The Designer States Concept
The other day Mark Gibson slipped in a link at the end of his Happy Birthday to self post -- not realizing that drawing such attention to himself was a cry to the Fates for some unwanted attention -- concerning a plan to establish a Christian state.
It's an interesting link, and is worth a little attention.
This immediately reminded me of the Free State Project, which is an ongoing attempt by a very Libertarian (though they are careful to point out that they're connected to no, formal political party) group to get 20,000 or more people to move to New Hampshire, creating what they hope will be a strong enough political action base to reinforce and concentrate a system of minimal government and as little as possible dependence on the Federal government for assistance. They codify it in part as a philosophy "that government exists at most to protect people's rights, and should neither provide for people nor punish them for activities that interfere with no one else." As this is very much in keeping with the core premises of the Libertarian Party, I had been under the impression that the Free State Project was connected with them... but whether or not it ever was, they're declaring no such association now.
The efforts of the latter group are more of direct interest to me -- not because I'd necessarily want to live there (I've come to appreciate the need in any advanced society for a social contract between state and citizens, and am looking for such things as national health insurance to be a citizen's right), but more as an interesting socio-political experiment. These people are generally the ones the Libertarians are reaching for, and are more often than not gobbled up by the GOP on the basis that they need a "real" party if they're to keep the Democrats out of office, assuring these people that Democrats = heavy taxation, handouts of public money to the lazy and undeserving, and full scale gun control to the point of near abolition. These are some of the people who flocked to the GOP under Ronald Reagan, and who have been largely kept there ever since on the basis of these fears.
(Every national election cycle they sweep through Pennsylvania - especially the North and Western parts of the state - to assure people that Democrats are nothing more than Communists who want to take away their God & guns, and, unfortunately, large numbers of people fall for it. I'm not sure if they convinced people in the former steel and mining towns of Western PA if Al Gore had a forked tail or not, but I'm fairly sure they ended up believing that he would send agents around to collect all of their weapons.)
I like to see Libertarian gains because it helps erode part of the power base of GOP, though I'm sure that (just as the Green Party insists that they do for the environmentally- and social justice-minded) they maintain that they largely draw in people who feel disenfranchised by the Big Two. In many cases I'm sure this is true, but I would be amazed if some of the people who voted for one of these "third" parties wouldn't have tossed their vote to either the Democrats or Republicans in a best-fit approach if they hadn't found a group so explicitely aligned with their views.
The Christian Exodus organization, which is currently looking to relocate some 50,000 Christians to Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina, and so establish strong Christian government at the state level rather than aiming to transform all 50 states in one, long move, disturbs me much more. Whereas the Free Staters want more of a hands-off approach from government, the C.E. is interested in what the rest of us would see as an infringement on the rights and activities of others, though I'm sure they would choose to see it as freedom from a secular state that restricts the exercise of their religious beliefs. Theocracies of any stripe scare me; the Bush Administration crew is already far too uncomfortably entrenched in this belief set for my comfort.
I have no idea if any considerable force is building behind this Christian Exodus movement, especially as: a) they appear to be overly focused on the gay marriage issue, and b) they've espoused that their movement to each of these target states is with "the express purpose of dissolving that State’s bond with the union." I seem to recall this sort of thing not going over too well with the federal government.
Each of these efforts is worth keeping an eye on, IMHO.
.png)
Comments