John Zube

An Anthology of

Wisdom & Common Sense

On the personal and social changes required to achieve
freedom, peace, justice, enlightenment, progress & prosperity in our time

Index - O

(1973 - 2012)



O'KEEFE, STEPHEN, in On Panarchy, 49, in PEACE PLANS No. 505.

O'LEARY, DE LACY, A Short History of the Fatimid Khalifate, London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co, 1923.


OATHS: By forcing an individual to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, it violates the ideals of justice and liberty that the flag is meant to represent.” – ACLU. - Only for members of a community of volunteers can an allegiance oath make some sense. But a withdrawal or secession or divorce clause should be applied even then. - J.Z. 25. 11. 06. – An oath in a community or society of volunteers is quite another matter. However, even there should be a withdrawal or secession option as part of their constitution.  They oath is then to be binding only while people remain voluntarily members. – One cannot rightly bind oneself forever into any kind of enslavement or allegiance. People and their ideas and opinions do change and they do have the right to change in these and other ways. – Naturally, the power-holders always preferred their subjects to remain “loyal” to them for the rest of the lives of the subjects. How loyal are territorial power-holders to their subjects and how often do they change their ideas, opinions and actions? How often do they stick to their oaths of office or how often do they break them? – J.Z., n.d. - COMPULSORY OATHS, ALLEGIANCE, FORCE

OATHS: I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…." – Congressional Oath of Office. Under territorialist statism it, too, has become a meaningless ritual. - What chances has the individual citizens to hold officials to their words, promises and oaths? Only the very small and limited as well as collectivist and territorial statist options and they are by far not enough or effective enough. - J.Z., 23. 11. 06, 30.12.11. - OF USA PUBLIC OFFICIALS

OATHS: Spooner argues further that oaths of office and loyalty, international treaties, and national debts are all invalid because one or more of the parties involved consist of unidentifiable individuals.” – Fred D. Miller, reason, 5/76. – Even if they were identifiable, they might be dissenters, not allowed to opt out from under a territorial regime. – J.Z., 4.2.08, 30.12.11. – To whom or what should such dissenters be loyal and bound by an oath? – J.Z., 2.3.09. – SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, HUMAN RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES – MUCH BETTER & MORE COMPREHENSIVELY DEFINED THAN BY ANY GOVERNMENTAL BILL OF RIGHTS, Q., LOYALTY, ALLEGIANCE, OBEDIENCE, CONSTITUTIONALISM

OATHS: The military oath is morally not binding, at least not when used to force someone to engage in mass murder with nuclear "weapons". An oath of obedience and allegiance to a nuclear armed regime is not better but worse than one to an absolutist monarch or totalitarian dictator. All such oaths must be publicly declared as invalid, as binding no one. Whosoever would persist in obeying them and showed any readiness and opportunity to use nuclear devices against other should be outlawed. He should get a chance for amnesty only if he destroys or surrenders at least one such device. - All present oaths in armed forces ought to be replaced by oaths to defend nothing but genuine individual human rights. One cannot defend them with nuclear devices. When all human rights are realized, no one will wield nuclear power over anyone any longer. Those unwilling to give this oath ought to be disarmed and kept disarmed. - All members of all armed forces, including policemen, are to swear this new oath. - Everyone will have to swear neither to give nor to obey any order whose execution would offend against individual human rights. Equal to such orders are general regulations and instructions. (J.Z.: Freely translated note by U. v. Beckerath, 23. 3. 55.) - ALLEGIANCE, AMNESTY, DISCRIMINATING WARFARE, DISOBEDIENCE, ELECTION OF OFFICERS, INDISCRIMINATE WARFARE, HUMAN RIGHTS, LOYALTY, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, MILITIA, OBEDIENCE, OUTLAWRY, RESISTANCE, SUBORDINATION, TERRORISM, TYRANNICIDE, WAR AIMS, WEAPONS. – J.Z. in An ABC Against Nuclear War. - TO DEFEND NOTHING BUT INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS, MILITIA, GENUINE DEFENCE & PROTECTION

OBEDIENCE: a government’s moral claim on the obedience of its citizens disappears when that government begins to control its citizens in an unjust fashion – through a purely arbitrary exercise of power rather than through just rules and fair procedures.” – Jeffrey G. Murphy, Kant: The Philosophy of Right, 139. – Any territorial government does that already merely through being a territorial government, at least for all its involuntary members and subjects. – J.Z., 4.2.08. – POWER, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, DISOBEDIENCE, RIGHT TO RESIST

OBEDIENCE: Is there any moral obligation at all to obey politicians and bureaucrats, their laws, regulations, boards, country-wide institutions, processes and systems and to pay their imposed tributes called taxes? – J.Z., 24.1.97. The supposed consent given by “votes” in “free” elections is mostly fictitious. No one, not even the legislators themselves, have given their consent to all the laws. They have not even read them in full and are quite unable to do so. There are just too many of them. – J.Z., 2.2.08. - - LAWS, STATES, LEADERS, MORALITY, TAXATION, BUREAUCRACY, STATISM, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM, PARLIAMENTS, REPRESENTATION, LAWFULNESS (OR AWFULNESS?), Q.

OBEDIENCE: Military discipline enforces obedience not only to rightful and rational orders but also to wrongful and irrational ones. – J.Z., 11.9.77, 20.6.12. – Military insurrections are thus harder to prepare but, on the other hand, easier to carry out, once they are well prepared. The knowledge for rightful and efficient military insurrections against wrongful regimes should be made readily accessible to almost all on the Internet. - Who would not be entitled to such knowledge? It should be the duty of all members of armed forces to acquire it. For wrongful rulers and regimes are an ever recurring phenomenon in the history if man, at least under territorialism. - Knowledge and appreciation of the exterritorial autonomy options for volunteers and of all genuine individual rights and liberties should be part of the training of any rightful militia of volunteers. Without that knowledge one would all too often not know who or what the real or main enemy is. Maps, borders and uniforms do not indicate them sufficiently or wrongly. - The militia soldiers would have to distinguish them in the same way as effective policemen have to distinguish between private criminals with victims and honest and decent citizens. - J.Z., 13.1.11, 30.11.11, 20.6.12. - MILITARY DISCIPLINE, DISCIPLINE, MILITARY LAW, MILITARY JURISDICTION, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, MILITIA, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

OBEDIENCE: Military obedience has more often been a vice than a virtue. – J.Z., 15.8.95. – In an ideal and self-managed militia of volunteers (for the protection of individual rights and liberties) it will be limited e.g. by the obligation to disobey wrongful orders. – J.Z., 2.2.08. – I assume that these militias will also form an exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers, locally organized but countrywide or even internationally federated. - It would also be an arbitrator between the diverse panarchies and a kind of direct democratic Supreme Court as well, comparable to the old folk assemblies but constituted out of the soundest citizens of all the diverse panarchies. - Is this hope or expectation comparable to faith in "the" party and its current party line? - Which political party is committed to natural law, natural rights and all genuine individual rights and liberties, to the extent that people do already claim them for themselves? - I believe that so far one could not even claim this for the LP. - J.Z., 13.1.11. – Q., MILITARY OBEDIENCE, MILITIA, HUMAN RIGHTS, DISOBEDIENCE, RESISTANCE, REVOLUTION, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, DESERTION, MASS FRATERNIZATION, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES OVER THE HEADS OF THE RULERS.

OBEDIENCE: Obedience is the main vice of citizens. – J.Z., 20.10.81. – [If it is insufficiently critical or even blind and simply submissive. – J.Z., 20.6.12.] In exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, who had subscribed to a particular personal law system, abidance by the agreed-upon rules would be as general and automatic as it is in sports and card games. – Obedience to these rules would also not be considered as a particular virtue but taken for granted. - J.Z., 2.4.08. - PANARCHISM

OBEDIENCE: Obedience to authority is … archaic and immature.” – Laissez-Faire Books catalogue, 1976, Spring, p. 44, on Eric Frank Russell’s book The Great Explosion. – Depends upon the type of authority. A territorial and a tyrannical one is, by its very nature, unauthorized by all its involuntary victims. A self-selected one may be obeyed like a self-chosen good doctor, dentist or tradesman. The pious Roman Catholics do still widely obey their Pope. - Obedience of people, who do know and appreciate all their individual rights and liberties, will be different from those, who don't. - Likewise the orders given by enlightened people, to their like-minded voluntary followers, will tend to be very different from the orders given by many to most territorial officers or authorities. - J.Z., 13.1.11, 30.12.11. - AUTHORITY, GOVERNMENT, STATE.

OBEDIENCE: Obedience to Authority stops the effective working of human energy to satisfy normal human needs.” – Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.225. – That is correct for obedience to wrongful authorities, which now, under territorialism are the rule, rather than the exception, at least as far as their peaceful and dissenting subjects are concerned. - J.Z., 13.1.11, 30.12.11.

OBEDIENCE: Obedience to the rule of the tyrant is nothing but rationalization by the moral slave.” - Dagobert D. Runes, A Book of Contemplation. – Also in his: A Dictionary of Thought. Who has supplied us so far with a rightful and practicable program for a liberation campaign against tyrants, a revolution or a military uprising against them? In some respects resistance against them is as difficult as it is for inmates of concentration camps or extermination camps. Disobedience can often lead to long-term imprisonment or one’s murder or formal execution. Militarily useful obedience requires extensive training and preparation. So does useful disobedience for xyz situations. Good will and intentions are not enough. – J.Z., 2.2.08, 13.1.11, 20.6.12. – It may also represent wise precaution and patience, until one gets the chance to rid oneself of a tyrant. – J.Z., 4.2.08. – A tyrant should be distinguished from an official elected by many, perhaps all too many and from those, who can also become unelected during the next relatively free election or even recalled or forced to resign before that election. – A duty to disobey wrongful orders would be part of the military code of an ideal militia. In training, such mock cases could and should be extensively explored and clarified, until sufficient agreement is achieved. - I would even expect every militia member to be trained as a sharp shooter. - Those who cannot might still serve e.g. in transport or communications. - Almost every bullet should hit its target. I should not require up to 100,000 bullets as was often the case in governmental armies, to wound or kill one enemy soldiers. For militias indiscriminate artillery fire and bombing would also be out, obviously. They should be able to induce more conscripts of an enemy regime to defect to their side than they would have to kill. - Precedents for this ability, in a better or even good case, do exist, although for a quite ideal case they are still absent, because the quite ideal defence case did not yet exist anywhere and at any time, to my knowledge. Territorialism has seen to that. - J.Z., 1.3.09, 13.1.11, 20.6.12. - RIGHTFUL WAR & PEACE AIMS, LIBERATION, Q., MILITIA, RESISTANCE, DISOBEDIENCE

OBEDIENCE: Obey or get killed? Tolerate or get killed! - J.Z., 28.7.01. – Tolerance only towards the tolerant! Intolerance only towards the intolerant! – J.Z., 2.3.09. - TOLERANCE, INTOLERANCE

OBEDIENCE: Since there can be no such thing as an obligation to assist in one’s victimization, there can be no such thing as an obligation to obey aggressive laws.” – Jarret B. Wollstein, The Case Against Victimless Crimes, leaflet. – OBLIGATION, DUTY, LAWS, AGGRESSION, INTERVENTIONS

OBEDIENCE: Socrates does not specify what conditions must be present to make a regime worthy of obedience.’ – William M. Evers, JLS, Sum. 77, 185. – Panarchism does: Voluntary membership, personal law, exterritorial autonomy only and the possibility to secede, even individually. – J.Z., 21.11.82, 4.2.08. – The Saar do not accept orders, …. They follow a sheikh just so long as they agree with what he asks of them. If they don’t, they go home. – Wilbur Smith, Blue Horizon, Macmillan, 2003, ISBN 0 333 76139 1, p.472. - PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

OBEDIENCE: Taxpayers, conscripted soldiers and all other innocent victims have been obedient to nuclear and other territorial power wielders for all too long. – J.Z., 14.3.04. - It is high time for them to assert their natural human rights via disobedience, secessionism, voluntary alternative organizations, societies and communities and all kinds of self-help steps. – J.Z., 19.10.07, 13.1.11. - DISOBEDIENCE & POWER WIELDERS, TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS, REVOLUTION, LIBERATION, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, TAXATION, CONSCRIPTION, AVALANCHES OF WRONGFUL & IRRATIONAL LEGISLATION

OBEDIENCE: TEST YOURSELF: Do you 1. Meekly give the government up to 2/3 or your income? – 2. Obey all regulations controlling what you can eat, drink, smoke, read, watch, hear, buy, sell …? – 3. Actually believe what government official say? - - CONGRATULATIONS, you win our ‘Blind Obedience to Authority’ Award.” – A libertarian sticker by ?

OBEDIENCE: The cause of the calamities people suffer is obedience to power.” - Tolstoy, “The End of an Age”, quoted in: Henry W. Nevinson, Essays in Freedom, London, Duckworth & Co, 1909, 1911, p.272. – To render power relatively harmless, it should become confined to power over volunteers. As volunteers they should be free to secede at any time from any power or other association or community. That would be the most important limitation of power, combined with the competition, which all remaining powers would then be exposed to from all the other diverse communities of volunteers with more, less or no power over their members. – J.Z., 29.9.07. – A mere competing and self-chosen service institution has not power over its subscribers. It rather depends upon their consumer sovereignty and free choice, like any other free enterprise business. – J.Z., 21.6.12. - POWER, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

OBEDIENCE: The Nature of Obedience: Government implies obedience. The reigning school of thought in Germany has magnified obedience to the point of virtue, and transformed it into an ideal, which is worthy of pursuit for its own sake alone. Liberty, it is argued, is a vain, inglorious thing, liable to be nothing better than licence and devoid of the soul-saving qualities of obedience, self-suppression, and discipline. The whole difference between democracy and dictatorship consists in the balance of liberty and obedience, the importance given to each, and their relations one to the other. - If there exists an absolute rule of good government, it is a matter of indifference whether it be enforced by a despotic emperor, a bloodthirsty dictator, or the popular premier of a perfect democracy. Since the existence of such a rule is always denied in practice, and there is a constant necessity for change and adaptation in the use of government, its form, nature, and principles should be the subject of constant and never-ending study. Government implies obedience, but self-government involves the added responsibility of understanding the principles upon which the right to obedience is asserted. A self-governing people, imposes obedience upon itself for reasons which it, itself, believes to be good; that obedience is a means to a higher end, and is a very different thing from blind obedience …” - Sir Ernest Benn, Modern Government, p.87. – Underlining by me. My version would be: Territorialgovernment implies enforced obedience even from peaceful and productive citizens, who do not agree with their territorial government and would not have chosen it for themselves, given the free choice or decisive vote on this. – J.Z., 4.2.08, 21.6.12. - GOVERNMENT, SELF-GOVERNMENT, DICTATORSHIP, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM STATISM, SELF-DETERMINATION, COMPULSION

OBEDIENCE: The obligation of subjects to the sovereign is understood to last as long, and no longer, than the power lasteth by which he is able to protect them.” – Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679. – Andrews Quotations, p.305. – Can any territorial ruler really discharge his protection promise and formal obligation? – By now almost all territorial governments are more a threat than a protection for their subjects, perhaps most of all through their nuclear “weapons” or alliances with nuclear powers. - J.Z., 4.2.08, 21.6.12. - SOVEREIGN, GOVERNMENT, STATES, DEFENCE, PROTECTION, LOYALTY, DUTY

OBEDIENCE: The path of freedom is blocked much more by those who wish to obey than by those who desire to command.” – M. D. Petre. – (Inge, Wit and Wisdom: Preface.) - Those who wish neither to obey nor to command, should see to it that they are separating themselves from those who do wish to obey and those, who wish to command, largely leaving them to their fate, apart from setting them a rightful example of proper human behaviour. – Self-determination to all kinds of people, societies, communities an governments of volunteers, but none of them to be conceded any territorial monopoly. – J.Z., 4.2.08. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, COMMAND, FREE CHOICE, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

OBEDIENCE: The strict obligation, binding upon all, to obey the lawful commands of the official class is, in my opinion, a political fiction of the same general character as the ecclesiastical fiction of papal infallibility.” - Theo P. Perkins, in Tucker's LIBERTY, 1892. - LAWS, CITIZENSHIP, STATES, TERRITORIALISM, OBLIGATION, DUTY

OBEDIENCE: The world suffers from too much obedience towards wrongful laws and commands.” – J.Z., 24.2.97. – Much more so than from disobedience to the relatively few rightful laws. Just compare the mass killings undertaken by territorial governments compared with those of private murderers and terrorists. – J.Z., 30.12.11. – CRIME, TERRORISM, GOVERNMENTS, MASS MURDERS

OBEDIENCE: There is one thing in the world more wicked than the desire to command, and that is the will to obey.” – William Kingdon Clifford. – Also a Byington Sticker.  – I see nothing wrong with voluntary obedience at the own expense and risk. - J.Z., 13.1.11. - STATISM, POWER– ORDERS, COMMANDS, DIS.

OBEDIENCE: There is too much emotional and unquestioning obedience in this world. – J.Z., 25.4.96. – It exists even towards the greatest wrong-doers and their “measures”, “methods” or “weapons”. Something like a Pavlovian and territorial conditioning seems to be involved. – J.Z., 2.2.08, 2.6.12. – RESISTANCE, REVOLUTION, DISOBEDIENCE, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, MILITIA, GUN CONTROL OR VICTIM DISARMAMENT, TOTALITARIANISM, MUSSOLINI, HITLER, STALIN, LENIN, MAO, CASTRO, IDI AMIN ETC.

OBEDIENCE: To a greater or lesser degree, then, all the civilized communities of the modern world are made up of a small class of rulers, corrupted by too much power, and of a large class of subjects, corrupted by too much and irresponsible obedience.” – Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means, p.58. - To that extent they are also uncivilized. Their warfare methods even with conventional weapons, not only with modern mass murder devices, characterize them even as barbaric and inhuman. As involuntary members and subjects of territorial, coercive, collectivist, centralistic and monopolistic States, we have to get rid of them and replace them by exterritorially autonomous communities and societies of individuals only, all starting with individual and group secessionism, but without making and maintaining any territorial monopoly claims. Within such societies etc. one would merely obey or submit or adapt to one's own best choices, as long as they remain one's best choices. Personal law and its exterritorially autonomous voluntarism mean obedience to self-given or self-chosen rules. Historically, it meant the law system one was born into, regardless of where one later lived on this planet. But already at the time of the declining Roman Empire one could switch from one legal system to the other, as Gibbon reports in his chapter 38, The Laws of the Barbarians, in his “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.” In this respect they were much more civilized than we are, being conditioned, for all too long by feudalism and absolute monarchies. - Republicans and Democrats failed to revive these old freedom traditions and rights and came to likewise insist on territorial domination and unification attempts, even empires. - J.Z., 14.1.11. – Under exterritorialism and its voluntarism and tolerance, only the flawed systems will decline while the better and good ones will progress and get more and more followers. Moreover, under territorialism the decline and fall is large scale, while under exterritorialism it will tend to occur only on a much smaller scale. – Territorial systems have the monopoly power to continue even with bad “business” practices. Exterritorial communities are continuously under strong pressure to adopt better and best “business” practices for their voluntary members; otherwise they would lose more and more of them, just like flawed business enterprises in a free market system would. No bail-outs for them, at the expense of tax slaves. - J.Z., 31.12.11. – CORRUPTION, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, SUBMISSIVENESS, SERVILITY, SLAVE MENTALITY

OBEDIENCE: To obey any territorial government any longer is treason to yourself and to mankind. – J.Z., 9.11.97. – Especially with regard to nuclear weapons and alliances with powers that possess them and are prepared to use them. – Who of us is not yet guilty of that kind of treason? – J.Z., 2.2.08. – TREASON, TERRITORIALISM, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, MASS MURDER PREPARATIONS. TRADE RESTRICTIONS, PASSPORT IMPOSITIONS, IMMIGRATION BARRIERS, MONETARY & FINANCIAL DESPOTISM

OBEDIENCE: Unquestioning obedience is not even good for those who are obeyed, not as a rule, anyhow, although sometimes it is a survival requirement. – J.Z., 13.5.82. - E.g., when a good captain steers a ship in a storm. However, those who attempt to steer, what they call the "ship of the State", can in most instances only pretend to be good captains and, usually, steer it into difficulties or even disasters, while monopolistically and coercively exploiting involuntary passengers and crews, all treated as territorial subjects, without the full range of genuine individual rights and liberties. Their false analogy also seems to justify their suppression of mutinies, insurrections, revolutions and secessions. - In territorialism the opposite of the "freedom of the high seas" is claimed. It can rightly only be claimed for communities of volunteers. - J.Z., 14.1.11.

OBEDIENCE: we totter along behind our politicians like lambs to the slaughter-house.” – Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, August 1978. - In war times this is made even more obvious. - We should become much more conscientious objectors than the present and all too limited conscientious objectors are. - Military servitude is a great wrong - but there are many other kinds of legally imposed servitude. The all-over sum of them I call "territorialism". We can no longer risk it in an age of mass extermination devices. - Last century despotic to totalitarian territorialism murdered already over 200 million victims, apart from the war victims. – See the web pages of Rudolf Rummel on this. - J.Z., 14.1.11, 21.6.12. - TERRITORIALISM, WARS, DESPOTISM, TOTALITARIANISM, TYRANNIES, AUTHORITARIAN DEMOCRACIES, WARFARE STATES, NWT

OBEDIENCE: When one sees how people let themselves be used and abused as soldiers, one should not be surprised seeing how they let themselves be used abused as taxpayers, just as if they were property of the State of military or tax slaves. - We still act all too much like conditioned serfs and slaves. - J.Z., 17.5.79, 14.1.11, 21.6.12.  – TAXATION, SUBORDINATION, SLAVE MENTALITY, STATISM

OBEDIENCE: Where justice reigns, ‘tis freedom to obey.” – Montgomery, Greenland, Canto iv, 1.88. – JUSTICE, FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

OBEDIENCE: Wherever blind obedience is preached, there is danger of moral corruption.” – Figgis, Churches, p. 154, quoted in David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, 1975, p.97. - Not only the danger of it but all too many instances. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - LEGALISM, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, BUREAUCRACY, POWER, SUBORDINATION

OBEDIENCE: Why obey a nuclear armed government? – J.Z., 20.2.74. – Or one that has allies who are thus “armed”? – Are nuclear “weapons” better than portable extermination camps, that can indiscriminately wipe out hundred-thousands of human beings - or even millions of them - in seconds? – J.Z., 4.2.08, 30.12.11. - Q., NUCLEAR WEAPONS

OBEDIENCE: Within one’s own sphere one should obey oneself more than others, unless one submits, temporarily, for learning purposes. – J.Z., 25.11.80.

OBJECTIONS AGAINST TOLERANCE: I for one am intolerant even of mere objections against tolerance. People who would argue even against tolerance should be stopped with a big stick! Or at least become ignored or ostracised and never be given any offices and powers with one's consent. - J.Z., On Tolerance. - Other "objections" against panarchism: Uniformity, Unity or Strength are required. Equality of all before THE Law. One Law for All. One Government for All. It would mean Anarchy or Chaos. Centralization vs. Decentralization. Majority Decisions Seen as Justified by Collectivised, Monopolistic and Territorial Voting. Representation Fallacies. "A country must be run." Common Interest. Public Interest. Public Affairs vs. Private Affairs. National Security. The Law. The Constitution. The Courts. The Country. The People. The Enemy. Limited Government. Anarchism. Libertarianism. Almost all supposed ideals are seen by their supporters as if they were rightful and suitable for all and as having to be applied to all, e.g. free choice for abortions or prohibition for abortions. Wars or civil wars and despotism against drug use or alcohol or tobacco. Freedom of action, freedom to experiment are so far seen only in limited forms. Statism. Fear of Freedom. History is seen only as a history of Territorialism. - Short list compiled by J.Z. in correspondence with GPdB. He has compiled a similar list. - J.Z., 16.10.11.  – The sheer number of errors and prejudices is enormous and still not counted. They are still not systematically collected, classified and responded to, not only in mostly vain attempts by somewhat enlightened individuals but, in WIKIPEDIA fashion, by all somewhat enlightened people in the world, going far beyond what e.g. the WIKIPEDIA and the Internet are already doing in this sphere, at present. We have explored and classified the diseases and defects of our bodies much better than those dangerous ideas and notions still remaining predominant in our minds and leading us to one man-made catastrophe after the other, most of them territorially imposed. – Their number is much greater than any individual can cope with in a long life, full or reading, studying and discussions. - J.Z., 30.12.11. - TOLERANCE, DIS., PREJUDICES, ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS OF POPULAR ERRORS, MYTHS & PREJUDICES THAT ARE OBSTACLES TO LIBERATION, PROGRESS, ENLIGHTENMENT, PEACE, JUSTICE, PROSPERITY, LONGEVITY & GETTING TO THE STARS, IGNORANCE, TERRITORIALISM.

OBJECTIONS TO PANARCHISM: One is frequently reminded of the old legend (on Hercules?) of the Hydra, a monster equipped not only with many dangerous heads but the ability to fast re-grow and even double each of them as soon as any one of them was chopped off. Similarly do popular prejudices, myths and errors obstruct the fight for truths like the panarchistic ones. In the legend it was sufficient to immediately burn the neck of the chopped off head - to prevent its re-growth. An as efficient encyclopaedia of the best refutations of popular errors etc. has still to be provided. Laws and bureaucrats have similar powers to the Hydra, at least until individuals are free to secede from them, chopping off their individual support and escaping their special and wrongful territorial powers, permanently. We need full liberty for all who would rather do without these burdens and monsters. – J.Z., 22.8.93, 9.1.99, 14.1.11. - While panarchism is contrary to many long established prejudices, it does have the advantage that specific objections against it are still rare, simply because panarchism is not yet widely enough known. But all of the usual old saws against any innovative proposal are bound to be advanced against it as well. - J.Z., 7.9.04, 21.6.12.

