BAARE-SCHMIDT, HANS-GEORG: Rights of Presence of Foreign Troops on West German Territory. NEUE POLITIK, Hamburg, pp.5-6, April 30, 1966, abstracted by Albert Challand, in Peace Res. Abstr. J., 4/5, p.146: "The military commanders are not bound by German laws ... have their own police forces, their own courts, fiscal privileges, custom officials, postal services, even rights of the hunt!"
BACHER, W.: Ein neuerschlossenes Capitel der juedischen Geschichte: Das Gaonat in Palaestina und der Exilarchat in Aegypten, JQR, o.s. 15 (1902-1903), 79-96.
BACK-SEAT DRIVING: people forever concocting designs for the rest of us ..." - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.40. - - Millions of people are afflicted with the back-seat driver syndrome, and this is freedom's widespread and persistent enemy. Thus, if freedom be our destination, then the prevalent itch to do back-seat driving ought to be restrained. But this bad habit isn't curable until we recognize that a driver, regardless of competence, can drive better when left to his own resources than when confused by instructions from behind. In automobiles, back-seat drivers range all the way from the kindly advisor to a thug with a gun in your back. In society, back-seat drivers range all the way from 'friendly', unsolicited instructors, to associational resolutions, to edicts by both private and public bodies backed by force, some legal and some not." - L. E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.33.
BACKSTABBING: We need the maximum of back-stabbing by politicians and against politicians - so that these evil and dangerous men would wipe themselves out. However, like the monarchs of old, who killed off their competitors, politicians do that only to gain temporarily more power to themselves. By depriving them of all political powers over non-consenting victims, we would back-stab them all. Only those could remain who would provide their money's worth as managers, magicians, entertainers or preachers to willing customers. - J.Z. 23.6.93, 1.4.94. - OF POLITICIANS
BAD EXAMPLE: The bad example which one free person affords another as a 'scandalum acceptum' is not an infringement of his rights." - I. Kant, Perpetual Peace, 346; Beck 89.
BADER, FRANZ von: If governments had ever tried to dominate physical and mathematical opinions of the public as much as political and religious views, then we would have wars for and against differential calculus as we had for the Holy Trinity of God."- Franz von Bader. - Since they do have territorially dominated the choice and practice of alternative political, economic and social systems, we do have wars for or against them. - J.Z., 17.10.11. - INTOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM, RELIGION, TOLERANCE, WAR, DOMINATION, POWER, STATISM, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM
BAER, I.: The Foundations and Beginnings of a Jewish Community Structure in the Middle Ages, ZION, 15, 1950, 1-41, in Hebrew.
BAER, YITZHAK: The Origins of the Organization of the Jewish Community in the Middle Ages, in Hebrew, ZION 15, 1950, 1-41.
BAEZ, JOAN: 49, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505.
BAKKER, CORNELIS B. & BAKKER-RABDAU, MARIANNE K.: No Trespassing! Explorations in Human Territoriality, Coventure Ltd., London, 1973, indexed and with a bibliography. JZL. - It seems to deal ONLY with close proximity "territorialism", whilst panarchism addresses itself to the territorial monopoly of large to small nation States. - J.Z., 28.1.99.
BAKUNIN, MICHAEL: According to Proudhon, quoted in Daniel Guerin, Anarchism: "Every individual, each association, every community, every province, every region, every nation, has the absolute right to decide its own affairs, to associate or not to associate, to federate or to dissolve its federation, without regard to the so-called historical rights of its neighbours." - "The right to associate freely and, likewise, to separate freely, is the first and most important of all political rights. Without it a confederation is never anything more than a camouflaged centralization." - Bakunin: Proposition, Oeuvres, p. 18. – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, SELF-DETERMINATION, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM
BALANCE OF POWER & THE NEW TERRITORIALISM & NATIONALISM: In the second half of the 20th century, the balance of terror based on nuclear weapons forcibly restrained the expansionistic urge and avoided the outbreak of a generalized waged war in favour of a tactical cold war. The aggressive force of the then existing super states (USSR, USA) was mainly used to subjugate 'unruly' people inside each area of dominance (USSR vs. Eastern Europe, USA vs. Central and South America), with open warfare occurring only at the periphery of the empires (e.g. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan). - Since the end of a bipolar world dominated by the two super states, the number of 'unruly' subjects (individuals, communities) who want to go their own way and resent being dominated by an external power has multiplied. This makes the state vs. the citizen scenario a very likely one for the violent clashes to come, if we also take into consideration the situation that affects the participants in modern-day hostilities. - The situation. The last global-scale episode of mass killing (the World War of 1939-1945) and the series of smaller conflicts of the following decades (Korea, Budapest, Vietnam, Prague, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Rwanda, Congo, East Timor, Sri Lanka, Palestine, Kashmir, Iran, Iraq, etc) have shown that the distinction between combatants (i.e. military forces) and non-combatants (i.e. civilians) is no longer practiced nor practicable due to the way wars are conducted nowadays. Non-combatants are involved in a conflict even if they are not the predestined target of a missile or a bomb. In cases like these, for instance when a baby is killed in a pram by a nearby conflagration, the fertile mind of some officer or journalist has invented the chilling absolutory formula 'collateral damage.' - "[Besides] the international 'laws of war' proved themselves during World War II to be noneffective. The adversaries on both sides by saturation bombing of the combatants, and even more the non-combatants, including women and children, broke all divine and human laws." (Pitirim Sorokin, Social and Cultural Dynamics, 1957) - - Moreover, the new role taken by some individuals and communities in opposition to state power (the internal or an external state) has changed the scenario and the rules of engagement. - As a consequence, the differentiation between war and terrorism is more and more unreal and deceitful. War is, in current times, a series of terrorist acts and terror is the most commonly employed weapon in the conduct of the war. The forms of terror depend on the technological and logistic capabilities of the fighters (e.g. a missile dropped on a market or a bomb planted in a busy intersection). Death and demoralisation are the common purpose of the terrorist war, i.e. of the war as terrorism. The only difference, in each combat action, consists in the power of the explosive employed, the number of people affected, and the consequent number of deaths caused by the conflagration. - For all the sides involved, in order to wear out and defeat the chosen 'enemy' it is necessary to destroy its war apparatus, which also consists, to a large and important extent, in its non-military personnel such as: taxpayers financing the production of weapons - workers producing weapons - citizens upholding the war effort through propaganda or by manning the supporting infrastructure. - - All this means that in a situation where masses are subjected or submit to a territorial, monopolistic and all-pervasive power, they find themselves hostages to any fortune or misfortune that befalls that power, in peace and in war, till death them do part, or more precisely, do unite them forever. - In other words, in a mass society dominated by territorial monopolistic states exerting pervasive power over 'their' citizens, the time of personal responsibility is over, supplanted by the reality of collective mass liability. - Given this situation, any criminal act of violence and aggression carried out in a representative democracy by the elected rulers is committed in the name and on behalf (at least in principle) of all the citizens of that country and so the liability is to be shared by all of them. In fact, to talk of personal responsibility in the context of an accepted mechanism of majority decisions would be inappropriate if not preposterous. - This notion of collective mass liability, albeit abominable in so far as it annihilates the individual as a unique human being with independent free will and critical autonomous mind, has long been and is still largely current political practice. This extremely immoral notion has been applied also to many individuals, all of whom have been indistinctly assigned as 'belonging' to a certain group (ethnic, religious, racial, political, national, etc.) and have been held responsible and made to pay for something committed elsewhere or at other times by others with whom they are deemed to share certain traits, real or presumed. - Most horror stories of the XX and the beginning of the XXI centuries are related to the concept of collective mass liability. Amongst them we have: group internment (e.g. the imprisonment of American Japanese in the USA after Pearl Harbour) - ethnic killing (e.g. the reciprocal slaughters of Muslims and Hindus after the partition between India and Pakistan) - - mass extermination (e.g. the massacres of Armenians, Kurds, Jews, Indonesian communists, Tutsi, Bosnian Muslims, Chechens, etc. by the prevailing state power reaffirming its monopolistic rule on minorities). - - If the principle of collective mass liability is bound to prevail also in the future, underpinned by the conditions listed above (namely: territorialism, monopolism, totalitarianism) which enable it to be accepted and practiced, willingly or forcibly, we must then be fully aware of what future events are likely to be in store for many of us. - GIAN PIERO de Bellis in his "Waiting for the bomb." - Appendix: Waiting for the Bomb? - STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, POWER, DECENTRALIZATION, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, COLLECTIVE LIABILITY, COLLECTIVE GUILT, TERRORISM, BY STATES & PRIVATE FANATICS, INDISCRIMINATE AIR RAIDS & BOMBING, SCORCHED EARTH "POLICIES", NUCLEAR "WEAPONS", NOTIONS & NUCLEAR ARMAMENT & WARFARE PREPARATIONS, CIVILIANS, NONCOMBATANTS, GENOCIDE, MASS MURDER
BALANCE OF POWER: It is like attempting to balance pyramids on their tips, i.e., trying to balance the survival and liberties of the population of a territorial State, with compulsory membership, on the more or less ignorant, prejudiced and unbalanced minds of its rulers - against other such precarious "balances". Only exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers can be stable and peaceful because they are based on individual consent and consumer satisfaction in sufficiently unanimous communities and tend to grant ignorant, prejudiced and "great leader" types no power over others, They maximise defensive and minimise aggressive urges. They maximise tolerance for tolerant actions and have the potential to withdraw all manpower and resources from territorial governments, while satisfying all rightful national, ideological, religious, ethnic, racial, cultural aspirations. - J.Z., 1.4.94, 27.9.02. - PANARCHISM
BALANCE OF POWER: Territorial policies have never achieved and kept a balance of power and cannot achieve it. Just look at the record of wars and revolutions under this supposed "Realpolitik". - J.Z. 15.5.92. - PANARCHISM
BALANCE OF POWER: The balance that keeps the peace is more fragile than I like to think about." - Poul Anderson, The Byworlder, p. 66.
BALANCE OF TERROR: The 'balance of terror' - which is nothing but an exquisitely rationalized social commitment to a policy of genocide - has entrenched itself in the economy, the morality and the psychology of our society …;” - Theodore Roszak, On Academic Delinquency, in: The Dissenting Academy, ed. by Theodor Roszak, Pelican, 19. - MAD, MUTUAL ASSURED DESTRUCTION, NUCLEAR STRENGTH POLICY, GENOCIDE, ATOMIC WEAPONS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, DETERRENCE
BALANCE: Balance ... It's what distinguishes a people from a mob." - Frank Herbert, Children of Dune, ANALOG, 1/76, p. 41. - The "people" of territorial States are inherently unbalanced. Only those of exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities live in balance with each other rather than in a form of civil war. - J.Z., 1.4.94. - JUDGEMENT, MATURITY, MASS, REASON, WISDOM, HARMONY, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE
BALKANIZATION OR EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS? - See: HAWAII.
BALTIC COUNTRIES: See: BECKERATH, ULRICH VON, Panarchie – immer konkret beschreiben.
BANKRUPTCY: Bankrupt the looters. Drive governments into liquidation! - J.Z., 31.7.75, 30.7.78. – Only those governments that are from now on based entirely upon individual consent do have the right to continue to exist – at the expense and risk of these volunteers, as long as they still have any. – J.Z., 5.11.10.
BANKRUPTCY: Let's bankrupt all governments and drive them out of business, forever. - J.Z., 19.4.94. – Except exterritorially autonomous governments with voluntary members and subjects only. -5.11.10.
BARBARIANS, LAWS OF THE: Chapter 38 of GIBBON, EDWARD, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, extract only, pages 93ff, in ON PANARCHY II, in PEACE PLANS 506.
BARBARISM: Barbarism has its earmarks, and the acquisition of property through conquest or superior force is notably one of them." - Edward P. Scharfenberger, quoted in THE FREEMAN, Aug.74. - By that standard the territorial governments, everywhere, are the greatest barbaric force. - J.Z., 1.4.94. – GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION, VOLUNTARY TAXATION
BARBARISM: How may we decide whether a person is trapped at the barbaric level or has ascended to the human level? There are many ways, but this simple test in economics should suffice: does an individual believe that one man's gain is another's loss?" - L. E. Read, Who's Listening? p.41. - Much work remains to be done to provide rapid testing facilities to discover the degrees of barbarism remaining in our contacts, e.g., by sets of a few short & significant questions and by drafting optimal classification schemes to indicate flawed and correct ideological positions. - The all-over approach to the problem would require e.g. an encyclopaedia of the best refutations for popular errors, myths and prejudices, one of definitions, one of optimal wordings, an Ideas Archive, a Talent Registry and a growing Encyclopaedia of Slogans for Liberty. - Does he favour tyrannicide or collective responsibility of his victims for his actions? Does he oppose or favor individual rights, especially in economics? Does he favour or oppose individual secessionism, voluntary taxation, free banking and exterritorial autonomy? - Alas, such questions might reveal that the vast majority must still be classed among the barbarians and that situation will not change rapidly unless we make the fullest possible use of all the affordable tools to speed up the process of enlightenment and automate it as far as is possible. - J.Z., 27.9.02. - GAIN, LOSS, TRADE, PROFIT, UNEARNED INCOME, INTEREST, MONOPOLIES, CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES, Q., ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, IDEAS ARCHIVE ETC.optimal chance to freely demonstrate what they have to offer, via their own volunteer communities that are exterritorially quite autonomous? - J.Z., 27.9.02. - PANARCHISM, TERRORISM, SOVIETS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM
BARBARISM: it was a motto of Lenin that 'barbarism must be met with barbarism.' As far back as 1901 the foremost of the Bolsheviks had written: 'In principle we have never renounced, and cannot renounce terrorism...'" - Stanton A. Coblentz, The Long Road to Humanity, p.406. - So say barbarians about those who attempt to resist them. As if e.g., Greeks, Romans, Persians & other semi-civilized people had found it impossible to gain barbarian allies and auxiliaries and to influence them, in the long run. - J.Z., 1.7.92. - But were civilization or enlightenment among the few advanced people ever given their chance for all their creative and their merely self-destructive efforts? Thus they might become turned off insurrections, terrorism, revolutions and conquests. - J.Z. 6.4.91. - When freed to engage in their hobbies, experiments and ideological spleens, ignorance and prejudices - but only at the own expense and risk and that of their voluntary followers, they will be so busy with their utopias that they will have no time, energy and means left to act aggressively towards others. The numerous communist and collectivist utopias of the early America did rapidly refute their beliefs and their members thereupon gave up their experiments. Only nationalising such ideas and practices and supporting them by compulsory taxation and laws has kept them alive and up to their usual wrongs and mischiefs. Allow their victims to secede - to do their own things to and for themselves! - J.Z., 27.9.02, 10.11.11. – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, UTOPIAS, PANARCHISM
BARBARISM: redirect the energies of the barbarians ..." - Poul Anderson, Maurai & Kith, p.92. - Grant them exterritorial autonomy. – J.Z., n.d.
BARBARISM: Those fragments of culture and liberty which mankind, or some sections of mankind, did laboriously acquire or conquer, are continuously threatened by large waves of barbarism, arising from almost everywhere, from almost all other peoples.” - Charles Peguy, Our Fatherland, unpublished sequel, NOUVAUX REVUE FRANCAISE, 1.7.1939. - Free trade, free migration, free enterprise, honest, free and competitive currencies, free transfers of land titles and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities as well as other liberties and rights, widely practised and effectively defended by volunteer militias, can, in combination, civilize the barbarians and defend us against them. - J.Z., n.d.
BARGAINING: There is no way to bargain with evil. You have to fight it - even to death." - Morris West, Proteus, 78. - You do not fight it by holding innocents collectively responsible for it. The enemy or aggressor must be properly defined and countered. Bargain with victims rather than with victimzers. Start by no longer recognizing the victimizers and recognizing the basic human rights of their victims, e.g., when they manage to escape and seek freedom under their own rules, anywhere. - J.Z., 27.9.02. - ASYLUM, REFUGEES, RESISTANCE, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, ENEMY, DICTATORSHIPS, TYRANNICIDE, LIBERATION, PANARCHISM. COMPROMISE, APPEASEMENT, NEGOTIATIONS, DIPLOMACY
BARGER, MELVIN D.: Experiments in Collectivism, in Essays on Liberty, X, pp 45 - 50, contrasting voluntary collectivist experiments with totalitarianism.
BARKER, ERNEST: Political Thought in England, 1848 to 1914, Thornton Butterworth, London, 1915-1928, indexed, 256pp, JZL. Page 26: "Kant, it appears, had little idea of the corporate life of a national State. The free will of the individual is the core of his thought. The State he conceives as in its nature a contractual body..." Page 101, on Spencer's view of the State: "In the first place it can efface itself, for the sake of the law of freedom, by admitting the right to the citizen 'to ignore the State'. It can, and it must, permit its citizens to abandon the benefits and throw off the burdens of citizenship. Dissent is already an ignoring of the State in one matter, and that a vital matter: dissent must be generalized. But the point of the paradox somewhat disappears, when we remember that this is only an ideal principle, and that it can only operate when society is ideal." - He overlooks that it is all the more important the more flawed the State (not society) is and that those who do systematically apply it against an oppressive and aggressive State can thereby make themselves stronger against it, if they manage to organize and educate all secessionist forces sufficiently against it, rather than engage in infighting among themselves. - These are the only panarchistic notions that I found in this book. But otherwise it is full of interesting and stimulating thoughts for freedom lovers. - J.Z., 31.1.99.
BARNES & NOBLE: Book Search on Extraterritoriality, 1999. Result: 3 titles, 1p: 119, in PP 1539.
BARNES, MICK: Article in "PEOPLE" (Australian illustrated weekly) 28.9.1978, p. 9: "Our newest independent State is a strawberry patch and Paul Neuman is its premier. P.N. has international personal law ambitions according to this article. As address is only given: Dr. Paul Neuman, Aeterno Lucina, near Byron Bay, NSW. - Alas, neither the mass media nor the anarchist and libertarian presses pay much attention to such news. This is the only hint I got. - J.Z., 12.9.04. - What are too me the most important ideas, facts and developments remain largely unreported or under-reported in the mass media and also, still, in libertarian media. - So much so, for example, that by now I had forgotten about this case. Under present conditions one man can certainly not resist or fight "city hall", as a proverb says, at least not effectively far less a State or even a Federal Government. – We must become free to seceded from all territorial and compulsory membership associations. Their territorial, constitutionalized, legalized, juridical and financial power, as well as their backing by public apathy, popular errors, myths, prejudices, dogmas, false assumptions and conclusions, are still all too strong for that and our enlightenment tools are still all too incomplete and those, which do exist, remain under-utilized or not most effectively and systematically used. - J.Z., 17.10.11, 29.11.11. - TERRITORIALISM, ENLIGHTENMENT, POWER, INDIVIDUALS, GOVERNMENTS, RESISTANCE, LIBERATION, OPTING OUT, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, MICRO-GOVERNMENT ATTEMPTS
BARNETT, RANDY E., Justice Entrepreneurship in a Free Market, Comment (*) upon SMITH, GEORGE, "Justice Entrepreneurship in a Free Market": JOURNAL OF LIBERTARAIN STUDIES 3 (Winter 1979), in JLS. - "I see no reason why monopoly statists should also merit a monopoly on the term, "law enforcement". As Lon Fuller has shown in "The Morality of Law", rev. ed. (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1969), it is not the monopoly of the rule giver or rule enforcer that makes a rule a "law", so there is not good reason for non-statists to resort to strange terms like "protection agencies" or "defense firms" when what is really meant is "law enforcement" agencies. (JLS, No.? Date?) - (*) The original version of this paper was delivered at the Sixth Annual Libertarian Scholars Conference, October 1978, at Princeton University.
BARNETT, RANDY E., Toward a Theory of Legal Naturalism, JOURNAL OF LIBERTARAIN STUDIES 2 (Summer 1978).
BARON, S. W., The Jewish Community, vols. I - III, Philadelphia, 1942.
BARON, SALO W., A Social and Religious History of the Jews, 2nd. Ed., revised, 16 vols., N.Y. & Philadelphia, Columbia U.P. &Jewish Publication Society of America, 1952-1976.
BARON, SALO W., Aspects of the Jewish Communal Crisis in 1848, JEWISH SOCIAL STUDIES, 14, 1952, 99-144.
BARON, SALO W., Church and State Debates in the Jewish Community in 1848, in Mordecai Kaplan Jubilee Volume, N.Y., 1953, pp 49-72.
BARON, SALO W.: Newer Approaches to Jewish Emancipation, DIOGENES 29, 1960, 56-81.
BARRY, NORMAN, The Tradition of Spontaneous Order. Bibliographical Essay [November 2006] - http://oll.libertyfund.org/Essays/Bibliographical/Barry0312/SpontaneousOrder.html - A list of references and debating ideas on spontaneous order. - GPdB hint.
BARTA, SILAS, Public Goods: Not a Problem. A Study of an Extreme Case. - Silas Barta - Public Goods: Not a Problem. A Study of an Extreme Case - Anti-State.com, February 21, 2005.
BASTIAT FREDERIC: For Bastiat, the rule of the people could be best achieved in a system which allowed the individuals of society to go their own way without placing restraints upon them: 'You contend that I am wrong to practice Catholicism; and I contend that you are wrong to practise Lutheranism. Let us leave it to God to judge. Why should I strike at you, or why should you strike at me? If it is not good that one of us should strike at the other, how can it be good that we should delegate to delegate to a third party, who controls the public police force, the authority to strike at one of us in order to please the other? You contend that I am wrong to teach my son science and philosophy; I believe you are wrong to teach yours Greek and Latin. Let us both follow the dictates of our conscience. Let us allow the law of responsibility to operate for our families. It will punish the one who is wrong. Let us not call in human law; it could well punish the one who is not wrong.'" - G. C. Roche III, Bastiat, A Man Alone, 193. - Alas, Bastiat, did not consider personal laws and exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers only as a rightful option. - J.Z., n.d. - DEMOCRACY, POLITICAL POWER, PEOPLE, GENERAL WILL, INDIVIDUALISM, TOLERANCE, EDUCATION, LAW, CONSCIENTIOUS RESPONSIBILITY
BASTIAT, FREDERIC, You contend that I am wrong to practise Catholicism; and I contend that you are wrong to practise Lutheranism. Let us leave it to God to judge. Why should I strike at you, or why should you strike at me? If it is not good that one of us should strike at the other, how can it be good that we should delegate to a third party, who controls the public police force, the authority to strike at one of us in order to please the other? You contend that I am wrong to teach my son science and philosophy; I believe you are wrong to teach yours Greek and Latin. Let us both follow the dictates of our conscience. Let us allow the law of responsibility to operate for our families. It will punish the one who is wrong. Let us not call in human law; it could well punish the one who is not wrong." - Bastiat, quoted in Roche III's biography, Bastiat, 193. - CONSCIENCE: Toleration means freedom to follow the dictates of one's own conscience, reason and belief - as long as one can do so at the own risk and expense. - J.Z. in pamphlet Tolerance. - We should become free to follow our own conscience in secular matters as well, as long as we allow the others to do the same. - To each his or her own utopia, - as long as they does not wish to secede from it. - J.Z., 15.10.11. - You will go your way, while I go my way. - You do your things, while I do my things. - Proverbial wisdom. - RELIGIOIUS TOLERANCE, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, APPLIED TO POLITICAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIPS. TO EACH THE OWN SYSTEM, AT THE OWN RISK & EXPENSE. LAWS, LEGISLATION, INTEREFERENCE, SELF-GOVERNANCE, SELF-DETERMINATION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM
BASTIAT, FREDERIC: Bastiat realized that unless men are allowed to experiment, to choose, to make mistakes and pay for them, make proper decisions and be rewarded by them, in short, to act for themselves on their own responsibility, they are denied precisely that quality of free choice that makes them men. The individual, who is relieved of responsibility for his own actions, incurs the gravest possible handicap for the future development of his own personality. Soon such men find no capacity in themselves and turn to government for the solution of all problems. - G. C. Roche III, Bastiat. - At present they are still not free to turn instead to alternative exterritorial governments of their choice. These would, and be it only to charge less taxes and offer cheaper services, promote self-responsibility in all spheres, more and more, while still encouraging competing services based on the division of labor and free exchange. Many of the free traders, free entrepreneurs and laissez faire marketeers fail, like Bastiat, to apply freedom to experiment and to choose to governmental experiments and choice among governments - which can be fully free and developed only on the basis of exterritorial autonomy - at least for all "package deal" protective communities and associations which people may still want instead of the present States and governments. - J.Z. 25.7.92, 7.1.93. - FREE CHOICE & EXPERIMENTATION
BASTIAT, FREDERIC: Let us hang no one, and set everybody free." - F. Bastiat, Economic Sophisms, 241. - LIBERATION, FREEDOM
BAT YE'OR, Dhimmitude Past and Present: An Invented or Real History? - See: DHIMMITUDE regarding this essay and a book by her.
BAU, M, J.: Foreign Relations of China, N. Y., Chicago, Fleming H. Revell Co., 1923.
BAU, M. J.: China and World Peace, New York, 1928.
BAUDES, M., La Condition Juridique des Etrangers en Chine, Paris, 1913.
BAUER, OTTO & RENNER, KARL: Two leaders of Austrian social democracy, developed, around 1900, what has become known under the name of "personal or cultural autonomy". - Hint by AKZIN, BENJAMIN, State and Nation, p.142. - Did it go far enough? I do not know. Relatively scarce as the literature relating to panarchism is, it is still so extensive that an individual can hardly access and study it all. Here, too, international collaboration is required. - J.Z., 12.9.04.
BAY, CHRISTIAN & WALKER, CHARLES C.: Civil Disobedience, Theory & Practice, Black Rose Books, Montreal, , 1975. On page 47, on methods of non-violent actions, it favours alternative institutions and parallel government.
BE YOURSELF: To be himself in this world, a man must fight all those who would not let him be himself." - Con Sellers, Mr. Tomorrow, p.159. - SELF-REALISATION, RESISTANCE, INDIVIDUALISM, MAN, FREEDOM
BE YOURSELF: You have your life in your own hand. Do not entrust it to anybody else, least of all to the Fuehrers you elected. BE YOURSELF! Many great men have told you so." - Wilhelm Reich, Listen, Little Man!, p. 76. - Leadership, Self-Development
BE YOURSELF: You must learn to be yourselves, ..." - Herman Hesse, Zarathustra's Return, 1919.
BE-LIKE-ME-NESS: This despicable be-like-me-ness..." - Leonard E. Read, The Path of Duty, p.81. - TOLERANCE, UNIFORMITY, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM
BEATEN PATH: To find a better way, one must depart the beaten path." - Leonard E. Read, Who's Listening? 183. - IDEAS, CHANGE, REFORMS, SECESSIONISM, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, UTOPISM, DOING ONE’S OWN THING
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, A ) EINIGE DER WICHTIGSTEN LEHREN VON ULRICH VON BECKERATH,
1882-1969. - In der Mikrofiche Ausgabe von PEACE PLANS 589 war diese Uebersicht
auf mehrere Seiten verteilt, naemlich S. 32, 34 & 51, aus Platzmangel
oder um Fueller-Moeglichkeiten auszunutzen. Hier sind diese Bruchstuecke
zusammengestellt. In meinen beiden Friedensbuechern, auf Englisch zu finden
in: www.panarchism.info , habe ich sein Programm ausfuehrlicher dargestellt.
- J.Z., 19.10.05.) - - - 1.) Alles Geld ist letztlich nur ein Mittel zur
Erleichterung der Verrechung. Verrechnung ist das Primaere, muss unbeschraenkt
sein und kann dann sowohl Deflation als Inflation verhindern. Freiheit der
Verrechnung verlangt u.a. Emissionsfreiheit und Freiheit des Wertmasses.
Wenn das monetaere Problem erst einmal geloest ist dann wird die Loesung
anderer sozialer Probleme erleichtert, z.B. das Fluechtlings-, das Revolutions-
und das Kriegsproblem, sogar die atomare Abruestung. Die Beendigung einer
Deflationskrise und Vollbeschaeftigung sind im wesentlichen durch Emissions-
und Verrechnungsfreiheit zu erreichen, stabile Waehrungsverhaeltnisse durch
freie Wahl des Wertmasses, insbesondere durch Wahl eines Goldgewichtes als
Waehrungseinheit, wenn die Einloesung in die Waehrungseinheit auf den freien
Goldmarkt verlegt wird und keinem Glaeubiger automatisch ein Rechtsanspruch
auf Zahlung in metallischem Gold gewaehrt wird. Stattdessen soll er nur und
automatisch einen Anspruch auf Verrechnung in Goldwerten erhalten, gemessen
nach dem freien Kurs von Zahlungsmitteln am freien Goldmarkt. Zum Emissionsrecht
gehoert natuerlich auch das Ablehnungsrecht gegenueber fremden Zahlungsmitteln
zu deren Annahme man sich nicht vertraglich verpfichtet hat. - - - 2.) Freiwilliger
Genossenschaftssozialismus durch Ankauf der Betriebe, durch Ausgabe von Industrieobligationen
die in Raten getilgt werden. - Libertaere Sozialisierung von natuerlichen
Monopolen durch offene Genossenschaften nach dem System von Theodor Hertzka,
aber eingefuehrt auch nur durch den Kauf solcher Betriebe in der oben angedeuteten
Art. Zwischen dem freiwilligen Genossenschaftssozialismus Beckeraths, der
alle gesetzlichen Monopole abschaffen and alle wirtschaftlichen und politischen
Verhaeltnisse auf freien Vertraegen aufbauen will und dem freien Unternehmertum,
der freien Marktwirtschaft, dem Anarcho-Kapitalismus usw. bestehen in der
Praxis nur geringe Unterschiede. Aber Beckerath war 1. konsequenter, er verlangte
freie Marktverhaeltnisse auch innerhalb von produktiven Betrieben und fuer
Zahlungsmittel, Verrechnungswege und Wertmasse und 2. er war extrem tolerant
und verlangte Freiheit auch fuer seine Gegner, nach ihren eigenen Ideologien
zu leben - auf eigene Kosten und eigenes Risiko. - - - Deshalb trat er ein
fuer: 3.) Experimentier- und Handlungsfreiheit oder Toleranz auf wirtschaftlichem
und politischem Gebiet durch Panarchie ("Jedem der Staat seiner Traeume".
– K.H.Z), die auf individueller und Minoritaeten-Sezession beruht und die
exterritoriale, autonome, freiwillige und dadurch friedensfoerdernde Alternative
schafft zu den territorialen, zentralen und vereinheitlichten Zwangsstaaten,
die nur zur Fuehrung von Angriffskriegen "gut" sind.
