John Zube

An Anthology of

Wisdom & Common Sense

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

Index - F

(1973 - 2012)



FABRIS, MARIA PIA PEDANI: La Dimora Della Pace, Considerazioni Sulla Capitolazioni Tra I Paesi Islamici e L'Europa. Venezia, Cafoscarina, 1996. An Italian book on the capitulations between Islamic countries and European ones, on which an abstract, 1/2 page, in English, can be found online. This abstract only was reproduced by me on p.94 of PEACE PLANS 1539. – J…

FACTION-GOVERNMENTS: Faction-Self-government might be even better. J.Z., 29.8.04. A prize competition for the best term? I would gladly donate a set of my ON PANARCHY issues in my PEACE PLANS series to the winner. - J.Z., 29.8.04.

FACTIONALISM: An end to factionalism? Rather: Equal rights for all factions - realized by full exterritorial autonomy for all of them. This would largely end faction fighting or in-fighting because it would end the threat of domination or of being dominated by just one faction. - J.Z., 31.3.86 & 26.6.00. - FRAGMENTATION, DIS, PARTY STRIFE, DISSENT, DIVISIVENESS & PANARCHISM

FAILURE: Governments have a consistent record of failure in their endeavors. Even if you're willing to force others to pay for what you want, no government is going to solve the ecology problems, make women professional equals, prevent monopolies, or fulfill any other objective you may have in mind.” - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom, p.99, on The Government Trap. - GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM

FAILURE: Paradoxically as it may seem to some, it is just as necessary to the health of a dynamic economy that dying industries be allowed to die as that growing industries be allowed to grow. The first process is essential to the second. It is as foolish to try to preserve obsolescent industries as to try to preserve obsolescent methods of production: this is often, in fact, merely two ways of describing the same thing. Improved methods of production must constantly supplant obsolete methods, if both old needs and new wants are to be filled by better commodities and better means.” - Henry Hazlitt, quoted in Free Man's Almanac, Oct. 18. – Individuals should become free 1. to exterritorially secede from all governments they consider to be failures and 2. to begin to compete with them, together with other volunteers, under personal law systems, i.e. full exterritorial autonomy. Thus they would not deprive any statists of any government that they may still love. They would merely leaving them to their States while the secessionists would do their own things – usually together with like-minded volunteers. – J.Z., 19.11.10, 2.5.12. - SUCCESS, SUBSIDIES, BANKRUPTCIES, SECESSIONISM,

FAIR FIELD: Allow no interference with creative activities, which is to say, permit anyone to do anything he chooses so long as it is peaceful. A fair field and no favor!” - Leonard E. Read, Having My Way, p.83. - NO FAVOR, NO INTERFERENCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

FAIR FIELD: How about using a phrase that implies the same virtues as "laissez faire": "A fair field and no favor"? Let them try to advance their socialism by advocating an unfair field and special favors to some at the expense of others! A fair field, with no favor, is a phrasing which nicely summarizes our position and has the added merit of putting the antagonists of freedom on the defensive.” - Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 11/74. - NO FAVOR, LAISSEZ FAIRE

FAIR PLAY: To give any fair play to the nature of each, it is essential that different persons should be allowed to lead different lives. In proportion as this latitude has been exercised in any age, has that age been noteworthy to posterity. Even despotism does not produce its worst effects, so long as individuality exists under it; and whatever crushes individuality is despotism, by whatever name it may be called, and whether it professes to be enforcing the will of God or the injunctions of men.” - John Stuart Mill, ON LIBERTY, 1859, in On Liberty, and Considerations on Representative Government, ed. By R. B. McCallum, Oxford, Blackwell, 1946, pp. 49-51, 55-56. - DIFFERENCES, DESPOTISM, INDIVIDUALITY

FAIRBANKS, JOHN KING: The US & China, Harvard Univ. Press, 1961, p. 264: "In October 1942 we offered to negotiate immediately, and a new Sino-American treaty on equal terms was signed January 11, 1943. But within five months another agreement was made, freeing American troops in China from Chinese criminal jurisdiction. American bases, supply and transport services, radio net-works, airlines and army post offices were soon operating on Chinese soil in greater volume and with greater license than Southwest China had ever seen under the unequal treaties. At war's end Shanghai streets for many months were filled with GI's and roistering sailors far beyond the memory of treaty-port days. This ill suited China's new great-power status. China's new-found sovereignty took on a quizzical character. Right-wing chauvinists, Communists, and patriotic liberals could unite in inveighing against GI incidents connected with wine, women, and jeeps." - Pages 187/8: Details on mutual protection association to protect merchants and land owners and maintain local order. - Pages 191/2 Chiang Kai-Shek tried to blame the "unequal treaties" for almost every difficulty China experienced, appealing to and expressing blind nationalism and economic ignorance. - He could hardly have done so if they had been turned into "equal treaties", granting Chinese equal rights in all other countries. But such reversal of policies can only very rarely expected from territorial governments, no matter how wrong and harmful their established policy is. - J.Z., 14.9.04.

FAIRNESS: Charlemagne, for example, in his desire to be fair to his three sons, divided his empire among them - an act that gave rise to France, Germany, and Alsace-Lorraine, and eventually to two World Wars.” - John Gall, Systemantics, p.53/54. – PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, TERRITORIALISM IN A NUTSHELL

FAIRNESS: Expecting the world to treat you fairly because you're a good person is like expecting a bull to not charge you because you're a vegetarian.” - Anonymous. - Territorialism puts all of us into a bull pen or fighting arena, rather than allowing us to separate our interests voluntarily, exterritorially, autonomously and tolerantly, ending the fears of being ruled by one's opponents. - J.Z., 28.6.00.

FAITH IN FREEDOM: A decline in faith in free men and what they can accomplish results in a rising faith in disastrous authoritarianism.” - Leonard E. Read, Elements of Libertarian Leadership, p.81. - That decline is not surprising when one ponders how few free men, how few liberties and free actions one can still find in one's experience, outside the private spheres. So many significant actions have been preempted by governments that we find ourselves in national territorial prisons or even perpetual kindergartens. After about 10 years of imprisonment institutionalization and personal incapacitation sets in and is often hard to impossible to reverse. - J.Z., 17.6.00. - IN FREE MEN VS. AUTHORITARIANISM FREEDOM VS. TERRITORIALISM

FAITH IN FREEDOM: Even with a fraction of the total freedom vision freedom does become already largely practicable. Only when there is too much confusion on its potential does its realization appear difficult to impossible. - J.Z., 23.1.76 & 24.6.00. – Recognition of individual sovereignty leads to taking the first step, individual secessionism, of a long journey, with other volunteers, and like-minded and self-selected ones, ultimately, perhaps, one of a thousand miles or even light years. Some may rest in-between while others will rush ahead as fast as they can. – J.Z., 19.11.10. - KNOWLEDGE OF FREEDOM

FAITH IN FREEDOM: Faith in freedom will allow it to burst forth and overcome the darkness of socialism.” - Leonard E. Read, Comes the Dawn. – The overcoming should be left to the State Socialists themselves, after the freedom, peace and justice lovers have opted out from under them and left them to their own “plans”, at their risk and expense. The secessionists will begin to do their own things, in accordance with their own ideals of freedom and rights, confident that once they are obviously successful more and more of those disappointed with territorial statism of any kind will sooner or later follow them. – J.Z., 19.11.10.

FAITH IN FREEDOM: If we lack this spiritual faith, our rights to life and liberty are placed on the altar of collective caprice and they must suffer whatever fate the political apparatus dictates. The record clearly shows what this fate is. Russia is the most degraded example, but practically every other nation, including our own, drifts in Russia's direction.” - Leonard E. Read, Elements of Libertarian Leadership, p.31. - Religious dissenters and nonconformists did formerly strive for exterritorial autonomy for their believers. Modern libertarians and anarchists, as a rule, do not, but still subscribe instead to the inherent totalitarianism of territorialism. Is the only thing that we can learn from history that most people are unable or unwilling to learn from history? - J.Z., 17.6.00. VS. POLITICS, COLLECTIVISM, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

FAITH IN FREEDOM: the decline of the West was due to Western man's loss of faith in himself.” - Edmund A. Opitz, THE FREEMAN, 11/72. - On the other hand, one might say that it was due to too great a faith in himself as a social engineer, remaking society into a supposedly better model by whatever panacea or utopia he believed in. Combine this with territorialism and you get all the evils and mistakes of statism and fanaticism. - J.Z., 17.6.00. – Utopism is O.K., on the basis of voluntarism, free enterprise and exterritorial autonomy. Then the good schemes will, sooner or later, drive out the inferior ones – but only through individual free and sovereign choices. – J.Z., 19.11.10. - THE DECLINE OF THE WEST

FAITH IN FREEDOM: The following chapters will attempt to remove some of the doubts and contribute to a faith that freedom should be the rule. - My own faith cannot be shaken, even though I fail adequately to make the case for this philosophy. Freedom, like righteousness or wisdom, must never be faulted because of my shortcomings. Or anyone else's. If I cannot articulate the merits of freedom, the fault is in my understanding and explanation, not in freedom as a way of life.” - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, XV. - This is almost like: "God is perfect, although I cannot understand and explain him!" - J.Z., 7.11.76. - Is there ANY experience, which does not confirm that faith in freedom? Do we pray to the "God" of freedom in vain? Does freedom ever fail us as a tool, a machine, a process? - J.Z., 17.6.00. - Let each follow his own faith into self-responsible, voluntary and tolerant actions in the own sphere, thus leaving all others free to do the same thing, in accordance with their ideals, among themselves. Exterritorial autonomy or personal law provides that option. – J.Z., 19.11.10. - HUMAN IMPERFECTIONS, FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

FAITH IN FREEDOM: We need a counter-faith in the inevitable triumph of freedom.” - Donald M. Dozer, 1/73. - What we need much more are practical programs on how to achieve FIOT or PIOT. - J.Z., 17.6.00.

FAITH: Between faiths in God, Government, Power, Fate, Custom, Tradition, Law, State, and a multitude of errors, myths and prejudices, what chances do Reason, Morality, Rights, Liberty and Self-Responsibility have left? - J.Z., 17.5.92. - This ignores that many have the former (a faith in a God), all too many still only a faith in Government, Power, Fate, Custom, Tradition and Law, and quite a few a mixture of all or most. Under panarchism all could get their preferences (well, at least worship of the Unknown) - at their own risk and expense. - J.Z., n.d. & 24.6.00, 19.11.10.

FAITH: Despotism may govern without faith, but Liberty cannot.” - Tocqueville, quoted by Leonard E. Read in Who's Listening? p.118. Also quoted by Read in: Castles in the Air, p.166. – Even liberty should “govern” only over volunteers, in accordance with their notions of liberties and rights. – Facts, experience, natural laws and knowledge of them, leading to firm convictions, is a much better foundation for liberty than mere faith. However, the faith in freedom should also go beyond one’s own experience. It is always the best “horse” that we should be betting on. – In any case of doubt bet on freedom rather than on despotism. – Even the most powerful despot is just one man. Naked, in most cases, he would rather look ridiculous. - J.Z., 19.11.10. - DESPOTISM & LIBERTY

FAITH: For all your relations with dissenters you have to renounce your faith and exclusive adherence to one book, one prophet, one leader, one guru, one dogma, one god, and have to recognize the existence of a multitude of them and the fact that most others have made quite different choices among them. Faith, dogmas and rituals are something for private practice only, among volunteers. - The opposite means religious wars, for which we have still too many practical examples - all without any moral justification on either side. - J.Z., 14.11.97 & 14.6.00. - RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE, NONCONFORMISTS, DISSENTERS, TOLERANCE, VARIETY, DIVERSITY, RELIGIOUS WARS

FAITH: Many atheists seem to be unaware that their combined beliefs embrace faiths that are just as intolerant as the religious ones once were, especially their territorial, totalitarian, communist and socialist dogmas. - J.Z., 5.12.94 & 13.6.00. - ATHEISM

FALKE, KLAUS, See: EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY COOPERATIVE [And whatever other files he cares to enter here to describe his panarchistic efforts, either, likewise, in German or in an English translation or both. - I cannot do it all, to his or my satisfaction. - J.Z., 14.9.11.]


FANATICISM: Fanaticism is an evil, but it is not the greatest of evils. It is good that a people should be roused by any means from a state of utter torpor; - that their minds should be diverted from objects merely sensual to meditations, however erroneous, on the mysteries of the moral and intellectual world; and from interests which are immediately selfish to those which relate to the past, the future, and the remote.” - T. B. Macaulay, Dante, 1824. (KNIGHT'S QUARTERLY MAGAZINE, Jan.) - This presumes that fanaticism is the best means to rouse them, better e.g. than free individual choices and the practical examples set by them. - J.Z., 12.7.86. They would demonstrate, under personal law or exterritorial autonomy, the benefits, flaws, limits and failures of all systems, ideologies, utopias etc., which are still believed in and practised by their volunteers. –  Attractions would be maximized and fear minimized. Everyone would be free to advance at the own speed or stagnate or go backwards, if that is his or her choice. - J.Z., 3.5.12.

FANATICISM: Fanatics are ready to kill others to uphold their own limited point of view. - J.Z., 6.7.92. – If they limited their fanaticism to the own actions and affairs, it would not be so bad. Then they would wrong only themselves, i.e. whatever remains of their moral and rational nature, and not anyone who does not subscribe to their faith or voluntarily abides by it. – However, they will be hardest to convince of the rightfulness of and necessity for this tolerance and restriction upon their desire to impose their faith on others. – Such faiths will rise again and again and we might need an ideal militia to keep them in check. - J.Z., 20.11.10.

FANATICISM: There is only one step from fanaticism to barbarism.” - Denis Diderot (1713-1784), “Essai sur le mérite de la vertu.” (1745). - I doubt that most advocates of nuclear mass murder devices are fanatics. However, they either lack moral sense or ethical knowledge and adhere to ancient prejudices like collective responsibility and territorialism. – J.Z., 23.1.08. – BARBARISM, CRUELTIES, ATROCITIES, MASS MURDER, GENOCIDE, TRUE BELIEVERS

FANATICISM: Though they seem at opposite poles, fanatics of all kinds are actually crowded together at one; It is the fanatic and the moderate who are poles apart and never meet.” - Eric Hoffer – Only territorially are they wrongfully and unnecessarily crowded together. Under full exterritorial autonomy they could be peacefully coexist in all their varieties, side by side, or living far apart, all doing only their own things for or to themselves, without having to achieve any compromises with dissenters. – J.Z., 23.1.08. - INTOLERANCE, TERRORISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, MODERATION, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM


FASHIONS & PANARCHISM: While generally approving the freedom of expression action in fashion, all too much reminds me of the absurdities in modern paintings and sculptures. A good human body could do without their aid and a bad one could hardly be improved by it. - J.Z., 31.8.04.  - But even panarchies that are objectively absurd and wrong, not just in my opinion - for the dissenters, in their ideas and practices of them among themselves, can at the same time be rational and rightful, at least as learning experiences, for their voluntary members. - J.Z., 14.9.04, 3.5.12.

FAST CHANGES, FUTURE SHOCK: The world is moving so fast these days that the man who says it can't be done is generally interrupted by someone doing it." Source? But why should all people progress or regress at the same speed and to the same extent? - J.Z., 14.9.85, 14.1.93. - I think that under panarchism changes in the political, economic and social spheres would come even faster, in the average, but for each individual and voluntary group only to the extent that they are wanted and thus they would not be perceived as shocking. - J.Z., 5.9.04, 14.9.04. – The economic progress achieved under that condition would also speed up scientific and technical progress. For instance, there would be more funds for space and life extension research. – J.Z., 3.5.12.

FATE: For man is man and master of his fate.” - Tennyson, The Marriage of Geraint, I, 355. – Would it not be nice if that were quite true already? – J.Z., 14.2.08. – Individual secessionism, exterritorial autonomy for volunteers and full monetary and financial freedom would be great steps in this direction. – J.Z., 20.11.10. – MAN, SELF-DETERMINATION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT

FATE: Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds.” - Franklin D. Roosevelt, Pan American Day address, April 15, 1939. – He, certainly was a prisoner of his own mind and its errors. Unfortunately, he had the territorial power to make his errors mismanage the lives of other Americans as well. He no more than any other US president, would let his involuntary victims secede from his rule and systematic and anti-economic meddling – or from his foreign policy. – J.Z., 14.12.08. - MINDS, PREJUDICES, MYTHS, BELIEFS, TERRITORIALISM, SECESSIONISM, KNOWLEDGE & APPRECIATION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, DIS.

FATE: Men at some time are masters of their fates.” - Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act I, sc. 2, l. 139. – They have all too small chances for that after being government-educated and while remaining subjected to territorialism and monetary and financial despotism. – Shakespeare did not realize that as yet – but we should. – J.Z., 20.11.10. – DIS.

FATE: Well, history can't be changed … but our future is always in our own hands.” - R. A. Wilson, Masks of the Illuminati, p.180. - Well, historians have almost made a habit out of changing their histories away from historic realities - in accordance with their personal prejudices and special interests. - J.Z., 22.1.02. – Alas, all individuals do not have panarchistic choices as yet for their own future. – J.Z., 22.12.08. – PANARCHISM, CHOICE, INDIVIDUALISM, TERRITORIALISM, HISTORY, FUTURE, MAN, CHANGE, DIS., HISTORY

FATE: Who can control his fate?” - Shakespeare, Othello, V, 1604. - Everyone to be free to control his own fate to the extent that it could possibly depend upon his own decisions. - J.Z., 3.10.85. - Nobody at present, everybody in the future, as far as is humanly possible - under panarchy. - J.Z., 12.7.86. - CONTROL & FREEDOM, SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION, VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, WHICH IS, INEVITABLY, MISMANAGED BY POLITICIANS & BUREAUCRATS, BOTH OF THEM POWER ADDICTS.

FATHERLAND, MOTHERLAND: By the way, home (patria) is not, necessarily, a territorial or a fixed reality. The ancients had already observed this when they said: "Ubi bene, ibi patria." ["Where the goodness is, there is my home"]. - Gian Piero de Bellis in his "Waiting for the bomb." - Appendix: Waiting for the Bomb? -TERRITORIALISM, HOME COUNTRY, OWN COUNTRY, NATIONALISM

FATTAL, ANTOINE: Le statut legal des non-Musulmans en pays d'Islam, Beirut, Imprimerie Catholique, 1958.

FAULTS: Faults, mistakes, errors, flawed actions are to be admitted as learning experiments - but only at the risk and expense of the voluntary participants. As far as possible, only innocents and non-participants are to be protected against the consequences of insufficiently informed or stupid actions by the remaining addicts to territorial power. – The exterritorialists might come to form the greatest power on Earth – but only for the upkeep of their exterritorial rights and liberties against all threats to them. - J.Z., 12.7.86, 2.2.02, 20.11.10, 3.5.12. - MISTAKES, ERRORS, EXPERIMENTS, ACTIONS, LEARNING, MILITIA, INTERNATIONAL OF ALL MINORITY GROUPS, DEFENCE, LIBERATION, TOLERANCE

FAVORITISM: A fair field and no favors.” – Leonard E. Red, The Free Man's Almanac. – No territorial field and its rulers is or can be fair to all of those living and working in this “field”. – J.Z., 20.11.10, 3.5.12. - FAIRNESS & FREEDOM

FEAR OF FREEDOM: We are willing enough to praise freedom when it is safely tucked away in the past and cannot be a nuisance. In the present, amidst dangers whose outcome we cannot foresee, we get nervous about her, and admit censorship.” – E. M. Forster (1879-1970), Two Cheers for Democracy, 1951. - Not only censorship but all too many other and quite wrongful territorial government powers. They would be right only for and among volunteers. - J.Z., 26. 11. 06. - ESPECIALLY IN CRISIS TIMES, WHEN IT SHOULD BE MORE APPRECIATED, REALIZED & UTILIZED THAN EVER BEFORE, PANARCHISM

FEAR OF FREEDOM: Word for today: Eleutherophobia. e·leuth·er·o·pho·bi·a – n. 1. The fear of freedom. – From - It is largely based upon ignorance of freedom and of individual rights and liberties, especially economic liberties and the numerous great opportunities they do provide for all. - It seems that they have never been sufficiently compiled and published as well as explained. - Certainly not in governmental constitutions and their bills of rights. - J.Z., 25. 11. 06.

FEAR: A man who fears, no longer guides and controls himself; right and wrong become shadowy and indifferent to him; the grim phantom drives, and he betakes himself to the path - whatever it is - that seems to offer the best chance of safety. We see the same vague dread acting upon the nations.” - Auberon Herbert, in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.403. - If they were to define their fears properly, then they would in many cases realize that they fear territorial domination over their lives and that this fear would tend to disappear if they were free to secede as individuals from territorial States - and other coercive organizations - and associate with like-minded people, forming governments or societies of their own dreams. Territorial statism has, on all sides, build-up powerful machines, including nuclear war preparations, which individuals and minorities, even majorities, have good reasons to fear. We should finally consider the best solvents for these powers. - Moreover, would they still be so fearful if they were organized in voluntary local militias for the protection of individual rights? - J.Z., 17.6.00, 3.5.12. – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, TERRITORIALISM & ITS POWERS

FEAR: It's quite natural that money should be found for war more easily than for adventure. After all, fear is an emotion deeper, ghastlier than any other. Insurance against fear is so much more imperative than is satisfaction of curiosity. Nobody's home will be prepared, nobody's life saved or freedom secured by conquest of Mars.” - Eric Frank Russell, Dreadful Sanctuary, p.40. - Somebody once reckoned that the costs of the moon landing could have been covered if everyone wanting to watch it on TV had been charged $ 5. People spend enormously for their curiosity, on literature, tourism, entertainment. Would we have much to fear of other societies if they did not have e.g. compulsory taxation and conscription and unjust laws, territorially imposed upon all? Could not all the assets now in the hands of despotic regimes be mobilized as redemption funds for the overthrow of these regimes? Even libertarians like Russell have let their thinking become all too much conditioned by existing practices. - The institutions an practices, which we do have good reasons to fear, are not products of nature but man-made, in ignorance, under prejudices and with bad intentions. - We have not yet fully mobilized all the powers of the ideas, resources, talents and manpower of liberty against any kind of oppression and exploitation. Freedom could become the strongest motive - and the strongest power, if we bothered to make it so. - Are we afraid of that? - J.Z., 17.6.00, 3.5.12. - AS A STRONG MOTIVE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SECESSIONISM & EXTERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, VS. TERRITORIALISM, LIBERATION, GENUINE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, MILITIA, DEFENCE, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, MILITARY INSURRECITONS

FEAR: Men not afraid to die and also using their reasoning power to the fullest, are almost invincible. - J.Z., 6/76. – If they know all individual rights and liberties and do make the best possible use of them. – J.Z., 14.12.08. – WAR AIMS, DESERTION, FRATERNIZATION, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, PANARCHISM, DEATH, REASON, STRENGTH, MILITIA, INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS, LIBERATION

FEAR: One can fear too much as well as too little. - J.Z., 27.9.90. - I never understood how so many people can complacently accept the existence and accumulation of mass extermination or anti-people mass murder devices, and that in hands of territorial governments that were responsible for all the wars in the past and present. - J.Z., 26.6.00.

FEAR: The fearless man is his own salvation.” - Robert Bridges, The First Seven Divisions, 5.12.1917. - That ought to be highly qualified. - E.g.: A man able to overcome his fears and prepared to take some risks may achieve his own salvation, while a panic stricken man may perish. - The fearless man may be a fool who will cause one disaster after the other for himself and others, by ignoring real dangers, rather than anticipating and avoiding them. If we do not fear war with ABC mass murder devices, then it will become all the more likely. And only those, who do fear despotism, inflation and unemployment, enough, will have a strong motivation to do ponder and something sensible and rightful about them. - J.Z., 17.6.00, 3.5.12. – Fearless soldiers have done and still do much damage, especially when fighting for all too wrongful causes. Have they the courage to face those, as armed insurrectionists, who sent them into senseless slaughters? – J.Z., 14.12.08. – Have the victims of monetary and financial despotism the courage to engage in a peaceful monetary and financial revolution, as business-like as possible? – J.Z., 20.11.10. – COURAGE, SOLDIERS, MILITARY DISOBEDIENCE & INSURRECTIONS

FEAR: The psychic condition of the atomized mass, governed by anonymous forces, is one of permanent anxiety. The masses are afraid of their leaders, the leaders are afraid of the masses and it is an amusing question which of these fears is the larger one. It can easily be proven that all tyrants, from Napoleon to his modern caricatures were driven forward by an overwhelming fear, that they themselves felt the illegitimacy of their power and tried to make up for it by ever new adventures and successes. …” - Dr. Herbert Stegeman, DER TAGESSPIEGEL, 25.11.51. - That might have applied to Dr. H. S. and DER TAGESSPIEGEL as well, because they were anxious to keep unpopular, different, fundamental ideas out of it, especially radical freedom ideas. - J.Z., 18. 6.00, 3.4.12. - THE HALLUCINATION OF THE AGE, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP

FEAR: would they … "fear liberty" too much to give themselves this new beginning?” – G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, a Man Alone, p.15. - They soon would not, if at least the few among them who are willing to give freedom a try were free to go ahead. - J.Z., n.d. - FEAR OF LIBERTY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM.

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: More power to the Federal Government? Deprive the Federal Government as well as the State Governments of all the power they already got! - J.Z., 1974. - Then do away with the power of Local Governments - leaving all free to make whatever voluntary arrangements they do like for themselves. - J.Z., 18.6.00. – No government has the right to territorial power. All should have power only over their own kind of volunteers. – J.Z., 3.5.12. - POWER, CENTRALIZATION? DECENTRALIZATION – ALL THE WAY, BUT ON AN INDIVIDUAL & VOLUNTARY BASIS: PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, DIS.

FEDERAL MONEY: Clearly, local government has a duty and a responsibility to resist centralism, to resist the temptation of direct money from Canberra. It may be easy money but it will be hot money.” - Peter A. Wright, Australian Campaign Against Centralism. - Even local governments are already small centralized empires on a territorial basis, with involuntary subjects, taxpayers and victims of their rulings. They are victimizers themselves, corrupt, power-hungry and enforcers of their monopolies and tribute levies. They do not allow any of their victims to secede from them and their monopoly services and levies. - That they themselves are also victimized - and subsidized - by State and Federal Authorities does not excuse them sufficiently. - J.Z., 18.6.00. - GOVERNMENT SPENDING, HANDOUTS, SUBSIDIES, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM

FEDERALISM ACCORDING TO ROCKER: The great task facing us today is not a problem of a few large states, but co-ordinated co-operation of ALL national groups on equal conditions and equal rights. Such a federation is, however, only possible if it is no longer influenced by separate national interests, but sets forth as its aim the furthering of GENERAL interests, and guarantees to every member of the federation the right for its aspirations for political, economic and social development. Only a REAL FEDERATION of European peoples is today still able to bridge the hostile rivalries between European national groups, fostered and encouraged by a narrow-minded nationalism, detrimental to all civilization ..." - Rudolf Rocker, "Nationalism and Culture", 547. - A rather narrow-minded territorial approach to federalism. Individual and minority secessions are not considered as options at all. I would call this a rather imperial federalism. All powers to the international co-ordinators, all, naturally, coordinating in the "general interest"? How can "peoples" federate, when they are not unanimous? And are minorities and local majorities to be free to "de-federate" themselves, to do their own thing? Is there, really, anything that could be done only on a European scale and could not be achieved by free trade and free contracts, freedom of association, free communications and free migration etc.? I see little that is panarchistic or anarchistic about his ideas here. Here he is just another territorial archist. - J.Z., n.d. & 3.5.12. - Federation should stake place only on the basis of individual decision-making, not decisions by majorities or State governments. Only then would they be genuine federations.  Along the way, possibly, several different European Unions and World Federations could happen, all only with voluntary members. E.g., one of European Free Traders and one of the remaining Protectionists. These could establish sufficient international ties to keep the peace. - J.Z., 14.9.04, 3.5.12.

FEDERALISM WITHOUT & WITH EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS: Federalism without exterritorial autonomy for minorities and individual secessionism is fraudulent and coercive, an unripe notion and immature practice, from Proudhon to today's anarchists and limited government advocates. - J.Z., 27 June 89. – Only federations of volunteers only could have unanimous approval and this degree of agreement cannot be achieved territorially. – J.Z.,  3.5.12. – CONSENT, VOLUNTARISM, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & CONTRACT

FEDERALISM, EXTERRITORIAL VS. TERRITORIAL: Territorial federalism, consisting of a general federation, sub-states and local governments grants each of these levels of governments a territorial monopoly. There is only limited competition between the federations, States and local governments. Their subjects can at most relocate in another State, local government or in a foreign federation or State. But they do already demonstrate a limited coexistence of different kinds of laws for different kinds of people, e.g. soldiers under military law. Moreover, in these different forms of territorial governments different parties are often ruling. However, this territorial subdivision and decentralization does not go far enough and still disfranchises the individual, whose individual sovereignty and right to individually secede and associate is not recognized by this system. The transition to full self-government, self-determination etc. would be reached only once one-person "cantons" would be recognized, too, as well as cantons made up exterritorially, i.e. of volunteers only and federations of such sovereign individuals and cantons, all under constitutions, laws and jurisdictions of their own choice, i.e., if individual were granted full voting rights on their own affairs, including those affairs which all too many people regard as "public affairs" to be administered by territorially monopoly institutions. – J.Z., n.d. & 3.5.12. – VOTING, FREE CHOICE AMONG GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES, VOLUNTARISM IN EVERY SPHERE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS COMMUNITIES & SOCIETIES

FEDERALISM, TERRITORIAL OR EXTERRITORIAL? Experience teaches us that every social innovation first permeates one little circle and only gradually achieves general recognition. For just this reason federalism (*) offers the best security for unrestricted development, since it leaves to every community the possibility of trying out within its on circle any measures which it may think fitted to advance the welfare of its citizens. The community is, therefore, in a position to apply practical tests and so to subject immediately to the proof of positive experience any proposed innovation. It thus exerts an enlivening and stimulating influence upon neighboring communities, which are thus themselves put in a position to judge the fitness or unfitness of the innovation. ..." Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, 424. - (*) I would rather state "exterritorial autonomy for all volunteers" here. Whether or not such volunteer groups would also want to federate into one or several national, continental or world-wide federations, granting any powers to their federations, which they like to transfer to them, while retaining the rights of communities and individuals to secede from such federations, should be left up to them. Some of them might be already world-wide associations of volunteers anyhow. I for one hold that mainly only an improved individual rights code would be required and local militias, internationally federated, to uphold such a code for the international relations, for all the diverse panarchies or exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers that would result, and this in each case only to the extent that they are internally claimed, by voluntary members.  If e.g. one group, like Catholics, believes in internal censorship for its members then it would be wrong to impose freedom of expression and freedom of information upon the members of such a community. - J.Z., 13.1.93, 14.9.04. – STATES, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, DECENTRALIZATION.

FEDERALISM: 1.) PROUDHON, PIERRE JOSEPH: Du Principe Fédératif, [chapitre VII] (1863) [Français]. - Pierre Joseph Proudhon,  Du Principe Fédératif - 2.) RICHARD, MAX: Max Richard,  Principes et Méthodes du Fédéralisme - (1956) [Français] - Gian Piero de Bellis put these two titles in his Polyarchy - Polyarchie - Poliarchia - Poliarquia collection. - 3.) Possibly the only copy of an English translation of a paper by another French decentralist (who mainly dealt with decentralizing large corporations, through work-coops, or other self-management arrangements), Hycinthe Dubreuil, on federalism, which I had lent to Dr. H. G. Pearce in Sydney, seems to have ended up, together with his library, with one of his heirs, a son in Canberra. Years ago I tried, in vain, to get it back from there. - His excuse was then, that the library had not been catalogued as yet. - J.Z., 27.8.11.

FEDERALISM: A world federation could be devised which would let old kinds of old and new civilizations and cultures keep their identities. (Popular view.) - Need States become federated when individuals and minority groups are free to join or to secede from them, to associate freely on the basis of exterritorial autonomy and personal laws and when they are free to communicate, migrate, to trade, invest and start a business anywhere except on private properties and without permission of their owners? - J.Z., 24.4.88, 22.6.00, 20.11.10. – At most one or a few world-federations of volunteers might be needed to uphold this degree of secessionism and of voluntary associationism. - WORLD FEDERATION, EUROPE, WORLD GOVERNMENT, PEACE THROUGH SECESSIONISM & EXTERRITORIALISM OR THROUGH TERRITORIAL UNITY? COMPETING WORLD-FEDERATIONS, ALL ONLY OF VOLUNTEERS.

FEDERALISM: Competition in Government: The only way, then, to prevent the monopoly of power from becoming absolute is to create a competitive market for government; to give the citizens, the customers, a choice of jurisdiction. That is exactly what our peculiar American system of divided authority, between states and federal government, accomplished. (1) The Constitution, as originally conceived, set up independent nations within an independent nation - imperium in imperio - each with delimited powers. In that way, it was hoped, the polarization of power that undermines freedom would be prevented. The central government was given certain specified chores to do; it would not intervene in local affairs, unless the state governments were not able to maintain order. If the state government got rough with its customers, they could easily transfer their allegiance to another state. (2) - Frank Chodorov, The Income Tax …, p.89. - (1) Obviously, it did not accomplish this aim or only VERY incompletely, as is inevitable, as long as the principles of territorialism, of collective sovereignty, and compulsory citizenship and uniform laws for all are maintained. - (2) That is like saying: If the customer of a monopoly shop in one State is dissatisfied with its service then he is "free" to shop in another State, from its monopoly shop. Consumer sovereignty means VERY MUCH more, towards all government "services" and disservices. The customers are often tied to jobs, homes, family members and friends and while freedom of movement has become relatively easy during the last 100 years, it is still costly. Local freedom and self-government means MUCH more for individuals and dissenting minorities. Free migration, even if quite free and even if it were free of all costs and other disadvantages, is not a sufficient substitute for full exterritorial autonomy, together with like-minded people, wherever one lives and works. Territorialism must go. - J.Z., 18.6.00, 3.5.12. - COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, THE MONOPOLY OF POWER, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM

FEDERALISM: Goldwater was discussing with me an amazingly perceptive insight: that in the natural development of federal power in this country there was a natural tendency toward totalitarianism.” - Karl Hess, Dear America, p.67. - Should he have been surprised, seeing that individual and group secessionism is suppressed in all territorial States? - A basic totalitarian trait, which all democratic to openly authoritarian States do already have in common, is their territorialism, with its many despotic features. - J.Z., 18.6.00. - TOTALITARIANISM & TERRITORIALISM

FEDERALISM: In ancient Greece, the confederation EXPERIMENT was very DIFFERENT FROM the THEORY. The powers were administered by appointed political deputies. Hence the weakness, disorders, and finally the destruction.” - Madison (&Hamilton), 1789, The Federalist Papers, # 18. - All TERRITORIAL federations have a fundamental inbuilt flaw, namely territorialism, which does not settle internal arguments but provokes them even into civil wars. - J.Z., 18.6.00. – Territorial lordship cannot be sufficiently reformed, no more so than slavery and serfdom can be. At least even slavery and feudalist relationships can become confined to volunteers. Territorialism, by its very nature, cannot be so confined. It does, inevitably, prevent individual free choices in whole populations, which, inevitably, made up of diverse individuals all with some different preferences for their lives, not only in their private, family, professional relationships and as sovereign consumers for ordinary consumer goods and services. Each “free election” under territorialism does already show some of this diversity – but still fails very much to represent sovereign individuals and their diverse individual choices in all spheres.– J.Z., 3.5.12. - ANCIENT GREECE, TERRITORIALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

FEDERALISM: In number 45 of THE FEDERALIST, Madison writes: "The power delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce … The powers reserved to the several state will extend to all objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the state." - And so THE FEDERALIST goes on, promise after promise, that the state governments will be free in all respects except to deal with foreign governments. At one time, Madison described the federal government as the foreign department for the state governments.” - Frank Chodorov, The Income Tax …, p.86. - The "few" powers of the Federal Government were significant and enough to permit it to develop into a monstrous territorial State. Even a bill of rights was originally omitted. The later amendments to the constitution, granting some rights were and still are incomplete declarations of individual human rights and were legislatively largely invalidated on every point. The militia idea, monetary freedom, competition with the P.O., individual and group secessionism and free trade were never clearly declared and specified. With foreign affairs and war powers granted, despotism was still inbuilt and so was protectionism. Worst of all, territorialism was established at every level of government. The general welfare clause was left open to abuse, and the parliamentary and leadership system as well as the powers of the Supreme Court. Later came enormous taxation powers through the income tax and withholding tax provisions. - This constitution was never an ideal one but flawed from the beginning and it turned worse as time went on. Even the question of slavery was not rightfully settled by it right away. So it should not be idealized by anyone. - To each his own constitution, laws, government, society, jurisdiction etc.! - J.Z., 18.6.00. – Most read monetary despotism into the U.S. Constitution, while some, like Lysander Spooner, read free banking into it. Territorialists still think it to be a fundamentally sound document, while Lysander Spooner revealed it as one without any real authority. To each the constitution and the monetary and financial system of the own individual choice! – J.Z., 20.11.10, 3.5.12. - ORIGINAL INTENTION VS. LONG TERM EFFECT OF FEDERAL TAXATION & CENTRAL BANKING

FEDERALISM: My solution is world (better; galactic) federalism: libertarianism for libertarians, statism for statists etc.” - Wayne Wallace Woodward, THE CONNECTION 129, p.54 of 28.7.85. - I would add an "s" behind "libertarianism" and "statism", seeing that there are so many different kinds of them. – Just like there are xyz varieties of anarchism, if one includes the hyphenated forms and their opposites, in which the seemingly secondary aim has really become the main one. Federalism without exterritorial autonomy for minorities and individual secessionism is fraudulent and coercive, an unripe notion and immature practice, but nevertheless still the dominant notion, from Proudhon's anarchists to today's capitalistic libertarians and limited government advocates. - J.Z., 27.6.89 & 26.6.00, 3.5.12. - PANARCHISM

FEDERALISM: Of all checks on democracy, federation has been the most efficacious and the most congenial. … The federal system limits and restrains the sovereign power by dividing it and by assigning to government only certain defined rights. It is the only method of curbing not only the majority but the power of the whole people.” - Lord Acton. - On its own it hasn't sufficed to end or sufficiently curb the excessive power and further growth of federal power. It must be supplemented by individual secessionism and by all other individual rights and liberties, e.g. by ideal volunteer militias for the protection of individual rights and liberties and their international federation, by panarchies (communities of volunteers, exterritorially autonomous, which provide e.g. their members only with the kinds of services they want for themselves and which are freely competing, as societies and communities within the over-all human society, within all countries, nations, continents and world-wide, under by personal law, their kind of voluntary taxation, usually a much more complete code of individual rights, and by monetary freedom, popular initiatives and referendum – among their volunteers.). - Have the U.S. federal government, that of Canada, Australia and the German Federal Republic been sufficiently curbed? - Conventional territorial federalism is no more effective in restraining power than is the supposed threefold division of powers. Neither of them does sufficiently reform the fundamentals. - J.Z., 5.4.89, 22.6.00, 1.2.02, 3.5.12. - STATE AND FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, DEMOCRACY

FEDERALISM: Of all checks on democracy, federation has been the most efficacious and the most congenial. ... The federal system limits and restrains the sovereign power by dividing it and by assigning to government only certain defined rights. It is the only method of curbing not only the majority but the power of the whole people." - Lord Acton. - 1.) On its own it has not sufficed to prevent the excessive growth of federal States and their powers and takings. 2.) Federalism must be supplemented not only by geographical but also be individual secessionism and exterritorial federalism. 3.) Federalism must also be countered by individual rights declarations and suitable institutions for upholding these rights, especially volunteer militias. 4.) Why should one thus reject, out of hand, e.g. popular initiatives and referenda or recalls as at least supplementary safeguards? 5.) Any system of voluntary taxation might prove superior to federalism. 6.) There should be freedom to set up competing exterritorial federations or several different panarchies in the same territory. 7.) A federation of local militias, made up of volunteers for the protection of individual rights, might prove to be helpful and so might 8.) e.g. international federations of free traders. 9.) To the extent that, e.g. panarchistically, the sovereignty of individuals can be achieved, it would offer more safeguards for rights and liberties than formal political federalism could. 10.) Have federal politicians proven to be more moral, rational and informed people than state and local government politicians? - J.Z., 5.4.89, 8.4.89, 3.5.12.

FEDERALISM: Our authority has been handed over to the federal power. We expect our economic solutions, our habitats, yes, even our entertainment, to derive from that remote abstract power. We are like wards in an orphan asylum. The shaping of the style of our lives is removed from us-we pay for huge military adventures and social experiments so separated from our direct control that we do not even know where to begin to criticize. ... So our condition is spiritless. We wait for abstract impersonal powers to save us, we despise the abstractness of those powers, we loathe ourselves for our own apathy.” - Norman Mailer. - STATISM, CENTRALISM, POWER, TERRITORIALISM, FROM FEDERAL TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

FEDERALISM: The federalistic structure of medieval society is threatened. No longer can we see the body politic as COMMUNITAS COMMUNITATUM, as system of groups, each of which in its turn is a system of groups. All that stands between the State and the individual has but a derivative and precarious existence.” - F. W. Maitland, Moral Personality & Legal Personality, in David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p.162. – The same could be said for the territorial State and the territorial local governments. – J.Z., 3.5.12. - PANARCHISM

FEDERALISM: The other tradition Kropotkin makes mention of is the popular or federalist tradition. If we seek a name that will convey its precise meaning, Kropotkin wrote, we might well call it "the libertarian tradition". The libertarian, unlike the imperialist, totally distrusts hierarchy, formal political authority, and organized government. Convinced that men are created by nature for a genuine social live, although they have not yet attained any significant degree of this potential, the libertarian, according to Kropotkin, denies that external compulsion and force are essential to order and peace. To the contrary, human freedom is only possible where men abandon the state and seek instead to create social life through the principles of federalism, mutual aid, and self-discipline.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.5. - Other kinds of federalists or secessionists might want to uphold quite different principles among themselves - and they, too, do have the moral right to do so. - J.Z., 18.6.00. - LIBERTARIANISM & ANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL, WHO WISH IT FOR THEIR OWN AFFAIRS.

FEDERALISM: There is nothing wrong with federalism on any, even the largest scale, if only it is competitive, by individual choice and consent of voluntary members only, and as long as individuals and dissenting groups remain free to secede from any federation or any of its members, i.e., as long a no territorial coercion is imposed upon all people living in a region or country, continent or the world. - J.Z., 17.2.96, 22.6.00. - VOLUNTARISM & EXTERRITORIALITY, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, WORLD GOVERNMENTS & WORLD FEDERATIONS PANARCHISM

FEDERALISM: To retain autonomy for branches and sub-groups, not the federation but the branches and groups ought to collect the membership fees and use them at their discretion, paying to the federation only for those services which they do want, selected from a price list of services offered by the federation. And members should have the choice of being members of the local group or of the federation only, expressing that by the direction of their contributions. To imitate in private and idealistic associations, especially in anarchistic and libertarian ones, e.g. a libertarian party, like the Workers Party and, later, the Progress Party of Australia, all the mistakes of territorial States is not advisable. - Nor should the federation have a monopoly for the supply of certain services. Outsourcing should be allowed to branches as well. Consumer sovereignty - even within libertarian organizations. If they can't stand the competition then they ought to fail. - J.Z., 27.4.89 & 22.6.00. - DECENTRALIZATION, AUTONOMY & FINANCE, LIBERTARIAN PARTIES




FEDERATIONS, IMPERIALISM, TREATY AREAS & MULTIPLE SOVEREIGNTIES: Federations can expand their territory without being imperialistic. Such an expansion is a matter not of absorption or subjection, but of the extension of a treaty area (*), which benefits both partners and will provide them with greater security. (**).... the old  international law contained a number of provisions which allowed more than one sovereignty over (***)the same territory." (****)- Otto von Habsburg, The Social Order of Tomorrow, London, 1958, pp 148 & 149. - I discovered this somewhat panarchistic work on 6 July 1985, together with another such reference, that I do not remember or jotted down. How many more such references remain to be "discovered" by panarchists? – (*) or a treaty sphere of independent actions! See the "capitulations" and consular jurisdiction and mixed courts and the remnant of personal law. – (**) And more justice, by their standards. – (***) not over but within!) (****) Rather, over different volunteer groups, all exterritorially autonomous. - J.Z., 14.1.93.

FEE FOR SERVICE: I submit that the vast majority, if not all, of government functions could be performed on a fee-for service basis, so that no tax would be necessary to subsidize that function.” - JAG, Aug. 26, 1978. - PAY AS YOU GO, TAXATION, SUBSIDIES, GOVERNMENTS, VOLUNTARY TAXATION

FEEDBACK: Healthy organizations - such as those normally found in the marketplace - must not only respond to feedback, but, in order to enlarge upon their support, actively seek out such feedback in an effort better to plan their operations. (Product market surveys are an example of this effort.) The greater responsiveness of market organizations to feedback is not due to any greater sense of maturity on their part, but is dictated by the competitive nature of the market in which consumers are neither compelled to pay for the product of any given organization (as they are with tax-supported government organizations) nor prohibited from transferring their business from one organization to another.” - Butler D. Shaffer, Violence as Product of Imposed Order, p.27. – Panarchism would provide healthy feedback effects even in the sphere of politics and of whole social and economic systems - all only for their volunteers. – J.Z., 14.12.08, 20.11.10. - MARKET & BUSINESS

FEES FOR SERVICES: Introduce competitive fees for all government services. … “- Progress Party, Queensland, n.d. - If they were made competitive, with private and cooperative alternative services, then fees would not have to be introduced. Free pricing and subscriptions would follow naturally - for those services which people really want and are willing to pay for. - J.Z., 2.2.02. - VOLUNTARY TAXATION VS. COMPULSORY TAXATION

FEETHAM, JUSTICE: Report of the Hon. Mr. Justice Feetham to the Shanghai Municipal Council, 1931. (Millar's bibliography on Exterritoriality in China.)

FELLER, A.H. & MANLEY, O. HUDSON, Editors: A collection of diplomatic and consular laws and regulations of various countries, Washington, Carnegie Endownment for International Peace, 1933, 2 volumes, XXX, 1505pp, forms, bibl., index.

FERAUD-GIRAUD, L.J.D.: De la Juridiction Francaise dans les Echelles du Levant et de Barbarie, 2 vols., Paris, 1866.

FERAUD-GIRAUD, L.J.D.: Les Justices Mixtes dans lea Pays hors Chretienite, Paris, 1834.

FERRUA, PIETRO, to JOHN ZUBE, 7 May 89, 1/2 page, 109, in ON PANARCHY XV, in PEACE PLANS 879.

FEUDAL GOVERNMENTS: We have feudal governments in a commercial age. It would be but an easy extension of our commercial system to pay a private emperor a fee for services, as we pay an architect, an engineer, or a lawyer." - Emerson. If he had mentioned that this option should not only extend to emperors but to democratic prime ministers and republican presidents, ultimately to any government or non-governmental society, which voluntary customers do want for themselves, his thought might have gathered less moss. - J.Z. 13.1.93.

FEUDALISM, TERRITORIALISM & PANARCHISM: Territorial rule was the essence of feudalism and it continues this essence of feudalism into our days, within democracies, republics, limited governments and constitutional monarchies as well as among dictatorships, tyrannies and totalitarian regimes. In all of them the people are essentially owned, exploited and controlled by "their" governments, used as educational, tax- and military slaves, exploited and "protected" by their rulers, who do pretend that they do and can sufficiently represent them. At least the minorities are more or less suppressed in all territorial States. At best a governmentally mis-educated and misinformed majority has some limited influence upon its rulers and it grants all too often and for all too long the sanction of the victims to its rulers. If that rule were only applied to the temporary majorities then this would be OK from the panarchistic point of view. But majority despotism over dissenting individuals and minorities is still despotism. - J.Z., 1.8.04, 3.5.12.

FEUDALISM: Feudalism hasn't been abolished; it has been nationalized. - J.Z., 2.11.78. - NATIONALIZED, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, LANDLORDISM ON A NATIONAL SCALE, NATIONALISM

FEYERABEND, PAUL: Erkenntnis fuer freie Menschen, Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt/M, 1979, 272 S., JZL. - It concludes with a panarchistic - pluralistic remark: "Each group will have its own ideas and keep to them, quite dogmatically, if it wants to. Pluralism is a pluralism of groups, not a pluralism of ideas in one head. ..."

FICHAS: One of the ways of dropping out of the State's money system, 26, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505. - One of the less likely ones by now, due to the development of PC's and the Internet, which facilitates digitized clearing using a sound and self-chosen value standard. - J.Z., 18.10.11. – However, I still believe in the usefulness of clearing house certificates, in monetary denominations and using a sound value standard, as well as in the potential of other forms of paper money, using a sound value standard and being redeemable only in ready-for-sale and wanted consumer goods and services, with such notes issued e.g. by a local shopping centre, i.e. by its own kind of note-issuing bank, using any value standard acceptable to this shopping centre, this bank for shop foundation money and their customers. The prices, wages, fees etc. would be marked or agreed-upon or accepted value standard. Essentially, such competing paper monies would be clearing certificates, too, and as such they would not need redemption in rare metals to keep their purchasing power as stable as their value standard. But the local prices and wages might be measured in rare metal units and so would these clearing certificates. – As long as they are, locally, quite readily accepted at their nominal face value, these clearing certificates or this shop currency would be quite sound. The good monies of this kind would soon drive out the bad ones. – Timberlake has written much on the spread, details and functioning of this kind of alternative currency. – Generalizing: monetary and financial freedom are merely important aspects of panarchism or polyarchism. - J.Z., 3.5.12. - MONETARY FREEDOM, FREE BANKING

FICHTE & PANARCHY: Den Staat konstruiert Fichte so, dass er eine aus Individuen und nur aus Individuen bestehende Institution ist, wobei es jedem Einzelwesen freisteht, durch Vertrag dem Staatsverband beizutreten oder nicht." - Manfred Buhr on Fichte's Beitrag. (..., with each individual remaining free to enter the State contract or not.) - Fichte, quite explicitly, allowed individuals not only to join the State - even the Founding Fathers of the U.S. did that, but also to secede from it, individually. Today almost none of the ruling or influential members of the U.S.A. would concede that right of individual to secede. They even deny, to millions of people the right to join the U.S. by freely migrating into it. - J. Z. 6.1.93. -IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS VS. FREE MIGRATION, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM & THAT FOR MINORITIES, UNDER EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR THE SECESSIONISTS.

FICHTE, JOHANN GOTTLIEB: Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urteile des Publikums ueber die Franzoesische Revolution, 1793, 282pp, in PP 416. (Contribution to correct public opinion on the French Revolution.) Auszug ueber das Austrittsrecht in PEACE PLANS 399-401. Extract in English, 7pp, in PP 12 & 61-63, with 2 comments, 15pp, in PP 416. - An early theoretical defender of the right of individuals to secede from the State. He even declared this right and its practice to be characteristic for any revolution. Well, anyhow for the beginnings of any revolution. For successful revolutionaries are usually also territorialists and suppress this right just like the previous men in power did with their territorial powers. - J.Z., 28.8.04, 3.5.12. - Extracts from: Contributions to Rectify Public Opinion on the French Revolution, with some comments by J.Z., page 64, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506. - Besprechung: HAHNE, HEINRICH: Klassischer Anarchismus, Eine Jugendschrift Fichtes, 1 S., in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901. - Besprechung seines 1793 Werkes: "Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urteile des Publikums ueber die Franzoesische Revolution", fiched in PP 416. - 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? - J.Z. - Is this book as yet online, anywhere, in German and also, preferably, in English? When I searched for it, in June 09, there were 114 search results. A full text offer was not on the first page. Why are some of the most important books out of print for all too long, un-translated and not even put online or on disc? There is no law against it! - I did at least put it on a microfiche, in PEACE PLANS 416 and reproduced his passages on individual secessions (Austrittsrecht) but did not get around to scan the whole book in and presently scanning system is inoperative for lack of a suitable driver. - J.Z., 30.10.11.

FIELDING, HENRY: The History of Tom Jones, first published 1749, brings, in XII/12, a short hint towards Gypsie autonomy. “… for these people are subject to a formal government and laws of their own, and all pay obedience to one great magistrate, whom they call their king. …” - “Day make de gypsy ashamed of themselves and dat be ver terrible punishment; me are scarce ever known de gypsy so punish do harm any more. …” - “I must confess, sir”, said Jones, ”I have not heard so favourable an account of them as they seem to deserve.” - “Me vil tell you”, said the king, “how the difference is between you and us. My people rob your people, and your people rob one another.” - - “Their tribal customes sometimes have the force of law. …” - - “They established their own courts (romano – kris), conducted in the manner of the gypsy-like peoples of India. Taboos are strictly enforced and punished by fines or by expulsion from the tribe. (mahrimé, defilement, rejection).” – Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1958.

FIGHTING: But they've fucked it all up with typical left-wing hatred trips. They haven't mastered the Gita: the art of fighting with a loving heart.” - Wilson / Shea, Illuminatus II, p.30. - Libertarians could and should induce mass fraternization, mass desertion, military insurrections and revolutions, rather than engaging merely in conventional fighting, aiming to kill or wound as many of the enemy regime's conscripts as they can, or imprisoning them, as if they were not also victims to be liberated. - Panarchistic war and peace aims - and warfare methods - could turn most enemies into allies or at least neutrals. E.g., through recognizing all kinds of governments in exile, all only for their volunteers. - Explore how an ideal libertarian volunteer militia for the protection of individual rights should be structured, trained, armed and fight. – Explore also, record and publish all genuine individual rights and liberties in an ideal declaration of them. Explore further, how to almost instantly turn millions of POWs, deserters and refugees into productively employed and thus well- paid associates, as members of their self-chosen and exterritorially autonomous communities, if they want these for themselves. - Any idiot can get into ordinary bloody fighting. - J.Z., 18.7.00, 20.11.10. - LOVE, HATRED & LIBERATION, TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, WARFARE, DES. WAR AIMS, TURNING CAPTIVE NATIONS & PEOPLE INTO ALLIES OR NEUTRALS, DES., GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE

FIGHTING: It is a perplexing and unpleasant truth that when men already have “something worth fighting for” they do not feel like fighting.” - Eric Hoffer. – It is too early to generalize on this - as long as no one has as yet known, appreciated and enjoyed all rights and liberties. People who really have them all would, probably, be very jealous of them and also be prepared to fight for them if that should really become necessary. With all rights and liberties on their side - and sensibly utilized in their kind of defensive, revolutionary and liberating warfare - much fighting could be avoided and many victories could be gained almost without bloodshed. But the limited liberties and rights conceded by territorial governments - and their all too limited or wrongful war aims - do not inspire much enthusiasm to fight for them. Who hasn’t as yet been outvoted on many points by his “countrymen”? Who hasn’t as yet been exploited by them through taxation? – J.Z., 23.1.08. - LIBERTY, DEMOCRACY, TERRITORIALISM, WARS, AGGRESSION, DEFENCE, Q.

FIGHTING: The Irish don't know what they want and are prepared to fight to the death to get it.” - Sir Sidney Littlewood, President of the Law Society, Speech, 13 April 1961. - If both sides bothered to try to define their rightful war aims, without uncritically clinging to territorialism, that war, too, could be ended soon. - J.Z., 22.6.00. – Not only the Irish “freedom-fighters” do lack quite rightful war aims. – J.Z., 14.12.08. - WAR AIMS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS VS. TERRITORIALISM

FIGHTING: the support of the right against the wrong is worth fighting for.” - Ernest Benn, This Soft Age. - Or at least organizing, training and arming and resisting, by civil defence measures, by disobedience, secessions, tax strikes, refusals to accept government paper money, tyrannicide, sabotage, dissent, publicity and military ju-jitsu. Via rightful war and peace aims, government in exile, separate peace treaties, rightful treatment of deserters and refugees as neutrals or allies, the initiation of liberating revolutions and military insurrections, most if not all fighting can be avoided. - J.Z., 27.7.93 & 22.6.00, 3.5.12.

FIGHTING: We hear a great deal about "fighting for freedom" as if success depended upon warlike skills. On the contrary, the very first step toward freedom and its advancement is to cease one's own belligerent tactics. Initially, such a step would have the effect of silencing most freedom protagonists. Were this miracle accomplished, freedom would then have only her enemies to guard against.” - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.98. - Who, once he has understood it, would fight against the ones who uphold and practice principle: "To each the government or free society of his or her dreams!"? - J.Z., 181.6.00. - Especially when it is already partly realized by recognizing exterritorially autonomous governments in exile, of all kinds, and thereby allowing those formed by refugees and deserters full exterritorial autonomy for all their volunteers. – We could not have better allies against all despotic enemy regimes. – J.Z., 20.11.10. - BELLIGERENCE, OFFENSIVENESS, TACTICS, WARFARE, ASYLUM, REFUGEES, DESERTERS, POWs, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, IN FORM OF PANARCHIES, Q.

FIJI: Via free individual decision-making at least 3 different Fiji communities should be constituted, all autonomous and exterritorially ruling themselves under personal laws, each with its own taxation, parliamentary, administration and juridical system. From then on any military force will become more and more superfluous for Fiji - and almost no one would be willing to pay for it or to serve in it. The at least three autonomous groups would be 1.) One made up of native Fijians, 2.) one of Indians, 3.) one mixed community in which differences of race and religions would be considered as irrelevant. A constitutional convention should be called for the introduction of such a tolerant kind of constitutionalism. - J.Z., n.d.

FILTHY PIERRE: 7, 18, 21, 25, 32, 35, 42, 43, 45, 47, 49, 54, 60, 61, 67, 68, 79, in PEACE PLANS No. 505. -- 97, 124, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. - 3, 14ff, 18, 24, in ON PANARCHY V, in PP 554. - 10-12, 13, 36, 44, 57, 61, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585. In ON PANARCHY X, in PP 755. -- 14, 20, 28, in ON PANARCHY XIII, in PP 869. E.g. page 63 in ON PANARCHY XIV, in PP 870. -- 89, 90, 96, 98-100, in ON PANARCHY XV, in PP 879. - - 13, 22-23. 30-37, 43-44. 46-61, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901. --  TC 150, 74-78, 81-82, 92, 95-96, 102-103, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901. TC 153, 92, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901. TC 154, 95-96, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901. TC 155, 102-103, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901.

