John Zube


Quotes, Notes, Comments & Slogans
for Individual Liberty & Rights
against Popular Statist Errors & Prejudices

Index - P2

(2013 - 2014)



PANARCHISM: The former territorial State powers would not merely be separated into the usual three branches, all of them still all too powerful and insufficiently separated, but the exclusive territorial powers would be abolished, with the remainder divided among many competitors, all only with voluntary supporters. Whether the former division of powers or any other or none would be practised within each of the resulting and freely competing panarchies, that would be up to their voluntary members and the constitution they agree upon. Already with the first freely seceding panarchist the former territorial government would be transformed into a panarchy itself, for the remaining members, as long as they remain, while free to secede, must then be seen as volunteers, too and the powers of the former territorial government are then confined to these, its volunteers, as long as they do not also secede from it. - JZ, 11.12.03, 7.9.04. – From JZ Pan AZ. - THE SEPARATION OF POWERS

PANARCHISM: The free society, peace, prosperity and justice, can begin with discussions in a little journal and with the example of a single village in an underdeveloped country. As the Russian proverb says, a single candle can light a million others. (*) – JZ, 4.4.84. – In my Pan AZ under START-UPS, I list a number of other start-up options. I doubt that all of them have so far been listed together and seriously discussed as yet. – JZ 14.3.09. – (*) Actually, directly a single candle can light, maybe, hundreds of other candles, hardly thousands and certainly not a million, before it, too, is burned out. But the other candles, which it has lit, between them, could light an unlimited number of candles available and used for this. – On important matters one should try to be even pedantically accurate. Flawed ideas and expressions lead to all too many unintended wrongs and disasters. - JZ, 27.11.13. - ENLIGHTENMENT BY EXAMPLE OR FREE EXPERIMENTATION

PANARCHISM: the future held as many alternatives as man had time to explore them.” – George T. Gilman. – Let the future hold as many alternatives as diverse men have time, energy and wish to explore – among themselves, when they have,  finally, established the freedom and right to do so, which is, so far, everywhere territorially suppressed in most important spheres. – JZ, 13.7.84, 15.2.08, 13.3.09. – FUTURISM, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW CHOICES, SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: The general contention that Anarchists are opposed to organization, and hence stand for chaos, is absolutely groundless. True, we do not believe in the compulsory, arbitrary side of organization that would compel people of antagonistic tastes and interests into a body and hold them there by coercion. Organization as the result of natural blending of common interests, brought about through voluntary adhesion, Anarchists do not only not oppose, but believe in as the only possible basis of social life. – It is the harmony of organic growth, which produces variety of color and form – the complete whole we admire in the flower. Analogously will the organized activity of free human beings endowed with the spirit of solidarity result in the perfection of social harmony – which is Anarchism. Indeed, only Anarchism makes non-authoritarian organization a reality, since it abolishes the existing antagonism between individuals and classes.” – Emma Goldman, What I believe, in: Alix Kates Shulman, ed. of Red Emma Speaks, p.60. - I wish for someone to put together all anarchist voices and quotes, ideas and proposals that are already to at least some extent panarchistic. The same should be done for libertarians. So far most anarchists and libertarians still seem to be unaware of them, for they remained territorialists. - Both lists could be sorted by the names of the authors. - JZ, 21.1.11. - ANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, CHAOS, , COMPULSION, ORGANIZATION, CHOICE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, ASSOCIATIONISM

PANARCHISM: The genius is forced into the straightjacket of the mediocre man's and the moron's mentality. That he can expand any distance at all beyond his prison is a tribute to the supreme power of high intellect. ... The ordinary man is just plain stupid. … He follows, or rather accepts what the creative or dominant minority does, but it is haltingly and unwillingly. - Sandra Miesel: The Book of Poul Anderson, 197, quoting his 1948 story: "Genius". - Let both opt out - and re-associate as they like! - JZ, 5.11.82.

PANARCHISM: The giving-notice period for offenders of a panarchy, before they can effectively secede from it, expires only after their punishment period has expired, in any cases in which they have committed an offence whilst they were still members. – JZ, 30 Sep. 89. – PUNISHMENT, CRIME, SECESSION OF CRIMINALS?

PANARCHISM: The greatness of America lies not in being more enlightened than any other nation, but rather in her ability to repair her faults. – Alexis de Tocqueville, quoted by Nizam Ahmad likes a photo. Capitalism - That ability would be greatly increased for the volunteers of panarchies, polyarchies etc., under their personal law or exterritorial autonomy constitutions, realizing freedom of contract, association and experimentation in those spheres still territorially monopolized by governments. - John Zube – Facebook, 13.1.12, 27.11.13. – VS. TERRITORIAL STATISM & MONOPOLISM

PANARCHISM: The human race is a fiction. There are only small groups with their own conflicting interests." - Poul Anderson, Cold Victory, The Psychotechnic League, 1982, 1983, a Tom Doherty Associates Book, ISBN 0-523-48527-1, page 137. - What Anderson said about the human race could also be said about "nations" and "peoples". The conflicting interests are mainly brought about by territorialism. Under exterritorialism all interests become voluntary commitments or contractual exchanges. Constitutional, legal and juridical territorial monopolies would cease. Nobody could then claim "ownership" in national customers. When each is free to do his own things to and for himself, then most of the supposedly "conflicting interests" would simply disappear. - JZ, 28.6.01, 27.11.13. – From JZ Pan AZ. - CONFLICTING INTERESTS, NATURAL HARMONIES, VOLUNTARISM, UNITY, GROUPS, MINORITY AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIAL RULE

PANARCHISM: The human rights draft in PEACE PLANS issue No.4 (and my peace book in PEACE PLANS 61-63 (online in English at describes the minimum of agreement required between the new political communities. – JZ, n.d.

PANARCHISM: The ideal family meal may be somewhat different for every family on earth. Precisely therefore no attempt should be made to make any of them uniform for all, in accordance with the currently dominant health apostles. Every family has still the right to live in accordance with its own preferences and each single adult with his or hers as well. (The uniformity spleen of the Nazis extended into this sphere as well, with their propaganda for all to eat at least once a week a particular common meal, what they called an “Eintopfgericht”, a simple and cheap pea soup.) The same free menu choice should apply to all other self-responsible actions, especially to those that are presently still territorially, constitutionally, legally and juridically monopolized by governments, namely the choice of whole political, economic and social systems. Here, too, full consumer sovereignty should come to prevail, always, naturally, at the own expense and risk. A quite free market for these as well would offer an enormous variety and with them many more opportunities for rapid progress of dissenters and, finally, for most others, at their own speed, when they are ready for it. Even the many failures of ignorant and prejudiced dissenters, harming only themselves with their “reforms”, would help all others to make better decisions for themselves. Experimental freedom only in science, technology, arts, fashions, religions etc. is not enough. – In so many spheres we do already take it for granted and it works well in all of them. – The classical justice idea of “to each his own!” has simply to be expanded to the last spheres that are still dominated by barbaric territorial powers – at great expense and risk to almost all of us. - JZ, 13.2.09, 23.4.09.

PANARCHISM: The ideal society is conceived as a whole, which lives and flourishes by the harmonious growth of its parts, each of which in developing on its own lines and in accordance with its nature tends on the whole to further the development of others. – L. T. Hobhouse, Liberalism, 123. - IDEAL SOCIETIES, UTOPIAS, INTENTIONAL COMMUNITIES, SCIENCE, CULTURE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, NOT ONLY FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION & INFORMATION.

PANARCHISM: The Jews in the Pale of Settlement constitute a ‘state within a state’, with its own administration and judicial organs, and with a national government – a state whose centre lies outside Russia, abroad, whose highest authority is the “Universal Jewish Alliance’ in Paris.” – Ivan Aksakov, in the journal RUS, 10 Oct. 1881. – “The Pale consisted of the western regions of European Russia where Jews were legally compelled to live.” - JEWISH AUTONOMY, THE PALE

PANARCHISM: The libertarian favors a condition of freedom for all, yet he realizes that freedom, because of its nature, can never be imposed by force.” - Robert LeFevre, LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Spring 1974. - Consequently, opponents of anarchism must be left at liberty, to continue and enjoy as much as they can the kind of statism they do like, as long as they do. Anarchists must not threaten them with the abolition of their kind of beloved State and government but, rather help to guarantee them for them, as long as they do remain their own free and individual choices. Towards them anarchists can rightly advocate only the one-man revolutions that are exemplified by individual secessionism, which is based on individual sovereignty or self-ownership - as soon as people are enlightened enough to want to claim this basic right. - And even then they might only be partly enlightened and will only choose new and lesser ties but still restrictions upon their own genuine individual liberties and rights. They should be at liberty to do so. Anarchists should not threaten their statist choices with abolition but at most try to convert them by words or by their own cooperative and competing examples of living in complete freedom. – JZ, 9.3.86, 21.1.11, 27.11.13.

PANARCHISM: The life and liberty of various panarchies, all of volunteers only, has not yet won over many or most minds over the loyalty, treason, obedience or death and tax tribute "ideals" of the territorial States but it could and must, rather soon, if peace, freedom, wealth, immortality, intelligence expansion and the stars are to be ours. - JZ, 4.4.84, 21.1.11.

PANARCHISM: the Mafia, which forces people to pay for protection, is dissimilar to "governments", which perform the same function, only in that "governments" claim that they have the right to initiate force; whereas Mafioso make no such claim.” - Jeffrey M. Friedman, OPTION 6/77. - Panarchies do not necessarily collect taxes to finance themselves but may levy contributions or insist upon insurance premiums and protection fees. They are designed not to initiate force against outsiders but to use, instead, at most defensive force against them. Internally their authority and opportunity to initiate force is limited by the right of their members to secede. - JZ 7.4.84. – So, which of the two is really more “honest”? - Obviously, there are diverse forms of “honesty”, too! – JZ, 13.3.09. - Their voluntarism and exterritorialism distinguishes them from the private Mafia and the official extortion and oppression rackets. - JZ, 21.1.11. - MAFIA, HUMAN RIGHTS

PANARCHISM: The main rule is that all the rules for all your productive and peaceful actions should be your own or self-chosen ones, i.e. the rules of your exterritorially autonomous volunteer community. If you breached these rules, negligently, aggressively or fraudulently, against its members, then you would be subjected to its criminal law and law enforcement. - JZ, 28.12.92, 3.1.93, 27.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - Likewise, if you breached them towards members of other panarchies. - JZ , 21.1.11.

PANARCHISM: The majority of us belong to some minority group.” – Dangerous Buttons, No. 345. - This means that, with the panarchistic common platform of: “Full minority autonomy for all who desire it!”- ultimately the majority of the world population could be “united” into a federation favoring minority autonomy or panarchism for all but criminals and aggressors. It could and should be organized for defensive and liberating common actions against the remaining criminals and aggressors. - This drop-out option could lead to the biggest ever drop-in option. However, I believe that not many functions would be delegated to any particular kind of world federation, even one of minority groups. It would be just one of several exterritorially and peacefully competing world federations. Those who supplied the most efficient and cheapest protective services would gain the largest shares of their potential markets. But trust upon human prejudices, errors, myths and stupidity to assure that even the best such institution would not become the only one, ever. Hundreds of years of atheist researches, teachings and refutations have not yet destroyed the power various religions hold over the minds of hundreds of millions. The alternative statist religions will have a similar hold over the minds of millions. And perhaps we would need them as deterrent examples, to keep us on the straight and narrow paths. – JZ, 7.1.99. I find particularly disgusting otherwise beautiful and decent people - still with religious spleens in their heads, which they guard with all their strength. - JZ, 18.9.04, 21.1.11. – I hold now that several panarchist federations of panarchies could and should peacefully coexist, as long as they still do believe that their differences are significant for themselves. - JZ, 21.1.11. - From JZ, Pan AZ. - MINORITY AUTONOMY

PANARCHISM: The man who can right himself by a vote will seldom resort to a musket. - J. Fennimore Cooper, The American Democrat, X, 1838. - Especially when that vote is so individualized and extensive that it includes individual secession and association with volunteer communities that are exterritorially fully autonomous. - JZ, 24.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - VOTING, DEMOCRACY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

PANARCHISM: The Mass media are largely produced and paid much attention to by the ignorant and the prejudiced. They are thus, at least initially, least suitable to launch new and radical ideas. They would rather ignore, attack or ridicule them than fairly report and discuss them. – JZ, 2.5.93, 27.11.13. - But have anarchists and libertarians shown enough interest in using all affordable, easy and powerful alternative media or, predominantly, only mass media, now including the Internet and print on paper editions for their books, magazines, leaflets and papers? - Well, at least their online offers have become large and increasing. - JZ, 18.9.04. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - THE MASS MEDIA. -

PANARCHISM: The members of one or the other of the various voluntary and exterritorial communities existing under panarchism could not be singled out as enemies to be murdered by mass extermination 'weapons’. There would be no enemy territory left to drop nuclear 'bombs' on. Without targets such destructive devices are obviously useless and no ideology would need their 'defensive' or aggressive power to realize or spread its system, i.e. the military 'need' for it, the war motive, would also disappear. These devices would become so obviously insane and dangerous in they eyes of most that a sufficient consensus could be obtained for their destruction. - JZ 64/82, 21.1.11. - NWT

PANARCHISM: The more schisms the better. All roads to a better life ought to be explored. Only harm and wrong is done by the suppression of peaceful and tolerant, i.e. voluntary and exterritorially autonomous experiments. - JZ, 6.4.84, 21.1.11.

PANARCHISM: The most diverse minorities could and should unite in their efforts to achieve and maintain full exterritorial autonomy for all of them and to maintain it, i.e., for all peaceful and non-criminal minorities, allowing them to do everything for and to themselves and nothing against the lives, liberties and properties of the members or other minority groups or of majority groups. – JZ, 15.8.98, 10.1.99. - An international federation of minority groups with such a platform, and also upholding individual rights and liberties for their international relations, could become the most powerful political force in the world and it would be backed by ideal militias for the protection of individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 15.8.98, 10.1.99. - INTERNATIONAL OR INTERNATIONAL PANARCHISM, MINORITIES UNITED IN UPHOLDING MINORITY AUTONOMY

PANARCHISM: The most rightful and rational option to end most conflicts caused and maintained by territorialism. For those who have clearly seen it, it becomes obvious. What then remains hard to understand is how one could have overlooked this solution for as long. It is almost as if one had only been able to conceive, in mathematics, the existence of a minus sign but not of a plus sign, or only the multiplication symbol and function but not of those for divisions. In almost every other respect people are aware that there are at least 2 sides to every story but here, territorialism considered as one side of a coin, they have, very widely, almost generally, refused to look at the other side of that coin. And this among as contrary and argumentative beings as human beings are – on most other subjects. After hundreds of millions of victims of territorialist institutions one should have expected that enough people among the survivors would finally have shown enough curiosity for voluntary and exterritorialist institutions and other individual individual rights and liberties, so far omitted in all governmental bills of rights. – JZ, 30.4.93, 14.1.99, 8.9.04, 21.1.11, 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. – POLYARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, COMPETING GOVERNANCE, PERSONAL LAW SYSTEMS

PANARCHISM: The nation is essentially the source of all sovereignty: nor can any individual or any body of men be entitled to any authority which is not expressly derived from it.” - Declaration of the Rights of Man by the French National Assembly, III, 1789. - Although as a declaration against the exclusive sovereignty of a single and absolutist monarch this declaration is understandable in its intent, its modern generalization is quite false and the opposite is true: The INDIVIDUAL is essentially the source of all sovereignty: nor can any nation or any body of men be entitled to any authority which is not expressly derived from it. - JZ, n.d. & 24.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - COLLECTIVE & INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, NATIONS, NATIONALISM, CONSENT, SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, PERSONAL LAW, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, ASSOCIATION & EXPERIMENTATION, VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: The need for “interventions” and the right to intervene do exist – but only by means of better ideas, platforms, programs, for quite rightful and rational actions, in all of the trouble spots of the world. Since neither the US government, nor its allies, nor the Middle East governments, nor the critics of either, nor the fighting factions in the Middle East, have so far come up with better ideas to solve their problems (which are, to a considerable degree our problems as well, especially the problems of the tiny libertarian minorities), we should loudly proclaim the need for “panarchistic interventions”. These “interventions” do not need external intervention with arms, much manpower and large budgets or blood sacrifices of official and underground soldiers and numerous unintended ones of civilians but, merely some intellectual efforts, time and energy and concentration and then an almost cost-free distribution e.g. via emails, websites, floppies and CDs. - This kind of "intervention" could come to turn numerous supposed freedom fighters in the world, themselves engaged in all too many wrongs, out of ignorance or prejudices, into genuine freedom fighters. Actually, with such a platform, common to all of them: Full autonomy, on a personal law basis, for all majorities and for all minorities, there would not be much for them to fight any longer, neither against their present governments or "foreign invaders", or among themselves. - Catholics and Protestants or members of other religions, do not fight each other on our streets or against our governments, because the freedom they do want for themselves, as members of such groups, they do already enjoy. It would be the same with full freedom for all in the political, economic and social spheres. - Well, there might be some disappointed totalitarians and authoritarians, who would, from then on, be confined to being shepherds only over their remaining flocks of voluntary victims and towards them they would then be forced to deliver more than mere empty promises and slogans to hold them. - In the Middle East (and in still too many other places) not even religious liberty or religious tolerance is sufficiently advocated and upheld. - Far less is its full equivalent in the political, economic and social spheres. In these spheres "Foreign Aid" is there, probably, needed more than any material aid. - The inevitable results of the remaining organized or legalized intolerance are continuing religiously, racist and ideologically motivated repressions, murders, atrocities, mass unemployment, inflation, stagflation, sales difficulties, "protectionism", monopolism, resulting in wide-spread poverty, all setting the scene for "freedom fighters", with their terrorist acts, civil wars, bloody revolutions, military insurrections, and for dictatorships and national war clashes. - Under full exterritorial freedom of action or experimentation for all groups of volunteers (initiated by individual secessionism and voluntary communities under personal law), those which successfully did away with e.g. involuntary unemployment and inflation, would soon see their solutions spread all over the world. - Then and thus political, economic, social, religious, racial, ethnic, ideological and, especially, monetary and financial despotism, could be brought down, almost as fast as the Berlin Wall - via such examples of freedom of action and tolerance for tolerant actions. – The easiest introduction of such alternatives might be through the recognition of all kinds of  governance systems and societies in exile, in their                          personal law or exterritorial autonomy in their host democratic host countries, all only for their present and future volunteers, as their best allies against any of the remaining tyrannical, totalitarian or despotic regimes, which posed threats to the relatively free countries. Nation-building attempts, on the territorial model, are not only follies but crimes against the numerous dissenters in each "nation" or "people". - Every day many people are still killed as human sacrifices, on the "altars" of territorial nationalism, and religious or ideological territorial monopoly claims, on their slaughtering or battle fields for human beings. – Ultimately, all those artificial "unified" nation constructs and their borders, to the extent that they are imposed upon dissenters, should be torn down, starting with the worst ones, almost unanimously condemned by the rest of the world and by their so far surviving but silenced present victims . – In democracies, after an effective enlightenment campaign, this could be easily done, step by step, quite peacefully, by allowing all individual dissenters and their voluntary associations to secede or withdraw from the local territorial impositions, based upon territorially imposed constitutions, laws, regulations, organizations and jurisdictions, allowing them to do their own things, among their own voluntary communities, all to or for themselves only and all only at their own risk and expense, under their own and diverse constitutions, laws and jurisdictions. All the opposition forces could be united - in their tolerance for autonomous diversity for all of their members and in their opposition to all who continued to attempt to dominate them territorially. - To the extent that this would be recognized, published and applied, it would bring peace, justice and freedom, as much internally, for each of the diverse and only exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, as their members want for themselves and, having achieved that, it would also bring peace between them. - Freedom includes the choice of being unfree, as much as one likes and as long as one can stand it. It permits even voluntary slavery. But in this case it can be renounced by any slave with immediate effect and without "indemnification" for the slave holder. - I would be as or even more successful in its peace, justice and freedom promoting effects as was the consistent introduction of religious freedom or religious tolerance e.g., among the "Christians", who, for all too long and all too atrociously, did fight each other, i.e., those whom their supposedly common religious dogmas said that they should love rather than kill. - They did not even clarify that their supposed primary command was not: "Thou shalt not kill!" but: "Thou shalt not murder!" - Nor did they clearly eliminate all "collective responsibility" notions from the "morality" of their religions. - Why even more successful? Before there would be concrete proofs for successes and for failures among the new and voluntary communities. They could be demonstrated as fast and as detailed as they are e.g. on profit and loss accounts. Their diverse mythologies could be ignored. One would merely judge them by their fruits. The proof would be in the pudding, not postponed into a future promised paradise on Earth or even into a supposed Heaven or Hell. - Ron Paul's suggestion of deconstructing or tearing down "built" and "uniform" nations or confining them to volunteers only, is the first from the general libertarian movement and from prominent libertarians that has come to my attention. - So far there were only all too few and all too obscure "voices in the wilderness" calling for such a general change of "policies". - Alas, even he did not yet develop it sufficiently, i.e., did not come out, quite clearly (to my knowledge), for individual sovereignty, individual secessionism or individual consumer sovereignty - towards all kinds of governments, non-governmental societies and communities as well as public services and community package deals or insurance or protection contracts, nor did he stress the exterritorial autonomy or personal law liberty that would be required. - Neither did he demand this kind of freedom for diversity and for individual choices and individual veto and decision-making power not only in e.g. Iraq and Afghanistan but in all other countries as well, including his own. – Needed is the freedom to fill your "shopping cart" or shopping or subscription list with as many or as few and as different governmental and societal services as you want for yourself. - Only then could former antagonists become quite peaceful, living and working in the same territories, side by side with all the various voluntary community members, who do their own things only to and for themselves, rather than trying to impose them upon dissenters. - But in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Ireland, etc., the need for this kind of solution is more urgent and obvious than in the already somewhat free countries. In these and at least in our remaining private choices we do already, every day, enjoy numerous private and, essentially, also panarchistic decisions and choices and diverse actions, quite independent of the choices others or the majority make for themselves. - Territorialist prejudices, shared by all the territorial governments in the world - and by most of their opponents, parties and movements, and most of their statist and territorialist subjects and by most of their victims, statist individual citizens, mere subjects and voting cattle, even most individual and minority group dissenters, drives at least some them into terrorist and guerrilla forces and into the arms of new aspiring dictators and into "democratic" or "republican" submission to numerous wrongful laws and regulations and "authorities". However, the best way to introduce this freedom in democracies might be to do this initially only for the diverse foreigners, deserters, refugees and asylum seekers in the democratic host countries, for their present volunteers there, as well as for their future volunteers in their home countries, after they have been liberated. As such these governance and societal systems in exile might become the most useful allies of democracies against all threats from despotic territorial regimes. They might be the best feature of their rightful defensive and liberating war and peace aims against all obviously criminal and all to aggressive territorial regimes remaining in the world and spread the image of a rightful alternative to these regimes among their civilian and military subjects and victims, preparing them to suddenly change sides, openly, against this regime. It could there, too, created a united front among all sufficiently tolerant opponents of the regime against it, and alternative that is much more attractive than that of a majoritarian democracy, by offering self-governance or self-management also to all dissenting minorities as. Thus any ideologically well prepared revolution or military insurrection could happen there fast and with little fighting, if any at all. Naturally, if in the somewhat free and democratic countries this kind of liberty and right were already fully realized, not only for governments and societies in exile, the influence of this example would be even stronger. - To my knowledge there are so far only a few websites in which this alternative is seriously considered: E.g.: & - JZ, in a letter response to Ron Paul’ s proposal for 3 independent communities in Iraq, 2004/5 to a circle of young freedom lovers around Jim Peron. - By now there are several more websites dedicated to panarchism and tens of thousand of results upon searches for "panarchy" and "panarchism" etc. on the Internet. - JZ, 21.1.11. – On my own I can certainly not extract all the relevant references out of them. – JZ, 28.1.13.

PANARCHISM: The network of one's friends, relations and business associates forms already a very important exterritorial society for everybody, one that is, to some extent, already autonomous, although still all too much interfered with by territorial governments. Individual secession and association are relatively free in these spheres and taken largely for granted. - JZ, 22.7.86, 23.6.01. - In orthodox Jewish and Chinese families the traditional autonomy is larger. On the other side we find the illegal or underground autonomy of Mafia families and crime syndicates. And in-between honest general smugglers, tax evaders and drug smugglers, the illegals without victims or, mostly, only voluntary victims, who, as such, are obviously not victimized - unless they are, e.g., coercively injected with drugs, which happens, all too much, in sexual slavery. - JZ, 18.9.04, 21.1.11, 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - FRIENDSHIP & FAMILY CIRCLES, RELATIVES & THEIR NETWORK

PANARCHISM: The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it.” – John Stuart Mill On Liberty. - Alas, Mill did not arrive at panarchistic conclusions from this statement. - JZ, 23. 11. 06. - To my knowledge J. S. M. never interpreted liberty in a panarchistic way. – JZ, 26.12.07.PANARCHISM AMOUNTS TO: PURSUING OUR OWN GOOD IN OUT OWN WAY

PANARCHISM: The only intelligent way to discuss politics, as Tim Leary says, is on all fours. It all comes down to territorial brawling.” - R. A. Wilson: The Illuminati Papers, p.46. - But from condemning territorial politics, to clearly becoming aware of the voluntary and exterritorial autonomy alternative is still a large step. - JZ 7.4.84, 17.4.08, 21.1.11. – EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM, PEACEFUL BECAUSE VOLUNTARY COMMUNITIES

PANARCHISM: The only way to make governments enterprising in the best sense is to turn them into voluntary and competing enterprises, fully dependent upon their voluntary members, customers, investors and suppliers. - JZ, 4.3.95, 27.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - GOVERNMENTS

PANARCHISM: The party for all parties: It favors full exterritorial autonomy for all the diverse communities made up by volunteers from among its own members. – JZ, 10.10.05, 16.10.07. - PANARCHIST PARTY

PANARCHISM: The personal law and panarchies of others around us would be like a free-of-charge, almost omnipresent and greatly varied street theatre entertainment - while certain utopian antics of one's own would provide free entertainment and instruction to others. One could expect that in such a situation at least some would be influenced or enlightened by model performances of other free people around them, practically demonstrating their alternatives. - JZ, 27.2.89, 3.4.89. – From JZ Pan AZ. - ENTERTAINMENT & EDUCATIONAL VALUE

PANARCHISM: The personal principle wants to organize nations not in territorial bodies but in simple association of persons" - Otto Bauer, Social Democracy and the Nationalities Question, 1907. - Hint by GPdB, 20.3.09 - - § 22. Das Personalitätsprinzip - EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PERSONAL LAW PRINCIPLE & PRACTICE

PANARCHISM: The political philosophy that is called libertarianism is the doctrine that every person is the owner of his own life, and that no one is the owner of anyone else's life; and that, consequently, every human being has the right to act in accordance with his own choices, unless those actions infringe on the equal liberty of other human beings to act in accordance with their choices.” - Prof. John Hospers, quoted in THE FREEMAN, August 1974. - He is one of the many who failed to draw the panarchistic conclusion from this principle, since he still advocated merely territorial “limited” government, at least in those writings of his that I read and when I met him, all too shortly, back in 1991, in L.A. His collection of books on ethics and morality was the largest private one that I had ever seen. However, apparently, it did contain nothing on the panarchist alternatives. – JZ, 9.3.86, 21.1.11. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTRY & SECESSIONISM, SELF-OWNERSHIP, EQUAL LIBERTY & RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, HUMAN RIGHTS

PANARCHISM: The present system simply wasn't geared for change of any kind; it was like wading through molasses.” - Piers Anthony, Politician, Bio of a Space Tyrant, vol. 3, p.238. - TERRITORIALISM, TRADITIONALISM, CONSERVATISM, CHANGE, PROGRESS, STATES

PANARCHISM: the principles of individual sovereignty were incompatible with the idea of a state, …” - Libertarian Handbook, 1973, p.43. - Yes, if one considers only territorial, exclusive and coercive States as States and governments, but not if one considers exterritorial, autonomous and competitive States formed only by volunteers also as States, governments or political associations. - JZ, 8.4.84, 21.1.11. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, STATE, STATISM

PANARCHISM: The principles of religious liberty or tolerance should be applied to ideologies and their organizations and practices as well, that is, likewise, only among their believers. Most ideologies are, like religions, merely composed of dogmas, articles of faith, errors, myths and prejudices, unchecked premises, wrongful assumptions and as such cannot be proven to those who disagree with them. Thus they should not be given any territorial status, privilege or monopoly, either, via territorial constitutions, laws and jurisdictions, over any dissenters. Naturally, the few relatively just and rational ideologies should be given the same freedom to be experimented with among their volunteers. It is wrongful to recognize freedom to experiment in the spheres of religion, science, technology, the arts, sports, entertainment and in private lives but to deny it in the very important spheres of political, economic and social systems and to monopolize it there in the hands of a few territorial leaders, parties, minorities, majorities or movements, most of them so far all too addicted to territorial power and ignorant or non-appreciative of the exterritorial and voluntary, rightful and peace, progress, freedom and enlightenment promoting alternatives to it. Each should have to suffer only the results of his own mistakes, including that of having chosen the wrong system for himself. Those who have learned their lessons should be free to withdraw from a previously chosen system, after an agreed-upon withdrawal period, or instantly, in case of obvious abuses, and to join any other system that is more to their liking. - JZ, 6.1.96 & 26.6.01, 21.1.11, 28.11.13. - Under panarchism even racists and extremist radicals could become peaceful neighbors - just doing their things to or for themselves, leaving all outsiders alone. - JZ, 18.9.04, 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. – THE FREEDOM & TOLERANCE OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY OR TOLERANCE FOR ALL FORMS OF STATIST & NON-STATIST & NON-TERRITORIAL BELIEFS, IDEOLOGIES & CONVICTIONS

PANARCHISM: The problem about e.g. Lebanon is that all sides think that it is a "Lebanese" affair, that Lebanon and Lebanese really exist as something more than a form of wishful thinking. What does exist in the area is a great diversity of groups and individuals and all of them are obsessed by the notion that self-government is possible only via territorial rule over all others. - JZ 9.12.83. Lebanese just suffer more acutely under the mental sickness or selective blindness that most people still suffer under. - JZ 6.5.84, 28.11.13. – PEOPLE, TERRITORIALISM, NATIONAL UNITY

PANARCHISM: The production of security and justice would be a result of market functions and transactions.” - L. P. Liggio: Charles Dunoyer and French Classical Liberalism, JLS, Sum.77, p.165. - I wonder whether he has further developed this classical liberal thought towards panarchism in others of his writings. He is one of the many libertarians now listed on Facebook, where one can look up some of their details, including, mostly, some bibliographical hints and their websites. But I would still love to see a list of all libertarians, indicating their main libertarian ideas and interests. - JZ , 21.1.11.

PANARCHISM: The progress of society like that of the individual depends, ultimately on choice.” – L. T. Hobhouse, Liberalism, p.136/37. - PROGRESS, CHOICE, INDIVIDUALISM

PANARCHISM: The punishment of wise men who refuse to take part in the affairs of government is to live under the government of unwise men.” - Plato. - All who try to govern all others living in the same territory and disagreeing with them, are very unwise and insufficiently informed. The wise ought to strive towards freedom of action or individual and group secessionism for themselves, to be able to set inspiring examples to all others, while already enjoying the benefits of individual liberties and rights among themselves. Moreover, they ought also to strive to realize also the fools' liberty to make their own mistakes, at their own expense, so they could learn sufficiently from them, while also providing a deterrent example to others. Why do so many accept these old saws, some, like this one, over 2,000 years old, without critically examining and correcting them? Territorialism statism and collectivism blinded Plato as well as it blinds most of us still. - JZ, 27.1.02, 28.11.13. - OPTING OUT, WISDOM, WISE MEN, PARTICIPATION, TERRITORIALISM, PLATO

PANARCHISM: The question of freedom and oppression cannot be easily settled once and for all. This would require that all really favored freedom and all were opposed to all kinds of oppression, violence and exploitation, i.e. that all understood the same under these terms. (This is not even true among libertarians and anarchists. See e.g. the debate on abortion, limited government and defence.) However are too diverse and contrary animals for that. Some do love their liberties, the few which they may presently enjoy undisturbed. Some want more. Few love all liberties. Some love some oppressions or wrongful compulsions. Few love all of them. Most individuals have their own odd mixtures of preferred liberties and coercion. - Consequently, the only practical and common sense approach would be to allow everyone to be as free as he wants to be and at the same time allow other people in the same territory or population to be as oppressed (and oppressive - towards voluntary followers) as they wants to be. - Instead of making plans for a single and universal, supposedly ideal society for oneself and all others, we should only draft, offer and realize plans for the supposedly ideal society for all those who think like we do, while leaving all others free to plan and enact their own tolerant societies - at their expense and risk. - Liberties to the ones, to the extent that they want or can stand them and are responsible and reasonable enough. At the same time restrictions and even oppressions for the others, to the extent that they are unreasonable enough to want them and patient enough to suffer them willingly. The decisive thing is that each individual can make his or her choice to join one or the other society (or establish the own and preferred kind) in accordance with his or her degree of enlightenment. - If that is the case, if one is not only set free to try to achieve a success in one's own social, economic and political relationships but also to work towards one's own failure, based on one's own errors, ignorance, prejudices, the own funds and risk-taking, i.e., when nobody's errors and failures are imposed upon anybody else, then, at least among some, the fastest possible degree of enlightenment and its practice will be achieved, easily, and only those, who cannot or do not learn from their own experiences, or that of others, will continue to suffer. Do not do unto others as you do not want to be done by. This old saw, the “golden rule”, in many versions, applies to statists as well as to the anarchists. And on that particular and very limited platform most members of very diverse groups can come to an agreement. Such an agreement would be something like a non-compromising compromise, something like a radical solution for all of them. Both would agree to leave each other completely alone - apart from the usual and morally unobjectionable persuasion and conversion attempts, and trades between them, which are quite peaceful and tolerable. - As long as we are not tolerant towards other tolerant and autonomous and exterritorial volunteer communities, all exterritorial with regard to the so-called law of the land, we are all to be classed among the totalitarians, no matter how anti-totalitarians we usually believe ourselves to be. - The statists say that all that is not explicitly allowed is prohibited whilst most of the anarchists say: only anarchist actions are permitted, even among volunteers. Anything that is not explicitly anarchistic (according to their own particular definitions of anarchism, which vary greatly) is not permitted by them and they even think themselves entitled to utilized force or systematic non-violent struggle methods against dissenters. In other words, they do not want to allow others to make their own mistakes, to follow their own errors at their own expense and risk. They, too, are fanatics or authoritarians in their way. They are not in favor of freedom of action for all but only in favor of the kind of anarchist actions and institutions and rules that they do approve of. Their choice of anarchist actions etc. is right for them - and only for them. They become wrong when they cross personal and property boundaries in attempts to impose their beliefs upon dissenters of whatever persuasion. Anarchists - and others who do not act aggressively - ought indeed not to be dominated. But people, who do love to dominate others (and be it only via an exclusive system of anarchism of one brand or the other), do each other no wrong when they dominate or attempt to dominate each other or submit to each other. They act out their self-chosen costly and dangerous rituals and sacrifices. Towards such people we can do no more than we can do towards religious zealots or mentally defective people who act aggressively towards each other. We can try to advise them. We can try to persuade them. We can try to ignore them - as long as they do not interfere with us. But if they attack us then we have to attempt to defend ourselves effectively and rightfully against them, even to dominate them, until they become peaceful and tolerant enough to be left alone. - We have already recognized freedom of action or experimentation as essential in natural sciences. We know that experimentation is likely to be successful in the long run only if one can make also experiments which may fail or even are likely to fail. Success and failure are inseparately interwoven in experimentation. Even an unsuccessful experiment is successful in eliminating one option in the eyes of a rational person. One can learn truths and rightful actions often only and sometimes only by being permitted to engage in wrong actions - as long as one can do so at one's own expense, i.e. wrongs only oneself or, in minor matters, can be held proportionally responsible and can and will offer indemnification asked for and juridically decided. But to impose any social, economic or political theory upon others, forcing them to act as if these theories were right, provable and accepted, is as wrong, if not worse, than imposing one's religion upon others. - On this point I repeat myself over and over again. It is a point of such immense importance and also a point so widely ignored (under all kinds of popular prejudices and rationalizations), and a point upon which now our liberties, our very lives, even the survival of mankind depends, that I believe it cannot be reiterated too often - until it is widely enough accepted. - - You may hold that the State is a defender of property and profit. I hold that it is the enemy of property and profit. - Establish for both of us freedom to try and prove our case. - I am in favor of you eliminating property and profit in any way you like - among your own followers, on a voluntary basis. But I contend that you have no right to act like the State or like intolerant anarchists do towards dissenters and nonconformists, who do not agree with their point of view. We have neither the authority nor the right to impose property and profit relationships between you - upon you. - You have no right to impose a condition of losses and expropriation upon us, i.e. to deprive us of profits and property relationships between us (and against outside claimants) which we voluntarily and non-aggressively arranged, by freely entered contracts with people who, in this respect at least, think like we do. - It has been shown and stated numerous times that voluntarism is the essence of anarchism, that it is the essence of anything that makes common sense (at least in the long run and for informed people), that is realistic and practical in anarchism, also, that voluntarism is the most important factor of anything that might possibly be described as a good in a limited government (one by consent), if such an entity exists or is possible at all, on a territorial basis, for then it is already all too unlimited through its territorialism. - You love your kind of land reform. Let me have mine - or none. - You love your kind of money or none. Let me have mine. - You like your kind of love life or family life, let me have mine. - You like your kind of exchanges or barter, let me have mine. - Before attempting to meddle, even with the best anarchistic intentions, always ask yourselves: Is there a tolerant alternative? Then, I believe, you will find out that there are very few human relationships where a tolerant solution is not possible. - This applies, in my opinion, even to wars and revolutions and terrorism. - But I do agree with you that there are some things (intolerant actions) that we cannot tolerate, which are really intolerable - but they are far less numerous than is commonly believed. (E.g.: either right or left-hand drive, quarantine for germ carriers.) - Under freedom we cannot tolerate intolerant actions. Continuous interruption of free speech of one by others we cannot tolerate. By all means, let us find out and list and agree upon these necessary, rational, rightful restrictions - but let it be in full awareness of how few and limited they are and full of suspicion towards our own so far unquestioned acceptance of restrictions of liberties. - JZ, undated, probably from a draft of a letter to syndicalist anarchists. – By all means, sum all this or part of it in one or several hard-hitting slogans or aphorisms or short answers. I can’t. – JZ, 14.3.09,  28.11.13.

PANARCHISM: The question still remains whether consent of the majority can substitute for the consent of all. Hobbes sought only to justify the original instituting of a government. Locke, however, does not believe that ancestors can bind future generations and does not believe that members of a living generation can contractually enslave themselves. Therefore the legitimacy of the government depends not only on consent to its founding but also on consent to its ordinary on-going operations.” - Williamson M. Evers, JLS, Sum. 77, 189. - CONSENT, MAJORITIES, VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: The race could save one-half its wasted labor // would each reform himself (*) and spare his neighbor.” - Frank Putnam, Reform. - (*) and like-minded people only and spare all others. - JZ, 5.6.82. – REFORMS, VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: The radical, exterritorial and voluntaristic solution of panarchism (polyarchism, multiarchism, experimental freedom, etc.) is the only one with the potential to stop the wars and revolutions everywhere, in all the trouble spots in the world. Almost everyone took so far for granted that there must be a uniform territorial solution for all the remaining political, economic and social problems that people are still fighting about. It exists no more so than it exists for all the different religions, ideologies and philosophies. Among as dissenting critters as human being are and living as intermixed with each other, only full exterritorial autonomy for all volunteer groups CAN work rightly and effectively at all, yet it is not even a topic in many public discussion, in spite of its many historical and few remaining traits. - JZ, n.d. & 27.1.02, 21.1.11. – EXTERRITORIALISM, PERSONAL LAW, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS

PANARCHISM: The readings of history and anthropology in general give us no reason to believe that societies have built-in self-preservation systems. And therefore we can't say that man will be sensible enough not to destroy himself. He never has been sensible enough not to destroy himself but he lived in small groups so that when he destroyed himself he didn't destroy everybody. So the necessity for new inventions for the conduct of the world cannot possibly be over-emphasized.” - Margaret Mead, Conversations with Henry Brandon, NEW REPUBLIC, June 23, 1958, in George Seldes, The Great Quotations. - It looks as if even she has overlooked the exterritorial autonomy and personal law tradition. It will be a long time before the "social sciences" really deserve the name of sciences. - Maximum freedom for all does, obviously, maximize self-preservation options. - When it comes to war and peace decisions and other aspects of international territorial politics, then many war-making factors, not maximum freedom, peace and justice promoting ones, have been realized even in "democracies", because they do all still represent territorial, centralistic, collectivistic and coercive governmentalism. ABC mass murder devices are the extreme product of such policies and institutions and yet, in the public mind and in the minds of most scholars, they are still not linked to territorialism! The democratic or republican States like the US & UK (with a strictly and constitutionally limited monarch as a safety valve at the top) were even the first to develop and acquire over-kill stockpiles of these mass-murder and anti-people "weapons". - As strong are wrongful notions of territorialism and of collective responsibility even in them! Nevertheless even these great wrongs and flaws are not yet a major topic of public debate and criticism. Democracies and their "great leaders", too, are ready for mass murder and mass destruction, laying whole countries to waste in the pursuit of their territorial "policies", powers and interests. - JZ, 26.6.01, 8.9.04, 18.9.04, 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - DECENTRALIZATION & THE EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE, NWT


PANARCHISM: The repeated theme of all human history is that man would rather die - even by torture - than give up their sincerely held beliefs.” - John Campbell, ANALOG, Dec. 66. - Consequently, if they are only applied to the individuals concerned, they should be left free to suffer or benefit from them themselves! - JZ, 21.9.82.

PANARCHISM: The revolution (1776) was this idea : 'Each person is a sovereign individual with certain inalienable...rights ...' - Vincent A. Drosdik, III, quoted in THE FREEMAN, 7/73. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

PANARCHISM: The right not to join, to ignore, to refuse to associate with others, to deny membership or admission to others, to deny them access to your property, are all aspects of the right to associate and to disassociate. If some groups do not welcome you in their ranks, then you cannot rightly complain. But you do have the right to set up or join another society operating on the same principles and practices and to run it, if you can, so well, that you could come to compete the other society out of existence, which refused to accept you as a member. You may refuse or discount their money and they may refuse or discount yours - but both of you have the right to issue your own money (exchange media and value standards) and to seek voluntary acceptors for it. You have the right to practise and develop your own code of morality or ethics, as far as you can, among like-minded people, your own constitutions, laws, regulations and juridical decisions etc., but not the right to force them upon any peaceful non-members, who have left you alone. One law for all people in a territory means legalized aggression by some people in that territory upon others. - JZ, n.d. & 24.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ.

PANARCHISM: The right of individuals to secede from any territorial State and to establish or to join any statist or non-governmental society that is only exterritorially autonomous, for all its volunteers, will see to it that States and societies will rise and fall only on their merits and demerits, as perceived by their individual members. No form of social organization will any longer be forcefully and exclusively upheld, neither by compulsory membership, nor by compulsory taxes nor by exclusive legislative and juridical powers over whole territories and all their inhabitants. - JZ 5.4.84, 16.4.08. – VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM VS. TERRITORISM

PANARCHISM: The right of revolution is an inherent one. When people are oppressed by their government, it is a natural right they enjoy to relieve themselves of the oppression, if they are strong enough, whether by withdrawal from it, or by overthrowing it and substituting a government more acceptable.” - Ulysses S. Grant: Personal Memoirs, quoted in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. – He, almost certainly, had only territorial secessions in his mind. - JZ, n.d. - SECESSIONISM

PANARCHISM: the right of secession is paramount and indisputable.” - Paul Berman: Quotations from the Anarchists, Introduction, p.9. - Did he have also exterritorial secession in mind or only geographical or territorial secession? The latter always provokes great resistance from local dissenters, minority groups and advocates of larger national territories. – JZ, 17.4.08. – EXTERRITORIALISM & VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: The right of secession would seem a better safeguard for liberty, especially if every individual person were to possess it on his own behalf. If one does not grant this right, then one would seem to have removed a key safeguard for liberty ...” - William Stoddard, "reason", 3/74. – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

PANARCHISM: The Right to Quit - a chapter heading by L. E. Read in "Having My Way, p.152.

PANARCHISM: The right to trade includes the right not to trade.” - Stormy Mon: A Liberty Book, p.35. - The right to be free includes the right not to be free - according to one's choice. - JZ, free after P. E. de Puydt in "Panarchy". – Just like the right to emigrate implies also a right not to emigrate but to stay in one’s native country instead. – JZ, 16.4.08.

PANARCHISM: The selfish wish to govern is often mistaken for a holy zeal in the cause of humanity.” - Elbert Hubbard, The Philistine, Vo. v, p. 194. - Anarchists, you do not want to govern yourself or be governed yourself - nevertheless, you want your anarchist system to "govern" others, too! - JZ, 7.7.82, 7.4.84. – INTOLERANCE, ZEAL, FUNDAMENTALISM, ANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, AUTHORITARIANISM, REFORMISM, REVOLUTION, TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: the social structures they have been conditioned to think of as timeless and immutable are collapsing; and that new systems of social organization – grounded in peace and liberty – must be found.” – Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 88. – I wonder, whether he has found it as yet, like a few others have, by now. – JZ, 28.11.13. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, TERRITORIALISM, STATE

PANARCHISM: The solution to most of the remaining problems in the world lies in all of us becoming contractors of experimental communities, serving or being served, and trying out all kinds of services and solutions, quite independent from similar efforts of others, convinced that freedom of action and experimentation will lead to the solution of problems, if they are solvable at all, or to the sufficient demonstration of those solutions already found by some. - JZ, 25.10.00. 2.2.02. - FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, PUBLIC SERVICES, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, FREE ENTERPRISE

PANARCHISM: The Soviet regime represented a high-pressure fusion with the territorial State. What could defuse and deflate such totalitarian regimes is a kind of unpressurized fission - or individual and group secessionism, combined with a new competition from alternative governments and societies, all of volunteers only, none of them with a territorial monopoly claim and practice. Then and relatively soon only their own volunteers would be left for them to rule over and exploit. - JZ, 26.2.84, 4.4.84, 16.4.08, 21.1.11. - One might also compare individual secessionism with evaporation. How powerful it can be is shown by evaporation from the seas – and rain and its effects on land. – It can even lead to many floods on land, after heavy rainfalls. - I doubt that massive exterritorial secessions and voluntary re-associations will or even can have any catastrophic results. - JZ, 14.3.09, 21.1.11. – I believe that this process can be greatly accelerated against all despotic governments through the recognition of governments and societies in exile, all only for their present and future volunteers, as perhaps the most  important allies for all somewhat democratic and republican governments, even though the have not yet been transformed into panarchies, polyarchies or freely competitive governance systems themselves. That might only happen after the governments and societies in exile have achieved their diverse objectives for all of them, against the remaining despotic territorial regimes. – JZ, 28.11.13.

PANARCHISM: The spirit of the herd should rule within the herd - but not beyond it.” - Nietzsche: The Will to Power. – It may rule in one or some panarchies but certainly should not rule in all of them. – JZ, 17.4.08. – As long as members of a “herd” selected it for themselves and remain free to secede from it, they have no reason to complain about its antics. – JZ, 14.3.09. – Even elephant herds do split up into those of females and their offspring and the elephant bulls, for most of the time.– Other nomadic and grazing animals do also split into numerous herds, and so do swarms of birds. No governmental legislation against secessions for them. It took territorial power addicts and their all too obedient followers, to invent and perpetuate the territorial States. – How many of us are not descendants of  slaves or serfs? - JZ, 28.11.13. – HERD INSTINCT & INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

PANARCHISM: The split between only two opposite groups of believers is one of the all too many false alternatives. Their disagreements could be avoided by a covenant between them, one that would e.g. concede monarchism for monarchists and republicanism for republicans, no matter where they lived in a territory. Naturally, this would have to be supplemented by the rule: Any kind of monarchism for any kind of monarchist and any kind of republicanism for any kind of republican. Moreover, one would have to add: Any kind of ism or utopia for any kind of adherent or utopian. - JZ, 5.11.99 & 28.6.01, 21.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - MONARCHISM & REPUBLICANISM, TWO PARTY SYSTEMS, POLARIZATION OF FALSE OPPOSITES OFFERED AS THE ONLY ALTERNATIVES TO EACH OTHER, VOLUNTARISM VS. ALL KINDS OR WRONGFUL TERRITORIAL COERCION & COMPULSION

PANARCHISM: The standard misconception of "panarchy" in SF space novels and stories is: “Everyone would go to the Earth of their desires, the Earth that really suited them.” - Robert Sheckley, “The Store of the World” in "Store of Infinity". Thus, by some of these futurists not only whole countries are territorially monopolized but even whole planets! And such offers are considered as offering full freedom of choice! – JZ, n.d. – Somewhat panarchistic science fiction novels and stories are still all too rare. – JZ, 28.11.13.

PANARCHISM: The State, any form of it except the territorial one – for all those who want it for themselves. That should be one of the main demands of consistent anarchists and libertarians, who, using the same kind of individual choice, would want to establish their desired degrees of liberty among themselves, quite undisturbed by the statists. – JZ, 12.2.98, 11.1.99. – From JZ, Pan AZ. – STATISM, ANARCHISM, MUTUAL TOLERANCE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY & PERSONAL LAW CHOICES FOR ALL GROUPS OF VOLUNTEERS

PANARCHISM: The stated objectives of 'anarchists' and advocates of 'limited government' would both be achieved if the whole market in a given territory adopted liberal secession policies (balanced against reasonable extraterritoriality doctrines).” - Phillip Jacobson, THE CONNECTION 100. - SECESSIONISM

PANARCHISM: The stateless persons to whom K.H.Z. appealed, shortly after WW II, with a proposal for a international league, for all of them, in a brochure that he published (*), were not stateless by individual choice but by territorial governments having revoked their nationality. They were “excommunicated” or displaced persons or refugees, and, at the same time, and almost everywhere, largely treated as people without human rights and liberties. (Often herded into refugee or DP concentration camps. At almost any time after WW II there were about 10 to 25 million captives or stateless persons, mostly refugees, of this kind.) Naturally, they hated that conditions and did not aspire to a federation of stateless persons but, rather, wanted to become members and subjects of one of the better territorial States. Ideologically they were still territorial statists. Therefore, that kind of project for stateless persons almost had to fail. – They were not individual and group secessionists. A league of stateless persons and of dissidents and members of various more or less suppressed groups of minorities, that would aim to gain and maintain for them all their individual rights and liberties, including full exterritorial autonomy, for their communities of volunteers, under personal laws, would be quite another matter. It would have at least the potential to become the most powerful (in a rightful sense) federation of the world. It could succeed, gradually or even suddenly, in dissolving all territorial States and replacing them by communities of volunteers, all under personal laws only. Such an aim could sufficiently unite, as allies, even those, who otherwise, under territorialism would be irreconcilable enemies. – To assure its success, it would have to have a full employment program via full monetary and financial freedom for all its members, without threatening the jobs or businesses of the natives, but clearly adding more jobs and more business. Via quite rightful governments in exile and quite rightful war and peace aims, such a federation could also become the most valuable ally against all remaining dictatorships. One of its off-shoots might also be an international federation of all local rightful militias of volunteers, all of whom would only have one common aim: the protection of all genuine individual rights and liberties, expressed in the best human rights declaration so far compiled and published. – (*) Der Weltverband der Staatenlosen und Du, (The World Federation of the Stateless Persons and You), 1946, 19 pages, with English translation and comments, 14 pages, reproduced in PEACE PLANS 388, on microfiche. -JZ, 23.1.06, 18.10.07, 21.1.11. - & WORLD LEAGUE OF STATELESS PERSONS, AS PROPOSED BY K. H. ZUBE, PANARCHIES & A FEDERATION FOR ALL KINDS OF PANARCHIES & PANARCHISTS, FULL EMPLOYMENT THROUGH MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM, MILITIA, AN IDEAL HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION

PANARCHISM: The Statists want a society in which there are only rulers and ruled. - Do you only strive for the absolute alternative, in which there are no rulers and no ruled at all? - Then you would be as intolerant as the first Protestants were and as some Atheists still are. Or does your desire not to rule others and not to be ruled by others lead you only to a voluntaryist society in which you can live, voluntarily, under anarchism (of your preferred type), undisturbed by the statists and anarchists of different persuasions , while the statists live, voluntarily, under the form of statism preferred by them, undisturbed by any anarchists? - I can understand why the statists do at present want to interfere with the anarchists. I also can understand it when anarchists are opposed to any territorial statism. But what I cannot understand is why the anarchists of the present and the future would want to interfere with those statists who merely wish to maintain or establish statism among themselves. Admittedly, presently there are few if any such statists. But genuine anarchistic propaganda could and should spread this tolerant attitude even among statists. It does not have to attempt the close to impossible task to persuade all statists to accept anarchism for themselves. - If you do not want to dominate others then you should not even want to impose anarchism upon others - but rather allow them to live under the government of their dreams or individual choice. - Your rights authorize you only to defend your own liberty against the statists, not to impose your kind of liberty upon them, no more so than you could claim the right to impose your ideas upon, let us say, an Aboriginal society or a Chinese society. - From the moment on that you cease to be a threat to their way of life and merely insist that they, in turn, do not threaten your way of life, you reduce the number of your enemies to a minimum and you do, at the same time, get a much better chance to obtain your independence. - JZ 7.7.82, 17.4.08, 21.1.11.

PANARCHISM: The tyrant has 'nothing more than the power you confer upon him to destroy you’.” - Albert the Unknown in THE LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION, 28.12.75. - Albert the U. does there question this statement but I would add: The proper secession of a single individual is already the beginning of the end of all tyrannies. - JZ ,76. – Later he called himself: Diogenes of Panarchia, to help promote discussion of the panarchist alternative. – JZ, 17.4.08. – TYRANNY, POWER, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

PANARCHISM: the ultimate decision about what is accepted as right and wrong will be made not by individual human wisdom but by the disappearance of the groups that have adhered to the ‘wrong’ beliefs.” - F. A. Hayek. - It will be made by the individual human wisdom of individual secessionists or one-man-revolutionaries, doing their own things, at their own expense and risk. What remains artificially, legally, coercively and monopolistically preserved, namely territorial institutions, may go on for decades to centuries, in spite of all the wrongs and damages it inflicts. - JZ, 11.2.02. - Unless they do self-destruct, together with all their innocent victims, in e.g. a general nuclear holocaust, using the modern and scientific "marvels" of mass murder devices, for which all too many even of the democratic States are all too well prepared. - JZ, 22.1.11, 28.11.13. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, ABOLITIONISM, NWT

PANARCHISM: The ultimate in voluntaryism is not an exclusive and uniform voluntaryism, be it of some socialist or libertarian kind, but rather tolerant voluntaryism - which embodies tolerance even towards those statists who are not voluntaryists internally, i.e. towards their voluntary members of their own statist communities (who have voluntarily renounced all or many of their human rights for the time being) but at least do no longer claim a territorial monopoly towards all those, who had seceded from their formerly ruling territorial States. They would have to become as tolerant with their statism as monks and nuns, doing their things in their monastery and nunneries and, outside of them, with tolerant service offers, have become towards outsiders. This tolerant voluntaryism makes voluntaryism in the most important spheres, those of political, social and economic systems, fit for followers of all isms and, moreover, renders all of them non-aggressive - to the extent that they are built and remain upon - this basic voluntarism and tolerance. - JZ, 6.4.84, 22.1.11, 28.11.13.

PANARCHISM: The value of constitutions does not lie in the assumption that the people are able to rule themselves best. That is only very rarely the case. No, they grant everybody the right to administer their own affairs themselves, whether good or bad.” - Grillparzer, 1844. – At least he did not merely write about constitutions for “the people” but, instead, had “everybody” in mind. – Was he elsewhere also explicit about individual secessionism, voluntarism and genuine self-government? – JZ, 17.4.08.

PANARCHISM: The various forms of State socialism and capitalism are only various forms of religion and their followers and organizations do not deserve any more privileges than any church has. But they are also entitled to no less rights and liberties than any church or sect has in a relatively free society, or any atheistic, humanistic and rationalistic association. – JZ, 9.3.86.

PANARCHISM: The very term "competing governments" excludes territorial governments - for territorial governments are geographical monopolists. Monopolists do not freely compete. They excluded competition for all those who do not possess a territorial monopoly. All of them do more or less oppress at least minorities in what they consider to be "their" territory and "their" "territorial integrity". - JZ, 26.2.01, 11.2.02. – The term “competing governance” lends itself less to contradictions and misunderstandings, I believe. – JZ, 28.11.13. -  COMPETING GOVERNANCE & TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: The voluntaryist watchwords. Now take as your watchwords: - Establish Free Trade in everything; face all competition fearlessly - don't try to escape from it by Chinese walls, or dodges, privileges, and artificial restrictions; let all peaceful faculties be unrestricted and unregulated; make liberty the universal basis of your thoughts and actions; remember always that laws are force, that the passing of laws means the use and the sanction of this evil thing - force; say resolutely to yourselves: - 'force is destructive of moral rights; force is no true remedy for existing evils'; refuse to use force to advantage yourselves; refuse to use force to attack vices, or to fight moral crusades, or to carry out any sanitary reforms, which pass beyond the restraint of actions that directly injure person or property; hate and despise force in all its forms; trust resolutely to moral weapons; fight with voice and pen the peaceful battle of persuasion; reason with and teach men - don't compel them; remember that a convinced man is worth everything, a compelled man is worth nothing; don't build up great governing machines with any powers, however slight, of compulsion lodged in the body of them - they will not remain your servants, they will always tend to become your masters; avoid all systems that make for uniformity, and that put all men, the good and bad alike, under the same regulations; favour difference - 'progress is difference'; avoid all war - war between nations, war between classes, war between rich and poor, war between employer and employed; seek peaceful solutions by allowing every individual concerned to act after his own fashion; for the sake both of peace and of liberty, don't seek to mass men together in great fighting organizations; follow after peace with a whole heart, remembering that peace is the blessed child of liberty, and apart from liberty is only a dream; don't be a politician, for a politician too often lives by stirring up prejudice and passion and by persuading people to use compulsion as their easiest and cheapest instrument; take no share in any action that divides the nation into two great factions, always fighting and quarrelling with each other; don't help the majority to force their opinions or interests upon the minority; don't be content to belong either to the party of those who compel or of those who are compelled; don't attack property in any form, even of the richest men (for?- JZ) to attack any form of property, honestly acquired, is to weaken all forms of it; let there be no uncertainty for any living man about the reward of his labors, but keep the possession and enjoyment of property - this great basis of all human effort - perfectly steady and assured; get rid of all existing public debt; submit to severe voluntary taxation for a time (*) so as to be rid of this curse for ever; let no penny ever be raised again on compulsory conditions; don't believe in the common compulsory fund, which is the devil's favorite instrument for teaching us all to quarrel with and hate and fear each other; never mortgage the faculties of your fellow-man for services, which he may not perhaps desire to have rendered to him; never deal with the faculties of any single man, living or unborn, as if they belonged to you and not to him, or place compulsory burdens on those who should exercise their own choice; above all, never allow any man to be used compulsorily, in purse or person, for war purposes; work heartily in the cause of voluntary taxation, since voluntary taxation means not only to escape from State bondage and the victory of free faculties but means the ending of a long series of oppressions of each other - oppressions sometimes petty, sometimes almost destructive of energy and life - means the beginning of a long series of friendly services, joyfully exchanged, means the spirit of peace instead of the spirit of war, means a far truer and higher recognition of our common fellowship; train and fit yourselves to serve the Voluntary State generously; do all in your power to make it a good and efficient national instrument (**); whilst you employ it as a force instrument - strictly limited to force purposes - with great moderation and scrupulousness, employ it, as a Voluntary instrument and dependent upon Voluntary contributions, freely and without grudging, wherever it can perform useful public services or assist in our common civilization; do not be persuaded for a moment that you cannot learn to contribute by gift or service under persuasion instead of compulsion; organize great national holidays for the collection of public revenue; but on no plea whatsoever give any man forcible control over the smallest part of your property, faithfully remembering that your property is the outcome of your faculties, that it has been won in the sweat of your brow, that it is a very part of you, and that he who rules your property also rules you.” - Auberon Herbert, A Voluntaryist Appeal. - YOU try to separate out short slogans from this long proclamation and to eliminate all his remaining flaws. It seems that he did not really consider several voluntary States and communities in the same territory but rather one ideal only, voluntarily accepted and supported by all, and very limited in its authority. Individual secessionism is not clearly indicated either, as an option, nor is panarchistic consequences. But there is much that is true and good in this extremely long sentence. Ideally, it should perhaps be turned into a point by point platform with comments upon each point. - Since I want to alphabetize these slogans, thoughts and aphorisms, and lack the time, motivation and energy for this at present, I will not try to do so but rather invite my few readers to attempt this. (The rest got lost in the sorting. – Sorry, but it got all to much beyond a mere slogan anyhow. - JZ, 9.2.08.) - (*) The public debt is an "investment" in tax slaves and as such it should be renounced altogether. - (**) He wrongly stuck to the territorial nation concept. - - Nor did he clearly enough distinguish between the merely defensive and the aggressive use of force. - JZ, 22.1.11. - TERRITORIALISM, FREE TRADE IN EVERYTHING, PUBLIC SERVICES, COMPETITION, BARRIERS, PRIVILEGES, RESTRICTIONS, REGULATIONS, LAWS, FORCE, COMPULSION, LIBERTY, PERSUASION, REASON, NONVIOLENCE, WAR, CLASS WARFARE, PEACE, MILITARY ORGANIZATION, POLITICIANS, PARTIES, RULE, PROPERTY

PANARCHISM: The whole of history, if viewed without a territorial bias, is full of evidence that you cannot trust the machineries of territorial States to keep the peace, uphold justice and freedom or minimize wars or promote progress and wealth, sufficiently, rather than obstruct and prevent them. Territorial States are Warfare States, oppressive institutions rather than liberating ones and all their “wars against poverty”, fights against unemployment and against drugs do rather spread poverty, unemployment and drugs than abolish them. I do not know of any creative or productive sphere in which territorial governments have always acted rightly and efficiently, i.e., provided a better service and at lower prices than free and competitive private or cooperative alternative suppliers could have provided, had they been free to do so. The services of territorial governments cost, as a rule, as I believe David Friedman has pointed out, twice to three times as much as competitively supplied private services cost and are, as a rule, not worth their enforced prices, including the subsidies that are involved, at the expense of taxpayers. As inefficient panarchies would rapidly fail, i.e. run out of members, customers and subscribers and would  thus go bankrupt, as they should. – JZ, 9.2.98, 10.1.99, 22.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - THE HISTORICAL EXPERIENCE

PANARCHISM: The world is but a canvas to the imagination.” - Henry David Thoreau – Are we, under territorialism, as free to be the smiths of our own fate, to run our own shows, to make our own political, economic and social experiments, just like a painter experiments on his canvas? – We are free to paint our house red but should not be free to paint the world, a country or its population red, especially not with blood. - JZ, 7.8.08, 22.1.11. – TERRITORIALISM VS. EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, DIFFERENT CHOICES BY & FOR DISSENTERS

PANARCHISM: The worst crime for most panarchies might come to be an offence committed against a non-member. - JZ, 27.6.01. – From JZ Pan AZ. - CRIME

PANARCHISM: Their institutions and laws should not be binding for you and yours should not be binding for them - unless either of you coercively interferes with the other side. - A mere criticism, joke or insult, even when the criticized or insulted consider it to be a "blasphemy", does not constitute an interference. - Let their "deity" take revenge, not those, who pretend to represent it or are foolish enough to believe in it. - My deity is reason and it tells me that those who take their faith as an excuse to try to murder "faithless" people do thereby condemn themselves to death in defensive actions against them. - Alas, the reasonable people have so far failed to declare their reasons in an ideal declaration of all genuine individual rights and liberties so that some barbaric and primitive dogmas still prevail in all too many heads. – JZ, 18.12.83, 22.1.11. - INTOLERANCE, BLASPHEMY

PANARCHISM: there are indeed better governments than democracies, namely, private, voluntary institutions which offer their services on a free market, and which may be dictatorial, democratic, fascist, monarchical, and so on, depending on the wishes of their customers. To say that these kinds of organizations could exist as purely voluntary associations is not at all paradoxical; such organizations already exist, usually (but by no means always) in the guise of religious institutions. I suppose this puts me somewhere near the so-called 'agorist’ camp, to borrow Dance's borrowed term.” - David B. Suits, OPTION, 4/78. - A list of all those, who made somewhat panarchistic remarks and are still alive and active, ought to be compiled, on the road to a world-wide panarchist association or federation. Internet searches for them will, mostly, reveal at least their websites. - JZ, 22.1.11.

PANARCHISM: There are people who think they know the only right way to live. They are so certain that their own way, their own system of religion or government or trade, is the only right one, that they want to make everyone else become like them. They hate anyone who differs from them...” - Richard A. Lupoff, One Million Centuries, p.185. – The prolonged and enforced existence of territorial States has led to this intolerant mentality. The cure lies in letting dissenters, opponents and enemies secede and suffer the supposedly worst (in the opinion of the regime they secede from), namely: living under their own systems, the one they believe to be ideal, thus establishing an ad hominem poetic justice which comes close to true justice in these cases. Moreover, even with such a mentality, people will come to appreciate panarchy and will become mollified by it - once they are in the minority and the panarchic road is the only one towards the realization or maintenance of their dreams for themselves. Then the disappointments to be expected from any particular new or old system will tend to settle them. They will tend to reduce their fanaticism to the bearable minimum, where it acts only self-destructively. - That convictions are often not as strong as is widely believed can be demonstrated when one proposes bets, starting with small amounts and proceeding to large ones. The ones with enough conviction for a 10 or 100 dollar bet have often not enough for one of 1000 or 10 000 dollars. Panarchism might also be considered as such a betting system. - The reformers would have to put their money and their labor where their mouth is. - JZ 7.4.84, 17.4.08, 22.1.11. – TERRITORIALISM, INTOLERANCE, STATISM, TOLERANCE, BETTING ON ONE’S IDEALS OR BELIEFS, VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: There is no common cause possible with so far coercive expropriators, equalizers and levelers, except on the basis of tolerance for tolerant actions. This means here, that they may and ought to confine all their panaceas and utopian schemes to their voluntary followers only. They should be free to introduce and maintain their schemes among themselves, even when they constitute only a small minority. They could be rightfully forced to do so, by any means, if they persisted with their aggressive, monopolistic and territorial policies in the pursuit of their own ideal against the rights, liberties, wishes and efforts of all others. - JZ, 4 Sep. 89, 10.10.89, 22.1.11.

PANARCHISM: There is no ideal territorial constitution for all and there cannot be. To each the constitution of his or her own choice. - JZ 21.7.87. - CONSTITUTIONALISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, TOLERANCE VS. INTOLERANCE

PANARCHISM: There is no one who does not love liberty. But the just demands it for all, the unjust one only for himself. (“Es gibt keinen Menschen, der nicht die Freiheit liebte; aber der Gerechte fordert sie fuer alle, der Ungerechte nur fuer sich allein.”) – Börne, Gesammelte Schriften, II: Der Narr im Weissen Schwan, 2. Kap. - Since all want different liberties to different degrees and some liberties not at all, all should also, as De Puydt clearly demanded, have the liberty to choose different degrees of un-freedom for themselves. – Making freedom, anarchism, libertarianism or any other ideal dependent upon either the acceptance by all, or the imposition upon all, does make the realization of most ideals difficult to impossible and is to that extent self-defeating. While one should always be free to recommend any kind of radical liberty or right to all potential “customers” or members, one should almost never impose any of them. There are some exceptions, though: E.g. the right for individuals to secede from a totalitarian regime or from e.g., an intolerant Islamic church or sect may be imposed. We might also come, one day, to reach the degree of moral consensus, that would induce us to prevent, as far as possible, parents from artificially and unnecessarily aborting their unborn children. (E.g. via adoptions or embryo transfers to a willing mother.) The right to establish exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities is also one that could be rightfully imposed. The same applies to the right to establish, organize and train rightful militias, rightfully armed, for the protection of individual rights and liberties. Tyrannicide could also be rightfully institutionalized, as it was, to a limited extent in the past. The discussion of natural and of individual human rights and liberties is hardly finalized as yet. – JZ, 9.1.99, 22.1.11, 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - FREEDOM & JUSTICE FOR ALL – TO THE EXTENT THAT INDIVIDUALS WANT THEM FOR THEMSELVES

PANARCHISM: There is no particular reason why many protective agencies might not be formed. - GEGENSCHEIN 34. – Panarchies should not be confined to provide only alternative protective agencies. The range of the institutions and personal law varieties, which they offer, should be up to their voluntary members. – JZ, 16.4.08, 28.11.13.

PANARCHISM: There is no such thing as a non-aggressive government.” - J. Michael Oliver, THE LIBERTARIAN FORUM, 7/77. – While territorial government amounts all too often to organized aggression, their opposites, namely exterritorial panarchic societies of volunteers only, are organized tolerance, at least towards tolerant people and organizations. – Against the intolerant ones they are likely to come to offer better defence and protection than any territorial State did so far, simply because of their voluntary and competitive nature. - JZ, 7.4.84, 22.1.11, 28.11.13. - While J. M. O.’s remark is true for most of the larger territorial States – with Switzerland and Sweden being among the exceptions, it is certainly not true for most of the territorial mini-States, like e.g. Monaco and the Vatican. – JZ, 16.4.08, 28.11.13.

PANARCHISM: There is not a single good reason why any group of people should be allowed to organize in territorial States, thus dominating all those of its population, who do not agree with them. We have given up the spleen of tribal and religious territorialism. We ought to similarly give up the spleen of exclusive and coercive territorial sovereignty and of the uniformly imposed political, economic and social systems that go with them, no matter how "democratically" they are imposed. - JZ, 17 Sep. 89, 10.10.89, 22.1.11. – DEMOCRACY, TERRITORIALISM, COUNTRIES, PEOPLE, NATIONS, VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: There ought to be no territorial sovereignty in the monetary sphere either but, instead, full exterritorial autonomy among volunteers, in their own payment-communities - if, instead of the most wrongful and harmful (the central banks), the most just and useful payment and clearing as well as credit systems and value standards are to arise and prevail, by voluntary adoption in free competion. - JZ, n.d. & 24.6.01, 22.1.11, 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - MONETARY FREEDOM, GRESHAM'S LAW, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

PANARCHISM: There will be peace when all live in a “world” of their own. – Free after a pop song heard on 10.10.93. – That can be achieved only once we are no longer confined to territorial choices only, which are “choices” for the abstract of “the people”, not for free individuals, unless they are prepared to subject themselves to emigration and submission to another territorial government. – JZ, 9.1.99. - The "alienation" of many people from the present world is sometimes even expressed during love-making by remarks like the one quoted in the above heading. Lovers often feel they have dropped out of the real world into a world of their own. At least for some moments they can feel that they have dropped out of the world with its numerous troubles. Presently, the real world does not give them that chance, for as long as they like - except in their private actions. Panarchism would give them the chance in their public activities, personal law choices and preferred institutions and systems as well. Unfortunately, in the above instances, the instincts and feelings involved do not help them to clarify their ideas on the right to drop out of the State or to ignore it, in all other matters as well. - JZ, 8.9.04, 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - PEACE & "A WORLD OF ONE’S OWN", ALIENATION & LOVERS

PANARCHISM: There would be less need for truthful propaganda if there were experimental freedom for all proposals and among volunteers. - JZ 4.6.92, 7.1.93, 10.12.03. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - CAMPAIGNS, PROPAGANDA, EDUCATIONAL EFFORTS, PUBLICITY

PANARCHISM: These two concepts do not reconcile in a single-valued physics. To reconcile them, I had to come to multi-valued physics - where a fact may be irrevocably true in one context of reality, partially true in varying degrees in many, and not true at all in some.” - Mark Clifton & Frank Riley, They'd Rather Be Right, part III of IV, ASTOUNDING SF, Oct. 1954, p.115. - Compare Ayn Rand's "Check your premises!" - which, alas, she did not apply to her misunderstanding of the concept of "competing governments" and "competing police forces".  - JZ, 7.2.02. - MULTI-VALUED PHYSICS, RECONCILIATION, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, THE NON-COMPROMISING COMPROMISE, FACTS, CONDITIONS, CIRCUMSTANCES, ENVIRONMENT, CONTEXTS, SUBJECTIVE VALUE THEORY

PANARCHISM: They apply the principle of religious liberty or religious tolerance, as well as the principle of scientific and technological experimentation and of private independent actions in the political, economic and social spheres, rightfully and consistently and with the same peace-, progress and prosperity-promoting effects. – From JZ Pan AZ. - PANARCHISTS

PANARCHISM: They make it possible for each sufficiently rational being to achieve or join the government or non-governmental society of his or her dreams - but only at the own expense and risk, i.e., without suppressing peaceful dissenters. – What is not meant here under this term, is e.g. the definition or underding of Ralph Borsodi and quite a few others, but the meaning of the original definition of “panarchy” by P. E. De Puydt, who applied the voluntarism of laissez-faire economics in the spheres of whole economic, political and social systems as well. - JZ, 22.1.11, 28.11.13. – From JZ Pan AZ.

PANARCHISM: They want to govern us. But we ought to concede to them only fully experimental freedom to rule themselves. And we should claim the same liberty for ourselves. - JZ, 17.11.99, 24.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - RULE, POLITICIANS, GOVERNMENT, PARTIES, STATES, TOLERANCE MOVEMENTS, IDEOLOGIES, SELF-RULE, SOCIETIES

PANARCHISM: They're always telling on the news about all those hundreds of political parties you have on each satellite, out where you guys are from. – There’re not hundreds, Sam said, sipping his broth. Only about thirty to thirty-seven, depending on which satellite you're on. - And when you have an election, none of them ever wins? - Bron watched San decide to laugh. No. They all win. You're governed for the term by the governor of whichever party you vote for. They all serve office simultaneously. And you get the various benefits of the platform your party has been running on. It makes for competition between the parties which, in our sort of system, is both inviduating and stabilizing. - It sounds pretty confusing.1 - The digger, who was very dirty and probably about fourteen, grinned. - The only reason Bron didn't say anything insulting was because he couldn't think of anything. – Sam said: “Well, it’s nowhere near as confusing as some of the excuses for government you’ve got here.” But he was still smiling.” – Sorry, but I managed to omit jotting down the SF story this segment was taken from! – JZ, 17.4.08. - The rather short list of all SF that contains some panarchist thoughts would, probably, soon reveal the author and the title. - Another job for panarchists, who are also SF fans like myself. - J.Z, 22.1.11. - PANARCHISM IN SF.

PANARCHISM: They're individualists, but they're also cooperators. Their basic social unit, above the family, is the Lodge - even nonmembers tend to follow that lead - and precisely because it is a voluntary organization, a Lodge need not be democratic. So a few persons can command large resources and give no accounting to anybody else for an indefinite period.” - Poul Anderson, Orion Shall Rise, p.366. - I believe most voluntary members, or at least the more intelligent among them, would insist upon some kind of accounting - or would leave. - He supplied more details on the Lodges, e.g. on pages 284 - 286. - JZ, 7.2.02. – “Membership in a Lodge was voluntary and revocable for cause. These days, a substantial part of the population belonged to none, and even members carried on most everyday activities independently of them. Regardless, they remained fundamental to the society - or societies, in this huge and diverse realm.” - Poul Anderson, Orion Shall Rise, p.275. - Then he goes on describing them as operating in a framework of very limited governments. I believe that he could never quite liberate themselves from territorialist notions and the empires and wars they lead to. I tried to convert him once, in a letter of 1 July, 1969. But before and after, all I ever found in his writings were some panarchistic thoughts, rather than the concept of an all-over panarchistic framework for all, the adherents of limited governments, those of various forms of anarchism and those of various forms of governmentalism. - Well, everything good is only very rarely found in combination. - JZ, 7.2.02, 22.1.11. - LODGES, LEAGUES, ORDERS, COOPERATION, VOLUNTARISM, DEMOCRACY, LIBERTARIAN SCIENCE FICTION

PANARCHISM: This advocacy was in turn based on a certain definition of government, namely "government has been defined ... as the subjection of the 'non-invasive' individual to a will not his own". (156-4, Tucker, LIBERTY. - Carl Watner, J.L.S., Fall 77.) - All non-invasive persons do have the right to complete self-government, regardless of where they live. - JZ 21.11.82, 22.1.11. – EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS VS. COMPULSORY TERRITORIAL DOMINATION

PANARCHISM: this age of organized intolerance of the other fellow's point of view." - Allen Drury: A Shade of Difference, p.229. – INTOLERANCE, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: This radical form of pluralist society would correspond to the diversity among human beings and human endeavors, would solve the minority problem, would make it impossible to set up dictatorships (except with unanimous consent and then they would no longer be dictatorships!), would deprive people of the motive and the need for revolt, would rid us of most motives for a war, would e.g. do away with military and economic frontiers, would make compulsory taxes and a conscription of men impossible. It would create a stable and yet dynamic basis for internal and external peaceful coexistence and competition. - JZ, 1966/82, 28.11.13.

PANARCHISM: Those considering only the possibility and practice of territorial experiments have often come to demand “an end to experiments”, as did e.g. Northcote Parkinson in “The Evolution of Political Thought”, 1960, Viking Press. Such thoughts reveal all too little evolution of but, rather, stagnation of thoughts, limited to the territorial model. In their condemnation of the compulsory territorial experiments, conducted by politicians and bureaucrats, they are right, in the majority of instances. These "mis-leaders" have repeated the same costly and often bloody and quite wrongful experiments over and over again and have shown an astonishing inability to learn from their own mistakes and those of others. We should, indeed, have the right and liberty to altogether get away from this territorial, limited, monopolistic and coercive kind of “experimentation” with our lives, rights and liberties and gain the right to conduct our own experiments among like-minded volunteers and this at the risk and expense of these volunteers only. Then experimentation will not longer be widely considered a curse, a burden, an evil, but, rather, as an opportunity for everyone to try to become a pioneer and to set a worthwhile example to be followed or, otherwise, a deterrent example, one that would demonstrate that even with unanimous support a flawed theory cannot lead to a successful experiment, if that theory is followed, rather than ignored, whenever it is contradicted by better theories and the facts. - How could we ever have subscribed to a system, which confined experimental freedom to politicians and bureaucrats, as if they were truly wise and superior beings, godlike or merely human beings able and willing to learn from mistakes rather than power addicts, trying to cover them up? Why should we allow these mis-leaders, liars and false prophets to give experimental freedom a bad name? We should never have entrusted these people with any exclusive territorial powers to conduct important experiments. Their results were predictable from numerous similar experiments in the past and through genuine political, economic and social wisdom, as embodied in some of the better declarations of individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 9.1.99, 18.9.04, 22.1.11m 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. – EXPERIMENTS, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIAL LEADERSHIP

PANARCHISM: Throughout history and pre-history, possibly thousands of millions of human beings were wrongfully and irrationally murdered, in an organized way, either as volunteers or conscripts or civilian victims of wars decided upon by a few territorial rulers because they did not know or appreciate the panarchistic alternative to what they considered to be their “rightful” territorialist monopolism and coercion or enforced “unity”. – JZ, 30.12.07.