- - - Waehrend er alle Gewaltmassnahmen auf ein Minimum reduzieren wollte, war er Realist genug zu erkennen dass das Recht mit der Befugnis zu zwingen verbunden ist (Kant) und dass dieser Minimalzwang auch optimal organisiert sein muesse. - - - Deshalb schlug er vor: 4.) Ideal organisierte, motivierte, bewaffnete und trainierte lokale Milizen zum Schutze der individuellen Menschenrechte, international verbuendet. (PEACE PLANS 61/3) - - - 5.) Eine verbesserte und vervollstaendigte Erklaerung der Menschenrechte, die auch die wirtschatlichen und monetaeren Rechte und die Widerstandsrechte einschliesst. - - - Ein Programm zur Beschleunigung der Aufklaerung, e.g. durch Freiheit fuer Anschlagbretter, Versammlungen unter freiem Himmel, Zeitschriften fuer freie Meinungsaeusserung, Nachdruck seltener Werke, Antiquariatszentralen, Vortragsvoranzeiger. - - - 6.) Friede durch militaerischen Ungehorsam, befreiende Revolutionen, oeffentliche Aufrufe an die Zwangsrekrutierten und anderen Underdrueckten in Despotien, Entscheidung ueber Krieg und Frieden, ueber Bewaffnung mit rechtmaessigen Waffen und Abruestung in Bezug auf ABC-"Waffen" und ueber internationale Vertraege durch das Volk selbst, in Abstimmungen, nach gehoeriger Aufklaerungsarbeit, Tyrannentoetung, Asylrecht und Autonomy fuer Fluechtlinge und Deserteure, rechtzeitige Verkuendung von rechtmaessigen Friedenszielen, Friedensschluesse zwischen den Voelkern, ueber die Koepfe der Regierungen hinweg, Separatfriedensschluesse, sogar einseitige Friedenserklaerungen (von denen nur Tyrannen und ihre Helfer ausgenommen sind), Freihandel und Freizuegigkeit - und, insbesondere, die Ersetzung von Territorial Staaten durch Panarchien und eine Foederation zwischen diesen exterritorialen und autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaften von Freiwilligen, die die nuclearen Zielscheiben und Motive fuer Atomkriege aufloesen und Machtmittel, die fuer die Atomruestung noetig sind, beseitigen wuerden. Zerstoerung aller Atomwaffen und Anlagen durch die bewaffneten Voelker selbst, die bis jetzt nur als Geiseln behandelt wurden. Pflicht aller Buerger an der Herstellung einer gerechten Gesellschaftsordunung und des Friedens mitzuarbeiten. - - - Seine Schriften umfassen insgesamt einige hundert Reformvorschlaege die, von antitotalitaeren Massnahmen abgesehen, alle auf tolerante Art zu verwirklichen sind. Sie enthalten rechtmaessige und praktische Loesungen fuer die groessten Probleme unserer Zeit. Aber sie sind bis jetzt so gut wie unbekannt geblieben. Mein LMP "Libertarian Microfiche Publishing" Unternehmen ist ein Versuch ein Beispiel zu geben wie Leute mit geringen Mitteln doch unter sich das Problem loesen koennten alle wertvollen Ideen und Vorschlaege fuer alle leicht und billig zugaengig zu machen. - J. Zube, 1/85. (War und ist es zu leicht und billig fuer die meisten oder einfach nur zu ungewohnt? - Nun, jetzt gibt es noch andere und sogar bessere Moeglichkeiten, wie floppy disks, Webseiten, CDs, DVDs und grosse Hartplatten. Aber, werden diese besser benutzt werden als die Mikrofiche Moeglichkeiten? - J.Z., 19.10.05.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Assoziationism vs Territorialism, in English & German (Assoziationsprinzip vs Territorialprinzip), with annotations by John Zube. - Translation from Beckerath Papers, the microfiched ones, in my PEACE PLANS series, page 4784 with some (some would say: all too many!) notes by J.Z. on Associationism vs. Territorialism & Ideas Archive & Talent Centre to mobilize ideas and talents. - - - PEACE THROUGH THE PRINCIPLE OF VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATION INSTEAD OF THE TERRITORIAL PRINCIPLE OF COMPULSION - - Should one not examine whether the last cause of the present threat of nuclear war lies simply in the fact that the surface of the world is divided among sovereign States that are quite independent of each other? - J.Z., May or June 1957. - - - "One thing is certain: If the UN were what it was intended to be, then no State would get the notion of protecting itself by keeping nuclear weapons in readiness, just like Hamburg does not perceive a need to protect itself against Berlin. - However, the division of the world among States was always the cause of all wars. - - The administration of the world must be decentralized in the future, too. For even the most clever and best informed world government would not be able to keep over 2 billion human beings in order. - But, according to the bad experiences we have had so far with it, the principle of decentralization can no longer be territorialism. - New and autonomous protective associations are to be formed, similar to those formed by the communities of the Franks, the "Alemannen" (English expression for them?), the Burgundians, etc. - after the collapse of the Roman Empire. - (J.Z., 25. 2. 06: Probably they had merely continued their old personal law traditions.) - Even for the preservation of peace did the principle of associationism show itself superior to the territorial principle. - (J.Z., 25. 2. 06: Here one will have to explain why the territorial principle dominated for so many centuries, instead of being overtaken by the voluntary and personal law principle and its communities. I had a long exchange of opinions on this with RCBJ. - - Among the reasons are, that the association principle was never fully developed and applied, particularly not by people who still practised or tolerated slavery or serfdom and monetary despotism. The latter has the tendency towards slavery and serfdom. - Further, they had all too little understanding and appreciation of individual rights and liberties and thus they did not sufficiently organize themselves in voluntaristic ways for the defence of these rights and liberties. - - One can also expect only so much from illiterate people and people with primitive religious notions and barbaric concepts of strength and power.) - - An alliance of by themselves weak towns defeated the Persian world power. If Polybius was right, then Greece would have defeated Rom as well, if only the aetolic (*) federation and the achaeic (*) league would have got along with each other. - (*) (J.Z.: I do not know the English expressions for them.) - - The Hansa was powerful enough to confront several kingdoms at the same time and a mayor of Danzig, supported by the Hansa, could declare war to the King of Denmark, who had mistreated members of the Hansa. - The Swabic League kept the peace among its members and protected them from powerful enemies. - The vehmic courts were a league of private persons and all trembled before them. - (J.Z., 25.2.06: First established to stop abuses it became, later, powerful and abusive itself. Just like the guilds of the Middle Ages and the trade unions of our times. Neither knew or cared sufficiently about individual human rights and liberties.) - In Spain the Holy Hermandad achieved what the King could not achieve with his great power, namely security in the country. - The merit of the church, not a territorial power, in establishing the "peace of God" in Europe is very large. Perhaps this "peace of God" has preserved European culture. - (J.Z., 25. 2. 06: It at least confined feuds to a few days in the week, even though it did not achieve "love" for one's enemies or, more sensibly, respect for justice towards one's enemies. B. was an atheist.) - - The old Germanic and primitive but, in principle, correct thoughts would, naturally, have to be supplemented today. - - The extensive precedents of the rights of foreigners established that were established by the "Capitulations" in the oriental States and that of the rights of minorities developed by legal scholars of international law do offer valuable material for such supplements." - Bth. - - What influence could exterritorially autonomous communities have upon the prevention of a third world war? - J.Z. - - "When war threatens millions of citizens will secede from a State which acts in an imperialist way, just like one may secede from a church. They will form exterritorially autonomous communities and will conclude peace treaties over the heads of the imperialistic government. This government will then have not only a great part of the inhabitants of the own country against it but also the exterritorially autonomous communities of other countries. - Bth. 5. 6. 57." - - - Comment by J.Z., 19. 2. 1984: These remarks, perhaps more than any other by Ulrich von Beckerath, stimulated me to write my first book, back in 1962, which appeared in English in PEACE PLANS 61-63 and in German in PP 399-101. Later, in 1975, they induced me to write my "ABC Against Nuclear War". - www.butterbach.net/epinfo/peace.htm & www.butterbach.net/epinfo/abc/htm - However, probably many other books of this kind will have to be written about the details and then such writings will have to become sufficiently spread and understood. Without the information service planned by LMP this will, probably, not be possible. - - - Comment by J.Z., 25. 2. 06: With this I meant my Super-Computer Project, which is my version, and that of my youngest, David, of my father's "Ideas Archive" proposal, which I described, together with David Z. in PEACE PLANS No. 20. This edition is for the time being still only obtainable from me as an email attachment, until it appears either on a website or a CD. - Both books of my father on the Ideas Archive are so far only obtainable from me, in the same way. The first of these two books also in my English translation. In German first edition he had published himself and he had also published a few editions of his Ideas Archive periodical, which I micro-fiched, although they contain hardly any libertarian ideas. My own PEACE PLANS series has concentrated much more on libertarian ideas. - - On exterritorially autonomous protective communities of volunteers I have so far compiled 24 volumes on 24 microfiche under the title ON PANARCHY, which I digitized, apart from those, which contain only material that I downloaded myself. - The two main web pages which do now discuss panarchistic ideas are: www.exterritorial.net and www.panarchy.org - - Ulrich von Beckerath. had long corresponded with Werner Ackermann on the rights of minorities and had filled one to three arch lever files with this exchange. These letters were burnt with his library and Ackerman, who fled from the Nazis to South Africa, could not, naturally, save his letter collection, either. Even now much material on discontinued websites would become lost if there were not already some archives established to preserve it. - - - The world of reform ideas and talents to achieve freedom, peace, justices, prosperity and much faster progress on all such positive fronts (but including as well life extension, prevention of illness, old age weaknesses, exploration of space, information exchange with inhabitants of other planets) has still to become fully "mobilized", as well as can be achieved only by special free markets. Supply and demand must become systematically brought together on these subjects, too, much better than happened so far on the Internet. - - By means of this market-like and voluntary mobilization the libertarians could soon become more influential than are today the largest territorial governments. - - - Knowledge can really become power in the best sense. What do we wait for? Do we expect States to establish such institutions? – A comprehensive libertarian library could, probably, be offered today on a single large but cheap external HD, of one to three TBs. - At least Google does now take the idea of a world library serious. Libertarians have not yet taken their ideas seriously enough to publish them together, in this way. - Could one interest Google in the project of an Archive of Libertarian Ideas? Or would it be much more sensible to leave the establishment of such an archive to those libertarians, who show an interest in it. - But, WHERE ARE THESE??? - Are the Libertarians as well, in this respect, still statists? Or do they, too, subscribe to the “principled” attitude of: “Let George do it!”? - Some websites, as e.g. the one of the Molinari Institute: http://praxeology.net/molinari.htm and Market Anarchism: www.againstpolitics.com do give me some hope, apart from the already mentioned panarchistic sites. - However, a libertarian WIKIPEDIA is still missing. Its entries, once reasonably complete, could and should be included, wholesale, in the general WIKIPEDIA. - PIOT- J.Z., 25.2.2006, 29.11.11. - firstname.lastname@example.org - - - BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Assoziationsprinzip vs Territorialprinzip. German original. The page numbers, like 4784 for this first page, refer to the paging in my microfiche edition of Beckerath papers. – J.Z. - - - FRIEDE DURCH ASSOZIATIONSPRINZIP DER FREIWILLIGKEIT ANSTELLE DES TERRITORIALPRINZIPS MIT SEINEM ZWANG - - Sollte man nicht prüfen, ob nicht die letzte Ursache, weshalb es zur Atomkriegsgefahr gekommen ist, einfach in der Tatsache liegt, dass die Erdoberfläche in souveräne, von einander ganz unabhängige Staaten aufgeteilt ist? - J. Z., Mai oder Juni 1957. - - "Gewiss ist: Wäre die UNO, was sie sein sollte, so käme kein Staat darauf, sich vor Nachbarstaaten durch Bereithalten von Atomwaffen zu schützen, ebensowenig, wie Hamburg auf den Einfall kommt, dass es sich vor Berlin schützen müsste. Aber, die Aufteilung der Welt in Staaten ist ja bisher die Ursache aller Kriege gewesen. - - Die Verwaltung der Welt muss auch künftig dezentralisiert sein, denn auch die klügste und informierteste Weltregierung wäre doch nicht imstande, über 2 Milliarden Menschen in Ordnung zu halten. Das Prinzip der Dezentralisation kann aber nach den gemachten, schlechten Erfahrungen nicht mehr das Territorialprinzip sein. - - Neue, autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften sind zu bilden, ähnlich wie sie das Reich der Franken, der Alemannen, der Burgunden, etc. nach dem Zusammenbruch des Römischen Reiches konstituierten. - (J.Z.: 25. 2. 06: Wahrscheinlich haben sie nur ihre alte Tradition des Personalrechts weitergeführt!) - - Selbst zur Aufrechterhaltung des Friedens hat sich das Assoziationsprinzip dem Terriorialprinzip als überlegen gezeigt: (J.Z., 25. 2. 06: Hier wird man erklären müssen warum das Territorialprinzip für so viele Jahrhunderte dominierte statt ersetzt zu werden durch freiwillige Mitgliedschaft und das Personalprinzip, mit ihren Gemeinschaften. Unter den Gründen für diese Entwicklung war, dass das Assoziationsprinzip niemals voll entwickelt und angewandt wurde, besonders nicht unter Menschen die immer noch Sklaverei oder Leibeigenschaft praktizierten oder tolerierten und, gleichfalls, den monetären Despotismus, der die Tendenz zu solchen Missbräuchen hat. - - Darüber hinaus hatten sie allzuwenig Kenntnis und Wertschätzung von individuellen Menschenrechten und Freiheiten und daher organisierten sie sich auch nicht ausreichend und freiwillig für die Verteidigung dieser Rechte und Freiheiten. - Man kann auch nicht sehr viel erwarten von Illiteraten und Leuten mit primitiven Religionsvorstellungen und barbarischen Ideen über Stärke und Macht.) - - Ein Bündnis von an sich schwachen Städten besiegte die persische Weltmacht. Wenn Polybius recht hat, so hätte Griechenland auch Rom besiegt, wenn der aetolische Bund und der achaeische Bund sich vertragen hätten. - - Die Hansa nahm es leicht mit mehreren Königreichen zugleich auf, und ein Bürgermeister von Danzig, gestützt auf die Hansa, konnte dem König von Dänemark (der die Hanseaten schikaniert hatte) den Krieg erklären. - - Der schwäbische Bund hielt den Frieden unter seinen Mitgliedern aufrecht und schützte sie vor Angriffen mächtiger Feinde. - - Die Fehme war ein Bund on Privatpersonen, und alles zitterte vor ihr. - (J.Z., 25.2.06: Zuerst errichtet um Misbräuche zu unterdrücken und bestrafen, bekam sie später selbst mächtig und missbräuchlich, genau so wie die Zünfte im Mittelalter und die Gewerkschaften in unserer Zeit. Keine von ihnen kannten oder kümmerten sich genügend um individuelle Menschenrechte und Freiheiten.) - In Spanien erreichte die Heilige Hermandad was der König mit seiner grossen Macht nicht erreichen konnte, nämlich die Herstellung er Sicherheit im Lande. - Das Verdienst der Kirche - - keiner Territorialmacht - - um die Herstellung des"Gottesfriedens" in Europa ist sehr gross. Vielleicht hat der Gottesfriede die europäische Kultur gerettet. - - (J.Z., 25. 2. 06: Es hatte wenigstens die Feuden auf wenige Tage in der Woche beschränkt, wenn er auch nicht Liebe für Feinde schuf oder, viel vernünftiger, Gerechtigkeit gegenüber ihnen. – B. war ein Atheist.) - - Die altgermanischen, primitiven aber im Prinzip richtigen Gedankengänge sind heute natürlich zu ergänzen. - - Die umfangreichen Vorarbeiten des durch die "Kapitulationen" geschaffenen Rechtes in den orientalischen Staaten, des durch die Juristen des Völkerrechts geschaffenen Rechte der Minoritäten, bieten wertvolles Material für die Ergänzungen." - Bth. - - Welchen Einfluss könnten autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften zur Verhinderung eines dritten Weltkrieges ausüben? - J.Z. - "Bei Kriegsgefahr werden Millionen von Bürgern aus dem sich imperialistisch gebärdenden Staat austreten, wie man aus der Kirche austritt; sie werden autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften bilden und über den Kopf der imperialistischen Regierung hinweg Frieden schliessen. Die imperialistische Regierung aber wird dann nicht nur einen grossen Teil der Einwohner ihres Landes gegen sich haben, sondern auch noch die autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaften anderer Länder." - Bth. 5.6.57. - - - Anm. von J.Z., 19.2.1984: Diese Bemerkungen, vielleicht mehr als irgendwelche anderen von Ulrich von Beckerath, regten mich zu meinem ersten Buch an, beendet in 1962, das in Peace Plans 61-63 in Englisch und in PP 399-401 in Deutsch verfilmt ist, und führten später auch zu meinem ABC Against Nuclar War" - in Peace Plans 16-18. - www.butterbach.net/epinfo/peace.htm & www.butterbach.net/epinfo/abc/htm - Zunächst müssen wahrscheinlich noch viele Bücher dieser Art über die Einzelheiten geschrieben werden - und dann müssen sie auch genügend verbreitet und verstanden werden. Ohne den von LMP geplanten Informationsdienst wird das wahrscheinlich nicht möglich sein. - - Anmerkung von J.Z., 25.2.06: Damit meinte ich mein Super-Computer Programm: meine Version und das meines Jüngsten, David, von meines Vater's "Ideen-Archiv" Vorschlag, die ich, zusammen mit David Z. in PEACE PLANS Nr. 20 beschrieben habe. Diese PP Ausgabe ist zur Zeit immer noch nur durch mich als Email Anlage erhältlich, bis sie entweder auf einer Webseite oder einer CD erscheint. Die beiden Bücher meines Vaters über das Ideen-Archiv sind bis jetzt nur ebenso von mir zu erhalten. Das erste dieser zwei Bücher jedoch auch in meiner englischen Übersetzung. Er hatte es in Deutsch im Selbstverlag herausgegeben, und auch einige Ausgaben einer Ideen-Archiv Zeitschrift herausgegeben, die ich verfilmte, obwohl sie kaum libertäre Ideen enthält. Meine PEACE PLANS Serie hat sich mehr auf libertäre Ideen konzentriert. - Über exterritorial autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften have ich bisher 24 Bände von Material, auf 24 Mikrofiche zusammengetragen, unter dem Titel: "ON PANARCHY", von denen ich die meisten ebenfalls digitisieren will, abgesehen von denen, die nur Material enthalten das ich selbst vom Internet abgeladen habe. - Die beiden Hauptseiten, die jetzt panarchistische Ideen besprechen sind: www.exterritorial.net und www.panarchy.org - - Bth. hatte z.B. mit Werner Ackermann über Minoritätenrechte korrespondiert und darüber vielleicht sogar drei Leitzordner gefüllt. Diese Briefe sind auch mit seiner Bibliothek verbrannt und Ackermann, der vor den Nazis nach Südafrika flüchtete, konnte seine Briefsammlung natürlich ebenfalls nicht retten. Selbst jetzt würde noch viel Material von aufgegebenen Webseiten verloren gehen wenn es dafür nicht schon besondere Archive gäbe. - - Die Welt der Reformideen und Talente zur Erreichung von Freiheit, Friede, Gerechtigkeit, Wohlstand und viel schnelleren Fortschritt auf allen solchen positiven Fronten (einschliesslich aber auch: Lebensverlängerung, Intelligenzvergrösserung, Verhinderung von Krankheiten und Altersschwäche, Weltraumforschung und Informationsaustausch mit den Bewohnern anderer Planeten) muss immer noch voll "mobilisiert" werden, so gut wie es nur besondere freie Märkte erreichen können. Angebot und Nachfrage müssen auch auf diesen Gebieten ganz systematisch zusammengebracht werden, viel besser als es bisher durch das Internet geschehen ist. Durch diese marktmässige und freiwillige Mobilisierung könnten Libertäre bald einflussreicher werden als es heute die grössten Territorialregierungen sind. - - Wissen kann Macht im besten Sinne werden. - Worauf warten wir noch? Darauf, dass die Staaten solche Institutionen schaffen? Wenigstens nimmt Google jetzt die Idee einer Weltbibliothek ernst. Könnte man Google auch für ein Archiv libertärer Ideen interessieren? - Oder wäre es viel sinnvoller die Schaffung eines solchen Archivs den Libertären zu überlassen, die sich dafür interessieren? Aber, WO SIND DIE??? Sind auch die Libertären in dieser Hinsicht immer noch Etatisten? - Einige Webseiten wie z. B. die des Molinari Instituts: http://praxeology.net/molinari.htm und Market Anarchism: www.againstpolitics.com geben mir Hoffnung, abgesehen von den bereits erwähnten panarchistischen. Aber, z.B., eine libertäre WIKIPEDIA fehlt immer noch. - Ihre Eintragungen, sobald sie einigermassen komplett sind, sollten insgesamt in die allgemeine WIKIPEDIA eingeschlossen warden. - PIOT- J.Z., 25.2.2006 email@example.com
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften. (Autonomous Personal Law Communities.) Concrete, rather than abstract description, in German, - Following a short abstract description of panarchism, probably by myself, and its discussion, B. sent me the following notice on 7.5.58. He often said: "Detaillieren heist interessieren!" - Herrn Zube.- - Betr.: autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften. - - Die Erklärung dieses Begriffes sollte nicht vom allgemeinen beginnen und dann successive zu den Anwendungen übergehen, sonders sie sollte mit einzelnen - - historischen oder konstruierten - - Beispielen beginnen, und daraus sollte die Theorie entwickelt werden. - - Im vorliegenden Falle hätte die Erklärung mit dem Beispiel Rußlands beginnen sollen. Daß die Bildung von autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaften in Rußland im Interesse der freien Welt liegt, ganz besonders aber im Interesse Deutschlands, ist klar. Es kommt folgendes hinzu: a.) in Rußland ist die Idee nicht unbekannt. Zur Zeit Lenin's war sie so bekannt und so häufig diskutiert, daß Lenin es für richtig fand, die Todesstrafe auf die Verbreitung der Idee zu setzen. Von seinem etatistischen Standpunkt aus hatte er ganz recht. - -- I. J. 1916 las ich im "Belgischen Kurier", daß die Juden Litauens den deutschen Besatzungs-Behörden ein ausgearbeitetes Projekt vorgelegt hatten, die Judenschaft als national unabhängig anzuerkennen, obwohl sie kein Territorium für sich beanspruchte. (Als Lettland, Litauen und Estland selbständig wurden, nahmen sie in ihre Verfassung dem Begriff der "Kultur-gemeinschaften" auf, der mit dem jüdischen Vorschlag in vielem übereinstimmte. Juden, Deutsche, Esten und Russen hatten z.B. ihre eignen Bildungsanstalten und unterhielten sie aus eignen Mitteln, erhielten später allerdingt Staatszuschüsse.) - - b.) Als i. J. 1919 in Europa die Greuel der Sowjetregierung bekannt wurden, da rief der Manchester Guardian zu einem Kreuzzug gegen Rußland auf. Der MG forderte, daß die “Kapitulationen", die im ganzen Orient den Europäern das Privileg gewährten, eigne Rechtsgemeinschaften unter ihren Konsuln zu bilden, sinngemäß auf Rußland ausgedehnt würden. Wirtschaftliche, religioese und weltanschauliche Gemeinschaften sollten nach dem Schema der "Kapitulationen" unabhängig und der Justiz der Sowjets nicht unterworfen sein. Aus dem MG hatte Lenin vielleicht seine Kenntnis der autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaften. - - Autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften in Rußland würden bedeuten, dass diese Gemeinschaften mit ausländischen Mächten, vor allen mit der Deutschen Bundesrepublik, Verträge abschließen können, würde sogar bedeuten, dass Russen, die mit den Sowjets nichts zu tun haben wollen, die deutsche Staatsangehörigkeit erwerben, ohne Rußland zu verlassen oder in ihren durch die Menschenrechte gegebenen Rechten beeinträchtigt zu werden. - - Daß vielleicht auch in Deutschland, falls hier autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften zugelassen warden, einige Personen aus dem Staate austreten, hat nichts zu bedeuten. Wie Herr Reichel richtig ausführte, würden gewiß nicht mehr als 1/1000 der Einwohner davon Gebrauch machen. Das dürfte während der nächsten Jahrzehnte auch so beibleiben. - - Überhaupt: Staaten, welche die Menschenrechte anerkennen und durchführen, werden Zulauf durch autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften erhalten und keinen Abbruch erfahren! - - Die Stärkung eines die Menschenrechte anerkennenden Deutschlands durch autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften im Ausland müßte hervorgehoben werden, so deutlich wie möglich. - - Herr Reichel bekam durch das Ausgehen von der Theorie und das Nicht-Vortragen von Beispielen einen ganz irrigen Begriff von der Sache; das hätte sich leicht vermeiden lassen. - Bth., 7.5.58. - I just found an old translation of this: J.Z., 13.10.11: Mr. Zube. - Re: Autonomous Protective Communities. - The explanation of this concept should not begin with general ideas and then be followed by their applications, but should, instead, begin with particular examples - historical or constructed ones - and from them one should develop the theory. - In this case the Explanation should have begun with the example of Russia. It is quite clear that the establishment of autonomous protective associations in Russia is in the interest of the Free World, and especially in the interest of Germany. To this must be added the following: a.) In Russia this idea is not unknown. At the time of Lenin it was so well known and so frequently discussed, that Lenin thought it wise to put the death penalty on the spreading of this idea. From his statist point of view he was quite right. - In the year 1916 I read in the "Belgian Kurier", that the Jews of Lithuania presented to the German occupation authorities a developed project, to recognize the Jewish community as nationally independent, although it would not claim any territory for itself. (When Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia became independent, they adopted in their constitutions the concept of "cultural communities", which agreed on many points with the Jewish proposal. Jews, Germans, Estonias and Russians had, for instance, their own educational institutions and maintained them from their own resources, although, lateron, they received subsidies from the State.) - (J.Z.: At least the new Estonia has, to my knowledge, largely renewed that tradition. In the 1930's it had, according to researches done in Beckerath's circle, the most highly developed minority rights system in the world. - J.Z., 11.10.03.) - b.) - When, in 1919, the atrocities of the Soviet regime became known in Europe, the Manchester Guardian called for a crusade against Russia. The MG demanded, that the "Capitulations" should be correspondingly applied to Russia. They had granted, in the whole of the Near East, the privilege to Europeans, to form their own protective and juridical communities, under their own consuls, Economic, religious and ideological communities should become, on the model of the "Capitulations" independent and no longer subject to the justice of the Soviets. Perhaps Lenin had his knowledge of the autonomous protective communities from the MG. - (J.Z.: Actually, the "Capitulations", or international treaties in chapters, were agreed upon with the Ottoman Empire when it was at the height of its powers. Ottoman subjects, in other countries, according to these treaties, could also claim these rights. Thus they were "equal" rights treaties, as opposed to the "unequal" treaties which the European powers later imposed, when they were powerful, for a few decades, upon China, then rather powerless. If, instead, they had granted Chinese people equal rights in Europe, history might have taken a turn for the better. - J.Z., 11.10.03.) - Autonomous protective communities in Russia would mean that these communities could contract treaties with foreign powers, primarily with the German Federal Republik. It would even mean, that Russians, who wanted nothing to do with the Soviets, could acquire the German nationality, without having to leave Russia or losing any human rights in Russia. (Instead: They would gain them! - J.Z., 11.10.03.) - That perhaps even in Germany, in case autonomous protective communities were allowed here, some persons would secede from this State, would not mean anything. As Mr. Reichel rightly explained, certainly no more than 1 per 1000 of the inhabitants would make use of this option. That would most likely remain the case for the next decades. On the contrary: States, which recognise the human rights and practise them, will gain members through autonomous protective communities and will not be broken up by them. - (J.Z.: So one could and perhaps would have to argue towards the nationalists. However, the discontented of e.g., the members and voters of opposition parties, are numerous even in democracies and they could, in this way, each win an election for itself and they could, subsequently, all live under the kind of government or society, which they prefer for themselves. The better States could gain many new members from the numerous bad ones, not necessarily immigrants but people, who remain where they are, but from then on, for example, under the German constitution and laws. Insofar the existing States could become larger, in voluntary membership, as they had so far in voluntary and compulsory members. But they would be "forced" thereby to reduce their "prices" or taxes and to improve their services, like any other "business". However, for the first few days or even months Beckerath was probably correct. Many would adopt a "wait and see" attitude, wanting to see convincing successes among the first new protective communities. But afterwards these could spread at lightening speed. Naturally, many deterrent examples would be established as well - lasting until they would disappear because of lack of members. But new fools are born every day. Thus there will be opportunities for many more politicians, leaders and misleaders. They will not have to gain a great election victory first. As long as they satisfy their adherents, they will be safe from any opposition. The opposing parties will all have to become practical, for their followers will say: Put up or shut up! - J.Z., 11. 10. 03.) - That a Germany that recognizes the human rights would be strengthened through autonomous protective communities in foreign countries (and also in Germany! - J.Z., 11.10.03.) should be stressed as clearly as possible. - Mr. Reichel got quite a wrong impression from the matter as the result of proceding from theory and the omission of examples. That could have been easily avoided. - Bth. 7. 5. 58. - P.S. by J.Z.: Immer diplomatisch! Nicht mit dem Kopf gegen die Wand oder populaere Vorurteile rennen! – J.Z., 9.12.04. - - For my original draft, here criticized by Bth., in its English version, see under ZUBE, JOHN, Short description of three of the most important institutions and principles for the abolition of the danger of war and the solution of the social problem - and their foundation.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Cosmopolitan Republicanism and Tolerance vs. Anarchy, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Draft for the Next Peace Treaty with Russia, July, 1933, page 89, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506. Compare WAR AIMS, JUST.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, FOOLISHNESS: Everybody considers himself an expert and almost all others consider him a fool. Thus only one way out remains: Each tries his system with his followers - at the own expense and risk - and also concedes to all others the right to take measures at their own expense and risk, regardless of whether they appear to him to be completely foolish. - U. v. Beckerath, 1953. - Be a fool at your own expense and risk. - J.Z.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Groups and associations intending to realize at their own expense and risk any particular economic system among themselves, may not be hindered to do so, even when those who believe to be experts do not agree with the system." - U. von Beckerath, 1953.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, HOW CHINESE SOLDIERS DETERMINED THE LIMITS OF MILITARY OBEDIENCE. (Or: Military Ju Jitsu. - J.Z.) - TRANSCRIPT of a small-print and badly offset-printed extract from a letter by U. v. BECKERATH, 1957. Previously reproduced in English in the appendix of Peace Plans No. 16-18. Translation by J. Zube, here only very slightly changed in an attempt to improve it.) - - Mao Tse Tung applied the following tactic towards Chiang Kai Shek: He simply asked the soldiers of his opponent not to let themselves be killed or crippled for Chiang but to declare themselves neutral, instead, and to desert to him, Mao, bringing their weapons with them and to let themselves be supplied with travel expenses and provisions and to go home. Success justified Mao's policy to an extent which has possibly surprised even him. In less than one year he conquered an area inhabited by over 300 million people - with less ammunition than was usually used in a single battle in W.W. II. - - Mao followed an old Chinese tradition. As Confucius reported in the Lun-Yii, King Wen did something very similar. Wen's enemies could not keep their soldiers. They all deserted to Wen because he kept his promises and , moreover, ruled well, very much better than the rulers opposed to him. Perhaps Mao himself does not know that he had such a predecessor. It is quite possible that he did not act in accordance with any principle but merely did what, for the time being, was the most opportune. In any case, it is the task of all peace lovers, who take themselves serious, to clearly recognize the fantastic example set here, to clarify the principle on which it rests and to see to it - everyone in his circle - that as many people as possible do fully understand what has happened in this respect in China and that, consequently, they try to achieve the same in other parts of the world, in all areas where the rulers put weapons into the hands of their subjects and tell them, essentially: "There - now attack each other! I have no other use for you but - if you win - my advantage will be great!" - Mao acted upon the following fact: Soldiers in modern wars do not fight voluntarily but under coercion. If they had a choice to go on fighting or to return to their families, then more than nine tenths of them would choose the latter. Moreover, when those soldiers still inclined to continue to fight, do see that right and left of them their comrades desist, then even those lose heart and desert likewise. Furthermore, once the units right and left have deserted, the remaining soldiers must expect to be attacked within hours by superior forces. There was much practical experience with all this in both World Wars. - Especially during WW I, I could make my own observations. I did then manage, for 11 months, the library of the military command in F. As I found out later on, it was one of the largest on the Western Front. Only the one at Lille was larger. I had discussions with hundreds of soldiers and, sometimes, with officers also. They all trusted me. I was careful not to discuss peace topics with gossipers and other unreliable people. This reading room was only 5 km behind the first trench and thus still in the fire zone. Anyhow, for all frequenting it, the question existed: Do we desert TODAY or not? Very often English planes dropped leaflets asking the German soldiers to desert. Good treatment was promised. Almost daily, I had a session with comrades who were considering: Do I make a run for it today or do I hold out longer? - At that time, I dissuaded them from desertion. I told them: Look at these Russians working here in F. They have to unload ammunition trucks within the fire zone and do many other things which are expressly prohibited in the conventions on prisoners of war. We have received information that the Germans on the other side are not treated any better. Supposedly, it is a "retaliatory" measure. Anyhow, if you desert, then you, too, will probaby have to unload ammunition in the fire zone and will not be any better fed than the Russians are by our side. - I have reason to believe that my words were effective. The reply was, of course, almost always: What? Do you expect us to let ourselves be turned into cripples fighting for these scoundrels? When they win, they will treat us like they treat today the Russian prisoners and when they lose, for what will we have been fighting? The hatred against those who prolonged the war (Ludendorff, Tirpitz, etc.) was unbelievable. - And then we realized: Indeed, if we could expect to be decently treated on the other side, if we knew, we would not have to work against our comrades, e.g. by unloading ammunition (these people were all good Germans, with no "international" inclinations), if we knew, moreover, that after the war is lost (only very few still believed in victory), Germany would be treated fairly, then we would not stay a single day longer. Yes, ours are scoundrels and those on the other side, too! These words I heard often. - Some approached me later on and asked me: "Couldn't we stay in touch with each other and work after the war for a declaration by all States assuring: 'WE no longer make anyone a prisoner of war. Whosoever comes to us voluntarily and declares that he fought against us only under coercion, will be treated by us as a guest and neutral foreigner. After our victory, the enemy government will certainly be disarmed but the country will not be treated worse than our own.' - - "What government would, under these conditions, still dare to declare a war? The war would be over within 4 weeks - because its soldiers will have deserted. And then the revenge comes: A government that declared an aggressive war, will be treated like a murder syndicate. We will see to that. Any government which starts a war shall remember that." - - I ended up in hospital and lost the addresses of these comrades. The pacifists, whom I met later had, curiously, no interest at all in this idea but merely discussed impractical proposals like: converting the government to the philosophy of pacifism, establishment of a peaceful world government with the consent of national governments, etc., etc. You yourself have heard all this very often. What these peace lovers did not have, was the experience of the immediate proximity of the front line, the continuously dropped leaflets which asked soldiers to desert, the daily arising question: Is there any rational sense in continuing? - - Man, I mean the average man, depends very much on immediate impressions. Where they are amiss, he is inclined towards obvious but useless phantasies. He does not consider the TECHNICAL aspects, since this would be uncomfortable. The world is supposed two be something very simple and easily comprehensible, something that only requires the expression of desires (later, as with the Nazis, the shouting), to achieve already half of the aim. But the world is very differently organized. - - During WW II, I spoke with many Nazis on this method applied today by Mao. That was not very dangerous, since it appeared to the Nazis, first of all, as a proposal made in patriotic eagerness, as an idea which, although impracticable, was at least meant to promote the final victory. (Once, indeed, I came to the wrong address.) The answer, particularly coming from the most convinced Nazis, was in essence always the following: "Such ideas are very contrary to National Socialism. If they spread, they could also influence the German soldiers. Very many German soldiers are not National Socialists at all and, anyhow, they would rather stay at home than in the trenches. The enemy would only have to apply this method against Hitler and Hitler would be in a very difficult position. Apart from this, it is the intention of National Socialism to increase the military spirit in the whole world, to educate men to think like soldiers, that is, to become disciplined and obedient. To draft plans for the whole is not the concern of just anybody. The Fuehrer appoints for this people he can trust. Thus let us talk about something else!" - The Nazis were quite right from their point of view. I recognized with great satisfaction that fascism cannot apply the system which is today used by Mao. (*) Fascism has to despise such ideas and even to prosecute them - for the same reason as Napoleon despised and prosecuted the German "ideology". He saw, rightly, that there was a power much stronger than his great army, comparable to a heap of gun powder. This may lie seemingly completely harmless in some dry and quiet corner for a hundred years. Then a single spark falls into it. No totalitarianism can then prevent this powder from exploding. - - The system is a kind of political Ju Jitsu. It uses the enemy's own power against him. Once this principle has been widely spread, only those governments could conduct wars, whose promises would be trusted even by the enemy's soldiers and who would, simultaneously, have propagated a good peace programme. - It is possible to make all preparations for this in peacetime. Better still, these preparations can be made with the knowledge that the enemy cannot interpret them as a hostile act. The advocates of the system will, in their own country, be considered as super-patriots, who want to lead their country to victory under all circumstances. Thus they would play a role very different from that played formerly by pacifists. A danger like that confronting the old peace lovers does not exist for them. - - As for myself, I will demand, as far as anyone will listen to me, that the German Federal Government and the German States, also, declare publicly: "In case of war all soldiers of powers hostile to us can call at all our office and troop units and declare that they will no longer fight for the enemy regime. We will not treat them as prisoners of war but as guests and neutral allies. They can go where they want to go, foreign neutral countries included." - During the first 6 months after their defection, these soldiers should be paid like civil servants, in case of doubt, like those of the Post Office. In this period, the soldiers need not work, if they do not want to. Afterwards, and without any qualifications, the rules for neutral foreigners should apply to them. - When these soldiers want to return home, they should be given sufficient funds for travelling expenses, enough food, and also a sum of money, which would permit them to live on it for 3 months. Officers should get a still better treatment, in analogous application of the rules of the Hague Convention on Land Warfare. - - Should the war not be finished within the above-mentioned 6 months, then these soldiers should, nevertheless, have claims to the privileges listed here for up to 6 months after the ending of hostilities - in case they still reside in the republic. - - After the victory over its enemies, the republic will endeavour to give the so far hostile countries a constitution that is, essentially, like the own. Under no circumstances will the republic conduct retaliatory measures after its victory or insist on reparations. It will leave the punishment of war criminals to those countries in which they can be arrested. - - Such a declaration, above only described in its essentials, would have to be supplemented by declarations on the payment of weapons brought along by the defectors. It would be simple to compile such a price list. Weapons handed over would be paid for at the same rates, which the manufacturers of war materials receive. Details would have to be publicized: An aeroplane: 1 million dllars, a machine gun: 200 dollars, a telescope: 10 dollars, etc. - - For atomic bombs the following rule should apply: "Whosoever surrenders one will thereupon and for the rest of his life receive the same salary as the president of the republic. Whosoever could prove that he destroyed one, before it could do any harm, should receive the same." - - Everyone should promote the inclusion of such clauses into the constitution of whatever country he lives in. He should also encourage his friends in other countries to insist upon the same towards their governments. - The relevant articles of the constitution should be announced by radio at least once every week and should be proclaimed in all civilized languages. - A few months later on, every man on Earth will then know how to behave in a future war. - - It seems me that such a procedure promises to be more successful than all petitions to all the governments in the world to financially support peace efforts. How far all governments are from such intentions, is proven by the fact tht the UN is so insufficiently supporterd that it could not provide people like the Count Bernadotte with a bodyguard. - - The idea described here is in reality a very old one and was often put into practice 2,000 years ago by the ROMANS. Montesquieu remarked in his "Considerations sur la grandeur des romains", that it was always a tactic of the Senate to constitute immediately, in case of war, a government-in-exile opposed to the enemy government. With this government-in-exile they concluded an alliance. Many enemy soldiers, who would never have deserted to the Romans, defected without any hesitation to the alternative government. Something similar was tried even in Europe now and then and, mostly, with success. During the war against Napoleon I, in 1814/15, the Bourbons were used as an alternative government. Very many Frenchmen, who would never have deserted to the Prussians, defected, nevertheless, without much ado to the Bourbons, saying to themselves: "Indeed, they did not rule very well. However, at least one could live under them and they are certainly better than the Prussians, Russians and Austrians." (It so happened tat the government of Louis XVIII was the best, which France has had up to then, much better than the rule of the famous Henry IV. France was advancing during the 10 years of Louis XVIII in ever respect faster than during any former 10 year period.) - - The Jews have for their passover a special ritual. (**) This is read in the family circle. (The Jews form the only religious community known to me with such a practice.) Subject of the ritual is the discussion of the general strike of the Jews during the building of the two towns Ra-amses and Pithom under the well-known Pharaoh. Families abiding by this rital are, thereby, induced to speak at least once a year on subjects outside of the ordinary household sphere. In the families of other nations, for thousands of years, only household matters are discussed. - I do envision a ritual for use in peace loving families, read on a great holiday, e.g. the 1st of May, in the same way in these families as is the passover rital. Long after I am dead, a better writer than myself will write this ritual.” - - (*) Mao was also a totalitarian. Under his rule even more people may have been murdered than were under Hitler. However, he did not start as a dictator opposing democracy but as an ideologically motivated liberator opposing a military dictatorship. Although the latter was never as bad, as his own turned out to be, later on, initially, he did offer advantages: Not only the open arms policy described above but also a reduction of rents, from something like 75 % to something like 25%. Naturally, he did not tell them that later on he would nationalize all land. Moreover, while there was a gallopping paper money inflation under Tschiang, Mao had conquered some silver mines and was sensible enough to pay for the weapons brought over by deserters in silver. That was a double attraction at that time. Then there was the ideological pretence to be on the side of the poor and exploited, pretences often not even seen through by academic scholars, confronted with stacks of evidence accumulated over decades. Thus many Chinese may be excused for having considered Mao, temporarily, as a liberator rather than a new and worse oppressor which he did become that later on, while Tschiang turned into a quite successful reformer where he took refuges with relatively few who remained loyal to him, on Taiwan. Thereupon Valenti Chu said that now Mao's own system could be very successfully applied against him, even if it were by someone equivalent to the former Empress of China. – (**) The bibliographer Abraham Yaari has listed 2,713 editions of the Haggadah, printed in 170 places, says Philip Goodman in "The Passover Anthology”, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadeophia, 1961, p.77. In short, these events and the legends and teachings around them have certainly stirred Jewish imagination for a long time and may be one of the explanations while Jewish people are so prominently represented in most reform and revolutionary movements. - - - "... though this year we be slaves, next year may we be free men!" - - Theodor Gaster, in his Passover, its History and Traditions, Beacon Press, Boston, 1949, comes in his epilogue, p. 93 to some conclusions: "Judaism does not believe in a passive freedom but in an active redemption. A man is not free simply because he is not a slave. A man is free when he assumes responsibility for himself and when he fights for that self-realization which is the true revelation. ... It is important to remind ourselves that freedom is not to be won by the easy road of excape, (***) but that it implies an active and combatinat [typo? combative? – J.Z.] struggle for the realization of spiritual ideals and the mobilization of spirital consciousness. - The answer to slavery is not absence of slavery, but militant struggle for independence. Men must be prepared to fight for their freedom without compromise and without capitulation. They must look not backward to Egype but forward to the Prmised Land, and they must be prepared to wander for forty years in order to reach it." - - I would add now that no territorial association can fulfil its promises and hopes and that only non-territorial but autonomous associations of volunteers can hope to approach them, among themselves. Thus the "promised land" lies in an independent community, one that free individuals establish between themselves, quite apart and different from any territorial regime. Cosmopolitan Jews who had asserted their autonomy anywhere on Earth would thus have come closer to Jerusalem or "the Promised Land, than those who settled before and after WW II in Israel or Palestine. All exclusive territorial claims amount to declarations of war against all dissenters and do, sooner or later, lead to civil and international wars. - - (***) Mere desertion is NOT enough. It is just a first step. Beckerath pointed at the need e.g. for an "open arms policy", neutrality and alliances, just war aims, the payment for surrendered weapons, support for the deserters etc. - Separately, partly reproduced in PEACE PLANS 428-466, he proposed many further details, regarding e.g. the self-help full employment and immediate housing of whole armies that defected and other details of a liberation programme. In PEACE PLANS 61-63 (written in German in 1962) and later (1975), in PP 16-18, an attempt was made to integrate all these ideas in an extensive peace programme. - J.Z., September 7, 1986. - We have here a special form of individual and group secessionism and voluntary associationism to be promoted during wars or even before they can occur, once again. - J.Z., 9.11.11. - ISRAEL, MILITARY DISOBEDIENCE, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, ASYLUM, PRISONERS OF WAR, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, DESERSION, DEFECTORS, REFUGEES.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, No group has the right to impose upon its fellow citizens rules not approved by them, when through disregard of these rules only the lives, the health, the property, the earnings and the employment opportunities of those are affected who disagree. - U. v. Beckerath, 1953. - DISSENTERS
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Numerous references to such ideas and practices are in his unpublished notes and letters. Some were integrated in PEACE PLANS Nos.16-18 and 61-65. His monetary freedom books mention the idea shortly. See: Peace Plans Nos. 9-11, pp.110, 178, 258.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, On Panarchism: E.g., see under War Aims and his last letters to Henry Meulen.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, On Tolerance. Extracted from 3 letters written by Ulrich von Beckerath, 1956 & 1957. - J.Z. 9/82) - - Considering the obvious fact that among men, especially those living today, only few have the ability to persuade others or to become persuaded, one should give up attempts at persuasion (at least if one wants to realize anything) and rather direct one's efforts to those already converted. One should, instead, propose to realize one's aims within the circle of like-minded people at the expense and risk of these followers only. Let me give you a concrete example: You will remember the monetary crisis from about October 1929 up to the first year of the Nazi's rule. Some enterprises attempted to help themselves like a small coal mine somewhere in Bavaria did ... The mine paid its miners in goods warrants inscribed somewhat like this: '10 Reichsmarks. This warrant will be accepted like cash when somebody offers it in payment for coal.' - For the surrounding district this was an act of salvation. Only few people had money. Thus very many could not afford to buy coal. There was almost a struggle to get these certificates. All shopkeepers accepted them gladly and could easily pass them on. The food retailers bought coal for themselves and for the rest, e.g. gloves, toys for their children etc. - The warrants returned very fast to the mine. Everywhere the home fires were burning again and tradesmen could heat up their workshops. - So far, so good. But, first of all, the Reichsbank intervened. It demanded that the procedure be stopped, firstly, because it would be inflationary and, secondly, because the issue of notes would be a monopoly of the Reichsbank, according to the Reichsbank Act. All large newspapers known to me agreed with the Reichsbank. - The unions pointed out that according to labour legislation all wages are to be paid in cash and that the employer should be punished. - The professional journals (banking and economic magazines) blew into the same horn. - Among the academics only Rittershausen had the courage to defend the issue of such emergency money. – [Actually, only some free exchanges took place, which, otherwise, would not have happened and thus everybody, who participated in them, was better off. These clearing certificates facilitated barter exchanges of goods and services and as such they were not only quite rightful and harmless but also useful. They were certainly not monopoly money with legal tender power. Everyone remained free to refuse or to discount them. - J.Z., 29.11.11.] - Was this merely a battle of opinions? No, it was something very different. If only opinions had battled each other then: A) The mine owners and his miners would have made their case as follows: Nobody is forced to accept the warrants, not even the miners. - Please explain how an inflation could occur through these warrants. - Inflation is the multiplication of legal tender money above the limit at which it would be accepted at par and without any compulsion on a free market. Such a multiplication results normally in price increases - expressed in legal tender money. Without legal tender one cannot inflate. - - B) The professors, with the honourable exception of Rittershausen, the ministers, journalists, union leaders, bankers and other experts, would have argued: Now, if indeed you want to make yourself unhappy, we do not want to hinder you. We will warn everybody against accepting your notes which are covered neither by gold nor foreign exchange but merely by coal. Although we cannot quote a single example for any inflation caused by any money without legal tender, we are, nevertheless, experts. Respect our professional knowledge, even if it is expressed only in a professional opinion! - - Upon this, group A would have replied: Alright. Let practical experience decide. You may warn us as much as you like. - But this did not happen. A monopoly was defended by its owner. The Reichsbank did not stop to argue its point but mobilised the power of the State and simply referred to the banking legislation. Voluntas stat ratione. (Whim instead of reason.) - - Where in any particular case freedom can be established and even should be granted, where even economic and political tolerance can be exercised and even should be practised, must be determined by a science yet to be established. To establish this new branch of science is necessary today because no party listens any longer to reasoned arguments nor possesses authority enough for people to believe that its plans have a reasonable foundation. … - - This has been my theme for 30 years. My insistence has always been no more than to demand tolerance where it can and should be practised. I have always endeavoured to show why tolerance would be right. If you peruse the vast literature you will find that not one of the authors studied by you has thought of tolerance. All published only proposals for new coercive measures and expected the government to find a chance to realize their new kind of coercion. - (Extract from a letter.) - - Extract from letter of Bth. to Dr. Mann, 26.9.57: 'What is truth? How does one recognize it?' is an old question. What a pity that you have not yet read Kant on this (K.d.R.V., Kehrbach, pp.81 ff.). It would cost you no more than 5 minutes' reading. But, the question of truth should not be brought up when it is primarily a question of rights! - Instance: A municipality in Baden did not participate in the lost elections. This was a tacit - and yet very loud - protest against the project to build a large nuclear reactor in the neighbourhood. Written protests had been ignored. This community had declared, in essence: 1. During the next war the first nuclear bomb will, naturally, be dropped on this reactor. Our town and the city of Karlstadt etc. will be pulverised. The government has no right to expose our community to such a danger, really, to the certainty of its destruction! - 2. The government has no right to leave unexamined the question whether there are no better, more healthy, cheaper and more reliable means to produce energy than, of all things, through nuclear installations, which are extremely unhealthy (radioactive garbage), uneconomical (only in the far future, perhaps, economical) and also very exposed to accidents. Moreover, they can easily be transformed into nuclear bomb factories. - - - Concerning the social question: When a group of men assert that their type of organization, e.g. the open cooperative system of Hertzka, would remove the old antagonism between 'work' and 'capital', doesn't this group then have the right to realize this form of organization at its own expense and risk, especially if it respects the right of all others to apply among themselves even those forms of organization which it considers to be the most foolish, tyrannical and unproductive ones, like monopolistic private or state enterprises? - - Submit at your discretion to the worst economic tyrants, order your affairs according to the spleens of the greatest fools but do not prevent us from realising among ourselves a quite different system! - - Go on believing that your system of uncritical subordination is as suitable, profitable and stable as you like (although experience shows at short intervals the contrary) but do not force us to participate in them. Do not bother about us. We refuse to accept your protection. Order your followers about! - - This is the sane situation as existed formerly, when the question of the true religion induced people to cut each other's throats. This question was answered as soon as one recognized the principle of religious tolerance as the right one. - - When under the rule of this principle e.g. a Muslim and a Buddhist argued whose religion would be preferable, then this was something completely different from e.g. the Muslim declaring: Muhammad has ordered us to spread Islam with the sword. Thus you have to submit. If you pay the tax on non-believers, then you may live, as Mohammed allowed. - The Buddhist would then declare: When the Chinese Emperor repeatedly tried to wipe out the followers of such a murderous religion, he was right. I will volunteer for the Chinese army! - - To demand economic and political tolerance is something completely different from propagating the true economic or political system. The task is merely to explain to people that in such and such a way tolerance is possible. - Should the other then declare: 'You dogs and vermin! You have no right even to be heard! - then, indeed and again, another situation arises. This situation must be mastered by men who say: 'Life is not the highest of all goods. The greatest evil is to live under tyrants, especially under irrational ones.' - - Consider the social problem from this point of view and 99% of the modern economic and political literature will appear to you as so much scrap. - The modern 'system' under which less than half a dozen people may command all others: 'Pulverise yourselves! Here are the technical means for this. Don't complain or argue!' is the logical expression of the absence of the kind of tolerance I am talking about here. - - Under the rule of tolerance, first of all, a referendum would be organized, whether a nuclear installation may be built and operated in the district. - - How the people will vote, once they understand what they are deciding about, is hardly subject to doubt. - If, afterwards, any group of nuclear fanatics attempted to act contrary to the referendum and established secret nuclear installations and operated them, then aren't these people to be dealt with like poisoners of wells? The outlawry of such people would only be natural after such a referendum - and would be practised even if the legislators should omit making it legal … (End of this segment of the letter by Bth. to Dr. Mann.) - - The advocates of currencies like that of Silvio Gesell and the numerous promoters of 'labor notes' should, naturally, have every chance to realize their ideals - but not through the use of coercion against the advocates of other systems. - - Economics, the science and the practice, will, in future, have an aim very different from all the aims it has ever had before, namely, to think of ways and means how the diverse systems can coexist side by side - although each follower holds all other systems to be false and even attempts to prove this. - But today no system can any longer claim authority for itself. Not even a complete agreement on the different systems is possible - as the systems have confused the language of economics. What is reasonable? What is logical? What is freedom? Everybody has a different answer. Only on tolerance one should agree. - - If we do not succeed with this then our 'culture' will have the same fate as that of the old and vanished ones whose ruins are now dug up in deserts and jungles.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Panarchie – immer konkret beschreiben. File: Pan konkret zu beschreiben Bth 7 5 58. - - Im Anschluss an eine kurze Darstellung des Panarchismus von mir, in ganz allgmeinen Worten, und, wenn ich mich recht erinnere, nur in 3 Paragraphen, schickte mir U. V. Beckerath die folgende Notiz: Siehe oben, unter: BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften. (Autonomous Personal Law Communities.)
