The Global Liberty Community
How I freed myself (ver× ) 1st My Own Mind Body Action Work It Out
Hi, here is a Reset Application of my work, where I weave a selection of an index of articles (attached) AS IF a palette to paint and expand on HOW I Found Freedom in An UnFree World standing on shoulders of my understanding of Harry Browne, L Neil Smith, Dennis Lee Wilson, Ludwig Von Mises, Ayn Rand…
tinyurl.com/Covenant-and-Galts-Oath-W
Nature to be commanded must be understood. A is A and man’s mind is capable of knowing it. One can’t have his cake and eat it! And moral code based on non sacrifice of self nor others…
https://tinyurl.com/Search-A-Is-A
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/objectivism.html
Some people follow a group, package deals, stolen concepts, contradictory identification and non sequitors…
|
And blame “Capitalism” for the evils being committed by Governments and their Crony Corporations!
http://tinyurl.com/Capitalism-is-ECONOMICS-W not Politics, so why is this something to be aware of? And why do I use the term free market…
Excerpt: *For a recommended, personalized system of governance, see the articles at the following links.
http://tinyurl.com/The-Bare-Minimum-W
http://tinyurl.com/Autarchy-vs-Anarchy-W
http://tinyurl.com/Autarchy-is-self-rule-W
Related article:
See the excerpt from Capitalism ALWAYS wins! by Simon Black
|
I supercede that by taking Direct Alternatives: what control directly. Not other people.
While others are told and may accept “A” is “B” by their leaders, they can be confused, controlled, played, bribed with their own money by politicians etc
You and I are questioning what we observe, and working it out, integrating it such that have a possibility of non contradictory identification (objectivity)…
Using logic, context and principles and history…
It’s a skin game…and we bare the consequences…
The govt leaders are removed from consequences as if I need point it out that it is their followers who bear the burden of being ruled and ruling others…
More specifically you and I as individuals respect ownership of ourselves and others by taking Directly Alternatives, what control directly. Not controlling other people.
Direct alternative: A choice available to you that requires only direct action by yourself to get a desired result. (See also indirect alternative.)
Indirect alternative: A choice available to you that requires that you induce someone else to do what is necessary to achieve your objective. (See also direct
alternative.
Excerpt of a definition fleshed out in: *How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World. By Harry Browne.
Here: is good overview that will give you info you asked for!
TO Where I started paddling and or driving on Freedom Road
Away from:
Watch “malvina reynolds – little boxes” on YouTube
https://youtu.be/2_2lGkEU4Xs
To this:
https://www.caseyresearch.com/articles/doug-casey-fresh-starts
I realize it relates and is PERSONALLY RELEVANT to FIRST standing in a position of freedom.
Dreaming about what I want. Comparing those wants to my life. Getting rid of what does not fit my wants. Using the proceeds of that to fund my new life…
Watch “Liveaboard life: minimalism in a tiny home at sea” on YouTube
Watch “Low-rent liveaboard life in high-rent San Francisco Bay” on YouTube
Nice. The shape of the roof is a hyperbolic paraboloid. Very nicely USED for that boat.
See “Stop dreaming and START BUILDING some real sea steads”.
https://connect.liberty.me/stop-dreaming-and-start-building-some-real-sea-steads/
In the interim why not try Harold Hough’s Freedom Road.
http://tinyurl.com/Hough-Freedom-Road-W
Watch “How to convert a Van in to an Off-Grid Camper in 17 Days!” on YouTube
But really the issue at hand is how to live and express in the attitude and action of a man, with a benevolent universe premise, in interactions with oneself and others…
This–Dreaming about what I want. Comparing those wants to my life.
Getting rid of what does not fit my wants. Using the proceeds of that to fund my new life–CHANGES the DYNAMIC so I am NOT HAVING TO GIVE UP things. I am CLEARING myself to find, Connect and live my Values/Needs and FLOW within conduits of an abundance of what makes my life better. ~ Paraphrased from Harry Browne “How I Found Freedom in an UNfree World”
Ref: SFZT Starting From Zero Technique
https://connect.liberty.me/stop-dreaming-and-start-building-some-real-sea-steads/
There is a balance of time and place and context for working with others in different capacities in the remnants of ability-pyramids and comparative advantages (self fully but never for and never living for them to create any resentment or rancor) and Doug Casey begins to point to that in his Fresh Start article.
