John Zube

Pan Directory

People & Projects (A - H)



A - H




AARON, SPENCE: Spence Aaron - 54 mutual friends - liked my Facebook, 5.7.15 comment to: Ty Arcuby : The government keeps telling us that we’re free. So why won’t they let us opt out of their system? – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM

ABIDEEN, RAFI: Rafi Abideen 1 mutual friend, liked my Facebook remark: Alas, even most Jewish intellectuals are still addicted, all too uncritically, to territorial statism. Private and voluntarily combined property is quite another matter. They and most Arabs and Muslims do habitually ignore much of their tolerant traditions of voluntarism and non-territorial separatism. – Facebook, 22.9.14.

ABIDINE, ZINE: Zine Abidine – liked my Facebook, 30.3.16. comment

ACOSTA, MARCOS: Marcos Acosta - 3 mutual friends – liked my Facebook remark, 30.5.15

ADORNEY, JULIAN: In any market-based relationship, one party can leave and the other party can do them no harm. This is a freedom that is noticeably lacking in our interactions with government. – Julian Adorney, quoted by Mises Institute – Facebook, 22.10.15. (It is his concluding paragraph. – JZ.) - You can find this quote in Julian Adorney's article, Employment Is Nothing Like Slavery. - You can read more here: - 471 likes.

AGNEW, RAY: Ray Agnew - 29 mutual friends – liked my comment on the USA constitution, Facebook, 2.7.15 & 4.7.15

AGORA REBEL, Agora Rebel, listed by Joe Kopsick, Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago. - AGORA REBEL: Agora Rebel - Ludwig von Mises Institute

AGORA REBEL ART: Agora Rebel Art -
Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL over a year ago

AHMAD, NATASHA: Natasha Ahmad Pan interest, according to his Facebook entries. - July 2013 email address: - Flat 9, Inverness Court, Qeen's Drive. West Acton, London WE 0HU U.K. - Nizam Ahmad, listed by Joe Kopsick – He liked my following statement on Facebook: John Zube Individual sovereignty & secessionism rather than territorial sovereignty & compulsory subjugation of diverse peoples who are not volunteers but dissenters, to a single territorial regime. To all the own system - but always without a territorial monopoly. Then they have a good basis for peaceful coexistence. – FB 25.3.14. - Nizam Ahmad, liked my Facebook, 20.10.12. remark: Territorial States do not represent but repress human societies and their creativity, all too much. Genuine solutions are known at least to some but under territorial statism they cannot be freely applied among the first enlightened volunteers, who would have seceded and chosen one or the other personal law or social contract system for themselves, to realize their solution at the own risk and expense. Territorial States are, largely, prisons for innocent and radical innovators. - John Zube – he also liked my Facebook, 22.10.16. note:

AHMAD, NIZAM: Pan interest, according to his Facebook entries. - July 2013 email address: - Flat 9, Inverness Court, Qeen's Drive. West Acton, London WE 0HU U.K. - Nizam Ahmad, listed by Joe Kopsick. - Nizam Ahmad, liked my Facebook, 20.10.12. remark: Territorial States do not represent but repress human societies and their creativity, all too much. Genuine solutions are known at least to some but under territorial statism they cannot be freely applied among the first enlightened volunteers, who would have seceded and chosen one or the other personal law or social contract system for themselves, to realize their solution at the own risk and expense. Territorial States are, largely, prisons for innocent and radical innovators. - John Zube – he also liked my Facebook, 22.10.16. note:

AHMED, E. J., E. J. AHMED - 2 mutual friends, liked my Facebook remark:

AHMED, FARUK: Liked : John Zube No territorial State is or can be rightful and free enough. Above a certain size they are all essentially warfare States. Even local governments can be very despotic and exploitative and monopolistic in many ways. - Faruk Ahmed
airborne: aerborne - Facebook, 9.3.14. - Replies to Jeremy Thaxter - I think it is key that the questions raised here: - Questions about Polycentric law and Panarchy : Anarcho_Capitalism - - I have been talking in another sub and trying to put across the ideas of polycentric law and panarchy. I am doing a really bad job of it so...

AKASH, NEEL: Neel Akash – liked: John Zube Under territorialism we are almost always ruled by the worst types. See Hayek, which has a chapter on why the worst get to the top. High time to explore the voluntary, personal law and exterritorial autonomy alternatives. – Facebook, 5.3.14. – However, according to his Facebook entries now on my Facebook page, his main interests are as far as possible away from this and my own main interests. – JZ, 6.3.14.

ĀKERMAN, HANS DEMIAN: Hans Demian Åkerman – BITNATION advocate, one of the few I found listed. – JZ.

AKOSAH, AFRIKANUS KOFI: Afrikanus Kofi Akosah - 729 mutual friends - He liked one of my panarchist remarks on Facebook, October 14. - Afrikanus Kofi Akosah – BITNATION advocate, one of the few I found listed. – JZ.

ALALIKHAN, HAIDAR: Haidar Alalikhan - liked my 24.3.16. Facebook remark, entered here under CLARK, RON: The terrorists among the many Muslim immigrants in Belgium are a small minority. … - Also, my 8.4.16 FB remark on Syrian Refugees: They would be much more welcome everywhere under full monetary and financial freedom combined with other economic liberties and also with the option for all to live under their own personal law choices, always only at their own risk and expense. Then some of them would set so rightful and attractive examples that many of the US people would join them or copy them. Browse a bit through - Personal law systems have a very much longer history than territorial and national statism. - JZ

ALAM, HABIBUL: Habibul Alam - 1 mutual friend - liked my Facebook, 28.10.16. comment:

ALBORNO, MOHAMED: Mohamed Alborno – BITNATION advocate, one of the few I found listed. – JZ.

ALEXANDER, JUSTIN SUPERFLY: Justin Superfly Alexander - 3 mutual friends, liked my remark

ALEXANDER, STEPHEN: Stephen Alexander – has a Facebook page and liked my Facebook note

ALEXES KRISTA: Alexes Kriste Ana - liked my 1.7.15 Facebook remark

ALFARO, ROBERTO: Roberto Alfaro liked my comment to news on The Institute for Leadership in the Americas (ILA)

ALI, HAFIZ: Hafiz Ali - liked the Facebook, 21.7.16. comment: He's a voluntaryist for sure.... he's nothing alike to what we call a statist. It's great he's promoting panarchism, obviously he is no state-mongerer and he doesn't promote the use of coercion/compulsion. - On Ron Paul, Facebook, 21.7.16.

ALSTON, WILTON D.: Wilton D. Alston, - Gian Piero de Bellis - update - December 2014

ANA, ALEXES KRISTA: Alexes Kriste Ana - liked my 1.7.15 Facebook remark:
Anarchy Admin: Nothing Gets Censored Page shared your post. Facebook, 4.10.16. - PANARCHY, POLYARCHY, PERSONAL LAW OPTIONS, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONS, VOLUNTARISM, LAISSEZ FAIRE, FREE MARKETS, COMPETITION & CHOICES IN EVERY SPHERE, FOR ALL IDEOLOGIES, RELIGIONS & SECTS, FOR ALL THEIR BELIEVERS, BUT ALL ONLY WITHOUT A TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY & ANY POWER OVER PEACEFUL DISSENTERS, THUS GENUINE SELF-DETERMINATION OR SELF-GOVERNANCE, WITH FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL MARKETS & FREE ENTERPRISES, WHICH PROVIDE PUBLIC SERVICES OR PACKAGE DEALS OF THEM, COMBINED WITH CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY TOWARDS THEM, FULL FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, CONTRACT & EXPERIMENTATION: That would allow all kinds of movements, ideologies, religions and isms to do their things among their volunteers, but always at their own cost and risk only, regardless of whether they are “progressives”, “conservatives”, reactionaries, racists or totalitarians (in their own affairs), personal law choices, signed social contracts, policies, institutions and actions, as long as they are tolerant towards tolerant outsiders, all those, who would then also do their own and different things but only among their members, however wrongful or foolish outsiders believe them to be or even know that they are. Other people are not to be saved from their own choices. There would be xyz different systems, all freely chosen by volunteers, for all kinds of anarchism, libertarianism and statism, for “progressives”, “conservatives”, “reactionaries”, “nihilists” and people with the mentality of mere subjects, serfs and slaves, always confined to their self-chosen networks, their internal affairs. Protectionists could then do their things among themselves and so could Free Traders – likewise all the other affinity groups, networks, clubs and social insurance companies into which people would freely choose to sort themselves into, at least for the time being, with the secession option, i.e. voluntarism, still open to all of them. Freedom for the wise and informed as well as for the fools and prejudiced to do their things among themselves, just as they have done by now for centuries already in the sphere of religions, in many countries. But this freedom or choice would be extended to all kinds of political, social and economic systems as well. Experimental freedom has not yet led to sufficient enlightenment in the religious sphere but when it comes to the more concrete offers of political, social and economic systems, then the enlightening effects of free enterprise and consumer choices will tend to be as large as they are for the experimental freedom in the natural sciences and in technology as well as for the enterprise sovereignty in providing ordinary consumer goods and services and for the consumer sovereignty in choosing among these. Even foolish people can, mostly, recognize genuine bargains. Unlimited tolerance for all tolerant people but no tolerance for intolerant people! A new and much better world would certainly result, although not immediately but as fast as is possible for human beings, all of their sufficiently rational adults then being free to make their own choices in all their own affairs. Naturally, the divorce or exit or giving-notice options must always remain, as a precondition for genuine voluntarism, instead of compulsory and permanent as well as territorially imposed chains, bonds, domination or suppression, exploitation and monopolies. If you can express this more clearly, comprehensively and concisely, PLEASE, do so and sent the result to me. – I have been trying to do so for decades already. - John Zube, john.zube at - 4.9.16. – They frequently shared some others of my posts. – So there is at least one anarchist group with an interest in panarchy. - JZ, 30.2.17.