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, to CLAUS, JOCHEN, 19.10.51. (Pan Bth to Jochen Clause ueber Ackermann & panarchism 19.10.51. Also filed as: Bth to Jochen Claus on Ackermann & panarchism 19 10 51.) - - -Sehr geehrter Herr Clauss, Berlin-Friedenau, Hedwigstrasse 17. - - Es war meine Absicht, Ihnen gleich nach unserer Besprechung zu schreiben, aber ich wurde krank (Erkaeltung) und war ein paar Tage lang inaktiv. - Ihr Plan, fuer West-Berlin eine neue Ausgabe der alten "Weltbuehne" zu veranstalten, muss realisiert werden. Die alte Weltbuehne ist noch nicht ersetzt: sie und Schwarzschild's "Tagebuch" haben Dinge eroertert, ueber die seit 1933 nicht wieder gesprochen worden ist. - Vielleicht das Wichtigste, was die Weltbuehne seiner Zeit publizierte, waren die Aufsaetze von Werner Ackermann, Gruender der "Cosmopolischen Union". Der bin ich sofort beigetreten. Ich lernte dann Ackermann, seine Frau und seine damals noch etwa 14-jaehrige Tochter kennen (ist inzwischen Aerztin in Brandenburg a.d.H. geworden). Ich bin ueberzeugt, dass die Kleine - - rein menschlich betrachtet - - irgend etwas geworden ist. Frau Ackermann ist eine sehr bedeutende Frau, und Ackermann selbst wuerde heute an der Spitze einer neuen Friedensbewegung stehen, wenn nicht Ungluecksfaelle allerschwerster Art ihn gehindert haetten. - - Meine Korrespondenz mit Ackermann - - im wesentlichen die CU betreffend - - umfasste s.Zt. mehrere Leitzordner. (Alles hin.) - (Ob wohl die Erben von W.A. noch etwas davon besitzen??? - J.Z. 30/5/83.) Wir bemuehten uns, die Idee ganz zu Ende zu denken, und zuletzt gelangten wir zu Ergebnissen, die in keinem andern Friedensprogramm enthalten sind. Ich bitte, Ihnen hierueber muendlich berichten zu duerfen. - - Ich selbst war in ganz besonderem Masse disponiert, auf Ackermann's Gedanken einzugehen. In meinem 18-ten Lebensjahr geriet ich an Roscher's "Geschichte der Nationaloekonomik in Deutschland", einem ganz profunden Werk. Roscher erwaehnte darin als einen durchaus ernst zu nehmenden Gedanken die Forderung J. G. Fichte's, dass jede Staatsverfassung das Recht des Austritts aus dem Staat vorsehen muesse. Ich war wie elektrisiert - - so jung wie ich war (oder weil ich noch so jung war ), verschaffte mir Fichte's "Betrachtungen ueber die Franzoesische Revolution", gedruckt 1794, und fand, was ich suchte. Das ging ja noch weit ueber den Anarchismus hinaus. Mir ist jedenfalls kein anarchistischer Schriftsteller - - Max Stirner und Max Nacht (Nettlau! - J.Z.) ausgenommen - - bekannt, der so konkret gedacht haette. - - Nachher war allerdings Fichte fuer mich eine sehr grosse Enttaeuschung. Anstatt seinen Gedanken auszubauen und vor allem die Moeglichkeit zu behandeln, dass ein Staat Krieg fuehrt, aber zahlreiche Ausgetretene innerhalb seiner Grenzen wohnen hat, anstatt dessen also verliess Fichte seine Idee ganz und gar und schrieb 6 Jahre spaeter sogar seinen "Geschlossenen Handelsstaat", dieses Urbild einer Wirtschaftsdespotie gemeinster Art. - - Ich geriet dann an Herbert Spencer und seine 1850 erschienenen "Social Statics" (nicht "Statistics"!). Im 19-ten Kapitel behandelt Spencer "The right to ignore the state" und fordert ebenfalls das Recht, aus dem Staat austreten zu duerfen. Den Fichte kannte Spencer offenbar nicht. Ich war wieder mal begeistert, erlebte dann aber wieder eine Enttaeuschung. Spencer, als er beruehmt geworden war, passte sich den Vorurteilen seiner Leser mehr an als seiner wuerdig war und liess in den spaeteren Auf lagen der "Social Statics" das herrliche 19-te Kapitel einfach weg. Also: ebenfalls Renegat! - - Dann kam ich darauf, dass ein hoher, belgischer Staatsbeamter, als Botaniker s.Zt. beruehmt (seit Jahren versuche ich, mich auf den Namen zu besinnen ) (P. E. De Puydt! - J.Z.) in der Bruesseler Zeitschrift "Revue Trimestrielle" - (Mir sagte er, dass er einen Hinweis auf de Puydt in Wilhelm Roscher gefunden hatte. Dort habe ich aber einen solchen Hinweis, in den mir zugaenglichen Schriften Roschers, noch nicht gefunden. – Vielleicht verwechselte er Roschers Hinweise auf Fichte mit seinem Hinweis of Fichte? Inzwischen waren ja schon ueber 50 Jahre vergangen. - J.Z.) - i. J. 1860 (Juli 1860 - J.Z.) einen Aufsatz "Pan-Archie" veroeffentlicht hatte, der anscheinend noch weiter ging als Fichte und Spencer gegangen waren. Der Autor (anscheinend ohne Fichte und Spencer zu kennen ) beschaeftigte sich mit der Organisation der Ausgetretenen und forderte fuer diese Organisationen Souverainitaetsrechte, aehnlich wie die alten Ritterorden sie s.Zt. besessen hatten. Die waren ja auch reine Personal-Vereinigungen, aber den Landesherren nicht unterworfen. - Die staatsrechtliche Moeglichkeit einer solchen Unabhaengigkeit bewiesen sie den Begriffsstutzigen und den Zweiflern durch die Applikation ausgezeichneter Waffen und Kriegsmaschinen. Ein Landesherr, der da meinte, es duerfe doch keinen "Staat im Staate" geben, und so was sei doch unmoeglich, der riskierte einfach, seinen Dummkopf gespalten zu kriegen. Der Nachfolger entnahm dann daraus die staatsrechtlichen Informationen, die ihm vielleicht gefehlt hatten. - Es ist erstaunlich, dass ein Ministerialrat solche Ideen publizierte. Aber, es ist eine alte Erfahrung, dass die am meisten freiheitlichen Ideen im Schosse der Regierungen geboren werden, weil man da das Wirken des Etatismus besser erkennt als irgendwo anders. Thomas Morus, Staatskanzler von England, war Verfasser der "Utopia", Wilhelm von Humboldt, preussischer Minister, verfasste die "Ideen ueber die Grenzen der Wirksamkeit des Staates" (aber schon lange bevor er Minister war! – J.Z ), der Alte Fritz, in seiner Art auch ein Revolutionaer, fuehrte vom ersten Tage seiner Regierung an die freie Meinungsaeusserung in Preussen ein und begann damit nach Voltaire's Meinung ein neues Zeitalter. (Er sperrte aber einen freihaendlerischen Offizier lebenslaenglich in Spandau ein, wie mir Beckerath bei einer Gelegenheit mal versicherte. - J.Z., 30.4.83.) (Bei dieser Frage war auch er nicht fuer freie Meinungsaeusserung! - J.Z., 16.10.11.) - - (Voltaire duerfte Recht gehabt haben.) Ein Historiker sollte den Gedanken ausfuehren. An Stoff wuerde es ihm nicht fehlen. Der Gedanken widerspricht allerdings allen Vorurteilen. Das Vorurteil stellt sich naemlich die "Regierung" als ein einheitliches Etwas vor und lokalisiert die Revolution voellig ausserhalb der Regierung, wohl gar beim Proletariat. Das ist aber immer noch so reaktionaer, wie es Marx und Engels im "Kommunistischen Manifest" schilderten. - - (Reaktionaer sein heisst: Die "Menschenrechte" nur dann anerkennen, wenn Machthaber sie einem absprechen, sie aber selbst nicht anerkennen, wenn man zur Macht gelangt ist.) - - Fast gleichzeitig mit Ackermann veroeffentlichte H. L. Follin - - gewiss einer der schaerfsten Denker Frankreichs - - seine Grundsaetze zu einer "Republique Supranationale". - - Ich wurde auch bei der RS Mitglied. Nachher versuchte Follin die CU und die RS zu einer Union namens "Cosmometapolis" zu vereinigen. Der Nazikram und nachher der Krieg verhinderten jede weitere Entwicklung. - - Ueber Follin waere sehr viel zu sagen. Er war gut mit Ackermann bekannt, auch ich lernte ihn persoenlich kennen, auch seinen ausgezeichneten Sohn. Follin's "Paroles d'un voyant", erschienen etwa 1934, sind in Paris wohl noch zu haben. - - In dem Stadium der Entwicklung, das der Nazismus abschnitt, bestand etwa folgende Situation: Ich schlug vor, allen Militaermaechten die Idee des Austritts aus dem Staat in folgender Weise nahe zu bringen: Es solle z.B. der Deutsche fordern : Nach dem naechsten Siege, den Deutschland erringt, legt es den Feinden als schwerste, aber hinzunehmende Friedensbedingung auf: Die feindlichen Staaten muessen jedem den Austritt bewilligen, der darum nachsucht. Die Ausgetretenen gewinnen vorlaeufig die Rechte staatenloser Einwohner. Die Organisationen der Staatenlosen sind souveraine Gebilde. Ihre Rechtstellung ist nach Analogie der Europaeer im Orient zu beurteilen, wie sie etwa bis 1913 bestand. Die "Kapitulationen" schufen den Begriff der "Konsulatsuntertanen", die einen "Staat im Staate" bildeten. - - (Dazu machte B. einen ausfuehrlichen Entwurf, den ich verfilmt habe. - J.Z., 7.2.04.) - - 3 - - Da das Wort "Kapitulation" in dem von mir hier gebrauchten Sinne von den meisten nicht mehr verstanden wird, so erlaube ich mir folgende Bemerkung: Die tuerkischen Sultane nahmen den Standpunkt ein, dass es eines rechtglaeubigen Kadi unwuerdig sei, sich mit Rechtsangelegenheiten der Giauren [Unglaeubigen - J.Z.] zu befassen, ausser wenn etwa ein Moslem einen Rechtsstreit mit einem Giauren hatte. - Die Sultane ordneten daher an, dass Rechtsstreitigkeiten der "unglaeubigen Hunde" untereinander von Konsulatsgerichten zu entscheiden seien, allenfalls auch von Gerichten anerkannter Giauren-Organisationen, z.B. der Parsen. - Die betr. Verordnungen, obwohl im hochmuetigsten Tone gehalten, waren dem Inhalt nach weise und sachgemaess, stellten auch eine an Zweckmaessigkeit nicht zu uebertreffende Form des rechtlichen Nebeneinanderlebens von Menschen voellig verschiedener Lebensauffassungen dar. - - Spaeter protestierten allerdings die Kadis dagegen, weil ihnen die hier gegebenen Moeglichkeiten entgingen, sich bestechen zu lassen und dadurch reich zu werden. Die Europaeer waren umgekehrt mit den Verordnungen sehr zufrieden und haetten nur gern eine weniger demuetigende Form gehabt. Die kriegten sie, nachdem die Sultane ein paar Niederlagen erlitten hatten. Da wurde die Sache nicht einseitig durch Verordnungen der Sultane geregelt, sondern durch Staatsvertraege, eingeteilt in "Kapitel", und daher "Kapitulationen" genannt. [Auf beiden Seiten sprachen auch Handelsinteressen fuer die Kapitulationen. – J.Z.] - - Nebenbei gesagt: die andere Bedeutung des Wortes, naemlich: "Ergebnis von Verhandlungen ueber die Uebergabe belagerter Staedte" u.dgl. kommt eben daher: "Einteilung des Inhalts in 'Kapitel' - - das war das, was den meisten schreibunkundigen Feldherrn an dem Werk ihrer Sekretaere zuerst auffiel. - - Als dann im Orient der Nationalismus nach europaeischem Muster Eingang fand, da wurden, die "Kapitulationen" der Sultane als ein Angriff auf die "nationale Ehre" hingestellt oder wirklich empfunden, und nach 1914 wurden die Kapitulationen gekuendigt; sie hatten vorher in China bestanden, in Marokko, in Siam und vielen kleineren, orientalischen Staaten, im wesentlichen nach tuerkischem Muster. (Die Tuerken sind hervorragende Juristen und schaetzen die Jurisprudenz hoch. Das ist wenig bekannt.) - - Es ist auffallend, dass so heterogene Bewegungen wie 1.) Die Ritterorden und einige andere Orden des Mittelalters, 2.) die Auseinandersetzungen der europaeischen Kaufleute im Orient mit den orientalischen Regierungen, soweit es die staatsrechtliche Stellung der Europaeer betraft, doch ein kulturelles Ziel zu haben schienen: Nämlich a.) Mittel und Wege aufzufinden, um allmaehlich den Etatismus (die Omnipotenz der Landesherren - - gleichgueltig ob Despoten oder Parlamente) abzubauen und zwar durch die Initiative der Einzelnen, b.) eine Sprache auszubilden, in der man sich ueber die Technik zu a.) verstaendiqen kann, c.) praktische Beispiele zu a.) aufzustellen, die jeden Einwand widerlegen, dass es sich hier nur um Wahnsinnsgeburten handele, dass also so heterogene Bewegungen von einem Standpunkt aus betrachtet, wie ihn etwas Kant in seiner Geschichtsphilosophie eingenommen hat, als etwas entwicklungsgeschichtlich Einheitliches erscheinen. Diesen Gedanken wuerde ich gern in einem Buch ausgefuehrt haben: die Moeglichkeit dazu hatte ich aber nicht. - - Sie koennen sich vorstellen, dass sowohl Ackermann als Follin durchaus nicht damit einverstanden waren, dass ich ihre Ideen als Fortsetzung sehr alter Gedankengaenge interpretierte: sie meinten zunaechst, ich wollte die Originalitaet ihrer Ideen bestreiten. (Kam mir natuerlich nie in den Sinn, um so weniger, als ich ja deutlich sah, dass sie weder von irgend einem ihrer unmittelbaren Vorgaenger etwas wussten, noch die fuer unsere. Zwecke sozusagen griffbereit daliegenden Formulierungen des "Kapitulationen-Rechtes" kannten.) - Ich schlug dann vor, Eroerterungen darueber zu vermeiden, dafuer aber ein Programm zusamme - - 4 - - zustellen, welches Forderungen einer Union Staatenloser an einen Staat darstellt. Ich machte einen Entwurf. Das war fuer mich nicht allzuschwierig, weil ich aus dem mir vorliegenden, umfangreichen Material ueber die Rechtsstellung autonomer Personalvereinigungen vieles nur abzuschreiben und in moderne Sprache zu uebersetzen hatte. - - [Hier liegt wahrscheinlich, der Ursprung der Broschuere meines Vaters, Kurt H. Zube, ueber einen Weltverband der Staatenlosen, die er nach dem 2. Weltkrieg veroeffentlichte. Von den Nazis ausgebuergert und enteignet, erhielt er seinte deutsche Staatsangehoerigkeit erst in 1952 wieder. – J.Z., 29.11.11.] - - Ich will ein Beispiel geben: Wie soll bei Streitigkeiten zwischen Anhaengern (Mitgliedern) einer autonomen, Cosmopolitischen Union und Untertanen des Staats verfahren werden? Die Antwort fand ich im Gesetzbuch der alten Franken aus der Zeit nach der Voelkerwanderung: "Die Gesetze der Koerperschaft sind massgebend, welcher der Beklagte als Mitglied oder als Untertan angehoert." - In den alten Germanischen Koenigreichen bestand naemlich folgende, einem Modernen geradezu wahnsinnig vorkommende Institution: Der muendig gewordene Buerger hatte zu erklaeren, ob er kuenftig der Koerperschaft als Mitglied angehoeren wolle, die das Roemische Recht als fuer sich verbindlich anerkennt, oder ob er dem Rechtsbund der Alemannen beitreten wolle, etc. Mehrere Rechtssysteme standen zur Auswahl frei. Darueber schreibt Gibbon in seiner Geschichte vom Niedergang des roemischen Reiches. (Chapter 38: The Laws of the Barbarians. - J.Z.) - - In meinem Entwurf nahm ich natuerlich keinerlei Bezug auf orientalisches Kapitulationenrecht oder Alt-Germanisches Recht oder sonstwas. In dem Entwurf konnte es ich nur darum handeln, das Prinzip der Gleichberechtigung von Staat und autonomer Union durchzufuehren. Als der Entwurf fertig war, da wunderten sich allerdings alle Beteiligten, was alles aus den alten Statuten herauszuholen war, und zu was fuer modernen Ergebnissen schon vor sehr langer Zeit die Menschen gelangt waren, die genau das gleiche Prinzip angewandt hatten, naemlich (z.B.) Gleichberechtigung zwischen Moslem und der Venetianischen Republik, in der ja viele Muselmanen wohnten, oder: Gleichberechtigung zwischen dem Aegyptischen Staat und Rittern vom Tempelorden, etc. - - [Ich habe diesen Entwurf leider nie gesehen. Er verbrannte wahrscheinlich mit der Bibliothek von B., in November 1943. Haben andere Mitglieder ihn erhalten? Ihre Addressenliste wurde verbrannt, so dass sie nicht in die Haender der Gestapo fallen konnte. – J.Z., 29.11.11.] Als unser Entwurf fertig war, da erlebten wir noch eine angenehme Ueberraschung. Durch einen grossen Zufall entdeckte ich drei Exemplare eines vor dem ersten Weltkrieg in Canada erschienenen Werkes eines canadischen Rechtsanwaltes namens Internoscia, "International Law" (Ich hoffe den Titel richtig wiedergegeben zu haben.). - (Jerome Internoscia, New Code of International Law, Nouveau Code de Droit International, Nuovo Codice di Diritto Internazionale, 1910, 1003 pages, 5657 paragraphs, with alphabetical index, a tri-lingual private draft, with English, French and Italian text side by side " ... offered in the hope that all will cooperate to bring about the era of universal peace foreshadowed by this code." Reproduced, 24 x reduced, in PEACE PLANS 85 - 95, on 11 of my LMP microfiche. I have not yet got around to arrange a refilming on a lesser number of microfiche. - J.Z., 7.2.04.) - Da hatte dieser sonst ganz unbekannt gebliebene Jurist sich die Aufgabe gestellt, ein Rechtssystem aufzustellen, anwendbar fuer Rechtsfaelle zwischen Angehoerigen verschiedener Rechtsgemeinschaften. Den Begriff "Rechtsgemeinschaft" fasste Internoscia ganz allgemein, so das auch autonome Personalvereinigungen darunter einbegriffen waren. Internoscia hat nun - - als Anleitung fuer Schiedsgerichte - - ein mit wunderbarer Sachkenntnis ausgearbeitetes, "neutrales" Rechtssystem gegeben, enthaltend ein komprimiertes (condensed - J.Z.) Buergerliches Gesetzbuch, und was sonst noch zu einem solchen Rechtssystem gehoert. Der Band wog ungefaehr 10 Pfund (prachtvoll eingebunden), und der Text war in drei Sprachen: Englisch, Franzoesisch und Italienisch. Unser Entwurf konnte nunmehr den einfachen Passus enthalten: Beim Entstehen von Rechtsfaellen zwischen Staatsuntertanen und Mitgliedern autonomer Vereinigungen von aus dem Staate Ausgetretenen wird das Rechtssystem von Internoscia angewandt, sofern nicht spezielle Abmachungen ein anderes Recht vorsehen. - (Spaeter bemerkte B. zu mir, dass in der Rechtsprechung jede Abweichung von den Grundsaetzen und Regeln Internoscias aufuehrlich und oeffentlich zu rechtfertigen waere. - J.Z., 7.2.04.) - - Ackermann wuchs immer mehr in seine Rolle hinein. Um nicht vom Nazismus gefaehrdet zu werden, wanderte er nach Antwerpen aus und zog spaeter nach Bruessel um. (Waehrend des Krieges fiel er doch den Nazis in die Haende. Zu seinem Glueck aber war er "als Deutscher" interniert worden, galt daher zunaechst einmal als "befreiter Deutscher"- - 5 - - Er wurde dann zum deutschen Heeresdienst gepresst und erlitt zahlreiche Ungluecksfaelle schwerster Art. Seine Frau, die ich nachher wiedersah, hatte in ganz kurzer Zeit weisses Haar bekennten. ----------------------------- Follin schrieb an Internoscia einen Brief. Der kam als unbestellbar zurueck. -------------- Es ist moeglich, dass das Buch: Beitrag zu einer Geschichte der Idee autonomer Personenvereinigungen, die keine Staatsangehoerigkeit besitzen, ungeschrieben bleibt. - - Das ziemlich umfangreiche, von mir gesammelte Material ist mir am 23. 11. 1943 nebst rd. 3000 Buechern bei einem Luftangriff verbrannt. Ob es noch einmal moeglich sein wird, es zu sammeln, ist sehr ungewiss. Ich werde es jedenfalls nicht koennen; werde 70 Jahre, bin abgekaempft und bei schlechter Gesundheit, arbeitslos, etc. - - - Dass Benjamin R. Tucker, ein amerikanischer Ingenieur, Jahre lang Herausgeber der "Liberty" in Boston, die Idee autonomer Personenvereinigungen sehr ernstlich eroertert und verteidigt hat, moechte ich hier der Vollstaendigkeit halber kurz erwaehnen. - Wuerde Tucker nicht darauf bestandan haben, sich einen "Anarchisten" zu nennen, er waere der Begruender einer grossen Bewegung geworden, und haette vielleicht ds begonnen, was ein paar Jahrzehnte nach ihm Ackermann und Follin ins Werk setzten wollten. - Uebrigens ist Tucker erst nach dem zweiten Weltkrieg gestorben. (Er sagte mir einmal, in 1949. Hier war er falsch informiert. T. starb 1939. - J.Z., 31.5.83.) - - Henry Meulen, Herausgeber des"THE INDIVIDUALIST", in gewisser Beziehung sein Schueler, hat ihn noch gut gekannt. Tucker's Hauptwerk ist "Instead of a book" - - eine Sammlung von Artikeln aus der "Liberty" - - alles sehr wertvoll und fast in jeder Zeile einen originellen und wichtigen Gedanken enthaltend. Vielleicht kriegen Sie's mal antiquarisch, etwa beim groessten Antiquariat der Welt, Foyle, London WC 2, 119-125 Charing Cross Road. - (Anm. von J.Z., 31.5.83: Wendy McElroy's otherwise excellent index to Tucker's "LIBERTY", 1881-1908, has some entries under arbitration, secession and tolerance but, unfortunately, none that I could see in a quick search under: autonomy, exterritoriality, competing governments, panarchy, alternative institutions, pluralism, personal law, voluntarism, voluntary taxation, associationism, capitulations, millet system, sof or cof- of the Berbers, consular jurisdiction, individual secession and ignoring the State. She might have put all such entries e.g. under the numerous ones on "anarchy", where they are, consequently, somewhat buried. If someone could point out to me all the relevant passages in Tucker's Liberty, I would be grateful and gladly reproduce such a listing.) - Zu erwaehnen ist noch Auberon Herbert, "Voluntary Taxation", das ich mir aber nicht verschaffen konnte. Herbert war Mitglied des englischen Unterhauses. Er trat da fuer die Republik ein, brachte sich dadurch - - natuerlich - - um jeden Einfluss, und setzte sich ausserdem in Widerspruch mit seinen eignen Ideen ueber die Moeglichkeit eines Austritts aus dem Staat. Tucker erwaehnt ihn ein paarmal. - (Anm. von J.Z.: Wendy McElroy erwaehnt ihn unter seinem Namen achtzig mal! - Namen sind leichter zu registrieren, als Ideen , mit ihren verschiedenen Bezeichnungen.) ----------------------- Ich sehe, dass ich Ihnen nun schon 5 Seiten geschrieben habe - - und das nur, weil Sie den Namen Ackermann erwaehnten, der fuer mich mals sehr viel bedeutet hat und noch bedeutet. - - Mit seiner Familie kam ich auf kurze Zeit in Verbindung, es gelang mir sogar ein paar Briefe mit ihm selbst zu wechseln. Das war 1947. Da arbeitete ich naemlich in Potsdam beim Finanzministerium. Die Berliner kriegten eines Tages alle ihre Kuendigung. Wir wurden auch ueberwacht. Ich selbst wurde noch dazu ganz schwer krank, humpelte monatelang an zwei Stoecken. Bei der Uebersiedlung nach Berlin verlor ich die Addressen. Ich getraute mir aber auch - - abgesehen davon - - nicht mehr an die Familie zu schreiben, weil ein Brief eines West-Berliners an eine politisch so bedeutsame Familie wie die Ackermanns allen das Leben und mindestens die Freiheit haette kosten koennen.(Wer ist bereit ueber diese Familie und ihre vielleicht doch noch erhaltenen Papiere von Werner Ackermann nachzuforschen? Der Name kommt nicht sehr haeufig vor. - J.Z., 7.2.04. Ueber das Privatleben von W. Ackermann und sein Schicksal had ein Berliner mir viele Einzelheiten mitgeteilt, aber Nichts ueber seine verbliebenen Papiere ueber die Cosmopolitische Union. Siehe unter Ackermann.) ------------------------- Nun noch ein paar Worte zur "Neuen Weltbuehne." Ich will Ihnen da nicht etwa Ratschlaege geben, aber immerhin moechte ich bemerken, dass ich selbst in Ihrer Lage keine Bedenkungen hegen wuerde, die amerikanische Unterstuetzung anzunehmen. Ich wuerde sogar auf dem Titelblatt ausdruecklich sagen: Erscheint mit Unterstuetzung des (Name der amerikanischen Dienststelle). Sollte es nach ein paar Monaten Krach mit den Amerikanern geben, so steht die "Neue Weltbuehne" bis - 6 - dahin so gesichert da, dass sie auf die amerikanische Unterstuetzung verzichten kann. -------------------------- Ob es zweckmässig ist, sich an die SPA anzulehnen, kann ich im Augenblick nicht recht uebersehen, halte es aber fuer nicht ganz ausgeschlossen. Im Augenblick wird ja erwogen fuer die SPA ein eignes Organ herauszubringen. Die Schwierigkeiten sind aber gross. Da die amerikanischen Geldgeber die Anlehnung an eine Vereinigung zur Bedingung machen, so kaeme - - wenn ich da eine Meinung aeussern darf - - die Schaffung einer neuen Gruppe in Frage. "Schutzverband der Staatenlosen" ??? (Mein Vater, von den Nazis ausgebuergerrt - - einschliesslich meiner Mutter, Schwester und ich, er wurde erst 1952 wieder als Deutscher "zugelassen" - - griff diese Idee spaeter etwa 1947 in Oesterreich auf, als es durch den Krieg Hunderttausende von Staatenlosen gab und schrieb eine Broschuere darueber, die ich digitisiert habe. Siehe unter Zube, Kurt. - J.Z., 7.2.04 & 16.10.11.) Das waere eine alte Idee Ackermann's. Nur ist der Titel nicht recht zugkraeftig, da die Wenigstens ahnen koennen, was dahinter steckt. "Schutzverband der Kriegsgefangenen"? Ich erlaube mir Ihnen eine kleine Ausarbeitung ueber die Behandlung von Kriegsgefangenen im naechsten Kriege beizufuegen. Es handelt sich da um die praktische Anwendung der auch von Ackermann vertretenen Grundsaetze. Die in der Ausarbeitung enthaltenen Grundsaetze hatte ich schon vor rd. 20 Jahren mit Ackermann gruendlichst durchgesprochen. Er war s.Zt. ganz damit einverstanden. Vielleicht aber faellt Ihnen noch etwas zur gegenwaertigen Lage Passendes ein. --------------------- Wichtig waere meiner Meinung nach die Aufstellung eines fuer Russland passenden neuen Sozialsystems nach der Beseitigung des Bolschewismus. Es ist ganz auffallend, dass sich da niemand mit beschaeftigt. Die Ausarbeitung der Ideen von Ackermann und Follin ergaebe aber nicht nur ein brauchbares, sondern auch ein durchaus "zugkraeftiges" Programm, vielleicht von den intelligenteren Sowjetisten selbst akzeptiert. - (Ich moeghte sehr vielen von ihnen weder guten Willen noch Intelligenz absprechen. Es koennte sogar sein, dass Stalin selbst ganz ketzerische Ideen ueber den Bolschewismus hegt, aehlich wie Lenin, dessen Aesserungen darueber ja bekannt geworden sind. Nicht umsonst war Lenin in den letzten Jahren seines Lebens praktisch der Gefangene Dsershinski's, des Chefs der GPU.) - - Die Neue Weltbuehne koennte ein Forum zur Eroerterung eines neuen, russischen Sozialsystems sein und damit gewissermassen die Rolle des Kolkol Alexander Herzen's fortsetzen, der so viel gerade durch den Kolkol zur Beseitigung der Leibeigenschaft beigetragen hat. Auch heute ist wieder in Russland die Leibeigenschaft zu beseitigen. - - Mit bestem Gruss gez.: U. v. Beckerath. - Max Nacht (Max Nettlau! - J.Z.) veroeffentlichte in dem von Landauer herausgegebenen "Sozialist" - - wenn ich mich recht erinnere, Jahrgang 1912 - - eine kurze Geschichte der Idee autonomer, souverainer Personalvereinigungen, kannte aber Fichte nicht und nicht Herbert Spencer. - Bth. - When I met him in 1952 his memory was still close to perfect. E.g., he could quote me a passage from one of his library books from memory, including the page number and then brought me to book to prove that he was correct. By that time, he had once again built up a considerable library, mostly located in orange boxes, but also on and under tables and on and under chairs, since the former tenant had not yet removed his furniture. - J.Z., 17.10.11. - - - - - John Zube, 7 Oxley St., Berrima, NSW, Australia 2577, 31.5.83. - To the descendents of Werner Ackermann PO Box 182 Orange Grove Johannesburg , South Afrika. - (I did not have and still do not have any address for his relatives in Germany! - Upon this letter I received no reply. - J.Z., 7.4.02.) - - Dear "Ackermanns", - my father, Kurt Zube, and my friend Ulrich von Beckerath, who died in 1969, used to belong with Werner Ackermann to the "Cosmopolitan Union" in Berlin. As literary heir of B., I am attempting to recover, retype or photocopy as much of B.'s correspondence and papers as I can, in order to microfilm them in an indexed edition which will almost amount to an encyclopaedia of social reform ideas. In the enclosed letter B. pointed out that he had a very extensive correspondence with W. A. on a subject which is also very close to my heart and the guiding idea of my "PEACE PLANS" series and Libertarian Microfiche Publishing effort. - - In case that, through all the vicissitudes of past dictatorships, wars and numerous moves, all or some of this correspondence would still exist, then I would like to get access to it, photocopies from it and your permission to reproduce it (on an non-exclusive and revocable basis) in my so far quite non-commercial microfiche publishing effort. I would gladly pay for the photocopying costs and labors and for x folders, filled with such material, I would even consider making an air trip to S.A. or to pay a reward from my salary for its transmission. - - Most likely, B. was right when he said in 1951 that none of this material has survived. But upon the chance that it has survived, I do write this letter. - - I used to send to W.A. the first 12 issues of my PEACE PLANS series but was told by him in 1969 to desist, since some of its ideas might compromise him. I was to keep the issues here for him, should he ever make it to Australia. - Should any of your family ever come to Australia for a visit, I would gladly offer accommodation in the hope to hear some more about Werner Ackermann, of whom B. spoke very often and always with the greatest respect. (I live in the Southern Highlands, ca. 70 miles South of Sydney.) - - Hopefully - signed: John Zube. - - - P.S. I have myself written already 2 books on the subject of exterritorial and autonomous associations of volunteers, as new constitutional structures that could prevent or end war and especially prevent nuclear war. I do intend to write at least one more, on the history of this idea and its limited practice so far. In my opinion it offers still the best moral and utilitarian solution to the problem of independent development of diverse groups, to the extent that such a separate development is voluntarily desired by individuals. And such a solution is today needed in all continents. Nevertheless, it is hardly discussed anywhere at sufficient depth. - Should any member of your family carry on some of these ideals of W.A., then I would, naturally, like to get into touch with that person.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, to CLAUS, JOCHEN, 21.11.1951. - Translation by J.Z. of a letter by Ulrich von Beckerath, on New Human Rights Declaration, Criticism of that of the UN. - ON FLAWS IN THE UN DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, WITH STRESS UPON: THE RIGHT TO ORGANISE EXTERRITORIALLY AND AUTONOMOUSLY. (My summary. - J.Z.). - Dear Mr. Clauss, in case you have not yet given up your plan to re-issue "Die Weltbuehne": I submit in the enclosure the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" of the United Nations. Would it be advisable, to reproduce it in the first issue? I estimate that the text is unknown to about 99% of all Berliners. - The "Weltbuehne" could prepare a supplement to this declaration. - The most important supplement would be the statement of a duty for every human being to help in the realisation and maintenance of human rights. To this would belong an active struggle against all those who by their words and deeds have proven that they have no respect for human rights and that one can expect offences against human rights from them. Furthermore, it would follow from this duty that those, whose human rights were offended against or threatened, have the duty to inform the civilized world of these offences and threats and to form resistance organizations and to seek and maintain alliances with those who are prepared to help them. - - A further supplement would consist in the declaration that all States, whose governments show not respect for human rights, do have to submit to corresponding limitations of their sovereign powers. Among such limitations are, e.g. (1.) Tolerance for autonomous protective associations of those inhabitants who are determined to take their own affairs into their own hands, to resign from their membership in the particular State and to live in its territory as neutral foreigners. - (2.) Exemption of the members of these autonomous protective association from all laws and regulations of that State which would offend against this autonomy, like conscription, compulsory social insurance, custom duties and other economic legislation. - - The declaration should state that each peace treaty, after a war with such a State and each declaration on the ending of hostilities, that replaces a peace treaty, has to include a clause for this kind of restrictions upon State Sovereignty or it must be tacitly included, when not expressly mentioned. … (Compare Beckerath's essay on this in PEACE PLANS 14 & 61-63. - J.Z.) - - [On the UN's Declaration of 10.12.1948.] Some articles are formulated in a way that one can immediately see that a former trade union secretary has participated in wording it. - In Article 23, No. 1, "protection against unemployment" is called a human right. Obviously, unemployment is here, exactly as in article 25, No 1, considered as an accident, like sickness, invalidity etc. which involves the employees. - No. 2, if it is to make sense at all, applies only to employees, likewise No.3. But, does a human being absolutely have to be an employee? Couldn't he be independent, too? Could not independent people associate in cooperatives and similar organizations? How much sense is there in recognising a "protection against unemployment" for independent tradesmen? - Unemployment is not an accident like sickness etc. Unemployment can have two completely different causes: (1.) It can happen that the unemployed has acquired capabilities for which there is no demand. When King Friedrich Wilhelm III. abolished pigtails at his court, ca. 150 years ago and with this gave a signal for almost all of Germany, to do away with this hairstyle. Many barbers had to change their jobs in order not to become unemployed. A protection against this kind of unemployment is obviously out of the question. However, one has to demand the abolition of all obstacles which are now frequently laid in the way of changing one's profession. In the Anglo-Saxon countries, one of these obstacles, not to be overlooked, is the monopolisation of many occupations by the unions. A few years ago, I read of an association of West-American glass workers, who not only turned all glass manufacturing plants in their area into "closed shops" but who also demanded an entrance fee of $1500. We have here a guild monopoly that obviously offends against human rights. - (2.) It may happen - and this is the normal case - that raw materials, machines, great needs and people willing to work are present but that these four factors do not get together because there is not enough money. Here a right is needed to ignore the existing monetary legislation. How could this be done? That remains to be discussed. … - The former union secretaries, who participated in formulating these rights, did not think of the right to leave the status of a dependent worker and to become an independent one. Their independence could be realized by their association into cooperatives of independents, when there are technical reasons for this as e.g. in mining and machine construction. The thought to abolish the wage system and not to replace it with dependent labour in State enterprises (thereby, it would not be abolished), is not at all new. It was often discussed in detail in the circles of the old International. - - Here I have to confine myself to these hints. - - What do you think of the following quote from Immanuel KANT as a MOTTO, upon the first page of each issue of the "Weltbuehne", similar to the "Rerum cognoscere Causas" of the "Tagesspiegel"? "Do not become the servants of men. Do not let your rights be trampled upon with impunity." - This is taken from his "Tugendlehre", Par.12. This book appeared in 1797. Kant was then already 73 years old. The older he became, the more revolutionary* he became. That Kant understood under "Tugend" (virtue) something very different from what the Churches meant, follows from the above quotation. - To read Kant is worthwhile. Do you possess Kant's "Eternal Peace"? I have a spare copy of it. - With best greetings, U. v. Beckerath. - - Jochen Clauss, Berlin, 23.11.51. - Dear Mr. von Beckerath, Please excuse my neglect of answering only today. Mr. Hirschel did, unfortunately, become sick, so that we had to postpone the intended talk for one week, when he is discharged from hospital. - I thank you for your very interesting letter of 21.11. - Permit me to reply to it orally. The draft Brandenburg/Berlin (**) I would like to keep for a few days longer, since Mr. Hirschel also expressed the wish to read it. - For today, sincere greetings, - Your faithfully, Jochen Clauss. - [I do not have a report by U. v. B. on the oral response by J. C. - J.Z., 23.8.11.] - - (*) How many others are there, besides I. Kant and L. Spooner, who became more radical with advancing age? Have many (perhaps most of those, 'who gave up the ghost', resigned, compromised or kept silent etc.) had been on the wrong path, anyhow? Will someone please make such a survey for me? The subject might even be suitable for a dissertation. - My father's (K.H.Z. Solneman's) point of view remained largely unchanged, as far as I can judge, since ca. 1930. But sometimes it is already an achievement merely to maintain one's convictions. Lafayette did so to his death. - I believe that I have come to see more and more of all the points that need changing and of the tools required for the job but I see no other way to initiate these changes by myself than via the realization of a program for a genuinely cultural revolution, to speed up the process of enlightenment - of which extensive use of microfiche and of personal computers are just two important factors. And this realization may already be too large a job for one person. (I described this program in a digitized book manuscript of 2010, so far only called NEW DRAFT. A review of it can be found on www.panarchy.org. - J.Z., 23.8.11.) - (**) The Brandenburg/Berlin draft of U. v. Beckerath got somehow lost by one of those who "borrowed" it, including J. C. If I remember right, what B. told me, it involved the reunification of West and East Berlin, together with the province of Mark Brandenburg, which enclosed both of them and the neutralization of this new association. Most likely, it also contained a declaration of independence and a bill of rights. Finder's fee in microfiche! - J.Z., 4.1.1986. - Or in some of my digitizations. - J.Z., 23.8.11.