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 - T2

(1973 - 2012)



TERRORISM & COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY: Terrorism, wars, civil wars, bloody revolutions, mass murders, oppressions and persecutions of whole groups of innocents are all the results of the territorialist ideology and its practices, combined with quite wrongful notions on “collective responsibility”. - JZ, 04-11.

TERRORISM & PANARCHISM: Panarchism can realize what is rightful among the aspirations of terrorists and can thus turn them from their indiscriminately destructive and murderous activities into creative ones. It amounts to full experimental freedom for communities of volunteers in the political, economic and social spheres. Under territorialism the radical dissenters do, all too often, rather prefer violence and bloodshed (associated with expropriations and occupations) to submission to territorial laws and institutions of their opponents. They get no chance to run their own affairs in accordance with their beliefs, convictions and ideologies, however rational or irrational these may be. Should they still remain intolerant and aggressive in a territorial way, wishing to force their systems upon others, then I see no way for panarchistically tolerating these intolerant parts of their program. Even panarchism is no cure-all for degrees of aggressive insanity- JZ, n.d. & revised: 5.11.11, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM & TERRITORIAL STATES: Should we entrust the biggest terrorists and killers of all, the territorial States, with the fight against terrorism? Should we also continue to ignore the fact that territorial statism, by its very existence, continues to breed or condition terrorists and that it might bring about the general nuclear holocaust for mankind? - JZ, 13. 5. 02, 31.10.02, 15.8.12. – Q.

TERRORISM THROUGH TERRITORIALISM: Terrorism is the result of territorialism, even when it comes through forms of representative or direct democracies. (*) For even then it is still essentially authoritarian towards dissenters and minorities, even though, sometimes, only on much smaller territories. - Collective Responsibility is the other leg totalitarianism stands on. - (*) As e.g. indiscriminate air raids did, in WW II, the Korean and the Vietnam war. Nuclear war does also amount to preparations for such "warfare", where the "weapons" amount to scientific, cheap and portable extermination camp packages, with which any city and its population could be wiped out at any time. - JZ, 30.3.91, 9.1.99, 8.12.03, 22.9.04, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM, CIVIL WARS, WARS, BLOODY REVOLUTIONS ETC.:  Terrorism, wars, civil wars, bloody revolutions, mass murders, oppressions and  persecutions of whole groups of innocents are all the results of the territorialist ideology and its practices, combined with quite wrongful notions on “collective responsibility”.

TERRORISM, FEAR: He who strikes terror into others is himself in continual fear.” - Claudian.

TERRORISM, PANARCHISM, GOVERNMENTS, ATROCITIES, MONETARY FREEDOM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY.  – Panarchists could, to some extent, side with governments in their fight against terrorism but without subscribing to the mere police, secret police and military efforts of governments, their merely suppressive and penal measures, which usually fail, for years, decades or even centuries – precisely because they are based on the territorial model.  The recognition of exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers – of former terrorists and „freedom-fighters“ and, more importantly, for their peaceful sympathizers, would also assure the same liberty and just settlement for all those who are still supporters of the present territorial governments. It would merely deprive them or their wrongful territorial monopoly and power over dissenters. It would even be a win-win settlement for all sides. The formerly ruling territorialists would, without any struggle on their side, lose all their active opponents, through their exterritorial secessions. It would also settle the infighting occurring within the opposition, resistance and freedom fighters, which often weakened them very much and prevented them from succeeding against more united governmental forces. For their various factions could all become exterritorially independent, if they want this for themselves.  For the sake of peace, the avoidance of further bloodshed, even amnesty should be considered for former terrorists who finally stop engaging in terrorist actions, i.e., actions on the „principle“ of collective responsibility. But while they are still active they should be considered as „outlaws“ in the old sense, i.e., as people who can be rightly executed by anyone getting the chance to do so. Once taken prisoner, they should at least be granted the rights of POW’s. Here one should take into consideration that territorial governments, in their wars, have often killed, carelessly or unintentionally even more innocent people than the terrorists have and, sometimes, committed mass murders as a matter of strategy, e.g. via all too indiscriminate air raids. – The experimental freedom introduced by panarchism would also end, relatively fast, deflations and inflations, with their masses of unemployment and their largely expropriated debtors and creditors, and would promote fast economic development, larger and faster than the economic “wonders“ in post-WW IIWest Germany and Japan, thus spreading satisfaction and reducing old hatreds. – JZ, 17.1.05, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM, SECRET SOCIETIES, CONSPIRACIES, MAFIA, ORGANIZED CRIME, POLICE MONOPOLY: What does characterize and perpetuate most secret societies, terrorist groups, conspirators etc.? While one may freely join them - after some testing - one may not freely leave them or only by risking one's life. This they do have in common with territorial States, although they are not necessarily organized territorially but, sometimes exterritorially and sometimes internationally, too. While they may try to cover exclusively some of the action in a territory, they do not, like States, attempt to provide all kinds of "public services" or public disservice actions in that territory. How much power could they retain if their dissatisfied members and victims could easily opt out from under their rule? And how much power could they retain on their outlawed or black markets if these markets were not outlawed in the first place by territorial governments but replaced by quite free markets and if they were not merely confronted by a monopolized police force but by competing private protection agencies and citizen militias? In other words, while the Mafia has SOME features in common with panarchies, it does not have one essential feature: freedom to opt out, and it does not, in general, aim at the protection of individual rights and minority autonomy, either. Territorial States and their restrictions are one of the preconditions for the development and staying power of organized crime and sometimes there are also considerable links between these two protection rackets. - JZ, 21.3.89, 31.3.89, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: A man who causes fear cannot be free from fear.” - Epicurus. – Wrongs, aggressions, suppressions and intolerance breed further wrongs, aggressions, suppressions and intolerance. –JZ, 14.4.09. - FEAR, DESPOTISM, TYRANNY

TERRORISM: A.) WHAT IS RIGHT ABOUT IT? B.) WHAT IS WRONG ABOUT IT? - A.) The wish for independence and self-government. The right to resist wrongful oppression and exploitation. The right not to be subjected to the laws and institutions that others passed in their own interest and at the risk and expense of those who do not agree with them, as far as their own affairs are concerned. I.e., the numerous disadvantaged and discriminated against minorities, whose only remaining option is to try to become or to persuade the majority, which is rather difficult regarding deep-seated errors, beliefs and convictions of the majority. - B.) Most terrorists themselves aim at intolerant and territorial domination, rather than merely at self-government under personal laws and institutions of their own, including legislative and juridical ones. Moreover, they hold innocent people collectively responsible, with their lives, for crimes committed or supposed to have been committed by their governments against the terrorists or those the terrorists sympathize with. - - A.) Genuine freedom fighters would aim only at exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities. To the extent that terrorists would only aim at that they would be right. To the extent that they would use terrorism, as a supposed means to reach that objective, they would still be wrong. I do not know of any terrorist group that has only such a rightful aim. - - B.) Genuine freedom fighters would not commit any terrorist acts against innocents, on the principle of collective responsibility but they might, quite rightfully, engage e.g. in tyrannicide and in genuinely liberating revolutions and uprisings that would liberate even those minorities or local majorities with whom they happen to disagree, by realizing, for them as well, all their voluntaristic and exterritorial options, their panarchies or polyarchies or establishing the framework in which they could form such communities themselves. – JZ, 23.1.04, 31.10.07, 15.8,12.

TERRORISM: All nuclear weapons are already controlled by terrorists, those constitutionally, legally and juridically, but not morally and individually, put in authority over such mass murder devices, their production, stockpiling, stand-by readiness and their use or, rather, abuse. Already for decades they have terrorized the people of this planet with them but have not eliminated conventional wars, either, by these anti-people “weapons”. – JZ, 31.1.03., 1.2.03, 21.10.07, 15.8.12. - NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, IRAQ & AFGHANISTAN WAR, TERRITORIAL WARFARE STATES, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

TERRORISM: Almost every European government is a legalized manufactory of dynamiters. Vexation piled upon vexation, restriction upon restriction, burden upon burden, the dynamiter is slowly hammered out everywhere on the official anvil. The more patient submit, but the stronger and more rebellious characters are maddened, and any weapon is considered right, as the weapon of the weaker against the stronger. …” Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p.223.

TERRORISM: Amnesty and exterritorial autonomy even for terrorists, provided only that they do surrender or are already captured and disarmed? After all, it was territorialism, combined with the predominant collective responsibility notions that led them into terrorism in the first place. And how many of the “decent” people have so far been quite clearly against territorialism and collective responsibility? – To that extent they are culprits, too. “Judge not, so that you will not be judged!” - JZ, 28.2.95, 18.7.08, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: an enemy whose deliberate policy was hysterical violence.” - "We will run amok!" - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune, p.179. - Their "why", their motive, ought to be explored - and the possibility of preventing it from arising. That is certainly not possible for every violent madman and zealot, but for many who have been turned into such by circumstances, ignorance, prejudices and false ideas. Among the latter the most important are: territorialism, collective responsibility and monetary despotism. Their opposites have the potential to turn the practice of terrorism to close to zero. - JZ, 7.2.02. - Can one expect terrorists to be fully aware of all genuine individual rights and liberties and to respect them – when most of the population, not to speak of most of the territorial rulers, are not? – J.Z., 15.8.12. – Q., AMOK, VIOLENCE

TERRORISM: Any coercion preventing dissenters from doing their own thing – at their own expense and risk and among themselves only (no matter how spleeny their ideas and actions may appear to others), does invite resistance, reprisals and even terrorist actions from those, who are thus frustrated in the attempts to realize their “ideals”, because under territorialism they can see almost no chance at all to get their ideals realized by mere persuasion efforts followed by majority voting. – Even if their ideas are quite correct, they are confronted by a mass of popular errors, myths, dogmas, prejudices, false definitions assumptions and conclusions against which no effective defences have so far been created or established or widely enough published. - JZ, 15.5.85, 26.7.08, 15.8.12. – NEW DRAFT manuscript of 2010.

TERRORISM: By suppressing exterritorial autonomy for volunteers the territorial governments create terrorism. By using terrorism as a means towards becoming territorially sovereign the terrorists themselves suppress the exterritorial autonomy of others, i.e., act like repressive territorial governments. – They deserve each other but their innocent victims do not deserve to be victimized by either of them. -  JZ, 28.5.08, 26.7.08, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: Citizen acts of terrorism (extreme misanthropy) are inevitable signs of ubiquitous government.” – Charles R. LaDow, THE FREEMAN, 9/74. – Also of the principle and practice of collective responsibility, which all people take all too much for granted. This principle is also supported by most religions, e.g. by the dogma on supposedly inherited sin, which denies individual responsibility. – JZ, 3.2.12. - COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENT POWER, MAJORITARIANISM, AUTHORITARIANISM

TERRORISM: Counter-terror and mere policing and military suppression and various security measures are not the best responses to terrorism. Tolerance is, not for the terrorist acts themselves but for all rightful aims of terrorists, provided only that they are prepared to realize them only for and among themselves and only at their own expense and risk. Their personal rights and liberties should be extended and recognized to that extent. Once this is done, then they will be well on the road to become peaceful and tolerant themselves. Then they will be free to practise their “ideals” among themselves, at their own risk and expense and without any territorial or international interventions. That will keep them occupied and disinterested in promoting their ideals territorially via terrorist attacks. Because then they would already be free to realize their ideals among themselves, would not even have to argue about them with their opponents and everything else would merely distract them from that “new business” opportunity and its chores. Beyond that, we have to demolish their collective responsibility notions – starting by destroying them within ourselves first. – Panarchist successful experiments would also demonstrate to them how to end e.g. involuntary unemployment, economic crises, inflation and poverty, and this rather fast. People, whose living standard is rapidly rising, by their own productive, creative or exchange efforts, will be disinclined to become e.g. suicide bombers. – Among their like-minded fellow experimenters they would also find their ideal men and women. Perhaps the most effective measure might therefore be the compilation and publication of an ideal declaration of individual rights and liberties. Who has already taken some steps in this direction or is willing to do so? – I offer as a starting point and reference a digitized anthology of over 130 PRIVATE human rights drafts. - JZ, 2.11.00, 20.7.08. See: - Index of /lmp/cd – INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, HUMAN RIGHT DRAFTS

TERRORISM: Counter-terror must be directed only against the guilty, not against any innocents. – JZ, 15.10.87.

TERRORISM: Crime and terror can't be fought militarily, especially not with area bombing, concentration camps and ABC mass murder devices. - JZ, 24.9.01. - Try exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers, individual responsibility, monetary and financial freedom and other liberties instead! Give terrorists a chance to rule themselves, and themselves only, in the only way that this is possible, and they will soon cease to terrorize others and do harm only to themselves, by their remaining ignorance, errors, beliefs and prejudices. - JZ, 31.1.02, 15.8.12. - & CRIME, AIR RAIDS, BOMBING, MILITARY STRENGTH, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, MINORITY AUTONOMY

TERRORISM: Disarm terrorists and rehabilitate them by offering them the kind of autonomy they could or should be satisfied with – not on a territorial basis but merely on that of personal law or exterritorial autonomy or experimental freedom for their volunteers. – JZ, 21.12.82, 26.7.08, 24.3.11.

TERRORISM: Every state is a "terrorist state," for each, in varying degrees, threatens people with the infliction of violence or death for failure to abide by its demands.” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 58. – By its monetary and financial despotism the territorial State also creates degrees of poverty and unemployment which are breeding grounds for terrorism and violent revolutions of its victims, who are, economically, just as ignorant and prejudiced as are their rulers. – Territorialism gives the somewhat enlightened minorities no chance to do their own things only for themselves, under full experimental freedom, which requires - in the sphere of the social sciences - the same kind of experimental freedom that does already exist in most other spheres. Thus they cannot set better examples for the rest or learn from those set by others. – Probably, this book can be found online. - JZ, 14.4.09, 15.8.12. - & STATES, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

TERRORISM: experience showed that domestic terrorism isn’t needed to further imperial ambitions, is actually counter-productive.” – Poul Anderson, The Byworlder, p.64. – The same applies to international terrorism and to domestic and international counter-terrorism by territorial governments. – JZ, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: Exterritorialism, on a voluntary basis, might come to end terrorism, in connection with sufficient enlightenment on the wrongfulness of collective responsibility practices. Terrorists and anti-terrorists have both territorialist ambitions, which make them, inevitably, antagonistic to each other. If all dissenters, even those forming only small minorities, had the exterritorialist panarchistic option for themselves, then few of them would be motivated to struggle towards their ideal with the means and methods of terrorism. Most of their ideal could then be realized, as far as humanly possible, among their volunteers, in a quite tolerant way towards outsiders or non-members and at the own expense rather than at the expense of others. Under voluntary membership - and the pressure of competition from other societies - each group of true believers would also have to provide some small to large successes for its system, relatively soon, or it would lose many members and could not gain enough new members to make up for such losses. Their leaders would have to put up or shut up. Nor could they prevent their members receiving much criticism from member of other societies with other convictions. Only by renouncing and doing away with exclusive territorial domination attempts can all kinds of movements and beliefs be realized, as far as possible, among their believers, under full exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. Under such freedom conditions terrorist acts would be condemned even by most of their fellow believers. There would be no longer any territorialist repression, which would breed more and more resistance and even terrorism. – JZ, 6.10.93, 19.7.08. - & THE TERRITORIALIST CONNECTION, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY

TERRORISM: Fanaticism is always the child of persecution.” – Napoleon I, to Barry E. O’Meara at St. Helena, Jan. 27, 1817. – Not always but often. – JZ

TERRORISM: for terrorism is, in practice, no more than ordinary warfare in which the objectives are the enemy’s highest officers and principal buildings and the maximum use is made of surprise. It is an infinitely cleaner kind of warfare, than, for example, the pattern bombing or enemy cities in which, as in terrorist warfare, civilians are as often the objectives as soldiers; and it is far more discriminating. The only serious question in the context of war is – is terrorism effective?” – Edward Hyams, Killing No Murder, p.171. – How can buildings be an enemy? This is as irrational as the destruction of churches by non-believers is. If there are no longer enough faithful to support a church the building can still be useful for other purposes. No place is more “holy” than any other. - Is either method rightful? – JZ, 26.7.08. - WARFARE, INDISCRIMINATE MURDER & DESTRUCTION, DIS.

TERRORISM: French society reacted violently against the anarchists before 1914,” Tixier-Vignancourt believes. “Terrorists were stopped by the gallows, the guillotine and public opinion. But at the time we had a healthy society, a civilized society …  Material terrorism stems from intellectual terrorism which is at once its innovator and source of inspiration.” – TROTN, quoted in NEWS DIGEST INTERNATIONAL, 9/77. – I deny that we have ever as yet had a fully civilized human society. Many important individual rights and liberties are still widely unknown or ignored. – JZ, 15.8.12. – CIVILIZATION, SOCIETY, HUMAN RIGHTS, DIS.

TERRORISM: How come we have an international association of terrorists before we have an international association of moral and tolerant minorities, that aspires to nothing but full exterritorial autonomy for all its very diverse communities of volunteers? – One of the main reasons seems to be that coercing others is either quite natural to almost all of us or because, as territorial statists, we do remain ignorant of or prejudiced against exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, and thus adhere to the “territorial imperative” rather than the “exterritorial imperative” and do not want to give up the deadly, destructive and despotic systems, institutions, “thinking” and “ideas” or prejudices as well as "actions" of territorialism. – JZ, 17.2.82, 20.2.82, 26.7.08, 24.3.11, 15.8.12. - EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE VS. TERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE, Q.

TERRORISM: How could one at the same time support full autonomy and self-responsibility for terrorists while, at the same time, strictly opposing and persecuting all their present and future aggressive, murderous and destructive methods against others? A complete refusal of all their "liberation" aims will, of course, continue to breed terrorists - as would a suppression of the practice of most faiths. Supposedly, most of them do not aim at terrorism in permanence, but only practise terrorism as a means towards the achievement of their "ideal" among themselves. If that ideal could be freely practised by them now, at their expense and risk, even while it would remain rejected by most people around them, in and for the lives of these other people, would terrorism then still go on, largely unchecked or even growing, or would it peter out? - Is there any other way to grant them what they want, for themselves, without subjecting others to what the terrorists suppose to be an ideal form of society, than granting terrorists (as well as all their opponents) full exterritorial autonomy, if they want it? - In the non-territorial minority autonomy model for volunteers, the terrorists would not have to defeat or terrorize the majority to achieve their aims for themselves, by imposing it for all. They could have, what they want, just like their favorite meals, for themselves but without dominating dissenters. They could get it without voting or bomb attacks or guerilla or military victories. The wrongfulness of their own ideas, the flaws in their systems, their internal contradictions, could not remain lastingly unknown to them, if they could practise them freely among themselves but at their own risk and expense only, under optimal conditions, i.e. among fanatic volunteers. Terrorism would tend to shrivel away or become transformed into a peaceful part of the whole minority autonomy movement for freedom of action and experimentation among volunteers. That would even apply to those kinds of terrorism, which now get statist support from totalitarian or dictatorial regimes. For these regimes could also be unsaddled via a program based upon minority autonomy for all - on a voluntary and non-geographical basis. This process may already have begun, if it does not remain confined merely to geographical secessionism and autonomy, if the latest reports from Hungary, Poland, Lithuania and Latvia are any guide. - JZ, 8 Oct. 88, 10 Oct. 89. – Q.

TERRORISM: How much, if at all, has international terrorism been reduced since the collapse of its sponsorship by the Soviet Empire? – JZ, 10.5.92. – The Anti-Americanism and Anti-Capitalism which the Soviet Union sponsored and all the other popular errors, myths and prejudices which led to territorial States, are still all too much alive, everywhere, and are not systematically and efficiently countered. – JZ, 26.7.08. – Q.

TERRORISM: I invite you, my friends, to consider a much more sinister proposition: that violence, cruelty and murder are completely rational acts, devised as deliberately as a theatre piece, to further the aims - political, financial or personal - of those who perpetrate them." - Morris West, "Proteus", 67. - Panarchies would grant even those people, who are now, under territorialism, terroristically inclined, all their rights and liberties and would thereby, frequently if not mostly, prevent them from becoming or remaining territorial terrorists. - JZ, 30.6.92, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: I think the terror most people are concerned with is the IRS." - Malcolm Forbes, when asked if he was afraid of terrorism. - & TAXATION

TERRORISM: in 1920 and 1921, she had second thoughts. It is one thing to employ violence in combat as a means of defence, but to institutionalize terrorism as the Bolsheviks had done is altogether different. ‘Such terrorism begets counter-revolution and in turn becomes counter-revolutionary’.” – Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, on Emma Goldman, p.405.

TERRORISM: In one way and only one way can the dynamiter be permanently disarmed – by abandoning in almost all directions our force machinery, and accustoming the people to believe in the blessed weapons of reason, persuasion, and voluntary service. (*) We have morally made the dynamiter; we must now morally unmake him.” - Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p.226. - (*) As well as in full exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers, doing their own things for or to themselves. – JZ, 26.3.08. – FORCE, COERCION, COMPULSION, TERRITORIALISM, INTOLERANCE, TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

TERRORISM: In the utilization of military possibilities, to talk in the language of the military, the “existing weapons” were employed, without regard for the own and the foreign population. – The use of the first atomic bomb and later the use of napalm bombs was done upon orders by a democratic government. In this the atomic test in Hiroshima was undertaken although at this point of time the military defeat of Japan was already assured. This murder of 90,000 people was never punished. – Whether the State’s terrorism – for nothing else were the wars of the past and will be the coming ones, will guarantee security (whose security?) – will remain questionable.” – LERNZIEL ANARCHY Nr. 3.

TERRORISM: It is the mindlessness and lack of quite rightful and liberating ideas among the terrorists and among the anti-terrorists “revolutionaries” and “warriors” that concerns me most. Their numerous wrong ideas makes them fight with wrong means for wrongful or flawed causes. Primarily both are intolerant territorialists and both apply all too much the “principle” of collective responsibility. Both do not sufficiently explore what induces terrorists to become terrorists and what conditions or institutions would not breed terrorists and would reduce terrorism almost to zero. Among these means would e.g. be individual secessionism and voluntary associationism under exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. Full employment mainly via full monetary and financial freedom. The replacement of collective responsibility by individual responsibility. The knowledge and practice of all individual rights and liberties – to the extent that one does wish to apply them among like-minded volunteers. The protection of individual rights and liberties through properly enlightened, motivated, trained and armed voluntary citizen forces. Easy access to all of the best libertarian ideas. The systematic refutation of all popular errors, myths and prejudices. – Mere military and police repression may produce more terrorists than it eliminates. - JZ, 26.10.07, 14.4.09. – ENLIGHTENMENT, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS DECLARATION, NEW DRAFT, IDEAS ARCHIVE, ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICES

TERRORISM: It should come as no surprise to find that the majority of the current crop of international terrorists come from prosperous liberal-minded middle-class families.” – H. R. H. Prince Philip, quoted in QUADRANT, 1/78. – Under the present territorial system they are insufficiently enlightened and all too frustrated intellectuals, who want to reform whole territories and populations according to their own territorialist notions, just like all the ruling territorial governments do. But the ruling territorial governments usually conform to popular errors and prejudices, while the likewise territorialist terrorists cannot with a similar success appeal to these errors and prejudices of the majorities. They are small secular sectarians without the benefit of the equivalent of religious freedom or religious tolerance in the political, economic and social spheres, which they want to territorially change according to their own preferences, not those of the majority of the population in these territories or those of other diverse and numerous minorities. – If the terrorists were sufficiently enlightened, then they would throw away their bombs and other devices and begin agitating for exterritorial autonomy for all communities of volunteers that merely want to do their own things for or to themselves. – Territorial governments do, as such and quite naturally, not offer them this kind of solution, either, but, rather, conduct prolonged military and police campaigns against them, by which still more innocent civilians or killed, injured and tortured. – However, with this program they could all other  minorities on their side and even many of those factions, which are part of the majority, and also all kinds of governments-in-exile, which do exist internationally. Thus, between them, they might even come to form an effective majority, while also minimizing resistance against them, for the existing regimes could continue to exists for their remaining volunteers, after their territorial statist regime over the whole population has been abolished. – They would have “lost” only rule over those people they do not agree with and might come to say to themselves: Good riddance. - JZ, 26.7.08, 24.3.11, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: Legalizing counter-terror and dictatorial methods and wars against governments that shelter terrorists, are not the ideal methods to prevent or fight terrorism or even to find terrorists. - Terrorism must be cut at its roots: Territorialism, collective responsibility, monetary despotism, other economic interventionism and education systems that do not educate or enlighten. - JZ, 28.9.01, 31.1.02.

TERRORISM: Less than 1,000 Americans die from terrorist attacks every year, which accounts for far fewer deaths than from falling off a ladder at home or from riding a bicycle.” - Stephen Moore & Julian L. Simon: It’s Getting Better all the Time. Greatest Trends the Last 100 Years, p. 178. Cato Institute, 2000 & 2001,

TERRORISM: Let terrorists secede and most of them will soon no longer be terrorists. – JZ, 30.10.81. – They will then be all too busy to try to realize their ideals among themselves. – JZ, 26.7.08. – SECESSIONISM. – See also under COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY

TERRORISM: Man is created free, is free. // Even if he were born in chains! // Do not be misled by the shouting of the mob, // nor by the abuses of aroused fools! // Be afraid only of the slave when he breaks his chains, but do not tremble before a free man.” - Friedrich Schiller, Gedichte: Die Worte des Glaubens. (JZ tr. of: “Der Mensch ist frei geschaffen, ist frei. // Und wuerd’ er in Ketten geboren! / Lasst euch nicht irren des Poebel’s Geschrei, // Noch den Missbrauch rasender Toren! // Vor dem Sklaven, wenn er die Kette bricht, // Vor dem freien Menschen erzittert nicht.)

TERRORISM: McVeigh said he blew up the building in Oklahoma City to protest the federal government's actions in Waco - and he was quickly apprehended, tried, and punished for his crime. That was proper, even if you might disagree with the morality of the death sentence. However, not a single FBI or BATF agent was arrested for their role in the fiery deaths of 86 people at the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas. There should not be one standard of justice for ordinary Americans, and another for government officials. Until that injustice is eliminated, many Americans will continue to view their government with suspicion, fear, and bitterness. People tend to turn to violence only when they feel they have no other way to be heard. When Americans feel they have a role in the political system, they will work through the political system to make productive changes. When that avenue is blocked - either by restrictive ballot access laws, legal curbs on political speech, exclusion from debates, or by attempting to discredit unpopular political speech - the Timothy McVeighs of the world turn to violence. That's why robust political debate - especially about the abuse of government power - is a healthy way to change the system. And that's why stifling such debate is downright dangerous.” - Steve Dasbach, Libertarian Party Press release, June 12, 2001. - PRIVATE & OFFICIAL TERRORISM

TERRORISM: Men who use terrorism as a means to power, rule by terror once they are in power.” – Helen MacInnes. – No wonder, seeing that they are also territorialists. – JZ, 26.76.08.

TERRORISM: Neither the military professionals nor the ruling territorial gangsters can solve the problem of terrorism. They caused and maintained most of it through their very nature, existence and actions, most on the principles and practices of territorialism and of collective responsibility. No wonder that many draw their private conclusions from these bad examples, just like most thieves and robbers merely engage in private enterprise taxation or piracy or tribute gathering. – When the leading men in a country set such bad examples – what can one expect from minor minds and activists? - JZ, 17.9.86, 26.7.08. – CRIME, TAXATION, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, AUTHORITARIANISM, LEADERSHIP, GOVERNMENTS AS PRECEDENTS

TERRORISM: no pity could be spared for those who never showed it to others.” - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune, 387. – Thus there would be a moral case even for tortures of convicted terrorists, to help avoid further terrorist attacks – if only the widespread condemnation of torture would not be usable to recruit even more terrorist. I think that terrorists should rather be confronted with all the arguments against collective responsibility and with all panarchistic alternative choices, to turn even them into enemies of any further terrorist acts. – Just like territorial governments – the largest terrorists of all, they still do know all too little of the rightful and effective alternatives to achieve quite rightful aims among themselves, all like-minded volunteers. – JZ, 14.4.09, 15.8.12. - ATROCITIES, FANATICS, WAR CRIMINALS, PITY, MUTUALISM, TERRORISTS, CLEMENCY, FORGIVENESS, TERRITORIALISM

TERRORISM: No private or movement terrorism is as mass murderous and destructive as that organized by territorial governments. – JZ, 9.11.97. – And even the private and movement terrorism is largely caused by governmental territorialism and its effects e.g. upon minorities, refugees, and the rates of unemployment. – JZ, 16.7.08. – See the online statistics of Rudolf Rummel on this. Governmental terrorism has been shown to be even more deadly than governmental warfare actions are. - JZ, 3.2.12. - GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, WAR, MASS MURDERS

TERRORISM: Now, many worthy people are apt to look on (*) dynamite as the archenemy of government; but remembering this definition, remembering that undeniably the great purpose of government (**) is the compulsion of A by B and C to do what he does not want to do, it is plain that such a view fails to distinguish essence from accident, and to appreciate the most characteristic qualities that inhere in this new political agent. Dynamite is not opposed to government; it is, on the contrary, government in its most intensified and concentrated form.” (***) – Auberon Herbert, in Mack edition, p. 192. - - (*) the users of dynamite for other than productive purposes. – - (**) territorial government! – (***) Governments, mostly, do not explosively altogether destroy societies and populations, but they do always, more or less, despotically and territorially suppress liberties and rights. - JZ, 26.7.08. – GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, RULERS

TERRORISM: Obviously, the action of a handful of fanatic individuals only, it is taken as a slur on all militia movements. Although a case of home-made explosives (fertilizer and oil), it is, nevertheless, taken as a case for more gun control! – Typically, two major motives of it, namely collective responsibility notions and territorial rule, with its territorially imposed laws and institutions, was not mentioned in the press reports. – JZ, 16.5.95. - OKLAHOMA TERROR BOMBING

TERRORISM: Occupation is a state of violence which breeds counter-violence.” – From a radio talk heard on 2/7/86. – Every territorial State amounts to a coercive occupation of a whole country or territory and all its population. Should we be surprised then when some would try to resist, even with terrorist means, especially when they have almost no chance at all to get the majority on their side, either in the voting process or in a revolution of the masses? Let all the dissenters secede to do, quite peacefully, whatever they like, their own things, for or to themselves. Then only would they be quite unlikely to ever think of or engage in terrorist actions. But make also sure that they are always acting only at their own risk and expense. Also see to it that their minds become cleaned of all notions of collective responsibility. Let them become fully and obviously self-responsible, with no chance at all to blame others for the results of their own mistakes and follies. – JZ, 20.7.08, 24.3.11. – TERRITORIALISM, OCCUPATIONS, VIOLENCE, BOMB-THROWERS, SUICIDE BOMBERS, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY UNDER PERSONAL LAWS, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY & CHOICES, SECESSIONISM

TERRORISM: Police and military forces practise rather than demolish the fixed idea of "collective responsibility" upon which most terrorists act. Furthermore, their governments and they do uphold the principle and practice of territorial rule, which drove terrorists into terrorism in the first place, because they do not possess and thus cannot practise exterritorial autonomy and its options. Moreover under the monetary despotism, protectionism and other economic interventions and monopolies, which they suffer under territorialism, which keep them poor, ignorant and prejudiced, they become so dissatisfied that, in extreme cases, they do resort to terrorist acts because they see no better options for themselves. Allow terrorists to vote themselves into the governments and societies of their dreams and they will be so busy with their resulting self-help problems that they will have neither the energy nor a motive left to try to interfere with the dream worlds and fantasy or utopian activities of others. We could not make them love us - but we could neutralize them, if we offered them justice and self-rule rather than territorial repression. - JZ, 31.1.02, 14.4.09, 24.3.11. - PANARCHISM, MONETARY FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, FORCE, VIOLENCE, REPRESSION

TERRORISM: Poverty is the greatest cause of terrorism.” – Azmat Hassan, at the Conference on World Affairs, Boulder CO, 4/6/04. - Terrorists often waste not only the lives of innocents but even their own, also much time, effort and funds. Probably they could achieve relative well-being with the same total effort, rationally and rightfully applied to serve themselves and others. Anyhow, at most it is a motive for some terrorists, it is not a cause. Otherwise every poor person would be a terrorist. - JZ, 25. 11. 06. – Wrongful and irrational “collective responsibility” notions and intolerance towards other kinds of people and beliefs do form a much greater factor than the envy caused by poverty. The terrorists, in their ignorance and prejudices, leave everything intact that makes for poverty! – JZ, 14.4.09, 24.3.11. – Many terrorists came from relatively rich families. Wealth does not protect anyone against becoming a victim of flawed ideologies and collective responsibility notions leading to terrorist acts against innocents. – JZ, 4.2.12. TROUGH POVERTY? DIS.

TERRORISM: Prevention is the cure for terrorism, not counter terrorism. - JZ, 26.9.02. - More territorial authoritarianism is certainly not the cure but rather breeds more terrorists, who are also territorialists. Full exterritorial autonomy for all voluntary communities is the main, long-term and preventative answer and it would not only undermine territorial domination attempts but also the wrongful concept of collective responsibility, by which, primarily or mainly, innocent people are targeted and murdered. Nevertheless, territorialism and collective responsibility as root causes and exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, and the principle and practice of individual as opposed to collective responsibility remain rarely discussed, if at all. To that extent most people are steeped in the very thinking and practices, which leads some to commit terrorist acts. - JZ, 31.10.02. The same applies to the monetary and financial despotism that impoverishes people and makes them poor and dissatisfied. – JZ, 14.4.09. – Thus most of the population are actually accessories to facts which lead to the crimes of terrorists, however much they might deplore these crimes. – JZ, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: Several Palestinians (interviewed by NBC) explained their resort to terrorism by insisting that for years “nobody would listen” to their outcry so now they were merely “speaking louder” with bullets and bombs. The principal aim of terrorism is not to destroy but “to be heard”, and to convince others of the seriousness of their cause.” (*) – David V. J. Bell, “Power, Influence, and Authority”, p.14. - (*) Often, not always. All too often the aim is to gain territorial power over others by terrorizing opponents. But even then, when they have become successful in this way, their real message is: Under our rule, too, exterritorial self-government options will also shine by their absence. – JZ, 26.7.92. - If lack of being heard were the only cause, then, with the rise of the Internet and other electronic options, the number of terrorist acts should have declined. But territorialism remains the same, on the side of those, who are in territorial power for the time being and those who strive by any means towards acquiring it themselves. Since territorialism does not allow them to start freely with the realization of their ideals, on a small scale, among their already existing volunteers, with the potential for unlimited growth, according to merit, under personal laws or full exterritorial autonomy or freedom of action or experimentation, and since they cannot win over the mass media and masses of voters to their cause, they resort to terrorist actions and thereby condemn themselves and their causes by the reactions to their wrongful actions, practised also on the principle of collective responsibility for all, who do not agree with them. – JZ, 25.7.08. – DIS.

TERRORISM: Some people get all excited about individual and relatively small-scale terrorism and yet side with ”strategic” indiscriminate bombing of cities and civilians and with nuclear terrorism as a way to peace! – JZ, 18.3.87, 26.7.08. – DIS.

TERRORISM: Someone recently asked: When was the last act of foreign terrorism was committed against Switzerland? Isn't it interesting that countries that mind their own business aren't targets of violence committed by citizens of other nations?” - Sheldon Richman, FREEDOM NETWORK NEWS No. 57.


TERRORISM: strong as terror gripped, it was a transient glue.” – Donald Kingsbury, Courtship Rite, ANALOG, 29 March 82, p.153.

TERRORISM: Terran Archives 2803: Terrorists were bands of desperate persons much like governments in that their chief occupations were murder and extortion. In his excellent study, “From Baboon Food-Gathering Bands to Consciousness”, Nomis of Noom demonstrates at least three differences between terrorists and governments: (1) the alpha male in a terrorist band was usually an intellectual, whereas in government he was usually a lawyer: (2) terrorists did not print their own currency, but governments did (*); (3) terrorists usually murdered small groups (from two or three to a few dozen), whereas governments murdered millions. – Otherwise, the two types of organization were indistinguishable from any other hominid predator-band from the autralopithecines ca. 4,000,000 B.C.E. to the dawn of True Consciousness begun by the evolutionary mutation recorded in this Romance.” – Robert Anton Wilson, Schroedinger’s Cat, p.161. - (*) Printing and issuing the own currency is nothing wrong – IF it is one soundly founded, with sufficient reflux or acceptance foundation to keep it generally at par with its nominal value and if it is not an exclusive and forced currency, i.e. one with compulsory acceptance and an enforced value, but, instead, one that is competitive on a free market for other privately or cooperatively issued exchange media, clearing certificates and value standards, subject to voluntary acceptance, refusals and discounts. – Only the issuer would always have to accept his own notes, IOUs, clearing certificates or account credits at their nominal or face value, in debt payments due to him or for whatever goods, services or labor he has for sale. - JZ, 26.7.08, 4.2.12, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: Territorial governments and territorialist terrorists create and deserve each other. The innocent and victimized or threatened civilians do deserve neither of them. Only freedom for individual group secessions can disentangle the current political, military, economic and social messes – and yet, presently, this option is neither known to nor demanded by most members of either group, the victims and the victimizers, private or officials ones. – JZ, 28.5.82, 26.7.08.

TERRORISM: Territorialism breeds terrorism among many other major wrongs. - JZ, 26.9.00. - Nevertheless, in the extensive writings on terrorism this link is never or almost never mentioned. At least I have never found it yet in any of them. - Not even collective responsibility "thinking" is widely recognized as a factor making for war with ABC mass murder devices or promoting all kinds of other bomb attacks on people who are really innocents. - JZ, 30.1.02, 14.4.09. - & TERRITORIALISM

TERRORISM: terror inspires terror not only in the beaten masses but in the very leaders.” (*) – Stanton A. Coblentz, The Long Road to Humanity, 1959. – (*) And in the private terrorists. – JZ, 17.7.89. – Extreme fears can turn many officials or private citizens into terrorists. – JZ, 2.8.08.

TERRORISM: terrorism cannot be combated by appeasement or negotiation.” – AINR, 22.6.66. – Was a serious attempt ever made to prevent terrorism by granting these true and fanatic believers full exterritorial autonomy for their communities of volunteers, under personal laws? I for one know of no such preventive policies, appeasement or negotiation attempts. In summit conferences, for instances, as far as I know, and their contents is, largely, reported, the panarchistic alternatives are never discussed. Only territorial non-solutions seem to remain on their agendas. Nor do most victims of territorialist actions of private and official terrorists and their sympathizers seriously consider these alternatives. – And so private and official terrorism goes on and on, also supported by the almost general and often quite unconscious belief in collective responsibility. - JZ, 26.7.08. – Q., DIS.

TERRORISM: Terrorism is a direct response to the crimes our government has committed against foreigners (besides which, the actual terrorists are within our own government). – Gore Vidal. - Not all the results of religious intolerance and fundamentalism, fanaticism etc. can be blamed on the Federal Government and its foreign policies. The false or wrongful pretences of the terrorists cannot be taken any more serious than those of territorial governments. - JZ, 23. 11. 06, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: Terrorism is a tactic. It's intellectually incoherent to declare war on a tactic.” - Alan Bock, 10.3.01. URL - By what means? Are terrorist actions, supposedly directed against terrorists only but killing more civilian innocents than terrorists, a way to defeat or prevent or, rather, to promote further terrorist acts and to recruit more terrorists? – JZ, 15.8.12. - WAR ON TERRORISM, DIS., Q.

TERRORISM: Terrorism is like protectionism and war: It is not reduced by counter-terror but rather increased by it, as are protectionism and wars by more "protective" measures against protectionism and warlike measures against wars. - JZ, 12.6.01, 30.1.02. - Violence breeds violence, wars breed wars, protectionist measure breed more protectionism. - JZ, 30.1.02. – Counter-terrorism breeds more terrorism. – All the participants in these mass murderous actions are territorialists! – J.Z., 15.8.12. -  WAR, PROTECTIONISM, TERRITORIALISM, TERROR, BOMBINGS, MASS MURDERS, INDISCRIMINATE AIR RAIDS, NWT

TERRORISM: Terrorism is not reduced by counter-terror but, rather, is fed by it. For thus more and more terrorists are made. One of the reasons for this is that both, the terrorists and the anti-terrorists, do share the same wrongful premises: Collective responsibility and territorialism, taking them for granted, unexamined, without a doubt about them. - JZ, 12.6.01, 30.1.02, 15.8.12. – The history of revengeful actions should have taught governments to avoid counter-terror actions, but do territorial governments ever learn sufficiently from history, except to repeat its numerous wrongs and mistakes? – JZ, 3.2.12. - COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY & TERRITORIALISM, REVENGE, RETALIATION, HISTORY

TERRORISM: Terrorism is one of the many and inevitable bad consequences of territorialism, its monopolistic, centralistic and coercive intolerance, especially in the political, social and economic spheres and sometimes and in some countries still even in the religious sphere– Its main other root cause consists in collective responsibility notions. Other factors making for territorialism are the various impoverishing policies of all territorial States, particularly those causing mass unemployment and import and immigration restrictions. – JZ, 20.4.99, 20.7.08, 15.8.12.

TERRORISM: Terrorism: deadly violence against humans and other living things, usually conducted by government against its own people.” - Edward Abbey, 1927-1989, Vox Clamantis in Deserto (A Shout in the Wilderness or Crying in the Wilderness.) - & GOVERNMENTS

TERRORISM: Terrorism? Yes! But only among terrorists! Not as terror inflicted upon innocents upon the wrongful "principle" of "collective responsibility". - If terrorists only wiped themselves out with e.g. their suicide bombs, who else would or should care? - JZ, 04-11.

TERRORISM: Terrorist, n. An aspiring statesman. One who believes that dynamite makes right.” – L. A. Rollins, Lucifer’s Lexicon, p. 122. – STATESMEN, POLITICIANS, AIR RAIDS, POWER

TERRORISM: Terrorists are amok runners on a national or even international scale. The essential question: What kind of institutions, beliefs, ideas, actions and processes turned them into such beasts, towards such states of "mind" and of "action", seems to be all to rarely asked and sensibly answered. Not even the to me rather obvious links to territorialism, to the notion of collective responsibility and to the results of monetary despotism are usually recognized - in the thousands of articles on the subject. - JZ, 10.10.01, 29.1.02, 14.4.09.

TERRORISM: Terrorists are persons with strong beliefs, who are convinced that they will always be outvoted or otherwise repressed – and so they lash out at almost anyone in their frustration. They would be disarmed and pacified by allowing them to live in accordance with their own beliefs – at their own risk and expense. – JZ, 27.5.08, 26.7.08.

TERRORISM: Terrorists being attracted by the large number of potential victims in large planes, there should be more freedom and less taxation and regulation for smaller passenger planes. Naturally, this would leave the risk of smaller planes used for chemical and biological warfare. The most effective ways to prevent or end terrorism remain: Exterritorial autonomy for dissenting groups, enlightenment on individual vs. collective responsibility and full monetary and economic freedom with their beneficent economic effects. Alas, they are not yet widely enough seen as such significant factors. - JZ, 4.10.01, 1.2.02, 15.8.12. - & LARGE PLANES

TERRORISM: Terrorists can handle weapons and tactics but by their very motives and actions, especially their targeting, they indicate, as a rule, that they can’t handle them rightfully and intelligently. Mostly they still use them under the primitive notion of “collective responsibility”, i.e., indiscriminately murderously, killing many more innocents than guilty persons, if any really guilty persons at all. They do not know what genuine individual rights and liberties are and would require for their realization. Thus they waste their own lives and all too many lives of others. But then the armed forces of territorial governments do often act not all that much different from them and do commit murders of innocents on a much larger scale and be it only via “friendly” fire or “collateral damage”. – They, too, and their leaders, dictators or tyrants, have not yet bothered to find out what quite rightful war and peace aims are, quite rightful defence, liberation and revolutionary methods. Nor have most of their radical opponents, the anarchists and libertarians, bothered sufficiently to inform themselves about these requirements. – If they had, they might already be as liberated as they want to be, in their own communities of volunteers. - JZ, 21.10.07.

TERRORISM: Terrorize tyrants and terrorists – and no one else! – JZ, 9.9.84, 26.7.08.

TERRORISM: that violence, cruelty and murder are completely rational acts, devised as deliberately as a theatre piece, to further the aims – political, financial or personal – of those who perpetrate them. …” - Morris West, Proteus, p.67. – Panarchism would grant every kind of ideology and movement its rights and liberties, to be tolerantly practised among its followers. Thus it would, largely, prevent the rise of terrorism used in attempts to realize the ideals of any ideological movement that would no longer attempt to territorially and thus intolerantly, impose its ideals upon dissenters as well, i.e., upon whole territorial populations. – JZ, 30.6.98, 20.7.08. - PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, CRIME, VIOLENCE

TERRORISM: the Basques are the terrorists, Spain is just maintaining order. In the same way, when Palestinian guerillas kill children, they are terrorists; when the Israeli air force kills children by bombing Lebanese villages, it is maintaining order. Not that the words make any difference, either way the children are dead, but they do illustrate the extent of the occupation. (The French Resistance were certainly terrorists as far as the Germans were concerned.) A terrorist can then be defined these days as a patriot without an air force.” – Michael Zwerin, A Case for the Balkanization of Practically Everyone, p.47. – To each his own voluntary community and personal laws and institutions. To no one any territorial monopoly. - A territory goes beyond private and cooperative real estate. – Territorialism includes wrongful rule – upheld by more or less terrorizing actions. - JZ, 26.7.08, 24.3.11, 15.8.12. - AIR RAIDS, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, LAW & ORDER

TERRORISM: The chances of your being harmed by terrorists are mathematically minute. The chance of your being robbed by your own government? That’s easy: 100 per cent.”Joseph Sobran, 1/1/04 - POLICE & MASS MURDERS: In America you are 8 times more likely to be killed by a Cop than by a crazed mass shooter. – Terror is something that is not unfamiliar to Government.” - Dustin Archer shared Victor Bozzo's photo. - Facebook, 28.7.12. – TERRORISM BY GOVERNMENT, TERRORIST THREAT COMPARED WITH THE THREAT POSED REGULARLY BY TAXATION

TERRORISM: The illegal drug trade is the financial engine that fuels many terrorist organizations around the world, including Osama bin Laden.” – Dennis Hastert, House Speaker. - If drug use were legalized then this source of finance for terrorism would tend to dry up. Drug production and drug trade would no longer be very profitable. - JZ, 23. 11. 06. - & DRUGS

TERRORISM: The official terrorism of territorial governments, even that of “democratic” governments, at least in their warfare methods (indiscriminate air raids and preparations for a general nuclear holocaust), has so far always been far more deadly than the murderous attempts of private people and groups of fanatics, who, quite wrongly, consider themselves to be genuine resistance fighters, freedom fighters and liberators. Neither the official nor the private terrorists know and appreciate all individual rights and liberties, which they prove every day through their actions, preachings, propaganda terms and preparations for mass murder with mass murder devices. Panarchism, through its practice and teachings, would undermine that mentality and would, finally, lead to its abolition. Can you imagine, e.g. one of the modern Popes having armed himself with nuclear weapons and using them against those, who are not Catholics? At least when it comes to religious practices, all of them have already subscribed to panarchism and do practise it in their sphere. – JZ, 3.2.12.

TERRORISM: the political terrorist is the most evil person on the face of the earth.” – Alan Johnson, PERCEPTION, 3/73. – The private territorialist terrorists do much less wrong and harm than do the official territorialist terrorists! – JZ, 25.10.08. – TERRITORIALISM, DIS.

TERRORISM: The price of empire is terrorism.” – Greenbacks - Terrorism does not even need whole large empires for its practice. Compare the terrorist acts, which religious fanatics still practise against each other in some countries, e.g. Indonesia and Iraq. Their own internal imperialistic ambitions are enough to motivate terrorists. - JZ, 25. 11. 06. – IMPERIALISM, DIS.

TERRORISM: The prospect of a government that treats all its citizens as criminal suspects is more terrifying than any terrorist. And even more frightening is a citizenry that can accept the surrender of its freedoms as the price of "freedom". – Joe Sobran – IT IS MORE BEARABLE THAN ALL THE ANTI-TERRORIST MEASURES OF GOVERNMENTS

TERRORISM: The territorial model terrorizes me and, indirectly, everyone. It leads consistently and directly to the nuclear war threat, to conventional wars and all internal oppressions and man-made large-scale disasters. And still this enemy No.1 is recognized only by a handful of people. - JZ, 5.12.90, 13.1.93. - TERRITORIALISM

TERRORISM: The terrorist is the suppressed autonomist PLUS the suppressor of other autonomists. – JZ, 28.5.82.

TERRORISM: The truth is, we're in far more danger from our own cars than we are from terrorism. Nearly 800,000 people have died in car accidents in the last twenty years. During that time there have been exactly two Islamic terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, with less than 3,000 total fatalities. That's more than 200 TIMES as many Americans dying in their cars as at the hands of Islamic terrorism. And yet … We've turned the whole world upside down in response to the two terrorist attacks. We've launched invasions, created vast new bureaucracies, shredded the Bill of Rights, compounded regulations, spent hundreds of billions of dollars, and disrupted travel and commerce. But no one is suggesting that we do 200 times as much to address the driving risk, which is 200 times greater." - "I Am Not Afraid," from DownSize DC: - COMPARED WITH CAR ACCIDENT RISKS: CARS VERSUS TERRORISTS – Compare also how many unborn children were aborted in the USA by their own parents – during the last 20 years. – JZ, 14.4.09.

TERRORISM: The war on "terror" will never be over, it will just change locations. Like the war on drugs, prostitution, pornography, and the many others that will follow, it is a war on humanity. These wars will never be won; the State will just keep creating new [ones? - JZ] to frighten us with. The sheep will anxiously anticipate the next fall guy the State offers up as a sacrifice for the war on whatever happens to be next. Be careful, the next pawn could be me or you.” – Mike Wasdin - - Private terrorists are not just boogiemen but terrorism by territorial governments is usually much worse. - JZ, 25. 11. 06.

TERRORISM: The War on Terror is impossible, not in the sense that it cannot cause immense amounts of bloodshed and destruction and loss of liberty, but in the sense that it cannot finally achieve what it is supposed to achieve, and will only end in creating more of the same conditions that led to its declaration in the first place." (10/23/02) - Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., The Impossible - & WAR ON TERRORISM

TERRORISM: To protect us from terrorists our government treats us like terrorists.” - Hal O’Boyle - & GOVERNMENTAL PROTECTION FROM IT

TERRORISM: We will never bow to terrorism” – said M. Fletcher, but at the same time he demands a “strong” territorial government, which tends to constitute the greatest of all terrorism and which also tends to produce, as a side effect, private terrorism, not only wars, revolutions, wars, civil wars and mass murders. – JZ, n.d. & 18.7.08.

TERRORISM: We’ve hear the oh-so-intellectual terrorists, who murder in the name of the People they pretend to represent (“Le people, c’est moi,” seems to be the radical aristocrat’s variation on Louis XIV). … Editorial, GALAXY 39/3, p.149.

TERRORISM: What had made these men into such beasts?” - Frank Herbert & Bill Ransom, The Jesus Incident, p.172. - Were their creative energies ever sufficiently released? Were they offered voluntaristic options, among their believers? Were they only subjected to governments and rules of their own free choice? Even if they had been among the most enlightened people, would their chances have been good to achieve majority approval for their aspirations in a democracy? - JZ, 6.10.01. - INTOLERANCE, MAN, BEASTS, ATROCITIES, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, Q.

TERRORISM: What is coercion otherwise than reason which has become desperate?” – Ortega y Gasset. – (“Was ist Gewalt anderes als Vernunft die verzweifelt?”) - Desperate unreasonable ambitions, dogmatism, fanaticism and fundamentalism are also involved, of people quite frustrated with their remaining options, e.g. with no chance to come territorially into power (through voting or popular revolutions) over themselves and others and who do not have or even know the exterritorial autonomy option. All of these “freedom fighters” and terrorists, suicide bombers etc. are territorialists, just like the territorial regimes are that they try to fight through indiscriminate murders and destructions, based upon quite unreasonable notions of collective responsibility. Mostly, they are also victims of monetary despotism but without knowledge of it and of its monetary freedom alternative. – The cure for terrorism, wars, civil wars, mass murders and violent revolutions is – sufficient freedom for all the diverse aspirations, to the extent that they can be tolerantly practised among volunteers, under personal laws and full exterritorial autonomy. – Only genuine individual rights and liberties deserve to be coercively protected – among all those who do appreciate them, to the extent that they do, and this, probably best, by a new kind of military militia force to protect all individual rights and liberties. It would minimize, if it could, rather than maximize the use of coercion - to merely defensive use of force. - JZ, 5.7.92, 25.7.08. – DIS., IDEALISM, TERRORISM, RESISTANCE, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, COERCION, VIOLENCE, MILITIA

TERRORISM: What is now called terrorism is, after all, the method of warfare employed by individuals and small groups against the power of the state. These groups were, not long ago, called the Underground and the Resistance. And they were, not long ago, automatically the heroes of our movies. The Secret Police that searched them out and the armies that hunted them down were automatically the villains.” - Larry Beinhart, American Hero, p.208. - - Most terrorists rather imitate rather than fight the motives, ideas, arguments, powers, methods and weapons of the territorial State. – JZ, 10.9.06. – They do also operate, as a rule, on the principle of collective responsibility and have only vague to flawed notions on rightful liberation. – JZ, 12.9.07. – Just like all their territorial governments! – J.Z., 15.8.12. - RESISTANCE & THE TERRITORIAL STATE & ITS WARFARE

TERRORISM: When voluntary paths are blocked then many true believers resort to coercive methods and hold even mere subjects of coercive territorial government collectively responsible for the wrongful and intolerant actions of these governments against dissenters. Admittedly, all terrorists are territorialists as well and as such we should never give in to them and their terrorist methods. But that does not mean that we should not respect their right to do their own things to or for themselves, at their own risk and expense. That might be the most effective way to disarm them, together with a thorough discrediting of almost all methods based upon collective responsibility notions. Realizing all economic rights everywhere, especially full monetary and financial freedom, even if at first only applied among volunteers, would also greatly reduced the conditions under which private terrorism tends to grow. – JZ, 6.11.80, 4.6.82, 26.7.08, 24.3.11.

