something. Anything the new 'liberated' state tries to do will be summarily shut down and/or harrassed by the feds - from witholding highway funds to them simply coming in on federal level and enforcing whatever draconian BS they feel like.

The idea is great in theory, but I can't imagine how it could work in todays less ideal world.

Springfield v. Shelbyville (5, Funny)

The_Rippa (181699) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496535)

Jebediah: People, our search is over! On this site we shall build a new
town where we can worship freely, govern justly, and grow vast
fields of hemp for making rope and blankets.
Shelb.: Yes, _and_ marry our cousins.
Jebediah: I was -- what are you talking about, Shelbyville? Why would
we want to marry our cousins?
Shelb.: Because they're so attractive. I, I thought that was the
whole point of this journey.
Jebediah: Absolutely not!
Shelb.: I tell you, I won't live in a town that robs men of the right
to marry their cousins.
Jebediah: Well, then, we'll form our own town. Who will come and live a
life devoted to chastity, abstinence, and a flavorless mush I
call rootmarm?

Excellent (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496539)

It is going to be so much fun watching these clowns get incinerated by the Federal Government forces.

Hmmm... (2, Insightful)

Dionysus (12737) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496540)

Isn't this what the White Supremacy people is trying with the North-West?

Move to the state of Arizona (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496541)

It's so rebellious, they don't even do daylight saving... ANYWHERE in the state!

And, it has referendum, recall, and initiative elections, and was one of the first states to have them.

Re:Move to the state of Arizona (2, Funny)

Peyna (14792) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496568)

Wow, in Indiana we have a few corners (near Chicago and Cincinnati) with DST. The bulk of the state is on Eastern Standard Time. You guys are truly hardcore!

Re:Move to the state of Arizona (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496641)

I guess I have entirely different definitions of "Off-Topic" and "Troll." This article is about people moving to a new state, this post is suggesting a state with reasons why... Um, yeah.

Walter Williams wrote an article about this plan. (5, Funny)

Prince_Ali (614163) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496543)

I hope it works, but it would take a lot of dedication on their part. I would consider moving to the selected state after the plan is already underway. We can have a Quebec in the US!

Re:Walter Williams wrote an article about this pla (5, Funny)

foistboinder (99286) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496603)

I hope it works, but it would take a lot of dedication on their part. I would consider moving to the selected state after the plan is already underway. We can have a Quebec in the US!

I remember reading about a series of events during the middle part of the 19th century that leads me to believe the federal government might not let this happen.

Google Cache (5, Informative)

fire-eyes (522894) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496549)

Not responding, however here is the google cache [216.239.53.100] .

Re:Google Cache (3, Informative)

Peyna (14792) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496683)

cache of the FAQ page [216.239.51.100] , it only took me a moment to find, but it was the first thing I tried to visit.

Don't waste your mod points on this either, I'm not worth it.

If they're going to do this.... (1, Funny)

deanj (519759) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496552)

If they're really going to do this, please move to an island and do it. Better yet, do it in New York or Mass.

Won't work out (3, Insightful)

Karamchand (607798) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496555)

Perhaps at first it will seem as it worked out. But when they reached some goals they'll probably fall out with each other over little issues.
I am not trying to look into a crystal ball, I am just pondering about it, thinking about other coaltions of people.

Opting out of federal mandates (2)

rw2 (17419) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496556)

Hmmm. They're going to opt-out and then try to negotiate better tax rates.

Maybe I'm jaded, but *my* reading of washington (and I read a lot, notice my sig) is that they will happily allow this highly unlikely state to opt out and re-allocate the funding to their own districts then do precisely nothing to lower the federal burden on the LP state.

Re:Opting out of federal mandates (3, Informative)

rw2 (17419) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496608)

Oh, and we covered this topic [poliglut.com] a long time ago at Poliglut.

Not that /. shouldn't, just that politically minded folk might find a politcally oriented site a better resource than /. for politics.

Exactly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496618)

They said "Hey, states, you don't have to make the drink age 21, but if you don't, this federal highway funding is going to be pretty hard to get." And all the states quickly got in line.