OBJECTIONS TO PANARCHISM: Seeing that panarchist ideas and practices are so old, also so right and useful, why haven’t they conquered the world as yet? See my recent letter on this to Richard C B. Johnsson and also my presently still unfinished paper on panarchism and peace. In our world, alas, rightful and rational ideas were never the only and main guides to actions. – We still live in an age where even religious freedom is still not fully realized everywhere, where national aggressions still happen and also genocidal civil wars, where not even sexual freedom is fully realized and where tribute gathering and loot sharing are still legalized and institutionalized. We have not even collected and cheaply and published all the best ideas and experiences as yet. We are still very far from living in an enlightened age, since e.g. “ideas” of Big Brother or of a God still dominate all too many heads. - J.Z., 7.1.05. Pan AZ – DIS., ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, ENLIGHTENMENT, EDUCATION

OBJECTIONS TO PANARCHISM: Uniformity, Unity or Strength are required. Equality of all before THE Law. One Law for All. One Government for All. It would mean Anarchy or Chaos. Centralization vs. Decentralization. Majority Decisions Seen as Justified by Collectivised, Monopolistic & Territorial Voting. Representation Fallacies. "A country must be run. Common Interest. Public Interest. Public Affairs vs. Private Affairs. National Security. The Law. The Constitution. The Courts. The Country. The People. The Enemy. Limited Government. Anarchism. Libertarianism.” All such ideals seen as being suitable for all and as having to be applied to all people living in a territory, e.g. free choice for abortions or prohibition for abortions. Wars against drug use or alcohol or tobacco. Freedom of action, freedom to experiment seen only in limited forms. Statism. – History is generally seen only as a history of Territorialism - J.Z. - See letter by Amber Pawlik [Capitalist], January 16, 2002, from an objectivist point of view, quoted in letter by Christian Butterbach, of 6 July 04. - FEAR OF FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, HISTORY, PREJUDICES, STRENGTH, UNITY, LAW, EQUALITY

OBJECTIONS: Dispersed, alphabetically, throughout the whole text but, often extra marked with DIS., as an indication that they should be included in a special encyclopaedia for the discussion of popular errors, myths, prejudices etc., which would include the best refutations so far found. – By using the "find" command for DIS. I can later easily extract these entries. - J.Z. - POPULAR OPINIONS, ERRORS, PREJUDICES & MYTHS, together with REFUTATION ATTEMPTS OR PROPOSALS

OBLIGATION: A man can be obliged to do something, so the theory runs, only if he has in some way willed it himself." – David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p 39. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CHOICE, SELF-OBLIGATION, VOLUNTARISM, AUTONOMY

OBLIGATION: Compulsion can't establish obligations. - J.Z., 2.6.84. - Compulsion is always wrong when not defensive. – J.Z., n.d. - DUTY, COMPULSION, TERRITORIALISM, STATE MEMBERSHIP OR SUBJUGATION, IMPERIALISM ON THE NATIONAL SCALE

OBLIGATION: Don't be a slave to a misconceived duty. The others do not own you. - Or your services. - J.Z., 2.6.84. - RIGHTS, SANCTION OF THE VICTIMS, SLAVERY, SELF-OWNERSHIP, DUTY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

OBLIGATION: Moral obligation, Green asserted, must be self-imposed and the laws of a state are binding only because they are thought to have been willed by the subjects. Will, rather than force, is the main basis of the state. Thus, by a fiction of consent, made plausible through the distinction between a real and an apparent will, a halo is placed above the state, which is given an authority that is absolutely binding upon the consciences of citizens." – David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p.41. – The laws and State membership and subordination to the State have not been willed by individuals, separately, each for himself. – J.Z., 4.2.08. - That is most clearly indicated by the suppression of individual and group secessionism. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - TERRITORIALISM, CONSENT

OBLIGATION: The belief that you have a duty to obey laws. The “obligation to obey laws” is a good example of one person trying to manipulate another through the use of moral dictums. Your obedience doesn’t even perform a socially useful function; it only enhances coercion and disorder." – Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom, p.98. - – What is the percentage of all laws among the flood of legislation, of which one could quite rightly say that it would be morally obligatory to obey it, or, rather, the moral law which this law may also express and try to confirm? – J.Z., 5.2.08. - DUTY, LAW, Q., OBEDIENCE, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, HUMAN RIGHTS

OBLIGATION: The only obligation the individual has to an unjust law is to “disobedience, resistance, destruction.” – Reichert, in Partisans of Freedom, p.136, quoting Lysander Spooner. - DUTY, LAW, OBEDIENCE, RESISTANCE, DISOBEDIENCE

OBLIGATION: There has long existed and still exists a terrible superstition, which has done men more harm, perhaps, than the most awful religious superstitions, and it is this superstition, which with all its might and perseverance the so-called political science upholds. The superstition is similar in every respect to religious superstitions. It consists in the affirmation that, besides the duties of man to man, there are still more important obligations to an imaginary being. In theology the imaginary being is God, and in political science the imaginary being is Government." – Tolstoy, quoted in Sprading, 324. - DUTY, GOVERNMENT, GOD, STATE, LAWS, STATISM, POLITICAL SCIENCE, PREJUDICES, SUPERSTITION, TERRITORIALISM

OBLIGATION: Unchosen obligations constitute slavery." – Paul Lepanto, Return to Reason, 141 (151?) - VOLUNTARISM

OBLIGATION: Whoever subjects me to the law in this State contract? ... Obviously, I do it myself. No one can be obliged except through himself. To no one can a law be given by someone else. If he would permit the imposition of a law upon him by someone else, then he would renounce his humanity and reduce himself to an animal. And that he may not do." - (Wer legt mir nun in diesem Vertrag (dem Staatsvertrag) das Gesetz auf? ... Offenbar ich selbst. ... Kein Mensch kann verbunden werden, ohne durch sich selbst: keinem Menschen kann ein Gesetz gegeben werden, ohne von sich selbst. Laesst er durch einen fremden Willen sich ein Gesetz auferlegen, so tut er auf seine Menschheit Verzicht und macht sich zum Tiere; und das darf er nicht.) - Fichte, Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urteile des Publikums ueber die Franzoesische Revolution, 1793, S.79. – J.Z., Pan AZ. - WILL, LAW, PERSONAL LAW, VOLUNTARISM, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, CONSENT, CONTRACT, INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & PANARCHISM

OBSTACLES: If a person fails to overcome his own obstacles – frustrations, superstitions, imperfections, ignorance, no will to strive – that’s his problem. But if the obstacles are put there by others – if the individual is compelled to live as others dictate – that is everyone’s problem. Freedom is everyone’s business!" – Leonard E. Read, THE FREEMAN, 7/74. – Territorial governments, dictators, tyrants and other authoritarians think otherwise. - J.Z., 2.3.09. - FREEDOM, RIGHTS, DUTIES.

OBSTACLES: Never put an obstacle in another man's path." - American proverb. - Territorialism imposes them by the thousands. And charges us very highly for them. - J.Z., 14.1.11. .- RESTRICTIONS, LAISSEZ FAIRE, REGULATIONS, LICENSING, LAWS, TERRITORIALISM, OBSTRUCTIONISM, TERRITORIALISM

OBSTACLES: There are only two kinds of people on this earth: Those who know how to overcome obstacles, and those who know only how to become obstacles." – William Windell, in GRYPHON No. 8, p. 12. – Or who produce, spread and uphold obstacles, like laws and legalized territorial monopoly institutions. – J.Z., 5.2.08.

OBSTRUCTIONISM: Government means obstruction. - J.Z., 17.12.76. – I meant territorial governments over others than their own volunteers. – Governments over volunteers only, i.e., confined to exterritorial autonomy, would fulfil the wishes of their people, as long as they remain their voluntary subjects. - J.Z., 5.2.08. – PANARCHISM. TERRITORIALISM, LAWS, PROHIBITION, COMPULSORY LICENSING, LEGISLATION, TERRITORIALISM

OCCUPATION FORCES: Incredible Privileges … of occupation forces or allies, in 1966 in Germany & Taiwan: - The foreign troops … have their own police forces, their own courts, fiscal privileges, customs officials, postal services, even rights of the hunt, … Many … institutions & services are closed to Germans in their own country.” – PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS JOURNAL, ref. no.32 399. - That a whole country is a collectivist “property” of all its inhabitants is still believed by many libertarians. – J.Z., 9.12.04. - “An agreement has been signed between the Chiang and the Johnson Governments settling the status of US forces on Taiwan, allowing extraterritorial rights, etc.” – Ibid, ref. no. 29902. – Pan AZ. - Why should occupation forces have to submit to the laws of a country or force the whole country to submit to the laws of the occupation force? At least in this respect some of the occupation forces have been sensible and tolerant. - J.Z., 2.3.09. – PERSONAL LAW, PRECEDENTS, THEIR EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PRECEDENTS FOR THE WORKABILITY OF EXTERRITORIALISM & PANARCHISM

OCEAN COMMUNITIES: Ocean communities, planned or speculated about on the ocean floor, on continental shelves, on artificial islands, on floating artificial islands and in form of ship-board communities. - Lately, Patrick Friedman, son of David Friedman, has popularized such ideas again. Much on this can be found on the Internet. - J..Z,, 20.10.11. – Even Zeppelin communities have been proposed – but their carrying capacity is rather limited, unless, with new and strong materials we could enclose large volumes almost completely emptied of air and this with sufficient safety and gain in carrying capacity. Then storms would still remain a large problem as such vehicles, - J.Z., 27.11.11. - COMPARE:  PROPRIETARY COMMUNITIES, OCEAN FREEDOM, SHIP COMMUNITIES.

ODDS AGAINST: The probability that we may fail in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just." – Abraham Lincoln. – But his main cause, namely, to uphold the unity of the USA coercively, with him at the top, was not a just one. – He could have promoted a genuine liberty more by e.g. introducing Free Trade in the North and also, in the long run, by recognizing all individual rights and liberties there, including full monetary and financial freedom and by granting free migration rights or asylum to all slaves that managed to escape from the South and by abolishing all legalized discriminations against members of other races in the North. - J.Z., 5.2.08. – The Southern people should not only have fought for geographical secessionism, rightly for Free Trade and wrongly for slavery, but for self-governance for all dissenting communities of volunteers, of whatever kind, all without a territorial monopoly. “To each the governance or non-governmental society of his or her choice!” Then it and all other people in the world would have gained a significant victory, by no longer trying to dominate other kinds of peoples and their societies. - DIFFICULTIES, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW SOCIETIES VS. TERRITORIALISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, VICTORY, DOMINATION, MUTUAL TOLERANCE

OFFICIAL VERSIONS: challenging the official version of anything is a civic responsibility and great fun." – Joseph D. Harrington, Yankee Samurai, Detroit, 1979. - Taken from the jacket of the book. – Freedom to opt out from under territorial governments and freedom to establish or join exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, not confined to any territory, would be even greater fun, for their participants and their observers. – J.Z., 5.2.08. - - PUBLICITY, CREDIBILITY GAP, CENSORSHIP, CRITICISM, EXPOSURE, PROPAGANDA, INVESTIGATING JOURNALISM, NEWS, PRESS, GOVERNMENT RELEASES, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, DENIALS

OFFICIALDOM: Officialdom gone mad." – Max Eastman, Reflections on the Failure of Socialism, p.98. – Should it be rather “has gone mad?” – J.Z. – Was is ever quite rightful, rational and wise enough? Can it be? Can it know the circumstances of individuals better than the individuals themselves do? Can their rule rightly and efficiently replace self-rule? - Officials only for volunteers or voluntary victims. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - BUREAUCRACY, STATISM, LEGISLATION, RULERS, TERRITORIALISM, Q.,


OFFICIALS: Are officials more wise and moral than their subjects?” - Ken Schoolland, The Adventure of Jonathan Gullible, Leap Publishing, Cape Town, with Commentaries by Ken Schoolland and Janette Eldridge, 1981 ff, 2004 ed., p.29. - PUBLIC SERVANTS, BUREAUCRATS, POLITICIANS, RULERS, Q.

OFFICIALS: judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong.” - If there is any presumption, it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you super-add the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it." – Herbert Read, Anarchism and Order, p.211. - POWER BUREAUCRACY, RULERS, CORRUPTION, GREAT MEN, AUTHORITY, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, ACCOUNTABILITY, HISTORY, PUBLIC SERVANTS, RESPONSIBILITY

OFFICIALS: Someone with the arrogance and courage of his connections. – L. L. Levinson, Webster’s Unafraid Dictionary. - Also with the usual popular errors, myths, prejudices, false assumptions and conclusions in their heads. Moreover, the worst kinds of people do usually go to the top. - J.Z., 14.1.11.

OFFICIALS: The harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers, gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony inflicted upon human beings by the professional do-gooders, who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others – with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means." – Henry Grady Weaver, author of a classic book on freedom, The Mainspring of Human Progress. - Private do-gooders or reformers do more harm and commit more wrongs, legalized, as a result of their efforts, via the territorial State model, than all the private criminals combined. - J.Z., n.d. & 14.1.11. - LEGISLATORS, BUREAUCRATS, REPRESENTATIVES, PUBLIC SERVANTS, PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS, CRIMINALS, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

OFNER, FRANCIS, Two Citizenships for Soviet Jews, CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, 8.5.1971: Israel citizenship is to be granted to Russian Jews by a special act of the Israel parliament - in order to facilitate their emigration. (The Nazis also tended to extend their concept of citizenship (Volksdeutsche) to people of German descent in other countries and made great efforts to return them to the "home land". Apparently, they thought that oppressing, exploiting and killing such people was to be a monopoly of the Nazi government. - J.Z., n.d. & 21.6.12.)

OIL: Territorial ownership claims on natural resources tends to lead to military clashes, especially among monopolists and protectionists. They could ultimately lead to nuclear war. Equal access for all to such resources, e.g. through open cooperatives and Free trade, would avoid these clashes. See: Exterritorial Imperative, Free Trade, Free Migration, Nationalism, Natural Resources, Open Cooperatives, Territorial Organization, War Aims. . – J.Z. in An ABC Against Nuclear War. - EXCLUSIVE TERRITORIAL POSSESSION? PROTECTIONISM VS. FREE TRADE, NATURAL RESOURCES, OPEN COOPERATIVES

OLIGARCHY: If Maine and Michels were right in claiming that the iron law of oligarchy applies as much to large organizations within the state as to the state itself, did the pluralists not see that large groups like trade unions and churches constitute a threat to individual freedom in the same way that the state does? Many of them did recognize that any large centralized organization would invariably be controlled by a small, often self-perpetuating and self-interested, oligarchy; these writers therefore extended their federal ideas to groups which composed the state." – David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p.7. – Here, too, voluntary and merely exterritorially autonomous communities should be distinguished from those with compulsory membership and compulsory subordination and a territorial monopoly. – A yoke that one has self-chosen and can throw off is not unbearable. - J.Z., 28.2.88, 4.2.08. – Voluntaryist and exterritorial bodies from which individuals may freely secede, which are in free competition with each other, should be distinguished from centralized and territorial organizations with compulsory membership. In panarchies abuses find a natural limit in the loss of members through individual or group secessions, whenever these members are sufficiently dissatisfied and do no longer hope to be able to reform the panarchy they secede from. - J.Z., 28.2.88, 2.4.89.  PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM & STATISM, ELITES MINORITY RULE & PANARCHIES, THE IRON LAW OF OLIGARCHY.

OLMSTEAD, C., ed., Extraterritorial Application of Laws and Responses thereto, 1984, ESC Pub.U.K. - Considering the number of legal titles on exterritoriality and extraterritoriality, lawyering would not get altogether out of style under panarchism. While territorialist "law factories" could no longer impose avalanches of "laws" of the worst type upon dissenters, a multitude of competing and decentralized rule making institutions would be established that, at least initially, might even out-produce the present law factories as far as numbers of acts and their pages are concerned. However, in the long run I would expect a great reduction of laws and their simplification to result. Sovereign consumers would not buy multitudes of complicated laws, that would interfere with their lives against their wills and that they would never find the interest, time and energy to read even once. Why should there be compulsory mass "consumption" of or obedience to laws that are mass- produced by others? Why should we be compelled to hire and support a monopolistic set of politicians and bureaucrats? Is it in our or their interest? - J.Z., n.d. – LAWYERS, LAWS, COMPETING JURISDICTION SYSTEMS, Q., FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, SECESSIONISM

OMNIARCHY: Although it is true that anarchy means ‘without’ government and that anaemia means ‘without’ blood, I prefer to think of the former term as I regard the latter (from a clinical point of view): less than average in amount. As an illustration, the country of Liechtenstein must suffer from anarchy as it has less than a dozen policemen in service in the entire country. In the USA, we need at least that many policemen to do any assignment (other than arresting speeders and stop sign violators ). - - To illustrate I would draw a square and divide the square into four quadrants. The top line would be labeled ‘Constitutional Republic (isocracy or isonomocracy). The opposite or bottom line would be labeled ‘Democracy (polyarchy).’ The left line would be labeled ’interventionism (omniarchy)’, and the right-hand line would be labeled ‘Laissez-faire (anarchy)’." – Robert Hawkins, M.D., LEFEVRE’S JOURNAL, Fall 77. - Panarchism would allow many more options, all only for volunteers, all only under exterritorial autonomy & personal laws. - J.Z., 2.3.09. - INTERVENTIONISM, CLASSIFICATION SCHEMES

OMNIPOTENCE: It is useless to ban the Bomb. What we must ban is the ideology of war, which means the ideology of governmental omnipotence, of aggressive nationalism, of interventionism run riot." - William H. Peterson, "THE FREEMAN", 8/76. - And we will not understand these and their peace-promoting freedom alternatives, until we have come to understood the difference between territorial and exterritorial individual sovereignty, i.e., between coercive and voluntary memberships in political bodies and economic and social systems. - J.Z., 9.1.93. – POWER, GOD, GOVERNMENTS, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, ATOMIC BOMBS, GOVERNMENTS & TERRITORIALISM, WAR & INTERVENTIONISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM

ON PANARCHY: Volumes I - XXIV, in the PEACE PLANS series of Libertarian Microfiche Publishing, on 24 microfiche, all of them digitized (thanks to the example set and efforts undertaken by of Peter Wraith. Without his example, I might have postponed the job for years or forever.) but not yet online. So far available, probably still only through me, as email attachments. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - The contents list of this still incomplete series and only a still incomplete list of supplementary panarchist works in the PEACE PLANS series has been integrated in this A-Z listing, which I hope to see developed into a general alphabetized encyclopaedia on Panarchism. – J.Z., 12.2.08, 2.3.09. - CONTENTS LIST, alphabetized, all in KBs, zipped versions: 57 KB. - 1., PP 505, 217 KB. - 2. PP 506, 283 KB. - 3. PP 507, 365 KB. - 4. PP 510, 368 KB. - 5. PP 554, 376 KB. - 6. PP 585, 364 KB. - 7. PP 671, 332 KB. - 8. PP 672, 443 KB. - 9. PP 589, 311 KB. - 10. PP 755, 379 KB. - 11. PP 832, 246 KB. - 12. PP 833, 383 KB. - 13. PP 869, 327 KB. - 14. PP 870, 298 KB. - 15, PP 879, 405 KB. - 16, PP 901, 434 KB. - 17, PP 1051, 170 KB. - 18, PP.1539, 282 KB., - 19, PP 1540, 564 KB. - 20, PP 1689-1693, 368 KB. (Here I referred largely back to the websites I had downloaded from. - J.Z.) - I have transferred the contents details from the shortened and alphabetized version of the contents list to the various entries here. This shortened contents list alone comes already to 29 pages.

ONE MAN REVOLUTIONS: Every revolution evaporates, leaving behind only the slime of a new bureaucracy." - Franz Kafka. - Apparently, Kafka, too, had only considered territorial revolutions and ignored the option of one-man revolutions that are made possible by exterritorial autonomy for volunteers.   J.Z., 12.6.92, 14.1.93. Pan AZ. - EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS, OR FULL EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM OR PANARCHISM - INSTEAD OF TERRITORIAL SUBJECTION OF A WHOLE POPULATION WITH MANY VERY DIVERSE CONSTITUENTS, REVOLUTION, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

ONE MAN REVOLUTIONS: I bid you to a one-man revolution. The only revolution that is coming." - Robert Frost, Build Soil - A Political Pastoral, 1932. - Did he anywhere become more explicit on this? Did he have only rural retreatism and self-sufficiency in mind? - J.Z., 14.1.93. - Rather, the only revolution worth having and realizing for all individual whatever ideals they have, to the extent that they are practical and this only together with and among like-minded volunteers. - J.Z., 2.3.09. - PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS, PERSONAL LAW

ONE NATION PARTY: Suppose that the "One Nation" party, established by Pauline Hanson, had favoured and achieved complete exterritorial autonomy for its leaders and followers, freedom to live under their own constitution, laws, jurisdiction and administration and to practise all their ideas, errors and myths among themselves, at their own expense and risk, rather than imposing them territorially upon all who disagree with many of its platform points (not all of them are 100% wrong or otherwise flawed!). Then it would have soon become obvious that it, too, really represents not one single and uniform nation but only a tiny fraction of what has been all too widely and long misconceived as one territorial nation, that of "Australia". Who, as a libertarian, would deny them this right to do their things to and for themselves? Only those still addicted, like the One Nation party, to the fallacy of territorial nationalism. Compulsory territorial membership and leadership, combined with compulsory subordination, do by themselves already produce many wrongs and evils. - Many communities of volunteers, if exterritorially freed to act out their program only among themselves, to the extent that they could do so without interfering with the rights and liberties of the many, who disagree with them, would then merely produce "enough rope to hang themselves". - At least they would provide an entertaining spectacle for outsiders, something to laugh about. But the few, who are successful, at least with some of their platform points, would be closely watched on these and, sooner or later, their successful examples would then be copied by many others. As it was, with the "One Nation" party, internal dissent, personality squabbles, perhaps some corruption, and strong resistance from outsiders and various court cases have largely destroyed it and done away with the leadership of Pauline Hanson. (The usual political mess of party politics.) I regretted very much that some Australian libertarians supported her, just because of a few points in her party's platform, like opposition to gun control. Alas, some "libertarians" may even have supported her because of her opposition to free migration and others of her prejudices in favour of territorial nationalism and protectionism. Other libertarians indiscriminately condemned all of this party's platform, in spite of the few libertarian ideas it contained. The world is not just black and white only. One should not malign even the "devil". - J.Z., 3.7.00, 1.2.02. - IN AUSTRALIA

ONE WORLD, WORLD STATE, WORLD FEDERATION, WORLD UNITY? Rather all the voluntary and autonomous worlds, governance systems, alternative societies and communities, in all their varieties, chosen by almost 7 billion sovereign individuals, all of them different from each other, wherever and to what extent and purposes they want to group and associate themselves, under full exterritorial autonomy or personal law, more or less concentrated in certain areas or decentralized in their own personal network systems. No one's supposedly ideal world scheme should be forced upon anybody. To each the government or free society of his or her dreams or free individual choice, provided it is merely an optional and competitive local, country-wide or international association or federation - one for its voluntary members only. - J.Z., 15.8.91, 13.1.93, 17.9.04, 21.6.12. – DIS. WORLD STATE, WORLD FEDERATION, WORLD UNITY?

ONE WORLD: Economically the world ought to be one, not the divided, restricted and polluted mess which territorial and coercive governments have turned it into. – J.Z., 20.5.93. - Let us opt out of all their messes and try again to do better, much better, in a great variety of free experiments, all only among volunteers. – J.Z., 2.2.08, 21.6.12. - - GOVERNMENTS, INTERVENTIONISM, STATISM, ALTERNATIVE SOCIETIES, SYSEMS, METHODS OF ASSOCIATION, ASSOCIATIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, POLITICS, DESPOTISM, WARS, GLOBALIZATION, FREE TRADE, FREE MIGRATION. BORDERS, FRONTIERS, BOUNDARIES, NATIONALISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIALISM-

ONE-MAN-CANTONS: The proposal for them was cheerfully received at a Libertarian Supper Club meeting in LA, 1990 or 1991, when "South Africa - the Solution", was discussed. – Naturally, non-territorial “cantons” of at least a few volunteers, if not many, are much more likely, for man is a social animal. – J.Z., 27.11.11. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY IN EVERY SPHERE, FULLY FREE MARKETS, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, SOCIETIES & COMMUNITIES

ONE-MAN-REVOLUTIONS: Each member of the remaining and only exterritorially autonomous States, intentional communities and free societies could engage in a "one man revolution" regarding his own affairs via individual secessionism. - No one would have any longer a licence to revolutionize or reform the affairs of any others against their will. - Thus, with each free to live according to the own tastes, fashions and prejudices, the total amount of dissatisfaction, anger and frustration would be rapidly and continuously reduced. - J.Z., in old Pan AZ. – Alternative societies for all, according to individual choice or design, all exterritorially autonomous for their volunteers. In other words, fully free enterprise and consumer sovereignty in this sphere as well. – J.Z., 21.6.12. – Panarchism, polyarchism, multiarchism, competing governments, societies and communities - for all the diverse statists and any kind of anarchism or libertarianism for their adherents in all countries or even world-wide for each of them. – J.Z., 21.6.12.

OPEN COOPERATIVES: Full exterritorial autonomy for volunteers of Aboriginal descent and open cooperatives regarding land use for them as well, but also only on a voluntary basis. – J.Z., 7.12.93, 2.2.08. - LAND RIGHTS, RESERVES, ABORIGINES, LAND MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, THEODOR HERTZKA, NATURAL RESOURCES

OPEN COOPERATIVES: Monopolistic territorial nations should be turned into open cooperatives, which individuals may freely join or secede from. Apart from their pooled private property investments they should not possess any exclusive sovereignty over any territory but, nevertheless, gain full exterritorial autonomy, although only over the affairs of their voluntary members, under personal constitutions, laws and jurisdictions of their choice. - J.Z., n.d. & 14.1.93, 21.6.12. (Earnings in Theodor Hertzka's "open cooperatives" are shared according to the labor and the investment input of members.) - J.Z.

OPEN SEAS: The open seas or high seas convention was never meant to be an open invitation to pirates and other aggressors to hide in and attack from, but it grants freedom for all peaceful activities from interventions by territorial States. - While placing nuclear devices into oceans might, to some extent, deter from aggression, because it ensures some counter-strike capability, it also keeps rightful counter-strikes away from those who might want start a nuclear war and does to that extent make possible and encourages aggression. - Moreover, by hiding the identity of an attacker, a nuclear armed submarine of a minor power might induce two major nuclear powers to make nuclear war against each other’s people - by pretending to be one of them and hitting the other. For instance, the Red Chinese regime might attempt to set the USSR and the US against each other. Several novels and films have explained these possibilities. When warning time is down to 15 minutes then verification of the identity of the attacker may be difficult to impossible. - Generally, an attack is considered to be all the more morally reprehensible the more it is undertaken from ambush or secret sanctuaries. We have here something like secret preparations for mass murder, for genocide, undertaken by the same people who outlawed the execution of a single tyrant, as if it were a murderous assassination, and sometimes outlawed even the execution of an ordinary murderous criminal. Moreover, they have usually outlawed self-defence with fire-arms, while being prepared to use nuclear devices to murder millions of innocents. They have good reasons to fear for their lives when their victims are armed and their powers and laws create victims by the millions. - Nuclear weapons are immoral and they are no weapons. They hit neither the real enemy nor the proper target. They are neither defensive means nor rightful retaliatory devices. Nor are they reliable deterrents or sufficiently fail-safe. Thus they should not only be kept off all land areas, out of the air and space, but also out of the open seas and out of space. The sea ought to be kept free of all nuclear armed and nuclear powered ships and submarines and thus free from nuclear counter strikes and the pollution caused by nuclear power plants. - All peacefully trading people, everywhere, are threatened, wronged, harmed or endangered by this abuse - All people on Earth, no matter how far they live away from the point of impact of any nuclear weapons delivered from the high seas, are exposed to the radioactive pollution hazard involved. - The high seas will be freed from these monstrous "military" "defence" preparations once this whole anti-nuclear war program has been realized. These nuclear war ships and submarines, too, could be rendered harmless by induced mutinies or by taking over their bases on land. To wipe them out with nuclear weapons would be wrong and risky. It would still amount to an attack against the whole world population, by means of radioactive pollution, and it could lead to a counter-strike from these nuclear armed ships and submarines. – The principle of the open seas, namely that they remain open for all peaceful activities, but not for piracy, if applied to land, would mean the dissolution of nuclear targets, the realization of the exterritorial imperative and would thus lead to nuclear disarmament and peace. - - At present the seas have become attractive to defence planners by their ownerless status and their relative emptiness. Thus everybody should get access to this natural resource: Let the seas be "owned" by open cooperatives. These cooperatives would lead to an extensive international use and lastly even to settlement of the seas. The technology for this "ocean freedom" has been achieved. Thus the high seas could become eliminateds as an unclaimed and empty battleground. The cooperatives would stop this abuse of their property. - - Individual sovereignty, thus applied to the high seas, would give every individual a veto against its abuse for nuclear power games. - - See: Accidental War, Aggression, Bases, Collective Responsibility, Counterstrike, Decision, Defence, Deterrence, Disarmament, Enemy, Exterritorial Imperative, Immorality, Individualism, Liberation Wars, Military Insurrections, Morality, Nationalism, Natural Resources, Open Cooperatives, Nuclear Strength, Radiation Hazard, Referendum, Secrecy, Secret Allies, Sovereignty, Sovereignty, Submarines, Targets, Territorial Organization, Terrorism, Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament, War Aims, Weapons. . – J.Z. in An ABC Against Nuclear War. - NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

OPEN SPACE OR CAGES: Every man may cage himself, not others and he may opt out of his cage and all territorially imposed “cages”. - J.Z., 8.4.89, 21.6.12. -  Pan AZ - TO EACH AS HE DESIRES, PANARCHISM, PERSONAL LAWS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM


OPINIONS: A man convinced against his will // Is of the same opinion still." - Samuel Butler. - Let him have his own ideas and opinions, as well as his own ways and actions - but only at his own expense and risk. In this way, if they are false, he will defeat himself fast enough. - J.Z., 26.11.02. - CONVICTIONS, ARGUMENTS, DISPUTES, DIS., ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, PUBLIC OPINION, PREJUDICES, IGNORANCE, LEARNING, ENLIGHTENMENT

OPINIONS: As many opinions as there are men." – (Terence, Phormio, II, 4. c. 160 B.C. - (Quot homines, tot sententiae.) - (Soviel Leute, ebensoviel Ansichten.) – - So let each follow his own, at his own expense and risk. J.Z., 10.7.86. – Only like-minded people should collaborate, to the extent that their interests and activities overlap and that they can thus assist each other. – J.Z., 4.2.08. - DIVERSITY & MULTIPLICITY OF VIEWS, DIS., RED.