TERRORISM: While, at whatever price, terrorism must be stopped, it would still be preferable to prevent it – by depriving terrorists of their motives for engaging in terrorist acts. – JZ, 27.2.86. – Once they are offered sufficient free, diverse and tolerant alternatives, to practise their views among themselves and also sufficient enlightenment to stop their collective responsibility notions and practices against their imagined enemies, whom they hold collectively responsible for their real enemies, they will tend to become peaceful and tolerant care-takers of their own and self-chosen spheres, running their own lives freely, rather than attempting to run the lives of others. Naturally some irrational, immoral, insane and pathological cases will remain but they will become smaller in numbers and powers. They will also run out of easily imagined enemies and targets, in most cases, when no longer confronted by single model territorial States. – Certainly, mass murder devices should be made even less accessible to them than to any territorial government. - JZ, 25.7.08, 15.8.12.

TERRORISTS: Terrorists can handle weapons and tactics but by their very motives and actions, especially their targeting, they indicate, as a rule, that they can’t handle them rightfully and intelligently and for rightful purposes and against their real enemies only. Mostly they still use them under the primitive notion of “collective responsibility”, i.e., indiscriminately murderously, killing many more innocents than guilty persons, if any really guilty persons at all. They do not know what genuine individual rights and liberties are and would require for their realization. Thus they waste their own lives and all too many lives of others. But then the armed forces of territorial governments do often act not all that much different from them and do commit murders of innocents on a much larger scale and be it only via “friendly” fire or “collateral damage”. – They, too, and their leaders, dictators or tyrants, have not yet bothered to find out what quite rightful war and peace aims are and quite rightful defence, liberation and revolutionary methods. Nor have most of their radical opponents, the anarchists and libertarians, bothered to inform themselves, sufficiently, about these requirements. – If they had, they might already be as liberated as they want to be, in their own communities of volunteers. - JZ, 21.10.07, 24.3.11. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, ENEMIES, INNOCENTS, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, INDISCRIMINATE MURDERS

TESTS, NUCLEAR TESTS: Some thoughts, unordered, on French and other nuclear tests: (1) Don’t just use verbal abuse. (2) Don’t immolate yourself. Rather wait for nuclear war to do so. (3) Don’t expose yourself to being murdered now by a nuclear bomb, by visiting such a bomb test area before the general nuclear holocaust. (4) Don’t attack a supposedly guilty large collective, the French people, for instance. They have no more say on this than you and I have. It would also mean acting on the same principle that made building, stock-piling and using nuclear “weapons” possible, namely collective responsibility! (5) Don’t use violence against private property. You could not outperform nuclear weapons in that, anyhow. (6) Destruction of “public” property is just as useless as nuclear war destruction – unless that “public” property is one of the nuclear bombs nuclear weapons factories or nuclear war “facilities”. (7) Don’t use warships or other military means – or you may set off the very nuclear war that we want to prevent. (8) Don’t use indiscriminate methods. (9) Don’t try to stop all trade when e.g. stopping merely the uranium mining and trade could be an effective means. (10) Not only refuse to recognize the French or other nuclear government but recognize, for each of them, several governments in exile, instead, each one representing all of its kinds of dissenters, all volunteers for it only, now or in the future. (11) Go directly after the really guilty ones only, all-out, the scientists, administrators, politicians and generals involved. They prepare for scientifically conducted mass murders or risk them accidentally occurring or by miscalculation. Pay them back in their own coin but with non-nuclear devices. (12.) Practise article 27 of the French constitution of 1793, which says that all those, who usurp sovereignty, shall be put to death, instantly, by the free men. (That did, finally, belatedly, happen to Robespierre and before him to Marat, by a woman, Charlotte Corday.) (13) Incite and help organize, rationally, a tax strike against the French government. The French taxpayers would enthusiastically support this if you show them a feasible way. (14) Dissolve France – and all other countries, as nuclear targets, by allowing individuals and groups to split it up into all the numerous diverse, decentralized and exterritorially autonomous groups, communities and societies that free people, would, individually, prefer for themselves, just like the do prefer different religions, sports, hobbies, fashions, music, writings, arts, meals, drinks, cars, bicycles and all other things that make life worthwhile. Thereby you would remove the motives to have nuclear weapons in readiness, the finance for them and also the targets. (15) Go not only after further tests but after the stockpiles and the production facilities, including nuclear reactors, which can be turned into nuclear “weapons” production facilities, if they are not already. There are already enough of these “weapons” to wipe all of us out, several times over. Who can seriously believe that the fact that all of them have not yet been “used” is a sufficient proof that they will never be used? These facilities are protected against the people but the people are not protected from these “weapons”. (16) Do not put pressure on the government but on yourself and on your fellow-citizens to do your bit to achieve nuclear disarmament, even one-sidedly, a.s.a.p. Governmental disarmament inspectors cannot be trusted, either. (17) Arm, organize and train yourself for your part in carrying out the nuclear disarmament and preventing your government from engaging in any aggressive war. (18) Achieve the constitutional power to vote on such issues, on war and peace, armament and disarmament and international treaties. Governments have never bothered to declare quite rightful war and peace aims only. Ponder them, declare them and stick by them with all your mind and strength. (19) Contribute to build up trust between nations – e.g., by public declarations under oath, of quite rightful war aims, and swear that you would rather secede from, escape from or rise against the own government than deviate from such aims. (20) Help to stop uranium mining. Export earnings should not be all that we should be concerned about in this respect. No more uranium no further nuclear “weapons” and no more and more “modern” or “innovative” and “better” nuclear “weapons”. (21) Stop advocating or tolerating “peaceful” nuclear reactors, which do also breed more material for more such “weapons”. The only nuclear reactor that is relatively safe for us, because it is far enough away – is the sun. (22) Don’t just be one-sidedly concerned with the radiation hazards coming from nuclear test fall-outs when there are many other daily sources of dangerous (in the long run) hard and soft radiation, like e.g. some luminous watch dials, x-rays, TV’s, planes flying at high altitudes, mobile phones (*), leaking microwave ovens, living in brick houses, in granite areas etc. We already live in a soup of artificially produced radiations and electro-magnetic effects, with the long-term results of them upon our bodies and minds still unknown. (23) “Nuclear giants and ethical infants” we were called by General Omar Bradley after WW II. Someone else stated: “The age of over-kill and under-think.” (24) What is a significant additional radiation hazard? – “… there are now two million people throughout the world who will die of cancer as a result of all the nuclear tests held so far, probably 1000 in Australia. If France goes ahead with its nuclear testing in the Pacific, another 70 000 can be added – a good percentage of them Australians.” – Prof. Linus Pauling. – While, Sir Robert Menzies, when he was still Prime Minister, said: “… the tests will be unlikely to lead to significant radiation hazards to the Australian population.” – And yet all such tests were carried out as far from human population centers as possible, which says at least something on their hazards. - JZ, probably from the 70’s, somewhat revised 2.8.08, 24.3.11. (*) The global address book for mobile phones has reached six billion contacts, and experts say the number o  mobile subscriptions will soon pass the world population. – According to a World Bank report, 75 per cent of the world’s population now has access to a mobile phone. … THETELEGRAPHL.COM.AU, 19.7.12, p.14. – What will be the effect of this additional radiation soup upon our brains? Very few of these phones are shielded, so that their output is not also radiating towards our brains, when held against our ears. – To what extent are the mobile phone calls the equivalents of putting our heads into a microwave oven and switching it on, partly cooking our brains? – Are the mobile phone wave lengths and strengths so VERY different from those of microwave ovens? Which are the time and power equivalents? - J.Z., 15.8.12. – Q.

THATCHER, MARGARET & PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS: While the war was raging in Bosnia, Greater Serbianism was proceeding to the same goal by other means in Kosovo. In April 1995 - shortly before the Serb defeats that led to the Dayton Accords - I had the opportunity to learn from the self-styled President of Kosova, Dr. Ibrahim Rugova, about the systematic intimidation of the ethnic Albanians there. Deprived of employment, education and access to medical care by a policy of racial discrimination in favour of the Serb minority, the Albanians - who constitute 90 per cent of the population - had eschewed violence and instead set up a whole system of parallel institutions. They had even elected their own 'President". Dr. Rugova, a moderate, mild-mannered and highly civilised intellectual, had become the centre of this resistance movement...." - Margaret Thatcher in "Statecraft, Strategies for a Changing World", HarperCollinsPublishers (77-85 Fulham Palace Road, Hammersmith, London W6 8JB,, ISBN 0 00 710752 8), 2002, page 310. - Otherwise, so far, this book is mainly concerned with the "statecraft" of territorialism. – JZ, n.d.

THEOCRACY: A system of theocratic government need not be founded on one or the great historical religions of the world. It may be founded on the metaphysical tenets, which reject all traditional churches and denominations and take pride in emphasizing their anti-theistic and anti-metaphysical character. In our time the most powerful theocratic parties are opposed to Christianity and all other religions, which evolved from Jewish monotheism. What characterizes them as theocratic is their craving to organize all earthly affairs of mankind according to the content of ideas whose validity cannot be demonstrated by reasoning.” – Ludwig von Mises, Human Action, quoted in THE CONNECTION 102, p.36. – The ethical validity of territorialism cannot be demonstrated even for democratic governments. – JZ, 1.8.08, 24.3.11. - COMMUNISM, INTOLERANCE, FUNDAMENTALISM, FANATIC IDEOLOGIES, IDEOLOGIES, TOTALITARIANISM

THEODORIC THE GREAT: Theodoric the Great   (493-525), the first of the Ostrogothic rulers, instituted special judges or courts (comtes) to decide litigations between Goths and, with the assistance of a Roman jurisconsult, to decide cases between Goths and Romans.1 1 Miltitz, op. cit., vol. i, p. 24. – Liu, Exterritoriality, pages 28/29.

THEORIES: No theories or hypothesis should be forced upon anyone as if it were true or a panacea. Especially not upon those opposed to it. The supposed experts were all too often wrong. Even if objectively proven it should not be enforced upon the non-believers. These punish themselves enough by not recognizing it. - Nor should any experiment be forced upon dissenters. All experiments are anyhow conducted best if undertaken only by volunteers. – JZ, 16.6.04, 18.10.07. - & EXPERIMENTS, VOLUNTARISM VS. COERCION & COMPULSION, EXPERTS, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS

THEORIES: Nobody has the right to force his own economic and other theories upon his fellow citizens, as guidelines for their actions. - The State may not put into force, by legislation, any scientific theory and force the opponents of this theory, and the people in general, to act as if this theory were right. - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE, free after Ulrich von Beckerath. (Nobody has the right to force his own economic and other theories upon his fellow citizens as guidelines for their actions.)

THEORIES: Nobody may be forced to adapt his life-style to any temporarily prevailing theory. Thus the State may not interfere with any law in any theoretical scientific dispute and any scientific experiment in the economic, social, juridical and political sphere, as long as they take place exclusively at the expense and risk of the experimenters. – JZ, free version of a remark by Ulrich von Beckerath. - HYPOTHESES, DOCTRINES, BELIEFS, CONVICTIONS, EXPERTS

THEORIES: The State may not put into force by legislation any scientific theory and force the opponents of this theory and the people in general to act as if this theory were right. – My version and translation of frequent similar remarks by Ulrich von Beckerath, 1882-1969. – Compare the statists springing into action upon the mere hypothesis that whatever global warming may be happening would be due to man’s production of carbon dioxide. According to published measurements the other planets in this solar system are warming up, too and there man can certainly not be blamed for this effect. – Alas, most of Bth.’s writings still remain to be translated into English. - JZ, 1.8.08. - STATE, LAWS, GLOBAL WARMING, GREENIES, STATISM, TAXES ON CARBON DIOXIDE PRODUCTION, DIS.

THEORIES: Theoretical labors achieve more in the world than practical labor. Once the sphere of concepts is revolutionized then the establishment can no longer stand up against them.“ – Hegel, in JZ tr. of: “Die theoretische Arbeit bringt mehr zustande in der Welt als die praktische; ist erst das Reich der Vorstellung revolutioniert, so haelt die Wirklichkeit nicht aus.” – Once territorialism and exterritorialism are clearly and widely enough understood, territorialism with all its wrongs and evils will not last much longer. - JZ, 24.3.11. - IDEAS, CONCEPTS, UNDERSTANDING, COMPREHENSION, REASON

THEORIES: Theories are usually rash conclusions of an impatient mind that wants to free itself from the phenomena and in their place merely puts images, concepts, yes, often mere words. One may be partly aware that this is merely a makeshift but are not passion and party-spirit always ready for makeshifts? And rightly so, since they require them very much.” - Goethe, “Sprueche in Prosa”, JZ tr. of: “Theorien sind gewoehnlich Uebereilungen eines ungedultigen Verstandes, der die Phaenomene gern los sein moechte und an ihrer Stelle desswegen Bilder, Begriffe, ja oft nur Worte einschiebt. Mahn ahnet, man sieht auch wohl, dass es nur ein Behelf ist; liebt sich nicht aber Leidenschaft und Parteigeist jederzeit Behelfe? Und mit Recht, da sie ihrer so sehr beduerfen.“ - Only under full experimental freedom for all can the flawed or false theories of some people do harm only to themselves, instead of to numerous involuntary victims of them in a whole territory. - JZ, 24.3.11. – Mere hypotheses should be distinguished from those theories, which are at least partly based upon some facts. – J.Z., 15.8.12.

THEORIES: Thinking and doing, doing and thinking, that is the sum of all wisdom, always recognized, always practised, but not understood by everybody. Both must, like breathing in and out, continuously happen in our lives, like questions and answers. None should happen without the other. Whoever makes it his law what is whispered by the genius of mankind secretly into the ear of every newborn human, to test the action by thinking and the thinking by actions, cannot go wrong, for if he errs he will soon be back on the right track.” – Goethe, Wilhelm Meister’s Lehrjahre. – Only in a JZ tr. of: “Denken und Tun, Tun und Denken, das ist die Summe aller Weisheit, von jeher anerkannt, von jeher geuebt, nicht eingesehen von einem jeden. Beides muss wie Aus- und Einatmen sic him Leben ewig fort hin und wider bewegen; wie Frage und Antwort sollte eins ohne das andere nicht stattfinden. Wer sich zum Gesetz macht, was einem jeden Neugeborenen der Genius des Menschenverstandes heimlich ins Ohr fluestert, das Tun am Denken, das Denkan am Tun zu pruefen, der kann nicht irren nicht irren, und irrt er, so wird er sich bald auf den rechten Weg zurueckfinden.“ - Panarchism would allow all people to apply this method as well in the spheres so far monopolized by territorial governments. – JZ, 1.8.08. - HYPOTHESES

THEORIES: With panarchism dozens to thousands of different theories, hypotheses, ideologies and utopias in the social sciences can all be tried out peacefully, among their volunteers and at their expense and risk only, without upsetting the whole of society through revolutions, civil wars, terrorism or wars, without bloodshed and destruction. Only the participants will take some risks with their lives, property and work. That they are entitled to do. Even their failures, properly observed, recorded and evaluated, will help to develop the present “social sciences” into genuine social sciences. – JZ, 1.8.08. – FAILURES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM



THINK DIFFERENTLY. THINK LATERALLY: We cannot cope unless we think differently." - Julius Stulman of the World Institute, mid-1970s, quoted by M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, 358. - How different exterritorial thinking really is, you will find out when you try to fully understand it and then try to explain it to others. After more than 5 decades of thinking about it, there are still aspects that are new to me. This should not surprise, seeing that new titles even on territorial politics are still being published all the time. - JZ 8.4.89, 22.9.04.

THINK FOR YOURSELF: Don let them do the thinking – against you. – JZ, 6.2.06. - Confine their "thoughts" and experiments based upon them to their voluntary victims, under exterritorial autonomy or personal law. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: All that we are, is the result of all that we have thought.” – Buddha. – Are human beings only the products of conscious thought and development from the first primitive life forms onwards? Did we inherit no characteristics from our parents? However, by now we should, finally, take our own fate, not that of dissenters, into our own hands, to the extent that this is already humanly possible, instead of leaving them to the not so tender mercies of power-addicted territorial politicians and bureaucrats. – JZ, 17.4.09, 15.8.12. - TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT, THOUGHT, IDEAS, SELF-HELP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, POLITICIANS, REPRESENTATIVES, BUREAUCRATS, VOTING, MAJORITARIANISM

THINK: allow them to think for themselves.” – John Wyndham, in “The Secret People”, p.116. - And to act and experiment for themselves, at their own expense and risk, in every sphere! - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: Beware when the great God lets loose a thinker on this planet. (*) Then all things [are? – JZ] at risk. It is as when a conflagration has broken out in a great city, and no man knows what is safe, or where it will end. … The very hopes of man, the thoughts of his heart (**), the religion of the nation (***), the manners and morals of mankind are all at the mercy of a new generalization. “(****) – Ralph Waldo Emerson, Circles, 1841. - They would not be at their mercy, if the great thinker were confined to exterritorial autonomy and personal laws in a community of volunteers. – An Ideas Archive would also concentrate opposition ideas, refutations and competing ideas and talents. – (*) He, she or it lets most other great thinkers go to waste! – So much for a great “creator”, who is supposed to love his children, especially man. What kind of cruel games would he really play with us – and with other, much more helpless creatures – if he really existed? – (**) Was he thinking with his heart instead of his brain? – (***) Does it really exist and does it only have one? - (****) How many new generalizations and old truths are habitually ignored every day? - JZ, 21.7.08, 15.8.12. - PANARCHISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, LEADERSHIP, TERRITORIALISM, PROPHETS, GENERALIZATIONS, IDEOLOGIES, INTOLERANCE, FANATICISM, TOTALITARIANISM

THINK: But keep on thinking. Keep your thinking close to the ground, where it belongs. Don’t ever trade your liberty for another man’s offer to do your thinking and make your mistakes for you.” – Poul Anderson, Brain Wave, p.25. – POLITICIANS, EXPERTS, REPRESENTATION, DELEGATION, AUTHORITIES, THINK FOR YOURSELF!

THINK: encourage … incite … every man, woman and child to examine the evidence and think for themselves.” – Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus III, p.174. – And do sufficiently assemble and publish and confront and compare the thoughts and ideas of all, instead of leaving even some of them best unknown or unappreciated for all too long. - JZ, 24.10.08. – Freedom to think and to act should always come together, for all peaceful and productive people. It should never be largely confined to territorial governments. - JZ, 24.3.11. - IDEAS ARCHIVE, LIBERTARIAN LIBRARY & ENCYCLOPEDIA, HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION OF ALL INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

THINK: Every thought which genius and piety throw into the world, alters the world.” – Emerson. – Such thoughts can make one all too complacent about the great waste of genius, talents and good ideas still happening in this world. - Yes, eventually that will happen, if the statist mass murderers do not put an end to mankind first, but when will it happen, with what certainty and how slowly or fast? Often only long after that genius is dead or the ideas had first been expressed. Should we not seriously consider the possibility of utilizing 1. via an ideas archive and talent center and 2. via full experimental freedom, under exterritorial autonomy, every genius, every talent, every idea a.s.a.p., at their greatest strength, rather than destroying or ignoring all too many of them for all too long? – JZ, 21.7.08, 24.3.11. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, WORLD LIBRARY, LIBERTARIAN ENCYCLOPEDIA, FREEDOM LIBRARY, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, COMMON PROJECT LIST FOR LIBERTARIANS. A DIRECTORY TO ALL LIBERTARIANS, INDICATING THEIR SPECIAL INTERESTS. – NEW DRAFT, 2010 digitized book manuscript by JZ.

THINK: Everything bears thinking it over. – JZ, 2/75, Almost everything bears thinking it over. – JZ, 30.7.08. – But, sometimes, one has to act immediately upon rightful impulses or one’s genuine moral sense, not that of any kind of indoctrination or wrongful or flawed legislation and jurisdiction. – JZ, 17.4.09, 24.3.11.

THINK: Few people think and yet all people want to decide.” – Frederick the Great.  (“Wenige Menschen denken, und doch wollen alle entscheiden.” - Friedrich der Grosse.) - All too many have left it to territorial governments to decide about war, peace and international treaties and to make territorial rules for all. Territorial statism is a mental disease. Few are consistently in favor of extending the referendum options to support extensions of individual rights and liberties. Many also suffer from a disease, which was called “decidophobia” by a freedom lover in one of his books. Panarchism confines the bad results of under-informed and prejudiced decision-making largely to volunteers, i.e. makes these people and their votes relatively harmless. - Regarding their own affairs they do have the right to decide, even though they might not have thought sufficiently about them, by whatever voting or other decision-making system that they prefer for themselves. – Let all individuals and minority groups form or choose their own decision-making bodies and institutions, always at the own risk and expense. - JZ, 30.7.08, 24.3.11. – STATISM, SUBMISSIVENESS, OBEDIENCE, THOUGHTLESSNESS, VOTING, DEMOCRACY, SELF-GOVERNMENT, MAJORITARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM

THINK: Good thoughts are the mainspring of human progress. They bring the unseen – the unimaginable – into the realities that bless our lives.” – Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 5/77. - As if it were already easy for anyone or any group of volunteers to practise any good idea among themselves – in spheres which territorial governments have monopolized and, thereby, created thousands of problems, due to primitive and false statist notions. – JZ, 21.7.08, 24.3.11. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

THINK: Great men are they who see that spiritual is stronger than material force, that thoughts rule the world.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson, Phi Beta Kappa Address, July 18, 1876. - False and bad thoughts as well, even more so, so far. – I wish that his thought would be applicable even to the victims of torturers against their torturers. – How powerful are thoughtful and dissenting conscripts in the armed forces or thoughtful and dissenting taxpayers against the tax department? – What good does it do great men, if they are crucified or have to empty a poison cup - when their ideas are only partly realized even 2000 years later? - All such general statements should become sufficiently qualified. - JZ, 21.7.08. – It is rather thoughtlessness that largely rules this world, still, applied from the top down. – JZ, 24.10.08. - IDEAS ARCHIVE, TALENT CENTRE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, TERRITORIALISM, PREJUDICES, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

THINK: Half of our mistakes in life arise from feeling where we ought to think, and thinking where we ought to feel.” - John Churton Collins, 1848-1908. – Neither thinking on its own nor emotions on their own are good enough to base personal relationships on – or even whole political, economic and social systems, unless one includes under “thinking” also morality and ethics and ultimately all individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 25.7.08. – Feelings and emotions should be confined to individuals and their voluntary associations. They should never be allowed to become territorially imposed, as if they were quite rightful and sound, upon the rights, liberties and actions of whole populations. Among it there are many, who do not share the feelings, emotions, ambitions, ideas and prejudices of territorial rulers, leaders and misleaders. - JZ, 24.3.11, 15.8.12. - FEELINGS, EMOTIONS, REASON, DUTY, MORALITY, SYMPATHY, CARING, EGOISM, ALTRUISM, PEOPLE

THINK: Have we fully mobilized already all the great thoughts of all the thinkers of the past and of the present or do we still neglect all too many of them most of them time and find it even difficult to access them, in print and online? – To a large extent, as Kleist once said, thinking and education or enlightenment is a collective process, just like the production of other goods and services. Have we already provided all the free markets required in this sphere, e.g. via ideas archives, bibliographies, abstracts and review collections, directories, projects lists and a comprehensive digital libertarian library services? See my 2010 “New Draft” digital book manuscript on our remaining omissions. – JZ, 3.2.12. – Q., ENLIGHTENMENT, EDUCATION

THINK: Honest, oral and sound economic thought results in commendable and creative action.” – NOTES FROM FEE, 3/78. – Only under sufficient freedom to apply them, together with other volunteers, in tolerant experiments, at the own risk and expense. – JZ, 31.7.08. – Obviously, the sound economic ideas and theories are not yet fully applied but strongly resisted by most territorial governments, their laws, taxes, wars, monetary and financial despotism and other legalized and bureaucratic meddling. – J.Z., 15.l8.12. – PANARCHISM, DIS., IDEAS ARCHIVE, TALENT CENTRE, ECONOMICS VS. THE RULING ANTI-ECONOMICS

THINK: How lucky for the governments that people don’t think.” – Adolf Hitler – JZ tr. of: “Was fuer ein Glueck fuer die Regierungen, dass die Menschen nicht denken.” - Enough people don’t think enough so that the Hitlers, Stalins, Maos, Castros, Idi Amins etc. become possible and majoritarian democracies and their Welfare and Warfare States as well. – JZ, 25.7.08. – Under panarchism it would be enough if at least a few thought enough and acted freely upon their thoughts to set attractive examples to most other people, too, at least in the long run. – JZ, 25.7.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

THINK: I deny the right of anyone – individually or collectively – to set up an inquisition of thought. Thought is, or should be, free. … For the government to attempt to control thought, to prescribe certain opinions or proscribe others, is the height of despotism.” – Alexander Berkman, declaration to Agents of the Department of Immigration, 1919. – The legalized inquisitions against free and self-responsible actions are in our times still more wrong and harmful. - JZ, 24.3.11. - CENSORSHIP, DISSIDENTS, “UNDESIRABLES”, DEPORTATIONS, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

THINK: If you don’t control your thoughts others will soon control your actions. – Woodrow Wilson. – JZ re-tr. of: “Wer seinen Gedanken nicht befiehlt … wird bald das Kommando ueber seine Handlungen verlieren.” - Obviously, people have not yet thought enough, e.g. about monetary despotism, territorialism, the employer-employee relationship, taxes, the warfare State, general despotism and the rightful alternatives to them to introduce monetary freedom, exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities, self-management schemes, voluntary taxation, peaceful communities that are peacefully coexisting because they are only exterritorially autonomous, all individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 25.7.08. - ACTIONS, CONTROL, SELF-DISCIPLINE, SELF-CONTROL

THINK: improvement in society rests exclusively on improved actions, these have their sole origin in improved thinking. Look to the thinking – the only magic key there is!” – Leonard E. Read, on a FEE advertising envelope, about 1974. - The best thoughts and ideas do not help enough if there is not full freedom to act upon them. - E.g., how much freedom was there to act upon rightful ideas under Stalin, Hitler and Mao? - JZ, 24.3.11. – Full freedom requires for the practice of many important rights and liberties full exterritorial autonomy for volunteers or personal law, individually chosen, individual sovereignty and individual secessionism. – Otherwise one encounters, e.g. taxation, immigration restrictions and monetary despotism. - J.Z., 15.8.12.

THINK: In bad times the thinkers think otherwise.“ - Werner Mitsch – (“In schlimmen Zeiten sind Denkende Andersdenkende.”) – In bad times the thinkers think other thoughts. – JZ, 8.7.92. - Alas, so far and everywhere the innovative thinkers, in the political, economic and social spheres, are not free to act upon their better thoughts but bound in the chains of territorialism, which they are not free to cut and throw away. Thus they cannot quickly set better examples, to solve a crisis for themselves and thereby show others how they could do the same for themselves. – JZ, 21.7.08. – Most of the supposed “intellectuals” are addicts to popular errors, myths and prejudices as well, especial in what passes still as “social sciences”. – JZ, 24.10.08. - PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL INSTEAD OF COLLECTIVIST, COERCIVE, MONOPOLISTIC & TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY

THINK: In Herbert’s dry and gritty world, the future belongs only to those who think for themselves.” – Peter Stoler, in TIME, 11.5.81, on Frank Herbert’s God Emperor of Dune. – And who are already free to act for themselves. - JZ, 24.3.11. - SELF-THINKING, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY

THINK: Intellect annuls fate. So far as a man thinks, he is free.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1893-1882., Fate, in The Conduct of Life, 1860. – As far as mere thinking goes, he is largely free, unless he is tortured, overworked, sick etc. But what about the freedom to act upon his thoughts? He still has not got that freedom in most important spheres. But with his best thoughts and those of others sufficiently combined, he has a pretty good chance to become free, even free to act and experiment autonomously in the political, economic and social spheres. –…, he can become free. – JZ, n.d.

THINK: Ke Wan Tze thought thrice and then acted. When the Master was informed of it, he said: “Twice may do.” – The Wisdom of Confucius, Analects, bk.v, c.xix. - Were any of us ever free enough to act upon our rightful ideas, at our own risk and expense, in every sphere, even those monopolized by territorial governments? - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: Learning without thought is labor lost; thought without learning is perilous.” - Confucius, 551-479 B.C., Analects. – The greatest genius and learning are insufficient when not accompanied by freedom to act and experiment. - JZ, 24.3.11. - LEARNING, KNOWLEDGE, IGNORANCE

THINK: Less than fifteen per cent of the people do any original thinking on any subject … The greatest torture in the world for most people is to think.” – Luther Burbank, quoted in Seldes, The Great Quotations. – As far as their work-places are concerned, good suggestion box schemes, associated with bonus schemes, have proven the contrary. In this respect even otherwise quite ordinary people can be quite creative. The same applies to their home decoration, their gardening, their hobbies and their crafts. Once they gained panarchistic liberties many might also demonstrate creative abilities in that sphere. Today, all too often, creativity and self-thinking is no more welcomed than it is in most soldiers and officers, unless it is initiative in fighting. –JZ, 21.7.08. – DIS.

THINK: Let the non-thinkers alone suffer under their own mistakes, errors and prejudices. And sue them for damages when they cause any to outsiders. – JZ, 21.7.08. - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, VOLUNTARISM, PERSONAL LAWS

THINK: Life with fools consists in Drinking; with the wise man, Living’s Thinking. – Poor Richard, 1748. – As if freedom of action and experimentation would have nothing to do with thinking and wisdom. - At least as a natural scientist, publisher and as a political reformer, Benjamin Franklin did also act. - JZ, 24.3.11. - SOCIALIZING, PARTIES, ENTERTAINMENT, GOING OUT, ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION, DRINKING, BEER, WINE ETC., FREEDOM OF ACTION

THINK: Live and think.” – Samuel Lover, Father Roach. We can enjoy a really free life only after sufficient rightful thought and action. – JZ, 21.7.08. – But most would, rather, merely vegetate and call that living! – JZ, 24.10.08. – Think and survive. But not by thought alone, until we have enough PSI power for this purpose. – JZ, 17.4.09. – Think enough – and thus survive and help mankind to survive. – JZ, 3.2.12.

THINK: Man is obviously made to think. It is his whole dignity and his whole merit.” – Pascal, Pensées, 1670, tr. W. F. Trotter. - As if sympathy, pity, considerateness for the feelings of others, benevolence, kindness, politeness and good manners would not matter at all. – People tend to generalize or exaggerate the importance of their preferences. – From the way most people act, much of the time, one can also get quite the contrary impression. Or should one conclude from Pascal’s remark that the multitude of others are no genuine human beings at all? For a small minority of them I would agree. – They are only beasts in human form. - Man is also made to act, self-responsibly - and yet that freedom is still all too much suppressed, territorially. - JZ, 26.7.08, 24.3.11. – Are they “made” or, rather, all too often the result of insufficient self-development? Do they often enough make themselves think or do they usually prefer to merely stimulate their senses, in one way or the other, to entertain themselves? – JZ, 3.2.12. – Q.

THINK: Man may renounce much. But he must think, and he has a deep need to express his thoughts. It is profoundly sickening to be compelled to remain silent when there is need for expression. It is tyranny at its worst to compel men not to think as they do, to compel men to express thoughts that are not their own. The limitation of freedom of thought is not only an attack on specific political and social rights, but an attack on the human being as such.” – Milovan Djilas, The New Class, Praeger, 1957, p.146. – Freedom of thought should be distinguished from freedom of expressing thoughts. – JZ - As if freedom of action or experimental freedom would not matter. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: Many there are, too depressed, too embruted with hard toil, and the struggle for animal existence (*), to think for themselves. Therefore, the obligation devolves with all the more force on those who can. If thinking men are few, they are for that reason all the more powerful.” – Henry George, Social Problems. – Only potentially. In territorial States it is mostly the non-thinking or false-thinking men, full of popular prejudices, who get into positions of power and stay there all too long. - If men have time and energy to drink, use other drugs, engage in sports or watch them, to bet, gamble and smoke, talks about the weather and trade union “actions”, etc., then they would and should also have some time to think seriously about their own situations and how to improve them. One cannot or should not blame everything on one’s own environment, conditions or jobs. That is just as bad as “blaming society” for all crimes. - (*) Hardly the case any more in most of the somewhat developed countries. – JZ, 21.7.08. – POWER, INFLUENCE, INDIVIDUALS, DIS.

THINK: Men who fail to think may expect to find themselves in a bad society. A good society is possible only among those who have reached the human level of thinking for themselves.” – Leonard E. Read, Who’s Listening? p.87. - And who managed to achieve freedom of action for themselves. Until then they are stuck with all the wrongs and evils of territorialism. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: Mind is the great lever of all things; human thought is the process by which human ends are ultimately answered.” – Daniel Webster, address on laying the cornerstone of the Bunker Hill Monument, Boston, Mass., June 17, 1825. - Only if the minds of man do also mind all the requirements for sound minds to be productively used in free actions, in every sphere. That requires the experimental freedom of panarchism. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: Most can think better for themselves than they can think for others. And under freedom they have more incentives to do so. – JZ, 19.1.96. – Under the rule of politicians and bureaucrats thinking becomes reduced, at the top as well as at the bottom. – JZ, 18.7.08. - THINKING FOR ONESELF, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, TERRITORIALISM

THINK: Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion – in the long run, these are the only people who count.” - Robert Heinlein, ISIL LIBERTY QUOTE LIBRARY 03. - Provided they do enjoy experimental freedom under full exterritorial autonomy. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: No form of territorial authoritarianism and “leadership” is a good enough substitute for self-thinking. – Each human brain ought to become self-programmed and self-directing, rather than remain one of the human sacrifices to the new territorial “gods”. – JZ, 3.2.12. – LEADERSHIP, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS

THINK: One has to multiply thoughts to the point where there aren’t enough policemen to control them.” – Stanislaw Lec, Unkempt Thoughts, 1962. – If we fully mobilized all libertarian thoughts, ideas, methods and reference works, it would become difficult to impossible for territorial governments to control and abuse us any longer. – JZ 30.7.08. – Libertarian thinkers have to become multiplied, too, not only via educational efforts. That is one reason why I do regret that so many libertarians do not have any or only all too few children. – JZ, 17.4.09. - IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, RED., SLOGANS FOR LIBERTY, LIBERTARIAN LIBRARY, L. ENCYCLOPEDIA, L. ABSTRACTS, L. REVIEWS, MONETARY FREEDOM & PANARCHISM HANDBOOKS

THINK: One must live the way one thinks or end up thinking the way one has lived.” – Paul Bourcet (Bourget?), “Conclusion”, Le Démon de midi, 1914. – But first one has to gain the freedom to do so. And that does, to a large extent and in very important spheres, require the experimental freedom of panarchism. – JZ, 20.7.08.

THINK: People who don’t think and act for themselves do become pawns in the hands of others. – JZ, 16.7.79. - I have still to find enough libertarians and anarchists to seriously tackle the job of producing, between them, an as correct and complete declaration of all genuine individual rights and liberties as it would now be possible to produce. I consider that to be a scandalous case of an extreme lack of interest in some of the most important own affairs, least excusable for these supposed "freedom-lovers". - Compare the digitized anthology of over 130 private drafts of this kind, which I compiled in PEACE PLANS 589/590, hoping that it would bring about such a collaboration. - JZ, 24.3.11. – It is online at - as part of a CD reproduced there. – J.Z., 15.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM, HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION

THINK: Riddle: What is the quickest thing in the world? Answer: Thought. - - It is and it isn’t. It can be slow, too – oh, how slow! Only slowly and laboriously do men, people, society, realize what has happened to them. Realize the truth about their position.” – Solzhenitsyn, Gulag 3, p.231. – Correct under territorialism. It puts too many barriers between thought and action. It would be very different if they were members of a community of volunteers, with numerous other such communities all around them, all experimenting with their ideas and ideals. – In spheres where there are few such barriers, e.g. in natural sciences and in technology, especially in computer technology, thoughts and actions can advance very fast. We do have to achieve the same for the "social sciences". Until we do they are not genuine sciences as yet. - JZ, 31.6.08, 24.3.11. – PANARCHISM, PROGRESS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, VOLUNTARISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER-PROJECT

THINK: see what everybody else has seen, and think what nobody else has thought.” – Albert Szent-Gyorgyi - And think as well as work to gain the freedom to do, at your own expense and risk, anything worthwhile that nobody has ever done before you. - JZ, 24.3.11. – FREEDOM TO ACT & EXPERIMENT

THINK: So varied are members of the human race that similarities can often be expressed only in broad generalities: the potentiality to think, for instance. (*) But there the similarity ends, for we do not think alike; indeed, each person varies in his own thinking from moment to moment. These observations merely set the stage for the thesis of this chapter, namely, that agreement among us is not in our nature and, as an objective, is both unrealistic and mischievous. –– (*) For an enlightening treatise on how enormously varied we are, see You Are Extraordinary, by Dr. Roger J. Williams, New York, Random House, 1967. - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.7. – This title by Dr. Williams is one of the best books I have ever read. – JZ, 21.7.08. - DIVERSITY, MAN, HUMAN RACE, PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM & NATION-BUILDING

THINK: some will be men and women who have suddenly found that they have to think and act on their own.” – Con Sellers, Mr. Tomorrow, p.159. – SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

THINK: Start thinking for yourself!” - Leonard E. Read, Having My Way, p.121. - Don't forget thinking and working towards full freedom of action for yourself and for all others as well. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: Stop to think – but don’t stop thinking. – JZ, 22.6.92. - Well, after you have done enough thinking you ought to think also about how to achieve the freedom to act upon your correct thoughts and ideas, in spheres so far monopolized by territorial governments. You might first have to become a sovereign individual, i.e., have to get territorial governments out of your way, starting with individual or group secessionism. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: TFYQA – Think For Yourself, and Question Authority.” – William McGowan, OMNI, 1/87. - Not only question territorial "authorities", but do away with them, at least with all their territorial powers. - Without them they would start to become harmless for the dissenters. These would then have the option to do their own things under their own personal law. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: The ability to think does not remain constant if one lets oneself go. As a result of inactivity its flexibility and strength become gradually reduced. It always requires a certain assistance through reasoning to keep the ability to think and to act awake and pure.” – Plutarch, Ob ein Greis noch Staatsgeschaefte betreiben soll, 8. (JZ tr. of the German version: “Die Denkfaehigkeit bleibt nicht gleich rege, wenn man sich gehen laesst: infolge von Untaetigkeit nimmt sie allmaehlich ab an Spannkraft und Bestandfaehigkeit, indem es immer einer gewissen Nachhilfe durch den Verstand bedarf, um das Vermoegen, zu denken und zu handeln, wach und rein zu erhalten.“) – Neither old nor young people should occupy themselves with territorial statism. That would be quite unreasonable. – They should rather try to abolish it. – The brain needs exercise as well as muscles do. Otherwise it deteriorates. Exercise it by exploring how all solvable problems could be solved much better than they could be solved by any territorial State, or, indirectly, through the abolition of all territorial States. - JZ, 21.7.86, 20.7.08.

THINK: the absurdity of allowing others to think for them. For this condition of mental and moral blindness the church is responsible.” – Emerson, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.144. – CHURCHES, RELIGION, STATISM, PRIESTS, EXPERTS, TERRITORIALISM, PREACHERS, POLITICIANS, LEADERSHIP, REPRESENTATIVES, PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS, AUTHORITARIANISM

THINK: The ancestor of every action is a thought.” – Emerson, Essays, First Series: Spiritual Laws. – Aren’t there also all too many criminal thoughts and actions, by official a well as private criminals? Which thoughts and actions would help us most against both kinds? – JZ, 21.7.08. – Q.

THINK: The class of those who have the ability to think their own thoughts is separated by an unbridgeable gulf from the class of those who cannot.” - Ludwig von Mises - There is also the present enormous gap between those who are free to act, even wrongfully and irrationally, and those, who are territorially and forcefully prevented from acting quite rightfully and rationally, or making their own mistakes, at their own risk and expense, due to the special interests, immorality, power addiction, ignorance or prejudices of those, who have gained territorial power. - JZ, 24.3.11. - THINKERS, CREATIVITY, ORIGINALITY, TERRITORIALISM

THINK: The conventional territorial voting system combines a minimum of thought with a minimum of responsibility. – And guess what kinds of “leaders” are the result of this! - JZ, 21.4.08, 24.10.08. – VOTING, DEMOCRACY, LEADERSHIP, RULERS, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, GOVERNMENTS, REPRESENTATIVES

THINK: the future belongs only to those who think for themselves.” - Peter Stoler: “In (Frank) Herbert's dry and gritty world (God Emperor of Dune)” - TIME, May 11, 1981. - And who manage to gain the freedom to act upon their thoughts and concede the same freedom to all others. Freedom to experiment in one's own affairs, no longer subjected to any territorial "authority"! - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: The greatest events of an age are its best thoughts.” – Leonard E. Read, The Path to Duty, in the contents listing. – So why have we still not fully mobilized them but rather publish relatively trivial news and entertainment all the time? – JZ, 21.7.08. – The best ideas and thoughts are still largely useless to oneself until one has also gained the freedom to act upon them, together with like-minded people. - JZ, 224.3.11. - IDEAS, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, SLOGANS FOR LIBERTY

THINK: The highest possible stage in moral culture is when we recognize that we ought to control our thoughts.” – Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 1871, p.4. - Only our own thoughts and also our own actions but not the thoughts and actions of anyone else. – JZ, 20.7.08, 24.3.11.

THINK: The man who does not do his own thinking is a slave, and a traitor to himself and to his fellow-men.” – Robert G. Ingersoll, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.279. Also in Seldes: The Great Quotations. – Consequently, we still have “nations” largely made up of traitors to it! – JZ, 24.10.08. - TERRITORIALISM

THINK: The pure political thinker, if caught up in practical politics, resembles the daughter of a cleric, that somehow found herself in a foreign country. One hears many laments from them.“ – Hans Kasper – (“Der reine Denker in die Politik verschlagen gleicht der Pastorentochter in der Fremde. Da hoert man manche Klage.“) - Until panarchism or polyarchism arrived on the scene there was no morally pure and also realistic political thinking done but merely that of territorial despotism. Both the political thinker and the virgin will have to adapt to a world of very many different ideals, models and practices or life styles, all peacefully coexisting and individually chosen, or simply lock themselves in or retreat to a monastery or an ivory tower. – JZ, 21.7.08.

THINK: the real hero of tomorrow is a Thinking Man; …” Mark Clifton, When They Come from Space, p. 104. - Provided, he is also free to act. Under territorialism he might still be quite powerless to do so or might even become imprisoned or exterminated for his thoughts and ideas. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: The revelation of Thought takes man out of servitude into freedom.” – Emerson, Conduct of Life: Fate. – So why haven’t all relevant thoughts – facts and ideas been as yet made easily, cheaply and permanently available to anyone with a P.C.? – Why has one still to dig for them, laboriously, like an archeologist, for some ancient relics? Why are they still mixed up with such multitudes of false or incomplete or flawed notions, prejudices, errors, myths, wrong assumptions and conclusions? Where is there only pure thought, where are only quite rightful ideas offered so far, e.g., in an ideal declaration of individual rights and liberties, in an ideal handbook of correct definitions regarding liberties and rights? Why exists there still no complete libertarian library, bibliography, abstracts and review collection, not to speak of an alphabetical index to all the texts? Why not even a complete and growing libertarian encyclopedia? Why are there still dozens of different classification schemes and, perhaps, not yet a single libertarian electronic “argument map”? We do have the technology for a complete liberation program – but haven’t used it as yet to develop it. – Why not? - JZ, 21.7.08. – Moreover, why are we still not free to act upon our ideas and opinions, at our own risk and expense? - JZ, 24.3.11. - IDEAS, FREEDOM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, TERRITORIALISM, Q.

THINK: The right to think is the beginning of freedom, and speech must be protected from the government because speech is the beginning of thought.” - Justice Anthony Kennedy, majority opinion Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, April 16, 2002. - Freedom of speech is merely the beginning, not the end of thought! Think again! Never get too tired of thinking when the subject is very important. - JZ, 26.3.04. – Kleist wrote an interesting essay on the gradual manufacture of thought while one is speaking. – The same is true for writing. Goethe is supposed to have remarked: If you do not understand something, write something about it! Doubts and questions are the first steps towards productive thinking. The brain, like a motor, has to be started to work. – Freedom of action, tolerant actions and experiments, among volunteers, is often even more important to clarify issues. – With mere verbal battles one can achieve only so much. Perhaps most with electronic “argument mapping” as proposed by Paul Monk at al. But I have still to see the first libertarian electronic argument map. - JZ, 4.1.08. – Actually, one must have a thought, flawed or correct, before one can express it in speech or writing. – Freedom of expression and information, as well as freedom of action or experimentation are merely the precondition for advancing thoughts and ideas, discoveries and innovations further. - JZ, 1.4.09, 25.3.11. - FREEDOM OF SPEECH, PRESS, EXPRESSION & INFORMATION

THINK: the single evil is the reluctance to think.” – Henry Hazlitt - As if the suppression of freedom to act self-responsibly, in every sphere, were not also an evil, one of many others. - JZ, 24.3.11. – SELF-THINKING, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-HELP, etc.

THINK: The wise, through not thinking, become foolish; and the foolish, by thinking, become wise.” – The Wisdom of Confucius, Shu King, pt. v, bk. xviii, 2. - Were the wise of the past and the wise of the present wise enough to stand up for full experimental freedom? - JZ, 24.3.11. - FOOLISHNESS, WISDOM

THINK: The world is a comedy to those who think and a tragedy to those who feel.” – Source not quoted in THE CONNECTION 109, p.12, 22.1.83, by Jim Downard. – Think and feel more and enough – then this tragi-comedy can be turned into the drama and exiting adventure of real progress. – JZ, 29.6.89, 31.7.08, 15.8.12. - The present territorial messes are still continued largely because freedom of action and experimentation is still suppressed in some of the most important spheres - by territorial governments. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: There is no expedient to which a man will not go to avoid the real labor of thinking.” – Thomas Alva Edison. On a placard in all Edison works. – Quoted in Seldes: The Great Quotations. - Compare: “Some people read only so that they do not have to think!” - Once many are free to act in their own sphere, independent of any government, many will begin to think and act in their own spheres. Many of these will make many mistakes. Some will make few or even none. The final and positive results of both groups will be widely imitated. Panarchism does not demand anything more but also nothing less than that. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: There never was a time when there was greater need for independent thinking than there is today.” – NZ RATIONALIST AND HUMANIST, Oct./Nov. 74. – Alas, most of the organized atheists and humanists do all too little independent thinking when it comes to the so-called social sciences. There they do mostly share the popular errors, myths, prejudices, false assumptions and conclusions. – JZ, 31.7.08. - Freedom of thought and its extensive usage can still not be very productive in all spheres, as long as people are not free to act in spheres still monopolized by territorial governments. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: They can because they think they can.” - (Possunt quia posse videntur.) – Vigil, Aeneid, v. – G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. - Isn't that one of the main errors of territorial politicians? - JZ, 24.3.11. – Q., DIS.

THINK: Think and let think.” – John Wesley, quoted in LIFE. – G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. - Act and let act. Think and work to obtain freedom of action for yourself and for all others, in a tolerant, voluntary and exterritorial autonomy way, under personal law. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: Think big – or don’t bother to think at all. – JZ, 23.3.75. - - If you can’t think big, at least think small. Both types are necessary. – JZ, 30.7.78. – Cars and planes developed to their present degrees of perfection mostly in relatively small steps. - Division of labor can and should also be applied to the thinking process. – Networking can be very productive. Now talents from all over the world can, hypothetically, become involved, if this is sufficiently prepared or organized. - Who said that “thinking is a collective process!”? Much thinking gets done in free discussions. Certain forms of guided and recorded discussions are more productive than others. The so far least utilized option seems to be electronic “argument mapping” as recommended online by Paul Monk at al. – JZ, 21.7.08. - Even the building of sound cars and planes required freedom to experiment. Experimental freedom is now is even more needed in the "social sciences". - JZ, 24.3.11, 15.8.12.

THINK: Think for yourself and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too.” – Voltaire, Essay on Tolerance. – Quoted in Seldes. – Is it a privilege, a right, a freedom, or even a duty? – JZ, 31.7.08. - Should we be satisfied with only freedom to think or insist upon freedom for self-responsible actions as well, in every sphere? - JZ, 24.3.11. - Q.

THINK: THINK FOR YOURSELF, SCHMUCK! – Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus I, p.87. - And gain the freedom to act for yourself - while conceding to others the same freedom. - And I do not mean the freedom to act of a clown, comedian, actor or artist. - JZ, 24.3.11. – Schmucks won’t – at least not until they can see the successes of self-thinking people all around them. Then they will try to imitate or join their actions as far as they can. Panarchism means freedom for all to lead by successful examples and to deter by unsuccessful ones. – JZ, 3.2.12.

THINK: Think like a man of action and act like a man of thought.” – Henri Bergson, quoted in ANALOG, 2/93. – Also quoted in ANALOG, 10/90, p.186. - For that, we and all others, do need freedom of action in every sphere - except in the sphere or wrongfully restricting rightful actions of others. - JZ, 24.3.11. - ACTION

THINK: Think then act safely.” - Author Unknown. – As if we were already quite free to act rightly or self-responsibly in all spheres. - JZ, 24.3.11. – To act rightfully and thoughtfully, under territorialism, does not always mean acting safely. At least under territorial totalitarianism it means risking one’s life. – Territorialism has outlawed numerous quite rightful actions. - JZ, 3.2.12. - THINK BEFORE YOU ACT, ACTIONS

THINK: Thinking people are never in agreement. People who do not think are always in agreement.” – E. Haldeman Julius. – However much agreement can be achieved on e.g. political, economic and social subjects can only be achieved within communities of volunteers. – Moreover, there is also great dissent among the ignorant, foolish and prejudiced, all placing their bets on many quite different and often opposite viewpoints, all of them at least flawed or incomplete, if not quite false. – JZ, 18.7.08. - RED., AGREEMENT, CONSENSUS

THINK: Those who like to think regarding all their own affairs and relationships with public affairs should be free to do so, regardless of the lack of thinking by others and they should also be free to direct their actions and involvements with others, all volunteers, quite in accordance with their own thinking only, again, quite independent of the thinking or lack of thinking of all those others, who live in the same country with them but did not voluntarily associate with them as like-minded people. Different laws, constitutions, jurisdictions, political, economic and social systems for different people. – JZ, n.d., 21.7.08. – Equality before the law is only quite rightful for personal law! – J.Z., 15.8.12. - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, ASSOCIATIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, INDEPENDENCE

THINK: Thought is the seed of action.” – Emerson, Society and Solitude: Art. – We do not as yet have the freedom of action that we have e.g. in art, gardening and sports, hobbies and crafts. We do not as yet have it where we need it most, in our times, namely in the political, economic and social spheres. There, under territorialism, most healthy seeds fall mainly on barren ground and sound thoughts encounter mostly deaf ears. – JZ, 31.7.08, 15.8.12. – A longer version: Thought is the seed of action; but action is as much its second form as thought is its first. It rises in thought, to the end that it may be uttered and acted. Always in proportion to the depth of its sense does it knock importunately at the gates of the soul, to be spoken, to be done.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson. - Was he unaware how limited his freedom of action was? - Are we still largely unaware of how limited it still is for us, even in the supposedly "free" countries? - JZ, 24.3.11. – We have still not a comprehensive seed-bank for fruitful ideas and thoughts. On the Internet as well, they are still mixed-in with and almost buried under land-slides of mud. – JZ, 4.2.12. – IDEAS ARCHIVE, A FREE MARKET FOR IDEAS, Q., THOUGHTS & TALENTS, LIBERTARIAN PROJECTS LIST ONLINE, LIBERTARIAN ENCYCLOPEDIA, DIGITIZED COMPREHENSIVE FREEDOM LIBRARY, PERHAPS ON A SINGLE & BOOK-SIZED EXTERNAL HD.

