Galt's Gulch

an alternative to revolution?

Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 5 months ago to Government
35 comments | Share | Flag

this might be interesting;;;; what would you think
of a fund to defend folks in litigation over refusal
to obey regulations from the executive branch??? -- j
.
SOURCE URL: http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/obamas-2300-new-regulations-spark-civil-disobedience-plan/

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by $ blarman 9 years, 5 months ago
    I like the idea of civil disobedience, but why should we tolerate the laws in the first place? What really needs to happen is for the States to say - we're not going to allow the Feds to enforce this law within our state - like Wyoming did with several federal rules recently.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 5 months ago
      As long as they understand and are willing to accept the consequences - or it's a blind donation. The unions have a similar fund whose main purpose is to defend litigation against the union bosses. Strictly voluntary but in truth if you don't donate forget about workinig. On it's face under the old system it's legal Keep in mind it's no longer the old system Eyes Wide open.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 9 years, 5 months ago
    his argument is that it is not the legislators who we have to be initially concerned with but those tasked to implement the laws as they see fit and they will continue to do this as long as they can get away with it. revolution is necessary but what type and how it will manifest itself is a good guess.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by cksawyer 9 years, 5 months ago
    I like the idea of a mega-scale organized tax revolt. Say 20K or so people, with a very public media/soc media campaign building up to April 15, refuse to pay taxes en mass. The necessary number may be larger or smaller, but needs to be large enough that the government could do much of anything functional in response. Then when the less bold-at-heart, middle-of-the-roaders and even folks who are no fully ideologically aligned, see 20K folks getting away with not paying taxes, the movement should spread rapidly from there.....
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Flootus5 9 years, 5 months ago
      I remember back in the 90's when sentiment against tax and spend Democrats was running high, it was estimated that if 10% of taxpayers refused to pay the whole thing would come down.

      Same issue today, just now the sentiment has evolved against what are now the Demoblicans.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 5 months ago
      Mailing the income tax stuff in on a preset date of April 16th or 17th might work as a civil disobedience posture taking a page from the oppositions book. Given a large enough response. Of course the response would be no response other than an automatic computerized charge of adding a fine But it might serve to spur discussion..
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Owlsrayne 9 years, 5 months ago
    The only way govt is going to change permanentely is that the states decide that regional secession from the union is the only answer. I would like to see the southwestern states post a signed document of secession and then Maine (they have an active group wanting that for a long time). Then the Southern States who still have animosity against the North for winning the Civil War.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 5 months ago
    I think it is an interesting idea. I have been glad of such organizations as the Institute of Justice and Pacific Legal Foundation because they make their purpose fighting the gov for the rights of the individual. No way do I have big enough bucks to hire a high class lawyer to defend me if I stand up for freedom sometime. I would have to hope that someone would think the cause itself were worth defending and stand up for me in turn.

    The idea of treating this like a kickstarter so that a lot of use who fly under the radar with our lives can contribute a bit here and there - and the money is used to try to extend personal freedom - is one that matches with my wallet and my philosophy.

    Jan
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 5 months ago
    There are already two good libertarian legal groups (and I don't count ACLU): the Institute for Justice (ij.org) and Pacific Legal Foundation (pacificlegal.org). PLF pursues mostly property-rights and environmental-law issues; IJ has done well lately against occupational licensing and in favor of school vouchers. I highly recommend both.

    Adding a new one to handle defense against overreaching regulation may be worthwhile, but it may be reinventing the wheel. I'd at least have a look at those two first.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 5 months ago
    Well, a tax revolt would surely result in immediate force.

    I think Murray makes an interesting point here. I see it as one of two alternatives. Do this or prepare to leave. Perhaps, at some point, a huge portion of the population would (maybe without saying a peep) just stop complying with a regulation. A few will be swat teamed to be made into examples. But, who knows where it would lead? My own personal position is that such a revolt won't happen here in my lifetime. The average American is eager for things to get much more restrictive. They want it. They're frightened and want the government to be their daddy. They're frightened of brown men in caves far away. They're scared of mumps. They're scared about the oceans rising 15 feet over the next year, etc... People, for the most part, are clamoring for more force, more regulation. I'd put Murray in what I call "the 15%ers".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 9 years, 5 months ago
    The problem with contributing to a fund that intends to defend purposeful lawbreakers is that it opens the door to prosecution of contributors to "aiding and abetting" charges. Encouraging civil disobedience is a dicey game, and there are no guarantees you'll be treated as kindly as the civil rights crowd are now treated. Remember it was no "cake-walk" for MLK in the beginning.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 5 months ago
    As long as they understand and are willing to accept the consequences - or it's a blind donation. The unions have a similar fund whose main purpose is to defend litigation against the union bosses. Strictly voluntary but in truth if you don't donate forget about workinig. On it's face under the old system it's legal Keep in mind it's no longer the old system Eyes Wide open.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by marshafamilaroenright 9 years, 5 months ago
      What's wrong with Murray's idea of a not for profit legal institution that does this? Then you contribute to that. None of the Kickstarter problems anyone's mentioned.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 5 months ago
        I looked through all the fore going and didn't find Murray's idea...???? But one without a too narrowly defined stated purpose might work. Then again as others mentioned once you bring lawyers into it .....Is there such a creature who has a track record for such defenses? Sort of an American Civil Liberties Union but a real one? then again after the Patriot Act which does away with all of that before whom would you argue a case? You see how far incrementalism has taken us and how many doors once opened are no longer available. Still want to vote for the Government Party and give them ''one more chance?" Go for it. It may indeed not be too late. But I wouldn't wait. For any one invoking the Constitution it''s not a backs against the wall structure anymore.,

        So. In absence of civil liberties and with no idea who was arrested nor their whereabouts then what? Infiltration is usually the next step. But no one has to say what happened to Aarethun if one day per chance the posts stop. he may have upped anchor and gone elsewhere.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 5 months ago
          I assure you that we Do Not Want You To Depart!!! -- j
          .
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 5 months ago
            Perish the thought but I didn't want to miss any of the key points mentioned by marshafamiliaroenright.

            Addition. Constitution is not a backs against the wall structure but it is a safe haven and worth reinstating. Lest your children be learning the straight arm salute and chanting We Serve The Party Comrade Hillary.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo