Hoppe strategy of municipality secession

Reply

josephbwarren Posted: Tue, Nov 10 2009 3:16 AM

rated by 0 users

When it comes to anarcho-capitalist strategy, it seems to me that many ideas floating around are a little ridiculous, such as staging a Maoist guerrilla war.  I agree that it is time to take the next step in the advancement of our cause, but does anyone else think that perhaps we are making things too complicated?  I mean, sea-steading is a fine idea, but libertarians have been talking about this since the 1970's, and, frankly, it's unlikely to become a reality.

Hans-Hermann Hoppe has discussed in several places the possibility of anarcho-capitalists taking over city governments through the current political system and seceding on the municipal level.  He gives several advantages to such a strategy, but it seems the largest advantage is the fact that this is a possibility.

A well-run campaign lead by dedicated Rothbardians such as local Mises members could take over a city government and enact many key reforms that, once successful and recognized as such, would lead to more anti-statist reforms.  There would soon exist in the United States a functioning and legitimately sized an-cap society that would prove to Americans across the nation that Rothbardianism is sound and the state is unnecessary.  We could do this in 2010 and have a statist city by 2012!

What am I missing? Why isn't this option discussed more?

Reply

Kakugo replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 4:03 AM

rated by 0 users

Working to bring down the system from within... it worked for the Socialists but won't work for anybody embracing Classic Liberalism, Libertarian ideas or Austrian economics. Why? It's very simple indeed: what can you offer "for free" to the people? Nothing. 

You are going to eliminate or at the very least drastically cut down welfare spending and business subsidies. Sure, it's the right thing to do and the only course of action if we don't want to become every bit as miserable as North Korea but do you think it will work? The free lunch mentality is the most addictive and destructive drug ever discovered by man. You cannot reason with people saying "we need to cut welfare spending right now because we cannot afford it anymore and we'll be back eating grass if we continue this way". They'll tell you they pay taxes for that. They'll tell you to tax the rich (which more often than not means "middle class", surely not George Soros). They'll tell you to "improve efficiency". They do not understand the system is inherently flawed. The don't understand and they don't care.

Reply

Conza88 replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 6:40 AM

rated by 0 users

josephbwarren:

A well-run campaign lead by dedicated Rothbardians such as local Mises members could take over a city government

josephbwarren:

enact many key reforms

"And now onto the last order of business.. the new 'capital' will be moved here. So that there may never be anymore capitals ever again."

josephbwarren:

We could do this in 2010 and have a statist city by 2012!

Wait, what?

Reply

Andrew Cain replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 6:41 AM

rated by 0 users

I can see it now. The city-state...Misesia!

Reply

G8R HED replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 6:49 AM

rated by 0 users

We had a local property owner here in east-central Missouri that recently attempted a secession style 'village' on his property. It was to be a development exempt from county building codes and planning & zoning. His proposed development was not prohibited by state law.

Well, it didn't take too long for state law to get changed. His proposed 'village' development is now prohibited by law.

Reply

Conza88 replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 6:55 AM

rated by 0 users

G8R HED:

His proposed 'village' development is now prohibited by law.

Such is the nature of the state.

Why would a gang of thieves let the hostages go free?

Reply

G8R HED replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 7:02 AM

rated by 0 users

Here is a link discussing the repeal of the 'village' law as reported by KMOV in St.Louis:

http://www.kmov.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8V1M3OO3.html

From the article:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This year's legislation by Sen. Jack Goodman, R-Mount Vernon, would repeal the 2007 law, returning the requirements for incorporation as a village to the way they used to be. Goodman said the 2007 change was too significant to have been enacted without any legislative debate.

"The net effect of last year's legislation is that now one landowner, going through minimal procedures, can incorporate a village of his or her own and exempt that village from county zoning, county planning and county land use rules," Goodman said.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The concept sounds similar to what you are talking about with municipal secession.  It seems that collective interests of 'city' and 'county' supercede those of the individual.

....not that I disagree with secession in any way - I would prefer individual secession.  Just appears as though even smaller political subdivisions are very aggressive in quashing any individual attempts at property-liberty.

Reply

Stranger replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 9:28 AM

rated by 0 users

Whatever you do, you have to be prepared to fight it out with the local authorities, at least. That means having a fighting organization is a prerequisite to any form of secession.

Then you can try municipal secession, but even that is a little big. It might attract too much attention from authorities above the local. The principle of microsecession is that only the smallest possible space is the target of secession, making it that much more likely to succeed, and establishing the precedent for an avalanche of additional microsecessions that the authorities will be dumbfounded to deal with.

But we can't really achieve that unless there already exists a properly organized Rothbardian defense society, if only to hide away the "perpetrators" should a secession attempt fail and the state seek to hunt them down. Our ability to protect secessionists from the state will eventually be cause of the state's total collapse. The alternative is to bribe the state's agents in return for freedom, but that is simply another form of protection expense.

Reply

Justin Laws replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 12:15 PM

rated by 0 users

I had always thought that Samuel Edward Konkin III's agorism/counter-economy idea was a great one.

Reply

liberty student replied on Tue, Nov 10 2009 7:27 PM

rated by 0 users

Justin Laws:

I had always thought that Samuel Edward Konkin III's agorism/counter-economy idea was a great one.

It is good because it is peaceful and voluntary.  It is bad because it is illegal and requires group action to be effective.  Lots of libertarians call themselves agorists, but pay taxes, vote and work in the white market.  I wish there was more libertarian scholarship on this than there is on the FED.

Reply

Justin Laws replied on Wed, Nov 11 2009 12:13 PM

rated by 0 users

liberty student:

Justin Laws:

I had always thought that Samuel Edward Konkin III's agorism/counter-economy idea was a great one.

It is good because it is peaceful and voluntary.  It is bad because it is illegal and requires group action to be effective.  Lots of libertarians call themselves agorists, but pay taxes, vote and work in the white market.  I wish there was more libertarian scholarship on this than there is on the FED.

This is why I have refrained from calling myself one, as "cool" is it might be.  One must practice what one preaches.

If I wasn't such a newbie at economic thinking, I might try my hand at this... http://www.agorism.info/ seems like a good start, for now.