The above is my version of Doug Casey’s PRIMARY, Fresh Start, Incrementally Improved using The Starting from Zero technique paraphrased from Harry Browne’s “How I Found Freedom in an UNfree World.” And Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged”…
A SECONDARY idea is that man is a social animal, and we tend to prefer to run with others who are like us – or who love what we love. Birds of a feather flock together, in either case.
Doug Casey on Phyles
http://www.internationalman.com/articles/doug-casey-on-phyles
AtlasAikido
|
Indeed there are those who understand the Differences between Faking Spontaneous Order via Majoritarianism I.E Democracy Versus Unanimous Consent
Here is an excellent intro and essay on how Unanimous Consent already works in our every-day world. It is one of two “founding documents” that L Neil Smith wrote–this one in 1989–supporting the Covenant of Unanimous Consent
|
Here is a Bare Minimums of Unanimous Consent Power Tool I use to start to SILENTLY FILTER Philosophy of Liberty Subscribers that play to strengths of myself and OTHERS Functional–Reciprocating–Rights, and form follows functional Dynamics of Direct Alternatives.
|
As it relates the autarchist will control himself in his own best interests. He will cooperate with others, individually or in groups, when he wishes to do so for his own gains. If he does not believe that cooperation in a given case will benefit him, he will refrain from such cooperation. He will not be coerced, and he will refrain from coercing others, even for their own good.
He will replace the apparent necessity for general coercion by clear evidence that he requires no coercion. He will no longer concern himself with what others ought to do because he will be too busy doing what he ought to do.
The autarchist is an intellectual activist. He is a builder, not a destroyer.
Browse the highlights…
Autarchy
by Robert LeFevre
http://tinyurl.com/Autarchy-is-self-rule-W
No one should be in charge…except of oneself
This is a completely different paradigm than what is out there…
I.E. volyuntarist believes and lives via non aggression principle and owning oneself…Vs
No one is the boss of others…
Yet most i.e. Statists Can’t fathom the idea and its giant contradictions because of propaganda… a pseudo religious belief that gives them an exemption from morality that one needs to rule over others or be ruled ahem hmm…otherwise there would be no order and yet it is the cause of inhumanity and chaos!
What? What am I talking about?
This may get someone interested or get oneself ahmm in dire straights.
So I find myself private from sales people snoops, shmoos, statists etc only interested in those who can hear or already attracted to what you and I do…Voluntarism in all phases of my life.
E.G. 1. The Idea of Pizzacracy which I spoke Vs Majoritism
2. Related to Unanimous Consent is a Utopian Vision -or- I Dreamed I Was a Signatory In My Maidenform Bra
The article may be seen by scrolling down from this link:
tinyurl.com/Covenant-and-Galts-Oath-W
Which also links to What is a simple Political and Moral Filter that describes what I will do instead of enslaving controlling others? http://tinyurl.com/Covenant-and-Galts-Oath-W
Which has link why I need a Political statement or Filter for myself what I subscribe to Vs Rule others…
http://tinyurl.com/Political-Statement-W
Finally, What is the Bare Minimum to get along with just one other.
http://tinyurl.com/The-Bare-Minimum-W
PS To avoid these kind of problems. Larken Rose names the problem. Yet I do NOT recommend waking up statists (but one self)”Larken Rose How Wakie Up Statists From Their Mind Control” on YouTube.
Similarly The following *Topics* thread also goes thru 1. Pizzacracy and tinyurl(DOT)com/Covenant-and-Galts-Oath-W link and adds on the same page 2. A Utopian Vision both that already live in and can Extend for oneself.
3. And adds link into what is Autarchy (Voluntarism)…
https://disqus.com/home/channel/covenantofunanimousconsent/topics/covenant-of-unanimous-consent/
|
It’s as if I had a spontaneous X ray capability to see thru differences in education, rationality and beliefs to see core principles and actions even if the person does not know what a principle is!
When it is I ENSURING the Job [focusing on Gift Giving and playful fun] of living peacefully with myself without putting myself in positions that create Resentment, and taking the Direct Alternative Response Ability and Risk *of paying the price* to make good my life experience, rep and on-going freedom–I am Interacting and Working it Out (Progressing Incremental Improvements via Prototyping) and Objectifying Self Reliance, Security and Next Step Future Trade opportunities with compatibles.
