Individuals Don’t Know Their True Power

Preamble: | | The Rats Revolt · Truthdig · Disqus | Lewie Paine / Lewie Paine 17 hours ago | “The division of people into Alpha and Beta started, unsurprisingly, with experiments on rats. Studying social dynamics, the scientists found that certain rats struggled to assume leadership of the rat packs and tended to end up as leaders. They were labeled Alphas. Other rats didn’t fight for leadership, and were content to follow: they were labeled Betas. The two categories seemed exhaustive, until those rat-watchers discovered a third kind of rodent. That rat was labeled the Gamma. Superficially, it appeared to be an Alpha. What differentiated the Gamma from the Alpha was the former’s disinclination to either lead or follow. Gammas that got leadership slots grew tired of being the boss and went off on their own. Interestingly, they were confused with Alphas but not Betas. Gammas weren’t much for following…. The Gamma personality has not entered the popular argot, despite the Gamma’s correspondence to a definite psychological profile. A Gamma male, or female, is a dominant loner. Like their rat counterparts, Gamma humans are not much for following but show little inclination to lead. In a way, it’s surprising that there’s not more recognition of the Gamma personality because there’s a whole Gamma subculture right in front of our eyes. As dominant loners, whether rough-hewn or refined, they’re inclined to be Individualists. As people, they tend to assume that other people are like themselves. Consequently, they tend to see the leader-follower bond as a little odd or degrading. Some are more sophisticated than others, but their psychological profile inclines them to look on leaders with suspicion and followers with disdain.” —- Let’s begin. I sometimes read: • “We need as many converts as we can get etc etc”. • Or “I can’t find a mate?” • “Or you’re selfish”. • ‘Or Both myths, about Government and God, are totally absurd; if a person comes to his senses fully enough to abandon the first, why would he not also abandon the second? • And if he does retain it [2. Reasons provided for pause], why should not his statist friend, whom he is trying to turn into a clear-thinking person [1] Problematic Trap for Reasons I’ll get to] accuse him of gross inconsistency and say, for example, “if you keep your religious fairy tale, I’ll keep my government fairy tale”? • That would be a response extremely hard to gainsay. That’s why it matters.~ Jim Davies’ Etc etc [1]. Dennis Lee Wilson responds to Author Jim Davies and Others HERE Re: Government [Authoritarianism] Question as it relates to: “WE need as many [clear thinking Atheist] converts as we can get”… Which Introduce The First Cause And The Covenant of Unanimous Consent Articles Index And Primary Goals. Page=1 Here is one Excerpt/Interaction of many: | DennisLeeWilson, posted on April 032, 2012 Jim, I understand the “shock” of “being wrong”. I thought *I* was wrong once, but luckily I quickly realized that I was in error to think such…. >>”But still, why does it matter?” >>”It matters because the prime task of those wishing to bring a free society about is to move our statist neighbors away from their belief in the need for, and efficacy of, government;…” It DOES NOT matter to me because MY prime task is BEING FREE. [] I don’t need a “free society” in order to be free. What you are describing is at best, a SECONDARY task for me. I would NEVER reverse the priority of the tasks. MY secondary tasks can never be sacrificed to MY primary task. It is actually not even a secondary task to me, nor a “huge” task. It is an UNnecessary task. See below.  >>”This can only happen when our statist friend begins to think straight; …” >>”It is of paramount importance that people _begin to think straight_. Otherwise, they will never, en masse, ditch their absurd, superstitious belief in government.” But THIS (understanding that government is a myth) is ALREADY happening! And it is happening without statists (not MY friend) changing their thinking “en masse”. It is happening partly because of other things that YOU have written. >>”We have to change their _mode of thought._” Arrrgghhh. The “WE” thing again. NO! WE do NOT have to change their mode of thought. “Billions of humans making trillions of decisions could never be harnessed or thoroughly theorized by even the most brilliant voluntaryist thinkers or free market economists.” Chris Dates [ ] And, as I point out below, it doesn’t matter to me what a man thinks or how straight or convoluted his thinking, as long as he respects MY right to exist as per the five Precepts by which I deal with other humans. I have NO desire whatsoever to meddle with the way most other people think. It is like wrestling with pigs. You ALWAYS get dirty and it only annoys the pig. I spent many hours as a youth attempting just what you recommend–and learning about “pigs”. | To paraphrase your own statement in Help Wanted, It is futile and a thankless waste of my time “…to try to impose [“MY version of what *I* consider to be rationality”] on people who do not want it and who made their preference lethally clear.”