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, to Dr. ARTHUR SCHINNAGEL, 8.12.62. A rough translation of the last paragraph of this letter. The German orginal version follows. "The "Befreiung" (Liberation) wants to abolish the State. One should not blame it for that after the many wars which governments have begun. De Puydt, however, whose essay you possess, said: One should extend tolerance to the last limits of what is possible. - Suppose half of the inhabitants of a country would consist of non-statists but the other half, if the State were abolished, would experience, as is presently the case, the same fear that small children show when they are left alone in darkness. Thus tolerance requires that one lets the State continue for the latter half. - The program of de Puydt solves the seemingly insolvable problem to bring the statists and the non-statists under one framework. - De Puydt solves the problem technically, not by general remarks." - - Zu der Juni- Nummer der Zeitschrift "Befreiung", die Sie mir am vorigen Dienstag freundlicherweise zur Lektüre überließen: Die "Befreiung" möchte den Staat beseitigen. Das ist ihr nach den vielen Kriegen, welche die Regierungen angefangen haben, nicht übel zu nehmen. De Puydt aber, dessen Schrift Sie besitzen, der sagte: Man sollte die Toleranz bis zur letzten Grenze des Möglichen ausüben. - Angenommen, die Hälfte der Anzahl der Bewohner eines Landes bestände aus Non-Etatisten, die andere Hälfte hätte aber, wie es zur Zeit ja der Fall ist, bei Beseitigung des Staates ein Gefühl wie kleine Kinder, die im Dunkeln allein gelassen werden, so erforderte die Toleranz, daß man für diese letztere Haelfte den Staat bestehen ließe. - Das Programm des De Puydt löst also das scheinbar unlösbare Problem, die Statisten und die Non-Etatisten unter einen Hut zu bringen. De Puydt löst das Problem technisch, nicht durch allgemeine Redensarten. - Mit bestem Gruß, Gez.: U. von Beckerath.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, to EINSTEIN, ALBERT, on Republique Supranationale, 1929, page 104; Reply by Albert Einstein to U. v. Beckerath, 106, translated page 109, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PEACE PLANS 585.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, to MEYER, WALTER, stud. phil., On Panarchy, Exterritorial Autonomy, Autonomous Communities, Defence Alternative & Courts Alternative, Vehmic Courts, Free Societies, Friedrich Engels, Tribal Freedom, Spain: Holy Hermandad, China: Insurance Companies for Defence, Defence through Private Insurance, Middle Age, Church Autonomy, Canonical Law, Bedouin Autonomy, Knights, Orders, Templars, Internoscia’s New Code of International Law, Outlawry, Individual Secessionism, Robespierre, Air Raids, POW’s, Desertion, Oath on Human Rights, Military Disobedience, Militia, State, Human Nature, Supranational Community, Revolution, Totalitarianism, Voluntarism, Historical Precedents, Precedents, Karl Marx, Communist Manifesto. File: Pan Bth to Meyer 23 12 60. - English translation: Ulrich von Beckerath, 23. 12 1960. - - Mr. stud. Phil. Walter Meyer, Berlin NW 21, Bremer Strasse 76. - Dear Mr. Meyer, the idea of the exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers is perhaps the most revolutionary, political-social idea which human beings ever conceived. - “Idea” is here really an unsuitable expression, since for many thousands of years the autonomous community was the political-social form of organization of mankind. That was when mankind was still organized in “tribes”, that is, before the State played the role that it plays today. - - That the old organizational form was not at all merely an imperfect and preliminary state of statism but, on the contrary, the form which is most adapted to human nature, was stressed by Friedrich Engels in his highly readable (but hardly ever read) book: “The Origin of the Family, or Private Property and the State”. - (Available from me.) At the end of the book is the following sentence: “The time that passed since the beginning of civilization is only a small fraction of the whole lifespan of mankind, only a small fraction of the time still in front of it. - - The dissolution of society stands threateningly before us, as the conclusion of a historical path , whose only final aim is wealth, for such a career contains the elements of its own destruction. Democracy in the administration, fraternity in society, equality of rights, general enlightenment will introduce the next higher level of society, towards which experience, reason and science are working steadily. It will be a revival - - but in an improved form - - of the freedom, equality and fraternity of the old tribes (Gentes).” (Stressed by Engels.) - - For Engels and Marx the State, after the proletariat had conquered it, was merely a means in order to transfer, in a very short time, the means of production into the possession of the newly formed societies. That is written in clear words in the Communist Manifesto. (Likewise available from me as a loan.) - - Still in the Middle Ages the exterritorially autonomous community was not a figment of the imagination but a reality known to everybody. For several centuries the Church was more powerful than the State, had its own laws (Canonical Law), so that, for instance, Priests could not be sentenced before the courts of the territorial lords. - (J.Z.: Only now are some of them held responsible for sexual crimes committed against children! – J.., 10.9.03. -These crimes would have been much rarer if priests were not forbidden to marry. - every rule that goes against human nature has disastrous consequences. - J.Z., 17.10.11.) - The orders of knights were autonomous communities and for a long time the Templars in France were more powerful than the King. Philipp IV was the first to gain power over the order. (In 1310 he burned 54 knights alive.) - In Arabia even today many Bedouin tribes, although they have to pay tributes, are not subjected to the legislation of the King. - I could still cite many further examples. - - Everything can be abused, even an autonomous protective association. The abuses could even go so far that the State appears as the lesser evil. - - - But it is remarkable that especially in Germany, once the people, during the Middle Ages, had lost their trust in the Church (as a protective community), in the State and – after many pestilences – apparently also in the metaphysical powers, organized itself in groups of autonomous communities, the vehmic courts. Goethe’s description, in “Goetz von Berlichingen” is not very much exaggerated. Almost at the same time the Spanish organized the “Holy Hermandad”. This achieved, in a short period, security on the roads, after the king’s police proved itself incapable. (I suppose that they got percentage from the highway robbers, as still happened in the 20th century sometimes among the imperial Chinese police.) - (J.Z.: Criminal actions of some policemen and their collaboration with professional criminals happen still today, all too often, even in democracies. – J.Z., 10.9.03.) - -In China, in the second half of the 19th century and further up to World War I, the insecurity on the water-ways was great. Thus the Western Insurance companies bought from the Chinese Government the privilege to operate in their own sphere as police. The societies acquired some fast boats, armed them and paid large rewards for evidence on pirate junks, hideouts of robbers and of addresses of official who had split the robbers’ takings with them. That worked! The fast boats attacked the junks of the robbers, were unafraid of the “stink-bombs” of the pirates, emptied their hide-outs and arrested the bribed officials. Once these patrol boats, with gallows set up on their decks, had passed a few times up and down the Yang-Tse-Kiang and the Hoan-Ho and the Chinese saw the robbers hanging there, who, shortly before, had extorted extra taxes from them, they did gain respect. No robbers dared any longer to rob houses which were marked by the well-known metal signs: “Protected by such and such a society”. Premiums were very high – but were gladly paid by the insured. - (J.Z.: This is the first instance that I have seen which gives an example for the kind of privately provided protection services by insurance companies (as recommended e.g. by H. H. Hoppe). – J.Z., 13.12.04.) - - It will be the task of jurists, economists and other theoreticians, to elaborate organizational plans for autonomous communities during the next decades. So far only a single jurist has offered such labours and this already before WW I: Internoscia, a Canadian lawyer, born in Italy. He published an immediately acceptable Civil Code in three languages: English, French and Italian. It is a thick volume in a large size. Zube still possesses a copy. Mine was burnt. (I microfiched it, much later. J.Z.) - Internoscia, apparently, thought mainly of the case which has now happened in Africa: A colony makes itself independent and needs from one day to the other a system of good laws. - (J.Z.: Elsewhere B. had proposed that deviations from this code should be permissible, provided only that they are publicly and quite sufficiently justified. – J.Z., 10.9.03.) - The autonomous community is the only weapon against war mongers, imperialism etc. - Suppose a group in the German Federal Republic demanded: If totalitarian States start a war and are defeated, then one of the peace conditions has to be: The defeated State permits individual secession from the State without the secessionists being forced to leave the country. - - The Secessionists do organize themselves into autonomous communities. - The primary purpose of these communities is to actively protect human rights and to render those governments harmless, immediately and with suitable means, which e.g. prepare a mobilization for an aggressive war. - - Outlawry, a very ancient but now forgotten legal means, which was revived during the French Revolution, will be applied again. - (On July 27, 1794 the National Convention outlawed Robespierre and his followers. Thus thousands of soldiers and gendarmes, who up to then stood by the Jacobines, allied themselves to the Convention merely upon the news that Robespierre and his followers had been outlawed. The outlawed were arrested in the town-hall, which its defenders had left, and were guillotined next day, without a court case. - - Imagine that in November 1918 the Allies had proclaimed: The German Government, from today an, has to permit individuals to secede from the State and the organization of exterritorially autonomous communities. These will not be burdened by Reparation claims. The Allies are also prepared to conclude treaties with these communities. Should these communities be attacked by reactionary groups, e.g., Pan-Germanists, then, upon request, the Allies will come to their aid. - - It is certain that neither the murder clubs, which e.g. murdered Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, captain Beerfeld, captain Persius and so many others (e.g. Rathenau), could have formed without having been immediately wiped out - nor could Nazism have arisen. - - Objection: The then deciding people among the Allies were so stupid and ignorant regarding international law that they would not have understood a program as Zube now represents. - Without prior enlightenment this system, too, cannot be realized. Today’s decision must be: This enlightenment has to begin immediately. - This enlightenment must contain a detailed peace program. - (Compare: www.panarchism.info/ - www.panarchism.info - www.butterbach.net/epinfo/peac.htm & www.butterbach.net/epinfo/abc.htm - J.Z., 13.12.04.) - - What will happen with the collectives? With the State enterprises or forced labour organizations calling themselves productive cooperatives? - - Answer: All that will be transformed according to the principle of cooperative socialism, the “productive coops” will be transformed into real productive coops, for which, first of all, compulsory deliveries at controlled prices will be abolished. - - Objection: What if enemies were to offer the same program for Germany? - Answer: If the enemies would really defeat Germany and then apply that program, then they would merely achieve what the German government has long tried to achieve but could not, because of the well known resistance. If then the enemies set up a new (totalitarian) regime and, at the same time, make the establishment of exterritorially autonomous communities possible: Well, then they would saw off the branch upon which they sit! That does not have to be explained here. - - Concerning the conduct of wars against totalitarian State: American writers have proposed already for years: Instead of throwing bombs on the cities of the enemy country, Germans will supply them, from the air, with food, clothing, shoes and nails and will also prepare an organization that would utilize everything that was so far used for arms production for the production of housing. - Leaflets with details for e.g., the building cooperatives to be established, will be distributed everywhere. - - Would the enemy regime find many fighters then? - - Further: Germany proclaims: We do not keep Prisoners of War! Each prisoner will be given travel money and food etc., so that he can get home to his family. - - Of especial importance would be the oath of the armies of the Free World upon the human rights, or upon that part of them that would be applicable if, e.g., German troops were to occupy Russian territory. - - Each soldier would have to swear that he would not obey any order that is directed against human rights. He will also refuse orders to shoot prisoners of war, as was so often commanded by Hitler and his helpers. - - Orders based upon the principle of collective national responsibility or family responsibility or similar principles will not be obeyed either by the soldiers. Instead, they will point out to their superiors, even if they were the highest ones, the wrongfulness of these orders and all their present comrades will support them. If the officer insists upon his order or even acts aggressively, then he would thus lose all rights as a German soldier and would have to be immediately arrested by the German soldiers that are present. - In all military manuals many such cases should be described as detailed as possible. - When a soldier infringes the human rights of inhabitants of occupied areas, e.g. plunders, engages in rape or tries to, or undertakes arbitrary or superfluous destructions or engages in chicanery, then he is likewise to be rendered harmless, through his superiors or his comrades. - (In the manuals of the armies of the world such actions have been prohibited for centuries; human rights would not introduce anything new in this sphere.) - - On each first of May a military celebration is to be organized, during which the soldiers and officers are to be reminded of their oath. - The highest ranking officers present will explain that the German army will not only protect the human rights of others but also claims them for itself. - This aim will replace the prior claims to conquests after declarations of war and the so-called law of war towards the inhabitants of occupied territories. - In all of Germany local groups of the Supranational Community will be established of which each will point out the above principles of this association in all of its weekly and public meetings. - - I reserve the right to propose for discussion a completion of these principles. I may follow-up the very thorough and detailed work of the couple Zube. A better work in this sphere was, to my knowledge, not offered so far. - (J.Z.: It was easy for him to praise this manuscript since it largely only combined many of the suggestions he himself had made, in writing or orally, over the years that I was in contact with him. – J.Z., 13.12.04.) - I will conclude now, for otherwise this letter will be too long. I hope to be able to continue it soon. - Although my health has improved a bit, I am plagued by frequent attacks of tiredness, so that I could not play a good role during a discussion. Therefore, I wish to dedicate the coming Friday (31. 12.60) completely to my recovery. - (I spend almost my whole free time either in bed or on a lounge.) - A copy of this letter is being sent to Mr. Elsoffer. - With best greetings, U. v. Beckerath, signed: Bth. - - - THE GERMAN ORIGINAL OF THE ABOVE LETTER: BECKERATH, ULRICH von, to Meyer, Walter, stud. Phil. Berlin NW 21, Bremer Strasse 76, 23. 12. 1960. File: H: Pan files: Pan Bth to Meyer 23 12 60. [German.] - - Sehr geehrter Herr Meyer, die Idee der autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaft ist vielleicht die revolutionaerste, politisch-soziale Idee, die jemals Menschen gefasst haben. - “Idee” ist hier eigentlich kein passender Ausdruck, denn sehr viele Jahrtausende lang war die autonome Rechtsgemeinschaft die politisch-soziale Organisationsform der Menschheit. Das war, als die Menschheit noch in “Staemmen” organisiert war, also bevor der Staat die Rolle spielte, die er jetzt spielt. - Dass die alte Organisationsform nicht etwa eine unvollkommene Vorstufe des Etatismus war, sondern im Gegenteil, die der menschlichen Natur am meisten angemessene Form, betont Friedrich Engels in seinem hoechst lesenswerten (aber kaum noch gelesenen) Buch: “Der Ursprung der Familie, des Privateigentums und des Staates”. (Von mir zu haben.) Am Schluss des Buches steht der Satz: “Die seit Anbruch der Zivilisation verflossene Zeit is nur ein kleiner Bruchteil der verflossenen Lebenszeit der Menschheit; nur ein kleiner Bruch der ihr noch bevorstehenden. Die Aufloesung der Gesellschaft steht drohend vor uns als Abschluss einer geschichtlichen Laufbahn, deren einziges Endziel der Reichtum ist, denn eine solche Laufbahn enthaelt die Elemente ihrer eignen Vernichtung. Demokratie in der Verwaltung, Bruederlichkeit in der Gesellschaft, Gleichheit der Recht, allgemeine Erziehung werden die naechste hoehere Stufe der Gesellschaft einweihen, zu der Erfahrung, Vernunft und Wissenschaft stetig hinarbeiten. Sie wird eine Wiederbelebung sein - - aber in hoeherer Form - - der Freiheit, Gleichheit und Bruederlichkeit der alten Gentes.” (Von Engels gesperrt.) - Fuer Engels und Marx war der Staat, nachdem das Proletariat ihn erobert hatte, nur ein Mittel, um binnen ganz kurzer Zeit die Productionsmittel in den Besitz der neu gebildeten Associationen ueberzuleiten. Das steht mit deutlichen Worten im Kommunistischen Manifest. (Von mir gleichfalls - - leihweise - - zu haben.) - - Noch im Mittelalter war die autonome Rechtsgemeinschaft keine Phantasiegebilde sondern eine jedermann bekannte Wirklichkeit. Die Kirche war mehrere Jahrhunderte lang maechtiger als der Staat, hatte ihre eigenen Gesetze (“Kanonisches Recht”), so dass z.B. die Priester nicht von den Gerichten des Landesherren verurteilt werden durften. - (Erst jetzt werden einige von ihnen wegen Sexualverbrechen gegen Kinder zur Rechenschaft gezogen! – J.Z., 10.9.03.) - - Die Ritterorden waren autonome Rechtsgemeinschaften, und in Frankreich waren lange Zeit die Tempelherren maechtiger als der Koenig. Erst Philipp IV. Gewann Macht ueber den Orden. (I. J. 1310 verbrannte er 54 Ritter lebendig.) - In Arabien sind heute noch viele Beduinenstaemme dem Koenig zwar tributpflichtig, seiner Gesetzgebung aber nicht unterworfen. - Ich koennte noch viele Beispiele an fuehren. - - Missbraucht werden kann alles, sogar die autonome Rechtsgemeinschaft. Die Missbraeuche koennen sogar so weit gehen, dass der Staat als das kleinere Uebel erscheint. Bemerkenswert ist aber, dass gerade in Deutschland, als das Volk im Mittelalter das Vertrauen zur Kirche (als Rechtsgemeinschaft), zum Staat und - - nach den vielen Seuchen - - anscheinend auch zu den uebersinnlichen Maechten verloren hatte, von sich aus Gruppen von autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaften organisierte, die Vehmegerichte. Goethe’s Darstellung im “Goetz von Berlichingen” ist so sehr uebertrieben nicht. Fast gleichzeitig organisierten die Spanier die “Heilige Hermandad”. Die stellte in kurzer Zeit die Sicherheit auf den Landstrassen her, nachdem die koenigliche Polizei sich als unfaehig dazu erwiesen hatte. - (Ich vermute, dass sie von den Strassenraeubern Prozente kriegte, wie noch im 20-sten Jahrhundert oefters die kaiserliche chinesische Polizei.) - (Verbrecherische Taten einiger Polizisten und ihre Zusammenarbeit mit Berufsverbrechern kommen auch heute noch allzuoft vor, selbst in Demokratien. – J.Z., 10.9.03.) - In China war in der zweiten Haelfte des 19-ten Jahrhunderts und weiter bis zum ersten Weltkrieg die Unsicherheit auf den Wasserstrassen gross. Da kauften sich die westlichen Versicherungsgesellschaften von der chinesischen Regierung das Privileg, in ihrer eignen Rechts-Sphaere als Polizei fungieren zu duerfen. Die Gesellschaften schafften sich Schnellboote an, armierten sie und zahlten hohe Belohnungen fuer den Nachweis von Raub-Dschunken, Raeuber-Zentralen und Adressen von Beamten, die mit den Raeubern geteilt hatten. Das klappte! Die Schnellboote griffen die Raubdschunken an, fuerchteten sich nicht vor den “Stinktoepfen” der Piraten, hoben die Raeuberzentralen aus und verhafteten die bestochenen Beamten. Als z.B. die Schnellboote mit den auf dem Verdeck montierten Galgen ein paar mal den Yang-Tse-Kiang und den Hoang-Ho herauf und herunter gefahren waren, die Chinesen die Raeuber haengen sahen, die ihnen noch kurz zuvor Extrasteuern abgepresst hatten, da kriegte alles Respekt. An Haeuser, die durch die bekannten Blechschilder gekennzeichnet waren als “Versichert bei der und der Gesellschaft”, an solche Haeuser also traute sich keine Raeuberbande mehr heran. Die Praemien waren sehr hoch, wurden aber von den Versicherten gern gezahlt. - - Die Aufgabe der Juristen, der Oekonomisten und anderer Theoretiker wird es sein, waehrend der naechsten Jahrzehnte Organisationsplaene der autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaften auszuarbeiten. Bis jetzt hat nur ein Jurist eine solche Arbeit geleistet und zwar schon vor dem ersten Weltkrieg: Internoscia, ein kanadischer, in Italien geborener Rechtsanwalt. Er veroeffentlichte ein sofort zu uebernehmendes BGB in drei Sprachen: Englisch, Franzoesisch, Italienisch. Es ist ein dicker Band in Grossfolio geworden. Zube besitzt noch ein Expl. Mir ist eines verbrannt. - (Ich habe es auf mehreren Mikrofiche verfilmt, bin aber noch nicht dazu gekommen, es auf viel weniger Mikrofiche noch einmal zu verfilmen. – J.Z., 10.9.03. Oder es zu digitisieren. - J.Z., 16.10.11.) - Internoscia dachte anscheinened hauptsaechlich an den Fall, der jetzt in Afrika eingetreten ist: Eine Kolonie macht sich unabhaengig und braucht nun von heute auf morgen ein System guter Gesetze. - (Anderswo hat B. vorgeschlagen dass Abweichungen von diesem Gesetzwerk erlaubt sein sollten, vorausgesetzt, dass sie oeffentlich und ganz ausreichend begruendet wuerden. – J.Z., 10.9.03.) - Die autonome Rechtsgemeinschaft ist die einzige Waffe gegen Kriegshetzerei, Imperialismus, und Aehnliches. - - Angenommen, eine Gruppe in der Bundesrepublik fordert: Sollten totalitaere Staaten einen Krieg anfangen und werden besiegt, so muss eine Friedensbedingung sein: Der besiegte Staat erlaubt den Austritt aus dem Staat, ohne dass die Ausgetretenen gezwungen werden, das Land zu verlassen. - - Die Ausgetretenen aber organisieren sich zu autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaften. - Diese Gemeinschaften haben in erster Lienie den Zweck, die Menschenrechte aktiv zu schuetzen und die Regierungen, die etwa eine Mobilmachung zum Zweck eines Angriffskrieges vorbereiten, sofort mit geeigneten Mitteln unschaedlich zu machen. - Die Aechtung, ein uraltes, jetzt vergessenes, aber waehrend der Franzoesichen Revolution wieder aufgegriffenes Rechtsmittel, wird wieder angewendet werden. - (Am 27. Juli 1794 aechtete der Nationalkonvent den Robespierre und seinen Anhang. Tausende von Soldaten und Gendarmen, die bisher zu den Jakobinern gehalten hatten, gingen zum Konvent ueber, nur auf die Nachricht hin, dass Robespierre und sein Anhang geaechtet waren. Die Geaechteten wurden aus dem von Verteidigern verlassenen Rathaus herausgeholt und am naechsten Tage ohne Prozess guillotiniert. - - - - - - - Man stelle sich vor, dass im November 1918 die Alliierten proklaemiert haettten: Die deutsche Regierung muss von heute an den Austritt aus dem Staat erlauben und die Organisierung von autonomen Rechtsgemeinschaften durch die Ausgetretenen. Die Rechtsgemeinschaften werden nicht mit Reparationen belasted. Die Alliierten sind auch bereit, mit solchen Rechtsgemeinschaften, die es wuenschen, Buendnisvertraege abzuschliessen. Sollten die Gemeinschaften von reaktionaeren Gruppen, z.B. Pan-Germanisten, angegriffen werden, oder sollten sie gar von der neuen Regierung angegriffen werden, so werden ihnen die Alliierten auf Wunsch zu Hilfe kommen. - Gewiss ist, weder die Moerderklubs, die z.B. Liebknecht und Rosa Luxemburg umgebracht haben, den Hauptmann Beerfelde, den Kapitaen Persius und so viele andere (z.B. Rathenau), haetten sich bilden koennen ohne gleich ausgerottet zu werden, noch haette ein Nazismus entstehen koennen. - - Einwendung: Die damals bei den Alliierten massgebenden Leute waren in bezug auf wirklich konstruktives Voelkerrecht so dumm und so unwissend, dass sie ein Programm, wie es jetzt Zube vertritt, nicht verstanden haetten. Ohne voraufgegangene Aufklaerung kann das System auch nicht realisiert werden. Heute muss es heissen: Die Aufklaerung ist sofort zu beginnen. - - Die Aufklaerung muss ein detailliertes Friedensprogramm enthalten. (Siehe: www.butterbach.net/exterritorial.net - J.Z., 10.9.03.) - - Was geschieht mit den Kolchosen? Mit den Sowchosen, mit den sich Produktionsgenossenschaften nennenden Zwangsarbeits-Organisationen? - - Antwort: Alles das wird nach den Grundsaetzen des Genossenschafts-Sozialismus umgewandelt, die “Produktionsgenossenschaften” z.B. werden in wirkliche Produktionsgenossenschaften umgewandelt, bei denen also zunaechst mal das Soll abgeschafft wird. - - - - - - - Einwand: Und wenn nun die Feinde ein gleiches Programm fuer Deutschland aufstellen? - Antwort: Wenn die Feinde wirklich Deutschland besiegen sollten und dann das Programm anwenden, so werden sie nur erreichen, was die deutsche Regierung laengst versucht hat, zu erreichen, es aber wegen der bekannten Widerstaende nicht durchgesetzt hat. Wenn dann die Feinde eine neue (totalitaere) Regierung einsetzen und gleichzeitig die Bildung autonomer Rechtsgemeinschaften ermoeglichen: Nun - - so saegen sie den Ast ab, auf dem sie sitzen! Das braucht hier nicht dargelegt zu werden. - - - - - - - Was die Kriegfuehrung gegen totalitaere Staaten anlangt, so haben amerikanische Publizisten schon vor Jahren vorgeschlagen: Anstatt Bomben auf die Staedte des Feindes zu werfen, werden die Deutchen die Staedte aus der Luft mit Lebensmitteln versehen, mit Kleidern, Schuhen und Naegeln, und werden ausserdem eine Organisation vorbereiten die alles, was bisher auf die Waffenfabrikation verwendet wurde, auf den Wohnungsbau verwendet. - Flugblaetter mit Angaben ueber die zu bildenden Baugenossenschaften, werden ueberall verteilt. - Ob dann die feindliche Regierung noch viele Kaempfer finden wird? - - Ferner: Deutschland proklamiert: Gefangene werden nicht gemacht!! Jeder Gefangene wird mit Reisegeld und Lebensmitteln etc. versehen, damit er zu seiner Familie zurueckkehren kann. - - - - - - - Von besonderer Wichtigkeit waere die Vereidigung der Armeen der freien Welt auf die Menschenrechte, bzw. Auf denjenigen Teil davon, der anzuwenden waere, wenn z.B. deutsche Truppen russisches Gebiet besetzten. - Es haette also der einzelne Soldat zu schwoeren, dass er keinen Befehl vollziehen werde, der gegen die Menschenrechte gerichtet ist. Er wird sich also weigern, Kriegsgefangene auf Befehl zu erschiessen, wie es durch Hitler und seine Helfer so oft befohlen worden ist. - Befehle, welchen das Prinzip der kollektiven, nationalen Verantwortung oder der “Sippenhaftung” oder aehnlicher Prinzipien zum Grunde liegt, wird der Soldat ebenfalls nicht vollziehen; er wird anstatt dessen den Vorgesetzten - - und wenn es der hoechste waere - - auf die Rechtswidrigkeit aufmerksam machen, und wenn Kameraden anwesend sind, so werden sie ihn unterstuetzen. Besteht der Vorgesetzte trotzdem auf seinem Befehl, oder versucht er gar taetlich zu werden, so verliert er dadurch alle Rechte als deutscher Soldat und ist sofort von den anwesenden deutschen Soldaten zu verhaften. - In den Instruktionsbuechern werden moeglichst viel solcher Faelle ausfuehrlichst dargestellt werden. - Wenn ein Soldat die Menschenrechte der Einwohner besetzten Gebietes verletzt, etwa pluendert, Vergewaltigungen versucht oder begeht, mutwillige oder ueberfluessige Zerstoerungen unternimmt, sich Schikanen erlaubt, so ist er durch Vorgesetzte und Kameraden ebenfalls unschaedlich zu machen. - (In den Felddienstordnungen aller Armeen der Welt sind seit Jahrhunderten solche Handlungen verboten; die Menschenrechte schaffen also in dieser Rechtssphaehre nichts Neues.) - - - - - - - An jedem ersten Mai ist eine militaerische Feier zu veranstalten, waehrend welcher die Soldaten und die Vorgesetzten an ihren Eid erinnert werden. Der im Rang hoechste der anwesenden Vorgesetzten erklaert den Anwesenden, dass die deutsche Armee die Menschenrechte sowohl schuetzt wie auch beansprucht. - Dieser Anspruch tritt an die Stelle des frueheren Anspruchs auf Eroberungen nach erklaerten Kriegen und das sogenannte Kriegsrecht gegenueber den Einwohnern besetzter Gebiete. - - - - - - - In ganz Deutschland werden Ortsgruppen des Supranationalen Gemeinwesens gebildet, von denen jede auf die obigen Grundsaetze dieser Vereinigung in jeder ihrer woechentlichen, oeffentlichen Zusammenkuenfte hinweist. - - Ich behalte mir vor, eine Vervollstaendigung dieser Grundsaetze zur Diskussion zu stellen. Ich kann dabei an eine hoechst gruendliche und ausfuehrliche Arbeit des Ehepaars Zube anschliessen. Eine bessere Arbeit auf diesem Gebiet ist meines Wissens noch nie geliefert worden. (Die meisten der darin enthaltenen Vorschlaege stammten von ihm oder waren von ihm gesammelt worden. - J.Z., 29.11.11.] - - - - - - Ich will jetzt schliessen, sonst wird dieser Brief zu lang. Ich hoffe, ihn demnaechst fortsetzen zu koennen. - - - - - - Meine Gesundheit hat sich zwar ein wenig gebessert, aber ich werde von haeufigen Muedigkeitsanfaellen geplagt, so dass ich waehrend einer Diskussion keine gute Rolle spielen wuerde. Ich moechte daher auch den kommenden Freitag (31. 12. 60) ganz meiner Wiederherstellung widmen. (Ich verbringe fast meine ganze freie Zeit entweder im Bett oder auf dem Liegestuhl.) - Einen Durchschlag dieses Briefes uebersende ich Herrn Elsoffer. - Mit bestem Gruss, U. v. Beckerath. Gez. Bth. [By now I am of the same age as he was then. - J.Z., 16.10.11.]
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Zur Freiheit, zum Frieden und zur Gerechtigkeit, A first compilation of his shorter papers and letters, in PEACE PLANS 428-466, contains many references to panarchist ideas. They have not yet been compiled. When this collection is as complete as I can make it and also digitized, I do intend to index this collection and then one could easily find all the relevant passages. Many of his writings are listed in my main catalog but I have not yet got around to extract relevant writings from this list, either. He said that was steered towards the essay by De Puydt by a reference in Wilhelm Roscher. I have not yet found that reference in Roscher's writings that are accessible to me. After monetary freedom and concern for other individual rights, panarchism was one of his main themes. - J.Z. - Ulrich von Beckerath, 1882-1969. Until he was 16, he was a Marxist. Then he encountered the writings of Theodor Hertzka and Benjamin R. Tucker and became an unusual individualist anarchist but an extremely tolerant one, towards all kinds of other reformers, after reading about De Puydt's essay, searching for it but never seeing a copy of it until I could provide him with one in 1959. I counted once the significant social reform proposals that he had made and that I had become aware of and came to over 200. Never did I meet his like again. It was my privilege to come to know him personally from 1952 to 1959 and to be in touch with him by correspondence to his death. - J.Z., 17.10.11.
BECKERATH, ULRICH von, Zur Reform des Wahlrechts - Frauenparlament 14 I 46.doc. - U.v. Beckerath, ... 14.1.1946. - An die Redaktion der "NEUE ZEITUNG", (13b) M ü n c h e n , ... - Der Redaktion überreiche ich als Anlage ein kleines Manuskript "Zur Reform des Wahlrechts" mit der Bitte es entweder in der Abteilung "Das freie Wort" oder an anderer Stelle abzudrucken. - Von der Nummer, in welcher der Abdruck erscheint, erbitte ich einige Exemplare. - Hochachtungsvoll, gez.: U. v. Beckerath. (Meines Wissens gelang es ihm nach dem Kriege nur einmal einen seiner Artikel in der angeblich freien Presse von Berlin und von West-Deutschland unterzubringen, obwohl er keine Bezahlung fuer sie verlangte. Nur ein kleiner Kreis von Korrespondenten, Besuchern und Versammlungsteilnehmern lernte ihn und sein Wissen und seiner Ideen zu schaetzen. - - - Zur Reform des Wahlrechts. - Es gibt bei uns und anderswo, wie eine traurige Erfahrung gelehrt hat, sehr viel politisch Unmuendige. Alle denkenden Politiker sind sich darueber auch einig und haben es deshalb auch abgelehnt, in Deutschland gleich nach dem Sturz des Hitler-Regimes Wahlen stattfinden zu lassen. - Man hielt es fuer richtig damit zu warten, bis das Volk einen groesseren Grad von politischer Muendigkeit erreicht haben werde. Geteilt sind die Meinungen darueber, ob unter den F r a u e n verhaeltnismaessig mehr politisch Unmuendige sind als unter den Maennern. Manche sind fest von der politischen Unmuendigkeit des allergroessten Teiles der Frauen ueberzeugt und moechten den Frauen das Wahlrecht am liebsten ganz entzogen wissen. - Ernst zu nehmende Frauen sind aus Gruenden, die man nicht ohne weiteres ablehnen kann, dagegen. Was tun? Vielleicht bietet aber die Lage, in der wir im Augenblick sind, ein ganz einfaches Mittel die entstandene Frage zu beantworten und jedenfalls sehr viele politisch Unmuendige von der Wahlurne fernzuhalten. - - Man stelle sich vor, irgend eine Stelle in Deutschland oder in China oder in Japan wuerde heute den Maennern eine Kiste Zigarren, 100 Stueck zu 15 Pfg. Vorkriegspreis, und den Frauen etwa 30 Tafeln Schokolade, jede zu 50 Pfg. Vorkriegspreis anbieten, falls der oder die Annehmende auf das Wahlrecht verzichtet. Wuerden viele von einem solchen Angebot Gebrauch machen? Wir wissen es nicht. Aber, was wir wissen, das ist, w e n n jemand davon Gebrauch machen wuerde, so waere er entweder als politisch unmuendig oder aber als politisch so desinteressiert anzusehen, das seine Wahlbeteiligung ebenso unerwuenscht waere, wie die eines politisch Unmuendigen. Wie waere es, wenn man wirklich einmal das Experiment machte? - (J.Z.: Ich schaetze das kollektive und territoriale "Wahlrecht" so gering ein, dass ich 30 Tafeln Schokolade dafuer fast immer vorziehen wuerde. Dagegen: Am Wahlrecht als Austrittsrecht des Individuums aus der territorialen Politik bin ich sehr interessiert. Fuer dieses Wahlrecht waere ich sogar bereit eine angemessene Gebuehr zu zahlen. Selbst eine grosse Gebuehr dafuer wuerde sich bei mir und bei vielen anderen bald bezahlt machen, sobald wir exterritorial autonom sein wuerden. - J.Z., 3.6.04.) - - Angenommen die oberste Wahlbehoerde erklärte: Jeder, der sich in seinen politischen Meinungen nicht gefestigt fuehlt oder sein Wahlrecht fuer wertlos haelt, der moege darauf verzichten und uns den Verzicht erklaeren. Er erweist damit der Volksgemeinschaft unzweifelhaft einen Dienst. Dieser Dienst ist sogar so bedeutend, daß er einen Gegendienst wert ist. Daher soll derjenige, der bis zum ... bei der ... Stelle die Erklaerung abgibt, dass er aus den vorgenannten Gründen auf sein Wahlrecht verzsichtet, eine Anweisung auf Lebensmittel oder Genussmittel (s. oben) erhalten. - (J.Z.: Bei Rueckerstattung des Wertes dieses Preises sollte er jedoch sein "Wahlrecht" wieder erhalten duerfen! - J.Z., 3.6.04.) - - Es fragt sich natürlich, ob zur Zelt die Behörden imstande sind, einigemassen erhebliche Mengen von Lebens- und Genussmitteln wirklich zur Verfügung zu stellen. Aber, über diese Schwierigkeit kommt man vielleicht hinweg, wenn man den Vorschlag ernstlich in Erwägung ziehen will. - - - 2.) Was das Wahlrecht der Frauen anlangt, so bietet das gegenwaertige System ganz offenbar Unzutraeglichkeiten. Es gewaehrt den Frauen auf manchen Gebieten Rechte, die fuer Frauen unwichtig sind, waehrend es ihren berechtigten Anspruechen auf andern Gebieten nicht genuegend Rechnung traegt. Wenn die Frauen in den Parlamenten und bei den Behoerden mehr Einfluss haetten, dann wuerde z.B. fuer Kinderpflege gewiss mehr getan werden als heute, und das was getan wird, wuerde wohl mit mehr Sachkenntnis getan. - - Als ein Ausweg,mit dem sowohl die Gegener wie die Befuerworter des Frauenwahlrechtes zufrieden sein koennten, erscheint die Schaffung eines besonderen Frauenparlamentes mit besonderen Rechten und Pflichten. In der Verfassung eines jeden Landes sollte ein solches Frauenparlament, zu dem nur Frauen wahlberechtigt sind, vorgesehen sein, und es sollte u.a. folgende Rechte haben: 1.) Gegen jeden Beschluss des Maennerparlamentes ein suspensives Veto einzulegen, 2.) zu jeder Gesetzesvorlage des Maennerparlamentes Abaenderungsvorschlaege einzubringen, die nach dessen Geschaeftsordnung zu behandeln waeren, 3.) zu verlangen, dass bei im Maennerparlament verhandelten Gesetzesvorlagen betreffend das Familienrecht, die Kinderpflege, den Schulunterricht der Maedchen, die Lebensmittelversorgung und Aehnliches, soviel Angehoerige des Frauenparlamentes and der Abstimmung teilnehmen koennen, wie dem Verhaeltnis der weiblichen Waehlerstimmen zu den maennlichen Waehlerstimmen entspricht. - 4.) Ohne Mitwirkung des Maennerparlamentes Anweisungen an einzelne Kommunalverwaltungen zu erlassen, welche Kinderpflege betreffen, Schulspeisungen, ferner Verbesserungen der Lebensmittelverteilung wie praktische Ausgestaltung der Formulare zu Lebensmittelkarten u. dgl. - - Einzelheiten, wie das Wahlrecht solcher Personen, die jetzt noch nicht altersmuendig sind, muessen hier uneroertert bleiben. - Bth., 14.I.1946. - (J.Z.: Ein wichtiger Punkt waere, dass alle von Frauen geleisteten direkten und indirekten Steuermittel nur vom Frauenparlament ausgegeben werde duerfen! - Jugendliche Steuerzahler koennten dann dasselbe Recht verlangen - und schliesslich alle anderen Minderheiten. Ein wichtiger Schritt in Richtung Panarchie waere getan. - J.Z., 3.6.04.)
BEDOUIN AUTONOMY: See: BECKERATH, ULRICH VON: On Panarchy.