THINK: Thought takes a man out of servitude into freedom.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson. - Not without a good enough enlightenment and action program on how to achieve that. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINK: Thoughts are mightier than the strength of hand.” – Sophocles, Fragments, No. 584. – Could he have thought himself out of an extermination camp or out of a huge tax debt imposed upon him? Should we put the thinkers in the front lines? Shall policemen only apply thought to prevent crime? How can correct thoughts defeat mighty armies or, better still and bring them over to the just side, as allies? – Have we mobilized all correct thoughts, insights, ideas and discoveries as yet and sufficiently published them? - Such general formulas contain too much wishful or hopeful thinking and not enough in form of platforms and blueprints for rightful actions. - JZ, 21.7.08. - DIS., Q., FREEDOM OF ACTION, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, PANARCHISM

THINK: Thoughts make everything fit for use.” – Emerson, The Poet. Essays: Second Series, 1844. – Every means? Even those used for criminal purposes, like break-in and safe-cracking tools, viruses, spam etc.? - When will we finally start fully mobilizing all of the best thoughts, ideas, suggestions, platforms etc., and all of the best or significant talents? – Starting out by making them fully accessible. - JZ, 10/85, 20.7.08. - Thoughts alone won't achieve freedom of action. - For that even some illegal action might be needed, even in democracies. - JZ, 24.3.11. – How can we make nuclear “weapons” fit for use? – J.Z., 15.8.12. – Q., DIS., PREJUDICES, IDEAS ARCHIVE

THINK: To live is to think.” (Vivere est cogitare.) – Cicero, Tusculanarum Disputationum, Bk. v, ch. 38, sec.111. - Are all the non-thinkers around us already dead? What kind of thinking do most of them habitually avoid? Have we thought enough about the nuclear war threat to be able to abolish it? My book on this, making about 500 alphabetized points, is still a record non-seller: - JZ, 21.7.08. - If soldiers really started to think then all of them might survive a war threat - by taking the actions required to prevent it, together with the soldiers of their supposed enemies, e.g. by concluding a separate and just peace between them and uniting them against the warmongers and war profiteers on both sides. Who could hinder them? Both forces are the main forces in both governments. But they do all too thoughtlessly obey rather than rise. – JZ, 21.7.08. - We certainly can't live and survive on thoughts alone. - JZ, 24.3.11. – All too many do still get by, just like animals, without thinking much and without acting morally, rationally and reasonably. The territorial system allows them to do this and even depends upon the non-thinkers, the immoral, prejudiced and stupid people and does even put them into territorial leadership positions. – JZ, 3.2.12. – Most people still mainly engage in what they call “living”, rather than thinking. They have this in common with most animals. – JZ, 4.2.12. – Compare the entry below: THINK: To think is to live. - MASSES, VOTING, DEMOCRACY, Q., LEADERSHIP, DIS., IGNORANCE, FOOLISHNESS, PREJUDICES

THINK: To the extent that you have to think for others you can’t think for yourself. – JZ, 23.7.75. - To the extent that you are not free to think and act for yourself you are not free. Under territorialism uncounted free and rightful actions are outlawed! - JZ, 24.3.11. - LEADERSHIP

THINK: To think great thoughts you must be heroes as well as idealists. Only when you have worked alone – when you have felt around you a black gulf of solitude more isolating than that which surrounds the dying man, and in hope and in despair have trusted your own unshaken will – then only will you have achieved. Thus only can you gain the secret, isolated joy of the thinker, who knows that, a hundred years after he is dead and forgotten, men who never heard of him will be moving to the measure of this thought – the subtle rapture of a postponed power, which the world knows not because it has no external trappings, but which to his prophetic vision is more real than that which commands an army.” – Justice Oliver Wendell Holms. – If the thinkers thought enough, then they would provide, between them, e.g. an Ideas Archive or Super-Computer Project (PEACE PLANS 20, on a libertarian Ideas Archive online on a disc at ) and Talent Centre, as essential markets for them, that would speed up the process of enlightenment and may help them greatly to achieve their ideals in their own life-time. – JZ, 31.7.08. - If they thought enough, then they would also realize freedom of action and experimentation for all people, who are able and willing to act self-responsibly with their ideas and opinions. - I can hardly blame others for sometimes forgetting about freedom of action when I manage to do it myself, as I did in the above first statement. - JZ, 24.3.11. - IDEAS, POWER OF IDEAS, FREEDOM OF ACTION.

THINK: To think is to live.” – Vivere est cogitare. – Marcus Tullius Cicero, Tuculanae disputations. – In G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. - How often has freedom of thought led to the death of the thinker when he had neither freedom of expression nor freedom to act? - JZ, 24.3.11. – Insufficient thinking is the greatest cause of death. It might even lead to the death of mankind, all too well prepared by territorialism, now “armed” with mass extermination devices. – JZ, 3.2.12. – Compare the above entry: THINK: To live is to think.

THINK: Under the territorial voting system it is wrongly assumed that every voter is sufficiently able and willing to ponder this very limited choice. But the slogans, used to induce him to vote for one party or the other, do already indicate that the appeal is mostly to the most ignorant, foolish and prejudiced voters. If his vote directly determined his tax burden, then he would be more careful with his vote and with his political association with others. – Just as he is with most purchases made with his own money. - JZ, 21.5.08. – If he were a member of a community of volunteers, then his vote, if still asked for, in such a community of like-minded volunteers, would also tend to be very different. - JZ, 24.3.11, 15.8.12. - VOTING, DEMOCRACY, PARTIES, ELECTIONS. TERRITORIALISM, ENLIGHTENMENT, VOLUNTARY TAXATION

THINK: Walk in the light of your own thoughts.” – From a radio play, episode 7, “Walk a Barefoot Road”, 4.9.89. - I did not catch the name of the author. – JZ – Strive to become free to act in the light of your own thoughts. - JZ, 24.3.11. - RED.

THINK: We are individual humans who think, and in our thinking capacity lies our salvation. It is only when we stop thinking for ourselves that we truly lose our freedom.” – Thomas Frederick O’Connell, THE FREEMAN, 11/73. - If we are only free to think but not free to act within our genuine individual rights and liberties, then even our best thoughts and ideas will not always help us sufficiently. Which are the best thoughts and ideas to achieve this freedom of action and experimentation? - JZ, 24.3.11. – START-UP OPTIONS

THINK: We haven’t the money. So we’ve got to think!” – Ernest Rutherford, in the BULLETIN OF THE INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS, 1962, quoted in OMNI, 3/80. – As if riches were a good substitute for thinking. But at least a rich person can hire himself one or several thinkers or researchers. - Money, that is good enough and problem-solving rather than problem causing, as well as wealth, that is safe enough, even from governments, do also require much thinking and thoughtful and free actions. – Both, money and wealth, are presently at the mercy of ignorant and prejudiced territorial governments. - JZ, 21.7.08. – With all their money, forcefully taken, territorial governments still act all too wrongly, stupidly and self-defeatingly. – Merely throwing money and manpower at problems does not solve them. Or you get “solutions” like that of the Manhattan Project: Mass murder devices! - JZ, 24.10.08.

THINK: What is the hardest task in the world? To think.” - Emerson, Journals, 1836. – To think up new utopias is relatively easy. To think up correct and practicable ones is harder. And then, under territorialism, the hardest job is to try to realize even the best of them. So first of all we have to ponder how to achieve the freedom to experiment, together with other volunteers, quite tolerantly, i.e., exterritorially, under personal laws, even in those spheres, which territorial States have so far, quite intolerantly, monopolized. – JZ, 20.7.07. – Recognizing the exterritorial autonomy of all kinds of governments and societies in exile and making alliances with them against all the remaining despotic regimes, would be one way. All of these governments and societies should be only for their present and future volunteers. Their establishment in Western countries might already transform these into panarchies as well, in a relatively short time. Peaceful, rightful and radical revolutions like that know no borders. The collapse of the territorial powers of the remaining despotic regimes would not be long delayed afterwards. However, confined to their remaining true believers, these despotism could be continued over these voluntary victims. – Deterrent examples are needed, too. Each new generation has been compared to an invasion of barbarians. - J.Z., 15.8.12. - PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, FREEDOM OF ACTION, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE

THINK: when men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon.” - Thomas Paine. – They officially quit thinking on certain subjects when they transferred decision-making power e.g. on foreign affairs, money issues – and on too much else as well - to certain officials, chosen or appointed only collectively and territorially, instead of leaving them to the free choices or decisions of individuals and communities of volunteers. – JZ, 11.1.08, 15.8.12. - & LIBERTY, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM, DELEGATION OF POWERS OVER THE OWN AFFAIRS, VOTING, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, COLLECTIVISM

THINK: Whenever government assumes to deliver us from the trouble of thinking for ourselves, the only consequences it produces are those of torpor, imbecility.” – William Godwin, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p. 96. - TERRITORIALISM

THINK: You can’t see a thought, you can’t measure, weigh, nor taste it – but thoughts are the most real things in the Galaxy.” – Robert Heinlein, Citizen of the Galaxy, p.139. - Are they more real than actions based on sound ideas? - JZ, 24.3.11. - IDEAS & ACTIONS, Q.

THINK: You conquer fate by thought.” – Thoreau. – At least, under full freedom, you are free to try to do so. – JZ, 20.7.08. – FATE, ACTIONS, FREEDOM, DIS.

THINK: Your subconscious mind acts upon repeated thoughts – make sure you have positive ones.” – From 1977 Collins Desk Calendar. - As if conscious action upon rightful ideas were not also possible under freedom to do so. - JZ, 24.3.11.

THINKING & ACTIONS: Think wrongly, if you please, but in all cases think for yourself." - Gotthold Ephraim Lessing. And let others think and act for themselves. - JZ, 7.1.93.

THOREAU HENRY DAVID: If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music he hears, however measured or far away."

THOREAU, HENRY DAVID, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience. - Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobedience (1848) [English] - Henry David Thoreau, Sul Dovere della Disobbedienza Civile (1848) [Italiano] - As opposed to terrorism, on the principle of collective responsibility, rightful resistance, revolutions and liberation efforts should be civilized, rather than mass-murderous. - JZ, 1.9.11. - REVOLUTIONS, LIBERATION, RESISTANCE, MILITIA, DISOBEDIENCE, NON-VIOLENCE, AS FAR AS POSSIBLE, MILITIA

THORNLEY, KERRY: Saturation Revolution. July 1968, plan 225, pages 36 - 37, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507.

THORNTON, ALAN, Biarchy: n.d., 8pp, with 5pp of comments by JZ, 158, in ON PANARCHY XVII, in PP 1,051. - Panarchism confined to two panarchies only. Perhaps suitable as a beginning, with the major two parties. - JZ, 28.8.04.

THOUGHT: A really original thought is still as rare as a piece of gold in the gutter.” - Christian Morgenstern, Stufen, 1918, P.122. - ORIGINAL, IDEAS, THINK

THOUGHT: Besides, why should we be cowed by the name of action? 'Tis a trick of the senses, - no more. We know that the ancestor of every action is a thought…. To think is to act.” - Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), Essays: First Series (1841), "Spiritual Laws". - Alas, too much action is rather thoughtless, by people who have no sound idea on it! - JZ, 27.11.02. – And sometimes much thinking is too much separated from freedom to act or even the will to act when one is free to do so. – JZ, 1.4.09. - & ACTION, IDEAS

THOUGHT: If there is any principle of the constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought – not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.” – Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (1841-1935), U.S. Supreme Court Justice, United States v. Schwimmer, 1929. - This freedom, if taken literally, is insufficient, without freedom of expression, communication, information, association, disassociation and assembly and disassembly. Moreover, full freedom of action and experimentation are also required, to test hypotheses, principles, assumptions and theories sufficiently, to either prove or disprove them. - JZ, 23.11.06, 14.4.09. - FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, ESPECIALLY FOR DISSENTERS, ALSO FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION FOR DISSENTER

THREATS: I don’t want to be misunderstood ever suggesting, or approving, anyone saying to anyone else, ‘You do so-and-so or I will do such-and-such to you.’ That is a threat, an attempt to invade another’s area of responsibility, to infringe human rights, to dictate another’s decision and acts.” – John Hospers, Rose Wilder Lane, LIBERTARIAN REVIEW, 4/79. - GOVERNMENT, LAWS, TERRITORIALISM

THUGS: 69, 77, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505.

TIGER, LIONEL & FOX, ROBIN: The Imperial Animal, A Delta Book, N.Y., 1971. - Here I found hardly anything on the wrong ideas and institutions making for war and oppression. The authors are mainly concerned with biology, psychology and customs. Some entries on territorialism can be found on pages 26, 60, 61, 74, 119, 226, 227. One can learn little on territorial nationalism and imperialism from it, in spite of its title. - JZ, 29.1.99.

TILLY, CHARLES, Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990-1992. (Studies in Social Discontinuity) Oxford, Blackwell, 1993. - According to James Dale Davidson & William Rees-Mogg (The Sovereign Individual), "for more detail about fragmented sovereignties as a precursor and alternative to the nation-state" see this book." – (I was rather disappointed by this book. It does not come up to the promise of its title, by my standards. – J.Z., 15.8.12.) - I found three quite new books that seem relevant to exterritoriality. Have any of you had a look at any of them? (See under CREVELD, MARTIN van; TILLY, CHARLES; & SPRUYT, HENDRIK.) - Richard CB Johnsson, - 2.5.05. - Alas, I have still not got around to look them up, in print or online. One person can do only so much. A common projects list, comprehensive electronic library, abstracts and review service for libertarians, i.e. sufficient division of labor among libertarians, has still to be established. - JZ, 6.10.11.

TILLY, CHARLES, War Making and State Making as Organized Crime, in: Peter B. Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, and Theda Skocpol, Bringing the State Back In, Cambridge U.P., 1985. (Davidson/Rees-Mogg)

TIME: March 9, 1970, p. 14: A report on black separatism and autonomy aspirations.

TIMM, UWE: Anarchie, 24 pp, in LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, Nr. 3, Mackay Gesellschaft, Freiburg Br., 1976.

TIMURI, IBRAHIM: Asr-I bi-khabari, 1953/54, 411pp, on capitulations and exterritoriality. (Ann Arbor)

TINSLEY, PATRICK, Private Police: A Note. - Patrick Tinsley - Private Police: A Note (pdf) - JOURNAL OF LIBERTARIAN STUDIES, Vol. 14, Num. 1, 1998-1999.

TITANIC: Thanks to our beloved territorial governments we had the equivalent of over 100 000 disasters like that of the Titanic in this century. And when one considers the destruction of property as well, then these governments are at least a million-fold as destructive as are e.g. natural causes like icebergs in shipping lanes. – JZ, 3.6.96. – With regard to territorialism and its WMD’s, we are all passengers and staff on a giant ship, Earth, on a collision course with a giant “iceberg”. – JZ, 3.2.12. -  GOVERNMENT CAUSED CATASTROPHES VS. NATURAL ONES, TERRITORIALISM, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT.

TITANIC: Why this continuing concern with an old shipping accident like that of the Titanic, which was certainly not an intended one, when during WW I and WW II thousands of ships were intentionally and systematically sunk, with the help of modern technology? – It seems that, just like during election campaigns, the really important questions are never brought up. - JZ, 14.8.98, 16.7.08. - Q., VOTING, ELECTIONS, MAN-MADE CATASTROPHES, CRISES, WARS, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS

TITLE LISTS ON PANARCHISM: For those in the 24 PEACE PLANS issues called "On Panarchy" see the file: ON PAN 1-24 A-Z CONT sorted. This list is already integrated here. The longest bibliography that I so far compiled has been, likewise, integrated into this A-Z.  An earlier and shorter one is on pages 107ff in PP 506 (ON PANARCHY II).

TOBIAS, HENRY J. & WOODHOUSE, CHARLES E., Editors: Minorities and Politics, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, 1969, 132pp, JZL. - Seems to be full only of territorial politics, as usual. - JZ

TOGETHERNESS: Compulsory togetherness is the problem, not the solution. The solution lies in voluntary togetherness and involuntary separatism – by all those, who do prefer them. – JZ, 1.1.92. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, BROTHERHOOD, Territorialism amounts to wrongful & compulsory “brotherhood” with strangers & enemies. – JZ, 3.2.12.

TOGETHERNESS: Let there be spaces in your togetherness.” – Kahli Gibran. – INDIVIDUALISM, ALONE

TOGETHERNESS: Personally, I can’t feel the slightest sense of togetherness with dopes. Nor do I feel that I have an inalienable right to inflict my presence on geniuses.” – John W. Campbell Jr., 8/58. – MERE PASSING & WASTING TIME, SOCIALIZING

TOGETHERNESS: Togetherness often and quite unnecessarily antagonizes – unless it is quite intentional and voluntary and has a sensible purpose. – JZ, 30.6.80, 14.7.08.

TOIVIAINEN, HILLEVI, Search for Security, U.S. citizens in the Far East, 1890-1906: a comparative study ..., 1886, 424pp, bibl., index. - "Diplomatic protection".

TOLERANCE & COOPERATION: Tolerance and cooperation are difficult to impossible to achieve with the territorial model of politics: "Tragedy, I think, is best defined as a conflict between good and good; the conflict of good vs. evil is mere melodrama. And, strangely, getting good to cooperate with good, is far more difficult than to get evil to cooperate." - Verge Foray, in "ANALOG", Nov. 68. - What is good is a matter of opinion among those of some good will. But what is evil for the good and yet advantageous for the evil, namely the coercive or deceptive exploitation of the good, is relatively easy to see and agree upon among evil people. Thus their looting efforts are easy to organize. However, is anything good that is not based upon consent? Can there be a good territorial system?  Isn't territorialism evil in itself and misleads even men of good will into evil ways? An enlightened good will would embrace exterritorial tolerance or autonomous volunteer communities for all dissenting minority and majority groups. - JZ, 13.1.93. – GOOD & EVIL, GOOD WILL, COOPERATION, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, NATURAL HARMONY THROUGH VOLUNTARISM RATHER THAN COMPULSION, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

TOLERANCE & DEMOCRACY: Demokratie ist das auf den Bereich der Politic ausgedehnte Prinzip der Toleranz. – (Democracy is the principle of tolerance extended to the sphere of politics.) - Quote, source unknown. It only tolerates some limited liberties and rights, and some freedom of action, not the full range. I wish it were but our democracies have a long way to go. And non-democrats are entitled to their wanted degrees of restrictionism, too. Panarchies or exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of democrats and non-democrats in all their peaceful or self-responsible activities, represent the principle of tolerance much more fully. J. Z. 6.1.93. – If only it really were that! Then it would amount to consistent panarchism. Instead, it still stands for territorial domination, with its monopolism, compulsion and authoritarianism and large degrees of wrongful collectivism, insufficiently moderated by constitutionalism, legalism and jurisdiction. – JZ, 15.8.12.

TOLERANCE & ITS LIMITS: A Culture that tolerates ANYTHING is doomed. Rome was so tolerant they allowed Caligula and Nero to practise personal foibles that are perfectly incredible." - John W. Campbell, Jr., Letters, I/151. - It is not tolerance but cowardness or indifference or consent that permits one person to commit intolerable actions against the rights and liberties of others, who are certainly not tolerated thereby. Although the Roman Republic and later the Roman Empire did have SOME tolerant features - e.g. by exempting foreigners largely from Roman laws and jurisdiction - they were not characterized by tolerance but by slavery, oppression, exploitation, regulation, wars, civil wars and usurpations. - JZ, 31.3.89. – Campbell should have used the term EVERYTHING rather than ANYTHING. Anything that is right should be tolerated for those wishing to practise it among themselves. It can also be rightfully defended by force against any aggression. But however rightful this practice is among volunteers, it should not be enforced among dissenters, who rather ignore or do not recognize their individual rights and liberties and do not wish to practise them among themselves. – If people love e.g. duels, rather than non-violence, or other ways to settle their disputes more or less rationally and peacefully, let them practise this “liberty” or “right”. Mankind would be improved by their gradual self-elimination. - JZ, 15.8.12.

TOLERANCE & MISTAKES: Everyone has the right to make mistakes, to try out his errors in practice - at his own expense and risk. - JZ

TOLERANCE & PANARCHISM: All religions must be tolerated, and the sole concern of the authorities should be to see that one does not molest another, for here every man must be saved in his own way.” – Frederick the Great: Cabinet Order, June 22, 1740. – Why only religions and not political, economic and social systems as well?  He was not even tolerant towards Free Traders, since, according to Ulrich von Beckerath, he managed to impose life-long imprisonment upon one of his officers who advocated Free Trade. This in spite of the fact that free traders and protectionists can peacefully coexist – as is proven in principle, although not yet through wide and free enough practice, by the existence of every free-port and duty-free shop. Panarchism would allow the protectionists and free traders to sort themselves out, with the protectionists having to bear all the costs and disadvantages themselves of the system they believe in and do practice among themselves. – JZ, n.d. & 7.1.99. – Q. – FREE TRADE VS. PROTECTIONISM, TO EACH HIS OWN SYSTEM.

TOLERANCE & PANARCHISM: If (religious) toleration is conceded, the cause of war will disappear.” – Harold J. Laski, introduction to A Defence of Liberty. -  One could class any political, economic and social intolerance also as the religious intolerance of a secular religion. – JZ, 9.1.99. - We do need the same tolerance in these spheres as well. Tolerance merely in the natural sciences, and in technology and e.g. in the arts, for their experiments or in private lifestyle choices, is by far not enough to achieve peace in the world and the degree of harmony, cooperation, free association, free disassociation, enlightenment, progress, prosperity, individual and group satisfactions that are possible and desirable for human beings. - JZ, 24.10.11, 15.8.12.

TOLERANCE & PANARCHISM: It takes all kinds to make a world." - Common proverb.

TOLERANCE & PANARCHISM: Tolerance is good for all, or it is good for none.” – Edmund Burke: Speech in the House of Commons, 1773. -  Tolerance as widely as possible, in all spheres, does make sense but tolerance for the intolerant would be self-contradictory and self-defeating.  Tolerance is ideal only between the tolerant. It requires intolerance towards the intolerant behavior of intolerants. That alone would maximize tolerance and serve to keep the intolerant ones in check. – JZ, 5.7.86, 1.7.99. – However, if the intolerant are prepared to confine their intolerance to those other people who are also intolerant and this in the same way, all of them volunteers, then in their own communities they should be free to be as intolerant towards each other as they wish to be. Others would have no right to interfere. – I would not care if they suppressed and exploited each other or even if they wiped each other out. Good riddance! – would be my response. - JZ, 15.8.12.

TOLERANCE & POWER: While tolerance means: no power over the affairs of others, it also means: full power over the own affairs. - JZ, pamphlet on Tolerance.

TOLERANCE & SENSE OF INFALLIBILITY: Next, even a belief in one's own infallibility does not necessarily lead to intolerance. For it may be said that though no man in his senses would claim to be incapable of error, yet in every given case he is quite sure that he is not in error, and therefore this assurance in particular is tantamount by process of cumulation to a sense of infallibility in general. Now, even if this were so, it would not of necessity either produce or justify intolerance. The certainty of truth of your own opinions is independent of any special idea as to the means by which others may best be brought to share them." - John Morley, On Compromise, 245/6. - But belief that solutions must be practised territorially does lead to intolerance. - JZ 12.6.92. - Accumulation?

TOLERANCE EVEN FOR FOOLS & PANARCHISM: Be a fool at your own expense and risk. – JZ, n.d.

TOLERANCE EXTENDED TOWARDS ALL TOLERANT PEOPLE: Religious AND political AND economic tolerance for ALL prepared to peacefully do their own thing, at their own risk and expense! - JZ 27.11.87, 2.4.89.

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

TOLERANCE FOR ALL TOLERANT ACTIONS: What this world needs even more than love or any new territorial laws, institutions and reforms is TOLERANCE FOR ALL TOLERANT ACTIONS. Or, in other words: Full experimental freedom even when it comes to whole political, economic and socials systems and their communities of volunteers. - JZ, 04-11.

TOLERANCE FOR FREEDOM OF ACTION: The most consistent real liberals, and certainly current libertarians, saw clearly that moral consistency demanded toleration not just for thoughts and beliefs - the most intimate function of all human conscience - but also for action in accord with thought. Tolerance for the latter without equal tolerance for the former was rightly seen to be a sham of the highest order. - Walter E. Grinder, An Introduction to Libertarian Thought, p.4.

TOLERANCE FOR THE TOLERANT: Tolerance is the acceptance of disassociation - and disassociation in a personality or a culture, if carried too far, is insanity." - John W. Campbell, Jr., Letters, I/151. - I agree with the first part and the personal part of the second part. Personal disassociation can go too far. Solitary confinement, whether imposed or chosen, in real or imaginary terms, has often and relatively soon led to madness and full sensory deprivation can achieve the same even faster. But to generalize from this upon the possible diversity in cultures and societies is a mistake. Here the greatest degree of disassociation and diversity can still be stable and stabilizing for the volunteers involved. This is true even when the diverse creeds involved are as irrational as some religions and ideologies are. However, the existence of mass extermination devices and the persistence of notions of collective responsibility has led to notions of and preparations for genocide towards the "outsiders" which can only be considered as forms of insanity. One does not have to believe in the brotherhood of man or in egalitarianism or solidarity in all cases to see the immorality and irrationality of such a stand. - JZ, 31.3.89, 10.9.04.

TOLERANCE IN THE SPHERE OF ACTIONS: Their meeting ground must be their common desire for truth. Let us be extremely tolerant of diversity of opinions. But let us be brutally intolerant of lies and insincerity. (By insincerity I mean the attitude that refuses to admit its real motives.)” - Gustav Stolper, This Age of Fable. - This is one of the many liberal sayings for freedom of information and expression, which wrongly assumes that there is a sharp and insuperable dividing line between freedom to express an opinion and freedom to act on it. But there is no clear distinction between an assault by noise (a shout into one's ear from close-by) and a slap in the face. Both amount to assault. A demagogue manipulating an excited crowd into aggressive actions may never get his own hands dirty - but is at least as guilty as the direct aggressors are that put his slogans into operation. In short, there are limits for freedom of speech as there are limits for actions towards others. You have no authority to shout other people down in their own homes etc. as you have none to run their lives - except when they authorize you to do so. – JZ, n.d. - Moreover, how brutal and intolerant may one be towards lies and insincerity – rather than merely ignoring them, at least the liars and the insincere? When there are some other people present, who might be thus deceived, only then is there something like a duty to speak up against them – provided one is free to do so. – JZ, 11.10.08. – PANARCHISM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

TOLERANCE MAXIMIZED TOWARDS THE TOLERANT: While archists and anti-archist (anarchists) are so far intolerant towards panarchism, panarchism is tolerant towards governments and anarchists - to the extent that they aim merely at providing their voluntary supporters with their kinds of disservices, services or non-services. Naturally, that could only be done on the basis of exterritorial autonomy for minorities and majorities. - JZ, 2.12.88, 1.4.89, 4.2.12.

TOLERANCE UNIVERSALIZED TO THE OPTIMUM: Universalize tolerance for all tolerant actions through panarchism! - JZ 10.10.89.

TOLERANCE VS. HATREDS: It is much easier to rile up a herd of primates by hollering 'That gang over there are sneaks, cheats and liars', than by the liberal path of saying: 'That gang has an honest difference of opinion with us.'" - R. A. Wilson, "Right Where You Are Sitting Now", 81. - Territorialism tends to create that frame of mind. Exterritorialism tends to destroy it and replace it by something better. Forced into territorial associations, many dissenters are left no other alternatives to submission than sneaking, cheating, lying, revolting or terrorizing. Individual secessionism can deflate territorial gangsterism and establish freedom, justice and peace. However one man cannot, assuredly, introduce the one-man revolutions on his own. - JZ, 8.1.93.

TOLERANCE VS. IMPOSED “MORALITY”: Pray you use your freedom, And, so far as you please, allow me mine. To hear you only; not to be compelled to take your moral potions. – Philip Massinger, The Duke of Milan, IV, 1623. - Mortal potions? - JZ

TOLERANCE VS. INTERFERENCE: the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually and collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection..." - Mill, On Liberty, Great Books edition, p. 271.

TOLERANCE VS. MEDDLING: Tolerance means a mutual agreement to refrain from meddling.  – JZ, n.d.

TOLERANCE VS. THE STATE & COERCIVE THEORISTS: The State may not put into force, by legislation, any scientific theory and force the opponents of this theory, and the people in general, to act as if this theory were right.  - JZ, free after U. v. Beckerath.

TOLERANCE, A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY: Tolerance. - Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536). - About Erasmus as a peace-loving tolerant person see: - Two major classic writings on tolerance are: John Locke (1689) Letter on Toleration. - - Voltaire (1763) Traité sur la tolerance. - - For a general history on the birth of tolerance see: Henry Kamen (1967) The Rise of Toleration, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London. - A quite recent essay on tolerance is [Ulrich von Beckerath] & John Zube (1982) On Tolerance - The sentence by Walter Lippmann on the modern state and its lack of tolerance is from Walter Lippmann (1929) A Preface to Morals, George Allen & Unwin, London. - Gian Piero de Bellis in: "Waiting for the bomb." - Appendix: Waiting for the Bomb?

TOLERANCE, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS: So wie wir jetzt kurz vor dem Untergang stehen, kaum noch eine Hoffnung, in Wuerde zu ueberleben, so lasst uns doch jezt mal die Moeglichkeit ergreifen, alles ganz anders zu versuchen ... freundlich ... kindlich ... herzlich ... fraulich ..." - Konstantin Wecker, Ein Vorschlag, in: Im Namen des Wahnsinns, 83. (Fraulich oder freulich? - JZ) – (My rough translation: Since we stand now shortly before the end, with hardly any hope to survive in dignity, let us now, nevertheless, try to grasp the possibility to try everything quite differently, … friendly, child-like, from the heart, like a woman … {like a woman or with pleasure? – JZ}) Some Christians, for 2000 years, tried to put such general notions into operation, without bothering about what liberties and rights and institutions would be required to do so and which principles and institutions would always counteract their good will or good intentions. - JZ, n.d. – General terms like “love” and “good will” are certainly not good enough, either. On justice, rights, liberties and morality there exist, unfortunately, still all too many diverse ideas and a declaration of all genuine individual rights and liberties has not yet been agreed upon. – J.Z., 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE, ANARCHISM & LIBERTARIANISM, DIVERSITY: Tolerance of tolerant diversity should be one of the first characteristics of any genuine anarchism and libertarianism. - JZ, 26.3.01.

TOLERANCE, BELIEVERS, MYTHS, LEAVE ALONE: Let them alone. If people are busy living out myths you don't like, leave them do it." - Samuel R. Delaney, Dhalgren, 278/9. - Compare: Let them do it. - MYOB. Leave them alone. To each his own!

TOLERANCE, DANCING & MUSIC: LET EACH DANCE TO HIS OWN MUSIC: If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music he hears, however measured or far away." - Thoreau

TOLERANCE, DEFINITION ATTEMPTS: 1. The only tolerance in the political sphere which is sensible and justified is one which respects the right to organize or participate in all kinds of social, political and economic experiments undertaken by volunteers, at their expense and risk, without let or hindrance by the majority or any of the minorities. - All experiments which are forced upon a disagreeing majority or minority or which occur at the expense or risk of others than the voluntary members, offend against this principle of tolerance and should, therefore, not be tolerated. - JZ, on Tolerance.

TOLERANCE, DEFINITION ATTEMPTS: 2. No government has the right to force individuals not to do something which they may desire to do at their own risk, provided that they, in turn, do not force their will on others or put others at risk." - From a discussion paper on drugs, by the then existing libertarian Workers Party, Australia, 1975.

TOLERANCE, DEFINITION ATTEMPTS: 3. Tolerance means fully free competition for all, even those who offer disservices for sale, as long as they do so without deceiving their customers any more than they are deceived themselves. - JZ, on Tolerance.

TOLERANCE, DEFINITION ATTEMPTS: 4. Tolerance means self-ownership and the abolition of monopolies, especially the economic and political ones. - JZ, on Tolerance.

TOLERANCE, DEFINITION ATTEMPTS: 5. Don't desire for others what you desire for yourself. Let them follow their own aspirations. Tolerance demands that you not only tolerate what you love or could not care less about - but also what you hate - as long as it is tolerantly practised. - JZ, on Tolerance.

TOLERANCE, EXPERTS, FOOLS & EXPERIMENTS: 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. – EXPERTS, PROFESSIONALS

TOLERANCE, FREEDOM & PANARCHISM: To gain your freedom you have to give it.” – From film: “Always”.

TOLERANCE, INTOLERANCE, MASS MURDER, ETHNIC CLEANSING, HOLOCAUST: Should we continue to smear, outvote, suppress, expropriate, incarcerate or murder rather tolerate each other? - JZ, 1.12.99, 23.6.01. – Q.

TOLERANCE, ITS SPREAD: There are only few friends of tolerance left in the West" said Mises in Omnipotent Government, p.11, and perhaps none in the East. (Mises himself was not a friend of the degree of tolerance here advocated.)

TOLERANCE, MUTUAL, WHAT IS RIGHT FOR OTHERS? Don't ever think you know what's right for the other person. He might start thinking he knows what's right for you." -- Paul Williams, "Das Energi"

TOLERANCE, RESPECT FOR OTHERS & PANARCHISM: In respecting ‘the other’ we assure respect for ourselves.” – Joan Slonczewski, The Children Start, ANALOG 6/98, p.88.

TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, LIBERTARIANISM, STATISM: This enterprise is still determined, among its myriad aims, to find a way to make the "gifting" paradigm work, and to lead the way for others to help us build a truly "alternative community" ... one which really doesn't MIND if they insist on herding the sheeple, if they'd just offer a way for the rest of us to be left to live in peace. " - A quote from Steve Trinward's PND (in a call for donations): You would like the quote better, I guess, if it consisted only of the part I marked in blue. It is actually panarchistic. - Christian Butterbach - To: John Zube Cc: Gian Piero de Bellis ; Richard C.B. Johnsson - Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 6:12 PM

TOLERANCE: A basic aim of the socializing process should be to create the widest possible tolerance of diversity among the society's components.” - Frank Herbert, Hellstrom's Hive, p.172. - Why assume that there can only be ONE territorial society and that within it only a limited diversity must be tolerated? Why not rather have an over-all society, in which numerous and very diverse and exterritorially quite autonomous sub-societies have, internally, for their own members, whatever kinds of arrangements, institutions and personal laws they do desire for themselves? Society is a much too loose term and frequently all too carelessly used, as is instanced when not even a distinction is made between “State” and "society". - JZ, 6.10.01. - DIVERSITY, SOCIALIZING, PANARCHISM, STATE, SOCIETY, DIVERSITY, Q.

TOLERANCE: A direct alternative would be to quit the club and find a better one.” - Harry Browne: How I Found Freedom, p.75. Or found or establish another “club”, society, association or community, under personal law or exterritorial autonomy – only for like-minded volunteers. – JZ, 16.8.12. - & DISCRIMINATION, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, EVE EXTERRITORIALLY AUTONOMOUS ONES, FOR VOLUNTEERS ONLY: PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: a free society permits any who wish to enslave themselves to others to do so. But if they have a psychological need for a slave's 'sense of belonging', why must other individuals without such a need be coerced into enslavement?” - Murray N. Rothbard, Power and Market, p.164. – One day I might get around to put all the somewhat panarchistic sounding remarks of M. N. R. together. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: a state that is not pleasing or delightful to me, how could I inflict that upon another?” – Samyutta Nikaya, v. 353. – BUDDHISM

TOLERANCE: Act toward others as you desire them to act toward you.” – Isocrates, 338 B.C.

TOLERANCE: Agree with me! A tolerance for differences (is) better then a demand for agreement. Truth is discovered by the correction of error; differences and disagreements are stepping stones to enlightenment. This law of polarity - tension of the opposites - (is) essential to personal growth.” - Leonard E. Read: Let Freedom Reign, VII, summary. - This law works also in the formulation of better slogans. False or imperfect slogans and aphorisms can and should be gradually corrected, by the same and different persons. Thus this collection should grow, be improved and become more truthful, more concise, clearer, in successively refined and enlarged editions. - JZ, 24.9.82. – Also in more selective and specialized editions. – JZ, 14.4.09.

TOLERANCE: All differences, which can be and are practised tolerantly, ought to be tolerated. – JZ, 3.2.12.

TOLERANCE: All government obtains its power from the consent of those who are ruled - even in a dictatorship, but most especially in a democracy. As fewer and fewer consent to be ruled, yet at the same time impose neither threat nor force on others, government is inadvertently less potent. Finally, it ceases to be potent altogether. But that cessation comes at a time when the population, in the main, is prepared for liberty. Were we to obtain the disappearance of government by any other process, the population would not be ready, and the screams of outrage and anguish would quickly create a new government.” - LEFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Winter 76.

TOLERANCE: All religions (*) must be tolerated, and the sole concern of the authorities (**) should be to see that one does not molest another, for here every man must be saved in his own way.” – Frederick the Great, Cabinet Order, June 22, 1740. – (*) world views – (**) society as a whole – JZ, 26.7.08. – As a young king and territorial ruler, he resorted to a war of conquest, conscription, taxation and even at least one other kidnap for his own gratification, incarcerated one Free Trader for life and would not permit individual and group secessionism. Like all “great” leaders he also had many great flaws. – JZ 26.7.08. He demonstrated, once again, how power corrupts even the best of them. – JZ, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: All religions must be tolerated ... for every man must get to heaven in his own way.” - Frederick II, the Great: In re the Catholic Schools, 1740. - Even religions believing in human sacrifices? Only when the victims are willing, i.e., not brain-washed or drugged. - JZ, 19.11.02. - Even those which want to send involuntary human sacrifices to "heaven", as e.g., some intolerant religions and ideologies did? - F. was rather intolerant towards Free Traders. He ordered the lifelong imprisonment of an army officer who advocated it. - Informant: Ulrich von Beckerath. - JZ, 13.10.02. – All ideologies must be tolerated – but only for their subscribers, not when they pick on involuntary victims. – JZ, 14.4.09. - RELIGIONS, LIBERTY, IDEOLOGIES, ISMS

TOLERANCE: All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the Law and the Prophets.” - Bible, Mathew: 7, 12. - CHRISTIANITY, GOLDEN RULE

TOLERANCE: Although every society (*) is based upon intolerance, every progress is based upon tolerance.” - G. B. Shaw, only in a JZ re-translation of the German version: “Kurz, wenn auch jede Gesellschaft auf Intoleranz gegruendet ist, so gruendet sich doch jeder Fortschriftt auf Tolerance.“ – In: G. B. Shaw, „So ist die Welt.“ - (*) Rather, every territorial State. How intolerant is e.g. a chess or a tennis club? – JZ, 20.7.08. – PROGRESS, STATE, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, Q.

TOLERANCE: Always have tolerance for other people’s ideas, even if you don’t agree with them.” – G. B. P., quoted in calendar. – Yes, if it remains a mere idea and no attempt is made to impose its practice upon dissenters. – Or if the idea is to be practised only among volunteers. But the public expression of intolerably wrongful ideas should not be suffered in silence but spoken up against, or contradicted publicly in writings - as a public duty, with all the politeness that is advisable, for all of us do make some mistakes. - JZ, 14.7.08, 16.8.12. – DIS.

TOLERANCE: Anarchism for the anarchists. According to you, as a statist, that should be punishment enough. – JZ, 2/75. – Statism only for the statists. – According to the anarchists, that should be punishment enough. – JZ 20.7.08, 16.8.12. - PANARCHISM.

TOLERANCE: Anarchy for anarchists only. Archies for addicts to governments. In other words: To each, exterritorially, the government or non-governmental society of his or her choice. – JZ, 8.3.84, 15.7.08, 4.2.12.

TOLERANCE: And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.” – Bible, Luke 6:31, King James version. - Rather: If you want your (*) actions to be tolerated, tolerate the (*) actions of others! - JZ, 9/82, 14.4.09. - Now I would rather confine this to rightful actions only, those undertaken at the own expense and risk. For in our "democracies" a collective agreement on mutual interventionism, if only one gets enough votes on one's side, is all too common. - JZ, 19.11.02. – (*) tolerable, - JZ, 14.4.09. – CHRISTIANITY, DIS., GOLDEN RULE, JUSTICE

TOLERANCE: And the choice is simply that, between mutual acceptance of a way not oneself’s own, or blind misunderstanding and misinterpretation, leading to mutual annihilation.” – Gordon R. Dickinson, None but Man, p.222. – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: And the key to cooperation is the responsibility upon both - we humans and ye Moldaug alike - to accept the other on the other's own terms, and judge them by their other standards.” - Gordon R. Dickson, None But Man, p.222. - ACCEPTANCE, STANDARDS, JUDGING, COOPERATION, PANARCHISM, COEXISTENCE, EXTERRITORIALITY

TOLERANCE: as Butterfield reminds us, toleration which had been a political necessity was turned into a religious ideal.” - David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p.34. – Alas, the religious and in that sphere tolerant people have not yet learnt to systematically apply the principles and practices of tolerance to tolerant people in the political, economic and social spheres. Nor have the non-religious ones learnt sufficiently from that example. Tolerance towards tolerant people, in all spheres, would be the best thing that people could teach themselves and others. – JZ, 26.7.08, 25.10.08.

TOLERANCE: As my poor father used to say when parsons came to call, 'he's not my sort, but pass the port, - thank god there's room for all’.” - S. A. P. Herbert, b.1890.

TOLERANCE: At least tolerate others in possessing or doing the same, similar or different things. - JZ, 24.9.82.

TOLERANCE: Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing.” – Thales, 464 B.C.

TOLERANCE: Be intolerant of intolerant actions and opinions furthering them, but tolerant of tolerant actions and the views upon which they are based. - JZ, On Tolerance.

TOLERANCE: Be not angry that you cannot make others as you wish them to be, since you cannot make yourself as you wish to be.” - Thomas A. Kempis, Imitation of Christ, I, 16. - ANGER, PERFECTION, HUMAN NATURE, HUMAN FALLIBILITY, HUMAN FAULTS, RIGHT TO MAKE MISTAKES

TOLERANCE: Be tolerant or perish! The ultimate alternative to the maximization of tolerance is the maximization of murder and destruction through mutual mass extermination. What helps it if man wins the whole world - but cannot stand others, cannot be tolerant? Then he will lose it again and perish. He has prepared the means for his destruction. Tolerance is the shortest connection between war and peace, poverty and wealth, oppression and liberty. Take your pick. There is also a unique kind of tolerant warfare and revolutionary action, yet to be consistently and comprehensively practised. It outmodes all current military theories and preparations. - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE. - PEACE PLANS 16-17 & 61-65.) – Revised: 16.8.12. - WAR, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, PEACE

TOLERANCE: Be tolerant to all tolerant people and intolerant to all intolerant people. - Be intolerant of intolerant actions and opinions furthering them, but tolerant of tolerant actions and the views upon which they are based. - Tolerate only tolerant people and offer intolerant people tolerance only on condition that they become tolerant also. - Others have the right to protect their liberty against you but they have no right to interfere with yours. Tolerance does not demand any more. Don't tolerate intolerance! - Don't tolerate ABC mass murder devices - the worst instances of intolerance! - JZ, in pamphlet on Tolerance. - LIMITS OF TOLERANCE, INTOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: Become intolerant – but only against the intolerant! - JZ, 4.10.75, 14.4.09.

TOLERANCE: Become tolerant, otherwise: ‘We become what we fight’." - Ray (Roy?) Campbell, in a poem, 1965. - Tolerance is right and advisable only towards tolerant actions, not toward intolerant ones. - JZ

TOLERANCE: Before we learn to live with real aliens, from outer space, we’d better learn to live with ourselves. – JZ, 15.12.85. - MAN, MANKIND, ALIENS, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Before you criticize people, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you’ve got a mile-long head start. And you have their shoes.” – The Lion -  CONSIDERATION, JUDGMENT, UNDERSTANDING, JOKES, HATE, INTOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: Being grown up means we can have our own way - at our own expense." - Source? – Panarchists demand no more but also no less – in all spheres so far still monopolized by territorial States. - CHILDREN, MATURITY, GROWING UP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-RELIANCE

TOLERANCE: Being tolerant does not mean that I share another one's belief. But it does mean that I acknowledge another one's right to believe, and obey, his own conscience.” – Victor Frankl (1905-1997), The Will To Meaning. – Freedom to act and experiment and to choose for oneself a political, economic and social system is not clearly enough indicated here, either, as an aspect of comprehensive tolerance. – JZ, 2.1.08. – The “conscience” of somebody else may demand that you cease reading certain books or uttering certain opinions, or that your wear certain clothing or abide by certain rituals. What is understood or misunderstood under “conscience” was never as yet a quite satisfactory guide. An ideal declaration of all genuine individual rights and liberties is long overdue. However, who is prepared to systematically work towards it, further improving all past drafts of this kind, especially the private ones. I encountered so far only a to me quite astonishing lack of interest in this sphere. – This in spite of the fact that via websites, emails and discs, all such drafts could be systematically examined, criticized and improved, with the best formulations taken from all of them, point by point, and improved further. A world-wide “parliament of man”, one online  – not of politicians – could do this job rather fast and effectively. Nevertheless, to my knowledge, this job is not yet being tackled anywhere and by anyone. – My own anthology of over 130 private drafts of this kind, first microfilmed in PEACE PLANS 589/590, later digitized and supplemented and put online as part of a CD at, in form of an anthology, may have come closest to such an attempt to start such a project – but who is interested in it? – No wonder then, that all too many genuine individual rights and liberties still remain widely unrecognized or suppressed. - JZ, 14.4.09, 16.8.12. – What if a misleading "conscience" or false premise persuades a man to become a mass murderer or to prepare to commit mass murder, e.g. by producing & stockpiling mass murder devices? His conscientious actions must be confined to his own sphere, his own life, his own property. - JZ, 23. 11. 06, 14.4.09, 25.3.11. - INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, AN IDEAL DECLARATION, DIS., CONSCIENCE

TOLERANCE: Broadly recognizing that there are MANY ‘right ways of life” in this pluralistic society makes you a TOLERANT.” – FREEDOM TODAY, 9/75. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Cherish reciprocal benevolence, which will make you as anxious for another’s welfare as your own.” – Aristippus, 365 B.C. – ALTRUISM, EGOISM

TOLERANCE: Chernyshevsky … was perpetually reminding his readers and himself that, in their zeal to help, the educators must not end by bullying their would-be beneficiaries; that what ‘we’ – the rational intellectuals – think good for the peasants may not be what they themselves want or need, and that to ram ‘our’ remedies down ‘their’ throats is not permitted.” – Isaiah Berlin, Russian Thinkers, p.231.

TOLERANCE: Children are tolerant. They learn intolerance from us.” – Alice Miller, psychologist, in OMNI, 3/87. – Has she really observed enough children and parents to come to that conclusion? I have seen children acting intolerantly and cruelly towards other children, even brothers and sisters, in an intolerance they had not learned from their parents. – JZ, 26.7.08.

TOLERANCE: Desire nothing for yourself which you do not desire for others.” - Spinoza. - At least tolerate others in possessing or doing the same, similar or different things. - JZ, 24.9.82. - Why should I not desire quietness or any type of music or exercise or reading for myself, without desiring it also for all others? - JZ, 19.11.02. – DIS. – GOLDEN RULE

TOLERANCE: Difference of opinion is advantageous in religion. The several sects perform the office of a censor morum over each other.” - Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia. – Let all secular ideologies or religions compete similarly with each other. – JZ, 14.4.09. - RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

TOLERANCE: Dissatisfied with the quality of defense they receive from the government, or with the price they must pay, they would elect to form a competing defense agency or 'government' within the area and subscribe to it.” - Rothbard, Power and Market, p.122. - Rothbard also brings an excellent defence of individual secessionism on page 142 of the same work. - I hereby offer my apology for having previously suggested, orally and in my booklet on tolerance, that R. would not have subscribed to the ideas of competing governments, tolerance for tolerant actions, panarchism, parallel institutions etc. The above quotes prove sufficiently that he does. I should have made a close check and not trusted my fallible memory too much. - JZ, 23.9.82. - What is needed for Rothbard as for every other major author is an alphabetization of his main ideas. - JZ, 19.11.02. – Or a complete works issue, on a disc, combined with a disc search engine. – J.Z., 16.8.12.) – COMPETING DEFENCE, PROTECTION & SECURITY AGENCIES, ROTHBARD

TOLERANCE: Do as you would be done by.” – English proverb. – That could sanction blood revenge. Better: Do as you ought to be done by and the decent, honest people will finally rally to your standard. Tolerance only towards the tolerant. – JZ, 12.7.86, 21.7.08.

TOLERANCE: Do for one who may do for you, that you may cause him thus to do.” – The Tale of the Eloquent Peasant, 109-110; (original is from 1970 to 1640 B - ? – JZ); trans. R. B. Parkinson. - Egyptian

TOLERANCE: Do I propose then, that every citizen shall be free to follow his own reason, and believe whatever this enlightened or deluded reason shall dictate to him? Certainly, provided he does not disturb the public order.” - Voltaire, A Treatise on Toleration, p.187. – The established “public order” is not always just and rational, i.e. a genuine order, that deserves to be upheld. – On the other hand, the official arbitrariness and coercion should not be replaced by even worse degrees of both, as happened in many revolutions. - JZ, 25.10.08.

TOLERANCE: Do not do to others that which would anger you if others did it to you.” – Socrates, 5th c. BCE.

TOLERANCE: Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you.” – Analects, 15:23, CONFUCIANISM

TOLERANCE: Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same.” - G. B. Shaw

TOLERANCE: Do not get out of your way to get in the way of others! – JZ, 12.1.84.

TOLERANCE: Do not to others what you would not like others to do to you.” – Rabbi Hillel, 50 B.C.

TOLERANCE: Do not to your neighbor what you would take ill from him.” – Pittacus, 650 B.C.

TOLERANCE: Do to every man as thou would'st have him do to thee; and do not unto another what thou would'st not have him do to thee.” - Confucius, c. 500 B.C.

TOLERANCE: Do unto others as they would have you do unto them.” – Halen’s First Canon of Metalaw, quoted by G. Harry Stine, ANALOG, Sept. 87, p. 141. – Also when you are a “normal” heterosexual and find yourself among homosexuals or sado masochists? – JZ, n.d. *& 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Do unto others as you say you do.” – Dagobert D. Runes, A Dictionary of Thought. – GOLDEN RULE

TOLERANCE: Do unto others as you would they should do unto you." – Jesus Christ

TOLERANCE: Do unto Vogarians as they have come to do unto you.” – Tom Godwin, The Helpful Hand of God, ANALOG, 12/61, p.80. – Do not merely offer your other cheek for another blow. – Moral rules should sufficiently cover all cases. If some “Vogarians” had murdered one or several members of your family, should you then endeavor to exterminate all “Vogarians” upon the “principle” of collective responsibility, or hold only responsible those, who are not only “Vogarians” but were really responsible for these criminal actions? - JZ, 25.10.08. – DIS., INTOLERANCE TOWARDS THE INTOLERANT

TOLERANCE: Do with your property, time and labor whatever you like. Just leave mine alone. - JZ, 8.12.76, 16.4.09.

TOLERANCE: Don't do unto others as you would have others not do unto you.” - Charles Blackwell. - But from this would, logically, still follow that you could impose upon others that what you are prepared to suffer or even welcome from them! - JZ

TOLERANCE: Don't ever think you know what's right for the other person. He might start thinking he knows what's right for you.” – Paul Williams, "Das Energi" – Think whatever you like – but do not interfere with the self-responsible actions of others. – JZ, 3.1.08. – MUTUAL TOLERANCE RATHER THAN INTOLERANCE. EVEN YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS BEST FOR ALL AT ALL OCCASIONS, DIS.

TOLERANCE: Don't question an alien custom. Tolerate it. You don't need to like it, but you have no business attacking it. You had just better learn to live with it.” - David Lewis, Shausta, IF, Nov./Dec. 72, p.112. - Live aside it or parallel with it, according to your own customs, I would say. - JZ - And do grant asylum to their involuntary victims. - JZ, 19.11.02.

TOLERANCE: Don't tolerate ABC mass murder devices - the worst instances of intolerance! – JZ, n.d.

TOLERANCE: Don't walk in front of me, I may not follow. Don't walk behind me, I may not lead. Walk beside me, and just be my friend.” - Albert Camus. – Or let each of us go his own and separate way! – JZ, 14.4.09.

TOLERANCE: Don't you think we are entitled to settle our own troubles in our own ways?” - Proverb. – Q.

TOLERANCE: DON'T, GOLDEN RULE: While my mother believes in the Golden Rule, she also advocates a second maxim, which she terms her Iron Rule: 'Don't do for others what they wouldn't take the trouble to do for themselves.' " - Mrs. D. Fulton, READER'S  DIGEST, 1/65.

TOLERANCE: Don’t do things you wouldn’t want to have done to you.” – British Humanist Society - HUMANISM

TOLERANCE: During the time of transition and whilst States are deprived of their power, we as anarchists conceded to the statists (in accordance with the principle of liberty) the right to be and remain statists, as long as they themselves bear the costs of their 'statist concepts' and confine their organization and its actions to its voluntary followers and do not constitute a danger for human society.” - LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, Nr.3. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental and spiritual. Mankind are great gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.” – John Stuart Mill, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.137. – All of the rest do not agree with each other, either. – JZ, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Encourage: To confirm a fool in a folly that is beginning to hurt him.” – Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary. – When there are numerous other, tolerant and better systems freely practised all around him, then the difference between his system and the successful other systems, should hurt him, as soon and as much as possible, to get him out of his self-chosen dead end. – JZ, 14.7.08. – DIS.

TOLERANCE: Every action is right which or according to whose maxim, arbitrary actions of anybody can agree with arbitrary actions of everybody according to a general law of freedom.” - Kant, Rechtslehre, 35. - RIGHTS, FREEDOM, RIGHT, LIBERTIES, VS. ARBITRARINESS TOWARDS DISSENTERS

TOLERANCE: Every man takes care that his neighbor does not cheat him. But a day comes when he begins to care that he does not cheat his neighbor. Then all goes well.” - Emerson, Conduct of Life: Worship. – MORAL SENSE, JUSTICE, RECTITUDE, HONESTY, CHEATS

TOLERANCE: Every revolutionary as well as every conservative has the right to his OWN utopia. - JZ 28.5.80. – Even terrorists have this right, as long as they do no longer act like terrorists. But their responsibility for their past terrorist actions does remain. It would be interesting to ponder how responsible all the anti-drug crusaders are, for all the damages by private terrorists, since these crusaders have made the drug trade so profitable that it also finances many if not most of the private terrorist actions that still occur. – Perhaps not only those, who make direct donations to terrorists should be held responsible? – JZ, 14.4.09. - UTOPIAS, REVOLUTIONS, REFORMS, PERSONAL LAWS, PANARCHIES, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, FREE SOCIETIES, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEER COMMUNITIES, Q., DRUG WAR, DRUG LAWS & DRUG LAW ENFORCERS

TOLERANCE: Everybody is right enough to be allowed to live as he pleases - at his expense and risk. - JZ, 15.2.81.

TOLERANCE: Everybody's deity is as good as anybody else's - indifferentism, I believe, is the theological term.” - H. Beam Piper: Temple Trouble, ASTOUNDING SCIENCE FICTION, 10/51, p.6.

TOLERANCE: Everyone is entitled to associate with like-minded people in order to try out social reform proposals within the group and at its expense and risk and to invite everyone to join, no matter whether the "experts" consider their principles to be right or wrong. – JZ, Free after U. v. Beckerath.

TOLERANCE: Everything you reprove in another, you must carefully avoid in yourself.” - Cicero.

TOLERANCE: Exercising tolerance is the opposite of exercising power. - While tolerance means: no power over the affairs of others, it also means: full power over the own affairs. - JZ, in pamphlet TOLERANCE: With power comes the exercise of intolerance" - said Mises in "Socialism", p.189. - However, a tolerant ruler or government, like a tolerant society, CAN become very influential. - JZ, 15.10.11. - POWER, INFLUENCE.

