Brian’s Column: Where Can I Do the Most Good (Part 2 of 2)

Some ruminations on how panarchy can be made to work in the real world

democratic_logoIn part 1 of this column I began from a local Republican convention where a couple of the customs—the invocation and gratuitous friendliness nod toward Israel—got me to thinking that there surely must be a better way for human beings to deal with their political needs (than to spend copious time working to elect public officials by majority vote, who then, together, exercise a comp- ulsory monopoly over providing an ever expanding range of services, whether you want these services or not). Unlike the normal marketplace, an individual cannot simply choose something else or opt out entirely. Again, the analogy to ordering breakfast is apt:

First of all, let’s assume that what I truly want for breakfast is on the menu. Go down to my local Kerby’s or Leo’s coney islands or regular coffee shop: virtually anything I want will be on the menu somewhere… and if it isn’t the owner will work with me, say, if I want salmon with my eggs. It may just cost a little more. Okay, then let’s contrast that with a system where if I want something, a majority of the patrons have to want that same thing before I can have it. Aliens in a space ship looking down at this kind of breakfast system would say to one another, “Boy, these humans are majorly retarded.”

Thus democratic politics in a coercive, compulsory government system means that in the neighborhood of zero persons get the government services they would freely choose, nor do they obtain the public officials (elected by ‘everyone’) they would prefer to provide these services. It’s all a bizarre, horrendously complicated and time-consuming process that no one in his right mind would spend a minute on, were it not for the fact that the actions of these officials can seriously eff up beyond recognition the lives of you and your loved ones. Continue reading

Brian’s Column: Shlabotkian Agorism

Effective action to end the coercive state
by Brian Wright

ShlabotkianismMy seed words for forming. Decided I would go ahead and create a Group in Facebook for Big L Michigan Libertarians and small l Michigan libertarians, because I like to have a Group listed on my Facebook home page that is more centered toward the Libertarian Party as well as people from other aligned Michigan proliberty organizations. And makes it easy to post my own hot issues for liberty from the national front. 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