Recent comments

  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    Movie Quotes
    Web link Sharon Secor
    They should have had, (IMO), several from the movie The Matrix. Here's one of my favorites. Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around. What do you see. Business men, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system that they will fight to protect it.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    I agree that man is born "self-owning", but I fail to understand why he cannot, (or who could forbid him to), sell, trade or give away, that which he "owns"? For example, could I not contract with someone, thus? "I will become your voluntary slave, for as long as I live, if you will take good care of my wife, for as long as she lives."
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    Movie Quotes
    Web link Sharon Secor
    Thanks, Sharon. The Field (1990): McCabe: "There's a law stronger than the common law." Priest: "What's that?" McCabe: "The law of the land." What is the "law of the land", "the law" of "all land", it's the "law of nature". And, what is "the law of man", not just some men, but "all men"? It's the natural law of the human race.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    "Voluntary slavery is alive and well. Employee = EMPire + LOYalist." - Darkcrusader. This seems to me not correct. Check the online etymology dictionary, and see that to "employ" is shown as having derived from Latin, via Old and Mediaeval French, for "to make use of." Unrelated to empires or loyalty. Employment is a _contract_. We take a job by _choice_. Freedom comes with responsibility; if we make a bad choice, we have to deal with the consequences. The lament of the folk song is that the coal miner was "deeper in debt" even after "loading 16 tons" a day, but that too was his choice - both to take the job and to incur a debt. We can empathize - maybe even help out - but his situation was his own doing, unless "the company store" had in some way deceived him about the contract(s). He was not a slave. As for Genesis, who wrote that book? - but let's suppose the story is accurate. So the farmers of ancient Egypt got in a pickle, and begged the government (Joseph, for the Pharoah) for assistance. He provided it, but took title to the farms in exchange. What's the background, here; how did the pickle arise, and _where did the bread come from?_ And what was meant by "the money faileth"? Anyway, how does the story relate to voluntary slavery? - which my reasoning above showed to be impossible, since a self-owning human being cannot change his nature even if he wants to.
  • DennisLeeWilson's picture
    DennisLeeWilson 4 years 25 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    TWICE, I tried to post the above comment to the original article. I wasn't actually denied, merely informed that "Your Comment will be Published Within 24 Hours" Is there something that I suggested that might be un-publishable in TheDailyNewsEgypt.com--perhaps the fact that the military already controls the news?
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 25 weeks ago
    Ball and Chain
    Web link Michael Dunn
    I always liked covers,it gives you a new interpretation on a song you may or may not like. They really ramp it up on this may favorite SD cover> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjQkgZmBjzE
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Suverans2, I suspect that this was not always the case,tho-you might be one who utilise an 'escape for the diligent'? Care to share the details? Work? Labor? Payment? &c. Are you sulf-sufficient;Energy,food production,Heat/cool,property tax? Do you patronize the Government monopolies?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Fortunately, as an individual secessionist, I am not an EMPLOYEE (an artificial entity), I have not submitted (or applied) to any of the STATES' (artificial entities) CORPORATIONS (artificial entities), since seceding from the body politic, (but not from society), however, I do work for a living (food, shelter & clothing). And, as a non-member of the body politic, I don't "owe my soul to the company store". I use no "Taxpayer Identification Number" to obtain benefits/privileges, or for any other reason; I, therefore, am not a "taxpayer", which is legally defined as, "one who is subject to a tax on income, regardless of whether he or she pays the tax", though I do voluntarily choose to pay most "sales taxes", and certain "use taxes".