ANDERSON, DARRELL, reviewing: Secession, The Morality of Political Divorce from Fort Sumter to Lithuania to Quebec - by Allen Buchanan, 1991, Westview Press - Ever since the American War Among the States, political secession has been a volatile topic. Secession has become a hot topic again with the collapse of the Soviet Empire, and remains an important issue as conflicts increase across the globe. In his book Secession, The Morality of Political Divorce from Fort Sumter to Lithuania to Quebec, Allen Buchanan evaluates many arguments both for and against the idea of political secession. - Buchanan recognizes a right to secede, but he focuses on various discussions that might be used to “domesticate” [p. 104] the process. His focus is on how secession can be peacefully employed. Thus, he concludes that secession is possible but only under qualified conditions. - The book is informational but frustrating. Not because Buchanan is lacking details, but because of his presumptions. - Buchanan’s entire discussion revolves around the idea of seceding from a nation-state only to create a new nation-state. Although Buchanan acknowledges that people form nation-states through conquest and coercive behavior [p. 68], he presumes throughout his book that the concept of statism is valid. For example, he offers an argument that (the collection of people known as) a state might possess a valid title to a territory [p. 153]. Such a presumption is acceptable to many political theorists, but to anti-statists that presumption is problematic because statism is a philosophy of conquest - Buchanan can be partially excused from this restricted view of secession because the nation-state has been the dominant form of political society for several hundred years. He also can be partially excused because for thousands of years human social systems have been tied directly to land and Buchanan sees secession as a claim to a specific geographical territory [p. 11]. Thus, humans tend to be planar in their idea about where one community ends and another begins. However, as other authors have shown (for example, The Sovereign Individual, Davidson and Rees-Mogg), the concepts of contract and virtual communities bypass the traditional geographical boundaries created in the past. As the world economy continues to become more homogenized, the idea of fiat political borders becomes less meaningful. - Of course, Buchanan could claim that by “state” he meant only a geographical area and voluntary social process of government, and not the typical coercive political nation-state that exists today. However, he never affirmatively established any such distinction. - Buchanan recognizes the theory of individual secession, but he purposely limits his discussion to group secession [pp. 13–14, pp. 102–104]. That is frustrating because in some respects secession is nothing more than a fancy word describing the right to not associate. Any theorist who accepts the right to associate also must accept the right to not associate (for example, see The Structure of Liberty, Randy E. Barnett, p. 66.). Secession is a logical conclusion of the right to not associate. - Interestingly, of all the reasons Buchanan discusses that might support the idea of secession, he rejects the foundation of consent [pp. 70–73]. Buchanan recognizes consent theory, but rejects that theory with respect to justifying secession. Yet, the right to associate or not associate depends upon a theory of consent. - If secession is merely a logical conclusion to the right to not associate, then consent theory must play a role in any theory of secession. Second, if Buchanan disfavors any consent theory, then he must argue that humans do not function upon the principles of free association and voluntary exchange, but conquest. Of course, if a reader accepts Buchanan’s presumptions that 1) statism is legitimate, 2) people can be coerced into involuntary relationships, 3) people secede from one political nation-state only to form another nation-state, and 4) those people who administer the nation-state political system possess legitimacy with respect to territorial “sovereignty,” then one must accept that any consent theory is limited in nature and is ultimately defined by those who exercise power under the pretense of administering the nation-state. - The German sociologist Franz Oppenheimer called voluntary exchange the economic means of satisfying needs and wants, and forced exchange as the political means.[1] The former method implies persuasion and cooperation to obtain title to resources, the latter implies force and coercion — and often violence or the threat of violence. The former method implies moral power, the latter political power.[2] - The French Liberals of the early nineteenth century also recognized the distinction between voluntary and involuntary exchange, articulating that difference as a class struggle between warriors (bandits) and the industrious class (producers).[3] This struggle can be expressed in many ways: power vs. liberty, takers vs. producers, administrators vs. producers, force and coercion vs. persuasion and cooperation, idlers vs. laborers, predators vs. creators, moneyed elite vs. workers, exploiters vs. creators, status vs. contract, or rulers vs. the ruled. The political means is merely a way to sustain energy flows with minimal effort — the desire of getting something for nothing. - The economic means of satisfying needs and wants fully recognizes consent theory and the political means recognizes consent only in a limited manner. - Because of these underlying presumptions, Buchanan additionally presumes that the process of government is the same as the philosophy of statism. The two ideas are not the same. - The process of government is a natural and normal outgrowth of people forming groups and societies. The process of government is a desire of peaceably regulating human interaction. The philosophy of statism is an outgrowth of conquest and legal plunder. Statism is a process of violently enforcing the political means of exchange. In the 19th century Gustave de Molinari and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, and in the 20th century Albert Jay Nock, recognized the distinction between the process of government and the philosophy of statism, but unfortunately many modern theorists have failed to maintain this distinction. - The fundamental idea behind the concept of secession is withdrawal — the desire to terminate relationships and to disassociate. Although Buchanan recognizes secession as a process of divorce, and discusses the topics of self-determination [pp. 48–52] and preserving cultures [pp. 52–64], he does not adopt the idea that divorce is another way of declaring “I don’t like you anymore — go away and leave me alone.” - In addition to relegating individual secession as impractical, possibly part of the reason Buchanan never addresses secession at the fundamental level of exercising the right to disassociate is because Buchanan embraces the idea of group rights. The idea of group rights makes sense, but only from within two perspectives: 1) a theory of consent and 2) statism. Buchanan dismisses consent theory as grounds for secession; thus, he is left with defending statism. Within that narrow focus, and because statism is a philosophy embracing the political means of satisfying needs and wants, one must acknowledge that politics is basically a process of forcibly redistributing wealth from one class of people to another. From within that context, the idea of group rights makes sense because factions and special interests always will use the political process to attack certain unique groups of people. - However, eliminate that narrow focus of statism and reject a theory of consent and the idea of group rights is then clouded. If group rights is meant to be nothing more than the idea that a group of people sharing similar beliefs can coordinate their efforts to concurrently claim the same rights, then the concept of group rights is valid. Yet, such a foundation requires a theory of consent. However, most discussions about group rights tend to focus only on the idea of native cultures and ethnicity. Nobody can deny the historical tragedies that various cultural and ethnic groups have suffered, but those tragedies are a result of people presuming statism and conquest is legitimate. Statism is a political theory justifying conquest — the political means of satisfying needs and wants. If humans depended upon free association and voluntary exchange, cultural and ethnic tragedies arguably would diminish. Thus, Buchanan fails to acknowledge a root cause for various cultural and ethnic problems and instead leans on a fragile theory of group rights. - Buchanan discusses the challenges of the “haves” seceding from the “have-nots” [pp. 16–17, pp. 114–124] and discusses discriminatory redistribution [pp. 38–45]. He recognizes that much of the unbalanced distribution of wealth might have been created through the political means of satisfying needs and wants [p. 120] and argues against the “haves” seceding if they have obtained their wealth in that manner. Yet, the simple historical observation is that all political systems enable the select group of people to accumulate wealth through force and coercion and the threat of violence. Thus, the discussion is largely academic. - Buchanan devotes an entire chapter discussing how to formulate a constitutional provision for seceding. Although such a discussion is theoretically applicable to a common covenant within private contractual communities, Buchanan’s discussion is based upon that same presumption of a constitution regulating the administrators of a nation-state. What is again missing, because of the presumption of statism, is that if people are allowed to form relationships and interact based upon free association and voluntary exchange, much of the tensions witnessed in the world would not arise and parchment barriers would be unnecessary. - Much of human tensions and conflict are a result of the philosophy of statism — an ideology of conquest, colonialism, imperialism, and the political means of satisfying needs and wants. In other words, conflict arises because people revolt against theft under the color of law. Thus, all objections against secession are based either directly or indirectly upon the various methods of coerced wealth redistribution. Those who oppose secession do so because they are beneficiaries of coerced redistribution. Thus, all objections to secession are arguments to maintain the political means of satisfying needs and wants. - Many people recognize that the political means of satisfying needs and wants is theft, and that is the only argument necessary to justify withdrawal through secession. -Within the context of his presumptions, Buchanan articulated well the many challenges and nuances of secession. As long as his presumptions are accepted, his discussion is packed with information to help readers understand those challenges. Although detailed in many respects, accepting the premise of statism and ignoring that people use that ideology to steal under the color of law leaves the book feeling frustrating and empty. By presuming that societal order is possible only through the political theory of statism limits Buchanan’s otherwise insightful effort. - More than likely, the final solution is not group secession. As Buchanan aptly demonstrates, group secession is filled with practical challenges. The better long-term transitional solution to resolving the many current human conflicts is to dramatically eliminate the mechanisms of statism. Fundamental property rights, free association, and voluntary exchange must guide human interaction. - Thus, the very topic Buchanan purposely ignored is the most likely path for resolution — a movement of continual individual secession where people bypass much of the legal plunder that statists support. Statists lose their grasp when individuals learn to effectively bypass and avoid the mechanisms used to coercively redistribute wealth. This is essentially what Herbert Spencer articulated as “The Right to Ignore the State.” From that point on, statism will drift away, and the nuances of secession no longer will be important. Although Buchanan provides an interesting discussion about a critical topic, he might have better served audiences had he addressed a root cause of human conflict — the willingness to usurp property boundaries and to justify those thefts under the color of law. From that starting point the topic of secession becomes clearer. - inis. - Terms of Use – Endnotes - [1] Oppenheimer, The State, Chapter 1, Theories of the State. - [2] Ballou, Adin, “The Superiority of Moral Power Over Political Power,” Dissenting Electorate, pp. 7–10. - [3] Weinburg, Mark, “The Social Analysis of Three Early 19th Century French Liberals: Say, Comte, and Dunoyer,” The Journal of Libertarian Studies, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 50–56.

ANDHRAID, MOTOJEE THREEJEE: Motojee ThreeJee Andhraid - liked my 24.3.16. Facebook remark, entered here under CLARK, RON: The terrorists among the many Muslim immigrants in Belgium are a small minority. …

ANENOME5: Anenome5: Anenome5 - Facebook, 9.3.14. - Replies to Jeremy Thaxter - I think it is key that the questions raised here: Questions about Polycentric law and Panarchy : Anarcho_Capitalism - - I have been talking in another sub and trying to put across the ideas of polycentric law and panarchy. I am doing a really bad job of it so...


ANENOME-ELIOT, MICHAEL: The Concurrent-Nomocracy — The Perfect Term for the Political System of Anarchy - The "Concurrent-nomocracy" is the perfect term for the kind of government connoted by political-anarchy. - By Michael -Anenome- Eliot – at: - He favors individual secessionism and has his own terminology for it. See also his other blog at The Problem of Politics and the Solution of Communities of Legal Agreement (COLAs) - By Michael -Anenome- Eliot from Anenome's Blog link Feb 3, 2015. - -

AQUARIAN AGRARIAN: The Aquarian Agrarian: On Agorism, Panarchism, and Libertarianism -‎ - Dec 30, 2010 - On Agorism, Panarchism, and Libertarianism ... Andrews and Paul Emile de Puydt, came to be described as “panarchism” or "pantarchism". ... by such figures as Ron Paul (Republican Congressman from Texas's 14th district), ... – FROM page 1 of the first 66,330 research results for Ron Paul on panarchism. – JZ, 14.13.13.

ARNDT, SANDEE: Sandee Arndt - liked the hint to on Facebook, 26.10.15.


ARCUBY, TY: Ty Arcuby – 35 mutual friends: Posted on Facebook, 4.7.15: The government keeps telling us that we’re free. So why don’t they let us opt out of their system? - You, , , and 13 others like this. - Liked my remark on Facebook: 6.4.15:

ARKESTÅL, SOFIA: Sofia Arkestål – BITNATION advocate, one of the few I found listed. – JZ.

ARNDT, SANDEE: Sandee Arndt - liked the hint to on Facebook, 26.10.15.

ASIF, JUAN: Juan Asif
- 1 mutual friend
- liked my entry: Territorial States do not represent but repress human societies and their creativity, all too much. Genuine solutions are known at least to some but under territorial statism they cannot be freely applied among the first enlightened volunteers, who would have seceded and chosen one or the other personal law or social contract system for themselves, to realise their solution at the own risk and expense. Territorial States are, largely, prisons for innocent and radical innovators. - John Zube - He also liked my Facebook statement, 23.10.16: OPEN SOCIETY & FREE EXPERIMENTATION: An open society requires free and self-responsible experimentation among volunteers in every sphere, i.e. panarchies, polyarchies, with personal law or social contract options or exterritorial autonomy for all networks, associations or clubs of volunteers, not merely a compulsory territorial power and experimentation monopoly for just one statist and governmental system or regime, one constitution or supposedly existing “social contract”, however democratic or republican it may be, for the whole population of a country, in all its diversity, wrongly seen as a single nation or people, however diverse its ethnic groups, beliefs, convictions and ideologies may actually be. No territorial government can possibly be or become something like an almighty, all-knowing and benevolent “God” for his “children”. Those territorial statists, who believe them to be as potent, knowing and benevolent beings or institutions, are liable to experience many great and costly disappointments, imposed burdens, problems and crises and no genuine solutions to any major man-made or governmentally produced problem. Governmental and statist “solution” attempts tend to add to the problems, e.g. with their price-, wage-, interest-rate-, rent-control attempts, quotas and rationing, licensing, protectionism instead of free trade, immigration restrictions instead of free migration, suppression instead of realization of all individual rights and liberties and with the wrongful and anti-economic powers and monopolies of central banks. Even the greatest rulers, leaders and heroes are still merely fallible human beings, with limited knowledge and capacities. Their wrongful and great territorial and statist powers and offices tend to induce great delusions in their minds and also all too uncritical beliefs, hopes, expectations and submissiveness or wrongful obedience in the minds and actions of their territorial and statist subjects and victims. As a result, many important individual rights and liberties remain undeclared, unknown, or unrespected and thus unrealized. Thus alternative free experiments with other systems, all only among their volunteers, do not take place, although whatever progress we have seen, e.g. with religions and their ethics or morality and in the natural sciences and technologies, were due to free experimentation among volunteers. Under territorial statism and its governance systems free experimentation in the social sciences, undertaken only among like-minded volunteers, at their expense and risk, remains constitutionally, legally and juridically suppressed. Thus rapid progress, enlightenment, increasing prosperity and security, peace, freedom and justice are, largely, prevented and often even the opposites are “achieved”, with most statist, territorial, and authoritiarian to totalitarian regimes and systems. – JZ, 17.9.16.

