An Anthology of
Wisdom & Common Sense
On the personal and social changes required to achieve
freedom, peace, justice, enlightenment, progress & prosperity in our time
Index - V
(1973 - 2012)
VALAS, ALEXIS, LES SÉPARATIONS D'ÉTATS. L'ORGANISATION DES NATIONS UNIES, LA SÉCESSION DES PEUPLES ET L'UNITÉ DES ÉTATS. Thèse pour le Doctorat en droit présentée et soutenue publiquement devant le jury de l'Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris II) par M. Alexis VAHLAS. Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris II) Droit, Économie et Sciences socials. - Date de soutenance: 13 janvier 2000 - - 577 pages, including over 50 pages of bibliography. 1.83 Mbs. Pointed out to me by C.B. It seems to deal exclusively with territorial secessions, from very small to large ones. I did not notice any chapter or reference on exterritorial secessionism autonomy in the contents list or its long bibliography. - 4.71 Mbs - when I converted it to WORD. With my school French I can't cope with it. - But in the English titles in its long bibliography there was none that interested me. - How can one write so many pages about territorial secessionism without any statement on its rightful and voluntaristic opposite? But that is typical for the immense literature on territorial politics. - JZ, 25.9.11. - TERRITORIALISM & ITS SECESSIONISM, Q.
VALENCIA, LORRAINA M.: 52, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585, & 6-7, 13, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PEACE PLANS 901.
VALUE FOR VALUE: a free society, a society, which gives them the opportunity to deal with other free men on a value-for-value basis. And when men no longer fulfill their needs and desires on a value-for-value basis, the code of ethics necessarily becomes “ever man for himself” and “anything goes”. – Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p. 118. – Compare Don Werkheiser's distinction between single convenience and mutual convenience relationships. - JZ, 1.4.11. - EXCHANGE, TRADE, FREE TRADE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & CHOICE, VOLUNTARISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, FREE ENTERPRISE, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY & FREE EXCHANGE IN EVERY SPHERE, FREE TRADE FOR GOVERNANCE OR SOCIETAL SERVICES
VALUE: most of these government activities can be maintained only under violence. Thus, under freedom of choice, many activities that different individuals think good, necessary, and valuable, would be dropped. But value, it has been conclusively proved, can be determined only by free market processes, not by the enforced will of one, or by any other authoritarian arrangements.” – Leonard E. Read, Instead of Violence, p.23. - But there are also many things that are, at least potentially, very valuable, although most people do not appreciate them or do not know of them at all and they have thus no market value, especially when no free market has as yet been established for them. That applies particularly to obscure or new but inherently valuable ideas and talents that most people remain today unaware of, often for a long time. To these belong, obviously, many libertarian ideas and talents. Should we declare them to be valueless because they do not yet have a popular enough reception? – JZ, 15.8.08, 20.8.12. - All territorially imposed "values" should be dropped. To each his own value system, as long as he does not interfere with the self-chosen value system of others. - JZ, 1.4.11. - BUDGET, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, WELFARE STATE, VOLUNTARISM
VALUE: The principle of equal opportunity operates as a restriction on governmental power, commanding government to leave each man to pursue the values of his life as he sees fit. (*) – It is not the role of government to determine what values a man should pursue – nor to hire think-tank intellectuals to declare what values should guide a man’s life.” – Anne Wortham, THE FREEMAN, 5/75. - (*) Panarchism demands no more, but also no less! – JZ, 15.8.08, 20.8.12.
VALUE: Value for value received.” - Proverb - FREE EXCHANGE, MUTUALISM, VOLUNTARISM
VALUER GENERAL: He acts as an agent for the official expropriators of the value of much of our real estate assets. The market value of our property is for them at best only one factor that is somewhat taken into consideration. And if we do not sell the property at all, we are taxed on its fictitiously but officially determined value anyhow. Another bureaucrat, legally operating by his own standards and getting away with it. Nothing but exterritorial secessionism by individuals and groups could make a clean enough break with all such bureaucrats and their cohorts. – They cannot be enlightened or reformed. The constitute the ultimate in third party and wrongfully legalized vested interests – in your own affairs, your own life and your own property. They are the modern feudal lords and treat us as their serfs and are very righteous about it. - JZ, n.d. & 15.8.08. - TERRITORIALISM, RATES, SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY
VALUES, LET LIVE: let individuals live by their own values as long as they do not impose them on others." - Fred Foldvary, THE CONNECTION, 115p91.
VALUES: We should … be able to see that our interest would be best served not by asking the state to promulgate our values but by forbidding the state to promulgate any values at all. If the state can espouse some value that we love, it can, with equal justice, espouse others we do not love.” - Richard Mitchell. - The values common to all territorial States and governments are very different from the values of all moral and rational individuals. - JZ, 22.8.02. – They are, largely, merely the “value” of power addicts. – J.Z., 20.8.12. - & THE STATE, GOVERNMENT, POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS, POWER ADDICTS, TERRITORIALISM
VALUES: When people have strong values, they can survive hard economic times. When they have dissolute values, they can't even survive prosperity.” - Harry Henderson - firstname.lastname@example.org - If their strong values included monetary and financial freedom and other economic liberties, then they would hardly experience any hard economic times. For then involuntary mass unemployment, depressions, inflations and stagflations could be overcome almost instantly. If their values included individual sovereignty, individual secessionism and exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities, then they could gain the minority autonomy, freedom of action and experimental freedom required to rapidly find out and demonstrate the best solutions to the remaining political, economic and social problems, all at their own expense and risk. – JZ, n.d.
VAN DYCK, E. A.: Reports on the Capitulations of the Ottoman Empire. Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 3. 46. Cong., Special Session, and Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 87. 47. Cong., 1. sess.
VARIETY: In a world where you could spend a lifetime looking for two snowflakes alike, it amazes me that variety as a quality of life is not more appreciated.” – SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 2/78 – A poster might display images of 100 to several hundred snowflakes, all different, with the inscription: “Even we are all different. And isn’t this beautiful?” – JZ, n.d. & 8.6.82. – Think of the differences even between beautiful flowers and beautiful people. “Vive la difference!” Not only when it comes to the sexual difference between men and women but also to the differences between all men and all women. No two of them are quite alike. So why should all of them become forced into a single governance, societal or community system? – “It takes all types to make a world.” - JZ, 20.8.12. – Q., DIVERSITY, INDIVIDUALISM, INEQUALITY, VARIATION
VARIETY: Man loves variety – and yet he does not love it enough, at least not in some of the most important spheres. There he is, all too often, rather a territorialist and unity or unification addict or egalitarian. – JZ, 20.8.93, 20.8.12. - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUALISM, DIVERSITY, DECENTRALIZATION, INDIVIDUALISM, CHOICE
VARIETY: One ought to have a system under which all varieties can be tried.” – Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom, p.154, when discussing varieties of medical practices. – Why only in that sphere? – JZ, 20.8.12. – Q., PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, IN HEATH & ALSO IN MOST OTHER RESPECTS, ALTERNATIVES
VARIETY: There is a vital truth contained in ecology, according to Bookchin, and this is that “if we wish to advance the unity and stability of the natural world, if we wish to harmonize it, we must conserve and promote variety.” – Murray Bookchin, quoted in Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.554. – Here we should take into consideration that man has not only wiped out some species but also bred many new ones, e.g. in form of pets, farm animals, cultured plants, flowers and, unfortunately, also in harmful microbes and viruses, etc., intended for warfare, while territorialism and its warfare States do still exist. – JZ, 15.8.08. - CONSERVATION, ECOLOGY
VARIETY: This book presents the facts of human individuality in clear non-technical language. It shows why advances in all fields, from politics to medicine, must be based on the infinite variety that exists.” - R. J. Williams, You Are Extraordinary. - DIFFERENCES, INEQUALITY VS. EQUALITY & EGALITARIANISM, INDIVIDUALITY, DIVERSITY, CHOICE, VOLUNTARISM
VARIETY: Throughout the whole of animate nature variation is one of the conditions of development.” – A.N.Z. RATIONALIST AND HUMANIST, Oct. 74. - DEVELOPMENT, PROGRESS, SPECIALIZATION
VARIETY: Variety and Progress. There has never been nor will there ever be a time when all men are equal in their capacities and conditions here on earth. The nature of the individual, as well as the nature and continuity of human society, demands these unfailing differences. Without the wide diversification of talents, taste, abilities and ambitions that now and always exist among men, Society could neither feed nor clothe itself. It is consequently a wise provision of Providence that causes the perpetuation of endless variety in the desires and capabilities of human beings.” - Clarence Manion, The Key to Peace, p.18. - There should also be an indefinite variety in human societies, governance systems and communities, all based upon free individual choices. – JZ, 1.4.11, 20.8.12. - EQUALITY, PROGRESS, SURVIVAL
VARIETY: What would the world be without variety? Soon all would die of sameness or satiety.” – J. W. Walsh, quoted in “The Peter Plan” by L. J. Peter, p.89. – Compare my digitized and growing file: “PAN numbers”, which demonstrates the great number of varieties, in all spheres, that most people are simply unaware of. – JZ, 15.8.08. – I still seek further entries for it and would gladly send as an email attachment the latest version upon request. – It is not copyrighted. So put it on your website, blog or disc and thus help to get it expanded. Its current length is 331 KBs. – JZ, 20.8.12. - email@example.com
VAUGHAN, C. E., Studies in the History of Political Philosophy before and after Rousseau, Vol. 11, from Burke to Mazzini. First published in 1925, Univ. of Manchester Press, N.Y. 1960 by Russell & Russell. Pages 95ff bring the first serious review of Fichte's view of individual secession (1793) that I have come across. Should the full discussion of all these ideas and experiences take another 200 years? Have we got that much time left? – JZ – Q.
VEHMIC COURTS IN TRADITION & PANARCHISM: They represented an alternative jurisdiction, one that was forced underground. Because there were not sufficient publicity checks and because they possessed real power, and enlightenment on individual rights and liberties was still more in short supply than it is now, they became corrupted. - JZ, 23.9.04. – My old Encyclopaedia Britannica compares them with lynch justice. That may have been true after their deterioration but not initially, when it was directed against despotic princes, who could not be sued before their courts. – JZ, 20.8.12. – A short search with Google for Vehmic courts just brought me 23,700 results, including 670 videos. One of the latter: The Vehmic Courts - A System That Worked - YouTube - youtube.com - 1 Oct 2011 - 5 min -Uploaded by aReaganDesignee - Brief historical piece on The Vehmic Courts of Medieval Germany. Based on the 1917 book by Lynn ... – Certainly more references than I have time, energy and interest left to explore. – J.Z., 20.8.12. – Vehmgericht is the German word for it. - See: BECKERATH, ULRICH VON: On Panarchy.
VENTURE CAPITAL: Massachusetts has a bigger venture capital industry than all of Europe combined. Venture capitalists are very important people in this day and age, and not just as a source of money. The best of them provide real expertise for start-up companies. They see a lot of them and they understand the stages through which companies have to go in order to develop, and they can help carry tem through, which is often as important as seed money.” - Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, p.369, Harper Collins Publishers, ISBN 0 00 655139 4. – Start-up attempts of panarchies, new country movements, ocean freedom etc. might get some financial assistance there, should they need it. – JZ, 20.8.12.
VESTED INTERESTS: I believe the problems of Australia are caused by the scramble for power and privilege by vested interests.” – Judith Forbes. - What kind and degree of power, privilege and vested interest would remain, after a while, under the voluntaristic free experimentation of panarchies? – JZ, 15.8.08 – Q., DIS., PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VETO IN POLISH HISTORY: A HISTORICAL INDIVIDUALIZED VETO AS AN APPROACH TO INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY. Source : James A. Michener, Poland, Corgi Book edition, p.XVI: "The incredible LIBERUM VETO, by which one man in a Seym (parliament) of hundreds could negate and prorogue the entire work of the Seym by merely crying 'I oppose!' was a major cause of Poland's disappearance from the map of Europe, but it was defended as the last refuge upon which a free man (in this case the magnate or his henchman) could rely to defend his freedom. That Poland survived so many fatal reverses was a testimony to its volatile spirit of freedom." - Ibid, p.193: "In the 1652 Seym the patriot Wlasdyslaw Sicinski, acting under secret orders from the Radziwills, said in a loud voice 'I object!' and this established the good principle that every act of every Seym must have unanimous approval. If even one member objects, the act is rejected. And what is most valuable to us, every other act which Seym has enacted is also rejected. It's as if the Seym had never existed." - Ibid, p.336: "Why do you and your old-style friends still seek to revive the LIBERUM VETO? - Because the major problem of any free government is how to protect the responsible few from pressures of the irresponsible many. Plato knew that. So did Cicero. - But look at these figures. Under King Augustus II, eighteen Seyms met, but only eight were allowed to enact any legislation. - I'm sure the other ten deserved to die. - Under King Augustus III, fourteen Seyms met and only one was allowed to function. Your people halted all the rest. - And saved Poland from a flood of bad laws. - In later years nine tried to meet, and all nine were broken up by your men. How can a nation govern itself under such circumstances? - We used the veto to prevent wrong decisions, Czartoryski, and our courage saved men like you from your own folly. - Are you ... you handful of magnates ... are you wise enough to make all the rules for Poland? - We are, because only we know the value of freedom. - Lubonski, talk sense! Your creatures may have broken up a Seym now and then to protect your freedom, not Poland's, but what about those that were broken up with the money of some foreign power, to protect their interests not Poland’s? - That never happened. - Coldly, bitterly, the facts were set forth: "In 1730 France paid the Bishop of Smolen sixty thousand livres to negate all the good work that the Seym had accomplished. A few years later Russia paid Granicki forty thousand rubles to do the same for it. And God knows how many thalers Austria paid her agents in the Seym to render it futile. ..." - - Peasants and burghers had no representation in the Seym, which had two houses, the upper for the upper nobility, the lower for the lower nobility. The lower nobility did constitute, though, a large percentage of the population. - - Mitchener largely condemns this veto power, without considering it, sufficiently in all possible contexts: It could preserve individual and minority rights. It could show up that a full unity does not exist. - At the same time, it could be used in an obstructing way to prevent majorities from doing what they like doing to or for themselves and against others. To that extent such a veto right would be perceived as wrong in many territorial as well as exterritorial autonomous communities. - Rather than having this kind of veto, dissenters should be free to secede and do their own things among themselves. Then, in in some exterritorial communities of volunteers, they would either adopt some majority rule principle or some veto principle, which all members of that community can agree upon. - No constitutional practice is correct for all subjected to that constitution unless they have given their individual consent to it or could or should have given it as rational and moral beings. - As happens so often, an imperfect practice like this veto was by most either condemned wholesale or wholesale approved - without all alternatives, limitations and extensions of it being sufficiently discussed and experimented with. – JZ, 23.6.88. - If only, instead of universalizing - for aristocrats - this veto or prohibition power, and perpetuating it, they had demanded, instead: Full exterritorial autonomy for the dissenters to do their own things! How would the history of Poland and the world gone one, from then on? - JZ, 13.10.11. - My file: PANVETO.POL,DISK 30/31) - CONSENT, UNANIMOUS CONSENT, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, HUMAN RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, LIBERUM VETO, POLAND
VETO POWER OF ROMAN TRIBUNES OF THE PEOPLE: There is an excellent article in Encyclopaedia Britannica on their history. Their powers varied. It gave at least these representatives the power to opt out or even deny the validity of the laws and decrees passed by the patrician rulers and legislators. The system seems to have worked pretty well as long as the Roman Republic or Empire was not over-extended, i.e. had too many distant provinces that were exploited rather than fairly represented and ruled. Then tribunal powers were, apparently, abused, too. But many details of their history and action seem to be still unknown. Panarchism would provide all individuals with such veto powers, or diplomatic immunity, as far as their own affairs are concerned and, more so, give them the chance to opt into their own favoured system or to realize it for themselves and like-minded people. For our times some people have proposed the referendum option only in form of vetos against laws passed by governments. That still does not go far enough but it is certainly a step in the right direction to preserve the right of minorities and individuals. There should be no constitutional, legal, juridical and administrative territorial powers over peaceful dissenters, who would rather like to do their own things for or to themselves. – JZ, 26.1.05.
VETO, LIBERUM VETO, SOVEREIGNTY, COLLECTIVE, MONOPOLISTIC & INDIVIDUALISTIC, PANARCHISM: The ancient right of any magnate to renounce allegiance to the king, if the king persists in error.” – James A. Michener, Poland, 316. – One Magnate existed per ca. 12 million people. (*) – From monarchic and aristocratic sovereignty we have to come down to individual sovereignty for every rational and peaceful individual. Somewhere in-between was the freedom of military officers to resign their commission. – JZ, 9.1.99. - But they were not free to establish and run alternative military organizations. As a panarchist I do not object to this, as long as military organizations are mere tools to be used and abused, like mere mercenaries, by any territorial government. I would exempt only ideal militia organizations for the protection of individual rights. - JZ, 23.9.04. - (*) I doubt this figure. Where there only as few magnates? What was the population of Poland then? More than e.g. 36 million, which would allow for only 3 magnates with veto power? – JZ, 6.2.12.
VETO: There is still another reason why the weaker party, or the minority, should have a veto upon all legislation which they disapprove. That reason is, that that is the only means by which the government can be kept within the limits of the contract, compact, or constitution, by which the whole people agree to establish government. (*) If the majority were allowed to interpret the compact for themselves, and enforce it according to their own interpretation, they would, of course, make it authorize them to do whatever they wish to do. – Lysander Spooner, Trial by Jury, II, p.216. - - Individual and group secessionism would be much more effective. Instead of trying to resist every oppression one by one, one could shrug off their whole burden by a single secession or alternative subscription or declaration of individual or group independence. - - (*) The whole population almost never agrees on anything! – JZ, 15.8.08, 1.4.11. - JURIES, FREE JURIES, CONSTITUTIONS, MAJORITIES, DEMOCRACY, MINORITIES, VOTING
VIABILITY OF PANARCHY & THE STATE: 55, 56, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505.
VICTIMIZATION: Neither victims nor executioners." Albert Camus, essay title. - Compare : Neither master nor slave. Neither anvil nor hammer be. Neither rule nor be ruled. - However, territorial systems do not give us this option in the political, economic and social sphere, without severe restrictions and obstacles. - JZ 13.1.93.
VICTIMIZATION: Victimization of individuals and minorities, via territorial constitutions, laws and jurisdiction, by majorities or any minority is no rightful substitute for genuine self-rule, self-determination or self-government for all. "Submit or else... - until you become the majority!" - seems to be the motto of majoritarian "democracies". - JZ, n.d. & 20.8.12.
VICTIMIZATION: You will remain victims as long as you continue to believe in and practise monetary and financial despotism rather than monetary and financial freedom territorial impositions rather than exterritorial individual choices. . – Mere fragments of genuine individual rights and liberties are not good enough, especially when they are almost swamped by unjustified mere claims and dogmas. – JZ, 22.2.03, 21.10.07, 21.4.09. - & MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM, VS. MONETARY & FINANCIAL DESPOTISM, TERRITORIALISM RATHER THAN EXTERRITORIALISM OR PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, VICTIM DISARMAMENT, GUN CONTROL LAWS
VICTIMLESS CRIMES & PANARCHISM: There would be panarchies in which victimless crimes would be prosecuted among their voluntary members and other panarchies in which such "crimes" would not be considered as crimes. For their international relations and "crimes" or "victimless crimes" towards members of other panarchies there would be agreements in advance to apply either the law of the accuser or the law of the accuse or to resort to arbitration courts with equal representation. - JZ, 23.9.04.
VICTIMS: The victims often do not know that they are victims. – JZ, 29.3.76, 16.8.08. – Free after a comment heard on the radio, 23.9.76. – For a while people do not even notice that they are victimized by inflation. And later they are only rarely aware what causes their victimization by inflation - what makes it possible (e.g. the money issue monopoly and legal tender power for its national paper money), and what would prevent this victimization. Likewise, as unemployed people, they are aware that they are victimized but they are not aware of why this was possible. Why they can no longer freely exchange their able and willing labor for the money they need and are willing to earn by honest and able labor. – Very few are aware that they are victimized e.g. by monetary despotism or territorialism. Even after centuries of the legal sanctioning of the postal monopoly, few people felt clearly enough victimized by it to demand its abolition. Likewise, not enough of the victims of copyright and of patent laws have so far demanded the abolition of these laws and pondered how writers and inventors could be rewarded otherwise, quite rightfully. – JZ, 16.8.08. – They are often unaware of poisons in their food, in their medicines, in their environment and, generally speaking, unaware of what e.g. territorialism, protectionism, monetary and financial despotism do to them and their lives. – Their government controlled “education” does not inform them about their genuine individual rights and liberties. - JZ, 5.2.12. 20.8.12. - SANCTION OF THE VICTIMS, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, MONETARY DESPOTISM, PROTECTIONISM.
VICTIMS: Victims of crimes should determine the punishment.” – Suggested on TV, 17.3.94. – Perhaps only victims of the same or similar crimes? At least the deterrent effect would tend to be larger. They should also be free to extract compensation from the property or work of all convicted perpetrators of the same kind of crime, under the principle of collective responsibility, here, for once, rightfully applied. In this way criminals could also be induced to denounce other criminals that are not yet caught and convicted, to reduce the only indemnification burden. - People desiring this reform could soon achieve it - if they established or joined corresponding panarchies. – Here and obviously, the laws of the victims and not those of the victimizers should be applied. – Some might operate on the principle of: “Death to all major criminal with victims, who are members of our society.” Others might rather say: “A life-long indemnification obligation will be enforced for all major crimes against any of our members.” – Indeed, that might lead to additional murders of victims, as the major witnesses against these criminals. But the choice of panarchy and thereby of its penal system - should be with the victims. – Moreover, what is already widely practised in shops, a chip in goods, to prevent shop lifting, might be extended to persons. An inbuilt chip, inserted somewhere in a body, might indicate its location and, perhaps, even record something about the attacker, e.g. his or her voice, if it is especially activated by the victim during his or her last moments. Or it might be inconspicuously dropped by the victim, in his or her last moments, as an alarm, location and recording device. – Miniaturization of gadgets has made very great progress. – Perhaps brain scanners will be developed that can extract some information even from the brains of very recently killed people. More certainly, brain scanners could extract the required information from suspects, better than ordinary lie detectors. Voice stress analysis has also made great progress in detecting lies, I read many years ago. – Perhaps miniaturized body-guards can be robotized and made to fly, protecting a potential victim, by a laser or a sting and recording the attacker if their defence fails, then retreating to where it can be retrieved by a defence agency. – Technology is still far from having been fully mobilized against crime. - JZ, 15.8.08. Some robots were already tried out as policemen and warders. – JZ, 20.8.12. - CRIME, PUNISHMENT, JUDGES, COURTS, CRIMINAL LAW, PROTECTION
VICTORIES: Confining the enemy regime to its own volunteers is not an immediate and total victory but a sufficient victory and when this is the rightful war- and peace aim, then it could almost guaranty the defeat of any despotic and aggressive territorial regime. – JZ, 13.5.06. – - The others, its former victims could have their own communities of volunteers, as voted in by all those, individually, who are freed to make their individual choices for themselves. Perhaps, one day, in the far future, however unlikely that may be, all will have joined the best kind of system, convinced of its rightfulness and usefulness. – But people are so different critters that they are choosy even regarding their tooth brushes, tooth paste and tennis rackets – and thousands of other items. Thus it is doubtful, at least to me, that they will ever agree on a single community organization. - JZ, 6.10.07, 11.7.07, 20.8.12. - ENEMIES & VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM OR POLYARCHISM, WAR AIMS, UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER, TERRITORIALISM, CONQUESTS, LIBERATION, ENEMIES, SECRET ALLIES, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, DESERTION, PRISONERS OF WAR
VICTORIES: It must be a peace without victory.” – Woodrow Wilson, Address to U.S. Senate, 22.1.17. – Especially since war guilt was not all one-sided. – JZ, 16.8.08 - The territorial misleaders cannot be held sufficiently responsible for all the wrongs and harm they caused to millions and their victims should certainly not be held collectively responsible for decisions of the misleaders upon which or whom they had no influence at all. - Territorialism was the main cause, combined with anti-economic interventions and monetary despotism and collective responsibility notions and the fear which territorial militarism inspires on all sides. Most people are only guilty by not yet having rejected territorialism, monetary despotism and collective responsibility. - JZ, 1.4.11, 20.8.12.
VICTORIES: The real secret of victory is not violence but communication.” – Tom Easton, in ANALOG 12/93, p.165. – With rightful public appeals one can more easily win than with weapons. – JZ, 16.8.08. – The aim must be to dissolve the foreign armies of aggressive governments, rather than to destroy them. They can be turned into allies against their dictatorship or at least into neutrals, like the Prussian Army through the Convention at Tauroggen. Formerly a reluctant ally of Napoleon, then temporarily neutralized, not much later it became one of his most determined enemies. – JZ, 16.8.08, 20.8.12. - WARFARE, INDISCRIMINATE WARFARE, DESERTION, PRISONERS OF WAR, LIBERATION, RIGHTFUL WAR & PEACE AIMS, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, LIBERATION, REVOLUTIONS, COMMUNICATION, FRATERNIZATION
VICTORY BY LIBERTARIANS & PANARCHISM, ELECTIONS & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM: Precondition for a rapid victory of libertarianism and its protection requires the redefinition of the world “victory” as meaning: Any kind of libertarianism for any kind of libertarians according to their own individual choice and this under conditions in which any other kind of ism is also realize by and only at the expense and risk of those, who do like it for themselves and as long as they can, individually, stand it. If e.g. the LP ever won in all local governments, States and the USA federal and presidential elections then it should allow all its opponents to secede. To gain this limited and above indicated election victory, it should advocate individual and secessionism and full exterritorial autonomy under personal law not only for its own members but for the members of all other movements and parties as well. – JZ, 22.24.04, 4.11.04. 23.11.04, 20.8.12.
VICTORY OVER OTHERS OR AUTONOMY OVER SELF? You can't win over everyone!"- Henry Boettinger: Moving Mountains, 139. - Thus rather aim at win-win frameworks, which offer or allow to each what they consider to be ideal for themselves. - JZ, 13.1.93.
VIETAM WAR & PANARCHISM: 10, 47, 49, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505. - How Could South Vietnam Be Politically Organized to the Satisfaction of All but the Totalitarians? From PP3, 1965, plan 102, page 8, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506.
VIETNAM WAR: During the Vietnam War era, people were led into all sorts of foolishness by simple ignorance of a part of the world strange to them. Many believe that North and South Vietnam were one country (*) divided, but such was never the case except briefly under French administration. – North Vietnam had originally been two countries, Annam and Tonkin, and their civilization derived largely from China. South Vietnam had formerly been known as Champa, and, like Cambodia, its civilization came from India. Before France moved into the situation, the two countries had been fighting for nearly two thousand years. – Champa had always been a rich agricultural region, its bountiful crops a challenge to less fertile northern countries. Both Annam and Tonkin, usually with assistance from China, had attempted to dominate Champa. The Vietnam War was simply another move in the same continuing effort. – A very good book on the history of the area is D. G. E. Hall’s A History of South-East Asia, although there are a number of other good ones.” – Louis L’Amour, Education of a Wandering Man, P.189. – This still overlooks that in the North as well as in the South there were also several ethnic and religious minorities, to which later were added various ideological minorities and those of immigrants. Territorial systems were wrong and harmful to all of them. – (*) and one people - JZ, 13.9.07. - What would its history have been if no group of volunteers had made any exclusive territorial claims and if all of them had made at least some use of their Free Trade options? The same question could and should be raised for all other territories. - JZ, 2.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, WAR
VIETNAM WAR: in Vietnam [a] whole nation was dying to be rid of one oppression, and to succumb to another. … - Oriana Fallaci, A Man, p. 152. – One of the numerous fallacies involved here was that there, too, existed only a single and this a territorial nation, instead of numerous minorities and the majority, all striving for territorial independence or domination. – The degrees of oppression differed greatly but not enough and were witnessed by numerous refugees, now spread all over the world. Three totalitarian and territorial regimes were involved on one side, not just the usual territorial nationalism. The internal faction fighting was so strong that finally even the totalitarians could win, in spite of much external assistance for the somewhat democratic and freedom-loving Southerners. The people in North Vietnam, suffering under a totalitarian regime, might, as a result, have loved freedom much more – but were given no choice at all. Wrongful and indiscriminate fighting and air raids and atrocities on both sides had their usual bad effects. A serious land and money reform was never attempted. All too much armed force was simply used against another armed forces, with conscription and all too flawed governments on both sides. With a consistent liberation and open arms policy the totalitarians could have been defeated and their regimes also overthrown. Military might was used rather than much better ideas and ideals. – Obviously, while the losses on both sides were all too high, the whole population was not dying or being killed. Territorialism on all sides presented us with the usual wrongful and man-made disasters, under the pretence that both sides fought for freedom, rights, prosperity and peace. – Nevertheless, this novel is worth reading. It makes some good points. - JZ, 15.8.08. – DIS.
VIETNAM WAR: Not all rightful and sensible war aims were declared by either side, far less practised and the laws of a somewhat civilized and limited warfare were largely unknown or ignored by both sides, too, especially regarding non-combatants and prisoners of war. – No wonder that this war was so bloody and long and few really knew what they were fighting for or against. – JZ, 23.5.73 (? Year largely illegible!), 5.2.12. - If the aim of all the participants had been merely self-rule over their own volunteers, an armistice and then a lasting peace treaty could have been concluded very fast. - JZ, 2.4.11. - VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM
VIETNAM WAR: PEACE PROGRAM, From PEACE PLANS No. 3, 1965: Plan 102: HOW COULD SOUTH VIETNAM BE POLITICALLY ORGANIZED TO THE SATISFACTION OF ALL BUT THE TOTALITARIANS? The problem of how to revitalize a country like South Vietnam with its inferior army, demoralized intelligentsia, warring religious factions and persecuted peasantry is p plainly one to which only the foolhardy can offer ready solutions." - THE BULLETIN, 26.9.64. - - "The problem seems to boil down to this: Can the United States assist a country that is as far away, as culturally and psychologically disorganized as today's South Vietnam? - - The only hint has come from a group of Buddhist professors at Hue University, who announced that they were forming a People's Revolutionary Committee to organize a convention and start a new government. If they didn't succeed, the professors indicated, they might try a secessionist movement from the rest of South Vietnam." - THE AUSTRALIAN, 7.9.64. - - The above two proposals are the old, conventionally utopian attempts to satisfy everybody. They have been vainly tried out over and over again. They never solved the problem to general satisfaction. There were always at least some grumbling minorities left waiting for their chance. This led to an endless chain of wars and revolutions. - - Let me be foolhardy enough to maintain that neither territorial "unity" nor "territorial secession" are the answer and that the more or less corrupt, power‑hungry, dictatorial and unstable government of South Vietnam could be abolished or rendered harmless and peace, order and freedom be achieved, in the main by one simple but revolutionary reform, going much beyond another territorial secession and the conflicts it would cause: Guaranty (given by American and other foreign forces) of the right of every citizen of South Vietnam to leave his present government's protection in the same way as one may nowadays leave a church. - - This right would inevitably lead to the establishment of new, exterritorial and autonomous communities of volunteers. They would rule themselves with almost unanimous consent of their voluntary members because of their common ideology. - - The communists have succeeded (by terror and deceptive propaganda) to establish a seemingly united front. They are using various non‑communist, nationalist and revolutionary forces for their purposes. The attempt to defeat them by unifying South Vietnam under an anticommunist dictatorship (hero, leader or strong man) has failed. The anti-communist dictatorships had no attractive ideology to offer, were not oppressive enough to achieve the outward appearance of unity and committed almost every mistake in the book. They succeeded only in alienating more and more the different groups they tried to unify, even drove them into the arms of the communists: "Two religious sects, the Cao‑Dai and the Hoa Hoa, both of which President Diem viciously betrayed after the Armistice, now have joined hands with the Vietcong." - Jerry L. Rose, THE NEW REPUBLIC, 13.11.61. - - There are numerous groups and movements, often with different or even contrary interests and aims: Catholics, Buddhists, various sects, mountain tribes, lowland Vietnamese, peasants, urban people, soldiers and civilians, nationalists, secessionists, bureaucrats, taxpayers, illiterates and intellectuals, various parties, people with an inborn desire to be ruled (statists) and people with a natural aversion against being ruled (libertarians). - - General Taylor said about South Vietnam: "The average citizen has instinctively developed a resistance to government. The government has always been the enemy." - THE AUSTRALIAN, 25.11.64. - - The politically active groups thought only along the old line of "rule or be ruled" and tried therefore to dominate the other groups. This internal struggle divided South Vietnam, made it weak and inefficient in its fight against the Vietcong. The 1964 riots especially showed that these groups were often more willing to fight enthusiastically among themselves than against the communists. None is satisfied with compromises which demand at least the sacrifice of some of their ideals. - - One specific compromise, the one, which would unite them in their anti-communist efforts, has not yet been tried. - - It is: full freedom for every of the different movements to rule their own voluntary members and all their own affairs independently and autonomously within exterritorial communities which would be federated with each other only for the purpose of mutual protection of their human rights, to the extent that they wish to realize them among themselves. For instance: The Roman Catholics still believed in censorship. - - Under such a libertarian constitution the internal unrest, religious strife, party struggles and power politics would be minimized. Each community could satisfy all rightful desires of its members without having to fight down or to convince an opposition. Then all would unite to defend this new tolerant society (including communities of tolerant communists, who have e.g. established communist kibbutzims) against totalitarian terrorists. - - "This is a war which is much more political and psychological, and the purpose of that war is not to defeat the enemy army. It is to win the people, the people in the country where the fighting is going on." - M. Maurice Couve de Murville, THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 30.6.64. - - As the "people" are not a uniform group, they cannot be won over to one uniform system. But they could be won over to a defensive federation of numerous exterritorial and autonomous groups, which represent and put into practice, for their voluntary members, almost every individual's panacea. - - Those, who do not like freedom and democracy would be satisfied, too, because among themselves they could live as unfree and undemocratic as they choose to. - - The only rule all these communities would have to have in common is to respect for the human rights at least for those of the members of other communities and to the extent that they do claim them for themselves. - This system would replace an enforced centralization by a freely chosen decentralization or centralization. It would offer diversity and free choice instead of an enforced uniformity. It would achieve the socially essential unity, order, liberty, a rightful and peaceful condition, by not trying to enforce any particular unity, order or freedom. "Freedom is the mother and not the daughter of order." - said Proudhon. – JZ, 1965, somewhat revised 21.8.12.
VIGILANCE: Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” – Thomas Jefferson. - - No wonder that we haven't got full liberty yet, for we are asleep about 8 hours a day! - JZ, 25.11.06. (Meant, but, probably, not received as a joke!) Moreover, mentally, most people are mentally also asleep for all too much of the rest of the day. – I encountered almost no interest at all in - finally and quite clearly expressing all genuine individual rights and liberties! Most human beings seem to think that they have better things to do, even while they involve themselves in relative trivia (see Facebook friends and their concerns, in most cases) and while some of their most important rights remain widely unknown or openly suppressed! That, to me, is a very depressing thought. If man does not assert and use all his individual rights and liberties, then he will certainly, sooner or later, end up in a general nuclear holocaust or one carried out with similarly indiscriminately murderous chemical or biological “weapons”. That careless attitude was clearly expressed towards me by one of my grandchildren: “I don’t read freedom books!” – JZ, 21.4.09. - By now most freedom books are also no longer of great interest to me, either, if they do not deal with what I perceive to be the highest priority subjects, namely panarchism, monetary and financial freedom and work towards the recognition and realization of all genuine individual rights and liberties, starting with the compilation of the best declaration of this kind that can and should be offered at present. - These high priority aims are, in my opinion, closely interconnected and would, if realized, provide the foundation for peace on Earth. - Am I wrong in this? - JZ, 2.4.11. – Anyhow, by now all freedom writings could and should be cheaply provided on a single large disc, making this important resource available to anyone, who is seriously interested in liberty, justice and the resulting peace, enlightenment and progress. – JZ, 6.2.12. - Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” – Wendell Phillips. – The practical realization of that vigilance might require local militias of volunteers for the protection of individual rights and liberties, properly organized, trained, armed and motivated for this purpose and nationally and internationally federated. – JZ, 16.8.08. – So far as important topics as are e.g. panarchism (polyarchism etc. or consistent voluntarism or genuine self-government, full freedom of contract and association, including personal law or exterritorial autonomy), and an ideal declaration of all genuine individual human rights and liberties, including full monetary and financial freedom, individual sovereignty, individual secessionism and free migration, are still all too widely neglected, in favor of involvements e.g. in sports, tourism, entertainment, fashions, food and drink choices. - JZ, 2.4.11, 6.2.12. - MILITIAS, LIBERTY, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, PROTECTIVE AGENCIES, SELF-DEFENCE, AGGRESSION, CRIME
VIGILANCE: No man is entitled to the blessings of freedom unless he be vigilant in its preservation.” – General Douglas MacArthur (1880-1964), Supreme Allied Commander, General of the U.S. Army. - Under panarchism there would be less need for vigilance - for each would have the government or non-government of his or her dreams. Thus rebellions, civil wars and aggressions would become relatively rare, while internal satisfaction would be maximized for all the different believers, free to act and experiment with their ideas, ideals, methods, tools and opinions, exterritorially autonomous, quite among themselves, unopposed by outsiders. Some would vigilantly uphold all their rights and liberties even against internal slackers, loafers or offenders. Others would be rather slothful and they might sink back to subsistence economics. It would all be up to them. But great external threats and arms races would be unlikely. Whatever military services would still be provided could be provided by volunteer militias for the protection of individual rights and liberties, locally organized and nationally and internationally federated. Police service would tend to be competitive and thus effective. Most of the old views on conventional territorial politics would become obsolete. – JZ, 24. 11. 06. - PANARCHISM
VIGILANCE: The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt.” – John Philpot Curran, 1750-1817, in Speech on the Right of Election of the Lord Mayor of Dublin, July 10, 1790. – Quoted by FEE & in FREE ENTERPRISE, II/III/75 and in THE FREEMAN’S ALMANAC, for Nov.28. - The condition upon which men establish the rule of individual rights and liberties between them is eternal vigilance, combined with sufficient preparations and training for all cases when this vigilance and rightful resistance ought to be applied. – JZ, 16.8.08. – The number of cases, in which I marked down the same slogan seems to indicate, either, the limits of my memory, the limitations of my reading, the limits of my recognition of pro-freedom slogans or that there are really only a limited number of such sayings available, so that this collection, at least for all past slogans of this kind, could only be multiplied by a not very high x factor. – On the other hand, I have discarded also only a limited number, which, upon second reading, appeared not to be quite correct, significant or clear enough to me. – I hope the readers will make many other and better choices and comments and add them to this collection! - JZ, 16.8.08. - I hold that we should leave notions of one or several Gods altogether out of such considerations. Human beings are, obviously, involved and their responsibilities for themselves and towards others, require the recognition of their own rights and liberties and respect for those of others, at least to the extent that others do claim them already. - JZ, 2.4.11, 20.8.12.
VIGILANCE: The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” – Modern common version of an old insight.
VIGILANCE: The war for freedom will never really be won because the price of our freedom is constant vigilance over ourselves and over our Government.” – Eleanor Roosevelt. - Only when too much power is granted in the first place, mainly territorial power, will one always have to be on guard against it. Not much vigilance is needed for members of a chess or bridge club, in which the leaders have no exclusive territorial powers. - JZ, 22. 11. 06. - Those, who do imagine that their constitution, legislation and jurisdiction do already sufficiently declare and uphold all genuine individual rights and liberties are, obviously, not vigilant enough. – How can people be sufficiently vigilant regarding their individual rights and liberties when, so far, all of them have not yet been recognized, declared and sufficiently published, at least not by any territorial government? – JZ, 2.4.11, 5.2.12. - POWER & TERRITORIALISM, Q.
VIGILANTES: There would be no wrongful vigilantes, in most cases, if only the police were able and willing to do the crime-fighting job effectively, a job, which it tries to monopolize. –That task, too, has to become performed in free competition under full consumer sovereignty and voluntary taxation and controlled by sovereign individuals and their freely competing and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers. – JZ, 12.3.95, 16.8.08, 2.4.11. MILITIAS, PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, CRIMES, DESPOTISM, COMPETITION, PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATIONS, LYNCHINGS. COMPARE THE ORIGINAL VEHMIC COURTS.
VIGILANTES: We need more, not less, vigilantes” – and they ought to be well trained, organized, armed and motivated to become self-policing as well, much more so that the State’s police forces and other armed forces are. – JZ, 21.9.87. – MILITIAS OF VOLUNTEERS FOR THE PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES
VIKLUND, ANDREAS: Panarchists - The right to choose your government. - Home - About - Gian Piero de Bellis’s new article - Gian Piero de Bellis, who does such extraordinary work on Panarchy.org, has completed what he calls a “brief review and personal view” of panarchy. The review includes a very fine history of the term, with interesting new tidbits of information. I highly recommend it. - 2009/07/04 Posted by kritarchist | Uncategorized | | No Comments Yet - - My introduction to Panarchy - - Professor Michael Rozeff published a magnificent article on the LewRockwell.com site at the beginning of this year. It was entitled “Why I Am a Panarchist”. It opened up a new world for me, and many others. - 2009/07/03 Posted by kritarchist | (MY Safari program tells me that it cannot download this file! – J.Z., 21.8.12.) Uncategorized | | No Comments Yet - - Hello world! - Let’s talk about panarchy. And let’s do something about it, too. Today we start a new site, but it is just another step in an always bumpy ride. Still, panarchy is what the world needs, and it is what people deserve to have. Let’s get started… again. - 2009/07/03 Posted by kritarchist | Uncategorized | | No Comments Yet - - About: This is a place to learn about Panarchy, the human right to choose your government. - Recent: The Case Against Involuntary Government - Stephen Kinsella highlights comment on Secession Day article - Secession Week at A Thousand Nations - Gian Piero de Bellis’s new article - My introduction to Panarchy - Hello world! - Links: Panarchy in Wikipedia - Panarchy.org – source material - Adam Knott – Writing on Panarchy and Praxeology - Adam Knott's panarchy booklets on LuLu - Panarchy South Jersey - Archives: July 2009 (6) - Panarchists. - Theme: Andreas04 by Andreas Viklund. Blog at WordPress.com.
VINCENS: Histoire de la République de Gênes. (Paris, 1842), vol. i, p. 389. - Quoted by LIU, ibid, on merchant law.
VINCENT, JOHN CARTER: The Extraterritorial System in China, final phase. 1900- : Cambridge, Mass., East Asian Research Centre, Harv. Univ. Press, 1969, 1970, 119pp, copy in Macquarie Univ. Libr., Sydney.& ANU Menzies Libr.,Canberra.
VINGE, VERNOR: Anti-Trust Rulings Against Governments, Conquest by Default. ANALOG, May 68, plan 237, page 68, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. Describes an extreme degree of decentralization which comes close to de Puydt's exterritorial panarchy. Reproduced in PEACE PLANS No.14, plan 237 pp. 87/8
VIOLENCE & PANARCHISM: Stacks of literature exist on violence and non-violence. But hardly any of them goes beyond the territorialist thinking, institutions, laws and actions and examines the exterritorialist alternatives. Under the latter not only all moral and rational ideals could be freely realized but also the immoral and irrational ideas of all too many, although only at their own risk and expense. Thus their resistance and destructive urges would be minimized. They would be led largely into constructive and self-learning channels. Within their own autonomous sphere they could give in to their impulses, i.e. would not be provoked to violence via the resistance of people thinking otherwise and living in their own volunteer communities. A man loving football and forced to play tennis by the majority of people around him would be frustrated and might become aggressive. But, if he is free to play football, alone or together with like-minded people, at least this frustration will disappear and he will be much more likely to become peaceful and harmless to others, who think different from him and like other activities. Likewise, why should party followers be satisfied with having to struggle for years to decades in order to get their leaders into power - when they have the chance, panarchistically, to achieve self-rule immediately? Those driven now to terrorism, because they see no peaceful way to achieve their ideals for themselves, would then get this option - naturally, always at the own risk and expense. Would most of them remain intolerant and violent then? "To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her choice!" - What more could any still somewhat rational and moral being ask for? - JZ, 31. 8. 04, 23.9.04, 20.8.12.
VIOLENCE, OPPRESSION, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, WAR, CIVIL WAR: End all bloody and despotic revolutions, civil wars and international wars via the personal, individual and voluntary revolutions of individuals, practised in individual secessions and by voluntary, exterritorial and autonomous associations of volunteers, living under personal rather than territorial constitutions, laws and jurisdictions. The same kind of tolerance that ended religious revolutions, civil wars and wars, wherever and whenever it was consistently applied, can also end revolutions, civil wars and wars conducted out of political, economic and ideological motives. - JZ 3.10.92, 4.1.93.
VIOLENCE: a quote from Lenin: 'You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.' Is it necessary to point out that 'eggs' is a metaphor for 'heads'? - Wendy McElroy, Contra Gradualism, in THE VOLUNTARYIST, Dec. 97, p.3. - Trotsky was more frank when he declared that he was prepared to sacrifice up to 75% of the population for the victory of his kind of revolution. - JZ, 22.11.02, 21.8.12. - COERCION, COMPULSION, TOTALITARIANISM, UNITY, UNIFORMITY, TERRORISM, TERRITORIALISM, STATES, GOVERNMENTS, DIS., POWER & ITS ABUSES, FORCE, TERRORISM, WAR, WARFARE, CRUELTIES, CRIME, VICTIMIZATION, BULLYING
VIOLENCE: All attempts to get rid of governments by violence have hitherto, always and everywhere, resulted only in this: that in place of the deposed governments new ones established themselves, often more cruel than those they replaced.” – Leo N. Tolstoy – Was no revolution ever justified? – JZ, 17.8.08. - No mere territorial revolution was ever quite justified. - JZ, 2.4.11. - REVOLUTIONS, GOVERNMENTS, DICTATORSHIPS, DIS., Q.
VIOLENCE: Another conclusion: The cause of our ills is a reliance on the principle of violence. Violence breeds violence. The more of it we practice, the more of it will we rationalize as justified – even “needed”. Just as a poke on the jaw provokes a retaliatory poke on the jaw, so does a subsidy to one industry or to one community evoke the sentiment: “We must have a subsidy in order to get our share of what we are paying in.” Subsidies are among the numerous institutions based on violence.” – Leonard E. Read, Instead of Violence, p.22. - The mere defensive use of force, without any territorial monopoly claims and wrongful collective responsibility practices, can be quite rightful and efficient and should not be classed as unjustified violence or aggression. - Territorialism is a term that covers all unjustified forms of violence and aggression. - JZ, 2.4.11.SUBSIDIES, REDISTRIBUTIONISM, TAXATION, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM, COERCION, COMPULSION
VIOLENCE: Apart from outbursts of revenge or anger, violence is used only in order to compel some people, against their own will, to do the will of others.” – Tolstoi, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.332. - TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: As usual the chief result of violence is the necessity to use more violence.” – Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means, p.35. – One might add: As usual, the chief result of using rightful force, i.e., of using it merely defensively, is the possibility to probability that one will have to use it even less in future. – JZ, n.d. & 17.8.08. – FORCE IN DEFENCE OF GENUINE RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, MILITIAS, PROTECTION
VIOLENCE: But it does seem remarkable in view of the record, that anybody could doubt that the State is the source of nearly all the violence in the world. Nobody else has the resources.” – Edgar Z. Friedenberg, The Disposal of Liberty and other Industrial Wastes. - STATE, TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: Disbelieve in any excuse for violence.” – Tolstoi, Civil Disobedience and Non-Violence, p.189. - He was, apparently, unaware of many instances of the quite rightful use of defensive force. Have we, by now, seen many or enough of them? - JZ, 2.4.11. - DIS., MILITIAS, PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATIONS, DEFENSIVE USE OF FORCE VS. AGGRESSION, TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: Everything would be alright - - if only we could wipe out - - all those who think that - - everything would be alright - - if only we could wipe out ..." - Hassan
VIOLENCE: For the rule prohibiting violence against the persons or property of innocent men is absolute; it holds regardless of the subjective motives for the aggression.” – Murray N. Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, p.189.
VIOLENCE: Force in the defence of the voluntary practice of a system should be distinguished from force used in aggressive impositions of any system upon dissenters. The former is rightful use of force, the latter is wrongful violence. Violence is initiated force. Forceful defence is non-initiation of force. – JZ, 30.11.92, 17.8.08. – TOLERANCE, INTOLERANCE, DEFENCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, RIGHTS
VIOLENCE: Government is violence.” - Tolstoi, Civil Disobedience and Non-Violence, p.129. - Under the false pretence that it would merely be protective. - JZ, 2.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: I've always been told that violence is generally the result of a series of frustrations and pressures that have no other possible outlet.” - Anne McCaffrey, Dinosaur Planet, p.143. - Rather than "possible", I would say: "known, appreciated, envisioned or demonstrated and practised alternative". - JZ, 23.1.02. - KNOWLEDGE, IDEAS, VISION, TERRORISM, PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VIOLENCE: In Spooner’s opinion, the constitution of the United States does not require those who live under it to abjectly submit to the usurpation of power committed by the government or the “lawless violence” of those who hold office. Endowed with the natural right to keep and bear arms, the people may also be credited with the right to use them in the protection of their liberties. “The constitution takes it for granted,” Spooner wrote, “that as the people have the right, they will have the sense, to use arms, whenever the necessity of the case justifies it.” It makes no sense whatever to argue as some people do, he continued, that the remedy of the people in the face of injustice is to change the nature of the government through discussion and the ballot. (*) In the final analysis, discussion by itself is impotent to deter a despotic government unless it is clearly understood that actual resistance is to follow if the people’s grievances are not alleviated.” – Reichert, Partisans for Freedom. - Alas, there are so many and so diverse grievances and the government has so systematically set the people against each other, that a united resistance becomes rather unlikely. The preferable method is individual and group secessionism and panarchies for all the diverse communities of volunteers that would result. Such a situation or aim could bring about an effective and united resistance. It would tend to eliminate all infighting among the diverse dissenters and opponents of a territorial regime. It could even make the use of most rightful force against a regime unnecessary. It would then tend to simply collapse, like a pricked balloon. – That happened even to Mussolini’s regime, and to the Soviet Regime, but all too belatedly. With panarchism used against it, it could have happened years to decades earlier. - (*) Or to attempt this through government courts. – JZ, 17.8.08. - GOVERNMENT, MILITIA, SELF-DEFENCE, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, ARMS, WEAPONS, GUNS
VIOLENCE: It is not violence per se that we can prevent. But we can prevent self-righteous violence.” – LEFEVRE’S JOURNAL, Winter 76. – But should we try to prevent rightful and merely defensive use of force as well, instead of preventing merely the violence of intolerant people towards tolerant actions? – We should rather encourage the rightful use of defensive force – and make even that usage largely unnecessary by a corresponding reform of States and societies, reducing them to communities of volunteers only, all free to do their own things for or to themselves only, and thus less inclined than they are now, under territorialism, to impose their views or ideals upon a whole population. - JZ, 17.8.08, 21.8.12. – Q., PEACE, TOLERANCE, DIS., AUTONOMY, PREVENTION OF VIOLENCE VIA EXTERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM OR EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL
VIOLENCE: It isn’t easy to identify the growing items of violence, which the accepted, limited violence initiated. Who can appraise the significance of immigration laws in a country sprung from immigrants? Who can assess the meaning of the protective Tariff imposed by a people who got their start by overthrowing trade tyrannies imposed on them? What will be written in the final judgment book of a nation whose citizens were “educated” by force, whose “prosperity” depended on violence? (*) - The answers to these questions are dependent on each individual’s value judgments. For my part, I have no faith whatever in any “good” that can come from these measures based on violence.” – Leonard E. Read, Instead of Violence, p. 15. – But he claimed a territorial monopoly for his ideal, an otherwise supposedly already sufficiently limited government. – - (*) What kind of prosperity is achieved through violence? Also one whose defence, safety and security is supposedly assured through mass extermination devices, directed and usable only against the helpless subjects of other authoritarian regimes, rather than against their victimizers! – What percentage of all violence is based upon the wrongful assumptions and usurpations of territorialism? - JZ, 17.8.08, 2.4.11. – DIS., NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS, PROTECTIONISM, COMPULSORY EDUCATION, NUCLEAR “WEAPONS”, Q.
VIOLENCE: It was their creed to do violence to no man, it was another readily admitted part of their same creed that no one should therefore be wantonly permitted to do violence to them.” – Gordon R. Dickson, Dorsai, in ASTOUNDING SCIENCE FICTION, Dec. 59. - VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY
VIOLENCE: Major changes in non-political institutions are at times carried through without violence, although this might be less the case if the legitimate violence were not a monopoly of political institutions.” – Everett Reimer, School Is Dead, p.139. - POLITICS, GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLIES, CHANGE, REVOLUTIONS, REFORMS
VIOLENCE: most of these governmental activities can be maintained only under violence.” - Leonard E. Read, Instead of Violence, p.23. - TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: Most violence is done by or in the name of the people, and this by people, who don’t consider themselves to be violent people. – And the people, supposedly represented, have no say at all in the matter, since war and peace decisions, international treaties and disarmament as well as experimentation with different political, economic and social systems is monopolized by territorial governments, always under the false pretence of a genuine mandate or representation. – JZ, 11.7.78, 17.8.08, 2.4.11, 21.8.12. – DECISION ON WAR& PEACE, NONVIOLENCE, VOTING, NUCLEAR STRENGTH, TAXATION, ARMS RACES, TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: Not only do most people accept violence if it is perpetuated by legitimate authority, they also regard violence against certain kinds of people as inherently legitimate, no matter who commits it.” – Edgar Z. Friedenberg, NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, Oct. 20, 1966. - TERRITORIALISM, DEFENSIVE USE OF FORCE AGAINST PRIVATE OR OFFICIAL CRIMINALS & AGGRESSORS.
VIOLENCE: Since the power to resort to violent actions is a government monopoly, Mises defined freedom as “that state of affairs in which the individual’s discretion to choose is not constrained by government violence beyond the margin within which the praxeological law restricts it anyway.” A laissez-faire society, he believed, where coercion can be used only defensively, would provide the maximum scope of freedom for all its citizens.” – Dave Osterfield, THE FREEMAN, 4/75. – GOVERNMENT, LAISSEZ-FAIRE, COERCION, COMPULSION, DEFENCE, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLY, POLICE, SELF-DEFENCE
VIOLENCE: The American public has been conditioned to believe that if Government commits violence it is not really violence.” – Murray N. Rothbbard, quoted in PROTOS, 11/70. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: the crimes of violence committed for selfish, personal motives are historically insignificant compared to those committed ad majorem gloriam Dei, out of a self-sacrificing devotion to the flag, a leader, a religious faith or political conviction.” - Arthur Koestler. - MAJORITY, SELFISHNESS, ATROCITIES, IDEOLOGIES, RELIGIONS, NATIONALISM, LEADERSHIP, TRUE BELIEVERS, FANATICS, FUNDAMENTALISTS, INTOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM, CRIMES, WARS, CIVIL WARS, VIOLENT REVOLUTIONS
VIOLENCE: The image of the anarchist as a bomb-throwing desperado in a black coat has stuck. It is an image immortalized in literature, by Henry James in “The Princess Casamassima” (1886) and by Joseph Conrad in “The Secret Agent” (1907). It was an image forged in the desperate 1880’s and 1890’s when there was a series of political assassinations and bombings in Europe linked to the anarchist movement. – In fact, anarchists have contributed far less to the sum of human violence than nationalists, monarchists, republicans, socialists, fascists and conservatives, not to mention the Mafia, organized crime, and banditry. They have never organized the indiscriminate slaughter that is war or practised genocide as governments have. They have never coolly contemplated the complete nuclear annihilation of the earth as nuclear scientists, generals and presidents have. They have never adopted a deliberate policy of terror in power as Robespierre, Stalin or Pol Pot did. … Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p.229. – Possibly still the best recent survey of anarchist thought and actions. – JZ, 17.8.08. – “or” Pol Pot or “and” Pol Pot? - ANARCHISM, ANARCHISTS, ASSASSINATIONS, MASS MURDERS, TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: The main perpetrators of violence have been those who maintain authority, not those who attack it. The great bomb-throwers have not been the tragic individuals driven to desperation in southern Europe more than a half century ago, but the military machines of every state in the world throughout history. No anarchist can rival the Blitz and the Bomb, no Ravachol or Bonnot can stand beside Hitler or Stalin. …” - Nicholas Walter, in his pamphlet “About Anarchism”, quoted in DANDELION, Sum. 77. - TYRANNICIDE, TERRITORIALISM, TOTALITARIANISM, AIR RAIDS, ASSASSINATIONS, BOMB-THROWING, WARS, MASS MURDERS
VIOLENCE: The major perpetrator of violence in the world today is none other than government itself.” – Jerome Tuccille, Radical Libertarianism, p.24. - GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM
VIOLENCE: The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.” - Martin Luther King, Jr., Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? p.62-63 (1967). - He, too, preferred the inbuilt chaos of territorial, centralist and involuntary communities and compulsory integration over voluntary integration and voluntary segregation, thus finally provoking an assassin among his opponents. He would have lived longer and would have achieved more if he had merely advocated full exterritorial autonomy for all races, ideologies, religions and convictions. Thus he could have neutralized his enemies or even turned them into allies. Voluntary integration is easier to spread and to maintain than compulsory integration. - JZ, 27.11.02. – HATE, LOVE OR JUSTICE, RIGHTS & LIBERTIES?
VIOLENCE: violence in the social order is almost always the result of institutional structures of power and not the free choice of individuals like John Brown or Nat Turner.” – Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.452. – POWER, CHOICE, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENT, RESISTANCE, REVOLUTIONS, UPRISINGS
VIOLENCE: Whereas ordinary people will normally rank interpersonal violence as a last resort of social breakdown or crisis, governments operate with violence as their immediate priority all the time. Determined courses of action are decreed, not voluntarily decided upon; ordered, not freely accepted. If the principle of government were extended consistently and uniformly throughout society, true chaos would result. Every civilized relationship would give way to the gun or knife, to force instead of persuasion.” – Fred Woodworth, Anarchism. – PANARCHISM & ITS VOLUNTARISM OR EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY OR EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR VOLUNTEERS, INSTEAD OF TERRITORIALISM
VIOLENCE: While territorial governments have an inherent monopoly on aggressive coercion, defensive and discriminating force has not yet been sufficiently mobilized against them. – JZ 25.8.84. The ultimate aim must be to replace territorial rule of a few over the many by exterritorial autonomy for all the diverse groups of volunteers. – JZ, 17.8.08. – FORCE, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM
VIRTUAL CANTONS: (FNF - Free Nations Foundation term, coined by Roderick Long.)
VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES & NETWORKS: The “virtual communities” and networks of people with like interests ought to be freed, to really opt out of the coercive and monopolistic, territorial, political, economic and social systems, that were so far misnamed communities or societies or nation States. Territorialist States are, essentially, nothing but territorial despotism, even in their best forms, even when they are based upon the support of a temporary majority. – JZ, 13.7.98, 9.1.99. - The good features of territorial States are only virtual or imaginary ones. Their reality is immoral and irrational - at least for all their involuntary members. - JZ, 23.9.04. – DEMOCRACY, MAJORITARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PERSONAL LAW
VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES: Also, there will be “virtual tribes” or “electronic tribes”. … E-mail is a tribe-maker. Electronics makes us more tribal at the same time it globalizes us. … With the new emphasis on what is tribal in a world increasingly global, the New Age mantra “Think Globally, Act Locally”- is turned on its head. It is now: Think Locally, Act Globally.” – John Naisbitt, Global Paradox, 20/21. - - But for this new tools are needed, at least for freedom lovers, compiled in WIKIPEDIA fashion, e.g. an Ideas Archive and well published market for ideas and a world market for talents, an encyclopedia of the best refutations of popular errors, myths and prejudices, a comprehensive electronic world library, bibliography, abstracts and review compilation, starting, ideally, with freedom books, an ever-growing libertarian encyclopedia and collection of argument-maps dealing with questions of liberties, rights, peace and war, a panarchistic or polyarchic encyclopedia, and one that brings and responds to all the diverse definitions and corrects them as far as necessary, a directory indicating special interests, a common projects list, periodical meeting calendars etc. – JZ, 16.9.07, 2.4.11. - NEW DRAFT, digital book manuscript by JZ, ELECTRONICALLY CONNECTED TRIBES? LOCAL & GLOBAL ACTION, NETWORKING, EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS NETWORKS OF VOLUNTEERS
VIRTUAL REALITY & MICRO-NATIONS ON THE INTERNET: A single electronic utopia would be relatively easy to describe on the Internet. At present there are, apparently, dozens to hundreds offered there. Most are more concerned with role-playing, titles, orders, fantasies than with individual liberties and rights. To describe the multitude of freely established panarchies, once individual secessionism & exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities is introduced - would be much harder. For a single such utopia see e.g. Greg Flanagan's Libertocracy webpages, which were partly reproduced in ON PANARCHY, in my PEACE PLANS series. - JZ, n.d. & 23.9.04.
VISIGOTHS: The laws of the Visigoths contain the remarkable provision that "when foreign merchants have disputes with one another, none of our judges shall take cognizance, but they shall be decided by officers of their nation and according to their laws.” 3 "Dum transmarini negotiatores inter se causam habuerint, nullus de sedibus nostris cos audire presumat, nisi tantummodo suis legibus audiantur apud telonarios suos." Leges Visigoth., lib. xi, tit. iii, cap. ii, Pardessus. op. cit., vol. i, p. 152. - Liu, Exterritoriality, page 28. – PERSONAL LAW, CAPITULATIONS, CONSULAR JURISDICTION, COMMERCIAL INDEPENDENT COURTS
VISIONARY IDEAS, IDEAL SOCIETIES, UTOPIAS, SELF-ADVERTISEMENT, DEMONSTRATION OF ALTERNATIVE COMMUNITIES, MINORITY AUTONOMY, UTOPIAS, SELF-REALIZATION: After a take-off stage is reached, based on sufficient enlightenment of a sufficient minority," as Theoreau said, "the minority need not wait to persuade the majority." 'And the vision, as we shall see, is self-propagating’.” - Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, 224. – PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, ENLIGHTENMENT, PROGRESS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VISIONS: too great a nation to limit ourselves to small dreams.” - President Reagan, 1984 State of the Union Address. - Let the few, as well as the many, freely pursue their OWN dreams, at their own expense and risk. We do not need and can no longer risk a territorial and collective monopoly of dream-mongers, enforcing their dreams, large or small ones. The small dreams have their values, too, for those who subjectively appreciate them. Let free owners and decision-makers vote for their own dreams, with their own dollars, rather than with territorial political votes, taxes and government spending over the dreams, fates, property and earnings of others. - Alas, too much of the libertarian movement is too much pre-occupied with small and limited dreams only. - It seems that none of the US Presidents ever questioned whether any problems of the State of the Union did arise out of the very attempt to coercively uphold a single territorial union of people, instead of merely a federation of various societies and communities of volunteers, all of them under full exterritorial autonomy, i.e. without any territorial monopoly. “None is so blind as he who will not see!” – - JZ, 23.1.02, 10.2.08, 2.4.11. – Let all people pursue or try to realize all kinds of dreams, great or small, but always only at the own expense and risk. – JZ, 21.4.09. - BIGNESS, SMALLNESS, DREAMS, GOALS, AIMS, PANARCHISM VS. COLLECTIVISM, DIS., TERRITORIALISM, DREAMS, GREAT & SMALL, AMERICANISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, UTOPIAS, INTENTIONAL COMMUNITIES, LIBERATION, INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, MILITIA
VISIONS: Vision without action is a daydream. Action without vision is a nightmare.” Japanese proverb. – The most important action is experimental freedom, action, among and for volunteers only. Territorialist action is almost always wrong and harmful, even self-defeating in many cases. – Territorialism has never lived up to its visions and promises and by its nature it cannot do so. - JZ, 4.1.08. - IDEAS, PLATFORMS, PROGRAMS & ACTIONS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM
VOICE STRESS ANALYSIS: Voice stress analyses and all kinds of other lie detectors for all public utterances of politicians. We know, that they are, largely, liars. Let’s prove it! – JZ, Nov. 73, 15.8.08, 2.4.11. - However, the option to secede from them and to compete with them under full exterritorial autonomy, together with like-minded volunteers, would be much more useful. - JZ, 2.4.11.
VOLITION: The Key Problem of man in society today”, advises Sylvester Petro, “is not individualism against collectivism … but rather of volitional activity against compelled action … man and his voluntary associations as against man and his compelled associations.” – Leonard E. Read, ABC’s of Freedom”. – VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, COMPULSION, COERCION, FORCE, VOLITIONAL ACTIVITY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM UNDER EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, CHOICE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM.
VOLTAIRE: One should cultivate one’s garden.” – Rather than try to lay down rules for the cultivation of all other gardens. Voltaire was, generally, a pioneer of tolerance. I do not know whether he made any explicitly panarchistic remarks. If he had, it might have endangered his life. He already risked enough by attacking religious intolerance. Perhaps his philosophical dictionary, now online, contains more relevant passages. “Il faut cultiver notre jardin.” (From my flawed memory.) – The following remark is also ascribed to him but not confirmed: I disapprove of what you say but will defend to my death your right to say it. – Panarchists would turn this remark into: I disapprove of what you do in your own affairs – but would defend to my death your right to do so. - JZ, 23.11.04.
VOLUNTARISM & ANARCHISM, SOCIETY & THE STATE, LAWS & DECREES, DECENTRALIZATION VS. CENTRALIZED POWER, NATURAL ORDER VS. ORGANIZED CHAOS, VOLUNTARY VS. ENFORCED ASSOCIATION, SOCIETIES AS OPPOSED TO STATES: It is to be noted in this regard that the opposite of government is not, as so many critics of anarchism erroneously suppose, social disorder or chaos. Anarchism for Proudhon, as for all anarchists, 'is not inconsistent with association, but only with enforced association; not to rule, but only to obligatory rule.' - (McIntire, Salter William, Anarchism or Government, An Inquiry in Fundamental Politics, N.Y., 1895, p.7.) - (This title, which I do not possess, seems worth reproducing, if that is not merely a single pearl in it. - JZ, 10.9.04. – Has anyone already digitized it? A Google search just now brought me not a single result! – JZ, 21.8.12.) Where men are encouraged to follow their own unaided understanding of the social relations they find themselves an integral part of, law and order is as natural to them as the seasons of the year are compelling to birds and trees. This is why Proudhon was so insistent that we must not allow the distinction between state and society to become blurred in our thinking. As Professor Franz Oppenheimer was to point out, years after Proudhon wrote, the state is primarily the sum of the 'privileges and dominating positions which are brought into being by extra economic power' enforced by the power of government. In contrast to this, Oppenheimer, like Proudhon, defined society as 'the totality of concepts of all purely natural relations and institutions between man and man, which will not be fully realized until the last remnant of the creations of the barbaric "ages of conquest and migration" has been eliminated from community life.' - In order to bring into actuality a libertarian social system, law must emerge from the free social relations of individuals who live in direct community rather than from decrees of formal legislative bodies. That is why the concept of decentralization looms so large in the thinking of all anarchists." - W. O. Reichert, in Holterman, Law in Anarchism, p.147.
VOLUNTARISM & COMMUNITIES: No community that is not a volunteer community is really a community in the true sense of the word. Instead, however small, it is then a coercive and despotic because territorial State with compulsory membership and enforced obedience. - JZ 28.8.92, 4.1.93. - See: BECKERATH, ULRICH VON: On Panarchy.
VOLUNTARISM & CONSENT: the almost universal acceptance among civilized peoples of the idea that authority of man over man originated in voluntary bestowal by the subject individual." - W. A. Dunning, Political Theories. From Rousseau to Spencer. Why only originated and not also: and should be maintained only by....? – JZ, 3.1.93. – SOCIAL CONTRACT, Q., CONTRACTARIANISM, ASSOCIATIONISM
VOLUNTARISM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY ARE PRECONDITIONS FOR PANARCHISM: Alas, this is still all too often overlooked and it is assumed unanimity or sufficient representation could be achieved within whole territories: "In every free state every man is his own legislator. All taxes are free gifts for public services. All laws are particular provisions or regulations established by common consent for gaining protection and safety. And all magistrates are trustees or deputies for carrying these regulations into execution. - Liberty, therefore, is too imperfectly defined, when it is said to be 'a Government by Laws, and not by Men'. If the laws are made by one man, or a junta of men in a state, and not by common consent, a government by them does not differ from Slavery." - Rocker, in "Nationalism & Culture", 145, quoting Richard Price, "Observations on the Nature of Civil Liberty and the Justice and Policy of the War with America", 1776. - Well, we all know where this has led under territorialism. The supposedly already sufficiently limited government has not led to full or more liberties but to almost unlimited government. Unanimity in associations and actions requires exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, i.e. a great variety of groupings in the same territory, all doing their own things to or for themselves, while tolerating the others doing their things to or for themselves. Even if one clearly expresses such an insight, that does not yet mean that one will habitually apply it in practice. Many, for instance, who would verbally stand for individual responsibility, when it comes to the crunch, do, unthinkingly, propose measures based on the principle of collective responsibility, instead. While such a state of mind and affairs continues, we would need ideal militia forces to keep or restore the peace, i.e. a conditions where claimed individual rights will prevail, because they are sufficiently protected. - JZ, 13.1.93. - Would ideal militia forces require the existence already of ideal and enlightened people or could their members become sufficiently and fast enough trained on the job? That remains to be seen. A starting point would be much better drafts of individual rights codes than have so far been offered. See e.g. my compilation of private drafts of such declarations in PEACE PLANS 589/590. So far this approach has not found any supporters. - JZ, 23.9.04. – However, C. B. has at least put it online, as part of a CD of mine that he did reproduce at www.butterbach.net - JZ, 21.8.12.
VOLUNTARISM & SECESSION: Not to associate, to associate otherwise and no longer to associate oneself or to disassociate oneself, are all as rightful as the right to associate and even part of it, if freedom of association is fully understood. Without disassociationism on an individual basis the right to associate is incomplete. Disassociationism is important for the numerous private associations. But it is even more important for our associations and relations with States, armed forces and trade unions. While the right to disassociate oneself should be applied towards all associations, especially those now having a compulsory membership, one should concede, except in emergencies, when major individual rights are threatened, the rightfulness of agreed-upon withdrawal or giving notice periods. Only when a basic right is threatened, by a supposedly protective association, would an immediate secession become part of the right to resist. With this kind of disassociationism territorial rule over dissenters would end and with it wars, civil wars and revolutions. - JZ 16.9.92, 4.1.93.
VOLUNTARISM, AUTONOMY & THE FREE MARKET: In fact, the free market is based on a contextual theory of values. It allows for the formation of virtually any completely voluntary association for the achievement of really common purposes, without requiring the subordination of any to a dictator, or to a majority vote. And at last we can see a sense in which autonomy can not only be meaningful in society, but is the heart of the libertarian creed: autonomy can be meaningful if we accept and understand the necessity for a system of property titles defining the sphere of decision-making and actions proper for men. Once this is accepted, under libertarianism every man is the ultimate decision-maker, the owner, of his own life and property." - Roy Childs, Anarchism and Justice, INDIVIDUALIST, 10/71. See also under Property and Associationism.
VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM: Voluntary associations, from e.g. cricket clubs to all kinds of voluntary communities, that only charge and serve their voluntary members, are, obviously less dangerous than are political parties, movement and regimes that, under territorialism, aim not only to serve or exploit their own voluntary members but to subject to their rule all dissenters who happen to live in the same territory. This imposition leads to wars, civil wars, revolutions, resistance, riots, poverty, despotism, exploitation and terrorism. It maximizes rather than minimizes dissatisfaction and has killed in our times even more people than were killed in its wars. During the last 2 centuries it has probably killed more human beings than were ever murdered in human sacrifices or by cannibals or by slave masters. Perhaps only the abortion idea and practice has led to more innocent victims than the idea of territorial rule has. All those, who thoughtlessly subscribe to territorialism, are, to that extent, not quite innocent but, rather, accessories to the facts of all the crimes that the believers in territorialism have committed, e.g., "in the name of the people" or "for the security of the State" or "in the public interest". - JZ, 16.10.98, 26.6.01.
VOLUNTARISM, GOVERNMENTAL TOLERANCE, POLITICAL TOLERANCE & FREEDOM: Governmental and economic systems should be as voluntary and without territorial privileges as churches and other clubs are now, in many countries. - JZ, 9 Feb. 89.
VOLUNTARISM, VOLUNTARYISM, ANARCHISM & LIBERTARIANISM: In their best forms and definitions they are also, essentially, panarchistic - even though most of their supporters are not yet fully aware of this. – JZ, n.d.
VOLUNTARISM: Only volunteers can be genuine citizens, free among equals in rights and liberties. The others are mere subjects, sheeple, people who are owned, abused, commanded, misdirected and exploited and this without their explicit individual consent. – JZ, 31.1.12. – TERRITORIALISM, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, STATISM, FEUDALISM, SERFDOM
VOLUNTARISM: [Paul] Beaird calls voluntarism, “the beginning principle of libertarianism”. – William M. Evers, JLS, Sum. 77, p.191. – LIBERTARIANISM, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: A pure free market society would be one in which all inter-personal relations would be voluntary.” – Sam Wells Jr., OPTION, 4/77. – Except, naturally, defensive actions against remaining criminals with victims, - Relationships between societies, competing governments, share companies, enterprises, customers and firms, investors and corporations, share companies and corporations, etc., would be voluntary as well, in a polite and just but businesslike and impersonal way. – JZ, 18.8.08. - FREE MARKET SOCIETY, PANARCHISM, MARKET ORDER, MARKET ANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: A society based upon voluntarism enables each individual to decide whether his interests are furthered by joining a collective or acting independently.” – THE MATCH, Jan. 75. – Even when it comes to whole political, economic and social systems and their organization and institutions as well as personal laws. - JZ, 2.4.11. - SELF-INTEREST, INDEPENDENCE, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY
VOLUNTARISM: Almost everything works better among volunteers. - JZ 7.12.91. - Contrary examples are rather rare but some do exist. Some panarchies would have their own forms of "conscription" or compulsion for their members - as long as they prefer to remain members. Compare the prohibitions of the Catholic Church for its members. - JZ, 11.12.03.
VOLUNTARISM: Anarchism … may be described as the doctrine that all the affairs of men should be managed by individuals or voluntary associations, and that the State should be abolished.” – Benjamin R. Tucker, State Socialism and Anarchism, in “The Heretics Handbook of Quotations”, ed. by Charles Bufe, p.64. – Only the territorial State has to be abolished. For its remaining volunteers it should remain, as long as they are willing to put up with it, individually. That should be sufficient punishment. – JZ, 18.8.08, 20.8.12. – STATE, STATISM
VOLUNTARISM: Anarchism does not have to be communistic, socialistic, egoistic, individualistic, libertarian or capitalistic – but it does have to be voluntaristic and at least to that extent individualistic. A genuine, i.e., a voluntaristic and tolerant anarchist (tolerant towards all other tolerant people and organizations and their actions undertaken at their own risk and expense) should also recognize and respect, at least to the extent of leaving them alone, apart from verbal criticism, all those organized as statists but without compulsory membership, without a territorial monopoly claim and without habitually committing aggressive actions against non-members, blamed collectively for all kinds of supposed “sins” or “crimes”, however real or merely invented or imagined these are or were and, at most, if at all, then undertaken only by and among individuals or voluntary members of some minority groups. – JZ, 2.5.95, 2.4.11. – INDIVIDUAL VS. COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF CASES. (I see an exception only e.g. for convicted criminals for crimes of, essentially, the same kind as their own. – JZ, 18.8.08.) - INDIVIDUALISM, ANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: Anarchy, as I see it, admits of any kind of organization, so long as membership is not compulsory.” – J. Labadie, LIBERTY V, April 4, 1888. - ANARCHISM, MEMBERSHIP, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: And I cannot imagine association without liberty.” – Augustin Thierry - LIBERTY
VOLUNTARISM: And until voluntarism is given a chance, politics will continue as usual and freedom will be just another flickering candle in the wind.” – Society for Libertarian Life, leaflet: “Voluntarism: The Absence of Force.” - POLITICS, GOVERNMENTS, POLITICS, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: Any government, however inefficient or despotic it might be, is a free government in the eyes of those who voluntarily chose to support it. Conversely, however benevolent or efficient it may be, a government which rules over its subjects without their free consent is a tyranny. It can thus hardly be called treason when unwilling subjects choose to severe their relationship with a government they never bound themselves to serve, as in the case of the rebellious colonists who demanded their freedom from George III.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p. 134, when discussing Lysander Spooner. – PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, TREASON, LOYALTY, TERRITORIALISM
VOLUNTARISM: Consistent anarchism and voluntarism would include voluntary governments and they are possible only on the basis of exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. – JZ, 4.4.95. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARY OR COMPETING GOVERNMENTS
VOLUNTARISM: Everything works better among volunteers. – JZ, 7.12.91. – Except when they are organized as a committee, supposedly authorized to decide how other people ought to act. – JZ, 18.8.08. - Or when they form a criminal gang to victimize others rather than themselves. - Then their victims are certainly not their volunteers. - If they are religious fanatics, believing e.g. in self-mutilation, then the “better working” exists only by the standards they have in their own minds. - How many other exceptions are there? - JZ, 2.4.11. - PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: For some people the voluntary alternatives come always only late into their minds – if at all. They seem to be able only to think in statist terms of compulsion against those who disagree with their commands, plans or ideas and yet they class themselves as mere “idealists” and “reformers”, with sufficient understanding and intelligence. Dissenters are seen by them as saboteurs, spies, criminals, subversives, enemies, conspirators, to be defeated, subjected or exterminated. – JZ, 19.1.93, 18.8.08, 2.4.11. – COMPULSION, COERCION, FORCE, DICTATORSHIPS, TOTALITARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM, INTOLERANCE, FANATICISM
VOLUNTARISM: Freedom can be created only by freedom, by a total rebellion of the people, and by a voluntary organization of the people from the bottom up.” – Bakunin, (in Dolgoff, “Bakunin” p.329/332?) – I interpret that as meaning individual revolutions through individual secessionism and voluntary and exterritorially autonomous reorganization. – JZ, 29.3.84 - He seemed to have had only a single alternative society in his mind, possibly even a territorial one. - His notion of a "total rebellion" and of "the people" seem to be also misconceptions. - If freedom exists already, then it is not needed to create freedom. However, some of the existing liberties can be utilized to work towards full freedom, as much freedom as individuals desire for themselves, at their stage of enlightenment. - JZ, 2.4.11. - PANARCHISM, DIS.
VOLUNTARISM: Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion – the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary cooperation of individuals – the technique of the marketplace.” – Milton Friedman - A market place for all kinds of societies and communities of volunteers, all of them only exterritorially autonomous, has still to be established. - JZ, 2.4.11. - VOLUNTARY & MARKET-LIKE COOPERATION OF INDIVIDUALS, COMPETITION, VS. TERRITORIAL STATISM & TOTALITARIANISM
VOLUNTARISM: Government would, in effect, be merely an instrument, voluntarily subscribed to, that would prevent anyone (including governments) from taking or abridging life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. That is all.” – Karl Hess, The Lawless State, p.8/9. – A territorial monopoly for this task seems to be implied here, which assumes that governments can and will fulfill such a task. All who agreed may have done so under the delusion that such a service can only or ought to be supplied as a territorial monopoly and that it can be satisfactorily supplied in this way, a popular error that still prevails. – JZ, 18.8.08. – VOLUNTARISM, CONSENT, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: I confess that many of the socialistic views that I have come across seem to be tainted with ideas of authority, if not actual compulsion. Of course authority and compulsion are out of the question. All association must be quite voluntary. It is only in voluntary associations that man is fine.” – Oscar Wilde, in “The Heretics Handbook of Quotations”, ed. by Charles Bufe. - PANARCHISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, AUTHORITARIANISM, COMPULSION, SOCIALISM
VOLUNTARISM: I favor every reasonable, just, peaceful and voluntary alternative. – JZ, 18.2.73, 18.8.08, 2.4.11. - ALTERNATIVES
VOLUNTARISM: I want to urge devotion to the fundamental human liberty – the principle of voluntarism. No lasting gain has ever come from compulsion. If we seek force, we but tear apart that which unified is invincible.” – Samuel Gompers. – Coercive trade unionists did not pay sufficient attention to him. As a result total union membership seems to be declining, everywhere, in spite of all efforts to make it compulsory and compel participation in their "anti-industrial" “actions”. – JZ, 18.8.08. – I was rather pleased today, reading as a positive sign of the times, in THE AUSTRALIAN FINANCIAL REVIEW, 23.3.11, page 55, that union membership in the Australian workforce is now down to 20%. - JZ, 2.4.11. - UNIONS, COMPETITION, LIBERTY
VOLUNTARISM: I, Henry Thoreau, do not wish to be regarded as member of any incorporated society which I have not joined.” – Thoreau - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOLUNTARISM: I’d rather live in an involuntary but mostly capitalist society than a voluntary socialist one.” – Wayne Wallace Woodward, THE CONNECTION 110, 6.3.83, p.53. – Voluntarism is already involved in a genuinely capitalist society, i.e., one without any monopolies and coercion. And the voluntary socialists would not want him as a member anyhow. – JZ, 28.6.89, 18.8.08.
VOLUNTARISM: If an exchange between two parties is voluntary, it will not take place unless both believe they will benefit from it. Most economic (*) fallacies derive from the neglect of this simple insight, from the tendency to assume that there is a fixed pie, that one party can gain only at the expense of another.” – Milton Friedman. - (*) as well as political and social … - Particularly the territorialist party people are of that conviction. Under the conditions of territorial rule and for them, as political parties within it, the zero sum game is, indeed, true. They have to learn to think in other terms and establish a panarchist party to grant total victory over their own affairs to all parties, which is only possible under territorial autonomy and voluntarism, i.e. free choice of governments and societies for all individual citizens. - JZ, 26. 11. 06. - TRADE & EXCHANGE. THE MYTH OF ONLY ZERO SUM GAMES INSTEAD OF WIN-WIN GAMES BEING AT OUR DISPOSAL OR WITHIN RELATIVELY EASY RANGE, IF ONLY WE CHANGED OUR IDEAS A LITTLE
VOLUNTARISM: If their object had really been to abolish slavery, or maintain liberty or justice generally, they had only to say: All, whether white or black, who want the protection of this government, shall have it; and all who do not want it, will be left in peace, so long as they leave us in peace. Had they said this, slavery would necessarily have been abolished at once; the war would have been saved; and a thousand times nobler union than we have ever had would have been the result. It would have been a voluntary union of free men; such a union as will one day exist among men, the world over, if the several nations, so called, shall ever get rid of the usurpers, robbers and murderers, called governments, that now plunder, enslave, and destroy them.” – Lysander Spooner, No Treason, VI/57, Works I. - UNITY, PROTECTION, SLAVERY
VOLUNTARISM: If there is any principle more certain than another, I suppose it is that what a people is able to do for itself the Government should not attempt to do for it. For nothing tends so much to strengthen a people, to make them powerful, great and good, as the constant exercise of all their faculties on public objects, and the carrying out of public works and objects by voluntary contributions among themselves.” – John Bright, 1847. - Alas, he failed to define what constitutes "a people" and, probably, thought only of the whole population of a territory. - This definition should be left to like-minded volunteers, who exist as a network rather than as a uniform and territorial organization. As such they could be spread even world-wide – and so could many other kinds of networks of volunteers. Compare e.g. the current social networks, Facebook etc., websites, blogs and email exchanges between people with some common interests, also the ever growing international purchases and sales happening through the Internet. - JZ, 2.4.11, 20.8.12. - DIS., SUBSIDIARITY PRINCIPLE VS. TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, WELFARE STATE, PEOPLE
VOLUNTARISM: If truth must be individually accepted then so must be any political and economic system – like any religion or philosophy or ideology. – JZ, 2.11.76, 18.8.08. - TRUTH, ACTION, TOLERANCE
VOLUNTARISM: In early societies a man’s position is determined by his place in the complex traditional groups into which he has been born, and history shows men gradually emancipating themselves from this closed society, and placing themselves in associations and relationships of their own choice.” – David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p.54 on Sir Henry Maine. - VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CHOICE, INDIVIDUALIZATION, INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM
VOLUNTARISM: In fact, the free market is based on a contextual theory of values. It allows for the formation of virtually any completely voluntary association for the achievement of really common purposes, without requiring the subordination of any to a dictator or a majority vote. And at last we can see a sense in which autonomy can not only be meaningful in society, but is the heart of the libertarian creed; autonomy can be meaningful if we accept and understand the necessity for a system of property titles defining the sphere of decision-making and actions proper for men. Once this is accepted, under libertarianism every man is the ultimate decision-maker, the owner of his own life and property.” – Roy Childs, Anarchism and Justice, INDIVIDUALIST, 10/71. - EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, LIBERTARIANISM, PANARCHISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, PROPERTY RIGHTS, ANARCHISM, JUSTICE, SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOLUNTARISM: Let the Whitlam followers have Whitlam and the Fraserites Fraser - that's enough punishment for both! - JZ, 75. - Free voting, free choice among governments and societies, always without any territorial monopoly. – Each party is to win – but always only the rule over its own followers. - JZ, 21.4.09. - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, PARTIES, LEADERS, LIBERAL PARTY & LABOR PARTY.
VOLUNTARISM: Life could really be wonderful if people learnt to either leave each other alone or to associate only voluntarily. – JZ, 3.2.92. – TOLERANCE, ALONE, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: Might it not be well to provide by law that, both in practice as well as in theory, all associations should be voluntaristic – free to join and free to quit?” – E. E. Finer, Anonymous Empire, London, 1958, p.126. - PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: Most anarchists are so enamored with egalitarian and communist notions that they tend to forget about the voluntaristic implications of their philosophy and imagine that everyone would have to share and practice the particular preferences of these anarchists. – Check your territorialist premises! JZ, 30.8.93, 18.8.08. – Compare my Anarchist Spectrum – of hyphenated forms of anarchism and their opposites, at www.butterbach.net - and do help to complete it! – Anarchists have so far shown a remarkable indifference towards the different kinds of anarchism t- here listed together. Lack of interest in the own affairs is one major cause of many of the remaining problems. – JZ, 21.8.12. - ANARCHISM, EGALITARIANISM, INTOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM
VOLUNTARISM: much advance was made in this country – through voluntary rather than state action.” – Margaret Thatcher on ‘Victorian values’, television interview with Brian Walden, 17.1.1983. - VS. STATE ACTION, WELFARE STATE, TRANSFER SOCIETY
VOLUNTARISM: No government should have the power to regulate voluntary human activity. Only acts involving involuntary activity should be outlawed, e.g.. murder, theft, rape, fraud, breach of contract, assault, etc. – All laws should have an obligatory review period of 5 years.” – From Progress Party advertisement in SUNDAY TELEGRAPH, 27.11.77.
VOLUNTARISM: no government, so called, can reasonably be trusted for a moment, or reasonably supposed to have honest purposes in view, any longer than it depends wholly on voluntary support.” – Lysander Spooner, No Treason. – VOLUNTARY MEMBERSHIP, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, VOLUNTARY OBEDIENCE, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: No injury can be done to one who is willing.” - (“Volenti non fit injuria.”) – Legal Maxim. – CONSENT, SANCTION OF THE VICTIMS, STATISM, SUBMISSIVENESS, SLAVE- OR SERF-MENTALITY, SADISM COMBINED WITH MASOCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: No peaceful, creative and adult person to be submitted to any ruler or rule against his or her will. – JZ, 14.4.93. – ANARCHISM – COMPARE CHILDREN’S RIGHTS e.g. in PEACE PLANS 589/590.
VOLUNTARISM: Not after commonality I strive but towards uniqueness. In the association you make yourself count, in society you are used. You or the society, Self-Owner or Subject, Egoist or Proletarian!” – John Henry Mackay, Stirner, S.146. – JZ tr. of: “Nicht nach Gemeinschaftlichkeit, sondern nach Einseitigkeit trachte Ich. In dem Vereine machst Du Dich geltend; in der Gesellschaft wirst Du verwendet. Du oder die Gesellschaft, Eigner oder Lump, Egoist oder Sozialer!“ – ASSOCIATIONISTS VS. SUBJECTS
VOLUNTARISM: Nothing but voluntarism can make politics right. – JZ, 25.1.97. – And it requires the abolition of territorialism. – JZ, 18.8.08. - POLITICS
VOLUNTARISM: Nothing but what is voluntary deserves recognition and respect. - JZ, 04-11.
VOLUNTARISM: Nothing but what is voluntary is deserving the name of national.” - Caroline Chisholm, an Australian pioneer woman, 1808-1877, in: “The A.B.C. of colonization in a series of letters”, No. 1, 1850. - Can anyone provide me with the exact reference? - JZ, 15.11.02. I found it, at last, in a small booklet by Wendy Sutherland, OUP, 1967, 30pp. – It has become one of my favorite quotes, thus I mentioned it several times in this compilation. - JZ, 20.8.12. – NATIONALISM, TERRITORIALISM
VOLUNTARISM: people are more efficient when they undertake their work voluntarily and participate freely in the process of decision-making.” – Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p.655. – My thanks go to Bob Cowin, Wollongong, for pointing this book out to me. – JZ, 18.8.08.
VOLUNTARISM: Q.: All relationships among individuals should be (a) Legal. (b) Voluntary. (c) Sanctioned by religion. (d) Based on altruism. – A.: (b) is the only acceptable answer. If an individual has the ultimate responsibility for his own life and happiness, he logically must be free to choose with whom and in what way he will interact with others. (a) must be rejected because legal and moral are not synonymous terms. (c) & (d) must be rejected because, among other reasons, they place the end of man’s action outside of himself and in one way or another dependent upon someone or something else, a principle we cannot accept.” – Glen G. Cooper, Contemporary Realism, p.23, under point 80.
VOLUNTARISM: Self-evidently, the “individualists” may freely associate, too. The decisive factor for an anarchist, whichever economic views he holds, is merely whether the principle of voluntarism is maintained in such a community and whether he may withdraw from it, in case that appears advisable to him, as fast as he has once joined it, while reserving his independency.” – St. Ch. Waldecke, Gedanken ueber Anarchie, S.14. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SECESSIONISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: Spooner’s system of voluntary government would rest on the two ancient principles of English liberty – no taxation without representation and trial by jury. Although never developed fully, Spooner’s views on taxation are quite clear. A government, as any other institution, must depend “on purely voluntary support.” (“Letter to Cleveland”, p.71.) Taxes would be given by the people, not taken from them; if a citizen disapproved of his government, he would simply withhold taxes.” – Charles Chively, in his introduction to Spooner, Works I, p.54. – VOLUNTARY TAXATION, GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: The ‘private sector’ of the economy is, in fact, the voluntary sector; and ... the ‘public sector’ is, in fact, the coercive sector.” – Henry Hazlitt - VS. COMPULSION, COERCION & MONOPOLIES OR PRIVILEGES, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM & ITS COERCION & MONOPOLISM
VOLUNTARISM: the assumption of former state powers by voluntary associations.” – David DeLeon, The American As Anarchist, p.75. - Always only over their own voluntary members, as long as they want to remain members, i.e., do not secede from them. – While volunteers, in their societies, might concede to some of them some monopolies, no societies of volunteers and however exterritorially autonomous, would be entitled to continue any territorial domination. – It would be confined to the private or cooperative real estate of its members and, even there, only property rights would prevail, and the rules of voluntary hospitality and of the obligations for mere guests, not territorial sovereignty. – In clashes between different legal ideas and systems the prearranged treaties should be applied, which decide whether the law of the accused, the law of the accuser or e.g. paritetically organized courts should decide such cases, which happened once at least in Egypt, also which set of international laws should be applied and with what qualifications, e.g. a universal declaration of individual rights and liberties or Jerome Internoscia’s New Code of International Law, which appeared in 3 languages, side by side, on a page, in 1910. - JZ, 18.8.08, 20.8.12. – ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM, INTERNATIONAL LAW, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, TERRITORIALISM
VOLUNTARISM: The authority of government … can have no pure right over my person and my property but what I concede to it.” – Henry David Thoreau. - CONSENT, CONTRACTARIANISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOLUNTARISM: The essential notion of a capitalist society … is voluntary cooperation, voluntary exchange. The essential notion of a socialist society is force.” – Milton Friedman - COOPERATION, EXCHANGE, CAPITALISM, VS. STATE SOCIALIST COERCION OR COMPULSION
VOLUNTARISM: The government outlaws many voluntary activities while engaging in many coercive activities. – JZ, 3.3.75. - TERRITORIALISM, COERCION
VOLUNTARISM: The libertarian defense of the individual and society against the pattern-producing State is voluntarism. Capitalism is legitimate simply because it is voluntary. But voluntaryism would give its stamp of legitimacy to any other system voluntarily chosen by those it encompasses.” – Istvan Telek, LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION 75.
VOLUNTARISM: The people are not the origin of all just power.” - David Hume - But their voluntary associations are the foundation of all just power over themselves. - JZ, 11. 10. 02. – Neither “the” people, nor “the” government, nor “the” “God” can always be relied upon to be just to all individuals. – JZ, 21.4.09. - PEOPLE, PANARCHISM, POWER, SELF-GOVERNMENT, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY TOWARDS STATES & SOCIETIES, JUSTICE, GOD, GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, NATIONS, DEMOCRACY
VOLUNTARISM: The political spectrum offers a choice among ideologies that try to sugar the water of the poisonous river. The Anarchist’s idea – and this is what sets him off the map altogether – is to drink from another source: voluntarism, rather than coercion.” – Fred Woodworth, Anarchist? What’s That? - in “The Heretics Handbook of Quotations”, ed. by Charles Bufe. - ANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: The primary thing about anarchism is voluntarism - in every respect, not egalitarianism, unionism, syndicalism, collectivism, communism, socialism, cooperative association, decentralization or any other ideal or supposed ideal. – JZ, Jan. & Oct. 95. - ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: There is a sphere of action in which society, as distinguished from the individual, has, if any, only an indirect interest; comprehending all that portion of a person's life and conduct which affects only himself, or if it also affects others, only with their free, voluntary and undeceived consent and participation." - J. S. Mill, On Liberty, Great Books Edition, 272..
VOLUNTARISM: There ought to be a constant endeavour to leave the more positive aspects of government in the hands of voluntary associations, the purpose of the State being merely to exact efficiency and to secure an amiable settlement of dispute, whether within or without its own borders. And with this ought to be combined the greatest possible tolerance of exceptions and the least possible insistence upon uniform systems.” – Bertrand Russell, Principles of Social Reconstruction, p.72. – Close, but not yet close enough to PANARCHISM. – JZ, 18.8.08. – With his State socialist leanings, he expected the territorial State, one of the most wrongful and inefficient institutions, to be efficient in very important jobs! – JZ, 20.8.12.
VOLUNTARISM: Total voluntarism.” – Joffre Stewart in NO GOVERNOR, Jan. 85, p.10.
VOLUNTARISM: Unity must be voluntary to release all its potential creative strength. – JZ, 25.8.98, 18.8.08. - UNITY
VOLUNTARISM: Unless a good deed is voluntary, it has no moral significance.” – Everett Dean Martin (1880-1941), Political Philosopher. - Assume that from one day to the other bad deeds would no longer be committed either by private or official criminals, so that at least outwardly a moral condition would appear. Would this have no moral significance and no moral effect at all? Would the belief persist that we are all sinners or that people are always inclined to take wrongful advantage of each other, people whose criminal urges need to be controlled by a central monopoly power, unless they were, somehow, miraculously, reconstituted into "angels, without criminal inclinations? " - As Kant suggested, even a society of devils could be formed in a way that devilish actions against each other would disappear. Naturally, they might still appear in the dreams of these devils. Who cares, as long as they would no longer act upon them? Moral behavior counts for something, too, not only moral inclinations, thoughts and reasoning. Without much moral reasoning, just by their good nature and common sense, there were dozens of tribes that had no government in our sense and knew no wars or slavery, no taxes and also tribes or native communities where children were treated respectfully, without violence. The African bushmen respected the individual rights of women thousands of years earlier than did the supposedly more civilized peoples. It is, to a large extent, the territorial State or intolerant religious beliefs that turn us into immoral and violent human beings: - JZ, 25. 11. 06. - GOOD WILL, GOOD DEEDS, GOOD INTENTIONS, MORALITY
VOLUNTARISM: Volenti non fit injuria, is a maxim of the law. To the willing no injury is done. That is, no legal wrong.” – Lysander Spooner, Vices Are not Crimes.
VOLUNTARISM: Voluntarism implies as well and ultimately - full exterritorial autonomy for communities, societies and governance systems by and over volunteers only, and also individual secessionism and minority group secessionism for all of them and the absence of any territorial monopoly going beyond private or cooperatively owned real estate. – JZ, 2.5.98, 18.8.08, 20.8.12. - PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: Voluntarism is much more basic to all forms of anarchism than e.g. egalitarianism. So are individualism, autonomy, anti-authoritarianism, self-determination, the love of peace, justice, liberty, basic human rights and liberties (of the individualist type). – JZ, 23.1.97. - ANARCHISM & EGALITARIANISM, COMMUNISM, SYNDICALISM
VOLUNTARISM: Voluntarism is the opposite of coercion and is the only kind of inter-personal relationship which allows all the parties involved to retain their personal sovereignty (right of exclusive control or jurisdiction over their own bodies …)” - Fred Wells Jr., OPTION, 6/77, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: Voluntarism, exterritoriality and personal law, all based on individual rights, are our only hope for the future, the only chances for the survival of man. Check it out for yourself, if you dare to think for yourself. – JZ, n.d.
VOLUNTARISM: Voluntary association limits freedom while it enlarges liberty. That which is limited by continuous association is the indulgence of individual appetites, passions and animal instincts – the carnal side of men. That which is expanded by continuous association is the perfection of individual skills, ambitions, and aspirations – the spiritual side of man.” – Felix Morley, State and Society, in Templeton: The Politicization of Society. - - Here he either overlooks or does not clearly enough express the benefits of individualism, disassociationism, personal independence, secessionism, retreatism, isolationism, etc. at least temporarily. We are at the same time both, social and asocial animals, to some extent even anti-social ones, which is rightful only to the extent that we do not infringe the rights and liberties of others. – JZ, 4.6.92. 18.8.08. - ASSOCIATIONISM, DISASSOCIATIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUALISM, ALONE
VOLUNTARISM: Volunteer groups should be quite free to live their own organizational lives, as sums of individual choices, and to organize, work and invest towards a common future of their own unanimous choice, always at their own expense and risk. This kind of liberty would be most instructive for their own members and for outside observers, through its successes as well as through its failures. - JZ, 11.9.87, 1.4.89. - PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VOLUNTARISM: Volunteers can and would test a social system, even to its and possibly their own destruction, and they should be given the chance to do so. - JZ 24.7.87. - After reading Poul Anderson, in Past Times, p.144: "John Campbell once pointed out that one advantage of science fiction is that in a story you can test a social system to destruction without actually killing anybody."
VOLUNTARISM: Volunteers financed out of taxes are not true volunteers.” – JZ, 10.2.91.
VOLUNTARISM: Voting should be voluntary not compulsory, just like church membership, membership in trade unions, police or military forces should be voluntary. – JZ, 2.8.95, 18.8.08.
VOLUNTARISM: We shall replace statism with voluntarism: a society wherein all man’s relationships with others are voluntary and uncoerced. Where men are free to act according to their rational self-interest, even if it means the establishment of competing agencies of defense.” – Roy A. Childs, Jr., Liberty Against Power, Fox & Wilkes, San Francisco, 1994, p.156. - VS. STATISM, COMPETING DEFENCE AGENCIES
VOLUNTARISM: We should not expect any economic, political and social system to operate as well as it could be if it were operated exclusively by volunteers, at their expense, risk and responsibility and under full exterritorial autonomy. - JZ 9.11.92.
VOLUNTARISM: What is the basic, the essential, the crucial principle that differentiates freedom from slavery? It is the principle of voluntary action versus physical coercion or compulsion.” – Ayn Rand. - If such ideas are consistently practised then they will mostly be victorious, soon or ultimately and this with a minimum of sacrifices. This applies even to national defence against despots and tyrants and their aggressions. Nevertheless, a consistent libertarian defence, revolution and liberation program has either not yet been drafted or not yet been recognized as such. - An attempt in this direction was made in my two peace books: www.butterbach.net/epinfor/peace.htm - & - www.butterbach.net/epinfo/abc.htm - JZ, 23. 11. 06. - VS. COERCION & COMPULSION, FREEDOM VS. SLAVERY, MONOPOLIES OR PRIVILEGES
VOLUNTARISM: With a clarity of vision that is extremely rare among modern day political scientists, Spooner, went right to heart of the matter when he declared that: “There is no other criterion whatever, by which to determine whether a government is a free one, or not, than the single one of its depending, or not depending, solely on voluntary support.” – Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.134. - Since even this remark can be misinterpreted, by saying subjects of a territory did not emigrate, did not rebel, did not resist, did not even publicly protest, but participated, e.g. in elections, or that at least the majority did, by voting in a certain government, one should have added that a mandate does not exist to a sufficient extent when all (except e.g. convicted criminals) have not granted their individual consent. It would exist only, in other words, when no individuals and minority groups, although quite free to secede, have seceded. Since that right and liberty has not been recognized and realized, no genuine and territory-wide mandate, consent and representation does exist. – Neither does voluntary taxation and monetary freedom. Even Free Trade and Free Migration are still all too restricted. - Nor does the population anywhere have any direct say on war, peace, armament, disarmament and international treaties. - Not even a comprehensive Bill of Rights or Human Rights Declaration does exist so far or has been sufficiently published. - Judging by these factors all present States are neither democratic nor republican, but, rather, all too despotic still. - JZ, 18.8.08, 2.4.11, 21.8.12. - POLITICAL SCIENCE, GOVERNMENTS, FREE GOVERNMENTS, VOLUNTARY GOVERNMENTS, PANARCHISM, DEMOCRACY, REPUBLICS, CONSENT, MANDATE, REPRESENTATION, TERRITORIALISM
VOLUNTARISM: Yet on reference to the preamble of this document for our notable State of Massachusetts, I find it set down in language of the plainest character that “The body politic is formed by a voluntary association of individuals”. Doubt as we may, this sentence stands at the head of the second paragraph of a document dated no farther back than the year 1780. If in so short a period as 63 years the most sacred public enactments are suffered by those who pretend to maintain them, to be reduced to waste paper; …” - Charles Lane, Letter IV, May 4, 1843, p.72 in the edition by Carl Watner: A Voluntary Political Government. - PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARISM: You can only have three basic relationships with others: voluntary, coercive ones or none, i.e., a condition of neutrality. E.g. Protectionists and, generally, the territorialists, prefer the coercive ones, being ignorant of or prejudiced against the rights, liberties and benefits of the voluntary ones. – JZ, 11/72, 18.8.08, 2.4.11.
VOLUNTARY & EXTERRITORIAL DECENTRALIZATION, COOPERATION & COMPETITION VS. GEOGRAPHICAL DECENTRALIZATION, COOPERATION ETC.: Multiple, competing and cooperative world federations vs. one territorial world federation by majority decision-making. - That seems utopian only to those who refuse to recognize precedents and wide-spread although unprincipled practices in other spheres, like religion, science, sports, entertainments, lifestyle choices, arts, fashions etc. – JZ, 7.1.99.
VOLUNTARY AGENCIES: Thousands of voluntary agencies, tired of living on leftovers, have turned to Washington for support and have thus become, in effect, agents of the state.” - Richard Cornuelle, Healing America, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New York, 1983, p.20. – End their government subsidies but let them become exterritorially autonomous so that their members are no longer tax slaves of territorial States. – JZ, 21.4.09. – PANARCHISM, CHARITIES, SUBSIDIES, TAXATION
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONISM ON THE BASIS OF EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY: Panarchism with its greatly varied panarchies, all only with voluntary members. - JZ, 23.9.04.
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS WITH FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR THOSE WHO WANT IT: The numerous voluntary associations, now existing e.g. in the U.S., and in most other States, do only lack autonomy in the spheres now restricted to territorial governments (local governments, States and the Federation), in order to form peaceful, voluntaristic and exterritorial alternative to governments as suggested by panarchism. To the extent that they do at present still somewhat clash with each other, they do so as a rule only about interventionist legislation of one kind or the other, i.e. about the effects of territorial rule upon themselves. Each lobby likes a certain type of legislation for itself but, in ignorance of or under non-appreciation of the personal law option in the sphere of governmental services (or disservices), they all want these legal "solutions" imposed upon all instead of being satisfied with having them realized only among themselves. In other words, most US citizens in most respects are already, unconsciously, panarchists. They have merely to be turned into panarchists in every respect. - JZ 31.3.89, 10.9.04.
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE: In early societies a man's position is determined by his place in the complex traditional groups into which he has been born, and history shows men gradually emancipating themselves from this closed society, and placing themselves in associations and relationships of their own choice." - David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p. 54, on Sir Henry Maine.
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS, plan 139, by Don Werkheiser, 21, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506.
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS: Henry Addis, on the other hand, typical of all nineteenth century American anarchists, was basically an idealist, a voluntarist, and an individualist. “The Anarchist ideal in matters of propaganda and revolutionary methods, as well as all things else, is personal choice,” HE WROTE. “Everybody to determine, for himself or herself, what to do and how to do it.” So adamantly did Addis cling to the individualist ideal that he found himself, like Emerson and Thoreau, defending the notion that law and order is primarily a matter between the individual and the forces of nature he discovers in the universe. Human freedom is only possible, according to Addis, where the individual frees himself from formal political authority and joints with other free individuals in voluntary cooperation designed to achieve the liberty of every member of the group.” – Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.263. - PANARCHISM, PROTECTIVE AGENCIES, DEFENCE AGENCIES, TOLERANCE, FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, LAW & ORDER
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS: In contrast to (territorial - JZ) government planning, in which a small elite directs society, the market allows many groups – each with different, limited purposes and means – to evaluate whether they succeed. Those who seek to earn profits by satisfying customers have the most direct means of evaluating how they are doing but other freely organized groups must also be financed and supported by their members. (*) Donald J. Devine, Does Freedom Work? Caroline House Books, Green Hills Publishers, 1978, p.46. - - (*) Thus their gain or loss of members is also a good indication of the success in their endeavors to satisfy them as their customers. – JZ, 26.9.07. - Did he consider, in any of his writings, full exterritorial autonomy or a free market for communities and societies of volunteers? - Or did he have only a free market for ordinary consumer goods and services in mind, not one for whole political, economic and social systems? - JZ, 2.4.11. - MOTIVATED BY PROFIT OR OTHERWISE, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM VS. CENTRAL TERRITORIAL PLANNING & DIRECTION, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS: It is only in the last few years that voluntary association has begun to disclose its great powers for good; and we have no right to expect that we shall suddenly become efficient masters in the use of so new and so great an instrument. (*) Many high qualities in ourselves are required before this can be the case. You can regulate a mass of half-men, half-slaves under government systems, under enforced association, almost when you choose, and as you choose; but it is only free men, with the qualities of free men, that can take their place in voluntary associations. When once our eyes are opened to this great matter, we shall see, perhaps with some indignation, that those who are constantly striving to extend the area of government management, and to make men do by compulsory association what they could learn to do by voluntary association, are pronouncing the doom of the race, and condemning it to perpetual inefficiency.” – Auberon Herbert, in Mack’s edition, p.187. - (*) Especially when it comes e.g. to the use of free banking and free choice of value standards or to ideal militias of volunteers for the protection of individual rights and liberties, or how to arrange for the jurisdiction between the members of different panarchies. – JZ, 18.8.08.
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS: Legitimate government can be formed only by the voluntary association of all who contribute to its support. As a voluntary association, it can have for its object only those things in which the members of the association are all agreed.” - Lysander Spooner, quoted in Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, A Study in American Anarchism, p.133.
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS: Plan 139, by Don Werkheiser, page 21, in ON PANARCHY II, in PEACE PLANS 506.
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS: The only efficient and just solution is to allow individuals and groups of individuals to form their own voluntary associations, providing there is no force, fraud or coercion in the market.” – PROGRESS PARTY, Australia, Platform, 4/4. - PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS: The sum-total of societal wisdom is not concentrated in the minds of an elite; it is dispersed among all the individuals in society who have direct acquaintance with their own needs, desires and situation. But this is not an argument for democracy; there is no collective wisdom which mysteriously manifests itself in the results of an election or referendum as Rousseau thought. It is, rather, an argument for allowing individuals to use their own unique perceptions and talents, in voluntary association with each other, to work out various solutions to their own problems.” – Philip B. Demattais, What Is Libertarianism? p.6. - ASSOCIATIONISM, REFERENDUM, ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY, PEOPLES, POPULATIONS, MASSES, INHABITANTS
VOLUNTARY COMMUNITIES: Only from voluntary associations of men who have understood their uniqueness and are conscious of it can society derive. Stirner distinguishes sharply the predetermined society, which means coercion, from the free association, which is formed by an act of choice: “The society consumes you. You consume the association. …” - Daniel Guerin, Anarchismus, Begriff und Praxis, edition Suhrkamp, 1967, p.29. - PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, SOCIETIES, INDIVIDUALS & THEIR UNIQUENESS, STIRNER
VOLUNTARY COOPERATION: Whenever we depart from voluntary cooperation and try to do good by using force, the bad moral value of force triumphs over good intentions.” – Milton Friedman - VS. COERCION & COMPULSION & MONOPOLIES, PRIVILEGES & SUBSIDIES, FORCE & VIOLENCE, VOLUNTARISM, TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY
VOLUNTARY DIVISIONISM & FEDERALISM: Divide and rule" is in reality more a "rule of forceful subjugation and unification" that does not create divisions but exploits existing ones for its own and centralizing purposes. It does not permit FULL divisions and FULL minority autonomy but only small fractions of them, sufficient to keep the unenlightened slogging at each other and to prevent their combination against centralized domination over all of them. It encourages battles and party strife and even some civil unrest for one or the other kind of internal, territorial and temporary domination, at least for local favouritism on a limited scale, in which the central power becomes an often arbitrary arbitrator and seeming peace maker, a real wolf in a sheep's pelt. A genuine division would be quite voluntary and un-resisted, even for individuals and radical minority groups, i.e. it would permit individual secessionism and full individual and minority sovereignty. It would amount to the abdication of rule over any but volunteers. Consequently: Allow free divisions to abolish all wrongful territorial domination. - JZ, 8.2.88, 1.4.89, 10.9.04, 21.8.12.
VOLUNTARY GOVERNMENT & CONSTITUTIONS, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, FREE CHOICE: It will not, surely, be said that this reading is to stand good for those who originally framed the Constitution; but that all voluntariness or choice is to be taken away from their descendants, from those whose misfortune, as it would appear, was to be born into the world a few years later. The fathers could not design that their children, their own flesh and blood, should be placed in a worse position than they claimed for themselves. It is true that in the next clause they say they form 'a new constitution of civil government for ourselves and posterity', but in the following they also say that 'all men are born free and equal'; and the declared right to amend the Constitution is too well known and too practical to be forgotten. I cannot see therefore the propriety of twisting the terms of the Constitution from their obvious, legitimate and true meaning, and under those terms I affirm the right of any man to be a member of the body politic or not, as to him, on conscientious dictate, shall seem best." - Charles Lane, Letter V, May 4, 1843.
VOLUNTARY GOVERNMENT, COMPETING GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENTS BASED UPON GENUINE SELF-DETERMINATION: Spooner also further elaborated on his conception of voluntary government. It was his opinion that legitimate government could only be formed by the voluntary consent of all who participate in it and contribute to its support. Like every other voluntary association, a voluntary government requires unanimity among its participants, so far as for the purpose for which they associated. - 'No voluntary association was ever formed, and in the nature of things there never can be one formed, for the accomplishment of any objects, except those which ALL the parties to the association are agreed (JZ: to, or upon?). Government, therefore, must be kept within these limits, or it is no longer a voluntary association of all who contribute to its support, but a mere tyranny established by a part over the rest.'" - Carl Watner, in Holterman, Law in Anarchism, 126, quoting Spooner, Trial by Jury, p. 130.
VOLUNTARY GOVERNMENT: By this qualification obviously the opposite to territorial government is meant. - JZ - TERRITORIALISM
VOLUNTARY MEMBERSHIP FOR ANY STATE & SOCIETY: Any government and any society only to survive via individual free choices of membership, including free and individual disassociation. - JZ, 04-11. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM
VOLUNTARY MEMBERSHIP IN STATES & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM: When governments are reduced to voluntary support only, most of them will sooner or later be deserted and the rest will continue their "demonstrations of the practical and moral disadvantages of authoritarianism" until almost all of them are converted to self-management principles and practices, as well. - It took hundreds of years before even church membership became quite voluntary in most States. Will it take further hundreds of years before State membership becomes likewise voluntary? - JZ, 3.9.04, 22.8.12. – Q.
VOLUNTARY OR COMPETING GOVERNMENTS: The organizations in question would not be voluntary governments (since government is an organization which coerces the non-invasive into membership and allegiance), but simply voluntary associations for purposes of defence. Between these and liberty there is certainly no incongruity, always remembering that by liberty is meant equal liberty, liberty for all." - Victor Yarros, LIBERTY, 22 Feb. 1896, in criticizing Salter, Anarchy or Government. - Merely appending "voluntary" or "competing" as a classification to "government", which is, in the eyes of most libertarians and anarchists inherently coercive, does not sufficiently communicate the intention of the advocates of panarchism. A few extra adjectives might help, like exterritorial, autonomous or non-geographical governments for voluntary members only. The fact that thus the former coercive governments would retain no special privilege over competing voluntary and autonomous associations in the same territory should not necessarily be stressed in the propaganda. Statists are often adhering more to mere forms than essences and the later they would wake up to the bare facts of the matter, the better. They could retain their favourite representatives and their institutions and bodies of law, their "great" leaders and all the old titles of them - for themselves. To declare that these institutions, favoured by them, would then be essentially anarchistic associations, in spite of their remaining hierarchies and voluntary obedience to them, would get their hackles up and would not do justice to their voluntary obedience to their chosen hierarchical institutions. That their compulsory membership levies would amount to voluntary taxation should also not be pointed out to them, while they continue to consider them as egalitarian and coercive taxes upon members. Why not leave them their favourite illusions? They would still have their sovereignty, their hierarchy, their constitutions, their laws, their police, their courts - so why not call them their "governments"? Should we insist more on a name than upon the essence of toleration and liberation? The appellation of "government" in these cases is certainly more fitting than in cases where numerous dissenting groups are also automatically presumed to be members of a State. In the same way as Frank Chodorov distinguished between governments and States, we might distinguish between governments or self-governments which deserve these names and mere despotisms of some, not only over their voluntary followers but also over others, in the same territory, others, who would prefer other arrangements for themselves, given a choice in the matter. In short, there are conceivable and practicable past and present forms of governments that ought to be unobjectionable to anarchists - precisely because they do not retain any of the common coercive features of all present governments - like enforced unity or territorialism and compulsory membership, legislation and jurisdiction, policing and defence monopolies. - JZ, 3.7.89. – A voluntary or government by any other name is not changed in its nature, neither is any free society by any other name. Some people like to impose their definitions, just like the present governments try to impose their territorialism. – JZ, 22.8.12.
VOLUNTARY POLITICAL GOVERNMENT: There is no safety for a person or property, while a government by force exists. Let us supersede it by one of charity. Let us have a voluntary State, as well as a voluntary Church, and we may possibly then have some claim to the appellation of free men. Till then, at least, we are slaves." - Charles Lane, in The Letters of Charles Lane, 52. – Slaves of territorial governments or territorialism. – JZ, 22.8.12.
VOLUNTARY SEGREGATION & INTEGRATION VS. COMPULSORY SEGREGATION & INTEGRATION: Accept association - integrate his framework with your own, knowing that neither of you is right, for Totality lies outside of yourself, and can't be cross-referenced from any single viewpoint." - John W. Campbell, Jr., Letters, I/151. - I would rather say: Accept association with like-minded people and disassociation from with people of a different frame of mind. Accept and realize a framework that tolerates and promotes diverse, autonomous, exterritorial and voluntary associations in the same area, without attempting to rule over them and all their peaceful activities, which do not infringe your own rights and liberties. - JZ, 31.3.89. - Isn't it odd that so many SF fans with a large collection of SF books, all describing a great varieties of futures, and so many SF writers, do still insist that on one whole planet only a single utopia should prevail? Luckily we haven't reached this stage on Earth as yet. Have they not enough imagination to envision the peaceful coexistence of many diverse societies and utopias on a single planet and also with members on many other planets? If they did, they would be much more helpful with their literature in solving the problems still remaining on Earth. – I would like to see a list of all the SF novels and stories, which have understood and described this option. So far they are certainly amounting only to a tiny fraction of all such writings. - JZ, 23.9.04, 6.2.12, 22.8.12.
VOLUNTARY SLAVERY: 31, ON PANARCHY I, in PEACE PLANS 505.
VOLUNTARY SLAVERY: From Lincoln come also these significant words: 'I have always thought that all men should be free, but if any should be slaves, it should be first those who desire it for themselves, and secondly those who desire it for others.'" - Rocker, Nationalism & Culture, 149.
VOLUNTARY STATE & VOLUNTARY TAXATION & SOVEREIGNTY OF THE INDIVIDUAL: Auberon Herbert and the group of English individualists he attracted, were the foremost expositors of voluntary taxation and the voluntary State. Condensed into as few words as possible, their voluntaryist formula was: 'The sovereignty of the individual must remain intact, except where the individual coerced has aggressed upon the sovereignty of another unaggressive individual’." - Rothbard, Murray N., Man, Economy & State, p. 159, on and citing Auberon Herbert.
VOLUNTARY STATE: We prefer a voluntary church as the only true church. We shall shortly devise a voluntary political organization as the only true State. Human beings, we are now convinced, cannot be rendered more fit for heaven by human coercion; neither can they, by such a contrivance, be better qualified for a true life on earth. In fact, the goodness and qualification for one are the same as for the other." - Charles Lane, Letter of Feb. 21, 1843, The Letters of Charles Lane, p.56.
VOLUNTARY STATES & COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, BUT ALL WITHOUT TERRITORIAL PRIVILEGES & POWERS: If the Church should be a voluntary organization, why not the State? If men's spiritual health could be left to the free reign of voluntary forces, why could not men's physical well-being be left to the free market? The early advocates of Church-State separation were in the vanguard of the libertarian tradition because they took one of the first steps necessary to separate the State from the rest of society. We may view them as the precursors of the latter-day abolitionists and anarchists." - Carl Watner, A Voluntary Political Government, Letters from Charles Lane, p.33. – Oddly enough, in correspondence with me, C. W. refused to call such governments voluntary, exterritorially autonomous or competing governments, as being contrary to his definition of governments as territorial and coercive ones (which is true, indeed, but only for the present and not the proposed ones) and insisted on calling them free societies etc. – JZ, 22.8.12.