Re:Exactly (2)

rw2 (17419) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496681)

Yup.

It will be pretty amusing watching this state pay federal taxes, get nothing in return, and have to boast state taxes (be they in the form of income, sales or user) to pay for the roads, et alia, that the feds do today.

Not that the system isn't broken, but this solution is about as likely to succeed as my sons chess team taking on Brazil in the world cup finals.

Haven't you overlooked something? (4, Insightful)

gowen (141411) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496558)

Like, the people who already live in the chosen state? Or will they get the same treatment as the Native Americans, the last time such a grandiose scheme was attempted?

Re:Haven't you overlooked something? (5, Interesting)

verch (12834) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496698)

According to the FAQ they believe with 20k supporters they could control a state with a population of 1.5M or less. How 20k votes outweigh 1.5M is one of the small details they don't explain. I wonder if they will get it figured out before the tanks roll into their compound.

Re:Haven't you overlooked something? (3, Insightful)

Ooblek (544753) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496722)

On that note, I have one thought for the people that are going to attempt this:

Remember Waco, TX

Now that the cult members weren't crazy and everything, but it just shows that people who want to not be under the control of the US government in the US may end up looking down the business end of a government issue sub machine gun.

And their rallying cry will be.... (3, Funny)

drspock (87299) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496559)

down with edumacation!

just another case of history repeatin'? (3, Insightful)

matt4077 (581118) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496560)

Isn't this what quite a few British did a few hundred years ago?

Freedom comes from within oneself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496564)

so long as you believe it simply comes from how others are towards you, you will never be satisfied.

Yeah sure! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496565)

And the US gov't will just sit back and let it's people decide it's own fate... right...

I've thought about doing this... (4, Interesting)

PingXao (153057) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496566)

But the question is, "Which State?" Basically they all suck. The Northeast is too crowded and cold. The Dakotas? Minnesota? No thanks, waaaaayyyyyy too cold for me. Perhaps the answer is in AZ or NM. Aren't there significant numbers of native Americans there, forced into squalid living conditions on Federal "reservations", that would be only too willing to negotiate a new deal for themselves? Instant constituency.

Um guys... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496570)

The South tried this once. Didn't work. The imperialists will come after you with guns and say "stop that."

Re:Um guys... (1)

Peyna (14792) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496602)

It would be easier for a US territory than a state to accomplish.

I say they choose.....Oregon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496571)

That state already seems to take its Anti-federalism pretty seriously. Take a look at their stance on drug decriminalization, for example.

If a whole lot of geeks move there en masse, it should be enough to completely overwhelm the pesky religious right (Mormons, I believe) and turn the state into a libertarian utopia. Or dystopia.

A great idea, except (1)

Compact Dick (518888) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496572)

that it makes an easy target when Prez Bush declares them as terrorists and orders their "removal" in order to protect our freedom.

What about the others? (1)

Jump (135604) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496574)


Will they force other people to move out?
Any sort of radicalism leads to some sort of unfree
society in my opinion.

Re:What about the others? (2)

DEBEDb (456706) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496627)

They plan to democratically create their
own laws, so it's no different than
the current situation, really.

Re:What about the others? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496668)

But democracy is incompatible with liberty:
haven't you ever read Ayn Rand?

In loving memory of Kyle Gass (-1)

Trolling Stones (587878) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496575)

This is not the first post of the article.
This is just a tribute.

g to the oatse
c to the izzex
fo shizzle my nizzle now what is Jack Black going to do?

Jim Jones (1, Offtopic)

yycs (514096) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496576)

Isn't this what Jim Jones wanted??

Re:Jim Jones (1)

proj_2501 (78149) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496605)

Louis Farrakhan before cancer wanted the same thing.

Protection. (2, Insightful)

Trusty Penfold (615679) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496578)



After opting out of everything, I bet they'll still want protecting by the US Army, Navy and Air Force.