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Voluntary slavery is alive and well. Employee = EMPire + LOYalist. If every means of sustaining your life is cut-off and you have to submit(apply) to one of the States fictions(CORPoRATIONs) for the means(Babelbux) to obtain sustenance.;after laboring for the Fraudulant Reserve Nots you have to again submit back to the Fictious State your 'voluntary' exchange becomes not so voluntary and you are indeed a slave that 'owes his soul to the company store'.(like the folk song states.And the old Book of Genesis unequivocally teaches. ) Gen 47:15 And when money failed in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, all the Egyptians came unto Joseph, and said, Give us bread: for why should we die in thy presence? for the money faileth. Gen 47:16 And Joseph said, Give your cattle; and I will give you for your cattle, if money fail. Gen 47:17 And they brought their cattle unto Joseph: and Joseph gave them bread [in exchange] for horses, and for the flocks, and for the cattle of the herds, and for the asses: and he fed them with bread for all their cattle for that year. Gen 47:18 When that year was ended, they came unto him the second year, and said unto him, We will not hide [it] from my lord, how that our money is spent; my lord also hath our herds of cattle; there is not ought left in the sight of my lord, but our bodies, and our lands: Gen 47:19 Wherefore shall we die before thine eyes, both we and our land? buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land will be servants unto Pharaoh: and give [us] seed, that we may live, and not die, that the land be not desolate. Gen 47:20 ¶ And Joseph bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyptians sold every man his field, because the famine prevailed over them: so the land became Pharaoh's. Gen 47:21 And as for the people, he removed them to cities from [one] end of the borders of Egypt even to the [other] end thereof. Gen 47:22 Only the land of the priests bought he not; for the priests had a portion [assigned them] of Pharaoh, and did eat their portion which Pharaoh gave them: wherefore they sold not their lands. Gen 47:23 Then Joseph said unto the people, Behold, I have bought you this day and your land for Pharaoh: lo, [here is] seed for you, and ye shall sow the land. Gen 47:24 And it shall come to pass in the increase, that ye shall give the fifth [part] unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones. Gen 47:25 And they said, Thou hast saved our lives: let us find grace in the sight of my lord, and we will be Pharaoh's servants. Gen 47:26 And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this day, [that] Pharaoh should have the fifth [part]; except the land of the priests only, [which] became not Pharaoh's. It is interesting to note that their is an escape for the diligent. :) http://loveforlife.com.au/content/08/07/30/standing-upon-land-john-josep... http://books.google.com/books?id=MemsAAAAMAAJ&dq=right%20of%20conquest&p...
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    JD, I, too, predict organics will continue a distant second, particularly if the government continues to shield and subsidize "corporate farming" "...the ultimate goal of corporate farming is to vertically integrate the entire process of food production, up to the point of the distribution and sale of food to consumers." Just wait until Archer Daniels Midland, Monsanto Company, and Cargill sew up the food market, completely...and they are well on their way to doing just that. They, with the help of their government co-conspirators, are monopolizing food, by buying up all of the old established seed companies and replacing heirloom seed with their own, "patented", GMO seeds, with built-in "terminator technology", which is also known as "genetic use restriction technology", so that we humans can't save seeds to grow our own food, which, by the way, is against "their so-called-bought-and-paid-for law" in some places already. And, I suppose, everyone here is familiar with the "Svalbard Doomsday Heirloom Seed Vault", which "places [through "years of manipulation and deceit"] Seed Savers Members’ Seed Collection under the control of the United Nations’ FAO Treaty, which was specifically designed to facilitate access by corporate breeders". I predict that "corporate farmers" are not only raping our Mother, the Earth, but they are, at the same time, raping our children, our children's children, our children's children's children, ad nauseum. Am I still "picking nits"?
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    If we use Noah Webster's definition for the word "slavery", i.e. "the state of entire subjection of one person to the will of another. Slavery is the obligation to labor for the benefit of the master, without the contract of consent of the servant", then I have to agree with Jim Davies assessment -- voluntarily agreeing to work with/for someone, whether it is for babel bux or not, is not slavery.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    S2, if I may, beware of picking nits and failing to see the big picture. My argument above against the "earth rape" morons was clear, I hope, and was that reversion to primitive agriculture would starve a larger fraction of humanity than were killed by the Black Death. Whether organic foods have more nutrients per gram than others is a detail. Absent government, happily the market will determine the price, demand and supply for foods grown with and without chemical assistance; I predict organics will continue a distant second. That's because of the spectacular success of intensive agriculture. In 1798 Robert Malthus solemnly stated that "The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man" and few scholars have been proven more utterly, profoundly wrong. In the two centuries since, our population has grown from one billion to seven billion, and thanks to intensive, scientific agriculture there is so far no sign that future agricultural ingenuity will fail to sustain yet more. BTW there's more on Malthus at http://strike-the-root.com/malthus-mistakes
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Fair question, John. My take would be that in applying for a job, one is offering to enter a contract. All contracts involve specified obligations by both parties. No job contract I've heard of say that the employee will do whatever the hirer wants, without limit, and all of them say employment can be terminated by either party on certain notice. Clearly, therefore, the employee retains control over his own actions. One sometimes hears phrases like "debt slavery" but it's really not. You take out a loan, you undertake an obligation. It may become tedious to fulfill it, but that's what obligations are. (Though if there was fraud by the lender, the obligation would be void. Different subject.) TOLFA is at http://tolfa.us - begin with the "Benefits" and "Entrance" pages, and decide whether you want to undertake the whole course. Don't cherrypick, it's not designed for that.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 25 weeks ago
    Ball and Chain
    Web link Michael Dunn
    Good choice.
  • DennisLeeWilson's picture
    DennisLeeWilson 4 years 25 weeks ago Web link Jad Davis
    SOPA and PIPA were diversions--and they worked!