Paraphrased from Harry Browne’s The Great Milk Robbery via my subjective understanding and choice of values and biases etc…
http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle593-20101031-04.html
The Unselfishness Trap
by Harry Browne
[From How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World, 1973]
http://www.harrybrowne.org/articles/UnselfishnessTrap.htm
And ‘Freedom Has No System–Challenge the premise. There is no “we.”’ http://zerogov.com/?p=2334 in the sense of I and thou enslaved or forced or expected to serve one.
I have teased out the “we”-ism and NAP facets as they relate in this blog/article.
|
A reminder: 8 minute summation of the HIFFIUFW book I sent a friend: Watch “Harry Browne – Anti-Freedom Traps” on YouTube
|
I was prompted recently, Jan 10th, 2019, to search and review what Scott Gilbert wrote about goals, systems and strategies as it relates to his work and free time as a Process within a day to day and perhaps day to week but not moonshots…
I had also already researched and progressed unfolding as it relates to differences between a voluntarist and nonvoluntarist.
Attachment
Join The Discussion
6 CommentsThoughts? Comments?
Please login or register to post a comment.
Atlas... 2015-10-21 , 9:50 am
Moved
Atlas... 2015-10-21 , 10:13 am
I have brought here the following brief excerpts from discussions and articles on The Covenant of Unanimous Consent by Dennis Lee Wilson in a different order than they were originally arranged to see what additional insights and strategies surface for me? And I share them here.
I found this to be very useful. After addressing several back and forth comments. Dennis states:
“…In my postings and articles I have attempted to show how I think the Covenant applies to problems with the current government, including issues that Lysander Spooner, Ayn Rand and L. Neil Smith identified.
I use the Covenant as a FILTER. I have something intellectually in common with other Signatories just like I have something in common with other Objectivists. However, my experience has been that there is more agreement among Signatories to the Covenant than there is among those claiming to be Objectivists. I think that is because the Covenant is quite specific whereas an entire philosophic system gets considerably more variation in the way people interpret meanings.
A couple of examples of how I have used the Covenant as a filter: I read most of the books of a libertarian author and then had occasion to meet and talk with him. At one point I asked him his views of the Covenant. He was familiar with it but was NOT a signatory and he declined to discuss it. Several months later I discovered some internet posting of his that indicated a xenophobic racism on his part, something that did not appear in any of his books. In this case, the Covenant and his reaction to it told me much about him even before I made that discovery.
However much I disagreed with that author, I respected him for NOT signing the Covenant. There was another person who claimed to be BOTH a Signatory and a racist! Such blatant hypocrisy earns only my contempt.
I have met several people who ARE Signatories and I have enjoyed their company immensely, some have become close friends.
As in all things of a personal nature, Your Mileage May Vary (YMMV) .
Dennis
Excerpt from works of Dennis Lee Wilson
So what is it about The Covenant that makes it both simple and deep such that it makes the above possible?
-Galt’s Oath and the libertarian Non-Aggression Principle[3] are moral/ethical principles.
-The basic or minimum requirement for peaceful interpersonal relationships[1] is understanding and adhering to the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP), a very simple MORAL/ethical concept that is even readily understood by most children.
-But sometimes moral statements are not sufficiently explicit or not easily applied to particular situations. Because of varying education levels (there will ALWAYS BE children coming into adulthood), understanding the full consequences of moral statements and/or applying them consistently can become problematic. In larger groups of people, applying moral statements consistently becomes increasingly problematic–especially when modern-day sophists specialize in deliberately distorting and delight in twisting the meaning[4] of even something as simple and rational as the Non-Aggression Principle.
-Minimum requirements for living peacefully amongst other people do NOT require a person to be “fully rational” nor to understand what moral/ethical principles ARE, nor even to understand what principles are! Education levels vary enormously as do levels of rationality!
-A characteristic of Political Statements—and a reason why they exist—is that they are more explicit than moral statements and consequently, are less vulnerable to innocent and/or malevolent “interpretations” and deliberate distortions and twisting.
-That important point is worth repeating:
-Rules of Conduct, such as a Political Statement or the last five of Moses’ Commandments, are MORE SPECIFIC AND CONCISE and considerably LESS ABSTRACT than moral principles, and are therefore less subject to misinterpretation and less liable to deliberate manipulation.
-The Covenant of Unanimous Consent is a five point (Precepts) Political Statement of interpersonal relationships based on and explicitly derived from the single moral principle in the Non-Aggression Principle.
