John Zube


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

Index - Q

(2013 - 2014)



AAA I included here a short collection of questions, intending, later on, to produce a separate file of Questions. – I have still not got around to do that, except for the short appendix to this file. The questions should be critical, clarifying and thought stimulating. I may never get around to it, although I do believe that the question method of Socrates is still important for enlightenment purposes in our times. - JZ, 19.6.13.



QUALIFY: Go only where called, but do everything within one’s power to qualify to be called.” – Leonard E. Read, Castles in the Air, p.143. – If a proper market is established for ideas, facts and talents, then the right ideas will come to the foreground and the competent will tend to be called upon rather frequently while the flawed and incompetent ones will become publicly exposed as such. – JZ, 29.4.08. - COMPETENCE, LEARNING, KNOWLEDGE, EXPERTS, WISDOM, IDEAS ARCHIVE

QUALITY GOODS: The good can sometimes be its own worst enemy. It can be so good, cheap, reliable and long lasting that its sale, in its special niche market, will almost come to a stop once that market is saturated. I experienced that e.g. with the variegraph pens fine line writings. By the time I finally needed replacements they were no longer on the market. The same would apply to almost ever-lasting tooth brushes or razor blades or light bulbs or watches. Some of the old-type pocket watches were actually passed on for several generations. – 13.8.07.

QUALITY STANDARDS: The imposition of product quality standards denies consumers the economic liberty to purchase products of lower quality.” – Dennis Bechara, THE FREEMAN, Oct. 77, p. 610. – CONSUMER PROTECTION LAWS

QUALITY STANDARDS: You could crusade for government-enforced quality standards. But history demonstrates that government interference produces worse products, not better. Government standards create red tape, contradictory laws, dictatorial agencies, payoffs, and the loss of your opportunity to buy the products you want but which don’t please bureaucrats.” – Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom, p. 131.

QUANGOS: QUANGOs rule exterritorially insofar as they pick and choose their victims among the whole population only in certain trades or professions. Thus their rules do not apply territorially to whole populations. Instances: Egg Board, Wheat Board. But they are like territorial States in that each of them, rule everyone in a whole country, who belongs into their defined category. No voluntarism is involved and no secession from them is allowed. Thus all of them are at least morally disqualified. – JZ, 10.7.86, 19.9.08. – TERRITORIALISM, LEGALIZED DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WHOLE GROUPS OF PEOPLE, EXTERRITORIALISM, QUASI-AUTONOMOUS NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS

QUANTITY THEORY: A normal situation cannot return until prices and wages adapt themselves to the quantity of money in circulation.” – Ludwig von Mises, The Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle and other Essays, p.5. - At least he realized here that the adaptation requires time. Rothbard assumed that it would occur instantly and without any friction or problems. – I also deny that the adaptation is complete. In the extremes of deflations and inflations money ceases to function and, as far as possible, a return to primitive barter transactions occurs. - JZ, 29.4.08.

QUANTITY THEORY: Advocates of this theory often assume that price changes do only take place as a result of actual monetary transactions or turnovers. But the merely "spoken" or offered exchanges, every day, on the stock exchanges, as well as the futures trading, do also influence prices, without actual turnover trades taking place immediately. The quantity theory assumes the existence of monetary despotism and that the percentage of free clearing transactions remains the same. But assume, e.g. that electronic clearing transactions were suddenly perfected country-wide or even world wide. Then the amount of available cash notes or coins would become irrelevant. But, on the other hand, for each separate issue of a competing currency and for its issue and reflux potential, its goods, services and labour effort in relation to its monetary circulation, in form of notes, coins, book or electronic credits or cheque accounts, the quantity theory would apply, especially under market-rated and competitive issues. The quantity of exchange media issued, measured in some sound value standard, under the same degree of clearing transactions, would tend to remain the same (under the same conditions) and it would correspond to that quantity of goods, services and labour offered by him and sold for his exchange media (and not settled by clearing instead). All transactions could be settled by such free issues, if that is wanted and all such transactions could also be settled merely by clearing, if that is wanted in a private or cooperative payment community, i.e., without any quantity of coined or printed money. But a one-sided and artificial blow-out of the monetary side, leading to corresponding price increases, would not be possible, beyond some temporary and small over-issues, rapidly leading to discounts or disagios, in the general local circulation, when the potential acceptors are sufficiently and fast enough informed of what is happening in this particular issue sphere. They would refuse or discount the over-issued notes. Their value standard and that of the over-issuer would not be changed thereby. Only the over-issuer would still have to accept them at par and he would have difficulties with his future issues. If then he tried to increase his prices beyond those of his local competitors, he might risk losing many to most of his customers forever. Clearing houses would notice it and also any over-issue very fast, because they would receive e.g. too many notes from the over-issuer and he cannot offer them enough of the issues of others in exchange. When the transactions are merely electronic then such an imbalance, indicating over-issues, could be discovered even faster. Thus over-issues can only be very limited and temporary under monetary freedom. Under-issues, giving exchange media an agio, will also be rare for issuers will tend to issue rather more, than not enough exchange media for their requirements - until their exchange media receive the first small discount, perhaps only in wholesale trading, which might never be noticed by most consumers. But the news will travel fast among these and retailers. When the discount is justified, the issuers cannot supply enough goods, services and receipts for debts paid, immediately, for his notes presented to him, then this would lead to extensive refusals to accept his notes at all. Otherwise his notes would stream back to him faster than is usual - while he could issue only many less notes than before, if any at all, than at the time when his notes where still at par in general local circulation. The discounted notes would rapidly stream back to him and thus disappear from circulation and thus would also disappear their discount. If the issuer could not restock his goods overnight, then he might have to promise his note holders to accept their notes at more than 100% for the trouble he has caused them, as soon as he has restocked. Anyhow, his new issues would, at least for a while, have only a lower volume of acceptance and circulation. - JZ, 24.3.97, 30.8.02, 19.2.11. To get away from the thinking or non-thinking about monopoly money with legal tender power, which has conditioned most thinking on money at present, when thinking about the money of monetary freedom, one should think of the analogy of issuing capital certificates on a free market. When more of one kind of them are issued than corresponds to the value of an enterprise and the returns from it, then their value on the exchanges tends to fall rapidly. But the fall of the market price of an over-issued capital security does not automatically lead to the fall in the value of other securities. On the contrary, their market value might be increased, because they did not depreciate. They are then, so to speak, treated like gold and silver, which goes up in value, by those seeking security, once the governmental paper money is further depreciated. Each private means of payment community, using a sound value standard, will have its own automatic adaptation of its means of exchange to the quantity of wanted goods, services and labour that are ready for sale among its members. It cannot significantly over-issue and will not be so foolish as to under-issue its notes, no more so than and entertainment company, which sells tickets to its performances. – JZ, 31.1.14.

QUANTITY THEORY: An inflation is always expressed in an increase of the general price level. When the price level remains unchanged, then no inflation has taken place." - Popular opinion. - We do often have no kinetic but merely a latent or potential inflationary power, e.g. in hoarded money or demand deposits - that can legally be transformed into ready cash - legal tender. Sooner or later these notes will get into circulation and increase prices correspondingly but only if they are monopoly money notes with legal tender power. Otherwise, against any sound value standard, in which goods prices, wages etc. are expressed, they will become discounted. Among the vast hoards of U.S. dollars, not appearing on the goods and service market of the U.S., are the amounts of U.S. dollars hoarded as reserves by foreign central banks and the emergency or alternative currency amounts that are used, or stored, mainly by the underground economy, in the rest of the world. There are also huge cash amounts used e.g. in the drug trade. Imagine that the rest of the world would suddenly introduce or permit sound currencies and that the war against drugs, which actually promotes the drug business by making it very profitable to the top men and allows them to bribe their way through many bureaucratic, policing, custom duty, parliamentary and juridical barriers, in all too many cases, would suddenly come to an end. Furthermore, foreign central banks and others might discover that they do not need U.S. dollars as a reserve or cover or convertibility fund for their own issues. Then enormous stocks of U.S. dollar notes would flood back to the U.S. market for US consumer goods and services and labour, etc., and, being there still monopoly money with legal tender power, they would lead to a corresponding depreciation of these notes for their cover, that with consumer goods, labour and services, would not be correspondingly increased, nor would taxes be likely to be as much increased to cope with this increased reflux of these dollar notes to the U.S.A. (Tax foundation.) Only in the U.S.A. would they still have legal tender power and thus U.S.A. prices, wages and services would be markedly increased by this flood of notes coming "home". - Moreover, the general trend of the technical, scientific and management production progress is to reduce the prices of goods. To the extent that a central bank would issue additional forced currency, in an attempt to preventing this natural reduction of prices, its currency would also be inflated. - JZ, 24.3.97, 19.2.11.