. I look for those INDIVIDUALS ONLY who have already indicated by word and especially be deed that they are thinking and acting in a manner I can admire and possibly help or support with what I have learned. | Minimum requirements for living peacefully amongst other people do not require a person to be “fully rational”. Education levels vary enormously as do levels of rationality! The basic or minimum requirement is understanding and adhering to the Non Aggression Principle (NAP), a very simple MORAL/ethical concept that is even readily apparent to children. | But sometimes moral statements are not sufficiently explicit or not easily applied to particular situations. Because of varying education levels, understanding the full consequences of moral statements and/or applying them consistently can become problematic. Enter from stage right: The Covenant of Unanimous Consent. [ Articles ] | The Covenant of Unanimous Consent is a Political statement [ ] explicitly derived from the Non Aggression Principle, which is a Moral statement. A characteristic of political statements–and a reason why they exist–is that they are more explicit and do not depend as heavily on education level as do moral statements and they are less subject to “interpretations”. | Education is a wider, more encompassing thing than is religion (i.e. religion is a subset of a person’s education). And education continues throughout an individual’s life and is a primary cause of behavior changes during that lifespan. | Free State/county/town movements are examples of people with varying levels of education–and varying religious views–agreeing to conduct their interpersonal relationships by the simple principle of live and let live. Personally, I am disappointed that NONE of the “popular” movements has adopted some EXPLICIT political pledge such as the Covenant provides. The closest thing to a pledge of personal conduct has been the Shire Society which needlessly plagiarized the Covenant and then REMOVED what I consider the most important part for a Free State/county/town movement, the Supersedure section! | You, me, Paul Bonneau, Darkcrusade and many (most?) of the contributors to this site–without resolving ANY of our differences–COULD conceivably agree to the entire Covenant and live in close proximity to each other in a “Supersedure Zone” and even trade with each other, without engaging in physical conflict. This is possible because the contents of the Covenant are the COMMON ROOT of everything that each of us considers to be important with regard to interpersonal relationships. | AND, as I pointed out in my article [ people who–for whatever reason–refuse to sign the Covenant, could still live amongst us and trade with us, knowing full well what to expect should THEY (the non-signatories or “dissenters”) violate our Covenant’s Precepts in their dealings with us. | Dennis Lee Wilson Signatory: The Covenant of Unanimous Consent. | DennisLeeWilson, posted on April 03, 2012 Jim, >>There’s truth there, but …. I’m disappointed. I thought we were BOTH too old for “buts”. >>Let’s imagine a situation where you are… Nope. Sorry. My imagination works differently. [] *I* imagine myself NEVER EVER allowing such conditions as you describe to be thrust upon me. (You supply the details, I will not spell them out). Perhaps the differences in our imaginations is because of differences where each of us was raised and/or the differences where each of us now chose to live… >>…in your own self-interest (to obtain that much larger measure of freedom, and the strong satisfaction of helping liberate others) I encourage you to undertake the work. I HAVE done what *I* think needs doing in order to attract the kind of people *I* can admire (i.e. liberated individuals) and I am quite satisfied with my work. Like you, I have expressed my views and shared my insights to hopefully help individuals liberate themselves. I have published articles (in The Libertarian Enterprise) and I built an on-line shop and two public websites with various collections of articles and projects–including several links to YOUR websites and articles. At this time, I have written more about The Covenant of Unanimous Consent than has the author, L. Neil Smith–who seems to have given up on his brainchild in favor of petitioning the government and blocking “illegal” immigration.