TOLERANCE: Experimental freedom even for State-socialists - at their expense and risk! - JZ, 25.9.75. - Naturally, a rightful pre-condition for this is individual sovereignty, individual secessionism, voluntary membership and exterritorial autonomy for all communities of volunteers, with all the diverse groups doing only their own things for or to themselves. - JZ, 19.11.02, 14.4.09, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Faith should not be compelled!” – And yet, almost everywhere and all the time, it still is, largely, at least in politics and, sometimes, even still in religion. – Naturally, only the pretence of faith can be enforced. – However, via brainwashing methods people can also be conditioned to believe in the “cause” of their victimizers. Military training has developed this into a “fine art”, turning out “good soldiers” for just about any regime, regardless of how wrong it is. - JZ, 9.12.82, 14.7.08, 16.8.12. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICS

TOLERANCE: For anarchists tolerance is not merely a question of necessity or utility but it is their fundamental ideal.” - Red Leber, NEUES BEGINNEN, Jan./Feb. 1970. – However, tolerance towards those statist volunteers, who would do their own things only among their own volunteers, is still a new ideas to all too many anarchists, intent on abolishing the State instead of merely the imposition of the State upon those, who do not want it. In this they rather follow the example of the territorial State, which imposes itself, or is imposed, by the statists, upon the anarchists. Since the statists are still much more numerous than are the anarchists, the change to a tolerant policy towards tolerant statists (admittedly, also only a tiny number as well) should have occurred to most of them long ago. Anarchism only for anarchists! Also each type of anarchism for each type of anarchists and each type of statism for each kind of statist. They could have gained that in collaboration with the adherents of all other isms, all other minorities, who would be satisfied with voluntary exterritorial autonomy for themselves. Instead, anarchists engage in much infighting and have not even generally accepted panarchism or self-determination for all kinds of anarchists. Rather, like most political party members, they constantly fight against all other isms. What a waste of time and energy is involved and also what a postponement of their own ideal for themselves! They have persisted with this intolerance in the face of numerous historical examples of extensive – although never complete - tolerance – and of the numerous minor spheres of individually determined and self-chosen actions and associations, in our daily lives, which amount to a kind of panarchism at least regarding minor and relatively trivial affairs and associations. They have also largely ignored the great precedent of religious tolerance or religious freedom, although it includes toleration for atheists, humanists, rationalists etc. Instead, they should have demanded the application of its principle to the adherents of all secular ideologies. They should also have paid attention to the tolerance demonstrated among natural scientists and technologists in their experiments. In this respect they too, are, usually, their own worst enemies. For they keep insisting on the general compliance with or acceptance of the particular anarchist ideals, which they favor not only among all other kinds of anarchists but also by all kinds of people, the majority of them still being statists. To that extent they, too, are authoritarians, territorialists, fundamentalists, fanatics, with, so far, all too few exceptions. – Add to this the fact that their secondary ideals, expressed in a multitude of hyphenated kinds of anarchism and their opposites, seem often more important to them than their primary one: The absence of an unwanted rule over themselves. In one word: voluntarism. People? Who can understand them? Anarchists certainly do not seem to understand themselves, nor do they want to understand themselves. I offer as evidence the zero-response rate from anarchists to the kind of anarchist spectrum that has been online now for several years at, although its incompleteness alone should have provoked further such entries to this list. In the meantime, I have myself collected a few other entries that should be added to the list – but why bother, when anarchists are so little prepared to think about anarchism? In this they seem to be as unwilling to think and learn as are most religious fundamentalists. - JZ, 14.4.09, 25.3.11, 16.8.12. - ANARCHISM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARY GOVERNMENTS, COMPETING GOVERNMENT, TOLERANT STATISM, INTOLERANCE, LACK OF INTELLECTUAL CURIOSITY, DIS.

TOLERANCE: For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways.” - Old Testament, Isaiah, 1v, 8. (55:8) - RED., PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Free speech is meaningless unless it tolerates the speech that we hate.” – Henry J. Hyde, U.S. Congressman, Speech, 5/3/91 – Freedom of action is also meaningless unless this freedom is granted to others as well. No more involuntary victimization! – JZ, 16.8.12. -  FOR FREE SPEECH & FREE ACTIONS

TOLERANCE: Freedom consists in the authority to do everything that does not infringe the natural and equal rights of others.” - Classical freedom definition.

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

TOLERANCE: Freedom of citizens to choose their own way of life, subject to the rights of others.” - Federal Platform of the Liberal Party of Australia, 1946, point c. - Well, by now almost everyone knows how modern liberals interpret such a clause. - JZ - All political parties seem to believe that all their promises can and ought to be broken whenever it suits them. - JZ, 19.11.02. – MODERN LIBERALS, PARTIES

TOLERANCE: Freedom of inquiry and expression are not so much to be tolerated as to be actively encouraged.” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 77. – The same is true for freedom of action, e.g. that exemplified by panarchies or polyarchies. – JZ, 20.2.05. - OPINIONS, ACTIONS, EXPERIMENTS, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

TOLERANCE: From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist deduces that everybody is free to create for himself his own ideology and to attempt to carry it out with all possible energy.” - Mussolini, quoted with negative comment by M. Stanton Evans in Outside Looking In, p.17, an anthology edited by Dorothy Buckton Jones. – Obviously, he was not prepared to let others do their own things, among themselves, if he could prevent it. – Should one expect consistency from any politicians, not to speak of morality? – JZ, 11.10.08. – Q.

TOLERANCE: From the recognition of individual rights and liberties follows sufficient respect for them to lead to tolerance for all actions that do respect individual rights and liberties, however much one does disagree with actions committed within their framework. – JZ 3 05 - RIGHTS, HUMAN RIGHTS, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Funny how people always try to change each other." - From film: The Man I Love, an Ida Lupino movie. - "Tragic" or tragic-comical, rather. – JZ

TOLERANCE: Give it a go.” - Australian saying, meaning: try it, experiment with it, but always at your own risk and expense. It is not an invitation to commit e.g. theft or murder. - JZ, n.d. & 3.2.12, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Give to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself.” - R. G. Ingersoll, Limitations of Toleration. - If you claim a 'right' to steal, would that make it right if you conceded to everyone else the same right? -  This would make it right at most within a society of e.g. the thieves of a Welfare State society if it applied its rules only among its own voluntary members. - JZ, 11.10.08, 16.8.12. – Q., WELFARE STATE, SOCIETIES OF THIEVES, VOLUNTARISM

TOLERANCE: Good astronomers do not get angry because a star is in the 'wrong' place for a more beautiful design. We must be just as cool in meeting what we perceive as 'wrong-headedness' during a presentation. The sense of personal triumph that follows conversion of hostile attitudes into support for an idea is the highest reward of a good presentation. As Edmund Burke remarked: 'He who opposes me, and does not destroy me, strengthens me.' - Henry M. Boettinger, "Moving Mountains", 132. - Try first to keep your own cool. Then try to cool the opposition, by clearly stating your rightful war aims, which should be attractive to it, too, and then try to sway and disarm it by clearly developing the opportunities, rights and liberties and securities thus opened up even for your opponents. Consistent tolerance, even for one's opponents, can be quieting and disarming. (Cool, then sway and finally disarm the opposition by ultimate tolerance.) But so far good agitators and demonstrators and writers for this approach are still in short supply. The more one grasps this idea and its implications, the more enthusiastic and eloquent one tends to become in its defence. To that extent it is potentially self-realizing. - JZ, n.d. – Cool the opposition and then try to sway it to your side or to disarm it by maximum tolerance for all tolerant actions. – PERSUASION, PRESENTATION, DIS., RED., ANGER, COOLNESS, KEEPING COOL

TOLERANCE: Handle people with gloves, but issues bare-fisted.” - Dagobert D. Runes, A Book of Contemplation, p.71. – Also in his A Dictionary of Thought. If issues and new institutions and methods are only offered in tolerant experiments among volunteers, then these experimenters might be freely criticized but otherwise handled quite tolerantly, with kid-gloves, if you like. – Freedom not only for utterances but also for voluntary and self-responsible actions. - JZ, 19.7.08. – Attack unsound ideas, principles and arguments – but not the people, who hold them or who act upon them only among themselves. – JZ, 3.2.12, 16.8.12. – POLITENESS, CONSIDERATENESS, PANARCHISM, AGGRESSIVENESS OR RATIONAL CRITICISM?

TOLERANCE: Has not God borne with you these many years? Be ye tolerant of others.” - Hosea Ballou.

TOLERANCE: have a deep sense of TOLERANCE, to recognize that there is no ‘One Only Right Way’ of life as bigot propounds … But that there are MANY ways, each right to the extent that it enables its followers to live happily without interfering with the equal rights of non-interfering others to seek happiness in their own ways.” – FREEDOM TODAY, 9/75, Selected sentences from “Lucky You”. – PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Have a stab at anything.” Supposedly an Australian characteristic. - Column 8, THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 12.12.70. - Not at other bodies or ways of life, only regarding your own ways! - JZ – Alas, the Australian laws and regulations, institutions and bureaucracies have become just as interventionist as those of most other territorial States. – JZ, 14.4.09. – Moreover, they are all too much accepted or tolerated by most Australians, who are still only territorial statists. – JZ, 3.2.12.

TOLERANCE: He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression.” - Thomas Paine, 1737-1809.

TOLERANCE: Hence it is advisable to set up a system wherein each individual may satisfy his selfishness to the fullest extent compatible with the like liberty of others, all further philanthropic and co-operative effort being left optional.” - Henry Meulen, Free Banking, p.9. – Alas, in his last correspondence with Ulrich von Beckerath Henry Meulen opposed panarchism, just as he opposed full monetary freedom in his prior correspondence with him. And this after decades of correspondence between these two advocates of Free Banking. Letter exchanges, like oral debates and discussions, are rarely enlightening enough. We haven’t given flow-chart discussions their chances as yet, especially not in their modern electronic form of “argument mapping”, as developed by Paul Monk et al and described online. I have strong hopes that once we do, we will finally settle many questions, which have remained unsettled for all too long. – JZ, 14.4.09.

TOLERANCE: How come that we imagine that we can really live with ten-thousands of laws that are unknown and unknowable to us, but not with people, who are only somewhat different from us in their nature, thinking and actions, with their different systems, beliefs and lifestyles, people, who simply want to be left alone, minding their own business just as we want to be left alone in our own affairs? What makes us enemies? Nothing but the errors, prejudices, fallacies, false assumptions and conclusions - the inherent intolerance of territorial nationalism and of egalitarians and coercive “unifiers”, with their multitude of intolerant laws and institutions. – JZ, 15.12.85, 12.5.87, 26.7.08, 16.8.12. - As if freedom of expression were enough without freedom to act - tolerantly. - JZ, 25.3.11.

TOLERANCE: How large is your tolerance for cannibalism, e.g. “roast suckling coolie?” – Poul Anderson, at the end of “Welcome” in “Past Times”. - There should be no tolerance for the intolerant. - JZ 10.1.93. – Q.

TOLERANCE: How shall we ever learn toleration for what we do not believe? The last lesson a man ever learns is, that liberty of thought and speech is the right for all mankind; that the man who denies every article of our creed is to be allowed to preach just as often and just as loud as we ourselves. We have learned this, - been taught it by persecution on the question of slavery. No matter whose the lips that would speak, they must be free and ungagged. Let us always remember that he does not really believe his own opinions, who dares to give free scope to his opponent. Persecution is really want of faith in our creed. …” - Wendell Phillips, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.161.

TOLERANCE: I always believe a man should be allowed to do one thing badly – provided he does not inflict his mistakes on others.” – from John Wayne movie “Tycoon”. – In the first part we are only allowed to make one mistake. In the second part it is assumed that we are allowed to make several. – JZ, 16.8.12. - PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, RIGHT TO MAKE MISTAKES

TOLERANCE: I am myself my own commander.” - (Egomet sum mihi imperator.) – Plautus, Mercator, I. 853. (Act v, sc. 2.) – He should have added: And I allow everyone else to be his own! – JZ, 7.7.82. – SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: I am not a totalitarian but a tolerant anarchist. I would let the others have all the government they can stand. - JZ, 1.1.77. – STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, PANARCHISM, FREEDOM OF ACTION FOR ALL TOLERANT ACTIONS & ORGANIZATIONS

TOLERANCE: I am not aware that any community has a right to force another to be civilised.” - J. S. Mill. - Just be tolerant towards whatever members of other communities will do merely among, for and to themselves. - JZ - And do offer asylum and protection to its involuntary victims, e.g., slaves, women, children and other oppressed people, its drop-outs, refugees, defectors, deserters, individual secessionists. - JZ, 19.11.02, 14.4.09. - CIVILIZATION. – We talk and write so much about it, as if it already existed or as if we fully knew all that it requires. – JZ, 17.4.09. COLONIALISM, CIVILIZATION, CULTURE, COERCION

TOLERANCE: I am not marching in his parade.” - From film "Extraordinary Seaman". – However, one should tolerate their peaceful parades, demonstrations and “actions”, all their foolish actions committed only at their own expense and risk. – JZ, 3.2.12.

TOLERANCE: I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." – Voltaire, The Friends of Voltaire. – I disapprove of what you intend to do – but I will defend to the death your right to do it – to yourself. – JZ, 26.12.07. – ANOTHER VERSION: TOLERANCE: I hate everything you say but will fight to the death for your right to say it.” - Remark ascribed to Voltaire. It ought to be extended to freedom of action: “… for your right to do it, to and for yourself and like-minded people.” - JZ -


TOLERANCE: I do assuredly believe that subjects must be tolerant towards their ruler; ... I am saying ... that there are limits to what subjects need tolerate, just as ... there are limits to what a sovereign should tolerate.” - Maurice Cranston, Political Dialogues, 37, in summing up Locke. - But should there be territorial rulers and territorial sovereignty in the first place? - JZ, 19.11.02. – TERRITORIALISM, SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

TOLERANCE: I do not mean that a man should have no definite persuasions. I only wish men to achieve sufficient understanding to entertain the possibility that they may, after all, be wrong. Toleration comes with the awareness of how limited our knowledge is.” - Locke, summarized, in Maurice Cranston, Political Dialogues, p.40.

TOLERANCE: I for one am intolerant even of mere objections against tolerance. People who would argue even against tolerance towards the tolerant should be stopped with a big stick! Or at least ignored and ostracized and never be given any offices and powers with one's consent. - OBJECTIONS AGAINST TOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: I have no right to interfere with an institution, which promotes economic and social ideas which are repugnant to me. On the other hand, there should be no obligation on my part to support such an institution. Thus, both the institution and I have freedom of choice, with commensurate responsibilities for the results of that choice. This is the very essence of libertarianism.” - Moreell: Log 1/136. - LIBERTARIANISM

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, On Liberty. – But the opinionated ought to be at complete liberty to conform themselves to their opinions in all their self-concerned actions. – JZ, 6.4.89. – PANARCHISM, FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION

TOLERANCE: I see no practical means of moving toward a free society, a state of liberty, save by the emergence of self-control and self-discipline. These virtues are taught and not imposed. In the end, education and self-control, precept and example, must be relied upon. And I see no procedure at all that does not entail risk. To be a libertarian, a person must be so devoted to liberty that he is willing to let others be free, too, despite his anxiety that each of them might do something wrong.” - LeFEVRE'S JOURNAL, Winter 76. – SELF-CONTROL, SELF-DISCIPLINE

TOLERANCE: I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion without imputing to them criminality. I know too well the weakness and uncertainty of human reason to wonder at its different results.” – Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Mrs. John Adams, 1804. – Alas, he, too, did not extend his tolerance to all tolerantly practised actions and remained stuck in the territorialist model for political, economic and social actions. And this in spite of the personal law tradition going back a very long time. But then everything good comes only very rarely, if ever, together. – JZ, 20.7.08. – PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

TOLERANCE: I’m not religious but I believe in religious freedom or religious tolerance, so much so that I want its principle and practice extended into the social, economic and political spheres, too, as a precondition to realizing and preserving anything that is worthwhile. What is not worthwhile will tend to perish by its own flaws. – JZ, 105.90, 26.7.08. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: I’ve never advocated tolerance for statists, anymore than I would advocate tolerance for murderers or thieves. Period.” – Jim Downard, LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION 106, p.16. – What if all these murderers and thieves confined all their activities to their own voluntary community members only, and confined e.g. their laws on abortions and euthanasia, duels and brawls, armed clashes as well as taxation only to their own volunteers? Likewise, IF they confined any kind of Welfare State activities to their own safety net insurance company would you interfere then? – JZ, 1.11.82, 17.7.08, 16.8.12. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, Q.

TOLERANCE: If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden (1854) - SELF-DETERMINATION, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: If Canada and the United States can be separate nations without being denounced as being in a state of impermissible 'anarchy’, why may not the South secede from the United States? New York State from the Union? New York City from the state? Why may not Manhattan secede? Each neighborhood? Each block? Each house? Each person? But, of course, if each person may secede from government, we have virtually arrived at the purely free society, where defence is supplied along with all other services by the free market and where the invasive State has ceased to exist.” – Murray N. Rothbard, Power and Market, p.3. - However, non-invasive 'States' with voluntary members and exterritorially organized under personal laws within the old State borders, may long continue - but they are then essentially only private protective associations. Would you call the English monarchy no longer a monarchy just because it has no longer absolute or extensive monarchical powers over all of the population? - JZ, 23.9.82, 14.4.09, 25.3.11, 25.3.11. – PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, VOLUNTARISM, ROTHBARD, Q.

TOLERANCE: If governments had ever tried to dominate physical and mathematical opinions of the public as much as political and religious views, then we would have wars for and against differential calculus as we had for the Holy Trinity of God."- Franz von Baader. - INTOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM, UNIFORMITY, RELIGION

TOLERANCE: If he displeases us, we may express our distaste, and we may stay aloof from a person as well as from a thing that displeases us; but we shall not therefore feel called on to make his life uncomfortable. We shall reflect that he already bears, or will bear, the whole penalty of his error; if he spoils his life by mismanagement, we shall not, for that reason, desire to spoil it still further: instead of wishing to punish him, we shall rather endeavour to alleviate his punishment, by showing him how he may avoid or cure the evils his conduct tends to bring upon him. He may be to us an object of pity, perhaps of dislike, but not of anger or resentment; we shall not treat him like an enemy of society: the worst we shall think ourselves justified in doing is leaving him to himself, if we do not interfere benevolently by showing interest or concern for him. It is far otherwise if he has infringed the rules necessary for the protection of his fellow creatures, individually or collectively ...” - J. S. Mill, On Liberty, Great Books of the Western World edition, p. 305.

TOLERANCE: If someone wants to set up a socialist scheme with their own money, I may not approve of it, but it's their money. But to force me to subsidize their socialist experiments - that's tyranny.” - Murray Weidenbaum, Reason, 9/81, p.44. – PANARCHISM, INTOLERANCE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY

TOLERANCE: If tolerance is tolerant of intolerance it fears being destroyed by intolerance. If it is intolerant of intolerance, then it destroys itself.” – Arthur E. Morgan, In ANTIOCH NEWS, Antioch College, Jan. 1934. – Tolerance towards intolerance can indeed become self-destructive. But intolerance towards intolerance is quite justified and merely defensive rather than aggressive. It does not destroy tolerance towards tolerant actions, but helps to uphold it. – JZ, 6.11.85, 20.7.08. – DIS., PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: If tolerance of diversity involves an admitted element of risk, intolerance involves the certainty of destruction. - JZ, 1975, free after: “If tolerance of diversity involves an admitted element of risk to national unity, intolerance involves a certainty that unity will be destroyed.” - Alan Barth, The Loyalty of Free Men, 1951. - TOLERANCE, INTOLERANCE, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, DIVERSITY, RISK

TOLERANCE: If you are desirous to prevent the overrunning of a state by any sect, show it toleration.” —Voltaire – I wonder to what extent even most of the present terrorists would become tolerant and tolerable in their endeavors – once they got the right to practise their own panarchy among themselves. – They would then certainly have much less to complain about and many more people would be critical of them and demand that they should to their own things, among themselves, rather than terrorize other people. Then nobody would prevent them from engaging in self-government or self-management, in their style and in accordance with their ideology or faith. - JZ, 18.9.08. – TERRORISM

TOLERANCE: If you really want to enjoy panarchistic liberties for yourself and like-minded people then you have also to stand up for this liberty for all other people, with different interests, beliefs and convictions. Panarchism is not another kind of privilege for a few only, not even for libertarians and anarchists. – JZ, 13.1.99. – PANARCHISM, PRIVILEGE, RIGHTS

TOLERANCE: In a great empire, whose domination extends over as many different peoples, as there are different faiths among men, intolerance would be the most dangerous mistake.” – Empress Catherine II of Russia (Catherine the Great) - But intolerance is inherent not only in large territories but also in small republics and democracies. Empires and territorial States can only stand so much tolerance for tolerant actions. If there is more then they tend to disintegrate into little territorial empires. If they practise full tolerance then they tend to disappear or become reduced to the number of their voluntary followers – under their own personal laws. However, they might gain followers all over the world, according to their attractiveness to them and would have to tolerate other world empires of this kind, just like the Catholic Church, a world-wide institution, has finally learnt to tolerate other religions - practised anywhere in the world, in a tolerant way. – JZ, 22.7.86. -  Judging by the number of published utopias and by that of popular errors, myths and prejudices, there are probably even more different kinds of secular faiths than there are religious ones. – Nevertheless, the tolerant actions of all of these different kinds of peoples should be tolerated, too, when exterritorially, i.e., tolerantly, practised among themselves. – JZ, 26.7.08. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: In a republic we must learn to combine intensity of conviction with a broad tolerance of difference of conviction. (*) Wide differences of opinion (**) in matters of religious, political and social belief must exist if conscience and intellect alike are not to be stunted.” (**) – Theodore Roosevelt, Speech at the Sorbonne, April 23, 1910. – (*) and actions - - (**) and freedom, justice, peace, progress and prosperity are not to be severely reduced. – JZ, 5.7.86, 20.7.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTARY COMMUNITIES.

TOLERANCE: In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a communist. Then, they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew … Then they came for the Catholics. I didn’t speak up then because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak up.” – Reverend Martin Niemoeller, German Lutheran pastor arrested by the Gestapo in 1937. - ONE CAN BE TOO TOLERANT OF INTOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: In one age the persecutor burnt the heretic; in another, he crushed him with penal laws; in a third, he withheld from him places of emolument and dignity; in a fourth, he subjected him to the excommunication of society. Each stage of advancing toleration marks a stage of the decline of the spirit of dogmatism and of the increase of the spirit of truth.” - W. E. H. Lecky, quoted in Sprading: Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.57.

TOLERANCE: In order that a society may be free, a great many people must exhibit a much higher level of tolerance for individual eccentricity than has hitherto prevailed. 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. Freedom of speech and press, of religion and economics, means that other people will say, print, believe and produce things, which we might find distasteful. Freedom doesn't come cheap; it costs, and those unable or unwilling to pay the price will never achieve freedom, nor will they retain the freedom they now enjoy.” - E. Opitz, THE FREEMAN, 7/75, p.43. - The principle: To each the government or free society of his or her dreams (*) - does NOT require any SACRIFICES from ANYONE! - Unless they consider getting rid of some of their prejudices to be a sacrifice. - JZ, 19.11.02. – (*) I think that GPdB was right in displacing this word by “choice”. – JZ, 16.8.12. - DIS.

TOLERANCE: informed by Robert Nozick’s suggestion in “Anarchy, State, and Utopia” that freedom is a filter permitting many different utopias to flourish.” – Michael Grossberg, REASON, 12/82, p.49. – Even the utopias of the statists – but this time only at their own expense and risk! Which makes a great difference, since it will tend to limit their life-spans and also shrink them, slowly to fast. – JZ, 23.10.08, 16.8.12. - Compare Nozick's concept of "meta-utopia". Just another expression for voluntarism in every sphere. - JZ, 25.3.11. - PANARCHISM, META-UTOPIA, COEXISTENCE OF VARIOUS UTOPIAS, ALL FOR VOLUNTEERS ONLY, FREEDOM

TOLERANCE: Institutionalized intolerance allows and concedes! - JZ – Territorialism allows and concedes all too much that is intolerant and, inherently, also intolerable. – JZ, 3.2.12. – TERRITORIALISM, THE ESTABLISHMENT, LEGALISM, CONSTITUTIONALISM, LAWS, LEGISLATION

TOLERANCE: Intolerant behavior is intolerable. (Intolerant actions are intolerable.) - JZ, 25.9.75.

TOLERANCE: Is high population density a vice or a virtue? Well, that all depends. As that great mythical Irish bartender, Mr. Dooley, once put it: 'As the Frenchman said, as he drank from the fire extinguisher, "Each to his own taste".' - B. R. Rogge, THE FREEMAN, 3/75. – Individual preferences differ. – How many different drinks are there by now? – JZ, 14.4.09. – In a few countries by now 90% of the population prefers to live in cities. – JZ, 28.4.09, 25.3.11. - JOKES

TOLERANCE: Is there one word, which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's life? The master said, Is not reciprocity such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.” - Confucius, Analects, Bk XV, ch.23. – GOLDEN RULE, RECIPROCITY

TOLERANCE: isn't there room for everybody's dream?” - of Keith Laumer & Rosa George Brown: Earthblood, p. 115. – There isn’t for all territorialist dreams. But there is for the practice of all exterritorialist dreams among their believers. – JZ, 14.4.09. – Q.


TOLERANCE: it don't matter much what any of us are (*), just so we get along with one another." - Clifford D. Simak, Way Station, p.43. – (*) do, or believe in or strive for. – JZ, 16.8.12. – “To each his own!” - MAN, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE

TOLERANCE: It is certain that many people in this nation do not want freedom. I think they are mistaken. But I have no more right to take their government, their crutch, away from them than they have to force me to lean on it. My understanding of freedom recognizes man's enormous individuality. Some will always disagree. Am I to banish disagreement?” - Robert LeFevre, LEFEVRE’S JOURNAL, Winter 75, p.118.

TOLERANCE: It is decisive that in the interest of equal freedom for all, we tolerate opinions and actions, which we not only dislike but even despise. The main point is that everybody has the widest opportunity to live according to his own taste, regardless of the contrary preferences of others: to manage under a mutual agreement, to renounce impositions of preferences. – K. H. Z. Solneman, LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, Nr.2., S.12.

TOLERANCE: It is evident that the most fair-minded man must become intolerant if you place him in a position where he has only the unpleasant choice either to eat or be eaten, either to submit to his neighbour's views or force his own views upon his neighbour. Cut the cord, give us full freedom for differing amongst ourselves, and it at once becomes possible for a man to hold by his own convictions and yet be completely tolerant of what his neighbour says and does.” (*) - Auberon Herbert, Essays, Mack ed., p.64. – (*) Regarding his own affairs! – JZ, 16.8.12. – DIS.

TOLERANCE: It is forbidden to decry other sects; the true believer gives honor to whatever in them is worthy or honor.” – Decree of Asoka, Buddhist emperor of India, 264-228 B.C. – Criticizing supposed flaws in other sects is not aggression. But suppressing their rituals, beliefs and actions is. – Ulrich von Beckerath pointed out to me that Buddha even recommended the study of other religions and that Buddhists never organized a book burning. But much of the Buddhist literature was destroyed when Buddhist monks appealed to the populations not to follow their princes any longer into their wars against each other. That kind of Buddhism was exterminated by the princes. – Does any text, document or book on this affair exist? Alas, the library of Ulrich von Beckerath was destroyed in Nov. 1943. I assume that he had some relevant reference in it. - JZ, 20.7.08, 16.8.12. – BUDDHISM, BOOK BURNINGS.

TOLERANCE: It is much better to reconcile an enemy than to conquer him." - Tolerance optimizes the chances for reconciliation. - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE. – Mutual neutrality would be enough. – JZ, 16.8.12. - ENEMIES, PEACE, RECONCILIATION

TOLERANCE: It is not so much what you believe in that matters, as the way in which you believe it and proceed to translate that belief into action.” - Lin Yutang. - VOLUNTARISM

TOLERANCE: It is often believed that too much tolerance would somewhat weaken a society. But if it is tolerance, not e.g. for crimes, for aggressive actions, for intolerable actions, but merely consistent tolerance only - for all kinds of creative and tolerant actions or self-responsible actions, then a society is thereby strengthened rather than weakened. - JZ, 23.9.82, 14.4.09. – DIS.

TOLERANCE: It takes all kinds to make a world.” - Proverb. - But we do not have to tolerate tyrants, oppressors, monopolists and exploiters with involuntary victims. - JZ, 19.11.02.

TOLERANCE: Jedem Tierchen sein Plaesierchen!” - German Proverb, meaning: “To each little animal its own little pleasures!” One should add: at its own expense and risk. - JZ

TOLERANCE: Judge not, that ye be not judged.” - St. Mathew, 7, 1. - Judge not even a murderer or a mass murderer? - Do not sit in judgment on non-offensive people, people who have done others no harm or wrong. - JZ - Judge all your internal affairs only according to the rules of your own voluntary community. - JZ, 19.11.02.

TOLERANCE: Let all people try to find, apply or develop better ways, at their own expense and risk, in any sphere, even the ones, which are, presently, still monopolized by territorial governments.  – JZ, 3.2.12.

TOLERANCE: Let friends and enemies associate and separate themselves with and from each other, in war and in peace - and you have the basic foundation for a lasting and just peace in freedom. - JZ 16.7.79. - The separation or association decision is to be made by every individual involved. - JZ, 23.9.82.

TOLERANCE: let individuals live by their own values as long as they do not impose them on others.” – Fred Foldvary, THE CONNECTION 115, p.91. – VALUES, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Let people ... pursue their own values in peace. Both groups might have to forgo the joy of coercing the unbeliever, but they would at least be free of the unbelievers breathing down their own necks.” - Murray Rothbard, in discussing education, in reason, 9/81, p. 46.

TOLERANCE: LET THE BAD PEOPLE DIMINISH THE BAD PEOPLE.  LET THEM FIGHT IT OUT AMONG THEMSELVES: What people really need and which could greatly improve their behavior patterns towards outsiders is: many attractive alternatives for mutual slaughter, plunder and oppression among like-minded people. Imagine all the boxers, wrestlers, karate experts and criminals with victims slogging it out only among themselves and not practising their powerful skills upon innocent bystanders. -  Propertarian battlefields for incurable militarists and their war games. - JZ, 20.12.87, 2.4.89, 12.12.03. - If one allows militarily armed people to fight it out, like various factions did in Beirut, then, inevitably, lives and property of innocents or neutrals will be destroyed, too. - But would Beirut's civil war have happened if each of the factions would have had the choice of full exterritorial autonomy and would have understood and appreciated it? - JZ, 10.9.04.

TOLERANCE: Let there be no violence in religion,” Mohammed had cautioned. “ … fight for the religion of God against those who fight against you, but transgress not by attacking them first.” – Henry Grady Weaver, The Mainspring of Human Progress, revised edition, FEE, 1953, p.115. – How do so many of the Islamic fundamentalists manage to still overlook this passage by their prophet? – I wish that it would be produced as a car sticker, at least bilingual, in English and Arabic, and cheaply offered for sale. – Perhaps one should add: Wherever there is religious freedom, do practise it as well! - JZ, 14.4.09. – Where this quote can be found in the Koran should also be added, for all those Muslims, who are, just like e.g. the Christians, not sufficiently well read in their “holy book”. – JZ, 3.2.12. -  RELIGION, MOHAMMED, VIOLENCE, DEFENCE, NOT AGGRESSION, ISLAM – Bold print added by me. – JZ

TOLERANCE: Let those who understand this to be a call to intolerance bear in mind the dictum of Etienne Gilson: tolerance is a meaningless concept except as practised by a fervent believer. How can the modern relativist exercise tolerance if he doesn't believe in anything to begin with? It is not hard to exhibit toleration toward a point of view if you have no point of view of your own with which that point of view conflicts. It is the man who believes, and only he, who is capable of exhibiting the virtue of tolerance. - - Even then, the balance is often off. We all know men who believe firmly in a set of principles, but for whom it appears to be more important to display an exemplary tolerance toward those who disagree, than to affirm their own beliefs. Surely, one should stand by one's views, evenly and quietly, even if in doing so it becomes necessary to rend the stillness of sweet modulation.” – William F. Buckley: Up from Liberalism, p.100. - Buckley has, apparently, not come up far enough to accept freedom of action or tolerance for tolerant actions or at least here he justifies only a determined and intolerant defence of truths in verbal battles. - In this limited sphere, I do not mind his kind of intolerance, either, but rather welcome it, in its proper place. As for tolerance for tolerant actions, I would not care why a particular person would be tolerant towards tolerant actions, as long as he is! - JZ, 23.9.82.

TOLERANCE: Let tolerance grow to its limits. No tolerance for the intolerant. – JZ, 3.5.92.

TOLERANCE: Let us agree not to step on each other’s feet”, said the cock to the horse.” – English proverb. – Do not ridicule good horse sense. Horses do only rarely step either carelessly or intentionally on other animals – unless greatly provoked or threatened. – JZ, 20.11.85.

TOLERANCE: Liberty must be tested by its friends, not by its enemies.” – Sprading, Freedom, p.138. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

TOLERANCE: like the anarchist, the individualist advocate of tolerance distrusts not merely State power, but public power; ...” - B. R. Barber: Superman and Common Men, p.94.

TOLERANCE: Live and let live - is the essence of tolerance. - JZ in pamphlet on tolerance. - LIVE AND LET LIVE

TOLERANCE: Live and let live is the rule of common justice.” - Sir Rober L'Estrange, Fables of Aesop, 127. - JUSTICE

TOLERANCE: Look, he said quietly, I have my troubles. I have things wrong with me. But I'm not blind. I'm not stupid. You wouldn't tell me to my face that I couldn't handle problems that are strictly my own, would you?” - Theodore Sturgeon: The Stars are the Styx. - Galaxy Reader of SF, p.236. – RED., DIS.

TOLERANCE: Man has a right to think all things, speak all things, write all things, but not to impose his opinions.” - Macchiavelli. - Instead of 'impose his opinions' I would rather say: 'force people to act in accordance with them.' - JZ, 11/78.

TOLERANCE: Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.” – John Stuart Mill, On Liberty. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Many to most people are rebels with a cause – however wrongly it may be conceived and executed. Let them have their cause and its experimental practice – but among themselves only and at their own risk and expense. Then they will cease to be rebels and bother others. “Peace on Earth!” – through good will towards all, even towards rebels, as far as that is morally and rationally possible. – JZ, 23.4.83, 14.7.08, 25.3.11.

TOLERANCE: May I do to others as I would that they should do unto me.” – Plato, 4th c. BCE.

TOLERANCE: Men must be "free to try their ideas in a competitive and voluntary market." - John C. Sparks. – FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

TOLERANCE: Mises makes a poignant plea for tolerance: “Liberalism”, he says, “must be intolerant of every kind of intolerance.” It proclaims tolerance for every religious faith and every metaphysical belief, not out of indifference for these “higher” things, but from the conviction that the assurance of peace within society must take precedence over everything and everyone.” “Only tolerance”, he says, “can create and preserve the condition of social peace without which humanity must relapse into the barbarism and penury of centuries long past.” - Sheldon L. Richman, Mises’s Blueprint for the Free Society, in: Llewellyn H. Rockwell, ed., The Economics of Liberty, Mises Institute, 1990, p. 362. - Here Mises forgot again about freedom of action and experimentation for minorities. See his remark under MINORITY AUTONOMY VS. MAJORITY DICTATES. – JZ, 4.10.07. - VS. INTOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: Most of the others came down heavily for the herd, often making explicit such principles as “The greatest good for the greatest number” or “Do as you would wish others to do.” Immanuel Kant said, “We know … by vivid and immediate feelings, that we must avoid behavior which, if adopted by all men, would render social life impossible.” – R. C. W. Ettinger, Man Into Superman, p.147. – TERRITORIALISM, MAJORITIES, DEMOCRACY, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Most people are too enamored with their favorite reform system or ideology to be inclined towards tolerance in the sphere of actions or experimental freedom for the follower of other systems. And this in spite of the fact that such liberty would give them, too, the greatest chance. – JZ, 10.4.86, 26.7.08, 25.3.11. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

TOLERANCE: Most revolutions are just like severe fevers, eliminating reason, morality and tolerance and, like war, victimizing more people than they liberate. To most of them Goethe’s saying applies: “There is no more terrible sight to behold than ignorance in action.” – Naturally, this applies only to territorialist revolutions, which are by this characteristic largely intolerant. Revolutions only aiming at exterritorial autonomy for all factions, movements, ideologies, beliefs and systems, would tend to be very tolerant, liberating and enlightening and would have only power-mongers, fanatics, terrorists and aggressors as their “victims”. – JZ, 25.9.84, 3.8.08, 25.3.11. – REVOLUTIONS, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Must stop at the threshold of monstrosity.” – Dagobert D. Runes, A Dictionary of Thought.

TOLERANCE: Never cut what you can untie.” - Joseph Joubert, 1754-1824. - Compare the proposals on abolishing or destroying the State. Reducing them to rule over their remaining voluntary victims is easier to achieve and provides a just punishment for them at the same time. - JZ, 19.11.02. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, NON-VIOLENCE, WHEN POSSIBLE & EFFICIENT ENOUGH

TOLERANCE: Never do unto others that which you would not have them do unto you. If you wouldn’t have other control your life, then never try to control anyone else. If you wouldn’t have others hinder you from producing, freely exchanging, owning the fruits of your labor, competing, traveling, then don’t inhibit these practices among your fellowmen. …” - Leonard E. Read, Castles in the Air, p.159. – But criminals with involuntary victims must be sufficiently controlled. – JZ, 15.7.08, 25.3.11. – Much better than the State does it. Especially those criminals at the top of it. – JZ, 23.10.08.

TOLERANCE: Never question a man's politics or his choice of a wife: they're his private affair.” - Mary Hays Weik, quoting her father, a Lincoln Scholar, in WINDOW ON THE WORLD, 2/76. - They are not private affairs, as far as territorial politics is concerned (apart from secret voting, which is another wrong, according to Lysander Spooner) but they should both be completely private. - Racial immigration policies restrict even the choice of wives, at least by imposing quotas on certain ethnic groups. - JZ, 20.11.78, 24.9.82, 11.10.08, 25.3.11.

TOLERANCE: No government has the right to force individuals not to do something which they may desire to do at their own risk, provided that they, in turn, do not force their will on others or put others at risk.” - From a discussion paper of the Workers Party on drugs.

TOLERANCE: No human creature is understood by any other human creature. At the most, from habit, patience, interest, friendship, they accept or tolerate each other.” – Taine

TOLERANCE: No man can ever build another man’s dream.” – Terry Carr & Alexei Panshin, Star Dream, GALAXY, May 69, p. 64. – Actually, many good ideas have been realized and sufficiently published not by the originators but by those who did appreciate them. – Just let’s make all the good dreams and also the well-meant ones readily accessible to all potential builders and activists. - JZ, 23.10.08. – PANARCHISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, DIS.

TOLERANCE: No man has a right in America to treat any other man 'tolerantly' for tolerance is the assumption of superiority. Our liberties are equal rights of every citizen.” - Wendell L. Wilkie. - One can very well class it as a right to be tolerated in one's tolerant actions, in the some way as a small step towards the desired tolerance, privacy, is already recognized as a right. And, between rational beings, it would be an equal right. - JZ, 23.9.82.

TOLERANCE: No one is my enemy, none a stranger and everyone is my friend.” – Guru Arjan Dev: AG 1299. – SIKHISM. - I lived for almost 12 years under Hitler, saw him only once from some distance and only heard his raucous and rabble-rousing voice on the primitive little radio that he had spread cheaply – it could not receive foreign broadcasts. He was certainly neither my friend nor my hero – JZ, 31.3.09, 25.3.11. -  All the Hitlers, Stalins etc., all the ruling territorialists, are my enemies. – JZ, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: No utopia is ideal for all.” – Michael Greenberg, REASON, 12/82 p.49. – I would rather say: Not any single territorial utopia can be ideal for all inhabitants. – Let the imperfect people with flawed ideals have their own utopia – among themselves. – JZ, 14.7.08., 3.2.12. – All the still living anarchists and libertarians who made public statements in the direction of panarchism still ought to be systematically approached with panarchistic ideas. They may be among the future public opinion-makers on the subject. – JZ, 23.10.08. – The “meta-utopia” that Robert Nozick hinted at or P.-E. de Puydt’s panarchism, consisting of as many different panarchies as free people choose for themselves, would fit all sufficiently enlightened and moral people and would be the best societal organization form to keep the rest in check in combination with an as complete declaration of all genuine individual rights and liberties as could and should be compiled and published and an ideal form of volunteer militia for their protection as human beings can manage to organize, enlighten and train for this task. – JZ, 3.2.12, 16.8.12. - PANARCHISM, UTOPIAS. PANARCHISM WOULD PROVIDE A “META-UTOPIA” FOR ALL THE DIVERSE UTOPIAS, TERRITORIALISM OR EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY?

TOLERANCE: Nobody is wholly tolerant. The more you believe in tolerance, the less you can tolerate the intolerant.” - R. Q. in READER'S DIGEST, 7/66.

TOLERANCE: Nobody may be forced to adapt his lifestyle to any temporarily prevailing theory. - Thus the State may not interfere with any law in any theoretical scientific dispute and any scientific experiment in the economic, social, juridical and political sphere - as long as they take place exclusively at the expense and risk of the experimenters.” – JZ, Free after U. v. Beckerath. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXPERTS, THEORIES, CHOICE

TOLERANCE: None of you (truly) believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.” – Number 13 of Iman ‘Al-Nawawi’s Forty Hadiths. - ISLAM

TOLERANCE: Nor was tolerance the result of religious indifference, as is sometimes suggested, much more is it true to say that religious indifference is the result of toleration.” – David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p.33. – Alas, religious indifference does not automatically arise in all people by toleration. But then even religious tolerance did not, under the rise of the territorial State, reach its ultimate freedom, namely of full exterritorial autonomy for the voluntary communities of religious - and other people. The long-term effect of this extended kind of tolerance for all tolerant actions is still to be experienced. – JZ, 26.7.08, 25.3.11, 16.8.12. - FANATICISM, FUNDAMENTALISM, INTOLERANCE, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Not all others should be or could always be treated as you wish to be treated. Especially not those who are very intolerant even towards mere different opinions and self-concerned actions. – JZ, n.d., 26.7.08, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Not confrontation but toleration. Let only your free words and free actions “confront” those of others and appeal mainly to the long-term understanding, judgment and appreciation of the differences you and they are freely demonstrating in practice. After all, all people are different. No two of them are quite alike. Any territorial population, yes even any family- and friendship circle can or should have great tolerance for the diverse actions of their members, without interfering with family and friendship relationships. The best husband and wife relationship and those between loving couples are also largely based on a great degree of mutual tolerance or acceptance of their differences. – JZ, 19.6.91, 7.1.93, 25.7.08, 25.3.11, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Not only should you forgive your enemies, but you should also forgive your friends.” – P. K. Shaw. – As long as no offences against fundamental human rights were involved or none are to be expected any more from them and they have indemnified their victims. – But should one ever forgive mass murderers? - JZ, 15.7.08. - FRIENDSHIP, AMNESTY, ENEMIES, FORGIVENESS, PRISONERS OF WAR, DIS.

TOLERANCE: Nothing can be excluded from life. It is all one thing.” – Frank Herbert, The Godmakers, p.138. – As if all the organized mass murders, repressions and robberies, all quite contrary to individual rights and liberties, were quite natural actions and developments, inseperately connected to the nature of man and his societies. Already Herbert Spencer pointed out the existence of several dozen quite peaceful societies and tribes. Later sociologists and anthropologists listed about 65. The territorial monopoly organizations that lead to repression, exploitation, mass murder, war, revolutions and civil war are still not clearly seen for what they are and cause. – JZ, 18.7.08. – DIS., STATES, WAR, TAXATION, DICTATORSHIPS, PANARCHISM, GOVERNMENTS, RULERS, INTOLERANCE, WARFARE STATE

TOLERANCE: Once lead this people into war and they will forget there ever was such a thing as tolerance.” – Woodrow Wilson. – WAR, INTOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: One going to take a pointed stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on himself and feel how it hurts.”- YORUBA

TOLERANCE: one individual’s paradise may be another’s purgatory.” – Michael Grossberg, REASON, 12/82, p. 49. PANARCHISM. – To EACH HIS OWN UTOPIA!

TOLERANCE: One man's poison is not necessarily the other fellow's.” - Moral by Aesop Mi. – To each his own self-chosen poison! Why should we be as tolerant only with regard to alcoholic drinks? – JZ, 14.4.09. – Choose your poison – is among the remarks drinkers make to each other. – JZ, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: one must seek ways of reaching agreement; or if agreement is not possible, we must (learn to? - JZ) know how to tolerate each other … (for? – JZ) nobody can be absolutely certain of being in the right. …” - Errico Malatesta, Life and Ideas, p.30. – I do not agree with the nihilism, relativism, or subjectivism in the last part of his statement, at least when it comes to the application and interpretation of well-formulated and genuine individual rights and liberties. - The "ethics" of emergency situations cannot be rightly generalized. - These exceptions as exceptions do merely indicate the rule for the normal cases. - JZ, 25.3.11, 16.8.12. - AGREEMENTS

TOLERANCE: One of the main troubles is that most of those who want to be free themselves are not willing to concede the same freedom to others. - JZ, 19.8.75. - Or, rather, they concede only the freedom to do exactly the same! - JZ, 3.8.78. - TERRITORIALISM

TOLERANCE: one of those bits of the rough that the wise take with the smooth and leave unmentioned except on those occasions of extreme provocation when the whole catalogue of one’s dissatisfactions is reviewed.” – John Wyndham, “More Spinned Against”, in “Jizzle”, p.183. – MISTAKES, FLAWS, ACCEPTANCE,

TOLERANCE: One should always allow the people what they want - if it is at their expense and risk. - JZ, 3.7.82.

TOLERANCE: One should be ‘contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow against himself.” – Thomas Hobbes

TOLERANCE: Only tolerance can make you strong enough for whatever you want to do - for it disarms your enemies. - JZ, in pamphlet on TOLERANCE. - It tends to make you strong, e.g. when you recognize as your allies all kinds of governments and societies in exile and when you tolerate panarchies also in your own country. - JZ, 15.10.11. - STRENGTH, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, PANARCHISM, SECRET ALLIES, LIBERATION, DEFENCE

TOLERANCE: Only whoever feels secure is tolerant. – Carstens – (“Nur wer sich sicher fuehlt, ist tolerant.”) – Fanatics, fundamentalists and terrorists, as “true believers” do also feel secure in their convictions. But they also know that they are not quite free to practise them among themselves. That is one of the main motives for them to become so intolerant that they even become terrorists. They combine this conviction with the belief that everyone else would conspire against them, to keep them unfree. Consequently, they hold all other people collectively responsible. They also know that they are not numerous enough to get their ideal realized by persuasion attempts or voting. Thus they resort to terrorism, if they take their “ideals” serious. If, however, they could freely secede, to do their own things for or to themselves, but among themselves only, at their own risk and expense, few of them would consider terrorist actions and even fewer of them would actually engage in them, if any at all, unless they are, really, mental cases. – JZ, 21.7.08, 25.3.11. – TERRORISM, FUNDAMENTALISM, BOMB THROWERS, SUICIDE BOMBERS, FANATICISM & FREEDOM OF ACTION OR FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT UNDER EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY & PERSONAL LAWS: PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM ETC.

TOLERANCE: Others have the right to protect their liberty against you but they have no right to interfere with yours. Tolerance does not demand any more. Don't tolerate intolerance! - JZ, On Tolerance.

TOLERANCE: Ours must be perfect tolerance but also entire conviction.” – J. N. Figgis, in David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, p.143. – Perfect tolerance requires intolerance towards the intolerant and intolerable! – JZ, 17.4.09.

TOLERANCE: Paddle your own canoe.” - Frederick Marryat, Settlers in Canada, ch.8, 1840. – Compare the movie title: “Row Your Boat”, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-HELP, etc.

TOLERANCE: Panarchism may express the maximum of tolerance that is possible and at the same time its optimum. - JZ 11.1.93. – Tolerance for the intolerable would diminish tolerance. – JZ, 16.8l.12.

TOLERANCE: People could do anything they wanted to do if they were willing to pay for it.” - Lee Correy, Remodeling of Eve, ANALOG 7/79, p. 151. – Buy and sell women and children as sex slaves or sacrificial victims? - Even the best rule needs to be somewhat qualified. – JZ, 11.10.08. – DIS., SLAVERY, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY

TOLERANCE: People get in the habit of taking their ways to be the only right and decent ways.” – Poul Anderson, The Tale of the Cat, ANALOG 2/98, p.133. – RIGHT WAY, RIGHTEOUSNESS, INTOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: People ought to be "free to choose - individually or collectively - whatever economic, social, moral, etc. system they want." - Jerry Millett, Texas, ANALOG, June 61. – I have still to include many of these names in my directory of panarchists, including such short quotes, Hopefully, many of them are still alive and active and could, by now, be found e.g. through the Internet or through the global directory of mobile phones. – An honors roll for the deceased panarchists should also be compiled. - JZ, 16.8.12. - PANARCHISM, CHOICE, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, PUBLIC SERVICES, SYSTEMS, INSTITUTIONS, LAWS, PERSONAL LAW

TOLERANCE: people pursue their own values in peace. Both groups might have to forgo the joy of coercing the unbeliever, but they would at least be free of the unbelievers breathing down their own necks.” - Murray Rothbard, in discussing education, in REASON 9/81, p. 46.

TOLERANCE: People who wish to live in a 'virtuous' society, surrounded by others who share their ideas of virtue ... would be free to set up their own communities and to contract with each other so as to prevent the 'sinful' from buying or renting within them. Those who wished to live communally could set up their own communes. But nobody would have a right to force his way of life upon his neighbor.” - David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom, XIII / XIV. - Only with the last 3 words does he indicate that he may not only have in mind territorial utopian colonies or proprietary communities but also personal law associations. – JZ, 24.9.82. – PANARCHISM, PERSONAL LAW

TOLERANCE: People with as different notions of life, as e.g. the Penguin International Thesaurus of Quotations indicates, should not be forced into a single territorial State, society or community. Only if they are not so forced will their voluntary membership become some kind of asset for them, at least as a learning opportunity, rather than merely a burden they have unnecessarily picked up. Only under voluntary participation will they tend to grow and mature as human beings and allowing others their ways of living. Let 1000 or even a million flowers bloom, all in their own way. – JZ, 4.9.82, 14.7.08, 16.8.12. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

TOLERANCE: Permit other persons to express themselves publicly and to act, among themselves, in their own buildings and at their own risk and expense, even in ways that seem to mentally and physically hurt you. – However I would draw the line at public or private human sacrifices, torture, child abuse, actions against involuntary victims, like private incarcerations, and against those not yet old enough to give a sufficiently informed consent. – With regard to abortions we may have to wait until enlightenment is sufficiently spread. We should not risk a civil war in an attempt to abolish or suppress it at once. – Only mutual tolerance is very extensively practicable and right. Otherwise it can become e.g. mass-murderous unilateral intolerance towards the “tolerant” or “liberal” victimizer of the most innocent and defenceless of all people, the unborn. - JZ, 3.8.92 & 26.7.08. Ulrich von Beckerath used to cite an extreme example: If you saw a dozen or a few dozen fanatics, about to burn a women, whom they would consider to be a witch and you would have no other way to stop them, would you be prepared to machinegun then down? We were both inclined to answer this question with “yes!” – JZ, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Plant the seeds of tolerance.” - Dagobert D. Runes, Handbook of Reason, p.60. – At least do spread thoughts like the ones collected and published here! – And offer better versions. – JZ, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Pray you use your freedom, // And, so far as you please, allow me mine, // To hear you only; not to be compelled // To take your moral potions.” – Massinger, The Duke of Milan, Act iv, sc. 3. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Private property (which may also be used as voluntarily pooled, collectivized or socialized property) forms the best basis for a tolerant and peaceful coexistence between the members of diverse ideological groups. To each his own, no more, no less! - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE. - PROPERTY

TOLERANCE: Regard your neighbour’s gain as your own gain, and your neighbour’s loss as your own loss.” – T’ai ShangKanYoing P’ien, - TAOISM.

TOLERANCE: remind… them that there were ways other than their own.” - Stephen L. Burns, Eden Tag, ANALOG 12/00, p.115. - DIVERSITY, INTOLERANCE, ALTERNATIVES, RED

TOLERANCE: Respect for others, tolerance of their ideas and foibles, compassion in their misfortunes, are the marks of the truly civilized human being.” - IPA FACTS, 12/68.

TOLERANCE: Rising to moral heights: I must so act toward others as I would have them act toward me.” - Leonard E. Read, The Love of Liberty.

TOLERANCE: Roger Williams, indeed, the Welch founder of Rhode Island, preached, as early as 1631, the principles of an unlimited toleration, extending to Catholics, Jews, and even infidels. Milton stopped a long way short of this. …” - John Morley, On Compromise, p.268.

TOLERANCE: Samuel Taylor Coleridge, the English poet and critic, writing in 1809, gives us wise counsel: “The only true spirit of tolerance consists in our conscientious toleration of each other’s intolerance.” That is to say that tolerance is never a slipshod or bungling achievement. It has to be conscientious, that is, based on reason of the highest order.” – NOTES FROM FEE, 12/78. - I would rather say that tolerance towards those people acting intolerantly towards tolerant people, is quite intolerable for a rational and just mind. – Only tolerance merely towards the verbal expression of intolerant ideas and opinions can go very far but it should not be extended to their intolerant actions against peaceful dissenters, who would rather be left alone to do their own things among themselves. - JZ, 14.7.08, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: Schisms, splitting up and polarizations are desirable, tolerable, neutral or even progressive – provided all polarized etc. groups are merely made up of volunteers and these remain tolerant enough of members of other and different groups, societies and communities, with all of them merely doing their own things for or to their own members. – JZ, 18.12.83, 14.7.08. - PANARCHISM, SCHISMS, POLARIZATION, VOLUNTARY SEGREGATION OR SEPARATISM

TOLERANCE: Shaftesbury: Supposing a man is completely indifferent? Is he not then a model of tolerance? - Locke: The indifferent man has no occasion to be tolerant since the indifferent man, by definition, has no particular dislike. - Shaftesbury: But in your “Letters for Toleration” people are called upon not only to tolerate what they dislike but what they disapprove of. - Locke: I have used the word 'dislike' very broadly, to include 'disapproval' and even 'fear of.’ That is the most difficult thing of all, to tolerate what we fear.” - Maurice Cranston, Political Dialogues, p.32.