QUANTITY THEORY: But if the standard of value remains constant and the basis of value is sufficient (*), I fail to see how the volume of money can affect its purchasing power.” - Tandy, Voluntary Socialism, p.101. - (*) I. e., as long as the exchange media are free market rated and at par with their value standard, the same standard in which the prices of goods and services are marked out. - Some over-issues might occur, in spite of all limiting forces and interests in a monetary freedom situation. But then only these particular issues would become somewhat depreciated in their purchasing power or suffer a discount against their value standard. They would be either refused in consequence, in general circulation, or accepted only at a discount, which means, they could not drive up prices or wages expressed in sound value units. They could only drive down their own purchasing power. - JZ, 2.7.91 & 12.4.97. - The larger their discount, the faster they would stream back from its remaining debtors to the issuing centre. To the extent that this reflux would still be possible, they would disappear from circulation and the discount would be reduced. If no further shop or debt foundation would remain (i.e., all the shelves of the issuer would be empty and could not be re-stocked overnight), then they would have only debt foundation in the liquidation process of that enterprise, against whatever real values it would still possess. - JZ, 5.9.02. - If the discounted notes still have "shop foundation", then the issuer would be wise to at least temporarily reduce his prices to sales prices, so that the discounted notes would stream back to him much faster. He could also do this by accepting his own notes not only at 100%, which he should anyhow do, morally, legally and juridically, but e.g. at 110%. - JZ, 19.2.11.

QUANTITY THEORY: It applies only to legal tender monopoly money. Other, optional and market rated monies, do not interfere with sound alternative value standards and sound pricing in them, nor with competing currencies, which would drive out unsound ones. The more a currency would be multiplied beyond its par value issues - if that could be done under these conditions at all and if the issuers still had a vested interest in trying to do so - the more would it be discounted, the more widely would it be refused altogether, until it is finally rejected by all. No one would be forced to accept a depreciated currency or use its "standard" in his contracts. For our purposes we can discount the few fools that can be found everywhere and at all times. Prices, wages, rents, etc., that are expressed in sound value standards would remain unaffected under this condition, i.e., would not fulfil the promises, fears or predictions of the Quantity Theory. - JZ, 13.1.94, 1.5.97.

QUANTITY THEORY: It is impossible for a country ever to have too much money." - Widespread opinion. - True for well-founded money, soundly issued and with a sound reflux, under competitive conditions, optional and market rated. Wrong for forced and exclusive currency. Without legal tender the mere multiplication of a currency can at most drive up the prices that are expressed in its paper standard. But when prices (incl. wages) are expressed in a sound value standard, then not the prices go up proportional to the multiplication but, rather, the inflated currency goes down, measured against the sound value standard. Reckoned in a sound value standard the prices etc. would remain the same, for all sound and competing currencies. Only if expressed or reckoned in a depreciated currency would they go up. Moreover, when there are competing currencies and the depreciation is considerable and persists, then more and more people will altogether refuse this flawed currency, which means, in effect, that the good money will drive out the bad and to that extent the quantity theory will simply not apply. The market will only accept and retain the currency that it considers to be good enough and that it needs for its transactions. More cannot be pushed into circulation without legal tender and the issue monopoly. The quantity theory applies only to forced and exclusive currency, not to the money of monetary freedom. It also does not take sufficient account of the number of transactions that can be conducted without cash - when and to the extent that creditors do not insist upon being paid in cash. Via free clearing more and more goods and services can be exchanged for each other, so that nominally more and more clearing actions or cleared debt amounts exist, without any exchange medium or any value standard being thereby depreciated. - JZ, 24.3.97 & 30.8.02, 19.2.11. – Naturally, to the extent that clearing replaces exchange media, less exchange media would be needed and issued. – GRESHAM’S LAW, properly understood, means that good money drives out the bad money when no money is monopoly money or has has legal tender power in general circulation. – JZ, 31.1.14.

QUANTITY THEORY: It is the quantity of money, not interest rate policy or controls over particular forms of lending, that is the centre-piece of monetary policy.” – Morgan E. Victor, Monetary Policy for Stable Growth, 1964. - Alas, he, too, did not distinguish between legal tender monopoly money and free market rated competitive monies. – The latter, by using sound value standards, do not and cannot monetarily affect the general price and wage level, expressed also in sound value standards. – Apparently, this writer did also take monetary despotism for granted. – And such people think themselves to be economists! - JZ, 29.4.08. – MONEY, MONETARY DESPOTISM, PRICES, LEGAL TENDER,

QUANTITY THEORY: One of life’s first lessons is that if you manipulate the supply of something people want, then ceteris paribus there will be a corresponding variation in what people will volunteer in exchange for it.” – L. Chipman, QUADRANT, 4/76. – He, too, did not sufficiently consider the power of the money issue monopoly and of its additional legal tender power under monetary despotism in an advance economy, depending upon monetary exchanges. Under that condition there is no free play between supply and demand in this sphere. The coercive monopolist wins for all too long in this sphere, all creditors suffer losses, when only nominally paid in full, thus lastly making further credits unavailable to debtors. Once the money is reduced to scrap value, we are back to primitive barter exchanges. – Monetary despotism, like any other despotism, dos have catastrophic results. The equilibrium is disturbed by it. Freedom is not automatically restored in this sphere, either, while it persists, just like it is not automatically and fast restored under territorialism, its monopolism, coercion and collectivism. - JZ, 31.1.14. - MONOPOLIES, PRICE CONTROL, LEGAL TENDER, PAPER MONEY, SUPPLY & DEMAND, INFLATION, DEFLATION, MONETARY DESPOTIM

QUANTITY THEORY: Suppose one said that the more yards put on the market, the shorter each yard would be. That would be 'textile inflation'. Now really!!???” - Don Werkheiser to Tom Greco, 9.3.84, p. 1. - & VALUE STANDARDS, COMPETING & FREELY CHOSEN, RATHER THAN FALSE OR FLAWED ONES, LEGALLY IMPOSED. SOUND, COMPETING & OPTIONAL MONIES DO NOT CAUSE INFLATIONS

QUANTITY THEORY: The quantity of any kind of cash currency in existence, legally or illegally, becomes significant only artificially, and customarily, not inherently, and economically, especially when it is subject to an issue monopoly, when it is considered to be a necessary reserve and redemption fund for any note, ticket and clearing certificate serving as money, for any non-cash account, for any claim of a creditor against a debtor, with every debtor thought to be under obligation to supply that cash, whenever payment or settlement is due and whenever it is, then and there, demanded in form of cash, instead of the debtor being merely obliged and entitled to settle in a non-cash way, by any form of clearing that is acceptable to both creditor and debtor. When custom, habit, constitution, law, jurisdiction, bankruptcy procedures and bank failure notions do insist upon or allow such a demand for an unjustified and unnecessary "backing" for the vastly larger non-cash and clearing transactions, even for the short term and self-liquidating credit transactions, involved e.g. in turnover credits for already produced and sold (to wholesalers) goods (the Real Bills Doctrine, which, essentially, demands only sound commercial bills as backing for banknotes issued in discounting such bills, not gold or silver coins, which might serve only as value standards) then, indeed, the slightest trouble or irregularity can set off an avalanche or chain reaction, in which a small cash shortage somewhere, of someone, can "explode" into requiring more and more cash payments in other transactions that were formerly and customarily settled with non-cash payments and by multilateral and anonymous clearing. They would, then and there tend to become payable only in cash, instead of the usual non-cash transactions. The demand for cash, beyond the usual cash transactions would thus, suddenly, become very much increased, just when cash is already somewhat short, and this at an accelerating rate, while the supply of cash, especially under a currency issue monopoly (or coinage monopoly, in previous generations), does not or is not correspondingly increased or not fast enough. There is then a great discrepancy between the available cash (under any monopoly issue system for it) and the vast number of non-cash transactions and clearing transactions built up and made possible beyond that limited quantity of cash, normally non-cash transactions but which, unfortunately or carelessly, are, formally, still payable, upon demand, in the limited quantity of cash that is available. Moreover, that limited amount of cash, when any shortage of cash is already felt, tends to become largely hoarded, as much as possible, by those, who have it. Thus this formal right to demand cash, instead of a settlement by a non-cash payment or clearing, may suddenly increase very much, while the cash supply is not correspondingly or fast enough increased. In this way an inherent instability is established and leads all too often and rather suddenly to the inability of many to pay cash, when cash demands suddenly increase, somewhere, between some people. (Today, maybe, for some additional drug deals or tax evasion cash deals.) For each amount of cash mobilised to settle the additional cash demand, from the existing total but presently limited quantity, a much larger total of non-cash transactions becomes then impossible or is not renewed and for these transactions cash is then also in demand but insufficiently supplied (under monetary despotism with its issue monopoly). That leads to further collapses of the non-cash transactions. Everyone in such a situation, who still has or gets some cash and who would, otherwise, readily pass it on, does then rather hold on to it and increases his cash demands in settlements, too, to increase his cash hoard. - Our present system is not adapted to suddenly and correspondingly increase the cash supply, but rather causes and increases the demand for it in crisis times. If a central bank were, for instance, to produce additional legal tender notes, then, during the crisis, they, too, would tend to become to a large extent hoarded, i.e. they would not be fully available for immediate turnovers and get business and employment going again. Moreover, these additional notes would remain in circulation even after the cash shortage crisis had disappeared, and would thus lead to a corresponding inflation. Legal tender notes are not sufficiently self-liquidating beyond their tax foundation. The issue monopoly and their legal tender power can push notes into circulation but do not automatically and soon withdraw them again, in sufficient payments due to the issuer, unless the government were to increase taxes accordingly. That is not always an option in politics or one that is realized, usually, if at all, only too slowly. It is rarely politically opportune or is not done fast enough and extensively enough to counterbalance any additional legal tender issue, if experience is any guide. During such sudden monetary famines (one was sensibly described by John DeWitt Warner in his "The Currency Famine of 1893", reproduced in my PEACE PLANS series), people are either free to issue and to clear their debts with their own clearing certificates or notes and make use of this opportunity or they are not free to do so and do not know how to break this kind of prohibition or do not dare to do so. Currency famines can arise only under the issue monopoly and when creditors have the formal right to demand cash, by law, jurisdiction, custom, habits, false economic teachings and practices, in short: whenever the issue of notes, coins and clearing certificates is not free or this option is not sufficiently known or realized. To the extent that people are free to clear or issue their own exchange media and know how to do so, they do become independent of the quantity of cash provided by a single issuer, who might under-issue or over-issue them. To the extent that they are free to provide alternative and competing forms of private cash, with sound value standards, they do become monetarily independent of the supply of governmental cash from some government centre, more or less bureaucratically and thus inefficiently run. To the extent that creditors are not granted the right to demand cash, under all circumstances, regardless of its availability, the cash shortages do not matter. Clearing and non-cash transactions can then go on undisturbed and even expand as required. One is then even likely to think of further improvements upon the current clearing technique, as happened e.g. in the repeated and sudden private issues of "clearing house certificates" during past cash famines. - Whenever debtors find it difficult to raise official cash but are still ready to supply their goods and services, to clear their debts, e.g. with their own goods warrants or service vouchers, both in money denominations that use a sound value standard, then they should become free to do so. The panicky demands of creditors for cash will also tend to disappear, when they, in their turn as debtors, do also become free to use clearing or self-issued notes instead of having to supply conventional cash that is still scarce, at least temporarily. Thus the legal and juridical entitlement or the commercial custom or fall-back option, to demand any exclusive currency, gold coins or legal tender paper money, in quantities which were or are not or not fast enough supplied by the monetary authorities, should be abolished, as long as the monetary authority (central banking system) is still allowed to exist, whenever its exclusive exchange media are not readily available to the otherwise sound debtors. A risky dealings in futures is involved, in this expectation or demand, which everyone thought could be readily settled with the as yet "un-grown" or "uncaught" or "un-produced" or insufficiently supplied cash. Even millionaires found it, sometimes, difficult just to pay for a cup of coffee - in cash. Precisely when a bit more cash is asked for, it is, presently, not made freely available, competitively, and this leads, instead, to more and more cash demands and thus to the at least temporary collapse of the non-cash-payment and clearing sphere, precisely because it is wrongly based on the supposed right of creditors to demand cash. By all means, let individual debtors and creditors go bankrupt when they individually contracted to engage in such risky future dealings, without insisting upon e.g. withdrawal premiums or a clearing option. But allow the general market to emancipate itself from such requirements, by freeing up the issue and the clearing option in all cases. Allow private people to competitively produce alternative and monopolized as well as coercive "cash" tokens or cash substitutes, as useful and less risky options than government-provided cash tokens inevitably are, when they are issued as monopoly money with legal tender power. The private alternatives tend to be safer e.g. through their competitive issue, optionality in their acceptance, their free market rating, alternative and agreed-upon value standard reckoning, elasticity of their issue and prearranged reflux channels and obligations, local availability or supply option whenever needed, in the quantity needed. In other words, by their inherently close ties to the values of the consumer goods and services, which the issuers offer for sale, and which these cash tokens entitle their holders to purchase them with. In short, allow alternative clearing and alternative cash settlements. Do not grant any exchange medium or value standard an exclusive and general monopoly in any country. Monetary freedom in every respect instead of monetary despotism of any kind. - If you can manage to express these considerations in one or a few clear sentences, PLEASE, do so! My verbal "inflation: is", probably, too much for most of the potential readers. It is so much easier to think only in terms of an exclusive exchange medium and value standard, as the forced and exclusive currency fanatics, including the gold bugs, are inclined to do. - JZ, 3/97, 19.2.11. - CASH & CREDIT & CLEARING & THE CREDITOR'S LEGAL & JURIDICAL AUTHORITY TO DEMAND CASH & CASH CRISES OR CURRENCY FAMINES

QUANTITY THEORY: The quantity of money depends on the rise of prices.” - Tooke, Thomas, An Inquiry into the Currency Principle, p.67. - Provided alternative sound monies can be freely supplied then price rises are one factor leading, temporarily, to a need for a larger supply of exchange media. If, instead, or at the same time, turnovers - at previous or increased prices, do also increase, then still more exchange media are required and, under monetary freedom, they could then be issued by the producers and traders of the increased goods and service offers. - When money issue is monopolised then the money supply will only rarely and temporarily adapt to variations in prices, wages etc. and the volume of trade. The existence of monetary freedom should never be presumed, as Say seems to have done, with his law, that goods and services would produce their own purchasing power. Rare metal coins or certificates and exclusive and forced currencies are not always made readily available to mediate the exchange of all goods and services at market prices. Only the providers of goods and services can supply the right quantity of sound exchange media to enable consumers to purchase all their goods and services. They provide the cover and reflux option for their competing monies - with their goods and services - in the various assortments of them, which individual consumers want and need and for which they are willing to give their goods, services and labour in return, mediated by that kind of competitive money. Compare SAY'S LAW in the amended version: Under monetary freedom, the suppliers of goods and services can themselves supply and circulate sufficient sound vouchers, goods and service certificates or "ticket money, in convenient monetary denominations," and using the same sound and optional value standards that they use in pricing out what they have to offer, to sell all of the ready for sale goods, services and labour for these vouchers, warrants or notes, assuming that there is still unsatisfied demand for their goods and services. (That can be assumed in a world in which all too many able and willing to work productively, are still unemployed, under-employed and without some basic consumer goods and services that are, in the somewhat developed countries, already taken for granted. A general and world-wide over-production has never existed. A plentiful harvest that cannot be sold fresh, immediately or soon, can, under modern conditions, be conserved for later sales also in other countries.) Without monetary and financial freedom the division of labour and free exchange or laissez faire and the market economy, free enterprise capitalism and free trade and free competition are not free and complete enough. - The supply of gold and silver and of gold and silver coins does certainly not rise with the supply of other consumer goods and services, mass produced and multiplied especially since the industrial revolution and great increase of the population and of the requirement for sound exchange media for these greatly increased outputs and turnovers. - But alternative sound exchange media and clearing options and sound value standards, both competitively supplied and used, can cope with these changes. - JZ, 24.6.85, 9.5.97, 19.2.11. - PRICE RISES,

QUANTITY THEORY: The quantity theory applies only to legal tender money. Money subject to a free market rate and voluntary acceptance or refusal can be depreciated by over issues but cannot drive up all prices freely expressed in sound value standards. – JZ, 31.5 76. – Private illegal means of exchange, which are optional, i.e. refusable and also discountable, i.e. market rated and not monopoly money at all, do no more affect the quantity of money in the meaning of the quantity theory of money, than do games tokens or the “money” of the game monopoly. They are not legal tender or monopoly money. Neither of these last two is any competitively issued free market money under full monetary freedom. This freedom also includes free choice in value standards, i.e. free market pricing for goods, services and labour goes on, no price or wage inflation occurs, because only the issuers themselves have to accept any depreciated notes of their own at par. All others will accept them only at their market rate, against any sound value standard, if at all.  – JZ, 19.6.13. - LEGAL TENDER, MONEY, MARKET RATING OF MONEY

QUANTITY THEORY: The Quantity Theory does not apply to all kinds of monies: 1.) It does not apply to prices expressed in stable value units while some exclusive currency is over-issued and thus depreciated. 2.) It does apply to the depreciation of the over-issued currency - until it is finally totally refused or recalled. 3.) It does not apply to any freely competing and not over-issued currency that does use a sound value standard rather than e.g. the paper standard of the depreciated government currency. 4.) It never applies to clearing transactions that are using sound value standards. Clearing itself, by its very nature, does not have any physical "quantity", anyhow, no matter what is the number, volume or the value of such transactions. They are all merely exchanges of goods, services and labour facilitated by clearing, using a sound value standard. When more is thus exchanged and the exchange values are cleared then the value of the clearing option or its value standard is not depreciated thereby. A sound value standard adopted for all clearing exchanges is not depreciated or appreciated by increasing or reducing the number of transactions that use it. - J. Z., 4.10.91. 27.4.97, 19.2.11.

QUANTITY THEORY: The Quantity Theory does sometimes apply and sometimes not - to free market rated money: 1.) It does not apply in case of a temporary over-issue of a competitively issued, market rated and refusable exchange medium, while prices remain expressed in stable value units and competing parallel currencies remain unchanged. It would then merely mean that this particular exchange medium would, temporarily, be somewhat depreciated. Other exchange media would not be, thereby, nor would the prices, expressed in sound value standards be changed, even though more would have to be paid for the SAME prices in the depreciated exchange medium. The prices of this issuer and the general price level would not be inflated. That exchange medium would be depreciated only in general local circulation, not in payments with it to its issuer. - 2.) However, the Quantity Theory does apply to an over-issued exchange medium that is an exclusive currency with legal tender power (Compulsory acceptance at a forced value.) It would be depreciated when issued beyond its reflux foundation as tax foundation money and its cover by goods, services and labour of those forced to accept it at par with its nominal value. Then it can be over-issued and thus increase, nominally, all prices, wages and service charges, for such increases are then the only way in which its depreciation can be taken into consideration, since the exclusive legal tender currency cannot be refused or discounted against a sound value standard. - 3.) The Quantity Theory does not apply at all to all competing, optional and soundly issued private currencies, with a sound reflux or demand or debt foundation arrangement for them (which assures their clearing nature). The more of these media would be issued, used and returned to the issuer, the more goods, services and labour hours would be turned over. The exchange media, clearing certificates and their value standards would not be depreciated thereby. The exchange media and exchanges might double but the prices would remain the same - unless there would appear some change on the goods side or in the subjective appreciation of certain goods, e.g. fashionable articles, design differences, innovations, new production processes etc. However, the tendency of all these alternative and additional means of payment would be rather to decrease than to increase the prices of all standard goods and services - even while those for luxury goods and services might go up. For then all of the usual consumer goods and services could be sold much easier, with less advertising costs, sufficient exchange media being competitively supplied for all of them. All goods, could then be easily sold. No more bankruptcy forced sales or emergency sales prices. As for services and labor prices, they might rise from emergency sales price for them to normal market prices for them. Unemployment, underemployment and correspondingly depressed wages would come to an end. Only to that extent would prices and wages go up, to their normal free market level. At the same time, more people becoming involved in production and the output becoming thus increased, and sales of he previous output and of the new production being increased and assured, prices of consumer goods would tend to go down. - 4.) The Quantity Theory does not apply at all to clearing transactions that use a sound value standard. If physically possible, and this were wanted by the participants, 10 times or 1000 times as much could be turned over tomorrow, in goods, services and labour, without the value standard being depreciated or the increase in the quantity of clearing certificates used (in as enormously increased exchange volumes) reducing the value of these clearing certificates at all. - JZ, 26.4.97, 19.2.11.

QUANTITY THEORY: When estimating the danger of inflation, one need not include the daily due deposits and the hoarded amounts of cash. - Pop opinion. - The contrary is true. Any expectation of rapid price rises will bring many of them out and lead to an acceleration of inflationary price rises. But it does not make sense to include deposits that become due only in the medium or long term future in the estimate of currency amounts that are needed and effective now for the settlement of current or near future debts, most of all for daily wanted consumer goods, services and labour. If all debts falling due in the medium of long term future were to be monetized now, by their creditors, then there would not be sufficient goods, services and labour cover for them now. The covers, for these securities will become available only day by day and year by year in the future. Future values can be "coined" into ready cash or current accounts only on a very limited basis, without causing depreciation: as a rule only values that will become available within the next 3 months. And this cover will function only as long as enough suppliers of daily wanted goods and services will already now accept such certificates like ready cash. This is quite common in retail trade, where much is sold on short-term credit, often without interest charges or even deposits. The short term IOU of good customers is considered almost as good as cash. Their promise to pay only in 3 or even 30 years is not as readily acceptable purchasing power for the recipient, it is not currency. Such capital certificates or other debts must be paid and repaid in currency which has current shop foundation and made is made available for the lending terms agreed upon. In currency questions, too, the time factor should never be ignored. In practice, sellers and buyers do not, as a rule. - JZ, n.d. & 5.4.97. – On the other hand, to the extent that these short-term deposits are invested by the bank, on short terms, and not yet repaid to it, their amounts are already in circulation thorough those, in whom the bank invested these amounts and they should not be counted twice. – 31.1.14. – JZ, SHORT TERM DEPOSITS & HOARDING

QUEEN: The Queen does not want compulsory subjects but only voluntary ones, criminals with victims and other aggressors excepted. – JZ, 30.7.98. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM, MONARCHISM

QUESTION REGARDING THE CLASSICAL GOLD STANDARD: Why should bread and butter exchanges be tied to the possession of gold? – JZ, 11.10.04. – Why should the total quantity of millions of different commodities, services and labors, which people want to exchange among themselves, be limited by the number of exchange media or clearing certificates that can be fully covered with and redeemed in a single commodity, like gold? – JZ, 22.10.07. If gold is the most stable or least unstable value standard, then its value per weight unit on a free gold market should be a good enough value standard for the purpose of gold value pricing, reckoning and accounting, without most of the traders and consumers possessing any gold coins or promising to deliver them. As an exclusive means of payment gold coins are among the least suitable ones because of the scarcity of gold. Gold weight values can be paid or cleared in any other means of payment, which the traders find acceptable. – JZ, 27.3.09. – This can be done even when other the exchange media used are also using another value standard than a gold-weight unit. The other currencies, would then tend to be accepted only at their “foreign exchange” value against the gold weight value agreed upon. – JZ, 31.1.14.

QUESTION TIME IN PARLIAMENTS: I’d rather see Keating than Question Time terminated. – JZ, 8.1.95. – Keating was then Prime Minister of Australia and Question Time in Parliament was attacked by him as an institution that was often a nuisance to him. – I would find well published and well formulated questions from the general public even more interesting as an institution. – I believe that significant and right questions should become collected and permanently published – until the right answers appear and are finally recognized as such. – Some suggestions for such questions I have marked with “Q.” – Who will help to build up such a file of questions? – The correct answers to them will be of much greater importance to mankind than e.g., which party or who will win the next elections or which club will win the next sports competition or which athlete or actor will win in the current competition. - JZ, 31.4.08.

QUESTIONS ON WAR & OTHER POLITICAL SOCIAL & ECONOMIC PROBLEMS: Are new kinds of ideas markets and talento centers as well as encyclopaedias, e.g. one of refutations of popular erros and prejudices, really required to achieve  sufficient enlightenment – by “sorting the wheat from the chaff”? – If so, why aren’t they establishe as yet? - JZ, 29. 6. 2003, 31.1.14. – IDEAS ARCHIVE, REFUTATIONS ENCYCLOPAEDIA, ENLIGHTENMENT, PUBLIC OPINION

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Are mere letters to the editor, protest meetings, petitions, marches and demonstrations good enough to effectively oppose authoritarian and warlike governments? What would real democracy and voting rights require in this sphere? What would freedom of action and freedom to experiment mean here? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW SOCIETIES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Are muclear or chemical or biological "weapons" really much safer or safe enough in the hands of any territorial government, even the best among them, than in the hands of any openly terrorist movement? They are anti-people "weapons" - and the people are nowhere given a vote on them. Should we continue, can we afford to tolerate such mass murder devices in the hands of anyone? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – Are they not terror “weapons” in anyone’s hands? – JZ, 31.1.14.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Are there rightful wars and rightful ways to conduct such wars? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Ask not only: But what can I do? A question which already indicates how helpless "they" have rendered you in this respect, but, rather: What kinds of freedom of action should I struggle for in order to become able to do something positive about the war and peace problem, much more than even the highest territorial or UN officials could do, who are also rather helpless when faced with these problems? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Can "conventional"  and "modern" wars become reduced to rightful policing actions only, directed only against the real war criminals – whenever armed clashes cannot be altogether avoided? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – Should one fight all of the conscripts of a tyrant’s armed forces or, rather, only his bodyguards? – JZ, 31.1.14. – TYRANNICIDE, HOLDING THE WAR MONGERS PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Can even the most democratic or republican government be trusted with exclusive powers to decide on war and Peace, armament and disarmament, the conduct of  rightful defences and with peace making? – JZ, 29.6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Could modern wars and arms races be conducted without compulsory taxation, forced loans and inflations, with the latter made possible only by the monopoly money of central banks and their forced currency (compulsory acceptance and forced value), i.e., by financial and monetary despotism? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do even the best of the present governments have better answers to the problems of war and peace than have been combined in my two peace books? I have long looked in vain for better books on the subject. Can you recommend any? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – Both are on - PEACE PROGRAMS, PEACE BOOKS

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do war mongers of all kinds have the right to live and to continue in their career, to be extensively and expensively protected and to finally retire on high pensions or do they fall under the tyrannicide principle and rule? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – TYRANNICIDE, WAR MONGERS

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do we even love our spouses, children, grandchildren, our boyfriends or girl friends or other family members and friends well enough - if we do not fulfil our duty to work for a free, just and thus peaceful societal arrangement? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do we have the right to choose our own friends and allies, as well as our own enemies, across all borders and within the present borders and this over the heads of "our" governments? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003, 19.2.11. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM & VOLUNTARY & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, ASSOCIATIONISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, META-UTOPIA COMPETING GOERNANCE

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do we have the right to ignore governmental and diplomatic peace-treaties and territorial governmental defence plans and commitments and alliances? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – IGNORING THE STATE, SECESSIONISM, FRATERNIZATION, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do we have the right to negotiate and conclude separate peace treaties upon rightful war and peace aims, without permission from any territorial government? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – Is it treason to betray a government, which one has not chosen for oneself but which was territorially imposed upon all peaceful dissenters in a country as well? – JZ, 31.1.14. - SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, FRATERNIZATION, TREASON, ESPIONAGE

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do we have the right to organise, arm and train rightful volunteer militias against them, for the protection of all of our individual rights and liberties? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do we have the right to secede from warlike governments? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Do we have to redefine certain treason, espionage and military disobedience actions into meritorious rather than criminal actions? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. - If they are directed against wrongful regimes, territorial ones, especially authoritarian to tyrannical ones? - JZ, 19.2.11. – TREASON, ESPIONAGE, MILITARY DISOBEDIENCE, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, REVOLUTIONS

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Does a genuine peace mean anything else than a condition under which all non-aggressive people are fully enjoying all their their individual rights and liberties? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Hasn't almost everything been prepared for another war while almost nothing has been done to produce and secure a lasting peace? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: How could one organise the widest possible citizen participation towards solving all questions on cause and cure for wars? Electronic memories and communication channels do now offer better opportunities for this than ever before but they are not yet sufficiently mobilised for this purpose, either. – JZ, 29.6.2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: How could the practice of collective responsibility become reduced to the imposition of fines upon those who remained silent on terrorist activities, wrongful war preparations, wrongful "weapons" and atrocities? – JZ, 29.6.2003. (See Bth.'s proposals on this in PEACE PLANS 61-63. - )

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Is it the duty of every mature person to work towards peaceful, just and free societies? – JZ, 29.6.2003. – DUTIES OF RATIONAL & MORAL BEINGS

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Is the mere possession of ABC mass murder "weapons" already high treason not only against other nations but also against the own? Do their owners fall by the mere possession of such terror devices already under the definition of tyrants? – JZ, 29.6.2003. – NWT, TYRANTS

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Isn't it high time to collect, combine, order, survey, discuss and criticise and publish all the supposed causes of war and cures for them, together with all the replies so far uttered to these proposals. Obviously, in no parliament or cabinet in the world and not even in the Peace Research Institutes are such questions so far sufficiently discussed and solved. – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Should children also have a say on whether there is to be another war and also a vote on peace? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Should peace-making remain a monopoly of governments, although they certainly haven't developed a peace-making science and practice as yet and have become somewhat skillful only in starting and prolonging wars and making them worse? - Should their decision-making power on war and peace, armament and disarmament, international negotiations and alliances and treaties remain a monopoly for territorial governments? - Should referendums, exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities and citizen forces dedicated to uphold individual rights and liberties have to play a role here, too? – JZ, 29.6.2003. –

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Should citizen forces have the right to mobilise themselves and to intervene, without permission from "their" governments? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – MILITIAS OF VOLUNTEERS FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDIVDIUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Should we voluntarily mobilise all related ideas, opinons, facts, talents and resources to finally clarify how to arrive at a just and lasting peace in freedom, world-wide? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Under what special conditions should even known war criminals and nuclear weapons holders be granted amnesty, asylum and protection? (Even a cornered rat is dangerous. Now imagine a cornered rate having nuclear weapons instead of teeth!) – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Was military interventionism so far mainly wrongful because it was conducted by territorial governments? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Was the last war of the USA government against the Iraq government the closest approach to a rightful war that one can expect from any territorial government? Did it have quite rightful and clear war aims only or are they full of territorial "democratic" prejudices and wrongs, for as diverse and divided populations as those in e.g. Iraq? Did the USA government fully mobilise the internal opposition against the Saddam Hussein regime or could it do so, being a territorial regime itself? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003. – GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES IN EXILE AS ALLIES

QUESTIONS ON WAR: What changes and offers would be required in foreign policy to induce the soldiers and officers of a despotic regime rather to rise against it or desert and fraternise, becoming allies or declare themselves neutral - than fight any interventionist forces that have only come to liberate all the groups in a country that were so far suppressed, forces which would fully act, quite consistently, only with that aim in mind? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: What rights and liberties and action opportunities do citizens have to acquire to render their will effective in this sphere, when neither their votes, nor their petitions, protests, marches and demonstrations are able to positively influence the top decision-makers? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: When is collaboration with the official enemy quite rightful? – JZ, 29. 6. 2003.

QUESTIONS ON WAR: Where does the duty to disobey and to resist begin? – JZ, 29.6.03.

QUESTIONS: A prudent question is one-half of wisdom.” – Francis Bacon, 1561-1626. – WISDOM, ANSWERS, SOLUTIONS

QUESTIONS: A question wrongly put cannot even be corrected by a correct answer.” – Ernst R. Hauschka. – JZ tr. of: “Eine Frage, die falsch gestellt wurde, kann durch eine richtige Antwort nicht korrigiert werden.“ – It can only be answered by correcting the question. – JZ, 29.4.08.

QUESTIONS: A well-published list of significant questions might result in some significant answers. That could now be achieved cheaply and relatively easily online, with feed-back options for answers. – One should not expect such questions to be raised and answered in parliaments. – They should appeal to all the intelligences on this planet, especially to those without a vested interest, except in their own individual rights and liberties. – This approach could also be the beginnings of an Ideas Archive and of a Talent Registry, i.e., a real market for ideas and talents. - JZ, 30.4.08. – IDEAS ARCHIVE, TALENT CENTER

QUESTIONS: A) What would you allow that is now prohibited? B) What would you permit, that is now legalized? – JZ, 13.2.05. - TO DRAW PEOPLE OUT

QUESTIONS: And there … is the answer. Not to listen; not to look. Who was it who said the badge of intellect is a question mark?” – Con Sellers, Mr. Tomorrow, p. 137. – CURIOSITY, DOUBT, INQUIRY, RESEARCH, UNDERSTANDING, SKEPTICISM, SCIENCE

QUESTIONS: Andre Malraux has stated that "a civilization can be defined at once by the basic questions it asks and by those it does not ask." - Thomas Pynchon offered the correlative observation that "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers."

QUESTIONS: Answer only important when ask the right question.” – From film “The Next Karate Kid”.

QUESTIONS: answers are always somewhere in the formulation of the question. … I had to learn how to ask my question in a specific enough way that I could be sure of understanding the answer. … the form of the question carried the language of the answer. Even more: A sufficiently precise question carried the information of the answer. … the better you get at asking questions, the fewer questions you have to ask. – Frank Herbert, Songs of a Sentient Flute, ANALOG 2/79.

QUESTIONS: Ask more questions than you answer.” - Source unknown. - At most the value in this policy lies in inducing others to think. - Sayings like: "Question authority!" make more sense to me. - JZ, 25. 11. 06, 27.3.09. - All significant and helpful libertarian questions have still not been sufficiently collected and published together, as potential enlightenment tools. – JZ, n.d. -  & ANSWERS

QUESTIONS: Do you want to live in an authoritarian society? Do you desire an intrusive government? Do you wish for a government that is a nanny state? Do you yearn for government bureaucrats to tell you what you can and cannot do? Do you like puritanical busybodies telling you how to live your life? Do you believe that the government should define and enforce morality? Do you reason that vices should be crimes? Then you should support the war on drugs. — Laurence M. Vance, “The War on Private Property” [October 18, 2012] In FFF EMAIL UPDATE, Facebook, 21.10.12.

QUESTIONS: Dumb questions will lead the questioner often only to dumb answers. – JZ, 30.4.08, 31.1.14.

QUESTIONS: How can one make liberty and rights as attractive for most men as are e.g. beautiful women? – JZ, 18.7.11, comment to Wall Photos. - I hold that an as comprehensive and clear declaration of all genuine individual rights a liberties - as could and should be compiled and published now – would greatly help. – JZ, 11.10.12. – THE POWER OF ATTRACTION, BEAUTIFUL WOMEN, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES? HUMAN RIGHTS

QUESTIONS: If you ask a question the right way, you’ve just given the answer.” – Theodore Sturgeon, Slow Sculpture, GALAXY, Feb. 80, p. 52. – RED.

QUESTIONS: If you ask the right questions you will have a much better chance at arriving at the right answers. – JZ, 23.8.94.

QUESTIONS: In order to ask a question you must already know most of the answer.” – Robert Sheckley, Ask a Foolish Question! – DOUBTS, QUESTING MINDS

QUESTIONS: It is not the answer that enlightens, but the question.” - Descouvertes. - Not always but often! - JZ, 29.1.02. - ANSWERS & ENLIGHTENMENT

QUESTIONS: My mini-peace questionnaire of 1984 contained 3 simple questions: 1.) What do you understand under the term “civil and international peace?” – 2.) What do you consider to be the main foundation stones for this peace? – 3.) How, according to you, could this kind of peace be achieved? I micro-fiched the answers in PEACE PLANS 650 and one by Fred Foldvary in PP 869. PP 650 was digitized by me and is offered for the time being as an email attachment but some later answers are still to be entered into this digitization. Who will put all these questions and answers online with an entry option for further ones plus criticism of the past ones? – How many people were killed in wars and civil wars since 1984? – Who does really care about these losses? - JZ, 30.4.08. - My incomplete peace Q & A compilation is on the disc that is online at - JZ, 19.2.11.

QUESTIONS: One does not have to have an answer to every question – because a question is often the better answer.” – Luwein. JZ tr. of: “Man muss nicht auf jede Frage ein Antwort haben, weil eine Frage oft die bessere Antwort ist.“ – RED. – Many questions need to be questioned themselves, as being wrongly and misleadingly put. – JZ, 29.4.08.