  • Darkcrusade's picture
    Darkcrusade 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VbYZDohsHk The First Thanksgiving The early settlers of America, who braved the privations of those incredibly difficult years, were a fabulous lot, indeed. We can hardly imagine the burdens they endured to make a new life for themselves in a new land. Their turning point began one Friday in the middle of March,1621. Samoset An Indian, wearing nothing but a leather loincloth, strode up their main street to the common house, and to their startled faces boomed in flawless English, "Welcome." His name was Samoset, a sagamore (or chief) of the Algonquins. He had been visiting the area for the previous eight months, having learned his English from various fishing captains who had put in to the Maine shore over the years. He returned the following Thursday with another Indian who also spoke English, and who was to prove "a special instrument of God for their good, beyond their expectation." His story was to prove no less extraordinary than the saga of Joseph being sold into slavery to Egypt. His name was Tisquantum, also called Squanto. Squanto His story began in 1605 when Squanto and four other Indians were taken captive, sent to England,and taught English to provide intelligence background on the most favorable places to establish colonies. After nine years in England, Squanto was able to return to Plymouth on Capt. John Smith's voyage in 1614. Lured and captured by a notorious Capt. Thomas Hunt, he, with 27 others, were taken to Mlaga, Spain, a major slave-trading port. Squanto, with a few others, were bought and rescued by local friars and introduced to the Christian faith. Thus, it appears that God was preparing him for the role he would ultimately play at Plymouth. He was able to attach himself to an Englishman bound for London, then he joined the family of a wealthy merchant, and ultimately embarked for New England in 1619. He stepped ashore six months before the Pilgrims landed in 1620.1 When he stepped ashore he received the most tragic blow of his life. Not a man, woman, or child of his own tribe was left alive! During the previous four years, a mysterious plague had broken out among them, killing every last one.2 So complete was the devastation that the neighboring tribes had shunned the area ever since. The Pilgrims had settled in a cleared area that belonged to no one. Their nearest neighbors, the Wampanoags, were about 50 miles to the southwest. Stripped of his identity and his reason for living, Squanto wandered aimlessly until he joined the Wampanoags, having nowhere else to go. But God had other plans. God's Provision Massasoit, the sachem (or chief) of the Wapanoags, entered into a peace treaty of mutual aid with the Plymouth colony that was to last as a model for forty years. When Massasoit and his entourage left, Squanto stayed. He had found his reason for living: these English were helpless in the ways of the wilderness. Squanto taught them how to catch eels, stalk deer, plant pumpkins, refine maple syrup, discern both edible herbs and those good for medicine, etc. Perhaps the most important thing he taught them was the Indian way to plant corn. They hoed six-foot squares in toward the center, putting down four or five kernels, and then fertilizing the corn with fish: three fish in each square, pointing to the center, spokelike. Guarding the field against the wolves (who would try to steal the fish), by summer they had 20 full acres of corn that would save every one of their lives. Squanto also taught them to exploit the pelts of the beaver, which was in plentiful supply and in great demand throughout Europe. He even guided the trading to insure they got full prices for top-quality pelts. The corn was their physical deliverance; the beaver pelts would be their economic deliverance. The First Thanksgiving The Pilgrims were a grateful people-grateful to God, grateful to the Wamp-anoags, and grateful also to Squanto. Governor Bradford declared a day of public Thanksgiving, to be held in October. Massasoit was invited and unexpectedly arrived a day early-with an additional ninety Indians! To feed such a crowd would cut deeply into their stores for the winter, but they had learned through all their travails that God could be trusted implicitly. And it turned out that the Indians did not come empty handed: they brought five dressed deer and more than a dozen fat wild turkeys. They helped with the preparations, teaching the Pilgrim women how to make hoecakes and a tasty pudding out of cornmeal and maple syrup. In fact, they also showed them how to make one of their Indian favorites: white, fluffy popcorn! (Each time you go to a movie theatre, you should remember the source of this popular treat!) The Pilgrims, in turn, provided many vegetables from their gardens: carrots, onions, turnips, parsnips, cucumbers, radishes, beets, and cabbages. Also, using some of their precious flour with some of the summer fruits which the Indians had dried, the Pilgrims introduced them to blueberry, apple, and cherry pie. Along with sweet wine made from wild grapes, it was, indeed, a joyous occasion for all concerned. The Pilgrims and Indians happily competed in shooting contests, foot races, and wrestling. Things went so well (and Massasoit showed no inclination to leave) that this first Thanksgiving was extended for three days. The moment that stood out the most in the Pilgrims' memories was William Brewster's prayer as they began the festival. They had so much for which to thank God: for providing all their needs-and His provision of Squanto, their teacher, guide, and friend that was to see them through those critical early winters. by Chuck Missler 1The Pilgrims lived that first winter aboard ship and suffered the loss of 47 colonists. 2This epidemic, from 1615 to 1617, is believed to have killed 95,000 Indians, leaving only about 5,000 along the coast. 3Canada first adopted Thanksgiving as a national holiday in November 1879, and it is now celebrated there annually on the second Monday in October. http://www.mayflowerhistory.com/History/BiographyTisquantum.php For many Native American people, Thanksgiving is cause for mourning rather than celebration? Although the First Thanksgiving included the Pilgrims' Native American neighbors, that spirit of cooperation did not last long between the native people and the colonists. The land and lives of the native people were pillaged and destroyed countless times during the early history of the United States of America. Racism and bigotry persist until this day. As a result, Thanksgiving has taken on greater historical significance for many Native Americans, who view that First Thanksgiving as the beginning of centuries of oppression and discrimination.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 25 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Good lord, hope it ain't the east coast. Godspeed.
