I was wondering if it would be possible to gather enough people, eco-pioneers, survivalists, off-griders to actually be able to vote themselves into power in a county. Might have to be a sparsely populated county but still. Construct havens one county at a time. Take over the county board and county sheriffs position.
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 15, 2007 - 6:53 AMI believe the Libertarians are trying to do just that in New Hampshire. It is also my goal to do something similer when I have the money. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 15, 2007 - 7:09 AMIf we wait till we have the money then we will wait forever. I tried that and lost a lot of money in a corrupt county in California. We need to set up a haven for people and votes are free. Just need a seed of a place to set up and invite the right like minded people. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 15, 2007 - 7:13 AMI am still young yet and already working on things. And it doesnt take that long to make money.
-
-
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 15, 2007 - 8:47 AMThat's a good idea, folks. Too bad counties are at the mercies of State govs. Well, if anyone finds one, lemme know! If I can afford land by then, I'll move there!
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 15, 2007 - 10:05 AMIt's not a bad idea, the hard part is getting rugged individualists to AGREE on one location. That discussion can last several lifetimes.
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 15, 2007 - 2:11 PMI've thought about that several times. It would be possible, but the group would have to be pretty well organised before it attempted that sort of thing. We usurpers would have to agree on enough of the bigger policies that affect us all so we wouldn't war amongst ourselves once we had a voting majority. There are some lists on the errornet detailing the least populated counties, and municipalities, of the U.S. Several have less than a thousand. Some have less than 500.
This is something that we should further explore...
-
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 15, 2007 - 9:21 PMI'm more interested in reducing the number of things to agree on. The gov. and states have the laws byta s a county we can choose to ignore or not help enforce them. A new hole in the wall type of place. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Wed, May 16, 2007 - 12:13 AMAgreed, but I'm thinking more about smaller, local, practical matters that would directly affect the usurpers.
A few here have already broached the subject of money. A bunch of counter-culturalists (for lack of a better term) arean't likely to have tens of millions of dollars at their disposal to throw into such a project. Well, then...how do they even go about establishing residency on the relative cheap?
Well, they could pool their money to buy land for an IC in the county of choice, and members joining the group subsequently would have a guaranteed place to go, and stay, in order to establish legal residency. Do they remain at the initial IC after establishing voter eligibility, or are they compelled to move out and establish another IC within the county?
What about property taxes? Unless everyone agrees to move to one of the municipalities in Alaska that doesn't levy property taxes, they are a definite reality. A group could overcome that if they agree to form some sort of non-profit or a church, and receive tax-exempt status from the IRS but that in itself would require establishing a bona fide purpose or something that actually resembles a religion and that, in turn, means putting by-laws down in writing.
Again, on the matter fo property taxes, they will be necessary for the day-to-day function of the county. You pretty much have to have a Sheriff's Department, and that means a budget for salaries, equipment, vehicles, an office, training, certifications... The state government isn't going to allow just anybody to pin on a badge and strap on a gun and play Gunsmoke--there are legalities to consider and minimum standards to meet to The Man off our backs. Minimum wage is established by law; personally, I'd be more than happy to step into the role of Sheriff or Chief Deputy for minimum wage in a small, rural, well-behaved community just because of the perks, like being able to able to go visit Cali, or Mass., or NYC strapped CCW with a Para-14 and hi-cap mags, or buying a full set of Crye body armour, or attending certain tactical schools that are closed-door to civilians, or a bunch of other cool shit, but how many others in the group will do the same?
Then, there's the rest of the county infrastructure to consider: roads, schools, hospitals, fire department, utilities... Do we gradually eliminate them via the voting process? Do we keep some and not the others? Which ones? Do our decisions conflict with state law to such a degree that we would receive unwanted attention from larger and more powerful authorities than ourselves who will surely insert themselves into our lives? What do we do about the people who already live in that county who may want or need some or all of that infrastructure? Run them out using eminent domain seizures? Constantly piss them off at the ballot box just because we have the numbers? Network with them and try to show them what we're all about and what we're hoping to accomplish, hoping they'll be amenable? Do we just silently rule them from the shadows, taxing them to subsidise our lifestyle and secrecy?