FINAL SOLUTION, A GENUINE ONE, WITH FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL: To call it a "final solution" goes, perhaps, a bit too far. But it is certainly a solution for man as he is now. Maybe in the far future almost all people will agree upon one kind of limited societal arrangements - but we are still very far from it. While they are as zealously in favor of particular regimes, the most appropriate response is to let them have them, for themselves, at their own expense and risk, to learn as much as they can through them - without bothering other people at all. Although we claim to be much more enlightened e.g. in the religious sphere, we do not make e.g. atheism compulsory, either, but, rather, defuse most religious movements via religious tolerance or religious liberty, including that for the atheists. Even that degree of enlightenment and practice of tolerance has not yet been universally achieved, even after hundreds of years. Religiously and ideologically motivated conquerors, terrorists and oppressors must, naturally, still be resisted - much better than democratic governments have done so far. In this respect even anarchists and libertarians could act as allies of somewhat rightful government efforts in this direction. - J.Z., 24.8.04, 3.5.12.


FINANCIAL FREEDOM & PANARCHISM: Obviously, under panarchism or polyarchism all kinds of financial freedom systems could be freely tried, e.g. diverse voluntary taxation and contribution schemes, competitive stock exchanges, gold-clauses and other value-preserving clauses in credit contracts, international lending and borrowing without government meddling, savings and investment banks and finance companies of all kinds. – J.Z., 3.5.12.


FINKELSTEIN, LOUIS: Jewish Self-Government in the Middle Ages, Jewish Theological Seminary, N.Y., 1924.

FIRE THE GOVERNMENT: George Getz, Communications Director, Phone: (202) 333-0008 -  - > Libertarian Party's new executive director appeals for 'second American revolution'. - WASHINGTON, DC - The incoming executive director of the nation's third-largest political party is issuing a bold appeal to the American electorate: Help us fire the government. (Stressed by me! - See comment below. J.Z., 4.6.03.) - From: "Destiny Worldwide Net" 4 June 2003. - Note by John Zube, 4.6.03: Attempts to "fire" the government will be more successful once we have achieved not only "the" vote and "free" collectivist elections and "representations" and by striving for "victory" over our opponents in this way, but the right of individuals to vote themselves out from under the State, to individually secede, to assert their individual sovereignty and voluntary associationism to the extent of full exterritorial autonomy. - Unfortunately, the LP does not stand clearly and strongly enough for this right to vote and, by trying to vote within the present territorial system, it arouses antagonism and involves itself in a prolonged and expensive struggle, which it might never win or only after decades of efforts. - If, instead, it advocated individual and group secessionism and full exterritorial autonomy for all communities of volunteers or experimental freedom for all, then THIS program of the LP would be supported even by many of those who ideologically stand far apart from the LP or are even its opponents. Thus they could turn their enemies into collaborators towards achieving for each the degree of freedom that each would be satisfied with. - A federation of all who would favour such exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of communities, societies and governance systems, except, naturally, territorial ones, does have at least the potential to come to outnumber all the supporters and representatives of the presently ruling parties and could, therefore, achieve a quite peaceful constitutional change in this direction. - Moreover, this liberation of all dissenting groups could be achieved fast, with this kind of program, if it is sufficiently publicised and discussed.  – J.Z., n.d. & 3.5.12.

FIREARMS: That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ...." - Samuel Adams, in the "Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer", August 20, 1789. – At least in the long run territorial statism destroys even great ideals and it always prevents the realization of the greatest ones, as long as it exists. – J.Z., 14.12.08. - GUN CONTROL – TERRITORIALISM & STATISM VS. PANARCHISM

FIREARMS: That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ...." - Samuel Adams, in the "Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer", August 20, 1789. – At least in the long run territorial statism destroys even great ideals among all too many people and it always prevents the realization of the greatest ones, as long as it exists. – J.Z., 14.12.08, 3.5.12. - GUN CONTROL – TERRITORIALISM & STATISM VS. PANARCHISM

FIREHAMMER, REGINALD, Prospects For Freedom. - Guest Editorial by Reginald Firehammer, The Autonomist: - - In a previous essay of mine, "Shoot The Bastards?" - - I described six of the many movements, views, and philosophies that have individual freedom as at least one of their common objectives. The methods promoted by various freedom fighters to establish freedom range from what I call the evangelical or persuasion method (propagandizing, advertising, education) to political activism, including civil disobedience. While no group is advocating, at this time, open armed rebellion, there is at least one group that definitely includes that as an option, when the "time is right." - That any of these methods is actually going to be effective seems extremely questionable, and frequently doubted, I think, even by those who are promoting them. How many Libertarians really believe their political campaigns and propaganda are truly going to reverse the growth and power of government, its repression, and tyranny? - But It Might Work? - The freedom movement in all its permutations is not a new thing. - Ever since the Whiskey rebellion, there have been advocates for less centralization of government and more individual liberty. - While federalization has steadily grown and government has become ever more repressive, there has never been a shortage of individuals attempting, in one way or another, to stem the flow of government power and fight for individual freedom. The list of freedom warriors is almost endless - these names immediately come to mind: Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Henry David Thoreau, Lysander Spooner, Rose Wilder Lane, Albert Jay Nock, Isabel Paterson, Ayn Rand, H. L. Mencken, Milton and Rose Friedman, ..., but [the?] list is almost endless. - The reasons why the battle for freedom has not been more successful are many, and even though the loss of freedom has been a continuous one, like a slow insidious leak, it would no doubt have been much worse if not for that army of warriors fighting for freedom. Nevertheless, the impression [that?] the war is a hopeless one is difficult to dismiss and the view that, in spite of our best efforts, government will continue to grow and the loss of freedom will continue to accelerate, is very convincing. [I listed some of the most significant omissions of the libertarian movement, which prevented it from being successful, in my 1910 digitized book manuscript NEW DRAFT, still not online, but reviewed by GPdB on - J.Z., 6.10.11.] - So why do we keep fighting? Partly because those who know what freedom is and desire it above all things just must, "do something." It is not in the nature of those who love freedom to surrender without a fight. For the living, and only the free are truly alive in the human sense, there is always hope. We continue to fight, in whatever way we believe is the right way, because, "it just might work." - And it might. The Autonomist is convinced most people do not really know what freedom is, and even if they did, they would not want it. They do not want to be completely responsible for themselves [Decidophobia! statism, territorialism! - J.Z.], they want security and safety, even at the cost of personal liberty. In the past, the cost in individual freedom seemed a small price to pay for the supposed security and safety the government promised. - But that is changing. As the restrictions on individual liberty become more oppressive and affect more people in their own personal lives and businesses, as the assault on private property grows more blatant and cruel, and as the government interference in the lives and private affairs of more people becomes ever more intrusive and pervasive, the number of people who find that, "price of security," is "too high," is growing too. - They Are Beginning to Listen. - In the past, the words of the freedom fighters, like Henry David Thoreau, Lysander Spooner, Rose Wilder Lane, Ayn Rand, largely fell on deaf ears. [Many years ago already more than half a million of Ayn Rand’s books had been sold in Australia, when its population was still only about 15 million. - But she did not have a good enough program, either. - J.Z., 6.10.11.] But people are beginning to listen. - The Autonomist has frequently made the point, most people think they are free. They have no idea how repressive and tyrannical the government has become. [Even most anarchists and libertarians are not yet sufficiently interested in exploring and publishing ALL genuine individual rights and liberties, and in the potential of a well designed, organized, enlightened and trained militia to realize and protect them - according to my experience over all too many decades. - J.Z., 6.10.11.] They do not believe innocent people's property is being confiscated, their lives threatened, and, more and more, are actually being killed by the government they are trusting to keep them safe and secure. They have no idea [of?] the extent to which the entire Bill of Rights has been abrogated, or, that in reality, we have none of the freedoms they were intended to protect. - When it is their luggage that is being searched and their bodies that are being violated by complete strangers, when it is their email that is being monitored and their bank accounts being watched by the government, when it is their land the government chooses to take from them or tells them how they can (or must) use it, when it is their privacy that is being violated by the endless forms and reports they are required to submit, and when it is their life and their time that is being regulated and interfered with almost every waking moment of their life, if they are awake at all, the fact they are not free finally dawns on them. It is dawning on more people every day. - - - Another Way. Will enough listen? Will enough of, "the people," finally, "wake up," or will the pot continue to, "heat up," until all the froggy people are cooked? - Whether enough listen or not, I do not know, but I do know, more will listen, and more will be sympathetic to the cause of freedom. Now is not the time to stop fighting. - The Autonomist does not believe any movement, campaign, or program will restore freedom in the foreseeable future - the Autonomist does believe individuals can make themselves free and they must do that before they can be truly effective in any other kind of fight for freedom. - It is to that end I have started the series of articles about establishing one's own personal freedom beginning with the first two, "Freedom Now" and "Freedom Now2". See: - - This series will provide real information about what freedom is and how to secure it in the real world today. - A Free Society - Outside the Government Box. - Those who free themselves are then free to find others who choose to be free. If enough people free themselves and find others who are living their lives freely, those individuals constitute a "free society." [Without individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy? - J.Z., 6.10.11.] - A society is not restricted by geography; a society consists of any group of people united by something they have in common. The Autonomist version of a free society is one consisting of all those who choose to be free, wherever they may live geographically, who choose to be part of that society, that is, choose to associate with others who have chosen to be free. - There is no reason why that kind of society cannot provide itself whatever free enterprise agencies it chooses for the protection of their persons and properties. There is no reason such a society could not declare itself a sovereign society and the members of that society "citizens" of that sovereignty. Free individuals do not believe a state is required for freedom. This means, sovereignty does not have to be bound by any geographic restrictions. [ Underlined by me. They should aim at and recognize exterritorially autonomous societies or governance systems even for their present enemies, the great variety of statists and could thus get numerous allies from among them. - J.Z.,6.10.11.] - This will be a totally new idea to most, and I am introducing it so those who love freedom can begin to think outside the "government box." - It is likely, that just as the Wright brothers would never have been able to convince the world human-heavier-than-air flight is possible, except by doing it, we will never be able to convince the world that human freedom is possible, except by doing it. [Flying via balloons was then already old hat. And some muscle powered flights occurred already in the time of the Roman emperors. It was recorded perhaps only once, because one of them fell, accidentally, near one of the emperors. - Birds, too, are heavier than air - a constant reminder. - J.Z.] - [Reproduced with permission of the author] - One comment [by John Allen] on that: It mentions the creation of sovereignty apart form the state, which is a concept Destiny Worldwide has advocated and been working to create. But we have want [ed to go?] much further than the Free State people, and are planning our community offshore in a friendly jurisdiction. [Hong Kong, probably, was for 99 years the most successful example of this kind. Some of its liberties seem to have persisted even after it became again subject to the modern Chinese empire. It's profitable for Red China, just like the "capitulations" were for the Ottoman Empire at the height of its power. The Chinese government even recognized some other free enterprise Zones and other fractions of free markets. One of the alternatives to protégée-citizenship, with degrees of autonomy, perhaps on the road to full exterritorial autonomy, is the recognition of any government or society in exile as an ally, which aims only to rule or guide its present and future voluntary members. In this way one could gain numerous allies, who need not be anarchists or libertarians, against any territorial authoritarian regime - and these could then already demonstrate - in the countries that recognize them, what they are able to do for, among and through their volunteers, if they have a sensible program. Otherwise, they will go bankrupt and disappear as failed attempts. - J.Z., 6.10.11.] We will keep our membership only informed of progress, so, if you like, once our domain is up again, you may want to consider joining us in the adventure. - Thanks and ejoy this fine editorial! - John Allen, wrote: To: - Subject: The SovereignLife Report - Editorial - 30 August 2004. From: - THE SOVEREIGN LIFE REPORT - EDITORIAL - 30 August 2004, Published fortnightly by: -  News and Views for the Seeker of Freedom, Privacy and Wealth. - Even the billionaires are not quite free as yet and safe from e.g. nuclear war and taxation. - J.Z., 6.10.11. - It quotes: "Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." - Voltaire - That is a widespread delusion. Mere wishes are not enough. Even the best ideas and talents are not enough. One must also know how to fulfil or realize them - and become free enough to do so or establish enough freedom to do so. Panarchism, would offer what Robert Nozick called a "meta-utopia", a framework that allows the realization of all kinds of tolerant utopias for those, who wish to realize them among themselves, at their own expense and risk. - J.Z.,6.10.11. - Join SovereignLife: - Declare your Independence Now! Discover powerful information, tools and strategies to Achieve Freedom and Prosperity. - Would it work in a concentration or even an extermination camp? To some extent all territorial States are prisons for all too many innocent and involuntary inmates! - E.g. the refugee camps for illegal immigrants. For many years after WW II and, perhaps, still, 20-30 million people per annum. Secession attempts and exterritorial autonomy attempts may be more severely prevented than prison escapes, by the ruling power addicts. - J.Z., 6.10.11.


FISCHEL, WALTER J.: Jews in the Economic and Political Life of Mediaeval Islam, 1937, Reprint, N.Y., Ktav Publishing House, 1969.

FISCHER-GALATI, STEPHEN: Man, State, and Society in East European History, Praeger Publishers, N.Y., Washington, London, 1970, bibliography, index, 338pp, JZL. - It brings the text of Turkish Capitulations of 1675 on pp 66-71.

FISHEL, WESLEY R. End of Extraterritoriality in China, Univ. of Col. Press, 1952, bibl p. 300-309. - ANU Menzies Library, Canberra, lists the author as Fischer.


FITNESS FOR FREEDOM: Many politicians of our time are in the habit of laying it down as a self-evident proposition, that no people ought to be free till they are fit to use their freedom. The maxim is worthy of the fool in the old story, who resolved not to go into the water till he had learned to swim. If men are to wait for liberty till they become wise and good in slavery, they may indeed wait forever.” - Macauley. - Actually, one can undertake certain exercises out of water, which can make the major swimming motions almost automatic - before one ever enters into the water. - There is also some sense in not allowing babies, infants and very young children to practise all liberties unsupervised. All people in a country might never be fit for all liberties. Think of the psychopaths and other mentally defectives. Whether people are sufficiently rational to be able to rightly claim all individual rights can only be decided from case to case, e.g. upon application for membership in a panarchy. - Even under full experimental freedom for adults not many will be prepared to "jump into the water without being able to swim". - J.Z., 20.6.00. - MATURITY, SELF-DEVELOPMENT, FREEDOM, RESPONSIBILITY, RATIONALITY, POLITICIANS VS. PEOPLE

FITTEST: We assume that only the fittest of each species survived, yet we find ourselves surrounded by multitudes of unfit creatures.” – Dagobert D. Runes, A Dictionary of Thought. - Read: Hayek's chapter: Why the Worst Get to the Top, in his: The Road to Serfdom. There he might have added: “or remain in the gutter.” Territorial Statism makes for the worst at both ends. - J.Z., 26.7.92. - SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST, DARWINISM, EVOLUTION, TERRITORIALISM, DIS.


FLACH, KARL HERMANN: Noch eine Chance fuer die Liberalen. Eine Streitschrift, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, Frankfurt/M, 1971, 1977, JZL. S. 13: "Niemand weiss, welche Minderheiten von heute die Mehrheiten von morgen sein werden. Wer Minderheiten in ihren Rechten einschraenkt, zwaengt die Gesellschaft into Formen der Erstarrung. Geistige Freiheit und Minderheitenschutz sind daher fuer die Entwicklung der Gesellschaft unverzichtbar. Ihre Voraussetzung ist Toleranz." (Nobody knows which minority of today will be the majority of tomorrow. Whoever restricts minorities in their rights forces society into petrified forms. Mental freedom and protection for minorities are thus essential for the development of society. Its precondition is tolerance.) - The author seems unaware how far minority rights and tolerance for tolerant actions or experimental freedom among volunteer communities ought to go. Typical modern liberal with his writings predominantly quite "flat" ("flach" in German). - J.Z., 26.1.99.

FLAG: A flag is an emblem of warfare; when unfurled, it is a challenge to combat.” - Sprading, Liberty & the Great Libertarians, introduction, p.31. – To the extent that it represents the intolerance of territorialism it is not to be respected – on the contrary! – J.Z., 14.12.08. - NATIONALISM

FLAG: Respect for the flag must be voluntary.” - William Kunstler, quoted by O'Rourke, in Parliament of Whores. – Only when a flag represents genuine values, especially all individual rights and liberties, do these values, not that symbol, deserve respect. Otherwise, less developed civilizations and cultures do not deserve respect but at most tolerance, to the extent that they are tolerantly practised only among volunteers and at their expense and risk. – J.Z., 14.12.08. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, 1.) 7.1.01 - Hi John, - I'd like to further explain Libercratic institutions in regards to jurisdictions and their authority over civilzens and non-civilzens. I use the term civilzen to differentiate between consensual members of Libercratic government and citizenship which has become synonymous with slave and co-conspirator in the crimes of the state. - - [J.Z.: Regarding Libertocracy: If all your institutions are voluntaristic and autonomous ones, and your laws "personal laws" as opposed to territorial laws, your jurisdictions "personal jurisdictions", internally for voluntary members and externally only toward aggressors against a community or its members, then, perhaps, a special chapter should be dedicated to this distinction between full exterritorial autonomy, for voluntary members vs. territorial sovereignty for all people living in a territory, whether they are volunteers or coercively or legally subjected to the territorial constitutional, legal and juridical system, with its monopoly administration, police forces and penal system. The distinction is quite fundamental and the prevailing statist and even most libertarian and anarchist opponents do not think themselves out of that model.] - - I already have to some degree. - Libercratic Government explains the basic concept of individual sovereignty within consensual government and its jurisdictions. - Neutrality in the Justice System explains the importance of choosing neutral judges to settle disputes between individuals who are under different jurisdictions and between anarchists. Others at the Free Nation Foundation have written more extensively on this subject. - Building Libertocracy deals with changing the statist system and defending freedom against those who would violate it, including agents of states. - Libercratic Justice explains free market justice services to settle disputes between different jurisdictions. - Free Sovereign's Universal Treaty Organization is a concept for a non-central supra-governmental authority to settle disputes between member governments, nations and with foriegn jurisdictions, including justice enforced on citizens and agents of states. IGT - Inter-Governmental Treaty - FSUTO Essay further elaborates on the above, especially the FSUTO Essay - Inter-governmental section. - Natural Rights and Natural Law - Librademian Government applies only to its voluntary civilzens and those who choose to enter into its jurisdiction. - If this needs further clarifying, I may need to expound onthose writings or write a separate essay. - Good Luck, Greg. - - - The following is a letter by G. F. to GPdB, for which I do not have a date: - Dear Mr. de Bellis, After reading your manifesto on Polyarchy I found that while it is a strong indictment of the state, it didn't go far enough to explain the political philosophy of Polyarchy.  What would a Polyarchic society look like?   How would a government of Polyarchy function? Is Polyarchy   anarchy without any organized government? Panarchy as described by de Puydt constitutes voluntary political entities to which a citizen might subscribe. Though de Puydt's concept contains one fatal flaw,   namely the requirement of   citizens to register their political allegiances at a central bureau. That would inevitably would lead to the licensing of political affiliations and eventually to a political monopoly -- i.e. a return to state citizenship. - - John Zube's Panarchy   is an anarchist model of consensual organization that requires no territorial or central regulation. - Roderick Long wrote about virtual cantons at" where people can choose between several non-territorial political jurisdictions. - My political philosophy of Libertocracy is based on the sovereignty of the individual to choose to join or to create consensual governments whose laws are enforced through contract insurance. Such a system does not place a monopoly over territory. - Libercratic law applies only to those people who choose to join the government that has jurisdiction over areas of interaction in which they voluntarily place themselves, their property and their activities. It leaves individuals responsible for governing their interactions with other people through contracts that are enforced through contract insurance where   people come together to form consensual regulatory authorities -- private contractual governments. By voluntarily entering into contracts, which may be explicit or implicit in the choice to visit the territorial jurisdiction of any individual property owner, persons signify by those choices which private courts will settle their disputes. Such governance does not apply to non-civilzens or anarchists who stay on their own property and don't infringe on the rights of others and places no obligations on anyone to join anything. - - How [does?] Polyarchy compare to these ideas? I would be very interested in reading more about Polyarchy when its more fully explained as socio-political philosophy. - Greg Flanagan, Director, Libertocracy Association, -

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, 2.) 8.1.01. Here only extracts from my correspondence with him: -- Original Message - From: Greg Flanagan To: John Zube Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001, Subject: Re: Libertocracy & LIBERTARIAN LIBRARY beginnings. - Hi John, I remembered reading an article in Formulations, on Panarchy. After going back to the Winter 2000 issue I discovered it was written by P.E. de Puydt and that you have already have it in your collection. Panarchy is mostly consistent with Libertocracy which is in concept like Roderick Long's Virtual Cantons, which has been influential on my ideas. - - J.Z.: Through Phil Jacobsen I finally got them to reproduce this article. Previously, several of my attempts to interest them in this and other panarchistic material remained in vain. The article is also appended on my website. Previously it was once reproduced in LeFevre's RAMPART COLLEGE JOURNAL but did not lead there to a sufficient discussion, either. I have been a fan of panarchism since I first heard about it in 1952 from Ulrich von Beckerath. He read about it first in Wilhelm Roscher's monumental works - but I was so far unable to find the work or that passage. Beckerath never managed to get the text of De Puydt's essay until I got it for him shortly before I migrated to Australia, in 1959. During WW I he once risked his life, deviating from his messenger job, to look it up in the Brussels Royal Library and was caught and almost shot on the spot as a spy for his effort! The all too ready killers didn't even want to make a phone call to his company commander, to vouch for him. But, finally, he managed to persuade them. Even the Nazis had some very limited panarchistic notions, by assuming that e.g. the Volksdeutschen, who for centuries had lived in other countries, were essentially still German citizens with the "rights" (under the Hitler regime!) of German "citizens". Thus it was relatively safe for Beckerath to draft e.g. the Conditions for the Next Peace Treaty with Russia, embodying some panarchistic ideas there. - Essentially, there is nothing more anti-totalitarian than voluntary and exterritorial autonomy for individuals and groups. Le Grand E. Day's "A New Dimension of Freedom", Mojave Books, Reseda, Ca, , 1977, and his Outline of the Theory of Multigovernment and his A Letter from the Future, are also largely voluntaristic, exterritorial in their autonomy proposals. I met him only once, in a very noisy restaurant in L.A., where one could hardly hear oneself speak, far less one's neighbour. I would have much preferred a cup of coffee in a quiet corner with him. Sometimes, our social customs are among our worst enemies. Those writings of his that I could get, I did microfiche. - (Later his main essays, not yet his journal, were put on - J.Z., 6.9.11. … - - Yes, I am interested in reading more about Panarchy. - Well, my first 19 volumes on it are ONLY available on microfiche, … (Later the 24 volumes ON PANARCHY were also digitized. - J.Z., 24.8.11.) …. On your list of people interested, at my entry it said: "One flaw I already found: He still wants to retain central banking!" - Would you please correct that as I explained in a previous e-mail. - (Sorry, not being a webmaster, I haven't corrected it yet. But at least I mention your correction here and now. Central banking is also one major despotic aspect of territorialism. Monetary freedom would be one of the inevitable results of panarchism. - J.Z., 20.8.11.) - - Good Luck, Greg - - I do not know whether it is luck that I need or more skill. A few more mentionings of the CD-ROM project on the Internet would help. … Second-hand you might be able to get: John Gall, Systemantics, 1975ff, first 1977 by Quadrangle, NYTimes Book, UK, 1978, Wildwood House, Fontana, 1979. It contains some pages with panarchistic ideas in interesting formulations. - I do intend to combine and convert to WORD my numerous slogans, quotes, short comments and aphorisms on panarchism. When that is done I could send them as an e-mail attachment. But, when will I get around to it? (That took me to 2010/11! - J.Z., 20.8.11.) … I also intend to combine all my contents lists in a literature list by Peace Plans issues. From them you would at least be able to see the contents of my 19 volumes on panarchy, plus that of a few supplementary titles on exterritoriality. - For many years still many explanations will be required for the panarchistic or libertocratic alternatives. An alphabetized list of all terms and relevant traditions and thoughts and ideas might be advisable. - For now the best wish of all: PIOT, John. - What response did you get so far to your website? More publicity to you! Your efforts deserve it! But probably your books will become most effective only in the good company of many other panarchistic etc. texts, together with all their discussions, all on one or a few CD-ROMs. - John. - - - Greg Flanagan, Director, Libertocracy Association - - "Libertocracy Association" <> - all addresses that end in work. - - - The list of articles that other people have contributed to the site are listed here - Next to my name in your list, [*] I would appreciate it if you placed this description for Libertocracy: Libertocracy is a polycentric free enterprise government and socio-economic system whereby sovereign individuals join together by mutual consent in a civilization that respects and defends the freedom, dignity and rights of all people equally. - In Libercratic society people live by the rule of sovereign individual freedom, where a person is free to do anything that one chooses as long as it's not imposed on others and doesn't infringe upon the equal right of other individuals to the same freedom. - Libertocracy includes all other forms of government or non-government (anarchy) that respects individual freedom in an environment where people must govern themselves through consensual contracts. [*] Here he referred to my lists on my CD-Project. - J.Z.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, 3.) 15. 1. 01: 2 extracts: Hi John, Le Grand E. Day's "A New Dimension of Freedom", Mojave Books, Reseda, Ca, , 1977, and his Outline of the Theory of Multigovernment and his A Letter from the Future, are also largely voluntaristic, exterritorial in their autonomy proposals. - Even the United States recognizes some extra-territorial sovereignty for Native American nations. The U.S. recognizes over 200 Native American tribes-nations, some of whom don't have any territorial reservation yet are considered under the constitution to be equal to the states and requires federal representatives to treat them as such. A couple of years ago, President Clinton apologized to native Hawaiians for the illegal invasion and overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy and recognized the sovereignty of native Hawaiian nationality. There is a movement among some native Hawaiians to make at least one island independent of the U.S. and secede from it. There was a vote a couple of years ago among native Hawaiians to begin the process of establishing greater autonomy for the native Hawaiian nation. And of course, there are many other secession movements around the world based on national identity not recognized by existing states. Though, of course, any seceding Nations could not be allowed to annex territory or force people within independent territories to submit to their national rule. The only way that different nations or political affiliations can establish their own governments while respecting individual rights is through Libertocracy or Panarchy or virtual cantons, which apply only to those who choose to enter into those governments and are enforced on visitors who enter the jurisdictional property of its members. … J.Z.: What response did you get so far to your website? - - Overwhelmingly positive from the dozens of responses I've gotten from libertarians. I only had a couple of negative responses, one from an anarchist who can't seem to grasp the idea of voluntary government. He believes that any voluntary government will inevitably lead to coercive government. But, I think that's a defeatist attitude. If everyone believed that way then there would be no reason to found any company, start any business or develop any invention because it may fall prey to political regulators.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, 4.) 20.1.01. Autonomy of Red Indians on and off Reservations, Steps towards it, Free Enterprise Zones, Traditionalist & Enlightened Red Indians. EXTRACTS from his letter. - Hi John, - You may have noticed the article by Vince Miller "Out of the Gulag" on attempts to liberate Indians in Canadian Indian Reservations, in FREEDOM NETWORK NEWS, Oct. Nov. 00. The key, as is said in this issue, somewhere, by Meaghan Walker-Williams, is indeed "sovereignty" or the degree of absolute exterritorial autonomy that can be attained. - - [J.Z.: The sympathies and trends are, in our time, largely, although often not yet sufficiently, on the side of the Red Indians &amp; [and?] other minority groups. But at the same time, public opinion still "thinks" in terms of territorial sovereignty, in most cases.] - - Indeed, there are some exceptions. - - I think, at this time, it may be more realistic to push for greater autonomy and secession for certain indigenous peoples as a way to dissipate the power of Central States, even though this will result in the establishment of more smaller states, it's better than powerful federal and Imperial central states. - - You may be interested in  that supports libertarian principles in secession as a path to liberation for the individual by supporting indigenous peoples against larger nation states. - - [J.Z.: That particular movement aims at a Free Trade Zone, Tax Haven &amp; Foreign Investment, something that to some extent conflicts with the notion of reservations to preserve the traditional way of life for those Red Indians who do prefer it. Thus it ought to be made quite clear, that those who prefer that way of life should remain quite at liberty and exterritorially quite free to preserve it among their volunteers. At the same time, they ought to become tolerant towards those want to make other use of their mental and physical capacities, inside and outside of the reservations, in association with non-Indians of their choosing. The traditionalists, in other words, ought to get away themselves from exclusive territorial notions.] - - There have been political battles in the U.S. over gambling on tribal reservations. Political gangsters in state legislatures and in Congress have debated taxing reservations which is currently unconstitutional. Under the constitution states don't have the authority to tax reservations, those who have tried have had it overturned in the courts. People living on reservations are the poorest group of Americans because the &nbsp; reservations are operated directly under federal authority where many people are supported by welfare. - There really is no traditional way of life still left for Amerindian people in the U.S., that was destroyed a century ago, now the tradition has become poverty and dependence. The only way to escape from that is developing free enterprise zones that are untaxed. The threat still remains for external taxation, though, because politicians can simply ignore the Constitution and appoint judges who will also ignore it. - There could be a qualification to this, stating that no lands are to be permanently alienated from the reservation lands, like the rest of the U.S. territory was. At most some land may be leased on long terms, falling back into the hands of the tribal type of reservation Indians at the expiry of the lease, unless the lease is extended under new conditions. - I think it's very important to sell indigenous people, who have autonomous authority over reservations, on laissez-faire capitalism as a road to prosperity and political independence. States have no respect for individual rights, and they think according to a mob mentality, therefore they only respect groups of people that either have enough power or have influence through an ethnic or indigenous claim on a territory. An indigenous group can get recognition from the U.N. and international human-rights organizations should the larger national state try to impede their attempt at political and economic self-determination. That's why I want to see more indigenous Nations demand total, sovereign independence. What do you think are the chances of Aborigines establishing a truly independent nation somewhere on the Australian continent? - - [J.Z.: Capital growth should also be mainly an internal and natural one, out of savings arising from free internal production and exchange. That freedom is vastly restricted under monetary despotism.] - - The problem for people on reservations is that they have been forced onto reservations that were reserved because it was the worst land that whites didn't want and therefore lacked natural resources. The U.S. had the resources to develop on its own but most small newly formed nations will need large amounts of external capital to develop. - - Establishing free enterprise zones within small nations provides a magnet to venture capitalists and opportunities for libertarians to develop not only the native economy but also individual freedom. - - There been several libertarian projects to establish free trade zones for purchase or lease land from a country to create an economic Haven like Hong Kong or Singapore through groups like Laissez Faire City, - Spencer MacCallum wrote about ideas for proprietary communities and negotiating leases with Caribbean islands for their establishment, you probably already know about these. Awdal Roads Co. is a group of libertarians actively looking into developing Somaliland. - [J.Z.: Three different kinds of sovereignty would be involved: - - 1.) The remaining traditionalist sovereignty, but reduced to volunteers and their share in the tribal lands, and extended to their right to live under tribal law, for all non-aggressive activities, outside the reservation. One would not only be born into it or married into it but could declare for it, as many white people did, when North America was largely settled by whites. - 2.) The personal law sovereignty and volunteer communities of the progressive Indians or other natives, in and outside the reservations. - 3.) The territorial sovereignty of people outside the reservation, not applicable to people living within the reservation and to reservation people living and working outside the reservations, but as members of their own volunteer communities that are exterritorially autonomous. Analogy: All of them to have "diplomatic immunity" - except for infringing the individual rights of others. - Such a condition could, naturally, lead to the development of more exterritorially autonomous communities of "white" etc. people outside the reservations, especially when it is seen, after a while, that the more and most freedom loving and practising volunteer communities would rapidly grow in wealth without any government subsidies and other "help" and also without any government burdens that are not voluntarily chosen.] - - I would gladly renounce U.S. citizenship and join a native American independent nation if was conducive to individual freedom and political self-determination. Sometimes it seems that libertarians care more about establishing a truly free and independent territory than do many of the native peoples who have become used to depending on federal handouts. - - Such is the concept of virtual cantons which would become fluid and extra territorial and then eventually non territorial, except for the authority and sovereignty of individual property owners, resulting in true Libertocracy or Panarchy. - - [JZ.: The degrees of sympathy now existing for natives and their rightful and self-help aspirations, among people outside of the reservations, could be utilized to achieve at first full exterritorial autonomy and economic liberties for those among the reservation people who do want it for themselves. From them these liberties could then spread to others.] - - I am ready and willing to fight in the Revolution to make that a reality. - - [J.Z.: Theoretically, monetary freedom and exterritorial autonomy could spread from the people in a small village, if only they are allowed to develop there, peacefully, for a while, quite undisturbed. - That might even include the exclusion of mass media publicity, which could, before such a development has achieved demonstrably large successes, lead to the suppression of such experiments before they have achieved their local potential. - - A socialist, with whom I discussed the Minerva Reef development, commented: Most publicity was premature and led to the suppression. Those in favour should have gone ahead quietly and securely established themselves first, able to resist e.g. an invasion attempt by the small police force of Tonga. Then they could have sought further support via world publicity. Publicly stepping on the toes of a local bully is not always advisable.] - Yea, I heard about that. I have communicated with people who worked on the Atlantis project" and they've realized that defense is critical. And don't agree that keeping the media out of it is necessarily a good idea because of lack of publicity allows states to invade and seized territories and commit atrocities against those seeking independence without public condemnation. Those involved in the Minerva Reef development should have prepared some realistic defense. If they had shot several of those Tongan invaders then they probably would have been left alone. - - The man who claimed Sealand has had to defend it more than once against attempted invasion. Just knowing the fact that at least a few cops or soldiers are going to get killed in an invasion is something of a deterrent. - I will comment on money creation in another e-mail. – [Note, that I am not sure whether I have always sufficiently distinguished between Greg's words and my own. I have also slightly edited what I thought were my own sentences. - J.Z., 6.9.11.] - RED INDIANS, NATIVE AMERICANS, RESERVATIONS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY WITHIN AND OUTSIDE OF THEM, TERRITORIAL AUTONOMY AS POSSIBLE FIRST STEP, SEALAND, TONGA INDEPENDENCE ATTEMPT, PUBLICITY & DEFENCE

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, 5.) 7.2.01: Some further correspondence, Dear Greg, I was too busy to answer sooner and have still insufficient time to engage in extensive discussion, even of a topic that is as dear to me as the alternatives to territorialism and compulsory State membership are and the monetary freedom alternatives to monetary despotism. Finishing my ON PANARCHY series and, finally, my rough draft towards an alphabetical handbook on monetary freedom options, will have priority compared with engaging in correspondence or online discussions. … - J.Z. - - - Hi John, You may have noticed the article by Vince Miller "Out of the Gulag" on attempts to liberate Indians in Canadian Indian Reservations, in FREEDOM NETWORK NEWS, Oct. Nov. 00. The key, as is said in this issue, somewhere, by Meaghan Walker-Williams, is indeed "sovereignty" or the degree of absolute exterritorial autonomy that can be attained. The sympathies and trends are, in our time, largely, although often not yet sufficiently, on the side of the Red Indians & other minority groups. But at the same time, public opinion still "thinks" in terms of territorial sovereignty, in most cases. Indeed, there are some exceptions. - I think, at this time, it may be more realistic to push for greater autonomy and secession for certain indigenous peoples as a way to dissipate the power of Central States, even though this will result in the establishment of more smaller states, it's better than powerful federal and Imperial central states. You may be interested in that supports libertarian principles in secession as a path to liberation for the individual by supporting indigenous peoples against larger nation states. - - [JZ72: I did notice the article, wanted to write to her but did not get around to it yet. Moreover, I believe no e-mail address was given. I concede that geographical secessionism is presently still MUCH more widely considered than is non-geographical secessionism. However, geographical separation also causes maximum opposition, while non-geographical secessionism, once sufficiently understood, minimizes opposition. Compare the geographical division of Germany after W.W. II, that of Israel, Korea and of Vietnam. Remember the troubles arising from new artificial borders after WW I, as among the causes of WW II. Compare the arbitrary split-ups of the former colonial possessions in Africa and what they led to. Compare the secessionist attempts during the French Revolution, e.g. in the Vendee, the geographical separation of the Netherlands according to religious affiliation, the bloodshed recently in Chechnya. Everywhere does the old and intended new territorial model lead to troubles, including terrorism. Unless you bring secessionism down to the small volunteer group or individual or to the dispersed voluntary community group, that is exterritorially autonomous, you will continue having trouble with the territorial model, an essentially collectivistic, compulsory, authoritarian, even totalitarian "solution". Both, decentralization and centralization can be optimized only under full voluntarism, which means full exterritorial autonomy based upon individual secessionism and voluntary associationism. Remember also how the decentralized city States of classical Greece fought each other. Monarchical unification attempts were largely popular for a while because they stopped most of the local warfare between local warlords. - We should in no way limit our discussion of alternatives to geographical "solutions". I grew up in a city, Berlin, that was divided into 4 and later 2 sectors. Sometimes "borders" have even divided villages and within them houses! "Borders" around individuals and volunteer groups are quite another matter and in our daily lives we are already habituated to them in most spheres - except the political, economic and social system spheres. There thinking has lagged far behind what is urgently required for our times. - - That particular movement aims at a Free Trade Zone, Tax Haven & Foreign Investment, something that to some extent conflicts with the notion of reservations to preserve the traditional way of life for those Red Indians who do prefer it. Thus it ought to be made quite clear, that those, who do prefer that way of life, should remain quite at liberty and exterritorially quite free to preserve it among their volunteers. At the same time, they ought to become tolerant towards those want to make other use of their mental and physical capacities, inside and outside of the reservations, in association with non-Indians of their choosing. The traditionalists, in other words, ought to get away themselves from exclusive territorial notions.] - - There have been political battles in the U.S. over gambling on tribal reservations. Political gangsters in state legislatures and in Congress have debated taxing reservations which is currently unconstitutional. Under the constitution states don't have the authority to tax reservations, those who have tried have had it overturned in the courts. People living on reservations are the poorest group of Americans because the reservations are operated directly under federal authority where many people are supported by welfare. There really is no traditional way of life still left for Amerindian people in the U.S., that was destroyed a century ago, now the tradition has become poverty and dependence. The only way to escape from that is developing free enterprise zones that are untaxed. The threat still remains for external taxation, though, because politicians can simply ignore the Constitution and appoint judges who will also ignore it. - - [J.Z., 72: Even a desert, under some freedom and initiative, can be made to bloom, as Israelis have to some extent shown. Under federal authority, under central banking and under welfarism it cannot. (Well, apart from e.g. tax-funded irrigation for growing cotton in desert areas. - J.Z., 21.8.11.) Not only full freedom from taxation and regulation would be required and not only full financial freedom but also full monetary freedom. Moreover, those who gained this autonomy should not only possess it while they live and work in a reservation but it should become their personal law outside of it as well. Nor should it be confined to Red Indians or other racial minority groups. The usual Freeport and free industrial zone projects do not go far enough away from governmentalism and territorialism. There could be a qualification to this, stating that no lands are to be permanently alienated from the reservation lands, like the rest of the U.S. territory was. At most some land may be leased on long terms, falling back into the hands of the tribal type of reservation Indians at the expiry of the lease, unless the lease is extended under new conditions.] - - I think it's very important to sell indigenous people who have autonomous authority over reservations on laissez-faire capitalism as a road to prosperity and political independence. States have no respect for individual rights, and they think according to a mob mentality, therefore they only respect groups of people that either have enough power or have influence through an ethnic or indigenous claim on a territory. An indigenous group can get recognition from the U.N. and international human-rights organizations should the larger national state try to impede their attempt at political and economic self-determination. That's why I want to see more indigenous Nations demand total, sovereign independence. What do you think are the chances of Aborigines establishing a truly independent nation somewhere on the Australian continent? - - [JZ72: "Total, sovereign independence", on the model of territorialism, threatens all those other minorities who live in the areas claimed. My first awareness of Australian Aboriginal sovereignty notion came from a slogan in a Maroubra tramway station back in 1959: "Leave this country to the Aborigines and go back, where you came from, you convicts!" That station was near the State Penitentiary. By now convicts or former convicts constitute only a small fraction of the population. Nor should their honest descendants be blamed or should all deportees of the past be considered as criminals with victims. Many Palestinian Arabs have the same notion towards Israelis and want to wipe them out and practise this on a small scale and have tried it, sometimes, on a large scale. Both sides have largely forgotten their prolonged and largely peaceful coexistence under large degrees of local and personal law autonomy, according to religious affiliation, under the Ottoman Empire. The territorial Israel is also a territorial decentralist attempt and it certainly has not led to peace in the area. Those Russians, who were more or less forcefully settled in Baltic States, are threatened by territorial nationalism there. So are the Chinese in Tibet. So are all the local minorities in the Balkans. Imagine us trying to separate the population of cities by religious, ideologies races etc., all into their own districts. It would be a great step backwards. But to impose a uniform territorial rule upon them was also a great step backwards. In the Middle Ages we had at least largely autonomous trade organizations. Their monopoly claims and officially granted privileges led later to many troubles and the collapse of that system. The exterritorialism practised by foreign territorial powers in China might have succeeded if the treaties hadn't been unequal (one-sided), in favour of foreigners in China (and of their Chinese protégées) only but, instead, two-sided, for Chinese in all other countries. On exterritorial autonomy for all volunteer groups most people can COME to agree. Will they ever agree upon territorial borders to divide them? I heard many years ago of an Aboriginal, Larry Foley, striving for full autonomy for Aboriginals. However, I believe he had a separate Australian State territory in mind for them, or one that would grant territorial sovereignty to all the diverse reservations. Moreover, he was so much of a racist, at least then, that he would not condescend to talk or correspond with a "white" person about this objective. By now they, including all their racial mixtures, constitute only a small percentage of the population, I believe around 3%, but already 14% of all land is officially allocated to them - and some of their radicals still claim the whole continent as their exclusive possession and hunting preserve! Should even such claims be ceded? And where is to be the cut-off point for any such claims? Should the claims include all prior temporary settlements, anywhere, while native tribes were still largely moving all over "their" country, continent or even the world? Then personal law was the obvious and recognized general solution. You took your law with you, like the American colonists did, who settled in the later U.S.A. They did not adopt the territorial laws of the Red Indians, except for a few pioneers, who did prefer their lifestyle. - Capital growth should also be mainly an internal and natural one, out of savings arising from free internal production and exchange. That freedom is vastly restricted under monetary despotism. - - The problem for people on reservations is that they have been forced onto reservations that were reserved because it was the worst land that whites didn't want and therefore lacked natural resources. The U.S. had the resources to develop on its own but most small newly formed nations will need large amounts of external capital to develop. Establishing free enterprise zones within small nations provides a magnet to venture capitalists and opportunities for libertarians to develop not only the native economy but also individual freedom. - There been several libertarian projects to establish free trade zones for purchase or lease land from a country to create an economic Haven like Hong Kong or Singapore through groups like Laissez Faire City, - Spencer MacCallum wrote about ideas for proprietary communities and negotiating leases with Caribbean islands for their establishment, you probably already know about these. Awdal Roads Co. is a group of libertarians actively looking into developing Somaliland. - - [JZ72: The greatest resources are freedom, ideas & initiative. With them even the Moon and Mars could be settled. With a complete freedom programme territorialism can be transformed into exterritorialism and whole armies can be induced to desert or to rise. But that requires full development of these ideas and their sufficient publicity. To start out making concessions to territorialism is a mistake. - Red Indians, for example, are to be exterritorially autonomous, in their voluntary associations, not only within the reservations but outside of them as well! To that extent America and the world should be theirs - and ours - but not EXCLUSIVELY. But one MIGHT start with such autonomy claims at first only WITHIN the reservations and then extend them. - Three different kinds of sovereignty would be involved: 1.) The remaining traditionalist sovereignty, but reduced to volunteers and their share in the tribal lands, and extended to their right to live under tribal law, for all non-aggressive activities, outside the reservation. One would not only be born into it or married into it but could declare for it, as many white people did, when North America was largely settled by whites. - 2.) The personal law sovereignty and volunteer communities of the progressive Indians or other natives, in and outside the reservations. - 3.) The territorial sovereignty of people outside the reservation, not applicable to people living within the reservation and to reservation people living and working outside the reservations, but as members of their own volunteer communities that are exterritorially autonomous. Analogy: All of them to have "diplomatic immunity" - except for infringing the individual rights of others. - Such a condition could, naturally, lead to the development of more exterritorially autonomous communities of "white" etc. people outside the reservations, especially when it is seen, after a while, that the most freedom loving and practising volunteer communities would rapidly grow in wealth without any government subsidies and other "help" and also without any government burdens that are not voluntarily chosen.] - - I would gladly renounce U.S. citizenship and join a native American independent nation if [it?]was conducive to individual freedom and political self-determination. Sometimes it seems that libertarians care more about establishing a truly free and independent territory than do many of the native peoples who have become used to depending on federal handouts. - Such is the concept of virtual cantons which would become fluid and extra territorial and then eventually non territorial, except for the authority and sovereignty of individual property owners, resulting in true Libertocracy or Panarchy. - - [JZ72: Agreed. Native exterritorial autonomy is just one of the options to start off with. To include such autonomy for all the descendents of formerly imported slaves would be an extension of it, including a still larger percentage of the population. Territorial sovereignty for Harlem etc. only would not be good enough. Go from there to e.g. all descendents of Asian and other immigrants and to all non-racial communities. The Secessionists to enjoy all individual rights in their communities but no welfare or collective or individual indemnification "rights" towards the community from which they seceded. On the other hand, they should be given their shares in the remaining assets of territorial States, in transferable certificates. - The degrees of sympathy now existing for natives and their rightful and self-help aspirations, among people outside of the reservations, could be utilized to achieve at first full exterritorial autonomy and economic liberties for those among the reservation people who do want it for themselves. From them these liberties could then spread to others.] - - I am ready and willing to fight in the Revolution to make that a reality. - - [JZ72: Most of the struggle and fighting that has to be done is of the intellectual kind - even when it comes to the establishment of ideal volunteer militia forces for the protection of individual rights. Some wrongly think that it is merely a question of arms, uniforms and military training. They could not be more wrong. Most of the revolutions of the past were results of determined minorities or of riotous masses, both mostly misguided by territorial and collectivist notions. These have to be replaced by peaceful one-man-revolutions, as peaceful as is, in most countries now, the secession of an individual from any church or sect is, from any sports, fashion, trend or consumer fad. Essentially, only an extension of consumer sovereignty is involved - to all services, i.e., non-recognition for ANY constitutionally, legally and juridically imposed territorial monopolies. After that change of ideas little fighting will be required. To the extent that it comes to it, a military ju jitsu could be successfully applied, turning the military forces of the remaining territorial regimes against them. But lots of rethinking of popular practices and notions is required to achieve that. However, precedents exist, e.g. that of the he recognition of governments in exile and of the auxiliary forces that they are able to raise. - - Theoretically, monetary freedom and exterritorial autonomy could spread from a small village, if only they are allowed to develop there, peacefully, for a while, quite undisturbed. - That might even include the exclusion of mass media publicity, that could, before such a development has achieved demonstrably large successes, lead to the suppression of such experiments before they have achieved their local potential. A socialist, with whom I discussed the Minerva Reef development, commented: Most publicity was premature and led to the suppression. Those in favour should have gone ahead quietly and securely established themselves first, able to resist e.g. an invasion attempt by the small police force of Tonga. Then they could have sought further support via world publicity. Publicly stepping on the toes of a local bully is not always advisable.] - Yea, I heard about that. I have communicated with people who worked on the Atlantis project and they've realized that defense is critical. And don't agree that keeping the media out of it is necessarily a good idea because of lack of publicity allows states to invade and seized territories and commit atrocities against those seeking independence without public condemnation. Those involved in the Minerva Reef development should have prepared some realistic defense. If they had shot several of those Tongan invaders then they probably would have been left alone. The man who claimed Sealand has had to defend it more than once against attempted invasion. Just knowing the fact that at least a few cops or soldiers are going to get killed in an invasion is something of a deterrent. - I will comment on money creation in another e-mail. - - [JZ72: Mass media reports might help to organize the opposition to liberation attempts much faster than it would help to organize the liberation attempts. (I was and am only opposed to premature publicity. So much depends upon proper timing. - J.Z., 21.8.11.) - While there should be a maximum of internal freedom of expression, to develop practical ideas and programs, what is usually called "publicity" CAN do more harm than good, can lead to ridicule, misunderstandings, provoke opposition and government "action". Compare the required external secrecy with the military model of secrecy. You do not announce in the mass media when and where you are going to attack your enemy or liberate some area, giving your opponents time and opportunity to maximize his defence and oppression efforts there and then. (Nor would most people freely publicize e.g. their tax evasion attempts. - J.Z., 21.8.11.) - Money "creation" is a very misleading term. If you oblige yourself to accept your own IOUs, in standardized and typified form, in convenient denominations, in an acceptable value standard, for consumer goods and services that are in daily demand and offered by you and your associates, and if you carefully issue these certificates, e.g. in wage and other debt payments, or short term loans (e.g. on the real bills or banking principle) to voluntary acceptors, then you do not "create" "money" out of nothing but do help establish a situation in which exchanges are easier and more honest and certain. Only insofar would you "create" a new "situation". Obviously, there should be no imposed limit on so obliging oneself. The natural limit lies in the acceptance obligation (shop foundation or tax foundation), refusal to accept and the discounting of such certificates and of their value standards in a free market for all kinds of monies and value standards. Such tokens are just part and parcel of free clearing and of the subjective value theory and of free pricing and free contracts and free exchange. Neither the existing quantity of gold nor silver nor platinum nor of any other commodity should be allowed to limit monetary exchanges (apart from the actions within voluntary payment communities, e.g. of gold bugs). Nor should any kind of basket or index currency be imposed. Fiat money is not a "creation" but an imposition, a false pretence of "payment" - best compared with requisitioning certificates.] - - Regards, Greg - - Hey John, I just realized. I would like our e-mails on the topics we discussed to be posted on my discussion group. Could you please join the eGroup I started recently at and send your e-mails on issues and political ideals to it. Its new so there's just a few people on it now. I would like our discussions of free nations, monetary policy, etc. included to get others involved and so they will be in the archives so that when more people join it the future they can read about those ideas. You can also post info about your project. - I also have a newsletter you can subscribe to at - If you don't mind, could you resend the e-mail you sent me last week about indigenous nation's struggles and I will post my response. You had some interesting comments, and I think that others would be interested in it. I want to comment on money creation and policy that you brought up when I have the time, next week, and post it to the group. ... Greg - - [JZ72: While panarchism and monetary freedom are my favourite topics, I do not have not unlimited time and energy available for their discussion, which can be very time-consuming. Most of my contributions towards these topics end up on my microfiche. I have not yet extracted all those which are digitized and no time and energy to digitize all of them. - However, you may use of my letters and microfiche whatever you like for your group and news and, sooner or later, I hope to get around to visit and read both. (I have still not got around to do that! - J.Z., 21.8.11.) I am still fully involved with microfiching libertarian writings and with trying to promote CD-ROM use among libertarians, towards a complete library and information service. - Le Grand E. Day did, for a while, publish a small panarchistic newsletter and had about 36 subscribers. I managed neither to get his subscription list from him nor all copies of this newsletter. - One of my downloads was Edward Stringham: Market Chosen Law, JLS 14:1, Winter 98-99, pages 53-77. It is full of essentially panarchistic ideas - but without a clue about the panarchistic tradition and writings. It is obviously high time to bring all this information together and published in at least one medium, as I try to do with my ON PANARCHY series. Those prepared to secede and fight for liberty, wishing for a genuinely liberating libertarian revolution, may have to revolutionize their reading and publishing habits, extending them to microfilm, floppies and CD-ROMs. The JOURNAL FOR LIBERTARIAN STUDIES contains possibly more such contributions but it is particular about copyrights and too expensive for me in print and on microfilm. PIOT, John. - I wish many other libertarians and anarchists would describe their kind of libertarian future, utopia, ideal, panacea, panarchy, polyarchy, political, economic and social experiment, multi-government, competing government or competing society etc. in as many details as he has done on his website. - J.Z., 5.9.11.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, 6.) 9.4.01. - Registration office for panarchies. - J.Z., to G. F., Cc GPdB. - Dear Greg, - in your 17 Feb. 01 letter to Gian Piero de Bellis, with copy to me, you mentioned that "... de Puydt's concept contains one fatal flaw, namely the requirement of citizens to register their political allegiances at a central bureau. That would inevitably lead to the licensing of political afficilation and eventually to a political monopoly - i.e. a return to state citizenship." - - I think you may make too much out of this point. Firstly, I doubt that de Puydt meant or clearly spoke of a single central bureau for all of Belgium, France, Europe or the World - to register political membership. - Secondly, I doubt that he would have insisted to giving such a bureau an exclusive authority to register political membership as well as any power to impose conditions for its registration. - We have, indeed, central national registers, formerly local church registers, for registering marriages, divorces, births and death. But it is not they who propose and pass laws on these events and their registration. There would be no national or international body to pass legislation on panarchy memberships. It would be just a convenient registration, like e.g the telephone and business directories are, as well as credit reference bureaus. - The registration of e.g. marriages and divorces became powerful only within the context of customs and laws imposing exclusive and compulsory conditions for both. - - Maybe the whole system will be able to develop and function well enough without any central or competing registers of membership, based merely upon membership registers of individual panarchies and corresponding documents, ID's or membership cards, issued by the diverse panarchies to all their members. - I do not consider this point to be very important but it is important that what you fear will not happen and that we prevent it from happening. So far I see no strong trend in this direction. - There are some anarchists, who do fear all kinds of organizations, any degree of chairmanship and office holding and who expect that all organizations inevitably deteriorate, degenerate, become corrupt and power-hungry and successful in practising power struggles. I do not share that belief. - Competition between organizations will even be extended into the spheres now reserved to governments. Individual secessionism and voluntarism will be generalized beyond their present limitations. Not only the bad monies will be driven out by good money - when they have no longer monopoly and legal tender power (in the reverse of the pop versions of Gresham's Law) but also the bad organizations, to a much larger extent than is presently the case. - However, man will remain imperfect and some organizations will make mistakes. That is why individual secessionism and voluntary associationism and its competition against the "baddies" will remain very important. - People will be free to secede from registration offices they do dislike and join others or establish competing ones! - - The share etc. company registers of territorial national governments are powerful also only because the legislative power of territorial national governments stands behind them. They are part of the whole complex of financial despotism. The same applies to stock exchanges, granted legal monopolies. You are probably well aware that there was formerly competition to them, even quite informally, in coffee shops and in "kerb exchanges" on the road-side. - The central registration of cars has and of land titles has also been legally and territorially imposed, largely with taxation in mind. Possibly car insurance companies and road owning companies would have made other arrangements to record their membership. - I heard that formerly private local solicitors were also keeping a register of local land titles and these private registers were recognized throughout the U.S. - until State and possibly also Federal Legislation came in on this subject. - One might also compare this registration with any kind of general information service. Many competing ones do exist. Supposedly 70,000 are now added weekly in form of websites. - Thus any kind of national or world governmental central registration bureau, especially a powerful one, for members of panarchies, with powers to impose conditions upon them, need not be established and hasn't been clearly proposed, to my knowledge, by anyone. - Furthermore, how powerful were most registration offices when de Puydt wrote his article? Even Marx assumed that when all private firms were nationalized that then they would be transferred merely into the administration of a then rather smallish Prussian bureaucracy, based upon low taxation, which appeared then and to him to be still relatively harmless. He imagined private capitalists to be more powerful and dangerous than such public servants. All too many of his followers still think so. - I would expect not only several world federation attempts to be made under exterritorial autonomy by volunteers, but also several federation and confederation conventions among different groups of panarchies and they might pass some rules on whom they would recognize as their members. - Court systems, competing with each other, would also have to make some arrangements to find out easily under what jurisdiction a particular person falls, if e.g. his offence against a non-member hasn't subjected him to his victims jurisdiction. - Members might also be issued with membership cards - by their own panarchy, in the same way as insured people are issued with documents by their insurance company. - Moreover, if members in panarchies subscribed to establish or maintain common assets, then they would also, upon leaving, be given their share in some transferable securities. Maybe the panarchy they secede from will have contracted a buy-back option for such securities. - I doubt that people who have grasped the rightfulness and need for individual sovereignty and individual secessionism, are aware of their individual rights and liberties and have organized and trained themselves to defend them, e.g. via rightfully organized, motivated, trained and armed volunteer militias, will let any kind of imposed law, administration, jurisdiction, police system etc., any bureaucracy, grow up and get on their backs again, apart, naturally, from those, who joined some communistic, socialistic, collectivistic, syndicalistic etc. community. But even then, they would be surrounded by their opposites and, once sufficiently enlightened, by their own inevitable failures, at their own expense, and by the successes of others, in other panarchies, they would secede from those who mislead and exploit them. Some former communists did become some of the strongest opponents of communism. - If the market has room for and any need for competing registration offices for political membership then they are likely to be established. - You might be the one who establishes the first competing one. - PIOT, John Zube. - Slightly edited: J.Z., 3.9.11. - For some of his website pages see ON PANARCHY, its contents list. - I would like it very much if others did describe their kind of libertocracy panarchy, polyarchy, competing governments or societies, multi-governments, meta-utopias etc. in as many details as he has done for his, on his web-pages. - J.Z., 6.9.11. - LIBERTOCRACY

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, Citizens under a Death Sentence, 1p: 757, in PP 1689-1693. - With regard to ABC mass murder or anti-people "weapons" in the hands of ANY government we all are. Only the execution date has not yet been determined but may be by some madman, drunk, drug or power addict, suicide candidate or by a computer malfunction. - J.Z.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, Determining Borders, 1p: 912, in PP 1689-1693. - Alas, here shows some of his remaining territorialism. Their private and coop property limits and membership lists and private contracts are all the "borders" that they need. Local and majoritarian decision-making is still wrongful territorial governmental over dissenters and not self-government for all. - J.Z., 7.7.01.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, FSUTO Monetary System, Free Market Money, 2pp: 939, in PP 1689-1693. - Here he envisions only a fraction of full monetary freedom but includes a general monetary freedom clause. Alas, in it, he still subscribes to the notion of "asset currency" and wants to entrust to libertocratic (i.e., voluntaristic) governments responsibility in this sphere and give their notes legal tender power towards their members. His design for their central banks resembles all too much that of the existing ones. - J.Z., 7.7.01. - Later he assured me, that his kind of central bank was meant only for his voluntary community. - J.Z., 23.8.04. - (I have not downloaded all of his numerous websites. Essentially, Gregory Flanagan describes his particular "panarchy", which he would like to be free to set up competition with all other panarchies. He confirmed this interpretation in a letter to me. - J.Z., 22.8.04.)

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, FSUTO-HRT: Human Rights Treaty, 5pp: 669, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, HIS "LIBERTOCRACY" & PANARCHISM: His extensive website has been partly reproduced on my first CD, together with some letter exchanges. It is dedicated mainly to his own libertarian utopia, which he wants to see only panarchistically realized for its volunteers. As a libertarian utopia it belongs to the small number of detailed libertarian constitution drafts that have so far been proposed and published. As far as I know, they have not yet been listed together, far less published together in an anthology. The latest one of these that I have encountered was published in THE FREE RADICAL, No. 38, by Libertarianz, This draft contains also a human rights draft, one not yet included in my collection of such private drafts in PP 589/590. It opposes e.g. central banking and compulsory taxation. Otherwise, I have noticed no exterritorialist feature in it. – J.Z., n.d.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, Human Rights Defense as an Alternative to War, 2pp: 755, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, Librademian Justice System, 15pp: 557, in PP 1689-1693. - That is ONE proposal by ONE. I would rather have seen a clear statement in favor of free competition between different justice systems, all individually chosen. - But he describes only the justice system in his panarchy! - J.Z.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, Natural Human Society, 2pp: 482, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, Natural Rights and Natural Law, 8pp: 871, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, Privately Produced, Publicly Provided Security Services, 5pp: 456, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, Rights of Human Persons, in "Librademia", 16pp: 440, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, The Case against the World System of Political States, 12pp: 766, in PP 1689-1693. - Only its compulsory or monopolistic or territorial feature is objectionable not its world-wide spread or that it is political and interventionist in the economic and social spheres as well. We could also have a polyarchic, libertocratic or panarchic world system of political States - but no one would HAVE to belong to anyone of them, while everyone would be under obligation not to interfere with their members, while their members would be under obligation not to invade the rights of non-members. - A State or government without territorial power, i.e., without exclusive sovereignty and compulsory membership or coercive territorial subjugation of non-members, which also means, without compulsory taxation, constitutional, legislative, juridical and administrative power over dissenters who have seceded from it, is like a beast of prey that has lost its teeth or beak, its claws, its strong muscles and its obvious victims. It would be harmless and tend to starve to death - unless it can find voluntary customers who want its "services" and are willing to pay for them. For me all the wrongful and harmful characteristics or such organizations are summed up by the world "territorialism". - J.Z.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, The State's War on Freedom, 3pp: 758, in PP 1689-1693. - When will the accumulated and overwhelming evidence finally lead to its conviction? - J.Z.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, The Universal Natural Laws, 1p: 870, in PP 1689-1693. - Another private human rights draft! - J.Z. - I am not sure whether I included it already in PEACE PLANS 589/590. - That job, too, is too big for one. What can one do with people who are insufficiently interested in finally getting all their genuine individual rights and liberties, according to the present stand of science, clearly expressed and published? - They let even their rights and liberties be defined and legally limited by territorial governments or remain faithful to ancient and all too incomplete and flawed official Bills of Rights. - J.Z., 18.10.11.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, to BELLIS, GIAN PIERO DE & ZUBE, JOHN, 17.2.01, 1p: 254, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY, to ZUBE, JOHN: 28.12.00, 1p - - 342, in PP 1689-1693. -- 8.1.01 & Z-F. 12.1.01, 4pp: 348, in PP 1689-1693. -- 15.1.01, 2pp: 352, & Z-F, 20.1.01, 4pp: 354, in PP 1689-1693. -- 9.2.01, & Z-F reply, 1p: 359, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY: Librademian Security Services. Securitariot. Defenders of Human Rights, Freedom and Keepers of the Peace, 7pp: 572, in PP 1689-1693. - "Anyone may form their own police, emergency response or defense and offer those services to anyone else. …".

FLANAGAN, GREGORY: Political Monopolies. - In this short essay he goes far towards panarchism. - E.g.: The only kind of monopoly that can't be tolerated is a political monopoly, its ironic that people fear free market monopolies, which is a phantom that doesn't really exist, and call for their breakup by turning to the most tyrannical monopoly in existence, the political cartel. If people think that all monopolies are bad, then why do they think that maintaining a monopoly over governmental services, regulation, courts and police is good when these things must, above all else, be provided in a free market because people's rights and lives depend on it. With other goods and services, if a monopoly provider prices them too high, you may do without them, but with the monopoly over government, not only are you forced to pay for it, you are denied even the right to refuse their "services" and do without them. - J.Z. - He also attacks territorialism, without calling it by that name, in another short essay: Political Police Monopoly Obstructs Justice. - And in his essay: Political Police Monopoly Obstructs Justice. - However, this kind of legally imposed local zoning is only a small fraction of the nation-wide zoning, regulation, domination and tribute extraction that territorial nation States practise, supposedly in the common or public interest, but in reality all too much against it. - J.Z., 7.9.11.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY: Sovereignty, 4pp (On individual secessionism, individual sovereignty and voluntary associationism. This aspect is not always clearly stated in all of his pages or executed in all of his proposals (I believe) but, in case of doubt, should always be assumed as implied or intended, since it is one of his guiding ideas. - J.Z.): 745, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY: Statism, 5pp: 761, in PP 1689-1693.

FLANAGAN, GREGORY: The Military: Mercenary Terrorists, the Embodiment of Evil, 9 pages: 837 in PP 1689-1693. - He means only the existing military of most territorial States and has his own ideas on competing, private, mercenary or professional security and defence forces and methods, mentioning voluntary and rightful militias only by the way. - J.Z., 7.7.01.

FLAUBERT, GUSTAV: Salambo, Berlin, Schreitersche Verlagsbuchhandlung, n.d., aus dem Franzoesichen ins Deutsche uebersetzt von Hugo Linder, JZL. On page 268 he reports on a numidic tribe, the Massylier, whose customs permitted them to leave their king after his failure. No further details are given in this novel. - Is there any government, which has not as yet failed in many ways? - J.Z., n.d. – Was there ever any such government? – J.Z., 4.5.12. - Q.

FLEW, ANTHONY, What Is a Right? in GEORGIA LAW REVIEW, vol. 3, No. 4, Summer 1979: On page 1140 he uses quite plain words, useful for individual secessionism: "In proclaiming the general right of association both the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the later specifically European version make it quite clear that this right is the RIGHT TO JOIN OR NOT TO JOIN, AT WILL."(Stressed by me.) - Art. 20 (2) of the UN declaration is obviously relevant: "No one may be compelled to belong to an association." - - On the same page he relates individual dissociation to the right to life - and to a voluntary death: "More specifically, and crucially, is the right to life necessarily and by the same token the right to death: the right, that is, to suicide, and to the assisted suicide that is voluntary euthanasia? - My own answer is an unhesitating, even passionate, "Yes'.'' - Before he mentioned dissociation only in connection with compulsory unionism. He might have added conscription - and State membership but did not. [Not even the best libertarian writers are always consistent. Even less should one always expect consistency in my own writings. But at least I am genuinely grateful if one points out my mistakes to me. - Should individual secessionism be confined to suicide? - J.Z., 1.10.11.] - More important than the right to suicide - which can hardly be ever fully denied to anyone - is, naturally, the right to live independent from any territorial State and its constitution, laws, regulations and jurisdiction. - J.Z., in a letter to GPdB & CB, 11.11.04.

FLOATING ARTIFICIAL ISLANDS: Plans for them exist but I do not know of any large-scale realization attempt. - Are those, who make plans for them, like e.g. Patrick Friedman, more realistic than those, who make plans for exterritorially competing societies - anywhere? - J.Z., 18.10.11. – Q.

FLOATING EXCHANGE RATES: Under fully freely floating exchange rates the governmental paper currencies would not only have to float against each other but against all other freely issues private and cooperative currencies. And in that case, they would tend to float to the top - like scum, and would, finally, be widely and totally refused. - J.Z., 23.10.78 & 20.6.00. – In the meantime, they would only be accepted still by the remaining statists, as a tax foundation money, to pay their taxes with. – All others should have seceded and joined their kind of free societies or panarchies. J.Z., 14.12.08. – MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM

FLORENCE: Finally, in 1402, a Florentine consul resided at London. The statutes of that consulate, collected and approved in 1513, provided that the consul, assisted by two counsellors, should decide all contests between the subjects of the republic resident in England; those who resorted to any other court were liable to a pecuniary fine, and in order to bring those who were not subjects of the republic under its jurisdiction, the Florentines were forbidden, under severe penalty, to trade with any foreigner who did not engage to submit to the consul's jurisdiction and to appear before him. 1 - 1 Miltitz, op. cit., vol. ii, pt. i, p. 152. Cf. Bonfils, Manuel de droit international (7th ed., Paris, 1914), § 737n. – LIU, Exterritoriality, pages 30/31. – CONSULAR JURISDICTION

FLOW-CHART DISCUSSIONS: 28, 29, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505. - By now they could be developed and published on the Internet or CDs, using the options for this offered by Paul Monk et al on the Internet, called "argument mapping", to finally settle some ancient, medieval and contemporary controversies. - J.Z., 18.10.11.

FOCJ: FUNCTIONAL, OVERLAPPING, COMPETING JURISDICTIONS. See: FREY, BRUNO S. for details of his proposed “competing jurisdictions” not tied to territories.

FOLDVARY, FRED, Public Goods and Private Communities: The Market Provision of Social Services. - Fred Foldvary - Public Goods and Private Communities : The Market Provision of Social Services - Edward Elgar Publishing, 1994

FOLDVARY, FRED, to J.Z., Nov. 16, 1985, page 83. - - On Financing Defence Without Taxation, 85, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585. - Also entries on pages 50 & 58. - - 107, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. - - 10ff, 18, in ON PANARCHY V, in PP 554. - - Reply to Peace Questionnaire, 1 page, 125, in ON PANARCHY XIII, in PP 869. - - in ON PANARCHY XIV, in PP 870.

FOLDVARY, FRED, Why Aren't You an Anarchist? - Christian Butterbach wrote, on 26. 2. 06: "I would like to draw your attention to an article of February 14, 2006, by Fred E. Foldvary called "Why Aren't You an Anarchist?" - as it contains a few lines on geoanarchism and geoarchy that seem to address some central point of our discussions about our panarchist radical tolerance towards all kinds of panarchies and the need for some minimum agreement on principles valid universally for all, about militia, about protection of panarchies against the few that might not respect the boundaries. I think that there is a hint at some solution here." -

FOLDVARY, FRED: On Panarchy, 28, 30, 63, in PEACE PLANS No. 505. -- 107, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507.-- 10ff, 18, in ON PANARCHY V, in PP 554. -- 50, 58, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585. -- On Financing Defence Without Taxation, page 85, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585. -- To JZ, Nov.16, 1985, page 83, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585. -- ON PANARCHY XIII, in PP 869. -- Reply to Peace Questionnaire, 1 page, 125, in ON PANARCHY XIII, in PP 869.-- ON PANARCHY XIV, in PP 870. - Reply to my Peace Questionnaire by Fred Foldvary, 1984, then 1920 Cedar St., Berkeley, CA 94709 USA. - (2011) - - (1) "Civil and international peace" is a condition in which there is - - A) neither fraud nor violence or the threat of violence; - - B) accepted ways to justly resolve disputes; - - C) freedom to do anything which does not cause violence or fraud. - - - (2) The foundation stone for peace is a widespread recognition of natural moral law, and its principal rule: All acts and only those acts which coercively harm others are evil. - - Politically, this means a system in which people have the legal right to do any non-harmful act, and to withdraw from the system. - - Economically, this means the freedom to produce and exchange wealth, free from restrictions other than those against force and fraud. - - Any public or government funds would be derived from voluntary contributions, user fees for specific services, and for general security, fees based on the value of land owned within the jurisdiction of the protecting agency. - Those who did not wish to pay would be free to secede or not join the agency. - Fees based on land values would minimize fraud and economic disincentives. - - - 3) The first step towards world peace would be to form a world-wide Association of Free Individuals based on natural law. This would eventually replace statist governments. Any individual of good will would be free to join, but would be expelled if he committed any aggression, fraud, or uncooperative behavior. - This Free Association would provide all the services of government, such as protection and courts, plus, initially, some business services such as providing currency backed by assets. - It would also be an educational organization, by example as well as instruction. - Esperanto would be the official language, though national languages would be used as well. - Revenue would be derived from dues, and later from rent on land owned by the Association. (I am working on a detailed proposal for this, which may be announced at the Libertarian International at England in August,1984. The name I am suggesting is the Republic of the Sun, a republic being at root a government by individual consent.) - Once the Association has several million members, represented in most countries, it can then be influential. It would first propose solutions to conflicts such as Northern Ireland and the Israeli-Arab wars. - The solution could involve, at first, the concept of “joint sovereignty” whereby Ireland and Great Britain would both have sovereignty over Northern Ireland and residents would be free to choose one or the other government. - For Israel, a Palestinian government with the same boundaries as Israel would be established and residents would be able to choose a government. The concept of sharing land as individuals would replace exclusive state sovereignty. - The idea would be promoted continuously until it received serious consideration and as the Association grew it would become more and more influential. Other ideas would be considered as well. - - The Association would work towards peace through education and by example. It would promote non-intervention and tolerance. It would also promote land reform as the key to eliminating poverty and work with Amnesty International to end internal violence. Eventually its large membership would cause the collapse of states, though opposition would be likely. The goal would be a solar system of free persons. (1984) - - - A few of his writings are in my PEACE PLANS series and are listed in my main catalogue: - The complete catalogue, or as complete as I could so far make it, is on: - J.Z., 16/12/04. - 35 Oxley St., Berrima, NSW 2577, Australia, Tel. (02) 48 771 436

FOLKWAYS: Leave all to their own folkways. Allow dissenting individuals and minorities to opt out of any territorial system and to adopt other systems, societies, ideologies or folkways for themselves, under personal law or full exterritorial autonomy. No more territorial rule by any party or coalition of parties under the pretence of real representation. At best they do represent only the majority, not the minorities, and even then the real power is in the hands of a few people only. Most of them are power-addicts and still all too ignorant and prejudiced. All of them are misleaders in most respects – and hungry for your earnings and property. – They promise very much and deliver very little in positive services but do provide many disservices. – They should all become confined to their voluntary victims only. Only these deserve them. - J.Z., 18.12.95, 14.12.08. 5.5.12. - TOLERANCE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, MINORITY AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, CUSTOMS, TRADITIONS, VOLUNTARISM, PARTIES, POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS, RULERS, PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS

FOLLIN, H. L., & LEFER, PIERRE, Paroles d'un Voyant, introduction a la pensee et a l’oeuvre de H. L. - Paroles d'un Voyant (passages choisis) [Français], Paris, 1934, 204pp, reproduced on microfiche in PEACE PLANS 322. - Henri Léon Follin, 1866 - 1949? was a long-term friend and correspondent of Ulrich von Beckerath. I believe that this edition was published after his death by one of his children. So far, I was unable to get any others of his writings and publications. He was at least in favour of seceding from the State and forming an exterritorially autonomous world federation of volunteers for peace. – J.Z., 4.5.12. – Today, 4.5.12, I checked with Google and found many references to him, also online texts - alas no translations into English. - Panarchy.Org | Website Statistics & Estimated Earnings - (1934) Henri Léon Follin, Paroles d'un Voyant (passages choisis) [Français]. Selected Website: Contrepoints (Une publication de [Français] ... Henri Léon Follin, Paroles d'un voyant (1934) - - - Translate this page - Note. L'humaniste et individualiste Follin a été trop en avant par rapport à son temps pour être connu et apprécié à l'exception d'un cercle restreint de ... - - - BARNES & NOBLE | e follin - - Format, NOOK Book (eBook) · FREE · La marche vers la paix. nookbook . La marche vers la paix. by; Henri Léon Follin. Format, NOOK Book ... - - - - La volonté d'harmonie - Henri Léon Follin, University of Michigan Library, fre, Paris, B. Grasset, 1913, 335 pages, [2. éd. ] ... La volonté d'harmonie. - - La volonté d'harmonie - - - - - La volonté d'harmonie., by Henri Léon Follin | The Online Books Page

Title: La volonté d'harmonie. Author: Follin, Henri Léon, 1866-. Note: Paris, B. Grasset, 1913. Link: page images at HathiTrust; US access only. No stable link ... Sur la participation aux bénéfices, par H.-L. Follin... 1901, 24 pages. - Henri-Léon ...énéfices_par.html?i...

Henri-Léon Follin · 0 Reviews Sur_la_participation_aux_b%C3%A9n%C3%A9fices_par.html?id= o6NvQwAACAAJ ... FOLLIN, Eugen Relgis Papers - - ... 1964, 1966-1969; proofs of Upton Sinclair's book `Personal Jesus' 1952; file of documents and letters concerning Henri-Léon Follin c. 1935-1951; file of letters ... - - - La philosophie économique devant la sociologie - Henri Léon Follin – 1904, ...é - A9conomique_devant_la_soc.html?id=j4kMGwAACAAJ&utm_source=gb-gplus- ... - - - Cosmométapolis. Traduit ... par Rose Arp. With special reference to ...étapolis-Traduit-special.../B00180B99C - Cosmométapolis. Traduit ... par Rose Arp. With special reference to the work of H. L. Follin: Eugen Relgis, Rose Arp, Henri Léon Follin: Books. - - - Le devoir du bonheur: Books

7 Results – Le devoir du bonheur (French Edition) by Henri Léon Follin (Paperback - Jan. 1, 1909). Buy new: $26.99. Get it by Tuesday, Mar. 6 if you order in the ... - - - La révolution du 4 septembre 19 (French Edition): Henri Léon Follin ...évolution-septembre-19-French/.../B00416BH1K... - - La Révolution du 4 septembre 19... - Henri Léon Follin – Google Booksé A9volution_du_4_septembre_19.html?id=KpmkQwAACAAJ&utm_source=gb- gplus-share ... - - - Sur la participation aux bénéfices, par H.-L. Follin... - Henri-Léon...énéfices_par.html?i...
Henri-Léon Follin · 0 Reviews - Sur_la_participation_aux_b%C3%A9n%C3%A9fices_par.html?id= o6NvQwAACAAJ ... - - - Metapolítica - - Translate this page - El ideólogo individualista pacifista Henri Léon Follin (1866-1949) publicó en 1903, como «président de la société havraise pour l'Arbitrage entre Nations» y ... - - - - H. L. Follin. La Métapolitique supra nationale. Genèse et Evolution ...étapolitique.../B00183QS86 - Translate this page... supra nationale. Genèse et Evolution de son concept et d'une organisation adéquate. Avec un portrait de l'auteur: Henri Léon Follin: Livres. - - - Follin, Henry-Léon (1866-1918?) - - Translate this page - 8 oct. 2009 – Quelques réflexions et aphorismes pour aider à méditer sur la faillite de la civilisation au XXe siècle / Henri-Léon Follin / Aix-en-Provence ... - - - Follin, Henri Léon (1866-....) - Bianco : 100 ans de presse anarchiste ... - Translate this page - Henri Léon Follin. Articles. Conditions d'un mouvement individualiste et supranational Follin, H.-L. Principes sociaux de l'ordre naturel Follin, H.-L. Révolution - - - H.-L. Follin. Parallèle entre les régimes protectionniste et libre ... - › ... › Régimes alimentaires - Translate this page... les régimes protectionniste et libre-échangiste. Communication faite au Congrès industriel de Rouen, le 23 août 1901: Henri-Léon Follin: Livres. - - - Henri Léon Follin: Livres - - Translate this page H.-L. Follin. L'Idolâtrie politique. Quelques réflexions et aphorismes pour aider à méditer sur la faillite de la civilisation au XXe siècle de Henri-Léon Follin ... - - - L'Ordre naturel : Journal des peuples : Explications (Book, 1900s ... - Author: Henry-Léon Follin. Publisher: [Epernay : Imp. sparnacienne], [19..] Edition /Format: Book : French. Rating: (not yet rated) 0 with reviews - Be the first. - - - Moralistes, économistes et solidaristes, par H.-L. Follin. (Book, 1903 ... - Get this from a library! Moralistes, économistes et solidaristes, par H.-L. Follin.. [ Henry-Léon Follin, pseud. de Léon Hendryk.] - - - Amazon lists the following titles but adds after each: Actuellement indisponible. 1.) H.-L. Follin. L'Idolâtrie politique. Quelques réflexions et aphorismes pour aider à méditer sur la faillite de la civilisation au XXe siècle de Henri-Léon Follin (Reliure inconnue - 1916) - 2.) H. L. Follin. La Métapolitique supra nationale. Genèse et Evolution de son concept et d'une organisation adéquate. Avec un portrait de l'auteur de Henri Léon Follin (Reliure inconnue - 1927) – 3.) Sur la participation aux bénéfices, par H.-L. Follin de Henri-Léon Follin (Reliure inconnue - 1901) – 4) H.-L. Follin. Parallèle entre les régimes protectionniste et libre-échangiste. Communication faite au Congrès industriel de Rouen, le 23 août 1901 de Henri-Léon Follin (Reliure inconnue - 1901) – 5.) H. L. Follin. La Révolution du 4 septembre 19 de Henri Léon Follin (Reliure inconnue - 1921) - These are just some of the search results today. I did not see any full text translations into English, far less into German. But some Spanish ones are offered. – Someone who is fluent in French will have to examine his available works for their panarchistic or polyarchic contents from among 262000 references – but including many other people named Follin. If the search name is put in quotation marks many less hints are offered also if one asks for the English version of the references. - J.Z. 4.5.12

FOLLIN, H. L., to Albert Einstein on the Republique Supranationale, 1922, page 104, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585. - All of the ON PANARCHY sub-series of PEACE PLANS has been digitized by me but is not yet anywhere online, as far as I know. - J.Z., 5.10.11. REPUBLIQUE SUPRANATIONALE

FOLLIN, H. L., to G. De La Fouchardiers, 1929, on Einstein, page 107, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585.

FOLLIN, H. L., who died in 1930, (*) was author of Paroles d'un voyant, highly recommended by his friend Ulrich von Beckerath. (He was also a friend of Heinrich Nienkamp, author of "Fuersten ohne Krone".) He established the Republique Supra-Nationale (See there!), a pacifist organization which demanded the right to secede from the State. Beckerath was a member and sent him once a book (title?) on the capitulations. Follin's son or, perhaps, grandchildren, may be still alive and possess F.'s papers. All of his writings, except the "Paroles ..." are wanted by J.Z. - Some correspondence with Einstein & Beckerath, 1922, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PEACE PLANS 585, PAGES 104 ff. His work is partly discussed also in HUTCHINSON HARRIS, S.: The Doctrine of Personal Right, 1935, 594 pages, 42 x reduced, in PEACE PLANS No. 483: TERRITORIALISM, FRONTIERS, BORDERS, NATIONAL UNITY ATTEMPTS & PANARCHISM, NATURAL ORDER VS. ARTIFICIAL ORDER & DISORDER: “Artificial antagonisms, chiefly national, and arising from the same cause, have scattered the natural elements of the economic, aesthetic, intellectual and moral solidarity of our race.” … Thus all civilized beings find themselves threatened with the same fate, and have no hope of escape but the questionable intelligence of talkers and dreamers urging different and contradictory conceptions and plans, or that of opportunists who follow after the events they are unable to control. In this peril the salvation of civilization is to be found in the imperative necessity of reaction against the prejudices of artificial Order and return to the conditions of natural Order.” – S. Hutchinson Harris, The Doctrine of Personal Right, p. 378, discussing Follin’s League Pour Ordre Naturel, published some time before WWI. – Follin was a friend of Ulrich von Beckerath and advocated individual sovereignty and individual secessionism as well as voluntary world-wide associationism. So far I was only able to obtain and publish a collection of some of his sayings, posthumously compiled by one of his children: “Paroles d’un Voyant”. Enquiries at the Alliance Francaise were fruitless. I have never seen any of his works in French sections of bookshops. – J.Z., 9.1.99. - (*) His birth was given online as 1866, his death as 1918 (?) and 1949. I rather suppose the above-mentioned 1930 is correct. His “Paroles …” were supposed to have been published after his death. – J.Z., 4.5.12.

FOOLING PEOPLE TO RULE PEOPLE: It may be true … that "you can’t fool all the people all the time", but you can fool enough of them to rule a large country.” – Will & Ariel Durant. - Even under panarchism you could still fool some foolish volunteers but not non-members and dissenters. - J.Z., 26. 11. 06. – GOVERNMENTS, RULERS, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM

FOOLISHNESS: Everybody considers himself an expert and almost all others consider him a fool. Thus only one way out remains: Each tries his system with his followers - at the own expense and risk - and also concedes to all others the right to take measures at their own expense and risk, regardless of whether they appear to him to be completely foolish. - U. v. Beckerath, 1953.

FOOLISHNESS: Only a fool, it has been said, insists on learning by his own experience.” - Russell Lewis, in Dr. Rhodes Boyson, editor, Down With The Poor, p.62. - But he has the right to do so. The worse fool is the one who does not even learn from observing him. And the most dangerous fools are those who outlaw and suppress self-responsible alternative experiments. - J.Z., 6.11.78 & 20.6.00. - EXPERIENCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TOLERANCE

FOOLISHNESS: The damn foolishness of one person is a breath of life to another.” - From film Hard Driver. – Politicians certainly live on the ignorance, foolishness and lack of interest of most voters. Panarchism would confine the negative results to them, instead of spreading them territorially, over a whole population, i.e. the minority of the enlightened as well as the majority of the unenlightened. Moreover, successive costly failures in the communities of the unenlightened would tend to rapidly lead to a loss of members for them. – J.Z., 15.12.08. DIS., TOLERANCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, VOTING, TERRITORIALISM

FOOLISHNESS: The fact that people are foolish, as everyone is from time to time, has been seized upon by reformers to justify all manner of impertinences.” - Kenneth Mc Donald, Who Guards the Guardians? - THE FREEMAN, 1/78. - Only the fools should have to suffer under their remaining foolishness. – Neither wisdom nor foolishness should ever be territorially enforced. – J.Z. 20.11.10. - GUARDIANS, MEDDLING, PROTECTIONISM, REFORMS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM

FOOLISHNESS: We have no patience with the mawkish philanthropy which would ward-off the punishment of stupidity. The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools." - Herbert Spencer, 1820-1903, Essays, State-Tamperings with Money and Banks. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, PROTECTION, PREVENTION & SECURITY, TOLERANCE FOR FOOLISH ACTIONS, FOLLY, WELFARE STATE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, STUPIDITY, IGNORANCE, CHARITY - (Bold print for this famous remark by me. – J.Z.)

FOOLISHNESS: Yet, it is from the actions of a few whom their fellows regard as foolish or dangerous, that we sometimes reap greatest benefit. Freedom to do only what someone else says is right is not freedom but slavery; and a society of free persons who know and choose to do only what is wise and good is a utopian dream.” - V. Orval Watts, THE FREEMAN, 8/75. - EXPERTS, PROGRESS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, IDEAS, INNOVATORS

FOOLS: Answer fools with silence.” – Iranian Proverb. – It would be more instructive still to let them practise their foolishness among themselves, at their own risk and expense. – J.Z., 3.1.08. Also bets on the outcomes of their experiments could be arranged, which would further increase the losses of those willing to undertake false or flawed experiments. Once they become aware of how large the odds are against them succeeding, many silly experiments might even be avoided. – J.Z., 12.12.08. – FOOLS TO BE ANSWERED WITH SILENCE

FOOLS: One fool can ask a question that a thousand wise men cannot answer. What one fool spoils, a thousand wise men cannot repair.” - Torat ha Kenaot, 42; Bet Jonathan, 8. - From: The Wisdom of Israel. - As far as opinions are concerned, thousands to millions of wise men could and should combine their wisdom in an encyclopedia of the best refutations. And as far as foolish actions are concerned, freedom of action or freedom to experiment is the best cure for them or, at least, it will minimize the damage and confine it mostly to the fools themselves. - J.Z., 22.6.00.

FOOLS: The only thing to do with an idiot and a thorn is to get rid of them.” - Shemot Rabbah, 6, 5. - From: The Wisdom of Israel. – Rather, leave them, and them alone, to the consequences of their own errors, mistakes and actions. – J.Z., 15.12.08. TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM.

FOOLS: There is no remedy for a fool.” - Gittin, 70b. - Yes, there are: E.g., ignore him or put him within an institutional framework that sees to it that he alone suffer from his follies, his irrational experiments and actions. - J.Z., 25.6.92 & 22.6.00.

FORCE & CIVILIZATION: I am not aware that any community has a right to force another to be civilized." - John Stuart Mill, On Liberty. - Nobody is under obligation to be a gentleman or a scientist or an artist. He may, instead, be a boxer, wrestler or footballer. The main point is that all his actions do wrong and harm at most only to himself and like-minded volunteers. - Practical examples of truly free and civilized societies would be a greater force for progress than all attempts of enforcing "civilization" via one or the other form of colonialism have ever been. - J.Z., 4.4.89, 12.12.03, 4.5.12.

FORCE & PERSUASION: The substitution of force for persuasion, among its other disadvantages, has this further drawback, from our present point of view, that it lessens the conscience of a society and breeds hypocrisy. You have not converted a man, because you have silenced him." - John Morley, On Compromise, 246. - Force might be used merely to uphold the right of individuals to secede and to defend them and their exterritorially autonomous communities. This means that force can also be rightfully used to establish and maintain conditions, which are essentially based only on the powers of attractive examples and persuasion and the deterrent effects of bad examples and flawed theories. J. Z. 6.1.93, 4.5.12.

FORCE & TOLERANCE, SUBSIDIARITY PRINCIPLE: Tolerance could also be defined as non-initiation of force or fraud. The State may not force any services upon the citizens, which they are willing and able to supply themselves or which they do not want for themselves. - J.Z., On Tolerance.

FORCE, GOVERNMENT, MILITIAS: Thus Bastiat insisted that collective force could only be used to insure the life, liberty, and property of individuals. While his position severely limited the role of government, Bastiat was far from adopting a position of philosophical anarchy. He went on to point out that man is primarily a social creature in nature, since: ..." - G.C. Roche, III, Bastiat, 197. - But collective force would better not be organized through and on behalf of any exclusive, coercive, sovereign, majoritarian, territorial, hierarchical or other despotic government, which is inherently anti-social and exactly the opposite of "a" free society, made up of numerous free societies, all free in the sense that they were freely chosen by their members. The worst kind of force that panarchists oppose is the compulsory membership in States and their exclusive sovereign and territorial powers over large areas. That force is not opposed by territorial governments but constitutes and maintains them. - It is an anti-social force. - J.Z., 24.7.92, 7.1.93, 10.12.03.

FORCE: Force will not keep the Empire together. Force has never kept anything together for very long. The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers.” - George Lucas, Star Wars, p.103. – The rightful, rational, libertarian and effective alternatives to territorial government force are still as little known and appreciated by as few as “the” positive “force” is in the Star Wars films of George Lucas. IMPERIALISM, UNITY

FORCE: forced association is the root cause of violence." - Mitchell Jones, NEW INDIVIDUALIST, 1972. - So are forced disassociation, segregation, exclusion and forced integration. - J.Z., 2.7.89 & 26.6.00. - COMPULSORY MEMBERSHIP, VIOLENCE, TERRITORIALISM & PANARCHISM

FORCE: Government, in its last analysis, is organized force.” - Woodrow Wilson. - Any street gang organizes its force, so does any coercive union or sect. Nevertheless, they do not yet constitute territorial governments. To say that government is territorially organized force would be more correct. - J.Z., 20.6.00. – Criminal gangs and crime syndicates do wrongfully imitate territorial governments and their wars with their claims to their exclusive “turf”. – J.Z., 15.12.08. - GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, TURF WARS BETWEEN GANGS, WARFARE STATES

FORCE: In every form, where men hold men in subjection to themselves, force is always organized against itself, is always tending sooner or later to destroy itself. Autocrat, restless politician, or socialist, they are all only laborers in vain. There is a moral gravitation that in its own time drags all their work remorseless to the ground. Everywhere across that work, failure is written large. …” Herbert Auberon, Mr. Spencer and the Great Machine, p.75. - So why have compulsory taxation, imposed territorial laws, jurisdictions and bureaucracies, monetary despotism, territorial coercion, the postal monopoly, monetary despotism and protectionism lasted as long as they did? - They never encountered a nearly complete freedom program - and enough people prepared to recognize and realize it with all rightful means! - J.Z., 21.6.00.

FORCE: In the first place, force begets force, and dies by the hand of its own offspring.” - Herbert Auberon, Mr. Spencer and the Great Machine, p.75. - So why hasn’t the continuance of compulsory taxation, by numerous new tax laws, led to the abolition of all compulsory taxation? Territorial force has spread rather than being reduced. The supposedly decolonized people have set up numerous new dictatorships or "democratic" territorial despotisms. The Pax Americana has not yet been very successful, world-wide, and has not even reduced wars as much as e.g. the Pax Romana and the Pax Britannica did. 30 to 90 "minor" wars per annum, since WW II, are just a little bit too much, by my standards. Terror and suppression lead to terror and suppression and are thereby continued for all too long - at least until the genuine freedom lovers finally do get their acts together. - J.Z., 21.6.00.

FORCE: No force is permanent.” - Leonardo da Vinci. - Those of territorial States, wars, compulsory taxation and legal tender have lasted already all too long. - J.Z., 25.6.00. – Suitable counter-forces, e.g. panarchies and local militias for the protection of individual rights and liberties, remain to be organized and for many even to be conceived and understood. – J.Z., 15.12.08. - COERCION, VIOLENCE

FORCE: No man - or group of men - has the right to assume the role of a criminal and initiate the use of physical compulsion against any man.” - Ayn Rand. - Any government which coercively upholds frontiers and uniform laws in "its" territory does thereby initiate force against all "its" dissenters and non-conformists, who would either like to trade or migrate freely or live in exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers within the territory which a territorial government has preempted. - J.Z., 21.6.00. - INITIATION OF FORCE & LIMITED TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS

FORCE: the one great curse of the human race is the use of force in the imposing of one's will, religion, habit, custom, or moral code upon another.” - Edward H. Fulton, THE EGO, quoted in: Reichert: Partisans of Freedom, p.194. – TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSION, GOVERNMENT, INTOLERANCE

FORCE: The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man's rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. … The proper kind of government acts on the principle of man's self-defence. … (It) may resort to force only against those who START the use of force. … Men have the right to use physical force ONLY in retaliation and ONLY against those who initiate its use.” - O'Neill: Ayn Rand. - She didn't believe in a God as a loving father but still believed in the possibility of a territorial and otherwise limited government, with compulsory membership, as a sufficiently loving Big Brother to act only as she suggested. - What precedents did she have in mind? Why did she expect any monopolistic government to act in this way, turning its expensive and inefficient protection racket into a rightful, wanted and efficient one, while competition with it would be expressly outlawed? - J.Z., 21.6.00. – Q.

FORCE: there never yet has been a great system sustained by force under which all the best faculties of men have not slowly withered …” - Auberon Herbert, in Sprading, Liberty & the Great Libertarians, p.399. – MAN, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

FORCE: Those who believe in the beneficence of force have never yet agreed upon the crimes that should be forbidden, the method and extent of punishment, the purpose of punishment, nor even its result. They simply agree that without force and violence social life cannot be maintained.” - Clarence Darrow. - There should be full freedom for believers in whatever forces and punishment, to apply them among themselves, in their own volunteer communities, under full exterritorial autonomy. And all the diverse freedom lovers should have the same option. It is high time to establish freedom of action in the remaining few spheres where experimental freedom has been preempted by territorial governments: the political, the economic and the social spheres. In all others we do enjoy this liberty already to a large extent and take it for granted. Unless we do thus extend our rights and liberties and do so fast, our very survival, the survival of mankind is at stake. - J.Z., 21.6.00, 4.5.12. - PUNISHMENT

FORCE: those who use force must be repelled by force. By their own act they place themselves in the force-relation, and, barbarous as is the relation, we must accept it just as far as they thrust it on us.” - Auberon Herbert, A Politician in Sight of Heaven. - Nuclear weapons are not the right response to Nuclear War, no more so than are terror, torture, scorched earth warfare, conscription, oppression, the murder of prisoners, and compulsory taxation - effective means to defeat terror, torture, scorched earth warfare, conscription, the murder of prisoners, oppression, and compulsory taxation. The counter-force should be based upon individual rather than collective responsibility and upon full recognition of individual rights and liberties rather than totalitarianism and upon corresponding weapons and warfare methods. The more the other side e.g. suppresses freedom of expression and information, the more it should be utilized. The more it tries to prevent e.g. tyrannicide, desertion, escapes, insurrections, secessions, neutrality declarations, revolutions, resistance actions, treason and separate peace treaties and the establishment of rightful governments in exile, the more these should be utilized against an oppressive regime. Its conscripts should be regarded as potential allies to be liberated rather than mass murdered. It nationalized property should be considered as an asset to be privatized in advance, as far as possible, for the benefit of the liberated and the liberators. The seeming strengths of the enemy regime could and should be turned against it, in a military and economic ju-jitsu. Then further violence and bloodshed and destruction can be minimized, ideally turning a total war into a limited and rightful police action against the major criminals only - or preventing a war altogether. Resistance to liberation forces must further be minimized by the declaration of rightful war and peace aims and their practical demonstration on the own side, e.g. through governments-in-exile, which are exterritorially autonomous and do represent and aim to represent only voluntary members. The old notions of military force and power are wrongful, clumsy and often self-defeating. Libertarian defence, liberation, revolution, military insurrection and policies form a new kind of science compared with which the old sciences of defence, liberation, revolution, military insurrections and policies are rather primitive and barbaric, wrongful and inefficient. The most "powerful" weapons turned out to be the most incapacitating, wrongful and useless or even suicidal ones. Nevertheless, anarchists and libertarians have not yet agreed upon their alternative policies. - J.Z., 19.4.89 & 22.6.00. - See especially PEACE PLANS 16-18 & 61-63.

FORCE: those who use force never act long together, for the force-temper leads them to turn their hand against each other.” - Herbert Auberon, Mr. Spencer and the Great Machine, p.75. - Too much wishful thinking is involved here. Hitler did not rule for his whole adult lifetime but even 12 years of his rule was already too much. Stalin ruled much longer, and so did Mao. They lived in a time without a tradition of tyrannicide and without sufficient knowledge of effective other forms of resistance and liberation. They benefited greatly from the prior existence of territorial statism and nationalism. Territorial statism has now ruled so long already that most are convinced that it existed forever in recorded history and that it will continue indefinitely, in spite of its many wrongs and disadvantages. - J.Z., 21.6.00. – TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

FORCE: Tolerance could also be defined as non-initiation of force or fraud. The State may not force any services upon the citizens which they are willing and able to supply themselves or which they do not want for themselves. - J.Z., in pamphlet: TOLERANCE. -  SELF-HELP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SUBSIDIARITY PRINCIPLE, GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC SERVICES

FORCED ASSOCIATION & VIOLENCE: forced association is the root cause of violence." - "NEW INDIVIDUALIST", in concluding essay by Mitchell Jones, 1972. - One should add that forced disassociation is also a root cause of violence. (E.g.: North & South Korea, North & South Vietnam.) In short, violence (aggressive force) leads to violence, whether used for one or the other purpose. But compulsory association and disassociation (Apartheid) are widely spread practices that are all too little questioned and thus compulsory membership or exclusion, as well as compulsory integration attempts, are important factors in producing violence, even on the terrorist scale and on the mass murder scale of ABC anti-people "weapons". - J.Z., 2.7.89. - 5.9.04.

FOREIGN CONCESSIONS IN CHINA: The "unequal treaties" that were militarily imposed, rather than "equal treaties" that were, alas, not offered there, as they were, often, previously, in the Mediterranean, under the term "Capitulations". – J.Z., n.d.

FOREIGN POLICIES: Foreign policies of territorial governments towards each other do ensure only continued insecurity, oppression and poverty rather than security, liberation and free and rapid development. - J.Z., 13.6.00. – FOREIGN POLICIES OF TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS, WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM

FOREIGN POLICY: Foreign policy and diplomacy, just like trade and self-defence, do not belong to the territorial statists. - J.Z., 1.7.92, 16.12.08. - Pick your own friends and enemies, aims and purposes and negotiate freely how to realize them, across all artificial borders, with all but the governments on the other side. - J.Z., 26.6.00. – DIPLOMACY, SELF-DETERMINATION, INDEPENDENCE

FOREIGN POLICY: In the ideal moral world, no States would exist, and hence, of course, no foreign policy could exist. Given the existence of States, however, are there any moral principles that libertarianism can direct as criteria for foreign policy? The answer is broadly the same as in the libertarian moral criteria directed toward the "domestic policy" of States, namely, to reduce the degree of coercion exercised by States over individual persons as much as possible.” – Murray N. Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, p.189, chapter 25: On Relations Between States. - Alas, he, too, did not distinguish between territorial States and exterritorially autonomous communities or societies of volunteers. Governments do not necessarily have to possess any territorial powers and rightfully cannot possess them. If they are granted them, then all kinds of anti-libertarian actions and beliefs follow automatically. - Did R. anywhere and quite clearly uphold individual sovereignty and secessionism and the exterritorial autonomy that would follow from it for the associations or societies of free people? - J.Z., 22.6.00. – I found only hints in this direction but no clear expression of panarchism in his writings, just like with most of the other anarchists. – J.Z., 16.12.08.

FOREIGN POLICY: None but voluntary foreign governments should be supported and also all kinds of volunteer communities should at least be recognized in their rightful aspirations for full exterritorial autonomy. - J.Z., 5.4.95. - GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM, RECOGNITION, PANARCHISM

FOREIGN POLICY: Only international relations with volunteer communities are just, beneficial, peace-, security-, freedom- and prosperity-promoting. All relations with internal and foreign territorial governments tend to promote the opposites. - J.Z., 5.4.95, 13.6.00. , VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM, PEACE, PROSPERITY, SECURITY, FREEDOM, FOREIGN AFFAIRS

FOREIGN POLICY: The broad goal of our foreign policy is to enable the people of the U.S. to enjoy in peace the blessings of liberty.” - John Foster Dulless, Address, before the Foreign Policy Association, N.Y., 16. Feb. 1955. - But, as with the Welfare State, the means employed assure the contrary! - J.Z., 8.7.82. – Especially when foreign policy is conducted monopolistically by territorial warfare States. – J.Z., 16.12.08.

FOREIGN POLICY: We ought to be on good relations with all foreign people rather than with all foreign governments. Nor should we permit our own governments to monopolize such affairs. Passengers on Spaceship Earth, loaded with mass murder devices, can't afford to do that. – It means leaving survival decisions to the worst criminals and mass murderers. - J.Z., 13.6.00, 16.12.08. - PEOPLE VS. GOVERNMENTS, DECISION ON WAR & PEACE

FOREIGN POLICY: While war and peace decisions are monopolized by territorial governments wars are more promoted than is peace. At best they do not achieve peace but temporary armistices. - J.Z., 22.6.00.

FOREIGN POLICY: Wrongful foreign policies, based on territorialism, murder more people, directly or indirectly than do all private murderers and mad serial killers combined. Yet they are rarely analyzed and criticized, far less replaced by libertarian and liberating policies. - J.Z., 17.4.97 & 14.6.00. - MASS MURDER, WAR, THREATS OF WAR, CRIME, MURDER, PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

FOREIGN RELATIONS: Foreign relations should be a matter only for those who have them and want them, e.g. like with overseas relatives and trading partners. Foreign relations not individually authorized are wrong. Based on territorial sovereignty and its usurpations, they are wrong. Between exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers they would develop or exist naturally, across all present borders and would always be backed by individual consent or ended by individual secessionism. - PIOT, J.Z., 8.2.95.

FOREIGN TROOPS, EXTERRITORIAL STATUS: Recent instances of extraterritoriality are those of American troops in Germany and in Formosa: PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS JOURNAL: Reference No. 32 399: "The foreign troops … have their own police forces, their own courts, fiscal privileges, customs officials, postal services, even rights of the hunt (!)". Reference No. 29 902: "An agreement has been signed between the Chiang and Johnson governments settling the status of U.S. forces in Taiwan, allowing exterritorial rights etc." If only Johnson would grant a similar and self-chosen status to all who desire it in Vietnam. Then the war would be soon over. - J.Z., in a letter to Robert LeFevre, 8.10.67.

FOREIGNERS: Foreigners and aliens and illegal immigrants have individual rights and liberties, too, the same as the natives and earlier immigrants. To imprison them or force them to live in camps until legally allowed in or deported, is, morally, a major crime. - J.Z., 1.12.99, 14.6.00. – Which territorial government is today not guilty of that crime? – The evidence can be found in its immigration laws and practices. - J.Z., 16.12.08. - ALIENS, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS

FOREIGNERS: the unknown is not by definition evil.” – Spider Robinson, Callahan’s Crazy Crosstime Bar, p.113. – However, the territorial governments of foreigners can be and often are real enemies, even of their own subjects. In the latter case their subjected people should be treated as our secret or even open allies. – J.Z., 3.11.07. - ALIENS, FEAR OF OR HATE TOWARDS THEM, AT LEAST GREAT SUSPICION

FORMOSA: See: Taiwan.

FORMULATIONS: II/3, FREE NATIONS FOUNDATION, FNF, September 1995, in PP 1365, 20pp.

FORUM, ELECTRONIC, FOR PANARCHISTS? So far there are only some websites: My own, & Gian Piero de Bellis': & Christian Butterbach's  The material of the latter is also accessible under

FOSTER, J. W.: American Diplomacy in the Orient, Boston and N.Y., 1903.

FOUNDATIONS: You know the words from the Bible: 'Build not on sand, but on rock.'"...."Ten years in prison for saying that there are 'good roads in America'." - Solzhenitsyn, Words of Warning to the Western World, p. 22. - Territorialism is a foundation of sand for a free society. It can stand only upon the rocks of individual consent. And when that is withdrawn, by all the individuals involved, then the supposedly best structure will come crashing down, for total lack of support. How long could present States e.g., avoid bankruptcy if even merely their tax slaves were at liberty to escape them? Territorial States from which all their members have seceded - are among my ideals. But I am prepared to tolerate some, which are confined to voluntary membership in their formerly exclusive territories. - J.Z. 1.7.92, 15.1.93. - Based merely upon the support of their remaining and more or less deluded volunteers, even the worst kinds of governments could continue for years to decades, even centuries. - J.Z., 10.12.03. - "For every tyrant a thousand ready slaves!" - Well, let THESE slaves have him, but do not tolerate the enslavement of any dissenters. - J.Z., 5.9.04.

FOUNDING FATHERS, MERELY SELFISH? 40, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505. - Any more than other politicians? Are voters selfish enough? - J.Z., 20.1.99.

FRACTIONAL PANARCHISM? An extract from PEACE PLANS 870: Fractional Panarchism? - A note on the merely fractional panarchism or opting out practices, which that are advocated in some of the contributions of this issue or in other sources. - - Quite consistent panarchists are still very rare. Most people among the freedom lovers have so far only adopted fractions of it. E.g.: Most Libertarians, Anarchists, Free Traders and Land-Reformers strive to get their ideal universally realized, instead of merely for their supporters, while leaving all dissenters free to do their things to or for themselves – and striving together with them for this kind of tolerance in the sphere of self-responsible actions. - Others conceived or got interested only in fragments of total liberty. For instance, they became conscientious objectors against conscription into armed forces – or trade unions or student unions. - Or their main bone of contention is compulsory unionism or compulsory vaccination or the wrongful restrictions placed upon autonomous juries or the imposition of graduated taxation instead of flat rate or head taxes. Some mainly want nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors abolished or anti-drug laws or even merely the prohibition of pot for sick people. - Most tax evaders and avoiders would want to be able to opt out of compulsory taxation – but without pondering details how voluntary contribution schemes might work. - Criminals with victims also opt out of the present legislation – to the extent that they can get away with it. But they are quite negative examples and deserve all they get if the inefficient governmental police, court and prison systems do manage to catch, convict and hold them – and more. - - There are also numerous illegal but moral actions by decent people, which have been termed “folk-crimes”, like e.g. driving carefully but above the officially set speed limit. - - Among the best are e.g. those US citizens who help Mexican illegal immigrants, getting them safely out of the controlled border areas and then with regard to jobs and accommodation – until they can stand on their own feet, at least in the underground economy, without governmental paper permits. - - I did once compile a list of such “offences” or free actions and may get around to finding it again and scanning it in. - - Many years ago Sydney anarchists had once compiled a list of numerous prohibited free actions upon which only a low fine had been fixed, in case of infractions, so that many people would have been prepared to pay it, in case they were caught and convicted. E.g., upon not submitting to compulsory X-Rays or compulsory voting. As far as I know, this list was confiscated and no further publication of it was permitted. Alas, since then, such penalties have often been very sharply increased and turned into money-makers for governments. - - There are also numerous people, who still believe that there are enough loopholes left for them in constitutions, laws and jurisdiction.  If they are right about their “loopholes” then these are usually fast closed or simply not recognized juridically. - - Some of them are so convinced that they are right that they even go to government courts to prove that they are right – and spend or waste much money, time and energy on this. - - There are still black markets, illegal crossings of State borders and many cash dealings that avoid taxes. - - Decades ago some beatniks e.g. “opted out”, more or less visibly, merely by their hair-styles, clothing, choice of music, songs, other arts, accommodation and of narcotics. - - One might look at all such attempts as mere trivia. But to realize the whole spectrum of panarchist possibilities one has also to some extent deal with or describe even such minor examples. At least they do help to envision all the possibilities that it embraces, for people who find it difficult to envision the whole of all panarchist alternatives at once. It is easier, at least initially, to focus only on some fragments of the whole, in the same way as we read and comprehend whole books only by concentrating on single words, lines, paragraphs, or pages, one by one. - - Political, economic and social “Protestantism” & independence, individual and group autonomy, require much more – but their achievement can also be promoted by publishing and discussing the minor ways of opting out and doing one’s own things to or for themselves.  Even if only historical instances of such limited disobedience and independent action are chosen. Or some modern ones: Like the local veteran, threatened by the Milk-Board, because he sold his old comrade some milk from his cow. He escaped bureaucratic prosecution by formally selling his mate half his cow! - While one needed official permission to knock down even a single tree on one’s property, a local grazier put in an application to knock down every tree on his paddocks because falling branches would threaten his cows. At least that absurd restriction was abolished and also e.g. shopping hour restrictions and compulsory X-rays, in my time in Australia. - Perhaps all the remaining illegal freedom options should not be published because that would help the statists to close them down? - But at least the informal voters will get away with their silent protests – as long as secret voting is continued. - - More freedom to all people, who desire it for themselves – even all freedom to those people, who want it for themselves. - J.Z., 19.12.04. - - Most of the older panarchist writings, including my own early ones, do still have at least traces of territorialism. - People are not always quite consistent. - Utopian colonies, intentional communities and proprietary ones, practising quite different systems from those in the territory in which they are located, can, naturally, exist on the basis of private, cooperative or partnership ownership of the real estate involved or as extraterritorial enclaves or special concessions, like Hong Kong enjoyed for 99 years. - But Hong Kong, although small, constituted already a considerable territory and a large foreign power was involved in it and is involved with it now, under the usual national, racial and territorial false pretences. What is admirable, though, about this basically still communist and totalitarian State, is the degree of economic liberty that it has permitted to exist there also in some other areas, special industrial development zones. - Such developments were inconceivable for Nazis and Soviets. In the long run, such concessions are likely to lead to the fall of the political territorial system as well, hopefully, non-violently. But the process could and should be greatly speeded up by the advocacy and practical demonstration of individual and group secessionism, combined with exterritorial autonomy under personal law. Then and thus any form of non-territorial communism or State socialism could be continued in China - for the remaining volunteers, likely to count into dozens of millions, in such a large population, at least for many years still, if not even decades. Compare how long the Roman Catholic Church lasted.. -J.Z., 18.10.11. - BIARCHY, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, CHINA, BLACK MARKETS

FRAGMENTATION: Fragmentation has almost become a swear-word - as if coercive associations should not be split up or as if all Protestantism is to be confined to the religious types of the past, or as if "fragments" could not have or should not be allowed to make free will decisions, or as if all dissenters have to be sacrificed to the self-appointed or majority approved aims of the former or present leaders. - J.Z., July 87. – In the process we even forget e.g. that we survive by fragmentizing our food intake. Panarchistic fragmentation of territorial States is rightful and necessary to assure mankind’s survival in the face of mass murder devices in the hands of such governments and of other terrorists. – J.Z., 16.12.08. – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, UNITY, CENTRALIZATION & DECENTRALIZATION, DISLOYALTY, TREASON, SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, PANARCHISM, MAJORITARIANISM, LEADERSHIP, TERRITORIALISM, COLLECTIVISM, OBEDIENCE, DISOBEDIENCE, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, NATIONALISM

FRAGMENTATION: Fragmentation is rightful, useful, peace and progress-promoting - if it is voluntary and under exterritorial autonomy only, when it liberates individuals, minority groups and majorities that want their own kind of independence and self-rule. It is still immoral and sometimes even harmful if it merely breaks down larger territories into smaller ones, each of which with some dissenting minorities, when are then more likely to be suppressed by local majorities than they were in the former larger territories. Territorialism does not solve the problem of minorities. Exterritorialism does. Exterritorial fragmentation or decentralization and voluntarism are some of the most important solutions, rather than a major problem. - J.Z., 28.9.93 & 23.6.00. - PANARCHISM, DECENTRALIZATION, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

FRAGMENTATION: There are many fallacies and misconceptions about libertarianism. Unfortunately, they often prevent people from embracing liberty. So it's vital that libertarians recognize them -- and effectively and persuasively squash them. - - One of the most common is also one of the strangest. "The myth of the atomistic individual" is the absurd idea that libertarians believe every person is, or should somehow be, detached from all others, totally autonomous, completely self-reliant and self-sufficient. That libertarians want a dog-eat-dog world devoid of human relationships, cooperation, or social interactions -- a world without society. - - This is bizarre, and completely untrue, yet widely believed. As the great - libertarian thinker Murray Rothbard noted: "This is a common charge, but a highly puzzling one. In a lifetime of reading libertarian and classical liberal literature, I have not come across a single theorist or writer who holds anything like this position." - - A good example of this can be found in the current issue of TIME, discussed in my President's Corner column this issue. Michael Kinsley, a brilliant writer who should know better, describes (some) libertarians as "a generation of smart loners, many of them rich and some of them complacently Darwinian, convinced that they don't need society - - nor should anyone else." - - What nonsense! Libertarians not only acknowledge the existence and the necessity of society, we celebrate it, and defend any and all peaceful, voluntary relationships. - - In fact, libertarians, more than most people, recognize that the modern industrial world is made possible only by people constantly cooperating in both personal and economic matters. Libertarians understand how the free market works -- through countless voluntary interactions and relationships. - - And we understand the vital role of non-business social organizations like families, churches, charities, book clubs, community theatres, civic groups and so on. - - Libertarians also understand how government actions can damage and sever these precious economic and personal relationships, often with terrible consequences. - - In fact, libertarians are ‘the greatest defenders’ of the vast network of personal and economic voluntary interactions that makes up society. - Libertarians oppose, as Rothbard put it, only "the compulsory pseudo-'cooperation' imposed by the State." - - So the next time you hear this bizarre and bogus fallacy, correct it - - using the polite and persuasive communication techniques the Advocates teaches, of course. And maybe invite your questioner to an upcoming libertarian meeting, where they'll see lots of libertarians acting, not as atomistic individuals, but as members of a group, cooperating to defend society and create a freer world. - - NOTE: For a lengthy and scholarly rebuttal of the "atomistic individual" notion, see this excellent article by Cato's Tom Palmer: - ONE-MINUTE LIBERTY TIP – “The Myth of the "Atomistic Individual" - Sharon Harris. THE LIBERATOR ONLINE, 1.11.07. - FRAGMENTATION OR ATOMISM, CHAOS THROUGH INDIVIDUALISM? COMMUNITIES, VOLUNTARISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, COMPETITION, DOG-EAT DOG WORLD, LIBERTARIANISM, PREJUDICES, DIS., OBJECTIONS

FRANCHISE, THE FULL, VOTING COLLECTIVELY VS. INDIVIDUALLY & SOVEREIGN: A full franchise includes the right to vote oneself out of any coercive political, economic and social system and into any system that corresponds to one's own individual choice or invention, and to have, moreover, all the other voting powers that one wants to have - among likeminded volunteers. – J.Z., 1986, 2004. – See: VOTING.

FRANCISCIS, AZIO DE: In der Via Condotti, DIE WELT, 3.3.1955, p.3 - an article on the sovereign order of the Maltese, internationally recognized, oldest government-in-exile in the world. 4,000 members, 440 in Germany. They enjoy diplomatic privileges & exemption from custom duties for their personal requirements.

FRANK, M.: Ashkenaz Communities and their Courts from the 12th to the 15th Centuries, Tel Aviv, 1938, in Hebrew.

FRANKFURTER ILLUSTRIERTE:  5.2.1955, article on Morocco's three independent legal communities, one for Muslims, one for Jews and one for Christians. The law of the accused was applied. - Alas, I believe this freedom was largely squashed in 1955. - J.Z.

FRANKLIN, BENJAMIN, ON EXTERRITORIALITY & HUMAN RIGHTS: God grant, that not only the love of liberty, but a thorough knowledge of the rights of man, may pervade all the nations of the earth, so that a philosopher may set his foot anywhere on its surface, and say, 'this is my country'."  - What would have happened if B. F. would have clearly drawn the panarchistic conclusion from this remark? – J.Z., 11.1.05.

FRAUDULENT ACTS: Form with introductory note, 121, in ON PANARCHY VIII, in PP 672.

FREE ASSOCIATIONISM: The only possibility for our time, said Joseph Campbell, the mythologist, in 1968, is 'the free association of men and women of like spirit ... not a handful but a thousand heroes, ten thousand heroes, who will create a future image of what humankind can be.' - Marilyn Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, p.60.

FREE ASSOCIATIONISM: The statist denies the right of free association. He does not permit men to establish corporations, organizations and societies independent from the supervision, control and exploitation by States, in order to satisfy needs, inclinations and interests through the own services. - LERNZIEL ANARCHY, Nr. 3. - VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIALISM & PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

FREE BANKING VS. CENTRAL BANKING: Free choice and panarchism vs. monetary despotismThe subject is much too large to be dealt with here in detail. Three of the Ulrich von Beckerath books & some writings by Prof. Heinrich Rittershausen & Dr. Walter Zander are online at  with some monetary freedom writings by Thomas Greco. My first peace book deals also extensively with this subject: See:  Beckerath's correspondence with Henry Meulen, author of "FREE BANKING", is on  An alphabetized collection of notes of mine on free banking is on - See also the and the Free Banking site on Facebook. A long but still very incomplete bibliography and an A to Z compilation of mine is on - Full monetary freedom is just one important practical application of panarchism. In this sphere, too, there should be no exclusive exchange media, value standards, credit and clearing systems except those, which volunteers have freely chosen for themselves. – J.Z., 5.5.12. – FULL MONETARY FREEDOM, CHOICE OF CURRENCY, VALUE STANDARDS & FINANCIAL SYSTEMS.

FREE CHOICE & PANARCHISM: Don’t Tread on my Right to Choose!” – Dangerous Buttons, No. 343.  – Free choice has been a demand for freedom lovers for a long time – but all too few have it applied, so far, to every sphere, like panarchism does. – J.Z., 9.1.99, 5.5.12.