-As can be seen in the essays, articles and discussions in Footnote[5], The Covenant of Unanimous Consent reflects a very explicit, sovereign individual oriented morality
Excerpted from: “Why is a Political Statement Needed?
http://tinyurl.com/Political-Statement-W
Footnotes:
[1] See What *IS* The Bare Minimum…? for more details:
http://tinyurl.com/The-Bare-Minimum-W
[2] A Written Constitution: Protecting the State from the People
http://tinyurl.com/Why-Constitutions-Fail-W
[3] Galt’s Oath and the libertarian Non-Aggression Principle
http://tinyurl.com/Covenant-and-Galts-Oath-W
[4] Even something as simple and concise as the NAP can be a target for distortion. See In Defense of Non-Aggression
by David Gordon at http://mises.org/daily/6414/In-Defense-of-NonAggression for details.
[5] http://tinyurl.com/Index-to-Covenant-Articles-W ”
Notes:
“It should be obvious at this point that the Covenant is not suitable for everyone”.
[As I rearrange this work I am discovering the significance and relevance of a FILTER for playing to my own strengthes regarding others (filtering for subscribers and non subscribers to freedom and those inbetween and walking away, indeed not even engaging some. Indeed if I need to use a contract(other than a hand shake)* I probably need to think again and come up with Direct Alternatives].
*In the not so wild west a man’s hand shake was as good as his word. Calling a man a liar was challenge to duel. That’s how important his word was.
I myself have used it this way. I can point to each of the 5 short Precepts and ask myself or another. Does the Covenant of Unanimous Consent apply if I go here or there or do this or that? Or do you agree with this precept?
“…In my postings and articles I have attempted to show how I think the Covenant [creates a new model instead of fighting the existing]… problems with the current government, [and thereby integrates ]…issues that Lysander Spooner, Ayn Rand and L. Neil Smith identified”.
“The Covenant of Unanimous Consent reintroduces the idea of personal responsibility instead of relying upon “other”, delegated people (government) to “make”, care for and enforce sensible and rational laws.”
What **IS* the ABSOLUTE BARE MINIMUM that Voluntary Groups of any size–two people or more–need to agree upon, in order to live together peacefully and productively?* by Dennis Lee Wilson
http://tinyurl.com/The-Bare-Minimum-W
David Montgomery 2015-10-24 , 8:34 pm
That Fuller quote never gets old.
Atlas... 2016-03-04 , 12:05 am
Just like terms can be too broad and vague i.e. rights, so can “do not steal” be too simplistic. Do not steal is nice but not enough and not adequate for long term living.
“Keep your word” is insufficient as Marxists will keep their word i.e. their promise to enslave you.
NAP is a moral statement. People are misusing it as a political statement. It is not intended to provide the details, it’s intended to judge the details. As one example: the moral statement does not speak to self defense, where as a political statement of it explicitly does.
Galt’s Oath, Non-Aggression Principle & The Covenant
http://tinyurl.com/Covenant-and-Galts-Oath-W
This begs the introduction of the Bare Minimum.
Any thing less than The Covenant is NOT adequate as discussed above.
What about assault? Or property laws?
Anything more than The Covenant can be covered by Blackstones.
In the Bare Minimum Dennis Wilson discusses the relationship between the covenant, merchant law and black stones ( The Covenant of Unanimous Consent provides the means by which individuals can and should judge, accept, modify or reject particular instances of Merchant Law and Blackstone’s).
Like Merchant law This is very personal, it is about self responsibility. They didn’t ask others to do it for them!
“…In my postings and articles I have attempted to show how I think the Covenant [creates a new model instead of fighting the existing]… problems with the current government, [and thereby integrates ]…issues that Lysander Spooner, Ayn Rand and L. Neil Smith identified”.
“The Covenant of Unanimous Consent reintroduces the idea of personal responsibility instead of relying upon “other”, delegated people (government) to “make”, care for and enforce sensible and rational laws.”
“What **IS* the ABSOLUTE BARE MINIMUM that Voluntary Groups of any size–two people or more–need to agree upon, in order to live together peacefully and productively?*” by Dennis Lee Wilson
http://tinyurl.com/The-Bare-Minimum-W
It is How I Freed Myself. Using The Covenant of Unanimous Consent and How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World.
https://connect.liberty.me/how-i-freed-myself/
Atlas... 2016-09-25 , 7:31 pm
Apparently There Is No Alternative for some! So it’s TINA, business as usual.
Update Re: Jack Lloyd
“…but few can articulate a practical policy which can shift our government expediently into a fully voluntary society.