PANARCHISM: to achieve non-disruptive change - change unaccompanied by wrenching social disruption and widespread human misery." - Willis W. Harman, p.16 of TRANSNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES, No. 3, 1988. - PANARCHY, AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: To adopt moral rules for oneself is not therefore inconsistent with anarchism. Government, with its laws, restricts our freedom by the threat of force, but if a person imposes rules on himself he is not being compelled but acting voluntarily. Freedom in the sense of government by reason is quite acceptable. As Tucker wrote: ‘If the individual has a right to govern himself, all external government is tyranny.’ The idea of ruling oneself rather than being ruled by others is implicit in the anarchist’s advocacy of self-government and self-management. The whole thrust of the anarchist argument for social freedom is that the absence of laws would not lead to a state of moral chaos or disorder since people are capable of governing themselves…." - “… they would accept Kant’s view of autonomy as self-imposed rules which have been freely chosen for oneself.” – Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p.38. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - All the anarchists texts that do contain some panarchist thoughts should also be combined in a separate list. Pointing to it, one could then ask most anarchists whether they are prepared to read these writers out of the anarchist movement. - JZ, 22.1.11. - SELF-GOVERNANCE OR SELF-MANAGEMENT, SELF-RULE, VOLUNTARISM, GOVERNMENT, ANARCHISM, COMPULSION, TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: To consistently oppose party politics and party powers does require that one consistently opposes all forms and practices of territorialism, especially in the political, economic, social and military spheres, and considers and applies quite consistent secessionist and voluntaryist alternatives to territorial statism. But if one is completely and primarily committed to nonviolence and to all its postures and attitudes and "actions" then one will not sufficiently explore this voluntaryist option and obligation. (Yes, one OUGHT to secede from a Hitler regime and from a government armed with anti-people "weapons" or mass murder devices.) – JZ, 9.3.86, 18.4.08. – SECESSION OFTEN NOT ONLY A RIGHT BUT A DUTY OR OBLIGATION

PANARCHISM: To each according to his own “taste-buds” – as long as only he pays the bills and takes the risks. – JZ, 26.5.04.

PANARCHISM: To each group, community or society of reformers the own reforms – and also freedom from the reforms of others. – JZ, 15.11.08, 22.1.11.

PANARCHISM: To each his own and self-selected heaven or hell on earth, as long as they can stand them. - JZ, 18.10.02, 31.10.02.

PANARCHISM: To each his own fashion and political system, his own diet and economic system, his own faith and religious or social system, his on personal life style and personal law, his personal philosophy and personal system of justice, his own artistic and public service preferences, all at his own expense and risk. - JZ, 8.1.88. – From JZ, Pan AZ.

PANARCHISM: To each his own governmental or non-governmental and societal system, including his tax- or contribution-, jury- or arbitration system etc. Limited government advocates have all too much limited themselves, rather than extending liberty into all spheres of rights and liberties. They are still territorial statists - only to a lesser extent than other territorial statists. They, too, in most cases, want to impose their supposedly highest ideal upon dissenters in what they consider, once they have won an election, to be their exclusive territory or turf. The same applies to most of those who call themselves anarchists. Most do merely want to decentralize exclusive territories rather than abolish territorial rule altogether. All too many of them still strive to establish new hierarchies, although upon the federalist model. Most are not yet consistently and fully for free competition, voluntarism, free markets, consumer sovereignty, free choice, free contracts, freedom of association and secession, when it comes to competing governments and competing societies, especially when these try to realize, among their volunteers, a program that is opposed to the spectrum of ideals which the anarchist movement offers, in which secondary ideals, like equality, often take first place. The explanation for this is that most do still think in terms of territorial models only, under which one can only be either an anvil or a hammer. - JZ, 1.2.01 & 24.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - Compare my still incomplete anarchist spectrum of hyphenated forms of anarchism and their opposites, on - JZ , 22.1.11. - LIBERTARIANISM & ANARCHISM IN THEIR MOST POPULAR FORMS

PANARCHISM: To each his own kind of reform, revolution, status quo or reactionary responses. – Self-responsibility in every way. The own aims, systems, methods, institutions, laws, all only for volunteers. No territorial monopolies any longer for anyone or any group. – JZ, 28.4.06, 24.3.09.

PANARCHISM: To each his own preference: Future shocks for those who do like them, reversals to old traditions for those in love with them and preservation of the status quo for conservatives and retreatists, all at their expense and risk. They could all be practised rightfully, peacefully and in the same territory and at the same time - by practising panarchists. - JZ, 24.1.87, 1.4.89. 11.12.03. – From JZ, Pan AZ.

PANARCHISM: To each his own revolution or reforms - JZ, 5.12.93. – REFORMS, REVOLUTIONS, TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM

PANARCHISM: To each his own system or experiment, at his own risk and expense. - JZ, 23.7.96, 26.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - SYSTEMS, EXPERIMENTS, DEMONSTRATIONS, UTOPIAS, FREEDOM OF ACTION

PANARCHISM: To each his own.” – (Suum cuique.) Old Latin proverb.

PANARCHISM: To each the government of his dreams. - K. H. Z. (K. H. Z. Solneman), in his Manifesto for Freedom and Peace. (*) – To each the government of his choice. – Improved version by Gian Piero de Bellis.  (*)

PANARCHISM: To each the government or free society of his or her dreams or choice - via individual secessions and exterritorial autonomy for all volunteer communities. - JZ, 18.10.99. - By all means, do find, develop and express a clearer and more concise expression of the essence of panarchism, one that would conquer, or, rather, free the world, because it would be spread from mouth to mouth, rapidly, and would also be widely adopted by all media. - JZ, 8.9.04. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - SOCIETIES, CHOICE, AUTONOMY, EXTERRITORIALITY, VOLUNTEER COMMUNITIES

PANARCHISM: To each the government or society that he wants for himself. – JZ, 3/73, 21.2.08. - To each the government, society or community of volunteers (panarchy) that he wants for himself. - JZ, 73, 20.4.08.  - To each the kind of anarchism that he or she prefer or the kind of statism they like, always as the own risk and expense and without a territorial monopoly. – JZ, 29.2.13.

PANARCHISM: To each the government-, money- and justice system of his or her dreams. – JZ, 8.4.1996. – From JZ, Pan AZ.

PANARCHISM: To each the world view and environment of his dreams, but only at the own expense, resting upon his own labor and energies, his own sacrifices, investments and at his own risk. - (Jedem das Weltbild und die Umwelt seiner Traeme, aber nur auf eigene Kosten, auf Einsatz der eigenen Arbeit, Energie, Opfer, Beitraege und Investitionen und auf eigenes Risiko.) – JZ, 23.11.97, 10.1.99. – Perhaps one or the other of the wordings or definitions or explanations or slogans of panarchism will "take off" or reach the "break-through point" and cause a “chain reaction” in political thinking and practices. Anyhow, the very possibility makes it worthwhile to bet on this, to the extent of engaging in the compilation of such a collection of wordings. I would rather engage in this kind of betting than betting on horses or dogs or a lottery number or card game or roulette number choice. “An idea whose time has come is mightier than all the great armies!” - JZ, n.d. – A remark ascribed to Napoleon I. Others ascribed it to Victor Hugo. Napoleon I has certainly made many similar remarks and, possibly, this one, too. - JZ, 8.12.03, 8.9.04. - Alas, his guiding idea was power for himself and even in this, like Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and Mao, he had too many followers. - JZ, 8.9.05 or 06. – From JZ, Pan AZ.

PANARCHISM: To everyone his own choice of utopia, at his own cost and risk and that of like-minded volunteers - as long as they can stand it. - JZ, 7.10.00. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - UTOPIAS, TO EACH HIS OWN

PANARCHISM: To everyone the God or Government of his dreams or choice. - JZ, 19.4.82, 28.11.13.

PANARCHISM: To give mankind a boot (boost? JZ) up the evolutionary ladder, away from his dead-end role as a territorially defensive (aggressive! - JZ) squabbler. Away from fighting over material resources.” - Joel Richards, Pindharee, p.182. A Tom Doherty Associates Book, N.Y., 1986. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY:

PANARCHISM: To make good ideas more welcome. A good example is worth a thousand admonitions.” - Heading in L. E. Read: Awake for Freedom's Sake. – Alas, Read favored only territorial “limited” governments as good alternative examples, not the whole range of societies and governments that at least some people consider to be ideal for themselves. – JZ, 16.4.08.

PANARCHISM: To prescribe peaceful ways of living by law is as absurd as to prescribe moves on a chessboard by law. Let each play his own game with his own partners. - JZ 20.12.82. – PLAYING SELF-CHOSEN GAMES

PANARCHISM: To preserve the peace we need not learn to live "together" but, rather, “apart” from each other, quite independently, although next door to each other. All our lives, and our production and consumption of public services should be as independent from that of others as are our religious and other private and individual preferences. - JZ, 2.3.01, 24.6.01. - By now we have already produced some competition in the provision of e.g. telephone and railway services. Even some private prisons have been established. Numerous private security services have already existed for a long time. But privatization has not yet been maximized in the most important spheres, those presently monopolized by territorial States. - JZ, 8.9.04, 28.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - PEACE, LEARNING TO LIVE TOGETHER OR APART FROM EACH OTHER, TOLERATING EACH OTHER

PANARCHISM: To save one from a mistake is a gift of paradise, …” - Frank Herbert, Dune, Complete and unabridged edition, p.272. - To save as many as possible from making mistakes, one should allow those, who insist on making their own mistakes, at the own expense and risk, to make them them, in their own free experiments or panarchies, as valuable lessons and demonstrations to all others. - JZ, 7.2.02, 28.11.13. - MISTAKES

PANARCHISM: To the extent that the territorial State has developed, it has done so as a parasitic growth upon society, a growth, which has almost suffocated the free society which is based upon voluntary cooperation and exchange. The same applies to the State's military forces. A society based upon diverse and freely coexisting and competing exterritorial and autonomous panarchies (formed by volunteers and supported by free local militias for the protection of individual rights, and their international federations), can be expected to form symbiotic relationships that do not depend upon compulsory membership and financial support. They can also be sufficiently self-policing via individual secessionism, associationism and voluntary contributions, combined with arbitration arrangements and recognition for individual rights (at least to the extent that these are claimed by others). - JZ, 17.9.87, 1.4.89. – From JZ Pan AZ. – VOLUNTARISM, COMPETITION, MILITIAS, ARBITRATION

PANARCHISM: To try to secede, individually and in minority groups, attempting to establish or to join exterritorially autonomous communities, of whatever kind, is another and major victimless "crime", one that makes all other victimless "crimes" legally possible via territorially imposed legislation. - JZ, 10.8.00. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, ANOTHER VICTIMLESS "CRIME"

PANARCHISM: Tolerance for all tolerant people, in all spheres, rather than any territorial imposition. – JZ, 25.3.09.

PANARCHISM: Tolerance of diversity, of individual idiosyncrasy and cultural pluralism, may increase while remaining responsible. (Much '"tolerance" heretofore has just been a closing of the eyes and rejection of responsibility.) There is likely to be a strong tendency to live and let live, when psychopaths and neurotics are few.” - R. C. W. Ettinger: Man into Superman, p.145. – Under panarchism psychopathic and neurotic leaders would be confined to voluntary victims. – JZ, 16.4.08.

PANARCHISM: Tolerance: Never do unto others that which you would not have them do unto you. If you wouldn't have others control your life, then never try to control anyone else.” – Leonard E. Read: Castles in the Air, p.159. - Read, too, saw many of the principles of panarchism but not their practical application in diverse panarchies. Up to his death he remained an adherent of limited but exclusive and territorial government. - JZ, 7.4.84. - Alas, most prophets of liberty advanced in only in an all too limited form, like e.g. limited but still territorial governments. - JZ , 22.1.11. – Tolerance for all tolerant people. Intolerance only towards all intolerant people! – JZ, 29.11.13.

PANARCHISM: Tolerance: People with as different notions of life as e.g. the Penguin International Thesaurus of Quotations indicates, should not be forced into a single State or society. Only when they are not so forced will their membership be more of an asset than a burden to a community. Only then will they be able to grow and mature as human beings. Let 1000 flowers bloom - wherever and as long as they can. - JZ, 4.9.82, 6.4.84.

PANARCHISM: Tolerance: You can't make all feet fit the same pair of shoes.” - Vic Thomas, 25.9.82. (During the last conversation I had with him before he died. - JZ 6.4.84.)

PANARCHISM: Too much of the polar thinking, i.e. thinking only in terms of two extremes, prevailed so far and has prevented panarchistic developments. Example: All or nothing! Majority vote or no vote! Territorial law or no law! All secede or no one does! One system or one government at a time only, for a whole population or no system at all (anarchism in the sense of chaos)! – JZ, 11.9.84. - POLAR THINKING, TERRITORIALISM, INTOLERANCE

PANARCHISM: True anarchism will be capitalism. True capitalism will be anarchism.” – Murray N. Rothbard, quoted in THE NEW BANNER, 25.2.72. – As if true anarchism, the essence of voluntarism, would not also have room and opportunity for communism and any other form of collectivism and statism to be also freely practised among their volunteers, as long as they are really foolish or ignorant enough to want to do this. – Here MNR showed clearly, that he did not yet think like a panarchist. However, under panarchism the remaining and voluntaristic State communism, State socialism or State capitalism of e.g. the Soviet Union and Red China would have developed much faster into genuine free enterprise or laissez-faire capitalism than they did and do under territorialism. – (I read only yesterday that Cuba is now also developing a free enterprise zone. – JZ, 29.11.13.) But, like the nunneries and monasteries under religious freedom, a few other communistic communities of volunteers might remain or become newly experimented with, for a long time, all doing their things to themselves, even when their members are surrounded by the various free societies of panarchism. A kind of mental atavism will see to that. They would serve as enlightening and deterrent examples to others. - JZ, 21.9.08. – Compare the old proverb stating: "Each new generation is a new invasion of barbarians." - An inborn instinct towards freedom does not automatically lead to clear freedom ideas and principles and consistent actions with them, not even, so far, among most anarchists and libertarians. - JZ, 22.1.11. – The voluntary sharing or communism of nuclear families, predominant even in the most capitalistic or anarchistic countries or segments of the populations, is also likely to be non-coercively continued for a long time yet, if not forever. – JZ, 29.11.13. - ANARCHISM, CAPITALISM

PANARCHISM: Tucker was one of the very first individuals in the world to advocate the idea "that defence is a service, like any other service", and that such a service could and should be provided by private agencies supported by voluntary patronage. LIBERTY, (104-4)” – Carl Watner, J.L.S., Fall 77. – Molinari and de Puydt preceded him in this respect. – And so did much of the ancient personal law tradition. - JZ, 29.11.13.

PANARCHISM: Turn all governments, movements and parties into competing local, national or international enterprises, companies, corporations, insurance services or protective associations and communities, all with voluntary members only, regardless of their residence and place of work, all under personal laws and full exterritorial autonomy, all subscribing only to their self-chosen projects and institutions, aims, purposes and principles, ideals and methods. A creative and productive outburst would occur the like of which this world has never seen. There would also be xyz new solutions developed to the problems of energy provision, transport, pollution, justice, police, penal and rehabilitation services. No longer any limits for tolerant freedom experiments and institutions! – JZ, 31.7.03., 16.9.07. - Perhaps most important, the already existing ideas to end involuntary unemployment, deflations, inflations and stagflations, all economic crises, tax slavery, wars, terrorism, civil wars and violent revolutions, all kinds of tyrannies, despotism and authoritarianism over involuntary victims could then become rapidly realized, spreading fast from the successes of their first few pioneers. - JZ, 22.1.11, 29.11.13. - POLYARCHISM

PANARCHISM: Unanimity is the best fortress.” – Danish Proverb. – And it can be attained, in most cases, only exterritorially, in the spheres of political, economic and social systems. – JZ, 16.2.86 – Rather, freedom in diversity, always for volunteers only, is the best fortress - because it prevents enemies from arising or remaining very active. - JZ, 5.7.87, 9.1.99, 29.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - Even inherently nonsensical and wrongful systems can then gain unanimous consent among millions of voluntary followers, for years to centuries, as the history of religious groups and movements and that of many pop ideologies proves. They are not strong in the long run but do tend to finally collapse from their inherent flaws and contradictions. Only those based upon freedom and diversity, i.e., individual choice, free contracts, voluntary membership, individual secessionism, do have a permanent strength and superiority over all their enemies, the more so, the more numerous and consistent their pro-freedom aspects are and the more consciously they are applied. A community, which does not limit the freedom of its members can (no guaranty!) prevail over all its enemies, by liberating most of their victims, no matter how small it may be initially and how numerous its enemies may be. Once established, then, by the very dispersal of its members, under exterritorial autonomy, it is largely protected even from ABC mass murder devices, which are "weapons" only against territorial States and their victims. - JZ, 24.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ.  – An agreement to tolerantly accept diversity if practised only among volunteers, can be even more powerful than seeming territorial unity and unanimity. – JZ, 14.3.09. – UNANIMITY, - STRENGTH, DEFENCE, VOLUNTARISM, NWT, UNITY & UNIFORMITY SPLEENS COMBINED WITH COMPULSION INSTEAD OF UNITY AMONG VOLUNTEERS

PANARCHISM: Unanimous consent will, even more so than democratic majority approval, support the delusions of any panarchistic leader and his followers. Thus all kinds of mad schemes are likely to be tried as well - and repeated over and over, at least among a few. We are unlikely to ever run out of fools. On the other hand, the inherent self-responsibility involved, the own failures and the successes of other panarchies all around the failed one, with members living inter-mixed with non-members, will tend to prick the mere glittering soap bubbles, again and again, and finally teach many people who could not be persuaded by mere words. - JZ, 19.5.99, 8.9.04, 18.9.04, 29.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - LEADERSHIP, DEMOCRACY, DELUSIONS, UNANIMITY, CONSENT

PANARCHISM: Under freedom people can choose this or that religion, likewise this or that life style or economic system. – (“In der Freiheit koennen sich die Menschen fuer diese oder jene Religion entscheiden, eben-so fuer diese oder jene Lebensform, Wirtschaftsform.”) - LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, No. 3.

PANARCHISM: Under full exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities only aggressive actions towards non-members would have to be suppressed and penalized. Experimental freedom implies that there are no involuntary victims of experiments, for that would restrict their freedom to experiment or to be left alone. Panarchism would also imply full publicity for all its panarchic experiments and would lead to scientific surveys of all of them. The social sciences could finally be established on a sound scientific and experimental basis. There would be no more involuntary victims. All creative energies would be released and destructive energies would be confined to their voluntary victims. Alas, in decades of SF reading I have not yet come across a single story or book that fully developed and envisioned the practice and results of panarchism, of many diverse panarchies peacefully coexisting in one country or on one planet, because all of them are exterritorially autonomous and have only voluntary members. Most envision diverse societies only for whole planets or their territorial nations or societies. None of their utopias are fully based upon freedom for one-man revolutions, based upon individual sovereignty and individual secessionism and voluntary associationism, which requires full exterritorial autonomy. Elementary prejudices, errors and wrong assumptions, predictions and expectations prevail even in SF on such matters. - JZ, n.d. & 24.6.01. - To the extent that diverse volunteer groups are envisioned upon a single planet, all are still presumed to have unlimited power or imperialistic ambitions, quite ignoring the experience with voluntary associations. - JZ, 28.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - Here is indicated an opportunity for future SF writers. - JZ , 22.1.11. – I would like to see a work sheet for them developed, which on the one side would contain all the popular errors and prejudices still held by some SF writers and on the other side the still widely unknown or insufficiently appreciated freedom, peace and justice alternatives for volunteers, both lists accompanied with links to their references. That might help to make this kind of literature much more enlightening than it was so far. – JZ, 29.11.13. – EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, SOCIAL SCIENCES & SCIENCE FICTION

PANARCHISM: Under individual secessionism every party would win, at the same time and in the same country, but only dominance, a non-territorial one, over its own members and voters, subject, to the limitation imposed by free individual secessionism. - JZ 4 Sep. 89, 10.10.89, 22.1.11. – POLITICAL PARTIES, ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY, VOLUNTARISM, SELF-GOVERNMENT

PANARCHISM: Under it you become a sovereign consumer or even producer of alternative political, economic and social systems that are much more to your liking than the present territorial ones, which are imposed upon you by the votes of others, with whom you strongly disagree on many subjects. You can then freely opt out of their systems while they are free to opt out of yours. So that in future all such affairs are practised only among volunteers. No one will be mostly outvoted any longer and if it still happens, then he would be free to secede and make other choices for himself, together with others, who are like-minded volunteers. To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her free choice. – JZ, n.d. & 25.3.09, 22.1.11. – VOLUNTARISM & FREE CHOICE VS. COMPULSION & MONOPOLISM, TERRITORIALISM, CONSUMER & PRODUCER SOVEREIGNTY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & CONTRACT IN EVERY SPHERE

PANARCHISM: Under panarchism all individual cells of the body of a society or of a competing government or exterritorially autonomous State are at liberty to and capable of leaving that body, to join another, already existing, or to form the beginnings of another exterritorially autonomous community of like-minded volunteers. In that respect panarchies are always potent, fertile and pregnant. - Both the separation and the new joining will also tend to be joyful rather than painful happenings. - JZ, 18.9.04. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - PANARCHIST BODIES & INDIVIDUAL CELLS

PANARCHISM: Under panarchism each can enjoy the personal law system that is preferred by himself or herself. To each his own. – JZ, 16.4.08. – PERSONAL LAW

PANARCHISM: Under panarchism one gets liberated or ruled only as far as one wants to be. – JZ, 16.4.08. – VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

PANARCHISM: Under panarchism one or even several competing world federations on a voluntary basis, structured for peaceful coexistence, would become possible and would be established step by step - through individual secessions and affiliations. - JZ 66/82. – FREE COMPETITION & PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE IN EVERY SPHERE

PANARCHISM: Under panarchism one’s own political commitment, to one’s own affairs would be as much tolerated as are now hobbies, crafts, sports and tolerant faiths. – JZ, 16.4.08, 22.1.11. – TOLERANCE IN THE SPHERE OF POLITICAL, ECONOMIC & SOCIAL SYSTEMS.

PANARCHISM: Under panarchism we could experiment with and practise all our ideas and ideals at our own risk and expense among volunteers, independent of the laws and permissions by territorial politicians and bureaucrats. We would no longer have to be obedient territorial subjects and tax slaves. Progress would become greatly accelerated – but no one would be forced to participate in it. People would be free to stagnate or even take backwards steps regarding their own affairs, if they wanted to. But in balance we would achieve much progress. The best minds and talents could then be productively and creatively engaged, no longer held back by wrongful laws, bureaucratic red tape or wrongful and imposed jurisdictions or by an ignorant and prejudiced public opinion. – JZ, 25.3.09.

PANARCHISM: Under territorial archism you are forced to contribute to the paying of the bills of everybody else and can claim that your own public affairs bills are largely paid by others. Under panarchism each has to pay only his own bills or only his share in the bills for those common projects that he personally approved. If, under these conditions, he is foolish enough to give others blank cheques upon his earnings and assets, then he has only himself to blame. – JZ, 9.1.99, 22.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - TERRITORIALISM, WELFARE STATES & OTHER EXPLOITATIVE STATES

PANARCHISM: Under territorialism ideas and knowledge, theories and practice do not mix effectively enough to assure rapid advances in all spheres monopolized and coercively controlled by territorialism, i.e. especially in the spheres of political, economic and social systems. Governments, like churches and sects, natural sciences, technology, sports, the arts and literature must become exterritorially competitive to advance fast enough, rather than repeating the old mistakes and wrongs over and over again. – JZ, 18.4.02, 24.3.09, 22.1.11. – PROGRESS, COMPETITION, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, CENTRALIZATION, DECENTRALIZATION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SECESSIONISM, TOLERANCE VS. INTOLERANCE, POLITICS, BUREAUCRACY, TERRITORIALISM, KNOWLEDGE, PROGRESS

PANARCHISM: Under the freedom of action and experimental freedom of panarchism, practised only tolerantly, by its very nature, i.e. only by and among volunteers and at their own expense and risk, we would have division of labor among reformers and revolutionaries, who could, peacefully coexisting and competing, try out xyz schemes at the same time and in the same country, each unobstructed by internal dissenters and active external animosity. Consequently, positive results from at least some of them could be expected soon and failures of self-managed false utopia would also become revealed much sooner and more widely, because people would pay more attention to such practices in the own country and times, possibly among their neighbors, than they would explore or follow those set in foreign countries or in historical precedents. Few people really study all of the alternative societies on record somewhere. Most of the recorded history is anyhow still and largely "a fable agreed upon", mostly a territorial one. New kinds of competition might result, like e.g.: In which kind of panarchy exists the lowest degree of unemployment, of inflation, of crime, poverty and taxation? – Free and tolerant experiments will introduce a proper scientific attitude in the social sciences and make them jump ahead, like natural sciences and technology did, once they were free to experiment. However, in spheres where nothing can be proven and everything merely asserted and believed, like religions, progress would not be speeded up, very much, although more tolerance would, probably, occur there, too, once tolerance is much more widely practised than it is today. – JZ, 18.6.93, 14.1.99, 22.1.11. – I blame all religious for not having proposed, from their experience with religious tolerance, the same tolerance when it comes to political, economic and social systems. Nevertheless, they all to still pretend to be the top teachers of ethics and morality! – From JZ, Pan AZ. - OFFERS DIVISION OF LABOR & A NEW FREE MARKET FOR PUBLIC SERVICES OR SERVICES BELIEVED TO BE PUBLIC SERVICES BY SOME, RELIGIONS, TOLERANCE, ETHICS & MORALITY

PANARCHISM: Unilateral Declarations of Independence: We need especially UD's of individuals and of minorities, who aspire only towards exterritorial autonomy. - JZ, 1.12.83, 22.1.11. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PERSONAL LAW, INDEPENDENCE FOR ALL TOLERANT PEOPLE

PANARCHISM: Universalize tolerance for all tolerant actions - through panarchism! - JZ 10.10.89. - TOLERANCE

PANARCHISM: Unlike Stephens, who took the federal Union as a joint-stock operation, Thoreau took all states as artificial and asserted his right to secede. - J. R. Strombert, "Secession, the Essence of Anarchy ..." in LIBERTARIAN FORUM, June 1976, p.6. – ANARCHY, SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: Until panarchism is generally realized, world-wide, only governments-in-exile (and various free societies in exile) could represent all of their people (except common and political criminals) in any territory and population, now wrongfully suppressed, provided that they confine their aim and efforts to their own panarchistic regimes, i.e. voluntary followers only and exterritorial autonomy and use only means that are in accordance with such an aim and with genuine individual rights and liberties. If and to the extent that they do so, they would greatly increase their chances for success and could employ a kind of political and military jiu jitsu, that would turn many of the forces of the regime (that they oppose) against this regime, especially their tax-slaves and military slaves. – JZ, 26.10.93, 9.1.99, 22.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ.  GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE

PANARCHISM: Up with freedom and damn the ideologies!" - concluding quotation, probably from Poul Anderson, given by Michael Moslow in New Libertarian Notes, 4.9.77. - Why not, instead: "Exterritorial autonomy for all burdened or enlighten by any ideology!"? - JZ, 21.11.82, 29.11.13. – And also for all those who believe that they are quite free of them. – JZ, 17.4.08.

PANARCHISM: Utopia is, for you, where YOU find it or establish it. You should get the full freedom to do so. - JZ, 7.8.03, 15.12.03. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - UTOPIA

PANARCHISM: Volenti no fiat injuria. (What one does voluntarily, does not do injustice to oneself) or: the volunteer does not do injustice to himself (although he may harm himself). – From JZ, Pan AZ. – VOLUNTARISM, VICTIMLESS “CRIMES” OR VOLUNTARY VICTIMHOOD

PANARCHISM: Voluntarism is the opposite of coercion, and is the only kind of inter-personal relationships which allows all the parties involved to retain their personal sovereignty (right of exclusive control or jurisdiction) over their own bodies and properties.”- Fred Wells Jr., OPTION, 6/77. – VOLUNTARISM, COERCION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SELF-OWNERSHIP

PANARCHISM: Voluntary vs. compulsory membership. Exterritorialism vs. territorialism. Autonomy of individuals and groups, based upon individual sovereignty, vs. geographical sovereignty. The latter, in practice, is merely that of a few. Individual secessionism vs. geographical secessionism or compulsory territorial unity. Voluntary, i.e., individualistic federalism vs. geographical and collectivist federalism. - JZ, n.d. – From JZ Pan AZ. - VS TERRITORIAL STATES

PANARCHISM: Volunteer with your own tax dollars for the government or society of your choice and obey only its rules in all your internal affairs. - JZ, 15.1.97. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - In all you external affairs grant foreign volunteers the same exterritorial autonomy or experimental freedom that you claim for yourself. Then they will, largely, cease to be your enemies and become allies or at least neutrals towards you. - JZ, 22.1.11. -  VOLUNTARY TAXATION, VOLUNTARY SUBORDINATION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL, UNDER EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY.

PANARCHISM: Vote yourself out of their territorial systems. A territorial vote confines you to remain in a territorial "prison". It is not a free vote but a mandate for serfdom, authoritarianism, bureaucracy, even for temporary dictatorships, all too often turned into lasting ones and abused to force you into participation in their wars, financially or with your rights, liberties and bodies. - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, VOTING, SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL, WAR

PANARCHISM: Voting and panarchism: Every candidate should be allowed to win - and to represent all those who voted for him, within an exterritorial and autonomous protective association formed by that minority. - JZ, 21.11.82. - VOTING, PARTIES, ELECTIONS, CANDIDATES

PANARCHISM: Warren had called his philosophy 'Individual sovereignty', and Andrews made this phrase his motto.” - William Chadwick, THE FREEMAN, 3/76. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

PANARCHISM: We admit of no government by divine right, the only legitimate right to govern is an express grant of power from the governed.” - William Henry Harrison. - That requires governments only that have exclusively the express consent of volunteers, for the time being. And they must remain volunteers. The dissenters must remain free to secede from it. - JZ, 11.10.02. - SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION, VOLUNTARISM, PEOPLE, RIGHTS, POWER, AUTHORIZATION, CONSTITUTIONS

PANARCHISM: We already have, to a large extent, panarchism in our private lives, in arts, sports, crafts, hobbies, religions, philosophies, literature, music, consumer sovereignty, free enterprise, free trading. All that we need, in order to overcome the remaining political, economic and social problems, is the same freedom of choice for each individual regarding the political, economic and social system, which he prefers for himself or herself. It works well enough in our private lives. It would work even better in our public lives. You want a better system for yourself, or one that you believe to be better: Opt out of your present one and subscribe to the one that you do now prefer and as long as you do or establish one that you think to be ideal and invite others to join you. - JZ, 30.7.98 & 26.6.01. – From JZ Pan AZ. - ANARCHISM IN OUR PRIVATE LIVES, FREE CHOICE & FREE ENTERPRISE IN ALL SPHERES!

PANARCHISM: We are already to a large extent practising panarchists in our interpersonal relationships, to the extent that these remain unregulated by constitutions, laws, jurisdiction and customs. What has to be achieved is the extension of this practice into community and State relationships as well as international relationships. -  JZ, n.d. & 18.9.04. - "How much of the life of the ordinary person is devoted to 'politics' ... and how much to problems of interpersonal relationships? To ask the question is already to provide an answer." - Maurice Brinton, The Irrational in Politics, p.50. - Maybe he should have called this book: "The Irrationality & Wrongfulness of Territorial Politics. - JZ, 22.1.11. - IN INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS

PANARCHISM: We are still mixed up in or stuck in territorial politics and all its wrongs, difficulties and crises and, alas, mostly do not even see and ponder the exterritorial alternatives to this situation. – JZ, 27.6.04, 24.3.09. – POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: we believe that the most manly and effectual method of dealing with the State is to demand its immediate and unconditional surrender as a usurper, and to flatly and openly challenge its assumed right to forestall and crush out the voluntary associative government and regulation of individuals by themselves in all things.” - B. R. Tucker, 16-2, quoted by Carl Watner, J.L.S., Fall 77, p.312. - LIBERTY proposed to abolish government and substitute in its place voluntary arrangements: "We offer every possible method of voluntary social union by which men and women may act together for the furtherance of well-being." (27-2) - Ibid, p.309. - VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: We believe that when men reach beyond this planet, they should leave their natural differences behind them.” - John F. Kennedy. - They should and must take them with them - and make arrangements that allow for them. Even a J. F. K. could never rightfully represent all of them and should not even tried or pretended to be able and willing do so. - JZ, 27.6.02, 17.8.02, 22.1.11. - All "great" territorial leaders are largely also great misleaders. - JZ, 22.1.11. - DIVERSITY, UNITY, DIFFERENCE, TOLERANCE, LEADERSHIP, TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: We can be the captain of a ship – but not of the sea. - Heard on TV show “The Sliders”, 29.5.98. - That is not a bad analogy to panarchism. - "Freedom of the High Seas" is another liberty, which demonstrates exterritorial autonomy at least in this sphere – amounting to ca. 2/3 thirds of the world’s surface. – JZ, 10.1.99. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - CAPTAINS & FREEDOM OF THE HIGH SEAS, OCEAN FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

PANARCHISM: We can serve society best by disobeying and disestablishing the territorial State. - JZ 24.1.95 & 28.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - DISOBEDIENCE, DISESTABLISHMENT, TERRITORIALISM, STATE & SOCIETY

PANARCHISM: we consider the various worlds as gene pools, sources of teachings and teachers, sources of the possible. Our goal is not to rule, but to tap these gene pools, to learn and to free ourselves from all restraints imposed by dependency and government." - Frank Herbert's formula, in "Dune Messiah", p.97. - My version: We consider the various panarchies as sources of teachings and teachers, sources of the possible. Our goal is not to rule, but to tap these resources, to learn and free ourselves from all unjustified restraints and, especially, from territorial governments. - JZ, 19.9.04. – We will also demonstrate by our free experiments what is possible and what is impossible to achieve. - JZ, 22.1.11. - From JZ, Pan AZ.

PANARCHISM: We didn't cross the borders, the borders crossed us.” - A T-shirt worn by a Hispanic-American 'Raza' protestor, in reference to the US's conquest of northern Mexico in the late 1840's. Mexico extends beyond its borders.” - Vicente Fox, Current President of Mexico (and a former Coca-Cola executive), speaking to a gathering in Milwaukee in July of 2001. - In an extraordinary political move, President Vicente Fox has announced the formation of a cabinet level agency to govern, protect and provide services to over 20 million Mexicans now living in Aztlan, a territory encompassing most of the southwest part of the USA.” - Ernesto Cienfuegos, Fox Extends Mexican Government into Aztlan – England acted once as a protectorate for all Englishmen abroad, Rome for all Romans abroad. But individual should be free to choose their own protectors or to establish their own protective communities, societies and governments everywhere, always without making any territorial claims. – JZ, 4.1.08. – With some such politicians panarchists could and should collaborate, especially when they are prepared to demand the same rights for all other minorities in all other countries as well. – JZ, .3.07. - CAPITULATIONS, CONSULAR JURISDICTION, PERSONAL LAW, BORDERS, FRONTIERS, TERRITORIALISM, IMMIGRATION, PERSONAL LAW, PROTEGEE CITIZENSHIP, PROTECTORATES, BORDERS, FRONTIERS

PANARCHISM: We do already have and enjoy panarchism (unconscious of it being panarchism) in many other limited spheres of life that are, however, most important in the eyes of most people, namely in sports, fashions, diets, entertainment, arts, crafts, choice of jobs or professions, choice of reading, studying and teaching activities, private lifestyles, private movement and transport choices, alternative medical and fitness means, organizational forms of private and cooperative enterprises, a great diversity of voluntary associations for a variety of purposes, in friendship circles, in sexual relations (even easy marriage and divorce contract options are panarchistic), in religion and in natural science experimentation. - However, because of a number of popular myths, prejudices and errors, we have so far exempted the political, economic and social spheres from this kind of freedom of action, choice, association, voluntarism, individual secessionism, competition, free market relationships or experimental freedom. - Panarchists are nothing but consistent anarchists, who want to realize this freedom in these spheres also. As John Bright suggested in 1867: "Let us lift ourselves above the narrow circle in which we are apt to live and think; let us put ourselves on an historical eminence and judge fairly." -JZ, 1986 draft & in Pan AZ. - JZ , 22.1.11. - IN PRIVATE LIVES, TO A LIMITED EXTENT, EXISTS ALREADY, DAILY PRACTISED IN MINOR OR PERSONAL CHOICES, ANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, PERSONAL LAW OR EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

PANARCHISM: We do not have to live and die like e.g. territorial hunting dogs or wolves or other beasts of prey. We can, instead, come to live exterritorially free, without borders, like the birds. - JZ, 6.1.95. - Like all analogies, this one limps, too, since many birds do establish their own hunting and food gathering areas as well, and, naturally, do try to protect their nests. However, in the same territory one can find different species of birds that are, mostly (apart from birds of prey), peacefully coexisting and thus set an example that most people still have to learn from. They do also manage to live without governments. For them a mere pecking order suffices. - JZ, 6.1.95, 24.6.01, 22.1.11. - Apart from micro- to macro life-forms preying upon each other, i.e., not being, to a large extent, self-supporting by productive efforts, the coexistence of a great diversity of life forms in an ecology in any territory, is not a bad example for the coexistence of very varied panarchies under panarchism. - JZ, 28.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ.

PANARCHISM: We either stay territorially unfree, always more of less in crisis situations as a result, or we become exterritorialists and voluntaryists and live in as much freedom as we want for ourselves, also in peace, security and prosperity, rapidly advancing in our enlightenment, but still at our own individual pace only. For any moral and rational being the choice should be easy. – JZ, 27.6.04, 24.3.09.

PANARCHISM: We have handicapped ourselves by choosing, too often and territorially, what is nothing but one of two or more false alternatives. E.g. the propertarian stand vs. the anti-property stand, the anti-egalitarian vs. the egalitarian stand, the non-violent vs. the aggressive position. The most extreme opposites could peacefully coexist in the same territory, and to a considerable degree they already do, once they are all confined to their voluntary supporters and practised quite tolerantly among their believers only, and tolerantly towards all outsiders. Only full exterritorial autonomy and voluntary membership are required for this and could lead to a wide-spread and lasting peace, at least to a situation in which aggressive violence is reduced to a minimum, that inherent in flawed human characters and their crimes with victims. But under territorial rule, whichever system is adopted, by the currently ruling minority or majority, may be constitutional, legal and approved by its courts but is, nevertheless, criminally and despotically imposed upon all those non-aggressive people in a territory, who happen to disagree with it. Such a "system", if it really deserves the term "system", does lead, inevitably, to dissatisfactions, frustration, resentment, hatred, rebellions, terrorism, even violent revolutions, civil wars and wars. It has no inbuilt cure for its own wrongs and irrationalities, which are inherent in its very structure. Those obsessed by the territorial model, as most voters and politicians and their victims still are, do not see a way out of this mess. - JZ, 22.11.99, 28.6.01, 22.1.11, 29.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - TERRITORIALISM, PROPERTARIANS, PROPERTY, COMMUNISM, SOCIALISM, CAPITALISM, FALSE ALTERNATIVES

PANARCHISM: We have recognized factors and consequences of immunity and rejection in medicine but not yet in the building and maintenance of nations and societies. We still imagine them to be organic beings and, quite inconsistently, imagine that they ought to be forcefully patched together, no matter how diverse their parts are and how unwilling. – Thus our territorial nation-states have much in common with Frankenstein monsters. - JZ, 6.2.84, 5.4.84, 16.4.08. – NATIONALISM, TERRITORIALISM, WRONGFUL & ARTIFICIAL MONSTROSITIES, ORGANIZED EXPLOITATION, OPPRESSING & KILLING MACHINES, WARFARE STATES

PANARCHISM: We libertarians want freedom not only for ourselves, we want it for other people. (As well? - JZ) – Walter Williams. – Whether they like it or not? We want it for ourselves but do not want to impose it upon others. Even freedom should not be obligatory for all but only optional for individuals. Each should have only as much liberty as he wants and is willing to handle, with more being optional - as soon as he is ready for it. Tolerance is required towards statists and authoritarians – provided only they are tolerant, too. That seems self-contradictory and is, for territorial statists but not for those organized under personal law only and exterritorial autonomy, which implies tolerance towards other personal law  authoritarian statists and towards the tolerant freedom lovers, all only doing their things among themselves. Religious liberty, as an example, makes that clearer: Tolerance e.g. for Catholics and Fundamentalists – as long as they do respect the religious liberty of non-members with different religious or anti-religious or non-religious preferences. That much has already been achieved in many countries. – JZ, n.d., 12.1.99, 22.1.11, 29.11.13. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - LIBERTARIANISM

PANARCHISM: We may, that is, be able to organize the political groups as the religious groups have organized themselves, without sacrificing whatever there may be of value in Nationalism, just as men have learned to maintain their religious faiths in mutual toleration, without sacrificing the element of truth in each.” - Norman Angell, Human Nature and the Peace Problem, 1925, p.21. - RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE, RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

PANARCHISM: We must continually convey the message that wrong policies will produce wrong consequences, which we can forecast. – Anthony Fisher. – There are no right territorial policies – because all of them suppress individual liberties, rights and choices for dissenters. – JZ, 6.2.97. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - RIGHT & WRONG POLICIES, TERRITORIALISM VS. PERSONAL LAW, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, ASSOCIATIONIM, CONTRACTARIANISM, POLYARCHY, COMPETING GOVERNANCE

PANARCHISM: We need all the diversity, all the assorted ways of living and looking and thinking, we can get!” - Poul Anderson, There Will Be Time, p.119. – DIVERSITY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, SCIENTIFIC APPROACH

PANARCHISM: We only got one life and most of us use it like a knife to cut up others with." - From film: The Wild and the Willing, 1962. – INTOLERANCE, LIVE & LET LIVE, TOLERANCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, TOLERANCE, AGGRESSION, LIVING THE OWN LIVES & LETTING OTHERS LIVE THEIRS

PANARCHISM: We ought to promote and welcome a certain fusion and fission process in the Soviet Union (*) and should welcome certain intelligent "missiles" from it: The fission of individual secessionism and of military insurrections and popular revolutions, the fusions of voluntaristic and exterritorial protective communities, the streams of human missiles: refugees and deserters, fleeing in our direction and of all the manuscripts they could not get published under their territorial despotism. - JZ, 23.2.84, 6.4.84, 22.1.11. – (*) And any other authoritarian regime. – JZ, 16.4.08. – REVOLUTION, LIBERATION, REFUGEES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, QUITE JUST WAR & PEACE AIMS, BETTER IDEAS & EXAMPLES AS LIBERATING “WEAPONS”, SUPPRESSED PEOPLES & MOVEMENTS AS ALLIES OF RELATIVELY FREE STATE & MOVEMENTS

PANARCHISM: We prefer the competitive market economy here. (*) … You may decide that or you may decide on another course of action. We would accept that as long as it represented (**) free choice.” – President J. F. Kennedy, in a recent interview with a group of Brazilian university students, quoted by - Ayn Rand, The Dying Victim of Berlin, in: “The Ayn Rand Column”, revised edition, 1998, p 38, Second Renaissance Books, New Milford, Connecticut, - (*) Alas, a really competitive, i.e., quite free market economy, even for public, State and community services, remained an unknown ideals for Pres. Kennedy as well as for Ayn Rand. – (**) realized!-JZ, 17.9.07. - & FREE CHOICE

PANARCHISM: We should be free to make our major choices ourselves, individually or via groups of volunteers, instead of delegating them to political parties, and their "representatives", in package deals that cannot fully satisfy anyone, because they are not individually subscribed to, item by item. - Compare how much more detailed e.g. insurance and real estate contracts are. - During territorial elections usually only a set of misleading slogans are offered as a "choice". Most legislation remains, inevitably, unknown to the "representatives", the rulers and their voters and victims. - JZ 30.6.87, 10.8.87, 22.1.11, 29.11.13.

PANARCHISM: We should not have to depend on monopolistic and centralized decision-makers or majorities for our steps towards freedom, peace, justice. Freedom for all to experiment also in the political, economic and social spheres, but, naturally, always only at the own expense and risk. Full exterritorial autonomy and personal laws for all dissenters and minorities attempting this with their own societies and communities. – JZ, 23.5.04, 24.3.09.

PANARCHISM: We upgrade our phones, computers, and cars regularly. Why aren't we upgrading our social tech, too? In this FEE-sponsored talk at Voice & Exit, Freeman editor Max Borders inspires us to think beyond politics. We need to pass beyond coercive means of making political decisions to peaceful means. - By Chuck Grimmett – Another fundamentally panarchistic and excellent talk by Max Borders – Facebook hint by FEE, 9/18/13.

PANARCHISM: We would need very little diplomacy, police power and military strength, secret service agents and no party politics at all, nor any election campaigns and donations - if we left each other alone, exterritorially. - JZ, 24.10.93, 28.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - STRENGTH, MILITARY, DIPLOMACY, POLICE, LEAVING EACH OTHER ALONE, EXTERRITORIALLY, SECRET SERVICES, VOTING, DEMOCRACY, LIBERTY, RIGHTS

PANARCHISM: We, as libertarians, affirm: That full individual liberty is impossible in any society other than a voluntary one that aggresses upon 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, providing that they do not physically harm or coercively restrict another individual's life, liberty or property. - That everyone is exclusively sovereign, and is a slave to no one. ...” - The Libertas Statement of the SLL (Society for Libertarian Life). – LIBERTY, VOLUNTARISM, RIGHTS

PANARCHISM: we’ll will arrive at a solution mutually satisfying to all. That is the point of our civilization, as you will learn with the passing of time.” – L. Neil Smith, Tom Paine Maru, p. 151. - MUTUALISM, CIVILIZATION

PANARCHISM: We’ve never had an enemy like this before, he realized. One that takes advantage of our greatest weakness, by offering (*) to make all our dreams come true.” – David Brin, Temptation, p.169 in: Far Horizons, ed. by Robert Silverberg, an Orbit Book, 1999. - (*) to allow us … Thus one’s supposed enemy can be turned into one’s best friend. – It is an old Christian saying (at least I saw it advertised, many years ago, at an Australian church, that “the best way to defeat an enemy is to turn him into a friend”. – But not merely Christian undefined or insufficiently defined “love” is required for this. Something much more instead, a consistent application of justice, individual rights and liberties, all of them: All the military applications of this saying have not yet been sufficiently explored and tried, since we are still, mostly, mere captives of territorialist ideas, institutions, powers, ideologies and schemes. - JZ, 29.9.07, 22.1.11. - POLYARCHISM, LIBERATION, RIGHTFUL WAR AIMS, ENEMY SUBJECTS TURNED INTO FRIENDS & ALLIES OR AT LEAST NEUTRALS, DES.

PANARCHISM: What a silly notion that politics and economics have to be tied to a certain territory, that no more than one such experiment may be tried at any time in any territory and that this can only be the one imposed by a minority or by a majority. - JZ 11.9.83, 5.4.84. – This is as silly and wrong as forcing all people to eat only the same kind of bread, fruit and vegetable, play the same sport, the same game, read the same books, watch the same movies, wear the same clothing, hats and footwear and listen to or produce the same music, instead of allowing them their own free choices in all spheres. – JZ, 29.11.13. - TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM, IMPOSED UNIFORMITY

PANARCHISM: What do you do when you have numerous free choices? You take the one that is best or easiest for you and you will, in future, probably, continue to make other choices that are even better for you, in your opinion. Panarchism gives you that choice in the three spheres that were so far still monopolized by territorial governments, that of political, economic and social systems. You will no longer have to abide by those choices, which large numbers of other people do prefer. They can have them for themselves and you can have and do your things for yourself – together with like-minded people only. To each his own. – JZ, 25.3.09, 22.1.11. - FREE CHOICE, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, FULLY FREE ENTERPRISE & COMPETITION IN EVERY SPHERE,

PANARCHISM: WHAT DOES IT MEAN? Panarchism is the equivalent to freedom of expression and information, freedom of speech and press but this in the sphere of tolerant actions and experiments and not as prescribed actions and experiments for whole "nations" or "peoples" or territorial governments but only for individuals and their voluntary associations, especially the dissenting and opposition minorities, for all who would prefer individually chosen personal law systems to territorially imposed laws, imposed by ruling majorities or minorities. All dissenters could then have their preferred political, economic and social system for themselves, although only among themselves and only on the basis of an-territorial autonomy and personal laws. Only the pretended shepherds would have lost their involuntary and imprisoned flocks, their fleece, their meat, the blood and bones fertilizer produced from their involuntary victims. Only voluntary victims or slaves would remain and those who get their kicks out of ruling over them. However, even fools will always find some greater fools still and both deserve the lessons they would get from their relationships while surrounded by the more free or quite free relations among people who formed better voluntary communities. The great and almost generally accepted precedent in another sphere is religious tolerance or religious freedom. – From JZ Pan AZ. - Revised: JZ , 22.1.11.

PANARCHISM: What freedom goal could not be attained, by those who want it, if we fully utilized existing alternative freedom of expression and information opportunities and this in combination with exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, to explore, and publicize and practise freedom of action and experimentation, individual sovereignty and free choice in the political, economic and social sphere? - JZ 23.7.89, 10.10. 89, 11.12.03, 22.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION PANARCHISTIC ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS & PANARCHISTIC ALTERNATIVE MEDIA USE

PANARCHISM: What is freedom? Freedom is the right to choose; the right to create for yourself the alternative of choice. Without the responsibility and exercise of choice a man is not a man but a member, an instrument, a thing.” – Archibald Macleish (1882-1982), 12.04.37. – And yet few draw the individualist secessionist, voluntaryist and panarchist conclusion in favor of personal laws and exterritorial autonomy from such general remarks in favor of freedom. Territorial rule is taken still all too much for granted by most people. – JZ, 3.1.08, 22.1.11. – MAN, SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: What is hardest of all? That which seems most simple: to see with your own eyes what is before your eyes.” - R. A. Wilson, Masks of the Illuminati, p.54. - This applies for me especially to the tacit acceptance of panarchistic principles, practices and choices in our daily private lives, to the extent that we are not under legal, juridical, bureaucratic or other commands. - JZ, 22.1.02. - Compare Bastiat's writings on "what is seen and what is not seen." - JZ, 22.1.11. - UNCONSCIOUSNESS, BLINDNESS, CUSTOM, HABIT, TAKING THINGS FOR GRANTED

PANARCHISM: What is missing is the provision of authority, if there is to be one at all, only upon the basis of consent, i.e. chosen by individuals and for themselves only. - JZ 27.5.87, 10.8.87. – TERRITORIALISM, CONSENT, CHOICE, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

PANARCHISM: What is needed to stop the trend toward socialism is common sense and moral courage.” - Ludwig von Mises, 1947. - Rather: What is needed to stop the trend toward State socialism is e.g. voluntary socialism, and the reduction of State socialism to its voluntary victims - to reduce the number of armed, aggressive and intolerant State socialists and to teach those that can be taught by their own experience. - JZ 17.11.82, 16.4.08. Thus forms of voluntary socialism would be developed which would become almost indistinguishable from consistent and wide-spread voluntary capitalism, a capitalism of and for all, who want it, or a "people's capitalism" as some called it. - JZ 7.4.84. - VOLUNTARY OR COOPERATIVE SOCIALISM, SELF-MANAGEMENT, PURCHASE OF ENTERPRISES, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, ALL IDEOLOGIES & THEIR PRACTICE ONLY FOR THEIR VOLUNTEERS

PANARCHISM: What is odd and hard to understand about panarchism is that this just and simple freedom alternative, in all essential things just the opposite of the systems we have been suffering under for many centuries, has so far been more or less clearly seen and appreciated by only a very small minority, usually only by a few isolated individuals, unaware how closely their relevant thoughts resembled each other, and unaware of all of the writings they had already produced between them and of all the historical precedents. On the other hand, territorial authoritarianism and even totalitarianism, have become and remained relatively popular in spite of their numerous wrongs and defects and the harm they cause to almost everybody most of the time. Please explain that riddle to me. – JZ, 16.7.98, 14.1.99, 8.9.04. – From JZ, Pan AZ. – VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY & PERSONAL LAW VS. TERRITORIALISM. WHY IS THE LATTER STILL SUPPORTED IN MOST HEADS?

PANARCHISM: What is the greatest gift of all? It is life itself. And what is life? The essential characteristic of life is the power to choose, to make decisions, to act. And that's another way of describing "freedom - to", or freedom in action. We can say that the greater the freedom in action, the more life there is - or the higher the form of life.” - Andre Spies, THE CONNECTION, 131, p.14. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - See his "Building Freedom" website. - JZ, 22.1.11. - A CHARACTERISTIC OF LIFE, FREEDOM, CHOICE, ACTION, EXPERIMENTATION, DECISION-MAKING, INDIVIDUALISM, FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION

PANARCHISM: What other political concepts are almost or fully synonymous with panarchism and its panarchies? Competing governments, parallel institutions, voluntary associations, voluntaryism, political pluralism, minority autonomy, individualism, freedom - including the freedom not to be free or to choose voluntary slavery, freedom of action, tolerance to the utmost extent possible, decentralization - down to individual choice, individual sovereignty, experimental freedom in the social, economic and political sphere, freedom of contract, personal law, alternative institutions, exterritorial utopianism, intentional communities that are confined to the private property of their members, proprietary communities - as long as their area of operation is not as large that it could be classed as a monopolistic State territory, the old Turkish Millet system, the old system of independent Orders, the Capitulations between States guaranteeing autonomy and consular jurisdiction and personal law for the own members within the territory of other States, the 'Laws of the Barbarians' as described by Edward Gibbons in chapter 38 of his “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire”, Opting out, Withdrawing from the State, Ignoring the State, Individual Secessionism, Leaving the State like one may leave a church, religious liberty or tolerance, dissent, non-conformism etc. applied in the political, economic and social sphere, free 'internal migration', conscientious objection in all spheres of responsible activities, full exterritorial autonomy for majorities and minorities to run their own affairs - and nothing else, laissez faire, laissez passer, as long and as far as free people want to apply it among themselves, free enterprise even for State Socialists to run their own lives, individual initiative in all spheres of human endeavor. I hold that it is the only societal form that is in accordance with human nature and that does permit peaceful coexistence in the long run. - JZ, n.d. - A comprehensive list has still to become compiled or published. - JZ , 22.1.11. - DEFINITIONS, TERMINOLOGY, ALTERNATIVE TERMS FOR PANARCHISM, NAMES, TERMS, DEFINITIONS

PANARCHISM: What remains of the territorial power, exploitation and Warfare State - once we make all participation in it quite voluntary and subject it to fully free competition by exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities? How many voluntary victims could they retain, in the long run, and mobilize against freedom lovers of all kinds? Free societies could ally themselves with all their military, tax and education slaves, with all the victims of its monopolistic "public services", its monetary despotism, its wrongful policies. Freedom could come "to eat up" or infect and overcome territorial despotism - with its principles and practices. - JZ, 23.7.97 & 26.6.01, 22.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - POWER, STATE & WAR

PANARCHISM: What under territorialism is believed to be in the national interest is, in reality, mostly very much against the national interest, that is, in the interest of all the peaceful and productive people in a territory. Almost exclusively only those intent upon abusing any powers given to them, in their own favor, pretend to act in the “public interest” or on behalf of “the” people. – JZ, 3.9.98, 9.1.99, 22.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - TERRITORIALISM & THE “NATIONAL INTEREST”, PUBLIC INTEREST, POLITICIANS, PUBLIC SERVANTS

PANARCHISM: What was true of our ancestors, is true of revolutionists in general. The monarchs and governments, from which they choose to separate, attempt to stigmatize them as traitors. But they are not traitors in fact; inasmuch as they betray, and break faith with, no one. Having pledged no faith, they break none. They are simply men, who, for reasons of their own - whether good or bad, wise or unwise, is immaterial - choose to exercise their natural right of dissolving their connection with the governments under which they have lived. In doing this, they no more commit the crime of treason - which necessarily implies treachery, deceit, breach of faith - than a man commits treason when he chooses to leave a church, or any other voluntary association, with which he has been connected. - This principle was a true one in 1776. It is a true one now. It is the only one on which any rightful government can rest. It is the one on which the Constitution itself professes to rest. If it does not really rest on that basis, it has not right to exist; and it is the duty of every man to raise his hand against it.” - Lysander Spooner, No Treason, 1/14, Works I. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, TREASON, LOYALTY, CHOICE, BEING TRUE TO ONESELF, VOLUNTARISM

PANARCHISM: What we can realistically hope to cancel (? My handwriting! – JZ) is America's intolerance of non-conformity.” - John T. Harlee, SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 5/82. – (I have microfiched many of its issues but have not the time and energy to look up this passage now. - JZ , 22.1.11.) - NONCONFORMISM

PANARCHISM: What we now need to discover in the social realm is the moral equivalent of war: something heroic that will speak to men as universally as war does (*), and yet will be as compatible with their spiritual selves as war has proved to be incompatible.” - William James: The Varieties of Religious Experience, XIV, 1902. - The chance of having one's own will, institutions and services but without imposing them upon any others and without destroying them and their institutions, in a purely creative and freely competitive struggle against the forces of nature only and for the realization of the own ideals in one's own sphere. - Thus all can be winners, gaining their systems for themselves, as long as they can stand them and, once dissatisfied, are free to advancing to something which they will then realize will be better for them, at least for a while. - The one-man-revolution will be made possible and millions of them will tend to advance all of us - fast and in a rightful and sensible way, but with each advancing only at his own speed. – This possibility or choice could or should inspire more people than the Olympic Games in sports. - JZ, 22.1.11, 29.11.13. - (*) MORE SO! - JZ, 7.11.85 & 24.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - WAR, ENTHUSIASM, COMRADESHIP, SOLIDARITY, VOLUNTARISM, PIONEERING, EXPERIMENTATION, FREEDOM OF ACTION, UNANIMITY, COMMITMENT, IDEALISM, VICTORY, WINNING, SELF-HELP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, FRAGMENTATION, SCHISMS & DECENTRALIZATION OF THE BEST TYPE

PANARCHISM: when he returned to Earth and again … rubbed shoulders every day with faceless millions, all busily living out their different ways and with their different aims and values. There, custom and synthetic social barriers served to mark out the lines of demarcation that man needed in order to identify with definable cultural groups.” – James P. Hogan, The Gentle Giants of Ganymede, 168. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - IN SCIENCE FICTION

PANARCHISM: When one makes secession easy then one makes also old and new forms of federalism easy to establish. This seems to apply to geographical as well as non-territorial secessionism and federalism. Ulrich von Beckerath mentions such a successful policy of the Republic of Venice. – When its allies or provinces were threatened by foreign military powers, the Republic of Venice allowed them to secede and told them, that in better times they would be received back, without rancor or penalties for their more or less enforced secession. Usually these foreign possessions of Venice gladly returned, afterwards, to their former association with Venice, to their mutual advantage. A federation that has to be enforced, just like a national unity that has to be enforced, is not good enough. Only what remains, after all dissenters can freely secede, is good enough to deserve preserving, as long as it still has some voluntary adherents. – JZ, 23.7.06, 31.10.07. - Otherwise it should "survive" only in historical records or theatrical re-enactments. - JZ, 22.1.11. - FEDERALISM, DECENTRALIZATION, SECESSION, GEOGRAPHICAL & NON-TERRITORIAL

PANARCHISM: When the adherence of the whole body of people to the public philosophy is firm, a true community exists; where there is division and dissent over the main principles the result is a condition of war.” - Walter Lippmann, The Public Philosophy, A Mentor Book, 1955, p.104. – Let the divisions be decided by adult individuals making their own choices for themselves, in all spheres! – JZ, 11.9.08. - DISSENT, FACTIONALISM, DIVISIONS, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, CONSENT, AGREEMENT, UNITY, COMMUNITIES, HARMONY, WARFARE STATE, CIVIL WAR

PANARCHISM: When we reflect how difficult it is to move or deflect the great machine of society, how impossible to advance the notions of a whole people suddenly to ideal right, we see the wisdom of Solon's remark that no more good must be attempted than the nation can bear.” - Thomas Jefferson, Writings, Vol. X, p. 255. – No territorial “nation” is a uniform entity. Some enlightened minorities can bear more than the average man or the majority can! They should not be obstructed in their free and tolerant experiments among themselves. - No non-invasive person should be reformed against his will and interventionists do each other no wrong if they confine their interventions to their own intentional community members. - JZ, 7.7.82, 17.4.08. - The difficulties arise only when one presumes it to be necessary to get national or majority or expert approval before one can undertake some progressive steps. Panarchism gives to individuals and minorities the freedom to undertake new experiments – at their own cost and risk. - JZ, 7.4.84. – EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, INCLUDING EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VIA INDIVIDUAL CHOICES & SECESSIONISM VS. ALL TERRITORIAL IMPOSITIONS.

PANARCHISM: When you consider the number of volumes, pages and repetitions of territorial politics and of religions, what do a few more volumes, pages and repetitions of panarchist thoughts matter at this stage? Whatever errors and mud they still contain, there might still be a few pearls among them or, by the tendency to contradict, a few pearls might become formulated even from the worst examples of trying to express panarchistic ideas and practices. – Thus I go on, unrepentantly, with my brain-storming and notes on panarchism, however repetitive, flawed and one-sided, without offering them as “revelation” but merely as personal notes, comments and preferred quotes by others, as food for further thoughts and challenges to offer something better, more concisely, clearer, more convincingly, with better examples. – It will require the efforts of many to develop this alternative into a genuine political science, one that is not confined to territorialism. - JZ, 24.3.09, 22.1.11, 29.11.13.

PANARCHISM: whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it.” – This kind of “abolition” notion is that of absolutist territorial reformers, revolutionaries and terrorists, all too ready to use force for the achievement of their “ideal”. The panarchist would merely demand the right to exterritorially secede from it and would say, tolerantly, towards the remainder: "Serves you right!" - JZ 7.4.84, 22.1.11. – Panarchists also see in every population many diverse peoples that should not be forced under any single territorialist system. Any population should be free to sort itself out into various self-governing or self-managing systems via individual secessions and subscriptions. – The resulting societies and communities of volunteers should not be confined to inhabitants of particular territories only. They might accept as members volunteers even from all over the world, without demanding that they do come “home” into a country from which their ancestors may have emigrated centuries ago. They might also accept members of different races, religions, cultures and ideologies, as long as they subscribe to certain common principles of voluntarism and tolerance. – They might also be as exclusive, discriminating, segregating or elitists as they want to be, leaving all others to their own choices. - JZ, 17.4.08, 22.1.11. – SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

PANARCHISM: Where a business makes a new product or service available to the public, a new social institution is created.” - Philip E. Jacobson, Marketguard, THE CONNECTION 100, 12 Nov. 1981. - There should be the same freedom to set up new political, economic and social institutions, quite autonomous ones but applied only exterritorially, to their volunteers, i.e. the same freedom as does already exist, in many countries, for the setting up of religious movements, enterprises and various other voluntary associations. - JZ 10 Oct. 89. – RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE, FREE ENTERPRISE, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS

PANARCHISM: Where there is no vision the people perish.” – Bible, Proverbs, XXIX, 18, ca. 350 B.C. – Not only “a” vision is required but a rightful and correct one or even many of them. We have suffered from the territorial imposition of too many wrongful and false visions or dreams and ideals. Panarchism is a vision or general framework for all visionaries and their followers. It facilitates the benefits they could provide and limits the wrongs and harms they could cause. For them, their own choices, whatever they may amount to, are right - until they learn to make better ones. – JZ, 16.2.86, 9.1.99, 22.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - VISION

PANARCHISM: Which one is the ideal ideology to be realized? Not just one but all deserve to be tried out! To the extent that this is technically and morally possible! Free after: “... Tizian ... beinahe hundertjaehrig, auf die Frage eines Schuelers, welche Farben er, der Meister, verwendete, antwortete: 'Alle.'" - Hans Habe, Leben fuer den Journalismus, S.266.

PANARCHISM: While enlightened subjects are entitled to opt out of suicidal, destructive, exploitative and aggressive policies, laws and constitutions of their rulers, fools and prejudiced people are entitled to remain in them and also entitled to opt out even from an ideally limited government or from an ideal anarchistic community. - JZ 18.12.83, 6.4.84.

PANARCHISM: While I cannot single-handedly stop territorialist nations and their fallacies from mass murderous attempts towards the own minorities and majority and minorities or majorities of other territorial “nations” and the attempts to suppress particular ideologies or their practice, I can at least, in my micro-fiched PEACE PLANS series, and in some digitized files jot down my own thoughts and those of others on the “exterritorial imperative” and make them available upon demand in this format, and via some correspondence, however small this kind of “publicity” for them is. The Internet might come to help me to make some of this material more widely accessible. But so far it has not dug up and spread such all such information or interest in it, to a sufficient extent. – JZ, n.d., note for ON PANARCHY No. 18, revised 11.1.99, 22.1.11. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE & PEACE PLANS

PANARCHISM: while individuals of different nationalities can peacefully coexist within any given territorial area, governmental territorial conflicts are perpetual.” – Murray N. Rothbard, Conceived in Liberty, I/303. – Individuals, as such, usually do not aspire to power over many other people. Territorial governments almost always do. – JZ, 16.2.08. - Apart from a few fanatics, the most diverse kinds of people do already manage to peacefully coexist in large cities. Those still and wrongfully interfered with, by some intolerant louts or fanatics, or supposed leaders and representatives, ought to become much more protected in their individual rights and liberties than territorial institutions can manage. - JZ , 22.1.11, 29.11.13. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, TOLERANCE, GOVERNMENTS, WARFARE STATES, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, INDIVIDUALISM, INTOLERANCE

PANARCHISM: While it is correct that almost all existing governments are territorial governments with compulsory membership or subjugation, "competing" only on the territorial level with other governments of the same kind for the own or their territory and subjects, including all their dissenters, in a struggle for territorial monopolies, all of them being, essentially criminal political turfs, it would be quite wrong to indiscriminately condemn as "governments" all of the past current and future governments and free societies that were, are or will be only exterritorially autonomous and have only voluntary members. Such competing or voluntary governments or governance systems are rightful, practical and possible, even desirable, compared with most of the past and present ones. - JZ, 1.1.99, 24.2.99, 22.1.11. - EXTERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS OF VOLUNTEERS VS. TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS NOT UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTED BY THEIR PEACEFUL SUBJECTS. -  Originally from JZ, Pan AZ. - TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS

PANARCHISM: While panarchism, once widely realized, would be a quick fix for many major remaining evils, everywhere, there appears to be no quick fix for making most people aware of and appreciative of the potential of panarchism to help them in their rightful aspirations and to quickly spread the theory and practice of panarchism. Maybe the publication of many to all panarchistic texts, their abstracts, their reviews, a comprehensive bibliography, and an index to all of them, on the Internet and or on CD-ROMs, would help, together with FAQs and discussion and newsgroups on this subject. That remains to be seen. Maybe an ideal declaration of all genuine individual rights and liberties would greatly help. Also an ideal militia of volunteers for their protection. Or the establishment of many governments and societies in exile, all with a panarchist platform and already realized practice for their present members, as allies against despotic governments. Maybe a clear declaration of quite rightful war and peace aims would help. My own collection of panarchistic texts, correspondence and notes, on microfiche and in my PEACE PLANS series and its ON PANARCHY sub-series, as well as several now existing panarchist websites, containing many new writings on the subject, have not yet proven to be “the better mousetrap” and “the path” to it. – Perhaps a questionnaire could help? It might put up a dozen or several dozen questions like the following: Do you know a territorial solution to the problem of involuntary mass unemployment, inflation, poverty, war, civil war and terrorism? Have you considered the exterritorial alternative options for solutions? - JZ, 25.11.93, 9.1.99. Are you opposed to others experimenting with possible solutions, if they would so at their own risk and expense? - JZ, 8.12.03. - An ideas archive would naturally be a great help, so would the wide-spread practise of flow chart discussions (or electronic “argument mapping”) and the establishment of an encyclopedia of the best refutations. – JZ, 9.1.99. Likewise Q & A lists, a comprehensive panarchist encyclopedia and library. A survey of all the start-up proposals for it that are on record so far. - See: Start-Ups, Questionnaire. – JZ, 22.1.11. - Originally From JZ Pan AZ., QUESTIONS, QUICK & EASY FIXES, START-UP OPTIONS

PANARCHISM: While schisms are the rule rather than the exception e.g. in religion, philosophy, arts, literature, music, hobbies, sports, in territorial politics they are outlawed and suppressed. Splits, separatism, autonomous actions are fought against and suppressed. Peace, security, justice and prosperity can only be secured when schisms become as legal, constitutional and moral as they are already in many other spheres and are similarly supported by an enlightened public opinion. - JZ 4.4.84, 22.1.11. – SCHISMS, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, PEACE, SECURITY, DEFENCE, HARMONY, MORALITY, TOLERANCE, JUSTICE, PROGRESS, PROSPERITY, VOLUNTARY SEPARATISM, PERSONAL LAW SOCIETIES, SECESSIONISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, POLYARCHISM, MULTIACHRISM, COMPETING GOVERNANCE

PANARCHISM: While the liberal-democratic governmentalism says, with Chief Joseph, American Indian, 1877: "Treat all men alike. Give them all the same laws. Give them an even chance to live and grow", panarchism says: "Let men treat themselves. Allow them their own laws. Give them thereby their even chance to live and grow in their own way.” - JZ 17.11.82, 5.4.84.

PANARCHISM: White people can no more rightfully lay an exclusive claim, of any constitutional, legal, juridical kind, to the whole surface of a continent or country or any large segment of it that goes beyond private and associated real estate, than any aboriginals, natives or other immigrants or any colored mixtures of them could. All that any such grouping or any other voluntary grouping, could rightly claim, would be full non-territorial autonomy or voluntary and non-territorial segregation or integration, not compulsory and territorial segregation or integration. - JZ 20 Sep. 89, 10.10.89. – TERRITORIALISM OR EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS VS. RACISM?

PANARCHISM: Who could doubt the right to secede from a government armed with nuclear anti-people weapons? - JZ, 22.4.83. – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

PANARCHISM: Who really loves politicians and bureaucrats? Not even the politicians and bureaucrats do. So, why do we put up with them rather than secede from them and picking, for ourselves, for our voluntary communities, only those authorities, experts, professionals, public servants and institutions which we do, individually, really trust, always at our own risk and expense? Do not vote otherwise, i.e., in the common, confused, collectivistic, majoritarian and territorial sense. "It only encourages them!" - JZ, 24.5.00. - That would end all imposed hate, revenge, resentment and frustration-relationships while not stopping any love, friendship, trust and business-relationships. - 28.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - LOVE, TRUST, SELF-RELIANCE, SECESSION, VOTING, POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS, EXPERTS, PROFESSIONALS, CONSULTANTS, LEADERS, GURUS, PUBLIC SERVANTS, INSTITUTIONS, PARTIES

PANARCHISM: Whoever wants to be ruled by the modern kings and aristocrats: the ruling politicians and bureaucrats, should be free to do so at his expense and risk, as long as he can stand them. But no one, anywhere and for any time, who has not acted aggressively against others, should be conscripted and taxed into such a servile and vile relationship. - JZ 11 Nov. 92. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - POLITICS AS USUAL

PANARCHISM: Whoever wants to bring freedom to the world, that is, his concept of freedom, is a despot and not an anarchist. („Wer der Welt Freiheit bringen will - das heisst eben doch: seine Auffassung von der Freiheit - ist ein Despot aber kein Anarchist.“) - Gustav Landauer, Anarchistische Gedanken über Anarchismus, in AKRATIE, Basel, No.13, Jan. 80, S.21. - Unless, of cause, he wants to realize it only exterritorially and among volunteers! - JZ, 26.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - FREEDOM, LIBERATION MOVEMENTS & ANARCHISM

PANARCHISM: Why and how could anyone represent AREAS and all their inhabitants rather than those free people only, who have chosen him and no one else? Who or what illusion or delusion made him “representative” for all, without a power of attorney from everyone involved? At most he could represent those, who subscribe to the delusions of territorial representative or direct democracies or republics. But not a single individual disagreeing with these “ideals” could be rightly represented by anyone in any territorial regime. – Territorial representation is not sufficiently representative. – It represents too much constitutional, legal, juridical and police repression for that. - JZ, 12.11.93, 9.1.99. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - Not districts, areas, countries or continents could sign them up but only individuals. Majorities, minorities and individuals can only oblige themselves. - JZ, 22.1.11, 29.11.13. - REPRESENTATION

PANARCHISM: Why can't we get along with each other, justly, tolerantly, peacefully? Because we are not yet panarchists! - JZ, 8.9.97, 26.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - GETTING ALONG WITH OTHERS, STRIFE & CONFLICT, Q. & A.

PANARCHISM: Why did territorial statism rather than panarchism prevail so far? Was the remaining over-lordship in the instances of part-realizations of panarchic freedom too strong an obstacle? Historical records on these experience are, perhaps, not complete enough to allow us to make a sufficiently informed judgment upon them. But on first principles one could conclude that any compromise with evil or wrong will benefit the evil or wrong while doing no good to the good or right side. Even now neither the rulers nor the ruled do fully know and appreciate all their individual rights and liberties. Even religious liberty is not yet fully realized in some countries. – JZ, 9.3.86, 18.4.08.

PANARCHISM: Why did the Reformation stop at religious liberty – in the minds of most? – JZ, 16.7.93. Solve that riddle and you could help us to come much closer to panarchism for all. – JZ, 14.1.99. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - REFORMATION, RELIGIOUS & OTHER TOLERANCE

PANARCHISM: Why didn't the diverse historical and philosophical beginnings of panarchism simply grow and keep growing until they would have won out everywhere? Doesn't this failure of panarchism, so far, prove a lack of viability as compared with the territorial State? - It took even the primitive, limited and despotic form of voting which we now "enjoy" thousands of years to be widely realized. Slavery and religious intolerance persisted for thousands of years. The insufficiently complete and consistent liberalism of the nineteenth century was defeated by the statist "modern" “liberalism” of our times. But this does not mean that voting in the meaning of comprehensive individual choice and a liberalism, which comprehensively and consistently goes beyond even the classical liberalism, are both impracticable or non-viable. Or that slavery and religious intolerance constitute superior systems. The prevalence of territorial nationalism and of State socialism do merely indicate that we are not yet living in a sufficiently enlightened age. Panarchism and the freedom etc. which it would make possible, does not exist as yet because certain dogmas are still too popular, e.g. those of territorial integrity, uniformity of law, compulsory state membership, exclusive territorial rule, equality under the law, majority rule, representative democracy, finance by taxation, combined with misinterpretations of consent, choice, the social contract, minority rights and self-government. (This listing does not claim to be comprehensive. Add your own examples.) While such errors and myths continue to dominate most minds, quite free institutions cannot prevail, no more among us than among other barbarians. - JZ, 18.3.84, 5.4.84, 16.4.08, 29.11.13. - The question is really only: How large must a panarchistic organization be at least and how consistently must its policies be applied towards others in order to allow it to survive and to infect and dissolve or transform the current territorial States? Many answers to such questions have already been supplied in PEACE PLANS 16-18 & 61-63 and in my 24-volume sub-series ON PANARCHY. (All digitized by now. – JZ, 22.1.11. – OBJECTIONS, QUESTIONS

PANARCHISM: Why do we allow monkeys in territorial leadership positions to determine our fates, leading us from one disaster to another, caused by them and at our expense and risk, even granting them our consent, under the delusion that they are helping rather than wronging and harming us? - End the rule of territorial political priesthoods. - JZ, 14.2.99, 22.1.11. - TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, LEADERSHIP, RULERS

PANARCHISM: Why fight, resist, subvert, boycott or even merely argue against any existing State or any proposed panarchy when the existing territorial States could be panarchistically reduced to mere panarchistic autonomy and when quite different panarchies do not really bother you at all but simply leave you alone, confining their activities to their own members and self-chosen own affairs? They could merely be your own suppliers or markets, if you are prepared to trade peacefully with them. You do not have to have any other relations with them. Thus you are free to ignore them, just as you are already free to ignore any church, sect, hobby or sports group that does not interest you. Panarchies minimize motives for violence, although they do not “offer the other cheek”. – JZ, 29.9.93, 9.1.99. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - NON-VIOLENCE

PANARCHISM: Why haven't we got panarchy as yet? 1.) Because it remains so far an almost unknown ideal. 2.) Resistance fighters have so far fought for territorial domination rather than personal law independence and this mistake is just one of many which they commit in their ignorance of better alternatives. 3.) Individual rights are still insufficiently declared and recognized. 4.) There is as yet no suitable organization for the defence of individual rights. - JZ, 7.3.88. - Moreover, the affordable, powerful and lasting alternative media are so far barely utilized for this purpose, so that most of the panarchist texts remain unknown and un-translated, are mostly not even listed in bibliographies, abstracts and review collections and contained in special library collections. - JZ, 18.9.04. – From JZ, Pan AZ., WHY HASN'T IT SUCCEEDED AS YET? Q., MILITIA, DECLARATION OF ALL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, FREEDOM FIGHTERS, MASS MEDIA

PANARCHISM: Why play negative sum games when positive sum games are available?” - J. Neil Shulman, "Alongside Night", p.221. - Why play the negative sum games of conventional territorial politics when positive sum games like panarchies are possible? - JZ, 4.7.89. – From JZ Pan AZ. - Alas, they are still outlawed and their legalizations is so far demanded or striven for only by a few. – JZ, 29.11.13. - VS. CONVENTIONAL POLITICS

PANARCHISM: Why should I shoot other people upon command only because they are different or disagree with me? I rather leave them alone as long as they leave me alone and, between us, we rather shoot such commanders. – JZ, 15.10.05. – TOLERANCE, RESISTANCE TO WRONGFUL ORDERS, WARS, DISOBEDIENCE, UNITY & HARMONY IN TOLERANCE FOR DIVERSITY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS RATHER THAN CENTRALIZED COLLECTIVIST TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY

PANARCHISM: Why should not men be free to decide for themselves upon diverse autonomous communities of a social (*) kind, or religious ones. Anarchists, at least for now, can speak only for themselves. Thereby they would on principle and quite clearly distinguish themselves from the statist ideologues, who always argue in the name of all of the people. It cannot be the intention of anarchists to force upon the whole of society one common concept. Rather, they must consider the State as a human association like every other one, however, they must never accept it as a coercive association.” (**) - Uwe Timm, Gesammelte Schriften, S.207. - (*) economic or political - (**) One with compulsory membership and a territorial monopoly. – JZ - POLYARCHISM, EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS, ANARCHISM

PANARCHISM: Why should we tolerate our domination by any economic system or any political or social system by any territorial political hierarchy - any more than our domination by any religious hierarchy or exclusive State church? Freedom for dissenters and non-conformists in every respect. But freedom also for those who do not want to conform with the systems of the dissenters and non-conformists. – JZ, 25.11.93, 22.1.11. – From JZ Pan AZ. - RELIGIOUS HIERARCHIES

PANARCHISM: Why should we tolerate political territorial hierarchies any more than religious ones? Why should we allow any government, that has not our individual consent for this, to impose any economic, political or social system upon us? – JZ, 25.11.93, 9.1.99. – From JZ Pan AZ. – QUESTIONS, RELIGIOUS HIERARCHIES, Q.

