Recent comments

  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    "Or, I should say, remove it from my suspicion that the promulgators are longing to govern, rule, or "lead" folks other than themselves and their families." Well, rejecting that is exactly the point of panarchy. The desire to join one or another "archy" within panarchy is more a tactical consideration than anything. I would probably join the ancap polity even though I don't believe things a lot of ancaps do, just because there is safety in numbers. But joining the "none of the above" polity, or no polity at all, remains an option.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 4 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    No, I didn't realize that sub forum was available only to members. Dang! Keep in mind that this was just another thought experiment, but even in that context the bottom-up nature of the change envisioned makes oppression of panarchists at least substantially more difficult. But certainly it would not hurt if more people were armed; that always tends to give pause.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    "attacking me"? - far from it, Brian. As I wrote, your question is good. I showed the answer.
  • Brian Mast's picture
    Brian Mast 4 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Re: Jim. I'm not sure if you are trying to be humorous or if you are attacking me. Re: Sam, I have no state either, and under the above choices I would select none of the above. I am already quite comfortable being on my own. I've been an Anarchist for well over a decade. You and I have exchanged several messages a few years back Sam. I formerly had zygodactyl as a username and I was and still am a truck driver. I lack the time to get into disputes between Paul and his opposition, but I am considering all of the points that are being made from all anti-statist sides. It would be nice if a good percentage of Statists would convert to anti-statism, but I don't see that happening any time soon unless Jims TOLFA plan works out. My question should not have been so thoughtlessly dismissed. We already know how the media manipulates the news. If a group of punks break into store fronts, the media tells us that anarchists did that. If cops invade a well armed household; that place gets labled as a bunker. The oligarchy will not just stand down as their power and extorted income declines. We should anticipate their responses and take strategic action. These will be necessary considerations as a critical mass adopts either Anarchy or Panarchy. Ignorance is not strength.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Brian Mast: "...What will be the reaction of the ruling oligarchy that controls the government be?..." Which "government" -- yours, or mine? I am a sovereign state. I treat your "ruling oligarchy" as I treat rattlesnakes. The psychopaths who hide under the guise of that brainless abstraction exist. I can't deny that. And they can be lethal -- each individually, and especially all collectively. They are all collectivists, and they do work collectively. If I carelessly give them reign to strike me at critical points of my anatomy I can be greatly harmed. Therefore (treating your government with the rattlesnake analogy), I wear tall boots to the woods. I walk slowly, watch where I step and stay alert when and where I reach. You might say that limits my freedom. You would be correct. I do not claim anarchy produces unlimited freedom to do anything I want. And particularly I do not claim anarchy gives me any "rights" to interfere in the freedom of you or anybody else. Anarchy implies that I will behave appropriately in the absence of rulers or oligarchies. I do hope in my lifetime to see millions -- perhaps billions -- of individuals declare sovereignty. That won't happen collectively -- it will be one individual declaration at a time. And they will not need a "Free State Project" or any other collective to bring it about. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 weeks 2 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Think I recently posted here my list of now over 120 "ism's" and "archy's" I've encountered on the web in my scant 15 or 20 years' exposure. So I won't take up space with that today. "Panarchy" is among them. I'm affiliated with none, intend to join none. As I perceive them, each of the 120+ (most reading this could add one or a few more that I've overlooked or missed altogether) seem to have encrypted within them very subtle desires to rule others -- to lead-the-flock-to-freedom. I could be wrong about that. If Paul chooses to offer solid substantiation of my error as regards "Panarchy", I shall be glad to remove it from the list. Or, I should say, remove it from my suspicion that the promulgators are longing to govern, rule, or "lead" folks other than themselves and their families. I'll leave it on the list, since Panarchy is definitely an archy, or archism. I am a sovereign state. Originally I would post that as rather of a tongue-in-cheek declaration. Eventually I came to see that once one achieves full-fledged anarchy s/he is automatically christened "sovereign" (by herself); therefore, a "sovereign state". If I'm wrong about that as pertains to you, I don't mean you. Go your way in peace. I'm not going to fight you over it. Nor will I rattle bones in attempt to get you disfellowshipped from STR because you disagree with me about that or anything else. Same with "rights". I've never declared that you have no rights. I've not declared that I have no rights for that matter ('tho I claim no "rights"). I have said that I ceased using the term some years ago as a part of my disengaging from statist mindset (thanks, Delmar England). I state that I make choices -- and, among my choices has been engaging in the challenge of sidestepping the beast wherever possible. Many there are who will go to extreme lengths to interfere with the choices I make. That's an occupational hazard of the anarchist lifestyle. It's interesting to dream up means by which one can navigate around "...voluntary compliance...". Sam
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 weeks 3 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    "What will be the reaction of the ruling oligarchy...?"   Good question, Brian. One nuclear bomb would quite ruin their day.   More at Panarchy is for Losers.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 4 weeks 3 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Excellent comment, Will - especially that final line.   You mention the amazing athletes from Kenya and the African Horn, so you'll agree that there are many exceptions to the general norms and averages. This week the best article I read was by the very black economist Walter Williams, on the subject of rights - which has confused a number of whites, even a pseudo-libertarian. And nearby there is a fine comment by mishochu, which reveals an IQ a long way above the average.