BEGINNINGS: The greatest tyranny has the smallest beginnings. From precedents overlooked, from remonstrances despised, from grievances treated with ridicule, from powerless men oppressed with impunity and overbearing men tolerated with complacency, springs the tyrannical usage which generations of wise and good men may hereafter perceive and lament and resist in vain." - An 1846 editorial in THE LONDON TIMES. – “Principiis obstat: Resist the beginnings.” - "A small object of injustice does not mean that the injustice expressed therein can't be very great." - Kant. - Should prevention and cure ever be made as difficult as it is often made today, especially when it comes to whole political, economic and social systems, territorially imposed? Establish an ideas and talent market, multiply affordable communications & publishing channels, permit experimental freedom at the own risk and expense. Let individuals and minorities opt out of coercively and collectively created messes. Do not impose any taxes to pay for them, except among their true believers. Make all relevant information permanently, cheaply and easily accessible. Provide all the blueprints for liberty. - J.Z., n.d., & 27.9.02, 10.12.11. - PRINCIPLES, PRECEDENTS, COMPROMISES, GENUINELY CULTURAL REVOLUTION TO SPEED UP THE PROCESS OF ENLIGHTENMENT, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONISM, EXTERRITORIALITY, ONE-MAN-REVOLUTIONS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, IDEAS ARCHIVE
BEGINNINGS: We direct our affairs at the beginning, ... but being once undertaken, they guide and transport us, and we must follow them." - Montaigne, Essays, Bk.iii, ch. 10. - Unless we make a new beginning. Compare Kipling's “IF”. One does not have to persist with one's mistakes and wrongs. Once can and should learn from one's own experience. One can even learn from that of others to avoid most mistakes in the first place. However, and admittedly, actions have consequences. Those infringing the rights and liberties of others should be much more frequently foreseen - and thus avoided. - J.Z., 3.4.94. - False starts are unlikely to be fruitful and those unwilling to study the numerous and diverse false starts of others - or history - are likely to repeat the previous mistakes. The flawed as well as the correct starting methods for reforms and liberation steps should at least be as scientifically studied as are the starts of runners and the moves of football players. - J.Z., 27.9.02. – EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SELF-OWNERSHIP, FATE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, SWIMMING AGAINST THE STREAM, SELF-DETERMINATION
BEING: To be is to be related." - Charles M. Child, Individuality in Organisms. - The greatest abstraction rarely conveys the largest possible amount of useful information, e.g., for self-liberation. - J.Z., 26.7.92. While all matter, all energies, all life, all rights and liberties and all truths are related, the extreme terms like universal consciousness and solidarity would, in the absence of omnipotence, incapacitate us. We should just make sure that we and all others become free and responsible in our own individual and limited spheres of interests, knowledge and actions, corresponding to our individual limitations and capacities. – Only rulers believe they can take care of a whole population or even the world, in the worst kind of superiority complex, one that induces them to resort to the kind or coercion that territorialism allows them to engage in, even in democracies. - J.Z, 3.4.94, 8.11.08. - GENERALISATIONS, DEFINITIONS, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP, POLITICIANS, PRESIDENTS, RULERS, DIS., ABSTRACTIONS
BEITO, DAVID T., PETER ORDON & ALEXANDER TABARROK, (eds), The Voluntary City: Choice, Community, And Civil Society. http://tinyurl.com/4veav
BELGISCHER KURIER: in 1916. It reported that the Jews of Lithuania submitted to the German occupation authorities a detailed project for the recognition of Jewish people as an independent nationality although they would not claim any national territory for themselves. When Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia became independent, they adopted in their constitutions the concept of "cultural communities" which largely agreed with the Jewish proposal. Jews, Germans, Estonians and Russians had e.g. their own educational institutions and maintained them, initially, themselves. - Hint by Ulrich von Beckerath.- Estonia has, supposedly, gone furthest in this direction and seems to have kept up this tradition after the fall of the Soviet Empire. Details are not known to me. - J.Z., 12.9.04. See: BECKERATH, ULRICH VON, Panarchie – immer konkret beschreiben. - According to a search for this paper, I found out that libraries, many years ago, cleared out their paper copies, offering them for sale. But they might have microfilmed them first, so that in this format the article might be preserved, somewhere. - J.Z., 17.10.11.
BELGIUM: See: NON-TERRITORIAL FEDERALISM.
BELIEF: Too many people are not aware that their beliefs are wasters, destroyers and even killers - when applied by them or others. They hold them to be productive, creative and protective. - J.Z. 11.3.84. - Thus we should grant them the right to make their own mistakes, at their own expense and risk, or experimental freedom or freedom of action - in the form of their own exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers. That would largely keep them out of our hair - and help to diminish their numbers. Allow the communists of the former USSR to continue to wrong and torture - themselves! But do not tolerate the continued coercive subjection of any peaceful dissenter to any of their torturous institutions and procedures. To that extent I am an unrepentant Darwinist. – J.Z, 3.4.94. – Tolerance even towards those, who are intolerant only among themselves! – J.Z., 8.11.08. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, INTOLERANCE, GENUINELY INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS, NON-INTERVENTIONISM
BELIEFS: Tolerate the practice of other beliefs among their believers. - J.Z., Tolerance pamphlet. - Including the practice of whole ideologies, or whole political, economic and social systems, in tolerant and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers. - J.Z., 15.10.11.
BELIN, M., Trans.: Fetoua relatif a la condition des zimmis et particulierment des chretiens en pays musulmans, depuis l'etablissement de l'islamisme jusqu'au milieu du VIIIe siecle de l'hegire." - JOURNAL ASIATIQUE, 4th series, 18, 1851, 417-516.
BELL, TOM W., Polycentric Law in the New Millennium - http://www.tomwbell.com/writings/FAH.html
BELL, TOM W., Polycentric Law. - Tom W. Bell - Polycentric Law - HUMANE STUDIES REVIEW, Volume 7, Number 1 Winter 1991/92.
BELL, TOM W., The Jurisprudence of Polycentric Law. - Tom W. Bell - The Jurisprudence Of Polycentric Law - Unpublished Manuscript, Chicago, Illinois, August, 1992. - http://www.tomwbell.com/writings/JurisPoly.html
BELL, TOM W.: Privately Produced Law, Legal Notes No. 16 of LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE, 1991, previously in EXTROPY, III/1, Spring 1991, with bibliography, 8pp: 120, in PEACE PLANS 1539. - Privately Produced Law, 1991, 7pp, LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE, in PEACE PLANS 1052-61, sheets 479-486. www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/legan/legan016.pdf
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de & ZUBE, JOHN: Letter exchanges: 2001, 21pp: 243; - B-Z, 14.5.01: 243; - Z-B & Greg Flanagan 23.1.01: 244; - B-Z, 25.1.01: 249; - Z-B, 27.1.01: 250; -B-Z & G.F., 16.2.01: 252; - B-Z, 21.2.01: 255; - Z-B, 22.2.01: 256; - Z-B, 3.3.01: 259; - B-Z, 29.3.01: 262; - B-Z, 7.3.01: 263, in PP 1689-1693.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, A. Not to be missed is his monumental and ever growing website: www.panarchy.org - He is also establishing a Panarchy-Polyarchy Institute in Switzerland, for conferences, seminars, library purposes. - J.Z., 24.8.11.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Anarchism/Antianarchism (2011) - Anarchismo/Antianarchismo [Italiano] (2011)
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Discovering de Puydt [English] (2008) - Alla scoperta di de Puydt [Italiano]
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Education, Schooling, Learning, 1989, 12pp, with bibl.: 232, in PP 1689-1693.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, On Panarchy, A brief review and a personal view - 2009. - Libertadcarajo's Blog - Just another WordPress.com weblog. Leave a Comment Posted by Rodrigo Diaz on October 31, 2010. - An excellent short survey! - When I downloaded it, it had 5588 hits. - J.Z., 27.8.11. - Contents List: Presentation. - A Brief Review: The origin. - The development. - The other voices. - The current scene. - - A Personal View: What Panarchy is. - What Panarchy is not. - What might make panarchies sprout. - What might panarchies be. - Summing up. - GIAN PIERO de Bellis, On Panarchy. A brief review and a personal view (2009) [English] July 2009 GIAN PIERO de Bellis, Sulla Panarchia. Una breve rassegna e una visione personale (2009) [Italiano] Luglio 2009 GIAN PIERO de Bellis, A propos de la Panarchie (2009) [Français] Septembre 2009 - Probably still the best short survey! - J.Z., 21.9.11.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, PanArchy - PanArchie - PanArchia, extracts from the website, 2001, 63pp, a "Gateway to Selected Documents and Web Sites" www.panarchy.org : 165, in PP 1689-1693.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Panarchy - Polyarchy - Personarchy. - GPdB, Panarchy
- Polyarchy - Personarchy (2005) [English] - GPdB, Panarchia - Poliarchia
- Personarchia (2005) [Italiano] - Panarchy – Polyarchy – Personarchy - More
words coined to use instead of anarchy. - GPdB. - Actually, more than all
forms of anarchism are involved, also all kinds of statism or self-governance,
as long as they are all practised only among volunteers and without claiming
or upholding a territorial monopoly. - However, most of the few panarchists
that I do know are also anarchists and see in panarchism their best chance
to see their preferred kind of anarchy also realized for themselves and like-minded
people,. - J.Z., 2.10.11. - In one of his own comments to this article GPdB
stated himself: Panarchy, Polyarchy and Personarchy indicate that what is
aimed at is: a worldwide open framework free from territorial sovereignties.
- a variety of voluntary systems of personal and social organization, like
parallel autonomous societies, even within the same territory. - full freedom
of association, circulation and action for each and every human being." -
[Index] - - At least the following version deals with ten of the fundamental
principles that are involved. - J.Z., 7.11.11. - - - PANARCHY - POLYARCHY
- PERSONARCHY (2005) - Note - A group of individuals, deeply dissatisfied
with the dominant mental attitudes and material practices based on compulsory
conformity to the majority and the restriction of personal choices, have
drafted a series of principles that they intend to present to everybody interested
in finding a way out of the present individual subjection and apathy. - The
principles are presented under the name of Panarchy – Polyarchy – Personarchy.
- Panarchy, Polyarchy and Personarchy indicate that, what is aimed at is
- a worldwide open framework free from territorial sovereignties. - a variety
of voluntary systems of personal and social organization, like parallel autonomous
societies, even within the same territory. - full freedom of association,
circulation and action for each and every human being. The principles have
been sketched under the following headings: 1. Aterritorialism - 2. Self-rule
- 3. Freedom of association - freedom of disassociation - 4. Voluntary engagements
- voluntary contributions - 5. Personal liberties - personal responsibilities
- 6. Freedom to act (enterprise) - 7. Freedom to interact (exchange) - 8.
Choices (utilities – services -- agencies) - 9. Variety - optionality - discretionarity
- 10. Cosmopolitanism - localism - personalism - - - 1. Aterritorialism -
A territory comprises a large and various set of natural and human-made resources
that constitute the so-called world common heritage. This ought to be like
an open resource for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations,
i.e. of all people from all lands. - Territorial sovereignty or territorialism
is the pretence of the rightfulness of exclusive sovereignty (e.g. national
state sovereignty) by some entity. Aterritorialism means the non-recognition
of any claim to territorial dominance by any power, institutional or not.
- According to aterritorialism, no so-called sovereign power can rightfully
appropriate a whole continent, country or region and dictate rules that are
binding for all the people living on the same territory, nor can he deny
the use of or access to a land, a river, a passageway or any territorial
resource, being those part of the common heritage. - At the same time, nobody
should infringe the property rights of individuals or groups. The use of
and access to their properties (e.g. a building, a specific tract of land,
a. cultivated field, etc.) is regulated directly by the owners (individuals,
communities) and the rules affect only the owners and those who have been
granted use-access. These property rights and property rules are valid only
in so far as they do not become impositions spreading out into the common
heritage. - The only general rules acceptable and desirable in a territory
belonging to the common heritage are norms of expediency (e.g. driving on
the left or on the right) and health regulations (e.g. standards of hygiene).
- The aim of those advocating aterritorialism is to achieve, in due time
and through a voluntary process, the overall extinction of every territorial
sovereignty and the promotion of self-rule. - - - 2. Self-rule - A rule is
generally a command by or to a person. The basic rules of social interaction
are usually internalized at an early age by the human being as long as the
commands are sympathetic to human nature and to the protection/promotion
of the human being. - - It is almost impossible for basic rules to be fairly
and successfully imposed from the outside. Imposed rules are likely to generate
continuous frictions leading, sooner or later, to bloody clashes. - The healthy
condition (ethical and rational) is either that of self-rule (self-determination)
or one leading to self-rule. - Self-rule means that is not for a king or
a majority (through an elected assembly) or anybody else to decide about
social and economic issues but is up to the individuals through their free
choices and continuous-voluntary adjustments to reality. The despotism of
one or the despotism of many (even a large majority) can generate the identical
negative results: the subjection of the individual and his moral misery and
personal helplessness. - Self-rule is, in this respect, the way most conducive
to true personal development (moral, mental, material) and full social acceptance
(universal reciprocal respect). - The concept and practice of self-rule include,
clearly, also the option of appointing self-chosen rulers (as in a representative
democracy) for those who prefer to be exempt from the process and effort
of decision-making. The only difference with current representative democracy,
albeit a substantial one, is that in the case of genuine self-rule the decisions
taken by the elected representatives will affect only those who have elected
them and will not concern those who have chosen other representatives for
their voluntary communities or those who want to take autonomous decisions
without any delegation of power. - Self-rule should then make room to all
possible form of social and political representation or non-representation
and people should consider legitimate and be bound only by the decisions
of whatever political, social, philosophical group or other they might be
members. - The aim is to stop political intolerance that imposes on everybody
the will of the majority (or of a strong ruler or a strong minority) in the
form of state policy. This is the same mass opium and oppression that once
appeared as religious intolerance in the form of a state religion. - - Presently,
self-rule is allowed in some societies only regarding some very personal
matters like religious practices or sexual orientations. - For the rest the
tyranny of the majority dominates, that is, largely, the power of pressure
groups, and vested interests prevailing over manipulated masses, isolated
minority groups and dispersed individuals. - Self-rule means in essence that:
- the norms affecting primarily the life of an individual (education, health,
economic activities, travel, insurance, retirement, etc.) are completely
subject to the choice of the individual; - the norms regulating primarily
the life of the individual within a community and between communities are
directly established and administered by the individual members of the community
affected by those norms or by representatives voluntarily appointed and are
accepted by all members. - An essential pre-condition for the compliance
by the individual of communitarian norms concerning his social life is the
existence of personal freedom of association to or disassociation from any
community. - - - 3. Freedom of association - freedom of disassociation -
Freedom of association means that any reasoning individual can freely decide
to which societal group/groups he/she wants to be member. - The freedom of
association cannot be separated from the freedom of disassociation. That
means that every person can opt out of the community he has joined whenever
he wishes to do so, after having absolved any existing contractual obligation
previously voluntarily accepted. - However, if the individual has been victimized
by the community or essential contractual obligations towards him have been
broken, the member can disassociate from the group without any delay or charge
and join or establish a new community. - Everybody should also be free to
live as quite autonomous human being bound only by his contractual engagements
and by the respect for the rights and liberties of others. - To no one should
be automatically ascribed any nationality or religion or membership in any
institution (state, church, guild) or be attributed any role or status (like
in a caste or class system) without his prior individual choice and consent.
- The automatic ascription to a national group under national rulers is the
equivalent, in our time, to the attribution of the status of servant under
the feudal master for the newborns within the feudal domain. - The realization
of these two freedoms (association – disassociation) would, at long last,
dispose of any feudalist and absolutist remnants still operating under territorial
statism. - - The extensive use of the technologies of communication and transport
is already making a mockery of any pretension or illusion to forcibly restrict
the associations to individuals belonging to territorial groups under the
control of the so-called nation state. - The necessary complement to the
freedom of association – disassociation and a more dynamic implementation
of it consists in the voluntary engagements – voluntary contributions to
the group(s) of which one is member. - - - 4. Voluntary engagements - voluntary
contributions - Voluntary engagements and voluntary contributions mean active
involvement and active support for the group or community chosen by an individual.
- The implementation of these two principles should lead to the extinction
of any forced demand on the part of any power, as for instance compulsory
enrolment (e.g. military conscription) or compulsory exaction (e.g. fiscal
impositions). - In other words, compulsory involvement and compulsory taxes
are to be replaced by voluntary engagements and voluntary contributions.
- Nobody should be forced to do anything or contribute to anything he/she
does not approve of, beyond the respect of voluntarily agreed contracts.
Even the group to whom one has associated himself cannot ask compulsorily
for engagements and contributions unless those were pre-conditions for membership.
In that case the individual who does not want any longer to fulfil those
obligations can disassociate from the group. - Voluntary engagements and
voluntary contributions are the centrepieces of communities based on individuals
who decide the degree and type of power that the community can exert on them
(from total voluntary submission to personal unrestricted autonomy). - The
focus is then not on the group (the collective will), as in the feudal or
neo-feudal (i.e. statist) society, but on the individual (the personal will).
- For this reason, whatever decisions the individual takes concerning his
personal and social sphere (from full autonomy = voluntary independence,
to full heteronomy = voluntary submission) paramount importance has to be
attributed to personal liberties (of choice) and personal responsibilities
(for consequences). - - - 5. Personal liberties - personal responsibilities
- The true essence and the rightful expectations of every human being are
to be free from impositions and limitations unless they are voluntarily and
willingly accepted. - This means also that nobody may infringe anybody's
choices whenever they are compatible with anybody else's freedom. External
interventions are not acceptable even if they are made (or said to be made)
in the name of the so-called public interest or on behalf of the person's
hypothetical well-being. Every adult human being should be the arbiter of
his own interest and well-being. - The other side of personal liberty is
personal responsibility for the decisions undertaken by each individual.
This means that the consequences (success or failure) of the own actions
or omissions fall on the individual and cannot be forcibly shared with or
imposed upon somebody else. - The practice of personal liberties (of choices)
and personal responsibilities (for consequences) is the only known way to
initiate and achieve a sound learning process for the human beings. - There
is no rational reason or historical experience that should convince any human
being to abdicate his own liberties and responsibilities. As the ancients
said, every human being is the maker of his own fortune (or misfortune).
- - Contrary to all this, territorial statism acts according to the principles
of limited freedom and collective responsibility. They arose from the delegation
of decisions to a few men in power, generating on one side general irresponsibility
and on the other side unjustifiable collective responsibility for the actions
of these few leaders. - This is the same ill-logic or sick logic implemented
by terrorist groups when they strike against unarmed individuals (in New
York, Madrid, Paris, Moscow, etc.). This ill-logic is also extensively practiced
by many states that act as the worst terrorist groups when they drop bombs
on a population (in Coventry, Dresden, Hiroshima, Grozny, and in so many
other places) that happens to live on the "wrong" side of a supposed
divide. - The reality that animates personal liberties and underlies personal
responsibilities can be summarized in the social and economic sphere by two
basic principles of civilization: the freedom to act (enterprise) and the
freedom to interact (exchange). - - - 6. Freedom to act (enterprise) - Freedom
to act means that there are no external interferences of any type (positive
or negative) on the enterprising activities of anyone by anyone. In other
words, no one can get in the way of any producer unless it is for the purpose
of stopping a damage or achieving an indemnity. - Individuals (singularly
or associated) are very well capable of looking or willing to learn how to
look after their own interests, if institutional restrictions and manipulations
do not render this ability and effort useless and vain or even outlaw such
self-help endeavours. - - One of the most blatant restrictions is in the
form of occupational licensures introduced by the state (in direct furtherance
of feudal practices) in order to perpetuate a caste or class system. These
feudal remnants are kept with the deceitful excuse of protecting producers
and consumers but in reality with the aim of favouring the strong (organised
lobbies) and exploiting the weak (isolated citizens). - For this reason the
entry into an institutional register of producers (workers, professionals)
should be left to the free decision of the interested parties and should
not be a pre-requisite for getting a job or practicing an activity. What
is only necessary is the availability of all sorts of relevant information
concerning producers and products (goods and services). - Freedom to act
requires then to get rid of all state compulsory interventions that lead
only to a condition of sectorial favouritism and general dependency, besides
damaging enterprising producers and thrifty consumers. - The necessary complementary
principle to the freedom to act (enterprise) is the freedom to interact (exchange).
- - - 7. Freedom to interact (exchange) - Freedom to interact means the abolition
of every state manufactured barrier (tariffs, quotas, passports, visas, censorship,
etc.) to the freedom of movement by individuals and of exchanges among individuals
and groups, for goods, services, and ideas. - The freedom of exchange is
achievable only through: - - the full freedom of information and communication,
making possible for everybody to participate unhampered in a flow of images,
sounds and concepts. - - the full freedom of trade and full freedom for volunteers
to experiment with their own exchange media, value standard, clearing and
credit system. - - the full freedom of movement because the world common
heritage belongs to all living beings and should not be monopolized by the
nation states and divided into national or supranational territorial boxes.
- - - The freedom to interact is compatible with the existence of secluded
enclaves of people who do not want to mingle with anybody and who prefer
to live in a closed society. Closed communities and communities which want
to keep to traditional life styles do have the right not to be disturbed
and trampled on. Nobody should interfere in the decisions voluntary assumed
by the members of those communities. - - What should eventually be overcome
is the fixing of border by any power, affecting indistinctively large populations
or concerning spaces that are common heritage of all living creatures. For
this reason, closed societies and cultural or economic protectionism cannot
extend to areas so big as to forcibly include people who do not share these
views and practices. - Any imposition of political, economic and social apartheid
(to be distinguished from voluntary separateness) is not only a crime against
humanity; it is also an act totally at odd with current technology (of transport
and communication) and, especially, with the natural desire of exploration
and self- improvement that has always characterized the human being. - -
In order that every individual be allowed to shape his life according to
his own views we need a full range of choices with respect to all kinds of
utilities, services and agencies, especially those so far monopolized by
territorial states. - - - 8. Choices (utilities – services - agencies) -
Individuals and communities should be free to organize for themselves or
to chose among freely competing providers, concerning: - utilities: gas,
water, electricity, telephone, etc. - - services: educational, medical, for
retirement, etc. - - agencies: for protection, for justice, etc. - - - Only
in recent times the way has been opened for a free choice in utilities providers,
with unquestionable benefits for the consumers. There is no sensible justification
for not continuing the process, finally reaching all sorts of services and
agencies still under state monopoly. - - In societies characterized by choices,
everybody should be committed to pay only for the services he wants and uses
or for the package deal of services that he and the community to which he
is member have contracted for. Further contributions should be made only
on a voluntary basis, according to the assessments and preferences of the
individual. - - The sooner we realize that self-help and free choice between
different providers in every field can produce better services at a better
price, the sooner we will put an end to the mental and material hold that
the states have exerted on the provision of (quite often appalling) services,
compulsory financed by everybody irrespective of their quality and desirability.
- - One of the central aspects of free choice is the setting and running
of voluntary protective agencies for assisting in providing security and
resolving controversies. - - The course of history has shown over and over
again that when the individuals rely for their protection on territorial
monopolistic organizations (the army, the police, the judiciary) over which
they do not have any control whatsoever or a very minimal one, their security
and freedom is at great risk. - For this reason individuals and communities
will replace the state monopolistic agencies with a number of different protective
agencies, with very limited and circumscribed power and under the control
of the individuals, in the same way as people control the performance of
a utility provider and can change it if unsatisfied. - These protective agencies,
to which everybody could contribute in various ways, are meant to provide
help and facilitate self-help for the safeguard of life, the respect of contracts
and the prevention of any infringement of personal freedom. - Apart from
that, anything goes, that is variety, optionality, and discretionarity. -
- - 9. Variety - optionality - discretionarity - The basic principles here
advocated characterizing the life of individuals and communities are those
of: - - variety (many different life styles and forms of social, economical
and political organization). - - optionality (existence of many actual and
potential choices in all fields). - - discretionarity (individual free-will
and personal power of decision). - - - These principles can be fully implemented
only after the abolition of all monopolistic territorial powers and in the
presence of free competition and cooperation in political, social and economic
communities and activities. - - Competition and cooperation are the two sides
of the same coin; they strengthen those who practice it (producers, performers,
etc.) and benefit those who enjoy the results of it (e.g. consumers, spectators,
etc.). Cooperation in total absence of competition means a rigged game and
a static society; competition in total absence of cooperation means a paranoiac
behaviour and a destructive society. - - An essential condition for the proper
interplay of competition and cooperation is the freedom of movement of individuals,
ideas, goods and services.
At the same time, as already pointed out, the principles of variety - optionality - discretionarity demand that everybody accept and respect also those communities whose members voluntarily decide to live in a way that does not allow, internally, for the free movement of individuals, ideas, goods and services. - - The solution, as usual, is to accommodate every possible type and style of life in every kind of political, economic and social community of volunteers (variety), enhancing the range of choices of the individuals (optionality) and accepting the autonomous decisions of each and everyone concerning their own lives (discretionarity). - This leads to the parallel development of cosmopolitanism, localism and personalism. - - - 10. Cosmopolitanism - localism - personalism - Cosmopolitanism, localism and personalism are views and ways of life that are variously shared by all human beings. - We should accept every possible mix or lack of mix by every individual as long as it results from his/her own voluntary, i.e. not imposed, choices. - In other words, acknowledging the existence of a multiplicity and variety of communities and individuals, each free to develop specific distinctive features, means to accept and respect every possible type and style of freedom. - This includes also, for reasons of logical and factual consistency, the freedom not to be free, e.g. the freedom to be under a protective master or to live within restrictive barriers. - - Love of freedom and fear of freedom must both find expression at a personal level and through political and social organizations (i.e. parallel societies even within the same territory), with nobody imposing one or the other upon dissenters but everybody accepting or realizing only for himself what he thinks most suitable and desirable. - In other words: To each the government or non-governmental society of his/her choice. - - For every human being, freedom consists only in acting according to his own inclinations and desires without being forced or manipulated by anybody and without forcing or manipulating anybody. For some, freedom can be the acceptance of voluntary servitude or seclusion in the name of a faith or belief or for any personal conviction and motivation. - - The only aspect that is not acceptable is to forcibly subject unwilling individuals, even if this is presented under the deceitful qualifications of democracy, public interest, national sovereignty or, alas, the promotion of personal freedom and welfare. - The individuals imbued with the ideology of territorial statism believe, consciously or unconsciously, that it is acceptable and highly recommendable to force all people in a territory to be identically free or equally un-free. - This is the source of every irrational, intolerant and incapacitating behaviour.
We should allow full development to variety, optionality and discretionarity, i.e. the plurality of forms and ways of thinking and behaving according to one's own desires and choices. - This would result in the flourishing of cosmopolitanism, localism, and personalism to suit every human being. - Only then we will achieve a long overdue aspiration: To each according to his own will - desires, From each according to his own evaluations - decisions. - - In a not so distant past many considered religious freedom for the dissenters and social emancipation for the powerless as a sure way towards immorality and chaos. - Presently some or many hold the same views as regard to the freedom of the individuals from territorial state sovereignty and the attainment of universal personal empowerment. - On the contrary, we think that is not only desirable but also advisable that the principles of religious tolerance should be extended to include, especially, political tolerance. The acceptance of many different churches within the same territory should be paralleled by the acceptance of many co-existing governments and non-governmental communities, each one presiding and regulating those who have chosen them and feel represented by them. Given the fact that the basic rules of civility are universal (i.e. not based on or determined by territorial governments) and are likely to continue prevailing amongst civilized individuals, and that the eventual existence of individuals who commit crimes can still be dealt by the various communities through their various aterritorial governments and protective agencies, there seems to be no obstacle why experiments of political freedom cannot be undertaken with the same success of the ones that promoted religious freedom. The only obstacles are in the grooves of our own mind and the blinkers put around our own eyes. - - For all these reasons, if you have an open mind and your mental and perceptual eyesight is strong and sharp, you should explore and contribute to the principles and practices of Panarchy – Polyarchy – Personarchy [Index]
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Polyarchy - A Paradigm, From territorial sovereignty to personal seigniory. 2002 - [Index] - Polyarchy: a paradigm - Replace the nation-state paradigm with polyarchy.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Polyarchy & Panarchism: See his two e-mail suggestions on an introductory essay on panarchism. He obtained a copy of the French original essay by de PUYDT, after I had long lost mine. He digitized it, translated it into Italian, also achieved a Spanish translation and discusses on his website in detail his closely related and original polyarchic ideas, before he ever heard of or read about panarchy, bringing also some related texts by others, e.g. Kropotkin, whom I had until then not classed as an panarchist, although his "Mutual Aid" brings e.g. the practical example of the Cof or Sof of the Berbers. - J.Z., 28.8.04.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Polyarchy: A Manifesto, 2,000, 164 pp, with bibliography & abstracts: 1, in PEACE PLANS 1689-1693. - www.panarchy.org/ - www.polyarchy.org - Polyarchy: a manifesto - "A virus has sprung up and spread throughout the world during the 20th century. - It has taken hold of people's minds and bodies, it has affected attitudes and directed actions, it has dominated the life and marked the death of individuals and communities. - The name of this virus is statism." – I rather call it “territorial statism”, for any form of exterritorial statism, for volunteers only, is already panarchistic. – J.Z., 10.12.11.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Polyarchy: documents. To unmask/understand Statism - to conceive/construct Polyarchy, 2000/2001, 130 pp: 35, in PP 1689-1693. (List of Sources, by authors, short list, 3pp: 36. Contents of Sources, Abstracts and Comments, Reference to Quotations, long list, 112pp, alphabetical, by topics: 39. Partly in French. List of Topics, alphabetical., 1p: 35. BASTA, Bisogna Abolire lo Stato! 2000/2001, List of Contents only, headings leading directly to the sites. Not yet downloaded and reproduced here, because it is in Italian. 1p: 150. Sources: Selected Texts and Documents, 14pp, titles, abstract and comments: 151. New additions to the Sources, 1p: 163.)
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Polyarchy: essays on post-statism. - Polyarchy: essays on post-statism - "On the Social Sciences as Social Scam and the Social Scientists as Social Scoundrels"
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Problemistics. Selected Tools, References, Subjects, List of links only. URL list not added, Bookshops, Libraries, Books, Bibliographies, e-texts, with URLs stated, 2000, 6pp: 227, in PP 1689-1693.
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, Scenarios for the Future, 2006, http://www.butterbach.net/dimpress.htm http://www.panarchy.net/
BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, to ZUBE, JOHN & Z.B. 21.6.01, 1p: 272, in PP 1689-1693.
BELLIS, GIAN-PIERO de, PanArchy - PanArchie - PanArchia 2001 - 2003, www.panarchy.org - A Gateway to Selected Documents & Web Sites: Panarchy - Panarchie - Panarchia: P. E. de Puydt, Panarchie (1860) [Français] - P. E. de Puydt, Panarchy (1860) [English - P. E. de Puydt, Panarchie (1860) [Deutsch] - P. E. de Puydt, Panarchia (1860) [Italiano] - - Max Nettlau, Panarchy. A forgotten idea of 1860 (1909) [English] - Max Nettlau, Panarquia. Una olvidada idea de 1860 (1909) [Español] - Anonymous, Democracy with a small "d" (1962) [English] - John Zube, Some Panarchistic Notions (1996) [English] - John Zube, Thoughts for freedom (1972-2002) [English] - BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de, PanArchy - PanArchie - PanArchia, extracts from the website, 2001, 63pp, a "Gateway to Selected Documents and Web Sites" www.panarchy.org : 165, in PP 1689-1693.
BELLOC, HILAIRE: The Jews, Constable & Co. Ltd., London, Bombay, Sydney, 1922. He favoured a separate Jewish nationality. - To be expressed territorially or exterritorially? - J.Z., 28.8.04.
BELONGING: You belong ..." - "I belong where I want to be." - From a film advertised on TV, Capital, 1.1.93. - CHOICE, MEMBERSHIP, VOLUNTARISM, MIGRATION, PLACE, STATUS, POSITION, ASSOCIATIONISM, SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSION, ALLEGIANCE
BELSHAW, CYRIL S.: Traditional Exchange and Modern Markets, Prentice Hall, 1965, 149pp, indexed, JZL. Page 70: "The social structure of the Afikpo Ibo is very different from that of Dahomey. Traditionally, there was no state system, but a crisscrossing of age sets and patrilineages and a regional organization of village groups without centralized political authority. Men and women shared agricultural duties, and men were involved in military and ritual roles. Both men and women entered the market, which, around the turn of the century, took place on special days during which there was a general respite from agricultural work." Pages 113/114: "Patterning, then, is indubitably a foundation of modern economies, and it does not have to be of the individualistic pure competition kind. But does it have to be just one pattern in any given society? ... One might also argue that if a modern society is to be dynamically oriented it must accommodate and make use of diversity in value orientation. Innovation consists in the rearrangement of old ideas and components of knowledge more than it does in pure discovery. The more a society is diversified, the more rapid its rate of innovation."
BEN-SASSON, H. H.: Editor, A History of the Jewish People, by leading scholars at the Hebrew University Jerusalem, Harvard U.P., Cambridge, 1969, 1976, bibl., indexed, 1170pp, JZL. - This monumental work contains many relevant essays, numerous references to Jewish autonomy and, especially on 912/913 some information on those territorialists who did not merely aspire to separate territories for Jews, in Palestine or somewhere else. The editor's own Part V contains at least 6 relevant sections, e.g: 28, The Flowering of Centralized Leadership and the Rise of Local Leadership, & 36: Jewish Autonomy from the Black Death to the Reformation, & 40: Autonomy: Institutions and Trends.
BEN-SASSON, H. H.: Hagut Vehanhagah, The Social Theories of the Jews of Poland in the Late Middle Ages, Jerusalem, 1960, in Hebrew, on self-government.
BEN-SASSON, H. H.: Jewish Reflection on Nationhood in the 12th Century, in E. ROSENTHAL, ed., P'raqim, Yearbook of the Schoken Institute for Jewish Research of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, vol. II, Jerusalem, 1969-74, pp 145-218, in Hebrew.
BEN-SASSON, H. H.: Sabbath Observance Laws in Poland and their Economic and Social Context, ZION, 21, 1956, 183-206, in Hebrew, on self-government.
BEN-SASSON, H. H.: The Social Teaching of R. Johanan Luria, ZION, 27, 1962, 166-98, in Hebrew, on self-government.
BEN-SASSON, H. H.: The urban Community in Jewish and General History and in Relation to Kiddush Hashem, Jerusalem, 1968, pp 161-78, in Hebrew, on self-government.
BEN-ZVI, Y.: Erez Yisrael under Ottoman Rule, Jerusalem, 1967, pp 3-261, in Hebrew.
BENAIAHU, M.: The Renewal of Semikhah, in Safed, in S.W. Baron, ed., I, Baer Jubilee Volume, Jerusalem, 1960, pp 248-69, in Hebrew, on self-government.
BENSON, BRUCE L., Amazon.com offers presently quite a few books on secession. Most are favoring only territorial secession but some do go beyond it. - J.Z., 27.8.11. - E.g.: Secession, State, and Liberty [Paperback], David Gordon (Editor), 4.7 out of 5 stars See all reviews (7 customer reviews) | Like (0) $29.95 & this item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping -25 of 27 people found the following review helpful: 5.0 out of 5 stars - Secession is dead only if might makes right, August 19, 2002, By Andrew S. Rogers (Stamford, Connecticut) - See all my reviews - (TOP 500 REVIEWER) - (VINE VOICE) - (REAL NAME) - As editor David Gordon notes in his introduction, secession may be the most under-theorized concept in political science. - - The last essay, Bruce Benson's look at arbitration as an alternative to state-run judicial systems in commerce and trade, provides a true-life example of a type of modern individual "secession," and recalls Mises' suggestion (quoted by several contributors) that the right to secession can ultimately be carried down to the community, home, and even individual level. Murray Rothbard reinforces this idea in "Nations by Consent: Decomposing the Nation State." - SECESSION
BENSON, BRUCE L., Customary Law with Private Means of Resolving Disputes and Dispensing Justice: A Description of a Modern System of Law and Order without State Coercion". 1990. THE JOURNAL OF LIBERTARIAN STUDIES, Vol. IX, No. 2 (Fall 1990). Available on-line at http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/9_2/9_2_2.pdf.
BENSON, BRUCE L., Da dove viene la legge. Da dove viene la legge [Italiano] (1997)
BENSON, BRUCE L., Enforcement of Private Property Rights in Primitive Societies: Law without Government. - Bruce L. Benson - Enforcement of Private Property Rights in PrimitiveSocieties: Law without Government (pdf) - Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 9, Num. 1, 1989.
BENSON, BRUCE L., Reciprocal Exchange as the Basis for Recognition of Law: Examples from American History. - Bruce L. Benson - Reciprocal Exchange as the Basis for Recognition Of Law: Examples from American History (pdf) - Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 10, Num. 1, 1991.
BENSON, BRUCE L., Restitution in Theory and Practice. - Bruce L. Benson - Restitution in Theory and Practice (pdf) - Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1996.
BENSON, BRUCE L., The Enterprise of Law: Justice Without the State - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/09...glance&n=283155 - http://tinyurl.com/y8nn6b
BENSON, BRUCE L., To Serve and Protect: Privatization and Community in Criminal Justice. - Bruce Benson - To Serve and Protect: Privatization and Community in Criminal Justice - New York University Press, 1998. - Alas, many justice systems have so far, indeed, been more or less criminal in e.g. prosecuting inherently self-responsible and innocent actions, which the territorial statists disliked. Justice towards genuine criminals with involuntary victims should not be called "criminal justice". - J.Z., 5.10.11.
BERBERS: Sof or Cof system for competing protective communities, See: Peace Promotion among the Berbers - through Exterritorial Institutions and Voluntary Associations, plan 201, pages 23 - 24, in ON PANARCHY III, in PEACE PLANS 507. - ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA: 1958: Kabyles, contains a note on the characteristic pairing of their protective associations for political activities, the "SOF" OR "COF". - See also PEACE PLANS No. 12, plan 201. – Kropotkin mentioned them in his “Mutual Aid”. - See: COF.
BERLIN WALL: The Berlin Wall forces the Soviets to admit that an imported government by coercion provides no platform stable enough for carrying on true political competition and economic coexistence with the West." - Willy Brandt. - True and quite free political, economic and social system competition and peaceful coexistence would have to include that by exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers. Whether a despotism is imported or not does not matter. A native despotism is just as bad. What is wrong with it is that individuals are forced to buy it and to submit to it. They are not free to reject it, for themselves. Willy Brandt's "representative democratic" government was neither democratic nor representative enough to allow his subjects this liberty, either. All territorial governments leave to their dissenters only the options of emigration, escape or submission. - J.Z., 5.4.89, 7.4.94, 10.12.11.
BERLIN WALL: The Wall is itself so gross an insult to human dignity, such a blatant admission of the moral bankruptcy of the communist regimes of the world that it doesn't bear discussing. I don't believe that I could possibly have anything in common with anyone who, seeing, or knowing of The Wall, feels anything but moral indignation bordering on pure rage at its builders.” - E. B. Reith, THE CONNECTION 117, p.62 - What is here rightly said against the Berlin Wall can, to some extent, be rightly said on any imposed border or frontiers - and against any legally or illegally established and maintained monopoly. It should have been blown down, again and again, by freedom lovers from the West. - J.Z., 7.4.94.