What form of government will we have at the county level? I don't much like rules, myself, but it's simply a reality that some form of regulation would be necessary. If we're anarchists within our own little county then fellow counter-culturalists arriving with little or nothing may feel inclined to simply "appropriate" the personal property of CCs who have more; or they may "appropriate" some piece of communal property and use it illicitly or to the detriment of the group. Are we one big, happy IC within the county; or are we a network of smaller ICs in the same county; or do we try to make the whole county our IC?
Are we survivalists like the kind from the early '80s, building underground blast shelters and stocking up on machineguns and M.R.E.s, waiting for the big one; or are we pacifistic, tree-hugging, vegans? No offense to you pacifistic, tree-hugging, vegans. Are we something in the middle, or something entirely different?
What do we do about money for the entire group? For individuals? Criminal backgrounds? Chemical dependencies? Mental illnesses? Jobs and industry? Are we working outside as individuals and bringing that income back to shave with the group? A percentage of it? ...Because, then were into the area of an additional income tax. Do we all take a vow of poverty? Do we foster small cottage industries within our enclave, or do we create one larger industry like the Hetterites do with communal agriculture? What do we do with a person who embezzles group funds? What do we do with people who want to live in our world but are too lazy to contribute? What do we do with egocentrists who may become pissed of if a group decision doesn't go their way and they decide to go to The Man with evidence about illegal activities that are sanctioned or conducted by the group?
If we're all living off the land with no real source of income, what do we do when someone has an accident and needs to have a hand reattached surgically, or suffers a permanently debilitating injury? Do we forbid SUVs? Is vehicle selection a personal matter, or a group decision? What do we do if two or more members have a personal disagreement that can't be resolved peacefully? Put them in the Thunderdome? Rapiers under the Code Duello? Is there capital punishment? Corporal punishment? No punishment at all for anything no matter what? What do if a bunch of skinheads and a bunch of anybody the skinheads will hate both want to move in? What do we do if the skinhead group happens to possess valuable skill-sets and the (insert your favourite minority group here) have nothing to offer? What do we do about other, less overt racial bias?
What do we do about arriving at a decision through concensus when a minority who have considerable experience in a given matter are out-voted by a majority who really shouldn't have been allowed to participate in the concensus-making at all because they have no knowledge or experience in said matter? What do we do about members of the community who are just plain stupid and should really never be allowed to have a say in any policy-making decision at all...ever?
What about polygamy? Polygyny? Polyandry? Or both? Age of consent for marriage? Age of consent for sex? Arranged marriages? Indentured servitude? Are we Constitutionally-based or not? If so, to what extent? Original Constitution with just the first ten amendments? Others? Which ones? Are we a red-blooded, flag-waving patriot group hangin' out with the Minutemen, or are we helping Mexicans and Guatemalans sneak across the border? Or do we not participate either way? What do we do if someone from our group does participate, one way or the other, and it causes problems for the rest of us? What about all the miscellaneous sexualities out there today? What do we do if we have fundamentalist Christian members and homosexual members who agree to get along and stay out of each others' business as far as sexuality goes, but then the homosexuals throw their own little gay pride parade to celebrate Stonewall, complete with assless leather pants and public screwing? What do we do about STDs considering that, in the long term, we'll probably be inter-marrying or, at least, several of us will be screwing several other of us? Are we all taking full panels, including Western blot tests, before we join or are allowed to join? Is it a non-issue? If it is an issue, what do we do if someone goes outside of the community, contracts HIV or herpes, and brings it back to the group? What kind of sexual morality, if any, will we establish and maintain to prevent something like this from happening? What do we do if it happens anyway? What do we do with a group member who is infected through no fault of their own by another who violated whatever rules agreed upon by the group? Adultery? Rape? Blood transfusions?