  • Brian Mast's picture
    Brian Mast 4 weeks 3 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Hello Paul, That link to the forum only works if you are registered to ZeroGov. I am not sure if you were aware of that. I have long been familiar with Bill Buppert and his website, so I went ahead and registered there as Bman1. I will post the following both here and there in the hopes of maximizing thoughts: I, as an Anarchist, do not oppose trying Panarchy. Looking at it from the bigger picture, a question arises that I haven't yet seen discussed: What will be the reaction of the ruling oligarchy that controls the government be? I am referring to the banksters, Wall Street, the Trilateral Commission, etc. I do not know the answer to that question, but it bears tactical consideration.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 weeks 3 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    "Violence, welfare, broken families incentivize lower IQ behavior. Most, if not all, of those incentives emanate from the state..." Absolutely. And, to take that another step down the road: when one can see that the deficit or character defect in question is one that can and "should" (we could write a volume or two on "should") be resolved at the personal and/or the family level, psychopaths hiding under the guise of that brainless abstraction we like to call "government" gallop in to "rescue" the victim (with stolen resources), making it "unnecessary" for her to take personal actions that would bring her "up to speed" (read: "like 'white folks'" -- more about that mentality in a moment). So now they have successfully not only created the victim, but also have brought in the victim mentality to make it quite American. The thing that makes our task as anarchists so challenging is the fact that each of us (I can't speak for you or anybody other than myself -- except, in this case, I think most reading this will agree, so I'm using the first-person plural) -- each of us has been so inundated over so many years with collectivist ideology, that it is difficult to detach reality from superstition. Some of the inoculations are overt (pledges of allegiance, political holidays, et al.) aggrandizing government wars and other heinous machinations of the lunatics who make up the abstraction seen of as state. Many are quite subtle implantations. Racism (racial discrimination) is collectivist. Collectivism and governmentalism are siblings. As I stated in a previous post, each of us is interracial in one way or another. Incest is unhealthy and not recommended by anybody. Impregnating a first or even a second cousin is of questionable health integrity. This is true with the animal kingdom as well as with human kind. So, for a member one group, or "race", to hate or denigrate a member(s) of another group (due to presumed deficits) is the height of collectivist stupidity. The IQ/geneticist "shmexperts" are collectivists through and though. They couldn't take into consideration the non-presence of incentives for increased learning capability if it bit them in the arse. Examples of "blacks" not achieving as a group or collectively engaging in theft are moot -- they have nothing to do with anything. Oh, and I meant to add something about the "like-white-folks" mentality. It's not just "Caucasians" who should try to make it a practice to engage in free thinking. Pulling each other down for being "dark black" as opposed to "light black" or "acting white" is a blight among many Africans that I've known, and it's senseless. How can I be at fault for the tone of my epithelium? I am where I am, and can go where I want to go. (Someone important said that. It must have been me, 'cause I can't google it). Anarchists, if anybody, should see through all this quite clearly. Sam
  • mishochu's picture
    mishochu 4 weeks 3 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Thanks Sam, I vaguely remember that quote but could never repeat it off-hand when needed. The race thing is always funny to me. Leftist friends I have cannot fathom why I (an African man) am against affirmative action (they're also afraid to even talk about race). Sometimes I feel the obligation to correct internet wrongs or change minds (after all, I've been assigned a skin color that gives me some immunity from political correctness). I'll sometimes ask, "Should I check MY white privilege?" That privilege just doesn't exist. To the IQ/genetics discussion: the averages will never rise unless incentives for lower IQ are eliminated. Violence, welfare, broken families incentivize lower IQ behavior. Most, if not all, of those incentives emanate from the state.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 weeks 4 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    Sorry to double-dip, but Harry Browne had an interesting observation in the ongoing razzmatazz of "conservative" vs "liberal" statism: Conservatives vs Liberals Conservatives say government cannot end poverty by force, but they believe government can use force and threats of violence to make people moral. Liberals say government cannot make people moral, but they believe government can use force and threats of violence to end poverty (redistribute wealth). Neither group attempts to explain why government is so clumsy and destructive in one area but a paragon of efficiency and benevolence in the other. ~Harry Browne Liberty A-Z p 35