PANARCHISM: Why, in recent times, anarchy pleases me so well? Everyone to live according to his own mind. That is also my own advantage. I leave everyone to his own endeavors in order to be also free to like in accordance with my own thinking.” – Goethe. (Warum mir in neuester Zeit Anarchie gar so wohl gefaellt? Ein jeder lebt nach seinem Sinn. Das ist nun also auch mein Gewinn. Ich lasse jedem sein Betreben, um auch nach meinem Sinn zu leben.) – Quoted in: Uwe Timm, Gesammelte Schriften, p.230. - To that extent even Goethe was far in advance of most of the present anarchists! - JZ, 22.1.11. - & ANARCHISM, PANARCHIES ALSO FOR STATISTS – BUT ONLY THEIR VOLUNTEERS & THE TOLERANT ONES, CONFINING THEMSELVES TO EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY!

PANARCHISM: Wish nothing else for your neighbour than what you wish for yourself. - Arab proverb. – “Wuensche deinem Naechsten nichts anderes als dir selbst.” - Arabisches Sprichwort. HILDESHEIMER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG, 24 Juni 1958. - Tolerate among others other things than you wish for yourself. Otherwise, you might do more than wish and begin to command and enforce your wishes. - Toleriere bei anderen und unter ihnen anderes als Du Dir fuer Dich selbst wuenschst! Sonst bliebe es vielleicht nicht beim Wuenschen fuer die Naechsten, sondern kaeme zu Befehlen und Zwaengen. - JZ, 24 10. 84. – TOLERANCE, BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR, GOLDEN RULE

PANARCHISM: With panarchism we mobilize also all rightful defence, policing and self-help, reform, revolution, resistance and liberation options, aspirations and opportunities and give them a much better chance than they would have without it. – JZ, 24.1.09, 25.3.09.

PANARCHISM: With the pro-freedom urges so rare and so insufficiently supported by publishers and libraries, especially in powerful and alternative media, and ignorance of freedom alternatives so wide-spread, it is no wonder that they are usually overshadowed or covered by avalanches of the results of power urges. All the more important is full exterritorial autonomy for the small groups of enlightened people that do exist. Their freedom experiments, to the extent that they are successful and are sufficiently publicized or observed, can have a significant effect, a much larger one than the all too limited quantity of freedom texts that is readily accessible so far, mostly in only in conventional media. Panarchism, once it is realized and utilized, allows even individuals to step out of collectivist messes on their own, by their "one-man-revolutions", in the same way that a dissatisfied consumer on a free market can start boycotting certain goods and services for the rest of his life, while accepting others. - JZ, 11.10.99, 27.6.01, 22.1.11. - Today I read with delight that the gun firm Smith & Wesson is in financial trouble, because it is widely boycotted by those defending their right to bear arms, after it compromised with government policies on trying to make guns "safe" via some technical gadgets. Guns are already safe with rational people and should always be very risky to use for criminals. Territorial governments are those organizations that can be least trusted with guns, far less with ABC mass murder devices. - JZ, 9.12.03. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - FREEDOM, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM & ITS EFFECTS, GUN CONTROL LAWS, NWT

PANARCHISM: Withdraw your “power of attorney” from your territorial governments, at the federal, State and local level. - JZ, 17.6.03, 8.9.04. Also from all their QUANGOS: Quasi-Autonomous Non-Government Organizations, established by territorial laws and granted privileges and coercive powers over dissenters. - JZ, 18.9.04. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - Actually, we have never formally granted it to any of them and are thus under no contractual obligation to obey them. - JZ, 22.1.11. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, POWER OF ATTORNEY, WITHDRAWING FROM TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS, CONSENT, VOTING, STATE MEMBERSHIP

PANARCHISM: Without agreement on panarchism not enough united resistance against tyranny is assured. – JZ, 12.8.06. - VS. TYRANNY, WAR & PEACE & LIBERATION AIMS, QUITE RIGHTFUL ONES, RESISTANCE, REVOLUTIONS, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS

PANARCHISM: Without freedom to disassociate oneself individually and to associate in exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities there is not sufficient freedom in our political, economic and social arrangements. - JZ, 25.8.98, 28.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - SECESSION, FRAGMENTATION, DESERTION, DIVERSITY, DISASSOCIATION

PANARCHISM: Workers! Opt out of the State Socialist Messes! – JZ, n.d. - 2911.13.

PANARCHISM: World-wide there would be competing governments A-Z, none with a fixed territory - apart from the land held privately by their voluntary members or by these associations, e.g. for whatever administrative buildings they require. (It is typical for the continuing territorial thinking and institutions that parliament and government buildings still resemble royal palaces. - JZ, 22.1.11.) In their internal structure and function the competing governments would be as similar or diverse as their voluntary members would wont them to be, varying e.g. from totalitarians to anarchists. Their only common features would be the following: (1) A code of natural and individual human rights that is comprehensive but of which only individual secessionism and voluntary associationism need be universally respected. Otherwise, for their internal arrangements, the free associations may deviate from such a code as much as they like. But they will have to respect the listed rights, at least to the extent that they are claimed and acted upon by members of other associations. (2) To assure respect for claimed rights, members of all competing governments would, at the same time, be members of local volunteer militias for the protection of human rights and of their international federations. (3) A network of various arbitration and international court arrangements would confederate these competing governments to assure, as far as possible, a civilized juridical settlement of all disputes between their members. - These three features - for the interrelationship between the competing autonomous and exterritorial associations of volunteers - would come close to the limited government or mini-government or meta-utopian ideal envisioned by many libertarians but would provide for competition and consumer choice in the political, social and economic sphere, providing each, within his own sphere, with the government or non-governmental society of his choice. - JZ 21.9.82, 29.11.13. - Some of the competing governments may have their voluntary members not all over the world but only in some of the present nations. But, if they traveled or settled elsewhere, they would or could take their personal law with them. – JZ

PANARCHISM: Worse, Iraq is not a real country, it is a collection of about 150 tribes. They have hated and fought each other since the beginning of history, until Saddam forcibly pacified them. I'm sure Washington has now realized, a bit late, that to control these warlike people it must be a carbon copy of Saddam." - Rick Maybury, Early Warning Report, 01-04. - Quoted in an e-mail I received today. The essential factor is omitted. These tribes fought all for exclusive territories and exclusive territorial rule - although their members live largely intermixed with each other. Each territorial unification and control system arouses thus strong antagonism. The only rightful and peace-promoting solution would be to give all of these 150 tribal and to the dozens to hundreds of other groups, full exterritorial autonomy for and among their voluntary members, and this under personal constitutions, laws and jurisdictions, which are not quite unknown or forgotten in the Middle East. (The present territorial and "unified" Iraq is largely a remainder of Western colonialism. Not the result of free and voluntary self-organization.) Then there would no longer remain any moral and rational motive for these factions or communities or societies to fight each other. Whether and how some or all of them would also establish a kind of federation or several of them, intertribal jurisdictions and policing arrangements, that could and should be quite up to them. What interventionists like the US government should promote, if they intervene at all, is this kind of mutual tolerance, not another kind of imposed, centralized and uniform system ruling over this great diversity of people, beliefs and aspirations. In this tolerant, exterritorial and voluntaristic way the US government - and all its supporters for such a peace program, could make many friends there - instead of enemies. - Western influence should be used e.g. to promote this exterritorialism - by recognizing all corresponding governments and societies in exile, all only for their present and future volunteers and by declaring such and other just war and peace aims, and by promoting especially religious tolerance and individual responsibility ideas and practices in this region rather than religious domination attempts and collective responsibility ideas, devices and practices. - JZ, 7.8.04, 22.1.11, 29.11.13. - & PACIFICATION, CONTROL, TRIBALISM, IRAQ, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, , PANARCHISM

PANARCHISM: Would you put some arbitrary limit on the number of different jurisdictions, bodies of laws, policies, penal systems, policing organizations etc. that could peacefully coexist, each operating only for its own voluntary membership and being paid for by it? Putting a limit on the number of experiments of this kind would be as absurd as putting e.g. a numerical limits on the number or religious organizations that may be established or on the number of technical and scientific or artistic experiments that may be tried. - JZ, 18.1.95, 27.6.01. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - VOLUNTARISM, LIMITS, QUESTIONS

PANARCHISM: Yes, do let the people get away with it: with making their own laws - but only and exclusively for their own affairs. - JZ, 28.11.82.

PANARCHISM: You are a citizen of this planet much more than of any nation or territory. No territorial nation and no continent should be closed to you and no system that you want and can tolerantly practise, i.e., at your own expense and risk, alone or in association with others, should be prohibited to you anywhere on Earth – or in the universe, except on the private or cooperatively owned properties of others. Individual and exterritorialist sovereignty rather than collectivist and territorial sovereignty – everywhere, on a proprietary never a territorial and political basis. – JZ, 8.9.93, 13.1.99, 28.11.82. – Originally from JZ, Pan AZ. - WORLD-WIDE OPTIONS FOR EVERYBODY

PANARCHISM: You are lucky. You are in the best place. A world of your own.” – from the TV series: The Bill. – Like many dreams of ideals, the popular and all too general one of “a world of one’s own”, does not contain the steps towards its realization. Individual secessionism, exterritorial autonomy and voluntary State and community membership and the resulting "personal law" are among the most necessary steps towards this popular ideal – but are still very far from being recognized as such. – JZ, 9.1.99 - From JZ Pan AZ. - A WORLD OF YOUR OWN

PANARCHISM: You can beat 'em if you don't join 'em. - Prof. Galambos. – SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW CHOICES

PANARCHISM: You can preach a better sermon with your life than with your lips.” - Oliver Goldsmith – Alas, we have this freedom so far only in limited private spheres left to us, not in that of political, economic and social systems, which should also be open to our free individual choices, instead of being territorially imposed upon whole populations. – JZ, 8.8.08. - SETTING BETTER EXAMPLES, NOT ONLY PERSONALLY BUT EXTERRITORIALLY, UNDER PERSONAL LAWS, TOGETHER WITH OTHER VOLUNTEERS

PANARCHISM: You leave me no choice! – is a very common expression, indicating a reaction to an all too common policy of intolerance and domination. The solution is simple: Leave maximum choice to people. Then they will not clash as often or as disastrously. – JZ, 24.4.82, 16.2.08. – CHOICE, TOLERANCE, DIVERSITY

PANARCHISM: You see, peace is an internal matter. It's a self-discipline. It must come from within. If you set up an outside power to enforce peace, that outside power grows stronger and stronger. It must. Inevitably, it degenerates. Comes the cataclysm.” - Frank Herbert, The Priests of PSI, A Collection of Stories, p.197. - TOLERANCE, HUMAN RIGHTS, SELF-DISCIPLINE, SELF-CONTROL, SELF-MANAGEMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TERRORISM, DESPOTISM, POWER, ENFORCEMENT, COMPULSION, COERCION, FORCE & PEACE, SCIENCE FICTION

PANARCHISM: You were citizens of a country, which had no frontiers … - Morris West, The Ringmaster, p.222. – From JZ, Pan AZ. – If a writer like him were to write a Science Fiction story about future panarchies and their relations to each other … But he would have to artificially insert some drama into this situation, once it is fully established. However, the transition period to its establishment would already offer many options for dramatic situations. – JZ, 5.4.08. - FRONTIERS, CITIZENSHIP, FUTURISM, SCIENCE FICTION, NOVELS AS A MEANS OF PROPAGANDA OR ENLIGHTENMENT

PANARCHISM: You will never change things by fighting against existing realities. To change something build a new model which makes the existing obsolete.” – JZ retranslation of a remark by R. Buckminster Fuller, from the German version: “Du wirst die Dinge niemals verändern, indem du gegen bestehende Realitäten kämpfst. Um etwas zu verändern, baue ein neues Modell, welches das bestehende obsolet macht.“ - R. Buckminster Fuller. Sent in by CB. - A new model is easier to build when it comes to houses, cars, bicycles, a new tennis racket, toothbrush etc. - New model building is largely outlawed when it comes to territorial systems and institutions. That outlawry must be criticized and resisted and finally abolished so that free competition can begin for communities of volunteers doing their own things to or for themselves. - New model building is common in architecture, general technology, in designs, in recipes, in medicines and in many other spheres but remains outlawed with regard to political, economic and social systems. Regarding them we still have totalitarianism in "democracies" and "republics", under supposedly freedom-oriented constitutions. – JZ, n.d. - REALITY, CHANGE, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, NEW MODELS, RESISTANCE, DEMONSTRATIONS, TERRITORIALISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE

PANARCHISM: You'll get your chance. You'll go your thousand-fold ways, finding a hundred that are new and good, because we have the wisdom to see that nobody has the wisdom to tell the whole world what it must do. - Poul Anderson, The Byworlder, p. 190 - Gollancz, ISBN 0 575 01574 8. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - Or a whole country and all the people in it. - JZ, n.d. - WISDOM, POWER, LAWS LET 100 FLOWERS BLOOM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, SCIENCE FICTION

PANARCHISM: YXZ tolerant and voluntary exterritorially autonomous communities or taxis (panarchies) would together form one harmonious cosmos, (that of panarchism, realized) not only for native human beings and foreign human beings but for all other rational and moral beings, even quite alien ones, as long as they remain not only self-governing and self-managing but also tolerant or non-aggressive towards all other such communities, for which good behavior they would have very good reasons and motives, under these conditions. – JZ, 10.10.05, 3.10.07. - Trying to use terms that Hayek tried to popularized. - JZ, 22.1.11. - POLYARCHISM, TAXIS, COSMOS


PANARCHY: AAA: For me, the original term of P. E. de Puydt used, back in 1860, in his classical essay, see, is just a single panarchy in a general system of panarchism for all kinds of panarchies, i.e. exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers under personal law, started first by individual and group secessions from territorial States and then associating again, according to the faith, convictions, ideologies, prejudices errors, wisdom, knowledge or insights of these volunteers, all doing their own things, as far as they can, even when it comes to whole political, economic and social systems, whole new societies and communities. - JZ, 16.1.11.

PANARCHY: Exterritorial - Alas, this interesting article still mixes up extraterritoriality with exterritoriality - JZ. - - , EXTRATERRITORIALITY & EXTERRITORIALITY

PANARCHY: JEWISH CULTURAL AUTONOMY IN ESTONIA, TO 1940: Thanks to the Germans! Jewish cultural autonomy in interwar Estonia - The idea of Jewish extraterritorial autonomy, as cherished by such Diaspora ideologists as. Simon Dubnov, made its most powerful appearance in Estonia. 46 ...

PANARCHY: Scepter of Judah: The Jewish Autonomy in the ... - Brill E-Books - › European History and Culture - Scepter of Judah: The Jewish Autonomy in the Eighteenth-Century Crown Poland, by J. Kalik, 2010 ... Exterritorial Urban Communities - Copyright © 2013 Koninklijke Brill NV. For more information please visit  - JEWISH AUTONOMY

PANARCHY: the transformation of local and even regional governments into quasi commercial corporations competing for citizens.” – Hayek - I wish he had developed that thought further, including the exterritorial options already widely practiced by corporations. – Dylan Evans pointed that quote out to me. – JZ, 15.12.12. - HAYEK, A PANARCHIST NOTION

PAN-COMMUNITIES: Voluntary communities under personal law, not confined by territorial constitutions, laws, jurisdictions and institutions, covering all countries, continents and the world, intermixed, overlapping and yet separate from each other, like the various churches and sects are. - JZ, 19.9.04. – PANARCHISM, PANARCHY, POLYARCHY, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW, COMPETING GOVERNANCE

PANAUTONOMY: Autonomy for everyone, to the degree he desires it, independent of territorial laws, under personal law, respecting the exterritorial autonomy and personal law of others in other volunteer communities. - JZ, 19.9.04. – PERSONAL LAW COMMUNITIES, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

PANCAPITALISM: There has even been some hesitant interest in management circles in participation. Probably the best-known “participation” program advanced from the management side has been the “pan-capitalism” of Marcel Loichot – distinguished from Western “oligocapitalism” and Eastern “monocapitalism” – which he has described in great detail. The basic ill he seeks to combat is familiar: “The economic alienation of the worker is the root of all the essential evils of the world.” – This could be altered in a system where, with only minor changes, “the worker would become ipso facto capitalists by receiving shares in their enterprise.” – David Jenkins, Job Power, p.151. – Receiving? They should be motivated to buy them, on terms, in a proper and business-like take-over bid! – JZ, 15.2.08. – See: PURCHASE OF ENTERPRISES BY THEIR EMPLOYEES, ON TERMS, & CAPITALISM, PROPERTY, COOPS, SELF-MANAGEMENT FORMS, LARGRE EMPLOYEE SHAREHOLDINGS

PANIC: Don’t panic” – pleads the P.M. – Why not, with him in power? – JZ, 29.8.74. - Be most alarmed when the government states that there is no cause for alarm. - JZ, 74. - JOKES

PANIC: If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it is just possible that you haven’t grasped the situation.” – Jean Kerr, introduction to: “Please Don’t Eat the Daisies”, 1957. – Calmness, in some situations, is just as useless as panic is, especially when the IBM’s are on their way. – We should not calmly and all too complacently continue to accept the decision-making power of a few men over the continued existence of mankind. Some anger and other emotions should be involved and motivate us into undertaking sufficient research, discussions, publicity and working out of preventative steps and institutions. – JZ, 20.6.92, 23.3.08, 9.12.13. - Compare the apathy even towards the nuclear war threat. – Compare: “Don’t panic!” – “Keep your cool!” – “Don’t take it too serious!” – “She will be all right!” etc. – Rightful and rational responses to real dangers are still all too rare. – JZ, 1.4.08. - CALMNESS, KEEPING COOL, SELF-CONTROL, JOKES, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, APATHY, IGNORANCE

PANIC: Panicky governments are more dangerous than panicky crowds. – Except when they resign or do nothing. Panicky “positive” action for the sake of action, is what is to be feared of them. – JZ, 20.5.92. – Including e.g. the button pushing that would start off a general nuclear holocaust. – JZ, 2.4.08. - NWT

PANICS: We need a new kind of panic reaction, namely, whenever the people hear anything of a new government action. – JZ, 30.12.93. – However, there are so many new government “actions” that then many people would soon die from nervous exhaustion. – JZ, 15.2.08. – We should, therefore, concentrate on the basic changes in principles and institutions required. Without them we cannot effectively resist every single wrongful and irrational government action and legislation. Their sheer number is simply much too large for that. We ought to become free of them, free to secede from them and do our own things among ourselves. – JZ, 9.12.13. - GOVERNMENT ACTIONS, GOVERNMENTALISM, LAW, TERRITORIALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR PANARCHIES, POLYARCHIES, COMPETING GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS, PERSONAL LAW

PAPER GOLD: A) Exclusive gold coin and gold certificate currency, whose paper gold certificates are 100% or fractionally covered and more or less at any time convertible, by the issuer, into part of his gold holdings, upon demand by the gold certificate holder. - B) The misnamed Gold Exchange Standard, in which gold is largely held and exchanged only among central banks, at rates more or less arbitrarily fixed and changed by them. Their gold price towards the general public is a gold purchase not a gold sales price. Gold as a value standard is fictitiously upheld but, in reality, destroyed and replaced by a paper "value standard", one that is given legal tender power. Gold certificates and other sound exchange media are outlawed. - C) Gold-clearing and gold account standard and currencies: The issuer is not under convertibility obligation but promises and is merely induced to uphold, as far as is humanly possible, 3 things: (1) He expresses a gold weight value on his notes and keeps this exchange medium at par with its nominal gold weight value, at least locally. (2) That is in his power to do, if he and his associates or debtors do have, between them, a sufficient assortment of daily wanted consumer goods and services and do accept his or their notes in all payments due to them, as if they were gold coins of the same gold weight expressed in his notes and in his prices. (3) The issuer obliges himself formally (actually, it is his natural moral and also juridical obligation to do so) to accept his own notes at any time at par with their nominal gold value. Only to that extent do his notes have legal tender power - towards him. In general local circulation they are subject to free market rating, i.e., discounting and refusal, and will thus be generally accepted only while he keeps them at par with their nominal gold value. To achieve that, he will probably oblige his debtors to accept them at par as well, as part of their debt contract. - Thus he can assure the issue and local circulation and reflux of his paper money, as good as gold. - No one should be prohibited to try to do so and to imitate his successful example. Any discount of such notes in local circulation should not be prohibited but, rather facilitated and well publicized, a) to make the issuer unable or unwilling to issue still more notes while the discount lasts, b) to keep the discount as low as possible, c) to encourage all his remaining debtors to accept or even buy up depreciated notes and rapidly pay their debts to him, with them, thus withdrawing the discounted notes and abolishing the discount, d) to induce more local people to accept these notes only at a discount or not at all. - In case No.3 the convertibility of paper money is transferred from the local issuer to the local agents of the world gold market, whose gold reserves embrace all gold reserves. Gold weight units are then mere accounting units or value standards and do not directly, by their quantity and local convertibility by the issuer, determine the quantity of exchange media in which they are used as value standards. But the par-value of the notes indicates that notes are not yet over-issued while a local discount, even a small one and in some quarters only, indicates that they may already be over-issued. This fact and its rapid public reporting would stop further issues and acceptances, at least for a while. Moreover, all prices, wages, salaries, rents, fees, pensions etc., marked out in gold weight units, could not be inflated by a somewhat depreciated optional currency of this kind, because, if at all, then it could be accepted, in general circulation, only at its discount, leaving the gold weight marked prices, etc., unchanged. Case 3 is usually neglected in discussions of the gold standard, although it has all the advantages and none of the disadvantages of the "classical" gold standard. It can be practised in any country, whether it has goldmines or not, whether its trading partners pay it in gold coins or not. Independent of the quantity of gold available locally or in the world, it would permit any quantity of goods, services, labor and capital to be freely exchanged at free market prices expressed in gold weight units. In an extreme case, the producers and traders and workers in a country would not have to possess, between them, a single gold coin. Nevertheless, they could freely exchange all they want, using gold weight unit prices for all their goods, services, labor and capital. They would merely have to observe the free market pricing of gold in some of the foreign gold markets. However, for the smooth functioning of the system and to establish and maintain its believability, it would be desirable if at least a few gold coins changed hands every day in every trading center. Seeing is believing. Abstract gold weight accounting is not convincing enough for many, although it would be able to supply them e.g. with their daily bread, milk and butter. - JZ, 11.5.97, 23.1.11. – That kind of clearing or accounting gold standard can help to turn over unlimited quantities of goods, services and labor and does not limit the volume of exchange media and of clearing certificates too much. Naturally, far from the local issuers of such exchange media and account credits, they could get a foreign exchange rate. The more they are discounted by it, the more their return as media of exchange to their local issuing area becomes accelerated. Like tickets they are returned to their issuers, as the main use of them. – JZ, 30.9.13. – There are other forms of “gold standards” but I do not wish to dig them up and describe them here. Any serious researcher can find them in the relevant literature. Usually, most people consider only the 100% cover and redemption form of it and the fractional cover and redemption system and ignore all the rest. – JZ, 9.12.13. GOLD WEIGHT CLEARING OR ACCOUNTING STANDARD VS. TWO OTHER KINDS OF GOLD STANDARDS

PAPER MONEY: A loan to an armed robber." - Mirabeau. – True, if it is the money of a central bank, which is monopoly money with legal tender power, i.e. with compulsory acceptance and this at a forced value and issued on the “foundation” of government debt certificates, which anticipate their repayment in this kind of bad money, usually inflated, deflated or stagflated. Within the volume of a short-term expected tax revenue it can retain its par value with a nominal gold weight value, even if it is not a monopoly money and has no legal tender power. In this way up to 3 months of expected tax revenues can be anticipated with such tax foundation money, as long as it is accepted at par with its nominal value. – They have also been called fiduciary issues. Adam Smith realized this option in a short comment. – (“A prince, who should enact that a certain proportion of his taxes should be paid in a paper money of a certain kind, might thereby give a certain value to this paper money, even though the term of its final discharge and redemption  should depend altogether upon the will of the prince. If the bank which issued this paper was careful to keep the quantity of it always somewhat below what could easily be employed in this manner, the demand for it might be such as to make it even bear a premium …  - The Wealth of Nations, vol I, On Money, p.366 in the London, Grant Richards edition.) - JZ. 30.11.13, 9.12.13. - For centuries most people understood under paper money the usual abuse of good paper in form of legal tender and monopoly paper money, i.e. as monetary despotism. All too often it was also the exclusive currency, since the coinage prerogative was mostly extended into a note issue monopoly, sometimes for notes metallically redeemable and all too often also non-redeemable notes without sufficient other readiness to accept foundation. Notes convertible into rare metals were not considered as fiat money or paper money but as gold certificates or gold receipts with a real commodity backing. - JZ, 15.5.97. Paper money without legal tender (compulsory acceptance and forced value) and without metallic redemption was largely left out of consideration by most writers, although it would be optional, refusable, discountable, market rated and could have a very good foundation and good reflux arrangement to circulate at least locally quite readily and this at its nominal value, expressed in one or the other freely chosen value standard, most likely a gold- or silver-weight unit. Those insisting on metallic redemption by the issuer largely ignored this alternative, although the pricing of goods, services, labour and contracts in gold weight units would be involved and the money tokens would be accepted by the issuers as if they were corresponding gold coins and in general circulation they would thereupon at least locally widely accepted, but, usually, only if they are kept at par with their nominal gold weigh value. Any discount arising would lead to refusals to accept it – and to debtors of the issuing centre buying up the discounted notes and paying their debts with them, rapidly. Thus the system would be automatic and self-limiting, not inflationary. Gold-weight pricing or other sound value standard pricing would go on although conversion into gold would then only be possible in free gold markets not at the issuing centres. Shares and bonds, for instance, are not valueless, either, because they are mostly not redeemable by their issuers in gold or silver. Standardized money token can be and have been kept at their nominal gold weight values for long periods in many cases. These instances should not be forgotten or ignored in favour of the primitive gold redemption model, which would permit only a limited issue of sound exchange media and prolong the deflationary condition that existed while only rare metal coins were allowed as exchange media for all larger payments, i.e. apart from small change tokens. The demand for means of payment, e.g. by taxation and by consumer goods and services ready for sale, and for the  payment of wages, salaries, fees, rents, subscriptions etc., when tax authorities have issued tax foundation money (in competition with e.g. shop associations issuing “shop foundation money” with their goods-warrants and service vouchers, in money denominations, for their current expenses and in short-term loans, mainly for wage and salary payments to employers), can give mere paper money tokens a par value with gold weight units and supply a local economy with enough sound exchange media to make every desired exchange monetarily possible. Although Adam Smith pointed that out, for tax foundation money, the “gold bugs” still manage to ignore that option, because they do not understand it. It does not fit into their primitive model for sound money. – JZ, 20.4.08, 9.12.13. - When there is no issue monopoly and legal tender power, then the good monies drive out the bad ones, in the proper interpretation and application of Gresham’s Law and prevent inflation. Then also enough money tokens and clearing accounts can be competitively supplied to prevent any deflation. Only under this condition can the money supply keep up with the supply of wanted goods and services, at least in my interpretation of Say’s Law. – The owners and providers of the best kinds of cover and redemption are still not free to competitively monetize them, while enjoying freedom in the choice of value standards in their prices, wages, rents and all other contracts. All too much was written and said – and still is on this subject – in too much ignorance, with too many popular errors, prejudices, false assumptions and conclusions. A proper handbook on the subject, correct and comprehensive bibliographies, abstracts, reviews and index file as well digital argument mapping and Q & A compilations are still missing. - JZ, 30.11.13. – PAPER NOTES AS MONOPOLY MONEY OF THE STATE, WITH LEGAL TENDER, OR AS OFFICIAL COMPETING BANKNOTE ISSUES WITH OR WITHOUT RARE METAL REDEMPTION OR PRIVATELY & COMPETITIVELY ISSUED BY PRIVATE ISSUERS, WITHOUT A MONOPOLY & LEGAL TENDER POWER, WITH OR WITHOUT RARE METAL REDEMPTION & BUT AT LEAST ACCEPTED LIKE RARE METAL COINS BY THE ISSUERS IN PAYMENT FOR THE WANTED CONSUMER GOODS & SERVICES OF THE ISSUERS, OR, IN CASE OF THE GOVERNMENT & ITS BANK, ACCEPTED IN PAYMENT FOR TAX RECEIPTS. WITH THE COERCIVE POWERS OF THE TERRITORIAL STATES THESE PAYMENTS CAN BE MORE STRICTLY ENFORCED THAN OTHER, PRIVATE & CONTRACTUAL PAYMENTS THAT ARE DUE. INSOFAR, SOUNDLY ISSUED TAX FOUNDATION MONEY IS SAFER THAN PRIVATE ISSUES ARE, WHILE TAX SLAVERY IS BEING CONTINUED. – MONETARY FREEDOM VS. MONETARY DESPOTISM

PAPER MONEY: A sound paper money can only be developed and maintained under free competition with other kinds of money. Let the good monies drive out the bad. Then cheap, plentiful and at the same time sound (as good as gold or even better) paper monies, reckoning in gold weight units, but not promising redemption, by the issuer, in gold weights, would tend to drive out, as well, the 100% or fractionally covered gold certificates convertible into gold, fully or less so, by their issuers. They do have a great cost advantage. However, some are slow learners. Among the gold bugs exclusive gold coin and gold certificate circulation and gold weights as an exclusive value standard, would tend to persist, possibly for years, in their own private or cooperative payment communities. They do have the right to establish these for themselves - and to leave them once they have learned about better solutions. - JZ, 11.5.97. – PAPER MONEY AS GOOD AS GOLD

PAPER MONEY: After nearly half a century of experience of this phenomenon, it is time to recognize the inherent error and to realise that while the State can manufacture and circulate paper-money, the rest of its new powers operate to discourage every other sort of production. - Sir Ernest Benn, The State the Enemy, p. 21. - Especially the power and abuses of Legal Tender and of the issue monopoly for paper money do discourage production and prevent exchanges from becoming free, easy and quite honest and satisfactory. - Optional and free market-rated paper money, freely issued by all who can and freely refused or discounted by potential acceptors (except the issuers themselves) can neither cause inflations nor deflations nor stagflations but can prevent all three phenomena. - JZ, 6.4.08, 30.11.13. – INFLATION, GRESHAM’S LAW, SOUND VALUE STANDARD RECKONING, MONETARY FREEDOM VS. MONETARY DESPOTISM, LEGAL TENDER

PAPER MONEY: Difference between voluntarily accepted and enforced paper money. Much as all historical experience appears to justify the deep mistrust most people harbor against paper money, it is well founded only with regard to money issued by government. Frequently the term “fiat money” is used as if it is applied to all paper money, but the expression refers of course only to money which has been given currency by the arbitrary decree or other act of authority. – Hayek, Denationalization of Money, 84/85. - LEGAL TENDER & INFLATION, FIAT MONEY, MONETARY FREEDOM VS. MONETARY DESPOTISM

PAPER MONEY: Forced and exclusive paper money by governments with legal tender power. That kind of “money” is valid or “valuable” only through the governmental and legalized money issue monopoly despotic commands, like legal tender laws for it, enforcing compulsory acceptance for it and a forced and fictitious value, usually almost continuously depreciated - and through governmental extortions like compulsory tax tributes. Through over-issue, beyond its tax foundation, its value becomes further depreciated, sometimes even reduced to that of the paper that it is printed on. In between, it causes money shortages because competition with it is outlawed and it has no inbuilt measure to assure and maintain the amount of circulation that is required to easily achieve all monetary exchanges that are possible, needed or wanted. – JZ, 25.9.06, 26.10.07, 9.12.13. – It should be clearly distinguished from privately and competitively issued paper monies that employ a sound value standard, are freely market-rated against it, have a sound readiness to accept foundation, i.e. an immediate and short term total reflux option and are discountable and refusable by all but the issuers and, by contract, his debtors. – JZ, 7.3.09, 9.12.13. – This voluntarism and pricing of competing currencies tends to keeps them to the amounts of circulation for each of them that can be mostly maintained at par with its nominal value, at least in local circulation. Elsewhere, as “foreign exchange” they can, naturally, get a discount. But the larger this discount is, the faster these currencies will be returned to their issuers, in payment for what they have to offer. They will have to accept them at par and thus their discount as foreign exchange will tend to be reduced again or even to disappear. – Under freedom to adopt a sound value standard in them and for the pricing of goods, services and labor, private currencies will never fluctuate as much in their value as Bitcoins do. Bitcoins are merely speculative capital certificates used by some as means of payment, although they do not have a sound value standard and are thus neither rare metal coins nor are they a sound paper money with a sufficient reflux to issuers for wanted goods, services and labor, measured in a sound value standard. - JZ, 12.12.13. - PRIVATE & COMPETITIVE AS WELL AS OPTIONAL & MARKET RATED PAPER MONIES VS. PAPER MONPOLY MONIES OF GOVERNMENTS, WITH LEGAL TENDER POWER (COMPULSORY ACCEPTANCE & A FORCED & MANIPULATED NOMINAL VALUE STANDARD), BITCOINS

PAPER MONEY: Gold frees the individual from the arbitrary paper money of the state, and paper money frees the state from the control of the people and places the people in the state’s power. – Rushdoony, Overpopulation, 29. - Not paper money as such does this as such but the monopolization of its issue and giving it legally legal tender power, i.e., compulsory acceptance and a forced value, does make this abuse possible. – His use of the term “arbitrary” paper money does not indicate this fact clearly enough. - JZ, 15.2.08. – Gold as such exists, whether possession and trade with it is legal or not. Merely as one of the existing elements it does nothing. It does not and cannot realize itself as a legal or illegal means of payment. It does not set people monetarily free, unless they realize this freedom by repealing contrary laws or ignore these laws and get away with this. It also confines those, who believe in it as an exclusive medium of exchange, to those exchanges, which can be paid thus. This tends to be an ever smaller part of all turnovers, for the total value of all goods, services and labor offered is increasing much faster than the gold production increases the total accumulated stock of gold. – That leaves gold coins of a certain weight still as a good standard of value but as quite insufficient as an exclusive cash means of payment for all needed and wanted transactions. -JZ, 12.12.13. GOLD, MONETARY DESPOTISM, LEGAL TENDER & MONEY ISSUE MONOPOLY

PAPER MONEY: Governments with their "monetary policies" and "monetary powers" make the value of government paper money and coins melt away in your hands and pockets, a little bit at a time, but to a large degree for prolonged periods. Instead of guaranteeing the value of a currency, the governments' central banks make it worth less and less, almost continuously. So why leave the power to issue currency in the hands of governments or their central banks? Allow anyone to try to offer better monies, if he or she or free issue associations can and allow every potential acceptor to refuse or discount money any money issued by others and offered to him. No more compulsory acceptance and compulsory values (legal tender) for anyone's currency, least of all any government. - JZ, 17.7.01, 26.9.02. - MONOPOLY MONEY, GOVERNMENT MONEY, INFLATION, DEPRECIATION OF MONEY, FORCED & EXCLUSIVE CURRENCY, CENTRAL BANKING, LEGAL TENDER

PAPER MONEY: It is said that the Chinese had been driven by their experience with paper money to try to prohibit it for all time (of course unsuccessfully) before the Europeans ever invented it. Certainly European governments, once they knew about this possibility, began to exploit it ruthlessly, not to provide people with good money, but to gain as much as possible from it for their revenue. - Hayek, Denationalisation of Money, 28/29. - There were a few exception to this rule in Prussian history, pointed out by the German School on Money, around Ulrich von Beckerath. That governmental honesty lasted, at least in Prussia, from about the Napoleonic Wars to WW I. - JZ, 21.3.97.

PAPER MONEY: John Exter regards most modern currencies as ‘I owe you nothings’. – John Chamberlain in THE FREEMAN, 9/75, P. 573. – Apparently, both overlooked the tax foundation options for paper money on a stable value basis. By issuing tax foundation money - for due or soon due taxes - a State can cover many of its current expenses and some States have done so, repeatedly in the past. These instances should not be overlooked. – But when State paper money is an exclusive and forced currency then it often becomes, indeed, to a large extent, merely a requisitioning certificate and can be issued into circulation far beyond its sound tax foundation. - JZ, 15.2.08. – When shop associations issue their own shop foundation money it would mean: We owe you goods or services of such and such a value. – JZ, 20.4.08. – As such currencies they do have always a large and sound foundation that you can assure yourself of by any visit to a shopping center. – JZ, 12.12.13. - SOUND TAX FOUNDATION MONIES, INFLATION, MONEY ISSUE MONOPOLY, SHOP FOUNDATION CURRENCY

PAPER MONEY: Paper money eventually reaches its intrinsic value - zero. – Voltaire - - Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value – ZERO.” – SAVE AUSTRALIA ALLIANCE, a newspaper, issue no.36 (12 01 06), p.4. – While this is correct for many to most of the forced and exclusive paper currencies of governments it is untrue for some official and sound tax foundation monies, or fiduciary issues, based on sufficient short-term tax claims of a government and also reckoning in a sound value standard, which facilitates tax payments. It is also wrong for competitively issued private paper money issues that are using a sound value standard and, are market-rated against it, refusable and discountable and do have a sufficient readiness to accept foundation, e.g. “shop foundation”, when the issuer is an association of local shops, thus assuring its reflux to this issuer at their full nominal value for wanted consumer goods and services. Actually, I do not know of a single one of them that was over-issued until it became quite worthless. At least the paper scrap value for them remained. If you think that you can name one, do so. – JZ, 7.3.09. – By now the few surviving examples get high prices from collectors. Slow to fast depreciation of paper monies occurs only with the forced and exclusive paper currencies of governments or their central banks. – JZ, 19.5.13, 9.12.13. - INFLATION, LEGAL TENDER, MONEY ISSUE MONOPOLY, MARKET RATING OF PRIVATE MONEY ISSUES, FREE BANKING VS. CENTRAL BANKING, MONETARY FREEDOM VS. MONETARY DESPOTISM

PAPER MONEY: Paper money, to be sound and sufficient in quantity, must not be a monopolised medium. It must not have legal tender or forced acceptance and a forced value in general circulation. Only its issuer must be obliged to accept it from anyone at anytime (well, during shopping hours or in private deals) at par, i.e., it must have legal or juridical tender power only towards him. By contract the issuer can extend this obligation to his debtors. It must not be given a monopoly for value standards, either, i.e., must not interfere with free choice among value standards. It must abide by its own chosen one, through acceptance by the issuer at par with its nominal value, no matter how much it may be discounted in general local circulation not to speak of its foreign exchange rate against other currencies or in other countries. Its value standard will as a rule be marked on it and in the prices of the goods and services of the note issuer. But this still does not mean that the value standard carrier, the paper note, as a means of exchange, will be accepted at its face value in general local or wider circulation. - As a rule, it will only be accepted at par with its nominal value standard value when sufficient "reflux" at par has been arranged for it, to achieve this, immediately and in the near future, so that continuously about the same amounts that are issued by the banker or issuing centre, are streaming back to the issuer or his debtors. This will happen mostly in payment for daily wanted consumer goods and services and in payments of other due debts. Other than the issuers and their debtors will not have to accept it at par or at all. Precisely this fact and that of their sound issue and reflux arrangements and that of the competition by other exchange media and the refusal and discount option for the potential acceptors and the self-interest of the issuers (via note and clearing exchanges and the intention to stay in the note issuing business - by arrangements that keep the own notes at par with their nominal values) will tend to keep them at par or close enough to par, in its normal local circulation area, most of the time. No such exchange medium needs to be universally or nation-wide accepted. A local issue and reflux area and payment community is enough for it. Not even any national paper money e.g. the Euros or US dollars are universally accepted, not even on this small planet. - JZ, 13.2.89, 16.5.97, 13.9.02, 9.12.13. - OPTIONAL & MARKET-RATED IN GENERAL CIRCULATION, ACCEPTANCE OBLIGATION FOR OR LEGAL TENDER TOWARDS THE ISSUER, AGREED UPON OPTIONAL VALUE STANDARD. - LEGAL TENDER & INFLATION

PAPER MONEY: The Chinese invented paper "money" at the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth century AD. Its original name was 'flying money' because it was so light and could blow out of one's hand. - Robert Temple, The Genius of China (1986), p.117. - - I feel certain that private paper etc. money tokens of diverse kinds, preceded the issue of any forced paper currency by any territorial government. – The Chinese called the various private token monies “street monies”, because they could only be used in some streets, i.e. shopping centers or even only in some individual shops, brothels and tea houses included. When governments “invented” and issued their kind of “currency” – to finance themselves and to abuse it, they usually did and still do outlaw the sound and private alternatives to it, which go far beyond e.g. mere rare metal coins, privately minted. - JZ, 19.5.13, 9.12.13. – CHINA

PAPER MONEY: the introduction of paper money provided governments with an even cheaper method of defrauding the people.” – F. A. Hayek, Denationalization of Money, p.28. – It was not the introduction of paper money which gave them this chance but the introduction of “legal tender”, i.e., compulsory acceptance at a forced value, combined with the note issue monopoly. Otherwise, they would just have been competitive issuers and acceptors of their own notes and could not have issued more of them than were required for their payment circles, e.g. tax foundation money, clearing their near future tax claims against their governmental expenditures. – JZ, 15.2.08. If they over-issued their market-rated official paper money, then these notes would either be refused or discounted. Price and wage expressions in sound value standards, could have gone on. Paper merely gave the practitioners of monetary despotism – central banks, with a note issue monopoly, the chance to inflate their forced and exclusive currency more cheaply than they could before, under metal coinage. – JZ, 15.2.08. – Optional, competitive, market rated and refusable paper notes could not be inflated. They would be refused and widely discounted if the attempt were made – and only the issuer would still have to accept them at par. – With them their issuers and acceptors would also practise free choice of value standards. And under that condition Gresham’s Law in the popular version would be reversed: The good money would drive out the bad. – Private money issues should not be automatically presumed to be mere “fiat money” just because their material is paper. Only government can, have and do issue fiat money, a monopoly money with compulsory acceptance and a forced and fictitious value. - JZ, 10.4.08, 30.11.13, 9.12.13. - LEGAL TENDER, CENTRAL BANKING, INFLATION, GRESHAM’S LAW.

PAPER MONEY: The more legal and political monopoly power is behind a currency the less rightful and economically useful it becomes. No sound value standard or exchange medium or clearing avenue or clearing certificate needs legal and political protection (except against forgers). Anyhow, no more so than any other standard or measuring tool or transport facility. The term ticket money for competitively issued money also makes clear how law and politics are not needed in the sphere. The same applies to the term “transport notes” which Swedes once coined for banknotes. For, indeed, they do authorize the transfer of goods, services and labor from one place to another, from one person to another or one firm to another and they facilitate free exchange in any economy based on division of labor and very extensive exchange of its products and services, somewhat through space and time. – JZ, 8.9.98, 26.9.08. – FREE EXCHANGE, DIVISION OF LABOR, MONETARY FREEDOM VS. MONETARY DESPOTISM

PAPER MONEY: The value of paper money obviously can be regulated according to a variety of principles – even if it is more than doubtful that any democratic government with unlimited powers can ever manage it satisfactory. – F. A. Hayek, Denationalization of Money, p.25. – Even some monarchical regimes did, especially in the 19th century. Already Adam Smith, in a short statement in his Wealth of Nations indicated the possibility of sound tax foundation money. – JZ, 15.2.08. - STABLE VALUE RECKONING, TAX-FOUNDATION

PAPER MONEY: There is thus more public anxiety about, say, the meat ration than about the supply of currency, and a false confidence is encouraged by the very dangerous fact that while no government can make meat, any government can manufacture any quantity of money, provided that quality does not matter.” - Sir Ernest Benn, The State the Enemy, p.78/79.  MONEY MONOPOLY & PUBLIC OPINION & THE "FREE" PRESS

PAPER MONEY: Though historical experience would at first seem to justify the belief that only gold can provide a stable currency, and that all paper money is bound to depreciate sooner or later, all our insight into the process determining the value of money tells us that this prejudice, although understandable, is unfounded. The political impossibility that governments will achieve it (*) does not mean there is reason to doubt that it is technically possible to control the quantities of any kind of token money so that its value will behave in a desired manner, and that it will for this reason retain its acceptability and its value. – F. A. Hayek, Denationalization of Money, p.25. - (*) Actually, a few governments have issued e.g. tax foundation paper money on a stable value basis that was not redeemable in gold. – but did reckon in silver or gold weight values and stood at par with them. They were accepted by these governments in payment of tax debts expressed in rare metal values and accepted by them as if they were rare metal coins. Alas, I do not have a survey of all these instances on hand. – JZ, 8.2.08, 30.11.13. - LEGAL TENDER & INFLATION, FIAT MONEY, MONETARY FREEDOM VS. MONETARY DESPOTISM, GOLD CURRENCY & TOKEN MONEY, STABLE & SOUND MONEY

PAPER MONEY: we know that there are all kinds of other possible sorts of money, not least paper, which government is even less competent to handle and even more prone to abuse than metallic money.” – F. A. Hayek, Denationalization of Money, p.22. – Usually their motive to act dishonestly in that sphere, in their own interest, is much stronger, at least for a period before their inflation goes out of their control. Finally even their public servants, policemen and soldiers refuse to accept it any longer. – JZ, 30.11.13. - GOVERNMENTS, MONETARY DESPOTISM

PAPER MONEY: When paper money is funded as under 9 (above: GERMAN, SWISS & JEWISH SCHOOL ON MONEY) then it can circulate more widely than merely among those who directly claim the cover involved. When the paper money has tax foundation, then it will circulate not only among those who just then have to pay taxes. If it has shop foundation (a concept coined by Rittershausen), then it circulates not only among those who have to buy something from the shops, which are under acceptance obligation. When the railway issues money (as in Germany in 1923/24 for several 100 million marks), then it circulates not only among those who just then want to use the railway's services. The tax foundation imparts to paper money (as apparently Lorenz von Stein found out first) a par value (to gold and silver coins, whichever are used as value standards) for an amount equivalent to the tax revenue for at least 3 months, even without legal tender. - Ulrich von Beckerath, 25.1.52. – PAPER MONEY CIRCULATION & FOUNDATION, TAX-FOUNDATION & SHOP-FOUNDATION PAPER MONIES, READINESS TO ACCEPT FOUNDATION. COMPARE THE FREE BANKING A     to Z on

PAPER MONEY: Whether the dollar is inflationary or counterfeit, it is a purchase order and, thus, it is a means by which government acquires your capital and gives not goods or services in return. This, of course, discourages saving, investment, and production; we run out of working capital and tools.” – Leonard E. Read, Then Truth Will Out, p.98. – It has at least tax foundation, i.e., the government delivers tax payment receipts for it. But when its issue is monopolized and its acceptance is compulsory and its value is fictitious and enforced, and it is the only legally permitted money in a country, apart from the foreign exchange monies of the central banks of other countries, then it can be abused and is widely abused, almost as a rule and constantly. Alas, Read did not know or discuss the technical details of sound alternatives to such forced and exclusive currencies. But at least in very general terms he did declare himself for monetary freedom. – JZ, 15.2.08, 9.12.13.

PAPER: The oldest piece of paper in the world was found on the site of the ancient town of Loulan, paper dated (it could still be read) A.D. 130. (Paper is said to have been invented in China in 106.)” - Louis L’Amour, Education of a Wandering Man, 189, 228. - INVENTIONS, IDEAS ARCHIVE

PARADISE: A wall is often the only method to prevent a paradise from dying out.” – Werner Mitsch. („Die Mauer ist oft der einzige Ausweg, ein Paradies vor dem Aussterben zu bewahren.“) – Werner Mitsch. – Since the Walls of totalitarian Communism have, largely, broken down, new walls or barriers have been erected, not against emigration but against immigration. That is one of the major scandals of the supposedly free countries, whose governments, due to their remaining State socialist opinions and institutions, are unable to gainfully employ masses of new and able and willing workers, seeking for jobs. The unemployed “natives” agree with this “policy”, because they fear for their jobs. Nor do those, who call themselves “employers” in the West, know how to employ them and to take all the necessary monetary, clearing and financial steps to make this profitable to themselves and to these new workers and their existing workers. It is almost as if they saw only the mouths and not the hands of immigrants. – At least the retailers should see the mouths and offer loans to employers for employing these new immigrants, paying these loans with goods and service vouchers, in monetary denominations, issued by shop associations, discounting with them the claims which the producers have against their buyers (wholesalers), and accepting their goods warrants etc. back in payment for their goods and services at par, as ready cash. Think of the vast stocks of ready for sale goods in Western stores waiting for buyers. To a large extent these could be monetized for wage- and salary payments to additional workers, thus also assuring sales for these stocks of consumer goods and this readiness to provide consumer services. However, under the existing monetary despotism, this kind of free exchange, with additional sound, private, competing and option cash or money tokens or sound free clearing, is outlawed, although such private monies, clearing certificates and clearing account credits would have no legal tender power, could be freely refused or discounted in general local circulation and thus could not cause an inflation. Such competitive issuers should also adopt a much sounder value standard, under free choice of value standards, than territorial States and their central banks are able or willing to supply. All prices, fees, subscriptions, rents, wages and salaries could still be denominated in sound and agreed-upon alternative value standards, once the laws enforcing monetary & currency despotism have been repealed. – JZ, 24.2.08. – BORDERS, FRONTIERS, IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS, FALL OF THE SOVIET REGIME, FREE MIGRATION, INFLATION, DEFLATION, STAGFLATION & CRISIS PREVENTION THROUGH FULL MONETARY FREEDOM, EMPLOYERS UNABLE TO PROVIDE MORE JOBS UNDER PRESENT CONDITIONS & GOVERNMENTS CAN PROVIDE ONLY MORE BUREAUCRATIC & OTHER USELESS OR LABOR & MONEY-WASTING UNPRODUCTIVE OR EVEN COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE JOBS. FULL EMPLOYMENT PREVENTED BY LEGISLATION, EVEN IF IT IS INTENDED BY THE LEGISLATION

PARADISE: Can you imagine what the life of Adam and Eve must have been in the Garden of Eden before they apple episode? The inescapable monotony of their existence. Eve put up the job about the apple. What was the result? They were fired out of the Garden of Eden. Adam got a job and went to work. Even got some clothes to wear, and when they met at night, they had something to talk about.” - Daniel Frohman, 1851-1940, Lore and Maurice Cowan, compilers, The Wit of the Jews, Leslie Frewin, London, 1970, p.85/86. – Will sex in heaven, if any, be really heavenly? – JZ, 13.9.08. – Will it be fruitful there? – JZ, 9.12.13. - HEAVEN, SEX, ADAM & EVE, JOKES, PARADISE

PARADISE: In the paradise for workers people stand in line to buy apples.” – Karl Garbe. („Im Paradies der Werktaetigen steht die Schlange nach Aepfeln an.“) – For current “abundance” in a “worker’s paradise” see North Korea. Even in China, according to a recent report, about one half the population still has to get along on the equivalent of about US $ 2 a day! In other words: Even its economic freedom is still very incomplete, especially if you consider that it still has, like ourselves, the monetary totalitarianism of central banking. – Not to speak of their and our beloved taxes. - JZ, 28.4.09. - Having only one employer in a whole country did certainly not create a paradise e.g. for the Workers in the USSR. – JZ, 13.6.13. - JOKES

PARADISE: It belongs to the definition of paradise that one is free to leave it again.” – Eschmann (“Zur Definition des Paradieses: dass man es wieder verlassen kann.”) – FREE EMIGRATION, FREE IMMIGRATION, INDIVIDUAL & MINORITY GROUP SECESSIONISM

PARADISE: Paradise for workers and peasants: An enthusiasm that is coercively held within bounds.” – Ron Kritzfeld. – Often it had to be pretended, or play-acted, by officially organizing it, with compulsory attendance and no criticism being allowed but only cheering and clapping, marching and enforced smiles and laughter. – JZ, 24.2.08. – STATE COMMUNISM, STATE SOCIALISM, SOVIET UNION, RED CHINA, TOTALITARIANISM, WORKERS’ PARADISE

PARADISE: Pick or Plot & Produce your Proprietary Paradise with your Party People – but only among People Pleased with it and Prepared to Pay its Price. – JZ, n.d., in Pan AZ. - PERSONAL CHOICES FOR PARADISE

PARADISE: The realization of the social paradise takes time, unfortunately our time.“ – Finck (“Die Realisierung des gesellschaftlichen Paradieses braucht Zeit, leider unsere Zeit.“)

PARADOXES: He who confronts the paradoxical exposes himself to reality.” – Friedrich Duerenmatt, 21 Points, The Physicists, 1962, tr. James Kirkup. – But telling truths in form of paradoxes does not always and sufficiently communicate understanding. Instance: The teachings of Proudhon. As accurate definitions of the differences, as human beings can provide, are more helpful – in my opinion. – JZ, 2.4.08. - FACTS, REALITY, UNDERSTANDING, DEFINITIONS, TERMS

PARADOXES: I would like to see a special collection of paradoxes with a libertarian flavor. – JZ, 23.12.76. – If it were listed in a common list online, as one among thousands of libertarian projects, then such a collection could soon become substantial. – JZ, 15.2.08. - SLOGANS FOR LIBERTY

PARADOXES: Paradoxes are useful to attract attention to ideas.” – Mandell Creighton, Life and Letters, 1904. – But only rarely do they sufficiently clarify ideas. Thus they should be accompanied by sound ideas and by refutations of the relevant unsound ones. – JZ, 20.4.08. - IDEAS, PUBLICITY, ATTENTION GETTERS, AROUSING INTEREST

PARADOXES: The truest sayings are paradoxical.” - Lao Tse. - Some of the truest sayings are paradoxical. - JZ, 13.10.02. – The true answer is often neither “yes” or “no” but, instead, “both! – for it all depends …“ – JZ, 7.3.09. - & TRUTHS

PARADOXES: There were other paradoxes that he discovered in the democratic system. For example, he was told that the people were competent to rule, but that they must be vigorously policed. - And again, it was said that the government was one of law and not of men, but yet “men sit upon benches to decide finally what the law is and may be. – R. Dale Grinder, LIBERTARIAN ANALYSIS, I/3, 49. – MAN, LAW, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, LIBERTARIAN TENDENCY, DEMOCRACY

PARALLEL CURRENCIES: If other rare metal standards or other value standards are used: parallel currencies is the term for all of them, no fixed rates of exchange for the metals or other value standards are involved or should be tried. There should be free exchange rates for them, against competing sound value standards. - Tax foundation for government money, with a sound value standard but without legal tender in general circulation. Only all issuers will always have to accept their own notes and this at their nominal and indicated par-value, for goods, services or other debt payments, with notes, prices and debts indicated in e.g. gold weight values or whatever other value standard was chosen for them. – JZ, n.d. & 7.3.09, 30.11.13. – MONETARY FREEDOM, FREE BANKING, COMPETING EXCHANGE MEDIA & VALUE STANDARDS, LEGAL TENDER, FORCED CURRENCY, COMPULSORY ACCEPTANCE, FREE CHOICE OF VALUE STANDARDS, MARKET RATING OF CURRENCIES

PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: A term used first either by Dick Gregory or Staughton Lynd, to my knowledge: p.70, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506. See also ibid, page 23. – JZ, n.d.

PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: a voluntarist would do well to visualize the parallel institutions as valuable constituents of a new voluntary society, wherein human existence would be independent of the Welfare-Warfare State.” – Lysander, in THE DAILY CALIFORNIAN, “Toward a Voluntary Society”, Jan. 17, 1967. – PANARCHISM, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, VOLUNTARISM

PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: Parallel for Profits! – Memon slogan.

PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: Parallel institutions is not a bad alternative term for the diverse panarchies of volunteers, all exterritorially autonomous, under panarchism. – JZ, 9.3.09.

PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: Parallel ventures, differing greatly in kind perhaps but fitting the needs of the different component traditions, might be put up by others. – Les Murray, QUADRANT, 4/76.

PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: The underlying aim has always been central to Communist strategy. It is to create a system of ‘dual power’; in other words, while the elected government appears to be sovereign, a parallel Communist administration is built up, working both through existing administrative and trade union structures, through a clandestine network, and through the newly-created workers’ councils. – Robert Moss, Parallel Institutions, in 1985, p.115. (*) – Parallel institutions could also become tools for us, for our kind of liberation and to liberate all others as far as they want to be liberated. – JZ, 11/76, 15.2.08. But the aim of the totalitarian communists aim was always not peaceful coexistence between various communities of volunteers but, instead, total territorial domination for their ideology and their system. – JZ, 15.2.08. – (*) 1985 An Escape from Orwell’s 1984. A Conservative Path to Freedom, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, Churchill Press, London, 1975.) - COMMUNISM, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, PANARCHISM, LIBERATION, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE VS. TERRITORIALISM, TOTALITARIANISM

PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: Uniform territorial States are without parallel in causing or preparing slaughter and destruction via conventional weapons and now ABC mass murder devices. They can be competed out of existence by the establishment and protection of parallel institutions, or competing governance systems, personal law societies or communities, panarchies or polyarchies, to take over all their desired activities - at the expense and risk of those desiring them. Via individual and minority group secessionism and voluntary associationism under personal law, all people could come to escape those territorial States and societies they do not want and could drive them into bankruptcy and thus make them disappear, for lack of followers or customers or could reduce them to the size determined by their remaining voluntary followers. - All revolutions are started and promoted by parallel institutions. To institutionalize these institutions means making revolution permanent, but doing this in a peaceful and individualistic way, by allowing the realization of any degree of progress or regress desired by some, without requiring anyone to resort to territorial legislation or other oppression or terrorist or totalitarian means to overcome a dissenting majority or a ruling minority or several dissenting minorities. In this practice even one-man revolutions would become possible and they would be confined to the individuals who made their kind of revolutions for themselves. - ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, AUTONOMY, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, LIQUIDATION OF GOVERNMENTS, MINORITY AUTONOMY, MAJORITY, PANARCHY, PERSONAL LAW, POWER, RULERS, SECESSION, SOVEREIGNTY, STATES, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, VOLUNTARISM, WELFARE STATES. - JZ, An ABC Against Nuclear War, in PEACE PLANS Nos.16 & 17, on JZ, 23.1.11, 30.11.13, 9.12.13. - PANARCHIES, ONE-MAN REVOLUTIONS

PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: While the war was raging in Bosnia, Greater Serbianism was proceeding to the same goal by other means in Kosovo. In April 1995 - shortly before the Serb defeats that led to the Dayton Accords - I had the opportunity to learn from the self-styled President of Kosova, Dr. Ibrahim Rugova, about the systematic intimidation of the ethnic Albanians there. Deprived of employment, education and access to medical care by a policy of racial discrimination in favour of the Serb minority, the Albanians - who constitute 90 per cent of the population - had eschewed violence and instead set up a whole system of parallel institutions. They had even elected their own 'President". Dr. Rugova, a moderate, mild-mannered and highly civilised intellectual, had become the centre of this resistance movement. Although demanding full independence (*), he would probably at that time have been prepared to settle in the medium term at least for a return of Kosovo’s lost autonomy – crushed by Milosevics thugs – and guaranties of basic human rights. …” - Margaret Thatcher in "Statecraft, 2002, Strategies for a Changing World", HarperCollinsPublishers (77-85 Fulham Palace Road, Hammersmith, London W6 8JB,, ISBN 0 00 710752 8), 2002, page 310/11. – (*) Alas, he and all his opponents and the foreign interventionists were still, otherwise, territorialists and thus violence escalated, as reported by M. T. – JZ, 8.10.07: - Unfortunately, this book is mainly concerned with the "Statecraft" of territorialism. – JZ, n.d. – BOSNIA, PANARCHISM, PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS

PARALLEL PARLIAMENTS: - RELYEA, HAROLD C.: Black Power & Parallel Institutions, Ideological and Theoretical Considerations, in Journal of Human Relations, Second Quarter, 1969, Central State University, Wilberforce, Ohio, pp. 208-223, bibl. 221-223. - See also the introduction, pp. VI and VII & Plan 126, page 16, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506. - WORLD FEDERATION(S) OF WOMEN

PARALLEL STANDARD: At this point we have arrived at the “parallel standard”. It would not in the least curtail government operations or impede government finance. (*) The Federal Reserve System could continue its operations, its inflation and credit expansion, (? - JZ ) and the US Treasury would receive taxes and make payments in Federal Reserve money. All contracts stated in U.S. dollars would have to be met in US dollars; but contracts stated in ounces and grains of gold would have to be met in gold. (**) Government money and gold would be circulating side by side. The relative supplies of and demands for the two monies would determine their exchange ratio, which would continually fluctuate in response to demand and supply. – Sennholz, Inflation or Gold Standard? P.63. - (*) It would. Then it could no longer force any quantity of paper money into general circulation. - Apparently, then the governmental paper money would not longer be the exclusive value standard, except in its taxation and government spending and it would be exposed to competition from at least one alternative currency. But governments have often legislated such and other monetary liberties and rights away when it suited them. - (**) Or in government paper money but only at its market rate against gold weight units! - JZ, 15.2.08. – In a quite sound parallel currency system neither of them should have a monopoly or legal tender power. All should be confined to the contracts made with their voluntary members. – JZ, 9.12.13. - GOLD & GOVERNMENT PAPER MONEY, MONETARY FREEDOM, FREE CHOICE OF VALUE STANDARDS, LEGAL TENDER, FREE BANKING

PARALLELS: Educated is the one who is able to see parallels. Fools only see something that is quite new. – Graff. (“Gebildet ist, wer Parallelen zu sehen vermag. Dummkoepfe sehen immer wieder etwas ganz Neues.”) – Do the fools really see and understand everything new or do they rather tend to stay with the fixed ideas they are accustomed to, at least in the social sciences. When it comes to novelties like fashions, songs, technical gadgets, they are a bit more “open-minded”. – JZ, 9.12.13. -   ANALOGIES, PRECEDENTS, HISTORY, EDUCATION, JUDGMENT ENLIGHTENMENT, NEWS, FOOLISHNESS, UNDERSTANDING

PARANOIA: they saw every event through the distorting lens of their own paranoia.” - Charles Sheffield, Proteus Unbound, ANALOG, 9/88, p.160. - PREJUDICES, CONSPIRACY THEORIES, IDEOLOGIES, RELIGIONS, RED.,

PARAPATH: Parapath, a person who cannot tell fact from fancy.” – Source unknown. – Is this really the optimal term for this common affliction? I cannot find it in my dictionaries. – JZ, 1.4.08.

PARAQUAT: A mother who tried to dissuade her children from eating cookies by poisoning the cookies would be regarded as a psychotic. A government that tries to discourage its citizens from smoking marijuana by poisoning the marijuana, is behaving quite normally, for a government. – Robert Anton Wilson, NEW LIBERTARIAN 5/6, 1978/80, p. 17. – ANTI-DRUG WAR, DRUG LAW, DRUG PROHIBITIONISM, MARIHUANA POISONING

PARASITES: In a welfare state parasites thrive; …” - Marshall Bruce Evoy, LIBERTARIAN OPTION, 1/75. - WELFARE STATE

PARASITES: Most people still make money by improving the flow of goods and services but all too many and a growing number make it by creating and maintaining bottlenecks and creating one-sided outpouring in their direction only. – JZ, 4.6.82.  – MONOPOLISM, PRIVILEGES

PARASITES: No man has the right to leave his own energies unused and live of the energies of others.” - („Kein Mensch hat das Recht, seine Kraefte ungebraucht zu lassen und durch fremde Kraefte zu leben.“) – J. G. Fichte, in his book on the French Revolution.

PARASITES: Since time immemorial, mankind has been ruled over by a tiny band or criminal parasites. They have tried every intellectual trick conceivable to bolster and perpetuate their bloody regimes. It is high time that the ruse of their lies were seen through, high time that their myths were punctured, high time that they themselves were turned out to pasture – or something more permanent.” – R. A. Childs Jr., quoted by George Kysor in LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION No. 3, page 29. – GOVERNMENTALISM, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, RULERS, TYRANNICIDE

PARASITES: That the independent and the creative should be made to feel guilty, as if they were the parasites, with the dependent and the passive lauded as the salt of the earth – such a reversal of civilized values is the mark of a wet society with a pathetic death wish. – Peregrine Worthorne, London, quoted in THE AUSTRALIAN, 7.11.74. - GUILT, DEPENDENTS, INDEPENDENTS, WELFARE STATE, UNDERDOGS, CLAIMS AS RIGHTS, ANTI-CAPITALIST MENTALITY, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, CREDIT, INSURANCE, MUTUAL AID, UNDER FULL LIBERTIES & RIGHTS FOR ALL SELF-HELP OPTIONS, INSTEAD OF CHARITY, HANDOUTS, RICH, POOR, POVERTY, BIAS AGAINST BUSINESSMEN, CORPORATIONS

PARASITES: The inventor and introducer of the first privilege was certainly a mixture of a scoundrel and a fool. – Johann Gottfried Seume. („Der Erfinder und Einfuehrer des ersten Privilegiums ist gewiss ein Zwitterding zwischen Schurken und Dummkopf gewesen.“) – Was he really a fool? He made his career in this way! – JZ, 12.3.08. – As Felix Riemkasten once said, satirically: “Nothing against socialism: It has made the career of many a good man.” – PRIVILEGES, STATE SOCIALISM, MONOPOLIES

PARASITES: They can take every penny we earn, including the clothes of our backs. There is not enough wealth in this great, rich country of ours to satisfy the wants of the plundering, grasping, greedy, unscrupulous thieving gangsters and scoundrels who have been bred and nurtured by the income tax and have seized control of our government.” – Vivien Kellems, 1952, “Toil, Taxes and Trouble.” – Why exaggerate the wrongfulness and effects of the tax robbery? The working people are not yet running around naked, although clothing is also wrongfully and heavily taxed and not only through the income tax, either. – JZ, 1.12.13. - TAXATION, GOVERNMENTS, WELFARE STATE, INCOME TAX

PARASITES: When you have parasites above, you will have parasites below.” - [Francis Du Bosque, CHRISTMAS EVE, in: LIBERTY, Vol. XVII, No.1, April 1908, Whole Number 403, p. 3554] – Sent in by C. B., 22.2.08. – WELFARE STATE

PARASITES: You think it is most comfortable to live at the expense of others!” – Juvenal, V.2 (“Summa bona putas, aliens vivere quadra!” – “Du haeltst es fuers Bequemste, auf Kosten anderer zu leben!”) - SOMETHING FOR NOTHING, LIVING AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER PEOPLE, POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS, PUBLIC SERVANTS, PROTECTIONISM, SUBSIDIES, MONOPOLISTS, WELFARE STATE, HANDOUT CLAIMANTS

PARASITISM: England exists on a parasitic system, every man preying on his neighbour and calling it trade or politics. – Showell Styles, Vincey Joe at Quiberon, p.51. – As if free exchanges were not for mutual benefit. What it wrong with territorial politics is precisely that is it is not a free  and contracted trade for those subjected to it. – JZ, 1.12.13. – TRADE VS. POLITICS, TAXES & GOVERNMENT SPENDING

PARASITISM: Hardin argues that trade is the only humane and dignified currency between nations (*) because “one-way transfer of wealth produces parasitism” and parasitism, as biology has taught us, degenerates protector and dependant.” – Adele Horn, N.Y., in NATIONAL TIMES, 28.7.74, on Dr. Garrett Hardin’s views. -  (*) He should have spoken rather about clearing certificates using sound value standards and accepted by their issuers for export goods and services and used to pay for imports. – JZ, 15.2.08. – See the monetary writings of Prof. Edgard Milhaud, Switzerland, in the ANNALS FOR COLLECTIVE ECONOMY, IN 3 LANGUAGES. ULRICH VON BECKERATH, 1882-1969, developed and generalized Milhaud’s ideas in his three monetary freedom books and together with the other 6 members of the proponents of the “FOUR LAW DRAFTS”, among them especially Prof. Heinrich Rittershausen and Dr. Walter Zander. – JZ, 9.12.13. - FOREIGN AID VS. TRADE & FREEDOM FOR PRODUCTIVE & PROFITABLE  INVESTMENTS, INTERNATIONAL CLEARING CERTIFICATES TO PROMOTE FREE TRADE

PARASITISM: if parasitism is rewarded (as it is by government), then production will falter and finally cease.” – John Hospers, reason, 9/72. – Even in Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany and Maoist China it did not come to a complete stop – but produced all too much hunger and deprivation, with millions of victims. – JZ, 15.2.08, 1.12.13. - STATE SOCIALISM

PARASITISM: it may be argued that the European competitive political system, taken at any point of its history, did not involve a distribution of the products of work substantially more advantageous to producers than obtained in the empires of antiquity or in the contemporary Oriental despotism. The European workers worked, the soldiers, politicians and administrators consumed the surpluses in accordance with the ‘natural pattern’ postulated.” – H. S. Ferns, The Disease of Government, 23. – Since they are territorially imposed upon involuntary victims and do not allow secessions and personal law alternatives, they are hardly truly competitive political systems. It is also wrong to describe all the tribute levy extortions as merely the taxation of “surpluses”. Even if the tax victims would not need these amounts for their survival, they are their earnings, to be spent or invested by them, rather than by politicians and bureaucrats. However, in many other respects I can only recommend this book. I microfilmed it and also bought and distributed some printed copies. - JZ, 1.12.13. - WELFARE STATE, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, WESTERN STATES, PUBLIC SERVANTS, POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS, TAXATION

PARASITISM: The creator’s concern is the conquest of nature. The parasite’s concern is the conquest of man.” – Ayn Rand, quoted in O’Neill, Ayn Rand, p.68.

PARASITISM: The greatest obstacle to progress is not man’s inherited pugnacity, but his incorrigible tendency to parasitism.” – William Ralph Inge, “Patriotism”, Outspoken Essays: First Series, 1919. - This strong tendency is closely related to territorialism, which provides all the needed opportunities for it. Without these opportunities, within communities of like-minded volunteers only, few, if any privileges will be granted by the volunteer and these only to those who, in their opinion, deserve them. Because of individual secessionism involved in communities of volunteers - no privileges can there be usurped and imposed upon dissenters. – JZ, 2.4.08, 23.1.11. - MONOPOLISM, PRIVILEGES; PROGRESS, DEVELOPMENT, AGGRESSIVENESS, MAN, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM

PARASITISM: those who produce are robbed for those who do not, contracting the economic basis of society and leading to economic parasitism, stagnation and retrogression. Can there be any doubt but that that conflict and corruption must inevitably result?” – Roy Childs, Liberty Against Power.

PARDON: Sentimentality is the false belief that in moral conflicts pardon should be given or could be given.” - G. B. Shaw, in my retranslation from the German version: “Sentimentalitaet ist der Irrtum zu glauben, dass in moralischen Konflikten Pardon gegeben oder gegeben werden kann.” - EXCUSES, SENTIMENTALITY, ETHICS, RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, MORALITY, SOCIETY TO BLAME? ENVIRONMENTALISM

PARENTAL AUTHORITY: Is “parent” the same as “owner”? ... You are trying to thwart him, I am helping him to do what he wants to do. … Our children’s courts have long taken a dim view of the arbitrary use of parental authority; coercion in choice of career is usually open-and-shut. … Don’t oppose him too far, or you will lose him completely. - Robert Heinlein, Star Beast, p.150 & 151 of the New English Library edition of 1971-1984. - RIGHTS OF CHILDREN, MOTHERS, FATHERS, PARENTS, EDUCATION, DOMINATION

PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY: In my kind of panarchy parents of delinquents would be co-punished, at least with stiff fines, for the criminal offences of their children. For they would, obviously, have fallen down in their responsibilities to bring up their children as responsible beings. They should also be held co-responsible for damages to victims. – JZ, 27.4.95. – But I am in doubt whether that should still apply after their children reach 18 or 21, the supposed age of maturity. I believe that here we have another case of somewhat justified collective responsibility. - Where family responsibilities are strongly felt, e.g. among orthodox Jewish and Chinese families, delinquency is rather rare. And also among families where children are greatly loved, and rarely punished, if at all, e.g. among Italians and Eskimos. We can still learn much, probably, by a close study of the successful upbringing of children among some primitive tribes, according to some hints that I have read. – JZ, 1.4.08.

PARENTHOOD: Parenthood remains the greatest single preserve of the amateur." - Alvin Toffler – AMATEURS

PARENTING: When parents take too large an interest in the lives of their children then this can be almost as bad for them as if they took too little interest in them. – JZ, 8.5.92. – CHILDREN, EDUCATION, SELF-RELIANCE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY

PARENTING: You are young and desire marriage and children but I ask you: are you a man who ought to desire a child? … I would have your victory and your freedom long for a child. You should build living memorials to your victory and your liberation. – You should build beyond yourself. But first you must be built yourself, square-built in body and soul.” – Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra. - FAMILIES, CHILDREN, SELF-DEVELOPMENT, FATHERHOOD, EDUCATION, MOTHERHOOD, SELF-LIBERATION

PARENTS: Awful job at times, bringing up your parents.” – From film “Connie”. – Parents should be prepared to learn almost as much through their children as the children should be prepared to learn through their parents. – JZ, 1.12.13. - EDUCATION, UPBRINGING, CHILDREN, EDUCATION, JOKES

PARENTS: Both, fathers and mothers tend to speak of their children not as “our” children but as “my” children. This choice of words expresses sentiments, which creates strife upon divorce or separation. – JZ, 4.4.95. - CHILDREN, DIVORCE, SEPARATION, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY

PARENTS: If one is not going to take the necessary precautions to avoid having parents one must undertake to bring them up.” – Quentin Crisp, The Naked Civil Servant. – JOKES, CHILDREN

PARENTS: Parents are merely larger and slightly more mature children than their offspring.” – Robert LeFevre. – Comment by SLM 7/77: “The logical conclusion (? JZ), if this be true, is that only those who have no children become adults.” – That’s wishful thinking and overlooks, at least, the educational influence of children upon parents. – JZ, 27.3.80. – At least in the more intelligent parents, their children induce more responsible actions and foresight. – JZ. 1.12.13. - CHILDREN,

PARENTS: Parents exist to teach the child, but also they must learn what the child has to teach them; and the child has a great deal to teach them.” – Arnold Bennett, How to Make the Best of Life. – CHILDREN, EDUCATION, LEARNING, TEACHING

PARENTS: Parents really know what’s best for their children only to a limited extent and for a limited time. If they wanted to, they could learn much from the nature of their own and other children and also from their own experience with them, but they do so only rarely and insufficiently. Not that government-appointed or controlled teachers would be much better in this respect and they have mostly and mainly only a monetary incentive and an almost impossible job within a statist education system. – JZ, 10.1.93, 20.2.08. – How many parents are responsible enough to try to do something to prevent nuclear war and to spread knowledge of all individual rights and liberties? – JZ, 1.12.13. - CHILDREN, UPBRINGING, EDUCATION, SCHOOLS, TEACHERS, NWT, DECLARATION OF ALL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARENTS: Parents, too, to be loved, must be lovable. – JZ, 29.10.87. – Just like children. – JZ, 22.2.08.

PARENTS: the everyday experience of children … with creatures that are, in fact, obscenely unmotivated, insensitive and dull.” – Kurt Vonnegut, The Sirens of Titan, p140. - CHILDREN

PARKINSON’S LAW: The more people you put on a job, the less work will get done.” – Ted White, Secret of the Marauder Satellite, 1968, 1978, p.27. – Well, at least by my poor memory it is somewhat similar to P.’s Law, in pointing out the inefficiency of bureaucracy. – JZ, 13.2.08. – Private enterprises still have to make a profit to survive. - PEOPLE, MANPOWER WASTE, BUREAUCRACY

PARKINSON’S LAW: Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.“ - Prof. C. Northcote Parkinson - Sudha Shenoy, in ON LIBERTY, Nov. 79, commented: This first part of Parkinson’s Law ensures that at least three civil servants are employed when two might be sufficient. Secondly, Parkinson’s Law says that “officials make work for each other.” This part of the Law ensures that officials never run short of “work” to do. The net effect is to continually expand the “necessary” functions that government “must” perform – in the public interest, of course. – In diverse panarchies, if they still have public servants, these would have to compete with those in other panarchies and with those, who manage without them. – JZ, 1.12.13. - BUREAUCRACY, PUBLIC INTEREST, JOBS & WELFARE FOR THE “PUBLIC SERVANTS”

PARLIAMENTARISM: Not by speeches and decisions of majorities will the greatest problems of the time be decided - that was the mistake of 1848-49 - but by iron and blood.” - Otto von Bismarck-Schoenhausen, impromptu speech to several ministers and deputies of the Prussian House of Delegates, September 29, 1862. - Rather, by tolerance for self-concerned and diverse actions of others: by experimental freedom in the political, economic and social sphere. Let the good solutions drive out the bad ones. Do no longer enforce the realization and maintenance of the statist non-solutions upon whole populations of a territory. Finally recognize individual sovereignty and exterritorial autonomy involved in communities, societies and governance systems of volunteers only. The more you do so, the less you will have to fight to protect your genuine rights and liberties. - JZ, 13.10.02. - Not that there were many States, Kingdoms and Principalities in Germany was the problem but that they were territorially organized and practised e.g. protectionism, restricted migration and did not permit individual and group secession and voluntaristic and exterritorial autonomy for their members, without a territorial monopoly claim. Bismarck's unified Germany, established by wars, led straight to WW I & WW II. - "It's not all brute strength and stupidity!" - said a captain to his rowers. Alas, for territorialist regimes it largely is. Add to this their inherent wrongfulness. - JZ, 27.11.02, 1.12.13. – Which great question was really positively solved by Bismarck’s method? I do not know of a single one. – JZ, 7.3.09, 23.1.11. – MAJORITIES, DECISION-MAKING, UNITY, TERRITORIALISM, IMPERIALISM, STATISM, PROBLEMS & SOLUTIONS, VIOLENCE, FORCE, COERCION, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, TOLERANCE

PARLIAMENTARISM: The difference between death and taxes is, death doesn't get worse every time Congress meets.” – Will Rogers - LAWS & TAXES, JOKES

PARLIAMENTARISM: This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as we do when the baby gets hold of a hammer.” – Will Rogers - Another version: This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer.” – Will Rogers - CONGRESS, REPRESENTATIVES, LEGISLATORS, POLITICIANS, JOKES

PARLIAMENTARISM: Well, it is true that we are still playing the same game, i.e. practising parliamentary government, but the sad fact is that all of this has become a matter of form or convenience. A habit that serves to pacify us and at the same time to make things easier for politicians. Elections, confidence votes, opposition or shadow governments are all beautiful, ideal means of operating the machine. A machine that has ceased to serve the purpose for which it was invented, as politicians have discovered a far better use for it. It is to their advantage to keep it functioning as it was originally meant to; or at least appear to do so; it provides them the proper cover, …” - Kevork Ajemian, The Fallacy of Modern Politics, Books International, PO Box 6096, McLean, Virginia 22106, 1986, Tel. (703) 821-8900, p.98/99. - POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, VOTING, DEMOCRACY VS. GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT & CONSENT, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE & DECISION-MAKING

PARLIAMENTARY REFORM: We need quite fundamental reforms of citizenship and State organization much more so than we need piddling parliamentary reforms. The latter are only as significant as "reforms" at the court of absolutist monarchs could be. And confining reforms to reforms of and through parliaments, to the extent that they are possible and desirable, may take years to decades and has in some cases (e.g. the corn and truck laws) taken centuries of vain efforts. Moreover, even the best reforms are then usually incomplete and temporary, i.e. all to soon reversed, with the same mistakes repeated over and over again, sometimes for thousands of years. (E.g.: monopolism, protectionism, price and wage controls, slavery. It has even sanctioned mass extermination devices, i.e., anti-people "weapons" in the hands of "democrats".) Through this kind of experimentation, limited the by number of territorial governments existing at any time, we cannot rapidly enough evaluate and reject wrongful and flawed experiments, at least the enlightened individuals and minorities cannot do so for themselves. In this way the more or less prejudiced, ignorant and misled majorities cannot be fast enough enlightened by a few enlightened and liberated pioneers and their free actions and experiments. (The conventional and territorial political process largely tends to legalize and institutionalizes popular errors and prejudices, false assumptions and conclusion. - JZ, 19.9.04. – Whole armies of them – not yet completely listed and confronted with their best refutations in a special digitized encyclopedia online. These notes are just one persons inevitably all too limited input towards such a work. – JZ, 9.12.13.) Reforms and even revolutions via tolerant, because exterritorially autonomous experiments among volunteers only, can be realized almost instantly, risking only a minimum or resources, and manpower, those of their first volunteers, and they could also, in case of successes, be copied almost instantly and would tend to be, for success convinces better than arguments do. And if rightful and beneficent, then they would also tend to last forever, at least among the volunteers, who would have to be exterritorially autonomous. No other  autonomy or sovereignty is rightful or sufficient. Only it is based upon individual sovereignty, choice and contract. – Look at their legislations and its consequences, also at their slogans, their party platforms, their debates and their all too flawed and incomplete bills of rights. – They can be rightful only for their voluntary members and victims, at their stage of development and enlightenment or lack of them. - JZ, 21.7.91, 13.1.93, 8.9.04, 19.9.04, 9.12.13. – EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, POPULAR ERRORS & PREJUDICES, ENGLIGHTENMENT, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS, PERSONAL LAW

PARLIAMENTS: A congress of parliamentary councilors is less a concentration of wisdom than a dispersal of it.” – Dagobert D. Runes, Handbook of Reason, p.43.