FREE CHOICE & POLITICS, LABOUR CONDITIONS, MARRIAGES, LITERATURE, SPORTS, ARTS, DRIVING, AUDIO FANS, COMPUTER USERS, HOUSING, GARDENING, CHURCHES & SECTS, ENTERTAINMENT, FOODS, DRINKS, SHOPPING, HOLIDAYS, CLOTHING, HOBBIES, CRAFTS - & PANARCHISM: A) How bad would labour conditions be if no potential employer were free to compete with existing employers and if no employee were free to give notice and look for another and better job or self-employment opportunities? B) How bad would marriages be if no one could select his marriage or defacto partner and get a separation or divorce and remarry? C) How unsatisfactory would reading matters be, for the individual reader, if no one were free to select it for himself? (Standard procedure in Australian Schools.) D) How popular would sports be if individuals had no choice in this respect? E) How much less would people be interested in music playing, composition and listening, if not free to choose? F) How oppressive would churches and sects be if we could not pick and choose between them or stay apart from all of them? G) How satisfactorily would we be entertained, if we had no choice between entertainments offered? H) How much would our motoring joys be reduced if all of us had to drive the same standard cars? I) What satisfaction would there be e.g. for hi-fi fans, if would be confined to standard audio equipment, compulsory for all? J) How satisfied would computer users be when supplied only by one computer business and programming agency? K) How proud would home owners be in standard prescribed housing? L) How many proud gardeners would there be, if their gardening efforts were prescribed by a uniform code? M) How satisfied would we be with our foods and drinks if we had no choice in this respect? N) How satisfied would we be with our holidays if their locations and activities were determined for us by strangers? O) How satisfactory would our shopping be if we had to fill our shopping carts only with the same types and quantities of prescribed goodies; official rations? P) How satisfied would we be if all of us had to wear the same kind of clothing? Q) R) How satisfactory would our hobbies, arts and crafts activities be if only one type of each were permitted and compulsory for all? Etc. - - Isn't it predictable that similar unsatisfactory situations will inevitably prevail with our territorial, compulsory, centralistic, hierarchical and monopolistic political, economic and social systems, when individual are not free to opt out of them and arrange for or freely choose desired alternatives for themselves?  Isn't it obvious that most of the present political, military, revolutionary, terrorist, economic and social problems in this world are precisely due to this kind of territorial, coercive, collectivist, political, economic, social, egalitarian, and ideological prescriptionism, domination and uniformity urge and intolerance for diversity and autonomy among volunteers? It is free, i.e. exterritorial, autonomous and voluntary individual and group choice that maximizes our satisfactions in the above listed daily living choices and in thousands of other private activities. It could do the same for us regarding whole political, economic and social system. It would introduce, there, too, consumer sovereignty, free choice, voluntary associationism, autonomy, privacy, self-determination, independence, genuine consent, freedom of action and freedom to experiment. - A free but merely political vote is not an extension of our liberties but indicates an extreme limitation of them, one leading ultimately to exploitation, oppression, stagnation, collapse, to wars, revolutions and even to nuclear holocaust. - We could become free, peaceful, just, secure, prosperous and very mature and progressive - by free individual choices, all only at our own risk and expense. Territorial political and bureaucratic choices cannot be sufficient substitutes. They are only prescriptions for disaster. They have proven this again and again, for many centuries and still do. Just pay attention to the daily news. They cannot even cope with as easily to solve and government-produced problems as are involuntary mass unemployment and inflations. Not to speak of wars. Too many of them are in essence still warfare States. - J.Z., 10.10.1989, 5.5.12.

FREE CHOICE AMONG DOCTORS & OTHER PROFESSIONALS & AMONG POLITICAL LEADERS, FOR INDIVIDUALS, NOT JUST FOR MAJORITIES: The curious aspect is that so many people, especially in the Western World, do take free choice in many spheres already for granted. So why don't they want to see it realized in the sphere of political, economic and social systems as well? Here their minds are still dominated by thousands of prejudices which have not yet been systematically and comprehensively refuted and thus still renders them into territorialists in these spheres. - J.Z., 15.9.04. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & CHOICE OF GOVERNANCE SYSTEMS, SOCIETIES & COMMUNITIES INSTEAD OF TERRITORIAL VOTING. Q.

FREE CHOICE AMONG NON-TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES, INSTEAD OF ANY TERRITORIAL IMPOSITIONS: Whoever wants to be ruled by the modern kings and aristocrats: the ruling politicians and bureaucrats, should be free to do so at his expense and risk, as long as he is willing to put up with them. But no one, anywhere and for any time, who has not acted aggressively against others, should be held, conscripted and taxed into such a servile and vile relationship. - J.Z., 11.11. 92, 5.5.11.

FREE CHOICE FOR EVERYBODY, IN EVERY SPHERE: We should be free to make the major choices for our lives, too, individually or via volunteer groups, not only the minor ones, which our territorial rulers are still allowing us to make, instead of allowing ignorant and prejudiced majorities to delegate them to political parties, and power-hungry politicians and in territory-wide package deals that cannot fully satisfy anyone. We need individual sovereignty, consumer sovereignty, free enterprise, freedom of contract and freedom of association in this sphere, too. Territorial monopolies continue only to provide us with more and more crises, at huge costs in liberties and rights, lives, limbs and money and are likely to lead to a nuclear holocaust, for which they provide these “weapons”, their targets, their motives, their powers and all their wrongful assumptions and conclusions. – It is territorial monopoly claims that multiply our enemies rather than our friends and allies. Enemies than can only mismanage their own affairs, among their own volunteers, cease to enemies that are to be feared. They can be tolerated and used as deterrent examples. -  J.Z., 30.6.87, 10.8.87, 5.5.12.

FREE CHOICE FOR SOLUTIONS, REAL OR IMAGINED ONES: To each his own doctor and his preferred medicine – in every sphere - even if this kills him or makes him more sick than he was before or does not provide him with anything else than new errors, prejudices and delusions. - J.Z., 04, 5.5.12. - RIGHT TO MAKE MISTAKES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, CHOICE OF GOVERNANCE OR SELF-GOVERNMENT OPTIONS, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY VS. TERRITORIALISM & ITS COMPULSORY & COLLECTIVIST SOVEREIGNTY.

FREE CHOICE IN EVERYTHING FOR EVERYBODY: Individual free choice in everything, not only e.g. marriage partners, jobs and religions but also governments, currencies, banking, clearing, credit arrangements, laws, constitutions and social experiments as well as in expenditure upon “public” projects. – J.Z., 8.6.97, 10.1.99, 5.5.12.

FREE CHOICE OF PROPHETS, LEADERS, SAVIORS, GURUS, DOCTORS AND OTHER SUPPOSED EXPERTS: Free choice of all supposed experts for all of one’s own affairs, even in the spheres presently considered to be “public affairs” to be monopolized by territorial governments. – J.Z., 15.10.98, 9.1.99.

FREE CHOICE or The Right to Vote, Properly Understood. Thoughts of Herbert Spencer, with a note by J.Z., page 33, in ON PANARCHY II, in PEACE PLANS 506. - Extract from his "The Right to Ignore the State", in his "Social Statics".

FREE CHOICE, THE ULTIMATE VOTING RIGHT: Each to be free to adopt his own favourite economic, social and political system. - J.Z., 29.6.87.

FREE CHOICE: Allowing individuals to make as many choices as possible for themselves, is not an argument for greed or materialism. For all I care, everyone can spend their days meditating or tending their gardens. I do not care if the GDP shrinks. What matters is that the pattern of activity reflects people’s free choices.” - Michael Prowse, Paternalist Government Is Out Of Date, in: David Boaz, ed., The Libertarian Reader, The Free Press, 1997, p.391. - The free choice for individuals should be extended to the free choice of communities, societies, States or governments that they want to belong to, provided only that all of these make no longer any territorial monopoly claims, by which the choices of their very neighbors might be suppressed. – J.Z., 4.10.07.

FREE CHOICE: Free choice of kindergartens and welfare States for all individual adults. J.Z. 25.7.91. - But also free choice for all forms of free societies, which the somewhat more mature or enlightened people do individually want for themselves. All on the basis of individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy among volunteers. If you can say it in a clearer and more appealing form, please do so. - J.Z., 14.1.93.

FREE CHOICE: Why can we have free choice only in relatively trivial matters like beers, cigarettes, tooth brushes, fashions, sports clubs, betting, entertainment, films, jokes, arts, music, and millions of other and different consumer goods and services, most of them privately and competitively provided, but not where it counts most in our lives (add up your direct and indirect taxes, the laws, regulations and bureaucrats under whom you are forced to live!) in States, societies, communities, in whole political, economic and social systems? Does any single form, if any at all, really have to be territorially imposed upon us by the most demagogic political misleaders, backed by the majority of the most uninformed and prejudiced voters, forming the majority everywhere in a territory? Has this territorial system, which denies us individual consumer choice and free enterprise in these important spheres, really been rightfully and positively successful, ever or anywhere, or does it amount only to an endless sequence of legislative and bureaucratic failures, corruption, waste and mismanagement, from which only politicians and bureaucrats profit, always under the pretence that they are serving us, rather than themselves? - Why should they be allowed to continue to spend so much of our earnings and our savings and lead us, in their ignorance and with their errors and prejudices, from one economic crisis into another, without, quite obviously, knowing how to end them or to avoid them? – Demand, instead, full experimental freedom in all spheres for volunteers, but always only at their own expense and risk. Then, we will see the same kind of progress, which we see in the natural sciences and in technology, also when it comes to whole political, economic and social systems. Only then we will also see the relatively harmlessness of popular spleens and fads, for which some people will always fall, temporarily or for their whole lives, for others, who, do not participate in them but merely observe these follies and do thus willfully abstain from them, just like they did and do wherever and whenever full religious freedom was introduced. Territorial despotism could become rejected from one day to the other, like the Berlin Wall was, which was an extreme practical example for the wrongfulness of territorialism. - Then, already tomorrow, each of us could enjoy the kind of governance or free society, which we would have individually chosen for ourselves, at least for the time being, if not for the rest of our lives. Free choice in EVERYTHING, as much as we are able and willing to pay for (also with the money we could issue or earn or have saved and built-up under full monetary and financial freedom), provided only that we allow this freedom of choice to all others as well. - Those, who do territorially - or as individual criminals - attempt to suppress it, are our common enemies and we still outnumber them by far and can establish better protection and defences against them than any territorial government has ever provided - at our own great expense and risk. - If you think that you know of a better system - by all means, do try it freely yourself, together with your faithful followers, but only at your risk and expense! - No more territorial impositions, which are all, essentially, totalitarian. - J.Z., 5.10.11, 5.5.12.

FREE CHOICES FOR ALL PEOPLE: People should have the right not only, as usual, to make the wrong flawed choices for themselves, politically and in territorial units only, by majority votes, and their kind of “representation” by politicians and bureaucrats, all power addicts, but also the right ones, or somewhat rightful ones, as individuals, not merely as one voter among millions, once they want them strong enough to be prepared to realize them for themselves, within exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers.- J.Z., 17.5.92, 13.1.93. – VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUALISM, CHOICE, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & EXPERIMENTATION IN EVERY SPHERE. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIAL DESPOTISM.

FREE COUNTRIES WITHOUT INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM & EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS? A nation famous for setting the world an example of freedom, is now become a land of tyrants, and a den of slaves." - Oliver Goldsmith, The Citizen of the World, 98. - Without individual secession, no "free" State is likely to be or remain very free for very long. -  J.Z., 7.4.91, 12.1.93.

FREE COUNTRY, HAPPINESS, EMIGRATION: The freedom to emigrate, which only a small number of people would in fact use, is an essential condition of spiritual freedom. A free country cannot resemble a cage, even if it is gilded. - Andrei D. Sakharov, Religion in Communist Dominated Areas, USA, No. 7/9, 1976. - No peoples are free when its members have only the emigration option. Full freedom for all peaceful and creative people requires comprehensive and individualized internal autonomy options, based upon individual secessionism and sovereignty. - J.Z., 21.4.89, 3.7.89.

FREE COUNTRY: It is not enough to be free to verbally denounce a government. One must become free to actively renounce all its services and disservices for oneself - and to contract alternatives - if and to the extent that one wants them. No country is a free country until this liberty of "choice of governments", of "personal law" and of "full consumer sovereignty" and full free enterprise (in all spheres), is established for all its non-criminal citizens. - J.Z., 18.12.93, 5.5.12. – PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, EXTERRITORIAL MINORITY AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

FREE COUNTRY: The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities.” - Lord Action, The History of Freedom in Antiquity, 1877. – Quoted in Seldes. – They should not only have the degree of freedom and security that the majority is content with but full exterritorial autonomy over their own affairs, if that is their desire. – Anyhow, the country needs no freedom. Only its various peoples do. – No population is quite uniform. - J.Z., 21.11.10, 5.5.12. – EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL MINORITIES & FOR THE MAJORITIES.

FREE COUNTRY: Wade through slaughter to a throne, / And shut the gates of mercy on mankind." - I have another and a far brighter vision before my gaze. It may be but a vision, but I will cherish it. I see one vast confederation stretching from the frozen North in unbroken line to the glowing South, and from the wild billows of the Atlantic westward to the calmer water of the Pacific main - and I see one people and one language, and one law, and one faith, and, over all that wide continent, the home of freedom, and a refuge for the oppressed of every race and every clime.” - John Bright, 1863. - Why only one law and one faith for all? These are not exactly descriptions of free choice for all! - J.Z., 27.6.00. – Even great minds like his fell for the territorial unity idea as if free market relationships were impossible without them. – Asylum, free migration and free trade are not enough! - J.Z., 16.12.08. – DIS., REFUGE, ASYLUM, NEW COUNTRY, AMERICANISM, FREE TRADE, FREE MIGRATION, CONFEDERATION, TERRITORIALISM? ONE LAW FOR ALL? ONE FEDERATION FOR ALL? ONE LANGUAGE FOR ALL? Q.

FREEDOM: Freedom is good for everybody.” – Thomas Larsson, The Race to the Top, The Real Story of Globalization, Cato Institute, 2001, p. 98. – Objectively, yes. But it also falls under the subjective value theory. Moreover, in government-controlled “education” it has gained a bad reputation. Fear of many liberties is still real among all too many. Thus each should only get as much liberty as he wants and chooses for himself, in combination with all those rules and restrictions that he still prefers for himself, in his own community of volunteers. Under that condition more and more freedom will, gradually, be more widely accepted, individual by individual and community by community. – J.Z., 28.9.07, 5.5.12.

FREE ECONOMY: A sufficient argument for a free economy need be made only in terms of its superiority to other conceivable social systems.” - Richard B. McKenzie, Bound to Be Free, Hoover Institute Press, 1982, p.11. – However, communities of volunteers should be free to select for themselves other systems, as long as they do believe in them. – Then all the supporters of the various systems will get their chance and will no longer have to fight in attempts to subdue each other. - J.Z., 6.10.07. - SOCIAL SYSTEMS

FREE ELECTIONS: 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. – Territorial and majoritarian voting disfranchises individuals and minorities all too effectively, regarding their own affairs, while giving them a tiny and wrongful voting power on the affairs of all others. – Only individualized, i.e., panarchistic choices, do deserve the term “free elections” or free voting. - J.Z., 16.12.08, 5.5.12. - POLITICS, PARTIES, POLITICIANS, CANDIDATES, IDEAS & PRINCIPLES, VOTING, PANARCHISM, CONSENT, DISSENT, DEMOCRACY, MAJORITY DESPOTISM, REPRESENTATION?

FREE ENTERPRISE & PANARCHISM: Free enterprise in every sphere, even in the political, economic and social spheres, which are now monopolized by territorial governments. - J.Z., 15.9.04. - The present peaceful coexistence of numerous and also varied forms of somewhat free enterprises, including large corporations, involved in very diverse production and exchange activities, and those of numerous different churches and sects and sports organizations as well, do form not a bad analogies to the rightful, tolerant and liberating panarchism between various exterritorially autonomous communities, societies and governance systems of volunteers. - Thus it is astonishing that not many of the free enterprise advocates have demanded full exterritorial autonomy for like-minded entrepreneurs and large holding companies and multinational corporations, e.g. the transformation of territorial nations into e.g. share companies, or cooperatives or partnerships for their various groups of volunteers. Probably only their own fixed ideas on nations, unity and territorialism prevented them from thinking along such lines. - J.Z., 21.9.04, 5.5.12.

FREE ENTERPRISE ZONES: Nothing less than full autonomy, including exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, will be quite satisfactory to all but criminals, monopolists and other aggressors. The few exemptions now granted by governments to some limited free trade and free enterprise zones, are only comparable to the limited privileges which former emperors sometimes granted to "free" cities and towns. - J.Z., 12.2.88, 1.4.89.

FREE ENTERPRISE: Choose free entry and competition: freedom!” - Leonard E. Read, Then Truth Will Out, IX. – But let the statists also choose any degree of restrictionism – for themselves! – They do deserve them – as self-chosen punishments. - J.Z., n.d. & 5.5.12. - COMPETITION, PANARCHISM ALSO FOR STATISTS

FREE ENTERPRISE: Cobden had a moral view of society and believed that free enterprise would not only bring prosperity but social harmony at home and peace abroad within a system of universal free trade.” – Dr. Rhodes Boyson, Right Turn, p.7. - Free trade and free enterprise do not have to be introduced universally, nationally and internationally. They will spread naturally as soon as their advocates are free to apply them among themselves, quite undisturbed. - J.Z., 15.6.00. - PROSPERITY, MORALITY, HARMONY, PEACE & FREE TRADE

FREE ENTERPRISE: Enterprise means a bold, arduous or dangerous undertaking. "Free Enterprise", then, connotes more than business activity unhampered by government. It implies the right to undertake bold, arduous or dangerous projects, any projects, only at one's own peril, at one's own expense.” - Bob Cowin, FREE ENTERPRISE, 3/76. - –Not all enterprises are bold, arduous or dangerous, although some are. – J.Z., 14.12.11. The option to provide “public services” which are now monopolized by territorial States, belongs also to an extended concept and practice of free private enterprise and full consumer sovereignty as well as freedom of contract and association. The best and most justified governments and societies can only be those of volunteers. – Territorialism is a wrongful remnant of absolute monarchies, with people still largely treated as their properties or subjects, at best in a paternalistic way or in form of a democratic Welfare State. All their subjects are still not free citizens bu rather serfs of a modern kind of feudalism with all kinds of democratic and republican false pretences of genuine representation. - J.Z., 5.5.12. - VS. MONOPOLIES, VOLUNTARISM

FREE ENTERPRISE: Free enterprise also e.g. for the provision of e.g. roads, police, courts, defence, prison services, social security, disarmament, international negotiations and treaties and full consumer sovereignty or individual sovereignt towards all such offers. - J.Z., 74, 5.5.12.

FREE ENTERPRISE: Free enterprise will be free to do a lot more for its participants, members and customers - once it is allowed to be practiced in the sphere of political organization and economic and social systems, too, i.e. when the freedom of action and freedom of experimentation and initiative, which is implied in the term, together with voluntarism, competition, free trade and free market relationships, can be fully and autonomously practised. - J.Z., 11.1.93.

FREE ENTERPRISE: Let free enterprise and consumer sovereignty replace all territorial political, economic and social powers and privileges. - J.Z., 2.2.76 5.5.12. - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUALISM, POWER, PRIVILEGES, THE STATE & CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY

FREE ENTERPRISE: Nothing less than full autonomy, including full exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities, will be quite satisfactory to all but criminals and other aggressors. - J.Z., 12.2.88. - And nothing less deserves the name of a fully free enterprise system. It would not exempt any production and service activity from free competition - except the dis-services of theft, fraud & coercion. However, there would be competitive free enterprises, partnerships, cooperatives etc. for their suppression or even abolition. - J.Z., 24.6.00, 5.5.12. – PANARCHISM

FREE ENTERPRISE: The so-called American capitalist, today, usually does not know what genuine free enterprise is. It means the total exclusion of the state from the economic realm, leaving producers free to compete, subject to the risks and hazards of the law of supply and demand alone. But the contemporary businessman's working definition of "free enterprise" is bribing specific government officials for favours - for contracts, for subsidies, for monopolies, for protective tariffs … for shelter against competition at home and abroad. - Edith Efron, quoted in Roger McBride, A New Dawn, p.18. – Alas, neither Efron nor McBride did, to my knowledge, recommend full exterritorial autonomy for businessmen and corporations, their volunteers and their federations. – Territorialism, in all too many important spheres, excludes free enterprises and replaces it by quite wrongful and inefficient monopolism. – J.Z., 16.12.08. - EXCLUSION OF THE TERRITORIAL STATE, WHILE INCLUDING ALL KINDS OF “PUBLIC” SERVICES FOR VOLUNTARY CUSTOMERS OR MEMBERS, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

FREE ENTERPRISE: There are still a few courageous bigots left who, parrot-like, tell us that capitalism is bankrupt and private enterprise has failed. Not only is the opposite the obvious truth, but it should be added that private enterprise has proved more wonderful than its most enthusiastic admirers could possibly believe, in that it survives and is still able to balance the budget of all this political foolery.” - Sir Ernest Benn, Honest Doubt, p.206. - Alas, it was never as yet quite free. For instance, it was never completely extended into the monetary and financial sphere, remained internationally restricted by protectionism, did not tackle the numerous governmental and legalized monopolies, especially not the monopoly of "government services". As a result, its successes are not as shiny and obvious and extensive as they could be. - J.Z., 22.6.00.

FREE ENTERPRISE: True self-government requires individual free choice for all kinds of governmental and societal services and also free enterprise or cooperative production of all such services. – J.Z., n.d.

FREE ENTERPRISE: Whenever there is some trouble in any area of the economy, the simplest solution to many people is "Let the government fix it." Yet the record is plain for everyone to see - every time the government uses its money or its power to favor this group or that it sets in motion a train of events, which causes even more serious trouble and imbalance in many other related areas. Over a period of years the net result is such a web of supports, subsidies, interventions and controls that it is almost impossible for a nation to find its way back into a dynamic system of really free enterprise.” - Lawrence Fertig, quoted in The Free Man's Almanac, Nov. 21. - What is difficult for a whole territorial nation would be easy for individuals and minorities who are free to secede and associate under exterritorial autonomy. - J.Z., 14.6.00. - GOVERNMENTALISM, INTERVENTIONISM, DICTOCRACY, MEDDLING, STATISM, PLANNING

FREE ENTRY: Free entry into any field of endeavor - the production of goods or the supplying of services - assures competition - each trying to get out front. …” - Leonard E. Read, ABC's of Freedom. - He opposed free enterprise in that sphere, which he considered to be the exclusive preserve of a territorial but otherwise limited government. Only this mind-block prevented him from going further towards the liberation of individuals. He still entertained the illusion that limited but still territorial monopoly governments could be ideal providers of justice, protection and defence. Daily news say otherwise. - J.Z., 15.6.00, 5.5.12. – Almost every existing government pretends that it is already a “limited government” and most of the “limited government” advocates still desire the totalitarianism that is inherent in territorialism for their “limited” government. – J.Z., 21.11.10, 5.5.12.

FREE EXCHANGE: Free exchange means also that individuals and minority groups should be free to exchange the present political and bureaucratic arrangements for those, which they prefer for themselves, as far as their own affairs are concerned. - J.Z., 25.8.98. - AUTONOMY, SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-RULE, PANARCHISM, MINORITY AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, MARKET ANARCHY, ANARCHO CAPITALISM, FREE SOCIETIES

FREE EXCHANGE: what is at stake is the freedom to buy, sell and exchange – the most basic of all civilized activities.” – Joseph F. Johnston, Jr., The Limits of Government, Regnery Gateway, Chicago, 1984, p.255. – It should not only be confined to ordinary consumer goods and services but also to public services of all kinds, including the provision of exchange media and value standards or clearing facilities and any kind of insurance, protective or defensive services. – J.Z., 2.10.07.

FREE GOVERNMENT: A free government is a contradiction in terms, if applied to territorial governments. All territorial governments are organizing oppression and exploitation and deception on a massive scale. Only the degrees of their criminal activities vary. Some have less dissenters and more consenting victims than others. - J.Z., 29.5.91. - Those only exterritorially autonomous and having voluntary members only could be classed as free as any government can be, short of individual self-government. - J.Z., 15.6.00. – TERRITORIALISM

FREE GOVERNMENT: No government can be free that does not allow its citizens to participate in the formation and execution of her laws. There are degrees of tyranny; but every other government is a despotism.” - Thaddeus Stevens, Speech in the House of Representatives, June 3, 1867. - A "free government" on a territorial basis is a contradiction in terms. It is a tyranny, too, although only over a lesser number or a less well organized number of people: the minorities spread over "its" territory and usually outvoted. - J.Z., 17.10.85 & 10.7.86. - TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIALISM

FREE INSTITUTIONS: Our greatest error as a people is that we put an idolatrous trust in free institutions; as if these, by some major power, must secure our rights, however we enslave ourselves to evil passions." - William Ellery Channing. - No exclusive territorial institution is a free institution. Nor are governmental standing armies ideal militias or government post offices and railways and roads freely competing services. A Central bank cannot provide free banking. A monopoly government cannot provide justice, peace and prosperity. Monopoly police forces, courts and prisons cannot provide competitive policing, jurisdiction and penal and corrective services. Whoever speaks as if we had quite free and only free institutions now, does not know what the word means and what such institutions would make possible. Territorial governments are territorial prisons for all dissenters, often with the worst criminals at the top. - J.Z., 8.1.93.

FREE INSTITUTIONS: No exclusive territorial institution is a "free" institution. - J.Z., 23.1.84. - How could one mistake a territorial State for a free institution  - while all inhabitants are subjected to uniform laws, and membership is, apart from emigration, compulsory? This compulsory memberships is also indicated by the suppression of individual and minority group secessions and of exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities. - J.Z., 23.1.84 & 22.6.00.

FREE LIFE: Negate the unfree life. Don’t negate the free life. – J.Z., 25.5.05. – Reject the artificial limitations of unfree lives; embrace the almost unlimited possibilities of free lives. – But only to the extent that you are individually ready for them, step by step. Otherwise you will be disappointed and will not understand all your rights and liberties immediately and will not be able to use them all to your advantage. To be and act like a fully free person will take time and effort. We see it in the natural growing-up process. We have seen it in the liberation of serfs and slaves and also among the refugees from long-term despotic regimes like the Soviet Union. Like school children we should all be able to advance at our own speed, in our own time and only up to our own limits, whatever they may be. – Allow others to advance faster or more slowly or not at all. - J.Z., 30.10.07.

FREE MARKET ALTERNATIVES TO THE STATE: Free-Market Alternatives to the State. - [September 2001] A list of topics (e.g. education, immigration, police and protection, taxes, etc.) leading to related articles. - - Link at

FREE MARKET INSTITUTIONS IN EVERY SPHERE: For one reason or motive or the other, rather unreasonably and irrationally, most advocates of a free market have not yet clearly advocated the free market for all those services, which all territorial governments have wrongfully usurped and territorially monopolized, just like absolute monarchs once did, namely whole political, economic and social systems, under the pretence of “legitimacy” of their territorial constitutions, legislation, jurisdiction, armed forces and other bureaucratic institutions. These wrongful territorial powers are continuously further expanded, at our risk and expense, into ever more numerous details of our lives, while all its practitioners assert that they would respect our privacy and that their interference would be necessary and justified in the common interest or public interest – as they misunderstand or misinterpret it. – J.Z., 7.5.12. – TERRITORIALISM, POWER, USURPATION

FREE MARKET: A market free of government intervention.” - Harry Browne: You Can Profit from a Monetary Crisis, 392. - I would add: and not subject to private banditry, either! - J.Z., 9.7.82, 7.5.12. – Most of the problems, which freedom lovers have with interventionist governments, would disappear as soon as membership and subordination to territorial governments become quite voluntary. From then on the remaining statists could only wrong and harm themselves, within the framework of panarchism, in their own and various panarchies. All those able and willing to learn from their negative experiences with them would sooner or later leave them as well. – The primary intervention, even in democracies, consists in their territorialism, which also means their involuntary membership and subordination under territorially imposed rather than personal and individually chosen law systems. - J.Z., 17.12.08, 7.5.12. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALIS

FREE MARKET: Free, unregulated markets, are a means of delimiting the monopoly power of government to determine what goods and services we each will have.” - Richard B. McKenzie, Bound to Be Free, Hoover Institute Press, 1982, p. 149. – Even limited governments of the territorial kind, as proposed by libertarians, would still leave some public services to the State, i.e., its politicians and bureaucrats, services, which are much too important to leave to such people, who tend to be power-addicts or even power-mad. – J.Z., 6.10.07. - VS. MONOPOLIES, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, POWER

FREE MARKET: In government, “small is beautiful”. (*) The great need today is for people to recognize the simple fact and to understand that the case for the free market is constructed largely on the premise that people should not be free to use the power of the state to protect themselves from the forces of competition in free exchanges between individuals.” (*) - Richard B. McKenzie, Bound to Be Free, Hoover Institute Press, 1982, p.43. - (*) Only its absence is beautiful enough for radical freedom lovers. Or its reduction to volunteers, their personal laws and exterritorial autonomy. – (**) The victims of such “protection”, i.e., those, who want to be able to compete freely, should be free to opt out from any territorial State that imposes such “protective” restrictions upon them. We should never expect “the people” as a whole, i.e. the whole territorial population to become sufficiently enlightened at the same time. The best that can be achieved in this respect is to allow everyone of them to follow the already somewhat enlightened pioneers in their more free actions, methods, systems and institutions. In this way freedom will become advanced as fast as possible, individual by individual, as a matter of individual choice. – The protectionists should be allowed to have their “protection”, but only at their own expense, as long as they are prepared to bear its burdens and the other consequences of the “protection” they desire for themselves. – Free Trade to Free Traders. Protectionism to Protectionists! - J.Z., 6.10.07. – Smallness of territorial governments is not yet beautiful enough. Even in nuclear families there are still strong disagreements, which can be sufficiently settled only by recognizing the rights and liberties of their members. – J.Z., 14.12.11. - COMPETITION, PROTECTION & THE STATE COMPETITION, PROTECTION & THE STATE

FREE MARKET: Massive conflicts arise when the market is not allowed to work.” - D. Shapiro, LIBERTARIAN REVIEW, 3/79, 22. - So why don't we allow it to work in all spheres? Do we really prefer the continuance of conflicts within and between territorial, centralized and monopolized warfare States? - J.Z., 12.6.00, 17.12.08. – VS. TERRITORIALISM

FREE MARKET: That condition of society in which all economic transactions result from voluntary choice without coercion.” - Wilson / Shea, Illuminatus III, p.70. – Why only all economic transactions and institutions and not all political and social ones as well – J.Z., 21.11.10. – VOLUNTARISM, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, CHOICE VS. COERCION

FREE MARKET: The classical economists, … agreed in holding that the free market economy was basically a self-regulating mechanism which would ultimately stabilize itself it left alone.” – Joseph F. Johnston, Jr., The Limits of Government, Regnery Gateway, Chicago, 1984, p.115. – Provided the free market is so free that it includes monetary and financial freedom as well and also the competitive provision of all kinds of public services. – J.Z., 2.10.07. – STABILITY UNDER CONTINUOUS CHANGES, FREELY & RIGHTFULLY UNDERTAKEN

FREE MARKET: the free market … 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.” - R. A. Childs, Jr., INDIVIDUALIST, 10/71. - – Alas, he did not draw the panarchistic or exterritorial autonomy conclusion from this and others of his freedom statements. – J.Z., 14.12.11. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, COMMON INTEREST, PUBLIC INTEREST, DICTATORSHIP, MAJORITARIANISM

FREE MARKET FOR ALL GOVERNMENT SERVICES: The free market cannot produce the perfect world, but it can create an environment in which each imperfect man may conduct his lifelong search for purpose in his own way, in which each day he may order his life according to his own imperfect vision of his destiny, suffering both the agonies of his errors and the sweet pleasure of his successes. This freedom is what it means to be a man; this is the God-head, if you wish. - Benjamin R. Rogge, The Case for Economic Freedom, p. 26 of a FEE book. - It is also the case for panarchistic freedom or competing governments. It is much more than a case merely for economic freedom. It is also one for political and social autonomy, which can be fully realized only within a panarchistic framework that assures exterritorial autonomy for all volunteers. - J.Z. 14.1.93, 7.5.12. – MAN, MANKIND, HUMAN BEINGS, SELF-OWNERSHIP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIAL MONOPOLISM, VOLUNTARISM, FULL FREEDOM OF CONTRACT & ASSOCIATION

FREE MARKET: The free market is another name for voluntarism, voluntary trade and voluntary association.” - THE LIBERTARIAN FORUM, 1.5.70. - So why do so few libertarians apply this principle to the supply of package deals of governmental and societal services on the free market as well, under exterritorial autonomy, voluntarism and personal laws? Why is this idea and this tradition still so new and strange to so many of them? - J.Z., 12.6.00. – Consistency is, obviously, not everybody’s strength. – J.Z., 17.12.08. – PANARCHISM

FREE MARKET: The great problem-solving device; the free market.” - R. A. Childs, Jr., Anarchism & Justice, INDIVIDUALIST, 10/71. – Without an ideas archive, a comprehensive freedom library, libertarian directory, bibliography, abstracts and review collection and encyclopedia of refutations and meeting calendar in every city and many other market institutions, especially full monetary and clearing freedom and free choice of value standards, and competing panarchies of volunteers it is by far not yet a quite free market. – J.Z., 17.12.08. - – There exists as yet no freed market for all tolerant enough anarchists, libertarians and all kinds of statists to practise their ideals freely among themselves, always at the own risk and expense. How can such a large example remain unexamined by so many for such a long time? – As someone once said, “man is not the master of words but he is mastered by his words.” – One might add: And by his definitions of the words he uses. – J.Z., 14.12.11. – WORDS, DEFINITIONS, MISUNDERSTANDINGS, ERRORS, PREJUDICES, Q., IGNORING FACTS, PUBLIC OPINION. THE FREE MARKET AS PROBLEM SOLVER IN EVERY SPHERE.

FREE MARKET: The market possesses a wisdom unimaginably greater than that of any individual.” - Leonard E. Read, Mediations on Freedom, p.21. - So why did he not meditate on letting it operate "governmental" services as well, under full exterritorial autonomy? - J.Z., 12.6.00. – We should also consider that it allows the practice of numerous stupidities, wasteful and even self-harm actions. – In Australia about $5 billion worth of food is thrown out every year. – J.Z., 14.12.11. - ITS WISDOM, KNOWLEDGE, RIGHT TO MAKE MISTAKES, FAILURES, FOOLISHNESS AT THE OWN EXPENSE

FREE MARKET: the unfettered market is a great problem solver and conflict avoider.” - D. Shapiro, LIBERTARIAN REVIEW, 3/79, 22. - So why do so few demand that exterritorially autonomous communities, freely, peacefully and tolerantly competing with each other, take over the role of the territorial warfare States, introducing free competition in the spheres of political, economic and social systems as well? - J.Z., 12.6.00. – Territorial monopolies are its greatest obstacles. – J.Z., 7.5.12. - CONFLICTS, WARS, PANARCHISM, PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM

FREE MARKET: They do understand one thing perfectly, however: that the greatest threat to their power is a free market economy, which sets stringent limits on the State. A significant move to free the market would decimate the "New Despotism," and the ruling group would try to destroy any politician who proposed such a course. The powerful political intelligentsia that determines the trends in social democratic nations today is as stubborn and ruthless a ruling elite as any in history and worse than many because it is possessed of delusions of moral grandeur.” - Simon, A Time for Truth, p.216. - Individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities could do even more to reduce the power of territorial States. - J.Z., 15.6.00. - RULERS, POLITICIANS, POWER, DEMOCRACY, STATE, ELITES, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

FREE MARKET: To "sell" the free market in the most efficient way, you should not force it upon anybody but allow it instead, for everyone who already appreciates it and who is willing to pay free prices. Free market salesmanship sells the free market best. - J.Z., On Tolerance.

FREE MARKET: We are a free-market nation, though the electors and the elected sometimes forget it.” - P. J. O’Rourke, Eat the Rich, A Treatise on Economics, Picador, 1998, p.237. – They forget it all too often and all too extensively. And if we really had free markets in every respect then we would soon see that territorial voting, politicians, the laws and institutions of territorial politicians are really superfluous and can be rightfully and effectively replaced by personal laws, institutions of volunteers and their genuine representatives, whenever one would really need them or believes that one would. – J.Z., 24.9.07, 7.4.12. – Sometimes even libertarians like him still forget how unfree they are in the U.S.A., although one must admit, one is, usually, still more unfree in all too many other countries. – J.Z., 12.12.08. – In all too many ways most voters and their “representatives” are enemies rather than friends of free markets.  – J.Z., 14.12.11. - VOTING & REPRESENTATIVES

FREE MARKET: We believe that a totally free market will maximize both quality and quantity of life, and that most, if not all, of the evils of the past and present were made possible not by a free market but by a lack of one.” –John Singleton with Bob Howard, Rip Van Australia, p.213. – A fully free market would include all kinds of political, economic and social systems that can be tolerantly practised among their volunteers and at their expense and risk only. – J.Z., 7.5.12.

FREE MARKET: We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfilment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down.” - Ronald Reagan. - Only practising panarchists could rightly say that they are living in free market societies. All territorial States are rigged societies, monopolistic and coercive ones, with compulsory membership or subordination and uniform laws and institutions forced upon all in “their” territories. - Libertarians should try to mutually correct their statements at every opportunity to reduce the existing confusions. - J.Z., 1.7.00. - SOCIETIES, INDIVIDUALISM VS. GOVERNMENTALISM, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM

FREE MARKET: When the market is free, the consumers wear the badge of authority.” - Bertel M. Sparks, Caveat Emptor: The Consumer's Badge of Authority, THE FREEMAN, June 75. - Full freedom for individuals and a fully free market require that consumer sovereignty becomes extended from that only over ordinary consumer goods and services to those so far pre-empted and monopolized by territorial governments with collective sovereignty, uniform laws for all in a territory, e.g. exclusive jurisdiction, protection, defence and international relation powers, to those of the associations of volunteers only, who individually subscribing to such services, which can and must be offered competitively as well. - J.Z., 15.6.00. – I haven’t seen such “badges” as yet. We can choose our papers and pencils – but not our politicians and constitutions, law systems and jurisdiction, our protection services, not even our postal services - quite freely. – J.Z., 14.12.11, 7.5.12. - CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

FREE MARKETS & REGULATIONS: Does a free market for goods and services need a government regulator? If not, then the free market for government services doesn't need one, either. It needs only consumer sovereignty and free market arbitration and policing and penal services against criminals with victims. - J.Z., 11.8.85, 10.1.93.


FREE MIGRATION: Every territorial frontier infringes individual rights and liberties. Property rights know no national borders. Territorial powers by vast collectives are wrong and absurd and, ultimately, self-defeating. You may not welcome me in your home - but your neighbor might and has a right to do so, if he wants to. And if you would not offer me a job or sell me some real estate for a residence or some business, your neighbors have the right to do so, if they want to. Nations are not to be treated as closed union shops. - J.Z., 30.11.91 & 14.6.00. - FRONTIERS, BORDERS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS, PROPERTY RIGHTS, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT & ASSOCIATION, EXTERRITORIAL SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDIUAL SOVEREIGNTY

FREE MIGRATION: Free migration is as much a right as freedom of movement within a national territory and freedom of movement as in sports, leisure activities and in work. If you do not have the right to migrate then you do not have the right to walk, or even move a finger or to breathe - for you might infringe some "frontier" or exclusive hunting preserve, one established by some ancient privilege granted by some overlord. Naturally, freedom of movement does not mean that you are quite free to move in, uninvited, into some private or cooperatively owned real estate or building, unless they are clearly marked as open for business with prospective customers. - J.Z., 30.11.99 & 14.6.00.

FREE MIGRATION: We are all migrants or the descendants of migrants. Earlier migrants have no more rights and liberties than have later ones. - J.Z., 30.11.99. - Earlier migrants may rightly exclude, if they want to, later migrants from their private property by they are not entitled to gang together and claim a whole national territory as their own and exclusive turf. - J.Z., 14.6.00.

FREE MIGRATION: While you are free to refuse to contract with a migrant, your neighbours are free to contract with him. Statist territorial borders are wrong, absurd and counter-survival. - 30.11.99. - Now they are even indicating attractive targets for mass extermination devices. - J.Z., 14.6.00.

FREE NATIONS, NEW ONES TO BE ESTABLISHED? The establishment of new free nations should be confined, apart from private, partnership and cooperative properties, to exterritorial autonomy of voluntary communities only. Even the best of them have no exclusive right to claim a territorial monopoly over large areas, including the private, partnership and cooperatively owned properties of those, who disagree with them. In other words, they must avoid the main wrong and mistake of territorial States, which e.g. Israel did not, in spite of the cosmopolitan and community autonomy traditions of Jewish people.  The exterritorial autonomy of dissenters must remain respected, regardless of how radical, advanced or backwards their views, convictions, practices and institutions may be – in the eyes of those, who are not members of the voluntary communities of the dissenters. Each territorial State must become reduced to a community of volunteers only, who individually subscribed to it or voluntarily remained its members (i.e., did not secede from it), a community, which is only exterritorially autonomous and does respect the exterritorial autonomy of all other communities of volunteers. – J.Z., 27.1.05, 7.5.12.

FREE PEOPLE: Free people would all be volunteers only. All other "free people" entertain only illusions of being free and practise suppression or subordination, at least over dissenting minorities. - Criminals with involuntary victims cannot rightly claim all individual rights and liberties. - J.Z., 5.4.95, 7.5.12. – VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, FREE COUNTRIES

FREE PEOPLE: lack of faith in the ability of a free people to rise from the ashes of past misfortunes to ever greater heights.” - Admiral Ben Moreell, The Admiral's Log II, p.35. - All people were never free, are not free nor do all of them want to be free. Thus we ought to be much more concerned with the minorities of those, who do appreciate at least some more liberties for themselves and ought to provide for them a more rightful and rational framework to achieve and protect them than the predominant political, territorial, monopolistic and coercive one can provide. Groups of people who, at least among themselves, could and would apply ALL economic liberties, would advance so fast and far that in the eyes of outside observers any previous "economic miracle" would be far exceeded. They could rocket ahead even further by the fact that the refuge capital of the world would be at their disposal. Late imitators of their example would no longer enjoy this extra boost. On the other hand, by then they would have many more trading partners than the first pioneers had and thus they might advance as fast or even faster. - J.Z., 12.6.00. – PANARCHISM, DIS.

FREE PEOPLE? FREE INDIVIDUALS!  A people free to dream, free to act, free to mold their own destinies.” – From film: How the West Was Won

FREE PORTS: They are somewhat autonomous or exceptional areas excepted from the usual protectionist and taxation policies, at least to some extent. – They should be free to choose full exterritorial autonomy for their voluntary members. The remaining protetionists should be free to restrict their own actions and exchanges as much as they like, always only at their own risk and expense. – J.Z., n.d. & 7.5.12.

FREE SOCIETIES RATHER THAN FREE COUNTRIES, FREE STATES, FREE PEOPLES: How can you stay free or become free in the country that is dear to you? By not claiming it as your exclusive turf, like a gangster, but sharing it with any other peaceful and productive citizen, while allowing them to rule themselves as they please, while they allow you to rule yourself in your volunteer communities - on an exterritorial autonomy or personal law basis. - J.Z., 21.3.91.

FREE SOCIETIES: Could genuinely free societies really develop without group and individual secessionism, leading to personal laws of exterritorially fully autonomous communities of volunteers? – 6.8.04. – Q.

FREE SOCIETIES: Without individual and group secessionism from the territorial State and from the future free societies and communities, all without a territorial monopoly, the best forms of free societies under personal laws cannot be freely and fast enough developed. Where would we stand now in the natural sciences, technology and in the arts if free experimentation had been suppressed during the last few centuries? All the atrocities and bestialities, all the legalized wrongs and crimes required the territorial suppression of free experimentation among volunteers in the political, economic and social spheres. We cannot afford this suppression any longer. The risk of nuclear war or of a worldwide despotism is all too large. – J.Z., 6.8.04, 24.3.09. - PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, DEVELOPMENT, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, WORLD STATE

FREE SOCIETIES: Without individual secessionism from territorial States and full a-territorial autonomy for the voluntary communities of secessionists, under their own personal laws, free societies cannot freely develop. In spite or because of numerous legislative changes by the territorial monopoly legislation they will tend to stagnate or even deteriorate. Monopolized territorial decision-making and experimentation depending on popular approval can hardly have better results. – J.Z., 6.8. & 23.11.04. – Compare: BECKERATH, ULRICH VON:  On Panarchy.

FREE SOCIETY: A basic axiom of civil society, we have assumed, is that individuals should be permitted to pursue their own goals.” – Joseph F. Johnston, Jr., The Limits of Government, Regnery Gateway, Chicago, 1984, p.277. – Alas, he fails to apply this principle to the free choice for individuals between political, social and economic systems, including e.g, education and justice systems, police and defence services. – J.Z., 2.10.07. - CIVIL SOCIETY & INDIVIDUALISM

FREE SOCIETY: A free society cannot be produced by human beings. Since liberty is a natural condition, we do not have to plan for or implement a free society. A free society emerges naturally when humans stop doing the things that prevent it.” - Robert LeFevre, LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Fall 78. - Are the discussions in my ON PANARCHY encyclopedia really superfluous? Should the peace-promoting effects and practices free societies not be described, as I tried to do in PEACE PLANS 16-18 & 61-63? - Could individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy and consistent voluntarism just happen - or should reason be employed to promote them? - J.Z., 12.6.00. – Q.

FREE SOCIETY: A Free Society Is a Pluralist Society Without a Common Hierarchy of Particular Ends.” – F. A. Hayek, The Free Market Order or Catallaxy, chapter heading, in David Boaz, ed., The Libertarian Reader, The Free Press, 1997, p.305. – The same could be said of panarchism and polyarchism. They leave particular ends to their particular panarchies or polyarchies in the same way as a general free society has room for millions of diverse particular societies. The difference is that the panarchies and polyarchies are not subject to central territorial control at all but exterritorially fully autonomous for their own volunteers, as long as they remain peaceful and tolerant, which under this condition is the most likely common outcome. – J.Z., 3.10.07. - PANARCHISM OR POLYARCHISM

FREE SOCIETY: A free society runs itself without central direction.” - Sheldon Richman, CHALCEDON REPORT, May 1997. - I find it always misleading to speak only of ONE free society. The future will have many and diverse ones. To speak of only one is like speaking of only ONE religion or ONE art or ONE  fashion and excludes the most important feature of a or all free societies, namely, their tolerance of differences practised by other societies. By using the term "the free society" we support errors like the notion that direct or indirect democracy or republicanism is the ideal for all, or that a single or many limited governments could be ideal for all, or a single or numerous different anarchies would be welcomed as the ideal utopia for all and by all people. The all-over society may not have any organizational form at all but it would have certain principles in common, like voluntary membership, exterritorial autonomy, individual secessionism, respect for genuine individual rights and liberties, to the extent that they are claimed by members of any volunteer community. Based on voluntary membership there may well be some societies which, internally, have centralized or delegated much or most of their decision-making. - J.Z., 14.6.00. –PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, DIS.

FREE SOCIETY: A society where it is safe to be unpopular.” - Adlai Stevenson, The Wit & Wisdom of Adlai Stevenson. – “My definition of a free society is a society where it is safe to be unpopular.” Adlai Stevenson, Speech in Detroit, October 1952. - Did he have only unpopular views or also unpopular actions in mind? Did he ever stand of for e.g. the right of individuals to secede and to engage with others in political, economic and social experiments, under personal laws or for other still unpopular individual rights? Not to my knowledge. - J.Z., 4.4.89 & 23.6.00. - OUTSIDERS, UNPOPULARITY, ECCENTRICS, INDIVIDUALS

FREE SOCIETY: Creating a free society is not a one-man job. – J.Z., 2.5.87. – Nor is it a job for territorial political leaders. On the contrary. Neither is it a job for libertarians and anarchists only, especially those of the territorially intolerant types. – J.Z., 29.10.07.

FREE SOCIETY: If freedom is to flourish the philosophic foundations of a free society must be kept a living intellectual issue and its implementation a task which challenges the ingenuity and imagination of the liveliest minds." Friedrich Hayek, The Intellectuals and Socialism. - It should not remain, for all too long, an intellectual issue only. Freedom of experimentation in the social sciences, confined to volunteers, should be opened up to test any kind of old or new hypothesis, theory, model or paradigm in practice. – J.Z., 26.12.07. - A CONTINUOUS INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE, DIS.

FREE SOCIETY: It is only within a free society that the crucial moral features of human life can be protected and preserved.” - Tibor Machan. - These "crucial moral features" should be clearly stated before one can agree with such a generality. - J.Z., 5.4.89. - I hold that a) individual secessionism, b) voluntary membership, c) exterritorial autonomy, d) recognition only of individual, not collective, responsibility, e) a much more developed and consistent declaration of individual rights, f) recognition of these rights for all individuals and their associations, which do claim them for themselves, even if one does not claim them for oneself, g) volunteer militias for the protection of individual rights, rightfully organized, trained and armed for this purpose and h) voluntary taxation, are "crucial moral features" of free societies. Alas, so far no consent has been achieved among libertarians on these and other features of free societies and on their possible peaceful coexistence with statist ones that are confined to exterritorial autonomy as well. - In other words, a new science of politics, war and peace has either still to be developed or recognized, - J.Z., 22.6.00.

FREE SOCIETY: It may be that a free society … carries in itself the forces of its own destruction, that once freedom has been achieved it is taken for granted and ceases to be valued, and that the free growth of ideas which is the essence of a free society will bring about the destruction of the foundations on which it depends." - Friedrich Hayek, The Intellectuals and Socialism. – While that may be the fate of even the best kinds of limited but still territorial governments, this would not occur in a really free society, in which there is consumer sovereignty even for political, economic and social systems. There will always be minorities of dissenters and nonconformists. Then they will be free to experiment, to fail or to succeed. Then the successful pioneers would be free to set shiny and very attractive examples that will be followed by more and more of the rest. – This kind of “frontier” should be opened and never be closed again. – J.Z., 26.12.07. - TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIALISM. LIMITED GOVERNMENT NOT LIMITED ENOUGH

FREE SOCIETY: Men will have a free society precisely at the point where they stop preventing it from emerging.” - Robert LeFevre, in Libertarian Handbook, 1973. - The main barriers by which they stopped it so far are: 1. Compulsory State membership, 2. Territorialism, 3. The outlawry of individual and group secessionism. Secondary barriers are: 1. The denials of individual rights, 2. Monetary Despotism, 3. Collective Responsibility. Many other factors are involved but if these are no longer recognized and enforced or become unenforceable then free societies would be well on their way. - PIOT, J.Z., 12.6.00.

FREE SOCIETY: Societies without any imposed (by majorities or minorities) governments, where whatever subordination remains is by individual consent and can be ended by individual secessionism. - J.Z., 16.4.93 & 29.3.94. – ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM

FREE SOCIETY: The perfectly Good State, a perfectly free and just society, is not to be found in this world; but unless we keep in front of us a true image, against which policies and proposals can be tested, "progress" will be not just meaningless but as dangerous as a will-o'-the-wisp hanging over a marsh.” - Anthony Lejeune, Freedom and the Politician. - Under consistent experimental freedom for all experiments it would be dangerous only to some of the voluntary experimenters. - As a matter of fact, the notions on perfection differ, not only between the various anarchists and limited government libertarians. "To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her dreams!" - would come close enough to the various forms of perfection, which different people want for themselves. Thereby the greatest all-over perfection or utopia could be achieved. Nozick called it a "meta-utopia" by Nozick. - J.Z., 22.6.00. -  ON PANARCHY, in the PEACE PLANS series. GOOD STATES, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM

FREE SOCIETY: The society of the future will be one in which men themselves will fashion the relationships that are expected to satisfy their needs.” - Brian Summers, THE FREEMAN, 3/74. – In these very general terms he was then already a panarchist, like many other libertarians. But how many of these “supporters” have been clear and consistent enough to advocate panarchism even for the great mass of various statists? – J.Z., 21.11.10. – How many of them are consistent advocates of full exterritorial autonomy for all peaceful people? – J.Z., 7.5.12. – Q.

FREE SOCIETY: Without monetary freedom, self-management and wide-spread ownerships of productive capital and without full exterritorial autonomy for communities of all kinds of dissenters, for all who desire and bother to establish them, and without the voluntary taxation involved through such panarchistic communities, without free trade and free migration and without sufficient protection for all other individual human rights and liberties as well, all existing and merely territorial political systems are dangerous, wrongful and harmful structures and systems built up a “foundation” of sand, monopolistic and coercive, ready to collapse any time and burying in the process innocents and guilty alike. – J.Z., 30.7.96, 6.10.08, 7.5.12. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, MONETARY DESPOTISM INSTEAD OF MONETARY FREEDOM & ALL OTHER INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES & PANARCHISM

FREE SOVEREIGN UNIVERSAL TREATY ORGANIZATION: FSUTO, Home page, 3pp: 637, in PEACE PLANS 1689-1693. - "Treaties and contracts formed between sovereign individuals and governments for the protection of individual freedom and the settlement of inter-governmental disputes." – Gregory Flanagan,

FREE STATES & FREE SOCIETIES ARE A CONTRADICTION IN TERMS – ONCE THEIR TERRITORIAL  & MONOPOLISTIC FORMS ARE CONSIDERED: For there are always dissenters and non-conformists, in every country, more so in every continent, and they ought to be free, too, to the extent that they want to be free. – J.Z., 9.3.93, 12.1.99.

FREE STATES: Free States" are a contradiction in terms - as long as minorities are still territorially suppressed or outvoted.” - J.Z., 18.9.82, 14.12.11. – TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM

FREE TERRITORY OF ELY-CHATELAINE: Common Law Sovereignty, 1p, 27, in ON PANARCHY XIII, in PP 869. - See: CHAITLIN.

FREE TRADE & PANARCHISM: Free Trade for Free Traders only, Protectionism for Protectionists only. – J.Z., n.d. – Smuggling is a still all too incomplete realization of this ideal. Some limitations of territorialism are indicated by the fact that it never succeeded in suppressing e.g. smuggling, tax evasion and crimes with involuntary victims, in spite of armies of enforcers. Sooner or later all territorial regimes are overthrown, due to the dissatisfactions they caused – but then, for lack of knowledge of and understanding of the better model, that of exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities, they are simply replaced by another territorial regime. – J.Z., 7.5.12.

FREE TRADE & PANARCHISM: Panarchism is just a consistent extension of the principle of free trade, free contracts, free markets and free enterprises - to political, economic and social organizations, systems and their services (constitutions, laws, administrations and jurisdictions). - J.Z. 10.12.92, 15.9.04, 7.5.12.

FREE TRADE & PROTECTIONISM UNDER FULL EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, BOTH FOR VOLUNTEER COMMUNITIES ONLY:  Trade policies should be decided by individuals and their voluntary groups, not by territorial governments and their treaties. That would open up opportunities for all kinds of anti-globalization idealists - or prejudiced people - to do their things for or to themselves. Then they would no longer have any motive to resist globalization.  At the same time, the Globalists could do their own things - for themselves. To each his own. Protectionism for the Protectionists and Free Trade for Free Traders. - J.Z., 14.9.04, 7.5.12.

FREE TRADE & PROTECTIONISM, TO EACH HIS OWN: The world to be one free market, one labour exchange, one residential area, one investment opportunity - for all individuals who desire that freedom, no matter how many different political dances other people do individually subscribe to and engage in. Protectionism is to be practised only by and among the protectionists - and at their expense. - J.Z. 22.10.92, 4.1.93. - All kinds of protective services to be offered, like any other free enterprise services. Territorial governments to be dissolved into contracted-for service institutions offering more or less comprehensive services as genuinely free and competitive "governments" and societies. – J.Z., 15.9.04.

FREE TRADE FOR FREE TRADERS, PROTECTIONISM FOR PROTECTIONISTS: Most people are not free traders or panarchists - and yet many to most smuggle, given the chance. In many other spheres they do also and often try to do their own things - to the extent that they expect to be able to get away with them. - J.Z., 10.8.87. - After panarchism has been generally realized, Free Traders, who act in a protectionist way and Protectionists, who act as Free Traders, might become subjected, by their own communities, either to expulsion or to contract fines. - J.Z., 12.12.03, 7.5.12.


FREE TRADE: All the best arguments about Free Trade will not help sufficiently against prejudices, vested interest and established territorial powers, i.e., when those already convinced of the rightfulness and advantages of Free Trade are not free to practise it among themselves at their own "risk and expense". Naturally, protectionists should enjoy the same freedom to gather the "benefits" of protectionism - but only at their own risk and expense. Free Trade for Free Traders! Protectionism for Protectionists. That would teach all who are teachable but cannot be reached by reasons and arguments alone. The remainder would have to pay the price for the continuance of their protectionist religion and its rituals and sacrifices among themselves. - J.Z., 1.11.92, 14.6.00. - FREE TRADE VS. PROTECTIONISM, PANARCHISM

FREE TRADE: Allow people to individually choose for themselves all or any of the real or imagined benefits of Free Trade or of Protectionism. - J.Z., 25.12.92. – PROTECTIONISM

FREE TRADE: Almost everybody favors division of labor INTERNALLY. Few favor it consistently in INTERNATIONAL economic relations, being confused by territorial nationalism and protectionist fallacies on balance of trade and payments, currencies and competition, employment and unemployment, exchange rates, devaluations, inflations, deflations and the money monopoly. - J.Z., 14.10.98 & 14.6.00. - PROTECTIONISM, DIVISION OF LABOR

FREE TRADE: An end to the endless debate: Protectionism for protectionists and free trade for free traders! - J.Z., 25.2.86. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

FREE TRADE: And free trade is impossible in a world of etatism.” - Mises, Omnipotent Government, p.6. - Therefore, free traders and other peaceful minority groups must be at liberty to opt out of any territorial State to do their own thing among themselves. - J.Z., 23.3.86. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

FREE TRADE: As little intercourse as possible betwixt the GOVERNMENTS, as much connection as possible between the nations of the world.” - Richard Cobden, pamphlet, "Russia", published 1836. – Not between “the nations” but between individuals and groups or companies or panarchies of volunteers! – J.Z., 17.12.08.

FREE TRADE: Bridging the gap between the haves and the have-nots, the knows and the know-nots, of the global economy requires not only access to new technologies, but also access to political freedom. So long as 80 % of the world’s population is denied access to a free press by their governments, the “information revolution” can only sputter.” - Thomas Larsson, The Race to the Top, The Real Story of Globalization, Cato Institute, 2001, p. 98. - - Access to evonomi resources, goods, and services is needed but also access to political freedom, and by this I do not mean political freedom confined to territorial majorities but exterritorial autonomy for all minorities as well, which do wish it for themselves, starting with free individual secessionism. - Moreover, unless monetary and financial despotism, of the territorial kind, are done away with, Free Trade will not be really free. – J.Z., 28.9.07. - UNRESTRICTED GLOBALIZATION FOR THOSE, WHO DO WANT IT FOR THEMSELVES.