  • John deLaubenfels's picture
    John deLaubenfels 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    I'd like to explore the question "whether a person can volunteer to be a slave" further. Where can a line be drawn between offering oneself for hire in a typical employee relationship vs. a slave? Certainly if the "master" has a legal right to terminate my life, then I'm a slave. Anything short of that seems to be a matter of contract, however. I haven't read the discussion at TOLFA; could you provide a link? Thanks, JdL.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 25 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    In the bread and circus seasons like we're currently witnessing I used to ask students, "..I'd like to hear your prediction, when all this falderal of election is over, who do you believe will emerge as the most powerful man or woman in the world. After I've heard your prediction I'll give you mine..." I heard lots of "Nixon" and "Reagan" and "The Pope" responses. Then I'd tell them mine: "I will! That's because the world revolves around MY belly-button, NOT YOURS! "MY world. If I die, nobody has power. "But what gives me even more power is the knowledge that YOUR world revolves around YOUR belly button, whether you admit it or not. Therefore, even when I think you might be wrong I need to respect your ideas and your opinions -- they're yours and you come by them honestly..." People who are outside our relatively small minority will never understand this. To them it amounts to a bunch of narcissism. Liberty comes at a price. Gotta go trucking to the coast. Sam
  • Gwardion's picture
    Gwardion 4 years 25 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    A comment and sentiment I can get behind no matter who says it. Well said Sam. isms and ians are the true enemy. Forming and controlling the debate on freedom without the consent of those attempting to be free is in itself a form of aggression.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Some are, but not many here. I'm certainly not. My concerns generally seek ways to promote liberty in a statist world, but I am not "imprisoned" by history or my ideals. I enjoy life as I believe most libertarians do; indeed most libertarians I know are hard-working high-achievers that lead virtuous lives. Primitivists appear to want to do no work, achieve nothing and believe in the fantasy that all they need would be just laying about waiting to get picked up if only there were no property rights; basically live like an ape (except apes are territorial). This is silly no matter how many "anthropologists" may think it a wonderful ideal. Further, there is a significant difference between promoting an ideal that is based on non-aggression and individual responsibility (libertarian) and one based on a fantasy that requires the death of about 90% of the population. The cognitive dissonance in your brain must be unbearable. Eliminating argriculture, civilization and most of the population as an ideal is, well, lacking perspective. Until you have at least one constructive contribution to any discussion on this board I will ignore you. I suggest that you go out to some big forest and try living off the land for a couple days to gain some perspective of reality.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Evan: "...To some degree, I think a "taboo on ownership" (when it comes to land and other living beings,) is a good idea in that it's a peaceful voluntary way to promote a culture that values individual autonomy and maximizing liberty. Regardless of "legal status," I strive to be a good steward of the land and the plants and animals on which I depend, and I try to keep in mind the interconnectedness of everything..." The question on a forum such as STR is, "in a 'free society' who emerges as the enforcer(s) of such taboos?" I think a major factor in the combative nature of the white man's incursion onto this land centuries ago is contained in this question. The natives [stupidly called "Indians" to this day] who had already been settled here and had, for the most part, gotten along fine with each other save skirmishes over such things as stealing each others' women and horses; simply could not understand the white man's proclivity to think he had authority to mark-off segments of spirit-given land and claim private "ownership" thereof. That made no sense in the world to them. They did not mark off fictitious lines in the sand and call them "borders". They had no "states" or "counties". If my history is accurate, there were Cherokee "nations" and Choctaw "nations" and the like. But even the term "nation" was white man's vernacular, not natives'; and they did not celebrate boundaries or borders. As I understand it there was little objection by natives to sharing with the white man. He (the white man) even to this day commemorates a political holiday in the fall ("Thanksgiving" -- a classic misnomer, I perceive) where his teachers chirp stories to the kiddies about the original "Thanksgiving" and how the natives helped by bringing wild turkeys, etc., to the feast. Of course in the collectivist ("public" ha ha) schools they have to interject the