<<–the shop | [Working on broken links although can access some Archives Here:] | I encourage you to explore the sites. I won’t guarantee light reading, but you may find things you have not considered. Best regards, Dennis | • • | [2]. Page=2 Since everything in the universe requires a cause, must not the universe itself have a cause, which is God? …     DennisLeennisLeeWilson, posted on March 23, 2012 Jim Davies: “The universe may or may not have had a beginning; the evidence (AFAIK) isn’t in.” Ah HA! A FIRST!! This is the very first time I have found ANYTHING written by Jim Davies with which I disagree! The following article is short and I would have copied it here except for the number of italics and the bother it would be to recreate them here. I date MY atheism from when the article arrived in my mailbox in 1962. In addition to correcting Jim’s statement quoted above, it may be of value to others who are still mentally wrestling with the deliberate misdirections (i.e. lies) that the culture surrounding us has pounded into each of us since our birth. Dennis Objectivist Newsletter-Vol 1, No 5, May 1962, page 19–The “First Cause” article Since everything in the universe requires a cause, must not the universe itself have a cause, which is God? … Login to post comments DennisLeeWilson, posted on March 24, 2012 Branden does indeed address whether or not the universe had a beginning. From Branden’s article: Just as the concept of causality applies to events and entities within the universe, but not to the universe as a whole–so the concept of time applies to events and entities within the universe, but not to the universe as a whole. The universe did not “begin”–it did not, at some point in time, “spring into being.” Time is a measurement of motion. Motion presupposes entities that move. If nothing existed, there could be no time. Time is “in” the universe; the universe is not “in” time. I admit that in 1962, it took me a week of reading and re-reading to fully grasp, understand and integrate the entirety of his short article and to abandon my agnosticism. But I found the above paragraph about “time” to be the cleanest and purest of logical constructs. If that is not so with you, then we are indeed NOT in sync. Dennis DennisLeeWilson, posted on March 24, 2012 Branden does indeed address whether or not the universe had a beginning. From Branden’s article: Just as the concept of causality applies to events and entities within the universe, but not to the universe as a whole–so the concept of time applies to events and entities within the universe, but not to the universe as a whole. The universe did not “begin”–it did not, at some point in time, “spring into being.” Time is a measurement of motion. Motion presupposes entities that move. If nothing existed, there could be no time. Time is “in” the universe; the universe is not “in” time. I admit that in 1962, it took me a week of reading and re-reading to fully grasp, understand and integrate the entirety of his short article and to abandon my agnosticism. But I found the above paragraph about “time” to be the cleanest and purest of logical constructs. If that is not so with you, then we are indeed NOT in sync. Dennis  comments DennisLeeWilson, posted on March 27, 2012 “…how would you answer the objection that time is not really a function of moving objects but occupies an independent dimension…” If you want to use your statement (quoted above) as a definition of the concept “time”, perhaps you would explain the nature of this “independent dimension” and how it differs from the nature of time in Branden’s article…: “Time is a measurement of motion. Motion presupposes entities that move.” “Admittedly if no thing exists, it would be tricky to construct a clock.” I think the word you want instead of “tricky” is the word “impossible”. Keep in mind the closing statement in Branden’s short article…: Existence is all that exists, the non-existent does not exist; there is nothing for existence to have come out of–and nothing means nothing. If you are tempted to ask: “What’s outside the universe?”–recognize that you are asking: “What’s outside of existence?” and that the idea of “something outside of existence” is a contradiction in terms; nothing is outside of existence, and “nothing” is not just another kind of “something”–it is nothing. Existence exists; you cannot go outside it, you cannot get under it, on top of it or behind it. Existence exists–and only existence exists: there is nowhere else to go. | [3]. I make a brief comment regarding Selfishness and Group Traps [3.1] And Resolving A Major Confusion: Capitalism is ECONOMICS, NOT government! [3.2]  Update: The embedded links [3.1 and 3.2] are broken so I’ve Carried them Forward here: (Search Tags: Unanimous Consent Articles [1] And Or Harry Browne Identity, Selfishness and Group Traps [3.1] as they relate Here) Find [3.2] Capitalism is ECONOMICS, NOT government! Link Here: “ What is called a Planned Economy is no Economy at all. It is just a system of GROPING ABOUT IN THE DARK.” ~ Ludwig von Mises [4.1] Additional Related: Counter Intuitives Regarding “Can’t Find A Mate”: • Loneliness, Hatred, Reason, Revolution – Freedomain Radio Listener Emails • What I can do here is is fill in the cracks between existing freedom books and a new Breakthru by Sara Burrows in an unlikely corner of Polyamorism as it relates to Self Owner ship and PLAYING to strengths of Methodological Individualism, Spontaneous Order and Human Ignorance. LET ME BEGIN TO SPELL IT OUT FOR MYSELF AND YOU • [4.2] Counter Intuitives Regarding “Can’t Talk Like Self Responsible Adults Anymore”:  Working Link Broken Here is an Excerpt and Response to the above trains of thought. It’s not necessary: • To convert • Nor petition others… • Nor is it to adopt methods of those I despise to make people do things to the extent that it is a TORN compromise… • Nor