TOLERANCE: Since even the question of all religions has so far not been any further settled than on the basis of religious tolerance (alas, not yet universally accepted), why do you expect a wide-spread agreement on political, economic and social questions, among the populations of whole territories, upon any other basis than the equivalent to religious freedom and tolerance for all actions and free experiments in these other three spheres, among the volunteers of these kinds of communities, all doing their own things only for or to themselves? - JZ, Dec. 92, 25.7.08. – Q.

TOLERANCE: So central is this passive, mechanistic freedom to tolerance, that the judgmental process which toleration entails is permanently skewed in favour of forbearance. It is always intolerance that requires justification.” - Benjamin R. Barber, Superman and Common Men, p.85.

TOLERANCE: So long as a man rides his hobby-horse peaceably and quietly along the King's highway, and neither compels you or me to get up behind him, - pray, Sir, what have either you or I to do with it?” - Laurence Sterne, 1713-1768.

TOLERANCE: Sometimes the best way to convince somebody he is wrong is to let him have his way.” – Rod O’Donnell. – Provided he can have it at his own risk and expense only. I would not give a robber what he wants, if I could prevent it. – JZ, 26.7.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

TOLERANCE: Spencer knows full well the limitations of government and warns us that human freedom can only flourish where the (*) State is absent. Breaking with all those philosophers before him who sacrificed the individual to the state, he develops a social system, which has the virtue of enthroning the individual as the sovereign power in all human activity. No longer is the individual to be the subject of the State; from hence-forth he is to be the source of value, free to determine how far he will give himself to society and how far he will preserve his privacy ...” - Kropotkin on Spencer, according to Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.268. – (*) territorial – JZ - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, HERBERT SPENCER

TOLERANCE: Stars can shine only in the dark.” - Proverbial wisdom. - Leave others free to choose darkness for themselves. - At least they would set deterrent examples. - JZ, 19.11.02.

TOLERANCE: Start when ready: anyone can begin the practice of freedom whenever he chooses to do so. It is easy, and one need not wait upon other persons to agree before he begins. No committee resolutions or elections or laws are needed for a person to begin the practice of freedom. One need merely resolve not to impose his will - legally or illegally - upon his peaceful fellow men in their religions, their economic theories, their attitudes, their morals, their mores, or whatever. And then start to practice it.” - Dean Russell, Ideas on Liberty, THE FREEMAN, 11/75. - While this attitude expresses and reveals a considerable scope for liberty and tolerance, numerous tolerant actions are not tolerated by laws and regulations. – JZ, 24.9.82. Or by tradition- or custom-bound neighbors. – If only it were that easy! Freedom, individual rights and liberties could already have spread from anyone thus starting the process off. – How many does it need to start it off? Or how well known and respected must be the person who could successfully start it off, as above suggested? – I hold that none of the present “great” political leaders would be as much respected and followed. - JZ, 11.10.08. – DIS., Q.

TOLERANCE: Steven’s mind was so tolerant that he could have attended a lynching every day without becoming critical.” – Thorne Smith – TOLERANCE AS TOLERANCE EVEN FOR QUITE INTOLERANT & INTOLERABLE ACTIONS.

TOLERANCE: Surely it is the maxim of loving-kindness: Do not unto others that you would not have them do unto you.” - Analects: 15, 23. - CONFUCIANISM, JUSTICE, LOVE

TOLERANCE: Takes all kinds to make a world.” - Proverb. – Compare: “The stars shine only in the dark.”

TOLERANCE: The best way to convince a fool that he is wrong is to let him have his own way.” - John Billings, 1818-1885.

TOLERANCE: The best way to defeat an enemy is to make a friend of him.” Sign on St. John's, Kings Cross, ca. 1970. And the best way to do that is to tolerate and give scope to his differences. - JZ - To the extent that they are tolerable, i.e., do not infringe anyone's rights and liberties without the victim's consent. - JZ, 19.11.02, 25.3.11.

TOLERANCE: The camel in the fable takes exception to all other animals for not having a hump and the Ruritanian criticises the Laputanian for not being a Ruritanian.” - L. v. Mises, Human Action, p.8. - From such a general approval of tolerance to approval for individual sovereignty and its consequences seems to be more than a simple mental step for most people. Well, even the original advocates of non-conformism and dissent were often themselves still intolerant towards atheists and certain sects. - JZ, 24.9.81.

TOLERANCE: The capacity for getting along with our neighbor depends to a large extent on the capacity for getting along with ourselves. The self-respecting individual will try to be as tolerant of his neighbor's shortcomings as he is of his own.” - Eric Hoffer - SELF-RESPECT

TOLERANCE: The continuance of liberty depends upon strict reciprocity in tolerance: there is no obligation to provide platforms for people who plot for the downfall of our free society.” - Rhodes Boyson, 1985, VIII.

TOLERANCE: The creative and initiatory behavior pattern is one of nature's rarest and most valuable. To make its activity dependent on majority approval is one of the most absurd human inventions. - JZ, 29.12.75. - Except where the very survival of mankind is involved. E.g. referendum against nuclear power installations. - JZ 24/9/82. – NUCLEAR REACTORS – POTENTIAL NUCLEAR “WEAPONS” FACTORIES)

TOLERANCE: The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can’t tolerate a libertarian community.” – David D. Boaz (1997) - UNDER LIBERTARIANISM & UNDER STATE SOCIALISM

TOLERANCE: The finest fruit of civilisation, however, has been the increasingly general recognition of the desirability of permitting the individual to form his own interpretation of the word (happiness), provided that his search for happiness does not interfere with the normal activities of others to a greater extent than is the rule in the community wherein he dwells.” – Henry Meulen, Free Banking, p.8. - I do not agree with his qualification. Is locally customary interference o.k., even towards strangers, or other dissenters, who never subscribed to these conventions? - JZ

TOLERANCE: The founders of the great world religions, Gautama Buddha, Jesus, Lao-Tzu, Mohammed, all seem to have striven for a worldwide brotherhood of man; but none of them could develop institutions which would include the enemy, the unbeliever.” – Geoffrey Gorer, THE NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE, Nov. 27, 1966. – The enemy or the non-believer should not have been included but simply left alone. Buddhists probably came closest to tolerance towards believers in other religions and, possibly, also towards non-believers and this without centuries of prior religious warfare. – JZ, 25.7.08. - RELIGIONS

TOLERANCE: The future could be theirs, not ours,” Flandry thought. Kathryn would reply: "Why can't it be everybody's?" - Poul Anderson, Rebel Worlds, p.102. – Q.

TOLERANCE: The Golden Rule is the only moral absolute. We either love people or we use them as things.” - Dr. H. G. Pearce. - Compare Kant's teachings on people as ends rather than mere means. - JZ – We do not have to love them but we should allow them to do their own things for or to themselves. – JZ, 14.4.09. - GOLDEN RULE, LOVE, JUSTICE, TO EACH HIS OWN CHOICES, AT THE OWN EXPENSE & RISK.

TOLERANCE: The good, as I conceive it, is happiness, happiness for each man after his own heart, and for each hour according to its inspiration.” - George Santayana, Soliloquies in England.

TOLERANCE: The government and its supporters should pay their own bills. – JZ, 5.12.83. - VOLUNTARY TAXATION, PANARCHISM, PERSONAL LAW, VOLUNTARY CITIZENSHIP

TOLERANCE: 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.” - Jerome Tuccille, Radical Libertarianism, p.32/33. – PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: The human mind must believe in something, so why not let it believe what it does believe.” – Source? – Let them even act on their beliefs – at their own risk and expense! – JZ, 5.1.08.

TOLERANCE: The inconveniences which are strictly inseparable from the unfavorable judgment of others, are the only ones to which a person should ever be subjected for that portion of his conduct and character which concerns his own good, but which does not affect the interest of others in their relations with him. Acts injurious to others require a totally different treatment.” – John S. Mill, On Liberty.

TOLERANCE: The law imprinted on the hearts of all men is to love the members of society as themselves.” – Roman Pagan - The hearts of private and official criminals, who are victimizing me, are certainly not so imprinted. - Nobody is obliged to love all others but merely to be just towards them or tolerant, to the extent that the others are tolerant. - JZ, 25.3.11. - LOVE, JUSTICE, DIS.

TOLERANCE: The Libertarians say: Let those who believe in religion have religion; let those who believe in government, have government; but also let those who believe in liberty, have liberty, and do not compel them to accept a religion or a government they do not want.” - Sprading: Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.22. – LIBERTARIANISM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM

TOLERANCE: The local and racial variations still will exist, of course, and that is as it should be, but overriding all of these will be a tolerance that will make for what one might be tempted to call a brotherhood.” - Clifford D. Simak, Way Station, p.120. - Panarchistic, exterritorial and voluntary autonomy is much easier to achieve for all than is brotherhood among all. - JZ, 6.10.01. – Even biological brothers are not always full of brotherly love. – JZ, 16.8.12. - DIVERSITY, VARIETY, MAN, PANARCHISM, BROTHERHOOD

TOLERANCE: The more sects there are, the less danger in each. Multiplicity enfeebles them.” - Voltaire, A Treatise on Toleration, p.165.

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

TOLERANCE: The most important one of all - freedom to try.” - John C. Sparks. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

TOLERANCE: The one thing more difficult than following a regimen is keeping from imposing it on others.” – Marcel Proust - INTOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good in our own way.” – John Stuart Mill.

TOLERANCE: the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling  him, or visiting him with any evil in case he do otherwise.” - J. S. Mill, On Liberty, Great Books of the Western World edition, p.271. – Wrong and harm should be distinguished. If one’s customers prefer to take their business somewhere else, one is harmed in one’s turnover but one is not wronged. – J.Z., 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: The only real test of civilization.” – Arthur Helps. Compare: “Freedom for diversity!” – If only we were already as tolerant towards the subscribers, contributors and practitioners of different political, economic and social systems as we are already towards different sports, fashions, hobbies, writings, plays, music, paintings, sculptures, leisure activities, shopping and consumption habits, religions, dances, philosophies, gadgets, etc. There are many private spheres in which we do take tolerance already largely for granted. – JZ, 23.10.08.

TOLERANCE: The people, organizations and individuals, do have the right to undertake, at the own expense and risk, social experiments - even when these are based on errors and when they are making mistakes. The freedom to correct their errors and to learn from the own experiences and then to undertake, at the own expense and risk, new experiments, belongs to all human rights. – JZ, Free after Ulrich von Beckerath. – FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: The principle of tyranny: anyone not for me is against me. The principle of tolerance: anyone not against me is for me.” – Thomas Szasz, Heresies, p.29. - TYRANNY

TOLERANCE: The problem with tolerance is that it is often a symptom of indifference.” - Richard Geis in SF REVIEW. - That is no problem or at least no more so than that most of today's atheism is based on religious indifference. We can only hope that people will become indifferent towards all myths, i.e. be no longer captivated by them and act on them. The few who still are and act on them, at their expense and risk, in their own voluntary circles, will then be rather harmless atavisms. - JZ, 23.9.82. – I look forward to the day when people are no longer interested in upholding authoritarian, coercive, collectivistic and territorial statism! But I would become disgusted with them if they continue to remain disinterested in their great variety of exterritorial, voluntary, self-governing and self-managing alternatives to it, in accordance with their individual preferences. – JZ, 4.4.09, 25.3.11. - DIS., INDIFFERENCE, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human.” - Aldous Huxley - & PROPAGANDA

TOLERANCE: The race could save one-half of its wasted labor // Would each reform himself (*) and spare his neighbor.” – Frank Putnam, Reform. – (*) And like-minded people only – sparing all others. – JZ, 5.6.82, 25.3.11. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: The reformist assumption underlying liberal thought had been set forth by Jean-Jacques Rousseau more than a century and a half before, when he wrote of compelling men to be free. To this Mencken's answer was no. Although he believed in liberty, he did not 'believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone.' Although he did not think the Klan, the DAR or the WCTU 'useful or honest', he was against any law that prohibited such organizations. Nor did he wish to propose 'quackeries' for civilization's ills; he advocated neither closing them or killing them. Instead, he argued that liberty should be irrevocably defended - to the limits of the feasible and the tolerable. This rejection of the Liberal's reformist nostrums was based on the notion that liberty as a “Ding an sich”. In light of this, perhaps, we can better understand why he desired to curtail the police powers of the Pure Food and Drug Commission. His commitment to liberty was, indeed, radical.” - R. Dale Grinder, LIBERTARIAN ANALYSIS, Vol. I, No. 3

TOLERANCE: The relationship between tolerance and freedom is inherent. Intolerance is underwritten by government favoritism and violence. When people are free – meaning that they are also necessary deprived of force (*) – they find ways to get along.” – Charles Murray, What it Means to Be a Libertarian, 1997. – (*) Of the option to use force, and be it only by territorial voting, except in self-defence. – JZ, 16.7.08. - INTOLERANCE, FREEDOM, VIOLENCE, FAVORITISM, GOD

TOLERANCE: The revolution that establishes tolerance is the only worthwhile and probably last revolution. - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE. - REVOLUTION

TOLERANCE: The stars shine best in darkness - and all the darkness in the world cannot extinguish the light of a single candle - and a single candle can light a million others.” - 2 Proverbs, combined. - FREEDOM OF ACTION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, EXAMPLES, DEMONSTRATIONS, FREEDOM OF ACTION AT THE OWN RISK & EXPENSE

TOLERANCE: 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. – JZ, free after Ulrich von Beckerath.

TOLERANCE: the test of a free society is its tolerance of what is deplored or despised by a majority of its members ... free societies are better fitted to survive than closed societies.” - A. Bartholini, 1597-1643. – It is often assumed that tolerance would weaken a society. But only tolerance for tolerant actions is meant. A free society, because it upholds freedom and rights, would not tolerate crimes or terrorist actions against the rights and liberties of others. Against these it would be rightfully and efficiently intolerant. Tolerance for voluntary actions within one’s own sphere or voluntary community would not weaken but strengthen any free society or community. Even totalitarians could become tolerated – on that limited basis. Their deterrent examples would e.g. strengthen the knowledge and appreciation of rights and liberties among the rest, their observers, living, perhaps, right next door. – JZ, 23.9.82, 11.10.08.

TOLERANCE: The test of courage comes when we are in the minority; the test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority.” - Ralph W. Stockton – Under panarchism we would not need the courage and patience for a prolonged liberation struggle but merely the strength of our convictions to place our bets, our labor, thoughts, assets and ideas behind an attempt to realize our ideals together with like-minded people among ourselves. Even if we should fail to realize our ideals in the way that we had thought suitable for them, our companionship and common efforts should be pleasurable. – JZ, 8.8.08. - PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

TOLERANCE: The trouble with being tolerant is that people will think you don’t understand the problem.” – Merle L. Meacham

TOLERANCE: The truly intolerant people are the ones who want tolerance for themselves but are prepared to show none for others.” - John Laws, Book of Uncommon Sense, PAN, 1995, 189. - & INTOLERANCE – Not prepared to show any for others? – JZ

TOLERANCE: The uncomfortable conviction that the other fellow may be right after all.” – TRAFFIC SAFETY.

TOLERANCE: Their meeting ground must be their common desire for truth. Let us be extremely tolerant of diversity of opinions. But let us be brutally intolerant of lies and insincerity. (By insincerity I mean the attitude that refuses to admit its real motives.) - Gustav Stolper: This Age of Fable. - This is one of the many liberal sayings for freedom of information and expression, which wrongly assumes that there is a sharp and insuperable dividing line between freedom to express an opinion and freedom to act on it. But there is no clear distinction between an assault by noise (a shout into one's ear from close-by) and a slap in the face. Both amount to assault. A demagogue manipulating an excited crowd into aggressive actions may never get his hands dirty himself - but he is at least as guilty as the direct aggressors are, who put his slogans into operation. In short, there are limits for freedom of speech as there are limits for actions towards others. You have no authority to shout other people down in their own homes etc., no more so than any authority to run their lives - except when they authorize you to do so and this must be done by all the adult individuals involved, only aggressive criminals and mental cases excepted. - JZ, n.d. & 19.11.02. - IN THE SPHERE OF ACTIONS

TOLERANCE: There are nine and sixty ways of writing tribal lays - and every single one of them is right!” - Rudyard Kipling. - I would add: for voluntary members of the tribe. - JZ – Ways or laws rather than lays? – JZ

TOLERANCE: There are only few friends of tolerance left in the West.” – MISES, Omnipotent Government, p.11. – And perhaps none in the East. – JZ, 21.9.75. – It is not impossible that by now there are more tolerant people in the East than in the West? – JZ, 14.7.08. – (Mises himself was not a friend of the degree of tolerance here advocated.)  - SPREAD OR SHORTAGE OF TOLERANCE, Q., DIS.

TOLERANCE: There can be no better instructions in ... all transactions in temporal goods than that every man who is to deal with his neighbor present to himself these commandments: 'What ye would that others should do unto you, do ye also unto them,’ and 'Love thy neighbor as thyself.' If these were followed out, then everything would instruct and arrange itself; then no law books nor courts nor judicial actions would be required; all things would quietly and simply be set to rights, for everyone's heart and conscience would guide him.” - Martin Luther, Werke, Vol. vi, p.49, quoted by Tawney, Religion and the Rise of Capitalism. (Luther as an anarchist!) - ANARCHISM, GOLDEN RULE

TOLERANCE: There is a natural freedom to promote one's well-being without infringing the rights of others.” - Source? – Alas, it remains largely suppressed by territorial States. – JZ, 14.4.09.

TOLERANCE: There is no standard to decide whether one ideal is superior to another and whether it has the asserted obligatory power for all. But there is a standard to decide whether anyone - as an individual or a collective demands more freedom of action at the expense of the equal freedom of others. … - K. H. Z. Solneman - LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, Nr. 2., S.12. – Alas, my father remained unaware that he simply put Kant’s definition of rights into other words. – JZ, 14.4.09. - The existing official and private declarations of rights and liberties do certainly need many corrections and supplements. They are still very flawed and incomplete. But an as perfect declaration as human beings can and should provide for themselves is certainly not superfluous but, potentially, very helpful as a guide even if no declaration, book, map or guide is quite absolute and perfect. - JZ, 25.3.11.

TOLERANCE: There is nothing wrong or intolerant in intolerantly (verbally) advocating tolerance (for words and actions) for all but the intolerant (towards words and actions). – JZ, 1969, 6.8.91.

TOLERANCE: There would be no society if living together depended upon understanding each other.” - Eric Hoffer. – Or fully approving of each other. – JZ, 4.1.08. – Full mutual approval is not even the rule in most of the relatively happy marriages. – JZ, 14.4.09. – LIVE & LET LIVE, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.” - Bible, St. Mathew, 7,12.

TOLERANCE: This is not to say that conflict would cease: men would (*) persist in their disagreements in the common (**) pursuit of their uncommon interests, but their disagreements would be bounded by a fundamental procedural consensus. Agreeing about how to disagree, they could cooperate in establishing the limits of conflict. Under such circumstances, revolution became obsolete. At least according to the dream.” - B. R. Barber, Superman and Common Men, p.100. - (*) I would replace 'would' by 'can'. - (**) I would rather say 'separate' than 'common'. - JZ,. 24.3.82.

TOLERANCE: This is the beauty of anarcho-libertarianism: utter and complete toleration for any and all styles of life so long as they are voluntary and non-aggressive in nature. Only under such a system can the capitalist and socialist mentality coexist peacefully without infringing on the rights of other individuals and communities.” - J. Tuccille, Radical Libertarianism, p.60. – Did he anywhere stand up for full exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of utopians, reformers and believers, libertarians, naturally, included, but also xyz different kinds of statists? – JZ, 14.4.09. ANARCHO-LIBERTARIANISM, ANARCHO-CAPITALISM, LAISSEZ FAIRE, FREE MARKET, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you.” - Brahmanism:Mahabharata, 5, 1517. – Another translation: This is the sum of the duty; do not do to others what would cause pain if done to you.” – Mahabharata 5:1517. – HINDUISM HARM, PAIN, WRONGS, DUTY, BUDDHISM

TOLERANCE: Though all society is founded on intolerance, all improvement is founded on tolerance.” - Bernard Shaw, Saint Joan, Preface. - One could qualify that: Almost all societies so far expressed an excessive degree of intolerance ... - JZ – Better still: All territorial States, as apart from all genuine societies or communities! – St. Joan fought for a unified territorial France, just another State! And that one even under an absolute monarch! – The various French peoples might have been no worse ruled or possibly even better under an English King and later, largely, the English Parliament. But neither would have been rightful alternatives to free choices for individuals for themselves. - JZ, 14.4.09.

TOLERANCE: Thought, action, ways of life, to each his own: For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways.” - The Bible (Isaiah 55:8).

TOLERANCE: To each his own prophet, leader, economic, political and social plan, method or system. None to be territorially imposed upon any non-criminal, and peaceful dissenters. – JZ, 4.10.98.

TOLERANCE: To enthrone reason is to discard error; to accept tolerance is to destroy prejudices.” – Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.106. - Even reason should only be enthroned or enforced among those, who voluntarily subscribed to it. Others, acting unreasonably only among their kind of volunteers, should be left to their own systems - as their fastest way to learn from their own errors and mistakes. – JZ, 14.7.08, 16.8.12. - PREJUDICES, ERRORS, MISTAKES, PANARCHISM, REASON

TOLERANCE: To everyone his own way out, even a self-destructive one!” - JZ, 10.9.80, 24.9.82.

TOLERANCE: To tolerate everything is to teach nothing.” - Dr. F. K. Kinsman, 1868-1944. - This overlooks that one can also learn from observing the mistakes of others. - JZ, 24.9.82. – One can teach something else than the bad examples set by others. – JZ, 11.10.08.

TOLERANCE: Tolerable: that may be born, that can bear or endure, supportable, bearable, allowed, countenanced, sufferable, allowable.” - Shorter Oxford English Dictionary.

TOLERANCE: Tolerable: that may be endured, supportable (physically or mentally); fairly good.” - Nuttal's Concise Standard Dictionary.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance: The disposition to be patient with the opinions or practices of others; forbearance, catholicity of spirit.” - Shorter Oxford English Dictionary.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance and solidarity to achieve peaceful co-existence ...” - Robert Jungk: The Everyman Project, 71. - Solidarity? With Nazis, Soviets, religious fanatics? Or, rather, with their victims? Solidarity, like loyalty, or courage, is not a value in itself. It depends entirely upon the cause that its supports. If that is wrong then solidarity to that cause, or its supporters, becomes a negative value, like, e.g., solidarity with coercive and monopolistic trade unionists. - JZ, 19.11.02. - SOLIDARITY

TOLERANCE: tolerance becomes a death warrant for legitimacy.” - Benjamin R. Barber, Supermen and Common Men, p.92. - About time! - JZ, 19.11.02.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance cannot be maintained against intolerance, unless this intolerance can be indifferently considered as merely a harmless private spleen. In no case should licence be granted for the destruction of liberty.“ – Karl Jaspers. – JZ tr. of: “Toleranz kann nicht bestehen gegen Intoleranz, wenn diese nicht als ungefaehrliche, private Verschrobenheit gleichgueltig behandelt werden darf. Es darf keine Freiheit geben zur Zerstoerung der Freiheit.“

TOLERANCE: 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. - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE. - SELF-HELP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, SUBSIDIARITY PRINCIPLE, GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC SERVICES

TOLERANCE: Tolerance does not at all mean giving up the own convictions but their full preservation under respect for opposite views and a common search for a foundation upon which all convictions can peacefully coexist with each other, none of them at the expense of the other, with each having a sphere for its realization. – K. H. Z. Solneman, (Kurt H. Zube), 9.9.46 in a clipping he marked with DÖN. (Deutsch-Oesterreichische Nachrichten?) - My tr. of the German version: “Toleranz bedeutet keineswegs Aufgabe der eigenen Ueberzeugungen, sondern volle Wahrung derselben by Achtung auf gegnerische Ueberzeugungen und gemeinsames Suchen nach einer Basis, auf welcher allen Ueberzeugungen nebeneinander, keiner aber auf Kosten der anderen, eine Auswirkunsmoeglichkeit geboten wird.“ - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Tolerance does not mean that you should stop criticizing others but just that you should not interfere when they do their own things - to or for themselves. Tolerate even ignorance, foolishness and stupidity - as a matter of individual choice, whenever they are expressed in actions not infringing the rights of others. - JZ, on Tolerance.

TOLERANCE: tolerance for rebels!” – Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune, p.23. – As long as they confine their rebellion to freely doing their own things for or to themselves. – JZ, 15.7.08. – PANARCHISM, RADICALS, EXTREMISTS, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

TOLERANCE: Tolerance is a better guarantee of freedom than brotherly love; for a man may love his brother so much that he feels himself thereby appointed his brother's keeper.” – Everett Dean Martin (1880-1941), Liberty, 1930. - RATHER THAN LOVE TO GUARANTEE FREEDOM, BROTHERLY LOVE, BROTHERHOOD, DIS.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance is an act of forbearance resulting from a particular kind of judgment or calculation: namely, the judgment that the harm or potential harm (*) of a given act or belief is less costly (by some specifiable (**) Standard) than the abridgement of the act or belief. - - Or, inverted and stated in the affirmative: Tolerance is an act of forbearance resulting from a particular kind of judgment or calculation: namely, the judgment that the actor's (***) general freedom of action is more valuable than the prevention of a particularly harmful (*) or potentially harmful (*) act or belief.” (****) - Benjamin R.  Barber, Supermen and Common Men, p.84. – (*) Not just 'harm' but "wrong”. - If I set up a second and competing barber shop then I will possibly 'harm' the first barber by reducing his turnover but I would do him no 'wrong' (whatever unionists and professionals 'think' about this) because he is not entitled to the continuing custom of his previous customers. – (**) Specifications can be too individualistic and hard to communicate. Thus one should state: specifiable to others than the actor or believer. – (***) Here I would insert: "and other people's". – (****) To the whole passage I would add: "or of an act or belief supposedly harmful or potentially harmful to the actor." - That would be largely a matter of more or less objective specifications - subject of a new science, as U. von Beckerath used to say.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance is the acceptance of disassociation …” – John W. Campbell in: The John W. Campbell Letters, vol. 1, 1985 Eds.: Perry A. Chapdelaine, Sr., et al., AC Projects Inc., ISBN 0-931150-16-7, p.151. - & DISASSOCIATION

TOLERANCE: Tolerance is the best and the only sensible policy. Every policy coercively regulating the affairs of others amounts to a declaration of war. - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE. - TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, POLITICIANS, INTERFERENCE, DOMINATION, LEGISLATION, POLICY:

TOLERANCE: Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” – G. K. Chesterton. One can also be so convinced of one’s case that one can become tolerant of all others that have not yet reached this state of enlightenment and therefore becomes tolerant towards their tolerant actions. – JZ, 26.7.08. – DIS.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance is the virtue of wisdom.“ – K. Peltzer, An den Rand geschrieben. – (“Toleranz ist die Tugend der Weisheit.”)

TOLERANCE: Tolerance means granting freedom even to your enemies - freedom to do their own thing and no chance to meddle with your affairs. - JZ, in pamphlet on TOLERANCE. - ENEMIES, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

TOLERANCE: Tolerance of diversity, if individual idiosyncrasy and cultural pluralism, may increase while remaining responsible. (Much “tolerance” heretofore has just been a closing of the eyes and rejection of responsibility.) There is likely to be a strong tendency to live and let live, when psychopaths and neurotics are few.” – R. C. W. Ettinger, Man into Superman, p.145. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Tolerance preserves minorities instead of destroying them.” - W. G. P.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance should only be a passing attitude. It should lead to recognition. To tolerate means to insult.” - Goethe, “Sprueche in Prosa”. – JZ tr. of: “Toleranz sollte eignetlich nur eine voruebergehende Gesinning sein; sie muss zur Anerkennung fuehren. Dulden heisst beleidigen.“ - Tolerance to any new experiment among volunteers means much more. It is always required, for all the new experiments and acceptance should happen only gradually, by volunteers. Tolerance for new experiments is not insulting. It shows respect for other innovators, reformers and scientists and their attempts to prove their case. – Moreover, people have the right to make mistakes at their own risk and expense. – To each his own! Panarchism! - JZ, 15.9.08. – DIS.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance towards all tolerant actions, not only tolerance towards the expression of different points of view, is also a characteristic of panarchism. It extends tolerance for tolerant actions and organizations and their beliefs much more widely than has so far been done by other ideologies. - JZ, n.d.

TOLERANCE: Tolerance, except for tolerance towards the intolerant. - Every concept is misunderstood and many to most invite misunderstandings, especially very general ones, e.g., freedom, equality, democracy, liberalism, anarchism, leadership, government, control, authority, voting, etc. - JZ, 13.8.99. - & INTOLERANCE

TOLERANCE: Tolerance: The disposition to be patient with the opinions or practices of others; forbearance, catholicity of spirit.” - Shorter Oxford English Dictionary.

TOLERANCE: Tolerate only tolerant people and offer intolerant people tolerance only on condition that they become tolerant also. - JZ, On Tolerance.

TOLERANCE: Tolerate: To allow to exist or be done or practice without authoritative interference or molestation, permit, to put up with.” – Source?

TOLERANCE: Tolerate: to suffer to be or to be done without prohibition or hindrance; to allow or permit, especially by not preventing. (L. tolero, bear).” - Nuttal's Concise Standard Dictionary.

TOLERANCE: Toleration : ... the allowance of that which is not approved of; the practical recognition by a state, and its concession to its citizens, of the rights of private judgment, especially in matters of religion.“- Nuttal's Concise Standard Dictionary.

TOLERANCE: Toleration for the followers of all prophets, be they Marx and Lenin or Mises and Rand. - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE - Naturally, only as long as they confine themselves to their own affairs. - JZ, 15.10.11. - PROPHETS, GURUS.

TOLERANCE: Toleration is not the opposite of intolerance, but is the counterfeit of it. Both are despotisms. The one assumes to itself the right of withholding the liberty of conscience, and the other of granting it.” - Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man. - That applies only to tolerance and rights as privileges, granted as royal gifts or divine or priestly concessions. Generalized tolerance can only be introduced as a mutual concession or exchange between rational beings, in their rational self-interest. It leads to full individual and minority autonomy - on an exterritorial basis, leaves no collectivist territorial sovereignty and is thus the true opposite to intolerance. - JZ, 24.9.82. – DIS.

TOLERANCE: toleration is odious to the intolerant; freedom to oppressors, property to robbers; and all kinds and degrees of prosperity to the envious.” – Edmund Burke, in a speech to the Electors of Bristol.

TOLERANCE: Toleration leads to comprehension.” - Lao Tzu, Medhurst edition, p.50. - Free experimentation leads to enlightenment. - JZ, 19.11.02. - & EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION

TOLERANCE: Toleration, in fine, never led to civil war; intolerance has covered the earth with carnage.” – Voltaire, A Treatise on Toleration, p. 165.

TOLERANCE: Toleration: ... the allowance of that which is not approved of; the practical recognition by a state, and its concession to its citizens, of the rights of private judgment, especially in matters of religion.” - Nuttal's Concise Standard Dictionary - Institutionalized intolerance allows and concedes! - JZ

TOLERANCE: Toleration: The action or practice of toleration or allowing what is not actually approved; forbearance, sufferance.” – Source?

TOLERANCE: TOTALITARIANISM AND NUCLEAR WAR: Unless you learn to become tolerant - prepare yourself to become a slave or to die! (Compare especially PEACE PLANS 16-17 and 61-65, now online: - )

TOLERANCE: TOTALITARIANS, AUTHORITARIANS, DESPOTS, DICTATORS: Hitlerism? Stalinism? Maoism? Fascism? Nazism? Sovietism? Communism? Racism? Empires? World States? Terrorism? Yes! – But only for their voluntary victims! When forced to deliver, by their own followers, and this soon, via experimental freedom, even for them, then, rather than being able to merely go on making great, contradictory, wrongful and irrational and unrealistic promises to their adherents, then they will freely act among their adherents, upon their flawed to false ideas, premises, definitions, plans, assumptions and conclusions and thsu they will soon and obviously fail. - (By a seemingly constitutional and legal putsch Hitler came to power when the number of his supporters was already declining. Territorialism allowed him to stay in power, for all too long. Under full experimental freedom for all dissenting minorities he would never have gained as many followers as he did. He certainly did not permit dissatisfied Germans and other dissenters to secede and become exterritorially autonomous.) - Under panarchism for all their supporters they will either not become or remain numerous for long. Their misleaders will have no excuse to postpone the delivery of their kind of “paradise” for long and to demand great self-sacrifices in the meantime. Usually already their early followers will leave them, soon. Moreover, their “great leaders” will no longer have any excuse to resort to violence, since they are allowed and invited to practise and demonstrate their articles of faith among themselves, at their own expense and risk. Then they would soon run out of voluntary victims to fleece. Furthermore, the more advanced and even enlightened other volunteer communities will soon and effectively gang-up against them, if they persist with any aggressive actions against non-members or outsiders. For all their sufferings as the results of their follies and mistakes, these true believers will have only themselves to blame rather than any scapegoats. For those, whom they used to blame and persecute, as their scapegoats, will, quite obviously, leave them alone and will, rather, do their own things for themselves. Thus their “superman” superiority complex will soon become replaced by a well deserved inferiority complex. For they will be surrounded by members of successful voluntary communities and experiments. - JZ, 04-11.

TOLERANCE: Treat others at least as good as you wish to be treated yourself.” – LITTLE FREE PRESS. – Within reason. You cannot e.g. provide everybody with the treats you sometimes treat yourself with from your earnings. But, certainly, do not offer them any unprovoked violence or aggression. – JZ, 15.7.08. – LAW, NATURAL LAW, SELF-RESPECT PLUS RESPECT FOR THE RIGHTS & LIBERTIES OF OTHERS

TOLERANCE: Treat your inferiors as you would be [wish to be? – JZ] treated by your superiors.” - Seneca, Epistle 47:11, 1st c. BCE. - That could be nasty! – He was finally ordered by his emperor to commit suicide! – But he offered better advice to his friends. - JZ, 31.3.09, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: True and generalized tolerance does also require intolerance against the intolerant: "It was the 'lex talionis’ - or the Golden Rule in reverse: Be done by as you do to others." - Damon Knight, Rule Golden, p.42. – Even to the extent of: "An eye for an eye?" – Under panarchism different juridical and penal systems would be practised among their volunteers. Some might even revive that old rule. – JZ, 11.10.08. – Q.

TOLERANCE: Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth.” – Mohandas Gandhi - & TRUTH

TOLERANCE: Tsze-kung asked, saying: "Is there one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's life?" - The Master said, "Is not Reciprocity such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others." - Confucius: Analects. - RECIPROCITY, MUTUALISM, EQUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

TOLERANCE: Vices are not crimes.” - Lysander Spooner - VICES, VICTIMLESS CRIMES, CRIMES

TOLERANCE: We consider that to be moral which a person considers to be right: also that he should have a perfect right to practise his morality, providing it does not interfere with the liberty of another.”- D. W. Brookhouse, in Bob James: Australian Anarchism, p.9.

TOLERANCE: We don’t have to like each other to get along.” – Morris West, The Navigator, p.228.

TOLERANCE: We don’t want any … society of the common man stifling the (*) uncommon man.” (**) – Kenneth F. Gantz: Not in Solitude. – (*) creative and tolerant actions of the … (**) Stifling their actions is only permissible in the defence of life, liberty and property rights of the common man, should the uncommon man, as a supposedly “great” leader, try to restrict them. – JZ, 3.9.82, 15.7.08.

TOLERANCE: We have resolved to grant to all Christians as well as all others the liberty to practise the religion they prefer, in order that whatever exists of divinity or celestial power may help and favor us and all who are under our government.” - Constantin the Great, Edict of Milan, 313, quoted by Adams, the Education of Henry Adams. – It did not take the “Christians” very long to eliminate or forget about the passage underlined by me. – JZ, 11.10.08, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: We have the right to choose the society most acceptable to us.” - J. S. Mill, On Liberty, Great Books of the Western World edition, p.304. – Even societies and communities or any kind of governance systems for volunteers, which are only exterritorially autonomous, under personal law. – JZ, 14.4.09, 16.8.12.-  FREE SOCIETY, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, CHOICE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: We must not mistake rapid for wise action, or violent language for firmness. Ours must be perfect tolerance, but also entire conviction; unwearied thought and courage immovable; above all faith …” - J. N Figgis, The Church and the Secular Theory of the State, on p.143 in David Nicholls, The Pluralist State.

TOLERANCE: We must take back our nation from all the people who think that anything that offends them should be removed.” - Unknown American. – The very concept of a nation, a people, a country, a single territorial State, is a very intolerant concept and it misleads many into quite intolerant and wrongful actions against the own countrymen and against “foreigners”, against individual rights and liberties, even to the construction and stockpiling of ABC mass murder devices. – JZ, 4.1.08, 25.3.11, 16.8.12.

TOLERANCE: We practice non-aggression by being tolerant.” - Dr. Mary J. Ruwart, Healing Our World, chapter 1: The Golden Rule. - NON-AGGRESSION, PEACE, WAR

TOLERANCE: We should agree upon a convention conceding to every group the right to practise the principles of its ideal social order within the circle of like-minded people. For society as a whole, the most important rule would be the one delineating the aspirations of any group against those of all others. The principle of this limitation must be the same as that which can claim general applicability in describing personal liberty: the principle that freedom consists in the chance to do anything that does not limit the sane freedom of others.” - Free translation by JZ of Karl Walker, Demokratie und Menschenrechte (Democracy and Human Rights), S. 101.

TOLERANCE: We should conduct ourselves towards others as we would have them act towards us.” – Aristotle, 385 B.C. – THE GOLDEN RULE

TOLERANCE: Well, for those who like that sort of thing I should think that is just about the sort of thing they would like.” - Abraham Lincoln, 1809-1965 – RED.

TOLERANCE: What can you do about “rats”, who allow rat poison (fluorides) to be put into their (and our) drinking water and think it is a good thing? Little to nothing! Let them die out in their own mad way and let us opt out of their rat race to death. - JZ, 7/76. – Just make sure that your own water supply is free of it. – JZ, 14.4.09. - COMPULSORY FLUORIDATION

TOLERANCE: What freedom except the choice of submission would you allow dissenters to your system? – JZ, 5.12.83, 14.7.08. - PANARCHISM, Q.

TOLERANCE: What good is the use of a house if you haven’t got a tolerable planet to put it on?” – Henry David Thoreau, submitted by G. Harry Stine to ANALOG, 3.86, p.116. – We should not blame the planet for the messes we have so far made or tolerated upon it. – J.Z., 16.8.12. - PEACE, FREEDOM, JUSTICE, Q.

TOLERANCE: What helps it if man wins the whole world - but cannot stand himself - cannot be tolerant? - JZ, 2.10.75. - Then, obviously, he will lose it again and perish! He has already prepared the means for his destruction. - JZ, 3.8.78.

TOLERANCE: What is hateful to thyself do not unto they neighbor.” - Babylonian Talmud, Shabbath, p.31 a. – Other versions: What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. This is the law; all the rest is commentary.” – Talmud, Shabbat 31a. - What is hateful to you, do not to your fellowmen. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary.” - Talmud: Shabbat, 31. –. JUDAISM, GOLDEN RULE – Sabath? – JZ

TOLERANCE: What is hateful to yourself, do not to your fellow-man. If you wish that nobody should harm you in connection with what belongs to you, you must not harm him in that way; if you wish that nobody should take away from you what is yours, do not take away from another what is his. … Thus did Rabbi Akiba teach me …” (*) - Abot d’R. Nathan (vers. II), 26, 4.27a. Quoted in: Lewis Bowne, The Wisdom of Israel. p.207. (*) Footnote by Browne: “Akiba’s teaching was not new. Hillel had already taught: ‘What is harmful to you, do not to your fellow-creature.’” (**) (Sab. 31a); and he in turn was echoing Tobit 4:15, and Leviticus 19:18.” (**) - I would not extend that e.g. to insect pests, which are pestering me. Nor do I consider totalitarians etc. to be fellow creatures, as long as they extend their intolerant practices to others than their own voluntary victims. – JZ, 26.7.08. - PROPERTY RIGHTS

TOLERANCE: What is Liberty without Universal Toleration?” – William Blake, Complete Writings, 615, 158, 395, 879, 40, quoted in Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, p.79. – Toleration even for the intolerant would be self-defeating. – JZ, 19.7.08. – LIBERTY

TOLERANCE: What is the 1) ethical, 2) philosophical, or 3) epistemological argument for requiring continued tolerance of ideas whose discrediting is the purpose of education to effect? What ethical code (in the Bible? in Plato? Kant? Hume”) requires “honest respect” for any divergent conviction? Even John Stuart Mill did not ask more than that a question be not considered as closed as long as any one man adhered to it, he did not require that that man, flourishing the map of a flat world, be seated in a chair of science at Yale.” – John Chamberlain, in introduction to W. F. Buckley, God and Man at Yale. – Should one be neutral and tolerant towards the expression of all kinds of ideas? Or try one’s best to refute some of them? – Even tolerance for freedom of expression and tolerance for freedom of action are not yet clearly enough distinguished. One can be very tolerant towards some false or absurd opinions and very intolerant towards certain intolerant actions. – JZ, 15.7.08. - ACADEMIC FREEDOM, VALUES, EDUCATION, Q.,

TOLERANCE: What judgment could I pass upon them worse than the judgment they pass upon themselves?” – Frank Herbert, The Mind Bomb, IF-SF, Oct. 69, p.18. – All those, who want to share the property of others, if panarchistically and exterritorially confined to voluntary victims, would by their “policy” prepare a bad fate for themselves. Likewise, e.g. the protectionists and the believers in central banking. However, they could and should “share” with their believers their own parts of all the assets which e.g. the politicians, bureaucrats and militarists do hold in their names. – JZ, 23.1.95, 18.7.08. - PANARCHISM, PRIVATIZATION, EXPROPRIATING POLITICIANS & BUREAUCRATS

TOLERANCE: What this world needs even more than love or a single law and justice system is TOLERANCE FOR ALL TOLERANT ACTIONS. – JZ, n.d.

TOLERANCE: What was it my mother used to say? Live and let live. Now, dear reader, that’s tolerance.” - John Laws, Book of Uncommon Sense, PAN, 1995, p.80.

TOLERANCE: What we need is a machine that will let us see the other guy’s point of view.” - Arthur C. Clarke & Stephen Baxter: The Light of Other Days, p.79. – Perhaps the electronic “argument mapping” as developed and described by Paul Monk et al on the Internet, does come already close to such a machine. – JZ, 15.4.09. - UNDERSTANDING, PREJUDICES, ERRORS, MYTHS, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, DIS.

TOLERANCE: What you do not want to be done to you that you ought not to do to anyone else! – (Was du nicht willst dass man dir thu, das fueg' auch keinen andem zu! – Quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne feceris!) – Another version: What you do not want others to do to you, do not do unto others. - Alexander Severus. - GOLDEN RULE

TOLERANCE: What you wish your neighbors to be to you, such be also to them.” – Sextus, a Pythagorean, 406 B.C. – NEIGHBORLINESS, JUSTICE, RECIPROCITY, BENEVOLENCE, GOOD WILL

TOLERANCE: What you would avoid suffering yourself, seek not to impose on others. – Epictetus, ca. 100 C.E.

TOLERANCE: What's one man's poison is another man's drug.” - Father Ronald Knox, 1888-1957.

TOLERANCE: What’s right is what works for you ... and no two yous are alike. A good thing about the Gathering, maybe the best thing, is it gives you a chance to look around and find what way of life suits you the closest - or start a new way, if you can corral a few disciples.” - Poul Anderson, Fire Time, p.153.

TOLERANCE: Whatsoever thou wouldst that men should not do to thee, do not do that to them. This is the whole Law. The rest is explanation.” - Ha-Babli.

TOLERANCE: When we put ourselves in the other person's place, we're less likely to want to put him in his place.” - F. D. in READER'S DIGEST, 1/77.

TOLERANCE: When we reflect how difficult it is to move or deflect the great machine of society, how impossible to advance the notions of a whole people suddenly to the ideal right, we see the wisdom of Solon’s remark that no more good must be attempted than the nation can bear.” – Thomas Jefferson, Writings, Vol. x, p.255. - Minorities can bear more! No non-invasive person or group should be reformed against his or their will. Interventionists do each other no wrong if they confine their interventions to their own intentional community members.  – JZ, 7.7.82. – EXTERRITORIAL & VOLUNTARY AUTONOMY OR PERSONAL LAWS VS. TERRITORIALLY IMPOSED UNIFORMITY, PANARCHISM, NATIONALISM

TOLERANCE: Where there is discord – separation of interests can settle it in most cases. – JZ, 12.2.84. – Let people sort themselves out! – J.Z., 16.8.12. - TO EACH HIS OWN! PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: Whereas each man claims his freedom as a matter of right, the freedom he accords to other men is a matter of toleration.” – Walter Lippmann. - He magnanimously accords to others the right to be wrong. – Dr. Lawrence J. Peter

TOLERANCE: Which is the maximum of tolerance and which is its optimum? JZ, 11.1.93. – Tolerance towards all tolerant actions in all spheres. – JZ, 25.7.08. – PANARCHISM, Q.

TOLERANCE: While I may strongly disapprove of what you do or want to do with your life and property and among like-minded people, I still more strongly uphold your right to do so. – JZ, 1.5.93, free after a remark on opinions ascribed to Voltaire. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: While my mother believes in the Golden Rule, she also advocates a second maxim, which she terms her Iron Rule: 'Don't do for others what they wouldn't take the trouble to do for themselves!" - Mrs. D. Fulton, THE READER'S DIGEST, Jan. 65. – GOLDEN RULE, IRON RULE, WELFARE STATE, MEDDLING, DO-GOODERS, ALTRUISM, SELFISHNESS

TOLERANCE: Whoever tolerates the intolerant does thereby become partly responsible for their crimes.” – Helvétius – (“Wer die Intoleranten duldet, macht sich an ihren Verbrechen mitschuldig.”) – Thus, who is quite innocent regarding the crimes committed by territorial States? – JZ, 21.7.08. – The Weimar Republic did not disarm the Nazis and the Communists – but only the peaceful people! And it imposed monetary and financial despotism upon all, - with the usual disastrous consequences. Economically, the Great Inflation and the Great Depression, did each cost Germany as much as did WWI and, naturally, the Democracy, rather than the legal suppression of the relevant rights and liberties, were then blamed for both economic disasters. What would have happened if only panarchism had been imposed upon the defeated Germany after WWI? – J.Z., 16.8.12. – WAR & PEACE AIMS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, MONETARY & FINANCIAL DESPOTISM, VICTIM DISARMAMENT, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, WELFARE STATE

TOLERANCE: Why shouldn’ every alternative be permissible – at the own expense and risk of whose, who do want it for themselves? – (Warum sollte nicht jede Alternative erlaubt sein, fuer die, die sie wollen, auf eigne Kosten und eigne Gefahr? ) – JZ, n.d. & 25.3.11. – Q.

TOLERANCE: Wish for your neighbors nothing else than what you wish for yourself.” – Arab proverb, in JZ tr. from the German version: “Wuensche deinen Naechsten nichts anderes als dir selbst.” – Quoted in HILDESHEIMER ALLGEMEINE ZEITUNG, 24.6.1958, a clipping by my father, K.H.Z. – But beware, their tastes, opinions, habits, customs, preference and ideas may be quite different. Tolerate among all others other kinds of thinking and actions than you desire for yourself. Otherwise your wishes for your fellow men may turn into your commands and their wishes into enforcement attempts towards you, in which they may be the victors and enforce their wishes for your life. – JZ, 24.10.84, 26.7.08.

TOLERANCE: With the multiplication of sects grows the spirit of toleration which is nothing else but the recognition of the sovereignty of others.” - S. P. Andrews, The Science of Society, 1848, p.14. - & INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

TOLERANCE: Words are what men live by.” - John Wayne in "Comancheros". - Allow them to do so! - JZ

TOLERANCE: You can't make it the same world for all people.” - From film on F. D. Roosevelt. – Pres. Bush II still tries! So did and do Welfare statists like F. D. Roosevelt. – JZ, 11.10.08.

TOLERANCE: You can’t make all feet fit the same pair of shoes.” – Vic Thomas, 25.9.82. - PANARCHISM

TOLERANCE: You contend that I am wrong to practice Catholicism; and I contend that you are wrong to practice Lutheranism. Let us leave it to God to judge. Why should I strike at you, or why should you strike at me? If it is not good that one of us should strike at the other, how can it be good that we should delegate to a third party, who controls the public police force, the authority to strike at one of us in order to please the other?” - From a discussion paper of the Workers Party on drugs. ?” - F. Bastiat, quoted in G. C. Roche III: Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.193.

TOLERANCE: You contend that I am wrong to teach my son science and philosophy; I believe you are wrong to teach yours Greek and Latin. Let us both follow the dictates of our conscience. Let us allow the law of responsibility to operate for our families. It will punish the one who is wrong. Let us not call in human law; it could well punish the one who is not wrong.” - F. Bastiat, quoted in G. C. Roche III: Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.193.

TOLERANCE: You do your thing, I’ll do mine. They do their thing - and everything can be wonderful - according to our different standards. - JZ, 30.1.78.

TOLERANCE: You don't have to blow out the other fellow's light to let your own shine.” - Bernard Baruch. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, COMPETITION, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE

TOLERANCE: You may be against our aims - but we are for yours! - JZ, 26.2.76. - If only you pursue them only for yourself, while leaving us alone! - JZ, 3.8.78, 19.11.02. - If only you pursue them only for yourself and like-minded people! - JZ, 3.8.78, 11.10.08


TOMASI, JOHN: Secession, Group Rights and the Grounds of Political Obligation, 6pp, from HUMANE STUDIES REVIEW, 8/1, Fall 92: 319, in PP 1689-1693. - On individual and territorial Secessionism. - JZ

TOOLS: The tool shapes the user.” – Robert Shea, NEW LIBERTARIAN, 8/78, p.11. – And the potential user should be free to shape the tools for his purposes. Including societies, communities, associations and States or governments, all only for their own volunteers and only at their risk and expense. – JZ, 23.10.08.

TORTURE: Forcing people to live under the laws and institutions of others is also a form of torture or at least as bad as a compulsory marriage. - JZ 23.12.92, 3.1.93.

TOTAL WAR: Better a desert than a country full of heretics.” – Words ascribed to the fanatical Austrian Emperor who launched the Thirty Years’ War, according to: Fred J. Cook, The Warfare State, Jonathan Cape, 1962, p.165. - TOTAL INTOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM

TOTALITARIANISM & ITS OPPOSITES: Which are the real opposites to totalitarianism? Panarchism, voluntarism and individualism, full tolerance, exterritorial autonomy, personal law, freedom to experiment, freedom of action (not only of expression and information). In totalitarianism as much as is possible is decided supposedly for individuals instead of by individuals. In panarchies the reverse is true, in every respect, with all the individual variations that follow from the diversity of individuals and their voluntary groupings. Territorial representative democracies and republics are not the opposite of totalitarianism but just somewhat moderated variations of it that share its most basic feature, namely exclusive territorial rule over involuntary members. - JZ, 29.10.91, 13.1.93. See: BECKERATH, ULRICH VONOn Panarchy.

TOTALITARIANISM & NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Unless you learn to become tolerant - prepare yourself to become a slave or to die! - - JZ, On Tolerance. (Compare especially PEACE PLANS 16-17 and 61-65, now online: - - )


TOTALITARIANISM & TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY: The “territorial integrity” basis of our democratic, republican or limited monarchic systems has no more moral or rational merit than the “territorial integrity” claims of any totalitarian or dictatorial State. In that respect all are totalitarian regimes. In all of them the exclusive power to decide on war and peace, armament and disarmament, even in favor of the use of ABC mass murder devices, is an obviously totalitarian and tyrannical or at least dictatorial feature, even while this power is not used. Compulsory taxation and central banking are more such features. The deterrence theory is a poor excuse for this unwarranted power. Anti-people mass murder devices should not be in anyone’s hands – but their potential victims should be suitably armed, trained and organized to disarm these “weapons” themselves, in order to prevent a generalized holocaust caused sooner or later by the continued existence of such genocide devices in combination with the powers, motivations and institutions of territorial States.  Like with cars and planes, some unintended accidents with these machines or devices are inevitable and we cannot afford them on their scales.  On the pre-conditions for peaceful States and societies read especially PEACE PLANS 16-18, 61-63 (online at and its digitized ON PANARCHY sub-series. (Not yet online.) – JZ, 5.7.86, 7.1.99, 17.8.12.

