Recent comments

Good for "the-Sentinelese"!

You've struck upon an excellent idea. I suspect it's only viable, however, for individuals who wish to (and plan to) stay small and independent. The key word here is "small". If you buy and sell for a living -- as an individual -- and employ few if any helpers in your enterprise, you might pull it off. For a time. If you deal only with people you trust not to be "statist" in mentality. And if you do so quietly -- and tell nobody. Anonymity is the road to success for a free marketplace. But whatever you do, never, never, never expect the white man to "obey-the-law". Never, never, never expect "rights". The only thing granted, sustained and guaranteed by the group of psychopaths acting under the umbrella of "the state" is wrongs. Please be aware of that. Keep in mind that a huge percentage of all populations are infected with "capture bonding" (Stockholm Syndrome). Psychologists and psychiatrists who publish definitions of that term are themselves infected. Because either they do not see or they refuse to admit that they see that the overwhelming majority of the population are afflicted -- not merely a small number of bank employees in 1973 in an obscure robbery in Stockholm, Sweden. Or Patty Hearst. Every "vote" is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome. Every submission of a confession ("filing" of a tax "return") is a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome. Well, of the latter, you might say it is a symptom of fear of an illusory beast that does not exist. Same difference. The hardest thing for libertarians to grasp is that "the law" is meaningless -- window dressing for coercion. No matter how you slice it, if you grow large and "go viral" as the current buzzword describes it, the white man is going to get you. He will force you into his "court". Once he gets you there, you will lose. In the event you enjoy a minor "victory" (like in the gambling business, the government business allows you to "win" now and again to keep them cards and letters comin' in -- sort of a "shill mentality"); you will still lose. Unless you have deep pockets for "legal" (another joke) counseling, in which case you've already spent large sums to "win", which is losing. Or unless you actively engage in the vast arena of mercantilism. Most of you have watched this video. The speaker talks in the first few minutes about the vast, incalculable myriad of laws on the books that can "getcha". I presume it's because the white man has constantly and consistently stuck his tentacles into the "holes" like the one you describe -- and come up with ways to prosecute you. Ask Bernard von NotHaus. Or Robert Kahre. Especially if you are "high profile". So don't "go viral". On the other hand -- and for exactly this reason -- I say you can be free. Here. Today. Where you're "at". The white man is too pompous and stupid to interfere with your liberty. Unless you allow it to happen. So go ahead and loan me 1,000 federal reserve notes. I'll pay you back in 60 years. I'm 80 now, so that should give me some time to gain liquidity. Meanwhile, I'll give you my old bike as collateral. What's your interest rate? Sam Sam

I'll check my privilege, if you will check your ignorance." (no, Paul, not saying it to you- saying it to them)

"I'll check my privilege, if you will check your tyranny."

Good point, Paul.  Authoritarians never learn how burning books and banning symbols of resistance to their authority only fuels the popularity of those books and symbols.  Also, this is another example of how coercion is typically counterproductive to desired goals.

This article advocates fascism. The troika here is actually (from what I can tell from the article) pointing more in the direction of the free market, hard to believe though that is.

Good one, Alex. Even assuming one has an interest in such exploration, government is a package deal, particularly in an empire. You don't get the planet flybys without the war, dead babies, torture, theft and ruined economies. Would people be exploring space without government? Of course! It's an interesting thing, and lot of people would put their money and efforts there, to participate. No doubt those little American flags were passed out for the purposes of a photo-op. Some whores went along with waving them, but there must have been quite a few who thought the whole thing was silly. Maybe some were thinking, "If I wave this flag enough, I get to keep my job." One can only speculate.

Awesome, Glen!  Thanks! I hope you enjoy it!  :-)

The figure I've read is upward of $900,000 in total. In addition to that you have costs of infrastructure, test equipment, etc. I doubt were taken into account but I get what you're saying.

Anarchists and libertarians are prone to follow Thomas Pynchon's observation: "If they can keep you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers." ( ~Thomas Pynchon http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/235.Thomas_Pynchon) Each time I read or hear a debate over "the-constitution" I'm tempted to advise the participants to go back to basics and read this: http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/library/AnatomyState.html It's easy to get caught up flailing away about the "police state" (yes, indeed, all states are police states -- they may appear in the beginning to not start out as such, but each and every monopoly upon violence will most certainly become one). Few want to simply go back to basics -- as the late Murray Rothbard did -- and understand that the state is an agency of coercion made up of psychopaths with a penchant to "rule". As long as "we" play along with their game and squabble over the details of their "rule", they win. Sam

"...we might well assert that, to the extent that gun violence is a problem in society, what we have is a violent persons problem." Not the least because, worrying about "gun deaths" apparently excuses murder by knife or baseball bat. Thinking instead of violent persons eliminates this absurd result. Good luck engaging a politician in logical dialog though. These people don't give a rat's ass who gets killed.

It's a waste of time, expecting consistency from human beings. Their entire education and daily continuing indoctrination amounts to training in cognitive dissonance.