Are children the children of their own parents, or are they now wards of the group as a whole? What if someone maintains their own traditional or fundamentalist religious beliefs, but those beliefs somehow violate the laws or spirit of the group? What if we all agree to a communal property standard, and a member who still legally owns an important piece of machinery decides he or she isn't happy here and wants to leave, and take his or her toy with him or her? What do we do if we are using the services of someone outside the group, like a the Amish do with renting refrigerator space for blocks for their ice boxes, and that outsider stiffs us? What if we didn't have a contract and have no legal standing? Which holidays do we celebrate? Which ones do we not? What if someone openly celebrates a holiday that really pisses someone else off? What about public nudity? Sure, Kaya is hot...but I'm sure that there will be some people in the IC that no one wants to see naked.
Do we have a militia for common defence? An emergency response team for...well...emergencies? Who is in charge? How are they organised? Are they even organised? How technological are we as a group? Are we like the Amish? The Hetterites? Cave men? Something else? To each his own? What if someone who is completely low-tech wants to use the personal property of someone who's more technology-based but the hi-techie doesn't want to share? What if the lo-techie barters some labour for tech use and decides not to fulfil his contract? Will we have contracts? Will we use any official currency among ourselves? Which nation's? Who is allowed to move into the county? Who do we keep out? To what lengths will we go to keep them out?
-
-
Re: Taking over a county
Wed, May 16, 2007 - 8:04 AMWOW. I don't think anyone's gonna touch all that! Way to kill a thread, Mick. :-)p
Thanks for the compliment, but c'mon - everyone is beautiful!
Solution to all those issues:
I'm just gonna buy and island and cede from whatever country it belonged to. Worked for that guy up north, I can too. It'll be called "The Kaisland", and I'm making the rules. If you don't agree, f**k yourself. I'll be my own self-sustaining militia. My kids will not be inbred.
That is all.
-
-
Re: Taking over a county
Wed, May 16, 2007 - 3:15 PMNot trying to kill the thread. Just illustrating that there are issues that should be discussed before a group of very different people untie to dominate the politics and government of a county. I mean, it would be a shame if we got enough people together to pull something like this off and moved to a nice, quiet, county someplace, voted ourselves into power succellfully, and then it all fell apart because we wound up having a heated disagreement over polka-dot-bikini-Thursdays or something equally trivial.
You're welcome. I'm amazed that you read the whole thing. Didn't think anybody would bother to do that.
Ummm...yeah...we're all beautiful, but there are some people who...er...are just too beautiful...yeah...er...that's it... I probably wouldn't get any wood chopped or irrigation ditches dug because I'd be blinded by their naked splendour. How's that?
Kaya: an army of one. ;-D
What guy up north?
I say we pool our energy and focus on Alaska. There's still hope for that state. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Wed, May 16, 2007 - 5:26 PMIncredibly well thought out Mick. That's why many self-created communities are often focused oriented. One way of thought, be it political or religious.
I doubt if I would be acceptable to anyone. A gun toting ex-cop liberal turned herbalist tree hugger pro-hunting pro-capital punishment pro-choice monogamous non-christian folkmusic singing gardener who uses snail poison.
I guess that about covers it.
What do you think Mick, would I pass muster if I left everbody alone?
:-)
cg -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Wed, May 16, 2007 - 9:22 PM<Just illustrating that there are issues that should be discussed before a group of very different people untie to dominate the politics and government of a county.>
Sounds just like what happens in the counties today. Same issues same problems and they don't fall apart.
But yes it was a good read. I did read all of it and was sorry I did as I got near the end of it. Glad to see that all the potential problems that face this country can be crammed into one county. But I think if enough people voted themselves into power then the mods approach would work. You don't like it too bad. Beats putting together the equivalent of the Federal Register for a county.
Like the guidestones say; make no unnecessary laws. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Thu, May 17, 2007 - 2:37 AMFor B:
Same issues, same problems...yes, but normal counties have an existing body of law from which to draw, and the commissioners are perpetually occupied with making new ones to screw over the rest of us. Plus, a typical county has thousands of residents from which to draw its leaders and they all have pretty much the same mundane, pedestrian, true-believer views on politics and government anyway, so that, in itself, is a self-perpetuating cycle. Most county comissioners, residents, and local politicians don't want to fix what's broken in the system; they want to watch T.V., play golf, and not think any original thoughts. Zombies. Fucking zombies.