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 4 weeks 4 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    "...Both sides are also in agreement, that the remedy must be done via government..." You hit the nail on the head: "racism", from its very outset, is definitely a GSE (government-sponsored-enterprise). If there were no such superstition as government, there could be no such insanity as racism. Human bigotry, yes. That might always be present in one form or another among a small number, even after people are truly free of government. And it might sometimes manifest as black vs white, (keep in mind that we are all of race-mixed ancestry, unless products of incest); Ukrainians vs Russians (neither actually exist -- borders are but fictitious lines in the sand. People exist -- some living in places they're currently calling "Ukraine" and/or "Russia"). Once government capsizes, I truly hope borders will indeed be erased and totally forgotten. Nationalism is definitely GSE. I was a government ("public" ha ha) educator in what was known as "the segregated south" (before, during and after "integration"). Ask me about GSE's. Jim Crow was a government sponsored enterprise from stem to stern. Many non-African individuals came out of that ignorance with severe guilt over not having revolted and rebelled against those "laws". From them come many of the anarchists among us. Good essay, Paul. Sam
  • Will Groves's picture
    Will Groves 4 weeks 5 days ago Page Paul Bonneau
    The notion of a technologically-advanced society based on voluntary principles is inconceivable in the context of a significant black population.  When people observe in their everyday lives that blacks seem less intelligent and more prone to violence, this isn't unfounded.  There are huge numbers of academic studies showing that blacks have much lower IQs than asians, Jews, and whites.  For instance, use Sci-Hub to read the whole article, or just read the abstract here:  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609001275  Or this one:  http://pss.sagepub.com/content/17/10/921.extract  Or this one:  http://www.amren.com/news/2015/07/new-doj-statistics-on-race-and-violent-crime/   Any white westerner with the average IQ of a sub-saharan african would be labeled mentally handicapped.   When I worked in semiconductor R&D, white engineers were utterly outnumbered by asians and east-Indians.  However, the only black people I'm aware of worked in the security department and in the cafeteria.  Seeing that the management unquestionably selected and promoted people on the basis of achievement, intelligence, productivity, work ethic, and had programs to capture all the "underrepresented" minorities in engineering, including women, it's not that they weren't looking for qualified blacks.     Another curious data point: when I was in graduate school, the only thefts that occurred from our laboratory were performed by the one and only black student in our department, who stole books and sold them to a bookstore.  Unsurprisingly, when it was discovered, the department gave him a pass and those of us who discovered the crime were told a story that began with, "Have you ever heard of a stigma?"   It's funny how nobody seems surprised or outraged that the Olympic 100-yard dash finals are always a competition among people with west-African origins, that the east-Africans dominate marathons, that the NFL is 70% black, or that the NBA is over 70% black.    Simply put, technological society values trustworthy and intelligent people.  Naturally, affirmative action is an illogical absurdity.  If it were discarded wholesale, though, we should not be surprised that the outcomes would strongly skew toward asians, Jews, and whites for all technically-advanced professions.   Nothing I've written here conflicts with individualist principles.  Of course people should be treated on an individual basis.  Race exists, and as the crime statistics show, it's not so much the white "I-hate-niggers" crowd that's doing the violent crime.  That award goes to the blacks.  As ever, diversity is wonderful when it comes to skills and talents, but there's nowhere in the world you can point where racial diversity and societal harmony go together.  The high levels of trust required among the inhabitants of a libertarian society is not consistent in the context of large numbers of people of various races living among each other.    Finally, wishing for mixing with peoples of inferior intelligence is to wish for the decline of humanity.  I can't see much value in that.  
  • rettafontana's picture
    rettafontana 4 weeks 5 days ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Alex have you seen this? "The $100 Startup: Fire Your Boss, Do What You Love and Work Better to Live More" It's a kind of "how to" by Chris Guillebeau. I started reading it on Amazon and it has a lot of practical advice.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 5 weeks 2 hours ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Some context here: Sanders & wife's yearly income was less than what Hillary got for one single speech, $234k vs. $250k, so I'm not too worried about that particular populist angle. Paying as much tax as possible isn't a virtue, in my opinion, either.