PARLIAMENTS: A constitutionally, legally and juridically sanctified band or robbers, despots and con-men, serving their own ends while pretending to act for the common good. – JZ, 22.11.93. – People like Ron Paul in the USA are rare exceptions among them and, to the extent that he is still a territorialist, he is also still part of the problem rather the part of the solution. – JZ, 15.2.08. - Ignoring Reality in Iraq by Rep. Ron Paul, MD. It is reproduced in DIS NOTES P 1 under PANARCHISM: AT 12:41 AM 20/12/2004, … - Somewhere else, on a Ron Paul fan-site there is an even better statement on the panarchist alternative. – Searching with Google for Ron Paul on panarchism – I just got 66,300 search results. – Take your pick! - JZ, 9.12.13. - REPRESENTATIVES, DESPOTISM, DEMOCRACY, REPUBLICANISM, POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: A deliberative assembly does not rise above the level of its average members.” – Lord Acton, Lectures on the French Revolution, ed. by Figgis & Laurence, MacMillan, 1932, p.9. – What makes it worse is that most “representatives” are merely territorialist and statist politicians and the majority of them are lawyers! – JZ, 1.10.07, 1.12.13. – CONGRESS, CONFERENCS, COMMITTEES

PARLIAMENTS: A democratic political system may be preferred to a monarchy or oligarchy on the ground that it is less likely to reduce social welfare. Presumably, the collective intelligence of individuals, as gathered and expressed by their representatives, greatly exceeds (*) that of either a single individual or a small group of people.” (**) - Prof. Russell Shannon, The Tyranny of Minorities. THE FREEMAN, 1/78. - (*) It is usually greatly below that of somewhat enlightened individuals and groups, because it has been pre-selected, voted in and votes itself in accordance with the most popular prejudices, errors and wrong assumptions. – Those, who do not share them, do not win in elections. - (**) Individuals and small groups of people can usually manage their own affairs better than parliaments could – and yet parliaments meddle with them. – But it must be admitted that, in order to obtain temporary approval of the conglomeration of views in a majority, special favors tend to be granted by territorial legislators to some minorities. Special interests can also buy their way into legislation. - JZ, 17.2.08.

PARLIAMENTS: a house fit for rogues and charlatans.” – Ian St. James, The Killing Anniversary, p.338. – I am certainly not alone in my harsh judgment of parliaments. – JZ, 23.3.08.

PARLIAMENTS: a kind of paid fake discourse. – Howard Rheingold, The Virtual Community, p.283. – It largely represents popular errors, prejudices and myths but also party interests and the special interests of various lobbies at the expense of the majority of the population, and, naturally, the political power ambition of every politician. – JZ, 9.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: A toilet for people with verbal diarrhoea. (Suffering diarrhoea from the mouth.) And people ask them and pay them highly to put their outpourings upon them! – JZ, 4.7.82. – There is nothing wrong with that – for the volunteers of such a system. They deserve it. Their peaceful opponents, just wishing to do their own things among themselves, do not. – JZ, 9.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: According to Johan a debate in a country club was carried on much more successfully than in a parliament. He continues: “The sad thing is that the people in all countries still imagine that by these ‘monkey-tricks’ their interest are represented and preserved.” – “In the Upper House”, he said, “there sat quite a lot of rhinoceroses, idiots and owls.” - A lot of representatives were priests, whom he calls black beetles (R.C.). He identified the representatives as fossils, and concluded by saying: “So this, thought I, is the gang that has been sent to guide the destinies of the People.” (SPUR, July 1927, vol VI, No. 12.) – RED & BLACK, 7, p.11.

PARLIAMENTS: According to this opinion of the court, congress has – subject to the exceptions referred to – absolute, irresponsible dominion overall commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States”; and all men’s natural rights to trade with each other, among the several States, and all over the world, are prostrate under the feet of a contemptible, detestable, and irresponsible cabal of lawmakers; and the people have no protection or redress for any tyranny or robbery that may be practised upon them, exceptthe wisdom and the discretion of congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections!” - Lysander Spooner, A Letter to Grover Cleveland, p.90, Works I. - CONGRESS, LEGISLATION, POWER, RIGHTS, FREE TRADE, PROTECTIONISM, SPOONER

PARLIAMENTS: All parliaments, democracies, republics and other governments should rule only over their own volunteers, with personal law and institutions rather than territorial ones. Everything else is, basically, still authoritarian, even despotic - in its territorial character. – JZ, 13.9.07. - & DEMOCRACIES, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM VS. VOLUNTARISM, CONSENT, GENUINE REPRESENTATION

PARLIAMENTS: All the world is fed up with parliaments but no one has anything better to propose. The knowledge of having to drag this discredited institution as a necessary evil into the next century is depressing the emotions of the best people.” – JZ tr. of: “Alle Welt ist parlamentsueberdruessig, aber niemand weiss etwas Besseres vorzuschlagen, und das Bewusstsein, diese missachtete Einrichting als notwendiges Uebel ins neue Jahrhundert mit hinueberschleppen zu muessen, lasted druckend auf den Gemuetern der Besten.” – Hartmann, Zur Zeitgeschichte, S.39. - To each and everyone of the voters and tax payers the kind of parliament or other governmental or societal management institution, including direct democracies, participatory democracies, monarchies, anarchies or libertarian societies of any kind - of his own and quite free individual choice, but none with any territorial monopoly or any compulsory members or subjects – criminals with victims or other aggressors excepted. - As much freedom in this sphere as exists already in most countries in the sphere of religions. – JZ, 11.12.85, 23.3.08, 23.1.11. – VOLUNTARISM, FREE CHOICE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SECESSIONISM & FREE EXPERIMENTATION, COMPETITION, LAISSEZ FAIRE, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT & ASSOCIATION IN EVERY SPHERE VS. TERRITORIALISM

PARLIAMENTS: Already we hear a chorus of despair from Congress. The Brookings Institution recently held several off-the-record round tables, in which outstanding Congressmen of both parties took place. Among their candid comments: “It is virtually impossible for the ordinary member [of Congress] to have any idea of what is going on.” - “The terrifying thing is that we are talking about the ability of Congress to make decisions on the basis of information furnished by the executive …” - “We have to take things pretty much on faith.” - “It is very difficult for a Congressman to know what the truth is or where to find it.” - “I often have a hard time finding out what the issue is.” - “You can’t get facts now.” - “Unless the administration volunteers the information, congress is generally pretty helpless.” - Time after time we go on the floor not knowing anything about the subjects to be discussed.” - “We are supposed to know all about domestic activities – about education, water pollution, small business problems, dams, etc. No matter how hard-working … a Congressman is … he just can’t master these problems.” - Richard C. Cornuelle, Reclaiming the American Dream, A Vintage Book, p.76/77. - DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATIVES, LAWS, LEGISLATORS, POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: An Anarchist will have nothing to do with ‘parliamentarism’, since it only lulls the people to sleep …” - Benjamin R. Barber, Superman and Common Men, p.30, quoting Plekanov: Anarchism and Socialism. – Alas, later in this passage P. recommends nothing better as an alternative than a “full, complete, immediate and immediately economic” revolution and for this he was immoral, ignorant and stupid enough to recommend terrorist bomb-throwing! – JZ, 17.2.08.

PARLIAMENTS: Ancient Rome declined because it had a Senate; now what’s going to happen to us with both a Senate and a House?” - Will Rogers - JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: Are there any affairs really within the competence of parliaments while States and laws are territorial and State membership or subordination to a State is compulsory? – JZ, 30.10.93. – Are e.g. their legislation, jurisdiction, police and defence services rightfully and efficiently run? If not, why do any libertarians still advocate “limited” but still territorial monopoly governments? – JZ, 1.12.13. – LIMITED GOVERNMENTS

PARLIAMENTS: Arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.” – Patrick Henry, Speech on the Stamp Act. – MINISTERS, GOVERNMENT

PARLIAMENTS: as a consequence of the fusion of the legislative and the governmental power in the same assembly, it possesses powers which in a free society no authority should possess.” – F. A. Hayek, Whither Democracy? – QUADRANT, 11/76.

PARLIAMENTS: As did Blackstone, Spooner argues that the nobles in opposing the King were only attempting to restore rights lost after the Norman invasion. But Spooner avoids some of the major pitfalls of Whig interpretation. The Whigs opposed the power of the King in order to increase that of Parliament – whose prerogatives they confused with liberty. For Spooner, the power of Parliament threatened the people’s liberties as much if not more than did the power of the King.” – From the introduction to Spooner’s Trial by Jury, Works II/6, by Charles Shively. – LIBERTY, DIVERSE PEOPLES, TERRITORIALISM & “REPRESENTATIVES”, SPOONER

PARLIAMENTS: As for the floor debates, the less said the better. … Doubtless some knew what they were doing; obviously most did not… These are the lawyers that run our world, and they seem quite mad.” – David Cort, Social Astonishments, p.24. – LAWYERS, LEGISLATORS, POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: As the nineteenth century reached its mid-point, it became clear that all shades of political opinion wished to play a role as the architects of a new England, with the remodeling process empowered by political pressures. People who called themselves “conservatives” wished to use political power to reverse the forces of change; people who called themselves “liberals” and “utilitarian” wished to use political power to speed up the process of change. Those who recognized that the interventions of political power in the lives of men were likely to bring disaster in their wake, were by now few in number, far from the seats of influence, and nameless, since all the labels had already been appropriated by those who were going to remodel England. The legislatures of such societies tend to resemble mad houses. When Ralph Waldo Emerson was visiting England, Thomas Carlyle showed him Parliament in session and asked bitterly, “Do you believe in the devil now?” – G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.182. - PARTY STRUGGLES, PARTY RULE, MINORITIES, DISSENTERS, DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATIVES, STATISM TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL MINORITIES, POWER, INTERVENTIONISM, PANARCHISM, POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: Assassination for personal interest is merely common murder, just as casting a vote in Parliament for personal interest is merely common fraud. But that having said, it would clearly be wrong indeed to deny the common man the right to assassinate, for example, a new Adolf Hitler.” – Edward Hyams: Killing No Murder, p.225. – TYRANNICIDE, ASSASSINATION, MURDER, PARLIAMENT, POLITICIANS, LEGISLATORS, LAWS, VOTING, DEMOCRACY

PARLIAMENTS: Australia needs an anti-parties party. – JZ, 17.10.74. – A party that opposes territorial rule by any party or coalition of parties, while it would advocate exterritorial autonomy for any party and all its voluntary members. – JZ, 17.2.08. – TERRITORIALISM, A PANARCHIST PARTY FOR ALL PARTIES, TO THE EXTENT OF FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL OF THEM

PARLIAMENTS: Believing that people can best run their own lives is the position of the realist. Believing that people, whom you’ve likely never met, can best run the lives of others, is the position of the starry-eyed dreamer. - Nizam Ahmad shared Indian Libertarians's photo. – Facebook, 6.11.12. - PARLIAMENTARISM, DEMOCRACY, VOTING, ELECTIONS, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: Bob Hawke, president of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, believes the present system under which all members of the ministry are elected by the people does not harness the best available talent. He suggests that at least half the cabinet members be appointed from outside Parliament. There is much value in the idea.” – READER’S DIGEST, 7/77. - Obviously, he wanted many of the ministers to be appointed e.g. by the Australian Council of Trade unions! – Jobs for the boys from the unions! I would have trusted their ministers even less. – JZ, 16.2.08. - MINISTERS APPOINTED THROUGH TRADE UNIONS? REPRESENTATION, , VOTING

PARLIAMENTS: Both the oppression of Ireland and the oppression of America were the work of the modern school, of men who executed one king and expelled another. It was the work of parliament, of the parliaments of Cromwell and of William III. And the parliament would not consent to renounce its own specific policy, its right of imposing taxes. The crown, the clergy, the aristocracy, were hostile to the Americans; but the real enemy was the House of Commons. The old European securities for good government were found insufficient protection against parliamentary oppression.” – Lord Acton, Lectures on Modern History, p.290.

PARLIAMENTS: British Members of Parliament vote as their party bosses bid them and not as their constituents would like.” – Edward Hyams: Killing No Murder, p. 224. - It is really different in any other parliament? Party discipline sees to that and hides the fact that opinions are split even within each of the political parties. – JZ, 23.3.08, 9.12.13. – PARTY DISCIPLINE & VOTING, REPRESENTATION, CONSCIENCE

PARLIAMENTS: But the American Congress, a body historically long on lawyers and short on vision. …” – Arthur C. Clarke & Michael Kube-McDowell, “The Trigger”, Harper/Collins Publishers, 1999, p.11. - - CONGRESS, SENATE, HOUSE OF COMMONS, HOUSE OF LORDS ETC.

PARLIAMENTS: but the peoples safety is the supreme Law; and if a people must not be left without a means to preserve it self against the King; by the same rule they may preserve themselves against the Parliament and Army too; if they pervert the end for which they received their power, to wit the Nation's safety; therefore speedily unite your selves together, and as one man stand up for the defence of your Freedom, and for the establishment of such equal rules of Government for the future, as shall lay a firm foundation of peace and happiness to all the people without partiality.” – Walwyn The Bloody Project, 1648. In A. L. Morton: Freedom in Arms. – Each of the many diverse groups in the population of every country should only stand of for the right and freedom to do its own things at the own risk and expense – and for the same right of any other society, community and governance system – as long as none of them claims a territorial monopoly over all others. The territorial unity spleen is one of the most dangerous ones and still, alas, a very popular one, even among the “intellectuals”, who never bothered to explore its rightful alternatives. – JZ, 9.12.13. – VOLULUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, PERSONAL LAW VS. TERRITORIALISM, MINORITY RIGHTS & LIBERTIES VS. MAJORITY DESPOTISM

PARLIAMENTS: But, at best, the right of suffrage can be exercised only periodically; and between the periods the legislators are wholly irresponsible. No despot was ever more entirely irresponsible than any republican legislators during the period for which they are chosen. They can neither be removed from their office, nor called to account while in their office, nor punished after they leave their office, be their tyranny what it may. Moreover, the judicial and executive departments of the government are equally irresponsible to the people, and are only responsible, (by impeachment, and dependence for their salaries), to these irresponsible legislators. This dependence of the judiciary and executive upon the legislature is a guaranty that they will always sanction and execute its laws, whether just or unjust. Thus the legislators hold the whole power of the government in their hands, and are at the same time utterly irresponsible for the manner in which they use it.” – Lysander Spooner, Trial by Jury, Works II/1, p.13-14. – VOTING, ELECTIONS, LEGISLATION FOR WHOLE POPULLATIONS FROM ONE CENTER, AMOUNTS TO ORGANIZED & CONSTITUTIONALLY & LEGALLY SANCTIONED IRRESPONSIBILITY, IN ALL TOO MANY IF NOT MOST CASES, DIVISION OF POWERS?

PARLIAMENTS: Capital Punishment – what we get when Congress is in session. – Henry Boye. – JOKES – Boyce?

PARLIAMENTS: Central Committee for the promotion of waste and mismanagement on a national scale.” – JZ, 4.8.91. - A large central committee against economizing, for promoting waste, mismanagement, monopolies and privileges on a national scale, all at the expense of its tax slaves and under the pretence of representing them and looking out for their rights, liberties and welfare. – JZ, 5.8.91, 23.3.08. – All their members are much better at looking after their own interests. Very few, if any, know the causes and cures for unemployment, inflation, wars, civil wars and despotism – and seriously try to get to know them. – JZ, 1.12.13. – Is there, at any time, even a single Ron Paul type of representative in every parliament? – JZ, 9.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Ceres was developed by the same outfit that runs the Bonaventura: Harriman, Taggart & Hill. In a daring stroke of capitalism, they organized a transport service to the asteroids, ignoring nit-pickers who pointed out that there wasn’t anyone out there to run a service to. Staking a claim on Ceres, HT & H modified its orbit, erected the plastic envelope, and offered homestead tickets on ships like the Indomitable Spirit. Utilities, like atmosphere and mirrors, they sold to other clients, as concessions, The question of who governs never arises: back home we’re stuck with what’s left of Congress. Here, where everybody ran his own life from the start, there isn’t even anything to vote on.” - L. Neil Smith, The Venus Belt, p.73. – Don’t leave anything to Congress! (Parliament). – JZ, n.d. – VOTING, GOVERNMENT, DEMOCRACY, SELF-DETERMINATION, VOLUNTARISM, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, FREE ENTERPRISE & CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY IN EVERY SPHERE, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

PARLIAMENTS: Citizens going to the capital to observe the party political process trampling all over common sense and reasonable debate must wonder how such a system came into being and why it is allowed to persist.” - Simon Upton, The Withering of the State, 1987, p.104. – It should certainly be allowed to continue to exist – for its remaining voluntary victims. But all the diverse groups of dissenters should be free to secede and to run their own shows under their preferred personal law system. – JZ, 1.12.13. – FREE COMPETITION IN A SELF-RESPONSIBLE WAY IN EVERY SPHERE: GENUINE SELF-MANAGEMENT OR SELF-DETERMINATION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FULL FREEDOM OF CONTRACT & ASSOCIATION, LAISSEZ FAIRE -  FOR VOLUNTEERS, UNDER PERSONAL LAW, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, COMPETING GOVERNANCE.

PARLIAMENTS: Congress doesn’t control the Administration; the Administration calls the tune in Congress. Parliamentary control, as Britain’s Sydney and Beatrice Webb once wrote, becomes an “illusion and a sham”. Congress mainly figures out how to pay for government in a way taxpayers will tolerate. – So government grows immune to popular control. We’re reversing public opinion’s historic role. Federal programs aren’t developed to provide what people want. People are sold on supporting the executive product. The executive advertises directly to the public in the press to create a demand for government action, and the reporters, concentrated in Washington, assume that no government action means no action at all. The Opinion Research Corporation says: “U.S. citizens can be led to embrace the welfare state, but they don’t demand it.” So long as people don’t violently object to a specific, the executive goes implacably on. …” - Richard C. Cornuelle, Reclaiming the American Dream, A Vintage Book, p.78. - DEMOCRACY, POLITICS, PEOPLE, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, TAXATION, GOVERNMENTALISM, TERRITORIALISM, WELFARE STATE

PARLIAMENTS: Congress is so strange. A man gets up to speak and says nothing. Nobody listens – and then everybody disagrees.” – Boris Marshalov. – CONGRESS, LEGISLATORS, DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: Congress seems to want to cure every ill known to man except unconstitutional government and high taxes.” – Claire Wolfe, Don’t Shoot the Bastards (YET), 101 More Ways To Salvage Freedom, p.3. - CONGRESS, CONSTITUTIONALISM, GOVERNMENT & TAXATION

PARLIAMENTS: Congress, that body aptly described by Mark Twain as “a madhouse with the inmates in charge.” – Quoted by? - JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: Congress: A nest of vultures simultaneously feathering and fouling their habitation. – L.A. Rollins, Lucifer’s Lexicon. – POLITICIANS, DEPUTIES, REPRESENTATIVES

PARLIAMENTS: Do not imagine that the Parliaments and Courts of oppressors will ever right the wrongs of the oppressed. They exist for no such purpose. Such a thing has never happened, and never will. – Lysander Spooner, Revolution, 1880, p. 11, Works I, behind the heading: TO ALL THE OPPRESSED CLASSES IN ENGLAND, IRELAND, & THROUGHOUT THE BRITISH EMPIRE, SPOONER

PARLIAMENTS: Each election should be accompanied by a referendum on the minimum number of laws to be repealed during the next year. If that number is not reached during this year then the legislators should immediately lose their jobs and their pension fund rights. That should give them a sufficient incentive. – JZ, 23.3.08. – Law repeal rather than multiplication should be their aim. – JZ, 14.3.09. – LAW REPEALS VS. LAW MULTIPLICATION

PARLIAMENTS: Even a God can do only one thing in a toilet - and no trapeze artist or clown can turn a circus into a genuinely educational institution. They don't find and expound truths there, at most they entertain, at our expense. - JZ, 78.

PARLIAMENTS: Few kings have oppressed and exploited us as much as parliaments have. - JZ, 76. – Beggars are non-violent libertarians, when compared with them. All private criminals, their gangs and organized crime do not rob us of as much, between them, as they do. Nor would there be as much privately organized crime if parliaments had not passed so many wrongful laws, e.g. on drugs, protectionism, prostitution. – They, their governments, other institutions, including the monopolized jurisdictions and also their remaining voluntary voters, between them, do constitute the largest and quite official crime syndicate in every country, a system that I usually call territorialism for its mostly vast to large “turf”. - JZ, 2.12.13. – TAXATION, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, BUDGET, TERRITORIALISM, CRIMES, CRIME SYNDICATES, VOTING, TERRITORIALISM

PARLIAMENTS: For by experience you now find you may be made slaves as effectually by a Parliament, as by any other kind of Government; …” - Walwyn The Bloody Project, 1648. - In A. L. Morton: Freedom in Arms. – As much later this truth is still not generally recognized. – JZ, 2.12.13. – DEMOCRACY, VOTING, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS, GOVERNMENTALISM, STATISM, LAWS, TERRITORIALISM

PARLIAMENTS: For each parliamentary representative a deputy should be appointed, perhaps the runner-up in the elections, who got just some less votes. This deputy should be granted a limited but sufficient salary, just to serve as a watchdog. As a primary incentive he should automatically get the representative’s job - if he can prove, before an independent judge and free jury, that the representative has committed any illegal act, and be it merely exceeding the speed limit. – JZ, 23.3.08.

PARLIAMENTS: Free riders? Well, suppose you want a streetlight: You either pay for it yourself or you get the neighbor to chip in. If one or two surly curmudgeons refuse, well, what’s more important, forcing old man Carruthers to cough up his negligible share, or getting the streetlight you wanted? Most likely the old bastard’ll demand you keep your crummy photons of his property!” - L. Neil Smith, The Venus Belt, p.73. – That could be easily arranged, by blacking out the light in the direction of his property. Black glass and black paint are cheap enough. – JZ, 23.3.08, 2.12.13. – FREE RIDERS

PARLIAMENTS: From the day when the first members of councils placed exterior authority higher than interior, that is to say, recognized the decisions of men united in councils as more important and more sacred than reason and conscience; on that day began lies that caused the loss of millions of human beings and which continue their unhappy work to the present day.” – Leo Tolstoy, quoted in FREE MAN’S ALMANAC, for September 8. – Also in THE FREEMAN, 9/74. - AUTHORITY, CONSCIENCE, REASON, LAWS, CENTRALIZATION, POWER, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES VS. INDVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARLIAMENTS: go beyond a state of affairs in which people (called representatives) convene in a room (called parliament) with the authorisation of meddling in the lives of everybody and taking decisions binding for everybody. This favours the formation of two competing factions, differentiated only by external labels (left and right) but indistinguishable in all the rest (values, ideas, projects, actions, etc.).” - Gian Piero de Bellis, in his 2002 book manuscript on Polyarchy. - POLITICIANS, MEDDLING, DECISION-MAKING, FACTIONALISM, PARTIES,

PARLIAMENTS: Gradually the position had changed from government by representative to government by hired staffs.” - Mark Clifton and Frank Riley, They'd Rather Be Right, ASTOUNDING SF, Nov. 1954, p.127. - REPRESENTATIVES, BUREAUCRACY, DIVISION OF LABOR

PARLIAMENTS: Has any question ever been quite rightly, rationally and lastingly settled by any discussion in any parliament? – JZ, 3.8.91, 23.3.08. – Q.

PARLIAMENTS: Has Congress shown itself to be able and willing to learn sufficiently from the vast storehouse of knowledge and experience that has been accumulated in the Library of Congress? – JZ, 3.8.91. - Has e.g. Congress ever learnt anything really worthwhile from the Library of Congress? – JZ, 6.12.92, 20.2.08. – Q.

PARLIAMENTS: He had already conned Congress out of two billion for nothing, and even granting the traditional congressional habit of shoveling out tax millions for wild-haired schemes while withholding pennies from sound and sorely needed projects, it was still quite a con feat. ... -  Mark Clifton, When They Come from Space, p.21.

PARLIAMENTS: He was beginning to see, now, that parliamentary procedure wasn’t any weapon against Ravick’s force and fraud and intimidation.” - H. Beam Piper, Four Day Planet, p.69. – It wasn’t e.g. against Napoleon I, Lenin, Hitler and in numerous other cases. – JZ, 23.3.08. – DICTATORSHIPS, DESPOTISMS, TYRANNIES, TOTALITARIANISM, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, TAXATION, LAWS, BUREAUCRACY, DEFENCE


PARLIAMENTS: However small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude. In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase this security.” – James Madison, The Federalist, No.10. - This might as well apply, but for the number of parties, to communities of volunteers. – JZ, 17.2.08. – The number of lobbies or special interest groups becomes maximized for country-wide common troughs, fed by compulsory taxation and in the absence of a genuine common interest for all territorial subjects. It becomes minimized when membership consists of largely like-minded volunteers only, who also are free to secede. – JZ, 2.12.13. – VOLUNTARISM, COMMON INTERESTS, OPTIMUM SIZE, SOCIETIES, COMMUNITIES & GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS UNDER PERSONAL LAW

PARLIAMENTS: I could study all my life and not think up half the amount of funny things they can think of in one session of Congress.” – Will Rogers, quoted in READER’S DIGEST, 4/77?

PARLIAMENTS: I do not wish to suggest that the democratic claim of the elected representatives of the people to have a decisive word in the direction of government is any less strong than their claim to determine what the law shall be. The great calamity of the historical development has been that these two distinct powers have been placed in the hands of one and the same assembly, and that in consequence government ceased to be subject to law. The triumphant claim of the British Parliament to have become sovereign, and to govern subject to no law, may prove to have been the death-knell both of individual freedom and of democracy.” – F. A. Hayek, Whither Democracy? – QUADRANT, 11/76, p.3. – What is the majesty of “the law” compared with an as comprehensive and clear declaration of individual rights and liberties, so far discovered and proven, as could and should be compiled by now? The lack of sufficient interest among most anarchists and libertarians in such a declaration is one of the greatest disappointments in my life. But at least I made some attempts in this direction (PEACE PLANS 4) and also compiled a digitized anthology of over 130 other private human rights drafts as raw material for the best possible one. If there were already a common list of libertarian projects online, then this important project might have attracted enough collaborators to complete it, as far as it could be and should be by now. – JZ, 2.12.13. - DEMOCRACY, POLITICIANS, REPRESENTTION, DECLARATION OF ALL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES VS. “THE LAW” & ALL TERRITORIAL LEGISLATION

PARLIAMENTS: I entered Parliament with what I thought to be the lowest possible opinion of the average member. I came out with one still lower.” – J. St. Mill, Autobiography. – POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, DEPUTIES, MP’s.

PARLIAMENTS: I found me a place where I can do good without doing any harm. – Kurt Vonnegut, The Sirens of Titan, p. 132. (? – Edge cut off.) – That is certainly not a parliament. – JZ, n.d. – A panarchy could do harm at most to its volunteers who favored its aims and methods, not to outsiders. – JZ, 17.2.08. – PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, LAWS, TAXATION

PARLIAMENTS: I have never suggested that freedom is dead in this country, but only that it is diminishing, and that a principal cause of its impairment is, in truth, the unlimited legislative power confided to Parliament, now largely limited to a single chamber elected on a first past the post system.” – Lord Hailsham, Letter in THE TIMES, April 14, 1977. – VOTING, LEGISLATION, LAWS, MAJORITIES

PARLIAMENTS: I was particularly glad to hear him say that he would try to make parliament operate again as a place for rational discussion instead of the gladiatorial circus that it has become lately.” – Bert Kelly on Bob Hawke, THE BULLETIN, 29.3.83.

PARLIAMENTS: If ‘pro’ means for and ‘con’ means against, it’s obviously a mistake to expect progress out of congress.” – Stephen Beeley, LEFEVRE’S JOURNAL, Fall 75. – CONGRESS, PROGRESS, JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: If I were elected into parliament you would have to pay me highly – for putting up with bad company. – JZ, 2/75. – However, I was never so foolish as to run for any political office. No one knows enough to be able to run not only the own life but the lives of the population of a whole country, e.g. as one of the parliamentarians, minsters or prime minister. By the assumption that they could, they already disqualify themselves. – Being one of the main activists among a group of like-minded volunteers is quite another matter. – JZ, 9.12.13. – LEADERSHIP, REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW

PARLIAMENTS: If parliaments could increase the productivity of national economies to the same extent that they have increased their output of laws and the amount of taxes they have imposed, then all of us could be rich. Instead, they have and still are reducing our standard of living and our rights and liberties by their interventions and imposed burdens or tribute levies. – JZ, 1.8.93, 2.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: If the experience with the repeal of the corn laws can be generalized, parliamentarians are just about the last ones to permit any sensible reform requiring the removal of the legal obstacles they had previously established against it. – JZ, 18.3.93.

PARLIAMENTS: If we do to Parliament what Parliament did to the Crown in the late seventeenth century, we will restore liberty in Britain and ensure its continuity until a new breed of rascals discover new means of exploiting producers.” – H. S. Ferns, The Disease of Government, p.121. – LAW REPEALS

PARLIAMENTS: In an omnipotent assembly, decisions therefore rest on a sanctioned process of blackmail and corruption, which has long been a recognized part of the system, which the best cannot escape. – F. A. Hayek, Whither Democracy? – QUADRANT, 11/76.

PARLIAMENTS: In his eyes Parliament was a sort of gaming-house; the members on the two sides of each house the players; and the property of the people, insofar as any pretence could be found for extracting it from them, the stakes to be played for.” – Jeremy Bentham, Fallacies, p.13. – Elections campaigns are struggles on who or which party is to exploit and misrule the whole population next. Instead, all people should become free to sort themselves out into their own kinds of affinity groups and  then begin to rule themselves under full exterritorial autonomy or personal law. That would establish something like a world-wide Olympic competition between all the diverse political, economic and social systems, all only for their volunteers and at their own risk and expense, giving all of them their best possible chance through unanimous consent on all their basics. Progress in these spheres might then become as assured and accelerated as it was in sports, many other private spheres and in the natural sciences and technology. All proposed solutions would get their chance – among their followers. – JZ, 2.12.13. – VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, COMPETING GOVERNANCE, VOLUNTARISM, FREE COMPETITION, LAISSEZ FAIRE, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, ASSOCIATION & EXPERIMENTATION IN EVERY SPHERE, NO LONGER BLOCKED BY THE “LAWS” OF “REPRESENTATIVES” & THEIR TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY INSTITUTIONS, LIKE E.G. CENTRAL BANKS

PARLIAMENTS: In terms of the great harm that Congress imposes on our people, it would be a bargain if we paid each member of the Senate and House a million dollars a year on the condition that they stay out of Washington.” – Walter Williams: The revolutionary spirit must … - SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, Oct. 89. – Our “representatives” do almost everything but represent our individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 2.12.13. – REPRESENTATION, VOTING, DEMOCRACY, POLITICIANS, RULERS, PRESIDENTS, GOVERNMENTS

PARLIAMENTS: In the first place, Rousseau related his idea of autonomy to the Contract, that is, to the hypothesis of an original pact in which ideally each party to the contract submits to norms that he has freely accepted. The fact that Rousseau had in mind a democracy that was not in the least inclined to change its Laws, shows how important it was for him to keep this liberty tied to is original legitimacy, and indicates that he did not mean this idea to be used as a basis for mass legislation, which is the way we are using it today. There is an essential condition that qualifies Rousseau’s formula, namely that the people are free so long as they do not delegate the exercise of their sovereignty to the legislative assemblies. So his conception has very little to do with obedience to laws that are made for us by others.” – G. Sartori, Liberty and Law, p.25. – Obedience towards self-chosen personal law systems or social contracts of communities of volunteers is quite a different matter and part of e.g. freedom of associations, contract, experimentation and individual secessionism and sovereignty, self-responsibility, self-ownership. – JZ, 9.12.13. - DEMOCRACY, OBEDIENCE, LAWS, SOVEREIGNTY, DELEGATION OF SOVEREIGNTY, PEOPLE, LEGISLATURES, SOCIAL CONTRACT, TERRITORIALISM VS. VOLUNTARISM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY UNDER PERSONAL LAW, ASSOCIATIONISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, INDIVIDUAL VS. TERRITORIAL COLLECTIVIST SOVEREIGNTY, ROUSSEAU, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, SELF-GOVERNANCE FOR MAJORITIES & FOR MINORITIES

PARLIAMENTS: Is it not plain … that the members of Congress, as a legislative body, whether they are conscious of it or not, are, in reality, a mere cabal of swindlers, usurpers, tyrants, and robbers? Is it not plain that they are stupendous blockheads, if they imagine that they are anything else than such a cabal? Or that their so-called laws impose the least obligation upon anybody?” – Lysander Spooner, quoted in THE DANDELION, Spring 77. - LAWS, CONGRESS, TYRANNY, OBLIGATION, POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, REPUBLICANISM, DEMOCRACY, SPOONER

PARLIAMENTS: Isn't it about time we found Congress in contempt of The People?” – Anonymous. – “In the eyes of the ruling politicians the unarmed and unorganized voter is just a comical figure.” – Frequent remark by Ulrich von Beckerath, 1882-1969, also an advocate of ideal militia forces of volunteers exclusively for the defence of genuine individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 3.1.08. - CONGRESS, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS IN CONTEMPT OF THE PEOPLE

PARLIAMENTS: It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress. – Mark Twain. - Quoted by David Friedman in The Machinery of Freedom, p.207. – Politicians, as top criminals under territorialism, are even the worst criminals. – How many exceptions from this rule do you know of? – Some of them keep even mass extermination devices in readiness, others strive to get some of these anti-people “weapons” themselves, while still posing as representatives of “the people”. - JZ, 2.12.13. - NWT

PARLIAMENTS: It enables parliament to do things at eleven at night that no sane person would do at eleven in the morning.” – George Bernard Shaw, 1856-1950, Major Barbara. – Many parliamentarians are addicted not only to power but also to tobacco and alcohol. No wonder then that their brains do not work very well. – JZ, 10.3.09. -  PARLIAMENTS & ALCOHOL, JOKES, LAWS, LEGISLATORS, REPRESENTATIVES.

PARLIAMENTS: It is a curious consequence of giving the representative assembly unlimited power that it has largely ceased to be chief determining agent in shaping the law proper, but has left this task more and more to the bureaucracy.” – F. A. Hayek, Economic Freedom and Representative Government. – With the all too many jobs they try to tackle with their legislation, they have to rely more and more on committees, consultants and advice from the extensive and expensive bureaucracy of all governments. Most do not even have the time to ready the many and long laws they pass but simply follow the party line, willingly, because of inclination or because of party discipline. – JZ, 9.12.13. - DEMOCRACY, LEGISLATORS, LAWS, BUREAUCRACY, REPRESENTATIVES

PARLIAMENTS: It is an absurd notion to make the extent, recognition and practice of individual rights and liberties dependent upon some discussions and decisions of others in an official debating club. Moreover, the lawyers, politicians and bureaucrats assembled there are least likely to comprehend or to be able and willing to defend or realize all genuine individual rights and liberties. For proof just survey their declarations of human rights and most of their legislation and party programs as well as their election slogans. – JZ, 27.11.93, 15.2.08, 24.1.11, 2.12.13, 9.12.13. - LEGISLATION, HUMAN RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARLIAMENTS: It is not true that Parliament is a conspiracy of the self-interested and unprincipled cynics bent only upon staying in office? On the other hand, if one assumes it to be such, and individual politicians to be such, one will correctly predict their behavior on nine occasions out of ten.” – Alex Comfort, “Authority and Delinquency. A Study in the Psychology of Power”, 1950, 1970, p.28/29, a book largely on the delinquency of authority. – Alas, kept out of print and off the Web for all too long. - JZ, 15.5.06. – With Google I just got over 6,500 search results for this book, but, apparently, it is not yet offered online but only in its old printed editions. – 2.12.13. - POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, CONGRESS

PARLIAMENTS: It is widely believed that this omnipotence of the representative legislature is a necessary attribute of democracy because the will of the representative assembly could be limited only by placing another will above it. Legal positivism, the most influential current theory of jurisprudence, particularly represents this sovereignty of the legislature as logically necessary. This, however, was by no means the view of the classical theorists or representative government. John Locke made it very clear that in a free state even the power of the legislative body should be limited in a definite manner, namely to the passing of laws in the specific sense of general rules of just conduct equally applicable to all citizens. That all coercion would be legitimate only if it meant the application of general rules of law in this sense became the basic principle of liberalism. For Locke and for the later theorists of Whiggism and the separation of powers, it was not so much the source from which the laws originated as their character of general rules of just conduct equally applicable to all which justified their coercive application.” – F. A. Hayek, Economic Freedom and Representative Government, 10/11. – As I read this, the job of all parliaments should merely have been to provide a quite complete and clear declaration of individual rights and liberties. If this is the case, then every parliament has failed in this job and become, instead, a despotic institution. – Alas, even Hayek failed to provide us with a private draft for such a declaration. Or I never came across it. – JZ, 16.2.08, 9.12.13. – POWER, LEGISLATION, HUMAN RIGHTS. - LAWS

PARLIAMENTS: It is with no disrespect to this House that I say that it is not an efficient body for checking expenditure, and that it does not help the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the day, be he who he may, to exercise control over expenditure. It is quite true that one section of members calls for economy here, and another section calls for economy there, and so on over the whole sphere, but at any given point there is always a majority for spending more, not less.” – Austen Chamberlain, quoted in C. Bingham, Men and Affairs, p.34. – Democratic or republican party rule over whole territories resembles a compulsory marriage of the whole population of a territory to a “wife”, who is only interested in spending all too much of its gross national product and knows, cares and does nothing about earning, saving, and productive investments. – JZ, 2.12.13. – TAXATION, ECONOMY, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, BUDGET, PARLIAMENT AS AN ALL TOO EXPENSIVE “WIFE”

PARLIAMENTS: It was Edmund Burke who said that the lives and property of all freeborn Englishmen were in jeopardy when Parliament was in session.” – David A. Williams, THE FREEMAN, 9/75, p. 568. – INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARLIAMENTS: It was too much like trying to curtail the powers of Parliament by Act of Parliament.” – H. Beam Piper, Four Day Planet, p.56. - PARLIAMENTARY REFORM? CURTAILING ITS WRONGFUL POWER THROUGH PARLIAMENT?

PARLIAMENTS: it was useless to expect anything from the existing Commons, “as there is little good to be hoped for from such Parliaments as need to be Petitioned; so there is none at all to be expected from those that burn such Petitions as these.” - A. L. Morton, Freedom in Arms, p.50, on the civilian Levelers. - PETITIONS

PARLIAMENTS: Its democratic political thinking can be seen in Walwyn’s Englands Lamentable Slaverie (October 1645) in which the Leveller doctrine of the sovereignty of the people is first clearly stated: “… a Parliamentary authority is a power intrusted by the people (that chose them) for their good saftie and freedome; and therefore a Parliament cannot justlie do anything to make the people lesse safe or lesse free than they found them.” – A. L. Morton, Freedom in Arms, p.30/31. – How much more evidence do we need that parliaments for the population of whole terriotories do not act justly in this sense? – JZ, 2.12.13. – REPRESENTATION, TERRITORIALISM, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, LEGISLATION, DEMOCRACY, PARTY SYSTEM

PARLIAMENTS: John Bright said he had known the British Parliament to do some good things, but never known it to do a good thing merely because it was a good thing. – Quoted by A. J. Nock. – MORALITY, POLITICS, POLITICIANS, LAWS.


PARLIAMENTS: Join Parliament? – It’s part of the problem, not part of the solution. – JZ, n.d. – Unless it is reduced to ruling only over volunteers. – JZ, 2.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Just another temple for the compulsory “representation” of a whole population, a place of worship and practice of immoral and irrational power, popular errors and prejudices, the passing of intolerant and unjust laws, the establishment of institutions based upon ignorance, errors and prejudices, in stupid attempts to provide improvements to natural laws and individual human rights and liberties. If all their laws and all their institutions applied only to volunteers, i.e., if they renounced their territorial domination powers, this would be quite another matter. They could then not wrong their own volunteers, since they volunteered, but merely harm them. And their volunteers would be free to opt out from under them, when they had finally learnt their lessons. – JZ, 14.4.95, 23.3.08, 2.12.13. – If any parliaments at all, in any country, then as many of them as there are diverse dissenting groups in that country, provided each is satisfied with its parliamentary representation. They should all have to compete like insurance companies for subscribers, transport companies for passengers and supermarkets for buyers. – JZ, 23.3.08. – VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, COMPETING GOVERANCE,

PARLIAMENTS: Lawmakers are not imbued with the idea of arriving at justice. The motive most prevalent among them is that of personal or class benefit. …” - Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.17. – SPECIAL INTERESTS GET THEIR SPECIAL ATTENTION RATHER THAN JUSTICE OR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARLIAMENTS: lawmaking has become an unhealthy ritual for parliament.” – A. T. Maurice, INTEGRITY, 3/83. - LAWS, LEGISLATION

PARLIAMENTS: laws without Parliament, and justice without government. – Matthew Bruce Alexander, Withur We, p.363. - LAWS, GOVERNMENT, JUSTICE, LIBERTARIAN SCIENCE FICTION

PARLIAMENTS: Lawyers: frequently M.P.s: Since Parliament’s astounding rules vouch for their honour and their learning. – James E. T. Rogers, 1823-1890. – Andrews Quotes, 246. – LAWYERS, HONOUR, LEARNING

PARLIAMENTS: Legislative bodies not only lay themselves open to be acted upon by outside influences, but they submit to clamor more than to any other influence.” – W. G. Sumner, Legislation by Clamor, in Selected Essays, p.158. – They are always more interested in more votes than in better, quite sound or rightful ideas, principles, projects, institutions. And to get more votes they have to appeal to the lowest common denominators in a population, thus giving the fools and the crooks the keys to the city. – JZ, 2.12.13. - LOBBIES, SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, PUBLIC OPINION, POPULAR PREJUDICES

PARLIAMENTS: legislatures are not over-populated with tolerant men indifferent to popularity.” – Stigler, The Intellectual and the Market Place, p.87.

PARLIAMENTS: Listening to the law and order in parliament – does it make you respect their laws and their order? – JZ, 27.2.75. – Less laws would result in much more order and the highest order would be achievable without man-made laws. – JZ, 16.2.08. – LAWS, ORDERS, NATURAL RIGHTS, NATURAL LAW, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARLIAMENTS: Many years passed before they fully realized that in making the monarchy completely subservient to Parliament, they surrendered the whole bundle of effective rights against government that they had developed and accumulated against the King through the centuries beginning with Magna Charta.” - Clarence Manion, The Key to Peace, p.59. – COMMON LAW, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, HUMAN RIGHTS. TRADITIONS, LEGISLATION, FIRST PRINCIPLES, POWER-MADNESS

PARLIAMENTS: Must we look to parliaments for guidance? We might as well resign ourselves to wandering about in a maze of contradictions and quit trying to make sense of experience.” - Frank Chodorov, One Is a Crowd, p.29. LAWS, LEGISLATION, POLITICIANS, POLITICS, LEADERSHIP, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, WELFARE STATE, TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION

PARLIAMENTS: My first view of a parliamentary body came back to me vividly when I read the despondent observation of John Bright, that he had sometimes known the British Parliament to do a good thing, but never just because it was a good thing." - Albert Jay Nock. Anarchist's Progress.

PARLIAMENTS: Never blame a legislative body for not doing some thing. When they do nothing, that don’t hurt anybody. When they do something is when they become dangerous.” – Will Rogers. – LEGISLATION, LAWS, DO NOTHING, JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: No “royal” or absolutist powers and privileges for parliaments, either! – JZ, 14.7.87, 23.2.08. – TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, MAJORITARIANISM, REPRESENTATION

PARLIAMENTS: No great reform is to be expected from any parliament. If, sometimes, it acts positively, e.g. by law repeals, then this is usually done only due to outside pressures and influences upon it. The repeal of the Corn Laws was a classical instance for this. At most parliaments prevent some revolutions by undertaking the necessary reforms in time. But they do, probably, also cause some revolutions and some terrorist acts by upholding territorial and authoritarian governments over peaceful dissenters. – JZ, 25.10.91, 20.2.08, 24.1.11,  9.12.13. – TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, REVOLUTIONS, TERRORISM

PARLIAMENTS: No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session." - Judge Gideon J. Tucker, 1866. Saying quoted by Gideon J. Tucker, Surrogate, in 1866 report of the final accounting in the estate of A. B. New York Surrogate Reports, I Tucker (N.Y. Surr.) 249 (1866). – I found it ascribed to Mark Twain (1866). – JZ. -  LAWS, LEGISLATION LEGISLATORS, LIFE, LIBERTY & PROPERTY, SAFETY, DEMOCRACY, SECURITY, REFORMS, STATES, PROTECTION BY THE GOVERNMENT

PARLIAMENTS: No parliamentarian represents me. – JZ, 9.5.79. – REPRESENTATION

PARLIAMENTS: No progress should have to depend upon a favorable vote for it in parliament. – JZ, 28.3.93. - PROGRESS, VOTING, REPRESENTATIVES

PARLIAMENTS: None of the men now in parliament has my vote. - JZ, 75.

PARLIAMENTS: Now that the House of Commons is trying to become useful, it does a great deal of harm.” – Oscar Wilde, 1854-1900. An Ideal Husband, 1895. - CONGRESS, HOUSE OF COMMONS, REPRESENTATIVES, LOWER HOUSE, JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: One cannot influence parliament through parliament. (“Man kann ueber das Parlament keinen Einfluss auf das Parlament ausueben.“ – Sefton Delmar, Rise and Fall of the Democracy, S.444. – Carlyle even asserted that this has never happened. – But there were a few exceptions. Two famous free traders managed to influence the English Parliament for a time, alas, not permanently. They managed to do so perhaps only because they aroused also much popular support, i.e. votes in favor of at least degrees of Free Trade. – JZ, 23.3.08, 2.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Online it would be possible to “democratize” parliaments. Links could be set up to each party center and from there to each party speaker, delivering, sometimes perhaps within seconds or minutes criticism from the public, questions, points of order, relevant facts, ideas, proposals and references that were omitted. While individual speakers and party rooms could, probably, not cope with all this input, at least not immediately, it could be put online and the discussion could be continued and evaluated there, largely by the voters, subjects, taxpayers and other victims of parliaments. From a whole country the most crushing refutations could be rapidly delivered. To the extent that there are supporters for a party and its speaker, sharing their ignorance, errors and prejudices, digital “argument-mapping” could be organized to thoroughly discuss and graphically display and interconnect each significant issue, argument and idea, with participation by all who are interested and can spare the time and energy. The speakers in parliaments would then have but their relatively few inside voices against numerous outside ones. Mock votes could also be held among the participants for or against the statements of the party speakers in parliaments. All this democratic input could be put digitally on permanent record and should not not subject to copyrights restrictions and censorship. It could also be electronically sorted, by catchwords and thus each opinion, fact and idea should be easily recallable. If the speaker had a screen in front of him, he could also very soon see some to much of this democratic response to what he had said at least in numbers of pro and con statements, and could try to tackle some of the individual input later, after he had finished with his speech. The input should at least be subdivided into two groups, the positive and the negative responses and their total numbers should be counted and indicated on the screen. A screening program could automatically eliminate statements that amount merely to personal insults and attacks. Each pro input and each contra input could also be given a consecutive number, in the order of their appearance. This procedure would certainly tend to make politicians more careful and thoughtful in their public utterances and they could no longer get away merely with mouthing general phrases without definite meaning, because these would be rapidly revealed as such. They would have to put up or shut up. – As former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser once said: “Life was not meant to be easy!” – Especially, it should not be made easy for politicians, as supposed representatives of the population of a country. - JZ, 8.2.95, 23.3.08, 2.12.13. – COMPARE: ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, DEMOCRACY VIA ONLINE INPUT

PARLIAMENTS: Online, in WIKIPEDIA fashion, it should be easy to compile a fact book on the limits of parliamentary wisdom and the extent of its ignorance, foolishness, wrongfulness and even criminality, with facts, figures and individual cases. This unofficial publication on any parliament, one for each of them, might be worth browsing through and not as boring as the other publications of parliaments, especially their numerous and all too long law texts. – JZ, 15.11.94, 23.3.08.

PARLIAMENTS: Our legislators are poor lawmakers, and this is because the system was not designed to permit legislators to replace jurists and jurisprudence. In this connection it is well to remember that when the classical theory of constitutionalism entrusted the institutional guaranty of liberty to an assembly of representatives, this assembly was not being assigned so much the task of changing the laws, but rather that of preventing the monarch from changing them unilaterally and arbitrarily. As far as the legislative function is concerned, parliaments were not intended as technical, specialized bodies; and even less as instruments devised for the purpose of speeding up the output of laws. - Furthermore, laws excessive in number and poor in quality not only discredit the law; they also undermine what our ancestors constructed, a relatively stable and spontaneous law of the land, common to all, and based on rules of general application.” - G. Sartori, Liberty and Law, p.38. - LAWS, LEGISLATION, CONSTITUTIONALISM, REPUBLICANISM, COMMON LAW, GENERAL RULES, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, PRINCIPLES, REPRESENTATIVES, JURISPRUDENCE, DEMOCRACY

PARLIAMENTS: our parliament has, for this short period of history, been hijacked by minority cliques called political parties.” – F. Bradbury, Business, Taxes and the Environment, p.1. F. = Favel? Farel? My handwriting! - JZ - PARTIES

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament and its executive proved to be unable to attend to all the numberless affairs of the community and to conciliate the varied and often opposite interests of the separate parts of a State. – Kropotkin, in Goodwin’s anthology: “NINETEETH-CENTURY OPINION”, p.244. – It would be different for communities of like-minded volunteers that are only exterritorially autonomous. – JZ, 17.2.08. – Almost like businessmen, they would have to respond to the wishes of their members and customers – or lose them, one by one or in whole groups of dissenters, who preferred to secede rather than try to reform the remaining wrongs and errors in a community of volunteers. These secessionists would also be free to establish competing businesses, communities or governance systems. Free enterprise or laissez fare or experimental freedom for all kinds of advocates. – JZ, 2.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament has, and can have, no original authority of its own. It is a result, and not a source. Its authority is not, like that of the folk and people, self-derived and inherent. No doctrine can be more self-evidently absurd than that of such original authority; while the implication of it is the true ground-work of centralization.” – J. Toulmin Smith, Local Self-Government and Centralization, p.23. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY VS. TERRITORIAL & COLLECTVIST SOVEREIGNTY OF TERRITORIAL REGIMES, DECENTRALIZATION VS. CENTRALIZATION, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests which interests each must maintain as an agent and advocate, against other agents and advocates, but Parliament is a deliberative assembly of one nation with one interest, that of the whole – where not local purposes, not local prejudices ought to guide but the general good resulting from the general reason of the whole. You choose a member, indeed, but when you have chosen him his is not a member of Bristol, but a member of Parliament.” – Edmund Burke, quoted in THE INDIVIDUALIST, August 75, p. 47. – Does this hypothesis of a supposedly ideal parliament and of a united nation remind you of any real one? – JZ, 10/76, 17.2.08, 25.1.11. – PUBLIC INTEREST? COMMON INTEREST? NATIONAL INTEREST AS COVERS FOR HIDING SPECIAL INTERESTS, UNITY, UNIFORMITY

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament is nothing but 2 minutes of illusory power.” – Joe Toscana, 20.1.95. – Obviously, a remark from the point of view of the voter, whose vote, usually, is only one among many and as such it counts for very little, while individual secessionism could count very much for him and that permanently. – JZ, 23.3.08. – VOTING, REPRESENTATION, DEMOCRACY, INDIVIDUALISM, SECESSIONISM, SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, ELECTIONS

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament is the encampment or quartering (establishment?) of political corruption.” – Karl Kraus. (Der Parlamentarismus ist die Kasernierung der politischen Prostitution.) – Whatever rightful and rational services parliaments could provide, they would be able to demonstrate as institutions of competing societies, communities and governance systems of volunteers. As territorial monopolists they are almost bound to provide more disservices than genuine services. – JZ, 2.12.13. – As such they can always only represent some, never all and do, naturally, primarily and always represent their own selfish interests at the expense and risk of the whole population. – JZ, 9.12.13. - TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES, LAWS, LEGISLATION, POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVESM, CORRUPTION IS FED BY COMPULSORY TAXATION & MONOPOLISTIC GOVERNMENT SPENDING OR BUDGETS, POLITICAL CAREERS, LEADERSHIP STRUGGLES, POWER ADDICTION, POWER MADNESS

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament is the equivalent to the Central Committee of a ruling Communist Party and its national and State-Socialist economic “policies”. To call parliamentarians coercive communists, collectivists and state socialists, is not far wrong, even for those of their members, who consider themselves to be anti-communists and opposed to State Socialism. – JZ, 21.7.91, 23.3.08, 2.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament is the spear-point of the bureaucracy.” – Helmut Nahr. (“Das Parlament ist die Speerspitze der Beamtenschaft.”) - BUREAUCRACY

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament knows not justice. It never did. It is a ruling body, an imposition upon free men. At most it could do justice to those who voted for its members. – JZ, 11/78. - None of their human rights declarations is complete or good enough. And they pass more laws than anyone could ever read. – JZ, 17.2.08. – If only they were to repeal as many or more of the older wrongful and counter-productive laws as they pass new ones. I propose a new parliamentary rule: For every new law passed at least ten of the old ones ought to be repealed first. – JZ, 9.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: parliament takes very little heed of petitions.” – M. Beer, History of British Socialism, p.39. – It also pays very little heed to many other individual rights and liberties, of which the right to petition anyone is, possibly, the least important one. The unarmed and militarily unorganized and untrained voter can usually be safely ignored. As Ulrich von Beckerath used to remark: In the eyes of the rulers he is merely a comical figure. – Once the voters got the franchise to vote themselves out of this subordination, then many would, at least by and by and one by one, opt out territorial State, Finally, these defections would be greatly felt e.g. in the fall of revenues. – Further, the competition from successful competitors, practising their alternatives exterritorially in the same countries, among their volunteers, would also make itself felt. – Territorial, centralistic, coercive and monopolistic politics as usual could no longer go on and on. – Then each voter would also have THE decisive vote on his own future and conditions. – So far we are all disfranchised in this respect and only got “their” “free” “vote”, rather useless, in most cases, for anything quite rightful and rational for oneself. – There might even be a rush of secessionists, who simply want to get rid of their tax burden, or who do not want to be conscripted. - JZ, 23.3.08, 23.1.11. – VOTING, OPTING OUT, IGNORING THE STATE, NWT, WITHDRAWING FROM IT, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PETITIONS, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM, PERSONAL LAW SOCIETIES & THEIR PEACEFUL COMPETITION & EXPERIMENTATION

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament, which is a drama as long and boring as ‘Blue Hills’. Santamaria, in a talk, September 1976, on a long-running TV show.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliament: organised mob. Let six hundred and seventy fools loose in the streets; and three policemen can scatter them. But huddle them together in a certain house in Westminster; and let them go through certain ceremonies and call themselves certain names until at last they get the courage to kill; and your six hundred and seventy fools become a government.” – George Bernard Shaw’s character Undershaft, in Major Barbara. – Andrews Quotes, 332. – POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, DEPUTIES

PARLIAMENTS: Parliamentarians have a vested interest in injustice: in favouring one group at the expense of others. This is the only "service" they have got to sell. - JZ, 73, 25.1.11. – COMMON INTEREST OF POLITICIANS: SHEARING US & DISPOSING OF OUR WOOL

PARLIAMENTS: Parliamentarians who vote for themselves pay increases of $5.000 p.a. are, naturally, very much concerned about YOUR poverty. - JZ, 75. – After 33 years of inflation, caused by their laws and institutions, such nominal pay increases would today be considered as very moderate. – JZ, 14.2.08.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliamentarians, too, whether left or right or centrist, democrats or republicans, even libertarians, do as a rule oppose every fundamental solution to the problems caused by territorialism. Instead, they merely strive for more or less of the same exclusive territorial power to the State and be it only in the sphere of courts, police and defence. These ”freedom lovers”, too, not only the obvious political criminals in power, and their statist followers, provide the justification and the necessity for individual and group secessionism, to escape their territorial rule. – JZ, 7.4.04, 19.10.07. - REPRESENTATIVES, TERRITORIALISM, DEMOCRACY & SECESSIONISM, POLITICIANS, LIMITED GOVERNMENTS, “FREEDOM LOVERS”

PARLIAMENTS: Parliamentarism is nauseating to anyone who has ever seen it at close range.” – Peter Kropotkin. – DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATIONS, POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: Parliamentarism, voting, territorial legislation, and xyz government offices and services are not a sufficient substitute for genuine self-government, including freedom to experiment or freedom to act for all groups, communities and societies of volunteers, under their own personal law, i.e. under full exterritorial autonomy, always only at their own risk and expense and without any territorial monopoly. – JZ, 30.7.98. - Then the belief in progress would become rekindled and rapidly backed up by successful experiments of this kind. Each group could then advance at its own speed, in its desired direction. Or stagnate or even go backwards, if its members desired that. – However, in the average progress would be achieved as fast as possible, or so I do believe. – JZ, 23.3.08, 2.12.13. – GENUINE DEMOCRACY & SELF-DETERMINATION, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

PARLIAMENTS: Parliamentary committees – Determined parliamentary committees can help bring the spot light to bear on a few areas of government waste. However the government apparatus has become too extensive, to secretive and too canny to be seriously threatened by a few well meaning amateurs in parliament.” – Viv Forbes, Accountability in Government.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliamentary salaries as well as legislation should be reduced, not increased, seeing the disservices they have offered us. – JZ, 2/75. – Perhaps every new law it passes should lead to a decrease in the salaries of M.P.’s, while every law that they repeal should lead to an increase in their rewards? – And when they have finally repealed all laws then we should give them a “golden handshake”! - JZ, 16.2.08. - PARLIAMENTARY REFORM

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments are a conspiracy against the diverse peoples in every country - manacling them - with territorial laws and institutions. - JZ, 77 & 25.1.11. – VS. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, TERRITORIALISM, LAWS,

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments are largely examples of ignorance, errors, and prejudices as well as vested interests in action, the more so as they do represent the masses and varies lobbies and their ignorance, errors, prejudices and various vested interests. – JZ, 24.1.00. - REPRESENTATIVES, DEMOCRACIES, POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments are often worse than schoolboy debating clubs - and they are much worse in their consequences - as they can territorially enact their ignorance, prejudices, confusion and malicious intentions into laws imposed on everyone in a territory, many more of them than anyone ever finds time and energy to read even once. - JZ, 1973, 25.1.11, 2.12.13, 12.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments discredit themselves. Just listen to them on the radio. – JZ, 28.11.93. – Come to think of it, the politicians must have noticed this after all. For by now, for years, I have not heard or seen any broadcast of parliamentary debates. Have you? – JZ, 28.11.93.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments have become, largely, mere mouthpieces of special committees and party machines. They don’t discuss their law proposals any longer but merely read out the law titles several times before “accepting” the laws. Most laws seem to pass thus, i.e., without discussion in parliament. – Naturally, without all the pre-done labor in committees they couldn’t flood us with as many laws. - JZ, 27.4.86. – Mass production of laws seems to have become their main purpose. – JZ, 23.3.08. – In this sphere the division of labor involved in these committees produces so many laws, with most of them being counter-productive rather than increasing productivity. There is no limit to laws that can be territorially forced upon involuntary victims. They do have legal tender power in a country i.e. have the same effect that legal tender paper money has, when it is a monopoly money. Their total becomes more and more inflated and more and more valueless or, rather, obstructing, preventing and destroying productivity in wanted goods, services and labor. – JZ, 12.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments have been called ‘democratic despotism’.” – Remark by Sudha Shenoy, 24.7.04 at ISIL conference in Rotorua, N.Z. – A close examination of their flood of legislation does confirm that in most cases. – JZ, 12.12.13. - DEMOCRACY & DESPOTISM

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments have raised bribes or other contributions in favor of special legalized privileges into a national, constitutional, legalized and juridically sanctioned system. And this on top of the large salaries, pensions and expense accounts that they voted-in for themselves. They have turned the people’s representatives rather into mouthpieces of special interest groups and lobbies that represent large voting blocks or other advantages to these representatives. – I hold that they should neither remain free to determine the height of taxation nor the spending of all tax and other revenues. At first the height of taxes might be limited by a referendum. Then the kind of taxation might be determined by a referendum as well. The referendum might decide upon a flat rate tax or a head tax. And finally, or even initially, the taxpayers themselves should become free to decide to which part of the budget their tax contribution is to go to. Then more and more of the budget items should be removed form the budget. First all those items supported by less than 5 % of the taxpayers, then by less then 10, 20,30.40, 50% of them. The resulting revenue surpluses should be refunded, as corresponding percentages of the income taxes paid. How many governmental subsidies would survive this screening? A healthy shrinkage of taxes and government spending would result. – JZ, 26.7.96, 23.3.08. However, even the best voluntary taxation system in a territorial State is no substitute for the kind of voluntary taxation that would result in panarchies of volunteers, all under their own personal law, i.e. full exterritorial autonomy, once freedom for dissenting peaceful individuals and minorities is finally introduced as a basic individual human right. – JZ, 13.4.08, 2.12.13. – VOLUNTARISM, VOLUNTARY TAXATION INTRODUCED GRADUALLY OR SECESSIONISM

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments should no longer be free to make any but unanimous decisions – except for the repeal of former decisions, which were mostly not unanimously arrived at. For this purpose a simple majority should suffice. – JZ, 11.12.97. – The dissenters should always be free to secede, together with their volunteers and practise their own system under personal law, in their own societies, communities or governance systems with voluntary members only. – JZ, 12.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments vote so rarely on principle and so habitually on party lines and for compromises and do go along with popular prejudices so much that, on these points alone already, they deserve to lose almost all respect and support. – JZ, 24.3.86, 2.12.13. – They have become accustomed to getting more and more in tax tributes to them and to spend more than most kings and emperors ever did. That neither improved their own character nor that of their own subjects. It also made them disinterested in genuine economics. – JZ, 2.12.13. – TAXATION, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, ETHICS, CHARACTER, POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES

PARLIAMENTS: Parliaments, which were originally set up to limit the profligacy of the rulers, are incurring huge expenditures on behalf of the electorate. – Hans F. Sennholz, THE FREEMAN, 7/78. – On behalf or on the false pretence that this would be in the general interest of most of the population? – They also blocked the way out for their victims – by suppressing individual and group secessionism. - JZ, 2.12.13. – POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, WELFARE STATE, TAXATION, DEMOCACRY, COMMON INTEREST? SECESSIONISM, TERRITORIALISM

PARLIAMENTS: place … these words above the entrance of the legislative chamber: ‘Whoever acquires any influence here can obtain his share of legal plunder.’ – Bastiat, quoted in G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.131. – PLUNDERBUNDS, PARTIES, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM, WELFARE STATES, SOAK THE RICH, PROGRESSIVE TAXATION

PARLIAMENTS: Private parliaments, discussion and debating clubs, without any legislative power, are more useful, more productive and less destructive and immoral than are the official parliaments, territorially established and coercively upheld for whole populations. – JZ, 26.7.93, 18.2.08. – CENTRALIZATION OF POWERS, COERCIVE COLLECTIVISM, TERRITORIALISM, VS. VOLUNTARISM & SECESSIONISM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL DISSENTERS

PARLIAMENTS: Reader, suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself. – Mark Twain, in A. Andrews Quotations, p.93. – Good jokes, too, must be often repeated to do much good. – JZ, 28.4.09. – CONGRESS, JOKES.

PARLIAMENTS: Repeal Congress.” – Students for a Libertarian Society, 1978 slogan. – CONGRESS.

PARLIAMENTS: Talk is cheap – except when Congress does it.” – Cullen Hightower – “Talk is cheap!” Next time a man tells you talk is cheap, ask him if he knows how much a session of Congress costs.” – Dr. Laurence J. Peter. - TALK, GOVERNMENT EXPENSES, GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA, GOVERNMENT MEASURES, POLICIES, BUDGETS, GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS, LEGISLATION, WELFARE STATE, POLITICIANS, CONGRESS, JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: The apparently paradoxical fast is that a nominally all-powerful assembly - whose authority is not limited to, or rests on its committing itself to, general rules, - is necessarily exceedingly weak and wholly dependent on the support of those splinter groups which are bound to hold out for gifts which are in the government’s command. The picture of the majority of such an assembly united by common moral convictions evaluating the merits of the claims of particular groups is of course a fantasy; it is a majority only because it has pledged itself, not to a principle but to satisfying particular claims.” – F. A. Hayek, Whither Democracy? – QUADRANT, 11/76, page 75. – Hayek did not see or declare that this behavior is one of the inevitable consequences of territorialism. Voluntary communities, that are only exterritorially autonomous, would have common principles and beliefs holding them together, making their decisions practically unanimous on all fundamental matters. – JZ, 15.2.08. – VOTING, PRINCIPLES, DEMOCRACY, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, MAJORITARIANISM, PRINCIPLES, SPECIAL INTEREST & PRESSURE GROUPS, LOBBIES

PARLIAMENTS: the authority of a popularly-chosen body is no more to be regarded as an unlimited authority than the authority of a monarch.” – Herbert Spencer, Man versus the State, quoted in: S. Hutchinson Harris, in The Doctrine of Personal Right, p.126. – AUTHORITARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM, POWER, ABSOLUTISM

PARLIAMENTS: The best thing to happen to an American taxpayer would be to have a DO NOTHING Congress. The less mischief the politicians are in, the better.” – David A. Williams, THE FREEMAN, 9/75, p.568. - POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: The British colonies in America were granted “a freedom of speech”, “a freedom of assembly”, and other freedoms from aggressions of Government upon their liberty, long before they began the American Revolution. They were granted these freedoms because the English had fought and died to defend the human rights that were recognized in the feudal system. - The colonies were furious when the British Parliament withdrew from them some of these freedoms, which until then had been granted to Englishmen in England. The English could not understand their fury. British Government had every right to act as it did; any Authority that can grant a freedom can withdraw it.” – Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.150.

PARLIAMENTS: The Congress, the Congress, the Congress.” Lafayette was brooding. “Always the Congress. And always the Congress is wrong – and must be pleaded with, or cajoled. We have the word in French, and now I know it in English. Must be cajoled. Or else scolded or frightened into being right. What is this Congress – a Moloch? A creature built of high priests? A something with fiery maw that demands sacrifice? … Non, non, ce n’est pas juste. I will speak more simply. It is a something that keeps itself in office not by thought and wisdom and a vision for liberty, but renews itself by groveling to all who can get drunk at your elections and make a vote. I am dejected with this liberty. It is getting nowhere. Americans do not want it, and the Congress has the mind of a spitting infant.” - Washington let the marquis’ emotions boil, knowing they would cool eventually. He couldn’t contradict them, in honesty, having felt the same emotions too often.” - Burke Boyce, Man from Mt. Vernon, on George Washington, Harper & Brothers, New York, 1961, p.225. – Congress was responsible for the paper money inflation. It left its troops unpaid for a year, according to pages 87, 103 & 143. – According to another report (Pelatiah Webster, Political Essays, 1791, 504 pages, reproduced in my PEACE PLANS 994/95 on two microfiche), the troops were finally “paid” off by Washington with inflated money at a forced and fictitious rate, after being first marched off into the wilderness. Otherwise, he feared, they might have mutinied. – JZ, 11.9.08. - CONGRESS, REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, DEMOCRACY, VOTING, GEORGE WASHINGTON

PARLIAMENTS: The evils of the present state of things are these. In the course of centuries everything in the working of the complex machinery of this nation has become concentrated in, or absorbed into, the House of Commons. The House has, in fact, become the most gigantic and heterogeneous Bureau that the world ever saw. …” - Frederic Harrison, The Deadlock in the Commons, September 1881, in Goodwin’s anthology: “Nineteenth-century Opinion”, p.249. – ALSO A BUREAUCRACY, LARGELY AN ABSOLUTIST & TERRITORIALIST “MONARCHY”, REPRESENTING SOME OF THE WORST FEATURES OF COMPULSORY STATISM

PARLIAMENTS: The fatal error which gave the elected representative assembly unlimited powers is the superstition that a supreme authority must in its very nature be unlimited, because any limitation would pre-suppose another will above it, in which case it would not be a supreme power. But this is a misunderstanding deriving from the totalitarian-positivist conception of Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes, or the constructivism of Cartesian Rationalism, …” - F. A. Hayek, Whither Democracy? – QUADRANT, 11/76, page 76. – Which individual rights and liberties does it really stand for and which ones does it habitually ignore? – JZ, 2.12.13. - SUPREME POWER, SOVEREIGNTY, MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM, FREE TRADE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, EXPERIMENTATION & ASSOCIATION, LAISSEZ-FAIRE, COMPETITION, FREE ENTERPRISE IN EVERY SPHERE

PARLIAMENTS: The government’s involvement in the life of the nation is so extensive that profound debates of principle are out of the question; and the opportunity for coercion through the tyranny of the majority is virtually unlimited. The legislators in this case are not representatives in any normal sense of the word – they are the captives of political parties. Parties lie at the heart of modern government; …” - Simon Upton, The Withering of the State, 1987, p.105. - PARTIES, MAJORITIES; REPRESENTATION; GOVERNMENT; PRINCIPLES, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, DEMOCRACY, TERRITORIALISM, PEOPLE, PARTY DISCIPLINE, POLITICIANS, NATIONS ARE NOT LIVING ENTITIES WHENEVER THEY ARE NOT MADE UP OF VOLUNTARY MEMBERS ONLY, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

PARLIAMENTS: The great political superstition of the past was the divine right of kings. The great political superstition of the present is the divine right of parliaments.” – Herbert Spencer, Essay on the Great Political Superstition. – DIVINE RIGHTS?

PARLIAMENTS: The greatest assemblies of ignorant, prejudiced, authoritarian, power addicted to power-mad people, politicians pretending to represent a whole population just because they have been elected by a majority. All of them ARE territorial statists, laying down “the” law for the population of all the other people in a country, treating them more or less as their property. – Parliaments, too, should be continued only exterritorially and for their remaining volunteers. - JZ, 9.3.12, 2.12.13. - CONGRESS, LEGISLATORS, POLITICIANS, PEOPLE AS THEIR PROPERTY, MAJORITY DESPOTISM, VOTING, LAWS, LEGISLATION, VOLUNTARISM

PARLIAMENTS: the House of Commons having become merely a ratifying animal of decisions taken by the leaders of the majority party.” – Bertrand de Jouvenel, Problems of Socialist England, 1849, p.214. – MAJORITIES, DEMOCRACY, PARTY RULE

PARLIAMENTS: The House of Commons is no longer, and never again will be, an aristocratic council, where honourable members, however much they contended for office, had been at the same schools, had common family connexions, and belonged to the same small class. - Upon this chamber, with no personal traditions but those of wealth and good society, with no machinery but that fitted to the deliberating council of a trained political order, there has been thrown within this century the entire control of the most complicated executive in the world. Things have grown up, under cover of the dogmas of popular freedom, until the result is a despotism centred in the House of Commons, more absolute and absorbing than that of any Tsar or Sultan. Everything has to be done in, or by the sanction of, or subject to control by, the House of Commons. And yet this House is, of any body in the range of all political history, the least equipped with the precision and authority required for executive actions.” – Frederic Harrison, in Goodwin’s anthology “Nineteenth-century Opinion”, p.250. Not that they would be suitable for passing territorial laws, either, or that territorial executives could ever be quite rightful and beneficial. – JZ, 17.2.08. – DEMOCRATIC & PARLIAMENTARY ABSOLUTISM VS. VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARLIAMENTS: The informing function of Congress should be even preferred to its legislative function. – Woodrow Wilson. – Judging by most of its legislation Congress is not very well informed. – JZ, 23.2.08. – Moreover, is it really possible to sufficiently inform parliamentarians, against their will, prejudices and special interests? – JZ, 12.7.92, 23.2.08. – CONGRESS, REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, ENLIGHTENMENT, POWER ADDICTS, RULERS

PARLIAMENTS: The longest running farce in the West End.” – Cyril Smith, 1928-, Big Cyril, 1977, of the House of Commons. - CONGRESS, HOUSE OF COMMONS, REPRESENTATIVES, LOWER HOUSE

PARLIAMENTS: The more numerous an assembly may be, of whatever characters composed, the greater is known to be the ascendancy of passion over reason.” – Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist, 1788. - PASSION VS. REASON, OPTIMAL SIZE, POWER, INTERVENTIONISM, LAWS

PARLIAMENTS: The most expensive tragic-comic theatre performance in every State. – JZ, 1.5.95.

PARLIAMENTS: The only difference between the Boy Scouts and Congress is that the Scouts have adult leaders.” – Rep. Floyd Spence, SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 6/77. – What makes it worse is that each M.P. fancies himself as an adult leader. – JZ, 17.2.08. – REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: The parliament should represent the interests of the majority of the population. Alas, for this no majority can be found in parliament.” – Winfried Thomsen, Radikalauer. – There is also a mathematical reason for this: If two thirds of the population are entitled to vote, two thirds actually vote, the elected combine two thirds of all votes upon themselves and, in parliament, they make decisions with a two thirds “majority”, then this “majority” represents actually only a minority of 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 16 over 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 = 81 = 16/80 = 1/5th of the population. – With two major parties almost running neck to neck, as large majorities as are assumed above, are rarely obtained and the ruling minority, pretending to represent the population, is then much smaller still. – Add to this the personality cult of parties and the effects of party discipline and the ruling minority becomes much smaller still, while it still pretends to represent the majority of the population or even all of it. - JZ, 20.2.08. – PARTIES, MAJORITIES, DEMOCRACIES, VOTING, REPRESENTATION, ERRORS, MYTHS, FALSE PRETENCES, LIES

PARLIAMENTS: The parliamentary-democratic machine, designed for compromises in permanence, does not educate towards tolerance, which would be a humane quality, going beyond the sphere of State citizenship. It much more induces people to resign themselves and give up every kind of utopia.” – F. Lohenbill, DINGE DER ZEIT, 7/77. (Die parlamentarisch-demokratische Apparatur, eingespielt auf Kompromiss in Permanenz, erzieht nicht zur Toleranz, was ja eine humane Qualitaet waere ueber den staatsbuergerlichen Bezirk hinaus, mehr noch erzieht sie zur Resignation, zur Preisgabe jeder Utopie.) – Naturally, this applies only to territorial States with involuntary subjects. – JZ, 17.2.08. – INTOLERANCE, TOLERANCE, COMPROMISES, UTOPIAS, DEMOCRACY, MAJORITIES

PARLIAMENTS: The people would not fit into any parliament. Dissenters should, rather, become free to secede from it and its laws and its territorial government, to do their own things for or to themselves, in their own societies, communities and governance systems under the leaders or representatives they still do trust, as individuals, free to secede, rather than as majorities or minorities of merely territorial voters. – JZ, n.d. – REPRESENTATION, DEMOCRACY, PEOPLE, DEMOCRACY, TERRITORIALISM, VOTING

PARLIAMENTS: The plea for freedom is an appeal beyond a parliamentary system which has become an elective dictatorship. Freedom has a unique authority vested in the ultimate sovereignty of the people themselves.” (*) – Norris McWirter, Freedom of Choice, in K. W. Watkins, In Defence of Freedom, 71/72. - (*) Rather of individuals and of their voluntary associations. – JZ, 7.4.91, 20.2.08. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

PARLIAMENTS: The poor, those “that depend on Farmes, Trades and small pay”, are invariably the only sufferers in war, while “The king, Parliament, great men in the City and Army, have made you but the stairs by which they have mounted to Honor, Wealth and Power.” – Walwyn, in A. L. Morton: Freedom in Arms, p.54. – POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, RULERS

PARLIAMENTS: The prevailing forms of democracy, in which the sovereign representative assembly at the same time makes law and directs government, owes its authority to a delusion: to the belief that such a democratic government will carry out the will of the people. That may be true of democratically elected legislatures in the strict sense of makers of law in the original sense of the term – that is, of elected assemblies whose power is limited to laying down universal rules of just conduct, designed to delimit against each other in the domains of control of individuals, and intended to apply to an unknown number of future instances. On these rules of individual conduct, preventing conflicts in which most people find themselves at either end, there is indeed likely to form itself in a community a predominant opinion and therefore also to exist agreement among the representatives of a majority. An assembly with such a definite limited task is therefore likely to reflect the opinion of the majority – and, being concerned only with general rules, has little occasion to reflect the will of particular interests on specific matters.” – F. A. Hayek, Whither Democracy? – QUADRANT, 11/76.