Re:Protection. (3, Insightful)

runderwo (609077) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496656)

After opting out of everything, I bet they'll still want protecting by the US Army, Navy and Air Force.
What is the federal government supposed to be, if not to defend the land from outside forces and to defend people from destroying each other's individual freedoms?

I think that it would be perfectly consistent of their Libertarian viewpoint to accept military protection from the federal government. They just won't accept abridgement of individual freedom in trade for it.

Re:Protection. (3, Interesting)

elmegil (12001) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496682)

Exactly. Which part of the statement that the government exists to protect individuals from force and from fraud did the original poster not understand? In defense, the military is all about protecting from force.

Re:Protection. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496705)

But first, they'll want the gummint to

- prevent their utility companies from gouging them
- provide accurate time bases for their devices
- keep the GPS birds flying
- keep stronger out-of-state entities from swamping their wireless frequencies
- back their currency so that they can do commerce with other states and countries
- pave their interstate highways

I'm not a big-gummint guy, really, but there are lots of things the USA does for us geeks, in the area of infrastructure, that we really don't want to just walk away from.

If you want change, work for it. Get involved. It's easy enough to get elected to local boards and councils; after that, work your way up.

Libertarians Are Stupid. (0, Troll)

_krimson_ (129334) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496719)

And it would be a proven fact if they got to go ahead with this plan and demonstrate it for all of us.

I can't wait to see it happen.

I propose a name for this state: (5, Funny)

RobinH (124750) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496729)

Quebec.

Re:Protection. (1)

ronfar (52216) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496734)

Actually, if they are at all serious about this, it is more likely they will need protection from the U. S. Army, Navy, and Air Force. (But then, don't we all?)

I like this idea... (5, Insightful)

SpamapS (70953) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496581)

But most great ideas seem to be lacking in practical application. This one, however, does have some interesting strategies.

My issues:

1) Family. I can't convince my parents, and my wife's parents to pick up and move. I don't want to seperate my children from their grandparents. :P
2) Professional Saturation. Lets just face it, Ted Knight was right when he said "The world needs ditch diggers too." There will be a ton of other smart guys out there. My profession (consulting) is all about being smart for other people.

If you can solve these issues(don't see how you can with #1)... I'm there.

Re:I like this idea... (5, Insightful)

Peyna (14792) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496726)

A bigger issue: How 20,000 people are going to take over a whole state when the main political parties will outnumber them almost 100 to 1? In order to enact these changes you have to get elected, and 20,000 votes isn't enough to make you governer or win a majority in a state house or senate.

This is a fantastic idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496582)

I believe this idea has long been entertained in fiction, particularly by some science fiction authors.

Sure, let's have a different state for each point of view!

If we can create a state where the original ideals of the USA can hold strong, all the people to whom they are important can migrate there. At least, that is, until the population is 100% sympathizers, at this point the larger, more armed remainder of the USA can label them all traitors and take over.

FSP (2, Redundant)

Omkar (618823) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496584)

Good Lord, I hope they're not contagious. People need to deal with the modernization of society. If they're unhappy with the power of corporations, there are appropriate forums to express their angst.

It seems like they want to become like Quebec..

Re:FSP (2)

DEBEDb (456706) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496648)

Why do you deny them the right to move
somewhere, organize, vote and get into
the government by election - anyone else in the
US has that right?

THE DANGER OF THIS PLAN (0)

EEgopher (527984) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496587)

Everything will be fine, but ONLY if they get their own NFL team.

Right name? (2)

jc42 (318812) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496588)

Was that Don Marti or Don Martin?

state of choice? (1)

Strudleman (147303) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496591)

You know, North Dakota is nice and all. But if I were going to take over a state it'd have to be California or Florida or some other state where the weather we'd be hiding from would be the best weather possible.

Did I miss something? (2, Informative)

diwolf (537997) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496593)

Wasn't this tried already? Like, uhm, the Civil War? States rights supreme. Freedom from the Federalists. etc...

Jeeze, go out and rent 'Civil War' (it's only like 10 hours of documentary)...