idea that the "governor" or the "president" declared this to be a "public holiday", and therefore it is a holiday. Many of those tribes planted, harvested and preserved certain crops (herbs) for their own consumption and in cases to exchange for goods with neighbors. They, like any of us, had to contend with defending their harvest from neighboring tribes and bands of ne'er-do-wells and predators (the precursors to what we now lovingly call "policymakers"). White Indian is correct, however, that agriculture as we know it gives rise to state. Before even progressing to lobbies of farmers demanding of state predators to rob citizens in order to "subsidize" farmers for the fickle nature of cash crops; the way the white man wanted to farm seemed to demand the farmer have "title" to the area of the earth on which he would plant. The white man had all kinds of "legal" reasons for that -- also a complete mystery to the natives here. If you can't sit down together, make agreements you intend to keep, smoke a pipe together and have a trust relationship, you might as well fight each other to the death of the loser and be done with it. As I've said before, my favorite American politician is Aaron Burr. He fought the only just war in US history. He didn't drag US citizens into the forray. He challenged Hamilton to a duel and shot his ass. Sam
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 25 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Starting in the 90's with the Clinton presidency such films as Independence Day, The American President, and TV programs like The West Wing, or The Commander in Chief that all purport to show vigorous, dynamic imperial presidents leading America. Coinciding with the ending of a 12 year long presidential drought and a pent up demand for a Democrat in the presidency by the entertainment media big shots. Unlike what the article implies "liberals" [sic] are totally fine with a powerful president provided that he's one of their own. Like was said of the Bourbon monarchy: They learn nothing and forget nothing.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 4 years 25 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    Amen to that Sam. TL:dr.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 25 weeks ago Web link Don Stacy
    To repeat previous comments, I see this as a non-debate debate. Arguments over this, that or some other type of "libertarianism" are senseless at best, detrimental to those of us wishing to be free on down the scale. They smack of an indwelling and perhaps highly intellectual compulsion to direct and control my liberty, as well as the liberties of everyone else (in the "free society" that they'd like to be the ones to bring about). And to that extent I'll agree with White Indian. My agreement is conditioned by the mutual understanding (I think) that there is no problem with individual liberty or bein' free. That is a good thing. That's the goal of all of us here. The problem is with the "ism" and the "ian" of libertarianism. Be free. Sam
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Sorry, I can't get used to this Drupal "Edit" thingie. My original comment seems to have vanished; it was to thank Sam for his generous remarks and to concur that government-funded research tends to be suspect. It also said my source for the migration dates in the article was Spencer Wells as it says, and he's done some good work with DNA tracking.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    It's probably not so, but just in case any visitor to this page has been confused about the self-ownership axiom by the incessant ranting of WhiteIndian, perhaps a clarification will help. The 2005 STRticle by David MacGregor is a fine place to begin; "Self-Ownership: The Foundation of Freedom" at http://strike-the-root.com/51/macgregor/macgregor2.html . Another excellent introduction is Ken Schooland's superb, 9-minute animation, "The Philosophy of Liberty" at http://www.jonathangullible.com/mmedia/PhilosophyOfLiberty-english_music... These establish that the right of every person to own and operate his own life is absolute. Another Root Striker, Per Bylund, has probed the axiom a little further, to deal with the possible objection that "self-ownership" implies a dual nature, as in "I own myself" where "I" and "myself" are two different entities in the same skin, with the latter being some form of property. His reasoning is that on the contrary, the "selfowner" is an integral whole, a person whose very nature is to direct his or her own actions. That insight helps us further understand why the axiom is indeed undeniable; if the selfowner is prised apart somehow, the organism is damaged and becomes less than fully human. This close integration will be familiar to graduates of TOLFA, for in its first segment we deal with the question of whether a person can volunteer to be a slave, perhaps under a contract for sale, should he be so misguided as to wish to do so. Our conclusion is no, it's impossible; because at the instant before the alleged transfer of ownership he would be a self-owning human being, _and the instant after_ the alleged transfer he would also be a self-owning human being, and therefore the contract and transfer would be fraudulent or void; the buyer would in fact not receive the goods he had attempted to buy. The bond can't be broken; to try to forcibly break it would be like splitting a person into two physical halves, left and right.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    "...vast state subsidies...currently prop up such unsustainable systems [non-organic agriculture] and allow them to externalize their costs onto their organic competitors." ~ Evan Amen ["verily, truly"]