OPINIONS: New opinions are always suspected and usually opposed, for no other reason than because they are not already common." – John Locke, Essay Concerning Human Understanding, dedication, 1690. – Nevertheless, the few who do share them should be at liberty to go ahead with them, at their own risk and expense, quite independent from public opinion, popular prejudices and laws expressing these. – J.Z., n.d. & 4.2.08 - PANARCHISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TOLERANCE.

OPINIONS: Nobody is entitled to an opinion about something he is ignorant of." - Robert Heinlein, Requiem, 51. - He is entitled to his flawed or false opinion - also to act upon them, but only at the own expense and risk and no one is obliged to listen to or read his views. - J.Z., 23.1.02, 14.1.11. - TOLERANCE, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, FREEDOM OF ACTION, RED., DIS.

OPINIONS: Opinion has caused more trouble on this little earth than plagues or earthquakes." – Voltaire, Letter to an unknown correspondent. Jan. 5, 1759. - Not so much mere opinions than intolerant popular prejudices. – J.Z., 4.2.08. – This applies only to the intolerant imposition of opinions upon the lives of others, not to opinionated actions applied only in one’s own sphere. – J.Z., 7.10.86. –  DIS. PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM

OPITZ, EDMUND A., Painting Government into a Corner, Essays on Liberty XI, 396-416, JZL. Page: 408: "Religion is to be free from political interference, just as we hope the other areas of life shall some day be free." - Page 412: "The totalitarian state must seek to destroy all lesser loyalties within it, just as it seeks to destroy religious loyalties above it; but in a free society, voluntary associations of all sorts flourish." - Even in democracies and republics all too many and very important individual and group choices have been preempted by territorialism. They have this in common with totalitarian regimes. - J.Z., 1.2.1999. - Since the essays in this 12 volume freedom encyclopedia did originally all appear in THE FREEMAN, they are all online now. Its microfiche editions, provided by a contractor, did not satisfy most readers of THE FREEMAN. - J.Z., 20.10.11. – TERRITORIALISM, TOTALITARIANISM

OPITZ, EDMUND A., Peace and World Government, in Essays on Liberty, IV, also in PP 1012. In Essays, 14pp, 381: "The first steps to peace are in the direction of a voluntary society in which each person is free to direct his own energy so long as he allows the same right to others. There is not utopia in this direction, but in striving for a voluntary society we may at least avoid such debacles as now plague our world." - Any utopia can be developed in this way - for its supporters. The voluntaristic framework, which also requires exterritorial autonomy, does itself constitute a kind of utopia, that of panarchism. In Nozick's point of view, still mixed up with geographical notions of an over-all limited government, it amounts to a "meta-utopia" for all kinds of utopias. - J.Z., 1.2.99.

OPPENHEIM, L.: International Law, 4th ed., London, Longmans,Green & Co., 1926-1928.

OPPONENTS: He that wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. - Our antagonist is our helper.” – Another version: “He that wrestles with us strengthens our will, and sharpens our wits. Our antagonist is our helper.” – Edmund Burke. – - Not when he deports us, puts us in prison or a concentration camp or even an extermination camp or threatens us with nuclear “weapons”. – J.Z., 2.2.08. As if no talent or innovator had ever been overcome by his opponents! Over 200 million victims of totalitarian statism in the 20th century alone and this in its “peace times”. The victims of majoritarian democracies and of popular prejudices in democracies are numerous as well. The delays in the utilization of new medicines introduced in the USA by the FDA have already cost very many people their lives. – Who does still believe that the territorial State is really our helper and our protector rather than our greatest and most powerful opponent, having suppressed individual rights and liberties for centuries and still suppressing all too many of them? Has he made us stronger and helped the cause of freedom, rights and peace? – With such “old saws” people manage to prevent self-thinking and rightful individual and collective actions. – It is true only within a rather limited sphere. - J.Z., 12.1.08, 21.6.12. - OPPOSITION, ANTAGONISTS, DIS., ANTAGONISM, ENEMIES, POGROMS, PERSECUTIONS, SUPPRESSION, TERRORISM, DESPOTISM, RESISTANCE, DIS. -

OPPONENTS: I respect only those who resist me; but I cannot tolerate them." - Charles de Gaulle, quoted N.Y. TIMES MAGAZINE, 12 May 1966. - I tolerate only those who do not attack me but often I cannot respect the wrongful things they do to themselves (or to others against their will) and them for doing them. - J.Z., 12.9.85. – I cannot forgive them for their wrongful actions to involuntary victims. – I can only tolerate what volunteers do only to themselves. I can only tolerate or sufficiently respect those, who do not attack my own individual rights and liberties or those of others but merely try to realize their own, in their own ways, in their self-chosen and exterritorially autonomous communities. - J.Z., 12.9.85, 14.1.93, 5.3.09, 30.12.11, 21.6.12. - RESPECT, RESISTANCE, TOLERANCE, AGGRESSION,


OPPORTUNITIES: All that any man can do for a people, all that any man can do for another man, is to set the man or the people free. Our work, whensoever and wheresoever we would do good, is to open for men the gates of life – to lift up the heavenly doors of opportunity … Give men opportunity and opportunity will give you men.” – George D. Herron, quoted by Sinclair, The Cry for Justice. - Also in George Seldes, THE GREAT QUOTATIONS. - Did he ever think of the opportunities that panarchies could provide for most people? - J.Z., 14.1.11. – MAN, JUSTICE, FREEDOM, DOING GOOD

OPPORTUNITIES: All that the free society can promise is maximum and equal opportunity – and this is all the guaranty we need.” – Rev. Edmund Opitz, THE FREEMAN, 6/76. - Panarchies provide such an opportunity, too. Limited governments provide it only for advocates of limited governments. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - Equal opportunity - for all kinds of ideologists, utopians, reformers, innovators - except the intolerant and territorial ones! - J.Z., 14.1.11.

OPPORTUNITIES: America is only another name for opportunity.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson. (*)  – Would it not be lovely if this were still true, to a large extent or even fully true? Then America would be much more loved than hated and would be largely and happily imitated. – What made it disliked to despised was and is largely its remaining degrees of governmental territorial interventionism which has also bred a lot of private interventionism, not only in the sphere of drug production and trade. - J.Z., 5.3.09, 30.12.11. - (*) Not yet for panarchists! - J.Z., 14.1.11. - & AMERICANISM, DIS.

OPPORTUNITIES: But without exception, every libertarian views government as it presently exists as a danger to liberty. - It follows that some wish government to be reduced in size; others hope that it will be remodeled and reformed. Still others suggest its elimination either by direct or indirect methods. - To sum u: every libertarian years for larger opportunity and less restrictive conditions in which to pursue his own ambition, business, or life style.” – Robert LeFevre, The Libertarian, p.7. – The exterritorial and voluntary or experimental freedom or personal law alternatives for States, governments, societies, communities, for majorities and all kinds of minorities, have still to be taken into consideration by most people - if they are serious about wishing to see their solvable problems solved as soon as humanly possible. – J.Z., 5.3.09. – PANARCHISM, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAWS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM

OPPORTUNITIES: Enlarge the opportunity and the person will expand to fill it.” - Eli Ginzberg. (*) - Panarchies, too, will tend to make men grow to their potential. - J. Z., 13.10.02. - Man will grow with his higher purposes. - Free after Friedrich Schiller, from memory, having said: "Es waechst der Mensch mit seinen hoehern Zwecken." - YOU look it up! - J.Z., 26.11.02. – (*) While this is certainly true for many people, it is certainly not true for all, e.g. the statists. They rather use the opportunities which territorial statism provides them with, to reduce increase their own statist wrongful opportunities to reduce the opportunities, rights and liberties for others. – J.Z., 21.6.12. -


OPPORTUNITIES: everyone … should have the chance for something better. That's what civilization is all about.” - R. W. Thompson, Outlaw, part II, in ANALOG, 10/90, p.137. – Something better by his own standards, as long as he does not interfere with the lives and actions of dissenters doing their own things for or to themselves. – J.Z., 5.3.09. - CHANCES, CHOICES, FREEDOM, CIVILIZATION

OPPORTUNITIES: Freedom is the opportunity for continuous initiative.” - Graham Wallas. – If only all freedom lovers were to take all the initiatives they could already freely undertake, and could afford to effectively participate in a general division of labor scheme, with each selecting his own priorities in this, from a complete list of all proposed or already somewhat advancing pro-freedom projects. But so far they are still mostly unaware of what most other freedom lovers are already doing or proposing or have suggested in the past. – J.Z., 26.12.07. – Territorialism has reduced experimental action opportunities to the few men in power and even they are largely dependent upon popular errors, myths and prejudices, whether they share them or not. – J.Z., 5.3.09. - Panarchism would extend this freedom to anyone interested in it, whatever his ideology, as long as he claimed no territorial monopoly for his experiment, society or community. - J.Z.,14.1.11. - FOR CONTINUOUS INITIATIVES OF ALL KINDS, FREEDOM, LIBERTY, RIGHTS, HUMAN RIGHTS, PREJUDICES, PUBLIC OPINION, POLITICIANS, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

OPPORTUNITIES: God supplies us with the opportunity, but He cannot take advantage of it for us.” - Author Unknown. – I would rather rely on my small chances than rely on the existence of a non-existing and supposedly benevolent God. – Have we fully explored and publicized all our chances as yet, so that we can freely pick and choose among them, the ones we are prepared to take? – Why is betting on horses and dogs or on winning prizes in sports or lotteries, etc., so much better organized still, than the search for liberty, peace, justice and all that they could provide? - J.Z., 5.3.09. - If we must bet, then we should rather do it on ideas and then test them in free experiments among volunteers. Thousands of them could be tried out at the same time in a large country, by different groups of volunteers. - J.Z., 14.1.11. – IDEAS, BETTING, SPORTS, LIBERTARIAN PROJECTS LIST ONLINE

OPPORTUNITIES: I seek opportunity, not security.” – Dean Alfange, THE FREEMAN, 6/73. – There are also opportunities for much more security than any territorial government could provide. They are not necessarily opposites! Think of e.g. insurance companies and protective agencies, freely competing for satisfied customers and not interfered with by any territorial government! – 5.3.09. – DIS., SECURITY – NOT TO BE EXPECTED FROM TERRITORIALISM

OPPORTUNITIES: If government must insure security to everyone – a highly debatable proposition – then it should give the only gift that can safely be given – opportunity. Instead of giving people money, give them the opportunity to earn it. Always be certain that something is given in exchange, to enable the recipient to have the proud feeling of having earned his way. Such a government will be loved, not hated.” – John G. Marson, ANALOG 7/75, p.173. – He was here expecting too much of any territorial government. – Made up of all too limited and corruptible humans, they do have their inherent limits, especially through the monopolistic and coercive form that they adopted and maintain. – J.Z., 5.3.09. - They are an obstacle to thousands of opportunities for associations of volunteers that would like to compete with them in the sphere of social, political and economic systems, which the governments have territorially monopolized. - J.Z., 14.1.11. – VOLUNTARY & COMPETING GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS VS. TERRITORIALISM

OPPORTUNITIES: Opportunities are never "lost." Someone else will take the ones you miss.” - Author Unknown. – Another version: Opportunities are never lost; they are taken by others.” - Author Unknown. – If that were quite true, then mankind, as a whole, would have taken up all the opportunities that existed and exist – and our situation would already be very much improved. Alas, history is full of missed opportunities. – And all too many quite rightful opportunities are legally closed to us. – J.Z., 5.3.09. – LEGISLATION, MONOPOLIES, PROHIBITIONS OF RIGHTFUL & RATIONAL ACTIONS, NOT ONLY UNDER “PROTECTIONISM”.

OPPORTUNITIES: Opportunity is more powerful even than conquerors and prophets.” – Disraeli. – But without all individual rights and liberties all opportunities will remain all too limited for most people. – J.Z., 4.2.08. – He certainly did not open up all rightful opportunities, e.g. the panarchistic ones. Not that most other territorial politicians were much better in this respect or that they are now. – J.Z., 5.3.09, 14.1.11, 21.6.12.

OPPORTUNITIES: Sell the American way and buy the American way – not as presently practiced, but as once prevailed and ought to be reinstituted. Keep ours the land of opportunity for everyone. “A plowman on his legs is higher than a gentleman on his knees.” – Leonard E. Read, Having My Way, p.103. – The “American way”, “laissez faire”, Free Trade, all individual rights and liberties, including the exterritorial options, monetary freedom, did never fully prevail, not even in North America. From still incomplete and flawed beginnings its people slid back, in all too many ways. Technological and scientific as well as medical progress were not sufficient substitutes. – In these spheres experimental freedom was already largely realized. In the political, economic and social spheres it remained largely territorially monopolized by governments. – J.Z., 5.3.09. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PROGRESS, VOLUNTARISM

OPPORTUNITIES: The office of government is not to confer happiness but to give men equal opportunity to work out happiness for themselves.” – William Ellery Channing, quoted by Leonard E. Read in NOTES FROM FEE, 1/77. - That is one of the numerous jobs that no territorial government can do properly or well enough. – J.Z., 5.2.08. – HAPPINESS, THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, WELFARE STATE, TERRITORIALISM, DIS.

OPPORTUNITIES: The opportunity society is gambling that the chance to have your child become an astronaut or a computer programmer is more powerful than the chance to get 8 % more in food stamps next year.” - Newt Gingrich, Window of Opportunity, A Blueprint for the Future, p.133. – I doubt that N. G. has as yet been made aware of the opportunities that panarchism would open up – for all kinds of people, to do their own things for or to themselves. – J.Z., 5.3.09. - SOCIETY VS. WELFARE STATE, OPPORTUNITY SOCIETY, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM

OPPORTUNITIES: There are two ways of looking at the world and there are two ways of leading one’s life: to do what is right, or to do what is opportune. By this proposition there are two types of persons, opportunists and the right kind of people.” – Dagobert D. Runes, A Book of Contemplation, p.97. – Probably we need more opportunists who take up opportunities for the application of sound principles, e.g. important individual rights and liberties. – J.Z., 5.3.09. – E.g. the opportunities that panarchism and monetary as well as financial freedom would provide in the spheres now monopolized by territorial governments. - J.Z., 14.1.11, 21.6.12. - RIGHTS, MORALITY, ETHICS, OPPORTUNISTS

OPPORTUNITIES: There is an attempt by some egalitarians to equate opportunities with rights; but while rights give meaning to opportunities, they are not interchangeable concepts. An individual has no more right to opportunities than he has to happiness; but as in the case of happiness and all rewards of successful living, he does have the right to pursue opportunities.” - Anne Wortham, THE FREEMAN, 7/75. - Actually, while we are still largely buried under avalanches of legislation, there are still more legal opportunities than any single person could effectively cope with. Most of them he is unaware of because they are not sufficiently published. Publishing all of them is also one of the many unused opportunities. - By thus fully developing this opportunity, we will come much closer to opening up all those rightful and promising opportunities still wrongfully and territorially closed to us by our "beloved" governments. - J.Z., 14.1.11.

OPPORTUNITIES: Wars and the threat of war. Revolutions and the threat of them. Already existing “freedom-fighters”. Governments in exile. All kinds of minority groups. Terrorism and the threat of them. Religious intolerance. Economic crises, especially unemployment and inflation. Conscription. Taxation. – Exterritorial autonomy or freedom to experiment in the political, social and economic sphere does have so much more to offer than territorialism even in its limited government form. – Alas, it is still outlawed and even insufficiently discussed as yet. - J.Z., 5.3.09, 14.1.11. - START-UP CHANCES FOR PANARCHISM

OPPORTUNITY SOCIETY: Every step toward centralizing decisions in Washington undermines local opportunities to practice freedom.” - Newt Gingrich, Window of Opportunity, A Blueprint for the Future, p.142. - Not only all local decision-making but also all decision-making by volunteers under exterritorial autonomy and personal law. Too many freedom lovers do still overlook that aspect. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT, INITIATIVE, CENTRALIZATION, DECISION-MAKING, FREEDOM, STATISM, FEDERALISM, DECENTRALIZATION

OPPORTUNITY SOCIETY: The transition from decay and violence to prosperity and peace requires a new approach to the structure of government and a reorganization of national activities - a fundamental 'paradigm shift' from the defeatist, welfare-state mentality to one of the focused determination to create an opportunity society.” - Newt Gingrich, Window of Opportunity, A Blueprint for the Future, p.116. - A single one, or the opportunity framework for diversity offered by panarchy, polyarchy, multi-archy etc.? Alas, those who cry for a new approach do rarely welcome it or seriously consider it when it is offered to them. - They still continue to think only in terms of territorialism, national sovereignty and collective decision-making for all. - J.Z., 23.1.02. - PEACE, PROGRESS, PARADIGM SHIFT, STATISM, FREE SOCIETY, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE, SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, WELFARE STATE, STATISM, CONSERVATISM, REPUBLICANISM

OPPOSITES: opposites should not destroy but should compensate each other, precisely because they are opposites.” – Steward Edwards, Proudhon, p.50. – DIVERSITY, TOLERANCE, COMPETITION, COEXISTENCE, PANARCHISM, FREEDOM, LIBERTY, LAISSEZ-FAIRE

OPPOSITION PARTIES: The Opposition: The dissenters, who know everything better because there is no danger that they have to prove their knowledge.” – Ron Kritzfeld. (Opposition: Andersdenkende, die allein deshalb alles besser koennen, weil keine Gefahr besteht, es beweisen zu muessen.) – The out-people, usually, know just as little and are as prejudiced as the in-people are. – Those party people who, after they have lost an election, are preparing themselves to further increase the mess, which the present victors are making. - J.Z., 4.7.92, 14.1.11. – That does somewhat describes the territorialist opposition. Those panarchists or polyarchists, striving only for freedom for their own kinds of experiments, among themselves, are likely to set many worse ones - and to that extent make themselves ridiculous - but some free experimenters would also set some better examples, always only at their own risk and expense. Thereby, they would promote progress as much as they could. Sometimes, they would do so contrary to their ideology, away from their own favourite ideas and institutions, which, during their free experimentation, they would have finally recognized as being flawed, clearly proven as such by their own free experiments, conducted under most favourable conditions, i.e. only among their like-minded volunteers. - Panarchies for political parties, instead of the usual fruitless party opposition, word battles and insults and territorial politics as usual. Everyone could have his or her way - but only with their own voluntiers. - The usual territorial elections could then be done away with. Every day at least some individuals would "vote" by either joining or leaving free experiments. - J.Z., 4.2.08, 11.1.11, 21.6.12. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, MINORITY AUTONOMY, PARTY POLITICS, OPPOSITION PARTIES, VOTING, ELECTIONS

OPPOSITION: A certain amount of opposition is a great help to man. Kites rise against, not with the wind.” – John Neal, READER’S DIGEST, 6/81. – Mere verbal opposition is not effective enough, in political, economic and social matters as well as in matters of natural sciences and in technology. Free experiments among volunteers are required to prove or disprove a case. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - DIFFICULTIES, OBSTACLES, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

OPPOSITION: Concerning the government and its opposition: The latter is only a second grade tyranny, which follows the first, that is practised now. How could I come to despise the second party less since both are only intent to build their pleasures and advancement upon my pains and my destruction?” – A Bellegarrigue, Manifesto. – Freedom of action and experimentation is needed for their victims, beginning with their individual or group secessions and then proceeding to new and exterritorially autonomous communities or societies, all of volunteers only. - Empowerment for individual people, up to now mere territorial subjects, to do their own things. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - PARTIES, OPPOSITION PARTIES, PANARCHISM, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT & SELF-DETERMINATION VS. TERRITORIALISM, ESTABLISHMENT, POWER.

OPPOSITION: He that wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.” - Edmund Burke – What about all those overcome by territorialist, collectivist and centralist as well as coercive legalized opposition, all the people not free to opt out and to try to realize their dreams in free experiments? Even when it comes to legally monopolized patents – only ca. 4 % are commercially utilized. Many of the others succumb to the usual opposing forces. This opposition did not give them the strength to succeed. – Were the victims of concentration camps, extermination camps, refugee camps, wars, inflations, unemployment, racial and religious prosecution – really strengthened? - J.Z., 23.1.08, 5.3.09. - Once we are free to do our own things, then we can ignore the opposition and criticism and just do what we believe in, at our own risk and expense. For almost every sound enough case there are many volunteers and resources, at least world-wide. Through the Internet these could now become mobilized and, after achieving exterritorial autonomy also for themselves, and supporting it for all others, they could go on undisturbed, apart from their own remaining errors and failures. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - & STRENGTH, RESISTANCE, DIS.

OPPOSITION: To oppose something is to maintain it.” – Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left Hand of Darkness, 106. – Some said that the greatest support for Judaism and Jewish communities came from the intolerance towards them, i.e. from antisemitism. Without that opposition they might have almost completely integrated over many generations, as happened with Jews who, very early on, fled to China. - J.Z., 5.2.08. – Individual and group secessionism, combined with panarchism would oppose existing wrongs and evils by providing at least some rightful and better alternatives – which all dissatisfied with their present establishment would then be free to adopt for themselves, one by one. – J.Z., 5.3.09. – PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

OPPOSITION: To strengthen a thing, oppose it.” – Frank Herbert, The God-Makers, 169. – To weaken some movement that has many prejudiced supporters, demand, rather, full exterritorial autonomy for it, too. Thereupon it could wrong and harm only its supporters and the number of its adherents would tend to shrink. Instead of having continued the animosity between you, you would have made some new friends or neutralized their former hostility. – You do not owe them love but merely justice and tolerance, as long as they leave you alone. – J.Z., 5.2.08. – Rather seek and publicly expose, clearly, its ridiculous side (while upholding the right of fools to make fools of themselves), its irrational and wrongful sides and either seek freedom to ignore them or, by secessionism from them and free competition with them, to gradually introduce their replacement by or conversion to something better. – J.Z., 5.3.09, 14.1.11. - DIS., FORCE, FEEDBACK, STRENGTH, PROVOCATION, ATTACK, DEFENCE, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAWS.

OPPOSITION: You become like the worst in what you oppose.” – Frank Herbert, The God Makers, p.170. –– It depends entirely upon your way of opposing it. To oppose e.g. totalitarianism, despotism or terrorism with totalitarian, despotic or terrorist means is not advisable and can lead to the realization of the above saying. – But true liberators, revolutionaries and crime fighters use means corresponding to their aims. – J.Z., 5.2.08. – Territorialism should not be opposed by another form of territorialism, but, instead, by the exterritorialism of free experiments by and among volunteers only, who seceded from territorialist regimes. - With that revolutionary and liberating step they would get all the suppressed groups on their side, eager to engage in their own free experiments. Here we should consider that even every majority has its own dissenting minorities, which might also prefer freedom to experiment for themselves. - On that basis we can all peacefully coexist and become good neighbours, also allies against the remaining power mongers, official and private criminals with involuntary victims. - J.Z., 1.1.11. - FORCE, POWER, MEANS & ENDS, TERRITORIALISM. PANARCHISM, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, AN IDEAL DECLARATION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, AN IDEAL MILITIA FOR UPHOLDING THEM

OPPRESSION: Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress.” – Napoleon I, Maxims, 1804-1815. – His censorship of the press was so severe that he himself remained unaware that before his final battle at Waterloo already ca. 10% of his conscripts had deserted, indicating rather a low morale among his soldiers. Not all were prepared to fight and die for his glory, while he pretended that they were doing so for France. – See e.g. the novels of Erckmann Chatrian about this. - J.Z., 5.3.09. - What Napoleon I said is particularly true for all territorialists. - J.Z., 14.1.11.

OPPRESSION: disseminate among the oppressed masses enough of good sense, information, and well-founded distrust, to render oppression more and more difficult and dangerous.” – Bastiat, Economic Sophisms, 132. – That might need spread of the knowledge and appreciation of the experimental freedom involved in panarchism, free banking, monetary freedom and all other genuine liberties and rights. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - LIBERATION, ENLIGHTENMENT, REVOLUTION, MILITARY INSURRECTION PROGRAM

OPPRESSION: He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression.” – Thomas Paine, Dissertation on First Principles of Government, p.242.  – Most people have still not clearly realized that this requires the freedom to establish or to join panarchies even for their opponents. On that basis they could even become allies. – J.Z., 5.2.08. – At least neutrality could be achieved between them. – The enemy, who does his things only to or for himself, at the own expense and risk, is no longer a real enemy by any moral and rational definition. - J.Z., 5.3.09. – TURNING ENEMIES INTO ALLIES OR AT LEAST NEUTRALS, PANARCHISM

OPPRESSION: If oppression is a continuous aggression against mankind, then a war of America against the European tyrants would be a justified defensive war.” – Lajos Kossuth, in speech in Cincinnati. - There were wars caused by power-madness and personal greed, even those caused by the whim of a woman. Why should the world not be given the grand example of a war which a great nation unselfishly conducts itself in order to defend the eternal rights of truth, of the human and divine laws? Such a war would be the most glorious one, it would also be the last one.” – Lajos Kossuth, in his speech in New York. - Quoted by Hans Habe, Leben fuer den Journalismus, Band 2, Meilensteine, S.131. – When proposing another bloody “war to end war” (even one of liberation against dictators oppressing and exploiting their captive nations). one should be more precise about one’s aims and means. Conventional and modern scientific warfare are not designed, suitable or conducted in a way to achieve quite rightful aims in a rightful way. They do inevitably murders many more innocents than tyrants and may even let the tyrants survive. Blinded by territorial and collective responsibility notions, governments cannot even see and define the enemy properly. – J.Z., 16.9.07. - Neither can most of their subjects and involuntary victims among them. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - TYRANNY, WAR, WAR AIMS, LIBERATION, ENEMY, DIS., INTERVENTIONISM, DIS.

OPPRESSION: It is not conclusive proof of a doctrine's correctness that its adversaries use the police, the hangman, and violent mobs to fight it. But it is a proof of the fact that those taking recourse to violent oppression are in their subconsciousness convinced of the untenability of their own doctrines.” - Ludwig von Mises. – Whoever is truly convinced that he is right would welcome publicity not only for his ideas but also for their critics. – J.Z., 23.1.08. - He would also welcome exterritorial autonomy for free experiments among their volunteers, thus, in his own opinion, giving them the chance to prove themselves wrong. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - REPRESSION, SUPPRESSION, AUTHORITIES, VIOLENCE, MASSES, MOBS POLICE STATES,, STATE, SUPPRESSION, INTOLERANCE, GOVERNMENTS, CENSORSHIP, VIOLENCE, DICTATORSHIPS

OPPRESSION: Men suffer from oppression, and to save themselves from this oppression, they are advised to invent common means for the improvement of their situation, to be applied by the authorities, while they themselves continue to submit to them. Obviously, nothing results from it but a strengthening of the power, and consequently the intensification of the oppression. – Not one of the errors of men removes them so much from the end which they have set for themselves as this one.” – Leo Tolstoy - They should not ask for reforms of any territorial government but aim at the abolition of the territorial monopoly of all governments, thus finally getting the chance to do their own things among themselves, under full exterritorial autonomy. - There is no territorial cure for territorialism. Under the continued suppression of experimental freedom for volunteers, volunteers cannot freely practise it. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, TERRITORIALISM, MAJORITIES, COUNTRIES, OBEDIENCE, SUBMISSION, CITIZENSHIP, NATIONALISM

OPPRESSION: Oppression cannot be stopped by oppressive means.” – Francis Ellingham, MINUS ONE, No. 30. – In all such attempts at best only another form of territorial oppression results. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - RESISTANCE, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, INSURRECTION, MILITIA, SECESSION

OPPRESSION: Oppression dehumanizes the oppressor.” – Rob Chilson and William F. Wu, Be Ashamed to Die, ANALOG, 7/86, p.119. – Only a large degree of dehumanization can lead anybody into committing oppressive and aggressive actions. Alas, it also largely dehumanizes the oppressed and keeps quite sound alternative knowledge and visions from most of their minds. - After decades of mass murder and depressions, Russian and Chinese opponents have, as a rule, come up with nothing better than majoritarian territorial democracies. - J.Z., 7.5.91, 4.2.08, 14.1.11.

