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 - W

(1973 - 2012)



WAGES: The fact is that wages are determined by supply and demand, and not in a general way, but in each case, by branches of production, by enterprises within each one of these branches, and by individuals within each enterprise, on the basis of the existing need for labor, its abundance or scarcity, and the productive capability of each particular worker. This holds true not only in countries with a system of free enterprise but also in those with a more or less interventionist policy, like Mexico, …” - Ballvé, Economics, p.37. – Nowhere does there exist as yet fully free banking or monetary freedom and thus no fully free market, free trade and free enterprise. But I was surprised to read today that in Afghanistan, in spite of all the anti-rights and anti-freedom and intolerant actions of these “freedom-fighters”, according to a report by Paul McGeough, in THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, of Aug. 9-10,08, p. 27, there exist 3 currencies in the Taliban area. Alas, details were not given. Nor was the unemployment rate in the Taliban and governmental areas or the inflation rate of the official currency. According to another source the unemployment rate in A. is extremely high. Much of its total income seems to be still due to drug production and drug trade. – If the three competing currencies there were issued and streaming back on a quite sound foundation, then the unemployment rate might be as low as it can be in a country in the middle of a civil war. – If the Talibans can be tolerant towards the coexistence of 3 currencies, why can’t they be tolerant in other respects as well? If they confined their “reforms” to volunteers only, they could be much more successful and would not provoke as much resistance as they do. E.g., according to the above newspaper report suicide bombings are on the rise and they killed 40 humanitarian workers and abducted 89. – So my sympathies are certainly not with their violent actions. – Any peace-plan, to be effective, should concede them their own panarchy – but not any territorial monopoly. Nor should such a monopoly be granted to any other group, movement or faith in Afghanistan – or anywhere else. -JZ, 19.8.08. – A DEGREE OF MONETARY FREEDOM IN AFGHANISTAN? PANARCHISM, TALIBANS


WALKER, KARL: Demokratie und Menschenrechte (Democracy & Human Rights), Rudolf Zitzmann, Lauf bei Nuernberg, 1947, 104 S., paper back, JZL. - Favours tolerance for tolerant actions or experimental freedom and autonomy for all minorities, e.g. on pp.74-76 & 80. One passage has been reproduced on sheet 21 in PEACE PLANS 1360. - We should agree upon a convention conceding to every group the right to practice the principles of its ideal social order within the circle of like-minded people ..." - Karl Walker.

WALLENBERG, RAOUL & DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY, SWEDISH PASSPORTS TO RESCUE HUNGARIAN JEWS FROM THE NAZIS: William Zuckermann, “They Found Friends”, condensed from a chapter in “Deadline Delayed”, a symposium by members of the Overseas Press Club, copyrighted 1947, and published at $ 3.50 by E. P. Dutton & Co., Inc., 300 Fourth Ave., New York 10, N.Y., here from READER’S DIGEST, April 1947, which summed up the article with the remark: “By the heroic efforts of the ‘little people’ of Europe, nearly 3.000 000 Jews were saved from destruction.” - E.g.: In Amsterdam dockworkers battled with the Nazis, who wanted to deport Jews. A general strike happened. 3500 demonstrators were killed by the Nazis.  - But here the relevant passage, for exterritorial status is: “In 1944 a special representative of the Swedish Government, Raoul Wallenberg, was responsible for the saving of 15,000 Hungarian Jews from certain death. He issued thousands of Swedish ‘protective passports’ to Jews. He bought up houses in Budapest, converted them into Swedish ‘consulates’ and filled them with Jews, thus giving the Jews the extraterritorial rights of citizens of a neutral country.” - Alas, this hero of WW II disappeared into one of the Soviet concentration camps!  And how many of the thus saved people and of their sympathizers, became consistent advocates for exterritorial status for communities of volunteers? – JZ, 9.11.04. – In my home-town, Berlin, an estimated 3,000 to 5,000 Jews survived, sheltered by their humanitarian neighbours, sympathizers and friends. The antisemitic Nazis never formed a majority of the German population. But their victims were disarmed, disorganized and terrorized – and, like the present populations, did not know how to organize and run, effectively, a liberating revolution or military insurrection and did not even care to acquire such knowledge. Should we blame this population more than the present ignorant, prejudiced and apathetic masses in all countries? – JZ, 7.2.12.

WALLERSTEIN, IMMANUEL, Utopistics: Or Historical Choices of the Twenty-First Century Immanuel Wallerstein 1998 politics, governance, history - Abstracts are wanted and review hints, as well as links to the full texts, if they are relevant to this collection. - Titles can be so deceptive. - JZ, 13.10.11.

WANTED & TOLERANT PARADISES ON EARTH VS. IMAGINED SCIENCE FICTION UTOPIAS IN SPACE: The exterritorial autonomy option offers all the diversity and liberation that most peaceful people really want, right on this planet. One does not have to wish for a multitude of different habitable planets in order to make a multitude of diverse free societies possible. - JZ 28.4.92, 13.1.93.

WANTS: I think a person should have the right to have whatever he wants just as long as he does not impose his wishes on somebody else. Now, if those people want to vote to support a certain system or a certain person, that’s fine. However, the problem is that they’re imposing this system and this person on the rest of us.” – Murray N. Rothbard, in PENTHOUSE interview, 10/76. – He came several times close to panarchism but never saw or described it fully, to my knowledge. - JZ, 7.9.08. – If he did, please, do inform me. – JZ, 24.8.12, - IDEALS, PERSONAL PREFERENCES, IMPOSITIONS, CHOICES, DREAMS, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, ROTHBARD

WAR & NATIONAL GOALS: That's what this nasty little war is all about, isn't it? ... Many peoples, or just one. Many moralities, or just one. Many values and goals and a thousand roads to reach them. Or just one." - Marie Jakober, The Mind Gods, 134. – PEOPLES, NATIONS, TERRITORIALISM, IDEOLOGIES, INTOLERANCE, TOLERANCE, CENTRALIZATION, SCIENCE FICTION

WAR & PANARCHISM: Panarchism in defence efforts against aggressors and in liberation wars against oppressors: With the panarchist programme all wars could become reduced to limited and rightful "police" actions, exclusively against the real war criminals and their fanatical followers. - Panarchism would abolish the major preconditions for all wars, civil wars and revolutions. - Perhaps most important of all, panarchism would do away with the threats arising from the mere existence of ABC mass murder or anti-people “weapons” and of territorial governments able and willing to use them. E.g. no nuclear targets would remain nor any war and peace making monopoly. Motives and means for conducting international wars would tend to disappear and almost everybody would gain a personal interest in becoming also a disarmament inspector against the build-up of ABC mass murder devices by anyone, anywhere and at any time. Imagine the almost general outcry of all kinds of religious and non-religious people if the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches tried to arm themselves with nuclear "weapons" against each other. Everybody would realize that his own fate would then be at stake and that of mankind. No nuclear strength advocates would then get far with such an aspiration. Most religious people, today, would not even entertain such a notion in the first place. It would be too obviously wrong, self-defeating and absurd. On this aspect consult especially my book "An ABC Against Nuclear War", reproduced in PEACE PLANS 16-17. (Now online: ) - JZ to Joe Toscana, March 96. - DECISION ON WAR AND PEACE BY THE PEOPLE, DEFENCE, DESERTION, LIBERATION, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, MILITIA, REVOLUTIONS, SEPARATE PEACE, WAR AIMS

WAR & PEACE AIMS: [Washington] “should identify war aims that in the last resort would contemplate the destruction of Soviet political authority and the emergence of a postwar world order compatible with Western values.” – Colin Gray, a top arms control advisor to the Reagan government. - THE NATIONAL TIMES, Sept. 23/29, 1983. – Why should there be only ONE world order and why should it be based upon WESTERN values? To each individual and to all communities of volunteers the system, laws, procedures, institutions, constitutions, jurisdictions etc. that correspond to their values – for all their own affairs! – JZ, 27.8.08. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, WORLD ORDER, AS MANY FREE SOCIETIES & COMMUNITIES AS VOLUNTEERS WANT FOR THEMSELVES.

WAR & PEACE AIMS: Be kind to your friends that they may continue so, and to your enemies that they may become so.” - Pittacus - Not so much kindness but rather justice is required, individual rights and liberties for those, so far suppressed. - JZ, 9.4.11. - CAPTIVE NATIONS, LIBERATION, QUITE RIGHTFUL GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE AS ALLIES. TO EACH THE GOVERNMENT OR NON-GOVERNMENTAL SOCIETIES OF HIS OR HER DREAMS!

WAR & PEACE AIMS: Ceterum censeo, Carthaginem esse delendam.” – “In my opinion, Carthage must be destroyed.” – Plutarch, Lives: Marcus Cato, ch. 27, sec. I. – Publius Scipio Nasica always countered with, ”In my opinion, Carthage must be spared!” – What kind of historic development would have followed if Rome and Carthage had come to a free trade, free migration, free labor, free banking, free investment arrangement and had both abolished slavery and reduced all citizenship to volunteers and all territorial sovereignty to exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers? – JZ, 27.8.08. - DESTRUCTION OF CITIES, AIR RAIDS, BOMBING, UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER DEMANDS, TOTAL WARFARE, DESTROYING WHOLE COUNTRIES & KILLING, ENSLAVING OR DISPERSING THEIR POPULATIONS

WAR & PEACE AIMS: Declaration of quite rightful war aims, made in a quite trustworthy way, by the people themselves, rather than by their governments. What were the quite rightful war aims e.g. in the American Civil War, in WW I, in WW II, in the war in Korea, in Vietnam, in Afghanistan, in Iraq etc.? – I never heard or read of any! Without a war aim that is attractive to both sides no war is likely to stop before almost complete mutual exhaustion. Minimum demands are: No reparations, no conquests, no discrimination, full exterritorial autonomy for all societies of volunteers, recognition of all individual rights and liberties. – JZ, n.d. & 27.8.08, 9.4.11. – Q.

WAR & PEACE AIMS: For shame therefore (Royalists, Presbyterians, Independents), before you murther another man hold forth your Cause plainly and expresly, and if any Adversaries appear either within or without the Land, reason it out with them if it be possible, deal as becometh Christians, argue, perswade, and use all possible means to prevent another War, and greater blood-shed; your great ones, whether the King, Lords, Parliament men, rich Citizens, &c. feel not the miserable effects thereof, and so cannot be sensible; but you and your poor friends that depend on Farmers, trades, and small pay, have many an aking heart when these live in all pleasure and deliciousness: The accursed thing is accepted by them, wealth and honor, and both comes by the bleeding miserable distractions of the Common-wealth, and they rear an end of trouble would put an end to their glory and greatness.” - Walwyn, The Bloody Project, 1648, quoted in A. L. Morton, Freedom In Arms, p. 177. – How different would history have run if tolerance for all tolerant actions and communities had already been accepted then and all individual rights and liberties had been recognized and realized? – JZ, 27.8.08. - VESTED INTEREST OF SOME IN VS. VESTED INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE IN PEACE

WAR & PEACE AIMS: Perhaps nothing could be more peace-promoting than the formulation, declaration and sufficient publication of quite just war and peace aims – and this in a timely and quite trustworthy form, by the citizens themselves and over the heads of their rulers. – JZ, 28.12.93. – That such declarations are not just mere words but that they can be trusted should be demonstrated by allowing the practice of these war and peace aims already on the side of the population which makes this declaration, by, e.g. permitting and promoting there all kinds of governments in exile and minority groups to set themselves up as exterritorially autonomous communities for their own volunteers, under their own personal laws. To use an analogy: You cannot charge any nation or government to be State Socialistic and correspondingly monopolistic and tyrannical when it has, like the USA, ten to twenty million private enterprises - provided only that these are not subjected to compulsory regulations, taxes, monetary despotism, trade unionism, protectionism and other wrongful and anti-economic interventions and when, furthermore, decision-making on war and peace, armament and disarmament and international treaties rests with the free peoples, in their various voluntary communities, rather than with a central territorial government, imposed upon all dissenters. – JZ, 21.8.08. - PANARCHISM, MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM

WAR & PEACE AIMS: Rightful war aims for defensive, liberating and revolutionary warfare, to establish peace, justice and freedom are almost obvious: No conquests, annexations and taxation. No imposition of the own constitution, laws or jurisdiction and administration. Just the defeat of a wrongful and aggressive territorial government, holding its leaders responsible for their oppressive and aggressive actions. A separate peace treaty with all their victims. The only expropriations that should take place are those of defeated and exploitative rulers and their henchmen to the advantage of their internal and external victims and this only after fair trials. As for the choice of new constitutions, laws and jurisdictions for the liberated population in the countries of the defeated despotic and aggressive regime, this should be left to the various choices of all the communities of dissenters, all of them freed to secede from the old territorial regime and free to establish their own systems of whatever kind – but all only for their own volunteers, i.e., without any territorial monopoly. On that basis the remaining supporters of the old regime, those not found guilty of having themselves offended against basic human rights and liberties, should be free to continue their old governmental system also, for their volunteers but no longer with any territorial powers over the dissenters, who had opted out from under them or will do so in the future. On that basis a separate peace treaty with them, also. Such rightful war and peace aims do naturally preclude the use of or the threat of the use of ABC mass murder devices against whole populations, cities, districts or countries. To be sufficiently trustworthy, the defending and victorious governments and societies should be likewise organized on a voluntary and exterritorial autonomy basis. Otherwise this modern equivalent to the slogan of the French Revolution: War to the palaces, peace to the cottages, could be as little trusted as it could during its wars and the subsequent imperialistic period and the following, all still continuing the wrongs of territorial rule over dissenters, instead of confining e.g. monarchism to monarchists and republicanism to republicans. Targets for mass murder devices must become dissolved by free individual actions and choices, by free associationism. – Such rightful war and peace aims can be unilaterally declared, and this in a quite trustworthy and well published way and must be strictly abided by. Then a war might even be altogether avoided. – The oppressive and aggressive regime might then no longer by obeyed by most of this soldiers, officers, policemen and other officials but become dissolved into societies and communities of volunteers only, all doing only their own things for and to themselves. - JZ, 23.3.09. PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, LIBERATION RATHER THAN CONQUESTS, VOLUNTARISM

WAR & PEACE AIMS: Territorial “free elections” and majority democratic territorial regimes are not attractive enough war and peace aims for all kinds of people, especially not those not yet accustomed to such a system for decades. It is not even very attractive one for those who were under it already for many decades, as is indicated by the low participation rate, unless voting is made compulsory and that kind of compulsion is another wrongful absurdity. - "Free elections" is rather a misnomer when through them almost no one gets only what he wants for himself and this at his own expense. Instead, he is subjected to the votes of millions of others and to the decisions made by the “representatives” of these others. - Quite rightful war and peace aims could and should be so attractive that they would reduce military resistance against them almost to zero, i.e. win over not only the civilian victims but also most of the soldiers of a dictatorship, whether they are conscripts or conventional patriots. – JZ, 23.4.04, 26.10.07. – One such war aim: To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her choice! This implies also voluntary taxation. It would also make the realization of full monetary and financial freedom possible, with their rightful and positive results. – JZ, n.d. - QUITE RIGHTFUL ONES, TERRITORIAL DEMOCRACY, VOTING, TERRITORIALLY IMPOSED RATHER THAN INDIVIDUALLY CHOSEN LAWS & COMMUNITIES, FREE ELECTIONS

WAR & PEACE AIMS: The greatest soldiering, heroism, military discipline, generalship, morale, manpower and the most powerful weapons are not a sufficient substitute for quite rightful war and peace aims and warfare methods, including revolutionary warfare, genuine liberation wars, including an alliance with refugees and deserters and with discontent military forces of the enemy regime against that regime. Even now POW’s that were conscripted by a dictatorial regime are, usually and indiscriminately regarded and treated as enemies rather than as liberated people, allies or at least neutral guests. The forces of the enemy regime are not systematically mobilized against it, by better ideas, systems and institutions than their regime can offer them. The centrifugal forces existing in any territorial dictatorship are not utilized against it, e.g. via as many governments in exile as are necessary to represent all suppressed minorities and to offer them immediately or a.s.a.p. full exterritorial autonomy for all their volunteers. The military academies do not study and teach such alternative warfare and liberation methods. They leave war aims to politicians who, as territorialists and power mongers, have nothing to offer that is sufficiently better, or, at most, only a majoritarian democracy that is not very attractive to any population split into many very antagonistic factions and with them almost constantly involved in a civil war. – JZ, 26.3.04, 26.10.07, 9.4.11, 24.8.12. - QUITE RIGHTFUL ONES, PRISONERS OF WAR & DESERTERS, OPTIMAL TREATMENT FOR THEM: GIVING THEM THEIR FREEDOM, UNLESS THEY ARE WAR CRIMINALS, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR ALL MINORITIES & FOR THE REMAINING MAJORITY.

WAR & PEACE AIMS: The key is communication. As soon as nations stop communicating with one another, individuals have no basis for developing world moral standards.” – Anita Weiner, in a review, No. 8797, in PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS JOURNAL. – Negotiations between diplomats and political leaders and their peace conferences and summit conferences are simply more power games, continuing all the problems of territorial warfare States. – JZ, 27.8.08. - So far there exists no freedom between the diverse peoples on both sides of any territorial frontier to negotiate and conclude treaties with each other. Such actions are presently reserved to the territorial power mongers, with results to be expected from such people. The communications and treaties between exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers would be very different from those between territorial governments. - They would concede to each other their right to subscribe to different moral and other standards for their own affairs, among their own volunteers. - JZ, 9.4.11, 24.8.12. - DIS., COMMUNICATION, PEOPLES, PEACE CONFERENCES, SUMMIT, PANARCHIES, CONFERENCES, LEADERSHIP, POLITICIANS, DIPLOMATS, NEGOTIATIONS, TREATIES

WAR & PEACE AIMS: The more just the war and peace aims are and the more widely and clearly they are publicized, already long before a war would break out, the less soldiers, weapons and fighting would be needed. When these aims are quite just on our side then even the enemy regime’s soldiers and officers would rather fight that regime than us, to achieve these aims, i.e., they would also fight for us, as our allies and against “their own” regime. In practice, they should then fight for the complete exterritorial autonomy of all their self-chosen panarchies or polyarchies. – JZ, 19.8.04. How many people can resist really good bargains, that they can afford? – JZ, 22.4.09. - Especially when their very survival and their liberty and rights may depend upon them? - JZ, 9.4.11. - QUITE JUST AIMS

WAR & PEACE AIMS: Thrice is he armed that hath his quarrel just.” – Shakespeare, Henry VI, part 2, act III, sc. 2. – A man fighting in a just cause fights with courage and determination, and may be said, poetically, to be three times armed. – But many soldiers may also fight bravely for an unjust cause and be victorious. (*) – Voltaire wrote: “It is said that God is on the side of the big battalions, i.e. God helps the stronger army.” (**) - A witty person added a line to the quotation, saying: “Thrice is he armed that hath his quarrel just, but four times he that gets his blow in fust (first) i.e. that strikes the first blow.” - A. Johnson, “Common English Quotations”, Longmans, London, 1963. - (*) Thus the propaganda of quite rightful war and peace aims must begin long before it would come to a war – in order to prevent it, if possible, or to make military disobedience and a military insurrection more likely. - (**) But what if the army consists only consists of volunteers sworn-in to fight for nothing but genuine individual rights and to resist and overthrow any government that tries to abuse them for an unjust war? – JZ, 24.9.08. - In WW I Czarist Russia got its blow in first in the East and it lost. In the West Germany got its blow in first - and it lost. No side had exclusively rightful war aims. - In WW II, the Nazi regime got its blow in first in Poland, and it lost, too, in the long run. But so did Poland, which was not liberated from totalitarianism for decades. - Only the mass murderous techniques of modern warfare are highly developed, not its ethics. - Thus only senseless huge slaughters and destruction are "achieved" on all sides. - And the fighting arenas, territorial States, remain wrongfully and coercively preserved, ready for the next war and the big and final one, that might extinguish mankind. - JZ, 9.4.11, 24.8.12. - DIS.

WAR & PEACE AIMS: To act unkindly toward an enemy will increase his hate.” – Antonius – I am not so sure that kindness will work towards, fundamentalists, terrorists, fanatics and totalitarians. – However, we should grant them the just opportunities of panarchies for their own remaining voluntary victims. - Justice, individual rights and liberties, to the extent that people do already appreciate them, rather than mere kindness, charity, territorial democracy and Welfare Statism! - To each the self-chosen system. Experimental freedom for all. - JZ, 28.8.08, 9.4.11.

WAR & TERRITORIALISM: As previously pointed out, an organization eager for war and expert in how to wage it must rely on: - - territorial sovereignty: the organization must have the power to place under its sovereignty all those who live within a certain territory (compulsory ascription) - - monopolistic rule: the organization must have the power to impose its exclusive laws on everybody under its territorial jurisdiction (compulsory submission); - - pervasive power: the organization must have the power to make use of the life of the individual for the maintenance of the territorial organization itself (compulsory conscription). - In modern times this organization has been the territorial nation state and that is why the coming to full dominance of this kind of state by the end of the 19th century also led to the biggest mass slaughters in the history of humanity. This is not an accidental correlation of events but a precise and documented conjunction of cause and effect. - Gian Piero de Bellis, Scenarios for the Future, 2006,

WAR & THE STATE: to him who contemplates the unfolding of the ages war presents itself as an activity of states which pertains to their essence." (Bertrand de Jouvenel, On Power, 1945) - Quoted by Gian Piero de Bellis in his "Waiting for the bomb." - Appendix: Waiting for the Bomb?WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR & TOLERANCE 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. (See PEACE PLANS 16-17 & 61-65.) - JZ, On Tolerance.

WAR & TOLERANCE: Be tolerant or perish! - The alternative to the maximisation of tolerance is the maximisation of murder and destruction through  mutual mass extermination. What helps it if man wins the whole world - but cannot stand  himself, cannot be tolerant? Then he will lose it again and perish. He has prepared the means for his destruction. - JZ, On Tolerance.

WAR AIMS & PEACE AIMS, RIGHTFUL & PEACE-PROMOTING ONES, BECAUSE THEY ARE ALSO PANARCHISTIC: See especially U. v. Beckerath's essay on this. Under panarchism each individual can pick his own war and peace aims, allies and enemies or declare himself neutral. Since we are no longer nations of warriors, this choice will turn out to be rather peace-promoting. - JZ, 3.9.04.

WAR ON DRUGS: No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we’re looking for the sources of our troubles, we shouldn’t test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed, and love of power.” – P. J. O’Rourke (1992) - - If we were not territorially centralizing society or government but allowing all the diverse societies and voluntary and competing governments (all only exterritorially autonomous, with their personal constitutions, laws and jurisdiction applying only to their voluntary members, at their risk and expense), then the remaining addictions, stupidities, ignorance and prejudices would be greatly diminished in their effects and, gradually to rapidly reduced, because then each community of volunteers would have to pay its own bills and could not lay this burden upon others, via taxes. - JZ, 22. 11. 06. - ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, DRUGS, STUPIDITY, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICES, POWER ADDICTION, VOTING ON THE AFFAIRS OF OTHERS, SINS, TERRITORIAL CENTRALIZATION,

WAR ON DRUGS? Wars on drugs – but only among their enemies! - Drug prohibitions only among those in favour of such prohibitions. - Just like teetotalism and non-smoking only for those, who are in favour of them. No vices or virtues to be forced upon anyone. - JZ, 23.9.11. - PROHIBITION


WAR, TERRITORIALISM & PANARCHISM: So far war was aggressive and imperialistic on both sides - i.e., for the extension or preservation of TERRITORIAL empires. Only panarchism could change this situation via its unique just, defensive and liberating methods. - JZ, 7.5.86, 24.6.01.

WAR: A continuation of policy by other means.” Karl von Clausewitz, On War, ed. Anatol Rapoport, Penguin, London, 1968. – Quoted in Shimon Tzabar: The White Flag Principle, p. 18. - A continuance of territorial politics! - JZ, 9.4.11.

WAR: a few men, fighting each other, do not make a war. A hundred, five hundred, ten thousand men, fighting each other, make at most a riot. Only a Government can make war.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p. 61. – Competing of voluntary governments, governance, societies and communities of volunteers, all only exterritorially autonomous, do not make wars, as a rule, but territorial governments do, all too often and for all too long. They are Warfare States, in most cases, with few exceptions, namely e.g. Switzerland, Sweden and the few miniature States. - JZ, 9.4.11. - GOVERNMENT, WARFARE STATE, TERRITORIALISM, FIGHTS, RIOTS

WAR: A war between the governments of two nations is a war between all the individuals of the one and all the individuals of … the other.” – James Kent, Commentaries on American Law, I, 1826. – That would be a totalitarian war. Governments pretend that their own conflicts with each other are always a contest between all of their subjects, too and do more or less force or otherwise induce them to participate in their struggles and even to carry almost all of the risks and burdens of them. But these individual subjects are not by themselves and thus individually motivated to fight each other. By their very nature, they do have rather a moral and rational interest, to conclude a separate peace between each other, over the heads of their territorial governments and, against these governments. – JZ, 8.11.85, 22.8.08. - Should the condition or misunderstanding that James Kent described be always predominant? In panarchies it would make some sense, to include all their members as enemies, since they are all made up of volunteers for the same cause. However, panarchies, as opposed to territorial warfare States, tend to be very peaceful. For territorial States their power concentration, their monopoly decision-making, their taxation, conscription and inflation power, their armament with mass extermination devices, are simply part and parcel of their nature as dangerous Warfare States. - The victims of territorialism have been so numerous that one should think it high time to check all its false premises and conclusions. – James, Kent, apparently, had not read J. G. Fichte, 1793, about the right of individuals to secede from the State, or Herbert Spencer, on their right to ignore it. - JZ, 22.8.08, 9.4.11, 24.8.12. – DIS., INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, SUBJECTS, OBEDIENCE, DISOBEDIENCE, PANARCHISM, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES BETWEEN SOLDIERS OF DIFFERENT NATIONS – AGAINST THEIR GOVERNMENTS

WAR: A war is not won if the defeated enemy has not been turned into a friend.” - Eric Hoffer. - The false assumption is here that the enemy, from ruler to forced laborer or conscript, is a single body. One does not have to turn a dictator into a friend in order to make friends with his victims or achieve peaceful coexistence with many different communities in the countries that he had formerly dominated and exploited. - JZ, 29.1.02. 9.4.11. - DEFEAT, VICTORY, DESERTION, WAR AIMS, ALLIANCES, FRIENDS, PEACE TREATIES

WAR: Advise none to marry or go to war.” – Herbert, 1640. – Hyman Quotes, p.254. – A joker might answer: What is the difference between marriage and war? - From marriage we can at least depart via divorce and make another try with someone else. I wish one could as easily depart from a war and avoid another such entanglement. – Individual and group secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers are still not widely enough understood and far less generally realized. – All genuine societies, even the smallest, are voluntary and amount to free exchange. Free societies are exterritorially competitive. Wars are like forced marriages or even rapes. - They are the result of territorial monopolies, of people forced to obey territorial regimes and the ambitions and corresponding orders of such regimes. - JZ, 22.8.08, 9.4.11. - MARRIAGE, SECESSIONISM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, JOKES, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM

WAR: After each war there is a little less democracy to save.” – Brooks Atkinson. January 7, Once Around the Sun, 1951. - Wars themselves and their conduct and motives and powers are, perhaps, the most undemocratic notions, actions and methods. Under full self-government no one would have to participate in them in any way. In this individualist way full democracy, with all individual rights and liberties realized, even for all minority group members, wars would mostly be prevented. Powers big enough to conduct modern wars could then not arise or be successful in their aggressions. They would rapidly lose their soldiers and taxpayers to their enemies, not to enemy bullets but due to desertion, defection and refugees saving themselves, or to military uprisings or popular revolutions. - Territorial democracies are also, all too often, merely Warfare States. - JZ, 24. 11. 06, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. - TO DEFEND OR SPREAD DEMOCRACY? WAR AIMS, JOKES, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM & SECESSIONISM VS. TERRITORIALISM.

WAR: All men are blood relatives. (*) All wars are family fights in an organized and mass murderous way – that leave most participants little other choice than “fight or die!” – JZ, 26.7.87. - At least as long as territorialism prevails. - (*) Assuming the common origin of all men from the first men in Africa. - Without territorialism we would only get some wrestling, fisticuffs, knife- and gun fights, no organized mass slaughter. - JZ, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM

WAR: all war is a symptom of man’s failure as a thinking animal. …” - John Steinbeck, Once there was a war, p.18. - Rather, the thinking men have allowed the territorial animals and power addicts to rule them. - They have not thought enough about their situations. - JZ, 9.4.11. – We are all the victims of whole “armies” or avalanches of popular errors, myths, prejudices, flawed to false definitions, fallacies, wrong assumptions and conclusions in the “social sciences”, which were so far nowhere systematically and encyclopaedically collected and confronted with their best refutations, although this could now be done, with wide participation and cheaply on a large disc, in a collaborative enlightenment effort by millions of contributors who have, finally, seen the value of such a reference work. With it compiled and widely published and referred to, anyone who continued to utter such flawed views in public would have a hard to impossible stand. Being thus and publicly refuted, several times, they would rather make a habit of checking their ideas and opinions in this reference work, before they make themselves ridiculous once again. Such a reference work could be book-sized and battery operated and also rather cheap. It might come to be spread like the mobile phones almost everywhere. Those, who do not have it on hand could then, probably, access it through a friend, via a mobile, or from some public telephone contact points, sponsored by some donors interested in the enlightenment of public opinion. Discussions e.g. in “letters to the editor” columns and in two-way radio talk shows, as well as in all public meetings, in parliaments, committees, conferences, seminars and classes, would soon rise to a higher level. The refutations would be of any needed kind, e.g. politely persuasive, biting or humorous, suitable for any particular occasion. Imagine political parties criticizing each other thoroughly with the help of such a reference work. Government censors have already listening-in computers for e.g. telephone conversations. These could be programmed to listen in for any flawed and doubtful term and almost immediately put a clarification or refutation on a screen, perhaps in portable gadgets, like tablet computers, which are already widely spread. With such an aid for public opinion exchanges, the accumulated knowledge, intelligence and wisdom of mankind could be quickly at hand to almost everyone at least in the already somewhat developed countries. There would be no longer any chance for demagogues to become influential. Speakers, debaters, writers, editors and publishers would have to become very careful with the ideas and opinions they try to spread, if they do not want to make themselves ridiculous and ashamed. Such a tool could also be privately used by any lecturer or writer preparing a lecture or writing and article as a helpful editor and advisor. A much corrected, improved and supplemented Panarchy A to Z  and a Free Banking A to Z, as well as an encyclopaedia of all the diverse definitions of important terms and one of the most suitable wordings for particular occasions, as well as an Ideas Archive could be separate or integrated parts of such a reference work. – In combination with the experimental freedom achieved through panarchies, the social sciences could finally come to really flourish and progress, cease being riddled by popular errors, prejudices and dogmas, becoming, finally, genuine sciences. – Anyhow, that is my kind of prayer or practical advice. Amen. - JZ, 25.8.12. – ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF THE BEST REFUTATIONS, DIS., PREJUDICES, IGNORANCE, FALLACIES

WAR: All warfare is based on deception.” – Sun Tzu, quoted in: Michael Z. Williamson, Freehold, 546. – Almost all wars are based on deception and self-deception. – JZ, 28.7.84. - How many or how few are even now aware already of territorialism as the main factor? - JZ, 9.4.11. – How many wars are not caused by as wrongful constitutions and laws? How many modern wars could be financed without taxation, inflation and the public debt option, all only made possible by the monetary and financial despotism of territorialism? - & WARFARE & TERRITORIALISM, Q.

WAR: All wars are made by governments; there are no exceptions.” – LEFEVRE’S JOURNAL, Fall 77. – Even if there were a few exceptions, e.g. riots between contending crowds, occurring even during some soccer games, or brawls between drunks, they are much less bloody, lasting and frequent than those daily slaughters occurring in wars caused and conducted by territorial governments. – JZ, 8.6.80, 20.8.08, 25.8.12. - Once governments are engaged in arms races and have established standing armies, then clashes between these standing armies can also occur without government decisions and commands, initiated by some brawls between soldiers or by some officers. The long war between Japan and China, beginning in the 1930’s, was supposed to have been started up in this way, later sanctioned by the governments involved. – Territorialism can make governments slide into war even against their will or intentions. - JZ, 20.8.08. – DIS. – GOVERNMENT, ACCIDENTAL WARS, ARMS RACES, TERRITORIALISM, PEOPLES, DECISIONS ON WAR & PEACE

WAR: All waste is a subtraction from his life.” – Dr. H. G. Pearce, Value, p. 84. – However, when a man can no longer excrete he is not likely to live much longer. – Sweat and exhaling are also necessary for survival. – Necessary waste processes should be distinguished from unnecessary ones. – One of ALDI’s cashier’s dockets had printed out one item as: “Recycled toilet-paper”. - JZ, 24.8.08. Any self-chosen waste of one's time and energy should be distinguished from any imposed one. - JZ, 9.4.11. – However, I would be the last one to deny the great waste of lives, limbs, property, money, capital, time, energy, raw materials and of rights and liberties involved in every war. “War is the health of the State.” – R. Bourne. The State is an even greater wastrel in war than in peace. – JZ, 7.2.12. - TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION, CONSCRIPTION, FIGHTING UPON COMMAND FOR THE INTERESTS OF OTHERS RATHER THAN THE OWN, JOKES.

WAR: An aggressive war is just a crime with victims on a larger scale. But it is an all too well organized clash between at least two territorial governments. A properly defensive war would be just a large police action, an action directed only against criminals with victims, in this case the aggressive and ruling war criminals on the other side. Neither aggressive wars nor private crimes with victims are reduced by not resisting them. Naturally, prevention of both is preferable – whenever it can be achieved. Panarchism, an ideal declaration of individual rights and liberties, enlightenment on collective responsibility notions, monetary and financial freedom and their effects upon free trade and free migration could achieve much in this respect, especially when all individual rights and liberties, to the extent that they are claimed by communities of volunteers, are defended by an ideal militia force of volunteers for the protection of these rights and liberties. As history has shown, all too often, territorial governments cannot be trusted in this respect. On the other hand, the anarchists and libertarians have not yet produced such a declaration and militia force, either and achieved full monetary and financial freedom for themselves through a corresponding peaceful revolution. To that extent they have only themselves to blame. – Properly aimable or discriminating weapons are not wrong by themselves, only their abuse is. All habitual criminals, who have often abused their weapons, i.e., territorial governments and their soldiers, ought to be disarmed. Especially disarmed  should be all territorial States and private terrorists, who “armed” themselves with ABC mass murder devices or anti-people “weapons” or who strive to “achieve” them. – JZ, 3.1.82, 20.8.08, 25.8.12. – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS, IDEAL MILITIAS, WARS REDUCE TO RIGHTFUL POLICE ACTIONS, WAR AIMS, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, TOLERANCE FOR ALL TOLERANT PEOPLE, INTOLERANCE ONLY AGAINST INTOLERANT PEOPLE.

WAR: Any war is a great folly. Especially on the side of the main aggressor. Mostly much more could be gained by increases in productivity and free exchange. – However, these two features are not characteristics of territorial governments. The contrary is true for them. For them, wars are merely extensions of their internal policies of aggression, oppression and exploitation, with their internal victims having no say on this and their external victims only being used as cannon fodder by their territorial mis-rulers. Mostly only degrees of mutual aggression do thus take place, rather than genuine defence efforts only. The main war criminals, the leaders, do, usually, get away with their crimes. They might even get rich, at least through their memoirs. - JZ, 31.7.92, 25.8.08, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. – LEADERSHIP, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, STATES, WARFARE STATES, RULERS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR AND PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP

WAR: Arm and organize yourself against the territorial warmongers. – JZ, 5.2.97, 9.4.11. - MILITIA, PANARCHISM

WAR: As far as the people themselves are concerned, they have little or nothing to gain by war, but everything – including their lives – to lose. In this sense, war is not in the nature of man, only in the nature of tyranny. - For a hundred thousand years, it is the tyrant who has made wars, although listening to the people’s war dances, one might be led to believe they really yearn to be slaughtered or to slaughter others equally misled.” - Dagobert D. Runes, On the Nature of Man, p.64. - At least the first part is also in his: A Book of Contemplation, p.140 and in his “A Dictionary of Thought.” - For how long was it considered to be the most exciting “sport”? – Even riots and arson seem to be attracted to some people. That may be one reason why territorial governments do not give their subjects any say in the matter! – But have they thus prevented more wars than they caused? Under territorialism some hotheads or ambitious officers could always start a war. Even in our times some young people still volunteer to join the armed forces! - Unfortunately, the peoples have so far put up with territorial Warfare States, even in supposedly “democratic” countries. - JZ, 20.8.08, 25.8.12. - MAN, NATURE OF MAN, TYRANNY, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP, GOVERNMENTS, PEOPLE, DECISION ON WAR & PEACE, PEOPLE, TYRANNY

WAR: As long as there are States there will be wars. Since States will exist for a long time there will be wars for a long time, wars which in atrocities, cruelties, savageness and systematic, in the means used, even if no longer in duration, cannot be exceeded. – The resistance should consequently be directed not against war but against its cause, the State. – Not “War against War!” but “War against the State!” should be slogan.” - John Henry Mackay, Abrechnung, S.128. (JZ tr. of: “So lange es Staaten gibt, wird es Kriege geben. Da aber Staaten noch lange bestehen werden, wird es noch lange Kriege geben, Kriege die sich erfahrungsgemaess an Scheusslichkeit, Grausamkeit, Wildheit und Raffiniertheit in den angewandten Mitteln, wenn auch wohl nicht mehr an Dauer, uebertreffen werden. – Der Kampf sollte daher nicht der Folge: dem Kriege, sondern der Ursache: dem Staate gelten. – Nicht „Krieg dem Kriege!“, sondern „Krieg dem Staate!“ muesste es heissen.“) - TERRITORIALISM, STATES

WAR: Be tolerant or perish! The ultimate alternative to the maximisation of tolerance is the maximisation 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.) - WAR, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, PEACE, DES., LIBERATION, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, FRATERNIZATION, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES

WAR: Before leaving the list of efficacious government enterprises, one should not miss the most obvious and proud State ability, namely, the exercise of killing large numbers of people in short periods of time within basically stationary geographical boundaries. (*) Commonly known as the art of war, government thrives in this theatre of operation in accord with sound economic principle, for there exists a fair amount of lively competition. When beefs between rulers reach the point of humiliation, respective governments openly compete for the largest casualty totals and, as in so many of the aforementioned categories, far outstrip the piker efforts of private capitalists.” – Thomas Winslow Hazlett, REASON, 7/77. – (*) By now they can  easily spread all over this world. – JZ, 25.8.12. - GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Berkman saw war as the greatest of all of mankind’s failures. “War! do you realize what it means?” he queried. “Do you know of any more terrible word in our language?” (*) In specific reference to the Great War of his time, Berkman lamented the purposeless sacrifice of human lives it entailed and the untold suffering it caused to individuals.” – Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.423. - Alas, he, too, did not have a clear political, economic, social and peace-promoting program and retained all too many popular errors and prejudices in his head. – It isn't mankind that decides upon war and conducts them - but territorial governments. - JZ, n.d. & 9.4.11. - (*) Probably many more unborn children are aborted – surely, quite innocent beings, than are children and adults killed in wars. - JZ, 20.8.08. - ABORTIONS

WAR: Big Wars from Little Errors Grow.” – E. W. Dykes, THE FREEMAN, Jan. 64. - Territorialism, conscription, taxation, racism and monetary despotism aren't small errors. - JZ, 9.4.11. – Neither are protectionism, statism, collective responsibility and beliefs in great leaders or big brothers – even when they have nothing better to offer than delusions (nationalism, patriotism, “the great society”, a “new deal”, the overpopulation spleen,  “Volk ohne Raum”, “Welfare State”, “soak the rich!”, medals, uniforms, martial music, honor, fame, glory, heroism, powerful offices, combined with powerless subjects and victims in “enemy countries”), mass murders, numerous cripples and sick people, mass unemployment, inflation and impoverishing taxes – JZ, 7.2.12, 25.8.12. - DIS

WAR: Bourne … argued that in order to crusade against war it is a first necessity to crusade against the state.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.563, on Randoph Bourne. – He should have said: “the territorial State”! A competing government, community or society with voluntary members only, no territorial monopoly but full exterritorial autonomy, acting internally freely and quite in accordance with the beliefs of its voluntary members and respecting the same rights of all other governments, societies and communities, is no longer a serious threat to world peace, in most instances. If fanatics or fundamentalists or other criminals with victims united exterritorially but at the same time waged war or terrorism against other communities of volunteers, then they would, thereby, unite all their victims more against themselves than anything else could. Then they could not last long at all and, in most cases, would not even be established as such intolerant organizations. But today all those, whom the terrorists fight, are territorialists. And territorial rule is also the “ideal” of the terrorists. Territorialism, the notions of collective responsibility and the practice of monetary and financial despotism (and their inevitable consequences) are the main factors that make for terrorism – at least from my point of view. By all means, examine this position closely and refute it, if you can. – JZ, 20.8.08.

WAR: Boys are the cash of war. Whoever said / we’re not free-spenders doesn’t know our likes.” – John Ciardi, “New Year’s Eve”, “This Strangest Everything”, 1966. - As if girls, babies, infants, children, men, women, the old and sick were not also its victims, at least in the way the currently recognized “experts” and territorial leaders do conduct their wars. – JZ, 22.8.08, 9.4.11. – HUMAN SACRIFICES, LEADERSHIP, RULERS, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, DIS.

WAR: But a libertarian America would clearly not be a threat to anyone, not because it had no arms but because it would be dedicated to no aggression against anyone, or against any country. Being no longer a nation-state, which is inherently threatening, there would be little chance of any country attacking us. One of the great evils of the nation-state is that each State is able to identify all of its subjects with itself, hence in any inter-State war, the innocent civilians, the subjects of each country, are subject to aggression (*) from the enemy State. But in a libertarian society there would be no such identification, and hence very little chance of such a devastating war. …” - Murray N. Rothbard, For a New Liberty, revised edition, p.138, Collier Books, 1978, ISBN 0-02-074690-3. - A libertarian America might still be feared, just as people fear what they perceive to be “freedom”, “competition”, a ‘market” and capitalism. However, if in America there were opportunities for all kinds of statists as well, doing their own things for and to themselves only, then fear would become confined to fearing the remaining territorial rulers. – (*) also! – JZ, 16.9.08 25.8.12. – FEAR OF FREEDOM, STATISM, SUBJECTS, LIBERTARIANISM, TERRITORIALISM, AGGRESSION

WAR: but if the contest was long and grim, the natives, even if victorious, might be so damaged mentally by an age of warfare that they would never recover their sanity.” – Olaf Stapledon, Star Maker, p.156. – If they had been sufficiently sane in the beginning, e.g. not to subscribe to territorialism, they would not have become involved in a war in the first place. How sane is any population that does not even seriously consider the alternative to its territorialist organization, institutions, laws and practices – and their consequences? – The targeted victims of nuclear “weapons” were not even shaken out of their lethargy when their rulers called their nuclear deterrence policy “MAD”, standing for “Mutual Assured Destruction”. – And this from governments, who pretend to be our rightful and rational “protectors”! - JZ, 20.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM VS. EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, ITS TOLERANCE & EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, APATHY, VOLUNTARISM, SANITY, MADNESS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, DIS.

WAR: But if they are commanded to join in a war, as often happens, if they are quite clear that the war is unlawful, they ought to abstain.” – Hugo Grotius, On the Laws of War and Peace. – Are they already quite free to do so? Can they freely disobey conscription, taxation and the inflationary finance for wars of their territorial governments? Is their right to rise and revolt, to resist and do only the own things fully recognized? - I am still searching for better libertarian resistance, liberation, revolution and peace programs than my own drafts going in this direction. - JZ, 9.4.11. – “Abstaining” is not always easy, even if one is not under external compulsion, as can be confirmed by any drinker, smoker or obese person. – Neither are effective resistance, revolutions and military insurrections easy to achieve. – The suggestion to “abstain” is thus not any more helpful than e.g. “say no to xyz.” – A mere good intention or resolution is, usually, insufficient to achieve an objective. – Nor does mere wishful thinking help. Genuine programs, platforms or blueprints are needed, all without too many errors and delusions. - JZ, 25.8.12.

WAR: But most of all, we propose to abolish the age-old scourges of militarism and war, by abolishing the powers of governments all over the world to conscript, loot and kill. Nothing has ever excused the horror of mass murder and nothing ever will.” – Roy Childs, Liberty Against Power, p.9. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM, INSURRECTION, DISOBEDIENCE, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM

WAR: But neither did the peoples of Europe’s dominant powers really find in their national unification the protection and security, which they had been promised. Due to the shortsighted power politics of their national governments, they were continuously being saddled with new taxes and contributions, which were not only absorbing more and more of the total national income, but were exposing them permanently to the danger of new wars, the logical result of their power politics.” – Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, Epilogue, p.553. – POWER, POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, RULERS, GOVERNMENTS, PEOPLES, UNIFICATION, WARFARE STATES, NATIONALISM, IMPERIALISM

WAR: But there couldn't be any war without government.” - L. Neil Smith, Contact & Commune, p.86. – The abolition of all territorial governments would be enough. – The others could remain for their volunteers as long as they are still satisfied with them. – JZ, 21.4.09. & GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

WAR: Ca. 60 wars are happening world-wide right now.” – Radio news, 22.8.93. – And so many people think that they are already civilized and part of a genuine culture. – Do e.g. musicians, painters, sculptors, singers, actors, writers, poems and sportsmen, as such, fight each other militarily, world-wide or only upon government commands? As artists and athletes they are already appreciated world-wide. They and their fans are cosmopolitans. To the extent that they are free to trade and invest, people are also cosmopolitans. More an more people have become world travellers. Tourism has become the greatest industry. Communication has become to a large extent world-wide. What gives governments the right to involve them or anyone else in any war? – The only fighting that should happen should be against those, who commit us to their wars as their pawns in their territorial political chess games. And since we are many and they are few, there should not be much fighting necessary in this fight. – I just heard on the radio the term “Russian soil”. Soil is neither Russian, Georgian, English, French, German or American, Chinese or Japanese. It is just soil! And as such it should certainly not be soiled by human blood, upon command of any territorial government. - JZ, 21.8.08, 25.8.12.

WAR: Can a thing be more ridiculous than that a man has a right to kill me because he dwells the other side of the water, and because his prince has a quarrel with mine, although I have none with him? – Blaise Pascal, Pensées, IV, 1670. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, RULERS, GOVERNMENTS

WAR: Ci vis pace para bellum!” – That is as old and ill considered an advice as was: “Love your enemy!” Neither “nuclear deterrence” nor “Make love, not war!” or “total non-violence” or “non-resistance” are sufficient improvements upon these old fallacies. – Without sufficient qualifications all such statements are at best only part-truths or half-truths. – And most people “comprehend” only the false part or half and mistake it for the truth on the matter. – Some of such good advice should be offered to the aggressors rather than the defenders. Not at all preparing to prevent or meet an aggression or preparing for it in the conventional or nuclear way can, indeed, lead to war. - JZ, 28.3.84, 23.8.08, 25.8.12. - DIS., TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, PEACE, WAR & PEACE AIMS, HUMAN RIGHTS, JUSTICE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL, PERSONAL LAW, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR MINORITIES, FREE TRADE, FULL MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM, MILITIA, LIBERATION, TYRANNICIDE, DES., FRATERNIZATION, UNILATERAL PEACE DECLARATION, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE

WAR: Clausewitz:“War is an act of violence for the purpose of compelling the adversary to fulfill our will”, and he adds that with this object it equips itself with the inventions of the arts and sciences; while, long before Clausewitz, the classical definition of war, set forth by Cicero, was finally formulated by Grotius as a conflict by methods of violence, “certatio per vim”. - Havelock Ellis, “Selected Essays”, “The Philosophy of Conflict”, p.218. - Territorialism assures the rule of the whim of a few misleaders over the lives, rights and liberties over their involuntary victims. - JZ, 9.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, IMPERIALISM, POWER ADDICTS, LEADERSHIP, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WAR: Cold War? - F. L. Greaves in “Peace in our Time”, CANADIAN WORLD FEDERALIST, Oct. 63, p. 17-18, lists 22 fair sized wars which occurred since 1945 and mentions 8 additional smaller ones. – Mankind is still not at peace even when a major war has ended. – In other words, just, free, tolerant and thus peace-promoting conditions have still not been established everywhere. – JZ, 23.8.08. - Sufficient agreement on cause and cure of these conditions has still to be achieved. - JZ, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. - DIS., TERRITORIALISM, WAR & PEACE AIMS, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM

WAR: Consider the almost incredible immorality, stupidity, absence of rational aims, rightful principles, laws, institutions and actions through which most wars have become possible and likely. – JZ, 4.4.88, 24.8.08, 25.8.12. – WAR & PEACE AIMS, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM, SECESSIONISM, GENUINE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, MILITIA, PANARCHIES, MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM

WAR: Contrary to Marx, all of history is not the story of class warfare. This is a minor theme, and only heats up at a few critical points. Most of history is a war between competing groups of (*) ruling elites, all of whom escalate politics into conspiracy when feeling threatened.” – Robert Anton Wilson, Right Where You Are Sitting Now, p.96. – (*) territorially! – JZ - CLASS WARFARE, POLITICS, CONSPIRACIES, RULERS, ELITES, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, DIS., MARX

WAR: Defensive and liberating warfare, the only warfare excusable, should be conducted in a self-liquidating way – not suicidal but, on the contrary, with a minimum of killing and destruction on all sides. Only the libertarian and panarchist philosophy, consistently applied, shows the way how this can be done, even against a regime armed with nuclear mass murder devices. – JZ, 11.2.73, 9.4.11. – DES., LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, FRATERNIZATION, WAR AIMS, MILITIA, DEFENCE

WAR: Definition of War. The biologist observes that warring is a form of group behaviour that is encountered solely within the human species (*), and that it is an instrument of dispute employed by conflicting groups within a human society (**), or by human societies and combinations of human societies that are in violent disagreement for the achievement of a settlement that has not been reached through reasonable discussion or diplomatic argument.” (***) – F. A. E. Crew, Must Man Wage War? Thrift Books, London, 1952, p.13. - - (*) Some types of ants do also fight each other. – (**) Rather, within an imposed territorial State! – (***) And that cannot be reached as long as each group insists upon territorial domination by itself, instead of on exterritorial autonomy for itself and for all others who are tolerant enough for this. - JZ, 21.8.08. – DIS. HUMAN NATURE, TERRITORIALISM, STATES, SOCIETIES, INTOLERANCE

WAR: develop a system without war or perish.” - L. E. Modesitt, Gravity Dreams, Orbit, London, 1999, p.202. – Develop, or understand, accept, and apply an already developed system that would prevent war. – JZ, 7.10.07, 9.4.11. - NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

WAR: Each government accuses the other of perfidy, intrigue and ambition, as a means of heating the imagination of their respective nations, and incensing them to hostilities. Man is not the enemy of man, but through the medium of a false system of government.” – Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man, I, 1791. – Since all governments are still territorial governments, they give each other much cause for such accusations. The same mutual accusations and fears would sound quite silly and false between societies and communities, all made up of like-minded volunteers only and all quite free to do their own things exterritorially for or to themselves, with only themselves to blame when they fail with their experiments. – However, between territorial governments over their involuntary victims once can, as a rule, expect nothing moral and rational. - JZ, 22.8.08, 9.4.11. – PANARCHISM, PEACE, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM

WAR: Efforts to prevent a war may be successful on particular occasions (as at Munich or during the 1962 Cuban missile crises). But as long as the basic institutions remain – military establishments and their overkill capacity, international political and economic rivalries, belief systems glorifying nationalism and sacrificial bravery – the problem of war must be met afresh time and time again.” – Brian Martin, Changing the Cogs, p.8. - TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATE, STATISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TAXATION, CONSCRIPTION, MONETARY FREEDOM, DESPOTISM, PUBLIC DEBTS

WAR: Either man is obsolete, or war is.” – R. Buckminster Fuller, I Seem to Be a Verb. – An exclusive war-making power for a handful of men is certainly obsolete. So are taxes, public debts and inflation to finance wars and conscription to conduct them and other territorial powers and monopolies that all make for wars. – JZ, 22.6.92, 9.4.11. - NWT

WAR: Every State is a war risk.” – Leo Naphta, quoted in: “Auf dem Misthaufen der Geschichte” (On the Manure Heap of History.), Bd. 2, p.9. – I would except Switzerland, Sweden and the remaining modern miniature States from that charge. – They have largely learnt their history lessons and applied them. The “territory” and thus their power of the latter is often no larger than that of some private real estate owner. - But the remark applies to most territorial States, which are, as such, still Warfare States and ready to prove this, once again, at any moment. - JZ, 20.8.08, 9.4.11. – DIS., WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Every war is a civil war. – JZ, 11.9.79. – Alas, largely conducted in an all too wrongful and uncivilized manner and only rarely ever for quite rightful war and peace aims. – JZ, 20.8.08, 9.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, POWER

WAR: Every war is a defeat of the human spirit.“ – Miller. - („Jeder Krieg ist eine Niederlage des menschlichen Geistes.“) – Which Miller was not stated in the German quotations book, from which I took this quote. - JZ - Human spirit, reason and ethics, are hardly ever applied in clashes between territorial government systems and by their victims against these regimes. - Power-mad territorial rulers can hardly be considered as representatives of the human spirit. - JZ, 9.4.11. - DIS., TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTS, POLITICS AS USUAL

WAR: Every war is unconstitutional - as far as the military clash between two or more powers is concerned. - JZ, 9.5.01. Even the formal and clear constitutional expression, granting the government a decision-making monopoly on war and peace, armament, disarmament, international treaties, the conduct of wars, the choice of weapons as well as war and peace aims, is unconstitutional in the sense that it contradicts any comprehensive enough bill of rights or declaration of individual human rights. - JZ, 30.1.02. – At least the larger territorial States, by their very constitution and powers, are largely despotic Warfare States still, even the democratic ones. – Kant pointed this out in his “Eternal Peace”, back in 1795. - JZ, 21.4.09.  UNCONSTITUTIONAL WAR, DECISION-MAKING, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS

WAR: Everybody happily killing each other for a shilling a day”. – From film The Assassination Bureau, after a Jack London story – somewhat changed. - Territorial organization and coercion are required to achieve mass murders on that scale. - JZ, 9.4.11. - DIS.

WAR: Explain why it is that what is most honourable in the world, in the judgment of the whole of humanity without exception, is the right to shed in innocence innocent blood?” – Joseph de Maistre, quoted in R. V. Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, p.12. – It is rather the most wrongful and stupid activity, in ignorance of the fact that it cannot be purely defensive on both sides, unless both, in ignorance, have accepted irreconcilable aggressive or dominating positions, like e.g. territorial claims to the same territory and its population. Then both “defend” merely a kind of aggression and domination attempt. – Most conscripts do no longer feel honored by being called up as sacrificial lambs. - But they do not know how to effectively and rightfully resist these call-ups. - JZ, 22.12.81, 20.8.08, 9.4.11. - DIS., HONOR, DEFENCE, AGGRESSION, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: extreme ill treatment by rival states of each other’s citizen.” – “Ideas”, “A Volume of Ideas, Living, Dying, Dead & Fossil, Which We Are Moved By Or Were Moved By”, P. P. T., People, Places and Things, London, The Waverley Book Company Limited, 1954, describing 183 ideas, p.87. - Some totalitarian regimes do thereby merely extend their mass murders, tribute levies and oppression beyond their frontiers. - JZ, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. – WARFARE STATES, IMPERIALISM, CONQUESTS, TERRITORIALISM, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY

WAR: Fame may be won in peace as well as in war.” – (Vel pace vel bello clarum fieri licet.) – Sallust, Catiline, Ch. iii, sec. 1. - Fame is much less the motive for most modern victims of wars than is fear of the own and of foreign territorial governments. But that fear is not sufficient to induce them to think sufficiently on how they could liberate and secure themselves and also their fellow victims on the other side of a territorial border. - The peace platforms even of the most famous peace lovers are, as a rule, still all too flawed and incomplete. - JZ, 9.4.11. - FEAR, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, IGNORANCE PREJUDICES, DIS., PEACE PROGRAMS

WAR: Father State will finally place all of us under the ground.” – Mother, in “Sponti Spezial” – (“Vater Staat bringt uns noch alle unter Erde.”) – The State as the great “protector”, the territorial Warfare State, brings often and finally only the “peace” of the graveyard. For the last ones there will be no one left to bury them. – JZ, 22.8.08. - We are still not free to opt out from under it and do our own things for or to ourselves. By that we could hardly do any worse than the territorial States do now. - JZ, 9.4.11. – Under full exterritorial autonomy, personal law and experimental freedom for volunteers, in all spheres, we would, on balance and rather soon do very much better than the territorial Warfare and Welfare States even though, on the road to general success, many experiments would fail, as happens in all other spheres, where there is freedom of action and freedom to learn from one’s mistakes. – J.Z., 25.8.12. – SUCCESS, FAILURES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM,  NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Fear is the mainspring of war”. – George Bernard Shaw, only in JZ retranslation of: “Angst ist die Triebfeder des Krieges.” – Why? Territorialism gives large States fearful powers, makes them and their subjects afraid of each other and drives them into arms races. It also deprives its subjects of individual choice in most important matters. – Add the effects of ignorance, prejudices, propaganda and government-controlled “education”. - JZ, 8.7.92, 25.8.08. – FEAR, POWER, PEOPLE CONTROLLED BY TERRITORIALISM

WAR: few if any of the more disastrously delinquent acts of nations (*) in recent years are, in the final analysis, the result of spontaneous upsurgings of public aggression. The attitude of the centralized society toward war is always ambivalent, but the manifestations of warlike tendencies are predominantly under the control of governments. Neither the German extermination of Jews, nor the Allied massacre of enemy civilian populations, which have been cited as the two most widespread and serious group-delinquent manifestations of the second World War, were spontaneous. …” - Alex Comfort, “Authority and Delinquency. A study in the psychology of power”, 1950, 1970, p.65, a book largely on the delinquency of authority. – Alas, kept out of print & off the Web for all too long. – spontaneous? upsurges? JZ, 15.5.06. – (*) Mostly only their territorial mis-governments. – J.Z., 25.8.12. - DIS., PEOPLE & TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE

WAR: For centuries that State has committed mass murder and called it “war”; then ennobled the mass slaughter that ‘war’ involves.” – Murray N. Rothbard, For A New Liberty: The State as Aggressor. - AS MASS MURDER, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, WARFARE STATES

WAR: For the masses war has that self-same fatalistic, unconscious character as the sea. It is only powerful through the absence of consciousness at the bottom and the absence of conscience and truth at the top.” – Alexander Herzen, Sochineniya, Moscow, 1958, vol. 8, p.268. - War is the catastrophe that is the natural consequence of territorialism. But territorialism itself is not natural but quite unnatural. It amounts only to a coercive perversion of the natural forms of human societies and communities. The territorial State suppresses natural human societies and wrongly exploits and misgoverns all its involuntary subjects, which are not free to secede from it, Even large families, tribes and clans are entitled only to their private and cooperatively combined properties, not to any territorial monopoly. Any attempt to realize the latter as a supposedly rightful and rational monopoly, does inevitably clash with all other free and just attempts to solve the remaining problems of human societies and communities. The State, as a territorial monopolist, is the greatest trouble-maker and problem. - JZ, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM, COERCION, COMPULSION, INSTEAD OF GENUINE PROPERTY RIGHTS & VOLUNTARY RELATIONSHIPS.

WAR: For thousands of years we have competed for the position of the most efficient killers and we have been too close to each other in that “sport”. We were not only driven into it but were even, all too much, proud of it and honored those killed in the struggle, as soldiers, largely forgetting about the civilian victims of wars, including e.g. the raped women, the murdered children! – You will not find them listed on the numerous war memorials! And we have invented all kinds of wrongful excuses for our (our territorial governments’) organized mass murderous actions and almost never (or almost no one has ever) sufficiently considered all the quite rightful and peaceful alternatives to these Warfare States and their wars. – Did even one of them have ever quite rightful war aims only? - JZ, 24.5.81, 20.8.08. - The few exceptions should be carefully listed and publicized, as certainly not excusing the rest. - JZ, 9.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, Q.

WAR: Force and fraud are in war the two cardinal virtues.” – Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, Pt. i, ch.13. – What is right for aggressors and dictators is not right for defenders and liberators. They could confine their force against the aggressors and dictators while making a separate peace with their conscripts and other victims, offering them, openly and trustworthily, quite rightful peace terms, so that they would be turned from potential and secret allies into open and active allies, or refugee and deserters, becoming either military allies against an aggressive and despotic regime or at least neutrals. Using force and fraud against such secret or potential allies or neutrals, instead of fully recognizing quite rightful governments and societies in exile, for their present and future volunteers, as one's natural allies, would be the worst thing that one could do – not only to them but also for oneself. And yet this is almost continuously done, by all territorial governments. They misnamed this: “respecting the territorial integrity” of other States, even when they are totalitarian ones. – JZ, 27.8.08, 25.8.12. – DIS., DEFENCE, AGGRESSION, LIBERATION, SEPARATE PEACE, DESERTION, SECRET ALLIES, CAPTIVE NATIONS & MINORITIES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, INSURRECTIONS, TERRITORIALISM, WAR AIMS,


WAR: G. Valbert on the basis of the computation of the “Moscow Gazette” says that “from the year 1496 B.C. to A.D.1861, in 3,358 years, there were 227 years of peace and 3.130 years of war, or thirteen years of war to every year of peace. Within the last three centuries there have been 286 wars in Europe.” He adds further that “from the year 1500 B.C. to A.D. 1860 more than 8,000 treaties of peace, which were meant to remain in force forever, were concluded. The average time they remained in force was two years.” - Valbert, G., in the “Revue des Deux Mondes”, April 1894, p.692. – Having these facts in view, the Honorable George Peel, in his “The Future of England”, p.169, said that for fifteen centuries, since the full adoption of Christianity by the continent of Europe, peace has been preached, and for these fifteen centuries the history of Europe has been nothing but “a tale of blood and slaughter.” – From a footnote in Pitirim A. Sorokin, Contemporary Sociological Theories Through the First Quarter of the Twentieth Century, Harper Torchbooks, 1928, p. 325. - PEACE, PEACE TREATIES, CHRISTIANITY, GOVERNMENTS, WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Generally speaking, it would be true to say that no one believes that war pays and nearly everyone believes that policies which lead inevitably to war do pay. Every nation sincerely desires peace; and all nations pursue courses which if persisted in, must make peace impossible.” – Sir Norman Angell, The Great Illusion, 1933. – Quoted in Seldes. – Compare: “War occurs because people prepare for conflict rather than peace.” – Trygve Lie: LABOR, Sep. 6, 1947. – Quoted in Seldes. – Most arms races ended in wars. – I quoted the figures about this – somewhere in my PEACE PLANS series. - JZ, 25.8.12. - PREJUDICES, DIS., TERRITORIALISM, ARMS RACES, “PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH”, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, DEFENCE

WAR: Give everyone a veto on war and wars would cease. – JZ, 7.4.74. – Individual secessionism, defection, desertion, military insurrections and revolutions, well planned and executed, separate peace treaties, mass fraternizations, would also be “veto” steps. – JZ, 22.4.09. – All constitutional or legalized “licences” to territorial rulers, to declare and conduct wars, should be withdrawn, also their monopolies for peace negotiations and peace treaties. With as great powers it is no wonder that they were all too often abused – by the leading territorial power addicts. – JZ, 25.8.12.

WAR: Governmental excuses for starting wars are rarely, if ever, moral and rational. At best they do satisfy the self-interest of the territorially monopolistic, powerful and coercive decision-makers – and even their selfish aspirations are mostly disappointed. – JZ, 20.1.98, 9.4.11. – The German territorial imperialists first built the German empire up, greatly, also by wars, and then, in two world wars, managed to reduce it greatly, always at huge prices in lives, limbs, freedom, earnings, savings and property. Whatever prosperity was temporarily achieved was achieved through degrees of economic freedom, science and technology, not through any statist territorial actions and organizations. – JZ, 25.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WAR: governments behave with such apparent irrationality as to prefer to destroy rather than persuade each other.” – View ascribed to Proudhon by R. B. Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, p.80. – What else can one expect from governments that subject, even in their best forms, whole populations to a single territorial rule? – JZ, 20.8.08. ( A centralized and federated territorial power only slightly mitigated through territorial decentralization into “independent” territorial States. – JZ, 25.8.12.) -GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES, POWER-MADNESS, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS, LEADERSHIP

WAR: Governments declare war. People declare revolution.” – August B. Black, My Briefs on Life, quoted in FRAGMENTS, 4-6/98. - Revolutions are not made by their mere declaration. Those, who believe that such a declaration and some "revolutionary" and mostly violent "actions" are enough to make a genuine revolution, usually produce just another bloody and anti-economic mess. It might even be worse than the mess of the territorial government, which they try to get rid of. - Their belief in "revolution" is often no better but rather worse than the belief of some others in a "God". - Think of the totalitarian revolutions during the last century. - Almost everyone knows already how a wrongfully wars are conducted after their declaration. How many know or wish to know, how a quite rightful revolution can be made? - Can it be based on the continuance of some of the other form of territorialism? - I would deny that. How many others do? - Even the term "people" indicates, largely, only a fiction. Only individuals are real units and so are societies of volunteers only. - Generalizations like that lead to "revolutionary" atrocities. - JZ, 9.4.11. - GOVERNMENTS, DESERTION, PEOPLE, REVOLUTION, LIBERATION, DIS.

WAR: Governments fight governments, people don’t fight people.” – Mary Ingram, 24.10.75. - More correctly: Territorial government fight other territorial governments - not by fighting them but by fighting their subjects! And by abusing the own subjects for this purpose! - I would find it desirable if governments would only fight governments. – JZ, 27.8.08. – DIS., GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, POWER

WAR: Grotius rejected the view of war as a medieval trial by combat in favor of the view that war is the negation of justice and of judicial authority.” – R. V. Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, p.83. – Even without conducting a war against its external enemies, a territorial State is constantly in a kind of civil war against all its dissenting individuals and minorities, denying them justice and their own personal law and judicial and other societal or communal arrangements. – JZ, 20.8.08. - TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES

WAR: has long been recognized by thinkers and statesmen (to use an American statesman’s phrase) as a “ferocious folly” – a stupid and clumsy expedient unworthy of our civilized life. For civilized nations – peoples, that is, who have acquired a self-respect which is second nature to all true nationalities – cannot regard the arbitrament of force as final. Such people fight (*) for moral issues, not to avoid tributes and save their purses, but for homes and liberties and customs and all their intimate associations.” (**) - Bruce L. Richmond, The Pattern of Freedom, Ljus English Library, vol 12, Stockholm, 1943, p.166, quoting A. E. Zimmern: “The Greek Commonwealth”. - (*) or believe they fight … – JZ, 28.7.07 - (**) These are merely the usual territorial and nationalistic propaganda slogans on both sides. All the governments involved claim to be defenders or liberators and not aggressors. It is typical that neither side proclaims - and not even the war victims, soldiers and civilians, are really interested in - quite rightful war aims and attempts towards their realization. What really makes for peace and would assure it has still not been widely enough recognized and realized. – There is even quite insufficient interest in attempts to solve this problem or answer this question. People rather continue to uphold popular errors and prejudices that make for war rather than peace, even when they consider themselves to be peace lovers and peace activists. – JZ, 28.9.07, 9.4.11.

WAR: Have you read Gil Elliot – The Twentieth Century Book of the Dead? A hundred and ten million killed by the machinery and the privations of war.” – Arthur C. Clarke & Michael Kube-McDowell, The Trigger, Harper/Collins Publishers, 1999, p.260. - And the “peaceful” or “internal affairs” and “territorial integrity” sovereign mass murders of territorial governments were even larger still! Worse still, they left us with a mass murder arsenal, ready and waiting for a leading crackpot or accident or misunderstanding or computer malfunction, to kill several hundred million people, maybe even all of mankind! – JZ, 29.9.07, 9.4.11. - IN THE 20TH CENTURY & NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

WAR: He had seen his brother die at Caporento, and he died in Ethiopia, a fine, brave, honorable man, who believed with his whole mind that an individual is a cell in the body of The State, that Authority controls all human beings, and that his own life had no value whatever but service to Immortal Italy. – That is the cause of war. - Men who have that pagan belief will always make war. They must make war, because of the nature of human energy. Not knowing that individuals control themselves, they do not recognize and accept that responsibility; they try to make their own energy work on a false basis. It will not work on a false basis, and one of the results of trying to make it do so, is war.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.58. - HUMAN ENERGY & ITS CONTROL, COLLECTIVISM, STATE AS ORGANISM, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, HUMAN NATURE, INDIVIDUALISM, TERRITORIALISM, NATIONALISM, AUTHORITARIANISM, STATISM

WAR: His fighting, like that of the individuals of many other species, would commonly appear to have its origin in frustration, in the failure to obtain his objective by other means.” – F. A. E. CREW, Must Men Wage War? Thrift Books, London, 1952, p.16. – Territorial governments may be considered as the main generators of frustration among men. – JZ, 11.8.87. – Since ideals are not territorially shared by whole populations, the attempts to realize them territorially leads inevitably to many frustrations among all kinds of idealists and true believers. In a fully free market for all associations of volunteers to realize their ideals among themselves, these frustrations would soon disappear. Chess players and tennis players are not frustrated as such – because they are free to play their games among themselves. – JZ, 25.8.12. -MAN, PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TOLERANCE VS. INTOLERANCE, COMPULSION VS. VOLUNTARISM & INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, FRUSTRATION

WAR: How is this deadly peril to the future of civilization to be averted or overcome? In the first place, we have to eliminate war – the most futile and ferocious of human follies, as John Hay used to call it, the patron of every form of violence, the fruitful mother of hate.” – G. P. Gooch, Dictatorship in Theory and Practice, p.43. - According to Immanuel Kant every State in which not the people but the governments decide upon war and peace is still a despotism. - JZ, 9.4.11. – Overlapping and different territorial claims lead to clashes. Confinement of all claims and preferred systems and institutions to personal law associations of volunteers only, all without a territorial monopoly, harmonizes them. – JZ, 25.8.12. - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, DICTATORSHIP, DESPOTISM OF DEMOCRACIES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: how useless it was to be fighting for our government, with no one’s heart in it and just shooting because the leaders couldn’t think of anything more to say.” – David Ireland, The Chantic Bird, p.192. – Do they have anything quite rightful and sensible to say? Aren’t all of them representing territorial Warfare States, with all too little knowledge of and appreciation for all individual rights and liberties? – JZ, 23.8.08. - TERRITORIALISM VS. GENUINE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, Q., LEADERSHIP, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WAR: I am tired and sick of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded, who cry aloud for blood, more vengeance, more desolation. War is hell.” - William T. Sherman. - And territorial governments, really only running Warfare States, keep leading and forcing us into more and more wars. - JZ, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. - GLORY, FAME, HEROISM, COURAGE, POWER ADDICTS, LEADERSHIP, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, VENGEANCE, ORGANIZED MASS MURDER & MASS DESTRUCTION, UPON COMMAND. TERRITORIALISM, STANDING ARMIES, DEFENCE INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM AGGRESSION. CIVIL WAR.

WAR: I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.” - Albert Einstein - From Monica Cellio homepage. – Claire Wolfe recommended it as a goldmine of quotes. Well, I found at least a few there that did fit into my collection. – JZ, 20.9.08. – And yet Einstein was one of those who advocated the first nuclear “weapons”, as if they were suitable devices to defeat tyrants. Did he ever advocate tyrannicide instead? Or a peace treaty with German governments in exile? I know that, as a territorialist, he was opposed to panarchism. – JZ, 21.4.09. - TERRITORIALISM, NWT

WAR: I see that the better alternative is free trade among nations. (*) Dwight Eisenhower, with a far greater experience, had a view which I share: “When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war. War settles nothing! – Leonard E. Read, How Do We Know? p.84. - Especially when not fought for any quite rightful and sensible war aims. – JZ, 25.6.89. - (*) Include e.g. monetary freedom, free migration, free private investments, freedom to establish communities of volunteers without any territorial claims but exterritorially fully autonomous under their own personal laws. – JZ, 26.8.08, 9.4.11. - DIS.

WAR: I think that people want peace so much that one of these days governments had better get our of their way and let them have it.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower – Did he not also get in their way? – JZ, 22.4.09. - PEOPLE, DECISION-MAKING, PEACE, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: I'm fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in.” – George McGovern. - Sent by C. B. - Neither old nor young people nor anyone else should have a decision-making territorial monopoly on war and peace, armament and disarmament and international relations and treaties. – JZ, 27.12.07. – By now, and for many decades already, in most wars, the civilian non-combatant war victims of all ages tend to far outnumber the young soldiers killed in military actions. Most of the guilty decision-makers survive, in the best bunkers. – JZ, 21.4.09. - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: I’m interested in preventing war and, I think, I know it could be done, although certainly not single-handedly and by me alone. But who else, among the living, is sufficiently interested in how it could be done in a rightful and practical way? I have still to catch up with or meet even one of them or find another writer who has set out at least some of all the required steps in at least some details. - (*) – The least interested seem to be those, who are organized in peace movements and engaged in what they call peace-promoting activities. - JZ, 5.2.93, 21.8.08, 9.4.11. – (*) - - PEACE, PEACE MOVEMENTS, INTEREST IN A GENUINE PEACE PROGRAM

WAR: I’ve come to the conclusion that most people who are given positions of authority in time of war are subject to epidemics of insanity.” – Kenneth Roberts, Oliver Wiswell, p.606/07. – Not only in war-time. Territorial States themselves are insane and inherently unjust artificial constructions. - LEADERSHIP, INSANITY, STATES, TERRITORIALISM, PEACE, AUTHORITARIANISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, POWER

WAR: If all the contenders in civil wars as well as in “international” wars were offered the panarchist option, i.e., each an exterritorially autonomous community of its own volunteers, under its own personal laws, and if they understood this option, would they still fight each other? – Panarchism would also abolish or diminish the incidence of international wars – but there its influence is not so obvious. One has to think much more and take many more factors into consideration to arrive at that conclusion. I attempted to do so in my two peace books at (*) - A comment to something that I read in THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD,, Weekend Edition, July 19-20, 08, p.33, but this was a fragment that got lost in my sorting process and I am unwilling to dig it up in the online edition. -  JZ, 11.9.08, 7.2.12. – – (*) - - Q., CIVIL WAR, PANARCHISM, DIS., WAR & PEACE AIMS

WAR: If any then there should only be popular wars, wars financed by voluntary contributions and carried out by enlightened volunteers, for just and peace-promoting aims and only against quite wrongful, intolerant, aggressive individuals and groups or those, who all too passively, stupidly or misled by propaganda lies, do fight for criminal territorial governments. – JZ, 11.2.73, 23.8.08, 9.4.11.

WAR: If one fights at all, or works or pays taxes for wars, then this should be done only voluntarily and for the own and self-chosen and quite rightful and peace-promoting war and peace aims, and this with rightful weapons and against one’s real enemies only, rather than being conscripted, to fight with wrongful weapons, for wrongful aims and this largely against innocents, whether conscripts or non-combatants, people forced to fight, pay taxes to and work for an aggressive, exploitative and oppressive territorial government. – JZ, 12.5.85, 23.8.08, 9.4.11.

WAR: If people knew why they are fighting (coercive and monopolistic territorialism) they might be able to prevent it or to stop it. – JZ, 27.3.84. – Usually they are simply in the grip of false and misleading ideas on the subject. – JZ, 23.8.08. – Or mere war-slaves, conscripts or forced laborers or tax-tribute payers or victims of the inflation used to finance the government’s war. – JZ, 25.8.12. - PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, TOLERANCE OF ALL TOLERANT ACTIONS, INTOLERANCE ONLY FOR INTOLERANT ONES, PREJUDICES, DIS.

WAR: If there had never been war there could never have been tyranny in the world.” – Percy Bysshe Shelley, A Philosophical View of Reform, 1819. – Without territorial authoritarianism there would be no war. – JZ, 27.8.08. – A tyrant can also come to power through the civil war that he conducts in the country that he exclusively claims as his own. While e.g. Hitler's career did benefit from the wrongs of WW I and of the Weimar Republic, he came to power without a war and then he conducted his own aggressive war and also his internal mass murders. - JZ, 9.4.11. - .TYRANNY, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.” – James Madison (1751-1836), 4th U.S. President. – The internal enemies of rights and liberties were, possibly, even more influential in establishing and increasing wrongful powers and suppressing genuine rights and liberties. – Territorialism alone (and its many monopolies) does already assure the occurrence of all too much authoritarianism and all too many wars. - JZ, 3.1.08, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. - TYRANNY & OPPRESSION, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

WAR: In all history there is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people, to whom war is always pernicious even when successful.” - Leo Tolstoy. - “Tolstoi on Civil Disobedience and Nonviolence”, p.79. - Well, there were some really peaceful tribes but also some really barbaric and warlike tribes, who elected war leaders to lead them to fighting, conquests, rape and plunder. But man, humanity, and "the people", are not necessarily warlike. Only some conditions, especially territorialism and its institutions, tend to make them warlike or at least induce them to put up with wars. - JZ, 29.1.02. – Territorialism, sometimes, makes governments slide into a war much against their will. A nuclear war could also occur just by an accident or a misinterpretation. Governments cause and maintain them. They do even possess and maintain a monopoly to decide on war and peace, one still not sufficiently questioned and criticized. – JZ, 21.4.09. - & GOVERNMENTS VS. RIGHTS, LIBERTIES & INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, WARFARE STATE, TERRITORIALISM, VICTORY

WAR: In short, the objective of the libertarian is to confine any existing State to as small a degree of invasion of person and property as possible. And this means the total avoidance of war.” – Murray N. Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, p.193. – It also means, its confinement to exterritorial instead of territorial autonomy and to volunteers instead of involuntary State subjects. – JZ, 25.8.08. – What were his suggestions “to totally avoid” war with an aggressive totalitarian regime like that of a Stalin, Hitler or Mao?  Many actions are much easier suggested than successfully done. – J.Z., 25.8.12. LIBERTARIANISM, STATE, PEACE, PANARCHISM

WAR: In war everybody is a prisoner, the historian Henennemores had written. – Ursula K. Le Guin, Old Music and the Slave Woman, p.37 in: Far Horizons, ed. by Robert Silverberg, an Orbit Book, 1999. In quite rightful defensive or liberating wars against a despotic territorial regime, every person on the other side, who, on his own, is peaceful and tolerant, but now exists as a captive of his regime, as a conscript or forced laborer, becomes a natural ally of all the rightful enemies of his regime, a person to be liberated, in a quite rightful way, rather than being treated, under the “principle” of collective responsibility, as an enemy, and thus killed or formally imprisoned as a POW or interned as an enemy even if he or she had successfully fled their regime. At present almost all people are also largely prisoners of their own fixed territorialist ideas and territorialist laws and institutions. At first a mental revolution or enlightenment is required to break out of these mental prisons and their despotic laws, methods, actions, institutions and aims. But this mental revolution or enlightenment must deal with all the liberation techniques required, military, policing, monetary and financial ones. All the freedom and liberation, revolution, military insurrection etc. alternatives must become sufficiently studied, discussed, improved and published, including even how a unilateral disarmament of ABC mass murder devices, could be effectively carried out by the targeted people themselves, rather than being merely promised by their territorial rulers. Those, whom we so far mistreated wrongly as POWs or civilian victims of our bombing raids, should be treated as, potentially, our best allies or as neutral persons. Even the conscripts of a dictatorship are, largely, involuntary victims of it. And all tax slaves should be liberated, too. All subjects of territorial constitutions, laws, jurisdictions and institutions should be given the opportunity to opt out, which is their basic right and liberty to escape the worst forms of statism and territorial associationism. Neither private nor official Mafias or fanatic sects should have compulsory members. Panarchism or polyarchism offers an escape route and asylum for every innocent political prisoner in any country-wide nationalistic territorial prisons. Conscripts are essentially innocent prisoners, too, captured and wrongfully used by conventional military institutions of territorial govenrments. So are taxpayers, captured and exploited by tribute-levying institutions. So are involuntary school slaves. The central banks have captured and withheld from us our free exchange options for our goods, labor and services. – Before and during wars panarchistic governments and societies in exile could largely help us to mobilize these allies. - JZ, 29.9.07, 25.8.12. - & PRISONERS, CONSCRIPTS, DES., CAPTIVE NATIONS, SUPPRESSED MINORITIES OR EVEN A SUPPRESSED MAJORITY, SECRET ALLIES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, PANARCHISM, LIBERATION, WAR AIMS, WARFARE

WAR: In war, the stronger overcome the weaker. In business, the stronger imparts strength to the weaker.” - Frederic Bastiat. - In war the more free side, via liberation and revolutionary warfare methods, can overcome the militarily stronger side. It can even turn most of the conscripts, forced laborers and taxpayers of a dictatorship into its allies. - JZ, 9.4.11. - & BUSINESS, CAPITALISM, MARKET, BIG BUSINESS, CORPORATIONS, MULTINATIONALS, INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONS, FREE TRADE, WAR AIMS, DES., POW TREATMENT, LIBERATION, PANARCHISM, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, CAPTIVE NATIONS, PROTECTIONISM, STRENGTH, WEAKNESS, LIBERATION, DES., RIGHTFUL WAR AIMS

WAR: Indeed, war is the natural fruit of the way in which communities conduct their normal lives in a state of what is called peace, by which is meant no more than the present and temporary absence of war.” - R. V. Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, p.1. – Compare Clausewitz: “War is the continuation of politics with other means.” One should, rather, speak of territorial politics as the continuation of war with other means – and of war as the continuation of territorial politics with other means. – JZ, 20.8.08, 9.4.11. - PEACE, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: individuality cannot prosper under the constant threat of total war.” – Felix Morley, Individuality and the General Will, p.131 in “Essays on Individuality”, ed. by Felix Morley. – Individuality must prosper to end the constant threat of total war. – JZ, 17.2.81. – Even to the extent of finally declaring and practising all individual rights and liberties, including individual sovereignty or self-ownership, individual secessionism, full monetary freedom and voluntary taxation as well as voluntary membership in States, societies and communities, under personal laws and without any territorial monopoly. JZ, 20.8.08. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUALISM

WAR: Is man so particularly good at controlling his Might and his Ferocity and his Property? What does he do? He massacres the members of his own species like a cannibal! Do you know that it has been calculated that, during the years between 1100 and 1900, the English were at war for four hundred and nineteen years and the French for three hundred and seventy-three? Do you know that Lapouge has reckoned that nineteen million men are killed in Europe in every century, so that the amount of blood spilled would feed a fountain of blood running seven hundred litres an hour since the beginning of history? And let me tell you this, dear sir. War, in Nature herself outside of man, is so much a rarity that it scarcely exists. In all those two hundred and fifty thousand species, there are only a dozen or so which go to war. If Nature every troubled to look at man, the little atrocity, she would be shocked out of her wits.” - T. H. White, The Book of Merlyn, p.121. – It is not human nature that causes the atrocity but the intolerance of the territorial Warfare State and its leaders. – JZ, 25.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, HUMAN NATURE, AGGRESSIVENESS

WAR: It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of drums.” – Voltaire, Philosophical Dictionary, 1764, article “War”, quoted in Seldes, p.540. – The territorial State is also not good enough to capture and convict all private murderers, not even all private mass murderers, like e.g. terrorists. – In its wars it becomes the worst mass murderer. - JZ, 27.8.08, 9.4.11. - MURDER, MASS MURDER, WARFARE, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: It is formulated somewhat sharp but essentially not exaggerated to speak of every war today, even that between two nations, as being, essentially, a civil war.” - Hans Habe, Leben fuer den Journalismus, Bd. 4 of 4, S.59. (“Es ist etwas zugespitzt formuliert, aber es ist nicht uebertrieben, dass heute jeder Krieg, auch zwischen zwei Nationen, im Grunde ein Buergerkrieg ist.”) – CIVILWAR: It is not fighting itself that is always the greatest evil but fighting for the wrong causes and for the purposes and profits of others, instead of only for the own basic rights and liberties, whenever that should become necessary against genuine aggressors, including, sometimes, the own territorial government. – JZ, 21.7.05. – A thought that I heard first expressed by Ulrich von Beckerath, 1882-1969. - Go far enough back into mankind's development and history and you will find that we are all related to each other. - All descendants of the first early men and women in Africa. - To that extent all wars are fights within a very extended family. - JZ, 9.4.11. - FIGHTING, WRONG CAUSES, NO OR WRONGFUL WAR AIMS, TERRITORIALISM, CIVIL WAR, THE HUMAN FAMILY

WAR: It is not private outfits what fight wars and operates concentration camps, it is governments, because governments is those organizations what claim the right to kill whatever will not do what they say. Corporations, unions, political parties, churches, God knows what, it makes no matter who gets hold of the machinery of government, they will use it and use it and use it.” – Poul Anderson, Mirkheim, p. 214. - ECONOMIC POWER, CORPORATIONS, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENT, STATES, LEADERSHIP

WAR: It is said they fight for freedom and rights but, upon a closer look, they are serfs fighting against serfs.” – LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, Nr. 3, S.23. (“Es heisst, sie streiten sich um Freiheitsrechte, genau beseh’n sind’s Knechte gegen Knechte!”) - SERFDOM, TERRITORIAL SUBJECTS FIGHTING AGAINST TERRITORIAL SUBJECTS, RATHER THAN BOTH AGAINST THEIR TERRITORIAL RULERS.

WAR: it is the wrong ideas that cause war and not the guns and ships. Armaments and wrong ideas no doubt flourish together, but to remove the guns and ships while at the same time encouraging the wrong ideas is to hasten disasters far worse than war.” – Sir Ernest Benn, This Soft Age, p.126. – See the history of totalitarian States and their mass murders: Over 200 million people mass murdered during the last century, apart from the war victims. And now even democratic governments have “scientific” mass murder devices, targeting whole victimized peoples, not the guilty territorial governments! - Details on the mass murders during “peace” time are on the very extensive website of Prof. Rudy Rummel. – JZ, 27.7.93, 21.8.08. - ARMAMENT, DISARMAMENT, IDEAS, PREJUDICES, ERRORS, DICTATORSHIPS, TOTALITARIANISM, MASS MURDERS, HOLOCAUST, TERRITORIALISM, NWT, TOTALITARIANISM

WAR: It is wonderful with what coolness and indifference the greater part of mankind see war commenced? - Samuel Johnson, Thoughts Respecting the Falkland’s Islands, 1771. - I find it rather fearful and disgusting. – But then: What say did they ever have on such matters? – Even the Falkland Islands War, a few years ago, was not seriously considered in all its absurd territorial claims and counter-claims and actions, although it could almost have served as a model for re-considering all exclusive territorial claims and the military struggles they lead to and the alternative and voluntary forms of organization that would avoid such wrongful and senseless conflicts. - JZ, 22.8.08. – PUBLIC OPINION, ENLIGHTENMENT, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM

WAR: It takes all nations to keep the peace, but it only takes one to start a war.” – Robert Heinlein, “Free Men”. – As long as “nations” are territorially organized in warfare States there will be wars. – JZ, 27.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, NATIONALISM, DIS.

WAR: it would take the war of 1898 and two world wars and two undeclared wars (‘police actions’ for God’s sake!) to make me realize that neither our government nor our press could be trusted with human lives.” - Robert Heinlein, “To Sail Beyond the Sunset”, p.83 in the hardback edition, chapter 6. – Since governments are not ideal to run even a police force well enough, we should not expect them to turn wars into quite rightful police actions, either. – The best of the militia ideas and practices, in combination with the best declaration of individual rights and liberties ever, one still to be compiled, are minimum requirements for that. – Alas, both subjects are still quite insufficiently discussed. – JZ, 10.9.08. – I did what I could, in this respect, in my two peace-books, both online at and largely based upon the ideas of Ulrich von Beckerath. – JZ, 25.8.12. - GOVERNMENTS, PRESS, MASS MEDIA, MILITIA, AN IDEAL DECLARATION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: It’s a useful rule of thumb that the bloodiest personal encounters are immeasurably less murderous than even the smallest, politest, and least-lethal wars; the whole point of war is that it is killing systematized and organized in a way that private encounters just can’t be and that it is designed to include millions of people who have nothing to do with the dispute at hand.” – Robert Brakeman, REASON, 7/76, p.24. – TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, WARFARE STATES

WAR: It’s we who are behind the times. Had we not abandoned our original ideas of political freedom, freedom from politics, war would have been outmoded by now. It is an uneconomic exchange.” – Joan Marie Leonard, THE FREEMAN, 3/77. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SELF-OWNERSHIP, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PERSONAL LAW, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: It’s worth noting, no nation every declared war on another.” - Sawyer/Wilshire, One Man Band, The best of Peter Sawyer, whistle blower, edited by Brian Wilshire, 1996, Brian Wilshire, PO Box 209, Round Corner NSW 2158, ISBN # 0 646 265117 2, p.87. – Actually, only national governments did. If a referendum on the subject had been held then the war hawks would, usually, have lost it. – JZ, 25.3.09. – DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP OR MIS-LEADERSHIP? PEOPLES, NATIONS, GOVERNMENTS

WAR: Jaw, not war.” – Dr. Soper, 29.5.89. – But, certainly not the professional diplomatic way – merely preparing the road for the next war. – Individuals and communities of volunteers were so far left out of such discussions. It would make much more sense to leave out all the territorial political leaders or mis-leaders. – JZ, 4.6.82, 22.8.08, 9.4.11. – All genuine individual rights and liberties for all, to the extent that volunteers do wish to practise them among themselves, rather than any wars for any of the usual wrongful or very suspect “war aims”. – JZ, 7.2.12. - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE, WAR AIMS, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, ALL PANARCHISTICALLY ORGANIZED FOR VOLUNTEERS ONLY, PEACE NEGOTIATIONS, PEACE CONFERENCES, LEADERSHIP, TERRITORIALISM, FRATERNIZATION, NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN PEOPLES, PANARCHIES & POLYARCHIES, UNILATERAL PEACE DECLARATIONS, APPEALS, DES., REFUGEES, ASYLUM, FULL EMPLOYMENT

WAR: John T. Flynn, in his book “As We Go Marching”, observed that the welfare state and the warfare state are intimately related. War and welfare are the two great means of consolidation of power in the hands of the central government. The welfare policies of Roosevelt live on to haunt us and his foreign policy of global interventionism has become the accepted policy of both liberals and conservatives.” - Jim Lewis, “Liberty Reclaimed”, p.46. - POWER, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, WELFARE STATE, WARFARE STATE, INTERVENTIONISM, FOREIGN POLICY, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WAR: Karl Hess … pointed out the perverted priorities we have when thousands and millions of people die to national armies and there is little resistance while individual murderers and murders get all the attention.” – NEW LIBERTARIAN WEEKLY, 13.3.77. – Most people still believe something can be done about murderers. Few believe the same about warfare that murders many more people. – Territorialism and its decision-making monopolies, are taken for granted. - JZ, 19.4.89, 24.8.08, 9.4.11. - MURDERS & MASS MURDERS, TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WAR: Lagorgette, in his large and useful book “Le Rôle de Guerre”, found twelve years ago that at least one hundred and fifty definitions of war had been put forth, and since then the number has greatly increased. But there cannot be much doubt that, roughly speaking, we means by war an organized attack by the whole community on another community of the same species. (*) The combats of animals – even apart from the fact that when with members of their own species they are rarely fatal and often approximate to play – cannot be said to even remotely to resemble war. There are two notable exceptions – though even here fighting scarcely attains the exact definition of warfare – among the ants and among the bees, the only creatures that have attained a kind of culture comparable to man’s. They may also be said to be the only two groups, outside men, combining density of population with the ownership of property. These are two significant facts which we must always bear in mind when we are discussing the origin of war.” – Havelock Ellis, “Selected Essays”, “The Origin of War”, p.193. - - (*) That is one of the myths which our mis-rulers spread, in order to hide their own guilt and to justify their own wrongful warfare methods, directed against the victims of governments rather than against the guilty governments. The soldiers and civil populations on both sides are not given, officially, any choice in this matter except to fight or otherwise support the war efforts of their territorial governments, always under the pretence that this would be in the national interest and that the whole population would be at risk. It would be, rather, in the national and national, not only the humanitarian interest, of both sides, if their soldiers and civilians concluded a separate peace treaty, over the heads of their governments and, rather, united their forces in a quite rightful and limited police action, conducted by themselves, against their territorial governments, i.e. if the intended victims united and fought only against their own governmental victimizers. Then not much fighting would have to be done. That resistance might even be quite bloodless. But how many are so far mentally and organizationally prepared to turn their guns around against the war-mongers (war hawks) on both sides? – JZ, 26.8.08, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. - DEFINITIONS OF WAR, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, PEOPLE VS. GOVERNMENTS, SOLDIERS VS. THEIR OWN GOVERNMENTS, UPRISINGS TO ACHIEVE PEACE, REVOLUTION, DISOBEDIENCE, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM

WAR: Let us have no more nonsense about capitalism causing war. Any schoolboy knows that Spartans made war. Men living in communism and under all forms of Government have always made war.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.58. – According to Herbert Spencer, about 50 primitive tribes are known who had neither governments no wars. But, most likely, they had fled from warlike tribes. – A fully developed free enterprise, free trade, laissez-faire economy, including full monetary and financial freedom, would not be war-promoting but peace establishing and maintaining. Some even expect this result e.g. from Free Trade or Land Reform alone. Historically, investments in foreign countries have sometimes already sufficed to prevent wars against them. – E.g. many rich people in Turkey had much invested in Venice – because their capital was safer and more productive there. Thus it did not come to a large or total war between Venice and Turkey. – Some American investments in Germany were also not bombed during the air raids of WW II. - J.Z., 25.8.12. - CAPITALISM, COMMUNISM, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES, DIS.

WAR: Make money, not war.” – Denise Keeney Bodey, TIME, Feb. 11, 1980. – Are the big money-makers really the big peace-makers? – How many of them did even sell arms and computer technology to dictatorships? – JZ, 20.8.08. - - Make money not war!” – PLAIN TRUTH – magazine. - Make money by producing still more weapons for still more wars? - If you were to issue our own private money and found satisfied acceptors for it, redeeming it in your goods and services, then you would actually do much to promote peace. But by merely working for the government’s monopoly money you do, whether you like it or not, also promote war to some extent. – JZ, 27.8.08. - By now territorial governments are, probably, the largest arms producers and traders. - JZ, 9.4.11. – Private arms producers have even priority access to tax funds, not only during wars but also during the intervening armistice periods, allowing them extraordinary profits from the production of arms. – JZ, 7.2.12. – The fact that some corporations made large profits from producing arms should not be over-extended to condemn all capitalist firms as war-promoting. All the other firms, for instance, paid much in war taxes to finance these war industries. The main customers of all war industries are – territorial governments and they do so use or abuse much of what they do levy in tax-tributes. – JZ, 25.8.12. - ARMAMENT PROFITS, ARMS RACES, THE MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Mexican War: “We come to overthrow the tyrants who have destroyed your liberties, but we come to make no war upon the people of Mexico.” – Zachary Taylor, Proclamation to the people of Mexico.” – Alas, more than such rhetoric was involved. See the following remarks: 1.) “Base in object, atrocious in beginning, immoral in all its influence, vainly prodigal of treasure and life, it is a war of infamy, which must blot the pages of our history”. – Charles Sumner, Speech in Boston, Nov. 5, 1946. – 2.) “The war has not been waged with a view to conquest.” – James Polk, Message to Congress, Dec. 8, 1846. – 3.) “I believe it to be a war of pretexts, a war in which the true motive is not distinctly avowed, but in which pretenses, afterthoughts, evasions and other methods are employed to put a case before the community which is not the true case”. – Daniel Webster, Speech in Springfield, Mass., Sept. 29, 1847. – 4.) To this day [I] regard the war as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies, in not considering justice in their desire to acquire additional territory”. – U.S. Grant, Personal Memoirs, III, 1885. - TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Minor Violence Leads to Major ViolenceThere is another way to demonstrate the inevitability of seemingly minor violence (*) leading to major violence. Responsibility and authority go hand in hand. If, for example, you accept the financial responsibility for a widowed sister you assume a commensurate authority over her expenditures, or risk bankruptcy. It is no different in society. When we as citizens turn over to the state an item in the responsibility of our welfare, the state assumes a proportionate authority over our lives. Thus, as we turn over to the state item after item of our own welfare responsibilities, we eventually arrive at the all-responsible (**) state. When we reach this point we will have over us, ipso facto, the all-authoritarian state. At the head of this state will be a gangster, a craftsman in violence, by reason of the nature of the job to be done: administering violence. Authoritarian states are, of necessity, headed by tyrants. Tyrants make wars. Logic says that they must. History confirms that they do.” – Leonard E. Read, Instead of Violence, p.24. Underlining by me. - This deduction overlooks that we had tyrants long before we had Welfare States. However, it is true that most tyrannies, except those established by conquests, putsches and military uprisings, are usually established gradually, step by step. Moreover, tyrannies have already the authoritarianism and centralism, monopolies and coercion of territorial States in common even with democracies, republics and constitutional monarchies and would have them in common even with the supposedly ideal but still territorial “limited” governments that most libertarians aim at. – (*) By territorial governments! – (**) And thus quite irresponsible State! - JZ, 28.8.08. – WELFARE STATE, AUTHORITARIANISM, VIOLENCE, AUTHORITARIANISM, TYRANNY, VIOLENCE, LEADERSHIP, GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Most battles amount to attempts at mutual mass murders, mostly of innocent people, driven into such situations against their will, forced to fight each other, without a trial, with no pardon granted or refusal or escape option, in all too many cases. None of the victims on both sides had any real say on whether there should be a war and against whom and for what. They are all treated as puppets by their puppet masters, or as expendable property or sacrifices. But they are armed and potentially dangerous. They could turn their arms around and fight their masters. They could desert or let themselves be taken prisoners or mass-fraternize and achieve mutually satisfactory peace conditions between them, over the heads of their rulers. But this requires much thinking, discussion and publicity, much in advance of such situations, like any successful and quite rightful military uprising or revolution. With such thinking the military slaves of territorial governments could be turned into efficient genuine peace makers, i.e. real patriots. – JZ, 1.1.04, 31.10.07. - BATTLES, AIR RAIDS, ARTILLERY FIRE, AREA BOMBING, WARFARE METHODS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, SELF-LIBERATION AGAINST WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Most government give foreign people more reasons for warring against them than for keeping the peace with them. Territorial governments can’t help doing this. By their very nature they are aggressive rather than protective, even towards many to most of their own subjects. – JZ, 8.12.85. – WAR AIMS, DEFENCE, LIBERATION, DES., REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE, TYRANNICIDE, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES

WAR: Most people are much more inclined to go to war, obediently, taxed, propagandized, lied to, uniformed, armed, organized, trained, disciplined and commanded, ignorantly, prejudiced, torn from all they really love, and this for the exclusive benefit of their rulers and the false pretences of these misleaders, “representing” merely territorial warfare States, i.e. for “causes” and against “enemies” decided for them by their own governments, rather than by themselves, instead of at least beginning to seriously ponder how they could come to live peacefully, unmolested and without molesting others, tolerant of their differences, with each free to look after his own welfare in his or her own way, and how they could and should act to achieve and maintain such a peaceful, just, free and progressive condition. – As long as this condition and mentality persists, wars will go on. - JZ, 17.4.99, 21.8.08. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, OBEDIENCE, REFUSALS TO THINK

WAR: Most wars are fought to achieve some form of unity without full individual consent. – JZ, 19.2.73. – TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, TOLERANCE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, ENFORCED UNITY, WARFARE STATES

WAR: NATIONAL DEFENCE: What about national defense? Isn’t the nation safe from foreign enemies only because of the government? - - What is a nation? In common usage, a nation is considered to be a geographical area under the jurisdiction of a single government that isn’t a subdivision of a larger government. The government assumes responsibility for the defense of the geographical area and makes all decisions regarding armed conflict with outsiders. - - If there were no government, there’d be no nation. And if there were no nation, there’d be nothing to defend. (*) - - If that sounds too simple, think about it. No aggressor conquers a nation by overcoming every single inhabitant and occupying every part of the geographical area. It would be far too expensive to do so. (**) - - Instead, the aggressor applies force against the country until the government of that nation surrenders. Then the aggressor takes over the existing governmental machinery to enforce the occupation. If no such machinery existed, how could it enforce the occupation?” – Harry Browne, How I found Freedom, p.96. - - (*) ??? - - (**) Could individual defenders have stopped the Nazi’s war machine? – Could the Jewish families that were arrested, have defended themselves separately and successfully? - JZ, 27.8.08. – Works of as famous and influential writers as H. B. should be published together with at least URL references to correction and refutations that should be added as comments to his texts. Otherwise, too many would still accept his remaining errors, false definitions, flawed or wrong views on authority. Perhaps for each important writer like him, a special website of criticism and supplementary information should be opened. Perhaps even for each of his books. To some extent this has started for online articles. However, most of the criticism offered does also need further criticism. Justified criticism should, perhaps, be offered separately from undeserved criticism. – JZ, 25.8.12. - DIS., GOVERNMENT, AGGRESSION, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: National governments are the only agencies on earth capable of waging wars. It is a cliché, but it is nevertheless the truth, that people do not start wars, only governments do. My thesis is that the legal monopoly on the use of force and weapons of defense should be taken away from the state. As long as the weapons monopoly remains in the hands of paranoid generals and politicians in Washington, the threat of war will always be imminent.” – Jerome Tuccille, Radical Libertarianism, p.86. - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, WEAPONS MONOPOLY, POLITICIANS, GENERALS, POWER ADDICTION, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES

WAR: Nations and individuals should treat each other in such a fashion that there can be no excuse for a fight.” – E. W. Howe, Sinner Sermons, 1926, p.47. - He, too, managed to overlook that “nations” and most “individuals” have no say on this matter, even in the supposedly most free countries. – JZ, 20.8.08. – He did not state what this would require, e.g. voluntarism and exterritorial autonomy, starting with individual and group secessionism. – JZ, 25.87.12. - WAR AIMS, INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, DIPLOMACY, MINISTERS FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, DIS.

WAR: Neither President Bush nor Saddam Hussein nor their territorial regimes were worth fighting for. Nor is any other territorial democracy, which is practised over all too many and very diverse dissenters, who would often rather fight or otherwise resist than submit to the outcome of “free” majority voting and decision-making. The important decisions are usually made by all too few people, as their constitutional and legalized monopoly. Thus let us rather fight or resist all such territorial leaders and their territorial systems rather than fight among ourselves. We should do so on the common basis of agreeing to finally let each individual or group have the government or non-governmental society of his, her or their own free choice, but none of these associated with any territorial monopoly or territorial monopoly claim. On that basis all of us, no matter how different we or our preferred systems are, could peacefully coexist and even extensively trade with each other. In many countries full religious liberty and tolerance was introduced, even among people who formerly used to be quite intolerant and murderous fanatics. Tolerance for tolerant actions and experiments would also work for political, economic and social systems, all practised only at the expense and risk of their believers. It would accelerate enlightenment as much as is possible for human beings, in these spheres as well. – Even in territorial democracies, in which the leaders, like formerly the absolute monarchs, are still allowed to decide on war and peace. These States are, thereby, as already Immanuel Kant stated, really despotic regimes. – However, there are differences between genuine tyrants and democratically elected despots. The former deserve tyrannicide. The latter one can still unseat peacefully, i.e. without executing or assassinating them. – Their territorial, monopolistic and powerful offices are the greatest wrongness involved and thus these offices ought to be abolished, for they produce more and more misleading leaders, again and again. – Even in territorial democracies and republics, as Hayek pointed out in “The Road to Serfdom”, “the worst rise to the top.” - JZ, 17.2.03, 21.10.07. – A real “mouthful” this, too. Can one reduce it to some attractive slogans? – JZ, 21.10.07. - TYRANTS, MEN IN POWER, DICTATORS, MEN WITH DECISION-MAKING POWER ON WAR & PEACE AIMS, QUITE RIGHTFUL ONES. TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Never think that war, no matter how necessary, nor how justified, is not a crime. – Ernest Hemingway. – The fallacies involved here consist e.g. in not distinguishing a) between aggression and defence, b) between territorial governments and the various peoples subjected to all of them. c) not considering quite rightful war, liberation, revolution and peace aims. - The essential crime involved lies in the organization and maintenance of the territorial Warfare States, even during their so-called “peace” periods, that are really merely temporary armistices. – JZ, 1.9.08, 9.4.11.

WAR: noideology, no power, no pride, nothing’s worth blackening this beautiful world we got and frying little children alive.” – Poul Anderson, Dialogue with Darkness, p.11. – Define your war and peace aims, individual rights and liberties, enemies and allies, including secret allies, defence, aggression and “weapons”, individual vs. collective responsibility, rightful targets, properly and everything else that is also involved. Then you might come to end and prevent wars. But with incomplete or muddled ideas only muddled, vain, destructive and murderous actions result. – JZ, 26.8.08, 25.8.12. - The atrocities of wars, their mass-murderous and mass-destructive nature, has never as yet succeeded in preventing them, while all the war-promoting characteristics of territorial States were continued. - JZ, 9.4.11. – A sound and comprehensive peace program is needed. A genuine blueprint or sound plan, with all the details, all the steps worked out. – JZ, 25.8.12.

WAR: no war can be just, unless (*) a war to which we are compelled in the sole cause of freedom.” – Lord Acton, Lectures on the French Revolution, ed. by Figgis & Laurence, MacMillan, 1932, p.4.  – (*) it is? – J.Z.  - Full freedom has, usually, other effective means to defend itself or to become fully realized in a country, than an outright war, civil war or violent and bloody revolution. – However, in its absence, in ignorance of it or under prejudices against it, these further calamities are among the inevitable consequences of this state of affairs, especially of territorial rule. - JZ, 1.10.07, 9.4.11. – For instance: If a close to perfect revolution and insurrection program were developed and made sufficiently known, then we could surrender, without fighting, to an aggressor, which is a despotic regime and then, together with his occupation army and his remaining forces in his home country, rise against this regime. All it would need is a much better and more attractive program than the regime has to offer. With it, its own soldiers and guns could be turned against this regime.  There may be still plenty of time to develop such programs. – JZ, 25.8.12. - JUST WAR & FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATES

WAR: No war is for the people.” – From Film: “Strangers at Sunrise.” – But every war is against the people on both sides, rather than against their warmongering territorial governments! – JZ, 24.8.08, 9.4.11. – PEOPLE, STATE, GOVERNMENTS, RULERS, PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Not a continuation but a failure of policy.” – Anatol Rapoport  – Quoted in Shimon Tzabar: The White Flag Principle, p.18. - I see it as a continuation and consequence of territorial monopolies and policies. - JZ, 9.4.11, 25.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION, MONETARY DESPOTISM, PROTECTIONISM, DIS.

WAR: Only governments make war.” – Hugh Frazer, 10.2.78. – Only territorial governments make war. – JZ, 28.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, DIS.

WAR: Only lunatics and generals love war. … the Battle of the Somme … 1 July 1916, when the British Army alone lost 60,000 men, the day that finally put an end to the glory of war. … they died like flowers under the scythe. …” - John Cleary, High Road to China, Fontana/Collins, 1979, p.33. - For what? - JZ, 9.4.11. - WAR AIMS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Our (our governments’ wars) as conducted today lead usually to more wars. The art of making war only against real enemies and aggressors, to end or even prevent most wars, is still largely unknown. – JZ, 22.1.98. - WAR AIMS, WARFARE METHODS, PEACE TREATIES, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, LIBERATION, REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE, DESERTION, SECRET ALLIES, TYRANNICIDE, WAR AIMS, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, PANARCHISM, MONETARY FREEDOM, POW TREATMENT

WAR: Our position on foreign policy is summarized by a remark attributed to Ronald Hamoway: „I am not a pacifist, I am only opposed, in principle, to communist wars. A communist war is any war fought between governments.” – David Friedman, Manifesto, p.57. – The details of a libertarian liberation war or libertarian revolutionary warfare have either still to be worked out or sufficiently published and discussed. – JZ, 25.8.12. - FOREIGN POLICY, COMMUNISM, GOVERNMENTS, PACIFISM, TERRITORIALISM, COLLECTIVISM

WAR: our whole existing way of life is itself a form of war and that therefore war cannot and will not be abolished by those who remain irretrievably wedded to our inegalitarian culture, however sincerely they profess their attachment to the cause of peace.” – R. V. Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, XXIII. – I would replace “inegalitarian culture” rather by “territorial, coercive and monopolistic system. JZ, n.d. & 20.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM, COERCION, MAJORITY DESPOTISM, PANARCHISM, POLITICS

WAR: People don't cause wars, governments do. Eliminate governments - hell, just eliminate conscription and taxation - and you eliminate war. Simple as that!”- L. Neil Smith, The Probability Broach, p.259. - Ignorant and prejudiced mobs can cause mass murders and wars as well. When the Pakistan government got its nuclear arsenal, all too many people danced with joy in the streets of Pakistan's cities, unaware that they were doing it on future ground zero places. Only territorial States are "Warfare States". - JZ, 24.1.02. - GOVERNMENTS, PEOPLE, DECISION-MAKING, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY NOTIONS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: People find themselves at war or in an armistice called peace or threatened by nuclear war and yet neither know why nor do they want to find out why. – JZ, 31.5.84, 25.8.12. – Nor are they given any say in the matter. The decision-making in this sphere is monopolized by territorial governments. All they are permitted to do is to work hard for a war, pay much in taxes for it, march to war, fight in it, get wounded, crippled, killed or taken prisoner, see their homes and lives destroyed, still more and more of their rights and liberties taken away - and all this for what? They don’t know. Their rulers never talk sufficient sense on the subject but go ahead anyhow with their aggressions or all too aggressive “defence” efforts, anyhow, slaughtering more and more people, even more civilians than soldiers and now even keep masses of mass murder devices in readiness and still expect to be trusted and obeyed by their victims. – JZ, 23.8.08, 9.4.11. – DECISION-MAKING, WAR AIMS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, OBEDIENCE, PEOPLE, GOVERNMENTS

WAR: Ponder the absurdity of war: Why should the bricklayers of one nation make war upon those of another? Or the farmers, doctors, dentists, bakers, greengrocers, watchmakers, etc. upon their counterparts or other tradesmen or professionals? Why should painters, musicians, actors, sculptors, singers and sportsmen do so? Or fathers, sons, some grandparents or anyone at all? When just war and peace aims are properly defined and declared, then no cause or motive for war remains. – JZ, 9.10.92. – Naturally, when, instead, two or more different parties declare an exclusive monopoly claim to any particular territory, it is at once another matter. It is then as if two or more families claimed the same house as their rightful and exclusive property. They are then likely to come to blows, soon. – JZ, 21.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, MOTIVES, WAR AIMS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, WARFARE STATES

WAR: Prisoners of war should be treated in a way that, at least after a while, they are having to confirm: We have not been captured but liberated. – JZ, 27.9.81. – They can and should be turned from indoctrinated enemies into allies or at least neutrals. – JZ, 27.8.08. - If they were conscripts and actually opponents of their territorial regime, then this transformation should be much easier. - JZ, 9.4.11. - PRISONERS OF WAR, LIBERATION, DESERTION, DEFECTORS, REFUGEES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, WAR AIMS, DES.

WAR: Q.: “I don’t understand why people can’t get along peacefully.” – They can and they do – but in some important spheres, monopolized by their governments, their territorial governments won’t let them. They get along as lovers, friends, traders, tourists, neighbors, scholars, sportsmen, hobbyists, music and art lovers, writers and readers, but not as territorial subjects that are taxed, conscripted, organized, uniformed, propagandized, armed, trained, disciplined and then ordered to fight against the armed forces of other territorial governments – because, as Ulrich von Beckerath used to say, they have, all too often, no other value for their territorial governments. – JZ, 21.8.85, 26.8.08, 9.4.11. - DIS., PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, MODERN FEUDALISM, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Quarrels would not last long if the fault were only on one side.” - Francois, Duc de la Rochefoucauld, Reflections; or, Sentences and Moral Maxims, p.496. - The most wrongful aspect on both sides is, usually, their territorialism. - JZ, 10.4.11. - WAR & PEACE AIMS, AGGRESSION, DEFENCE

WAR: Replace wars, which are largely only slaughtering victimized peoples, by tyrannicide of the guilty few and make wars close to impossible by depriving all governments of all their powers over others than volunteers. – Then, without compulsory taxation and monetary despotism and the option of taking up forced loans, they could not even finance any aggressive wars, which they might still want to conduct. – JZ, 18.3.94, 21.8.08. – TYRANNICIDE, PANARCHISM, FINANCING WARS, TERRITORIALISM, POWER, VOLUNTARISM

WAR: Sees in national warfare rather a destiny than an organizational stupidity.” – Beaulieu, The Modern State, p.164. - TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Since it seems that, despite reason, despite good will (*), despite economic pressure and all the other forces which ought by now to have made war a thing of the past, we are to go on using war as one of the means of regulating our foreign relations, … I advocate this innovation of waging war by assassination of the enemy’s leaders because I believe it would save millions of lives and untold suffering.” - Edward Hyams, Killing No Murder, p.38. – (*) Territorialism, and its coercion and intolerance, does not represent reason and good will. – JZ, 16.10.88. - ASSASSINATIONS, TYRANNICIDE, DIS.

WAR: Since the power of modern great states means war, says Proudhon, we must weaken them all.” – John Bowle, Political Opinion in the 19th Century, p.162. - Best by ending all their territorial powers. Then they can wrong and harm only their remaining voluntary victims. How? Extend individual and minority group secessionism to them and confront them with the multitude of societies and communities of volunteers, which would result from this and which would tend to federate comprehensively against all remaining intolerant and aggressive societies, in their obvious and common self-interest. - JZ, 10.4.11. - STATES, BIGNESS, POWER. TERRITORIALISM, SECESSIONISM, AN INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF ALL SOCIETIES OF VOLUNTEERS, AGAINST THE REMAINING FEW TOTALITARIANS. CENTRALIZATION, NATIONALISM

WAR: Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed.” – United Nations: Constitution of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization). – Quoted in Seldes. - Are really the minds more involved than feelings, urges, fears and instincts and institutionalized coercion? – JZ, 27.8.08. – The UN's 1948 "Universal" Declaration of Human Rights does not contain e.g. the panarchistic and the monetary freedom rights and defines many mere claims against others as if they were rights. Its "thinking" has still not been refined, especially when it comes to territorialism. It "represents" only territorial States and all their wrongs and irrationalities. - JZ, 10.4.11. - DIS., PREJUDICES, EDUCATION, ENLIGHTENMENT, UN, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF REFUTATIONS, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, DEFINITIONS

WAR: So far territorial politics forced innocent people to kill other innocent people for the benefit of power-holders. I would rather like to see innocent people achieving the power to execute criminal men in power. Naturally, it would be more peace-promoting if the victimized achieved the right to secede from the men in power and to withdraw from them, from any territorial power, until only the power over their volunteers remains and even that only to the extent that it is not used for aggressive actions against outsiders. – JZ 15.3.04. – Does that remain a mere beautiful dream or can it be turned into practical and effective exterritorialist policies? I believe the latter to be the case, if the freedom options involved are properly pondered and formed into a political and attractive platform, based e.g. upon genuine individual rights and liberties and corresponding quite rightful peace- and war aims and quite rightful defence, revolution, insurrection and liberation methods. – JZ, 19.10.07. – Q.,  LIBERATION, REVOLUTION, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, DES,M TYRANNICIDE, POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING, PEOPLE & DEMOCRACY, PANARCHISTIC SELF-GOVERNMENT

WAR: So long as such conditions continue and the public fails to revolt, we are bound to live in a constant state of alarms, threats and crisis, in constant danger of war and in a distorted and wasteful economic climate, which can in the end only be disastrous. It is a situation and a condition which gives substantial and at times complete truth to the Kremlin accusations of ‘warmongering”. It blocks all possibility of conference and negotiation and the opening of the congested channels of trade, food, raw materials, markets, exchange of goods and other economic factors which lie at the very root of nearly all the troubles of the world. …” Louis Bromfield, A New Pattern for a Tired World, p.13. - Was there no war mongering by the Kremlin? - At least it was even more at war with its own involuntary subjects. - JZ, 10.4.11. – Monetary despotism is another factor, which congests the channels of the market and worsens “protectionist” “policies” and their results. – JZ, 26.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM

WAR: So long as there is a State, war will never cease.” – Bakunin – It is territorial States that are the main enemies. One should know and clearly express the character and very nature of one’s enemy. Voluntary associations of statists, doing their things only to or for themselves, are not our enemies. That option might sooner or later enlighten even them, since they would have to pay for all their mistakes themselves. They could not conscript dissenters or impose forced labor upon them, nor could they then cause a general inflation or impose almost unlimited government debts. – JZ, 22.4.09, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL, EVEN THE STATISTS, WAR AIMS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: So much of intellectual and physical as well as financial and other resources go into preparing for and fighting wars and so little into preventing or ending them fast, and with little if any further bloodshed of innocents. So much effort goes into upholding wrongful territorial States and their harmful laws and institutions and so very little systematic effort goes into the development and publication of quite rightful war and peace aims, quite rightful liberation, defence and revolutionary methods, quite rightful declarations of individual rights and liberties, quite rightful alternative institutions and methods (that could and would peacefully compete or coexist, tolerating each other, permitting full minority autonomy, freedom of action and experimentation for all of them). Not even the best ideas and talents have so far been systematically collected, archived, published and marketed in a sufficiently comprehensive and systematic way, not even by people who are otherwise free marketeers. – JZ, 14.1.05, 24.10.07. - INTELLECTUALS, SCIENTISTS & TECHNICIANS & PEACE, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, INTEREST IN THE OWN MAJOR AFFAIRS.

WAR: Sovereign States have shown themselves to be incapable of judging their own causes objectively. Such (Their! – JZ) judgments are too heavily tinged with prejudice. …” – F. A. E. Crew, Must Man Wage War? Thrift Books, London, 1952, p.36. - SOVEREIGNTY, STATES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Spencer again laid his finger on the spot when he declared that war is the great enemy of individual liberty.” - Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, 4/72, p.14. - That remark makes freedom appear weak as against war and its conditions. Indeed, incomplete or unknown liberties create weakness towards the war-mongers, But complete liberty would be stronger than the forces of most wars are. Freedom is the greatest enemy of war. If we recognized and utilized ALL of it, then almost all wars would end soon or be altogether prevented or would be reduced to rightful police actions against the major war criminals. Precisely during wars freedom is needed most by all the victims of wars, including their conscripts. - JZ, 18.9.00. - Complete liberty for all who desired it and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers for all satisfied with lesser degrees of liberty, that is one idea whose time has finally come and it will prove to be stronger than all the armies in the world. It can pull them onto its own side, mostly without any military fighting. - JZ, 30.1.02. At least the terms "panarchy" and "panarchism" are widely used now, although not always correctly, in the meaning of de Puydt. My last Google search on 7.4.11 brought me 59,400 references under "panarchy", 38,100 under "panarchism" and 17,200 under "panarchy, books". - Alas, on my own I haven't got the time to explore all of them. - JZ, 10.4.11. – In today’s search I get 113,000 results for panarchy, 19,000 under panarchism and 58,600 for panarchy books, a rise of about 60,000 references in over a year. How many will there be in 5 years? – JZ, 26.8.12. - & FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, LIBERTARIAN DEFENCE, DES., IDEAS, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, PEACE

WAR: Statism causes war.” – R. A. Childs, Jr., in reviewing “The Society of Tomorrow” by Gustave de Molinari, in BOOKS FOR LIBERTARIANS, Dec. 72. - A statism that would be confined only to its volunteers, would not cause wars, no more so than the most disciplined monasteries would cause wars and no more so than body-contact sports would cause wars. – However, territorial statism, with all its coercion and monopolies does cause wars. - JZ, 28.8.08. – DIS., CAUSES OF WARS, TERRITORIALISM VS. EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

WAR: Submission to tyrants makes not for peace but unending war.” – Dagobert D. Runes, Treasury of Thought, p.101. - Every territorial State as such is tyrannical and as such more or less also a Warfare State, unless it is of a quite insignificant size or has a long and effective tradition of neutrality, which Switzerland and Sweden finally acquired after having been involved in all too many wars. – Their neutrality tradition will not protect them against the threats posed by a nuclear war. - JZ, 27.8.08, 10.4.11. – TYRANNY, DIS., TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATE

WAR: Supreme excellence in warfare consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting. – Sun Tzu in “The Forge of War”. – Quoted in: Donald Kingsbury, Courtship Rite, ANALOG, 29.3.82. - Compare the Christian slogan: “The best way to defeat an enemy is to make a friend out of him!” - The captive nations and minorities are already our natural but so far only secret and not yet activated allies. - JZ, 10.4.11. - CAPTIVE NATIONS, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, LIBERATION, DEFENCE, - APPEALS, WAR AIMS, DECLARATION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, DES., WARFARE WITHOUT FIGHTING, REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE

WAR: Taxation is theft; Conscription is slavery; War is murder.” – Unknown. – All these abuses can also be defined as expropriations or nationalizations. They are also characteristics of territorialism with its suppression of individual and group secessions and exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers. – JZ, 4.1.08. - CONSCRIPTION & TAXATION, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Territorial governments are by their very nature not receptive enough for peace ideas and practices – because wars do make such governments more powerful and power corrupts. Power and wars, not peace or service, are the main concerns for most territorial rulers. – JZ, 26.3.05, 29.10.07, 10.4.11. – They are the most incompetent “peace makers” and providers of genuine services. However, they do cause an over-production of laws, taxes, corruption, false excuses, lies, frictions, false pretences, successful and prolonged frauds, extortions, military atrocities and numerous other crimes. – JZ, 6.11.07, 10.4.11. - PEACE & TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS

WAR: Territorialism means war, civil war, bloody revolutions and terrorism, interrupted only by various degrees of "peaceful" oppression and exploitation – under various cover names. – JZ, 1.7.92, 21.8.08, 10.4.11.

WAR: The best kind of war is to let them ruin themselves with their bad government.” - Simon Contarini, Venetian ambassador, 1605; Green Vo. 4, 1968, p.11. – The Soviet system lasted all too long, even the Nazi regime managed to last 12 years. How many innocents died as a result of both systems? - JZ, 21.4.09. - Especially under the nuclear war threat totalitarian and territorial regimes are no longer tolerable and acceptable, not even for another year or decade. - JZ, 10.4.11. - DIS., NWT, PANARCHISM & TOLERANCE, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, OUR TIME IS RUNNING OUT, TOTALITARIANISM

WAR: the fertilizer of chaos.” – Proudhon, quoted R. V. Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, p.81. – Our chaos, even during “peace” times, is already the product of the attempt to impose a uniform order by force, territorially, upon all kinds of very different individuals and minorities. Wars merely extend the territorial monopoly claim and its chaos into other territories. – JZ, 20.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, INTOLERANCE, WARFARE STATES, GOVERNMENTS, LEADERSHIP

WAR: The form of the Government makes no difference. (*) Whether the ruler is a majority, as in Greek democracy, or a King or a dictator or elected member of Parliament, if men in Government sue the force that is Government in an attempt to control human energy, one result is war.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.64. - (*) As long as it is still a territorial government. (The only exceptions are, possibly, Sweden, Switzerland and the quite tiny governments. At least historically many of them have been persistently warlike as well. Now, with almost no power at all, except e.g. to grant tax concessions to foreign investors, they have become quite peaceful.) – JZ, 0.8.08, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. – Professor Rummel in his large website has also shown that democracies are less warlike than are dictatorships and tyrannies. But it was a democracy the built and used nuclear “weapons” first. – JZ, 7.2.12. – Even democracies have not been sufficiently peaceful. Territorially, they are still despotisms. – JZ, 26.8.12. - FORCE, GOVERNMENT, FORM OF GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM

WAR: The good, if they are actually good, do not battle against the good; those who are at war are either the bad against the bad, or the bad against the good.” – St. Augustine, City of God, IV, 5. (*) - How many governments were so far good enough to avoid aggressive wars or defensive wars conducted in an aggressive way? – How many wars were wars of slave, serf or conscript soldiers against slave, serf or conscript soldiers, on the other side, all or most of them insufficiently aware of the alternatives to such abuses of themselves? – (*) With territorial regimes it is never as clear-cut as that. - JZ, 2.6.82, 22.8.08. – DIS., Q., WARFARE, DESERTION, ENEMY DEFINITION, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, LIBERATION, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, WAR AIMS, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, DESERTION, TYRANNICIDE

WAR: The last war was only the culmination of the leader's plans that they had laid years before. It gave them the complete emergency powers they needed to make our country into a State.” - Tom Godwin, The Greater Thing, ASTOUNDING SF, July 1954, British edition, p.89. - Compare: Bourne's "What is the health of the State." - According to some this applies not only the lies and false pretences which led to the sinking of the Louisitania, and thus to the entry of the US into WW I, and to F. D. Roosevelt's conspiracy, which led to and permitted the attack on Pearl Harbor to succeed, but also the mass murderous attack on N.Y. and Washington on Nov. 11, 01. - What are a few thousand lives less to an ambitious politician, who can thereby further his career and extend his power and control? Our "democratic representatives" are almost as capable of such mass murderous crimes as are the worst of the despotic leaders. - JZ, 7.2.02. - STATE, POWER, AUTHORITARIANISM, DICTATORSHIPS, DESPOTISM, EMERGENCY POWERS, LEADERSHIP, DEMOCRACY, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS, RULERS, GOVERNMENTS

WAR: the lesson from history that wars result from conflicts between nation-states, each armed to the teeth, each directly suspicious of attack by the other.” – Murray N. Rothbard, REASON, 3/73. - TERRITORIALISM

WAR: The more meaningless, non-creative, non-productive, non-prosperous, empty, hard, aimless, helpless, hateful and disgusting life is made by territorial governments, the more is death welcomed or the less it is feared. In this way, too, do territorial warfare States prepare their victims for further wars. – JZ, 16.7.07, 26.8.12.

WAR: the only rational war is a war to end war. The only valid crusade is a crusade to establish universal peace. - - At first sight, this conclusion would seem to justify those who argue that if we would ensure peace we must prepare for war: that peace can only be guaranteed by force of arms. Such a position ignores, as pacifists have often pointed out, the positive evils of a state of war-mindedness. You cannot sit on a powder-magazine and smoke your pipe in peace. Sooner or later a spark sets fire to it. If peace can only be guaranteed by force then that force must be super-national. …” Herbert Read, Anarchy and Order, p.116. – H. R. did not clearly enough define the kind of peace that he aimed at. A peace between bullies, violent gangs or territorial Warfare States - or a peace between communities and societies, all of volunteers only, all without national territories and territorial powers, all doing their own things freely – but only for or to themselves. Thus and then they would be no more likely to go to war against each other than e.g. coin- or butterfly collectors would, chess players against bridge players, golf players against tennis players, swimmers against runners, etc. – JZ, 20.8.08. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

WAR: The prevention of wars should rest e.g. upon peaceful international contracts and treaties between individuals and minority groups and whole peoples rather than merely between territorial governments. The territorial leaders, politicians, diplomats, ministers, presidents, prime ministers, chancellors and their cronies and favorites can never be trusted in this respect, perhaps least of all in this respect. No officials should ever be granted a monopoly for decision-making in these spheres – or any others – for whole territories and their populations. – As it is now, the diverse peoples and their minority groups are not armed with weapons that can be used discriminatingly, organized and trained, for effective resistance against territorial governments which exploit, suppress and victimize them or threaten to do so - but the territorial governments are all too well armed against their own peoples and all dissenters and minority groups, and those subjected to other territorial governments, with conventional weapons and even with ABC mass murder devices, that cannot be used discriminatingly, e.g. as tyrannicide weapons. - JZ, n.d. & 21.8.08. – DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, DISARMAMENT BY THE PEOPLE, NUCLEAR WEAPONS, PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, MILITIAS, TERRITORIALISM, MILITIA, NWT

WAR: The problem of war is not a problem of human nature, it is a problem in human organization. So long as leaders have the power to command armies, they will.” – Karl Hess, Dear America, p.230. - LEADERSHIP, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, POWER, GOVERNMENTS

WAR: the process of arranging conflicts involved the hoodwinking of large masses.” - Frank Herbert, Heretics of Dune, p.494. - CONFLICTS, DECEPTION, FRAUD, HOODWINKING, LIES, PROPAGANDA, MASSES, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS

WAR: The thesis that “war makes the state, and states make war” has been advanced by Charles Tilly (notably in his essay “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime”, in Peter Evans, Dietrich Rueschemeyer, and Theda Skocpol, editors, Bringing the State Back In (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), and in ….” – Tom G. Palmer, The Literature of Liberty, in: David Boaz, ed., The Libertarian Reader, The Free Press, 1997, p.440. - The State is, usually, territorially defined. - JZ, 10.4.11. & THE STATE, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: The trade of kings.” – John Dryden. – Quoted in Shimon Tzabar: The White Flag Principle, p.18. – Also in A. Andrews Quotations, p.403 – Rather, of most territorial governments, regardless of their form. - If Dryden had been right, then with most kings most wars would be abolished by now. - JZ, 20.8.08. – Naturally, it is also the trade of all too many other territorial rulers – but in modern times, once their territory and their tax slaves exceeds a certain minimum size and number, their territorial power gives them enough power for major abuses. – JZ, 27.8.08, 10.4.11. – POWER, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, DIS.

WAR: The universe without war involves critical-mass concepts as applied to human beings. … The human situation as it relates to war can be likened to a multi-linear looped feedback system in which nothing is unimportant.” – Frank Herbert, The God Makers, p.136. - The “critical masses” brought together by territorialism would tend to become reduced to harmlessness through individual and groups secessionism combined with full exterritorial autonomy for the secessionists, on whichever basis each of their groups of volunteers would agree upon - for themselves. – Under full freedom not the masses would be decisive in the long run but many individuals and minorities would be. - JZ, 20.8.08, 26.8.12. – And again: “The human situation as it relates to war can be likened to a multi-linear looped feedback system in which nothing is unimportant.” – Frank Herbert, The God Makers, p.109. – Compare the ca. 500 war-promoting factors that I listed, largely alphabetically, in my second peace-book: An ABC Against Nuclear War, JZ, 20.8.08. - PANARCHISM, PEACE, ALTERNATIVE INSTITUTIONS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM

WAR: The very existence of the territorial State - and the statism associated with it – lead to unification and secessionist wars, civil wars, revolutions, oppression, terrorism, poverty, hunger, disease and, mostly, to economic crises, depressions, inflations, mass unemployment, many bankruptcies and involuntary under-employment. – JZ, 28.12.99, 21.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, CRISES

WAR: The world has seen enough of men and women dying for causes, it was time to live for one.” – Don Crick, “The Different Drummer”, p.32. - What made it worse was that they were forced to fight not for their own and self-chosen causes but for the causes of others. Moreover, these causes of the others were only rarely, if ever, quite rightful causes. And the territorial State powers usually forbade them living in the ways they would like to adopt, at their own risk and expense. – JZ, 27.8.08. – PANARCHISM, ENEMIES, CONSCRIPTION, WAR AIMS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: The worst treason in wars lies often in going on to obey the own territorial government upon the “principle” of “My country, right or wrong!” – JZ, 23.8.08. – TREASON, NATIONALISM, PATRIOTISM, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Theft, incest, infanticide, patricide, have all had a place among virtuous actions. Can anything be more ridiculous than that a man should have the right to kill me because he lives on the other side of the water, and because his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have none with his?” – Pascal, Pensées, quoted in Seldes, p.540. – Another version: “Can anything be stupider than that a man has the right to kill me because he lives on the other side of a river and his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have not quarreled with him? – Blaise Pascal, quoted by Tolstoy in “Bethink Yourselves”. – Perhaps we should have engaged in more quarrels with our own territorial and more or less authoritarian governments, subduing them, rather than letting them subdue us? – JZ, 21.8.08.

WAR: There are no warlike peoples – just warlike leaders.” – Ralph Bunche, in the March 93 issue of THE VOLUNTARYIST. – There are warlike individuals – subjects and leaders – and warlike institutions – only because there are war-promoting ideas, errors, myths, prejudices, false assumptions and conclusions, all still not sufficiently refuted. – JZ, 14.11.93. - And war-promoting territorial constitutions, beliefs, laws, institutions, popular prejudices, errors, myths, false assumptions and conclusions. – JZ, 24.9.95, 20.8.08. – For those with aggressive instincts there are popular contacts sports. There should be even dueling options for them, gradually eliminating them from the human race. – JZ, 26.8.12. - LEADERSHIP, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, POWER, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, DIS., PEOPLE, HUMAN NATURE, AGGRESSIVENESS? MAN, RULERS, PRIME MINISTERS, PRESIDENTS, WARFARE STATES

WAR: There have been more than 130 wars, civil wars, revolutions and coups d’état in 90 countries around the world since 1945. The U.N. with its present 146 member states is supposed to primarily look after peace but the above figures show that the U.N. efforts are not very successful. (A special article on the U.N. page 25.)” – The UN does not fight territorialism but represents it and its wrongful and irrational powers. - JZ, 10.4.11.  NEWS DIGEST INTERNATIONAL, No. 1, March 1977 - PEACE, U.N., TERRITORIALISM

WAR: There never was a good war or a bad peace.” – Benjamin Franklin (1773). - Was there ever an attempt made by any territorial government to fight a war only for quite rightful war aims and with quite rightful means and methods? Unconditional surrender to a totalitarian regime can cost more in lives than rightful and sensible resistance to it. It would be rational only if sufficient preparations are made to overthrow the victorious regime with the aid of its own soldiers and policemen. - JZ, 22. 11. 06. & PEACE, Q., REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE

WAR: There was no shifting expedient in the composition of Cobden. The principles he cultivated were firmly held on all occasions. Rogers says: “… In public and private he denounced war as a barbarous and irrational expedient for removing a difficulty. He saw that it demoralized those who adopted it. He endorsed Bentham’s definition of it, that it was “mischief on the largest scale.” He say that when the war fit is on a nation, there is no place left for reason and argument; that it was simple waste, unmixed evil. He believed that no war in the world’s history was necessary, and therefore that none was capable of defence. …” – GOOD GOVERNMENT, 6/77. – War is not just a one-sided affair. Usually there is one aggressor or one who started it. But, under territorialism, with its wrongs on both sides often leading to the aggressive actions against other such States, it is well possible that both sides are, at least to some extent, aggressors, or wrong-doers, instead of merely one side being the aggressor or war criminal and the other a quite innocent defender. What is impossible for both territorialist sides is that both sides are quite innocent defenders, although their governments do often claim or pretend that they are. – Already their territorialism makes both sides guilty. -JZ, 20.8.08. – AGGRESSION & DEFENCE, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: There will be wars - but the human race thrives on trouble. We're built for it - that's what we're good for. We wouldn't know how to get along without it.” - Robert Heinlein, Requiem, speech 5 Sep. 1976, p.277. - One of his most flawed utterances. Who, and how many among the human race thrived on them and who and how many died, were crippled, starved, diseased, oppressed and otherwise suffered from them? Did neutral Switzerland and Sweden progress only through wars, since they became neutral countries? He might as well have said: The human race exists only for and thrives only through the Warfare State. Alas, his libertarianism had limits, not only in the monetary sphere. - JZ, 23.1.02, 10.4.11. – At least since Herbert Spencer’s sociological studies there are records of several dozen quite peaceful human tribes. But they were not organized into territorial warfare States. The war-promoting role of territorialism is still widely overlooked. – JZ, 21.4.09, 26.8.12 - & PROGRESS, DIS., TERRITORIALISM

WAR: These ideological battles and wars are not being fought for mankind. As a matter of fact, no war has ever been fought for man himself, but only and solely to satisfy the whims and ambitions of the leaders.” - Kevork Ajemian, The Fallacy of Modern Politics, Books International, PO Box 6096, McLean, Virginia 22106, 1986, Tel. (703) 821-8900, p.154. - & IDEOLOGIES, MANKIND, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP, POWER ADDICTION

WAR: these international duels …” REVUE DES REVUES, No. 8 of 1891. – See my remark under: WAR: War is nothing but a duel on a large scale. – Karl von Clausewitz, Vom Kriege, I, 1832. - There are many differences between wars and duels. I only wish, that the territorial "statesmen" would replace their wars by duels between them. Kant quotes, in his "Eternal Peace" the reply of a Bulgarian prince upon such a proposal: "A smith who has a pair of tongues will not take the hot iron out of the fire with his bare hands." - That is all we are to them, tools, to be used or abused. Peoples as property of territorial rulers, just like they were under absolute monarchs. - JZ, 10.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, POWER ADDITION OF RULERS, DIS.

WAR: They are prepared to fight rather for protectionism, which causes many of their problems, than for Free Trade, which would cure many of them. – JZ, 4.10.08. – Similarly, today, governments rather “fight” to uphold their monetary despotism, which causes numerous problems for them and their victims, which monetary despotism cannot solve, rather than allowing its opposite to take place, namely Free Banking or Monetary Freedom, which would also cure many problems of the existing governments – except their power addiction and power madness. – JZ, 8.10.08. – On today’s radio news there was a proud report that another ship of illegal immigrants had been intercepted just before it reached the West Australian coast. Use of the Australian Navy to keep out willing and able workers, who could and would, under freedom, help to increase our standard of living! Just because the territorial government is unable to solve the employment problem, which freedom for self-help measures could solve almost instantly. But it seems impossible to talk sensibly with governmental experts and most of their subjects and victims about this. – Competitive and exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, which with their free experiments could refute the spleens of the territorial governments, are outlawed. Thus governments repeat their wrongful and irrational crimes and mistakes over and over again and they do so world-wide, in the current economic crisis. – Solutions are not impossible – but simply outlawed by those too ignorant or prejudiced to apply them themselves and do have the territorial power. - JZ, 22.4.09, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. - PROTECTIONISM, FREE TRADE, TERRITORIALISM, POWER, STATES, GOVERNMENTS, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, SELF-HELP, SECESSIONISM, MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM.

WAR: They are so confident that no one can envy their country enough to seize it that they have no armed forces. After all, if the Icelanders with their thousand years of experience behind them still find it most difficult to scratch a living out of the country then who else in his right mind would want it.” – Desmond Bagley, Running Blind, p.79. – But as far as I know they do have an American military base. How many U.S. military bases are there around the world? No wonder that the already paranoid Soviets got further afraid of them. Objectively, can one trust anyone with his hands on mass extermination devices? Even if the Soviets had been as harmless as a simple-minded voluntary communist is, could one trust such a person or a “capitalist” businessman with a nuclear “weapon”? Wouldn’t already the fact that they acquired and kept it in readiness indicate that they are mentally defective? – How many other small States are there without defence forces of their own? – Icelanders may one day be envied for their volcanic power source potential as much as other countries are now about their oil. – We should also remember how the U.S.A. and Japan fought for the possession of some small islands in the Pacific. - JZ, 7.9.08. - STATES WITHOUT DEFENCE FORCES OF THEIR OWN, DIS., NWT, TERRITORIALISM & ITS SPHERES OF INFLUENCE & MILITARY BASES, NWT, ICELAND, UNARMED GOVERNMENTS

WAR: they take precautions against the microbes that kill more people than war.” – Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, VIII. – At least then most of the deadly microbes were not made by man. Until governments financed and developed biological warfare “weapons”. One more reason to get rid of all territorial governments. – JZ, n.d. & 20.8.08. - One does not need mass murder devices to kill tyrants. Such "weapons" are clearly directed against the primary victim of territorial governments, their population, treated by such weapons as if it were merely the property of territorial governments. - Or held "morally" responsible for their criminal government, under the "principle" of "collective responsibility". "They made a desert and called it peace." - An old proverb, referring to the scorched earth warfare of its times. - JZ, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. - MICROBES, BIOLOGICAL THREATS TO HUMAN LIFE, BIOLOGICAL WARFARE, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, NWT, WEAPONS VS. MASS MURDER DEVICES, TYRANNICIDE, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY

WAR: Those aware of the peace-promoting effects of just and liberating actions, even towards aggressive totalitarian regimes, especially with regard to their victimized subjects, will almost never, if ever, simply choose the usually mass murderous road of another military invasion, usually leading to another international war rather than liberation. They might only engage in some police actions or underground and secret service strikes against the major dictators or tyrants. They would rather help with good advice, unilaterally offered peace treaties and welcome refugees and deserters than fight and kill the conscripts and tax- and other victims of a criminal regime. They would, as Eugene Lyons wrote in several books and articles, consider and treat the captive nations as their secret allies, rather than bombing them. – They would recognize a variety of governments in exile as attractive options for their present and future volunteers, once a despotic regime is overthrown. - JZ, 3.7.82, 22.8.08, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. - GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, OF THE PANARCHIST TYPE.

WAR: To deliver men from the terrible and ever-increasing evils of armaments and wars, we want neither congresses nor conferences, nor treaties, nor courts of arbitration, but the destruction of those instruments of violence which are called Governments, and from which humanity’s greatest evils flow.” – Tolstoy, Essays and Letters, p.252. – If we destroyed the territorial aspect of institutions, which leads to arms races and wars then we would not have to bother to try to destroy all military weapons. Only the mass murderous parodies upon still somewhat discriminating military weapons, in form of nuclear, chemical and biological mass murder devices, would have to be destroyed, best by the people targeted by them. - JZ, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. - GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, STATES, STATISM, DISARMAMENT, DIS.

WAR: To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.” – Sun-Tzu, The Art of War, Chapter 2, Paragraph 2. – Provided one has right completely on one’s side. Then supposed enemy soldiers could become neutrals or even allies. – Wars can be turned into quite rightful policing actions – if that is seriously tried. – JZ, 4.1.08. - Instead, our territorial governments, supposedly democratic or republican, threaten them and indirectly us as well, with their ABC mass murder devices, which are certainly not tyrannicide weapons, thus creating fear among the innocents on the other side and driving them into the arms of their victimizers, acting as patriots. - JZ, 10.4.11. - WITHOUT FIGHTING, DESERTION, PRISONERS OF WAR TREATMENT, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS & POPULAR REVOLUTIONS AGAINST DICTATORSHIPS, NWT, LIBERATION INSTEAD OF BOMBING CAMPAIGNS, NWT

WAR: Today the real test of power is not capacity to make war but capacity to prevent it.” – Anne O’Hare McCormick - Alas, territorialism is powerless to solve the problems which it inevitably creates. - JZ, 10.4.11. – And the exterritorial and voluntary alternatives are still all too widely unknown or unappreciated. – JZ, 26.8.12. - POWER, PREVENTION OF WAR, PEACE

WAR: Today, since war is everybody’s tragedy, peace has become everybody’s business.” – Abba Eban, NEW OUTLOOK, Sept./Oct. 81, p.22. - And yet, even in some of the otherwise best democracies the ordinary citizen has no real say or influence upon war and peace decisions. They are monopolized in the hands of territorial governments, precisely the worst people for such decision-making. We should be able to realize that merely from the fact that several of them have even adopted nuclear mass extermination devices, under the pretence that with them they could defend us or always deter other territorial governments from committing an aggression. Not only the possibility of accidental nuclear war and its likelihood in the long run is overlooked by these territorial power maniacs. - JZ, 10.4.11. - PEACE, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, DUTY TO WORK FOR PEACE, NWT, POWER ADDICTION, TERRITORIALISM, ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WAR

WAR: Two persons’ zero-sum game with no complete information.” – Oskar Morgenstern and John Van Neuman, Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1947. See Anatol Rapoport, “The Use and Misuse of Game Theory”, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, Vol. 207, No. 6, New York, 1962. – Quoted in Shimon Tzabar: The White Flag Principle, p.18. - As if only two persons, the heads of two States, were involved. They make the decisions now, territorially, for millions of their subjects - and might end up as the only survivors. Their decision-making monopoly and privilege is still not systematically criticized and then abolished. Who is to be blamed for that? - JZ, 10.4.11. – Only the victimizers or also the all to apathetic victims? – JZ, 16.8.12. - DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, DIS.

WAR: Under full market freedom there will be no war. It isn’t the predominant free consumer choice in any of its aspects, means and aims. The minority which somewhat could benefit would no longer have enforced customers and victims. – JZ - If they managed to kill each other off, in private fights, without wronging or harming anyone else, who else would care? – JZ 27.8.08, 26.8.12. - Perhaps we should arrange TV appearances for them, for their fights to the death of either or of both. Such fights would be more useful to mankind than fights between boxers, wrestlers and football players. - We could then celebrate that there would be at least one less of these territorial leading bastards, these power addicts. - We should have them in our power. They should not have us in their power. - JZ, 10.4.11. - FREEDOM, TERRITORIALISM, DUELS BETWEEN TERRITORIAL LEADERS RATHER THAN WARS BETWEEN THEIR SUBJECTS.

WAR: Undoubtedly this is the most stupid, senseless and unnecessary war of modern times. It is a war not wanted by Germany. I can assure you, but it was forced on us and the fact that we were so effectually prepared to defend ourselves is now being used as an argument to convince the world that we desire conflict.” - The German Crown Prince Wilhelm, then commanding one of the German armies in France, in an interview, Nov. 1914, quoted by: Phillip Knightley, The First Casualty. The War Correspondent as Hero, Propagandist and Myth Maker, Quartet books, 1975, 1982, p.103. – It would have been more helpful if he had proclaimed quite rightful war aims and peace conditions. Alas, they were amiss, even at that level! – Each side felt attacked or threatened by attack, with no rightful aims made known. – Their “principle” seems to have been: “What we can take we will!” – according to Ulrich von Beckerath, 1882-1969, who was an involuntary German soldier in that war. - WW I - Territorialism does actually threaten all States, all governments and their populations. It is the main enemy but, alas, not yet generally seen as such. - JZ, 14.5.00, 9.9.08, 26.8.12.

WAR: War – one of the many malfunctions of the territorial nation State. – JZ, 4.9.99. – But it must be admitted that as Warfare States and tribute gatherers and producers of wrongful laws they do function, all too much and all too often. But how often do they function in a quite rightful way and for a quite rightful cause? – JZ, 21.8.08, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. – TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATE, WAR AIMS

WAR: War … the work of the … government, not of the … people.” – Tolstoy – Competing governments, of volunteers only and confined to exterritorial autonomy and personal laws, would not longer be Warfare States. – JZ, 21.8.08. - GOVERNMENT, PEOPLE, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM

WAR: War and revolution never produce what is wanted, but only some mixture of the old evils with new ones.” – W. G. Sumner, War, 1903. – I think that libertarians, anarchists and panarchists should reinvent both institutions, turning them into something very limited, quite rightful and peace-, justice- and freedom-promoting, with a minimum of the use of force and this directed only against the remaining territorial power mongers and war criminals. A dream castle in the clouds? Let’s draft some blueprint and build some sound foundations for it! – JZ, 21.8.08. - EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM VS. COMPULSION, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY VS. GOVERNMENTAL SOVEREIGNTY, UTOPISM, IDEAL SOCIETIES, SOCIAL REFORMS

WAR: War between two civilized nations is high treason against civilization.” – Sylva. – It is also treason against civilization to call the wars between territorial governments - wars between “nations”, since the various peoples of nation-States  have no say on such matters. They are all decided by only a handful of people on all sides. And by now some of these few mis-leaders are even armed with ABC mass murder or anti-people “weapons”. – Once we get our terminology, our definitions, our concepts right (*), we will be much closer to peace, e.g. a peace between the peoples themselves, concluded over the heads of their rulers and directed only against the war mongers on both sides. – JZ, 25.8.08. – (*) Already Confucius taught that. – JZ, 26.8.12.  (If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. If language be not in accordance wit the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success. – James Legge, The Wisdom of Confucius, Axiom Publishing, 2002, ISBN: 1 86476 171 7) -TREASON, CIVILIZATION, GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, PEOPLES, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, WAR AIMS

WAR: War can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.” – Mao Tse-Tung, Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung, 1966, p.5. – Alas, he had something else in mind than an ideal militia for the protection of genuine individual rights and liberties. – No other Chinese has ever commanded the murder and oppression of so many other Chinese as he did. – JZ, 18.11.85, 22.8.08. - Territorialism gave him this chance, as it did every other dictator or tyrant or mere authoritarian. - JZ, 10.4.11. – Mao Zedong is another spelling that I saw recently in a paper. – JZ, 7.2.12.

WAR: War cannot be divorced from politics for a single moment.” – Mao Tse-Tung, Lecture, 1938, THE NATION, April 16, 1955. – Quoted in Seldes. - From territorial politics. The exterritorial autonomy politics of societies and communities of volunteers tends to be quite peaceful, non-aggressive, but also powerful against the few remaining aggressors. – JZ, 27.8.08. – Precisely because of that they are still suppressed, even more so than private criminals trying to compete with the crimes of territorial politicians. - JZ, 10.4.11. - POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: War cannot be driven out by war, for the use of evil breeds more evil, hostility more hostility, and the use of force more force.” - Hans F. Sennholz, ISIL LIBERTY QUOTE LIBRARY 03. – This assumes that no war can be rightfully conducted. But if a defensive war had exclusively quite rightful war aims and were conducted in accordance with them, as a liberation war or revolutionary war, only against the real enemy, a despotic regime, rather than its subjects, against the war mongers rather than their victims, then it could become reduced to a quite rightful police action or even that might become unnecessary, because the regime would, most likely, be soon overthrown, perhaps even by its own military forces. – JZ, 10.1.08, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. - DIS., DEFENCE, LIBERATION, REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, RIGHTFUL WAR AIMS, UNILATERAL PEACE DECLARATIONS, APPEALS

WAR: War comes from the individual’s ignorance of his own nature, from his placing responsibility for the moral values of his own life in a fantasy, in a pagan god which he imagines exists outside himself and superior to him and controlling him – an Immortal Italy, a German Race, a Nation, a State.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.59. – NATIONALISM, IDEOLOGIES, RACISM, IDEOLOGIES, FAITH, IGNORANCE, MAN, HUMAN NATURE, KNOWLEDGE OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, ENLIGHTENMENT, MORALITY, STATISM, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP

WAR: War consists not only in actual warfare but also in the general insecurity of all before everyone and the readiness resulting from this to prepare for war is also a part of war and has for mankind almost the same consequences as actual warfare.” – J. G. Fichte, „Das gegenwaertige Zeitalter. – JZ tr. of: “Krieg is aber nicht nur, wenn Krieg gefuehrt wird, sondern die allgemeine Unsicherheit aller vor allen, und die daraus erfolgende immerwaehrende Bereitschaft zum Kriege ist auch Krieg und hat fuer das Menschengeschlecht fast dieselben Folgen wie der gefuehrte Krieg.” - - No one's genuine individual rights and liberties are so far fully secure nor are they even widely enough known and appreciated. To that extent we are still living like savages in the wilderness, surrounded by other savages and wild beasts. - Civilization would be a good alternative. Let's start it. - JZ, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM, PEACE, ARMISTICE, ARMS RACE, PREPARATIONS FOR WAR, TERRITORIALISM, TYRANNY & THE AUTHORITARIANISM OF PARLIAMENTS, COLLECTIVE & TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY VS. INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY.

WAR: War games between power-mad territorial rulers ought to be replaced by free human relations between their subjects, all to be liberated from their territorial rulers. – JZ, 5.12.81. – The only “uniform rule” systems to be permitted in the future would be those over volunteers only, who are tolerant enough to confine all their activities to their own affairs and do leave those of their neighbors alone, regardless of their political, religious and social affiliations. – Who is to guarantee that condition? All those voluntarily united, in their own interest, in order to be able to go on doing their own things, for or to themselves. – No more territorial bullying! - JZ, 20.8.08. - Alas, so far we haven't even got rid of bullying in schools! - JZ, 10.4.11.

WAR: War Has Become Megamurder.” – Heading of Chapter 1 in Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.1. - NWT

WAR: War has become the mass slaughter of civilians.” – Willis W. Herman, article: “The Quest for Security Viewed as a Whole System Problem.”-  TRANSNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES, vol. 14, No.3, 1988. – TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, UNITY, UNIFICATION, NATION-BUILDING, FEDERALISM. WARFARE. STATISM, INDISCRIMINATE WARFARE, AIR RAIDS

WAR: War has on the whole “assumed the form of cold-blooded and systematic destruction from which unarmed civilians and armed soldiers suffer alike. …” - Irving Louis Horowitz, War and Peace in Contemporary Social and Philosophical Theory, a condor book, 1957, 1973, Chapter 12: Ralph Barton Perry: Universal Individualism, p.181. – - That was neither a rightful nor a necessary development and it could become reversed, rightfully and efficiently, with conscripted soldiers and forced civilian labor being effectively turned against their slave masters and war mongers - by quite rightful peace aims of the supposed “enemy”, whose unilateral peace offer to these slaves and also whose one-sided freedom and rights practices in "his" countries, could become more attractive than all the promises and threats of their present territorial masters. However, this possibility has to become seriously examined and practised in every respect, instead of being rejected out of hand as if a genuine defence against the real aggressors and quite rightful aims and policies against their victims, in the countries subdued by them, had become quite impossible. E.g. a tyrant, armed with nuclear weapons, cannot effectively defend himself with them against a knife, poison, revolver or a hand grenade or even against a person skilled in unarmed combat. – How and with whom could he defend himself against a federation of governments-in-exile, that would offer each of his subjects the government or society of his or her dreams or choice? – Tyrants are, rather, strengthened by opposing them with tyrannical means and aims. It permits them to mobilize nationalist feelings, like even a Stalin could arouse against a Hitler regime. Trying to impose a territorial democracy by force of arms upon an all too internally divided peoples, e.g. in Iraq and in Afghanistan, does also amounts to tyranny and does not find sufficient compliance but rather unites many factions in their resistance to all such efforts. – It is deplorable that our “great leaders” are unaware of much better war and peace aims and warfare methods and do not even search for them, although with a little effort they could find them on the Internet. Their “intelligence services” seem also unable to find these "open" secrets. - JZ, 29.9.07, 26.8.12. - & WARFARE, TOTAL WAR, SECRET SERVICES, BLINDED BY THEIR TERRITORIAL PREMISES, TERRITORIALISM, WAR AIMS, LIBERATION, DES., SECRET ALLIES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE.

WAR: War is a ritual, a deadly ritual, not the result of aggressive self-assertion, but of self-transcending identification. Without loyalty to tribe, church, flag or ideal, there would be no wars.” - Arthur Koestler. - And these “ideals” are usually only territorially defined! - JZ, 11.2.02. - & LOYALTY, SOLIDARITY, COLLECTIVISM, FAITH, BELIEF, FANATICISM, IDEALISM, NATIONALISM VS. INDIVIDUALISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY OR PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, EGOISM OR RATIONAL & RIGHTFUL SELF-INTEREST VS. COMPULSORY ALTRUISM

WAR: war is a whole lot harder to stop than to start.” – Deborah Wheeler, Jaydium, p.241. - Especially if one has no quite rightful war- and peace aims and excludes, mass fraternization, desertion, military insurrections, revolutions, putsches and treason right away and continues to follow the orders of territorial governments and fails to aim at full exterritorial autonomy for diverse groups of volunteers. – JZ, 16.9.07, 26.8.12.

WAR: War is an act of power, of murder, of robbery. … It is the sharpest and clearest life expression of the State. … “ – Gustav Landauer, War, 1922. – Rather of its deadliness. – JZ, 27.8.08. – In another version: “War is an act of power, of murder, of robbery. It is the sharpest and clearest expression of the State.” – Gustav Landauer, 1912. – Compare: Randolph Bourne: “War is the health of the State!” - STATE, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, POWER, TAXATION, CONSCRIPTION, REQUISITIONING, POWER, CONQUEST, WARFARE STATE

WAR: War is an attempt of one group to impose its will upon another group by armed violence. This is the immediate object of a war. But war has wider implications. War offers those in power a chance to rid themselves of opposition while covering up their designs with patriotic slogans.” – Scott Nearing, The Making of a Radical, Harper & Row, 1972, p.212. – TERRITORIALISM, STATE, INTOLERANCE

WAR: War is an uneconomical, inefficient, and temporary way of trying to get something.” – Lee Correy, Manna, in ANALOG June 83, p.138. – The price to be paid, in lives, crippled lives, sickness, hunger, destruction and in rights and liberties, incomes and wealth does, in balance, far exceed its “achievements”. – Nevertheless, it is still all too popular with territorial States, which are, at least from a certain size on upwards, by their very nature Warfare States, either already engaged in a hot war or preparing for the next one, also at an enormous cost, in money, productive labor lost and even in lives, if one considers the accidental losses in their military exercises. - JZ, 26.8.08. – It is also one of the largest of the quite wrongful actions, at least on one side, if not on both. Internal mass murders and abortions may be the only crimes that have more victims. Only a nuclear war could have still more victims. It may even finish us off altogether, in a general nuclear holocaust. At least in wars the combatants can fight back. Mass murdered people, like Jews and Gypsies and others, in Nazi-extermination camps, had, mostly, no chance to fight back. They were neither armed nor organized and trained for this. And not even free to emigrate – because of the numerous immigration barriers in other countries. The most innocent, helpless and defenceless victims of mass murders are the unborn. And they are murdered by their parents, with the help of medical experts! – JZ, 22.4.09. – MASS MURDERS, “ETHNIC CLEANSING”, “FINAL SOLUTION”, EXTERMINATION CAMPS, ABORTION, NWT

WAR: War is blind.” – West African proverb. – The question is: Is its blindness curable? Can it be turned towards some rightful purposes into some rightful although forceful actions? I believe that to be possible, for defensive, liberating and revolutionary wars. – JZ, 22.8.08, 10.4.11. – It is also, mostly, aggressive, even in what it calls “defence” and full of lies, for e.g., there are no “ministers for aggression” or “departments for aggression”. On all sides there are, officially, only “defenders”. – JZ, 7.2.12. - WAR AIMS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, WARFARE, DES., MILITIA, POW’s, AIR RAIDS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, DEFENCE, LIBERATION, PEACE, GOVERNMENTS & SOCIETIES IN EXILE, PANARCHISM, SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY & EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, DIS., Q.

WAR: War is caused by the ancient pagan belief that Authority controls individuals, and must and should control them. This belief is in individual minds, and no force whatever can change any man’s mind. War will end when a majority of men on this earth know that every man is free. Each person must see for himself that everyone is self-controlling and responsible.” – Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.69/70. – Are we already or should that be our main aim? - JZ, 10.4.11. - CONTROL, SELF-CONTROL, SELF-MANAGEMENT, SELF-GOVERNMENT, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, Q., VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

WAR: War is confined to a few persons and the many are friends.” – Plato, The Republic, b.7, sect. 471, tr. Jowett. - That should be the case, alas it was not and it is not! – JZ, 27.8.08. - The top and criminal territorial leaders are, indeed, only a few. The masses subjected to them, are certainly not friendly, brotherly and tolerant towards each other, enough to leave all groups of volunteers among them quite free to do their own things. - JZ, 10.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, DIVERSITY WITHOUT THE OUTLET INTO EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, DUELS, DIS.

WAR: War is essentially the playground of the psychopath in society." - Alex Comfort, Authority and Delinquency in the Modern State, 1950, p.64. - Not in society or in societies but, rather, in territorial States. – JZ, 27.8.08.  Without the powers that territorialism grants them, there would be much less scope for their abuses. - JZ, 25.8.11. - POLITICAL LEADERS, LEADERSHIP, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY ON WAR & PEACE, DIS., POWER ADDICTS, POWER MADNESS. SOCIETIES VS. STATES, DIS.

WAR: War is just one more big government program.” – Joseph Sobran - & GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: War is made possible by large degrees of territorial State Socialism and does multiply these degrees rapidly. In wars the State Socialists do quite openly get away even with mass murder. – JZ, 9.11.92.

WAR: War is much too serious a matter to be entrusted to the military.” - Attributed to various Frenchmen, including Talleyrand, Clemenceau, and Briand. - Unverified. - Often heard, "…entrusted to generals." – “War is much too serious a thing to be left to military men.” – Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord, quoted by Briand to Lloyd George; also spoken by Clemenceau as his own. - Quoted in Seldes. - Or to civilian territorial statists, i.e., politicians. - JZ, 10.4.11. - GENERALS, MILITARY, POLITICIANS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: War is much too serious a thing to be left to the government.” – Charles Sheffield, Fixed-Price War, ANALOG, 5/78. – Anarchist and panarchist version: War is much too serious a thing for any territorial government to be allowed to exist any longer. – JZ, 30.3.80, 20.8.08. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, PEACE

WAR: War is not an independent phenomenon, but the continuation of politics by different means.” – Carl von Clausewitz – We are all living in occupied countries, occupied by our territorial governments, not free to secede from them to do our own things for and to ourselves, without making any territorial monopoly claims, together with like-minded volunteers. And these internal occupiers all too often conduct turf wars with other internal occupiers just like Mafia gangs and drug dealers fight for their present or more turf. – Only the latter do so without false pretences and they do not kill as many of their customers but, rather, discriminatingly, more of their enforcers and competitors only. They are not as indiscriminately mass murderous as our military "experts" are, all too often. – JZ, 22.4.09. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION, INFLATION, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, POWER ADDICTION, MAFIA, ORGANIZED CRIME,

WAR: War is not in the nature of man; defense is. Ancient, naked man was a grain and root eater, having neither fang nor claw nor swiftness nor the stomach to hunt down, tear apart, and devour other hide-covered animals.” – Dagobert D. Runes, On the Nature of Man, p.62. – The first sentence is also in his “A Book of Contemplation”, p.140. - He should not have forgotten about fruit, worms, insects, birds, rats, mice, mushrooms, greens, fish, shellfish, etc. And some of them were strong, fleet enough and enduring on their feet to hunt larger animals down to exhaustion! - Even primitive and Aboriginal man in Australia was already a match for many of the larger animals, which he wiped out. Among his earliest tools were – weapons! But he was wise enough - or too busy trying to survive - not to organize for war, apart from the occasional cannibalistic raid or raid for slaves or women. – On the other hand, there are at least 50 quite peaceful tribes on record. And some even treat their women and children well. – JZ, 20.8.08, 10.4.11. - MAN, HUMAN NATURE, DIS.

WAR: War is not merely a political act, but also a political instrument, a continuation of political relations, a carrying out of the same by other means.” – Karl von Clausewitz, Vom Kriege, I, 1832. – “Uebliche Zitierweise. - It is just another kind of territorialist wrongs and nonsense! – However, neither has to be conducted, organized and institutionalized in this way! - JZ, 21.8.08, 10.4.11, 26.8.12. – Der Originalwortlaut aus Clausewitz, “Vom Kriege”, II. Aufl., 1832, S. 620: “Der Krieg ist nichts als eine Fortsetzung des politischen Verkehrs mit Einmischung anderer Mittle, um damit zugleich zu behaupten, dass dieser politische Verkehr durch den Krieg selbst nicht aufhoert, nicht in etwas anderes verwandt wird, sondern dass er in seinem Wesen fortbesteht, wie auch die Mittel gestaltet sein moegen, deren er sich bedient.“ - DIS., POLITICS, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL IMPERATIVE

WAR: War is not simply violent behaviour on the part of individuals. It is the organized and skilful use of force by one group for the purpose of overcoming another group of the same kind of species. (*) As such, it is non-existent in the animal kingdom, unless the slave-making ants provide an exception. … The fact is that ‘war is practically unknown biologically except among human beings’ (J. R. Baker and J. B. S. Haldane, “Biology in Everyday Life”, 1933, pp.84-88.). And with these, it is much more than biological; as political and military leaders in time of war recognize. They rely not on instincts, but on authority, on propaganda, on the challenge to defend high ideals, and on calls to realize noble goals … In any case, warfare as we know it is comparatively recent, being a concomitant or product of civilization. (**) Indeed, one ethnologist, Dr. W. J. Perry (“The Primeordial Ocean”, pp.97-123, and “The Children of the Sun”, pp.146-63, 490-3.) maintained that it was not an element in the earliest civilization in the Near East, the ‘archaic civilization’ as he called it, but that it was developed along with the rise of ruling groups who, in the interest of their political ambitions, educated themselves and their followers in organized violent forms of behaviour.” – A. P. Elkin, “War and the Biological Struggle for Existence”, in “Paths to Peace”, ed. by V. H. Wallace, Melbourne University Press, 1957, pp.27/28. - - (*) It is also misleading to speak here of groups as if large territorial groups were really unified and acting in concert, instead of merely a few men put into power over a population, making all war and peace decisions, either by usurpation of power or by a constitutional concession to them, which took the need for such power for granted, without examining it and its consequences. – (**) Rather of the uncivilized, irrational and immoral nature of territorialism! – JZ, 25.8.08, 26.8.12. – DIS., PROPAGANDA, TAXATION, CONSCRIPTION, DEFINITION OF WAR, BIOLOGICAL STRUGGLE? HUMAN NATURE, MAN, AGGRESSIVENESS, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WAR: War is the contention between two or more states through their armed forces for the purpose of overpowering the other and imposing such conditions of peace as the victor pleases.” – L. F. L. Oppenheim, International Law, II, 1906. – Anarchists, libertarians and panarchists, obviously, will have to reinvent international law, the laws of warfare and its conduct and the final aims of wars as well. – And in the process they might not only defend whatever liberties and rights they already enjoy, in some countries, but gain their full range for themselves and for the people in their own countries and those on the other side of a border, who want to adopt as much freedom for themselves or, instead, only as little as they do appreciate already among themselves. – JZ, 21.8.08. – DIS., LIBERATION, REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE, MILITIA, LIBERTARIAN DEFENCE, DESERTION, WAR AIMS, WARFARE, DESERTION, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE

WAR: War is the extreme case of centralized, monopolized and collectivized decision-making. – JZ, 5.3.75, 24.8.08. – DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: War is the ultimate absurdity and crime of territorial politics. – JZ, 30.11.79, 20.8.08. – POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

WAR: War is the ultimate abuse of men, women and children by governments – for the benefit of governments. – JZ, 7.9.98. - GOVERNMENTS, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, WARFARE STATE, AUTHORITARIANISM, POLITICIANS, POLITICS, LEADERSHIP

WAR: War means human sacrifices to the “God” of war: the ideas and institutions of territorialism. – JZ, 4.1.08. - PANARCHISM, HUMAN SACRIFICES & TERRITORIALISM

WAR: War means that most of the “thinking” of the decision-makers on all sides has been done in wrong terms and upon wrong premises and assumptions and for the wrong aim, with the wrong means. – JZ, 19.8.98, 20.8.08, 26.8.12. – DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, LEADERSHIP, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: War means the collective decision-making by a few, for their own benefit, over the fate of all others, while peace is based on individual decision-making over all of the own affairs, including one’s international relations, by oneself. – Thus, for instance, the tax evader and the smuggler, deserters and refugees are much more in control of their own lives than are “their” governments. Naturally, territorial warfare States do not like such behavior among their “subjects”, no more so than slave masters and feudal lords would. – JZ, 15.1.97, 21.8.08. – DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, POWER MONGERS, POLITICIANS, STATISM

WAR: War relied for centuries quite successfully upon the fact that, instead of cursing war one prayed for peace.” - Graff. – (“Der Krieg verlaesst sich seit Jahrhunderten mit Erfolg darauf, dass man, statt ihn zu verfluchen, fuer den Frieden betet.”) – There is plenty of cursing and swearing going on in wars but that does not stop them either. We have to ponder the territorial Warfare States and their governments and radical alternatives to them. Then we will neither have cause to pray or to swear in this sphere. – War or peace themselves decide nothing. Only war- and peace-makers do. - JZ, 25.8.08. - PEACE, PRAYERS, RELIGION, CURSING, SWEARING, BELIEF IN “WORD MAGIC”, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP, DIS.

WAR: War will not disappear with more territorial unification – because that will require coercion and thus remain only temporary. But it will disappear with more diversification, decentralization, variety, based upon individual and minority choices and their gradual and voluntary changes only. – JZ, 24.6.95, 20.8.08. – UNIFICATION, DIVERSIFICATION, DECENTRALIZATION, PANARCHISM, FRAGMENTATION, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS VS. TERRITORIALISM

WAR: War within and war without – such is the life of the government. It must be armed and ceaselessly on guard against both domestic and foreign enemies. Though itself breathing oppression and deceit, it is bound to regard all, within and outside its borders, as enemies, and must be in a state of conspiracy against all of them.” – Michael Bakunin, Science and the Urgent Revolutionary Task, 1870. - STATE, WARFARE STATE, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: War would end if the dead could return.” – Stanley Baldwin. – Since we cannot resurrect the dead, let us at least give all the living adults a vote on war and peace, instead of maintaining a privilege or monopoly on such decisions in the hands of a few government people in the whole world, who have all too often abused this power and will do so again. – JZ, 25.8.08. – DECISION-MAKING ON WAR & PEACE, VOTING, WAR VICTIMS

WAR: War, as usually conducted by „strong“ territorial government is an „operation meatgrinder“. – AllenDrugy, The Promise of Joy, p.200.

WAR: Wars are force-fed by taxation, inflation, requisitioning, forced loans, conscription, compulsory State-wide membership or subordination, in short, by the territorial monopoly and its despotism, administered by territorial governments, whether they are democratic, republican, constitutional monarchies or openly dictatorial or totalitarian regimes. – JZ, 24.8.93, 21.8.08.

WAR: wars are fought primarily for the purpose of establishing a specific taxing body in a given area.” – JAG, Dec. 25th, 1975. - TAXATION, TERRITORIALISM, OFFICIAL GANGSTERS FIGHTING FOR EXCLUSIVE TURFS

WAR: Wars are mostly imposed upon peoples by their governments and not wanted by the peoples themselves, unless they are all too much lied to by their governments and kept in ignorance of the facts. Even then most of the people do not volunteer their lives, their labors, their properties and their incomes for the war efforts but have to be conscripted, commanded, taxed and expropriated for it. Moreover the decision on war and peace, armament and disarmament and international treaties is never left to the people but monopolized by their own greatest enemies, the territorial governments. In other words, by their warlike rulers the people are not considered to be warlike enough. Nevertheless, the peoples, not their governments, are, as a rule, held responsible for wars, during the wars and after them by the victorious governments. The various peoples and their minorities have finally to become separated from their territorially imposed and thus more or less totalitarian and uniform governments, with their territorial and collectivist and centralized sovereignty, territorial monopoly constitutions, laws, and jurisdictions and other monopolistic and compulsory bureaucratic institutions and rules. They have to assert their individual sovereignties, and to establish and maintain their own voluntary communities, societies and self-governments, under personal laws and full exterritorial autonomy for their own voluntary groupings. Under the nuclear war threat we certainly cannot afford to live under territorial warfare states any longer. – JZ, 30.9.06, 26.10.07. – One article in FEE’s THE FREEMAN, recommended once, to start with e.g. the privatization of the garbage service - as a first step to get rid of all the wrongful powers of territorial governments. – JZ, 26.8.12. - DESPOTISM, GOVERNMENTS & PEOPLES, TERRITORIALISM, TOLERANT PANARCHIES OR POLYARCHIES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY

WAR: Wars are started and carried on and made worse by wrongful and collectivist notions about “enemies”, i.e., largely about conscripts, forced laborers and taxpayers, about people who have had no say on war and peace and are just used and abused by their governments for their wrongful aims. – At least in our age the territorial governments find few voluntary supporters for their wars. We should regard all the other peoples as fellow victims and thus as our secret allies, and treat them as such, in most cases, as people to be liberated and not as enemies to be killed. Even most of the volunteers of an aggressive government could be won over by suitable appeals, timely propaganda, e.g. quite rightful war and peace aims, believably declared and practically demonstrated already in the democratic countries, e.g. by numerous governments-in-exile already operating as exterritorially autonomous panarchies for all kinds of suppressed minorities and for the suppressed majority, also by quite discriminating warfare methods. The difference between warring against whole populations and engaging in police actions only - against despotic and aggressive regimes, was, during the French Revolution, clearly expressed by the slogan: “War to the palaces, peace to the cottages!” – Wars should be turned into liberation campaigns and rightful police actions against criminal governments only, not against their victims, but, rather, liberating them. They should no longer aim at imposing just another new and uniform territorial regime upon them, no matter how good it is supposed to be.– Our supposed enemies are, usually, our best allies, although, to far only secret and not recognized ones and respected as such. –  JZ, 2.8.93, 21.8.08, 26.8.12.

WAR: Wars are the chess games of governments against subjects, primarily against the subjects of other governments but also and at the same time, against their own subjects. The real war criminals, those in government, are usually spared in them, by a sort of “gentleman’s agreement”, although neither rulers are gentlemen, at least not in these games. Generally, they are the best protected persons in any war, although they are all too readily sacrificing their own pawns and mass murdering the pawns on the other side. – When will their victims finally get sick of playing this despicable role in the games of their masters? – Territorial governments fight wars, in effect, against peoples, not against other territorial governments. When will the victimized peoples finally begin their liberation war against their territorial victimizers, together with the other peoples, on the other side, who are similarly victimized and whom their territorial governments declare to be their enemies, rather than their natural, although so far merely unknown or secret allies? - JZ, 30.9.06, 26.10.07, 26.8.12. - GOVERNMENTS & THEIR SUBJECTS, FRATERNIZATION, ALLIANCES BETWEEN THE VICTIMIZED PEOPLES, “ENEMIES” TURNED INTO ALLIES

WAR: Wars are the epileptic seizure fits of mankind. – JZ, 25.4.75. – Rather the mental disease of territorial governments, with which they coercively infect whole nations and even mankind. – If mankind were clever and organized enough then it would let only the rulers fight each other, and watch their fights on TV and would thus get fast rid of all its warlike mis-leaders. - JZ 27.8.08. – DIS.

WAR: Wars of independence are but the inverted will for peace.” – Dagobert D. Runes, “A Dictionary of Thought.” - Territorialism expresses a kind of victory, conquest, domination and control of whole and diverse territorial populations with which a permanent peace with justice and freedom for all its diverse groups cannot be achieved territorially but only further struggles. It has this in common with e.g. the Inquisition, dueling and the blood revenge tradition, which also assured only more bloodshed for all too long. - One might also compare it with the kind of marriages in which it is assumed that one of the partners has to dominate the other, so that a kind of "peace" can only be achieved by violence or the threat of it and submission this established marriage custom. - JZ, 11.4.11. - INDEPENDENCE, PEACE, NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM

WAR: Wars of opinion, as they have been the most destructive, are also the most disgraceful of conflicts; being appeals from right to might, and from argument to artillery.” – C. C. Colton, Lacon, 1820. – Tolerance not only for diverse opinions but also for tolerant actions and experiments: panarchies of volunteers, based on full exterritorial autonomy is a simple, just and rational idea, whose time has come. – JZ, 22.8.08. – INTOLERANT IDEOLOGIES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

WAR: Wars start for a variety of reasons (*), but unlimited national sovereignty is always the necessary and sufficient condition.” - Poul Anderson, The Big Rain, ASTOUNDING SF, October 1954, p.48. - Territorial power is the essential but usually not sufficiently expressed feature of national sovereignty, as generally understood today. Most people are unable to comprehend that national sovereignty and other forms of autonomy could also be practised without geographical limitations, frontiers, for quite different groups living in the same territory or spread all over the world, as exterritorially autonomous volunteer communities, the political, economic and social equivalent to independent churches or sects. – (*) motives! - JZ, 7.2.02. - TERRITORIALISM, NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY, PANARCHISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR COMMUNITIES OF VOLUNTEERS, PERSONAL LAWS

WAR: Wars, to be rightful, as far as possible, must be undertaken with rightful organizations, weapons, war- and peace aims and warfare methods, which are, all as far as possible, merely the equivalents to quite rightful police actions against real criminals with victims. It must be conducted, as is still usual today, against the victims of these criminals. Territorial governments and their armed forces seem to be quite unable or unwilling to conduct such defensive and liberating wars or interventions, as they have demonstrated, again and again. Thus, at last, we freedom-lovers should consider, discuss and finally realize quite rightful and efficient alternatives to their war prevention, defence, protection and liberating methods, which would spare rather than cost all too many lives of innocents. – JZ, 23.3.03. 21.10.07, 11.4.11. – MILITIA, INTERVENTIONISM, AGGRESSION, TERRITORIALISM, COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, WARFARE METHODS, STATISM, PEACE, WAR AIMS, WARFARE METHODS, LIBERATION, TOLERANCE, MINORITY AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM, DES., GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, DEFENCE

WAR: Was peace, in fact, like diplomacy, merely another means of waging war…? – World Wars III, by Paul Di Filippo, in The Best of InterZone, ed. David Pringle, p.234. – Indeed, that is true for “peace” between territorial Warfare States. During their peace times they wage war internally, against dissidents and externally e.g. via protectionism. – And they do prepare for the next war, nowadays even with ABC mass extermination devices. As territorial large States they are essentially Warfare States, but unable to endlessly maintain permanent and open warfare against other territorial States. – They agree upon armistice periods, called peace, in-between. - JZ, 13.9.07, 11.4.11, 26.8.12. - & PEACE, ARMISTICE, BLOCKADES, PROTECTIONISM, IMMIGRATION BARRIERS, FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROLS, NWT

WAR: We are still suffering under wars, civil wars, violent revolutions, mass murders and systematic preparations for mass murders, inflation, deflation, economic crises, mass unemployment and numerous injustices because all the constitutional, legal and juridical preconditions for them, all the diverse hypotheses and notions and corresponding institutions that are causing them have not yet been thoroughly and publicly enough examined or their refutations and criticism have not yet been sufficiently published or understood by most victims of our territorial systems. A mess of conflicting views still exists, in which the statist ones dominate and cause most of our remaining political, economic and social problems. The different contending groups are still not free to sort themselves out, through individual choices and voluntary communities and as such free to do their own things only for and to themselves, thus learning and teaching by their own free actions and experiments. Under majority voting the dumbest creeds, hypotheses, errors and prejudices still dominate and the worst people tend to get to the top and manage to stay there for all too long. Not even the sufficient classification of all the various system has been achieved (there are still xyz classification systems, most of them incomplete, flawed, misleading or quite false), nor have all the wrongful ideas, definitions and prejudices been systematically collected and published together with their best refutations. – Not even the correct ideas have been comprehensively collected and published through an Ideas Archive. - JZ, 19.10.06, 26.10.07, 11.4.11. - & TERRITORIAL MONOPOLIES & COERCION AS USUAL

WAR: We cannot accept the doctrine that war must be forever a part of man’s destiny.” – Franklin Delano Roosevelt, quoted in: - Arthur C. Clarke & Michael Kube-McDowell, The Trigger, Harper/Collins Publishers, 1999, p.399. - - But as long as men like him, Truman, Churchill, Stalin, Mussolini & Hitler can get into territorial power and stay in it, for all too long … Not man’s destiny but his foolish and wrongful ideas, opinions and popular prejudices and institutions are involved, leading inevitably to what is here wrongly called “destiny” - JZ, 29.9.07. - Most people still accept the territorialist myths and with them wars, revolutions, riots, terrorism, civil wars, oppression and exploitation. - JZ, 11.4.11.

WAR: We do not fight for the real but for shadows we make. / A flag is a piece of cloth and a word is a sound. / But we make them something neither cloth nor a sound. / Totems of love and hate, black sorcery-stones.” – Stephen Vincent Benét, John Brown’s Body, 1928, 4. - That is why quite just and clear war and peace aims, sufficiently and trustworthily publicized, long before a war might occur, are so important. – Only then can they, too, serve to prevent wars. - JZ, 18.11.85, 11.4.11, 27.8.12.

WAR: We had a war to end war. What we really need is a genuine peace to end war. We have not even defined that peace – as long as we stick with the territorialist wrongful and false statist premise. – JZ, 29.4.93, 18.9.08. – What we had so far were merely armistice periods in which the next wars were prepared. – JZ, 27.8.12. - PEACE, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: We have a solution for war. It is to expand the sphere of liberty.” - Rudolph Rummel. - Just expanding it is not yet enough. Even the Soviet Union did this in the end and Red China did it by introducing some economic liberties. It should be expanded to its maximum, to as much liberty as we know of and can manage to realize. Anything less will not make us safe enough. - JZ, 6.1.03. – Only voluntary victims of statism should be allowed to continue to embrace it for themselves, but without a territorial monopoly and without WMD’s! – JZ, 22.4.09. - & LIBERTY, PEACE, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT

WAR: We have heard many times that wars have the good effect of unifying a whole people behind a common cause. The ideology in these cases is war. Regardless of the dedication to the cause, warring nations eventually join the long list of those that have not survived. The economies of war is such that the eventual outcome has to be detrimental to all participants.” – Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.145. - In most cases, at least some people survived even very bloody wars - and, alas, with their territorialist errors and prejudices intact, thus preparing for their next war or civil war or violent revolution. - JZ, 11.4.11. Territorial unity is just an idea and does not necessarily constitute a genuine ideal, as demonstrated e.g. by Stalin, Hitler and Mao. The same is true for “common causes” or motives, with might be domination, plunder, rape or mass murder. – JZ,, 27.8.12. - UNITY, COMMON CAUSE, WAR AIMS, DIS., NATIONALISM, DIS., TERRITORIALISM, PEOPLES, INDIVIDUALISM, PANARCHISM

WAR: We have no adequate idea of the predisposing power which an immense series of measures of preparation for war has in actually begetting war.” – William E. Gladstone, quoted in Seldes. – Continuing one's territorial organization, not only standing armies, arms races, taxation, monetary and financial despotism and the monopolization of decision-making power on war and peace, are among the essentials parts of making sure that the next war will occur sooner or later. - JZ, 11.4.11, 27.8.12. - PREPARATIONS FOR WAR RATHER THAN PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, CAUSES OF WAR

WAR: We have shown, that political society, on a moderate calculation, has been the means of murdering several times the number of inhabitants now upon the earth, during its short existence, not upward of four thousand years in any account to be depended upon.” – Edmund Burke, A Vindication of Natural Society, p.74. – POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM, STATE

WAR: We know more about war than we know about peace, more about killing than we know about living.” – General Omar Bradley, quoted in The Free Man’s Almanac. - Also more about injustice and oppression than about justice and freedom and seem to be more interested in upholding the former than achieving the latter. - JZ, 11.4.11. - LIVING, KILLING, PEACE, TERRITORIALISM, KNOWLEDGE, IGNORANCE, INTEREST IN THE OWN INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

WAR: We shall never stop war, whatever machinery we may devise, until we have learned to think always, with a sort of desperate urgency and an utter self-identification, of single human beings.” – Victor Gollancz: From Darkness to Light, p.504. - Quoted in Seldes. - Most of the territorial, collectivist and statist notions lead to war rather than peace, in freedom and justice. - JZ, 11.4.11. - INDIVIDUALISM, INDIVIDUAL HUMAN RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PEACE, TOLERANCE, TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM

WAR: We should not train armies for wars but, rather, allow all kinds of voluntary groups, communities and societies for peace, freedom and justice by their own standards, recognizing and realizing their full exterritorial autonomy, but no longer grant to anyone or any group any territorial monopoly that goes beyond private property in real estate. – JZ, 3.7.82, 22.8.08, 27.8.12, after reading: “It is not an army that we must train for war, it is a nation.” – Woodrow Wilson, speech, 12.5.1917. – That kind of remark I would rather have expected from a leading Nazi. – JZ, 22.8.08. - DIS., NATIONALISM, TERRITORIALISM, LEADERSHIP

WAR: We speak of five major wars we’ve been in, but actually we’ve committed military forces to action 158 times in our 197-year history. Most of the time, we did so to help someone else – someone weaker whose freedom was threatened.” - Ronald Reagan, p.148/149, in “Sincerely, Ronald Reagan”, a collection of his letters, compiled by his secretary Helene von Damm, 1976. A survey on the successes, failures and costs in lives and money of these military attempts would be instructive. – JZ, 16.9.07. – It would also be of interest to find out how often or how rarely other major States have been so involved in the same period. It might turn out, contrary to the public image of the USA, that it was and is one of the most militaristic States. Always, naturally, with the best of intentions! – JZ, 22.4.09. – But good intentions are not a sufficient excuse when in the attempt to realize them even more people are killed and injured and more property is destroyed than would have happened, most likely, without this intervention. – JZ, 27.8.12. - WARS OF USA & OF OTHER STATES, MILITARISM, FREQUENCY OF MILITARY ENGAGEMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, LIBERATION, INTERVENTIONISM, IMPERIALISM, USA, AMERICA, PRESIDENTS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WAR: We used to wonder where war lived, what it was that made it so vile. And now we realize that we know where it lives, that it is inside ourselves.” – Albert Camus, Notebooks, 1935-1942 (1962), 3, tr. Philip Thody. - Especially in our territorialist ideas, actions and institutions! – JZ, 18.11.85, 22.8.08. – DIS., HUMAN NATURE, AGGRESSIVENESS, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: What generates war is the economic philosophy of nationalism: embargos. Trade and foreign exchange controls, monetary devaluation, etc. The philosophy of protectionism is a philosophy of war.” – Ludwig von Mises. - Protectionism is just one of the many wrongful and irrational aspects of territorialism. - JZ, 11.4.11. - & PROTECTIONISM, NATIONALISM, FREE TRADE, PEACE, DIS., POWER

WAR: What gets people emotionally involved to fight? Some hate object conjured or dreamed up or falsely concluded upon via collective responsibility notions or war propaganda that is not sufficiently criticized. All too many simply believe a territorial government that declares that such and such other government is your main enemy. Moreover, they are right to fear any territorial government beyond their borders just as the people behind these borders have good reasons to fear the large and powerful territorial governments of other States. We have now a number of “democratic” governments that are armed with nuclear “weapons”, i.e. anti-people weapons, mass murder devices. The Soviet nuclear weapons were, after all, directed not against “capitalists” only but, rather, against masses of people, mostly and wrongly perceived to be merely “proletarians”. While the Western nuclear weapons were not, primarily, directed against e.g. the Soviet regime in the Kremlin but against the Russian people and over other 120 other ethnic groups and xyz other types of groups captured and dominated by that regime. Against whom are the Russian nuclear weapons directed now? And the Western ones? And the others? Truths on international relations are not dominant in most peoples heads and in crisis and wartimes they become rarer still. – JZ, 26.2.82, 23.8.08, 27.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM, ITS MUDDLES, MYTHS & CONFUSIONS, NWT, WAR AIMS, WEAPONS

WAR: What inducement has the farmer, while following the plow, to lay aside his peaceful pursuits and go to war with the farmer of another country? Or what inducement has the manufacturer? What is dominion to them or to any class of men in a nation? Does it add an acre to any man’s estate, or raise its value? Are not conquest and defeat each of the same price, and taxes the never failing consequence? Through this reasoning may be good to a nation, it is not so to a government. War is the faro-table of governments, and nations the dupes of the game.” – Thomas Paine, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.80/81. – Another version: “War is the gambling table of governments and citizens the dupes of the game.” – War was almost always the game of kings and other war lords and it is still the game of the modern power addicts. – JZ, 27.8.12. - WARFARE STATES, NATIONAL INTEREST VS. GOVERNMENT INTERESTS, POWER, WAR GAMES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: What millions died – that Caesar might be great!” – Thomas Campbell, The Pleasures of Hope, II, 1799. - GREATNESS, WAR VICTIMS, CAESARISM, LEADERSHIP, POWER ADDICTS, TERRITORIALISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WAR: When soldiers begin to understand and fight for the own rights and interests, instead of the wrongs, special interests, monopolies and privileges of their abusers, exploiters and great mis-leaders, war will soon cease. – Who could prevent them from concluding a just and separate peace-treaty with the soldiers on the other side, over the heads of their rulers, and uniting them against the war-mongers on both sides? – Especially when attractive models for such peace treaties are published in time and made thus sufficiently known to them? – They could transform themselves into militias of volunteers only for the protection of individual rights and liberties. – Cromwell’s Ironsides, at least in England, not in the religious war in Ireland, have set a pretty good precedent. The genuine rights and duties of soldiers and officers are still as little explored and agreed upon as are the rights and duties of children. The same is true for rightful war- and peace aims and for all too many of the genuine individual rights and liberties. - JZ, 27.4.87, 21.8.08, 27.8.12. – PANARCHISM, WAR AIMS, PEACE TREATIES, SEPARATE PEACE TREATIES, RIGHTS OF MAN, RIGHTS OF SOLDIERS, RIGHTS OF CHILDREN, HUMAN RIGHTS, MILITIAS, FRATERNIZATION AGAINST THE WAR MONGERS, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS THAT LIBERATE & ESTABLISH PEACE

WAR: Whenever you ponder war, remember that on both sides there were many willing and peaceful producers, traders, investors and potential migrants not allowed to do what they wanted to do, liked to do, could and would have done, peacefully, without wronging or harming anyone. They, too, were not given any choice on any war and peace questions, armament and disarmament and international treaties, or the free choice of their own community, under personal laws and without any territorial monopoly. It cannot be denied that these and many other kinds of prohibitions, restrictions and monopolies helped to bring about the mass slaughters, commanded and financed by territorial governments (via wrongful inflations, taxation and government debts) and that they will go on doing so in the future, unless we do abolish them, all of them, as territorial regimes and reduce them to associations under personal law only, i.e. without a territorial monopoly! From then on they could do their own things only to their voluntary victims. – JZ, 6.11.76, 3.8.78, 20.8.08, 11.4.11, 27.8.12. - TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Wicked waste of good men.” – WW I nurse. – They soon knew that they were senselessly slaughtered for the aims of politicians. They had guns in their hands. Why did they not turn their guns around, more often and do this quite sensibly and well organized, well thought-out and well executed? - against the main war criminals, the territorial power addicts? Who could have successfully resisted them then? – JZ, 21.8.08. – The soldiers, too, on all sides, are themselves victims of territorialism and yet, so far, mostly addicted to it and know and appreciate nothing better. - JZ, 11.4.11, 27.8.12. – MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, Q., FRATERNIZATION, FIGHTING ONLY THE MAIN ENEMIES: TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS, NOT THEIR VICTIMS IN OR OUT OF UNIFORMS.

WAR: Without war no State could be. All those we know of arose through war, and the protection of their members by armed force remains their primary and essential task. War, therefore, will endure to the end of history, as long as there is a multiplicity of States.” – Heinrich von Treitschke, Politics, London, 1916. – Quoted in Seldes. – Without territorial States few if any wars would and could occur. – JZ, 27.8.12. - STATES, WARFARE STATES, TERRITORIALISM

WAR: Would not almost everything else come, too, with a genuine peace, based on tolerance for all tolerant actions and as much freedom and justice as one wants to have for oneself and among like-minded other volunteers? – JZ, 27.9.05. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM & CHOICE, PEACE, PROGRESS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM TO DO THE OWN THINGS & ALLOWING OTHERS TO DO THE SAME, WAR & PEACE AIMS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

WAR: You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake.” - Jeannette Rankin, 1880-1973. - In or against or over an earthquake? – JZ – While wars, as conventionally conducted, are almost as senselessly destructive and murderous as Earthquakes are, there was also a number of wars and revolutions that were conducted and won almost bloodlessly. Such instances should not be forgotten but widely published and explored for the possibilities of further improved actions. - JZ, 25. 11. 06. – Even a one-sided peace declaration did occur and was, somewhat, effective. War is a man-made or, rather, an event or happening produced by territorial governments. As such it is preventable. Free people can win, even against a powerful territorial government and this without a war against all its subjects, but, rather, by liberating them and fighting, together with them, only against their despots or tyrants. With territorial governments wars would disappear. – JZ, 22.4.09, 27.8.12. - WARS LIKE EARTHQUAKES? REVOLUTIONARY WARFARE, MILITARY INSURRECTIONS, MASS FRATERNIZATION, PRISONERS OF WAR & REFUGEE TREATMENT, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, INDUCED MASS DESERTIONS & DEFECTIONS, UNILATERAL PEACE DECLARATIONS, PEACE TREATIES BETWEEN THE PEOPLES OVER THE HEADS OF THEIR GOVERNMENTS, QUITE RIGHTFUL WAR & PEACE AIMS, LIBERATION RATHER THAN MORE MASS MURDERS OF INNOCENTS, DIS.

WARD, COLIN, Harmony through Complexity - (1973)

WARD, COLIN: Anarchy in Action, Freedom Press, 1973, 1982, JZL. Page 52: "The anarchist alternative is that of fragmentation, fission rather than fusion, diversity rather than unity, a mass of societies rather than a mass society." - Here he overlooks the option of voluntary unity, e.g. a) among Kurds, across all present state borders, and b) that of world federalists, of one type or the other, each forming their own competitive but tolerant world federation and c) the unity among Free Traders, forming a world wide Free Trade Community. - Fusion by voluntary membership and limited by individual secessionism should not be objectionable to a rational anarchist. Neither diversity nor unity, neither decentralization nor centralization are purposes in themselves but just options for free individuals. - JZ, 29.1.1999, 27.8.12.

WARDS OF THE GOVERNMENT: is it so difficult to permit men to experiment, to feel their way, to choose, to make mistakes, to correct them, to learn, to work together, to manage their own property and their own interests, to act for themselves, at their own risk and peril, on their own responsibility? Do we not see that this is what makes them men? Must we always start with the fatal premise that all those who govern are guardians and all the governed are wards?” – Bastiat, quoted by G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.242. – Here he came, perhaps, closed to panarchist ideas in all his writings. – JZ, 8.9.08. - OR FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT? PROTECTION, PROTECTIONISM, TERRITORIALISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM, MUTUALISM, TOLERANCE VS. INTOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, SELF-GOVERNMENT VS. GOVERNMENT, NO MORE VICTIMS & VICTIMIZERS

WARDS OF THE GOVERNMENT: Karl Marx, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.Under this dispensation, the political apparatus, having nothing at its disposal except the police force, uses this force to take the fruits of productive effort in order to dispense the loot among the less productive. In theory, at least, that’s all there is to it – a leveling procedure! – Admittedly, this procedure appears to attract millions of our fellow citizens. It relieves them, they assume, of the necessity of looking after themselves; Uncle Sam is standing by with bags of forcibly collected largess. – To the unwary, this looks like a choice between security and freedom. But, in fact, it is the choice between self-responsibility of a free man or (*) the slave-like security of a ward of the government. Thus, if a person were to say, “I prefer being a ward of the government to exercising the personal practice of freedom”, he would at least be stating the alternatives in correct terms.” – Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 1/80 - (*) and? - JZ - At least all individuals should have the free choice of being a ward of the government of their own and individual free choice or being the own man, or woman. – Panarchies or experimental freedom also for statists of all kinds, in form of voluntary or competing governments, all only with voluntary subjects and none with any territorial monopoly. This being assured, it would be much easier for the various minorities that love at least degrees of liberties, to get the chance to practise as much liberty as they want to, among themselves only. It is a live and let-live compromise that is absolutely non-threatening to any other community, society or State except the ones which insist on upholding what they do misname “territorial integrity” or “national unity”, in reality a territorial monopoly for a relatively small ruling or group and its supporters. – JZ, 8.9.08. 11.4.11. - SELF-OWNERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, SECURITY, WELFARE STATE, NEEDS, MARXISM, COMMUNISM, TAXATION, STATE SOCIALISM, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, TOTALITARIANISM, PROPERTY RIGHTS

WARFARE STATE: A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY: The concept and theme of war in history is treated in Gaston Bouthoul, La Guerre, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1973. - André Corvisier, La guerre. Essais historiques, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1995. - An historical and sociological approach to war is in Pitirim Sorokin (1957) Social and Cultural Dynamics, Revised and abridged in one volume by the author, Porter Sargent Publisher, Boston, see: Part six: fluctuation of war in intergroup relationships. - A simple statistical treatment of wars in history is presented in - Jack S. Levy, War in the Modern Great Power System, 1495-1975, The University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, 1983. - A collection of essays on war is Leon Bramson and George W. Goethals, editors (1968) War. Studies from Psychology, Sociology, Anthropology, Basic Books, New York. - Amongst them is the essay by Bronislaw Malinowski (1941) An Anthropological Analysis of War. - Also worth reading is: Harold D. Lasswell (1941) The Garrison State. - A contemporary analysis of war with future scenarios is in Alvin and Heidi Toffler (1993) War and Anti-war, Warner Books, New York. - The climate of rivalry that prepared the terrain for the outbreak of the First World War is poignantly presented in A. J. P. Taylor (1954) The Struggle for Mastery in Europe, 1848-1918, Oxford University Press, Oxford. In the opening is found the famous sentence that ascribes the "bellum omnium contra omnes" not to the state of nature but to the state "tout court" (i.e. to the state as political institution, territorial and monopolistic): "In the state of nature which Hobbes imagined, violence was the only law, and life was 'nasty, brutish and short'. Though individuals never lived in this state of nature, the Great powers of Europe have always done so." - A short reconstruction of the incredible series of circumstances surrounding the killing of the Archduke and his wife is in - About the tangle of alliances that brought a continuous accession of new states into the conflict see - The identification of the political causes of war makes it very necessary to refer to the state and its features. - Gian Piero de Bellis in his "Waiting for the bomb." - Appendix: Waiting for the Bomb? - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, POWER

WARFARE STATES: Governments are prepared to sacrifice blindly the lives of millions of subjects when the prestige of State power is involved or some “error” in the defence system leads to military measures.” – LERNZIEL ANARCHIE Nr. 3. – HUMAN SACRIFICES, TERRITORIALISM, STATES, GOVERNMENTS

WARFARE STATES: Whenever the legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves into a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience …” – John Locke (1632-1704). - According to this statement territorial States tend to be Warfare States not only in their external policies but also in their internal ones. I haven't seen this stated before as clearly as it is here. - JZ, 24. 11. 06.

WARFARE: Encourage deserters and mutineers, disobedience and insurrections towards their dictatorial regimes – e.g. through quite rightful war and peace aims, and by recognizing all kinds of governments in exile for them, to be freely chosen by them as alternatives to their ruling territorial regime. And do treat prisoners, deserters and refugees as potential allies or neutrals, rather than as enemies. Make sure they are freely integrated in the process of production and exchange, in accordance with their preferences and abilities. Preparations should be made, as Ulrich von Beckerath suggested, to provide millions of such people, arriving quite suddenly, with productive jobs. Full monetary and financial freedom has the potential to achieve that. The technical and economic details of such measures should be studied and already employed in peace time – to overcome then any involuntary unemployment, under-development and sales difficulties or economic crisis, all of them all too frequent and likely under monetary and financial despotism. – JZ, 16.4.82, 28.8.08.

WARS, CIVIL WARS, REVOLUTIONS & TERRITORIALISM: Non-recognition of exterritorial autonomy for volunteer communities is at least a significant factor, if not the basic cause, of most wars, revolutions and civil wars. Imagine trying to still allocate different territories to the adherents of different religious faiths. – JZ, 24.9.93, 12.1.99. What worked to pacify the adherents to different religions would also serve to pacify the followers of different ideologies – as long as they do no longer claim a territorial monopoly for it. Religious people managed to give up that monopoly claim. So why should not the followers of diverse ideologies be able to do the same? – JZ, 27.8.12. – RELIGIOUS & IDEOLOGICAL TOLERANCE & FREEDOM

WASTE: Government coercion and compulsion, monopolies, laws, regulations, bureaucracies, conscription and taxation allow the government to waste much of your life, time, energy, labor, productivity and thus, to a large extent, waste you. – JZ, 1.6.84, 28.8.08. - TERRITORIALISM

WASTE: when people have freedom of choice and are spending their own money, there can be no waste (*), at least at the time of expenditure. Waste appears (**) when people start spending other people’s money. It appears with corporatism and reaches its zenith with big government. – The addition of coercion to corporatism creates a powerhouse of waste-making. – Viv Forbes, in a letter to the editor, reproduced in PROGRESS PARTY NEWSLETTER 4/87. - (*) In many ways private individuals can also waste their own life, earnings, property and resources – but, all people should be free to do so and thereby learn from their own mistakes and thereby learn, as much as they can or want to. - (**) It not only appears but becomes multiplied and perpetuated in these cases. – JZ, 8.5.87. – TERRITORIALISM, CHOICE, RIGHTS, FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, LUXURIES, PROPERTY RIGHTS, SUBJECTIVE VALUE THEORY


WATNER, CARL, to TAYLOR, DAVID: 31 August 1989, 2pp: 149, in PP 1539.

WATNER, CARL, VOLUNTARYISM, VS. PANARCHISM, LETTER BY JOHN ZUBE, March 24, 1986, from PEACE PLANS No. 671: John Zube, 35 Oxley St., Berrima, NSW, Australia 2577, March 24, 86. - - Carl Watner, Box 1275, Gramling, South Carolina 29348. - Dear Carl, - - thanks for your letter of March 11th., with $ 1 for the enclosed photocopy. Since Alan Koontz wanted to produce the interview from a repeated exchange of questions and answers, and since I wanted to reproduce the lot anyhow in microfiche, I did not put any size limit on my replies, assuming that he would see to that for any reproduction in THE VOLUNTARYIST. - - On my view of voluntaryism and how it relates to panarchism: As I understand voluntaryism and panarchism, I see no discrepancy between the two at all. - - Nor do I see a distinction between either and a comprehensive and consistent libertarianism. - - Nor do I draw a distinction between voluntarism and voluntaryism. - - (It was perhaps my mistake to assume a consensus between us on this.) - - Panarchism, as I see it, is based on voluntarism and has drawn the conclusions from it in the sphere of actions, which are at the same time tolerant and non-territorial. - - Panarchism, because it puts voluntarism or individual free choice and freedom of action first, rejects all conventional political structures which are based on territorial exclusiveness of and involuntary membership in States and which subject individuals, minorities and even majorities to more or less centralized and uniform governmental decision-making, including legislation, administration and jurisdiction, protection and defence. - - It regards as irrelevant whether a government represents a minority or the vast majority. - - The essential point for panarchists is that a territorial government represents no one else but its voluntary members. The others are unrepresented and not given freedom of choice and action - and cannot obtain full liberty within its framework. - - The panarchist vision of a free society, and of the means to achieve it, is voluntaristic: Even State membership is to be quite voluntary, on a personal law basis. - - This does not imply any "acceptance" of the State as an organizational form for all people but it opens the way for all kinds of organizational alternatives, provided and maintained e.g. by all kinds of anarchists and libertarians - each group operating only through and upon its own voluntary members, like churches and sects tend to do nowadays. - - What is left of governments of the old type, when each individual can, panarchistically, have "the government of his dreams" (Solneman) or the non-government of his dreams, for himself? - - Simply a voluntary organization of statists doing their own thing to themselves only and no longer to any involuntary victims. - - Such a "State" I can live with, although I would not want to live "within" or "under" it. - - I would find it even serviceable, as a living demonstration of what harm a State does to its members, i.e. as a deterrent example. - - As such a demonstration it might be so valuable, educationally, that if it should one day happen that no one will any longer volunteer for such political and economic sadism and masochism combined, then freedom-minded people will, temporarily and for show-purposes only, re-establish such statist relationships in theatrical performances and exhibitions, as they now do at least occasionally re-enact scenes of slavery etc. to keep alive an awareness of historical developments. - - (In Australia even the whipping of deported convicts is regularly play-acted out - in historical village exhibits. (The only things I have not heard of as being re-enacted, except on screens, are scenes of torture and hanging.) - - In other words, not by being overthrown but merely by being largely deserted and otherwise left alone, would the old types of States be, likewise, turned into non-territorial and autonomous associations of volunteers, would thus represent voluntarism and associationism pure and simple, although they might retain the old names and practices among their voluntary victims. - - The moral legitimacy of any panarchy would rest on the unanimous consent of all its members, all being volunteers, and the confinement of each panarchy to the own affairs, i.e. those of the own members. - - As for the various political and economic systems and methods applied by various panarchies coexisting peacefully in the same territory - and world-wide - that would be no one else's affair. Whether they apply some despotic or authoritarian system, a representative democratic or direct democratic one or any other one that they preferred, would be irrelevant for any outsiders. Outsiders would only ask: Did they volunteer for this? Are they still volunteers? Then it serves them right if they suffer the consequences of their own choices. - - Even if they instituted, in an extreme case, slavery and mutual assassination and theft, as practised “principles”, this would be quite up to them. As long as individuals remain free to secede from such bodies, there will be a limit to the number of people joining them and remaining members. And these people may need these lessons because they would not sufficiently respond to any theoretical teachings. - - All panarchies, in the interest of their own security and to achieve the potential of unlimited growth for their own system, would see to it that individual secessionism from all panarchies and old type states remains a reality and, where it is not yet realized, that it is utilized as the main means to overthrow the old coercive systems, largely with the aid of refugees, deserters insurrectionists and their recognized non-territorial governments in exile. Here lies the main potential military and purely defensive and liberating strength of panarchism. - - Panarchism intends to "defeat" and replace the old territorial statist system a) by propaganda, b) by individual secessionism and c) by demonstrating the working of panarchism in examples of panarchy. - - In these 3 aspects panarchism is purely voluntaristic. - - Panarchism considers conscientious objection and tax strikes, however extensively they are realized, as only part-realizations of the withdrawal of consent and cooperation by individuals, which is expressed by individual secessionism. - - Voluntary taxation would be automatically realized, in whatever form it might take, through the voluntary membership of panarchies. Even if, internally, all agreed upon high and progressive income taxes, this would be voluntary and fair taxation, as far as their members were concerned. The mandate given for such measures would be 100%. Dissenters would opt out. - - There appears to be, however, an important difference between my and your voluntaristic position. You seem to have applied the voluntaryist principle also to offenders and aggressors. Their choices should not be interfered with. They should not be coerced, not even defensively. Thus, in application, non-violence seems to have become your primary principle. I consider this to be an absurd and contradictory over-extension of the voluntaryist principle, one that ignores voluntarism for victims of attacks committed by "free" offenders who want to be "free" to follow their whims in arbitrary actions against others. - - I, for one, do not expect a criminal, political or military aggressor or invader to volunteer to do right and abstain from doing wrong. I rather favour volunteers to resist them, even forcefully, with as much and as little physical force as is necessary and justified, when other appeals have failed or are useless at least for the moment of an acute threat against basic rights. In all such instances, I am mainly concerned about the lack of choice on the side of the victims rather than about the voluntary but wrong choice of the aggressors. I want to preserve and extend voluntarism on the side of the victims, however much that is disliked by the aggressors, invaders, monopolists etc. and however much that would restrict the choice of the latter, even forcefully. - - Defensive force is for me an expression of voluntarism, not its denial. - - Aggressive force is for me not an expression of voluntarism but its denial. - - I find it deplorable that aggressors do remain and that one is thus often forced to resort to defensive force against them. I do not deplore that in such instances defensive force is used but rather applaud its use. - - I remember a newspaper article on a 3-year old, who successfully repelled a rapist attacking her older sister by bashing him on the head with a heavy glass ashtray. (Whether such a defence was risky for both victims and whether other means were available, comes secondary to my main consideration: Was her defence within her rights and that of her sister?) -  Thus, if you will, you might class yourself as a non-violent voluntaryist while I might class myself as a rightful voluntaryist. - - At the same time, as a panarchist, I do favour voluntary victims and aggressors doing their chosen thing among themselves, even it this amounts to mutual slaughter, like duelling, playing chicken with their cars, cutting each other's throat in one way or the other, if they prefer that. - - Voluntarism comes first for me, not non-violence - although people committed to violent acts against each other would also be very low in my value scale. - - (I recommend highly the criticism of absolute pacifism in: Jan Narveson: Pacifism: A Philosophical Analysis, in: Moral Problems, edited by James Rachels, 2nd. ed., Harper & Row, 1975, pp 346-360. The preceding article by Douglas Lackay on Ethics and Nuclear Deterrence is good, also. - - (By the way, a well organized and known printing house like Harper & Row produces only ca. 1200 titles p.a. with 1800 employees, i.e. 0.66 per head and keeps only the output of ca. 10 years in print, i.e. up to 190 years of its 200 year output is out of print! Production-wise, not with regard to distribution, I am much more efficient!) (I was referring to my LIBERTARIAN MICROFICHE PUBLISHING output, 1779 PEACE PLANS issues from 1977 to 2002.) - - Your statement of purpose of “THE VOLUNTARYIST”: The Voluntaryists are libertarians who have organized to promote non-political strategies (1) to achieve a free society. (2) We reject electoral politics, in theory and in practice, as incompatible with libertarian principles. (3) Governments must cloak their actions in an aura of moral legitimacy in order to sustain their power, and political methods invariably strengthen that legitimacy. (4) Voluntarists seek instead to delegitimize the State through education, and we advocate withdrawal of the co-operation and tacit consent on which State power ultimately depends."(5) - - - (1) For panarchists political strategies are characterized by involuntary membership and subordination and territorial exclusiveness and powers. To that extent, panarchists would not utilize "political means". But on a voluntary and non-territorial basis, they would  use any political means internally, among their own members. Moreover, they would use precisely their characteristics to defend themselves against remaining despotic and territorial States and to transform them into similar frameworks for voluntary actions. If that must be called "politics", then so be it. - (2) Panarchism would even realize the freedom not to be free. – Always only for voluntary victims of victimizers. - (3) All the voting occurring in panarchies would tend to be unanimous. Unelected leaders would have 100% voluntary consent. Dissenters would always be free and encouraged to opt out. If it could and should happen that within a panarchy several parties would develop, expressing some dissent on some internal constitutional, legal or juridical questions, unanimity would tend to be rapidly restored, for even the losing party would be free to opt out with all its members and voters, i.e. the defeated could be victorious, too, regarding their own affairs, if only they wanted to. - Each vote could then be 100% valid for each individual voter. He would not be dependent upon thousands or millions of other voters agreeing with him. To that extent panarchistic voting would agree, not disagree, with libertarian principles. - (4) Each aspiration regarding the own affairs would be legitimate and would cease to delegitimize different actions of others in their affairs. - By means of all remaining and new associations enjoying unanimous consent, true legitimacy would be achieved for the first time. Illegitimate regimes would be largely deserted or only precariously upheld by a few crackpots and at their expense only and for these they would be legitimate. - (5) Panarchists assert that the ultimate "withdrawal of co-operation and consent" consists in individual secessions. - But they go beyond that and assert that man is also an associative animal and can be relied upon to establish numerous diverse alternative institutions, pursuing one or the other political, economic or social aim for the own members. - - In the light of panarchism, most of the old names for systems, methods and aims lose their meaning or gain a new one. - - Panarchism would radically realize voluntarism, help greatly in its realization, help maintain it and would help to spread libertarian voluntarism by the successes of the examples it would set. - - Panarchists, from my point of view, are therefore consistent voluntaryists - who apply voluntarism in all spheres and envision how this would operate among people as they are now and as they will, one day, be. Most voluntaryists, that I have so far encountered, still persist with some of the old notions that apply only coercive and territorial governments and States. They are thus, in my eyes, inconsistent panarchists and inconsistent voluntaryists. - - - - The first article in The Voluntaryist No. 17 discusses whether the "button for total freedom for all, now" should be pushed. Under panarchism, each would push the button only for himself and not territorially on behalf of others. - Others would thus have no right or reason to complain. Even that decision should not be made in a process of collective decision-making. Any attempt to do so does lead to clashes between people, even when all of them consider themselves to be libertarians. - - Summing up LeFevre's approach you say: "Forcing men to be free is an improper way to achieve freedom..." - That is also the panarchist attitude. - - Ibid: "LeFevre went on record as advocating no substitute for government except the market place." - Panarchism wants to introduce a market for governmental and non-governmental services, one in which not even his private property concept would be an absolute concept for any but LeFevre-type autarchists, since various forms of cooperative and collective property would be also be practised, voluntarily and among their believes only. - The establishment of socialistic approaches to property would also be based on voluntary means. - - Panarchists do not expect, with LeFevre, a “long and painful re-education of the American people” but their rapid persuasion via experiments and demonstrations, once they have been persuaded of only one thing, namely, tolerance for tolerant actions or freedom of action for all dissenters. - - "We cannot use the weapons of tyranny: for freedom and reason are our only tools." - That general clause would be differently interpreted by panarchists: Panarchists would tend to achieve the defection of the military power of tyrants. Their soldiers and officers, if not sufficiently motivated or able to rise against them, would tend to defect from the tyrants to panarchies of their own choice, bringing their weapons with them, as potential allies or at least as neutrals. And their involuntary and exploited workers would tend to flee and would be welcomed, with open arms and well paid jobs, at least by the members of the economically free panarchies, if these communities are their choice. - - Panarchies would not only use reasoning but free experimentation or attractive job offers and personal freedom choices to persuade, like natural scientists, technicians and inventors use freedom of action and freedom to experiment for their purposes. - - And the freedom they offered to opponents would include even the option to adopt a condition of voluntary slavery for themselves, as long as this is their preference. - - In other words, they could "dissolve" tyrannical regimes almost or altogether without a war or fighting. - But this would also require that they are not committed to non-violence. - - Panarchism allows each to push the button only for himself. - - The pro-freedom button is not a pro-freedom button unless it would introduce this disarming alternative, also. - - It would not bring love but justice to its enemies, including the freedom to choose to remain unfree. - - With the inclusion of this option most scruples about pushing the button would disappear. - - In your article, in the same issue of THE VOLUNTARYIST, "The Decision Is Always Yours -Freedom As Self-Control", you speak of "the voluntaryist insight that all human organizations and institutions require the consent and cooperation of their participants to function." - - In the social, economic and political spheres only panarchism turns this insight into a formal and obvious basis of organization. Territorial States try to deviate from this ideal as far as they can, substituting centralized decision-making by usurpers, experts, majorities and minorities. - - As for "self-control", panarchism institutionalizes it as much as individuals want it institutionalized for their own affairs. - - In this article you fail to distinguish between rightful and defensive force and wrongful and aggressive violence and thus come to wrong conclusions like: "Force always inhibits creative energy." - - The policing force (it could be privately and competitively practised) that expels those, who by wilful noise or assaults would break up a peaceful meeting, does not inhibit creative energy, that of the peaceful speakers, and listeners, but only the destructive and preventative energy of the "disturbers of the peace". - - Any true right is associated with the authority to enforce it. (Kant) - - Wrongdoers have no such rightful authority. No wrong is done to them if they are stopped in their wrongful acts, even when they are stopped forcefully - or permanently. - - To class a force used for the preservation of freedom of speech, press, assembly, association and action, quite indiscriminately with violence, used for their suppression, is wrong and absurd. - - Solneman claims that J. H. Mackay made the distinction between aggressive and defensive force clearest among all anarchist writers. Perhaps re-reading his 2 main anarchist works would help you, too, in becoming aware of the difference. I believe that I didn't need that aid to see the difference - but then so many years have passed since I have fully read these books that I may have forgotten that I owe them something in this respect. - - (Mackay’s three anarchist books are by now online, I believe. - JZ, 2.10.11.) - - To deny that coercion and even torture could "control" others, does really cast all people into an extremely heroic mould. While it is quite true that some people have resisted, to their death, even the most extreme degrees of coercion and torture, most people have not been as firm and have, under such pressures or even mere believable threats of using them, involuntarily chosen to compromise as much as seemed advisable to them under the circumstances. (Live and fight another day!) To equate a thus enforced consent with genuine consent tends to deprive "consent" of any real meaning. - - Consent and dissent become full and free consent only if their expression becomes fully free and institutionalized. Panarchism offers that. Territorial States do not and cannot offer that choice in very important spheres. The coercion at least of enforced or "chosen" emigration remains and of forcefully prevented immigration for many of those who find e.g. the S.A. or U.S.A. degree of coercion still attractive enough for them to want to immigrate there. - (There are now ca. 1 million enquiries a year from potential immigrants to Australia, while only ca. 80,000 are accepted at present. But Australia is still very far from being a quite free country. Presently, it even runs concentration camps for illegal immigrants that were caught.) - - "This insight into the nature of human action has many implications. For one thing, it leads directly to the voluntaryist insight, that all States rest on the consent and cooperation of their victims." - I wish it were so. But count me out. - - As a panarchist I consider this to be a dangerous fallacy of some voluntaryists, one that does ignore how effective taxation, migration restrictions, compulsory membership and uniform territorial laws are, even though they are not 100% effective. - - The fallacy involved is to me comparable to those involved when people declare legal tender laws to be harmless – because, ultimately, in a galloping inflation, they are ignored – and price controls to be harmless – because a black market exists. It is also expressed by various self-liberationists of today, who imagine that they could not only increase their personal liberty today by rational and rightful efforts but achieve total individual liberty, including tax exemption, freedom from the threat of war, immunity towards all effects of mass unemployment and rapid inflations etc. right now, by clever individual actions, legally or underground or even merely by declaring themselves to be “sovereign individuals”. - - "Freedom is self-control", panarchistically interpreted, means, also, non-intervention with the voluntary and non-territorial and autonomous experiments and free actions of others, no matter how repugnant their beliefs are to oneself - not only "doing one's own thing" oneself, in one's on sphere. Only in this way do others remain free to control themselves as much or as little as they want to. - - I could go on in this vein for a long time - but if I have not yet got my meaning across, more pages will not help me, either. - - - How did I get involved with libertarian ideas? - On the one hand through reading some anarchist writings (probably long before I was 16 and I had some discussions with my father on this ), from books he had left with my grandmother in Berlin. There may have been other influences. Before I was 10, I watched Hitler driving past, slowly, on a parade and looked around, surprised, that none of the dissenters made an attempt on his life. - But I distinctly remember only one case, that of taking the Free Trade side, during the last years of high school and together with some school mates, against the to us absurd protectionist arguments of one of our main teachers. And once one has seen the light in this respect, one can work oneself through to seeing most other aspects of liberty. - Between 1952 and 1959 Ulrich von Beckerath introduced hundreds of reformist and revolutionary libertarian ideas to me. I tried to practise some of them publicly, without success and then tried to combine them in my first book-length manuscript, finished ca. 1961, for which I could not find a publisher. Instead, I began to include particular libertarian proposals in my Peace Plans series, since 1964. - - How did I get into prison work? By an advertisement, offering comparatively good pay and a chance to practice my school-English. I assumed then and still do that the restraint of wrong-doers does them no wrong and does society and freedom in general a favour, that crimes with victims are offences against basic human rights, that these rights deserve to be defended and that imprisonment for such offenders is preferable to shortening them by one head. That belief is unshaken. - But I have long seen that competing private and cooperative jails, operating productively with many of the normal incentives and more, quite profitably, would be much better than governmental ones and that competitive penal laws, court systems and prison and other penal systems - in accordance with individual choices, made in advance, are preferable to a single and imposed system for all, even to any supposedly ideal libertarian one. - From this it follows that I do not consider prison work as necessarily inconsistent with the aim of wanting to abolish the State and realize individual rights. - - Really rightful, economic and reformist prisons could do much to reduce crime, together with numerous constitutional, legislative, juridical, police reforms. I have elaborated my view on this in PEACE PLANS No.13. ... – Slightly revised: 10.12.04, 24.10.11, 27.8.12. - ANARCHO-CAPITALISM, CAPITALIST ANARCHISM, FREE MARKET ANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, VIOLENCE, NON-VIOLENCE

WAY OUT: A State which citizens may not freely leave may be said to have no way out. - Stanislaw Jerzy Lec. (Ein Staat, aus dem die Buerger nicht herauskoennen, hat wohl keinen Ausweg.) - One can exit or withdraw from or leave a State either through geographical emigration or through internal emigration, via individual secession and exterritorial autonomy. Most would prefer the latter, once they fully understood it and learned to practice it, given the chance to do so. - JZ 4.7.92, 15.1.93. - Individual secessionism is a way-out not only for victimised subjects but also for unpopular governments to perpetuate themselves as long as possible - among their voluntary followers. - JZ, 10.12.03.

WAY: Have it your way. If you think this is the way then this is the way - but only for you. - JZ, in pamphlet: TOLERANCE.

WAYS OF LIVING, FORCE & COERCION: Every act of coercion directed against an opinion or a way of living is in so far calculated to lessen the quantity of conscience in the society where such acts are practised. Of course, where ways of living interfere with the lawful rights of others, where they are not strictly self-regarding in all their details, it is necessary to force the dissenters, however strong may be their conscientious sentiment." - John Morley, On Compromise, 239. - Ways of living should be extended to embrace autonomous exterritorial experiments of a political, economic and social kind or "States within States" and yet exterritorially separated. And for all rational and adult people the test of self-regard would largely be determined by their voluntary membership. If they sacrificed, tortured, incarcerated or sexually assaulted e.g. children, or denied them medical aid, then other societies could and should rightfully and forcefully interfere with such actions in such societies. Children are not mere property, which parents or societies can use and abuse as they please. They need guardians and if their natural or present guardians fail them, then other and better guardians ought to step in. Under the old Athenian constitution anyone could make himself the guardian of a child - but only to the extent of upholding that child's rights. In doubtful cases international courts would have to decide. - JZ, 7.1.93. –PROTECTION, DEFENCE OF RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

WE VS. I: What, however, is the meaning of the should of a collective person? As long as the I prevails, my rights and duties can be determined by my reason alone. As soon as I speak of We, I am no longer authorized to follow my own understanding. I must become sure of the will of all to act in their name. …” – (Was hat aber das Sollen einer kollectiven Person fuer eine Bedeutung? Solange es heisst: Ich, so sind meine Rechte und Pflichten allein durch meine Vernunft bestimmbar; sobald ich aber sage: Wir, so bin ich nicht mehr befugt, meiner Einsicht allein zu folgen. Ich muss des Willens aller versichert sein, um in ihrem Namen zu handeln. …) – J. G. Fichte, Beitrag zur Berichtigung der Urteile des Publikums ueber die Franzoesische Revolution, 1793, S.299. – In this book he advocated individual secessionism and considered it to be the rightful essence of any revolution. Alas, in the struggle against emperor Napoleon he became a collectivist and territorial nationalist of the almost totalitarian type. Even great thinkers are children of their times and not always consistent. – JZ, 21.4.09. - COLLECTIVISM, DUTIES, REASON, INDIVIDUALISM, RIGHTS, SELF-DETERMINATION, SHOULD, OUGHT, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES VS. COLLECTIVIST MERE CLAIMS

WEAKNESS: The weak have one weapon: The errors of those who think they are strong. – G. Bidault, b. 1899, quoted in A. Andrews Quotations, p.443. – In politics and in military matters their very strength can at least sometimes be turned against them, as happens e.g. in forms of unarmed combat, like Judo and Jiu-Jitsu and, probably, many other forms. The conscripts of a regime and almost all its suppressed minorities can be turned against it. They are our “secret allies”, as Eugene Lyons described them in several books about the conflict with totalitarian communism. – Strength can be a weakness, or a delusion, not only regarding the nuclear war threat. – Soviet Russia had ca. 120 ethnic minorities and Red China has 56 – not to speak of all their other suppressed minorities or even their suppressed majority. – The centrifugal forces of any enforced territorial "unity" can be released. - JZ, 28.8.08. – BUREAUCRACY, LEADERSHIP, CONVENTIONAL WARFARE, CONSCRIPTION, MINORITIES, GOVERNMENTS IN EXILE, FROM POWERLESSNESS TO POWERFUL & GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT

WEAKNESS: Weak nations etc. are also all those which are territorially organized and thus expose themselves more or less or even invite the use of ABC mass murder devices against as large “targets” and also conventional mass murder devices used in military attacks upon “their” territories or populations. – JZ, 5.4.95, 8.9.08, 27.8.12. – The imagined strength of nuclear armed powers is also a weakness. For it they ever accidentally or intentionally make use of these "weapons" then their own subjects are also exposed to the mass murder devices of the territorial enemy regime. - JZ, 12.4.11. - WEAK NATIONS, WEAK STATES, WEAK SOCIETIES, STRENGTH, TERRITORIALISM, UNITY, NATIONALISM, NUCLEAR WAR THREATS, TARGETS, CONQUEST OPPORTUNITIES

WEALTH THROUGH PANARCHISM: There are several roads to wealth for most working people under full freedom. I have described them elsewhere. One approach is described in PEACE PLANS 19 c: Privatization of all public assets, with taxpayers or citizens receiving their shares in certified and transferable certificates. - International associations of Free Traders would be another way. So would private and cooperative old age insurance companies be that would productively invest, credit-insured and with value preserving clauses their premiums on long terms and at very high interest rates - which, nevertheless, would be only a fair share in the productivity of their investments. An Ideas Archive and Talent Registry would be another road to riches. Full employment, an end to inflations, deflations and stagflations or economic crises, a permanent book economy, based especially on full monetary and financial freedom would be another. - Peaceful and businesslike purchases of enterprises on terms, by their employees, would be another and could raise productivity and thereby living standards enormously. - JZ, 23.9.04. – For some more details see my Free Banking ABC on - JZ., 27.8.12. - RICHES & PROSPERITY, A PERMANENT BOOM ECONOMY, FULL EMPLOYMENT, DENATIONALIZATION OF ALL GOVERNMENT ASSETS

WEALTH: abolishing major taxes and removing excessive regulations could triple or quadruple the average person’s wealth virtually overnight.” - Jarret Wollstein, in talk: “Who Needs Uncle Sam?” - As reviewed in FREEDOM NETWORK NEWS. 12/07, p.19. – Whether that much or less, it would certainly be increased considerably. – But freedom options do go much further than that. How far? Panarchies should be free to demonstrate that to all the doubting Thomas’s. - JZ, 10.9.08. – We would have much less of a chance through betting, gambling and buying lottery tickets and yet these activities are already very popular. – JZ, 27.8.12.

WEALTH: Above all, governments are by nature incompetent at organizing or stimulating the production of wealth.” – From the cover of Prof. H. S. Ferns, The Disease of Government. - Also its free exchange. - JZ, 12.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, CENTRAL BANKING

WEALTH: It will be a shabby world where dependent wealth corrupts irresponsible power, and no doubt the loudest complaints against its inevitable results will come from those who insisted on making all wealth dependent and all power irresponsible.” – Dr. Rhodes Boyson, ed., Goodbye to Nationalization, p.28. – Not only the rich but also the poor are made dependent upon irresponsible power in all territorial States. – JZ, 30.8.08. - CORRUPTION, INTERVENTIONISM, LAWS, REGULATIONS, MIXED ECONOMIES, STATISM, MONOPOLISM, POWER, DEPENDENCY

WEALTH: James Gwartny in his Freedom Index explained the Prosperity is dependent on: Private property and the rule of law. Peruvian Hernando de Soto noted that 50 to 90% of people in 3rd world countries can’t get clear title to their land property. When the U.S. West was settled, property rights were settled by common law. They drew up deeds among themselves and when government did come it they accepted those deeds as legitimate. In 3rd world countries this hasn’t happened yet, which means the government can seize land and homes at any time. This makes property less valuable and prevents individuals form getting bank loans, etc.” - Mary Ruwart in speech: “How Any Country Can Become Rich”, as reviewed in: FREEDOM NETWORK NEWS. 12/07, p.15. – Again, if individuals and minorities were free to secede, this difficulty would also disappear. - Individual secessionism and exterritorially autonomous associationism are two individual rights to be included in an ideal declaration of individual rights and liberties – for which, so far, almost no one has shown any interest to me! Will you be one of the exceptions? – JZ, 10.9.08, 27.8.12.

WEALTH: James Gwartny in his Freedom Index explained the Prosperity is dependent on: Free trade and regulation. Trade openness is probably the best single predictor of whether a third-world country is going to have an increase in wealth creation. Countries employing trade protectionism (tariffs, quotas and trade barriers) lost significantly. Countries whose industries focused on what they could trade efficiently prospered. Countries that erected trade barriers experience lower wealth creation and the levels remained low. It can’t be emphasized (*) how important this is as the world becomes smaller and smaller through communication.” - Mary Ruwart in speech: “How Any Country Can Become Rich”, as reviewed in: FREEDOM NETWORK NEWS. 12/07, p.15/16. – Such facts are still not sufficiently communicated. Apart from that, a great difference in enlightenment would occur if Free Traders could freely secede and establish Free Trade between themselves, world-wide, while the remaining Protectionist volunteers could from then on only harm themselves. Free Trade for Free Traders, Protectionism only for Protectionists! (**) The experimental freedom and individual sovereignty and exterritorial autonomy for whole communities of volunteers – the panarchies of panarchism, are required here, too to speed up progress. – (*) too much? Enough? - JZ, 10.9.08.– (**) Likewise, full monetary freedom and full financial freedom for the advocates of it. It would mean an end to involuntary unemployment, sales difficulties, inflation, deflation and stagflation, i.e. economic crises, as well as of compulsory taxation and the governmental regulation of investments. – JZ, 27.8.12.

WEALTH: People around the world want to better their lives, to have more wealth, to live happily, to be better educated, and to live longer and happier lives. Freedom is the way, perhaps the only way, to achieve this. Once these facts are known … Governments will have to step aside and let people become rich.” - Mary Ruwart in speech: “How Any Country Can Become Rich”, as reviewed in: FREEDOM NETWORK NEWS. 12/07, p.16. – Governments are unlikely to step aside. But, allow individuals and minorities to step aside to do their own things for or to themselves and they will rapidly learn from their own mistakes and successes, much faster than any territorial governments ever did. Panarchism In Our Times! – JZ, 10.9.08. – PANARCHISM, PROSPERITY, A HIGHER STANDARD OF LIVING

WEALTH: Poverty increases and wealth declines proportionately to the growth of territorial governments. – JZ, 5.6.80, 29.8.08. – Apart, naturally, from the influence of science and technology. – JZ, 22.4.09.

WEALTH: The creators of wealth are shackled by controls, rules, regulations, tribunals, boards, commissions and enquiries. They are abused, mocked and insulted by politicians who would have us believe that we should be ‘protected’ against the wealth creators.” – Workers Party paper: “Government is a Wealth Hazard”, 1975. – Here not even exploitation through taxation is mentioned and that governments artificially produce and multiply poverty, while pretending to alleviate or abolish it in their “wars against poverty”. – JZ, 30.8.08. - We need protection mainly against territorial governments, as the main wealth destroyers and preventers of wealth production. - JZ, 12.4.11.

WEALTH: The wealth of nations? Nations are neither rich nor poor. Only individuals are or can be. Nations are fictions – unless they are associations of volunteers only. – JZ, 24.9.95, 30.8.08. - Territorial nations are artificial and misleading images or mere concepts, based upon flawed observations, ideas and opinions and coercively and monopolistically upheld for whole territories and their populations. If a nation consisted e.g of 10 million millionaires and 45 million who at last never go hungry and 45 million poor people, who, sometimes, do, would it then make sense to say that it is a rich nation or a poor nation? - JZ, 12.4.11. - DIS., RICHES, POVERTY, NATIONS

WEALTH: Wealth increases where ideas are free.” – Robert Anton Wilson, The Earth Will Shake, p.277. – Provided enough of the right and fully developed ideas-seeds are planted, watered and nursed and that they are not suffocated by weeds. – JZ, 8.6.92. - Freedom of expression and information for ideas mean much but are not enough. They must be accompanied by freedom of action and experimentation for volunteers! – JZ, 26.8.08. – Even the  Internet, in its present form, is not yet an effective enough market for e.g. libertarian ideas and talents, as any libertarian can confirm from his or her own experience. – JZ, 27.8.11. - PANARCHISM, IDEAS, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION & INFORMATION, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, PROSPERITY, DEVELOPMENT

WEAPONS: an unarmed citizenry has no way to resist the State.” – SANTA BARBARA NEWS AND REVIEW, “Chilean Calls Junta ‘Nazis’”, 21.9.73, p.8. – If the Leftists had come to power, instead, would they have treated their opponents any better? I read then that ca. 20,000 independent transport firms, truck and bus owners, etc., feared expropriation by the State socialist Allende government and thus welcomed the military take-over. – On an exterritorial autonomy basis the State socialists and the free marketeers could have peacefully coexisted, with individuals freely choosing between them, every day. – By now the State socialists would, probably, have lost most of their voluntary customers and would have only themselves to blame for this. - JZ, 29.8.08. – Not only arms and ammunition but also sufficient and suitable organization, aims and action programs are required to make efficient use of them. In other words, an ideal form of militia for the protection of genuine individual rights and liberties – to the extent that people wish to practise them among themselves. – JZ, 7.2.12. – GUN CONTROL LAWS, MILITIA, ARMS

WEAPONS: Governments are afraid of guns in the hands of the people – because the people might use them against their authoritarian governments. Surely, most governments have given the people enough reasons for resisting their governments, effectively, not only with ineffective territorial votes, or cases before government courts, which hardly ever stopped any legalized or illegal crime committed by any territorial government. – The first governmental wrong they ought to abolish, after its weapons monopoly is done away with, is the government’s territorial monopoly. It must be replaced by individual and group secessionism, combined with exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of voluntary communities. Leaving statist communities only for statists. This would, by the way, also eliminate targets for mass murder devices. It would also abolish monetary despotism and with it inflations, deflations, stagflations and involuntary mass unemployment. – JZ, 29.8.08. – GUN CONTROL LAWS, VICTIM DISARMAMENT, TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, MILITIA, VOTING

WEAPONS: Ideology counts. The only catch is – almost always when ideology counts, it does the counting with a sword.” – Christopher Anvil, Ideological Defeat, ANALOG, 9/72. – Ideologies tend to defeat themselves if they insist on a territorial monopoly without even bothering to explore the alternative of exterritorial autonomy or experimental freedom for their volunteers. – JZ, 29.8.08. – PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE, IDEOLOGIES, INTOLERANCE, VIOLENCE

WEAPONS: Most people have seen justifications for the use of firearms, e.g. in Westerns and in cops and robbers shows, on TV and in cinemas, dozens to hundreds of times and yet they remain still undecided on or even opposed to the rightful use of guns. Why? Don’t they trust themselves sufficiently with such tools? Just like they might not want to drive a racing car or fly a jet plane? Or a helicopter? If so, then, under freedom, they would simply abstain from such activities. But, not satisfied with that, they want to deny others the rightful and careful use of these tools, even in the defence of their basic rights and liberties! People who are so unreliable, irresponsible, ignorant, intolerant and prejudiced should not even be allowed to have a vote in a territorial State, no more so than children, madmen or convicts. I would certainly not want to have them in my community of volunteers – but others are welcome to them. – JZ, 29.8.08. – VOTING, GUN CONTROL LAWS

WEAPONS: Property owners and working people – arm, organize and train yourself with rightful weapons - against all looters and extortionists, especially the official ones. – JZ, 8.3.75. – “Aux arms citoyens!” – But arm yourself also with the knowledge required on how to use such weapons quite rightfully only, i.e., in the defence of individual rights and liberties – only against those, who suppress or threaten these rights. The very first “weapon” you ought to provide yourself with is a complete declaration of all individual rights and liberties, which territorial governments cannot or will not provide you with. – JZ, 29.8.08. - The fact that other such rights may still be discovered in the future should not deter us from declaring all those that have already been discovered, as well as we can, by now. - JZ, 13.4.11. - PEOPLE IN ARMS, IDEAL MILITIAS VS. TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, THE NUCLEAR WAR THREAT. TAXATION. - LIBERATION, VOLUNTARY TAXATION & VOLUNTARY STATE MEMBERSHIP, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, PANARCHISM, PERSONAL LAWS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL PEACEFUL MINORITIES

WEAPONS: We need more and better firearms for use against those ready and willing to use nuclear weapons and those producing them and keeping them in readiness, nuclear reactors included as open, secret or potential nuclear “weapons” factories. Nuclear weapons themselves could not be used by their defenders against the own people armed with conventional weapons and ready to destroy such mass murder devices. The government’s own forces could also be won over for this purpose. Especially with a panarchist program that would assure peace and a full employment program for all government employees in the private economy, based upon monetary and financial freedom. – Obviously, a lot of enlightenment has still to be provided on all these and related points. Numerous popular errors, myths and prejudices have created the present situation - where a handful of men can wipe out all of mankind. - JZ, 29.8.08. - NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, TERRITORIALISM, DISARMAMENT, UNILATERAL, BY THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES.

WEAPONS: What if irresponsible people get into government and I have no gun?” – Len Archer, 24.10.75. – Where ever any others in charge of any territorial government? – JZ, 29.8.08. – LEADERSHIP, RULERS, Q., LEGISLATORS, POLITICIANS, BUREAUCRATS, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENT, PRESIDENTS, PRIME MINISTERS, PREMIERS

WEAPONS: What kind of idiots would let themselves be deprived of handguns while leaving nuclear “weapons” – really only mass murder devices or anti-people “weapons” in the hands of politicians and military officers? – JZ, 22.4.83, 29.8.08. - TERRITORIALISM, NWT

WEB OF GROUP AFFILIATIONS: R. Bendix, in his English translation of G. Simmel, The Web of group affiliations. Mentioned in David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, page 120. - It's one of the "thousand" names for panarchism, which are, alas, still not fully listed. - DEFINITIONS, TERMS, PANARCHISM, NAMES

WEBER, MAX: Law in Economy and Society, translated by Edward Shils & Max Rheinstein, Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press, 54, on privileged legal order: p. I & VII.

WEBER, MAX: Rechtssoziologie (Sociology of Rights), Winckelmann, J. ed., Luchterhand, 1967, on personal law & private law enforcement with many historical instances.

WEBSITES WITH SOME PANARCHISTIC INFORMATION: - - There are many others either already mentioned in this compilation or not . I have not yet got around to pull all of them together. See e.g. und Dwight Johnson and R. C. B. Johnsson. – JZ, 27.8.12. - WORDPRESS.COM BLOG, PANARCHISTS: You can get to the blog now by using this url: - Dwight Johnson, 11.7.09.

WECKER, KONSTANTIN: A panarchist comment by John Zube, Dec. 1987, to writings by K. W., 119, in ON PANARCHY X, in PP 755.

WEIMAR REPUBLIC: CONSTITUTION, OF THE WEIMAR REPUBLIC: 11.8.1919, Article 109: It repealed the private autonomy of the lower nobility in matters of inheritance and family law. Thus this republic destroyed these republican self-government features still persisting under monarchy. - JZ - This republic also continued the monetary despotism of the German Empire, which had previously been clearly proposed in the Communist Manifesto of 1847. Thereby it continued the inflation of the Empire’s currency and led to the German Great Depression and thus to the Nazi Regime. Needless to say, it did not settle the problem posed by dissenting minorities in Germany. It remained essentially territorial. - JZ, 1.9.04, 27.8.12.

WEISBORT, STEVEN M.: Extraterritorial Regulation of Life Insurance, Huebner Foundation for Insurance Education Studies, Univ. of Pennsylvania, R.D. Irvin, 1975. (Seen at Macquarie Univ. Library, Sydney.) (Weisbart, Steven N.? Irwin?) - Practical men at work. Their experience might be invaluable for future autonomous minority groups. I'd like a copy but can't afford to buy most new or scarce second hand titles, nor do I find the time and energy to study them. - There is an army of political scientists, mostly on the wrong track, who should take over this chore and turn their sciences" into real ones. - JZ - They are saddled now by territorialist dogmas and beliefs just as they were formerly by religious ones. - JZ, 24.10.11, 27.8.12. – The same applies, as far as I know, to the Departments for Aboriginal Affairs and Red Indians. Total spending per head of the supposed beneficiaries – but mainly spent on the public servants involved, would, probably, still provide each Aboriginal or Red Indian with an above average income – if it were put directly into their hands. Naturally, such income transfers would not be rightful and rational either. – JZ, 27.8.12. - WELFARE STATE

WELFARE STATE: A study for the Association of Life Underwriters relates that for a dollar to reach the needy, churches spend 8 cents, charitable organizations spend 27cents, and the federal government spends $ 3.” - Dr. Laurance J. Peter. The territorial State is the least suitable institution to make any financial, monetary and currency decisions. Why should we assume its competence in this sphere when it is a failure in all others? - JZ, 13.4.11. - CHARITIES, CHURCHES, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, BUREAUCRACY

WELFARE STATE: A young cat or dog chasing its tail: The image of the average taxpayer trying to get a net benefit out of the Welfare State. – JZ, 6.2.77, 7.2.12. – And we still pretend that humans are intelligent animals – JZ, 4.9.08. - Well, at least the politicians and bureaucrats and some other hand-out recipients do make taxation pay for them. What can and do they offer us in exchange? - Anything that we do want or need and this at genuine and competitive prices? - All, who are dissatisfied with these services should become free to opt out of them and their costs. - JZ, 13.4.11.

WELFARE STATE: All the supposedly good causes ought to be paid for only by those volunteers who selected them for themselves, not by tax slaves. – JZ, 21.1.98. – VOLUNTARISM, PANARCHISM

WELFARE STATE: Any man who thinks he is going to be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him should take a close look at the American Indian.” – Hugh Allen, READER’S DIGEST, 1/67. - How prosperous could many of them become and this how fast, under full exterritorial autonomy? I mean those, who are not satisfied with e.g. hunting, fishing, handicrafts and merely permitting e.g. gambling casinos in their reserves? - Are they enough aware of their freedom rights to push for them? I believe that many to most Americans would sympathize with them if they made this attempt. - The self-made men and self-help efforts are still widely respected there, although not by the territorial Local, State and Federal Governments. - RED INDIANS, RESERVATIONS, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY FOR VOLUNTEERS

WELFARE STATE: Benevolence is a natural instinct of the human mind; when A sees B in distress, his conscience always urges him to entreat C. to help him.” – Sydney Smith, 1771-1845. – The muddle-heads mis-educated in government-controlled schools cannot even clearly distinguish between compulsory and voluntary charity, compulsory and voluntary education, compulsory and voluntary military service, compulsory and voluntary taxation, compulsory and optional and competing monies, compulsory and voluntary voting, compulsory and voluntary membership in States and societies, territorial laws and personal laws, bills of rights and liberties declared by territorial governments and those declared by rights and freedom loving individuals and groups. – No wonder, that they find themselves in a mess, almost anywhere, at least partly with their own consent. - JZ, 7.9.08. - JOKES, PHILANTHROPY OR CHARITY BY PROXY, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, THE SANCTION OF THE VICTIMS, CONSENT, DEMOCRACY, BENEVOLENCE

WELFARE STATE: Can we, then, afford the welfare state? Certainly not in its present form.” - David Moller, THE BULLETIN, 2.1.77. - Cut out the "we"! - Let those, who want it for themselves, suffer under it, at their own risk and expense. All the others should become free to opt out from under it. - JZ, 13.4.11.

WELFARE STATE: Conservatives do not see that the welfare state is not only inefficient but also increasingly unwanted. Millions of working-class Mums would jump at the chance of an education voucher so that they could cock a snoot at a tyrannical official or lordly headmaster. (Islington and Hackney Parents Action Group saw the point of the voucher in twenty minutes.) Millions of families would jump at a health voucher with which they could insure for more personal or earlier attention than they can get out of the NHS. But how slow Conservatives are to see the political point – the reward of millions of votes! (Are they misled by their party managers?)” - Arthur Seldon, Welfare, in 1985, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p.44. - Are these limited options to be the only options for them to opt out from under the present territorial welfare State or should that option become generalized, as it is under panarchism or polyarchism? – JZ, 7.9.08. – Can we afford not to get rid of the Welfare State? It should be tolerated only for its remaining believers, all volunteers, under exterritorial autonomy or personal laws. – JZ, 7.2.12.

WELFARE STATE: Cut back the Welfare State!” – Source? Widespread opinion. – This would be easy only if taxation were already voluntary and individual and group secessionism were permitted. – JZ, 5.9.09.

WELFARE STATE: dismantle the welfare dinosaur.” – From an advertisement of the Workers Party in NATIONAL TIMES, 2.2.76. - Easier said than done, unless we become free to opt out from under it. For the remaining victims of it could go on, at their expense and risk, as long as they are willing to tolerate it. - JZ, 13.4.11.

WELFARE STATE: Each exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers will be at liberty to provide its own welfare, insurance, monetary, credit, clearing and financing services and will be exempted from all corresponding present taxes, levies and all other restrictions and of those of all other voluntary communities. – JZ, 14.12.92, 7.9.08. - PANARCHISM

WELFARE STATE: For year after year the Conservative Party has ignored or stared blindly at the growing concentration of evidence that the welfare state has failed. (*) For a quarter of a century increasing strain and breakdown, academic analysis, field research such as the IEA’s and day-to-day consumer dissatisfaction have all pointed in one direction: the welfare state is a noble failure that should be re-thought, re-designed and re-constructed. (**) But, here more than elsewhere, the Conservative Party’s attitude has been: We can run the system better than ‘they’ can! Socialism is evidently nasty – except under Conservatism.” – Arthur Seldom, Welfare, in 1985, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p. 41. - (*) And it had to fail, as a result of its own inherent flaws. – Even today nobody is free to opt out from under it. That is the main reason why it still exists. – (**) Was it really “noble” - on a compulsory basis, under a territorial monopoly, under compulsory taxes? – And should only one alternative be allowed to it for all, instead of as many alternatives as voluntary communities wish to have among themselves? - JZ, 1976 & 7.9.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, Q., DIS.

WELFARE STATE: Fortunately, I believe that elementary economic analysis can help us understand why the ‘welfare’ state fails to preserve, let alone elevate, minimum standards and will continue to fail until government policy departs radically from the present system of relying for finance on ever-mounting taxation.” – Ralph Harris in “Down With the Poor”, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson. – Under continued territorialism positive radical departures can only rarely be expected. Under full individual consumer sovereignty even towards all kinds of political, social and economic systems they are not only possible but very likely and also very likely to spread widely fast. – JZ, 6.9.08. – Governments do also and likewise quite wrongly rely on inflation and further increases in government debts, at the expense of future taxpayers, to “finance” their excess spending of the funds they legally robbed in the first place. JZ, 27.8.12. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, VS. TERRITORIALISM WITH ITS COERCION, MONOPOLY & EXPLOITATION

WELFARE STATE: it is immoral to rob or to enslave one man for the purpose of helping another.” – Workers Party platform draft, 1975. – All too true! But, as the fate of the W.P. itself indicated, it is “good” territorial politics as long as no one is free to secede from it. – JZ, 7.9.08.

WELFARE STATE: It is obvious that government would not take from some and give to others were the others to reject the loot. It follows them that the recipients of ill-gotten gains are as sinful as the government, which effects the transfer by force. (*) – Only the hardened professional criminals – a fraction of the population – would personally so indulge themselves. The vast majority would refrain from immoral action were it a you-and-me relationship. Honesty would prevail. However, when government does the coercive taking and handing out, most citizens – those who do no thinking for themselves – are relieved of any sense of indulging in crimes. Instead they experience a false sense of absolution. Their lack of vision obscures reality!” – Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 3/78. - - (*) However, since all are or were much taxed, directly or indirectly and largely helpless to resist that taxation, they consider a government handout often as a part-indemnification for what has been taken from them. Thus stopping compulsory taxation must rather come from a general denationalization and demolition of the Welfare State via individual secessionism, exterritorial autonomy for volunteers and a tax strike towards the existing territorial governments, including a monetary and financial revolution, to disable them from financing themselves through inflations and public debts certificate sales or forced loans. – Also from alternative institutions, which, on a voluntary, insurance, credit and mutual aid basis not just private charity, would take better care of the at least temporarily helpless people than does any territorial government. - JZ, 6.9.08.

WELFARE STATE: It will no more wither away than the Marxist state. It should be pruned of its superfluous parts, piece by piece, as a conscious act of policy. A good doctor peels the plaster off a healing limb. But the officialdom of the welfare state will not preside over its dissolution even when and where the ‘working classes’ want it.” - Arthur Seldon, Welfare, in 1985, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p.46. – Let the victims decide, so to speak, by voting with their feet! - It would wither away under the right of individuals - and of whole dissenting minority groups - to secede from the State and do their own things for or to themselves, under personal laws and full exterritorial autonomy, an alternative which the IEA and UK Conservatives, generally, have, alas, not yet seriously considered. – They are all too much territorialist nationalists for that. – JZ, 7.9.08. - PANARCHISM

WELFARE STATE: learn not to blame the average welfare mother with her pitiable child-support check, but the sixty-thousand-dollar-a year public official whose nonproductive way of life keeps everybody else destitute.” - L. Neil Smith, Lever Action, A Mountain Media Book, 2001, p.15. – Rather, the territorial statism of almost everybody is to blame. – JZ, 27.9.07. - Mostly not persons but wrong ideas, principles, laws and institutions are to blame. None of them should be forced upon anybody. - JZ, 13.4.11. - & PUBLIC SERVANTS, TERRITORIALISM

WELFARE STATE: My welfare is no one else’s business.” – Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 5/73. - Alas, the territorial State made it its own and even Leonard E. Read did not make it his business to promote the abolition of the territorial State. He only imagined that he could help to make it harmless by limiting its power and this without touching its essential power, namely, its territorialism, which allows it to grow from weakness to mass murderous strength, like even the USA did. – JZ, 7.9.08. – PANARCHISM, TERRITORIALISM, LIMITED GOVERNMENT, NWT

WELFARE STATE: Never ask of him who has, but of him who wishes you well.” – Spanish proverb. – If applied to the like-minded volunteers of panarchies, welfare among them should be no problem. – JZ, 7.9.08. - However, mostly they would rather resort to their self-help options, insurance, credits or mutual aid contracts than charity. - Anyhow, whatever they would do among themselves, it would be THEIR choice. - JZ, 13.4.11.

WELFARE STATE: Official handouts and subsidies will only end when all those, who are now forced to pay for them, can freely opt out of these income transfer schemes and establish their own alternative welfare, insurance, credit and mutual aid organizations of whatever kind, which they may like among themselves. – JZ, 7.9.89. – It mainly looks after the welfare of politicians and bureaucrats. Its other coercive red-distribution of capital and earnings serves mainly that purpose, it buys votes and thus re-election for the power addicts. – JZ, 7.2.12.

WELFARE STATE: Slavery, as we ordinarily understand the term, died out, but it gave way to a servitude of each to all, when each was locked tight in an immense and artificial organization of society.” – W. G. Sumner, State Interference, in: War and Other Essays, p.215. - STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION, REGULATION

WELFARE STATE: Taking all households together, a calculation based on 1967 taxes and benefits showed that two-thirds of the total value of state benefits went to families whose tax payments were at least equal to the value of benefits received. Thus, the most welfare payments go to families who could afford to buy for themselves through private insurance the same value of welfare as the state provides, if they were relieved of the tax which the state levies to provide it for them.” - Priscilla Polanyi, in “Down With the Poor”, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p.114. – Let people secede from the Welfare State! – As sovereign “consumers” of competitively supplied State and societal services they would, usually, make better choices for themselves that bureaucrats and politicians are able and willing to make for them. - JZ, 6.9.08.

WELFARE STATE: the cost of ‘welfare’ is borne largely by those who are its intended beneficiaries.” – E. P. Middleton. – This would be O.K. if it were openly, consistently and intentionally organized. – JZ, 6.5.80. – Among volunteers only! – JZ, 4.9.08.

WELFARE STATE: The incontestable fact remains that the working masses of the Western democratic world have secured for themselves a greater freedom and a higher welfare at a far lesser cost than “the blood, sweat, and tears” paid by their Russian brothers for their present lot.” – Sydney Hook, “Revolution, Reform and Social Justice.” – Quoted in Bachman’s Book of Freedom Quotations, p.120. - The question is: How much better off would they be by now, if they had, at least experimentally and for volunteers only, introduced full economic freedom, including full monetary and financial freedom, instead of merely some fractions of it, all too much mixed-up with State Socialism? – JZ, 4.9.08. – Moreover, how much sooner would several of the communist regimes have collapsed and by how much would the influence of State Socialist ideas have been reduced, all over the world? The contrast between somewhat free populations and obviously un-free ones must become much more obvious than it has been so far in order to “take the wind out of the sails” of the statists. – JZ, 27.8.12. - STATE SOCIALISM OR EXTREME MONOPOLY CAPITALISM, STATISM, GOVERNMENTALISM, INTERVENTIONISM

WELFARE STATE: The more numerous public instrumentalities become, the more is there generated in citizens the notion that everything is to be done for them, and nothing by them. Every generation is made less familiar with the attainment of desired ends by individual action or private agencies; until, eventually, governmental agencies come to be thought of as the only available agencies.” – Herbert Spencer, The Man versus the State, 1884. - PUBLIC SERVICES, BUREAUCRACY, CIVIL SERVICE, PATERNALISM, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, DEPENDENCY, SERF-MENTALITY, INDIVIDUAL INITIATIVE, INDIVIDUALISM, SELF-HELP, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, STATISM

WELFARE STATE: The state is the great fiction by which everybody tries to live at the expense of everybody else.” - Frederic Bastiat - Imagine we had a common fund, raised by taxation, for all kinds of entertainments, hobbies, amusements, leisure activities and luxuries. – Would there not be parties and election struggles and campaigns and State budgets for all of them? We have already gone all too far in this direction, with xyz hand-outs to voluntary associations, even those with massive support from numerous volunteers, like sports activities and arts. – JZ, 23.1.08. – “Leisure centres”, government sponsored, and paid for by tax payers, is one of the new schemes of the statists. – JZ, 21.4.09. – As if the politicians and bureaucrats, the clowns with power, did not already supply us with enough circus performances – and all too bloody shows with their wars. – JZ, 22.4.09. - STATE, TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION & HAND-OUTS

WELFARE STATE: The use of the state for the alleged purpose of assisting the disadvantaged has cause enormous growth in the size, power and cost of government. Like a giant octopus, government now intrudes into every aspect of our lives. It is seriously threatening the freedom of every individual and removing from his hands the control over his own destiny. – The bureaucracy grows larger every year until government is now the biggest employer in society – in Australia one in every three employees works for some arm of government. The taxation needed to support this apparatus is now consuming wealth as fast as it is being created. It is destroying the incentive to work, to save, to invest and to create jobs. – Government has become the master rather than the servant, the consumer and destroyer rather than the protector. Its record is one of taxation, conscription, inflation, confiscation and regulation. - - It is time to reverse the tide.” - PROGRESS PARTY PLATFORM, ca. 1976/77 - - Thus let us break down this power by individual sovereignty, leading to individual and group secessionism and competition from exterritorialy autonomous minority groups, all only of volunteers and engaging in their own kinds of political, economic and social experiments, in the efforts to provide for themselves something much better and cheaper and also to set attractive examples to all others on how this can be done. – JZ, 6.9.08. – PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, MINORITY AUTONOMY

WELFARE STATE: The welfare state has led people to believe that the government should protect the population from every misfortune, every eventuality, every folly – except of course the folly of surrendering their freedom to the government.” – Betty Noble, GOOD GOVERNMENT, June 73. - STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, FREEDOM, WARDS OF GOVERNMENTS INSTEAD OF SELF-RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS

WELFARE STATE: The welfare state has never been approved by public opinion: neither in macro nor in micro measure. General elections offering 57 varieties provide no indicator of opinion on single policies. And micro-indicators, as in field sample surveys that have recorded apparent public approval of state education or the National Health Service, have been useless since they have not been based on the costs of alternatives. The only cost-based surveys, those devised by Harris and Seldon and conducted in 1963, 1965 and 1970, (*) showed a marked and growing preference for a choice of private welfare services. But they were cavalierly ignored by Conservatives (and by Social Democrats and Liberals).” - Arthur Seldon, Welfare, in 1985, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p.46. - But then it is quite unreasonable to expect any territorial government to listen to reasoning and facts instead of to its own special interests. – JZ, 7.9.08. - VOTING, DEMOCRACY, REFERENDUM, GENERAL PLATFORMS, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY, TERRITORIALISM, PUBLIC OPINION, SPECIAL INTERESTS OF GOVERNMENTS & PUBLIC SERVANTS

WELFARE STATE: The welfare state has, after 25 years (or 50 years, or 100 years, according to how it is defined), failed to make people independent of it.” - Arthur Seldon, Welfare, in 1985, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p.46. - Independence of it was not the intention of those who introduced it and of those who still run it! – On the contrary: With it they managed to tie many votes to themselves and the voters of involuntary taxpayers and State-subjects are almost never asked for and counted regarding taxes and State-membership as well as subordination to the territorial State, where their own votes could do them the most good. - JZ, 7.9.08, 14.4.11. - VOTING, REFERENDUM, COMPULSORY STATE MEMBERSHIP OR SUBORDINATION, TERRITORIALISM, TAXATION, DEMOCRACY

WELFARE STATE: The Welfare State would fast decline if net-taxpayers showed towards net-welfare recipients, of all types, the same moral disapproval that they now have towards robbers, murderers and rapists. – JZ, 27.7.78, 4.9.08. – However, that is only to be expected under full employment resulting from full economic freedom, including full monetary and financial freedom. While the territorial State still produces as much involuntary poverty as it does, the sympathy with and pity for its artificially impoverished and unemployed victims will tend to predominate and, instead of doing away with this territorial State they will support it – and feel good about it! – JZ, 4.9.08. – SANCTION OF THE VICTIMS, POVERTY, SYMPATHY, ECONOMIC FREEDOM, MONETARY & FINANCIAL FREEDOM, UNDERDOGS, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM

WELFARE STATE: The whole country run like a big commune – but without individual consent and with greatly reduced escape opportunities. – JZ, 4.11.78. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

WELFARE STATE: The worst form of tyranny the world has ever known: The tyranny of the weak over the strong. It is the only tyranny that lasts.” – Oscar Wilde, in A. Andrews quotations, p.480. – Actually, the tyranny of the politicians and of their bureaucracy is also involved and it is large, strong, armed, organized and dangerous and has disarmed all too many of its tribute payers and other victims or pawns and does not allow them to secede and establish just and sound alternative communities for themselves, under personal laws and full exterritorial autonomy. It even made sure that most of them know almost nothing about such alternatives. – JZ, 7.9.08, 27.8.12. – PANARCHISM, WEAKNESS, STRENGTH, ORGANIZATION, WEAPONS, GUNS, MILITIAS, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM, TERRITORIALISM, MODERN SERFDOM & FEUDALISM

WELFARE STATE: There are still Conservatives who simply do not understand that people may prefer welfare of their own choice to welfare decided by their supposed betters.” – Arthur Seldon, Welfare, in 1985, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p.43.

WELFARE STATE: There is a modern abuse … which consists in using the law to impose pet social aims on society, which use up the time and energy of the citizens in other aims than those chosen by themselves for their own happiness.” – W. G. Sumner, Liberty, in Selected Essays, p.54. – It generalized the delusions, privileges and exploitation of protectionism and took the place of absolute monarchism and other forms of personalized despotism. Instead, we get now the “great” politicians and bureaucrats and between them and their courts or departments they cost us even more, always under the false pretence that they could and would serve us more, while, in balance, we are worse off with their “help” (at our expense and for their benefit) than without it. – It does not even work well enough and economically enough as an immense insurance company. – However, to each and everyone the kind of Welfare State that pleases them – but always only at the own expense and risk! - JZ, 7.2.12.

WELFARE STATE: There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him.” – Robert Heinlein - & TAXATION

WELFARE STATE: There’s not a single plank in the platform of the welfare state that was put there because of a genuine demand by a genuine majority. A welfarist government is always up for grabs, and various factions, pressure groups, special interests, causes, ideologies seize the levers of government in order to impose their programs on the rest of the nation.” – Edmund Opitz, THE FREEMAN, Jan. 77, p.40. - TERRITORIALISM, SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, LOBBIES, STATISM, TAXATION, SUBSIDIES

WELFARE STATE: Though the people support the government, the government should not support the people.” – Grover Cleveland. – As if it could! – And why should they support any territorial government, i.e., any government not individually chosen by themselves and for themselves only? - JZ, 7.9.08, 27.8.12. - Q.

WELFARE STATE: We maintain that there is no better way to secure social welfare than to recognize the principle of the sovereignty of the individual over himself, and the rights of each to do as he pleases within the limits of equal freedom.” – Victor Yarros, LIBERTY, No. 339, May 16, 1896, p.4. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

WELFARE STATE: Welfare provided by individuals and their contracts for themselves, not a pretended welfare expensively organized from above and at the price of impoverishing taxes. – JZ, 3.7.89.

WELFARE STATE: Welfare States only for those, who still believe in them. They alone should be the beneficiaries and the tax payers for such systems. And they should be exposed to free competition from exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers who made other arrangements for themselves. – JZ, 4.12.86, 7.9.08, 14.4.11. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, SELF-RESPONSIBILITY

WELL-ADJUSTED: A well adjusted person is one who makes the same mistake twice, without getting nervous.” – Jane Heard, ANALOG, 2/90, p.10. – Territorial governments must be well adjusted. For they manage to make the same mistake not only twice but dozens to hundreds of times. – And we are all too well adjusted to them, for we put up with this, at our expense and risk! – JZ, 7.9.08. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTS, SANCTION OF THE VICTIMS, JOKES, RED.

WELLING, WOODROW J., (WOODY WELLING): ON PANARCHY: 16, 52, 53, 72, in PEACE PLANS No. 505. - 102, 103, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. - - In ON PANARCHY XIV, in PP 870. - - 100-101, in ON PANARCHY XV, in PP 879. - 39, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PP 901.


WERKHEISER, DON: Voluntary Associations, plan 39, page 21, in ON PANARCHY II, in PP 506.

WEST, THE: He saw before most of his contemporaries that Western men had their destinies in their own hands as never before.” – G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p.15. – Western men have their destinies in their own hands as never before. – but only if they adopt the right principles, ideas and institutions and remain no longer addicted to territorial statism. – JZ, 8.9.08. - DESTINY, FATE, DIS.

WESTLAKE, J.: International Laws, 2 vols., 2nd. ed., Cambridge, 1910-13, on private or civil international law. - The whole system of private international law is an important exception to the exercise of territorial jurisdiction, but being founded in international comity and constituting, in fact, a part of municipal law, it does not fall within the province of public international law. See Phillimore, op. cit., vol. iv, pp. 1 et seq.; Westlake, A Treatise on Private International Law (6th. ed., London, 1922), p. 1.“ – A footnote in Liu’s book on Extraterritoriality, page 18.

WESTPHALIA, TREATY OF: Indeed, there is further evidence of the spirit of Westphalia; foreign intervention is prohibited by the Treaty of Westphalia. Article LXIV of the treaty reads (emphasis added): “And to prevent for the future any Differences arising in the Politick State, all and every one of the Electors, Princes and States of the Roman Empire, are so establish'd and confirm'd in their antient Rights, Prerogatives, Libertys, Privileges, free exercise of Territorial Right, as well Ecclesiastick, as Politick Lordships, Regales, by virtue of this present Transaction: that they never can or ought to be molested therein by any whomsoever upon any manner of pretence.” Thus, the idea that foreign intervention is supposedly going to be avoided by World Government is implicitly present also in the old treaty. – RCBJ review of LIU? – TERRITORIALISM

WHAT IS SUPREMELY POLITICAL? Somewhere I saw or heard the term: "supremely political". What was meant by it? What does really turn something "political" and more so? I hold that it is the underlying ideology of exclusive territories under collectivist sovereignty and uniform rule, constitutions, laws and jurisdictions. If that is the case then, I hold, we should rather become supremely apolitical - as a matter of liberation, peace and justice and sheer survival, at least with regard to all territorial politics. Exterritorial and autonomous politics is apolitical in the conventional sense, since it is practised only among volunteers and establishes natural law and individual rights relations between them as their international law. -JZ, 22.11.90, 14.1.93. - SUPREMELY POLITICAL, APOLITICAL, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM

WHEATEN, H.: Elements of International Law, 8th ed., by R. H. Dana, Boston, 1866.

WHIGS: And since, if there must be labels, I would acknowledge Old (i.e. pre-1789) Whig as defined by Friedrich Hayek (1), or economic liberal as used by Samuel Brittan (2), I may perhaps touch a chord in what Lord Coleraine has identified as the still small voice of Whiggism in the Conservative Party (3). – Arthur Seldon in 1985, ed. by Dr. Rhodes Boyson, p.40. – (1) “Why I am not a Conservative”, in “The Constitution of Liberty”, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1960. – (2) Capitalism and the Permissive Society, Macmillan, 1973; Participation without Politics, Hobart Paper Special (No. 62), IEA, 1975. – (3) For Conservatives Only, Tom Stacey, 1970. – All of them are still territorialists conservatives, and thus opposed to complete individual sovereignty, experimental freedom under exterritorial autonomy and personal laws for volunteers. – JZ, 8.9.08. - Obviously, the modern "Liberals" are even worse. - JZ, 14.4.11. - LIBERALS, CLASSICAL & MODERN, LIBERTARIANS, LAISSEZ-FAIRE ADVOCATES, PANARCHISTS, CONSERVATIVES, LABELS, DEFINITIONS

WHISTON, THOMAS, Medieval Iceland and the Absence of Government. - Thomas Whiston - Medieval Iceland and the Absence of Government - Ludwig von Mises Institute, Daily Articles, December 25, 2002.

WHITAKER, BEN: Editor, Minorities a Question of Human Rights? Pergamon Press, 1984, 131pp, JZL. - The present evils are listed but, apparently, none but territorial statist non-solutions are offered. - JZ

WHITE RUSSIANS: Those defecting after the revolution to Serbia, were considered and acted as an exterritorial community. - Hint by Ulrich von Beckerath. Consider this as a search notice for literature or a tip for a dissertation. – JZ, n.d.

WHITE SUPREMACY? BLACK SUPREMACY? GREEN SUPREMACY? – Yes, e.g. for all “whites”, who agree with them over all whites who agree with them. But also Black Supremacy for all Blacks who desire it over all Blacks who agree with them. Genuine self-governments also for all kinds of Greens over their own affairs. Self-government, voluntary governments, competing governments, experimental governments, all for their voluntary supporters only, whether they are statists or limited government libertarians or any other kinds of statists. But also all kinds of free societies for all kinds of libertarians and anarchist who desire them for themselves. They can all peacefully coexist, just like religious groups do by now in most countries, as long as none of them claims any territorial monopoly. All of them can also be as world-wide and united across frontiers as they want to be. All based upon individual sovereignty, individual choice, voluntarism and full exterritorial autonomy and thus experimental freedom for each such group. All under their own personal laws, constitutions, jurisdictions and other institutions, always at their own expense and risk only and all subject to individual and group secessions from them for all who are disappointed by them. To that extent all of them could and would present a united front against all the remaining intolerant people, territorial governments, fanatics, fundamentalists, meddlers, authoritarians, aggressors, interventionists private and official totalitarian terrorists and war mongers. Each group or community to be “the smith of its own fate.” – All united in diversity, in doing their own things for or to themselves only. – The Greens determining their own agriculture, gardening, natural parks and tree planting etc. on their own properties, as long as they don’t endanger their neighbors thereby, e.g. during storms and fires. - JZ, 27.8.08, 14.4.11. - TOLERANCE FOR ALL THEIR TOLERANT ASSOCIATIONS, ACTIONS & EXPERIMENTS, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIALISM

WHITE, WILLIAM CHARLES: Chinese Jews, A Compilation of Matters Relating to the Jews of K'ai-feng Fu., 2nd. ed., with an introduction by Cecil Roth, Univ. of Toronto Press, 1966, published and distributed by Paragon Book Reprint Corp., N.Y. - Wanted by JZ

WHITEHEAD, ALFRED NORTH: Adventures of Ideas, A Brilliant History of Mankind's Great Thoughts, A Mentor Book, published by The New American Library, 1933, 1955, JZL. - I did not find it full of adventurous, great and brilliant ideas or descriptions, on the contrary, rather a swamp of generalizations that do not interest me. However, on page 65 there is an interesting observation: "The organization of professions by means of self-governing institutions places the problem (? JZ) of liberty at a new angle. For now it is the institution which claims liberty and also exercises control. In ancient Egypt the Pharaoh decided, acting through his agents. In the modern world a variety of institutions have the power of action without immediate reference to the State. This new form of liberty which is the autonomous institution limited to special purposes, was especially exemplified in the guilds of the middle ages; and that period was characterized by a remarkable growth of civilize genius. The meaning that - in England at least - was then assigned to the word 'liberty' illustrates the projection of the new social structure upon the older form of customary determination. For a 'liberty' did not then mean a general freedom, but a special license to a particular group to organize itself within a special field of action. For this reason 'liberties' were sometimes a general nuisance. - Of course the Catholic Church was the great 'liberty' which first confronted the Roman Empire, and then dominated mediaeval life..." - - These liberties amounted to vast privileges and monopolies, not to competitive enterprises and confederations or communities of volunteers. They pre-empted, like the State does, whole spheres of action and extorted monopoly returns for their services. Their liberty was, largely, licence. There was no voluntary membership in them and no competition among them in the same sphere. Monopolism prevailed. - On the bottom of page 122 he brings a remark that can well be applied e.g. to publishing exclusively on paper or electronic media only, to territorialism and monetary despotism, to the employer-employee relationships, to the decision-making power on war and peace and many other mistakes or evils: "But modern scholarship and modern science reproduce the same limitations as dominated the bygone Hellenistic epoch, and the bygone Scholastic epoch. They canalize thought and observations within predetermined limits, based upon inadequate metaphysical assumptions, dogmatically assumed. The modern assumptions differ from older assumptions, not wholly for the better...." Whitehead also rarely thinks outside of popular channels. Compare Kuhn on scientific revolutions and their dependency upon the gradual acceptance of new models of thought. - JZ, 29.1.1999.

WHY PANARCHISM? There are dozens of reasons for it, many of which I have stated in my two peace books. The main is that it corresponds to individual rights and liberties and to the nature of men and of the differences between them. - JZ, 3.9.04. – Q.

WHY: Why did some writers like e.g. Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Herbert Spencer and Roy Childs retreat from the panarchistic stands they had once taken? - None of them seems to have left a record on why they changed their clear and principled previous stand. That seems to indicate that their motives for this change of mind are suspect. - JZ, 3.9.04.

WICQUEFORT, A. VAN: The Ambassador and his Functions, trans. by John Digby, London, 1716. - To some extent panarchism would turn everyone into an ambassador, propagandist, experimenter and demonstrator for his own ideals. - JZ, 3.9.04.

WIDENGREN, G.: The Status of the Jews in the Sassanian Empire, IRANICA ANTIQUA, I, 1961, 117-62. (A Persian empire, 226-637.)


WILL, FOREIGN WILL & OBLIGATION: ein fremder Wille verbindet nie." (A foreign will does no oblige.) Fichte, in Beitrag ..., 1793. "Kein fremder Wille ist Gesetz fuer uns." (No foreign will is law for us.) Fichte, ibid, p.80. - LAW, TERRITORIALISM

WILL, GEORGE F., Entrepreneurial Federalism. - NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE, March 13 2006, page 72, Let States Be Entrepreneurs, by George F. Will argues in favor of competitive federalism, although George F. Will calls it "entrepreneurial federalism". Entrepreneurial federalism might be a better name than competitive federalism. Competitive federalism suggests that existing governments compete with each other, while entrepreneurial federalism emphasizes the importance of allowing people to create new governments to compete with the existing governments. I think that competition between new governments and existing governments is more important than competition between existing governments. However, George F. Will says nothing about new governments, so George F. Will is probably not in favor of allowing people to create new governments, so George F. Will's use of the phrase entrepreneurial federalism is misleading. - Hint in links of Kenneth Howlett.

WILL: a human being’s Will is never in an external organization.” – Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus III, p.156. – Not even in an association of volunteers, with a genuinely common objective? – JZ, 30.8.08. – At least part of a person's interests can be represented in a voluntary association, even if only temporarily. He must remain free to secede from it. Only thus can he assert his individualism against this group, whenever this seems necessary to him, be it a chess club or an anarchist or libertarian society. Both of the latter can exist in uncounted varieties, just like various statist groups. But the latter run out of territories for their practice. Without a territory of their own, they can only propose alternative statist utopias. Panarchistic societies never run out of territories, because they do not need any. They would have in common only their voluntarism, their personal laws, their exterritorial autonomy. All too much coercive, intolerant and monopolistic statism is represented in the present territorial States. Anyhow, I find the above Wilson/Shea statement not sufficiently illuminating. In uncounted ways people can or wish to join their wills for xyz purposes, if free to do so. We are individuals and remain individuals but also associating and dis-associating individuals. - JZ, 14.4.11. - DIS., FREE WILL, ORGANIZATIONS, PANARCHISM, INSTITUTIONS, VOLUNTARISM, MAN, EXTERNALITIES, DIS., INDIVIDUALISM

WILL: Do what thou wilt.” – Francois Rabelais. – As long as you leave others their will while they leave you alone. – JZ, 23.6.93. - PANARCHISM

WILL: If and when the American people want freedom above everything else, if they say with their hearts “give me liberty or give me death”, income taxation will go.” – Chodorov, The Income Tax … p.233. – The income tax will be abolished for its opponents, quite by the way, once they have achieved the freedom to go their own way, as sovereign individuals and as exterritorially autonomous communities of like-minded people, opting out of the territorial State and joining or establishing their own and exterritorially quite autonomous communities of volunteers, or merely making their individual contracts with any of a variety of peacefully coexisting and competing service providers. – JZ, 30.8.08, 27.8.12. - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, POLYARCHY ETC.

WILL: liberty to follow my own will in all things, … and not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary will of another man.” – John Locke, quoted, more completely and qualified, in “The Free Man’s Almanac”, for July 6.

WILL: Man’s life is not determined by the law of causality of the material world, but rather by the free intuitive choice of his “ego”, which expresses itself in deliberate acts of the will.” - Alexander Kerensky, “The Kerensky Memoirs.” – How much, or, rather, how little freedom of action and experimentation do we have now, when it comes to alternative political, economic and socials systems under territorialism, i.e., when many of the most important decisions are monopolized by a few and then imposed upon millions? - He certainly did not get his will for Russia, not even for his own volunteers. - JZ, 14.4.11. - MAN, LIFE, DETERMINATION

WILL: The will flags when it no longer perceives an end, an object in existence.” – Russel Kirk. – Thus: FIOT: Freedom In Our Time, and PIOT: Panarchy In Our Time. – JZ

WILL: They only wanted a world where no man could bend the destinies of another man against that second man's will. … Each man has a right to his own destiny, until he crosses the line into another man's.” - Gordon R. Dickson, Dorsai!, p.8/9 of ASTOUNDING SF, Brit. Ed., 8/59. - DESTINIES, SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-GOVERNMENT, FREEDOM

WILL: Where the willingness is great, the difficulties cannot be great.” - Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince, ch.26. - "Where there is a will, there is a way." - Proverb. - Not always. The difficulties for innovators should not be underestimated, especially the legal ones in all spheres which territorial governments have monopolized or subjected to their controls and regulations. – Enthusiastic supporters also need freedom to experiment, under full exterritorial autonomy, to maintain and utilize their enthusiasm. - JZ, 23.11.02. – Imagine you are a conscript of Hitler or of Stalin and forced to fight the conscripts on the other side. Will a mere act of will get you out of this dilemma or is much more required. If so, what? - JZ, 14.4.11. - WILL & WAY PANARCHISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, Q., TALENT CENTRE, LIST OF LIBERTARIAN PROJECTS, DIRECTORY TO FREEDOM LOVERS INDICATING THEIR SPECIAL INTERESTS, DIS.

WILL: Where there is a will, there is a way!”- But, usually, not the usual way, which leads us, all too often, astray or nowhere, especially if we try to advance new, radical or largely unknown freedom ideas. Such ideas require special markets and marketing methods. Otherwise the costs in time, energy and money will be too high and the returns from it too low. For instance: What would be your success rate in a door knock campaign, in which you tried to promote libertarianism? – JZ, 23.1.90, 30.8.08. – “When there’s a will there’s a way.” – George Bernard Shaw, Fanny’s First Play: Preface. - - I fall back on my favourite proverb, “Where there’s a will there’s a way.” – Bulwer-Lytton, The Caxtons. Pt. xviii, ch.5. The French form of the proverb is, “Vouloir c’est pouvoir.” - I do deny that there is a territorial way out of the inherent difficulties of territorial statism. In the same way as there is no way out of the inherent difficulties of illiteracy without its opposite, literacy. And literacy itself, including printing, including broadcasting and the Internet has not yet sufficed to enlighten public opinion to proceed from collectivist, monopolist and compulsory territorialism to individualist, competitive and voluntaristic exterritorialism, panarchism or polyarchism etc. - JZ, 16.4.11. - Where there is a will."- Herbert, 1640. – Robin Hyman Quotations, p.283.” – There are at last a dozen ways. – JZ, 4/77. – Actually, when it comes to political, economic and social systems, judging by the number of utopias published and at least microfilmed so far, more likely dozens to thousands of systems. - To each his or her self-chosen utopia, as long as its voluntary members are prepared to put up with it or as long as they keep improving it to maintain their individual satisfactions with it, i.e. do not secede from it. - Exterritorially, all only for their volunteers under their own personal laws, they could all peacefully coexist. - JZ, 16.4.11. - WAY OUT, DIS., INDIVIDUALISM VS. COLLECTIVISM, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, VOLUNTARISM VS. COMPULSION, COMPETITION VS. MONOPOLISM, MARKETING IDEAS, IDEAS ARCHIVE

WILL: Will power is the ability to make decisions knowing that you have insufficient knowledge.” – Bob Cowin’s summing up of an idea by Krech & Cruschfield, Elements of Psychology, chap. VIII, The Self. - This fact alone does already indicate that we have only the right to experiment among volunteers and this only at their risk and expense. Through experimentations scientists have discovered already many of the natural laws. Through experimentation we can also discover many of the natural laws for human beings and their societies. The sooner we start with quite free experiments of this kind, the better. That would exclude e.g. free experimentation with mass extermination devices, including e.g. the nuclear reactors required to produce the raw material isotopes for them. – Likewise excluded would be experiments that try to imitate the original "big bang" chain reaction conditions. - JZ, 16.4.11, 27.8.12. - KNOWLEDGE, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

WILL: With will one can do anything.” – Samuel Smiles, Self-Help, chapter 7. - One person, when it is within the capacities of human beings, maybe. But not everyone can be e.g. an Olympic gold medal winner, far less one of several such medals. Nor could everyone, just as an act of will, become a significant inventor or discoverer. I certainly could not, regardless of the strength of my will. A moral and rational will must keep itself within the limits of one’s one physical and mental limits. Luckily, the limits of what is possible within natural law, human nature and individual human rights and liberties is still very far from having been reached in all spheres. – Unfortunately as someone once said, anyone can become President in the United States of America. Practical experience seems to have confirmed this view. - JZ, 30.8.08. - Moreover, as social beings, via cooperation and free exchange, we can achieve much more than individuals can on their own. Robinson Crusoe on his own and even with the assistance of Friday, cannot be inventive and productive enough to establish an extensive civilized society with all its advantages and opportunities. Panarchism is something like a key to it. - JZ, 16.4.11.

WILL: You imagine what you desire. You will what you imagine. You create what you will.” – Sylvester Jackson’s motto, quoted in TIME, 13.9.82. – Provided, you and all others do also enjoy full freedom of action – all only in their own sphere. - JZ, 16.4.11, 27.8.12. - DIS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, CREATIVITY, IMAGINATION

WILLARD, AMMIEL JENKINS: 1822-1900, An examination of the law of personal rights, to discover the principles of the law, as ascertained from the practical rules of the law, and harmonized with the nature of social relations, N.Y., Appleton & Co., 1882, 429pp. Cover: The principles of the law.

WILLIAMS, B. H.: The Protection of American Citizens in China: Extraterritoriality, American J. Of Intern. Law, Oct. 1922, vol. XVI, p. 43.

WILLIAMS, S. W.: The Middle Kingdom, 2 vols., New York, 1883.

WILLING EXCHANGE: Combining the Constitution’s establishment of free trade among the states and Franklin’s correct theory of value, what then is meant by “Buy American” in its proper sense? – Let willing exchange prevail among all people, locally and world-wide.” – Leonard E. Read, Having My Way, p.102. - No producer has the right to be the only supplier to the consumers of any territories. - No residents, laborers, tradesmen or professional or their associations, have the right to exclude competitors from other territories. - JZ, 16.4.11. - VOLUNTARISM, FREE TRADE, BUY AMERICAN? AMERICANISM, FREE EXCHANGE, PROPERTY RIGHTS, CONSUMER SOVEREIGNTY, IMMIGRATION BARRIERS, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM, PROTECTIONISM, COMPETITION

WILLOUGHBY, WESTEL W.: Foreign Rights and Interests in China, 2 vols., 2nd. ed., Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1927, 1141pp, indexed, reproduced in PEACE PLANS 673/4. - 594p, 1920. - Willoughby, Westel Woodbury, 1867-1945. FOREIGN RIGHTS AND INTERESTS IN CHINA - File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML - Reprinted: Buffalo; William S. Hein & Co., Inc., 2007. - One of the interesting aspects of the foreign enclaves with extraterritorial autonomy was that at least some of them also adopted Chinese as protégée citizens. - As unilaterally imposed unequal treaties they were wrong. The same rights should have been granted to Chinese in foreign countries and they should not have been confined to territorial enclaves, either. Exterritorial autonomy for volunteers under personal laws is a much more rightful alternative. It would suit almost everybody, except incurably intolerant and totalitarian people. - JZ, 1.10.11.

WILSON, JAMES LEROY, One State, Many Legal Systems, December 2005. - - Another interesting article (31 March 2005) on non-territorial governance. - GPdB reference. - INDEPENDENT COUNTRY - But the concept is not all that unusual in history. Swedish economist Richard C.B. Johnsson calls it “non-territorial governance” and it prevailed in many places through most of human history. And it could work here. - The logic of the State goes like this: 1. The sovereign “owns” - that is, controls the land by force, and therefore gets to 2.“Legislate and tax” - that is, enslave the people by force. - The sovereign powers of  #1 are economic; of #2 ethical. The rise of the “nation-state” system ratified by the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 after the Thirty Years War pretty much established the tradition that if you control the land, you get to control the people on the land and subject them all to the same laws, regardless of their religion and traditional culture. - This is madness. A Catholic landlord owns, but does not live at, a three-flat that has a Wiccan lesbian couple on floor one, a fundamentalist Baptist family on floor two, and a conservative Moslem family on floor three. Is this Catholic “sovereign” obliged to expel the lesbians based on his own religion? Or is he compelled to expel the lesbians because the Baptists and the Moslems find their behaviors sinful? Or expel the Moslems because the lesbians and Baptists agree that the Moslems are undesirable “potential terrorists?” - No, the landlord wants tenants that respect the rules of the building, which are basically rules against trashing the hallways and rules against noise pollution. This landlord is no more obliged to discriminate here, then if he if was a shopkeeper. Is a Christian shopkeeper obliged to not sell laundry detergent to homosexuals or Muslims on moral grounds? - The purpose of sovereignty is to extract revenue from land. That’s it. That could be from land valuable for its desired natural resources, or land valuable because lots of people want to live and do business there. Sovereignty does not exist to control people, to command them on what is right or wrong. Sovereignty acts only in self-defense, when the economic value of the domain is under attack externally or internally. - - Comments (0) -Post a Comment - - His column appears every Thursday only in The Partial Observer. - - JZ, 3.4.05: Dear Mr. Wilson, Richard C. B. Johnsson pointed out to me today your site: - Why still only ONE State, why not many of them, in every country and also many societies, but none of them with a territorial monopoly? - Why not States without artificial frontiers or borders? - A free, peaceful and just mini-State could, potentially, get more voluntary subscribers, world-wide, than any of the present large States has in voluntary and involuntary subjects. - After the experiences with totalitarian and despotic and authoritarian regimes, we ought to get away as far as possible from “Ein Reich, ein Volk, ein Fuehrer!” (“One empire, one people, one leader!”). - Why only many legal systems, not also many constitutional, legislative, juridical and policing systems in the same country – or even none of them confined to one country only but extended to all their voluntary subscribers world-wide? - Why should not States be like national or multinational corporations, of concern only to their owners, investors, managers, employees, suppliers and customers? - Do any of them have any “holy” connection to any territory or are all of them the results of conquests, annexations, usurpations – with none of them being based upon individual consent, like most churches and sects are nowadays? - They do have a rightful authority only over those, who individually consented to them or contracted with them and over those, who wrongfully attacked any of their members or rightful possessions. - Why should experimental freedom or freedom of action or full minority autonomy be excluded in this sphere? - We have finally and to a large extent achieved it in the sphere of religion. To the extent that it is realized, religious wars and civil wars have ceased. We have also achieved experimental freedom in the arts, in science and technology and in private lifestyles, to a large extent. - Should we not expect the same rightful and positive results in the political, economic and social spheres, if the same individual choice and exterritorial group autonomy for voluntary communities were established there? - Leonard E. Read, founder of the Foundation for Economic Education (still predominantly a Christian) summed the possibilities up very shortly with his demand: “Release all creative energies!” - Experimental freedom, on a contractual basis, with regard to current landholders, should even extend to land reform experiments, not only of the George-ist kind. - The Henry George School library in NYC had a collection of, if I remember right, 22 small annual volumes on “Enclaves of Economic Rent”, of which a photocopied a few, back in 1990, the last one that I copied being: Enclaves of Economic Rent for the Year 1933, being a compendium of the legal documents involved, together with a historical description by Charles White Huntington, Fourteenth Annual Volume, Published by Fiske Warren, Harvard, Massachusetts, 1934, 362 S. - This series surveyed very well the numerous experimental and contractual land reform approach of George-ists. - Well, with the exception of e.g. the Proprietary Community proposals of Spencer Heath and of his grandson Spencer Heath MacCallum. - Other kinds of land reformers (of which there are dozens if not hundreds of different schools) could, should or have undertaken similar experiments to demonstrate their ideals and practical proposals in this sphere. - George-ists might have concluded a treaty with them, to mutually respect their diverse land tenure systems and revenue raising methods. - Instead, most different schools of land reformers simply ignored each other, instead of trying to objectively evaluate each other’s proposals. - True “Laissez Faire, Laissez Passer”, in the meaning of: Let people produce, let them exchange, and a genuine free market for all kinds of services (not for unwanted disservices) should include various land holding systems as well as various juridical, policing, road, constitutional and legislative systems, including even the independent or self-managing or self-governing anarchistic ones, as long as they are not aggressive towards dissenters, as e.g. the Anarchists of the Spanish Civil war were towards Catholic priests. - Any form of anarchism only for peaceful anarchists and any form of libertarianism only for peaceful libertarians, always at their own expense and risk. That should also be part of the competing government or competing free societies concept and practice. - Personally, I hold that for our future full experimental freedom. for voluntary payment communities, in the monetary, clearing, credit and value standard spheres, would be even more important than full experimental freedom in the sphere of land tenure. - Under that condition it would soon become relatively easy for productive people to buy land individual or cooperatively, on terms, paid out of the thus achieved increased agricultural or industrial etc. productivity. - Whether that is true or not is still open to discussion. Too few have so far combined the advocacy of full monetary and financial freedom with the advocacy of free competition in the sphere of land reform. - Full experimental freedom regarding land tenure system would possibly come to show that “open cooperatives” (in the meaning of P. Buchez, Theodor Hertzka and Ulrich von Beckerath, not legally imposed but chosen by volunteers), would be the best form to cope with what is wrongful in large private or State land holdings and would tend to justly distribute whatever monopoly advantages certain sites do offer. - (Such open coops are open to new employees and investors to the limits of usefulness of their labour power and investments, and provide returns only in accordance with the labour and investment input and productivity and they are open even, in general meetings, to anyone interested in their activities, for people with voting rights but no financial claims towards such coops. - In several books Theodor Hertzka described how that would work out in practice but he was so enamoured with the system that he wanted to impose it. – It is good enough to stand on its own merits, without compulsion and legislation, based upon private contracts. It could spread through them, if there are no legal obstacles and if it does not have to operate under monetary and financial despotism, under protectionism and imposed regulations.) - However, adherents of other land tenure systems may believe that their system would win out in free competition and they should all be given that chance. - I see no moral justification for any government imposing a single land tenure system upon what it claims to be its country or its subjects. - Such claims do become particularly absurd in the case of continental countries making claims to islands in their vicinity. E.g. the claims of communist China to Taiwan are no more moral or rational than e.g. the claims European countries might raise towards England and Ireland. - Nor do I see a need for a single government owning and running all roads in a country. There exist already many alternative proposals and experiences and writings on the subject. Historically many to most of the pioneering turnpike companies were not mainly run for financial profits or run even at financial losses – to gain their indirect benefits. - Terri Schiavo: Why should there be a single and imposed solution for all such cases? Why not introducing individual choice as far as possible there, too, via e.g. “living wills” before one becomes incapacitated, or vial health and life-insurance contracts or family compacts? - As you suggested, each religious community might have a different decision for such cases among its members. And those making the decisions should also have to bear the costs involved. - Some voluntary communities, anticipating e.g. greedy heirs, might limit or abolish inheritance rights in such cases. - Imposed uniformity is not the greatest possible ideal in this sphere, either. Is it really, in any sphere? - I liked many of your remarks on Richard C. B. Johnsson’s essays but have reservations on your following paragraph: “The purpose of sovereignty is to extract revenue from land. That’s it. That could be from land valuable for its desired natural resources, or land valuable because lots of people want to live and do business there. Sovereignty does not exist to control people, to command them on what is right or wrong. Sovereignty acts only in self-defense, when the economic value of the domain is under attack externally or internally.” - The term “sovereignty” is loaded here. - If, instead, one spoke of autonomy, self-management or free enterprise or business, or organization, then one could generalize: The purpose of an enterprise, business or organization is to either gain some financial benefit e.g. from land use or from any other economic activity or to achieve some other political, economic, social, scientific, cultural, artistic etc. purpose upon which the members do agree, by their collaboration. - They provide a service by those who want to provide it to those who want the service, whatever the service might be, under mutually acceptable conditions. - The State is simply a monopoly business, which has usurped authority over a country and all its inhabitants, without their individual consent. - It certainly does not have the full consent of all the dissenters. - And it charges even for imposed disservices. - One of the extreme and obvious cases is Mainland China, with an army of bureaucrats amounting to 58 million [Figure from my flawed memory. I think now that the correct figure was 46 millions. - JZ, 26.9.11.], many of them power-hungry and corrupt. - This in a country which had once only one Mandarin for ca. 20,000 people. - Even its excessively large army comes only to 2.5 million people. (Curiously enough, this army seems now to be involved in many economic activities, alas, many of them, probably, exploiting slave labour.) - What is there that qualifies any of the present governments for exclusive territorial sovereignty? - Or even for the limited sovereignty of “limited governments”? - Approval by a temporary majority is certainly not good enough. It might grant e.g. approval to ritual human sacrifices, to cannibalism, to slavery, or involve all in a war, even one that might be unpopular. - The Catholic Church was once an intolerant church, but as such by far not the only one. Later, some Protestant churches were intolerant as well, for a while. But now intolerance is no longer its official church policy - it is at most expressed by some individuals and their followers. - I cannot imagine, for instance, any of the Popes over the last century as having been in favour of the production, storage and use of e.g. of ABC mass murder devices. Almost everywhere on Earth some innocent Catholics would be murdered by such “weapons” and many to most Catholics would protest against such murders of other innocents as well. - But, on the other hand, I have not come across a clear statement of any one of Popes that quite explicitly condemned “collective responsibility” actions on principle. Perhaps you have? - Collective responsibility notions grow strongly on the manure heap of exclusive territorial claims. - “And we can’t have it both ways, claiming that we want 'Separation of Church and State!' and then turning around and legislating moral and ethical issues that are primarily religious in foundation.” - Not only separation of Church and State is needed but also separation of the State from Economics, and of the State from alternative Political Systems and alternative Social Arrangements, unless these alternative economic, political or social systems are all based upon individual consent, continuously maintained via individual secessionism. - The present States, especially, must become separated from territorial powers and collectively imposed sovereignty. - I do not know of any sphere in which the State has been the best possible defender, protector, adjudicator, developer, instructor or entrepreneur. Do you? - Only if exposed to businesslike and voluntaristic competition, nation-wide and worldwide, would it become fully revealed what it is capable of or, what it is incapable of. - But a State with voluntary members only, a State from which individuals may freely secede (immediately only upon infringements of their rights otherwise after the agreed upon notice period has passed), a State without a territorial monopoly, taxation, legislation, police, juridical and administration powers over all inhabitants, is no longer as dangerous a great machine or monster as are the present States. - Then Gresham’s Law would apply to these remnants of the former States as well. Their services would no longer have legal tender. The good States or societies would drive out the bad and flawed States. Consumer sovereignty would prevail in this sphere as well. - I thank you for having given some thought to alternatives to the present States. I do hope that you will write some more on this subject. - There is still much pioneering work to be done in this sphere. - Freedom, here, too, has no other limit than the equal freedom of others. - And these freedom possibilities, too, go much further than most people have envisioned so far. - I offer a few text on this subject on my main website or via email upon request. More can be found on  and on - PIOT, John Zube. (Panarchy In Our Time or: To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her choice.) (Slightly edited & corrected: 26.9.11, 27.8.12.) – Q.