  • PECB's picture
    PECB 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Contrary to this article, quite a few Native American tribes, prior to, & extant to the arrival of Europeans on the continent practiced agriculture and had what we would call sophisticated governments (though many were arguably more Libertarian in nature -- and it should be noted those past Indian societal/governing structures in no way resemble the socialistic ceaspools that many surviving U.S. Tribal Govs. have become). If I remember correctly, the Iraquois ("Haudenosaunee"?? and some related tribes) in particular were quite sophisticated & very prosperous & practiced farming, hunting, gathering, and fishing -- and some historians have argued that the Iraquois' Political & Philosophical Ideas played a major role in shaping early European-American political thought (despite the settlers Eurocentrism & Bigotry) and in the drafting of the Articles of Confederation and eventually the U.S. Constitution. Unfortunately the two cultures did not have a peaceful coexistance for long (though from my reading; the Iraquois really did try, because they did see value in some of our ways and wished to united with the Europeans for mutual benefit. However, the extreme racism of many European settlers (especially those of influence) prevented this & the many diseases Europeans brought with them effectively wiped out the Iraquois. NOTE: Some current Indian decendants in Upstate NY claim to be Iraquois, trying to grab past glory maybe??? but I highly doubt it -- measles, small pox, & chicken pox is devastating to the uprepared immune system & wiped the Iraquois off the map & those that disease did not get, the blade and bullet later did in. And even if by some lucky chance there actually are direct Iraquios decendants, it is irrelevant as the Iraquis Culture & the potential it offerred is long dead. [As a foot note, so to speak, I'm note making a noble savage argument. I simply trying to give credit to what I view as a great tribe/culture/society that actually did achieve a lot and had a lot of potential, and were not savages. From reading about the Iraquois, I strongly feel that had they had an extra hundred years or so of being left alone, or had they gotten a foot hold as a culture a couple hundred years earlier, they very likely would have developed their own written language and various technological toys like metal working, wheels, true sea-faring craft, etc. As a matter of fact, the Iraquois' technical and intellectual precociousness with European gadgets and such bothered many European settlers, and they felt threatened by it.]
  • Evan's picture
    Evan 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    As far as I can tell, despite all his fiery rhetoric, it seems like WhiteIndian wouldn't mind if you engaged in agriculture, as long as it's "permanent," (i.e. permaculture.) This may seem paradoxical, because if "agriculture creates government," then wouldn't permanent agriculture create permanent government? But I digress, because while I disagree that agriculture inevitably results in government, I too see permaculture as a way forward. Permaculture is land-use design that seeks to work with nature, rather than against her, to create stable, productive environments that provide for human needs. Waste is transformed into food, work is minimized, and yields increase. I must strongly disagree with whoever it was earlier in this thread that predicted that a truly free market / free society would favor non-organic agriculture over organic farming, considering the vast state subsidies that currently prop up such unsustainable systems and allow them to externalize their costs onto their organic competitors. Permaculture is a tool that belongs in every good agorist's bag of tricks, and I would even go so far as to say that the success of the agorist strategy depends on how effectively agorists integrate the insights of permaculture into their activism. When it comes to individual sovereignty / personal autonomy, I have to say that I'm not a fan of the "self-ownership" terminology. I think phrasing it that way isn't very good marketing, and as a market anarchist, I think we should be marketing anarchy as effectively as possible. To some degree, I think a "taboo on ownership" (when it comes to land and other living beings,) is a good idea in that it's a peaceful voluntary way to promote a culture that values individual autonomy and maximizing liberty. Regardless of "legal status," I strive to be a good steward of the land and the plants and animals on which I depend, and I try to keep in mind the interconnectedness of everything.