PARLIAMENTS: The real necessity, he argues, is to limit the unlimited powers of the legislature. …” - From report of THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 13.5.78 on a lecture by Lord Hailsham. – LIMITATION OF POWER, LEGISLATURE

PARLIAMENTS: The representative system, far removed to be a protection for the peoplecreates and guarantees, as Bakunin says, “the permanent existence of a governing aristocracy against the people.” The general right to vote is merely the mask behind which the really despotic power of the State hides, which is founded on the banks, the police and the army. Thus it helps “to suppress a people in the name and under the pretence of the will of the people.” - Daniel Guerin, Anarchismus, Begriff und Praxis, edition Suhrkamp, 1967, S.16. – Alas, Bakunin & Guerin did not distinguish between the banks of monetary despotism and the banks of monetary freedom, which could well be various cooperative banks of the people themselves. – JZ, 17.9.07. – Did they ponder alternative and competing police and defence forces aNd improvements upon militias? – JZ, 2.12.13. - CONGRESS, SENATE, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS, FREE BANKING, INDISCRIMINATE ATTACKS ON “BANKSTERS”, COMPARING THEM TO GANGSTERS & IGNORING THEIR LEGALIZED FOUNDATIONS

PARLIAMENTS: The salaries of all parliamentarians should rise and fall in inverse proportion to government spending and all their financial deals should be subject to public scrutiny. – JZ, 14.8.87. - But, most importantly, we should be free to secede from them, their laws and other institutions. – Also free to establish other institutions and communities, societies or competing governments for ourselves, more to our liking, regardless how different they are from the present ones, all of them, naturally, without any territorial monopoly and no longer recognizing the territorial monopoly States of parliaments or open despotisms. - JZ, 22.2.08. - POVERTY & TAXATION, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, PERSONAL LAW, EXTERRITORIL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS VS. TERRITORIALISM

PARLIAMENTS: The singing of birds in the bush reminds me of “discussions” in parliament. Both signify no more than: Beware! I am here! If you walk under them or stand under them, you may get their droppings on your head. However, there is one important difference: The birds in the bush don’t cost us anything in form of taxes or forced labor. – JZ, 26.7.91, 2.4.08, 2.12.13.  - JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: There are few positions more demonstrable than that there should be in every republic some permanent body to correct the prejudices, check the intemperate passions, and regulate the fluctuations of the a popular assembly.” – Alexander Hamilton, Speech in the Convention in New York, June 24, 1788. – Why should there be only one such body? And why should anyone have to be dependent upon a popular assembly, if it is not popular with him? – JZ, 23.8.08. – SECESSIONISM, COMPETITION, CHOICE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREDOM OF ASSOCIATION, CONTRACT, EXPERIMENTATION, LAISSEZ FAIRE, FREE ENTERPRISE, FREE EXCHANGE IN EVERY SPHERE

PARLIAMENTS: there was room for doubt about whether, say, the U.S. Congress was evidence of human intelligence.” – Stanley Schmidt, editorial in ANALOG, October 95.

PARLIAMENTS: They balked at creating posts for men who like to make rules to control other men, the very concept of a legislature was suspect and still is, as far as I’m concerned. I mean, what kind of a man is it who wants to spend his life making plans and rules to alter or channel lives other than his own? There is a basic flaw in that kind of man.” – F. Paul Wilson, The Healer, p.93. – REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, LEGISLATORS, RULERS, LEADERSHIP

PARLIAMENTS: They do not … form a great council of the nation, but a body of struggling and scrambling attorneys.” – W. G. Sumner, The Challenge of Facts, p.260. – They merely represent the “political science” of territorialism. – JZ, 2.12.13. - LAWYERS ENGAGED IN THE WORST LAWYERING OF ALL, POLITICIANS.

PARLIAMENTS: This must be the only asylum in the world where the inmates are in charge. – Max Falstein, one of the youngest members of Parliament … - Quoted by Fred Daly in his book “From Curtin to Kerr”, p.22, Sun Books, Melbourne, 1977. – There are, probably over 100 such asylums in the world, in the somewhat “democratic” States. Was this member unaware of this? – JZ, 23.12.13.


PARLIAMENTS: Thus, from the premise that we all (as infinitesimal fractions) participate in the creation of the legislative body, we boldly evince that it is as if we ourselves made the laws. - G. Sartori, Liberty and Law, p.31. – Parliaments, upheld by such a misconception, are a poor substitute for individual sovereignty and the exterritorial autonomy of communities, societies and competing governance systems of volunteers. – JZ, n.d. & 12.12.13.– “THE PEOPLE”, DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATIVES, MAJORITIES, TERRITORIALISM, VOTING, LAWS

PARLIAMENTS: Today, characteristically, the legislature, which is supposed to represent the people, is judged by the majority of citizens on the basis of how many enlargements of state power it passed rather than how many it resisted! The legislature has become, thus, not representative of the people at all. (*) It is just as surely representative, in the main, of the state, of the bureaucracy, as is the executive branch itself.” – Karl Hess, The Lawless State, p.25. - (*) Apart from the current and temporary majority of voter and of some powerful minority groups or lobbies. - JZ, 17.2.08, 14.3.09, 12.12.13. - It represents the ignorant, the prejudiced, the special interest groups, all trying to act parasitically and monopolistically, and the officials, politicians and bureaucrats. The moral and somewhat enlightened minorities remain suppressed and exploited and, largely, without influence regarding many of their own individual rights, liberties and affairs. - JZ, 25.1.11, 2.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Tom Paine hoped that representative government would draw on the wisdom of all sections of the community. The Preface to Norman Macrae’s “To Let” (1) in 1960 remarked that in practice representative government capitulated to sectional interests at the expense of the long-run general interest.” – Ralph Harris and Arthur Seldon, Not from Benevolence, p.43. - (1) Hobart Paper 2, 1960. - Under territorialism, to get a temporary majority together, they have to get the support of many special interest groups. This is an inherent flaw of territorialism. – JZ, 17.2.08. - SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, LOBBIES, COMPROMISES, ELECTIONS TERRITORIALISM, VOTING, DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATION

PARLIAMENTS: Vote for any body among these politicians? You must be kidding. You might as well vote for one of a number of drunken brawlers in front of a pub - who are fighting about who of them is going to rob you! - JZ, 75. – TAXATION, VOTING, REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS

PARLIAMENTS: Vote for Guy Fawkes – the only person ever to enter parliament with honest intentions.” – Sign in the office of Mr. Bill Hayden, when he was Minister for Health, quoted in GOOD GOVERNMENT, Dec. 75.

PARLIAMENTS: We all wish to see the due investigation of abuses by Parliament. But there are limits to the omniscience and omnipotence even of Parliament; and if its myriad-faceted eye is to be turned sleeplessly on every act of the entire human and animal race, if every fact recorded in the daily newspapers is the fit subject of a night’s debate, we need a thousand Parliaments all sitting simultaneously and in permanence to get through the work.” - Frederic Harrison, in Goodwin’s anthology “Nineteenth-century Opinion”, p. 252. - Reforms and experiments in political, social and economic matters are everybody's affairs and can best be practised among volunteers only and at their expense and risk. Confining decisions on such affairs to a few dozen or a few hundred "representatives" in parliaments is as absurd as confining progress in the arts, in literature, in technology and natural sciences to decisions in parliaments. The absolute and territorial "monarchism" and “despotism”, collectivism and monopolism of parliaments must be ended if freedom, justice, peace, progress, prosperity and security are to be achieved. - JZ, 24.1.11, 2.12.13. – VOTING, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM & VOLUNTARISM VS. STATIST DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION

PARLIAMENTS: We assemble parliaments and councils, to have the benefit of their collected wisdom; but we necessarily have, at the same time, the inconvenience of their collected passions, prejudices, and private interests. By the help of these, artful men overpower their wisdom, and dupe its possessors; and if we may judge by the acts, arrêts, and edicts, all the world over, for regulating commerce, an assembly of great men is the greatest fool upon earth.” - Benjamin Franklin, letter to Benjamin Vaughan, July 26, 1784. - The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, ed. Albert H. Smyth, vol. 9, p.241 (1906). - POLITICIANS, POLITICS, STATES, GOVERNMENTS, LEGISLATION, WELFARE STATES

PARLIAMENTS: We can either have a free parliament or a free people.” – F. A. Hayek, in QUADRANT, 7/78. – PEOPLE, DEMOCRACY, FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARLIAMENTS: We elect assemblies to govern us. We are amazed that their members are as ignorant, as selfish, as mediocre as we are ourselves.” – Morris West, THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 23.11.74. – VOTING, POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, DEMOCRACY, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICES, VESTED INTERESTS, MAJORITARIANISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIIES, LAWS

PARLIAMENTS: We need a much better control of government taxation and spending than parliaments can provide. Referenda on such questions should be a minimal first steps and individual secessionism and associationism would be the ideal. - JZ, 9.9.88. - Referenda, ideally, should apply the majority's decision ONLY to the majority, leaving the minorities free to do their things to themselves - or for themselves. - JZ, 8.9.04. - Individual consumer sovereignty towards all decisions, services and institutions of territorial governments! No enforced consumption of and payment for territorial government services and disservices! - JZ, 19.9.04. - REFERENDUM, SECESSIONISM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, PANARCHISM

PARLIAMENTS: We shall see that the root of the trouble is that so-called “legislatures”, which the early theorists of representative government, and particularly John Locke, conceived to be limited to making laws in a very specific narrow sense of that word, have become omnipotent governmental bodies. The old ideal of the “Rule of Law”, or of a “Government under the Law”, has thereby been destroyed. The “sovereign” Parliament can do whatever the representatives of the majority find expedient to do in order to retain majority support.” – F. A. Hayek, Whither Democracy? – QUADRANT, 11/76. – EXPEDIENCY, SELF-SERVING LAWS, TERRITORIAL DOMINATION BY POWER ADDICTS RATHER THAN FREEDOM, JUSTICE, PEACE, ENLIGHTENMENT & RAPID PROGRESS?

PARLIAMENTS: What are parliaments otherwise than oversized committees? They recognize that themselves by appointing numerous sub-committees and these are still more under the influence of special interest groups than the whole parliament is. Details of new legislation are hardly any more discussed by the whole parliament. – JZ, 1.11.08. - COMMITTEES

PARLIAMENTS: What difference does it make to a poor man whether he is devoured by a lion or by a hundred rats?” – Voltaire. - At least the lion kills faster. – JZ, n.d. – Parliaments inflict the torture and the slow death by thousands of little cuts, their xyz wrongful laws and regulations, bureaucratic boards and committees monopolizing important decision-making. – JZ, 2.12.13. - DEMOCRACY, LEGISLATION, DEATH BY MANY SMALL CUTS, LAWS, REGULATIONS, BUREAUCRACY, TERRITORIALISM, BLOCKOING THE SECESSIONIST WAYS OUT FOR DISSENTING VOLUNTEERS

PARLIAMENTS: What we call “legislatures” are in fact constantly deciding on particular measures, and are authorising coercion for their execution, on which no genuine agreement among the majority exists, but for which the support of a majority has been obtained by deals. In an omnipotent assembly, which is concerned mainly with particulars and not with principles, majorities are therefore not based on agreement of opinions but are formed by aggregations of special interests mutually assisting each other.” – F. A. Hayek, Whither Democracy? – QUADRANT, 11/76. - I believe “log-rolling” is the cover-term they use. – JZ – MAJORITIES, LOG-ROLLING, COMPROMISES

PARLIAMENTS: What’s in a name?” When New York Congressman Jack Kemp (Republican) concerned by the need to increase capital, introduced a bill called “Capital Formation Act”, the bill languished in the hopper. Funny, but when the congressman introduced the same bill under the title “Job Creation Act”, more than 100 congressmen rushed to sign up as co-sponsors. – RICHMOND NEW LEADER, reported in SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 9/76. – LEGISLATION, POLITICIANS, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICES, LABOR MENTALITY, ANTI-CAPITALIST MENTALITY, CAPITAL, CAPITALISM, JOKES

PARLIAMENTS: When buying and selling are controlled by the legislators, the first thing to be bought and sold are the legislators.” – O’Rourke, in Parliament of Whores, p.210, on the Savings and Loans crisis, with a $500 Billion bailout at the expense of taxpayers, after xyz regulations and legislative controls and guaranties in this sphere. – CORRUPTION, LEGALIZED & ILLEGAL IS MASS PRODUCED BY THEM

PARLIAMENTS: When in that House M.P.’s divide, // If they’ve a brain and cerebellum, too, // They’ve got to leave that brain outside, // And vote just as their leaders tell ‘em to.” – Gilbert, Private Willis, - Hyman Quotes p.144. – PARTY DISCIPLINE

PARLIAMENTS: When the reins of government finally passed to the people’s representatives in Parliament, popular vigilance relaxed. The ultimate result was a popular tolerance for parliamentary measures, which, in the form of Royal decrees would have been a signal for a new battle of Runnymede.” – Clarence Manion, The Key to Peace, p.62. – To win the votes of the majority the candidates had to represent the popular prejudices, i.e., the lowest common denominator, so that enlightenment among them, as well as among the majority, became minimized. – JZ, 15.2.08. – REPRESENTATION BY TERRITORIAL POLITICIANS – A KIND OF SLEEPING PILL FOR MOST SUBJECTS

PARLIAMENTS: Whoever thinks that all affairs of a country should be run by its parliament, hasn’t listened carefully enough to some parliamentary debates. – JZ, 13.3.86.

PARLIAMENTS: Why not a legislative house whose sole duty is to repeal laws? – Suggestion by Robert Heinlein in “The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress”. – But I for one would prefer the option for individuals and minorities to simply opt out of all present laws and other territorial institutions. – JZ, 23.3.08. – And then to do their own things under their free choice among personal law systems, which can, by their very nature, peacefully coexist with each other, just like diverse busineses and sports clubs etc. – JZ, 12.12.13.

PARLIAMENTS: Within the parliament, the minority party or grouping is effectively disfranchised until the next election.” – Filthy Pierre, LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION 73, p.48. – POWER, MINORITIES, REPRESENTATION, DEMOCRACY, VOTING, ELECTIONS, MAJORITY, TERRITORIALISM

PARTIALITY: Impartiality is a bourgeois ideas. Partiality is a socialist idea.” – Lenin. (“Parteilosigkeit ist eine buergerliche Idee. Parteilichkeit ist eine sozialistische Idee.“) – That notion alone should have condemned Leninism and Communism in they eyes of all reasonable persons. – JZ, 24.2.08. - IMPARTIALITY, OBJECTIVITY, COMMUNISM, LENIN

PARTIALITY: Partiality is not something, which is well thought of in comparison, for example, with abstract justice. Nevertheless, nobody has ever said anything worth saying unless he was deeply and passionately partial.” – Isaiah Berlin, Russian Thinkers, p.193, when discussing Alexander Herzen. - PASSION, ENTHUSIASM, COMMITMENT, PERSISTENCE, PREJUDICES, BIAS, SLOGANS FOR LIBERTY, NEUTRALITY, OBJECTIVITY, DISCRIMINATION, SELF-INTEREST, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-DETERMINATION VS. BEING TERRITORIALLY RULED BY OTHERS, POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRACY, LAWS, CONSTITUTIONALISM, VOLUNTARY INSTEAD OF TERRITORIAL

PARTICIPATION: Mere participation is not enough for obligation. If a burglar lets you argue with him while he is relieving you of your valuables, it does not place you under an obligation to him.” – Williamson M. Evers, JLS, Sum 77, p.185. - SELF-DETERMINATION, PROPERTY, OBLIGATION, OBEDIENCE, TAXATION. PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY

PARTICIPATION: Only by taking part in events can we hope to exercise any influence." - Poul Anderson, "Iron, II", "NEW DESTINIES", Spring 87. - Should we therefore all participate in preparations for a nuclear holocaust or one with biological or chemical mass murder devices? Should we participate in alcoholism, smoking and other drug abuse, in over-eating, in causing or tolerating inflations, deflations and stagflations, wars, terrorism, civil wars, riots etc.? - Only by freedom to initiate or join alternatives and to escape territorialist decisions, actions, institutions and events can we hope to exercise any positive and significant influence. - Participation or submission to them cannot help us much. - JZ 20.6.89, 10.12.03, 12.12.13. - Abstention can be as powerful, especially in case of massive desertions of individual soldiers and of individual secessionism from warlike or oppressive regimes and in separate peace treaty or individual or group neutrality declarations. - JZ, 5.4.91, 12.1.93, 12.12.13. - Any compromise with evil is a step away from the good. One cannot achieve the good or the best for all but one can and should try to realize it for oneself and achieve a framework that would allow everyone to make that choice for himself. - JZ, 12.1.93, 8.9.04, 19.9.04. – Participation in victimization should be distinguished from participating as a victim or as part of the resistance against victimization. – JZ, 21.4.08. - SEPARATISM, ABSTENTION, SECESSIONISM, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, INITIATION, INFLUENCE, PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY & FREE ENTERPRISE, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT & ASSOCIATION IN EVERY SPHERE, COMPROMISES, FREE CHOICE, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

PARTICIPATION: The cumbersome, inefficient and enfeebling bureaucratic ‘welfare’ state should also come under the surgeon’s knife. True participation means entrenching the rights of ordinary citizens to free choice in the education of their children, in the home they live in, and in their pension, insurance and health provision.” – Dr. Rhodes Boyson, 1985, VII. - And in the government and legislation that they live under. While this cannot be realized territorially, it can be realized exterritorially, for communities and societies of volunteers. – Welfare States, too, but only for their volunteers! - JZ, 17.2.08, 25.1.11. – Everything voluntary! – JZ, 13.12.13. – PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, PERSONAL LAW

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: Citizen participation [is] a device whereby public officials induce nonpublic individuals to act in a way the officials desire.” – Daniel P. Moynihan – POLITICS, VOTING

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: Don't monopolize the power to prepare, start, end or prevent nuclear war! Don't make nuclear power a nationalized industry or a government option. Destroy all such powers and preparations. Allow everyone freely to act to prevent nuclear war and thus to help preserve his life and that of his beloved. To work towards a just, free and peaceful society is not only a right but a duty - for every sufficiently reasonable being. - Any "democracy" or "republic" in which decision-making on war and peace, armament and disarmament as well as on international treaties and on war and peace aims is monopolized, in a few hands, instead of such affairs being decided by the people, by individuals, for themselves, is in reality an authoritarian, even a despotic regime. Never mind its democratic or republican trappings and pretences. - We have been so conditioned by statist education systems that hardly anyone questions the wrongfulness of centralizing these excess powers and rendering all others powerless in these respects. - Self-defence, survival preparations, self-determination, cannot be rightfully and effectively delegated for whole populations. Attempts to do so have always led to disasters and man-made catastrophes can be all the greater while ABC mass murder are available to anyone. No one has the right to determine whether mankind is going to survive or not. All such powers must be destroyed - together will all means and "weapons" for them. - See: APPEALS, CONSENT, DECISION, FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, RESISTANCE, FREE MIGRATION, FREE TRADE, HUMAN RIGHTS, DEFENCE, INDIVIDUALISM, MILITIA, MINORITY AUTONOMY, NEGOTIATIONS, PEOPLE, PEACE DECLARATIONS, REFERENDUM, REPRESENTATION, RESPONSIBILITY, SECESSION, SELF-HELP, SEPARATE PEACE, VOLUNTARISM, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, VOTING, WAR AIMS, WEAPONS. . – JZ, An ABC Against Nuclear War, in PEACE PLANS Nos. 16 & 17, on - Rev. 13.12.13.

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: It has remained for the twentieth century to perfect the new and far more powerful obstructive force of collective restrictions and controls. The vested interests ranged against innovation and improvement are by no means confined to the official classes. They include all the busybodies and all the misguided enthusiasts imbued with the new spirit of citizenship – the principle of control and interference with everybody and everything, at other people’s expense, and of course without a suggestion of personal responsibility or individual effort anywhere.” – Ernest Benn, Honest Doubt, p.202. – Whatever is right in “participatory democracy” would be described in any as complete declaration of individual rights and liberties as freedom, peace and justice lovers can and should provide by now, between them. – Participating in a monopolized and coercive territorial institution, which is imposed upon a whole population, is not a or a duty, on the contrary, it amounts to an active participation in a territorially imposed authoritarianism, largely a majority despotism or, seeing the few decisive leader or misleaders of it, in another despotism imposed by a small minority. - JZ, 13.12.13. - INTERVENTIONISM, REFORMERS, CITIZENSHIP, CONTROL, BUSYBODIES

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: My own position is in favor of participatory democracy. ... None of this, of course, means that I would deny any other non-aggressive group of dopes the right to go ahead and have their own theocracy, representative democracy, monarchy, or what have you. It should be a matter of choice in a free society, and a free society, in turn, seems to me only possible in discrete units, communities, where a society is possible as opposed to a corporate state." - Karl Hess, undated letter to Martin Shepard. - Here he appears as a panarchist, after all, but still somewhat confused as to ends and means and closer to the collectivist anarchist than to the individualist anarchist position, i.e. without recognizing the right to individual sovereignty and to individual secession and of individuals to form new communities of volunteers. Nor does he seem to see clearly the exterritorial requirement and option. - JZ, 15.6.92. - But then one should not judge a man by a single paragraph, far less an as important libertarian thinker as Karl Hess. - JZ 15.6.92, 13.1.93. & AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” – Plato. - Governments are almost always manned by inferiors. Superior men would not want to dominate others. They would anyhow not be voted-in by inferiors and the superior people have almost never the voting majority. Resistance to territorial politics should be distinguished from participation in it. Mass murders or mass murder preparations should be resisted and not participated in, if humanly possible. The same applies to any suppression  of any individual right and liberty. Only participation in developing and applying the new science of the politics of exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of voluntary communities can here be considered not only as a right but even as a duty for a rational and moral being or, at least, as a good advice. - Should one also participate in wars or, rather, as far as possible, in measures to prevent or end them? - JZ, 22.11.06, 13.12.13. - IN TERRITORIAL POLITICS AS USUAL? WARS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, RESISTANCE,

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: Participation in territorial governments is participation in one’s own enslavement. – JZ, 7.12.93. – VOTING, ELECTIONS, LEGISLATION, PARLIAMENTARISM

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: Participation of the people in the government means, under territorialism, participation in their own suppression. A coercive and oppressive system – which a territorial government with involuntary members inevitably is – leaves no other option. – JZ, 23.6.87. Only voluntarism and exterritorial autonomy can provide all the rightful participatory options with no one being territorially victimized through the faith, opinions, convictions, popular errors or prejudices of others. – JZ, 1.4.08, 13.12.13.

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: Participatory democracy is possible only in small groups.” - David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p. 7. – Is that a dogma or is it the truth? Firstly, there can be several levels of participation. And communication is no longer confined to personal meeting and letters and printed newsletters and periodicals. Via phones, fax, emails, CDs and websites they could be more interlinked than ordinary territorial citizens are with each other, just like family members and friends and business associates are closer to each other, even when living apart, than they are as mere nationals of a territorial State. Some religions and sects are worldwide, too. Scientists and artists are largely linked worldwide in the pursuit of the same kind of objectives. I see no membership size or territorial limits for advocates of participatory democracy, no more so than e.g. for Esperantists or World Federalists doing their own things. At what level their participation would be most active would be entirely up to them. – Huge corporations, including multinationals, can also be decentralized into autonomous work groups. - JZ, 21.2.08. - DEMOCRACY, DECENTRALIZATION, OPTIMAL SIZE, BIGNESS, PANARCHISM

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: Participatory democracy was the chief idea in the Port Huron Statement, the founding charter of Students for a Democratic Society. It is a cry for a say in the decisions that shape our lives, as against top-down direction, social engineering, corporate and political centralization, absentee owners, brainwashing by mass media. In its connotations, it encompasses no taxation without representation, grass-roots populism, the town meeting, congregationalism, federalism, Student Power, Black Power, workers’ management, soldiers’ democracy, guerrilla organization. It is, of course, the essence of Anarchist social order, the voluntary federation of self-managed enterprises.” – Paul Goodman, NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE, 14.7.1968. – FREE CHOICE, ASSOCIATIONISM, SELF-HELP, SELF-MANAGEMENT, AS FAR AS POSSIBLE, CONTRACTARIANISM, VOLUNTARISM, COMPETITION IN EVERY SPHERE

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: Power, particularly majoritarian or collective power (i.e., the power of an elite exercised in the name of the masses), is the god of the modern liberal. Its only recent innovative change is to suggest that the elite be leavened by the compulsory membership of authentic representatives of the masses. The current phrase is ‘participatory democracy’.” – Karl Hess, Death of Politics, p.4. – POWER, GOVERNMENTALISM, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, AUTHORITARIANISM

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: To make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not simply observers. One who does not vote has not right to complain.” - Louis L’Amour, Education of a Wandering Man, p.189. – To make anything work properly it should be undertaken only by volunteers. The participants in any voluntary organization or project should not have to depend upon the votes of outsiders, unless they experiment e.g. with nuclear weapons or reactors, which would endanger outsiders as well. Only the voluntary participants in a project or community should have voting or other decision rights in it. Different interests and inclinations should be only voluntarily integrated or segregated, not by territorial compulsion. We do, as dissenters, have a good cause to complain about all territorial voting and other decision-making and organizations and their actions. A compulsory participation in what we consider to be wrong or irrational would be a great wrong in itself. – JZ, 13.8.07. - VOTING, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, DEMOCRACY, PANARCHISM

PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY: While better than the representative democracy, it is not yet the ideal form of government or society. Participation in any domination or collectivist coercive scheme, based on compulsory subjection to territorial laws and taxes, is not the equivalent to genuine self-government based upon individual sovereignty and voluntary membership. – JZ, 21.11.82, 17.2.08. – VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, COMPETION VS. COMPULSION

PARTIES, LIBERTARIAN PARTY: The Party of Principle: We, the supporters of the Libertarian Party, rise to challenge the myth of the omnipotent state, to defend the freedom and dignity of man. The citizen who is subservient to the state is either a ward or a slave - a ward if he receives from the state that which he did not freely earn, a slave if his life and property are placed at the disposal of the state. The free man can be neither ward nor slave. The free man renounces the initiation of force to attain his ends; he thus will not sanction the initiation of force by any agent - the state included - to attain those ends for him. The free man regards his life and property as inviolably his alone; he thus refuses to allow himself or his property to be a 'national resource’ to be manipulated for the 'public good’, or involuntary fodder for war. - The free man recognizes as his moral right the freedom to think, speak, and act as he and he alone chooses, so long as he does not infringe voluntary relations among others. The free man disclaims any 'right', and refuses to recognize any claim to a 'right' by others, which requires for its implementation or enforcement the destruction of voluntary relations. - Our goal is nothing less than to create a society in which the free man can flourish. - If you are in substantial agreement with this platform, and would like to help to ensure that the philosophy if presented therein is represented in future elections, you can do so by joining the Libertarian Party as a working member. Annual dues are $ 6 ($ 4 for students), and include a subscription to the Party's monthly newsletter. ($ 3 to non-members). - Libertarian Party, 7748 Lowell Blvd., Westminster, Colo 80050. - Libertarian Yearbook, 1972. – LIBERTARIAN PARTY, VOLUNTARISM. – Have its membership fees gone up with inflation or beyond it? – JZ, 21.4.08. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, VOLUNTARISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM

PARTIES: a choice between two carbon-copy puppets.” - Richard Cummings, Proposition 14, p.121. – Adding a few dozen minor parties, all only territorialists as well, does not sufficiently improve this situation. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: A country with several, even dozens of political parties, all striving for territorial domination, is not a sufficient substitute for a one-party State or despotism. Only a country with dozens of even hundreds of different panarchies would be, because all of them would govern or manage only themselves while leaving all non-members alone, to do their own things under their own personal laws – JZ, 12.5.08, 25.1.11. – PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE

PARTIES: A party is only a part. It should never rule the whole - only itself. - JZ, 74.

PARTIES: A party means an organized opinion.” – Disraeli. – (JZ retranslation of: “Partei ist organisierte Meinung.”)

PARTIES: A party, whichever it may be, merely exists and is only feared because it strives for power.” – A. Bellegarrique, Manifesto. – He overlooked that their own party is also loved by its voluntary followers. – JZ, 18.2.08. – POWER,

PARTIES: A political party gives birth to a party line as naturally as a cat has kittens.” – J. Neil Schulman, NEW LIBERTARIAN WEEKLY, Aug. 15, 1977. – Only as long as exterritorial autonomy for volunteers is not one of their options. Then they would split often enough to achieve finally, within the remaining factions of volunteers, almost unanimity on all subjects important to them. – But under territorialism they have to more or less coercively uphold the lowest common denominator among their members. - JZ, 21.11.82, 17.2.08. - PARTY DISCIPLINE, CONFORMISM, LEADERSHIP, PARTY LINE, VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM, SCHISMS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: A political party has never accomplished anything for humanity. Individuals and geniuses have been the pioneers of every reform and of progress.” – Leo N. Tolstoi, quoted by Seldes, under Government, p.454. – INDIVIDUALS, GENIUSES, PIONEERS, REFORMS, PROGRESS

PARTIES: A political party is much like an army sent to conquer a neighbouring country; men are supposed to “give up” their own judgment in all things and be moved at will by the hands of their general. Defeating an enemy and defeating a political rival have only too many points in common; and in either case separate (*)intelligences would be a great hindrance to success. It would be best in both cases to use the mildest phrase – that they should be disciplined.” - Auberon Herbert, A Politician in Sight of Heaven. - (*) independent? – JZ - OBEDIENCE, PARTY DISCIPLINE

PARTIES: A political party is usually naïvely pictured as a group of like-minded people co-operating to further their common interests. This is no longer valid. That function is now carried on entirely by the lobby, and there are as many lobbies as there are special interests. A political party now exists primarily as an apparatus for selecting candidates and getting them elected to office.” - Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hall, The Peter Principle, 1969ff, p.57. - POLITICIANS, DEPUTIES, REPRESENTATIVES, MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, POLITICAL, & LOBBIES, SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS

PARTIES: A sect or party is an elegant incognito devised to save a man from the vexation of thinking.” – Emerson, Journals, 1831. – FAITH, BELIEF, RELIGION, IDEOLOGY, SELF-THINKING

PARTIES: Abolition of the party dictatorship. From the program of the Waehlerorganisation “Muendige Buerger”, quoted in: Erika Herbst, Alle suchen nach Loesungen – Wir haben sie, S.9. WELFARE STATE, STATISM, SUBSIDIES, HAND-OUTS, POVERTY

PARTIES: After political party memberships have already shrunk to a tiny percentage of the population, while their leaders have usurped, as law makers and party leaders, more and more legalized powers to themselves, why don't we begin to ignore them altogether, opting out of their expensive and restrictive circus performances and do our own things for and to ourselves, at our own expense and risk? We have driven them already, to a large extent, out of our private lives. Why not, likewise, out of the political, economic and social spheres which they have territorially preempted and then wrongly and irrationally mismanaged to an enormous extent, all at our own expense and risk? - JZ, 24.5.00. - PANARCHISM, SECESSION, SELF-GOVERNMENT, OPTING OUT, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS

PARTIES: All common property on a compulsory basis has this inherent defect that two parties tend to be formed, and to intrigue against each other for the management of it. Under a perfectly free system this defect is reduced to its smallest proportions; under a compulsory system it becomes an evil of the first magnitude.” – Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p.159. - TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSORY COLLECTIVISM, NATIONALISM, PATRIOTISM, FACTION STRIFE, PROPERTY, SCHISMS, PARTY POLITICS AS USUAL, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

PARTIES: All parties do wrong - until they rule only over volunteers. - JZ 29.6.87. - That is the only way in which "party-rule" could become quite rightful. - JZ, 12.12.03. – PARTIES TO RULE ONLY OVER THEIR FOLLOWERS, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM

PARTIES: All parties to act in future only for and at the expense and risk of their voluntary members and voters. Each to establish a one-party State or society or community but this only under exterritorial autonomy and personal law like secular churches or sects, but quite autonomous on their own affairs, with all the secular institutions that they consider to be necessary for themselves. – JZ, 18.11.92, 19.2.08. – This kind of one-party rule would be tolerable – for their volunteers and would not bother the others. – JZ, 19.2.08. - PANARCHISM, PERSONAL LAW, SELF-GOVERNMENT, TOLERANCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM,

PARTIES: All parties, presently, want to retain or get into territorial power. Personally, I want none of them to keep or gain power over me. But individualists like me might, perhaps, use the power urge of parties by advising one of them, a libertarian or panarchist party, to win, i.e. gain independence for its own members and followers, on the following platform: Refund to the taxpayers, collectively, tenfold to a hundredfold their campaign contributions – in the form of reducing government expenditures and taxes correspondingly. To do so a party would naturally have to break the law on election contributions and expenditures until it can repeal this law. But the existing parties break it anyhow. This one might be honest about it and publicly declare that it will break this law. – This party might further declare that its functionaries would serve only part-time and honorary. – How could it reduce taxes? By liquidating all unnecessary and unjustified government expenditures and at the same time removing all restrictions and tax penalties on all activities which achieve the desired aims much better than subsidies out of tax revenues would and could: (1.) The housing subsidies to young couples instead of being increased should be cancelled. The young married couples would benefit more by the removal of interest rate restrictions (as lenders and as depositors), by an end to the forced loans (Up to 60 %) from their savings bank accounts, going into government insecurities, which they have later to repay to themselves in form of taxes!), by the removal of zoning restrictions, the sale of all crown land, the ending of inflation by permitting free choice of value standards and exchange media, i.e., the repeal of legal tender laws and all laws establishing the money issue monopoly, the repeal of fair rent laws and landlord and tenant acts. (2.) If the import duty on pre-fabricated housing and xyz other restrictions and burdens upon house constructions were removed, then housing could be achieved much more cheaply, perhaps as Buckminster Fuller suggested, at the price of a new car. (3.) Full employment could be achieved thru the methods of free banking and monetary freedom. (4.) If no death duties, company taxes, land taxes etc. were raised any longer, then these and other financial freedom steps would promote private productive investments, especially since inflation, deflation and stagflation or economic crises would no longer occur, in the absence of financial despotism, legal tender paper money and of the money issue monopoly. Good monies and value standards would be able to drive out the bad ones. (5.) No subsidies to airports (and other public works). Free enterprise airlines with rates to cover their costs including returns on investments. All public works to pay for themselves under free competition or to disappear. No subsidies to any enterprise. Sale of all nationalized enterprises to make further subsidies to them unnecessary. Shares in them to be distributed free of charge, apart from brokerage fees, to all citizens or taxpayers, as the real owners. (See PEACE PLANS 19c, online at ) No more subsidized public bus services. Instead, competitive better and cheaper private and cooperative transport services. (6.) No handouts to unemployed and other needy people. Instead, loans to be guaranteed by their next of kin, and right to work for old people and young people at a freely agreed- upon wages and salaries. Under conditions of full monetary freedom the transformation of ready for sale goods and services into sound monetary demand for them would become possible, sufficient for the employment of millions of additional employees and self-employed within days. (7.) No subsidies to education instead: freedom in education at a fraction of the cost. Half of the State revenue goes at present down this drain - with less and less real education as a result. (8.) No subsidized immigration but free private migration. Then, under full employment due to full monetary, financial and other economic liberties, everyone would be benefit from it. (9.) No health and old age subsidies or taxes but also no interferences with private insurance and the investment of insurance funds. (10.) No ABC subsidies but freedom in broadcasting, commercial and cultural on a subscription or advertisement basis. (11.) If this party added the promise: We will not prosecute any tax evaders, and also offered the free distribution of all remaining governmental capital assets, it would become unbeatable at the polls. (12) However, it should claim no territorial monopoly or any privilege to compulsorily introduce its program for the whole territory and all of its population but, instead, individual and group secessionism for itself, while favoring peaceful coexistence with the tolerant realization of all other party programs – all only among their own voluntary members and at their expense and risk, i.e., within different panarchies or polyarchies for all kinds of societies and communities of volunteers, all under their own personal law system, i.e. exterritorially autonomous and federated only to the extent that they want to be. – No imposed territorial unity but free choice, for individual and their groups of volunteers, however diverse, as long as they are tolerant towards other tolerant individuals and groups. - JZ notes from the middle 70’s, somewhat revised 16.4.08, 25.1.11, 2.12.13, 13.12.13. – TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, LIBERTARIAN PARTY

PARTIES: All parties, without exception, are, when they strive for power, merely varieties of absolutism.” – Proudhon – (JZ tr. from: “Alle Parteien sind, wenn sie nach Macht streben, ausnahmslos Abarten des Absolutismus.”) – POWER ADDICTION, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM, ABSOLUTISM

PARTIES: All political parties die at last of swallowing their own lies. – John Arbuthnot, quoted in Richard Garnett’s Life of Emerson, 1887, p.165. - Do they really swallow all their own lies or do they merely mass-produce them, as long as they are widely accepted and, even later on, in their memoirs? - JZ, 26.11.02. - Alas, it takes them often all too long to die. – JZ, 18.2.08. - Lies will not be endlessly believed, even when they are endlessly repeated. - Perhaps they finally fade away as they can no longer cover the messes made by politicians. Alas, they will tend to be replaced by others, by politicians trying to hold on to power. (Initially they sound plausible, like most older popular errors and prejudices. Alas, neither online nor on disc has a comprehensive refutations file for all of them so far been compiled and published. The still very incomplete beginnings of one are being put online at under the heading “ON LIBERTY”. Letters A to F are already up. – JZ, 13.12.13.) – How could one accelerate their death as territorial parties and revive them only as exterritorial ones for volunteers? – (*) Then their governments would actually be one-party States, societies or communities – as long as they still had any volunteers. - JZ, 20.11.85, 24.3.08, 25.1.11. - (*) On the other, hand, some of the lies on economics, of Stalin's and of Mao's regime, did, finally, die away. But think of the price to be paid for this in millions of lives and in liberties and rights. - JZ, 25.1.11. - POLITICIANS, LIES, LIARS, LYING, ENLIGHTENMENT, NEW DRAFT, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF REFUTATIONS

PARTIES: All territorialist political parties act in principle in accordance with the motto, not openly announced: We like to spend your money our way! – JZ, 12/86.

PARTIES: Almost all parties do, in practice, favor more taxes and more spending by themselves. – JZ, 12.12.87. – But they speak and write more about the spending than the increased taxes, because they want to catch the votes of the majority of the ignorant and the foolish. – JZ, 21.2.08, 25.1.11. – TAXATION, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, VOTING, ELECTIONS, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS

PARTIES: Almost every political party is wrong on most points of its platform. All are wrong in wanting to realize their platforms territorially, over whole populations, including all kinds of dissenting minorities. – JZ, 12.1.00, 1.2.08. – POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, FACTIONS

PARTIES: although there are many honourable and high-minded men in both parties, the interest of the party, as a party, ever tends to be the supreme influence, overriding the scruples of the truer-judging, the wiser and more careful. Why must it be so, as things are today? Because the conflict for power over each other is altogether different in its nature to all other – more or less useful and stimulating – conflicts in which we engage in daily life. As soon as we place unlimited power in the hands of those who govern, the conflict which decided who is to possess the absolute sovereignty over us, involves deepest interests, involves all our rights over ourselves, all our relations to each other, all that we most deeply cherish, all that we have, all that we are in ourselves. It is a conflict of such supreme fateful importance, as we shall presently see in more detail, that once engaged in it we must win, whatever the cost; ...” - Auberon Herbert, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.401. - TERRITORIALISM, POWER, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, PERSONAL LAW FOR VOLUNTEERS, PANARCHISM, POLLYARCHISM, COMPETING GOERNANCE

PARTIES: An anarchist party? A party which, when in power, will pass a law cancelling all laws? Such a law will cancel itself. Anarchy is not available in the context of political activity, directly. – Moshe Kroy, free enterprise, 7.8.76. – But a panarchist party seems possible to me and it could gain the support of all other parties, with its program: Full exterritorial autonomy for the volunteers of all parties, under their own personal laws and institutions. – JZ, 26.2.08. – ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM, PANARCHIST PARTY, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW, SECESSIONISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM & COMPETITON IN EVERY SPHERE

PARTIES: an honest man, who is of no party, and who does not value himself the less for that.” – Rousseau, The Cultivation of the Arts and Sciences, in the anthology Against the Grain, p.61. – SELF-ESTEEM, SELF-APPRECIATION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SELF-OWNERSHIP

PARTIES: Any party means too much organization and not enough thought. (This applies even to any Libertarian Party, not to speak of the mixed bag of Tea Parties. – JZ, 6.12.77, 13.12.13. - The Australian Workers Party and, later, the Progress Party showed not only too little thought and tolerance but also all too little organization. – No political party can help being a political party, i.e. a territorial one, unless it subscribes to panarchism or polyarchism, i.e. to consistent voluntarism, associationism, contractarianism, self-ownership, personal law, individual sovereignty and secessionism or experimental freedom in all spheres. - JZ, 31.7.78, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: Anybody who bets on any of the conventional parties is going to lose – even if his favorite party wins. You can bet on that. – JZ, 23.2.75. – I was then optimistic enough to add: “Other parties than the Workers Party. – JZ, 18.2.08.

PARTIES: As long as we have parties we will have merely the usua party politics. - JZ, 76, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: As soon as a cause becomes organized it becomes corrupted. As soon as it becomes successful it becomes intolerable. Revolutions devour their best children.” – Eric Lambert, Glory Thrown In, p.16. - While this does certainly apply to territorial organizations and movements with territorial ambitions, it does, I believe, apply much less, if at all, to voluntary associations, those from which members can freely secede and which are only exterritorially autonomous, i.e. the members have to make themselves the required contributions to all their expenses and cannot put their costs upon the shoulders of non-members, as happens with governmental territorial taxation-tributes and legislation. – JZ, 17.9.07, 2.12.13, 13.12.13. - MOVEMENTS, POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, REVOLUTIONS BY TERRITORIAL STATISTS

PARTIES: At each election all parties should win – each of them full autonomous rule over its voters. – JZ 7.10.78, 25.1.11. – Rather: At the last general election in any country, each party should win … - JZ, 18.2.08. – AUTONOMY, VOTING, PANARCHISM

PARTIES: Being fed up with conventional party politics does not necessarily mean that one should condemn all parties and their potential. Perhaps we need at least one new political party, one that would represent the producers and consumers as opposed to those, who represent the looters and monopolists, the creditors rather than the debtors. Such a party would not extend the franchise to those who do not produce (or do not pay taxes) but who do, instead, merely hold their hands out to be filled by the more or less tribute-enslaved others through a territorial government as an intermediate force. It would not grant handouts or subsidies to anyone, not even to old age pensioners. Let them sue the territorial government into bankruptcy and liquidate all remaining government assets by forced sales for the pensioners’ benefit. This proposed party, different from all others, would represent the rights of owners and creditors as against those of tenants and debtors, the rights of taxpayers instead of the immoral claims of the tax gatherers and hand-out recipients. In short, it would attempt to replace status by contract, subordination by self-help. Compare the Libertarian Party. - Moreover, this new party should opt out of immoral party politicking by stating categorically that it does not claim and intend to represent and gain all individual liberties and rights for anyone but its members and voters. It would leave all others free to muddle through or fail at their own expense and risk – in their own kind of panarchies, even statist and State Socialist ones. – Lastly: Full exterritorial autonomy for the voluntary members of all parties. No more, no less. – Each diverse group, wishing to achieve this, becoming an independent panarchy, with members not only in Australia – but all over the world, if it wants to and if people want to associate with it. – Only parties, which continue to raise territorial monopoly claims, are quite wrong to that extent. - JZ, notes in middle 70’s, when there was an attempt to establish a libertarian party in Australia, under the name of Workers Party, later Progress Party. Somewhat revised: 16.4.08, 25.1.11, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: Big-endians and Little-endians: In the empire of Lilliput, the Big-endians belonged to the party which made it a matter of conscience to break their eggs at the big end, and were regarded as heretics by the orthodox party, who broke their eggs at the little end. – Swift, Gulliver’s Travels: Voyage to Lilliput, Pt. i. ch.4. - JOKES

PARTIES: both have an overpowering desire for power, and both offer to buy votes with tax money. The programs and the tactics of the two are identical. And neither has any theoretical position, any philosophy of either government or economics, by which they can be judged. Both are opportunistic.” – Frank Chodorov, Out of Step, p.87.

PARTIES: both main political parties have been moving dangerously close towards monopolizing welfare and much else besides.” – Sir Lincoln Evans, in Right Turn, p. 145.

PARTIES: Both parties are corpses; the country needs a live one.” – Thomas F. Bayard, quoted in Lysander Spooner, Works I, introduction to his A Letter to Thomas F. Bayard. – The more alive, active and energetic a political territorialist party is, the more wrongs will it commit and the more harm will it do and the more its programs will cost. – JZ, 26.2.08. – The country and the people do not need anything. Just like ghosts or gods; they are only fictional “entities”. – JZ, 21.4.08, 25.1.11, 13.12.13. -  TERRITORIALISM, POLITICAL MYTHOLOGY, GOD, THE PEOPLE, THE COUNTRY, THE NATION

PARTIES: both parties were wrong, each in endeavoring to compel the other party to do what they considered the right thing.” – D. W. Brookhouse, quoted in Bob James, Australian Anarchism, p.9. – This kind of stand is the almost inevitable consequence of territorialism. – Let each party opt out and do its own things only to or for its own volunteers, on the only basis that makes this freedom possible: full exterritorial autonomy under personal law. Then they would, like businessmen, sensibly strive to attract more customers to their system and services and to lose less of those they already have, by trying their best not to disappoint them. Any disasters they would still cause by their actions would then be confined to their volunteers, their customers, their subscribers. – JZ, 25.2.08, 25.1.11.

PARTIES: Both parties, in this view, have been tents, holding in their capacious interiors all manners of political men united only in the organizational urge to run things. The only purpose of a political party it could thus, be said, is to win political office.” - Karl Hess; In a Cause that Will Triumph, The Goldwater Campaign and the Future of Conservatism, Doubleday & Co, 1967, p.4. - POLITICIANS, POWER ADDICTION, RUNNING A COUNTRY, TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: both sides will be locked in an endless tug of war to elect their own authoritarians into office and suppress the opposition.” – Jerome Tuccille, Radical Libertarianism, p.42. – ELECTIONS, VOTING

PARTIES: Both want to take your money and control your already limited freedom.” – Dr. Mike Stanton, quoted in THE SATURDAY EVENING MERCURY, 5.10.75. - MAJOR PARTIES, TWO-PARTY-SYSTEM

PARTIES: comprehend that there was only one political party, formed by the two pretend parties wearing their labels like party hats and joining their hands in a circle around their prey, …” - Richard Condon, Winter Kills, p.13.

PARTIES: Damn you principles! Stick to your party.” – Disraeli. Quoted in C. Bingham, Men and Affairs, 22. – Who has expressed party loyalty and party discipline, above principles, better than that? That seems to be the main principle of any political party and all of them are power-hungry. Alas, not all party leaders are as frank. – Damn your party and stick to your principles! - JZ, 18.11.78, 17.2.08, 21.4.08. – PRINCIPLES, POWER, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, POLITICIANS

PARTIES: Democracy is not the mere formality of dropping a ballot in a wooden box or glass jar every four years. … We abhor political parties. We are against political parties, and we have none.” – Francisco Franco, speech, Pamplona, 1953, quoted by Mowrer, also by Seldes. – Parties are bad – but beware: Some territorial statist conditions without parties can be even worse. – JZ, 1.11.76, 25.1.11. - DEMOCRACY, VOTING, HUMAN RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, MINORITY RIGHTS, TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIE

PARTIES: Democrats can never get any sleep because they are afraid somebody somewhere is making too much money. Republicans can never get any sleep because they are afraid somebody somewhere is having too much fun. Anonymous – ENVY & FEAR

PARTIES: Divide and rule.” – (Divide et impera.) - Anonymous Latin ancient political maxim, cited by Machiavelli. - Let people, down to individuals, divide themselves up as they please, into groups volunteers only, via free choices by individuals, then no one will any longer be able to rule all of them imperialistically. Only then will they come to rule themselves. - JZ 11.10.02. - FACTIONS, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION, DECENTRALIZATION, POLITICS, DEMOCRACY, POLITICIANS, RULERS, STATES, PLURALISM, IMPERIALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

PARTIES: do not attempt any new political organization; …” - Garrison, quoted in Sprading, p.156. – He should have said: do not attempt any new territorial political organization. – JZ, 18.2.08. – VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: Do you really think that progress lies before us if we simply exchange holy mother church for holy mother party?” – Auberon Herbert, A Politician in Sight of Heaven, p. 85,essay three in Mack edition.

PARTIES: Don’t be a party to any party. – JZ, 13.11.73. - That was the belief of most present libertarian Workers Party members. – JZ, 2.11.76. – And after their experience with the Workers Party and its successor, the Progress Party, I presume that most have gone back to their previous beliefs. – JZ, 17.2.08. – LIBERTARIAN PARTY, WORKERS PARTY, PROGRESS PARTY, TEA PARTY

PARTIES: Each and every man’s “rights” being consistent and harmonious with each other and every other man’s “rights”; and all men’s rights being immutably fixed and easily ascertained, by a science that is open to be learned and known by all; a government that does nothing but “equal and exact justice to all men” (*) – that simply gives to every man his own, and noting more to say – has no cause and no occasion for any “political parties”. What are these “political parties” but standing armies of robbers, each trying to rob the other, and to prevent being itself robbed by the other? (**) A government that seeks to “do equal and exact justice to all men,” has no cause and no occasion to enlist all the fighting men in the nation in two hostile ranks, to keep them always in battle array, and burning with hatred towards each other. It has no cause and no occasion for any “political warfare,” any “political hostility”, any “political campaign”, any “political contests”, any “political fights”, any political defeats”, and any “political triumphs”. – Lysander Spooner. - How I wish that he left us a complete private draft of a declaration of individual rights and liberties! Perhaps he had, but it was burnt, with others of his manuscripts, with Tucker’s library. – So it is up to us to attempt to produce such a declaration. - (*) As if any territorial government could do this, seeing, e.g., that there are a variety of justice systems, of which Spooner mainly advocated only one, the free jury system. – (**) They are allies in robbing the general population, taking alternatively leading positions in this common campaign. – Ideals or pretences of ideals do differ and under territorialism only one or the other can be consistently realized. Thus parties are inevitably associated with territorialism or vice versa: territorialism is inevitably associated with political parties. – Territorially the limited government ideal can’t be realized. It is suitable only for some kinds of freedom lovers, not for statists. - Underlining by me. - JZ, 18.2.80. – LIMITED GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM VS. VOLUNTARISM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, SPOONER

PARTIES: each city was inhabited by two hostile nations (our two major parties) who no laws of war could control, no leagues or treaties bind.” – Richard Carlyle, The Earth Belongs to the Living, p.46.

PARTIES: Each party believes to know exactly what is required to save the people and says: give the power only to us and we will establish general happiness. However, although many of these parties already had the power or have it still, the promised general happiness did not come… because the ruling minority, however it may call itself: absolute monarchy, constitutional State or democratic republic, as in France, Switzerland, America, once it is in power, does, naturally, use this power, driven by the general human egoism, to coercively assure to itself those advantages, which can be attained only at the expense of the working people and not otherwise at all.Leo Tolstoi. Ein Leben in Selbstbekenntnissen. Tagebuchblaeter und Briefe. Herausgegeben von Arthur Luther. Bibliographisches Institut, Leipzig, p.387, An einen Revolutionaer. – My own rough translation from the German translation. – JZ, 30.1.09, 26.2.12. - PARTY POLITICS

PARTIES: Each party is only good enough for its followers and supporters and should have power only over them. - JZ 17.6.87. – Under personal law or exterritorial autonomy for volunteers this can be done. – JZ, 23.3.12. - POLITICAL PARTIES - EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM

PARTIES: each party is worse than the other.” – Will Rogers. – JOKES

PARTIES: Each party ought to get to rule and misrule, to tax or leave unmolested, to serve or abuse - all those of the citizens of a country and of the world who want to be ruled by it - and as long as they can stand it, i.e., do not secede from it, its constitution, laws, regulations, jurisdiction and other governmental institutions. - JZ, 1.3.00, 26.6.01. - PANARCHISM

PARTIES: Each party should only be free to attempt to rule itself and the affairs of all its voluntary members. It should no longer be given the chance to rule territorially and by majority voting over all other parties and their followers and the whole population of a country. Then it would soon become clear how much or how little they can do with their own limited knowledge and ideas and at their own risk and expense. They would either fast learn from their own failures or more and more of their members and subjects would simply leave them. Then they would either disappear altogether or become quite insignificant political sects. For their present platforms they deserve nothing better. – JZ, 12.5.08. – Each political party should become confined to rule only the lives of its voluntary members and subscribers. – JZ, 12.8.13. - PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, SELF-GOVERNMENT

PARTIES: Each to get only the party he deserves in power over him – because he voted for it. Each and everyone to get only the government or society that he deserves, because he voted for it. Just as he “voted” for any particular insurance, business or marriage partner or any particular job on offer to him. – JZ, 1985 & 24.3.08. – PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREE CHOICE AMONG GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES

PARTIES: elitist parties may promise solutions but cannot identify the problem.” – Paul Berman, Quotations from the Anarchists, p.24.

PARTIES: Every party in power goes from being the lesser evil to being the larger evil. – JZ, 24.3.84.

PARTIES: Every party is unfit to govern anyone but the own members and voters. – Then all would get what they deserve: their own choice. - JZ, 13.9.75. – When thus reduced in power, but quite independent in their own affairs, they might really do their best, rather than their worst, as exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, setting either a shiny examples for others to follow – or a deterrent one. Both are needed for their own enlightenment and that of outsiders. – JZ, 26.2.08. – No party has the right to rule the members of any other party who merely wish to do their own things for or to themselves, at their own expense and risk. But we should resist all parties that try to maintain territorial power or try to acquire it. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: Every party’s platform is a scaffold. – Bob Black, THE CONNECTION, 147, p.48. – Multiple and freely competing panarchies would offer scaffolds only as one suicide option. To other people they would offer springboards of the kind they prefer, into the waters they like. To some of them even the sky would be no limit. They would systematically strive for complete freedom, life extension to immortality and the stars. No longer being taxed by the ignorant and prejudiced, exterritorially quite autonomous, they could, each of them, try to finance and work for their tolerant dreams for their own lives. E.g., the technology exists to cheaply combined and duplicate all freedom writings on an affordable single HD of one to four TBs. Only much voluntary scanning and proof-reading input is required, apart from copyrights restrictions, which could be, largely, bypassed e.g. via summaries, reviews, and indexes or simply ignored by some panarchies, since they would not be part of their personal law. – JZ, 22.2.08, 13.12.13. – TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS, STATES, PANARCHISM, CHOICE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PROGRESS

PARTIES: Finally, the polls show that people are at last beginning to understand that there really is no distinction between the two major parties. Doesn’t every candidate urge you to vote? Doesn’t every candidate urge you to pay your taxes? Doesn’t every candidate talk about helping the “poor”? Doesn’t every candidate endorse obeying laws, regardless of whether those laws are moral? It is rarely a matter of different principles; it is virtually always a case of debating over the degree to which each candidate exhorts you to adhere to traditional government doctrine. – If half the people in this country are not voting, it is fairly obvious that they are trying to tell the government something. But the government, instead of being responsive to the people whom it supposedly represents, retaliates with an endless barrage of slogans, the essence of which are, “It’s your duty to vote.” To say the least, the politician has a closed mind when it comes to the nonvoting phenomenon.” – Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p.59. – As for the last sentence: Not quite. A number of States, including Australia, have introduced the absurdity of compulsory voting. So far only informal voting is a way out of this compulsion. Maybe the next step of politicians will be to do away with secret voting? – With regard to our exterritorial autonomy choices all of us remain disfranchised. “The” vote does not include the individual sovereign, secessionist and personal law vote and choice. - JZ, 17.2.08, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: Football and soccer games remind me of party politics. No matter which team wins or loses – it’s all the same silly game. But – at least in sports – there are only voluntary victims. – JZ, 31.12.?? (Illegible!) - SPORTS, GAMES, VOLUNTARISM, ELECTIONS, VOTING, CAMPAIGNS, POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: for such a coalition was … in their eyes much like jockeys selling a race. They did not care to … take office as pay for votes sold to pro-slavery Democrats.” - Henry Adams, The Education of Henry Adams, 1907, ch.2. - COALITIONS, COMPROMISES

PARTIES: For the simple fact that a party is a party, an organization, a clique, a mafia, at best a sect, which does not allow its adepts to express their own personality, their own creativity: on the contrary, it destroys them or at least it twists them. A party does not need individuals with personality, creativity, imagination, dignity: it needs bureaucrats, functionaries, servants.” – Oriana Fallaci, A Man, p.401. – Also followers and voters. The less these think and act for themselves, the better for the party. – JZ, 17.2.08, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: For years, the Republican response to Democratic spending initiatives has been to do the “fiscally responsible” thing and vote tax increases to pay the bills. Democrats spend, Republicans tax, and those who are not too impressed with either the spending or the taxes have left both parties in droves. It wasn’t always so, and the greatest political and economic successes of each party have been the periods when the pattern was broken. The Coolidge prosperity combined drastic tax cuts with a freeze on federal spending; John Kennedy did the same in fiscal 1965. Recent events suggest that we are once again entering an era in which good economics will also be good politics.” – Alan Reynolds, reason, 12/78. - Territorial statists remain every hopeful, no matter how small their chances. – Ayn Rand imagined that good government and economics could be combined with territorialism. – Economics is always a matter for individuals and competing firms. – All party intervention, including taxation and territorial government spending, amounts to anti-economics. - JZ, 18.2.08. – ECONOMICS, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, AYN RAND


PARTIES: Governments of the parties, through the parties and for the parties. – JZ, 4.10.92. - REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, DEMOCRACY, RULERS TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: Helen Boyle, a Sydney Aboriginal activist, said trying to reform the ALP was ‘like trying to reform a crocodile from the inside.” …” - HONI SOIT, 3.6.86. – WORKING FROM THE INSIDE, FABIANISM, INFILTRATION, SUBVERSION

PARTIES: I always voted at my party’s call. // And I never thought of thinking for myself at all.” – W. S. Gilbert, 1836-1911. H.M.S. Pinafore. – JOKES – SELF-THINKING, SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, DISOBEDIENCE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-HELP

PARTIES: I am not opposed to all parties. On the contrary, I wish full exterritorial autonomy for all of them. I am only opposed to any territorial monopoly for any of them. - JZ, 5.11.02.

PARTIES: I have no obligation to choose between two wrongs. – George C. Wallace. – VOTING, FREE CHOICE & COMPETITION, FREE ENTERPRISE & CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY IN EVERY SPHERE

PARTIES: I have once or twice suggested that one or other political party, in order to demonstrate its complete ability to supplement the businessman and supply our every requirement, should write upon its banner the tempting slogan, “You have the baby, we do the rest.” – Sir Ernest Benn, The Need for Individualism, p.236 in a 1927 article in THE REVIEW OF REVIEWS (1 & 15 March, 13 April 1927.) – Compare the slogan: “Cradle to grave security”. One of our “great” labor politicians of the past (Gough Whitlam, once Australian Prime minister) came close to it, when he suggested that the citizens under him would only need some pocket money. All the rest would be paid for by the government. – That reminded me then of the inmates of our prisons, who do also only get something like pocket money, for their kind of “labor”, with all the rest paid for by the prison system, i.e., mainly by involuntary taxpayers, all of them directly or indirectly victims of these convicts. – I can’t say that they really enjoy this system and that thus they would vote for its indefinite continuance, given the chance. - JZ, 18.2.07, 25.1.11. BUSINESS, STATISM, WELFARE STATE

PARTIES: I lay my bets against all parties except the one which will do away with all parties by offering all of them full exterritorial autonomy and then abdicating, once this is achieved. – JZ, 8.11.75. – SELF-GOVERNANCE THROUGH VOLUNTARISM, COMPETITION, LAISSEZ FAIRE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM – IN EVERY SPHERE

PARTIES: I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men, whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.” – Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Francis Hopkinson, 1789. – INDIVIDUALISM, INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT & THINKING

PARTIES: I ought to point out how reckless in all countries becomes the rivalry of the great political parties which hope to obtain the good things that go under the name of office; the increasing deterioration of the people when invited on all hands to judge everything from one standpoint of their own immediate advantage.” – Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p.183. – Instead: Full self-responsibility under exterritorial autonomy or personal law for all communities of volunteers, all doing only their own things for or to themselves, at the own risk and expense. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: I would not vote for any party. - JZ, 3.5.74. - I must confess that I did not always stick to this good intention. But mostly I voted only when forced to do so and then, usually, only informally. - JZ, 25.1.11. - VOTING

PARTIES: If nothing else, the political parties should be arenas for promoting action and ideas. But they are so corrupted by prostitution to their backers and personal lust for power, that they are incapable of addressing any of the real problems in our society.” – Richard Cummings, Proposition 14, p.44. – Mostly they do not even seriously try. Usually because they have manly only false ideas, popular errors and prejudices in their heads. Their knowledge of or appreciation of individual rights and liberties and of the exterritorial autonomy alternative is very limited. – JZ, 23.3.08, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: If parties in a republic are necessary to secure a degree of vigilance to keep the public functionaries within the bounds of law and duty, at that point their usefulness ends.” - William Henry Harrison. - They, and the territorial system upon which they are based, have made possible the powerful and destructive careers of many bad men. Because men are flawed we cannot risk giving any of them TERRITORIAL power over others. Exterritorial powers given to them must be by volunteers prepared to be used and abused by their self-chosen leaders or gurus, as long as their victims are individually prepared to put up with this. - JZ, 11.10.02, 24.11.02, 7.3.09. - & TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM

PARTIES: In a remarkable volume of essays (*) by the late Sir Louis Mallet, it is argued that the only scientific political party which has ever attained prominence in this country was created and led by his friend and teacher, Mr. Cobden.” - Thomas Mackay, Empiricism in Politics. - (*) Free Exchange, by the late Right Hon. Sir Louis Mallet, Kegan Paul and Co., 1891. – The degree of free trade then introduced brought much progress but it was still incomplete and was thus finally done away with. It did not even bring fully free international trade and it did not include full monetary and financial freedom, either. Thus State Socialism or Feudalism grew again, to its present proportions everywhere. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: in passing through the web of personal ambitions and structural complexities that compose a political party the voice of the people is distorted beyond recognition.” – Jean Jordan Kirkpatrick, Dismantling the Parties, p.7. – Add too this the distortions occurring in the parliamentary struggles between xwz parties and factions within parliaments and then within the factions of ruling governments and their bureaucracies, which results largely in various degrees of feudalism or serfdom for the most of the diverse peoples in a country. – JZ, 13.12.13. - PEOPLE, DEMOCRACY, POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS AS USUAL, REPRESENTATION, LEGISLATION

PARTIES: In short, the players change but the game is always the same. … The choice is never between complete freedom and restriction of freedom. Political debates, when stripped of politicalese, always boil down to discussions of whose freedom should be increased or decreased and to what extent.” - Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p.63. – That should always be subject to individual decision-making on the own affairs only. – JZ, 17.2.08.

PARTIES: Individuals Against the Two Party System - Nizam Ahmad shared Individuals Against the Two Party System's photo. - John Zube : Individualists should organise against ALL territorialist parties. Full exterritorial autonomy to all parties, all their factions and their volunteers. That would be educational in ever case, for their members and volunteers as well as outside observers. Then they would keep each other in check like most of the churches and religious sectarians do. – Facebook, 6.3.13, 13.12.13. – POLITICAL ONES

PARTIES: It is in America that we see best how there takes place this process of the state power making itself independent in relation to society … we find two great gangs of political speculators, who alternatively take possession of the state power and exploit it by the most corrupt means and for the most corrupt ends – the nation is powerless against these two great cartels of politicians who are ostensibly its servants, but in reality dominate and plunder it.” – Engels, in his 1891 preface to The Civil War in France, quoted by Ralph Raico, JLS, Sum 77, p.180. - Such a trend is inevitably connected with territorialism. – However, even the worst two-party State is usually much better than any one-party State. - JZ, 17.2.08. - Unless, of course, it is an exterritorially autonomous government for its own volunteers only. - JZ, 25.1.11. - POWER, STATE & SOCIETY, POLITICIANS, CITIZENS, PEOPLE, PLUNDER, CORRUPTION, POLITICS AS USUAL – UNDER TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: it is of no consequence what the principles of any party, or what their pretensions are; the spirit which actuates all parties is the same, - the spirit of ambition, of self-interest, of oppression, and (of in another version! - JZ) treachery. This spirit entirely reverses all the principles, which a benevolent nature has erected within us; all honesty, all equal justice, and even the ties of natural society, the natural affections. – Parties in religion and politics make sufficient discoveries concerning each other to give a sober man a proper caution against them all.” – Edmund Burke, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.66. – Edmund Burke, A Vindication of Natural Society, p.57. - Only once they are confined to exterritorial autonomy, each for all its volunteers only, would they cease to be essentially wrongful political parties and become rightful and self-governing institutions. - JZ, 25.1.11. - TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: It makes not difference who you vote for – the two parties are really one party representing 4 percent of the people.” – Gore Vidal. – Is party membership in most countries still as large as 4%? – JZ, 13.12.13. - VOTING, REPRESENTATION, DEMOCRACY, POLITICIANS.

PARTIES: Judging merely by their membership, in comparison to the total population of adults, most political parties are very unrepresentative. As such they have more in common with lobbies or special interest groups than as representatives of all the voters. – JZ, 13.6.13. – POLITICIANS AS A LOBBY OR SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP, FEEDING ON THE PUBLIC TROUGH FED BY COMPULSORY TAXATION

PARTIES: Konkin … was asked, “Which Party, Republican or Democrat?” The answer: “Victim”. [The editor does not remember this, but it might have happened. SEK 3] – NEW LIBERTARIAN WEEKLY, Aug. 21, 77, p.5.

PARTIES: Let each party struggle only for the benefit of its own members and voters - and exclusively at their expense and risk. This would end all party struggles and replace them by (*) peaceful and non-coercive competition. - JZ, On Tolerance. – (*) rightful, - JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: Let parties rule - over their followers - but never over even a single non-aggressive dissenter. - JZ, 74.

PARTIES: Let party members and their voters tax themselves and spend the proceeds on their programs. Each group to autonomously run its own taxing and spending program, its own budget for its own purposes, its whole own system for itself, just like a church or sect, independent of the views of other believers or supposed experts and independent of the votes of others. If party leaders, followers and voters really believed in what their party, supposedly, has to offer, then they would explore and apply this system, for with it they could always win, as long as their party still has any followers, the exclusive rule over their own affairs. How ignorant and prejudiced they really are is demonstrated by their lack of interest in this freedom option. Like barbarians, they seem to prefer domination over dissenters, even at the bloody price of party despotism and revolutions and civil wars or of resistance through terrorism. - JZ 10.10.91, 13.1.93, 11.12.03, 13.12.13. - PANARCHISM, BUDGETS & TAXES, SELF-RULE FOR EACH PARTY

PARTIES: Let the Labour people have a Labour Party government, exclusively to themselves, and let the Liberal people have a Liberal Party government exclusively to themselves. - JZ, 74.

PARTIES: Let us hope that all the parties fold up. – JZ, 22.3.75.

PARTIES: Let us then, who have the great mistake, let us try to redeem it; let us show the people that there is a nobler, happier form of life than to live as two scrambling, quarrelling crowds, mad for their own immediate interests, void of all scruple or restraint. Let us shake ourselves free from this miserable party fighting; let us speak only in the name of the great rights, the great all-guiding, ever enduring principles; let us oppose the power of some men over other men, as a thing that is in itself morally untrue, untrue from every higher point of view, that is lese-majesté as regards all the best and noblest conceptions of what we are – being gifted with free responsible souls – as the source of hopeless confusion and scramble and injustice; …” - Auberon Herbert, Spencer and The Great Machine. - Alas, A. H., too, did not leave us his draft of a declaration of all the great individual rights and liberties and still believed in the possibility of a single territorial free nation, united by ideals that he had but that the statists do not share, at their stage of development. – That scramble and injustice is inseparately connected to territorialism. – If he had attempted his own draft, he would have noticed some disagreements even between him and H. S. - JZ, 18.2.08. – HUMAN RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, LIMITED GOVERNMENT

PARTIES: Let's turn the Labour Party, the Liberal Party, and all other parties into something like political churches, i.e., organizations for voluntary members and voluntary tax payers only. - JZ, 74.

PARTIES: liberty under faction democracy is utterly untenable.” – Richard Carlyle, The Earth Belongs to the Living, p.31. – DEMOCRACY, FACTIONS, TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: Look at the picture that you may see today in every country in Europe. Nations divided into two or three parties, which are again divided into several groups, facing each other like hostile armies, each party intent on humbling and conquering its rivals, in treading them under their feet, as a conquering nation crushes and tramples on the nation that it has conquered. What good, what happiness, what permanent progress of true kind can come out of that unnatural, denationalizing, miserable warfare? Why should you desire to compel others; why should you seek to have power – that evil, bitter, mocking thing, which has been from of old, as it is today, the sorrow and curse of the world – over your fellow-men and fellow women? Why should you desire to take from any man or woman their own will and intelligence, their free choice, their self-guidance, their inalienable rights over themselves; why should you desire to make of them mere tools and instruments for your own advantage and interest; …” – Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p. 315/16. - TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP, SUPPRESSION OF INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM, COLLECTIVE SOVEREIGNTY, POWER, NATIONALISM, NATIONAL UNITY, SELF-GOVERNANCES, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SELF-OWNERSHHIP, SELF-DETERMINATION

PARTIES: Millions of young people are leaving the political parties. In Gallup’s most recent poll of party preferences, most students expressed none. A historic 40 percent of the whole population are not members of any party, but “independent”. - Cornuelle, Demanaging America, p.143. – Above even a mere  4% are mentioned. The Nazis has only about 7 million party members and sometimes whole departments were “signed up” without their consent by their directors. In “elections” sometimes whole ballot boxes were replaced by others, prepared for this purpose by Nazis. – Thus it is doubtful that they ever reached even a temporary majority in any election. - JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: More freedom and opportunities for political parties - but no longer any tyrannical - because territorial, monopolistic and coercive power and domination options for them. - JZ, 8.12.03, 8.9.04, 19.9.04, 13.2.08. - PANARCHISM

PARTIES: Most of "party politics" and faction strife and personality cults will end once all parties and movements can freely become exterritorially autonomous. - JZ, 5.11.02.

PARTIES: Most parties cannot even rule themselves properly, honestly, without in-fighting. - JZ, 74.

PARTIES: Most parties should be honestly renamed. Here are a few suggestions: Wrongdoers’ Party, Parasites’ Party, Conmen’s Party, Robbers’ Party; Victimizer’s Party, Coercers’ Party, Big Brother’s Party, Tribute Party, Tax Party, Monopoly Party, Privilege Party, Lawyers’ Party, Corruption Party, Liars’ Party, Fools’ Party, etc. I’m am sure that others will have some better suggestions. – JZ, 5.5.91.

PARTIES: Most people approach politics from a partisan point of view. And if you challenge them, their reaction is very much like a religious reaction. Each party has a kind of catechism and there is a clannishness about them. Members of each party claim all virtues for their own position and for the elected representatives of their own party. Similarly, they contend that all members of another party are scoundrels who are betraying the country, the Constitution, or the American public.” (*) – Robert LeFevre, Lift Her Up, Tenderly, p.182/83. – (*) In this accusation all territorial parties are right about each other. – JZ, 25.2.08, 25.1.11.

PARTIES: Mostly only tiny fragments of the whole population, pretending that they can and will represent, between them, the whole population of a territory. – JZ, 13.6.13.

PARTIES: Multiple political parties are a fact of life throughout Europe and most of the West. Today the only countries without strong multiparty political systems are the United States and a number of third world military dictatorships. –Thomas H. NaylorSINGLE TO TWO-PARTY SYSTEMS VS. MULTIPLE PARTIES DEMOCRACIES

PARTIES: No matter how many parties you have, they are all fighting for the same thing – salary. You abolish salaries and you will abolish politics and taxes.” – Will Rogers. – If you leave political power intact you would still leave bribery, the monopoly to take up public debts, the power to force some large institutions to “buy” or invest in these certificates and the inflation-tax as an option for them. Moreover, as territorialists they would still be inclined to oppress us and lead us into wars, civil wars and violent revolutions. At least hypothetically they could also use e.g. their nuclear anti-people “weapons” to blackmail a whole country. – JZ, 24.3.08, 13.12.13. - POLITICIANS, OFFICES, POSITIONS, JOBS

PARTIES: No more parties, no more authority, absolute liberty of man and citizen – that is my political and social confession of faith.” – P. J. Proudhon, Confessions d’un révolutionaire, 1849. – No more party politics except party rule over party members only. No more authority except that unanimously supported by volunteers. Absolute liberty of men and citizens – if they want it or only as many liberties and rights as they do want for themselves - that is the political faith that I adopted from much better thinkers than myself. – JZ, 2.11.85, 24.3.08, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: No more party coalitions, leading to mutually compromised platforms and principles. Instead, exterritorial autonomy for all parties, all their factions and all their voluntary followers. – JZ, 4.9.87, 21.2.08 – Perhaps this overly large collection of quotes, notes and comments should be broken up, by major topics, into a number of gradually growing electronic books, compiled by Internet readers adding their quotes and comments? In this fashion a few dozen subjects could become covered rather fast. Each a WIKIPEDIA on its subject! – JZ, 14.3.09.

PARTIES: No more party coalitions, party strife, party conspiracies, party compromises or bending of principles in the interest of unity and power. Instead, exterritorial autonomy for all parties and all their followers. - JZ 4.9.87, 2.4.89.

PARTIES: No party does or can represent the whole population At best it can only represent and act for its voluntary members and voters, at their expense and risk only – while leaving all others alone. No present territorialist party is prepared to do that. They all want to dominate the rest of the population of a territory as well. To that extent all present political parties are wrong. – Trying to force a limited territorial government upon statists is wrong, too. – JZ, 4.10.98, 24.3.08. REPRESENTATION, LIBERTARIAN PARTY

PARTIES: No party is good enough to be granted any powers over others than its own members and voters and their tax contributions - and over those, who committed criminally aggressive acts against it or any of its voluntary members and voters or any of its institutions and services. - JZ, 20.6.92, 14.1.93, 8.9.04. PANARCHISM

PARTIES: No party or majority has the mandate to deprive any minority or any individual of any of their rights - and vice versa. - JZ, 75.

PARTIES: No sooner has one party discovered or invented an amelioration of the condition of man, or the order of society, than the opposing party belies it, misconstrues it, misrepresents it, ridicules it, insults it and persecutes it.” – John Adams: Letter to Thomas Jefferson, July 9, 1813. – Thus make each party exterritorially autonomous. – JZ, 3.11.85. – Then it need not argue any longer but could let its successes speak for themselves. – One should imagine that all parties would rush for this better “mouse trap”. But they are still foolish and prejudiced enough not to do so. If they have no real improvement platform then that is understandable. But if they really believe in certain reforms then that behavior is incomprehensible, for this method would be the fastest way for them to become successful for all their present and future supporters. They would only have to sacrifice their faith in territorialism, which only led them into permanent struggles, at great costs of money, time and energy to themselves, with never a chance for a permanent victory for themselves. – Their own territorialism is a Berlin Wall against their better options. - JZ, 24.3.08. – PANARCHISM, POPULAR ERRORS, PREJUDICE, WRONG ASSUMPTIONS, CONLUSIONS, FALLACIES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREE COMPETITION UNDER PERSONAL LW OR EXTRRIORIAL AUTONOMY TO SETTLE DIFFERENCES, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

PARTIES: No wonder the working man put no great trust in party government, for the two historical parties have both fleeced him with most impartial persistence.” – Dr. H. G. Pearce, in GOOD GOVERNMENT, in a review, summarizing a book. (Taylor, Working Classes in 600 Years, pp.505-506?)

PARTIES: Nor am I about to suggest that a third party offers anything in the way of a solution. What we have in America are competing groups of organized brigands, each with its own favourites and each with its own bête noir, engaged in sacking and looting the property and income of all for the benefit of some, and most notably for the benefit of those who hold office.” – Robert LeFevre, The Power of Congress. - All the problems of territorialism would remain. – Under the exterritorial autonomy and personal laws of voluntary communities there would always remain at least the sanction of the victims. They would always have only satisfied customers. - JZ, 18.2.08. - THIRD PARTIES, POLITICS, SANCTION OF THE VICTIMS, TERRITORIALISM & EXTERRITORIALITY, TAXATION, POLITICIANS, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW

PARTIES: Not suitable as a party-man. Who thinks much is not suitable as a party-man: he soon thinks himself out of the party.” – Friedrich Nietzsche. (Nicht geeignet zum Parteimann. Wer viel denkt, eignet sich nicht zum Parteimann: er denkt sich bald durch die Partei hindurch.) – SELF-THINKERS

PARTIES: Of necessity, the party man becomes a liar. … By a lie I mean wishing not to see something that one does see; wishing not to see something as one sees it. – The most common lie is that with which one lies to oneself; lying to others is relatively exceptional. Now this wishing not to see what one does see, the wishing not to see as one sees, is almost the first condition for all who are party in any sense: of necessity, the party man becomes a liar.” – Friedrich Nietzsche, quoted in Kaufmann, Without Guild & Justice. - LIES, DISHONESTY, SELF-DECEPTION

PARTIES: offering two bland candidates as a ‘choice’. No real issues are confronted, no real ideas proposed, no real questions answered.” - Richard Cummings, Proposition 14, p.120. - VOTING, POLITICIANS, CANDIDATES, REPRESENTATIVES, PARLIAMENTS, POLITICS TERRITORIALISM, DEMOCRACY

PARTIES: One of the absurdities at every election is that each party tries to get the largest number of people into office – who can then be blamed during the next election campaign. – JZ, 29.9.78. - ELECTION CAMPAIGNS, VOTING

PARTIES: One political party is very much like another, especially in office.” – Norman Ginsbury, Viceroy Sarah.

PARTIES: Only parties striving for exterritorial autonomy for their members and supporters do promote freedom and rights for all. – JZ, 3.11.85, 10.7.86, 24.3.08. – PANARCHISM

PARTIES: Our two-party system is a fraud, a sham, a delusion. On foreign policy, trade, immigration, Big Government, we have one-party government, one party press; and conservatives are being played for suckers.” – Patrick J Buchanan - TWO PARTY SYSTEM, DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS, ALL STATIST CONMEN, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS, POLITICS AS USUAL, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES, TERRITORIALISM, CENTRALIZATION

PARTIES: Panarchism means that all politicians and all parties could be in office, elected permanently into office - unless they blundered too much, even in the eyes of their own previous followers, who had seceded from them. - JZ 3.11.90. - POLITICIANS & PANARCHIES, POLYARCHIES, VOLUNTARISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY & FREE ENTERPRISE COMPETION, IN EVERY SPHERE, FULL FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, SECESSION, CONTRACT, EXPERIMENTATION, SO FAR SUPPRESSED BY TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: Parallel governments with labor politicians for labor voters and liberal politicians for liberal voters – JZ, 12.10.74. – And to all others their own choices as well! – This way everybody would win genuine self-government options for himself. - JZ, 17.2.08. – PANARCHISM, PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, VOTING, ELECTIONS.