OPPRESSION: Oppression has now become a custom, and custom is the tyrant of kings.” – Winwood Reade: The Martyrdom of Man, p.84. - What he meant but did not state is territorial oppression. There remains no oppression once all are free to organize themselves under full exterritorial autonomy, in accordance with their knowledge, ideas, errors and spleens, always only at their own expense and risk. Those becoming critical could then opt out to make other and hopefully better choices for themselves, perhaps establishing new customs in this way. - J.Z., 14.1.11, 21.6.12.

OPPRESSION: The inevitable failure of slavery and peonage. You created a reservoir of hate. Implacable enemies. If you had no hope of exterminating all of these enemies, you dared not try. Temper your efforts by the sure awareness that oppression will make your enemies strong. The oppressed will have their day and heaven help the oppressor when that day comes. It was a two-edged blade. The oppressor always learned from and copied the oppressor. When the tables were turned, the stage was set for another round of revenge and violence - roles reversed. And reversed and reversed ad nauseam.” - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune, p.160. - We ought to liberate even our enemies - to the degrees of freedom - or lack of it - that they want for themselves. - J.Z., 9.10.01, 14.1.11. - Well, our supposed enemies, i.e., the civilians and conscripts of a dictatorship, those, who are not incurable fanatic adherents to a despotic ruler. - The real enemies can't be easily turned from wolves into lambs, if at all. They may have to be killed or indefinitely imprisoned, as long as they remain real enemies. - J.Z., 7.2.02. - Like fanatic and murderous territorial terrorists. Even the democratic ones, as territorialists, can be quite mass murderous, as they have demonstrated in many of their wars. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - VS. LIBERATION, PANARCHISM, ENEMIES, WARFARE, CONQUESTS, VICTORY, TERRITORIALISM, MASS MURDERS, WARFARE

OPPRESSION: Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. You don't need anything else.” - Malcolm X - Unless our territorial and power-mad rulers manage to wipe us out first, with their mass-extermination "devices" or anti-people "weapons". - The authorities or tyrants making such mad decisions, might then survive for years or decades in the safes bunkers. If they and their descendants managed to survive, imagine what kind of future mankind they would produce, perhaps killer apes or the "human" equivalent to tyrannosaurus. - At least then they would do no wrong to each other. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - TRUTHS & TIME, NWT.

OPT OUT FROM UNDER POLITICIANS & BUREAUCRATS: Don't remain clay or puppets in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats. Opt out. Do your own thing, to or for yourself. - J.Z., 13.1.93, 11.12.03.

OPT OUT, OPT IN, MAKE IT YOUR OWN CHOICE, RATHER THAN THAT OF A BUREAUCRAT, POLITICIAN OR THE ACCIDENT OF BIRTHPLACE: Opt out, into your favourite condition of freedom or the kind of un-free status that you prefer for yourself. - J.Z., 27.11.91, 13.1.93.

OPT OUT: Don't remain clay or puppets in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats. Opt out. Do your own thing, to or for yourself. - J.Z., 13.1.93, 11.12.03. – Prior Pan AZ - FROM UNDER POLITICIANS & BUREAUCRATS, INDIVIDUAL & MINORITY SECESSIONISM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY – FOR VOLUNTEERS ONLY, PANARCHISM

OPT OUT: Go West, young man!" "Grow up, young man!" "Go up, young man!" "Opt out, young man!" "Grow very old, young man!" - All of these and other aims of young men and others can best promoted via individual sovereignty and individual secessionism combined with individual associationism, on the basis of exterritoriality. - J.Z., 29.11.90, 10.1.93. - PANARCHISM

OPT OUT: Opt out, into your favourite condition of freedom or the kind of unfree status that you prefer for yourself. - J.Z., 27.11.91, 13.1.93. – Previous Pan AZ. - OPT IN, MAKE IT YOUR OWN CHOICE, RATHER THAN THAT OF A BUREAUCRAT, POLITICIAN OR THE ACCIDENT OF BIRTHPLACE, PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

OPTIMISM: The pessimist is optimistic about the victory of pessimism. - J.Z., 12.4.00. - Or he is pessimistic even about the victory of pessimism, i.e., he expects optimism to win out. - Both, optimists and pessimists are wrong a) in their mere twofold or bipolar view of reality and b) in their passivity. They should rather be prepared to do something moral and rational towards the realization of whatever ideal they do hold - for themselves, and or among like-minded people only. Others they should leave alone, apart from the examples they would set. - Otherwise, they will remain people who do not really count in the long run, for the development of mankind into something better than it is today. - J.Z., 2.2.02, 14.1.11. - VS. PESSIMISM, ACTIVISM, FREEDOM OF ACTION VS. APATHY OR BEING A MERE SPECTATOR AND PROPHET, RED.

OPTIMUM SIZE: In most economic activities, the efficiency of a firm increases with size up to some optimum size and then decreases. The increasing efficiency reflects the advantages of mass production. …” - David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom, p.40/41. – Mankind is also a kind of “firm” or “enterprise”. What is its optimum size? With increasing prosperity fertility does usually decline. So this optimum size might be reached quite naturally, at least for this planet. – But most governments have long exceeded their optimum size, if there is any for territorial governments. – Is there any for exterritorially autonomous communities, with members all over the world? The practice of panarchism will show whether it exists or not. Electronic communications only and the occasional personal meetings would often not suffice, to hold them together. However, e.g. a community of Free Traders, by their very nature, could very well be world-wide. – J.Z., 5.2.08. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, STATES

OPTING OUT & IN: Let all nations, empires and other communities fail or succeed by the daily opting out and opting in of individuals, who are either dissatisfied with them or still hopeful for them. - J.Z., 14.8.88.

OPTING OUT & PANARCHISM: Politicians, judges and bureaucrats, quite unconstitutionally, illegally and unjustly, often do opt out from under the constitutions, laws and juridical precedents they are supposed to uphold - but do not grant ordinary citizens the right to opt out from under these power-holders. - J.Z., 30.8.04.

OPTING OUT & SELF-RESPONSIBILITY & FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: Only the constitutional, legal, juridical and tax option to freely opt out of all costs and benefits of so far coercive government schemes, will drive the true costs of all "free" schemes home to the remaining believers in them and will, finally, educate most of the remaining voluntary participants, too, into become financially mature, informed and self-responsible people, i.e. true human beings, rather than human sheep ("sheeple") or cattle. - J.Z., 7 Sep. 89, 10.10.89.

OPTING OUT VS. CONVENTIONAL VOTING: Vote A: you lose; vote B: you lose; don't vote at all: you lose. - Opt out! - J.Z. 10/74. -  That's the decisive vote for everyone.  - J.Z., 7.9.04.

OPTING OUT: Allow the unemployed, the tax victims, the inflation victims and any other deceived, oppressed or exploited or merely disappointed or dissatisfied individuals and groups in any country - to opt out of all the relevant federal, State and local government policies, laws, constitutions, jurisdictions and bureaucracies, to do their own alternative things to or for themselves. All kinds of self-help experiments to become quite free, liberated by exterritorial autonomy under their self-chosen personal laws. Then many of these problems would very soon become solved - for the successful exterritorial autonomists, all volunteers. The solutions do already exist, in historical records and in theoretical studies, or modern blueprints, largely unrecognized and under the present system they cannot be freely tried or demonstrated by their believers. And the wrongful approaches can, likewise, not be sufficiently demonstrated as such, by their practice becoming confined to their voluntary supporters, instead of being realized by territorial politics as usual. - J.Z., 10.10.91, 13.1.93, 21.6.12. Among these the flawed systems would then operate under optimal conditions, with unanimous consent, i.e. without internal opposition and thus their failures would be much more convincing. - They would have far less excuses. Whom else could they blame then? - J.Z. 7.9.07, 14.1.11. – SECESSION, INDIVIDUAL & EXTERRITORIAL

OPTING OUT: Don't be part of the nuclear war establishment. Dissociate yourself completely from those engaged in it. Opt out of all beliefs and institutions making for nuclear war, including armies, national economies and territorial States. - See: Alternative Institutions, Authoritarianism, Autonomy, Conscription, Consent, Competing Governments, Decision, Desertion, Experimental Freedom, Exterritorial Imperative, Freedom of Action, Government, Minority Autonomy, Panarchy, Parallel Institutions, Pluralism, Revolution, Secession, Separate Peace, Sovereignty, State, Territorial Organization, Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament. - J.Z. in An ABC Against Nuclear War. - OF THE NUCLEAR ARMS RACE, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

OPTING OUT: I’m all for opting out! – J.Z., 23.3.76.

OPTING OUT: Let all nations, empires and other communities fail or succeed by the daily opting out and opting in of individuals, who are either dissatisfied with them or still hopeful for them. - J.Z., 14.8.88. – Let all individuals become free to leave the wrongful or flawed communities and free to join the more successful or even quite successful societies, but all should be confined to exterritorial autonomy or personal law only. Then the wrongs and irrationalities of territorialism will be confined to the statist volunteers. Only they deserve them, as long as they are not prepared to secede from them. – J.Z., 23.6.12. - & IN! VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM

OPTING OUT: Let people opt out of the Warfare States. – J.Z., 3.8.75.


OPTING OUT: Only the constitutional, legal, juridical and tax option to freely opt out of all costs and benefits of so far coercive government schemes, will drive the true costs of all "free" schemes home to the remaining believers in them and will, finally, educate most of the remaining voluntary participants, too, into become financially mature, informed and self-responsible people, i.e. true human beings, rather than human sheep ("sheeple") or cattle. - J.Z., 7 Sep. 89, 10.10.89. – Pan AZ & SELF-RESPONSIBILITY & FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, STATISM, ENLIGHTENMENT, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, WELFARE STATE, TAXATION, HANDOUTS

OPTING OUT: Opt Out Now.” – A BMS button, that was offered in the USA. - Tomorrow might be too late. - J.Z., 14.11.11. – As if we were already free to do so! Numerous steps have to be undertaken to achieve that liberty, until it really becomes an individual option rather than merely an insufficient advice, thought or idea.  J.Z., 30.12.11.

OPTING OUT: Opt out of the nuclear arms race. Dissociate yourself, as far as you can, from all engaged in it, as far and fast as possible, as a first step towards preventing nuclear war. Exterritorial secessionism and voluntary associationism under personal laws and full exterritorial autonomy would, among other things, eliminate nuclear targets. – J.Z., 31.1.78, 5.2.08, 22.6.12. – PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, POLYARCHISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, POWER, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, NWT

OPTING OUT: Opt out of the warfare States. – J.Z., 23.11.76, 5.2.08. – That means, practically, out of almost every territorial State now in existence. – Alas, that is not yet a recognized, constitutional, and legal free choice. But we can work towards it, together with numerous other dissenters. – J.Z., 5.2.08, 23.6.12.

OPTING OUT: Opt out or die out. - J.Z., 19.5.75. – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, NUCLEAR STATE

OPTING OUT: Opting out is concerned with freedom – your freedom here and now – freedom to live your own life as you see fit and to peacefully associate with others.” – El Ray and Dr. Naomi Gatherer, PROTOS, Nov. 70. – Opting out by retreating into a wilderness or underground-living or retreatism to primitive or simple lives, with no taxable incomes, may not be enough to escape e.g. nuclear powers and their actions. – J.Z., 5.2.08. – VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

OPTING OUT: Politicians, judges and bureaucrats, quite unconstitutionally, illegally and unjustly, often do opt out from under the constitutions, laws and juridical precedents they are supposed to uphold - but do not grant ordinary citizens the right to opt out, quite legally and completely, from under them. - J.Z., 30.8.04. - PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, ASSOCIATIONISM

OPTING OUT: The abuse of alcohol, marijuana, and drugs is wrong. But so is the abuse of government-power …” - Paul Lepanto, Return to Reason, p.131. – Let us individually opt out of using and suffering under either. – J.Z., 9/72. – DRUG ABUSE, ABUSIVE TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS, PANARCHISM STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

OPTING OUT: Vote A: you lose; vote B: you lose; don't vote at all: you lose. - Opt out! - J.Z. 10/74. - That's the decisive vote for everyone.  - J.Z., 7.9.04. - Pan AZ - VS. CONVENTIONAL VOTING

OPTIONAL ASPECTS OF PANARCHIES: Quite optional for all the diverse panarchies would be e.g.: a) Whether their membership would be merely local or national or worldwide. b) The ism applied and organization forms, means and financial methods used. c) Whether they rule themselves by direct democracy, anarchist self-management, unanimity, egalitarian methods or various hierarchical systems or voting methods. d) Whether or not they make religions, race, customs or other features a condition of membership or consider them irrelevant. - - Volunteer militias for the protection of individual rights and liberties, rightfully armed, organized, trained and motivated for rightful resistance methods only, locally organized, autonomous but also federated and fully respecting "soldier's rights", as well as trained in the duties or rightful resistance to wrongful orders, would at the same time be a common feature of most panarchies, with militia members recruiting themselves from most of them and, through the optional membership, also an optional feature for individuals and different panarchies. Some will hire or set up other protective associations. - - In what is common to them and what is optional for them, internally and in their external relations, they differ so much that comprehension of a single of their rightful and necessary features and of their numerous optional ones does not lead, easily or soon, in most cases, to an understanding of all the differences, between the existing territorial States and the potential of exterritorially autonomous panarchies of volunteers only, now or in the future. Whoever favours e.g. religious liberty will not always understand every religious or atheistic etc. creed. Whoever favours e.g. free scientific experimentation (within the limits set by human rights and liberties of people who do not volunteer to participate), will not necessarily understand even a fraction of natural science, its philosophy, potential and past and current practices. With Panarchism and panarchy it is just about the same. It requires the same kind of revolution in our thinking, ideas, principles and actions as the introduction of religious tolerance and freedom for scientific enquiries once did. But the rewards of this revolution could become even greater and lead to a much higher development of philosophy, science and technology, too - apart from the achievement of peace, freedom, justice and prosperity, perhaps longevity, intelligence expansion and space exploration and settlements. I would not believe anyone who declared himself fully converted to panarchism after being exposed to such ideas for a few minutes or hours only. Some discover some gaps in their knowledge of panarchism and remaining doubts and reservations only after months or even years and many never think themselves deeply enough into this alternative world to become fully converted - but merely superficially and out of curiosity play with it for a while and then suffer a relapse or are repelled from it through their continued adherence to one or several long-established and popular prejudices. - For a "slogan" this kind of description is certainly too long but as a summary or capsule description it may not yet be long or complete enough. - J.Z., 3.7.89, 14.1.11,  23.6.12.


OPTIONAL LAW: A term for “personal law” used in Rex Gordon's "Utopia 239", Heinemann, London, 1955, reproduced in PEACE PLANS series as plan 236, and again on page 67, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507.

OPTIONAL SOCIETIES: Religion is to be free from political interference, just as we hope the other areas of life shall some day be free." EDMUND A. OPITZ, Painting Government into a Corner, Essays on Liberty XI, p.396-416, - JZL. - Page 408, Ibid, page 412: "The totalitarian state must seek to destroy all lesser loyalties within it, just as it seeks to destroy religious loyalties above it; but in a free society, voluntary associations of all sorts flourish." - Even in democracies and republics all too many and very important individual and group choices have been pre-empted by territorialism. They have this great wrong in common with totalitarian regimes. - Underlining by me. - J.Z., 1.2.1999, 14.1.11, 23.6.12. - FREE SOCIETIES, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS

OPTIONAL SOCIETIES: The first steps to peace are in the direction of a voluntary society in which each person is free to direct his own energy so long as he allows the same right to others. There is not utopia in this direction, but in striving for a voluntary society we may at least avoid such debacles as now plague our world." - EDMUND A. OPITZ, Peace and World Government, in Essays on Liberty, IV, 14pp, p.381. Also in PP 1012. - Any utopia can be developed in this way - for its supporters. And the voluntaristic framework, which also requires exterritorial autonomy, does itself constitute a kind of utopia, that of panarchism. It amounts to a "meta-utopia" for all kinds of utopias. Nozick's point of view is still mixed up with geographical notions of a somewhat limited government, which through its remaining territorialism and monopolies is still all too authoritarian and, fundamentally, in these respects, still even totalitarian. This kind of power and authority is still so insufficiently limited that it has still all too much in common with absolute monarchies. - J.Z., 1.2.99, 23.6.12. - Pan AZ - FREE SOCIETIES, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS

OPTIONALITY: - Optionality The Case against Science. … Optionality rejects the concept of a universal truth or law. This point has been discussed many times, e.g. in the article Science: The failed Search for the Universal Truth, first published in the August 1991 issue of Optionality Magazine. - - Users of the concept optionality can request to be listed under the domain, which is administered by Optionality. - - We don't want anyone to rule society, not a majority and certainly not a minority or a small group of people. There has been a long debate about politics and activism in general in the magazine Optionality, culminating in the conclusion that such methods are too much associated with the way the Government operates. - - From October 1993, (the magazine) Optionality has decisively expressed preference for Don Paragon's Vision that we do not actively have to end the Government, because it will simply slide into irrelevance by itself as its failures become more and more exposed. - - The Mobile Revolution will make the application of force, such as in territorial conquest and implementation of law and order enforced by military means, a bad idea that inflicts more damage than that it achieves any perceived gains. This becomes more and more clear from all kinds of perspectives, including economic, social, moral and philosophical perspectives. - - If your concern is that violence should be controlled, then we suggest that, in these days of modern communications, acts of violence can be quickly exposed to global audiences. Violent behavior will be regarded as intolerable, as it victimizes everyone. Violence should not be regarded as a private and personal matter between perpetrator and victim. The one who inflicts violence will more and more have to justify (as if that is at all possible) such behavior in front of global audiences that can exercise tremendous pressure in terms of market economics. Such audiences will demand to know why no alternative solutions were considered to solve whatever the problem what perceived to be. No dictator will be able to stand up to such scrutiny. Manipulation of the masses by controlling the media is becoming more and more difficult due to progress in communications combined with greater awareness that there are alternatives, that there is optionality. - - Another comment was: "No single concept should be put on a pedestal as the one and only solution to all that is wrong in society! Appointing Kings is what's wrong in society and, similarly, no single concept should be crowned as superior or, even worse, as the winner over all other concepts!" - - G.) Don Paragon's Vision: It is important not to confuse Don Paragon's Vision of the Future with this unarticulated, universal perspective. For Don, optionality is a concept, not a perspective. For Don, optionality is an ideology, it represents what he believes in. But optionality is just one part of Don's Vision, i.e. the ideological part, if you like, optionality is what Don believes in. Don regards optionality as just one of the concepts of the future, or rather as one of the aspects of cultures that will flourish in future times, next to other aspects such as improvisation, creativity and appreciation. - - H.) Pledge for more coherent Reasoning: Those calling optionality inconsistent only show that their reasoning is incoherent. This magazine does not promote optionality as the one and only concept that should rule the world, as alleged, but merely tries to stimulate discussion about optionality as a concept. This magazine puts optionality into practice by articulating various implementations of optionality. - - In this article, Ben Mettes, Quintessence's Managing Director, describes how Optionality can be used in practice, as opposed to interpretations of Optionality as a theory, ideal or ideology. Different Interpretations: Many people have asked me, over the years, to give them a definition of what optionality is. I always have problems with such requests, as optionality by nature (not by definition) defies such definition: Inherent to the concept optionality is a rejection of the use of definitions to put things in boxes, to determine exactly what it is and what it's not. [The details of any particular panarchy are dependent upon what its voluntary members wish it to be, at their expense and risk. Under panarchism a great variety of panarchies would exist, all freely chosen for themselves, by their voluntary members and all of them exterritorially autonomous. As I see it, this would be the organizational realization of "Optionality" or tolerance or freedom of action of freedom of association or freedom of contract or freedom of choice, of freedom of experimentation and the result of individual and minority group secessionism. - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - - Perhaps the easiest way to show how the concept optionality can be used in practice, is by giving some examples of comparative analysis. In urban planning, e.g., what is the better policy, centralised development or decentralisation? From the perspective of optionality, the Government's central control is a burden. Thus, in this age of advanced electronic communications, decentralisation is the better approach. Of course, if we take optionality as an ideology, any planning by the Government must be rejected. But this example is a simplified choice only between centralised development and decentralisation. - Similarly, what is the better organisational structure, the traditional hierarchical control and command structure that is common almost everywhere or the so-called networking approach? From the perspective of optionality, networking is the better approach. - - The Optionality Network provides a web-presence to members, complete with a website under the domain, an email address at and joint discussion areas and other utilities, such as a guestbook, mailing lists and promotional tools such as pages where visitors can add URLs and messages. - - Optionality versus Duality: Abstract: Many people have a simple ideal of natural harmony in which everything has an opposite with which it should be 'in balance'. This article argues that duality's plural look is deceptive. Obviously, such a fixation on two opposites is an inaccurate simplification of far more complex matters. This article also argues that duality inevitably restricts optionality. A fixation on the number 'two' restricts optionality as it endorses situations such as monopolies and cartels. A. The Deception of Duality: The concept of duality is very old. It plays an important role in Taoist philosophy, dating back thousands of years. The opposites of Yin and Yang represent respectively negative and positive forces, feminine and masculine, the moon and the sun, dark and light, winter and summer, the left hand and the right hand, passive and active, etc., etc. This duality is deceptive as the different appearances are in fact part of one larger concept, e.g. gender, seasons, etc. When it becomes a rule, such duality is very close to singular thinking, as anything must have its opposite to complement it into unity. Such use of opposites is also common in western philosophy. In the dialectic system of Hegel, each thesis calls up an anti-thesis and together they establish a synthesis, which in turn is a thesis calling up another anti-thesis to form a new synthesis, and so on. This is very similar to the method used by Socrates to search for 'the Truth'. Many scientists have based their theories on the presumption that if something is there, the opposite must also be there, right through to the existence of anti-matter. But again, it is deceptive to claim that one can always put together two opposites to find completeness, truth and reality. In many cases, this kind of thinking is merely an exercise in hollow rhetoric without much deeper thought or logic. - B. Duality and Competition: To present duality as the summum of competition is another example of this deception. Two suppliers, each concentrating on opposite parts of the market do not really compete with each other, they complement each other, forming a duopoly that, when institutionalised by law, prevents any other supplier from operating in their joint area of the market. A duopoly is sometimes presented as a highly competitive environment. The claim is that competition will be most fierce between two players that have only each other to fight for market share. In this kind of rhetoric, competition is portrayed as a fight between two parties, resulting in a single winner. The fighting may be fierce, but as the winner emerges, competition has ended; the competition has effectively been destroyed. It is as if the two parties are tugging a rope each at one end; there may be fierce competition, but in this tug-of-war all energy is spent on fighting each other, rather than on providing competitive services to customers. [This kind of destructive or fighting competition is most likely to occur under territorialism and monetary despotism, instead of exterritorial autonomy and monetary as well as financial freedom for all. - J.Z., 13.9.11.] This kind of competition is therefore also unhealthy and unproductive. - C. More 'healthy' Competition: A duality is not the best environment for competition to flourish. Either the two parties concentrate on opposite ends of the market and start jointly acting as a monopoly, or a tug-of-war breaks out between the two, destroying the very concept of competition. Consumers are not benefiting from all this, they are ripped off [in? – J.Z.] one way or the other, as there is no mechanism to prevent dual suppliers to exploit the absence of other players in 'their' market. If there were more players in the market, say five or six, there would be little chance that two of them would start a tug-of-war, a cut-throat fight between the two; if they did, the other ones would be smiling at the sideline, watching the two fools disappear from the market; the fight makes that the two can no longer compete with the other players that do not have to spend so much of their energy on such a fight. The very existence of more than two players prevents such a destructive tug-of-war. - D. An even more 'healthy' Environment: In a more 'healthy' environment, consumers can choose between suppliers and they should not even have to give such choice much consideration; competition will ensure that any supplier represents a good choice. The problem is that such competition needs a legal framework that insists on multiple suppliers. [? - Rather, the absence of a territorial and legal framework! - J.Z.] And such a legal framework comes with the risk of governmental abuse of power. Furthermore, a healthy environment can technically exist even when there is only one supplier active in a given area, as long as market entrance for other suppliers is not obstructed. Therefore, optionality is conceptually superior to competition. What is clear is that a healthy environment is not so much a question of numbers; thus, any fixation on the number two is likely to do more harm than good, not only because it diverts attention away from optionality, but because it actually restricts optionality. - [Here, once again, as in many of the articles that I downloaded, many years ago, a very restricted view of competition is presupposed, not a laissez-faire-competition in economics, politics and social arrangements, by volunteers, all only doing their own things, without claiming a territorial monopoly for themselves, apart, naturally, from their private and cooperative or partnership property claims in real estate. - Another bias, in at least some of its contributions, seems to be total non-violence, rather than total non-aggression. - RULERS & RULED, EMPLOYERS & EMPLOYEES, ARCHY & ANARCHY, CONTRACTS VS. DOMINATION, TERRITORIALITY VS. EXTERRITORIALITY, BUT ALSO EXTRATERRITORIALITY & PRIVATE OR COOPERATIVE PROPERTY IN LAND, RULING PARTY & OPPOSITION PARTY, BIARCHISM, BIPOLARITY. -  - J.Z., 1.9.11.] - - Optionality versus Parallelism: Abstract: This article argues that parallelism and diversity are both forms of plurality that, due to their insistence on multiplicity, incorporate some degree of coercion. Similar to plurality, parallelism seems to reject monoism, but does not clearly reject the Government. Indeed, the big question is, does parallelism reject the singularity of the law? By contrast, optionality rejects monoism in a definitive yet practical way. - A. Who backs Parallelism? Parallelism has not been given much attention as a concept in this magazine (Optionality, ed.), mainly because there have not been many people known to back the concept. This may change with the recent (1994, ed.) publication of the book Parallel Thinking by Edward de Bono. - In 1967, de Bono became famous with his catch-phrase lateral thinking, which could be regarded as a form of alternativism, i.e. doing something else than what you are expected to do for the sake of it or for the delight of variety. The article "There must be another Way", which first appeared in the July 1991 issue of this magazine, suggested that rather than choosing between alternatives, it is better to let multiple ways co-exist. De Bono's new book "Parallel Thinking" suggests that he agrees with us that this is a better approach. - Optionality versus Plurality: Concepts such as parallelism, alternativism, diversity and plurality - all oppose monoism. In the August 1991 issue of this magazine we expressed our preference for competitors to operate in parallel with each other. But we added that this is not always necessary. As long as the market is open, a single organization can operate in a market (sector) without consumers having to fear that this will lead to unfair exploitation. Optionality differs from concepts such as parallelism and pluralism in that optionality merely insists on testability of a market, i.e. the actual presence of multiple players is no absolute necessity. [Freedom for individual or group secessionists, combined with exterritorial autonomy or personal law options, is enough. - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - Parallelism and diversity are both forms of plurality. Parallelism may insist on multiple ways that are virtually identical, while diversity regards difference as a virtue. But they all demand the co-existence of multiple ways, they insist that multiple versions of something always be present. This calls for dictatorial measures against a sole supplier in a market. Especially in the case of something new, there may not have been enough time for parallel structures to develop. Demanding plurality from the start may prevent it ever coming off the ground. Optionality is easier to achieve as there is no necessity for each option to become fully manifest. Optionality is satisfied with the possibility of alternatives or rather with the presence of options. [Stressed by me. - J.Z.] This explains why plurality is often portrayed as essential regarding the shape of government and its socio-economic and trade policies, but is rejected in a wider context. Plurality does not reject the monopoly position of the Government as it realizes that it has to force some of its opponents (monoists) into compliance. [Territorial protection is inherently a monopoly. But protection need not be a monopoly and it need not be territorial. Even now the governmental police forces are largely outnumbered by those of private protection and security services, in many of the somewhat civilized countries. - J.Z., 13.9.11.] In its full implementation, plurality becomes a rule that needs to be looked after by law enforcers. [Have the territorial protection enforcers and defenders done their job anywhere well enough, so far? - J.Z., 13.9.11.] Ironically, plurality looks at the Government for help, but the Government will only allow plurality where it feels it can benefit from it, e.g. in tendering processes. Power corrupts and anybody in a position to write down the law will inevitably use that power selectively to strengthen positions and create a monopoly of power. - C. Is Parallelism different? How does Edward de Bono deal with the paradox of forcing people to reject dictatorship? Does he reject the coercion and monopoly position of the Government? Let us quote from the book: "Many developed countries ban cock-fights and dog-fights. I suggest we do the same with adversarial argument. I would like to see 'thinking' taught as a specific subject in all schools. At all levels of education I would like much more attention paid to the 'design' side of thinking. I would almost like to see government taking 'design' seriously enough to have a Department or Ministry for New Ideas. I would like to see the United Nations set up a formal Office of Creativity." [How many new ideas would be suppressed for all too long, and how much creativity - as a result of these reforms? - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - De Bono recently wrote that he wants to be king …. Australia. Does he intend to force the majority of Australians to give up monotheism for parallelism? Optionality does not force people into such choices, in the confidence that when bad options are exposed for what they are, few will choose them. - Edward de Bono's "Parallel Thinking" was reviewed in this article. … [At least when it comes to exterritorial parallelism for societies and communities, all only by and for volunteers, this article seems to overlook that option altogether. - PLURALISM, PARALLELISM, POLYARCHISM, MULTI-GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, FREE ASSOCIATIONISM ETC., DIVERSITY, EDWARD DE BONO, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, TOLERANCE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM. - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - - The concept optionality has all the advantages of options that possibility lacks. Optionality gives people the freedom to choose, without forcing them to choose. Optionality encourages multiple possibilities to co-exist, but it does not force all of them to become equally manifest. Optionality encourages other options to continue to be there, if someone selects one of them. Associated with the concept possibility is the question which one of the possibilities will become reality. By contrast, optionality rejects the idea of a singular truth or reality. Whether one particular option becomes manifest or not is not relevant, instead optionality encourages many options to co-exist, without forcing any particular option on people and without enforcing plurality on people who do not want that. There are various ways to express what optionality stands for and this magazine has devoted many words to this purpose, emphasizing that optionality is not merely verbal rhetoric. This magazine does not claim to be the sole authority on optionality, e.g. much of Don Paragon's music expresses optionality, sometimes without containing any words at all! - - Optionality versus Voluntaryism: - Abstract: In another one in the series of articles on the concept optionality, this article compares optionality with voluntaryism, to conclude that voluntaryism lacks the practical applicability of optionality. [Only if one manages to ignore the exterritorial autonomy options for volunteers! - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - What is Voluntaryism? - The concept voluntary can mean different things in different situations. Sometimes, voluntary work means one does not get paid for it, it is charity work. A volunteer may be asked to do work that involves risk or has other unattractive aspects. As a philosophy, voluntaryism can go well beyond charity work or risky military operations, and apply to any transactions and relations between people and organizations, from the perspective that there should always be mutual, prior consent. As such, voluntaryism becomes a strong moral principle that condemns coercion and dictatorship, while offering a positive alternative vision. This in contrast to philosophies such as anarchy, chaotism and libertarianism that reject the rule of the Government without offering much of an alternative. [Radical libertarianism or panarchism, does offer all alternatives that can be tolerantly practised among their volunteers, at their expense and risk. It limits all governments by removing their territorial monopoly, to achieve genuinely limited governments, those for their remaining volunteers only. - Libertarians, who do not go that far are only "limited libertarians". - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - Carl Watner has for many years articulated voluntaryism as such a broad philosophy in the bi-monthly publication The Voluntaryist (P.O. Box 1275 Gramling SC 29348 USA). One problem is that voluntary decisions are limited to people who are able to make up their minds. Carl therefore hangs on to rather conservative values (property, honesty, family, etc.) where disputes go beyond such limits. –[A? – J.Z.] more fundamental problem with voluntaryism is that, even if everybody were capable of having articulated views about everything they possibly could have a say in, they would be overwhelmed by the sheer amount of decisions they had to take and the number of times they would be asked to give their consent. [Under panarchism "sheeple" would also be free to follow their shepherds, even into their abbatoirs. - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - Voluntaryism may work if things can be satisfactorily decided between a few people, but as more people get involved, the number of interrelations that require consent can increase logarithmically. [E.g. truly free and world-wide Free Trade and Freedom of Expression do not require governmental regulation! - The Optionality people, judging by what I have read of their output, seem to be living so far only in a half-way house, in most cases. - They still suffer under what Fromm called "the fear of freedom". - J.Z., 13.9.11. – Nor do e.g. international sports, communication and transport options require governmental regulations. The Optionality people are also all too limited libertarians, playing around their main term, without taking historical experience and facts sufficiently into consideration. – J.Z., 23.6.12.] - Voluntaryism focuses on prior consent of consumers of products and services, but in many cases it is practically impossible to discuss in detail all aspects of supply. [Producers do also offer almost continuously unordered and unasked for new products and services, under the assumption that among the masses of their potential futures customers there will be at least some, who will come to appreciate them soon and will be willing to pay a free market price for them. Sometimes, as novelties, even high prices can be charged for them. In other cases introductory low prices have to be offered. That kind of thing can be seen in operation all the time in specialy and novely shops and also in supermarkets. – J.Z., 23.6.12.] - Thus, a voluntary society either has a stagnating economy or it remains a Utopian dream. [Another great mis-judgment! - J.Z., 13.9.11.] Voluntaryism may claim the higher moral ground, but it fails on practical grounds. [When I am shopping - then I am always looking for genuine bargains. Obviously, I am not alone in this. For these bargains tend to disappear rather rapidly. Not all consumers are as dumb as some intellectuals believe them to be. - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - Where do Options differ? The concepts optional and voluntary overlap considerably. Both imply that it is up to people to make a decision, rather than that they are forced into a specific direction. However, people who are asked to volunteer can usually only decide to agree or disagree; the fact that they can decide on something does not imply that they are offered the best option and, as a result, they may agree on a relatively bad choice. By contrast, having options implies there are a number of possibilities between which people can choose, each of which may constitute an attractive choice. Having options is more than being offered a yes-or-no choice. - - The concept Optionality: The concept optionality implies that people should be offered more than a yes-or-no choice. Optionality gives people decisive power, but it does not concentrate solely on the consumer side. Optionality promotes an increase in the number of options available to people. Thus, optionality also has some important things to say about the way products and services are being offered by suppliers. Optionality rejects a single supplier exploiting a monopoly. Optionality rejects collusion between suppliers leading to the formation of trusts and cartels. Such situations often result when one or more suppliers are being privileged over other suppliers by the Government. Optionality principally rejects the entire concept of government, not only because it is backed up by coercion and thus leaves people no choice, but also because a government typically derives its power from monopoly control over a given territory. Optionality can be implemented in society without requiring prior permission from every person, as, over time, optionality will ensure that all the products and services that are offered are attractive ones - except of course for dictators. - [Even dictocrats will find some fools to exploit and oppress. They deserve and their followers do each other - as long as their victims not not make use of their right to secede. - J.Z., 13.9.11.] - - What is Optionality? (B) - Abstract: This article is compiled from recent discussions. The article argues that many people talk about freedom, liberty, anarchy and libertarian ideologies. But each of these concepts is essentially empty compared to optionality, which offers a constructive way to tackle politics. - A. What is Optionality? The concept of optionality is rather self-evident. It is about having options. However, giving any rigid definition of what optionality is supposed to be, is incompatible with the very concept. So, rather than splitting hairs about what the exact meaning is supposed to be, let's look at the following example. Many people will reject dictatorship. They try to achieve freedom, anarchy, whatever. Their method is confrontational, inevitably leading to the use of force. In other words, they turn to exactly the same methods that they dislike in the dictator's behavior. Optionality is different in that it does not seek to conquer opposition in a violent conflict, but instead optionality simply creates additional options. The more optionality, the less dictatorship. There are many ways in which dictatorship can be tackled. Having more options in the media and telecommunications is a good example. Dictatorship is full of lies. The more options there are, i.e. a pluriform press, multiple radio and tv-stations, cheap access to faxes, the WEB and email, etc., the more likely it is that such lies will be exposed for what they are. This is why dictators are always out to control the media. Sure, if one is a victim of dictatorship, one may not have many options. But that does not mean that one therefore has to agree philosophically with the dictator. The fact that one is forced to do something does not mean that one agrees with dictatorship. After all, one is forced to do things. The point is, what do you believe in, what do you want instead! The difference between anarchy and optionality is that anarchy merely opposes government, but does not offer much beyond that. Anarchy will fight government, police, any form of oppression or dictatorship, but it offers nothing beyond this fight. As such, anarchy is confrontational, even destructive, rather than constructive. Optionality does offer something beyond a rejection of dictatorship. As an example, the article "Vision of the Future" argues that we are on the verge of what he calls the Post-Government Era. The ideology that will be most prominent in future times, if you like the belief that will shape future times most, is optionality. Thus, optionality's influence goes well beyond the end of the government as a system that currently controls our lives to such a large extent. This implies that government control will simply fade away in future, as the influence of optionality increases. Take an issue such as power (electrical, oil, etc.). Solar power offers great opportunities, especially if combined with small flywheels that are light in weight, can store large amounts of energy by spinning a huge speeds (thus reducing greenhouse effects), are portable (like small batteries) and can be reloaded from solar panels. [For a while even large buses were driven for considerable distances through the power of inbuilt large and heavy flywheels, whose speed was recharged at arranged points via electricity supplies.J.Z., 23.6.12.] At present, such options are dramatically reduced due to the control by governments over electricity, transport, etc. Such issues can be resolved by progress in technology combined with greater acceptance of optionality. - By its mere presence, optionality shows its virtues and opens up further opportunities. Sure, some options will turn out to be bad options. But the point is that they become visible and exposed as such. If there is a dictator or a central government taking all the decisions, then such comparison is hardly possible. Optionality works by exposing bad choices for what they are. - - B. Mass Media: The mass media are a privileged bunch whose joint focus on nationalism, disasters and violence represents a giant call for greater government control. This is no surprise, as the privileges of the mass media are the direct result of such government control. The mass media are out to quench creative thoughts by their deliberate sensationalism, and by appealing on impulse desires and irrational fears. The mass media try to protect their privileged situation by discrediting alternatives to government control. The mass media will either ignore optionality or regard optionality as another version of anarchy. In the mass media, anarchists are typically portrayed as extreme left-wing, bomb-throwing dreamers. For that reason alone, optionality should be regarded as distinct from anarchy. - Similarly, the mass media are keen to lump optionality together with terrorism, tribalism, chaos and the practices of the Mafia, warlords and drug-gangs. But there are strong indications that more optionality will not lead to more tribalism, warlords and violent revolutions: - Optionality declares itself to be non-violent, in contrast with many revolutionary movements. - Optionality rejects tribalism and local territorialism. [Underlined by me: J.Z.] - Some global developments point at other directions. Such developments include political trends towards greater individual freedom, economic and social globalization and the growing intellectual insight that geographic isolationism is economic suicide, ideological nonsense and populist ludditism. Current-event journalism is great in exposing the atrocities of fights between local warlords, but in the bigger picture such tribalisms are poor imitations of the biggest gang around, the cartel of civil servants, judges, police and military forces, in other words: government. In the bigger picture and in the prospect of more optionality, all these hierarchical systems that are out to impose their order and rules in a specific territory - backed up by the threat and application of force - will simply fade away into history as less preferable options. Their lackeys in the mass media, at universities, etc. will go down with them. As national borders collapse, people will lay down their national identity as a strait-jacket that fits nobody. Government rule will be replaced by optionality, not by tribalism and local territorialism. Violence may enjoy a high profile in speculative journalism, but the mindset that is promoted in the media is extremely harmful not only towards their obvious victims, but also towards those who may misguidedly belief to gain some benefit out of it. C. The Shape of Future Times. Bureaucrats typically use words such as structure, building and platform to give the false impression that society is like a building that requires a foundation, skilled workers and an architectural plan. But progress does not benefit from bureaucrats' lust to co-ordinate industries and to coerce people's behavior into specific directions. - Instead, progress is the result of all the smaller and larger improvements that people all over the world make every time they are confronted with a situation. The most valuable contributions are often the direct results of the brave individuals who choose to trust their feelings, talents and creativity and who improvise rather than follow orders, who follow their dreams against the norms and rules of the bureaucracy, and who ignore any master plan imposed by dictatorial government. - Not only is it morally and ethically wrong to impose a centrally-controlled organizational structure onto society; any such 'master plan' is simply doomed to fail, as has been proven over and again in the past. [See under PLANNING. – J.Z.] Government control invariably muffles innovation and results in a bureaucracy lusting for power, in corrupt politicians and civil servants, cronyism and nepotism, in wasteful greed, myopia and delusion, and most of all in total and absolute failure. - Voluntary actions and interrelations that are based on mutual agreement with an appreciative focus, are superior in all respects to government control. Instead of developing rigid blueprints of the future, we should continue to describe the kinds of future times we like to live in. There are many things that are wrong, in so many places in the world, in so many events in the past. There is plenty of background material on the horrors of the past and there are plenty of journalists active in exposing atrocities in current events. But few people seem interested in formulating better alternatives for future times. Many people complain about oppression, bullying and coercion, many talk about freedom and liberty, but they only define what they do not want. There are plenty of anarchists and rebels who protest against something, but lack any vision beyond that. Instead of continuing to complain without ever offering better alternatives, it is better to spend some time discussing such alternatives, without falling into the trap of trying to put together some kind of master plan. - From a political perspective, optionality is the key. By asking for more optionality, the better alternatives will automatically become manifest. Some options will turn out to be better than other ones. But it is hard to decide in advance which are the better ones. Instead, it is better to aim for greater optionality. This implies a rejection of all the monopolies that currently dominate sectors such as health care, education, security, travel, transport, communications, etc. Politicians are keen to make deals with the media, keen to censor the Internet, prescribe key escrow in encryption, allow a cartel of TV stations to dominate new digital transmission techniques, etc., etc. Communications has the highest priority - after all, for people to agree that benefits will evolve from greater optionality, they first need to hear about the very concept. Look at the strategy of the IMF, the OECD, the WTO and many similar organizations. They believe they can improve the situation in a given country if trade barriers are lowered, if the respective Government stops subsidizing and otherwise privileging certain domestic producers, etc. But why do they not start with opening up communications? Why do they allow mass media to continue to spread a message that is the direct opposite of their own vision of opening up borders? Furthermore, how sincere are such organizations in their vision? After all, they are organizations that are controlled by nations [Rather, by the fictions, errors, prejudices dogmas, wrong assumptions and false conclusions of territorial nationalism. – J.Z., 23.6.12.), they will always aim to preserve national borders. - Politicians, presidents, organizations such as the UN, cannot be trusted in this regard. People should not leave it up to politics to create better alternatives. The beauty of optionality is that it is in the hands of the people, it is not a choice that is enforced upon people by politicians, it is not a political choice that makes people choose one and therefore lose the other. Optionality encourages people to stop acting as a looser. What Don Paragon says about optionality is: If you want it, all you need to see is that you need it, if you want to be! (Don Paragon, Vision of the Future.) - First issued: Optionality March 1998 | Theme: What is Optionality? | Content | Find | Discussions | Suggestions | Listings ] Designed by Optionality 1996-97-98, all rights reserved. - Last revised: March 1998, Quintessence Pty.Ltd. - [The above are just some extracts from their numerous OLD articles. By now they may have produced many better ones. I have not yet got around to do a search for all of their later output. Maybe even panarchists can find some real pearls there, by now. - Do I infringe their rights when I try to help making their output better known, with some samples? What wrong or harm do I do to them, if I put copy some of their material online, giving the source? - By all means, offer a better survey of what OPTIONALITY has to offer, by now! - J.Z., 13.98.11.]

OPTIONS, FREE: Panarchies offer all political, economic and social system options, not only left and right or centre ones or mere compromises, not only conservatism, status quo stagnation,  traditionalism or petrification, reactionary relapses or radical liberation for all, but these and all other options, all at the same time and in the same territories and even world-wide, but all of them only for all those who individually declared that they want them, and all only at the risk and expense of the voluntary participants. What more could anyone rightly ask for? What lesser state of affairs should anyone be complacent about? - J.Z., 27.9.91, 13.1.93, 7.9.04, 24.6.12.

OPTIONS: All options for everybody! – J.Z., 16.6.04. – Which means, naturally, no infringement of the voluntarily chosen options of others. – J.Z., 19.10.07. - All the options, for everybody, everywhere, all the time – but always only at the own risk and expense. – J.Z., 16.6.04. - CHOICES, ALL FOR EVERYBODY, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM UNDER FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM

OPTIONS: Panarchies offer all options, not only left and right or centre ones or mere compromises, not only conservatism, status quo stagnation, traditionalism or petrification, reactionary relapses or radical liberation for all, but these and all other options, all at the same time and in the same territories and even world-wide, but all of them only for all those who individually declared that they want them, and all only at the risk and expense of the voluntary participants. What more could anyone rightly ask for? What lesser state of affairs should anyone be complacent about? - J.Z., 27.9.91, 13.1.93, 7.9.04. - Pan AZ – FREE OPTIONS

OPTIONS: Peace requires the existence and availability of peaceful options for all dissenters. – J.Z., 12.3.74. - OPPORTUNITIES, PEACE, DEVELOPMENT, WAR, PANARCHISM, NEUTRALITY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, SECESSIONISM, OPTING OUT

OPTIONS: Peace requires the existence of peaceful options. They are denied e.g. by censorship, the practice of collective responsibility, compulsory State membership, conscription, monopolies for decision making, diplomatic monopolies, immigration or emigration barriers, majority despotism, military discipline, monetary despotism, legally established monopolies, territorial nationalism, protectionism, repression of individual and minority group secessions and exterritorial autonomy, secrecy, coercive subordination, taxation, uniform territorial legislation, legalized and mass murder "weapons" systems. - See also under: Alternatives, Exterritorial Imperative, Secession. . – J.Z. in An ABC Against Nuclear War. - PEACEFUL OPTIONS

OPTIONS: The president wants to keep his options open.” – His options to restrict further or even abolish our individual options. – J.Z., 21.6.96, 2.2.08. - DIS.

ORBIT: But it is not impossible that the nation which was the first to put a man into orbit outside the earth may soon permit its citizens to choose their own orbits.” – H. E. Salisbury in After-Word to Andrei D. Sakharov’s Progress, Coexistence & Intellectual Freedom – Orbits, alas, are still all too much fixed, just like the territorial powers are, which force us into their orbits on the surface of this Earth. Man needs not only freedom of movement and exchange and communication all over this planet but also freedom of association, of contract and experimentation, together with like-minded people, all over Earth, and thus under full exterritorial autonomy, in xyz communities of volunteers, all doing their own things for and to themselves only, always at their own expense and risk. – I doubt that these authors had this kind of panarchistic or polyarchic freedom in mind. – J.Z., 5.2.08. – . – SPUTNIK, PROGRESS, FREEDOM, SOVIET UNION, USSR, INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM. MERE SATELLITES INTO FREELY ORBITING INDIVIDUALS & MINORITIES, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENTS & SELF-DETERMINATION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, MINORITY AUTONOMY, BOTH WITHOUT ANY TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY, FREE CHOICES FOR INDIVIDUALS, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, OUR “FATES” TO BE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE IN OUR OWN HANDS, AS A RESULT OF APPLYING OUR OWN MINDS,

ORDER & DISSENT: we wanted dissent and order, …” - W. R. Thompson, Second Contact, ANALOG, 4/88, 56. – Self-chosen exterritorial autonomy order vs. territorially imposed “order”, laws and controls, which all too often leads to all too many wrongs, irrationalities and disorders. - J.Z., 14.1.11, 24.6.12. - DISSENT, ORDER, PANARCHISM, SELF-SELECTED ORDER RATHER THAN TERRITORIALLY IMPOSED ORDER

ORDER WITHOUT DIRECTION: Order without direction”. - Slogan seen in the office of William A. Niskanen. - David Boaz, ed., The Libertarian Reader, The Free Press, 1997. (Claiming copyrights even to the writings of Paine, Madison, Tocqueville, Mill, etc.! – J.Z.), p.243. - That means, if anything, individually chosen systems of order, which can only be realized together with all other such systems, exterritorially, by volunteers under personal law. I doubt that D. B. had then fully considered this option. - Does he now? One could find out, if one looks him up on Facebook. This is also possible now for many other famous libertarians, who are already listed there. But I have so far, after only recently entering it, not seen many references to panarchism, monetary and financial freedom, ideal human rights declarations and militias. Perhaps it is not yet centered enough on ideas rather than persons. - What I would like to see is an equivalent ideas-book. - Who is willing and able to start it? - J.Z., 14.1.11. - IDEAS ARCHIVE & TALENT CENTRE

ORDER WITHOUT DESIGN: A concept often used by Hayek. It is comparable to the “meta-utopia” concept of Nozick, but it does not mean no design for any of the panarchies or utopias of volunteers but simply no prescribed over-all design, territorially imposed upon all panarchies and utopias, whose designs and realization attempts are left to choices and discretion of their volunteers. Merely the open framework of voluntarism and exterritorial autonomy or voluntary membership is demanded, combined with personal law systems, leading to natural harmonies and natural order or natural law relationships, which agree with genuine individual rights and liberty choices of sovereign individuals. – J.Z., 24.6.12. – NATURAL ORDER, NATURAL LAW, NATURAL HARMONY, NATURAL RIGHTS, NATURAL LIBERTIES, HUMAN RIGHTS, MUTUAL CONVENIENCE RELATIONSHIPS, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM

ORDER WITHOUT LAW: Where will anarchists keep the madmen? - by John D. Sneed, JLS, I/2, 8pp. Hopefully, one day all such articles will find their way into my collection. Marks (on the paper master for the microfiche edition, are by myself.) - J.Z., 197, in ON PANARCHY XVII, in PP 1,051. - See: SNEED.

ORDER, CHANGE, PANARCHISM & PROGRESS: The art of progress is to preserve order amid change and to preserve change amid order.” – Alfred North Whithead.  – Panarchies would solve this problem by making laws and experimental actions a matter of personal choice. – J.Z., 21.11.95. – Let each learn and advance at his own speed and his own risk and cost. – J.Z., 7.1.99.

ORDER, CHAOS & PANARCHISM: Panarchism will help us to escape the imposed "order" and the resulting chaos of territorialism - into a natural order corresponding to the abilities, knowledge and ideals of all non-aggressive individuals trying to realize their own dreams at their own risk and expense. It will make political, economic and social experiments as voluntary and harmless as most artistic, culinary and scientific experiments are - to all but the voluntary participants. Precisely because the large-scale territorial experiments of conventional governments are so dangerous and expensive, in money, labor and blood, all such public affairs experiments should, in future, be confined to volunteers only. Then their believers could only harm themselves, not doubters and dissenters: any non-members, anyone who seceded from them in time. The process could become as peaceful as that of diverse people engaging in diverse card- or sports games or artistic competitions. Imagine the chaos that would result if parties struggled on the kind of uniform rations for all, according to their various dietary beliefs or convictions, instead of letting everyone pick from a menu or from the shelves of a self-service store, to fill his shopping cart with the items he or she thinks to be necessary or which are good for them or, at least, temporarily enjoyable and thus preferred. - J.Z., 17.9.04, 24.6.12.

ORDER, SOCIAL ORDER: For every social order must ultimately be genuinely constructive. All its members must have a stake in its existence." - Otto von Habsburg, The Social Order of Tomorrow, 21. - How could this be sufficiently realized without individual sovereignty, individual secessionism and voluntary associationism in exterritorially autonomous communities? - J.Z., 14.1.93. – Q.

ORDER, SPONTANEOUS ORDER: For in fact we are able to bring about an ordering of the unknown ONLY BY CAUSING IT TO ORDER ITSELF. In dealing with our physical surroundings we sometimes can indeed achieve our ends by relying on the self-ordering forces of nature, but not by deliberately trying to arrange elements in the order that we wish them to assume. This is, for example, what we do when we initiate processes that produce crystals or new chemical substances (see previous section and also Appendix C). (*) In chemistry, and even more in biology, we must use self-ordering processes in an increasing measure; we can create the conditions under which they will operate, (**) but we cannot determine what will happen to any particular element. Most synthetic chemical compounds are not 'constructible' in the sense that we can create them by placing the individual elements composing them in the appropriate places. All we can do is induce their formation. (***) - A similar procedure must be followed to initiate processes that will coordinate individual actions transcending our observation. In order to induce the self-formation of certain abstract structures of inter-personal relations, we need to secure the assistance of some very general conditions, and then allow each individual element to find its own place within the large order. (****) The most we can do to assist the process is to admit only such elements as obey the required rules. This limitation of our powers necessarily grows with the complexity of the structure that we wish to bring into being." - Hayek, The Fatal Conceit, p.83. - - Hayek on self-ordering processes but short of an understanding how they would work in a panarchistic framework for free human beings. [He wrongly assumed that his supposed ideal of a “limited government”, still only a territorially monopolistic and enforced one, could already achieve all that for all people within a country, province or district. – J.Z., 24.6.12.] - I hold that to have overlooked the "exterritorial imperative" or freedom for social reform or revolution options for minorities or dissenters, constitutes our worst "fatal conceit", one common to all territorial statitsts, and it was shared by Hayek, although he came as close to the truth as he did in the above. Adoption of the territorial monopoly and force model, even in its best form of limited but still territorial government or of anarcho-capitalism or laissez faire economics, as the only rightful option for all, does inevitably muddle our thinking. - J.Z., 9.1.93, 24.6.12. - Adoption of the central bank paper money and even of the gold redemption currency as an exclusive currency, leads to similar fallacies, wrongs and mistakes. - J.Z., 7.9.04. – At least he did not share that fallacy in full. However, he managed to completely misunderstand a radical monetary freedom advocate like Professor Heinrich Rittershausen and even called him an inflationist, although Rittershausen opposed both pre-conditions for inflation: the issue monopoly and legal tender power for its currency. – He also seems to have remained unaware of the classical free banking writings of Ulrich von Beckerath, although his three books on the subject were published in several European languages. [See: ] - J.Z., 14.1.11, 24.6.12. - (*) J.Z.: One can look differently at this, as working with rather than against the basic laws of nature of free human societies. - - (**) For instance the panarchistic framework. - - (***) After thousands of trial and error experiments, we might, finally, find the way in which it works well, to a sufficient degree, in most cases. That is a worthwhile knowledge and the experimental approach is worth knowing and using, too and how to largely replace it by mathematical formulas or computerized calculation and imitation models, reducing the costs of experimentation. - - (****) That is exactly what panarchism tries to do but what Hayek had not considered for exterritorially, autonomously and voluntarily competing diverse human societies within the all-embracing human society. - J.Z., n.d. & 24.6.12.