North Dakota? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496594)

For Pete's sake, don't go to north dakota. It's a flat, frigid Hell. (Trust me.) If anything, come to Montana. We're already probably the most spiteful toward big business (owing to our *ahem* interesting history with copper barons). Plus, we have mountains. Really nice ones.

Re:North Dakota? (2)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496717)

Oh, come on. North Dakota only "sounds" cold 'cause it has the word "North" in it. Heck, I live in VA and I never go to North Carolina 'cause it just sounds too cold.

I'm sure it's a wonderful warm place, with beaches and bikini parties year 'round. I wish they'd just drop that stupid "North" thing and then everyone could see the truth.

Sounds familiar... (0)

TrollBridge (550878) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496596)

Isn't this the same fundamental principle behind Louis Farrakhan's demand for an independent state in the U.S. for his Nation of Islam?

My point is that such suggestions are often met with skepticism at best and downright ridicule at worst. Such idealism isn't usually afforded much in the way of credibility.

May I suggest New England? (5, Interesting)

schlach (228441) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496599)

Some states in that bunch have a history of liberty-mindedness, making it able to make use of existing population, and some of em are small enough that 20,000 voters could have a profound effect on any state-wide votes.

Of course, 20,000 votes goes a long way in any state with close elections. Maybe they should all move to Florida, instead... more electoral votes, anyway.

How original... (4, Funny)

CreepyNinja (615245) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496609)

The South tried this once already gang. Didn't work. The Imperialists will come after you with guns and say "stop that" just like they did back then.

hrmmm (2)

carpe_noctem (457178) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496611)

Sounds like a good idea...the more optimistic part of my ideology certainly agrees with it. However, it seems to me that it will be difficult to actually come up with the 20,000 people in the first place. Kind of like, "well, I'll go if my friend Bob goes, but Bob will only go if Fred goes" and so forth.

We'll see.... (4, Informative)

cybermace5 (446439) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496613)

So. Liberty geeks now want nation-state status?

What a joke. Indians have had this for years, they negotiate directly (for the most part) with the federal government, and they technically run their own show inside the borders.

Confine yourself to a reservation, and call it liberty? Don't think so.

Even prison inmates have liberty, within the confines of their cells.

Not in my backyard :=) (1)

bozoman42 (564217) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496615)

Phew! My state isn't under consideration. For a while I thought I might have to move!

*wink*

This is a great idea! (2)

L. VeGas (580015) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496616)

I, myself, am starting a "Free Beer" project so that I and my friends can petition "the man" who has been putting us down.

Cache of FAQ (2)

fire-eyes (522894) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496619)

Karma whoring is cool! But this really serves a purpose.

google cache of FAQ [216.239.53.100]

liberty-oriented destruction (2, Interesting)

alandrums (593019) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496622)

how convenient. get all the liberty-oriented people in one place where they can easily be destroyed.

Freedom, OK (5, Funny)

wowbagger (69688) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496626)

Obviously, the town they should target is Freedom, OK [mapquest.com]

And it is right near Protection, KS [mapquest.com] .

Which just goes to show, you can have either Freedom or Protection, but not both.

Re:Freedom, OK (5, Funny)

TrollBridge (550878) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496703)

"And it is right near Protection, KS [mapquest.com]."

...which should always be visited before Intercourse, PA [mapquest.com] .

A bit OT, I know, but appropriate for htis thread :)

North Dakota is a Bad Idea (1)

duckpond (198930) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496629)


North Dakota is a bad idea for no particular reason. Come to South Dakota instead.

No taxes, sure. (3, Insightful)

Jump (135604) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496635)


"We will repeal state taxes ..."

Wow, but wait...

"Make a donation"

I see....

Privatization? (5, Insightful)

Irvu (248207) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496636)

"What can be done in a single state? A great deal. We will repeal state taxes and wasteful state government programs. We will end the collaboration between state and federal law enforcement officials in enforcing unconstitutional laws. We will repeal laws regulating drugs and guns. We will end asset forfeiture and abuses of eminent domain.
We will privatize utilities and end inefficient regulations and monopolies. Then we will negotiate directly with the federal government for more autonomy."