ASUFI, ROSE: Rose Asufi - 1 mutual friend, liked: John Zube : In the panarchist alternative the 49% could rule themselves and so could the 51%. Not all people ought to belong as members or compulsory subjects and tax slaves to a single territorial "club". - Facebook, 18.4.15.

ATANASOV, ATANAS: She liked my comment on Ayn Rand:

ATRICKPAY: What do you think of the political theory of panarchy? - Submitted by atrickpay on Fri, 01/02/2009 - in Daily Paul Liberty Forum - This is an interesting theory of government that I came across from reading some of Michael Rozeff's articles on LRC. - Its basic tenet is that people should be free to choose their own type of government. - So, liberals would be free to choose a welfare state; - conservatives would be free to have their police state; constitutionalists would be free to have a limited government; libertarians would be free to have self-government, etc. – Implications - This has some very interesting implications for us in the freedom movement... For example, constitutionalists shouldn't force their own ideal of limited government over everybody in the geographical area currently known as the USA. - They should work towards secession from the US government. They should establish constitutional government on the territory(ies) that they themselves possess. - What do you think? - Forgive me, maybe I misunderstand... - Submitted by jcd93 on Sat, 06/20/2009 - 18:37. Permalink -... but how could interactions between governments even possibly always work out. What if fascopolis felt that their neighbors in libertania were too unruly and dangerous. I don't know how well the nations could relate. I also see issues with land and other natural resources (especially something like emission regulations). - "Freedom is popular" - Ron Paul - "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi – Alas, R. P. still had his doubts: Would it play out like that in practice? - Submitted by atrickpay on Fri, 01/02/2009 - Permalink - It is of course possible. But I don't think it's at all likely. Why? - Well, it probably wouldn't be economically feasible to have a collective government (ie, republic, democracy, monarchy, etc) at the household level. For economic reasons, they would probably need to be spread out on larger territories. - Furthermore, what benefit does a liberal (who wants a welfare state) get from having just a government of their own household? Remember, they want to be able to redistribute wealth within a sizable population. – Even among quite intelligent people – it does, often, take quite a while before such ideas really sink in, if at all. – Even on such a site there are only few comments so far and all too many prejudiced or under-informed. - JZ, 23.1.15.

AXERTO, XANDER: Xander Axerto – BITNATION advocate, one of the few I found listed. – JZ.



BAIRD, PAUL: PANARCHISM: Since a proper government may act only on those who consent to it, its proper object of action is only the life and property of those persons who subscribe to it.” - Paul Baird, JLS, Fall 77, p.191. – Thus to the advocates of all existing and proposed governments one can only say: Lay out your subscription lists - even if, initially, you could do so only in the form of private polls. - JZ, 21.11.82. – What is the chance that he is still alive and active in this sphere – after as many years? – JZ, 27.11.13.

BABUL, SGAGHAGAN CHOWDHYRY: Shahjahan Chowdhury Babul - Liked my note on Facebook 5.5.14: How much more in statists & territorial crimes and aggressions do you want or need to convince you to seriously consider that we do need the voluntary, just, peace-, freedom-, enlightenment-, progress- & prosperity-promoting alternatives to them - if mankind is to continue for much longer?

BALDWIN, GEORGE: George Baldwin - Lake County - Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL over a year ago.

BARBERINI, ASIA: Asia Barberini, asiabarberini @ - Gian Piero de Bellis - update - December 2014

BARNETT, RANDY: Professor Randy Barnett, who originally wrote about "non-monopolistic" law, later used the phrase "polycentric legal order." He explains the advantages of such a system in his book The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law.[5] - Randy E. Barnett, E/TOC.htm The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law, Chapters 12 -14, Oxford University Press, 2000. - Randy Barnett, “Pursuing Justice in a Free Society: Part One—Power vs. Liber- ty,” Criminal Justice Ethics (Summer/Fall 1985):.66.

BASSIL, CHRIS: chris.bassil @ -

BAUWENS, MICHEL: Dear John Zube, please let me recommend you adding Michel Bauwens as a friend. Head of the P2foundation, his constant output of content related to what I think panarchism would look like in the 21st century. He actually sees panarchism as a synonym to his concept of peer governance, informed by, for instance, progressist libertarian Kevin Carson, which I assume you already know. If you add him as a friend you would get the opportunity to follow the content he is posting, plus participating in the debates happening around it. I would be happy to see that happen. All the best in your libertarian explorations, Arthur - Arthur Tres – Facebook message. – I replied: John Zube - I wrote to him and had a look at some of his many pages. His movement tries to embrace a great variety of movements and proposals but so far I cannot agree upon his framework for them. Panarchism leaves that quite open. E.g. cooperative socialism for its advocates, the aims of the greenies practised at their expense and risk among themselves. No world governance but, possibly, a variety of world federations, all only for their volunteers. But he offers already so many pages, that exploring his system is time and energy consuming. I like his term "netarchies". Peer governance would be the equal of panarchies and societies and communities of volunteers only, all doing their own things. But panarchism e.g. includes also statism and governmentalism - but only for volunteers so inclined and at their own risk and expense. Voluntary victimhood. It seems to me that he wants to predetermine much of the contents of the new associations, just like the Tea Parties have a variety of ideas which they try to push together, even though they are not all libertarian ideas and often in conflict with libertarian ideas. Panarchies or polyarchies would sort themselves out, much more, into like-minded people just doing their own things among themselves, at their own risk and expense. Well, my first impression might be wrong or incomplete. With peer to peer relationships we would certainly bypass the territorial monopoly power ones. - Arthur Tres - : His associations are still a bit nebulous to me also due to the amount of content he's putting out, on the one hand I like that he has a plan to offer on how to reach peer governance (through the "partner state", using existing infrastructures), on the other hand he is not a libertarian, and thus does not see change possible as the result of the interaction between autonomous voluntary associations operating on a free market of governance, but rather the need for a global scale commons orientation for p2p dynamics. Emphasis on open-source and transparency, as ways of signaling to other groups intentions and actions is I think good, and yes, territorial monopoly would be overriden, also possibly "free banking" achieved by use of bitcoins and affiliated discoveries, BUT he thinks there is no way to get there by ourselves, that we need some degree of top-down global scale determination of dynamics that he wants to be part of. Can't decide if I should agree with that, but it's certainly fascinating to read, and feels like "it could work". It also makes me want to dig more into dynamical systems theory, which he consistently uses the scenarios he predicts. This short video is a very good introduction to his theory. Glad you are starting to take part in the debate.

BEBEMES, HUDSON: Hudson Bebemes, listed by Joe Kopsick

BEHM, JUERGEN: juergen.behm @ - U. T.

BELL, TOM W.: tomwbell @ - 1999, polycentric law article, downloaded. – JZ. - WIKIPEDIA: Polycentric law is a legal structure in which providers of legal systems compete or overlap in a given jurisdiction, as opposed to monopolistic statutory law according to which there is a sole provider of law for each jurisdiction. Devolution of this monopoly occurs by the principle of jurisprudence in which they rule according to higher law. - Tom W. Bell, former director of telecommunications and technology studies at Cato Institute,[1] now a professor of law at Chapman University School of Law in California[2] wrote "Polycentric Law," published by the Institute for Humane Studies, when he was a law student at the University of Chicago. In it he notes that others use phrases such as "privately produced law," "purely private law," and "non-monopolistic law" to describe these polycentric alternatives.[3] He outlines traditional customary law (also known as consuetudinary law) before the creation of states, including as described by Friedrich A. Hayek, Bruce L. Benson, and David D. Friedman. He mentions Anglo-Saxon customary law, church law, guild law, and merchant law as examples of polycentric law. He notes that customary and statutory law have co-existed through history, as when Roman law applied to Romans throughout the Roman Empire, but indigenous legal systems were permitted for non-Romans.[3] In "Polycentric Law in the New Millennium," which won first place in the Mont Pelerin Society's 1998 Friedrich A. Hayek Fellowship competition, Bell predicts three areas where polycentric law might develop: alternative dispute resolution, private communities, and the Internet. Address rejected also: tbell @ - Bell, Tom W. (1992). "The Jurisprudence of Polycentric Law" available online at: - Polycentric Law, HUMANE STUDIES REVIEW, Vol. 7, Number 1, Winter1991/92, THE FREEMAN of FEE, Feb. 26, 14, has an article by him: “What Is Polycentric Law?” dealing mainly only with private towns of up o 80,000 people.

BELLIS, GIAN PIERO de: - gpdebellis @ - rue de la Malathe 4, 2610 Saint Imier, Switzerland - Gian Piero de Bellis -
Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago

BENFORD, GREGORY: PANARCHISM: Ideologies ranging from the devouring collective all the way through to the rigidly, rabidly free – all found their scripts performed. - If necessary, the ever-elusive human nature got tinkered into compliance with the demands of belief. Populations lived joyfully under crushing control. Skeptics found their every doubt confirmed. Believers dwelled in ecstasy, bonding in rapture with their God. Sybarites lounged in pleasure palaces sustained by unflagging energies and desire. Revolutionaries got to their experiments upon themselves.”– Gregory Benford, Beyond Infinity, Orbit, 2004, p 283. – The Home of SF Online. Monthly email newsletter. - IDEOLOGIES, TOLERANCE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

BENNETT, JESSE: He liked my Facebook comment on 31.1.14: To each leader only his kind of followers. No leader should be forced upon peaceful dissenters, i.e. he should never rule a whole population territorially. Voluntarism, freedom of contract, association and experimentation in every sphere, to finally turn the “social sciences” into genuine sciences.

BENNETT, JOSHUA: commenting on Geo-politics and Ukranian secession at Patriot’s Lament, May 24, 2014: Whether they want an autonomous state, or to live in an Anarchist state, what business is it of ANYONE'S except theirs? … Hans Hoppe argues for individual secession, and I like that idea. Why can't folks just live the lives they want, and be loyal, or disloyal, to whomever they want? … And more important, what business is it of anyone else? … we should ask, why should any entity be able to tell any individual who or what they must obey or follow? - America was founded on secession, shouldn't Americans support secession movements anywhere in the world? I certainly do. If humans have the right to self-ownership, we have the right to secede. If we don't have the right to secede, then we are merely slaves to the State that claims to own us. - Independence from the State should be our goal. - PATRIOT'S LAMENT RADIO SHOW - Don't forget to tune into the Patriots Lament radio show every Saturday at 9 a.m. Alaska time on KFAR 660 AM. Or listen live on the web here: Patriot's Lament Radio - Email us at patriotslament @

BENSON, BRUCE L., The Enterprise of Law: Justice Without the State - In the minds of many, the provision of justice and security has long been linked to the state. To ask whether non-state institutions could deliver those services on their own, without the aid of coercive taxation and a monopoly franchise, runs the risk of being branded as naive anarchism or dangerous radicalism. Defenders of the state’s monopoly on lawmaking and law enforcement typically assume that any alternative arrangement would favor the rich at the expense of the poor—or would lead to the collapse of social order and ignite a war. Questioning how well these beliefs hold up to scrutiny, this book offers a powerful rebuttal of the received view of the relationship between law and government. The book argues not only that the state is unnecessary for the establishment and enforcement of law, but also that non-state institutions would fight crime, resolve disputes, and render justice more effectively than the state, based on their stronger incentives.