ORDER, SPONTANEOUS ORDER: For in fact we are able to bring about an ordering of the unknown ONLY BY CAUSING IT TO ORDER ITSELF. In dealing with our physical surroundings we sometimes can indeed achieve our ends by relying on the self-ordering forces of nature, but not be deliberately trying to arrange elements in the order that we wish them to assume. This is, for example, what we do when we initiate processes that produce crystals or new chemical substances (see previous section and also Appendix C). (*) In chemistry, and even more in biology, we must use self-ordering processes in an increasing measure; we can create the conditions under which they will operate, (**) but we cannot determine what will happen to any particular element. Most synthetic chemical compounds are not 'constructible' in the sense that we can create them by placing the individual elements composing them in the appropriate places. All we can do is induce their formation. (***) - A similar procedure must be followed to initiate processes that will coordinate individual actions transcending our observation. In order to induce the self-formation of certain abstract structures of inter-personal relations, we need to secure the assistance of some very general conditions, and then allow each individual element to find its own place within the large order. (****) The most we can do to assist the process is to admit only such elements as obey the required rules. This limitation of our powers necessarily grows with the complexity of the structure that we wish to bring into being." - Hayek, The Fatal Conceit, p.83. - - Hayek on self-ordering processes but short of an understanding how they would work in a panarchistic framework for free human beings. I hold that to have overlooked the "exterritorial imperative" or freedom or social reform or revolution options constitutes our worst "fatal conceit" and it was shared by Hayek, although he came as close to the truth as he did in the above. Adoption of the territorial monopoly and force model does inevitably muddle our thinking. - J.Z., 9.1.93. - Adoption of the central bank paper money and even of the gold redemption currency as an exclusive currency leads to similar fallacies, wrongs and mistakes. - J.Z., 7.9.04. – At least he did not share that fallacy. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - (*) J.Z.: One can look differently at this, as working with rather than against the basic laws of nature of free human societies. - - (**) For instance the panarchistic framework. - - (***) After thousands of trial and error experiments, we might finally find the way in which it works well, to a sufficient degree, in most cases. That is a worthwhile knowledge and the experimental approach is worth knowing, too and how to largely replace it by mathematical formulas or computerized calculation and imitation. - - (****) That is exactly what panarchism tries to do but what Hayek had not considered for exterritorially, autonomously and voluntarily competing diverse human societies within the all-embracing human society. - J.Z.

ORDER: a certain amount of surface disorder is bound to appear where education is established on the principle of complete freedom. But this disorder, or “free order”, as Tolstoy called it, only appears chaotic because we do not understand it and thus have no confidence that things will work out, as they should. Young people can be trusted with much more freedom than they ordinarily are given simply because they are naturally in “harmony with the true, the beautiful, and the good which we carry in us …” The secret of successful teaching, according to Crosby, is not to guide the student to his goal but to turn him loose upon his own resources, for human creativity can only take place as the result of spontaneity and individual enthusiasm. Crosby’s first attempt at anarchist propaganda resulted in the publication of his Plain Talk in Psalm and Parable (1899), which Tolstoy liked “very, very much”. Benjamin Rucker, however, was unable to share Tolstoy’s unqualified enthusiasm, …” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.332, on Ernest Howard Crosby. – Freedom in education as well as in everything else that really matters for mankind! - Maximum individual choice and experimental freedom. That requires exterritorial autonomy for volunteers. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - FREE ORDER, DISORDER, EDUCATION, FREEDOM IN EDUCATION, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, HARMONY, TEACHING, CREATIVITY, SPONTANEITY, ENTHUSIASM, YOUNG PEOPLE

ORDER: A continuation of the present order will surely lead to further chaos.” – Jerome Tuccille, Radical Libertarianism, p.69. – Did he advance from territorialism to exterritorial autonomy in every sphere? - J.Z., 14.1.11. - CHAOS, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, LAWS

ORDER: A free society is not established by replacing the old order through a “new order”. It develops through the expansion of the sphere for free actions, until these determine the social life. (That such a liberation occurs step by step does not mean, that it can succeed without revolutionary breaches, because in many spheres, e.g. the military, economics, sexual education – a real liberation would mean a total change.) …“ Paul Goodman, in Blankertz/Goodman, Staatlichkeitswahn, p. 90. (Eine freie Gesellschaft entsteht nicht, indem die alte Ordnung durch eine “neue Ordnung” ersetzt wird. Sie entsteht vielmehr durch die Ausdehnung des Raumes fuer freie Handlungen, bis diese das soziale Leben bestimmen. (Das solche Befreiung Schritt fuer Schritt geschieht, heisst nicht, dass sie ohne revolutionaere Einbrueche geschehen kann, da in vielen Bereichen – z.B. Militaerwesen, Wirtschaft, Sexualerzieung – eine wirkliche Befreiung eine totale Veraenderung einschliesst.) - Each new order proposed, in order not to deteriorate into a new kind of despotic disorder, should be the free choice of individuals and groups of volunteers, a free choice maintained through individual and group secessionism. - J.Z., 14.1.11.

ORDER: A great part of that order which reigns among mankind is not the effect of government. It had its origin in the principles of society, and the natural constitution of man. It existed prior to government and would exist if the formality of government was abolished. This mutual dependence and reciprocal interest which man has in man, and all the parts of a civilized community upon each other, create that great chain of connection which holds it together.” – Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man. - - GOVERNMENT, STATES, TERRITORIALISM, MAN, SOCIETY, CIVILIZATION MUTUAL DEPENDENCE, RECIPROCAL INTERESTS, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

ORDER: A living disorder is better than an ordered graveyard.” – Storm Jameson, “In the End”, in the pacifist essay collection “Challenge to Death”. - If it is an individually chosen disorder, then it will, ultimately, lead to as much and as many orderly kinds of autonomous orders or communities or societies of individuals, as man is capable of. Compare the historical orders of Knights, like e.g. the Templars and the Maltese. - When free enough, only very few people choose death for themselves and for some others. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - TERRORISM, MURDER, SUICIDE, MASS MURDER, PEACE, WAR, NWT.

ORDER: a social unity will be attained in comparison with which the so-called order of governmental societies will appear for what it is – ‘nothing but chaos, serving as a basis for endless tyranny’.” – George Woodcock: Proudhon, p.172. – Alas, Woodcock did not get around to translate more of Proudhon’s writings. – According to three hints, not all of them are published as yet, not even in France. - J.Z., 6.2.08. – Compulsory territorial "order" leads to disorder, even chaos, oppression, exploitation, resentment, acts of revenge, wars, civil wars, violent revolutions, infighting and terrorism. Exterritorial autonomy as a matter for individual and group choice, leads to satisfaction, peaceful coexistence, tolerance and wanted kinds of order only. - Nevertheless, the former is still all too popular among governments and their voluntary victims, even among their involuntary victims. Obviously, we need sound alternatives in the sphere of enlightenment as well. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - GOVERNMENT, ANARCHY, TYRANNY, CHAOS, ENLIGHTENMENT ALTERNATIVES, NEW DRAFT

ORDER: A society that will trade a little order for a little freedom will lose both, and deserve neither.” - Thomas Jefferson. – Any such trade, like other trades, should be left to individuals, who have also the right to choose fetters for themselves. – J.Z., 2.1.08. - SECURITY & FREEDOM, FREE CHOICE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM

ORDER: A spontaneous economic order is more efficient than an imposed order … A spontaneous order is inconceivable without personal freedom and, in particular, without freedom of choice." - Lord Coleraine. - SPONTANEOUS ORDER VS. IMPOSED ORDER, FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF CHOICE

ORDER: Although I am a strong supporter of order, I am in the fullest sense of the term an anarchist.” – Proudhon, 1840, Memoir, p.335. – quoted in D.S. Edwards, Proudhon, p.88. – Compare under ANARCHISM, ANARCHIST: “Although a firm friend of order, I am (in the full force of the term) an anarchist.” – P. J. Proudhon, What Is Property, 1840. - A genuine anarchist is a voluntaryist first and would not wish to impose his life's choices upon his enemies. He would, rather let them suffer under their self-chosen systems and merely defend himself against them, should they try to extend their kind or authoritarianism or despotism to him. He could do this in a sensible alliance with all the other victims of such systems, e.g. the "captive nations", fighting not them but merely their territorial mis-rulers as well as the voluntary followers of these rulers, with genuine self-government for the current aggressors still being their rightful war and peace aim for them. - J.Z., 14.1.11. – ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM, SELF-GOVERNMENT

ORDER: Anarchists believe that the only adequate definition of freedom is one that stems from a spontaneous and trusting response to the natural order that surrounds us. To be free, in the anarchist view, is to be capable of living life according to the rational imperatives of nature that are prior to human intelligence and organization. Far from believing that there is no order in the universe, anarchists hold that there is a necessary universal order that obligates all reasonable creatures to acknowledge certain natural dictates as real.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.582. – Nevertheless, they would or should not impose their insights territorially upon their opponents but merely defend themselves against their further territorial oppressions and aggressions, being satisfied with full exterritorial autonomy for themselves. This limited aim they can achieve and defend, successfully, in alliance with all those governmentalists, who would be satisfied getting and keeping their system for their own volunteers. - Not "divide and rule!", territorially, but "let them divide and let all groups of volunteers rule themselves, under personal law, i.e., exterritorially!"- J.Z., 4.1.11. – All forms of anarchism for all types of anarchists only and all kinds of statism only for all kinds of statists – but for none of them any territorial monopoly! – J.Z., 24.6.12. - NATURAL ORDER, NATURAL LAW, ANARCHISM

ORDER: Anarchy is order.” – Proudhon. - But it should be only one of the self-chosen orders. Actually, there are many kinds of anarchism and of statism. All should be freely practised only among their own supporters. - What rightful complaints would then be left for anyone? - J.Z., 14.1.11. - ANARCHISM, DIS., STATISM, TOLERANCE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

ORDER: And, behold, thusly was the Law formulated: IMPOSITION OF ORDER = ESCALATION OF CHAOS! – Lord Omar Khayaam Ravenhurst, “The Gospel According to Fred”, The Honest Book of Truth. – Quoted from Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus I. – FORCE, VIOLENCE, COMPULSION, IMPOSITIONS, DISORDER, CHAOS, LAW. – Also in: Kerry Thornley, The Gospel According to Fred, as quoted by R. A. Wilson, Cosmic Trigger, p.65. - Territorialism is the essence and the largest instance of wrongful impositions. - J.Z., 14.1.11, 24.6.12.

ORDER: As man seeks justice in equality, so society seeks order in anarchy.” – P. J. Proudhon, What Is Property? 1840. – Equality only in rights and liberties, to the extent that volunteers want them among themselves. – J.Z., 6.2.08. – Each should be free to live under the kind of order, system, ideology, utopia, personal law, justice, equality, rights and liberty system, which he prefers for himself. There are xyz different anarchist as well as statists systems. Exterritorially they can all peacefully coexist for their volunteers. - No one should be conscripted into any of the others. Individual choice, voluntarism and tolerance of the tolerant should be primary for all kinds of anarchists and libertarians as well. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - ANARCHISM, SOCIETY, EQUALITY

ORDER: But while the order of the physical environment is given to us independently of human will, the order of our social environment is partly, but only partly, the result of human design. The temptation to regard it all as the intended product of human action is one of the main sources of error. The insight that not all order that results from the interplay of human actions is the result of design is indeed the beginning of social theory.” – F. A. Hayek, The Confusion of Language in Political Thought, p.10. - Our social environment should also be a choice for ourselves, regardless of who designed it or discovered it. XYZ alternatives are possible and all could and should be practised by their volunteers among themselves, peacefully, tolerantly, and under exterritorial autonomy. That would be bring about a natural order for as diverse and antagonistic critters as human beings are. To each his own utopia or supposedly ideal society, whatever his convictions, faith, errors, myths or spleens are. Let him learn from his own experiences and those he observes being practised by others. Let each be his own cook, game-player, fair sportsman of one kind or the other, gambler or betting man. Let him drink, digest or smoke his own preferred poison and follow his own kind of leader or authority if he must. Free choice among all the menus, systems, faiths, ideologies and their societies. No more territorial power to any of them than to any of the existing private clubs etc. No more impositions - except upon official and private criminals with involuntary victims. - J.Z., 14.1.11, 24.6.12.  LAWS, LEGISLATION, CONTROLS, INTERVENTIONS, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS, GOVERNMENTS, RULERS, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, REPRESENTATION, NATURAL ORDER, NATURAL LAW, NATURAL RIGHTS, NATURAL HARMONY

ORDER: Do not give up your freedom in the expectation of order. You will lose both.” – Dr. H. L. Soper, LIBERTARIAN DIGEST, June 81. – Alas, he died a few years ago. – J.Z., 5.2.08. – Good advice. However, even that choice should be open to individuals and groups, as long as they are prepared to put up with it, at their own risk and expense. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - FREEDOM

ORDER: Dr. Ulrich Klug pointed out that anarchy is an order according to the model of the “round table”, where the subjects are replaced by partners with equal rights. In this sense our family law would be “anarchically” ordered, our marriage law knows neither rulers nor subject in a marriage but marriage partners possess equal rights. Anarchic forms of order exist also in the economy, in voluntary associations, in the classical sense in cooperatives, for the leaders of a cooperative steer but do not dominate. Our traffic laws function in the sense of an ordered anarchy, apart from some exceptions. …” - Uwe Timm, Gesammelte Schriften, S.206. - However, other kinds of order should also be a matter of individual and group choice - for their own affairs. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - ANARCHY, ROUND-TABLE MODEL

ORDER: Economics has from its origins been concerned with how an extended order of human interaction comes into existence through a process of variation, winnowing and shifting far surpassing our vision or our capacities to design. Adam Smith was the first to perceive that we have stumbled upon methods of ordering human economic cooperation that exceed the limits of our knowledge and perception. His ‘invisible hand’ had perhaps better have been described as an invisible or unsurveyable pattern. We are led – for example by the pricing system in market exchange – to do things by circumstances of which we are largely unaware and which produce results that we do not intend. In our economic activities we do not know the needs which we satisfy nor the sources of the things which we get. Almost all of us serve people whom we do not know, and even of whose existence we are ignorant; and we in turn constantly live on the services of other people of whom we know nothing. All this is possible because we stand in a great framework of institutions and traditions – economic, legal, and moral – into which we fit ourselves by obeying certain rules of conduct that we never made, and which we have never understood in the sense in which we understand how the things that we manufacture function. - - Modern economics explains how such an extended order can come into being, and how it itself constitutes an information-gathering process, able to call up, and to put to use, widely dispersed information that no central planning agency, let alone any individual, could know as a whole, possess or control. Man’s knowledge, as Smith knew, is dispersed.” – Hayek, The Fatal Conceit, p.15.  – [The extent and the volume of this dispersal is well indicated by the search results on the Internet. However, all the wanted relevant information on any subject is not yet sufficiently brought together even there. The results are all too much muddled up by the diverse meanings and misunderstandings of words, which leads often to many more search “results”, most of them irrelevant to the wanted information, than an individual can effectively handle, to separate the pearls from the mud. – J.Z., 24.6.12.] – We need the same kind of free market, laissez faire free enterprise, free trade, consumer sovereignty, freedom of contract, and freedom of association, freedom of choice - for all political and economic systems, considered merely as competitively offered services, under competitive pricing, subscriptions and charges or voluntary taxation. Panarchism does not demand anything more but also not anything less. Thus the same harmony can be achieved in these other two spheres, that were sometimes approached by laissez faire or free market economics and that are largely realized for religions, natural sciences, technology, the arts, crafts, hobbies, entertainment, reading, writing, travel, job and profession choices, sports, food, drink and health preservation methods. - J.Z., 15.1.11. -  MARKET, PLANNING, DESIGN, PRICING, CONTRACTS, VOLUNTARISM, RULES OF OWNERSHIP & TRADE, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, ECONOMICS, NATURAL ORDER, NATURAL HARMONY, NATURAL ORDER OR BY DESIGN? ORDER BY TERRITORIALLY IMPOSED PLANNING OR BY PRIVATE & FREE CHOICES? FREE PRICING, PUBLICITY, KNOWLEDGE IN & FROM THE MARKET

ORDER: For every social order must ultimately be genuinely constructive. All its members must have a stake in its existence." - Otto von Habsburg, The Social Order of Tomorrow, p.21. – (Worth reading even for an anarchist. – J.Z., 2.2.08.) - How could this be sufficiently realized without individual sovereignty, individual secessionism and voluntary associationism in exterritorially autonomous communities? - For their volunteers they could also be very conservative, reactionary, foolish and spleeny, always at their own expense and risk. - J.Z., 14.1.93. - SOCIAL ORDER, Q., STAKE-HOLDING, PARTNERSHIP, PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY, VOLUNTARISM, SPREAD OF OWNERSHIP, SOCIETY, ORGANIZATIONS, ENTERPRISES, COOPERATIVES, SELF-MANAGEMENT, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, PROPERTY, CAPITALISM, OWNERSHIP

ORDER: Genuine order can not only be achieved without territorial governments but it can only be achieved without such governments. – J.Z., 23.6.87, 4.2.08.

ORDER: Henry Hazlitt has called economics a science of recognizing secondary consequences. What he and others who have taken the time to study the working of free markets have perceived is that there is a natural orderliness in uncoerced dealings between men which tends to maximize the well-being of each individual and put resources to their best use. But to accomplish this, a market must be free, which means that each participant must be allowed to decide for himself how he will use his assets, whether personal skills, money, or physical property. …” - That thought should also be applied to a free market for political and social services that are wanted by diverse consumers of them. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - George C. Leaf, THE FREEMAN, 1/78. - - MARKET, FREEDOM, SECONDARY CONSEQUENCES, ECONOMICS, NON-COERCION, COMPULSION, LAWS, PROPERTY

ORDER: In its best sense and by itself, order ought to mean the forms and conventions by which we live and work together; order ideally is freedom from disturbing interruptions of peace, physical safety which in turn gives the psychological security for the pursuit of intellectual, emotional, and spiritual aims. But when coupled with law, it implies a rigid clinging to old forms of acting, a prevention of the very changes made necessary by our transitional age.” – Rollo Mayer, Power and Innocence, 1972, quoted in Butler D. Shaffer, Violence as a Product of Imposed Order, p.40. – [peace and physical safety, ? – J.Z.] - LAW, IMPOSITIONS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY CHOICES VS. TERRITORIAL IMPOSITIONS

ORDER: In many instances “order” is “chaos” and “chaos” is “order”. This applies to both, territorially imposed and voluntarily chosen exterritorial relationships. However, chaos happens much more often under territorially imposed relationships and order system. – J.Z., 19.6.80, 15.1.11. – Imagine all the arts and crafts being fully under government control, while at least now, e.g. each painter can fill his canvas in the way he likes, with paints, colours, brushes and other tools as he likes and nobody is forced to buy his output. Nobody should be forced, either, as a taxpayer, to subsidized anyone’s preferred form of art. – In so many ways we act already panarchistically, taking our actions of this kind for granted, i.e. without considering the principles involved and ourselves to be panarchists and being willing to apply this limited panarchism to spheres, which are now territorially monopolized by governments. - J.Z., 24.5.12. - CHAOS, COMPULSION & MONOPOLY VS. NATURAL ORDER, CHOICE & COMPETITION.

ORDER: In other words, one of the chief tests for any social order should be the measure by which the satisfaction of man’s true personal ends would automatically serve corporate ends.” – Thomas Robertson, Social Relations & Freedom, p. 13. Modern Publishers, Indore. – In the free market order of Free Trade, Free Enterprise and Consumer Sovereignty, as well as full Monetary and Financial Freedom, Freedom the demand for consumer goods & services and for productive jobs can be best satisfied. In the free market for societal and community and governmental services, for whole political, economic and social systems, panarchism, with its voluntarism, experimental freedom, personal laws and exterritorial autonomy, starting with individual and group secessionism, the other aspirations of man, from reasonable ones to still prejudiced ones, could also be satisfied, with the lasting trend of more and more people making more sensible choices in these spheres as well but always only for themselves and like-minded people. No more territorialist domination practices! – J.Z., 6.3.09. – The author should have said: social, common, free people’s or genuine public interest ends or those of sovereign producers and consumers, rather than merely “corporation” ends. – J.Z., 24.6.12. -  CORPORATIONS, CONSUMER SATISFACTION, PANARCHISM.

ORDER: In short, those who are truly concerned about the maintenance of social order, will attempt a reduction of governmental authority, since it is intervention which is the underlying cause of social disorder.” – G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.229. – The reduction of territorial governmentalism, even down to "limited" but still territorial governments, is not enough. All territorial powers, coercion and monopolies must become abolished. If nuclear "weapons" and economic, political and social crises could speak and reason then they would convey this message very clearly. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - INTERVENTIONISM, DISORDER, FREEDOM, NWT.

ORDER: In short, while the political state continues to be presented to the public as a system of order designed to protect them from acts of victimization, in truth it functions as a mechanism for the ordering, regulation, and restriction of human conduct to the end of maintaining a “status quo” for the benefit of those who would stand most to lose whatever advantage they presently enjoy, were men permitted a greater degree of flexibility and opportunity for change in their economic and social relationships. Such “order”, enforced by the physical state, is reminiscent of the “order” existing within a cartel, in which, in the words of one observer, “the goal is to restrain disturbing influences, to stabilize prices, and to assure those in the business the comfortable feeling that their position is secure.” – Butler D. Shaffer, Violence as a Product of Imposed Order, p.11. - Mere degrees of flexibility and opportunity are not enough. Nothing but full exterritorial autonomy for volunteers will suffice. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - STATE, STATUS QUO, PROTECTION, VICTIMIZATION, EXPLOITATION, VESTED INTERESTS, REGULATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, TERRITORIALISM

ORDER: Law and Order!” – What order? What law? – J.Z., 27.6.73. – DIS.

ORDER: Law and Order” are incompatible. Forced political law creates chaos. Order is harmony with natural, human principles.” – Stormy Mon, A Liberty Book, p.80. – LAW, HARMONY, NATURAL LAW

ORDER: Let me tell you, friend, that wherever there’s some sonofabitch giving orders and another taking them, whether those orders are the results of a leader’s ulcerated nightmares or a ‘vote of the People, the spirit of Alexander Hamilton is hovering.” – L. Neil Smith, The Nagasaki Vector. - It does make a difference whether the subjects are all volunteers, or, largely, merely territorial subjects and whether they can exterritorially secede, as individuals or in whole groups. Vive la difference! - J.Z., 15.1.11.

ORDER: Man has no affinity for social chaos; as a matter of fact, he will pay about any price for social order, and order there will be. But how? All history attests to the answer: The cleverest and most energetic know-nothing will take over, not on a mutual consent basis, because there is no mutuality of minds; the take-over will be achieved by the use of coercion. Some one know-nothing will forcibly impose his own concept of rightness on all the others.” – Leonard E. Read, Deeper Than You Think, p.20/21. – Libertarian thinkers and writers should not only take the territorial model into consideration. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - DIS., CHAOS, DISORDER, INTOLERANCE, DESPOTISM, DICTATORSHIP, LEADERSHIP, TOTALITARIANISM, AUTHORITARIANISM

ORDER: Most of all chaos and disorder in human affairs is brought about by attempts of a few to impose their kinds of “order” territorially upon whole populations. Laissez faire, laissez passer! All people should be free only to manage their own affairs – not the affairs of others, who do disagree with them. – J.Z., 14.7.97. – DISORDER, CHAOS, PANARCHISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT & ASSOCIATIONS, FREE EXPERIMENTATION UNDER PERSONAL LAW, INTERVENTIONISM, TERRITORIALISM VS. VOLUNTARISM & SELF-RESPONSIBILITY.

ORDER: Order is not a pressure imposed upon society from without, but an equilibrium which is set up from within.” – Mirabeau, in José Ortega y Gasset, Mirabeau ó el politico. In Mirabeau: Obras completas, 1847, Vo. III, p. 603, quoted in THE FREEMAN, 3/74, p. 178. Every territorially imposed order in human affairs leads to disorder. – J.Z., 5.4.89, 4.2.08, 15.1.11.

ORDER: Order is possible under decentralized authority.” – Miller Upton, THE FREEMAN, 9/74. – Maximum genuine order, self-selected, is possible only when individuals and their voluntary groups are free to live under the law and order systems of their own free choice and that cannot be achieved territorially but only exterritorially, apart from some private property arrangements, usually not amounting to whole territories, like gated communities, proprietary communities and company towns, where the landlord, which might be a cooperative, sets the rules. – Globalism, the Internet, friendship and family relationships, and xyz voluntary private associations of people with common interests, e.g. sports, music, arts, literature, hobbies like coin and stamp collections, fashions, scientific research, modern transport and communication facilities as well as somewhat free exchange options, do already connect us, largely exterritorially, all over the world. – The monopolies for whole systems, upheld by territorial States, are the last holdouts for the territorialist, collectivist, monopolistic and coercive non-solutions, producing rather than curing wrongs and upholding harmful laws and establishments, without permitting the freedom for individuals and dissenting minorities to opt out from under them. - J.Z., 6.3.09, 24.6.12. – PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, PROGRESS, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS.

ORDER: order, without law to disturb it.” – Frank Chodorov, Out of Step, p45. – Order through personal rather than territorial law associations. - J.Z., 14.1.11. - LAWS, TERRITORIAL LAWS VS. PERSONAL LAW

ORDER: Our people do not want their lives ordered from Washington.” – House minority leader Charles Halleck of Indiana, quoted by Dean Smith, Conservatism, p.100. – However, those who still, in spite of everything that happens under it, do want to be ruled by Washington or some other center or central authority, a Staate or a Local Government, should be free to so submit to them, individually, for all their own affairs, at their own expense and risk, leaving all others alone to do their own things for or to themselves. – J.Z., 6.3.09, 24.6.12. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUALISM, CENTRALIZATION, DECISION-MAKING, AUTONOMY, SELF-GOVERNMENT

ORDER: Panarchism will help us to escape the imposed "order" and the resulting chaos of territorialism and into a natural order corresponding to the abilities, knowledge and ideals of all non-aggressive individuals trying to realize their own dreams at their own risk and expense. It will make political, economic and social experiments as voluntaristic and harmless as most artistic, culinary and scientific or technical experiments are - to all but the voluntary participants. Precisely because the large-scale territorial experiments of conventional governments are so dangerous and expensive, in money, labor and blood, all public affairs experiments should, in future, be confined to volunteers only. Then their believers could only harm themselves, not doubters and dissenters: any non-members, anyone who seceded from them in time. The process could become as peaceful as that of diverse people engaging in diverse card- or sports games or artistic competitions. Imagine the chaos that would result if parties struggled about the kind of uniform rations for all, according to their various dietary beliefs or convictions, instead of letting everyone pick from a menu or from the shelves of a self-service store, to fill his shopping cart with the items he thinks he needs or which are good for him, using them in his own cooking etc. - J.Z., 17.9.04, 14.1.11, 24.6.12. - Too many cooks, especially politicians and bureaucrats, do spoil the broth. - J.Z., 15.1.11, supplementing an old proverb. - CHAOS & PANARCHISM

ORDER: Rather than wholesale destruction of today’s government, we advocate its replacement (preferably peaceful) with a natural system of order consistent with life and liberty for individuals.” – W. Robert Black, THE NEW BANNER, 18.2.72. – The natural system of order in this sphere would require free choice for individuals when it comes to their governmental or societal affiliations. Exterritorial autonomy for volunteers offers almost unlimited choices. – Freedom for experiments with different societal systems but no further experiments with territorial ones. Why not? Put your head into some history books! – How many bloody failures does it need to convince you? - J.Z., 6.3.09. – ABOLITION OF GOVERNMENT? TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, NATURAL ORDER, Q.

ORDER: Should we „keep order“ by taking away man’s liberties and rights? – J.Z., n.d. & 15.1.11. E.g. his freedom of association, freedom of contract, freedom to experiment, freedom to secede, freedom to organize under personal law, monetary and financial freedom, freedom to migrate, right to privacy? Right to resist, right to defend his genuine individual rights and liberties in rightful ways, with rightful weapons? - J.Z., 15.1.11. – Q. – ORDER, ENLIGHTENMENT & PROGRESS THROUGH INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES.

