Wyoming
453,588
Alaska
550,043
Vermont
562,758
North Dakota
638,800
Delaware
666,163
South Dakota
696,004
Montana
799,065
Rhode Island
1,003,464
Idaho
1,006,749
New Hampshire
1,109,252
Nevada
1,201,833
Maine
1,227,928
Population Density (must be ≤ 35/mile2)
There is ample evidence of philosophical and political mass psychosis when population density levels are great. Using the states' political recognition of the right to own and carry guns as a benchmark, the most densely populated states typically have the worst civil rights records regarding the 2nd Amendment.
For example, here are the ten worst and best RKBA states:
The 10 best gun-owning states have an average population density of only 47 people/mile5. The 10 worst states (including D.C.) have a density of 1,393, and if D.C. is excluded their density is still 494, which is over 10 times that of the 10 best states. We suggest that there is a very high correlation of low population density to reason, responsibility, and political sanity.
The national average in 1990 was 70/mile5. Thus, the Committee requires a state with half or less than the national average, i.e., 35 or less people per square mile.
States in bold also have a population less than 1M (we include Idaho). There are only 14 states with densities less than half the national average, and all are in the West or MidWest:
Alaska
1
Wyoming
5
Montana
6
South Dakota
9
North Dakota
9
Nevada
11
Idaho
12
New Mexico
12
Nebraska
21
Utah
21
Kansas
30
Oregon
30
Arizona
32
Colorado
32
We mention the case of Vermont at 61 people/mile5 as a distant possibility, given its third smallest population of just 562,758.
Water/Land Ratio (must be ≥ 0.66%)
The national average is 0.66%, so we will use this as our standard. All of the above six states in bold meet this criterion:
Alaska
13.10%
Vermont
3.81%
North Dakota
2.42%
South Dakota
1.59%
Montana
1.00%
Idaho
0.98%
Wyoming
0.73%
Water/Population Ratio (≥ 0.50 acres/person)
Water is life, and water rights issues will be key in the early half of this century. The national average of water acres/person is 0.65, though that figure is a bit high because of our huge Great Lakes. The Committee considers 0.50 water acres/person to be an acceptable minimum. Six of our top 7 states make the grade:
Alaska
100.12 water acres/person
North Dakota
1.71 water acres/person
Montana
1.19 water acres/person
South Dakota
1.13 water acres/person
Wyoming
1.00 water acres/person
Idaho
0.52 water acres/person
Vermont
0.42 water acres/person
Alaska is the last outdoors paradise in America, however, living there is arduous. The Dakotas, Montana, and Wyoming are quite wet at 1.00-1.71 water acres/person. Idaho squeaks by at 0.52.
Alas, Vermont (already on "probation" because of her high population density) drops out due to low water acreage/person, even though her water/land ratio is a very high 3.81%. Even if we kept Vermont in the running, she would be eliminated later because of her high Democratic voting history (half the counties voted for Gore in 2000).
Contiguous States ("brushfire quotient")
The Committee requires, for relative tax and business climate advantages, that our state border at least 4 other states. Also, such contiguousness will likely enhance the brushfire nature of our political actions.
It is advantageous, though not absolutely necessary, that our state border at least one Canadian province for increased opportunity of imports (legal or not).
Idaho
6 (plus 1 Canadian province)
Wyoming
6
South Dakota
6
Montana
4 (plus 2 Canadian provinces)
North Dakota
3 (plus 2 Canadian provinces)
Alaska
0 (plus 2 Canadian provinces)
Because of her remoteness from the "lower 48" we must remove Alaska from our consideration. While Alaska remains high on any pioneering survivalist's list, we conclude that she is far too isolated to stave off any US invasion or blockade.
Topographical Defensibility
Since the Committee believes US military action to be a likely eventual threat, we must consider topographical defensibility. For example, flat Poland has been overrun numerous times by Russia and/or Germany, yet mountainous Switzerland survived WWII without invasion by Hitler.
At this juncture, we must eliminate mountain-free North and South Dakota, which had remained in very solid running with Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho (the only remaining states).
Idaho offers the most topographical defensibility (e.g., the Bitterroot Range), followed by Montana (i.e., the western half).