BERKING, KRISTOF: kristof.berking @ - U.T.

BERNADO, JOE: He liked my listing of panarchism and related terms. – I replied: Well, we do have at least one interest in common: panarchism and related subjects. The most informative website on this is, as far as I know. A new, more comprehensive and justified political and social science is developing out of this and there are already many hints to it online. But e.g. a comprehensive library, bibliography, abstracts and review collection, ideas archive, encyclopaedia and directory are still missing, a common links list an compilation of the refutations of the usual objections and, probably much more to achieve that. E.g. a comprehensive history of all precedents. That of personal law provides many examples. Full monetary and financial freedom are included but they do not oblige anyone or any group to practise them - as long as they do imagine that they could do better without it, in their own transactions. Much collaboration between many people is required to achieve that. The Internet makes that easier and cheaper than it was ever before. - John Zube, jzube @ - Facebook, 26.12.14.

BERNER, KON: Kon Berner - Wow.... great stuff, and only 45 views and zero likes ... what a shitty planet this is... Comment on talk of Max Borders on Author’s Forum: Panarchy by Paul Emile de Puiydt, Facebook, 28.1.14.

BERTRAND, LES: Complete Liberty, 2007, online, downloadable, PDF, 1.3 MBs, not copyrighted, 256 pages with extensive bibliography and an alphabetical index, insurance companies as competing panarchies: Google search offers 9.7 million results, including even a printed edition. – Alas, I overlooked it in my downloaded files until now. – JZ, 28.6.14. - I invite you to join the forum at, which will be dedicated strictly to brainstorming ways to do this - to achieve complete liberty as quickly as humanly possible. Appeal on p. 206/07 of this book.

BEUTLER, MARTIN: martin.beutler @ - Friend of Gian Piero de Bellis

BIECHLER, MATT: Matt Biechler -He liked my following remark on Facebook: Everything voluntary. To each the own system, under personal law, starting with individual secessionism, based upon full individual sovereignty or self-ownership.

BIELE, ULRICH: Ulrich F. Biele - Works at Ron Paul Revolution
- Added by John Zube about 8 months ago to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL – mabprodig @ - Ulrich Biele, listed by Joe Kopsick

BIGGINS, KEISER JOSIAH: Keiser Josiah Biggins - Denver, Colorado
Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL about 6 months ago

BISHOP, ARCH: A hereditary monarch is as absurd a position as a hereditary doctor or mathematician." ― Thomas Paine – I commented on this on Facebook 26.14: Nothing wrong with it if it is no territorially imposed but merely practiced among volunteers, all convinced monarchists. – A. B. liked that comment and is thus at least a panarchistic monarchist, which is not a bad start towards being panarchistically tolerant towards all tolerantly practised other isms of volunteers among their kind volunteers. – JZ, 26.1.14.

BISHOP, STUART: Likes Iland Nation.

BITLAW: Susanne Tarkowski Tempelhof BITLAW... Very interesting - a mix between cryptography solutions, 'smart contracts', and open market place for arbitrators, and of course - jurisdictions. I really want to be involved in the development of this - If anyone know who's behind this, I would appreciate if you could put me in touch with them. Thanks. The law (e.g. jurisdiction) isn't necessarily an 'online' law - jurisdiction is optional, could be common law, could be sharia, whichever people fancy using. What it provides is a platform for what they call 'smart contracts', choice of jurisdiction, and choice of arbitration. – Facebook, 23.12.13.

BIT-NATION: Susanne Tarkowski Tempelhof – Facebook, 16.7.14. - Trying to come up with a one sentence description for BitNation - something along the lines of: "Welcome to Governance 2.0: Distributed, Voluntary and Geographically Unbound." - Suggestions?... - See More - BitNation Introduction - Google Docs - - DOCS.GOOGLE.COM -
BitNation - Welcome to Government 2.0: Geographically Unlimited, Decentralised and VoluntaryPolitical Organisation: 145 like this.

BLUE, ZACHARY: Zachary Blue, listed by Joe Kopsick

BOWEN, JOEL: - Joel Bowen - Facebook, 13.1.15. Crimes against the state and victimless crimes are no crimes at all, should not be prosecuted and punished and their prevention and prosecution not be financed by tax payers’ money. Huge resources would be released for useful appropriation if private companies in open competition would prevent, prosecute and punish crimes against individuals, companies, and their property. We could all live in greater prosperity, with more individual freedom and less surveillance. -…/peter-bi…/the-state-is-a-crime/ - - Joel Bowen - Facebook, 13.1.15

BOETTINGER, HENRY M.: a high-ranking presenter who said at the end of his proposal, 'All in favour say aye; all opposed say I quit.' - Henry M. Boettinger, "Moving Mountains", p.133.

BOYKIN, SCOTT: Scott Boykin, "The Ethics of Secession," in David Gordon, ed., Secession, State and Liberty, Transaction Publishers, 1998.

BOLLINGER, FABIAN: Fabian Bollinger, 1 mutual friend

BONNEAU, PAUL: Paul Bonneau said ... "The tactics employed by the GOP establishment to isolate, intimidate, and ultimately to expel Ron Paul delegates were the natural product of the party’s totalitarian genetics." - Thank heaven they stayed true to form. Had they instead, come to their senses and invited Paulians into the party, these Paulians would have wasted the rest of their lives trying to reform the unreformable, working within the system. As it is, the Paulians will now reject such easily co-opted half-measures and look for real solutions, such as secession, anarchism and panarchism. - Pan-Anarchism is the Logical End of Anarchism « Attack the System -‎ - Jun 13, 2013 - By Paul Bonneau It's not unusual to see here on Strike The Root ... One other characteristic that is usually included with panarchism is that of ... – “If I may be permitted, Yay, panarchy! - Just to head off any misinterpretation, I am not suggesting that alternative polities are equally correct, equally fair or decent. I think anarcho-capitalism is superior to all others. It’s just that I’m unwilling to impose it.” – Email or postal address not known to me.

BORDERS, MAX: Towards Panarchy by Max Borders (Paperback) - Lulu - - Buy Towards Panarchy by Max Borders (Paperback) online at Lulu. Visit the Lulu Marketplace for product details, ratings, and reviews. - Author's Forum: Panarchy by Paul Émile de Puydt with Max Borders - Don’t panic: Belgian philosopher Paul Emile de Puydt proposes nothing scary, however radical the thesis of “Panarchy” may seem at first. Just…

BORDON, NEMESIO: Nemesio Bordon, listed by Joe Kopsick

BORING, RANDY: Randy Boring - 10 mutual friends – liked my Facebook comment, 6.2.15: However, that right ought to be extended through individual and group secessionism and free choices for alternative personal law systems, while one stays in the country one lives and works in.

BOSE, SASHA V.: Sascha V Bose - Inhaber/owner at Ivaldian Arts - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick about 2 months ago

BOSSI, FABIO: Joined Panarchist International.

BOYCE, ZACH: Rated de Puydt’s essay 4 of 5 and commented: Short article on the merits of competitive governance. His wise crack at the end made me chuckle just a bit. In any case, the author answers objections someone might have about panarchism. At the heart of this article, it is simple, sweet, to the point, and raises a good point. – On goodreads. Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. -

BOYKIN, SCOTT: Scott Boykin, "The Ethics of Secession," in David Gordon, ed., Secession, State and Liberty, Transaction Publishers, 1998.

BRILMAYER, LEA, Lea Brilmayer's "Consent, Contract, and Territory," University of Minnesota Law Review Vol. 74 (1989). – Quoted by John Tomasi.

BUCHANAN, JAMES: Because normative individualism indicates that the value of political order lies in its capacity to facilitate the self-chosen plans and projects of individuals, it can play a key justificatory role in political argument. As James Buchanan argues, the principle supplies the normative premise that individuals are the ultimate sovereigns in matters of social organization, that individuals are the beings who are entitled to choose the organizational-institutional structures under which they will live. In accordance with this premise, the legitimacy of social-organizational structures is to be judged against the voluntary agreement of those who are to live or are living under the arrangements that are judged. The central premise of individuals as sovereigns does allow for the delegation of decision-making authority to agents, so long as it remains understood that individuals remain as principals. The premise denies legitimacy to all social-organizational arrangements that negate the role of individuals as either sovereigns or principals.5 - NOTES: 5 James M. Buchanan, The Economics and the Ethics of Constitutional Order (Ann Arbor University of Michigan Press, 1991), p. 227, emphasis in original. - Quoted by Scott Boykin, "The Ethics of Secession," in David Gordon, ed., Secession, State and Liberty, Transaction Publishers, 1998. IBID: 9 Buchanan, Secession, p. 75. He discusses this idea further on pp. 75-80. & 11 See Buchanan's comments, Secession, pp. 139-43. - Allen Buchanan argues that because only groups may secede, secession must be a group right. – Scott Boykin argues against that position.

BUCKO BOB, JR.: Bob Bucko Jr, listed by Joe Kopsick

BRANDSON, PETER: On Facebook Peter Brandson, 20.6.14, liked my remark: - John Zube P. B.: The individual self-determination of a Robinson Crusoe on an island is a rather limited liberty. Man is an individual as well as social animal. But all his social, economic and political relationships should be self-chosen, voluntary, among competitively supplied service offers in every sphere.

BRAUER, JURGEN: Jurgen Brauer - brauer.jurgen @ - GPdB.

BUELL, SHANE: Shane Buell liked my Facebook remark, 26.12.14:

BUFFCHEST, FLEX: Flex Buffchest, listed by Joe Kopsick


BUTTI, CARLO: Carlo Butti, carlo.butti @ - Gian Piero de Bellis - update - December 2014

BYAS, JASON LEE: Jason Lee Byas - Campus Coordinator at Students For Liberty - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago



CACERES, ZACHARY: Pan fan in form of FOCJ, on Facebook - Z. Caceres August 27, 2011, Professor Chartier, Thanks so much for your comment. I absolutely agree with your overall point, as I suspect would many of the other writers here. I am personally a big fan of Bruno Frey’s work on Panarchism, with de-territorialized governance in which small units contract out separate services to any other jurisdiction in a federation. - Unfortunately I don’t believe that nation-states will prove willing to open their borders regardless of how inhumane the consequences. For the same reason, they are unlikely to adopt panarchistic proposals which erode their ability to form coalitions of power through the selective provision of various goods. - That’s why I think proposals like Free Cities and Seasteading are the best bet.

CALLAHAN, GENE: Gene Callahan - gcallah @ - GPdB - CALLAHAN, GENE: The Right to Exit: An Apologetic for Panarchism - gcallah @ - GPdB - Wednesday, November 07, 2007 - Panarchy in the UK! - My political philosophy has made it onto Wikipedia. Now, when someone asks, "Are you a Democrat or Republican," and I say, "No, I'm a panarchist," and I get a blank look, "I'll say, 'Look it up on Wikipedia.'" - By the way, this is one of my two great re-inventions. When I first arrived at panarchism, I had no idea others had done so before me. My other great re-invention was to come up with the Sieve of Eratosthenes one afternoon at work. - Posted by Gene Callahan at 7:14 PM - Callahan – The Right to Walk Away

CANCADE, DAN: Liked my remark on Facebook, 31.5.14: Everything voluntary. To each the own system, under personal law, starting with individual secessionism, based upon full individual sovereignty or self-ownership. Dan Cancade

CANCRO II, PETER PAUL, 4 mutual friends, liked: Henry Moore Secession right on down to the individual level. – Facebook, 18.2.14.

CANNOLI, PAULIE: Paulie Cannoli shared The Essence of Liberty's photo. “ Action on behalf of others, or their action on behalf of you, is only virtuous when it is derived from voluntary, mutual consent. For virtue can only exist when there is free choice. All interactions between human beings should be done on a voluntary, mutual, consensual basis. This is the basis of a truly free society It is not only the most practical and humanitarian foundation for human action, it is also the most ethical. - He also liked my remark on “Government Shuts Down 11-Year-Old’s Bake Sale.” – If only the territorial governments would shut themselves down – after their millions of wrongs and failures. – JZ, 31.1.14.