BERLIN, ISAIAH, Four Essays on Liberty, Four Essays on Liberty by Isaiah Berlin - SPONTANEOUS COMMUNITIES, DECONSTRUCTING "POSITIVE FREEDOM": Deconstructing 'Positive Freedom' - If this article interested you, you might like to buy this book - Four Essays on Liberty by Isaiah Berlin - Positive freedom, as understood by some left-libertarians and Marxists differs profoundly from our usual understanding of the word ‘freedom’. - Such ‘freedom’ is apparently only to be found after the individual has the opportunity to evaluate his or her preferences along with the rest of society and arrive at his or her ‘true’ ones as opposed to ‘merely’ the revealed preferences he or she would be free to pursue in a classical liberal society. - The distinction between ‘revealed’ preferences and ‘true’ preferences is intuitively appealing, but it is another thing altogether to translate this distinction into political prescriptions – who decides what are the true and what are the revealed preferences? Is it ‘the majority rules’ or is unanimity required? How does one define ‘majority’ and ‘unanimity’ if the people who are to comprise the set of deliberators may have had preferences ‘imposed’ upon them by the previous social order? Does that mean that the Marxist anointed get multiple votes? - You can see where this is heading. Defining away revealed preferences as not being the true ones but ones ‘coerced’ upon individuals can become a rationale for taking away the liberties of individuals in order to set them free (voila deconstruction!). This will always be the result despite the best intentions of libertarian Marxists. One can see why Marxism in practice has led not to the withering away of the State (something I would applaud if it did) and the flourishing of civil society, but quite the opposite. - This is an imperfect world and the best way one can make people see their ‘real’ preferences is through private persuasion within a free social order where the boundaries of individual autonomy are protection from coercion by a constitutionally limited government as minarchists see it, or perhaps even through the market itself, as some free market anarchists think is feasible. - (Underlining by me: J.Z.) There are limits to the freedoms you can demand for yourself morally speaking. These limits are defined by your reciprocal duties to respect other individuals’ boundaries of autonomy. Without this reciprocity, the freedoms you claim for yourself would be self-defeating. The duty of reciprocation I have outlined here is the minimum content of social engagement under a libertarian ethic, not the maximum content, which is why the Rousseauian/Marxist portrait of classical liberalism as a force for the atomisation of individuals is a blatant caricature. - Far from being at odds with ‘communitarianism’, classical liberalism provides the maximal space for the freedom of association necessary for spontaneous communities to emerge. - Here he came at least close to panarchism, without being explicit about the required details. Classical liberalism, to my knowledge, only rarely and clearly enough defended the right of individuals and minorities to secede and associate under full exterritorial autonomy for whatever ideals they have in common. - J.Z., 27.10.11. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, RECIPROCITY, LIBERTARIAN ETHICS, VOLUNTARISM, FREE MARKET ANARCHISM, ANARCHO-CAPITALISM, PANARCHISM
BERMAN, HAROLD J., Law and Revolution: the Formation of the Western Legal Tradition. (Harvard University Press, 1983). - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/06...glance&n=283155 - „Berman describes how during the middle ages in Europe, people were ruled not so much by law fitting each person, rather than law fitting all persons in the territory, but by a multiplicity of legal codes, each applicable to a certain kind of actions, things, or relationships: hence, a man might be bound by manorial law, feudal law, town law, merchant law, royal law, canon law, folk law, and so forth, depending on the circumstances and the matter at issue. In a way, this legal regime was even more "decentralized" than the extraterritoriality that you describe.“ – Robert Higgs, The Independence Institute, to Brenda Ship, Jan. 05. – Brenda Ships [RCBJ] commented: „I'm surprised he wrote „even more ‚decentralized’ than the extraterritoriality that you describe. It is not a variety of imposed laws that is desirable, but freedom to pick the laws you like and thereby be bound by them. Maybe he meant that, but that's not evident.“ – See also under MIDDLE AGES, MEDIEVAL LAW, STATUS LAW.
BERTALANFFY, LUDWIG von, General Systems Theory, Ludwig von Bertalanffy: General System Theory (1968) – Note: Ludwig von Bertalanffy (1901-1972) has been on of the most acute minds of the XX century. Here is a miscellanea of passages from his General System ... www.panarchy.org/vonbertalanffy/systems.1968.html - 19k - Cached - Similar pages More results from www.panarchy.org »
BEST POSSIBLE GOVERNMENT? May the best man win!” is a fair wish for most competitions. It is rarely fulfilled, even in democracies or republics. On the contrary and almost inevitably, by the nature of the selection processes involved and their participants, even there the worst tend to get to the top. [Hayek’s finding in “The Road to Serfdom”.] - But this wish will be realized, subjectively and soon, under panarchy and also, objectively, for the best men or best systems. However, this can happen, regularly, not merely accidentally and rarely, only under panarchy, and, in the long run, with a high degree of certainty. For the good systems will peacefully and gradually, step by step, via one-man “revolutions” or individual consumer choices and acceptances, win more and more consumer and client support, while the worst and inferior systems will tend to lose more and more supporters and individual and free rejections and, while they are still continued, they will be a burden and a risk for their voluntary supporters only. - - While the most successful panarchist examples will be attractive to potential new members, they worst ones will also supply an excellent public service, although only as instructive deterrent examples for outside observers and as practical experiences for the participating believers, until they cease to be true believers. Then the refutation of and evidence against flawed systems, institutions and experiments can be and will be carried out under the best possible condition, namely, under support by volunteers only, and freedom to act self-responsibly, in the absence of any significant internal opposition, apart from the remaining doubts or objections still occasionally raised even among the own voluntary members. They will then never have any reason to blame non-members or outsiders for the failures resulting from their own free choices, decisions and actions. – Consumer sovereignty in this sphere, too, will be realized. May the buyer beware! At most they can then only hold their own leaders or misleaders responsible. If they hang them or otherwise torture them to death, I for one would not blame them. Let the misleaders beware! - J.Z., n.d. However, free enterprise also for the misleaders – but under severe restrictions by multiple other enterprises, all of them exterritorially autonomous and under personal law, establishing and maintaining, between them, a free market even for all kinds of political, economic and social systems with only territorially imposed systems exempted from this competition because these are by their very nature non-competitive, coercive, centralistic and monopolistic and as such have to become finally abolished. Only as self-defeating “games” among their true believers can their non-territorial practices then be continued – exclusively at their risk and expense, providing laughs for outsiders. – J.Z. 30.11.11.
BEST VS. GOOD: The best is the enemy of the good." - Voltaire. - And the good is the enemy of the best. E.g., many people believe that democracy is already the ideal political form, in spite of its compulsory membership and uniformity based upon the territorial, constitutional, legislative, juridical, police, defence and monetary monopolies involved. All, the bad, the indifferent and the good and the best, should be in free competition with each other, according to individual choice. Neither the worst nor the best choices, nor any in-between one, should be territorially imposed or maintained. - J.Z., 7.4.94. – TERRITORIALISM VS. INDIVIDUAL CHOICE
BETTING AGAINST GOVERNMENT POLICIES: If the government is wrong in what it is doing there must be a way for an individual to profit by betting against it." - Harry Brown. - Bet against government policies! - J.Z. Not only to make a profit, but upon their wrongfulness and or uselessness or harmfulness sooner or later becoming provable and upon wrong and harmful side-effects, together with the costs, outweighing the supposed advantages. Party representatives should also be induced to engage in such bets, but using only private earnings and funds, not tax-based ones, for this. Arbitrators to be agreed upon and all details to be public. - People have, apparently, not yet been able to learn enough from just "betting" their vote and their taxes. And merely to bet upon who will be the next ruling party, representative, premier or president does not help to enlighten either side. - J.Z., 7.4.94. - So Far the mass media have shown much more interest in who will win or which party will win, than in what a politician or party stands for. Will they ever demand: Let individuals vote with their dollars for all the services they want. No more tribute-financed "services" and "goods" collectively imposed by majority voting and party "representatives", "statesmen" and bureaucrats, with the aid of policemen and "judges". No more territorially & legally imposed injustices. Instead, full individual consumer sovereignty, full individual choice, with each spending only his own earnings and no one's earnings coercively and legally restricted by others or partly confiscated. - PIOT, J.Z., 26.9.02. – IDEAS, PARTIES, PROGRAMS, VOTING, ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY
BEUTLER, MARTIN: A Swiss friend of GIAN PIERO de Bellis, undertook in 2009 an experiment. In a public display, which he called "Panarchistische Verfassungsstelle" (Panarchist Constitution Center?) he took 16 short personal independence declarations of visitors, witnessed them and then recorded them online. He filmed some of them, including Bellis and, I guess, interviewed others. The statements are in several languages. - GPdB, 10.9.09: I just realized that there is a short video about Martin Beutler who is taking part in the Swiss social sculpture fair (Theme: Utopics) with an installation on Panarchy (drafting a personal constitution, becoming independent). If you are interested you find it at http://yourtopicsonutopics.blogspot.com/2009/09/panarchist-constitution-martin-beutler.html - Perhaps GIAN PIERO de Bellis can supply the full record of this experiment. - PANARCHISTISCHE VERFASSUNGSSTELLE
BIARCHY, by ALAN THORNTON: n.d., 8pp, with 5pp of comments by John Zube, 158, in ON PANARCHY XVII, in PP 1,051. - Panarchism confined to two panarchies only. Perhaps suitable as a beginning, with the major two parties. - J.Z., 28.8.04.
BIARCHY: another State election ... happened ... 25 May 91. Apart from some independent votes, the 2 major parties shared the cattle vote almost evenly, again. Nevertheless, at least in public, I didn't hear or see biarchy proposed: 2 separate governments for the two major and almost evenly matched voting blocks, - far less panarchy. One of my boys asked me (many years ago ): Why should the 51 rule the 49 or the 49 rule the 51? Why should not rather the 51 rule the 51 and the 49 rule the 49? - J.Z., 29.5.91. - Naturally, I would rather have the independents, the anarchists and others rule themselves, too. - J.Z., 7.4.94. - Germany just had a similarly close election that also demonstrated the wrongfulness and absurdity of majority rule. But most minds are still closed to the alternative of all parties winning - full exterritorial autonomy for their own members. - J.Z., 26.9.02.
BIBLE, I Cor. 6/4: The first Christians may have had their own courts. The New English Bible: "If, therefore, you have such business disputes, how can you entrust jurisdiction to outsiders, men who count for nothing in our community? I write this to shame you. Can it be that there is not a single wise man among you able to give a decision in a brother Christian's cause? ..."
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Preliminary Bibliographical Notes on Individual Sovereignty, Individual Secession, Exterritorial Organization and Autonomy, Minority Autonomy, Freedom of Action, Voluntary Protective Agencies, Tolerance for Tolerant Actions, Panarchism, Pluralism, Parallel Institutions, Alternative Institutions, Freedom to Experiment, Ignoring Laws, States, Armies and Unions, Competing Governments, Consular Jurisdiction, Capitulations, Personal Laws etc., pages 107ff, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506. – The 1999 version, file: PANCOMSO.WORD 1999, 68 pages, 1321 entries, 478 KBs, has been integrated here. It was also reproduced on my first CD on panarchism and free banking. Millard's bibliography has been included.
BIERSTEKER, T. & WEBER, C. (eds.), State sovereignty as social construct . (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1996) - Abstracts are wanted and review hints, as well as links to the full texts, if they are already digitized and really relevant to this collection. - Titles can be so deceptive. - J.Z., 13.10.11.
BIG GOVERNMENT, FIVE LAWS: The Five Iron Laws of Big Government: 1.) Big Government doesn’t work. 2.) Big Government makes things worse, often hurting the very people it is intended to help. 3.) Big Government creates new problems. 4.) Big Government is costly and wasteful. 5.) Big Government diverts money and energy from positive, productive uses. That’s why we must make government small!” – Small Government Act to End the Income Tax in Massachusetts 02/06/02. - Are small territorial governments really quite rightful and good enough? – Even small governments can still be territorial despotisms and often have been. Absolute kings and Czars constitute small governments of a kind, too, single persons, but with too great powers! – J.Z., 6.1.08. - In some respects local governments are even more intolerant and meddling that federal or State governments are. Let's abolish territorialism for all sizes of States. Then they would become relatively harmless and sufficiently limited. That means voluntary membership, enforced by individual sovereignty and individual secessionism, also personal laws and the maximum expansion of the tradition of exterritorial autonomy for volunteers. - J.Z., 26. 11. 06. – TERRITORIALISM, SIZE, PANARCHISM
BIG GOVERNMENT: Do you know how empires find their end? Yes, the great States eat up the little. ... But how do the great States come to an end? By their own injustices, and no other cause. They would make unrighteousness their law, and God wills not that it be so." - Theodore Parker, Sermon, Thanksgiving Day, 1850. - Allow individuals to "eat up" their portions of all the large and small States - by individual secessionism. - J.Z., 9.4.94. - And by a general expropriation of all the governmental bureaucracies for the benefit of all their victims. - J.Z., 27.9.02.
BIG GOVERNMENT: The more things a government undertakes to do, the fewer things it can do competently." - Henry Hazlitt, Life and Death of the Welfare State. - From this it follows that the less a government would do, the more competently it would do it and if it did nothing at all and dissolved itself, that would be its supreme achievement. - J.Z., 9.4.94. – Anyhow: What rightful and necessary jobs were ever quite competently and economically performed by any territorial government? – J.Z., 8.11.08.
BIG GOVERNMENT: We have no right to destroy big government - some people still like it - but we have the right to secede from it and to form our own exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers. The most suitable penalty for all advocates of big governments is to make them and them alone bear all their costs, burdens and risks. Individual secessionism, combined with exterritorial associationism would leave over such large manure heaps. They would be biodegradable. - J.Z., 9.4.94.
BIG GOVERNMENT: What is so bad about big government? My indictment of big government is that it is bad because it attacks liberty, prosperity, progress, harmony, and morality. Thanks to big government, we have significantly less of all of those good things than we would if we had been able to keep government right-sized. Big government is cancerous. Like a cancer, it hurts the body and tends to spread, doing more and more harm as it grows. It is time for some radical surgery.” – George C. Leef, director of FEE’s Freeman Society Discussion Clubs. - All the surgery required on present States is the removal of their exclusive territorial powers, including their compulsory membership and subjugation of peaceful dissenters. - J.Z. 26. 11. 06. – Whether the remainder is large or small does hardly matter. – J.Z., 10.12.11.
BIGNESS: If big alone is bad, maybe we should begin dismantling the government." - Terry P. Brown, WALL STREET JOURNAL, quoted in SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, p. 7, April 76. - Each individual should be free to begin doing so on his own - by his own individual secession. - J.Z., 9.4.94.
BIGNESS: The cruelty of man increases with the size of countries, ..." - Jean Paul, Bemerkungen ueber die Menschen. - "Reasons of State" or "National Security" or "Public Welfare" or "Ethnic Cleansing" have been advanced by them for any kind of atrocity. But the builders of small local empires, i.e. of territorial rule over others, can be genocidal, too (e.g. Bosnians and Serbs in our times), while large exterritorial rule over hundreds of millions of faithful can be rather mild, like the example of the Catholic Church has shown in modern times. The real evil is the totalitarian territorial claim - and its sanction by all too many of its victims. - J.Z., 9.4.94.
BIGNESS: Through an unwieldy combination of big government, big military, big business, big labor and big cities, we have created an unworkable mega-nation which defies central management and control. Not only is the United States too big, but it has also become too authoritarian and too undemocratic, and its states assume too little responsibility for the solution of their own social, economic, and political problems.” – Dr. Thomas Naylor, professor emeritus of economics at Duke University. - Not only States & local governments but also individuals are made largely irresponsible and their voluntary, possible and desirable self-help organizations in the political, economic and social sphere are not getting the exterritorial autonomy they would need to freely practise their alternative systems at their own risk and expense. - The territorial statist point of view is always too limited and also too dominating, to be quite rightful and sufficient. - J.Z., 26. 11. 06. - AUTHORITARIANISM
BILL OF RIGHTS: A constitution without a Bill of Rights enforces a "lawless" State. - J.Z., in PEACE PLANS 29. – (*) That maxim, too, applies naturally only to a constitution based upon a territorial monopoly, thus establishing compulsory membership, legislation and jurisdiction. - J.Z., 20.4.94. – (*) Especially when it produces avalanches of legislation, which no one has any time, energy or interest to read even once. Even those few, who do draft new laws, read, as a rule, only their own drafts. – And the one-book people usually do not even read that one fully and thoughtfully enough. - J.Z., 10.12.11.
BILL OF RIGHTS: Hutt River Province, Independent State of Australia, seceded, 21.4.1970, by Len Casley, 1.3.1971, page 6, in ON PANARCHY IV, in PP 510. - On individual secessionism by a proprietor in Western Australia who tried to effectively secede, after his “wheat quota” was officially reduced to a ridiculously small amount with regard to the area that he had planted with wheat. - J.Z., 28.8.04. – If the wheat growers etc. were free to offer their agricultural products in form of international clearing certificates, in suitable denominations, then these could be used to purchase imports with and imports and exports would thus be quite naturally balanced. Professor Edgard Milhaud and Ulrich von Beckerath wrote extensively about this. No monopoly money of any central banking system is a good enough substitute for such self-help methods by producers and distributors. Monetary despotism always provides more problems than solutions. No enforced unity or uniformity can effectively replace free choices and free competition, actions and exchanges on a free market. – J.Z., 30.11.11, 10.12.11.
BIN ABBUD IMHAMMAD: Markaz al-ajanib fi Marrakish, 1950, 135pp, on capitulations in Marocco. – CAPITULATIONS, MAROCCO
BIODIVERSITY & PANARCHY: Seeing that most animals and even insects, microbes and plants, live under a form of panarchism, in the same area, admittedly not always peacefully (but then they are hardly somewhat ethical and rational beings), why should not man be able to do so and really preserve the peace between human beings in this way? - Why should man subject himself to territorial statism and its inherent despotism? – Consider in how many diverse ways and spheres man does already act panarchistically, to the extent that these spheres are not monopolized and dominated by territorial governments! These daily practiced diverse choices, actions and associations come quite naturally to man and he takes them for granted. Only rarely does anyone philosophize about them and consider, whether these free and harmonious but very diverse choices could not also be introduced in the spheres now monopolized by territorial governments. – At least the fact that territorial governments tend to be warfare States, once they are beyond a minimal size - and the fact that by now all too many of them are armed with mass extermination devices [against which kind of enemy and which kind of targets?] - should finally induce enough people to re-examine their attitudes and beliefs or false assumptions, errors and prejudices in this sphere. - J.Z., 28.8.04, 30.11.11. - Q.
BIRDS & PANARCHISM: Free as a Bird", should man be and act, but also freely producing exchanging, not only hunting and food gathering. – J.Z., n.d.
BLACK MARKET: A free market operating without the government's legal sanction." - Harry Browne, You Can Profit from a Monetary Crisis, p.390.
BLACK MARKETS: Black markets are to some extent panarchistic freedom networks in spite of the State and its efforts to suppress them. - J.Z. 13.1.93.
BLACK, BOB: in ON PANARCHY X, in PP 755.
BLANKERTZ, STEFAN, Has the State Always Been There? How Tribal Anarchy Works. - Stefan Blankertz - Has the State Always Been There? How Tribal Anarchy Works - Paper presented at ISIL Conference, London, Ontario, July 2000.
BLANKERTZ, STEFAN, Parallel Societies: No Tolerance for Intolerance. Parallelgesellschaft: Keine Toleranz für die Intoleranz - von Stefan Blankertz - Wann wird der „Staat im Staat“ ein Problem? - Ob es „Parallelgesellschaft“, „Sub-“ oder „Gegenkultur“, „gesellschaftliche Minderheit“ oder „Staat im Staat“ genannt wird, es stellt sich unter politischem Blickwinkel immer die gleiche Frage: Was kann, soll und darf von der Kultur sowie von der Sozial- und Rechtsstruktur der Mehrheit auf die Minderheit übertragen werden („Integration“)? Und umgekehrt: Wieviel Eigentümlichkeit darf die Minderheit beibehalten? Besonders drängend wird die Frage, wenn tatsächlich (oder zumindest anscheinend) aus dem Umfeld der Parallelgesellschaft Kriminalität ausgeht. - In der Diskussion wird oft ein Zusammenhang übersehen: Viele der bedrängendsten Probleme gehen auf den Wohlfahrtsstaat zurück oder werden von ihm verstärkt. Auseinandersetzungen über Sprachen oder Bildungsinhalte sind ebenso klar hier zu verorten wie das Gefühl der steuerzahlenden Mehrheit, zur Unterstützung von Projekten oder Personen herangezogen zu werden, die ihr gegen den Strich gehen. Bildungs-, Wirtschafts- und Sozialpolitik führen dazu, dass der Arbeitsmarkt die „Fremden“, „Migranten“ oder schlicht die schlechter ausgebildeten „Integrationsverweigerer“ nicht aufnehmen kann. Manchmal werden gut ausgebildete Migranten durch Nichtanerkennung ihrer Abschlüsse zu schlecht ausgebildeten. Oder umgekehrt: Schlecht ausgebildete Migranten werden durch die Anerkennung ihrer Abschlüsse zu Scheingleichen. Beides verschärft Probleme, die zweifellos auch ohne den Staat vorhanden, aber leichter lösbar wären. - Während der Staat also viele Dinge tut, um die wirkliche Integration zu verhindern und stattdessen mit Sozialhilfe von der Bürokratie abhängig macht, schützt er bemerkenswert lasch die individuelle Freiheit, wenn es um Probleme innerhalb der Parallelgesellschaften geht. Dies ist durchaus nachvollziehbar, denn dabei geht es um das Austrittsrecht: Genauso, wie es das Recht gibt, sich einer Gruppe, Religion oder Kultur, in die man hineingeboren wurde oder die man sich ausgewählt hat, zugehörig zu fühlen, muss es ein Recht geben, auszutreten. Das eine Recht bedingt das andere. Eine Gruppe, die das Austrittsrecht verweigert, darf (muss?) gezwungen werden, den Austrittswilligen gehen zu lassen. Ein türkisches Mädchen, das sich der Zwangsverheiratung widersetzt oder das sich den Umgang mit Freunden nicht untersagen lässt, tritt aus ihrer Parallelgesellschaft aus (wenn es keine andere, gütliche Einigung gibt). Da der Staat kein Austrittsrecht garantiert, kommt er in ideologische Bedrängnis, wenn er es von anderen Organisationen einfordert. Private Sicherheitsagenturen sind die bessere Lösung. - Die Behauptung, die Toleranz gegenüber anderen Kulturen oder Religionen sei zumindest indirekt an den sogenannten Ehrenmorden oder an Terroranschlägen schuld, entbehrt der Grundlage. Toleranz ist der einzige Wert, der universell aufgezwungen werden darf: Er gehört nicht zu einer speziellen „Kultur“, sondern ist die Bedingung der Möglichkeit eines friedlichen Zusammenlebens. Wer gegen den Wert der Toleranz verstößt, provoziert Konflikt und Krieg. Die Toleranz ist insbesondere kein gleichsam natürlicher Ausfluss aus dem real existierenden Christentum, wie es manche Propagandisten mit schlecht funktionierendem historischem Gedächtnis in der Frontstellung gegen den Islam behaupten. Der Toleranzgedanke (und mit ihm das Austrittsrecht) ist dem Christentum durch Aufklärung und die nachfolgenden Auseinandersetzungen abgerungen worden. In gleicher Weise muss er dem Islam abgerungen werden (von dem die Minderheit der christlichen Theologen, die in der „ersten Aufklärung“ des 13. Jahrhunderts für Toleranz eintrat, den Gedanken übernahm). Das ist die notwendige Integration. Nicht weniger, aber auch nicht mehr. Mehr Integration zu verlangen, ist im Prinzip das gleiche Unrecht, das von den Islamisten ausgeht. - 21. Oktober 2009. - http://ef-magazin.de/ offers many comments by readers, but not up the standard of S.B. - J.Z., 25.8.11. Here, in German, he stands up for INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, INTOLERANCE, PARALLEL SOCIEITES, VOLUNTARISM AND TOLERANCE. - J.Z., 19.9.11. - www.stefanblankertz.de - Jetzt moechte ich doch noch zufuegen, dass nicht ALLE Islamisten intolerant sind. Es gibt, leider, unter ihnen, nur noch zu viele kleine und fanatische Minderheiten. - J.Z., 30.10.11.
BLOCK, WALTER, A libertarian case for free immigration [January 2003] - Published in the Journal of Libertarian Studies, Summer 1998. - Link on www.panarchy.org. http://www.libertarianstudies.org/journals/jls/pdfs/13_2/04block.pdf - Freedom of internal "migration", into full exterritorial autonomy, is the essence of panarchism. - J.Z., 20.8.11. However, already territorial free migration would greatly reduce the suppression of individuals and minorities, just like territorial secessionism, if quite free. - J.Z., 17.10.11. - SECESSION, IMMIGRATION, FREE MIGRATION
BLOCKADES, TERRITORIALISM, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY & PANARCHISM: I did not fill in or attempt to fill in information on all such hints myself but welcome them from others on these and related subjects. – Otherwise, they will just serve as reminders to myself to tackle them when or if I do have the time and energy for them. - J.Z., 30.11.11.
BLUMENKRANZ, B., Juifs et Chretiens dans le monde occidental, 430-1096, Paris, 1960.
BOAZ, DAVID, Libertarianism, A Primer. - Chapter 11: Bypassing the State: The 20th century has been a failed experiment in big government. (*) Every day more people see more ways that problems could be better solved by profit-seeking companies, mutual aid associations, or charities than by government. Private capital markets can provide actuarially sound insurance and offer better retirement benefits than Social Security. One of the world's largest engineering projects, the $12 billion tunnel under the English Channel, was designed, financed, built, owned, and operated by a private consortium. A company called Human Capital Resources wants to sell equity investments in the future earning power of college students as an alternative to student loans - better return for investors, less post-graduation burden on students, and no cost to the taxpayers. - - Private communities, based on governance by consent, can be better tailored to the needs and preferences of 250 million diverse Americans than local governments can. Private schools provide a better education at lower cost than government schools, and in the next few years information technology and for-profit companies will revolutionize learning. Private charities get people off welfare rather than snaring them in it. - - Some day soon we may be able to bypass governments to get all the goods and services we need. But in the meantime our $2.5 trillion federal-state-local governments are not going to give up their power without a fight. The U.S. Postal Service tenaciously clings to its legal monopoly. School boards and teachers unions declare that they won't let children "escape" from their schools, and spend millions to prevent the implementation of school choice plans. The people who benefit from the existing system won't willingly downsize government even if all the customers desert it. As school enrollment in the District of Columbia fell by 33,000--about 25 percent--the system actually added 516 administrators. The 800,000 postal employees are not going to quietly accept layoffs even if we send all our communications electronically. - - We cannot simply wait for "social forces" or technology to automatically replace bloated government. To ensure that such changes happen, individuals will have to demand their right to choose schools for their children, to compete with the Postal Service, to invest their money in a secure private retirement fund. And then taxpayers will have to work to ensure that government stops producing services no one uses any more. - - Order Libertarianism | About the Author | Home Page | The Libertarian Reader | Next Excerpt | - - Why has it take me so long, to recognize a fellow panarchist in him? I met him once, all too shortly, and thought that he was just another limited government advocate! - J.Z., 29.8.11. – (*) Small territorial governments did, largely, fail, too. – Individuals & minorities have to become free to secede from the whole bag of territorial governments tricks, snares, tribute levies, institutions, constitutions, laws, jurisdiction, bureaucracies and regulations, not only in some limited aspects, if they want to and then to do their own things under full exterritorial autonomy. – D. B. did not clearly enough demand that. - J.Z., 30.11.11.
BOAZ, DAVID, Libertarianism, A Primer. - Chapter 7: Civil Society. - In the libertarian view, the role of government is to protect people's rights. That is all, but that is quite enough of a task, and a government that does a good job of it deserves our respect and congratulation. The protection of rights, however, is only a minimal condition for the pursuit of happiness. As Locke and Hume argued, we establish government so that we may be secure in our lives, liberties, and property as we go about the business of surviving and flourishing. - - We can barely survive, and hardly flourish, without interacting with other people. We want to associate with others to achieve instrumental ends--producing more food, exchanging goods, developing new technology -but also because we feel a deep human need for connectedness, for love and friendship and community. The associations we form with others make up what we call civil society. Those associations can take an amazing variety of forms--families, churches, schools, clubs, fraternal societies, condominium associations, neighborhood groups, and the myriad forms of commercial society, such as partnerships, corporations, labor unions, and trade associations. All of these associations serve human needs in different ways. Civil society may be broadly defined as all the natural and voluntary associations in society. Some analysts distinguish between commercial and nonprofit organizations, arguing that businesses are part of the market, not of civil society; but I follow the tradition that the real distinction is between associations that are coercive--the state--and those that are natural or voluntary--everything else. Whether a particular association is established to make a profit or to achieve some other purpose, the key characteristic is that our participation in it is voluntarily chosen. It should be noted that the associations within civil society are created to achieve a particular purpose, but civil society as a whole has no purpose; it is the undesigned, spontaneously emerging result of all those purposive associations. - - Some people don't really like civil society. Karl Marx, for instance. Commenting on political freedom in an early essay, "On the Jewish Question," Marx wrote, "the so-called rights of man . . . are nothing but the rights of the member of civil society, i.e., egoistic man, man separated from other men and the community." He argued that "man as he is in civil society" is "an individual withdrawn behind his private interests and whims and separated from the community." Recall that Thomas Paine distinguished society from government, civil society from political society. Marx revives that distinction, but with a twist: He wants political society to squeeze out civil society. When people are truly free, he says, they will see themselves as citizens of the whole political community, not "decomposed" into different, non-universal roles as a trader, a laborer, a Jew, a Protestant. Each person will be "a communal being" united with all other citizens, and the state will no longer be seen as an instrument to protect rights so that individuals can pursue their selfish ends but as the entity through which everyone would achieve "the human essence [which] is the true collectivity of man." It was never made clear just how this liberation would arrive, and the actual experience of Marxist regimes was hardly liberating, but the hostility to civil society is clear enough. - - Marxism is a bad word these days (as it should be), but Marx's powerful hold on so many people for so long indicates that he was on to something when he wrote about people feeling alienated and atomized. People do want to feel at least some connection to other people. In traditional, pre-capitalist communities they didn't have much choice about it; in a village, people you had known all your life were all around you. Like it or not, you couldn't avoid having a sense of community. As liberalism and the Industrial Revolution brought freedom, affluence, and mobility to more people, more and more of them chose to leave the villages of their birth, often even the countries of their birth, and go off to make a better life elsewhere. The decision to leave indicated that people expected to find a better life - and the continuing mobility and emigration, generation after generation, in modern society, would seem to indicate that people do find better opportunities in new places. But even a person who is glad he left the village or the old country may feel a loss of that tight sense of community, just as one's departure from the family to become an adult may generate a profound sense of loss even as one enjoys autonomy and independence. That's the longing to which Marxism seemed for many people to provide an answer. - - Ironically, Marxism promised freedom and community but delivered tyranny and atomization. The tyranny of the Marxist countries is well known, but it may not be so well understood that Marxism created a society far more atomized than anything in the capitalist world. The Marxist rulers in the Soviet empire in the first place believed theoretically that men under conditions of "true freedom" would have no need for organizations catering to their individual interests, and in the second place understood practically that independent associations would threaten the power of the state--so they not only eliminated private economic activity, they sought to stamp out churches, independent schools, political organizations, neighborhood associations, and everything else down to the garden clubs. After all, the theory went, such non-universal organizations contributed to atomization. What happened, of course, was that people deprived of any form of community and connectedness between the family and the all-powerful state became atomistic individuals with a vengeance. As the philosopher and anthropologist Ernest Gellner wrote, "The system created isolated, amoral, cynical individualists-without-opportunity, skilled at double-talk and trimming." The normal ways in which people were tied to their neighbors, their fellow parishioners, the people with whom they did business, were destroyed, leaving people suspicious and distrustful of one another, seeing no reason to cooperate with others or even to treat them with respect. - - The even greater irony, perhaps, was that Marxism eventually produced a renewed appreciation for civil society. As the corruption of the Brezhnev years faded into the liberalization under Gorbachev, people began to look for an alternative to socialism, and they found it in civil society, the concept of pluralism and freedom of association. The billionaire investor George Soros, eager to liberate the land of his birth (Hungary) and its neighbors, began by making large contributions not to bring about political revolution but to rebuild civil society. He sought to subsidize everything from chess clubs to independent newspapers, to get people once again working together in non-state institutions. The burgeoning of civil society was not the only factor in the restoration of freedom to Central and Eastern Europe, but a stronger civil society will help to protect the new freedom, as well as supplying all the other benefits that people can only achieve in association. - - Even people who aren't Marxists share some of Marx's concerns about community and atomization. Communitarian philosophers, who believe individuals must necessarily be seen as part of a community, worry that people in the West, especially in the United States, overemphasize claims to individual rights at the expense of the community. Their view of our relationship to others could be represented as a series of concentric circles: an individual is part of a family, a neighborhood, a city, a metropolitan area, a state, a nation. The implication of these arguments is that we sometimes forget to focus on all the circles and that we should somehow be encouraged to do so. - - But are the circles merely concentric? A better way to understand community in the modern world is as a series of intersecting circles, with myriad complex connections among them. Each of us has many ways of relating to other people--precisely what Marx complained of and libertarians celebrate. One person may be a wife, mother, daughter, sister, cousin; an employee of one business, an owner of another, a stockholder in others; a renter and a landlord; an officer in a condominium association; active in the Little League and the Boy Scouts; a member of the Presbyterian Church; a precinct worker for the Democratic party; a member of a professional association; a member of a bridge club, a Jane Austen fan club, a feminist consciousness-raising group, a neighborhood crimewatch, and more. (True, this particular person probably feels pretty frazzled, but at least in principle one can have an indefinite number of associations and connections.) Most of these associations serve a particular purpose--to make money, to reduce crime, to help one's children - but they also give people connections with other people. No one of them, however, exhausts one's personality and defines one completely. (One can approximate such exhaustive definition by joining an all-embracing religious community, say, a Roman Catholic order of contemplative nuns, but such choices are voluntary and--because one can't alienate one's right to make choices - reversible.) - - In this libertarian conception we connect to different people in different ways on the basis of free and voluntary consent. Ernest Gellner says that modern civil society requires "modular man." Instead of a man who is entirely the product of and absorbed by a particular culture, modular man "can combine into specific-purpose, ad hoc, limited associations, without binding himself by some blood ritual." He can form links with others "which are effective even though they are flexible, specific, instrumental." - - As individuals combine in myriad ways, community emerges; not the close community of the village, or the messianic community promised by Marxism, national socialism, and all-fulfilling religions, but a community of free individuals in voluntarily chosen associations. Individuals do not emerge from community; community emerges from individuals. It emerges not because anyone plans it, certainly not because the state creates it, but because it must. To fulfill their needs and desires, individuals must combine with others. Society is an association of individuals governed by legal rules, or perhaps an association of associations - but not one large community, or one family, in Mario Cuomo's and Pat Buchanan's utterly misguided conception. The rules of the family or small group are not, cannot be, the rules of the extended society. - - The distinction between individual and community can be misleading. Some critics say that community involves a surrender of one's individuality. But membership in a group need not diminish one's individuality; it can amplify it, by freeing people from the limits they face as lone individuals and increasing their opportunities to achieve their own goals. Such a view of community requires that membership be chosen, not compulsory. - Order Libertarianism | About the Author | Home Page | The Libertarian Reader | Next Excerpt - I consider this to be a panarchist article. - J.Z., 29.8.11. – Alas, he did not clearly demand the abolition of territorial statism, i.e. of all of the monopolies that territorial governments reserved to themselves and quite free secessions from it. – J.Z., 30.11.11.
BOAZ, DAVID, The Coming Libertarian Age, CATO POLICY REPORT, January/February 1997. - Part of this article is headed: Toward a Framework for Utopia. - - Lots of political movements do promise utopia: just implement our program, and we'll usher in an ideal world. Libertarians offer something less, and more: a framework for utopia, as Robert Nozick put it. - - My ideal community would probably not be your utopia. The attempt to create heaven on earth is doomed to fail, because we have different ideas of what heaven would be like. As our society becomes more diverse, the possibility of our agreeing on one plan for the whole nation becomes even more remote. And in any case, we can't possibly anticipate the changes that progress will bring. Utopian plans always involve a static and rigid vision of the ideal community, a vision that can't accommodate a dynamic reality. We can't imagine what civilization will be like a century from now. What we need is not utopia but a free society in which people can design their own communities. (Bold print by me. – J.Z.) - - A libertarian society might offer thousands of versions of utopia, which might appeal to different kinds of people. Government would respect people's right to make their own choices in accord with the knowledge available to them. As long as each person respected the rights of others, he would be free to live as he chose. His choice might well involve voluntarily agreeing with others to live in a particular kind of community. Individuals could come together to form communities in which they would agree to abide by certain rules, which might forbid or require particular actions. Since people would individually and voluntarily agree to such rules, they would not be giving up their rights but simply agreeing to the rules of a community that they would be free to leave. We already have such a framework, of course; in the market process we can choose from many different goods and services, and many people already choose to live in a particular kind of community. A libertarian society would offer more scope for such choices by leaving most decisions about living arrangements to the individual and the chosen community, instead of allowing government to impose everything from an exorbitant tax rate to rules about religious expression and health care. - - One difference between libertarianism and socialism is that a socialist society can't tolerate groups of people practicing freedom, but a libertarian society can comfortably allow people to choose voluntary socialism. If a group of people--even a very large group--wanted to purchase land and own it in common, they would be free to do so. The libertarian legal order would require only that no one be coerced into joining or giving up his property. - - In such a society, government would tolerate, as Leonard Read put it, "anything that's peaceful." Voluntary communities could make stricter rules, but the legal order of the whole society would punish only violations of the rights of others. By radically downsizing and decentralizing government--by fully respecting the rights of each individual--we can create a society based on individual freedom and characterized by peace, tolerance, community, prosperity, responsibility, and progress. - - It is hard to predict the short-term course of any society, but in the long run, the world will recognize the repressive and backward nature of coercion and the unlimited possibilities that freedom allows. The spread of commerce, industry, and information has undermined the age-old ways in which governments held men in thrall and is even now liberating humanity from the new forms of coercion and control developed by 20th-century governments. - - As we enter a new century and a new millennium, we encounter a world of endless possibility. The very premise of the world of global markets and new technologies is libertarian. Neither stultifying socialism nor rigid conservatism could produce the free, technologically advanced society that we anticipate in the 21st century. If we want a dynamic world of prosperity and opportunity, we must make it a libertarian world. The simple and timeless principles of the American Revolution--individual liberty, limited government, and free markets--turn out to be even more powerful in today's world of instant communication, global markets, and unprecedented access to information than Jefferson or Madison could have imagined. Libertarianism is not just a framework for utopia, it is the essential framework for the future. - - This article originally appeared in the January/February 1997 edition of CATO POLICY REPORT. - - David Boaz is executive vice president of the Cato Institute and author of http://www.catostore.org/index.asp?fa=ProductDetails&method=cats&scid=14&pid=1441021Libertarianism: A Primer - Here he came far away from LP Libertarianism or "Limited Government Libertarianism", also from anarcho-capitalism and free market anarchism towards panarchism, polyarchism, multi-archism etc., i.e., fully free societal choices for individuals and minorities. - J.Z., 29.8.11.
BOAZ, DAVID, Thoughts that came close to Panarchism: Some such hints are in the files accumulated for ON PANARCHY Nos. 25 ff.
BODYGUARDS: I had always a healthy suspicion of governments whose chiefs had to surround themselves with bodyguards. - H. Beam Piper & John Mcguire, Lone Star Planet, 259. - On my U.S. trip, in 1990, I was told, in Detroit, that the local mayor had 65 bodyguards. Imagine the salary amounts we could save if we abolished the mayor's office - or merely his bodyguards, letting nature, here wronged citizens, take over. However, a more peaceful and less bloody approach would be to let individual citizens secede from municipal authorities as well as from local country governments, State governments and federal governments. Perhaps a special voting should be instituted for any government official? As soon as 100 citizens demand the death penalty for him, he should be presumed guilty enough to be executed! Some might want to bring that number down to 12 jurors. If any voluntary, competing and exterritorially autonomous government were subject to that kind of retaliation, constitutionally established, it would tend to treat the rights and liberties of its subjects as carefully as each of its members does his own eyeballs. In some SF stories the ruler is made to feel himself all of the pain inflicted by his government upon any of its citizens. I wish it could be done. Running for office would no longer be a popular sport then. As it is, we pay them a high salary for ignorant, prejudiced, corrupt and irresponsible actions. - J.Z. 9.4.94. - LEADERS, POLITICIANS, TYRANNICIDE.
BOERESCO, B., Memoire sur la juridiction consulaire en Roumanie, 2d. ed., Bucharest, Imprimerie d'Etat, 1869.
BOETIE, ÉTIENNE DE LA: Der Mensch, welcher euch bändigt und überwältiget, hat nur zwei Augen, hat nur zwei Hände, hat nur einen Leib und hat nichts anderes an sich als der geringste Mann aus der ungezählten Masse eurer Städte; alles, was er vor euch allen voraus hat, ist der Vorteil, den ihr ihm gönnet, damit er euch verderbe. Woher nimmt er so viele Augen, euch zu bewachen, wenn ihr sie ihm nicht leiht? Wieso hat er so viele Hände, euch zu schlagen, wenn er sie nicht von euch bekommt? ... Wie hat er irgend Gewalt über euch, wenn nicht durch euch selber? .... Seid entschlossen, keine Knechte mehr zu sein, und ihr seid frei. Ich will nicht, daß ihr ihn verjaget oder vom Throne werfet; aber stützt ihn nur nicht; und ihr sollt sehen, daß er, wie ein riesiger Koloß, dem man die Unterlage nimmt, in seiner eigenen Schwere zusammenbricht und in Stücke geht." - In general terms B. advocated individual secessionism and ignoring the State as the best means to defeat it. It is still worth re-reading even now, as one of the best essays against statism. Numerous editions exist. See the English and French editions and essays on B. reproduced in PEACE PLANS 1484/84 (5 pages on 555); 392; 1367/68 (page 132); 1254. (This last, ed. and introduced by J. J. Martin, is the most scholarly treatment of this freedom classic that I am aware of. It brings the text in English and French. - J.Z., 28.8.04. - Page 31, ON PANARCHY I, in PEACE PLANS 505. - PEACE PLANS 1550): Ein Zitat aus http://www.utopie1.de/autoren/boetie0.htm - The full text and xyz comments are online, in several languages, as any search will rapidly reveal. – But in his time he could certainly not speak and write about individual and group secessionism and open resistance against any form of ruling territorial despotism. – Thus he rather accused the victims of having granted the consent the victims, thus offering the rulers an excuse and protecting himself by not antagonizing them too much. – Much more than mere resolution and determination are required. - J.Z., 10.12.11. - SECESSIONISM, REVOLUTION, RESISTANCE, LIBERATION, TYRANNY, DESPOTISM
BOIS, EDWARD DE: 10-11, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901.