Although Wyoming is generally a plains state (hence its name derived from the Delaware Indian term Mecheweami-ing, which means "on the great plain"), about 25% of her surface is mountainous. Wyoming also has a mean elevation of 6,700', the second highest after Colorado.
U.S. Land Ownership (must be < 50%)
This affects not only freedom, but property prices.
Montana
27.7%
Wyoming
48.8%
Idaho
62.6%
Political Tenor
Wyoming is more conservative than even Idaho or Montana, with zero counties voting for Gore in 2000 (a testimony matched only by Utah and Nebraska). Two-thirds of Wyoming votes Republican, and the state has an entrenched Libertarian Party. (The only liberal enclaves are Jackson, Rock Springs, Laramie, and Cheyenne.) The allowed open carrying of firearms is fairly common throughout the state. Wyoming tied with Montana at 92% for RKBA in Boston's Gun Bible.
Idaho is population top-heavy in/around Boise, however, this metro area is not yet as liberal as the Hollywood playground/haven of Ketchum/Sun Valley (the "Aspen" of Idaho). Idaho is very much a libertarian state, which rated 97% (2nd Place) for RKBA in Boston's Gun Bible. Northern Idaho (above I-90) attracts many privacy-seeking folks.
Montana has remained an astonishingly "uppity" state to this day. She and Nevada were the only states to openly flout the egregious 55mph national speed limit with speeding tickets of only $5. In the mid-1990s daytime highway speed limits were "Reasonable and Prudent" — which transformed the state's highways into a de facto autobahn. Open carry of weapons and no open container laws (shades of Louisiana) combine to create an extremely libertarian climate (with a Boston T. Party RKBA score of 92%). The only liberal enclaves of note are Billings and Helena.
Business Climate
Wyoming is the winner, with excellent incorporation laws and lack of income (personal and corporate), gross receipts, and inventory taxes. Sales tax is just 4%, and fuel tax is only 9¢/gallon. Low property taxes. Aggressively seeks new business.
Social Acceptance
> Northern Idaho has somewhat of a reputation for racist behavior, although this has been greatly overblown by the liberal media. (The Aryan Nations has only a few hundred members.)
Montanans and Wyomingans "live and let live," although they do not gracefully brook urbanites who whine that "it isn't like back home."
Election Sweep Possibility
Wyoming offers a near perfect opportunity for our scenario. Every four years (2006, 2010, 2014, etc.) are elected: the House, half the Sentate, the Governor, the Secretary of State, State Treasurer, State Auditor, Superintendent of Public Instruction, some Supreme Court Justices, and all county officials (clerks, treasurers, assessors, coroners, attorneys, sheriffs, DAs, and JPs).
Self-Sufficiency
Energy
Wyoming is the undisputed champion with huge coal production (1st in USA) and bountiful oil and natural gas (6th in USA). 95% of power is generated by low-sulphur coal, and the 5% is produced by the state's 10 hydro-electric plants. Electricity and natural gas prices are among the nation's lowest.
Food
Wyoming is very strong in cattle and sheep, sugar beets, barley, dry beans, beef, corn, and wheat. Wyoming has the largest antelope population, and has ample elk, deer, and fish.
Raw Materials
Over half of Wyoming's economy is based on trona, bentonite, gemstones, wool, hay, and timber.
Industry
More than 5M tourists visit Wyoming each year, spending over $1B. Minerals bring in $3.2B, and agriculture $1.5B.
OUR RECOMMENDATION: WYOMING
After much research and consideration, the Committee is unanimous in our strong recommendation that Wyoming be chosen for our plan. In fact, Wyoming appears nearly tailor-made for our needs. The few disadvantages are either inevitable given our criteria, fairly insignificant in a relative sense, or will be mostly minimized with a successful long-term implementation of our plan.
Wyoming pros:
Smallest population, 2nd lowest population density, ample water, 6 contiguous states, near ideal political conditions, superb business climate, friendly and conservative people, bountiful energy and raw materials, self-sufficient agriculture.
Wyoming cons:
Mediocre topographical defensibility, little commercial air service, variously harsh weather (wind and cold), small manufacturing base, lack of border with Canada, lack of coastline.
If Montana and Idaho were as sparsely populated as Wyoming, then the selection would have been more difficult, however, ceteris paribus, Wyoming would have nevertheless remained our first choice. Montana and Idaho were strong runners-up, although they are both under some colonization by the liberal yuppy/"infopreneur" class.