Counties also do not fall apart because the state government won't allow that to happen. Nor will the federal government. There is a preexisting infrastructure with nearly limitless resources. What we are discussing is establishing, effectively, a shadow government for the sole purpose of bucking convention by rejecting established laws and regulations. It's not so much a matter of us making new laws and policies; it's more a matter of us deciding which laws that are already on the books that we will reject as a group, which laws we will retain for our own good, and which laws we will amend to better coincide with out own agenda and the way we want to live, while doing so in a way that won't provoke interest from higher authorities who have the legal, if not ethical or moral, power to imprison us and confiscate our property and belongings.
I am a firm believer in "he who governs least, governs best", so I'm not proposing that we start making a bunch of new rules here. Funny, that part about the Federal Register. What I am saying is that there needs to be some sort of dialogue about law in the new and improved invisible kingdom before anybody starts contributing money, resources, or packs up their family to move half-way across the country. There needs to be some sort of consensus about how things will get done, how we'll retain voting control, how we'll resolve disputes among ourselves... Whether we're using English common law, French common law, the Code of Hammurabi, The Talmud, Sharia, U.C.M.J., the Constitution, the Viking Sagas, the Old Testament, the Code Duello (my personal favourite), or have an old witch woman or naked midget shaman pounding a drum and casting lots, some form of value system and vehicle for recourse needs to be established and accepted.
The mod approach only works because, in forums, nothing really matters and there are no real and lasting consequences. In a county populated by counter-culturalists for the primary purpose of rejecting the establishment so they can live according to their own mores, or lack thereof, there are consequences. All it would take to ruin everything for everybody is one person being wronged by another member of the group and the former not having his grievance redressed. People do stupid and irrational things when they're angry. One person deciding that "You don't like it too bad." just isn't good enough poses a significant problem when there is still a whole system in place outside of the IC that has far greater police powers on its side. It needs to be established well in advance what the members--and not just SOME of the members, but ALL of the members--are willing to do in order to maintain the integrity of the IC. That is reality and that is survival.
-
-
Re: Taking over a county
Wed, May 16, 2007 - 9:40 PMWell, judging purely on the basis of what you've said here on tribe, I can honestly say that I could hang out with you without wanting to kill one of us right away. :-) You seem like one big, walking contradiction, and I mean that in the nicest possible way. I'd like to know how you personally reconcile some of those things, like toting a gun and being a liberal at the same time.
A lot of those question are just that: questions. Some may be more important that others to some people just because of the value system that those people have developed for themselves. Some may not be important to anybody at all. However, I feel that any serious discussion of creating an IC, especially if it's going to be used to direct the political life of something like a county and would affect the residents who are already established there and are not part of the IC, should definitely begin with some kind of brainstorm like that, because all kinds of issues will be raised eventually when a bunch of very different, or maybe not so different, people are planning to live together long term. I'm not trying to rain on the parade; I think it's a great idea. In fact, I've been thinking of this sort of thing for almost two decades.
However, we need to face the simple but absolute reality that some people's personal views could create an irreconcilable conflict: like, can the guy whose only child who died on the operating table because the surgeon who liked to smoke herb in his free time got an emergency page and showed up completely baked get on with the guy who sounds like Tommy Chong and likes to garden hydroponically in his basement under grow lamps? If we're all in this community because, presumably, we don't like most of The Man's and Society's rules then it's safe to say that some of us will be conducting not-so-lawful activities. All it would take to ruin everybody's days, in perpetuity, would be for the father of the deceased to get annoyed enough to make a call to the authorities.
As another example: How would Chuck, as an ex-cop and a liberal, feel about the guy who's installing unregistered DIASs in a few hundred unregistered, short-barrelled AR-15s with unregistered cans, even though Chuck, himself, owns, carries, and uses a gun? Yet another reason to maintain a fully accredited Sheriff's Department, btw... Make everyone a reserve deputy, or organise a posse... Anything to keep it legal.