QUESTIONS: Question everything, at least once. – JZ, 30.4.08. - DOUBT

QUESTIONS: Questions & Answers: If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers. - Thomas Pynchon. – Ask the right, the optimal questions. A short set of questions can help you decide whether it is worthwhile to further engage in discussions with a person. A libertarian questionnaire or even a book full of intelligent libertarian questions could be very thought-provoking. – Our armory should also be filled with this kind of intellectual ammunition. – JZ, 4.1.08. - THOUGHT PROVOKING ONES

QUESTIONS: Should parents have to get a government licence for a second and further children (like in Red China) that they are able and willing to support? – The unchecked premise is that “overpopulation” is real or a real threat for the future. – In the already somewhat free countries, with falling populations and obesity a problem, it would make more sense to ask: should parents get a licence not to have children or only one or two? But that would be a wrongful and questionable demand, too. - JZ, 30.4.08, 19.2.11. – OVERPOPULATION, CHILDREN, PARENTS, , SIGNIFICANT ONES

QUESTIONS: The great questions are those an intelligent child asks and, getting no answers, stops asking.” - George Wald - I rather think that the greatest questions are those which children never ask and adults, even at mature age, only very rarely and without seriously looking for an answer! - See e.g., their stands towards the nature of money and of monetary freedom, panarchism, the Ideas Archive, self-management options, war and peace, libertarianism. - There are also all too many people, young and old, who, given a rightful and rational answer, manage to ignore it!  - JZ, 11.2.02. - We need an easily accessible record of all the great questions asked and not yet satisfactorily answered. It could be part e.g. of a libertarian projects list or of a libertarian ideas archive or libertarian encyclopedia. Demand and supply should be systematically brought together by a special market in this sphere as well. Compare: Ideas Archive. – JZ, 26.12.07. At least in Websites compilations of Q’s & A’s on certain questions have now become relatively popular. – JZ, 27.3.09. - GREAT QUESTIONS, INTELLIGENCE, JUDGMENT, DOUBT CHILDREN

QUESTIONS: The history of science knows scores of instances where an investigator was in the possession of all the important facts for a new theory but simply failed to ask the right questions.” - Ernst Mayr – Mayer?- JZ - DOUBTS, INVESTIGATIONS, TRUTH SEEKING, RESEARCH, FACTS

QUESTIONS: The most important questions are rarely ever put and still more rarely sufficiently answered. – And most are usually ignored by the public, sometimes for centuries. – Thus they need the special market of an ideas archive and a talent center. - JZ, 21.1.79, 30.4.08. - Perhaps also a special market for important questions and answers. - JZ, 19.2.11.

QUESTIONS: The questions lead to that which lastingly remains.” – Kaestner. – JZ rough translation of: “Die Fragen sind es, aus denen das, was bleibt, entsteht.” – SEARCHING FOR ANSWERS, RED.

QUESTIONS: There are bogus questions and real questions. Politicians allow us only to decide on bogus questions not on real and important ones. For instance, whether Australia should become a republic or remain a part of the British Commonwealth, with the Queen as its figure-head and her Governor General as her representative for Australia. What annoys the ruling politicians is that in the Governor General there exists a constitutional counter-force against their excesses. An Australian Federal Government can be recalled by the Governor General and that does not suit the Australian power addicts among the politicians. They want to monopolize e..g. the call for another election. The dismissal of the Whitlam regime was a classical case for a Governor General. It was confirmed by the landslide victory of the opposition party in the election that followed that recall. For the dismissed it was a bitter pill to swallow. They were all power addicts. Even for individualist anarchists and panarchists like me the Governor General is at least one safety valve for the Australian people against governmental power abuses. Not a sufficient or quite satisfactory one, but one worthwhile, until we can secede from any territorial government like from a church, sect or football club. – Naturally, a government so dismissed for all of the people of Australia should have the right to continue ruling over its remaining voluntary followers. But that solution did not occur to the dismissed ALP government. It and the major opposition party, the Liberal Party, continued to think and rule only in territorial terms. – They do not know and appreciate anything better. – JZ, 24.6.91, 29.4.08. - AUSTRALIA A REPUBLIC? REFERENDUM, GOVERNOR GENERAL, PANARCHISM, REPUBLICANISM, DEMOCRACY, COMMONWEALTH, QUEEN, MONARCHY, TERRITORIALISM

QUESTIONS: There are many significant questions (e.g. on free banking, panarchism, rightful militias, tyrannicide, nuclear strength, enemies, unemployment, inflation) that one could and should ask politicians, mass media, most people, even academics, with more than a minimal chance for getting a sensible answer. – JZ, 4.7.93.

QUESTIONS: Those, who are not troubled by questions know all the answers.” – Dagobert D. Runes, A Dictionary of Thought. – They only imagine that they know them. – JZ, 19.6.89. – RED.

QUESTIONS: Usually good questions are needed to arrive a good answers. It has often been even observed that a really good question almost answers itself. – JZ, 5.8.07. - If that is true, then it would be worthwhile to collect and publish really good questions as a means to open and develop minds towards real truths and solutions. Perhaps in the appendix, like with riddles, answers should be provided or at least attempted, but still better answers should be asked for – for future editions. Such a collection and reference work could almost write itself, online, if a good start is made for it by someone. Will you be the one? What I can do at present and at most, is collect some suggestions for such questions in this alphabetized collection of “slogans” etc. for liberty. Many good questions can be found e.g. in the writings of Michael Cloud, collaborator of the Advocates and in their email newsletter. Not only good libertarian jokes, poems and songs, all very rare still, but also good libertarian riddles might also become used for propaganda purposes. – JZ, 22.10.07. - LEADING & ENLIGHTENING QUESTIONS, COLLECTION & PUBLICATION

QUESTIONS: We should not waste time with people to whom we can neither convey freedom ideas nor receive some from. – JZ, 2.4.05. – Lists of such characterizing questions should be compiled, different in accordance with the priorities of the questioner. They could save us spending too much time with people unlikely to share our interests sufficiently. – JZ, 27.3.09. - TO FIND OUT WHETHER A PERSON IS WORTH CONVERSING WITH

QUESTIONS: What thought provoking questions can you ask that will stimulate their interest in liberty? What questions would intrigue or hook them? What questions would prompt them to say: “Tell me more”? What questions about government or liberty would tempt or tantalize them?” - Michael Cloud, Secrets of Libertarian Persuasion, The Advocates for Self-Government, 2004, - p.85. – Instead of each trying, separately, to think of optimal questions of such kinds, all such questions should be collected sorted, discussed, further improved and then published together, for use by everyone, according to his choices. Perhaps hints towards the successes of particular questions should be added, too. – This book of his offers already many good questions of this kind. Many more should be collected and published! – M. C. has already something like this in mind, for he writes, on page 114: “A Persuasion Script File is a collection of effective libertarian answers, questions and phrases.” … Every one will need to be tested, re-phrased and re-tested. Those that work will be recorded in your Persuasion Script File. – And we should combine all our files of this kind, mutually improve them and then publish them all, thoroughly, together! - They should not be kept private and secret. M.C. wrote: “Harry Browne’s extraordinary performances on TV and radio were the result of developing and mastering his own Persuasion Scripts. Of building an exceptional file. – Carla Howell’s Persuasion Script File was the foundation of her brilliant performances on TV and radio during her 2002 Libertarian ballot initiative to end the income tax in Massachusetts. - Frankly, this is my secret, too. You can rise to the heights of libertarian persuasion – if you build a strong foundation with your own Persuasion Script File." – ibid, page 115: - Why keep it secret, rather than sharing and combining these secrets of thousands and making them easily and fast accessible to all? – M.C. does that somewhat in his books. But as yet sufficiently? – I have whole encyclopedias of such references in mind, portable and electronic ones. -JZ, 30.9.07.

QUESTIONS: Who will be or should be the next President or Prime Minister? Who will be or should be the next party leader? Who will or should win the next election? The right questions to ask should rather be: Should there be a President or Prime Minister for all the people in a territory? Should there be a party struggle for territorial domination? – JZ, 30.4.08.

QUESTIONS: Why are we so much better at answering than at asking the right questions? Is it because we are trained at school and university to answer questions that others have asked? If so, should we be trained to ask questions? – Trevor A. Kletz, submitted by Ron Ward in ANALOG 1/94, p. 195.

QUESTIONS: Why, he wondered, did so many people spend their lives not trying to find answers to questions – not even thinking of questions to begin with? Was there anything more exciting in life than seeking answers?” – Isaac Asimov, Prelude to Foundation, p.267. - DISINTEREST, APATHY, CURIOSITY

QUESTIONS: you weren’t asking questions but making a speech.” – Eric Ambler, The Case of Time, p. 156. - LONG-WINDED QUESTIONS COMBINED WITH STATEMENTS, LOADED QUESTIONS, RED.