FREE TRADE: Everyone should keep in mind the limited free trade examples already set by duty free shops in all large cities - for international travelers - and the free trade and industrial free enterprise zones that governments except from at least some of their tax and regulation burdens. Free trade for some and protectionism for others works. They should both be practised via individual free choice, not through governmental licensing only. – In the long run this competition would, naturally, work in favor of Free Trade – always by individual choice. - J.Z., 23.3.86 & 28.6.00, 22.11.10.

FREE TRADE: Export our politicians and bureaucrats. Even dump them on others or offer them as gifts. Then our internal and external free trade will be able to take care of itself. - J.Z., 20.9.92 & 22.6.00. - Naturally, it would be more rightful if they left us free to simply ignore them and mind our own business. But since they do not, their deportation would be the least violent form of resistance. - J.Z., 22.6.00.

FREE TRADE: Free trade for all who have sense enough to already see its benefits - even without having experienced practical examples of it - and, at the same time, full tolerance for protectionists practising their faith only among themselves and at their own expense. - J.Z., 23.3.86. - FREE TRADE & PROTECTIONISM, MUTUALLY TOLERANT, PRACTISED BY VOLUNTEERS ONLY

FREE TRADE: Free Trade is such a simple solution for so many of the world's ills. … It requires only that ONE NATION see the light and remove ITS restrictions. The results will be immediate and widespread.” - Curtiss, The Tariff Idea, p.80. - But it is NOT easy to PERSUADE one whole nation to accept free trade for itself. Those within it, who are already convinced, ought therefore to be set at liberty to practise Free Trade among themselves and with all other Free Traders in the world, at their own expense and risk. Their example would help to persuade the rest. To suppress such a limited and tolerant liberation would, obviously, be tyrannical. It can thus be achieved much easier than Free Trade for all people in one country. - J.Z., 26.3.86 & 27.6.00. – The nation, society or panarchy, which unilaterally introduced Free Trade, including all the other factors that belong to a fully Free Trade, could jump even faster ahead of other nations and people than England once did. – Territorial governments are, usually, too dumb to understand that but at least the members of some panarchies would. Then they could simply bypass the ignorance, popular prejudices and burden of laws, which hold back the protectionists. – J.Z., 17.12.08. - PANARCHISM

FREE TRADE: Free trade is the free choice of free consumers and producers. Protectionism is the legal imposition of the self-interested, ignorant and short-sighted prejudices of a few monopolists. Territorial States do wrongly and coercively throw and keep these two antagonistic groups into one pot. - They do not permit Free Trade for Free Traders and Protectionism for Protectionist. - JZ., 20.4.93 & 24.6.00.

FREE TRADE: Free Trade means protection for labourers and consumers and all men; … Protection is for the benefit only of the few.” - Franklin Pierce, in Free Trade Congress, 1908, p.408. – The introduction and spread of Free Trade would be very easy - once Free Traders are free to opt out of Protectionism, as far as their own Free Trades are concerned. – As long as territorial governments are allowed to have any say in this sphere, they will always and sooner rather than later fall back into primitive protectionist ideas and practices. – Territorialism favors all kinds of wrongs and stupidities – at the expense and risk of their voluntary participants. - J.Z., 17.12.08, 7.5.12. - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

FREE TRADE: Free Trade or Protectionism? Give each individual a fully independent vote - for all his own dealings, with all his dollars, property, labor and services, together with his voluntary customers and associates. Only thus could each get, finally, what he has the right to freely acquire by free exchanges. – Protectionists would then merely postpone the realization of that option for themselves – to their own disadvantage. This they have the right to do, like any other spleen or error or mistake, at their own risk and expense. - J.Z., 9.11.93 & 22.6.00, 22.11.10.

FREE TRADE: Free Trade will inevitably result and spread fast and finally become universal once it is left to the individual to decide upon whether to adopt Free Trade or Protectionism for himself. - J.Z., 5.4.95 & 13.6.00. - FREE TRADE VS. PROTECTIONISM, SHOULD BE A DECISION OF INDIVIDUALS FOR THEMSELVES, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, TO EACH HIS OWN, IN FULL JUSTICE FOR ALL

FREE TRADE: Free trade would spread and become most prevalent, approved by one individual and group after another, once the territorial monopoly disappears, which maintains protectionism and any other coercive system. - J.Z., 18.7.95 & 13.6.00. – PANARCHISM

FREE TRADE: Free trade, by individual choice, in all spheres, including government services, currency and financial services and institutions. - J.Z., 30.7.98, 14.6.00.

FREE TRADE: Free Trade, like a Free Press, Free Love, Free Labor and Free Enterprise, will remain more or less restricted, i.e., unfree, as long as they remain dependent upon government decisions, laws, regulations, permits, and jurisdictions. - J.Z., 20.11.93 & 22.6.00.

FREE TRADE: Free Traders are not really Free Traders, Free Marketeers are not really Free Marketeers, Libertarians are not really Libertarians and Anarchists are not really Anarchists until they do also advocate e.g. monetary freedom, free migration and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers based upon individual secessionism. - J.Z., 10.7.96. - FREE MARKET, LIBERTARIANISM, ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM, MONETARY FREEDOM

FREE TRADE: Free traders should become free to boycott all protected industries and to shop freely and worldwide only among free traders. Only protectionists should come to depend exclusively upon protected goods and services. - J.Z., 20.4.93.

FREE TRADE: If its realization is entrusted to politicians, their diplomats and international conferences and treaties, parliaments and their lobbies, then it becomes endlessly delayed or largely eliminated by "exceptions", "temporary measures" etc. and finally turned into outright protectionism. Thus, instead of remaining a subject for collective, territorial and governmental decision-making, it should become a matter for individuals and voluntary groups. That would mean any degree of free trade for any kind of free traders and any kind of protectionism for any kind of protectionists, always at their own risk and expense. Full experimental freedom in this sphere, too. - I predict that unilateral free traders, using also full monetary and financial freedom, will become the most successful and most imitated ones. - J.Z., 8.9.97 & 14.6.00. – PANARCHISM

FREE TRADE: It is not intended to satisfy directly all internal and external producers but all internal and external consumers. - After all, the purpose of all production is consumer satisfaction and in a free market the ultimate judges of the value of an enterprise are the free consumers. - J.Z., 2.11.92 & 22.6.00. - Full consumer sovereignty over "producer sovereignty" obtained only via governmental privileges. - J.Z., 22.6.00. – Naturally, that consumer sovereignty should be extended also to all governmental “services”, which constitute the worst and most expensive kind of protection rackets. – J.Z., 22.11.10, 7.5.12.

FREE TRADE: It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.” – George Washington. - Under panarchism one could have free trade or protectionism - all for volunteers only and also all kinds of political voluntary associations, communities and governments and all kinds of federations and alliances of them. Only the territorial, monopolistic, collectivistic, centralistic and coercive features of alliances are to be rejected. Alliances of known aggressors are another matter. Territorial States are mostly somewhat aggressive and oppressive by their very nature and thus all their alliances are more or less suspect. - J.Z., 25. 11. 06, 7.5.12. - FREE TRADE BUT NO POLITICAL ALLIANCES

FREE TRADE: Just ponder this: Would e.g. WW2 have happened under fully freed trade, including full monetary and financial freedom, free exchange, free banking, free choice of value standards, free migration, voluntary membership in all States and societies, under personal law choices for individuals, individual and minority group secessionism, exterritorial autonomy for all who desire it, instead of territorial monopolies imposed by States, full voting and decision-making rights for all the own affairs, i.e., individual sovereignty vs. compulsory sovereignty confined to the governments of whole territories, lording it over all its population? - J.Z., 19.8.11. - WAR, PEACE, ATROCITIES, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, NWT, AIR RAIDS, MASS MURDERS, HATREDS, TERRITORIALISM, PROTECTIONISM, UNEMPLOYMENT, FREE MIGRATION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIALISM, Q.

FREE TRADE: Let Free Traders trade freely and Protectionists protect themselves - each at the own expense and risk. Merely trying to further more exchanges of ideas and information cannot sufficiently advance and protect the case of either party. Let each act on his beliefs - among and with like-minded people. That will teach them - even when nothing else can. - J.Z., 20.4.93, 24.6.00. - PROTECTIONISM, TOLERANTLY COEXISTING UNDER EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY & VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHIES FOR EACH

FREE TRADE: Liberation is a demand, which is being voiced today in every country on earth, to counter the attempt to impose and maintain authority over free men. This is exactly why men who believe that a peaceful and free world must be built, know that that world must be maintained through the principle of FREE TRADE! - There is no other alternative to collectivism.” - Duncan Yuille, leaflet, "Free Trade". - Yes, there are, alternatives or, rather, extensions to Free Trade, conceived only as free trading internationally, e.g., full monetary and financial freedom, individual secessionism, voluntary State membership and exterritorial autonomy, and self-management in production. – Naturally, in an extended sense they all do also amount “merely” to Free Trade but few Free Traders were consistent enough to demand these applications as well. - J.Z., n.d. & 17.12.08.

FREE TRADE: Nationalist sentiment will persist, as will the struggle between those who want to tear down walls and those who want to keep them up.” – Thomas Larsson, The Race to the Top, The Real Story of Globalization, Cato Institute, 2001, p.81. – All kinds of nationalism and statism, as well as all kinds of free trade and protectionist arrangements should all be confined to their volunteers only. Free Ports, industrial development zones and duty-free shops point the way for mutual tolerance and free experimentation in this sphere as well. With the supposedly harmful effects of Free Trade confined to Free Traders only,  the Protectionists would have no right to complain and, with the supposed benefits and really losses of the Protectionists confined to the Protectionists only, the Free Traders would have no reason to complain, either. To each his own, at the own expense and risk and also for his own benefit only. – J.Z., 28.9.07, 7.5.12. - VS. PROTECTIONISM & NATIONALISM

FREE TRADE: Now is the time for the complete emancipation of trade from legislative thralldom.” - William Legget, in the 1830's. - JLS, Fall 77, 320. – Nations and their leaders do not learn enough out of books and history. Let individuals judge and choose their own policy and systems for themselves. From their successes the better policies, methods, ideas and practices will tend to spread, relatively fast. – J.Z., 17.12.08. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM.

FREE TRADE: Only countries clinging to a policy of unhampered capitalism, today generally derided as reactionary, can do without trade barriers.” - Mises, Omnipotent Government, p.267. – It is not necessary for a whole country or whole population to be subjected to capitalism or to any other ism. Let individuals choose the system they want to live under. – J.Z., 17.12.08. PANARCHISM, CAPITALISM

FREE TRADE: The world, one market, one labor exchange, one residence, one investment opportunity - for all individuals who desire that freedom for themselves, no matter how many different political dances other people and individuals subscribe to and engage in, at their own expense and risk. Protectionism is to be freely practised - but among the protectionists only and at their expense and risk. Free trade is to be freely practised, but only among Free Traders and for their own benefit only. - J.Z., 22.10.92, 4.1.93 & 22.6.00. – That is the most rightful and rational road towards Free Trade for all. – J.Z., 22.11.10.

FREE TRADE: Zonal, voluntarist, individual and unilateral free trade are the only hopes left for introducing it generally. Protectionists are generally too thickheaded and short-sighted to recognize the advantages of free trade merely by discussing them. - J.Z., n.d. - And governments seem to be able to introduce Free Trade only partly and temporarily. - J.Z., 27.6.00.

FREE WEST: The more we get to be like Russia, the less I like it.” - Mark Clifton, Remembrance and Reflection, Venture SF, Australian edition, August 65. - If we used proper descriptive terms then we would not be in the messes we find ourselves in. The way we abuse the language is among our most costly mistakes. - J.Z., 3.6.00. – Russia and the Soviet Regime were never identical. The Czarist and the Soviet Empire embraced, coercively, at least 120 different ethnic groups, not to speak of all others, who neither thought nor felt like Russians and Soviets. Without such vast misjudgment expressed in single words, we would never have arrived at the wrongfulness and irrationality of “nuclear strength” and other indiscriminate mass murder devices. Compare with them even the “ethnic cleansing” mass murders by Nazis and others were relatively discriminating in their mass murders. All captive nations are our natural but so far only secret allies. We could turn them into open allies, much against the will of territorial and despotic enemy regimes, by fully recognizing all kinds of governments and societies in exile, on the basis of exterritorial autonomy and personal laws – for all of their present and future voluntary members. Neither our “policy experts” nor our “secret services” nor our military schemers have so far managed to discover and utilize this alliance potential and strength, which could turn most of the soldiers and the civilian victims of a despotic enemy regime against it, not only those, who so far managed to escape from its clutches. – J.Z., 22.11.10, 8.5.12. – The “Free West” will be a genuinely Free West only once it becomes a federation of all kinds of voluntary communities and societies, all only of volunteers and with none of them claiming a territorial monopoly. – J.Z., 22.11.10. - COMMUNISM, STATISM, DES., WAR AIMS, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, WELFARE STATE, LANGUAGE, DEFINITIONS, TERMS, CAPTIVE NATIONS, NATURAL ALLIES, SECRET ALLIES, REFUGEES, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, NATIONALISM, WRONGFUL GENERALIZATIONS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL, WHO DESIRE IT!

FREE WILL: never sell free enterprise short.” - SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, Winter 75/76, 10. - Libertarians do this themselves while they continue to ignore their alternative media enterprise options. - J.Z., 13.6.00. – And the monetary and financial freedom options as well as the panarchist ones. Is it really so difficult to see all of the major implications of Free Trade, freedom of contract, freedom of association, freedom to exchange, freedom to quit or withdraw? – J.Z., 22.11.10. – If they do have free will then all too many people do not sufficiently apply it. – J.Z., 14.12.11.

FREE WILL: No one can rob us of our free choice.” - Epictetus, Encheiridion, III, c. 110. - Wouldn't it be nice if, especially, territorial governments, with their coercion and robberies, did not exist? - J.Z., 25.6.00. – As if history and our times as well were not full of such robberies. – J.Z., 8.5.12. – DIS., FREE CHOICE

FREE WORLD: If the so-called “free world” were really free, then it would not have to be afraid of any dictatorship. – J.Z., 14.9.04. – Then the conscripted soldiers of dictators would rather rise against them or desert to the free countries than fight them. Then they would also be welcomed with open arms and, in quite rightful and publicized war and peace aims, addressed as our secret allies. Those who managed to escape the dictatorships would already be treated as such, through their own and diverse governments in exile, in alliance with the already somewhat free populations. We would get even more such allies if we did away ourselves with all territorial misrule over involuntary victims on our side. – J.Z., 14.10.04, 30.10.07, 8.5.12.  - DICTATORSHIPS, DESERTERS, REFUGEES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE

FREE: Not in bondage to another person.” - Concise Oxford Dictionary. - I would say: Not in INVOLUNTARY bondage to another person. If you are in VOLUNTARY bondage, then, as long as you are willing to put up with it, while you enjoy the individual divorce or secession option, you are as free as you want to be. - J.Z., 26.6.00, 8.5.12.

FREE: Not subject to an arbitrary external power or authority.” - Webster's New International Dictionary. – Being subjected to a territorial constitutional, legal and juridical powers, which others prefer for themselves, does also mean lack of freedom for individuals and for minorities, sometimes even for the territorial majority. – J.Z., 22.11.10, 8.5.12.

FREE: We have confused the free with the free and easy.” - Adlai Stevenson, Putting First Things First. - Actually, a comprehensive freedom program, consistently applied, would make the attainment of liberty for liberty lovers and any degree of statism for any kind of statists relatively free and easy as well. Essentially, only the sufficient collection of all relevant information is required and then considerably re-thinking based upon sufficient references. That re-thinking might be painful or unattractive to some. Those finding themselves unable to adopt even alternative, affordable, easy and efficient media for their freedom of expression and information opportunities will find the job hard to impossible. - J.Z., 22.6.00.

FREEDOM & CHOICE, ALTERNATIVES, MEN & THINGS: What is freedom? Freedom is the right to choose: the right to create for yourself the alternatives of choice. Without the possibility of choice a man is not a man but a member, an instrument, a thing. - Archibald MacLeish.

FREEDOM & CLASHES OF OPINION: Freedom rings where opinions clash." - Adlai Stevenson. - But full freedom exists only when conflicting opinions can not only be freely expressed and sought but also tolerantly put into practice, by all those who share them, at their own expense and risk. Freedom to act and experiment must go together with freedom of expression and the free exchange of opinions and freedom of information. Mutual tolerance is possible in the sphere of actions as well as in that of opinions. Our daily lives are already full of it. Only in the sphere of territorial politics, embracing the economic system and legislated social relations, is this tolerance forcefully suppressed. - J.Z., 12.3.87, 14.1.93. – FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, EXPRESSION, INFORMATION, ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION, DIS.

FREEDOM & CONTINUOUS INITIATIVE OPTIONS: For freedom, as Mr. Graham Wallas has finely said (H.L. Laski, The Pluralistic State), implies the chance of continuous initiative. - David Nicholls, The Pluralist State. - For individuals and minorities, too. I.e., they must be free to secede and to do their own things. - J.Z., 6.9.04.

FREEDOM & PANARCHISM: Freedom means”, among other things: “No, I won’t!” (Eric Frank Russell, somewhere.) Also: Yes, I may – and I can, if I want to! – J.Z., 25.12.04.

FREEDOM & PANARCHISM: The freedom idea takes account of the reality of human nature." - Some limited government advocate. - I assert that only panarchism takes full accout of human nature. It recognizes and accounts for the diversity of "human nature" and wants freedom to establish exterritorially autonomous diverse governments and communities for all the different volunteer groups that exist now and that might come into existence under such freedom. It recognizes even an individual's liberty to choose a condition of voluntary slavery for himself, as long as he prefers it, i.e. freedom to be unfree, too. Since few people are pro-freedom absolutists at present, this would much better account for human nature and its differences than one ideal freedom constitution that all would have to live up to, few would presently demand or would be satisfied with, at least not in the short run. - J.Z., 11.1.93, 6.9.04, 8.5.12.

FREEDOM & PARLIAMENTARISM: The plea for freedom is an appeal BEYOND a parliamentary system, which has become an elective dictatorship. Freedom has a unique authority vested in the ultimate sovereignty of the people themselves." - Norris McWirter, "Freedom of Choice", in K. W. Watkins, "In Defence of Freedom", 71. - Rather, of those individuals only who voluntarily, autonomously and exterritorially act and experiment among themselves. - J.Z., 7.4.91, 6.9.04.

FREEDOM & SELF-IMPROVEMENT: Freedom to him was very much a do-it-yourself project - a process of improving society by means of self-improvement. Set an example that others may chose to follow. FEE: The Philosophy of Freedom, on Leonard E. Read. I would be very pleased if my LMP and On Panarchy efforts found as many followers and competitors as FEE has found by now. J. Z. 6.1.93.

FREEDOM & THE REDUCTION OF DIFFICULTIES: Nur die volle Freiheit kann Schwierigkeiten auf ein Minimum reduzieren - dadurch dass sie all schoepferischen Kraefte freisetzt. - J.Z. 10/90. (Only full liberty can reduce difficulties to a minimum by setting free all creative energies.)

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: Don't ever force freedom on anyone. Leave people in self-chosen slavery as long as they prefer it. Otherwise, you might get a slave rising against you, by slaves who want a new master and will see to it that you get one also and again. If you are not tolerant then you are not for freedom! - J.Z., pamphlet on Tolerance.

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: Freedom consists in the authority to do everything that does not infringe the natural and equal rights of others. – J.Z. n.d. (There are thousands of similar expressions by others.)

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: Freedom is the only thing you cannot have without also granting it to others." - Source?

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: Nobody should be forced into freedom or given it against his will. Freedom embraces the choice not to be free, to voluntarily accept a condition of slavery - as long as one likes it. Freedom should also be a matter of individual choice - one should be free to decline its benefits and responsibilities. - J.Z., pamphlet on Tolerance.

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way." - J. S. Mill

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: There is a natural freedom to promote one's well-being without infringing the rights of others." – Source?

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: Tolerance means granting freedom even to your enemies - freedom to do their own thing and no chance to meddle with your affairs. - J.Z., pamphlet on Tolerance.

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: We should agree upon a convention conceding to every group the right to practice the principles of its ideal social order within the circle of like-minded people ..." - Karl Walker.

FREEDOM & TOLERANCE: You can have whatever ism you want to have, but I want to be free. - J.Z., On Tolerance.

FREEDOM AMONG PEERS: The Greeks held that no one can be free except among his peers, ..." - Hannah Arendt, On Revolution, 23. - Only among like-minded people can one be as free as one wants to be.  - JZ., 6.9.04.

FREEDOM FROM STATE COERCION: Freiheit von jedem staatlichen Zwang fuer das Individuum." ... "Jeder Mensch ist von Natur frei, und niemand hat das Recht, ihm ein Gesetz aufzuerlegen, als er selbst." - J. G. Fichte, Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urteile des Publicums ueber die Franzoesische Revolution, 1793, S. 246. (Freedom for the individual from any State coercion .... Every human being is by nature free and no one has the right to impose a law upon him than he himself.)However, this applies only to peaceful, creative and productive individuals, not to aggressors, parasites and looters. These are subject to the penal laws of the communities they have joined or those of the community whose members they have wronged. If they had not associated themselves with any protective community or only one of thieves, robbers or murderers, then they have thereby outlawed themselves and put themselves in a state of war against all free societies and are subject to the laws of just defensive wars or rightful individual and group defensive acts and indemnification claims and procedures. - J.Z. 4.1.93, 8.5.12.

FREEDOM IN EDUCATION & PANARCHISM: In this sphere panarchism is already widely accepted. However, one has also to become free to opt out from under all government taxes spend for its education schemes, as well as from all government education departments and their regulations, their compulsory curriculums, their teacher training and licensing institutions etc. - J.Z., 15.9.04, 8.5.12.

FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION FOR ALL WHO DESIRE IT FOR THEMSELVES: Merely verbal freedom of expression is not enough against legislated abuses. One must also have the option of alternative legislation or of no legislation at all for oneself - as long as one does not interfere with the legislation of others for their consenting adults. - J.Z., 16.2.88. – PERSONAL LAW, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM

FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION: Freedom of action and experimental freedom even for political, economic and social systems, i.e., for the a-territorially autonomous volunteer communities that would realize the great variety of them, each practicing only for itself its own preferred system, at the own risk and expense. That would lead to many more but quite pleasant “future shocks” in our times and abolish the present risks and costs of territorial imperialism or reduce them to those of its remaining voluntary supporters. Full exterritorial autonomy and free market choices for all peaceful sovereign individuals in all their own affairs. Bad examples, which they may set, would have to be tolerated and would have an enlightening and deterrent effect that should be appreciated. - J.Z., 04-11. - FREEDOM IN ALL SPHERES, TOLERANTLY PRACTISED

FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION: Lange Reden und dicke Buecher schaffen es nicht mehr; ungeduldig steht etwas an dem grossen Tor und klopft und klopft. Und es wird ihm wohl eines Tages aufgetan werden muessen ..." - Kurt Tucholsky, Politische Texte, 104. (Long speeches and thick volumes do no longer suffice. Something stands before the big gate, impatiently knocking and knocking. And some day, most likely, it will have to be opened.)

FREEDOM OF ACTION & PANARCHISM: Freedom of expression and information are to many almost self-evident liberties. But they alone do not suffice for our purposes, as decades of rather fruitless anarchist agitation have demonstrated. They must be supplemented by freedom to act upon one's information, however limited and misleading it may be, at one's own expense and risk. Freedom of action and experimentation are moral and useful not just in some limited and minor spheres but in all.

FREEDOM OF ACTION IN EVERY SPHERE & FOR EVERYONE, WHO RESPECTS THAT SAME FREEDOM IN OTHERS: Freedom of speech and action for politicians can achieve little if any positive good. We have to rest all our hopes upon freedom of speech AND ACTION for individual and volunteer groups. - J.Z. 30.7.82. For this the framework of exterritorial autonomy for volunteers is required. - J.Z., 3.4.89.

FREEDOM OF ACTION, PANARCHISM, PROGRESS: If you want freedom, justice, peace, prosperity, security, progress, an end to war, oppression, poverty, inflation, unemployment and depression, establish and help maintain full economic freedom and full autonomy for volunteer groups on an exterritorial basis, thus achieving free experimentation and freedom of action for all peaceful and productive people, with each under a system of his choice only. - J.Z. 22.10.92, 4.1.93.

FREEDOM OF ACTION, TOLERANCE: I hold that it is allowable in all, and in the more thoughtful and cultivated often a duty, to assert and promulgate, with all the force they are capable of, their opinion of what is good or bad, admirable or contemptible, but not to compel others to conform to that opinion." - John Stuart Mill. - But the opinionated ought to be ALSO at complete liberty to conform to their own opinions by their own actions, to the extent that these are merely self-concerned or practised among likeminded people, who have joined their individual sovereignties in one or the other autonomous minority group, exterritorially organized under personal laws. - J.Z., 6.4.89, 8.4.89.

FREEDOM OF ACTION: Either freedom means freedom of individual action, or it means nothing.” (*) - Richard B. McKenzie, Bound to Be Free, Hoover Institute Press, 1982, p. 67. - - (*) Without freedom of action or experimentation in spheres now still monopolized by territorial governments it does not mean enough. Without it the full spectrum of liberties and rights cannot be realized. Too many individual human rights remain non-recognized, restricted or even outright suppressed by territorial politicians and bureaucrats, their constitutions, laws, regulations and jurisdiction. – J.Z., 6.10.07. – However, that still does not mean that e.g. freedom of expression and freedom of information are worthless. Most generalizations are flawed. – J.Z., 22.11.10. - FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION

FREEDOM OF ACTION: The people need freedom - full freedom to act. - Volin. - Should the freedom to act, autonomously and in an exterritorial way, be denied to volunteers among the people? And if individual people and volunteer groups of the people have achieved that framework for freedom of action, must they then, all of them and within that general framework, and within the particular framework of different exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities, subscribe to the greatest imaginable freedom of action for all their voluntary members or should they remain at liberty to impose their own preferred restrictions upon themselves? E.g. free love relationships are rightful as a matter of individual choice but hardly as imposed duties for all, who do at least to some or the other extent disagree with them. - J. Z. 19.6.92, 6.1.93, 8.5.12.

FREEDOM OF ACTION: When men could act freely, there was a terrific outburst of human energy, transforming the world.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, 1943. – Some men were allowed to act somewhat freely, to some extent or did so, anyhow. How many were there (or are there now), who knew and appreciated the full range of liberties and rights, which has not yet been publicly compiled and declared even now? – Even Rothbard argued against full monetary freedom – because he misunderstood it! - J.Z., 19.12.08. – INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & DISASSOCIATION, PANARCHISM: Panarchism simply favours freedom of association in the widest possible sense. This does, naturally, imply also freedom for individuals to disassociate themselves. Moreover, it implies the freedom not only to associate territorially but also exterritorially. Furthermore, it implies the freedom not only to associate for minor private interests, under very limited autonomy and still subject to some territorial overlordship but also to become exterritorially fully autonomous in every respect, in at least one of one's voluntary associations, one's own most wanted and basic community with others. - J.Z., 13.4.92, 13.1.93. Such personal law implies monetary and financial freedom options instead of subjection to territorial central banking and taxation. Also the freedom to conclude international free trade and peace treaties, and the right to declare oneself and one’s community neutral regarding the wars of others, i.e. the right to refuse to serve in their wars. – J.Z., 8.5.12.

FREEDOM OF CHOICE: A society based on the freedom to choose is better than a society based on the principles of socialism, communism and coercion.” – Milton Friedman. - Obviously, even he overlooked that full freedom of choice would include also separate panarchies for all kinds of socialists, communists and coercers, but all only at their own risk and expense. That might teach them, if anything still could. - J.Z., 23. 11. 06. - The remaining flaws in the teachings of all great men should become compiled and published, permanently, together with their collected works, as cheaply and accessibly as possible, e.g. on powerful disks and drives, even when one cannot afford to place them on vast websites. - J.Z., 26. 11. 06. – PANARCHISM

FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, EVEN IN SPHERES PRESENTLY PRE-EMPTED BY TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS: Freedom of Contract to everyone for all kinds of government services and disservices. - J.Z., 19.9.88.


FREEDOM OF CONTRACT: Each peaceful citizen to be free to contract out of any territorial constitution, government, law and jurisdiction over himself and to contract one or the other exterritorial and autonomous alternative for himself. No one to be bound by the votes, rules and institutions of thousands or millions of others who happen to live in the same territory. These are to be valid only for them, for their own exterritorial and autonomous communities of volunteers. - J.Z., 6.7.91, 8.5.12. - Is it possible to express this idea so concisely, convincingly and in so popular fashion that it and its implications will be widely accepted? I will continue to attempt to find or word such a formula - even if that attempt should greatly bore most other people. - 13.1.93.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Democracies tolerate the expression of radical opinions in small circles but not their application among volunteers. - J.Z., 29.12.86. – To that extent even the best democracies are also territorial despotisms. Democracy without full experimental freedom for volunteers is not democratic at all. – J.Z., 8.5.12. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM INSTEAD OF EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Freedom of expression does not really exist as long as one group (e.g. the majority) can make laws to enforce the practice of its opinions. People can only protest but have to obey the legally enforced opinions of others. - J.Z., 8.6.82. – The practical realization of one’s preferences, at one’s own expense and risk, belongs to freedom of expression. – J.Z., 19.12.08. – Just like full freedom of action belongs to freedom of expression. – J.Z., 22.11.10. - LAWS, TERRITORIALISM, FREEDOM OF ACTION ADDITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS!

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: I say there can be no safety for these States without innovators - without free tongue, and ears willing to hear the tongues.” - Walt Whitman. - Territorial States can increase their safety by converting to exterritorial States, formed by volunteers only. This requires no more than letting all dissenters secede. - J.Z., 16.4.00.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us all.” – Justice William O. Douglas. - The prohibition of free experiments by volunteers in the political, economic and social spheres, all on the basis of full exterritorial autonomy, has even worse results. For even the best words are rarely convincing enough for most people. Even when they do get through, it is often only temporary and all too many people, even highly intelligent ones, have relapses into their old errors and prejudices. - J.Z., 22. 11. 06. - INFORMATION ARE NOT ENOUGH. FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION ARE NEEDED AS WELL, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: The dollar spent is for Friedman the highest form of freedom of expression. He compares "voting with dollars" to "voting with votes". Using the first, he says, the individual has absolute control over that spending whereas with the second, he may end up with a useless vote…" - NATIONAL TIMES, 3.1.77, on Milton Friedman. - Why shouldn't we also be free, individually, to spend our monies only on those governments and those government services that we do want and are willing to pay for? Milton Friedman has only limited governments in mind, which, with their compulsory membership (apart from free migration), universal laws and territorial rule are, to that extent, still totalitarian ones. - J.Z., 13.6.00. – If the dollars in our hands are only government monopoly money with legal tender power then our voting with them is also flawed. At the last stage of a rapid inflation, made possible by such legalized money, we cannot pay our way with it any longer. It is then simply refused, even if there is a severe penalty on such refusals and some kind of barter good or service or some black market foreign exchange is demanded instead, which is not yet as depreciated. Only the monies of full monetary freedom can always be relied upon because under that condition good monies drive out bad bad monies and no one can cause an inflation, deflation or stagflation. – 8.5.12. - THROUGH FREE SPENDING, VOTING, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, CHOICE, SELF-DETERMINATION

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: The power of free discussion is the right of every subject of this country. It is a right to the fair exercise of which we are indebted more than to any other that was ever claimed by Englishmen. All the blessings we at present enjoy might be ascribed to it.” - Lord Kenyon. - Theodore Schroeder, compiler, “Free Press Anthology”, 1909, Sec. III, ”Laconics of Toleration and Free Inquiry.” – As if freedom of action and experimentation would not matter! – J.Z., 22.11.10.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: When even one American - who has done nothing wrong - is forced by fear to shut his mind and close his mouth, then all Americans are in peril.” - Harry S. Truman, N.Y. TIMES MAGAZINE. - There was censorship involved in "Project Manhattan" but, I believe that it was partly justified, to keep at least for a while such devices out of the hands of even more totalitarian territorial regimes. - J.Z., 16.4.00. – Truman, too, did not give his subjects a vote on taxes, conscription, war aims, international treaties, central banking, State membership and subordination. He did not concede to them the right to secede and live under their self-chosen personal laws. – J.Z., 19.12.08. – Far less did he advocate it for the victims of all other territorial regimes. – J.Z., 22.11.10.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION & FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, FROM - TO FREEDOM OF ACTION & FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, IN EVERY SPHERE: Obviously, we are not yet free to act as libertarians in every sphere but are, all too much, still the footballs or other ideologues and get kicked around in their games. However, utilizing to the fullest the large degrees of freedom of information and expression, that do already exist for us in many countries, we could come to so combine our dispersed knowledge, ideas, references and arguments and could come to permanently and cheaply publish them, at least in alternative media, that in this way we could also come to achieve the required freedom of action for ourselves and for all others, including various statists, to whom it was so far denied, with even large numbers non-libertarians acting as our allies, because they want freedom of action and experimentation for their own people, rather than merely the often very small chance to become, by education and propaganda, the local ruling majority. In the sphere of religion Atheists, agnostics, rationalists etc. have long been, in practice (without stopping their verbal disagreements), allies with all religions and sects that practise religious liberty or tolerance, against militant religious fanatics, zealots and terrorists. But at least by now the freedom to hold and practice religous or non-religious views has to be extended to practise one's convictions or faith in the politicial, economic and social sphere - among like-minded people and this at the own risk and expense. How could we cheaply, permanently and easily record and publish our combined knowledge and references? - (1) On a 50 cents microfiche we could cheaply reproduce 1 to 3 books or 0.75 to 1.5 Mbs. - (2) On the 50 cents, humble and supposedly already outdated floppy disk of 1.44 Mbs we could reproduce, zipped, up to 6 books. (3) On a 50 cents and 700 Mbs CD we could reproduce 3,000 books. (4) On a MAXTOR 120 Gbs. external hard drive, of the volume of only a medium sized book, we could reproduce up to 400 000 books. (5) On a presently at ALDI stores offered other hard drive, of 160 Gbs, priced $ 279, we could combine over 500,000 books and thus, if there were one of 320 Gbs, over 1 million books. Obviously, via e-mail attachments, floppy disks and CDs and also by direct computer to computer linkage programs, we could spread and exchange such books one by one or by the dozens, as desired. Alternatively, each of us, in one small gadget, could come to posses a comprehensive libertarian reference library, including all the desirable reference tools. [This year a 3 TB HDD was offered in Australia for A$173. On one of these disks could probably be offered all anarchist and libertarian books. – J.Z., 8.5.12.] With the aid of this "deus ex machina", each of us could become a libertarian light-house or "oracle", advisor or consultant on how to solve many of the remaining problems in our times, much better than any bureaucrat, politicians or presently widely recognized experts could. With it we could all come to prove out case, with all the references that are already existing now - somewhere, but still all to hidden and inaccessible for most of us. The old proverbial power that knowledge means power - better: influence - would be proven by these wide-spread treasure chests of libertarian knowledge, which could become multiplied almost without limits, for everyone interested and willing to pay their relatively small costs. The largest encyclopaedias so far existing would be like drops on a hot stone, compared with that kind of reference tool.  The question is only: Will we bother to assemble our knowledge in this way? My answer: We don't deserve liberty if we do not collaborate to achieve this combined knowledge in as accessible and affordable form. Another question: How many such knowledge centres (merely book-sized!) would be required in the world for the knowledge contained in them to largely conquer the world, i.e., most minds, at least to the extent of achieving freedom of action and experimentation for voluntary communities of all kinds? We know that a number of "holy" books, which do contain much less knowledge and many prejudices, fallacies and myths, succeeded in conquering the minds of millions. The intended comprehensive libertarian reference library, in a single book-sized and portable disk drive, could offer each of us at least a million times as much and quite genuine knowledge as any of the holy books offers. This fact will certainly not satisfy many of the religious zealots, although they dream of a being that is omniscient and imagine that we are his or her children. The politicians, bureaucrats and preachers may come to fear the competition from these secular "oracles". But, could they afford not to consult them, themselves, when confronted by any problem? Would they continue to enjoy the confidence of their "flocks", when each of them could acquire and use such a gadget and many of them would? All positive ideas and facts and talents could then become very influential and this rather soon, not merely long after they were conceived or long after the innovator died, or only after a major and prolonged struggle. - - - So far we have largely only tried to spread libertarian and panarchist ideas with a few of the relevant writings, not with all of them. Mostly we were not even aware of how many others exist - somewhere. Moreover, we were not enabled to supplement our verbal education efforts by practical demonstrations, under full freedom to act and experiment among ourselves and in competition with the same freedom for all others, on the only basis in which this can be consistently done, namely, under full non-territorial autonomy for the voluntary experimenters. -- Once freedom of information and freedom of expression as well as freedom of action and experimentation opportunities have become maximized - always respecting the equal rights and liberties of others, progress in every sphere will advance as fast as is possible for human beings - and as fast as groups of like-minded human being will wish it to advance among themselves. Not all people will want to arrive in man-made "heavens" as fast as possible - but some do. They will even strive towards immortality and access to all of space, as far as possible for human beings. Primitives would certainly consider them as divine beings. As the supposed children of a benevolent God we are already such beings. This reminds me of the last paragraph in Robert Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land": "Thou art God", ... "Skip the formalities, please. I've left you a load of work and you don't have all eternity to fiddle with it. Certainly, 'Thou art God' - but who isn't?"  - - - Instead of systematically proceeding in this direction within a world-wide network of libertarian educational activists we could, forever hopeful, continue to produce another leaflet, slogan, article, essay, pamphlet or book or assemble a few of them in our private collections, another lecture or discussion, another video or audio tape, another conference or discussion, another few letters to the editor or to some like-minded or opposing libertarians, another literature table, march or demonstration by libertarians, another few books or periodicals, or make some e-mail and website use of the Internet, hoping that it will bring us and all our ideas, references and talents closely enough together. And it cannot be denied that having computer access to may be 30,000 to 40,000 anarchist and libertarian websites, containing, all too dispersed and too little interlinked, numerous short articles and hundreds of books, and dozens of newsletters and numerous discussion forums, mostly for free downloading, has a considerable value for our purposes. But, in spiteof the over 1500 automatic search engines the Web has not yet made all libertarian knowledge easily and permanently accessible, not even through e.g. the, not even through numerous URL links. [A Google search for anarchist websites and blogs brought me 19 million results in April 12. For libertarian websites there were 14.4 million results. No one can fully explore and evaluate as many hints. That would require extensive networking between thousands to tens of thousands of people.] The whole is not yet working like the world-wide telephone network, in which all libertarians, who do want to participate in the network, are listed by name, organization and main libertarian interest and activity and the scarce libertarian resources that are at their disposal and offered to the interested public. Thus such obvious results of sufficient international collaboration between libertarians as the following are not yet achieved: Libertarian directories, nation to world-wide, a libertarian abstracts compilation, an archive of all libertarian reviews, a libertarian encyclopaedia, a libertarian ideas archive, a libertarian current projects list, a libertarian encyclopaedia of the best refutations so far found of popular errors, myths and dogmas upheld against liberty, an encyclopaedia of all libertarian slogans, aphorisms, definitions and quotes for liberty, an encyclopaedia of the most suitable wordings to be used in refutation atttempts, flow-chart discussions of alle the major topics that remain controversial among us, comprehensive, cheap and permanent publishing of all libertarian texts, at least in one or the other affordable alternative medium, an alphabetized index to all libertarian writings, the translation of all significant libertarian texts into all the major languages. Not even a common list has so far been provided of all the libertarian texts that are already online - more or less hidden, somewhere, by someone, although all these providers would like the whole movement to come to know and appreciate what they do already offer on their web pages. One can hope that all these diverse electronic offers will come together at one stage, in the not too far future, but I have seen no clear indication of sufficient systematic collaboration in this direction or interest whenever it was suggested or begun on a small scale.  We do not even know how many libertarian books were ever published, how many of them remain still un-translated, out of print and how many remain still unpublished, somewhere, as manuscripts, not yet digitized and offered online. Private libertarian book collections contain only fragments of the whole libertarian literature and, consequently, in the minds of most, even of famous libertarians, many libertarian insights and ideas are still missing and they uphold even many errors and prejudices still that have long been refuted by others, somewhere. No one has had, as yet, full and easy access to all the libertarian knowledge that is still all too widely dispersed, in print, typewritten or even hand-written and even too widely dispersed and too little interlinked when already digitized and online - somewhere. The existing panarchistic freedom of alternative media options ist still quite insufficiently utilized, especially when it comes to microfilms, floppy disks and CDs. Why? In this respect most libertarians still are not consistent radicals but, rather, conservatives and tradionalists. They have not yet sufficiently inquired why their conventional educational approaches and their modern and fashionable ones are not leading to a rapid progress for their movement. They still think that doing more of the same kind of thing will be sufficient. And, indeed, a steady drip can hollow even a stone. But can we wait or should we wait that long, all too patiently? Or should we try to systematically speed up this slow process, e.g. via high pressure water jets or diamond drills? Shouldn't we work towards FIOT: Freedom In Our Time, for ourselves? Will the owners of builders of WMD leave us sufficient time for proceeding, the conventional way, all too slowly towards liberty? I am already 71 now and no longer prepared to wait, indefinitely, but get more impatient all the time. Aren't you? Do you see no way to greatly accelerate the process of enlightenment? Then you are probably not aware of all alternative ways for achieving this - because there exists as yet e.g. no comprehensive enough libertarian encyclopaedia, no libertarian ideas archive, no libertarian projects list, no libertarian "ministry for propaganda", a special network, that would explore all these options for libertarians and point out the flaws in the conventional approaches. It might e.g. tabulate the cost-and labour effectiveness per page or per 1000 pages published or per new libertarian gained, of all the media, including the alternative media, and of all the libertarian propaganda methods. Our propaganda should become a science rather a fumbling repetition of the same flawed methods over and over again, that largely waste our time, labour and funds, because we remain unaware of better, faster and more certain and less obstructed paths. How many different libertarian leaflets and leaflet-sets were ever published, for a limited and all too temporary circulation? We do not even have a comprehensive collection of them, although the contents of at least some of them may be brilliant. Mostly they are gone with the wind, like the leaves of autumn! Dozens of libertarian books exist, containing A-Z. short articles or columns. None of them are as yet combined, towards a libertarian encyclopaedia. In short, even while surrounded by statists, authoritarians and totalitarians, in vast numbers, and assaulted on many levels, we have not yet sufficiently mobilized all of our main resources, not even whenever and wherever this is still legally possible. To that extent we still do not deserve liberty - because we did not struggle enough and effectively and consistently enough to obtain it - but left all too much to chance. If we fully mobilized all our resources, all our voluntary inputs, and combined them properly, using all suitable and affordable tools and methods wisely, at every opportunity, then our influence could soon become larger than that of any other movement, for we have the best ideas and most relevant facts on our side. Moreover, we could and should proceed tolerantly, aiming at leaving even our opponents full freedom to do their things for or to themselves (all forms of socialism for consenting socialists!), turning them thus largely into our allies and making them tolerant towards e.g. "capitalism for consenting adults". The still remaining controversies would then ultimately and objectively be answered by free experimentation, while all people would still remain subjectively free to accept or to refuse the results of these experiments, as far as their own affairs are concerned. How fast libertarianism could be advanced among human beings as they are now, how fast could the remaining and wrongful walls be broken down? That could only be seen once we effectively mobilized all our ideas, resources, knowledge, talents and methods to speed up the process of enlightenment. With only a fraction of them we can only achieve a fraction of what is possible. - - We should largely act as panarchists: opting out of the conventional media and utilize all of the alternative media in their strengths, at least in a supplementary way to our conventional efforts. Then we might come to find that some of the alternative media will be more efficient, for our purposes, than the conventional ones. At least we should no longer ignore the alternative paths but explore and evaluate them, especially the alternative publishing and reading media. For us the mass media are like the territorialist trap: They confine our freedom of expression and information options. That applies even to our websites, mostly costly to establish and to maintain and still not sufficiently connecting us to all other libertarians, perhaps largely because there are already so many different libertarian websites, all more or less isolated from all others, so that it would take a very prolonged and patient search, in spite of automatic search engines, with their remaining flaws, to find among that avalanche of information those particular parts that are of greatest interest to us or to reach in this way those, who would have the greatest interest for our particular messages and ideas. Thus panarchism in libertarian publishing and reading may also be the best way for us to go. It has the advantage that in most countries it is already quite legal to proceed in this way, even though the alternative media are not yet popular and may never become popular. They could still provide all libertarian information resources cheaply to all of us, in any desired assortment, fast, wherever and whenever needed. With that kind of automated and comprehensive assistance, almost every libertarian could become an effective advocate. - - Other legal panarchist options: We are already largely free to apply panarchism within the sphere of organizing production, exchange and communication and could come to experiment with all kinds of self-management, partnership and cooperative forms, which would do away with the hierarchical forms that we despise. We could at least mentally prepare ourselves for monetary and financial revolutions in times and places suitable for them, including blueprints for the welcoming and rapid productive employment of large streams of refugees and deserters, by the millions (while our governments are apparently incapable of coping with a mere hundreds to thousands of them) and for the almost instant ending of inflations, deflations, stagflations, credit restrictions and mass unemployment as well as the ending of any housing shortage. We do have the best programs to offer for ending any involuntary poverty. We could make our blueprints for liberty, security, peace and prosperity very appealing to those who get no rightful, effective and affordable programs and actions from their governments. We could develop and sufficiently publish rightful and rational alternative war and peace aims, libertarian liberation, revolution and military insurrection programs directed against the remaining dictatorships and terrorist movements. We could make ourselves appreciated as consultants for the solution of the remaining major political, economic and social problems of our times, always without attempting to impose our solutions upon dissenters but claiming, instead, only the freedom to demonstrate their effectiveness among volunteers. In this way we could come to achieve freedom at least for ourselves - in our time, within a few years. But in the same way as freedom to experiment in science and technology leads, rather soon, to world-wide adoption of new methods, the successful experiments of libertarians will also spread world-wide, supported by sufficient publicity for the results of these experiments. Voluntary communities without unemployment, inflation, other economic crises and without involuntary poverty and with a very low crime rate among their members, will become known, world-wide, very fast, together with sufficient explanations for these economic and social "miracles". – J.Z., n.d., ca. 2005 & 8.5.12.

FREEDOM OF THE HIGH SEAS TO BE EXTENDED TO CONTINENTS, by K. H. Z. Solneman (Kurt H. Zube), plan 159, page 39, in ON PANARCHY II, in PEACE PLANS 506.


FREEDOM SHOULD BE AN OPTION, NOT AN IMPOSITION: Neither any degree of freedom nor any degree of domination should be imposed upon individuals. Let them pick and choose their own contracts for their own relationships. - J.Z., 8.4.89.

FREEDOM SPECTRUM: I favor the whole freedom spectrum. You seem to favor only a small fraction of it. Why? - J.Z., 26.7.01, 31.1.02. – RED., DIS.

FREEDOM TO ACT & EXPERIMENT RATHER THAN MERE FREEDOM TO PROTEST: Mere protests, i.e. talking, marching, meetings etc., are not enough. Full freedom of action is required and its first and essential step would be individual secessionism. The result of this would be a variety of peacefully competing, because exterritorial and autonomous alternative institutions. - J.Z., 4.9.89, 10.10.89.

FREEDOM TO ACT & FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT: Freedom to act and experiment autonomously among volunteers, with exterritorial status (rather than merely freedom to march, demonstrate, agitate and protest, in order to turn antagonistic or apathetic masses, hopefully, into followers and to gain government powers for oneself and then to act freely in favour of one's own ideals, with the manpower and resources even of the dissenters. - J.Z., 21.4.92, 13.1.93.

FREEDOM TO ACT: you will not make people wiser and better by taking liberty of action from them. A man can only learn when he is free to act. It is the consequences of his own actions, and the consequences of these same actions as he sees them in other persons, that teach him." Mack, introduction to Auberon Herbert, The Right & Wrong of Compulsion, p. 125. - E.g., sound ideas on monetary freedom will become wide-spread only under its free experimental practice. False and stupid ideas on money flourish under monetary despotism. They will become self-limiting under full monetary freedom. - J.Z., 8.5.00, 19.12.08.

FREEDOM TO DECIDE, CHOOSE, ACT & EXPERIMENT, NOT ONLY TO PROTEST, DEMONSTRATE, MARCH, AGITATE, PETITION OR VOTE: Do not demonstrate, march, agitate or vote to change the system preferred by others but, rather, struggle to gain the liberty of action and experimentation to competitively demonstrate, together with like-minded volunteers, the rightfulness and benefits or your own system, reform or utopia, quite independent of the opinions of “experts”, legislators, judges and of all the popular prejudices that the others continue to believe in. At the same time, let these others apply their own ideas, opinions and systems – but only in their own spheres, among their own volunteers. You have no right to abolish or destroy their preferences – but merely the right to freely compete against them. - J.Z., 04-11. - EXPERTS, PROFESSIONALS, SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, DOING THE OWN THINGS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM

FREEDOM TO DEVELOP, EXTERRITORIALLY & AUTONOMOUSLY: Society must escape the straight-jacket of statist and territorial organization and regain the liberty to develop freely, in numerous ways, according to the desires, abilities and knowledge as well as the errors and prejudices of voluntary participants. - J.Z., 19.2.89, 3.4.89. – RIGHT TO MAKE MISTAKES, FAILURES


FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT: How can one make the solution to political, economic and social problems as efficient as good cooking recipes? Not merely by freedom of expression and information. They must be combined with freedom to act and experiment. - J.Z., 14.2.99. – Freedom to cook up and consume our own freedeom recipes. – J.Z., 8.5.12. - We have recognized that in science and technology and in our private lifestyles, so much so that there we take it already for granted. Now we must extend this freedom for tolerant, voluntary and thus harmonious, or peacefully coexisting diverse actions into the last three remaining and very important spheres, where it has so far remained outlawed, the political, social and economic spheres, which were so far mainly pre-empted by territorial governments, as they "royal prerogative", their monopoly, their exclusive decision-making power. - J.Z., 28.1.02, 8.5.12. - PANARCHISM, FREEDOM OF ACTION VS. CONFINEMENT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION & INFORMATION

FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT: Since there are, probably, hundreds of depression theories and “cures” for them, all of them offered by some, somewhere, in some resources, their adherents should all become quite free to compete tolerantly with each other in their attempts to realize their ideas as far as they can, among themselves. Free experimentation will settle the question who among them is right about any reform attempt. – J.Z., 30.3.84, 8.5.12.

FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT: The country needs and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it; if it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something. The millions who are in want will not stand by silently forever while the things to satisfy their needs are within easy reach.” - Franklin D. Roosevelt, governor of New York, Looking Forward, chapter 2, p. 51 (1933). - He did not allow the millions to undertake their own experiments freely, at their own expense and risk, but forced his own, wrongful and flawed experiments upon a whole nation and it has still not recovered from them. - J.Z., 14.10.02. - NOT FOR TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS BUT FOR ALL VOLUNTEERS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT: We have to live today by what truth we can get today and be ready tomorrow to call it falsehood.” - William James. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, TRUTHS, ERRORS

FREEDOM TO FAIL & FREEDOM TO SUCCEED: There can be no freedom without freedom to fail.” – Eric Hoffer (1902-1983), The Ordeal of Change, 1964. - Both do ultimately require panarchic choices as well - for individuals, minorities and majorities. - J.Z., 23. 11. 06.

FREEDOM TO MAKE MISTAKES: If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all.” – Jacob Hornberger (1995) - FREE CHOICE, FREEDOM TO ERR, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM TO ACT

FREEDOM UNLIMITED & TOTALITARIANISM: the choice is really between freedom unlimited and totalitarianism." - Russell Lewis, "Freedom of Speech and Publication", in K. W. Watkins, "In Defence of Freedom", 85. - Everyone should have more than just 2 choices. Any choice which panarchists make for themselves and practise voluntarily, exterritorially and autonomously, is right for them and tends to preserve the peace and justice between them and all others. It's rather obvious that most people want neither full freedom nor totalitarianism but rather their preferred mixed batches of part-freedom and part-totalitarian measures. - J.Z., 7.4.91, 12,1.93, 8.5.12.

FREEDOM, CHOICE, SELF-MANAGEMENT, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY: Dass dieser Mai nie ende, und Frau und Man, ein jedes, wie es will, gedeihen kann!" - Konstantin Wecker, Im Namen des Wahnsinns, p.85. (That this May day may never end. And may every woman and man, each as he likes, prosper and advance.) Alas, such general formulas do not help enough, if they are not specific enough on particular programme points, like e.g. the right to bear arms for self-defence, to use drugs for one's amusement, to issue one's own monetary notes and clearing certificates, without legal tender, to refuse to accept the unknown or depreciated notes of others, especially those of the State, the right to ignore and break any monopoly which the State has legally established, the right to organize oneself in military fashion for the protection of one's rights, the right to secede from governments and to organize under exterritorial autonomy and personal laws etc. Mere poetry and vague but high sounding sentiments are not enough, no matter how appealingly expressed. - J.Z., 8.1.93.

FREEDOM, ERROR, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICE: No one, who lives in error, is free. - Epictetus, Discourses, Bk. ii, ch. 1, sec. 24. - But there should also be freedom to believe in errors, prejudices and mistakes - to express them and to act on them, always at the own risk and expense. - J.Z., 9.5.00. – Should one conclude that since no one is free of errors no one is or can be free? We can be free only to the extent that the power addiction and the maliciousness of some has been overcome or reduced to a bearable risk against which one can take sufficient precautions, while the remaining errors in their consequences are confined to those who still uphold them. – J.Z., 20.12.08.

FREEDOM, EVEN TO BECOME UNFREE, BY ONE'S OWN FREE CHOICE: Der Mensch will frei sein; und wenn es nur deswegen waere, dass er sich selbst die Ketten schmiede." - Charles Tschopp. (Man wants to be free, even if only in order to force his own chains himself.) - Panarchism merely demands that he remain free to remove them again and that he tolerate other or no chains upon other volunteers and in their voluntary societies, trying to practise their supposed ideals. - J.Z. 15.1.93, 8.5.12. - What else does the usual marriage contract amount to? It is the mutual grant of a monopoly, of an exclusive relationship. The "forever" or "as long as we live" part may be the original intention, but people do change and cannt be rightfully and permanently held to that original intentions. - J.Z., 10.12.03. - MARRIAGE, DIVORCE, ASSOCIATIONISM, DISASSOCIATIONISM, SECESSION.

FREEDOM, EXTREMISM & DEMOCRACY, EXTREMISTS, TOTALITARIANS: Freedom calls even for electorates, or other communities, personal ones, not territorial ones, which may be given to extremism and aim at the destruction of democracy - but only among themselves and at their own expense and risk. - Let them do this to themselves but not to anyone else! - J.Z. 30.7.91, 7.1.93, 10.12.03.

FREEDOM, MINORITIES & MAJORITY: Freedom isn't realized when only the majority has the few liberties which it wants and when only some minorities have a handful of minor liberties, too, but only when all minorities and even individuals have all the liberties they want - at their expense and risk. - J.Z., 9.10.88, 1.4.89.

FREEDOM, POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM: Freedom means much more than obedience towards millions of territorially "elected" and selected politicians and bureaucrats and their avalanches of laws, regulations, boards, committees and commissions. - J.Z., 21.1.04, 24.3.04.

FREEDOM, Review of Chaz Bufe: Listen, Anarchist, pamphlet, March 86, with note by J.Z., 124, in ON PANARCHY XIV, in PEACE PLANS 870.

FREEDOM, STATISM & POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY: If freedom is the sine qua non of political life, as political philosophy in the West has held it is, since the time of the ancient Greeks, the most urgent task before us is to find a form of political organization that eliminates coercion of one person over another as much as possible in human relations, even if it is not realistic to suppose that coercion might be done away with absolutely. Freedom, or liberty, as Proudhon and all anarchists use the term, means precisely what Professor F. A. Hayek means by it, that is, a relationship of men to each other that permits the individual the greatest possible room for privacy and initiative in all undertakings. - The primary thing that has limited individual freedom in all ages, according to both Proudhon and Hayek, is coercion exercised over the affairs of some men by those of their fellows who have succeeded in putting themselves in places of power. And since it is the state that is the greatest source of the coercion that deprives people of their liberty, according to Proudhon, we need a political theory that addresses itself directly to a solution of the problem of statism." - W. O. Reichert, in Holterman, Law in Anarchism, 146.

FREEDOM: 'Tis not a freedom that, where all command.” - Andrew Marvell, The First Anniversary. - Except where all are voluntary members and thus and essentially command and manage only themselves, their own affairs, together with like-minded volunteers. - J.Z., 30.3.99, 23.11.10. – COMMANDS, VOLUNTARISM, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-MANAGEMENT, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT

FREEDOM: 20. Freedom is both an end and a means. The end sought is the self-control freedom is. Once it is attained, it is the fundamental means to the attainment of all else.” - Robert LeFevre, LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Fall 78. – Part-freedom is also a means to achieve full freedom. - J.Z., 27.1.78. At least for all who desire it for themselves. I do not care about the others. Let them fry in their self-made hells. But deprive them of all hellish "weapons". - J.Z., 11.4.00. - ENDS & MEANS, SELF-CONTROL

FREEDOM: 23. No human being is capable of providing freedom for another. The best each of us can do is to see to it that he does not destroy freedom for another.: - LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Fall 98. - LeFevre did much more for liberty. He clarified some aspects of it, as far as he could and introduced many freedom lovers to many freedom thinkers. Once he even reproduced de Puydt's Panarchy article. Alas, he did not sufficiently discuss it - to my knowledge, in those of his writings that I have seen. - J.Z., 11.4.00.