ORDER: the anarchists … wanted … to bring a kind of order to the world for the first time. … The order desired by anarchists is different from the order (“Ordnung”, the Germans called it; “law and order” say the American politicians) of national governments. They want a voluntary forming of human relations, …” - Herbert Read, Anarchism & Order, ix. – But they have, mostly, not yet envisioned voluntary and tolerant, i.e. freely governments, societies and communities as yet, all only on the basis of exterritorial autonomy, as neutrals at least or even as allies in the struggle for this kind of genuine self-management or self-governance, always without any territorial monopoly claim or practice. - J.Z., 15.1.11, 24.6.12. - ANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

ORDER: The art of progress is to preserve order amid change and to preserve change amid order.” – Alfred North Whithead.  – Panarchies would solve this problem by making laws and experimental actions, societies and communities a matter of personal choice. – J.Z., 21.11.95, 14.1.11. – Let each learn and advance at his own speed and his own risk and cost. – J.Z., 7.1.99. – Panarchism for all kinds of panarchies of volunteers does introduce full consumer sovereignty and fully free enterprise competition - even in the spheres of providing whole political, economic and social systems, not only within the religious sphere, that of sports, arts, technology and science and for the production and consumption of consumer goods and services. – J.Z., 5.3.09, 24.6.12. - CHANGE, PANARCHISM & PROGRESS

ORDER: the best social order is not susceptible to being … scientifically constructed.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn, quoted in Cornuelle, Demanaging America, chapter 11. – Nevertheless, under full experimental freedom for communities of volunteers, it would gradually be developed, at least each type that would be optimal for particular kinds of people at their stage of enlightenment. After all, the natural sciences and technologies, too, were not all produced at once, in a scientific way, but developed gradually, often by accidents and as a result of numerous experiments, most of which resulted in failures. – From that point of view: The more “planned” and supposedly “scientific” “utopias” or experiments are set up, by volunteers, for themselves only, the better. - J.Z., 6.2.08.

ORDER: The chaos that gave rise to us was created by you. From the order that you are setting up a new chaos will spring. You always call chaos order, and the fear of others you regard as greatness. We don’t want any share in it.” – Hans Habe, Off Limits, p.363. – CHAOS, DISORDER. – Panarchists aim at letting everyone have his own kind of order or disorder in his own affairs, under his own rules or personal laws, in exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, not confined to any territory but by their own personal laws and, naturally the individual rights and liberties of all non-members. – J.Z., 6.2.08. – Only territorialism should become “off limits”! – J.Z., 6.3.09. – Panarchism amounts to the most rightful and rational, economic, political and social framework, also the most humane, tolerant and enlightening and progressive one, for all kinds of  systems, methods and institutions. – J.Z., 24.6.12. - PANARCHISM

ORDER: The highest perfection of society is found in the union of order and anarchy.” - Proudhon, quoted in Herbert Read, Anarchy & Order, p. 128. – ANARCHY, PERFECTION, SOCIETY

ORDER: The imposition of order invariably results in chaos.” – Doug Casey – Rather: The attempts to impose order. – J.Z., 30.12.11.

ORDER: The only liberty I mean, is a liberty connected with order; that not only exists along with order and virtue, but which cannot exist at all without them." - Edmund Burke, Speech at Bristol, 1774. - But the order required may only consist of the naturally and automatically ordering and enlightening principles and practices of voluntarism, individual sovereignty, individual secessionism or panarchism, exterritorial full autonomy and recognition for the individual rights of others, to the extent that the others do already claim them for themselves. - J.Z., 12/11/82, 8.4.89, 24.6.12. - (Naturally, to the extent that one does recognize and respect individual rights and liberties one would not intentionally infringe them among those people who do not yet recognize certain rights and liberties. - J.Z., 15.1.11.) But the optimal ordering principle does not consist in territorially imposed uniformity but, rather, in free choices and contracts for individuals and their groups of volunteers, including individual sovereignty, minority autonomy, individual secessionism, personal laws and exterritorial autonomy for all groups of volunteers who do want the for themselves and tolerate them for all others. – J.Z., 12.11.82, 4.2.08, 24.6.12. - FREEDOM

ORDER: The order we need is command over self.” – Leonard E. Read, Legacy of Truth, ch.10. - Voluntary membership in States and societies is a primary requirement and this requires also freedom to dissociate oneself or to secede from any organization that no longer suits an individual at his stage of enlightenment and to associate anew with other, like-minded people, under full exterritorial autonomy. – J.Z., 5.2.08 – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, SELF-COMMAND, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-GOVERNMENT.

ORDER: the ordering of society is antipathetic to liberty.” – John Anderson on Croce, History as the Story of Liberty, in The Servile State, “AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY”, 1943. - Correct for the imposed, coercive, monopolistic, collectivist and territorial ordering. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - LIBERTY

ORDER: the prime ethical purpose of order, and its only long-term assurance, is the furthering of individual autonomy.” – Silvert, Man’s Power, XX. – AUTONOMY, FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

ORDER: the result of human action but not of human design.” – F. A. Hayek. – But there can also be a rationally created order in human knowledge, e.g. via alphabetized indexes, bibliographies, directories, ideas archives, clearing houses, free exchange, free enterprise, free communications, the full realization of all individual rights and liberties. – J.Z., 27.4.89, 4.2.08. - Also a designed orderly society or utopia or free political, social and economic experiment for volunteers only are possible and desirable. The only impossibility is for everyone or anyone, even the greatest genius, to design the over-all society for all others, in details. For we do not know what rightful use others will make of all their genuine individual rights and liberties. They are entitled to make their own individual and group choices. - J.Z., 15.1.11, 24.6.12.

ORDER: The same is in some measure true of the term ‘order’ itself. ‘Though one of the oldest terms of political theory, it has been somewhat out of fashion for some time. But it is an indispensable term which, on the definition we have given it – a condition of affairs in which we can successfully form expectations and hypotheses about the future – refers to objective facts and not to values. Indeed, the first important difference between a spontaneous order or cosmos and an organization (arrangement) or taxis is that, not having been deliberately made by men, a cosmos has no purpose. This does not mean that its existence may not be exceedingly valuable in the pursuit of many purposes: …” – F. A. Hayek, The Confusion of Language in Political Thought, page.11, IEA Occasional Paper 20, 1968. - Even the basic distinctions between a) an imposed order, b) a voluntarily and intentionally arranged order and c) a spontaneously arrived at order, are usually not made. - Except the order imposed upon criminals, aggressors, barbarians and primitives, when they endanger others, I favour only voluntarily arrived at orderly arrangements, like e.g. panarchies and the spontaneous order arising out of freely, non-coercively, non-invasively, i.e. tolerantly interacting people. The voluntary orderly arrangements, like panarchies or polyarchies, are also part of a spontaneous order system, that of panarchism. – Territorial States are not. – Hayek, having only a supposedly ideal and limited territorial State in mind, did not discuss the panarchistic or polyarchic options. At least not to my knowledge. – The “taxis” order of territorial States, “deliberately made by men”, are only made by some men, the victimizers, not their victims, e.g., by the extermination camp mass murderers, not by their victims, in the extreme case. - J.Z., 6.2.08. – Exterritorial autonomy for volunteers embraces all rightful, rational, self-responsible and tolerant options for human beings and all other somewhat rational and moral beings that we might encounter one day. – J.Z., 24.6.12. - LAW & ORDER, TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSION, COERCION, MONOPOLIES & DISORDER

ORDER: The situation is, of course, that because it was not dependent on organization but grew as a spontaneous order, the structure of modern society (*) has attained a degree of complexity which far exceeds that which it is possible to achieve by deliberate organization. Even the rules that made the growth of this complex order possible were not designed in anticipation of that result; but those peoples who happened to adopt suitable rules developed a complex civilization which prevailed over others. It is thus a paradox, based on a complete misunderstanding of these connections, when it is sometimes contended that we must deliberately plan modern society because it has grown so complex. The fact is rather that we can preserve an order of such complexity only if we control it not by the method of “planning”, i.e. by direct orders, but, on the contrary, aim at the formation of a spontaneous order based on general rules.” – F. A. Hayek, Kinds of Order in Society. - - (*) Only to the extent that it is a free market society! – But to the “simple rules” should belong: Voluntary membership or subordination, individual and group secessions as options, the option of full exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities under personal laws, not confined to any territory. And, naturally, a fully developed declaration of all individual rights and liberties, which were so far discovered or developed, a declaration which is still all too much amiss. – J.Z., 6.2.08, 24.6.12. - Also required is an ideal militia for the protection of all genuine individual rights and liberties. I for one would greatly prefer it to any supposedly limited but still territorial government. - 15.1.11, 24.6.12. - COMPLEXITY, UTOPIAS, LAWS, CENTRAL PLANNING, DICTATORSHIPS, DICTOCRACIES, SOCIETY, CIVILIZATION, RULES, DIS., SOCIETY, ORDERS VS. SPONTANEOUS ORDER & HARMONY

ORDER: the time has come for the private property order. It needs no political plan, no economic legislation, no economic policy, only freedom.” – Hans F. Sennholz, THE FREEMAN, Nov. 1985, p.673: Classical Liberalism Reconsidered. – Would his private property order have outlawed voluntary or cooperative socialism and the practice of all kinds of statism and collectivism among volunteers only, who do not claim any territorial monopoly? - 15.1.11. - PROPERTY RIGHTS

ORDER: The untutored mind does not sense the magnificent and intricate order in a free society, which is the result of human action but not the consequence of human design. Merely enforce a few simple rules against theft, fraud and murder, enforce contracts, redress injury – and within these few rules people acting freely and productively will project an order so complicated that it defies human understanding. Could we fully understand it, economic calculation apart from a market would be feasible – which it is not.” – Edmund Opitz, THE FREEMAN, July 75, p.438. – Did he, somewhere, envision the exterritorial autonomy options for volunteers, even when it comes to whole alternative social, political and economic systems and institutions? - J.Z., 15.1.11. - FREE SOCIETY, SIMPLE RULES

ORDER: The utilization of the spontaneous ordering forces of the market to achieve this kind of optimum, and leaving the determination of the relative shares of the different individuals to what must appear as accident (*), are inseparable. Only because the market induces every individual to use his unique knowledge of particular opportunities and possibilities for his purposes can an overall order be achieved that uses in its totality the dispersed knowledge which is not accessible as a whole to anyone. The ‘maximisation’ of the total product in the above sense, and its distribution by the market, cannot be separated because it is through the determination of the prices of the factor of production that the overall order of the market is brought about. If incomes are not determined by factor pricing within the output, then output cannot be maximized relative to individual preferences.” – F. A. Hayek, The Confusion of Language in Political Thought, p.30, IEA Occasional Paper 20, 1968. - - (*) Rather as the result of many free exchanges, made voluntarily by people believing to benefit from them. Each consumers, so to speak, voting with his dollars, in a free market and thus making extraordinary profits possible to some, who satisfy many people with their goods or services. The outcome can hardly be called a mere accident. An accident may only be involved insofar as the supplier may have hit, by accident, on the kind of product or service that will satisfy many people. – The essential “prices” or costs of panarchies are 1.) The kind of special package deal that they offer, 2.) voluntary membership, 3. full exterritorial autonomy and 4.). the kind of charges they have to make for their kind of package-deal community services, offered to all of their members, comparable to insurance premiums in relation to insurance pay-outs. – However, there is no obligation to become or remain a member of a panarchy. – Individuals may come to rely entirely on free market relationships, buying or subscribing to goods and service deliveries by free contracts with a variety of suppliers, just like they do now as sovereign consumers for all but those services, which are now exclusively supplied by territorial governments. - J.Z., 6.2.08. – PANARCHISM, AN EXTENSION OF CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY

ORDER: they thought they were ordering their lives.” – Poul Anderson. Past Times, p.90. – All individuals and all groups have the right to do that but not to order the lives of other individuals and other groups of volunteers. – J.Z., 4.2.08. – PANARCHISM, VOTING, MAJORITY DESPOTISM, TERRITORIALISM

ORDER: think of deadly order." - (Source? - It got somehow lost in automatic sorting! - J.Z.), Think of the order, peace and security – of grave-yards. – J.Z., 5.3.09. – NATURAL ORDER VS. MAN-MADE ORDER, SELF-CHOSEN ORDER VS. IMPOSED ORDER, CHAOS, LAW, OBEDIENCE, SYSTEMS, TERRITORIALISM, NUCLEAR STRENGTH, NUCLEAR DETERRENCE

ORDER: Those (who) seek to establish systems of Government based on the regimentation of all Human Beings by a handful of individual rulers … call this a new order. It is not new and it is not order." – Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of The United States. - He himself and his "New Deal" was one of the best proofs for his statement. - This was an involuntary joke on him. - J.Z., 23. 11. 06. - REGIMENTATION, RULERS & ORDER, CONTROLS, LEGISLATION

ORDER: Watch out for the fellow who talks about putting things in order! Putting things in order always means getting other people under your control.” – Denis Diderot, Supplement to Bougainville’sVoyage”, 1796. – Rather under his control, not permitting us to control our own affairs, keeping our own kind of order or chaos. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - LEADERSHIP, POLITICIANS, CONTROL, POWER, TERRITORIALISM, HIERARCHIES

ORDER: Where and when the artificial and territorial „law & order“ system ends, then the natural order arising from morality, reason and human nature begins. – J.Z., 13.1.79, 6.2.08, 15.1.11, 24.6.12. – LAWS, ORDER, HARMONY, MAN, HUMAN NATURE, MORALITY, LAWS, PERSONAL LAW, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & CHOICES

ORDER: Where men are left to regulate themselves according to their own individual self-interests and their “native sense of equity”, social order inevitably asserts itself without any artificial assistance.” – Benjamin R. Tucker in Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.160.

ORDER: You may have heard Holgee’s Theorem; that Order is merely a primitive and arbitrary relational grouping of objects in the chaos of the universe, and that, if a being’s intelligence and power approached maximum, his coefficient of control (considered as the product of intelligence and power, and expressed by the symbol ing) would approach minimum – due to the disastrous geometric progression if objects to be comprehended and controlled outstripping the arithmetic progression of Grasp.” – Robert Sheckley, Dimensions of Miracles, p.16. - - Nothing can be properly, i.e., quite rightfully, rationally and lastingly ordered from a centre. At least, in one’s own affairs one should be free to achieve the own kind and degree of order that one can be somewhat satisfied with. – J.Z., 4.2.08, 24.6.12. - & THE LIMITS OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE, IGNORANCE, HOLGEE’S THEOREM



ORDERS: Give as few orders as possible … Once you've given orders on a subject, you must always give orders on that subject.” - Frank Herbert, Dune, The Prophet of Dune. Complete & unabridged edition, p.368. - Let people command themselves, in all their own affairs. – J.Z., 5.2.08. - Our language often has still more sense than most people have under the statist ideology. See, for instance, how many terms, starting with "self-" have still positive connotations. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-DISCIPLINE, SELF-CONTROL, SELF-MANAGEMENT, SELF-IMPROVEMENT, SELF-EDUCATION, SELF-HELP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY ETC. - LEADERSHIP, INITIATIVE

ORGANIC CHANGE: To disdain anything short of an organic change in thought or institution is infatuation. To be willing to make such changes too frequently, even when they are possible, is foolhardiness." - John Morley, On Compromise, p.229. - Exterritorial, autonomous and individual and voluntary change is organic and natural change. - J.Z., 26.6.89. – Territorialism is unnatural. Natural is only e.g. elbow room, the privacy, home- and nesting- instinct, which do not require as large real estates that they deserves the term “territories”. National territorialism infringes rather than protects house and home, and personal liberties and rights. – J.Z., 6.3.09. – EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM, NATURAL LIBERTY & RIGHTS, GRADUALISM, VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, COMPETING SOCIETIES & COMMUNITIES, PANARCHISM, ONE-MAN REVOLUTIONS

ORGANIC DESIGN PANARCHY: Organic Design, Panarchy [Systems Organization] March 2009. - It has very little directly to do, in most of its numerous writings and websites with panarchy and panarchism for political, economic and social systems, all only for volunteers, but in recent times it has dominated the discussion of this the term "panarchy", e.g. in the WIKIPEDIA and in searches for the term online. The term has become fashionable. Before and otherwise there were only a few rare misunderstandings or misinterpretations of the term, by a few people, away from the meaning de Puydt gave it. - J.Z., 11.10.11. – Under “panarchism” at least a Google search will reveal many links to panarchy of the de Puydt types, so many that I could skim only through a small fragment of them and among these were already many links that were new to me. – Go on your own journey of exploration and submit your findings for possible inclusion, in the future, in this alphabet soup, which attempts to explore all facets of this diamond. - J.Z., 24.6.12.

ORGANIC GROWTH: Often it is more imagined and wished-for than real. Particularly regarding States, laws and borders one should not pretend that coercion, suppression, invasion, conquest, exploitation, deception, prejudices etc. played no role in them, while, supposedly, only peaceful and natural development did. Only under panarchism will there be something approaching natural and free organic growth in this sphere. – J.Z., 20.6.92, 4.2.08. – DEVELOPMENT, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM, NATURAL GROWTH

ORGANIC LIFE: Man finds his instincts, already deformed by being defined, now altogether inhibited. The organic life of the group, a self-regulative life like the life of all organic entities, is stretched on the rigid frame of a code. It ceases to be life in any real sense, and only functions as convention, conformity, and discipline.” – Herbert Read, Anarchism and Order, p.40. – LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS, DISCIPLINE, LIFE, CONFORMITY, TERRITORIALISM, STATES, CODES, LEGALISM, LEGALITY, NATION-BUILDING, UNIFICATION ATTEMPTS, EGALITARIANISM

ORGANIZATIONS: Anarchists actually want much more organization, though organization without authority. The prejudice about anarchism derives from a prejudice about organization; people cannot see that organization does not depend on authority, that it actually works best without authority. – A moment’s thought will show that when compulsion is replaced by consent there will have to be more discussion and planning, not less.” – Nicolas Walter, About Anarchism. - - But organizations should be as far as possible and desired decentralized also, not only centralized. They should have only voluntary members. And they should not be confined to territorial organizations but rest exclusively on exterritorially autonomous organizations without any territorial monopoly, local or world-wide ones, in every sphere. – J.Z., 2.2.08. - - ANARCHISM & AUTHORITY

ORGANIZATIONS: As the Sufis say, every organization eventually becomes a conditioning or brainwashing instrument.” – Robert Anton Wilson, The Illuminati Papers, p.109. - As if one should not distinguish coercive from voluntary organizations, monopolistic ones from competitive ones, organizations from which one can secede and those from which one cannot, territorial and exterritorial communities, those recognizing individual rights and liberties and those, which do not. They are like men and their characteristics and preferences are all different. Thus generalizations on one type do not necessarily fit all the other types. But since they are run by people and people are all too often power-mongers … Some organizations, including the democracies, give all too much scope to power-mad people and power-addicts. – Can and does a shopkeeper brainwash his customers, or can any employer, being merely one among dozens of millions, brainwash his employees? They may try, but can they, really? - J.Z., 6.2.08, 24.6.12.

ORGANIZATIONS: But size and complexity could not avert the doom that ultimately faces any human enterprise.” - Poul Anderson, The Long Night, p.42. - Some people draw no distinction between governments and private corporations and believe that both do equally suppress and mislead. One will arrive at another judgment if one considers all the features, e.g. the centralism, monopolism, coercion, compulsory membership and territorialism of territorial States, and the degrees of competitiveness, voluntarism (in finance, membership, custom), decentralization and exterritorialism involved in private corporations that are not endowed with any legal privileges. The question of size also matters, from under-sized to oversized organizations finally to optimally sized ones. Further, hierarchic organized bodies should be distinguished from those with various forms of self-management at every level, centralized from decentralized ones, anarchistic, democratic and partnership ones from authoritarian ones. Not every institution institutionalizes power, privilege, coercion and prejudice and each could and should be subjected to individual secessionism, competitive alternative institutions and sufficient publicity about its characteristics. - J.Z., 9.2.02. - GOVERNMENTS, CORPORATIONS, EMPIRES, TERRITORIALISM, ASSOCIATIONS, COMPANIES, ENTERPRISES, BUSINESS, PANARCHISM

ORGANIZATIONS: Every organization trespasses against the autonomous individual.” – Prof Kemp and Butler Shaffer. - The autonomous individual would join it and remain in it only for the advantages that his participation in it would bring him or her. Organizations should be distinguished according to all their characteristics. Cooperation restraints are not significant when the cooperative or corporation have no privileges or coercive powers and individuals may give notice, sell their shares, do not have to work in them or invest in them or buy their goods or services. – J.Z., 7.4.91. - But hardly as much in voluntary associations as in compulsory, territorial or even totalitarian ones. – J.Z., 4.2.08, 15.1.11.

ORGANIZATIONS: Freedom needs special organizations and special markets that help to unleash and utilize creative energies rather than restrain them. They should bring demand and supply in their special spheres as fully together as is possible. – J.Z., 24.9.88, 4.2.08. - FREEDOM, POLITICAL ORGANIZATION, IDEAS ARCHIVE, CONTACTS, LIBERTARIAN ENCYCLOPAEDIA, LIBERTARIAN LIBRARY, DIRECTORIES

ORGANIZATIONS: I have no respect for organizations as such – be they labor unions, chambers of commerce, organized religions, educational organizations, governments, or whatever. Respect can be extended only to individual persons who uphold and practice the several virtues. A person’s membership in this organization or that may reveal much or nothing.” – Leonard E. Read, Who’s Listening? –As if organizations that would really “release all creative energies” of their members, were impossible. – Obviously, most territorial States are not such organizations. And all too many private and voluntary organizations, hierarchically structured and based also upon the leadership principle and that of public servants and their allocated bureaucratic functions, do rarely act like a successful business or cooperative or partnership. Already the mere employer-employee relationship is a major obstacle to success. Or foreign ownership may be or dependence upon donors. There is still no agreement on which kinds of alternative media, reference works, structures or institutions are required to become successful in a positive and rightful way. – The most talented and creative person can’t do much within most ordinary organizations and without the special help that is needed for all such persons to become almost certainly successful. See e.g. Ideas Archive and Talent Centre. - J.Z., 6.2.08.

ORGANIZATIONS: If, as Nicholas Beryaev argued (*), all complex organization enslaves, then at certain points individuals must assert their claim for freedom by limiting the enslavement through rebellion – an important theme of Albert Camus’ great novel The Rebel.” – Milford Q. Sibley, The Obligation to Disobey, p.87. – They do not have to rebel - if they are free to secede, individually or in whole groups. – J.Z., 6.2.08. - - (*) Nicolai Berdyaev, Slavery and Freedom, New York, 1944 and The Realm of Spirit and the Realm of Caesar, New York, 1952. – DIS., INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM

ORGANIZATIONS: It is organization which gives birth to the domination of the elected over the electors, of the mandatories over the mandators, of the delegates over the delegator. Who says organization says oligarchy.” – Robert Michels. – C. Bingham, in Men & Affairs, p.17, goes on: “This is the essence of Michel’s increasingly discussed ‘iron law of oligarchy’ – ‘the fundamental sociological law of political parties’.”. Michels emphasised that he was using “political” in its most comprehensive significance. – What both should have stressed is that their judgments apply mainly only to territorial States with an exclusive monopoly for a whole territory and all its population, legislative, juridical, police, defence and penal powers, and that individuals and minorities are not yet free to secede from them. Under that condition every territorial monopoly organization can be very much abused and often is. – Why did they not seriously consider the radical alternatives to these authoritarian systems? - J.Z., 6.2.08. – Q.

ORGANIZATIONS: it is usually impossible to get an organization to change its ways unless you drastically change the organization.” – ANALOG 5/77, editorial. – All institutions should have sufficient inbuilt self-change options. A quite basic one is their voluntarism and another one their exterritorialism. Both are maintained through individual secessionism. - Each secessionist is, so to speak, on a lasting and perhaps even permanent strike against the organization that he seceded from. - With enough following his example, the organization is likely to change, trying to improve itself. Otherwise it will simply disappear, one by one. - J.Z., 15.1.11. – Individual and group secessionism amounts to a safety valve for diverse high pressure activities. Without it we get the frequent and large explosions of territorial statism, resulting for its wrongful and irrational inbuilt and building-up pressures. – J.Z., 24.6.12. -  CHANGES, RADICALISM, REFORMS

ORGANIZATIONS: Many people, for example, equate government with almost any kind of organization. (*) And so, if they hear me say “I don’t think we need any government”, they think they heard me say, “We don’t have to organize” – human beings don’t have to organize. Well, that’s NOT what I mean. - - I think it is a natural thing for human beings to organize. I think it is true that no one of us has enough brains or enough time or enough energy to put the pieces together that we have to put together, if we are going to live and live in relative comfort and happiness in this troubled world. So I am not at all opposed to organization.” – Robert LeFevre, Good Government, p.7. – To me it seems obvious and it was, probably obvious for LeFevre as well, that there be really good (or limited) government on a quite rightful and rational basis, for all the people in a territory, regardless of their diversity, their statism, their love of freedom or of something else. – (*) But they do not demand really free competition for it, as for all other organizations, that are not territorial ones. - J.Z., 6.2.08, 15.1.11. – FULL FREEDOM TO ORGANIZE, ASSOCIATE, DISASSOCIATE, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT

ORGANIZATIONS: People often divide American organizations into three sectors: public, private, and nonprofit (or “independent”). Another division may be more fundamental: forced or free. There are essentially only two kinds of organizations, those that involve coercion and those that are entirely voluntary. The voluntary sector includes for-profit firms, clubs, churches and synagogues, and charitable organizations. All of these differ from government in one crucial way: They may not acquire resources or implement plans through coercion.” - David Boaz, ed., The Libertarian Reader, The Free Press, 1997. ( Claiming copyrights even to the writings of Paine, Madison, Tocqueville, Mill, etc.! – J.Z. ), p.249. - Another characteristic is that they claim neither a territorial monopoly nor or territorial sovereignty, nor compulsory membership or subordination. And the voluntary sector does not only embrace the examples D. B. lists and similar ones but also exterritorially autonomous communities of all kinds, all only of volunteers under personal law. Advocates of limited governments or mini-governments, still being territorialists, usually find it hard to make this inclusion. – J.Z., 3.10.07. - VOLUNTARISM VS. COERCION, TERRITORIALISM VS. PANARCHISM

ORGANIZATIONS: Social organizations have a natural tendency to become monopolistic and inflexible.” – Vernor Vinge, Conquest by Default, p.66 in ANALOG 5/68. – One should keep in mind that so far all of them were run by people habituated or conditioned to think in terms of power, especially exclusive and territorial powers and monopolies and the corresponding notions of statism and of “leadership” – Butler Shaffer makes the same above point e.g. in his “Calculated Chaos” but does not distinguish, or not sufficiently, between voluntary associations and those with a territorial monopoly. The voluntary associations and autonomous communities are at least constantly exposed to free competition and individual secessionism. – J.Z., n.d. & 2.2.08, 14.1.11, 24.6.12. – INTOLERANCE, MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, INFLEXIBILITY, POWER, STATISM

ORGANIZATIONS: The fundamental criticism of modern society is its lack of organic growth.” – Alex Comfort, Authority and Delinquency, p.116. – How can it grow organically, as long as it is based on a territorial monopoly and compulsory membership or subordination? – Only by population growth within its territory and by GNP can it grow, if it has sufficient liberties left for this. – Territorial States are not productive or organic as such. – And without individual and group secessionism they cannot organically shrink, either. - J.Z., 6.2.08. – SOCIETY, GROWTH, FREEDOM.

ORGANIZATIONS: The good society rests on individuals having high moral scruples and ethical guidelines; no organizational gadgetry, however deftly devised, can overcome moral and ethical deficiencies.” – Leonard E. Read, Who’s Listening? - Apparently he had not read or not remembered Kant’s remarks in his “Eternal Peace” on the possibility of a society of devils. – When moral people and immoral people are forced to live together in the same territorial society, then the deficiencies of the immoral people are not, obviously, sufficiently overcome. But when all kinds of moral people are free to secede from a territorial State and to live under exterritorial autonomy - in their own kinds of more or less free societies, peacefully competing with each other, then only the immoral people would be left of the former territorial State. They would have to learn to live by their own efforts, at their own risk and expense, with the examples of members of more successful societies all around them. While at first they might be inclined to continue to turn to crimes against their peaceful and productive neighbors, not members of their own community of criminals, they would soon experience that these other communities, free from territorialist shackles, will be able to defend their rights and liberties, especially their property rights, much more effectively than was ever done for them by any territorial State. So the criminal natures would soon be thrown upon their own resources (“Root, hog or die.”), for they could not survive for long merely by robbing and killing each other. [If they were only eating each other, not their innocent children, I would not mind this. – J.Z., 24.6.12.] They would have to find or discover a productive, peaceful, non-violent way of life – or perish. I think that there would be many and finally decent enough survivors, at least in their outward behaviour. White Australia was originally largely settled by white convicts. Most of them learnt to become self-supporting and decent people, not only the political "criminals" who were also deported to Australia. – J.Z., 6.2.08, 24.6.12. - DIS.