  • rettafontana's picture
    rettafontana 5 weeks 2 hours ago Page Retta Fontana
    That's so kind of you, Jim! Thanks!
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 5 weeks 5 hours ago
    A UK Decsion Point
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    Speaking of Brits, today is Patriot's Day, when in 1775 that famous first shot was fired. To mark the occasion I'm announcing a new e-book: How Government Silenced Irwin Schiff; find it here. Any who dislike paying the alleged income tax will want to read it.   Irwin died half a year ago, as noted in the ZGBlog Schiff's Crusade.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 5 weeks 3 days ago Page Retta Fontana
    In the next edition of A Vision of Liberty, I'll link to this one.  Another super job, Retta.   Jim
  • Bob Sherman's picture
    Bob Sherman 5 weeks 4 days ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Things have less meaning than experiences -> Well put! We all invest too much of our time in working to buy stuff we don't need or won't even remember we've bought 2 years from now.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 5 weeks 6 days ago
    Staying North
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    Thank you, Sam, very gracious.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 6 weeks 3 hours ago
    Staying North
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    "...The blame lies squarely upon government, with unions close behind..." As usual, Jim, your essay is absolutely on target. The incestuous intertwining of those brainless abstractions we call "government", and "unions", and "churches" is incredible. All, in their own light, are superstitions pure and simple. And all work together to wreak havoc upon those who worship at their alters -- the state being the most egregious of them all, since all of what we like to call "jurisdiction" rests with the firearms and the firepower in the hands of their agents. The enormity of the truth is unbelievable. You do an excellent job of bringing it to the surface for exposure to all who will listen. Thanks for another good article. Sam
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 6 weeks 5 hours ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Your article inspired today's Zero Government Blog, called Freedom, Now and Then - see my entry "Delights to Come" in http://strike-the-root.com/blogs
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 6 weeks 3 days ago Web link KenK
    This reeks of the classic dominant social theme syndrome embedded in most mainstream press. If you don't grasp "dominant social theme" I can no longer help you (unless I cut, paste and post the entire Daily Bell definition I have in my library -- possibly "illegal" according to copyright "law"), as Bell for some reason has seen fit to scuttle access to their definitions glossary. Of course the presence of the group of psychopaths hiding under the brainless abstraction called "state" eliminates common sense. So arguing whether gays or transsexuals or those in between "should" be allowed in your or my or anybody else's bathroom is moot. But it's funny how they use the sacred cow of sexuality in the genius of divide-and-conquer. 25 years ago I had never heard of "sexual orientation". I think, after they were successful in introducing the word "gay" as a euphemism for homosexual; it was first called "sexual preference". But then it turned out to be politically incorrect to imply that one had "preferences" in how s/he fooled around sexually. Either is you is or is you ain't homosexual -- you have no "choice" in the "matter". So some mastermind came up with the brilliant idea of inculcating "orientation" into it. That was a stroke of genius. It solidified the "condition". Oh, how terrible it must be to live in your own body and work through your own desires and "preferences"! Fortunate for me, I'm the richest man in town and like the body I'm in. And, as I've said before, grateful to have lived it in the body of a male (meaning no offense to you ladies, mind you). I wouldn't want to have faced some of the issues with which you gals have had to cope just to get by. And rest assured, I have no desire to come into your bathroom. Haven't made that egregious error since I quit drinking almost 35 years ago. Sam
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 6 weeks 5 days ago Web link Bri_Voluntaryist
    This is a decent treatment of individualism vs collectivism, although I don't think the word "collectivism" or "collectivist" occurs in the piece. Many years ago when I first began to serf the web, and I became focused upon individualist thinking, I was moved by the inordinate amount of "anarchist theory". Seemed everybody and anybody had an idea as to how freedom would, or should, work out -- how to "arrange anarchy" (an oxymoron if there ever was one). I saw the contradictions, but was not able to catalog them in any sensible order. So I started to simply jot down each time I came across a "theory". The list grew -- unmanageable. So, I put them on the computer in an alphabetical program -- and, later, began to index each to a website. It's a work in progress. This will be long, but I'd like to list what I have so far: Various Anarchist and Libertarian Labels • Abolitionism http://www.strike-the-root.com/62/allport/allport4.html • Acclarism http://www.reddit.com/r/acclarism/ • Agorism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agorism • Anagorism (http://anagory.wordpress.com/2013/03/29/antilibertarian-antistatism/) • Anarcha-Feminism http://dailyanarchist.com/category/anarcha-feminism/ • Anarchy http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/Obvious.pdf • Anarcho-Capitalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism • Anarcho-communism https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/wayne-price-what-is-anarchist-co... • Anarcho-Kritarchy http://dailyanarchist.com/2015/04/06/no-true-anarchist/comment-page-1/#c... (See Kritarchy) • Anarcho-pacifism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_schools_of_thought#Anarcho-pacifism • Anarcho-primitivism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivism • Anarcho-syndicalism http://dailyanarchist.com/category/anarcho-syndicalism/ • Antilibertarian antistatism (see “Anagorism”) • Anti-Positivism • Apriorism • Autarchism (Le Fevre) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autarchism • Black Anarchism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_anarchism • Buddhist Anarchism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_anarchism • Carsonian mutualism http://www.socialmemorycomplex.net/2006/04/21/vulgar-libertarian-revisio... • Christian Anarchism http://dailyanarchist.com/category/christian-anarchism/ • Civil Libertarianism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_libertarianism • Classical Liberalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism • Collectivist anarchism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivist_anarchism • Communism • Communitarian anarchism http://www.ic.org/wiki/communitarian-anarchism/ • Consequentialism • Dialectical Libertarianism http://c4ss.org/content/15318 • Eco-agorism • Eco-Libertarianism • Eco-Socialist-Libertarian • Egalitarian Anarchism http://uscundercurrent.wordpress.com/2010/11/20/what-an-egalitarian-anar... • Egoist anarchism (Max Stirner) • Establishment liberal left • Existentialism http://anarchiststandard.com/2015/11/subjective-meaning-objective-ethics... • Explicitly anarchism, pro-decentralist libertarians (Kinsella) • Extreme Minarchism http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=8167.0;wap2 • Free Market Anarchism • Free Market Capitalism http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard146.html • Geoanarchism • Geoism (see “Georgism”) • Geolibertarianism • Georgism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism • Green-Libertarianism • Individualism • Individualist anarchism • Individualist/collectivist anarchist Individualist/collectivist anarchism • Insurrectionary anarchism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrectionary_anarchism • Kantianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant) • Kratoclism http://www.marketmentat.com/i-think-i-maked-up-a-word-two-actually/ • Kritarchy http://www.voluntaryist.com/backissues/135.pdf P 8 • Las Portadas (“Seasteading”) http://wiki.seasteading.org/index.php/Las_Portadas • Leftarchism https://rudd-o.com/archives/leftarchism • Left Libertarianism • Left Market Anarchism http://c4ss.org/ • Left-Rothbardians • Legal Positivism • Liberal socialism • Liberalism • Libertarian • Libertarian Anarchism • Libertarian conservatism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_conservatism • Libertarian Populism (James Ostrowski) • Libertarian Relativism http://takimag.com/article/the_relativist_roots_of_libertarianism/#axzz2... • Libertarian Socialism • Libertarian Solipsism http://www.masson.us/blog/libertarian-solipsism/ • Libertarian Transhumanism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_transhumanism • Localism and decentralization • Logical Positivism • Market anarchism • Minarchism • Modal Libertarianism • Modern Liberalism • Modest Libertarianism http://www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/modest_libertarianism.html • Moral consequentialism • Moral Libertarianism http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2216836?sid=21105612397333&uid=70&... • • Muslim Anarchism http://dailyanarchist.com/category/muslim-anarchism/ • Mutualism http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2006/03/p2p-cooperatives-and-counter-econo... • Natural-rights libertarianism • Neo-liberalism • Neolibertarianism • Objectivism • Originalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Originalism • Panarchism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panarchy • Patrio-psychotic anarcho-materialism http://www.subgenius.com/ • Philosophical Anarchism http://radgeek.com/gt/2015/12/05/the-self-confidence-argument/ • Platformism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platformism • Plumbline Libertarianism • Polycentrism • Post-Anarchism • Post-left anarchy • Post-modernism • Post-structuralism • Praxeology • Primitivism • Progressive Libertarianism • Propertarianism http://www.propertarianism.com/ • Punkish/syndicalist/queer radical social anarchism (above two from Rad Geek site) • Queer anarchism http://dailyanarchist.com/category/queer-anarchism/ • Radical Libertarianism http://www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/radical_libertarianism.html • Radical minarchists • Right Libertarianism • Rothbardian strain of market anarchism • Schmodal Libertarianism • Scientific Anarchism Social Darwinian right-wing economics • Situationism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International • Socialism • Socialist Anarchism • Socialist-Libertarianism • Sortocracy http://sortocracy.org/ • syndicalism • Syndicalist Anarchism • Thick Libertarianism http://c4ss.org/content/23175 • Thin Libertarianism http://c4ss.org/content/23175 • Transhumanist Anarchism http://c4ss.org/content/17838 • Utilitarianism (Friedman’s strain of Anarcho-capitalism) • Utopian socialism • Voluntarism http://voluntaryist.com/fundamentals/introduction.html#.VwXDCHoYM20 • Vulgar Libertarianism http://www.socialmemorycomplex.net/2006/04/21/vulgar-libertarian-revisio... • Zenarchism Sam