CANNON, BRUCE: Bruce Cannon – He liked my statement on Facebook, 5.5.14: John Zube Individual sovereignty, secessionism, self-ownership & personal law options!

CAPELLE, YVES: Yves Capelle, yves @ - Gian Piero de Bellis - update - December 2014

CAPLAN, BRYAN: Bryan Caplan, “The Economics of Non-State Legal Systems,” (working paper, Princeton University, (1993).

CARDACI, TEE: on Facebook, likes Iland Nation.

CARICO, JOHN MICHAEL: John Michael Carico, listed by Joe Kopsick

CARIGAN, JIM: John Zube All remedies, true, flawed and faked ones - for their volunteers only! – FACEBOOK, 3 March 14. - Jim Carigan liked that, Facebook, 5.3.14. - John Zube It should always be confined only to those, who voted for it, under personal law, like all other systems should be: Full voluntarism or exterritorial autonomy, voluntarism, freedom of contract, association & experimentation to all majorities and minorities, to the extent that they desire to practise them. Jim Carigan liked that, on Facebook, 15.3.14.


CARTER, ESTANISLAO: Estanislao Carter - 16 mutual friends on Facebook. Liked: John Zube We do not want a civil war but a civil society. Competing police force, voluntary taxation and the right to secede and live under personal law would be important steps in this direction. – entry of 27.2.14.

CELINSKI, BRETT THOMAS: Brett Thomas Celinski , liked, on Facebok, my remark: John Zube No territorial government, i.e. one that wrongly rules over its peaceful dissenters, is to be trusted and fully obeyed. For all the peaceful dissenters, who would secede if they could and live under their preferred personal law system, it is the primary enemy. All governments should be confined to their volunteers.

CHAIRMAN YANG: Chairman Yang if he talks about books, you better damn well listen. - (01-09-2008, 10:11 PM) – - Panarchy is the only good form of government #1 - Read about it here: - My argument is simple. Whatever government you choose to live under, you're going to have to live under the tyranny of those you disagree with. Even in a democracy, you may agree on most issues with the majority, but there are always going to be some issues where you won't. Despite that, you have no choice but to abide by the decisions of the majority (subject to constitutional constraints, of course). Everyone's a minority on some issues, and therefore everyone would be subject to many small tyrannies. - The solution is clear. There should be a "free market" of governments and countries. People should have the right to live under the system of government they want. The panarchy described in the wikipedia link is one way to do that. Of course there would be massive (perhaps insurmountable) practical barriers, but theoretically at least, panarchy (or similar systems, like simply having lots of jurisdictions in different places with the ability to easily move) strike me as the only form of organization that gives people a chance for true freedom. – Alas, the level of most responses to the above is rather depressing in this and in many other instances. – A refutations handbook on the subject is needed, as well as an A to Z and a Q *& A compilation, & a panarchist. encyclopaedia. - JZ, 23.1.15.

CHOINA, SHLOMO: Shlomo Choina - Kingsborough Community College
Added by Vincent Fincher to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL over a year ago

CHLOMO CHOINA, listed by Joe Kopsick

CHRISTIAN, MARK: We do already suffer from all too many “well-meant” bans. Let all people be free to choose the restrictions they prefer for their own lives and also set all people free to set much better examples for the practice of all individual rights and liberties. – JZ, Facebook – Mark Christian comment: John, you got a cheer from me on that. – Facebook, 31.1.14.

CLARK, OREN: Oren Clark - 41 mutual friends – liked my Facebook remark.

CLAYTON, JAMES: jameshclayton @ - He emailed me on 3.1.15, as follows: John, I wrote the following article from a "Canadian" perspective. Feel free to add it to your collection, if you wish. - (see: – James – See here. – I happen to agree with him on most points, except the supposedly free private monetary and credit “creation” options, as if they already free and as if they were wrong. – JZ, 3.1.15.

CLEN, HERBZ UNID: Herbz Unid Clen – liked my remark.

COCO, LAURA LO: Laura Lo Coco (King’s College, London) The Lockean theory of territory and individual secession: a qualified defense. Her talk was listed for th1th Pavia Graduate Conference in Political Philosophy, 9-10 September 2013, Sponsored by Department of Political and Social Sciences, University of Pavia.

COLLINS, SKYLER J.: Skyler J. Collins · John Zube : I favour the personal law or exterritorial autonomy or individual sovereignty and self-ownership or experimental freedom secessionism for all groups of volunteers, even statists ones. Do you? Territorial secessionism still infringes the rights of dissenters. – S. J. C. replied, 23.4.14: Sounds legit to me. - Read more from "One Voluntaryist's Perspective": Secession and Voluntaryism - The Values of a Voluntaryist

COMBS, CHARLIE: Charlie Combs - 1 mutual friend. He liked my following remark on Facebook: John Zube Conflicting ideals do not matter - as long as one does not attempt to impose the own one upon others with different ideals. Full toleration for all tolerant people. No toleration for intolerant ones! – I had responded to Nizam Ahmad sharing Singh Street Style's photo: “We may have different religions, different languages, different colored skin, but we all be long to the human race.” – On Facebook, 5.8.14.

CROSS, GREG: I had sent him PP 20, NEW DRAFT, PP4 & THE on pan 1-24 contents list and am sending him now ON PANARCHY issues 1-3. He had responded on Facebook 25.6.14 with: Greg Cross - Cool - I am a big believer in pan-secessionism.

CROSTHWAITE, ISAAC: Isaac Crosthwaite, listed by Joe Kopsick



DAHLBERG, OSKAR, on Facebook, likes Iland Nation. - I read some chapters of the rtf-document and I share your values. Although I see the pan-part as a pretty far fetched goal I'm very interested in more dynamic forms of governance and I'm looking for opportunities to try it out on a smaller scale. – O.D., 21.1.14. - Exactly that would be made possible by panarchism, polyarchism or competing governance. – JZ, 22.1.14.

DALTON, CLIFF: He liked my Facebook remark: RELIGIONS: The most important moral lesson, which all religions - that have become tolerant in the sphere of religions – ought to teach, but still do not teach, is that the same kind of mutual tolerance can and should be applied to the great variety of political, economic and social systems that are aspired to by at least some volunteers for each of their diverse movements. All of them could and should be freely established and maintained by their volunteers, as long as they have any, all among themselves only and at their own risk and expense. That would be possible under personal law or full exterritorial autonomy, in the frameworks called e.g. panarchism, polyarchism and consistent voluntarism and this in all spheres now wrongfully monopolized and coercively maintained by territorial States. None of dozens of preachers, whom I encountered in my long life and tried to convey this moral, rational and realistic message to, was able to grasp it and to accept it. The reason for this continued intolerant belief and behavior among them is, probably, that all of them, in spite of their many seeming religious differences, did and do subscribe to the same popular errors, prejudices, false assumptions and conclusions in these other three spheres. This demonstrated to me that their MAIN religion is not the one they believe to have and do preach but, rather, that of territorial statism. – JZ, 10.12.14. - BELIEFS, TOLERANCE, PREACHERS, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, PERSONAL LAW, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, VOLUNTARYISM

DANIELS, GENEVEVE: Liked my remark on Facebook, 31.5.14: Everything voluntary. To each the own system, under personal law, starting with individual secessionism, based upon full individual sovereignty or self-ownership. Genevieve Daniels

DARBY, DOUGLAS: douglasdarby @

DARBY, MASON, on Facebook

DARKHEART, KRISTOFEL MALKAVIA Kristofel Malkavia Darkheart
Patriarch at Universal Church Militant of the Spiritual Agnostic
Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL about 10 months ago

DAUGH, JAIN: jain_daugh @ - GPdB - Jain Daugh replied on Sun, May 25 2008 5:27 PM - I am interested in panarchy, in the original definition of that word - as a choice of government. [In his 1860 article “Panarchy” de Puydt, a firm supporter of laissez-faire economics, applied the concept to the individual's right to choose any form of government without being forced to move from their current locale. This is sometimes described as "extra-territorial" (or "exterritorial") since governments often would serve non-contiguous parcels of land. - wikipedia/#1] - I am not happy to see that that same word is now being 'updated' - [ In the twentieth century the term was re-coined separately by scholars in international relations to describe the notion of global governance and then by systems theorists to describe non-hierarchal organizing theories.- wikipedia/#2] - What makes me unhappy is that this term will become more referenced and referred to as a 'systems theory' rather than the valuable option for (individual) choice of government. Panarchy, as an open choice by individuals, to choose which government (and that choice includes NONE) that person prefers to live in accordance with. This seems to me to be even better than what libertarianism has to offer in its 'non-agression' basis. Not that I don't agree with that, but lets face it, it hasn't 'sold' either ;-) I think it would be far better, as well as just down right more respectful, to not attempt to create and enFORCE a single choice onto all people living in a (human defined) area. Afterall, such a 'single choice' is not required of religions, insurance, stores, communication media etc. etc. within A specific location. So why is government 'different'?!? Unless of course its really not a necessity, but rather an accepted 'tradition' of force parading as protection? - Jain

DEIST, JEFF: Keith Preston and Mises Institute shared a link. – Secession Begins at Home. This article is adapted from a talk presented at the Houston Mises Circle, January 24, 2015. - - Facebook, 31.1.15. - The Talk is by Jeff Deist. - There are 262 likes and 93 shares. – Perhaps they should be included in the Panarchist directory? – That would certainly give it a growth spurt. - JZ, 31.1.15.

DENZIN, MATT: Matt Denzin - Day Laborer at The Salt Mines
Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago Add Friend – Unable to open that Facebook page. – JZ, 10.12.13.

DeSADE, RONECI PIRATE-KING: Roneci Pirate-King DeSade - Nebraska Wesleyan - Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL over a year ago

DOING FREEDOM ZINE: Doing Freedom 'zine: Secession - St. Clair, Bill - - Even the United States has several secession movements afoot--and that's not counting the increasingly popular idea of "individual secession", something ... 2001 - Editor in Chief: Sunni Maravillosa Sunni Maravillosa ( My hushmail address is - Even the United States has several secession movements afoot--and that's not counting the increasingly popular idea of "individual secession", something Walter Williams has been talking about for a few years now. … I think we'd make great progress toward real freedom--individual sovereignty--if we could encourage alliances and find allies among these varied secession movements. They're already talking our language, to some degree or other; perhaps we can bring them further along the curve, and actually contribute to some successes. Breaking up a large, overbearing nation-state into smaller nations that are more rights-respecting is progress, after all. And maybe, just maybe, we can get one or two to give a total free-market system a try. What an exhilarating thing that would be! – Imagine a world of legalized secession. Too often minority groups of a given state are made slaves to the tyranny of the majority (power). Imagine how blessed Palestinians would be if they could simply secede from Israel? Imagine how blessed Israel would be, for that matter. What if Kurds could secede from Iraq? Basque from Spain? Lakota from the US? Tibet from China? Boer from South Africa? Chiapas from Mexico? A good short survey of the seccession movement. – JZ, 22.1.15.

DONNELLY, DARCY NEAL:” - principles, as reported on Facebook, are panarchistic and voluntaristic – but he favors a World Government of World Citizens – a competing and personal law one, among several others? - Carol Moore - I'm for all types, as long as it's voluntary... - Darcy Neal Donnelly - Libertarian Driver / Candidate at Ontarion Libertarian Party / Libertarian Party of Canada - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago - - Email? I tried to send pan the directory file via Facebook but do not know whether this worked. – JZ, 10.12.13. - John Zube - POLITICS: When politics are used to allocate resources, the resources all end up being allocated to politics." – P. J. O’Rourke - Then they largely tend to be allocated to territorial politics. - In panarchies they are allocated only in accordance to the wishes of their voluntary members, who remain free to secede from them and free to allocate much or little to their community, their political, social or economic experiment, utopia or intentional community. – D. N. D. liked that on Facebook, 14.2.14. – He liked: Everything voluntary. To each the own system, under personal law, starting with individual secessionism, based upon full individual sovereignty or self-ownership. – JZ, Facebook, 31.5.14.