FREEDOM: 24. Freedom must be earned by each person for himself. 25. It follows that a free society will arise as a result of the forces of nature when human beings behave in harmony with nature and do not seek to impose their controls on others.” - LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Fall 78. - That's putting it in an all too abstract form, like Christians do with their "love command". In practice nothing else is required to achieve this objective than letting individuals secede from all institutions with compulsory membership and allowing them to associate in their own, under full exterritorial autonomy for their communities. Such guidelines are more concrete and much easier to understand, especially if one considers their extensive but under-reported tradition. - J.Z., 11.4.00. – MERITED OR EARNED FREEDOM & CONTROLS

FREEDOM: A rational man would want freedom of choice, of action and experimentation, not only regarding sex, fashion, hair styles, foods, art, religion, expression and on election day - but in all his economic, political and social activities. - J.Z., 10/72. - FULL, GENUINE, COMPLETE FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, ALL OF THEM

FREEDOM: According to Aristotle freedom is the basis of democracy. As democracy is a principle of social order freedom in this sense can mean only the relation of the individual to his fellows and to the social order within which he lives with the others. A freedom not applying to the individual, a freedom which does not liberate the individual from the domination by others, is senseless in this connection. But when Cicero holds that freedom consists in being able to live as one likes, then this can naturally not be the freedom on which democracy is based. Necessarily, the unlimited freedom of the individual, whenever it prefers to live in groups of the species, must suffer the limitations, which follow from the conditions of life in groups. With a closer living together the limits of personal freedom tighten. There is no no-man's land left in between. Instead, the freedom area of one contacts the freedom sphere of the other. The freedom of the individual must end where the freedom of the fellow man with equal rights would be infringed.” - Karl Walker, Demokratie und Menschenrechte, S. 38. - Alas, here he does not yet indicate the possibility that people with different ideas, interests and abilities could sort themselves out into their own groups, which could practise their common beliefs under exterritorial autonomy. Then the mutual interventionism via territorial political voting would be abolished and fighting reduced to infighting within groups, with secession of the minority of dissenters always an option, so they might continue to disagree only about relatively trivial things. Larger disagreements would lead to peaceful schisms - i.e. new tolerant and voluntaristic experiments among like-minded people. - J.Z., 8.5.00. – DEMOCRACY, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: According to the Continental theory of freedom, the "mere impulse of appetite is slavery, while obedience to the laws which we prescribe to ourselves is liberty." (Rousseau) - Dr. John O. Nelson. - There are many continental theories of freedom! – To each only the personal law system that he or she choose for themselves, even if these are authoritarian or feudalistic or monarchistic. – Freedom also to be unfree – by free individual choice! Some people still go get married, or don’t they? And some still become and remain monks or nuns. - J.Z. – 22.11.10. – LAW, APPETITE, PANARCHISM, INDIVDIUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, PERSONAL LAW

FREEDOM: Americans have taken the position that government exists for freedom, and that freedom means individual freedom vis-à-vis government.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.3, quoting: Saul K. Padover, The Genius of America: Men whose ideas shaped civilization, N.Y., 1960, p.14. - To be fully free individuals must be free to secede and to associate under exterritorial autonomy. In other words, only governments that are exterritorially autonomous and that have only voluntary members can harmonize with the full range of liberties. - J.Z., 11.4.00. - GOVERNMENT & INDIVIDUALS

FREEDOM: Anarchists to be free ONLY to do what they please with their OWN persons, property and communities. They do not have the right to be aggressors, coercers and expropriators of those who happen to disagree with them.” - J.Z., 18.1.95. - ANARCHISTS, INTOLERANCE, EGALITARIANS, SOCIALIST LIBERTARIANS ETC.

FREEDOM: And according to this proper and generally received meaning of the word, a "freeman is he that in those things which by his strength and wit he is able to do, is not hindered to do what he has a will to do." - Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Of Commonwealth. – George Seldes. The Great Quotations. - Unless the necessity of the same freedom for others or the fact that others, too, have the right to be free men, is expressed, a criminal with victims might make the same statement. The actions ought to be confined to productive & creative or self-concerned ones. - J.Z., 13.4.00. - SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, CRIMINAL ACTIONS, ARBITRARINESS, WILLFULNESS

FREEDOM: And this freedom will be the freedom of all. It will loosen both master and slave from the chain. For, by a divine paradox, wherever there is one slave there are two. So in the wonderful reciprocities of being, we can never reach the higher levels until all our fellows ascend with us. There is no true liberty for the individual except as he finds it in the liberty of all. There is no true security for the individual except as he finds it in the security of all.” - Edwin Markham. - While you enjoy your panarchic full liberty, leave others in possession of the degrees of liberty and dependence or equality or whatever they do enjoy. There is not rightful and good reason to go to war against other people - as long as they do leave you alone. Freedom must be welcomed. It cannot be forced upon anyone. - J.Z. 12.4.00. - FREEDOM IS MUTUAL, EQUAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM FOR ALL PEACEFUL PEOPLE, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Anyone can begin the practice of freedom whenever he chooses to do so.” - The Free Man's Almanac, compiled by Leonard E. Read. - Anyone can initiate the practice of some liberties to introduce more and more of them and others. - J.Z., 13.4.00. – This is rather hard to do e.g. for those unarmed victims marched, under guard, into the gas chambers. – But most of us have still got some chances left – and can work towards increasing them. - J.Z., 17.12.08, 8.5.12. – INITIATIVE

FREEDOM: Anyone requiring persuasion to be free doesn't deserve to be.” - L. Neil Smith, Brightsuit MacBear, 137. - But we have only three options to spread freedom: persuasion, example and force in its defence. Of these the easiest to attain and a freedom already largely realized, although not by using all the alternative media options, is persuasion. Or can we assume that without further persuasion or defence efforts we can already practise enough liberties among ourselves so that these examples will by themselves persuade others? - J.Z., 16.4.00. – To each his own preferred degree of freedom and restrictions! – J.Z., 18.12.08. – PERSUASION, PANARCHISM, PERSUASION LARGELY ONLY BY SETTING BETTER EXAMPLES ONESELF

FREEDOM: Anyone who tries to put HIS ring in my nose and lead me off to HIS freedom pasture is an enemy of mine. Quite a few people are now hustling others in the name of freedom.” - Robert Sagehorn, letter to J.Z., 10.2.80. - He led me, quite willingly, to the pastures of micrographics but was himself quite unwilling to be led by me to graze there himself, although he attempted to organize my own efforts better. He remained addicted to printing on paper. - J.Z., 11.4.00.

FREEDOM: are we being held in bondage, having lost control of ourselves, and our freedom of choice and action?" - Willis E. Stone, FREEDOM MAGAZINE, Spring 74. - How much are you, for instance, in control of politicians that you dislike and of bureaucrats and their spending and restrictions, by means of the kind of vote that you are permitted to give and the taxes you are forced to pay? - Are you free to secede from these “representatives”? - Have you seriously considered radically different ways of giving your consent, like voluntary State membership, paying for wanted common expenses via one or the other form of voluntary taxation or subscription, and of expressing your dissent not merely by protests but individual secessionism? - J.Z., 16.4.00, 22.11.10. - FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: As a consumer, I choose freedom. But even if the coercive way had economic advantages, I would still choose freedom. There is much to be said for being one's own rather than somebody else's man.” - Leonard E. Read, Then Truth Will Out, p.73. – A truly free man would not only have a “limited” but still territorial government as his option. – J.Z., 19.12.08. - CONSUMERS, CHOICE, COERCION, ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES & INDEPENDENCE

FREEDOM: Assume England under panarchist conditions. Assume also that in spite of the differences of the Welsh, Scotch and Irish - and other local differences, they would think alike to wish to preserve "pure" Englishmen and their institutions in England and would exclude from membership, in their own exterritorially autonomous panarchy e.g. all Chinese. That would not hinder those Chinese (also a mixed "race", only with them it goes usually back much further), who wanted to live and work in England and under the English Constitution, laws, jurisdiction and customs, to do so, as a matter of their individual choices. They might then or might not exclude "pure" Englishmen from their English-Chinese system - or they might accept "good enough" English gentlemen as members and good enough other Chinese as English gentlemen in their English-Chinese society or might be quite cosmopolitan in their acceptance of other groups of people. Perhaps these English Chinese will become more English than the English - or, perhaps, they might come to make further improvements upon the English system and then exclude any English riff-raff from membership in their society of progressive English-Chinese gentlemen. That would be up to them. Each member of each volunteer community would only have cause to complain about the own mistakes within the own community - and about the few cases of individual aggressions against members of other communities, that might still occur, human nature being what it is. That they can get along with each other, they have long demonstrated in Hong Kong and in the former China, in foreign concessions under still unequal treaty status. But, under our assumptions, no one would have any good reason for being afraid of the other. Naturally, Englishmen should also insist upon equal treaty status for their settlement in China, as good and free Englishmen. Nor could the majority of Chinese rightly prevent Chinese minorities from doing their things for and to themselves, in England, China and the rest of the world. How much would the anti-Chinese sentiment among native Englishmen be reduced if they would see millions of Chinese voluntarily adopting their system, living it, maintaining it voluntarily among themselves but, e.g., - without crowding Englishmen e.g. in their exclusive clubs? How long would their antagonism last if they would see that most of these Chinese would behave as better English gentlemen than most English natives would? One day they might laugh and shake all these artificial barriers off - but, those who wanted to, could keep them up indefinitely. How small racism becomes under the free contract system is already indicated by the non-Chinese customers of Chinese laundries and restaurants. - J.Z., 2.5.00. - FREEDOM UNDER PANARCHISM, RACISM, ETHNOCENTRISM & NATIONALISM

FREEDOM: At REASON Magazine, we believe in freedom for everyone.” - From REASON adv. in FREE ENTERPRISE, 9/72. - For tyrants, and for private and convicted criminals with victims? - J.Z. – And is freedom really the best present offer that we can make to statists, rather than reducing them to their own varies statist panarchies, at their own expense and risk? To each his own! – That is the path of least resistance, here for freedom lovers who want to obtain full freedom for and among themselves. – J.Z., 21.12.08. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE EVEN FOR TOLERANT, I.E., NON-TERRITORIAL STATISTS!

FREEDOM: Bastiatinsisted that men were imperfect and unique, that freedom could be found only by protecting the individual's life, liberty, and property from the predations of other men, organized or unorganized. Thus he adapted a unique conservative-libertarian position, well-suited to a difficult transitional stage in modern history.” - George Charles Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p. 233. - Neither Bastiat nor Roche III have seen the full potentials of panarchies, i.e. volunteer communities that are only exterritorially autonomous - but in this form provide a rightful and peace-promoting framework for freedom of action or experimental freedom for all kinds of faiths and ideologies. They remained stuck in territorialist models. - J.Z., 8.4.00.

FREEDOM: Because Germans know that wild animals are free, they fear that freedom would turn them into wild animals.” - Friedrich Hebbel, Diaries. - Until freedom is understood, they will, sometimes, act like wild animals. - When the republic was declared in some factory halls in Germany, in 1918, there were cheers among the men: “Now we can throw the women out of the factories!” - Report by Ulrich von Beckerath. Compare also what the "liberated" negroes often did to each other in Africa and the "liberated" minorities and majorities in the Balkans and the Middle East. - J.Z., 9.5.00. – The fear of freedom and the resulting monopolism are greatly strengthened by the fear of unemployment and of sales difficulties, two risks that arise under monetary and financial despotism. The full employment and easier sales under full freedom will at least dispel this kind of fear of freedom. – There is also the fear of becoming outvoted by majority voting under territorialism. Panarchism would dispel that fear. - J.Z., 20.12.08. - FEAR OF FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM, MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Both, the more enlightened and the ignorant, misled or prejudiced, need not only freedom of expression and information to inform themselves or be informed sufficiently - but also freedom to experiment, among like-minded volunteers, or at least the chance to observe such experiments by others. - J.Z., 19.9.94 & 6.4.00. - FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: But for actions, their result may be irreparable, and so we choose - to support beneficial acts, to oppose harmful ones. (*) - Remember, there are other values in the world besides free speech; indeed, the social utility of free speech is to give us a full opportunity to choose among those other values. (**) In speech absolute toleration is a social good. In action, the existence of values other than free speech demands we choose right over wrong (***) and respond accordingly. Free speech gives the citizenry the informational base from which they can then make social choices in action. (****) To limit free speech is to distort our capacity to make such choices. To refrain from making choices is to say that beyond the issue of free speech we have no substantive values, which we will express in action. If we do not discriminate in the actions we support or oppose, how can we rectify the injustices of the present world?” - Howard Zinn, Disobedience and Democracy, Essay: Nine Fallacies on Law and Order, p. 15. - - Such utterances are typical for most of our present academics of political science. They indicate that we need a new science of politics, one that considers the voluntaristic and exterritorial autonomy alternatives as well. - - (*) Here, he, too, did not consider the option of freedom of action under full exterritorial autonomy, among volunteers only in their own free experiments or exterritorially autonomous communities, acting only at their own expense and risk. Territorial "free" actions of governments go largely at the expense and risk of dissenters. Look around you. Exterritorial autonomy for volunteers works everywhere, so harmoniously that we hardly notice it any longer. Only for political, economic and social systems it is outlawed - and the consequences of this outlawry in these important spheres are catastrophic. - - (**) Only if we happen to belong to a majority, and provided at least majority voting has been achieved! - - (***) Nay, we may choose wrong - but only at our own expense and risk! - - (****) Only fully developed panarchism would give them that choice! - J.Z., 11.4.00. - FREE SPEECH & FREEDOM OF ACTION - FREE SPEECH & FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: But what is Freedom? Rightly understood, a universal licence to be good." - Hartley Coleridge, Liberty. - 1.) I would add: and to make mistakes at one's own expense and risk. 2.) Since "goodness" is very differently interpreted, this kind of ruling is also a guide for all kinds of despots, statists and territorial and exclusive and coercive utopians. To that extent it leads to intolerance rather than voluntaryism and panarchism. - J.Z., 6.4.89.

FREEDOM: Can our form of government, our system of justice, survive if one can be denied a freedom because he might abuse it?” – Harlon Carter - This statement does already assume that our form of territorial government and its system of justice are genuine and high values that cannot be exceeded. The very fact that they can be and are abused, and this all too frequently, indicates that they are far from ideal or optimal. - J.Z., 22. 11. 06. – ABUSES

FREEDOM: Careful experiment will show us, provided we are willing to experiment. I conceive the wholly free society not as an absolute good we can have instantly for all time and free of any cost, but as a goal to strive toward, a direction for us to take. - If we do take it, my bet is that soon we will begin to see an explosive release of creative energy - and common sense - which will bring us a future more bright than we can now imagine.” - Poul Anderson, NEW LIBERTARIAN, May 78. - To get it we should promote the information explosion, especially on peace, freedom & justice knowledge. - J.Z., 20.11.82. – My SLOGANS FOR LIBERTY encyclopedia [online] is part of it. So is my Libertarian Microfiche Publishing (PEACE PLANS) effort, and its panarchistic encyclopedia: On Panarchy. - J.Z., 12.6.00. - See my list of libertarian writings that are already digitized, my free banking bibliography, my free banking A to Z and this current A to Z compilation on panarchism – most of them on -  EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Charles Dickens wrote in a letter to John Forster from America: '… I do fear that the heaviest blow ever dealt at liberty will be dealt by this country, in the failure of its example to the earth.' He was, in 1842, referring to the imminent War between the States, which opposed two absolutely intransigent parties. Much the same phrasing applies to the war in Vietnam.” - John Wilkinson, The Civilization of the Dialogue, in: The Dissenting Academy, ed. by Theodor Roszak, Pelican, p.163. - And to all the other wrongs and mistakes following from territorialist principles and practices. The American Revolution stopped at a still quite insufficiently limited government and did not reach panarchism in theory or practice. - J.Z., 26.1.02. - LIBERTY, UNITED STATES, CIVIL WAR, UNFINISHED AMERICAN REVOLUTION, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Come on in. Freedom is fine! - J.Z. 2/75. – If we could really and freely demonstrate it, in our own lives and relationships, inviting others to join us would not be much of a job. Then freedom options would almost sell themselves to outside observers. – J.Z., 21.12.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

FREEDOM: Conformity is the jailer of freedom and the enemy of growth.” - John F. Kennedy, quoted in ANALOG, Jan. 2000. - Voluntary conformity should be distinguished from enforced conformity. The conformity within an exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers, which one has chosen for oneself, should be distinguished from the conformity enforced or habitual in a territorial State. - J.Z., 18.4.00. – Panarchism offers the most diversified kinds of conformity when it comes to political, economic and social systems. – J.Z., 19.12.08. - CONFORMISM & GROWTH

FREEDOM: Controllers, control yourselves! Rulers, rule yourselves! Liberators, liberate yourselves! - J.Z., 30.5.74. – Statism only for statists.  Territorial powers to no one. – J.Z., 8.5.12. - CONTROL, RULE, LIBERATION, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM, ITS COERCION, MONOPOLISM & INHERENT INTOLERANCE

FREEDOM: create 'small worlds of freedom' within this impractical world." - Barbara Deming, quoting Paul Goodman, WIN, 15/12/72. - What does she mean by this world being "impractical"? – Does it not exist? – Perhaps she meant the panarchistic demonstration of freedom options – in a world full mainly of territorial and other mal-practices, abuses and oppression. - J.Z., n.d. & 21.12.08.

FREEDOM: De-nationalize and de-monopolize war and defence decisions - if you want peace and freedom. - J.Z., n.d. - PEACE, WAR & DEFENCE, DENATIONALIZATION, MILITIA, DECISION ON WAR & PEACE.

FREEDOM: degree of autonomy or independence in the taking of decisions.” - Prof. Kemp. - Exterritorial autonomy for volunteers maximizes self-government, self-determination, self-management, self-responsibility and self-liberation. – J.Z., 8.5.12. - AUTONOMY & DECISION-MAKING, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Despotism sits nowhere so secure as under the effigy and ensigns of Freedom.” - W. S. Landor, Imaginary Conversations: Lacy and Cura Merino. - The number and kinds of despotic features remaining in democracies and republics, as well as in the few remaining constitutional monarchies, has still to be brought to the attention of most people. Some of them, like territorialism, the monopoly of governments to make war and peace decisions and to conclude international treaties, are not even recognized and attacked by most libertarians. - J.Z., 8.5.00, 8.5.12. – DESPOTISM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Do what thou wilt.” - Francois Rabelais, Gargantua and Pantagruel, I, Rabelais to the Reader, ch. 57. - Only if you can do so at your own expense and risk! - J.Z. - WILL, ARBITRARINESS, WHIM, DIS.

FREEDOM: Each man must be left free to determine his own destiny, to seek his own goals, to live his own life as he sees fit.” - Ridgway K. Foley Jr., THE FREEMAN, 4/74. – To each his own utopia – at his expense and risk, together with like-minded volunteers! – J.Z., 22.11.10. - SELF-DETERMINATION

FREEDOM: Each man to be "free to follow the dictates of his conscience and to seek his own destiny." - Ridgway K. Foley Jr., THE FREEMAN, 11/73. – This is still expressed in too general terms for everybody to arrive at panarchism. – J.Z., 22.11.10. - CHOICE, CONSCIENCE & DESTINY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS

FREEDOM: Earth holds billions of people who not only fail to comprehend what you mean by freedom but would not like it if you gave it to them.” - Poul Anderson, Conflict, p.177. – Also in his: Kings Who Die, in: Judith Merril, The Best of SCI-FI 4, 126. - Therefore, full freedom only for the most radical freedom lovers. Any degree of freedom or un-freedom - for those who like them! - J.Z., 21.4.00. - Just think of how unpopular illegal immigrants are at present. And most cannot even conceive monetary freedom otherwise than as a condition of unlimited inflation, because they know only of legal tender monopoly money. Indeed, if everyone were free to issue that kind of “money”, with its forced acceptance and forced value … - J.Z., 6.10.01, 8.5.12. – Also in: Kings Who Die, in: Seven Conquests, 32. – Thus, to each his own choice, as much or as little freedom as they like for themselves. Laissez-Faire in this sphere as well. – J.Z., 18.12.08. - PEOPLE, MAN, UNDERSTANDING, FEAR OF FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL, TO EACH HIS OWN

FREEDOM: Economic freedom is the implicit right of any individual to own any kind or any amount of property and to unite voluntarily with others for purposes, which relate to property in any particular. Impositions by any agency of force, regardless of the end in view, are essentially contrary to freedom. If one believes in freedom, one must believe in economic freedom - full latitude of choice in any and all economic areas, for each person. This can never be accomplished by any procedure, organized or otherwise, which uses violence (even the violence implicit in taxation) to take from one owner anything, which is rightfully his. Nor can one support arguments which are offered within a voluntarist framework which would lead to controls of an extra-market character imposed at any point of market participation. - Support of freedom is essentially support of self-government in all particulars. Freedom is autarchy - self-rule.” - Robert LeFevre, RAMPART JOURNAL, Winter 1965. - But each should remain free to restrict his own liberties as much as he likes, or leave them unused. - J.Z., 4.4.00. - ECONOMIC FREEDOM, AUTARCHY, PANARCHY, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Either be wholly slave or wholly free.” - John Dryden, The Hind and the Panther. - Or enjoy or suffer under any in-between mixture that you have freely chosen for yourself and as long as you are comfortable with it. - J.Z., 2.11.82, 8.4.00. - SLAVERY, ABSOLUTE FREEDOM

FREEDOM: Even if we were surrounded by radical degrees of liberty that would not necessarily mean that most people would become conscious of the full potential of liberty. "The last creature in the world to discover water would be a fish." - Source unknown. - E.g. oxygen, as part of air, was discovered rather late by scientists. We are surrounded by and practise many private-life liberties in a panarchistic way - but very few people are able or willing to abstract from these precedents the panarchistic freedom in all spheres, especially those of whole political, social and economic systems. Therefore the old saw that "freedom is best appreciated when it is absent" is not fully true, either. It applies only to known and missed liberties. - J.Z., 12.4.00, 8.5.12.

FREEDOM: Every rightful and sensible freedom option encounters not just a few but a whole host of objections, myths, errors and wrong premises among the majority of viewers, listeners and readers, so that freedom of expression, without freedom to experiment, cannot get very far or fast. - J.Z., 9.7.89. - OBJECTIONS, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION & FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

FREEDOM: Everyone gains through freedom.” - Read, Then Truth Will Out, IX. - Even if they are not aware of this. Then they should be allowed to live under the restraints that they prefer for themselves. - J.Z., 14.4.00.

FREEDOM: Everyone may seek his own happiness in the way that seems good to himself, provided that he infringes not such freedom of others to strive after a similar end as is consistent with the freedom of all according to a possible general law.” – Immanuel Kant. – In all too general terms he stood here for panarchism as well. – J.Z., 22.11.10. - HAPPINESS & EQUAL FREEDOM, UNIVERSALITY PRINCIPLE, PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

FREEDOM: Everyone wants to move FORWARD to freedom. - However, through muddled thinking and growing bureaucratic controls, we have been moving BACKWARD to the days of the Pharaohs. - If you want your country to move FORWARD … WHY NOT TRY CAPITALISM? - Discover the TOTAL meaning of freedom through Capitalism.” - From a leaflet by Joseph A. Galambos: Destination Freedom. – It does not stand, clearly enough, for panarchism as well, although the principle of “laissez faire, laissez passer” DOES. – J.Z., 22.11.10. -  It is also implied but not clearly enough expressed in “self-ownership”, “individual sovereignty”, “personal law”, “freedom enterprise”, “free trade”, “freedom of contract” and “freedom of association”. – CAPITALISM, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Everything that limits us we have to put aside” - Richard Bach, Jonathan Livingston Seagull, p.76. - If we were to include all others, who are not aggressive, within this "us", then it would make sense. - Naturally, we should not consider the laws of nature as limits upon the liberty that should exist between human beings. Nor could we put them aside. –J.Z., 16.4.00. We should start with the territorial State. – J.Z., 21.12.08. - UNLIMITED FREEDOM

FREEDOM: fertilize freedom, shed sunlight on liberty and watch it grow.” - Stormy Mon, in THE CONNECTION 122, p.67. – Most are so far only prepared to fertilize it by pissing or shitting on it. But, indeed, what makes freedom clear and valuable is, at least in they eyes of the somewhat enlightened, is, often and precisely, its absence. What it needs most under present conditions is ready access to all freedom ideas, arguments and facts, the secessionist, exterritorial autonomy and militia option for the protection of genuine individual rights and liberties – and these are still not optimally expressed and publicly, widely enough, declared. – J.Z., 21.12.08. 

FREEDOM: For freedom there is not substitute; there can be no substitute.” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.237. - Especially not if one also includes under freedom the panarchistic freedom to be unfree, i.e., for individuals the option to choose a condition of un-freedom for themselves. - J.Z., 17.4.00. - NO SUBSTITUTE FOR FREEDOM!

FREEDOM: For freedom, as Mr. Graham Wallace has finely said, implies the chance of continuous initiative.” - H. L. Laski, in David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, 1975, essay: The Pluralistic State, p.149. - The remark by Wallace was in an article in NEW STATESMAN, Sep. 25, 1915. - This requires individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities, no matter how often this option is ignored. - J.Z., 8.8.86 & 17.4.00. – INITIATIVE

FREEDOM: For how many more centuries are you prepared to postpone the introduction of peace, a just and free society, free trade, free banking, individual sovereignty, panarchism, longevity, space exploration, intelligence expansion, complete libertarian library and information services and to tolerate the prevailing ignorance and prejudices, mass murder practices and preparations, bloody wars, civil wars, revolutions and terrorist actions that serve no rightful and rational purposes, mass unemployment, inflation, tax robberies, bureaucracy, despotism, corruption, exploitation, monopolies and avalanches of oppressive laws and regulations? - J.Z. 22.11.93. - Shouldn't you at least search for programs that could achieve FIOT or PIOT? - J.Z., 9.4.00. - ITS INTRODUCTION

FREEDOM: For man must have every possible freedom.” - Robert Sheckley, Immortality Inc. – May have! Only if he chooses it for himself. He must not be compelled to live as a free man if he does not want to. Naturally, this choice, too, must be at his own risk and expense. Nor is he at liberty to force other to live like him in some degree of slavery.  - J.Z., 14.4.00. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE

FREEDOM: For some people, like infants and the insane, as well as for some criminals, there can be too much liberty for them to be able to cope with it and for some there can never be too much. Others are already satisfied with a fraction of all liberties. Let all peaceful and productive people chose for themselves their own societies, communities, laws and responsibilities as well as ideological systems. And let no one impose his choices upon non-criminal and adult others. - J.Z., 28.4.95, 6.4.00. - CHOICE, FREE SOCIETY, PANARCHISM, TOO MUCH FREEDOM?

FREEDOM: For we mean by freedom the power and the faculty for every man or organic group of men to decide on such issues as are vital to his or its destinies.” - Salvador de Madariaga, The Blowing up of the Parthenon, p.31. – Only societies and communities of volunteers can be considered as “organic” ones. – J.Z., 22.11.10.

FREEDOM: Free men, defined as those who understand these distinctions, are the only ones who can rescue the indifferent and the docile from a growing serfdom. The burden is on them and them alone.” - Leonard E. Read, ISIL LIBERTY QUOTE LIBRARY 03. – The primary burden or responsibility of freedom-loving men is to set themselves free, as free as they want to be. They can most easily achieve that if they clearly proclaim that they want their degrees of liberty only for their own kind of volunteers and are fully tolerant towards all kinds or communities of statist volunteers, doing their own things ONLY to themselves, under personal laws and exterritorial autonomy, until they have finally learnt their lessons about liberty as well. The freedom lovers would best enlighten them by setting practical examples of free societies – all only for their volunteers. In other words, freedom lovers should fully recognize the value of free experimentation and freedom of action – even for their opponents. On that basis they can even collaborate to uphold, between them, exterritorial autonomy for all volunteers. – J.Z., 10.1.08. - RESPONSIBILITY & PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: freedom … exists when people can think and act for themselves.” - H. J. Ehrlich et al, Reinventing Anarchy, p.31. - THOUGHT & ACTION, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT: PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Freedom above all else.” - Dean Smith, Conservatism, p.63. - That is o.k. for those who love it most. Freedom lovers should let others have their own choices, even if and while they prefer something else to freedom, provided, naturally, they do so only at their own risk and expense. E.g. by outlawing communist practices in Russia, among its remaining communists, we do unwittingly drive them towards grasping for power, once again. Let them, alone, suffer under their chosen form of communism and let all others, around them, provide them with instances of free lives and their benefits - then the still all too large number of indoctrinated communists will tend to shrink, perhaps rapidly. Anyhow, there, too, still all too much of a coercive, territorial and collectivist system remains and all its consequences are now blamed on "freedom".  - J.Z., 12.4.00. - PRIORITY, VALUES

FREEDOM: freedom and union…" Gustav Landauer, in: Die Revolution, commenting on Kropotkin's Mutual Aid. - I would rather speak of "freedom and free association". This requires also the freedom for individuals to disassociate themselves or to secede, e.g. from territorially unified nation states and from any kind of trade union. - Freedom in diversity, rather than lack of individual and minority liberties under "unity". - J.Z., 7.4.91, 17.4.00. - Quoted from Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.488. - UNITY, UNIONISM, VOLUNTARY SEPARATISM

FREEDOM: Freedom as being left alone (being independent). - A basic trait of freedom, but one that often gets overlooked, is being left alone, undisturbed by anyone, whenever a person so desires. When, in 1846, Thoreau retired into the wood to build his cabin and live in direct contact with nature and totally self-sufficient, he came across the taxman and was arrested for his refusal to pay a specific levy. He did not want to be part of a society whose government approved of slavery and was engaged in an imperialistic war against Mexico. But he wasn't free to be left in peace, on his own. Since then the intrusions of the state into the lives of individuals have multiplied to the point that, if we (rightly) include this condition ("being left alone") as characterizing a free person, not many people on earth will qualify as such. Nowadays Big Brother is everywhere and where there is Big Brother there are only little children subject to him and bullied by him, and no free human beings. - "Freedom consists both politically, economically and even religiously in being left alone." (F. S. C. Northrop, The Logic of the Sciences and the Humanities, 1947) - Freedom as behaving as one wishes (being different). The free independent individual is likely to be a person who desires to develop his unique qualities in an original way. This means, as a general principle, living and letting people live in their own way, according to their wishes and plans. For instance, practically all the great artists, including Leonardo, were itinerant people, moving from place to place according to their inclinations and desires of exploration. If the first creative person in human history had been stopped from entering the next village because he spoke with a different accent or behaved in a different way, we would still be living in caves, eating raw meat and be, more or less, all the same, namely uncivilised brutes. This has not happened because the ingenuity and tenacity of some human beings has always found a way out of restrictions and confinements. However, the formation of the nation states, with their state schools and state laws, has represented the biggest attempt to make all people, living within certain (artificial) borders, identical to one another (national identity) and inimical to outsiders (hostility towards so-called "foreigners"). Needless to say, imposed identity is starkly opposed to the freedom to be different and is just another subtle form of suppression of liberty. - Freedom as acting in novel ways (being enterprising). Freedom is or might prove/turn out to be a risky business, especially when people start experimenting with new ways of living. The entire existence of the individual could be shaken up (for good or bad) by those experiments. Moreover, the lives of many people could be upset by the free circulation of new ideas (for instance, in the past, the philosophy of the Enlightenment) and the free adoption of new technological devices (for instance the printing press). That is why any state power insists so much on the concepts of security, protection, border controls, regulation of everything in order to avoid changes (especially those coming from the outside) that could compromise its hold on people. Clearly the state rulers do not like very much the freedom of enterprising people; for this reason they depict in terrifying terms the insecurity associated with what they call an "excess" of liberty, and present with various embellishments the safety of conformity. Unfortunately, those who want to get rid of the risky parts of freedom are not in favour of a softly reassuring version of liberty, but of a moronic and demeaning type of servility. - "A being only considers himself independent when he stands on his own feet; and he only stands on his own feet when he owes his existence to himself. A man who lives by the grace of another regards himself as a dependent being." (Karl Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of '44) - The social scientists, almost all of them ardently preaching and actively promoting social regulation, social integration, social protection (note: in their vocabulary, social = state), have made a mockery of the very idea and practice of freedom. In other words, they have discarded the true essence of personal freedom in favour of state fiefdom. Considering that freedom is the essential pre-condition for development, it is interesting to see what the social scientists have made of this concept too. - Gian Piero de Bellis, in Escaping Obscurantism & Overcoming Nonsense - STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Freedom can only be secured by economic means. - J.Z., n.d., rewording: "And freedom can only be secured by political means." - Ron Manners, in bookshop notes. - However, the political means of individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities can be a key to all other liberties. - J.Z., 8.5.00. – Economic means, in this sense, includes “competing governments”, including competing governments in exile, with governmental “public services” being reduced to private enterprise offers, decided upon by sovereign individual consumers. – J.Z., 19.12.08. - ECONOMIC MEANS VS. POLITICAL MEANS, VOLUNTARISM VS. COERCION, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Freedom can only be the whole freedom; a piece of freedom is not the freedom.” - Stirner, in: John Henry Mackay, Max Stirner, S.142. - While it is not ALL of freedom, it is still a PIECE of freedom. Even a piece of bread or cake is better than no bread or cake at all. Admittedly, we should never be content with having achieved just one piece of it or imagine that this would be all that could be attained. - J.Z., 13.4.00. – Even free public lecturers do not, in person, lecture all the time. – J.Z., 19.12.08. - ALL OF FREEDOM, NOT ONLY PART OF IT, BUT ALWAYS ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT ONE WANTS IT FOR ONESELF! PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Freedom consists in the authority to do everything that does not infringe the natural and equal rights of others. - Source?

FREEDOM: Freedom creates this new world, that cannot exist half slave and half free. It will be free.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.262. - The old world has existed for all too long in a mixed state of affairs: mainly unfree and only in parts and temporarily free. - Since she wrote that, it has continued with this compromise, one rather unsatisfactory for freedom lovers. Panarchism proposes another, but "non-compromising" compromise: Full freedom for all those who love full freedom, no matter where they may live and work. Also any degree of freedom or un-freedom for all those individuals who desire them for themselves. Let them separate their interests and activities like the different sports clubs, churches and enterprises do. What works best there and in all other spheres would also work best in the remaining three spheres where panarchic freedom has so far been outlawed, namely in the spheres of politics, economics and social systems. - PIOT, J.Z., 14.4.00.

FREEDOM: Freedom does not mean license for bureaucrats and politicians but freedom of action for ordinary citizens. - J.Z., 2/10/85. - FREEDOM OF ACTION OR LICENSE FOR BUREAUCRATS & POLITICIANS?

FREEDOM: Freedom does not rule.” - Kalenda 1993. - (“Freiheit herrscht nicht.”) - Freedom will have to try to dominate those who persist in attacking it. It should also become the rule for the relationships between people who love liberty. And they should leave the communities of those alone, who do not love it and thus do their things to themselves, and only to themselves. - J.Z., 17.4.00. - RULE OR DOMINATION. PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE EVEN FOR STATISTS, DOING THEIR THINGS ONLY AMONG THEMSELVES

FREEDOM: Freedom does require breaking or repealing or ignoring many territorial laws but means also being obliged to obey the law one has chosen oneself - or would have chosen if one were rational enough. - J.Z., n.d. & 17.12.08. – LAW

FREEDOM: freedom for all manner of people", a really equal society.” - A. L. Morton, ed., Freedom in Arms, Leveler Writings, p.12. – Rather as many different societies as unequal people want for themselves. – J.Z., 17.12.08. - EQUALITY, EGALITARIANISM, DIS.

FREEDOM: Freedom for everyone is the smart way to achieve freedom for me.” - Mike Gunderloy, quoted in THE CONNECTION 117, p.54. – Confine all liberation attempts to freedom lovers. Leave all others undisturbed in their preferred messes! Under panarchism we could freely sort ourselves out in accordance with our individual preferences. – J.Z., 21.12.08.

FREEDOM: Freedom from any central body that is not responsible to the individual because the individual cannot opt out from its services and disservices. An end to compulsory membership and enforced obedience. - J.Z., 19.3.99., 21.1.99. - INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

FREEDOM: Freedom has a thousand charms to show, that slaves, how'ver contented, never know.” - William Cowper, Table Talk, 1782, 260. – Its full charms can only be revealed in full nudity and public view – once volunteers are free to practise it among themselves: Panarchism! – J.Z., 21.12.08.

FREEDOM: Freedom has cost too much blood and agony to be relinquished at the cheap price of rhetoric.” - Thomas Sowell. – However, volunteers should be free to renounce as many of their own liberties and rights as they want to, for as long as they want to. – J.Z., 23.1.08.

FREEDOM: Freedom has nothing to do with politics.” - Hans Habe, Aftermath, p.69. – Nothing with territorial politics but everything with exterritorial and thus tolerant politics. – J.Z., 18.12.08. – POLITICS, PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS, DIS.

FREEDOM: Freedom implies that individuals, no less than their governments, are immune from external or foreign control, unless such control is exercised by an agency - a Federation or Confederation - in which they participate and to which they have given their voluntary allegiance.” - Lord Davis, The Seven Pillars of Peace, London, Green & Co., 1945, p.93. – VOLUNTARISM, INDIVDIUAL CONSENT

FREEDOM: Freedom in every historical instance has been brought on by desperation; there simply wasn't anything else to try. And then followed the miracle which was attributed far more to organization than to freedom.” - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.12. – Freedom needs exterritorially autonomous organizations of volunteers to spread as fast and wide as possible. – J.Z., 22.11.10. - DESPERATION, MIRACLE & ORGANIZATION

FREEDOM: Freedom in the natural state is simply the legitimate (but unguaranteed) claim that each man has a right to be let alone to do whatever he wants - subject, of course, to the limitation that the same right is extended to others.” - Jeffrie G. Murphy, Kant, The Philosophy of Right, p.126.

FREEDOM: Freedom instead of unity. But also freedom to realize unity exterritorially or panarchistically, under personal laws that may restrict many liberties.” - J.Z., 10.4.96, 6.4.00. – Unity is of optimal value only among volunteers. – J.Z., 18.12.08. – UNITY

FREEDOM: Freedom is achieved not by submitting everyone to the same compulsions, but by securing for everyone the possibility of obtaining happiness and contentment in his own fashion. Not equality of men but equality of social conditions under which they live creates true moral unity. All ethical principles of religion, all rights which the constitution of the State guarantees to the citizen lose their meanings so long as men are forced to live under conditions which give to some the prerogative of determining the fate of the others. Under such a condition the best ethical perceptions change into their direct opposite. …” - Rudolf Rocker, Pioneers of American Freedom, 1949, p. 75. – RULERS, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, REPRESENTATION

FREEDOM: Freedom is an indivisible word. If we want to enjoy it, and fight for it, we must be prepared to extend it (*) to everyone, whether they are rich or poor, whether they agree with us or not, no matter what their race or the colour of their skin. - Wendell Wilkie. - First of all, we must fully come to know it, as fully as a human being can come to know anything. – We should even recognize the freedom for volunteers to live with as little or no personal, economic, political and social liberties as they want to have among themselves. - J.Z., 26.12.07. - (*) as a basic option, not as an obligation to make use of all of it. - J.Z., 5.4.89. – DIS., TOLERANCE.

FREEDOM: Freedom is an indivisible word. If we want to enjoy it, and fight for it, we must be prepared to extend it (*) to everyone, whether they are rich or poor, whether they agree with us or not, no matter what their race or the colour of their skin." - Wendell Wilkie. - (*) as a basic option, not as an obligation to make use of all of it. - J.Z., 5.4.89.

FREEDOM: Freedom is fragile and must be protected. To sacrifice it, even as a temporary measure, is to betray it.” - Germaine Greer. – Full freedom would embrace all the rights liberties and institutions required to protect it. With them freedom would not be weak but strong. But if it is in any way compromised and incomplete, as it is e.g. when only partly realized under territorial statism, even in its supposedly best forms of territorial limited governments or territorial kinds of anarchism, then it is, indeed, often and least for a while, weak when compared with militaristic and despotic territorial regimes – because it has then not fully mobilized its own strengths. That it requires exterritorially autonomous communities, societies and competing governments, all for volunteers only, as well as ideal militia forces of volunteers to introduce or maintain individual rights and liberties, comprehensive peace, liberation and revolution programs and e.g. full monetary and financial freedom, to prevent most economic crises, has also not yet been recognized by enough people. – When the condition of “freedom” is still deprived of many important liberties and rights then, indeed, it is fragile and requires much protection or the remaining fractions of freedom will also become suppressed instead of growing up into full freedom. – J.Z., 4.1.08. – Once all genuine individual rights and liberties are known and applied, they are no longer fragile but very influential, even powerful. Mere fragments of liberties and rights, still largely remaining unused, are, naturally, not enough – J.Z., 14.12.11. - ITS PROTECTION OR DEFENCE, MILITIA, COMPREHENSIVE HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION

FREEDOM: Freedom is good for everybody.” – Thomas Larsson, The Race to the Top, The Real Story of Globalization, Cato Institute, 2001, p. 98. – Objectively, yes. But it also falls under the subjective value theory. Moreover, in public education it has gained a bad reputation. Fear of many liberties is still real among all too many. [For instance, in our times, the fear or even hatred of illegal immigrants. – Only relatively few do understand free migration sufficiently to welcome it. Only under Welfare States and in mixed economies can they become a burden. In a free economy they are an additional “resource” that helps to enrich all its participants. It has no legalized monopolists. Under panarchism some panarchies will welcome new members from foreign countries and will achieve full employment for them and their “natives”. Others will not and keep their membership confined in one way or the other. - J.Z., 9.5.12.] Thus each should only get as much liberty as he wants and chooses for himself, in combination with all those rules and restrictions that he still prefers for himself, in his own community of volunteers. Under that condition more and more freedom will, gradually, be more widely accepted, individual by individual and community by community. – J.Z., 28.9.07. - FREEDOM IS GOOD FOR EVERYBODY

FREEDOM: Freedom is indivisible and freedom compromised is freedom lost.” - Carl A. Keyser, THE FREEMAN, 7/72. - Every contract contains some compromises - and no contract is eternally binding. Under freedom individuals can opt out of all contracts, even the implied ones with governments. - J.Z., 13.4.00. - INDIVISIBLE & COMPROMISES, DIS.

FREEDOM: Freedom is indivisible"- like peace.” - Solzhenitsyn, interview, March1976, by Michael Charlton, on BBC-TV program PANORAMA. - Some freedom and peace are better than none, more are still better and all for all everywhere would be best. All forcefully upheld State borders prove how divisible the practice of freedoms is and how threatened peace remains. Rather some limited peace, with a few dozen minor wars in the world, than total and world-wide wars. Rather some limited dictatorships spread over the world than a single and world-wide one. Full freedom and peace will have to be gained step by step - by those who appreciate liberties, and rights and the degrees of peace they can establish and should establish. - PIOT, J.Z., 11.4.00. The most important steps towards world-wide and lasting peace would, probably, be the establishment of the first panarchy, the first fully free banking and the first comprehensive instance of voluntary taxation. – J.Z., 9.5.12. - INDIVISIBLE, DIS.

FREEDOM: Freedom is not a narrow idea.” - Jasper the Jester, THE CONNECTION 122, p.100. – It embraces all rightful and rational options for their believers and all wrongful and irrational options for their believers. – J.Z., 21.12.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: Freedom is not only good in moderation but even in extremes: E.g., it would be beneficial in the long run if at least some people would individually choose a condition of voluntary slavery for themselves - for a while, until they and others have become sufficiently enlightened about it. - J.Z., 28.3.82. – Not merely territorial rulers should decide for all others regarding war or peace but each individual, being a potential victim of war, should be free to decide upon his or her participation in war, allies and enemies and enjoy a neutrality option. If the remainng war hawks were then to kill off only each other, I for one would not shed a single tear for them. At least the conscientious objection option should be greatly expanded and the peace lovers should be suitably armed, organized and trained for effective resistance against a minority of war mongers. They should proclaim quite rightful war- and peace aims, in a trustworthy way, something, which the territorial rulers always failed to do, and could thereby not only reduce and shorten warlike actions but, possibly, prevent them altogether. – J.Z., 9.5.12. - MODERATION, RADICALISM, EXTREMISM, VOLUNTARY SLAVERY, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Freedom is not possible under centralized authority.” - Miller Upton, THE FREEMAN, 9/74. - Not even if there existed only one government in the world, a limited world government? For me it would not go far enough - or, in some ways, too far, but the limited government advocates should be pleased with it. - J.Z., 15.4.00. – It is not so much the centralization that is wrongful and harmful but the territorialism and its coercion and monopolism that are involved in conventional and imposed centralization. – Centralization on a voluntary basis is quite another matter. – J.Z., 19.12.08, 9.5.12. – PANARCHISM, DIS., VOLUNTARISM, TERRITORIALISM, AUTHORITY & CENTRALIZATION

FREEDOM: freedom is not the right to do as one pleases but as one ought.” - Ronald Conway, QUADRANT, 4/76. – At least we ought to respect the genuine individual rights and liberties of others, to the extent that they have clearly laid claim to them. – J.Z., 22.11.10. - RIGHT, DUTY & OUGHT

FREEDOM: Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better.” - Albert Camus. - Or to DO better. - J.Z., 2.7.00. - And to do better or worse, but always only at the own risk and expense. - J.Z., 26. 4. 06. - PROGRESS, CHANCES, OPPORTUNITIES, DIS.

FREEDOM: Freedom is rarely taken from men and women who are jealous of it. Quite to the contrary - they give it away eagerly for something they want more.” - Allan C. Brownfeld, THE FREEMAN, 9/75, p. 517. - One might add: Marriage is the most common example - but only jokingly, since it is voluntary and divorce is hardly restricted nowadays. - There is so far no free choice for individuals among all kinds of governments and free societies, nor the free and unilateral individual secession option for them. - J.Z., 12/75 & 10.4.00, 9.5.12.

FREEDOM: Freedom is the absolute right of all adult men and women to seek permission for their actions only from their own conscience and reason, and to be determined in their actions only by their own will, and consequently to be responsible only to themselves, and then to the society to which they belong, but only insofar as they have made a free decision to belong to it.” - Bakunin, Gesammelte Werke, III, 9. - Seldes. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM

FREEDOM: Freedom is the absolute right of all adult men and women not to have to seek other permissions for their actions than those of their own conscience and their own reason, the right to determine their actions only by their own will and, consequently, to be responsible, firstly towards themselves, then towards the society to which they belong, but only insofar as they gave their free consent to belong to it.” - Max Nettlau. - For me that is one of the best definitions. - J.Z., 9.4.00. – Note that it is almost identical with the above definition by Bakunin. - J.Z.

FREEDOM: Freedom is the greatest possible restraint upon licence and violence, power and coercion, war and oppression. - J.Z., 23.2.97. - Fully realized that full freedom does away with the monopolies of territorial governments and with all other monopolies so far legally upheld by territorial governments. - J.Z., 14.6.00, 22.11.10. - FREEDOM THE GREATEST RESTRAINT - UPON POWER & MONOPOLIES

FREEDOM: Freedom is the negation of any kind of government.” - Pelletier, in LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, No. 3. – Freedom is also represented by “competing governments” that rule only exterritorially over their own volunteers, according to the degrees of freedom and government that they do want for themselves. – J.Z., 17.12.08. – PANARCHISM, GOVERNMENT, COMPETING GOVERNMENT

FREEDOM: Freedom is the only thing you cannot have without also granting it to others." - SOURCE?

FREEDOM: Freedom is the option of succeeding or failing because we did or did not make a wise choice. No computer, guideline, or political system should dictate the choice.” - Ruth E. Hampton, THE FREEMAN, 11/75, 644. - Membership in a political system should also be a free choice - for individuals, not just for majorities. - J.Z., 14.4.00. - Otherwise "consent" and "voting" become meaningless.  - J.Z., 8.5.00. – CHOICE, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Freedom is the possibility to doubt, the opportunity to make mistakes, to search and to experiment. It is the option to answer "no!" to any authority, whether it be a literary, artistic, philosophical, religious, social or even political authority.” - Silone. - A mere protest is not enough to assure your liberty. You must be safe to say "no!" and must be free to act differently. - J.Z., 9.4.00. - SAYING NO

FREEDOM: Freedom is the right to choose, the right to create for oneself the alternatives of choice. Without the possibility of choice and the exercise of choice a man is not a man but a member, an instrument, a thing.” - Archibald Macleish, in "A Declaration of Freedom". - There are many pro-freedom sayings which clearly do indicate the rightfulness of exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities or experimental freedom in the political, economic and social spheres but few of those who expressed them first or who quote them do, in their minds, include these panarchic freedoms or choices as well. Most remain addicted to the territorial model, even if confined to limited governments or small anarchistic settlements. - J.Z., 4.7.00. – CHOICE, PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” - George Orwell, The Road to Wigan Pier, 1937. - It goes much beyond freedom of expression and information, namely to freedom to act responsibly and independently, alone or with like-minded people, under full exterritorial autonomy. Then people, who will not listen to good ideas or read about them, will soon be confronted with many successful experiments that demonstrate how particular liberties do work to the advantage of those who realized them among themselves. Then, step by step, even the most ignorant, prejudiced and dumb will tend to adopt, gradually, all those liberties which obviously pay their practitioners or all those they are capable of applying. Even dumb people can see advantages in electric lights and can turn on a light switch and can have them installed. - J.Z., 8.4.00. - FREEDOM, CONFINED TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: Freedom is to be above, not under the law. - Or: Freedom is to be above the law, not under it. - J.Z. 8.8.72. - "Freedom under the law" - is a rather sick joke - if one takes the sheer number of laws, their pages and their quality or lack of quality into consideration. - Herbert Spencer's project to prove the impracticability of all legal interventionism from the historical tradition of legislation has still not been realized. Not even the proposals of Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson on introducing sunset clauses into all laws and regulations have been realized. Shall such proposals and personal law and voluntary taxation proposals have to wait for further centuries for their realization? - Let individuals secede from laws, jurisdictions, constitutions, States, armies, unions, all compulsory institutions, as long as they are peaceful citizen, just doing their own things to and for themselves. - J.Z., 11.4.00. – LAWS BY CHOICE FOR INDIVIDUALS, PERSONAL LAW VS. TERRITORIAL LAWS, CHOSEN VS. IMPOSED LAWS.

FREEDOM: Freedom is within the reach of the “stockholder-citizen”. - J.Z., 6.10.76. - Term used in ANALOG 8/76, p.108. - See PEACE PLANS 19c.

FREEDOM: Freedom means diversity for all - according to individual choice in all spheres, including those of political, economic and social organization, laws and institutions, even though this can be fully realized only on the basis of exterritorial autonomy. - J.Z., 10.7.86, 9.5.12. – FREEDOM FOR ALL & DIVERSITY, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Freedom means only to be able to do at any time a) what is right and reasonable and b) what is irrational but is done  only at one's own expense or risk. - It means that one will be held responsible for one's actions by others only when one has intentionally, negligently or accidentally infringed upon the equal individual liberties, rights and responsibilities of others. In other words, freedom needs no limitations but arbitrary actions do. - J.Z., 7.10.85, 9.5.12.

FREEDOM: Freedom means the right to disagree, to act differently at the own expense and risk, after withdrawing, opting out or seceding from others and their groups. It means freedom to experiment with the own ideas, plans, systems, institutions and beliefs, even while the majority of other people and of the experts do disagree. The only agreement that must be reached is that a free experiments is undertaken at the own expense and risk. That is relatively easy to determine. - J.Z., 20.9.00, 30.1.02, 9.5.12. – DISASSOCIATION, VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM

FREEDOM: Freedom means to refuse absorption by ‘systems’." - Peter L. Berger, Movement & Revolution, Doubleday, 1970, quoted in a review in THE UNIVERSITY BOOKMAN, Spring 71, p.69. – Absorption in territorial systems. Absorption in an exterritorially autonomous system of volunteers, which one has individually chosen or even established for oneself, is quite another matter. – J.Z., 18.12.08. – TERRITORIALISM, SYSTEMS, PANARCHISM, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

FREEDOM: Freedom means voluntarism in every sphere. Especially regarding State and community memberships, exchange media and value standards, the defence of individual rights. Many still quite legal opportunities for voluntary actions have been left unused or underutilized, like e.g. the use of microfiche, floppy disks and CDs for ALL pro-freedom writings. - J.Z. 8.5.00. – CD-PROJECT, VOLUNTARISM, LIBERTARIAN LIBRARY, ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING

FREEDOM: Freedom means you have to make your own choices.” - Kelvin Throop, ANALOG 8/85, p. 131. – But your choice might be to leave many choices on your life to others! – J.Z., 17.12.08. – STATISM, DECIDOPHOBIA, CHOICE, DIS.

FREEDOM: Freedom means you must be free to speak your mind or to keep silent, to act or to remain passive, to associate or to remain alone, to obey or to disobey, to progress or to regress - within the limits of natural law. - J.Z. - CHOICE, ORDER, PANARCHY

FREEDOM: Freedom means your solution proposal can be tried out freely among voluntarily. - J.Z. 28.4.76, 21.12.08. , SOLUTIONS, ANSWERS, IDEAS, FREEDOM OF ACTION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Freedom means”, among other things: “No, I won’t!” - Eric Frank Russell, somewhere. Also: Yes, I may – and I can, if I want to! – J.Z., 25.12.04. - And do work hard enough to achieve it. With the panarchist platform almost anybody could become one's ally, although one might disagree with them on most other points, differently settled within each panarchy of volunteers. - J.Z., 29.9.11, 9.5.12. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CHOICE, NO! INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, DIS.

FREEDOM: Freedom must be absolute. Otherwise it is valueless.” - Popular opinion. It coexists with another popular opinion: “Total freedom means chaos!” - Are freedom of speech, press, assembly and association, freedom of trade and migration valueless if not accompanied by all other liberties? - "We look with deep aversion upon the way primitive peoples are attached to their lawless liberty - a liberty which enables them to fight incessantly rather than subject themselves to the restraint of the law to be established by themselves; in short, to prefer wild freedom to a reasonable one. We look upon such an attitude as raw, uncivilized, and an animalic degradation of humanity. Therefore, one should think, civilized peoples (each united in a state) would hasten to get away from such a depraved state as soon as possible. Instead, each state insists upon seeing the essence of its majesty (for popular majesty is a paradox) in this, that it is not subject to any external coercion. The luster of its rulers consists in this, that many thousands are at his disposal to be sacrificed for a cause which is of no concern to them, while he himself is not exposed to any danger…" - Kant, Eternal Peace, in: Carl J. Friedrich, The Philosophy of Kant, p.442. - Alas, this is a statist and legal notion of liberty too, not the best way to describe the opposite to the arbitrary freedom of savages: freedom among enlightened and civilized people with ideas similar enough for them to want to establish a voluntary community for themselves. - J.Z. 7.4.00. – The freedom and rights of the others always indicate the limits of the own, even while we are greatly expanding our individual choices. – J.Z., 19.12.08. - ABSOLUTE FREEDOM? ERRORS, OBJECTIONS AND PREJUDICES, DIS.

FREEDOM: freedom not only works, but is the only thing which works.” - Joseph P. Martino, Defending a Free Society, p.131. - If he hadn't copyrighted it, I would have micro-fiched this work. How many other freedom writings are still unpublished or out of print because of copyrights claims? - J.Z., 10.4.00. - Totalitarianism also "works", at least for a while, enough to keep totalitarians in the saddle, for all too long. The same can be said for all other kinds of territorial governments - although governments and free societies that are only exterritorially autonomous would work much better for all their members. - J.Z., 8.5.00. – Alas, terror and monopolism as well as wrongful powers do “work” also, in their way, - J.Z., 14.12.11. - FREEDOM WORKS

FREEDOM: Freedom of action avoids conflicts about minority and majority aspirations. - J.Z., 96, 99. - It renders election campaigns and political parties, politicians and territorial States superfluous. It can assure peace, justice, freedom and prosperity for us, even life extension and intelligence expansion and the stars. But, do we bother to radically insist upon it and ponder and calculate its consequences and plan for it? Do we even bother to make use of all the powerful freedom of action opportunities that are still quite legal for us? - J.Z., 8.5.00. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, Q.

FREEDOM: Freedom of conscience, of choice, of action, freedom to experiment in the political, economic and social spheres as well as in all others. - J.Z., 30.7.98, 14.6.00. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Freedom rests, and always will, on individual responsibility, individual integrity, individual effort, individual courage, and individual religious faith. It does not rest in Washington. It rests with you and me.” - Ed Lipscomb, quoted in THE FREEMAN, 7/72. – Also in: – THE FREE MAN'S ALMANAC, compiled by Leonard E. Read, entry under April 17. - Even while individual secessionism and panarchistic communities are suppressed, we are responsible for this situation to the extent that we do not even question and criticize this condition. – J.Z., 18.12.08. – RESPONSIBILITY, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Freedom to do as we please, so long as we all agree with each other and remain in a state of harmony with the cosmos, is no freedom at all. It is little better than a religion in which faith in a deity has been replaced by faith in some supposed truths of the human spirit. It is a single-party system that is as superficially benign, yet as subtly authoritarian, as Disneyland.” - Gregory Benford, Reactionary Utopias, FAR FRONTIERS, Winter 85, p.227. - Freedom means: I won't. It means I may make another choice. It also means that I may make mistakes. It does not exclude voluntary associations and voluntary communities in which all decisions are made by unanimous consent. Disneyland is not imposed upon anybody, except, to some extent, upon parents wanting to spoil their children. I may enter it, upon paying its price and if I did, which I have never done, I may freely leave it at any time. Does territorial despotism grant such liberties? - Religions, to the extent that they have recognized and respected the faiths of others, or their lack of faith, by subscribing to religious liberty or tolerance, have actually set an enormous example for panarchism: volunteer communities that practise their own political, economic and social systems under full exterritorial autonomy. - Instead of being no freedom of all, this is the greatest degree of freedom, which human beings, as they are, with all their flaws, can attain for themselves and can wish for themselves, as rational beings. Only in ignorance or upon prejudices would they reject this kind of freedom for themselves and for others. - J.Z., 17.4.00. - CONSENT, IDEOLOGIES, INTENTIONAL COMMUNITIES, UTOPIAN COLONIES, PANARCHISM, OBJECTIONS, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM OR TOLERANCE

FREEDOM: Freedom to get away and start fresh, … “- Poul Anderson, The Avatar, p.97. - Without having to emigrate, leaving family, friends, jobs and many possessions behind, and having, perhaps, to acquire a new language in another country, i.e., by individual secession and new association with an exterritorially autonomous community of like-minded volunteers. - J.Z., n.d. – EMIGRATION, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, DIS.