to social engineer… • Nor to convince, • Nor to run after people, • Nor to be in constant mediation mode, • Nor to have no idea with whom and what domination education or empath voices I am dealing with. Individuals still don’t know their own power. Build your own model instead of fighting the existing. “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” ~ R. Buckminster Fuller To this day many are UNaware of spontaneous order of individuals in society and methodological individualism and human ignorance in making calculations for others. I am imagining, guessing, exploring: That perhaps Bruce Lee AND Buckminster Fuller were groking aspects of Ludwig Von Mises Human Action: spontaneous order of individuals in society and methodological individualism and human ignorance in making yes and no on the margin calculations for others. (XRef Marginal Steps Toward a Better Life – Jeffrey Tucker []). A Work-It-Out title or sub-title Starting with Buckminster Fuller Model AND Trim Tab Insights. \|/ I also introduce and branch off to solutions that uncover and handle purposefully orchestrated genocide: Everyone In Middle East Given Own Country In 317,000,000-State Solution By Mal Roarke is a pseudonym… from Connect Sep 22, 2016 Why is this individual act, productive, profitable and powerful? Read on Dear Reader• • • − Apollonius Dionysius And solutions that uncover and handle purposefully orchestrated stampedes, bombing countries, false flags and shipping people via nation states False Flag Mass Migration Madness By Mal Roarke is a pseudonym… from Connect Sep 7, 2015   ADDENDUM “To secure freedom requires intelligence. It must be comprehended and self—asserted …but more than anything else not demanding another or a group provide me everything I want. | Indeed there are Abundant NOT Scarcity of individual ways and strategies in a division of labor society to get a value met… • I am interested in this: How does this all play out in my personal life and relationships? Is there a blow forward progression of Order and Breakthru waiting for me and or you to adopt? Indeed the Curiousity driven projects and conversations I involve myself in. Is there such a thing as Carry Forward natural Order Interaction that come from individual Voluntary Self Rule?  One school of thought leads to what I am pointing to which is each individual doing their own thing (not petitioning nor manipulating nor converting nor master slave controlling oneself nor others) | ALSO happen to create a path thru the forest of complexity of Group Traps, which includes such things as self correcting pricing, making and delivering bread or say private security and/or space, energy, time, creative Non Violent Communication where solutions find you and others, to a whole community, city of individuals,  which was not the intention of each individual nor within their capability as one individual to dictate; | AND the OTHER school is Social Engineering Command Control theorists who support Gods Will AND/OR The Secularization of that: The Statist Quo Ignorance of and Interference of and DESTRUCTION  of Spontaneous Order that manifests thru Methodological Individualism. | Adam Smith may not have been the first economist, as he is sometimes called. But more than any other social philosopher he popularized the notion that human beings, left Free– from the Superstitions In Authority–to pur- sue their own goals, would give rise to a Social Order that none of them had consciously planned. As Smith famously put it in The Wealth of Nations, free man acts as if “led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.” …French economist Frédéric Bastiat remarked on the wonder of that stufefying phenomenon by exclaiming, “Paris gets fed!” Economics did not create that regularity, nor is it faced with the task of proving that it exists—we see it in front of us every day. Eco- nomics, rather, must explain how it comes about. Enter the die hard skeptics:…For many, the feeling of stupefaction was soon replaced by one of frustration. They had ideas for reforming society, and now they discovered that the emerging science of economics stood in their way. Economics advised these reformers that some plans for social organization would fail regardless of how well they were carried out, because the plans violated basic laws of human Interaction. …Temporarily Stopped in their tracks by the achievements of the early economists, some of these reformers, such as Karl Marx, attempted to invalidate the entire subject. Economists, Marx contended, were simply describing society as they found it under the domination of the capitalists. There are no economic truths that apply to all men in all times and places; most specif- ically, the laws formulated by the classical school, by writers such as Smith, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo, will not apply to those living in the future socialist utopia. In fact, said the Marxists, these thinkers were merely apologists for the exploitation of the masses by the wealthy few. The classical economists were, to phrase it in the style of the Chinese Marx- ists, running dog lackeys of the