I'm saying that impeding corporate bodies from using mass communication violates the first amendment. Which it does.

Best of luck with it, Alex. Seeing it on Facebook, the DHS will have moved you up several levels on their Enemies List :-)   I love that A-symbol photo by Bryan Baucom.

I keep wondering when enough will be enough; people can only take so much.

Molyneux produces some good videos. This was one of his not-so-good ones. He spent much of his 6 minutes hu-rah-ing California teachers' union (not that I support teachers' unions in any manner). But his points were well taken. I ceased use of the term "rights" years ago. I make choices. There are many in this unfree world who would interfere with choices I make. Some of those obstructions may themselves be well taken. For instance, if I infringe upon your person or your property or breach contracts or agreements, you may rightly react negatively. So, (particularly now that I'm old and feeble :-[) to avoid getting my butt whipped I'll treat you with respect. You have that right -- do you not??? :-] Sam

"...The science that supports the message is what gets funded and reported, the rest is portrayed as "junk."..." You got that right. I began to look at "science" with skepticism many years ago -- long before I entered the canyon of anarchy. I often refer to my 5 year-old great granddaughter as one of the few remaining "genuine" scientists. If she proclaims, "Grandpa! Your breath stinks!" (within hearing of the entire scientific community), I can be certain mouthwash is indicated. Sam

Great essay (February was also when we did our episode on this topic).  All of those what-if questions should be part of the public discourse.  Sadly, they are not, for many of the reasons you mentioned.  Science likes to believe it has cornered the market on objectivity, but the reality is, when money is involved, it trumps everything else.  The science that supports the message is what gets funded and reported, the rest is portrayed as "junk." But there are still two sides to this debate, no matter how "fringe-y" they both end up looking to the other.  Curiously, the same is true for climate change.

Not sure why you're disappointed.  It sparked some discussion, which is the point of this site, right?  Appreciate the feedback.  You might be interested in a recent episode of our show where we talk about vaccination.

It must suck to be a bureaucrat in Keene. :D My experience with so-called "low tax" entities like NH is that they make up for it with numerous and higher fees and charges for everything so that those two goons can get paid, pensioned & insured.

Wow, I am really disappointed to see a link to this article on STR. Up until now, STR has been sympathetic to the movement of people who are skeptical about the government's vaccine program and especially the efforts of the State to impose medical procedures on people against their will. The timing could not be worse. CA is one signature away from denying access to public and private schools (SB277) to kids who do not follow the CDC schedule. There is good reason to believe that, in the future, they will go after the homeschoolers as well and then adults. All because (supposedly) fewer than 200 people got the measles and everybody recovered. WTF. And, in all likelihood, other states will follow, if not the whole country. So (apparently) one activist became unhinged, so that means it is time to smear and discredit the entire movement with an article that could not be more biased? After the WW2 tribunals when the horrors of Nazi medical experimentation came to light, the Nuremberg principles were set forth to cover the ethics required for medical experimentation and they were subsequently applied to medical procedures in general. Their cornerstone is informed consent. That principle is now being trashed with this law (though, in fact, it had already been partially violated in the past, in the way that the vaccine program has been administered). So yes, the comparisons to Nazi Germany are entirely appropriate. Many parents, who have seen their kids injured or killed by vaccines in the past, and thus know that they are extremely vulnerable to them, are being told by the State to play Russian Roulette with their kids. Any decent person who understands what is going on ought to be outraged at the very thought of this. But libertarians especially, whose philosophy is largely based on consent, should be especially appalled.  

A few days ago (22 June 2015) Tom Woods of The Mises Institute interviewed Jonathan Haidt: http://tomwoods.com/podcast/ep-429-is-reason-enough-why-your-opponents-w... Again arose that common objection: But we libertarians are caring--it's our policies that will truly help the poor. Haidt addressed it fairly well.

Right again, Dr. Hein. Glenn Greenwald says he is quick to ask for all passwords to email accounts, to make the same point. The camera in the bathroom paints a vivid picture. Sam is correct that we are dealing with psychopaths, who appear eager to have a little nuclear war with Russia. That should be fun.

"...Your remark is lost on me..." If you read the (2007) linked article, it should come clear. "Mainstream" (media, "education", religion, et al.) have from time immemorial been motivated to discourage individualism. To embrace individualism is portrayed as akin to insane behavior. The individualist is the anathema of the state. Nobody has a "right" (whatever that's supposed to mean) to think for himself or herself. Therefore, every berserk killer must be labeled "loner". The association is an absolute necessity. We anarchists are mostly all "loners". It's the nature of anarchy. As such, we interchange more peacefully and constructively in a free marketplace by our very natures than do those steeped in statolatry. That very fact makes us dangerous to the superstition of statism. For if a plurality of individuals were ever to seriously question whether "the state" is really productive of order, popular support for government would almost instantly collapse. The enormity of the truth is incredible. Sam