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 7 weeks 6 hours ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Of course!  Thanks for confirming.   So I'm going to take all the joy you express in this great STRticle and square it, to describe the pleasure of having that knowledge - even in our presently heavily-governed environment.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 7 weeks 12 hours ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Correct, M-Macks! And, anybody who knows me understands I am a strong advocate for homeschooling -- for the reasons you outline and infer. Sam
  • mjackso6's picture
    mjackso6 7 weeks 15 hours ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    Sam, I think we all agree on the underlying unreality of conceptual "objects" like counties and concepts like citizenship, but I do believe some valid points are made here. People, in large part because of their belief and participation in such fictions are allowing themselves and their children to be "dumbed down" (whether this is a flaw in the "educational" system or simply it functioning as intended... well, that's another question). I personally don't see this as a fixable or even valid system; compulsory "education" is just incarceration and indoctrination. If parents want to avoid this, I believe home schooling, or more specifically ~un-schooling~, is probably the best answer.
  • rettafontana's picture
    rettafontana 7 weeks 16 hours ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Thanks, Jim!
  • rettafontana's picture
    rettafontana 7 weeks 16 hours ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Hey Alex! Thanks so much for your comments. It is thrilling to know that I have inspired you! One thing I've learned is that what works well this month, doesn't work at all the next month. I have to keep experimenting and try not to project. Shoulder to plow! I am happy to be back at writing again. I'm just a bit rusty but I feel happy with myself. XO Retta
  • rettafontana's picture
    rettafontana 7 weeks 16 hours ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Knowing that I own myself - of course!!
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 7 weeks 1 day ago Web link Melinda L. Secor
    "America" has not become stupid. America does not exist. People exist. It might be true that many individuals in a place many have been calling "America" (which I assume would include a place called "Canada", as well as central and south "America") are stupid. That would be in the eyes of the beholder. And, as the late Delmar England has observed, if one can't escape "...the government-centered way of thinking with which we are indoctrinated from birth..." in one's writing, s/he will forevermore flounder around in half-assed "anarchy". And half-assed "anarchy" is probably stupider than full-assed statism. For example, the author laments over: "...Seventy-three percent couldn’t correctly say why we fought the Cold War. Forty-four percent were unable to define the Bill of Rights. And 6 percent couldn’t even circle Independence Day on a calendar..." First of all, "we" didn't fight in any "Cold War" that I know of. At least I didn't fight in a "Cold War". I can't speak for you. Secondly, I don't want to belabor my little brain concerning the white man's so-called Bill of Rights. I have no dog in his fight, and he couldn't grant me any "rights" if I did. And, third -- whose "independence day" would you want me to circle??? Every grand wizard of every political entity called "nation" everywhere on the face of the globe from the beginning of recorded history has come up with celebrations supposedly depicting "independence". I want no part of it. Who's stupid??? (or "stupider"???) Sam
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 7 weeks 1 day ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    A friendly amendment: a "black market economy" might be better called white.   Also a question: from which do you derive more pleasure, (a) knowing that you own yourself, regardless of how you choose to earn bread, or (b) earning bread by serving several customers instead of just one?
  • Alex R. Knight III's picture
    Alex R. Knight III 7 weeks 1 day ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Retta:  You may have already seen on Facebook, but I just also read this great e-book (for free!), and it compounds and expands on what you have to say here.  You may want to check it out:   http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0195CE37O/ref=pe_385040_188798810_TE_M1T1DP      
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 7 weeks 2 days ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    You hit another one for six! (That's the English, cricket equivalent of out-of-the-ballpark.)   Cash is indeed king, which no doubt explains the current rumors about de-throning it. Any practical experience yet of Bitcoin, or other forms of non-government money?