imperialist warmonger pigs. The extent to which Marx and like-minded thinkers  suc- ceeded in their goal of undermining the foundations of eco- nomics reflected the fragility of those foundations. The classi- cal economists had discovered many economic truths, but they were plagued by certain inconsistencies in their own theories, such as their inability to construct a coherent theory of value. (We will address this specific difficulty in more detail later.) It was Mises, building on the work of earlier Austrian econ- omists such as Carl Menger, who finally reconstructed eco- nomics “upon the solid foundation of a general theory of human action. P19 thru 21 EFRP… Check out Wendy Mcelroy’s “The Art of Being Free” and Gene Callahan’s “Economics for Real People”. The latter is free at the other can be purchased anywhere or free at Jeffrey Tucker’s See upcoming links P. 44 of Wendy McElroy’s ebook “The Art of Being Free”: provided “…ORDER espoused by Mises and Hayek was a spontaneous one in which individuals pursued their own diverse interests without coordination by a central authority. What does such an order look like?” As it pertains. I was reviewing this recently: Denver DA Creates Countless Fully Informed Jurors Excerpt: It occurs to me that perhaps it begins to look like a few individuals peacefully passing out a gift: pamphlets for jury nullification at a court house not to fight govt, not convert others, but to provide information… And Yes the MORE the Central Authourity Interfere with that need for Autonomy to give and receive a gift of care, support, collaboration, and contribution, the more individuals appear, awaken, and Leave By Their own preferences, interests and actions. This is a far cry from converting and manipulating and social engineering. And yet No it is not how I would secure my freedom. It smacks too much of petitioning others as it pertains to this: “To secure freedom requires intelligence. It must be comprehended and self—asserted. To petition for it is to stultify oneself, for a petitioner is a confessed subject and lacks the spirit of a freeman. To rail and rant against tyranny is to manifest inferiority, for there is no tyranny but ignorance; to be conscious of one’s powers is to lose consciousness of tyranny. Self government is not a remote aim. It is an intimate and inescapable fact. To govern oneself is a natural imperative, and all tyranny is the miscarriage of self government. The first requisite of freedom is to accept responsibility for the lack it! Just Walk Away (Atlas Shrugged -By Ayn Rand)… …Because… Mathew Reece posted this as it relates And I posted this: Natural laws playing out. Spontaneous Order looks chaotic. However there IS a self correcting taking place here. Both Tucker and Cantwell offer strategies, mind sets etc. Jeffrey is pointing out that NON INTERFERENCE with migration will allow individuals to sort out what Statism deems impossible without command control, social engineering etc Cantwell has fallen for the WE have an emergency what are WE going to do? And the We-ist Traps that come from such! There is no WE! per se. Freedom Has No System by Chris Dates posted by Bill | October 10th, 2011 “It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself.” ~ Thomas Jefferson How does this play out in one’s Personal life and Personal Relationships? Is the following  possible in “There Is No WE” Context? P. 44 of Wendy McElroy’s ebook “The Art of Being Free”: provided by “…Order espoused by Mises and Hayek was a spontaneous one in which individuals pursued their own diverse interests WITHOUT  Coordination by a Central Authority. What does such an Order–[There Is No WE]— look like?” It Occurs to me such Order looks like how I make it possible to play to Jeffrey Tucker’s Insights–Steps Toward a Better Life–on Methodological Individualism as it relates to Wendy Mcelroy’s [Mises Human Action] Spontaneous Order by mindful and respectful connection that others live on the margin (marginal utility) with different yes or no preferences and strategies • As it relates to each ones needs/values to be heard; • What’s important, safe, peaceful; • And implicitly the strategy of the NAP, Non Aggression Principle, • And NAP, Non Violent Communication. Can such spontaneous order Flow emanate from Methodological Individualism? | See Marginal Steps Toward a Better Life – Jeffrey Tucker – By Jeffrey Tucker from Beautiful Anarchy Aug 4, 2014 I’m at dinner and the hostess serves me pie for dessert. I gobble it up. Then the hostess says, “Would you like another piece?”–toward-a-better–life/Proxy  Highlight |  Notes: Another Exploration Carrying Forward The Above Spontaneous Sonar or X ray and surfing capability Tools to use my intellect to politically to hear, see thru, point to DIFFERENCES in education, rationality and beliefs (Strategies) to be able to recap, understand and INTERACT with what’s driving a situation: i.e. their and or my core values even if the person does not know what a principle is… … Using Marshal B. Rosenberg’s NVC Giraffe Ears and Language Technology I describe and relate Observations and Actions predicated on Facts and Connection…and other aspects to make it relatively easy to see, hear, feel, value and request IN THE MOMENT such that when BOTH our Needs are known there is Relief, from which the Solution will find us within 20 minutes…Yet got to know the law of the holes… Law of holes An excavator that is in a hole and has stopped digging The first law of holes, or the law of holes, is an adage which states that “if you find yourself in a hole, stop digging”.