QUITTERS: Too many people quit in the pursuit of a worthy aim before they have even seriously begun. They turn the idea and the remaining opportunities down and do not even attempt to create new opportunities. On the other hand, in quitting from territorial and coercive organizations, whenever and wherever this is already possible, and even in merely exploring this freedom, we prepare ourselves for many of the possible and the desirable answers. Under this freedom, fully realized, even failed utopian attempts will have their lessons to tell. – JZ, 1.1.77, 30.4.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, PERSISTENCE, COURAGE, REFORMS, REVOLUTIONS, RESISTANCE

QUITTING: The right to quit and the right to start are basic aspects of the right to life. – Leonard E. Read, Having My Way, XI. – More completely he expressed himself on page 155: “The right to quit is fully as important as the right to start. To deny any man either of these rights is to deny him his right to life. It is to freeze him into his position regardless of how ill-chosen it might be and to erect a barrier to opportunities irrespective of the wonderful promises they may hold. It is to immobilize and stop the growth of an erstwhile living human being. Making things out of humans is inhuman!” - Alas, he never applied this right to whole political, economic and social systems, i.e. to his kind of supposedly ideal “limited government” as well, still a territorial one, under the illusion that it would be possible, some day, merely by educational methods, to convince all or the majority of statists at once, that it could be their ideal as well. He did not stand up for the right of libertarians to separate themselves, non-territorially, from the statists and that of the statists to separate themselves, non-territorially, from the libertarians. But that was just one mistake in an otherwise very creative and effective life. Nobody is perfect. –At least in the monetary sphere he favored, in short and very general terms, full experimental freedom. - JZ, 30.4.08. – INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, PANARCHISM, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, OPTING OUT

QUITTING: We need freedom for quitters. – JZ, 2.1.77. - It is as important and rightful as freedom for joiners. – JZ, 29.4.08. – But it is not correct to give u[ and quit prematurely, before one has tried out all likely possibilities – if a case is really worthwhile. – JZ, 27.3.09. - VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, DISASSOCIATION, WITHDRAWAL

QUORUM: Enough people to start the quarrel.” – Anon. – A feature of authoritarian, centralized and monopolized decision-making – instead of letting dissenters go their own way, at the own expense and risk. That is already the usual way for shareholders who are free to sell their shares in the open market and invest the returns otherwise, as soon as they are dissatisfied with management decisions based on the approval of most other shareholders. – JZ, n.d. - Thus a number of people have already proposed exterritorially autonomous societies of shareholders, although most of them are not explicit about their inevitably exterritorial and, inherently, also cosmopolitan nature. - JZ, 19.2.11. - VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM, MAJORITIES, MINORITIES, DECISION-MAKING, DEMOCRACY, SHAREHOLDER SOCIETIES, , PARTIES, EXTERRITTORIALISM, COSMOPOLITANISM, TERRITORIALISM, FACTIONALISM

QUOTAS: I don’t believe in quotas. America was founded on a philosophy of individual rights, not group rights.” – Clarence Thomas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice. - I suppose he meant quotas for immigrants from different countries. - JZ 23.11. 06. – It did not recognize the rights of slaves and women for a long time and still does not include all individual rights and liberties. Neither does any other territorial State. It is also wrong to speak of all of North-, Middle- and SouthAmerica, as if it had ever been a single State like the USA. Individual rights lead also to group rights, like minority rights of like-minded people, choosing different institutions and customs for themselves, but never at the expense and risk of others. Immigration quotas simply infringe a single individual rights and liberty for all people, namely the right to free migration on Earth. However, communities and societies of volunteers, who established certain welfare services among themselves, should be free to refuse these services to any claimants they dislike and refuse to accept as members, just like exclusive clubs of like-minded volunteers. Membership in all association is not an individual right or liberty for all, only the freedom to leave any association or to establish any association is always rightful, if it does respect or at least tolerate the different aims, purposes and means which other associations do have for their members, always at the own expense and risk – JZ, 25.4.13. – VOLUNTARISM, TOLERANCE FOR THE TOLERANT, FREE MIGRATION, REFUSAL TO ACCEPT CERTAIN KINDS OF NEW MEMBERS IN ANY ASSOCIATION, THE RIGHT TO ASSOCIATE & ITS LIMITS, IMMIGRATION QUOTAS, IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS, PROTECTIONISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

QUOTAS: Liberty had no quota at all.” – Douglas Woodruff, Plato’s American Republic, 1926, p.50. - Yes, it has, namely the law of equal liberty and equal rights to all who are up to these standards, as sufficiently rational beings. Otherwise they have only the right not to be unnecessarily deprived of their lives and not to be cruelly treated. – One might also say: Freedom and rights have no other limits than themselves, as represented in other beings that are rational enough for their practice. - JZ, 30.4.08. – RATIONALITY, PROTECTIONISM, IMMIGRATION BARRIERS, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENT, ALLOCATIONS, LIBERTY, FREEDOM, PLANNING, AUTHORITARIANISM, BUREAUCRACY, RATIONALITY, RIGHTS,

QUOTAS: would it not be just if, after a hard day’s ill-paid work, you could exchange the little you had received for the greatest amount of satisfaction that you could obtain from any man on the face of the earth?” – Bastiat, in G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.113. – One might add: Why should it have to be badly paid, in governmental monopoly money, when under freedom you could be well paid,for your productive efforts,  in an optional, market-rated, competing and thus sound and sufficient currency, one that would promote rather than restrict free exchanges? – JZ, 30.4.08, 31.1.14. - PROTECTIONISM, IMPORT RESTRICTIONS, FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROLS, FREE TRADE, FREE EXCHANGE, FREELY FLOATING EXCHANGE RATES, MONETARY FREEDOM, JUSTICE, PRICE CONTROLS

QUOTATION BOOKS: Altogether ca. 15 000 were counted years ago. I collected only a few dozen and have not even yet listed these few as yet. But here I mention at least 3 – just because I saw them recently mentioned: 1.) Peter's Quotations, compiled by Lawrence J. Peter. 2.) Aphorisms, selected by John Gross. 3.) The Most Brilliant Thoughts of All Time, edited by John M. Shanahan. – - To peruse all of them, in search for the best freedom quotations, would be a job for many people, in division of labor. A common list of these titles could be used for all participants and could be put online to indicate who has already somewhat dealt with any of these titles, to avoid duplication of such work. – JZ, 5.1.08. – I consider “digging” for good quotes, questions, jokes, refutations to be more worthwhile than digging for gold or other hidden treasures. – JZ, 27.3.09, 31.1.14.



QUESTIONS, SOME PANARCHIST QUESTIONS, PEACE & FREEDOM: Extract from “ON PANARCHY” No.VI, published in PEACE PLANS No.671. - Some relevant extracts from my Pan A Z compilation, which comes to several MBs.: Here slightly edited today, 11.8.05.



A Questionnaire with Some Answers

Is the membership in any kind of anarchistic community, collective, society or cooperative ever to become compulsory?

Are non-anarchists only to be given the choice: death or adoption of anarchism for them-selves?

Are anarchists prepared to tolerate statist activities among statists adults in the same way as they want their anarchistic activities among themselves tolerated by the present statists?

Are anarchists sufficiently in favor of free individual choices to permit other people to make quite different choices for themselves than anarchists would make for their own groups?

Or do most anarchists, in common with most statists and authoritarians, centralists, unity fanatics, territorialists etc., want to permit only one type of supposedly ideal society to exist in any country, province, region or district at any one time?

Should we therefore distinguish between voluntaryist anarchists and authoritarian anarchists?

If one really believes in any kind of system then one always tends to imagine that all others could or should share one's beliefs and that one day they will. But should one be prepared to wait as long as would be necessary to persuade all?

Should one, thereupon, postpone the realization of anarchy until all have become anarchists - if ever?

Or should one, rather, aim at alternative institutions for all who desire them, i.e., at minority autonomy, at doing one's own thing, at one's own risk and expense, while leaving all others free to do their own thing, however hateful that thing may be to oneself?

If membership in anarchistic communities and societies is not to be compulsory, then what about the however limited liberties and rights which the others want to retain or realize for themselves?

Are they to be free to organize and limit them in accordance with their own choices, quite undisturbed by anarchists whom they would leave free to do their own thing?

If so, then let us state this now and quite clearly: Primarily and as realists and advocates of the rights and liberties of others, we want only anarchism for anarchists and do FAVOR statism for statists, according to their own free choices. - "The libertarians say: Let those who believe in religion have religion; let those who believe in government, have government; but let those who believe in liberty, have liberty, and do not compel them to accept a religion or a government they do not want." - Charles T. Sprading, in his introduction to "Liberty and the Great Libertarians".- Instead of: "No nation can long endure half free and half enslaved", panarchists say: No nation can long endure when one section cannot be as free as it wants to be while the other is not allowed to be as un-free as it wants to be. - Or they say, with Mary Chisholm: Nothing but what is voluntary deserves the name of national. Organizationally this would, naturally, require some changes, preparations and precautions. - The only quite fundamental ones would be VOLUNTARY MEMBERSHIP, based on individual secessionism and NON-TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION, under contracts or the personal law of one's OWN choosing. - In other words: Minority and majority autonomy for all who desire it, based on individual sovereignty, shared and combined as much as individuals want to. - JZ, draft of 1986. Slightly revised: 10.12.04. & 11.8.05.



QUESTIONS, QUESTIONNAIRES TO PUBLICIZE PANARCHIST IDEAS? Perhaps a questionnaire could help? It might put up a dozen or several dozen questions like the following attempt to construct, collect and later arrange, in optimal order, some leading questions that steer in the direction of panarchism or polyarchism and utilize already existing notions and sentiments. Many more such questions are dispersed over my panarchist notes and should all be brought together, with other such questions under this heading, towards the selection of the most suitable ones. - JZ, 16.10.04.