DONOFRIO, CANDICE A.: Candice A Donofrio - She also liked my following remark on Facebook: Best by individualism, instead of by collectivist & territorialist statism, centralisation or monopolist, i.e. by voluntarism, associationism, contractarianism, experimental freedom, individual free choice, personal law or individual secessionism, based upon self-ownership or individual sovereignty, instead of the imposition of another compulsory system for a whole population, which at best amounts only to majority despotism. – As comment to: “… do you want to change the world …? – Facebook, 30.8.14.

DOSTER, JARED: <doster.jared @> got printed copy of P. E. de Puydt from Lulu, looked up

DOUGLAS, MARCUS: When Allen West commented on Facebook, 8.3.14: The president is in violation of his oath … He should be removed from office by impeachment! - I had commented: John Zube That would still leave us with territorial statism, not with freedom, peace and justice, which must be based on voluntarism, individual sovereignty, individual secessionism, full freedom of association, contract, competition & laissez faire and free markets in every sphere, i.e. with personal law associations of volunteers only, regardless of whether they are any kind of statists, libertarians or anarchists, all without a territorial monopoly. Then we would see some rapid progress towards peace, freedom, justice, enlightenment, prosperity, even towards intelligence expansion, life extension and the stars. Until then we remain e.g. under the nuclear war threat and all the other wrongs, irrationalities and burdens of territorial powers doing their own things at our risk and expense. - Marcus Douglas liked that on 9.3.14. - John Zube I wish you would rather accentuate the positive alternatives to any territorial government, under any kind of president and parliamentary system and election system. These are all more or less merely distopias, all too often even tyrannies and Warfare States and under the pretence of a War against Poverty they manage to increase it, just like their War against Drugs turned drugs into a much greater problem and into a profitable business for organised crime. - Marcus Douglas - liked that.

DRESSLER, SANDRA: Sandra Dressler - 480 mutual friends - liked: John Zube Freedom to compete in every sphere now monopolised by territorial States or to drop out of wrongful but imposed burdens, laws and institutions of territorial States. Free markets, voluntarism, freedom of association, experimentation and contract in every sphere, not only in economics, for all those, who prefer this for their own affairs. All governmental actions against innocent people and at their expense and risk are "wrongful foreign interventions". - Facebook.

DDR CUSTOMS-FINE ART: DDR Customs - Fine Art – A Facebook page, 26.12.14.

DULCE, MALIKA: She liked my comment on Facebook, 3.6.14: - John Zube Individual & group secessionism, combined with the personal law option, would constitute decisive and effective voting for the individuals and groups involved. Trying one law, one institution, one policy for the whole population is comparable to getting all to dress, eat, drink and otherwise consume alike or enjoy themselves in the same way. Let all people have their choices for themselves. Do never interfere with their self-help efforts in any sphere. Leave them alone, just like they should leave other people alone and just do their own things - just like everybody else should do. All individual rights and liberties to all who wish to make use of them and do respect them in others.

DYKES, NICOLAS: Mrs. Logic and the Law: A Critique of Ayn Rand's View of Government -‎ - by ACOFAYN RAND’S - ‎1998 - ‎Related articles - Oscar nomination for the documentary Ayn Rand: A Sense of. Life. This last, by all .... absurdity called 'competing governments'”;[112] “this theory ... is obviously  ... An excellent critique of Ayn Rand on government and competing government writings. – JZ, 11.4.14.



EICHENBERGER, REINER: Two similar ideas are "Functional Overlapping Competing Jurisdictions" (FOCJ) advocated by Swiss economists Bruno Frey and Reiner Eichenberger

ELNASHAR, ANDRE: Andre Elnashar - De Pere, Wisconsin - Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL over a year ago

EMBORSKY, PETER: Peter Emborsky - Owner / Repair Ninja at OTG Repairs - Likes Panarchism – Facebook, 24.12.14.

EPTON, TERRY: Terry Epton "It should never be territorially imposed upon dissenters." With this principle, all things are possible. - - Facebook 12.3.14. – He liked that remark. - John Zube I agree with you there. It could be attractive even to the xyz factions in any of the major parties. Whoever really believes in the validity of any idea he or she holds, should welcome experimental freedom for it and competition with it from others, who hold different ideas. - JZ, 12.3.14.

ELHELWA, SHERIF: He liked my comment.

EMBORSKY, PETER: Peter Emborsky - Owner / Repair Ninja at OTG Repairs - Likes Paul Émile de Puydt – Facebook, 24.12.14.

ENGEL, C. JAY: Editor and creator of The Reformed Libertarian. Living in Northern California with his wife, where he writes on everything from politics to theology and from culture to economic theory. You can send an email to - Individual Secession and Lysander Spooner on Taxation - Posted by: C.Jay Engel August 21, 2014 in Blogs, C.Jay Engel - - One of the hilarious contradictions of the mainstream conservative (I consider myself very conservative by the way –and I’m also a consistent libertarian) is that he wants to make sure that everyone knows how much he is against individual secession, which is a libertarian concept.  And yet at the same time it is often these folks who are more attracted to American folklore, the independent cowboy, the Western Hero, the Daniel Boonesque frontiersman.  It is my understanding, though, that what makes these things so appealing is that they all exist in the absence of the State.  Can you imagine a frontiersman’s reaction to some government schmo following him around the wild country (if you can convince a bureaucrat or politician to leave his air conditioned office) trying to “protect him?”  No, what makes these Tall Tales and exaggerated American stories so interesting and exciting is that these are manly men who can take care of themselves!  They took their families across the wilderness in covered wagons, armed with rifles and the like. - This is a excellent example of individual secession.  Today’s neoconservatives shriek in horror when one suggests State-level secession from the Federal government and about have a heart attack when they hear “county secession.”  But why do they pretend to have a cowboy appeal? Perhaps they like the movies that carry the theme of the “man’s man” who goes out on his own to explore God’s green earth.  But when it comes down to it, they despise the adventurer, the person who wants to live his own life and explore unknown territories (not that they exist anymore, but you get the point).  In short, they want to make sure everyone is “protected” at all times and conveniently, they require a tax for their “services,” and quote Romans 13 when the individual just wants to be left alone.  What exactly is the individual being protected from if he is prevented, by the strong-arm of the State, from going his own way?  Talk about a Protection Racket. - Lysander Spooner was a mid-nineteenth century natural rights philosopher and lawyer.  Desiring to conduct a free-market competition in the mail delivery services, was was soon shut down by the government, who, naturally, wanted its own monopoly.  He was in many ways one of the most vocal supporters of taking the founders’ philosophy to it’s logical conclusion.  Below he is in all his brilliance on the subject of taxation compared to the action of theft by a robber. – THEN HE QUOTES Lysander Spooner: “The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: “Your money, or your life.” And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat. - The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. - The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you. He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.

ERIKSON, MARTIN: on Facebook, likes Iland Nation.

EVANS, DYLAN, evansd66 @ - He works on book on competitive governance, invites reading of draft and comments. “Beyond Democracy”.



FALKE, KLAUS: klaus.falke @ - - Support @ - Klaus.Falke @ - GPdB – U.T.

FAWKES, JEFFERSON: JeffersonFawkes | February 6, 2009 at 1:25 pm | .comment-meta .commentmetadata .comment-author .vcard - It sounds like your coming to the some similar conclusions as myself. I think you and others that enjoyed this podcast would enjoy It is on the topic of secession and is a government theory on competing systems, which I believe fellow survivalists would benefit from setting up. – He was commenting on EPISODE-137- INDIVIDUAL SECESSION FROM THE SYSTEMS - Posted on February 6, 2009 by Modern Survival| 5 Comments – the SURVIVAL PODCAST WITH Jack Spirko. FAWKES, JEFFERSON: Commenting on APATRCKPAY: Submitted by JeffersonFawkes on Mon, 03/23/2009 - 16:31. Permalink - That’s a close analysis, but panarchy, actually doesn't separate land. You would have the Obama followers as next door neighbors. You just wouldn't pay taxes to their ruler of choice. A closer description would be freedom of political leader in the same way that we are free to choose our church or cell phone service. Basically it would just mean figure out what you would need a government to do, and get a group of friends together, and start doing it. Those who have a different view than you on what government needs to do can organize and do their own thing.

FEEN, LOUSANDER: Liked my remark on Facebook: John Zube At least by now we should all have come to recognise not only territorial secessionism but also individual and group secessionism, combined with the personal law options, in realisation of free markets, free choice, free competition, freedom of association, contract, experimentation, exchange, full monetary & financial freedom and genuine SELF-governance and SELF-responsibilty and free competition in every sphere, especially all those now monopolised by territorial and statist governments. Collectivist & monopolistic, coercive "self-government" and "sovereignty" are not good enough substitutes for individual sovereignty or self-ownership and freedom of action for all peaceful and tolerant people. - Lousander Feen - 203 mutual friends – 10.7.14. – He also liked today’s statement by myself: GOVERNMENT: Territorial government over involuntary subjects means "ignorance in action". One should also add that it amounts to enforced popular errors, prejudices, false assumptions & conclusions, intolerance for tolerant actions, monopolism, wrongful aggressive & defensive actions, unjustified hierarchies, coercion & compulsion, bureaucracies, unwarranted interventions, always wrongful collectivism, all too often even fanaticism, tyranny and totalitarianism. Already Goethe said: "There is nothing worse to behold than ignorance in action!" - JZ, 3.1.15. – John Zube - Facebook 4.1.15. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, IGNORANC IN ACTION

FEIGENBAUM, CYNDI: PANARCHISM: They use our differences to divide us. What would happen if we unite around our love of peace, abundance, and freedom? - The Advocates for Self-Government - Peace, freedom, and abundance. It works if we try it. - Tokyo Tom shared a photo to the group The Collaborative Center Community/#CCC. - Facebook, 25 August at 13:13 - Via Sandra Dressler - John Zube: Since there are thousands of different ideas on how to achieve peace, abundance and full freedom, that would mean letting the supporters of all such ideas do their different things - among themselves, in full freedom of experimentation, contract and association in these spheres as well, naturally, always only at the own risk and expense. Is that so difficult to understand? Should e.g. all housewives "unite", to provide uniform meals for all they do love or should all of them remain free to do the best they can, in this respect, too? Peace, freedom, justice and abundance are the result of letting all people do their own things - and learn from their experience. - Liked by Tokyo Tom & Tony Palmentera - Cyndi Feigenbaum

FIČURA, MILAN, Milan Fičura - University of Economics, Prague
Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago

FINLEY, DEVIN: On Facebook, 19.1.15, he liked: AGORISM: Agorism has the ultimate goal of bringing about a society in which all relations between people are voluntary exchanges. - Timothy Voluntarist Fogle shared Statelessness's photo - Facebook, 19.1.15. – PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, FREE MARKETS IN EVERY SPHERE, FREE EXCHANGE, SOCIETY

FISHER, COREY: Dear Cory, I only seek friends who do share some of my own main interests: e.g. panarchism, monetary freedom and peace through individual rights and liberties. E.g.:, & - He replied: That's why I added you ...- I added you to my provisional list of people with that interest. Adding email address, blog, website etc. would be appreciated. - JZ, 1.12.14.

