Ian Freeman for City Council At-Large

Originally published at: https://freekeene.com/2019/09/18/ian-freeman-for-city-council-at-large/

Vote Freeman for City Council At Large on Oct. 8th

Vote Freeman for City Council At Large on Oct. 8th

This year, I’ve thrown my hat in the ring for the Keene at-large city council election. The city clerk’s office requested a candidate statement, so I’ve sent them an essay that you can find here on my campaign website at ianfreeman.nhliberty.info. In short, I’d like to get rid of the BEARCAT armored tank the police acquired against the will of the people, end enforcement of victimless crimes, abolish useless and counterproductive city bureaucracy like the Parking Enforcement and Zoning and Code Enforcement departments, and make taxation voluntary.

You can read my full statement here.

Please come out to the primary election on October 8th and vote for me and other pro-freedom candidates like Nobody for Mayor, Aria DiMezzo for Ward 2 Council, Robert Call for Ward 4, and Conan Salada for the Ward 4 special election. Then mark your calendar for general election on November 5th, and “remember, remember” to come vote for any of us that made it through the primary!

You’re a reformist. Reform doesn’t accomplish any real gains. You should read Kaczynski’s books.
Samm

Industrial-Technological Society Cannot Be Reformed

111. The foregoing principles help to show how hopelessly difficult it would be to reform the industrial system in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing our sphere of freedom. There has been a consistent tendency, going back at least to the Industrial Revolution, for technology to strengthen the system at a high cost in individual freedom and local autonomy. Hence any change designed to protect freedom from technology would be contrary to a fundamental trend in the development of our society. Consequently, such a change either would be a transitory one—soon swamped by the tide of history—or, if large enough to be permanent, would alter the nature of our whole society. This by the first and second principles. Moreover, since society would be altered in a way that could not be predicted in advance (third principle) there would be great risk. Changes large enough to make a lasting difference in favor of freedom would not be initiated because it would be realized that they would gravely disrupt the system. So any attempts at reform would be too timid to be effective. Even if changes large enough to make a lasting difference were initiated, they would be retracted when their disruptive effects became apparent. Thus, permanent changes in favor of freedom could be brought about only by persons prepared to accept radical, dangerous and unpredictable alteration of the entire system. In other words by revolutionaries, not reformers.

112. People anxious to rescue freedom without sacrificing the supposed benefits of technology will suggest naive schemes for some new form of society that would reconcile freedom with technology. Apart from the fact that people who make such suggestions seldom propose any practical means by which the new form of society could be set up in the first place, it follows from the fourth principle that even if the new form of society could be once established, it either would collapse or would give results very different from those expected.

113. So even on very general grounds it seems highly improbable that any way of changing society could be found that would reconcile freedom with modern technology. In the next few sections we will give more specific reasons for concluding that freedom and technological progress are incompatible.