Guest Column: April 1 Cyberwarnings

“Be vewy vewy afwaid,” sayeth Uncle Elmer
by Electronic Frontier Foundation

FBI Issues Reflection Warnings

EFF_April_1Starting this week, department stores will begin affixing “FBI Anti-Piracy” stickers to mirrors, warning consumers that placing a reflective object in the same room as a television could constitute a violation of U.S. copyright law. In a related lawsuit, EFF is representing Dana Auerbach, a ballet instructor who was caught watching The Black Swan in her dance studio while on lunch break. She faces a $750 to $150,000 penalty for each of her infinite charges of infringement. Continue reading

Guest Column: The Canton Movement

Whenever a government becomes destructive…
by Dwight Johnson

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. — from the Declaration of Independence

The following column is a compilation from Dwight Johnson’s Website, The Canton Movement (http://www.cantonmovement.com). I caught up with Dwight roughly a year and a half ago, finding his development of the idea of panarchy—freedom of choice in government—to be a simple and practical method for moving away from coercive government with minimal blood, sweat, and tears.

If done right, implementation can result in going to bed one night under our gangster government’s thumb and waking up the next morning a free person, with others, protected from the gangsters by a common, mutual defense agreement of the honest. IMHO panarchy and the cantonization process are the final piece of the puzzle for those who deny consent to gangster compulsory government—which we discussed in the guest column, Imagine There’s No Congress, by Jim Babka last week.

The Political Mess

Politicians are people who make friends for themselves with other people’s money. With money from taxpayers. With your money.

We are supposed to have governments of representational democracy. The truth is that politicians get themselves elected in a very tightly-controlled system that limits the viable parties to two. The electoral process ensures that someone will get elected to office, even if the electorate is not particularly happy with either candidate, increasingly voting for the lesser of two evils, or just not voting at all out of frustration. Continue reading

Guest Column: Imagine There’s No Congress

Rolling down the road on the deconsent bandwagon
by Jim Babka

You don’t need government when you have one another.
— Russell Means

Denial of Consent

I regard this column by Jim, and the two that preceded it ([1] and [2]), as a significant contribution to best strategy for countering—at the grass roots level—the Leviathan State. Essentially we counter via denial of consent (DOC) through insistence on the Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP) as he and others, chiefly the Libertarian Enterprise and Rational Review Program, have named it… or the Sacred Nonaggression Principle (SNaP), as I have named it. Jim and I have exchanged thoughts on DOC. My only significant complementary idea is to finesse the transition to the New Paradigm of nonaggression by cultivating practical ‘freedom of choice’ of government, otherwise known as panarchy. After all, government isn’t the problem per se, rather compulsive, coercive government. As people opt out of the current system by choosing their own government-service providers (or none)—under umbrella of a yet-to-be-written Universal Nonaggression Protocol—our criminal state dies a quick, sure death with minimal collateral damage. — Brian Wright, ed, 2/25/2013 Continue reading

Guest Column: The Real State of the Union

“People’s Protection-Manual” on life support
by John Galt

Obama burns USCInstead of the traditional Republicon versus Demoliar debate which ensues for theatrics on cable news, I thought a more prudent analysis of the State of the Union after Obama’s first term is much more appropriate and realistic as to where our nation is going in the future.

Thus I present the following commentary on the State of the Union for the United States of America by analyzing our Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution and their status as of tonight.

Original column by John Galt-Florida here. Continue reading

Guest Column: Peace and Guns

The common ground of peace and armed citizens
by Scotty Boman

Scotty Guns PeaceFrom the Daily Paul 08 February 2013

In addition to being a libertarian activist, I am also a peace activist. In the course of attending meetings, rallies, and protests, I have noticed confusion by some anti-war activists who favor laws designed to prohibit, or severely limit, private gun ownership. Some have suggested that it is hypocritical of me to advocate both non-violence and gun rights.

The most absolute approach to non-violence is pacifism; but can a pacifist support gun rights? The answer can be found in a careful analysis of core moral principles. Pacifism is a philosophy most notably promoted by Jesus Christ, as described in the canonized gospels. These teachings have been adopted by well known twentieth century activists such as Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. To sum it up in a few words, pacifists oppose violence as immoral, regardless of any provocation or defensive justifications. A pure pacifist is willing to be killed or allow others to be killed rather than take up arms to defend one’s self or family.

The other moral code at issue here is the non-aggression principle. This philosophical standard builds on premises developed in the enlightenment movement, which appears to have influenced writers of the United States Constitution. Continue reading

Guest Column: Letter to the Leahy Subcommittee

Spokesmen for Hitler’s victims know why gun rights
‘shall not be infringed’
by Ron Burcham

JPFOMy letter was e-mailed to the Senate committee hearing, for today (1/30/13) only, on “What Should America Do About Gun Violence.” It was sent to the 18 members of the committee which include Feinstein, Schumer and Franken. Also it was CC’d to both Levins, US Congressman Kerry Bentivolio of the 11th District of Michigan, and Senator Debbie Stabenow for good measure. If anybody actually reads it I’ll be on another list for sure. 🙂 [1] Continue reading

Guest Column: Club of Liberals

Thoughts on the club of liberals, transhumanism,
and depopulation, by Jon Rappoport

libertas_veritasJanuary 25, 2013: www.nomorefakenews.com

By liberals, I simply mean those people who accept big government as a given, regardless of their political affiliation.

And yes, at certain key levels, they are a club. They come from major media, large corporations, banks, the military, well-funded foundations, investment houses, do-good non-profits, legal and medical societies, academic factories, think tanks, and of course the huge pool of government employees. Continue reading