VOLUNTARY STATES: This argument that 'the voluntary church is the only true church' (and by analogy, that the only true political organization is the voluntary state) illustrates the role that voluntaryism has played in the struggle between Church and State in England during the 17th Century ..." - Carl Watner, A Voluntary Political Government, Letters from Charles Lane, 33. – Based on favourite definitions, people can often remain very argumentative, even though they do already agree upon the fundamentals. – That applies also to those, who, like B. M., equate anarcho-capitalism with panarchism. – Already Stirner complained about the fixed ideas of all to many people - and then insisted upon some of his own. - J.Z., 22.8.12.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION & PANARCHISM: Give people the choice to pay all of their imposed tax burdens in one annual, direct lump sum, or even in instalments, if you like, for their right to vote and all the benefits they are supposedly receiving or expecting from their territorial government. And let the financial voters alone have all the government services, which governments can supply from these resources. At the same time, let all the non-voters receive no government services and no territorial government tax bills, either and exempt them from the laws and institutions approved by the remaining voters of the formerly exclusive territorial government. Let them be subject to only to their own and self-chosen institutions and laws and taxes, for all their peaceful and creative or self-concerned actions. Then we would soon find out how popular any government really is, how small or large its "mandate", how representative and democratic it is, how competitive its public services are and its pricing policy for them. I feel certain that more and more people would then soon opt out of the territorial monopolies and would individually choose cheaper and better alternatives. And they would tend to opt out from these alternatives, too, in accordance with their advancing enlightenment, until they are finally as free as they want to be and are able to be. - JZ, 4.10.91, 13.1.93. – VOTING, DEMOCRACY, DIRECT & INDIRECT TAXATION
VOLUNTARY TAXATION & PANARCHISM: The variety of schemes so far practised or proposed. All panarchies would have only voluntary taxation or contribution schemes - because their membership is voluntary. All voluntary taxation schemes would be self-limiting. Abused taxpayers would opt out in droves and could easily do so. The taxers would be aware of this and would act accordingly. Better methods would be rapidly adopted, either by whole panarchies or as a result of many individual members opting out and choosing them for themselves in their own new panarchies. Under panarchism taxes or contributions would be subject to free pricing and its competitive free market pressure. Under it few contributors would continue to elect or tolerate "representatives" that vote-in great benefits for themselves. The package deals offered by competing panarchies would reduce costs and prices of public services. - Voluntary Taxation, See e.g.: Herbert Spencer on this in his "Social Statics", my first CD under Voluntary Taxation and the LMP literature list. - - Voluntary Taxation in a Voluntarist Society or: Free Market Prices and Subscriptions for all Desired Services - as Steps towards Peace and Individual Liberty - by JZ, April 1971, plan 233, pages 38-64, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. Previously published in PEACE PLANS 14, which is now available digitized. – JZ.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION & PUBLIC DEBT: I haven’t signed up for any public debt. Find voluntary tax slaves to pay it. – JZ, 8.3.05.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION OR VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION SCHEMES: Panarchies, through their voluntary membership, are inseparably connected with voluntary taxation, even when all the adult members of a panarchy do agree on compulsory contributions for all their members towards their common purposes. As long as its nature as a community of volunteers is maintained, i.e. as long as members are free to secede from it, their "taxes" or membership contributions must be considered to be voluntary ones. This means, among other things, that their members have consumer sovereignty regarding their kind of public services. They get only those, which they are, individually, willing to pay for. Moreover, if voluntary taxation is introduced, this would also tend to lead to various panarchies, i.e. to panarchism. Already Herbert Spencer, in his 1850 book "Social Statics", saw this quite clearly in his chapter 19: The Right to Ignore the State, although he did not call this consequence by this name. - The introduction of panarchism would inevitably lead to some or the other form of voluntary taxation or contributions that would replace territorially imposed compulsory taxes in all their varieties. - Google search references to voluntary taxation are multiplying, although not all of them do refer to voluntary taxation in the libertarian sense. (I got 583 search results from it on this, on 25.8.02 and today 1800.) (*) I still have to see a comprehensive anthology and discussions of all the voluntary taxation ideas and proposals. The sooner it and such discussions are sufficiently published the better. - JZ, 3.9.11. – (A Google search on “voluntary taxation” today brought me 19,700 results an over tenfold increase since my last search, about a year ago! Alas, I haven’t got the time and energy to peruse them all. – I only looked at the abstracts of the first 10 pages and many of them did appeal to me. – How many millions such references do we need before we are, finally, close to realizing it? – Why doesn’t anybody pull the best of all these offers together, on a CD or DVD and offer it for sale? It could become a bestseller and a conversation piece in numerous gatherings. So far, the printed literature on this subject was very scarce. - JZ, 22.8.12. – Q.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION, OPTING OUT OF TAXPAYERS: Allow taxpayers to opt out of all tax based benefits systems, in the same way as they may opt out of all insurance-, credit- and church systems and out of risky jobs and sports. - JZ, 19.9.88.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION, VOLUNTARY COMMUNITIES: Handouts in the Welfare State: Most statists handouts and subsidies will only end, or be continued only on a voluntary subscription basis, when those who are now forced to pay for them can freely opt out of these income transfer schemes and establish among themselves only those alternative welfare, insurance, credit and charitable arrangements which they really want for themselves. - JZ, 7.9.89, 10.10.89, 23.9.04.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: 12 % is all the Baptists want. I think that’s all the federal government should get.” – Walt Williams, 1990. – From those limited government advocates who do follow his line of reasoning in this. – JZ, 1990.Voluntary taxationists should be free to tax themselves more highly or even less, if at all. – JZ, 18.8.08. – FLAT RATE TAXATION, TAX CEILINGS
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Failure to pay one’s taxes was not to be treated as a crime. They took the position that while governments would still retain a monopoly of control over the army, the courts, and the police, in a given geographic area, no could be forced to support such an …” - Carl Watner, A Voluntary Political Government, p.34. – Non-tax-payers, like un-financial memes of private organizations, should merely lose their membership and claim to membership services. – JZ, 25.6.92. – Whatever financing and spending activities they should then arrange for among themselves would be quite up to them. – JZ, 18.8.08. - PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: For example a petition circulated in London in 1647, demanding that “tithes and all other enforced maintenance may be for ever abolished and nothing in the place thereof imposed, but that all ministers may be paid only by those who voluntarily chose them and contract with them for their labors.” – By substituting “taxes” for “tithes” and “government officials” for “ministers” we realize how close these early religious dissenters were to espousing the ideas of a truly voluntary State. People such as Lane and Spencer merely carried out these arguments to their logical conclusion.” – Carl Watner, commenting on the letters of Charles Lane, in “A Voluntary Political Government”, p. 33. - CHILD-MAINTENANCE? – J.Z.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Just because we are supposed to be somewhat represented still does not turn compulsory voting, State membership, schooling, military service, taxes, elections, etc., etc. into their voluntary alternatives, e.g. cosmopolitan ones, exterritorial autonomy ones for voluntary communities, societies or panarchies and into peacefully competing and just ones – JZ, 25.7.97, 18.8.08. - REPRESENTATION, GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM, VOTING, MILITIA, CONSENT, POLITICS AS USUAL, STATES, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES, COMPULSION
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Let Each Support His Own, Without Forcing Others.” – R. K. Foley, Jr., in THE FREEMAN, 9/78, heading on p.519. – Support your own favorite projects and "public institutions", societies and communities yourself, as far as you can or want to. – JZ, 18.8.08, 2.4.11. – MYOB.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Let only those who vote for a politician or a party or a government pay for the salaries involved and the expenditures they favor. – JZ, 74, 18.8.08. - PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Let those who want government - pay for it. - JZ, 30.3.85. Deny all government services and subordination to those who do not pay for them. Do not force any government services and disservices upon any peaceful dissenters, who would rather do their own things. - JZ, 2.4.11.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Men are dunces', he declared, ‘for giving their support to any laws or government other than those they can give their complete support to.’ - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.135, on Lysander Spooner.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: no government, so called, can reasonably be trusted for a moment, or reasonably supposed to have honest purposes in view, any longer than it depends wholly on voluntary support." - Lysander Spooner, No Treason.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Self-Ownership & The Case For Voluntary Taxation - Last Updated on Monday, 27 September 2010. Written by L. K. Samuels Wednesday, 07 April 2010. - Anyone can oppose a particular tax as being unneeded, wasteful, or too expensive. But what if government buildings, schools and roads are in poor shape? What if there appears to be a real need for higher taxes? Consider the following syllogism developed by Professor Robert Nozick of Harvard University. - PREMISE A: I own myself. If you don't own yourself, then who does own you? Is it the mailman, the next door neighbor, some foreign corporation, doctors, politicians? Who? The abolitionists asked this question before the Civil War, when slavery was quite acceptable to the general public. (*) PREMISE B: What I produce is part of me. - This premise is less generally accepted than the first. But if people own themselves (the right to life), then they must own what they legally produce (providing they do not initiate physical force or fraud). How can it be any other way? If you cannot dispense your income freely, then you are enslaved to another. As Nozick argued: it is wrong to foist benefits on one person and then command someone else to pay. “What if I mowed your lawn and then demanded you to pay me?” (**) This is exactly what government does through forced taxation. - CONCLUSION C: Therefore I own what I produce. - If someone else had a claim to on person’s income, the person would not truly own himself. Since each individual must give personal consent, a majority vote has no effect on the morality of forced taxation. Rape does not magically become okay when ten men do it. One hundred robbers have no more right to break into your home than one. Can a 51% majority who happen to be Christian force the 49% who are Muslim to pay for a new church? Of course not! So why should they have the authority to make you pay for something you did not personally authorize? Yet most people have accepted the bizarre concept that Peter has a right to make Paul fund government programs mandated by Peter. - TAXES SHOULD BE VOLUNTARY. - Those who favor government programs should be the ones to pay for them. In this way, the self-ownership premise is not violated, nor the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which “prohibits involuntary servitude.” - If a product or service is worthwhile, people will support it. After the American Revolutionary War many churchmen and politicians warned that if the U.S. government did not fund churches and clergymen (as some colonies did during the colonial period), there would be few churches. But it did not turn out that way! Those who do not participate, have no responsibility to fund such a system. Would it be fair for everyone to be billed for Disneyland's upkeep, even those who never attend? To be equitable, only those who use it should pay the cost, through user fees. - TIME-LIFE EQUATION. - Since time equals money and since humans are mortal, to confiscate money from an individual is to take a portion of his or her life. In a way, those who steal are physically injuring the victim. They are taking a piece of limited life away from the victim. Taxation is simply a form of coerced redistribution of other people’s lives. - (*) The concepts of self-ownership and individual consent date back to John Locke (1632-1704) who is considered the main influence behind the American Revolution. Locke’s concept of “life, liberty and property” was used by Thomas Jefferson as the philosophical basis for the Declaration of Independence. And it was Thomas Jefferson who as President repealed all federal taxes on individuals. This policy lasted until the Civil War. - (**) Quote from Prof. Moore. - Another good quote from Prof. Moore: “No one is anyone else’s master, and no one is anyone else’s slave.” - Taken by JZ from a Google search result, 3.9.11, as one of 1720, second page, for "voluntary taxation", taken from the website: www.dekkerforcongress.com/ - Paul Dekker copyrighted this note. Why he did so, is a riddle to me. The more people, organizations, magazines etc. would publish it, the more likely it would become that he would be elected. - On the other hand, a single Congress for all of the population of the present USA would disappear under voluntary taxation and panarchism. - Dekker might become president of one of the resulting panarchies, possibly a world-wide one. - For more entries on voluntary taxation see 1.) my Slogans for Liberty file, which is online. http://www.butterbach.net/lmp/cd/ - http://www.dataprospecting.com/cgi-bin/ls.cgi?dir=zube - SLOGANS FOR LIBERTY, Ca. 38 Mbs. - 2.) My Free Banking bibliography: www.panarchy.org/zube/money.index.html and 3., the upcoming Free Banking A to Z, which will be put online, beginning this month, also at www.panarchy.org - JZ, 3.9.11.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Since all the functions of government can be provided competitively and voluntarily, there remains no pretense for any form of taxation at all.” - Carl Watner, commenting on the letters of Charles Lane, in “A Voluntary Political Government”, p.37, on letters III & IV.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Spooner is here laying down a necessary condition for legitimate government: it must be voluntarily financed. He is asserting, not that no government is legitimate, but that no government that is financed by extortion is legitimate." - Fred D. Miller, in "Reason", 5/76. - TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Taxes are not to be laid on the people, but by their consent in person or by deputation.” – James Otis, “The Right of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved”, 1764. – Quoted in Seldes. - By "voluntary and individual deputation” is the interpretation of the Panarchists. –- JZ, 3.11.76, 18.8.08. - What if neither personal consent nor representative consent is granted by the individual taxpayer? How could one leave this question unanswered for so long? – Particularly when most taxpayers remained so ignorant that they still believe that most taxes are paid by the rich rather than by themselves. – Only under territorialism could all the abuses of taxation and all those financed through taxation be continued for so long. – Under panarchism - and its voluntary membership - taxation would soon become limited by the willingness or unwillingness of tax-payers or voluntary contributors to finance the schemes of politicians and bureaucrats. - JZ, 18.8.08. – PANARCHISM, CONSENT, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM, Q.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: That no government, so called, can reasonably be trusted for a moment, or reasonably be supposed to have honest purposes in view, any longer than it depends wholly upon voluntary support.” (p. 221) – Spooner is here laying down a necessary condition for legitimate government: it must be voluntarily financed. He is asserting, not that no government is legitimate, but that no government that is financed by extortion is legitimate. Since the possibility of a legitimate government is thus left open (*), it is clearly consistent with the limited government libertarian.” – - Lysander Spooner, at least partly quoted by Fred D. Miller, in REASON, 5/76. - How much more evidence for this do we still need before we do seriously consider and try to realize rightful alternatives, in our own communities of volunteers? – JZ, 21.4.09. - (*) Not for a territorial government, no matter how legitimate it would otherwise be! – JZ, 18.8.08. - PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, NATIONS, STATES, GOVERNMENTS, COMPULSORY TAXATION, VOLUNTARISM, TRUST, HONESTY, Q.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: The introduction of voluntary taxation could very well come to introduce voluntarism in every sphere. – JZ, 30.3.95, 18.8.08. - PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: The only efficient and just solution is to allow individuals and groups of individuals to form their own voluntary associations, providing there is no force, fraud or coercion in the market." - PROGRESS PARTY PLATFORM
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: The public service wisdom and interest of the individual taxpayer will be truly represented only once he is free to subscribe to any freely competing providers of such services – or to none of them. – JZ, 12.1.95. – REPRESENTATION, DEMOCRACY, SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: The pure libertarian’s solution to this dilemma, of course, is to make taxation and government control voluntary and to recognize the right of every individual to self-rule; i.e., if anyone does not wish to subscribe to government “protection”, he should be left alone to fend for himself. Morally speaking, what right does “the majority” have to force him to come under government rule? If democratic government is truly “by consent of the governed”, then it would seem that anyone wishing not to be governed should be allowed to go his own way.” – Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p.327.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: there are things government just doesn't have to do and things that could be done on a fee-for-service basis.” - SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, Winter 75/76. - Are there any services that require any territorial government or that cannot be done cheaper and better privately and cooperatively, among volunteers? - Too many libertarians do not go far enough with their ideas and proposals. - They have set too narrow limits to their imagination. - JZ, 2.2.02. – There are numerous references to voluntary taxation online. The best statements of all of them need still to be extracted and alphabetically combined. – Everyone, on his own, should not have to laboriously search for it. To my knowledge no anthology or all voluntary taxation schemes and how to introduce them does so far exist. - Don’t expect me to do all such jobs for you. - JZ, 21.4.09. - FEES FOR SERVICES, PAY AS YOU GO, SUBSCRIPTIONS TO WANTED SERVICES, VOLUNTARISM, LET BENEFICIARIES PAY, USER-PAYS-PRINCIPLE, COMPETITIVE SUPPLIES & PRICING, FREE ENTERPRISE FOR PUBLIC SERVICES, Q., LIMITED GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, BUDGET
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Those in favor of taxes should only be free to tax themselves and to negotiate user-pays charges for competitively supplied services they have to offer to others. – JZ, 20.4.93. - They should not be free to levy monopoly charges for them. – Under free competition for all kinds of public service genuine market prices for them would soon result. They cannot be discovered e.g. for postal services, while the postal monopoly is upheld. – JZ, 18.8.08, 22.8.12.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Voluntary Taxation in a Voluntarist Society or: Free Market Prices and Subscriptions for all Desired Services - as Steps towards Peace and Individual Liberty - by JZ, April 1971, plan 233, pages 38 - 64, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Voluntary taxation would reduce most governments to harmlessness. It could be achieved via voluntary membership in governments that are only exterritorially autonomous. – JZ, 28.12.92. – Or through an ideal and complete declaration of individual rights and liberties. Or through an ideal militia for the protection of these rights and liberties. Or through a well-organized tax strike. – JZ, 18.8.08. – PANARCHISM, START-UPS
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: What do you do with or expect from people who still tolerate compulsory taxes and even further tax increases “to slow their economic actions down” and otherwise mismanage the country, while unemployment is still around 10%? – JZ, 2.12.94. - Everyone should be free to secede from wrongful, unenlightened and prejudiced associations, their laws and institutions, free to either make his own mistakes at the own expense and risk or to benefit from his own understanding and ideas as well as his own moral standards. We have already his separate development to a large extent, except e.g. regarding taxation, in our private affairs. We should extend it to all so-called "public affairs", i.e., turn them into private and individual choices as well. - JZ, 3.4.11. – The frequent occurrence of inflations, deflations, stagflations and various other economic “crises” seem to have served, so far, only to spread the number of popular errors, myths and prejudices about them, even among anarchists and libertarians, rather than the truths about them and how to end and prevent them. Insofar, the ordinary means of freedom of expression and information have failed to spread sufficient enlightenment until now. This situation would be greatly improved once full experimental freedom is added, in every sphere. Apparently, not even the required special free markets for ideas, opinions, talents and facts should be simply be assumed to exist already (compare the frequent remark: “the free market for ideas and talents”) but, instead, should finally become systematically established. My digitized 2010 book manuscript draft, still only called “New Draft” and not yet online, deals extensively with some of the genuinely cultural revolutions stepts that have still to take place. At least it was extensively reviewed by GPdB on www.panarchy.org - I still offer it free as an email attachment of 306 KBs to anyone who asks me for it, until it is finally put somewhere online or offered on a CD. No copyrights are claimed for it. It explains much about the regrettable failures of the anarchist and libertarian movements, organizations and individual efforts so far. But getting anarchists and libertarians interested in this – is, nevertheless, still extremely difficult, at least for me. – JZ, 22.8.12.
VOLUNTARY TAXATION: You write that Nozick did not succeed in deriving the just minimal state. Then you write that if an institution does not tax, it is not a state. Since taxation itself is not just, then the “just state” is a logical impossibility. - My own definition of a ‘state’ does not necessarily include taxation. If the state were financed by user fees, for example, and it still had an enforced uniform law, why would it not be a ‘state’? The essence of a state is centralized use of ultimate force, not taxation.” - Fred Foldvary to T.-R., in THE CONNECTION 107, 23.10.82, p.6. - “Centralized use of ultimate force” is characterized by territorial sovereignty, i.e. by involuntary membership or subordination, an imposed constitution, laws, jurisdiction and other statist institutions, the suppression of at least some individual rights and liberties, especially individual and group secessionism, voluntary taxation, and monetary freedom and of the exterritorial autonomy of alternative societies of volunteers on the basis of personal laws, and of any competition in spheres which a territorial government imagines are subject to its own territorial monopoly claims. – JZ, 29.6.89, 28.8.08. - STATE, TAXES
VOLUNTARY VS. COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP, EXTERRITORIAL VS. TERRITORIAL AUTONOMY: But for the libertarian, the only worthwhile goal is breaking the hold of the state. ..." - Filthy Pierre, THE CONNECTION 107, 23.10.82. - Yes, if that means breaking merely its compulsory membership rule, its exclusive sovereignty, its territorial domination over dissenters, its exclusive jurisdiction etc., breaking this bond by individual secessionism and voluntary and exterritorial associationism under personal laws. But whatever voluntary associations of statists remain and to the extent that they do want to rule themselves in the old way, that form of voluntary statism and obedience or bond should NOT be broken, since it would no longer have any hold any upon dissenters, who are free to secede and do their own things. - JZ, 29.6.83, 3.7.89, 22.8.12. – Is THE CONNECTION, finally, online, somewhere or provided on a disc? - JZ, 6.2.12. – It stuck much too long with the printed format and in this form even with much reduced print. It was a good repository for libertarian ideas but could not, in this medium, publish all of them. If it were fully digitized then an alphabetized index could even be produced automatically by now and digitally published with it. – However, I am here the pot that calls the kettle black, for I did take up only some computer options and this only rather belatedly and I am still merely a “computer idiot”. - JZ, 22.8.12.
VOLUNTARYISM & LIMITED GOVERNMENT: There ought to be a constant endeavour to leave the more positive aspects of government in the hands of voluntary organizations, the purpose of the State being merely to exact efficiency and to secure an amiable settlement of disputes, whether within or without its own borders. And with this ought to be combined the greatest possible tolerance of exceptions and the least possible insistence upon uniform systems." - Bertrand Russell, Principles of Social Reconstruction, p.72. - Has any territorial State achieved efficiency and secured the amiable settlement of disputes? - JZ, 23.9.04. – Q.
VOLUNTARYISM: The assumption of former state powers by voluntary associations. - David DeLeon, The American as Anarchist, 75. – Anarchists among Americans – would have been a more truthful title. – JZ, 6.2.12.
VOLUNTARYISM: The doctrine that all the affair of men should be managed by individuals or voluntary associations, and that the State should be abolished.” – Benjamin R. Tucker, 1888. – ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM
VOLUNTARYISM: The name they usually give their philosophy is 'voluntaryism'. They have an obsession with doing everything voluntarily, and they claim, a 'compulsory' government, even if a freedom-loving one, forces itself, its police, its courts, and its military unto people - hence is wrong. The fundamental philosophy is this: you are not truly 'free' unless you can be your own little government, with your own police force, your own military - and with laws, written by yourself. True freedom, they say, is being able to make your 'own decision' over all matters in your life, including being able to choose what would be your own privatized government." - Amber Pawlik in Christian Butterbach letter of 26.7.04.
VOLUNTARYIST, THE, No.49, April 1991: Special issue on renunciation of citizenship, the case of Clark Hanjian, 8 pp, including an article by Carl Watner: Man Without A Country, 163, in ON PANARCHY XVII, in PP 1,051.
VOLUNTARYIST.COM: Statement of Purpose: Voluntaryists are advocates of non-political, non-violent strategies to achieve a free society. We reject electoral politics, in theory and in practice, as incompatible with libertarian principles. Governments must cloak their actions in an aura of moral legitimacy in order to sustain their power, and political methods invariably strengthen that legitimacy. Voluntaryists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate withdrawal of the cooperation and tacit consent on which State power ultimately depends. – www.voluntaryist.com/ - An IN group formed by Carl Watner. – Facebook hint 6.2.12.
VOTES, EXCLUSIVE ONES, FOR ONE'S OWN PREFERENCES. THESE INDIVIDUAL VOTES TO BE FREELY REALISED BY EACH INDIVIDUAL, TOGETHER WITH LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE: Each to be free to choose his own prime minister, tax system, constitution, laws, juridical-, police-, defence- and economic system and his ethnic or other associates. - JZ, 19.9.88.
VOTING & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM: The mere vote against should become a free vote to vote yourself out of their oppression, exploitation, unjust laws, measures, systems and institutions and to decide yourself on your own. - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04.
VOTING & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM & EXTERRITORIAL MINORITY AUTONOMY: Without the right of individuals and minorities to secede and to do their own things for and to themselves, conventional territorial voting is a despotic act, an attempt to rule not only oneself but also all dissenting others in a territory, even all non-aggressive neighbours, without their consent and to their disadvantage, depriving them of their rights and liberties. - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04.
VOTING & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM: Vote yourself out of their majority-voted decisions. - JZ 21.8.75, 10.9.04. - A few of my panarchist slogan remarks on voting are accessible on www.butterbach.net/epinfo/voting.htm - JZ (They have already been integrated here. - JZ, 23.9.04.)
VOTING & NON-VOTING: Why I don't vote? None of the current crop of bastards and of their platforms deserves my vote. Moreover, I don't want to impose my vote on anyone but myself and no one offers me or others the option of voting oneself out of this territorialist and monopolistic and coercive system. - JZ, 17.7.82.
VOTING & OPTING OUT: The most essential voting right is the right to opt out. - JZ 5/73.
VOTING & PANARCHISM: Individual votes for all kinds of varieties and futures rather than collectivist votes for only one form of democracy or republicanism, could solve the problems of most of the present trouble spots in the world. Even some governments might, early on, see this approach, at least as a face-saving solution, aware that all their previous and present territorialist approaches ended in failures or great difficulties and uncertainties and that they have nothing better to offer than the re-enactment of old and popular errors and prejudices. – JZ, to Richard C. B. Johnsson, 14.1.05, rev. 22.8.12.
VOTING & PANARCHISM: One man, one vote and this over all people in a territory - that is the territorial vote. One man, one vote, but only over his own individual affairs or only within a community of like-minded volunteers, that is the exterritorial vote. - JZ, 6.7.04. - We have all been and still are disfranchised regarding our most important individual vote, the one which would permit us to secede from any majority and to establish or join an exterritorially autonomous minority, whether statist, libertarian or anarchist, i.e. of our own individual choice and for the realization of our own ideals, independent of majority opinions or the opinions of presumed experts - but, at our own expense and risk only. - Compare my several long files for SLOGANS ON LIBERTY, digitized but not yet integrated, dealing with Voting.
VOTING & PANARCHISM: Panarchism replaces the majority-dependent voter by the autonomous individual decision-maker who realizes his preferred government or non-governmental society, together with like-minded volunteers, for himself and them, or who simply makes do with all the private, cooperative and mutual services that are offered on a free market. Each a king, emperor or prince, prime minister or president, lawmaker or judge regarding all his own affairs only or as a collaborator in voluntary communities. – JZ, 29.12.04.
VOTING & PANARCHISM: Privatize and individualize decision-making by voting. This requires that individuals are allowed to secede, making their own revolution, by establishing or associating with an already existing exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers. Compulsory membership for any association must be discontinued. It benefits only criminal officials. – JZ, 26.8.93, 9.1.99. (In the meantime many more panarchistic statements of voting have accumulated but have not yet been integrated in a single file for my SLOGANS FOR LIBERTY collection. - JZ, 10.9.04.)
VOTING & PANARCHISM: Your individual vote against the vote of millions of others will leave you a suppressed and exploited subject while your individual vote for the panarchy of your choice would get you anywhere that is humanly possible and rightful. – JZ, n.d. & 22.8.12.
VOTING & SECESSION: All "cliff-hanger" elections clearly point towards the right of individuals to secede but not to dominate others. A handful of voters should never be given the power to decide the fate of almost half the voters against their will, nor should any majority, no matter how large, have the fate of minorities in its hands. - JZ. 4.10.88, 1.4.89.
VOTING & TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS & BUREAUCRATS: With your territorial vote you give up most of your basic rights and liberties to gangs of politicians and bureaucrats. They are the first pigs at the troughs filled via compulsory taxation. - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04.
VOTING & TERRITORIALISM: Consent, free choice and free voting means much more than to have one vote among millions in territorial voting. - JZ, 21.1.04.
VOTING & TERRITORIALISM: Don't hand over your rights and liberties, with a territorial and majoritarian "equal" and "free" vote to - politicians and bureaucrats, who will not let you fire them, as far as your own affairs are concerned and who will overcharge you for their numerous "services", even if these are really disservices done to you. - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04.
VOTING & TERRITORIALISM: The territorial vote is not a free vote. - JZ, 21.1.04. - With it you can dictate, to some extent, the lives of others and they, usually much more numerous, can thereby dictate many details of your life. - JZ, 6.10.11.
VOTING & VOLUNTARY TAXATION: Let those who vote for a politician pay for his salary and for all the expenditures that he favours among them. - JZ, 1974, 2.4.89.
VOTING RIGHTS: An unlimited vote over the own affairs. No vote at all regarding the affairs of others! - JZ 24.6.84.
VOTING SYSTEMS & PANARCHISM: Under panarchism all voting systems could be freely practised - but all of them only among their voluntary supporters. See e.g.: VOTING, 22, ON PANARCHY I, in PEACE PLANS 505. Compare also the large online compilations of SLOGANS FOR LIBERTY on Voting.
VOTING, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, PUBLIC SERVICES & PANARCHISM: Full consumer sovereignty towards and fully free enterprise for the supply of all political and bureaucratic "public services". - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04. The present “free vote” is a farce – when it comes to the decision-making of some of the most important parts of your life – decisions which are monopolized by territorial governments. – JZ, 22.8.12.
VOTING, DEMOCRACIES, POLITICIANS: Voters do not control governments. In most respects government do control their voters. The political vote represents only a tiny and almost insignificant fraction of all rightful and necessary individual choices in decision-making. Of most of these voting rights our "free voters" are now coercively, legally, constitutionally, juridically deprived and ultimately by the armed forces of the State, all under the pretence of granting them the general franchise, or the equal right to vote in a "free" State. - JZ, 29.7.92, 6.2.12.
VOTING, DEMOCRACY, SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-OWNERSHIP, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-HELP, SELF-RELIANCE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY: Voting on the legal fate of others and genuine self-ownership, self-determination and self-government are irreconcilably opposite approaches. Voting on the fate of others, holding quite different views, characterizes territorial governments. Voting among like-minded people, voluntarily associated in exterritorially autonomous communities, characterizes panarchies and their almost unanimous decision-making. The most decisive vote against the continuance of territorial politics as usual, for oneself, is expressed by an individual secession. And the decisive vote for any particular panarchy is expressed by the act of individually joining it. - JZ 25.4.92, 13.1.93, 23.9.04.
VOTING, EMIGRATION & SECESSION: If nothing else helps, vote with your feet, or, if you feel strong enough, vote by secession. - JZ, 5/73.
VOTING, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM, POLITICIANS & BUREAUCRATS: Politicians and bureaucrats should all depend upon individual voters for their systems, not upon large voting blocks given them a majority despotism "mandate" for a whole territory and all its inhabitants. Regarding their own affairs, any peaceful individual and group should be free to fire them - and to hire others or no one - as their individual and group choice for themselves. All territorial constitutions, laws and jurisdictions and protective agencies to be replaced by exterritorially autonomous ones. Except, perhaps, an ideal militia for the protection of all individual rights and liberties - to the extent that they are rightfully claimed by anyone. - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04.
VOTING, FRANCHISE, STILL ALL TOO LIMITED & TOO EXTENSIVE: The universal franchise, can be approximated in a non-despotic way only by universalizing laissez faire, laissez passer choices for individuals and volunteer groups. - JZ, 4.9.87. What is now called universal franchise is only somewhat comparable to the very limited personal "freedom" one grants to infants. On the other hands, if individual infants and children could already opt for alternative parents, who are willing to accept them, then this kind of vote for this limited relationship would, to that extent, be already panarchistic. Behind the Iron Curtain, the remaining voting rights have been compared to giving these people "free choice of colours" while eliminating from their choice all but a certain kind of red from the whole spectrum and with penalizing them if they do not make that restricted "choice" in public or in a way that can be otherwise controlled by the regime. - JZ, 4.9.87, 1.4.89.
VOTING, INDIVIDUAL SECESSION & DISFRANCHISEMENT: We have all been disfranchised regarding our most important vote, that of individual secession from the State and that to join or establish our own and only exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, whether statist, libertarian or anarchistic ones, under whatever programs we would prefer for them. – JZ, 13.3.96, 11.1.99.
VOTING, MAJORITIES, DEMOCRACY, GOVERNMENT: The majority will hardly ever elect an enlightened minority as its rulers. On the contrary. - JZ, 24.3.04.
VOTING, PANARCHISM & “FREE VOTING”: There is not a single good reason why anybody should vote in any of today’s so-called “free elections” for territorial and, correspondingly, despotic governments. – JZ, 14.9.91. - One exception would be if fanatics and totalitarians are so numerous that, with the next election, they might take over a territorial government quite peacefully. Afterwards they would be very difficult and costly to dislodge. Compare the case of the Paris Commune. If all entitled to vote had voted, then it would not have happened. Naturally, the preferable method is always to let dissenters opt out to do their own things for or to themselves. - JZ, 23.9.04.
VOTING, TERRITORIAL: Territorial voting is a farce on individual consent, self-respect, self-government, self-determination, independence, free choice, individual rights and liberties. - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04.
VOTING, TERRITORIAL: With your territorial vote you give up your rights and liberties and destroy or suppress those of others. - JZ, 21.1.04.
VOTING, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS, RIGHTS & LIBERTIES: The territorial voter has to dance to the tune of territorial politicians and bureaucrats - no matter whom he voted for or against. - JZ, 21.1.04, 24.3.04.
VOTING, TERRITORIALISM: Territorial voting means despotism for those outvoted or deceived by it. - JZ, 24.3.04.
VOTING, TOLERANCE, SELF-RULE: Every man one vote - and an exclusive one - on his own affairs. No man to have any vote on anybody else's affairs, except within volunteer communities. This is my political ideal. - JZ 7.5.76, 2.4.89.
VOTING: 10: Voting only for or against the president or prime minister or ruling party of the own country, to the extent that they determine international policies that affect oneself, and voting on the leaders and leading parties of all other countries, as far as their foreign policy decisions are concerned and as these affect the own lives, liberties and rights. We have all been deprived of the latter vote under the pretence of "internal affairs", "self-rule" and "territorial integrity". – Obviously, our own individual preference has also very little influence, if any at all, on the foreign policy of “our” "own" territorial government. - If we were voluntary members of an exterritorially autonomous society or community, only then would we, largely, agree with its internal and "foreign policy". It would then also tend to be a rightful and peace-promoting one. - JZ, n.d. & 3.4.11, 22.8.12.
VOTING: 22, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505.
VOTING: A complete vote would include full decision-making authority on one's own affairs and this would include freedom of action, But this it precisely what the collectivized, exclusive and centralized territorial political process prevents, even in countries and with elections called "free". - JZ, 4.6.04, 22.8.12. - FREEDOM OF ACTION
VOTING: A congressman is more than an agent who attempts to carry out the views of his constituents. If he were no more than that, we probably could set up a nation-wide computer system so every citizen could simply register his vote on each piece of legislation." - Frank E. Evans, quoted by LeFevre, "The Power of Congress", p.17. - Such a referendum system might be introduced in one or several panarchies of volunteers, combined with initiative options for its members. - JZ, 3.4.11. – Since voters could not be interested in voting very frequently, i.e. tens of thousands of laws, the current avalanches of “positive” legislation would be prevented. – JZ, 22.8.12. - REFERENDUM, INITIATIVE, DIRECT DEMOCRACY, WITHOUT REPRESENTATIVES.
VOTING: A consumer, on the other hand, votes all the time, in a sense. He votes for groceries or clothing or hi-fi sets or other things by buying or by refusing to buy. He's the complete master of his fate. He doesn't have to make a choice between only two products.” - Murray N. Rothbard, interview in "PENTHOUSE, international", 10/76. - CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY IN EVERY SPHERE.
VOTING: A free society has nothing to vote on.” – Quoted somewhere, author unknown. – A free society votes only individualistically, on a free market. – But why assume that there will be only a single free society, not a variety of them, and also a variety of un-free societies, all freely chosen by individuals for themselves. In these, some forms of voting might still happen, not only in cooperatives and share companies. – JZ, 29.10.07. – The members and owners of free enterprises, including self-managed ones, like productive coops, might well adopt one voting system or the other for their internal affairs, possibly in a decentralized way, so that in each of many autonomous production units of a large enterprise at least theoretically a different voting system might be used. – ONLY territorial voting systems should be abolished. - JZ, 6.2.12. - FREE SOCIETIES, PANARCHISM, FREE ENTERPRISE, DECENTRALIZATION, AUTONOMOUS PRODUCTION UNITS, DEMOCRACY, DECISION-MAKING
VOTING: A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years. Neither are a people any the less slaves because permitted periodically to choose new masters. What makes them slaves is the fact that they now are, and are always hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power over them is, and always is to be, absolute and irresponsible. (Of what appreciable value is it to any man, as an individual, that he is allowed a voice in choosing these public masters? His voice is only one of several millions.)” - Lysander Spooner, 1808-1887, "No Treason", Works I, p.24. - TERRITORIALISM, ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACIES, FRANCHISE
VOTING: A man who believes in politicians renders himself helpless by voting for them. If he does not believe in them, then he should become free to secede from them and their systems. – JZ, n.d. – Naturally, today he is also helpless under the more or less despotic rule of “his” territorial government when he did not vote for any of the candidates or parties that led to it. – J.Z., 22.8.12. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM
VOTING: A people can vote themselves into slavery, though they cannot vote themselves out of it.” - Frank Chodorov, "Fugitive Essays", p.141.
VOTING: A territorial and collectivist choice is not rightful and effective substitute for individual choice. – JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: A voted-in rule over all is still a despotism over all dissenters. - JZ, 4.10.98. - TERRITORIALISM, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: A voting system that leads only to personal laws, for those who approved of them is much more rightful and rational than any a voting system that leads to coercive territorial laws, imposed upon all, by a temporarily ruling minority, based upon a fluctuating, always misled and exploited and often coerced majority of involuntary supporters. – JZ, n.d. & 22.8.12.
VOTING: Accepting Suit's theory of democracy, one must conclude that even voting is immoral, since it gives one's consent to the rule of all by politicians who do not have the consent of all.” - George Dance, OPTION, June 77.
VOTING: Admitting that there is no difference in the political philosophies of the contending candidates, should I not choose the "lesser of two evils?" But, which of the two qualifies? If my man prevails, then those who voted against him are loaded down with the "greater evil", while if my man loses then it is they who have chosen the "lesser evil". Voting for the "lesser of two evils" makes no sense, for it is only a matter of opinion as to which is the lesser. Usually, such a decision is based on prejudice, not on principle. Besides, why should I compromise with evil?” - Frank Chodorov, "Out of Step", p.40. - DIS., TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Advocates of majority democracy argue: "Even though counting heads is not an ideal way to govern, it's better than breaking them.” - Learned Hand, "READERS' DIGEST", 1972. This is a case of at least two wrong premises: 1. There is only one alternative. 2. Territorial government is necessary and there is an ideal way to do it. - Why not just leave the heads, bodies and self-concerning actions of others alone? - JZ n.d., slightly revised 30.11.87. - DIS., Q.
VOTING: All "cliffhanger" elections clearly point towards the right of individuals to secede but not to dominate others. A handful of voters should never be given the power to decide the fate of almost half the voters against their will, nor should any majority, no matter how large, have the fate of minorities in its hands. - JZ, 4.10.88, 1.4.89. – SECESSION?
VOTING: All claim victory in dead-heat poll."- THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 16.7.01, front-page headline. - While over and over engaged in such fruitless, costly and harmful exercises, at most preferable to civil wars, all of them could claim a 100% victory, not one over opponents but for self-government - under panarchism, i.e., under full exterritorial autonomy. Then each would get the government or non-governmental society he dreamed of and voted for. Instead, the whole territorial mess goes on and on, until it finally ends for all of us in a general holocaust with ABC mass murder devices. - JZ, 16.7.01, 31.1.02. - PANARCHISM, VICTORY, ELECTIONS, LANDSLIDE VICTORY OF ONE PARTY VS. TOTAL VICTORY FOR ALL PARTIES – FOR ALL THEIR DIVERSE PANARCHIES
VOTING: All elections are rigged - against all dissenters, whom they deprive of exterritorial autonomy with the chains of their legislated and territorial uniformities. - JZ, 15.6.91.
VOTING: All it does is give you a tiny pick on who will pick your pocket, all too much and all too often. - JZ n.d. & 6.2.12. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: All majority voting is unfair to the minorities of dissenters, who are involuntary members of the same territorial State. - JZ, 3.9.88.
VOTING: All political representation is a very expensive, dangerous and risky game, putting power into the wrong hand, exploiting the involuntary taxpayers and restricting their basic rights and liberties. It is profitable only to the elected politicians and their favorites. – JZ, 30.3.07. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: All political voting under present conditions supports criminal and tyrannical territorialism. – JZ
VOTING: All territorial political choices are contrary to individual rights and liberties and thus do not get my consent. – JZ – I believe that the list of exceptions to this rule would be rather short. Has anyone tried to provide such a list? – JZ, 22.8.12.
VOTING: All territorial voting means slaves voting a new slave-master in or serfs voting for a new feudal lord over themselves - or confirming the present one. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: All that is left for a self-respecting man is not to vote at all.” - Alexander Herzen, "The Other Shore", p.96/7 of the London, 1956 edition. - Or, under compulsory voting, to vote informally. - However, if there were the danger of e.g. a right or left totalitarian party winning an election, then a vote for one of the alternatives to them might be part of one's duties, as long as one is not yet free to secede and establish or join a panarchy or polyarchy. - JZ, 3.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: All the candidates and parties you can territorially vote for - are parasites and looters, rather than producers and exchangers. So, how can one vote for them? – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: All the candidates and their platforms deserve only contempt and not a single vote, at least until they offer themselves only as options for volunteers. That might teach them! – JZ
VOTING: All voting that imposes great costs and burdens upon others than the majority of voters is inherently wrong, an act of invasion, conquest, subjugation and exploitation. - JZ, 23.2.00. - TAXES & MAJORITIES, TERRITORIALISM, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: Allow the presently outvoted to rule themselves. "No one is good enough to rule another one without his consent!" - JZ, n.d. - INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS.
VOTING: Almost all of the territorial voters and their representatives don't know what they are talking about and what they are doing to themselves and to others with their votes and legislation. So, how can I vote for them or choose among them? – JZ, n.d. & 3.4.11.
VOTING: Almost every vote for a party or a politician is a vote for the further disfranchisement of citizens regarding their own and most important affairs. - JZ, 15.9.87.
VOTING: Almost every vote is a wasted vote - if you want something right and reasonable. - JZ, 2.10.98.
VOTING: Almost every vote is wasted to the voter. I will not pretend to myself or to others that I give my consent to what either of them are doing to me and others. - JZ, 11.7.87.
VOTING: Almost no politicians are prepared to get out of my way, so why should I vote for any of them to stay or get into my way? - JZ, 28.8.95. – Q.
VOTING: Also on veracity, remember that politicians come last in any private opinion survey, yet such is the perversity of the voter, that come election time, people actually believe what they are told, and happily give away their precious freedoms on the strength of it.” - Dr. H. L. Soper, "LIBERTARIAN DIGEST", May 1981. - This reminds me of the saying on re-marriage, as being the victory of hope over experience. - Territorial statism demands of people to act on the unchecked premise that someone has to "run the country" and be he or his party ever so bad. - Further, the urge to submit is in many people even stronger than the sexual urge. - JZ, 6.6.04. - At least when it comes to marriages and business contracts we are now mostly free to dissolve them, once we are all too disappointed by them. We are not free to secede from territorial States and to compete with them, exterritorially. - JZ, 3.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, OBEDIENCE, POLITICIANS, PROMISES, REPRESENTATIVES
VOTING: American youth attributes much more importance to arriving at driver's licence age than at voting age.” - Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media, 1964, p.22. - The first gives a degree of real freedom, the second only an illusion. - JZ 14.4.84.
VOTING: An election is coming. Universal peace is declared, and the foxes have a sincere interest in prolonging the lives of the poultry.” – George Eliot - RIGHTS, LIBERTIES & POLITICIANS, POWERS, REPRESENTATIVES, JOKES, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: An election year is the time politicians want to help us out of all the trouble they got us into in the first place.” - G. S. - Only one thing is sure: Those elected into territorial power will make matters even worse than they are now. - JZ, 3.4.11. – JOKES, POLITICIANS THEIR PROMISES “SOLUTIONS”
VOTING: An elective despotism was not the government we fought for.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1781. - DEMOCRACY, DESPOTISM, ELECTIONS
VOTING: an electoral process, whose only aim is the turning of some people against others and the victory of some people over others. That is why so many of us are so ambivalent about political participation and why our social conventions decree that one does not introduce the topics of religion and politics into dinner-party conversations – out of fear that guests will be forced to turn against one another. In all probability many people do not vote because they vaguely realize something is wrong with the act itself. We all intuitively realize that the political process is a dirty business in which people must behave abominably if they are to succeed. …” - Frederick C. Thayer, An End to Hierarchy! An End to Competition! Organizing the Politics and Economics of Survival. – New Viewpoints, N.Y. 1973, p.57/58. - He ignores that an all too heated discussion about religion can be avoided by agreeing in advance to approve of the practice of religious tolerance or religious freedom. That should have brought attention to the difference of territorial party politics and its intolerance and led to demands to introduce a similar tolerance in political matters. Thus this social taboo helped to prevent sufficient enlightenment from occurring. – JZ, 26.3.09. - ELECTIONS, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS AS USUAL, TOLERANCE, INTOLERANCE, COERCION VS. VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: An inherent weakness of a pure democracy is that half the voters are below average intelligence.” – Unknown. – This is, essentially, a flaw of territorialism, under which different kinds of people cannot freely sort themselves out into their own kinds of preferred communities. Under panarchism there would also be different kinds of democracy, not only “representative” and direct ones or the ones with different voting systems. Some for the more intelligent and some for the less educated and more prejudiced. To each his own! – JZ, 3.1.08. – DEMOCRACY, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL, MAJORITY, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICES, FOOLISHNESS, STUPIDITY
VOTING: An option without all the rightful and useful other options! - JZ, 21.12.90, 7.6.04.
VOTING: An unlimited vote over the own affairs. No vote at all regarding the affairs of others! - JZ 24.6.84. – NOT A NATURAL OR HUMAN RIGHT – IN ITS TERRITORIAL FORM
VOTING: And yet there remains a case for referendum - on particular issues, close to the basic rights and interests of all. The self-education results of such decision-making would well compare with the irresponsibility and ignorance spread by the present voting system. Moreover, a referendum could be wholly moral if the results of a yes vote were applied only to those, who said yes. - JZ, 4.6.04. – REFERENDUM FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS BUT NOT AGAINST THEM, REFERENDUM IN PANARCHIES
VOTING: And, indeed, each has a voice to accept the tyrant of his party's choice.” - A. Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary, p.221.
VOTING: Any election is just an advance-auction of stolen goods." – Source unknown. But compare: “Every election is a sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods.” - H. L. Mencken. - TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION
VOTING: Any territorial vote is a vote for oppression, war, revolution and terrorism, as well as for man-made poverty, not only by taxation and monetary despotism, protectionism and other forms of monopolism. – JZ, n.d. & 22.8.12.
VOTING: Any territorial vote misleads the elected leaders as well as it does the misled voters. – JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: Any vote for the continuance of "politics as usual" is a wasted vote. - JZ, 1.12.87.
VOTING: Are any people mature and informed enough to vote? The mere will to vote territorially testifies to immorality, prejudices, errors, immaturity and ignorance - unless the voting takes place only within groups of volunteers. - JZ, 26.4.93, 3.4.11.
VOTING: Are elected officials better at governing or at winning elections?” - Larry Niven & Jerry Pournelle, "Building a Mote in God's Eye", in: "A Step Further Out", by Jerry Pournelle, p.139. - Good and better government over their involuntary victims? Governing good or well and quite rightfully is impossible under territorialism. All peaceful and productive dissenters are always wronged and harmed by it. - JZ, 21.10.89. - ELECTIONS, Q., POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM, GOOD GOVERNMENT?
VOTING: As a 19th. century U.S. lawyer, Lysander Spooner, pointed out, the very act of secret elections assures that no one can be held responsible for any disastrous actions that may follow from his vote, whereupon, in extreme cases, these secret voters become the equivalent to "secret bands of robbers and murderers". In political and moral philosophy the majority principle has long been demolished and it persists in practice only because most people are ignorant of and disinterested in better alternatives. – JZ, n.d., in one of several protests against compulsory voting. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: As a private citizen the predatory person is only one AMONG millions. As an agent of government he becomes one OVER millions.” - Leonard E. Read, "Instead of Violence", p.14. – GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS
VOTING: As everybody who supports the Constitution by voting (if there are any such) does so secretly (by secret ballot), and in a way to avoid all personal responsibility for the acts of his agents or representatives, it cannot legally or reasonably be said that anybody at all supports the Constitution by voting. No man can reasonably or legally be said to do such a thing as to assent to, or support, the Constitution, UNLESS HE DOES IT OPENLY, AND IN A WAY TO MAKE HIMSELF PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ACTS OF HIS AGENTS, SO LONG AS THEY ACT WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE POWER HE DELEGATES TO THEM.” - Lysander Spooner, "No Treason", VI, 7/8, Works 1, p.10/11. - In communities of volunteers responsibility cannot be as easily denied or avoided. - JZ, 3.4.11. - VOLUNTARISM, PUBLICITY, SECRECY, RESPONSIBILITY, CONSENT, MANDATE
VOTING: As F. A. Hayek said in: "The Road to Serfdom", chapter X: "Why the worst get on Top": "To split or decentralize power is necessarily to reduce the absolute amount of power, and the competitive system is the only system designed to minimize by dezentralization the power exercised by man over man." - Alas, he remained an adherent to "limited" rather than "competing government" and to territorial sovereignty rather than individual sovereignty and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities, just like Ayn Rand and still all too many of the followers of the present libertarian parties. - JZ, 5.6.04. – Panarchist alternative and individual choices are the most voluntary and competitive alternative to all kinds of territorialism and their political voting systems. Volunteers would then mainly vote themselves into the government or society of their own individual choice and achieve there almost unanimous consent on all major issues. – JZ, 28.10.08, 3.4.11. – CONSENT, CHOICE, OPTIONS, ALTERNATIVES, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, COMPETITION, DECENTRALIZATION, POWER
VOTING: As Herbert Spencer, Johann Gottlieb Fichte and others taught, every individual has the right to secede or to opt out of the State, to ignore the State and would not wrong anyone by this action. I also claim this right, a right not to support the present establishment, not to be represented by those offering themselves to me as my representatives, the right, not to hire them as my agents but rather to vote for alternative institutions, all of which would operate only for volunteers. - JZ, 4.6.04. - IGNORING THE STATE
VOTING: As long as I am not allowed to vote on specific issues in referendum, I will not pretend that I have "the right to vote". Voters, to be genuine voters, must also be free to vote in a referendum, which they must also be free to initiate. Once they are deprived of this franchise, then a few more steps put them in the position of subjects in totalitarian States, who may "vote" only for officially approved candidates of a single ruling party. - Here it must not be overlooked that even a referendum would be wrong to the extent that it allowed a majority to deprive minorities of their natural or human or individual rights and liberties. To allow merely officially sanctioned referendum decisions on relatively trivial issues and otherwise to allow only a vote for "representatives" and then to call this restricted process "the right to vote", is certainly an abuse of the English language. - A majority vote in a referendum or in a general election should be binding only upon that majority. The rest should be free to opt out and do their own things. Like they are already doing in so many private activities. - JZ, 5.6.04, 29.10.08, 3.4.11. - RIGHT TO VOTE? REFERENDUM, SPECIFIC ISSUES, SELF-CHOSEN PACKAGE DEALS INSTEAD OF THOSE IMPOSED BY MAJORITIES OR THEIR “REPRESENTATIVES”, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL & VOLUNTARY VS. COLLECTIVIST, ENFORCED & TERRITORIAL ACTIVITIES
VOTING: As long as top politicians are allowed to engage in the “game”, all too often a war game, of world politics, the voters of all the countries, whose fate they do also decide, should get a vote on their election and on their recall. Today the people in all other countries than his own are disfranchised in this respect, not represented at all by him, not even as much or as little represented as they are by their own politicians. However, if they approved of his politics then they should become free to join his political state or to establish an allied one, but only on the basis of exterritorial autonomy. And if their own government is allying itself with the foreign policies of a foreign power, while many of their subjects disagree with it, then the subjects of the local "national" governments should be free to secede from their politicians, their territorial States and foreign policies and to establish their own personal law communities of volunteers, with quite different foreign policies. – JZ, 31.5.04, 29.10.07. - Should not all the peoples targeted by nuclear "weapons" have a say on who will have a finger on a nuclear weapons button and whether such a button, such a decision-making power and monopoly and such “weapons” should exist at all? - Nuclear weapons are certainly not tyrannicide weapons but mass murder devices. Just like e.g. the Nazi extermination camps were. These "weapons" are even more indiscriminately murderous than the Nazi death camps were. - And yet we are completely disfranchised regarding them! - JZ, 3.4.11. - FOR PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, NWT, PREMIERS WHO MAKE DECISIONS FOR ALL OR MUCH OF THE WORLD BY THEIR FOREIGN POLICIES & BRINKMANSHIP
VOTING: As long as you and they can shoot with votes, shooting with guns is reduced. Only to that extent is voting peaceful and preferable. However, the mere chance to vote (rather than the choice of full autonomy for individuals and minorities) will not pacify every minority group, which has no hope for winning at the ballots. Some will then rather resort to subversion, rebellion and terrorism than to submit to such territorial decision-making. - JZ 11.9.75, 3.8.78, 6.2.12.
VOTING: Asked if she supported women's suffrage, Emma said that the ballot would not free women anymore than it had freed men.” - Roger A. Bruns, The Damndest Radical, The Life & World of Ben Reitman …, p.102, Univ. of Illinois Press, 1987. - By now we had already many instances of leading female politicians, proving that their ideas and actions are no more right and rational than those of the male politicians. - JZ, 3.4.11. - BALLOT, SUFFRAGE, ELECTIONS, WOMEN, WOMEN'S LIBERATION
VOTING: at least undisguised dictatorship would be more honest than our present shabby system in which we are, in effect, free to elect our dictators every few years.” - Jerome Tuccille, "Radical Libertarianism", p.112.
VOTING: At least with regard to all those, who did not vote for the party and parties in government, all governments are unlawful - and not based on consent. - JZ, 29.9.93. - CONSENT, PANARCHISM
VOTING: Back Australia: Don't vote for any of them!" - A T-shirt message, next to the picture of a garbage can full of politicians. - 1981. – But what is the meaning or interpretation of “Australia”? Whose opinion or idea is to count there for more than the own? There is no such thing as a single national goal. All Australians have at least somewhat different ideals and priorities. – JZ, 21.4.09, 6.2.12. - JOKE, DIS., TERRITORIALISM, NATIONALISM, COLLECTIVISM
VOTING: Ballots, under the present system, are indeed a form of bullets and unnecessarily and without justification introduce force into human relationships. In any system based on territorial law and compulsory membership they are always used to suppress rights. They are thus a disservice that I am unwilling to approve and far less willing to buy. If, instead, the voted-in services were applied only to volunteers, who had opted and paid for them, then they would be harmless to society in general, while they might teach a lesson to the voluntary participants. Then they would, anyhow, as volunteers, in most instances come to unanimous decisions and, as such, would have to bear their costs and risks themselves. - JZ, 4.6.04, 3.4.11.
VOTING: Basically, it comes down to: Throw the bums out!” - Jim Ackenhousen, NY TIMES, 7 Nov. 90. - Just to vote in another lot of bums? - JZ, 17.6.92. – Secessionists would leave the bums in, for those, who still like them enough to put up with them. Panarchies for all the secessionists, according to their individual preferences, offer a much more tolerant and much less provocative solution. Only initially and with regard to all those spheres so far territorially monopolized by governments, will that idea be resisted by many. But these opponents will not have to actively practise the panarchist ideal themselves. They have only to tolerate its practice among those, whom they believe to be fools. - However, once secession from the remaining statists is free, also the right to associate under personal law and exterritorial autonomy, then the subsequent secessions and alternative societies will see to it that the remaining statists are also and automatically transformed into voluntary members of a statist panarchy, one with the same platform as the old territorial State had, but without its territorial monopoly, privileges and taxation powers over those, who had seceded from it. They would then only be in their own and supposedly better company, without any internal opposition. Apart, naturally, from other kinds of statists, doing their own and different statist things among themselves and at their own risk and expense. All these statist panarchies - with all their diverse volunteers - would have the chance to prove that their system is best. They could not blame anyone else for their remaining failures. - In all other spheres than those territorially monopolized by States we have already adopted this idea of tolerance and its practice and take it so much for granted that we never doubt it any longer. – Under panarchism those perceived to be bums would be thrown out or leave by their own free choice. – JZ, 21.4.09. – PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, DIS., TERRITORIALISM, TOLERANCE
VOTING: Be honest with yourself: Are you voting for what you want, or against what you don't want?" - Prof. Galambos. - One might add: Does your territorial vote give you a worthwhile chance to achieve what you really want or does your vote depend too much on the vote of others, with different ideas, under any territorial system? - JZ, 5.6.04, 3.4.11. – Q.
VOTING: Before and after a referendum vote - as long as the territorial government monopoly continues - there ought to be checks upon the legitimacy and validity of a referendum. Any referendum proposal or any referendum passed, that is found to infringe a single basic individual right should thereby become automatically invalid. - JZ 2.12.87. - REFERENDUM
VOTING: Being armed only with a voting slip is not enough to protect any individual rights or liberties. – This right is as much an indication of personal and group helplessness as is the right to petition the authorities. Different territorial power-mongers in territorial offices would also only compound rather than abolish the problems that territorial rule inevitably creates. – JZ, 23.9.07. - & GUN CONTROL LAWS, POLITICIANS, ELECTIONS & TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Believe in your own potential rather than in that of any party, politician or bureaucrat. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Besides, one has to be about half drunk to vote for most of the candidates they run nowadays.” - Will Rogers.
VOTING: Blind mice choosing the hungriest tomcat.” - Donald M. McLean in LIMIT. A Cynic's Word Book.
VOTING: boycott of the polls until every ballot contains a provision enabling voters to vote against all candidates or measures thereon.” - Proposal of the League of Non-Voters, - REASON 2/72. - That aim is still all too short from the right to secede and to join or established exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers. - JZ, 3.4.11.
VOTING: Brian Moore will work for the benefit of everyone. Give him your No.1 vote on 24th September." - Only those could do that who work to the best of their abilities on a free market. They would benefit their customers directly and all others by their competitive endeavors setting attractive examples. - JZ, 22.9.83, 30.11.87, 22.8.12. - POLITICIANS, CANDIDATES, PROMISES, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: But the present-day American esteems what Mencken calls "false forms of liberty, for example, the right to choose between two mountebanks." - George H. Douglas, THE FREEMAN, 12/73.
VOTING: But under present conditions the voter often has a choice of evils.” - Bliss, Encyclopedia of Social Reform, article: Direct Legislation. - It would be more correct to say: He has ONLY a choice among evils and the difference between them is often almost invisible. - JZ n.d. & 6.6.04.
VOTING: But voting does not equal freedom. Voting is merely the act of yanking a lever (or slipping paper into a box) every few years to register one among thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions or hundreds of millions of preferences for this or that candidate. The chance that any one vote will affect the output of any election is practically zero. No voter every really chooses his or her representative -- at least not in the way that each of us chooses an occupation, a house, a church, a college major, books to read, or a spouse.” - firstname.lastname@example.org - March 04, www.cis.ksu.edu/~mcalhoun/home.html & FREEDOM, CHOICE, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: But voting has nothing to do with freedom. Clearly, in this country the vote is being used to destroy our freedoms, not to protect them - just as clearly as those seeking the vote are competing for political privileges for their groups and states, not freedom and opportunity for all.” – Joan Marie Leonard, THE FREEMAN, Feb. 77, p. 74. FREEDOM
VOTING: But we voted for it," meaning that the Federal grab bag - open sesame with other people's income - has been democratically approved. Granted! But this is nonsense: the fruits of the labor of one man are not up for grabs by others, that is, not rationally. This is not a votable matter, except if one's premise be a socialistic society. What's right and what's wrong are not to be determined at the shallow level of nose-counting or opinion polls. To argue otherwise is to place the same value on the views of morons as you do on your own.” – Leonard E. Read, "Let Freedom Reign", p.76. – PROPERTY RIGHTS VS. TAXATION
VOTING: but when we realize that all government derives its "rights" from its might, and that majority rule is merely a short cut to the victory of the numerically-stronger party, we see that the ballot confers NO RIGHTS upon majorities and their representatives that are inviolable, and imposes NO DUTIES upon minorities that are binding.” - Badcock, "Slaves to Duty".
