JohnN

Thanks All, I was raised semi-catholic. The idea of going to a church is not one that crossed my mind. Having shed the spiritualism of my younger years and the last place I thought that I would ever go again was to a church. But maybe that is not a wise thought.

Hi all, I am looking for opinions and advice on how I may better find people who are passionate about friendship and who can be relied upon. I left the "comfort" of my community of origin (for the second time) about 2 years ago and moved to New Hampshire. My wife is native to New Hampshire, but having now spent significant time with her friends and family, I am not convinced that they represent the highest quality of character that I can associate with. She encourages me to find other friends but I am not sure where or how to look. I have loosely associated with the Freestate Project and will be trying to search their ranks more thoroughly. I find the biggest struggle in making quality friends is philosophical and emotional in nature. I have made a devotion to honesty and truth, but find that this is not a virtue shared by many. That is why I am reaching out to this community. Hopefully some understand this struggle and can share some advice. My wife and I are looking to start a family within the next two years and I am feeling as though I must provide a safe community for my children to grow in. Thanks, John

Thanks for everyones responses. My issue still exists with the commonly used phase, the other half of which I did not talk about, "human wants/needs are infinite". If resources being finite means, scarce in a specific moment (for instance I do not have a pen or pencil in this room) as opposed to meaning the knowledge of their existence, than what does human wants/needs are infinite mean. The second part of the saying, should, if it is to make sense, be held to the same standard of referring to a specific moment and the accessibility. However, all the wants of a person are not accessible at any moment. For instance I am thinking about this topic, and not thinking about my next meal; i just ate. I am not thinking about many things right now, I would therefor not call my wants infinite. I find the phase, "resources are finite, human wants are infinite" to be a poor representation of what is happening. I think that it would be better stated that "wants do not always align with available resources".

Could someone explain the idea that resources are finite and how this is applied to economic thinking? It would appear to me that resources are near infinite, there is an entire universe waiting to be harvest and mined. While I get that humanity cannot currently access the resources outside of earth, this does not mean that the resources are limited. It means instead that our capacity to effectively utilize resources are limited. Fossil fuels may run out but if someone develops nuclear fusion, the energy problem is solved. I don't see how the idea that resources are finite can describe anything other than peoples anxiety that their survival is in jeopardy. Instead I tend to think that resources are infinite, limited only by our individual capacity to access them. This implies that instead of fearing a tougher future, we should think about how to build a better future from the near limitless possibilities. What am I missing?

Jeff, Thanks again. The question becomes, what does "doing it" look like? To me, doing what I think is right, is about earning enough capital to buy land, building a home, and become as self sufficient as possible (permaculture). Once I can live with or without whomever I choose, than I can selectively add, cautiously, back into my life, those whose values I support. In my current state of living I am helpless to look at the thousands of people I rely on for my survival and try to take any universal stance that is not hypocritical, or a double standard. I have already have committed my future to this goal. Instead of the typical political approach of attempting to change all of societies people to my image, I am instead opting to change myself. My post here, is an attempt to discover possible segues off of this main goal which may be viable. Mainly, the feasibility of a community. But communities need people. I am trying to discover what the people want. Where are these people? Are they here on the forum......?

Jeff, Thanks for your response. I moved to NH 8 months ago, I did not sign the FSP "intent to move". I already moved out of NH to VT. This is because of an investment property, not due to anything political. Although, I did not find what I was looking for in NH. Not yet anyways, which is why I am striking up this convo. Are you implying when you say, "there are many more productive things to do", that trying to make such a community a reality is not productive? Or do you assume that I am not being productive in other ways as well? I did not receive your comments as productive. John

Hello all, If you are of a mindset like me, then you have spent time not only fantasizing about an anarchotopia but about a practical, "start-up model", stateless community as well. While much of my thoughts on this topic, may be wishful thinking, I have no doubt that a community of voluntaryist people could exist. Consider these questions a form of market research. 1) Is anyone in the process of making this happen? 2) How, where, why, and with whom would you like to see this happen? 3) What "sacrifices" to your lifestyle are you willing to accept in order to create a new community? 4) How could I gain a better understanding of where a market for an anarchommunity exists? 5) Any other thoughts?