  • Alex R. Knight III's picture
    Alex R. Knight III 7 weeks 2 days ago
    Cash Is King
    Page Retta Fontana
    Retta, good to see you back here again lately, and that things are going well for you!  This is a great one, and crystallizes what I've felt for a long time now.  I've REALLY had it with employers and LONG to be rid of them once and for all.  No matter what it takes.   I've tried for years now to make it as a writer, but that always seems to be a "someday never" proposition.  I have been learning welding, however, and have been approached about the prospect of doing some private tutoring.   Maybe something will bear fruit.  Regardless, this essay gives me the motivation keep trying to break free.  :-)
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 7 weeks 3 days ago Web link strike
    You really need to watch this WSJ video. "...Kookie (read: 'libertarian') -is-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder.." (giggle giggle giggle). Don't get me wrong: like Block's support of the clown "running" for U.S. grand wizard, the "free state project" phenomenon is crazy-making from its inception as far as I can tell. Not far removed from "...hair of the dog..." to the drunk. And I suppose I would be concerned if I depended upon "libertarian-ism" (as a movement) to make me free. I don't. I genuinely want you to find the freedom you seek. But, in case you don't, I will still be free. But mainstream media types are obviously terrified of the incessant move toward freedom -- and the internet reformation that is sweeping it along. Sam
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 7 weeks 5 days ago
    The Limits of Support
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    I might reconsider Trump if today's news about a poll of Federal workers is proved correct and applicable nationwide. It revealed that "25% [of them] would consider quitting if Trump becomes President."   The one and only way government can be caused to vanish is to persuade all its employees to quit; hence the QuitGov site and hence TOLFA.  If a Trump victory took care of a quarter of that at the Federal level in one single sweep, it might be worth it!   But no. They'd only go back when his term ran out. There's no practical alternative to universal re-education.  
  • Autonomous's picture
    Autonomous 7 weeks 6 days ago
    The Limits of Support
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    Quoting Block.... "My thought, though, was that out of all the Republican candidates, he [Trump] was the most libertarian on foreign policy. He [Trump] was the least likely to get us into World War III." GASP! I view Trump as a whiny, fickle, petulant and unpredictable loose cannon whose arrogant narcissism gets in the way of reason. I envision a Trump presidency as something akin to the running of the bulls in Pamplona, Spain! "The Libertarian movement is surely in a very sick state." Unfortunately, I'm not convinced that will ever change.
  • KenK's picture
    KenK 8 weeks 1 hour ago Web link KenK
    "Wayne County Judge Lawrence Talon" said today's Detroit News, "denied the Wayne County prosecutor’s motion to pull Smith’s plea deal off the table after Talon said he would not enforce the portion of it that would have the Detroit Democrat step down from the Legislature." How Sen. Smith is gonna vote on things and otherwise do WTF it is that Michigan state senators do from a jail cell not mentioned. Bottom line: Dems are daring the Republican majority to vote to expel Smith from the senate and rile up the usual crew of race hustling community organizers, public employee unions and street ministers that form the core of Smith's base in an election year. And so Smith keeps the paychecks coming unless & until they boot him. And so much for Smith's advocacy of harsh measures to curb gun violence in Michigan. What a shameless hypocrite.
  • mjackso6's picture
    mjackso6 8 weeks 2 hours ago
    The Limits of Support
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    At this point in the Game of Thrones ("election" bread and circuses), it's a certainty that some puppet will be coronated President. I honestly don't think that "votes" from the plebes will change who "Ascends", but if the popular "vote" ends up favoring Darth Trumpious and Cruella de Clinton somehow miraculously gains the Throne instead, TPTB™ will have some 'splainin' to do. And though I have no intention of participating in the sham and help I'm lend it credence, that would put a big smile on my face
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 8 weeks 3 hours ago
    The Limits of Support
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    'I resist libertarian "theory".'  Hmm. Don't theory and practice complement each other?   You're in trucking, I recall. So you enjoyed the partial freedom of the open road, the practical pleasure of controlling a big rig as it crossed the Continent with all its beauty.   But I bet you knew something also about the theory of diesel engineering. Not perhaps enough to spell out the equations for the three-dimensional swirl of gases in the combustion chambers, but probably enough to know what to do when a mechanic charged you for changing the spark plugs.
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 8 weeks 5 hours ago
    The Limits of Support
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    I'd hoped that the near-silence on LRC since Walter Block first launched LFT indicated a storm of protest that has made him go quiet. Alas, a new piece out today shows that the opposite is the case. The Libertarian movement is surely in a very sick state.