PARTIES: Parties allowed to command others than their own members and voters are as wrong and absurd as e.g. the allowing majority of consumers to command all the rest what to consume, how much of each item and when and where to consume it. – JZ, 25.8.98, 24.3.08, 21.4.08, 25.1.11. - TERRITORIALISM & ITS COMPULSION VS. EXTERRITORIAL VOLUNTARISM & INDIVIDUAL CHOICES, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY

PARTIES: Parties always treat the country and the people too much as their personal property, their natural resources, to be exploited by them at their discretion. - JZ, 74. – PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM

PARTIES: Parties are either already legalized robber bands or gangs that aspire to that powerful position. – JZ, 5.7.80. – GANGSTERS, ORGANIZED CRIME, CRIME SYNDICATES, LEGALIZED MAFIA GROUPS

PARTIES: Parties are not the answer and cannot be. They just continue in the internal sphere what externally leads to nuclear war. They are also pushing for wars when their kind of people are suppressed in other countries. - They do not offer services to willing buyers but are engaged in power games, planning for aggressions, oppressions and exploitation and engaging in it whenever they get the chance. Territorialism gives them that chance. They, combined with the territorial system, guarantee that the world population remains coercively organized in antagonistic groups, Warfare States, that either the majority or minorities will be more or less oppressed. They are unable to harmonize interests and to coexist quite peacefully in the long run. Their compromises are at best temporary expedients, which do not settle anything and continue to antagonize all concerned. They play zero-sum games rather than win-win games. - Parties will cease to be parties for more or less bloody civil or external wars and become harmoniously and peacefully coexisting organizations only once their powers become confined to their own members and voters, once one can escape their sphere of influence and power as easily after they have gained political power than before: when one can at any time - in case of aggression - or, otherwise, at least after a giving notice, secede from one’s governments unilaterally, individually, without thereby endangering a single of one's individual human rights and liberties. - Let parties freely rule - but only over their members and followers - but not ever over a single non-aggressive dissenter. - Under panarchism every party would win in every election: full exterritorial autonomy for itself and its voters. – JZ, An ABC Against Nuclear War, in PEACE PLANS Nos. 16 & 17, - - Revised: 25.1.11, 13.12.13. - EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, COEXISTENCE, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, LAISSEZ FAIRE, LAWS, LEADERSHIP, MAJORITY, MINORITY AUTONOMY, NATIONALISM, PARLIAMENTARISM,  POLITICIANS, POWER, REFERENDUMS, SECESSION, SOVEREIGNTY, TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION, VOLUNTARISM, VOTING- POLITICAL PARTIES

PARTIES: Parties are only good for partying and for parting you from your individual rights, liberties, earnings and wealth. – They can always, as territorial parties, represent only particular interests and not the general interest, the public interest of the common interest, because each of them interprets these differently, honestly or in its own special interest. - JZ, 28.11.93, 13.12.13. – REPRESENTATION, LIES, FALSE PRETENCES

PARTIES: Parties are too busy obstructing each other to become constructive experimenters. - JZ, 74. - Apart from the cases in which they do wrongfully force their flawed experiments upon the population of a whole country. Then they construct the modern types of costly , wrongful and useless "pyramids". - JZ, 25.1.11, 13.12.13. - TERRITORIALISM VS. EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

PARTIES: Parties are very small fractions of Politics, and can not only be dispensed with, a sustained attack on them will bring more libertarians into more productive political activities. – The LP only pursues votes, eschewing the other 57 varieties of political activity. That leaves a lot of avenues remaining unexplored.” – SEK 3, NEW LIBERTARIAN NOTES, # 23, July 1973. - In PEACE PLANS 20 I suggested ca. 1000 libertarian projects. Probably tens of thousands exist that are worthwhile but they are not yet publicly listed to invite the widest possible participation in them. – JZ, 17.2.08. – LIBERTARIAN ENLIGHTENMENT & ACTION PROJECTS, LIBERTARIAN PROJECTS LIST, NEW DRAFT, LIBERTARIAN LIBRARY, ABSTRACTS, REVIEWS, IDEAS ARCHIVE, ENCYLOPEDIA, NEW DRAFT

PARTIES: Parties at most benefit their members and voters - at the expense of all others. They do prevent all the progress that could have occurred without party rule. Their dependence upon numbers assures that the most wide-spread prejudices largely determine their platform. - JZ, 14.7.87, 2.4.89. - Territorial parties could become rightful and useful parties only by becoming exterritorially autonomous parties for all their followers. - JZ, 12.12.03. - Just look at the "intellectual" level of their electioneering slogans. To entrust any powers over dissenters to people wooing the majority of voters with as primitive and incomplete notions is quite immoral, irrational and irresponsible. - JZ, 19.9.04. – DEMAGOGUERY, RHETHORIK, SLOGANS, FALSE FLAG PRINICIPLE & PRACTIC, PREJUDICES, POPULLA ERRORS, MYTHS, TERRITORIAL, VS. EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS PARTIES

PARTIES: Parties exist not because there are two sides to every question, but because there are two sides to every office – an outside and an inside.” – Anon. – Bingham, Men and Affairs, p.25.

PARTIES: Parties have not only party fights between them but also faction and leadership fights within them, all mainly caused by the power struggle inherent in territorialism. Not all of them are carried out publicly and not all of them are mere personality clashes. – To each party, party faction and aspiring leader the option of his own panarchy. Then they should be able to live in peace with each other, in peaceful and tolerant coexistence, merely competing with each other for more members or to retain their old ones. – JZ, 21.7.87, 22.2.08. – FACTION FIGHTING, PARTY FIGHTING, TERRITORIALISM, POWER GAMES, LEADERSHIP STRUGGLES

PARTIES: Parties in Australia need between $ 40 to 100 million dollars to run themselves between elections. – Mentioned in a radio interview on 24.1995. - Could they raise that much in membership fees from their usually rather small membership? I doubt it. – JZ, 24.3.08. - CORRUPTION, LOBBIES, VESTED INTERESTS

PARTIES: Parties in religion and politics make sufficient discoveries concerning each other, to give a sober man a proper caution against them all.” – Edmund Burke, A Vindication of Natural Society, p.53.

PARTIES: Parties is the madness of many for the gain of a few.” – Alexander Pope – CONSENT OF THE VICTIMS

PARTIES: Parties offer only the choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledummer.” – Source?

PARTIES: Parties only argue on how much they are to tax us, in what ways and how to spend this loot – not whether they have the right at all to tax us and to spend “for us” in the first place, without our individual consent to each tax and each budget item. – JZ, 17.6.87, 24.3.08. – Imagine what would happen if all our shopping were done in this way. – JZ, 13.12.13. – CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY & FREE COMPETITION IN EVERY SPHERE – UNDER FULL MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM

PARTIES: Parties to act and rule only for and upon their own followers and at their own expense and risk. - JZ, 11.8.91.

PARTIES: Parties to act only for and at the expense and risk of their voluntary members and voters. Each to establish a one-party State, quite autonomous, but this only exterritorially. Then they would become something like secular, voluntaristic, autonomous and exterritorial churches, each with its own voluntaristic constitution, laws, jurisdiction, administration, taxation and policing and penal system. - JZ 18.12.92, 4.1.93.

PARTIES: Parties to rule only over and act only upon their own followers and subscribers. In that sphere they should be fully autonomous, as long as they let their dissatisfied members withdraw or secede freely from them. One-party rule for all, and all only by individual choice, and for all kinds of parties, all in the same territory or all over the world. – JZ, 11.8.91, 20.2.08. – Until YOU express this much better I will simply keep trying. – JZ, 13.12.13. - PANARCHISM, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT, INDEPENDENCE, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY

PARTIES: Parties today, as ever before, are war-makers, not cooperative or self-managing enterprises, as they should be. - JZ, 74. – As long as they are territorialists they are warriors rather than peace makers, upholding Warfare States rather than freely and peacefully coexisting and competing societies and communities of volunteers, including also statist ones, as long as they find any such sovereign consumers and voluntary victims. – As long as their numerous and various dissenters remain also territorialists, they will mainly struggle against each other and dominated by whichever party or coalition does temporarily rule in a whole country, i.e. over the population, consenters and dissenters alike, an inherently wrongful and irrational arrangement. - JZ, 13.12.13. – TERRITORIALISM FAVOURS CENTRALIZATION VS. TERRITORIALIST OPPOSITION PARTIES & MOVEMENTS

PARTIES: Parties, as mere parts of the whole (*), should never be granted the constitutional, legal and juridical power to dominate a whole territory and all its population – but, instead, merely themselves and their own voters, then also becoming their voluntary members or subjects. – JZ, 6.6.89, 24.3.08. - (*) A fictitious whole, too, merely seemingly unified through the occupation of the same territory. – JZ, 24.3.08. - An older version: Parties, as mere parts of the whole, should never be given the legal and constitutional chance to dominate the whole - but merely themselves and their own voters, as long as their members and voters can stand it. - JZ 6.6.89, 4.7.89.

PARTIES: Party divisions, whether on the whole operating for good or evil, are things inseparable from free governments.” – Edmund Burke: Observations on a Late State of the Nation, 1769. – They are only inseparable from territorial governments, wrongly called in in some cases “free” governments. They are all too free or liberal with the rights and liberties of all too many of their subjects. All governments and non-governmental societies and communities should, instead, be subject to the free choices of their sovereign consumers and signed up customers. – JZ, 3.11.85, 10.7.86, 24.3.08, 13.12.13. – PANARCHISM, FREE CHOICE, CONTRACTS, MEMBERSHIP, COMPETITON, ASSOCIATION & EXPERIMENTATION IN EVERY SPHERE FOR INDIVIDUALS & MINORITIES AS WELL AS THE TEMPORARY MAJORITIES

PARTIES: Party is the madness of many for the gain of a few.” – Jonathan Swift, 1667-1745, Thoughts on Various Subjects, 1712. - Andrews Quotes, p.376. - Party is the madness of the many, for the gain of a few. – To which may be added, There are honest men in all parties, wise men in none: Unless those may be call’d wise, for whose profit they rest are mad. – POOR RICHARD, 1748. - Party is the madness of the many for the gain of a few. – Alexander Pope, Thoughts on Various Subjects. - Sometimes mistakenly ascribed to Swift. - “Party spirit, which at best is but the madness of many for the gain of a few.” – Yes, under territorialism. Under voluntarism, personal laws and panarchism each could come to be ruled by the party that he prefers for himself. – JZ, 18.2.08. - “Die Partei ist der Wahn vieler zum Nutzen weniger.” - Pope

PARTIES: Party loyalty lowers the greatest men to the petty level of the masses.” - La Bruyére, Characters, 1688, 11.63. – True for territorialist parties. Untrue for exterritorialist ones. – Only in the latter would they be free to lead only the already converted followers in the direction desired by all of their voluntary members. – JZ, 24.3.08, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: Party members usually constitute only a small minority in any State. And yet the territorial system allows them to gain power over the rest. The same applies even within each political party: A handful of members dominate all the rest. – JZ, 17.2.08. – Under full experimental freedom most parties would themselves refute most of the points of their party programs as wrongful, irrational and counter-productive. Experimental freedom has a enlightening results. Only the own program and actions can then be blamed by them, not arbitrarily picked scape goats and supposed conspirators or open enemies. Their volunteers will have to face their own errors and mistakes, especially when they are surrounded by some successful other communities and societies. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: party politics is self-serving and deceptive – and paid for by working people.” – Karl Hess, Dear America, p. 87.

PARTIES: Party spirit enlists a man’s virtues in the cause of his vices.” – Richard Whately, quoted in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations.

PARTIES: Party struggles are to a people what change is to the hod carrier, as he shifts his hod from one shoulder to the other, a temporary but not a genuine relief.” – Max Nordau, Conventional Lies of Civilization. - ELECTIONS, VOTING, DEMOCRACY, POLITICS AS USUAL

PARTIES: Party victories for all parties and without the need for election campaigns and majority approval. - Party Power – over Party People only! - Party Programs – for all their own Party People! - Pick your Party but for your life only! – JZ, n.d., from Pan AZ.

PARTIES: Party work is a waste of time, energy and money – unless you want to join the ranks of the exploiters and oppressors. – JZ, 5.12.83.


PARTIES: Party-zeal is the madness of man to the advantage of a few.” – JZ rough re-translation of the German version: “Parteiwut ist die Tollheit vieler zum Nutzen weniger.” – Pope, Gedanken ueber verschiedene Gegenstaende.”

PARTIES: Political parties are machines of and for corruption, exploitation and oppression – under different names and with different pretences, premises and articles of faith. – JZ, 6.11.96.

PARTIES: Political parties are only temporary military (*) structures designed to mobilize and herd people into voting booths for the sake of victory. We have known for years that we have no consistent explanation for our dedication to a two-party system, and we are mired in the contradictions it thrusts upon us. We fear the one-party system for the same reason we fear economic monopoly; given our addiction to hierarchy, we assume that any field of endeavor dominated by a single organization will trap us within authoritarianism.” - Frederick C. Thayer, An End to Hierarchy! An End to Competition! Organizing the Politics and Economics of Survival. – New Viewpoints, N.Y. 1973, p. 119. – Compare the hatred against Microsoft, reinforced every time we encounter trouble with its patented software, upon which all too many of us have largely become dependent. - (*) militant? – JZ, 26.3.09. – I changed over to a compromise between Apple and Microsoft two years ago. – JZ, 13.12.13. – DEMOCRACY, MAJORITIES, VOTING, POLITICS AS USUAL, TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: Political parties are usually only tiny parts of a territorial population. Nevertheless, they wish to rule the whole of it. To that extent they are wrong. By rights they should only be free to rule over their own subscribers and voters. All have to give up their wrongful territorial ambitions and power addiction. Then they can come to rule as long as they want to - but only over their followers, as long as they can manage to have any. A panarchist party would not attempt to rule all people and all their parties in a territory but, instead, it would only aim at giving all the other parties a chance to rule their own members. Therefore it could become a powerful coalition of all other parties, one influential enough to achieve this fundamental change-over from territorial domination to exterritorial autonomy for all. – Then, as a national party it could retire, for it would have achieved its aim. However, for a while it might still continue to operate, in order to achieve the same change in all other countries for their diverse populations, movements and aspirations, to help finally their populations to finally achieve between them, peace, freedom and justice on Earth, step by step, to the extent that individuals become interested in their rights and liberties and wish to practise them among like-minded people in their own panarchies, polyarchies, multi-archies, societies, communities or governance systems. - JZ, 21.8.12. – PERSONAL LAW, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, POWER ADDICTION, LEADERSHIP

PARTIES: Political parties exists for the benefit of their office holders, while they are hoodwinking their members and voters into believing that they can get what they want through the process of party politics. Sometimes their voters even get a privilege as a result, at the expense of the general population. – JZ, 23.4.89, 23.2.08.

PARTIES: political parties that argue merely the cost of programs or institutions founded on state power.” – Karl Hess, Death of Politics, p.5. – PROGRAMS, BUDGETS, GOVERNMENT POWER & COERCION

PARTIES: Power politics is the politics of group warfare, of ‘factious spirit’, to use Madison’s term. And the eternal casualty of this factious spirit is the individual.” – Meera Badhwar, THE FREEMAN, 10/74. – POWER, FACTIONS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARTIES: Public funding for parties means, among other things, that we are taxed in order to put one or the other type of people in power over us – to tax us and otherwise misrule us, ever more! Few, if any, tax or spending proposals of the present parties would be passed in a referendum, i.e., they have no such general mandate. – JZ, 3.2.82. - It is bad enough that party policies and party politics and election costs are forced upon us as tax payers. Now political parties want to be completely funded by taxpayers, as if they provided really wanted public services to others than their members and voluntary supporters. I favor “only” their complete exterritorial autonomy – for them and all their volunteers. Then they would be supported by all the members of their voluntary communities, societies or “competing and voluntary governments” all without any territorial monopoly. - It is astonishing enough that in a country like Switzerland even some tax proposals are decided and passed by referendum. Apparently, the statism of the politicians there does not exceed the statism of the majority of the population, so they find enough consenting victims. - JZ, 25.2.08. - PUBLIC FUNDING FOR PARTIES

PARTIES: public liberty under any political party is not safe. – Richard Carlyle, The Earth Belongs to the Living, p.34.

PARTIES: Rather than splitting a country and its population into parties and their wards, their civil wars, their log rolling and unsatisfactory compromises, let each party form an exterritorially autonomous "country" or body for protective association and cooperative experimentation of its own, with voluntary members only and living under their own personal law and institutions, societies and communities, even States – but for their statists onlly. - JZ, 21.8.92, 4.1.93, 13.12.13. - Parties are so foolish or so criminal that they haven't aimed at this already long ago! - JZ, 8.9.04. - PARTY RULE, DEMOCRACY

PARTIES: Real democracy through overcoming the monopoly of political parties.” – Heinz Peter Neumann, 5.12.86.  “Wirkliche Demokratie durch Ueberwindung des Parteienmonopols.”) Alas, he probably never really and fully understood that this can be achieved only under the free competition of exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, not under any territorial monopoly for any part, or party coalition. – Insofar I have failed to make this quite clear to him. He used to be my lecturer and one of my bosses and was a kind of libertarian and tolerant follower of Silvio Gesell. - JZ, 24.3.08.

PARTIES: Remember, the party, which serves you best, is the one that costs you less! – John Curvers, in election leaflet, 1976. – We should also be free to decide our own affairs without the “benefits” of any party, paying our way for what we prefer, possibly with our own monetary and financial system as well. A life without territorial statism an its parties and without a commitment to any ideological or religious system, as sovereign producers, exchangers and consumers, with laissez-faire, free competition, freedom of contract, experimentation and association in every sphere. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: Revolutionary parties are no remedy against oppression, but themselves equally tyrannical. – View ascribed to Godwin in: John Bowle, Politics and Opinion in the 19th Century, 139.

PARTIES: Ruling parties rarely ever rule in favor of individual rights but they can be relied upon to rule in favor of the ruling party. – Noted while listening to a parliamentary “debate”. – JZ, 13.3.86.

PARTIES: Since the need for office holders is too small to fit all applicants, the eternal struggle is: who will push the other ones out? Fundamentally, they are split into two parties: Those who are in and those who are out.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1810, but only in my re-translation from the German version. – JZ - POLITICIANS, POWER ADDICTS, TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: So far all of them provided merely candidates and platforms for territorial exploitation and despotism over dissenters. All their powers must become reduced to rule over their own volunteers and voters only. This kind of experimental freedom and tolerance would tend to enlighten them while territorial powers do keep them ignorant, prejudiced, corrupt, coercive, fraudulent, exploitative and abusive, in spite of “free elections” and parliaments of “representatives”. – JZ, 21.10.07. – Free competition even between the various constitutionalists, World State and World Federation advocates. – JZ, 13.12.13. - POLITICAL, DEMOCRACY, DESPOTISM, TERRITORIALISM, COMPETITIVE COSMOPOLITANISM AS WELL

PARTIES: socialism had come to be an article of faith with most of the major political parties.” – INDIAN LIBERTARIAN, May 75. – STATE SOCIALISM

PARTIES: Some party followers hold the flag of their party so high that they no longer notice the change of its color.” – Lothar Schmidt. (JZ tr. of: “Manche Parteianhaenger halten die Fahne ihrer Partei so hoch, dass sie einen Wechsel der Farbe nicht mehr bemerken.“) - JOKES


PARTIES: Territorial party politics is no substitute for ethics, wisdom, knowledge and competence. It does not represent consumer sovereignty in its sphere, no matter how loudly it protests that it does or asserts that it would represent the whole population or would have its consent or its mandate. All such assertions are mere fictions, applicable, at most, to a fleeting majority, rarely ever to a majority on any particular point of its platform or its actions while in power. – JZ, 25.8.98, 24.3.08.

PARTIES: Territorial political parties at most benefit their leaders, members and voters – at the expense of all others and do prevent all the kinds of progress that would have occurred without party rule. – JZ, 14.7.87, 21.2.08. – PANARCHISM, PARTY RULE, TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: Territorialist parties can represent freedom at most for their members, followers and voters but never for their opponents. As the very name says, they are only parts of the whole but, due to territorialism, they want to dominate the rest, too. That makes them essentially wrong. – JZ, 10.10.95, 24.3.08.

PARTIES: Territorialist parties do not offer sound alternatives but just more of the same. – JZ, 19.9.88, 24.3.08.

PARTIES: Territorialist parties hide their inevitable inherent factional dissent behind meaningless generalities and worthless compromises, i.e., more or less by fraud present a “united front” towards most of their members and voters and towards most of their opponents. If they quite clearly stated that their own ideals would be applied by them only to their own volunteers, then they would not have to engage in any lies but would just have to consistently work towards the realization of that quite tolerant and tolerable platform. – JZ, 1.10.88, 24.3.08. – FACTIONALISM, UNITED FRONT, COMPROMISES, DISHONESTY, SECRECY, RATHER THAN FULL PUBLICITY

PARTIES: Territorialist parties represent the politics of power, obstruction and coercion, misdirection and death. Only communities of volunteers, limited to personal laws and exterritorial autonomy represent all the possibilities of life, progress, peace, liberty, rights and tolerance, in all their varieties. – JZ, 13.6.83, 17.2.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, TOLERANCE, DIVERSITY, EXTERRITORIALITY

PARTIES: The appeals of all parties during this period have been fundamentally identical. They all amount to this: ‘What are your troubles? Vote for us and we will find somebody else to pay for putting them right.” – Sir Ernest Benn, speech, 27.1.1931, in Deryck Abel, Ernest Benn, Counsel for Liberty, p. 158 – POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, WELFARE STATE, TAXATION, TRANSFER SOCIETY, VOTING, PROGRAMS, PROMISES

PARTIES: The best Party is but a kind of Conspiracy against the rest of the Nation.” – George Savile, Marquess of Halifax, Lord Halifax, 1633-1695. - The Complete Works of George Savile, First Marquess of Halifax, 1912, 225, in Seldes & in A. Andrews Quotations, p.333. – Unless panarchy is its aim. Then it might liberate all parts of the nation in accordance with their own ideals. – JZ, 26.2.08. - The best party is nothing but a kind of conspiracy against the rest of the nation. … Ignorance allows people to join a party and shame prevents them from leaving it again.” – Halifax (JZ retranslation from: “Die beste Partei ist nichts als eine Art von Verschwoerung gegen den Rest der Nation. ... Unwissenheit laesst Menschen in eine Partei eintreten und Scham haelt sie davon ab, die Partei wieder zu verlassen.”) – I rather hold that prejudices, envy, greed and power-lust makes them mostly join and stay, all too uncritical of it. – JZ, 24.2.08. - TERRITORIALISM VS. VOLUNTARISM & PANARCHISM

PARTIES: The Conservative Party must give the country a clear choice between individualism and collectivism, competition and monopoly, enterprise and bureaucracy, growth and stagnation.” – Dr, Rhodes Boyson, ed., Goodbye to Nationalization, p.11.

PARTIES: The consummate politician (read “statesman”) is the man who can fool most of the people most of the time. Since Sir Robert Menzies, the best we can hope for are men who can fool most of the people at election time. … As a general rule, politicians perform best when avoiding the fundamental issue, (*) which, in Australian politics is: that there are no fundamental differences between the parties.” – Mark Tier, Tweedledum & Tweedledummy. - (*) Almost all fundamental issues! – They always avoid the most fundamental issue: Should there be territorial politics at all or should all of us have all exterritorial autonomy options, together with like-minded volunteers? - JZ, 17.2.08. – PERSONAL LAW, COMPETING SOCIETIES, COMMUNITIES & GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS

PARTIES: The country runs in spite of parties. In fact, parties are the biggest handicaps we have to contend with.” – Will Rogers, The Autobiography of Will Rogers, 1949, p.13. – If they merely existed, like e.g. sects, they would be tolerable. But they do tax us and do something to us with the money they have taken from us, without our consent, against our rights, liberties and interest and under the pretence that they would do something for us. Thus not their mere existence but their usual activities wrong and harm us. – JZ, 24.3.08.

PARTIES: The fate of parties is determined by those, who are not party members.” – Lothar Schmidt („Das Los der Parteien wird von den Parteilosen bestimmt.“) –– Actually, parties are only one of the many wrongful and unpleasant consequences of territorialism. In search for the lesser evils among parties, at most one (or a coalition of evil parties) gets to mis-rule a country for a while. – Party-members do usually constitute only a small fraction of the voters. - JZ, 24.2.08. ) - VOTING, ELECTIONS PARTY-MEMBERSHIP

PARTIES: the folly of supposing that the party in possession of the ballot box and the physical country could be successfully resisted by an appeal to reason, truth, justice, or the obligations imposed by the constitution.” - John C. Calhoun, A Disquisition on Government, C. G. Post edition, p.26. - RULING TERRITORIALLY, TERRITORIALISM VS. VOLUNTARISM, CONSTITUTIONALISM, ENLIGHTENMENT

PARTIES: The greatest of all doctrinal errors, as Tucker saw it, was to become confused as to the basic character of political power. As Proudhon had warned, the attempt to use organized political power for good ends must inevitably result in failure, for the means one chooses to attain any given goal always condition the outcome of the overall situation. Organized power, since it is fundamentally authoritarian in character, can only result in a further growth of authoritarianism. This was why Tucker insisted that labor tread on dangerous ground when it began to think in terms of organized force and political power. The tendency of labor to mobilize its force for a showdown in the political arena, he warned, is a most disastrous decision that can only lead away from a true social revolution.” – Reichert, Partisans of Freedom. A Study in American Anarchism, p.173. - However, one should distinguish between the politics of volunteers and those of compulsory territorial rulers and subjects, or, between exterritorial autonomy and territorial domination, between personal laws and institutions and those territorially imposed, between voluntary taxation and compulsory taxation, organizations that permit secession and those that don’t. – JZ, 25.2.08. - POWER POLITICS, PANARCHISM, MEANS & ENDS, POLYARCHISM, AUTHORITARIANISM, GOVERNMENT, DOMINATION, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, ANARCHISM, TRADE UNIONS, LABOR MOVEMENT, CENTRALIZATION

PARTIES: the highest morality in sight among them is: Get the votes.” – Rose Wilder Lane, July 1948, Economic Council Review of Books. – VOTING, ELECTIONS

PARTIES: the inconsistency of what is said and done by each party, when acting as government or as opposition, and the hypocrisy that is begotten while they serve their own interests under the cloak of the interests of the people.” – Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p.183. – PUBLIC INTEREST, COMMON INTEREST

PARTIES: The Labor Party for labor people, the Liberal Party for liberals! – JZ, 3.5.74. – Only! JZ, 17.2.08.

PARTIES: The Labor people deserve a Labor government, the Liberals a Liberal government. Exterritorially both could have the government of their dreams at the same time and in the same country. That should be enough and a just punishment for both of them. – JZ, 15.3.93. - Self-government should even be applied to the defeated parties. They should not just be given a minor role as "loyal" and obedient opposition. - Why should the defeated parties be deprived of self-government? - JZ, 13.10.04. That means turning politics into conquests, domination and oppression. – JZ, 13.2.08. – Q., SELF-GOVERNMENT, EACH POLITICAL PARTY TO BECOME EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS FOR ITS OWN MEMBERSHIP & VOTERS

PARTIES: The League of Nations has suffered, at least in this country, from the absence of criticism. Modern political parties, knowing nothing whatever of principles, and devoted to the practice of the most degrading opportunism, have accepted the League at its face value.” – Ernest Benn, Modern Government, p.228. – That is the state of “mind” to which political parties become reduced under territorialism. – JZ, 24.3.08. – TERRITORIALISM, LEAGUE OF NATIONS, PRINCIPLES

PARTIES: The Liberal Party is by far not liberal (*) enough and the Labor Party is by far not socialistic (*) enough. – (*) when both terms are taken in their best, not their worst sense. – JZ, 1.7.95, 24.3.08.

PARTIES: The liberals have long forgotten what liberalism means and the laborites never knew what is really good for labor. – JZ, 5.3.82.

PARTIES: The Liberals know almost nothing and Laborites know even less. Both compete on who will manage to learn the least while in government. – JZ, 7.3.83, 17.2.08.

PARTIES: The Liberals make me sick and Labor is simply sickening. – JZ, 27.11.75.

PARTIES: The main thing that every political campaign in the United States demonstrates is that the politicians of all parties, despite their superficial enmities, are really members of one great brotherhood. Their principal, and, indeed, their sole object is to collar public office, with all the privileges and profits that go therewith. They achieve this by collaring, by buying votes with other people’s money. – H. L. Mencken in  - & POLITICIANS

PARTIES: The major political parties engage in advertising conventions known as election campaigns and compete with each other in the business of promising favors to some people at the expense of others.” – Workers Party paper: Government is a Wealth Hazard, 1975.

PARTIES: The militant workers of the Confederation and the Anarchist Federation of Iberia (F.A.I.) (*) were branded asbandits with a membership cardby the Socialists.” – Albert Meltzer, A New World in our Hearts, p.19. – Not a bad term for almost if not all political parties. Even the US LP strives for territorial rule, i.e. an exclusive monopoly for its kinds of “limited government” policies over the whole population, although this population is still largely made up of one kind or the other of statists, not only other territorialists. – JZ, 25.2.08. - (*) To the extent that they simply wanted to expropriate they deserved this term. But then every political party or movement so far, wants to operate on the basis of compulsory taxation, a gradualist form of expropriation, that keeps its victims working for these robbers. – JZ, 25.2.08. – LP, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, LIMITED LEGALIZED CRIMES OR MONOPOLIES, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, TAXATION, EXPROPRIATION, COMPULSION & LEGISLATION VS. VOLUNTARISM, CHOICE, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PARTIES: The more you read about politics, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other.” – Will Rogers, A Rogers’ Thesaurus. – Another version: The more you read and observe about this Politics thing, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other. - Will Rogers, 1879-1935, The Illiterate Digest, 1924. - The one that’s out always looks the best. – Will Rogers, “Breaking into the Writing Game”, THE ILLITERATE DIGEST, 1924. –– Is something else to be expected under territorial politics, which permits the winning party to rule over the affairs of the other parties and their followers? – JZ, 10.9.07. - & POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, JOKES

PARTIES: The nest of office being too small for all of them to cuddle into at once, they contest is eternal which shall crowd the other out. For this purpose, they are divided into two parties, the Ins and the Outs.” – Thomas Jefferson. – This, too, applies only to territorial power systems, not to voluntary communities that are only exterritorially autonomous. In this form each party can remain permanently in the saddle – but only over its own volunteers. – JZ, 18.2.08. – RIDING THE COUNTRIES’ HERDS, INSTEAD OF EACH ONLY RIDING ITS OWN HERD

PARTIES: The old parties are husks, with no real soul within either, divided on artificial lines, boss-ridden and privilege-controlled, each a jumble of incongruous elements, and neither daring to speak out wisely and fearlessly what should be said on the vital issues of the day.” – Theodore Roosevelt: Speech before the National Convention of the Progressive Party, Chicago, Aug. 6, 1912. – How often have leaders of new parties said similar things, quite truthfully, about old parties, only to become later similarly and rightly accused? Let all of them become automatically purified by voluntary secessionism, personal laws and exterritorial autonomy, thus, essentially, by complete voluntarism, except in their defensive treatment of criminals with victims and other aggressors against them. – JZ, 3.11.85, 24.3.08. – Most of the new political parties were not any better. All are still territorialists and as such monopolistic, power-hungry, coercive and wrong. – JZ, 7.3.09. – The same is true for all newer parties, as long as they are all territorialists. – JZ, 15.1.13. – The Tea Parties, too, represent such a jumble. – JZ, 13.12.13. - PARTY POLITICS AS USUAL, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

PARTIES: The only object of party is power. To get it or to preserve it, is [the party’s] only possible motive. Anything that would bring power, or perpetuate it, is always unhesitatingly and unscrupulously resorted to, and anything that would hazard it, is shunned with instinctive dread.” – N. P. Rogers, Politics, in Miscellaneous Writings, 1849, p.264, quoted in Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.39. - POWER

PARTIES: The party in power has never more than a precarious possession of it.” – Beaulieu, The Modern State, p.102. – In form of a panarchy, a community of volunteers, only exterritorially autonomous, it could continue safely and indefinitely, as long as it has still any voluntary members. Maybe some of the existing parties will realize this fact - one day. – JZ, 24.3.08. - But don't hold your breath till then. They are VERY slow learners. However, they have looked after their pension "rights", even after only short periods of "service" and, usually, at the expense of the taxpayers, too. - JZ, 24.1.11.

PARTIES: The party system, its frustrations, conspiracies and civil wars are all caused by territorialism. - JZ, 21 January 99. - Name the party, if any, which has recognized this inherent flaw by now! - JZ, 8.9.04. - None of their "research" departments has cared about this aspect. As territorialists they all take it for granted, as natural and unavoidable. - JZ, 19.9.04. - As yet, to my knowledge, none of them criticizes territorialism. - JZ, 24.1.11. – Apart from some small groups with their Facebook pages. – JZ, 13.12.13. - TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: The people can be of a Blanquist, Mazzinian or Garibaldian party, that is to say of a party where one believes, where one conspires, where one fights; they are never of a party where one reasons and thinks.” – Proudhon, in George Woodcock, Proudhon, p.230.

PARTIES: The political interests of most people are too small and superficial to allow any party to really involve most people in party politics and to allow a popular or public opinion revision of the basic principles of each party. They will cheer for one or the other party merely on the same level as they cheer for one team or the other in ball games or for one or the other fighter in a ring. – JZ, 21.11.82, 17.2.08. – On the Internet, theoretically, the flaws of each party’s platform and actions could be thoroughly criticized – but who will make use of that information? Something might be achieved if, before every election, all the parties are fully informed about the weaknesses of their opponent’s ideas, principles and action programs and at the same time, sound alternatives are proposed, that they should adopt in their own platforms. The sloganeering in the mass media and election campaigns and the selected facts appearing there do not sufficiently enlighten, if at all. – JZ, 17.2.08, 24.1.11. – PUBLIC OPINION, ENLIGHTENMENT, PARTY PLATFORMS, PRINCIPLES, IDEAS, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS. EACH PARTY SHOULD BE SUPPLIED BY SOME LIBERTARIAN GROUP WITH THE BEST REFUTATIONS OF THE PLATFORMS OF ALL OTHER PARTIES.

PARTIES: The political parties … are … standing armies of robbers – each trying to rob each other and prevent themselves from being robbed.” – Carl Watner, on Spooner, reason, 3/73. – Seen in this way we are not so far away from the primitive tribalism that until recently still existed in Papua-New Guinea, with its ca. 1,000 diverse tribes, all territorial monopolists. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: The political parties, who have controlled our nation have, without exception, legislated for the few and have thought only of personal gain.” – Richard Carlyle, The Earth Belongs to the Living, p.30.

PARTIES: The Prime Minister is considering changing the name of his party to the Condom Party. – It stands up to inflation, it protects a bunch of pricks, it halts production, and it gives a false sense of security while the nation is being screwed. -  George Coote, The Joke Book, Gap Publishing, Norman Park, Queensland, 1996, p.306. – JOKES

PARTIES: The promises of the parties of today are the taxes of tomorrow.” – Mackenzie King, 1874-1950. – JZ tr. from the German version: “Die Versprechungen der Parteien von heute sind die Steuern von morgen.” Perhaps the original remark in English spoke of the additional and higher taxes of tomorrow. – JZ, 17.2.08, 13.12.13. – PROMISES, POLITICS, POLITICIANS, ELECTIONS, VOTING, TAXATION

PARTIES: the raison d’etre of any political party is to capture the State, to exercise its power for its own interests – and against the interests of its enemies. It is a monopolistic, winner-take-all game; necessarily, I win, your spoils end up in my pocket.” – J. Neil Schulman, NEW LIBERTARIAN WEEKLY, Aug. 14, 1977. – Even the one losing his office can usually retire on a pretty good pension. – Or he gets a good job with some of his contacts in large corporations. And whatever he could have saved from his high salary and any “donations” or results of “deals” that he was able to get or willing to make and accept and, will also remain his. So each new office holder does not become the heir of the riches of his predecessor but only of his new opportunities to get rich. – They do not rob each other – except for the official positions, but, rather, both of them rob the people they are supposed to represent and share the loot with their particular favorites or fellow travelers - JZ, 17.2.08.

PARTIES: The shallow notion that “something must be done” has harmonized so perfectly with the superficial thought of recent times as to rule out without discussion the virtue of doing nothing to aggravate a condition only susceptible of natural cure. For a quarter of a century there has been no effective criticism of political help. Each party has been content simply with a different method of committing the same folly. All appear to agree that somebody else shall be employed, on the authority of those who have no direct responsibility, at the expense of others, who are not consulted, for the benefit of people who could act much better for themselves.” – Ernest Benn, Modern Government, p. 75. – POLITICAL PLATFORMS OR PROGRAMS, MEASURES, METHODS. TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS, SELF-HELP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, NATURAL CURES

PARTIES: The two major party candidates were doing what they had always done, making rash promises and flinging recriminations at one another.” - Joseph H. Delaney, The New Untouchables, p.145 in ANALOG, Mid Sep. 83. - With the latter they are usually much more truthful than with the former. - JZ, 17.8.02. – PROMISES & RECRIMINATIONS, BLAMING OTHERS, SCAPEGOATING

PARTIES: the two major political parties in the United States today stand for the same things. Both had chosen to receive their instructions from precisely the same source, the lowest common denominator of popular opinion. The result is a one-party system under two meaningless labels.” – Leonard E. Read, Elements of Libertarian Leadership, p.106.

PARTIES: The two-party system – giving you one more choice than communist Russia. - Lisa Leeds sharing R. Lee Wrights's photo. Facebook, 4.11.12. - DEMOCRACY

PARTIES: the two-party system is only slightly less tyrannical than the one-party system.” – Howard Zinn: Disobedience & Democracy, p.65. – Both are territorial and have involuntary members and do not permit secession from them. Both have taxation, compulsory schooling, central banking, trade restrictions and many monopolies under their rule. Both are more or less authoritarian. Both abuse their powers. – JZ, 25.2.08. – Not one recognizes all individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: The Workers Party is inevitably also something like a pressure group, although not a legally effective one, or, rather, a bunch of pressure groups, with the inherent disability for the leadership to satisfy all sub-groups. – JZ, 31.12.78. – LIBERTARIAN PARTIES. (The Workers Party and the Progress Party were such parties for Australia.)

PARTIES: There can not a greater judgment befall a country than such a dreadful spirit of division as rends a government into two distinct peoples (*), and makes them greater strangers and more averse to one another than if they were actually two different nations. – Joseph Addison, THE SPECTATOR, July 24, 1711. - The solution to this seemingly insoluble problem is quite simple: Turn all political parties into independent nations of volunteers, all of them exterritorially quite autonomous. What more can they, quite rightly, ask for? – If they concede each other that much or that little, then there can be peace between them and even a defensive alliance between them becomes then possible. - JZ 3.11.85, 10.7.86, 24.3.08. - (*) If only they would, voluntarily and tolerantly, become two distinct peoples, leaving each other alone and with each doing its own things only for or to its own voluntary followers! Then they would only have to “sacrifice” their attempts to dominate the other part as well. Not much of a sacrifice, if you look at it objectively. – JZ, 24.3.08.

PARTIES: There is a difference between the Republican and the Democratic Party. One is in and the other is out.” – From film: “State of the Union”. - POLITICS, REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, DEMOCRACY, PARLIAMENTS

PARTIES: There is a hundred things to single you out for promotion in party politics besides ability.” – Will Rogers, The Autobiography of Will Rogers, 1949, p.13. - There are .... - JZ - JOKES

PARTIES: There is no newspaper in France that does not sponsor a party. There is no party that does not aspire to power. There is no power that is not an enemy of the people.” - A. Bellegarrique, Manifesto. – "The people" is also a fiction. Any population is a conglomerate of very diverse and often antagonistic segments. Territorialism does not permit them to sort themselves out, quite freely, without mutual interference. – JZ, 18.2.08. – All political parties are enemies of many to most of these diverse groups, while trying to favor and subsidize some of their own at the expense of all others. - JZ, 24.1.11. - POWER, PEOPLE

PARTIES: There’s small choice in rotten apples.” – William Shakespeare - POLITICIANS

PARTIES: This country is a one-party country. Half of it is called Republican and half is called Democrat. It doesn’t make any difference. All the really good ideas belong to the Libertarians.” – Hugh Downs (1997) - Even libertarians should not rule over anarchists, democrats and republicans or other ideologues. They, too, should confine themselves to genuine self-rule or self-governance, among their volunteers and thus always only on the basis of personal laws and exterritorial autonomy. - JZ, 26. 11. 06. - PARTY RULE, DEMOCRACY, REPUBLICS, LIBERTARIANS, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, GENUINE SELF-RULE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM, ITS COERCION, MONOPOLIES, TAXES, WARS, CIVIL WARS & DESPOTISM

PARTIES: To be short, all the quarrel we have at this day in the Kingdom, … is no other than a quarrel of Interests and Partyes, a pulling down of one Tyrant, to set up another, and instead of Liberty, heaping upon yourselves a greater slavery then that we fought against.” – Walwyn, The Bloody Project, VIII. – Quoted in A. L. Morton, Freedom in Arms, p.54.

PARTIES: Tucker’s fear of centralized political power led him to reject the system of organized political parties, which American liberals cling to so tenaciously. Within every party system, Tucker urged, the party in power is inevitably in favor of a further centralization of power. Although the party out of power always favors decentralization, as soon as it gets into power it suddenly reverses itself and calls for the exact opposite of what it previously championed.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom. A Study in American Anarchism, p.165. - DECENTRALIZATION CENTRALIZATION

PARTIES: two powerful and highly organized political parties, whose members, giving up the attempt to see for themselves what is right and true, are content to act in a crowd and to follow their leaders in blind struggles to gain ascendancy over each other.” - Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p. 181. – Add to this “party discipline”, acting almost like military discipline. – JZ, 25.2.08.

PARTIES: Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule – and both commonly succeed, and are right. – H. L. Mencken, Minority Report, 1956, p. 330. – Another version: Under democracy one party always devotes its energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule – and both commonly succeed and are right.” – H. L. Mencken, 1880-1956, Minority Report, 1956. -  – Alas, neither they nor the voters nor most political “scientists” do so far realize that this is inevitable under territorialism, with its monopolism, coercion and compulsory collectivism. – JZ, 27.3.12. – TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS AS USUAL, DEMOCRACY, ELECTION CAMPAIGNS, POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, JOKES

PARTIES: Under individual and group secessionism and exterritorial autonomy each party could win – but only a temporary domination over its own members, and voters, all its voluntary subjects, as long as they are inclined to remain in that position. But most of them, over long periods, are inclined to change jobs, residences, suppliers and even friends and become more enlightened and will, under that condition, not remain territorially stuck with any party, its ideology and its system, especially seeing that all around them all kinds of other systems, all chosen by volunteers for themselves, are in operation, some with more successes than others, while some would only serve as deterrents to somewhat enlightened people. – JZ, 4.9.89, 24.3.08. – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY.

PARTIES: Under individual secessionism and full exterritorial autonomy practised by panarchies each of the major parties would split up into several autonomous communities of volunteers, to the satisfaction of most of their members and voters and displeasing only their current leaders. – JZ, 14.6.92. – All of them tend to be mere coalitions of minority groups. – JZ, 20.2.08. - Another version: Under individual secessionism and minority autonomy, exterritorially practised by volunteers in panarchies, not only would the present territorial States split up into different communities, each ruled by one of the existing parties, but each of the major parties would split up into several autonomous communities of volunteers, for the greater satisfaction of their members and voters and to the displeasure only of their current leaders. Consumer sovereignty towards party politics, too! - JZ 14.6.92, 6.1.93.

PARTIES: Under individual secessionism every party would win, at the same time and in the same country, but only dominance, a non-territorial one, over its own members and voters, subject, again, to individual secessionism. - JZ 4 Sep. 89, 10.10.89. – PARTIES UNDER PANARCHISM

PARTIES: Under territorialism even the worst two-party system is probably better than the best one-party system. Under exterritorial autonomy for volunteers we would have only diverse one party systems, all with satisfied customers. – JZ, 17.2.08, 13.12.13.

PARTIES: Vote for the party that offers to give us the least, and thus takes the least from us in terms of both, liberty and money.” – Tony Bryan, in a letter, 8/73. – PROMISES, VOTING, TAX BURDEN

PARTIES: we are devoted to the successive struggles of factions, not issues, who will rule by turns, the worst of whom will rule last and triumph by the sword.” - Richard Carlyle, The Earth Belongs to the Living, p.39.

PARTIES: We are former independents who know that whichever major party is in power the result is more corruption, more taxation, more power in the hands of politicians (and bureaucrats) and more loss of personal freedom.” – From Workers Party, Australia, leaflet The Alternative. – INDEPENDENTS

PARTIES: we have all seen, … we have some of us felt, such oppression from party government as no other tyranny can parallel.” - Edmund Burke, A Vindication of Natural Society, 57.

PARTIES: We need a party aiming to do away with party politics. – JZ, 15.10.74. – PANARCHIST PARTY

PARTIES: We see it as politics as usual. What else is a political party but a clique of individuals devoid of principle and ethics, patching together a program in an effort to gain or retain political power?” – John Gordon, in THE MATCH, Sept. 75.

PARTIES: We’ve got so many parties that the people are not represented at all, only factional interests.Morris West, - The Salamander, 1973, Coronet ed., 1984, p.180.  The “people” as a description of the population of a territory, is already a misnomer, hiding or ignoring the numerous differences between their diverse groups. How unrepresentative political parties are is already shown by the fact that their total membership comes, usually, except in totalitarian States, only to a small fraction of the population. – Most of the public or common interests the politicians talk about are false pretences or assumptions. - JZ, 6.6.13. - FACTIONS, REPRESENTATION, DEMOCRACY, PEOPLE, PRESSURE GROUPS, LOBBIES, SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, TERRITORIALISM, POPULATION, PEOPLES

PARTIES: What are they offering as bribes to make you vote for their politicians? Your tax money! – JZ, 18.3.88. – And this under the pretence that the taxes they spend would always be paid exclusively or largely by others than yourself, e.g. by “taxing the rich”. – JZ, 22.2.08. – As direct or indirect suppliers of many to most of the consumer goods and services for the masses of the population, the rich, even if their direct taxes amount to a large percentage of the total tax-take, will include these tax amounts in the prices for the goods and services they supply to the poor and the middle class. – JZ, 13.12.13. - TAXATION, EGALITARIANISM, ENVY, VOTING, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICES

PARTIES: What form of slavery can be more debasing than that which a man undergoes when he allows either a party or a church to lead him to and fro when he is in no real agreement with it?” - Auberon Herbert, A Politician in Sight of Heaven. - VOLUNTARYISM, CONSENT, SLAVERY, REPRESENTATION, PARLIAMENTARISM

PARTIES: What is the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats? They are in and we are out.” – From film: The State of the Union.

PARTIES: What we have now is not a democracy but a dictatorship by parties.” - Erika Herbst, Alle suchen nach Loesungen – Wir haben sie, S.13. – I found no fundamental solutions in this book, no mores so than in most party programs. – JZ, 13.12.13. - DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATION, LIBERTARIAN IDEAS ARCHIVE

PARTIES: When you lay a real liberal against a real conservative there’s not enough difference to put on your hat.” – Barry Goldwater. – LIBERALS, CONSERVATIVES, DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS

PARTIES: Whether the Left or the Right is ruling doesn’t change things in the least. For it the important thing is not that one party is better or worse than the others are. The party system itself is bad. Regardless of any party! For all parties do fundamentally want the same: Jobs, pensions and power for the party.” - Erika Herbst, Alle suchen nach Loesungen – Wir haben sie, S.11.

PARTIES: While true association is fertile and healthy, coalition is sterile and destructive. … The principle M. Follin commends to us, as one of the greatest needs of the time, is that of a reaction of the spirit of association against the spirit of coalition.” – S. Hutchinson Harris, in The Doctrine of Personal Right. – I see in territorial nation States the worst forms of coalitions. A unity is pretended by them that does, in reality, not exist at all. – JZ, 21.2.08. – All the different human animals are herded and exploited and misdirected and wrongly controlled in a country-wide prison or concentration camp. – JZ, 13.12.13. - STATES, UNITY, NATIONALISM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, COMPROMISES, ASSOCIATIONISM, COALITIONS, TERRITORIALISM

PARTIES: Whoever thinks much is unsuitable for a party member; he will think himself beyond the party.” – Nietzsche. (“Wer viel denkt, eignet sich nicht zum Parteimann; er denkt sich durch die Partei durch.“) - THINK

PARTIES: Whosoever is in any political party feels correspondingly irresponsible. – JZ, 7.11.93. – Mob psychology applies there, too. – JZ, 15.2.08. – POLITICS OF MASS PSYCHOLOGY


PARTIES: With society gone there remain only parties.” – J.O.Y. Gasset, Concord and Liberty, p.20. – So, to restore society we have either to get rid of all parties or to autonomize all of them. – JZ, 1/78. – All only for their volunteers and under personal laws or exterritorial autonomy. – JZ, 17.2.08.

PARTIES: You don’t imagine any political party has been any use whatsoever in the last three or four generations, do you? They’ll get worse.” – Poul Anderson. There Will Be Time, p.42.

PARTIES: You should pay your taxes only to the party of your choice and you should obey only the rules and laws of your own party's separate republic, democracy, other governance system or society or community - as long as you respect the individual rights and liberties of others. - JZ, 74, 13.12.13.

PARTITIONING: Has any partitioning of territories ever been a satisfactory solution in the long run? - JZ, 8.6.99. - Think of the splitting up of Europe among the sons of Charles the Great, the partitioning of Germany, Berlin, Korea, Vietnam, Soviet Russia, Israel/Palestine or any other! But the same can be said on any enforced unification, e.g. that of Indonesia and Red China and that of the USA, through its civil war. - JZ, 27.6.01, 9.12.03. - SPLITTING UP, TERRITORIALISM, GEOGRAPHICAL DECENTRALIZATION, FRONTIERS, BORDERS, UNIFICATIONS, CONSISTEN VOLUNTARISM & SELF-DETERMIINATION UNDER PERSONAL UNDER PERSONAL LAW INSTEAD

PARTNERSHIP: The solid ground of mutual confidence”, said Mr. Kennedy, “is the necessary partnership of government with all the sectors of our society in the steady quest for economic progress.” – “Partnership” is an indecent euphemism for “government control”. There can be no partnership between armed bureaucrats and defenseless private citizens who have no choice but to obey. What chance would you have against a “partner” whose word – whose arbitrary word – is law, who may give you a hearing (if your pressure group is big enough), but who will play favorites and bargain your interests away, who will always have the last word and the legal “right” to enforce it on you at the point of a gun, holding your property, your work, your future, your life in his power? Is that the meaning of “partnership”? Dos such a use of language contribute to the clarity of our national ‘dialogue’?” – Ayn Rand, The Fascist New Frontier, in: “The Ayn Rand Column”, revised edition, 1998, p.102, Second Renaissance Books, New Milford, Connecticut, - WITH TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS? PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY?

PARTNERSHIP: Willing partnership can replace secret aggression to the benefit of both sides. – Even public, benevolent interference can be deadly.” – Sandra Miesel, in Poul Anderson, The Book of Poul Anderson, p.194. – Cooperation, collaboration to some extent or free exchange, of goods and services, or at least ideas and opinions or mutual tolerance and respect for each other’s panarchy and its exterritorial independence, thus leaving each other sufficiently alone, to the extent that this is desired, by more or less voluntarily closed societies, as long as they do not claim any exclusive territory for themselves. – JZ, 26.2.08. - VOLUNTARISM, COOPERATION, FREE EXCHANGE, BUSINESS DEALS, AGGRESSION, RESTRICTIONISM, PROTECTIONISM, TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

PARTY POLITICS: No more party politics, election campaigns and party struggles and political bribery. Under exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities all parties could win, all the time, self-rule for themselves and all their voters. They would no longer have to struggle to gain the majority of all voters in a territory nor would they have to compromise with their program by joining a temporary political coalition that would gain the majority of votes. A panarchist party with members from all other parties, that would fight for all the aims of all other parties being rightfully applied, i.e., only to all their voluntary supporters. Obviously, this can only be done exterritorially, i.e. under personal law. This approach could thus unite all "democratic" parties against all "despotic" parties, against all intolerant zealots, fanatics and totalitarians, including the majoritarians. After a sufficient enlightenment campaign such a party would cease to be a mere party and come to represent, with its panarchistic or voluntaristic program, the "common interest" or "public interest", in an effective "coalition" that would respect the exterritorial autonomy of all voluntaristic movements. Self-government for all parties and other movements could be their motto. - Panarchists could be apolitical anarchists and enemies of rule by any party and yet, they could, consistently and in good conscience, advocate and join a panarchistic and secessionist party - because it would represent the rights and best interests of all, whether members of any party or not, no matter for what party they usually vote and whether they usually vote at all in a valid way. - JZ, n.d. & 19.9.04, 8.4.08, from Pan AZ. - PANARCHISM

PARTY SYSTEM: Multiple political parties are a fact of life throughout Europe and most of the West. Today the only countries without strong multiparty political systems are the United States and a number of third world military dictatorships.” – Thomas H. Naylor. - This fact of life is all too often a cause of death, exploitation and oppression, internal and external wrongs committed on a vast scale. Only exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities would sufficiently correspond to the facts and all the requirements of life and ethics to all individual rights and liberties, to the extent that volunteer groups wish to apply them among themselves. - JZ, 26. 11. 06, 13.12.13. - & TERRITORIALISM, VOTING, VOLUNTARISM, POLITICAL CHOICES, PANARCHISM,

PARTY WORK: Still, as a time-passing occupation it was better than chalking slogans on walls. “Vote for Moriarty”. “Not likely!” – Eric Frank Russel, Dreadful Sanctuary, p.24. Four Square, London, 1967.

PASSIONS: Act nothing in a furious passion. It's putting to sea in a Storm.” - Thomas Fuller. - Compare: “Think before you act.” - VS. ENTHUSIASM & SELF-CONTROL, ANGER, TEMPER

PASSIONS: As soon as men are informed of their true interests (*) they will become just and fair.” Louis-Sebastian Mercier, L’an 2440, 1772, p.257. - In German, 1772: „Das Jahr 2440“, in Der Traum vom besten Staat, 1972, 1975, p.244 ff, Dokumente, dtv. Wissenschaftliche Reihe, Herausgeber Helmut Swoboda, born 1924. - Mercier envisioned a primitive system of voluntary taxation. The motto of his book is: “The presence is pregnant with the future.“ - (*) Provided they care to acquire that knowledge. - But who cares, even today, to acquire full knowledge of all individual rights and liberties and to spread that knowledge? - JZ, 12.9.07. - VS. TRUE INTERESTS, JUSTICE, FAIRNESS, TOLERANCE & INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PASSIONS: I passionately love liberty, legality, the respect for rights, but not democracy … liberty is my foremost passion.” – Alexis de Tocqueville, THE FREEMAN, 1/76, p. 25. - ENTHUSIASM, ZEST, LOVE, LIBERTY

PASSIONS: None can be free who is a slave to, and ruled by his passion.” – Pythagoras, Stobaeus, Florilegium. Pt. xviii, I. 23. – EMOTIONS, FEELINGS, FAITH, BELIEFS, ANGER, FREEDOM

PASSIONS: Nothing great in the world has been accomplished without passion.” – Hegel, in introduction to Philosophy of History, 1832, tr. John Sibree. – ENTHUSIASM

PASSIONS: Over against Nature stands the Man, and deep in his heart is the passion for liberty. For the passion for liberty is only another name for life itself. Liberty is a word of much sophistication, but it means, when it means anything, opportunity to live one’s own life in one’s own way … The original sin of the world is not contempt for arbitrary laws, but respect for them. …” - Rev. Charles Ferguson. - LIBERTY, ENTHUSIASM, LAWS, LIFE

PASSIONS: Passions are spiritual rebels and raise sedition against the understanding.” – Ben Jonson, “Explorata”, Timber (1640). - UNDERSTANDING, REASONING, TOLERANCE, ZEALOTS, INTOLERANCE, EMOTIONS, FANATICISM, FUNDAMENTALISM, ENTHUSIASM

PASSIONS: Serving one’s own passions is the greatest slavery. – Thomas Fuller, M.D., Gnomologia, 1731, 4103.

PASSIONS: The organization and the passions of men result from the elements of which they are composed. When they submit to their passions they are slaves, but they are free as often as they resist them.” – Frederic the Great of Prussia to d’Alembert, 18.10.1770. – JZ tr. of: “Die Organisation und die Leidenschaften der Menschen ruehren von den Elementen her, aus denen sie zusammengesetzt sind. Wenn sie also diesen Leidenschaften gehorchen, sind sie Sklaven, frei aber so oft sie ihnen widerstehen.” - Friedrich der Grosse – Ulrich von Beckerath provided the underlining and added: Kant said the same in the „Critique of Practical Reason“. - AUTONOMY, SLAVERY, INDEPENDENCE, RESISTANCE, FREEDOM

PASSIONS: There is a close connection between lack of confidence and the passionate state of mind.” - Eric Hoffer – But when emotions prevail over reason they can all too easily make you over-confident in a wrongful or flawed cause. – JZ 7.3.09. - INTOLERANCE & LACK OF CONFIDENCE, TRUE BELIEVERS, FANATICS

PASSIONS: When the passions become masters, they are vices.” – Pascal, Pensées, 1670, 502, tr. W. F. Trotter. - EMOTIONS

PASSIVITY: But the peaceable nature of Australians is being exploited as never before, and if a few of us don’t speak up we will be the most passive society ever to have had our freedoms taken away.” – W. Jauncey, writing to free enterprise. – His false premise was that we ever had already the full range of our liberties and rights. If we had, we would not be in the troubles that we are in. – JZ, 26.2.08.

PASSIVITY: Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there. –Will Rogers

PASSIVITY: He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it.” – Martin Luther King, Jr. - APATHY, GUILT, TOLERATION OF EVILS, PASSIVITY

PASSIVITY: The whole world is stinking in its own passivity.” – Damien Broderick, The Judas Mandala, p.51. - STATISM, OBEDIENCE

PASSPORTS, A document treacherously inflicted upon a citizen going abroad, exposing him as an alien and pointing him out for special reprobation and outrage.” – Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary, p.241.– IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS, FREE MIGRATION

PASSPORTS: Did you know that prior to 1914, there were only two countries in the world (Czarist Russia and the Ottoman Empire) that required you to have a passport if you wanted to enter the country?" - Coley Hudgins. Read more at - Rui Nobre Pinheiro - Facebook, 13.3.12. – IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS

PASSPORTS: I don’t need a passport. I know who I am.” – B. Traven, Totenschiff. (“Ich brauche keinen Pass, ich weiss wer ich bin.”)

PASSPORTS: it is obvious that passports exist for the benefit of those who make a living by issuing, stamping, inspecting, and renewing them, and for no other reason.” – Sir Ernest Benn, Modern Government, p.89.

PASSPORTS: other than in wartime, countries did not require passports for travel before 1914.” - Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, p.xvii, Harper Collins Publishers, ISBN 0 00 655139 4

PASSPORTS: The world cannot always, for instance, have its intercourse hampered by the stupidity of passports, …” - Ernest Benn, About Russia, p.135.

PASSPORTS: Those willing to pay for the costs and inconveniences of them should be free to continue this farce. – JZ, 17.7.84. – But they should not be forced upon anyone else. A country is not a private host asking an arrival for his invitation or his ticket for entry. – We are by now so institutionalized by territorial statism that we can hardly imagine how mankind got along for hundreds of thousands to millions of years without passports. And this although they became common largely only after WW I. – JZ, 26.2.08. – IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS, FREE MIGRATION, COERCIVE DISCRIMINATION

PASSPORTS: to get from one country to another without benefit of a rubber stamp. – Christopher Egerton-Thomas, A Taste for Conspiracy, p.124. – FREE MIGRATION

PAST: There is not future in the past.” – A song verse, heard 17.12.87. – Only if we become sufficiently aware of our past will there be a future for us. Otherwise, we will wipe ourselves out with all the mistakes of the past repeated, but now with ABC mass murder devices. – JZ, 17.12.87, 23.2.08. - FUTURISM, HISTORY,  – Goethe said somewhere that if one is not aware of 2000 years of history then one cannot count on one’s head. I would add that if one is only aware of the history of territorialism then one cannot count on it, either. – JZ, 8.4.08. The same applies to the history of monetary and financial despotism. - JZ, 24.1.11. – HISTORY, KNOWLEDGE

PATENTS: Both of them (Patents & copyrights. – JZ.) are taken too much for granted, although they rest only upon “positive” legislation. All alternatives to them ought to be published, explored and freely discussed and experimented with. Under Panarchism this would occur automatically, in different personal law communities of volunteers. We should take into consideration: A) The patent laws do not lead to the use of every usable invention but instead to the suppression of some. B) Their protection is costly and time consuming through litigation. C) The difficulties involved have led some people to keep their inventions and processes rather secret than patent them, D) No absolute ownership right in inventions and discoveries is recognized by them, since they do impose a time limit. E) Not all ideas are patentable and thus registered centrally. F) Employees are often robbed of their patent rights in favor of employers. G) High licence fees tend to price inventions out of their potential market. - Inherently ideas and discoveries are something like a natural resource and are often willingly passed on for mere recognition. Originators get a chance for a high financial return through hiring themselves out as consultants etc. at a higher rate than they could get before. Who does not appreciate the hen that lays the golden eggs? Even the Soviets did, in spheres, which their ideology had not monopolized. - They can earn something as famous persons – due to endorsements. The first of one’s popular inventions would establish one’s name. It would thus be something like a capital investment in or advertising for oneself. - By being the first on the market an innovator has always the chance to scoop the cream off it. (If an “open cooperative” were established for each patent, or new text produced, then the development costs and labors of the inventor, innovator or writer would be taken into consideration in the distribution of incomes from it. In them each would be rewarded only in accordance with his investment of capital or mental or physical labor. – JZ, 16.4.08. ) Social science innovations are now most important but not patentable anyhow. – Authors describing new ideas want recognition of their ideas usually more than a financial reward. A patent monopoly often hinders the widest possible spread of an innovation and its rapid further development. - The creative man wins and loses without patent laws. What he loses in monopoly profit he wins thru access to the ideas of others. (See Bastiat's “Economic Harmonies” on free social benefits for everyone as an inherent market feature.) - At most the development time and money spent is to be recognized as property of the innovator and as creating a first claim against profits of all those copying the innovation. – JZ, n.d. & 16.4.08. - & COPYRIGHTS LAWS, ALTERNATIVES TO THEM

PATENTS: FOR FOOD: The truth is that 90 percent of the value of these patented foods comes from their basic genetic endowment, another 9,9 percent is due to improvement over the centuries, and the corporations add about a 0.1 percent change and then declare that they “own” the food and all rights to its seed.” (42) - Rosalie Bertell, No Immediate Danger. Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth, The Women’s Press, 1985, p 352. - (42) Kenneth A. Dahlberg, “Plant Germplasm Conservation: Emerging Problems and Issues”, Mazingira, vol 7, no. 1, 1983, United Nations Environment Program.

PATENTS: Patent monopolies are the most costly, inefficient and – in the case of essential medicines – life-threatening form of protectionism that exists today. From an economic point of view, they create the same kinds of distortions as tariffs, only many times greater. Yet the attempt to extend US patent and copyright law to developing countries has become one of the primary objectives of America’s foreign commercial policy. The expansion of foreign intellectual-property claims not only drains scarce resources from developing countries but also makes it difficult for them to follow the more successful examples of late industrialization, such as South Korea or Taiwan, where diffusion of foreign technology played an important role.  – Mark Weisbrot, director of the Centre for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC. – Quoted in: - FRANCIS WHEEN, How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World, A Short History of Modern Delusions, Harper Perennial, London, 2004, p.244. - “Intellectual property” is not a genuine property, which can only belong to one or a few people, but something that can be indefinitely multiplied without depriving anybody of it, like a word, a sentence or an idea. Thus it does not deserve this term. – JZ, 19.2.12. – TARIFFS, PROTECTIONISM, FREE TRADE, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, COPYRIGHTS, MEDICINES, INDUSTRIALIZATION, HEALTH DEVELOPMENT

PATENTS: Patents are to cover a) the long period now required until an invention is fully developed and finally found a sponsor and producer, b) the achieve for the inventor at least a good return for his thinking, labor and costs. – But if, due to good data banks, he could instantly reach those wanting his thoughts, labor and inventions or partners, then, on a quite free market, he could get a lump sum reward or return for his efforts, and, on top, the publicity value of having been the innovator. Any production can now be geared up so fast that the firm coming out with a gadget can already saturate the existing demand for it rather fast. I do not see why it should get a monopoly to satisfy future demand for it. Further innovation is, anyhow, a continuous process. And to grant a monopoly for every single forward step seems absurd to me. – Anyhow, there will be panarchies without copyrights and patent laws. Others may penalize only their own members if they buy any “pirated” products from them. – The long-term test will be: Which kind of society will advance faster, that with copyrights and patent laws or those without? - JZ, 6.6.82, 26.2.08.

PATENTS: Tucker’s principal argument against the injustice of the copyright and patent law thus concluded: “The central injustice … is that it compels the race to pay an individual through a long term of years a monopoly price for knowledge that he discovered today; although some other man might … have discovered it tomorrow.” – DANDELION, Spring 77. - Anyhow, which life form or word of any language should be copyrighted or trade-mark protected? At most I can see some sense in registering company or business or website names, preventing a multiplicity of firms operating under the same name, one that does more than indicate merely their kind of activity: barber, butcher etc. – But I see no sense in monopolizing anything physical that can be endlessly duplicated or copied. – Whoever comes first out with it, in a free market, could and should make his “killing” then and there, others will have to limb behind him. He will also always have the special fame as the originator, which has some advertising value for his product or service. - JZ, 26.2.08. – COPYRIGHTS, IP = INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

PATENTS: While government, through taxation, takes real property, it has legally set up a fictitious property, one in ideas or writings. If you really like an idea or some writing, then you want them spread as widely as possible. There are other ways to make money than to legally monopolise ideas and writings, music and pictures etc. How weak this "right" is, is indicated even by the time limits on copyrights and patents. Genuine properties are not time limited. – John Zube - Facebook, 5.10.13, COPYRIGHTS, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

PATERNALISM: A Government founded upon the principle of Benevolence towards the people - after the analogy of a father to his children, and therefore called a paternal Government - would be one in which the Subjects would be regarded as children or minors unable to distinguish what is beneficial or injurious to them. These subjects would be thus compelled to act in a merely passive way; and they would be trained to expect solely from the Judgment of the Sovereign and just as he might will it, merely out of his goodness, all that ought to make them happy. Such a Government would be the greatest conceivable Despotism; for it would present a Constitution that would abolish all Liberty in the Subjects and leave them no Rights.” – Kant, The Principles of Political Right, 1793. - BENEVOLENCE, GOVERNMENT

PATERNALISM: A new class is arising, the so-called ‘paternalistic utopians’.” – Greg Lindsay, quoted in ON LIBERTY, 11/79. – Libertarian utopists should and could counter it by more attractive, moral and reasonable utopias and utopian experiments, wherever and whenever they are already legal (E.g., PEACE PLANS 19 c, 20, 183, libertarian publishing on CDs, and thousands of other libertarian projects, that should all be listed together, online) or as well developed blueprints for the time they can be legally or illegally undertaken with a good chance for success, like e.g. liberation, revolution, resistance and tax strike programs, which would really liberate rather than lead to a new territorial domination. – JZ, 8.6.82, 26.2.08. - NEW CLASS, UTOPIANISM

PATERNALISM: A paternalistic government inevitably becomes an oppressive and suffocating government.” – Miller Upton, THE FREEMAN, 9/74. – WELFARE STATE

PATERNALISM: And once such political power has been obtained, the possessors of it seem to say to the rest of us “common people”: “We do not know what course you would follow if government were to leave you free to pursue it, but we strongly suspect that you would act in ignorance of your own best interests. Therefore, we will take no chances – we will pass a law that will force you to follow the course that we have decided is best for you. But as for us – give us more power to impose controls, rules and regulations upon you for your benefit – and for our glory.” - Admiral Ben Moreell: The Admiral’s Log II.

PATERNALISM: But they were guilty of one monstrous crime. And that, oddly enough, was paternalism. It was the doctrine of Father Knows Best – and its inevitable corollary, Other People Are Children.” – Chad Oliver, Caravans Unlimited: Monitor, in CONTINUUM 4, p.79.

PATERNALISM: Extended to its extreme, such governmental paternalism becomes an authoritarian system of confiscation – taking from the producers and bestowing favors upon the non-producers of society.” – Robert G. Bearce, THE FREEMAN, Jan. 76. – Until finally everything is prohibited that is not expressly permitted or ordered, as someone once wrote. Back to the despotism of one of Plato’s utopias? – JZ, 26.2.08.

PATERNALISM: Government is like a kind of father. It’s a real big - big daddy. But it’s filled with men, sometimes very good and wise men, and without exception they, too, want the good. Of course, some will be bad-selfish and some good-selfish, but that is only to be expected. Finally, as a species, we have to grow up. And no one ever really grows up while he is dependent upon a big daddy. You have to go it alone. It’s hard. But that’s what we all have to do. Individually, and eventually as a species.” – Robert LeFevre, Lift Her Up, Tenderly, p.202. – WELFARE STATE, BIG BROTHER

PATERNALISM: Here too, in our own America, the State is taking control and ownership off the people. It is using the power to tax to destroy their independence and self-reliance. It is converting free men into vassals and dependents. It is devouring the substance of self-supporting people to render them self-supporting no longer, and to establish a condition of universal reliance upon the biased paternalism of a Great White Father – a “Father” corrupted and corrupting, since great power does corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” – Editorial in OMAHA WORLD HERALD, entitled: God Hates a Coward, quoted by Admiral Ben Moreell: The Admiral’s Log II, p.125. – SELF-RELIANCE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, WELFARE STATE, TAXATION, POVERTY

PATERNALISM: In ancient Greece Pericles inaugurated the feeding of the people out of the public treasury. A hundred years later Plato found that he had so completely debauched the Athenians that they were reduced to pauperism. Instead of working, they hung around the market place gossiping, and their characters were so weakened that the State was forced to hire barbarians to defend it from invasion. A paternalistic government is bound to destroy the self-reliance and self-respect of the people. When those attributes go, everything goes. Those are the virtues which have made our country great and those virtues alone will keep it great.” – Tomas P. Gore, in The Free Man’s Almanac, for September 17th. – SELF-RELIANCE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY

PATERNALISM: In correcting social conditions which produce intolerable frustration it should be recognized that ‘give-aways’ and paternalism do little to enhance the recipient’s dignity and self-esteem.” – Ilfield, quoted by B. D. Shaffer, Violence as a Product of Imposed Order. p.35. - Or his self-responsibility and initiative. – Compare panarchism or polyarchism as a framework for individually chosen systems, communities, societies and even governments and as precondition for mutual tolerance and peaceful coexistence. - JZ, 26.2.08.

PATERNALISM: In the long run, state paternalism may become a primrose path to serfdom; …” - A. E. Dyson, in Right Turn, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, 1970, p.150. - WELFARE STATE, SERFDOM

PATERNALISM: It is the Forgotten Man who is threatened by every extension of the paternal theory of government. It is he who must work and pay. When, therefore; the statesmen and social philosophers sit down to think what the State can or ought to do, they really mean to decide what the Forgotten Man shall do..." - W. G. Sumner, What Social Classes Owe To Each Other, p.130. - WELFARE STATE, TAXATION, FORGOTTEN MAN, TRANSFER SOCIETY, ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES

PATERNALISM: Nobody can compel me to be happy in his own way. Paternalism is the greatest despotism.” – Kant, quoted by Isaiah Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty, 1958. – Seldes.

PATERNALISM: Nothing is so galling to a people, not broken in from birth, as a paternal, or, in other words, a meddling government, a government which tells them what to read, and say, and eat, and drink, and wear.” – T. B. Macaulay, Southey’s Colloquies, 1830. – Governments may allow them all these basic liberties – but none of the many others. – JZ, 13.12.13. - MEDDLING, WELFARE STATE, STATISM & TERRITORIALISM VS. MANY TO MOST INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PATERNALISM: Paternalism is not only ill-conceived, but usually ineffectual as well.” – Stan Lehr and Louis Rossetto, Jr., in THE NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE, Jan. 10, 1971. – As a territorial imposition it is always wrong. – JZ, 13.12.13.

PATERNALISM: Paternalism: the principle or system of government similar to a parent’s relationship with their children. We as individual citizens have given up too much responsibility for our lives to all forms of bureaucracy. Then we complain about the results. – A mother lion overprotecting her cubs shows them no love. They will be weak and perish.” – Stormy Mon, A Liberty Book, p.32.

PATERNALISM: paternalists, who think that they know what is best for their fellow-citizens and have the right to impose this belief, …” - Dr. Rhode s Boyson, Goodbye to Nationalization, p.95.

PATERNALISM: Professor Galbraith is a paternalist who believes he knows better than other people how the world should be run and would like to see it run as he thinks best.” – Milton Friedman, From Galbraith to Economic Freedom, from the introduction by Arthur Sheldon.

PATERNALISM: Sooner or later, Conservatives believe, federal paternalism (*) weakens the determination of individual citizens to care for themselves and their needy neighbors. First the urge to be charitable is dulled by the knowledge that the government will provide. And, eventually, increasing taxes gobble up the dollars which once went into private charity.” – Dean Smith, Conservatism, p.122. - (*) As if State or local government paternalism would be much more rightful and better. They can be even more meddling with small details of private lives and enterprises. – JZ, 26.2.08, 13.12.13. – CHARITY, BENEVOLENCE, AID, RESPONSIBILITY

PATERNALISM: The greatest threat to the future of our nation – to our freedom – is not foreign military aggression or internal communist subversion but the growing dependence of the people on a paternalistic government. A nation is not stronger than its people and the best measure of their strength is how they accept responsibility. There will never be a great society unless the materialism of the welfare state is replaced by individual initiative and responsibility.” – Charles B. Shuman, quoted in THE FREEMAN, under “Ideas on Liberty”. - ISIL LIBERTY QUOTE LIBRARY 03. - The freedom of nations or of their governments should be distinguished from individual liberties. The collectivist and territorial notion of freedom for a whole or imagined "people" or "nation" is often very contrary to individual liberties and rights. - JZ, 23.11.06. - Gian Piero de Bellis shared Nizam Ahmad's status update. - John Zube: It will be, once individuals and dissenting minority groups become free to secede and to organize themselves under personal law or full exterritorial autonomy, the equivalent to experimental freedom in science and technology, private life styles, the arts, sports etc. – Territorialism is a greater threat to our freedom than foreign aggressors – because it includes the internal aggressors as well. - JZ, 14.12.13. INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INITIATIVE,  RESPONSIBILITY & SECESSIONISM, FREEDOM, LAISSEZ FAIRE ECONOMICS, FREE ENTERPRISE, FREE TRADE, FREE MARKET, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, CONTRACTS, EXCHANGE, EXPERIMENTATION VS. STATISM & TERRITORIALISM, LAISSEZ FAIRE IN EVERY SPHERE, EVEN FOR STATISTS DOING THEIR OWN THINGS TO THEMSELVES, VOLUNTARY COLLECTIVISM OF ANY TYPE VS. STATE SOCIALISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, PERSONAL LAW, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM VS. MODERN FEUDALISM & SERFDOM OR COUNTRY-WIDE CENTRALIZED LANDLORDISM

PATERNALISM: The principle of government which Mr. Cleveland has euphemistically called paternalism means simply the Party in power jobbing the resources of the country to feed its own pack of wolves.” - Thomas Mackay, Empiricism in Politics. - GOVERNMENT, WELFARE STATE

PATERNALISM: The State is now to administer, not merely to protect our daily life.” - Thomas Mackay, Empiricism in Politics. – It also failed as a protector and defender and still does and has to, under territorialism. – JZ, 14.12.13. - STATISM VS. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, PROTECTIONISM, WELFARISM, LIBERTIES & RESPONSIBILITIES, LIMITED BUT STILL TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY GOVERNMENT?

PATERNALISM: The trouble is that a democratic government is in greater danger than any other of becoming paternal, for it is sure of itself, and ready to undertake anything, and its power is excessive and pitiless against dissentients. – What history shows is, that rights are safe only when guaranteed against all arbitrary power, and all class and personal interest.” – W. G. Sumner, What Social Classes Owe to Each Other, p.28. – But who or what can provide such a guaranty? Obviously not any territorial government. They do not even know, respect and declare all individual rights and liberties. A revival and further improvement of an old institution seems needed: a voluntary militia, one confined to protecting only individual rights and liberties, their own and that of all their fellow citizens, to the extent that they do claim them, within their diverse panarchies of volunteers. That, too, would be a self-help institution, one of them most important ones, the ultimate safeguard for individual sovereignty and individual choices. – JZ, 26.2.08. – MILITIA FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PATERNALISM: The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools. – Herbert Spencer.

PATERNALISM: They continue to believe that the community is like a group of small children who are unable to fend for themselves and who need at all times to be told what they should and should not do.” – Workers Party Economic Policy, NSW State Elections, 1976.

PATERNALISM: To be held to rigid rules of justice for the sake of others, develops the feelings and capacities, which have the good of others for their object. But to be restrained in things not affecting their good, by their mere displeasure, develops nothing valuable, except such force of character as may unfold itself in resisting the restraint. If acquiesced in, it dulls and blunts the whole nature.” – J. S. Mill, On Liberty, p.55/56.

PATERNALISM: we substitute government paternalism for direct encouragement of freedom of action on the part of the pioneer.” – Vandevar Bush, Modern Arms and Free Men, p.230.

PATERNALISM: Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread.” – Thomas Jefferson, Autobiographical note, 1821. – CENTRAL PLANNING, GOVERNMENTALISM, CENTRALIZATION, STATE SOCIALISM,

PATERNALISM: Whenever is found what is called a paternal government, there is found state education. It has been discovered that the best way to ensure implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in the nursery.” – Benjamin Disraeli, 1874 - COMPULSORY SCHOOLING BY GOVERNMENTS, EDUCATION SYSTEM, CONDITIONING OF CITIZENS FROM AN EARLY AGE, OBEDIENCE, TYRANNY

PATERNALISM: whenever we try to get paternalized we only succeed in getting policed.” – W. G. Sumner, State Interference in War and Other Essays, p.226. – Quoted in JLS, Fall 78, p.270.

PATERNALISM: Who will rid us of this Tyrannical Paternalism?” – Arthur Sheldon, in 1985, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p.40. – Sounds as if he shared the unsound leadership and statist premise. However, with his book he already provided a good opposition to it. The subtitle is: “An escape from Orwell’s 1984. A conservative path to Freedom.” It appeared 1975, as part of a whole series of such books by Churchill Press, Ltd., London. – JZ, 26.2.08.

PATERNALISM: will they prefer to remain cradled in the infantile “security” of Big Daddyism? – O. V. Garrison, The Dictocrats, p.305. – Not an admirable condition for human beings, but those preferring it for themselves should be free to have it for themselves, at their own expense and risk, as long as they are prepared to put up with it. – JZ, 26.2.08. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, FREE CHOICES FOR INDIVIDUALS, PERSONAL LAWS, WELFARE STATE, SECURITY


PATIENCE: A wise man does not try to hurry history. Many wars have been avoided by patience and many have been precipitated by reckless haste.” – Adlai Stevenson, speech, San Francisco, Sept. 5, 1952. – There is also such a thing as rightful, rational and careful haste. – JZ, 21.11.85. - Can we accelerate the process of enlightenment and of the establishment of panarchies and monetary and financial freedom too much? - JZ, 24.1.11. -

PATIENCE: All recommend patience, but none can endure to suffer.” – Thomas Fuller, M.D., Gnomologia, 1732, p.508.