Thanks for the response. Communicating my thoughts, feelings, and fears are not an issue. I am fully honest to the upmost of my ability to understand why I do/feel what I do. However, my feelings of fear, or hesitation, typically lead her to become more shut down as opposed to supportive. Instead of helping figure out why I feel what I feel, she fills herself with her own worries. She, due to past relationships, believes that relationships are fragile (her words). This is preventing her from becoming fully invested (my opinion). She is waiting for the water to warm up before she jumps in. While she is a self motivated and rational person, I do not think that she has had exposure to the types of ideas that I put forth. She is skeptical of my beliefs because she has never heard them before and some of them, if accepted, change ones entire perspective. But she is starting to open her field of vision further. Example, she is now listening to podcasts. A lot of my feelings of fear, I believe, stem more from the potential lost opportunity costs of moving forward. We live about two hours away from each other. How that came to be is a long story and is not an issue in our relationship. However, a issue arises in trying to solve our geographical distances. She has a job she likes and I am okay with moving again. However, she lives in a more expensive area, and given my goals, I do not want to invest all my money into the very little property i would be able to afford there. I could continue, but I think I have articulated enough thoughts to go share with her now. Any other feedback or questions that you have is welcome.

I submitted this post prematurely. I wanted to add that: It is when I, do not press (or force) the topic of Anarchy on her, that she slides closer to that perspective. When I get upset at our differences it only serves to drive her further away from the perspective. Since I know that her and I are rational, I know that our philosophies will eventually merge. The question I have been asking myself is when, and whether that is worth waiting for? My fear is that I may look back upon the decisions that I am making now and believe that I made them out of fear. But this potential future regret could come in the form of moving forward with the relationship, or terminating it. I have never regretted any decision I made in the past, any ideas why I feel I may fear this one?

Hello all, I want to describe for you the current predicament in which I find myself. Maybe you all can explain to me something that I am missing. I am currently in a sexual/romantic relationship with someone who, while ceding pro government stances, still hasn't accepted that "government" is inherently evil. Political and ethical discussion were abundant for the first two months of our relationship, but then more or less disappeared. It is with the absence of those discussions that our relationship appeared to begin flourishing. After, a recent discussion, which highlighted again our differences, I believe that I have come to a conclusion about the status of our relationship. 1) that it is sustained by my desire to censor myself, in order to make it work, 2) that if I do not censor myself, I will not be okay with the perspective she holds.

Hello all, I want to describe for you the current predicament in which I find myself. Maybe you all can explain to me something that I am missing. I am currently in a sexual/romantic relationship with someone who, while ceding pro government stances, still hasn't accepted that "government" is inherently evil. Political and ethical discussion were abundant for the first two months of our relationship, but then more or less disappeared. It is with the absence of those discussions that our relationship appeared to begin flourishing. After, a recent discussion, which highlighted again our differences, I believe that I have come to a conclusion about the status of our relationship. 1) that it is sustained by my desire to censor myself, in order to make it work, 2) that if I do not censor myself, I will not be okay with the perspective she holds.

I would agree, it is best to avoid the moral issue unless "they" have left no other way around. This is the case for what I am looking to do. I would like to design and build alternative style homes, which most towns will likely require a licensed architect to sign off on. I could design them and have an architect simply sign the plans to please the building inspector. But why should some architect be able to charge me to sign his name. I don't like the justification of stealing back from a thief. It is a slippery slope. Since I was in the military, I spent four years as a parasite. I was paid more than was stolen from me. $142,837.95 is what I was paid over the 4 years. So I cannot say that, I have been taken from. In fact I have taken a lot from others.

Should I steal from tax payers to fund my education? My immediate reaction is no. However, were do I make a distinction of what government services are acceptable and which ones are not? How can I justify using roads but not the GI Bill? Thoughts? John

I am sorry, I am having a hard time following your first post. I would like to engage in your discussion but wish to gain clarification as to your interpretation of the "american way".

I see it as another attempt to grow the church. "Acceptance" of atheist and "acceptance" of homosexuality were only the beginning. Why not cash in on those Occupy Protesters who are obviously pissed at the system. The pope wishes to be more sympathetic to the "99%" then the government is. I would argue that the "Occupy" emotion (people who are pissed at the illusion of capitalism) is widespread across the western world. Since western countries make up the Popes audience and since the governments are not meeting the emotional demands of the 99% the pope has a clear target. With the new Pope, catholics who's faith is waning and are angry at "capitalists" will find themselves sympathetic to the church once again.