To fill the gap, I would ask for the libertarian movement to get behind the “not-for-profit” government model.”
https (colon) //volcomic.liberty.me/from-tyranny-to-liberty-a-practical-solution/
And
Re: Jack Lloyd, “The policies laid out here are recommendations to help reduce institutional violence by ensuring that the government’s only chief functions are to enforce laws which have actual human victims and to remediate historical harms due to government theft.”
https (colon) //volcomic.liberty.me/the-not-for-profit-government-model-concurrent-policies-in-reshaping-america-for-liberty/
And
Re: Michael Rhymer replied 5 hours, 24 minutes ago
“Voting is the means by which we peacefully change power. It is an unprecedented advancement of civilization. Not voting is a vote to revert to a less civilized means of transferring power. It is similar to the Amish choosing not to use electricity or the fundamentalist Muslims refusal to recognize the rights of women. It is a rejection of the progress of civilization. Not voting is an indication that you do not intend to make a peaceful transition of power work. That you are waiting for the previous method of changing power by blood and death.”
Ref: https (colon) //veksler.liberty.me/five-reasons-why-im-boycotting-the-vote/
And
Justin Hale posted an update 2 days ago
“Does anyone have any pragmatic means of going from where we are now to Libertopia? Moral suasion doesn’t seem to be working. Just wait for the Crash and hope we are the ones left to rebuild? We all understand the theory. We all understand live your life as free as you can and don’t worry about it. That’s great. Some of us however would like to see some progress before we die. Any thoughts?”
I’m doing a Work-It-Out of THREE Alternatives with links (for those who bother to read my prior posts and links on Onar’s site regarding Dennis Wilson’s Libertarian Dream City; Jeffrey Tucker’s Atlantic City; and Dale Brown’s Threat Mgtment in Proto Dystopian Detroit with Private Security excerpts).
All THREE were written by well “respected” libertarians ( author/innovator; author/founder of this site; and a very successful security entrepreneur/innovator respectively.)
Someone who has actual “respect” for ideas that do NOT involve Enslaving others would be thanking me when 3 REAL Libertarian City/Zones–“Utopias”–are offered on a libertarian/anarchist site.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia
I also offered evidence of recent and relevant Grand Scale Models of INTERPOSITION* and blossoming of Privatized Security and Volte-face by “Nation” states…Russia, Germany etc…
Ref: See Interrogatory/Comments with Onar Am
https (colon) //onarchy.liberty.me/racist-skittles/
————-
As to further TINA SOLUTIONS, I am supposed to provide?
Why bother to “make an impact in American government”?
What a colossal waste of irreplaceable personal time, energy and resources!
Instead of trying to “stop” the avalanche (think fall of Roman Empire and the similar status of the USA Empire), consider personal secession options and join other like-minded peoples and form small communities for trade and self defense. Free State efforts in Wyoming and New Hampshire are an example, although they suffer from the same problem of working with government, but on a smaller scale.
Instead of goals which are impossible for you to achieve, such as trying to save or change the corrupt, failing system, think in positive terms which are ENTIRELY within YOUR personal control, such as how to secede at the personal level. Apply those energies toward BUILDING a system that will continue to serve you when the Evil Empire (please don’t make me explain) collapses from its own corruptions.
Consider forming or joining small personal secession groups or zones. The following are some of the “lifestyle-choices” that liberty lovers may be seeking.
It takes two people or more to form Voluntary Groups such as Friendships; Marriages; Agorist, Anarcho-capitalist, Anarchist and Survivalist Communities; Objectivist “Galt” Gulches and similar Societies; Redoubts; Family/Community Farms; Free State Groups; Temporary and Permanent Autonomous Zones; Supersedure Zones; Sea Steads; Independent Territories; Private Apartment Buildings; Home Associations and Restricted or Gated Communities, ZEDEs (Zones for Employment and Development of the Economy) and more.
Formation of such groups begs for (screams for!) an answer to the question: “What *IS* the bare minimum that two people need to agree upon, in order to live together peacefully and productively?”