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Aw shucks Sam, thanks. That is very kind. I am humble to learn from anyone. I think WhiteIndian's perspective is important too, even if I don't understand it completely nor agree with his conclusions.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Jim, this essay and those past ones of yours to which you link are examples of why I hold you up as a mentor in the discipline of self-ownership. I may not always totally agree with your facts (although one of the things I like about your writing style is that you are not a "fact-dogma" writer -- you suggest your observations and allow the reader to make conclusions), your presentations are informative and educational. Thanks for another #10 (my rating)! As Golefevre commented above, I can only speculate upon that which I have not seen with my own eyes and experienced with my own senses. I'm perhaps a few years older than most on here (76), and I look at it thus: I have a valid time frame of reference of somewhere more than 70 years. I have an older sister (80), and anything previous to 70 years ago that I think I recall is difficult for me to accurately discern from stories she has relayed to me about our lives in the mid to latter 1930's on the various farms. I can't be certain an event or object is actually something I remember, or whether it is something about which she or a peer has told me. Suffice it to say I'm limited in my active knowledge of time and space. When historians talk about "discoveries" indicating "man" as having accomplished this or that 10,000 years or so ago and longer I can only believe what I have the confidence to accept as far as their credentials and/or abilities to make those determinations (knowledge of and access to carbon dating, etc). And I'm acutely aware that the number of doctorates one has written has little to do with that human limitation of time and space. Education and "scientific" study helps one to be capable of locating tools to measure, based upon what "we" know here and now of carbon depletion (and presume it has always depleted evenly across time -- the key word being "presume"), but I still have to rely solely upon my confidence of "science", much of which is funded by parasites of state through stolen resources. I always have to laugh at scientific proclamations of distance in terms of "light years" and my confidence in any of their capabilities to grasp such tidbits of time/distance. As a professional truck driver I know something about cramming 862 miles of flat land driving into the white man's 11-hour daily drivers' limit on his log books, but light years???? I read once that light is supposed to travel at 186,282 miles per second -- (that's not miles per hour, mind you -- there are 3,600 seconds in an hour last time I counted). It's a good thing those guys are government funded I say. I do not disagree with White Indian's assessment of the historical blame for today's crises in food and economics. But I have to once again side with Golefevre: I only have today to become free. If I'm going to be free I have to become so with the cards I hold in my hand today. I don't have time for hand-wringing about how it came to be this way. I only have to proceed with what I know. And Jim, your essay has improved what I know to become free. Thanks! Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    (I hit the "post" button twice -- this is to erase one of the entries. Sorry)
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    State level politics is the way things are. Libertarian types constantly refer to how things "could have been" or "should be." Are libertarians the ones you refer to as "forever bitter and hateful?"
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Fascinating! Thanks for the explanation.
  • Mark Davis's picture
    Mark Davis 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    I agree, well said. People imprisoned by the way things "could have been" will forever be bitter and hateful. The outlook "to live as sovereign as possible and not participate in politics" is as good as it gets IMHO.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Golefevre: "...I don't see any need to romanticize any aspect of history and I certainly can't get sentimental about what I haven't witnessed. I can, however, look to live as sovereign as possible and not participate in politics. This, in my opinion, is the way forward: divestment from the immoral and failing state. We see examples of this more often every day in agorism or market anarchism as Jim suggests here. We are not human because of the state but in fact human DESPITE the state..." To that, were I of religious bent, I would shout, "..AMEN!" Well said. Sam
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Benjamin Franklin describes a White Indian who abdicated a "good Estate" to live a Non-State lifeway, as follows: When an Indian Child has been brought up among us, taught our language and habituated to our Customs, yet if he goes to see his relations and make one Indian Ramble with them, there is no perswading him ever to return, and that this is not natural to them merely as Indians, but as men, is plain from this, that when white persons of either sex have been taken prisoners young by the Indians, and lived a while among them, tho' ransomed by their Friends, and treated with all imaginable tenderness to prevail with them to stay among the English, yet in a Short time they become disgusted with our manner of life, and the care and pains that are necessary to support it, and take the first good Opportunity of escaping again into the Woods, from whence there is no reclaiming them. One instance I remember to have heard, where the person was brought home to possess a good Estate; but finding some care necessary to keep it together, he relinquished it to a younger Brother, reserving to himself nothing but a gun and a match-Coat, with which he took his way again to the Wilderness. ~Benjamin Franklin Philadelphia, May 9th. 1753 James Axtell has a whole chapter in the following book describing such White Indians, as follows: Chapter 13. The White Indians The Invasion Within: The Contest of Cultures in Colonial North America by James Axtell Oxford University Press http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/HistoryAmerican/ColonialRe... The White Indians of Colonial America by James Axtell The William and Mary Quarterly, Third Series, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Jan., 1975), pp. 55-88 Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture http://www.shsu.edu/~jll004/colonial_summer09/whiteindians.pdf
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    John: "...but must admit to misgivings about what life without government will be like..." Try it. You might like it. Sam
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Strictly out of curiosity, why pick the name "WhiteIndian"? Is there some significance to that user name?
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    You despise agriculture which is certainly a very scientific industry, yet you quote scientific studies. I'm not sure if that is contradiction, but it is a bit odd. Yes sir, there is plenty of food in the world and people can in fact feed themselves. Feeding oneself is a time-honored necessity. I'm not convinced that I "suffered" because I was able to trade for two over-easy eggs, wheat toast and a piping hot cup of coffee this morning.