FREEDOM: Freedom under territorial governments isn't and cannot be genuine and complete enough freedom. - J.Z., 21.12.93, 18.12.08, 22.11.10. – TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Freedom works. Only freedom does. But let everybody be free to find that out for himself - if he risks nothing but his own freedom in his experiments. - J.Z., 23.2.75. – Terror, totalitarianism, nuclear “weapons”, despotism, wrongful laws etc. do also work, in their way, unfortunately. – J.Z., 14.12.11. – At least as long as all freedom and justice options have not yet been fully recognized and utilized against the authoritarians, dictatorships and totalitarians, the fundamentalises, fanatics, aggressors and criminals.  – J.Z., 9.5.12. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, MILITIA, HUMAN RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, DESERTION, PRISONERS OF WAR TREATMENT, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, RESISTANCE

FREEDOM: Freedom, alas, is more often given away than taken away.” - Allan C. Brownfeld, THE FREEMAN, 9/75. - Instead of complaining about this, we should work towards panarchistically institutionalizing the option of giving away one's own freedom, as long as one can stand it, by seceding and joining a no-freedom or little-freedom society of one's own choice. Naturally, the other side of the coin is to let all freedom lovers secede as well and join free societies of their choice. In this case one has neither to win an election nor a revolution in order to get what one wants for oneself. Unfortunately, to my knowledge, THE FREEMAN has never clearly advocated this option, since it remains addicted to limited governments, still unlimited in their territorial form, with an exclusive monopoly for that territory and all its inhabitants. It took this stand in spite of its comprehensive attack on all other monopolies and forms of compulsion. With some the love of freedom goes a long way but not all the way. - J.Z., 14.4.00. – We are not born into a condition of full freedom and thus adapt all too much to the lack of it. – J.Z., 20.12.08. - FREEDOM, GIVEN AWAY RATHER THAN TAKEN AWAY, ADAPTATION, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Freedom, as decentralized as possible, is the best option, including the freedom to choose a condition of voluntary slavery for oneself. - J.Z., 1990. - PANARCHISM, DECENTRALIZATION, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM & VOLUNTARY COMMUNITIES

FREEDOM: Freedom, in a political context, means freedom from government coercion. It does not mean freedom from the landlord, from the employer, or freedom from the laws of nature, which do not provide men with automatic prosperity. It means freedom from the coercive power of the state - and nothing else.” - Ayn Rand. - O'Neill, Ayn Rand, p.46. – What about freedom from the coercive powers of a church, a union, a criminal gang or a local war-lord? - J.Z., 8.4.00. - Alas, she did not want to destroy the power of territorial statism but merely reform it towards “limited” government, while trying to ridicule the very idea of “competing governments” which she had, obviously, not understood although many of her own statements should have led her in this direction. – J.Z., 26.12.07. - FROM GOVERNMENT & STATE POWER

FREEDOM: Funny thing about me - I like to make my own decisions.” - Free after film: Wagons West, which has also an "us" and a "we" version of this saying. - J.Z., n.d. - Unfortunately, on all too many important subjects, e.g. on taxation, currency questions, war and peace, and membership in States or free societies, too many people have not yet insisted on making their own decisions. - J.Z., 8.5.00. – DECISIONS, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Generations of people wasting their lives away buying crutches because they'd been brainwashed into thinking they were cripples.” - James P. Hogan, Code of the Life Maker, p.85. – Territorial governments are very expensive and inefficient crutches. – J.Z., 23.11.10. - FEAR OF FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Genuine merit consists according to Sybel in full opportunities for all people of talent and merit. This overlooks that this is at least as well possible in a good monarchy as in a good democracy.” – Wilhelm Roscher, Grundlagen, par. 88. - Is there such a thing as a good monarchy or a good democracy? - Only if all their members were free to choose it and if their choice applied only to themselves. - J.Z., 4.4.00. – OPPORTUNITIES, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM

FREEDOM: give the individual the freedom to do with his resources what will best meet his own goals.” - R. C. Batten, THE FREEMAN, 3/73. - Replace "give" by: "leave"! - J.Z. – Societies of volunteers should have the same right, under full exterritorial autonomy. – This freedom can hardly be rightfully ‘given” but it can be rightfully taken, in a genuine revolution, which leaves all its dissenters to go on doing their own things either for or to themselves. - J.Z., 22.11.10. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, DIS.

FREEDOM: Government cannot give man freedom but can only take it away from him.” - Robert Charlton, FREEDOM MAGAZINE, Spring 74. – But a panarchistic, voluntary or competing government can concede to its volunteers as little or as much freedom as they want for themselves. – J.Z., 17.12.08, 24.11.10. GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: His war on the Hegemony had been a fight for Democracy, which to him had simply meant freedom, and now he knew that the deepest meaning of freedom was not freedom from any particular tyranny or indeed from tyranny itself, but freedom to. And for men to be truly free, that "to" had to be open-ended, had to refer to every possibility that could ever exist. Freedom was the right of every man to fulfill his own private destiny, and there were at least as many destinies as there were men. Freedom was infinity. And only the stars were a concrete form of this theoretical freedom. In an infinite universe, Man would have the room to become infinite himself, and, being infinite, perhaps immortal. And he himself, personally, beyond the Hegemony at last, would at last be able to breathe free - not in some distant dream, but right here, right now! …” - Norman Spinrad, Agent of Chaos, 168/169. - As if the diverse options of freedom could only be practised planet-wide! That is one of the many wrong assumptions in most SF novels. - J.Z. - We do need an essential freedom FROM: Namely, the freedom from compulsory membership and territorial monopolies and sovereignties and powers over us. Only then can we fully develop our freedom TO our potential. - J.Z., 1993. – Neal Stephenson, The Diamond Age, is a recent exception. According to Gene Callahan, The Right to Exit, An Apologetic for Panarchism, in “Panarchy – Essays in the new political philosophy”, Dec. 2008, p. 37, it is, probably, the first panarchistic SF novel.

FREEDOM: How can a populace, unaccustomed to freedom in small concerns (*), learn to use it temperately in great affairs? What resistance can be offered to tyranny in a country where each individual is weak, and where the citizens are not united by a common interest?” - Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America. - This problem cannot be solved at once, collectively, but only gradually and individually. Allow all those volunteers, who think that they can handle more freedom, in small or large affairs, do so at their own expense and risk. Let individuals secede fully from territorialism and recognize and deal with full exterritorial autonomy for themselves and others. Then, gradually, via rightful one-man revolutions, voluntarism and exterritorial autonomy, alternative institutions will take over, each as fast as it can, in accordance with knowledge and abilities of its members. One can never rehabilitate or reform all, instantly, forcefully, against their will and contrary to their prejudices. We have seen what resulted when e.g. communist fanatics tried to make atheism compulsory. Even where it is optional, its progress has been very slow. But there it did progress, rightfully and rationally. - J.Z., n.d., 8.4.00, 9.5.12. – (*) Often they are already used to freedom in small concerns or relatively trivial ones, but not to freedom in large and important matters that involve thousands to millions of others. They are even disinclined to think about them. – J.Z., 14.12.11.

FREEDOM: How can one persuade people who distrust it to come to trust in freedom? How could I give you confidence that you, too, could live as a free person in every respect - if only you are not aggressive or dishonest? Perhaps the best approach is to admit my own ignorance and that of most people on most of the complicated activities of a modern civilization. Instead of further discouraging us, this ignorance should encourage us. For under the system of division of labor it is not required that everybody becomes a "know-it-all". What is required is only that you remain free to pick and choose your job, your goods and services, your supplier or cooperator, your consultant or expert, all at fair, that is freely and voluntarily agreed-upon market prices. This rule applies to all services, including all public services. All you really need is the ability to recognize a bargain when you see it, or freedom to be advised on it, and the freedom to accept it. Neither you nor I could run a post office or a railway. But both of us know that there are some people in this country who could run either of these services better than they are run now and also competitively. Good postal service is not impossible, it is merely outlawed. One has to stress that there are among us many people to run such services, not just one. It would be as wrong to give any of them an exclusive monopoly to run any service as it would be to give a monopoly to any incompetent person. No, let us have, instead, free enterprise and free consumer choice in everything. - J.Z., n.d. & 10.4.00. - Well, not for the supply and use of ABC mass murder devices. But where would the customers for them be, how could they be safely constructed and maintained, when the territorial targets disappear and government financing and protection for them? - J.Z., 9.5.00, 9.5.12. - IGNORANCE & TRUST IN FREEDOM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, DIVISION OF LABOR, PRICING & PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: How can they be reconciled? By not trying to reconcile them at all; by letting each party govern itself - in its own way and at its own expense. Theocracy, if you want it. Freedom should even extend to the right not to be free and should include it.” – de Puydt, Panarchy. - RECONCILIATION, PARTIES & PANARCHY

FREEDOM: I agree that freedom is not a panacea. Nothing is. But freedom is an essential ingredient which is rarely thought about until it is being lost. Perhaps that explains my constant emphasis.” - Robert LeFevre, LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Fall 78. - If freedom is seen to include the possibility of voluntarily chosen degrees of un-freedom, or of panarchism, then it comes to a framework that embraces all options that are not victimizing involuntary victims. Insofar, all subjective and objective panaceas or utopias or ideal societies would be included, as options. But full freedom (without the un-freedom option for individuals) as a prescription for all people, as they are now, is certainly not a panacea but, rather, quite unrealistic except for the better freedom lovers. - J.Z., 11.4.00. - PANACEAS, PANARCHISM, META-UTOPIA

FREEDOM: I am convinced that a great future is in store for them provided they continue to be allowed to breathe the bracing air of freedom and, indeed, is it so difficult to permit men to experiment, to feel their way, to choose, to make mistakes, to correct them, to learn, to work together, to manage their own property and their own interests, to act for themselves, at their own risk and peril, on their own responsibility? Do we not see that this is what makes them men? Must we always start with the fatal premise that all those who govern are guardians and all the governed are wards?” - Frederic Bastiat, Economic Harmonies, Van Nostrand, 1964 edition, p. 382. – Did he really have even competing panarchies in mind or only the still all too limited economic liberties? – J.Z., 22.11.10. – EXPERIMENTATION VS. TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: I am free only in so far as I recognize the humanity and respect the liberty of all the men surrounding me.” - M. A. Bakunin, Dieu et l'état, 1871. - Even if they choose for themselves quite different principles and institutions to live under! - J.Z., 12.7.86. - HUMANITY, RESPECT, RECOGNITION

FREEDOM: I am free only when all human beings around me - men and women alike - are equally free. The freedom of others, far from limiting or negating my liberty, is on the contrary its necessary condition and confirmation.” - Michael Bakunin, The Knouto-German Empire, 1871. - What good is freedom to exchange for me if no one is around or reachable with whom to exchange? What good are freedom of speech or press when there are no listeners or readers around or easily enough reachable? - J.Z., 9.5.00. – However, not all need to be equally free if only that is done by individual choice. One can still somewhat trade and communicate with people who have chosen less than full liberty for themselves. – Actually, these are all the kinds of international trades and communications that we have now and have had for many centuries. – J.Z., 23.11.10. – The different countries, wioth their different populations, laws and institutions are equal only in their territorialism! – We do have extensive trading with Red China, which is still, politically, a totalitarian country, even while it has introduced a great degree of economic freedom, but exclusing important parts, like full monetary and financial freedom and competing land title systems. - J.Z., 9.5.12. - EQUAL FREEDOM

FREEDOM: I am free to do what I will, but I must not abdicate my own liberty.” - St. Paul, Corinthians, The Bible. - One should add: or disregard that of others. However, one may temporarily, until one learns better, abdicate one's liberty by joining e.g. a communist community of volunteers. - How can e.g. 1/3rd or even less, of a truth pass as the full truth for close to 2,000 years? - J.Z., 4.4.89. – Q.

FREEDOM: I am truly free only when all people around me, men and women, are as free as I am. The freedom of others is far removed from being a restriction or a denial of my own freedom. On the contrary, it is its necessary precondition and confirmation … My own personal freedom, in this way assured through the freedom of all, stretches into infinity.” - Michael Bakunin, 1814-1876. - He, too, omitted here to consider the option to choose a condition of un-freedom for oneself. - J.Z., n.d.

FREEDOM: I do what I want to do, and I don't give a damn what you think.” - Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus I, p.257. - Quite o.k. - as long as you do it with your life, your property and that of your followers only. - J.Z., 13.10.08. - WILL, WANT, NEED, POWER

FREEDOM: I don't have all the answers - but free men have.” - J.Z., 10.12.75. – Or they will find them. – J.Z., 17.12.08. – ANSWERS, DIS., EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: I have been thinking in a desultory way about civil liberty lately. I doubt that one in 100,000 of us has anything remotely like the conception of it that you and I have. I believe that for the immense majority of people liberty means only the system and the administrators they are used to. What do you think of that idea? - For instance, the Scots clansmen had their feudal or semifeudal chieftains, who certainly pushed them around plenty enough, and made them sweat. The English came and ran out the chiefs, and took over the job of pushing the clansmen around exactly as before; and then the clansmen put up a tremendous roar about losing their liberties, which, in your view and mine they never had. Isn't it so? I don't know but what (J.Z.: that?) the great libertarian movements might profitably be examined in the light of this notion. I know it must have been dam' disagreeable to the Gauls to have le vieux César Brisetout busting in on them, and all that; and as a matter of sentiment I'm in favour of Arminius, Ambiorix, Ariovistus, Vercingetorix, & Co.; but what I should like to know is, how much actual liberty did the Gauls lose? Or again today, if King George or Hirohito or any one else conquered us, ran Franklin and his banditti into the Potomac and put us under the identical regime that we are now under, we would raise a frightful row about the loss of our liberties, when actually we were losing none. - This idea seems to reach pretty far in one direction at least. If people grow up in adjustment to a system and are told that they have their liberties under it, the natural thing would be for them to think they have, for they would have nothing to true the statement up by, and it would not occur to them to test the statement by an exercise of imagination.” - A. J. Nock, to Paul Palmer, January 31, 1944. - Panarchies would demonstrate some very successful alternatives – and much more free and prosperous models almost everywhere. - J.Z., 25.4.00, 9.5.12. - STATISM, GOVERNMENTS, FREEDOM FIGHTERS, NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE, LIBERTY, INDIVIDUALS RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, IDEOLOGIES, PREJUDICES

FREEDOM: I recall one ten-second bit on MacBride on the network news in which his position was summed up as "absolute freedom for absolutely everyone". - I can't imagine a better way to put the libertarian position in such a short time…” - Erwin S. "Filthy Pierre" Strauss, THE CONNECTION 66, p.60. – Absolute freedom, for everyone? Including arbitrariness and whims towards others, or: equal rights and equal liberties for all who respect such rights and liberties? Moreover, should all liberties be forced upon everyone? Should no one be free to choose less than full liberty for himself and like-minded people? Should e.g. any form of “sexual freedom” be forced upon anybody? Should atheism be enforced? To everybody only as many liberties and rights as he or she wishes to use undisturbed! – J.Z., 23.11.10. – Q., DIS.

FREEDOM: I see and I forget. I hear and I remember. I do and I understand.” - Chinese Proverb. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

FREEDOM: I seek no quarrel with those whose conviction it is that individual freedom is a burden from which they would be relieved. I do not, however, wish them to relieve me of my freedom because they believe that my freedom should seem onerous to me.” - Ray L. Colvard, THE FREEMAN, 1/73. – To each only as many liberties and rights as they are individually willing to accept or use. E.g., no one is to be forced to become a public speaker or writer, to join an association or to establish one or to attend a meeting or to arm himself and train himself with a gun. – J.Z., 23.11.10. - TOLERANCE, FREEDOM OF ACTION & PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: I want to … stand upon free ground with men who're free!” - Goethe, Faust. - If we could freely and permanently live e.g. in Zeppelins, on ships, in submarines, in space stations or artificial planets, I would not mind such alternatives. In essence not the ground, a territory or country ought to be free but people and their associates, to the extent that they want to be free. - J.Z., 12.4.00. – The term “free” does not apply to land, air or space but only to the relationship between moral and rational beings. – J.Z., 21.12.08. – DIS.

FREEDOM: I want to be impressed by what George Sand called "the ideal life, which is only man's normal life as he shall some day come to know it." A great sentence, that, and a great truth.” - Albert Jay Nock, A Journal of These Days, June 1932 - December 1933, William Morrow, 1934, 59. - Man will be truly man or human only once he is fully free, i.e. can practise all his individual rights and liberties undisturbed. - Until then he is restrained by various chains, cages and prisons in form of territorial nations. No one, who is under such restraints, can be and act at his best. - J.Z., 4.5.00, 9.5.12.

FREEDOM: I wish men to be free - as much from mobs as kings - from you as me.” - Lord Byron, Don Juan. - Then recognize their right to exterritorial autonomy under personal laws, introduced by individual secessionism! - Instead, he fought for the "national freedom" of e.g. Greeks, or territorial national sovereignty, which then and now largely suppresses many individual human rights. - J.Z., 6.4.89, 7.4.00.

FREEDOM: I'm a firm believer in the 5th freedom - the freedom to go to hell in your own way.” - A. Bertram Chandler, Spartan Planet, p.372. - " … the most sacred freedom of mankind. Which is? Freedom to go to hell in your own way.” - A. Bertram Chandler, Gateway to Never, p.194.

FREEDOM: If only a small minority are legally allowed "to act" (i.e., to exercise power), then the society as a whole will be limited to the vision of those individuals who make up that minority.” - Central News Service, INFORMATION PAPER II, THE CONNECION 114, p.52. - FREEDOM OF ACTION & PANARCHISM, LEADERSHIP, PARTIES, POLITICS, MINORITY RULE VS. SELF-RULE, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTS, RULERS, PRESIDENTS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, CENTRALIZATION

FREEDOM: If you want to be free, there is but one way; it is to guarantee an equally full measure of freedom to all your neighbors. There is no other.” - Carl Schurz, quoted in George Seldes, The Great Quotations. - We ought also to grant them them also the liberty to be as unfree as they want to be. Otherwise, they will tend to pull us down, too. - PIOT, J.Z., 13.4.00, 9.5.12. – If you want your kind of Panarchy for yourself then you must conceded to the others their kinds of panarchies. – J.Z., 19.12.08. - EQUAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: in a world divided for the most part between those who are hostile to freedom, and those who are indifferent to it.” - William F. Buckley Jr., Execution Eve, Berkeley Publishing, 1972-75, p.480. - Let them separate themselves from each other, constitutionally, legally, juridically, but not territorially. Let each have the own ideals autonomously realized in exterritorial models of volunteer communities. Then each can do the own things undisturbed, without having to gain or retain power over dissenters. - J.Z., 9.5.00. - HOSTILITY & INDIFFERENCE

FREEDOM: In the CITY PRESS, Commander Hyde Burton demands a "complete review of the present 24,000 regulations restricting the economic freedom that England enjoyed in 1913."- It is a pity that he did not go further and revive that wise proposal of Jefferson to restrict the operation of all laws to 30 years, and of regulations to a few years only.” - Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, August 11951. - Better still, let individuals opt out from all territorial laws selected ones and apply their own revised body of laws within their own volunteer communities, under personal laws, exterritorially quite autonomously. - J.Z., 4.4.00. – The call for personal laws only, all only for communities of volunteers, goes much further than this proposal, which is still a territorial one. – J.Z., 9.5.12. - RESTRICTIONS, REGULATIONS, ECONOMIC LIBERTY, SUNSET LAWS, TIME LIMITS FOR LEGISLATION, PERSONAL LAWS

FREEDOM: In times of war or insurrection the freedom of the individual becomes, with good reason, subordinated to the safety of society as a whole.” - Popular opinion. - Precisely during wars is the upholding of certain liberties more important than ever. Nor should one assume that wars are conducted as a rule for the safety of society as a whole. On the contrary, they are among the greatest dangers to all societies, especially since the invention of mass extermination devices or anti-people "weapons". A whole book or xyz volumes could and should be filled with popular wrong notions on liberty. To end wars, as Thomas Moore suggested, tyrannicide might have to be re-introduced, military insurrections against despots should be encouraged. The monopoly of governments to make treaties and alliances and to decide upon war, peace and disarmament ought to be discontinued. The people should be armed against their governments, rather than the governments against the people. Free people, their communities and their military organizations: Citizen soldiers should decide about war and peace and the destruction of anti-people "weapons". Economic liberties, e.g. free trade and free migration, could prevent many wars, like e.g. the clash between Japan and the U.S.A. during WW II. So could individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities and rightful practices of direct democracy - that would not dominate dissenting minorities but left them free to do their own things to and for themselves. Rights of soldiers could turn militaristic and aggressive and oppressive armed forces into rightful forces for the preservation or restoration of peace and liberty. Territorial governments messed up defence, security and protection as they messed up the economy and communities. - J.Z., 4.4.00. - & WAR, DIS., REVOLUTION, MILITIA, HUMAN RIGHTS, UNILATERAL NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT BY THE PEOPLE, ORGANIZED IN RIGHTFUL MILITIAS.

FREEDOM: In Tucker's eyes, since freedom is the sum and substance of life, nothing must be allowed to stand in the way of its implementation. (*) If this necessitates violence then violence there might be, however much we regret to see it employed by man against man.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, 156. - Elsewhere Tucker indicated that freedom should be only implemented among volunteers. It should not be forced upon anyone. The preference of others, for conditions of non-freedom, should be respected. Furthermore, the rightful use of force, in the defence of rights and liberties, should not be classed as violence, which is, rather, the wrongful use of force to attack rights and liberties. - J.Z., 11.4.00. – (*) Among those who desire it for themselves. J.Z. - VIOLENCE, FORCE

FREEDOM: Individuality is the aim of political liberty. By leaving to the citizen as much freedom of action and of being as comports with order and the rights of others, the institutions render him truly a freeman. He is left to pursue his means of happiness in his own manner.” - James Fenimore Cooper, The American Democrat, 1838. - As a panarchist I can only agree - but he would, most likely, have opposed panarchism, as most modern libertarians still do, as adherents to limited governments with an unlimited territorial monopoly, a monopoly for legislation, jurisdiction, protection and defence. - J.Z., 4.7.00. – This in spite of the fact that through panarchism the limited government advocates could, probably, achieve their own ideal for themselves much faster than in any other way. Experimental freedom for all does, at least to a considerable extent, disarm their opponents or deprive them of their motive and opportunity to territorially repress these limited laissez-faire advocates. - J.Z., 23.11.10. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

FREEDOM: Indivisible? Yes and No! For those who want it need every part of it to really be and remain free. But this does not mean that those who do not want it could not put themselves under all sorts of contractual and penal penalties against its use by them, thus living themselves under the governments of their dreams without imposing them upon others. To that extent freedom is divisible - within a general framework for individual choice, in which many individuals would give primacy to some other of their values. - J.Z., 7.7.82 & 10.4.00. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM VS. COMPULSION

FREEDOM: instincts for freedom, for beauty, for a graceful and amiable social life" were "truly primary instincts" and that all the forces of nature encouraged their development if men were left free and unfettered.” - Michael Wreszin, The Superfluous Anarchist Albert Jay Nock, Brown U.P., Providence, 1972, 62. - We have never as yet experienced how well different people could develop under full freedom because we never had full freedom as yet in all spheres, in any country. It is a bit like speculating about the possibilities of an afterlife, in heaven or hell. - J.Z., 3.5.00.

FREEDOM: Is freedom anything but the right to live as we wish? Nothing else.” - Epictetus, Discourses, book 2, ch. 1, sec. 23. – Quoted in Seldes. - Not at the expense of others! Provided we leave others alone to live as they like, under the same right. Anyhow, one cannot live other people's lives for them. To the extent that one tries, one loses a slice of one's own life. "Any leash has two ends." - J.Z., 30.3.99. - Alas, one cannot clearly derive panarchism from such generalities, although, with the wisdom of hind-sight, such conclusions are implied. – J.Z., 18.12.08. – WISHES, WANTS, PANARCHISM, LIVE AS WE WISH, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

FREEDOM: is it not a self-contradiction to speak of imposing freedom?"- James P. Hogan, "Code of the Lifemaker", 192. – Q.

FREEDOM: It is hard to define freedom because freedom includes the right not to be free according to one's choice, the right to submit to voluntary servitude: 'The truth is that there is not enough of the right kind of liberty; the fundamental liberty to choose to be free or not to be free, according to one's choice. …" - P. E. de Puydt, Panarchy, in PEACE PLANS No. 4, p. 4. – By now in several languages on - THE RIGHT NOT TO BE FREE, ACCORDING TO ONE'S CHOICE, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: It is nevertheless quite possible that the "free" suffer more than the "enthralled". Freedom brings responsibility and often guilt. It may indeed provide a deeper satisfaction and a richer life, but the evaluation of such rewards is a distressingly subjective process. Perhaps no argument in favor of liberty can satisfy the intellect; perhaps the best we can hope for is a shared emotional conviction.” - Patrick L. McGuire, comments to Poul Anderson, The Book of Poul Anderson, p.95. - Only a man who knows very little about freedom could make such a remark. - J.Z. 10.4.00. - But he is right about one thing: Full freedom should not be forced upon anybody. It should be chosen by individuals, step by step, at their own speed of mental development. Otherwise, they do become enemies of a degree of freedom, which they do not as yet understand and cannot as yet sufficiently handle. Those, who were too long in a prison, with other people thinking and acting for them, come to fear open doors and the decisions now expected of them. Let them have their voluntary half-way houses! - J.Z., 9.5.00, 9.5.12. – OBJECTIONS, DIS., PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO BE AS UNFREE AS ONE WANTS TO BE

FREEDOM: It is not enough to contribute just another fact, lecture, article, leaflet, pamphlet or book to the total freedom philosophy. It is necessary to make all of them, and more, available, cheaply and permanently, when, wherever and for whosoever - in an overwhelming avalanche of facts and arguments - and yet, a "tolerant" avalanche, one that would spare and welcome all dissenters who are only wanting to do their own things and are willing to let others do their own things to or for themselves. - J.Z., 19.6.80, 11.4.00. - FREEDOM AVALANCHE, CULTURAL REVOLUTION, ENLIGHTENMENT

FREEDOM: It is only in freedom of action that a man's full powers are used and developed.” - Dr. H. G. Pearce, GOOD GOVERNMENT, 12/71. - No wonder that most of the people that we do encounter are so uninspiring. They are the products of perpetual territorial kindergartens! - Top suggestion box schemes, like those of Matsushita and Sony have demonstrated how creative average people can be at their work place - given the opportunity and the incentive to do so. Compare also how creative many of them can be - in their own homes and gardens, to which their freedom of action is largely limited now. - J.Z., 8.5.00. - FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: It must be obvious that liberty necessarily means freedom to choose foolishly as well as wisely; freedom to choose evil as well as good; freedom to enjoy the rewards of good judgment and freedom to suffer the penalties of bad judgment. If this is not true, the word "freedom" has no meaning.” - Admiral Ben Moreell, Log I, p.24. – Alas, he, too, did not arrive at the panarchist conclusion from such general thoughts. – J.Z., 23.11.10. – Crimes against involuntary victims should certainly not be a matter of free individual choice – for they would, inevitably, destroy the free choice of these victims. – J.Z., 9.5.12. - CHOICE, MISTAKES, FOOLISHNESS, DIS.

FREEDOM: It should be obvious that anyone could voluntarily restrict only his OWN freedom to the advantage of one or several others, but not the freedom of OTHERS, for then he would appoint himself their guardian and ruler and claim for himself more freedom of action at their expense as well as against their will.” - Kurt H. Zube, Letter to Rudolf Augstein. – RESTRICTIONS, EQUAL RIGHTS, EQUAL FREEDOM

FREEDOM: It's not likely that you'll ever gain your freedom by joining, marching, picketing, or complaining - because all those methods rely upon changing the attitudes of others. What I have in mind concerns the use of methods over which you have complete control.” - Harry Browne, How I Gained Freedom In an Unfree World, p.13. - Only freedom for individual secession and exterritorial and autonomous association would give you complete control of your "fate", as far as that is humanly possible, i.e., apart from accidents, health problems and natural catastrophes. - J.Z., 25.11.76, 11.4.00. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, ACTIONS, CONTROL, SELF-HELP, POLITICAL ACTIONS, PROTESTS, DEMONSTRATIONS, MARCHES, PARTIES, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS

FREEDOM: leave a well-marked trail that others may follow toward a worthwhile destination - Freedom." - George Ellis, THE FREEMAN, 11/74. - Under the voluntary and exterritorial autonomy of panarchism we would have consumer sovereignty towards an abundance of free society goods, services and organizations, offered all around us, in a super-market that covers the world. - We could merely do window-shopping and pondering our options or fill our "shopping carts" with whatever we liked and take it home. - J.Z., 9.5.00. - EXAMPLE, EXPERIMENT, DEMONSTRATION, FREEDOM OF ACTION, FREE CHOICE AMONG COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, SOCIETIES OR PUBLIC SERVICES, PANARCHISM, EXPANDED CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY & FREE ENTERPRISE, FREE TRADE, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION & CONTRACT

FREEDOM: Leave me free to do anything I please - stupid or brilliant - so long as it is peaceful and not injurious to others.” - Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 5/73. – That is as close as he came to panarchism, in very general terms. But it is the details that do matter. His kind of “limited” government, but for volunteers only and confined to exterritorial autonomy, is only one of many panarchist options. He remained blind to the others. – J.Z., 18.12.08. – LIMITED GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM, PEACEFULNESS

FREEDOM: Leave others free to live their own lives.” - Leonard E. Read, THE FREEMAN, 9/73. – Even under full exterritorial autonomy or personal laws. He had only private lives and economic liberties in mind. Politically he was still a territorialist – who advocated otherwise limited governments instead of authoritarian ones. Limited governments only for the advocates of limited governments and even these only under personal law or exterritorial autonomy, i.e. SUFFICIENTLY limited. – J.Z., 9.5.12. – LEAVE OTHERS FREE, TOLERANCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM. LIMITED GOVERNMENTS WITHOUT A TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY.

FREEDOM: Legal freedom to have to obey no other law than those to which one has given one's consent. … 3. the condition of civic independence, to thank for one's existence and preservation not the arbitrary actions of someone else in a people but his own rights and efforts as part of a common society.” - Kant, Metaphysic der Sitten, Par.46. - LAWS, OBEDIENCE, IGNORING LAWS, DISOBEDIENCE, OPTING OUT, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CONSENT

FREEDOM: Let every person do their own thing provided that they do not obstruct or prevent another person from doing their own thing. The old don't listen to the young, the young don't listen to the old and both are too ignorant or stubborn to mind their own business.” - L. J. Bullen, 1970. - DOING ONE'S OWN THING OR MINDING ONE'S OWN BUSINESS

FREEDOM: Let freedom be the cure.” - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.134. - Even statism can mostly be cured - once panarchistic freedom forces the statists to take all the risks and burdens of statism only upon their own shoulders. - J.Z., 8.5.00, 9.5.12. - CURE, SOLUTION, ANSWER

FREEDOM: Let me succeed - let me fail - at my own risk and expense - and that of my voluntary associates. More I do not ask for. - J.Z., 14.3.75. – TOLERANCE FOR ALL TOLERANT ACTIONS.

FREEDOM: Let us hang no one, and set everybody free.” – Frederic Bastiat, Economic Sophisms, p.241. - Only those who want to be free: Leave all others the individual choice for their preferred dependencies. - J.Z., 12.4.00. - LIBERATION VS. PROSECUTION, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Let us rather recognize that people are free - in the political sense - when they live under institutions they prefer, no matter what those institutions are.” - J. O. Y. Gasset, Concord & Liberty, 52. - Alas, like most others, G. understood under "people" only the collective, more precisely the majority, not the individuals. Thus he would allow "the people" to force institutions and laws upon dissenting individuals and minorities. - J. Z., 14.4.00. – He seems to have considered only territorial “solutions”, taking territorialism for granted. But then I haven’t read all his writings. Do they really contain panarchistic ideas somewhere? – J.Z., 21.12.08. - TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, CHOICE, INSTITUTIONS, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Let's "vote for freedom". - Edward Y Breeze, THE FREEMAN, 9/73. - That is probably the least one can do for liberty - and it means using a wrongful means towards a rightful end. Voting can only be rightful within volunteer communities, so voluntary that dissenters are permitted to secede from them. - J.Z., 16.4.00. - That right alone would already turn the tax or subscription system of such a community into a voluntary taxation system, even if, nominally, it would not be one. - J.Z., 8.5.00. – Alas, territorial governments usually do not put such options on the ballot papers. Imagine a referendum against compulsory taxation and central banking! – Since most voters are not libertarians, there would, often, be land-slide voting against many freedom options. – Rather work towards the right of all those, who are already somewhat enlightened, to secede and do their own things, in their own panarchies. - J.Z., 18.12.08., 9.5.12 – VOTING, REFERENDUM

FREEDOM: Liberty and freedom are the conditions of man within a contractual society.” - Ludwig von Mises, Human Action, p.282. – Voluntary members of diverse panarchies may contract other than freedom relations and institutions between themselves. – Especially in these cases one should remain free to secede. - J.Z., 20.12.08, 23.11.10, 9.5.12. - MAN & CONTRACTS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, PANARCHISM, DIS.

FREEDOM: Liberty calls to us again. We must follow her fully; we must trust her fully. Either we must wholly accept her or she will not stay.” - Henry George. – Like with e.g. marriages and jobs, one should be free to engage in all kinds of contracts, even those, which imply a considerable degree or extensive personal dependency. We have never denied that this applies e.g. to voluntary soldiers and officers. Also to insurance and credit contracts. Let’s apply this choice also to whole political, economic and social systems. To each his own – but always with a withdrawal or secession option. – J.Z., 23.11.10. TRUST, ACCEPTANCE & FAITH, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, ASSOCIATIONISM, SECESSIONISM

FREEDOM: Liberty consists in the safe and sacred possession of a man's property.” - Fox, 1784, quoted by Wilhelm Roscher, I/236 and in his “Grundlagen”, page 211. – Somewhere in Roscher’s works Ulrich von Beckerath found his first hint towards P. E. de Puydt’s July 1860 essay panarchy. I have never found that passage. – J.Z., 23.11.10, 9.5.12. – PROPERTY

FREEDOM: Liberty should be the constant measure of action.” - Karl Hess, The Lawless State. - We need not only one standard and measure of action but also freedom of action, not only in our remaining private spheres but in the political, economic and social spheres. That requires exterritorial autonomy. Did Karl Hess clearly stand up for it? Where, when and how often? - J.Z., 8.5.00. – For instance, let others have any form of State-Socialism – but always only at their own risk and expense, rather than being territorially imposed upon dissenters. – J.Z., 9.5.12. - FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: Literally a condition is free when everybody may freely choose his society without forcing it on others, when nobody may be submitted against his choice to any society. If it pleases somebody to call a situation free, in which a society, dissatisfactory and disgusting to somebody, may nevertheless be imposed upon him, then it becomes necessary, provided one wants to achieve understanding, to find another word for the contrary condition where an unpleasant society is not forced upon anybody.” - Prof. Dr. Gottfried Eiserman, in: Vilfredo Pareto's System der allgemeinen Soziologie, Enke Verlag, Stuttgart. Quoted in ERLESENES, IV/1964. – PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Live free or die.” - General John Stark, revolutionary war hero, quoted in PLAYBOY, July 76, page 50 or 56. - Give all who want it also the freedom to choose un-freedom for themselves and become poor, oppressed, sick and die early as a result. - J.Z., 8.5.00. - DEATH, LIFE, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Living the life one wants to live and in a society one likes - that is freedom. - J.Z., 4.2.90.

FREEDOM: Make happy those who are near, and those who are far will come.” – Chinese proverb. - But do not just make them happy with alcohol, tobacco and other drugs. Under full economic freedom, including full monetary freedom, there would be no unemployment and millions or refugees and immigrants would be welcome at any time and not herded into concentration camps. Fewer people would seek consolation in drugs. The core of panarchistic freedom and its consequences is already contained in this proverb as well. The successful panarchies will either gain many more members, all tending to stay where they are, but free and successful, and their successes will be copied by volunteers living and working in other countries, perhaps by becoming members or establishing their own panarchies there. A few symbols or words cannot clearly enough express and convey all the options contained in them. At most they can provide some hints for further thoughts, like my collection of "Slogans for Liberty" attempts to do and also the present collection of quotes and notes relating to panarchism, polyarchism, personal law, individual secessionism etc. - J.Z., 24. 11. 06, 9.5.12. - FREE MIGRATION, PANARCHISM, DES., ASYLUM, REFUGEES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, WAR AIMS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM

FREEDOM: Man is free when he controls himself. Self-control is never an imposition.” - Robert LeFevre, in “THE REGISTER”. - SELF-CONTROL

FREEDOM: More than half the world lives under tyrannical regimes and has as much freedom of logical choice as the galley slave on a Roman boat.” - Dagobert D. Runes, Handbook of Reason, p.104. - To the extent that States are territorial all of them are tyrannical or totalitarian. - J.Z., 12.4.00. – At least the almost completely totalitarian States have been greatly reduced in numbers by now. However, even one of them would be still one too much. – J.Z., 9.5.12. – TOTALITARIANISM, DICTATORSHIPS, DEMOCRACIES

FREEDOM: Most freedom lovers are prejudiced against one or the other practice of liberty. They would and should therefore agree only upon one point: Free individual choice to use or not to use any liberty or right among like-minded volunteers. They must become as tolerant even towards the enemies of liberty - while these do nothing but their own things to themselves. - J.Z., 25.8.93, 9.5.12. - PANARCHISTS, ANARCHISTS & LIBERTARIANS, TOLERANCE FOR THE TOLERANT OF ALL KINDS

FREEDOM: Mr. President, … it is my belief that nothing is more important than freedom! Nothing is more sacred than freedom! Nothing is greater than freedom! Nothing, - nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing … can be permitted to stand in the way of freedom!” - Allen Drury, A Shade of Difference, p.748. - Freedom means also letting others have, in their lives, at their risk and expense, what is more important, more sacred and greater to them than freedom. - If one wishes to impose full freedom upon all those who do not desire it themselves, then and thereby one greatly reduces one's chances to attain freedom for oneself. Freedom is not to be used as a bulldozer over the preferences of others. Let them play their silly, flawed, wronglful or trivial games, as long as one is not forced to participate in them. - J.Z., 10.4.00, 23.11.10, 9.5.12. - IMPORTANCE, SACREDNESS, GREATNESS, DIS.

FREEDOM: My freedom is more important than your good idea.” - Bumper Sticker. – (*) However, full freedom for all people with ideas to try them out among themselves, at their own risk and expense. – J.Z., 4.1.08. (*) “Great” idea – in another version. – “GREAT IDEAS” OF TERRITORIAL REFORMERS, WHO ARE TERRITORIALLY INTOLERANT

FREEDOM: No plan by which one man treads another man's freedom of action underfoot will do. Besides, Mr. Bramston, can you not see what lies before you in the near future: This unjustifiable power of taking money from others, even from those unborn, has led to such extravagance, such waste, and such heavy burdens that the people everywhere, improving upon the honest methods of the politicians, are beginning to ask the question, 'Granted that, as you teach us, our wishes are the law of right, why should we pay debt we have never incurred?'” - Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p.112. - Freedom to repudiate debts one has not oneself incurred or contracted and to refuse or discount money one has not issued oneself or contracted to accept at its nominal value! - J.Z., 9.5.00, 20.12.08. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, PLANNING, TAXATION, PUBLIC DEBTS

FREEDOM: Nobody should be forced into freedom or given it against his will. Freedom embraces the choice not to be free, to voluntarily accept a condition of slavery - as long as one likes it. Freedom should also be a matter of individual choice - one should be free to decline its benefits and responsibilities. - J.Z. in pamphlet on TOLERANCE.

FREEDOM: One can found nothing lasting except on liberty. Nothing that already exists can maintain itself or operate with full efficiency without the free interplay of all its active parts. Otherwise, energy is wasted, parts wear out rapidly, and there are, in fact, breakdowns and serious accidents. Thus I demand, for each and every member of human society, freedom of association according to inclination and of activity according to aptitude, in other words, the absolute right to choose the political surroundings in which to live, and to ask for nothing more.” – P. E. de Puydt, Panarchy. – PANARCHISM –

FREEDOM: One of the worst illusions is the belief that we are already as free as we can be or should be. – J.Z., 7.2.95. – Thus e.g. territorialism is all too widely and uncritically accepted, with all its wrongful government powers and abuses. – J.Z., 21.9.08. – PREJUDICES, ENLIGHTENMENT, EDUCATION, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: People fear liberty too much to give themselves this new beginning.” - G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.15. - They do not fear liberty but their strawman substitute for liberty, in the same way as they do not fear the genuine laissez faire, free enterprise and free market capitalism but the wrongful image of capitalism that they do have in their minds. - They fear the bogus liberty so much that collectively they will not allow genuine liberty to work. But they would come to permit it to work even for themselves, once the few faithful or convinced advocates of liberty are set free to demonstrate its potential to them, in their free experiments, which they could then join - or refuse to join as long as they liked. - J.Z., n.d. & 8.4.00, 9.5.00. - FEAR OF FREEDOM

FREEDOM: Perfect freedom is here defined as an absence of man-concocted restraints against the release of creative energy.” - Leonard E. Read, in announcing his work: Let Freedom Reign. - Perfect freedom is only required for those who desire it for themselves. And they would achieve it most easily if they left all other people free, to restrict their own lives as much as they want to - in their own panarchies, i.e. among their followers only. This is the basic condition for a lasting peace between freedom lovers and statists. It also promotes enlightenment on both sides and lets each individual advance at his own pace, without interfering or having to interfere with the lives of others. Exterritorial autonomy for all the diverse statist ideologists as well, i.e. an equal chance for all of them to thus prove or disprove their case. Only territorial domination ought to become outlawed for all. - J.Z., 13.4.00, 9.5.12. – RESTRAINTS, PEACE.

FREEDOM: Power in defence of freedom is greater than power in behalf of tyranny and oppression.” - Malcolm X, speech, NYC, 1965. - So why is oppression still dominant everywhere, even if only as "benevolent" oppression and exploitation? It has e.g. mobilized monetary despotism for itself and military forces, and compulsory taxes and governmental “securities”, and government-controlled “education”, even indiscriminate mass murder devices, while liberty lovers are still far behind in mobilizing monetary freedom, ideal militias, voluntary taxation, their own security issues and alternative education institutions and quite rightful defensive and protective alternatives. – What has prevented the freedom options from becoming victorious in every sphere, at least for the freedom lovers? – I listed some of their fatal omissions in my 2010 digitized book manuscript “New Draft”, not yet online but reviewed on by G.PdB. - J.Z., 4.7.00, 18.12.08. - POWER, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE FOR ALL BUT THE INTOLERANT, IDEAL HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION & MILITIAS FOR ITS DEFENCE

FREEDOM: Review of Chaz Bufe: Listen, Anarchist, pamphlet, in "FREEDOM", March 86, with note by J. Z., 124, in ON PANARCHY XIV, in PP 870.

FREEDOM: Rose Wilder Lane, author of Discovery of Freedom, makes a profound observation in her great book. She points out that freedom is a natural condition. If one ponders that observation and glimpses its truth in its depth, he learns that men cannot create a free society. They will have a free society precisely at the time they stop preventing it. And the device that prevents it is government. Not government in the "wrong hands" but government in any hands. It is not the direction that government takes that is the enemy of freedom. Government by its nature is invariably an instrument of coercion and special privilege. (*) When those who employ that instrument become privileged and have power, they coerce those out of favor. The result is a continuation of a non-free society. And this holds true even if the privileged are libertarians.” - LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Winter 75. – (*) Although Robert LeFevre was one of the few who reprinted de Puydt's article on Panarchy, here he considers only territorial governments with compulsory members, instead of competing or voluntary governments or non-governmental societies, which are only exterritorially autonomous and have only voluntary members. – Panarchism is the natural result of abolishing the territorial monopoly and compulsory membership in or subordination to it. – Territorial governments constitute an unnatural state of affairs. - J.Z., 20.12.08. - FREE SOCIETY, A NATURAL CONDITION & GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE

FREEDOM: So free we seem, so fettered fast we are!” - Robert Browning, Andrea del Sarto. - Most people are much more unfree than they believe themselves to be. Several of their chains are invisible to and unfelt by them, so used are they to them. Or they love their chains, believing them to be necessary and justified. - They need to see the examples set by at least a few free men around them. Mere words will not cure them. To achieve that, the territorial national prisons and their governments have to be broken up by individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities: Panarchism. - J.Z., 6.4.99.

FREEDOM: socialism is force, applied in restraint of faculties. For good or for evil, it is the attempt to place all men and all human affairs under a compulsory system; and to allow no free system to exist by the side of its own system, which would be necessarily endangered by such rivalry. It differs from every free system in this essential particular: that under liberty, you may give away your own liberty, if you think good, and be socialist, (*) or anything else you like; under socialism, you must be socialist, and may not make a place for yourself in any free system.” - Auberon Herbert, Mack, edition, Essay Six, p. 230. - Compare: "Capitalism for consenting adults." - - There are ca. 600 hundred different kinds of socialism. Some are anarchistic or libertarian. A few might even be panarchistic, for e.g. Max Nettlau and Gustav Landauer viewed panarchism favorably. - J.Z., 11.4.00. -  (*) If you think that to be good for yourself and become a socialist? –  J.Z., 9.5.12. - STATE SOCIALISM

FREEDOM: Some say: "This is precisely because there is too much freedom", the others: "It is because there is still not enough."- The truth is that there is not enough of the right kind of liberty; the fundamental liberty to choose to be free or not to be free, according to one's choice. Everyman is a self-appointed judge and settles this question according to his particular tastes or needs.” – De Puydt, Panarchy.

FREEDOM: Such being the reasons which make it imperative that human beings should be free to form opinions, and to express their opinions without reserve; and such the baneful consequences to the intellectual, and through that to the moral nature of man, unless this liberty is either conceded, or asserted in spite of prohibition; let us next examine whether the same reasons do not require that men should be free to act upon their opinions - to carry these out in their lives, without hindrance, either physical or moral, from their fellow-men, so long as it is at their own risk and peril. This last proviso is of course indispensable. No one pretends that action should be as free as opinions…" - J. S. Mill, On Liberty, p.49-51. - At their own expense, too! – Was he even more panarchistic in any of his other remarks? - J.Z., 9.5.12. - FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: That the person of our citizens shall be safe in freely traversing the ocean, that the transportation of our own produce, in our own vessels, to the markets of our own choice, and the return to us of the articles we want for our own use, shall be unmolested, I hold to be fundamental, and the gauntlet that must be forever hurled at him who questions it.” - Thomas Jefferson, Writings, xiv, 301. - Alas, he did not extend the principle involved in "freedom of the seas" to land surfaces, although on land exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities would make it possible as well. On land this liberty is even more important and urgent to finally achieve peace, justice, prosperity, security and progress, to the extent that they are desired by the greatly diverse groups of volunteers. Not only international and internal free trade is involved but all exchanges, all contracts, all non-criminal intentions, all creative actions. As Bastiat said: "Society is exchange." - See under Panarchism. - J.Z., 5.4.99. – Society is not established, maintained and further liberated and developed through territorial domination. – J.Z., 19.12.08. – TERRITORIALISM, FREEDOM OF THE SEAS, OCEAN FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIALITY

FREEDOM: The American individualist Josiah Warren speaks for most anarchists when he writes: "Man seeks freedom as the magnet seeks the pole or water its level, and society can have no peace until every member is really free." - Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, ch. 3: Freedom and Equality, on the first page. - I wish every man were as constant in his attachment to liberty as a magnet is to e.g. iron. Why should those preferring freedom not enjoy it among themselves, while those preferring other relationships enjoy these – as far as possible - among themselves, as long as they can and want to. Only territorialism and intolerance make them fight each other although there is not good reason for them to do so. If freedom lovers mobilized all the protective and liberating potential of individual liberties and individual rights, then the enemies of liberties would have hardly any chance against them, even if they organized themselves for an aggressive war. In the East/West clash, that lasted, under a nuclear arms race, for decades, both sides never clearly stated only rightful war and peace aims and neither side was aware of major internal contradictions like the following: The Soviets pretended to wish to liberate the proletarians in the West. Instead, they threatened them with nuclear IBMs. The Western allies all accused the USSR of being a totalitarian regime and wished freedom for its victims. But, instead, they threatened them with their nuclear IBMs. The governments on both sides would have survived a nuclear exchange, in the safest bunkers. Even this great absurdity did not make headlines and was not publicly discussed. - J.Z. 9.4.00, 9.5.12.

FREEDOM: The believer in freedom, then, is like a salesman trying to persuade people to buy a product, by telling them that, chances are, there are things about it they won't much like after they get it! That's a hard sell! Freedom means putting up with a lot of things you don't like, and living with a lot of people you can barely stand.” - E. Opitz, THE FREEMAN, 7/75, 439. - No, freedom means you can choose your company, friends, associates etc. although you live in a territory that contains many people that you do no like and who engage in activities that you do not like. For instance, you may participate in or watch any sport - or none, any religion, or none, any fashion, or none. Neither regarding these and many other differences, nor about the differences in political, economic and social systems, is there any need to enter into street fighting or oppression via majority voting. Each can be free to do his own thing. They have only to tolerate seeing, reading or hearing about the activities of others, which they do dislike, and they can reduce even this to a minimum, as they do already now, in their daily choices, in their private lives. Almost everything will then be reduced to a free, private and individual choice. Only people, who are so intolerant, that they would e.g. like to bulldoze houses or gardens of others, whose looks they do not like, or who would like to cut off the noses or the hair of others, whose looks "offend" them, will have to be restrained, forcefully, if necessary. - J.Z., 27.12.76 & 14.4.00. – TOLERANCE, INTOLERANCE, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE OF VOLUNTARY COMMUNITIES, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, DIS.

FREEDOM: The best achievement of sportsmen as well as religious people are the examples they have set which prove that quite different games, rules and rituals can be peacefully played with at the expense and risk of different people, all volunteers, in the same country. Their examples are applicable to political, economic and social systems or experiments tried out within volunteer communities that are only exterritorially autonomous. Alas, most religious and sports people are not aware of this, nor are most students and scholars of political, economic and social systems, although they have these examples right before their own eyes and could abstract their exterritorial autonomy and voluntaristic features from them and should have come across at least some of the personal law or exterritorial autonomy traditions and their few remaining traits. On such important subjects a few hints should suffice - for sufficiently rational beings. Alas, they don't. Does that mean that most people are not sufficiently rational, observant and thoughtful, aware, conscious and open-minded? Even when their territorialism leads them, sooner or later, to a total nuclear war? - J.Z., 10.4.00, 9.5.12. - RELIGIONS & SPORTS, PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: The cause of freedom is identified with the destinies of humanity, and in whatever part of the world it gains ground, by and by it will be a common gain to all those who desire it.” - Louis Kossuth, Speech in New York, 1851. – The same could be said about panarchies and the gradual spread of freedom ideas and practices through the peaceful imitation of the successful practices of the first panarchistic pioneers. – J.Z., 22.12.08, 9.5.12. – PANARCHISM, FREE CHOICE OF GOVERNMENTS SOCIETIES FOR INDIVIDUALS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

FREEDOM: The cause of freedom may well be lost before men realize that it is worth fighting for.” - From an article on the Workers Party, in FREE ENTERPRISE, 12/74. – It is also worth living for and in this “fighting” should be reduced to the absolutely necessary and quite rightful minimum. – Panarchists rather opt out and do their own things and encourage even their enemies to do the same to fully realize their own ideals – but only among themselves. – J.Z., 22.12.08. – PANARCHISM, DIS.

FREEDOM: The content and purpose of freedom to my mind, is to let men accept what appeals to them, and live their lives as they want to, so long as they do not encroach injuriously upon the lives of others.” - Max Eastman, quoted in REASON, 8/79. – Panarchism does not demand anything more but also not anything less. – J.Z., 18.12.08. - TOLERANCE

FREEDOM: The enemies of Freedom do not argue: they shout and they shoot." - W. R. Inge, The End of an Age. - And the supposed friends of freedom do usually only argue on: who should temporarily have territorial monopoly powers over them (to shout and shoot)! They do not argue for individual secessionism from the shouters and shooters, either, and for the right to resist and revolt against the shooters, as long as they suppress e.g. individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteers. - J.Z., 5.4.89., 5.8.12.

FREEDOM: The essential new that we bring, the possible maximum of freedom for everybody without exception. In other words, the State of your dreams - if you demand no privilege for you at the expense of others.” - Mackay Gesellschaft. – The majority of territorial statists would certainly not welcome that offer at present. Freedom lovers must also offer them “statism of any kind for statists of all kinds!” – J.Z., 23.11.10.  – Except, naturally, territorial power over dissenters. No one is good enough for that. Least of all the statists. – J.Z., 9.5.12. - MAXIMUM, PANARCHISM, SOCIETY OF YOUR DREAMS

FREEDOM: The farmer works to improve the environment in accordance with the nature of plants and animals. He doesn't attempt to control them. History verifies that mankind flourishes with freedom and only with freedom. Yet politicians and bureaucrats spend all of their time attempting to control humans (an impossibility) instead of trying to improve the environment for mankind. (*) They still claim their only motive is to help. It's obvious they don't really know what they're doing and haven't identified man's nature or what benefits him.” - Dale Green, LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Sum. 77. - (*) Misunderstanding ends and means, they try to "improve" upon what they wrongly perceive to be a free society, by the Welfare State, instead of liberating society from the chains imposed upon it by any territorial State. - J.Z., 11.4.00. – Totalitarian territorial statism is all too possible, for all too long. How many more instances do we need before we admit this? – J.Z., 23.11.10. - ENVIRONMENT, NATURAL GROWTH, HUMAN NATURE, CONTROLS

FREEDOM: The fight for freedom begins every day anew.” – Lajos Kossuth, quoted by Hans Habe, Leben fuer den Journalismus, Band 2, Meilensteine, S. 138. – Would that still be necessary, once freedom becomes properly defined as something different for many different groups of volunteers, running their own affairs independently under personal laws, exterritorially quite autonomous? Territorial general agreement on political, economic and social ideals is not achievable under the present degree of enlightenment. But tolerance for all ideals that are tolerantly practised only among their believers, that is achievable, much more by sufficiently reasonable persuasion attempts than by force and fighting. – J.Z., 16.9.07.

FREEDOM: The free man is in essence the voluntary executive of his own moral judgment.” - Bertrand de Jouvenal. - This is an abstract formulation of panarchism without any hint towards its concrete realization. - J.Z., 6.4.89, 8.4.00. – All too many generalities and abstracts are useless as blueprints or programs. – J.Z., 23.11.10. PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS

FREEDOM: The freedom and happiness of man... are the sole objects of all legitimate government.” - Thomas Jefferson to Gen. Kosciusko, 1810. - But CAN territorial governments with involuntary members provide freedom and happiness? - J.Z., 30.6.00. - HAPPINESS THROUGH TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS? – Q.

FREEDOM: The fundamental need of man in society is freedom of action, which means: recognition of his rights to actions over property which he morally owns, i.e., has a justifiable claim to, which means: Justice.” – R .A. Childs, Jr., THE INDIVIDUALIST, May 71, p. 5. - Did he recall his criticism of Ayn Rand's notions on "competing governments", as some people have asserted? I would like to obtain and microfiche documentation on this, with my comments. - The same applies to Herbert Spencer withdrawal of his chapter on "The Right to Ignore the State", in the original edition of "Social Statics". I would also like to find out whether J. G. Fichte ever explicitly withdrew what he said about the right to secede from the State - in his earlier work on the French Revolution. (Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urteile des Publikums ueber die Franzoesische Revolution.) - J.Z. - FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: The government of the Revolution is despotism of liberty against tyranny.” - Maximilian Robespierre, French National Convention, Feb. 5, 1794. - Remember how he applied his maxims. Despotism in the name of liberty is still despotism rather than the defence of liberty. Robespierre despotically defended only a kind of collective freedom, as interpreted by himself, against all dissenters. He allowed no one to secede from his policies. That constituted his terror regime. It has given revolutions a bad name, all too widely, even up to our times. A rightful revolution begins and continues with individual secessionism and voluntary associationism. He did not permit these in the most important spheres. - J.Z., 6.5.89, 8.4.00. - Exterritorially the absolute monarchists, the constitutional monarchists, the radical republicans and the moderate republicans of the French Revolution could have peacefully coexisted. And from them this tolerance for tolerant actions could have spread, largely peacefully, over the rest of the world. How much bloodshed would have been avoided thereby, how much despotism and poverty? - J.Z., 8.5.00. - DESPOTISM, REVOLUTIONS, FRENCH REVOLUTION, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, TERRORISM

FREEDOM: the great human liberty, which, destroying all the dogmatic, metaphysical, political and juridical fetters by which everybody today is loaded down, will give to everybody, collectivities as well as individuals, full autonomy in their activities and their development, delivered once and for all from all inspectors, directors and guardians.” - Bakunin, quoted in Krimerman & Perry, Patterns of Anarchy, p. 92. – AUTONOMY

FREEDOM: The greatest blessing of democracy is freedom. But in the last analysis our only freedom is the freedom to discipline ourselves.” - Bernard Baruch. - All too few and limited liberties lead merely to democracy. Democracy does not produce liberties but merely tolerates some to some extent. All the remaining problems with democracies could be fast overcome if all freedoms were realizable, at least among all those who do want them for themselves. - J.Z., 4.4.00. – What good is self-discipline when externally imposed discipline, controls, laws, regulations, restrict out basic rights and liberties? – J.Z., 20.12.08. - SELF-CONTROL & DISCIPLINE

FREEDOM: The greatest safety valve to alleviate discontent in any country is the right to expound ideas, advocate government reform and criticize public officials or governmental institutions.” - W. P. Hunt, of Arizona. - A still better safety valve is freedom for autonomous action among communities of volunteers. Where would science and technology be without freedom to experiment? Governments and bureaucrats have developed a very thick skin against mere criticism. But allow their victims to secede and pay their contributions to their own community and ignore all the messes of their former territorial rulers - then we will soon see considerable improvements occurring fast. - J.Z. 4.4.00. - FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ONLY OR ALSO PANARCHISM: FREEDOM OF ACTION & FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT?

FREEDOM: The illusion that one is already as free as one can be is, perhaps, the greatest obstacle to the achievement of full individual liberty. Another significant illusion is that all must achieve the same degree of freedom together, at the same time and in the same country. Panarchism would allow all individuals to approach full freedom step by step, as soon as they are ready for another. - J.Z., 26.4.95, 6.4.00. - ILLUSION THAT ONE IS ALREADY FREE, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: The individual can't be free in the choice of his social and political environment but it can be free in his individual point of view towards his environment.” - Popular unchecked premise that ignores the panarchistic or exterritorial and voluntaristic alternatives for societal autonomous actions. It resembles the opinion of Frederick the Great who said: "Argue as much and about whatever you like - but obey! We should have advanced beyond this point of view - after about 250 years. - J.Z. – OBJECTIONS. DIS.