VOTING: By not even voting for the somewhat lesser evil, I am at least not giving my consent to being trapped in the ruling territorial system. - JZ, 11.7.87.
VOTING: By the universal right to vote every adult is permitted to periodically disfranchise himself by transferring many to most of his responsibilities as a free person to some politician, party functionary and bureaucrat, who cannot be held responsible by the voter for his or her mismanagement. - JZ, 4.9.87, 22.8.12.
VOTING: By voting informally, I vote against a system which, under the pretence of a free vote does actually disfranchise us regarding the most important decisions of our lives - entrusting them to lying, corrupt and power-hungry politicians and bureaucrats of either party. - JZ, 11.7.87, 6.2.12.
VOTING: By your vote you become merely a football for party politics, politicians, bureaucrats and other power mongers. Why get your kicks that way? – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Can't we trust the people to be the curb? The honest, good folk, I mean - not the common mob. Will the people vote to oppress themselves?” - Joseph G. E. Hopkins, "The Price of Liberty", p.202. - They can and they have and they are likely to - given only the present options, i.e., as long as the more and the less enlightened dissenters and non-conformists do not have full freedom to opt out and do and demonstrate their own things. Where would science and technology be without experiments being permitted for those, who want to engage in them, at their own risk and expense? - JZ, 1.12.87, 22.8.12. – Q.
VOTING: Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence." - M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, p.216. - Better make sure that the constitutions, the law, x regulations and numerous controlling boards and commissions can no longer block your freedom of action, your full voting rights over your own affairs and all that belongs to you. - JZ, 8.4.89. – What “influence” does the average or even outstanding person have under territorialism? – JZ, 27.10.08. - DIS., Q.
VOTING: Cliff-hanger voting results are among the strongest indications for the need to split uniform territorial political communities into however many voluntary communities could and would really represent their voluntary members and voters. - JZ, 19.3.88, 7.6.04, 4.4.11. – Even land-slid victories at the polls should only be applied to the majorities, which voted for them. The outvoted should become free to take their own lives into their own hands, in whichever way they like, under personal law or full exterritorial autonomy. – JZ, 6.2.12. – INDIVIDUAL & MINORITY GROUP SECESSIONISM
VOTING: Compare the time and thought and effort a man spends upon buying a car or a house for himself with his interest and efforts in voting for one or the other politician. - JZ, 30.11. 87. No wonder, we get so many "lemon" representatives. However, the job of being a territorial "representative" is really an impossible one. No one, not even the greatest genius and scholar, could fully represent all the diverse interests, rights and liberties of the whole population of a territory, from thousands of diverse individuals to hundreds of millions of them. We are not just a beehive under one queen and guided largely by instincts only. - JZ, 4.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION, DIVERSITY, INDIVIDUALISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: "Leave me alone", the non-voter could say. I don't want anything of you and only wish you would not want and extort any service or money from me, e.g. compel me to attend at election time. You don't even give me the chance to deny my consent to the modern territorial servitude imposed by the bureaucratic, territorial and monopolistic Welfare State which is supported by almost all parties. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11, 22.8.12. - LAISSEZ FAIRE, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & DISASSOCIATION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: A rational man wants to vote only on issues not on persons - unless he remains free to give orders to those persons as his agents. But politicians are notorious for not being bound by instructions given to them by their electors. Moreover, an enlightened person would consider only those actions as rightful, which are undertaken within the sphere of natural rights. Presently and in most cases, voting does not permit us to vote on particular issues. It allows us merely to vote for politicians and parties which, judging by their records, habitually infringe our individual rights and liberties. - Allow people to vote on issues they are really interested in, activities they can engage in without infringing the rights of others, and I for one would not have to be compelled to vote, I would vote voluntarily. But the present democratic or pseudo-democratic system prevents that. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11, 22.8.12. – Moreover, it prevents the establishment of exterritorially autonomous communities with voluntary members only, whose common interests would induce them to do their own things for or to themselves, in their own ways. – JZ, 29.10.08, 4.4.11. - ISSUES ARE NOT DECIDED UPON, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM IS NOT PERMITTED, COERCION RATHER THAN VOLUNTARISM & ITS PANARCHISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: After describing the normal healthy voting with one's dollars in the market place, Bob Lefevre says on politics: "When we place voting into the framework of politics, however, a major change occurs. When we express a preference politically, we do so precisely because we intend to bind others to our will. Political voting is the legal method we have adopted and extolled for obtaining monopolies of power." - Even if this does not discredit territorial politics sufficiently for you, it does for me. - JZ, 5.6.04. - TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS AS USUAL.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Among the many other unjustified limitations put on the present political vote is also its limitation by national borders. We are e.g. not allowed to cast our votes for or against those men, all over the world, who have their hands on nuclear triggers. We are not free to vote those out, who put immigration barriers or emigration restrictions up, to stop our freedom of movement. We are given no say when protectionist barriers infringe our freedom to trade. What value has "the vote" when it cannot even be used for survival and life-supporting decisions like these? To force one to vote on largely wrongful, irrational, trivial or messy and compromising package deals, whilst outlawing freedom to have one's say (fully realized only under freedom of action) on essential survival questions, is absurd. - JZ, 5.6.04, 22.8.12. – NATIONALISM, TERRITORIALISM, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, BORDERS, FRONTIERS, WAR
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Any man more right than his neighbors, constitutes a majority of one." - said Henry David Thoreau. Since the numerical majority doesn't recognize this, why vote at all when you are an individualist or member of a small minority group? - When most voters believe that everybody can get rich at the expense of everybody else, when everybody has therefore his hands in everybody else's pockets, when society is nothing but a "mutual Plunderbund" (Bastiat), what chance has the individual enlightened voter or an enlightened minority - as long as his or their freedom of action (the one decisive vote) is suppressed and they are only granted "the right to vote" or the compulsory vote? - JZ, 5.6.04, 22.8.12. – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM VS. MAJORITIES OR “REPRESENTATIVES”, PANARCHISM,
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Being opposed to power, coercion and monopolies, I feel compelled not to vote. - JZ, 5.6.04. – TERRITORIAL POLITICS AS USUAL VS. PANARCHISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Compulsory voting helps to prevents fully free competition and upholds territorial political power. – JZ, 4.6.04. - However, not as much as the suppression of individual and group secessions and of exterritorialy autonomous communities and societies does. - JZ, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Compulsory voting insists upon everyone making friends or deal with the same territorial group of people only - while some people rather prefer to choose their own fellow-travelers, friends and associates in all the spheres and activities that they are interested in, even if they are living in other parts of Earth. – JZ, 4.6.04, 4.4.11, 22.8.12.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Compulsory voting is compulsory foolishness: It means pretending that people could live the lives of others for them - by voting on all too many aspects of their lives. - JZ, 5.6.04. - In the process so many laws and regulations are produced that no one has the time and energy to read them even if only once. Thus all of us are turned more or less into law breakers. - At the same time, genuine individual rights and liberties remain largely unknown, unpublished and unrealized, although they are not so numerous that every adult could not learn all of them by heart. - JZ, 4.4.11. - LIVING ONE'S OWN LIFE, PANARCHISM INSTEAD OF DICTOCRACIES OF SINGLE DESPOTS OR DESPOTIC MAJORITIES, INTOLERANCE, HUMAN RIGHTS, LAWS, LEGISLATION
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Compulsory voting is like compulsory tooth extraction. It may not immediately hurt you as much - but it costs you much more. Furthermore, it will only add to rather than end your woes. Voting, like taxation, army, church, State and union membership should be quite voluntary. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Compulsory voting tends to keep parties in power which otherwise would obviously represent only a minority of the electors. This on its own would already suffice to make it wrong. - If the major parties are almost balanced, then the present political system amounts to the rule by one or the other minority - which just holds the balance. Any rule by a minority over the majority is no more right than a majority rule over the minorities (excepting only a majority rule over criminal minorities, real criminals, with victims!). Thus why should one sanction such an immoral process by voting? - Prof. Galambos said once: "You can beat'em if you don't join 'em." His suggestion should also be given a fair trial. Only minority autonomy for all voluntary communities would allow sensible voting within each group. In the collectivist voting process, the voting makes some sense only when there exists a powerful minority of totalitarians ready to grasp power, if offered power by too many people abstaining from voting. But this shows merely that no voter is morally bound to obey an election result which would infringe his rights and that the voter ought also to be armed, trained and organized for his own defence against totalitarians. – MINORITY OR MAJORITY RULE OR PANARCHISM, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT?
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Counting votes is not satisfactory to me. Votes should be rather weighed or somehow otherwise measured, using the I.Q., property, income, political education, moral education, whichever way I or you prefer for our own autonomous and exterritorial political communities of volunteers. All other political associations are wrong anyhow. If 1., you force me into one territorial monopoly community, 2. one with your favorite voting system and 3. force me to vote, then you do me at least a triple wrong. My vote is, in my own estimate, at least worth 100 average others, but as you would just count it as one, why should I bother to offer it to you? - "Don't throw pearls to the pigs!" - is a sound old maxim. – JZ, n.d. & 4.4.11. - COUNTING HEADS OR NOSES, PANARCHISM, FREE CHOICE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Empty ballot boxes are better than empty pockets and empty ballot boxes and empty pockets might lead us, sooner to a taxpayers' revolt and individual and group secessionism than some people expect. - Compare the rapid growth of Google search results upon searching for "voluntary taxation". Also the growing number of Google hints to panarchy and panarchism. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: From the viewpoint of the voter himself, the vote would be even more wasted if given to a party likely to do, in many respects, the opposite of what he wants done. - The choice of the lesser evil can hardly be called a constructive use of the vote. - At the same time as all genuine alternatives to the territorial voting process are going to waste (e.g. freedom of action for individuals and minorities), alternatives which constitute more important votes or choices, it is very misleading to raise the charge of waste only concerning the political vote, where it matters least. - What about the waste of all the taxpayers' money as a result of any election? - Not only the informal votes are presently "wasted" but all votes cast in the cause of freedom, because they may be channeled only through a territorial, coercive, monopolistic, centralized and collectivist political party system. It is no consolation to see another foolish, prejudiced or even criminal politician elected by 100 001 instead of merely by 100.000 votes or, in case of abstention by 99.999 instead of 100.000 votes. All votes for politicians are, as a rule, quite wasted - except to promote their careers, their power and their incomes. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: If I had full consumer sovereignty, even towards governments considered as agencies offering services, I would not vote for any of them or buy their services but rather prefer one or the other competitive market agency, one which would offer me exactly the help and protection or information services that I do want, and can afford, at a competitive price. They wouldn't "run the country" for me. I do not want it collectively "run" by any team of politicians and bureaucrats. Others can run their part of it at their expense and risk as they please. I just want to be free to run my own business and other affairs. - JZ, 5.6.04. – PANARCHISM, FREE CHOICE AMONG GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES FOR INDIVIDUALS
VOTING: Compulsory voting: If those voting voluntarily would understand their rational self-interest, they would welcome abstainers from elections, because they grant their own votes a relatively larger influence (however small that would still be). - If there were only 10 voters and e.g. 7 abstained, then the 3 remaining ones would be the decision makers. (Under territorialism all 10 decide for all ten. Under the exterritorialism and voluntarism of panarchism all 10 would decide only for themselves.) Thus, if they were rational, they should send letters of thanks to those, who e.g. voted “informal” or did not attend, instead of prosecuting them. But who says, that they are rational? - JZ, 5.6.04. - RATIONAL SELF-INTEREST
VOTING: Compulsory voting: If you value your right to life, liberty, and property, then clearly there is every reason to refrain from participating in a process that is calculated to remove the life, liberty, or property from any other persons. Voting is the method for obtaining legal power to coerce others." - Robert Lefevre. - I do not choose to opt for territorial political power. Why should I? - JZ, 5.6.04. – Why should anyone have the opportunity to gain such power over other people, who do not agree with him? – JZ, 29.10.08.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Is compulsory voting necessary, so that nobody can rightly complain that he had no part in electing the culprits? My main complaint is mainly that my "free choice" is confined to territorial politicians and their bureaucrats and that I have to pay for their disservices, no matter who gets in. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11. – DIS.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: It amounts to compulsory worship of the territorial political "leaders" (misleaders or gods) and their political system and institutions with prescribed rites and penalties for heretics. – Most urgently needed, if mankind is to survive much longer, is the political, economic and social equivalent to religious liberty or religious tolerance. Most of the religious people are not even aware that this kind of tolerance is the best that they have to offer! - JZ, 4.6.04, 4.4.11. - RELIGIONS, TOLERANCE
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Many other voting systems make more sense to me than the one-man-one-vote system, especially when it is combined with compulsory voting. Nevertheless, I do recognize that everyone should be free to choose his own voting system. Naturally, it could not be practised by all people in a whole country and this at the same time. It could only be practised within their own exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteer, of which so far not a single and quite pure example does as yet exist. - They are not impossible or wrong but merely outlawed. Probably none of the existing States could survive their competition for long, with many voluntary members and subjects. They would tend to become reduced to insignificant sects of "true believers". With that kind of faithful support they could continue to uphold their supposed "ideals" - among themselves and would no longer be a threat to others. - Then they would even provide a service - as deterrent examples. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11. - UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE? TO EACH COMMUNITY OF VOLUNTEERS ITS OWN VOTING SYSTEM: PANARCHISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: MYOB: “Mind Your Own Business” - All democratic voting tends to offend against this principle. Compulsory voting means that everybody is forced to mind everybody else's business and that nobody remains free and undisturbed to mind just his own. (It is even more wrongful than voluntary territorial voting - for compulsory territorial subjects. He will always be likely to be outvoted in his own affairs by people who, of necessity, know not where his shoe pinches him. Mind your own business! This is a difficult enough maxim to follow. Think of the numerous business failures, even in normal times! Nobody, and I mean nobody, no matter how great his genius is, is qualified or truly authorized to run everybody's life and business. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: No matter who you vote for, always a politician gets in", says one libertarian slogan with which I cannot help but agree. - JZ, 5.6.04. What makes it worse, under territorialism, that a territorial politician gets into power. What has he got to offer to his subjects, that is quite rightful and rational? His addiction to power? His pleasure to subjugate all others to his spleens and whims, his ideology, his choices? One "cook" for the population of a whole district or even the population of a whole country can, certainly, not cater to all the different tastes and requirements. - Nor can a parliament-sized committee do so with its rules. - JZ, 4.4.11, 23.8.12. – PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS, POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATION, VOTING, TERRITORIALISM REMAINS INSTEAD OF PANARCHISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Non-voting is nothing immoral. People have the right to remain neutral, to live their own life, to abstain from meddling, to disagree by not participating: "This above all: to thine own self be true, and it must follow, as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man." - said Shakespeare in "Hamlet". - JZ, 5.6.04. – However, we should certainly try to become free to mind our own business, to run our own affairs and institutions, under personal law or full exterritorial autonomy, after formal individual or group secessions from the existing States. - JZ, 4.4.11, 23.8.12. - INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: Compulsory voting: None of these parties and candidates knows or cares about what peace, freedom, justices, progress, prosperity, full employment, a sound currency etc. would really mean and require. Thus they should get no votes at all. However, if they acted only for or against their own volunteers, then I would mind them. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Nonvoting is a nonviolent non-action which violates no natural law. There are not many territorial political actions today of which one could say the same. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11. - NONVIOLENCE
VOTING: Compulsory voting: One can make a good case for allowing only independent people to vote - and this would exclude compulsory voting: "My father", wrote Arthur Smith in a letter to "ANALOG", used to say that if a man was not his own master by the time he was 35, he had no business voting as he had proven himself unable to manage his own affairs successfully. To father it was immaterial whether a hired man made a dollar a day or $100,000 a year, he was still a hired man and socially below the man who was his own master." – - JZ, 5.6.04. - Panarchism goes much further. It provides to each the independence and responsibility of his own choice, also the independency of any voting, representation, decision-making and public service system that other people do prefer for themselves. – JZ, 29.10.08, 4.4.11. – PERSONAL INDEPENDENCE VS. DEPENDENCY AMONG VOTERS
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Politicians want to go on pretending that they represent everybody in a whole country, in thousands of different and important matters - by forcing all registered voters of a country to attend their elections, thus giving an all too limited and all too indirect “free” choice. But the mere fact that in their opinion attendance has to be coerced and that in practice decisions are made only in accordance with the ignorance, errors and prejudices of most voters and their representatives, does objectively destroy this myth, no matter how long its “ghosts” or sub-myths have haunted all too many heads. - Representative self-government is nothing but a farce when one's vote is merely a very small fraction of the power required to put a single representative into office, a representative who, even with the best of will and greatest abilities cannot truly represent all those he is supposed to represent, a man, who has only a small fraction of the power required to bring about changes or repeal legislation, a man who, moreover, is subject to party discipline, while no party, as already its name says, can truly represent the whole. - Only individual sovereignty would allow true self-government. Those with totalitarian inclinations and territorialist prejudices wouldn't even allow a man either to vote or not to vote for the present system and any of its parties. - JZ, 5.6.04, 29.10.08, 4.4.11. - REPRESENTATION, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Politics is not like football; in politics it is possible for both sides to lose." - said Prof. Galambos. - Why should one be forced to play a game in which one's partners are, largely wrongdoers or ignorant and prejudiced and thus everybody is likely to lose? - JZ, 5.6.04, 29.10.08. - TERRITORIALISM, MAJORITARIANISM, DEMOCRACY, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT, Q.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Seeing only offers of territorial meddlers, such as political parties, candidates, statist "ideas" and "free" votes, I rather "abstain from beans". – The most decisive vote, that of individual secessionism and voluntary associationism under personal law & exterritorial autonomy is denied to me. - JZ, n.d. & 4.4.11.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: The great merit of market place choosing is that no one is bound by any other person's selection. I may choose brand X, but this cannot prevent you from choosing Brand Y. ... When a vote is expressed in the market place, the only relationship that ensues is one between the purchaser and the seller. Those not voting, or those voting elsewhere, are untouched by our individual decisions. (*) But when we vote politically, we seek a monopoly of control over others. And the largest number invariably binds the minorities. The political voting process is, basically, hostile to all minority views. It must be. Once a plurality of choice is found, it becomes binding upon all." - Robert Lefevre – (*) Each “dollar vote” still has its tiny and justified influence on the total demand and supply situation in a free market, with billions of such voters deciding, between them, free market prices and with them also supplies to a free market. – JZ, 23.8.12. - MARKET VOTING VS. TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: The nation could cut expenses, as anyone can note, if only those expenses couldn't vote!" - Roger Devlin, quoted in THE READER'S DIGEST, May 66. - Instead of compelling people to vote many should be compulsorily excluded - if one accepts the premise of exclusive and territorial nations with compulsory membership. All people should only be free to vote among their likes, at their expense and risk, in their own volunteer communities, on their own affairs. - JZ, 5.6.04. – Then at least some communities or societies, if they continued some voting system at all, would let only those of their members vote, who had paid their dues. The others might be tolerated or excommunicated. – JZ, 23.8.12. - WELFARE STATE VS. PANARCHIES & THEIR INDIVIDUAL CHOICES
VOTING: Compulsory voting: the no-government concept includes as a correlative proposition the idea that people will be correspondingly free to choose - individually, or collectively - whatever economic, social, moral, etc., system they want." - Jerry Millet, Texas, in ANALOG's Brass Tacks column. Date? - Compulsory voting in a single territorial State is one of the factors preventing this free voting. - JZ, 5.6.04. - MINORITY RULE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, IGNORING THE STATE, SECESSION, NO GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: The only condition which would make it obligatory for a rational man to make use of his limited right to vote (but he should also engage in all the other activities, which could prevent this from happening) does not exist now and here: the threat of a totalitarian minority, one ready to take over power at any time and which could gain it, most easily, by almost all but the members of this dangerous minority abstaining from the vote or merely voting informal. However, even if only the totalitarians voted, then this need not mean disaster, if one does not believe in the voting system as much as some do believe in the "Holy Spirit". There here is no moral obligation for the whole population to accept such an election result. The dissenters would retain the human right to secede and they should better be armed, organized and trained to be able to do so successfully. If they had granted, in time, to the totalitarians, as well, the right to secede and to rule or misrule themselves, at their own expense and risk, as much as they like, then this dilemma, of resorting to rightful force to uphold one's rights and liberties, would be unlikely to ever arise. Then and soon, the number of totalitarians, suffering alone and by themselves all the consequences of their own spleens, without being able to transfer their burdens to the shoulders of others, who disagree with them, would tend to shrink towards harmless proportions. - Thus, while I would vote to keep the minority of the 100 % totalitarians out of office, I find it futile to attempt to defeat, merely by my vote, the majority of 3 to 50 % totalitarians at the polls. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11 – TOTALITARIANISM, PANARCHISM: LET ALL PEOPLE DO THEIR OWN THINGS ONLY TO THEMSELVES
VOTING: Compulsory voting: The territorial collectivist political vote allows everyone to shift the costs and consequences of their utopian dreams and projects on to the shoulders of others, who are turned into scapegoats – taxpayers, conscripts, capitalists, kulaks, Jews, landlords, aliens, asylum seekers, refugees, immigrants etc. - The receivers of hand-outs do, largely, determine with their votes, who is to pay taxes and how much. Thus irresponsibility and exploitation follow almost inevitably. Compulsory voting, combined with the territorial monopoly, helps to perpetuate this abuse by preventing self-enlightenment through full self-responsibility. - JZ, 5.6.04, 23.8.12. – IRRESPONSIBILITY, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: The territorial political process is an unjust process. It has to produce its wrongs without my “valid” vote, for it induces me to vote only informally, just to avoid the fine upon not voting at all. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: The vote, as currently offered, is at most a civil right, but not a duty. As a right the present right to vote ought to be extended to the maximum, including the right to secede, i.e. the right to vote individually, and for oneself only, against the whole of the present establishment and to make one's vote count for one-self, and for oneself only, also the right to establish for oneself and likeminded volunteers some alternative autonomous institutions practising personal laws among their members, no matter how ignorant or enlightened the present territorial majority is, and its supposed experts are, regarding the rightfulness, practicability and desirability of such an action. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11, 23.8.12. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CHOICE OF GOVERNMENT OR SOCIETY, PANARCHISM
VOTING: Compulsory voting: The worst compulsory vote consists in being forced to support the territorial governmental extravagances in form of taxation, central banking and war and peace decisions. The penalties for not paying are so high, at least for those caught, that not many individuals can or are willing to afford them. - The tax laws, in our territorial protection rackets, have become so numerous and complicated that even the tax gatherers themselves give false information, on taxation rulings, in about 50 % of the cases, at least according to two reports that I have seen. – The right to opt out or to withdraw is nowhere fully recognized. - JZ, 5.6.04, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: This vote is, already by its very nature, not a vote for individual liberty and rights. Thus count me out. – JZ, n.d. & 4.4.11.
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Those who have to be compelled to vote are either a) so ignorant or disinterested in politics that they would make the usual election result still worse - by easily falling victims to the catchphrases of the professional demagogues, or b) of the same opinion as most of the other voters and would thus not change the result, or c) so far ahead of their contemporaries and so small in numbers that they have no chance or hardly any to affect the election results. - If the compulsion used does not force them to vote for one or the other but, instead, to vote informal, the result of the elections remains unchanged. Thus we would have another futile or harmful but anyhow quite wrongful legalized coercion in compulsory voting. - JZ, 5.6.04, 4.4.11. – However, I do admit that many voters are still induced by compulsory voting to vote validly for either of the parties or candidates, persuaded that otherwise their votes would be “wasted” and they wish to feel important, even if only as tiny parts of this whole decision-making process. Mere readers, viewers and spectators tend to take sides, once they read a book, view a movie or a sports game. They may also wish to bet on the outcome and then influence the result in the tiny way that is still open to them. – JZ, 23.8.12. - USELESSNESS OF COMPULSORY VOTING
VOTING: Compulsory voting: To call the extremely limited choice or vote, which is offered in the present territorial political process "the vote" is a misnomer because it presumes the non-existence of alternative, freer or wider choices or votes. The term "compulsory voting" is also a misnomer as long as elections are secret: It means no more than an objectively useless compulsory attendance at the polling booths, at least no more for all those, who are not conned into voting for the supposedly lesser evil or those on the top of the list, but who, instead, would rather vote informal than support any of the politicians offering themselves and the taxpayers of a territory for sale. (Alas, the alternative choice of: "None of the above!" is so far only very rarely offered on any ballot paper.) - JZ, 5.6.04.) – However, a very short-term but, nevertheless, quite wrongful forced labor is involved. - JZ, 4.4.11. - MISNOMER, INFORMAL VOTING
VOTING: Compulsory voting: To mix everybody's interests with the interests of everybody else through the territorial political process results only in a general mess or hotchpotch, a compromise, one in which the interests of nobody are properly taken care of. Who could paint a pretty picture when all his colors where compulsorily mixed up? Only common or separate interests can be satisfied. - JZ, 5.6.04. - ALL TOO MIXED UP INTERESTS & COMMITMENTS, PANARCHISM, FREE CHOICE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TO EACH HIS OWN! TERRITORIALISM, DIVERSITY, DIFFERENT INTERESTS
VOTING: Compulsory voting: Voters, candidates and the elected take themselves too serious. I don't. - JZ, 5.6.04. – At least not in a positive way, while I do see the many wrongs and losses caused by this territorialist system, with its tendency to practise popular errors, myths and prejudices rather than enlightened views. Let all the dissenters do their own things for or to themselves, thus setting attractive or deterrent examples! – JZ, 29.10.08. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & DISASSOCIATION, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY – EVEN IN THIS SPHERE!
VOTING: Compulsory voting: What value is the vote for public servants, when its natural counterpart, namely to vote against them: by recall at any time, the right to sue for disservices, done to oneself, and also done at one's own expense, and, moreover, the right to secede from them and to act with other volunteers under exterritorial autonomy - are not realized? The territorialist, collectivist, monopolistic and coercive political process turns the presumed representatives and servants into real masters. Isn't it wrong to force people to continue hiring "servants" when they would rather not hire any at all or would soon dismiss them because they are not worth a cent to them? - JZ, 5.6.04.
VOTING: Confinement of our choices to territorial and collectivist ones breeds tyrannies, dictatorships, revolutions, civil wars, national, religious, religions and other wars as well as terrorism. Thus a moral and rational being cannot favor these restrictions. - JZ, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Conscientious objection against territorial voting offers not practical way out but at least it refuses to sanction that "liberty" and supposed "right". - JZ - I would favor a vote on individual and group secessionism and on exterritorial autonomy for societies and communities of volunteers. - At least it would introduce these alternatives into the public discussion. - JZ, 4.4.11. - REFERENDUM
VOTING: consider the nature of the ballot. It is nothing but a fragment of sovereignty. It represents a small piece of the power which, in an absolutism, is vested in a single person or an oligarchy. And just as the substance of political power consists of castles and food and pleasures for the autocrat, so does the holder of this fragment of diffused sovereignty spell "good times". In short, the right of suffrage carries with it the expectation of economic welfare, and that expectation is still the motive behind the "x" set down along the candidate's name. We vote, in the main, by our belly-interest.” - Frank Chodorov, "Out of Step", p.38/39. - And the belly is rather shortsighted and does not give a hoot about principles. However, it is usually better able to distinguish rotten food from good food than the brains of most voters can distinguish between rotten and good ideas and proposals or whole platforms and it has its unique ability of instantly rejecting or rapidly bringing up rotten food, whilst we are stuck with voted-in political platforms, distortions of them and lies and deceptions for years, decades and sometimes centuries. - JZ 1.12.87. - If only we, individually, could "vomit up", or otherwise excrete, all politicians and their "programs" and "policies", if we had been foolish enough to swallow them - as soon as we are quite sick of them! - JZ, 6.6.04.
VOTING: Decision-making: Imagine, a few well-paid people sitting down and deciding your fate, even that of your country and, possibly, of the whole of mankind on this world and - and being elected, also by you, to do so! I prefer other nightmares. – JZ, n.d. & 4.4.11, 23.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM, NWT
VOTING: democracy (the voting mechanism) is a very poor means for determining people’s preferences. Votes can be cast either for or against a limited number of proposals offered in referenda, but votes remain extraordinarily poor devices for registering the intensity (*) of different people’s wants and desires. – Furthermore, why would we want to rely on the cumbersome procedures of democracy to determine how many toothpicks or bow ties to produce?” - Richard B. McKenzie, Bound to Be Free, Hoover Institute Press, 1982, p.56. - - (*) and great variety! – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Democratic voters, whether they are aware of it or not, are as much voting against territorial governments, all their wrongs and evils, even when, formally, they voted for them, as did the voters for e.g. Lenin, Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro and Idi Amin and similar beasts. They condemn themselves by their own votes, merely heaping up more and more evidence against every territorial system. - JZ, 9.11.97, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Disfranchise net tax-recipients. - Disfranchise all who, in balance, get more tax money than they pay and we will get another kind of politician and policies. - JZ, 19.9.88. - By far not good enough as a proposal but a tiny step in the right direction. The fools too, have the right to self-government - but only among themselves and at their own expense and risk. - JZ, 8.6.04, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Disfranchise politicians and bureaucrats rather than letting them disfranchise us under the pretence of representing us via the political and territorial "vote". - JZ, 25.8.98.
VOTING: Distance yourself from territorial politicians and bureaucrats, rather than associate with them, even if merely by one vote among millions. – JZ, n.d. & 4.4.11.
VOTING: Do no longer vote for your tyrants!” - JZ, 18.3.02. – Try to gain the vote to opt out from under them, as individuals or as whole groups of volunteers. – JZ, 21.4.09. - FOR "DEMOCRATIC" TERRITORIAL TYRANNY? PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY TOWARDS AUTHORITIES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, SECESSIONISM
VOTING: Do territorial elections have any value otherwise than as circus performances by clowns for clowns? – JZ, n.d. – Q.
VOTING: Does it mend matters to say that under our system we choose the best man available, and leave the hundred questions for him to deal with? That is only our old friend, the autocrat, come back once more, with a democratic polish rubbed over his face to disguise and, as far as may be, to beautify his appearance. Our sin consists in the suppression of our own selves and our own opinions; and in one sense we fall lower than the slaves of the autocrat, for they are simply sinned against, but we take an active part in the sin against ourselves.” - Auberon Herbert, "Mr. Spencer and the Great Machine", p.63. - DEMOCRACY, AUTHORITARIANISM, TYRANNY, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Don't deny the most important vote to any individual, namely, the freedom to secede from any government and to join or set up an exterritorially autonomous minority group. - JZ, 2.10.85.
VOTING: Don't leave anything to vote on!" - JZ, free after L. Neil Smith: "The Venus Belt", p. 73: "... there isn't even anything to vote on."
VOTING: Don't let all people decide all for other people. - JZ 26.6.79.
VOTING: Don't Re-elect Anybody!” - Bumper sticker by H. G. Enterprises, n.d. – Do not elect them in the first place! - JZ, 28.10.08.
VOTING: Don't vote wrongly? Everyone who uses his political or territorial vote, votes wrongly. Instead, vote upon the market and establish a free market for all public services, for all political, economic and social services, for the first place, a market upon which one can freely choose, as a sovereign consumer, also as a free entrepreneur, also vote and act as a competitor, with the own money and labor - JZ 22.9.90, 4.4.11. – Originally, in German: Nicht falsch wählen"? Jeder der politisch (territorial) wählt, wählt falsch. Wählt auf dem Markt oder schafft einen freien Markt für Regierungsdienstleistungen - auf dem man wirklich als Konkurrent mit dem eigenen Geld und der eigenen Arbeit wählen und handeln kann. - JZ, 22.9.90.)
VOTING: Each adult and rational person to get a complete freedom of action and veto power vote over the whole sphere of all his genuine individual rights and liberties. - JZ, 18.1.96, 4.4.11. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL VETOS VS. TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Each libertarian organization can be founded and sustained only by a conscious, well-informed public. Each person would be able to vote where he or she works or is active, on all issues of significant concern.” - David DeLeon, "For Democracy where we Work", in "Reinventing Anarchy", p.320, by H. J. Ehrlich et al. - We should strive for freedom not only at the work place but also when it comes to the individual choice for any political, economic and social system. To each the own utopia - at the own risk and expense. No more territorial impositions based upon the majority decisions of other people, with whom one disagrees. - If any non-libertarian people wish to organize their own work and property, as well as their own political, economic and social system, in one or the other form of statism or socialism etc., it should be entirely up to them. - Self-chosen hells should also be optional. - JZ, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Each political and territorial vote is a vote against self-help for oneself as well as for all others. - JZ, 4.10.98. - It only helps the power-addicts to help themselves to the property, rights and liberties of others, as if they were entitled to them. - JZ, 7.6.04. - TERRITORIALISM, SELF-OWNERSHIP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-HELP, SELF-LIBERATION
VOTING: Each should directly or indirectly tax only himself and like-minded people, for whatever he and they wants in services. - JZ 22.7.85.
VOTING: Each should have only the liberty to vote in or out his OWN office bearers or laws or constitutions etc. without any pretense that he could, with his vote, rightly represent others, who disagree with him. - JZ, 23.5.91.
VOTING: Each territorial election benefits me, but only by provoking more thoughts and expressions on why there should not be any territorial and collectivist voting that would, as such and quite inevitably, infringe the individual rights and liberties of any dissenters. - JZ, 11.9.99, 4.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Each to be free to choose his own prime minister, tax system, constitution, laws, juridical-, police-, defence- and economic system and his ethnic or other associates. - JZ, 19.9.88. - VOTES, EXCLUSIVE ONES, FOR ONE'S OWN PREFERENCES. THESE INDIVIDUAL VOTES TO BE FREELY REALIZED BY EACH INDIVIDUAL, TOGETHER WITH LIKE-MINDED PEOPLE
VOTING: Each vote cast for any territorialist politician is a not only a wasted vote but a wrongful and harmful vote. It teaches neither the politicians nor the parties nor the voters enough of their fundamental rights, liberties and choices. Only individual votes that bind only the individual voter and his individually chosen representatives, are really representative and educational for both the elector and the elected. Only they can lead to quite rightful and reasonable experiments and actions among volunteers and undertaken only at their expense and risk. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Each voter should be free enough or become enfranchised to decide all issues concerning his own affairs for himself, by his own sovereign vote, regardless of how others vote on their affairs. – E.g.: Your medical or social security system for you - mine for me! - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Either the secret voting hides dishonest intentions or it is a cover for honest intentions which cannot be revealed because the voters do not live in a democracy but in a single or multiple (pluralistic) despotic State in which people can be penalized for the public declaration of rightful views and actions. Neither the dishonest intentions and actions nor the remaining despotism should be territorially sanctioned in any way, least of all by compulsory participation in such proceedings. - Let people do their own things - for or to themselves! - JZ, 1.12.87, 4.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Elected, legalized and temporary despotism over dissenters is still despotism. Voting can be rightful only among volunteers. - JZ, n.d. & 4.4.11. - VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL & MINORITY GROUP SOVEREIGNTY, EXTERRITORIALISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION FOR ALL SELF-CONCERNED ACTIVITIES.
VOTING: Electing new masters does not lead to more freedom - unless freedom is already realized to the extent that all communities are reduced to only exterritorially autonomous associations of volunteers. - JZ, 16.3.95.
VOTING: Election proved unable to find out the men who might represent a nation and manage, otherwise than in a party spirit, the affairs they are compelled to legislate upon. These defects became so striking that the very principles of the representative system were criticized and their justness doubted. “- Kropotkin, in "19th Century Opinion", p.244. - Who compels anyone to legislate? - JZ, 2.12.87. - Who could, possibly and quite rightfully represent all others and make decisions on their behalf? - I deny that there is even a single such person in any country or even in the whole world. - JZ, 4.4.11. – Q.
VOTING: Elections alone will never be enough to ensure good government. Russia and Pakistan are proof enough of that.” – Thomas Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree, p.189, Harper Collins Publishers, ISBN 0 00 655139 4 www.fireandwater.com - Territorialism will make sure of that. As I wrote today on my local government election slip, when I voted informal, crossing out all the candidates and parties: “The lesser evil is still an evil!” – Even for these elections attendance is here compulsory but not filling it out just as the politicians want us to. – So I went for a walk, did some scribbling at the election booth and avoided the fine. To punish all the informal voters they would have to do away with the secrecy for ballots. - JZ, 13.9.09, 4.4.11. – ELECTIONS, GOOD GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, VOLUNTARY GOVERNMENTS, PANARCHISM
VOTING: elections amount to no more than choosing between the scum that floats to the top of the barrel and the dregs that settle to the bottom.” - L. Neil Smith, Lever Action, A Mountain Media Book, 2001, email@example.com, p.73. - At least under territorialism. Under the voluntarism of panarchism it may have other and better results. Anyhow, then each will get what he choose for himself, as long as he is prepared to put up with it. Upon disappointments he would be free to secede and try again, in a different way. - JZ, 4.4.11. - & ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: elections are now no more than a plebiscite by which a whole people (*) puts itself into the power of a small gang.” - Bertrand de Jouvenel, On Power, 1993, Liberty Press, p.324. – (*) Not all are entitled or registered as voters and not all do vote and some do vote informally. - JZ, 21.6.01. - DIS., ELECTIONS, GOVERNMENTS, VOTING ONESELF INTO SLAVERY, POLITICIANS, RULERS
VOTING: Elections are often nothing but organized stupidity and, as Schiller said: "Against stupidity even the Gods fight in vain." - The present enforced territorial solidarity between the stupid and the wise doesn't teach the one nor protect the other. Only when their interests are separated and the stupid ones still have to bear the full brunt of their own mistakes, whilst the wise ones are free to set them the example of the benefits they derived from their wise decisions, is there any hope that the wise will have some positive influence upon the stupid. - JZ, 4.6.04.
VOTING: Elections do not mean in practice: "Who should run the country?" but, rather: "Who should further mess up the country?" - JZ, 28.7.84. – TERRITORIALISM, DIS.
VOTING: Elections inevitably attract and select some of the worst, voted in by those most ignorant, deceived or prejudiced. - JZ, 27.2.89. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Elections provide no security, no guaranty that in parliament and government will be people with special mental and scientific qualifications.” - Uwe Timm, Gesammelte Schriften, S.170. - However, they do assure that the worst get to the top (as Hayek pointed out in The Road to Serfdom), they will be filled with statists, territorialists and taxers, as well as practitioners of financial and monetary despotism, parasites, looters abusing the legalized monopoly powers of central banks and tax departments and loot allocators, via governmental budgets for the proceeds of legalized robberies. - JZ, 4.4.11, 23.8.12. - ELECTIONS & PARLIAMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, EXPERTS, PROFESSIONALS, STATISM, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, VESTED INTERESTS, BAILOUTS, SUBSIDIES, WASTE, BUREAUCRACY, “WELFARE STATES”, WARS AGAINST POVERTY THAT PRODUCE MORE POVERY
VOTING: Elections were being held in Russia and a peasant went to the polling booth to cast his vote. An official handed him an envelope to place in the ballot box. When the peasant began opening the sealed envelope, the Russian official cried out, "What are you doing?" - "I only wanted to see who I was voting for", said the peasant. - "Are you crazy?" roared the official. "Don't your realize this is a secret ballot?" - Arnold Fine, in "READERS' DIGEST", 9/75. - The Soviets always liked Westerners to mix up their own regime with Russia and its Russian population and pretended that all of the other over 120 captive nations in their empire (not to speak of the numerous diverse ideological and religious groups, subjected to that territorial and totalitarian regime, as if all of them were behind their slave masters (rather than under them). - JZ - "Their" people are behind their slave masters - very far behind. And so are the voters in all other countries. - JZ, 6.6.04. - This is a humorous instance, one that drives real experiences just one logical step further, of making the vote really secret. Not only who votes for whom and at whose expense, and who picks the candidates remains largely a secret but also for whom the vote goes. - JZ - JOKES, SECRET VOTING, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, TOTALITARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM, THE UNITY SPLEEN
VOTING: Ethical reasons and rational arguments have all too little influence upon election results. Prejudices and ignorance tend to prevail among the voters as well as among those elected by them. The process and the actions arising from it are themselves wrong, because they are based on compulsory membership and territorial coercion and enforced uniformity. - JZ, 15.11.95, 8.6.04. - ELECTION RESULTS, ETHICS, RATIONALITY, REASON, MORALITY
VOTING: Even "free" but territorial elections are always opposed to individualized selections for the selecting individuals only. - In territorial elections the contents of our "shopping baskets" for “public services” are, mostly, determined by the votes of others. - JZ, n.d., & 4.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Even an honest election is dishonest in many of its representative pretensions until a "count me out!" vote can be validly cast for constitutions, laws, jurisdictions, policing and penal services, and their whole package deals, in favour of those institutions and laws which dissenting individuals and groups prefer for themselves. J. Z. 29.4.90, 6.1.93, 28.3.12.
VOTING: Even if I could overcome all my objections and were to cast a valid vote and even if it should happen that I would agree with so many of my fellow citizens that my single vote would tip the scale in our favor, I cannot see why my vote should be binding upon those who voted otherwise. I will not commit that wrong towards them. I do not want to turn them, without justification or necessity, into enemies. I do not want to be subjected to their vote, either. - JZ, n.d., in one of several protests against compulsory voting. - revised, 4.4.11, 23.8.12. - VOLUNTARISM, TOLERANCE FOR TOLERANT PEOPLE, FREEDOM TO DO THE OWN THINGS.
VOTING: even Mr. and Mrs. Webb had come to admit that the democratic State is inadequate to provide for all human needs in all their varied complexity, and to declare that there has been a revolution in thought with regard to Democracy, and it has become realized that the individual citizen cannot be adequately represented for all purposes by means of a single vote as a human being. But it is a dangerous admission for them to make, for when once the omni-competence of the idol, the State, has been brought in question, we are in the fair way to voluntary association, unless life is to be an unblushing struggle to obtain the domination of compulsory co-operation in conflicting spheres.” - S. Hutchinson Harris: "The Doctrine of Personal Right", p.248/49. – DOMINATION, TERRITORIALISM, HIERARCHIES, AUTHORITARIANISM, COMPULSION, POWER VS. GENUINE SELF-DETERMINATION
VOTING: Even supposing politicians were perfectly informed of the full effects of their taxing and spending programs, the political market would remain an inferior democratic mechanism to the economic market. No reform of the electoral system could enable national macro-policy to reflect different individual micro-preferences as effectively as the competitive market economy.” - Ralph Harris, "The End of Government ...?" p.18. - TERRITORIALISM, MAJORITARIANISM, REPRESENTATION
VOTING: Even though counting heads is not an ideal way to govern, at least it is better than breaking them." - Judge Learned Hand. Speech to US Federal Bar Association, 8 March 1932. - Voting may not break heads, directly, but it does not liberate our heads and bodies, either. - JZ, 20.6.92. - Moreover, indirectly, it does lead to the breaking of many heads, to the extent that it is imposed territorially upon all, as a collective decision-making process, regardless of the fact of how many minorities and individuals would rather govern themselves than be governed by a majority of people who do not agree with them. This common practice is a breeding ground for dictatorships, not only in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan. - JZ, 7.6.04. - Moreover, as Kant pointed out, by monopolizing decisions on war an peace, even democratic or republican governments are really already despotic regimes. Not only through their taxation and monetary policies and their avalanches of wrongful legislation. How many more examples do we need to demonstrate, clearly enough, to most people, that they can also be Warfare States, with a few exceptions, like Switzerland (*), Sweden and the miniature States? - We have democracies armed with anti-people mass murder devices, while they do, usually, abstain from serious attempts at tyrannicide. - JZ, 4.4.11. – (*) Not involved in any war since 1815! – JZ, 6.2.12.
VOTING: Every candidate should be allowed to win or represent - but only the rule over those, who voted for him. He could do that as one of the elected leaders of an exterritorially autonomous protective association, formed by any particular group among many diverse minorities or, if he is lucky (or unlucky, seeing that living and acting for many others rather than living the own life, is a time and energy-consuming chore) by the majority in any country or even in the whole world. - Any leash has two ends, as one proverb puts it. A very small example for this: A sovereign, like the constitutional English Queen, does not even have the freedom to celebrate her birthday on its real day but, instead, only on a day, often a few days removed from the real birthday, that is convenient for the public! - Moreover, how much privacy does a ruler have? How many bodyguards does he need? A ruler over or manager of volunteers only would be much more loved, safer and likely to rule much longer, if he wanted to. - Thus, if our territorial rulers knew at least their own interests and rights well enough, they would become pioneers in transforming their territorial States into communities or societies of volunteers. Thereby they would lose many enemies and retain and gain many friends and allies. - JZ, 21.11.82, 4.4.11. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: Every law ever made stands over you.” - John Pearce, 30.7.82. - Do you really want to be a "lawful" stand-over man? - JZ, 82. Or to be subjected to one? Or even to millions of them? – JZ, 28.10.08. - TERRITORIALISM VS. PERSONAL LAW, VOLUNTARISM, Q., EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM & TOLERANCE, LAWS, LEGISLATION
VOTING: Every man can at best only properly represent himself. Certain individual responsibilities should not, nay cannot even be rightly transferred to others, never mind how often and in what form the attempt is made. Each has to live his own life and fulfill his own obligations. Otherwise he is not a personality, not fully human, but merely a vegetable, puppet or robot managed by or all too much under the influence of others. When it comes to majority voting, he is under the influence of the most ignorant and prejudiced people. To formally give the consent to such an abominable condition makes matters even worse, puts people on a level of those who voluntarily (largely through force of circumstances, as a last resort to raise some cash) sold themselves into galley slavery. I believe Archenholz, in his "Travels in Italy", middle of the 18th. century, reported still some such instances. - Or should a ruler be proud to have submitted to his addiction to territorial power? - How many enemies does he thus make for himself, quite unnecessarily? - How much that is really enlightened and enlightening, just and liberating, can he possibly do in such a position? - JZ, 1.12.87.
VOTING: Every man one vote - and an exclusive one - on his own affairs. No man to have any vote on anybody else's affairs, except within communities of volunteers, if all of them subscribed to this kind of decision-making. Since they are volunteers, agreeing on all main points, elections or a referendum will only be rarely needed by them. - This is my political ideal. Genuine self-government or self-management by like-minded people. - JZ 7.5.76, 2.4.89, 4.4.11, 23.8.12. - TOLERANCE, SELF-RULE, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-HELP, ASSOCIATIONISM
VOTING: Every territorial government inevitably betrays many of its voters. - JZ, 74. - Naturally, it also acts as an enemy of all those who voted against it. - JZ, 29.11.87. - Thus it becomes widely hated or despised and often insulted and breeds or motivates all kinds of "freedom fighters", resistance efforts, revolutionaries and terrorists, as well as dictatorships, wars and civil wars. - JZ, 4.4.11, 23.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Every territorial vote reduces us as individuals. Only exterritorial votes and choices can liberate us to the extent that we do individually desire and that is rightful and possible for us to achieve. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6. 04.
VOTING: Every vote in territorial States does wrongfully usurp the rightful self-government powers of others while at the same time extremely and wrongfully limiting them to a few still private and somewhat free actions, limited by the income that is left to them after taxation. - JZ, 2.3.96, 23.8.12. - MYOB, GENUINE SELF-DETERMINATION.
VOTING: Everybody gets a vote on everyone else's affairs and no one gets the decisive vote on his own affairs. - JZ, 6.11.99. – TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY
VOTING: Everybody should have dozens of panarchistic or polyarchic systems to choose from, whether governmental types or non-governmental ones, for himself and his own affairs. Any other vote is trivial compared with this one. - JZ, 28.5.99, 8.6.04. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: Everyone should only have the right to vote in or out his OWN representative, office bearer or law or constitution, without any pretence that these could, possibly and rightly, represent others, who disagree with him. - JZ, 23.5.91, 4.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Everyone votes for a dictator.” - Ron Chusid, - THE CONNECTION 66, p.64. – Even in a democracy. Only its dictators are not quite as powerful and tyrannical as the Hitlers, Stalins and Maos. – Except when it comes to nuclear “weapons”, anti-people “weapons” or mass murder devices, central banking or other features of territorialism. - JZ, 28.10.08, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Everyone, supposedly, gets an equal vote for the government type that they do want. However, through the territorial and majoritarian system often as many as 50% and, sometimes even more of the population (e.g. those, who did not even bother any more to vote), do not get the government or non-governmental system that they would prefer for themselves. Moreover, the final and most important decisions are made by ever-smaller minorities among the victors, all too often quite wrongfully and always wrongfully for the peaceful dissenters. Only a fraction of the population is entitled to vote. Only a fraction does actually vote. The candidates are usually pre-selected by others than the voters. The winners combine only a fraction of the votes upon themselves. And when they vote in the "representative" bodies, provided all of them bother to be present there, rather than e.g. being on a world trip with their current love, under one false pretence or the other, their decisions are made only by a fraction. And this on proposals usually made by only by a very exclusive group and decided upon by party discipline rather than free discussion. In numerous ways the supposedly "representative" system is very unrepresentative. Minorities and individuals? Who cares about them, in a democracy, unless they form a powerful voting block or are rich contributors to lobbies and party funds - or bribes. - JZ, 20.11.96, 8.6.04. – TERRITORIAL VOTING, CORRUPTION, DESPOTIC MINORITY RULE EVEN AFTER LANDSLIDE VICTORIES BY MAJORITIES
VOTING: Everyone, who does not vote, should be considered as an autonomous, exterritorial, voluntary and individual secessionist. - JZ, 4.9.89.
VOTING: Exterritorial self-government for all those who, today, are merely territorial politicians and voters, victimizers and victims of the territorial system. - JZ, 25.5.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Exterritorial voting among volunteer communities rather than territorial voting over involuntary subjects. - JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: Exterritorially autonomous panarchies for all communities of volunteers rather than territorial sovereignties, monopolies and coercive powers and majority despotism also over dissenters, i.e. over all compulsory members or mere subjects. - JZ, 11.9.99. – PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, TERRITORIALISM, POWER
VOTING: Factions and voting blocks prevent sensible and tolerant actions among those able and willing to agree and do enforce, instead, senseless and wrongful compromises. – E.g.: They manage to turn their inflations and deflations into stagflations. - JZ, 4.6.04, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Fancy being one of the culprits who either tried to keep McMahon in power or put Whitlam into office. Rule thyself. Don't try to dominate others, neither directly nor by proxy. "One people, one empire and one leader" means disaster heaped upon disaster, as the Hitler Regime amply demonstrated. "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuehrer!" was one of its main slogans. - JZ, 5.6.04. – LEADERSHIP, ONE PEOPLE? ONE NATION? ONE TERRITORY, ONE LAW FOR ALL IN IT? CENTRALIZATION & ITS TERRITORIAL COERCION, PANARCHISM, I.E., THEIR OWN CHOICES FOR ALL BUT AGGRESSORS & CRIMINALS WITH VICTIMS
VOTING: First past the vote or absolute majority voting vs. e.g. qualified and minimum (e.g. 75%) majority voting, where e.g. a 75% consensus is required at least and where, perhaps a mere 25% vote of the dissenters can throw out a new legal measure, at least its application to the affairs of the 25%. (*) - By rights, even an individual should remain free to opt out of majority decisions, if he is not criminally responsible for wrongs committed to the majority or some members of the majority. – JZ, n.d. – (*) Robert Heinlein made a similar proposal in his “The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress.” – I read it and appreciated it decades ago. He used somewhat different percentages, 80% and 20% I believe. - J.Z., 23.8.12.
VOTING: for a completely honest election, I submit we need to give every voter a chance to express his true preference. Instead of being forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, as is so often the case, let the voters actually vote for the candidate of their choice, if any, or for Nobody, or, for None of the Above. If Nobody wins, then Nobody fills that office for that term. If None of the above wins, then a second election will be held, and none of the turkeys that were on the ballot the first time will be eligible to appear on the ballot the second time. Fair enough?” - JAG, 21.9.76. - No. Fairness will exist only when volunteers can follow their own voting preferences in their own exterritorial and autonomous; volunteer groups, regardless of what other minorities or the majority may choose to do among themselves. - JZ, 2.12.87. – Q., DIS.
VOTING: Free choice of "keepers" or a real choice of adult status for all adults, i.e., free choice of exterritorial autonomy for volunteers? - JZ, 25.7.91, 14.1.93. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY IN EVERY SPHERE
VOTING: Free decision-making for all, not just for politicians and bureaucrats! – JZ, n.d. – Politicians should only remain free to make decisions for themselves and for their remaining voluntary followers. – JZ, 23.8.12. - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, POLITICIANS
VOTING: Free enterprise for voters or freedom of action, rather than: vote and obey! - JZ, 24.3.03.
VOTING: Free voting requires exterritorial voting within one's own volunteer community. Territorial voting denies that most important franchise of all to all of us. – JZ
VOTING: Free voting under monetary despotism and compulsory taxation and imposed territorial rule, without free choice among competing governments and societies? I’s a delusion rather than a reality. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12.
VOTING: Free, peaceful, just and rational men cannot reach their aims through the bottleneck of the territorial political process. – JZ, n.d. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Freedom has the case but not the votes. But this does not warrant despair. Every movement in history - good or bad - has been led by a few. Not even simple matters have ever had mass understanding.” - Leonard Read, "Meditations on Freedom", p.12. - All too many liberation steps were prevented or for all too long postponed by the imposition of territorial decision-making. - JZ, 4.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Freedom of speech and actions for territorial politicians can achieve little if any positive good. We have to rest all our hopes upon freedom of speech and action for individuals and volunteer groups. - JZ, 30.7.82, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Friedrich Hayek, in "The Road to Serfdom", dedicated a special chapter to answer the question why, in democracies, based upon voting and representation, "the worst get to the top". Even now he has not yet seen the exterritorial and voluntaristic alternative but merely tries to suggest reforms to the existing system. - JZ, 1.12.87.
VOTING: From my point of view, the mere act of voting is a cop-out. The voter has, in effect, admitted by manipulating his ballot machine lever, that he can do nothing himself. Therefore, he is shrugging his shoulders and asking "George" (or Pete or Joe) to take action. This is not taking action; it is refusing to act.” - Robert LeFevre, "LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL", Fall 78. - It amounts also to denying freedom of action or freedom to experiment to others, even when these actions are carried out quite tolerantly, only among volunteers and at their risk and expense. - JZ, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Full exterritorial autonomy for all and all their individual choices and votes, rather than any territorial impositions upon all or upon any peacefully dissenting citizen. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04, 4.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Fundamental differences in basic values can seldom if ever be resolved at the ballot box; ultimately, they can only be decided, though not resolved, by conflict. (*) The religious and civil wars of history are a bloody testament to this judgment.” - Milton Friedman, in "Capitalism and Freedom", p.24. - F. is still unaware of the potential of exterritorial autonomy of volunteers - panarchism - for lastingly avoiding conflicts by permitting sufficient constitutional, legislative and juridical separation of antagonists, which gives all of them full scope for their own beliefs, practised at their own expense and risk among themselves, introducing rightful tolerance or freedom of action or experimental freedom in politics, economics and social etc. "public" affairs. - JZ 30.11.87. - - (*) Or by free and peaceful competition from exterritorially organized volunteers. - JZ, 4.4.11. Most of the fundamental differences between religions were peacefully settled wherever and to the extent that religious tolerance or religious liberty was applied, including their exterritorial autonomy. The same solution would work for the different faiths of ideologies, in the social, economic and political “sciences”, as soon as territorialism is rejected there as well, as morally and rationally indefensible. – Has his son, David Friedman, gone sufficiently beyond his father in this respect? - JZ, 23.8.12. – PANARCHISM, MILTON & DAVID FRIEDMAN, Q., RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
VOTING: Fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote; they depend on the outcome of no election.” – U.S. Supreme Court – West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette, 1943. – But what about the votes of the legislators on laws and regulations infringing basic rights and liberties? They are not outlawed by this Supreme Court decision. – JZ, 27.7.96, 18.8.08. - Is there any Bill of Rights clause in the Amendments to the USA Constitution that has not yet been infringed by many mere laws and regulations? - To a large extent this constitution, too, has been outlawed! - Governmental jurisdiction has not prevented that development. Not has any territorial government every formally recognized and declared all genuine individual rights and liberties. - JZ, 4.4.11. - PARLIAMENTARISM, REPRESENTATION, HUMAN RIGHTS, LEGISLATION, DIS.
VOTING: Give a free vote to all adults, on taxes, international treaties, defence and disarmament measures and on whether there should be a war at all and if so, then for what rightful aims. Allow all to vote in a referendum and via individual secessions. - JZ, 2.10.85, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Good Lord! What a lot of trouble to prove in political economy that two and two make four; and if you succeed in doing so, people cry, “It is so clear that it is boring.” Then they vote as if you had never proved anything at all.” – Bastiat, in G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.240. – Those who managed to enlighten themselves and even those who merely believe that they did, should be quite free to vote themselves out of the messes that others do vote themselves and all dissenters into, territorially. Individual and group secessionism on the basis of personal laws and complete voluntarism is a much better way to enlighten citizens and “representatives” than any territorial and collectivist voting and decision-making system. – J.Z, 6.12.07, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Governments always win voters with their promises, before they are elected, and soon afterwards lose them again, by their actions. The riddle consists in this: Why do the voters, again and again vote, all too hopefully, one set of rascals in and another set out, only to be soon disappointed by them, once again? Why do they rely more on these professional rascals and liars rather than upon themselves, to improve their own conditions? One of the baits is, naturally, that with their votes they get some access to the common trough, filled with tribute funds that they and others were forced to pay into. Taxes and government hand-outs are taken for granted, just like death. In their schools and universities the voters have apparently learnt nothing about e.g. voluntary State membership, voluntary taxation, free banking, individual rights and liberties, privatization of all government assets, competing police forces, competing communities of volunteers under personal laws and xyz other freedom options. – JZ, 22.10.07. - GOVERNMENT PROMISES & GOVERNMENT ACTIONS
VOTING: Governments will always stick to their own priorities, not to those of the voters. - JZ, 13.7.87. - Under territorialism they got away with this for a long time. I deny that they could furthermore get away with this under voluntarism and its personal law communities, all under full exterritorial autonomy, with unrestricted individual and group secessions. - JZ, 4.4.11.
VOTING: groups that lose too many votes eventually explode in frustration.” - Ken Schoolland, The Adventure of Jonathan Gullible, Leap Publishing, Cape Town, with Commentaries by Ken Schoolland and Janette Eldridge, 1981 ff, 2004 ed., www.jonathangullible.com firstname.lastname@example.org p.232. – That fate is largely spared to communities of volunteers. They can only blame themselves, for their own mistakes and, due to individual secessionism, those, which produce one failure after the other, will finally run out of old and new members. – They would thus tend to rather implode than explode. - JZ, 21.4.09, 23.8.12. - TERRORISM, PANARCHISM, DEMOCRACY & MAJORITARIANISM VS. SELF-RULE, VIOLENCE, RIOTS, ARSON
VOTING: Have your say!" - Then they will still act as pleases them, not you. - JZ, 8.3.93, 7.6.04. - & POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM, DIS., FREEDOM OF SPEECH TO BE SUPPLEMENTED BY FREEDOM OF ACTION OR EXPERIMENTATION
VOTING: Having been bitten 30 times by the territorial election bug and 30 times disappointed by the results, we should be 30 times as shy of it. – JZ, 14.2.07, 25.10.07, 4.4.11.
VOTING: Hawke for the 49% who voted for him, Fraser for the 38% who vote for him and none of the above for the happy 13 % who want neither of them. - JZ, 20.2.83.
VOTING: He did foresee the position of the citizen who should be one out of fifty million, a power-unit with no sense of power, an elector of superior (*) people who would treat him in turn with savage contempt as raw material for their pet theories or reform and social betterment. Like Mill, he foresaw the dangers of the integrated mob-mind, crushing with its hideous homogeneity every spontaneity or innovation: like Mill, too, he saw that democracy alone was no panacea; that the transference of legal sovereignty to the majority of the moment was no guaranty of the universal right to happiness (*); and that the value of self-government depended entirely on the nature (**) of the ‘selves’." - Ivor Brown, English Political Theory, Methuen, London, 1920, p.134/135, on Spencer and Mill, but remaining short of panarchism and even of individual secessionism. And this in spite of Herbert Spencer's lucid defence of individual secessionism in the original 1850 edition of "Social Statics", in chapter 19: "The Right to Ignore the State." - JZ, 4.4.11. – (*) ? – (**) and freedom! - JZ, 23.1.02. - VOTERS, POLITICIANS, DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATION, POWER, SELF-GOVERNMENT DELUSION, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, MAJORITY, UNITY, SPONTANEITY, INNOVATION, DISSENT, HERBERT SPENCER, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: How is it 'responsible' to vote for a party whose politics you don't support? If you feel dissatisfaction, REGISTER it, rather than help to keep these lunatics in business. And if a majority registered dissatisfaction, we might even see a few sensible ideas sprouting up!” - Terry Arthur, "95% Is Crap", p.235. - In some ways non-voting is comparable to atheism. It is more moral and rational than voting, in the same way as atheism is a morally and rationally superior concept. However, one should not confine oneself to relying on criticism and the negative faith or conviction involved and expect any kind of miracles from them. Neither from all truly independent and creative activities. - Nothing is a good enough substitute for full freedom to experiment for all peaceful dissenters, under exterritorial autonomy for the societies and communities of volunteers that do not claim a territorial monopoly for their program. - JZ 2.12.87, 4.4.11.
VOTING: How many elections have not led to new taxes, new official frauds, more laws, regulations, punishments for “crimes” without victims, penalties and controls, more lies and wrongful and harmful actions? Lawmakers, everywhere, have turned out to be the modern vandals. All, naturally, with the best intentions, presumably in the public interest and for the common good and the general welfare and with a public mandate, supposedly supplied by majoritarian, collectivist and territorial elections. – JZ, n.d. & 26.10.07, 4.4.11. – POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, MANDATE, Q., CONSENT, DIS.
VOTING: However, there are some honest people, who have no desire to control others, who want to live at peace with all their neighbors, and who thus refuse to vote for ANY collectivist-statist.” - JAG, Sept. 21, 1976. – All territorial States are to that extent collectivist, despotic, tyrannical, even totalitarian ones. – J.Z., 23.8.12. – TERRITORIALISM, COLLECTIVISM
VOTING: Hundreds of millions of voters can be wrong, often were and still are. The dissenters are not obliged to bow to them in their self-concerned actions. - JZ, 26.9.99. - PANARCHY & TOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL MINORITY AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT
VOTING: I advocate action. But I advocate taking action in the market place where things can be done effectively. I advocate refraining from political action totally. Political action, in fine, is the opiate of the self-righteous. They imagine that by voting they are doing something. By voting, they are in agreement that they will do nothing and are passing the buck to the politicians. In short, political action, so called, is a cop-out.” - Robert LeFevre, in his "LEFEVRE’S JOURNAL", Fall 76. - Worse, it prevents most others from acting and even thinking about sensible actions. - JZ, 30.11.87. – A genuinely free market has still to be established in all too many important spheres. – JZ, 23.88.12. - TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION INSTEAD OF EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM & INDIVIDUAL CHOICES FOR ALL.
VOTING: I am not a betting man. Voting means that one bets, once more, all too hopefully, on one or the other politician or party, ignoring all experiences that indicate that they will, once again, be disappointing and rather represent their own interests than those of the voters, that they will not represent enlightenment but their particular prejudices, errors and myths. But hope lives forever in the human heart and thus all too many still go on to vote, "validly", contrary to all their experiences, again and again, because they do not know of any better option and neither territorial politicians nor the "free" media or the universities point the alternatives out: Voluntary communities, exterritorially autonomous, under personal laws, called panarchies, polyarchies or whatever else. Even the daily experience that only voting with their dollars on a somewhat free market does get them what they want and that territorial politics has no solutions but only its old and new problems to offer. They all should know by now that e.g. in religion only exterritorial tolerance, to the extent that it was finally realized, not territorial separation and domination, has led to religious peace and independence. From this they seem to be unable to conclude that the same rightful and positive result could be achieved in the sphere of political, economic and social systems. Thus their wrongful territorial voting, and the results of it, have not yet turned them off the wrongful territorial track, no matter how much it has cost them in lives, property, rights and liberties and for how long already. The schools, most literature and most of the "experts" certainly do not help in this respect, even when, like all of us, they are faced with ABC mass murder devices, always indiscriminately directed against territorial targets, i.e., mainly civilians, against "the people" (as if they were collectively responsible for the crimes of their rulers), “weapons” which are now in the hands of obviously criminal governments or even of private terrorists. Isn't every government criminal, as long as it keeps such "weapons" handy, much more so than any private owner of a mere gun? (I'm not in favor of gun control - but in favor of the destruction of all mass extermination “weapons” - in anyone's hands! These are “weapons”, which cannot be used rightfully against real enemies and aggressors ONLY!) The exterritorial freedom, peace and justice options are still very widely ignored. They do not fit into the narrow framework of territorialist thinking, ideas, "principles", prejudices, actions and institutions, which have become all too traditional, habitual and customary. The political witch doctors do still rule the field and the minds, although they have only problems and burdens and no solutions to offer. - JZ, 28.3.99, 8.6.04, 5.4.11, 6.2.12, 23.8.12. – VOTING AS AN UNSAFE BET ON POLITICIANS, PARTIES & TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: I am sure that MIGHT does not make RIGHT. LEGALITIES do not determine MORALITIES. And when the political right to vote is used to violate the moral right of a person to keep what he has honestly earned, the future of the nation that practices such immorality is in grave jeopardy.” - Admiral Ben Moreell, Log I, p.5. - Genuine individual human rights and liberties should stand far above "voting rights". - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I am voting all the time - by voicing my opinions all the time - at every opportunity I get, not only on election days and when a party meeting is convened, or when the House is in session. This individual private vote, combined with freedom of action, is the really important one and all progress depends mainly on these two liberties. The other, the territorial voting option, it a farce, if not worse. - JZ, 4.6.04, 5.4.11. - FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION & FREEDOM OF ACTION
VOTING: I am willing to let the majority got to hell in its own way, based on its own votes but I do insist that it allows me, as an individual or minority group member, to do the same to myself or, alternatively, to reap the full, untaxed, and unregulated benefits of my own efforts, i.e. in self-chosen and un-inflated, optional private exchange media and value standards. In other words, democratic voting as practised now, does not realize but rather outlaws autonomy, independence and government by consent, not only for the most backward but also for the most progressive and enlightened people. - JZ, 30.7.82, 30.11.87, 3.4.89, 12.12.03, 5.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: I believe in really free choices, not in pretended ones. – JZ
VOTING: I believe in representing myself, my own ideas and opinions or those, which I have checked out for myself and accepted. I won't permit any politician or bureaucrat to pretend that he represents me. - JZ
VOTING: I believe only in defectors and deserters from conventional territorial politics, i.e., people who want to do their own things and only to and for themselves and among their volunteers. – JZ – PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: I can't represent you and you can't represent me. Give up this vain territorial struggle and let each represent himself or associate and act only with and among like-minded people and at their own expense and risk. - JZ, 4.10.98. – Elected temporary monarchs and aristocrats only for their volunteers. - JZ, 5.4.11. - PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONISM UNDER FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, REPRESENTATION, VOLUNTARISM
VOTING: I declare seriously that we shall never get a sane economic system until we abolish the electoral rule of one man one vote.” - Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, Dec. 74. - This does not apply to exterritorial and autonomous communities of volunteers. Among them, there would e.g. be voluntary groups of Free Traders, and anarcho-capitalists, nationally or internationally organized and, among them, they would unanimously vote for and practise Free Trade and all other aspects of free markets. In their communities or societies they might have this voting system, any other or even none at all but merely individual sovereignty and decision-making. - However, among the exterritorial choices for volunteers there would also be Protectionism and any other kind of statism, except its territorially imposed forms. - Territorialism can teach us only what we should not do - if we value our genuine individual rights and liberties. - JZ 1.12.87, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I dislike the games, which all of the territorialists and their voters want to play with my life and what is mine. They don't give me the real and free choices that I am most interested in. – JZ, n.d. - They do not know or respect all genuine individual rights and liberties. So why should I respect them? I rather object to and resist all their wrongful actions, systems, laws and institutions as far as I can, under their territorial rule, aiming a D-Day for all of my genuine individual human rights and liberties as well as for those of all others, to the extent that they do also wish to practise them among themselves and respect them in others. To each his own personal law, political, economic and social system and institutions as well as all the like-minded volunteers, to do their own things among themselves, in all spheres now monopolized and expensively mismanaged by territorial politicians and bureaucrats - at our risk and expense. They even managed to threaten us with a general nuclear holocaust, not only with flawed and risky nuclear reactors. - JZ, 5.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: I do have hundreds of reasons, which are good enough for me, why I should not vote for any territorial politician. None of them has give me any reason to vote for him or her. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04, 5.4.11, 5.2.12.
VOTING: I do not believe in make-believe "self-government" but only in real self-government, by individual selves and for these selves. – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11. – PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SECESSIONISM & ASSOCIATIONISM
VOTING: I do not consent to be "raped" or robbed by anybody, any time, anywhere, in any way, under any "excuse", least of all by any territorial politician or bureaucrat, any political party and to become thus deprived of any fundamental liberties and rights, e.g. regarding my property, my income, my life and my tolerant and peaceful activities, so that they and their hangers-on can live it up and practise their addiction to power at my expense and risk. - Statism is only good enough for statists. - Territorial statism is a threat not only to the survival of many dissenting minorities but even to the survival of mankind. - JZ, 29.2.96, 7.6.04, 5.4.11. - NWT
VOTING: I do not favor any territorial, monopolistic, collective and compulsory package deal or "collective bargaining", no more so in politics than in trade union "contracts", because they suppress individual preferences and choices, voluntarism and competition - and their results are correspondingly bad. - JZ, 11.9.99, 8.6.04. - There is no more terrible sight to behold than ignorance in action. - W. v. Goethe. - TERRITORIALISM, COERCION, COMPULSORY COLLECTIVISM, STATISM, UNIONS
VOTING: I do not forgive you for you do not know what you are doing to yourself, to me and to all others - with your "free" vote. - JZ, 14.9.91, 5.4.11. – VOTING INFORMALLY:
VOTING: I do not like a Labor government in charge but neither do I like a Liberal government or any other government in charge over me and what is my own. So why vote for any one of them? It only encourages them. I work towards the right and opportunity for all nonconformists to opt out from being ruled by any territorial government. - JZ, 21.5.96, 7.6.04, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I do not share the beliefs of these parties, candidates and of most of their voters - and thus I do abstain. – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: I do not want all votes inextricably mixed up with the voting preferences of others, so that no one can have what he wants (properly sorted out and freely chosen by himself, according his individual preferences involved). Under the opposite and rightful as well as rational arrangements of voluntarism, personal law and exterritorial autonomy, started by individual and group secessionism, the remaining individual votes would fully apply to the individuals involved and the groups of their choice - and to no one else. I.e., the largest number of votes should not bind the whole community but merely the largest community of like-minded people in a territory or in the world. All the voluntary members of minority groups would have to put up with their own individual choices - in their "shopping carts" or package deals of their societies of volunteers, or shut up or secede from them. Each could get what he asked for - at his own expense and risk, to the extent that it is physically and organizationally possible. - Let each fill his shopping basket only with the public services he wants and is able and willing to pay for. - Pay only for your own choices - in all spheres. - Buyer beware! All sellers of all kinds of goods and services to be under fully free competition. No more territorial monopolies and coercion! - JZ, 30.7.82, 30.11.87, 2.4.89. 10.9.04, 5.4.11, 23.8.12. - INDIVIDUAL CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY IN EVERY SPHERE, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARY INSTEAD OF COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBJUGATION
VOTING: I don't know anyone worth voting FOR but see only candidates and parties worth voting AGAINST. - JZ, 4.10.98. - Not even the US Libertarian Party is a quite consistently SECESSIONIST party, whose secessionism is not confined to territorial secessionism. - JZ, 7.6.04. - LIBERTARIAN PARTY, SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIALISM
VOTING: I don't vote for any system, which believes in the "nuclear deterrent" and has made corresponding preparations and alliances. - JZ, 30.7.82, 30.11.87. - NWT
VOTING: I don't vote for any trivia, far less for any wrongs. – JZ, n.d. - Nor for fools and prejudiced people territorially in power over dissenters. – JZ, 29.10.08.
VOTING: I don’t vote for bad jokes, clowns, criminals or fools as my "leaders" or representatives. I never heard of, saw or read about any territorial politician whose "program" was quite rightful, rational, problem-solving and complete, fully respecting all genuine individual rights and liberties. Can you name even one? – This unfounded expectations towards territorial statist leadership and representation is just like the God-worship and prayer delusion in believing that any human being could possibly analyze and solve the multitude of remaining problems of all too many and very diverse people in a whole country. - Even once all individuals are freed to attempt to solve what they consider to be their problems, few of them will fully succeed in doing this soon. - Our knowledge, wisdom, information sources, learning and action abilities are, all too limited. There are neither gods nor governments, politicians, bureaucrats, judges, policemen, entrepreneurs and businessmen or union functionaries, who are all-knowing and all-mighty. Quite the contrary is true. But we could and should all become free to do the best we can do in our own "public" affairs and relationships, just like in our remaining private ones, alone or together with like-minded volunteers, unhindered by anyone, especially by any territorial politician and bureaucrat. Freedom of action, tolerant action, or experimental freedom for anyone, always at the own risk and expense! We should not strive for more but also not for anything less. Everyone to become free to set good examples, inviting imitation - and also bad ones, deterrent ones, which would help to prevent others from making the same mistakes. - JZ, 15.2.07, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I don’t vote for the same reason I don’t rob banks or molest children: it is not the way I choose to live my life. I am not "apathetic" about not victimizing others: to the contrary, I insist upon such a trait. My entire sense of being is incompatible with coercing others. I can no more hide my ambitions over your life or property within the secret confines of a voting booth than I could confront my neighbor with a gun and demand his money. Voting is nothing more than a periodic public affirmation in the faith of systematic violence as a social system.” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 88. - VIOLENCE, COERCION, MAJORITIES, DEMOCRACY, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS AS USUAL.
VOTING: I elect not to elect anybody over myself and over all others in a territory.” – Politically organized exclusive “turfs” are criminal monopolies, too. - JZ, 2.5.06, 30.10.07, 6.11.07. – ELECTIONS, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICAL GANGS OR PARTIES, ORGANIZED CRIME, TURF WARS
VOTING: I favor individual decisions and choices over territorially coercive and collective ones. - JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: I favor my own program for myself and no one else. (Unless he volunteers.) But I am also willing to let everyone else have his program for himself. – JZ, n.d. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VOTING: I favor self-rule to rule by or over others - whatever faction they may belong to. - JZ, 8.7.87. - With the exception of defence against and rule over private criminals with victims and official aggressors against genuine individual rights and liberties of myself and my voluntary associates and our allies. If criminals confined their crimes to other criminals and aggressors their aggressions to other aggressors, I would not mind but rather think: good riddance. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I find particularly objectionable that voting is put forward as an important free choice, as an enfranchisement, while in reality it is part of a process by which most citizens are disenfranchised from deciding upon some of the most important parts of their lives, e.g., on whether the central bank should have the power to cause inflation, deflation and stagflation, how much of their income should be spent by politicians rather than by themselves, who their external allies and enemies are to be, with whom and under what conditions they may peacefully trade across frontiers, whether there should be war or peace, whether "their" armed forces are to be armed with mass extermination devices or not, what would be rightful war and peace aims (should we have the misfortune to become involved in another war). On these and thousands of other questions the ordinary citizens are effectively disenfranchised by the "representative" system. Even the referendum options are in most cases severely and wrongfully limited. The most important right to vote, namely the right of individuals and groups to secede, opt out and do their own thing, peacefully, at their own expense and risk, is not conceded but denied to them by the present systems of territorial "voting". - JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting. - Revised: 5.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: I give my vote only to my own decisions. No one can truly represent me. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I go for all sharing the privileges of the government who assist in bearing its burdens. Consequently, I go for admitting all WHITES to the right of suffrage who pay taxes or bear arms, by no means excluding females.” - Abraham Lincoln, Letter, 1836. - "Whites" has been capitalized by me. If even "holy prophets" of democracy like Lincoln could commit such basic errors, what makes present democrats so certain that they are not themselves and still involved in similar blunders? The political vote is limited, regulated and hedged-in - in numerous ways and confined to be practised only very shortly, with years in-between. It thus compares only very badly with e.g. the dollar vote of individuals, daily, in a free market. Worst of all, the political vote is confined to monopolistic, coercive and territorial regimes with largely involuntary membership and has confined all experimental freedom to these. Thus the practice of political freedom compares very badly with e.g. religious freedom, freedom for arts and crafts, for sports and entertainment activities, freedom for all kinds of cultural and scholarly activities. Politics as usual does persist because of the fallacy that coercion, domination and monopoly in this sphere would not only be justified but also efficient and that it could be consistently practised. - How little the principle of direction and control of others works and that we are really and basically, by our nature, self-controlling agents, is subject to a very simple experiment: "Appoint" somebody to direct or control somebody else to take off or put on a pullover or a shirt and prohibit the directed and controlled person from making a single move without a corresponding qualitative and quantitative clear command. - Better known instances are the "work to rule" strikes. If every law, regulation and order were fully enforced, the standard of living, or productivity, would slump to at least one half, if not one quarter. (Assuming, wrongfully, that all could still come to know and apply all the laws and regulations.) Here one should keep in mind that even totalitarian regimes do only persist in power because at least to some extent its rules are ignored or broken by various black market and other unauthorized activities. - Thus, in other words, voting provides the illusion but not the reality of control, while the real possibilities of self-control are largely suppressed, obstructed or misdirected. (Think of all the energies going into tax avoidance, searches for loopholes, bribery, applying for permissions, complying with regulations.) - JZ, 1.12.87.
VOTING: I got the vote and it never did me much good. Go around voting all the time and all you do is encourage the senators and governors and them boys. It’s like you gave ‘em a license for their foolishness.” – Jake Logan, Slocum’s Blood, p.138. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: I have cast my vote often and recorded it - for a process of accelerated enlightenment, which would, among many other things, use micrographic self-publishing and personal computers extensively and which would, lastly, do away with most of the now predominant political superstitions. That is a daily, life-long and now full-time commitment for me, using up all my energies and limited resources. The limited political options, still considered primary by most others, have become almost valueless in my eyes. As stated before, I would only vote with any of the present Australian parties or independents against any totalitarian party - should the latter become a real threat. My childhood experience in Nazi - Germany and my growing up in West Berlin, surrounded by a communist totalitarian regime, would see to that. But these are not the options and dangers confronting us here and now. - JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting. – Revised: 23.8.12.
VOTING: I have evidence, satisfactory to myself, that there exists, scattered throughout the country, a band of men, having a tacit understanding with each other, and calling themselves "the people of the United States," whose general purposes are to control and plunder each other, and all other persons in the country, and, so far as they can, even in neighboring countries; and to kill every man who shall attempt to defend his person and property against their schemes of plunder and domination. Who these men are, INDIVIDUALLY, I have no certain means of knowing, for they sign no papers, and give no open, authentic evidence of their INDIVIDUAL membership. They are not known individually even to each other. They are apparently as much afraid of being individually known to each other, as of being known to other persons. Hence they ORDINARILY have no mode either of exercising, or making known, their individual membership, otherwise than by giving their votes SECRETLY for certain agents to do their will.” - Lysander Spooner, "No Treason", Works I, p.34. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, SECRET VOTING
VOTING: I have never believed in universal suffrage. In this country it is so easy to accumulate wealth that I would restrict the ballot to heads of families, letting man and wife fight it out as to which one was the head, and to taxpayers owning real property. If you have no children you have no interest in the future, and if you don't own real estate you have no stake in the local community." - Arthur Smith, in a letter to "ANALOG". – This proposal, with all its flaws, is, nevertheless, at least temporarily, fit - for its subscribers. I doubt that many will subscribe to it and that those who do, will stick for long to their subscription. - Free choice among all voting, community and societal systems as a result of voluntary and exterritorially autonomous communities only! – JZ, 29.10.08, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I know of no territorial government that has not been, is not or will not be corrupt and oppressive, at least to some extent. Why should I be compelled to sanction this kind of corruption and oppression with my vote? Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, as Lord Acton said. - JZ, n.d. in one of several protests against compulsory voting.
VOTING: I like only real options. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I neither consent to being mastered nor give my mandate to master others. - JZ, 11.8.87.
VOTING: I neither like being bound by the dictates of a Labor nor of a Liberal majority nor those of any splinter group not of my own individual choice. Nor do I want to help impose, by my vote, any system, not even any freedom system, upon any dissenting others. Only those deserve liberty who choose it for themselves. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: I neither want my vote imposed upon you - nor your votes imposed upon me. I'd rather have fully free competition under exterritorial autonomy for all, in our public lives, as much as and more than it is already widely practised in our private lives and activities. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I neither want nor need a guardian from either party but, instead, freedom to experiment with my own ideas, at my own risk and expense, and to defend myself and my own affairs and self-responsible efforts against the "protectors" of all parties. - JZ, 11.7.87, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I neither want to be submitted to the votes of others nor submit others to my vote. - JZ, 30.7.82.
VOTING: I never vote — It only encourages them.” - Little old lady, quoted in "SYDNEY MORNING HERALD", 20.12.75.
VOTING: I never vote. It's such a relief not to feel responsible for what goes on in Canberra.” - From Progress Party leaflet, 1978. - I never vote. It's such a relief not to feel responsible for anything that happens in Parliament.” - said one woman to a friend, according to THE READER'S DIGEST, November 1968.
VOTING: I only vote for opting out of all territorial governments and, therefore, out of their inherent offences and crimes. - JZ, 11.9.99, 8.6.04, 28.10.08. - OPTING OUT, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: I oppose all immigration barriers - and none of the territorial candidates favors free migration as I do. – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: I prefer full experimental freedom for all - to any of the compromises of territorial party politics. Until I get that choice, count me out of your wrongful to silly voting games. - JZ - Afterwards, I would at most and only sometimes vote within my self-chosen community of volunteers, provided that in it anything would be left to vote about. - My initial joining it would already be my most important "voting" for and in it. - JZ, 5.4.11. – Also my staying in it, if free to secede from it, or my secession from it, if I am no longer sufficiently satisfied with it. – J.Z, 23.8.12.
VOTING: I prefer my choices to theirs. This territorial voting "right" denies me that right. – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: I prefer not to elect any master over me. - JZ, 10.5.02.
VOTING: I prefer not to vote for any territorial tribute collector, politician or bureaucrat. - JZ, 11.5.02.
VOTING: I prefer personal laws to territorially imposed ones. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I prefer the reality of free choice to the delusions about it. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I remember another phrase of Mill's: the common people 'do not need political rights in order that they may govern, but in order that they may not be misgoverned'.” - Maurice Cranston, "Political Dialogues", p.178. - Agreed, if one sees in political rights not merely the right to elect and be elected etc. but, instead, all genuine individual human rights and liberties. - The territorial legal right to vote or become elected is not a genuine individual right or liberty. - JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11. - GENUINE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS LIBERTIES.
VOTING: I see no reason for registering my faith in the "lesser of two evils;" if memory serves me right, the "lesser" of either party who attained office has always increased the taxes I have to pay. - All in all, I see not good reason for voting and have refrained from doing so for about a half century. During that time, my more conscientious compatriots (including, principally, the professional politicians and their ward heelers) have conveniently provided me with presidents and with governments, all of whom have run the political affairs of the country as they should be run - that is, for the benefit of the politicians. They have put the nation into two major wars and a number of minor ones. Regardless of what party was in power, the taxes have increased and so did the size of the bureaucracy.” - Frank Chodorov, "Out of Step", p.42. – POLITICIANS, PARTIES, PRESIDENTS
VOTING: I think one of our mistakes is that we do not have enough stages in election; a hundred thousand voters are reduced by a single act to one man who goes to Parliament. This must inevitably mean a large degree of dictatorship from above. A sane democracy would, I feel, choose its representatives by a series of electoral stages, each lower stage electing the one above it.” - W. H. Auden in the Anthology: "I Believe -19 Personal Philosophies", p.15. - Whichever electoral system one favors, it truly fits, at least for a while, only those volunteer groups which favor it. And they should be at liberty to adopt it for themselves, as long as they are satisfied with it, as a group or individually. Consumer sovereignty, even there. - JZ, 1.12.87, 23.8.12. – PANARCHISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, COERCIVE UTOPIANISM
VOTING: I think that if people aren't fit to decide how to run their own lives, then they certainly aren't fit to decide how other people should run theirs.” - Daniel C. Burton, Libertarian Anarchism, LA Political Notes, No.168. - PEOPLE, DEMOCRACY, SELF-GOVERNMENT, DECISION-MAKING, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: I try to make a difference by not making a difference. In the short run my own single informal voting does certainly not make a difference but, in the long run, a majority of informal voters would form a majority against the present territorial political process and could come organize and secure its opting-out rights and liberties, as well as its voluntary association rights in various exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers. - In addition, I "vote", as publicly as I can afford, for the individualistic and voluntary individual and minority secessionist "vote", at every opportunity. - JZ, 25.4.96, 7.6.04, 5.4.11. - INFORMAL VOTING
VOTING: I use the term "democracy" to refer to any government with free elections, rather in the disparaging sense of government with nothing but free elections. It is doubtful whether the latter system of government is viable, outside the pages of Rousseau.” - George Dance. - I rather hold that our territorial democracies are "viable" for all too long through this limited "liberty", which is not a real achievement, either. Its "free and equal", territorial and collectivist voting practices have not sufficiently enlightened or liberated its subjects, so that a best they have become members of a Welfare State, which is a kind of Kindergarten for adults, making them more and more irresponsible, at worst a Warfare State or even a despotism, tyranny or totalitarian regime. In all territorial forms they do still suppress all too many genuine individual rights and liberties and this for all too long. - JZ, 5.4.11. - DIS.
VOTING: I vote against all candidates - for, so far, all of them want to rule territorially and collectively, rather than merely exterritorially and over volunteers only. – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: I vote against territorial political voting and in favor of the free choices under exterritorial autonomy for all volunteer communities. To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her choice. – JZ, 2.3.96. - Alas, this kind of free and equal voting is still denied to me. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I vote also for all those genuine individual rights and liberties which none of the present territorial candidates or parties is prepared to concede to me. – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: I vote for all territorial politicians and their bureaucrats, their laws and institutions, to get out of my pockets and out of my life. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I vote for experimental freedom for all. Territorial party politics prevents that and the enlightenment, self-responsibility, peace, justice, freedom, rights, progress and prosperity that would arise from this. – PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, PARTIES
VOTING: I vote for free market services in every sphere. Today they are preempted by territorial political institutions and their decision-making. – JZ - PANARCHISM
VOTING: I vote for full freedom for all responsible people and for no “licence” at all for irresponsible ones. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I vote for full freedom for all to the extent that they want it for themselves, rather than for territorial, collectivist and political decision-making. – JZ
VOTING: I vote for individual free choices in numerous spheres, choices to which all these candidates, parties and the vast majority of voters are opposed. Thus my only valid vote is an informal vote. – JZ
VOTING: I vote for individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for all dissidents! The Democrats, Republicans and Monarchists are no more prepared to concede that liberty to myself and to others than were Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, Mao etc. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I vote for nobody. – JZ, 24.3. 07. – Only Nobody deserves my vote. – JZ, 25.10.07.
VOTING: I vote for NOBODY. If he or she become elected, then NOBODY will tax me, govern me and disappoint me. - JZ, 14.9.91, 6.2.12.
VOTING: I vote for panarchistic freedom and experimentation rather than collectivistic, territorial, centralistic and coercive decision-making. – JZ - PANARCHISM
VOTING: I vote informally for panarchism, i.e., for free individual choices, not for any territorial, constitutional, legal, juridical and bureaucratic obstcles obstacles for creative and self-responsible activities. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: I vote only for all voluntary and exterritorial alternatives. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: I vote only for individual and panarchistic free choices, made by volunteers, under full exterritorial autonomy for their preferred communities and associations, all limited by individual secessionism and personal law. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: I vote only for individual secession and voluntary associationism under exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. Every other voting system is tyrannical towards peaceful dissenters. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: I vote only for real and rightful choices, not for imaginary, delusionary and wrongful ones. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I vote only for rightful principles, ideas and actions, not for any party, politician or bureaucrat, to act contrary to them, as they usually do, quite habitually and inevitably in our territorial prisons for all. That Australia is only a minimum security prison does not excuse its existence as a territorial prison. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I vote only for the liberty of each adult individual to shop around, with his dollars only, and at his own risk and expense alone, even for the political “goods” and “services” or non-profit self-help options that he or she wants for himself or herself, just like consumers do in a supermarket or shopping centre. – JZ, 2.3.96, 18.8.08. - Even his own dollars should become either freely issued or freely chosen by himself. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I vote to hang all territorial politicians and bureaucrats - unless they abdicate, satisfied with a gold hand-shake, Imagine the huge savings of further expenses for them and for their measures, systems and institutions! - JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: I want Aboriginals to have a full vote in their own communities of volunteers and us none in theirs. I also want to see some "off-white" communities in which aboriginals have no vote - and some mixed ones - all on a voluntary basis. - JZ, 30.7.82, 30.11.87.
VOTING: I want and I am morally entitled to many more free options or votes on my own fate than territorial political voting can offer me. - JZ, 4.10.98.
VOTING: I want elections organized in a way that all coercive-collectivist candidates lose, and only the ones of volunteer communities (and they are not coercers) would win. Voting by individual and group secessionism, ending all territorial monopolism and a continuance of conventional voting only within newly established and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers - could achieve that. - JZ 20.5.74, 30.7.78, 5.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: I want free choices, for myself and all others and an end to the territorial monopoly choices of a few for all other people in a territory. These few people do not and cannot fully represent me and all other people in a territory. - JZ, 14.9.91, 5.4.11. - PARTIES, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP OR SUBJECTION, DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATION, FREEDOM OF CHOICE, EXPERIMENTATION & ACTION.
VOTING: I want no one else to be a sovereign ruler over my life, liberty, rights, income and property. So count me out of your expensive, unproductive, counter-productive and misleading power games. - JZ, 9.9.95, 8.6.04. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: I want no territorialist party or politician to stand over me. – JZ, 24.3.07, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I want only the individual, voluntary and exterritorial autonomy votes, choices, decisions and self-responsibilities which your territorial authority, majoritarianism, coercion, centralism, monopolism, collectivism, legalism and all too limited "free and equal vote" denies to me. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04, 5.4.11. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: I want the full and decisive vote on my own life and none at all on the lives of others. Nothing less will satisfy me, nor would anything more be rightful. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I want the vote to secede from that scum! – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I want to be free to decide my own fate, not the fate of others. Majority voting is a sham, leading only to still more troubles caused by the ignorant and prejudiced masses. They should only be free to decide their own fate, not the fates of any of the peaceful and dissenting minorities. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: I want to be free to vote myself out of subjugation to any territorial government. - JZ, 17.12.93.
VOTING: I want to be free to vote with honestly earned and honestly managed (competitively supplied and freely chosen) dollars in a non-managed and non-regulated free market, one even for all kinds of political, economic and social systems. The territorial political voting process denies me that vote and this is one of my more important reasons for not valuing the territorial political vote. - JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting. - JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting. - Revised: 5.4.11.
VOTING: I want to be free to vote with my dollars, my own choices, in every sphere, not merely with the quite insignificant and basically wrongful collectivist and territorial vote at the polling booth! - JZ n.d. & 6.2.12.
VOTING: I want to opt out or withdraw but am not free, by my "free vote" to vote myself out or to secede. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: I was asked today, whether I hade already voted. I replied: To have to do so once is already more than enough of an unwanted chore. Why ask such questions at all when supposedly, one is crossed of the list of voters and repeated crossing off, of the same persons, in different election offices, should be noted by the system? But then no ID is required and others might, e.g. vote somewhere else in my name and with my address, which is not a secret. Even with computerized voting, like in many USA States, all kinds of tricks have been practised for a long time and are ,still up to the present, by some rather famous politicians and their cohorts, and do have to be expected in the future, in all territorial voting. - There would be no sense in engaging in such forgeries in societies of volunteers, from which one can freely secede. - If they still have some voting done in them, then it is unlikely to be secret but well published voting. - JZ, 22.3.03, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I won't give my consent to being skinned alive by anyone, no matter how artfully and tenderly and under what pretence he uses to flay me. Nor do I want to skin anybody else with the help of my vote. - JZ, 11.7.87, 7.6.04.
VOTING: I won't sign a blank cheque for anyone, least of all any territorial politician. - JZ, 14.9.91, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I won't sign away my own individual responsibilities. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12.
VOTING: I won't vote for any master - not even for the less evil one. - JZ, 11.7.87, 23.8.12.
VOTING: I won't vote for anyone to make my choices and decisions for me and to impose his disservices upon me, at my expense and risk. - JZ, 14.9.91. - I do prefer the no-government and no-taxes option to any of your coercive, corrupt, monopolistic and fraudulent choices and outright disservices. - JZ, 14.9.91.
VOTING: I would cast my vote only where and when it would really count. A pearl in the mud of swine doesn't. – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: I would like to see a ballot that had two candidates and then a third choice of no candidate. We should vote them all out.” - Clifford A. Farrington, NY TIMES, 7 Nov. 90. - At least as territorial rulers, i.e. over others than their own volunteers. - JZ, 5.4.11. – DIS.
VOTING: I would rather “vote” for any "illegal" immigrant than for any territorial politician, who keeps up e.g. immigration barriers or any other obstacles to genuine individual rights and liberties. - JZ, 10.10.01, 21.4.09, 23.8.12. - POLITICIANS, IMMIGRANTS, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
VOTING: I would rather be free than be merely allowed or even compelled to vote or attend the polls. - JZ, 30.7.82.
VOTING: I would rather fill my shopping cart only on a free market, with the goodies and services that I really want and can afford. - JZ, 14.9.91. - When politicians promise to equally fill all shopping carts and this at the expense of taxpayers, with the good intention to assure to everyone a good enough standard of living, then, as a consequence, the total output of consumer goods and offer of consumer services will be greatly reduced and many people will go hungry – for a sufficiently strong incentive to produce and to increase production will be missing. - JZ, 7.6.04, 5.4.11. – COMMUNISM, WELFARE STATE, SOCIAL SECURITY, SUBSIDIES, HANDOUTS, INCENTIVES
VOTING: I would rather vote only with my dollars in a free market. - JZ, 14.9.91. - Alas, the government allows me only to earn and use its depreciated, forced and monopoly paper dollars and then taxes many of them away, via its direct and indirect taxes or , 23.8.12.. - JZ, 7.6.04.
VOTING: I would vote only if the 51 could rule the 51 and the 49 the 49. - JZ, 30.7.82. – Another version: VOTING: I'd vote only if 51% of the votes would bind only these 51% and the 49% the 49%. - JZ, 30.7.82, 2.4.89.
VOTING: I'd like to vote for Thomas Jefferson or someone like that.” - Mrs. Frances McCauley, NY TIMES, Nov. 7, 1990. - Among volunteers and exterritorially, a Jeffersonian republic would be quite possible, following his teachings as far as they have reached. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I'd rather decide on the spending of my own money myself and I do not want to spend any money of others. - JZ, 14.11.92.
VOTING: I'd rather vote myself with my own tax dollars and decide myself over my own life, rights and liberties, property and income and their uses than entrust them to any territorial politician or bureaucrat. - JZ, 2.3.96, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I'd vote for freedom every time I am given the opportunity - but it almost never happens. – JZ, 17.2.77. - Yet they want to compel me to vote for any of their territorialist coercive parties and programs. - JZ 17.11.78, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I'll not give my power of attorney and blank cheques to any politician and bureaucrat, because I believe in full autonomy, self-rule, self-government, self-management, self-reliance, self-help and self-responsibility, while they have restricted them as much as they could, under all kinds of false pretences. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: I'll only cast one vote, for myself, appointing myself to mind my own business: a vote against all meddlers with my affairs. – JZ, 11/72.
VOTING: I'm like the rope that does not fit through the eye of a needle - and thus I do not even try. – JZ
VOTING: I'm not one of those slaves, who votes for one or the other master over himself and all others. - JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: I'm talking about my own vote for myself, of course. That's the only one I can cast and MAKE IT STICK.” - Edward Y. Breese, THE FREEMAN, 10/72. - Alas, we are not yet as free - but should be, a.s.a.p. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: I’d rather vote for every item in my own political “shopping cart” myself, in a free “super-market” for all political, economic and social services, systems, laws, methods, institutions, all of them competitively offered to me and all others, and this only with my own dollars, and also only at my own risk and expense, while tolerating all the diverse choices that others make in theses spheres for themselves, than have my consumer sovereignty in these spheres interfered with by others and their votes or using my vote to interfere with their choices in these spheres. – Full exterritorial autonomy for all of us, in our own communities and societies of volunteers, would make this not only rightful but practicable. – No territorial impositions upon anyone! - JZ, 2.3.96, 18.8.08.
VOTING: If a politician tries to buy votes with his own money, he is a dirty crook; but if he tries to buy votes with the people's money, he's a great liberal.” - THE FREEMAN. - TERRITORIALISM, WELFARE STATE, TAXATION, GOVERNMENT SPENDING, MODERN LIBERALISM, GOVERNMENT SPENDING
VOTING: If I can't have freedom, I am not satisfied with the "free" vote. Nor is the political vote of the present type, within the present territorial system, the best means to establish freedom. Such voting is simply not sufficiently using genuine rights and liberties and freedom- and rights-promoting. One can almost generalize and say, that the more widely spread the suffrage became, the more accelerated the reversal to Statism became. I don't believe in voting my freedom away. If you want to stamp out freedom - vote, territorially! But I would prefer you to do so in your own volunteer community and I would recognize your right of secession to establish it. As long as we are forced to live in the same community, State or federation, the vote means that others are free to vote my freedom away and as a minority of one I cannot outvote them in this. Thus why should I participate in this racket? In most instances the "freedom" to mark a few crosses now and then on a ballot paper, for one or the other political party, all offering only to me unattractive package deals, is not worth having, by my standards. - For the single exception see under "totalitarianism". - JZ, 4.6.04. – FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL FREE CHOICE.
VOTING: If it is humiliating to be ruled, how much more degrading is it to choose our own masters?” - Anti-Authoritarian Anonymous, quoted by Ernest Mann in "I Was Robot", 112. - "If it is humiliating to be ruled, how much more humiliating is choosing one's Masters?" - in "The Heretic's Handbook of Quotations" by Chaz Bufe, p.20.
VOTING: If it were an extreme case, in which I were only given the choice between a somewhat democratic government and a totalitarian government, then I would adopt a compromise and vote for the lesser evil. Luckily, in Australia, we are not right now in such a desperate position. One can still "vote" for more freedom by not participating in the political voting process and utilizing various classical human rights that are not restricted in this country, or not too much, as best as one can. – JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting.
VOTING: If no one voted any longer for any territorial party, politician or bureaucrat, or only a few would, what excuse would they have then to rule us any longer? – JZ, n.d. – Q.
VOTING: If nothing else helps, vote with your feet, or, if you feel strong enough, vote by secession. - JZ, 5/73. - EMIGRATION & SECESSION
VOTING: If of ten men nine are recognizable as fools, how ... in the name of wonder, will you ever get a ballot box to grind you out a wisdom from the votes of these ten men?” - Thomas Carlyle – MAJORITARIANISM, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: If people are as incapable, as immoral, and as ignorant as the politicians indicate, then why is the right of the same people to vote defended with such passionate insistence?” - Frederic Bastiat
VOTING: If people had all other rights but not the right to vote, what value would the vote have then? And if they had the right to vote and if it were used only to suppress all other rights, what value has the right to vote then? – JZ, 17.10.85. – Q.
VOTING: If people were closely watching what they are doing to us, would anyone go on voting for politicians and government programs? – JZ, 5.1.77.
VOTING: If political management could achieve anything positive, at a competitive price, I might bother to cast a valid vote. However, I only know of the contrary. - JZ, 14.9.91.
VOTING: If politicians are crooks, then those, who help them, by voting, are crooks, too. - JZ, 17.7.92. – Voters are accessories to the facts of crimes by those they vote for. – J.Z., 23.8.12.
VOTING: If territorial politicians could and would lead us to liberty, justice, enlightenment, peace, progress, prosperity, full employment, stable value measurements etc., then we would have had them already for a long time. Voting is an obstacle rather than a path to self-liberation and to the liberation of others. - JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12.
VOTING: If the ballot box (*) cannot defend personal rights in England, you may be sure that voting alone will not protect personal rights in America.” - Clarence Manion, "The Key to Peace". – (*) To be fair, he should have inserted "alone" also regarding England, behind "ballot box". – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: If the lesser mind could measure the greater as a foot-rule can measure a pyramid, there would be finality in universal suffrage. (As it is, the political problem remains unsolved.)" - G. B. Shaw, quoted in ANALOG, Dec. 84, p. 81.
VOTING: If the majority wills what is socially atavistic, then to thwart the majority may be the indicated, though concededly the undemocratic course. It is more important for a community, wherever situated geographically, to affirm and live by civilized standards than to labor at the job of swelling the voting lists.” - William F. Buckley, "Up from Liberalism", p.128.
VOTING: If the territorially elected are not already scum, then they soon will be, when in power, with very few exceptions. That is unavoidable under territorial politics. Thus I only want the free vote for and within the exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers that I would chose for myself and for others those, which they choose for themselves. - JZ, 2.3.96, 5.4.11, 23.8.12. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: If the voters demanded that every political promise be accompanied by a specific estimate of the out-of-pocket tax cost to each voter, the nature of practical politics would quickly change.” - Joseph F. Johnston, Jr., The Limits of Government, Regnery Gateway, Chicago, 1984, p.316. - Various forms of voluntary taxation and, naturally, voluntary State membership and competition from exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, would work even better. – No fiddling around can sufficiently improve territorial regimes. - JZ, 2.10.07. - VOTERS & POLITICAL PROMISES
VOTING: If there were a vote not to get a particular territorial government in but all territorially imposed governments out, then I would be interested in that election. - JZ, 25.6.92, 5.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: If they offered me any real and worthwhile choices, then I might be tempted. But all they offer is junk, financed from loot. – JZ - POLITICIANS
VOTING: If they were able and willing to ever learn their lessons, then I might vote for them. - JZ
VOTING: If those who support and advocate the political system of voting are as enamored as they claim to be about the sanctity of the vote, and if they want voting to express the will of the people, then consistency demands that they champion the economic vote above the political vote.” - Sy Leon, "None of the Above", p.66.
VOTING: If votes would liberate and enrich us, bring us peace and justice, they would have done so long ago. - JZ, n.d. - If voting could enlighten and liberate us, it would have done so long ago. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: If voting could change anything, it would be illegal.” - Anarchist slogan, seen 1984.
VOTING: If voting could change the system, it would be against the law.” - Wilson/Shea, "Illuminatus III", p.236.
VOTING: If voting could change things, it would be illegal.” – Unknown.
VOTING: If voting could change things, they'd make it illegal!” - from a tiny flyer for THE MATCH, P.O. Box 3488, Tucson Arizona 85 722. It describes itself as "the Apex of Atheistic Anarchism".
VOTING: If voting made a difference, they would make it illegal.” – Donal Scannell, at the Conference on World Affairs, Boulder CO, 4/6/04
VOTING: If voting meant anything, it would be banned.” - Wall graffito, Nov. 78, Kings Cross, Sydney.
VOTING: If we all stop voting, will they just go away?” – Bumper Sticker. - Under the only really significant vote, that of individual and group secessionism and of voluntary and exterritorially autonomous associationism, friends and enemies would sort each other out, with each group left at liberty to do the own things for or to the own members, thus removing almost all bones of contention between them, internally and externally. - Well, some would even complain about the bad language or bad jokes used by others and about the bad example they set, or the type of building, hair style, clothing, perfume or garden they prefer for themselves. But we are not likely to conduct a civil wars about such issues, which do not infringe basic rights and liberties. - JZ, 25. 11. 06, 5.4.11. – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VOTING: If we continue to attempt voting together, territorially and collectively, we are all going to die together. - JZ, 26.9.85. - The ABC mass murder technology in the hands of official or unofficial fools and criminals will see to that. - JZ, 8.6.04. – TERRITORIALISM & NUCLEAR WAR THREAT (NWT)
VOTING: If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote FOR ... but there are certain to be ones you want to vote AGAINST. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong.” - Robert Heinlein, quoted by Bob Howard in FREE ENTERPRISE, 2/76. - Just another version of the old advice to choose the lesser evil - which is still an evil. JZ, 1.12.87. - That could only be changed by not only an abstaining option being provided but also "negative votes" against certain candidates and parties. - JZ 1.12.87. – But the most important vote accessible to all should be the individual secessionist one and the voluntary vote for one or the other governmental system or non-governmental society that one should be free to establish or to join, as long as it has no territorial power or ambition. – JZ, 28.10.08.
VOTING: If you believe in voting for others, then you do thereby indicate that you don't believe in yourself and have not sufficient self-respect. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: If you can only vote for it, rather than choose it for yourself and pay for it directly, you will either not get it at all or get something you did not really want or you will have to pay much more for it, in taxes. - JZ, 7.9.84.
VOTING: If you can vote away half the yearly value of property under the form of a rate, as we do in some towns at present, then under the same convenient and elastic right you can vote away the nine-tenths or the whole. "Only logic", perhaps you lightly answer - but remember, unless you change the direction of the forces, logic always tends to come out victorious in the end.” - Auberon Herbert: "Mr. Spencer & the Great Machine", p.72.
VOTING: If you favor anything wrong or nonsensical, THEN you have a good chance to get it realized through territorial political voting and all too soon, too. However, if you think otherwise … - JZ, n.d.
VOTING: If you favor territorial voting, then most of your political education is still amiss. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: if you give every man who has no property, a vote, will you not make a fine encouraging provision for corruption?” - John Adams, 1776.
VOTING: If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else's expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else, including themselves.” – Thomas Sowell (1992). - & TAXATION, POLITICIANS, WELFARE STATE, GOVERNMENT BUDGETING
VOTING: If you have the right to vote, you should also have the right not to vote.” - One protester, who was jailed for not voting and not paying the fine, according to news, 10.1.79. - I would not let the government impose a still greater evil upon me, namely a prison sentence, for not voting, instead of the lesser evil, namely the likewise undeserved but quite legal fine for not voting. - Preventatively, I would rather vote informal, submitting to compulsory attendance, which would not expose me to a fine, due to the secrecy of the voting process. In short, the still lesser evil, when having only 2 or x candidates to choose from, is not to vote formally and effectively for either of them. When, afterwards, subjected to the conventional rule and broken promises of the candidate elected by others, I'll find at least myself blameless for this state of affairs. - JZ, 1.12.87.
VOTING: If you know of any political service worth a vote, taxes and compliance with all relevant laws and regulations, then why don't you vote and pay for them. I won't, if I can help it. - JZ, 14.9.91, 5.4.11. - PUBLIC SERVICES, Q.
VOTING: If you sell your vote then you get at least something out of a party or a politician. - JZ, 29.7.92. - Alas, politicians bribe you mostly with money extracted from other victims or donated in the expectation of political favors at the expense of the consumers. - JZ, 7.6.04. – BRIBERY, CORRUPTION
VOTING: If you still believe territorial parties, politicians and bureaucrats, then you will believe almost anything. - JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: If you value your right to life, liberty, and property, then clearly there is every reason to refrain from participating in a process that is calculated to remove the life, liberty, or property from any other persons. Voting is the method for obtaining legal power to coerce others.” – Robert LeFevre
VOTING: If you vote for a territorial politician, then you vote at least part of your freedom, rights and your money away. – JZ, 12.5.74, 23.8.12.
VOTING: If you want to play political games or undertake political, social and economic experiments - do so only within volunteer communities and at the expense and risk of your members. All your territorial votes have so far prevented that freedom from coming into existence for all. – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11.
VOTING: If you were in prison and you had a 50% choice of lethal injection, a 45% chance of going to the electric chair and only a 5% chance of escape, are you likely to vote for lethal injection because that is your most likely outcome? If you continue to vote for the Democrats or the Republicans, you are committing political suicide." - Michael Badnarik – If you continue to vote for territorial systems you do, whether you like it or not, vote ultimately for a nuclear general holocaust. It needs and feeds on these “targets”. I stated ca. 500 points on this, mostly in alphabetical order, in my second peace book, “An ABC Against Nuclear war”, www.butterbach.net/epinfo/abc.htm - Refute me, if you can. – I do not want this to happen, either. - JZ, 21.4.09. - VOTING FOR A THIRD PARTY? LIBERTARIAN PARTY, NWT
VOTING: If you, like all others, are just one pixel in a large screen image, no sensible image or action can result from your actions and your political “choices”. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12.
VOTING: If your freedom was left to a vote of the whole American people you would get it two to one. But anything important is never left to a vote of the people. We only get to vote on some man; we never get to vote on what he is to do.” - Will Rogers, Autobiography, p.272. – REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS
VOTING: If, as frequently alleged, individuals are grasping, greedy monsters in the market place, by what magic are they transformed into foresighted altruists in the privacy of the polling booth?” - M. Bruce Johnson, REASON, 7/74. – Q.
VOTING: Ignorance is also a problem for the more knowledgeable voter, for the very simple reason that no one on the outside of, say, Cabinet, really knows what goes on inside. All we do know is that history is full of examples of politicians lying about their actions and the reasons for them.” - John Singleton with Bob Howard, "Rip Van Australia", 1977, p.13.
VOTING: Imagine if they called for another vote - and not one came and cast it for any of them! – Source?
VOTING: Implicit in all political voting is the necessity to coerce some so that all are controlled. The direction taken by the control is academic.” – Robert LeFevre, in "LibertarianYearbook 1972", p.117. - It is not quite academic in the extreme case of a choice only between somewhat democratic-liberal politicians and totalitarian ones. - JZ, 1.12.87.)
VOTING: In 1975 New York City went bankrupt. This was not the result of recession, or of the energy crisis. It was not because of any special features of New York. It was caused by the same lack of accountability that we see in almost every western democracy. The cause of New York's crisis was headlined by the New York Times - "No one has ever won an election by proposing to give the people less." In New York they all got more - more public services, more salaries, more fringe benefits and pensions, more free schools, free buses, free universities and subsidized housing.” - V. A. Forbes, "Accountability in Government". - And more in taxes, laws, inflation, unemployment, public debts and bureaucratic interventions. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: In a free society, voting occurs constantly in the market place. The customer is king and votes for or against a product or service by buying or refusing to buy. Elections are not periods of time for sowing suspicion and hatred. Elections go on every day, and every hour, with each person expressing his wishes by the practical method of participating as he will or abstaining as he will. Yet his decisions are not binding on others. Freedom remains a constant, and the rewards go to the best producer and not to the best confidence man. - [Territorial - JZ] Government, on the other hand, is invariably an instrument of monopoly and special privilege. This is, indeed, why so many people support it. Government behaves like an intoxicated millionaire, willing to throw money around in an irresponsible manner. The difficulty is that the government has no money to throw around except the ...” - "LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL", Winter 76.
VOTING: In a highly organized world, personal initiative connected with a group must be confined to a few unless the group is small. If you are a member of a small committee, you may reasonably hope to influence its decisions. In national politics, where you are one of some twenty million voters, your influence is infinitesimal unless you are exceptional or occupy an exceptional position. You have, it is true, a twenty-millionth share in the government of others, but only a 20-millionth share in the government of yourself. You are therefore much more conscious of being governed than of governing. The government becomes in your thoughts a remote and largely malevolent "they", not a set of men whom you, in concert with others, who share your opinions, have chosen to carry out your wishes. Your individual feeling about politics, in these circumstances, is not that intended to be brought about by democracy, but much more nearly what it would be under a dictatorship.” - Bertrand Russell: "Authority and the Individual", p.74. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: In a truly free society the consumer would vote with his money.” - Marilyn Giesekam, FREE ENTERPRISE, 8/74. – Later she adopted the name Marilyn Fairsky and, perhaps due to a love relationship, ceased to be an active libertarian. People in love are, often, not quite rational any longer. The personal relationship may come to mean more to them than any ideological commitment. That makes, by my standards, one more point against: “All you need is love!” Well, voluntary egalitarianism is one thing, totalitarian egalitarianism is another. I very much doubt that she would ever subscribe to the latter. There have always been some voluntaryist communist anarchists, religious and atheist ones and any close family does also practise at least degrees of communism. – JZ, 23.8.12.
VOTING: In ancient Athens, those who admired the Stoic philosophy of individualism, took as their motto: 'Abstain from Beans'. The phrase had a precise reference. It meant: DON'T VOTE. Balloting in Athens occurred by dropping various colored beans into a receptacle." - Robert LeFevre. - STOICS ABSTAINED FROM BEANS
VOTING: In democracies you have only one vote among millions and with your website you have also only one vote among millions. But at least millions have a chance, via search engines, to find your vote or idea or plan. But do they do so very often? I have got very little response from all that has been put on my own website and those of some others, regarding the ideas that I favor and expressed. If your ideas are not popular, then they might as well be expressed and become also largely ignored in the mass media. Alas, the Internet has not yet served as an effective market for ideas and talents. But it has made many more of them easily accessible than have e.g. public speech, printed texts, radio, TV, telephones, telexes and photocopying machines. But the sound ideas, opinions and observations are still smothered there, too, by masses of unsound ones. The wheat is still not automatically and sufficiently sorted out from the chaff there. – JZ, 23.9.04, 22.10.07, 23.8.12. - INTERNET & DEMOCRACY, PUBLISHING, MASS MEDIA, IDEAS ARCHIVE
VOTING: In democratic elections we get secret approvals to measures of envy, greed, prejudices and exploitation. - JZ, 4.7.92, 7.6.04.
VOTING: In fact, the very nature of politics adds to the pressure for more inflation, since inflation is one of the ways by which politicians pay for the expensive vote-catching programs they use to buy votes at every election.” - Maxwell Newton, WORKERS PARTY NEWSLETTER, 6/75.
VOTING: In general elections, however, it's still a case of having to choose between Tweedledum and Tweedledumber - to borrow a phrase coined by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a man whose career certainly gave him a chance to make an informed judgment on the quality of American elections.” - Nicholas von Hoffman, in "PENTHOUSE", ca. 11/1980. Nevertheless, he managed to persistently choose the wrong side with his platform. – JZ, 23.8.12.
VOTING: In general, the electoral process, whether in a democracy or a dictatorship, performs this citizen domestication function in various ways …” - Robert Weissberg, THE VOLUNTARYIST, Dec. 97, p.1. – I made a typo at first, spelling “democracy” as “demoncracy”. Makes some sense, too. – JZ, 21.4.09. - ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP
VOTING: In his "Letter on the Political Obligations of Abolitionists", Garrison maintained that the political reformation which would bring about the abolition of slavery "is to be expected solely by a change in the moral vision of the people; - not by attempting to prove that it is the duty of every abolitionist to be a voter, but that it is the duty of every voter to be an abolitionist." - Carl Watner, "Voluntaryism", p.7.
VOTING: In other words, the less political voting we have, the more economic voting will be possible.” - Sy Leon, "None of the Above", p.72.
VOTING: In our everyday, nonpolitical lives - equipped as we all are with our private property rights - we routinely make choices that count. If you choose to buy a Ford rather than a Volkswagen, you get a Ford. What you get among the available options does not depend upon how others choose. You get what you want; everyone else gets what he and she wants. Not so in elections. You get only what a majority of the voting group wants. Thus, every time a decision is made collectively rather than individually, no individual is free. Each is a slave to the majority.” - email@example.com - March 04, www.cis.ksu.edu/~mcalhoun/home.html - ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY, CHOICE, MAJORITY RULE, COMPARED WITH VOTING AS SOVEREIGN INDIVIDUAL CONSUMER IN THE MARKET, PROPERTY, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-GOVERNMENT
VOTING: In politics, there are few skills more richly rewarded than the ability to misstate issues in a way that will sound plausible and attractive.” —Thomas Sowell. – POLITICS, ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: In practice, not in theory: Are your elected parties, politicians and their appointed bureaucrats, your employees or your masters? So why vote for any of them? Wouldn't you immediately dismiss any servant or employee who began to tax you and gave you orders? – JZ – POLITICIANS, PUBLIC SERVANTS, LAWMAKERS, REPRESENTATIVES, RULERS, Q.
VOTING: In several respects we are all second-class citizens and disenfranchised: We do not have the right to determine or vote that our individual rights not become restricted by any "positive" legislation. - We have only rarely a chance to vote on important issues by referendum. - We have no recognized individual right to vote or opt ourselves out of the establishment. - We have no right to vote-in for ourselves the kind of institutions and laws which would please us and not some majority or large conglomeration of minorities. - We do not have the right to determine our tax burden and government spending ourselves, by one or the other voluntary taxation and spending scheme. - We are not free to repudiate the governments depreciated paper currency and opt for alternative and healthy exchange media and value standards, instead. - We are not set at liberty to pick our international allies and enemies ourselves. - We are not allowed to trade freely with our business partners across national borders. - We are not even free to decide what is to happen to our savings, insurance premiums and old age and invalidity funds but see them exposed to inflation, taxation, confiscation (by replacing real capital asset certificates with investment in tax slaves certificates or government debt certificates (regulation and mismanagement - without sufficient voting powers to stop these abuses. - JZ, 87, 5.4.11, 23.8.12.
VOTING: In short, he finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he uses the ballot, he may become a master, if he does not use it, he must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these two. In self-defence, he attempts the former. His case is analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, where he must either kill others or be killed himself.” – Lysander Spooner, "No Treason", p.2.
VOTING: In terms of actual change, as a matter of fact, there hasn't been an election in the United States since its inception that has driven the country solidly onto a course toward less government and more liberty. Each, rather, has driven the country toward more government and less liberty. Parties and promises notwithstanding, this is the way it is. To not recognize that one overpowering fact is to let the meaning of the entire political history of our time utterly escape you.” - Karl Hess, "The Lawless State", p.4. - TERRITORIALISM, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: In the American political system, you're only allowed to have real ideas if it's absolutely guaranteed that you can't win an election.” - P. J. O'Rourke, in "Parliament of Whores". – Correct ideas are not outlawed but simply not popular enough when compared with the tens of thousands of popular errors, myths and prejudices that have accumulated in all too many heads and form an almost insuperable barrier to rational persuasion attempts, at least until all the best refutations of all of them are finally put together in an vast electronic reference work. That kind of public discussion and record keeping would, at this stage, be much more valuable than all the parliamentary debating clubs and their decrees, mostly based upon the same popular prejudices etc. – Imagine, for instance, each party being supplied with the best refutations for the platform of its opponents! – They would then appear in all their naked stupidities and foolishness and all their great wrongs. – JZ, 21.4.09. - ELECTIONS, PARTIES, DEMOCRACY, PREJUDICES, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS.
VOTING: in the hope that there is indeed strength in numbers, that a sufficiently ponderous mass of humanoid flesh is enough to tip the scales of reality against the laws of nature.” - PHILOLOGOS, Nov./Dec. 76.
VOTING: In the meantime, all reasonable citizens will accept the inevitable corollary that those in receipt of public relief are not entitled to a vote in public affairs.” - Ernest Benn, in Deryck Abel: Ernest Benn, Counsel for Liberty, p.76. - That reform, too, still does not go to the root of our problems, namely, territorialism. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: In the political democracy only the votes cast for the majority candidate or the majority plan are effective in shaping the course of affairs. But on the market no vote is cast in vain. Every penny spent has the power to work upon the production process.” - Ludwig von Mises, "Human Action". - Actually, on the Exchanges even unsatisfied offers and unsatisfied demands are registered and sometimes published. Even they do have their influence upon the market, although they did not, immediately, lead to corresponding contracts. - They do influence contracts in the near future. -JZ, 7.6.04. - MARKET & DEMOCRACY
VOTING: In this context, it may be pointed out that only a vote for an alternative can be an 'effective negative expression'. Abstention is not effective, since it does not influence the vote results; neither is a vote for 'none of the above', as it leads not to defeat of a particular candidate, but only to a new election. ‘Abolish this office' may qualify.” - George Dance, OPTION, 6/77. - Also: Allow individual and groups secessions as well as exterritorial autonomy for societies of volunteers. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: In times such as these, it is incumbent upon free men to re-examine their most cherished, long-established beliefs. There is only one truly moral position for an honest person to take. He must refrain from coercing his fellows. This means that he should refuse to participate in the process by means of which some men obtain power over others." - Robert LeFevre. - Unless the others are private criminals with victims or official aggressors. - JZ, 5.4.11. – POWER, POLITICS, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION
VOTING: In what respects are all of us disenfranchised or deprived by the vote? In how many respects do we not have a free choice? Why is it wrong to speak of "the right to vote"? - Because it describes only a small fraction of all human activities where we could and perhaps should have a say: namely in the election of public officials. In the some of the most important affairs, our own, we have no vote, whilst the political vote, indirectly and with distortions through the political machine, gives us the wrongful authority to meddle with the affairs of others. The "free and equal vote" is a misnomer. By laws and regulations and constitutional clauses we are not permitted to vote in many ways and spheres: a) We are not allowed to "vote" for free prices - because they are fixed. - b) We are not allowed to vote on or agree upon certain wages for us because they are below prescribed rates. - c) We are not allowed to choose overseas suppliers for us, freely, due to protectionism. - d) We are not free to refuse the government's currency and to issue or accept alternative and sound currencies instead. - e) We are, as a rule and in most important matters, not allowed to vote in referendums.- f) There are restrictions on our choice of rents. - g) We have no vote on what services of the government to buy and which ones to refuse. - h) We are not even free to vote with our feet - because of passport requirements and other immigration restrictions. - i) We are not free to opt out of the State, the army or a union. - j) We have no freedom of choice regarding certain services, e.g. postal, transport and medical services. - We have relegated ourselves to 10th class citizens. - But count me out. I am not subjected to this mess with my consent and I do not feel free under all these and similar restrictions. - JZ, ca.1972, slightly changed while retyping in 1987. Revised: 5.4.11, 23.8.12 . – Q.
VOTING: Indeed, you can outvote others. But they can also outvote you. So, why engage in such a wrongful and silly game? - JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Individual liberty and choices rather than collective territorial voting. To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her dreams. No one's dream, not even the best possible one, to be centrally and collectively imposed upon all people living in a territory. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04. – The term choice fits better than dreams, as GPdB suggested. – J.Z., 23.8.12.
VOTING: Individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities amount to genuine self-government as a rightful alternative to territorial voting for one or the other kind of territorially imposed misgovernment. - JZ, 24.3.04.
VOTING: Individual sovereignty, individual secessionism, tolerance, fully free market competition and consumer sovereignty and free enterprise in every sphere cannot be consistently realized under any territorial government, not even the most limited one. - JZ, 11.9.99, 8.6.04, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Individual votes can rightly bind only the individual voter - and this only in the direction of his vote. - JZ, 15.12.81.
VOTING: Individual, voluntary and exterritorially autonomous votes, that can raise us up, towards our best dreams, as opposed to collective, compulsory, monopolistic, authoritarian and coercive territorial votes, which put all of us down and into nightmares based upon wide-spread ignorance, prejudices, stupidity, rapacity and greed for power and their wrongful rituals. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04, April 11.
VOTING: individuals as voters demand more government services than any of them would be willing to pay for directly as consumers.” - David Boaz, ed., The Libertarian Reader, The Free Press, 1997, p.312. – He should have added that they do so as involuntary State members or State subjects and as involuntary tax payers. As voluntary members of exterritorially autonomous communities, which would make their taxes or contributions essentially voluntary, too, their ideas, attitudes and behavior would tend to change. Then they would favor the reduction of their contributions to the kind of public spending, which they do still prefer, especially when they see the successes of more economically operating other panarchies or polyarchies all around them. Anyhow, those becoming dissatisfied would be free to secede and would, thereby and indirectly, "discipline" or influence the high taxation and high public spending panarchies. – JZ, 3.10.07, 5.4.11, 5.4.11.
VOTING: Information is not subject to a vote.” - Dangerous Buttons, No. 194. The same is true for genuine facts and principles, also for genuine rights and liberties which others do which to claim and practise in their lives. – JZ, 5.2.12.
VOTING: Instead of voting any new rascals in, let us vote all the old rascals out, and their territorial offices as well, until no one is left in any such office, ready and able to lord it over us. - JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12.
VOTING: Is it who votes that counts or who counts the votes?” – From an email by Terry L. Parker, of 30.10.04.
VOTING: Is virtue verily found in voices? Or is wisdom won when all win votes?” - Swinburne, "A Word from the Psalmist", St. 3.
VOTING: Is voting any more successful than the wishful thinking of prayers? – JZ, 17.5.95. - At most you get rid of one major bastard - only to be stuck, for years, with another one. - JZ, 7.6.04.
VOTING: It cannot be said that, by voting, a man pledges himself to support the Constitution, unless the act of voting be a perfectly voluntary one on his part. Yet the act of voting cannot properly be called a voluntary one on the part of any very large number of those who do vote. It is rather a measure of necessity imposed upon them by others, than one of their own choice. On this point I repeat what was said in a former number, viz: (No Treason, No.2, pages 5 and 6.). - In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is not to be taken as proof of consent, EVEN FOR THE TIME BEING. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, without his consent having even been asked, a man finds himself environed by a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, too, that other men practise this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees further, that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. ...” – Lysander Spooner, "No Treason", VI, 7/8, Works 1.
VOTING: It certainly is not moral to commit aggression against others; yet when you vote for a candidate, you are voting to put someone in a position to rule the lives of your fellowmen-men who either do not want that candidate to rule them or do not want ANYONE to rule them. And if it is an issue you are voting for or against, you are usually voting to interfere with the lives of those who are on the opposite side of such an issue.” - Robert Ringer, "Restoring the American Dream", p.341.
VOTING: It doesn’t matter if the powerful are chosen by birth, divine right, drawing straws or universal suffrage. It is the power that is abusive, no matter how it is attained.” - Joan Marie Leonard, THE FREEMAN, 2/75, p.75. - Power only exterritorially, among volunteers, as a result of their own individual free choices, is quite another matter. - JZ, 5.4.11. - POWER
VOTING: It is also true that we could vote to re-establish slavery in America. Would that make slavery 'right" or "democratic'? We could democratically vote to have a state religion and to force everyone to conform to the majority decision; but that would make a mockery of democracy and the right to vote. We can democratically vote to print enough money to give every person a million dollars; but would such exercise of the franchise help anyone except those who wish to destroy America? - All these measures - and others of a similar nature - could be enacted legally and democratically under the concept of majority rule. But would any person be so foolish as to say that they should be enacted? Will any thinking person say that a law is "right" merely because a majority has voted for it? We must always remember that our Constitution was designed to protect the freedom of the smallest possible minority - one person - against the demands of the greatest possible majority - all other persons combined.” - Ben Moreell, "Survival of the Species", THE FREEMAN, July 1978, p. 415. - Even this constitution has not done a good job of this task. Largely, because it is a territorial one and all genuine individual rights and liberties were not yet sufficiently known and appreciated either. Neither are they today included in the USA constitution or any other. - JZ, 8.6.04, 5.4.11, 23.8.12. - SLAVERY
VOTING: It is clear to me that universal suffrage is the most extensive and at the same time the most refined manifestation of the political charlatanism of the State; a dangerous instrument without doubt, and demanding a great deal of skill and competence of those who make use of it, but becoming at the same time - that is, if those people learn to make use of it - the surest means of making the masses cooperate in the construction of their own prison.” - Michael Bakunin, The Knouto-Germanic Empire, 1871. - It allowed even a Hitler to win and to plunge Germany, then a democratic republic, into a totalitarian despotism and the world into another world war, one from which we still suffer and which has set the stage for the third one. - JZ 1.12.87, 23.8.12.
VOTING: It is high time to recognize conscientious objection for voters as well as for conscripts and for religious dissidents. - JZ 30.11.87. - Not to speak of taxpayers, pupils and generally, of State subjects. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: It is nonsense to speak of choice when you are only allowed to choose between e.g. two parties and you disagree with 97 % of the program of the one and with 95 % of the program of the other and you are not given any chance to escape the grasping hands and the domineering boots of whoever catches most votes, usually those of the most ignorant and most prejudiced. – JZ, 4.6.04, 23.8.12. - CHOICE
VOTING: It is not a free choice, either to be referred to the possibility of starting a new party, when all the existing ones are not considered acceptable to oneself. Not only do those in power have many opportunities to discourage the growth of a new party, but the new party would also have to work within the present territorial political system, would not enjoy freedom of action, either, could not autonomously rule its own voluntary members and voters only (and thereby clearly demonstrate its superiority or inferiority). It would still be involved in the party system, a struggle for territorial power and domination, where the rule is that almost anything goes in the attempt to either beat or become beaten, instead of: Leave each other free and alone so that each group can freely pursue and further the happiness of its members in its own way or leave them free to do this for themselves. It is criminal to force people to participate in this present-day criminal because territorially imposed activity. - JZ, 5.6.04, 23.8.12. - PARTY SYSTEM, INTOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM, DOMINATION VS. GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT OF LIKE-MINDED VOLUNTEERS IN THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES, ALL ONLY EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS
VOTING: It is not in the nature of politics that the best men should be elected. The best men do not want to govern their fellowmen.” – George E. MacDonald (1824-1905), Scottish Novelist - Those who share popular prejudices, errors and false premises with the masses are the ones most likely to become elected to public offices. – In the game of politics the worst men are most likely to win. The greatest liars, the most ignorant leaders, the greatest confidence tricksters, the most ruthless characters. - JZ, 3.1.07. - LEADERSHIP, POLITICS, POLITICIANS, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, PREMIERS, MINISTERS, BEST MEN? ELECTIONS & THE BEST MEN, POWER-MONGERS
VOTING: It is of little use to have the overt power to deciding between A & B, when secret powers have picked out for choice an A and a B who are both undesirable.” - Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Ethics, vol.11, p.417. – POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, PARTIES
VOTING: It is quite possible that the expansion of the franchise caused a relapse into the practice of popular fallacies - after at least a considerable number of leading men were already somewhat enlightened on classical liberalism. - JZ 25.4.86. – LIBERALISM, CLASSICAL, ENLIGHTENMENT & DEMOCRACY
VOTING: It is significant that in the most recent United States presidential election, which was a very important and close contest, ALMOST HALF OF THE ELIGIBLE VOTERS DID NOT BOTHER TO CAST A VOTE. That is both an indictment of the modern United States government and a reflection on the lousy choices offered to voters at election time. It also makes a mockery of the 'democratic process. (It is no solution, however, to compound the problem by advocating compulsory voting.) The answer, as stated above, is to reduce the power of government. So the low voting figures doesn't matter because politicians don't matter.” - John Singleton with Bob Howard, "Rip Van Australia", 1977, p.263. - Territorial politicians do not matter in a rightful and positive sense but do matter, very much, in a wrongful and irrational sense. - JZ, 5.4.11. - DIS.
VOTING: It is the means of pressuring governments into handing out privileges, and determining which privileges are handed out by which government to which group. It represents a total perversion of the original idea of governments.” - John Singleton with Bob Howard, "Rip Van Australia", 1977, p.263. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: It is the surprising paradox of our society that while we think people incapable of looking after even their own interests, we trust them to select politicians who will know and look after everybody's interests.” - "THE AGE", Melbourne. - Sufficient agreement on common actions can only be found among volunteers. - JZ, 5.4.11. – TERRITORIALISM, DIS.
VOTING: It makes a lot of difference whether one has just one vote in a territory among millions of voters of different parties, movements, faiths and ideologies or one vote among like-minded people. Panarchism takes care of these differences, just like e.g. business partnership and productive cooperatives do, in their sphere. Conventional territorial democracies do not or do not do so sufficiently, just like vast share companies can’t, with millions of minor share-holders. – Self-government, self-management and self-administration have to become much better defined and developed. – Territorilism has legalized and perpetuated on the worst forms. - JZ, 13.9.05, 29.10.7, 21.4.09. 23.8.12. - DEMOCRACY, MAJORITARIANISM, ELECTIONS, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: It makes no difference who you vote for - the two parties are really one party representing four percent of the people." - Gore Vidal – Sent by CB 27.8.08. - PARTIES, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS, PEOPLE
VOTING: It merely means that I can be forced, by the threat of a (to me) large penalty, to attend the election ritual performance but, seeing the practice of secret voting, I cannot be forced to supply a valid vote. Anyhow, I do believe the political vote, in a territorial State with compulsory membership, to be, in most cases, an immoral act and a non-representative one, at least as far as my own basic rights and liberties are concerned. So I deface the election paper, as a rule, so that others may not make any illegal entries of their preferences on them and leave some short message on it, intended to be educational. Thus all the voters of “valid” votes have only themselves to blame for the results of their votes. - JZ, 28.3.99, 8.6.04, 5.4.11, 23.8.12. – COMPULSORY VOTING
VOTING: it not only encourages them, it feeds and sustains them." - Selections from Lysander Spooner, by Carl Watner.
VOTING: it provides little solace to know that one has the chance to vote for the people who are going to be in control of the government juggernaut that controls every facet of one's life.” - Miller Upton, THE FREEMAN, 9/74.
VOTING: It seems that the Australian voter will vote for any party prepared to give him more money and less responsibility.” - John Laws, Book of Uncommon Sense, PAN, 1995, p.125. – WELFARE STATE, RESPONSIBILITY
VOTING: It was such a disappointment that I have not voted since. When I pull a lever, I am used to hearing a mighty rush of waters. But there was just a tiny click, which, it turned out, did not count. Everyone was looking at the thousands column. No one looked at the units column, where my little click was tucked away.” - Marvin Slobodkin, Inside Dope, in THE DIAGONAL RELATIONSHIP, No.3.
VOTING: It's a strange paradox: the more voters the candidate can speak for, the farther away from the voters he becomes.” - Ben Bova, ANALOG editorial, 4/76. - POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATION
VOTING: it’s a way of abdicating your responsibility to take care of yourself.” – Selections from Lysander Spooner, by Carl Watner.
VOTING: It's been tried again and again in history, giving everybody a vote, and it's always failed - always, in a few generations, the worse politicians drove out the better. Because by definition, half the people have below-average intelligence; and the average is not high." - Poul Andersen, "ASTOUNDING SCIENCE FICTION", Oct. 55: "The Long Way Home." - One might add that those below the average are taken in, anyhow, by the politicians and many of the others are taken in by the professionalism of these liars. Together these victims form the clear majority. - JZ, 4.6.04. – In this application of the popular version of Gresham’s law, in the territorial political sphere, the monopolism and compulsion of territorialism takes the place of “legal tender” (with its compulsory acceptance and forced value). Panarchism in this sphere is an equivalent to monetary freedom in the monetary sphere. But panarchism embraces many other alternatives as well, even e.g. central banking and legal tender money among their fanatic adherents – at the own risk and expense. – Under panarchism, inevitably, the better and best system will reduce and possibly even abolish the worse and worst systems – because the worse and worst will find less and less voluntary adherents. - JZ, 28.10.08, 23.8.12.
VOTING: It’s illegal to say to a voter "Here’s $100, vote for me." So what do the politicians do? They offer the $100 in the form of Health Care, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, Food Stamps, tobacco subsidies, grain payments, NEA payments, and jobs programs.” – Don Farrar - average guy, age 51. – Date & source? Help from the Internet: Under “Don Farrar” libertarian, I get today 292 Google results, including 3 tags “It's illegal to say to a - The Information Paradox -dieselciviltrust.org/post/.../its-illegal-to-say-to-a-voter-heres-100-vote - Don Farrar - average guy, age 51 (via combattant-de-la-liberte). (Source: primal- libertarian). Bookmark and Share. Report Filed: 24 April 2011,10:05 Zulu ... Another result: OBSERVATIONS ON POLITICIANS - freedomkeys.com/politicians2.htm -Don Farrar. "It's illegal to say to a voter 'here's $100, vote for me.' So what do the politicians, do? They offer the $100 in the form of health care, social security, . … BRIBERY & CORRUPTION, ELECTIONS, POLITICIANS
VOTING: It's not a choice, not a vote, to be allowed to vote only for a candidate who is not bound by one's own instructions to him, not even by his own conscience, not even by the laws of the land and the constitution he was sworn to uphold, but, instead, is bound by party discipline, which is swayed hither and thither by unprincipled opportunism in the desperate attempts to gain or keep power. Anyone with any election experience will know how small the chances are for any independent and enlightened candidate to become elected in the expensive and time consuming rat race called an election. As someone said recently, in any rat race it is only too natural that the biggest rats will win. - JZ, 5.6.04. - PARTY DISCIPLINE, FACTION STRIFE, SPECIAL INTERESTS, POLITICIANS
VOTING: It's not much good voting on the toss of a coin", said Ron Shaw, quoted in the DAILY MIRROR, 27.11.63. – Why should the votes of informed people be mixed up with those of ignorant and prejudiced ones? Why should both groups have to live under the same territorial government rather than a self-chosen one, one that has only voluntary members? Let them separate themselves according to their interests and knowledge just like they do already in so many other spheres. Statism for the ignorant and prejudiced. Free societies for the enlightened. Always at the own expense. Their own kinds of panarchies for all. – JZ, 28.10.08, 5.4.11. – IGNORANCE, ENLIGHTENMENT, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & DISASSOCIATION
VOTING: It's terrible; a choice between which rotten bum ...” - Mr. Farrington, NY TIMES, Nov. 7, 1990. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: It's those who do vote for the winning candidate who may deserve what they get, not the ones who don't vote for anybody.” - Murray N. Rothbard, interview in "PENTHOUSE, International", 10/76. – Or who voted for the opposition. Each party in the last election should win exclusive rule – but only over the own voluntary members or subscribers. – J.Z., 23.8.12.
VOTING: It's usually a close contest, if one considers: Who is more corrupt, incompetent and prejudiced, the voters or the elected politicians? But the voter is certainly the greater fool, for, as John Menzies, former PM of Australia, once declared: He is the greatest fool, who lets himself be bribed with his own money. - JZ, 6.9.87. - Not that the modern "Liberals" often and consistently abstained from such bribery. - JZ, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Join the secret band of robbers and murderers. Do it! Vote!” - Association of Voluntarists, leaflet.
VOTING: Just another employment program at the expense and risk of the tax-payers and for benefit of the politicians and their favorites. Compulsory voting does also amount to forced labor, rather useless to most of its victims. All this happens under the pretence of giving us a real choice rather than power to them, while we are being denied the decisive votes of individual secessionism and of voluntary associationism, our own self-governing panarchies, all without any territorial monopoly. – It is the territorial politician’s public circus program to keep us quiet and maintain our delusions and hopes. - JZ, 6.11.07, 21.4.09, 5.4.11. - & ELECTIONS, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM
VOTING: Just look at the criminals and criminal measures that voting brings forth. Participation means becoming an accessory to the facts or jumping into a manure heap. – JZ
VOTING: Keep things as they are. Vote for the Sado-Masochist Party.” - Graffiti from "Swiss Cottage". Also offered as: - Graffito from Nigel Rees, Graffiti Lives, O.K., Unwin Paperbacks, Sun Herald, 30.9.79.
VOTING: Kings and parliaments build their palaces and increase their powers and incomes. Compare what your get out of them, if anything, and certainly not at their expense. – JZ
VOTING: Knowing that governmental actions are the cause of most of the problems of our times and that they cannot, by their very nature, provide any or the best solutions, but rather perpetuate or increase problems, a thesis on which there exists an extensive literature and which I have tested myself in hundreds of cases, how could I, in good conscience, contribute to the problems of our times by voting for any of the problem-makers and maintainers? – JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting.
VOTING: Laws restricting, absolutely, the ability of rich corporations, individuals and labor unions to dump large amounts of money into political campaigns. With Milton Kotler of the Institute for Policy Studies, I have been working for some time on a plan, which would be almost a modernized poll tax, in which people wishing to vote would buy a certain amount of "electoral scrip" which they could give to the candidates of their choice. Candidates could pay for major campaign expenses such as travel and media ONLY with this scrip. Cash payments for any such thing would be a crime. This would mean that candidates, from the outset, even at primary time, would have to have the support of citizens at large and not just a few fat cats." - Karl Hess: "Dear America", p.270. – Bandaid reforms can't cure all the numerous ills of territorialism. However, all in favor of this proposal should become free to form their own panarchy in order to realize it. - JZ, 5.4.11.
VOTING: Let me opt out of the messes caused by territorial politics, in which the masses of the ignorant and prejudiced vote and gain power for politicians of their own - over the lives and liberties of more enlightened dissenters and this also at the expense and risk of their involuntary victims. - But I am quite content to let them, and them alone, suffer under the politicians of their own choice. – They deserve each other. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04, 21.4.09.
VOTING: Let me opt out of this territory-wide protection racket. – JZ, n.d. – TERRITORIALISM, PROTECTION RACKET
VOTING: Let people vote their own money only, unless they are individually authorized to vote with some specific funds of others. – JZ, 21.11.82, 2.12.87. This requires voluntary communities, without any territorial powers, and each having its own budget for the voluntary contributions of its members, for its own aims and purposes, as fully in agreement with its voluntary members as is humanly possible. Always losing them to competing free communities that offer better or cheaper services or more wanted services, if they can no longer satisfy them. Just like businesses lose customers. In short, introduce free market and individual rights and liberty relationships in all spheres, with any remaining restrictions confined to their voluntary subscribers. To each his own kind of community. No one to be any longer a territorial tax slave and subject against his will, unless he has committed crimes upon involuntary victims. – JZ, 21.4.09. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAWS, SEPARATE TAX- CONTRIBUTION-, BUDGET- & EVEN SEPARATE & COMPETING MONEY- CLEARING-, VALUE STANDARD- AND CREDIT SYSTEMS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WIDELY DIVERSE VIEWS ON THESE SUBJECTS. ONE SYSTEM HAS NEVER SATISFIED ALL PEACEFUL & PRODUCTIVE PEOPLE. LET THEM VOTE WITH THEIR OWN PAYMENT SYSTEMS, SAVINGS & EARNINGS FOR WHATEVER THEY WANT.
VOTING: Let taxpayers vote against taxation and soldiers and civilians against wars. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Let the 51 rule the 51 and the 49 the 49 – rather than letting the 51 rule the 49 or the 49 rule the 5 – as well as themselves. That would be truly democratic and republican self-government. – All else is merely a false pretence. – JZ, 4.10.98, 19.9.08. – A suggestion first made to me by one of my kids, many years ago. – JZ, 21.4.09. – Later I found the same suggestion was a already made by several others, perhaps first more than 200 years ago. – J.Z., 13.8.12. - PANARCHISM, FRANCHISE, ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY, PARTIES, SELF-GOVERNMENT, MAJORITY RULE VS. MINORITY AUTONOMY
VOTING: Let the election losers rule themselves, rather than being dominated by the winners. - JZ, 4.10.98. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: Let the voting on: "Who is to dominate whom?" be replaced by individual declarations on who wants to secede and federate and let these people go ahead at their expense and risk. - JZ, 10/72. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: Let those who vote for a politician pay for his salary and for all the expenditures that he favors. - JZ, 1974, 2.4.89. – The same rule for whole gangs or politicians or wanted leaders. To each community of volunteers its own system. – JZ, 21.4.09. - PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, VOLUNTARY SUBJECTS ONLY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM UNDER PERSONAL LAWS
VOTING: let those who want to reveal themselves vote publicly ...” - Zechariah Chafee, LIBERTY, Summer 1974. - That would still leave secret voting powers to others. - JZ, 1.12.87. – Moreover, those voting publicly might be powerful terrorists or totalitarians or fundamentalists and those not joining their vote might thereby risk their lives. Coercively “unified” territorial systems rule always more or less by fear and terror and be it only by the fear the tax collection system produces. Only the voluntarism of panarchism would separate all interests sufficiently and rightfully. – JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: Let us suppose that the question at issue is whether neckties should be red or green. If that is going to be decided by a political mechanism, everybody votes. If 51% of the people vote that ties shall be red, 100 % of the people get red neckties. In the economic market each one of us goes to the shopping centre separately. If 51 % of the people vote that ties shall be red, 51 % get red neckties and 49 % get green neckties. (or whatever else he chooses. - JZ) Everybody gets what he votes for - and this is a fundamental difference between the two markets." - He points out that in some things there must be a majority vote: there is no way in which 51 % of Americans can be at war in Vietnam and 49 % not at war. (Wrong, there can be corps of volunteers, as in the Spanish Civil War. - JZ) The trouble is that we have extended the political market beyond its useful function. - Henry Meulen, The INDIVIDUALIST, 12/76, quoting somebody. – Rather, we have failed to introduce free market relationships and associations for political, economic and social systems. – Panarchism, market organizations, systems and methods in all spheres – but always for volunteers only. Others are to be free to retain their non-market systems as long as they are willing to put up with them. – JZ, 21.4.09. – DIS.
VOTING: Let voters vote with their own dollars rather than allow politicians to vote with the dollars of all voters, coercively extracted from them. - JZ, 4.10.98, 6.2.12. – POLITICIANS, TAXES, TRIBUTE LEVIES, VOLUNTARY TAXATION
VOTING: Liberty is not to be found in any form of government; she is in the heart of the free man; he bears her with him everywhere.” - Jean-Jacques Rousseau – GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, LIBERTY
VOTING: Liberty requires a commitment to the values of liberty. Such a commitment can not be imposed by force. An election is no indication of such a commitment. Hitler was elected. Hell, so was Helen Clark. Voting is not a guarantee of freedom. Rand knew people must embrace the values of freedom first. She wrote an essay explaining that "It's too early" where she outlined why political action, before there is an ideological change, would be useless. This was for America. Odd that some Objectivists think it's not too early for Iraq and that spending billions of taxpayer funds, killing thousands of Americans and maiming tens of thousands of Americans along with tens of thousands of dead Iraqi's will somehow impose freedom-loving values in Iraq.” - Jim Peron To: ILV Discuss ; free students network , February 04, 2005.
VOTING: Look around you - think these apes are fit to decide public policy?” - Poul Anderson, The Long Way Home, p.65. – POLITICIANS, RULERS, LEADERSHIP
VOTING: Lysander Spooner explained long ago that voting does not indicate a sanction of your oppressor. If you're in prison and allowed to pick your jailer, it is only rational to pick the one you would prefer, who would allow you the most freedom. It does not mean you have accepted your place in jail.” - Filthy Pierre, THE CONNECTION 64. TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Majoritarianism has to be voted out rather than in or be continued. Full exterritorial autonomy for all voluntary communities or experimental freedom for all, under personal laws! – JZ, n.d. & 5.4.11. - MAJORITIES
VOTING: Majority rule is one of the most corruptive political methods that can be contrived. Yet in our schools, children are taught that politics (through voting) is the 'science of the possible'. In simple terms, this means 'anything goes'. - Robert LeFevre. -– MAJORITY RULE
VOTING: Make the most of your own life - but don't ruin that of others by using your vote against them. - JZ, 27.2.73. – Let them live their own lives in their own preferred ways! – JZ, 21.4.09. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, LAISSEZ-FAIRE, MARKET RELATIONSHIPS IN EVERY SPHERE – INSTEAD OF TERRITORIAL IMPOSITIONS.
VOTING: Man cannot become free by holding elections.” - Charles R. Wiles in HAIL, 1:6:1, June 1967.
VOTING: Man is not the master of his own fate when he has only the one-man, one-vote "choice" within a territorial and uniform law system. – JZ
VOTING: Man, as the voter, is the role in which he most abuses his freedoms and responsibilities within the system. ...” - Charles Heath, "The Golden Egg, the Goose, and Us", p.32.
VOTING: Many anarchist libertarians claim it immoral to vote or to engage in political action - the argument being that by participating in this way in State activity, the libertarian places his moral imprimatur upon the State apparatus itself. But a moral decision must be a free decision, and the State has placed individuals in society in an unfree environment, in a general matrix of coercion. The State - unfortunately - exists, and people must necessarily begin with this matrix to try to remedy their condition. As Lysander Spooner pointed out, in an environment of State coercion, voting does not imply voluntary consent. Indeed, if the State allows us a periodic choice of rulers, limited though that choice may be, it surely cannot be considered immoral to make use of the limited choice to try to reduce or get rid of State power.” – Murray N. Rothbard, "The Ethics of Liberty". - The least that one should expect of these libertarian voters is that they will speak up at every opportunity for voluntary State membership, individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers. Otherwise they would just continue to live and survive within the limits of the territorial system and do so without even publicly protesting against it. - JZ, 7.6.04, 21.4.09. – SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS OR PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Men honestly engaged in attempting to establish justice in the world, have no occasion thus to act in secret; or to appoint agents to do acts for which they (the principals) are not willing to be responsible.” – Lysander Spooner, "No Treason", Works I, p.29.
VOTING: Merely voting for liberty will not get you there - under the present territorial voting system, by which you are deprived of the vote required to opt out and do your own thing, exterritorially and autonomously. - JZ, 5.9.01. - FOR LIBERTY & TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, DISFRANCHISEMENT, PANARCHISM, LIBERTARIAN PARTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSION
VOTING: Minding one's own business and deciding upon the business of others. Self-responsibility vs. "voting" by a "democratic" process, usurping the responsibility over and for others, whether these others like that or not at all, and at their expense and risk, too, rather than that of the voter, who remains anonymous and can thus engage in a secret conspiracy against all or many others. – JZ, n.d. – A thought often expressed by Lysander Spooner.
VOTING: Minority voters to secede from rather than submit to majority decisions. - JZ, 25.8.98, 7.6.04. – Outvoted minorities still to retain all their individual rights, to the extent that they do want to apply them among themselves. – JZ, 21.4.09. - SECESSIONISM.
VOTING: modern fairy tales usually start with: 'If elected, I will ...'" - Roger A. Freeman, "The Growth of American Government", in "Champions of Freedom", p.77. – POLITICIANS, VOTING, TERRITORIAL POLITICS, TAXATION & GOVERNMENT BUDGETS, PROMISES
VOTING: Monarchical absolutism is unspeakably clumsy, stupidly exposing itself to rebellion and uprisings. But the ballot box is the most potent factor for well-ordered oppression and exploitation. It hypnotizes its victims into the belief of political sovereignty and independence, while at the same time still firmer riveting the chains of bondage.” - Emma Goldman, MOTHER EARTH, October 1910.
VOTING: Morally only the non-voters count. - JZ, 8.6.82.
VOTING: More and more people vote, but they have less and less control over the government and their own affairs and lives.” - Clarence B. Carson, "The U.S.: The Concentration of Power", in THE FREEMAN, July 1978, p.435. - CITIZEN CONTROL OVER GOVERNMENTS
VOTING: Most are ignorant, some unintelligent, and all have the vote.” - Nadia Weiner, "LIBERTARIAN OPTIMISM", Nov. 78. – One should not forget the mass of popular errors, prejudices, fallacies, wrong assumptions and false conclusions they have in their “minds”. Alas, they are still not systematically listed together and confronted with their best refutations, in something like an encyclopaedia of the best refutations. – JZ, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Most of all, the vote I cast for myself is one I also must extend to my fellow man. I must grant to him the same right and the privilege of self-reliance that I would claim.” - Edward Y. Breese, THE FREEMAN, 10/72.
VOTING: Most of those territorially elected do not feel themselves bound to respect as "representatives" any individual rights and liberties and have only vague and limited awareness of them anyhow. Their agenda is a quite different one and their office gives them all too many opportunities to pursue their own interests at the expense of almost everyone else. Thus traces of royal absolutism still persist in modern "democratic" or "republican" territorial politics. - JZ, 8.6.04. - "By authority of the people" is as wrongful a "mandate" as "by divine authority". - JZ, 8.6.04. - POLITICIANS & HUMAN RIGHTS
VOTING: Most voters are prepared to use their political power to disfranchise others, i.e. to deprive others of their voting power regarding their own affairs, leaving them only the meddling political vote. - JZ, 14.6.82. And that territorial vote is, largely, made ineffective for the dissenters through majority rule and the majorities are not sufficiently enlightened by their experiences, history knowledge, mass media, governmental education and not even through the Internet as yet. – JZ, 21.4.09, 23.8.12.
VOTING: My only vote is for myself - to manage my own affairs, undisturbed by other fools. - JZ 11/72. - Or by those considered to be experts – by others. – JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: My own vote alone should decide upon my own life, as long as I have not interfered with the live of others. No one's vote should decide upon the life, rights and liberties of others, unless these others have transgressed upon basic rights and liberties. – JZ
VOTING: My rights, liberties and self-interest demand that no one gets the power to "represent" me. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: My vote becomes worthless for myself if mixed with that of millions of others. I am not satisfied with one vote only among millions regarding my own affairs. Instead, I want the exclusive vote on my business and actions - as long as they do not interfere with the rights of others. I certainly do not want any vote on the affairs of others. Thus, how could the present vote offer me anything? - JZ, 4.6.04, 23.8.12. – HOTCHPOTCH, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, INCLUDING EXTERRITORIAL SECESSIONISM OR PANARCHISM
VOTING: My vote cannot get my point of view across to the majority. - JZ, 13.7.87. – Thus I, like all other dissenters, should be free to opt out and do my own things for or to myself, at my own risk and expense. Panarchism does not ask for more – but also not for less. – JZ, 21.4.09. – SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, LAISSEZ FAIRE
VOTING: Neither bullets nor ballots!" - Source unknown.
VOTING: Neither democracy nor any other ism imposed upon all - but, instead, panarchistic victories. They are made possible for all, based on full exterritorial autonomy for all, to finally achieve self-responsibility, self-government and the degree of liberty and rights that individuals want to practise for and among themselves. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04, .5.4.11.
VOTING: Neither the majority nor swinging voters should have the right to rule all. - JZ, 4.10.98.
VOTING: Never has the vote been used to abolish privilege; it has always been used to demand new ones or to effect a change in beneficiaries.” - Frank Chodorov, "Out of Step", p.212.
VOTING: Nicholas von Hoffman quotes Sy Leon as saying that 'voting is like going through one of two doors. Whichever one you take, you wind up in the same room.'” – Robert Ringer, "Restoring the American Dream", p.63.
VOTING: Nicht falsch waehlen"? Jeder der politisch (territorial) waehlt, waehlt falsch. Waehlt auf dem Markt oder schafft einen freien Markt fuer Regierungsdienstleistungen - auf dem man wirklich als Konkurrent mit dem eigenen Geld und der eigenen Arbeit waehlen und handeln kann. – JZ, 22.9.90. (Don't vote wrongly? Everyone who uses his political or territorial vote, votes wrongly. Instead, vote upon the market or establish a free market for public services in the first place, a market upon which one can appear and vote and act as a competitor, with the own money and labour.) - DIS.
VOTING: No choice - no vote.” - League of Non Voters, "A is A NEWSLETTER", 1/72.
VOTING: No choice or program deserving the name - no vote! – JZ – No to speak of their character – as power addicts. – J.Z., 23.8.12.
VOTING: No exclusive and imposed territorial government with involuntary subjects provides or protects for myself and all others the exterritorial autonomy that I desire for myself and the individual liberties and rights that that I want to practise myself, at my own risk and expense, while tolerating all similar and quite tolerant self-rule efforts of all others. - JZ, 2.3.96. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: No form of communication exceeds that of an exemplar. Think what could be wrought if literally thousands of citizens refused to accept social security or medicare checks, or failed to employ "taxpayer identification numbers," or opted not to cast a ballot to either of two unholy thugs seeking an office.” - Ridgeway K. Foley Jr., THE FREEMAN, 5/79, p.312.
VOTING: No libertarian could swallow the Social Contract defense of plundering productive members of society. (*) Nor could he condone the use of the secret ballot to shield looters and murderers by proxy from accountability for their actions.” - Fred D. Miller Jr., REASON, 5/76. - (*) It would be a different matter within a Panarchy, which would have only voluntary members, all of whom would have subscribed to a common social contract that they could and did agree upon. - JZ 1.12.87.
VOTING: No matter for whom you vote, always a politician gets in.” - By now proverbial. - One might add: "and a bureaucrat comes to rule you." - JZ, n.d.
VOTING: No matter who you vote for, always a wage freezer (Fraser, Liberals) or a tax Hawk (Hawke, Labor) gets in. That's why I would like to become enfranchised to have a vote for "none of the above!" or for "nobody", so that I either can get a real choice nor nobody to rule over me. - JZ, 28.3.83, 5.4.11.
VOTING: No method of voting can be better than that of open declaration.” - (Nihil ut fuerit in sufragiis voce melius.) - Cicero, De Legibus, Bk.iii, ch.15, sec.33. – Only wrongful intentions require, as a rule, that they be kept secret in order all the more easily to realize them. – If all people knew how e.g. their neighbors had voted and how bad the effect of this vote was, once it passed into law and had been acted upon, friendly relationships between neighbors might be at an end. They might even want to kill each other. The best of neighbors need a fence between them, a separation of property and interest spheres, not only when it comes to their blocks of land and their houses and other properties and relationships. Their affairs should not be coercively and territorially mixed up with those of all others, against their individual and free decision-making as sovereign individuals and volunteers. - JZ, 21.4.09. – VOLUNTARISM, SEPARATION OF INTERESTS & PREFERENCES, PANARCHISM, SEPARATISM, LAISSEZ FAIRE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PERSONAL LAWS VS. TERRITORIALISM, OPENNESS RATHER THAN SECRECY, PUBLICITY, APPEALS, DECLARATIONS
VOTING: No monopolistic and coercive system, that unilaterally imposes taxes and monopoly fees for unasked for services and disservices rendered, does get my mandate and is considered by me as representing me. - JZ, 14.9.91, 7.6.04.
VOTING: No more voting over the affairs of others, who are not members of the same community or society of volunteers. - JZ, 04-11.
VOTING: No one becomes my master with my consent. - JZ, 11.5.02.
VOTING: No one gets my consent to tax me. - JZ, n.d.
VOTING: No one is forced to gamble (except around election time.)” - Merilyn Fairskye, FREE ENTERPRISE, 6/76. - Australia has compulsory voting, like a few other States. – JZ
VOTING: No one to blame but ourselves. Government is a gun and ballots are bullets. So why do so many 'peace-loving' people step into the voting booth and pull the trigger?” - LIVE AND LET LIVE, No.30, Sept. 15, 1982.
VOTING: No politician is worth voting for. I vote informally against the lot. – To me all of them are only worth voting against. But we won't get rid of them until we vote their offices out as well - and the compulsory financial support for them. - JZ, 14.9.91. – The activities, powers and revenues of each of them should be confined to his volunteers. Likewise that of all political parties. Personal laws to replace territorial laws. Voluntary associations to replace territorial ones. – Powers would be correspondingly reduced to those degrees that people want or find bearable. – JZ, 21.4.09. – POLITICIANS, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PERSONAL LAWS.
VOTING: No politician, bureaucrat or political party (including the LP) knows and appreciates all individual rights and liberties so far discovered. But they make a good living by more or less helping to suppress or furthermore ignore many of them. – JZ, n.d., & 5.4.11.
VOTING: No presently practised political voting system allows the voters to treat their politicians as their servants, fulfilling specified duties at the individual citizens' expense. Only the fiction that this does occur is held, somehow and vaguely, by most. What the system allows in practice is the use the law and of politicians and bureaucrats as oppressors and henchmen against competitors. - JZ, 5.6.04, 5.4.11. - INDIVIDUALLY HIRED SERVANTS OR PUBLIC SERVANTS, FOR THE POPULATION OF WHOLE TERRITORIES?
VOTING: No territorial government as such gets my consent! – JZ, 2.3.96, 21.4.09. - TERRITORIALISM, ELECTIONS & CONSENT
VOTING: No territorial politician has earned or can earn my vote. - JZ, 4.10.98.
VOTING: No vote can turn a wrong into a right. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: No vote for anybody getting hand-outs. – D.Z, 1974. – Unless this is done in a community of volunteers. – JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: No, thanks! - option: Brisbane (AAP) - The Progress Party has called for an amendment to the Electoral Act to allow voters the choice of 'none of the above' in all federal, state and local elections. - National secretary of the party, Mr. Viv Forbes, said in Brisbane yesterday that until voters could say 'no' to all candidates, the voting apparatus was merely an illusion of free choice. - He said: 'To many people at the ballot box, the decision is as significant as the choice between arsenic and rat poison.' - 'Free people must have the right to say: no.'" - CAIRNS POST, n.d.
VOTING: No, thanks! If I consented, I'd become your accomplice. While I can't get rid of territorial tutelage and exploitation, I prefer remaining their victim. - JZ, 14.9.91. – VOTING FORMALLY
VOTING: Nobody can sufficiently represent another mature and adult citizen. The power of attorney comes closest. But who would want to trust any politician to that extent? Especially when it comes to numerous diverse and very important decisions, where their interests and ours tend to be poles apart. – JZ, 24.3.07, 25.10.07. - POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIONS, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: Nobody gets my consent to rule over my life, liberties, rights, property and income and I have better things to do than to try to decide upon the lives etc. of other people with my "free" vote. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Nobody has any responsibility to vote. The responsibility that everyone does have is to exercise control over his or her own life, not anyone else's. Voting gives politicians the power to take away that control. Governments don't solve problems, they create them. Voting improves nothing except politicians' egos and pocketbooks. We don't need the illusion of political reforms. What we do need is to eliminate politics from our lives as soon as possible. Voting allows us to choose the lesser of two evils. Since the lesser of two evils is still evil, refusing to vote is a responsible choice that is our right and duty to make.” - Doris Gordon, LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Winter 76.
VOTING: Nobody keeps his campaign promises. Nobody deserves to live off your taxes. Nobody can legislate your freedom. Nobody is the perfect candidate! If you think that Nobody represents your interests, vote for Nobody. If you think there's no difference between political parties, vote for Nobody. If you think Nobody should run your life, vote for Nobody. If you think, vote for Nobody.” - "The Heretic's Handbook of Quotations", by Chas Bufe, p.24. – NOBODY, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS
VOTING: Nobody makes a better president than nobody! - JZ, 8.5.83. - PRESIDENTS
VOTING: Nobody should have the authority, however fractional, to vote on the affairs of others. But everybody should have the exclusive right to vote on his own affairs - i.e., he should be the one and only voter in his decisions. This includes his right to resign citizenship. Then he should be free to throw in his lot with others, who might strongly agree with him. - One has no right when one has always to abide by the decision of the majority. One has not even full voting rights when only the majority's noses count. - JZ, 5.6.04. – RIGHT, AUTHORITARIANISM, MAJORITIES, TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY & PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PERSONAL LAWS
VOTING: Nobody to have a vote on depriving others of rights. Everyone to have a vote on the protection of rights. - JZ 21.1.78. - That requires a higher degree of knowledge on what are individual rights are than has so far been achieved. - See the collection of private human rights drafts in PEACE PLANS 589/90. – www.butterbach.net/lmp/cd2/
VOTING: Nock actually did go to the polls once or twice to vote for the candidate of his own choice. Jefferson Davis, of Mississippi. "I knew Jeff was dead," he said, "but I voted on Artemus Ward's principle that if we can't have a live man who amounts to anything, by all means, let's have a first class corpse." - Rev. Edmund Opitz, on Nock, "INTERCOLLEGIATE REVIEW", Winter 1975. – Later, after the death of Ludwig von Mises, somebody proposed appointing him as “President”, making all presidential decisions in accordance with the writings of Mises. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: None of the above represents my rights, liberties and interests sufficiently, if at all, regardless of which party is in power. Nor does any other territorial government. So why should I vote for them? - JZ, 11.9. 99, 8.6.04. - TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION, RIGHTS & LIBERTIES
VOTING: None of the above were or will be authorized by me to gamble with my life, property and earnings. - JZ, 4.10.98.
VOTING: None of the above, for they do not favor free trade, free migration, monetary and financial freedom, including voluntary taxation, voluntary State membership, individual secessionism, personal laws and the abolition of all legally, constitutionally and juridically established monopolies and thus caused or permit the continuance of numerous problems, strife and dissatisfactions. – JZ, n.d., probably 2003.
VOTING: None of the above!" for all territorial candidates. I "vote" only for each voter to gain, finally, the ultimate franchise, namely to get, but only for himself, by his vote, the kind of government or society that he dreams of, in the same way as his religious decision-making affiliates or disaffiliates him and as consumers do make their sovereign choices on a market that is at least partly free. All political "services" are to be offered and realized only for the individuals who choose them for themselves and they, as a result, ought to be the only ones to bear their burdens and risks. - JZ, 3.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: None of the package deals offered by any of the parties has my consent. Thus how could I vote for them? It's like going into a gigantic restaurant - together with 5 million other people and being served only 2 or 3 swills, made up by pouring the hundred thousands of different dishes for every imaginable taste into a few huge boilers to produce some egalitarian stew. What chance has anyone then to obtain precisely his favorite dish? - What percentage of the customers would be likely to be completely satisfied with the selection among three pots of hash only, the one containing perhaps a bit more potatoes, the other perhaps some more rice, the other perhaps some more meat? Parties can make almost any project indigestible by mixing it with numerous other projects desired by others. - JZ, 5.6.04. – A FEW PACKAGE DEALS ONLY? ONLY A FEW STEWS ON THE MENU? NO CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY? PANARCHISM: TO EACH HIS OWN PARTY, SYSTEM & LAWS!
VOTING: None of them provides me and all others with the rightful and free choices that I want and that all are entitled to as free human beings. – JZ, n.d. – POLITICIANS, PARTIES, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Not just children, madmen, criminals and some foreigners are disfranchised but most normal adults are, in many respects, even in most of the "free and democratic" countries: None of them may vote, for instance, on what other governments claim are 'their internal affairs", even if the consequence is another World War. - Nobody is allowed to vote 'nobody for president!' if the presidential office has become too powerful or held by too foolish or dangerous a man. - The USA president has a large influence upon world politics – but most of the world’s population have no influence at all upon his election. – Naturally, no one should be granted such powers in the first place! - Nobody is allowed to opt out of the existing territorial systems, legally, constitutionally and juridically. - All those, who are “atheists”, anarchists or libertarians - towards the now secular gods, the supposedly all-wise and all-powerful leaders and their national territorial governments, are everywhere disfranchised regarding their most important vote: their choice not to be ruled by such or any other men not of their own personal choosing. - Mind you, I am not against all voting as such but am in favor only of genuine and complete voting in all respects, which concern me. - Under the present system "the vote" is for me only a very trivial thing when compared with the other freedoms that I miss: e.g. freedom of trade, freedom of action, freedom to secede, monetary freedom and living under self-chosen personal law systems. - Only when it is practised merely in a panarchistic system would I become completely tolerant towards every voting system practised by others, because then none of them could be forced upon me. I could then deliberate on my choice among many different groups in the same country and could choose only one close to my liking or even none at all and try to introduce one of my own. In short, only "competing governments", which would possess only exterritorial autonomy and voluntary members, could grant what I consider to be a full and unrestricted free vote or choice. - JZ, 5.6.04, 29.10.08, 6.4.11, 23.8.12. – PANARCHISM, VOTING DOES NOT REALLY MEAN VOTING, NOW, UNDER TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Not one of the existing diverse voting systems, all of them merely territorial, represents my ideal. – JZ, n.d. - But all of them could and should be freely practised exterritorially - among their voluntary supporters. None should be territorially imposed upon dissenters. - JZ, 6.4.11.
VOTING: NOTA is correct as far as elections for territorial rule over a whole population is concerned. However, EACH OF THE ABOVE would be morally correct and practicable under exterritorial autonomy for their volunteers. Justice requires: For each his own political, economic and social system. – JZ, 26.10.07. - PANARCHISM VS. NOTA = NONE OF THE ABOVE
VOTING: NOTA: None Of The Above.” – I like that response to territorial and collectivist voting. But I also favor any voting system for any society of volunteers, i.e., as long as the elected would come to rule only over their own voluntary members and this under full exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. Then membership and voting as a voluntary member would provide a genuine individual choice and no longer a secret vote and conspiracy against all other voters but a published fact and commitment, regarding the own affairs only. – JZ, 27.3.04, 16.10.07, 6.4.11. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, GENUINE REPRESENTATION
VOTING: Once enough voters have advanced enough in knowledge, ideas and wisdom, then it might be worthwhile to vote. For now this would be possible only within voluntary and exterritorially autonomous communities - and they are still outlawed. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Once you have sanctioned the act of stripping the individual of his own intelligence and will and conscience, and of the self-guidance which depends upon these things, you cannot then turn your back upon yourself, and indignantly point to the mass of unhappy individuals who are now writhing under the stripping process. You should have thought of all this before you consented to put up the ownership of the individual to public auction, before you consented to throw all these rights into the great melting pot.” - Sprading, "Liberty and the Great Libertarians”, p.407. Section on or by Auberon Herbert. - TERRITORIALISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
VOTING: One chink in the armor of any democracy is that when the Plebs discover that they can vote themselves Bread and Circuses, they usually do ... right up to the day there is neither bread nor circuses. At that point they often start lynching the senators, congressmen, bankers, tax-collectors, Jews, grocers, foreigners, any minority - take your choice. For they know that THEY didn't do it. The citizen is sovereign until it comes to accept blame for his sovereign acts - then he demands a scapegoat.” - Robert Heinlein, "Expanded Universe". - Like the absolutist king of old (a fraction of whose wrongful sovereignty he has "inherited" or usurped), he thinks "vox populi, vox dei" (The voice of the people is the voice of God.) and "The King can do no wrong" (The citizen, who represents the majority, can do no wrong.). - JZ, 1.12.87. – DEMOCRACY, WELFARE STATE, PEOPLE, HATREDS, PERSONAL THINKING, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, LOOKING FOR CULPRITS RATHER THAN CAUSES, MAJORITARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: One man one vote? Or: One man, one veto, as far as his own life is concerned! - Or, one man and a one-man revolution, whenever he wants it and of whatever kind he wants for himself! - Or: One man, and one man's personal law. Or: One man, and one man's exterritorial autonomy or individual sovereignty. - JZ, 1.2.02. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: One of the most important votes would be one of majorities as well as of minorities and individuals on kind and level of taxation and of government expenditures, as well as upon the question whether there ought to be any taxation at all upon dissenters. - JZ, 19.9.88, 3.4.89. - Still more important is the decisive vote of individuals on their own membership in one or the other voluntary and exterritorially autonomous community. An individual's vote in favor of compulsory membership in a territorial State would make him an accessory to the crimes of that territorial State. - JZ, 12.12.03. - Starting with the crime of imposing compulsory territorial membership upon dissenters. - JZ, 6.4.11.
VOTING: One vote every four or five years in the political market is a derisory substitute for the daily vote in the competitive market where we spend our own money - and accept responsibility for our choices.” - Ralph Harris, "The End of Government ...?" p.38. - TERRITORIALISM VS. FULL CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY OR INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY.
VOTING: One's life, liberty and property, free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and all other fundamental rights, may not be submitted to a vote, they depend on the outcome of no election. The very purpose of the Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of the majorities.” - U.S. Supreme Court, "Board vs. Barnett". - In Australia we do not even have a bill of rights. Do we have a Supreme Court that does come out, at least very occasionally, like its U.S. counterpart, in favor of individual rights? No case comes to my mind. - JZ 30.11.87. - INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS, SUPREME COURTS
VOTING: Only among volunteers does voting make some sense but there it would hardly be required, since decisions would there be mostly arrived at by unanimity, anyhow. Otherwise, they would not voluntarily stay together. Indeed, there would be some recognized leaders but they would be not anything more than recognized experts in a system based on the division of labor. - JZ, 4.6.04. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, CONSENT
VOTING: Only exterritorial voting among volunteers is sufficiently rightful and educational, labor- and cost-saving and can satisfy individuals and lead ultimately to an abundant, because free and competitive supply of all wanted goods and services. Territorialists, their politicians and voters, are still so primitive and backward in their economic thinking, that they have not even adopted free market pricing for a commodity that is so precious as is water in Australia. Their "solution" is: Artificial water use restrictions and prohibitions and rationing! Territorial voting imparts only delusions of power and grandeur but leads to widespread powerlessness and impoverishment. Only the power addicts benefit from it. - JZ, 2.3.96, 8.6.04. - VOTING IN PANARCHIES:
VOTING: Only the free choice of: 'No territorial government and no compulsory taxes!' would get my vote. - JZ, 14.9.91, 6.4.11. - GOVERNMENT & TAXES
VOTING: Only the free vote with your OWN dollars (not those which monetary despotism produces) and in a truly free market, for all kinds of services, does really count regarding your own affairs - and only it is right. – JZ
VOTING: Only the victims of governmental “education” and propaganda would vote, once again, in spite of all the disappointments they had so far with the results of collectivist and territorial voting by people with all too different opinions and ideals. – JZ, 24.11.07, 21.4.09, 6.4.11. - VOTING FOR THE NUT-CASES AMBITIOUS FOR POWER? REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Only under full experimental freedom for all parties, for all their party members and voters, would parties finally learn enough about their own wrongs, mistakes and errors. Also which, if any, of their platform points does really work. Under territorialism they can always blame others as scapegoats or impose the costs of their wrongs and mistakes upon them. Organized in their own exterritorially autonomous communities, they could not persist for long on mere hopes, expectations and promises. Their actions would have to be quite clearly better or cheaper than those of others. Only then would they remain properly “in business” and this undisturbed by any organized internal opposition, i.e. under optimal conditions for them. If politicians were moral men and informed enough, they would work for these opportunities for themselves and their followers. But don’t hold your breath until they do. – JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: Only under personal laws, voluntary taxation and voluntary State membership, leaving the individual free to secede, could you buy, with your money, those experts and services your prefer for yourself, independent of the votes of others. Territorial voting blocks this freedom option for you. – JZ - PANARCHISM
VOTING: Only voting with your dollars does really count for you. - JZ, 26.8.93. – And make sure they are really only YOUR dollars, i.e., sound and sufficiently supplied money, and not the mismanaged and depreciated monopoly paper money of the government that lords it over you. – JZ, 28.10.08. - WITH THE OWN DOLLARS
VOTING: Our voting system gives the cabin-boy a vote in the steering equal to that of the captain.” - Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, 12/76. - Under panarchism the cabin boy might rather opt to become captain of a smaller vessel and be it merely as the single person in charge of a small fishing boat. - JZ, 2.12.87, 23.8.12. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: Outlaw territorial voting. Legalize exterritorial voting. – JZ
VOTING: People, who do vote in the territorial political process, do deserve whatever politician and policies they get - as a punishment for this particular crime, one of trying to impose their will, politically and territorially, upon others. If only they were the only ones to suffer under this system then this would be poetic justice. - JZ, 21.9.91, 6.2.12.
VOTING: Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom.” – F. A. Hayek – Alas, even he did not distinguish between territorial elections and elections among the volunteers of panarchies that are exterritorially autonomous. – He continued to subscribe to the supposed ideal of a “limited” but still territorial government. – Everything good comes rarely together. – At least towards the end of his life he advocated monetary freedom, which is one important application of panarchism. - Voting in elections of territorial governments is not all that it is pretended to be. - JZ, 21.4.09. - DEMOCRACY, TYRANNY, DESPOTISM, FREEDOM, PANARCHISM
VOTING: Perhaps worst of all, the present territorial voting, representation, legislation and government systems do help to preserve nuclear targets, which ought to be dissolved by political, economic and social tolerance, comparable to the replacement of religious hierarchies and intolerance by religious tolerance. Wherever "free choice of religion" was realized, religious wars disappeared. When each can have the government or the non-governmental society of his dreams then, similarly, war between territorial nation States will disappear with the present territorial States. I firmly believe that my very survival, that of my children and grandchildren and of most other people on earth depends on the realization of this reform and have written two books and numerous essays on the subject. In this and similar respects I do want the right to vote and would make good use of it - but "the vote", as practised now, denies me these decisive votes. - JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting. – Revised: 23.8.12.
VOTING: Persuasion has its limits towards prejudiced masses and elections are all based on the assumption that by mere persuasion any degree of enlightenment could be easily spread. This is wrong. Most people will understand something - if they are able to do so at all - only when it is put into practice before their very eyes and when they can see the results. This would require freedom of action and freedom for experiments by all minority groups, like freedom for alternative religions and life styles undertaken at the risk of those advocating them. When the majority does not allow this, then it deprives all minorities of the only way, which really counts, the vote to choose one's own way of life. Stagnation and even relapses in the social, economic and political sphere are the inevitable result of treating innovators in this way. – Compare the recurrence of territorial absolutism in the 20th century, as one of the results of the effects of democratic majoritarian voting, bringing public affairs down to the lowest common denominator of ignorance and popular prejudices. - JZ, 5.6.04. 29.10.08. – PERSUASION OR BETTER EXAMPLES & FREEDOM TO IMITATE THEM? PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VOTING: Political (territorial and collectivist) voting is a dis-enlightenment process for both sides, making for irresponsible, prejudiced, ignorant and wrongful decisions among voters as well as among politicians and bureaucrats. – JZ – Voters and those, whom they elect, do form the worst kind of committees and establish the largest degrees of irresponsibility. – JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: Political and territorial voting is such a small fraction of one among many rights and so wrongly mixed up with tyranny (rule over others without their consent) that it should never be used as an authorization to restrict the other and larger fractions of that right (self-rule, freedom of choice, freedom of action) or any other basic rights. - JZ, 24.7.92. – Only voting within communities of volunteers could rightfully restrict genuine individual rights and liberties of somewhat dissenting members, while they prefer not to secede from them, in spite of the differences of opinion that they do have with them. However, when their genuine rights and liberties are restricted in such a community, too much, by their own standards, then they should be free to secede from it instantly, without a notice period. – JZ, 5.2.12, 23.8.12.
VOTING: Political campaigns and elections are methods of conquest and occupation, in which votes take the place of bullets and bayonets but are just as wrongly used. They could be right only for volunteer communities that are only exterritorially autonomous. - JZ, 4.10.98.
VOTING: Political power is not only more visible but far more concentrated than market power can ever be. The Kennedy family is a harrowing example. Joseph P. Kennedy amassed a fortune of hundreds of millions of dollars. Yet he never had power of a kind to tempt anonymous assassins. Two sons have been assassinated, one at the pinnacle of political power, the other at the beginning of a great political career." - Milton Friedman – How many leaders with their finger on nuclear weapons buttons have been assassinated so far? J. F. K. doubled the nuclear arsenal of the U.S.A. To that extent his execution would have been justified, as a tyrant, who threatened the lives of dozens, if not hundreds of millions of people. Admittedly, the Stalin and Hitler leader would have deserved this fate much more. Did and does mankind have any or even many worse enemies? - JZ, 5.6.04, 23.8.12. – What voting or decision-making rights and liberties should we have in this sphere, which are presently denied to us under the pretence that we do already have “the” free vote? Are we free to secede from the territorial political power systems and free to destroy their nuclear mass murder devices, really only “anti-people” “weapons” – However, we should also remember that the riches of the J. P. Kennedy helped to finance the election victory of J. F. Kennedy. There should be no “political market” for such wrongful powers. It would disappear if all of us gained the market freedom to opt out of it, thereby ceasing to be mere voting cattle and free to take our own lives into our own hands. - JZ, 29.10.08. - POWER, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, TYRANNICIDE, RICH PEOPLE, POLITICAL POWER COMPARED WITH MARKET POWER, Q., PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CORPORATIONS
VOTING: Political voting in territorial States is the denial of some of the most important votes, decisions and choices regarding our own lives, liberties, rights, property and income and as such is quite wrong and harmful. - JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: Political voting is nothing more than the assumption that might makes right. There is a presumption that any decision wanted by the majority of those expressing a preference must be desirable and the inference even goes so far as to presume that anyone who differs from a majority view is wrong or possibly immoral." – Robert LeFevre. - MIGHT DOES NOT MAKE RIGHT, MAJORITIES
VOTING: Political voting is the legal method we have adopted and extolled for obtaining monopolies of power.” – Robert LeFevre, "Libertarian Yearbook, 1972", p.116.
VOTING: Political voting within territorial States is like voting for an average shopping basket full of the same goods - for everybody, or like the same fashions, holidays, meals or sports for everybody. It cannot fully satisfy anybody and it clearly deepens disagreements and practises intolerance. It is not a path which offers to each the government or non-governmental society of his or hear dreams, via the most important vote, the one all of us are now deprived of, namely the individual vote to individually secede and to associate only voluntarily, in all spheres. - JZ, 27.2.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Politicians have never stopped reminding you that you have the "right to vote", the right to choose your rulers. During those years they claimed that you were sovereign, that your view was "represented". By this dodge, the question of rule itself was safely confused and submerged under the question of WHO shall rule. Your supposed "right to vote" offered a very limited option to choose your rulers, and even the option to try to become a ruler; but it never offered you the choice of NOT BEING ruled.” - Roger McBride, "A New Dawn", p.95. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Pretending that the present political vote is a rightful and sufficient action does, indeed, make it possible to continue some of the worst crimes, with the largest number of victims, in the own country or in other countries, which thus remain free from any serious liberation attempt or from the liberating effects of the realization of a free and thus just, peaceful and therefore also prosperous society, at least somewhere on earth or in space, or among some freedom-loving people, associated exterritorially, perhaps only via the Internet. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Privatize and individualize decision-making by voting. This requires that individuals are allowed to secede, making their own revolution, by establishing or associating with an exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers. Compulsory membership for any association must be discontinued. It benefits only official criminals. – JZ, 26.8.93, 9.1.99. - PANARCHISM:
VOTING: Progress and knowledge are not obtained by voting. Rights cannot be effectively protected by majority vote when ignorance of rights is the rule. Through the general franchise or territorial voting system - in every difficult question the opinion of the mass of ignorant and prejudiced people will tend to prevail. - JZ, 4.6.04.
VOTING: Putting aside compulsion, what might be the effect on the citizenry and the social order if an overwhelming majority should quit voting? Such abstinence would be tantamount to giving this notice to politicians: since we as individuals have decided to look after our public affairs, your services are no longer required. Having assumed social power, we would, as individuals, have to assume social responsibility. The job of looking after community affairs would devolve on all of us. We might hire an expert to tell us about the most improved fire-fighting apparatus, or a street cleaning manager, or an engineer to build us a bridge; but the final decision, particularly in the matter or raising funds to defray the costs, would rest with the town hall meeting. The hired specialists would have no authority other than that necessary for the performance of their contractual duties; coercive power, which is the essence of political authority, would be exercised, when necessary, by the committee of the whole.” - Frank Chodorov, Out of Step, p.44. - He still envisioned only one decentralized geographical community in each location, not a variety of exterritorial and autonomous ones, all only run by volunteers. - JZ, 1.12.87. - We will have to step beyond the town-hall concept and practice. It, too, is still saddled with all the wrongs and flaws of territorial collectivism and its coercion and monopolies, although on a smaller scale. Precisely because it is on this small scale, it is often even more meddlesome than are the State and Federal Governments. My business is still not the business of the local government, not even a direct democratic one. And the local direct democracy is not my business. My business lies within my own individual rights and liberties and requires me only to respect the individual rights and liberties of all people in the local and other communities. - JZ, 6.6.04. – DIRECT DEMOCRACY, DECENTRALIZATION, LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT
VOTING: Rather panarchy than democracy or any other ism imposed upon all - because only panarchy can provide to each the kind of government or non-governmental society of his or her dreams. - JZ, 2.3.96. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: Rather than asking for and being given a licence to vote upon the fate of others and imposing risks and costs upon them, we should altogether abandon this political vote and establish, instead of States with compulsory membership and territorial rule, protective communities that are only exterritorially autonomous and embrace only voluntary members. Then each could decide his own fate by choosing one or the other of such communities. Only he and his collaborators could then reap the direct benefits and would have to bear the risks and losses of such associations. Then it would not matter to outsiders which voting system would be internally applied in any such community and whether it would have any political voting or structure and system at all. That would all be up to its voluntary members. - JZ, 7.9.92, 4.1.93, 6.4.11, 6.2.12.
VOTING: Rather than continuing to meddle in all human affairs, by direct and indirect voting, we ought to unleash human creativity again by de-voting actions, which would end all former decision-making based on political voting for all people in a territory. Exterritorially autonomous voting of whatever kind, among volunteers and for their own tolerant experiments among themselves, at their expense and risk, is quite another matter and is morally and economically unobjectionable. - JZ, 22.9.91, 13.1.93. – EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY OF VOLUNTEERS VS. MEDDLING IN THE AFFAIRS OF OTHERS
VOTING: Rather than trying to outvote others, let people "withdraw", "split" or fragment or secede away, to do their own things for and to themselves, not molesting, injuring or wronging others in any way. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: representative democracy … It is crude because the ballot box does not record and is not geared for supplying individual requirements, Despite that decisive disqualification, government is still unnecessarily used for a vast range of institutions supplying personal services that individuals could provide themselves.” - Arthur Seldon, Charge, Temple Smith, London, 1977, p.12. - DEMOCRACY, REPRESENTATION, SELF-HELP, FREE MARKET, PERSONAL SERVICES, COMPETITIVELY SUPPLIED, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Robber gang A or B wins an election. What's the difference? You lose. - D.Z., 10.9.75.
VOTING: Self-caused ignorance becomes a crime - if it leads to a formal vote on the affairs of others. - JZ 10.3.75.
VOTING: Sign displayed before elections: "There are bad laws because good people didn't vote." - Translation: Until now only bad people voted.” - Jackpine Savage, THE CONNECTION 156, 27. Jan. 89, p.22. – Let all kinds of people secede and live under their own and self-chosen personal laws, in panarchies of volunteers. Then further and other “voting” would largely become superfluous. Those becoming discontent would secede and form or join other panarchies, thus realizing, for themselves, a revolution, a quite peaceful one, a one-man revolution. – JZ, 21.4.09. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FULL FREEDOM TO ASSOCIATE & TO DISASSOCIATE
VOTING: Sir, a secret ballot creates an irresponsible electorate. And an irresponsible electorate creates an irresponsible body of men who contend that they are the government. And that is the kind of government which you and your colleagues insist that the Constitution authorizes you to foist off on the American people.” - LeFevre, in "The Power of Congress", p.42. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Sir, a secret ballot makes a secret government; and a secret government is a government by conspiracy; in which the people at large can have no rights. And that is the only government we now have.” – Lysander Spooner, A Letter to Thomas Bayard, p.6, in Works I. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: So long as you approved of SOMEBODY, government itself is approved and strengthened. - "LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL", Fall 77. – That can be disastrous under territorialism with its coerced “unity”. It can be relatively harmless – except for the voluntary participants – in the voluntary communities or panarchies of panarchism. Each would simply constitute an experiment in the social, economic and political spheres – at the risk and cost of the participating experimenters only. – In the Fall 1966 issue of his RAMPART JOURNAL LeFevre had reproduced the 1860 article by P.-E. de Puydt: “Panarchy”, but, apparently, 11 years later he had still not fully understood it. – Such is the fate of even some of the best ideas in some of the best minds, under present conditions. – JZ, 21.4.09. – PANARCHISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, TALENT CENTRE.
VOTING: So much corruption is reported quite openly in and out of the media on so many politicians that whoever votes for any of them should also be charged - as an accessory. - JZ 15.10.85. - Via the handouts of Welfare States the majority of politicians tries to bribe the majority of voters into voting for them. Most people, sooner or later, do get one or the other Welfare State handout or gift, as a bribe - and do accept it. Its corruption becomes thus almost universal. How these handouts are financed, namely through prior robbery or through robbery via the note printing press, is not mentioned by the politicians and, usually, overlooked by most of the recipients. - JZ, 6.4.11.
VOTING: So they say that every individual has a right to vote, and a majority of votes must control the Government that controls all citizens. Thus, the largest possible number of persons will control the Government that controls them. - Then what becomes of the exercise of freedom by the individuals in the minority? Why, they must submit to control by the majority. Everyone should be happy to sacrifice himself (the Greeks did) to the pagan god Demos, The Greatest Number. The voice of the Greatest Number is the voice of God. If anyone is not willing to obey the Greatest Number, why this is outrageous, this is anti-social; make him submit and obey. - And how can you make him submit? Why, by force, of course; the police. Oh yeah, Mr. Hitler?” - Rose Wilder Lane, "The Discovery of Freedom", p.209/10. - Force him to submit to the vote of the majority. Force him to participate in the voting. (Totalitarians do that best, achieving voter turnouts of 99.9 %.) Make the vote public - (at least to the secret police), since we are all "brothers" or “comrades”, and those selected by others will get more than 99.9 % of the votes cast. The totalitarians are also best in achieving this kind of "consent" by "the people". But, all over, the differences are just matters of degree. Voting, even when somewhat free and secret (and correspondingly irresponsible), inevitably involves degrees of totalitarianism and coercive collective decision-making, in the best of cases. It would be right and relatively harmless only within volunteer communities. To make this voluntarism complete, exterritoriality and full autonomy are required, i.e. panarchism. - Otherwise, I would only consent to use voting as a tactic against totalitarians. But these voters would better be armed, trained and organized against the totalitarians, too, otherwise, they might win at the polls but lose in reality. - JZ, 30.11.87.
VOTING: Social harmony cannot result by counting noses, but by the sovereignty of the individual.” - Jo Labadie, on anarchism. - PANARCHISM, HARMONY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: Some day, sooner or later, they’ll learn not to blame people with funny names, funny clothes, funny customs, or a funny way of talking, but to look upon their own so-called “representatives” as the foreign despots they’ve all become.” - L. Neil Smith, Lever Action, A Mountain Media Book, 2001, firstname.lastname@example.org, p.15. - FOREIGNERS & REPRESENTATIVES, POLITICIANS
VOTING: Spooner eventually concluded that no one should have the right to vote or make laws. (*) - "No human being, nor any number of human beings, have any right to make laws, and to compel other human beings to obey them. To say that they have, is to say that they are masters and owners of those of whom they require such obedience." - Carl Watner, "The Literature of Voluntaryism", 10. – (*) for all, I would add, as a panarchist, i.e., for all in a territorial "community". - JZ, 2.12.87. – What volunteers do among themselves, for or to each other, is quite another matter. Let them have their own rules for their own affairs! – J.Z., 24.8.12.
VOTING: Start voting for yourself, and among your family, friends and voluntary associates only. Cease voting for or against anyone else. - JZ, 27.10.93. - Well, aggressive criminals with victims excepted. - JZ, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Staying in power is the overriding objective of the government of the day; and gaining it, almost at any price, is the aim of the opposition. Substantive issues – the merits of which have little or nothing to do with ideology – are frequently too complex and of insufficiently broad interest to excite debate. So the electoral auction becomes centred around fuzzy considerations of “image” and “credibility” (whatever that is). It is a process, which can only be described as trading in public ignorance. It is less a cynical corruption of democracy than an inevitable response to big government and swollen statism. If the business of the state is so complex and multi-faceted as to be beyond explanation, then it is better either to invent something simple, or concentrate on scoring points about the qualities of the respective teams on a “them and us” basis. Such, indeed, was the slogan of the unsuccessful government campaign in 1972 – “man for man the better team”. - Simon Upton, The Withering of the State, 1987, p.107. – The radical alternative: Let each group of volunteers do its own things for or to itself: PANARCHISM! – JZ, 12.9.08. - ELECTIONS, GOVERNMENTS, POWER, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS AS USUAL
VOTING: Terms like "the vote", "voting", elections, democratic choices, policies and liberties, are used as if they could have only one or one of a few and also quite agreed-upon meanings and practices, also as if only these would be possible, rightful and desirable and as if all the others did not exist or were not worth mentioning at all. But we will not understand our democratic "principles" and practices properly until we becomes aware of much more of the whole spectrum of voting options than is discussed or meant by those interested only in "politics as usual". Thus awareness of the whole possible, rightful and desirable spectrum of "voting" should be increased, at least by mentioning and listing it, as a precondition for finally achieving a real choice for individuals and volunteer groups, real self-government, in form of individual sovereignties and, of voluntary combinations of these, leading to full minority autonomy, freedom of action and experimental freedom in the political, economic and social sphere, even though this could only be achieved via exterritorial autonomy, based on individual secessionism and voluntary associations. The frauds, farces, self-deceptions, corruptions, despotisms, expensive games and massive wrongs and mass murders involved in coercive, monopolistic, centralistic, party political etc., because they are all wrongful, irrational and ultimately self-defeating TERRITORIAL games, should finally be brought to their well deserved ends and they could be, through arousing sufficient or full awareness of what voting could and should mean. In a sentence: It could provide to each individual (except criminals with victims, children and the incompetents or insane) the government of non-governmental society of his or her choice. - Who could rightly ask for more? Who should aim at less?– JZ, n.d. & 7.4.11, 24.8.12.
VOTING: Territorial “free” voting maximizes disagreements, mutual suppression and mutual exploitation. – JZ, 2.3.96, 18.8.08.
VOTING: Territorial and collectivist "choices" are a very wrongful and poor substitute for exterritorial and individual choices. I rather do without the former while working towards the latter. - JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: Territorial and collectivistic voting means to allow politicians and bureau-rats to continue to obstruct individual decision-making, free contracts and free experiments. Such obstructionism does not get my vote but only my strongest disapproval. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial monopolistic, collectivist and coercive governments, leaders, parties, their laws, budgets, taxes are the problem rather than the solution. - JZ, 11.9.99. - GOVERNMENT & PANARCHISM
VOTING: Territorial political "representation" does not really represent. So why pretend that it does, by voting for it? – JZ, n.d. - REPRESENTATION
VOTING: Territorial political choices are not free choices for all peaceful people and are thus to be mostly rejected - unless there is a threat that totalitarians or fanatics might take over through them. But territorialism by itself is already the most important totalitarian factor. What is called totalitarianism is merely a more comprehensive application of it. - JZ, 11.9.99, 8.6.04, 24.8.12. - CHOICE, TERRITORIALISM – Perhaps there should be a simple program that would allow one to put the first word of every paragraph into bold print. Perhaps this exists already. - JZ, 5.2.12.
VOTING: Territorial political voting systematically restricts rather than expands my liberties, rights and choices. Thus I do not participate in it. – JZ
VOTING: Territorial politics does not get my consent. I prefer the rightful options, choices and votes of full exterritorial autonomy for all, in which all parties could win self-government for themselves and all their voters. To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her dreams! Nothing less will do! - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Territorial politics offers only a "choice" between various degrees of compulsion and coercion. It suppresses, in very significant spheres the options and competition of free markets and free consumer choice as well as free enterprise opportunities for sovereign individuals and they are, therefore, to be rejected by all sufficiently moral and rational beings. - JZ, 11.9.99, 8.6.04. - POLITICS, CHOICE, COMPULSION, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Territorial powers are wrong. So I can't vote for them. – JZ, n.d. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Territorial voters and politicians can neither be sufficiently taught nor can they even be sufficiently reached with reasonable messages and ideas. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Territorial votes are even worse than prayers - because they are, as a rule, all too effectively supporting one or the other wrongful or nonsensical actions of "our" politicians. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Territorial voting and "representation" make full self-responsibility as impossible as does absolute monarchism or any other despotism. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting disfranchises exterritorial voting. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting does not confine politicians and bureaucrats to their own voluntary followers but allows them to lord it over dissenters. To that extent it is quite wrong. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting does not evaluate ideas, actions and persons properly but, rather, prevents their examination by the conditions of a really free market, with its experimentation, free choice for individuals and its voluntary associations. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting does not let us get away from them. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting does not permit me to do all my things, at my own risk and expense, to or for myself, in anything but a very limited private sphere. At the same time, it permits me, although only to a very limited extent, with the "power" of my single vote, to impose my choices upon the public affairs of others, at their risk and expense. But the votes of many ignorant, foolish and prejudiced people can add up into a despotic force. I neither want that limitation of power over my own affairs nor any authority over the affairs of others. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Territorial voting does not provide for everyone the government or society they deserve for themselves, but at most it leads to compromises which, by their very nature, cannot fully satisfy anyone. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting gives the illusion but not the reality of rightful government powers. It is just another form of civil war. - JZ, 23.2.00.
VOTING: Territorial voting is not a road to individual self-determination. Only the individual secessionist vote is. Only it respects individual sovereignty. That might be the reason why this most important voting right is outlawed, everywhere, even by the most "democratic" governments, supposedly all in favor of "self-government". – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting is not an escape hole to liberty but a trap for all escape and liberation attempts. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting is upheld only by the prejudices of the masses of stupid and ignorant voters. Rightfully, they should only be free to thus decide over their own affairs, not over the affairs of any peaceful dissenters, intending to do only their own things to and for themselves and this at their own expense and risk. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting leads to a few of the blind and prejudiced, mostly of the worst type, leading the masses of the blind and prejudiced. – JZ, 26.3.04, 26.10.07. - Thus they do also and quite wrongfully dominate those, who are already somewhat enlightened. - JZ, 7.4.11. - LEADERSHIP, IGNORANCE & PREJUDICES
VOTING: Territorial voting limits rather than liberates my voting. On the other hand, it grants me and others wrongful, even despotic powers, over others. I for one do not desire such powers over others for myself - and do not want to be thus in their power. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting makes for irresponsible voters, politicians and bureaucrats. Thus it does not get my consent and participation. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting offers no rightful and easy ways out of the messes that it causes. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorial voting releases wrongful and destructive energies and ambitions and brings the scum to the top and keeps it there, rather than releasing all creative energies and ambitions. Thus I "vote" only for exterritorial autonomy for all communities of volunteers, in whichever way I still can. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04, 7.4.11.
VOTING: Territorial voting restricts us to one experiment at a time in any territory, that voted in by the largest number of fools, prejudiced and vested interest people, rather than achieving experimental freedom and full exterritorial minority autonomy for all. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Territorially, uniformly and collectively "chosen" political "goodies" in all of our shopping carts, allocated to us like rations, by bureaucrats, cannot fully satisfy all individual consumers of these political "services". Even the recipients of these official hand-outs of other people's earnings are not fully satisfied. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04. – DEMOCRACY, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Terrorism, Stealing and Miscellaneous Bullying - we voters enjoy it! When we vote, we sanction government terrorism, tax theft and assorted underworld activities intended to force our will on all...” - Poster on p.341 of H. J. Ehrlich et al: "Re-inventing Anarchy".
VOTING: That belief in the omnipotent vote, as we urged, was striking its roots deeper every year, it was the certain, the inevitable result of our party fighting for the possession of power. So long as the vote carried with it the unlimited, undefined power of the majority, the giving away of property must always remain as the easiest means of purchasing the owners of the vote; and that belief in the final ownership of property being vested in the voter, we could only fight, not by resisting here or there, not by denouncing this or that bit of excessive and wasteful expenditure, but by challenging the rightfulness and good sense of the whole system, by pointing to a truer, nobler, social life, and by resolutely standing on the plain broad principle of individual control over ourselves and our own property.” - Auberon Herbert: "Mr. Spencer & the Great Machine", p.71.
VOTING: The "free choices" of democracies mean no choice for those outvoted and also too few and rare choice for the victorious voters. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: The "free vote" is a vote for subjects and masters: the serfs and slaves of territorial governments. - JZ, 7.6.04.
VOTING: The "free vote" offers only a wrong and false choice, which assures the continuance of old and new wrongs and false choices made by the "chosen people". - JZ, 25.5.91.
VOTING: The "free votes" of territorial votes are not free votes by free people. The representatives of such votes do not really represent and their voting is quite wrongful decision-making over the lives of dissenters. It's all a great fraud - until it becomes reduced to the voluntary associationism of exterritorially autonomous communities. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: The "free voting" grants you and others not even free emigration and immigration, voluntary taxation, monetary freedom, free trade etc., far less full exterritorial autonomy for your preferred voluntary community, or experimental freedom and personal laws. To call this THE right to vote is an abuse of the language. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: The "free" voter is thereby an un-free man. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: The "one-man-one-vote" system, apart from its other defects, is only a ONE-vote-among-MANY system, on almost everything, i.e. a collectivist system that is disfranchising most people from most of the most important decisions on their own affairs. – JZ, 14.8.77, 6.6.04.
VOTING: The “free” votes of any territorial voter and the decisions of any territorially elected politician or appointed bureaucrat are a very wrongful and poor substitutes, in my eyes, for my own choices and decisions, all made at the own expense and risk only. – JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: the absurdity of the suggestion that a vote at an election once every few years produces in any sense a representation of our millions of separate personalities embodied in a common Mind." - S. Hutchinson Harris: The Doctrine of Personal Right, 318, on Follin.
VOTING: The anarchist does not believe in the emancipation through the election slip. (*) Proudhon is, at least in theory, a non-voter. He was of the opinion that the social revolution would be endangered if it were initiated by a political revolution. Elections appeared nonsensical to him, as a conspiracy with the corruption of government. …” - Daniel Guerin, Anarchismus, Begriff und Praxis, edition Suhrkamp, 1967, p.29. - (*) In territorial elections. Voting among volunteers, on the affairs of their own community, exterritorially quite autonomous from the votes, laws, leaders and institutions of outsiders, is quite another matter. – JZ, 17.9.07. - ANARCHISM & ELECTIONS, FRANCHISE, SUFFRAGE, REPRESENTATION
VOTING: The annihilation of universal! suffrage - that is to say, that system by means of which the lowest natures prescribe themselves as a law for higher natures.” - Friedrich Nietzsche, "The Will to Power." - Only control of the self over the self amounts to justified power. At most it can be rightly extended by volunteers over the volunteers. - JZ, 6.6.04. - POWER
VOTING: The appeals of all parties during this period have been fundamentally identical. They all amount to this: 'What are your troubles? Vote for us and we will find somebody else to pay for putting them right.' “ - Ernst Benn, House of Commons, 22.4.31, in Deryck Abel, "Ernest Benn, Counsel for Liberty”, p.158. & p.71.
VOTING: the box ... a diabolical institution that should never have been given to the rabble ...” - Petr. Beckmann, "Small is Beautiful?", p.10. - (I could not even, consciously, vote for him, although he is, like myself, an anti-communist, because at the same time, he, in his personal package deal, favors e.g. "modern" and "scientific" nuclear reactors! - JZ 1.12.87. - How many of the "peaceful" nuclear reactors are abused for military purposes? How many have not yet been so abused, officially or unofficially? - Even if you lived in a "democratic" country like Israel, you could be sentenced to ca. 20 years for speaking out about this - and could be shut up afterwards. - The survivors of the Holocaust and their descendants have not yet realized that nuclear weapons are "scientific", small and portable "extermination camp" packages, i.e., mass murder devices, "anti-people-weapons" not genuine weapons and that they do also apply the wrongful principle of "collective responsibility". It would take all too few of them to wipe out the population of a small country like Israel or England. (Or all the major cities of a continent like Australia, where most of its people live! – JZ, 28.10.08.) The Mutual Assured Destruction game IS MAD! "Defence" by mass murder is hardly a defence. - But, nevertheless, there is not sufficient public discussion and far less a referendum on this question, not even in Israel. The statists are prepared to leave even the discussion of the solution of this problem to the very territorial government institutions - which caused it. That's no better than entrusting the abolition of crime to the Mafia. - JZ, 6.6.04. – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, NUCLEAR REACTORS
VOTING: The ballot is instituted in a way that it continuously confirms the existing anonymous tyranny. This tyranny is exercised by the mass of the mediocre or even inferior subjects, who always constitute the majority, over the capable citizens and independent characters, whom the majority suspects and who are always in the minority.” – K. H. Z. Solneman (Kurt H. Zube) , in "LERNZIEL ANARCHIE", No. 4, S. 30. - TERRITORIALISM, MAJORITY RULE VS. VOLUNTARISM, MINORITY AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM
VOTING: The choice between two or more intolerant and coercive - because territorial - systems. - JZ, 19.4.89.
VOTING: The collective vote enchains your individual vote. - JZ, 2.3.96. - TERRITORIALISM VS. INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL & MINORITY SECESSIONISM & AUTONOMY
VOTING: The danger is that the hopeless voter, forever victimized by his false assumption about politicians, may in the end gather such ferocious indignation that he will abolish them teetotally and at one insane swoop, and so cause government by the people, for the people and with the people to perish from this earth." - Peter Marshall: "Demanding the Impossible", p.137. - It was always much more a government of, by and for the politicians, under the pretence that they were acting for the people, just like the priests pretend to be speaking, acting and collecting for "God". - JZ, 7.6.04. – PRIESTS, CHURCHES, RELIGIONS, TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS
VOTING: the democratic assumption - that the eternal verities can be discovered by counting enough noses…” - Poul Anderson, Among Thieves, p.49 of ASTOUNDING SF, 6/57. - Correct for territorial democracies, incorrect for the experimental freedom of exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities. - JZ, 17.8.02. – In panarchies votes would only be taken as a practical measure to settle minor differences of opinion. Major differences would be settled by the dissenters seceding. – JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: the disturbing fact remains that we are not insignificant and powerless nonentities.” - Kevork Ajemian, The Fallacy of Modern Politics, Books International, PO Box 6096, McLean, Virginia 22106, 1986, Tel. (703) 821-8900, p.165. – Although even the territorial democracies do, largely, treat us as such. – JZ, 21.4.09. - Politicians, with all their supposed knowledge and powers are much more fictitious or imagined beings than individual voters or non-voters are, just like the individual believers or non-believers in Gods or Devils are much more real than these imagined beings. - Our thoughts, laws and institutions actions are all too much ruled by the ghosts of our religions and by our territorial political faith, dogmas, errors, prejudices, false assumptions and false conclusions. - JZ, 7.4.11. - & VOTERS, CITIZENS, INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, TERRITORIALISM, DIS., PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, POWER
VOTING: the dollar vote - represents the true key to economic democracy.” - Ridgway K. Foley Jr., THE FREEMAN, 1/74. – Yes, if only the “dollar” where not a monopolized, forced and depreciated or deflated currency of the government! – JZ, 28.10.08. - However, even the governmental dollars of monetary despotism gives us already a more real individual decision-making power in our own lives than does the territorial vote for politicians, their laws and institutions. That remaining freedom and self-responsibility would be multiplied under individual and group secessionism, in exterritorially autonomous societies of volunteers and under full monetary and financial freedom. - JZ, 7.4.11. – Moreover, in the common hierarchical model of “free enterprises” hierarchies are predominant, those of the employer-employee-relationship, rather than any of many diverse self-management and co-ownership systems, which would turn the capitalism of the few into the capitalism of the many, at the workplace, not only indirectly and largely uneconomically, through pension-fund socialism. – J.Z., 24.8.12.
VOTING: the dollar vote seems to reflect subjective values more accurately than a political vote: even those who opt for all manner of coercive national spending orgies seem likely to be wise shoppers at the supermarket." - Ridgway K. Foley, Jr., "The Texture of Society", in THE FREEMAN, Aug. 1977, p. 503. – Alas, the dollar is a despotically mismanaged monopoly money, assuring deflations, inflations and stagflations for us, with all too much involuntary unemployment and all too great sales difficulties! – JZ, 27.10.8, 24.8.12. - DOLLAR VOTE VS. TERRITORIAL VOTING
VOTING: THE ECONOMIST MAGAZINE, March 4-10 2006, page 54, Bagehot: Otherwise engaged says some people do not vote because "voting is not more like shopping". That is like competitive federalism because the relationship between people and the government should be more like the relationships between consumers and consumer businesses. But I would not use the word shopping because the word shopping suggest the social experience of a trip to the mall instead of the relationship between a consumer and a consumer business." - HOWLETT, KENNETH, in his website links. – Underlining by me. I do not think that the following comment by K. H. does clarify the issue sufficiently. Does he favour consumer cooperatives? – JZ, 24.8.12.
VOTING: The Electorate is the jury writ large.” - Walter Bagehot, 1826-1877, "Parliamentary Reform." - An excessively large jury with partly too many and partly too little powers. - JZ, 11.11.81. - If unanimity were required for voters as for jurors, they would not be so harmful. But for larger numbers this can only be achieved within volunteer communities. – JZ, 2. 12.87.
VOTING: The emptiness of election slogans represents the empty-headedness of most voters and politicians. - JZ, 5.8.92. – TERRITORIALISM, ELECTION SLOGANS
VOTING: The faces of aspiring politicians are defacing our homes, newspapers, TV news, gardens and trees once again. All of them are pretending that they are our helpers or even saviors and yet they only jockey for power for themselves, to spend our money and direct and control our lives otherwise than we would. – JZ, 24.3.07, 25.10.07. - ELECTION CAMPAIGNS, POLITICIANS, PROMISES, REPRESENTATIVES, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: The fact that quite primitive election slogans are successful factors in election campaigns proves that the choices made are not moral and intelligent ones, neither among the voters not among the elected. Only one thing is assured through political elections in territorial States, namely: excess powers will be concentrated in the hands of incompetent, ignorant, prejudiced, conceited, interventionist and impertinent people. -– Moreover, they are power-addicts if not even power-mad. – JZ, 23.6.87, 27.10.08, 24.8.12.
VOTING: the fact, so disconcerting an experience in this century, that the enfranchised masses have not, surprisingly enough, been those who have most staunchly defended the institutions of freedom.” - Walter Lippmann, The Public Philosophy, A Mentor Book, 1955, p.38. – That should not surprise anyone who is aware that we have still no ideal declaration of all individual rights and liberties and still all too little interest in providing it. – JZ, 11.9.08. – Moreover, we have left even education largely in the hands of territorial governments. – JZ, 21.4.09. - Enlightenment and enlightened actions and laws are not to be expected from any territorial governments. - JZ, 7.4.11. – Or from people who are descendants of slaves and serfs or all too faithful people. – JZ, 24.8.12. - DEMOCRACY, FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: The finance plan elaborated in PEACE PLANS 19 C to finance a libertarian party into victory, amounts to a vote - to abolish the political and territorial vote. Privatize all capital assets of politicians and bureaucrats. Turn people into independent shareholders in all such assets, voting, privately, only with their property securities. They could thus become so independent, that they would not longer tolerate their taxation and any public "budget" policy with their money or any compulsory territorial association with any politicians and bureaucrats. - JZ, 28.4.89, 7.6.04. – This issue is also on www.butterbach.net/lmp/cd2/ - JZ, 7.4.11.
VOTING: The franchise, as understood and practised today, keeps most voters disfranchised on most questions, even on the survival questions of our times.” - JZ 29.9.85.
VOTING: The free market is the only freedom-of-choice voting system ever invented. In a free market, a person does not have to go along with the desires of the majority. That is, he can 'vote' to buy any product HE desires, without regard to whether others want it. The free market not only gives the individual free choice, but also offers him great diversity in products and services. As soon as government intervenes and imposes regulations, price restrictions and other controls, business and people are forced to conform and the individual's choices are restricted.” – Robert Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p.82. - Alas, under territorialism the free market is quite incomplete. Under panarchism, each "consumer of government services and contributor to their burdens" would have free choice of government, too, i.e., individual consumer sovereignty in this sphere as well. A free market for all governmental services! Full consumer sovereignty! A comprehensive "vote"! - JZ 2.12.87 & 6.6.04. – It would also include full monetary and financial freedom and competitive protective agencies for genuine individual rights and liberties, to the extent that they are already claimed by societies of volunteers for themselves. - Its experimental freedom for all kinds of political, economic and social systems would supplement the all too limited "free enterprise", freedom of association and freedom of contract that we have now. A fully free market would also include contractual or constitutional restrictions of it - within societies of volunteers, who would be conscious and voluntary victims of such self-chosen restrictions. Most people, for instance, still to do not subscribe to "free love" or promiscuity but, rather, practise free choice of long-term individual partners for themselves. - JZ, 7.4.11. - PANARCHISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: The futile prayer and ritual of the believers in territorial politics and its priesthood and churches. - JZ, 17.5.95, 24.8.12.
VOTING: The general franchise ensures that public discussion of public affairs revolves mostly only around the lowest common denominator. - JZ, 30.7.78. – For proof consider the usual election slogans. – JZ, 24.8.12.
VOTING: The general franchise suffocates public conscience, means suicide for the independence of the people, the betrayal of the revolution by itself. Such a system of voting may, occasionally and in spite of all precautions taken against it, oppose the government in power by a negative vote. However, it is incapable of producing a single idea.” - Proudhon, 1858, quoted in LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, No. 4.
VOTING: The general suffrage of the people becomes all too often and extensively their self-inflicted (as far as the majority is concerned) disfranchisement and suffering. Not only that of outvoted and thus stood-over minorities. – JZ, 27.10.08. - If only volunteers were involved, in their exterritorially autonomous communities, then it would be quite a different matter. Dissenters would then remain free to act otherwise - within their own communities of this kind. - JZ, 23.5.91, 14.1.93.
VOTING: The good or bad politician is not the cause of good or bad government. He reflects the thinking of his constituents. When the thinking is good enough, then good men can and will be elected to office.” - Leonard E. Read, "Who's Listening?" - I would rather say that when the thinking is good enough, they will not need the public offices and policies or a single territorial government organization for all. Then they might even be able to do without panarchies. – JZ, 2.12.87. – However, since man is a social animal, with diverse values, interests and specializations, some forms of communities or societies of volunteers are likely to be continued, but they will have very little in common with the present territorial States. – JZ, 24.8.12.
VOTING: The government needs voters to make it appear legitimate. Without them, its totalitarian nature becomes too clear.” - Girard Baker, INTEGRITY, vol. 4. No.12. - TERRITORIALISM, TOTALITARIANISM, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: The impact of modern communications technology, then, has been to put more distance between the candidate and the voter. It's a strange paradox; the more voters the candidate can speak to, the farther away from the voters he becomes.” - "ANALOG", editorial, 4/76. - JZ: There is another technical difficulty: Even between unmarried or married couples, parents and children and within relatively small groups at the workface, communication is often insufficient to prevent misunderstandings and strife. No candidate would have sufficient time to listen to and talk to all of the thousands or ten thousands of his voters nor could he possibly comprehend and represent all their diverse points of views. - The choice of one cannot rightly and properly replace the individual and diverse choices of thousands. - Except in his own affairs. – JZ, 1.12.87, 28.10.08. - TERRITORIALISM & REPRESENTATION VS. GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION OR SELF-RESPONSIBILITY.
VOTING: The intellectual level of election slogans discredits all territorial politics. - JZ, 21.6.87, 7.6.04.
VOTING: The intellectual, philosophical, moral, judicious, genuine political science case against territorial voting is overwhelming but still largely unknown and unappreciated. Quite a few prejudices and fallacies are still so popular that it remains upheld by them or through them. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: The lesser evil is still an evil. Each to become free to vote for his own ideal, as he sees it, to be applied only to him and like-minded people, at his own risk and expense, as long as they can stand it. - JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: The majority of voters has an invisible sign around their necks: "We don't want freedom", they say this, in practice, with their votes. This automatically disfranchises all the minorities of those who do prefer at least large degrees of freedom to any degree of security offered by generalized official serfdom, or feudalism, misnamed “Welfare States”, all those who realize that sufficient and lasting security can only be obtained through individual liberty, individual choices and constant self-help efforts. - JZ, 5.6.04, 29.10.08. - PREJUDICES AGAINST FREEDOM, MAJORITY DESPOTISM, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: The masses of ignorant, dumb, prejudiced and disinterested people cannot recognize and choose knowledge, intelligence, wisdom and the best ideas and reformers through their votes. Nor can the minorities of the opposition people thus realize their sound or unsound ideas for themselves, in experimental freedom. They are all confined to the territorial political process and are, to that extent, disfranchised. – JZ, n.d. – TERRITORIALISM, MAJORITARIANISM, LACK OF EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM & VOLUNTARISM
VOTING: The more your choices are determined by the votes of others, the more un-free you will be. - JZ, n.d.
VOTING: The most essential voting right is the right to opt out. - JZ, 5/73. – Precisely this right is denied under “freedom to vote” in “democracies”, not only in dictatorships. – JZ, 27.10.08. - Probably that is why it is still outlawed and not included in the “free” vote. – JZ, 28.10.08. – Individual secessionism does not suit the ruling or aspiring power addicts. They are also so short-sighted that they do not realize that it could lead to sinecures for them – among their remaining voluntary victims. But then if they were farsighted and enlightened enough, they would not be interventionist territorial politicians. – JZ, 24.8.12. - OPTING OUT, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, POLITICIANS
VOTING: The most important vote would be that expressed by voluntary membership in all States, communities and societies. It would give all people freedom of choice, consumer sovereignty, experimental freedom and freedom of action in the last three spheres still coercively monopolized by territorial governments, those of political, social and economic systems. Nevertheless, this alternative is hardly ever discussed in the mass media and universities or by political scientists, who are mainly only apologists for territorial States. (*) – This in spite of the fact that territorialism has nowhere provided full consumer satisfaction. Quite the contrary. - JZ, 14.11.05, 29.10.07. – (*) They are not even mere apologists for it but outright advocates and defenders of the greatest criminal of all, the territorial State! – JZ, 6.1.12. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PERSONAL LAW, CHOICE
VOTING: The most valuable vote is that expressed by individual secession and exterritorial and autonomous re-organization on a voluntary basis. We are all disfranchised with regard to this opting-out-vote. I am not seriously interested in the remainder. It does not ensure but rather blocks progress and freedom. - JZ, 5.6.04, 7.4.11. – SECESSION, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM
VOTING: The notion that productive activities ought to be politically managed by non-productive and territorial authorities, does assume that "we" do need them. Let those who think that they do need them - pay for them and obey them. Let their service institutions charge their subscribers whatever the traffic will bear, once there will be free competition in the provision of services, and individual and group choice of services instead of any governmental or government protected territorial monopoly. - JZ 30.11.87, 7.4.11.
VOTING: The only ultimate way to reduce the use of the vote motive for political advantage is to reduce the scope of government.” - Milton Friedman, "From Galbraith to Economic Freedom", back cover. - I would like to see it reduced by individual secessionism, combined with exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers. - JZ, n.d. – LIMITED GOVERNMENT, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM
VOTING: the only words that the great mass qua mass can speak – with a Yes or a No.” - Walter Lippmann, The Public Philosophy, A Mentor Book, 1955, p.23. – As sovereign individuals and volunteers, just like as sovereign consumers, they would have millions of different votes when it comes to their individual choice of economic, political and social systems in all their varieties, with all their details in their personal laws – under panarchism as opposed to territorialism. – JZ, 11.9.08. As it is they are only allowed different choices like those between different tennis rackets, beer brands, bread, cakes, vegetables, fruits or tooth pastes. – Important as all such minor choices are to individuals, they and the territorial vote should not be mistaken a full or sufficient realization of individual liberties and rights. - JZ, 21.4.09, 7.4.11, 24.8.12. - DEMOCRACY, VOTING, MAJORITIES, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VOTING: The opposite to self-ownership and self-responsibility and to most individual rights and liberties. – JZ
VOTING: the ordinary political methods of voting and campaigning make it impossible for the real will and the real interests of the people to come forth.” - Henry Demarest Lloyd. - The political, economic and social system preferences of individuals and their groups are as diverse as their fashion, sports, amusement, travels, arts, crafts, hobbies and reading preferences. Thus "the will of the people", "the common interest" is almost always a false pretence for many to most people in a territory. - JZ, 7.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM VS. VOLUNTARISM & EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM
VOTING: The political and territorial decision-making process arrives at many more failures than successes, many more criminal than just actions. It assures wars rather than peace, revolutions, civil wars and terrorism rather than liberation and self-responsibility for all, to the extent that they desire them for themselves. It must be abolished for all and replaced by communities of volunteers. Regardless of which kind of anarchism, libertarianism or statism or other ism they do subscribe to, none of them should be granted any territorial monopoly and, thereby, domination over peaceful dissenters. - JZ, n.d. & 7.4.11, 24.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM
VOTING: The political process is one of restricted choices, full of coercion, fraud, corruption and monopolistic overcharging. So why should I vote for it and consider it to be a liberty and a right or an honor to do so? - JZ, 14.9.91, 4.8.92. - THE POLITICAL PROCESS, TERRITORIALISM, Q.
VOTING: The political process, including compulsory voting, excludes competition and creates power. I like, instead, free market competition (free enterprise and consumer sovereignty) for everything and dislike territorial political power over anything and anybody. – JZ, 4.6.04, 7.4.11. - COMPETITION VS. POWER
VOTING: The political territorial vote gives you a choice only if thousands to millions of others happen to share the same individual choice that you make. – Thus a genuinely free vote and choice must come to mean in practice, politically, the same kind of individual choice, towards political, economic and social systems and their services or disservices that the individual sovereign consumers enjoy on the ordinary market for consumer goods and services. – JZ, 10.7.07, 7.4.11. As sovereign consumers on the ordinary market we do almost daily reject many more goods and services than we do individually accept and pay for and remain free to ignore all the others. We do the same towards all entertainments, travel options, hobbies, crafts, reading, arts and the divers sports engagements etc. That same freedom of individual choice, that significant “vote” is very urgently needed in the spheres of political, economic and social systems and their institutions, constitutions, laws, jurisdictions etc. – JZ, 19.10.07, 24.8.12. - & CHOICE, FREE COMPETITION, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, FOR ALL KINDS OF WANTED SERVICES
VOTING: The political vote excludes most other and more important free individual choices or votes. - JZ, 12/72, 7.4.11. – Especially all quite rightful and self-responsible decision-making in communities of volunteers, who do not claim a territorial monopoly for themselves. – J.Z., 24.8.12.
VOTING: The political vote is as intolerant as a decision arrived at by civil war. Its only benefit is that it achieves domination for one or the other group without armed violence, that it allows the oppressed to protest, reduces their number somewhat, and grants them a faint hope, no more, that their time might come to oppress the others in their turn. – Unless their numbers are so small that they can never hope to win an election. Then their frustration will drive some of them to commit acts of terrorism. - JZ, 5.6.04, 24.8.12. - INTOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM, IMPOSED RATHER THAN REAL & FREELY CHOSEN UNITY, TERRORISM
VOTING: The political vote is the least say you have on your own life. - JZ, 28.9.97.
VOTING: The political voting and decision-making, as practised now, outlaws all too many of your rightful individual choices and votes. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: The politicians won't let you vote on taxes, war and peace, monetary and financial despotism. Not to speak of individual and group secessionism, international treaties, armament and disarmament. They allow us only the trivial choices and do restrict even these. Last year the local council even tried to prescribe to me how much firewood I could have and where and how I should stack it! - They even tried to put tax-money into a multi-million leisure centre, as if we could not sensibly choose or our leisure activities with our own money. - JZ, n.d. & 7.4.11, 24.8.12.
VOTING: The present "free voting" system allows me only to vote as one among millions, for or against the choices of these millions and never once and decisively on my own rights and interests, as far as they are involved in this process. - Under millions of laws and regulations and hundreds of bureaucratic offices with their special powers, my rights and liberties and those of everybody else are violated, all too often and all too extensively. Nevertheless, this all too limited right to vote, once every few years, is continually misrepresented as if it were THE right to vote, a full and unlimited right and free choice on the own affairs, interests and rights, as if it would make all of us politically independent and self-governing. There only few still greater lies. - JZ, 15.10.95, 8.6.04. - VOTING VS. INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: The present franchise amounts to asking slaves to vote for the continuation of slavery - not for its abolition. - JZ, 11/72.
VOTING: The present political vote is usually no more than registering, and anonymously at that, a protest against the greatest evil or that considered to be the greatest evil. It is a rather useless protest and the anonymity involved renders it still more inefficient. It is especially inefficient as a protest compared with the usual protest reaction of consumers on the market: they complain effectively, they sue for damages, or, most simply, they give their custom to another supplier and warn their friends. - JZ, 5.6.04. - MERE PROTESTS VS. FREE CHOICE, TOLERANCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM
VOTING: The results of territorial voting speak against it, everywhere. – JZ
VOTING: the right of suffrage is the indispensable and primary principle in the foundation of a constitutional government.” - John C. Calhoun, A Disquisition on Government, C. G. Post edition, p.11. – It is not the indispensable and primary principle e.g. for monarchists or anarchists. And libertarians would make their economic and social decisions rather individually in a free market than via the political process. Among the primary rights is individual associationism, which is, inherently, interconnected with individual secessionism. Whether and to what extent the seceded and newly associated would use any voting system among themselves should be entirely up to them. What is indispensable to somewhat democratic or republican governments of the territorial type is not indispensable to exterritorially autonomous competing governments, communities and societies. Territorial constitutions allow only one form of government in a territory (*) for their customers or clients, believers and dissidents, followers and opponents, while exterritorialist constitutions allow thousands of different communities to peacefully coexist in a former national territory or formerly territorially split up continent or even world-wide, all valid as self-governing institutions, all only for their volunteers. Their kinds of “chess players” or “cricket players” would have only internal competitions with each other or peaceful matches of clubs against clubs, but not street battles, international wars, revolutions, civil wars or terrorist activities of their club members against those of other “clubs”. – JZ, 1.10.07, 24.8.12. - (*) Apart from the three tiers of territorial governments: Federal, State and Local Governments. – JZ, 11.10.07. - DIS.
VOTING: The right to vote for politicians is incomplete when we are not free to sue them (and those, who voted for them) whenever they wrong or hurt us. To compel voting and outlaw the holding of politicians and voters personally responsible for their actions - is wrong and does not achieve a free, consistent, peaceful, just and prosperous system, free of the crises resulting from political interventionism. - JZ, 5.6.04, 29.10.08. - If we were free to secede whenever we do strongly dissent, then we could avoid being wronged and harmed by the political decisions of others. Thus we would not come into the position of later on trying to sue those, who wronged or harmed us by their territorial decision-making. - JZ, 7.4.11. - SUE POLITICIANS & VOTERS. AT LEAST LET US OPT OUT FROM UNDER THEM & BECOME SELF-RESPONSIBLE, WITH OTHER & LIKEMINDED VOLUNTEERS OR EVEN ON OUR OWN, IN A FREE MARKET: PANARCHISM
VOTING: The right to vote is incomplete if it does not include the right to recall - before a lengthy period is up (apart from all the other factors which make “the” vote incomplete, like lack of recognition for the right to opt out and choose alternatives for oneself.) - JZ, 5.6.04 - RECALL
VOTING: The right to vote is neither properly expressed nor exhausted by the right to elect new politicians or parties as masters over us, every few years. - JZ, 29.10.83, 30.11.87.
VOTING: The rights of man are too sacred to be voted away in any contests of our political parties.” - Auberon Herbert, essays, Mack edition, p.379. – HUMAN RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
VOTING: the suffrage of the minority is overborne by the suffrage of the majority, and is thus rendered powerless for purposes of legislation. The responsibility of officers can be made of no avail, because they are responsible only to the majority. The minority, therefore, are wholly without rights in the government, wholly at the mercy of the majority, unless, through the trial by jury, they have a veto upon such legislation as they think unjust.” – Lysander Spooner, "Trial by Jury", 11/215. - He thought not of the present crippled and managed juries but of the original and autonomous juries of free men. - JZ - Did he stand up as clearly for individual and group secessionism as he did for free juries? - Did he anywhere advocate exterritorial autonomy and personal law for volunteers? - JZ, 7.4.11. – Perhaps he did, but only in his unpublished manuscripts, which were burnt together with Tucker’s library. – JZ, 24.8.12.
VOTING: The suffrage of the people (universal suffrage, the equal right to vote) becomes all to often and extensively the road to their self-inflicted suffering. If only volunteers and their contributions were involved, then it would be quire a different matter. They would have to shed their own blood and liberties, sacrifice much of their own capital and incomes. Dissenters would then be free to act otherwise. Incentives to learn from one's own mistakes and those of others and to benefit from the own correct actions would become maximized. All such aspects are so self-evident to me and still so widely considered as being out of question, if considered at all, by most other people, especially the sheeple still participating in the territorial election circus performances, with their “valid” and under-informed votes. - J. Z. 29.4.91, 6.1.93, 24.8.12.
VOTING: The tendency to turn to the government for solutions" (*) promotes violence in at least three ways: 1. It exacerbates discontent. - 2. It directs discontent at persons, not circumstances. - 3. It concentrates great power in the hands of identifiable individuals". - Milton Friedman, Politics and Violence, "NEWSWEEK", June 24, 1968 – (*) And what else is an election? - JZ, 4.6.04. - In the following part of this NEWSWEEK article he went on to prove these points and their relation to violence. – JZ. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM
VOTING: The territorial and collectivist or “democratic” or majoritarian process of the masses of ignorant and prejudiced people voting territorially, has voted many of our individual rights and liberties away or outlawed them. It also endangers our survival, security, property and peace. It does not leave you a secessionist, experimental, voluntary and tolerant way out, doing your own things for yourself, as far as you can or want to, at your own expense and risk, in every sphere. – JZ, 4.3.03. – VS. PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAWS & PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE
VOTING: The territorial political process does not educate but mislead, again and again, until it is finally halted and replaced by exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: The territorial political process leads us to extinction rather than enlightenment, liberty, justice and progress. It must become completely replaced by individual choices and responsibilities or full experimental freedom or volunteer communities and personal laws for all. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: The territorial political system reduces my choices and diminishes my income in all too many ways to make me want to vote for it. - JZ, 14.9.91.
VOTING: The territorial political vote does not liberate or enchant but enchains. It does not enlighten but dumbs us down further. Thus only fools will play that game by its rules. – JZ, n.d. & 23.8.12.
VOTING: The territorial political vote does not represent enough democracy and freedom of choice and genuine self-government. That is why it is to be condemned. It does not provide full liberty but merely the illusion of it and thereby prevents its realization. Territorial democracies are still so inferior in realizing individual rights and liberties that it takes them years and millions of human lives to defeat totalitarian regimes. If they were consistent radical alternatives to dictatorships and totalitarian regimes then they could bring about the collapse of most such regimes fast, mostly without any military struggle or with only minimal loss of lives among volunteers for full liberty. - JZ, 7.6.04. – WAR, DEFENCE, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, WAR & PEACE AIMS, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE
VOTING: The territorial political vote has empowered politicians but not ourselves to decide over our own affairs. - JZ, 30.7.98.
VOTING: The territorial political vote has largely disfranchised us regarding our own affairs and preferences. - JZ, 30.7.98.
VOTING: The territorial political vote is not an individual's choice but an individual's submission to popular opinion and prejudices and to the lies of politicians. - JZ, 26.8.93.
VOTING: The territorial political vote is one of the most limited one, as far as the own affairs are concerned and, at the same time, one of the most authoritarian ones, the most intolerant and intolerable votes, as far as the affairs of other people are concerned. – JZ, 2.3.96, 18.8.08.
VOTING: The territorial political vote is the least valuable right to vote and it does also and quite wrongfully outlaw the most important votes of sovereign individuals. - JZ, 11.9.98.
VOTING: The territorialism, monopolism, collectivism, centralism and coercion of local governments are also oppressive, exploitative, corrupt and deceptive. It goes even further into regulating the details of our daily lives than most State and Federal Governments do. In one instance it even wanted to prescribe for me the size and location of my firewood stack - far downhill from my house. Its building restrictions are despotic and it has compulsory rules even for driveways. For married couples one household dictator is already too much. Their territorial rule goes into absurd details! At least governments have no sexual attractions although the personality and leadership cult seem to have some sexual connotations as well, and in war, for military forces, some homosexual ones. - JZ, 11.9.99, 8.6.04, 8.4.11. - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
VOTING: The territorially elected choices are rarely the choices free and informed individuals would have made for themselves. One voice among millions is close to a zero choice - unless it is can be freely acted upon, with the own means on a really free market. - JZ, n.d. & 8.4.11.
VOTING: The theory of government by elected representatives is that these fellows are hired by the voting citizenry to take care of all matters relating to their common interests.” - Frank Chodorov, "Fugitive Essays", p.198. - Their interests, not mine! - JZ, n.d. - A closer look at all democracies indicates that genuine common interests of all citizens, not only pretended ones, are very rare and still rarer is general agreement on possible or desired solutions. - JZ, 6.6.04.
VOTING: the third group of non-voters - the growing number of people who have consciously, deliberately decided that the voting process is the wrong approach to making social and economic decisions.” - Harry Brown, quoted in Sy Leon: "None of the Above", p.8.
VOTING: The trouble is not so much that voting is compulsory but that subjection to its results is - as well as the “financing” of its "achievements" or wrongful interventions. - JZ 16.9.77, 2.12.87, 8.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION
VOTING: The universal franchise, can be approximated in a non-despotic way only by universalizing laissez faire, laissez passer choices for individuals and volunteer groups. - JZ, 4.9.87. What is now called universal franchise is only somewhat comparable to the very limited personal "freedom" one grants to infants. On the other hands, if individual infants and children could already opt for alternative parents, who are willing to accept them, then this kind of vote for this limited relationship would, to that extent, be already panarchistic. Behind the Iron Curtain, the remaining voting rights have been compared to giving these people "free choice of colors" while eliminating from their choice all but a certain kind of red from the whole spectrum and with penalizing them if they do not make that restricted "choice" in public or in a way that can be otherwise controlled by the regime. - JZ, 4.9.87, 1.4.89. - FRANCHISE, STILL ALL TOO LIMITED & TOO EXTENSIVE
VOTING: the US authorities can let Indians vote without fear that they'll win.” - Filthy Piere, THE CONNECTION 115 p.52. - However, they are, probably, fearful of what might happen if they granted them individual and group secessionism and full exterritorial autonomy for the kind of societies they might then form, all over the USA and with voluntary members only, not only Red Indians. - JZ, 8.4.11.
VOTING: The valid votes of others threaten my rights and liberties and those of many others. My informal voting threatens nobody's rights and liberties - but is not yet a free and powerful enough vote to set me and others free from territorial impositions, i.e., on the road to exterritorial autonomy for all voluntary communities. – JZ
VOTING: The very limited voting and choice processes in public affairs, as instituted now, territorially, cause endless strife and turn x groups against each other. Compulsory participation in that political voting means a compulsory participation in that strife. Instead, I would rather, with Leonard E. Read, see "all creative energies released" so that anyone can do "anything that's peaceful", as he also used to say. - JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting. – JZ, n.d. & 8.4.11.
VOTING: The victims should rather organize, train and arm themselves against all official and unofficial criminals. The present territorial vote is not a sufficient self-defence weapon against them. - JZ, 28.4.95, 7.6.04. - MILITIA
VOTING: The voice of the people is seldom their own.” - Dagobert D. Runes, "A Book of Contemplations", p.100. – PEOPLE, GOVERNMENTS, POLITICIANS, RULERS, REPRESENTATIVES, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: The volunteers of panarchies, if they use political voting at all among their members, might use dozens to thousands of different voting systems. There are at least thousands of different utopias! – JZ, 27.10.08.
VOTING: the vote does not control men in office.” - Rose Wilder Lane, "The Discovery of Freedom", p.211. - On the contrary. It gives them all too much discretionary power. - JZ, 8.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: The vote is the illusion of us owning politicians. Their rule is the reality of them owning us. - JZ, 25.4.92. - They deal with "the people" as their property - and do they abuse us! - JZ, 7.6.04. - POLITICIANS, POWER, LAWS, TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION
VOTING: The vote is used to attain power and privilege, not deny it.” - Joan Marie Leonard, THE FREEMAN, 2/77. - POWER & PRIVILEGE, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: The vote spreads political power over a wide area, but carries no guaranty of its rightful use.” - "NZ RATIONALIST & HUMANIST", Oct. 74. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: The vote would really be a vote only if it included a veto right of every voter concerning all decisions affecting his own natural rights. As this veto right is not granted to anyone, one should not speak merely of "the vote" as if it embraced every possible and desirable voting right. - JZ, 5.6.04. – DIS., VETO RIGHT, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
VOTING: The vote, as a "right" to decide upon the affairs of others, is usually just used as a declaration of a war of plunder against them. - JZ, 3/73.
VOTING: The vote, as practised today, disfranchises people (regarding most options for self-determination). - JZ, 3.12.77. – “The vote", as practised now, disfranchises us in all too many different and important ways. - JZ, 5.8.91, 7.6.04.
VOTING: The vote, first of all, means warfare among a people: a dog-eat dog conflict between the producers and the non-producers, between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots', with the political and bureaucratic elite taking its cut off the top." - Lysander in "THE DAILY CALIFORNIAN", 11.1.67. - I claim the right to remain neutral in this struggle, so long as I have no alternative free choice. - I leave e.g. the "Klassenkampf" (class warfare) to the believers in it, while working towards the peaceful and businesslike replacement of the employer-employee-relationship through all kinds of partnerships, self-management and cooperative production schemes agreed upon by their participants. - JZ, 5.6.04. – I work towards the replacement of compulsory members and subjects by volunteers, in all spheres. All should be free, for instance, to choose for themselves the personal law system they wish to live under. - JZ, 8.4.11, 24.8.12.
VOTING: The vote: A means for mutual enslavement. - JZ 3.12.76. - True for the territorial and collectivist vote. By a free individual vote individuals could liberate themselves as much as they want to in their own kind of societies of volunteers, quite regardless of how others voted on their affairs, in their societies. - JZ, 8.4.11.