For additional things to consider use Dennis Wilson’s article, “The Bare Minimum”, (reconstruct the link below) as a possible starting point to begin some personal brainstorming…:
tinyurl.com/The-Bare-Minimum-W
Dennis Wilson
Signatory: Covenant of Unanimous Consent
Ref https (colon) //denniswilsonlibertysite.liberty (dot) me/whither-now-libertarian/
Indeed it is How I Freed Myself
https (colon) //connect.liberty (dot) me/how-i-freed-myself/
—————————–
Well, if the evils done in the name of “authority” and “government” ever get so bad that you are willing to re-examine a few fundamental concepts and principles, then read “The Most Dangerous Superstition.” Until then, keep trying to cage the omnipotent monster that you continue to create, and see how well that works…(which is great for TINA racketeering, master/slave fat cat fascist mercantilist relationships)
http://tinyurl.com/scaredoffreedom-W
Dear Reader, as Harry Browne points out in his book How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
“Government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, “See, if it weren’t for the government, you wouldn’t be able to walk.”
…in 2002 Harry wrote, …”Since our politicians have no regards for [limits]* we can expect the following headline on a newspaper in the year 2032: “Middle East Violence Continues”
“A solution for the Middle East,” WorldNetDaily (April 11, 2002)
“Why Government Doesn’t Work (1996)”
Ref: https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Harry_Browne
I address* that aspect as it relates to Immigration here: https (colon) //connect.liberty.me/a-response-to-jonathan-gillispie-alleged-liberty-lover/
———–
As a people that have long puffed out their chests for having the most free and richest country in the history of the world, it is hard for Americans to come to grips with the fact that their country is now a toilet (hat tip to Sean Gabb for this phenomenal metaphor). The country they have long viewed as a bastion of liberty and free markets is now nothing more than a bankrupt, run-of-the-mill police state, but many Americans have been slow to recognize this, and they continue to flail away at issues that are completely irrelevant or quixotic. The prime example of this is the fact that many Americans still waste their time trying to get Congressman X or Senator Y elected, as though it really matters whether the man in Washington robbing them to fund war, government eavesdropping, and corporate welfare is from the Donkey syndicate or the Elephant syndicate.
There is a very fine line dividing the cautiously optimistic from the hopelessly naïve, and I fear that an overwhelming number of Americans have slipped into the latter category as they wistfully imagine that their government and their economy can be salvaged in the voting booth.
The truth is, no amount of voting and no amount of electioneering can make the American government or the American people any less bankrupt. No amount of voting and no amount of electioneering can roll back a government so militarized and secretive into a government circumscribed by the Constitution. No amount of voting and no amount of electioneering can save the American people from the excruciating economic depression that is coming, thanks to the Federal Reserve’s monetary policies.
Last, but certainly not least, no amount of voting and no amount of electioneering against so-called “illegal” immigration will save this country from any of its present or impending ills. This country was turned into a toilet by Americans in the voting booth, not by so-called “illegal” immigrants, and it certainly won’t be saved by spending more time in the voting booth.
What is even more troubling is the fact that most Americans never think about the consequences to themselves that will follow from building giant fences and hiring even more armed thugs in order to keep out the “illegals.” They apparently assume that there will never come a time when they themselves will need to move to another country in order to escape from the economic and political nightmare that is erupting all around them. Drunk on the chauvinistic view that America is and always will be “NUMBER 1!,” these anti-immigration ostriches use their own hands to help to build the fences that will bar their own escape in the future.
My advice to you, the next time you hear some hyperventilating, flag waving jackass going on and on about how we need to keep the “illegals” out of America, is to congratulate him for his sensitive humanitarian impulse to keep those innocent foreigners from falling into the reeking hell hole we call “America”.
How Could Illegal Immigration Make America Any Worse Than It Already Is?
By Mark R. Crovelli
https://mail.marketoracle.co.uk/Article22047.html
————–
Today it is easier to attack a politically correct shadow with a pitch fork than the statue–the elephant in the room–that darkens the landscape. And thereby avoid the controversial causes and any taint of stigma.
I recommend Tom Woods and Stefan Molyneux Take On Wall Street to begin to understand this issue!
Woods asks the Right Question: Would there likely be Less Wars and Bailouts–that ENRICH the military-industrial complex and POLITICALLY CONNECTED FAT CATS–Or More if the Fed Gov had a magical money machine? This is not a hypothetical question. They–all the above–Do have such a machine and access to it: it is called The Federal Reserve System.
As Hayek (a Nobel prize winning student of Mises) points out money is half of every transaction economy wide. And Woods makes a cogent connection: Is there a chance that this magic printing machine has a tinsy chance of creating economy wide up and down Boom, Bust, Volatility and Classes of People Herded, Corralled and Enriched by Govt?