FREEDOM: The institution of freedom, if properly defined, suffices to render justice to each individual. John Stuart Mill said: "The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it." - My own definition of freedom, if practiced, would assure universal justice: No man-concocted restraints against the release of creative energy.(*) This is to say that no one would inhibit any individual in any way whatsoever except to curb his destructive actions: fraud, violence, misrepresentation, predation, and the like.” - Leonard E. Read, Who's Listening? p.295. - - (*) Rather, as many and only as many as some people desire for themselves! Freedom lovers do not have to be in a constant state of liberation war against the statists. The best way to teach statists, those who are teachable at all, is to leave them to their own and self-chosen fate. We have large example before our eyes that even totalitarian regimes, after dozens of millions of blood-sacrifices, do finally make some concessions in order to benefit by some of the additional productivity which even mere degrees of economic freedom can already provide. When all the damages of their interventionist policies have to be born exclusively by themselves and by their voluntary followers, while all around them other people benefit from large degrees of freedom or even full freedom practices, this kind of enlightenment will proceed much faster, if not at the level of the top leadership then at the grassroots level, at which individuals are free to secede and to select a better future for themselves and their families. - J.Z., 13.4.00, 9.5.12. – JUSTICE

FREEDOM: The intellectual leaders in the movement for liberty have all too often confined their attention to those uses of liberty closest to their hearts, and have made little effort to comprehend those restrictions of liberty which did not directly affect (*) them.” - F. A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, introduction. - (*) rather: "interest". For all restrictions of liberty do directly or indirectly affect the lives of all, whether they are aware of this or not. Thus its spread can never be too wide nor its application too extensive. But no one should be forced to take up all its options. We must all grow towards full freedom, and the full maturity it can bring us, at our own speed, in accordance with our knowledge and abilities. - J.Z., 6.5.89. - ITS INTELLECTUALS

FREEDOM: The key that opens the door is not the end of the journey.” - H. G. Wells, The World Set Free, p. 178. - Individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy would have permitted H. G. Wells and his followers to realize their ideals among and for themselves. Then their kind of State socialism would have been harmless to all non-consenting outsiders. Their kinds of expensive and oppressive territorial package deals would not have monopolized the whole population of several State territories. Even ignorant and prejudiced individual consumers of his socialist utopias would soon have begun to look around for better bargains - and many better ones would have been ready and waiting for them. - PIOT, J.Z., 11.4.00, 19.12.08. - ENDS & MEANS, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: The last freedom - freedom to flee.” - BERLINER ILLUSTRIERTE. - It is insufficient without a right to asylum, a right to immigrate and to settle - and to be exterritorially autonomous - in other countries. - J.Z., 8.8.86 & 17.4.00. – If the right of individuals to secede and to live in self-chosen and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers were already realized, then one would no longer have to try to escape to other and somewhat better countries. – J.Z., 18.12.08. PANARCHISM, ASYLUM, REFUGEES, ESCAPING, EMIGRATION & IMMIGRATION, DEPORTATION

FREEDOM: The main freedom is the freedom to be free or unfree according to one's choice. If this right were realized for the individual (and volunteer communities) then there would be no threat of war. We would have many autonomous groups, not confined to any particular area, peacefully coexisting and competing with each other. - Those who want to be exploited would have the right to remain dependent laborers in a private capitalistic enterprise or to set up a State capitalistic enterprises for themselves. - Those who want to be managed, guided and led in most of their own affairs would elect their dictators of the communist, Nazi or any other brand, whichever would take their fancy, and could obey them as long as they wanted to. - Those who appreciate individual liberty would join in autonomous communities within which they would have the benefits of free trade, free banking, the abolition of all monopolies, in short, they could fully enjoy all their human rights under exterritorial autonomy. - Partly this principle is already recognized: Freedom of speech, press and assembly for instance does not mean that everybody has to write articles, speak in public or attend public meetings. One may leave these rights unused as long as one likes, or limited as much as one likes. - The only limit of the above freedom would have to be that your preferences and choices concern, bind, obliges only yourself and like-minded people - but nobody else - until you give notice to your exterritorial and autonomous community of volunteers. - J.Z., n.d. & 4.4.00. - THE MAIN FREEDOM, FREEDOM TO BE FREE OR UNFREE, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: The mainspring of this astounding progress was freedom - freedom to try, to save, to experiment, to invest, to improve and to fail. For the first time in thousands of years a nation was organized on the basis of voluntary co-operation, instead of being directed under central planning, serfdom or slavery. Freedom is the essential element of free enterprise.” - Viv Forbes, Let's Free Enterprise, on the American experiment. – Alas, it did not include experimental freedom for whole political, economic and social systems, based upon personal law or full exterritorial autonomy. If it had …. – J.Z., 23.11.10.

FREEDOM: The most drastic deprivation which any person can suffer is that of the freedom to utilize and enjoy the faculties which nature has given him and which his will and desire have developed. Keep a man from exercising his mind, his body, his faculties, in the pursuit of his own wishes and delights, keep him from enjoying the fruits of his efforts - and you have done everything evil to him that you can. The greatest desire of each person, in short, is to be free to get the most he can get out of life. There is no other way objectively to define social goals than to call them the sum of those individual goals which can be harmonized in society.” - Sylvester Petro, The Labor Policy of the Free Society, quoted in THE FREEMAN, 11/72. – Different panarchies would have different policies towards labor and, hopefully, some of them would have no official policies towards it or other economic aspects or groups at all, leaving them to free contracts on a free market. – J.Z., 20.12.08. - GOALS, INDIVIDUAL & SOCIAL

FREEDOM: The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it." - John Stuart Mill. - Here you have panarchism in a nutshell. Alas, it was not interpreted by him and most others in this way. - J.Z., 13.1.93.

FREEDOM: the only moral and just society is one in which people have the right to act as they choose, to deal with each other on a voluntary basis, provided they do not violate that right of someone else."- Leaton Jay of Kingscliff, NSW, in a letter, reprinted in FREE ENTERPRISE, Sep. / Oct. 1975. - FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: The only unfailing and permanent source of improvement is liberty, since by it there are as many possible independent centers of improvement as there are individuals.” - John Stuart Mill. - One could say the same on panarchism for volunteer communities. - J.Z. – LIBERTY, PROGRESS, INDIVIDUALISM

FREEDOM: The political method is wrong. It goes against the basic principle of libertarianism. The ends don't justify the means. We cannot achieve by using coercion. If we want freedom, we must use it to achieve it.” - Hodgson Gleen, in LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Summer 75. – To further explore and utilize are e.g. freedom to resist, to defend oneself, to protect one's property, to commit tyrannicide, to engage in rightful revolutions. The most radical among the non-violent methods are individual and group secessionism, combined with voluntary associationism to form alternative institutions like exterritorially full autonomous communities. By a variety of non-forceful means force might be altogether avoided or its rightful use minimized. - J.Z., 11.4.00. - USE DEGREES OF FREEDOM, TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY ARE ALREADY AVAILABLE, AS FAR AS POSSIBLE - TO ACHIEVE FULL FREEDOM, POLITICS? NON-VIIOLENCE? PASSIVE RESISTANCE? MILITIA, HUMAN RIGHTS, PROTECTION

FREEDOM: The right of the individual to choose or refuse one thing at a time." - Ascribed to Major C.H. Douglas by Dennis Byrne. - The right to an individual vote within a collectivist voting system, for one or the other package deal, offered by one or the other party or "independent" candidate, does not give an individual sufficient options, especially not when he is not a member of the majority. Only if he could freely choose - for himself, and at his own expense and risk only - among dozens to hundreds of panarchies and their package deals, offering various governments and free society systems, could he come close to voting, one by one, on all significant items. Under such conditions he might also vote for one or the other world-wide society (of volunteers, all only exterritorially autonomous and thus peacefully coexisting) which lets the world market freely operate for all its members, which means that he could then shop around for each world-wide bargain and service offered, by the members of each world society, just like he does choose today already between the free enterprise offers of various corporations engaged in national and international trading. Consumer sovereignty in this respect as well, or comprehensive individual sovereignty. – On E-Bay and with other such electronic world market services, and with his shopping for software, he does so already, to some extent. – We are already internationalists or cosmopolitans e.g. with regard to our choice of music options, Internet and telephone usage, cars, airline and tourist package deals, sports contests, fashion involvements etc. and take such consumer choices for granted. - J.Z., 1.4.00, 19.12.08, 9.5.12. – VOTING, PANARCHISM, COMPETING WORLD GOVERNMENT SOCIETIES, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.” - H. L. Mencken – Here he muddles the aim and the situation. -We should fight the passing of oppressive laws, oppressive already because they are for involuntary subjects, applied territorially to whole populations, innocents and guilty, volunteers and dissenters combined. We should not stop but properly organize the suppression of any scoundrels (at the top or  bottom), with involuntary victims, better than any territorial government has done so far and can do. – J.Z., 8.8.08. – PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: The true test of one's commitment to individual freedom, wrote economist Walter Williams in a recent column for Heritage Features Syndicate, "is when you allow others to voluntarily do those things which you don't like." - Robert Poole, Jr. & Christine Dorffi, in REASON, 9/81, p.18. – Did Walter Williams and Robert Poole in any of their writings really go beyond small scale territorialist decentralization? – J.Z., 21.12.08. - TOLERANCE, TEST, DISSENT, FREEDOM OF ACTION & PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: The whole world is against us and only because we want to be free.” - From film: Madame. – Only the territorial advocate of freedom for whole populations provokes the popular prejudices and doubts against and fears of freedom. If we advocate freedom, instead, only for volunteers, that would leave our opponents the option to simply ignore us and our activities or to content themselves by asserting that we would, inevitably fail, so that there would be no need to stop us. – They could also disassociate themselves from us as much as they liked – but not territorially. - J.Z., 21.12.08. – UNPOPULARITY

FREEDOM: There are two good things in life - freedom of thought and freedom of action.” W. Somerset Maugham, Of Human Bondage. - Seldes. - Territorial governments are largely organized to legally or bureaucratically deny freedom of action to their subjects, in the most important spheres, the political, economic and social spheres. Being in charge of these, they mostly do not care much about the rest. - J.Z. - 8.5.00. - FREEDOM OF ACTION & FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

FREEDOM: There is a natural freedom to promote one's well-being without infringing the rights of others." - Source?

FREEDOM: There is nothing to take a man's freedom from him, save other men. To be free, a man must be free of his brothers.(*). That is freedom. That and nothing else.” - Ayn Rand, Anthem, 1946, p. 101. – (*) Not only of his brothers!” - J.Z., 22.8.02. - He must also be free to disassociate himself, voluntarily, not only from his brothers but from all other men, and also free so associate even with aliens or foreigners, as if they were his brothers and to live only under personal laws, rules and contracts , which likeminded people have agreed upon. Could one generalize and say that everyone who asserts that his freedom definition is the only correct one, is wrong? This certainly applies to many freedom "definitions". - J.Z., 31.1.02, 9.5.12. – Compulsory territorial association is, certainly, one of the greatest wrongs. – One cannot choose one’s brothers but one should certainly be free to choose one’s friends and other associates. - J.Z., 9.5.12. - MEN, BROTHERHOOD, DEFINITIONS, PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW.

FREEDOM: They may indeed have power. They do not have freedom.” - Wendy McElroy, comment to J. Neil Shulman's Rainbow Cadenza, p.310. – Nor have the freedom lovers so far explored and utilized all the powers of freedom options. – Panarchism is not only an ideal but also a very powerful weapon – if enough people use it. - J.Z., 18.12.08. – No secret service has discovered this as yet! – J.Z., 23.11.10. - POWER

FREEDOM: They say a man needs protection - but he needs freedom and self-respect, arising from his own actions, still more. - J.Z., 29.10.87. - Self-protection and voluntary protective associations rather than monopolistic and coercive protection rackets by territorial States, which, by their "defence" efforts, in war and peace, cost us much more in lives, health, property and earnings than the combined efforts of all private criminals. - J.Z., 8.4.00. – PROTECTION, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: This is a world of compensation; and he who would be no slave must consent to have no slave. Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and under a just God, cannot long retain it.” - Abraham Lincoln, letter to H. L. Pierce and others, April 6, 1859. - The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, ed. Roy P. Basler, vol. 3, p. 375 (1953). - Territorialists deny freedom to all dissenters until they become the territorial majority, if ever. Only exterritorialists would end the at least temporary part-enslavement of dissenters and fully respect their rights and liberties, especially their right to do their things to and for themselves, under their own governments or within their own non-governmental societies or communities. - J.Z., 27.1.02, 9.5.12. - SLAVERY, MUTUALITY, LEADERSHIP, CITIZENSHIP, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE, PANARCHISM, MUTUAL CONVENIENCE RELATIONSHIPS

FREEDOM: Those who must be persuaded to be free to not deserve to be.” - L. Neil Smith, Lever Action, A Mountain Media Book, 2001,, p. 61. – - While they do have the right to remain as unfree as they want to be, as long as they can stand it, they do have the right to secede from this condition as soon as they have become sufficiently enlightened. – Even freedom should not be forced upon anyone. – The frequently beaten wife should not have to put up with this condition. Not even with one beating! All freedom options should be open to her. The same applies to any other oppressed individuals and minority. With free conditions being observable next door, even infants would soon learn to appreciate freedom. - J.Z., 27.9.07, 23.11.10.

FREEDOM: Throughout history orators and poets have extolled liberty, but no one has told us why liberty is so important. (*) Our attitude towards such matters should depend on whether we consider civilization as fixed or as advancing … In an advancing society, any restriction on liberty reduces the number of things tried and so reduces the rate of progress. In such a society freedom of action is granted to the individual, not because it gives him greater satisfaction but because if allowed to go his own way, he will on the average serve the rest of us better than under any orders we know how to give.” - H. B. Phillips, On the Nature of Progress, quoted in The Free Man's Almanac, compiled by Leonard E. Read of FEE, also in THE FREEMAN, 12/73. - Nevertheless, neither Read nor FEE ever stood up for full exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities - or panarchism. Freedom lovers should develop their ideas to the utmost, not stop suddenly and assert: It is impossible or undesirable to go any further because: "Limited government is the ultimate for human organization!" – (*) ??? - J.Z., 16.4.00. – Limited but non-territorial governments only for advocates of limited governments. All other options for the own affairs for all other communities of volunteers. – J.Z., 19.12.08. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, TERRITORIALISM, LIMITED GOVERNMENT & PANARCHISM.

FREEDOM: To act as a free, moral and responsible being requires today a large amount of lawbreaking and will thus lead to prosecution. For instance: smuggling, black marketeering, illegal immigration and emigration, tax evasion. Unjust laws ought to be broken - if one can get away with it. See my article on "folk crimes". But caution does often demand that we abide by unjust laws that we cannot safely break or ignore. Conscience demands only that we respect the equal individual rights of others and law that clearly and exclusively uphold them. - To live really free and not like hunted or caged animals, without withdrawing from society onto little islands, boats, farms, in the wilderness, in ghost towns etc. requires rightful and efficient defensive organization, weapons and training. Perhaps we ought to act like some of the slaves in the Middle Ages did. They ran away together and palisaded themselves in new towns, rapidly, before their pursuers could catch them. Now no "new frontiers" are available or required but the exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities is: Experimental freedom, panarchies, alternative institutions replacing territorial States and based upon unanimous consent among their members. People might still somewhat concentrate in certain areas but this should not lead them to attempting to establish their own and exclusive territorial system there, dominating dissenters living in the area. Their tolerance towards the experiments or traditions of others, combined with a rightful and suitable defensive force against interference, should enable them to cope with the remaining fanatics who do want to subjugate them. The peacefulness and productivity of the new communities will soon speak for them. - J.Z., n.d. & 4.4.00. – MILITIA, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: To destroy freedom of action is to destroy the possibility, and consequently the power, of choosing, of judging, of comparing; it amounts to destroying reason, to destroying thought, to destroying man himself.” - Frederic Bastiat, quoted by Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.213. - Freedom of action requires panarchic liberty, i.e., full exterritorial autonomy or experimental freedom for all volunteer communities. - J.Z., 16.4.00. - FREEDOM OF ACTION

FREEDOM: To move into a free society is an evolutionary process, not a revolutionary one. (*) - Barbarians are not ready for freedom. Civilized people are. (**) Our task is not to impose freedom, but to encourage the advance of civilization. (***) Barbarism vanishes when there are enough civilized people who accept their own liberty and limit their actions to the areas of their own lives and properties, and hold their actions to the level of their own competence. - LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Fall 77. - (*) If one starts with a democracy rather than a dictatorship or a totalitarian State. Both of the latter tend to repress evolution rather drastically. - (**) Many people who are otherwise civilized are not civilized in this respect. - (***) If we want to survive territorialism and e.g. its ABC mass murder devices, then we may have to impose individual secessionism and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers upon all territorial States. That could best be done by all resistance groups adopting the panarchistic framework against all aggressions by territorial States and thereby achieving sufficient unity among themselves and gaining many allies among the armed and unarmed subjects of such States. - J.Z., 11.4.00. - REVOLUTION, EVOLUTION, BARBARISM, CIVILIZATION

FREEDOM: Under freedom a limitless number of different programs can be realized by different people. It is not possible to predict, in detail, where creative thinking and freedom of action will take them. We can only predict some likely developments, based upon past experiences and deductions from them. - J.Z., 4/1976, 8.4.00. – So far, alas, we have only a great freedom to express ourselves and to read, not yet to act and experiment in all spheres monopolized by territorial States. Do we already quite systematically and sufficiently act to achieve that freedom as well? – J.Z., 24.11.10. – DIVERSITY, ENLIGHTENMENT, EDUCATION, PROPAGANDA, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: Unfortunately the notion of freedom has been eviscerated by the literary treatment devoted to it. … The concept of freedom has been narrowed to the picture of contemplative people shocking their generation. When we think of freedom, we are apt to confine ourselves to freedom of thought, freedom of the press, freedom of religious opinion. … This is a thorough mistake. … The literary expression of freedom deals mainly with frills. … In fact, freedom of action is the primary need.” - A. N. Whitehead, Adventure of Ideas, N.Y., Mentor Books, 1955, p. 73. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, NOT ONLY OF EXPRESSION & INFORMATION

FREEDOM: Voluntary integration is the basis and essence of freedom - in the state as well as for spirit and soul.” - From Rudolf G. Bindings diary: Ad se ipsum. - The voluntary segregation aspect of liberty, the withdrawal option, the minding one's own business, the doing-one's-own-thing aspect of liberty should not be ignored, either! - J.Z., 4.4.00. - Especially not since it could give anarchists and libertarians as well their chance to do their ideal things for themselves, under full exterritorial autonomy for their communities, after their members had individually or in groups seceded from the present territorial States, together with all other dissenters, intent on doing their own things to and for themselves. - J.Z., 8.5.00. - VOLUNTARY INTEGRATION & VOLUNTARY SEGREGATION ARE BOTH RIGHT.

FREEDOM: Warren proclaimed the sovereignty of the individual instead of the sovereignty of the people. According to his convictions every man in himself presents a distinct and separate physical and psychical entity. Therefore each individual should be his own authority and his own governor. It follows that no one else would have the right to interfere with the shaping of his life. Where, however, the social relationships of men are concerned, they must, according to Warren's conception, rest on the just exchange of the products of their labor which will prevent any undue gain of one to the disadvantage of another. The prerequisite of this is that all natural wealth such as land, minerals, waterways, etc., should not be a monopoly of a small minority, but that access to the necessary raw materials should be open to every man under equal conditions insofar as these may be naturally produced without human labor. But every man is entitled to the full product of his own labor or to his share of what he produces together with others. This right to the full product of one's labor is for Warren the foundation of all personal freedom, the necessary condition of all social harmony…” - Rudolf Rocker, Pioneers of American Freedom, p.55. – Alas, neither Warren nor Rocker states here quite clearly what individual sovereignty would mean for freedom of association, namely the most diverse use of that liberty in voluntary communities and societies, all of them exterritorially autonomous. – J.Z., 24.11.10. - SOVEREIGNTY OF THE INDIVIDUAL & THE RIGHT TO THE FULL PRODUCT OF ONE'S LABOR

FREEDOM: We are all components in the two billion body problem.” - C. M. Kornbluth, The Syndic, Sphere SF, 1953, Faber & Faber, London, 64, p. 160. - The choice is merely between collisions, harmful to all involved, and freedom for all. - Each is responsible for steering his route so that collisions are avoided. - J.Z., 3.4.00. – We do manage that, mostly, as pedestrians, as car drivers, with our reading choices, hobbies, sports involvements, recreation, insurance contracts etc. Why not also with the choice of whole political, economic and social systems, as long as we claim no territorial monopoly or compulsory membership for any of them? – J.Z., 24.11.10. – COLLISIONS, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY OR EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM VS. TERRITORIALISM, Q.

FREEDOM: We cannot be free men if this is, by our national choice, to be a land of slavery. Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves.” - Abraham Lincoln, speech, 19 May 1856. - Hyman, Quotes, 196. - Another version: Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and, under a just God, cannot long retain it.” - A. L. in Letter to H. L. Pierce, April 6, 1859. – Alas, the rule of territorialism, with e.g. tax slavery, conscription, education slavery and a monopoly for decisions on war and peace, monetary despotism, migration and trade restrictions, has already lasted all too long, in all countries, for all populations. The wrongness of it is still not widely enough realized to get it abolished. – J.Z., 24.11.10. – TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: We have developed sports and games as a simulation of life, and they command a wide and profound interest from masses of men and women. But we are killing life itself by endeavors to control the outcomes of human activities. Now we have to return upon ourselves and ensure that life simulates sport and games, the outcomes of which we do not control but the playing of which is life itself.” - H. S. Ferns, The Disease of Government, p.125. – Territorial Statism is a drug addiction that by now even permeates sports and games. Compare e.g. the subsidies that even some popular sports receive. To that extent sports and games simulate life under statism. - J.Z., 11.4.00, 24.11.10. – If territorial statists were aware that only exterritorial autonomy for communities, societies and governance system can achieve what territorial systems vainly strive for, they would not only permit them but even try to subsidize them. But panarchies and polyarchies do not need subsidies but only freedom to come into existence and it would often  be a very profitable freedom for them, e.g. in the absence of all compulsory taxation and with as much economic freedom as they like to practise among their members. – Territorial States remained even unaware of the defensive and liberating strength that panarchism or polyarchism can provide against open dictatorships and tyrannies. - J.Z., 9.5.12. - SPORTS & GAMES, FREEDOM OF ACTION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

FREEDOM: We have tried so many things; when shall we try the simplest of all: freedom?” - Bastiat, quoted in G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.62. - Try freedom - and let others try it in their way! - J.Z., 13.4.00.

FREEDOM: We have used up all our inherited freedom like the young bird the albumen in the egg. It is not an era of repose. If we would save our lives, we must fight for them.” - Thoreau. - Grow up and break the shell keeping you encaged. Under freedom you can fly with all your abilities like a grown up bird can with his. - J.Z., 17.4.00. – Why should birds and even insects have more freedom on where to live and how to live than we have? – Explore your personal law or exterritorial autonomy options – and then work to realize them. - J.Z., 24.11.10. - FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, FREE CHOICE

FREEDOM: We maintain, therefore, that man is free NATURALLY. That a condition of other-than-freedom, in which circumstances of slavery manifest, is man-made and perforce artificial. We maintain that men cannot provide freedom for other men, for the freedom is theirs to begin with.” - Robert LeFevre, March 24, 1956. - From Carl Watner, LeFevre, p.58, motto above chapter 7. - What freedom lovers can and should do for other freedom lovers is merely to help them shift the weight of oppression from them and to try to do that not merely with "brute strength and stupidity" but with reason, using e.g. leverage intelligently and efficiently. - Handbooks on the machinery and processes, the tools, weapons and intellectual ammunition of liberty, its tactics and strategies, have still to be compiled and published. - J.Z., 9.5.00. – We are still, quite unnaturally, expressed and exploited by the laws and institutions of territorialism. Let us abolish them first, via individual and group secessionism and then let each choose, and try to realize the ideals that he believes in, alone or in association with like-minded volunteers, always merely trying to set a better example to others, rather than trying to force anything territorially upon them. If they should come to like degrees of or even full freedom successfully practised among the volunteers of other communities, then they will come to adopt them, by and by, in their own communities as well. – J.Z., 24.11.10. NATURAL FREEDOM, NATURAL PROGRESS, VIA INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, MAN, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, CHOICE

FREEDOM: we must be able to understand the meaning of 'freedom' ('self-legislation') without having to appeal to any moral notions. This, unfortunately, is just what Kant's doctrine of freedom will not let us do. For freedom is for him a morally loaded notion, …" - Jeffrie G. Murphy, Kant, The Philosophy of Right, p.81. - For me, too. Why should "self-legislation" be separated from all morality, especially, when as reasonable people, we must concede the right to self-legislation to all others, too? - J.Z., 8.4.00. - SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-LEGISLATION, LAWS, PERSONAL LAWS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE

FREEDOM: We must be free or die, who speak the tongue that Shakespeare spake; the faith and morals hold which Milton held.” - Wordsworth, National Independence & Liberty, London, 1802. - Hymans, Quotes, p.413. – Just see to it that you become as free as you wish to be and let all others remain as unfree as they want to be, as long as they are willing to put up with this and are not prepared to join you or to secede and to establish their own kind of free society. If we tried to push full freedom on all others, the present majority of statists, we would only have a good chance to end up dead. – J.Z., 24.11.10, 9.5.12.

FREEDOM: We must return to the broad highway of individual freedom where we, too, can pledge "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor" to the purpose which inspired our Founding Fathers.” - Admiral Ben Moreell, The Admiral's Log II, p.111. – When and where did this broad highway ever exist? It is still to be built. Its name: Full experimental freedom in all spheres now monopolized by territorial governments. Exterritorial autonomy of volunteers vs. territorial authoritarianism over all too many involuntary members and subjects. - J.Z., 24.11.10. - INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM OR CHOICE IN ALL SPHERES, DIS., EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM VS. TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: We offer freedom, and the risks, the dangers, the uncertainties, the untidiness, but also the responsibilities and the opportunities which are inseparable from it.” - Enoch Powell. – He, too, did not advocate all individual liberties and rights but just his own selection. – J.Z., 22.12.08. – He and his followers are entitled to them, under full exterritorial autonomy. All his critics and opponents should also have their choices, supposedly ideal or better than his, but also only at the own risk and expense. – All forms of liberty for all kinds of libertarians. All forms of statism for all kinds of statists! - J.Z., 24.11.10.

FREEDOM: We want freedom.” - YAF conference slogan. - Add: You can have your restrictions! - J.Z., 16.3.75. – TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

FREEDOM: What are the primary values? They are concerned with pursuit and attainment of the good for human beings. What is the good? We are not sure. Of one thing only we are sure. The good of man cannot be coerced. Being certain about this, we say that freedom comes as close as it is possible to come to the unknown essence of the good.” - Quotation from MANAS, Dec. 19, 1965. – Let each choose, under full exterritorial autonomy and together with like-minded others, what they think to be good, at their expense and risk. Full free enterprise and consumer sovereignty in all spheres now monopolized by territorial governments. In the long run the best quality and most economic offers will become most widely made and accepted, via individual free choices. Have territorial governments ever made the very best choices for all of us? – J.Z., 24.11.10. – Only among volunteers can any collective sovereignty be largely identical with your individual sovereignty. Whole territorial popultations, usually quite wrongly called THE people, are much too diverse for that. – J.Z., 10.5.12. - FREE ENTERPRISE GOVERNMENTS, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, VOLUNTARY GOVERNMENTS, GOVERNMENTS BY FREEDOM OF CONTRACT OR FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, FREE MARKET GOVERNANCE FOR VOLUNTEERS, COMPETITIVELY ESTABLISHED & RUN, BASED ON INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM & WITHOUT ANY TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY.

FREEDOM: What is already almost common: experimental freedom for all kinds of scientists and technicians and inventors (all volunteers), is also characteristics of panarchism - even when they are not always consistently applied and understood in its sphere. In the panarchisti future, though, nuclear scientists can no long expect taxpayers to fund e.g. their multi-billion nuclear particle colliders, in attempts to re-create the conditions of the “big bang”, always imagining that, like a God, they could fully control it. As if their nuclear “weapons” had not already demonstrated how far they can and do go beyond any rightful and discriminating defensive weapons towards quit wrongful and irrational as well as indiscriminate mass murder devices. – Nuclear “scientists”, too, just like our territorial rulers, are power-addicts and power-mad. – The only nuclear reactor we really need is the sun and even at its distance from us it is not quite harmless for us, either. - J.Z., 31.8.04, 10.5.12.

FREEDOM: whatever stands against … freedom must be set aside, be it ritual or superstition or limitation in any form." - Richard Bach, Jonathan Livingston Seagull, p. 83. - Are there really man-concocted restraints upon the freedom of seagulls - apart from the precautions taken near airports? So, why didn't seagulls develop indefinitely, seeing the freedom they enjoy? Only their flight and hunting capacities seem to have been developed to the utmost - and there they remained. - J.Z., 16.4.00. – There are also e.g. freedom of religion and the right to make mistakes – at the own risk and expense. Not every one has to live under maximum freedom and maximum use of that opportunity. As little freedom as you want for yourself must also be an individual option – as part of the total freedom options sphere. – J.Z., 21.12.08. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, DIS.

FREEDOM: Whatever the issue, let freedom offer us a hundred choices, instead of having government force one answer on everyone.” – Harry Browne. - Alas, to my knowledge he did not propose free choice for individuals between all kinds of governments and societies, all of them only exterritorially autonomous. - J.Z., 23. 11. 06. - CHOICE & TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS

FREEDOM: Who, nowadays has the right to sit in judgment on his fellow man? Who has the right to deprive another of his freedom?” - Solzhenitsyn, First Circle, p.372. - The victim against the offender. - J.Z., 27.12.76. - All should be free to choose for themselves the constitutional, legal, policing, juridical and penal system of their individual preference. They should suffer under no other, unless they interfered with the same free choices of others. Then, as an aggressors or criminals with involuntary victims, in a way, each offender would have chosen his own judge - or penal system, whether he likes it or not. - A territorial government's judges are, indeed, so distant from our lives and thinking, our personal preferences and values, that we have often to question their authority over us and others.  - But that does not devalue every system of jurisdiction, particularly not for their subscribers. - J.Z., 14.4.00, 10.5.12. - JUDGING OTHERS, PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

FREEDOM: Why argue? Whatever you want to do, under freedom you could do as you please - at your own expense and risk. - J.Z., 23.11.75. - Concede the same right to all those who disagree with you and we can stop arguing. - J.Z., 8.4.00. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAW, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY,

FREEDOM: Why give freedom to sheep? They only bleat.” - Stirner. - Let them freely choose their favorite dependencies, owners, shepherds and butchers - for themselves! - J.Z., 6.4.00, 10.5.12. - SHEEP, MAN, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: With Herbert Spender and John Stuart Mill, we believe a person should be free to take any action, as long as it does not interfere with the liberty of anyone else. We call this point of view libertarianism.” - From a REASON adv. in FREE ENTERPRISE, 9/72. - To what extent has "reason" advocated individual secessionism and full exterritorial autonomy? After a few years it got so concerned, in the main, with relative trivia that I could no longer stand reading all of it. - J.Z., 8.5.00. - FREEDOM OF ACTION & LIBERTARIANISM

FREEDOM: Without all its parts functioning freely and in combination, as intended, how well would a car drive and a plane fly? And with them and other tools, systems and associations, we should be free to determine our routes and destinations, independent of any politician or bureaucrat that we have not chosen for ourselves as our own guides. – J.Z., 19.12.08, 24.11.10. – Is there really anything that functions quite rightfully and rationally among all the territorial governments of the past and present? – J.Z., 10.5.12. – TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, LAISSEZ FAIRE IN ALL SPHERES, LEAVING OTHER PEOPLE TO THEIR CHOICES & FREE ACTIONS

FREEDOM: You are the people … you are the will .. you are the government … you are the power … you are America … you are the free … no one … no one … has the right to take away your freedom.” - Zarlenga, The Orator, p.61. - That is true only for voluntary communities or panarchies! - J.Z., 16.4.00. – Without them it merely amounts to an incantation or attempt at word-magic. – J.Z., 23.12.08, 10.5.12.

FREEDOM: You can have as much freedom as you can be responsible for.” - S.S.T. (Calendar proverb.) - Unfortunately, constitutions, laws, regulations, politicians, bureaucrats and policemen do not accept that principle as a major one. - J.Z., 10.4.00. – RESPONSIBILITY

FREEDOM: You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.” - Lazarus Long. – One of the fictional heroes of Robert Heinlein. There is such a thing as a libertarian road to a lasting peace in freedom and justice. But so far most libertarians have shown little interest in it, to my knowledge. - J.Z., 28.6.00. - I hold that libertarian and panarchist ideas and practices offer the ONLY road to rightful and lasting peace in freedom, security and prosperity. - J.Z., 1.7.00. – DIS. PEACE, LIBERTARIAN PEACE PROGRAM, PANARCHISM

FREEDOM: You can have whatever ism you want to have, for yourself and like-minded people - but I want to be free, especially of any territorial monopoly claims by others. - J.Z. in pamphlet on TOLERANCE, in an amended version of 10.5.12.

FREEDOM: You can impose authority but you cannot impose freedom.” - Colin Ward, ANARCHY IN ACTION, 135. – You should not even try. Let each advance towards it at his own speed and as a result of his own free choice or free experiments. – J.Z., 24.11.10. – Each imposed authority is not really an authority, one that is chosen and authorized by its victims. To impose any authority territorially is not only wrong but absurd. All populations are made up of individuals and all individuals are different and prefer different things and relationships for themselves. – J.Z., 10.5.12. - FREEDOM VS. AUTHORITY & TERRITORIALISM, INDIVIDUALISM VS. ENFORCED COLLECTIVISM

FREEDOM: You can only be free if I am free.” – Clarence Darrow. - Degrees of liberties and rights can also be won one by one and step by step. If we made it dependent on achieving total liberty for all at the same time, then we might never achieve it. - J.Z., 26. 11. 06. – FREEDOM IS A MUTUAL CONCESSION, OPPORTUNITY & RIGHT

FREEDOM: You should be able to be as free or unfree as you want to be. - J.Z., 23.4.76. - FREEDOM TO BE UNFREE, PANARCHISM

FRENCH & AMERICAN REVOLUTION & PANARCHISM: Imagine that during the French and the American Revolution the option had been left to all, either to remain a loyal monarchist or become a republican, with different laws and institutions for both groups. The bloodshed that could have been avoided! The different course that history would have taken! – J.Z., 14.1.05 to Richard Johnsson.

FRESTONIA, pamphlets, clippings etc. on a partly successful secession in the middle of London, 1977, in PEACE PLANS 633.

FREY, BRUNO S.  & EICHENBERGER, R., Competition among Jurisdictions: The Idea of FOCJ. In Competition among Jurisdictions, edited by Lueder Gerken, 209-29, London: Macmillan. – The same, 1996: FOCJ: Competitive Governments for Europe, INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 16: 315-27. - 1999: The New Democratic Federalism for Europe: Functional Overlapping and Competing Jurisdiction. Cheltenham, Eng: Edward Elgar. - Robert Higgs of The Independent Review wrote in a letter: " ... Bruno Frey or his collaborators, especially R. Eichenberger. Frey has written a good deal on this topic, or on closely related topics, on one occasion for THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW ...“ „Frey's plan involves "functional overlapping competing jurisdictions," which he represents by the acronym FOCJs.“ See:

FREY, BRUNO S., & R. EICHENBERGER, FOCJ: Competitive Governments for Europe. 1996. International Review of Public Economics 16: 315–27.

FREY, BRUNO S., & R. EICHENBERGER, The New Democratic Federalism for Europe: Functional Overlapping and Competing Jurisdictions. 1999. Cheltenham, Eng.: Edward Elgar.

FREY, BRUNO S., A Utopia? Government without a Territorial Monopoly. THE INDEPENDENT REVIEW, v.VI, n.1, Summer 2001, ISSN 1086-1653, Copyright © 2001, pp. 99–112. - 14 pages. - - Frey is a professor at the Institute for Empirical Economic Research, University of Zurich. In sum, the quest for territories in which many governments have engaged and still engage is often, if not normally, a bad deal from the point of view of society as a whole." - Reproduced on - Bruno S. Frey, A Utopia? Government without Territorial Monopoly - A Utopia? Government Without Territorial Monopoly - "Governments have not always had territorial monopolies on the creation and enforcement of law. Functional, overlapping, competing jurisdictions have been important exceptions to the identification of government with territory and could play a greater role in the future."

FREYTAG, GUSTAV: Bilder aus der deutschen Vergangenheit, 1.Bd, Leipzig, 1927, Schlueter & Co, S. 48: On personal law: "Nach vier  Jahren wurden den Sachsen Italien verleidet, weil ihnen die Langobarden nicht gestatten wollten, in eigenem Rechte zu leben, sie brachen auf, ..." S. 55/56: On voluntary taxation: "Eine Anzahl Gemeinden bildeten den Gau, die Gaugenossen waehlten ihren Haeuptling. Die Macht des Haeuptlings beruhte auf persoenlicher Tuechtigkeit oder auf dem alten Adel seines Geschlechts, und darauf, dass er Vorsitzender des Volksgerichts war. Aber er sass in seiner Gemeinde nur so wie ein anderer Freier, seine Einnahme bestand nur in freiwilligen Gaben der Stammgenossen und Fremden, und es ist charakteristisch fuer den Unabhaengigkeitssinn des Volkes, dass diese Gaben als Geschenke behandelt wurden, auch wenn sie stehende Abgaben geworden waren, ..."

FRIEDLAENDER, ISRAEL: Dubnow's Theory of Diaspora Nationalism, The Maccabean, N.Y., 1905. - See: Dubnow.

FRIEDMAN, DAVID, Anarchy and Efficient Law. - David Friedman - Anarchy and Efficient Law - For and Against the State (ed. John T. Sanders and Jan Narveson), Rowman & Littlefield, 1996, p. 235-253.

FRIEDMAN, DAVID, Libertarian Stuff. [September 2001] - - Papers by David Friedman on welfare, immigration, law, virtue and more. - Link at

FRIEDMAN, DAVID, Police, courts, and Laws - on the Market. - David Friedman - Police, Courts, and Laws-on the Market - in The Machinery of Freedom: Guide to A Radical Capitalism, Open Court, 1973 (1989 second edition)

FRIEDMAN, DAVID, Private Creation and Enforcement of Law: A Historical Case. - David Friedman - Private Creation and Enforcement of Law: A Historical Case - JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES 8, 1979.

FRIEDMAN, DAVID, The Machinery for Freedom" & Panarchism: "Some" Machinery for Freedom - would have been a more accurate title. Panarchies would provide the main "machinery" for the spread of liberty, with all participants proceeding in this direction only at their own speed. Some would be standing still, others would even go backwards, always at their own risk and expense. His book omitted the panarchistic options and requirements, especially those for non-libertarians among themselves: - J.Z., 1.9.04, 10.5.12.

FRIEDMAN, DAVID, Viking Iceland: Anarchy that Worked. - Liberty 2, no. 6,July, 1989, pp. 37-40. - ICELAND

FRIEDMAN, YONA: Machbare Utopien. Absage an gelaeufige Zukunftsmodelle, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, 1974-1979, aus dem Franzoesischen von Joachim A. Frank, 210 S., JZL. A decentralist book that has an illustration of 2 herds of elephants on the cover with the comment, in German, roughly translated by me: A herd of elephants which grows beyond its critical number divides itself into two smaller herds. S. 122: "The geographical dependency of a group depends upon the group's means of communication. With corresponding means even non-geographical groups are possible without difficulties." S. 140: "Apart from territoriality, on a reduced area, there are also, as we have seen, communities or groups that we called non-geographic, i.e., groups whose members are constantly communicating although they do not live side by side." - The economics of this architect is primitive to irrational but there
 are these and other decentralist and panarchist strands of thought. - J.Z., 28.1.99.

FRIEDRICH, CARL J.: Prof., An Introduction to Political Theory, twelve lectures at Harvard, Harper & Row, Publishers, N.Y., Evanston & London, 1967. On page 25 he ascribes the concept of individual sovereignty to J. S. Mill: On Liberty: e.g. p.13 - "Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign" and to the writings of I. Kant. - JZL.  - But neither I. Kant nor J. S. Mill had drawn clear panarchistic conclusions from it. - J.Z.

FRIENDSHIP GROUPS: They have always been exterritorial and insofar panarchistic. The same applies, to a large extent, now more so than ever before, to families.  - J.Z., 15.9.04.

FRONTIERS Borders are myths. Borders have lost all meaning. The French/Belgian border, for example, borders nothing, controls nothing. French Alsatian workers cross into German Switzerland and Germany itself to work, each day by the thousands. French Basques cross into the Spanish Basque Country at will. State frontiers have not been around so long that we should consider them irrevocable. Hitler could have crossed the Swiss frontier any time he wanted to. It wasn't the frontier that kept him out, it was the fact that the German-Swiss were in very good shape. They controlled their own affairs and did not need any outside "help". He knew he would have no support there. The nature of the people kept Hitler out, not the frontier.” - Eugene Goyenneche, in: Michael Zwerin, A Case for the Balkanization of Practically Everyone, p.33. - Not only the German-Swiss were largely opposed to Hitler, but also most of the other minorities and the various local majorities in Switzerland. They were also well prepared to fight for their liberties, so the conquest and occupation of Switzerland would have cost Hitler several divisions which he could not spare. And if all Swiss had lived as completely free men he would not have dared any contact of his subjects with them. - J.Z., 24.6.00. – BORDERS – What remains of borders and frontiers has still many negative and wrong meanings, in most instances. – J.Z., 24.11.10.

FRONTIERS, BORDERS & PANARCHISM: Under panarchism the remaining borders would not be geographical but personal and individual choices that would separate them from other people or unite them with them largely regardless where they live. Even now many of the goods and services that we live by are already supplied by people from all over the world, often even by people we do not know at all, in more or less free exchanges. The Internet has cast an even closer net. It has turned people into friends, who have never met each other personally. – J.Z., 10.5.12.

FRONTIERS: abolish national frontiers.” - Paul Goodman, NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE, 14.7.68.

FRONTIERS: An Old World Frontier is a bayonet-line that marks the geographical limit of a ruler's attempt to control individuals. The Government's actual use of force is stopped there, where the guns and garrisons of another Government face his.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.65.

FRONTIERS: Anarchy knows no frontier; it is a gospel of human brotherhood that spans oceans.”  - Benjamin R. Tucker, LIBERTY, 33-2. - Carl Watner, JLS, Fall 77, p.311. & ANARCHISM

FRONTIERS: As long as state boundaries exist, force will exist.” - Robert Hawkins, LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Summer 77. - (R. H. favors competing governments or panarchism!) - Robert LeFevre commented: "Robert Hawkins makes an excellent point respecting artificial political boundaries. Their elimination will not, however, eliminate the problem. Take a good look at a trade union. It is a quasi-government that does not seek to dominate a territory. However, force persists." - Unions persist because a) there is not enough competition against their "services", e.g. by various self-management systems and b) because due to monetary despotism not enough monetary demand can be realized for the services that labour has to offer, so that it would not, all too often, have to be sold at "emergency sales prices" of wages, that have to be contracted and paid in the State's monopolized currency. c) Moreover, unions have, to a large extent, been granted special legal privileges and exemptions from common law. Thus they are as much the product of State interventionism as is the Mafia. d) Unionists, too, run coercive and monopolistic protection rackets, sometimes enforced even by legalized compulsory membership and closed union shops. – However, the faith in their benevolence and effectiveness is declining and with them the percentage of the voluntary membership in unions. Under full economic freedom they would be reduced to a tiny sect, like the IWW is already now. - J.Z., 28.3.80 & 14.6.00, 10.5.12. – TERRITORIALISM, UNIONS

FRONTIERS: Borders are not defensible. - J.Z., 13.12.73, after reading: Anthony McDermott, in THE AUSTRALIAN, 13.12.73, writing: "totally defensible and secure borders are impossible.” - They can neither be defended on moral, economic nor political grounds. - J.Z., 9/74. - International borders are defensible neither on military nor moral not economic nor political grounds. - J.Z., 31.7.78. - BORDERS, TERRITORIALISM

FRONTIERS: But the Missouri-Kansas line is not an Old World frontier. No one guards it. No one wants to move it, because it is not the boundary of an imaginary control of individuals and an actual use of force.” - Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.68. - No, indeed not. But on both sides the citizens are victims of a major imperial force, that of the Federal Government, which has territorial monopolized most but not all territorial government interventionism. - J.Z., 24.6.00. – The States and Local Governments have their own kinds. – J.Z., 10.5.12.

FRONTIERS: Down with the artificial barriers which were forcibly erected by congresses of despots, according to so-called historic, geographic, commercial and strategic necessities.” - Bakunin, as quoted by Engels, in Democratic Panslavism, in Marx/Engels, The Russian Menace to Europe.

FRONTIERS: Enclosures of any kind are a fertile breeding ground for hatred of outsiders.” - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune, p.27. - Does that really apply to the small parcels of real estate held by private individuals or their coops or companies? - J.Z., 22.6.00. - BORDERS, ENCLOSURES, TERRITORIALISM & PRIVATE REAL ESTATE

FRONTIERS: From here on we recognize no national borders. All countries now belong to all peoples of this planet. No government has the right to bar anyone from leaving or entering any territory. TO PLACE RESTRICTIONS ON OUR FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT IS A VIOLATION OF OUR HUMAN RIGHTS. Passport visas, exist permits, residency rights - all these formalize restrictions on our freedom of movement across this planet which now belongs to all of us.” - F. M. Esfandiary, Up-Wingers, 1973, p.92. - BORDERS, TERRITORIALISM

FRONTIERS: Frontiers are not important but freedom - within them and outside of them, is. - J.Z., 15 March 1988. – FREEDOM

FRONTIERS: Frontiers establish inhuman divisions. - J. Z., 6.6.94. - The notion of "spaceship Earth" indicates the absurdity of these divisions very well. - J.Z., 24.6.00. – HUMANITY

FRONTIERS: Geography - natural frontiers - is the most arbitrary of criteria and means only endless wars.” - W. A. Dunning, Political Theories, p.338, on Renan. – TERRITORIALISM, WARS

FRONTIERS: I'm all for the abolition of all unnecessary and unjustified borders but not, e.g., for the chucking of garbage over the fence into a neighbor's plot or for using it as a toilet for one's pets. - I would also like to see all those behind bars or otherwise severely penalized, who like to drop their rubbish wherever they go, e.g. alongside highways. - Maybe when DNA and fingerprinting and other identification methods are perfected we can respond to all persistent litterers with a high bill for all the clean-up and identification costs involved. Neither the air ocean nor the seas or water ways are to be any longer considered as public dumping grounds, least of all for radioactive garbage produced by government installations. - J.Z., 23.3.98 & 13.6.00. - BORDERS, FENCES, LITTERING, POLLUTION

FRONTIERS: If one raises one's view one sees no frontiers.” - Japanese proverb.

FRONTIERS: It is a ridiculous justice that is limited by a river! Truth this side of the Pyrenees and error across it.” – Pascal, Pensées, Nr. 294, ed. Giraud. (“Eine spassige Gerechtigkeit, die von einem Fluss begrenzt wird! Wahrheit diesseits der Pyrenaeen ist Irrtum jenseits.“) - BORDERS, TERRITORIAL LAWS & JUSTICE, TERRITORIAL LEGISLATION

FRONTIERS: lines drawn on the earth make no boundaries and no defence.” - Ursula K. LeGuin, The Left Hand of Darkness, p.65. - But they can indicate and make much coercive and monopolistic interventionism, like the "turf" which private gangs claim for themselves. - J.Z., 14.6.00.

FRONTIERS: National borders are irrelevant for free economic relationships. They are only important for anti-economic or neo-comic relationships, and monopolistic relationships between members of different nations, i.e. for coercive interferences by territorial governments with private, peaceful and productive and mutual benefit relationships. - J.Z., n.d. & 24.6.00, 22.12.08. - BORDERS, ECONOMICS, FREE TRADE

FRONTIERS: Only perhaps in the United States, which alone of countries can do without governing, - every man being at least able to live, and move off into the wilderness, let Congress jargon as it will, - can such a form of so-called "Government" continue for any length of time to torment men with the semblance, when the indispensable substance is not there.” - Thomas Carlyle, Latter-Day Pamphlets, no. 6, pp. 16-17 (1850). - Let them emigrate internally, like they do in the sphere of religion, establish their societies and governments based upon their faiths and convictions. - J.Z., 11.10.02. - ESCAPE FROM GOVERNMENT, WILDERNESS, PIONEERING, EMIGRATION, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR COMMUNITIES & SOCIETIES AS WELL AS GOVERNANCE SYTEMS OF VOLUNTEERS ONLY.

FRONTIERS: People within national borders remind me of penned-in cattle, contentedly grazing while being milked and waiting for their slaughter time to arrive. - J.Z., 1.12.81 & 14.6.00. - Territorial nations are nation-wide prison systems and, at least to the extent of taxation, also forced labor camps. - J.Z., 14.6.00.

FRONTIERS: Should nations be fenced in or should their members be free as nationals and human beings, all over the world, to live in their own way? - J.Z., 4.6.86. – PANARCHISM, Q.

FRONTIERS: The border does not lie between right and left but between liberty and authoritarianism.” - Andre Siegenthaler, in ESPERO 4/5, p.9. - LIBERTARIANISM VS. AUTHORITARIANISM

FRONTIERS: The defence of freedom is worth the price of many lives, voluntarily offered, in the opinion of freedom lovers. The defence of a mere State border and of State privileges - none! - J.Z., 20.9.88 & 26.6.00. – FREEDOM

FRONTIERS: The front is a line dividing right from wrong.” - Heinrich Gerlach, The Forsaken Army, p.326. - If that were really the case then no frontier would exist today for right and wrong can be found on both sides of all marked geographical borders. It makes more sense to speak about borders around individuals. Those around people acting only rightfully ought to be made inviolable. Those around invaders, aggressors, criminals with victims, ought no longer to be respected by anyone. By their actions they lost the rights of reasonable beings, at least to a large extent and for some time. What remains to them is only the right of animals, i.e. not to be, without necessity, killed or cruelly treated- J.Z., 13.6.00. - WAR, BORDERS, BOUNDARIES, RIGHT & WRONG, ENEMY

FRONTIERS: The new frontiers to be conquered are mainly in the convolutions of the cortex.” - Arthur Koestler - NEW ONES, IN THE MIND, BRAIN, IDEAS

FRONTIERS: There are no rightful, natural and inherent frontiers for States. They all have expansionary tendencies that can and have easily crossed oceans and mountain chains, not to speak of rivers. We ought to draw the line against governments somewhere else: mainly around individuals! - J.Z., 28.1.77 & 14.6.00. – TERRITORIALISM

FRONTIERS: We mean to erase politically constructed national boundaries and bring to human beings the liberty to travel and trade where they will, at their own expense and risk.” - Roy Childs, Liberty Against Power, p.9. - To avoid misunderstandings he should have added: migrate, settle, work and invest. - J.Z., 14.6.00.

FRONTIERS: We neither need weak nor strong frontiers but NO frontiers. - J.Z., 8.6.91. - Already Pericles, when speaking about the defence of Athens, argued that the love of liberty among its people would constitute a better defence for it than the strongest wall. - J.Z., 22.6.00.

FUERER-HAIMENDORF, CHRISTOPH VON: in his "Man, Myth and Magic", No.15, p.416, is an article on "caste": He describes the Indian caste system as a system of peaceful coexistence of many different groups - however stagnant and unequal, custom-, habit- and tradition-ridden. – J.Z., n.d. & 10.5.12. - INDIA, CASTE SYSTEM, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, PERSONAL LAW

FULKS, JOE: On Panarchy, 20, 61/2, in PEACE PLANS No. 505. -- 99, 114, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. - - 55, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585. - 97, 105, in ON PANARCHY XV, in PP 879.

FULL MINORITY AUTONOMY: This requires exterritorial autonomy and freedom for individuals and minorities to secede from territorial States - to do their own things for and to themselves, in accordance with their beliefs and convictions, as a matter of individual rights and liberties. - J.Z., 15.9.04.

FUNDAMENTALISTS: Fundamentalists are mystics, dogmatists and fanatics, who are fundamentally wrong on basic religious, moral, political, economic and social issues. - J.Z., 2.3.95. – However, no matter how wrong their views are, they ought to be set free to practise them upon themselves, at their own risk and expense. - Full exterritorial autonomy for all of them - and for all of their opponents! - J.Z., 13.6.00, 10.5.12. – FUNDAMENTALISTS, RELIGIOUS & OTHER TOLERANCE & FREEDOM

FUTURE FOR MAN: The shape of things to come. - The scenarios presented above, even when they are in stark contrast to one another (decadence - regeneration) all share a common aspect, namely the end of statism and the disappearance of the territorial sovereign state. - Technological, ecological, economic, cultural and many other factors all coalesce into a trend whose continuous progression will sanction the end of the age of statism. - What precisely will replace the ideology of statism and the state as organization is not clear yet, but the fact that individuals living in advanced societies (and not only them) are moving in the direction of post-statism reality/realities is more than a simple matter of chance. It is a consolidated dynamic that only state subservient social scientists fail to notice. - This being the case, it is then likely that, with the formation of a critical mass of individuals thinking outside the ideology of statism and acting beyond the sphere of the state, a tipping point will be reached (probably during the first quarter of the XXI century) that will start a chain reaction leading to the widespread acceptance of new ideas (new paradigm/s) and new forms of behaviour (new social organization/s). - At this stage we can only formulate hypotheses, based on past history, about the Who (protagonists) and What (organizations) will replace the state. They might be: scattered individuals and communities, like after the collapse of the Roman Empire and the abandonment of Rome in favour of the countryside; parallel societies, like different Churches existing side by side after the wars of religions and the acceptance/practice of religious tolerance; unified ecumene like a cosmopolis (or cosmorurapolis) inhabited and animated by cosmopolitan human beings. This would be something totally new that has nothing to do with the emergence of a world government but with the formation of world citizens and of a global village. - These new protagonists and new organizations are not mutually exclusive, but might be present, in various ways, at the same time, in different realities or even coexist in the same place. - We could give these three hypothetical outcomes the names personarchy, polyarchy, panarchy. However, what is important is not to stick labels on new realities but to sense what are the qualities of the new protagonists and the essence of the new organizations. - If decadence and/or collapse are only temporary phases of the human adventure and are followed by regeneration, for this to take hold it is necessary that individuals with creative and critical faculties multiply and spread everywhere. - The qualities of these individuals and the essence of the organizations they will be members of,? are likely to be characterized by:- enthusiasm and energy - - knowledge and wisdom - - trust and care. - When enough individuals with those qualities come forward and actively use and promote those qualities, against all obstacles, then, no comma? new social entities will emerge based on new organizational lines. At that point regeneration will be in full swing. - It is up to everyone to make his/her choices. - And it is always time to make the appropriate choices. - Let the Persons be and let Life begin! - Gian Piero de Bellis in: Scenarios for the Future. Scenarios for the Future - A man-made future rather than a State-made future. Free Societies, chosen by individuals for themselves, versus territorial States imposed upon whole territories. - J.Z., 26.8.11. - PANARCHISM, PERSONARCHY, MANARCHY, POLYARCHY ETC. A FREE & NATURAL LIFE, GROWTH & DEVELOPMENT INSTEAD OF A CENTRALLY PLANNED & IMPOSED ONES.

FUTURE: I have been over in the future and it works.” - L. Steffens, in The Peter Plan, by L.J. Peter, p. 54. - To each only the future he or she wants for themselves, together with like-minded people - and at their own risk and expense. - J.Z., 13.6.00. – To each the choice of his own utopia! – J.Z., 22.12.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

FUTURE: I hold that man is in the right who is most closely in league with the future.” - Henrik Ibsen, quoted by L. J. Peter in The Peter Plan, p.51. - As if "the future" were an already existing association and as if there were only one possible and desirable future for all. Let each be free to design and suffer his own kind of future or be "master of his own fate." - J.Z., 13.6.00. – PANARCHISM

FUTURE: I will be more of a man: I will forget the past, and do better for the time to come. The future, the future is always our own.” - William Godwin, Caleb Williams, p.124. - Yes, if we are quite free to choose it for ourselves. But all too often and in too many important matters we are territorially forced to live in the nightmarish futures that other have dreamed up for or against ourselves within their territorial, exclusive, monopolistic, coercive, collectivistic and centralistic systems. We ought to be free to choose, to opt out, to withdraw, to secede from any and all of them. - J.Z., 13.6.00, 10.5.12.

FUTURE: If there is to be a future for humans on this planet then you and I will have to work to help make and secure it. Are you ready for this task? Do you already know enough about it? If then, then let's discuss the problems involved - if there is a spark of survival instinct left in you. - If you are prepared to furthermore entrust your future and that of your children and grandchildren and friends and other relatives to the tender mercies of territorial governments then you deserve to be their victim and are likely to die as such. - J.Z., n.d. & 13.6.00. - MAN-MADE INSECURITIES & CRISES, WARS, CRIMES, OPPRESSION, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY & FREE EXPERIMENTATION

FUTURE: It is impossible today to plan, build or save for the future. Without liberty there is no future.” - Rene Baxter, in introductory letter to THE FREEDOM FIGHTER. - We continue to exist (it does not deserve the term “live” or “living”?) under bureaucracies, an avalanche of laws and taxes, inflation, deflation, stagflation, the threat of war, oppression, nuclear holocaust and numerous other threats, mostly posed by territorial governments, which endanger the futures of all of us. - J.Z., 13.6.00. – Nevertheless, we do not even bother to sufficiently discuss individual and group secessions from territorial governments and the natural follow-ups of new societies and communities, all only with voluntary members, under personal law and with full exterritorial autonomy – all free to do their own things for and to themselves., From this kind of experimental freedom even the ignorant and prejudiced would tend to learn very fast, for more or quite successful experiments by others would be all around them. – J.Z., 24.11.10, 10.5.12 - INSECURITY, INTERVENTIONISM, CRISES, SECURITY

FUTURE: The future cannot be predicted. It can only be invented.” - Dennis Gabor.  - We already suffer from too many invented utopian and territorial schemes that are imposed upon us. We ought to be free to liberate ourselves from all these inventions and to invent or adopt for our own purposes, aims and means, only our own or those which we do prefer for ourselves from very diverse and freely competing suppliers. - We need to so liberate ourselves that, as a result, we do get a future, the kind of future we want for ourselves, independent of the votes and powers and institutions of all those who disagree with us. We should not any longer remain the involuntary subjects of the experiments preferred by others but, instead, have our own free experiments or loyalties or traditions without interference. - Free societies need not be newly invented. They should merely be released from their present fetters or obstacles. The territorial States ought to take their boots, taxes, laws and bureaucracies etc. off them. - J.Z., 13.6.00. – Futuristic and libertarian utopias science fiction stories should offer more than a repetition of mere old “gold age” myths and errors. – J.Z., 22.12.08. – FUTURISM, PROPHECIES, PREDICTIONS, INVENTING THE FUTURE, UTOPIAS

FUTURE: The future has no cure for the past.” - Author unidentified. - I would rather say: The future IS the cure for wrongs and mistakes of the past. - - The wrongs of the past are much easier to bear once they have finally been ended. - J.Z., 1985, 25.6.00, 22.12.08. – Or when each individual or group of volunteers are free to end it for themselves and to build another and better future for themselves. They have plenty of historical examples on what not to do. There is even much advice on offer, on what to do, when they are free to do it. – J.Z., 24.11.10. - PAST, ERRORS

FUTURISM: To each his own chosen future within the framework of his rights and what is scientifically and economically possible for him. - J.Z., 11.9.87. – PANARCHISM


[Home] [Top]