Q: Do you know a territorial solution to the problem of involuntary mass unemployment, inflation, poverty, war, civil war and terrorism?

Q: Have you considered the exterritorial alternative options for solutions? - JZ, 25.11.93, 9.1.99. - If not, why not? Mental laziness? Addiction to territorialism? Any particular reason or motive? - JZ, 11.8.05.

Q: Are you opposed to others experimenting with possible solutions, if they would so at their own risk and expense? - JZ, 8.12.03. -

Q: Why should the defeated parties be deprived of self-government? - JZ, 13.10.04.

Q: Why should we tolerate political hierarchies any more than religious ones?

Q: Why should we allow any government, which has not our individual consent for this, to impose any economic, political or social system upon us? – JZ, 25.11.93, 9.1.99.

Q: To whom does your own life belong? To you or to the territorial authorities?

Q: Are you self-owned or public property, partly or fully?

Q: Do you believe in self-ownership or in being a "national resource"?

Q: What should apply to your life, your choices or those of others?

Q: Who should rule your life? You or they?

Q: Who should exercise your rights and liberties? You or they?

Q: To whom does your property belong? To you or to them?

Q: To whom does your income, your house and other property belong? To you or to them?

Q: To whom belong the returns from your labor, the values you added to the products or services of others, as measured on a free market? Should they be taxed, 10 % or even 100 %, without your consent, without proper billing for services wanted by you, ordered and received?

Q: Should you be forced to pay tribute to any authority?

Q: Who should be responsible for your family? You or they?

Q: Who should determine how, when, where and for what you spend your money? You or they?

Q: Who should determine your marriage conditions? You or they?

Q: Who should determine the details of your exchanges, e.g. the exchange medium or value standard used. You or they?

Q: Do you prefer genuine self-government, self-rule, self-determination, self-reliance, self-help, self-control or would you rather be a controlled, managed and directed subject, a serf of a territorial State, a slave of its mis-education and military and tax system, subject to many more laws and regulations than you would even ever have time to read?

Q: Should you be a serf of politicians and bureaucrats?

Q: Should you run you life in your just and rational self-interest or become the sacrifice or the resource for the irrational and unjust self-interest of others?

Q: Have you a right to act egoistically or only a legal and moral obligation to act altruistically?

Q: Do you have to give your consent when others want to cannibalize your life & your property?

Q: Are you the property of the State?

Q: Are you the proper resource for all who claim that their need is greater than yours?

Q: Do you have a greater right to all of what you have earned or have otherwise peace-fully and honestly acquired, than anyone else, even the State?

Q: Who should determine the kind, choices, institutions, policies, rules, principles and methods of your community, you and like-minded people or people who strongly disagree with you and who many outnumber you?

Q: Should you only be free to boycott some private goods and services but not to boycott, ignore, withdraw or secede from any exploitative monopoly, any despotism, any authoritarian, bureaucratic, exploitative, aggressive, even totalitarian territorial State, no matter how supposedly benevolent and in the public interest its declared aims and practised methods are?

Q: Have you really given your consent to all the things that your supposed representatives are doing to you and others?

Q: Is the foreign policy of your rulers really to be obligatory for you? Should you be bound by their war or peace decisions, their choice of allies and enemies, their international treaties, without having any real say or decision-making power in this sphere, although your life and the lives of your children, friends and other associates are at stake, too?

Q: Should you pick all your goods and services and pay for them or should they be selected, allocated and rationed to you - by politicians and bureaucrats and paid for out of general tax revenue?

Q: If you prefer to pay your own way, why should any and supposedly public services be imposed upon you, at monopoly prices or paid for out of your taxes?

Q: Why should your consumer sovereignty be confined only to private dealings while public services and disservices by the greatest monopoly organizations are forced upon you via constitutional and legal privileges?

Q: Should you be free to pick your trade, job, profession, residence, tour, entertainment, books, music, clothing, painting, hair style etc. or should they be determined for you by politicians and bureaucrats, as their monopoly services and disservices are, at your expense and risk?

Q: Should you be free to pick your friends, partners, allies, service providers, non-associates and enemies or should they be allocated to you by politicians and bureaucrats, as they are by their foreign policies, laws and treaties?

Q: Should foreign policy decisions always remain foreign to you, quite out of your reach, although they do greatly affect your life and you are often very much in disagreement with the foreign policies of your territorial government? Should you be free to opt out of them and make your own decisions in this sphere, together with like-minded people?

Q: Should only a few others decide, whether you are to become involved in another war or should you, yourself, have a significant say on this question, deciding upon a separate peace or neutrality or even effective opposition to your own government in this respect?  - JZ, 11.8.05.

Q: Do you believe that it was e.g. the duty or the right of subjects of Hitler, Stalin or Mao to obey their murderous, oppressive and exploitative commands? Should they have had the right to secede from them? Should the enemies of these regimes have given every possible encouragement and support so such secessionists? - JZ, 11.8.05.

Q: Should you be free to pick your sports or other physical actions or should there be equal and compulsory physical training for all, all at the same time and in public places, as happened e.g. in Red China?

Q: Should you be able to pick the location of your residence and job or should they be allocated to you by bureaucrats, as they were for serfs under feudalism?

Q: Have you got sufficient reasons to be satisfied with the public policy and public service choices politicians and bureaucrats made in their internal and external policies, with budgets from revenues that you were forced to contribute to? Or would you rather have made your own individual choices in all these spheres, or made your choices only within communities of like-minded individuals?

Q: Should you design your garden, your interior decoration etc., or would you have to obey the rules prescribed by others for this? Why should you be subjected to the rules of others in any other spheres?

Q: Should you determine which rights and liberties you may use, when, where and to what extent, or should politicians and bureaucrats make all these decisions for you or "regulate" and "control" them, supposedly in the interest of the public, never minding your own interests?

Q: Have you, individually, given any politician or bureaucrat any god-like powers over your own life?

Q: Have you given any politician or bureaucrat power of attorney?

Q: Are the politicians that decide all too much about your own life any more human or less human than you are?

Q: Should we only be individually free to choose our own religion, our own gods, but not our own politicians and bureaucrats?

Q: Are politicians and bureaucrats so superior beings that they ought not to be subject to individual choices but may be rightfully imposed by majorities upon dissenting minorities and this in spite of the fact that we have (by now in many, not yet in all countries) individual free choice towards the deities that we choose for ourselves in our religious lives? Are politicians and bureaucrats superior Gods? At least sometimes they seem to believe that they are and sometimes act like them, mostly to our regret.

Q: Are politicians and bureaucrats any more "loving fathers" or "loving mothers" than our Gods are?

Q: Why should panarchism remain confined to religion, science, technology, arts, crafts, gardening, fashions, architecture and life styles, mere ordinary consumer sovereignty, instead of being expanded to political, economic and social systems, where it is needed most of all and where justice requires it most? To each his own! – JZ, 25.1.05.

At least dozens, if not hundreds or thousands such questions might be added and then a fraction of them, as supposedly the most hard-hitting and thought-provoking, might be selected from them, after sufficient revision.

They must be hard questions - but with as obvious answers as possible, to overcome the strengths of conventional politicians and bureaucracies.




Could panarchism or polyarchy or full experimental freedom or exterritorial minority autonomy really lead towards peace, freedom, justice, prosperity & progress for everybody, in our time, and towards all the diverse societies that individuals wish for themselves? Could they release all creative energies? - Check out e.g  &   - If this is really the case, then this could be the most important message you ever received and should pass on. Please save it and insert it in all your e-mails, to all your contacts, at least once. But first do also check it out yourself and submit your pro and con to at least these sites! You might thus become one of the new "Founding Fathers"! For now you are not committing yourself to more than putting this question to others. - Optional extras: E.g.: 1.) I checked it out and found the material interesting, 2.) appealing, 3.) challenging, 4.) excellent - or 5.) doubtful but worth checking out more closely. 6.) It did not yet convince me. But what do you think about it? 7.) Add whatever comments you want to add. - Do your bit for freedom and peace etc., as easily! - John Zube - 18.1.2005. - You may leave out this contact address or add your own, as you please! - Under Pan Questions, I have by now accumulated a number of supposedly stimulating questions on the subject, 171 Kbs. in WORD, 57 KBs zipped. I would gladly send them to anyone interested nor even wishing to put them online or wishing to add his own questions of this kind or to respond to one of those put forward by others. Someone might even be able to put them online, with an option for further entries there. - JZ, 14.9.11. - See also the files ADVERTISING OPTIONS USING EMAIL ADDITIONS, PUBLICITY OPTIONS, EMAIL OPTIONS, COLLABORATION OPTIONS. - See also: ZUBE, JOHN, QUESTIONNAIRE TO PUBLICIZE PANARCHIST IDEAS?

The best, i.e. most effective refutations of errors, prejudices, fallacies, wrong assumptions and conclusions, are probably those, which their holders produce themselves - when they are challenged to do so by stimulating questions, which are not too provocative, contradictory, down-putting or insulting but do require and invite self-thinking. – JZ, 19.6.13.



[Home] [Top]