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Are you really going to claim there is plenty of food now? Seriously? Billions of people in agricultural civilization are either starving or suffering major food insecurity, and even those "well-fed" at the center of empire are suffering from agriculture with Diseases of [agricultural] Civilization. High stress is endemic to the civilized population. It has become the leading cause of death in the United States. At the same time, while one quarter of U.S. citizens suffer from some form of mental illness, one would be hard-pressed to find any examples of mental illness among foragers. Thesis #21: Civilization makes us sick. by Jason Godesky | 2 January 2006 http://rewild.info/anthropik/2006/01/thesis-21-civilization-makes-us-sick/ P.S. Not only maladies like diabetes are diseases of civilization; Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, MD relates how Schizophrenia is a disease of civilization. Schizophrenia and civilization Torrey, E. Fuller http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=acls;idno=heb02208
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    "Nobody holds the view that North American natives never had State level governments." Well, okay--perhaps I misunderstood you. Apologies. The finer point is that I think you are falsely blaming agriculture. When thieves became too lazy to work as highwaymen, they invented the state, IMO. Are we really going to complain that there is too much food now? Seriously?
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Nobody holds the view that North American natives never had State level governments. There have been several agricultural civilizations and agricultural chiefdoms rise and collapse in North America, and I've referred to them, several times. And I've referred to "The Great Law of Peace" and how their Egalitarian Non-State sociopolitical typology influenced American ("all men are created equal") and then French politics (liberté, égalité, fraternité,) as described in "Indian Givers: How the Indians of the Americas Transformed the World" by Jack Weatherford.
  • golefevre's picture
    golefevre 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    The view that native peoples on this continent didn't have governments is a bit more interpolation that I think we can do with the evidence. Pueblos of the Anasazi indicate that some cities of the Anasazi were of significant size (likely in the 100K+ range for some in Colorado, for example). Other ruins suggest that city or nation states of natives were hiding from one another, possibly during a time of conflict over scarce resources as Jim suggests (strictly speaking as a layman here, of course). Other evidence suggests the Iroquois may have greatly influenced the U.S. Constitution. It is much easier to sit around philosophizing when you have a few jars of beans stored for eating later rather than foraging with every spare moment for calories. Did agriculture lead to the rise of the city states that became the the nation states we suffer today? Sure, absolutely. We've become ever more productive and as any thief knows, you don't steal from your poor neighbors, you go to where there is wealth to plunder. I don't see any need to romanticize any aspect of history and I certainly can't get sentimental about what I haven't witnessed. I can, however, look to live as sovereign as possible and not participate in politics. This, in my opinion, is the way forward: divestment from the immoral and failing state. We see examples of this more often every day in agorism or market anarchism as Jim suggests here. We are not human because of the state but in fact human DESPITE the state.
  • Gwardion's picture
    Gwardion 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    Actually it was caused by the bronze age. Haven't you wondered what the forges that made the hundreds of thousands of bronze swords and such used as fuel? The forests were destroyed to quarry rock and to smelt metals. Also to build the tens of thousands thousands of ships that the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, etc. used. I am sure agriculture played a part, but the forests took their biggest drop when they were being clear cut for fuel for the forge fires and timbers for the ships. Not saying agriculture doesn't destroy things when done improperly, but stating as a definitive something that is not so weakens your argument.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    I Can Do It; You Can't
    Page Paul Hein
    "Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless... the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is [now (1784)] while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion." ~ Thomas Jefferson in “Notes on the State of Virginia”, Query 17, p. 161, 1784.
  • Suverans2's picture
    Suverans2 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    "This method was a cheap and effective method of slow death. The victim was bound and buried up to his neck near an ant hill. A sweet substance, usually tree sap, was poured over the victim's head. He was then left to be slowly eaten by the ants. this method was used by Native American tribes and sometimes involved a second captive who acted as a witness. The witness would see what kind of death the victim suffered and was allowed to go back to his village to report what he had seen. This was supposed to act as a deterrent of further white settlement. However, this usually produced quite the opposite effect and angered the whites."
  • WhiteIndian's picture
    WhiteIndian 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    And look at what a few thousand years of agriculture did to the "Fertile Crescent." Vast cedar forests of Mesopotamia have been transformed into the Iraqi desert. Agricultural city-Statists call it "improving the land." Now that's rubbish.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 years 25 weeks ago
    1492
    Page Jim Davies
    John, it would be nice if an anarchist society were perfect, but I don't know anyone who makes that claim; rather, it is just by far the best possible form of society. Any time one person enforces his will upon another, there's a government in miniature. It may happen. That's why a justice industry will arise. http://www.strike-the-root.com/81/davies/davies4.html shows how I think it will function.