Wyoming, however, does not attract such people and has remained the most undiscovered state in the lower 48. Life and earning a living are more difficult, which has served to repel the daintier types.
Finally, Wyoming is a very homogenous state on voting issues. Although a fiercely independent people, Wyomingites truly "pull together" for their special land. This Committee is confident that they can eagerly be led for dramatic change. Montana and Idaho, however, are more dichotic (though not to the extent of Colorado or Arizona), which would likely thwart our political agenda if attempted there.
In closing, we suggest that a unique fate seems to have preserved Wyoming for us and our kindred spirits, in a similar fashion that the USA retrospectively once served as a haven for the world's oppressed. As a rather eerie aside, this Committee has noted a recent surge of libertarian interest in Wyoming as a preferable state for the laissez-faire diaspora. (Also note the emergence of the NH-oriented Free State Project.) We take this to mean that we are definitely "on to something":
[A] fundamental scientific rule...: If the time comes for a fundamental innovation, a breakthrough discovery or invention will be made several times, at different places, and by persons working independently from one another.
— Stefan T. Possony, Psyops
We are very confident, however, that our plan is clearly the earliest, most extensive, and most ambitious of anything in its class. We believe that only a dramatic and concerted effort will achieve our desired results, and that our vision is, quite simply, one whose time has come.
(RE)TAKING LIBERTIES
Just as there was a specific formula for tyranny comprising several stages, there can be such for Liberty. As we will likely have only one chance at this it must be very carefully planned, and then executed with great courage and determination.
Counties
2006 and 2010 county "dress rehearsals" of the statewide effort in 2014 is absolutely vital. Twelve of the 23 counties have less than 15,000 people.
(Note: The "R#" is Republican %, and emboldened headings are actual figures. Counties are listed in order of # of reg. voters, not gross population. 2002 is used for reg. voters, as it was a general election year. The estimated primary voters % is a 12-year average of 75%.)
Conservative counties less than 9,000 people:
Preliminary analysis indicates that as few as 10,557 current Wyomingans (or 10,557 FSPers with 25% local voter support) could politically control all eight of these counties.
Conservative counties between 11,000 and 18,000:
Preliminary analysis indicates that as few as 13,901 current Wyomingans (or 13,901 FSPers with 25% local voter support) could politically control all five of these counties.
Controlling the 13 least populated counties
As few as 10,557 could politically control the 8 least populated counties, which means a geographical third of Wyoming. Only 586 could "own" Niobrara county. But here is the most amazing thing: as few as 24,458 current Wyomingans (or 24,458 FSPers with 25% local voter support) could politically control the 13 least populated counties, which geographically means over half of Wyoming. These 13 counties total an area the size of New York state! This kind of astounding political leverage exists no where else in the USA.
If we win in November 2014, then those of us who still live out of state will want to start packing and come to their new home. Even if we do not win the entire state, we will have won some counties for ourselves, and then can work for total victory in 2018.
Using political parties
The most important question is which party to field our gubernatorial candidate, Republican or a third party? A Republican nominee would clearly garner more votes than a third party figure and thus have the better chance of winning. However, he/she must first win the Republican Party's (RP) nomination. The difficulty of that cannot be measured presently. If the RP by 2014 has steered significantly towards a libertarian course, then our chances would be greatly increased, and we could possibly elect our own candidate in the primary election.
Or, the Libertarian Party (LP) could have made, by that time, large gains in voter popularity. If so, we would seriously consider an LP vehicle for our political goals.
We suggest a two-pronged approach: shifting the Wyoming Republican Party towards libertarianism, while enlarging the state's LP in order to command at least 10% of the general vote (instead of its 1-3% today). In this fashion, voters can choose from Freedom Party A or Freedom Party B.
State electoral considerations
Every four years (e.g., 2006, 2010, 2014, etc.) the entire Wyoming state government is up for grabs. Their Senate rotates in halves, so even the upper house can be swept out of office every two elections.
In 1996, Wyoming had 488,190 people, of whom 343,300 (70.3%) were voting age. Some 240,711 were registered voters for the general election, and of these 215,844 (a very high 90%) voted. A simple majority of those was just 107,923 voters.
Molon Labe! Page 56