PATIENCE: Every oak tree was once a nut who stood its ground.” - (anonymous) – Compare: “All good things take time.” - GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT

PATIENCE: Further, let us not deal harshly with their blindness, for that would reveal a myopic weakness in those of us whose eyes are attuned to freedom. And I confess to such nearsightedness at times. It isn’t easy to be patient with those who fail to see what we see. Overcoming this psychic blindness in ourselves may be the first stop in attuning another’s eye to freedom. So let us strive for patience, bearing in mind the infinity of things and ideas for which no living person has ever had eyes.” – Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 11/76. - Let us rather strive for the experimental freedom of panarchies, under full exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. It can work much faster than a purely educational effort like that of FEE. - Become impatient for liberties and rights, even if, at first, they can be practised only among volunteers. - But that requires patiently working for all liberties and rights, for experimental freedom, also in the monetary and financial sphere and in publishing all libertarian texts and discussions. - JZ, 24.1.11. - RED., IDEAS ARCHIVE, LIBERTARIAN BIBLIOGRAPHY, ABSTRACTS, REVIEWS, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF REFUTATIONS, DEFINITIONS, ARGUMENT MAPPING, ETC.

PATIENCE: Genius is nothing else than a significant aptitude for patience.” – Buffon, Discourse de reception à l’Académie. („Le genie n’est autre chose qu’une grande aptitude à la patience.“ – „Genie ist nichts anderes als eine bedeutende Anlage zur Geduld.“) - GENIUS

PATIENCE: He who has patience may accomplish anything.” – Rabelais, Gargantua and Pantagruel (1532-64) 4.48. – Should one be patient with tyrants – e.g. waiting for their natural death or should one merely wait or prepare for a chance to execute them? – JZ, 20.11.85, 24.3.08. -

PATIENCE: How poor are they that have no patience! What wound did ever heal but by degrees?” – Shakespeare

PATIENCE: In any contest between power and patience, bet on patience.” – W. B. Prescott, READER’S DIGEST, 6/80. - POWER

PATIENCE: It can lead to a life of peace and accomplishment. Yet so few of us put it to work: the power of patience.” – Norman Vincent Peale. – IMPATIENCE, ANGER, FORCE, VIOLENCE, FRUSTRATION, RESIGNATION, PESSIMISM

PATIENCE: Our patience will achieve more than our force.” – Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790. - Should injustice and aggression be suffered patiently? – JZ, 21.11.85. . – Patient and tolerant persistence with rightful ideas, actions and organizations. – JZ, 19.9.07. – We are still very far from having fully mobilized the power of ideas, knowledge and talents. – JZ, 14.3.09. - VS. FORCE, MILLITIA, HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION, NEW DRAFT

PATIENCE: Our Work? Time Will Tell.” – Leonard E Read, How Do We Know?” Heading of chapter 20.

PATIENCE: Patience accomplishes its object, while hurry speeds to its ruin.” - SA’DI, Gudistan (1258), 8.37, tr. James Ross. – But an impatient may, conceivably, not only act faster but also more sensible and better informed. The slow and patient chess player, for instance, is not always the best. – We have suffered too much for too long, too patiently, under territorial governments, wrongly assuming them to be inevitable. – Likewise monetary despotism and many other wrongs. – Should we not, by now, get impatient for liberty, peace, justice, all individual rights and liberties? – I for one am, while approaching 75. - JZ, 20.11.85, 24.3.08. – Is patience e.g. the first rule when involved in sports? For the training – yes. For its practice – no. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PATIENCE: Patience alone is not enough. It must also have a moral, rational and sensible purpose. Otherwise one might merely try to break a new world record for the next issue of the Guinness Book of Records, or produce a very laborious work of craft. – And should we any longer be patient with our politicians and bureaucrats? - JZ, 5.2.92, 23.2.08. They are crafty, but are they the products of our crafts? – JZ, 8.4.08.

PATIENCE: Patience and diligence, like faith, remove mountains.” – William Penn, Some Fruits of Solitude, 1693, 1.234. – I prefer “persistence” in steady efforts towards one’s rightful and rational aims. – JZ, n.d. & 14.12.13.

PATIENCE: Patience is a resource which is exhausted mainly when one most needs it.” – MacWilliams. Retranslated. by JZ from: “Geduld ist die Faehigkeit, die dann, wenn man sie am meisten braucht, erschoepft ist.“ – In territorialist political struggles patience and enthusiasm soon runs out. An assumed hypothetical extreme case: If the choice of our next meal were dependent upon a political campaign and a majority decision in a whole territory – would we not often become rather hungry before that decision is achieved? Would we have enough time left to produce the things we want to eat? And if that production also depended upon a political majority decision? – Haven’t we, all too patiently, put up with all too many interventionists laws and bureaucratic rules? – Why should any dissenting minority patiently wait for the realization of its own ideals among its members, i.e., for the approval of the majority for it? - JZ, 8.4.08. - Should we patiently have to wait for years for officials to finally grant a licence or a development plan? Laissez faire, laissez passer meant: Let people produce, let people exchange! - The quickest way towards it might be individual and group secessionism, followed by exterritorially autonomous associationism, for all kinds of volunteers. - JZ, 24.1.11, 14.12.13.

PATIENCE: Patience is a tamed passion. – Abbott, tr. by JZ: “Geduld ist gezaehmte Leidenschaft” – PASSION

PATIENCE: Patience is good, but quick hands are better! In other words, all things come to he who waits – but he who takes gets them first.” – E. D. Doc Smith, Planet of Treachery, p.85, advanced as gypsy wisdom. - INITIATIVE, SELF-HELP, WAITING, OPPORTUNITIES, CHANCE, ENTERPRISE, SECESSIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM

PATIENCE: Patience is the art of hoping.” – Schleiermacher. - Retranslated by JZ from: ”Geduld ist die Kunst zu hoffen.” – Or the stupidity of relying on hope and fate or even on prayer or mere wishes rather than on persistent self-help efforts. – JZ, 8.4.08, 14.12.13.

PATIENCE: Patience is the virtue of asses.” – French proverb.

PATIENCE: Patience, n. A minor form of despair, disguised as a virtue.” – Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary (1881-1911).

PATIENCE: The term Satyagraha was coined by me … in order to distinguish it from the movement then going on … under the name of Passive Resistance. - Its root meaning is “holding on to truth”, hence truth-force. I have also called it love-force or soul-force. In the application of Satyagraha, I have discovered in the earliest states that pursuit of truth did not permit violence being inflicted on one’s opponent, but that he must be weaned from error by patience and sympathy. (*) For what appears truth to the one may appear to be error to the other. And patience means self-suffering. So the doctrine came to mean vindication of truth, not by the infliction of suffering on the opponent, but on one’s self.” (*) – Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. - To some extent panarchists aim at that, too, but by reducing their own suffering to the usual difficulties with experimenting with new ideas, practices, gadgets and systems and by eliminating outside resistance and prohibitions. - I prefer freedom to practise truths, or what one holds to be truths, oneself and together with other volunteers, i.e., experimental freedom for all. Regardless of what others still prefer doing to themselves. Then it is up to one’s opponents to learn from that practice, if it is successful, or go on with the realization of their errors, prejudices and false assumptions, always only at the own risk and expense. Gandhi, too, aspired to territorial changes and thus did strongly provoke his opponents, even if only by non-violent or passive resistance and putting up with any violence offered by the opponents. (*) – JZ, 26.2.08. - (*) Will that method sufficiently reform all violent private criminals and official ones? Is that the correct response to murder, rape and robbery attempts? – NONVIOLENCE SHOULD BE PRACTISED BY THE AGGRESSORS, RESISTANCE, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, SELF-DEFENCE, MILITIA, NON-VIOLENCE, AGGRESSION, ZAP: ZERO AGGRESSON PRINCIPLE, NON-INITIATION OF FORCE

PATIENCE: The trick, Fletcher, is that we are trying to overcome our limitations in order, patiently. We don’t tackle flying through rock until a little later in the programme.” – Richard Bach, Jonathan Livingston Seagull, p.86.

PATIENCE: There was once a discussion between Mr. Pitt and some of his friends on what were the qualities most needed in politics. Was it knowledge, patience, courage, eloquence, or what was it? Mr. Pitt said, “Patience”. We liberals have tried patience for twenty years. I vote we now try “courage”. I say again, don’t let us be afraid of our own shadows. We have principles we believe in, we have faith, we have great traditions, and we have a great cause behind us and before us. Let us not lose courage and straightforwardness.” – John Morley. - COURAGE, DETERMINATION, PERSISTENCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, OPTING OUT, SECESSIONISM, PERSONAL LAW, FREEDOM OF ACTION, PRINCIPLES, FAITH, TRADITIONS, FACTS, RIGHTFUL AIMS, STRAIGHTFORWARDNESS, TOLERANCE, CONSISTENCY, PERSEVERANCE, POLITICS, SUCCESS, DETERMINATION, ENTHUSIASM

PATIENCE: Time makes more converts than reason.” – Thomas Paine. – REASONING, TIME, WAITING, PROPAGANDA, FRUSTRATION, OPTIMISM. – Compare: “All good things take time.”

PATIENCE: We shall sooner have the fowl by hatching the egg than by smashing it.” – Abraham Lincoln, speech, April 11, 1865. – Should Slavery have been “patiently” continued for so long after the American Revolution? – Also patiently endured by the slaves, when they got a fleeting chance to escape? – JZ, 24.3.08.

PATIENCE: Whoever has no patience has no wisdom.” - SA’DI, Gudistan (1258), 3.1, tr. James Ross. - The wise man knows when patience is due and when impatience is due. – JZ, 20.11.85.

PATIENCE: Only by doing some stupid things does one, usually, get some quick "results". - JZ, 76. - Certainly not always those one was hoping for. - JZ, 5.11.02.

PATRIOT: Someone who thinks the state created the indigenous flora and fauna, and that these benefit from occasional feeding with blood.” – J.C. Lester


PATRIOTISM: A Japanese wants to die for his country, but the Chinese, he ain’t going to let patriotism run away with his life. He wants to live; he loves life; he enjoys it.” – Will Rogers, Autobiography, p.265.

PATRIOTISM: A lovely sense of collective responsibility.” – L. L. Levinson, Webster’s Unafraid Dictionary. – I do not know what is lovely about it. It can be easily over-extended into welfare-statism or imperialism or readiness for nuclear war against whole populations. – JZ, 25.3.84, 26.2.08. – See COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM,

PATRIOTISM: A man's homeland is wherever he prospers.” - Aristophanes, Plutus, 1151. - He should have added: As a free and productive man! If he merely becomes the protégé of a tyrant then it may become a temporary home for him but hardly a free and prosperous home for the other subjects. - JZ, 25.11.02, 11.3.09. - NATIONALISM, FATHERLAND, MOTHERLAND & FREEDOM


PATRIOTISM: A patriot is a fool in ev’ry age. – Pope, Epilogue to the Satires. Dial. I, I.41.

PATRIOTISM: A patriot is not the one who loudly praises his own; he is just a braggart. A patriot is the man who praises the land and the people that are dedicated to freedom. … - Dagobert D. Runes, Treasury of Thought, p.102. - A patriot is the man who praises the land and the people that are dedicated to freedom and brotherhood. -  - Dagobert D. Runes, A Book of Contemplation, p.100. – I am not so sure about the brotherhood and that praising people merely dedicated to freedom is enough, instead of being active in its favor as well. – JZ, 18.2.08. – FREEDOM

PATRIOTISM: A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.” - Edward Abbey, 1927-1989, A Voice Crying in the Wilderness. (Vox Clamantis in Deserto.) - A country does not need defending. The individual rights and liberties do. – JZ, 7.3.09, 14.12.13. - GOVERNMENT, DEFENCE, RESISTANCE, REVOLUTION, STATISM, DESPOTISM, TYRANNY, TOTALITARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM, LIBERATION, SECESSIONISM

PATRIOTISM: And the devices of national patriotism in all lands encourage the veneration by the citizenry of those, who have been unstinting in sacrificing the lives of their ancestors in warfare. (*) It has been remarked that the masses everywhere most dearly love those who have been the most proficient in getting them killed. – (*) one is reminded of the grim observation of William L. White: “Very few of those who maintained that it is sweet to die for one’s country have ever done it.” – James J. Martin, Revisionist Viewpoints, p.128, Ralph Myles Publisher, Inc. Colorado Springs, 1971. – WAR PROPAGANDA, LEADERSHIP, RULERS, PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS, NATIONALISM, TERRITORIALISM

PATRIOTISM: Ask not what you can do for your country; ask what your government is doing to you.” – Joseph Sobran (1990). - And not only what it is doing to you but to your whole country and your whole population and often also to other countries and their diverse population. - JZ, 26.11.06, 14.12.13. - NATIONALISM & GOVERNMENTS

PATRIOTISM: Best they honour thee // Who honour in thee only what is best.” – William Watson, The True Patriotism. – DISCRIMINATION, JUDGMENT, WISDOM, HONORS

PATRIOTISM: Combustible rubbish ready to the torch of any one ambitious to illuminate his name.” - Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary. – The Enlarged Devil’s Dictionary, p.242. – NATIONALISM OR NATION-WIDE MOBS

PATRIOTISM: Great danger is imminent when any criticism of the government is considered unpatriotic. Patriotism never demands obedience to the state but rather obedience to the principles of liberty. – Ron Paul, Liberty defined, 2011, quoted by Nizam Ahmad sharing The Libertarian's photo.– Facebook, 21.4.13. - LIBERTY, OBEDIENCE, GOVERNMENT

PATRIOTISM: He loves his country best who strives to make it best.” – R.G. Ingersoll, Decorations Day Oration, 1882. – Thus the innovators, inventors, discoverers, reformers and revolutionaries may be the greatest patriots, not the generals and soldiers. – JZ, 26.2.08.

PATRIOTISM: Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism - how passionately I hate them!" - Albert Einstein, "My First Impression of the U.S.A.", 1921. – Often “roboticism” or “Pavlovian conditioning” would be a good substitute for “heroism”. – JZ, 7.3.09. - HEROISM ON COMMAND, VIOLENCE

PATRIOTISM: How I wish that somewhere there existed an island for those who are wise and of good will! In such a place even I should be an ardent patriot.” – Albert Einstein.

PATRIOTISM: I am an anarchist patriot – a curious kind of thing.” – Paul Goodman, 5 Years …, p.198.

PATRIOTISM: I wish very much for some men in every State who are beyond the prejudices of nationalism and know exactly when patriotism ceases to be a virtue.” – Lessing , tr. by JZ of: “Ich wuenschte recht sehr, dass es in jedem Staate Maenner geben moechte, die ueber die Vorurteile der Voelkerschaft hinweg waeren und genau wuessten, wo Patriotismus Tugend zu sein aufhoert.”

PATRIOTISM: If I wished to put a curse on a nation, I would invoke the gods to decree that it be governed by those who consider themselves the only true patriots in it.” – Sydney Harris, quoted in READER’S DIGEST, 10/84.

PATRIOTISM: If patriotism were defined, not as blind obedience to government, nor as submissive worship to flags and anthems, but rather as love of one’s country, one’s fellow citizens all over the world, as loyalty to the principles of justice and democracy, then patriotism would require us to disobey our government when it violates these principles. – Historically, the most terrible things – war, genocide, and slavery – have resulted not from disobedience, but from obedience. – Howard Zinn, quoted by Afrikanus Kofi Akosah sharing Truth Movement Canada's photo. – Facebook, 18.2.13. – DISOBEDIENCE

PATRIOTISM: In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.” - Mark Twain. - Patriotism and nationalism, especially of the territorial kind, have led, probably, to more wrongful than rightful actions. When not representing voluntarism in all spheres then they are not representative enough. Where are the peaceful and tolerant patriots and nationalists for full exterritorial autonomy or experimental freedom in all spheres, for communities and societies of volunteers? All territorialists do subscribe at least to internal aggression against or suppression of or the outvoting of internal dissenters. - JZ, 29.10.02, 14.12.13. - Full experimental freedom already for the first pioneers! Their successes will be infective and attractive. Their failures will warn others. Patriotism is a dangerous sponge-word, one that has soaked up all kinds false or misleading of meanings. - JZ, 22.11.06, 24.1.11. - INNOVATORS, REFORMERS, NATIONALISM

PATRIOTISM: It can never be unpatriotic to take your country’s side against your government. It must always be unpatriotic to take your government’s side against your country.” – Benjamin R. Tucker. – It has never been unpatriotic to take your country’s side against your government. It must always be unpatriotic to take your government’s side against your country. – A Byington sticker. - It must never be unpatriotic to support your country against your government. It must always be unpatriotic to support your government against your country.” – Stephen T. Byington - It is always patriotic to support your country against your government. It is never patriotic to support your government against your country.” – Advertisement for the Libertarian Party of South Carolina, in SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER 4/77. - It is not YOUR country. Nor is it YOUR government, unless you are a volunteer for it. And if you are so lucky to be already a member of a competing and exterritorially autonomous government or non-governmental free society, then it would be very patriotic of you, to take your government’s or your society’s side against all the rest of the “country” and its population, whenever they try to interfere with your liberty and rights over your own affairs. – The old terminology is quite insufficient and misleading. – JZ, 18.2.08. - COUNTRY, GOVERNMENT, PEOPLE, COMMUNITIES, TREASON, TERRITORIAL & EXTERRITORIAL, PANARCHISM, RESISTANCE

PATRIOTISM: It is clear that patriotism, far from being the glue that holds society together, has weakened us culturally, politically, intellectually, and morally. When patriotism flourishes, freedom languishes." - Gus Ellis,, 08/27/02. -

PATRIOTISM: It is still sweet to die for your fatherland – if it houses freedom.” – Dagobert D. Runes, On the Nature of Man, p.90. - Even if you and it are wiped out by ABC mass murder devices? – JZ, 26.2.08. – It is still much better to practise all your individual liberties and rights as long as you live. – JZ, 14.3.09. -

PATRIOTISM: It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government.” – Thomas Paine (1737-1809) - Only the population, i.e. the individuals of a country and their voluntary associations do need protection, not the geography of a country. Territories do not have individual rights and liberties and territorial governments, as such, are the worst possible protectors and defenders. – JZ, 26.4.13. - PATRIOTISM WOULD ALSO PROTECT THE COUNTRY OR ITS POPULATION FROM THE OWN GOVERNMENT, NOT ONLY FROM EXTERNAL ENEMIES

PATRIOTISM: It would therefore seem to be obvious that patriotism as a feeling is a bad and harmful feeling, and as a doctrine is a stupid doctrine. For it is clear that if each people and each State considers itself the best of peoples and States they all dwell in a gross and harmful delusion.” – Tolstoy, Patriotism and Government. – It was, I believe, Ashley Montague, who called it, in the title of one of his books: “The Myth of the Chosen People” and who showed how universal this particular spleen is. – JZ, 26.2.08.

PATRIOTISM: Like the ancient Stoics, the anarchists have always been cosmopolitan and internationalist in outlook, and considered themselves ‘citizens of the world’. In general, they have supported national liberation struggles as part of a wider struggle for freedom, but they have opposed the statist aspirations and exclusive loyalties of the nationalists. They are particularly critical of patriotism, which makes the ruled identify with their rulers and become their obedient cannon-fodder. They also recognize that rivalry between Nation-States is one of the principal causes of war.” - Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p.32. – But they are, usully, not aware that the underlying cause is the territorial monopoly claim. – JZ, 18.2.08. - ANARCHISM, OBEDIENCE, CANNON-FODDER, NATIONALISM, COSMOPOLITANISM, WAR

PATRIOTISM: Love your country but fear its government.” – N.E. folk wisdom - PATRIOTISM: Love your country, but never trust its government. – Robert Heinlein in  – Always a good advice under territorialism, as long as we still allow it to dominate us. – JZ, 1.4.12. - COUNTRIES, NATIONALISM & GOVERNMENTS

PATRIOTISM: My Country, right or wrong" is a thing no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying, "My mother, drunk or sober." - Gilbert Keith Chesterton, English journalist. - Roy Halliday, Quotations with an Attitude, online. - It is mainly only their territorialism, which makes their situation and that of their occupants often rather desperate. – JZ, 8.8.08. It induces them to stand up even for wrongful cases, like protectionism, territorialism, imperialism, racism and nationalistic intolerance. – JZ, 26.5.13, 14.12.13.  – PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, VS. TERRITORIALISM

PATRIOTISM: My patriotism is not the least all-absorbing or exclusive. I will never put devotion to my country before the rights of man.” – Proudhon, in C. S. Edwards, Proudhon, p. 188. – HUMAN RIGHTS

PATRIOTISM: Never was a patriot yet, but was a fool.” – Dryden, Absalom and Achitophel, Pt. I, I.968.

PATRIOTISM: No, I don’t mean love, when I say patriotism. I mean fear. The fear of the other. And its expressions are political, not poetical: hate, rivalry, aggression. It grows in us, that fear. It grows in us year by year. We’ve followed our road too far. …” - Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left Hand of Darkness, p.21. – Other territorialists are to be feared, too. only the inherently tolerant voluntaryists, all living under self-chosen personal law, are not to be feared. – JZ, 14.12.13. - NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISM, SECURITY FEARS, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, WAR & PEACE, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW COMMUNITIES

PATRIOTISM: On one major point Mencken did agree with some of the progressive reformers, excepting, of course, the Bull Moosers. He was opposed to an overzealous patriotism, and attacked the so-called “ardent American”. He agreed with Sam Johnson’s dictum that patriotism was the “great nursery for scoundrels”. … R. D. Grinder, on Mencken, in LIBERTARIAN ANALYSIS, I/3/49. - SCOUNDRELS, POLITICIANS, NATIONALISM

PATRIOTISM: Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right.” - Carl Schurz

PATRIOTISM: Panarchist Patriotism vs. Territorialist Patriotism. – Panarchism vs. the still all too popular and thoughtless patriotism. – JZ, n.d. & 14.12.13.

PATRIOTISM: Patriot, n. One to whom the interests of a part seem superior to those of the whole. The dupe of statesmen and the tool of conquerors.” – Ambrose Bierce, The Enlarged Devil’s Dictionary, p.242.

PATRIOTISM: Patriotic, apathetic and obligation are other good examples of words that have been completely distorted over the years through propaganda. One is considered patriotic if he unquestioningly supports his “country”. All of our founding fathers, therefore, were unpatriotic, because they did not support the government that was in power at that time. Likewise, anyone who challenges the authority of the present-day government to violate human rights is unpatriotic. One can see why it has often been said that one man’s anarchist is another man’s patriot. Whether or not you are ‘patriotic’ depends not only on the eyes of the beholder, but on time and place of your action.” – R. J. Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p.301.

PATRIOTISM: patriotism … this dangerous form of tribal madness.” – Frank Herbert, The Dosadi Experiment, in GALAXY, 7/77, p.49.

PATRIOTISM: patriotism asks you to be ready to leave your wife at a moment’s notice. Possibly that’s the secret of its appeal.” – Norman Mailer, The Dear Park, p.32. - JOKES.

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism can be rightful within volunteer communities that mind their own business and leave peaceful members of other communities alone - apart from trading relationships. - Like nationalism, in territorial States, with compulsory membership, it is largely a farce or tragicomedy. - JZ, 23.9.00, 31.1.02. - VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIALITY, PERSONAL LAW, PANARCHISM

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism has become a mere national self-assertion, a sentimentality of flag-cheering with no constructive duties.” – H. G. Wells, The Future in America. - The self-assertion that is really involved is merely that of power-mad politicians, and their ignorant, prejudiced and irrational followers. What do they have to assert, except irrational notions on territorial sovereignty? They are mere persons, en masse, not mature and enlightened personalities or sovereign individuals. They know no better values than this kind of collectivistic faith and trash. They have no reasons to respect themselves, so they respect their national territorial collective, as if it were a god that needed to be worshipped, - They do not appreciate all the values represented by foreign individuals, all over the world. - JZ, 26.2.08. - Nor do they even know and appreciate all their own genuine individual rights and liberties. - JZ, 24.1.11, 14.12.13.

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism involved more than loyalty to a particular piece of ground. If Ardrey, (*) could not discern that, then he was not really trying. It also (**) involves loyalty to a particular group of people and to a ‘cultural tradition’ as Ardrey put it.” – Filthy Pierre, THE CONNECTION 115, p 119. - (*) Robert Ardrey, Coiner of the slogan “the territorial imperative”, also the title of one of his books. – JZ, 22.2.08. - (**) Also? Territorial or proximity feelings do not really stretch over the whole territory encompassed by territorial borders, much of which is not even known to most people living within these borders. – JZ, 22.2.08. - TERRITORIALISM

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is a kind of religion; it is the egg from which wars are hatched.” – Guy de Maupassant (1850-1892), My Uncle Sosthenes. - Territorialism, centralism, addiction to uniformity notions and compulsory membership demands are strong contributory factors which are neither sufficiently examined by patriots and nationalists nor by political scientists and writers. - JZ, 26. 11. 06. - Without territorial monopoly claims the diverse people would tend to peacefully compete with each other as they do in the Olympic Games, in private businesses, in hobbies, crafts and professional activities, as producers and consumers, entertainers and entertained. – JZ, 3.1.08. - NATIONALISM & WAR, CHAUVINISM, TERRITORIALISM, HATRED OF & FEAR OF FOREIGNERS & ALIENS, WAR & PEACE

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is a maggot in their heads.” – Thoreau

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is a praiseworthy competition with one's ancestors.” - Tacitus

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is good so long as it's patriotism towards America's tradition of freedom. Don't confuse that with blind nationalism.” - Dan Mc Donald, 13.12.01, quoted in FREEDOM NEWS DAILY, 15.12.01. - NATIONALISM, FREEDOM, AMERICANISM

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is in political life what faith is in religion.” – Lord Acton, Nationality, 1862 – And of as little objective value! – JZ, 12.11.81. – But it has not learnt yet, like most religions have, in most countries, the peace-promoting qualities of voluntarism combined with exterritorial autonomy and personal law only. Since patriots are now armed with mass murder devices, it has become very urgent and necessary to introduce the same kind of tolerance that already exists for religions and in many other spheres, finally, into the political, economic and social spheres – for all their various systems, beliefs, laws and institutions. – JZ, 26.2.08, 14.12.13. – TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is loyalty to geography.” – Source unknown. (“Patriotismus ist geographische Loyalitaet.”) - TERRITORIALISM

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is not enough. I must have no hatred or bitterness toward anyone.” (*)  - Edith (Louisa) Cavell, to the Rev. Mr. Gahan, the night before her execution by the Germans in Belgium. - Not all Germans were her judges and executioners! - JZ, 13.12.02. – (*) Not even towards tyrants, mass murderers, fanatic or fundamentalist aggressors? – JZ, 7.3.09.

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is often an arbitrary veneration of real estate above principles.” – George Jean Nathan, 1882-1958, (*) - Bernard Berenson, 1865-1959, Lore and Maurice Cowan, compilers, The Wit of the Jews, Leslie Frewin, London, 1970, p.58. – (*) G. J. Nathan, Testament of a Critic. (“Patriotismus ist oft nichts anderes als Grund und Boden hoeher schaetzen als Prinzipien.“) - PRINCIPLES, TERRITORIALISM, JOKES, NATIONALISM, TERRITORIALISM & PRINCIPLES

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” - Samuel Johnson. - James Boswell, Life of Johnson, entry for Friday, April 7, 1775, p. 615 (1970). "In Dr. Johnson's famous dictionary patriotism is defined as the last resort of a scoundrel. With all due respect to an enlightened but inferior lexicographer, I beg to submit that it is the first." - Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary, at entry for patriotism, The Collected Writings of Ambrose Bierce, p. 323 (1946, reprinted 1973). - H. L. Mencken added this to Johnson's dictum: "But there is something even worse: it is the first, last, and middle range of fools." - THE WORLD, New York City, November 7, 1926, p.3E.

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is the necessary condition for war.” – Free after Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left Hand of Darkness, p. 39/40. – JZ, 16.1.80. - WAR

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons.” – Bertrand Russell. - Alas, most of the "patriots" still ignore some of the most important rights, liberties, questions, problems and solutions and do so proudly rather than repentantly. - JZ, 26. 11. 06.Or even for wrongful ones, like protectionism, territorialism, nationalism. – JZ, 26.5.13.  - NATIONALISM & WAR AIMS, TERRITORIALISM

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.” – George Bernard Shaw. - It ought to be your determination to try to make it superior to others, as far as you could, through your own creative efforts. – JZ, 12.9.85. - Another version: Patriotism is the belief your country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it.” - George Bernard Shaw. – Sent by C.B.

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism means loving our country, not the government.” – Michael Cloud. - Especially not a territorial government over its involuntary victims. - JZ, 26.11.06. - Even the best kind of territorial patriotism still constitutes a great wrong, by territorially suppressing secession and exterritorial autonomy for dissenters. – JZ, 2.1.08, 14.12.13. - VS. GOVERNMENTS, PATRIOTISM DOES NOT MEAN STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM OR LOVE OF SUPPOSEDLY GREAT "LEADERS", OR RULING PARTIES, ADMINISTRATIONS & POLITICIANS OR TERRITORIALISM

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official.” - Theodore Roosevelt – The country and the people are misnomers for the usually very diverse populations, containing mostly several peoples, judged by their races, languages, religions, customs and ideologies. – JZ, 14.12.13. - PEOPLE, GOVERNMENT, RULERS, TERRITORIALISM, COUNTRIES, POPULATIONS, DIVERSITY, ENFORCED UNIFORMITY OR OBEDIENCE

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism to one’s self precludes any other form of rational patriotism.” – W. Robert Black, THE NEW BANNER, 12.2.72. – RATIONAL SELFISHNESS, SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism wants to advance the own nation. Nationalism wants to put other nations down. – JZ, 22.6.92, expressing in my own words something that Ulrich von Beckerath, 1882-1969 has often stated to me and others. The term nation does not cover the reality of diverse peoples in the population within any State’s territorial border. It is, usually, an unwarranted generalization. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PATRIOTISM: Patriotism, if aggressive, and at the expense of other countries, is a vice; if in sympathy with them, a virtue.” – Thomas Hardy, 1840-1928, Notes made for the Dynasts, quoted in THE TIMES, 1930. – I consider it a virtue only if it does favor individual rights and liberties within and across all artificial borders. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PATRIOTISM: Patriots always talk of dying for their country and never of killing for their country.” – Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) - Autobiography, 1967.  – Patriots, too, are not frank enough about their violent means. – JZ, n.d. – They are also not patriotic enough to develop and proclaim and stick to quite rightful war and peace aims! – JZ, 14.3.09. – How often has warfare really benefitted either the aggressor or the defender or both of them? – JZ, 2.4.12. – Are soldiers mostly proud and frank about their war experiences? – JZ,  14.12.13. - WAR, WARFARE, WAR PROPAGANDA, TERRITORIALISM, WAR AIMS, PEACE AIMS

PATRIOTISM: Take a look at your patriots: They do not walk, they march. They do not hate the enemy; instead, they have “hereditary enemies” whom they exchange every 10 years or so, making them hereditary friends, and back into hereditary enemies. They do not sing songs; they yell martial airs. …” - Wilhelm Reich, Listen, Little Man! p.54. - ENEMIES

PATRIOTISM: That pernicious sentiment, "’Our country, right or wrong’." - James Russell Lowell.

PATRIOTISM: that unthinking patriotism, child of habit and not of reason, which mistakes government for liberty and law for justice. – Wendell Phillips, quoted in Sprading, The Great Quotations, p.164.

PATRIOTISM: The dangerous patriot ... drifts into chauvinism and exhibits blind enthusiasm for military actions.” - Colonel James A. Donovan, U.S. Marine Corps - & CHAUVINISM

PATRIOTISM: The government takes what it needs to prosecute the war – that’s the only way – and hands over these interest-bearing receipts as a sop to patriotism. If it did not offer these claims on future production in exchange, for what it needs of the current production to carry on the war, well, the resentment might cause the war to be called off; patriotism that isn’t paid for might be diluted.” – Frank Chodorov, Out of Step, p97. - WAR BOND ISSUES & WAR, PUBLIC DEBTS, GOVERNMENT SECURITIES OR INSECURITIES, TAXATION OF FUTURE GENERATIONS

PATRIOTISM: The only country that any man has a right to love is one where there is a balanced judgment, justice found on wisdom, a free spirit and a temperate mind.” – Judge Learned Hand, quoted in C. Bingham, Men and Affairs, p.316.

PATRIOTISM: The patriot is not the one who loudly praises his own; he is just a braggard. A patriot is the man who praises the land and the people that are dedicated to freedom and brotherhood.” – Dagobert D. Runes, A Dictionary of Thought. – And Brotherhood? – JZ

PATRIOTISM: The patriots are those who love America enough to wish to see her as a model to mankind.” – Adlai E. Stevenson, The Hard Kind of Patriotism, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, July 1963.

PATRIOTISM: The secret of our patriotism is in our love of freedom. It is not our land that moves us. It is that we are free in the land. It is not our people who move us. It is that the people must be free. - It is not genius or accomplishment in themselves, but that we are free to invent, discover, and live our own lives – it is freedom which provides the basis for any patriotic fervor we may have. - This is the lesson the men in power have never learned. It is they, not us, who need a lesson in love of country. We do not need to be taught devotion to what is ours. The men in power work against that devotion. They lust after our possessions; they impose their rule; they take our loved ones from our midst, and intone against any resistance to their manifold dictates. The men in government think that they are the country. And, after molesting us and victimizing us, they marvel that they have not inspired our devotion.” – Robert LeFevre, The Libertarian, p.60. – PEOPLE AS PROPERTY OF GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM

PATRIOTISM: The time is fast approaching when to call a man a patriot will be the deepest insult you can offer him. Patriotism now means advocating plunder in the interest of the privileged classes of the particular State system into which we have happened to be born.” – E. Belford Bax. – Was there enough left to plunder in systematically destroyed Germany and Japan, after WW II? – JZ, 22.2.08. – Enough to make all the own losses worthwhile? – JZ, 14.3.09. - WAR AIMS, WARFARE, AIR RAIDS, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, VICTORIES & DEFEATS, NOW MASS MURDERS & MASS DESTRUCTION

PATRIOTISM: There is no patriotic art and no patriotic science. Both belong, like every exalted good, to the whole world, and can be fostered only by the general free cooperation of all who live at the same time, with constant regard for what remains known to us from the past.” – Goethe, quoted by Rocker in Nationalism and Culture, p.460. – Is there such a thing as a patriotic philosophy, a patriotic economics, a patriotic justice, a patriotic right or liberty? – JZ, 24.6.08. – Q.

PATRIOTISM: This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it … Why should there not be a patient confidence in the ultimate justice of the people? Is there any better or equal hope in the world?” - Abraham Lincoln. - People own only their own property, not whole countries or continents. But politicians try to rule territorially, based upon this lie and false pretence. - JZ, 13.10.02. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

PATRIOTISM: To defend one’s home and country is patriotic. Patriotism is a fine, healthy, selfish feeling; but it is comparatively little developed owing to its subordination to political duties. Reverence for the national flag, and duty to rulers, are frequently mis-called patriotic sentiments. You, however, are able to disconnect fatherland and government, and will understand that patriotism recognizes no difference between a foreign king and a home king, i.e. between a foreign foe and one in possession, - and that the most truly patriotic people are those who try to preserve their homes and country from all kinds of invaders, from military conquerors to School Board inspectors and rate and tax collectors.” – John Badcock Jr., Slaves to Duty, quoted in LIBERTARIAN ANALYSIS, 9/71. - TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, STATISM

PATRIOTISM: To make us love our country, our country ought to be lovely.” – Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France, III, 1790. – It not only ought to be lovely but ought to be free, peaceful, just, enlightened and progressive as well. – JZ, 24.3.08. – Compare the several sayings on: Where I am free there is my country. – Is there any such country, any such population now? – JZ, 14.12.13.

PATRIOTISM: To mind your own business and do the square thing with your neighbors is an extremely high order of patriotism. If every man were to do this, flags, governments, powers, dominations and thrones might all take an indefinite vacation.” – Puck. – M.Y.O.B.: MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS, PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAWS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL

PATRIOTISM: Tolstoy like Godwin also rigorously condemned patriotism. He saw it inextricably linked with government. By supporting government and fostering war, he declared patriotism to be a ‘rude, harmful, disgraceful and bad feeling, and above all, immoral”, since it influences man to see himself the ‘son of his fatherland and the slave of his Government, and commits actions contrary to his reason and his conscience.” - Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p.32. – However, patriotism, as opposed to chauvinism and nationalism, has also been defined as the attempt to make one’s own nation or people, as far as one could, superior with regard to enlightenment, progress, peacefulness, freedom, justice and prosperity and this without attempting to do so at the expense of other peoples or States or societies. Ulrich von Beckerath, an anarchist cosmopolitan, held that view. – JZ, 18.2.08. – NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISM, PEOPLE, GOVERNMENT, WAR, IMMORALITY

PATRIOTISM: Treason is in the air around us everywhere. It goes by the name of patriotism. – Thomas Corwin: Letter from Washington, D.C., Jan. 16, 1861.

PATRIOTISM: We Americans seem to be bent on doing something, but very few of us are bent on thinking through what needs to be done. We’re a little bit like the famous general who was so patriotic that when he heard the bugle call he raced from his tent, leaped on his horse and rode off in all directions. We’re a little bit like that. We want to do things, rather than think them through. – Robert LeFevre, Good Government, p.7. – ACTION, “WE MUST ACT!”

PATRIOTISM: When a dog barks at the moon, then it is religion; but when he barks at strangers, it is patriotism! - David Star Jordan - Roy Halliday, Quotations with an Attitude, online. - & RELIGION

PATRIOTISM: When I was growing up, we understood a "patriot" to be as it is described in The Oxford English Dictionary: "one whose ruling passion is the love of his country," and "who maintains and defends his country’s freedom or rights." Such a definition was even extended to one who was "a factious disturber of the government." Today, "patriotism" – like "liberty" – has come to mean little more, to most people, than obedience to political authority!” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 23. - PATRIOTS, FREEDOM, RIGHTS

PATRIOTISM: Where liberty dwells there is my country. (“Ubi libertas, ibi patria.”) “A Latin phrase whose author is unknown, but which Algernon Sidney (c.1640) adopted as his motto. A similar sentiment is attributed to Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine. – “And where liberty is not, there is mine. – “The world is my country.” – “I am a Terranian”. – “Where liberty dwells, there is my country.” – John Milton, 1654. - Also ascribed to Benjamin Franklin. - Where liberty is, there is my country. – James Otis - LOVE OF COUNTRY & LIBERTY

PATRIOTISM: Where one is happy, there's one's homeland.” – (Ubi bene ibi patria.) - Anonymous Latin Saying. - NATIONALISM, FATHERLAND, MOTHERLAND & FREEDOM

PATRIOTISM: Where one is well off, there is one’s fatherland.” – Derived from Aristophanes, in “Plutos”. („Ubi bene ibi patria.“ – „Wo es einem gut geht, da ist das Vaterland.“)

PATRIOTISM: Who loves his country cannot hate mankind.” – Charles Churchill: The Farewell, 1764. - Well, there seem to be too many false loves around, for all too many are willing to use nuclear mass murder devices against “foreigners”, even upon the risk of nuclear retaliation and accidents with such devices. – JZ, 12.7.86.

PATRIOTISM: Who seeks for truth should be of no country.” – Voltaire, Réponse, à un Académicien. – Genuine knowledge and wisdom, genuine knowledge of man and mankind, is world-wide. – JZ, 26.2.08. – NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISM, COSMOPOLITANISM

PATRIOTISM: You can count on him to lay down your life for his country.” – Safian I, 170.

PATRIOTISM: You can’t expect everybody to be a patriotic fool who fights and risks all for undeclared and, usually, quite wrongful war aims of his territorial government. – JZ, 30.1.79, 26.2.08, 14.12.13. – WAR AIMS, QUITE JUST ONES, DECLARED IN TIME, THUS, POSSIBLY EVEN PREVENTING A WAR.

PATRIOTISM: You will never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the human race.” – Bernard Shaw, O’Flaherty V.C. – Or direct it into harmless channels of which sports is the least important. Free Trade, competitive production, personal law, various panarchies of volunteers only. – JZ, 16.11.78. – Once patriotism becomes confined to volunteers only and they have to pay the full costs and risk their own lives only for their “patriotic” acts, such acts will become greatly reduced. Anyhow, under free choice of governments and societies for oneself and for everyone else, how many real enemies of significant power would remain? – JA, 26.2.08. – ENEMIES UNDER VOLUNTARISM? ONLY THE REMAININT TERRITORIAL COERCERS.

PATRIOTISM: You’re not supposed to be so blind with patriotism that you can’t face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or who says it.” – Malcolm X, Malcolm X Speaks, 1965, p.12. - NATIONALISM

PATRONAGE: One may choose either to patronize a government with one's money and services or one might prefer not to do so. Both actions are right, if voluntary and nobody else is coerced. - One may owe a patron something or such debts may simply be asserted, but nobody is owned by his patron. One may, by individual rights and liberties, freely secede from feudal and other forms of imposed patronage and opt out from contracted conditions. - JZ, 3.6.84, 15.11.02, 14.12.13. - VS. VOLUNTARISM

PATRONAGE: Patronage of any kind is untrustworthy. State patronage, although more ambiguous, is the least trustworthy of all. It can create a highly-baffled public which one day is taught it has a right to State money and next day is told it has a duty to be self-sufficient. Such conflicting imperatives would turn one of Pavlov’s dogs irredeemably neurotic. In the case of the public, it has the effect of weakening judgment and morale, since in the main we all require normal social approval.” – Michael Moorcock, The Retreat from Liberty, p.18. – WELFARE STATE

PAUL: A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can depend on the support of Paul.” – George Bernard Shaw. – That’s politics. – Stormy Mon, in A Liberty Book, p.1. – PLUNDER, WELFARE STATE, PETER, TAXATION, POLITICS UNDER TERRITORIALISM

PAUPERS: Every man or woman, Benn argued, who was taking from the common till more than he or she paid into it, or more than someone else paid into it on his or her behalf, was a pauper. The tax-payer subsidized beet-sugar producer of East Anglia he cheerfully categorized as a pauper.” - Deryck Abel, in Ernest Benn, Counsel for Liberty, p. 74. - RICH PAUPERS, WELFARE FOR THE RICH, SUBSIDIES, WELFARE STATE, HAND-OUTS, WELFARE FOR THE RICH

PAX BRITANNICA: In almost every instance in which the rule of the Queen has been established and the great Pax Britannica has been enforced, there has come with it greater security of life and property, and a material improvement in the condition of the bulk of the population.” – Joseph Chamberlain, speech at Royal Colonial Institute, 1897.

PAY YOUR WAY: Another benefit would be that it would tend to get government out of the business of providing services appropriately left to the market. (*) If people had to pay the full costs of using government services they would quickly see how inefficient government is, and would turn to (or demand to be allowed to) alternatives.” - George C. Leef, THE FREEMAN, 9/78. - (*) Or to competing and voluntary governments or communities or societies of volunteers only, all without a territorial monopoly. – JZ, 26.2.08. – PUBLIC SERVICES, EFFICIENCY, COMPETITION, ALTERNATIVES, PUBLICITY, PRICING

PAY YOUR WAY: Each must pay for his own sins.” – Quoted under “Solzhenitsyn’s Logic” by J. Josten, Editor of FCI, London and reproduced in NEWS DIGEST INTERNATIONAL, June 76. – SINS, RESPONSIBILITY, ACCOUNTING, RECKONING, TANSTAAFL

PAY YOUR WAY: He who pays the piper can call the tune.” – John Ray, English Proverbs.

PAY YOUR WAY: If it is just that each person pay the full cost of a haircut or movie ticket, then it is also just that he pay the full cost of those services which the government provides him. (*) Others should not be expected to pay his way. Our present tax system is unjust in that it often compels one person to subsidize the government (service? – JZ ) used by another. Government would have to remain neutral among its citizens (**) if we taxed strictly on the basis of the benefits received by each person. (***) Any other system becomes a breeding ground for injustice and social strife.” – George C. Leef, THE FREEMAN, 9/78, p.569. - - (*) Provided, these services are not monopolized. Under territorialism many services are monopolized. - (**) Or should be just one competitive service organization among many, without a territorial monopoly, serving only its volunteers. - (***) Then it would already be a form of voluntary taxation or subscription. – JZ, 26.2.08. – TAXATION

PAY YOUR WAY: It would be unethical to accept payment for nothing.” – F. Paul Wilson, The Healer, p.75. – Earn and pay your way. – JZ, 14.3.09. - TRADE, REFUSING HAND-OUTS, PERSONAL INDEPENDENCE, SELF-RESPECT, EXCHANGE, WELFARE HANDOUTS

PAY YOUR WAY: Life is too short to do anything for oneself that one can pay others to do for one. – W. S. Maugham, 1874-1965. – A. Andrews Quotations, p.379. - However, at the prices which tradesmen charge, one is often forced to rather try to do repair and renovation jobs oneself. – JZ, 18.2.08. - SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, DIVISION OF LABOR, MARKET, TRADESMEN, DO-IT-YOURSELF MOVEMENT, TRADESMEN

PAY YOUR WAY: Pay your debts.” - L. E. Modesitt, Gravity Dreams, Orbit, London, 1999, p.103. – It matters very much with what kinds of exchange media or clearing certificates or clearing accounts one is free to pay one’s debts. – JZ, 10.3.09. – MONETARY & CLEARING FREEDOM, FREE BANKING, ABILITY TO PAY, COMPETITIVE SUPPLY OF EXCHANGE MEDIA

PAY YOUR WAY: Pay your way. – JZ, 2/75. – How many have said or written that before me? But for me it was a good formula for an almost self-evident advice. – I still think that the shortest slogans should be sorted out in the end, when many others have completed this collection. - JZ, 26.2.08. – If you can, with your own money or clearing certificate. – The means of payment should never be monopolized but competitively supplied. Likewise the value standard. - JZ, 14.3.09.

PAY YOUR WAY: Paying for what you want stimulates appreciation.” – Source unknown.

PAY YOUR WAY: The best things in life are paid for. – Saunders. – Is a quicky with a prostitute to be preferred to a quicky with your wife or girl friend? – We pay, directly or indirectly, a lot for government services. Do we get the best possible services from it? - JZ, 26.2.08.

PAY YOUR WAY: There is no such thing as a cost-free decision. So nothing comes without its price. But that’s not quite the way I’d define freedom. Freedom isn’t the ability to avoid costs or the ability to avoid the consequences of your actions. Freedom is the ability to decide which actions you will take. And freedom is being able to act without having someone else interfere forcefully. So, freedom isn’t quite the same as escaping payment. There is no escape from payment. But you can and, indeed, must and will decide just what plus factors you want. After which, you must always be prepared to pay the costs, for the costs will be there.” – Robert LeFevre, Lift Her Up, Tenderly, p.73.

PAY YOUR WAY: Things you don’t pay for don’t do you much good.” – Walter Brooks, This Is America, an anthology ed. by Max J. Herzberg, p.295. – Try to live without breathing! – JZ, 21.4.08. –

PAY YOUR WAY: What will you have? quoth God; pay for it and take it.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), Essays: First Series (1841): Compensation. Quoted as a proverb. – How many shopkeepers have already said this to their customers? – JZ – - “Take what you want”, said God. “Take it and pay for it.” – Quoted as a Spanish proverb. - Let us have that consumer sovereignty and free choice towards all kinds of governments, societies and communities. Only the territorial monopoly ones ought to become outlawed. They certainly have committed an excess of crimes for all too long. – JZ, 7.3.09, 14.12.13. – PANARCHIES, TERRITORIALISM, GOD, SUPPORT YOURSELF, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, TRADE, FREE ENTERPRISE, FREE EXCHANGE, MARKET, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARY TAXATION

PAY YOUR WAY: You get only what you pay for.” - Robert Heinlein, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, IF SF, April 66, p.160. - Taxpayers get less. Bureaucrats and politicians and their favorites get the rest. - JZ, 9.2.02. - TANSTAAFL, PAY AS YOU GO, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, WELFARE STATE, TAXATION,

PAYMENT DIFFICULTIES: Payment difficulties can be overcome by inflation or “deficit financing”. - Popular belief. Maybe a government's payment difficulties can be TEMPORARILY overcome in this way but certainly not permanently, as monetary history has often shown. But payment difficulties of others are not decreased but rather increased thereby, for most people, sooner or later, especially creditors and even debtors. For after they had once cheated their creditors with legal tender "payments", which were only part payments, because they were made in depreciated paper money, at their nominal and fictitious, they will have difficulties in getting any further credits. - "Payments" in inflated, forced and exclusive currency do not constitute a full and just payment. They are, rather, comparable to "payment" in requisitioning certificates by a conquering or occupying army, which is unable to pay in sound cash. - To some extent payment difficulties are inevitably associated with the system of monetary despotism. But this system is not inevitable. - The ability to pay should be increased not by inflationary issues of exclusive and forced currencies but, instead, by issues of optional, competing and market rated currencies that may be freely refused and discounted and which have to be accepted at their face value at any time and from anyone only by their issuers. Then and thereby all ready-for-sale consumer goods, services and even labour, which are in daily demand, could become monetised by such issues and thus easily sold for such competing currencies, clearing certificates or account credits, when they stream back, after having been spent into circulation by their issuers, who then and thus oblige no one else but themselves by these issues. – JZ, 2. 4. 97, 14.12.13. – Only then would good monies be free to drive out bad monies. Not only gold or silver coins and certificates for them are good and sound money. – JZ, 8.4.08, 14.12.13. - Naturally, free choice of value standards does also belong to such a free exchange system. Likewise - all kinds of agreed-upon forms of clearing and credit. - JZ, 24.1.11, 14.12.13. – INFLATION, PUBLIC DEBT, TAXATION

PAYMENT PRACTICES REVERSED: With e.g., a gold commodity money, a creditor lends the gold money to a debtor and the debtor has to return equivalent gold currency to him. And the debtor, to enable him to repay a debt, which he had used for a temporary investment, has to collect at least enough gold money to enable him to pay back his creditor. When both, creditors and debtors are free to issue their own shop-foundation money or clearing certificates the situation is reversed. The creditor issues mere money tokens to the debtor, which have shop foundation with the shop or shop association or shopping centre of the creditor. From there the debtor - or his suppliers, have to collect the real values they want – consumer goods or services, by presenting the tokens to this creditor. Then, when the debt is due, the debtor would not only be free to try to collect, through his trading, sufficient tokens issued by the creditor, but, instead, he could also offer the creditor the own money tokens or clearing certificates, whose real values (goods, services, labour) the creditor would then have to collect from his debtor, directly, or through his suppliers, to whom he has passed them on, in payment of his debts. - Alternatively, the debtor could have issue himself his own kind of clearing certificates or IOUs, or shop currency tokens, to the degree that his creditor would find them acceptable either at par or at as discount. The debtor would then and thus and to that extent become a payer first and then a supplier. And so would the creditor. Both could mobilise whatever assets they have in ready for sale goods, services and labour, for additional turnovers. Both, to some extent, could also mobilise this ability, for medium- and long-term investments, if that is their wish, but only to the extent that some people are prepared to invest their shop currency stock in this way. To use an analogy from international trade: All could become first importers, paying with assignments upon their delivery capacity and readiness for internationally wanted goods and services and then exporters, by accepting their own assignments at par in payment for their exports. - Money would be “transport tickets” for a wide local, national and also international choice of goods, services and labour. Unlike gold coins, they would not transfer commodity values directly but only indirectly. Like gold certificates they would have convertibility or redemption values, but not in one commodity only but in all desired consumer services and goods and labours, which are in daily in demand and supplied by the local note or shop currency issuers. No one would be forced to supply gold that he does not possess or may not be able to acquire. He would only have to back up his own standardised IOUs (or those of his payment association) with his own labour, services and goods. He would point out that he would state their prices in gold weight units but would not insist on payment of these prices in gold weight units. Instead, he would accept his own standardized IOUs at their nominal gold weight value, as if they were such weight units in gold. In this way he would be able, together with his associates, to keep his IOU's at par with their nominal gold weight unit values, although not a single gold coin might circulate or even exist in his locality. Those really wanting gold coins and bullion could then be referred to the world-wide market for gold, whose reserves embrace all the gold in the world may be freely traded, either openly or underground. Both the creditors and the debtors would be freed to monetise their assets directly or indirectly through their local voluntary payment association. Both could first appear as “money” or token money or ticket-money payers and then as the redeemers of their competing alternative currency or money tokens, IOUs or clearing certificates or account credits, with the own goods, services and labour. Both would no longer depend on being hunters and collectors of scarce and forced monopoly money and dependent upon its manipulation in inflations, deflations and stagflations. Both, indeed, could grow their own money on trees or as easily as grass - but only to the extent of their redemption capacity for it with their own services, goods and labour. Their own IOU's would, inevitably, soon stream back to them in payment of debts owed to them or to pay for their goods, services and labour. The more they could thus freely issue their own money, the more of their goods, services and labour they could sell for it. They would thus be enabled to supply themselves with sales and labour, or put cash demand for what they have to offer into circulation, rather than depending on the cash which might or might not be sufficiently supplied by others or, most unlikely at all, be sufficiently and soundly supplied by a distant governmental monopoly institution like the government’s central bank . - I tried, largely in vain, to convey in English Beckerath's short expression: "Jede Bring-Schuld wird eine Hol-Schuld!": “Every debt to be delivered becomes a debt to be collected.” - Every IOU is still covered and redeemed but its purchasing power remains, then, to be collected, not in gold, from the issuing debtor, but in form of wanted goods, services and labour, which is ready and willing to offer them. Every debtor and every creditor would have a small potential to become an issue and acceptance “bank” for the own banknotes - or for clearing house certificates or their kind of shop currency. But suitable local mergers into local payment communities, for the issue of “local currencies” would make such issues more acceptable to other local people than issues of individuals, tradesmen or single shops. And such mergers would not lead to new money issue monopolism because secessions from them, as well as the establishment of new issue and acceptance centres, would always remain possible and often advisable. - The old wish that your own money spent should come back to you in payments, would at last be realized to the extent that it could be and should be. - JZ, 19.11.92, 14.4.97, 14.12.13. - Under a perfect clearing system this return could be perfectly achieved. - JZ, 5.9.02.

PAYMENT SPHERES: Each different payment sphere could and in some cases should establish its own suitable and competitive as well as sound exchange medium, as well as using a sound value standard. No payment sphere should be under the obligation to supply not only exchange media for its own transactions but also for the transactions of other payment spheres. Any attempt to do so will lead to liquidity difficulties, to over- and under-issues. Any payment sphere must be largely self-liquidating. It cannot systematically subsidize others without running into difficulties. Money issues for e.g. the transport sphere, should not be utilized largely to achieve the turnovers in the entertainment or education spheres or for the purchase of foods or other consumer services. An exclusive general currency, intended for and monopolized for general circulation, will, first of all, be wrong, because it cannot rightly represent all the goods and services provided by others than the issuer. Secondly, it will not be evenly distributed through an economy but run stronger through some channels than through others. Thirdly, its quantity will tend to be either larger or smaller than is required, at least in certain spheres. It is not regulated by the price mechanism, i.e., by voluntary acceptance or refusal and market rating. In essence, it is as absurd as a ticket to all performances and an invitation to all parties. Free and voluntary exchanges or trades require free and voluntary exchange media, supplied and accepted, rated or refused by the participants in these exchanges, as well as sound value standards that are acceptable to them, under free choice of value standards. Without this freedom there are no fully free exchanges, contracts and markets, prices, rents, interest rates or fees. - JZ, 24.8.02, 14.12.13. – FREE BANKING, MONETARY FREEDOM, COMPETITIVE SUPPLY & USE OF EXCHANGE MEDIA & VALUE STANDARDS, ALL OPTIONAL, MARKET RATED & REFUSABLE BY ALL BUT THE ISSUERS

PAYMENTS, UNDERGROUND ECONOMY: To what extent would it be possible and safe enough to buy and sell only partly in legal tender, say, 10 %, pay taxes only on these and spend and receive the rest only in alternative credits or privately issued underground cash? As little use of Legal Tender would definitely arouse suspicion among the revenuers, since wage rates etc. are reasonably well known. Moreover, at least initially, the readiness to accept legal tender is greater, in most cases, than the readiness to accept a new currency, even when it is a better one. Thus, 90 % payments in legal tender and only 10% in "green dollars" etc., underhand, seem easier to attain and to hide. Pricing out one's goods, services in alternative value standards would be even harder to achieve. For how can you publish your prices to the potential buyers without also publishing the fact of your alternative value standard reckoning? It is like using the right to freedom of expression and information quite openly, publicly, while living under severely enforced censorship. However, although not legalised, in crisis situations emergency monies are used, alternative standards, too, and shop prices during the Israel inflation of the official shekel paper money, are, supposedly, quite openly marked in US dollars rather than in shekels, while an index standard is officially and periodically used to bring wages and salaries temporarily in line again with the inflation rate. Moreover, unofficially, in border towns, two national currencies are often widely offered and accepted. Monetary despotism isn't always fully enforced. - When its rules are frequently breached by many, then there is also the possibility of insuring oneself against the risk of the remaining instances of monetary despotism being enforced. - JZ, 13.10.85, 9.5.97. - As far as taxation is concerned: I know of a tradesman, well paid, daily, in cash, in unrecorded payments for his services. However, when he applied for a housing loan from a bank, he had difficulties in proving that he was earning enough to be able to repay the housing loan. He was engaging in such black market wage payment transactions using the government's legal tender paper money. Both sides were honest and saved in taxes and in record-keeping. - JZ, 24.1.11. - MONETARY FREEDOM EXPERIMENTS & TAX EVASION, BLACK MARKET TRANSACTIONS & PAYMENTS

PAYMENTS: Wages and salaries, pensions and superannuation payments, rents, dividends and interest rates, import and exports, all kinds of fees, subscriptions and charges (including taxes, while they can still be imposed and extracted), are to become payable in any means of payment and using any value standards which the contractors can agree upon or which their chosen arbitrators settle for them in case they do not agree. Each currency issuer must only accept the own means of payment or IOU's or clearing certificates at any time from anyone in any payment or settlement due to him, at par with their nominal value. No means of payment to be legal tender or an exclusive means of payment in general circulation any longer. But when a local currency, standing at par with its nominal value, has not been explicitly excluded in a contract then, in case of disagreements regarding its use, it may be juridically presumed as having been the intended means of settlement of a debt. These are the only cases that I can presently think of where some form of moral or customary legal tender would still continue, under any just and free system. But for this no special legal tender legislation would be required. This form of acceptance obligation or honest or moral settlement is inherent in the obligation of contracts. - JZ, n.d., 29.4.97. - FORMS OF PAYMENTS OR CLEARING TO BE QUITE FREE, LEGAL TENDER, CONTRACTS, LOCAL CURRENCIES

PC's, COMPUTERS, HARDWARE, SOFTWARE: I want to be a satisfied user of a well working and lasting computer system, not its servant and maintenance technician. - JZ, 5.4.02. - Will computer users have to more and more service their system or get it serviced, rather than the system serving them? - JZ, 26.4.02, 14.12.13. - Their acquisition and maintenance require already much more in money, labor and time from us than typewriters did and books. – I am once again for a fortnight without a fully functioning system! - JZ, 14.3.09.

PEACE & FREEDOM: Freedom of action and maximum tolerance or endless wars, civil wars, terrorism, party struggles, compromises, dissatisfaction and finally, in desperation, error, by misjudgment or accident, the nuclear, chemical or biological general holocaust? - Australians, like other victims of the territorial nation state concept and its corollaries (one rule, one law, one jurisdiction for consenters and dissenters alike, based on limited but despotic voting powers over the fates of others) are split up into at least 3 groups that are antagonistic to each other and permanently wrestle with each other for domination, which neither side has any great chance to completely achieve. A lot of energy, earnings and resources are wasted and misdirected and expropriated in the process whilst numerous forms of parasitism are sponsored. - These three groups are: a) The Statists. They want as much as possible of human life run by the State, centrally directed, regulated, manipulated, adjudicated, permitted or refused, in the pursuit of variously and vaguely defined "public interests". Former Prime Minister G. Whitlam put it once in a nutshell when the stated (I do not have the literal quote on hand): Australians should, ideally, only need a pocket money. All important and essential services ought to be paid for by the State. Rarely was a politician as frank. That would have really institutionalized their subjects. Through his hands would have gone almost all of our earnings and "our" expenditures, provided the latter agreed with his choices. The State, that's me, he could have said, with Louis XIV. He got very upset when Australians, at least temporarily, gave him, his cohorts and his aims a resounding "NO!" in reply, during the next election. Alas, the same Australians, largely with their consent, fell later victims to more of the same policies by others and by the same party. We are still far from living in an enlightened age. - b) The Compromisers, Moderates and Middle of the Roaders or Majoritarian Democrats. They have very much in common with the Statists but are not as consistent as the Statists are. They want to have their cake and eat it, too. Their committees, special boards and authorities, royal commissions, majority voting, representative institutions, democratic procedures, etc. try to somewhat satisfy almost all of the most diversified people, interests and aims, setting themselves up as universal adjudicators between the contenders a) and c). They have only a statist concept of "The Law" and of "Order", "Freedom" and "The Market" and ignore, despise or ridicule all radical and consistent principles, especially natural law, human and individual rights and liberties principles, preferring the "civil rights" that are very narrowly defined by them and which very often restrict rather than uphold genuine rights. Naturally, they are unable to provide more than a hotchpotch of ad-hoc measures and compromises, a mixed stew, which cannot fully satisfy anyone except those who are very mixed-up themselves. - c) The Freedom and Rights Lovers, however limited their vision of individual freedom and rights is, who do appreciate at least a number of individual rights and liberties and want to be left alone to enjoy these undisturbed. For this purpose, and to the degree they can envision, they want power over others to be limited and decentralized. Only a few want it altogether abolished, with no restrictions remaining on any creative, productive, tolerant and voluntary activities of individuals and their groups of volunteers. There are still many disagreements among them, e.g. on how to resist and penalize or neutralize the remaining aggressive and invasive people and associations. Paucity of literature, meeting places, other contacts between them and the general conditioning they suffer from their a) and b) environment are contributing factors to make them insufficiently enlightened and consistent to always defend and spread their views successfully, even among themselves. - To some extent almost all of them still belong to categories a) and b). It is possible that, if they did not, then they would have won the contest long ago, for they do represent, in principle and in their consistent proposals, all men, diverse as they are, equal and unequal alike, in many ways, in their nature, their aims and their methods. - If one accepts this rough and ready division of any people or nation as a fact of reality and wants to arrive at a sensible and rightful conclusion from it, one has to take at least one other very important fact into consideration: Centuries of discussions and debates, talks and lectures, floods of newspapers and magazines, libraries of books and brochures and manuscripts, broadcasting systems, databanks etc., an ever increasing multitude of communication channels, which do not achieve sufficient communication, have failed so far to bridge the remaining gulfs between these three groups - and the numerous splits within each of these groups. - - If one accepts this observation, too, as a fact, then one may conclude that it is somewhat unlikely, unless some quite new and very important factors come into existence, that would change this picture, that further decades or even centuries of conventional and modern enlightenment efforts, methods and tools, will sufficiently reconcile these three groups. - One will then predict that, unless a radical change in their constitution and relationship to each other takes place, they will remain in a more or less peaceful or militant civil war against each other, one that might also involve them in international wars, even a general holocaust with ABC mass-murder devices. - Several “democratic” regimes are already “armed” with mass extermination devices or anti-people “weapons”. - What can be done, what ought to be done to avert this danger, to end this continuing struggle? - The most radical and consistent solution, that I know of, would be to allow each of these groups to go its own way, with individuals deciding for themselves which of these groups they are to join, just as they have done now, in some countries, for centuries, regarding their religious allegiance and in their different private life-styles and in their semi-public sports, arts, crafts and other entertainment, recreation and cultural activities. - There is no inherent reason why the political, economic and social sphere should be exempted from the benefits to be expected from private contracts, compacts, experiments and minority autonomy based on individual choice, while very serious arguments can be raised in their favor, including the very survival of the human race, the preservation and expansion of liberty, peace, justice and prosperity, the achievement of longevity, intelligence expansion, access to the stars. - What would this mean in practice? - - Each Statist could have the State of his dreams and could become as much the victim of a centralized or a decentralized government as he would like to be - or the beneficiary of such an arrangement, if that can be achieved - all at his own expense and risk and that of his voluntary associates, now amounting to the vast majority. - A precondition is only that he does not, alone or in association with fellow statists, interfere with the realization of the different dreams of the moderates and of the freedom lovers. - This requires ("unless one wants to force all people into "reservations") that all are autonomously organized in a non-territorial way, under personal law and their own self-governance or societal or community systems, all applying only to their own and voluntary members. - Moreover, each adult and rational person must be set free to make his own choice between the various systems and subsystems, i.e. to have the all-important vote of seceding from any territorial State or any non-territorial autonomous community and joining another. - In this important respect, among others, citizens have so far been completely disfranchised, never mind the excess writing and talking about "the right to vote". - The compromisers would be set free to attempt to settle everything by voting, committees and procedures, giving each individual one voice among many others but never the fully deciding vote on their own way of life, fate, liberties and choices. - Like the other territorial statists, they could muddle on as before - but undisturbed by internal and external opposition or active dissent. Words would still be slung, as between some churches and sects, but hardly missiles. - - Even the targets for mass extermination devices would become dissolved - and the motives and powers and means for building and keeping them. - (However, only an in-depth analysis of this change will fully and convincingly reveal this consequence. See on this my two panarchist peace books at ) - To leave each other alone, in the pursuit of each one's different aspirations by different associations, routes and means, would be the only compromise required between members of the 3 major different groups and this would be a rather uncompromising compromise, excepting perhaps the question of 1.) right- or left-hand driving, 2.) quarantine for infectious diseases and 3.) the continuance of anti-people "weapons" and of production plants that make them possible. - Regarding 1) and 2.) a general agreement, at least locally or regionally, seems possible to achieve. - Regarding 3.) most people have to be emancipated still. - When this emancipation is achieved, the outcome is not in doubt, at least not to me. There are only rationalizations and excuses for their continuance and the dilemma created by the existence of territorial and sovereign nation-States, which have correspondingly disfranchised their subjects. - The governments by individual consent, or thorough self-governance proposed here, would dissolve this dilemma and the mutual fears involved and make room, at the same time, for genuinely protective self-help steps and organizations against the remaining and relatively few aggressive individuals and their gangs. - The freedom lovers, whether consistent believers in individual sovereignty, free trade, free contracts, free cooperation, free association, free exchange, a free market or only more or less approaching these and related aims and means and liberties, would at last be allowed to either victimize (exploit, deceive, coerce - if you take some of the sayings of their opponents serious) or to mutually benefit each other, acting (apart from some trade relationships) almost exclusively among themselves. - If their opponents were right, they could only say: We warned you and we told you so - you suffered only what you deserved, as a result of your own free choice. If the opponents are wrong then they would, sooner or later, individually or in small groups, join the successful freedom experiments, welcomed with open arms and, hopefully, without any reproaches for the past. - While these freedom experiments still go on, only among the already converted freedom lovers, under the suspicious eyes, cat-calls, ridicule and slander of the enemies of individual liberty, the latter would be at complete liberty to discriminate against these experimenters, boycott their schemes, protect themselves against such "licence" as much as they liked - all, naturally, at their own expense and risk. They could become as censorious - towards their own voluntary members - as the Catholic hierarchy has been for along time, to prevent the spread of the freedom-infection to their own members. Many of the resources of the statists and moderates would be furthermore wasted in propaganda efforts against the freedomites – but with less and less effect, provided the freedomites demonstrate their cases successfully with their own experiments, undertaken exclusively at their own cost and risk. - No national borders would separate them from their doubtful and taunting observers. They would live and work “next door” to them – but under different and self-chosen laws and institutions. - As a result, future conversions would be achieved by the own actions, with their successes and disappointments, or by observing the successes and failures of others, rather than by collecting, studying and slinging words (or laws or threats of law repeals – JZ, 10.12.04.) at each other, almost incessantly, for months, years, decades or even centuries. - Admittedly, my kind of grouping is an over-simplification, comparable to a mere distinction between Theists, Agnostics and Atheists. Members of each group would tend to subdivide themselves further until finally, or perhaps only in an intermediate stage, there are in any country or worldwide not only 3 such groupings but 3 dozen or maybe even 300 or more. - Between them they would have a much stronger motivation to defend their chosen and practised lifestyles against any aggressors than they have now. In this respect they would have a common interest against totalitarians, like the opponents of the Nazis had, whatever their convictions and ideals were, otherwise. In this respect they showed solidarity. - This common interest could and soon would be expressed in corresponding defensive organizations - even though the all-over threat of further aggression would already be greatly reduced. However, new fanatic prophets and "great leaders" may arise at any time. (But under panarchism they could not gather great crowds of supporters by mere promises. They would either have to put up or shut up. They would have freedom of action among themselves to prove or disprove their “ideals”. Since their “ideals” are rather flawed, disappointments would follow soon and reduce the number of their followers to relatively harmless proportions. – JZ, 13.2.08. ) - Based on this tolerance for tolerant actions, the freedom lovers, being tolerant, i.e., panarchistic enough, would almost always have the chance to find many converts, friends and allies or at least neutrals among the conscripts and slave laborers of despotic regimes, whose proper utilization or, rather, liberation, would greatly simplify their defensive task. - Moreover, the example of this degree of tolerance would often be effective in persuading victims in other countries to follow suit. Revolutions have often been infectious. (Maybe the example of Haiti, recently, has also helped to get the Philippines upon a less despotic path.) A full record of all the resistance actions in this century could be very instructive and would have many lessons to teach. - Among them would be this one: No despotic government is firmly in its saddle if the oppressed considered and utilized all their options. - Overthrows of despotic governments do now, probably, occur more frequently than ever before. Alas, most of the revolutionaries and insurrectionists are on most questions just as ignorant and disinterested than most of those were, whom they have overthrown, and libertarians have far not had any better programs to teach them for e.g. revolutions and liberation wars and military insurrections. - All such consideration go beyond the interest of most people with some practical interest in and sympathy for mutual tolerance for tolerant actions. Well, they ought to consider precedents set by institutions on a much more limited scale, like duty-free shops for international travelers and free-enterprise-zones, both of which do allow, in practice, antagonists like Free Traders and Protectionists, Deregulators and Regulators, to peacefully coexist. - When each can choose his way of life as an individual, how much has he still to fear from others? - How much have others still to fear from him? - The dilemmas in which the terrorists find themselves - and also their victims, will largely be dissolved and so will be the motives for building and stockpiling ABC "weapons". - Territorial integrity and sovereignty would be replaced by non-territorial autonomy, imposed laws by voluntarily chosen laws. - The common glue remaining, to achieve a free world society between them, would be: a) true respect for the self-government of others, for dissenters tolerantly doing their own thing. - b) Recognition for the individual rights and liberties that are claimed by people in other communities for themselves, from an updated declaration of individual rights, as complete and clear now as could and should be attempted by lovers of individual rights, liberties and peace. - c) A reliance on predetermined arbitration courts and other avenues for the settlement of differences between members of different autonomous volunteer groups. - d) Local militias of volunteers sworn and trained to defend nothing but individual rights and liberties, to the extent that they are claimed, and doing so, as far as is humanly possible, without offending themselves against them, for instance by not using indiscriminate means for killing and destruction. - On each of these points much could and should be said but this would go far beyond the “short” case for freedom for self-relating and voluntaristic actions that it was my intention to make here. - If individualism, liberalism, libertarianism, the natural rights philosophy, anarchism, voluntaryism etc. do not go as far in the direction of mutual tolerance and individual choices and freedom of action as is indicated here, then they do not go far enough but are still stuck on the theoretical and practiced models of territorial authoritarians and statists, i.e. of people, who want to remake the world coercively, in their own image or in accordance with their own ideals, at least in what they consider to be their exclusive territorial domains or hunting preserves. Then they still fail to see that their own future liberties, rights, security and prosperity do, largely, also depend on the degree to which they are willing to respect the equal freedom of all dissenters and non-conformists to do their own things – to and for themselves. - Without this kind of freedom of action, tolerance and voluntaryism, we can expect, in the long run, only Mutually Assured Destruction, the realization of “our” governments’ MAD policies. - Extract from JZ, “ON PANARCHY” No. VI, published in PEACE PLANS No. 671, 26.2.1986, in Pan AZ. Slightly revised: 10.12.04, 13.2.08, 24.1.11, 14.12.13. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE

PEACE & NOBEL PRIZES FOR PEACE: How many winners of Nobel Prizes for peace efforts have we had so far and how much peace resulted or could result from their ideas and practices? Thus should we not ask: Did they really deserve their prizes or did they merely express and act upon the usual popular prejudices on what makes for peace? – JZ, 17.2.07. Perhaps we should try to organize a new kind of peace prizes for genuinely peace promoting efforts? – Nobel felt guilty, because he imagined that that the dynamite that he invented would be used in wars. Dynamite is very useful, for many purposes, mainly industrially required explosives, but it was hardly ever used in most weapons and explosions used for military purposes. Many other explosives, not invented by him, were so used or abused. – Perhaps we should start with an annual Peace Olympics that would reward as winners those 3 individuals or groups that provided the best peace ideas, projects, programs and platforms published during the year and were able to successfully defend them against their critics. - JZ, 25.10.07, 14.12.13.

PEACE DECLARATION, UNILATERAL: In refusing to sign the annexation peace Russia at the same time declares the war with Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey at an end.” – Trotsky, declaration to the peace conference at Brest-Litovsk, 10 Feb. 1918 (NS); Bunyan and Fisher, 1934, p.510.

PEACE DECLARATION: We declare peace towards war.” – Sponti-Spezial, Eichborn Verlag, S. 37. (“Wir erklaeren dem Krieg den Frieden.”) - I hold such a declaration to be merely wishful thinking and a word game. But a genuine and even unilateral peace declaration is possible, has actually happened and it can be very effective. Likewise, a declaration of quite rightful war and peace aims can be very peace-promoting and even war-preventing. Effective can also be the unilateral offer of quite rightful peace aims to the primary victims, soldiers and civilians of any dictatorship, offered as a separate peace treaty with them and as an alliance and treaty against their oppressor and exploiter and aggressor against other countries and their people. – JZ, 23.3.08. – Not only one such treaty should be offered by a territorial “democratic” government on our side but xyz peace treaties, by xyz governments- and societies-in-exile, recognized by our government as its most important allies against all despotic, tyrannical and totalitarian regimes and all of them only for their present and their future voluntary members. On that basis these diverse governments and societies might, come to agree with each other and make a combined appeal to the victims on the other side. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE DECLARATIONS, UNILATERAL: Especially under the threat of nuclear war, a peace declaration, even a unilateral one, makes more sense than a war declaration - but it requires more thought and preparation to become quite effective. Any fool in power can start a war but not just any fool in power can preserve the peace with some foolish peace declaration. Peace declarations by governments deserve to be distrusted. Only thoughtful and practicable peace declarations, given publicly, by a free people, are trustworthy. A sensible and trustworthy peace declaration could serve to destroy the morale of the enemy regime's troops and could lead to a revolution or military insurrection. - Lenin and Trotsky tried this out in 1918, at the peace negotiations in Brest Litowsk. Not immediately but only after a few months afterwards, i.e., not as early as they had hoped for, they were successful: the democratic and partly communistic revolution broke out in Germany, started by the mutiny of some sailors who did not want to be sacrificed in a last and major naval attack, and so World War I was terminated. Then the subsequent and territorial non-solutions, imposed by governments, prepared for WW II. - The unilateral peace declaration, uttered by Trotsky, simply invited the soldiers in the trenches to leave, go home, and till their soil. It told the ammunition workers to do the same, closed the armament factories, declared the war to be over, regardless of what the Germans would do and appealed to the revolutionary and peaceful spirit of all the other victims of the war, world-wide. - This is the kind of non-violent action and "turning the other cheek", which does deserve study and ought to be repeated - in combination with many other libertarian steps. The Russian revolution and this declaration did also have an effects on several of the invasion-forces, which the Western Allies sent in later, in an attempt to suppress the communist revolution. Some of these soldiers disembarked but refused to march far away from the ships that had brought them. They had their sympathies for these revolutionaries - and all too many delusions about them. War wariness existed on all sides but may not have been sufficiently recorded and publicized on the side of the victors. - APPEALS, BROADCASTING, DECISION- MAKING MONOPOLIES, DECLARATIONS, DESERTION, DISOBEDIENCE, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, MILITIA, NEGOTIATIONS, NON-VIOLENCE, OPEN AIR SPEAKING, PEOPLE, PUBLICITY, REFERENDUM, REFUSAL TO ACCEPT GOVERNMENT PAPER MONEY, REVOLUTION, SECESSION, SEPARATE PEACE, TAX STRIKE, TRUST, TOLERANCE, UNILATERAL NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, WAR AIMS, peace plans 169 & 234. – JZ, An ABC Against Nuclear War, in PEACE PLANS Nos. 16 & 17, on - JZ, 24.1.11, 14.12.13.

PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST: Through Rejuvenation of Old Jewish and Arabian Exterritorialist Traditions, plan 202, pages 25-29, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. – I offer the digitized ON PANARCHY 1-24 series upon request, free of charge, and without copyrights restrictions, as email attachments, until it appears on a website or on a disc through someone. I doubt that I will get still around to do this myself. – JZ, 14.12.13. - ISRAEL, ARABS, MILLET SYSTEM.

PEACE MOVEMENTS: All around me I see people shouting for peace with hatred on their faces. – Henry Miller.

PEACE PLANS & PANARCHISM: brings the main and the supplementary literature list of LMP: Libertarian Microfiche Publishing and its PEACE PLANS series, published since 1964. All of them are still in print - on microfiche. PEACE PLANS 1-20 and a few others have been digitized and are offered so far only via e-mail or my first primitive CD. The contents of the sub-series "ON PANARCHY" and also other relevant books have been integrated in this list. My two peace books, reproduced on , & - are mainly based on panarchism and monetary freedom. The latter liberty is extensively discussed in the works of Ulrich von Beckerath. His 3 books on this are now offered on  See also  and  See also Kurt Zube's anarchist Manifesto containing a whole chapter dedicated to the ideal of: “To each the government of his own dreams!” – - JZ, 19.9.04. - PEACE PLANS: A pamphlet series, from 1964 onwards, is largely based on this idea and numerous of its plans deal with this subject, e.g. the following plans: 4, 20, 21, 67, 77, 90, 91, 93, 100, 102,109, 110, 120, 126, 130, 132, 135, 136, 138, 139, 141, 142, 143, 147, 153, 154, 155, 157, 159, 160/44, 162/50&53, 169,181, 170,173,174/3, 175/31ff, 179, 181/47, 183/50 & 51& 54, 184, 188, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 206/35, 216, 219, 220, 221, 228/78, 230, 233, 234, 236, 239, 240, 241, and issues Nos. 16-17,19C, 29, 61-65 - and many future ones on microfiche. Almost all issues since No. 21 to No. 1779 are available on microfiche only, except e.g. its sub-series ON PANARCHY. - A list of panarchist or panarchist-interest writings in the LMP series PEACE PLANS, outside of the sub-series "ON PANARCHY", is in ON PANARCHY XII, in PEACE PLANS 833.