FITZGERALD, CRAIG: Craig FitzGerald - Organic Farmer at Self-Employed
Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL about 4 months ago

FOGLE, TIMOTHY VOLUNTARIST: Timothy Voluntarist Fogle, pointed out on Facebook, 24.1.15. -

FOLDVARY, FRED: TOLERANCE: let individuals live by their own values as long as they do not impose them on others.” – Fred Foldvary, THE CONNECTION 115, p.91. – VALUES, PANARCHISM - fred @ - My vita is at: - My Progress-Report articles are at SECESSION- Encyclopedia of Global Justice - 2011, pp 976-979. - This is an excerpt from the content: Secession is the withdrawal of persons and land from the jurisdiction of the original governing unit. The seceding territory, the new realm, becomes independent of the jurisdiction it was part of, the old realm. Secession can be either complete or partial. For example, in St. Louis, the residents of a neighborhood are legally able to privatize their street, exercising partial secession from the city government (Foldvary 1994). - For those who advocate the legal ability to secede, the moral right to secession derives from human equality. If each adult human being has the moral right to consent to the government, then one not only has a right to vote, but more fundamentally, the right to emigrate or secede. In this view, global justice requires the right of individual secession. - If emigration is prohibited, then the residents are enslaved by the state, forced to abide by the laws or be penalized. But emigration has a high cost, as those leaving must let go of territory and heritage they cher ... – 2006 - 2014?

FORGIONI, JESSE: Jesse Forgione - Brooklyn, New York - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago

FORREL, ARTHUR: Panarchy, Phyles & P2P Foundation: Arthur Forrel - Dear John, I am familiar with your work that I have been following for year. I already got in touch with you with a different name. You might remember me trying to introduce you to P2P foundation's work, which has a certain degree of overlap with your ideas. You decided to terminate the conversation since they are not discarding taking the state from the equation. I am still interested in the idea of Panarchy although it is to me an idea not focused enough on the possibilities of today. I think I prefer the idea of Phyles By the way, don't trust the info on my profile : I am not 105 years old and I have no reason to provide the correct information to Facebook. So my birthdate is only a joke. I wish you a pleasant week end. - Phyles - P2P Foundation - - Business-empowered communities: they are not companies linked to a community, but transnational communities that have acquired enterprises in order to gain continuity in time and robustness [1] – Facebook, 1.2.15.

FOWLER, JUSTIN: John Zube : Abolish the territorial power aspect of this office. Confine them to their voluntary victims. The same for all other politicians. - Justin Fowler liked this, Facebook, 18.2.14.

FRASER, BRYANT: On Facebook, 1.2.14, he liked my following statement: The best future of mankind will occur when every group of dissenters is free to experiment with supposedly better solutions, always at the won risk and cost. All territorial experiments with whole popolations are, inherently, wrong and usually all too flawed. – I would like to hear more of him on this. He is, obviously, on Facebook. - JZ, 1.2.14.

FREE, DONALEA: Donalea Free – She liked my following remark on Facebook: John Zube Just let all dissenters secede and confine all remaining federal, State & local government systems to their remaining volunteers. That would cause the least friction immediately and also in the long run. – Facebook, 5.6.14.

FREEDOMAIN RADIO: The Largest Philosophy Conversation in The World, Podcasts, Videos, Free Books, Speeches, Call In Show, etc.: https – It also engaged in a discussion on panarchy. Panarchists like Adam Knott and Richard C. B. Johnsson participated. I haven’t extracted references to all those, who had something worthwhile to contribute to the subject, beyond the usual misunderstandings and prejudices. – Look up the site yourself. JZ, 23.1.15.

FREEMAN, THE, FEE, under Max Border’s editorship: iol @ - freeman @

FREI, ANGELO: Angelo Frei - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick about 7 months ago

FREY, ANDREW: Andrew Frey - Kansas State University -
Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL over a year ago – JZ, 11.12.13.

FREY, BRUNO: Two similar ideas are "Functional Overlapping Competing Jurisdictions" (FOCJ) advocated by Swiss economists Bruno Frey and Reiner Eichenberger – Probably identical with: FREY, B. S. - bsfrey @

FRIEDMAN, DAVID:‎ - by David Friedman - in 3,095 Google+ circles - Dec 3, 2012 - I would be pretty content with a panarchist approach of simply letting people opt out from various government ... See the Ron Paul experience. - David Friedman, Police, Courts, and Laws---on the Market, David Friedman home page. - Friedman, David D. (1979) Private Creation and Enforcement of Law: A Historical Case. Retrieved 12 August 2005. - David D. Friedman. "Police, Courts and Law – On the Market (The Machinery of Freedom, 1989, Chapter 29) - Law as a private good David Friedman describes free market production of law and order. ddfr @ - He put a book draft online for comments: Legal Systems Very Different From Ours - David Friedman's draft book now online: "Legal Systems Very Different From Ours" ( – “Law Without the State - - Quoted by Tokyo Tom - Facebook, 18.6.14.

FRIEDMAN, JILL: Liked my remark on Facebook.

FRIEDMAN, PATRI: Patri Friedman - As part of a Secession Week blogging series celebrating Independence Day, I devoted today's post to non-territorial secession, it's a great collection of material: - John Zube : I found your site mentioned among my old Panarchy files only today. It made my day. - Currently I am working on updating and enlarging my old Panarchy A to Z, a major chore, since by now there are so many files involved, too many for an individual to handle. Most, alas, deal only with territorial secessionism and one has to separate the wheat from the chaff. You site might help me in this. - John Zube, jzube @

FUSARI, LUCA: Luca Fusari - Senior Editor at MiglioVerde
Likes Panarchism – Facebook, 24.12.14.



GABB, DR SEAN: sean @ - Pan interest according to at least one Facebook entry & Gian Piero de Bellis - update - December 2014

GALL, JOHN, Systemantics, This book does also contain a chapter on panarchism, using unique terms. He has a Facebook page and Google has over 2,700 search results on him. - jcgall @ - Gian Piero de Bellis - update - December 2014

GALLOWAY, JAMES BLU, on Facebook, liked my remark: No territorial constitution is worth protecting. Only those for communities, societies and governance systems of volunteers are worth upholding - by their volunteers, for their own affairs. - John Zube – 21.3.14.

GARELLO, PIERRE: Pierre Garello, garello.pierre @ - Gian Piero de Bellis - update - December 2014

GEANKOPLIS, GEORGE: George Geankoplis - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago

GENESTINE, AL: Al Genestine – Likes de Puydt & related pages, according to Facebook, 24.12.14.

GENEVA, MARK: Mark Geneva liked: John Zube Freedom to compete in every sphere now monopolised by territorial States or to drop out of wrongful but imposed burdens, laws and institutions of territorial States. Free markets, voluntarism, freedom of association, experimentation and contract in every sphere, not only in economics, for all those, who prefer this for their own affairs. All governmental actions against innocent people and at their expense and risk are "wrongful foreign interventions". - Facebook.

GHERTNER, MICHA, Micha Ghertner, listed by Joe Kopsick

GITTLER: PANARCHISM: Most thoughtful men recognize that group diversity is part of our world; how we learn to live with and accept diversity will determine in great measure the future of civilization.” - Gittler, Understanding Minority Groups. – From JZ, Pan AZ. - RADICAL PLURALISM, NON-GEOGRAPHICAL ASSOCIATIONISM, TOLERANCE, AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, GROUP AUTONOMY, EXTERRITORIALITY, VOLUNTARISM

GLAPION, CHAD: Chad Glapion - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago

GODZILLA GAL: Godzilla Gal : answered 7 years ago - Welcome To Individual Secession! - Welcome to the "Individual Secession" blog! You may be curious as to what "Individual Secession" is - it is the personal choice to secede - that is withdraw - from current society in its current form. The way that society is now is, IMHO, totally against the wishes of the framers of the constitution. The framers wanted a republic form of government composed of "part-time" legislators - not a permanent ruling class! What we have now is a government composed of a ruling class in all three branches who make decisions not on what is good for the people, but they make these decisions on what is going to get them re-elected and/or what is good for the "special interest groups" that contribute to their campaigns! The 2008 presidential campaign is expected to top ONE BILLION DOLLARS for the first time. The 2008 race began in 2006 (even before the mid-term elections) - 18 months before the first primary. - This is just one of the factors that led me to decide that we were going to secede from current society. The traditional fabric of our country is being destroyed by those persons and organizations in order to enrich themselves personally with either money or power (or both). Our rights are being eroded and our sovereignty (both personal and collective) is under concerted attack. The NAFTA "Super Highway", NAIS and the not-so-secret North American Union are but a few examples. - Individual Secession is not just a physical act, it is also a mental exercise in which you begin to see things as they really are. You also begin to take steps to secede physically from the system - as far as you are comfortable to go. Any step, no matter how small is a statement of defiance and a repudiation of the status quo. For some, the steps may only consist of speaking out on the issues while others (like myself) decide to go "off the grid" totally and use only the minimum amount of "goods and services". - There is not much difference between what I am going to do and neo-homesteading, back-to-the-land or voluntary simplicity - it is a matter of why I chose to do it. For some it is because of enviromental concerns, religious beliefs or some form of nostalgia. For me it was mostly a political decision (with a bit of religion mixed in) to return to a life style that does not have to depend on anyone except myself. Society is so interconnected that a single disruption causes extensive problems throughout the rest of society. A hundred years ago, people were more reliant on themselves rather than being reliant on a system that is controlled by large corporations and the ruling classes. I determined that my participation in the system was not only enabling the continued existence of it, but it also made me a "subject" of the system. - In future posts, I will give examples of how the system is designed to be a self-perpetuating entity that exists to enrich itself at the expense of the "common man". I will also be posting on what you can do to deny the system the fruits of your labor and how to make a statement that you are not going to play the game by THEIR rules anymore. - Source(s): - Published on YAHOO! ANSWERS. – I tried in vain to open that individual secession site. It may be on the web archive by now. – Since America is now taxation without representation can ... - Nov 12, 2007 - Godzilla Gal answered 7 years ago. - Welcome To Individual Secession! Welcome to the "Individual Secession" blog! You may be curious as to ... – However, on searching for Godzilla Gal & individual secession site – not in apostrophes, I got about 829,000 results. – With both terms “Godzilla Gal” + “individual secession” – I got just two results. - JZ, 21.1.15. Secession - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - - Secession (derived from the Latin term secessio) is the act of withdrawing from an organization, union, .... Anarcho-Capitalism: individual liberty to form political associations and private property rights ..... A girl during the Nigerian Civil War of the late 1960s. ..... This page was last modified on 18 January 2015, at 15:26. - Secession - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - - Secession (derived from the Latin term secessio) is the act of withdrawing from an organization, union, .... Anarcho-Capitalism: individual liberty to form political associations and private property rights ..... A girl during the Nigerian Civil War of the late 1960s. ..... This page was last modified on 18 January 2015, at 15:26.

GOODIN, JOHN: Joel Bowen and John Goodin shared a link.

GORDON, DAVID: editor of Secession, State, and Liberty (Englisch) Gebundene Ausgabe – Juni 1998. - Gebundene Ausgabe: 344 Seiten, ab EUR 47,77, Taschenbuch EUR 34.20, - Verlag: Transaction Publishers (Juni 1998) - Sprache: Englisch - ISBN-10: 1560003626 - ISBN-13: 978-1560003625 - Secession, State, and Liberty: David Gordan ... › ... › Sachbücher › Politik › Geschichte & Theorie - David Gordon is senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. He is the author of Resurrecting Marx: The Analytical Marxists on Exploitation, Freedom, and Justice, available from Transaction, The Philosophical Origins of Austrian Economics, and Critics of Marxism. He has contributed more than 100 articles to such journals as Analysis, The International Philosophic Quarterly, The Journal of Libertarians Studies, and The Review of Austrian Economics and is the editor of the Mises Review. – Reader comments: A Must Have - Von eunomius am 4. März 1999. – This is an absolutely masterful book that deserves a great deal more attention than I fear it will ever receive. It deals with one of the most overlooked issues in political theory, secession. Although most people think that the American Civil War settled the issue for all time, the authors of this book beg to differ. From a variety of different vantage points and ideologies, secession is given the support that it so deserves. Secession is rooted in individual liberty and any opposition ultimately requires an outright act of force. It is this crucial fact that much of this book is based upon. Issues of secession, past, present, and future are all dealt with accordingly. This book should be on the bookshelf of every individual with a serious interest in libertarian political philosophy. - - Von am 31. Juli 1999: Best discussion on Secession ever. This book is the best discussion on the subject of Secession I have ever seen. This topic is so important and yet so ignored. No one can understand the "Civil War" with out understanding this important topic. The Right of succession is a crucial element of protecting liberty and this book Provides the best possible understanding of it available - Another reader commented, 19.3.99: Radical political decentralization worldwide is inevitable because of technology, demographics and the continual threat of nuclear destruction of large nation states, it is useful to have a scholarly investigation of the issue like Mr. Gordon.