BONDAGE: .free ... (yourself) "from bondage to other men - ... from organisational and institutional ineptness such as governments gone berserk." - Leonard E. Read, Elements of Libertarian Leadership, p.113. - While intellectual individual secessionism from prevailing wrong ideas is a precondition, it is not enough on its own. It must be supplemented by individual practical secessionism towards the institutions of bondage. Read wanted still to retain a territorial monopoly for a "limited" government. From such a totalitarian foundation any "limited" government can grow into an unlimited government. - J.Z., 10.4.94. – LIMITED GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
BONFILS, Manuel de droit international (7th ed., Paris, 1914), § 737n. – Quoted in LIU, Exterritoriality, page 31.
BONNIFIELD, LEE: in ON PANARCHY X, in PP 755. - THE CONNECTION 150, 78-79, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PEACE PLANS 901. -TC 152, 83-89, ibid.
BOOKCHIN, MURRAY, Spontaneity and Utopia - Spontaneity and Utopia (1971) - Individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers provide a rightful and rational organizational framework for peaceful organizations and actions of dissenters. Territorial regimes still suppress that option in all too many very important spheres. - J.Z., 17.10.11.
BOOKS: Books are like people: one man's revelation is to the other a meaningless bore." - Dagobert D. Runes, A Dictionary of Thought. – Let each individual shop for his own library, his own religion, his own political, economic and social system, just like he does for his kind of consumer goods and services or mixture of them. – Outside those spheres still wrongfully monopolized by territorial governments we do already largely live as panarchists in most countries, doing our own things for or to ourselves, individually or with like-minded groups. Wherever this is permitted peaceful coexistence tends to prevail. - J.Z., 9.11.08. - PANARCHISM
BOOKS: Books are the invisible tie between the people of the world. The Torah binds the Jews as the Koran the Moslems and the Gospels the Christian nations. Confucius bound the Chinese and so did Lao-tse and Buddha; until books were replaced by Marx's Capital. - Dagobert D. Runes, A Dictionary of Thought. - But especially the religious books, of ancient and modern prophets, have not only bound people within State boundaries and across some of them, but also set them at loggerheads and even at war with each other, whenever they tried to realize their supposed truths uniformly over large and ever larger territories. - J.Z., 10.4.94. The panarchistic equivalent to freedom of religion or religious tolerance has still to be established for political, economic and social systems. No whole populations are all ever adherents of the same faiths or ideology and compulsory conversions do have their limits. – J.Z., 9.11.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREE CHOICE AMONG FREELY COMPETING GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES, ALL WITHOUT A TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY!
BOOKS: I was told yesterday that I am addicted to books. Well, in a way I am. But give me interested company and I am addicted to talking and listening, too and give me freedom of action and I am addicted to action, too. - J.Z., 30.10.85. – And give me access to lectures of interest to me, live or recorded and I am addicted to them as well. – J.Z., 9.11. 08.
BOOKS: In his rooms and out of books, he has built certain systems on every subject. According to their principles, he concludes obstinately. He is astonished and angered by all that deviates from them. His theory is quite good but, unfortunately, not suitable for realisation. Why? Because he has only studied but not practised. He knows books but not human beings. He labours with his subject matter and gives birth to it with pains." - Chesterfield, Letters to his Son, London, 27. Mai 1753. – Re-translated from the German version. - Too many critics remain unaware that certain practices, like issuing one's own money, are outlawed or that some of the prohibitions of free actions are frequently and severely enforced. Their criticism would thus apply only under full freedom for tolerant actions. - J.Z., 10.4.94. - THEORY AND PRACTICE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
BOOKS: Many to most modern books have bypassed too much of the older knowledge on a subject, accumulated in older books, and thus the modern books are often correspondingly flawed and behind the real and much older science on a subject. Especially in the social “sciences”, which are still all too much under the spell of the mysticism of territorial statism.- J Z, 29.1.89, 9.11.08, 10.12.11.
BOOKS: The revolutions of thought which shape the basic outlook of an age are not disseminated through text-books - they spread like epidemics, through contamination by invisible agents and innocent germ carriers, by the most varied forms of contact, or simply by breathing the common air.” - Arthur Koestler – Alas, so far they were largely confined to those revolutions of the “mind” that are based upon popular myths, errors and prejudices, which persisted throughout the external revolutions and predetermined their all too often negative processes and outcomes. One-man revolutions, all for volunteers only, have still to become seen as rightful and desirable and then institutionalized, so that the revolutionary chaff becomes sufficiently separated from the grains and progress becomes assured, speeded up and maximized and this without unjustified and unnecessary bloodshed and suppression. The best textbooks for such revolutions may still have to be written and they we will see how effective they could be. – J.Z., 23.1.08. – The programs for libertarian revolutions should differ very much from those of totalitarian and territorialist revolutions. – All the possibilities for accelerating and assuring the process of enlightenment have also not yet been sufficiently explored or publicized and used. - J.Z., 12.11.08. - TEXT BOOKS, REVOLUTIONS OF PUBLIC OPINION
BORCHARD, E. M.: The Diplomatic Protection of Citizens Abroad, New York, 1915. – CONSULAR JURISDICTION, DIPLOMACY
BORDERS & FRONTIERS, GRAPHICALLY SHOWING THEIR WRONGFULNESS, ARBITRARINESS & TEMPORARY NATURE: The wrongfulness and irrationality of territorial borders or frontiers could, perhaps, be best graphically demonstrated by their various positions and durations in a row of maps for each State. These rows could be combined in a short movie, in which years or decades of duration could be reduced to e.g. seconds. A table could be added indicating the percentage of the total time that a particular frontier was “valid” for a State. Poland, Israel, USA, Russia, China and others might be good examples. – J.Z., 12. & 17.1.05.
BORDERS & INDIVIDUALS: Borders, only voluntary ones and only around individuals! – J.Z., 12. & 17.1.05.
BORDERS & PANARCHISM: The borders of panarchies are around individuals or their groups but they might also be limited to their members in local and national areas and to those members they have world-wide. – J.Z., n.d. - FRONTIERS.
BORDERS, FRONTIERS, TERRITORIES, SOVEREIGNTY, SELF-DETERMINATION, INDEPENDENCE, INDIVIDUALISM: Borders around individuals and their contractual arrangements, not around territorial States. The latter cannot be just, at least not towards dissenting individuals and minorities that have not committed any crimes or aggressive actions. - J.Z., 13.4.92, 13.1.93, 10.12.11.
BORDERS, FRONTIERS: The only borders we need are those around individuals and their voluntary associations. They would not need border guards in most cases and large armament budgets. They will and can change and fluctuate as is desired by the individuals involved. They can carry their laws with them, wherever they go, for all their self-responsible actions. (Apart from e.g. house rules, the laws of hospitality and the duties of invited guests. - J.Z., 8.12.03.) The same applies to all their voluntary communities. None of them will have any exclusive territories – except the private or cooperatively owned real estate of their members. But all will be exterritorially autonomous. – J.Z., 20.3.93.
BORDERS, MAX, Towards YouTopia. - Max Borders, Towards YouTopia (2009) [English] November 2009 - Ideas Matter (The interesting blog space of Max Borders)
BORDERS: A few State barriers we got rid off but most of them remained, especially those in the heads. And already, passages across East European frontiers are made more difficult, again. - J.Z., 4.10.90. - FRONTIERS, WALLS, TERRITORIALISM, BERLIN WALL, UNIFICATION OF GERMANY, IRON CURTAIN, IMMIGRATION BARRIERS
BORDERS: An end to (*) gated communities. The gate between Slovenia and Italy is opened for the last time (**) as Europe’s border-free zone is extended to nine eastern European countries. – Heading and explanation to a picture in THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD of December 21-13, 2007, page 14. - - (*) governmentally. - - (**) permanently opened! – If only we could “gate” all communities of volunteers against all territorial governmental interventionists! – Will the federation of Europe in the medium and long run become more or less interventionist? – Will it permit communities of dissenters to secede from it and establish exterritorial autonomy for their volunteers? – Or will it be another attempt to establish a territorial empire? - J.Z., 3.1.08. – Some people do not even recognize the difference between “gated communities” and territorially imposed and centrally controlled ones! – J.Z., 12.11.08. - FREE ZONE IN EUROPE, OPEN FRONTIERS, QUESTIONS, EUROPEAN UNIFICATION? GATED COMMUNITIES.
BORDERS: Borders are always part of the problem and never along-term solution. - J.Z., 29.6.79. - Territorial national borders, that is, not proper private property and exterritorial autonomy borders. - J.Z., 20.5.80, 11.4.94. - 700 territorial enclaves, with their borders, are not a lasting and permanent peace promoting solution to the Balkanese mix-up of people in the former Yugoslavia, either. Yet, there is no public outlet to propose and discuss the alternative of exterritorial autonomy for all volunteer communities. - J.Z., 20.4.94. – Well, by now there are at least two websites dealing with panarchism: www.panarchy.org and www.panarchism.info – J.Z., 9.11.08.
BORDERS: Borders are not solutions but problems. Defended borders should exist only around peaceful individuals. - J.Z., 29.9.84. - FRONTIERS, PROTECTIONISM, IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS
BORDERS: Borders around individuals and their contractual arrangements, not around territorial States. The latter cannot be just, at least not towards all dissenting individuals and minorities. - J.Z., 13.4.92. – PANARCHISM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM
BORDERS: Boundaries have no existence save on charts or in small minds. Nature does not draw lines.” - Tulisofala, Extracts, CCLXII, vi, translated by Leisha Tanner, quoted in: - Jack McDevitt, A Talent for War, 304. , BOUNDARIES, FRONTIERS
BORDERS: http://www.facebook.com/Ron Manners - Is it time (once again) to allow people to choose for themselves where in the world they'd like to reside? - A world without borders makes economic sense - Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. - Michael A Clemens: Allowing workers to change location significantly enriches the world economy. So why do we erect barriers to human mobility? - Simon Larman - Like everything, the free market should be our only governance. A 'world without borders' is likely to produce less poverty, more liberty and greater employment opportunities. The individual should be returned their rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and if that means being able to move from one continent to another unrestricted then so be it. - John Zube = Also, under what laws and institutions they wish to live! Frontiers are just for the benefit of our modern feudal lords, politicans and bureaucrats, to keep-in their human cattle, all the more to exploit them. - J.Z., 11.9.11. - FRONTIERS, NATION STATES, TERRITORIALISM, NATIONAL LAND MONOPOLY, FREE MIGRATION VS. IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS.
BORDERS: Identifying sports teams is the only real value of borders!” – Prof. Jan Narveson, 25.7.04. – Another version: “Identifying sports teams – that’s the only value of borders.” – Prof. Jan Narveson. – FRONTIERS, SPORTS
BORDERS: The only rightful borders are those around individuals and their voluntary associations. - J.Z., 27.3.87. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
BORDERS: Time and again the doctors of political science have prescribed some sort of political union for the ills of Europe, on the assumption that such a union will be followed by a customs union. Quite the contrary; the borders between countries lose all meaning (*) if the peoples can 'do business' with one another; which is another way of saying, if the States get out of the way of society. No political union can set up a society in Europe; that can only come from uninhibited 'higgling and haggling" in a common marketplace." - Frank Chodorov, Fugitive Essays, One Worldism, p.126/127. - - (*) Here he overlooked the imposition of territorial constitutions, laws, regulations and bureaucracies that are not confined to economic interventionism. The “higgling and haggling” or contractual options for individuals should be extended to all government services, making them thus exterritorially voluntary, autonomous and competitive. Exterritorially, several competing United Europe, United States and World State or World Federation services could be offered. They would in some respect resemble multinational corporations, but without any territorial privileges granted to them and, at the same time, without any restrictions upon their exterritorial autonomy. - J.Z., 11.4.94. - FREE TRADE, PROTECTIONISM, PANARCHISM, UNITY, SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM VS. COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP &/or SUBORDINATION: PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM ETC.
BORDERS: When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will.” – Fredric Bastiat, early French economist. - One might likewise say that when immigration for peaceful immigrants is restricted then this may lead to one's military conquest by a dictatorial regime. - J.Z., 22. 11. 06. - FRONTIERS, PROTECTIONISM, FREE TRADE, FREE MIGRATION, IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS
BOREL, De Origine et des fonctions des consuls. St. Petersburg, 1807, p. 90. - Quoted in LIU, Exterritoriality, page 44.
BORGIUS, WALTER, Dr., 38, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505.
BOSS: A boss whom you, individually, can hire or fire, by agreeing to work for him or giving him notice, is harmless, is your servant, not your master. - J.Z., 2.9.75, 11.4.94. – The same applies to governments and societies of volunteers, which are only exterritorially autonomous and compete with each other. One might “hire” or “fire” them, like one hires commercial or factory bosses when one joins their firm and fires them, when one gives notice to them. Or one avoids them altogether by organizing one’s own production or service enterprise under one or the other self-management scheme. – J.Z., 9.11.08. - Secessionism, Cooperative Production, Capitalism, Self-management, PANARCHISM
BOUNDARIES: Morality knows nothing of geographical boundaries or distinctions of race." - Herbert Spencer. – EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, RACISM, EQUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES
BOUNDARIES: The only sound boundaries to be respected are those around individuals and their voluntary associations. - J.Z., 24.4.87. - BORDERS, FRONTIERS, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM
BOURNE, RANDOLPH, War is the Health of the State, Randolph Bourne, War is the health of the State (1919) [English] - On the effects of statism, territorialism, governmentalism, nationalism, centralization. - J.Z., 28.8.11. - Ludwig von Mises Institute Bourne of War - www.mises.org - "One of the great anti-war thinkers in history. - Bourne defined war as the ultimate act of statehood, as the utmost act of "a group in its aggressive aspects." - WAR, PEACE, STATE, TERRITORIALISM, CENTRALIZATION, POWER
BOYCOTT: But religious people shunned government service and regarded government in general as the very substance of the forces which opposed God's rule on earth. A pious man would not accept an invitation to dine from a government official. The good offered there could not be regarded as halal, (religiously permissible), in the moral sense of the word since most of the government's revenue was thought to emanate from extortions, law-breakings, and oppression of the weak. But the religious attitude toward commerce was completely different. The income of the honest merchant is regarded in Muslim religious literature as a typical example of halal, as earnings free of religious objections." - S. D. Goitein, Jews and Arabs, p.104. (His book on the Mediterranean Society is excellent e.g. on the large degree of autonomy enjoyed by Jewish communities. Complete exterritorial autonomy for Jews and Arabs, Christians and others, combined with whatever boycott they would otherwise want to practise towards each other, could bring peace to the Middle East and elsewhere. Under these conditions peaceful trading of goods, services and information, between such independent communities, would soon become extensive. Thus, by individual choice, and in the long run, more and more of the unwanted differences would melt away and make a peaceful, just, free and cosmopolitan society grow. - J.Z.)
BOYD, JOHN: The Pollinators of Eden, Victor Gollancz, London, 1970. He favours individual secession, on page 190, with the following words: "'Isn't this treason?' she asked. 'Oh, no,' he said. "We're not betraying our country. By the terms of the Social Compact, a government rules only by the consent of the governed. We are merely exercising our right to withdraw our consent ... " - S.F., JZL. – How frequent or, rather, how rare is this idea still in Science Fiction? – J.Z., 10.12.11. - TREASON, DISLOYALTY, CONSENT, SECESSIONISM, SCIENCE FICTION
BRAINSTORMING ON PANARCHISM: Brainstorm sufficiently on panarchism and the storms, woes and crimes of all territorially imposed systems would soon come to an end. - J.Z., 04-11. - This A to Z compilation is largely one man's brainstorming effort and collection effort only. It needs YOUR input. - J.Z., 17.10.11.
BRAUTER, JURGEN: See: NON-TERRITORIALISM. BRICK PILLOW, in ON PANARCHY X, in PP 755.
BREACH OF "CONTRACT" BY TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS: Pretended protection turned into the greatest threats. E.g., their "nuclear umbrella" offers only nuclear extermination. Their "defence" against tyranny does not kill any aggressive tyrants but, rather, their victims. - J.Z., 30.8.04. – SECURITY, INSECURITY, PROTECTION, DEFENCE, WARFARE STATE, TERRITORIALISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, SOCIAL CONTRACT
BREAKING FREE: The unfree person can never fully repress his urge to freedom - whether he considers his jailer to be his family, his job, society, or the government. And so, from time to time, half-hearted attempts are made to break free from the restrictions. But unfortunately, those attempts usually depend upon the individual's ability to change the minds of other people- and so optimism ultimately turns into frustration and despair.” - Harry Brown, How I Found Freedom. - The territorial government is our jailer. Breaking free ought to become an individual option, like one's separation from a spouse, religion, church or sect. -J.Z. - GOVERNMENT, RESTRICTIONISM, SELF-LIBERATION, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM
BREYSIG, KURT, PANARCHY, EXTERRITORIALITY, TERRITORIALISM, STATE: Ferner ist mit aller Absicht vom Gebiet nicht die Rede. Die Forderung, dass dem Begriff Staat auch das Vorhandensein eines Gebietes einzuverleiben sei, ist abzulehnen. Sehr viele wohlgeschaffene Urzeit-, ja noch selbst maechtige Alterstumsstaaten sind nachzuweisen, die des dauernden Landbesitzes durchaus entbehrten." - Kurt Breysig, Die Geschichte der Menschheit, 1. Band, Berlin, 1907, Georg Bondi, S. 531. (Furthermore, and quite intentionally, territory is not dealt with. The demand that the concept of the State has to include the existence of a territory is to be rejected. Very many well established States of the primeval period, indeed even powerful ancient States can be shown that did not permanently own any territory.)
BRICK PILLOW: in ON PANARCHY X, in PP 755.
BRIN, DAVID: The Doctrine of Otherness", ANALOG, April 1986: People as they are, different and prejudiced and misled, are likely, given individual choice, to make now, in the foreseeable future and many of them probably in the far future, different voluntary choices for themselves than anarchists would. Panarchists assert that according to the basic anarchist doctrines of individualism, voluntarism, choice, consent, rights and liberties, they ought to be given that right even to the extent of choosing slavery and despotism - FOR THEMSELVES - as long as they can stand them, or any mixed bag of statist or religious welfarism, etc. - Instead of opposing all such different choices, anarchists should fundamentally (for moral and utilitarian reasons) welcome and even advocate them - because when these choices become generally recognized, then their own would likewise be recognized. To each his own. – J.Z., n.d.
BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS: (Millard bibliography.)
BRITISH & FOREIGN STATE PAPERS: (Millard bibliography.)
BRITISH: The National Association for Freedom ... declares that a British citizen is not to be judged by his race, colour or creed but by his devotion and adherence to British Freedom. The non-British are those totalitarians, both Fascists and Marxists, who seek to destroy British Freedom..." - Narindar Saroop, in: “In Defence of Freedom”, ed. by K. W. Watkins, pp 118/119. – Let the freedom lovers and the opponents of freedom sort themselves out into their own kind of exterritorially autonomous communities, under their own personal laws, always at the own expense and own risk. The resulting differences between systems will then become obvious to almost everyone and thus the more free systems will gain more and more convinced followers while the others will shrink and may never even gain dangerous proportions. – J.Z., 10.11.08. – PANARCHISM, FREE CHOICE FOR INDIVIDUALS AMONG SOCIETIES & GOVERNMENTS
BRITTAN, SAMUEL: Hayek the New Right & the Crisis of Social Democracy, ENCOUNTER, 1/1980, 16pp, JZL. Page 35: "5.ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES. - What are the main alternatives for those who find the Hayekian outlook, so far from displaying the anarchism of which it is accused by ignorant critics, too authoritarian in many elements? Even if the evolutionary ethics are removed, individual freedom is left to depend on Hayek's writing on 'the Rule of Law' - by which he means the generality of rules. This is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a free society. - One alternative is the thoroughgoing libertarianism of certain Americans. Some young libertarians (including Milton Friedman's son, David) call themselves 'anarcho-capitalists' and believe that personal safety and property can be secured by private armies and police forces; and that the way to choose between rival rules of law is competition, including competition between courts, in which the better system will gain adherents and be enforced in private bargains. (David Friedman, The Machinery of freedom, 1973.) The arguments used are often ingenious and subtle. But the reality which corresponds to such proposals is too much like the warring private armies of the Renaissance Italy, or the feuding factions of the Mafia and the Red Brigade in the Italy of today. These are potentially even more oppressive than many authoritarian governments - and hardly a model for reformers. - Those libertarians who wisely retain the idea of state authority would confine it to 'night watchmen' activities, mainly law and order, and defence.' - - What law and order? What defence? - All of the straw-men models he suggested where those which did not or do not recognize individual rights and liberties of their own members, far less of non-members. They aimed at and practised territorial despotism in their national and other "turfs", at least at the local level. They had the panarchistic (voluntaristic and exterritorial autonomy) option as little in mind as has the man in the street today. It is like arguing that religious liberty does not work because there are the ignorant, the prejudiced and the fanatics. - It is a case of either accepting the "wisdom" of others, chosen by others for you, whether you agree with them or not, or doing your own things to or for yourself, with the aid of the wisdom of those you choose to help you. Under panarchism you could even choose to live entirely under your own "wisdom", if you are willing to risk that. - A true evolution of law and order and of any public institution can only occur under free competition and individual consumer sovereignty towards them, including voluntary taxation and subscription arrangements. That is the most limited and limiting government or self-government model. It means freedom to do the right things for oneself and towards others, not licence to commit crimes and other aggressions towards others. It means freedom to opt out from all laws and jurisdictions or only selected ones - regarding one's own affairs. It would require a much higher degree of enlightenment and tolerance and freedom of action than has been achieved or seriously considered by most people, so far. And it would require its own protective and self-governing institutions, like volunteer militias for the protection of individual rights, and their federations. - J.Z., 6.1.85, 1.2.99.
BROADCASTING: advances in technology can make increasingly efficient use of increasingly narrow band-widths to the point where radio-wave space can become virtually unlimited." - Filthy Pierre, THE CONNECTION 101, p.18 of 24 Jan. 82. – But under territorialism any abuse, once introduced, has all too much staying power. Essentially, it suppresses individual consumer sovereignty and its consequences. – J.Z., 10.11.08. - PANARCHISM
BROWE, P.: Die religioese Duldung der Juden im Mittelalter, ARCHIV FUER KATHOLISCHES KIRCHENRECHT, 118, 1938, 3-76.
BROWN, P. M.: Foreigners in Turkey; their Juridical Status, Princeton, Princeton Univ, Press, 1914, on capitulations.
BROWN, W. JETHRO: The Underlying Principles of Modern Legislation, John Murray, London, 1912, 331pp, H. C. Deals on pp. 252-254 with "The Sovereignty of the Individual" but is good only in quoting Locke, Spencer and Paine. Also "discusses" anarchy (pp.]-37 & 219), laissez faire (46-50,166-231) and the rights of the individual (234-295). – J.Z., n.d. – People, who do disagree with me or with the statements that I have copied here from others, should at least get the chance to add a URL leading to their counter-statements. – This is not to be continued largely only as a one-person brainstorming and alphabetized note-taking effort. – J.Z., 30.11.11.
BROWNE, HARRY: See: PERMANENT TOURISM.
BRYCE, JAMES, The Holy Roman Empire, Macmillan, London, Melbourne, Toronto, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1968, first published 1864, numerous editions, including German, Italian and French translations, 571 pages, indexed, JZL, from pages 31-33: File: Pan, Roman Law. - On the persistence of Roman Law after fall of Roman Empire. It remained a customary or chosen law for many. - The Extract: “As the Empire fell to pieces … the Church clung more closely to her unity of faith and discipline, the common bond of all Christian men.” (Not women? – J.Z.) … “Only second in importance to this influence was that which was exercised by the permanence of the old law, and of its creature the municipal organization of the cities. The barbarian invaders retained the customs of their ancestors, characteristic memorials of a rude people, as we see them in the Salic law or in the ordinances of Ini and Alfred. But the subject population and the clergy continued to be governed by that elaborate system which the genius and labour of many generations had raised to be the most lasting monument of Roman greatness. - The civil law had maintained itself in Spain and in Southern Gaul, nor was it utterly forgotten even in the North, in Britain, on the borders of Germany. Revised collections of the Theodosian Code and other Roman law books were issued by the West Gothic and Burgundian princes. - (Footnote h: The Lex Romana Burgundionum, published by the Burgundian kings at the beginning of the sixth century, and the Lex Romana Visigothorum [Breviarium Alaricanum], published in or about A.D. 506, continued to form bodies of written law which were in use for a long time, and became the kernel of the customary law which grew up in South-eastern and Southern Gaul.) - “… Other motives, as well as those of kindness to their subjects, made the new kings favour it; for it exalted their prerogatives, and the submission enjoined by it on one class of their subjects soon came to be demanded from the other, by their own Teutonic customs almost the equals of the prince. - Considering attentively how many of the old institutions continued to subsist, and studying the ideas of that time, as they are faintly preserved in its scanty records, it seems hardly too much to say that in the eighth century the Roman Empire still existed in the West; existed in men’s minds as a power weakened, delegated, suspended, but not destroyed.” - - These remarks should be read in connection with e.g. the description of Edward Gibbons in his chapter 38 on “The Law of the Barbarians”. Roman citizens, for instance, were permitted to adopt the tribal laws of the “barbarians”, if they preferred them. – Even subjects were not automatically subjected to the laws of the conquerors. – The Roman Law, too, was continued as a personal law, by individual choice. – During the Roman Republic and Roman Empire Roman citizenship was long considered a privilege that was not readily granted to others than Romans. Subjected peoples were largely left to their own laws and institutions and even in Rome had their own juridical avenue. But, gradually, the rule of Roman Law was extended, as a privilege and favor, to more and more of the subjected people, doing away with their status as second-class citizens. - Neither cared much about the slaves although slave uprisings were feared. But, gradually, the legal position even of slaves were improved. After some time, in cases where fathers had, repeatedly, sold their sons, once again, as their sole “property”, into slavery after these victims were released from it, a law was finally passed that after the third release of a son, from a thus established slavery, a father could not again sell his son a fourth time. Great progress! - The sale of children into slavery or the capture of them and women as sexual slaves or prostitutes, has continued even into our times and neither their "managers" nor their “customers” or abusers. nor the territorial governments have always and sufficiently stood by these victims. - All too often, they rather abused them themselves. - J.Z., 15.12.04, 5.10.11.. - PERSONAL LAW, SELF-CHOSEN LAW, COMPETING LAW SYSTEMS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, COMPETING JURISDICTIONS, SLAVERY, SEXUAL SLAVERY, ROMAN EMPIRE
BUCHANAN, J. M., An Economic Theory of Clubs”, ECONOMICA 32: 1-14.1965. - Frey points him out as having discussed Clubs as service providers, from limited private real estate, not territories.
BUCHANAN, MARTIN L., Strategies for Liberty, 84-88, 89, in ON PANARCHY XV, in PP 879.
BUCHANAN, MARTIN L.: The Voluntary Levy: Financing Public Goods in a Free Society, 3pp, 60, in ON PANARCHY XIV, in PP 870. - VOLUNTARY TAXATION
BUCHHEIT, LEE C.: Secession: The Legitimacy of Self-Determination, 1978, 271pp, appendixes, index, ISBN 02182-8. I saw this title in a catalog of Yale Books in print, some years ago. - J.Z., 3.2. 99.
BUCKLEY, WILLIAM F. Jr.: PLAYBOY Interview. Very shortly he favours dropping out: "A third is to drop out. The society ought to let him alone, to the extent it is possible to disengage reciprocating gears."
BUDDHA: In spite of that I am the Illuminated, if you disagree with me - follow your own convictions, not mine! - Be yourself and allow others to be themselves. - TOLERANCE, SELF-GOVERNANCE, NON-INTERFERENCE, CONVICTIONS, FAITH, BELIEF, DISAGREEMENTS, FREEDOM OF ACTION
BUDGET: Everybody has a vested interest in the system and it is hard to think of a politician who ever got elected on a platform of promising people less. So one is faced with this dilemma: the only (*) way to solve the problem is to spend less, yet the only government that can be elected is one that promises to spend more." - Patrick M. Boarman, Money, Employment and the Political Process, 14. - (*) Repeal Legal Tender. Permit Individual Secessionism & Exterritorial Autonomy. Distribute all Government Assets among the Taxpayers. Organise sensible tax strikes. – J.Z.
BUDGET: Everybody is entitled to a clear account on how much he contributed and how his money was spent, at least in percentages. Everybody has the moral right to cross out expenditures he disapproves of and demand a refund or reallocation. Moreover, every taxpayer has the right to opt out from any budget policies and to run his own budget. Everybody has the right not to be taxed, directly, indirectly or by deficit financing or inflation ( in which cases taxation takes place without even any pretence of consent ). The current budget also proceeds on the old fraud that the government could give more than it takes, that it could increase expenditures while cutting back taxes. What a condemnation of the public education system - when citizens accept such big lies without any protest! - J.Z., ca. 1972, slightly revised 16.4.94. - It is true, however, that really sharp cuts of high taxes can altogether increase the tax revenue. To reduce or abolish the total take of the bureaucracy, we would have to replace compulsory taxes by voluntary contribution schemes or by voluntary citizenship membership in exterritorially autonomous and competing communities, which would make all their taxes automatically voluntary. - J.Z., 20.4.94. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARY TAXATION
BUDGET: Government budgets to become, rather, catalogues of competitive services and goods for sale, individually or in wanted batches. - J.Z., n.d.
BUDGET: I have to pay my bills from my earnings. All governments, communities and societies should do the same by offering their services competitively to voluntary and satisfied customers, thus advancing upon their merits, as judged by sovereign consumers, or failing, because they disappointed too many of their customers, or muddling along for a while, based upon various delusions. In the long run and in fully free competition all large-scale package deals of "public services" are likely to go bankrupt when they exceed their optimal sizes. - J.Z., 28.9.02. - PANARCHISM
BUDGET: I won't be satisfied with any government budget until every cent in it has been voluntarily allocated by voluntary taxpayers, all of whom having an individual choice between competing government services. I will never be satisfied with being a tax slave owned by bureaucrats and politicians in "their" turfs. ( In the largest and most common protection rackets. - J.Z., 28.9.02. ) Each should be at liberty to finance his own political, economic and social system, church or faith, with his own money. One could begin such a freedom system by allowing each taxpayer to allocate himself his own tax money to those budget items only which he personally favours - and then eliminating all budget items that are not sufficiently or not at all voluntarily financed by such individual and voluntary contributors. - J.Z., 18.8.93, 16.4.94. - E.g.: When this first step is introduced and less than 5 % of the tax payers voluntarily contributed to a budget item, then, for the next tax year, that item should be eliminated from the government budget, i.e., that government activity should be ended. - How many government activities would then remain, after 10 or 30 years? - J.Z., 28.9.02. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, GRADUALLY & PARTLY INTRODUCED
BUDGET: Let each budget for his own expenditures, savings and investments, i.e., no one to budget for any income earned by others or property coercively taken from them. - J.Z., 10.10.91. – Except in communities of volunteers. – 5.11.10.
BUDGET: Let each not only choose his friends and companions freely but also, let each spend his own money freely, without interference by any bureaucrat. In other words, let each choose HIS politician - OR NONE, and let each run HIS OWN budget for all his earnings. Let each be his own and independent finance minister, a finance minister so independent that he does not have to crawl to any superior for a hand-out - from funds which he had accumulated himself and of which he was robbed. Introduce true democracy by letting each citizen fully dispose of or vote his own funds. - J.Z., revised 16.4.94.
BUDGET: No government to be authorised to interfere, unilaterally, with its budgets in all private budgets. All government budgets, on the contrary, to depend totally upon voluntary and individual private budget allocations, in exchange for those services which they would supply, services which are wanted, ordered and competitively delivered, either individually or in the wanted batches individually subscribed to. - J.Z., 19.12.93.
BUDGET: No politician is good enough to be authorised by me to confiscate over half of my income and to control me in spending the rest. - J.Z., 8.7.87.
BUDGET: Not politicians and bureaucrats but WE should budget our livelihood - and theirs - to the extent that we think them necessary at all. - J.Z., 8.8.93. - With the easy and thoughtless use of words like budgets, taxation, selective service, nuclear weapons, etc., etc., we accept the great wrongs and losses that are their consequences, granting, the "sanction of the victims". For all too long even open slavery was all too widely accepted as natural and inevitable. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUDGET: Private budgets ought to rule supreme over government budgets - rather than government budgets over private budgets. - J.Z., 19.12.93.
BUDGET: The more you spend for good value, the greater your Economy. The essence of Economy is that the individual must decide for himself, not for anybody else or anybody else for him." - Ernest Benn, in D. Abel, ERNEST BENN, p.70.
BUDGET: Those who earn and own should be free to make their own budgets. That would include the freedom to include in their own budgets allocations and orders and subscriptions, to private, competitive and voluntary associations, including all government levels, for all kinds of governmental services they want for themselves, competitively supplied at competitive prices. - J.Z.,19.12.93, 16.4.94.
BUDGET: We, as free individuals, should be free to budget from our own resources for any political services and servants - if we want any at all, rather than permitting these "public servants" to dispose of our earnings and property at their convenience and for their own purposes. - J.Z., 14.9.93.
BUDGET: Would there be as many civil wars (really, usually, very uncivilised ones) and international wars (wars between governments, at the risk and expense of their subjects) without compulsory common budgets, taxation, constitutions, laws, bureaucracies and jurisdictions? - J.Z., 20.4.94, 28.9.02. – Q.
BUDGETS OF TERRITORIAL STATES & THEIR TAXES VS. THE BUDGETS OF INDIVIDUALS AND OF VOLUNTEER COMMUNITIES THAT ARE EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS: Panarchies would all have only taxation that is fundamentally voluntary, because their membership is voluntary, even when quite formally they do levy compulsory membership fees or subscriptions. – J.Z., n.d. & 30.11.11. - VOLUNTARY TAXATION.
BUDGETS: A private citizen ought to budget, whatever he sees fit and wants from a competitive local government service. This one should allocate from these funds whatever it sees fit towards a state-wide association of some such local service competitors. The competing state-wide service companies, from these allocations, should budget what they see fit towards some competitive federation, continental or world-wide. The lower ranks should always be able to cut off the higher ranks and the individual consumer should retain his consumer sovereignty through freedom to secede from any local, state, federal or world federation. - J.Z., 16.4.94. - AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM & SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, FEDERALISM FROM THE BOTTOM UP
BUFE, CHAZ: Listen, Anarchist, March 86 pamphlet, review only, by FREEDOM, with note by J.Z.. 124, in ON PANARCHY XIV, in PEACE PLANS 870: LISTEN, ANARCHIST! by Chaz Bufe (no publisher, no price) Freedom Reviews, in “FREEDOM”, London, 3/86. THIS 16-page pamphlet, which takes its title from Murray Bookchin's well-known polemic, Listen Marxist!, and comes from the Black Duck Press in San Francisco, contains a powerful critique of 'the deliberate self-marginalisation of a relatively large number of North American anarchists, especially in their hostility to work and workers, their bias against any form of organisation, their romanticisation of violence, their employment of lies and abuse in controversy, their misuse of words and use of jargon, their rejection of science, rationality and technology, and their reversion to mysticism and superstition. The conclusion, 'What Can Be Done', contains ten points: 1.) We should avoid the use of violence except in self-defence and in revolutionary situations . . .2.) We should avoid deliberate self-marginalisation ...3.)We should attack irrationality and mysticism wherever and whenever they arise . . .4.) We must refuse to tolerate personal abuse, physical harassment and outright violence . . 5.) We should take great care - especially in printed matter - to employ simple, clear language . . .6.) We should look askance at those who attack other anarchists, using emotionally loaded terms such as 'Leninist', 'Stalinist', 'purge' and 'censorship' ..7.) We should not tolerate dishonesty and personal attacks . . .8.) We should not cower behind pseudonyms or anonymity when we criticise the ideas of other anarchists ... 9.) We should accept the fact that freedom of association implies freedom to disassociate . . .10.) We should attempt to live our lives as nearly in accord with anarchist ideas as we can . . . - Much of the detailed discussion relates to recent events in the United States and Canada, but the general argument is just as relevant to anarchists in Britain. - Provided anarchistic communities may be freely established, how many of their members, judging by their present utterances, would be prepared to tolerate individual and collective secession from them and re-association, exterritorially and voluntarily, to realize some or the other statist ideal (voluntary, non-territorially and only among themselves and at their own risk and expense!)? - If they are going to be as tolerant then they have certainly not said so, often, loud and clear enough. - J.Z., 11.1.87.
BULGARIAN DELEGATION: Observations of the Bulgarian Delegation on the Conditions of Peace with Bulgaria, Paris, 1919.
BULLARD, READER WILLIAM: Sir, 1885 -, Large and Loving Privileges; the Capitulations in the Middle East and North Africa, Glasgow, Jackson, 1960, 39pp, Glasgow University Publication. (Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor.) – Loving privileges? – J.Z.
BULLYING: Must men be bullied forever?" - H. G. Wells: Boon. - Wells himself strongly promoted his own kind of statist bullying, on a national to world-wide scale: State socialism. - J.Z., 16.4.94.
BUNGLING: States assure centralised bungling. - J.Z., 22.5.80. – States that are only exterritorially autonomous could do so in a decentralized way – only at the expense of their volunteers – and they deserve it, as voluntary subscribers to statism, who have not yet learnt their lesson about it. – J. Z., 10.11.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
BURDENS: If it were ever true that we grow strong by bearing burdens, it's true today. It follows, and is equally true, that we grow weak and flaccid when our burdens are taken away." - Vollie Tripp, quoted in The Free Man's Almanac. - One should distinguish between chosen and self-imposed burdens and burdens like taxes. - J.Z., 1976. - I doubt that anyone has ever become strong through the imposition of tax burdens upon him and weakened through the abolition of taxes upon his labour and property. - J.Z., 16.4.94. - OBSTACLES, NEED, EMERGENCIES, GROWTH, STRENGTH, TAXATION
BUREAUCRACIES: Bureaucracies are enemies of rights and reason. They rather serve primitive, false and fixed ideas and dogmas and persist with them as long as they can, contrary to experience, facts and reason. – J.Z., 18.8.07. - Once their victims enlighten themselves sufficiently their political and bureaucratic masters will soon become powerless and deserted. – E.g. by an efficiently organized tax strike, combined with alternative institutions that are really wanted by their volunteers and alternative, competing and self-managed protective services. Only for territorial statists are such alternatives hard to imagine. – J.Z., 19.10.07.
BUREAUCRACIES: Our compulsory, multiple and all too prolonged "marriages" to bureaucrats, which we may not unilaterally and individually dissolve, their plans, orders and demands upon us, their power games, including even MAD policies, with mass murder ABC devices, should not be considered as a natural and inevitable state of affairs, far less an ideal one. These kind of marriages, too, should become optionalised and individualized, with individual members at any time free to unilaterally divorce themselves from them and to choose for themselves other and supposedly better political or ideological system relationships or even none at all, if they can stand that. - J.Z., 18.9.91, 13.1.93.
BUREAUCRACY & PANARCHISM: No more involuntary victims of bureaucracy. The victims are then free to opt out and choose for themselves less bureaucratic regimes or regimes without bureaucracy. Bureaucracy could no longer parasitically grow and grow.
BUREAUCRACY & PANARCHY: Any territorially imposed, i.e., not individually and freely chosen bureaucracy is useful only to the bureaucrats. – J.Z., 19.8.03. . – And their favourites. – J.Z., 5.11.10.