[1][2] Digging a hole makes it deeper and therefore harder to get back out, which is used as a metaphor that when in an untenable position, it is best to stop carrying on and exacerbating the situation   …It’s as if I had another on going Spontaneous Sonar or X ray and surfing capability Tool to use my intellect to in addition to politically also echo empathically to hear, see thru DIFFERENCES in education, rationality and beliefs (Strategies) and to be able to recap, understand and INTERACT with what’s driving a situation: i.e. their and or my core values even if the person does not know what a principle is or what constitures being heard, is. | Watch “FULL – Nonviolent Communication Workshop – Marshall Rosenberg (2000) (Multi Subtitles)” on YouTube And then building on that and with NVC–based on Work-It-Outs standing on shoulders of Dan Siegel, Gene Gendlin–and such conduits, mind sets, as Harry Browne’s “How I Found Freedom and –NAP Via Dennis Wilsons Bare Minimums Of Covenant of Unanimous Consent in an UnFree World” and Ayn Rand’s Galt’s Oath…and Integrated Philosophy Interaction And Carry Forward via her Opus Atlas Shrugged; AND Darrell Becker’s Silent Non Violent Mediation and Communication merged with Trivium Method and Progress by Incremental Improvement and Prototyping (PIIP™), such that Insights and Strategies are facilitated and allowed to surface and come together. In so doing that they are Spontaneously more Productive and Profitable and Orderly on many levels than could be expected or dictated by either of the individuals wedded to social engineering, command control, group traps, petitioning or converting or demanding equal effects from unequal causes etc. It makes a difference who you surrounded yourself with first and foremost and how you connect in these environs!!  The question becomes how do I get out of dreaming and design and start to build a power tools and conduits to FILTER those who already SUBSCRIBE to Spontaneous Order and Methodological Individualism Philosophy of Liberty that I can Trade with without Sacrifice? That makes that possible to be around those who want me to be free? Indeed a natural monopoly such that contracts other than a hand shake are redundant? And such that mistakes can be pointed to and resolved without contracts. I have been PIIP™ing that–Progress via Incremental Improvement and Prototyping–Here: How I Freed Myself. It is the way I live and the way I personally live in relationships as it pertains to P. 44 of Wendy McElroy’s ebook “The Art of Being Free”: provided by “…order espoused by Mises and Hayek was a spontaneous one in which individuals pursued their own diverse interests without coordination by a central authority. What does such an order look like?” See 1. Marginal Steps Toward a Better Life – Jeffrey Tucker – **–toward-a-better–life/Proxy  Highlight The Art of Being Free by Wendy Mcelroy Gene Callahan’s “Economics for Real People” Refer back (replace monopoly with spontaneous order) A Direct Alternative is one that requires only direct action by yourself to get a desired result. An indirect alternative requires that you act to make someone else do what is necessary to achieve your objective. ~ HarryBrowne  How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World NOTES. I am becoming progressively less stupid without the perjorative as it relates spontaneous order and methodological individualism. I am tending to the question of various FILTERS and Conduits for liberty lovers and living in that space. I’ve been informally Working-It-Out. More formally   PIIP™ing that–Progress via Incremental Improvement and Prototyping that Here: How I Freed Myself. And Here is another facet I CONNECT with… Here: And Here: More Notes: I ask, are the individuals in govt becoming progressively less stupid? Does the institution of govt incubate less stupidity? Re: The whole time I was listening to the Harris County DA I was asking myself what am I MISSING? Well now I know! AND you will too! Let’s compare notes? 