PEACE PLANS: How many more ideas and texts would my series have to offer before it became interesting to a considerable number of people? Most are already deterred merely by its microfiche format. So much do they love freedom, peace and justice ideas and texts! - JZ, 30.10.02. - Interest in the microfiche reading and publishing option was so low even among libertarians and anarchists that I finally ended my libertarians series of PEACE PLANS issues with No. 1779 in 2002. - JZ, 24.1.11. – So far the interest among most anarchists and libertarians in digitizing all their writings and offering it online, on discs or on a single external HDD was all too low to achieve this aim fast enough. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE RESEARCH: Science has brought little peace on earth or to the soul of man, although it has brought many comforts to body and business.” - Source not known. - Serious peace studies have not even begun until the exterritorial alternatives are seriously considered, too. - JZ 26.7.92. - There exists no scientific peace research as long as this relatively simple and obvious alternative is not considered at all or not taken serious, in spite of extensive and persistent precedents that have led to relative peace in their spheres. - JZ 8.1.93. - SCIENCE

PEACE TREATIES:  from the year 1500 B.C. to A.D. 1860 more than 8,000 treaties of peace, which were meant to remain in force forever, were concluded. The average time they remained in force was two years.” – G. Valbert, “REVUE DES DEUX MONDES”, April 1894, p.692. - Pitirim A. Sorokin, Contemporary Sociological Theories Through the First Quarter of the Twentieth Century, Harper Torchbooks, 1928, in footnotes, p.25. – Can we expect better results from territorial Warfare States? – JZ, 7.3.09.  – TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES

PEACE TREATIES: They are merely temporary armistices that prepare the ground for more territorial wars, gathering resources, weapons and further victims for them. – JZ, 28.12.93, 15.2.08. – At least as long as they are merely conducted between territorial Warfare States. – JZ, 14.12.13. - TERRITORIALISM

PEACE VS. STATISM: Whoever wishes peace among peoples must fight statism.” - Ludwig von Mises - Especially territorial statism. - JZ, 24.1.11. - TERRITORIALISM

PEACE-LOVERS: Peacemakers do not exist as yet. Peace-Lovers were so far among the war mongers – although unconsciously and unintentionally. Simply by their support of territorial sovereignty and uniform territorial laws and jurisdictions. Through their approval of compulsory schooling, compulsory taxation, the monetary despotism of central banking, protectionism, immigration restrictions, other kinds of anti-economic interventionism, the employer-employee relationship and in dozens to hundreds of other ways. I pointed out ca. 500 aspects of this in my second peace book: An ABC Against Nuclear War: - To my knowledge nobody has ever tried to refute this book as yet. – JZ, 19.5.94, 16.2.08.


PEACE: [It is] my disposition to maintain peace until its condition shall be made less tolerable than that of war itself.” - Thomas Jefferson to Noah Worcester, 1817. ME 18:298. – It quite depends upon what kind of peace or war is meant. – The usual kind of peace is just a temporary armistice between territorial Warfare States. – The usual form of “defensive” war is also a form of aggression. - JZ, 4.1.08.

PEACE: A bad peace is even worse than war.” – Tacitus, Annals, III, c. 110. – Some wars are worse, than some peace conditions. However, some “peace” conditions are also worse than some wars. One should not generalize about either - when both can be so very different. – JZ, 25.3.08.

PEACE: A bayonet is a weapon with a worker at each end.” - British pacifist slogan, 1940. - But seeing what's in the minds of these workers, one could as well say that the bayonet is a mere piece of shaped steel, harmless by itself - but situated between and within reach of two programmed fighting machines, the workers, programmed to "fight" not only during military clashes but also during "peace"-times, for whatever they want and no matter how just or unjust their desires may be. – JZ, 28.5.83.

PEACE: A commonwealth whose subjects rise not in arms because they are overcome by terror is rather to be spoken of as being without war than as enjoying peace. For peace is not mere absence of war, but an excellence proceeding from high-mindedness; … Moreover, a commonwealth whose peace depends on the dullness of its subjects, and on their being driven like cattle, to learn nothing but slavery, is more fitly called a wilderness than a commonwealth. When therefore we say that the government is best under which men lead a peaceable life, I mean that life of man which consists not only in the circulation of the blood and other properties common to all animals, but whose chief part is reason and the true life and excellence of the mind.” – Spinoza, Tractus Theologico-Politicus, ch.5.

PEACE: A conqueror is always a lover of peace. He would like to make his entry into our state unopposed.” - Karl von Clausewitz – Here one should, perhaps, append the assertions of peacefulness by some of the best-known war leaders. – JZ, 21.4.08.

PEACE: A disadvantageous peace is better than the most just war.” - Erasmus, Colloquies. - As long as e.g. total enslavement isn't counted a mere 'disadvantage'. – JZ, 26.4.83.

PEACE: A government fighting for peace is like a priest fucking for the sake of virginity.” – D.Z., 17.3.77, free after the PLAYBOY version: "Fighting for freedom in Vietnam is like fucking for virginity."

PEACE: A government which makes war against its own people cannot be trusted to make peace with its neighbors.” – Jan Rokita. – Any government which retains a military monopoly and monopolizes decisions on war and peace, armament, disarmament and international treaties, and which does not permit dissenters to secede from it and does not allow dissenting minorities to become exterritorially autonomous, which also insists on keeping the power to tax, inflate and conscript and to pass any laws it likes, cannot be trusted in this respect, either. – JZ, 22.2.08. – Already the monopolization of the decision-making on war and peace is enough, according to Immanuel Kant, (“Eternal Peace”) to characterize any government, even a democracy, as a despotic regime. – JZ, 8.4.08. - GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIAL, LAWS, MONOPOLIES, TAXES, DECISION-MAKING ON WAR & PEACE

PEACE: A peace is of the nature of a conquest, // For then both parties nobly are subdued. // And neither party loses.” – Shakespeare: part II of Henry IV, iv, c.1598.

PEACE: a peace of liberation for the human beings now under the yoke of tyranny.” – David Lawrence, quoted in Eugene Lyons, Our Secret Allies, p.364. – LIBERATION, TYRANNY

PEACE: a people, deaf to the things that belong to its peace, is destroyed or enslaved, because it will not be instructed.” – Richard Carlyle, The Earth Belongs to the Living, p.41. – PEOPLE, MAN, DEAFNESS, PREJUDICES, IGNORANCE, ENLIGHTENMENT

PEACE: A thousand roads don't lead to peace. We'd have to pick and choose the few that really do.” – JZ, 15.3.83. - PEACENIKS, PEACE MOVEMENTS & ORGANIZATIONS, NON-VIOLENCE, DISARMAMENT, WORLD STATE, UN, CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECION, PASSIVE RESISTANCE

PEACE: A universal proclamation of peace brings not enemies but friends.” – Charles Lane, Letter IV, April 17, 1843, in Carl Watner, A Voluntary Political Government, p.81. – That would entirely depend upon the kind of peace declaration. (*) – To my knowledge, Carl Watner has still not approved of panarchism and thinks the concept of “competing governments” to be entirely absurd, because he has only territorial governments in mind, not those which are only exterritorially autonomous for all their volunteers. I think that in a book with this title he should have gone further. Alas, C. W. seems also committed to total non-violence. – (*) If it were made, e.g., by a federation of governments in exile, all aiming only at full exterritorial autonomy for their present and future volunteers, without any exclusive territorial claim for any of them, then they would find many adherents among the present subjects and victims of dictatorships and could, thus, perhaps to most likely, prevent or greatly reduced armed clashes. So far, to my knowledge, no government in exile has ever made such a declaration and peace offer. This would, naturally, not be a declaration of peace towards those still territorially suppressing various minorities or even the majority of a population. - JZ, 23.3.08.

PEACE: A world which had never managed to discover the secret of peaceful coexistence.” - E. C. Tubb, Space 1999. Earth Fall, p.97. - Rather: Which shows insufficient interest to seek out and sufficiently publish or read about this "secret" from its own literature, in more or less obscure and unpopular writings. - JZ, 31.8.00, 1.2.02. - PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, POLYARCHY, MULTI-ARCHY, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY,

PEACE: All around me I see people shouting for peace with hatred on their faces.” - Henry Miller

PEACE: All men desire peace, but few desire the things that make for peace.” – Thomas A. Kempis, ANALOG, May 92, p. 170. - Compare: “All people want peace but only very few want the things that make for peace.” – Source?

PEACE: All the oratory of the advocates of government omnipotence cannot annul the fact that there is but one system that makes for durable peace: a free market economy. Government control leads to economic nationalism and thus results in conflict. – Mises, Omnipotent Government, p. 286. - I would add: including a free market for protection services, for money issues, for access to natural resources and for forms of industrial organization. – JZ 1975. – Free enterprise, consumer sovereignty, freedom of contract, association and experimentation are as much needed in the political and social spheres as they are needed in the economic sphere. Too many libertarians have so far overlooked that. Currently, I try to compile a directory list to all of those, who haven’t. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE: All we really need is the new and old kind of justice, freedom, tolerance and experimental options expressed in panarchies. You do not have to love your neighbor, far less your enemy. But you owe, even to your enemy, the panarchist peace, justice and freedom option. Even more so, you owe it to yourself, to your family and friends and to your neighbours. Only thus will “peace in our times” become possible. – JZ, in Pan AZ. - JUSTICE, FREEDOM, PROGRESS, TOLERANCE, THROUGH PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM & COMPETING GOVERNANCE RATHER THAN LOVE

PEACE: Allow all individuals to undertake all peace promoting steps that cannot be rationally interpreted as aggressive, e.g.: negotiations, trade, migration. - JZ 21.9.81. - Individual and group secessionism, exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, panarchistic governments and societies in exile and their federation, an ideal declaration of all genuine individual rights and liberties, a militia for their protection, a unilateral peace declaration towards all suppressed people, unilateral nuclear disarmament, publication of programs for genuinely liberating revolutions and military insurrections, an open arms policy towards refugees and deserters and a full employment program for them and all others, primarily through full monetary and financial freedom, unilateral free trade, except for war materials to dictatorships. - JZ, 25.1.11.

PEACE: An analysis of the history of mankind shows that from the year 1496 B.C. to the year 1861 of our era, that is, in a cycle of 3357 years, were but 227 years of peace and 3130 years of war: in other words, were thirteen years of war for every year of peace. Considered thus, the history of the lives of peoples presents a picture of uninterrupted struggle. War, it would appear, is a normal attribute to human life.” - Jean de Bloch, The Future of War, trans. R. C. Long, p.Ixv (1903). - It is rather a normal characteristic for territorial States. - JZ, 27.11.02. - WAR, HISTORY, WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Anarchism favors peace but knows no peace without liberty.” - Benjamin R. Tucker, quoted in Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.153.

PEACE: Anarchism means peace and tranquility to all.” - August Spies, courtroom speech after being sentenced to hang for the Haymarket bombing, 1886.

PEACE: And Peace itself is War in Masquerade.” - Dryden: Absalom and Achitophel, Pt.l, l, 752, Pt. 11,1, 269. - Only what is regarded as peace today - but what has never been more than a temporary armistice. – JZ, 26.4.83.

PEACE: And the fight ceased, as there were no fighters any more. (“E le combat cessa, faute de combatants”.) - Corneille, Cid IV, 3. - NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

PEACE: Any sort of peace with our follow-citizens seems to me preferable to civil war.” (Mini enim amis pax cum civibus, bello civili utilior videbatur.) - Cicero, Philippica, No.ii, ch.15, sec.37. - That does not apply to the mass murderous rule of totalitarians, who last century, murdered more than 200 million people. - Peace only with their victims, not with their victimizers. - JZ, 25.1.11.

PEACE: As war mongers territorial governments are very important and noticeable. But as peacemakers they are so woefully inadequate that their efforts in this respect can safely be ignored. - JZ, 61, 25.1.11. - TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Because it gives great and undue facility far engaging a whole nation in war. If it were necessary to raise the sum required from those who individually agreed in the necessity of war, we should have the strongest guarantee for the preservation of peace. Once given the power of compulsorily taking the property of others, then a minister 'with a light heart,' a general on a black horse, a jingo press, or the shouting crowd of a capital, may turn the scale in favor of war.” - Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p.398, discussing the income tax. - Although this tax and other taxes, are important factors, they are not the only ones. And direct requisitioning has often made wars even worse and forced generals to conquer in order to subsist. - JZ, 28.5.83. - TAXATION, INFLATION, GOVERNMENT DEBTS

PEACE: Better to keep peace than make peace.” – Dutch Proverb. – WAR, PREVENTION

PEACE: But dream not helm and harness // The sign of valor true; // Peace hath higher tests of manhood // Than battle ever knew.” - Whittier, The Hero, St.19.

PEACE: But PEACE IS PROFITABLE, just not for the war industry. - Ken Van Doren - War is destruction of wealth as well as life. - Facebook, 11.2.13. – WAR, ARMAMENT INDUSTRIES, PROFITS

PEACE: Certain peace is better and safer than anticipated victory.” – Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, c. 29 B.C., 30.30. – A certain “peace” could be one only in slavery, in which more innocents would be killed than even in a war. – However, any peace is preferable to a certain and general nuclear holocaust. It will still have its lives and freedom and rights options in its future. – I saw today the film SOBIBOR again. Of the last 600 survivors 300 managed to escape. Even their chances were not altogether hopeless. - Before that, ca. 250 000 innocent people had been murdered there, mostly Jews. - JZ, 20.11.85, 25.3.08.

PEACE: Chains are worse than bayonets.” - Douglas Jerrold, Specimens of Jerrold's Wit. - But chains can be cut - whilst bayonets do not cut steel chains! – JZ, 26.4.83, 25.1.11.

PEACE: Civilization is synonymous with peace.” - Madelaine Duke: Claret, Sandwiches and Sin, 125. - Yes, but have you met many truly civilized people as yet, civilized even in their attitudes towards aliens and members of minority groups, respecting all their individual human rights and liberties, even their right to live autonomously under personal and self-cholsen law? – JZ, 26.4.83, 14.12.13.

PEACE: Conclusion of Peace: That means, already according to its wording, it is preceded by war. ("Friedensschluss: das heisst, schon dem Worte nach: Kriegsbeginn.") - Lohberger. - In German the term "Schluss" means also "end", not only a "contract" or a treaty.) - A "peace" between territorial powers is merely “the continuance of war with other means." - Or, as someone has said, a temporary armistice, during which preparations are made for the next war, until all governments involved are ready to take up their open military contest once again. – A genuine peace can only be achieved and last between communities that make no exclusive territorial claims that overlap in any way. It does not leave all their wrongful war making powers and territorialist motivations untouched and thus amounts at most to a temporary armistice which reduces continuous and wholesale slaughter to occasional or frequent armed clashes and, otherwise, to  a more or less open or repressed civil war on both sides. - JZ 5.7.92, 15.1.93, 5.7.99, JZ, 13.2.08, 14.12.13. – WAR, PEACE, TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Did Japan really enjoy peace for 200 years before the arrival of Admiral Perry, ca. 1854, as was asserted in the John Wayne film: The Barbarian and the Geisha? – Was there no civil war, no military insurrection, no popular revolution? – Were all sufficiently drilled to obedience to those in power? - JZ, 18.2.08. - If it is true, was it a peace in freedom and under justice? - JZ, 15.1.11. – HISTORY OF JAPAN

PEACE: End all bloody and despotic revolutions, civil wars and international wars via the personal, individual and voluntary revolutions of individuals, practised in individual secessions and by voluntary, exterritorial and autonomous associations of volunteers, living under personal rather than territorial constitutions, laws and jurisdictions. The same kind of tolerance that ended religious revolutions, civil wars and wars, wherever and whenever and as long as it was consistently applied, can also end revolutions, civil wars and wars conducted out of political, economic and ideological motives. - JZ 3.10.92, 4.1.93. - JUSTICE, FREEDOM, PROGRESS, INITIATED & MAINTAINED BY INDIVIDUALS DOING THEIR THINGS FOR & TO THEMSELVES

PEACE: Establish justice as the only means of banishing the menace of war.” - Ramsay Muir, "The Future of Democracy", The Liberal Book Club, Nicholson & Watson, London, 1939.

PEACE: Eternal peace is a talent quest for mankind.” – Rudolf Rolfs (“Ewiger Frieden ist die Talentprobe der Menschheit.”)  - So far, we have not yet attained a “pass” in that examination. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE: Even Hitler said that he preferred peace and would be prepared to disarm - If the other States disarmed! Naturally, you could not rely on his promises. But then: Can one rely on the promises of any other territorial government – in this respect? – JZ, 19.4.08.

PEACE: Even those, who want a war, have not other intention than to win. Thus, through warfare they wish to achieve a new and glorious peace. … Thus it is clear that a peace is the wished for aim of a war. Every man strives to arrive at peace through the war but not the other war around.” - ST. Augustinus, Gottesstaat, 19.12. – However, a peace of territorial domination is still a kind of civil war. – JZ, 21.7.86, 25.3.08. - It can even have more victims than a war against an external enemy has. Often it is even conducted more cruelly. - JZ, 25.1.11. – WAR, CIVIL WAR, TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Even torture, murder and terror are used to extract pro-war intelligence", while, during wars and during the armistice periods now called peace, no rightful and systematic effort is made to extract, combine, spread and utilize all of the already somewhat published pro-peace intelligence, ideas, references, resources and talents that do already exist somewhere, towards the development of a genuine science and technique for the establishment of peace in freedom and justice. We still have only, almost exclusively, territorial Warfare States and no real peace research and peace science efforts, equivalent to e.g. military science and technology. Even religious spleens do still prevail among all too many who consider themselves to be genuine peace lovers and peace activists and they seem to be unable to arrive from the experience with religious tolerance at tolerance for political, economic and social systems, as long as they are, likewise, applied only exterritorially and by volunteers.. – JZ, 18.9.98, 25.3.08, 25.1.11.

PEACE: every time that, in the name of this or that, ‘peace’ or ‘relaxation of tensions’ or any other empty slogan, we (*) consent to talk with those who are oppressing freedom, we are not only misguided, we are downright foolish, because we lose our moral authority, not to gain anything, albeit hard and material, (by? - JZ) such a ‘peace’, or ‘relaxation of tensions’; but on the contrary do increase the tension, and the war that is bound ever to go on beyond the Iron Curtain between communism and freedom. That is to say that we are betraying our first front line, the peoples of Eastern Europe, in exchange for a ‘peace’ which is no peace.” - Salvador de Madariaga, The Blowing up of the Parthenon, p.91/92. – (*) On our side “the” people are excluded from such negotiations and treaties as well! – On our side our governments haven’t even declared quite rightful war and peace aims and recognized governments in exile for all the oppressed peoples, nations and minority groups on the other side. – Moreover, Western governments are armed with nuclear mass murder devices against them, rather than their despotic rulers. - JZ, 24.2.08, 25.1.11. – These “weapons” are, obviously, useless as tyrannicide weapons. By threatening the victims of tyrants more than the tyrants themselves, they induce these victims to support their tyrants against us. An their tyrants, of the leftist type, direct these “weapons” not against democratic or republican territorial governments but, rather, against their subjects, who have no voice or power regarding military affairs, armament and disarmament. The communists pretended to intend to liberate the people, which for them meant “the proletariat”, but with their mass murder devices they threatened these “proletarians” more than they did the rulers of these proletarians, who, probably, with the “captains” of industry, would be sitting in the safest shelters. – The hollowness of their “liberation” intentions, on both sides, was revealed by their nuclear arms stockpiles which they choose to build up and maintain and, occasionally, threaten with. – JZ, 14.12.13. - PEACE NEGOTIATIONS, WITH GOVERNMENTS RATHER THAN THEIR VICTIMS, THE CAPTIVE NATIONS OR CAPTIVE PEOPLES, FREEDOM, LIBERATION, SUPPRESSED MINORITIES.

PEACE: False explanations of war and correspondingly false peace hypotheses abound. Most take most of the war-promoting features and powers of territorial States for granted, as quite natural or inevitable, necessary and moral. – JZ, 19.7.92. – That is probably the main reason why the peace movements remained so ineffective so far. – JZ, 24.2.08. - Most of them have not shown any interest in all genuine individual rights and liberties, either or in quite rightful war and peace aims, which would have to include these rights and liberties. - JZ, 25.1.11, 14.12.13.

PEACE: For America today, as in Jefferson's time, peace must be our passion. It is not enough for America to be a sentinel on the frontiers of freedom. America must also be on the watchtowers seeking out the horizons of peace.” - Lyndon B. Johnson, speech, Univ. of Cal., Los Angeles, 21.2.1964. – But what kind of peace plans are territorial governments really looking for? Certainly not the ones that would eliminate them as territorial governments! – Usually they look only for more statist proposals to throw tax money at. - JZ, 21.4.08. - Could a house or a car be built based upon such a vague "blueprint" or phrases? - JZ, 25.1.11. -

PEACE: For from Freedom we can derive peace. And with freedom and peace we can go forward to achieve life's richest spiritual and material blessings for all people, everywhere. “- Admiral Ben Moreell: The Admiral's Log II, p.15. – PROGRESS, PROSPERITY

PEACE: For more than one hundred years, Morse complained, we in this country have tried to forge a strong union on the anvil of authority, force, and compulsion. "Not through liberty, but without it, we sought our peace." But peace has been denied us, as it is denied to every people who seek order through the wrong means. "Union, harmony, peace, are not to be taken by violence. Every gift of such sort laid on Union's altar has been spurned. ‘Thou Fool! First go and be reconciled to thy brother.'" - For liberty alone is peace.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.57, on Sidney H. Morse. – Territorial rule acts like an internal occupation force or dictatorship, at least towards all kinds of dissenters. - JZ, 15.1.11. - FREEDOM, LIBERTY, FORCE, AUTHORITY, VIOLENCE, TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSORY "UNITY", COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBJECTION

PEACE: Free Trade ... the best human means for securing universal and permanent peace. It has often struck me that it would be well to try to engraft our Free-Trade-agitation upon the peace movement. They are one and the same cause.” - J. A. Hobson: Richard Cobden, the International Man, 1918, p.37. - Only if in "Free Trade" one also includes free contracts with alternative political, social and economic system services, all of them competitively and exterritorially provided only to their subscribers. - JZ, 25.1.11.  – PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREE EXCHANGE, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & CONTRACT IN EVERY SPHERE

PEACE: Freedom and Peace are inseparable.” – Arthur Koestler. – So are justice and tolerance for all tolerant people. – JZ, 25.3.08. – The rights and liberties involved ought to be sufficiently specified and publicized. Otherwise “freedom” and “rights” will remain, like “peace”, merely wishful thoughts with no useful knowledge of how to get from here to there. – JZ, 14.4.08. – INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION, A CORRECT, COMPLETE & IDEAL ONE.

PEACE: Freedom is the only workable utopia or peace plan. - JZ, 73. - Provided all genuine individual rights and liberties are sufficiently spelled out. - JZ, 25.1.11. – I meant laissez-faire or voluntarism in every sphere, even when it comes to the various choices, which statists would make for themselves. – JZ, 13.6.13.

PEACE: Freedom to Differ .... the 'umpire of peace’, the 'last appeal,' the 'end of disturbing disputes'!” - J. Warren, True Civilization, 143 (Nos. 411& 412.

PEACE: From liberty flow all the blessings of peace, prosperity, and human happiness; from power flows war, impoverishment and despotism. - Murray Rothbard, LAISSEZ FAIRE REVIEW, May-June 74. – RIGHTS & LIBERTIES VS. POWER, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM

PEACE: from war and despotism in any form to peace and liberty.” - Carlyle, in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.46. - The details of the "how?" have to be stated clearly and publicly enough. - JZ, 25.1.11.

PEACE: G. Valbert, on the basis of the computation of the “MOSCOW GAZETTE” says that “from the year 1496 B.C. toA.D.1861, in 3,358 years, there were 227 years of peace and 3.130 years of war, or thirteen tears of war to every year of peace. Within the last three centuries there have been 286 wars in Europe.” He adds further that “from the year 1500 B.C. to A.D. 1860 more than 8,000 treaties of peace, which were meant to remain in force forever, were concluded. The average time they remained in force was two years.” - Valbert, G., in the “REVUE DES DEUX MONDES”, April 1894, p.692. – Having these facts in view, the Honorable George Peel, in his “The Future of England”, p. 169, said that for fifteen centuries, since the full adoption of Christianity by the continent of Europe, peace has been preached, and for these fifteen centuries the history of Europe has been nothing but “a tale of blood and slaughter.” – Pitirim A. Sorokin, Contemporary Sociological Theories Through the First Quarter of the Twentieth Century, Harper Torchbooks, 1928, in footnotes, p.325. - The effects of territorialism or Warfare States, in balance. - JZ, 25.1.11.

PEACE: General peace and order are the attendants of justice or a general abstinence from the possessions of others.” - F. A. Hayek: The Confusion of Language in Political Thought, p.15. - Property is not the only important right and liberty. Sometimes people are governmentally largely prevented even from the use of their own language. Territorial non-recognition and respect for all genuine individual rights and liberties, at least for those, who do already claim them, creates a lasting civil war. - JZ, 25.1.11. – As if all we had to do is to say “yes” to “peace”, which remains undefined in its details, causes, principles, practices and institutions. Does any of the existing peace movements have a good enough and comprehensive enough peace program, one that would really assure peace on Earth? Please, do inform me about it. – JZ, 5.4.12. – Q., PEACE MOVEMENTS, PEACE PROGRAMS, JUSTICE, INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES & RIGHTS, NOT EVEN FULLY DECLARED AS YET

PEACE: Generals often declare that peace is their business. However true or false that might be: war is their game! - JZ 2/12/81 & 28.5.83.

PEACE: Give Peace (A) Chance.” – Dangerous Buttons, No. 164. - Give peace a chance. – John Lennon - How, when we have almost no freedom of action left in this sphere? - All such decision-making powers are territorially, coercively, collectively, centralistically and monopolistically placed in a few hands only, those of power addicts, who almost habitually abuse these powers. - All war and peace decisions ought to be placed into the hands of individuals and voluntary associations and only they should be held responsible for them. - We do not give peace a chance under territorialism. - JZ, 25.1.11. – Give peace a chance. – John Lennon - What kind of peace? What kind of Chance? It cannot be readily bought over the counter. What are its preconditions, its foundations? By what means could or should it be established? He certainly did not advocate giving it its panarchist chance. How little most peace lovers have pondered the necessary details is revealed by the answers to my short peace questionnaire, which I compiled in PEACE PLANS 650 and have digitized and offer as email attachment until it appears online or on a CD. – JZ, n.d. - As if all we had to do is to say “yes” to “peace”, which remains undefined in its details, causes, principles, practices and institutions. Does any of the existing peace movements have a good enough and comprehensive enough peace program, one that would really assure peace on Earth. Please, do inform me about it. – JZ, 5.4.12. – Abolish all territorial governments. Replace them only with societies, communities and governance systems of volunteers, under personal law or exterritorial autonomy. – JZ, 24.4.13. – Q., PEACE MOVEMENTS, PEACE PROGRAM, TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES

PEACE: Give Peace Lord! - ? - Make or establish peace! – That means, first of all, seriously study the freedom and justice preconditions for a lasting peace. - JZ, 24.9.95, 25.3.08. – PRAYER, RELIGION, GOD, PRECONDITIONS

PEACE: Give us peace.” - (“Dona nobis pace.”) - From a song or Latin prayer. Peace has to be established rather than begged or prayed for. This has to be undertaken with the widest possible participation of human beings able to participate in this effort. It can’t be donated by a “God”, or at least never was and cannot, lastingly, be provided by territorial States, which are, essentially, Warfare States. – JZ, 25.4.06, 25.1.11. – WAR, ESTABLISHING PEACE, GOD, RELIGION, CHRISTIANITY

PEACE: Government will not permit men to live in peace.” - Taylor Caldwell: A Pillar of Iron, p.214. – Territorial governments! – JZ, 14.3.09. – It is territorial governments alone which are, everywhere, the greatest internal and external aggressors. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE: Governments are ready to fight wars, risking our lives, limbs and health and our property for their purposes. We ought to become likewise ready to fight them, whenever they act criminally, fighting thus for our lives, earnings, property, rights and liberties. This would mean, largely, peace, freedom and rights for us, for we are many and they are few. Ideal voluntary militia forces for the protection of all genuine individual rights and liberties could be our essential protection against rapacious, warlike and oppressive governmental regimes, movements and terrorists. Was there ever, so far, a strong military force of volunteers organized in defence of all individual rights and liberties? How could it have been, seeing that even now these rights are not yet fully known and recognized! As a result we have had centuries of the usual territorial political messes. - JZ, 18.4.89, 23.2.08, 25.1.11. - MILITIA, GOVERNMENTS, STANDING ARMIES, DECISION-MAKING ON WAR & PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, DESPOTISM, DECLARATION OF ALL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, ALSO OF ALL RIGHTFUL WAR- & PEACE AIMS, WARS, OPPRESSION, INTOLERANCE

PEACE: He is a fool who preaches peace in a country that is in the midst of war.” – Torquato Tasso, Gerusalemme, v, 1592. – And he is the ultimate fool who persists in the ultimate foolishness of conventional war, total war or one conducted with ABC mass murder devices. – JZ, 8.11.85, 5.7.86. – And this without knowing, proclaiming and applying quite rightful war and peace aims and methods. – JZ, 25.3.08. - WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM, RIGHTFUL WAR- & PEACE AIMS, DECLARED IN TIME & ALREADY REALIZED ON THE OWN SIDE

PEACE: He sought liberty because of his dedication to peace. “Peace”, he told us, “will exist only as liberty is increased in all its forms among individuals throughout the world.” – F. A. Harper, Writings, 1. – Did he anywhere include panarchies or personal law communities, exterritorially quite autonomous, as desirable peace and freedom options? – JZ, 23.3.08.

PEACE: How many winners of Nobel Prizes for peace efforts have we had so far and how much peace resulted or could result from their ideas and practices? Thus should we not ask: Did they really deserve their prizes or did they merely express and act upon the usual popular prejudices on what makes for peace? – JZ, 17.2.07. - Perhaps we should try to organize a new kind of peace prizes for genuinely peace promoting efforts? – Nobel felt guilty, because he imagined that that the dynamite that he invented would be used in wars. Dynamite is very useful, for many purposes, mainly industrially required explosions, but it was hardly ever used in most weapons and explosions used for military purposes. Many other explosives, not invented by him. were so used or abused. – Perhaps we should start with an annual Peace Olympics that would reward as winners those 3 individuals or groups that provided the best peace ideas, projects, programs and platforms published during the year and were able to successfully defend them against their critics. - JZ, 25.10.07. – If the Nobel prize winners for peace had been right in their ideas, views, proposals and actions then we should have gained peace long ago. – JZ, 7.3.09. - PEACE & NOBEL PRIZES FOR PEACE

PEACE: I believe that anarchism is the only philosophy of peace, the only theory of a social relationship that values life above everything else. I know that some Anarchists have committed acts of violence, but it is the terrible economic inequality and great political injustice that prompt such acts, not anarchism. - Every institution to-day rests on violence, our very atmosphere is saturated with it. So long as such a state exists we might as well strive to stop the rush of Niagara as hope to do away with violence.” - Emma Goldman: What I believe. - By now one should be able to specify which acts of violence were just in the past. The facts should be all in by now for a proper judgment. And which ones were and still are quite immoral and a contradiction to the ideals of anarchism? That would also be revealed by such a survey - which is long overdue and urgently required as a guide towards further just and peaceful actions. – JZ, 26.4.83. – Any inequality not based on violence and monopolies is certainly no justification for violence, terrorism and assassinations. And if it were, there are better ways, in most cases, e.g., doing away with all legally imposed monopolies and to claiming and achieving indemnification. – JZ, 19.4.08, 25.1.11.

PEACE: I bet you that history don’t record any two nations ever having war with each other unless they had a conference first.” – Will Rogers. – Negotiations between criminal regimes tend to be futile – at last for their victims. - JZ, 2.8.92. - Even democracies are criminal despotisms to the extent that the decision on war and peace, armament and disarmament and international relations is monopolized in the hands of their governments. - Saddam Hussein’s attack on Kuweit did not follow a conference between these two regimes, to my knowledge. There were, probably, many other exceptions to this rule. E.g. the attack on Pearl Harbor. – Hitler’s attacks were, usually, also not preceded by conferences immediately beforehand. - JZ, 25.3.08. –  WAR, NEGOTIATIONS, PEACE CONFERENCES, SUMMIT CONFERENCES, AGGRESSION

PEACE: I cease not to advocate peace; even though unjust it is better than the justest war. (Equidem pacem hortari non desino; quae vel injusta utilior est quam justissimum bellum.) - Cicero, Epistolae ad Atticum. Bk.VTI, epis 14.

PEACE: I choose the Peace Race.” - Seymour Melman: No Place to Hide, p.206. - Unfortunately, most of the many required peace races are outlawed by governments. – JZ, 26.4.83. – There is no free choice for them. – JZ, 19.4.08. – A race has usually a clearly marked aim and the steps and direction of it are clear. But the peace movements seem to move aimlessly and uselessly in almost any direction. They are marching, but to what effect and purpose? They rather put their legs and mouths into gear than their brains. – JZ, 21.4.08, 25.1.11. - ARMS RACE, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, PANARCHISM, PEACE AIMS, PEACE PROGRAM, PEACE MOVEMENTS, WAR AIMS

PEACE: I declare peace towards all who leave me in peace. - JZ, 73.

PEACE: I do not advise you to fight but to work. I do not advise you to conquer but to conclude peace. Let work be your fight, your victory a peace. – JZ, 7/82, after reading Friedrich Nietzsche's remark in Thus Spake Zarathustra, Of War and Warriors: "I do not advise you to work, but to fight, I do not advise you to conclude peace, but to conquer. Let your work be a fight, your peace a victory!”

PEACE: I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of trying to figure out “the plain truth of things”. The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY. – Ron Paul, quoted by Armstrong Tommie sharing Retired Ron Paul's photo. - John Zube:  Provided it is FULL liberty, including all genuine individual rights and liberties, especially those not yet in any governmental bill of rights. – Facebook, 15.1.13. - PROSPERITY, LIBERTY, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, BILLS OF RIGHTS

PEACE: I like to believe that people in the long run are going to do more to promote peace than are governments. Indeed, I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get out of their way and let them have it.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower, 6.9.1959, quoted in: Dr. Paul Rogers, Dr. Malcolm Dando, Dr. Peter Van den Dungen, “As Lambs to the Slaughter, The Facts About Nuclear War”, An Ecoropa Report, Arrow Books, London, 1981, 289 p., p.284. a pocketbook. – Alas, the authors discussed only the usual governmental ideas and actions in this sphere. Just like most other peace lovers and peace writers do. – JZ, 11.9.08. - PEOPLE, GOVERNMENTS

PEACE: I suspect ... that we must become as aggressive and as skillful in the pursuit of peace as we are in the pursuit of war.” - Steven Aftergood in "NEW OUTLOOK", Sept./Oct. 81.

PEACE: If actions of territorial governments could bring about a lasting and just peace in freedom then we would have had it long ago – for no possible government action (except abdication of all territorial governments – JZ, 14.2.08.) has been left untried, over and over again, in numerous versions. Territorial governments achieve wars rather than lasting peace, externally and internally. At most they arrive at temporary armistices. – JZ, 20.8.99, 14.2.08. - GOVERNMENTS, STATISM

PEACE: If after being released from the toils of war, you neglect the arts of peace ... you will soon find peace the most adverse to your interests. Your peace will be only a more distressing war; and that which you imagined liberty will prove the worst of slavery ...” - Sir John Eliot, MP for Cornwall, who died in prison, 1632.

PEACE: If an international controversy leads to armed conflict, everyone loses; if armed conflict is avoided, everyone wins. It is better to lose a point now and then in an international tribunal and gain a world in which everyone lives at peace under the rule of law.” - D. D. Eisenhower, quoted by L. J. Peter in The Peter Plan, p.137.

PEACE: If one checks a good etymological dictionary, one discovers that the words "peace," "freedom," "love," and "friend" share some common origins.” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 33. - LOVE, FREEDOM, FRIENDSHIP

PEACE: If peace had been studied as systematically as war has been … But then even the "art" of war was not studied comprehensively enough except for its killing and destruction machines and processes. Genuinely libertarian, liberating and revolutionary warfare has not been systematically researched and publicized either, not even by libertarians. Otherwise, total war could long ago have been reduced to rightful police actions against a few war criminals. - JZ, 4.8.01, 31.1.02. - PEACE ACADEMIES, PEACE RESEARCH, PEACE STUDIES, MILITIA, LIBERTARIAN WARFARE

PEACE: If people really knew, the war would be stopped tomorrow. But of course they don't know and can't know, the correspondents don't write and the censorship would not pass the truth.” - Lloyd George, quoted in THE NATIONAL TIMES, 5.1.75. – And the peace lovers don’t like to think enough. – JZ, 21.4.08.

PEACE: If the alien ship now approaching the Llanvabon returned to its home base with news of humanity’s existence and of ships like the Llanvabon, it would give its race the choice of trade or battle. They might want war. But it takes two to make trade and only one to make war. They could not be sure of men’s peacefulness, nor could men be sure of theirs. The only safety for either civilization would lie in the destruction of one or both of the two ships here and now.” – Murray Leinster, First Contact, in The Astounding-Analog Reader, Book Two, ed. by Harry Harrison & Brian W. Aldiss, p.185. - A first contact problem, uniquely dissolved, through a free exchange, here of their space-ships, between people really alien to each other and correspondingly suspicious. – Here, on Earth, humans are not as alien to each other and do not know as little of each other. But they have so far pursued, through territorial governments, internal and external policies that gave them, too, many good reasons to become and remain suspicious of each other. Both of these policies have to become almost totally changed, to make the disappearance of distrust and suspicion possible. Internally the territorially uniform State under one government, constitution, body of laws and juridical system must become decentralized into all its various voluntary components, all under exterritorial autonomy and personal law, with each society, group, corporation, community or genuinely limited government ruling only its own volunteers and their internal affairs. And their external policy or their rightful war and peace aims must largely consist in the same practice: recognition and respect for all voluntary communities and opposition and resistance only to all those, which still make territorial monopoly claims and try to realize them by force. Under that condition enemies would largely dissolve and become friends and allies or at least neutrals instead. Why fight when genuine self-governance, in which ever societal or community form it is desired, by like-minded volunteers, is not threatened at all but, finally, fully realized? The few remaining political criminals, territorialists, with corresponding victims, would become relatively harmless and would encounter. Everywhere, united opposition and resistance to their attempts. – JZ, 28.9.07, 14.12.13. – PEACEFULNESS &TRUST, TRADE & WAR, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM VS. COERCION, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES VS. DESPOTISM, MILITIAS VS. CONSCRIPTS, DESERTION, LIBERATION, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, NEGOTIATIONS WITH & QUITE RIGHTFUL & UNILATERAL PEACE OFFERS TO THE PEOPLE RATHER THAN THEIR TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS, PUBLIC DECLARATION BY THE PEOPLE OF QUITE RIGHTFUL PEACE & WAR AIMS

PEACE: If they want peace, nations should avoid the pin-pricks that precede canon-shots.” – Napoleon I, to the Czar Alexander at Tilsit, June 22, 1807. – More than mere pin-pricks are involved, all of them making for still more wars between territorial governments. E.g. the suppression of very important individual rights and liberties through territorial nationalism and territorial imperialism in all their statist forms. – JZ, 10.7.86, 25.3.08. - HUMAN RIGHTS, TERRITORIALISM, PROTECTIONISM

PEACE: if we define "peace" as the Reds do: "A lack of all resistance to Communism." - THE AMERICAN SENTRY REPORT, 1.10.80.

PEACE: If we look to our responsibility to the generations yet unborn who will come after us, how can we fail to recognize that peace and freedom are inextricably bound up one with another and that the threat to one is a threat to both?" - Sir Winston Churchill, Address at a National Association for Freedom meeting, 1976. - How many genuine individual rights and liberties did he fail to stand up for? - JZ, 25.1.11. - FREEDOM & HUMAN RIGHTS, RESPONSIBILITY FOR OURSELVES & FOR OUR DESCENDENTS

PEACE: If we properly defined e.g. peace, enemies, aggression, obstacles to peace, freedom and justice, defence and protection, security, our individual rights and liberties and made them sufficiently known, then we could soon arrive at a lasting peace, in freedom and justice, with tolerance or even harmony between the various communities, societies and communities as well as competing governance systems that would result, doing all of them justice and this by their own standards, by letting all of them peacefully coexist, each without any territorial monopoly, as long as they can still find any volunteers for their continuance. – JZ, 25.3.04, 24.3.09, 14.12.13. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TOLERANCE, PREJUDICES, ERRORS, MYTHS, IGNORANCE, KNOWLEDGE, ENEMIES, AGGRESSION, OBSTACLES, JUST WAR & PEACE AIMS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, DEFINITIONS

PEACE: If we shrink from this experiment because of hypothetical dangers, what will the doubters and followers think – that the cause of peace it to be pursued only when it is easy? That persistence and dedication are virtues only for the war-sayers? No, peace is too important to abandon because of a few initial difficulties.” - Deborah Wheeler, Jaydium, p.292/93. – With a rational and rightful peace program it would be much easier to make peace than to make war. – Have enough of us done enough to prepare and publish such a program? - JZ, 11.3.09. – I did my bit with the two libertarian peace books you can find on - and with my PEACE PLANS series, which continued from 1964 to 2002, although from 1977 onwards only on microfiche. - JZ, 25.1.11. - PACIFISM, WAR, WORKING ON A PEACE PROGRAM THAT DESERVES THE TERM

PEACE: If you want peace - prepare for liberty. - JZ, 73.

PEACE: If you want peace - shoot those who want war. - JZ, 75. – Or merely intern them. There are not all that many of them. – They might also be put into a zoo, like wild and dangerous animals and get as such only as much attention as they deserve. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE: If you want peace – prepare for a war - but only one against the war mongers. – Peace lovers, arm, organized and train yourself for a fight, a rightful police action, against the war mongers, in the own country as well as in all the other ones. - JZ, 20.1.98, 25.3.08. – Compare: “War to the palaces; peace to the cottages!” – MILITIA FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS

PEACE: If you want peace, declare your war against certain intolerant institutions, principles and beliefs - but tolerate or make peace with all those applying the institutions, principles and beliefs of their choice only to themselves. - JZ, 78. – Voluntarism, individual secessionism and personal law choices for all the diverse communities, societies and governance systems, which the diverse peoples do really want for themselves and as long as they do, always at the own risk and expense. – JZ, 14.12.13. – EXTERRITORIALISM VIA INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM & FREE CHOICE VS. ANY KIND OF IMPOSED TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: If you want peace, make diversity instead of unity your aim. - J.Z, 19.2.73. - TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, TOLERANCE

PEACE: If you want peace, prepare for justice.” - Slogan at Christian Anti-War Conference, July 72, Sydney, quoted in PROGRESS, October 1972. – Including individual sovereignty and individual secessionism, voluntarism and personal choices even when it comes to laws and public institutions. No more territorial impositions under any pretence. No more decision-making monopolies for whole populations and against the will of numerous diverse dissenters. Voluntarism vs. coercion. Exterritorial autonomy vs. territorialism. Personal laws vs. imposed legislation. Experimental freedom, competition, freedom of association and contract in every sphere. To each his or her preferred justice and policing or protection and insurance system. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE: If you want peace, wage peace. - JZ, 78. – Establish all the personal laws, constitutions and institutions required for it, all only for their voluntary supporters, none of them territorially imposed upon peaceful dissenters. – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE: If you want peace, work for justice.” – Quoted but “criticized” by Walter E. Williams, Do the Right Thing, Hoover Institution Press, 1995, p.132. – W. E. W. does here defend governmental “defence” efforts! – He does not explore, at least not in this article, what kind of just steps could prevent wars. - JZ, 5.10.07. – He, too, like most libertarians, even most of the great ones, failed to supply a declaration of individual rights and liberties that all just and rational libertarians and other ideologues would be able to subscribe to, because it would not wrongfully suppress any of them. – JZ, 14.12.13. - & JUSTICE, FREEDOM

PEACE: If you would preserve peace, then prepare for peace.” - Barthélemy Enfantin, 1776-1864. (See above: Si vis pace ...) - If you want peace, prepare for it. - JZ, 1973. (Then I had not encountered Enfantin’s remark as yet. How many of the better modern sayings are merely repetitions of unknown and largely inaccessible former remarks? – JZ, 21.4.08.

PEACE: Imagine for once economy and culture as free from the State, the businessman free to peacefully acquire coal and oil needed in industry in the same way as he previously bought flowers from Nice and ebony from Africa. Think of the State confined to the task to achieve order, justice and health in its district. (*) Imagine the borders not as iron curtains and electrified barbed wire obstacles but as almost invisible demarcation lines, recognizable only by a marking stone. Imagine everyone free to reside where he could support himself. What for should any wars be conducted then?” - Bishop Otto Dibelius, speech 27.4.47. - (*) I believe the territorial State to be the least suitable organization for achieving either of these targets! – JZ, 28.5.82, 25.1.11. – FREE MIGRATION, LIMITED GOVERNMENT

PEACE: In international affairs, a period of cheating between two periods of fighting.” – Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary, 1906. – MUST BE MORE THAN A MERE ARMISTICE.

PEACE: In our age of international division of labor, free trade is the prerequisite for any amicable arrangement between nations. And free trade is impossible in a world of statism.” - Ludwig von Mises, Omnipotent Government, p.6.

PEACE: In peace sons bury their fathers, but in war fathers bury their sons.” - Croesus (?-546 B.C.), Last king of Lydia. - Attributed by Herodotus. - WAR

PEACE: In short, it is evident now - even as it was to any one with some familiarity with the history of alliances - that the high moral purpose written into the charter of the UN charter is but a fairy tale. World peace is not to be achieved through this monstrosity. Like the League of Nations which it succeeded, or the Holy Roman Empire, or any of the political coalitions in the history of the world, the UN is incapable of giving the world peace simply because it rests on the unsound assumption that peace is a function of politics. The fact is that peace and politics are antithetical.” - Frank Chodorov, Fugitive Essays, p.121. I would add, that this applies only to territorial politics - the only type of politics most people can visualize and yet it is not the only one. – JZ, 28.5.83, 25.1.11. – UN, LEAGUE OF NATIONS, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, FREE COMPETITION BETWEEN ALL KINDS OF GROUPS OF VOLUNTEERS

PEACE: In the arts of peace Man is a bungler …” - George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman, 1905. Quoted by Arthur C. Clarke, in ANALOG 7/83, editorial. – All the peace ideas have not yet been sufficiently assembled and evaluated. Like in religion numerous errors and prejudices prevail, which perpetuate war and territorial Warfare States. – JZ, 15.3.09. - Let individuals make their own choices, in all their own affairs, quite independent of territorial governments, with their own preferred kinds of voluntary societies and communities, starting with secessions from all territorial governments, and we would soon see that the vast majority do prefer peace and if sufficiently free, can also efficiently defend it against the relatively few remaining war mongers. - JZ, 25.1.11. – SECESSIONISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, COMPETION IN EVERY SPHERE, PEACEFUL COEXISTENE WITHOUT ANY TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY CLAIMS, MILITIA, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, NO MORE DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES FOR WHOLE POPULATIONS

PEACE: Indeed, the whole wisdom of world history can be expressed in a single sentence: Each State robs, as much as it can. Full stop. In between there are digestion periods and periods of powerlessness, which one calls “peace”. – Spitteler. - Such sweeping generalizations do generally fail to cover all cases. How much robbery have e.g. Monaco, Liechtenstein, Sweden and Switzerland engaged in during the last 150 years? – JZ, 23.2.08. - Panarchic, i.e. competing and voluntary governments, communities and societies, all without any territorial monopoly and any involuntary members, would be very different, in this respect as well. – JZ, 23.2.08. – VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY & FREE ENTERPRISE COMPETITION IN EEYR SPHERE, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

PEACE: Individual liberty and rights drive out war. Freedom and genuine individual rights work peacefully. – JZ, 8/75, 25.1.11.

PEACE: It hath been said that an unjust peace is to be preferred before a just war.” - Samuel Butler, speech in the Rump Parliament. - That depends upon how unjust the peace is and upon how just and rational and life-saving the war measures are. – JZ, 26.4.83.

PEACE: It is a general rule of reason, that every man ought to endeavor peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may see, and use all helps and advantages of war.” - Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, . – Rather, only the peace, justice and freedom promoting warfare methods. – J Z., 9.7.82. – In essence, they would reduce war to rightful policing actions against the war mongers while establishing quite rightful and tolerant peace conditions with their primary victims, those whom they do territorially rule, exploit and abuse or even murder. – JZ, 15.3.09, 25.1.11.

PEACE: It is better to have a war for justice than peace in injustice. – Charles Péguy, The Rights of Man, Basic Verities, 1943. - Provided, that war is fought in a quite just way, against the real enemies of individual rights and liberties only. – JZ, 14.4.08.

PEACE: It is far easier to make war than to make peace.” (*) – Georges Clemençeau, Speech, Verdun, 14 July, 1919. – A lasting peace, based upon rights and liberties requires certainly more in thoughts and ideas than does a war. However, with our ideas and thoughts sufficiently clarified, it can be relatively easy to achieve as well. Alas, so far most thoughts and ideas, proposals and programs on the establishment of peace are almost as muddled as those which make for war. Those of the war hawks sufficed to “achieve” wars, those of the peace doves did not suffice to establish peace. – JZ, 14.4.08. – (*) Especially when you do not know how to establish and maintain peace but know only how to make war and do possess the territorial monopoly power to decide upon war and have any wrongful motives for war, like many to most of their power-addicted or even power-mad leaders of most territorial States, in almost all of the larger ones, under which they operate, also internationally, under all kinds of wrongful excuses and false pretences and using wrongful warfare measures and weapons. – JZ, 15.3.09, 14.12.13.

PEACE: It is interest that keeps peace.” – Oliver Cromwell, Speech in the House of Commons, Sept. 4, 1654. – If you perceive you own interests wrongly, like e.g. the Protectionists do, than you start wars by first engaging in economic warfare. The Protectionism of the Western World almost forced Japan into WW II. – JZ, 15.3.09. – Free Trade being blocked, it tried to conquer markets. – JZ, 14.12.13. - What Cromwell said applied only to rightful and rational interests, well understood and upheld. – JZ, 15.3.09.

PEACE: It is not enough just to be for peace. The point is, what can we do about it?” - President Richard M. Nixon, on-the-record interview with C. L. Sulzberger, March 8, 1971. - THE NEW YORK TIMES, March 10, 1971, p.14. - One has to be just, first of all, to make lasting peace possible. - JZ, 13.10.02. - N. did not know, either, what rightful war and peace aims would require, namely, first of all the abolition of territorial monopolies. - JZ, 26.11.02. – For several years he represented one of the largest and he, too, had stockpiled WMD’s. – JZ, 7.3.09.

PEACE: It is now urged in the interests of liberty that many persons become ‘peace mongers’." - Dr. F. A. Harper, 1951, "In Search of Peace."

PEACE: It is one of the most elementary rules of scientific inquiry that if you don’t know exactly what you are looking for, you may not know when you have found it.” – Motto to Francis A. Caries, The Signals, in ANALOG, July 66. – For instance: How many recognize in personal law rather than territorial law and in voluntary taxation rather than compulsory taxation and in monetary freedom rather than monetary despotism three of the major preconditions for peace? – JZ, 14.4.08. – Q.

PEACE: It must be a peace without victory. Only a peace between equals can last; only a peace, the very principle of which is equality and a common participation in a common benefit.” – Woodrow Wilson, Address to the Senate, Jan. 22, 1917.

PEACE: It was the development of a world or worlds where war would not be merely outlawed, but impossible, where fear would never raise its head, where progress would have a different value than it had in mankind's world today.” - Clifford D. Simak, Ring Around the Sun, p.137. - PROGRESS, SOCIETY, WAR, JUSTICE, SECURITY, PANARCHISM

PEACE: It's co-existence or no existence.” - Bertrand Russell, quoted by L. J. Peter, The Peter Plan, p.144. – But peaceful coexistence is possible only on the basis of voluntary exterritorial autonomy, not on the basis of compulsory territorialism, which means always the territorial domination by one or the other party – and struggles for the acquisition, expansion or retention of territorial domination. – JZ, 21.4.08, 25.1.11. - TERRITORIALLISM

PEACE: Just as, in fact, there can be no peace without order, so there can be no order without justice. – Pope Pious XII. – How many different concepts and practices do exist for each of these terms? And how many of these lead to wars rather than peace? – JZ, 7.6.13. - ORDER, JUSTICE, Q.

PEACE: Just ponder the fact that hundreds of millions of people let themselves be led into wars against each other without insisting upon quite rightful war and peace aims. In that respect they were and are still not much better than former armies of slaves driven to fight each other for the benefit of their masters. – JZ, 14.4.08. - The imposition of a territorial and majoritarian democracy is certainly not a quite rightful war aim. Our present territorial rulers know nothing better. Nor have they shown even the slightest interest in any more rightful and rational war aims. Their subjects pay in life, limbs, freedom and rights for this ignorance and disinterest of their war leaders. - E.g. in Iraq and in Afghanistan. - JZ, 25.1.11. – Alas, most of them do also share the ignorance, popular errors, prejudices and lack of interest in individual rights and liberties of their misleaders. – JZ, 14.12.13. - WAR AIMS.

PEACE: Justice creates peace.” – Quoted by E. Krippendorff, Staat und Krieg, p.231. – And how many unsettled disagreements on justice are still remaining? We have still not developed and published an ideal and complete declaration of all individual rights and liberties! – JZ, 15.3.09. – No territorial government recognized all of them, nor do I know of an active movement among peace-, freedom- and justice lovers to compile and declare a all of these rights and liberties. – JZ, 14.12.13. - JUSTICE

PEACE: Know guns, Know peace and safety. No guns, no peace nor safety. – Source? – Have guns and other armaments or armed territorial forces everywhere and for all the time that they existed, assured peace and safety? But then the genuine requirements of a lasting peace, in freedom, justice and security are still not known or sufficiently appreciated. – JZ, 23.4.13. – Who has so far represented only quite rightful war and peace aims and has already realized the, as far as possible, in the own country? Without them the best defensive weapons are rather useless for preventing wars. – JZ,, 14.12.13. – QUITE RIGHTFUL WAR & PEACE AIMS, INDIVDIUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

PEACE: Let loose the hogs of peace. – Lawrence Ferlinghetti. – Let them secede – and arm, organize and act in voluntary communities and societies, for the protection of their individual rights and liberties, all those rights and liberties, which they do want to apply among themselves. – JZ, 25.3.08. – PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES – THROUGH MILITIAS & PEACEFULLY COEXISTING & COMPETING PANARCHIES OF VOLUNTEERS, PANARCHISM

PEACE: Let me be my own man - a privilege I would extend to all peaceful persons.” - L. E. Read, Notes, 1/75. – But he was not prepared to let statists be their own men, doing their statist things to themselves only. He wanted to subordinate all of them to a “limited” territorial government, whether they liked that as their ideal or not. He was not satisfied with introducing limited governments only for its volunteers, regardless of what others might be doing to or for themselves. To that extent even he was a war-monger, too, without being aware of this. Did he ever clearly renounce e.g. the decision-making monopoly on war and peace? – JZ, 21.4.08, 25.1.11. – To try to impose a territorial limited government is as wrongful and self-defeating as to impose e.g. a majoritarian territorial democratic government on a country and population like that of Iraq and Afghanistan. – JZ, 14.3.09. - PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS, UNDER PERSONAL LAWS & FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. ANY FORM OF TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Let no man posture as an advocate of peace if he proposes or supports any social system that initiates the use of physical force against individual men, in any form whatever.” - Ayn Rand: For the New Intellectual, p.56/57. – Alas, her kind of supposedly limited enough but still territorial government does so, too, upon the vast majority of statists. - With quite flawed arguments she attacked the idea of "competing governments" or, rather, her straw-man notion of it. - So "objective" was her "objectivism" and still is, as far as I know, among most of her followers. - JZ, 25.1.11. – How many of them have renounced her views on this subject? – JZ, 14.12.13. - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, COMPETING OR VOLUNTARY GOVERNANCE SYTEMS, VOLUNTARISM & FREE COMPETITION UNDER PERSONAL LAW IN ALL SPHERES, AYN RAND

PEACE: Let us be kings in our dreams but businessmen in their realization.” - (Seien wir Koenige in unseren Traeumen, aber Kaufleute in ihrer Verwirklichung.) - Thomas Bata. - How many peace lovers have studied the detailed preconditions for peace and the steps towards their realization? - JZ 28.5.83.

PEACE: Let us have peace. - Lysander Spooner: No Treason, VI, 55, Works I. – Alas, it cannot be simply offered, ready-made, as a gift. One has to work for it, establish it. But in that effort unilateral peace declarations could play a significant role, if directed  towards the victims of a dictatorship, believably expressed and already practically demonstrated on the own side, e.g. by freely competing governments and societies in exile, all only for their kind of volunteers. They, too, could also be an effective, i.e., a peace-promoting “gift”, one that would be gladly embraced by many of the unarmed and the armed victims of a dictatorship, at their first opportunity to do so. – JZ, 21.4.08. – WAR AIMS, LIBERATION WARS, DEFENCE, DESERTIONS, PUBLIC APPEALS, TRUST, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM

PEACE: Let us take the risks of peace upon ourselves, not impose the risks of war upon the world.” – A Quaker book title, seen Dec. 86. - What risks are there, in any genuine peace, based upon individual rights and liberties, compared with risking all rights, liberties and lives  - made now possible by "modern" and "scientific" wars, using "high technology" mass murder devices, still stockpiled by thousands, even by "democratic" governments? – JZ, 25.3.08, 25.1.11.

PEACE: Liberalism starts from the premise that not war but peace is the father of all things. What alone enables man to advance and distinguishes man from the animals is social cooperation … War not only destroys, it cannot create.” – Ludwig von Mises. – Well, it creates weapons and ammunition, hunger and diseases and all too many dead, wounded and cripples, widows and orphans. It even created nuclear mass murder devices and so far we are stuck with them, for territorial governments are protecting them against destruction by the people. – They create ever new laws, wars, taxes, inflations and statist restrictions, e.g. on immigration, especially since WW I. - JZ, 22.2.08. - How many of the classical liberals of today favor only exterritorial autonomy for volunteers instead of territorial domination, however well meaning, over involuntary subjects? - JZ, 25.1.11. - LIBERALISM, TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Make money not war. – D. Z., 8.6.77. (When he was 13.)

PEACE: Making peace is harder than making war.” – Adlai Stevenson. – quoted in: Arthur C. Clarke & Michael Kube-McDowell, The Trigger, Harper/Collins Publishers, 1999, p. 98. - If one does not really know what one is doing, should do and how to do it. – JZ, 29.9.07. – We do have e.g. military academies but not yet worthwhile peace academies and revolution academies teaching how to overthrow despotic and warlike regimes with the least trouble and human sacrifices and costs. – Most of the peace programs published so far are unworkable or flawed. Their worst aspect was and is their remaining territorialism. - JZ, 11.3.09. - & WAR, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM

PEACE: Man's greatest blunder has been in trying to make peace with the skies instead of making peace with his neighbors. - Elbert Hubbard - Roy Halliday, Quotations with an Attitude, online. - & RELIGION

PEACE: mankind is confronted today with the alternative: either lasting peace or serious risk of total destruction.” - Jacques Maritain, Man & The State, edited by Richard O’Sullivan, London, Hollis & Carter, 1954, p.173. - Can one have total peace with those men, now territorially in power, who are prepared for mass murder and total destruction? Should one resist them only non-violently? Can one do so effectively? Are their nuclear mass murder devices protecting us? Can they protect tyrants from tyrannicide with minor conventional weapons or poisons or by an expert in unarmed combat? Are these monsters safe from military insurrections or revolutions? – Plausible slogans are often rather thoughtless. – But it is right to point out the nuclear war threat under the present territorialist conditions. Peace requires the exterritorial autonomy and the voluntarism of panarchism. – JZ, 29.9.07, 11.3.09. - OR TOTAL DESTRUCTION? NUCLEAR WAR THREAT,

PEACE: Many favor peace but not many favor the things that make for peace.” - Thomas a Kempis, the fourteenth century author of The Imitation of Christ, quoted in Leonard E. Read: Elements of Libertarian Leadership, p.13.

PEACE: Mises is solidly in the tradition of the makers of the liberal ideology when he states that Heraclitus was wrong, “not war, but peace, is the father of all things.” – Ralph Raico, in reviewing Mises’ Liberalism, in THE FREEMAN, Nov. 85, p. 671. – Since we haven’t had a genuine peace as yet but mainly merely armistices with arms races, we haven’t experiences as yet all the progress that a genuine peace could and would provide. – JZ, 14.4.08, 25.1.11. – Those peace programs, which we have had so far, were not yet informed and ingenious enough to become almost self-realizing, like a well-developed general staff plan for a successful war. – Our "benevolent" territorial rulers have worked much more to promote and to prepare for war, even a general nuclear holocaust, than to try to establish peace. They have all too uncritically accepted and perpetuated what makes for war rather than peace. - JZ, 15.3.09, 25.1.11.

PEACE: More than an end to war, we want an end to the beginnings of all wars.” - Franklin Delano Roosevelt, speech, written for broadcast, 13.4.1945 (the day after his death).

PEACE: Most of the organized peace lovers seem to wallow in ignorance and prejudices, errors and myths regarding peace – and do not even seriously attempt to study to rid themselves of their beloved hang-ups and handicaps regarding peace. – JZ, 16.8.95, 25.3.08. – They do wrongly believe that they already know the solution to the problem of war and so they no longer look for it but, rather, like religious sectarians, they parrot their errors, prejudices and nonsense. – No wonder that they could not get anywhere with them. – JZ, 15.3.09.

PEACE: Most of us would rather risk catastrophe than read the directions.” - Mignon McLaughlin, READER'S DIGEST, 11/64. – Conclusion from this: Experimental freedom for everybody, even for those unwilling to read alreadyo prepared and published directions. – JZ, n.d. & 14.12.13 – Clearly enough directions to peace have either still to be written or published or read. – JZ, 21.4.08. - Our territorial rulers were prepared to experiment with mass murder devices but not with radical and peace promoting ideas, programs, rights, liberties and institutions. - Perhaps, because with them their territorial powers and institutions would disappear. - JZ, 25.1.11. - DIRECTIONS, PROGRAMS, BLUEPRINTS, KNOWLEDGE, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICES, TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Most peace books and other writings are not worth their price or reading. - JZ, 13.10.00. - They only demonstrate how badly and insufficiently one can deal with a very important subject. - JZ, 31.1.02. - BOOKS, WRITINGS, PEACE WRITINGS, PEACE MOVEMENTS

PEACE: Most peace lovers are full of good will - and prejudices and ignorance. That's why they are so ineffective. - JZ 2/12/81.

PEACE: Most writings on peace are as abundant, useless and irrelevant as are most laws, prayers and preachings of love, faith, hope and charity. – JZ, 25.1.92, 25.1.11.

PEACE: My advise is: open all the doors to peace! – JZ, 3.7.82, upon reading: "My sentence is for open war." – in Milton: Paradise Lost, Bk II, i.51. - We haven't even opened our doors to all asylum seekers. - JZ, 25.1.11. - IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS, TERRITORIALISM, MONETARY & FINANCIAL DESPOTISM

PEACE: My reply was simple: "Sir," I said, "you have never had real peace in Montgomery. You have had a sort of negative peace in which the Negro too often accepted his state of subordination. But this is not true peace. True peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice.” - Martin Luther King Jr., Stride towards Freedom, p.24. – JUSTICE, LIBERTY, RIGHTS, VOLUNTARISM

PEACE: Natural harmony between all human beings, who are not criminals with victims or other aggressors, does require that each special or common interest group can freely practise its own affairs in its own way in, i.e., without laying down the law for all other groups in a country and undisturbed by them, however much the others may dislike what particular groups are doing among their volunteers. All democracy is supposed to be based on consent and consent can only be maximized or approach completion among volunteers. No force or threat of force is to be used against non-members and the remaining or new internal dissenters should be free to secede – to do their own things among themselves or together with other and preferred already existing associations and communities of volunteers. No power over others except over criminals with victims and other aggressors against peaceful and tolerant people. No taxation power or other powers over non-members. Citizenship and obedience only by free individual choice. Only intolerant physical actions – genuine crimes with involuntary victims – committed by outsiders against the own members, are to be resisted and prosecuted but not mere verbal insults, slanders, libels, bad examples etc. – which are either to be ignored or publicly responded to with the same "weapons and ammunition", or ridiculed or morally and rationally refuted. To take mere verbal assaults or mere images serious, e.g. full or part-nudity, and class them as aggressive, does amount to belief in word or image magic or witchcraft. In the eyes of moral and rational beings, those using such published mere words and images as an excuse for wrongful and aggressive actions, infringing basic individual rights and liberties, are not excusable but dangerous criminals. They discredit themselves and their "cause" in they eyes of all moral and rational beings. – They must become effectively resisted and deprived of any power over dissenters. – JZ, 23.3.09, 25.1.11.

PEACE: No peace that still involves political borders can be a fully just peace in freedom. – JZ, 3.4.06. - JUSTICE, BORDERS & FRONTIERS, TERRITORIALISM, PRESENT STATISM

PEACE: No treaty of peace shall be esteemed valid in which it is tacitly reserved matter for future war.” – Immanuel Kant, Perpetual Peace, I, 1795. – All peace treaties so far were valid only as temporary armistices. Should, therefore, every peace treaty and armistice be considered invalid, even for as long only as it usually lasts? – JZ, 5.7.86, 25.3.08.

PEACE: Not by crying “peace! peace! when there is not peace. But by “evaporating” the points of antagonism in the social-economic system (*) that lead to war.” – John Hargraves, Words Win Wars, 1940, p.211. - Alas, he was a territorial statist and didn't recognize the major and irreconcilable antagonisms which territorialism causes. - JZ, 7.1.93. – (*) These “points” are, essentially, the territorial and statist impositions of such systems. Hargraves offered merely a word, “evaporating”, for the technique or method to be used. How does one “evaporate” territorialism? Essentially, one allows individual atoms or molecules to separate themselves from the mass of others and to join each other in another state or condition, that is not bound by frontiers or borders but merely by affinities in a gaseous environment of mixed gases, possibly forming various clouds, moving often in different directions, dissolving and reforming in different ways again. But then all analogies do limp somewhat. The essential point is that the smallest entities involved, namely individuals, are finally given their own choices, becoming self-responsible, really self-governing, self-determining their own future, as far as any human beings can, rather than being continually bound by collectivist “choices”, which others made for them. (XYZ laws, taxation, conscription, licensing, registration, passports, tariffs, penalties upon crimes without victims, monetary and financial despotism, etc.) If and to the extent that they will furthermore associate; it will be only with like-minded people, whether well enlightened idealists and reformers or fools or true believers of one kind or the other. Under that condition all of them would tend to learn faster and more than they could as mere subjects of imposed territorial systems, just like artists, technicians and scientists, or cooks of any broth do learn more by being free to experiment than by being kept under imposed dogmas, recipes or laws. – JZ, 20.2.08, 25.1.11, 14.12.13. – PANARCHISM

PEACE: Not even a quite rightful war, one with only quite rightful war- and peace aims and quite rightful warfare or, rather, rightful policing methods, has so far been properly defined and practised, far less a quite rightful peace, so rightful that in most cases it would prevent any military clashes or large-scale crimes. – JZ, 13.4.03. – After so many wrongful wars one should imagine people would be interested in becoming quite informed and clear about such possibilities. Alas … JZ, 21.10.07. – Even after thousands of years of the suppression of all too many individual rights and liberties – how many are today finally prepared to collaborate to fully and as clearly declare all of them? In this respect I still feel myself mostly as isolated as Diogenes felt with his lamp, looking for human beings. – JZ, 14.12.13. - PEACE & WAR, RIGHTFUL WAR- & PEACE AIMS, DECLARATION OF ALL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

PEACE: Not organizing for peace but thinking for peace is the most important first step. – JZ, n.d., in comment in PEACE PLANS No. 11. - THINK, PEACE MOVEMENTS

PEACE: Nothing can bring you peace but the triumph of principles.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1803 -1882. - That much we can agree upon but now: Which ones are these principles? Can we agree upon them? Let's start by listing what we consider to be "first principles". - JZ, 26.11.02. – And among these I would try to begin with compiling an ideal declaration of individual rights and liberties. – But I have still to find volunteers prepared to work together on this job, utilizing especially all previous private declarations of human rights. – JZ, 25.3.08. – (I offer an anthology of over 130 of these as a starting point, in PEACE PLANS 1589/90, updated edition, digitized. - JZ, 15.3.09, 25.1.11. - HUMAN RIGHTS, PEACE THROUGH PRINCIPLES

PEACE: Nothing can bring you peace but yourself.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson – I am already at peace with myself – but the world, especially its territorial governments, are not at peace with me. They do not leave me - and others of their victims - sufficiently alone. At least Emerson should have been able to clearly distinguish between internal peace of individuals and external peaceful relationships with other people and peoples, the own and foreign governments. The internal peace, within ourselves, we can achieve for ourselves, relatively easily. But how can we achieve external peace, abolishing war, merely by being at peace with ourselves? One should not carelessly play with words and apply them where they should not be applied. – JZ, 8.8.08. -

PEACE: Nothing was impossible – not even peace.” - Robert J. Sawyer, Starplex, p.258 - NO IMPOSSIBILITY

PEACE: Now, peace must precede, not follow, disarmament; and freedom must precede peace. Not peace is thinkable in Europe without the liberation of the subjugated peoples, since while these peoples are not free they will want their freedom and must be held by force of arms.” - Salvador de Madariaga, The Blowing up of the Parthenon, p.77. – The people in the West were and are not free, either, but are not held down by force of arms but rather through their own prejudices, through their own consent to territorialism. – JZ, 24.2.08. - FREEDOM, LIBERATION, DISARMAMENT

PEACE: Of 4711 peace treaties in 3500 years , 4697 were broken and of 1656 arms races since 650 BC, 1640 led to war.” - Otto Lehmann Russbueldt: Wie gewinnen wir den Frieden? – ARMS RACES, PEACE TREATIES, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES

PEACE: On the first day of every war the President (Prime Minister, Chancellor etc.), the ministers of foreign affair and the minister of defence, of all of the participating governments should be summarily executed, as the first casualties of the war. Obviously, they would have failed in their role as “protectors”. In some States this would require secret tyrannicide action. Well, haven’t the military trained enough commando units for that and are there not, in every State, sufficient wronged dissenters and whole armies of conscripts prepared as cannon fodder? Putting a high price on these top heads would help. Compare Sir Thomas More’s Utopia, 1516, especially his chapter “On warfare”. – JZ, 25.3.08. – WARMONGERS & HELPLESS AS WELL AS USELESS LEADERS, TYRANNICIDE, WAR MONGERS, LEADERSHIP

PEACE: One has to begin peace, just like a war.” – Stefan Zweig. (JZ tr.: “Einer muss den Frieden beginnen wie den Krieg.”) – Allow everyone to begin a peace – at least for himself and like-minded people. – JZ, 5.7.92. – No more total wars upon command! – JZ, 23.2.08. – Individuals have to achieve the freedom to individually secede from ever territorial State, which means, usually, most Warfare States. -  JZ, 14.12.13. – Is this freedom really impossible to achieve, if seriously aimed at by enough people? – It would even be in the interest of most of the politicians, who have still enough rationality left to see their own interest in this option, as permanent leaders of as many volunteers as they an find and satisfy with their leadership. Naturally, it would not satisfy the incurable territorial power addicts. They may have to be killed off – before they manage to kill all of us. – JZ, 14.12.13. - SEPARATE PEACE, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES, NEUTRALITY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, DEFECTION, DESERTION, PANARCHISM, ASYLUM, TYRANNICIDE

PEACE: One peace is better than ten victories.” – German Proverbs. – Often, not always. There can also be the “peace” of totalitarianism and that of the graveyard. – Peace with tyrannical regimes should be excluded. It is only a prelude to international war and already practises a form of civil war, using extreme territorial terrorism. - JZ, 10.7.86, 25.2.08, 25.1.11. – Remember the over 200 million innocents murdered by territorial States during the last century – on top of their war victims. – JZ, 14.12.13. – DEMOCIDE STATISTICS OF PROF. RUDOLF RUMMEL

PEACE: Only a peace between equals can last.” – Woodrow Wilson, address to U.S. Senate, 1917. – As if he had been the “equal” to any US, German, UK, French or Russian subject. Equality merely between other territorial power mongers, and power addicts is not enough. On the contrary. It almost assures wars, again and again. - It is not equality among all territorial subjects that makes for peace but the possibility for each of them to have and to enjoy equal rights and equal liberties, to the extent that they do, as individuals, want them for themselves and for like-minded people, that makes for a genuine peace, or for peaceful coexistence for all kinds of quite diverse societies, communities and voluntary governments. – It would be a peace between individuals - who are free to be as different and unequal as they want to be - from other people (those outside their own exterritorially autonomous communities and societies or even competing governments, all only of volunteers). It would mean non-territorial "unity" only among like-minded people, all within many and diverse communities and societies of volunteers, all confined to personal laws and exterritorial autonomy only. Thus they could achieve justice and freedom for all of them, in all their diversity, by all their different standards, principles and institutions. Thus a peace between them, based on recognizing their different choices for themselves, would have a good chance to become a long-lasting one. – It would mean the greatest possible tolerance for all tolerant people but no tolerance at all for criminals with victims and other aggressors, especially all territorialist power addicts. - JZ, 25.3.08, 25.1.11. – EQUALITY? INEQUALITY? PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM, PERSONAL LAW VS. TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Only freedom and justice or natural and individual human rights and liberties, are peace-promoting. – JZ, 26.4.83. – FREEDOM, JUSTICE, NATURAL RIGHTS, HUMAN RIGHTS, LIBERTIES

PEACE: Only freedom could guarantee peace.’ – President Reagan, THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 10.8.87. - But not the peace of statism and territorialism. In which, e.g., one man like him – and too many worse ones, can command the use of mass extermination devices. – JZ, 22.2.08.

PEACE: Our foreign policy is a disaster, apparently designed to 'protect' us by giving us the 'peace' that Comrade Khrushev bleated for so much. (In case you have forgotten, the Soviets have it all figured out that the world will have peace as soon as everybody bows down and obeys THEM.) - "JAG", 4.7.75.

PEACE: Our present kind of peace is a only kind of war. At best it is a temporary armistice. And in most cases it is a more or less violent internal or civil (anti-civilization) war of the few who rule in any territory against the many among "the" people, who do not want to be ruled by these few but, rather, if at all, then by some other few. And this situation, inherent in territorialism, prepares the ground for turning armistices into international wars. At most one can say that democracies and republics are, generally, not as bloody and violent against the own citizens and foreign subjects as are dictatorships. However, even their best and peace-loving intentions can lead to minor and major wars, as long as they remain addicted and shaped by territorialist ideas, institutions and actions. See e.g. their indiscriminate bombing campaigns, their nuclear strength policies, their wars against drugs and terrorism. - JZ, 9.10.00, 9.2.02. - The are still far from permitting individual and group secessionism, full monetary and financial freedom and restrict even free migration. None of them has bothered to declare or to so subscribe to a complete code of all genuine individual rights and liberties! - JZ, 25.1.11, 14.12.13. - ARMISTICE, WAR, GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, CIVIL WAR

PEACE: Panarchism is the main platform point for the peaceful settlement of most of the remaining internal and external disagreements. Nevertheless, and although it is only the exterritorial opposite choice to territorial decision-making, it has been left almost completely out of the public discussion of opportunities to achieve peace in freedom and justice for all. The exterritorial autonomy solution for volunteer communities has e.g. not been publicly and widely discussed e.g. for South Africa, the USSR, Korea, Vietnam, Lebanon, Israel, Ireland, Cambodia, Laos, Burma, India, China, Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Yugoslavia, the Balkan and for all the new territorial States and former colonies. – The territorial model has blocked most minds and blinded them to exterritorial and voluntary alternatives. This applies even to most of the anarchists and libertarians who, in this respect, are not so radical after all. – JZ, n.d., 9.1.99, 25.1.11. - It has also blinded them to the atrocities and oppressions and exploitative actions that are, inevitably, associated with territorialism. - Thus territorialism is still widely seen as the solution rather than the problem. - JZ, 8.9.04. – PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

PEACE: Panarchy, with its individual secessionism, voluntary membership, exterritorial autonomy under personal laws, is not yet a major force for peace, just like radical liberty proposals are now not yet a major force towards total liberty, or towards as much liberty as each wants for himself, and as the present and monopolized justice system, and reform attempts for it, are not yet a major force towards justice for all – to each his own! – Just like freedom in education proposals are not yet major and effective forces towards sufficient enlightenment, and just like freedom to experiment is not yet a general free option, as long as it is excluded in the political, economic and social sphere via territorial statism and as long are long as all of them remain, largely and in all countries and in most circles, unknown, unappreciated, even objected to and resisted or, worse still, systematically and severely obstructed. – JZ, in Pan AZ. See also my file: Pan JZ notes 29 12 04 Peace & Pan of ca. 18 pages. - PEACE THROUGH PANARCHY?

PEACE: Pax libertatis, a term on p.11 of COMMENTARY ON LIBERTY, VI/6, April 76. – According to my experience most libertarians have still not sufficiently pondered the requirements of an effective libertarian peace program. – At least their response to my two libertarian peace books (*) has been close to zero. - JZ, 13.2.08. – (*) Online at - PAX LIBERTATIS

PEACE: Peace - or else! – JZ, 7.8.74.

PEACE: Peace - through defensive war against all the meddlers. - JZ, 15.8.66. - PEACE & MEDDLING

PEACE: Peace ... a Marxist code-word for: the ultimate global triumph of Marxism.” - Pyrrho, THE CONNECTION, 24.1.82, p.43/44. - Yes, if one would allow even one's ideals to be defined and "realized" by one's worst enemies! – JZ, 28.5.83

PEACE: Peace … the continuance of war with other means.” – Spengler. (“Frieden: … die Fortsetzung des Krieges mit andern Mitteln.”) – Yes, if by this he meant peace treaties between territorial powers and Warfare States in the armistice periods in which they prepare for their next wars. – JZ, 21.4.08, 14.12.13.

PEACE: Peace and good will - towards all men of good will. - JZ, 74. – That would require quite rightful war- and peace aims. Have they ever been declared by any territorial government? – JZ, 14.12.13.

PEACE: Peace and justice are two sides of the same coin.” - Dwight D. Eisenhower, News Conference, 6.2.1957.

PEACE: Peace at any price never quite worked out the way one hoped. There was always a higher price to pay.” - Frank Herbert, Hellstrom's Hive, p.115. - PEACE AT ANY PRICE?

PEACE: peace between nations cannot be attained by reasonable means, by conversations, by arbitration, as long as the subordination of the people to the government continues, a condition always unreasonable and always pernicious.” -"Tolstoi on Civil Disobedience and Nonviolence," p.80. - I hold that it can only be attained by reasonable means, which, among personal law, exterritorial autonomy, full freedom of association, secession, contract and experimentation, do also include the use of force some rightful defensive and liberating use of force in a morally and rationally restrained way, e.g. through an advanced militia of volunteers fully motivated, prepared and trained to effectively defend all individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 26.4.83. – MILITIA TO DEFEND ALL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, WAR & PEACE AIMS, DEFENCE, LIBERATION, FORCE



[Home] [Top]