BUREAUCRACY: a bureaucracy has nothing in common with the people; it is a parasitic body, and has to be maintained by taxation and extortion." - Herbert Read, Anarchy & Order, p.100. – The common tie is the coercion and monopoly of territorialism and the statist beliefs it rests upon, making the “sanction of the victims” possible and likely. – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: A citizen asked to specify his complaints about the evils of progressive bureaucratisation, might say something like this: 'There cannot be any doubt that this bureaucratic system is essentially anti-liberal, undemocratic, and contrary to the spirit of the traditional British system of parliamentary government, and that it is a replica of the totalitarian methods of Stalin and Hitler. It is imbued with fanatical hostility to free enterprise and private property. It paralyses the conduct of business and lowers the productivity of labour. By heedless spending it squanders the nation's wealth. It is inefficient and wasteful. Although it styles what it does planning, it has no definite plans and aims. It lacks unity and uniformity; the various bureaus and agencies all work at cross purposes. The outcome is a disintegration of the whole social apparatus of production and distribution. Poverty and distress are bound to follow." - Quoted in ERC WORLD MARKET PERSPECTIVE, Canada, 15.10.75. - Allow individuals to opt out from under it! - J.Z.
BUREAUCRACY: All bureaucratic services to be for volunteers only, i.e. to be hired or fired or ignored by them. No monopolies, no sinecures, no compulsory taxes to support them (except within communities of volunteers, from which individuals may freely secede, which makes their contributions voluntary - in essence). - J.Z., 19.11.92, 18.4.94.
BUREAUCRACY: All bureaucratic services to be for volunteers only, i.e. to be hired and fired by them. No monopolies, no sinecures, no compulsory taxes to support them - except among volunteer groups. - J.Z. 19.11.92, 4.1.93.
BUREAUCRACY: all we need now is some free market alternatives to The Mystical Order of Bureaucrats..." - FREE MARKET REPORTER, 12/77. - With the finance plan described in PEACE PLANS 19C, we could distribute its assets, whereupon it would disappear. - J.Z., 21.11.82. - Unless we were foolish enough to leave it any powers. - J.Z., 18.4.94. The realisation of individual secessionism and of volunteer militias for the protection of individual rights should take care of that. - J.Z., 20.4.94.
BUREAUCRACY: Almost any bureaucracy can withstand almost any criticism but it cannot withstand being deprived of its monopolistic powers and tax or subsidy income. These are its roots to be cut. They must all be turned into competitive enterprises living of earnings for asked for and delivered, services that are wanted by sovereign consumers. - J.Z., 17.4.94.
BUREAUCRACY: Almost everybody hates it, even many bureaucrats themselves do. But until everybody becomes free to opt out from under them and from the taxation and inflation and deflation policies they pursue, it will persist. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: Any territorially imposed, i.e., not individually and freely chosen bureaucracy is useful mainly only to the bureaucrats and various lobbies and special interest groups. – J.Z., 19.8.03, 12.11.08. – PANARCHY, TERRITORIALISM
BUREAUCRACY: Anyone who knows the difficulty of restraining a bureaucratic apparatus not controlled by profit-and-loss calculations from constantly expanding - also knows that without the rigid barrier of strictly limited funds there is nothing to stop an indefinite growth of government expenditure." – F. A. Hayek, Denationalization of Money, p.91. - Individual taxpayers should become free to stop their tax contributions to government projects or even to whole governments which they have not individually chosen for themselves. Individual tax slaves ought to be turned into sovereign consumers of competing government services. - J.Z., 19.4.94.
BUREAUCRACY: Anything that cannot work will not work, e.g., territorial bureaucracy and government. - J.Z., 8.7.74, 10.11.08. - TERRITORIALISM
BUREAUCRACY: At home, we must liberate people from bureaucracies so that they can achieve more for themselves.” - Newt Gingrich, Window of Opportunity, A Blueprint for the Future, p.138, - Allow people, even individuals, to liberate themselves from bureaucracies - by legalizing individual and minority group secessions and exterritorial autonomy for volunteers! - J.Z., 23.1.02. - LIBERATION, SELF-HELP
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucracies are enemies of rights and reason. They rather serve primitive, false and fixed ideas and dogmas and persist with them as long as they can, contrary to experience, facts and reason. – J.Z., 18.8.07. - Once their victims enlighten themselves sufficiently their political and bureaucratic masters will soon become powerless and deserted. – E.g. by an efficiently organized tax strike, combined with alternative institutions that are really wanted by their volunteers and alternative, competing and self-managed protective services. Only for territorial statists are such alternatives hard to imagine. – J.Z., 19.10.07.
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucracies are the excreta of thoughtless and irresponsible altruism, ignorance and prejudices, combined with power addiction and personal greed. Flawed thinking produces flawed actions, institutions and results - numerous large and small wrongs at great cost, indefinitely continued at the expense of its victims, who are not free to opt out from under it, minding their own business and their own voluntary communities under personal laws. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucracies conscript and waste the manpower and resources of whole nations. - J.Z., n.d. - Actually, "nations", "peoples" and "countries" are also mere bureaucratic inventions. Only individuals and their voluntary associations and communities are real. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucracies feed upon productive and peaceful people, largely against their will, through compulsory taxation. To reduce or even abolish bureaucracy, voluntary taxation is required, Then only as much bureaucracy could survive as voluntary victims are willing to pay for. - J.Z., 14.9.88, 18.4.94.
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucracies form the largest crime syndicates and yet they encounter not only many dissenters but also many voluntary victims. In future they should have to confine their activities to the latter. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucracies themselves should be assumed to be noxious, authoritarian parasites on society, with a tendency to augment their own size and power and to cultivate a parasitical clientele in all classes of society. Area after area of American life should be set free from their blind power drive." - William E. Simon, A Time for Truth, p.219. - Just allow individuals to secede form them - and the whole set of them. - J.Z., 19.4.94. – That would be least provocative to the remaining majority of statists and mobilize their own decentralist and dissenting forces as well – against territorial rule. – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: bureaucracy without which human beings cannot be governed at all." - Jules Romain, Verdun, p. 50. - Just one more reason to get rid of both, governments & their bureaucracies! - J.Z., 7.4.80. It is neither humane to govern nor to be governed. - All territorial government leads to Verduns and Hiroshimas. - J.Z., 20.4.94. In the battle for Verdun almost a million people were massacred, more than in Hiroshima, Nagasaki combined and even if one adds the artificial firestorms of e.g. Tokyo, Hamburg and Dresden. The essential difference was only that it took longer, was confined largely to soldiers ordered to kill each other and that each of the victims had at least for a short time the chance to shoot back, rather than being merely a victim. Now, with IBMs, the victims are even less known than they are to the flyers in bombers or to the artillery men and the “targets” don’t have to be in uniform for “recognition” as “enemies”. – It is enough that they are taxed and misruled by a government in a country that on maps is indicated by a particular colour. – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucracy, the rule of no one, (*) has become the modern form of despotism.” – Mary McCarthy. - Without compulsory membership or obedience, i.e., territorial rule, without individual and group secessionism, bureaucrats would be relatively harmless and even loved by their voluntary followers and supporters. - (*) Rather, the rule of all too many bureaucrats over all too many dissenters. - J.Z., 26. 11. 06.
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucracy? Yes! But only among bureaucrats! -J.Z., April 04. - And at their expense and risk only – and of those, who still believe in bureaucracy. They do deserve all that they get from it. – J.Z., 9.5.04.
BUREAUCRACY: Bureaucrats cannot meet the competition of foreign markets (*); they flourish only where they are sheltered by the State, with its compulsion and coercion." - Mises, Omnipotent Government, p.57. - (*) and internal ones. - J.Z.
BUREAUCRACY: citizens ... not government bureaucrats, should be in control of their lives and property and that they should insist on it." - James Tobin, NTU, Illinois chapter, NEW LIBERTARIAN WEEKLY, 10/11/77. – Well, as statists they do not. Thus we should have statism only for the statists and any alternative communities only for those volunteers who do want them for themselves. They should not all be monopolistically, centralistically and coercively “united” under “territorialism” but become, instead, exterritorially autonomous, together with like-minded people – at their own risk and expense – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: Do not protect any government department from competition by private enterprises. - J.Z., 30.8.79, suggested by remarks by Spooner, Works I, on Mails, p. 43. – Nor from competition by exterritorially autonomous societies of volunteers. – J.Z., 6.11.10.
BUREAUCRACY: Don't let the bureaucrats run any show. - J.Z., PEACE PLANS 29. – Except those among and for or against voluntary victims. – J.Z., 6.11.10.
BUREAUCRACY: Europe writhes in a thousand spasms under the iron yoke of a senseless bureaucracy which abhors all independent action and would prefer to put all people under the guardianship of the nursery. Such are the fruits of political centralisation." – Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.232. – Nurseries for children are often life-preserving. The country-wide territorial prisons of national governments do often engage in mutual slaughters of their subjects, i.e. in human sacrifices on a colossal scale, misnamed defensive wars on both sides. – J.Z., 6.11.10.
BUREAUCRACY: Every country has the bureaucracy it deserves. Ours, trained in public school and university, is efficient (*), unimaginative, unfeeling, dull, and honest (*). In other countries the bureaucracy has no such gentlemanly traditions; it is lazy, lousy, and corrupt." - Herbert Read, Anarchy & Order, p.100. - - “Countries” and “peoples” are also invented abstract notions of the bureaucrats, to give them more power and preserve the myths that they are representatives of whole countries and their populations. - (*) ??? - J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: Free people can manage everything better than government bureaucrats can. - J.Z., 21.9.91. - SELF-MANAGEMENT, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, FREE PEOPLE, FREE SOCIETY, COMPETITION, MONOPOLIES, DIS.
BUREAUCRACY: Free people working together freely can accomplish more than millions of federal bureaucrats telling you what to do with your life." - Center for the Defence of Free Enterprise, SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 6/78. – All the strengths and abilities of freedom ideas, resources, references, systems and talents are still very far from having been fully mobilized for the struggle of liberty against authoritarianism. They could lead to a fast and easy victory. – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: Government bureaucracies are like hydras devouring us. For every one of their heads that you might succeed in chopping off, after a costly struggle, they grow two others. In the ancient legend you had to burn their necks, after you had chopped the heads off. Regarding our bureaucratic hydras, we ought to become free to divorce ourselves completely and permanently from their sadistic disservices. Only masochists would retain them. - J.Z. 27.2.89, 18.4.94.
BUREAUCRACY: I do not want any efficient bureaucrat over my honest, peaceful and productive life but no bureaucrat, politician, administrator or judge at all. Others are welcome to their "services" and burdens. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labour of the industrious." - Thomas Jefferson: Letter to William Ludlow, 1824. - It should be up to the peaceful individual to decide how much bureaucracy is necessary for him. - J.Z., 18.4.94. – A voluntary tax or contribution payer would not pay for too much of it, in his opinion. – J.Z., 6.11.10.
BUREAUCRACY: In a bureaucratic system useless work drives out useful work." - Milton Friedman. NEWSWEEK, 7 Nov. 77. - Only because it has been given an artificial legal tender or forced currency value. – ( Compulsory acceptance & a forced nominal value. ) Under the individualized choice and free market rating of governmental and societal systems existing under panarchism, the bad systems would be driven out by the good systems. Now the bad systems are constitutionally, legally and juridically enforced and allow no good systems to compete them out of existence. – J.Z., 11.11.08. - Compare GRESHAM'S LAW. – PANARCHISM, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM VS. COMPULSION & MONOPOLIES
BUREAUCRACY: In a government bureaucracy that is exempt from competition, the customers have nowhere else to go. Their interests are largely irrelevant. Hence, the bureaucrat can serve his self-interest at their expense by expanding his empire and reducing his workload." - Milton Friedman, NEWSWEEK, Nov. 7,1977. – Alas, M. F. offered only one way out, another territorial State, although this time a limited one, a far future ideal, since most of the present subjects and rulers are still statists. – His son, David F., to the extent that he is a free market anarchists, does also offer only a far future ideal as a way out, a territory-wide anarchism, instead of one which would allow each individual his self-chosen system, exterritorially quite autonomous, according to his own individual preferences in the political, economic and social spheres as well, just like the largely free and different choices he makes already now as an almost sovereign consumer between the various consumer goods and services offered in a relatively free market. Any kind of non-governmental society to any kind of anarchist, any kind of statist society to any kind of statist – is an ideal that both kinds of people could soon achieve, once they recognize that this kind of framework would give them the chance to come much closer to their own ideal, quite undisturbed by that of others, if it is a peaceful, non-aggressive or tolerant one, than is the present situation for them, with its all too few and limited individual choices under territorialism, with its collectivism, monopolies, centralization and compulsion. – J.Z., 11.8.08.
BUREAUCRACY: In a government bureaucracy that is exempt from competition, the customers have nowhere else to go. Their interests are largely irrelevant. Hence, the bureaucrat can serve his self-interest at their expense by expanding his empire and reducing his workload. The fault is not with the people who run the system, but with the system itself. More fundamentally, the fault is with those of us who are responsible for replacing the economic with the political market." - Dr. Max Gammon, PROGRESS, 4/76. – The political “market’ is not a free market under territorialism, majority rule and parliamentary representation and legislation! – J.Z., 11.11.08. - TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM
BUREAUCRACY: Individuals rather than bureaucrats should be free to choose, decide, and act. - J.Z., 10.11.91. And individuals should pay themselves and directly, for what they want - rather than through politicians, bureaucrats and taxes. – Or associate in their own kind of self-chosen panarchy to provide the “public services that they do want by one or the other kind of voluntary taxation. - J.Z., 18.4.94, 6.11.10.
BUREAUCRACY: It is bureaucracy which has sickened all of us." - Bismarck, in Friedrichsruh, 12.12.1891. - Alas, it has not yet sickened us enough! If we were really sick of it we would use or create options to opt out from under it - like we would try to escape from the mistreatments of a quack. - J.Z., 28.9.02. – Was he really unaware that with his creation of the “united” territorial German Reich he created an even bigger and ever growing bureaucracy? – And prepared the foundation for two world wars? - J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: Let us undertake at once an orderly demobilisation of the bureaucracy by the progressive repeal of the socialistic laws now on our books. This is the road back to social health and sanity, and it will be a struggle all the way; every pressure group in the nation will fight to retain its special privileges, subsidies, and government protection. But if freedom is to live, all politically privileged positions must go!" – Admiral Ben Moreell, Log II, 197. - I would rather like to mobilise all taxpayers for tax refusal and alternative institutions that pay their way, and reward them for this effort not only by saving them all further tax payments but also with their personal share in the privatisation of all public assets. This kind of resistance could be made to pay. In countries like Australia the average citizen could even end up a millionaire. See PEACE PLANS 14 & 19 C. - J.Z., 17.4.94.
BUREAUCRACY: Our temporary or lasting marriages to bureaucrats, their orders and demands, should also be entirely voluntary for the individual, i.e., everyone should at any time be free to divorce himself from his present bureaucracy and choose for himself any other, which he supposes to be better, or none at all. - J.Z., 18.9.91, 18.4.94. - PANARCHISM
BUREAUCRACY: Reverse the trend of corrupt bureaucracy by taking personal responsibility." - Martha Treichler, THE FREEMAN, 6/74. - As if this were a legal option in most cases, i.e. as if responsible actions were free and untaxed at present. Her recommendation would be practicable for every individual only under panarchism. - J.Z., 17.4.94.
BUREAUCRACY: Sack all bureaucrats! - n.d. - Drop out, withdraw, secede, do your own thing: Organise and support alternative and competing providers for wanted services. - J.Z., 28.9.02. - PANARCHISM, COMPETITION, EXTERRITORIALITY, SECESSION, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, VOLUNTARISM
BUREAUCRACY: Thanks to the inefficient very nature of bureaucracy, no matter how hard it tries, we are still not completely governed by it, no matter how annoying, expensive and restricting it has got. – What would happen if it were suddenly confronted by a significant number of people who knew, appreciated and utilized all their individual rights and liberty options to free themselves from this domination? – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: The best way to deal with bureaucracy is to sell it, i.e., to declare it bankrupt and distribute its assets fairly and start anew, each with his share going in the direction he or she wants to travel. - J.Z., 5.9.83. - See PEACE PLANS 19c.
BUREAUCRACY: the bureaucrat has only a bureaucrat to please." - Frank Chodorov, Fugitive Essays, 51. – Exterritorially freely competing panarchies would have to satisfy only their own voluntary members – as long as they leave all the voluntary members of other panarchies alone. – Since interventions with the affairs of other communities of volunteers would be a costly and risky “enterprise”, even if one would wish to engage in it, such imperialistic and colonial “enterprises” would tend to become very rare under panarchism, while the competitive drive to make the own panarchy in some or many respects better and more attractive than the others are, would be rather strong, perhaps as strong as e.g. the competitive spirit in sports. – Each of us has many different bureaucrats to please and, at least partly to support, with our obedience and taxes. - J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: The government is one big group trap. To be efficient it depends upon millions of bureaucrats whose incomes and careers don't depend upon efficient action." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom, p.176. - He might have added that their power and salaries depend upon the continuance of their monopoly and that, conscious of this, they are often efficient in preserving this monopoly. Instances: Post Office and Central Bank. No matter how harmful and deteriorating their "services" were, they managed to uphold their privileges. - J.Z., n.d.
BUREAUCRACY: The growing bureaucratic tumours should be surgically removed. Or one should cut off their blood supply: taxes. - J.Z., 26.4.76, 3.4.81. - Plus government "securities" and its inflationary as well as deflationary central banking system. - J.Z., 28.9.02. – Fundamentally: its involuntary subjects. – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: The king has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their Substance." – U.S. Declaration of Independence. – We need now millions of individuals declaring a.) their independence and b) their affiliation, if they wish it, with self-chosen societies, communities or competing governments, all of them only exterritorially autonomous and under personal rather than territorial laws and not with any claim to any exclusive territory for its members only. – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: The modern inquisition, made up of fanatics, torturers and robber barons. - J.Z., 21.6.91, 18.4.94. – What makes it worse is that they are acting, mostly, within their constitutional, legal and juridical powers. It is from that angle that their powers and activities ought to become limited, starting with individual secessionism and full exterritorial autonomy for all communities of volunteers. Just think how much or how little bureaucracy the voluntary members of such communities would be willing to pay for, as membership fees, before thinking of a further secession by themselves. – J.Z., 6.11.10. – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARY TAXATION
BUREAUCRACY: The only good bureaucrat is one with a pistol at his head. Put it in his hand and it's good-bye to the Bill of Rights.” – H. L. Mencken. – Individual and group secessionism and exterritorial autonomy rather than revolutionary violence in most cases! One should not fight the internal enemies but, rather, leave them alone, to their own devices and means and their voluntary victims. – Otherwise the largest battalions might still fight for them rather than against them. - J.Z., 3.1.07. – Their “bills of rights” are also produced by politicians, trade union functionaries and bureaucrats and are thus correspondingly flawed and incomplete. - GUN CONTROL, RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, HUMAN RIGHTS MUST BECOME DEFINED & PROTECTED BY ARMED CITIZENS NOT ONLY AGAINST PRIVATE CRIMINALS
BUREAUCRACY: The only rightful and efficient alternative to bureaucracy is self-management, down to its optimally decentralized and various forms. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: The only thing that saves us from bureaucracy is inefficiency. An efficient bureaucracy is the greatest threat to liberty." – Eugene McCarthy's Adage, quoted in SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 7/81. - Probably it was David or Milton Friedman who said that we should be grateful not to get all the government we are forced to pay for. - J.Z., 22. 11. 06. – It does not save us but just costs us more in money than competitively supplied and wanted services would cost us, not to speak of the rights, liberties and opportunities lost through this compulsory territorial “help” and protection. – J.Z., 2.1.08. – JOKES, – EFFICIENCY, INEFFICIENCY
BUREAUCRACY: The strength and persistence of bureaucracy lies in this that its very foundations are rarely attacked, namely: territorialism and taxation, which are, all too widely and still considered to be natural, rightful and inevitable. Hardly anyone even considers theoretically the exterritorialist, voluntary and autonomous alternatives, including, e.g., voluntary taxation and subscription schemes. Bureaucracy rests upon this ignorance, prejudices and lack of interest in the own affairs. Thus thousands of objections and slogans against and jokes about bureaucracy remain ineffective as long as these foundations are not tackled. - That much about public bureaucracies. When it comes to the private bureaucracies, those of large companies or corporations, then here, too, the alternatives to them, in various forms of self-management, are insufficiently considered and practised. Here, too, the ancient hierarchical or monarchical system largely persists, unquestioned, as if it were quite natural, rightful and effective. Not even the insight that there are optimal sizes for all organizations has sufficiently penetrated in this "free enterprise" sphere and the share-holders' voting system has, in practice, almost as much disfranchised the small shareholder as his voting in political matters has disfranchised him from important decision-making. - Do consider the numerous alternatives to both of them, all only for their volunteers! - J.Z., 28.9.02. – SHARE COMPANIES, CORPORATIONS, VOTING, CENTRALIZATION, DECENTRALIZATION, POWER
BUREAUCRACY: The term 'civil servant' is rendered ridiculous when applied to the high-handed method used by bureaucrats to enforce their directives." - FREEDOM, Spring 73. - Anyhow, even polite behaviour would be no excuse for the wrongful and unwanted actions of official and legalized robbers and gangsters, usually misnamed civil servants or public servants. – At best they tend to provide wanted services at double to treble the costs that competing free market institutions would pay for them. – To that extent even then their monopolism and finance by taxation is quite wrong. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: The whole of life is bureaucratised'. This bureaucratisation of Life, Senor Ortega proceeds, produces decay in all orders, wealth diminishes, births decrease, and then the State, in order to attend to its own needs, proceeds to bureaucratisation to the second power, the militarisation of society. The State's most urgent need is its apparatus of war, its army..." - Ortega y Gasset, The Revolt of the Masses, reviewed by S. Hutchinson Harris, The Doctrine of Personal Right, 402. – The masses rarely ever revolt and then, usually, only in a revolting way. – Let individuals, minorities and dissenting majorities peacefully secede! - J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: Throw a few thousand sticky-noses bureaucrats out of work." - Duncan Yuille, THE NATIONAL TIMES, 4.11.74. - Why not all of them? Under full competition only really wanted and needed public services would be continued and willingly paid for. These would have places for the able and willing among the unemployed bureaucrats. The rest would have to be satisfied with jobs corresponding to their limited abilities and willingness to work. - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: To hire a competing public service agency in a free market is, usually, much cheaper than to be taxed to support a monopolistic and bureaucratic one that offers or imposes its services - whatever there are of them - and its disservices, "free" of charge. - J.Z., n.d.
BUREAUCRACY: We are 'virtually locked into a continuously expanding, ultimately self-destructing bureaucratic monster'..." - ?, quoted in REASON, March 73. - Let us consider all our break-out or escape options! - J.Z., 28.9.02.
BUREAUCRACY: We are sovereign citizens. (*) This nation belongs to us, not to the thieving, corrupt bureaucrats we've got 'working for us' in Washington today. We are going to get our freedom back." - Rene Baxter, in advertising his book: The Tax Revolt. - (*) We are not but ought to become individually sovereign, making or hiring our own governments and other institutions, exterritorially autonomous, with other volunteers with whom we contracted or associated. Limited government constitutions and anarchistic societies are just some of our options as free men, doing our own things, minding our own business, experimenting freely, harming and risking only ourselves and our property. - J.Z., 18.4.94. – The very concept of a “nation” is already a cover-up term to hide the reality, just like the territorial systems of “free voting” and “parliamentary representation” are. – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUREAUCRACY: We must always ask in other words, INSTEAD OF WHAT?" - Henry Hazlitt, THE FREEMAN, 3/76.
BUREAUCRACY: We need bureaucracies in order to solve our problems, but once we have got them they effectively prevent us from doing so." - Prof. Ralph Dahrendorf, Reith Lecture, 1974. - Upon this Terry Arthur, in 95% is Crap, p. 16, replied: "We need 'A' to get to 'B', but 'A' stops us from getting to 'B'! If they really do prevent us from solving our problems, then as sure as God made little apples, we don't need them!"
BUREAUCRACY: What an absurdity to entrust the defence of liberty, justice, peace, the promotion of education, science and wealth - to territorial bureaucrats and politicians! - J.Z., 19.8.87.
BURGESS, A.: Perfect World Limited, Robertson & Mullens, Melbourne, 1942, 132pp, JZL. - A statist with some interesting hints to exterritorialism and monetary freedom. Pages 50 & 51 bring some information on Extraterritoriality and the "Unequal Treaties and China's Sovereign Rights". On pages 61 - 63 there is some information on the "special areas" in China, especially Tientsin. Alas, he offers no information on its competition between note-issuing banks. - J.Z., 3.2. 1999.
BURKE, EDMUND: A Vindication of Natural Society, or: A view of the miseries and evils arising to mankind from every species of artificial society: 1756, 54 pages, in LIBERTY, No. 53ff, in PEACE PLANS 247-273, also in a more legible edition in PEACE PLANS 583. Many conservative libertarians still imagine that he was not serious when he wrote that essay but meant it only as a satire. It is these libertarians, who do not take liberty serious enough. - J.Z., 2.8.04. – At least in Tucker’s LIBERTY it is now online, probably also e.g. at the Molinari Institute. – J.Z. – TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSORY STATISM, SOCIETY, NATURAL SOCIETEY
BURMA & PANARCHISM: Burma is just another example of how important it is to replace territorial impositions, largely continuing the old imperialistic and colonial frontiers and their territories, by organizations that provide for self-government not only to ruling minorities or majorities but to all minorities. It has ca. 20 minority groups making up ca. 50 % of the population, according to radio news on 26 Nov. 1995. While these groups were tribally located and in little contact with each other and largely self-governing, left each other’s religions alone and to the extent that they did support themselves productively rather than through banditry, there were few conflicts. But by now they live intermixed but have not yet fully subscribed to a common ideal except the territorial distopia. That is a recipe for disaster, for oppression and civil war. Allowing each minority group as well as the majority to follow the own path opens up the paths to peace, freedom, prosperity and progress, to all the anarchistic, libertarian, welfarist, socialist and communist dreams by removing all the territorial, constitutional, legal and juridical obstacles to them. Naturally, this is not the kind of societal framework for those who are constitutionally unable to be tolerant. But this framework would also be the best to develop and apply much better defence systems against criminals with victims than do exist at present. Burma is not unique in that. E.g. Papua New Guinea has been called a country of a 1,000 tribes. The downfall of the Soviet Empire brought over 120 ethnic minorities into the limelight, not to speak of the still more numerous others. Unfortunately, most of them are still conditioned to dream only territorialist dreams of “national independence”. – J.Z., 7.1.99.
BURNHEIM, J., 1985, Is Democracy Possible? The Alternative to Electoral Politics. Cambridge, England: Polity. - According to Frey, he discusses several elements of FOCJ.
BUSINESS: Government is to go and to get and to stay out of business. - J.Z., 2/75. – With the exception of the voluntary customers that it can still find for its “goods & services”. – J.Z., 11.11.08.
BUSINESS: Off the State - Start a Business.” - Jim Stumm, LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION, May 6th, 71. - Replace all territorial States by voluntaristic business package or insurance schemes for volunteers, under full exterritorial autonomy for all of them. - J.Z., 20.10.02. - So far the territorial States managed all too well to live parasitically of the work and business and property of others, largely non-consenting victims. Alternative business institutions that might be readily accepted by individual sovereign consumers as attractive alternatives to the coercive and monopolistic and also very expensive and risky package deals of territorial States have to be described in more and attractive details. See under panarchism and e.g., www.panarchy.org - J.Z., 16.11.02. VS. THE STATE, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, THE MARKET FOR LIBERTY - IN ALL SPHERES, DIS.
BUSINESS: Public authorities: "... politicians... have promised to operate according to sound business principles. Well, it's nice to hear they admire business principles. But why 'play' business? If it's the Better Way, then let private business do it and get government out." - SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, Winter 75/76.
BUSINESS: The average businessman believes that free enterprise is a marvellous system - in every field but his." - Louis Rukeyser, SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 3/77. - That is not true e.g. for note-issuing banks, postal services, policing and defence services and for competing and exterritorially autonomous communities for volunteers. In other words, most businessmen still share all too many territorialist and statist prejudices against comprehensive laissez-faire market services in every sphere. - J.Z., 19.4.94, 6.11.10.
BUSINESSMEN: I have always found it remarkable that so many men and women are prepared to distrust any and all businessmen – whose appeals, in a free market, they are free to ignore – while trusting even the most corrupt or cruel politician – whose demands they fail to meet at their peril.” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 34. – Businessmen operate largely exterritorially & competitively, for voluntary customers only while politicians operate largely territorially, monopolistically and coercively – towards all dissenters in “their” territories. – J.Z., 12.11.08. – Indeed, why is the exterritorial, competitive and voluntary method not more popular in the sphere of political, economic and social systems? Are we, like Pavlovian dogs, conditioned by territorialism? – J.Z., 12.11.08. - POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL COMPETITION
BUSSE, HERIBERT: Chalif und Grosskoenig: Die Buyiden im Iraq, 945-1055, Beirut, F. Steiner, 1969.
BUTTER: No more butter for me - until the margarine quotas are abolished. - J.Z., 17.2.73. - See SUBSIDIES, MARGARINE QUOTAS. - I guess they have been abolished by now, quietly. I do not know when it happened. The supermarket shelves are full of a variety of margarine, butter, oil etc. offers - in great quantities. - J.Z., 19.4.94. – By now I have for years rather boycotted margarines, using mostly only oils, peanut butter and, very occasionally and for a long period, half a pound of butter, for its taste. I wish we had already as much of a free consumer choice in the sphere of governments and free societies – all offered to individuals on “shelving” or, rather, by private or public competing membership registration companies. – Consumer sovereignty and genuine self-government or self-determination in every sphere! An end to all territorial monopolies! - J.Z., 6.11.10.
BUTTERBACH, CHRISTIAN, Territorialism: [Previous entry: "No fear of words!"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "Papiergeld regiert die Welt"] 10/03/2005 Entry: "Animal Kingdom" - One of his references: 07/21/2004: Sovereign Life/The True Significance and Power of the Word Secede - 04/05/2004: The Manifesto of Peace and Freedom - 03/18/2004: Mourning Madrid/Libertarians and Terrorists ~ Common Traits - 02/27/2004: Immigration ~ Immigration ~ Einwanderung - Elephants, donkeys, ostriches, sheeple, libertarians... - Would you say that voting and, in the case of the United States, choosing between two animals, is a national liberation movement? I wouldn't! Especially since the voters do not vote for ostriches! - And like domesticated birds they feel reasonably well [though a bit less lately] in the corral into which, as wild animals (individuals), they have been caught. Also with the help of libertarian lassos (spell it with upper case L , if you want). Like animals, they stick to territory. And as in the case of the USA, the territory is rather large (and rich in natural resources, including hurricanes, sorry), the territorial addiction is solid. Thus they put up with that nonsense that every individual born, living, residing, travelling in such a territory, including those outside the territory, but dealing with the inmates, plus those unwilling to deal like in Iraq, should abide by the same set of laws set by others. They only have a choice as to which colours the feathers should have that their Supreme Commander Fowl are wearing. Never a real change, only changing and returning fashion trends, as superficial and dishonest as Max Factor "Pancake" makeup. All made up, all cover-up! - National liberation movements, national liberation fronts or with whatever military names and cosmetic they like to beautify themselves, so abundant in the past and now, are normally initiated and pursued by those who know least how to create abundance, extreme left-wingers. In spite of tons of good reasons to be extremely dissatisfied with the conditions for them in the to them foreign national corral or coop they are cooped up in, all those Kurds, Chechens, Basques etc. are less imprisoned and AbuGhraibed by the nations they consider foreign than by their own flawed ideas. - - Secession is good, but not from a territory in most cases and not from a monopolist legal system, if it's only to become a transfer1 of the despised one, falling again into the trap of territorial despotism and start all over again. Or do history books have to be filled with all that crap? Paper is too precious to be wasted for such an ineffective perpetuum mobile. Secession is good if it allows, for as many as spontaneously form (and maybe dissolve again), voluntary and very different and diverse legal communities to exist and function peacefully towards each other within the same territory (like Catholics and Protestants in Germany, unlike in Northern Ireland). And there should be only one: the Earth! Let's shoot those imperialists, nationalists, monopolists, border Nazis, Patriots and other despots to the moon! What a paradise it will become there for real estate agents... - And while I'm at it, legitimate territorial instinct only as far as the "my home is my castle" goes, private property. Man made one. Animals living on the same territory, let's say wild cats or dogs, mark their "territory", but that is not in any sense as exclusive as when a Coast Guard takes a leak on the shore. It allows dogs and cats and rabbits and squirrels, blackbirds and the whole of Noah's Ark to each live quite differently in its own "panarchy" within the same territory. Some individuals of one animal panarchy, but far from all, will "sometimes" kill and eat an individual from some other animal "legal" community, but that's simply because, in the view of our human more advanced evolutionary and civilized state, God has done its job VERY badly. What can you expect from an absentee landlord/lord/Lord (upper or lower case, not unlike with libertarian and Libertarian...)? Not much. In the best case that you are left alone. Left in peace. That peace which is almost perfect within one animal panarchy, totally unlike in our human nation states. With their murders and executions and the Draft. All in all, the statistics put us in a very bad position on the chart, compared to animals here. And without the slightest need, unlike for some animals. - - Therefore, everything that is not created by human hand or mind, the gift of nature, the natural resources, the simple ground on which we stand and walk and work and love, should equally, "communistically", belong to each living human individual. The animals can have it for free (they rarely ask). There is such abundance without our artificial allocations of quota, destructions through wars and other human crimes and stupidity, without our present putting so much off limits, and without all that tribute asking. Animals and the plants give us so much in return. Each parcel of land and natural resources on it or underlying it should be leased from and paid to the whole of humanity2 for a price determined on the market. This is the ideal to be reached, but it has to be done in many practical steps. We will never solve the problems of the world, which are ours, if we do not start with this most basic one among all and if we do not stop to ideologically either be wholesale on the right or wholesale on the left. The salvaging truth is a synthesis of both approaches, according to the requirements of the problem at hand. Provided the self-ownership of the individual is respected. And freedom both as an end and as a means is the guideline. - To make exterritoriality and panarchism work, we need in common only a world-wide consensus on the most basic natural individual rights, expressed by the Zero Aggression Principle, the Equal Freedom of All, Reciprocity, the respect for each individual's life, corporeal intactness and self-ownership. And all our thugs who after all do not want to board that space ship to the moon or Mars, those with a cop disposition, would finally find a legitimate playground, strongly ensuring this respect and NOTHING ELSE, so that we may finally love them! - - When will our voting sheeple and voting libertarians-cum-Libertarians or a combination of the two finally drop their blinkers/blinders and illusions and jump on the panarchist, polyarchist, personarchist train? Are they satisfied with the little they might reach through politics, losing their and our time, while the lemmings like floods blindly and boldly march on to cataclysm? - - Fly the coop! - - (1) décalque in French, Abziehbild in German, apsebillt in Luxemburgish. - (2) from the new embryo to the wise old head exhaling the last breath on the deathbed; a monthly distribution in equal parts to all living humans of the whole proceeds of that land rent would also make obsolete the need for welfare, unemployment insurance and the like, as the basic needs, as nature intended, would be covered; those who want a higher standard of living will work, earn in addition and pay insurance; an important side effect will be that who happens, through no merit of his own, to sit on an oil well, be it the Sultan of Brunei, a Bush or a Shiite in Basra etc. will not be able to claim it privately without compensation to the rest of the world, like now; and this revolutionary change alone will make all wars obsolete! - [Animal Kingdom versus] Animal Farm! - http://www.butterbach.net/blogs/epinfo/archives/00000029.htm.
BUTTERBACH, CHRISTIAN, The following is the message I sent today, 4th of July , to an American friend: Happy "False of July"! [Here he inserted an up-ended US flag.] - Are you also mourning, like me, the loss of revolutionary spirit? The revolutionaries of 1776 would be distressed to see today's situation! Let us look for the new revolutionaries for tomorrow and may each freedom lover sign its own New Declaration of Independence! - Chris. - [He sent this under the subject: 'dying embers'. - .Z.] - DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, INDIVIDUAL & MINORITY INDEPENDENCE VS., THE MAJORITY DESPOTISM OF TERRITORIALISM.
BUTTERBACH, CHRISTIAN: Exterritoriality ("The Exterritorial Imperative") - Libertarian Microfiche Publishing - Panarchism, Panarchismus, Exterritorialität ("Der exterritoriale Imperativ") - Exterritorialité - L'Impératif Exterritorial - Panarchisme - Immigration: An Abolitionist Cause (en anglais) - Why Open Immigration? (en anglais) - Immigration: Controversies, Libertarian Principles & Modern Abolition (en anglais) - Immigration : controverses, principes libéraux et anti-esclavagisme moderne - (traduction française du texte précédent) - Inmigración: controversias, principios libertarios y abolición moderna (traduction espagnole du texte précédent) - Immigration within the Right Framework (en anglais) - www.exterritorial.info/ - www.panarchism.info - www.panarchy.net/ - www.panarchism.net - He wrote and published as much on his various websites that he, just like other recent very active activists in this sphere, e.g. GIAN PIERO de BELLIS, RICHARD C. B. JOHNSSON, DWIGHT JOHNSON, MICHAEL S. ROZEFF et al, he should take over the editing of what is here entered under his name. I have certainly not provided sufficient and the best choices. – He is also one of those, who is left without old age security in the Welfare State. Only donations by friends and sympathizers have allowed him to keep up numerous web pages. I wish that he would put all his digital information on a CD and make a living by selling it, on the road to a complete libertarian reference library on a CD, associated to a common libertarian website for supplementary entries, to be included in the next edition of the CD or DVD or a large external H.D. He is a computer expert – but, like most other anarchists and libertarians, remains addicted to the Website options only. – To expect all libertarian solutions from the all too wide dispersal of them on the Internet and the admixture of their pearls there with all too much “mud”, does expect too much of it, as much as statists expect of Big Brother and religious people of a supposed God. – It still does not offer e.g., a complete libertarian library, bibliography, abstracts and review collection, libertarian encyclopedia, ideas archive, refutations file, directory etc. The Internet, too, still swamps us with false, misleading and irrelevant information. - J.Z., 30.11.11.
BUTTERBACH, CHRISTIAN: In the unfortunate still absence of liberty, have a nice day in spite of it all! - AND: Happy New Year!!! - Christian - "L'État, ce n'est pas moi!" - - Christian Butterbach, * 3 September 1938 in Luxemburg City (Grand Duchy of Luxemburg) [Luxemburg citizen by descent, cosmopolitan by conviction (national feelings largely destroyed by the state I could not secede from like from the Roman-Catholic religion that was included in the package), I had no say here, but it no doubt is not the worst citizenship, though deteriorating, like in most places...] - "By Appointment to Her/His Majesty the Individual EXTERRITORIAL™ Publisher to the Internet" - Snail mail: P.O. Box 11 21 21, D-20421 Hamburg (Germany). For parcels [with bullion ;-)] (*): Rödingsmarkt 25, D-20459 Hamburg (Germany) - Web mail: http://www.butterbach.net/contact.htm - E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. Fax: +49-40-37501769. Phone (land line): (0 40) 37 50 17 60 [+49-40-37501760]. Phone (cellular): stopped using that radiation catapult! - (*) & for organic food, flowers, cuties, bailiffs, Islamic terrorists.... (in order of decreasing preference) [I like books too, not just one!] - - Your Majest y the Individual, please donate €1 (or $1) or more to Your web portal BUTTERBACH.NET/EXTERRITORIAL.NET. To donate preferably go to http://www.butterbach.net/donation.htm (secure links on that page) - On of his advertisements: Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
BUYING VOTES: First, the power of government to buy votes must be limited. As things stand at the moment, political parties who want office have first of all to win a 'Dutch auction' using the taxpayer's money to buy votes on the handout trail." – John Singleton with Bob Howard, Rip Van Australia, p.230. - I would say abolished, rather than limited. Voters should get the franchise to vote themselves and individually over every one of their tax-dollars and vote themselves out of any particular tax, even out of all taxes, all constitutions, laws and jurisdictions and vote themselves into the kinds of exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities which they do like. - J.Z., 19.4.94. – VOTING, PANARCHISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT
BYLUND, PER, Competition in Private Industry. - Per Bylund - Competition in Private Justice - Strike-the-Root, March 5, 2004.
BYOCK, JESSE, Viking Age Iceland, Penguin Books 2001, brings some of its early tradition of exterritorial organization and competing protective systems. It should be included in a bibliography on panarchism, although the society it describes is of the Middle Age and lasted only a few hundred years and this in a remote small country, with a small population and under special geographical conditions. But human nature hasn't changed much since that time. - J.Z. in email to GPdB, 24.11.03. - ICELAND
BYRON, Lord: I wish men to be free, as much from mobs as kings - from you as from me." (Where did he say that? - J.Z.)