While in principle I agree with the objection to unconstitutional laws I have a real problem with privatizing everything. I see street-sweeping, electricity, etc. as one of the reasons for government. As Enron, and Colifornia have shown private companies cannot be trusted with basic infrastructure. And, as At&T, the RIAA, and AOLTW have shown eliminating all regulation is the best way to encourage monopolies.

I hate bad government, I also hate bad corporations.

Irvu.

Re:Privatization? (1)

deego (587575) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496694)

yep.. Can't privatize everything..imagine a comet on a collision course to earth. Whose job is it to fund Bruce Wills' trip to the asteroid?

Amen Brother! n/t (1)

kilfarsnar (561956) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496724)

n/t = No Text NT = New Technology, but it still sucks

Not Representative of Most Libertarians (2)

goldspider (445116) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496637)

"Jan Helfeld says, 'The Free State Project is the best libertarian strategy.'"

It's a shame he has to bring Libertarians into this mess... gives the rest of a bad name if you ask me.

Re:Not Representative of Most Libertarians (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496679)

libertarian != Libertarian

seems shortsighted... (2)

mblase (200735) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496639)

The Free State Project is a plan in which 20,000 or more liberty-oriented people will move to a single state of the U.S. to secure there a free society. We will accomplish this by first reforming state law, opting out of federal mandates, and finally negotiating directly with the federal government for appropriate political autonomy. We will be a community of freedom-loving individuals and families, and create a shining example of liberty for the rest of the nation and the world. ...they'll be broke, owing to the fact that they'll be spending so much time on business-hours activism that they won't have any time to actually work and maintain a useful economy, but at least they'll be shining.

oh boy...there goes the farm (2)

ruebarb (114845) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496640)

I grew up in Montana...

I heard this stuff every week...be real curious if it worked...I HIGHLY doubt it would, of course....but it'll be fun...get rid of those pesky Californians who keep moving into the state.

daschel plot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496643)

"... the geeks should do this by moving en masse to North Dakota ..."

It seems like a plot by Senator Daschle, otherwise he had no chance to get reelected in 2004.

see Salem Sue... (1)

bucklesl (73547) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496649)

...the worlds largest Holstein Cow [sethbuckley.com] . Only in North Dakota.

20,000 people? Are you serious? (2)

Wakko Warner (324) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496650)

Precisely where do you intend to go where 20,000 people will have any say whatsoever on a statewide level?

20,000 people might be enough to influence local politics, but good luck getting statewide crack-smoking legislation changed.

- A.P.

location (1)

alandrums (593019) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496651)

so what state do we get to live in? NC? and can we live in domes? how about a whole city inside a dome? if so, i'm game!

Wyoming (3, Insightful)

4of12 (97621) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496658)

Wyoming is demographically ideal for this kind of thing.

I don't know if the current inhabitants would mind too much, either. They seem to generally be hostile to the federal government. OTOH, without much of a manufacturing or service base, I think the econonmy probably is dominated by extractive industries such as mining and ranching. Thus, the choice between economic livlihood and a beautiful environment usually weighs in heavier on the former, since the local perspective is that there's "plenty enough" of the latter.

I had heard of something akin to this on a county level occuring in Oregon a few years ago, where enough Hare Krishna (?) adherents moved in to affect the makeup of the county government.

But from what little I remember of the Civil War / War Between the States, the federal government of the United States won't take kindly to secession.

What? (1)

Chris Parrinello (1505) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496661)

I hate to be one of those people but "Why is this on the front page of Slashdot?"

This and other "political" movements that want liberty is usually about one issue that they feel the government has too much power or has taken rights away from them and given them to some other group. Sometimes the trigger point is gun control. Sometimes it is affirmative action. Usually "liberty" in this case is the freedom to do whatever you want without being responsible for how your actions affect your family, your neighbors or your community or society as a whole.