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 8 weeks 13 hours ago Page Hogeye Bill
    Defending our culture from the invaders: http://ncc-1776.org/tle2014/tle783-20140810-03.html
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 8 weeks 13 hours ago Page Paul Hein
    I think all the factors mentioned contribute to this drop. I know someone who did not have a license for a few years due to a dispute between two state bureaucracies. He had a lead foot too. Cops would pull him over and he'd just say he didn't have a license. They always let him go. I found this interesting. I've noticed that states are now going with permitless concealed carry, Idaho is the most recent one. I always worried about the notion that we should ask permission to carry, but it appears that gradualism worked for once. It must be becoming increasingly obvious that one does not need permission to defend one's life. Also the world did not come to an end because people carried guns, as the gun prohibitionists predicted it would. Anyway just another trend along the lines you mention.
  • mjackso6's picture
    mjackso6 8 weeks 13 hours ago Page Retta Fontana
    How did you pull that off in "upper northern Kalifornia", Paul? I grew up just outside of Salem, and even back in the '70's and 80's I can't imagine being able to slide that past TPTB™ (high five!).
  • Paul's picture
    Paul 8 weeks 14 hours ago Page Retta Fontana
    Actually, a fair percentage of homeschoolers have been motivated to remove their learning-disabled children from the government schools because those schools were serving their needs so poorly. As to evading state control, a lot can be chalked up to bureaucratic incompetence. Also, even if they are competent, the last thing they need is to deal with irate parents; they want an easy life. Oregon has a long tradition of noncompliant homeschooling. We never bothered to register my son. My family is none of their business.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 8 weeks 1 day ago
    The Limits of Support
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    "Live and let live" is a basic anarchist concept, as Larken Rose explains to a young couple in a park conversation (video -- somewhat distracting due to the background activity and noise). The way you and/or I see things is the way things are -- for you, and for me. We won't always see the same things in the same way. We haven't both had identical exposure to the millions (billions?) of tiny experiences and studies and observations that make up who we are as individuals. But we obviously do agree upon the principles. I lean toward the practical. I resist libertarian "theory". None of us has ever actually lived in a world where there was no such thing as monopoly "government" (which does not actually exist -- it is an illusion and a superstition -- because only people exist). I proceed from the premise that others are not going to believe and behave the way I think they "otta" believe and behave. It matters not whether "we should" abide by the non-agression principle. Many folks ain't a gonna. I have to deal with that, and yet be free here. Now. Where I'm "at". You might say I have "faith" in liberty and freedom. My kids (soon all over fifty) and grandkids mostly think I'm "far too trusting" of free people. I'm not totally certain exactly how such things as "justice" will play out when people do indeed perpetrate crimes against others of our acquaintance once all government everywhere is scuttled and becomes history. I can only speculate. I'm still gradually pulling myself away from and out of, as Delmar England has described it, "the government-centered way of thinking with which we are indoctrinated from birth". We won't always agree on the definitions and the nuances within the concept of freedom and liberty. That's one of the values of these forums and blogs. I'm not the same person (philosophically -- or physically for that matter, since most of the cells that made me up 20 or 25 years ago have been pooped and pee'd out by now) as I was when we first met in cyber space. I'm still swayed by your easy, jocular style of convincing folks that it would be a good idea to abstain from beans if we ever want to live a life of freedom. Sam
  • Jim Davies's picture
    Jim Davies 8 weeks 1 day ago
    The Limits of Support
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    Okay, Sam, if THAT's how you see rights, we certainly agree. They do NOT come from government in any way, nor from the Constitution which set ours up.   On the contrary, rights are natural, an integral element in human nature. That was the whole point of that superb paragraph by Rothbard, which I quoted in Liberty: Rooted in Rights.   Incidentally the best part of what Trump is saying (one of the very few good bits) is his understanding of Amendment 2. He says it did not grant a right, rather it guaranteed (ha!) that an existing, natural right would be left undisturbed.
  • Samarami's picture
    Samarami 8 weeks 2 days ago
    The Limits of Support
    Blog entry Jim Davies
    Thanks for the response. Any difference you and I have is mostly definition, or contextual, by nature. My resistance to the term "rights" has to do with my observation that many, if not most, using the term were tying it to the sense of "constitutional rights". My take on use of the term was that, in order to have "rights", there had to be (or was implied to be) a "granter" or "sustainer" of those rights. But that is not necessarily, or always, the context under which it is used. Thus, you might (correctly) retort, I was "...throwing the baby out with the bath h2o..." True. So, having power over nobody other than myself, I can't issue a moratorium toward its use. I will probably continue to use "choice" in its stead -- not that you "should". Sam