VOTING: The voters are conceding defeat." - Lindsay in BULLETIN, 26.4.88, p.27. - That is all any territorial election victory amounts to, not only every defeat of the outvoted minorities. - JZ, 8.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, RULERS, POLITICIANS, CONSENT, MANDATE, REPRESENTATION
VOTING: The voters, as well as those voted-in, are looters, at least by their intentions. And they loot not only money but rights and liberties. – JZ, n.d. - TERRITORIALISM & ITS COLLECTIVISM & ENFORCED COMMUNISM
VOTING: The votes and decision-making powers involved in full monetary and financial freedom (voluntary taxation, for instance!), the right of individuals and minorities to secede and to live under their own personal laws, together with like-minded volunteers, are among the most important votes and decisions that you could ever have. Your right to vote for a candidate or party in the usual political, collectivist and territorial elections is as nothing compared with these rights and liberties. – JZ, 22.2.03, 21.10.07, 8.4.11. – The same applies to your vote on international treaties, the decision on war and peace, armament and disarmament and on quite rightful war- and peace aims (which seem to be quite unknown to territorial politicians, and yet the great territorial misleaders are prepared to sacrifice millions, even dozens of millions of human lives for their aims and notions and the vast majority of their territorial statist victims still puts up with this, granting their sanction of the victim by voting for these Molochs). – Were the human sacrifices of the Inca Priests and the Moloch Cult really any worse? – JZ, 21.4.09, 8.4.11. - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM, LEADERSHIP, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, WAR, PEACE, NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT
VOTING: The voting choice of others should not determine my fate and actions nor should my vote in any way determine the choices of others. – JZ, 2.3.96, 18.8.08.
VOTING: The voting is now a battleground to see which special interest will get the most.” – Joan Marie Leonard, THE FREEMAN, 2/75, p. 75.
VOTING: The voting process in politics is simply disguised coercion. Stripped of all pretense, it is the method of employing violence and coercion on others in such a devious way that men bow supinely before its dictates. Had the same choices been offered at the point of a gun, a fight to the death might have ensued." - Robert LeFevre, in Libertarian Yearbook, 1972, p.117. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: the voting process, per se, is a means used by the majority to coerce the minority." - George Kysor. - It can also be used by a minority to coerce a majority. - JZ, 6.7.89. - For instance: The relatively few party leaders of the relatively few party members, by means of the voting process, come to rule the majority of the people. - JZ, 7.6.04. - DIS., MINORITIES, MAJORITY
VOTING: The world would be much better off, and so would almost all of us, if political voting were totally replaced by free and individual voting only in a quite free market for all kinds of goods, services and institutions, systems, methods, experiments, ideologies, religious, ethnic and other groups of like-minded people. – JZ
VOTING: Then why is it taken for granted that every person is endowed on his twenty-first birthday with a God-given right and ability to elect the men who decide questions of political philosophy and international diplomacy? - This fantastic belief is no part of the American Revolution. Thomas Paine, Madison, Monroe, Jefferson, Washington, Franklin, did not entertain it for a moment. When this belief first affected American Government, it broke John Quincy Adams' heart; to him it meant the end of freedom on earth; it made him doubt the goodness of his God.” - Rose Wilder LANE, "The Discovery of Freedom", p.208. - TERRITORIALISM, COLLECTIVISM, FRANCHISE, MATURITY, ADULTHOOD, CENTRALIZATION, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY
VOTING: There are alternatives to the one-man-one-vote system which are preferable and which would make compulsory voting less desirable in the eyes of most. Mack Reynolds in "The Five Way Secret Agent", ANALOG, May 69, mentioned the following two. Another one can be found below under Literacy Tests: "You've got to realize that when and if the Party is eliminated we in the Soviet Complex will have to establish new Institutions. Obviously, at this late date we can't go back to Czarism, or even classical capitalism. Personally, I'm not particularly happy about your American one-earned-dollar-one-vote arrangement", Rex said, "would you have an unemployed ditch digger have as much say in the running of the country as, say, a nuclear scientist?" (1) - Simonov shook his head. "No, I recognize the fact that all men are not created equal in the sense that some can be and are, of more value to the community than others.” – “Why not do it this way? (2) Every voter begins with one vote. For every unit of I.Q. that he has above one hundred he is granted another vote. A man with an I.Q. of 101 would get two votes. A genius with an I.Q. of 150 would have 51 votes." "An interesting conception," the chairman nodded." - - I would rather give a ditch digger a vote, who has an I.Q. below 100 than any nuclear scientist! I feel much safer with the former! - M. R. does not appear to have noticed the lack of logic in his argument. The unemployed ditch digger, not earning anything, would not have any vote, under his assumed American system. - With a vote per dollar “earned”, the nuclear scientist would, usually, get many more votes than an employed ditch digger, although, at least potentially, he does much more harm to the community and to mankind. – As for voting according to intelligence: Think back how on how many “intellectuals” fell for the economic and social nonsense spouted by totalitarians – and still uphold it. “Thou shalt recognize them by their fruits!” - Anyhow, any election system is right which is voluntarily practiced, even compulsory voting - if practised only within a volunteer community. But those advocating compulsory voting are usually the worst enemies of communities of volunteers only. – Quite possibly, thousands of voting systems have already been produced and hundreds tried out. - JZ, 4.6.04, 28.10.08. – ALTERNATIVE VOTING SYSTEMS.
VOTING: There are no territorial political solutions to the economic, political and social problems caused by territorial political interventionism, except by transforming all such coercive, monopolistic, collectivistic and centralistic political activities into voluntary ones, undertaken only at the expense and risk of the voluntary experimenters. That will teach 'em, at least some time later, if not soon. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: There exists no valid justification or reason for territorial, collectivistic and political decision-making. In balance it is criminal, unjust, destructive, oppressive and obstructive - and very costly, too. It cannot even cope effectively, cheaply and fast with dictatorships and tyrannies without major bloodletting and destruction. - JZ
VOTING: There is a crucial difference between an unrestricted "right to vote" and the right, say, peaceably to conduct one's own life without outside interference. For one man's vote may affect only his own future but that of others. Through it he exercises power over the whole community, a power that ought not to be granted to those who have shown incapacity to provide for even their own elementary needs.” - Henry Hazlitt, "The Conquest of Poverty", p.203.
VOTING: There is another technical difficulty: Even between married couples, parents and children and within relatively small groups at the workplace, communication is often insufficient to prevent misunderstandings and strife. No candidate would have sufficient time to listen to and talk to all of thousands or tens of thousands of voters nor could he possibly comprehend and represent all their diverse points of view. - The choice of one representative cannot rightly and properly replace the individual and diverse choices of thousands. - JZ, 1. 12.87, 24.8.12. - Except in his own affairs. – JZ, 28.10.08, 8.4.11. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, FULL CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY & FREE ENTERPRISE, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW
VOTING: There is no better vote than the "no vote", "informal vote" or "none of the above" vote - excepting only the votes for and within volunteer communities that are exterritorially autonomous. – JZ, n.d. & 8.4.11.
VOTING: There is no intrinsic virtue in votes.” - Herbert Spender, "The Study of Sociology", p.277. - But there is intrinsic virtue in unrestricted choice for all creative individuals and their productive activities, in every sphere. Territorial political voting means very little individual choice combined with all too much wrongful power over the individual choices of others. - JZ, 6.6.04. – FREE CHOICES FOR INDIVIDUALS
VOTING: There is not a single good reason why anybody should vote in any of today’s so-called “free elections” for territorial and, correspondingly, despotic governments. – JZ, 14.9.91. - PANARCHISM & “FREE VOTING”
VOTING: There is only one truly moral position for an honest person to take. He must refrain from coercing his fellows. This means that he should refuse to participate in the process by means of which some men obtain power over others.” - Robert LeFevre, in Libertarian Yearbook, 1972, p.118. - Unless that process involves merely free choice for individuals and like-minded groups of people. - JZ, 8.4.11.
VOTING: There're some pretty silly methods for selecting those who govern.” - Mack Reynolds, “Fiesta Brava", in "ANALOG 7." - The wrongful assumption is that a) people must be governed by others than themselves and b) they must be governed territorially. - Both assumptions are wrong. - JZ, 8.4.11, 24.8.12. - TERRITORIAL ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY
VOTING: There's only two kinds of people, those who work for a living and those who vote for a living.” - THE FREEMAN, FEE, Nov. 73, p.18. – There are …? – J.Z.
VOTING: They had a proverb in America which went, "If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve. - Poul Anderson, Tau Zero, Coronet edition, 1978, 1980, p.189. - Not in a territorial system, anyhow. Among like-minded friends, all volunteers, it would be quite another matter. - JZ, 25.8.11. - RUNNING FOR OFFICE, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS AS USUAL
VOTING: They need the myth of a 'popular mandate' for propaganda purposes. The theory is that a vote for a particular politician is also a vote for each and every policy that he supports and a vote against each and every policy that he opposes. This is patent twaddle; for rarely does a voter see eye to eye with a particular politician on each and every one of myriad of issues.” - "The Charles Curley Letter", April 77. - TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION, POLITICIANS, DEPUTIES, RULERS, CONSENT, MANDATE
VOTING: They provide only the false pretence of individual choice for the voter. Only in a quite free market, with free enterprise and consumer sovereignty for all kinds of services, systems and ideologies, is there really a free choice for the individual. – JZ, 23.3.07, 25.10.07. – Among the voluntary societies and communities of panarchism there would also be a real choice for individuals. – JZ, 21.4.09. – PANARCHISM, CHOICE, ELECTIONS, PARTIES, POLITICIANS, CANDIDATES, INDIVIDUALISM, COMPETITION, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, FREE ENTERPRISE, TOLERANCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, PERSONAL LAWS
VOTING: Think, speak up and act freely - rather than merely vote as one among millions. And do always cast your valid votes with your dollars in the market. - JZ, 14.2.93. - Live under a self-chosen Personal Law system rather than under laws territorially imposed by other voters. - JZ, 8.4.11. - THINKING, SPEAKING UP & FREEDOM OF ACTION, FREEDOM OF CHOICE
VOTING: This “free” vote is just about the most insignificant vote that we could have in our lives. It is only of some very minor significance to our territorial masters, who allow us, apart from consumerism for ordinary goods and services and choice of jobs and entertainment, tourism etc., all too little decision-making about our lives and fates. All major decisions are reserved to politicians and bureaucrats, already distrusted by most people but still in power over us, because most people have not yet envisioned an alternative to territorial rule. – Governmentally controlled education certainly does not teach them about this alternative, nor do the supposedly free mass media or even most of the alternative media. On the Internet such alternatives are also swamped by masses of territorialist views. – JZ, 5.12.07, 8.4.11. - COLLECTIVELY, TERRITORIALLY & POLITICALLY, PANARCHISM, PERSONAL LAW, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: This all too limited and wrongful vote cannot save me from any of my official territorial “saviors”. It only leads to a territorially dominated, exploitative, monopolistic, torturous and collectivist hell, imposed upon me and all other dissenters. Usually only the most popular errors, myths, fallacies, prejudices, wrong assumptions and conclusions and the most wide-spread ignorance, combined with lack of interest in most important matters, do decide these "free" elections and the votes of those thus elected. – JZ, 2.3.96, 18.8.08, 8.4.11.
VOTING: This in-and-out game isn't even fun - except for its rapists. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: This is what liberal politics is all about. Americans are urged to vote away their decision-making power to representatives who will make decisions for them.” - SOCIAL ANARCHISM, Winter 1980. - TERRITORIALISM, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT VS. FICTITIOUS REPRESENTATION
VOTING: This kind of voting neither enlightens the candidates nor the voters sufficiently. – JZ, n.d. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: This pretence of individual choice is not good enough for me. – JZ, 2.3.98.
VOTING: Thoreau ... in "Civil Disobedience" ... attacked voting, ... as a moral inanity.” - Charles Lane, in C. Watner, A Voluntary Political Government, Letters from C. L., p.29. - ... "It behooves us therefore as Christians, as philanthropists, aye, even as selfish beings of any sound discrimination, to turn our backs upon this forceful and representative system." (Letter VI). “Whatever be the inherent condition of man's nature (whether basically good or evil), voluntary relations among them are the most moral and the most productive of peace and prosperity. Either men are sufficiently aware of their own self-interest so as to take care of themselves and their property, or they are so far from this (being able to care for themselves and their property) that they have no business participating in the political process called government. In either case, Lane urges that there is no need for compulsory government.” (Letter IV). - Ibid. - VOLUNTARISM
VOTING: Three or four package deals, while item by item trades are outlawed, are just not sufficient choice for me. I will therefore almost always tend to boycott territorial elections. - JZ, 4.6.04, 8.4.11, 24.8.12. – BOYCOTT AGAINST THE TERRITORIAL VOTING SYSTEM, NONE OF THE ABOVE, INFORMAL VOTING
VOTING: through the economic vote, we are able to express our desires directly, without using an intermediary. With the political vote, however, another person claims to act in our behalf, and we are forced to pay for his services through money stolen by taxation.” - Sy Leon, "None of the above", p.70/71." - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Through the political vote I do not get the choice I want for myself, although I am forced to pay the piper who plays the unwanted tune and does even do this one only badly. - JZ, 14.9.91, 7.6.04.
VOTING: To be sure, the United States is a democracy in the sense that votes are taken on just about anything (*), but it is a democracy unconstrained by set boundaries of (**) legitimate collective action. Legitimacy is now determined, not by principle but by the possession of the necessary votes. In such an environment, no one should be surprised to find politics becoming a circus of revolving majorities and special interest groups.” - Richard B. McKenzie, Bound to Be Free, Hoover Institute Press, 1982, p.8. - (*) On the income tax, on central banking and legal tender, on war and peace, armament and disarmament and international treaties? On individual- and group- secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteers? You make your own list on subjects still exempted from majority voting. – (**) for? –JZ, 11.10.07, 8.4.11. - DEMOCRACY, LEGISLATION, LEGITIMACY VS. PRINCIPLES, DIS.
VOTING: To each man the decisive vote on all of his own affairs. - JZ, 19.3.88.
VOTING: To expect any genuine solution to our remaining problems from territorial governments is as absurd as to expect them from any heavenly “divinities”. – JZ, 24.11.07. - & DEMOCRACY, TERRITORIALISM, RULERS, GOVERNMENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS, POLITICIANS
VOTING: To force anyone to make a choice between 2 or more different ones, all of which he considers evil, although to different degrees, forces that person to opt for something that he considers evil. Consequently, such a coercion is evil at least towards such persons. - JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting. - All territorial politicians and parties are wrong, irrational or evil, as such. - JZ, 8.4.11.
VOTING: to vote for politicians is to renounce one's own personality.” - Albert Meltzer, A New World..., p.60.
VOTING: to vote nowadays is to sanction the State.” - George Kysor, LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION 65.
VOTING: turning the officials into sacred persons, and turning the public into dead material, without will, conscience and intelligence of its own; of giving every individual, say, the one-ten-millionth voice in the affairs of all his neighbors (*), and no practical authority over his own affairs; of thus allowing men who don't own themselves to own the selves of others; of destroying differences and consecrating uniformity; of massing the good, the bad, and the indifferent, all together under one system, and therefore making regulations that apply to the criminal and half-criminal, apply also to the good citizen, and thus reducing the best and ablest citizens to systems fitted to the least intelligent and the least civilized citizens, as a cavalry charge is regulated by the pace of the slowest horse; of multiplying regulations till they become as the grains of the sand of the sea, and require libraries to contain them, and a professional class to expound them, ...” - Auberon Herbert, Mack ed., p.382. – (*) and countrymen? – J.Z. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Under territorial voting the worst get to the top and can maintain themselves there for all too long, at the expense and risk of their victims. Almost all of history amounts to a proof for this thesis. Only exterritorial voting and daily, free and comprehensive competition, established and maintained by the most apolitical and anti-political vote, that of individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities, can reduce the dangers of politics, as usual, to the minimum, almost to zero, while releasing all creative energies and all self-defence and self-protection powers. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Under the present territorialist conditions and practices you can’t vote or bribe yourself into full possession and practice of all your individual rights and liberties. They have even remained largely unknown and unappreciated. Your vote is almost always totally wasted and, unless your vote is informal or you become finally free to secede and join alternative institutions of your choice, it will be merely a part and parcel of a territorial system that will cost you much of your earnings, your property, your job, your health and even your life. The few rights and liberties that are still officially recognized, at least somewhat, are always under threat of becoming more restricted or even outlawed. – JZ, 4.3.03, 21.10.07, 8.4.11, 24.8.12. - TERRITORIALIST & COLLECTIVIST “FREE” VOTING & CONSENT
VOTING: Universal suffrage places a heavy handicap on sanity in government.” - Charles R. LaDow, THE FREEMAN, 3/74. - Are there many instances for sanity in territorial governments, with or without "equal voting" rights of its subjects? - JZ, 8.4.11. – Q.
VOTING: Until "the vote" lets me opt out, I won't vote anybody in. – JZ – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM
VOTING: Until I get a real choice and real decision-making powers, I will not cast a valid vote. - JZ 16.12.78. - The so-called "valid" vote is mostly an invalid vote, an "invalid", very extensively incapacitated, so disabled that its owner cannot even practise quite basic rights, liberties and self-help opportunities without coming into conflict with "the law". - JZ, 6.6.04.
VOTING: Voltairine de Cleyre, perhaps the most prominent individualist-feminist, said: "A body of voters cannot give into your charge any rights but their own. By no possible jugglery of logic can they delegate the exercise of any function, which they themselves do not control. If any individual on earth has a right to delegate his powers to whomever he chooses, then every other individual has an equal right; and if each has an equal right, then none can choose an agent for another, without that other's consent. Therefore, if the power of government resides in the whole people and out of that whole all but one elected you as their agent, you would still have no authority whatever to act for that one." - Wendy McElroy, in? - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, RIGHTS, MAJORITARIANISM
VOTING: Vote A: you lose, vote B: you lose. Don't vote at all: you lose. Opt out! - JZ, 10/74. – INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM
VOTING: Vote all the territorial offices out of office. That would be the only vote that would really count. - JZ, 7.6.04. – Apart from your secessionist vote and the vote with which you join the panarchy of your own individual choice. – PANARCHISM MEANS VOTING NOT WITH ONE’S FEET OR WITH ONE VOTE AMONG MILLIONS, BUT WITH ONE’S MIND, ON ALL ONE’S OWN AFFAIRS! - JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: Vote for people who are still dumb enough to believe in territorial government actions? – JZ, n.d – Q.
VOTING: Vote only for him, who promises to let you run your own life.” - Girard Baker, INTEGRITY, vol. 4, No. 2.
VOTING: Vote with your feet - or, better still, by individual secession. - JZ, 3/73. - Indeed, you are not yet free to secede as an individual or with your minority group. But at least you can and should consider this option from every angle and envision its implications. - JZ, 6.6.04.
VOTING: Vote your life away! Vote for conscription, taxation, compulsory schooling, censorship, in short for as much government power as possible! – JZ, 1972. – But confine your utopia to your own kind of volunteers. Bad examples are needed, too, as deterrents, not only good ones, to be followed. – JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: Vote your life, property, freedom and security away! Vote! No matter who you vote for, you will lose or threaten what is yours by rights. - JZ, 9.11.97, 7.6.04. – But do not vote on the affairs of those, who do not threaten or rob you or try to run your life. Let them do their things for or to themselves. To each his own! – JZ, 21.4.09. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT FOR ALL
VOTING: Vote yourself out of their majority-voted decisions. - JZ 21.8.75, 10.9.04. - VOTING & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM:
VOTING: Vote! It's your council!" - Don't vote! It isn't your council! And your vote will not make it yours, either. It's absurd to apply the possessive pronoun to any territorial government, i.e., any that has not only voluntary members but masses of conscripted subjects or serfs. - JZ 1974, 6.6.04, 24.8.12. – DIS., TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Voters do not control governments. In most respects governments do control their voters. The political vote represents only a tiny and almost insignificant fraction of all the rightful and necessary individual choices, of which we are now politically and territorially deprived. – “Free” territorial voting deprives people of their votes in most respects under the pretence of fully enfranchising them. - JZ, 29.7.92, 9.1.93, 8.3.11, 24.8.12. – GOVERNMENTS, DEMOCRACIES, POLITICIANS
VOTING: Voters who live off taxpayers are the Democrats’ ace in the hole. The Democrats created big programs and never let the recipients forget it. This gives them an initial advantage of tens of millions of votes in any presidential election.” – Joseph Sobran. - As if Republicans did not have their own voting cattle, tax slaves and otherwise victimized subjects and “beneficiaries” - Not particular parties are to be blamed but the territorial party system and its majoritarian "representation". - JZ, 23. 11. 06, 21.4.09. - VOTERS AS PARASITES, DEMOCRATS & REPUBLICANS
VOTING: Votes are for politicians, not people.” - Jack Gratus, The Redneck Rebel, Corgi Books, London, 1980, p.190. - And, at least today still only for territorial politicians, i.e. the worst of the lot. - JZ, 8.4.11.
VOTING: Votes should bind only those who agree – to the extent that they do and for as long as they do. – JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: Votes, exclusive ones, for one's own preferences. These individual votes to be freely realized by each individual, together with like-minded people: Each to be free to choose his own prime minister, tax system, constitution, laws, juridical-, police-, defence- and economic system and his ethnic or other associates. - JZ, 19.9.88. – PANARCHISM, FREE CHOICE OF GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES, NONE OF THEM WITH A TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY
VOTING: Voting and decision on war and peace: The ultimate wrongful and absurd result of "democratic" voting: one man decides on war or peace for all! – JZ - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, CENTRALIZATION OF POWER, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES
VOTING: Voting and Decision on War and Peace: Those now deciding to go to war should only be free to go themselves to war - in a quite rightful case - but no one should have the right to command others to go to war or to tax, impose public debts upon people or inflate a forced currency for that purpose or for any other. - JZ, 13.3. & 22.3.03. 8.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, WAR & PEACE, WARFARE STATE, WAR & PEACE AIMS
VOTING: Voting and free choice are at opposite ends, no matter how often politicians try to make us believe that what they offer us a real choice. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting and Panarchism: There would be no incentive to cheat in voting or to lie in election campaigns if individual voters were quite free to vote which party or movement should rule their voluntary community and if they were to remain free to change their minds and disassociate themselves from any society, community or competing government that disappoints them. They would no longer be involuntary members of captive nations of the totalitarian, democratic or republican kind. Even if once caught, by misleading promises, they could easily escape again. They would not remain tax slaves, military slaves, involuntary subjects or victims of imposed “education” systems. - JZ, 25.11. & 14.12.04. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & MAJORITY AUTONOMY, DEMOCRACY OR GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT & EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREE SOCIETIES & COMMUNITIES, PEACEFULLY COMPETING WITH EACH OTHER IN THE SAME TERRITORY, JUST LIKE BUSINESSES, PRODUCTIVE ENTERPRISES, SPORTS- & HOBBY GROUPS, FASHIONS, ENTERTAINMENT & SELF-EDUCATION OPTIONS.
VOTING: Voting and territorial "representation": A tub without a bottom. No matter how much in taxes, property, lives and liberty you throw into it, almost never does anything positive come out of it. It provides many more disservices than services and the latter, being monopolistically provided, are over-priced and not of the highest quality. – JZ, n.d. - TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Voting brings the scum to the top and suffocates or enchains the enlightened, the pioneers and experimenters. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting brings us all down to the lowest common denominators. It's not a guide to enlightenment, progress, justice, freedom and peace - on the contrary! – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting can be right only for voluntary and personal law systems. - JZ, 4.10.98. – However, under such systems very little voting will still occur, in the long run, since agreement between their volunteers will be extensive to unanimous. – JZ, 2.4.09, 24.8.12. - PERSONAL LAW, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM
VOTING: Voting can lead a party politician or an independent or bureaucrat to victory (The bureaucrats are all indirect beneficiaries of the voting process and its institutions and still more irresponsible than politicians are.) but it always means defeats for yourself and for others of their victims. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting cannot replace freedom for tolerant and autonomous actions. - JZ, 4.6.04. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM UNDER FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS
VOTING: Voting could solve anything only if it were preceded by sufficient and reasonable discussion. That almost never takes place, even in small circles, during election campaigns or during parliamentary discussions. To decide, by territorial voting, the fate of non-criminal others, rather than merely the own fate, is never neither right nor representative. - JZ, 4.10.98, 8.4.11.
VOTING: Voting directly on foreign policy issues, including international treaties, armament and disarmament steps, free trade or barriers to it, war and peace decisions, rightful war and peace aims, rightful defensive steps and rightful peace promoting steps could, possibly, lead to some liberating steps, even if only rarely. But any territorial voting in which our fates are delivered into the hands of unscrupulous diplomats, politicians and bureaucrats, supposedly our representatives, who play their power games with our lives and liberties for their own benefit will, mostly, lead us only from one man-made disaster to another. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting does not make politicians dependent upon me but rather independent of me, leaving me only protest votes and other ineffective protest "actions" rather than freedom of action and genuine self-determination. – JZ
VOTING: Voting does not open a path to full liberty and genuine individual rights for anyone. – JZ, n.d. & 8.4.11.
VOTING: Voting enchains minds and bodies. Nevertheless, people continue to fall for its fallacies and wrongful practices and even praise them as national ideals. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting ensures that centralized control will replace individual control and that SOME program will be imposed upon all, administered and enforced by SOME agent who holds monopoly power.” - Robert LeFevre, in Libertarian Yearbook, 1972, p.117. – Even before it individual sovereignty, genuine self-government, self-determination and self-ownership were, mostly, absent. – JZ, 24.8.12. – DIS.
VOTING: Voting for decision-makers restricts the own decision-making options. – JZ, n.d. – DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, LEADERSHIP, POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS
VOTING: Voting for individual rights and liberties is only very rarely practised, while and voting against them, by voters and their supposed representatives, is common practice under territorialism. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12. – Most of the present votes cast in territorial elections amount to votes against individual rights and liberties. – I had once compiled a list of different kinds of voting and had numbered them. – For this compilation I eliminated the numbers. - JZ, 6.2.12
VOTING: Voting for individually and voluntarily chosen laws and institutions rather than any territorially imposed ones! – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting for masters does neither liberate us nor enlighten us or them sufficiently. - JZ, 30.7.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting for or against issues, instead of candidates or parties, makes a little bit more sense. But the choice of the majority should still not be forced upon dissenting minorities. The majority should then be merely able and willing to go ahead on its own. – The dissenting minorities should be free to do their own things, each for or to itself. - JZ, 11.7.87, 7.6.04, 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting for others restricts voting for yourself. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting for parliamentary representatives of territorial States with compulsory membership and uniform laws imposed upon all - means the abdication of most individual rights and liberties. - JZ, 17.6.87.
VOTING: Voting for political clowns shows lack of self-respect. Even the greatest territorial statesman is still full of the bullshit and wrongful ideas and practices of territorialism. – JZ – SELF-RESPECT, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS, LEADERSHIP
VOTING: Voting for territorial politicians? I vote only against all such quacks. – JZ, 24.3.07.
VOTING: Voting for territorial politics means voting for wrongful, false and misleading slogans, "principles", premises, institutions, methods and practices. - JZ, 21.9.98, 8.6.04, 28.10.08. - POLITICAL TERRITORIAL VOTING
VOTING: Voting for the lesser evil is still voting for an evil system. Each individual vote should, like a contract signature, bind only that voter or signatory to his contract with like-minded people. It should never give him or his representatives any power of attorney over dissenting signatories to other contracts, which please them. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting for the nut-cases ambitious for power? Only the victims of governmental “education” and propaganda would. – JZ, 24.11.07.
VOTING: Voting for the population of whole territories does turns all of us into captive people or captive nations. - JZ, 24.3.03.
VOTING: Voting has almost never promoted economic rights and liberties. The repeal of the corn-laws was one of the few exceptions. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting imposes territorial misrule upon me - and many others. For instance, taxation, the government-caused inflations, deflations, stagflatons and their mass unemployment, sales difficulties, most of their laws, regulations and controls and compulsory licensing wrongs, penalizes and harms almost everybody. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting in a free market, with one's own dollars, on one's own affairs is rightful and contributes to prosperity, while voting in the territorial political "market", with the dollars of others, on the affairs of others, is wrongful and harmful. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting in a multi-party or non-party system should be distinguished from territorial voting in a system in which there exist only one, two or a few officially recognized parties and all become exposed to their various conspiracies, corruptions, power games and idiotic pursuits. This has happened so far, as a rule, in spite of the fact that every party could and should be exterritorially fully autonomous, for its members and voters and that voting should merely determine who votes and belongs to one or the other, with each remaining quite independent of all the others. In Australia e.g. the Liberals would rule the Liberals, the Labor people the ALP members and voters, the Nationals the Nationals, the Democrats the Democrats, etc., which would automatically end most party strife. – The experimental freedom which it would introduce would have an enlightening effect. Finally, most of our man-made or government-made problems could be solved in this way. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting in a new master? No territorial government permits the release of all creative energies. They are themselves the worst criminal syndicates. Just add up their total annual take and the total of those they killed. - JZ, 11.9.99, 8.6.04, 8.4.11.
VOTING: Voting in democratic elections is based on the wrong notion that there are hundred thousands of matters (regulated by a corresponding number of laws, regulations and ordinances, with a multitude of pages and paragraphs, no one would have time to read - but everyone is supposed to abide by), in which no individual can be trusted to be responsible for himself, making his own correct or incorrect decisions at his own expense, while, at the same time, it is assumed that everybody could be trusted, via his voting, to be responsible for everybody else. This is one of the basic flaws of voting, which reduces it from a general human right to a mere procedure that is only of some use within communities or associations of like-minded volunteers. Today neither Local- nor State- nor Federal Governments are such bodies of volunteers. They claim compulsory membership or subordination for all people within what they consider to be "their" turfs. - By thus not recognizing full minority autonomy, on an exterritorial and voluntary basis, they act towards all potential minorities of this kind not democratically but rather despotically, in the sense of majority (or "representative") despotism. Genuine democracies would recognize not just some but all rights of individuals and minorities. – JZ, in one of several protests against compulsory voting.
VOTING: Voting in which the primary vote of the individual is recognized and realized: Individual secession and individual choice between societies of volunteers and the right to establish such a community, exterritorially autonomous and not tied to any territory, having, instead, only private or cooperative real estate, versus a mere territorial voting "right" in which this essential right for the own affairs is missing or expressly denied. – JZ, n.d. & 3.4.11.
VOTING: Voting in which the voter is unarmed and unorganized for rightful and sufficiently informed and sensible resistance and the protection of his individual rights and liberties, especially against the own politicians and bureaucrats, vs. voting in which the unarmed and unorganized and mis-educated voter is merely a pawn or comical figure, if not the bloody victim or bulldozed corpse, in the political power games of various political mobsters. - JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting in which women are free to vote on women's issues, in their own elections, parliaments and budget decisions, thus disposing over their own voluntary tax contributions and "democratic" voting in which the battle of the sexes is politically extended and worsened and most women are subjected to the decisions of men, at their own expense and risk, not only within macho families of wife beaters and abusers but also of power mad and ignorant and prejudiced men in the political arena. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting indicates the self-delusions of democrats and republicans. – JZ, n.d. & 8.4.11.
VOTING: Voting is an irresponsible non-action leaving it to a few others to commit irresponsible actions. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting is not a good substitute for self-responsibility. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting is not an expression of power, but an admission of powerlessness, since it cannot do otherwise than reaffirm the government's supposed legitimacy.” - THE MATCH, June 75.
VOTING: Voting is not your right - it is the sell-out by you of your rights.” - David Taylor, 5.6.85.
VOTING: voting is only part of the illusion that you are the government.” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 50.
VOTING: Voting is picking somebody to pick everyone's pocket for the benefit of a few. - JZ, 19.11.78. – However, enough crumbs are shared out, widely enough, from this plunder, and accepted widely under the wrong impression - among these beneficiaries - that they could and would benefit from this coercive redistribution system more than it costs them in direct and indirect taxes and in lost opportunities, rights and liberties. They still manage to believe that it would be mainly only the rich, who would be soaked by taxation. – The poor overlook that the productive rich (as service providers or investors in services and goods production), recover their tax burden by corresponding prices charged to their customers, the majority of them being poor or having only medium incomes. – JZ, 6.2.12. - TAXATION, WELFARE STATE, GOVERNMENT SPENDING & HANDOUTS, GOVERNMENTAL ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAMS.
VOTING: Voting is preferable to civil war. But that's all that can be rightly said in its favor. And in some situations it can even lead to civil war, by, temporarily, allowing a majority to lord it over a strong minority. - JZ, 26.8.93, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting is the individual choice that gives no worthwhile individual choice but, rather, monopolizes decision-making, even on war and peace. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting is the method for obtaining legal power to coerce others.” – Robert LeFevre, "Libertarian Yearbook, 72", p.118. - Perhaps voters should be re-named: "legalized coercers"? A rather stark term, coined by one of the regulars of THE CONNECTION was: "Territorial gangsters". - However, this does not sufficiently describe the good intentions that are also involved, however wrongly they are steered by ignorance, popular errors and prejudices. - JZ. 30.11.87, 6.2.12.
VOTING: Voting is the opiate of the masses.” – Steven LaTulippe - It provides them with the delusion that they are already free or that voting is the only thing they need to promote peace, freedom, justice, prosperity and progress, regardless of the kind of scoundrels, parties or territorial systems that they do vote into office. - JZ, 25. 11. 06, 21.4.09, 8.4.11. - & THE MASSES
VOTING: Voting is the original sin of citizens. It's punished by ever increasing taxes and bureaucracy and avalanches of laws and regulations, by government-produced and maintained economic crises, wars, civil wars, terrorism and man-made poverty, although under full freedom all of us could soon become relatively rich by our own productive efforts - without governmental chains and extortions. Territorialism might still lead us to the general holocaust, the end of mankind and of most other life on earth. - JZ, 10.8.99, 8.6.04.
VOTING: Voting is wrong to the extent that it usurps an authority to rule others living in the same territory, whether they agree with you or not. - JZ, 26.10.93, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting keeps you a captive victim of territorialism. – JZ, ca. 24.3.03.
VOTING: Voting locks you into wrongful, territorial and collectivistic political process and does not give you the free vote to opt out from under it. – JZ
VOTING: Voting makes sense only among volunteers and can rightly bind only volunteers - and aggressors against their rights and liberties. - JZ, 28.4.93, 24.8.12. - Voting makes some sense only within voluntary communities. Otherwise it is almost always wrong. Among volunteers not much voting would be required, either. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting means abdication." – “Voter c'est abdiquer!" - Elisee Reclus.
VOTING: Voting means adopting a method of resolving conflict that, like war, subjects losers to the will of the winners. (The non-political solution consists of letting people do as they wish as long as they do not physically harm others.)” - Christian Michel. - I would replace "harm" by "wrong". My competition might harm you, reducing your income, but it would not wrong you. - JZ, 30.1.02. – Neither of us owns our customers or contractors. – J.Z., 24.8.12. - VOTES & WAR, COMPETITION, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: Voting means becoming an accessory or supporter or sponsor of criminals. Do not give them this sanction of the victims. – JZ
VOTING: Voting means compelling others or being compelled. I favor voluntarism in every sphere. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting means giving your individual human rights and your liberties away, much of your property, of your income, your health, sometimes even your life. So, why do this to yourself - or to others? – JZ., n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting means giving blank cheques to dishonest politicians and bureaucrats. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting means giving up my rights and liberties to the not so tender mercies of a politician, bureaucrat, political party or other power addict. – JZ
VOTING: Voting means in practice the disfranchisement of citizens from the most important decisions in their lives. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting means lack of self-responsibility, self-ownership, self-government, self-determination, individual sovereignty. – JZ, n.d., 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting means making decisions on the lives of your neighbors and allowing them to make decisions on your own life. So why do this to them and yourself? This certainly does not mean acting like a good neighbor. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting means participating in what Bastiat called a "plunder bund". – JZ
VOTING: Voting means participation in a "they win, you lose" game. – JZ - Under the delusion that you could win it. - Even if you did, that would not make it right. - JZ, 8.4.11.
VOTING: Voting means voting for a territorial utopia which can never be realized. What we can thereby get are merely distopias and all kinds of wrongs and disappointments. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting of old people only on the affairs of old people, of young people only on the affairs of young people and of young and growing family people only on their own affairs, vs. a system in which all try to manage or mismanage other affairs than those of their own age group. – JZ, n.d. – However, that would be merely a significant step towards exterritorial consumer sovereignty and free enterprise sovereignty under personal law. – JZ, 6.2.12. – Others would consider the age differences to be their least significant ones. For them e.g. religious, racial and ideological differences would matter much more. To each group the own system, including several cosmopolitan ones. – JZ, 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting on issues that could be rightfully determined by voting, e.g. issues of a productive coop, partnership of share company should be distinguished from those which cannot be so determined, because they would infringe the rights and liberties of others, who are entitelt to mind their own business and affairs themselves by their own decision-making processes. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting on the legal fate of others, as opposed to genuine self-ownership, self-determination and self-government, are irreconcilably opposite approaches. Voting on the lives of others, who do not agree with us, does characterize territorial governments. Voting among like-minded people, voluntarily associated in exterritorially autonomous communities, characterizes panarchies and their almost unanimous decision-making. The most decisive votes against the continuance of territorial politics as usual, are expressed by an individual secessions. And the decisive vote for any particular panarchy is expressed by the act of individually joining it or helping to establish it, then staying with it, by not seceding from it. - JZ 25.4.92, 13.1.93, 8.4.11, 6.2.12, 24.8.12. - DEMOCRACY, SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-OWNERSHIP, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-HELP, SELF-RELIANCE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY
VOTING: Voting on the own spending vs. voting on the spending of others. In other words: Voting in which one votes whether, how and how much one is to be taxed or is willing to contribute for the expenses of one's own and self-chosen community and how these expenses are to be distributed, to whom, when and by what amounts, with each perhaps allocating his own shares to those expenses preferred by him, would be very different from a "voting" system in which one is taxed almost without limits and against one's will for the budget allocations made by politicians and bureaucrats, and for their associated parasites, hangers-on and fan-clubs and subjected to all kinds of wrongful and irrational laws, to which one has not given one’s individual consent. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting organizes and assures irresponsibility at top and bottom. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting ought to permit each voter to vote the old bastards out and to vote no new bastard into power, as far as the own individual affairs are concerned, involving one's own share in public affairs. If there are to be victims in the future, then they are all to be only voluntary victims. - JZ, 26.3.95, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting provides "mandates" for wrong-doing - and turns you into an accessory to crimes. – JZ
VOTING: Voting provides only a collectivistic and territorial self-delusion of self-determination, while preventing genuine self-determination and self-government of SELVES. - Nations are not "selves". – JZ
VOTING: Voting should be limited to individuals voting or deciding on their own affairs. Beyond that, it should be allowed only within volunteer communities. – JZ
VOTING: Voting spreads self-delusions among the voters as well as among those voted into office. It does not spread sound knowledge, ideas, principles and practices, but, rather, errors, prejudices and mistakes. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting supports politicians, bureaucrats and other vested interests and monopolies and not our rights, liberties, interests and security. – JZ
VOTING: Voting systems in which the members of one "race" or ethnic community remain exterritorially as autonomous as they want to be vs. voting in systems where they are subjected to the prejudices, errors and lack of judgment or presumed superior knowledge and wisdom of those around them, who have "democratically" usurped leadership or guidance or responsibility over them. – JZ, n.d. & 6.2.12.
VOTING: Voting systems under panarchism, with its territorial autonomy for protective communities made up of volunteers only, all peacefully competing with each other vs. a single, uniform and prescribed voting system for all people who happen to live in a single territorial State system, imposed upon followers, neutrals and dissidents alike. – JZ, nd.
VOTING: Voting systems, which permit members of one or the other ideology to lord it over others, disposing of their lives, liberties and property as they please and voting systems, which would grant each of the followers of any ideology the chance to practise it, or try to practise it, at their own expense and risk, no matter what opinions and judgments the majority of the people around them hold against them or what the supposed experts and professionals think of their ideology and its practice. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting that really benefits only politicians, power seeking judges and lawyers and other parasites and voting that enables and protects the "forgotten man or woman", the productive and inoffensive people, against depredations by all others. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: voting today is the means whereby one group of voters help themselves to the property of another.” - Robert Howard and John Singleton: "Rip Van Australia", p.263.
VOTING: Voting under which one can choose for oneself the justice-, protection-, penal- and rehabilitative or preventative system and administrative system that one does like or still trust enough for oneself vs. voting under which all these systems are more or less territorially imposed upon oneself. – JZ
VOTING: Voting upholds the pretence that real voting takes place and is allowed. - JZ, 30.7.82.
VOTING: Voting within a "limited" government system or a non-governmental system (competitive and only exterritorially autonomous) vs. voting within an unlimited government system that is monopolistic, imposed and territorial, with many other than voluntary members or subjects. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting within a minority or a majority group, upon all its own affairs vs. voting by a minority or majority on the affairs of a majority or of minorities of other people. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12. – Under panarchism a great variety of voting systems would be tried – among their volunteers. – JZ, 6.2.12.
VOTING: Voting within a system from which the individual can freely secede vs. voting within a system in which secession attempts by individuals and minorities are severely restricted or repressed. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: Voting within a system of mutual oppression, domination and exploitation, however temporary and limited, is still wrong. - 2.3.96. - Already Bastiat characterized these institutions as "mutual plunder bunds". - JZ, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting within a system where all self-concerned religions are either fully tolerated or fully autonomous over all of their own affairs which they do consider and want to treat as their own affairs vs. voting within systems where even churches and sects that are self-concerned only and have only voluntary victims, are subjected to government legislation, jurisdiction, taxation and regulation and even military extermination methods in some instances. – JZ, n.d. & 14.8.12.
VOTING: Voting won't solve anything rightly and lastingly. On the contrary: Territorial voting brings its own numerous problems and thus leads to resistance, from minor acts to terrorist ones and even civil wars. Based on it dictatorships and tyrannies arise and manage to last for all too long. - JZ, 4.10.98, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting, as permitted or even enforced today, does not expand but limit our individual rights, liberties and choices. We are un-free through this kind of "voting". - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting: A sharing-the-loot “game”. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Voting: The ever hopeful act of expecting the impossible from the incapable or a rightful result from wrongful actions or a beneficial result from irrational actions, or construction from a destructive device. - JZ, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Voting: The only valid vote is an invalid or informal ones. All the others do not really count. The only vote still more valuable would be an individual vote sufficient for individual or group secession and exterritorial autonomy. All the others get lost in the messes of territorial politics and its man-made and inherent disasters. - JZ, 3.3.03. - INFORMAL VOTING, TERRITORIAL POLITICS AS USUAL
VOTING: Voting? For territorial politicians? I vote only against all such quacks. – JZ, 24.3.07, 21.4.09.
VOTING: Voting? Rather full individual consumer-sovereignty towards all political, social and economic services and prices or subscriptions for them. If these services are really so important, as is usually assumed, then they should be competitively supplied rather than monopolistically. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: We are prevented from exercising our economic vote ..., for the simple reason that free choice has been pushed aside by political decree. - In advocating a voters' boycott, we are referring to the political vote. We oppose voting, not because we want people to have less say in their own affairs, but because we want them to have more say.” - Sy Leon, "None of the Above", p.72.
VOTING: We are still surrounded, suppressed and enslaved by savages. But now they hide their attacks on our basic rights and liberties behind their legalized and secret votes on our rights, liberties, property and fate. - JZ, 15.8.95, 8.4.11.
VOTING: We are supposed to be ruled by our consent only. But how can we speak of consent when practically only two or three parties have any chance to win the election and when all three merely offer a package deal containing numerous points we disagree with? You may like the external policy, or part of it, of the one, and the internal policy, or part of it, of the other. How, then, can one rationally vote for either? Only the separation of interests allows their satisfaction. The suggestion to start a new party is largely futile also. It might succeed - but most likely only in another 20 - 50 years. No, consent is supposed to exist now. The "consent" by majorities in communities held together by a type of conscription (involuntary membership in the nation) cannot satisfy the very diverse individual aspirations. Only voluntary State membership would permit that and it would require exterritorial organization. - JZ, 5.6.04, 8.4.11. – CONSENT, DEMOCRACY, PARTY SYSTEM, CHOICE, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, PANARCHISM
VOTING: we do not want so-called universal suffrage, since we cannot get away from our own personal sovereignty, and cannot make ourselves accomplices in the crimes committed by our so-called representatives.” - "Manifesto of the Anarchist International", in E. V. Zenker, "Anarchism", 288-290.
VOTING: We have all been disfranchised regarding our most important vote, that of individual secession from the State and that to join or establish our own and only exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, whether statist, libertarian or anarchistic ones, under whatever programs we would prefer for them. – JZ, 13.3.96, 11.1.99. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSION & DISFRANCHISEMENT
VOTING: We must husband the great reservoir of tolerance in our people ... not waste it trying to do by legal compulsion what we can do as well or better by voluntary means." - Milton Friedman. TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM, LAWS, COMPULSION, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: We should begin to see that the mere fact that millions vote for something they do not understand, gives no right to impose that falsely-founded aim upon a helpless minority.” - Ernest Benn, Modern Government, p.243.
VOTING: We should not vote anyone IN but, instead, vote all the rascals OUT. - JZ, 9.12.71. – The whole territorial system should be voted out. Last century alone, even without its war dead and cripples, it has cost the lives of over 200 million people according to the extensive online statistics of Prof. Rudolf Rummel, who is, however, not yet a panarchist but still thinks that territorial democracies are good enough alternatives to territorial totalitarian States. – JZ, 21.4.09.
VOTING: We should only be free to decide our own fate, not that of others. That makes territorial voting and conventional democracies and republics wrong. Their voting disfranchises all of us regarding many of our own affairs. – JZ
VOTING: We should vote to abolish territorial voting and let each proceed at his own risk and expense in any direction he prefers for himself, alone or in association with like-minded people, under personal law systems. – JZ, n.d. & 24.8.12.
VOTING: We would be told, most emphatically, that by not voting we would be turning government over to ‘rascals’. Probably so; but do we not regularly vote ‘rascals’ out? And after we have ousted one set, are we not called upon to oust another crew at the next election? It seems that rascality is endemic in government. …” - Frank Chodorov, Out of Step, p.46. - Let us have the most decisive free individual vote, that of individual secessionism! – JZ, 17.9.08. – Combined with that for exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of communities, societies and government systems of volunteers onlyl. – J.Z., 24.8.12. - GOVERNMENT, POLITICIANS, ELECTIONS, REPRESENTATIVES, PARLIAMENTS, PANARCHISM
VOTING: We've been conditioned to believe that we have total incompetence in all areas except those relating to the selection of our masters." – Robert LeFevre: in LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Summer 74.
VOTING: What a terrible illusion that you could, with one vote among 5-200 millions, contribute considerably towards pursuing your own interests and protect your own rights, that nationalized property in some way or the other belongs to me and gives genuine responsibilities. - Interests and rights, to be effective, must be individualized, not collectivized. - JZ, 4.6.04. – ILLUSION, DELUSION
VOTING: What are these rights which - as we must assume, if the world is not to be given over to a blind, trackless, moral confusion - each possesses? Must they not be rights, in the case of each person, over his own body and mind? Is it possible to suppose, without absurdity, that a man should have no rights over his own body and mind, and yet have a 1/10 000 000-th share in unlimited rights over all other bodies and minds?” - Auberon Herbert, Mack ed., p.202.
VOTING: What do we do with people who don't vote? - Allow them not to join the government game or religion and rather freely vote on or decide their own affairs, playing their own favorite game, not that of others. - JZ 30.7.82, 30.11.87. - PANARCHISM
VOTING: What Influence has an enlightened voter today when his own money can be taken from him to bribe his enemies into voting against his rights and interests? Only voluntary taxation can prevent that and I am not allowed to vote on this issue. My concept of democracy is based on the recognition of individual rights, including the right to secede and full autonomy for voluntary minority associations. The majority democracy we suffer under now is, for my taste, too close to the totalitarian opposite of individual liberty. Only among voluntarily associated people do majority decisions make sense and can great injustices to minorities within a group be prevented. Today's "democracy" was foreseen by the French philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville, after his stay in the United States, in 1831-32, when he said: "Democracy in the United States will last until those in power learn that they can perpetuate themselves through taxation." - JZ, 5.6.04. - DEMOCRACY, VOLUNTARY VS. COMPULSORY TAXATION, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, MAJORITIES, TERRITORIALISM, TOTALITARIANISM
VOTING: what our voters are in the pit and gallery they are also in the polling booth.” - G. B. Shaw, "Man and Superman", on theatre crowds. But he overlooked here that in the theatre they only spend their own money, i.e. they vote only with their own dollars. – Attendance is not compulsory. Several self-chosen plays can be performed in the same city at the same time and for different crowds. They can also be watched from different electronic records. We have already largely free choice in that sphere. But not yet in the territorial political circus. - JZ, 28.10.08. – TERRITORIALISM VS. VOLUNTARISM
VOTING: What would be wrong with a vote to abolish voting on the affairs of others? - JZ, 27.4.89. – Q.
VOTING: What, then, society has to do is to remove the obstructions to this universal self-election, by every Individual, of himself, to that function which his own consciousness of his own adaption prompts him to believe to be his peculiar God-intended office in life. Throw open the polls, make the pulpit, the school-room, the workshop, the manufactory, the shipyard, and the store-house the universal ballot-boxes of the people. Make every day an election day, and every human being both a candidate and a voter, exercising each day and hour his full and unlimited franchise. - In order to (reach? - JZ) this consummation two conditions are indispensably necessary: the first is the cordial and universal acceptance of this very principle for the absolute Sovereignty of the Individual...” - Stephen Pearl Andrews, The Science of Society, p.37. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: What's the point of having a vote if there is nobody worth voting for?” - Sheila MacLeod, SUNDAY TIMES, "Look" 26, Jul. 1981. - Nobody CAN BE worth voting for - as far as territorial political offices are concerned. - JZ, 22.6.92. – TERRITORIALISM, Q.
VOTING: When an advantage, either of candidate or issue, is offered at the polls, the only choices available to the individual are: vote for it; vote against it; refrain from voting. The assumption is that by the process of voting, each individual is practicing self-rule. - If an individual votes aye but a majority opposes his view, he is clearly not obtaining his preference. - But he is told that he must abide by the decision since, had the results been as he wished them to be, others would have been coerced to back his position. - Now, if he votes aye and a majority is with him, he will be told that he got what he wanted and that those who opposed were wrong. - Finally, if he does not vote, he will be told that he could have voted and, therefore, he can only blame himself if he didn't get what he wanted. - This is a curious philosophy. He is told, in effect, that right has triumphed, whether he got what he wanted, whether he got what he did not want, or whether he did not express a preference." - Robert LeFevre, summing up Herbert Spencer's argument in "Social Statics", chapter IXX, 'The Right to Ignore the State’. - SELF-RULE, SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, PANARCHISM
VOTING: When you vote, you tacitly accept the idea that some people shall rule other people. I favor freedom; the right of each person to manage his own affairs.” - Robert LeFevre: LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Fall 75. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY
VOTING: Whichever politician wins, the people lose. - JZ, 5.3.83.
VOTING: While my basic belief is that each sovereign individual should have the right to cast the only and decisive vote on his own life, there are voting proposals that may serve to somewhat undermine the dogmas on voting in our time. A strong case can e.g. be made out for some or the other voluntary association, like a share company, of having not merely single and equal votes for all stockholders, but multiple votes, according to contributions or investments - or service inputs. - In one very important respect the one-man-one vote method, as a decisive vote, for one man, should also be retained and even vastly expanded. Namely, the vote on the decision whether a person is to belong or not to belong, to any party, movement, union, juridical association, constitutions, State or Federation of States or to any voluntaristic society, whether he is to be subject to any territorial power or only to an exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers. I do want and do insist on a right to vote, for myself, on such questions and feel disenfranchised as long as I am not given that voting right, the right to secede and to associate with others voluntarily, for all our peaceful and productive purposes and actions that do not interfere with the basic rights and liberties of others, who also insist only on doing their things for and to themselves. That right to vote is today generally quite suppressed and not even widely discussed as a basic right and liberty. - JZ, 20.12.95, 8.6.04. - ONE-MAN-ONE VOTE, OR MULTIPLE VOTES FOR SOME?
VOTING: Why I don't vote? None of the current crop of bastards and of their platforms deserves my vote. Moreover, I don't want to impose my vote on anyone but myself and no one offers me or the others the option of voting oneself out of this territorialist and monopolistic and coercive system. - JZ, 17.7.82. - NON-VOTING, INFORMAL VOTING, “ABSTAIN FROM BEANS”
VOTING: Why prolong this game, compulsorily or compulsively, of "you give and they take" and "you obey and they command"? – JZ, n.d. – TERRITORIALISM, Q.
VOTING: Why should any slave vote for any slave master? - JZ, 14.9.91. – Q.
VOTING: Why should any tax slave vote for any tax master? - JZ, 11.8.87. – Q.
VOTING: Why should I be compelled to vote for you or any of the others? – JZ, 23.3.07. – What have you and they ever done for me? What could you and they ever do? What right and liberty have you and they not yet infringed by your territorialist political actions? – JZ, 25.7.07. – COMPULSORY VOTING, Q.
VOTING: Why should I vote for lack of choice, unwanted, overpriced services and outright disservices? - JZ, 14.9.91. – Q.
VOTING: Why vote upon the fate of all? To each his own utopia - at his own risk and expense. - JZ, 4.10.98. – Q.
VOTING: Why vote? The candidates, mostly, do not know what they are doing to us or what needs to be done or rather undone of former political "actions". The same applies to most voters. Rather introduce voluntary State membership and experimental freedom or free enterprise or initiatives for all, in the political, economic and social spheres as well and free consumer choice for voluntary members among all "public services" then quite competitively offered. - Replace all enforced territorial sovereignty by freely and individually chosen exterritorial autonomy for all dissenting groups. That would end not only election campaigns but wars, civil wars, revolutions, terrorism and resistance actions, because each could then easily get what he wants - at his own expense and risk - to be mostly and soon disappointed by his choices. But this would not matter either for him, because then he could resign and join a more successful community or start one. All would benefit by the flawed experiments not being forced upon anyone and remaining relatively small, revealing their mistakes early and already thereby losing membership, before their number has swelled to proportions that are, again, dangerous for dissenters. - JZ, 2.10.98, 7.6.04, 24.8.12.
VOTING: Win or lose voting vs. win and win voting, as exemplified by free trading and free contracts and their corresponding protective and insurance and credit, contract, indemnification, adjudication and administration systems. The language of ordinary political voting is quite explicit and warlike. They do speak of winners and losers. In it politics is nothing but the continuation of war or civil war by other means. – JZ, n.d. – EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS VS. TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Winning votes and losing votes turns friends into enemies.” - L. Neil Smith, Lever Action, A Mountain Media Book, 2001, email@example.com, p.74. - Panarchistic or polyarchistic choices for individuals do not antagonize and confront but rather neutralize animosities and maintain friendships and alliances between very diverse people, each of them remaining free to do their own things. – JZ, 27.9.07. - TERRITORIAL ELECTIONS VS. INDIVIDUAL CHOICE OF COMMUNITIES, SOCIETIES & COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, PANARCHISM
VOTING: Wisdom, knowledge and sound ideas cannot be achieved through majority voting, least of all in territorial politics. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: With every territorial vote we vote against ourselves. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: With the territorial vote you vote against yourself and permit politicians and bureaucrats to practise a temporary despotism over your affairs. And if, next time, you vote the rascals out and another lot in, they will continue that territorial despotism over you, in the name of democracy and popular self-government, the "national interest", the "common good" and the majority "mandate". – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: With your territorial vote you give up your own choices and deny their choices to others as well. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: With your vote you drop self-responsibility. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: With your vote you put out contracts upon your own life, property and liberty - and those of others. - JZ, 17.7.92. – REPRESENTATION, TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: With your vote you try to dominate others, while they are trying to dominate you with theirs. Rather agree with them to leave each other alone, so that each can do his own things for and to himself. – JZ, n.d. – EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: Within our territorial and nation-wide "prisons" or voters, politicians and bureaucrats do not lead us to individual rights and liberties for all - because they despise rather than love them, and obstruct them as much as they can. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: without his consent having ever been asked, a man finds himself environed by a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, too, that other men practise this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees further that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, he finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use the ballot, he may become a master; if he does not use it, he must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these two. In self-defence, he attempts the former.” – Lysander Spooner, No Treason, II, Works I, 5/6. - Two wrongs do not make a right. Alternatives are so much needed that they ought to be established. I hold that panarchism offers them. – JZ, 30.11.87.
VOTING: Would it take very long before I would be so disappointed by the policies of a ruling Libertarian Party that I would want to secede from it and its territorial government, too? - Dissent on some fundamental questions does certainly still persist within its ranks and with the non-party and anti-party radical libertarians. - JZ, 8.6.04. - LIBERTARIAN PARTY
VOTING: You can always express your ignorance, apathy, prejudices and errors through your territorial political votes. But you would vainly try, if you were interested in them, to practise their opposites by means of this political process. – JZ, n.d. – TERRITORIALISM VS. PANARCHISM
VOTING: You can't vote for enlightenment, peace, justice, prosperity and liberty within a territorial system. It leaves you only the choice of being either anvil or hammer. – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: You can't vote-in liberty in a territorial State while most do not understand or even revile most liberties. - JZ, 13.12.93. - LIBERTY & TERRITORIALISM
VOTING: You may vote as you wish. After all, this is a free country. But you'll have to pay just the same" - said someone in "PROGRESS" (a Melbourne George-ist periodical) 8/68. So, why vote at all? - JZ, 5.6.04. Are we free to vote against all compulsory taxation – and all the laws and institutions financed by it, by individually opting out of it? Now, that would be a vote worth having! – JZ, 29.10.8. – TAXATION, TERRITORIALISM, IMPOSED LAWS & “REPRESENTATION”, INSTEAD OF PERSONAL LAWS & GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT OR SELF-DETERMINATION
VOTING: You vote for your life only. They vote for their lives only. To each his own. - JZ, 22.6.91, 7.1.93.
VOTING: You won't recognize my fully free vote, one including individual secession. All the others don't really count. So why should I vote for you? - JZ, 2.12.89, 28.10.08.
VOTING: Your democratic and territorial "free" vote does wrongly restrict my individual rights and liberties - through your ignorance, prejudices and intolerance. Only panarchistic, individual and voluntary voting and exterritorial and individual secessionism could achieve for me the liberty that I want and for you the system that you choose for yourself, thus deserve and would have to suffer under for a while, with all its burdens only on your own back and that of those, who do agree with you, until you finally learn enough about it to want to opt out of it, as I want to do now. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Your individual vote against the vote of millions of others will leave you a suppressed and exploited subject while your individual vote for the panarchy of your choice will get you anywhere that is humanly possible and rightful. - JZ, 04-11. - POLITICAL TERRITORIAL VOTING TO BE REPLACED BY INDIVIDUAL MEMBERSHIP APPLICATIONS OR INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONS. SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM
VOTING: Your kind of territorial and collectivist voting is all too wrong and unlimited on one side and all too limited on the other side. In particular, it limits my individual choices all to much, so much, that it leaves me almost no choices but relatively trivial ones. - JZ, 2.3.96, 7.6.04, 24.8.12.
VOTING: Your only real choice for the next election consists only in what slogans you will use, while voting informally, i.e., against any of the candidates and parties, in the territorial election system that disfranchises you in most respects, while pretending to offer you the full franchise. - JZ, 11.7.87, 7.6.04.
VOTING: Your political territorial votes leave you all too few individual options - if you are more than a sheep. ("sheeple" - people.) – JZ, n.d.
VOTING: Your territorial system allows you to victimize me - but not with my consent. - JZ, 14.9.91. - CONSENT
VOTING: Your territorial voting does not liberate me. It rather wrongfully restricts me and deprives me of rightful individual choices, which require individual secessionism and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers under personal laws. - JZ, 2.3.96.
VOTING: Your vote for your life only. Their votes for their lives only. To each his own. - JZ, 22.6.91.
VOTING: Your votes should not be authorized to limit my rightful individual choices nor should my vote be authorized to limit yours. Thus I rather abstain from this territorialist farce. - JZ, 2.3.96.