1. Regarding: EVERYONE needs to adopt Harris County DA’s concerns and claims and come forward and join law enforcement. That’s clearly not the case nor a strategy need in Proto Dystopian Detroit. Didn’t Detroit go bankrupt? No paycheck no DA and LEO’s? Good riddance! And yet there IS  protection from a private security company! But wait, is this a request by Harris County DA on youtube to come forward and join with LEOs to be Deputized? No Dear Reader, perish the thought. A town of deputized citizens would have equal standing to the deputies? Can’t have that. That’s going too far! The DA is playing the let’s be reasonable folks and the martyr card and allegiance to “nation” state as a citizen. The card they play when things start to be seen for what they are. But as I pointed in prior post without reciprocal serve and protect there is NO duty nor allegiance of the citizen to a “nation” state…they know this. Listen to the DA and watch her now that you know this! How does it feel to be duped? This retired sheriff comes forward, and comes up with and shares an equivalent to handing out jury nullification pamphlets. Although in this case I do not recommend it. It is too much like sticking the finger out and taunting a bull with a red flag! “What a motorist should[might choose for himself to] do when stopped by a police officer [as preferable strategy to his own dissatisfaction]” By Walter E. Block It’s a shell game…they need us to sanction the institution. If I know why and how then the spellbinding is broken! And if I see thru it and others do, it begins to add up to many awakened individuals. OK ok we have got some bad apples but we are the good (we hope you do not realize we extort you) and need your [blind] support and sanction… We need to trial ballon whether you will Mourn and Honor our fallen (bad apples) and Celebrate our services that you are forced to pay for at the point of a gun, but which falls outside any directed productive use to you citizens (we actually don’t serve and protect you) but we will happily act on SWATing or CPSing your neighbours and their kids and seperating you or them from your or their property in myriad ways… How’s that for the false alternative of your money or your life? Will the DA stop being a DA? Will LEO’s go on strike? No not as of this moment but what if they keep loosing LEO’s and bankrupting cities? PPT Plunge Protection Team is unable to hold up markets any more. Confidence of the people in the statist quo system is waning. Perhaps LEO’s and DA will not have a regular paycheck anymore even with a magical printing machine and world reserve status. Surprise! Different means same ends. No paycheck, no LEO’s. No LEO’s no DA… And to excaberate this townsfolk and private peace officers ARE DOING for themselves what DA and LEO’s dictate as their reason d’etre but infact do not do! It’s not looking pretty for these guys. People are seeing thru the pretense,  spectacle, presumptiousness and duplicity. The following are the very opposite of the Harris County’s DA and LEO concerns, claims and resultant CHAOS… The DA and LEO’s have become redundant! In Addition: 2. The Sagra Model in Russia; a town took out a drug cartel on its own and nation state did a Volte-face: Fired 200,000 LEO’s. 3. A German version of the Sagra Model where 30,000 LEO’s guarding a train loaded with radioactive cargo, begged for relief after getting led into the forest by farmers… 4. A western version of the Sagra Model: Recent Lakota and Navajo and Bundy Ranch personal goals that could spark a similar model. 5. What people do naturally which is unofficial version of Sagra Model … This they wanted to do and did not need a leader or DA or the foot soldiers to do force them. Same in proto-dystopian Detroit with local private police services. Instead of Social Engineering others using LEO’s and DA’s they are taking care of themselves and as a result providing actual verifiable documented natural peaceful respectful order one person at a time under conditions “nation” state officials dictate as impossible… INTERESTED? “There are criminals here who might rob you, kidnap you and murder you [LEOs], **so you’ll get free bodyguard service anytime you’re in the neighborhood**”. Progressing Opsec and INTERPOSITION via Incremental Improvement and Prototyping By Mal Roarke is a pseudonym… from Connect Sep 2, 2015   Preamble: In a prior exploratory article–reference link below–I speak to the question who protects who and who declared war on who? I show why it’s not possible to protect a citizen of a “Nation” state (statist quo). And the corollary of that: Why “You never change things by fighting the existing reality”. And I show an on going working example of the principle: “To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” ~ R. Buckminster. And finally I briefly introduce the Incremental Improvement of using a holographic Prototype modelling of a protection service to deal specifically with the question: who will protect you from so-called protectors in real time and why that is so important! “Who Declared War on Who? And Intro to INTERPOSITION” Here, I do a CREATIVE work-it-out to clarify and begin to sum up my Operational Security [OPSEC] explorations and create new strings as they relate to: Buffering, [INTERPOSITION] Neutralizing problems and Entrappment INSTEAD of being corraled into ever ratcheting TRIGGERING and Escalating Stimulus Asset Forfeiture Paradigms and Progroms of “State “Security” Monopoly”   ORG by David Benzal 2D > Illustration – posted 12th January 2015 Character design In PART II, I link to Covenant of *Unanimous Consent Bare Minimums*. In PART III:  I provide evidence of recent and relevant Grand scale models of INTERPOSITION* and blossoming of Privatized Security and Volte-face by “Nation” states! Introduction