ORGANIZATIONS: The more highly public life is organized the lower does its morality sink.” – E. M. Forster, in “I Believe”, p.49. – Instance: “Democratic” governments “armed” with mass extermination devices! – J.Z., 6.3.09. – I would not call an organization “highly organized” when only the lowest, form of organization is used, the one which is least moral, rational and economic. – J.Z., 24.6.12. - MORALITY, RESPONSIBILITY, POWER, OFFICIALS, PUBLIC MEN, POLITICIANS, LEADERS, STATES, PUBLIC AFFAIRS, POLITICS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, TERRITORIALISM

ORGANIZATIONS: The potency of social power is in proportion to the number who are of like mind, but that is a matter or education, not organization.” – Frank Chodorov, Out of Step, p.112. – The two factors can be combined in market-like organizations of volunteers, each doing its own things to or for itself. – When people are really free to do their own things for themselves, then their number need not be very large to enable them to set a very shiny example for others to follow. - J.Z., n.d., & 6.2.08.

ORGANIZATIONS: The socialists brand us with the name individualist. – We assure the socialists, however, that we repudiate only forced organization, not natural organization. We repudiate the forms of association that are forced upon us, not free association.” – Bastiat, in Dean Russell: Frederic Bastiat, p.12. – VOLUNTARISM, FORCE, ASSOCIATIONISM, CONTRACTARIANISM

ORGANIZATIONS: There is no reason why good cannot triumph as often as evil. The triumph of anything is a matter of organization. If there are such things as angels, I hope that they are organized along the lines of the Mafia.” – Kurt Vonnegut Jr., The Sirens of Titan. - - Actually, the Mafia does successfully organize some voluntary and free market activities that the territorial governments have wrongfully outlawed. To that extent, as an anarchist, libertarian and panarchist one can admire it, without approving all of their other activities, criminal ones, with involuntary victims. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - MAN, ANGELS, DEVILS, GOOD, EVIL, SUCCESS, JOKES, MAFIA, ORGANIZED CRIME, CRIME SYNDICATES

ORGANIZATIONS: We find everywhere a type of organization (administrative, commercial, or academic) in which the higher officials are plodding and dull, those less senior are active only in intrigue against each other, and the junior men are frustrated to frivolous. Little is being attempted. Nothing is being achieved. …” - C. Northcote Parkinson: Parkinson’s Law, p.95. – I would rather have said: Too little is thus achieved. – Usually the leadership principle is practised rather than participatory democracy or any other system, which releases the creative energies of all members. Extreme cases: Territorial States and vast private corporations. – J.Z., 6.2.08.

ORGANIZATIONS: When authority presents itself in the guise of organization it develops charms fascinating enough to convert communities of free people into totalitarian states.” – THE TIMES, London. – Quoted in C. Bingham, Men and Affairs, p.17. – Have we ever had communities of really free people? These could and would have done better for themselves than any territorial Welfare State could. – What is above stated about “charms” hardly fits territorial, coercive and centralized monopoly States that are largely Warfare States. As such they do not possess the charming characteristic of letting dissenters secede to do their own things among themselves. – However based on numerous popular prejudices, not efficiently countered by State education systems, many abuses can be continued by any territorial State for all too long periods. - J.Z., 6.2.08. – AUTHORITY, TOTALITARIANISM, WELFARE STATE, Q.

ORIGINALITY: Originality is the one thing which unoriginal minds cannot feel the use of.” - John Stuart Mill, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.139. – But even unoriginal minds can easily learn to use the consumer products of originality. – J.Z., 6.2.08. - Moreover, good suggestion box schemes have demonstrated how creative most people can be if one really listens to them on improvements in their work sphere. - That ordinary people can be quite creative in their homes, gardens, hobbies, arts and crafts is already well known. - As Leonard E. Read suggested, all creative energies should be released, especially while the coercive, monopolistic, collectivistic and territorial ones do lead us towards Doomsday, the general Holocaust. - J.Z., 15.1.11. – COPYRIGHTS, PATENTS, IDEAS ARCHIVE, INNOVATION

ORTEGA, Questiones del derecho publico (Madrid. 1747), pp. 314 et seq. - Quoted in LIU, ibid, page 43. LIU adds: „In this connection, a nineteenth century survival of consular jurisdiction in Europe may be mentioned. The treaty of May 2, 1880, between Italy and Ethiopia, provided for the reciprocal exercise of consular jurisdiction in regard to criminal matters. After setting forth the rights of the Italians in Ethiopia, the agreement goes on to say:‚Similarly, the Ethiopians accused of a crime committed in Italian territory shall be tried by the Ethiopian authorities.’ - Art. 12, State Papers, vol. lxxxi, p. 735.“   

OSTERFIELD, DAVID, Anarchism and the Public Goods Issue: Law, Courts, and the Police. - David Osterfeld - Anarchism and the Public Goods Issue: Law, Courts, and the Police (pdf) - Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 9, Num. 1, 1989.

OSTRACISM: If a prominent politician hires a hall to make a speech, stay away; the absent audience will bring him to a realization of his nothingness. The speeches and the written statements of a political figure are designed to impress you with his importance, and if you do not listen to the one or read the other you will not be influenced and he will give up the effort. It is the applause, the adulation we accord political personages that registers our regard for the power they wield; the deflation of that power is in proportion to our disregard of these personages. Without a cheering crowd there is no parade. – Social ostracism alone can bring down the top layer of political skullduggery to its moral level. Those whose self-respect has not dropped to the vanishing point will get out of the business and put themselves to honest work, while the degenerates who remain will have to get along on what they can pick up from a reluctant public.” – Frank Chodorov, Out of Step, p.110. – In a number of countries voting has already been made compulsory. But unless it becomes open, one can always vote informal and somewhat protest thereby. – Alas, any fool can always find more fools to support him. What he must lose is his territorial monopoly or such a monopoly as something that he could acquire by becoming elected. - J.Z., 6.2.08. POLITICIANS, PARTIES, REPRESENTATIVES, TERRITORIALISM

OSTRACISM: So, let’s try social ostracism of politics and politicians. It should work. Reform through politics only strengthens the State.” – Frank Chodorov: Out of Step, p.112. - Individual and group secessionism, combined with exterritorialist competition by communities of volunteers, all under their own personal laws, would go much beyond that – but is presently still outlawed. – J.Z., 4.2.08. – Ostracize all territorialism, as soon as you can and already by word and in writing, as far as you can! - Help to make the case for panarchism complete and spread it as far as you can. - J.Z., 15.1.11, 24.6.12. - IGNORING THE STATE, SECEDING FROM IT, ESTABLISHING PERSONAL LAWS & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS: PANARCHISM. - POLITICS, POLITICIANS.

OTHERNESS: What is the fourth meme? You've heard me call it the dogma of otherness. A world-view that actually encourages an appetite for newness, hunger for diversity, eagerness for change. Tolerance plays a major role in the legends spread by this culture, plus a tradition of humorous self-criticism. (Look at the underlying message contained in most situation comedies. It is always the most intolerant or pompous character who gets comeuppance before the final curtain.)” - David Brin, Otherness, p.385. - PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, DIVERSITY, CHANGE, AUTHORITARIANISM, EXPERTS

OTTOMAN EMPIRE & ITS LARGE DEGREE OF TOLERANCE, HOWEVER LIMITED & TEMPORARY: [13] To support these claims, Creasy (p.208) refers to "a remarkable State paper published by the Ottoman government, 1832, in the Moniteur Ottoman, justly claiming credit for their nation on this important subject. Mr. Urquhart cites, in his "Turkey and her Resources", the following passages from this official declaration of Turkish commercial principles: "It has often been repeated, that the Turks are encamped in Europe; it is certainly not their treatment of strangers that has given rise to this idea of precarious occupancy; the hospitality they offer their guest is not that of the tent, nor is it that of the Turkish laws; for the Mussulman code, in its double civil and religious character, is inapplicable to those professing another religion; but they have done more, they have granted to the stranger the safeguard of his own laws, exercised by functionaries of his own nation. In this privilege, so vast in benefits and in consequences, shines forth the admirable spirit of true and lofty hospitality. - "In Turkey, and there alone, does hospitality present itself, great, noble, and worthy of its honourable name; not the shelter of a stormy day, but that hospitality which, elevating itself from a simple movement of humanity to the dignity of a political reception, combines the future with the present. When the stranger has placed his foot on the land of the Sultan, he is saluted guest (mussafir!). To the children of the West who have confided themselves to the care of the Mussulman, hospitality has been granted, with those two companions, civil liberty according to the laws, commercial liberty according to the laws of nature and of reason. - "Good sense, tolerance, and hospitality, have long ago done for the Ottoman Empire what the other states of Europe are endeavouring to effect by more or less happy political combinations. Since the throne of the Sultans has been elevated at Constantinople, commercial prohibitions have been unknown; they opened all the ports of their empire to the commerce, to the manufacturer, to the territorial produce of the Occident, or, to say better, of the whole world. Liberty of commerce has reigned here without limits, as large, as extended, as it was possible to be. Never has the Divan dreamed, under any pretext of national interest, or even of reciprocity, of restricting that facility, which has been exercised, and is to this day in the most unlimited sense, by all the nations who wish to furnish a portion of the consumption of this vast empire, and to share in the produce of its territory. - "Here every object of exchange is admitted and circulates without meeting other obstacle than the payment of an infinitely small portion of the value to the Custom-house. - "The extreme moderation of the duties is the complement of this régime of commercial liberty; and in no portion of the globe are the officers charged with the collection of more confiding facility for the valuations, and of so decidedly conciliatory a spirit in every transaction regarding commerce. - "Away with the supposition that these facilities granted to strangers are concessions extorted from weakness! The dates of the contracts termed capitulations, which establish the rights actually enjoyed by foreign merchants, recall periods at which the Mussulman power was altogether predominant in Europe. The first capitulation which France obtained was in 1535, from Solyman the Canonist (the Magnificent). - "The dispositions of these contracts have become antiquated, the fundamental principles remain. Thus, three hundred years ago, the Sultans, by an act of munificence and of reason, anticipated the most ardent desires of civilised Europe, and proclaimed unlimited freedom of commerce." - RCBJ in his review of SHI SHUN LIU's work. - Turks were tolerant, to a considerable degree, before the "Christians" were, in spite of all their talk about "loving one's enemy". - Admittedly, all the "holy" books have their atrocious passages and actions, often upon "divine" command. - J.Z., 20.9.11. – Alas, Turkey is still not very hospitable, just and liberating e.g. regarding its women. – J.Z., 24.6.12. - TOLERANCE, TURKEY, CAPITULATIONS, DHIMMI, DHIMMITUDE, MILLET SYSTEM, CONSULAR JURISDICTION, RIGHTS OF STRANGERS, FOREIGNERS & ALIENS, FREE TRADE OR AT LEAST SOMEWHAT FREED TRADE, RIGHTS & LIBERTIES OF WOMEN

OUTLAWRY: See: BECKERATH, ULRICH VONOn Panarchy.  – Instead of rulers declaring some of their victims to be outlaws, because they dared to resist, sometimes the victims of governments declared their rulers to be outlaws – and treated them as such. What a reversal of role-playing!  See Vehmic Courts. Alas, due to their secrecy and lack of competition they deteriorated, so that my old Encyclopedia Britannica mentions them only under lynch law! – J.Z., 27.12.04.

OUR COUNTRY: This is our country." - "This is a free country." and "It's a free country, isn't it?" - Such remarks constitute some of the greatest lies - for all who utter them. - J.Z., 25.6.01, 6.10.01. – However, as an aspiration towards individual rights and liberties, independent of territories, under full exterritorial autonomy, the remark makes some sense. As territorial nationalism it mostly led only to frequent clashes between the various groups in any population and with the territorial States of others. – J.Z., 6.3.09. – More correctly, the diverse territorial governments do not fight each other but rather the largely involuntary subjects and victims of the other governments. The rulers themselves seem to have a “gentleman’s agreement” not to attack each other militarily. – J.Z., 24.6.12. - TERRITORIALISM VS. PANARCHISM OR EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY OR EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR VOLUNTEERS, DIS.

OUGHT: It ought to be so, therefore it is so.” – Chas Kingsley, Hypatia, p.69. - Rather, by rights it ought to be so. Therefore, it can be. - Moral principles oblige and are practical, even though sometimes not immediately, because of organized and powerful immorality being well established. The remark by Kingsley and similar ones do often express intellectual blindness, wishful or hopeful thinking, excess optimism - rather than realism. But as an ideal, to be approached, as far and as fast as possible, it is realistic and even powerful through its adherents. - J.Z., n.d. & 4.2.08. – The whole of territorial statism and of limited government notions rests on that fallacy. – The majority of people are still territorial statists, regardless of what that system has done  to them and all dissenters. However, if suddenly taxation would be made quite voluntary, how many voluntary contributors would remain faithful to their present tax collectors and pay them as much or more as they do now, if anything at all? – Naturally, this is only a thought experiment. I do not expect the current crop of territorial politicians to introduce voluntary taxation. - J.Z., 6.3.09, 24.6.12. - REALISM, OPTIMISM, WISHFUL THINKING, IDEALS, DIS.

OUT OF THE WAY: get out of the way of all creative activities (*), an absence of authoritarianism, As a consequence of getting out of the way, there is a releasing, a flowering of creative energy. We refer to this as the free market, private ownership, limited government way of life.” – Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.46. – Did he ever say anything against a limited government having nuclear or other mass murder devices? – - (*) Even in the political, social and economic spheres! – J.Z., 6.2.08. – AUTHORITARIANISM, STATISM, CREATIVITY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, OBSTACLES, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLIES, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM MINORITY AUTONOMY, FREE MIGRATION, MONETARY DESPOTISM VS. MONETARY FREEDOM, BORDERS, FRONTIERS, BOUNDARIES, LAWS, OBSTACLES, OBSTRUCTIONISM, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, A GOOD ENOUGH IDEAL?

OUTCAST: I would be proud to be an outcast of this statist society. – J.Z., 1.1.73. – On the other hand: I do have to make a living, somehow, and if I were not tolerated under my own kind of exterritorial autonomy, with like-minded volunteers, then I would be deported to another territorial monopoly State, possibly or even likely one with an even worse territorial regime. My pensions would cease or become non-transferable. – I would probably lose many of my few local assets – and would be separated from my children and grand-children. – Territorial States do have us in their claws. - J.Z., 6.2.08. – OUTLAWRY, EXCOMMUNICATION, SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, TERRITORIALISM

OUTRAGE: God said, I am tired of kings, // I suffer them no more; // Up to my ear the morning brings // the outrage of the poor.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1863. – Since then most kingdoms have been abolished – but was it that which somewhat improved the fate of the poor in most countries – or something else? – Have we more or less government abuses now in democracies? Getting outraged leads, usually, at most to outrageous riots, arson and other destruction. We need to become outraged at certain laws and abuses, at what they do to us, instead of passively accepting them. But outrage and anger are obviously not enough. What should one do against nuclear war preparations, inflations, mass unemployment, immigration barriers, the continuance of some dictatorial and even totalitarian States and of territorialism in all States? – Perhaps we should become outraged about our own remaining ignorance and prejudices and our lack of interest in what should be done and what could be done against all of the remaining wrongs and abuses. – J.Z., 28.10.76, 6.2.08, 15.1.11, 24.6.12. – SUFFERING, STATISM, PREJUDICES, DIS, INTEREST, IDEAS, SUBORDINATION, INDIFFERENCE, IGNORANCE

OVER-GOVERNMENT: The more we are governed the less we are free.” – Albert Parsons, on being sentenced to hang, in 1886. – How does one “hang” a whole territorial government? – By quite peacefully leaving it quite alone, left to its own devices and the few remaining followers it may still have. Then, after a while, the secessionists might all claim their share in the remaining government assets, no longer defended against them. - Or the last ever territorial election might be turned into an advance auction sale of all remaining government assets, with each voter and taxpayer getting already, in advance. a promise to his share in the territorial government’s assets, upon it being voted out of office, permanently, with only the winning trustee-party remaining for a while – in order to administer the distribution of these assets among the population. - See e.g. PEACE PLANS No. 19c on this, available at  - J.Z., 6.2.08. – All territorial governments amount to over-government. – J.Z., 30.12.11. – TERRITORIALISM, Q., DIS.

OVER-GOVERNMENT: There are, on the contrary, the strongest general reasons why every proposed extension of governmental interference or power should be scrutinized with jealous vigilance. We know that the more things a government, like an individual, attempts, to do, the worse it is likely to do any one of them.” – Henry Hazlitt, The Conquest of Poverty, p.189. – Is there really anything that any territorial government, even the best of them, can do quite rightfully and rationally, and that only such a government could do? – J.Z., 6.2.08. – LAWS, OVER-LEGISLATION, BUREAUCRACY, WELFARE STATE, LIMITED GOVERNMENT

OVERBECK, ALFRED: Freiherr von, -, Die Kapitulationen des Osmanischen Reiches, 1877, Breslau, Korn (C. Mueller), 1917, 34pp. (Ann Arbor)

OVERESTIMATION: Habitual overestimation of the own strength and underestimation of that of the opposition makes for war. This tendency applies also to nuclear war and is supported by the usual servile reports of the own followers and the secrecy of the preparations for war on all sides. - See: Accidental War, Aggression, Censorship, Decision, Experts, Generals, Miscalculations, Politicians, Publicity, Rulers, Referendums, Secrecy, War Aims, Weapons. – . – J.Z. in An ABC Against Nuclear War. - - MacNamara, then secretary for defence, in an interview now accompanying the DVD movie “Dr. Strangelove”, indicated that only decades after the Cuba Crisis, it was revealed that many nuclear war heads were already in Cuba, so that the USA invasion of it, intended for the next two days, with the intention to prevent the arrival of these Soviet nuclear war heads there, would have led to a nuclear counter-strike against the invasion force, probably also to one against some USA cities and that this would have lead to a general nuclear war. – For our survival one cannot rely on governmental secret services and their surveillance technology, either. He also revealed that in 1961/62, in another of the Berlin crises, we came once again very close to nuclear war. And that we are still close to it with regard to governments like those of Iran and North Korea, preparing for nuclear War. Territorial governments are unable or unwilling to motivate and unleash the military forces and the captive people of despotic regimes against these regimes. Quite rightful war- and peace aims, sufficiently publicized and already practised by all kinds of governments and free societies in exile, all only for volunteers, could achieve that, without an invasion or open material assistance to genuine liberation efforts. But that would also require that Western governments cease to threaten whole peoples with ABC mass murder devices – by getting them destroyed through the Western peoples themselves, seeing that their rulers are unable or unwilling to engage in this kind of disarmament. – Governmental disarmament inspectors are rather useless under present territorial conditions. - J.Z., 12.2.08. - WAR, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, DETERRENCE

OVERKILL: By 1960 we could destroy the world 23 times over. By 1776 - 67 times over – appeared a conservative estimate.” – Merritt Clifton, The Akwesasne’s Fight For Freedom, DANDELION, Fall 79. – Obviously, those people, who bring about such a situations, are not sane! – J.Z., 6.3.09. - They are all territorial rulers and as such already insane. Uncounted times they have also proven their insanity by their anti-economic measures. - J.Z., 15.1.11. - NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

OVERNIGHT: Freedom can be realized overnight – for all who want it – provided they succeed in fighting the opposition down or persuade it to leave them alone. And that is much easier, provided only full autonomy for freedom lovers is their limited aim. The statists, who fear freedom, would not be afraid of that and resist desperately. However, genuine freedom lovers should not confine themselves thus but demand also full exterritorial autonomy for all non-aggressive and no-criminal people, even if politically, economically and socially they are the opponents of the freedom lovers. One slogan says it all, how to win friends and influence people in this respect: To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her dreams. (Gian Piero de Bellis changed the last word into "choice". - J.Z., 15.1.11.) Personal laws and exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities could make this possible overnight, just by repealing all the clauses opposing this liberty and this right. – J.Z., 2/75. – J.Z., 6.2.08. - PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, SECESSIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF CHOICE & FREEDOM OF ACTION FOR ALL, ALSO FULL FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & CONTRACT, LIBERATION, START-UP OPTIONS,

OVERPOPULATION? 21, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505. - Any city is "over-populated", but so is any village and any house without any garden. - J.Z., 20.1.99. - As Jim Peron indicates, e.g. in "Exploding Population Myths" a real and coming threat is, rather: Under-population. - Full freedom will lead to prosperity for almost all who are able and willing to work productively and with this prosperity a stable and optimum population could also be achieved. - J.Z., 2.9.04. - Julian L. Simon wrote several excellent volumes against the overpopulation spleen and considers man to be the ultimate resource. I just read on Facebook that someone has continued and updated Simon’s pioneering writings on this subject. – J.Z., 24.6.12.

OVERRULE: Governments don’t rule; they overrule.” – Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom, p.90. – Rule out governments that overrule! – J.Z., 14.11.75. – How many territorial governments are there which do not do that? Perhaps some of the mini-states, like Monaco etc. – But why not simply let all the various freedom lovers opt out or secede from them, into full freedom to do their own things for or to themselves, while all the various statist should be free to do their things only to themselves? Then no one would have any longer a right to complain about his society or government – but only over the own free choice he made – and he could change that affiliation. His next choice might be a much better one for him. – J.Z., 6.2.08, 24.6.12.

OVERTHROW: Get away from ‘we vs. them’.” – David Shoemaker, 1990. - - Get away from attempts to overthrow or abolish governments, from territorial revolution to exterritorial ones. Supplant the old, coercive and territorial institutions rather by alternative and voluntary ones, freely competing with the old ones for voluntary members only, demonstrating positive solutions that work or voluntary experiments that will cost and harm only their participants. – J.Z., n.d. & 4.2.08. - ABOLITION, COMPETITION WITH, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, PANARCHISM, VIOLENT REVOLUTIONS OR INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM?

OVERTHROWING: No government, not even the worst, which is at least wanted by some, should be overthrown, for these people - by people who dislike that government. In other words, only the monopolistic, coercive and territorial features of any government should be abolished, not their voluntaristic and exterritorial remains. - J.Z., 8.2.89, 3.4.89. - OR ABOLISHING ALL GOVERNMENTS? VOLUNTARISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, SECESSIONISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, EXTERRITORIALISM

OWEN, ROBERT: Human beings, for example, even the best, are now all 'localized animals, peculiar to some of the innumerable districts into which irrationality has divided the world.'" - John Bowle, Political Opinions in the 19th  Century, p.145, quoting from Owen’s "A New View of Society ..." 1813, from a Justice of the Peace for the County of New Lanark, 76p., Everyman Edition: Robert Owen. As far as I have read him so far, he did not want to do away with this territorial conditioning but replace the existing one merely with his own more enlightened and humane one. - Territorialism creates localized animals, in country- or state- or nation-wide and government-run prisons, zoos, circuses or concentration camps  - J.Z. 7.1.93. – TERRITORIALISM, CONDITIONING OF HUMAN BEINGS


OWENS, TOM, to ZUBE, JOHN: 14 August 1992, 4pp: 110, in PP 1539.


OWN BEHALF: Act on your own behalf. J.Z., 1/76, after reading ANARCHY 8: “What will persuade people to act on their own behalf?” – David Wiek, discussing Malatesta. – Freedom to do so will. – We should systematically strive for that freedom and not merely assume that it does already exist in all spheres in which it should exist. E.g. that of free choice among all kinds of political, economic and social systems, none of them with a territorial monopoly. – J.Z., 6.2.08. – SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-LIBERATION, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

OWN JUDGMENT: The Libertas Statement: “We, as libertarians, affirm: That full individual liberty is impossible in any society other than a voluntary one that aggresses on no one. - - That men and women require the full and independent use of their own judgment in order to survive at an optimum level, and therefore have a natural right to do their own thing, provided that they do not physically harm or coercively restrict another individual’s live, liberty or property.” – Compare the common saying: “Use your own judgment”. – VOLUNTARISM, SELF-GOVERNANCE

OWN LIFE: I believe, as many say they believe, that everyone has the right to run his own life – to go to hell in his own fashion.” – David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom, XI. - SELF-OWNERSHIP, PROPERTY IN ONESELF, SELF-OWNERSHIP, TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM

OWN PATH: A man must follow his own path… No one can choose it for him.” - George Lucas, Star Wars, p.160. – Conscription still exists in many countries. Also taxation and compulsory schooling and many other legalized restrictions upon individual rights and liberties. – J.Z., 6.3.09. - DIS.


OWN THING: Each Does His Own.” – (Jeder macht seins.) - zitiert von Stefan Rabenau, 23.9.90. (Compare Stirner: The Ego and His Own. – Also Ayn Rand: The Virtue of Selfishness. - DOING THE OWN THING, INCLUDING GOVERNMENTAL & SOCIETAL INSTITUTIONS

OWN THING: seek … unlimited positive freedom to do one’s own thing.” – Bob Dickens, ANARCHY 8. – SELF-DETERMINATION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

OWN THING: whatever a person does, short of physically harming another – his “own thing” – is okay, regardless of the consequences.” – Charles Goodman, All These Rights, THE FREEMAN, 1/78. - DO YOUR OWN THING. – That is much easier said than done, as long as we are still trapped under territorialism and in the traps of languages and their all too flawed and incomplete definitions and ideas. – Compare the host of negative and positive, flawed and wrong notions, still very incompletely listed here and, in public opinion and even in many scholarly writings, mixed up with still all too few correct but unpopular notions, ideas, definitions. All of them are still not sufficiently listed, sorted out, classified, responded to and easily enough retrievable and refutable, if they deserve that, because of the lack of corresponding reference works. - J.Z., 31.12.11. – DIS., ENCYCLOPAEDIA FO THE BEST REFUTATION …

OWN WAY: Do it your own way and it will probably work for you; do it somebody else’s way and it probably won’t.” – The 1 Minute Sales Person, p.74, by Spencer Johnson & Larry Wilson, p. 74.

OWN WAY: everyone has to make his own way on this day. No one can tell others what to do.” – Richard Matheson, The Last Day, AMAZING STORIES, April-May, 1953. – If that had been consistently done then “The Last Day” might not have occurred in this future, in accordance with this SF story. – J.Z., n.d.

OWN WAY: Go your own way if you don't want to go mine. - Poul Anderson, Tau Zero, Coronet edition, 1978, 1980, p.75. - TOLERANCE, SUUM CUIQUE, TO EACH HIS OWN, CHOICE, PANARCHISM

OWN WAY: He has to follow his own pattern. No one can choose it for him.” – George Lucas, Star Wars.

OWN WAY: Let each man have the wit to go his own way.” - (Unis quisque sua noverit ire via.) – Propertius, Elegies, Bk. ii, eleg. 25, I. 38.

OWN WAY: Like almost everyone else, I want to have my own way. Is this possible? Yes, if my way be right; indeed, having one’s own way is not only possible but certain if the way be right, and just as certainly impossible if the way be wrong. Thus, having one’s own way or not revolves around right and wrong behavior. While few matters stand more in contention than right and wrong, I have a way of drawing the line that suits me.” – Leonard E. Read, Having My Way, p.4.

OWN WAY: Make your own way on your own steam. – J.Z., n.d., after reading Frank Chodorov: Out of Step, p. 5: “… as did the earlier entrepreneur who made his way on his own steam.” –– Compare, ibid, page 153: “They all came to make their way in life under their own steam, without let or hindrance, which is the condition of freedom.” - PAY YOUR WAY, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-MAINTENANCE

OWN WORLD: I’d rather be in a world of my own making.” – Alfred Bester, Starburst, p.104. – For most people the own world is usually only a dream and a very short one at that. Then they wake up or become aware again of the unpleasant and wrongful realities all around them, which they are, as individuals, usually and largely, all too powerless to change in a significant way, as victims of the various but mostly territorial establishments, which leave them degrees of freedom only in very limited and private spheres. The rest is coercively manipulated by territorial power-holders. – J.Z., 30.12.11.


[Home] [Top]