TOTALITARIANISM: After the defeat of the totalitarian Nazi regime in WW II, did the better German minds finally and quite consistently turn to the opposite of all totalitarian institutions, namely to individual liberty and rights in every sphere, to voluntary communities under full exterritorial autonomy only? Far from it. For the victors and liberators were territorialists too, even though most of them were democratic ones. The very moral and intellectual morass and the resulting laws and institutions that led from the Weimar Republic to the Nazi regime, in the first place, kept their minds captive and allowed them no more than to establish another territorialist federal democracy and Welfare State system, which, during future man-made crisis times could lead to the rise of another totalitarian regime, with much hatred against foreign competitors or groups of immigrants as scapegoat for the results of the own still all too popular wrongs and mistakes, in Germany as well as almost anywhere else in the world. - If you consider that far-fetched, consider the proliferation of mass murder devices, whose use would be even more indiscriminately mass murderous than were the mass murder camps of the Nazis. And contemplate central note issuing banks with legal tender powers as the preconditions for further inflations, deflations, stagflations and their mass-unemployment, without which the Nazis could never have risen to political and war-making power. – They also had taxation, imposed territorial legislation and public debts in common with all the other democratic states, and the decision-making monopoly power on war, peace and international treaties. Consider also their mass murders via indiscriminate air raids. The difference is only one of degrees. – JZ 23.2.95, 18.7.08, 25.3.11. – DEMOCRACIES, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM

TOTALITARIANISM: As Franz Neumann demonstrated, the key to totalitarian practice has been to eliminate as systematically as possible all competitive sources of social decision. To spread the power of the ruler or ruling class pervasively, it is necessary to close off all practical alternatives. Thus the striking affinity of all the totalitarians for highly centralized controls of economic life. Just as each is relativist and nihilist in ethical theory, so each is collectivist in matters of politics and economics.” – M. Stanton Evans, in the anthology, ed. by Dorothy Buckton James, “Outside Looking In”, p.18. - It is just an extreme and consistent form of the territorialist monopoly practised presently by every State. – JZ, 15.708. – STATE, DEMOCRACY, TERRITORIALISM

TOTALITARIANISM: but why concern ourselves as to how the firing squad is organized? It is tyrannical by whatever name.” – Leonard E. Read, The Love of Liberty, p.12. – Only when organizing ourselves in the opposite way, volunteers only, all only exterritorially autonomous and otherwise very differently organized, will we maximize our common strengths against all totalitarian regimes, while, at the same time weakening them by preparing all their centrifugal forces for their release on liberty day. – JZ, 16.7.08. – LIBERATION, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, EXTERRITORIAL DECENTRALIZATION VS. CENTRALIZED TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM INSTEAD OF COMPULSION

TOTALITARIANISM: Civilization cannot long survive half totalitarian and half free.” – Max Eastmann, Reflections on the Failure of Socialism, p.126. – Unless both halves consist only of volunteers and both do their things only among their own voluntary members. – Can there be any doubts on which half will then be the stronger one, in the long run? And which half will come to shrink, more and more, through defectors, deserters and refugees seeking asylum – especially when the more free side is free enough to be able to offer fully employment not only to its own citizens but also to masses of escaped victims and new converts to freedom? - JZ, 16.7.08.

TOTALITARIANISM: Democratic totalitarianism works via monopolistic and coercive (majoritarian) territorial sovereignty, taxation, conscription and multitudes of laws and regulations. – JZ, 1.8.92, 28.7.08.

TOTALITARIANISM: If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.” – George Orwell, 1984. – One boot could not do that forever. It does not exist that long. Neither does the face. But many different boots kicking, for all too many years, on all too many different faces, comes closer to the reality. – JZ, 16.7.08. – One wrongful and irrational law, democratically passed, for all the people in a territory, can be just as bad! – JZ, 23.10.08.

TOTALITARIANISM: In a totalitarian system there is nothing to which the attribute “free” could be attached but the unlimited arbitrariness of the dictator.” – Ludwig von Mises. – Unfortunately, with his philosophy Mises did not recognize all individual human rights and liberties. His utilitarianism or praxeology was not a good and attractive enough alternative to totalitarian ideologies and his economics, although going very far in the right direction, did not go far enough; nor did his politics go sufficiently beyond limited, but still territorial governments, quite wrongly assumed to be the best choice for all human beings, not only his own voluntary followers. – JZ, 4.4.89, 28.7.08.

TOTALITARIANISM: It is not how the Soviet Union will find a way out of totalitarianism, but how the West will be able to avoid the same fate.” – Prince Philip, THE FREEMAN, 2/78. – Both aims should be our concern. Not fate is involved but a genuine liberation platform for the remaining dictatorships and totalitarian regimes. – JZ, 15.7.08. – Already voluntary state membership and voluntary taxation would go a long way towards ideal, free, just and peaceful societies. – Territorialism is already inherently totalitarian and has, in our times, totalitarian institutions like central banks, parliaments and the tax departments. - JZ, 23.10.08, 17.8.12. - DICTATORSHIPS, LIBERATION, DEFENCE, PANARCHISM, TOTALITARIANISM

TOTALITARIANISM: It is vain to fight totalitarianism by adopting totalitarian methods. Freedom can only be won by men unconditionally committed to the principles of freedom.” – Ludwig von Mises, Omnipotent Government, p.14. – Territorial laws and institutions do not commit us to the principles of freedom but to the errors, spleens and prejudices of the masses, of the supposed experts and of political “leaders”. Obviously, these “leaders” and “experts” do not even know how to prevent mass unemployment and inflation – but only how to cause them, and this without being aware of this fact! – Nor are they receptive to good advice and information on such and many other important subjects. No more so than are the inmates of mental asylums. – Thus let us opt out from under them and engage in our own free experiments, under personal laws and self-chosen institutions, quite independent from them! - JZ, 23.10.08. - FREEDOM, DEFENCE, VICTORY, STRENGTH, PANARCHISM ?

TOTALITARIANISM: It is widely assumed that there is little to choose between authoritarian and totalist governments; yet in one important sense, they are mutually antithetical. Authoritarian governments seek to abolish politics; totalist governments seek to involve the whole population in (*) politics." - Brian Crozier. - 1.) Totalitarian governments attempt to involve "their" population only in a narrow range of politics but they do want this involvement to be close to total. 2.) Both have in common with each other and with representative and direct democratic governments as well, the territorial, monopolistic and coercive decision-making machinery, in practice that by a few for or against all too many involuntary subjects and dissenters, regardless of all their protests. If instead they ruled only exterritorially and over their own kind of volunteers, then they would tend to become harmless for non-members and could not grow to dangerous proportions for the rest of the population. - (*) the dangerous path of territorial politics. – JZ, 6.4.89, 6.5.89, 28.7.08. - AUTHORITARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM, PERSONAL LAWS, VOLUNTARISM

TOTALITARIANISM: It’s hard enough to die for an ideal, but to give up your life for a lie …” - Frank Herbert, The Priests of Psi, p.41. – Statists and Totalitarians have never as yet been exposed to competition from fully free societies and communities. If they were, they might lose their popular support very fast. Their powerful regimes might shrink to powerless small sects. – JZ, 23.10.08. - THE WEAKNESS OF TOTALITARIANISM, DESERTION, WAR AIMS, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, DEFENCE

TOTALITARIANISM: Nothing more exactly identifies the totalitarian or closed society than the rigid and, more often than not, brutish direction of labor at all levels.” – John F. Kennedy, State of the Union Message, Jan. 14, 1963. - He doubled the nuclear arsenal of the USA and, to my knowledge, did never anything against monetary despotism, which suppresses not only labor but all other participants in an economy. Did he do away with Protectionism or taxation? How many new and wrongful laws were passed while he was President? Did he question the voting system? Did he permit individual or group secessions? Was his politics not also full of many of the wrongs and irrationalities of territorialism? – JZ, 25.7.08. – DIS., Q.

TOTALITARIANISM: One may put the matter even more simply by saying that under conditions of political liberty a certain pattern of economic activity will emerge. This pattern is the free market. The economic aim of a totalitarian state is to annul the decisions of the free market by replacing un-coerced personal choices with political directives and overall plans.” – Admiral Ben Moreell, Log I, p.150. - Do we not also have authoritarian regimes under which at least degrees of economic liberty emerged? E.g., Taiwan and Mainland China. And have we not experienced that under “representative” government and legislation ever more economic interventionism occurred? The essential requirement for totalitarianism is the territorial monopoly, with its outlawry of individual and group secessionism and of exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities. – JZ, 15.7.08. – Our “democracies” never fully unshackled individuals and minority groups. – JZ, 23.10.08. – It is not political liberty that leads to economic liberty, but, rather, degrees of economic freedom that ultimately lead also, although still all too slowly under territorialism, to political liberties instead of all too limited totalitarian or democratic or limited government “choices”. Free market options are needed in all spheres. Territorial statism denies them in very important spheres. – JZ, 17.8.12. - PANARCHISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLIES, LEGALIZED MONOPOLY INSTITUTIONS, POWER VS. CHOICE, DIS., Q.

TOTALITARIANISM: Our consistent and just answer to totalitarianism should be full minority autonomy for all, on an exterritorial and voluntary basis, allowing each the government or non-governmental society of his or her dreams. With this alternative realized on our side and to that extent uniting the diverse groups in a common front with a common platform against all totalitarian regimes and offering, obviously, a much more just, peaceful, free, progressive, diverse and tolerant alternative, the remaining flaws of a single territorial democracy model could no longer be effectively exaggerated in totalitarian propaganda. Fear would turn into attraction, especially when “democratic” mass murder devices are very publicly disarmed and destroyed as far as possible and quite rightful war-, peace- and liberation aims are proclaimed and demonstrated already through various governments in exile. Then all the various dissenters in totalitarian regimes would unite in their resistance against it and it would soon and relatively easily be overthrown. Defectors and deserters from it should be welcomed with open arms, everywhere. They could even retain and practise their remaining ideological spleens among themselves, anywhere, with unanimous support by all their volunteers. They would only be deprived of the territorial opportunity to impose them any longer upon dissenters. I would also favor disarming some groups of ideologues among them, until they have, obviously, become sufficiently peaceful. Against such a program they would have no motive to engage in a desperate resistance. Thus internal and external peace could be relatively easily and fast assured. – JZ, 25.2.86, 27.7.08. - NWT, WAR AIMS, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE AS OPEN ALLIES, CAPTIVE NATIONS & MINORITIES AS NATURAL ALLIES, LIBERATION, LIBERTARIAN REVOLUTION & MILITARY INSURRECTION PROGRAM, DESERTION, REFUGEES, ASYLUM, FULL EMPLOYMENT, ABOLITION OF IMMIGRATION RESTRICTIONS, CAPTIVE NATIONS AS SECRET ALLIES

TOTALITARIANISM: Russia employing Communist doctrine 100 per cent, is very weak. We must stop being frightened of her. (*) The best answer to Russia and all totalitarian states is to surround them with free markets. This will break down the totalitarian walls and enrich the free countries to a point where they become too strong to be attacked.” – Antony Fisher, The Case for Freedom, - P.47. - Free markets are also needed for competing governments and societies, all only for their volunteers and only exterritorially autonomous, starting with corresponding governments in exile. – J. Z., 16.7.08. – Russia, too, is merely a figment of the imagination, not a single moral and rational entity. All issues become confused if one uses such flawed terms. – JZ, 3.2.12. - (*) Of nuclear “weapons” in anyone’s hands? – JZ, 16.7.08. FREE MARKETS, PANARCHISM, GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES IN EXILE, AS ALLIES OF DEMOCRACIES AGAINST DICTATORSHIPS

TOTALITARIANISM: Seeing the past crimes of totalitarian regimes and how many of their henchmen are still free or even in office somewhere and how widely degrees of despotism were continued or renewed, mere relapses or thaws of despotism are just not good enough. A complete reversal and open renunciation of all territorially enforced policies, laws and institutions is required. Only those ignorant, prejudiced and foolish enough - to individually and freely vote for the restriction of their own liberties and rights, which are involved, should be free to continue them among themselves, at their own expense and risk. All others should become quite free to individually and exterritorially disassociate themselves from all territorial statists and associate voluntarily to practise among themselves whatever system, laws, institutions and ideologies they prefer, in free and peaceful competition with all other such systems, societies and communities. – JZ, 3.7.87, 28.7.08. - THAWS, LIBERATION, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, SANCTION OF THE VICTIMS.

TOTALITARIANISM: The great strength of the totalitarian state is that it forces those who fear it to imitate it.” (*) – Adolf Hitler, Koenigsberg, September 1933. – George Seldes, The Great Quotations. – One of the many errors of Hitler was to assume that terror, through the fear it inspires, does provide genuine strength. In reality, the terror is a sign of the weakness of totalitarian regimes. They are so afraid of different opinions and ideas that they try to prevent their spread by severe censorship. They are so afraid of alternative associations that they strictly outlaw them. They threaten with prison and concentration camps incarceration and death even the smallest protest and resistance actions, for fear that they would rapidly spread. They have to conscript their soldiers and keep them in line with the strictest military discipline. That of the Red Army was the strictest of all. And yet many thousands deserted even to the Nazis and during the Hungarian Revolution to these revolutionaries. Mere territorial democracies, with some rights and liberties for their subjects, when they try to imitate totalitarian regimes, do not, thereby, become militarily strong, as strong as totalitarian regimes but rather weaken themselves. E.g. by nuclear threats against the victims of despotic regimes they rather rouse nationalist and survival feelings against themselves. When both of two enemy regimes adopt totalitarian methods and the principle and practice of collective responsibility, then they resemble then the Hitler- and the Stalin-regimes fighting each other by sacrificing millions of their subjects quite wrongfully and uselessly for the wrongful aims and practices on both sides, while the victims, in or our of uniform, on both sides, ought to become liberated with a minimum of bloodshed, e.g. by the mass fraternization of their conscript armies, based upon a liberation program for both sides and combined actions against both regimes. - Only once the freedom, justice and peace lovers do, quite consistently, recognize and realize all individual rights and liberties (at least to the extent that they are already appreciated and wanted) and also all minority rights and institutions and do clearly respect also all those of all the suppressed individuals, captive nations and other victimized groups under totalitarian and other territorial governments, can the then fully free societies and all those societies which are then as free as their members want to be, all of them only formed by volunteers, become powerful enough to certainly and easily defeat totalitarian regimes and other criminally authoritarian ones. – Just a little bit of freedom and rights is not enough against quite ruthless powers. The rest of the remaining territorial restrictions in the supposedly “free” democratic countries does keep their populations partly enchained – and does not prove attractive enough to all the victims of territorial regimes. The contrast between the totalitarian, tyrannical and despotic regimes and the free or partly free communities, societies and governance systems must become much greater to become quite unmistakable and thus powerfully attractive e.g. to most of the victims of totalitarianism, including its conscripts and forced laborers. – The remaining racism, piety, crony capitalism or monopolies, poverty and unemployment in the West were skillfully utilized by the Soviet Regime in its propaganda so that they became its greatest allies in combination with the nuclear strength policy of the West. (That the Soviet nuclear weapons were a threat to the supposedly exploited masses of proletarians in the West was conveniently overlooked, just as the Western ruler conveniently overlooked that their “scientific super-weapons” threatened the victims rather than their victimizers. Only the attempt to imitate totalitarian regimes and to refuse to go far beyond mere “democratic” and all too limited civil rights all too restricted and incomplete individual rights and liberties does keep the democracies relatively weak. – Those, who fear totalitarian regimes do so only because they do assume, in their errors, ignorance and prejudices, quite wrongly, that they would have to imitate the actions of these regimes, rather than using all genuine individual rights and liberties and corresponding personal law systems and institutions as their greatest strength against totalitarian, tyrannical and despotic regimes. Napoleon I, for instance, was aware that he would have won his war against Russia if he had liberated its serfs. However, he did wrongly assume that this would have required an as bloody revolution as the French Revolution was and so he thought it to be more humane to defeat it in the conventional military way. – Naturally, if the “free and democratic” governments hold the victims of repressive regimes collectively responsible and demand unconditional surrender of the whole population and conduct a total war against these primary victims of a totalitarian regime, namely its captive peoples, then they might get, once again, the equivalent of the wrongful, bloody, destructive, useless and prolonged fighting of WW II. – If, instead, they would e.g. welcome deserters and refugees from them with open arms, and offer them jobs at wages and salaries they had so far hardly dared to dream about, then they could get millions of deserter and defectors. They could get even more and more easily, if they offered all of them the kind of communities of their own individual choice, in form of societies and government in exile, with which they could and should be allied. – Alas, the present territorialism of all democracies does make them, too, unable to achieve very fast, by free experimentation among volunteers, all the solutions that are required to the remaining and mainly government-caused problems, like e.g. unemployment and inflation. – As the present crisis demonstrates, governments cannot even manage the mortgage business correctly but, rather, prevent it from operating soundly. - JZ, 23.6.91, 9.7.92, 15.7.08. 28.7.08, 23.10.08, 25.3.11, 17.8.12. - DIS., SEPARATE PEACE WITH THE CAPTIVE PEOPLES, DESERTION, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, DEMOCRACY, RIGHTS, DEFENCE, LIBERATION, CAPTIVE NATIONS, REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE, WAR & PEACE AIMS, LIBERTIES, MILITARY STRENGTH

TOTALITARIANISM: the phenomenon is invariably marked by nihilism in the realm of value, and collectivism in the sphere of political organization. … At our own pace and in terms of our own institutions, we have been traveling the totalitarian road.” – M. Stanton Evans, in the anthology “Outside Looking In”, p.19. (Edited by Dorothy Buckton James.) – Even the most democratic States practise the territorial monopoly, monetary despotism via their central bank system, financial despotism via taxation, protectionism via numerous interventionist laws and most have also severely restricted initiative and referendum options for their populations. All outlawed individual and minority group secessionism and the exterritorial autonomy option for their groups of volunteers. Thus it is no miracle at all that some of them turned into totalitarian States but, rather, a natural development under these conditions. – JZ, 15.7.08.  – VALUES, NIHILISM, RELATIVISM, PRINCIPLES, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, ETHICS, MORALITY

TOTALITARIANISM: The proximate source of all this misery is of course well known – the fact that ours has been the century of totalitarianism, of movements that claim an absolute lien on the energies and affections of man, that in pursuit of this claim have wrought the characteristic horrors of the age. But totalitarianism itself is not a final cause, an unmoved mover without further source or origin. Its repeated appearance on the stage of modern history suggests, on the contrary, that it is the result of certain fundamental tendencies of our time and place – tendencies that are by their nature hostile to freedom. If we would preserve the liberties we have and entertain the hope of enlarging them, we must set about to understand these forces and repel them.” – M. Stanton Evans, in the anthology, ed. by Dorothy Buckton James: “Outside Looking” in, p.16. - TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSORY STATE SUBORDINATION VS. INDIVIDUAL & GROUPS SECESSIONISM & PANARCHISM, OR EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, MONETARY & FINANCIAL DESPOTISM, PANARCHISM

TOTALITARIANISM: The totalitarian State stands for force naked and unashamed. For only by violence or the threat of violence can the infinite variety of human types be dragooned into the mechanical unity, which the Dictator demands. – He knows that adult citizens do not change their convictions at the word of command, and he therefore concentrates on the capture of the child. …” - G. P. Gooch, Dictatorship in Theory and Practice, p.39. – Not that most “democratic” territorial legislators proceed so very differently. They do merely somewhat recognize some individual rights and liberties. – All too many of them did also acquire mass murder devices and keep them in readiness! - JZ, 15.7.08, 25.3.11. - TERRITORIALISM

TOTALITARIANISM: The totalitarian world is weak internally and strong externally … The free world is strong internally and weak externally.” – Jaspers. (“Die totalitaere Welt ist schwach nach innen und stark nach aussen. ... Die freie Welt ist stark nach innen und schwach nach aussen.“) - Not really - if only it were free enough and well enough informed to fully utilize all individual rights and liberties for all its defence, revolution and liberation efforts against totalitarian and despotic regimes. Then it could easily win, together with all its secret allies on the other side, the captive nations and suppressed minorities, even with the help of the suppressed majority. But, so far, this was only very rarely systematically tried and is not even studied at the military and revolutionary academies. – JZ, 21.7.08. – DESERTION, DEFECTORS, REFUGEES, LIBERATION, RIGHTFUL WAR & PEACE AIMS, SEPARATE PEACE TREATY WITH THE CAPTIVE NATIONS, UNILATERAL PEACE DECLARATION TOWARDS THE VICTIMS, DEFENCE, LIBERATION, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, PANARCHISM, DIS., NWT

TOTALITARIANISM: This is not to say, of course, that totalitarianism is right around the corner or that we have already passed the corner. That particular corner is one of the most difficult of all political landmarks to recognize. (*) History strongly suggests, as a matter of fact, that the time when most persons recognize it is precisely the time when it is too late to do anything about avoiding it.” – Karl Hess, The Lawless State, p.26/27. - (*) Just let individuals and minorities secede and organize voluntarily under exterritorial autonomy and then see what happens! – JZ, 15.7.08.

TOTALITARIANISM: We must oppose all forms of totalitarianism, even those appearing in our own country.” – Chuck Brookes, 9/72. – Unless they are exterritorially confined to volunteers only. – Let them do their own things to themselves! Could there be a more fitting punishment? – JZ, 16.7.08.

TOTALITARIANISM: While under territorialism the totalitarians coercively united their forces and fought their opponents down, the democrats and republican forces tended to largely fight each other rather than their common totalitarian or dictatorial enemy. Examples from Russian and Spain are numerous. Freedom, peace and justice-lovers are much more likely to unite sufficiently and to win under the flags of exterritorial autonomy and tolerance for all communities of volunteers than under the flags or exclusive territorial domination for only one group of them. – JZ, 8.11.93, 19.7.08. - TERRITORIALISM, DEMOCRACIES, REPUBLICANS, TERRITORIAL UNITY OR MUTUAL TOLERANCE? PANARCHISM, PEACE, VICTORY, RESISTANCE, DICTATORSHIPS

TOTALITARIANS, AUTHORITARIANS, DESPOTS, DICTATORS: Hitlerism? Stalinism? Maoism? Totalitarianism? Fascism? Nazism? Sovietism? Communism? Racism? Empires? World States? Terrorism? Yes! – But only for their voluntary victims! - - When forced to deliver, by their own followers, and this soon, via experimental freedom, even for them, then, rather than being able to merely go on making great, contradictory, wrongful, irrational and  unrealistic promises to their adherents, then they will soon and obviously fail. - By a seemingly constitutional and legal putsch Hitler came to power when the number of his supporters was already declining. Territorialism allowed him to stay in power, for all too long. Under full experimental freedom for all dissenting minorities he would never have gained as many followers as he did. He certainly did not permit dissatisfied Germans and other dissenters to secede and become exterritorially autonomous.) - Under panarchism for all their supporters and all their opponents, the statist regimes will certainly keep the largest numbers on their side or have the chance to grow very much from small beginnings. Their misleaders will have no excuse to postpone the delivery of their kind of “paradise” for long and to demand great self-sacrifices in the meantime. Usually already their early followers will leave them, soon. Moreover, their “great leaders” will no longer have any excuse to resort to violence, since they are allowed and invited to practise and demonstrate their articles of faith among themselves, at their own expense and risk und the most favorable condition, that of unanimous support and absence of any internal opposition or any external military threat. Then they would soon run out of voluntary victims to fleece. Furthermore, the more advanced and even enlightened other volunteer communities will soon and effectively gang-up against them, if they persist with any aggressive actions against non-members or outsiders. For all their sufferings as the results of their follies and mistakes, these true believers will have only themselves to blame rather than any scapegoats. For those, whom they used to blame and persecute, as their scapegoats, will, quite obviously, leave them alone and will, rather, do their own things for themselves. Thus their “superman” superiority complex will soon become replaced by a well deserved inferiority complex. For they will be surrounded by members of successful voluntary communities and experiments. – JZ, n.d.

TOTALITARIANS, COMMUNISM: The Bolsheviks do not merely claim the right to think for themselves, they assert their determination to think for everybody. They are quite logical, quite frank, quite open. In a paradoxical sort of way of their own, they are quite honest. ..." - Ernest Benn, About Russia, 138. - All territorialists do that - only not as ruthlessly and frankly in most cases. - JZ 27.7.92.

TOTALITARIANS: Territorial laws are for totalitarians. Personal laws are for libertarians and all other non-totalitarians. - JZ, 5.11.83, 11.1.93.

TOUGHNESS: Way ahead will be tough.” – Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser, in headline in THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 13.3.76. - It need not be tough if it were free and honest, e.g. under fully free trade, voluntary taxation and full monetary and financial freedom, with all legalized monopolies and privileges done away with. Only territorialism makes it hard, slow, even impossible or retrogressive. - JZ, n.d. & 25.3.11. - Compare PEACE PLANS 19 B: “The Soft Option”. - DIS., POLITICIANS

TOURISM & PANARCHISM: So far, tourists, representing the largest industry in the world, are welcome, in most instances, only as temporary and paying guests, not as new settlers and competitors for jobs and housing. As temporary guests they can already enjoy most sections of "spaceship Earth". Overseas they are, supposedly, represented by their ambassadors and consuls but they do not enjoy "diplomatic immunity" unless they are on an official diplomatic junket. Why should their freedom in other countries be only temporary and depending on passports and visas? Potentially they are also good targets for panarchist propaganda, especially if they come to like aspects of the countries they visited, but, not necessarily, all of the foreign laws and customs. - JZ, 2.9.04.

TOWNSEND, JAMES B., Jr.: Extraterritorial Antitrust: The Sherman Act vs. the Market Entry Strategy of Selected Multinational Corporations, 1980, Westview, $ 35. - That could be a very interesting title on panarchy now being practised to some extent by multinationals! – I have seen no abstract or review of it – but it might be online. - JZ, n.d.

TOYNBEE, A. J. & KIRKWOOD, P.: Turkey, N.Y., 1927, has information on capitulations.

TRACHTMAN, J., Externalities and extraterritoriality: The law and economics of prescriptive jurisdiction’, in J. Bhandari and A. Sykes, (eds.), Economic dimensions in international law: Comparative and empirical perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1997) pp.645-686. - Abstracts are wanted & review hints, as well as links to the full texts, if they are relevant to this collection. - Titles can be deceptive. - JZ, 13.10.11.

TRADE: A world torn apart by trade barriers.” - C. R. Batten, THE FREEMAN, 3/73. – And by territorialism and its coercion, monopolies and power “games”, instead of full experimental freedom for all - of panarchies, all only exterritorially autonomous for their voluntary members. – World unity or cosmopolitanism through tolerance for all tolerant diverse communities, just like it is already widely practised by churches and sects in their sphere. - JZ, 15.10.08, 25.3.11. – PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, INTOLERANCE

TRADE: Abolish all forms of governmental restrictions on trade and exchange of goods and services.” - JAG, Aug. 22, 1972. – Why not remove all territorial government restrictions on all other peaceful, tolerant and creative activities as well? And why not allow e.g. all Protectionists to suffer under it - as a matter of their individual free choices? – JZ, 15.10.08. Let them practise their right to make mistakes – at the own expense and risk. – J.Z., 18.8.12.

TRADE: All credits granted to regimes like the Soviet Union did at least indirectly strengthen its military power and its bureaucratic despotism and prolonged their lives, while they weakened our wealth, liberty and defensive strength. Only dollar for dollar, quit pro quo, free exchanges can leave the military strength relationship untouched. But we can presume that we will make better use of the products and raw material received in exchange from them than they will with whatever they receive from us. Naturally, we should not supply them with technology that would strengthen them militarily or sharpen their repression. – As far as possible we should rather trade with their subjects than with their regimes, especially when it comes to potentially liberating information. That we could and should offer even free of charge. - JZ, 31.5.07, 20.9.08. - WITH DICTATORSHIPS

TRADE: Freedom in transactions is an absolute principle.” – Leonard E. Read, Who Is Listening? p.153. - That means, full freedom in transactions with territorial governments as well and that requires individual secessionism and voluntary associationism under personal laws, i.e. full exterritorial autonomy for such communities. R. never arrived at that conclusion but stuck with the limited government concept applied to a whole territory and all its population and, to that extent he remained still a territorial authoritarian or statist. – But he did stand up for the kind of panarchism, voluntarism and experimental freedom that is involved in monetary freedom. - JZ, 15.10.08. - TRANSACTIONS, COMMERCE, CONSENT, PURCHASE, PRICING, SELF-OWNERSHIP, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-HELP, FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, COMPREHENSIVE FREE TRADING & FREE MARKETS IN ALL SPHERES

TRADE: Go and take up some honest trade.” - Makhno, quoted by Voline, The Unknown Revolution, in The Essential Works of Anarchism, ed. by Marshall S. Shatz. – Panarchistic trade and community relationships and exterritorialist revolutions are still among the great unknowns. – JZ, 15.10.08. – A good advice to all politicians and bureaucrats, which they are disinclined to take. – JZ, 18.8.12. - PANARCHISM

TRADE: It takes two to make trade and only one to make war.” - Murray Leinster: First Contact. – In an extreme case, e.g. to avoid a “modern” and “scientific” “war” with mass murder devices, like nuclear “weapons”, the intended victim of an aggressive regime might formally surrender and then,  through its rightful and rational ideas ultimately “conquer” or overthrow the aggressive regime, together with all of its former victims. - Libertarian ideas, consistently applied, could lead to a bloodless and successful revolution or military uprising against any totalitarian or despotic regime. Such ideas could be made very infective and spread like a positive “plague”, knowing no borders. But have libertarians so far bothered to develop their ideas to that extent? I found even advocates of nuclear “weapons” among them! – On the other hand, the development and sufficient publication of quite rightful and peaceful war and peace aims could lead to the overthrow of any despotic regime and this even before it can engage in an further aggression. – All alternatives to territorialists “war games” have not yet been sufficiently explored and discussed, not even by libertarians and anarchists. - JZ, 15.10.08, 18.8.12. - NWT, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, SURRENDER, DEFENCE

TRADE: Liberty to trade goods or services at freely negotiated prices between buyer and seller is essential.” - Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, 12/74. – Not only for ordinary consumer goods and services but also for all “public services”. – JZ, 15.10.08. – PANARCHISM, DIS.

TRADE: No nation was ever ruined by trade.” - Benjamin Franklin, 1706-1790, “Thoughts on Commercial Subjects.” - Wasn't the USA largely ruined through the slave trade and couldn't the trade in weapons of mass destruction or of means for their production ultimately produce only ruins everywhere? - JZ, 24. 11. 06. - Many peoples where ruined by confining their trade for “public services” to those offered by territorial States, i.e., by not taking up their panarchist or polyarchic options and, instead, paying tributes and obedience to a territorial master. –JZ, 15.10.08. – B. F., most likely, meant only Free Trade, not the “trade” of Protectionism and other forms of monopolism, which can be ruinous for most of the people of a country, while a minority wrongly benefits from it. – JZ, 3.2.12, 18.8.12. - PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, DIS.

TRADE: no state has the right to regulate commerce in any way.” - Wilson/Shea: Illuminatus I, p.86. – Not even the commerce within “itself”, for the official or governmental “services” it offers. – JZ, 15.10.08, 18.8.12. - PANARCHISM

TRADE: The best service our politicians can do for trade and for us is to leave it to the traders. Governments are not fitted to trade.” - "GOOD GOVERNMENT", 4/76. – They best service each State, politician and party could provide would be, if they confined themselves, with all their constitutions, laws, jurisdictions, institutions, policies and measures to their own consenting victims, their own volunteers only. Then all statists utopias would be exposed to free competition from all non-statist ones and full individual sovereignty and consumer sovereignty, freedom of contract, freedom of association and free enterprise would be realized in that sphere as well. – JZ, 15.10.08. – PANARCHISM, FREE CHOICE OF GOVERNMENTS, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS & COMMUNITIES, ALL UNDER PERSONAL LAWS ONLY, LAISSEZ FARE

TRADE: The greatest ameliorator of the world is selfish, huckstering trade.” - Emerson - Another version:  The greatest meliorator of the world is selfish, huckstering trade.” - Emerson, Society and Solitude: Works and Days. – Let us also bargain, individually and as members of minority groups, for the political, economic and social systems that we do want to belong to. – JZ, 15.10.08 - PANARCHISM, PROGRESS

TRADE: The symbol of all relationships among rational men, the moral symbol of respect for human beings, is the trader ... who earns what he gets and does not give or take the undeserved.” - Ayn Rand, quoted by O'Neill: Ayn Rand, p.50. – Why should our trading choices for “public services” become confined to those offered by limited but still territorial governments? – JZ, 15.10.08. – Bakers, butchers and tailors do also provide “public services”. – The State is not a real entity. The real entities involved in this concept are e.g. politicians, legislators, bureaucrats, judges, policemen and voluntary as well as involuntary subjects. -  JZ, 18.8.12.

TRADE: The task of western countries is therefore clear. It is to use the instrument of trade not only to meet the Communist challenge on neutral territories in Africa and Asia but also to take their own economic challenge into the most remote cities of the Soviet Union itself.” - Desmond Donnelly, Trade with Communist Countries, 1960, quoted in R. Harris & A. Seldon, Not From Benevolence, p.135. – If the exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of governments in exile, all for volunteers only, had been fully recognized in the West, then much more than Western export goods and services would have peacefully competed in the Soviet Empire for the minds of its victims. Ideas know no borders. No censorship can keep them out completely. But the territorialist West was not yet ready, either, for this kind of competition, free enterprise and consumer sovereignty. Thus the prolonged “cold war” and the nuclear arms race and brinkmanship. – Freedom, contract and voluntary alternatives in every sphere, in all countries, for all populations and their diverse groups, as a radical alternative to territorial totalitarianism and democracies. - JZ, 15.10.08, 18.8.12. - PANARCHISM

TRADE: There are too many government barriers between people who want to trade something.” - Alan Reynolds, "REASON", 8/74. – Enterprise and trade in governmental services should be free, too. Then barriers to other trades will fall to the extent that the volunteers of exterritorially autonomous communities want them abolished for their private exchanges. – To that extent “public affairs” would become private, individual and voluntary affairs, too. - JZ, 15.10.08, 18,8.12. - PANARCHISM

TRADE: This claim (against non-involvement) rests upon the very serious error that world intercourse and world interchange of the elements of civilization require (*) political interference and intermeddling. This is not only false, but it is so false as to be highly mischievous and harmful. Outside of this lies the whole free realm of trade, commerce, science, literature, art and social relations, things which bring all parts of the world together in friendly and helpful interchange, while political intermeddling almost always provokes hatred, enmity and war.” - John W. Burgess, quoted, in Leonard E. Read's Free Man's Almanac, for December 18. – If all meddling and interference had been confined to volunteers, in their communities, these voluntary victims and their outside observers would have learnt much, just like natural scientists learn much from free experimentation. But territorial States suppressed such experiments in all spheres that they monopolized for themselves. – JZ, 15.10.08, 18.8.12. - (*) territorial - PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

TRADE: Trade has never been and can never be fully free without monetary and financial freedom, which includes the right to issue standardized value tokens, to use any kind of standard of value and to use any possibility for clearing. Too many Free Traders have overlooked this aspect and still do. They have also overlooked that within enterprises alternative free trade relationships have to be introduced to that of the employer-employee relationship - which, all too much, organizes antagonism instead of common interests. - JZ 16.7.84, 18.8.12. – They have also overlooked that territorialism constitutes the greatest obstacle to Free Trade in every sphere. – JZ, 15.10.08.

TRADE: Trade older than the State!” – Heading, in F. A. Hayek: The Fatal Conceit, p.43. – Personal laws and exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers is also older than the territorial State. – JZ, 1.8.08. At least some of the old traditions are worth restoring and further developing, naturally, always only among volunteers. – J.Z., 18.8.12. – STATE, PANARCHISM, PERSONAL LAW

TRADE: Trade or perish.” Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 5/73. – “ ... it should be self-evident that human survival depends on trading. We trade or perish.” Leonard E. Read, The Love of Liberty, p.3. - Trade also panarchistically, i.e., autonomously and exterritorially, for all “public services” or perish! The WMDs and their territorial “targets” and “enemy” “definitions” will see to that. – JZ, 15.10.08, 18.8.12. – PANARCHISM, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

TRADE: Trade with the enemy and thus make a friend out of him. – JZ, 72. – Offer his subjects quite rightful war and peace aims, which would mean their liberation, instead of the wrongful war and peace aims of their ruling regime. Offer truths and facts to the victims of despotic regimes in “trade” for its lies and propaganda. Make long-term free trade agreements with all the governments in exile set up to represent all of those, who escaped a regime and wish for genuine self-government or self-management and also all the still captive nations and other peoples, groups, communities and societies now under despotic rule. – Exterritorial autonomy should even be offered to the remaining volunteers of a ruling despotic regime. – All its nationalized assets should be offered, in personal shares, to all those, who already escaped it and those still to be liberated from it. - JZ, 1.8.08. - Compare PEACE PLANS 19 C.

TRADE: Trade, internal or international, is the harbinger of good will among men, and peace on earth.” - Frank Chodorov, Fugitive Essays, p.105. – Let us also trade freely and individually for all kinds of political, economic and social systems, societies, communities and organizations that we do want to belong to or wish to establish, together with like-minded people. – JZ, 15.10.08, 18.8.12. - PANARCHISM

TRADE: US Trade? It's none of our business … there is, or should be, no such thing; governments produce nothing, and hence have nothing to trade ...” SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 4/80. – Governments that are only exterritorially autonomous – for their own volunteers, should be free to trade with whatever “public services” or disservices they have to offer to their victims, just like e.g. brothels or sports clubs. Free enterprise, consumer sovereignty, Free Trade and voluntarism in this sphere as well! Any form of communism, capitalism etc. for consenting adults! – Should we not concede that they have so far managed to “sell” dictatorial to “Welfare State” services very successfully, for very high prices, coercively collected in form of taxes, much better than libertarians have so far sold to the masses their freedom, peace and justice alternatives? – Limited government advocates should limit themselves to this target: Experimental freedom for themselves – and for all others! – It seems that one can be “pregnant” with a general idea, without applying it consistently and letting it grow to its own inherent potential, finally developing into a “baby”, healthily born and then taken sufficiently care of, until it becomes independent. - JZ, 15.10.08. – PANARCHISM, DIS., FREE TRADE FOR GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES AS WELL AS DISSERVICES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

TRADE: War requires authority; trade requires liberty.” - John Beverly Robinson, Economics of Liberty, p.13. - Free societies tend to win wars all the easier, the more they introduce freedom principles and practices even into warfare. Free trade in all peaceful goods could and should continue during the war, too. The Netherlands, in their war for independence, traded with Spain while fighting its government. During the long Chinese/Japanese war, beginning in the thirties, there was extensive trade between them. - JZ 16.7.84. – Most importantly, we, not our territorial governments, should negotiate with the subjects of territorial enemy regimes and offer them quite rightful war and peace aims and conclude a separate peace treaty with them - on that basis. We should never leave that kind of international negotiations, bargaining and trading to governments. Especially not nuclear disarmament negotiations. Fully free trade requires also full exterritorial autonomy for all former territorial subjects. – Also a position of strength towards the own government: A rightfully armed, organized and trained citizenry that knows and appreciates its individual rights and liberties and thus can no longer be victimized and exploited. - JZ, 15.10.08. - WAR, TAXATION, AUTHORITY, WAR & PEACE AIMS, LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, DES., REFUGEES, ASYLUM, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, MILITIA, HUMAN RIGHTS, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES

TRADE: We don't have to fear Communism in the area of economic competition. We do almost everything so much better than they do that the sooner the fighting stops and the trading starts, the quicker we win.” - US Ambassador to the UN, Andrew Young, quoted in NEWS DIGEST INTERNATIONAL, 9/77. – If the panarchistic, the monetary and financial freedom competition and all the rest of Free Trade and Free Markets had been fully practised by the West, at least through communities of volunteers, then the communist empire would have disappeared much sooner. – The arms race competition we did engage in brought us merely closer to war and impoverished both sides. - JZ, 15.10.08, 18.8.12.

TRADITION & INNOVATION: The old systems can and should remain for their adherents, while the new ones could and should be constructed and tried out by their advocates. - JZ, 1.4.92. - Free experimentation is one of the main aspects of the game. - JZ, 13.1.93, 18.8.12.

TRADITION: Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please, they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living.” – Karl Marx, quoted in ANALOG, 1/84. – By now an ancient communist tradition, a Marxist, Leninist and Stalinist as well as Maoist tradition and a general statist tradition weighs us down, on top of the territorialist tradition, while the exterritorialist tradition is still largely forgotten or ignored. – JZ, 5.4.91, 1.8.08, 26.3.11. - MARXISM, STATE SOCIALISM, STATE CAPITALISM, TERRITORIALISM, DIS.

TRADITION: One of the greatest burdens in the world is tradition.” - John Milton. - Only if we are not allowed to opt out from under it! - JZ, 14.10.02. - We are no longer free enough to start our own and new traditions. - JZ, 26.3.11. – We would first have to get legalized licences or permits for them, from territorial politicians and bureaucrats inclined to refuse them, although they are supposed to be the mere servants of the public, the people, the numerous voluntary and very diverse groups of free people! – J.Z., 18.8.12.

TRADITION: Some mediocre people are only able to maintain or obey a tradition. Capable and free people start their own. – JZ, n.d., & 26.3.11.

TRADITION: The INDIVIDUALIST here roundly accuses government of acting according to tradition rather than on clear thought.” – Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, 8/75. – Does any territorial government ever do the latter? – If so, in what percentages of all cases? - Does it ever and can it ever start with a quite clean slate? - JZ, 16.7.08, 26.3.11. – Q., DIS.

TRADITION: To follow a tradition means to do things in the same grand style as your predecessors; it does not mean to do the same things.” – Robert Heinlein, Space Cadets, p.141. - Set a new tradition, rather than follow an old, wrongful and irrational as well as very harmful one, like the territorialist tradition. – JZ, 1.8.08, 26.3.11.

TRADITION: Traditions are neither holy nor untouchable – except among those, who love them and subscribed to them, individually. For all others they are largely a heap of unwanted garbage, rituals and taboos dumped upon them, much against their will, wasting much of their lives, to the extent that they can be and are enforced. They are something to be individually and rationally sifted, examined, tested, criticized and rejected or accepted by the standards of individuals, just like popular prejudices, errors and myths should be, as well as laws, governments and societies and institutions should be, all confined to volunteers, criminals with victims and aggressors excepted. Individuals and voluntary communities should be quite free to establish their own customs, traditions and personal laws. – JZ, 20.6.92, 1.8.08. - CUSTOMS, TABOOS, RITUALS, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & CHOICE & SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

TRADITION: We are tradition-bound and experimental just to the right degrees – if only we do not organize ourselves territorially so as to subject experimenters to the majority or minority rule of those, who are all too much tradition-bound or want to monopolize experimentation for themselves. – JZ, 27.5.76, 1.8.08. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, MAJORITIES, TERRITORIALISM, MINORITIES, LAWS, DEMOCRACY

TRADITIONAL INSTITUTIONS & HUMAN UNDERSTANDING: we may get a clearer view of the situation in which we actually find ourselves by conceding that, indeed, our traditional institutions are not understood, and do not have their purposes or their effects, beneficial or otherwise, specified in advance. And so much the better for them." - Hayek, The Fatal Conceit, 71. - Perhaps, if they were merely traditions that are voluntarily, emotionally and uncomprehendingly upheld.  But this does not apply to those "traditions", which are not voluntarily upheld by all but, rather, strongly or even violently opposed by dissenting minorities and, nevertheless, territorially and uniformly imposed upon them, ultimately with the death penalty. Very basic aspects of enslaving governmental structures, like their compulsory membership, exclusive territorial monopoly or collectivist sovereignty, their imposed uniformity, exclusive constitutional, legal, juridical, police, defence and penal powers and their other "public service" monopolies, all with their inevitably catastrophic consequences, should be understood, as well as the obvious and yet ignored and denied clear alternatives of individual sovereignty and secessionism, exterritorially autonomous associationism, the competition between such bodies of volunteers and with freely competing public service companies. If we denounce the desirability of knowing about and applying such basics, then we might as well renounce the desirability of any knowledge and science and reasoning and continue to abdicate our most important rights and liberties in favor of ignorant, prejudiced, vainglorious, dishonest and mainly self-interested politicians, who inevitably rise to the top in territorialist power systems, as Hayek himself recognized in The Road to Serfdom. - JZ, 28.7.92, 9.1.93, 10.9.04, 18.8.12.

TRANSACTIONS & FREEDOM: If human creativity is the goal, the reliance should be on freedom. And it matters not whether the anticipated area of growth or the development be education, steel making, dress designing, or whatever. Creativity at the human level behaves according to the law of attraction. Attracted to what? To someone or to something better. Available to each of us are literally tens of thousands of “betters”. From among the millions of seemingly common men, stars appear – some tiny, some a little larger, and the relatively big ones: Socrates, Edison, Beethoven, Christian Dior, Pasteur, Madam Curie, Booker T. Washington, Menger, Adam Smith, Bastiat, Marshall Field, Mises, and perhaps your good self should be included. These luminaries – when freedom in transactions prevails, set the pace, lead us if we so elect, into new and higher realms; they cut all the patterns for progress.” – Leonard E. Read, Deeper Than You Think, p.13. – Alas, under territorialism not all are free to follow only those examples and those ideas and principles, methods and institutions, including personal law, which they believe to be best, for all of their own affairs. - Read offered only the limited but still territorial government alternative, which he wrongfully assumed would be right for the whole population of a country, regardless of its great diversity. - JZ, 26.3.11, 18.8.12. - PANARCHISM, EXAMPLES, FREEDOM OF ACTION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, IDEAS, PLATFORMS, THOUGHTS, LEADERSHIP, THE REMNANT, INDIVIDUALS, LUMINARIES, FREEDOM, PROGRESS, ATTRACTION, VOLUNTARISM, CHOICE, TERRITORIALISM, LIMITED GOVERNMENT

TRANSACTIONS: Bastiat’s solution was simply stated in the phrase, ‘freedom of transactions’ ” – G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat – A Man Alone, p.231. – Did he clearly enough favor all kinds of non-territorial societies, communities, constitutions and legislation, all forms of personal law, all for volunteers only? - JZ, 26.3.11m 18.8.12. - FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT IN ALL SPHERES, VOLUNTARISM, CHOICE, PERSONAL LAW

TRANSFORMATION RATHER THAN REFORM: The political system needs to be TRANSFORMED, not REFORMED. We need something else, not just something more. Economist Robert Theobald said, 'We are engaged, if the transformational thinker is correct, in a process which has no parallel in human history - AN ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE WHOLE OF A CULTURE THROUGH A CONSCIOUS PROCESS.' In a report commissioned by the Office of Technology Assessment, an advisory arm of Congress, Theobald said, 'It is impossible to change one element in a culture without altering all of them.' " - M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, p.207. - The change-over from territorialism to exterritorialism will change almost all our public affairs and, indirectly, also our private lives, e.g. through the elimination of wars, civil wars, violent revolutions, dictatorships, unemployment and inflation. - JZ, 8.4.89. - And yet it will do so gradually - and yet radically and uncompromisingly - for individuals and their voluntary groups only. Not immediately but only ultimately will this affect and change society and its numerous sub-societies for all kinds of people, with a strong tendency towards genuine progress. Only in the mathematical sense does the first successful individual secessionist already reduce the remaining State, to a society with voluntary members only and one limited to exterritorial autonomy. – Many to most of its remaining members might then not even become aware of this for a long time. - JZ, 10.9.04. But, gradually, his example will be followed by more and more other individuals and their groups. – JZ, 18.8.12.

TRANSFORMATION: The political system needs to be transformed, not reformed.” – M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, p.207. – “… to borrow Virginia Satir’s phrase – failing to see that all growth depends on the capacity to transform. Among the flux of the natural world, we cling to the familiar and resist transformation.” – Ibid, p.214. – Allow individuals and minorities to opt out and do their own things among themselves! - WE? Territorialism does not give us an individual choice in this matter. - There are always curious people and experimenters, dissenters, non-conformists and radicals. But now their creative activities are forcefully restrained from providing other services, even better ones or the best possible ones. (In the spheres preempted by territorial States.) – JZ, 8.4.89, 10.9.04, 1.8.08. - POLITICS, STATES, SOCIETY, STATISM, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, TOLERANCE VS. INTOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM VS. COMPULSION, PERSONAL LAWS VS. TERRITORIAL LAWS, PANARCHISM VS. DEMOCRACY & DICTATORSHIPS, TYRANNIES & TERRORISM

TRANSITION DIFFICULTIES: The best solution to avoid transition difficulties is not to attempt a transition solution. – JZ, 17.4.77. – Instead, cut off an old abuse instantly. – JZ, 17.11.78. – Rather, let each individual make his own choices of changes for himself, advancing, if at all, then only at his own speed. It is absurd, wrong and quite inefficient to try to change everything for everybody in a whole country via centralized power and coercion. The mere attempt will, usually, tend to increase or enlarge problems rather than reducing them. – JZ, 16.7.08. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, ONE-MAN-REVOLUTIONS, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, MARKET RELATIONSHIPS IN ALMOST EVERY SPHERE

TRANSITION TO PANARCHISM, PEACEFUL, BY INDIVIDUAL CHOICE: The transition from our present state to the future state, which would embody for each the government or non-governmental society of his or her dream, is to be accompanied largely peacefully, non-violently, in the main through individual and group secessionism. This does not threaten to abolish or destroy existing regimes, institutions, ideals and practices but would merely confine them to their own voluntary members. Territorial regimes were never justified in ruling over or persecuting dissenters. Thus panarchists could come to win friends and allies (or at least neutrality) - everywhere, among all kinds of people, believers and ideologues.  - JZ, 15.10.04. – GPdB rightly recommended replacing the term “dream” with choice. Genuine free choices are much more under our individual control than are mere dreams. – JZ, 18.8.12.

TRAVEN, B., Der Karren. (The Wagon - or The Cart), Verlag Volk und Welt, Berlin, 1954, p.8, reports on the Mexicon town Tenejapa with half Mexican and half Indian population. The Mexicans have their own Mayor and the Indians their own Chief (Jefe or Cosique). - MEXICO, A CASE OF MUTUAL TOLERANCE & SELF-GOVERNANCE, PARALLEL INSTITUTIONS & GOVERNMENTS

TREASON & ESPIONAGE: Between territorial monopolies laws and penalties do make a very limited sense, if one can consider them to be ideals. But when individuals and groups are quite free to practise their ideals among themselves and to secede from those institutions they no longer believe in, and under the full publicity for such a state of affairs, then the old concepts of treason and espionage become largely meaningless, unless an attempt is made to reintroduce territorial intolerance again, by one or the other group of fanatics or zealots, resorting e.g. to terrorist means on the principle of "collective responsibility". To act for such tyrannical groups would be treason and espionage against mankind, in favor of one or the other new territorial tyranny. - JZ, 2.9.04.

TREASON, ALLEGIANCE: Especially in wartime people should be free to change their nationality, i.e. pick their own allies and enemies and to establish new, neutral and peaceful or rightful and merely defensive alternative nations, on the basis of exterritorial autonomy. Desertion from, treason against and resistance against the old regimes may be even obligatory from the moral point of view. - To meekly submit to the choice of enemies and allies, of war aims or no sensible aims at all, by territorial leaders, dictators, presidents, prime ministers or parliaments, does mean an abdication of one's basic rights, liberties and responsibilities. If you have to have enemies, pick your own and deal with them yourself, at your own risk. (Except on the "principle" of collective responsibility, which has induced some to attack even infants in schools or on school buses.) The decision-making monopoly of governments on war and peace, armament and disarmament, international treaties and policies ought to be questioned in our times more than ever before. To call opponents of this monopoly "traitors" is merely the equivalent of monopolistic and coercive unionists who are engaged in anti-industrial warfare, calling voluntary workers de-humanizing names like "scabs" and waging a kind of civil war against them. High emotions make a bad mixture with ignorance, dull, flawed and quite unethical notions. - JZ, 27.6.89, 3.7.89, 10.9.04, 18.8.12.

TREASON: A traitor to his country’s government is often loyal to his county, its population, to mankind and to himself as a man, whenever the real traitor is his territorial government. – JZ, 3.7.82, 29.7.08, 4.2.12.

TREASON: Clearly this individual consent is indispensable to the idea of treason; for if a man has never consented or agreed to support a government; he breaks no faith in refusing to support it. And if he makes war upon it, he does so as an open enemy, and not as a traitor – that is, as a betrayer, or treacherous friend.” - Lysander Spooner, “No Treason”, I/11, Works I. - VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, CONSENT, TAXATION, OBEDIENCE

TREASON: Close behind charges of betrayal lurks the accusation of “treason”. The threat of being charged with treason is a powerful deterrent to those who want to promote a peace settlement with the enemy. The importance of the threat, though, lies not in legal sanctions but in moral condemnation. Fear of this taint of “traitor’ deters senior officers and government officials from taking steps to end a war, even if they know full well that further fighting will do more harm than good. … The horror of “this most odious crime” helps to keep a nation, once committed to a war, from breaking up in internal disagreements.” – F. C. Ikle, Every War Must End, 1971, p.60/61. – In that case a genuine and unified nation does, obviously, not really exist and is not worth fighting for. It is never the whole nations that committed itself to war. That is just the pretence of its territorial rulers, who really decided and forced it into a war. – JZ, 21.7.08. - PEACE TREATIES, NEGOTIATIONS, SEPARATE PEACE, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE, PATRIOTS AGAINST “TRAITORS”

TREASON: Especially in wartimes individual people should be free to change their nationality, i.e., pick their own allies or enemies and to declare themselves neutral. – JZ, 27.6.89, 2.8.08, 26.3.11. - NEUTRALITY, ALLIANCES, ALLEGIANCE, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE OF GOVERNMENTS OR SOCIETIES, PANARCHISM, WAR

TREASON: George the Third called our ancestors traitors for what they did at that time. But they were not traitors in fact, whatever he and his laws may have called them. They were not traitors in fact, because they betrayed nobody, and broke faith with nobody. (*) They were his equals, owning him no allegiance, obedience, nor any other duty, except such as they owed to mankind at large. Their political relations with him had been purely voluntary. They had never pledged their faith to him that they would continue these relations any longer than it should please them to do so; and therefore they broke no faith in parting with him. They simply exercised their natural right of saying to him, and to the English people, that they were under no obligation to continue their political connection with them, and that, for reasons of their own, they chose to dissolve it.” – Lysander Spooner, “No Treason”, I/13, Works I. – And if they were not free to do so legally then they had the right to do so illegally. – JZ, n.d. - (*) Not even the slaves, the Red Indians, the taxpayers and the inflation victims and other victims of their constitution and legislation? – JZ, 29.7.08. - By now we need many more cases of exterritorialist and voluntary "treason" against the U.S.A. and every other territorial regime. - JZ, 26.3.11. - INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY & SECESSIONISM, CONSENT, VOLUNTARISM, ALLEGIANCE, RIGHTS, EXTERRITORIALISM & VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM.

TREASON: I think lightly of what is called treason against a government. That may be your duty today, or mine. But treason against the people, against mankind, against God, is a great sin not lightly to be spoken of.” – Theodore Parker, Speech, denouncing Mexican War, 1846. – Quoted in Seldes. How can one commit treason against a non-existing being? Or against someone one has never met, never made a contract with? - How often have governments been charged with treason against the people? – Considering only the population of whole territories to constitute a “people” is also a kind of treason against many of the very diverse individuals and minorities involved. - JZ, 29.7.08.