Myself, I'm pretty easy to get along with. I'm not saying that I'm full of love for every human creature like some of our more enlightened friends here, but I don't normally go out of my way to make trouble for someone else unless I have a really good reason.
You could all become devoted followers of my religion, but I doubt anyone here has enough confidence in my abilities as supreme, exhalted overlord and most worshipful potentate to even subscribe to my newsletter, let alone carry out my every order as loyal minions. It would solve the problem of not having a core focus around which to rally though... I do promise you this: there's no magic Kool-Aid involved. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Wed, May 16, 2007 - 11:58 PMIt's harder to explain myself rather than reconcile the contradictory aspects of my life. The gun thing probably comes from the fact that I was raised in the country, on a small walnut ranch (we were fairly self sufficient) and guns were a tool. Every kid owned a .22, but we never shot each other. Being a liberal (at least for me) is to insure everyone gets an even chance at some things...but not necessarily a free ride.
I'm not a pacifist having fought in one war, but I would sure like to bring our boys and girls home and let the Iraqi's fight it out and let the best fanatic win. (Yeah that's not popular...but I really hate war.)
I'm a tree-hugger to the extent that I want more land added to our state park system (we got a great one here in California), but if the old growth redwoods are on private property, there's not much you can do about it. Offer the companies and fair price and if they turn it down, so be it.
I believe the homeless, the sick, and the elderly should be cared for...so I do, to the extent of my finances and my own health. I'm not going to wait for liberals or conservatives in government to argue about it. So stay the hell out of my way, I got people to take care of.
I don't see the harm in growing some ganga for your personal use, or moonshine, or ale, or wine (an Episcopalian priest I knew made the best homebrew dark ale I EVER HAD!). But if you run down a kid (or anyone) in that state, say goodbye to your freedoms.
The American Herbalist Guild would like every herbalist to be under their umbrella, would love to have us practice under their rules...sorry, aint gonna happen. If I don't trust the AMA, I'm sure not going to trust you.
I'll share what I can because that's the way I was brought up...one big famila...even if your name was O'Malley, Shwartz, or Wong. But you aren't going to take it away from me because I worked too hard to get it.
Who ever stole my beet plants in 1997, you came over the fence to get 'em, you were lucky you didn't get shot. Those snake loads reallllyyyy hurt.
Law and order are important to me, but so is my privacy. That doesn't mean I have the right to own child porn.
I want freedom of religion for everyone, but I want to be free from religion.
If three people or four people or five people want a group marriage...my only concern would be who's doing the cooking that night. What folks do in bed after age 18 is not my concern. Frankly I'm happy with one woman in my bed and she's been happy with me for almost 30 years. (I do know some poly families...and their kids are wonderfully adjusted.)
I think folks have a right to deny themselves medical treatment and after carefully consideration...end their lives if they face only a life of pain. (As a chronic pain sufferer who is denied effective pain killers, the thought of ending my life has come up more than once. Glad I didn't because one doctor risked her license to give a non-approved treatment. Thanks Dr. B!)
I'm an herbalist who is not a vegetarian and has no problem chowing down a steak with mushrooms. Don't lecture me about animals. I've raised them, loved them, eaten them. I've also been hungry and know the value of a chicken that has to last a week.
I see the value of the FDA, but why can't I market my homemade jams and jellies if folks know they're made in my kitchen?
If I'm such a good citizen, ex-cop, former special education teacher, pillar of the community, why can't I get a CCW permit, especially since I live in a city with the highest murder rate per capita of any town in the state?
I think I would be too much of a curmudgeon to live in a survivalist county. I'd want to be left alone to do my own thing (liberal), and be willing to carry a gun and use it if vegan food nazis tried liberating my beef cow (conservative).
Oh well, it was a nice thought :-)
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Taking over a county
Thu, May 17, 2007 - 1:26 AMGood answer. There are only a couple itenms in your self-description there with which I might contend, but nothing that would cause me to want to burn down your teepee with you in it.