GRECO, THOMAS: Thomas Greco - thg @ - GPdB - GRECO, - Gian Piero de Bellis - update - December 2014

GRINDER, WALTER: TOLERANCE: The most consistent Real Liberals, and certainly current Libertarians, saw clearly that moral consistency demanded toleration not just for thoughts and beliefs – the most intimate function of all human conscience – but also for action in accordance with thought. Tolerance for the latter without equal tolerance for the former was rightly see to be a sham of the highest order.” – Walter E. Grinder, An Introduction to Libertarian Thought, p.4. - PANARCHSIM

GROSSBERG, MICHAEL: PANARCHISM: If you can't privatize city hall, secede from it! - Michael Grossberg, reason, 12/82, p.48. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM Google offers 1200 results on G. on secessionism, among them, first page: Issue 595 - The Libertarian Enterprise -‎ - Nov 14, 2010 - "The secession of the individual from the state" ... Sweeter Than Wine, when I received e-mail from my old friend Michael Grossberg.

GUDE, JOERG: joerggude @ - U.T.



HAILEY, JAY: Jay Hailey - Taxi Driver at City Cab - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick over a year ago. - The percentage of panarchist taxi-drivers seems to be high in this listing. Chance or more than that? - JZ, 28.8.14.

HALLIDAY, ROY: royhalliday @ - He put a survey of exterritorialist links onto a webpage of his.

HANSEN, PETER BJØRN: Peter Bjørn Hansen - Nordsjællands Grundskole og Gymnasium samt HF - Added to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL by Joe Kopsick about 4 months ago

HARMAN, WILLIS W.: 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

HART, DAVID: dhart @ - Translator of Molinari writings. E.g.: The earliest statement of the anarcho capitalist position - In 1849, Gustave de Molinari argued on economic grounds for “Free Government” and “Free Self Defense”, by which he meant “free” as in “free speech” — the right of any individual or group to see to their own government and their own self defense

HARTZOG, PAUL B.: In his essay entitled, "Panarchy: Governance in the Network Age," Paul B. Hartzog describes the process by which old systems of government are being bypassed and overcome by new systems of networked global "governance." Hartzog points out that "[t]he key distinction between the old system and the new lies in the fact that governance in the old system was achieved through states, whereas in the new system it is not only achieved outside of hierarchies through horizontal networks, but is in fact often achieved in spite of hierarchies." [italics his] (Hartzog, 2007). What Hartzog perceives is the effectiveness of new IPP to affecting social change, which rely not on lobbying the state through a democratic process, but on completely bypassing the state system, forming a disperse self-organizing global network of committed actors, capable of instantly spreading information amongst their members. Such networks are far more flexible, dynamic, and responsive than the state system, and will ultimately make the state system obsolete. These networks will form "meshworks," (integrated networks of networks) as the current state systems begin to crumble under their own weight. With their economies failing, counter economies, similar to those envisioned by Samuel Edward Konkin III, will begin to emerge, utilizing new forms of trade, and bypassing the 1st Tier state economies entirely. Eventually new economic frameworks emerge, they may come to resemble the sort of "Economics 3.0" envisioned by Michelle Holliday. As she puts it, "[w]ith a view of the economy as a living system, economic leaders will likely be less fix-it men-and-women and more gardeners or farmers, actively cultivating the fertile conditions for life's processes to flow naturally." (Holliday 2010) - BRYAN O’DOHERTY: The Political Paradigm of an Integral Society. - Hartzog, Paul (2007). "Panarchy: Governance in the Network Age".

HASNAS, JOHN, J.D., Ph.D., Philosophy, Duke University, LL.M., Temple University. Assistant Professor of Business Ethics, Georgetown University and Senior Research Fellow, Kennedy Institute of Ethics. An earlier version of this Article was presented as a lecture at the Institute for Humane Studies Liberty and Society Summer Seminar.: The Myth of the Rule of Law,”- “In a free market, the law would not come in a one-size fits all.” – THE VOLUNTARYIST, April 1999. Originally published in 1995 Wisconsin Law Review 199 (1995)

HASSAN, MOHAMMAD MAHDI: He liked my comment.

HAZEL, TODD: on Facebook, likes Iland Nation.

HEBETUDE: Pragmatic Panarchistic Pantheist – on reddit: Some interesting discussion at /r/technology about the size ... - Oct 21, 2014 - Because once secessionism is established as popularly legitimate, the argument for individual secessionism becomes the next logical step.

HESS, BARRY: Barry Hess - He liked: John Zube : Best by individualism, instead of by collectivist & territorialist statism, centralisation or monopolism, i.e. by voluntarism, associationism, contractarianism, experimental freedom, individual free choice, personal law or individual secessionism, based upon self-ownership or individual sovereignty, instead of the imposition of another compulsory system for a whole population, which at best amounts only to majority despotism. – As comment to: “… do you want to change the world …? – Facebook, 30.8.14.HESS

HESS, GREGORY: Gregory Hess – on Facebook, liked my following remark there on 12.3.14: John Zube The only effective votes for our times would be those of people free to secede and do their own things.

HONDT, STEVE: "Snow Crash" by Neal Stephenson anyone? This is the first step. – A comment to Schnurer’s essay on Estonian citizenship law. – JZ, 17.2.15.

HOSSEIN, MOHAMMAD BELAI: Mohammad Belal Hossain - He liked my Facebook remark, 4.1.15: GOVERNMENT: Territorial government over involuntary subjects means "ignorance in action". One should also add that it amounts to enforced popular errors, prejudices, false assumptions & conclusions, intolerance for tolerant actions, monopolism, wrongful aggressive & defensive actions, unjustified hierarchies, coercion & compulsion, bureaucracies, unwarranted interventions, always wrongful collectivism, all too often even fanaticism, tyranny and totalitarianism. Already Goethe said: "There is nothing worse to behold than ignorance in action!" - JZ, 3.1.14. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, IGNORANCE IN ACTION

HSH Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein - A state model which is to secure peace, the rule of law, democracy and the welfare of the population has to withdraw from the state the monopoly on its territory. The "emigration" of the population is only a realistic alternative in our world if the affected population can "emigrate" with their territory." - Lecture by HSH Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein: Will the State Survive the Third Millennium? -… - audio:…/will_the_state_survive_the_3rd_mi…
Text: - version1-Hans_Adam_II_projev.doc - FSI Stanford, The Europe Center Seminar Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Encina Hall, Tuesday, 9th November, 2010. – Quoted by Halit Yerli shared HSH Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein's photo. – Facebook 22.12.14.

HARRISON, RALPH: He liked my Faceboook remark.

HESS, ZACKARY: Zackary Hess: People should only have to obey laws that they voluntarily agreed to. – Facebook, 18.6.14.

HIGGS, ROBERT: Robert Higgs - GPdB – update - December 2014

HILL, BRENT: Brent Hill - Works at March Against Monsanto
Added by Joe Kopsick to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL over a year ago. - John Zube : Rather, a free market for all the isms and their establishments, all always only for their volunteers and without a territorial monopoly. Too many anarchists have forgotten that voluntarism is the primary thing. For those people wishing to live under a government or State, without trying to force it upon dissenters, it is the right institution for their stage of development. They are then not ruled against their will by people they dislike. Naturally, they should be free to secede from any such association. - B. H. liked that remark.

HILL, HEATHER: Adam Kokesh for President! - Heather Hill - John Zube: ONLY for his followers. All other candidates or proposed leaders only for their followers. Territorial powers over whole populations to no one, because they cannot be based upon consent by all peaceful people. – H. H. liked that on Facebook, 6.4.14.

HINKLE, MARK: Mark Hinkle shared Young Americans for Liberty's photo. - 2 December 14. He liked my comment:

HINMAN, HOWARD: Howard Hinman - Works at Now an independent MERS paralegal, expert in the Massive Mortgage Meltdown. - Added by Joe Kopsick about 6 months ago to PANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL

HOGAN, JULIA: On Facebook: Julia Hogan She liked my comment: The essence of fascism and Nazism and wrongful authoritarianism in any State are statism and territorialism. Do you know of any present government which is free of these basic flaws? I don't. – Facebook 16.5.14.

HOLFORD, JASON DOUGLAS: Jason Douglas Holford - 856 mutual friends on Facebook, liked: John Zube We do not want a civil war but a civil society. Competing police force, voluntary taxation and the right to secede and live under personal law would be important steps in this direction. – entry of 27.2.14.

HOPPE, HANS HERMANN: You cannot first establish a territorial monopoly of law and order and then expect that this monopolist will not make use of this awesome privilege of legislating in its own favor. Likewise: You cannot establish a territorial monopoly of paper money production and expect the monopolist not to use its power of printing up ever more money. – Hans-Hermann Hoppe, BASTIAT INSTITUTE, Moral Hazard shared Luis Rivera III's photo. – Facebook, 26.1.14.

HOSSAIN, MOHAMMAD BELAI: He liked my Facebook remark: CONSPIRACIES: To each the own system! That is the "system" that I prefer for all. That also means freedom to secede for individuals and whole groups of volunteers from any existing system, which they might believe to be run by conspirators. Under territorial statism it is hard to impossible to quite get away from any system one dislikes. That is the nature of this "beast", still predominant today in all countries. To get information on this already ancient alternative, with only traces remaining today in some countries, look up "personal law" with Google. In all spheres not wrongfully monopolized by territorial governments it does work very well and is already taken for granted. - John Zube to W. E., not published on Facebook because her original comment, asserting the reality and power of conspiracies, had already been deleted. – JZ, 9.8.14. – SYSTEMS – Facebook, 16.12.14. – He also liked my FB remark: SINGLE ISSUE REFORMS: Let people sort themselves out into the personal law societies that they do prefer for themselves. That saves them much in propaganda, publicity, lobbying and promotion costs. It would fully use the power of attractive examples and the deterrent effects of failing false systems, although they were supported by volunteers only. – This way all the various systems, reforms, institutions, methods and ideologies do get their best chance. - JZ, 8.1.15. - REFORMERS, LOBBIES

THE HOUSTON FREETHINKERS: The Advantage of Panarchy | The Houston Free Thinkers - › Blogs - Jul 17, 2014 - STR. The crucial advantage of Panarchy is that it converts aggressive violence into defense. Most people on the Internet tend to “stick with their ... – Its kind of individual and group secession and personal law or exterritorial autonomy practice cannot be perceived as aggressive or dangerous towards those with other preferences, unless they are authoritarian power addicts, dictators, tyrants and totalitarians, fearing the enlightening and liberating influence fro the practice of such peaceful and successful competition. – JZ, 23.1.15.

HUEMER, MICHAEL: Talk reported on Facebook, 3.8.13 by Skye Stewart - "Modern states commonly deploy coercion in a wide array of circumstances in which the resort to force would clearly be wrong for any private agent. What entitles the state to behave in this manner? And why should citizens obey its commands? This book examines theories of political authority, from the social contract theory, to theories of democratic authorization, to fairness- and consequence-based theories. Ultimately, no theory of authority succeeds, and thus no government has the kind of authority often ascribed to governments. - "The author goes on to discuss how voluntary and competitive institutions could provide the central goods for the sake of which the state is often deemed necessary, including law, protection from private criminals, and national security. An orderly and livable society thus does not require acquiescence in the illusion of political authority."


[Home] [Top]