TREASON: Instead of condemning treason, we should elevate it into the highest political right and duty, namely the right of individuals to freely choose their own political affiliations and the highest duty, namely to betray all military, dictatorial and conspiratorial efforts to suppress this kind of individual choice, secessionism, voluntarism, associationism, freedom of contract, freedom to experiment, freedom of action – under full individual sovereignty, including exterritorial autonomy for communities and societies of volunteers. To each the government - or non-governmental society - of his or her dreams or choice, this completion of consistent individualism. Territorial governments are not our owners, not even our guardians, protectors, defenders or representatives. They have, as a rule, done much more to us than for us. But the better ones among them deserve a withdrawal notice and will retain many voluntary followers and thus deserve to survive, as long as they can, on the basis of exterritorial autonomy for them and their followers. Even the worst ones will retain some adherents and can serve as deterrent examples. - JZ, 26. 6. 89, 2.8.08, 3.7.89, 10.9.04. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, STATES

TREASON: No one is a traitor who remains loyal to his own cause and who does not oppose or suppress the voluntary support of the rightful or tolerantly practised causes of others (regarding their own affairs). But all are traitors to their own causes and to the causes of all others, who try to impose their own preferred system upon all others. – JZ, 5.4.95. – We should not leave, either, the definition of treason and high treason or of espionage to the territorialists. They will almost inevitably get them wrong, too. – JZ, 18.7.08.

TREASON: Not to betray some governments in their wrongful activities amounts to treason against mankind. – JZ, 15.11.92.

TREASON: One can be a traitor only to a government one has individually chosen for oneself. Otherwise one is a spy for the government one would be loyal to – if it could be freely chosen by oneself and for oneself. Loyalty cannot be legally or juridically imposed, contrary to one's wishes and contractual agreements, so that, later, one can be charged with “treason” or “disloyalty”. An imposed "service" like a passport, cannot be rightfully interpreted as individual acceptance of an allegiance obligation. It is just one more disservice one has no reason to be grateful for to any territorial government. And all governments impose this disservice now. Since loyalty cannot be rightly imposed, in cases of such fictitious impositions, the existence of "treasonable" actions cannot then be rightfully claimed. Individuals ought to have the freedom and choice to publicly change their loyalty or allegiance by secessions and free new contracts. Freedom of contract in this sphere should not be monopolized by rulers or territorial governments. – Communities should also be at liberty to refuse to accept them but not to outlaw competing institutions for those they refuse. Loyalty to humanity and human rights and individual liberties is another matter. - JZ, 27.6.89, 3.7.89, 2.8.08, 18.8.12. – PANARCHISM, ALLEGIANCE, TREATIES, ALLIANCES, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, LOYALTY, FREEDOM OF CONTRACT VS. TERRITORIALISM

TREASON: One cannot be a traitor to anything, … except to oneself. – Loyalty, … is like rubber: one can stretch it so far, and then – it snaps.” – Ayn Rand, Red Pawn, p.161 in L. Peikoff, The Early Ayn Rand. – Compare, Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “To thy own self be true …” (My memory is flawed. Look it up yourself!) And I do not believe that he or she meant being true to one’s worst but rather to one’s best characteristics. – JZ, 1.8.08.

TREASON: Since the traitor’s offence is that he conspires against the liberty of his fellow countrymen to choose their way of life …” - Rebecca West, The New Meaning of Treason, p.404. - By that standard all territorialists and all statists are, presently, traitors! – JZ, 21.7.08. – STATISM, WELFARE STATE, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTALISM

TREASON: Sometimes “betraying” one’s “fatherland” (or, rather, those posing as its representatives) is the only way to save it. – JZ, 15.7.85.

TREASON: Spooner was impatient with those, who cry “treason” upon the assertion that actual resistance to the laws of the government, are sometimes necessary for the preservation of liberty. Correctly defined, he held, the word treason implies deceitfulness, treachery, and a conscious breach of faith upon the part of the actor involved. When we revolt against government, we break no contract with anyone. A free government by definition is one that is maintained not by force and coercion but by voluntary support freely given.” – Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.134. - PANARCHISM, FREE GOVERNMENT, VOLUNTARISM

TREASON: The Constitution certainly supposes that the crime of treason can be committed only by man, as an individual. It would be very curious to see a man indicted, convicted, or hanged, otherwise than as an individual; or accused of having committed his treason otherwise than as an individual. And yet it is clearly impossible to say that any man can be personally guilty of treason, can be a traitor in fact, unless he, as an individual, has in some way voluntarily pledged his faith and fidelity to the government. (*) Certainly no man, or body of men, could pledge it for him, without his consent; and no man, or body of men, have any right to presume it against him, when he has not pledged it himself.” - Lysander Spooner, “No Treason”, II/12, Works I, under IV. - - (*) Even if he had done so, this may have been done under coercion or terror, with no other choice open to them. Under the Nazi regime the employees of whole offices were all signed up as Nazi-party members by their bosses and no one dared to protest such actions. They simply paid their party dues as an additional tax imposed upon them, directly to this party. – JZ, 29.7.08, 18.8.12. – VOLUNTARISM, CONTRACTARIANISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, ALLEGIANCE, LOYALTY

TREASON: The doctrinaire desire to preserve the ideological system leads us to the attacking of dissenters as traitors.” – Jim Downard, THE CONNECTION 102, p.33. - Especially when territorial rule is the aim and the compulsory practice of an ideology. Otherwise, there are so many dissenting groups that one has hardly the time and energy to merely call all of them treacherous or false or wrong. And there would be no special and urgent interest to do so. One would be free to do one’s own things to or for oneself. But one would do this also under the influence of numerous surrounding other systems freely practised by others, different and objectively either better or worse than the own. – JZ, 27.7.92, 25.7.08. – DIS., PANARCHISM, IDEOLOGIES, INTOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIALISM

TREASON: The higher the territorial power position, the higher the treason. – JZ, 17.6.97, 26.3.11. – All territorial rulers are traitors towards the individual rights and liberties of their involuntary subjects. – JZ, 18.8.12. - RULERS, GOVERNMENT, LEADERSHIP, POLITICIANS, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, CHANCELLORS, POWER, TERRITORIALISM

TREASON: The worst betrayal of the people does always take place at the top. – JZ, 28.9.91. – GOVERNMENTS, RULERS, TERRITORIALISM

TREASON: There is only one treason – that against reason. – JZ, 27.6.89. – And that against genuine individual rights and liberties. Mere territorial governments do often have to be “betrayed” in order to protect these rights and liberties. – JZ, 28.6.89, 2.8.08.


TREASON: To determine, then, what is treason in fact, we are not to look to the codes of Kings, and Czars, and Kaisers, who maintain their power by force and fraud; who contemptuously call mankind their “subjects”; who claim to have a special license from Heaven to rule on earth; who teach that it is a religious duty of mankind to obey them; who bribe a servile and corrupt priesthood to impress their ideas upon the ignorant and superstitious; who spurn the idea that their authority is derived from, or dependent at all upon, the consent of their people; and who attempt to defame, by the false epithet of traitors, all who assert their own rights, and the rights of their fellow men, against such usurpations. - Instead of regarding this false and calumnious meaning of the word treason, we are to look at its true and legitimate meaning in our mother tongue; at its use in common life; and at what would necessarily be its true meaning in any other contracts, or articles of association, which men might voluntarily enter into with each other. The true and legitimate meaning of the word treason, then, necessarily implies treachery, deceit, breach of faith. Without these there can be no treason. A traitor is a betrayer –one who practises injury, while professing friendship. … “ - Lysander Spooner, “No Treason”, II, 7/8, Works I.

TREASON: Treason doth never prosper, what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it Treason.” - Sir John Harington, 1561-1612, Epigrams, Of Treason, 1615. The Letters and Epigrams of Sir John Harington…, ed. Norman E. McClure, book 4, epigram 5, p. 255 (1977). The complete edition of his epigrams was published in 1618. - The pursuit of the own ideal, the attempt to realize it, at the own expense and risk and the corresponding discarding of the old ideals and practices, should never be prosecuted as treason but rather should be praised as innovation or worthwhile free experimentation among volunteers or pioneers. If one was never a volunteer or ceases to be one, then one's supposedly “disloyal” or treasonable different actions are never really "treasonable". One does not have to be loyal to territories, whole populations or the ideals or prejudices of other people. - JZ, 14.10.02. – Another version: “Treason doth never prosper; what's the reason? // Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.” - Harrington? - Hyman Quotes, p.158. – In A. Andrews quotes the name is spelt the modern way: Harrington. - VOLUNTARISM

TREASON: Tyranny is far the worst of treason.” – Byron, The Two Foscari, Act ii, sc. I. - If it is territorial tyranny. There is also the voluntary submission of fanatics to some whom they imagine to be great leaders, gurus, prophets etc. Such people then only get what they deserve and asked for, their kind of "paradise", by their own standards. - JZ, 26.3.11. - DIS.

TREASON: We are a rebellious nation. Our whole history is treason; our blood was attained before we were born; our creeds are infidelity to the mother church; our Constitution, treason to our fatherland. What of that? Though all the governors of the world bid us commit treason against man, and set the example, let us never submit.” – Theodore Parker, quoted by H. S. Commager, HARPER’S, Sept. 1947. (George Seldes, The Great Quotations.)

TREASON: What makes a man a traitor?” … “I do not know what makes a man a traitor. No man considers himself a traitor; this makes it hard to find out.” – Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left Hand of Darkness, p.33. – Another puzzle that can only be solved by accepting individual sovereignty. – JZ, 16.1.80.

TREASON: While on the look-out for an opportunity to repudiate the obligations thrust upon me, it makes no difference whether succor comes from abroad or from within my own country, so long as I gain in freedom. - When, in 1887, a war was talked of as imminent between Russia and Germany, the hope was expressed by a considerable number of Russians that, in the event of war breaking out, their own side would be defeated. (*) Said Georg Brandes, alluding to this patriotic feeling, “No other possibility of liberation from the predominant misery presents itself than that which is offered in the weakness which an unsuccessful war would entail on the ruling system.” – John Badcock, Slaves to Duty, quoted in LIBERTARIAN ANALYSIS, 9/71. - (*) Rather the side of the territorial government imposed upon them. – During WW II many of the Germans, who were enemies of the Nazis, did also hope that the Nazi regime would be defeated. – But the Western Allies did not recognize any German government in exile and offered it a just peace. - JZ, 28.7.08. - Nor did they offer a just peace to a whole spectrum of diverse German governments and societies in exile, all only for their present and future volunteers. By how much could WW II have been shortened, if they had done this? - Only Stalin offered his kind of government in exile, naturally, only another communist and totalitarian one, attractive only to a few misguided Germans. - JZ, 26.3.11, 18.8.12. - LOYALTY, TERRITORIALISM, DUTY, LOYALTY TO ONESELF & ONE’S OWN IDEALS, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, FREE CHOICE, FULL FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, PANARCHISM, SELFISHNESS, MORALITY, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, LIBERATION, WAR & PEACE AIMS

TREASON: Who are the Traitors – // The Doves or the Hawks?” – F. C. Ikle, Every War Must End, 1971, p. 60.

TREASON: Write on my gravestone, ‘Infidel. Traitor’ – infidel to every church that compromises with the strong; traitor to every government that oppresses the people.” – Wendell Phillips, quoted in George Seldes, The Great Quotations.

TREASURER: I don’t treasure any governmental and territorial treasurer, because all of them covet, steal and rob me of my all too limited income and treasures, under all kinds of false pretences. – JZ, 18.11.93, 19.7.08. - MINISTERS OF FINANCE, TREASURY, TAX DEPARTMENT, TRIBUTE LEVIERS

TREATIES, INTERNATIONAL: A GENERAL COLLECTION OF TREATIES, London, 1772. - Should include at least some "capitulations". – JZ

TREATIES, INTERNATIONAL: All international treaties to become automatically invalid for all but those, who signed them and those who approved of them in a referendum. – JZ, 28.4.95.

TREATIES, INTERNATIONAL: They represent only territorial regimes, not the various people and minorities and individuals these regimes rule over. They often recognize and tolerate quite wrongful regimes and actions. They are not thoroughly based on consent only but amount, often, to wrongful impositions, e.g. like "Free Trade" treaties, that largely regulate and thereby control and limit genuine Free Trade. Individuals and minorities must become free to opt out of international treaties and "agreed-upon" international institutions like the UN - and to establish their own alternatives to them. - JZ, n.d.

TREATIES: Make you own treaties, alliances or enemies – rather than letting any territorial government make them for you, or against you and your ideals. – JZ, 25.1.97, 18.8.12. 

TREATIES: Negotiations and treaties with territorial governments are inevitably largely fruitless or untrustworthy in most cases. Only those with the various peoples themselves, largely sorted out into groups, communities and societies of volunteers, have a good chance to be successful and lasting. – JZ, 14.6.92, 1.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, PEOPLES, TRUST, DIPLOMACY, SUMMIT CONFERENCES, LEADERSHIP, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, FOREIGN POLICY, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

TREATIES: People should not be bound by international treaties between governments, especially when most people are not even aware of the existence of these treaties. – JZ, 4.10.96. – DIS., INTERNATIONAL LAW, GOVERNMENTS

TREATIES: The saying that “treaties are made to be broken”, evidently originated in the easily perceived fact that war treaties are never free contracts. A promise, wrung from a people at the sword’s point, counts for nothing. Let the tables be turned, and the vanquished gain strength enough, and the promise is repudiated as a matter of course.” – Badcock, Slaves to Duty. - Anyhow, what moral value do treaties have that are concluded between territorial gangsters? – JZ, 26.7.08.

TREATIES: Treaties are like roses and young girls. They last while they last.” – Charles de Gaulle, TIME, July 12, 1963. - Unless they are negotiated by the people themselves, ideally volunteers in exterritorially autonomous communities and in full accordance with their individual rights and liberties as well as interests. – J.Z, 21.11.85. – Treaties between territorial government are almost never of this kind. – JZ, 25.11.08.

TREATIES: Treaties, even with dictators? – JZ, n.d. – Q.

TREATY WITH ABORIGINALS? Nay! That would perpetuate the fallacy that one group could represent all Aborigines on the one side and all the rest of the Australians on the other. Thousands of treaties, instead! With everyone who wants independence from the present exclusive, coercive, territorial and sovereign establishment. Not only with all Aboriginal groups that do want them but with all dissenters of all colors, faiths and ideologies, except the territorial ones! - JZ, 20.9.88, 10.10. 89, 10.4.04, 18.8.12.

TREATY WITH ABORIGINES? Rather than having a treaty of the Australian Government with, supposedly, all Australian Aborigines, let each Aboriginal make his own treaty, choice of government, constitution, laws, juridical, political, economic and social system, starting with an individual secession, as long as he or she does not claim any territorial monopoly. Nobody is entitled to that. Certainly, our territorial system should not be imposed upon any of them, either. – JZ, 19.7.08. – Nor should we be subjected to their laws and customs. Not even in their territorial “reserves”. A tiny fraction of the Australian population does through them and by now “own”, legally, about 14% of the land surface of Australia. And most of these people are only part-Aboriginals. – All territorial monopolies are wrong, regardless of how constitutional and legal they are. - JZ, 18.8.12. - PANARCHISM


TRIBAL JURISDICTION IN THE CONGO: Dear de Bellis, regarding your Africa trip, I just remembered a hint by an anthropology student, Melanie Foxcroft, about 30 years ago, that at least in one part of Africa, among supposedly primitive tribes in the Congo, there was a tradition of choice among up to 5 different "juridical systems", for those who felt that their rights had been infringed. However primitive their justice system was otherwise, it was based upon such a fundamental choice rather than having a uniform system imposed upon them - as it is now: the "justice" of one or the other territorial war lord. - JZ, in email to Gian Piero de Bellis, 16.2.01. - COMPETITION & CHOICE IN JURISDICTION.

TRITTON, A. S., The Caliphs and Their Non-Muslim Subjects: A Critical Study of the Covenant of 'Umar, 1930, reprint, London, Frank Cass, 1970.

TROUBLE: People could survive their natural trouble all right, if it were not for the troubles they make for themselves.” – Ogden Nash, quoted in ANALOG, 3/97. – Well, ultimately, we all die from old age, if not before that through natural or man-made disasters. – JZ, 16.7.08. – PROBLEMS, SURVIVAL, MAN, DIFFICULTIES, NATURE, INTERVENTIONISM, STATISM, WARS, LAWS, REGULATIONS, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, DIS.

TRUE BELIEVERS, UTOPISM & PANARCHISM: Let the "true believers" and "slaves of systems" be enslaved by them, as long as they can stand it. To each his own utopia, at his expense and risk. - JZ 5.9.87, 1.4.89.

TRUE BELIEVERS: People who despise themselves, lack self-respect or self-appreciation and knowledge of genuine individual rights and liberties, suffer under and inferiority complex and then and thus tend to subscribe to supposedly great and rightful causes, although they do often represent the contrary, like nationalism and imperialism, and so help to destroy others in any “great cause”, more often imagined than real. – Especially when they are still so unenlightened that they try to realize it coercively, territorially, collectively, for whole populations, even with totalitarian methods and “weapons” like the ABC mass murder devices. – JZ, 7/72, 27.7.08, 18.8.12.

TRUST: A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them.” – P. J. O’Rourke – How much territorial government is really necessary and do we have good enough reasons to fully trust even the smallest of them? For instance, the local governments, even more so than the State and Federal Governments, interfere even with minor affairs of our lives. – JZ, 4.4.09. - TRUST IN GOVERNMENTS: THE WORST FOOLISHNESS, STATISM, UNFOUNDED CONFIDENCE, GULLIBILITY

TRUST: As soon as people have power they go crooked and sometimes dotty, too, because the possession of power lifts them into a region where normal honesty never pays. (*) For instance, the man who is selling newspapers outside the Houses of Parliament can safely leave his papers to go for a drink, and his cap beside them; anyone who takes a paper is sure to drop a copper into the cap. But the men who are inside the Houses of Parliament – they can’t trust one another like that; still less can the government they compose trust other governments. No caps upon the pavement there, but suspicion, treachery, and armaments. (**) The more highly public life is (***) organized the lower does its morality sink; the nations of today behave to each other worse than they ever did in the past, they cheat, rob, bully, and bluff, make war without notice, and kill as many women and children as possible; whereas primitive tribes were at all events restrained by taboos. It’s a humiliating outlook – through the greater the darkness, the brighter shine the little lights, reassuring one another, …” - E. M. Forster, in the Anthology: “I Believe – 19 Personal Philosophies”, p.48. - - (*) The honesty of quite rightful war and peace aims, freely and trustworthily declared and demonstrated by the people themselves, especially by their own panarchies of volunteers and their own unilateral nuclear disarmament steps, has never as yet been sufficiently combined, declared and utilized against any despotic territorial regime, not even in wars “to save democracy”. – (**) Even going to the wrongful absurdity of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) policies and preparations. – (***) territorially, i.e. coercively, collectivistic and monopolistic. - JZ, 28.7.08. - - PARLIAMENTS, POLITICIANS, POWER, TERRITORIALISM, , PEOPLE, TOTAL WAR, GOVERNMENTALISM, STATISM, AIR RAIDS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

TRUST: Government is a trust, and the officers of the government are trustees; and both the trust and the trustees are created for the benefit of the people.” - Henry Clay - After thousands of years of experience with governments and politicians and bureaucrats - have we got any reason left to trust any of them any longer? Those who still do, should be given that option. That would be the worst possible punishment for them - and a richly deserved one. However, all others should be set free to run their own lives or associations or communities in whatever ways pleases them. - JZ, 11.10.02. - GOVERNMENT, STATISM, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, DEMOCRACY, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, DIS.

TRUST: governments can’t be trusted, as they vary their actions with whatever pressure is brought to bear; and … exactly what is done and how it is done is a numbers game …” - John Singleton with Bob Howard, Rip Van Australia, p.46. – LOBBIES, MAJORITIES, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, DEMOCRACIES, POLITICS AS USUAL, POLITICIANS, RULERS, STATES

TRUST: I don’t even trust myself!” – Greg Bear, Moving Mars, p.274. – So how could I trust any territorial Government? – JZ, 11.9.08.

TRUST: I don’t trust a government I can’t shoot back at.” – quoted by Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do ‘til the Revolution, Breakout Productions, Port Townsend, Washington, 1999, rev. ed., ISBN 1-89.3626-13-X, p.16. – To avoid shoot-outs as much as possible, we should first of all be free to secede, individually and in groups, from all governments and States and also free to set up our own communities of volunteers. Thus: First of all, I don’t trust any government from which I can’t secede. Secondly: I become even more suspicious when it disarms me. – JZ, 26.9.07, 26.3.11. - GUNS & GOVERNMENT, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM

TRUST: Nothing a man lives with daily is ferocious to him. It is the stranger who seems ferocious. They will think we lie to gain their favor so that we may have their skins. All logic reaches one conclusion: Without trust, no argument is effective. Trust must be the key word of our strategy. – Donald Kingsbury, Courtship Rite, ANALOG 29.3.82, p.157. – Observe the distrust common among wild birds. Only one of the magpies, that I occasionally feed with some cheap bread, in winter, ever trusted me enough to quickly take a bit bread from my hand. All the others keep a safe distance all the time. – I suppose that the Aboriginals caught and ate them, too. – According to one report, these birds do have a limited language, not yet sufficiently translated. – Trust the captive nations rather than their rulers. - JZ, 28.7.08. – Should we trust any government that is “armed” with nuclear mass murder devices and become quite accustomed to it? – JZ, 25.10.08. - Is there any good reason to fully trust any territorial government? - JZ, 26.3.11. – Q.

TRUST: Some things, my dear Silverthorne, are too important to entrust to any individual.” – W. Alling, Memo to the Leader, GALAXY, vol. 39, no.1, p.5. – NUCLEAR STRENGTH, POWER, TERRITORIALISM

TRUST: The great crime of the past has been that mankind has never been willing to trust itself, or men each other. (*) We have tied ourselves up with laws and traditions, and devised a thousand ways to prevent men from being thrown on their own responsibility and cultivating their own powers. Our society has been constituted on the principle that men must be saved from themselves. We have surrounded ourselves with so many moral hedges, have imposed upon ourselves to many checks and balances, that life has been smothered.” – Randolph Bourne, quoted in Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.559. - (*) They have good reasons not to trust each other while they are territorially organized! – JZ, 28.7.08. – LAWS, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, MAN, PROTECTION, CONTROLS, REGULATIONS, TERRITORIALISM

TRUST: Trust in territorial government is almost as absurd and misleading an attitude as is trust in a God. Trust only in yourself and in voluntary relationships with others - offers better alternatives. – JZ, 18.11.82, 28.7.08, 18.8.12.

TRUST: Trust men and they will be true to you.” – Emerson. – But only within the limits of their knowledge and abilities. – Never trust e.g. Rulers, party leaders, political representatives, politicians, bureaucrats etc. beyond their self-interest. – But when all human groups are reduced to voluntary ones and all of them are free to tolerantly do their own things, under personal law or full exterritorial autonomy, then you can trust that, between them, at least some of them will successful, some even very successful and upon these the enlightenment and progress of all of mankind depends. - JZ, 28.7.08. – All of them will then also tend to become much less fanatic, aggressive or intolerant, at least towards outsiders, who are doing their own things and leave them alone to do theirs.  – JZ, 18.8.12. - LEADERSHIP, PROGRESS, OBEDIENCE, FOLLOWERSHIP, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

TRUST: While politicians and the media are asking, in the wake of Watergate, “Can trust in Government be restored?” others are asking: “Why should trust in government be restored?” It never deserved our trust in the first place.” – R. K., Charing Falls, Ohio, quoted in PENTHOUSE, 3/74. – At least do not trust in territorial governments or other organizations with compulsory membership and rules against and punishments for individual and group secessions from them. – JZ, 28.7.08, 26.3.11. – Was there EVER a TERRITORIAL government that deserved to be quite trusted by all its subjects? – JZ, 13.2.12. - POLITICIANS, SELF-RELIANCE, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

TRUST: With regard to international relationships we have to become so trustworthy that even our enemies will trust us. But they can hardly do so while we have still ABC mass murder devices in our hands or these and we are at the disposal of our territorial leaders and while we still trust these leaders all too much, grant them the monopoly on international decision-making, while we know and trust our individual rights and liberties all too little and haven’t even bothered to ponder, publish and explain quite rightful war and peace aims. – JZ, 5.5.83, 28.7.08. – PEOPLE, LEADERSHIP, DIPLOMATS, SUMMIT CONFERENCES, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, PEACE CONFERENCES, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, REPRESENTATIVES, PEOPLE, DECISION ON WAR & PEACE, DISARMAMENT, MILITIA, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, PUBLICITY, REFERENDUMS, WAR AIMS, ENEMIES, POWER, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM

TRUSTS: Implicit throughout the antitrust system, of course, is the traditional fear of unchecked power, the demand for safeguards, for countervailing authority, for “checks and balances”. The error throughout is that of assuming that free enterprise (*) is unchecked to begin with, an error which is rooted in the failure to observe that it is bounded at all times by the objective laws of the market place, which curtail abuses far faster and far more readily than the whims of governmental authority.” - O’Neill, Ayn Rand, p.60. - (*) Free Enterprise, Free Trade and a Free Market are not fully free under monetary and financial despotism, especially full monetary and clearing freedom, including free choice of value standards, which Ayn Rand did not favor, either. The demand for labor and for produced goods and services offered for sale was mostly tied either to an exclusive metal currency or to an exclusive governmental currency, later even to a forced paper currency. (Legal tender laws, making acceptance compulsory and introducing a forced and fictitious value to be accepted at par rather than market rated.) As a result mass unemployment and sales difficulties occurred all too often, the “cursed hunger for gold” arose and the shortages of sound paper money, which most governments did not know how to produce or had no interest to offer to the market. Alternatively, inflations and stagflations resulted, all ascribed to supposed flaws in the “free” market or in the supposed but non-existing “laissez-faire capitalism”. Governments believed that they could do better via their monetary despotism, practised by their central banks, by inflating or “regulating” their monopoly money. – Long experience with them has proven that the opposite is true. Only full monetary freedom can provide sound and lasting currencies. They are not impossible but merely outlawed, to keep the unsound and dishonest ones of territorial governments in circulation as the almost exclusive monetary option at a time when we are very dependent upon monetary exchanges. - JZ, 26.7.08, 26.3.11, 18.8.12, 18.8.12.

TRUTH: Error is the force that welds men together; truth is communicated to men only by deeds of truth.” – Leo N. Tolstoy: My Religion, in Seldes, The Great Quotations. – Even religious tolerance has not eliminated religions errors. It has made them only less wrongful and harmful towards others. – JZ, 7.8.08.PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, ENLIGHTENMENT, RELIGIONS, NATIONALISM, CHAUVINISM

TRUTH: Expositions devoid of any intention of making over others are attractive in proportion to the truth they contain.” – Leonard E. Read, Elements of Libertarian Leadership, p.132. - If this is true, then panarchism, once understood, should be very attractive to most people. – JZ, 7.8.08, 18.8.12. - TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, POWER OF ATTRACTION & FREE CHOICE, NONINTERFERENCE

TRUTH: He who sees the truth, let him proclaim it, without asking who is for it or who is against it.” - Henry George – By seeking, finding and organizing supporters for important truths they could become realized much sooner, at least among these supporters, once freedom to experiment is attained for all kinds of volunteers, always only at their own expense and risk. – JZ, 14.4.09, 18.8.12. – PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION& INFORMATION OPPORTUNITIES MULTIPLIED BY A GENUINELY CULTURAL REVOLUTION

TRUTH: Henry George said there is a satisfaction in working for the truth that can be gained in no other way.” – Robert Clancy, GOOD GOVERNMENT, Dec. 73. – Alas, all too many work for what they hold to be the truth but what is, in reality, only another error. These cases would be greatly reduced under full experimental freedom, i.e., when we are no longer confined to almost endless and fruitless verbal battles. – For instance: Which is the best standard of value? The most rightful rapidly useful and truth-promoting answer is: Free choice of value standards! – If there is really a best one for all people, all transactions, then this freedom is likely to discover it as soon as possible. - Which is the best kind of government or society? Answer: Free choice of governments and societies for all individuals will supply this answer as soon as some human beings, all volunteers, can manage to supply it, by their free experimentation. – JZ, 6.8.08, 26.3.11, 18.8.12. - PANARCHISM, MONETARY FREEDOM, FREE CHOICE OF VALUE STANDARDS.

TRUTH: It has been said that "The truth shall make you free," a proposition that is only partially correct. It is our insistence upon truth being identified and spoken – particularly to our own minds – that will make us free.” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards of Ozymandias, chapter 75. – Essential is freedom to act upon truth and to establish that freedom first when and where it does not yet exist. Merely standing up for it and publicizing it is obviously not enough. Atheists, Anarchists and Libertarians have done that for centuries – with insufficient results. – JZ, 20.2.05. - FREEDOM, SPEAKING UP, PUBLICITY & ACTION

TRUTH: It is a strange and dismal thing that in a world of such need, such opportunity and such variety as ours, the search for an illusory peace of mind should be so zealously pursued and defended, while truth goes languishing.” – Karl Menninger: This Week, October 16, 1958. – Quoted in Seldes. - Or it is extinguished in book burnings or in concentration camps. - Territorialism largely prevents the needed variety and free actions in very important spheres, suppressing free experimentation there. – JZ, 7.8.08. – PANARCHISM

TRUTH: Liberty of speech (*) is justified on three grounds: First, if the opinion be true, the world reaps a benefit to be derived from the truth; secondly, if the opinion be false, truth is the more strengthened by contest with it, and lastly, if it be partly true and partly false, our opinions, if they do not entirely lose their weakness, at any rate gain the corrections which have greatly improved them. …” - J. P. Poole. - (*) and of tolerant actions or experiments! – JZ, 7.8.08.

TRUTH: Rejoicing not in the many but in the probity of the few, we toil for truth alone.” - William of Conches. – Under full freedom to experiment neither majority approval not a struggle against opponents would be necessary. Innovators would then simply be free to do their things among themselves. But if one depends upon compulsory licences or permits to be granted by territorial authorities or upon the outcome of the next elections … - JZ, 23.1.08, 18.8.12. - VS. POPULARITY, PANARCHISM VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, SECESSIONISM, DOING THE OWN THINGS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS

TRUTH: Rumor travels faster, but it don’t stay put as long as Truth.” – Will Rogers, Politics Getting Ready to Yell, The Illiterate Digest, 1924. – Truths may have all of eternity for them, but numerous prejudices, errors, etc. seem to have won, mostly, in our centuries, so far. – JZ, 21.11.95. - Even truths, once discovered, can become unappreciated once again and overpowered by prejudices. Compare e.g. how large degrees of Free Trade were overcome by Protectionism, large degrees of laissez faire economics by mixed economies or even totalitarian ones, degrees of monetary freedom by the monetary despotism of central banks and how some experimental successes with cooperative production became widely forgotten again. Truths do not have as yet sufficient staying power at least not under territorialism and in democracies subject to all too many popular errors, myths and prejudices. They seem to be often “still only wobbling around on “lolly legs”, often falling down. However, once they are preserved by a free market for ideas (Ideas Archive or a Super Computer Project) and also supported by full experimental freedom, then they might develop sufficient staying power to assure their wide-spread and lasting realization a.s.a.p. – JZ, 25.7.08, 26.3.11. - TRUTH, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, DIS.

TRUTH: The best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market.” – Mr. Justice O. W. Holmes, Dissenting opinion in Abrams vs. United States, 1919. – Provided that market includes a truly free market for ideas and is also a free market for free experiments. – JZ, 5.7.86, 26.3.11. – How often and for how long have wrong ideas and opinions dominated the limited markets that existed for them? – JZ, 18.8.12. – PANARCHISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, DIS., MYTHS, PREJUDICES, POPULAR ERRORS

TRUTH: The fact is, that to deny to smaller societies a real life and meaning, a personality, in fact, is not anti-clerical, or illiberal, or unwise, or oppressive - it is untrue. And ‘all the king’s horses and all the kind’s men’ cannot make that true which is untrue. The House of Lords cannot do it. Even the Roman Empire, with the mediaeval Papacy thrown in, the fons et origo mali cannot do it; because it is impossible. And we shall win.” – J. N. Figgis, The Church and The Secular Theory of the State, in: David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, 1975, p.142. – “The question, be it observed, is not the theological one, ‘What is the Divine authority or nature of the Church?’ but the political, ‘What rights has the religious society (*) which the State is bound to acknowledge on pain of being false to itself?’ “ – Figgis, ibid, p.141, bottom. – The same could, naturally, be asked for any political society of volunteers that does not claim any territorial monopoly for itself. - This book by Nichols comes in many places close to panarchism. – JZ, 21.7.08. - PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL MINORITY AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM

TRUTH: The only thing more dangerous (to those who make their living from popular errors, myths, prejudices, dogmas etc. and corresponding territorially imposed institutions) than telling the truth in our world of territorial politics, is to believe in it and start acting on it. – JZ, 30.7.94, 18.8.12. – PANARCHISM, FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION

TRUTH: There is no refuge but in truth.” - Norman Angell, Human Nature and the Peace Problem, 1925, p.138. – All the publicly stated truths about the dangers of a nuclear war have not yet made sure that it will be prevented and that we have a safe refuge against it. The best refuge does not consist in underground shelters and survival stocks of goods but, rather, in eliminating the territorial targets, powers, ideas and motives. For instance, could you imagine any of the modern Popes wishing to acquire and to stockpile nuclear weapons? But territorialist governments built and stockpiled them and territorialist terrorists try to acquire them, too. It is the flawed program of territorialism combined with that of collective responsibility notions, in their heads, that induce them to prepare for such mass murders and the statist territorial prejudices in the heads of their present and future victims, and the economic conditions that result from numerous and all too popular anti-economic territorial interventionist actions, that makes nuclear war possible and even likely in the long run. The truths that could prevent nuclear war are still widely ignored or even resisted. – JZ, 14.4.09. – Alas, most people still try to find a sufficient shelter under popular errors, myths, prejudices, dogmas and the laws and institutions built upon them. – J.Z., 18.8.12. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, FANATICS, TRUE BELIEVERS

TRUTH: Truth can liberate only if people are prepared to act on it.” – Richard Barnel, The Economy of Death, N.Y., Atheneum, 1969, p.182. – They must also be free to act on it! See under EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM & PANARCHISM. – JZ, 7.8.08, 26.3.11.

TRUTH: Truth is not determined by majority vote.” - Doug Gwyn – Indeed. - Nevertheless, the members of voluntary societies or communities or enterprises should also be free to decide their questions by majority voting, if they want to. They will have to put up with the competition from other societies etc. that use better ideas and decision-making methods. – JZ, n.d. & 18.8.12.- VOTING, MAJORITIES, DEMOCRACY.

TRUTH: Truth is the beginning of every good thing, both in heaven and in earth; and he who would be blessed and happy should be from the first, a partaker of truth.” - Plato. – How many are truth- rather than pleasure-m power- or money-hunters? – The few truth hunters and finders are not free to opt out and do their own things for themselves. And the fools, ignorant and disinterest people are not confined with their flawed ideas, actions, beliefs and institutions as well as their non-actions and their lack of interest in their own rights and liberties, to their own organizations of volunteers, their own properties, incomes and lives only. They are still given the power or a vote to decide upon the fate of all others and are not held responsible for their impositions upon dissenters. – Confinde to their own panarchies, their personal law and exterritorial autonomy only they would suffer from their errors and untruths. - JZ, 14.4.09, 26.3.11, 18.8.12. – SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR VOLUNTEERS, RESONSIBILITY

TRUTH: Truths (or truthful ideas) work only among those able and willing to accept them as guides. – JZ, 24.8.75. – These people are few and far between. All the more important it is that they do become free to act upon the truths they found – at the own expense and risk, without approval or permission by the majority or that of any authority outside of their own associations. – JZ, 6.8.08, 18.8.12. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS.

TRUTH: We do not know a truth without knowing its cause.” - Aristotle. – He failed to insert: "fully" between "not" and "know". - JZ, 22.8.02. - We do know something about e.g. gravity – but just not enough to be able to fully counteract it. We know something about freedom, but not yet enough to cause it to become fully effective or to realize it in all our spheres. – Since our knowledge is always limited, we have almost always to act upon insufficient information. That alone should induce us to become tolerant towards different but tolerant actions of others. – JZ, 14.4.09. KNOWLEDGE, CAUSE, FREEDOM OF ACTION, TOLERANCE, KNOWLEDGE, IGNORANCE, DIS.

TRUTH: Were there ever any TERRITORIAL governments that were more characterized by their truths than by their errors, prejudices and lies? – JZ, 3.2.12, 18.8.12. – GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, LIES, Q., PROPAGANDA

TRY AGAIN: Let us try everlastingly to move ahead on the road to success. The guideline? If at first you don’t succeed try and try again!” – Leonard E. Read, How Do We Know? p.113. – But check your premises, tools, methods and aims first, whether they are quite in agreement with individual rights and liberties. Every dictator and tyrant or other monopolist and criminal with victims could follow that rule by Read as well.  It is empty of moral or ethical guidance. – JZ, 26.6.89, 1.8.08, 18.8.12. – PERSISTENCE IN RIGHTFUL AIMS

TRY: But I’ve got to try, don’t I? We can only lose all hope by giving up all hope.” – Poul Anderson, Mirkheim, p.168. – If we conceded to each other full exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of experiments undertaken by volunteers and at their own expense and risk only – then very much could be achieved, and this fast, almost with certainty. – Experimental freedom worked well in technology, in the natural sciences, in art, literature, in our private lives. It would work very well in the political, economic and social spheres, too, once the present territorial monopolies are abolished or systematically ignored, like ancient superstitions and royalist despotism. – JZ, 27.7.08. - Each experimenter could also, indirectly, via sufficient information exchange, benefit from any successful experiment among many freely experimenting groups, with at least some of them demonstrating what can be achieved and how it can be done. - JZ, 27.3.11. – EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM


TRY: If in the first attempt to create a world of free men we have failed, we must try again. The experience we have gained ought to have equipped us better for the task. The guiding principle that a policy of Freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy remains as true today as it was in the past.” – Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, London, 1944.

TRY: 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.” – F. D. Roosevelt, Speech at Oglethorpe University, May 22, 1932. - Even if it had been tried and failed numerous times before? – Even if a little thinking could already tell that a “measure” or new “positive” law would be bound to fail? – No government should be given the opportunity to make its tries upon the population of a whole country. Every government experiment should be confined to its volunteers. – Otherwise, the same wrongs and stupidities will be repeated by them – over and over again. – Be experimental and voluntaristic – even about the panarchistic, exterritorial autonomy method. – It could be introduced step by step, e.g. in the insurance sphere, in the police sphere, in the jurisdiction system, in the money and credit sphere, in transportation etc. - JZ, 2.8.08. – PANARCHISM, DIS., IGNORANCE, ERRORS, PREJUDICES, TERRITORIALISM, POWER

TRY: The best angle from which to approach a problem is the Try-angle.” - Author Unknown. – Alas, territorial statism outlaws that in most important spheres. – JZ, 15.4.09. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PRACTISE, ACT INTELLIGENTLY RATHER THAN MERELY WAIT & SEE, TERRITORIALISM

TRY: There is no comparison between what we may lose by not trying and by not succeeding; since by not trying we throw away the chance of an immense good; by not succeeding we only incur the loss of a little human labor.” – Sir Francis Bacon. – Think and work for the freedom to try, at the own expense and risk, in ALL spheres. - JZ, 30.7.92, 9.1.93, 25.7.08. – EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TESTS, TRIALS, PANARCHISM

TRY: To prove it, try it.” – Leonard E. Read, THE FREEMAN, 8/73. – At your own expense and risk or that of like-minded volunteers, i.e., panarchistically. – JZ, 11/73, 27.7.08.

TRY: Try and try again and let everyone else try, quite freely, as well, even the enemies of freedom, at the expense of their own rights and liberties and at their own risk and costs. Only in this way can as much freedom be realized or used and with it as much achieved as is really possible or as people wish to achieve at any time. – Instead of a few and all too limited and prejudiced governmental experiments, let us have tens of thousands or even millions of private and cooperative ones. – It worked in technology and in the natural sciences, didn’t it? It would also work well in the spheres now monopolized by politicians and bureaucrats. - JZ, 17.11.82, 27.7.08, 27.3.11.


TUCCILLE, JEROME: Anarcho-libertarianism: This is the beauty of anarcho-libertarianism: utter and complete toleration for any and all styles of life so long as they are voluntary and non-aggressive in nature. Only under such a system can the capitalist and socialist mentality coexist peacefully, without infringing the rights of other individuals and communities." - Jerome Tuccille, Radical Libertarianism, p.60. - That may be the tolerant attitude of some of the best anarcho-capitalists, like J. T., but does it characterize and express this attitude well enough, by itself, with these two words, for all, who formally do subscribe to this ideology. Furthermore, is this expression accepted by other people, most of them statists, in this meaning? To really communicate, a term must take prevailing or dominant attitudes and opinions into consideration, rather than provoking them by statements that go quite contrary to their views and offer only one term for one particular ideology as a term that is supposed to allow the free practice of all other ideologies as well. - JZ, 24.10.11. – Anarcho-libertarianism or market anarchism or anarcho-capitalism are meant only for their volunteers. Neither should be imposed upon dissenters or clearly declares itself also in favor of all kinds of non-territorial statism for all kinds of non-territorial statists. Thus it does not make sense to equate them with panarchism for all kinds of tolerant movements, ideologies, laws and institutions. Like most other present movements, they merely declare their own preferences and do not clearly enough, propose the same freedom for all their opponents, if only their practise their ideas also tolerantly, among their volunteers only and at their expense and risk. Yes, they would fit easily into a panarchist country, population or world. They might even represent the only model that will ultimately be adopted by most individuals. But they are they are not clearly indicating that it will be exterritorial tolerance and voluntarism for all ideologies, systems and institutions that would get us there. They are only part of the many choruses that do all sing, in essence: We are the chosen people. Only we hold all the truths. Our conviction and beliefs are the best of all! We have all the anwers!– J.Z., 18.8.12. - PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE, VOLUNTARISM, NON-AGGRESSION, TOLERANCE. Compare: ANARCHO-CAPITALISM, MARKET ANARCHY, ANARCHO-LIBERTARIANISM, TOLERANCE EVEN FOR ALL TOLERANT OPPONENTS, FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION FOR ALL

TUCCILLE, JEROME: It Usually begins with Ayn Rand", N.Y. 1971, 1972, P/B., 192 pp, favors individual secession on pp. 25-27,164/5 and 191. Ayn Rand was opposed to this and to its consequences: "competing governments", which she thought to be an absurd concept, because she could not envision it nor did she know of the numerous historical precedents for it. She was not even aware of the large number of private police and security forces, which do not give battle on the streets, as she predicted that they would. - JZ, 2.9.04.

TUCKER, AVIEZER, The Best States. Beyond the Territorial Fallacy. - Aviezer Tucker, The Best States. Beyond the Territorial Fallacy [English] June 2009.

TUCKER, AVIEZER, The Panarchist Solution. Sovereignty without Territory, Emigration without Movement. - The Panarchist Solution. Sovereignty without Territory, Emigration without Movement (2010)

TUCKER, BENJAMIN R., Liberty and Taxation. - Benjamin R. Tucker, Liberty and Taxation (from Liberty 1881-1908) [English] - With voluntary taxation we are already at least half-way on the road to panarchism. - All the more it is important to assemble all the essays and discussions on voluntary taxation either on a website or on a disc. - JZ, 27.8.11. - VOLUNTARY TAXATION, VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTIONS INSTEAD OF COMPULSORY TRIBUTE PAYMENTS TO TERRITORIAL POWERS.

TUCKER, BENJAMIN R., State Socialism and Anarchism. - Benjamin R. Tucker, State Socialism and Anarchism (1886)

TUCKER, BENJAMIN R., The Bill for Justice: Who Should Pay It? - Benjamin R. Tucker - The Bill for Justice: Who Should Pay It? - Liberty, Vol. 9, No. 49, Saturday, March 24, 1894, Whole No. 283

TUCKER, BENJAMIN R., TUCKER'S PANARCHISM: He would replace the State by voluntary associations - which the individual would be free to join or not as he thought best and from which he could secede. ... that the political organization of society be founded upon the voluntary formation by individuals of a number of social contracts, which once made, are binding according to the terms of the agreement." - W. A. Dunning on B. R. Tucker in: A History of Political Theory, Recent Times, page 198.

TUCKER, BENJAMIN R.: Instead of a Book, as quoted in Eltzbacher: Der Anarchismus, p.174ff, favored voluntary associations and exterritorial autonomy.