Vermont (2)

istartedi (132515) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496662)

Isn't Vermont already a little bit like that?

Geeks Moving? (2)

BurritoWarrior (90481) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496671)

No...you would need a diverse population, otherwise this scenario will develop:

Help Wanted
Computer professional with 15+ years of experience in the following: C, C++, Java, TCP/IP, Windows, AIX, Solaris, VAX, Assembler, VB, HP-UX, AS/400, Cryptography, AI, and be willing to serve coffee to the boss.

Minimum Educational Requirements: 3 PhD's in Computer Science.

Must be willing to live in antartica 6 or more months per year.

Maximum salary: $6.50/hour

A much easier option (1)

Can (21457) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496672)

Of course the option to this is to convince people to get off their lazy butts and vote in an election...

If it's so hard to get the liberty-minded people organized well enough to vote in any significant size in an election (which it clearly is given how much politicians get away with), what are the odds that they are really all going to get morivated enough to move to a different state?

yeah, that'd work (-1, Flamebait)

Rude-Boy (25678) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496676)

You geeks would die in a pool of your own filth before the week was out.

This would work? (3, Insightful)

pclinger (114364) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496678)

When the US has control over a territory, we never want to let it go. Why would we even let these guys do this?

Take a look at this [phil-am-war.org] for some examples of territories we (the US) have made claim to. We've faught wars to protect these territories. You think that we would just give up some of it to a bunch of idealists who think they can make the perfect society?

Yeah, right.

I can see it now. (1)

Sergeant Beavis (558225) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496680)

North Dakota, Land of the free, home of the freezing balls.

one problem... (5, Insightful)

supernova87a (532540) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496685)

The deciding factor in whether or not something like this will be successful, is how the courts (and supreme court) interpret the freedom of a state to create and practice law widely different than the 49 other states.

Remember that in the constitution, it is stated that no citizen shall be denied equal protection of rights, and importantly, that federal law is supreme when Congress speaks to a question of law (trumping state law). So citizens have an expectation that states will have a bascially consistent set of laws under which they can live. (the supreme court has taken cases which test the ability of states to "pioneer" new kinds of law, and this is contentious I believe)

Therefore, while it might be easy to get some measures passed (ones that no one would conceivably object to), other more controversial measures might be quite difficult.
Just look at the medical marijuana thing in CA. The state says that it's ok, but the federal government says it isn't. And what happens? People get arrested for using and distributing it. Federal law has supremacy over local/state law, regardless of how charitable or well-intentioned.

I know! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496687)

They could do something daring: they could risk everything and leave their native soil and the continent they grew up on, to flee from oppressive governments to a new country and continent to seek prosperity, liberty and religious freedom.

Oh wait, that's already been done, about 2-300 years ago. Never mind...

No place for a geek (2, Funny)

HighJack (20546) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496689)

These people haven't even kicked the Y2k problem yet. Just look at the lower left corner of their homepage:
"This page was updated on December 13, 1901"

Utopias... (2)

pmz (462998) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496697)

How long until their little utopia becomes the thing they fled?

Hm... (1)

FudgePackinJesus (444734) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496704)

It's like succession... except legislation replaces rifles and geeks replace rednecks.

Wouldn't that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4496710)

... really drive up the autism rates?

Hail t o the new boss... (2)

Usquebaugh (230216) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496713)

...same as the old boss.

Politicians, politicians we don't need no politicians.

Go read Animal Farm!

Rename the state (5, Funny)

fobbman (131816) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496715)

"I think Don Marti was also the one who thought the geeks should do this by moving en masse to North Dakota."

When we get there we will rename it to GNU/North Dakota.

from the website (3, Funny)

carpe_noctem (457178) | more than 11 years ago | (#4496730)

"The Free State Project (http://www.freestateproject.com/) calls for 20,000 libertarians and fellow-travelers to move to a single state of the U.S. to create a free society there through the electoral process."

So, I guess the libertarians are fed up with not winning elections. I wonder where the hell they are going to find 20,000 voting libertarians?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>