This is not the same as the pyramid of ability or comparative advantages of a division of labor society (remnant of hands off–laissez faire–anarcho–self-rule–capitalism. What’s changed? There is now MORE impoverishing Wars and the same for Bailouts than can be supported or hidden.
Woods and Molyneux further discuss: Seeing thru the duality of what is bad, evil and corrupt in the private sector magically rendered good in the public sector. It can only occur on the scale we have via a “coercive” monopoly that can be wielded by the politically connected to bypass the competition of free market.
There is a reason that “Atlas Shrugged” is becoming a political “Harry Potter”. Ayn Rand SHONE a spotlight on a problem that STILL exists today: Not pre-1989 Soviet commmunism, but 2016-style State capitalism (mercantilism/fascism)..
————-
The Covenant of Unanimous Consent gets one out of all this “We” stuff–there is no We–and back into dealing with *I* and perhaps you and me. Where do YOU have a problem with the Covenant? Or where do you agree with the Covenant?
Dennis Wilson ties it all together from what Ayn Rand says about the gulch in her letters; Judge Narragansett’s activities in the closing pages of Atlas Shrugged; Galts Oath NAP/ZAP and the L. Neil Smith’s Covenant of Unanimous Consent. The Covenant also satisfies the objections noted by Lysander Spooner
http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2006/tle379-20060806-03.html
https (colon) //denniswilsonlibertysite.liberty.me/whither-now-libertarian/
————–
Is there a difference between those who seek to build a system, and those who only seek to build?
In the copy below, emphasis has been added…
http://tinyurl.com/There-is-NO-WE-W
When it comes to FREEDOM, there is no “WE”.
There really is only ONE person that you are capable of freeing and that is yourself. A person with the attitude of a slave cannot be free anywhere or at any time. Here is a link to a picture of such a person…:
http://tinyurl.com/American-Sheep-pic-W
THE CONTEXT of the statement is that when it comes to solving problems without using the Collective, the Government, the State (the WE), a person must adopt the ATTITUDE of an individual instead of a collective, one must think for himself/herself. For an example of switching from “WE” to “I”, Ayn Rand’s book “Anthem” comes to mind. Another example that springs to my mind is when the Lone Ranger says to Tonto “We are surrounded by hostile Indians. We are in real trouble.” and Tonto replies “What you mean ‘WE’, white man?”
To elaborate on that example: Someone says that the State solution to such and such problem isn’t working, we are in real trouble, what are we going to do about it. The essay “Freedom Has No ‘System” very nicely answers with the equivalent of “What do you mean ‘WE’, Statist?”
Such an approach puts the burden of freeing oneself onto the Statist. It UNDERSCORES the fact that the Statist has NOT bothered to think of solutions that do NOT involve enslaving other people. As pointed out in the article: “…[watch] my fellow humans squirm when asked to think like a free people…”.
Ref:
Stephan Molyneux’s Handbook to A Statist.
http://www.strike-the-root.com/72/molyneux/molyneux4.html
Note: There is only one entity that can pit the poor against the rich, the young against the old, the white against the black, this country against another and thrive thru divide and conquer. Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged presciently warned of ALL of this…
It is the state that creates conflict where none need exist…
Original Ref: Interrogatory with Onar Am
https (colon) //onarchy.liberty.me/racist-skittles/
Atlas... 2018-10-12 , 4:32 pm
Liberty Lovers:
Stop trying to fit in to the dominant culture.
Stop trying to conform to something that doesn’t fit you.
Be yourselves, even if nobody recognizes who you are but yourself.
That is what Liberty is about. The individual. The self.
Read the Covenant and the articles about the Covenant. If you agree, become a Signatory. Create a Supersedure Zone around you. Visualize the Zone. Extend it to the walls of the room you are in. Extend it throughout the apartment or building in which you live, extend it beyond to the property boundaries. Meet other Signatories and join your Supersedure Zones. If you are fortunate enough to have a neighbor who is Signatory, the Zone has just grown larger. If feasible, invite other Signatories to rent part of your Zone. This extends the Zone to other people, making it stronger instead of larger.
Wash, rinse, repeat. Eventually a small community can have enough size to become somewhat self-sufficient and enough people to become self-reliant and self-secure. With the inevitable collapse of the USA Imperial Empire, such things become highly valuable.
http://tinyurl.com/Whither-Now-W
Sent from my 4G LTE Device