TUCKER, BENJAMIN R.: TUCKER-LESIGNE TYPE OF COMPARISON BETWEEN PANARCHISM & TERRITORIALISM: - Some notes made while re-reading: Benjamin R. Tucker: "State Socialism & Anarchism", 1886. - - How do you best describe something? By pointing out its opposite! - - - Not yet sufficiently prioritized and grouped. There should be main topics and sub-topics & groups of contrasts. - - If I perused and selected from my Panarchy A-Z then probably more such entries ought to be made. - - But in the end, for the sake of popularity, perhaps only 1 dozen to 3 dozen confrontation points should be chosen from the list. – JZ, n.d. - - - - Motto: "I assume as an incontestable fact that man is so constituted as to be a social being. His inclinations and wants, physical and moral, irresistibly impel him to associate with his kind; and he has, accordingly, never been found, in any age or country, in any state other than the social. In no other, indeed, could he exist, and in no other - were it possible for him to exist - could he attain to a full development of his moral and intellectual faculties or raise himself, in the scale of being, much above the level of the brute creation." - John C. Calhoun, A Disquisition on Government. - - - - Liberty vs. Authority - - - Individually chosen authorities or self-management in diverse voluntary associations vs. Territorially imposed authorities. - - - Voluntarism vs. Coercion, force & compulsion - - - Tolerance, even in the sphere of actions, for all tolerant actions or actions only among volunteers. vs. Intolerance in the sphere of actions, unless tolerance is permitted or ordered by territorial governments. - - - Associationism: Exterritorialists consider, with Tucker, "... the State as an association like any other, generally managed worse than others. vs. Territorialists " ... regard the State as a society sui generis, of an especial essence, the product of a sort of divine rights outside and above all society, with special rights and able to exact special obediences; ..."  - Tucker, ibid. - - - Anti-Monopolism: "... abolition of all (territorial - JZ)  monopolies." - Ernest Lesigne, quote by Tucker, ibid. vs. Monopolies predominant in "public affairs": "... All monopolies held by the (territorial - JZ) State. - Ernest Lesigne, quoted by Tucker, ibid. - - - Natural law & human individual rights, in the best & most complete formulations - but internally applied in "volunteer communities only to the extent that their members do claim them for themselves, but respected in the members of all other volunteer communities. vs. "Positive" territorial laws, avalanches of them, State concessions and privileges, civil rights, constitutionally granted rights, government-authored "Bills of rights", however incomplete, and "Common Law", however differently interpreted or misinterpreted by the territorial establishment. - - - Freedom and degrees of un-freedom - as chosen by individuals for their preferred volunteer communities. vs. Degrees of freedom & of subordination, all centrally imposed upon whole populations. - - - Individual sovereignty is absolute. (For those who claim it for themselves & recognize it for others.) When it is voluntarily combined, we arrive at absolute minority autonomy. vs. "The right of the majority is absolute." - A popular and insufficiently examined and contradicted premise. - - - "No sort of (universal - JZ) sovereign." - Ernest Lesign, ibid. - Only full exterritorial autonomy for all voluntary communities and based upon individual sovereignty, with e.g. individual secessionism an essential and continuing feature. - JZ vs. Sovereignty of the State, or "the people", but in practice only of the territorially ruling minority, the monopolistic and coercive government, more or less power-mad, guarding & extending its powers into every sphere, mostly insufficiently checked by territorial democracy, republicanism, elections, jurisdiction, bills of rights & constitutions. - - - Libertarian. (If tolerantly practised. - JZ) vs. Dictatorial. (Ernest Lesigne, quoted by Tucker, ib.) - - - Scientific. (Experimental, like in natural science. - JZ) vs. Dogmatic. (Ernest Lesigne, quoted by Tucker, ib.) - - - Happiness: "... aims ... to enable each to be happy in in his own way." - Ernest Lesigne, qu. by Tucker. vs. Happiness: "aims to establish happiness for all..." - Ernest Lesigne, quote by Tucker. - - - Free competition in every sphere except violent or fraudulent intervention. The cure for monopolism is competition. "... making competition, the anti- thesis of monopoly, universal." - Tucker, ibid. vs. Monopolism and privileges, territorially enforced. The cure for monopolism is considered to be: "... one vast, enormous, all-inclusive monopoly. The remedy for monopolies is monopoly." - Tucker, ib.  - - - Free markets, free enterprises, free trade, consumer- sovereignty towards public services. Even the best market arrangements applying only to volunteers. vs. Public service monopolies etc., territorially imposed upon all. - - - To each the political, economic & social system of his choice, of his dreams " vs. To all the single political, economic & social system dreamt up by a few for all and, supposedly, agreed upon by all, by a "mandate", at best a temporary majority & then imposed upon all dissenters, at least for a limited period. - - - Individually chosen establishments & societies vs. One territorial establishment imposed upon all. - - - Free individual conduct. vs. "... absolute control by the majority of all individual conduct." - Tucker, ibid. - - - E.g. marriage systems & contracts individually chosen vs. Marriage systems & contracts universally and territorially prescribed by governments. - - - Freedom of action & experimentation for all, at the own risk and expense, even in the political, social and economic spheres, vs. Freedom of action and experimentation in the so-called "public spheres" monopolized by territorial governments, with progress thus slowed down, made temporarily impossible or even reversed. - - - Self-chosen degrees of equality, liberty and equal liberty. vs. Imposed degrees of equality, liberty and equal liberty for all, subject to egalitarian ideologies, which make some people "more equal" than others. (See George Orwell: Anima Farm.) - - - Self-control or individually chosen control systems, vs. Centrally imposed controls, by majorities, supposed experts or usurpers. - - - Individual responsibility for the own actions. Qualification: Members of panarchies (voluntary communities that are exterritorially autonomous) to be held collectively responsible for actions of their communities only if they did not protest or resist them or tried to secede from such communities when it or its members acted wrongfully on a large scale against outsiders. vs. Collective responsibility for members of territorial organizations or people of the same race or religion. - - - Minority autonomy, also autonomy for the majority or: Minority or majority self-rule. vs. State, government & national sovereignty, i.e., subjugation of most minorities, combined with privileges for ruling minorities & their favourites or majority or minority rule over all. - - - Non-geographical organization by individual choice. vs. Geographical organization by majority choice, or via usurpation by minorities or individuals. - - - Market-like natural order, based upon individual liberty & individual choice & individual secessionism, with unity in diversity. vs. Centrally imposed artificial order, an organized chaos, called a constitutional, legal or ideological order and unity. - - - Self-liberation, including that of voluntary groups Liberation of individuals, minorities & of majorities. vs. Territorial & national "liberation". "Liberation" only of States, "nations" and "peoples", most of them imagined rather than real, under one territorially enforced model that never fully satisfies all those subjected to it. - - - Individual choice, even of governments & societies. vs. Centralized political prescriptions for the whole population. " ... all affairs of men should be managed by the (territorial - JZ) government, regardless of individual choice." - Tucker, ibid. - - - Self-responsibility for individuals and volunteer communities. vs. Theoretically "responsible" central, State and local governments, in practice more or less irresponsible, abusive, corrupt, exploitative and power-mad, at least for prolonged periods. - - - Individuals voting upon and deciding their own fate, together with like-minded people. vs. Collectivist voting on the fate of others, one strongly disagrees with. Regarding public affairs: "the individual is nothing" & "the government is everything." - Tucker, ibid. - - - Individualism: "the individual is everything, the (territorial - JZ) government is nothing." - Tucker, ib Abolition not of "the State" but only of the territorial State & its minority rule or majority despotism & its territorial monopoly. vs. Compulsory membership or subordination. - - - Individual and groups secessionism permitted & encouraged, vs. Individual and group secessionism outlawed or only limited territorial secession permitted. - - - Diversity, individually chosen vs. Uniformity, collectively & territorially imposed. - - - Decentralization, voluntary, non-geographical vs. Centralization, territorially enforced, with unity pretended under one or the other myth. - - - Associationism & federalism by free individuals based upon unanimous consent. vs. Geographical "unification", fictitious, of whole populations, without unanimous consent. - - - Societies of free individuals, also in form of States & governments, but without a territorial monopoly. vs. States, nations, peoples, of a territorially determined type, however fictitious. ("Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuehrer!") - - - Self-government, self-determination, self-rule by individuals & voluntary associations, regardless of their location. vs. Rule by others, on the federal, State & local level at best approved of by majorities. - - - Societies of volunteers, exterritorially autonomous under personal laws. vs. Territorial States & governments over largely involuntary subjects, with uniform and imposed laws, formally at best representative or majority determined. - - - Self-chosen degrees of liberties & restrictions. vs. Imposed degrees of liberty and restrictions. - - - Freely competing court- and arbitration systems, all only as chosen by volunteer communities for themselves. vs. One court system for all, except for leaders or MPs, and other people with powers, who are only rarely held juridically responsible for their actions. - - - Peaceful one-man-"revolutions", valid only for such volunteers. vs. Bloody and coercive revolutions, imposed upon dissenters, mostly more oppressive than liberating. - - - Natural leadership over volunteers. vs. Imposed leadership, at best by a majority. - - - Voluntary integration. vs. Compulsory integration. - - - Voluntary segregation. vs. Compulsory segregation, e.g. Apartheid or "Africa for Africans only!" - - - Progress via individual step by step, choice by choice. vs. Wholesale or territorial "progressive" steps, under popular errors, myths & prejudices - often making matters worse, for most, for all too long. - - - Voluntary contributions or taxes or subscriptions to the expenses of the own panarchy - even if this is realized only via the voluntary membership. Each panarchy running its own budget or spending. vs. Compulsorily imposed (by supposed representatives) taxes or tributes to territorial budgets of centralized governments for whole populations. - - - Voluntary socialism, freely competing with other forms of socialism and other isms. vs. Compulsory State socialism. - - - Labour & capital self-managed in all freely chosen varieties in different voluntary communities. vs. Uniform labour & capital laws & jurisdiction imposed upon all. - - - Free prices, wages, rents, profits, interest rates etc. within the volunteer communities favoring them, at the same time controls and regulations of them for and by others in their voluntary communities. vs. Price-, wage-, rent-, profit- & interest rate controls for or people in a territory monopolized by a government. - - - Individualism in every sphere, combined with voluntary associationism. vs. Statism: " ... government or State becoming the all in all."  - - - Anti-monopolism, competition, market-relationships the rule rather than the exception. But all voluntary restrictions remain tolerated. vs. Monopolism, privileges, powers over others, rule by others rather than self-determination. - - - Laissez faire, laissez passer (let people produce and let people exchange) for all communities of volunteers desiring this arrangement for themselves but also "laissez faire" for people loving controls, serfdom and slavery, as long as they can stand them. vs. Laissez-faire economics either imposed upon all or outlawed for all people in a territory. - - - Laissez-faire extended into the political & social spheres, for volunteers. vs. Laissez faire confined to economics and as such extended or suppressed for whole territories and their populations. - - - Shopping hours chosen by individual shops. vs. Shopping hours centrally imposed upon all. - - - Monopolies only continued among volunteers, at their own risk and expense. vs. Centralized & territorial monopolies in every "public" sphere, with no one being free to opt out from under them. - - - Individual decision-making in almost every sphere. vs. Monopolized decision-making, even on war & peace, international trade, exchange media & value standards and nuclear disarmament. - - - Self-protection via rightful arms, training, organization and contracts, protective agencies, private police forces & ideal volunteer militias for the protection of individual rights. vs. Pretence of collective security via State police, armed forces & ABC mass murder devices. - - - "Protection ... to be secured, as long as it is necessary, by voluntary association and cooperation for self-defence, or as a commodity to be purchased, like any other commodity, of those, who offer the best article at the lowest price." - Tucker, ibid. vs. Protection monopoly by the territorial State, coercively maintained, even when no or only quite insufficient protection is offered by it or the price to be paid for it is an all too high monopoly price. Only rulers get large protection - and even they get sometimes assassinated, nevertheless. Governments are, obviously, not providing sufficient protection against terrorism - and provoke and breed more terrorism by their actions. - - - M.Y.O.B.: Mind your own business, as guiding principle. Including the so-called "public services" as the own business, rather than that of bureaucrats and dishonest politicians. vs. "Interference with another's business." - Tucker, ibid. - General meddling and expensive abuses, under the pretence of working in the common or public interest, but unchecked by free competition, free pricing and consumer sovereignty. - - - Vices dealt with as private affairs. In some voluntary communities all vices will be permitted, while in others all will be outlawed & others have various rules on them. vs. Vices treated as public affairs, and crimes, even when they have no involuntary victims. - - - Non-governmental free societies, minimal or limited government societies, all by individual choice & only for their voluntary members. vs. One form of government, constitution, legal & juridical system & administration for all people in a territory, at best chosen by the temporary majority, mostly a coalition of minorities. - - - Property rights, individual & however voluntarily combined, in all wanted forms, private, partnership, cooperative, collectivized by volunteers, including voluntary socialism chosen by individuals for themselves. vs. All properties largely or ultimately nationalized in a territorial feudal system, with private remainders subject to part- (taxes) or total confiscation and all property transfers more or less regulated, exploited and  controlled, e.g. by monetary despotism, price controls etc. At best only a "mixed economy", more statist than private. - - - Self-ownership and private property rights - if claimed in volunteer communities: - "... wishes to leave each in possession of its own." - Ernest Lesigne, quoted by Tucker, ibid.  vs. "... wishes to take everything from everybody." - Ernest Lesigne, qu. by Tucker, ibid. - Extreme case: Totalitarian State socialism or statist monopoly capitalism. - - - Propertarianism: "... wishes everybody to be a proprietor." - Ernest Lesigne, quoted by Tucker, ibid. - To the extent that he wants to be and as a result of his own efforts or gifts etc. or inheritance, not by the expropriation of others or via monopolies. - JZ vs. Expropriation: "wishes to expropriate everybody." - Ernest Lesigne, qu. by Tucker, ibid. - Well, except the politicians and the bureaucracy, and as far and as long as the territorial rulers can get away with this, limited only through the bankruptcy, poverty and weakness this finally leads to, for the majority, though not for the rulers, who then try to safeguard their extorted riches largely in safer countries. - - - Equality: As much equality or inequality as the members of each volunteer community do want for themselves. This leads to high degrees of satisfaction, peace and harmony between the diverse groups, just religious tolerance does in its sphere. vs. The present degrees of equality and inequality,  compulsorily preserved for all people living in a territory as long as possible. This leads to continuous conflicts rather than harmony or at least peace and neutrality between the adherents of different systems. - - - Voluntary free enterprises competing with each other and other economic systems. vs. Centrally imposed planning, direction and controls upon all enterprises under a vast State corporation. - - - Self-management among volunteers. vs. Imposed hierarchies or central administration of all economic activities. - - - "Do as you wish yourself." - Ernest Lesigne. vs. "Do as the government wishes." - Ernest Lesigne. - The territorial government. - JZ  - - - All kinds of constitutions, laws, principles, methods and institutions practised among those, who prefer them for themselves. vs. One type, size, quality, quantity of them imposed upon all.  - - -  "... promises liberty." - Ernest Lesigne. Ultimately for all who want it for themselves and as completely as they come to wish it and supply to and maintain for themselves. - JZvs. "threatens with despotism." - Ernest Lesigne. - And all too often achieves it, all too fast and for all too long. - JZ - - - "... makes the State (or a competing society - JZ) the employee of the citizen." - Ernest Lesigne." vs. ... makes the citizen the subject of the State." - Ernest Lesigne. - - - Brings about, gradually, for most, step by step, according to their individual choices, " ... the minimum of command, of regulation, of legislation." - Tucker, ibid. - Even if, initially, some choose even more of them for themselves. - JZ vs. "... aspires to command, to regulate, to legislate." - Ernest Lesigne  - - - Education, Self-Enlightenment: "...wishes to enable everybody to instruct himself." - Ernest Lesigne. vs. "... wishes to instruct everybody." - Ernest Lesigne. - - - Progress: "... social progress will result from the free play of individual efforts." - Ernest Lesigne. - And that of the quite free associations of free individuals. - JZ vs. Progress, when decided upon by politicians and bureaucrats, will be prevented, leading to relapses or stagnation and will at least be slowed down or require much more in capital investments. - JZ - - - "... wishes to enable everybody to support himself." Ernest Lesigne. (Within or through his individually preferred utopia or intentional community. - JZ) vs. "... wishes to support everybody." - Ernest Lesigne. (At the expense of everybody. - Establishing "mutual plunder bunds", as Bastiat says, and saving fools from the results of their follies only to fill the world with fools, as Herbert Spencer remarked. - JZ) - - - "...opens unlimited horizons to progress." (Among volunteer communities. The examples of the most successful ones will tend to be followed by others.) - "... will succeed." - Ernest Lesigne. vs. " ... followed by the most atrocious reactions". ... " ... will fail; ..." - Ernest Lesigne. - - - Exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities. vs. Territorial imposition. - For example: Voluntary capitalism vs. State socialism or territorially imposed capitalism. - - - Voluntary monarchism vs. compulsory monarchism for all. - - - Voluntary conservatism vs. compulsory conservatism for all. - - - Voluntary futurism, progress steps vs. compulsory futurism and "progress" for all. - - - Voluntary anarchism, various forms vs. voluntary libertarianism, various forms and even voluntary statism or competing governments vs. anarchism for all, although different forms of anarchism may be chosen by volunteers. None may choose statism or rulers for themselves, or libertarianism for the whole population, whether they like it or not. - - - Voluntary greeny reforms. vs. greeny "reforms" for all, however wrong or absurd, however unwanted. - - - As much or as little bureaucracy as individuals wish for themselves in their own communities. vs. Territorially imposed bureaucracies. - - - Parties becoming self-governing societies for their members and voters, or, rather, voluntary citizens, without having to defeat other parties in elections, but subject to individual and group secessions all the time and the competition provided by the self- concerned policies of other "one-party communities" vs. Territorial one-party rule or rule by a particular coalition of parties (if these were to persist) over all other parties and their members and voters. The mere part - and its leader or leaders - ruling the whole on the pretence of a genuine mandate from all but at best only from a temporary majority. - - - Voluntary Globalism and also voluntary Anti-Globalism. vs. Imposed Globalism or Imposed Anti-Globalism. - - -Voluntary societies with many different forms and objectives, in all spheres, all self-responsible. vs. One territorially imposed State "society" for all. - - - Consumer sovereignty towards all public services and different consumer coops for them. vs. The domination and exploitation of all consumers, with central planning, rationing, price controls. - - - Free pricing in every sphere - at least among all those who prefer it for themselves, while others may choose to try price controls among themselves. vs. Price-, wage-, rent-, fee- and interest rate controls for all transactions. - - - Free capital markets and investments or free capitalist acts among consenting adults. vs. Centrally collected, planned and invested capital. - - - Monetary freedom. vs. Monetary despotism, characterized by: characterized by: Freedom to issue notes in private payment communities. vs. State monopoly for money issues. - - - Free market rating for private note etc. issues. vs. Legal tender for the State's monopoly money. - - - Right to discount money offered, when it was not issued by oneself also to altogether refuse the money of others. vs. Compulsory acceptance for the State's money, no matter how much it is deteriorated. - - - Compulsory acceptance at par only for money one has issued oneself or has contractually obliged oneself to accept. vs. Compulsory acceptance for State money for all people in a territory. Also enforced by the issue monopoly and made worse by the forced value for this paper money. - - - Free choice of value standards, with issues usually kept at par or close to their nominal value in sound and competing monies. vs. Compulsory or fictitious value of State paper, turning them into fiat money or requisitioning certificates. A value standard monopoly, usually much abused. Value preserving clauses outlawed. - - - Monetary demand for goods, labor, and services only limited by the competitive issuers' own readiness to accept their own notes for their goods, labor and services, using sound and agreed upon value standards in these competitive exchange media and in their pricing, so that lastly an unlimited quantity of goods, labor and services can not only be freely produced or offered but also freely exchanged, without encountering a monetary bottleneck or money shortage. vs. Demand for labour, goods and services limited to the monopoly money provided by central banking, which due to its Legal Tender (forced acceptance and forced value) is not self-regulating and self-limiting and either over-supplied or under-supplied in certain spheres and channels and all over mostly leading to inflations, deflations or stagflations and through these to political catastrophes. - - - Privately and cooperatively issued and accepted currencies have goods, service or debt foundation. vs. State paper money, which has some tax foundation, at best without legal tender and using a sound value standard. - - - Competing currencies, free banking. vs. Monopoly money of Central Banking. - - - Good money drives out the bad. (Good-money = optional money, subject to free market rating.) vs. Bad money drives out the good. (Bad money = money with compulsory acceptance and enforced value.) - - - Freedom also for all honest clearing and credit systems. vs. All clearing and credit arrangements under governmental licensing, legislation and controls. - - - Freely competing land-tenure systems, all practised only by those in their favor, the various land reform movements and at their risk and expense. All to be realized only peacefully, via private and cooperative purchases of land titles from present owners. Even high prices are cheaper than civil wars. vs. A uniform land-tenure system imposed upon all people in a territory. No one is free to opt out from under it. The worst land monopoly is that of the State or nation or claimed in the name of "the people" or a "race" against all "foreigners" or "aliens". - - - Free migration. No borders. vs. Controlled emigration and immigration, sometimes both largely stopped or restricted. - - - Free Trade for Free Traders, combined with Protectionism for Protectionists. Both only on a voluntary basis and to the degrees wanted by them. vs. Protectionism or "guided" and controlled "Free Trade" imposed upon all. Tariffs, quotas, foreign exchange controls, international tradetreaties applied to whole territories. - - - Various forms of encouraging and rewarding inventions and writings, without artificial monopolies for prescribed periods. Patents and copyrights continued only among volunteers and not binding for those not subscribing to them. An ideas archive and talent registry could play a large role in marketing these resources better than happens today. Free competition will reveal the best methods. vs. Patent- and copyrights monopolies, legally imposed upon all for long periods. The most important ideas and talents for our times have not been found, publicized and utilized through the existing legal systems. - - - Free choice of language. vs. Governmentally imposed language for all. - - - Religious liberty or tolerance, even for atheists, deists humanists and rationalists. vs. Religion monopolized or privileged within a territorial State, i.e., religious intolerance. - - - Power, under these conditions, becomes self-limiting and self-reducing. vs. Power expands and abuses towards total chaos and collapse. - - - Individual independence "... the affairs of men should be managed by individuals or voluntary associations and that the (territorial - JZ) State should be abolished." - Tucker, ibid. vs. National or State or governmental independence Countries and their populations should be run or governed by those in territorial power. - - - Moral choices made by individuals and their voluntary groups, e.g. on abortion, sexual contracts, ethical codes. vs. One moral code and kind of behavior inflicted upon the population of whole territories. - - - Cultural diversity freely chosen by individuals. vs. Either multiculturalism or a particular culture imposed upon all people in a territory. - - - Population control by responsible parents. vs. Population controls through territorial governments. - - - Panarchism: The thesis that a great variety of in the best sense anarchic, libertarian or governmental societies, all only with voluntary members, are rightful, possible, practical, efficient and can peacefully coexist, in the long run, on the basis of exterritorial autonomy under personal laws, as long as they, too, permit individuals to secede from them. All of them to be free to do their things to and for themselves and thereby inclined to become and remain peaceful. vs. Statism, Territorialism, Governmentalism, Nationalism, Centralism, Imperialism, Archism: The theory and practice that sovereign or self-governing and independent public institutions should be territorial, with compulsory membership and otherwise centralized or decentralized, federated or unified or separated and that the territorial majority may rightfully rule and exploit "its" various dissenting minorities and deny them the right to secede and to live exterritorialy autonomous under their own personal laws. Instead, they are, often and much against their will, territorially integrated and subjugated, with at most the option left to them to try to persuade the majority to leave them alone, give them equal rights or even privileges or, perhaps, the chance to emigrate to other territorial countries which would give them a somewhat better chance. - - - Membership only by individual choice, which is largely achieved via freedom for individual secessionists. vs. Compulsory membership or subordination of all people living in a territory. Dissenters not allowed to withdraw or opt out or secede. - - - States within States and diverse societies within the general society, but all ruling only themselves and not any of the others. That is possible only under voluntarism and personal laws or individual sovereignty, individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities. A framework for all the desired diverse societies among volunteers, even in seemingly statist forms. All subject to individual and minority group secessionism and to their own and personal laws only. Governments and non- governmental societies only by individual choice. They do provide the greatest opportunities for all kinds of anarchists, libertarians and archists, in peaceful competition with each other. vs. Coercively unified and monopolistic and compulsory States for all people living in a territory, imposing their territorial governments, administrations, constitutions, laws and jurisdictions upon all inhabitants of a certain territory and frequently arguing or fighting over the borders between them. All claiming to rightfully, rationally and benevolently and to represent the interests and rights of all their involuntary members as well, via their kind of franchise. Dissenters are not free to do their their own things to or for themselves but at most free to emigrate or to protest or to try persuade or outvote the present majority. - - - Panarchies are exterritorially and voluntarily either centralized or decentralized. However diverse their ideals, within each they are uniformly realized via unanimous consent of voluntary members. vs. Archies or governments of the present type are coercively and territorially centralized or decentralized. Uniform systems, imposed by majorities or minorities upon involuntary members. - - - - - - If you can think of any other distinctions, and better wordings, please let me know! Any improvement suggestion is welcome although I cannot promise to adopt it. But, by all means, circulate your own version of such statements, including or changing mine. - JZ, 30.9.04. – Perhaps all these opposite notions should also be alphabetized and cross-referenced? – JZ, 3.2.12.

TULLOCK, G. 1985. A New Proposal for Decentralizing Government Activity. In Rationale Wirtschaftspolitik in komplexen Gesellschaften“, ed. H. Milde and H. G. Monissen, 139-48, Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer. Reference given by Prof. Fred Foldvary, „Proprietary Communities and Community Associations“, in David T. Beito et al, The Voluntary City, Choice, Community and Civil Society, The Independence Institute, 2002, ISBN 0-472-11240p6 & ISBN 0-472-08837-8 (pbk). Ibid, on page 283, Foldvary comments: "Whereas the earlier discussion is centered around territorial communities, Tullock (1985) proposes non-territorial constitutions for contractual associations. He notes the example of the Millet system of the old Turkish empire, under which autonomous non-Muslim religious communities were formed. Tullock proposes associations with quasi governmental power, which would be without a specific geographic location. They would provide services that are not geographical in scope, somewhat like those that churches provide today. Aspects of law that these "sociological“ associations could assume might include those concerned with family, probate and contract.“ – Apparently even F. and T. did not envision them taking over no part at all or only a few of all of the tasks now usurped by territorial governments – corresponding to the wishes of their voluntary members. – JZ, 7.1.05. - But in the meantime they might have come to include voluntaristic libertarian and anarchistic society models as well. - JZ, 20. 11. 06.

TUNDRA WIND, to ZUBE, JOHN: 22 July 86, lp, with reply, 1 Aug.1986, 2pp, 102, in ON PANARCHY XIV, in PP 870. - TUNDRA WIND, 44, 60-65, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901. - TUNDRA WIND, in ON PANARCHY X, in PP 755. - An extract from PEACE PLANS 870: - Transcript of a letter by "Tundra Wind", a subscriber to "THE CONNECTION", of July 22nd., 1986, to John Zube, on PANARCHY: Dear John, - thanks for your material on panarchy. Panarchy represents precisely and specifically what I have been groping toward for many years. The simplicity and power of the idea (and its actual existence) speaks to the unfolding of a basic true thing. - - The beauty of panarchy, as I understand it, lies in the fact that most people, most of the time, function panarchistically. Therefore, it seems but a small step to full-scale panarchy. - Now, that step may have its difficulties, but I perceive that it is possible because no new skill, no new revolution in perception or conception needs accomplishing. The simple extension of the predominant pattern of association among humans suffices to bring this about. - Panarchy also shows, by contrast, the flaws of other libertarian thinkers. When such writers seek to write a blueprint for an ideal society, they show that they have not challenged the fundamental basis for tyranny. Under panarchy, individualists would simply associate with other individualists, collectivists with collectivists, etc., etc. What could be simpler? I love it! - - (Incidentally, I know of a functioning panarchistic monarchy. A group of transvestites has a system of "Royal Courts" complete with Emperors & Empress & other grades of Royalty. The subjects join this organization voluntarily and can leave at will.) - - You asked what I meant by a Zen Panarchy. The West has been interested in Zen for two reasons; meditation and Koans (*) Historically, however, Zen has a basis in a system of ethical behavior defined by a set of precepts. - - (I will enclose of copy of my elucidation of these precepts in the near future.) My idea for a Zen Panarchy would be that one joins it by taking these precepts. That would be the first, minimal step. - - I don't have access to a micro-fiche reader, but I'm checking around. - - I don't consider Lao Tzu's statements on government obscure. In fact, I find them clearer than von Mises or Rothbard. I have a feeling personality factors enter in, shaping what seems clear to us. - - F.P. is impressed by the 10,000 years of Statist history but I am more impressed by the hundreds of thousands of years before the State appeared, in which people did not oppress each other (see The Parable of the Tribes). 10,000 years represent but a small fraction of human history and this period does not seem representative of human history as a whole … - - I could write much more and will do so in the future. Thanks again. - - Signed: Tundra Wind, P.O. Box 429, Monte Rio, CA 95 462. - - P.S.: A few quick observations on panarchy that occur to me: 1.) By solving the problem of borders, panarchy simultaneously solves the problem of defence, which so vexes libertarian thinkers. Since panarchies do not define themselves geographically, the amount of energy that needs devoting to defence becomes a miniscule fraction of that spent by geographically defined states, I think of the Vatican's defence budget, or the Red Cross. - - 2.) The durability of panarchies seems to surpass that of States. Rarely do States last even a century without some internal or external challenge to their fundamental structure. This derives directly from their border definitions by territorial borders. Yet, offhand, I can think of several panarchies that have lasted a very long time. Probably the longest running one is Taoism. Judaism in Diaspora represents an example of panarchies' astonishing resilience. The Catholic Church, while admittedly a state for a significant part of its history, nevertheless endures quite successfully as a non-state. Finally, Freemasonry, which some say is thousands of years old, shows how remarkably influential panarchies can be beyond their numbers. - (*) I believe that I came across the term "Koans" before but forgot its meaning. None of the dictionaries that I consulted in a hurry could give me an explanation. - JZ) - - - - (JZ: The question remains: Why did not these and other panarchies become and remain all fully autonomous and lasting? On the other hand: Could we have expected a better performance from times of slavery, sorcery, astrology, pride in conquests, readiness to plunder and kill upon command, for the long periods in which most individual human rights were not yet known or sufficiently appreciated? – JZ, 19.12.04.) - - - -  John Zube, …1.8.86: Tundra Wind, PO Box 429, Monte Rio, CA 95 462. - Dear Tundra, I received your letter of July 22nd., 86, yesterday and the cheque for the information package with thanks. I was pleased that you showed such an interest in the panarchist option. - - Wrong word: in the most important spheres it is not an option yet. Only in some of the more personal things are people so far allowed to act a) voluntarily, b) non-territorially and c) autonomously. - - - The c) part is the one missing or only very incompletely realized in the larger instances that you quote. - - And it has so many implications that go against most people's grain. For instance: Monetary freedom experiments among volunteers, while others subscribe to exclusive and 100% gold currency only or to governmental forced paper currency. - - - Use of recreational drugs in a society where most people are inclined to be prohibitionists against these drugs, although they may be alcohol and tobacco consumers. (My only such drugs are coffee, tea and cacao, not very healthy but sometimes helpful in keeping me awake.) - - Think of the Jewish people in the Diaspora: They were volunteers in that they did not fully integrate into the societies around them. Faith, obstinacy, custom, conviction - and prosecution - made them adhere, mostly or frequently, to their ancient creed and related customs, even if it cost them their property, liberty and, sometimes lives. They had degrees of autonomy for their own affairs, legally or illegally, even their own jurisdiction - but, they were not FULLY autonomous. This shortage was so keenly felt, after considerable degrees of emancipation in the 19th. and 20th. century - with intermittent pogroms, e.g. in Russia - and, especially after what happened under the Nazi regime, that they came to imagine that full autonomy could only be obtained in a territorial way and strove to establish the State of Israel, which, inevitably, developed its own minority problems and international difficulties. - - - Around World War I there was another movement among the East German Jewish people, about which Beckerath and Dr. Walter Zander told me something, but which has, perhaps, not yet been fully described. These people called themselves, very inaptly from my point of view, the "territorialists", because they wanted to achieve full autonomy WITHIN the TERRITORIES they lived in, i.e. wanted to avoid migrating into the "holy" land or to relatively free North America or Western Europe. - - Think of the age and persistence even of minor steps of autonomy: The "corn law" restrictions existed for 410 years before, finally, after much agitation, most of them were repealed - for a few decades. In the meantime, hundreds of attempts to get them repealed failed, in parliament, and smuggling was not sufficiently effective to keep the people supplied with cheap bread etc. - - Similarly with the anti-truck legislation, which existed in England for at least 575 years, although insufficient to suppress truck arrangements completely. The truck or token system was revived, again and again, during depressions and their money famines. The repressive legislation was not fully effective but it was effective enough to prevent the use of truck or tommy-shop vouchers from developing, let us say, into the goods warrants or standardized shopping vouchers of local shop associations, into independent local currencies. Full autonomy was missing. - - One could, alas, all too easily, quote many other instances. Freedom is not really freedom until it is complete, until all pro-freedom and all anti-freedom options have become not a matter of collectivist coercion but a matter of individual choice, in the own sphere. - - Most people, in spite of being "panarchists", unconsciously, on many points of personal choice, are still prohibitionists and protectionists on larger matters. That aspect of the present and past mentality and of "rat-bags" of wrong ideas, in most people's minds, has to be taken into consideration when one strives towards political and economic tolerance or experimental freedom or minority autonomy like the faithful dissenters and nonconformists did once against religious hierarchies and repressions. - - The basic idea of panarchy is, indeed, very simple - but to apply it, oneself, in all spheres and to get others, although already somewhat sympathetic, to see all the implications and to think through them in a panarchistic way, without imagining the effort to be hopeless, in the face of large odds, is not easy. - - How many freedom lovers are, e.g., able to apply freedom ideas to the problem of defending a RELATIVELY free society against a) terrorism, - b) subversion, - c) putsch attempts, - d) revolutionary take-over bids by determined minorities and - e) international aggression by external and territorially organized totalitarians? - - Most people, in their minds, do not even attempt to tackle such larger problems but merely subscribe to the usual statist notions in this respect which help to continue and spread oppression and opposition even on the own side and defeat many rightful and defensive intentions. - - The idea of panarchy will only be powerful once it is powerfully advocated. That has not yet been done. Powerful i.e. very capable advocates of it are missing. This is still a frontier where anyone could distinguish himself by a pioneering effort. - - Even small mental steps are not easily taken by most people, if they do lead them away from their conventional thought grooves, e.g. if they do contradict popular prejudices. Not only the native tribes have their taboos. For instance, decades after people could no longer redeem their paper currency at their local bank into gold coins, there still persisted, against their own experience, in the belief that their currency was based on and covered by gold or ought to be so covered.  It takes some people years before they wake up to some of the facts of inflation and there may be still only a handful of people in the world now, who have woken up to all or most of them, enough to clearly see the need for certain preventative steps. - - If you imagine it easy to convert others to panarchist ways of thinking then you are either a great innovator as a salesman for new ideas or you will be disappointed and come to reject the idea because others do not respond to it as fast as you did. - - Come to think of it, you said yourself that you have "been groping toward (s it) for many years." - - Do not imagine that it will be much different with many other people! - - Expect even that most have not even been groping for weeks, far less for years, for something that is a true alternative to the present mess. - - I am still an enthusiastic panarchist and will remain so for the rest of my life but I do not expect others to catch my fire fast and this is, nevertheless, a fact that will not lead me to disappointment and resignation. - - Thus you may consider me a fanatic in this respect. I am fanatically for tolerance, no matter how low its chances appear to be at present in the eyes and minds of most and seeing their many conditioned reflexes. - - Altogether, a considerable revolution in the minds of people is necessary to make panarchism a widely enough accepted philosophy to enable determined minorities to begin with consistent realization attempts that are so far considered to be within the "holy sphere" of the State. - - Imagine the responses of governments in the East and West if, over the heads of the governments, peace negotiations and separate peace treaties, resulting from them, or unilateral peace declarations were attempted, by groups of their subjects, if some of their subjects armed, organized and trained themselves with rightful weapons for the protection of some of their basic rights, including e.g. the retention of their own earnings and property in the face of confiscatory intentions on the side of their official "protectors". - - Long before it would come to such practical steps, in the own country, the battle ought to have been won in the minds of enough people. - - Moreover, it would be wise to start to rise in the defense of basic rights not against the own government but to support, as much as possible, those in other countries, who have already risen or resisted despotic regimes, in a panarchistic way. Then one would have the advantage of being considered rather an immediate ally than an immediate enemy by the own government. - - Wherever one can still study, agitate, assemble and associate freely, there is, usually, not sufficient justification for any forceful resistance, anyhow. - - You know of the trauma of the conscientious objector experience for many young men. Panarchists intend to opt out not only from one law they consider to be too restrictive - but from the whole package deal that is imposed upon them, a deal that is tolerated or approved or even demanded by all too many others. - - Libertarians, like other humans, are not readily prepared to admit to their remaining errors and mend their way but can be expected to cling to them tenaciously. - - I'm looking forward to your Zen-Panarchy paper. Lao Tse is clearer to me, too, than most of the other Eastern freedom philosophers. Most wrote, probably, under censorship. - - (I believe that I did not receive his Zen-Panarchy paper. But I have started a small collection of different translations of Lao Tse’s famous book. (*) – JZ, 19.12.04.) - - 10,000 years are but a small fraction of human history, indeed, but already many less are enough to condition most people's way of thinking. F. P. wrote in T.C. that he was so repressed and desperate as a school boy that he once threatened to poke out the eyes of his torturers with a pencil. That "defence" has now turned into notions of private nukes! - - My main copier broke down and I ran out of the 4/86 supplementary literature list. - FIOT, John      (Somewhat revised: 18.12.04, 3.2.12, 18.8.12.) – (*) In my translations and comments on Lao Tse I get different spellings: E.g. Laotze, Lao-tze, Laotse, Lao Tzu. Take your pick! – JZ, 3.2.12.

TURGENEV: He believed - this was his 'old-fashioned' liberalism in the English dynastic (he meant constitutional) sense (Letter to Vestnik Evropy ... also the letters to Stasyulevich ... and to Herzen of 25 Nov. 62, and F. Vlkhovsky's article, "Ivan Sergeevich Turgenev", FREE RUSSIA, vol. 9, No. 4, 1898, pp 26-9 ) - that only education, only gradual methods, 'industry, patience, self-sacrifice, without glitter, without noise, "homoeopathic injections of science and culture" could improve the lives of men. ... He went on believing ... that no issue was closed for ever, that every thesis must be weighed against its antithesis, that systems and absolutes of every kind - social and political no less than religious - were a form of dangerous idolatry; (See the letters to Countess Lambert in 1864, and to the writer M. A. Milyutina in 1875, quoted with much other relevant material in V. N. Gorbacheva, Molodye Gody Turgeneva, Kazan, 1926.) above all, one must never go to a war unless and until all that one believes in is at stake and there is literally no other way out." - Isaiah Berlin, Russian Thinkers, 295. - - One, on his own, can never go to war, although he might use rightful force in self-defence or wrongful force in criminal aggression with victims. As for whole countries and their people, there are better ways, in most cases, than going to total war against all the subjects of an aggressive government. The total defensive war should only be total against the decision makers of an aggressive regime. It should e.g., include a separate peace offer to all others and chocolate bombs rather than high explosive bombs on the civilian victims of a dictatorship that commits the international aggression, using its subjects merely as military, labor and tax slaves. - JZ, 10.9.04, 23.9.04.

TURKEY: If Turkey seems to receive an undue amount of attention, it is probably because of the late date and the fine documentation of the extraterritorial rights there. This should not be seen as a one-sided critique of Turkey – if anything, Turkey was remarkable for having maintained a much higher degree of tolerance far longer than most other states. - - According to R. J. Rummel, "Lenin's rapacious agricultural policies 1918-1923 created a famine that killed by starvation and associated diseases about 7,300,000 people. Half of these victims comprise democide, the other half are the unintentional victims of failed policies." R. J. Rummel also writes that "From 1900 to 1923, Turkish dictatorships murdered about 2,100,000 Armenians." See for both quotes and his references. This is "free national development", early 20th century Soviet and Turkish style. - RCBJ in his review of the book on extraterritoriality by SHI SHUN LIU. - TOLERANCE, GENOCIDE, MASS MURDERS, TERRITORIALISM, NATIONALISM, SOVIETS, ARMENIANS.

TURKISH EMPIRE, BALKANS, MILLET SYSTEM & NATIONALISM: From "Life" - "World-Library", volume "The Balkans", chap.: Obstacles to Harmony, pa 136: "Fragmented nationalism has been the besetting curse of the Balkans. But the cause of this destructive nationalism cannot be stated simply. The doctrine of nationalism is by no means native to the Balkans: it grew up in Western Europe in early modern times and first took root in England, Spain and France - countries with well defined frontiers which had been in existence for centuries before a national consciousness was aroused. - - … "By contrast, the Turkish Empire was a multinational and supranational conception; the Empire did not foster nationalism in the modern Western sense. It followed the millet system: a non-Moslem subject of the Empire belonged to a community determined by his religion - Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Gregorian Armenians, Jewish or Protestant - wherever he might dwell. Nationality depended on religion, not on place or ethnic origin. Such a concept of nationality was ideally suited to the complex grouping of racial, cultural, religious and linguistic groupings in the Balkan. - - "As the Empire declined, however, and as the modern doctrine of nationalism struck the Balkans after the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars, the millet concept lost force. One land, one folk, became the new cry in the Balkans, as it did in other parts of the continent. Macedonia, for example, was claimed by the Macedonian: it belonged to the Slavic speaking Macedonians of Orthodox faith, and they would kill to make it so. But what of the thousands of Moslims, Jews, Vlachs, Greeks and Albanians who had dwelt in Macedonia for centuries and had as good a title as anyone to the land? …" - - If one considers various nationalities and isms as modern religions then the desirability of modern forms of the millet system, not only for the Balkans, becomes obvious.”

TURMOIL, GLOBAL ECONOMIC TURMOIL: It exists only in all too many heads. What has happened and is still happening, are merely the unnatural consequences and disorders of an imposed “order”, mainly that of territorial, monetary and financial despotism, that largely prevents competition, self-help and self-responsibility. Governments are willing to do everything in these spheres except getting out of the way and allowing full self-responsibility, fully free enterprise, exchange, cooperation and competition, under which the good systems, means and methods would soon drive out the bad ones, including all those of territorial governments, unless they are preserved among statist volunteers and at their expense and risk only. – JZ, 23.10.98, 18.7.08.

TURNER, JENNIE M.: Proposal for a New Constitution of the United Nations, mimeo, 4 pp. in Canadian Peace Research Institute files, proposes either UN reform or a parallel "Federal Union for Defence and Prosperity", P.R.A.J., Ref. No. 29 532.

TUSSMAN, JOSEPH: Obligation and the Body Politic, OUP, 1960, 1963. Page 5: "Partly by way of criticism of the above view is the position that a body politic is a group of persons sharing a common set of habits or customs..." Page 7: "Saving the best for last, I come now to the notion of 'agreement' as expressing the core of political relatedness. A body politic, on this view, is a group of persons related by a system of agreements; to be a member of a body politic is to be a party to the system of agreements. The model is obviously the voluntary group or organization. A voluntary group is composed of a number of individuals who, in pursuit of a common purpose, agree to act in concert, putting themselves under a common discipline, authority, and obligation. The difficulty is not in understanding what a voluntary group is but in seeing the body politic as such, or essentially like such a group...." - Page 9: "In this tradition of 'political freedom' does not turn on the absence of law but on whether the law is 'self-imposed'. And it is only in this tradition that one can make any sense at all out of 'freedom under law'. The demand for freedom under law is not the demand for an indulgent master. It is the demand that our social order be reconstructed as a voluntary group..." - The books starts out as well but does not end as well. - JZ, 26.1.99.

TWERSKY, ISADORE: Aspects of the Social and Cultural History of Provencal Jewry, in "Jewish Society through the Ages", ed. by H. H. Ben-Sasson & S. Ettinger, N.Y., Schocken Books, 1971, pp 185-207.

TWISS, Laws of Nations, 2nd. ed., Oxford, 1884, vol i. P. 444, on PERSONAL LAW, RELIGIOUS BASIS, referred to by Liu, Extraterritoriality, page 22: „The principle of territorial sovereignty as stated in the epoch-making opinion of Chief Justice Marshall in the case of The Schooner Exchange mentioned above was unknown in the ancient world. In fact, during a large part of what we usually term modern history, no such conception was ever entertained.1  In the earlier stages of human development, race or nationality rather than territory formed the basis of a community of law. An identity of religious worship seems to have been during this period a necessary condition of a common system of legal rights and obligations.  The barbarian was outside the pale of religion, and therefore incapable of amenability to the same jurisdiction to which the natives were subjected.2  For this reason, we find that in the ancient world foreigners were either placed under a special jurisdiction or completely exempted from the local jurisdiction. In these arrangements for the safeguarding of foreign interests we find the earliest traces of extraterritoriality.“ - - 1 Maine, Ancient Law (3d Am. ed., New York, 1888), p. 99. Cf, Moore, op. cit., vol. ii, p. 761. - - 2 Cf Twiss Law of Nations (2nd ed., Oxford, 1884), vol. i, p. 444.

TWISS, TRAVERS: On Consular Jurisdiction in the Levant, or the Status of Foreigners in the Ottoman Law Courts, London, William Clowes & Son, 1880.

TWO PARTY STATES: We get to go to the polls every couple of years and choose between two flavors of the same gruel. The inmates get to elect the guards. Then, having exercised our rights as free citizens of a great social democracy, we go back to obeying orders.” – Hal O’Boyle – VOTING, PARTY POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM

TYAU, M, T. Z.: The Legal Obligations Arising Out of Treaty Relations between China and Other States, Shanghai, Commercial Press, 1917.

TYRANNICIDE: 14, 43, ON PANARCHY I, in PP 505. - I find it inexcusable and scandalous, that even tyrannicide is not sufficiently discussed as a single step that might, in extreme cases, especially when combined with many other rightful and rational steps, do some good, instead of leading only to even more atrocities, by a tyrannical government, in retaliation. - (Typically, it is not even a word in my automatic spelling system, inbuilt in Eudora.) - - Obviously, a “separation” of fanatic rulers and their volunteers from unwilling victims is involved here, or some choice of governments and removal of unwanted and imposed ones. Tyranny would be reduced through it by at least one significant head. These executioners have, obviously, undertaken an individualist "secession" by such actions, even though they knew, that they had, most likely, to lay down their lives in such an action. - - A few dozen such secessionists and Hitler would not have survived for long and millions of lives would have been spared. Such secessionism and determination cannot be fully effectively outlawed and suppressed. Thus it leads to the question: Why was it not more effectively applied against obviously criminal governments, real “human” monsters? Bad as the present US government is, it has undertaken some sensible steps in this direction. (Please do not distort this statement as if it meant that I am a fan of Bush or apologist for him. I merely want to state that I am not a fanatic enemy of all his efforts and actions, and those of his advisors, in every respect.) - - Rommel was one of the best and most honorable German soldiers. But, he still served, for all too long, even a Hitler and his regime, all too well and all too long, in spite of his scruples. He had not clearly decided and early enough, when a soldier ought to disobey a government that is as criminal. He still found himself bound, for all too long, by his oath. Thus, the several assassination attempts by the Allies against him were justified, in my eyes. But they should have been better organized. - - At least one promising attempt, proposed by an English officer, against Hitler, was prevented by the English government! Czarism was once defined as "despotism, somewhat moderated by assassination". - - Romans and Greeks, at one stage, and some medieval theorists, did not consider such actions as assassinations or murders but, instead, as rightful, even as obligatory executions, after these criminals had outlawed themselves, by their actions. The secret but popular Vhemic courts against tyrants first organized some underground case against them, leading to their underground “outlawry” and then to the execution of the outlawed. - JZ

TYRANNICIDE: in general the only remedy by which they attempt to cure the tyranny, is to change the tyrant.” – Edmund Burke, A Vindication of Natural Society, p. 39. – I agree. From free to imprisoned or from alive to being dead. – JZ, 9.4.82. – Territorialism amounts to a standing invitation to future tyrants to usurp and maintain power. – JZ, 29.7.08. – TYRANNY, TERRITORIALISM

TYRANNICIDE: Prepare for tyrannicide, insurrections, revolutions and liberation campaigns against dictators but not for war against their victims, whether civilians or conscripts. Consistent libertarian actions, methods, appeal and organizations are ideal for this objective, especially governments and communities in exile, representing all those diverse groups that are suppressed by despots and tyrants, all with a quite rightful war or rather peace program, which at the time of the French Revolution was reduced to the slogan: “War to the palaces but peace to the cottages!” – JZ, 24.3.84, 307.08. – WAR AIMS, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, LIBERATION RATHER THAN ANNIHILATION, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

TYRANNICIDE: Put only leaders like Saddam Hussein or President Bush into a fighting arena, no one else and no spoils ought to go to the victor. More fundamental would be the dissolution of their offices, as far as territorial powers over others than volunteers are involved. And no leader or other people should be allowed to stockpile and use mass extermination devices. Who could assure that? Probably only sufficiently enlightened and properly armed, organized and trained forces of volunteers, who would have only one war and peace aim, namely the realization and protection of all genuine individual rights and liberties, to the extent that they are claimed by communities of volunteers. – So far we assured all too much “freedom of action” to the tyrants and all too little to ourselves. - JZ, 17.2.03, 21.10.07. – ASSASSINATIONS OR DUELS? TYRANNICIDE OR DUELS BETWEEN THE LEADERS OR MISLEADERS? LEADERSHIP, MILITIA

TYRANNICIDE: RESPONSIBILITY, INDIVIDUAL: The responsibility to prevent the occurrence of catastrophic man-made events relies on each individual. Otherwise each individual, in different ways, will be doomed, going down with the conflagration or being swept away by the resulting vortex, unaware of why ultimate terror is befalling him and naively proclaiming his innocence right until the moment terror arrives to visit him. - What is instead required from each one of us, in the ways and forms which are humanly possible in each case, is the: - Dissociation from tyrants: We should distance ourselves, as soon as possible, from vicious rulers and their criminal gangs and withdraw our support, as much as possible, either through underground resistance or through open intervention. - Denunciation of tyrants: The open intervention should aim at deposing the tyrant and his criminal clique, bringing them to trial. The examples set by the detention of Slobodan Milosevic and Charles Taylor should represent only the beginning and should lead to a wider and deeper cleansing of the world of murderous rulers. - - Dissolution of tyrants: A judicial process should be the proper way for the abolition of tyrants. However, if a Prime Minister, President of State, Commander in chief of the army, etc. cannot be brought to trial for one reason or another, then, tyrannicide is the justifiable act of last resort. - - "They [the Utopians] regard it as honourable, as an act of humanity and mercy which, by the death of a few guilty individuals [the warmongering rulers], saves the lives of thousands of innocent people who would otherwise die on the battlefield. For the mercy of Utopians embraces all enemy soldiers. They know that the soldiers do not begin a war on their own initiative but are forced by orders resulting from the quarrelsomeness of princes." - Thomas More, Utopia, 1516. - - "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." - Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to W. S. Smith, 1787. - Clearly tyrannicide should only be the extreme option, taken in order to stop further large scale crimes committed/ordered by a person; stop other people following the example and engaging in similar crimes. - However, if the person (Prime Minister, State President, etc.) responsible for those crimes, brings an end to the wrongdoings (completely) - makes reparation (as far as possible) - asks sincerely for forgiveness (as soon as possible) he should be re-admitted into the circle of humankind and no attack on his life should be undertaken. - With this necessary act of retribution we are, nonetheless, still in the realm of politics and so of hatred and vindictive deeds. - After that, we need to move beyond politics and beyond territorial, monopolistic and totalitarian organizations, towards the sphere of spatialism, pluralism, voluntarism, a sphere inhabited by cosmopolitan individuals characterized by the universal attitude and practice of tolerance and acceptance of different creeds and customs, in all fields. - - The trajectory started a few centuries ago with the introduction of religious tolerance would be then extended and completed with the practice of political tolerance and freely chosen membership covering the wide social area of state allegiance and group association. In other words, the practice of voluntary association (or abstention from any association) should be available to every individual, in relation to any community and organization, the state included. - BELLIS, GIAN PIERO: Scenarios for the Future, 2006, - For a brief general overview on tyrannicide and the position of the Catholic Church see J. M. Harty (1912) Tyrannicide (Catholic Encyclopedia) - - For Voluntary Servitude as the most fertile ground for Tyranny see La Boetie (1553) Discours de la servitude voluntaire. - - For an act of tyranny such as the imprisonment of Japanese Americans refer to - Gian Piero de Bellis in his "Waiting for the bomb." - Appendix: Waiting for the Bomb? - - Probably in his 1795 book "Eternal Peace", Kant called any government as being, essentially, still a despotism, in which one or a few decide upon war and peace. Alas, he still believed in the representation of the people by politicians assembled in a parliament. - He did not favor direct democracy on this subject and the right of minorities to stay neutral or make other alliances. - JZ, 25.8.11. - INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR AND PEACE, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, TYRANNICIDE, LEADERSHIP, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, DESPOTISM, MONOPOLISM, WARFARE STATE

TYRANNICIDE: So far many more innocent people were murdered by tyrants and their supporters than tyrants and their supporters were executed. We ought to try to reverse that relationship, primarily by quite rightful tyrannicide actions against all tyrants and their main supporters. Furthermore by undertaking all the measures required to prevent new tyrannies from arising. That would require citizen forces of volunteers, motivated, trained, armed and organized to protect individual rights and liberties, voluntary instead of territorial States and societies, abolition of all excessive power positions, e.g. on war and peace decision-making, an ideal and complete declaration of individual rights and liberties to be finally produced and published, including a tyrannicide clause, full enlightenment on all liberty options via new reference tools, methods and institutions, beginning e.g. with an ever growing electronic libertarian encyclopedia, ideas archive, and comprehensive freedom library on a large or very powerful disk. – A clause on tyrannicide ought to be included in all constitutions, like it once was, for a short time, during the French Revolution, in a French one. - JZ 5.12.04. - MILITIA, EXTERRITORIALISM

TYRANNICIDE: There exists something like a “gentlemen’s agreement” between most rulers, although most rulers are not gentle men. They agreed not to harm each other but “only” “their” subjects. In this "policy" measure the people are considered as their mere property or hostages or pawns in chess games. That policy should be radically changed, by the people themselves. From now own they should agree not to harm each other, but only their wrongful rulers. – The people, negotiating properly and over the heads of their rulers, have a much better chance than their territorial governments have, to arrive at a just peace between them, one respecting all their individual rights and liberties and their personal choices of systems, communities, societies and statist regimes, all without any territorial monopoly and territorial powers. - JZ, n.d., & 30.10.07. - GOVERNMENTS VS. THE PEOPLE, THE PEOPLE VS. TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS, PANARCHISM, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, NWT, MASS MURDER DEVICES, ENEMIES, TARGETS

TYRANNICIDE: Tyrannicide will rarely be successful in its final objective: destruction of a tyranny, when it remains an isolated measure instead of being one resistance step among many others that are practised at the same time. – JZ, 1.10.84. – The main and quite rightful aim must be to do away with territorial powers, laws and institutions, which continue to breed tyranny and tyrants. – JZ, 29.7.08. – TERRITORIALISM, TOTALITARIANISM

TYRANNIES, TYRANTS & PANARCHISM: By allowing individuals to secede tyrannies would be avoided and tyrannicide would be rendered superfluous. Voluntary followers, doing only their things to themselves or letting them be done to themselves, have only themselves and their choice of leaders to blame. Such tyrannies are not wrongful impositions to be resisted to the utmost. They can serve as deterrent examples to others. - JZ, 23.9.04.

TYRANNY, REBELLION & TERRITORIALISM: Today's rebel is tomorrow's tyrant. - Will and Ariel Durant. - Territorialism alone would already assure that - at least for the periods of elective despotism.  - J. Z. , 9.7.92, 6.2.94.

TYRANNY: All tyrannies are abolished the moment all individuals are free to secede from them. What remained of them would be, likewise, merely volunteer communities. Exclusive territorial sovereignty and compulsory membership and subjugation are the essence of tyranny in the political sense. Without this territorial political tyranny only small-scale tyrannies would be possible towards relatives and associates, within certain limits, set by their voluntary association, and the tyranny of some private criminals over their non-consenting victims. And these are tyrants which are now not sufficiently resisted, either. A competitive resistance from autonomous volunteer communities and ideal militia forces for the protection of individual rights could most effectively subdue or eliminate them, if they are not already prevented from coming into existence through the spread of panarchism by numerous diverse panarchies of volunteers. - JZ, 12.4.91, 13.1.93, 23.9.04, 18.8.12.

TYRANNY: I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” - Vice President Thomas Jefferson, letter to Benjamin Rush, September 23, 1800. - The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, ed. Andrew A. Lipscomb, vol. 10, p. 175 (1903). Carved at the base of the dome, interior of the Jefferson Memorial, Washington, D.C. - He should have added: and over the actions of peaceful and innovative men. - JZ 14.10.02. - - Not only over their minds but also over their bodies! - JZ, 22. 11. 06. - OVER MINDS & BODIES, TERRITORIALISM

TYRANNY: Most had not yet learnt the deeper lesson of the Tyrant, that violence builds its own limits.” - Frank Herbert, Heretics of Dune, p.197. – It does, but it also builds and maintains its own supports, relatively easily with e.g. taxation, its monetary despotism, its public debt certificates based upon continued tax slavery, its territorialism, its monopolistic armed forces and its compulsory public education system. – JZ, 15.4.09, 18.8.12. - STATISM, LIMITS, VIOLENCE, AGGRESSION, INVASIONS, COERCION, COMPULSION

TYRANNY: Since every tyrant is ipso facto immoral and ruthless, it [a tyranny? – JZ] has much more freedom in the choice of its methods than an institution which still takes account of the individual.” - C. G. Jung, The Undiscovered Self. – But it does not have the potential power and attractiveness of all liberties and rights, fully known, appreciated, applied and offered as liberation aims and already fully demonstrated by peacefully coexisting but also competing and very diverse governments in exile, all only for their present and future volunteers. – It does not even have the attractiveness of somewhat free countries, relatively wealthy and ready to welcome refugees and deserters. - Freedom lovers have still not sufficiently surveyed and published all their alternatives and all too often know only a small fraction of them. – JZ, 26.12.07. - VS. FREE & MORAL SOCIETIES, MORE POWERFUL? DIS., INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, PANARCHISM, POWER OF ATTRACTION

TYRANNY: Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day. But a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly proves a deliberate systematic plan of reducing us to slavery.” – Thomas Jefferson – Could thus even a Welfare State be described as a tyranny? Yes, as long as dissenters cannot freely secede from it. Would it justify tyrannicide? – Hardly, for there are too many tyrants involved, including every statist voter, the majority of voters! Many of them, possibly, close members of your own family! Enlightenment works too slowly – unless all means now available for it are sufficiently used. Once dissenting minorities have gained experimental freedom, even if the majority would grant it only as a liberty for those it considers to be fools, further enlightenment efforts could be spared and would be replaced by practical demonstrations of sound alternatives among their believers. – JZ, 15.4.09. - FLOOD OF LAWS & REGULATIONS OR DECREES, WELFARE STATES, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, MORE ENLIGHTENING THAT CONTINUOUS VERBAL ENLIGHTENMENT EFFORTS

TYRANNY: The conflict between tyranny and freedom won’t end, he says, until there is a world of free men everywhere.” – John Chamberlain, on Isaac Don Levine, in THE FREEMAN, 9.73. – Contrary to most anarchists and libertarians, panarchists do not aim at making all men immediately as free as they could and should be - some day in the future - but, for the present, only as free as they want to be at this stage of their development and enlightenment, with each group free to advance towards full liberty at their own speed and by their own free experimentation They would often start out merely with some authoritarian, egalitarian or outright despotic system, with the utopias of ignorance and prejudiced people. They should be free to suffer under and learn from their own mistakes and should never be pushed into a liberty they do not as yet understand and appreciate. Let them break their own path towards it, which will be the fastest way for them, especially if they are also somewhat guided by the more successful examples of other and better systems. – JZ, 30.7.08. – DIS., PANARCHISM, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, TOLERANCE FOR ALL TOLERANT ACTIONS

TYRANNY: The evils of tyranny are rarely seen but by him who resists it.” – John Hay (1872) – The resistance- and freedom-fighters are often not aware of the worst wrongs that put them under conditions that induced them to resist and fight. How many of them are aware of the wrongs and irrationalities e.g. of monetary despotism, territorial organization and hierarchies in the sphere of organizing production and exchange and of sound alternatives to them? – So they merely fight for another territorial regime, one which others will resist and fight against. - JZ, 15.4.09, 18.8.12.

TYRANNY: The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which (*) blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves.” – Dresden James – In a political system of xyz diverse panarchies of volunteers, all peacefully and exterritorially competing with each other in the same country – or even world-wide - for subscribers, wrongs committed against their members and mistakes made by them would become relatively fast recognized as such and ended, almost automatically, simply by more and more disappointed people seceding from them and less and less hopefuls joining them. – (*) which or who? - JZ, 15.4.09, 18.8.12. - SLAVERY, DEMOCRACY, VOTING, CONSENT OF THE VICTIM, VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, LEGALIZING WRONGS –

TYRANNY: The immense tyranny of someone else’s system.” – Margaret Jones on 2FC radio, 7.7.72. – IF it is territorially enforced over peaceful dissenters! – J.Z., 18.8.12. – DIS., TERRITORIALISM

TYRANNY: The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they suppress.” - Frederick Douglass (1817?-1895) - That would be true only if individuals and minorities were free to secede. Until then the dissenters are largely forced to endure. - JZ, 14.10.02. – Another version: The limitation of tyrants is the endurance of those they oppose.” – Frederick Douglass – So far they are insufficiently limited by freedom for the establishment of diverse panarchies of volunteers, all without any territorial monopoly. – Nor were, preventatively, monetary and financial freedom and tolerant land reform options peacefully and peace-promotingly introduced. – It is all not merely a question of brute force and counter-force. - JZ, 15.4.09. - & RESISTANCE TO IT, REVOLUTION, SUBMISSIVENESS, STATISM, OBEDIENCE

TYRANNY: The violation of a free nation’s constitution and of its citizens’ individual rights is called tyranny.” – INDIVIDUALIST, vol. 4, No. 2. – By that definition every territorial government, constitution and democracy would also be a tyranny. We ought to be more careful with our definitions. – JZ, 30.7.08.

TYRANNY: The worst forms of tyranny, or certainly the most successful ones, are not those we rail against but those that so insinuate themselves into the imagery of our consciousness, and the fabric of our lives, as not to be perceived as tyranny.” – Michael Parenti - INSINUATING, WELFARISM, SALAMI TACTICS, WAR AGAINST POVERTY, WAR AGAINST DRUGS, WAR AGAINST TERRORISM, COMPULSORY EDUCATION, GRADUALISM, CENTRAL BANKING, TERRITORIALISM, PROTECTIONISM

TYRANNY: Tyranny can also be established and maintained “democratically”. – JZ, 13.2.12. – DEMOCRACY, VOTING, MAJORITARIANISM, PUBLIC OPINION



[Home] [Top]