You're probably too much of a curmudgeon NOT to live in a survivalist society.
Yeah, Cali sucks sweaty balls for CCW. If it's withing your means, you might want to look into establishing legal residency somplace like Mariposa or Mendocino where the sheriffs are pro-CCW. You could still live where you are, just be legally domiciled elsewhere. That's what I had to do. I live in FL now, so CCW is much easier. The weather sucks though. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 29, 2007 - 7:19 AMMick, Why would you have to go to a tactical school? I thought you were a soldier in africa. do you have something against suv's? Can I drive my 7.3 liter turbo deisel pick up in your county? Have you ever been to Alaska? If you went up there spewing your rhetoric some good ole boy might give you the back of the hand. I'm not trying to be mean, I'm just worried about your safety. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Tue, May 29, 2007 - 5:03 PMWill you two please arrange to meet up and knife each other? Or some other way to take it off list? -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Thu, May 31, 2007 - 12:36 PMThank you, Kate! I agree. Please do that, boys. Gah.
All apologies for being an inattentive moderator!
Play nice kids. This is all hypothetical.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Taking over a county
Thu, May 17, 2007 - 8:17 AMI'd love to have you around! :-)
-
Re: Taking over a county
Thu, May 17, 2007 - 9:18 AMDoc you and I have more incommon then I could have ever thought. I cant wait till MAPS.
Chuck -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Thu, May 17, 2007 - 11:09 AMOh, silence! I'm jealous! Finally got the $$ for it, and registration is closed! Grrr.... -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Taking over a county
Thu, May 17, 2007 - 3:29 PMYou can still be placed on the list...I know they are holding a few spots open. They always do. Contact Cindy. Say Doc sent you. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Fri, May 18, 2007 - 1:45 PMYou're my hero - I'm in! See you there, Doc!
:-D -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Fri, May 18, 2007 - 5:22 PMim with kaya on the island thing, they go for around a million bucks on ebay just type in island then search highest price first
search.ebay.com/island_W0Q...3QQsbrsrtZd
that one for 2.2 mil is awesome but id settle for the 750 k one as well, just sail there in my sailboat and build a castle out of the rocks there, grow weed on my fantasy island hehehehehe -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Fri, May 18, 2007 - 5:31 PMon second thought the 2.2 mil one is sweet peep this video
www.ourislands.com/islands/...eo2.shtml
off the hinges -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Fri, May 18, 2007 - 5:45 PMtruthfully, forget paying for an island, when the shit hits the fan and the government or whats left of it is fighting someone or giving help to the victoms i will just sail 13 miles to santa cruz island and call it my own. there are wild boars, indigenous plant life and fish galore. i can get there in just a few hours. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Fri, May 18, 2007 - 8:23 PMThat's the spirit!! :-)
Don't forget your guns though, and maybe a small cannon - you won't be th only one after it! -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Fri, May 18, 2007 - 9:08 PMive got a winchester 12 gage semi auto for big game and zombies and a sighted in 22 rifle for small game onboard, i also have waterworld on dvd for entertainment hehehe
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Taking over a county
Fri, May 18, 2007 - 9:16 PMIt's good to have friends in high places.
:-)
C. -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Mon, May 21, 2007 - 7:25 AMIsn't it though, Chuck? Glad I can call you my friend! Heehee...bubbling over with pure elation - it'll be my ONLY vacation this summer besides going to PHX, AZ to get my crap outta storage...woohoo.
Rick - Excelente. That should help! -
-
Re: Taking over a county
Mon, May 21, 2007 - 11:40 AMI'll be the guy with the beard, the fedora, and the chicken legs. (On my body, not from KFC.)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Taking over a county
Mon, May 28, 2007 - 11:01 AMRipley county in missouri is a poor county. It's in the eastern ozark's with 3 spring fed river's. I wouldnt be surprised if there were only about 100 registerd voter's. Very cheap living, Hill's, lot's of tree's, fertile ground, good hunting and fishing. Doniphan is the county seat.