WILSON, WOODROW: The New Freedom, London, Paris & Toronto, J. M. Dent & Sons, 1916. JZL. - The only somewhat panarchistic passage that I noticed so far in this book is on pages 126/27: "My very distinguished friend, Senator Gore of Oklahoma, made this interesting proposal; that we should pass a law that every piece of goods sold in the U.S. should have on it a label bearing the price at which it sells under the tariff and the price at which it would sell if there were no tariff, and then the Senator suggests that we have a very easy solution for the tariff question. He does not want to oblige that great body of our fellow-citizens who have a conscientious belief in 'protection' to turn away from it. He proposes that everybody who believes in the 'protective' tariff should pay it and the rest of us should not; if they want to subscribe it is open to them to subscribe. As for the rest of us, the time is coming when we shall not have to subscribe. The people of this land have made up their minds to cut all privilege and patronage out of our fiscal legislation. We have come to recognise in the tariff as it is now constructed, not a system of protection, but a system of favouritism, of privilege, too often granted secretly and by subterfuge, instead of openly and frankly and legitimately..." - I would find it simpler to allow Free Traders to buy freely from the world and sell to it, via Free Ports & Duty Free Shops, for members only. And these institutions are to be exterritorially autonomous, parts of a world wide Free Trade Panarchy, i.e., no longer subjected to any territorial government taxation and regulation. - JZ, 29.1.99. – FREE TRADE VS. PROTECTIONISM

WIN-WIN-SITUATIONS: Sometimes it’s impossible for everybody to win.” – James Gunn, Touch of the Match, ANALOG, Feb. 85, p.137. – Less often than is commonly believed – if the panarchist option is taken into consideration. – JZ, 5.4.91. - Maybe in some warfare situations. Even now, all remaining and at least somewhat free market transactions are win-win transactions for mutual benefit. – Certainly, in Welfare States and Tyrannies and present democracies, under territorialism. - JZ, 8.9.08. – DIS.

WINE: One of the disadvantages of wine is that it makes a man mistake words for thoughts.” - Samuel Johnson. - Not only drunks make that mistake quite frequently. - JZ - Neither alcoholic nor other drugs are required to make mistakes and commit wrongs, but they do help to multiply them. So does the addiction to power. - So do sexual urges not under sufficient self-control to avoid compulsion or interference with minors. - JZ, 16.4.11. - ALCOHOL, JUDGMENTS, WORDS, DRINKING, DRUGS, SEXUAL OFFENCES, POWER-ABUSE, POWER MADNESS, POWER ADDICTION

WISDOM: A desire not to butt into other people’s business is eighty percent of all human wisdom.” – Robert Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land, p.165. – MYOB, NONINTERVENTION, MEDDLING, PRIVACY, TOLERANCE, INTERFERENCE, INVASION, INTERVENTIONISM, INTOLERANCE

WISDOM: As for the wise man, his lot will be much the same under any ideology. Under democracy he will be encouraged to starve to death in a garret, under fascism he will be put in a concentration camp, under communism he will be liquidated. – T. H. White, The Book of Merlyn, p.116. -  As if wise men could not achieve self-employment, e.g. through an ideas archive and talent registry. As if they could not successfully escape or resist by mastering the science of resistance and revolution. As if they could not enrich themselves by trading, even if only on the black market. – The wise men have not yet been wise enough to combine their particular bits of wisdom, to market it properly and thus to make themselves independent and influential. - JZ, 27.7.92, 31.8.08. - Especially, they have not yet been wise enough to establish panarchist options for themselves as well as for all others. To each wise person the fruits of his wisdom. To each fool the "fruits" of his follies. - JZ, 16.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, INNOVATORS, RIGHT TO MAKE MISTAKES AT ONE'S OWN EXPENSE & RISK, RIGHT TO APPLY REASON & MORALITY AMONG LIKEMINDED PEOPLE.

WISDOM: As it says in the Good Book: 'In much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.'" - Graham Masterton, Tengu, p.69. – Apparently, we have not yet assembled all the knowledge required to liberate us from our territorial masters. – JZ, 22.4.09. – DIS., KNOWLEDGE, GRIEF, LACK OF PANARCHISM OR EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, LIBERATION, ENLIGHTENMENT, PEACE & REVOLUTION PROGRAM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, FREE BANKING HANDBOOK, ENCYCLOPAEDIA ON PANARCHISM OR POLYARCHISM

WISDOM: Don’t go to market just with wisdom.” - Lore and Maurice Cowan, compilers, The Wit of the Jews, Leslie Frewin, London, 1970, p.114. – But you can help to start a proper market for wisdom, ideas, projects, talents. – There, on a special market for them all of them could easily be found and none has to be pushed, desperately, by the innovator or ideas carrier or talent on his own. It is probably the most important market of all for our future and yet it remains to be established. Largely because of the common error and prejudice that a quite free market for ideas and talents does already exist. – Even the patent offices are not yet good enough markets for inventions. Only about 4 % of their patents are ever utilized. Venture capital companies tackle many positive ideas but by far not all of them as yet. Need I remind that we are still stuck in Protectionism, all too many laws and regulations and bureaucracies, in monetary despotism, territorial Warfare States and that some of our most important individual rights and liberties are daily infringed? So, how well does the current “free market” for ideas and talents work? Not much better than the territorial governments, which are supposed to look out for us in every respect. - JZ, 27.11.07, 22.4.09. – PANARCHISM PROVIDES A MARKET FOR THE FOOLS AS WELL AS FOR THE WISE, FOR RADICAL LIBERTARIANS AS WELL AS FOR RADICAL STATISTS, ALWAYS AT THE OWN EXPENSE & RISK & WITHOUT A TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY. - IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, POLYARCHISM, TOLERANCE, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, VOLUNTARISM

WISDOM: He was a fool, more so for believing he was clever. Wise men always left room for new things; fools thought they knew it all already.” - Tom Clancy, Net Force, p.115. - VS. FOOLISHNESS, KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING ONE'S LIMITS, EXTERRITORIALISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, COMPETITION VS. MONOPOLY, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE VS. COERCIVE COLLECTIVISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

WISDOM: Here, at the outset, is the central, compelling fact, a truth that is almost unanimously overlooked: the market possesses a wisdom that does not exist, even remotely, in any discrete individual. For instance, because you cannot imagine how mail would be delivered ever so much more efficiently than now if turned over to the market, never, for heaven’s sake, let your faith falter by reason of your infinitesimal know-how. To claim that the free market has a wisdom a million or billion times your own is a gross understatement.” – Leonard E. Read, Castles in the Air, p.16. – And yet we have not yet systematically attempted to collect and permanently publish all the wisdom that is dispersed in the market, in hundreds of millions of books, many more other records and in 6 billion minds. – Only the knowledge required to produce our daily consumer goods and services has been almost sufficiently coordinated and utilized so far, at least in some of the somewhat developed countries. - JZ, 31.8.08. – IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, WORLD LIBRARY, LIBERTY LIBRARY, LIBERTARIAN ENCYCLOPEDIA, BIBLIOGRAPHY, ABSTRACTS, REVIEW COMPILATIONS. FREE MARKETS FOR ALL KINDS OF IDEAS, SYSTEMS & INSTITUTIONS - EXCEPT THE INTOLERANT ONES, THE PRIVATE & OFFICIAL CRIMINALS WITH INVOLUNTARY VICTIMS, WISDOM, KNOWLEDGE

WISDOM: It's easier to be wise for others than for ourselves.” - Duc de la Rochefoucauld. - You may try to explain your wisdom to others but not impose it upon them. Confine yourself to make your own mistakes in your own sphere and let them make their own. At best you can, under freedom, demonstrate your own wisdom in your own free experiments. Let them provide their own. - JZ, 16.4.11. – EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

WISDOM: Let the wise and honest make a place to which the wise and honest can repair.” – The source of this variation of Washington’s remark is unknown to me. – From the panarchistic point of view it need not be a place but can be merely a society, association or community, but one that is exterritorially free and under its own personal laws. – JZ, 31.8.08. – PANARCHISM, UTOPIAN COLONIES, INTENTIONAL COMMUNITIES, NEW COUNTRY MOVEMENT, ASYLUM, REVOLUTION, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM

WISDOM: Make men wise and by that very operation you make them free.” – Godwin, Political Justice, Book II, Chapter III & Book IV, chapter I, quoted in Carl Watner; Voluntaryism, p.4. – Much easier said, than done, particularly since not one of us is fully wise in every respect and cannot be, since none of us is a superman. –  If only it were as “simple” as an "operation" on the brain! – JZ, 31.8.08. - Let all try their own things - among themselves. - Some of them would get somewhat wise in the process and could then enjoy the fruits of the degrees of their wisdom. - JZ, 16.5.11.

WISDOM: no single person knows how to make an ordinary wooden lead pencil, explained in a brevity entitled, “I, Pencil”. Yet, the year that piece was written, we made in the U.S.A. 1,600,000,000 wooden pencils. How come? How explain a know-how that exists in no one of us, even remotely? My answer: It is the overall luminosity, the wisdom in the free market. (*) When millions of people are free to act creatively as they choose, an unimaginable wisdom is the consequence. To assert that it is a billion times greater than exists in any discrete individual would be a gross understatement.” – Leonard E. Read, THE FREEMAN, 1/75, p.15. - (*) A wisdom good enough to mass-produce pencils but not wise and free enough to produce wisdom in political, social and economic system spheres, because there experimental freedom is territorially monopolized by the worst of us, the politicians and bureaucrats, with all too wide consent by those, who were mis-educated by the State controlled education system, so that they still do know all too little about their individual rights and liberties, including full freedom to experiment, among volunteers, in all spheres. – JZ, 31.8.08, 16.4.11, 28.8.12. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, MARKET, INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, SPECIALIZATION, DIVISION OF LABOR, FREE EXCHANGE, FREE ENTERPRISE, MINORITIES, MAJORITIES, POLITICAL PROCESS & MACHINERY, ENLIGHTENMENT THROUGH FREEDOM OF ACTION, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM, DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY

WISDOM: That happens only to the wise, that he does nothing against his will.” – Cicero, Paradoxa, V. 1. – (“Soli hoc sapienti contingit, ut nihil faciat invitus.”) - On which planet did he live? – If wisdom were as powerful to make a man as free and independent, then many people would have striven for it and this world would be a much better place already. We may never know how many people were murdered merely for one or the other wise remark or action. But e.g. the cases of Socrates and Christ are well enough known to act as a deterrent to many. – New ideas, systems and talents need safe asylums and nurseries, freedom to experiment, too, not Inquisitions! - JZ, 31.8.08. – Only for people who are not only wise but also free to experiment will that happen. - JZ, 16.4.11. - DIS., IDEAS ARCHIVE & TALENT CENTRE, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, FREEDOM OF ACTION TO SUPPLEMENT FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

WISDOM: The more intelligent gives up. A sorry truth. – It establishes the world domination of stupidity.” – Marie von Ebner Eschenbach. – JZ tr. of: “Der Gescheitere gibt nach! Eine traurige Wahrheit; sie begruended die Weltherrschaft der Dummheit.” – That is only likely to happen under the stupid system of territorialism, under which the better informed and more intelligent are usually outvoted. Once they enjoy full experimental freedom or panarchism, after being intelligent enough to recognize and adopt it, they can set attractive practical examples for all others and thus rapid progress will become the rule in all spheres rather than the exception. – The question is only: Are the more intelligent humans intelligent enough to adopt panarchism or will they continue to largely ignore it as they did for the last two centuries? – JZ, 3.9.08. - STUPIDITY, PROGRESS, PANARCHISM, DEMOCRACY, MAJORITY RULE, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM & EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM

WISDOM: The most basic inherent constraint is that neither time nor wisdom are free goods available in unlimited quantity. This means that in social processes, as in economic processes, it is not only impossible to attain perfection but irrational to seek perfection or even to seek “the best possible” result in each separate instance.” - Thomas Sowell - One should leave that search to volunteers under experimental freedom and exterritorial autonomy. – JZ, 23.1.08. - EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, KNOWLEDGE

WISDOM: There is somebody wiser than any of us, and that is everybody.” – Napoleon Bonaparte, 1769-1821. – Andrews Quotations, p.377. - It is not collective wisdom but wisdom of individuals, somewhere hidden in the collective and to be made sufficiently known, e.g. through a world library, the Internet or an Ideas Archive. – No one knows everything but every existing knowledge does already exist, at least in fragments, somewhere, among some individuals. They and their knowledge and ideas and proposals have just not been sufficiently recorded and combined and they have not yet sufficiently and mutually corrected each other in public records. – Far less have they achieved panarchism or experimental freedom for themselves. - JZ, 31.8.08. – IDEAS ARCHIVE, SUPER-COMPUTER PROJECT, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, MINORITIES, INDIVIDUALISM

WISDOM: To educate the wise man, the State exists, and with the appearance of the wise man, the State expires. The appearance of character makes the State unnecessary. The wise man needs no army, fort, or navy – he loves men too well.” – Emerson, quoted in Sprading, p.151. – The Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1913 - He should not love most men, as they are, too well. He should set them better examples. And one wise man would not be enough. There must be enough to act like yeast upon the lot. Most of the required free experimental demonstrations of political, economic and social truths require more than a single participant. It is not so much character that makes the State unnecessary but a sufficiently refined morality or ethics, expressed mainly in an ideal declaration of individual rights and liberties. Moreover, all the wise men ought still to be defensively armed, organized and trained against the remaining unwise men. – According to Emerson’s statement, if taken literally, with the appearance of the first wise man the State has already disappeared – or no single wise man has as yet appeared and so the territorial State has been continued! - JZ, 31.8.08, 16.4.11. – STATE, INDIVIDUALS, TERRITORIALISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, MILITIA, HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION

WISDOM: Wisdom Will Not Be Forced. - It is a simple, obvious, self-evident fact that ideas, understanding, wisdom cannot be coercively injected into the consciousness of another. Yet, such is the presumption of persons who employ the coercive techniques.” – Leonard E. Read, Deeper Than You Think, p.13. - TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, LAWS, COERCION, COMPULSION, REFORMS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, INDIVIDUALISM, VOLUNTARISM, CHOICE, PANARCHISM, TOLERANCE

WISDOM: Wise men do in the beginning what fools do in the end.” - Author Unknown. - Let each advance at his own speed. - Free competition in every sphere. - JZ, 16.4.11. - VS. FOOLISHNESS, PROGRESS, FREEDOM OF ACTION & EXPERIMENTATION VS. TERRITORIALISM

WISDOM: Wise men learn by others' harms, fools scarcely their own; but felix quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum. (Fortunate the man who learns caution from the dangers of others.) - Benjamin Franklin. - Freely competing panarchies will not only teach about the best but also about the worst options. - JZ, 27.11.02. - VS. FOOLISHNESS, LEARNING FROM EXAMPLES, PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM FOR ALL

WISDOM: Wise men profit more from fools that fools from wise men; for the wise men shun the mistakes of fools, but fools do not imitate the successes of the wise.” - Marcus Porcius Cato, The Elder, from Plutarch, Lives, Cato, 9. - Let all ignorant and foolish people make their own mistakes, at the own expense and risk. But also let all the already somewhat wise, enlightened and experienced people profit from their knowledge, by living in their own ways, their own associations and systems. - JZ, 16.4.11. - VS. FOOLISHNESS, IGNORANCE, PREJUDICE

WISDOM: With how little wisdom do we organize our lives, especially in the areas of government and the economy!” – Edmund Opitz, THE FREEMAN, 1/77, p.30. – GOVERNMENT, ECONOMY, POLITICS, LAWS, TERRITORIALISM

WISDOM: You’ll get your chance. You’ll go your thousand-fold ways, finding a hundred that are new and good, because we have the wisdom to see that nobody has the wisdom to tell the whole world what it must do.” – Poul Anderson, The Byworlder, p.190. - LEADERSHIP, PLANNING, CENTRALIZATION, INDIVIDUALISM, TERRITORIALISM, DIRIGISM, RULERS, GOVERNMENTS, LAWS, LEGISLATORS, PARLIAMENTS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PROGRESS, PANARCHISM

WISSENBURG, MARCEL, Political Pluralism and the State: Explorations in political theory beyond the nation-state. (Routledge Innovators in Political Theory) (Hardcover) - by Marcel Wissenburg (Author) - Key Phrases: policy telos, politically pluralized world, consultative elitism, John Rawls, Brian Barry, Act of Supremacy (file:///H/%5C%5CPan%20combined%20file%5C%5CPan%20Pluralist%20book%20new%20one.htm%22%20%5Cl%20%22sipbody) $150.00. - Ships from and sold by – Such prices for prints, in an age of online texts and texts on discs! How many writings never got into print or all too soon out of print and were not sufficiently spread because of the high prices charged for them? If you are lucky, you might get them a few years later, second-hand, for 50 cents to a dollar. – The copyrights monopoly, like all other legalized monopolies, is not the best solution for writers, editors, publishers and readers. - JZ, 28.8.12.

WITHAM, STEVE: On Panarchy, 5, 13, 42, 47, 73, 76, in PEACE PLANS No. 505. - - 125. , in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. - - 5, in ON PANARCHY V, in PP 554. - - 44, 50, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585. - - 107, in ON PANARCHY XV, in PP 879. - - 6, in ON PANARCHY XVI, in PEACE PLANS 901.

WITHDRAW YOUR SANCTION FROM THE STATE: Lane implicitly recognizes that governmental control rests on the acquiescence of the citizenry. What is needed is for reform to begin with the individual, so that eventually enough people will be aroused to withdraw their sanction from the State..." - Carl Watner, in: Charles Lane, A Voluntary Political Government, p.40. – Alas, individual and group secessionism, under exterritorial autonomy, is not yet a widely recognized individual right and liberty. – JZ, 28.8.12.

WITHDRAWAL FROM TERRITORIAL POWERS: Suicide, slumming, beachcombing, alcoholism, drug tripping, retreatism, dropping out, immersion in music, dancing, escapist literature, travels and adventure trips, sports, hobbies, crafts, entertainment, tourism, gardening, interior decoration, fashion, arts, cultism, sectarianism, charity work, emigration, conspiracies, or counter-conspiracy attempts, promiscuity, perversions, underground activities, black markets, tax avoidance, terrorism, should not be the only legal or illegal ways to withdraw individually from the power addicts or the territorial system. How many of these escape routes would be taken and how extensively, if only people were free to individually secede and associate autonomously, exterritorially, under personal laws? If their creative energies were thus and otherwise quite released? We know the barbarism, primitivism and degeneration that has resulted from territorial systems of subjugation of the majority and of many minorities by a few men in power. We do not as yet know how high many if not most people could rise under full freedom for all to follow and act out their knowledge, ideas, preferences  and abilities, in all spheres, at their own risk and expense. Life might become much more of of an interesting and attractive adventure then - than it can be now. - JZ, 11.2.92, 13.1.93, 11.12.03. – Q.


WITHDRAWAL: any “powerless” individual’s minimum power can be revealed by his withdrawal from participation. For the withdrawal to be recognized and to have effects requires institutional devices – the communications system, and then all the sub-agencies of the state. Other institutional spheres may also be called into play, ranging from wifely disapproval to the beating up of the recalcitrant’s children by schoolmates, from anonymous telephone calls from vigilantes to the loss of his livelihood.” – Silvert, Man’s Power, p. 28. - Even non-voting and conscientious objection, not to speak of desertion and refusal to pay taxes or individual and group secessions, can be made extremely difficult to impossible for individuals. There are special laws against e.g. “whistleblowers”, traitors and spies, even if these revealed only secrets of authoritarian, tyrannical or totalitarian regimes. All the more so should the individual’s right to secede from the State or any law or institution of it, become fully recognized, included in an ideal declaration of individual rights and liberties and in international law and jurisdiction and, ultimately protected, by an ideal militia force for the protection of individual rights and liberties, by international recognition, asylum rights in other countries for refugees. So far it is not even recognized by what passes itself wrongly off as “political science”. – But the very difficulties all territorial States raise for individual secessionists, not to speak of several minorities or the majority wanting to secede, even when they do not claim any territorial monopoly for themselves, does, indirectly, indicate the power of this method. Territorial governments are more aware of this than are many of the individual secessionists. The territorial monopoly has still an enormous emotional backing and one by numerous popular errors, myths, prejudices, false assumptions and conclusions, e.g. on unity, defence, equality, law, justice, democracy, majorities, mandates, consent, duties, rights, obligations, nations, peoples, governments. – JZ, 1.9.08, 16.4.11, 28.8.12. – TERRITORIALISM, POWER, STATISM

WITHDRAWAL: At certain times, especially amid the political crudities of underdeveloped lands, withdrawal from the formally established structure is the only viable alternative, whether or not accompanied by violence.” - Silvert, Man’s Power, p.162. - SECESSIONISM

WITHDRAWAL: How can a man have freedom (liberty) unless he is free to withdraw from situations (governments, groups, jobs)?” - Mildred Loomis, “Moving into the Front Ranks of Social Change”, p.74. – Alas, her limited view of “withdrawal”, in the meaning of “retreatism” to subsistence living on the land, can be seen in here very next sentence: “To what in the last analysis (except land) can he withdraw and survive? How can he withdraw to it if there are serious hurdles, like absentee ownership, to his access to the source of his life?” – But at least a tax strike against income tax is involved as a rule, since these retreatists tend to keep their cash income below the taxable levels. - JZ, 1.9.08. – PANARCHISM VS. INTENTIONAL COMMUNITIES & UTOPIAN COLONIES & RETREATISM, TAX STRIKE, SECESSIONISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY

WITHDRAWAL: To be free does not require the violent overthrow of government but merely mass withdrawal of consent.” – LAISSEZ FAIRE CATALOGUE, Summer 75, in a review of the work of Etienne de la Boetie: “The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude”, ca. 1550. – “Resolve to serve no more and you are at once freed.” - De la Boetie. – Much more than enlightenment, courage and resolution are required. However, even revolutions are often to mostly not actions by the masses but by determined minorities. While a few sporadic individual secession attempts are certainly not enough to do away with a well-established and still somewhat popular State, only a minimum number of individual secessionists and of minority group secessionists can already lead to the dissolution of a territorial State. Imagine, for instance, that these secessionists concluded an attractive peace treaty with a supposed enemy regime, as a first step to a general peace, or that they managed, by a quite peaceful and rapid monetary and financial revolution among themselves, to eliminate unemployment and inflation for themselves. Or that, instead of a multitude of commercial protective associations and security forces, that in many countries already outnumber in manpower the official police forces, the first ideal militias for the protection of individual rights and liberties were formed, so well prepared and trained for this job that soldiers and policemen would rather join them than fight them, especially once unemployment is no longer a problem. Only the CRITICAL “mass” is required that would set off a chain reaction against territorialism, one without mass murder and without mass destruction. – JZ, 1.9.08. 16.4.11, 28.8.12. – REVOLUTION, CONSENT, OVERTHROWING GOVERNMENTS, ONE-MAN REVOLUTIONS, MINORITY AUTONOMY, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM, PRECONDITIONS

WITHDRAWAL: Warren’s destiny as a social reformer was initially shaped by a lecture he heard delivered by Robert Owen in Cincinnati. Persuaded by Owen to the view that the most efficacious way of eliminating social evil from society is to withdraw from the established social and economic system into voluntary communities, Warren moved his wife and baby daughter to New Harmony in 1825 where he imbibed a number of new ideas, not the least important of which were the educational theories of Pestalozzi” … - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p. 66, on Josiah Warren. – But Warren, in his later writings, stood up strongly for “individual sovereignty” and what he understood under “monetary freedom”. – JZ, 1.9.08. - Exterritorial autonomy on the smallest scale, like in utopian colonies, monasteries and nunneries, is usually not persuasive enough to attract many new converts. Freedom to experiment anywhere, under full exterritorial autonomy, has more persuasive power. It brings positive as well as negative examples closest to the greatest number of people. Obviously, full freedom of expression and information are not yet enough to enlighten all or most people fast enough, especially when most people still suffer under the consequences of numerous still popular errors, myths and prejudices. - JZ, 16.4.11. - VOLUNTARY COMMUNITIES, UTOPIAN COLONIES, INTENTIONAL COMMUNITIES, STILL MINI-TERRITORIAL ONES OR AT BEST COMPANY TOWNS OR PROPRIETARY COMMUNITIES, RETREATISM, OCEAN FREEDOM, NEW COUNTRY MOVEMENT

WITHDRAWAL: We should note also that living by the Golden Rule involves respect for privacy – the right to be let alone and the right to choose one’s associates. Coercion – the attempt to compel people to associate with others – leads to conflict rather than to the attitudes and actions which are mutually beneficial. Freedom established by the Moral Law of the Golden Rule and the Ten Commandments includes the moral right to withdraw from an unwelcome contact with other persons, as well as the right freely to cooperate in mutually beneficial ways.” – Orval Watts, THE FREEMAN, 1/76. – Already at least once before, in THE FREEMAN of 3/73 he declared: “Freedom includes the moral right to withdraw from an unwelcome contact with other persons, as well as the right freely to cooperate in mutually beneficial ways.” - Did he have individual and group secessionism in mind and full exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers, under personal law? – JZ, 1.9.08.

WITHDRAWAL: what Professor Alan Walters … calls a ‘massive withdrawal’ of government control and regimentation from the lives of the British people. In social welfare, as in commerce and industry, government policies must be dismantled …” - Ralph Harris, on p.17 of “1985”, edited by Dr. Rhodes Boyson. – For all too many centuries reformers discussed only the obligations and duties of monarchs and aristocrats. Little was ever achieved thereby. Things began to change rapidly only once the subjects and victims began to recognize their own individual rights and liberties, and also their right and duty to realize and uphold them and then to act upon this understanding, however limited at the beginning. That latter approach, too, has still to become very much improved, based upon the sufficient collection, discussion, declaration and publication of all individual rights and liberties and of all the details and techniques on how theses rights and liberties can be effectively used to realize them in practice and then protect them. - No territorial governments should withdraw their wrongful territorial controls but their involuntary victims should withdraw from them, leaving them to their remaining voluntary victims. - JZ, 1.9.08, 16.4.11, 28.8.12,

WITHDRAWAL: When people do agree that government is unneeded, total withdrawal of support will render their governments impotent without resources and will signal their imminent collapse.” – Fred Woodworth, Anarchism, p.16. - Withdrawal does not have to be complete, covering the whole population. It is enough when individuals and various minorities can freely withdraw to do their own things. - How many of the others will withdraw later-on should altogether depend upon them. - JZ, 16.4.11. - DIS., INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM

WITHDRAWAL: When the people withdraw their support from it, when they oppose it and refuse to pay taxes, when they refuse to go to war, refuse to accept office to enforce unjust laws, then the end will come, and a voluntary co-operative society of free people will take its place, and nothing of the invasive nature of the State will remain.” – Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.23. - The whole population need not withdraw at once. It is enough when all individuals and minorities realize the right to do so, as soon as they are ready for exterritorially autonomous experiments of their own. - If a rump of statists remains, one without a territorial monopoly, then it could, still serve, e.g. as a deterrent example and as a lesson for those new and voluntary members, who failed to learn enough from history, from the recorded mistakes of others with certain flawed economic, political and social or utopian notions and from successfully practised alternatives to them. - JZ, 16.4.11. – Not a single and cooperative society will result but a society made up of numerous independent sub-societies, all under personal law and not necessarily subscribing to cooperation but merely e.g. to separate development, tolerance, leaving each other alone or to trade and to communicate to some extent. – JZ, 28.8.12. - PEOPLES, POPULATIONS, MINORITIES, SOCIETIES, COOPERATION, STATES, EXTERRITORIALISM & VOLUNTARISM VS. TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, DIS.

WITHDRAWAL: Withdraw from unjust laws and lawmakers.” – Merlilyn Giesekam, FREE ENTERPRISE, Nov. 77, p.17. - PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SECESSIONISM, OPTING OUT

WITHDRAWAL: You set yourself free when you break all volitional ties to the state. And you sanction freedom and withdraw your sanction from any instrument of violence. – By this process, a free society emerges one by one because there will be a growing number of persons who stop preventing it.” – LEFEVRE’S JOURNAL, Winter 75. – Alas, he thus rejected e.g. tyrannicide and other armed ways to defend one’s individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 1.9.08. - The right to withdraw from it, quite unhindered by a territorial State, should not be presumed to exist already, in practice, not only as a theoretically sound proposal. - JZ, – It is only the aggressors and coercive interventionists who should withdraw their sanction for the use of any method or instruments of violence. – JZ, 28.8.12. – DIS., VIOLENCCE, NON-VIOLENCE, DEFENCE, AGGRESSION

WITTVOGEL, KARL: Oriental Despotism, Yale Univ. Press, 1957-1967, p.121 has a note on the Millet system, mainly the restrictions upon it. – J.Z.

WOLLSTEIN, JARRET B.: Society without Coercion, A New Concept of Social Organization, SIL 1969, Arno Press & The New York Times, N.Y., 1972, 45 pp. - On competing governments out of existence through private alternative institutions. – JZ.

WOMEN: In all countries where women are still treated as inferiors, by laws or customs, they should not only be in the forefront of religious freedom and democratic civil rights but also in the fight for individual secessionism and personal laws, thus depriving their male political masters and religious fanatics of the sanction of the victims and of the tax-tributes they were so far forced to contribute to systems that suppress them. And yet it seems that individual and group secessionism and exterritorially autonomous personal law communities for themselves were so far furthest from their minds. – JZ, 5.1.04, 16.10.07. - & PANARCHISM, WOMEN’S LIBERATION

WOMEN’S LIBERATION: A parliament, government and administration and laws, voted in and appointed only by women for their own affairs and interests, in a panarchy of their own, by women who consider this to be a solution for their problems, would be one approach to tackle their remaining real or imagined problems. It would enfranchise and empower them more than did decades of equal votes with men, which resulted in relatively few women representatives and ministers etc. and gave them, just like male tax payers, all too little say on the kind and size of the tax burden and its usage by governments. Such organizations should receive all the taxes paid by their members and run their own budget. That would be a part-realization of panarchism – one that would be relatively popular at least among women. – JZ, n.d. & 1.9.08. – PANARCHISM, SELF-GOVERNMENT FOR WOMEN

WOMEN’S LIBERATION: Can’t half the human race help itself? – JZ, 21.4.76. – Actually, in my own life I have observed very little unequal treatment for women. But I do admit that too many men are still violent, not only towards other men but even towards women and children. If more women studied unarmed combat techniques then these cases would be more rare. They should also be allowed guns for self-defence. And if one of them finally kills a violent husband, I would not turn such an action into a criminal case against them. Maybe they should then even be given a medal for bravery on the battlefield! – Perhaps this will be done in one or the other panarchy. - JZ, 1.9.08, 7.2.12.

WOMEN’S LIBERATION: Getting more women into governments? No! Rather: getting more women and men out from under territorial governments! – JZ, 7.10.93.

WOMEN’S LIBERATION: Most hierarchies were established by men who now monopolize the upper levels. Thus depriving women of their rightful share of opportunity for incompetence.” – L. J. Pete, The Peter Plan, p.99. - JOKES, TERRITORIALISM, GOVERNMENTALISM

WONDER: By what mental feat, then, are we to sustain our awe and curb our dreaded know-it-all-ness? The answer is simple to express, though difficult to achieve: Keep alive our sense of wonder!” – Leonard E. Read, Then Truth Will Out, p. 23. – One way to do this is to keep in mind the vast variety of facts, observations, ideas, opinions, writings, species, characteristics, possible actions, occupations, associations, activities. Compare my digitized file: Pan Numbers. – JZ, 7.9.08. I just “googled” “cough medicine” and got over 50 million references. – How can one person on his own find the best tip among as many? – JZ, 28.8.12.

WOODCOCK, GEORGE, Reflections on Decentralism, George Woodcock, 1969. - - Note: Originally published in Anarchy, October 1969. - DECENTRALIZATION

WOODHEAD, HENRY GEORGE WANDESFORDE (H. G. W.), et al: Exterritoriality in China, The Case Against Abolition, 1929, 72 pages, in PP 715. - Here is one of the few defenders of the exterritorial status of foreigners in China. Did he also clearly defend the same right of Chinese in foreign countries? I do not remember finding this interesting detail in this book. - JZ, 28.8.04. - This titles was reprinted in Feb.1980 by Garland Publ., 189 pages, $24. – JZ, n.d.

WOODWARD, WAYNE WALLACE: 19, in ON PANARCHY I, in PEACE PLANS No. 505. - - 100, in ON PANARCHY III, in PP 507. - - 53, in ON PANARCHY VI, in PP 585.

WORDPRESS.COM BLOG, PANARCHISTS: You can get to the blog now by using this url: - Dwight Johnson, 11.7.09.


WORDS: I see // that everywhere among the race of men // it is the tongue that wins and not the deed.” – Sophocles, Philoctetes, tr. David Grene. - So far the multiplication of false or misleading words and definitions has not encountered a sufficient counter-measure, like e.g. an Encyclopedia of the Best Refutations. Or fully developed argument maps or the refutations of a comprehensive archive of ideas. At the same time, the multiplicity of possible and desired (at least by some) alternative actions and experiments, including alternative whole societies and systems, under full exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, has, mostly, encountered the wrongful and irrational barriers of territorialism and also the armies of its particular errors, dogmas and prejudices. - JZ, 16.4.11, 288.12. - DEEDS, ACTIONS – Greene?

WORDS: In human relations so many non-verbal messages are involved that conflicts can only rarely be straightened out merely by using more words. In these cases free disassociation and re-association are all-important and require not only e.g. divorces and new marriages and affiliation with a new club etc. but also individual and group secessions and exterritorially autonomous new communities under personal laws to assure full independence for all. – JZ, 26.7.87, 2.9.08. - PANARCHISM

WORDS: The Indian, he’s a ward to the government, but we all are now. Everybody’s an Indian.” – Will Rogers. – “And who guards the guardians?” - Whole populations are reserved to national State and local governments, under the pretence of serving their inhabitants. - JZ, 16.4.11. - INDIAN RESERVATIONS, RED INDIANS, WARDS OF THE GOVERNMENT, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, WELFARE STATE, AUTHORITARIANISM, GUARDIANSHIP, RESERVATION INDIANS

WORDS: There would be many less fights in the world if one took words for what they really are, merely the symbols of our ideas and not the things themselves.” – John Locke, but only in a JZ re-translation of the German version: “Wir wuerden viel weniger Streit in der Welt haben, naehme man die Worte fuer das, was sie sind – lediglich die Zeichen unserer Ideen und nicht die Dinge selbst.” - Compare: "The map is not the territory." - Also consider that a genuine "people" is not indicated by the territory that a diverse population happens to occupy under territorial statism. - JZ, 16.4.11. - PEOPLES, NATIONS, STATES, TERRITORIALISM, POPULATION, UNITY, BORDERS, FRONTIERS

WORDS: Words are dwarfs, examples are giants.” – German proverb. (“Worte sind Zwerge, Beispiele sind Riesen.”) - "Teach by example!" – EXAMPLES, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, FREEDOM OF ACTION

WORK: Government can neither guarantee useful and profitable work, nor provide it, not compel it.” – Henry Hazlitt, 1971. – By taxing us they force us to work harder or longer just to make a living and often force both parents to work. They also have their forced labor or concentration camps. At the same time, they do keep millions of penal prisoners and of refugees in idleness, because they fear their influence on the labor market and thus upon its ignorant and prejudiced voters. – That kind of "employment policy" does also apply, largely, to their compulsory school education, immigration restrictions, and to those forcefully retired because of their age. – The rest are then forced to pay more tributes to support these involuntary idlers. – Territorial governments prove daily that they are capable and willing to do almost anything wrong, irrational and contradictory. – Panarchies would do so, too, but on a much smaller scale and only to their voluntary victims, as long as these are prepared to put up with this. – JZ, 22.4.09. – In the free competition between them the successful ones would attract more and more support or imitators. – JZ, 28.11.12. - JOBS, EMPLOYMENT, ENFORCED RETIREMENT, PRISON LABOR, COMPULSORY SCHOOLING, REFUGEE CAMPS, INTERNMENT CAMPS, CONCENTRATION CAMPS, FORCED LABOR, TAXATION OR TRIBUTES

WORK: What is still more important than even this matter of feeling is the practical discipline, which the character obtains from the occasional demand made upon the citizen to exercise, for a time and in their turn, some social function. It is not sufficiently considered how little there is in most men’s ordinary life to give any largeness either to their conceptions or to their sentiments. Their work is a routine; not a labour of love, but of self-interest in the most elementary form, the satisfaction of daily wants; neither the thing done, nor the process of doing it, introduces the mind to thoughts or feelings extending beyond individuals; if instructive books are within their reach, there is no stimulus to read them; and in most cases the individual has no access to any person of cultivation much superior to his own. Giving him something to do for the public, supplies, in a measure, all these deficiencies. … “ - John Stuart Mill, Considerations on Representative Government, 1861, p.148-151. - Once they are free to choose a panarchy or polyarchy for themselves, i.e., to apply their consumer sovereignty as well as their free enterprise initiative and personal responsibility in the political, economic and social system spheres as well, then this will have a beneficial educational and character building effect. – JZ, 2.9.08. – PANARCHISM, WORK FOR SOME SOCIAL OR PUBLIC CAUSE OR INSTITUTION

WORKERS PARTY: Burn bureaucracy, burn! – JZ, 1.8.75. – A tax strike, a peaceful monetary freedom revolution and individual and groups secessionism would be much more effective than any violent and arsonist revolution, at least in a still somewhat democratic country like Australia. – But I can at least understand the anger and other feelings of violent revolutionaries, who see no other way than arson, violence and killing people - after their rightful aspirations have been frustrated for all too many years. - JZ, 2.9.08. – Individual and group secessionism under personal law is peace-, freedom- justice-, progress-, enlightenment- and prosperity-promoting. – JZ, 28.8.12. - ARSON? BUREAUCRACY, PUBLIC SERVANTS

WORKERS PARTY: For sale: Your freedom! Liberal and Labor Parties are ready to buy it and to monopolize it for themselves, with your money and vote. Check out the W.P. – if you want to hang on to your remaining freedom, get all the rest and retain your money! – JZ, 12/75, 3.9.08, 28.8.12. – But to most people, believing that they were already as free as they could or should be and that a territorial government could and would assure “freedom”, “peace” and “social security” for them, the idea of more or full freedom could not be “sold”. – Only small minorities were ready for some more liberties and their minds were not prepared for full exterritorial autonomy for all minorities, either. – Territorialism remained rampant in the W.P. as well. - JZ, 3.9.08. - PANARCHISM

WORKERS PARTY: Ignorance makes most Men go into a Party, and Shame keepeth them from getting out of it.” – George Savile, Complete Works, p.227, quoted in George Seldes, “The Great Quotations”. – The W.P. wants you to join because of your knowledge and to abstain from leaving because of pride in its achievements. – JZ, 16.3.75. – Man is often all too hopeful and optimistic rather than realistic and pessimistic. – Only via panarchism can sufficiently convincing examples be set which will, finally, be copied by most others, even while they still not understand why certain experiments were successful. One does not have to understand electricity in order to flick on a light-switch or the inner workings of a computer to use it for word processing. – JZ, 3.9.08. – PANARCHISM, MINORITY AUTONOMY, PROGRESS, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, ENLIGHTENMENT,

WORKERS PARTY: It is immoral to force people to support services they do not use or do not value – just because some think they know what is best for everybody else. – JZ, 75. – I believe that Robert Heinlein made a very similar remark. – JZ, 28.8.12.

WORKERS PARTY: Less government, less regulation, less taxation, less inflation, less unemployment. The right to work and to succeed. And the risk of failure. Real incentive.” – W.P. advertisement, THE NATIONAL TIMES, 15.12.75. – It did not believe, sufficiently, in freedom to promise e.g.: No territorially imposed government, regulations or taxes, No inflation, No unemployment for those volunteers prepared to take the necessary steps. – It was absurd to promise the right to succeed. All they could have promised was the right to try to succeed, without any coercive or monopolistic hindrance, e.g. through full experimental freedom for volunteers under exterritorial autonomy & personal laws. – A fortune was expended on such advertisements. To what effect? - JZ, 3.9.08.

WORKERS PARTY: Let the worker retain what is his and let the parasites try to live off each other. – JZ, 12/75. – Charity notions are so ingrained in the minds of most Australians that they are not prepared to limit it to voluntary charity but insist on making it compulsory, via taxation. And even after this has been done, at huge expense, mainly to the benefit of a huge bureaucracy, they are prepared to provide in addition private and voluntary charity to those obviously not enough helped by the Welfare State, which is mainly self-serving. – The examples of statist “help” to Aborigines, Red Indians and Eskimos etc. were, apparently, not yet enough of a deterrent example. We had all to be turned into territory-wide inhabitants or wards of the State in a giant governmental “reservation”, with no right to opt out to do our own things for or to ourselves. - JZ, 3.9.08. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL & GROUP SECESSIONISM WITHOUT ANY TERRITORIAL MONOPOLY.

WORKERS PARTY: Most parties and people want to use the territorial State to realize their ideals. We want to reduce it to allow us and you to realize the own ideals, exterritorially and among volunteers only. – JZ, 10.11.75, 3.9.08, 16.4.11.

WORKERS PARTY: No kidding! Honest work, in a free economy, could turn an ordinary man, willing to productively invest a moderate amount safe from inflation, taxation and confiscation at the highest possible interest that can be earned (as a fair share in the additional productivity achieved by that investment), over the decades to his retirement, into a multi-millionaire in his old age, with the economic freedom program of the Workers Party. – JZ, 1.8.75, 3.8.78, 2.9.08. - For some details see under PENSIONS. - Also: PEACE PLANS 19 C, offered by me digitized. - JZ, 16.4.11.

WORKERS PARTY: Set fire to the bureaucratic structure through the W.P. – JZ, 1.8.75. – Since some fools may take such remarks literally, it would be better to speak of taking down or no longer legally and juridically sanctioning any bureaucratic structure except those which volunteers want to maintain among themselves, at their own expense and risk. Statism should be confined to statists. That is punishment enough for them and leaves them their State socialist or welfare statist “paradise” as long as they can stand it. – JZ, 2.9.08.

WORKERS PARTY: The Australian Labor Party in government for Labor voters, the Liberal Party in government for Liberal voters and the Workers Party in government for working voters. – To each his own kind of government or free society, according to his or her own individual choice, under full exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. – JZ, 2.8.75, 2.9.08. - PANARCHISM

WORKERS PARTY: The party for anti-political persons – a party which will finally and panarchistically do away with parties and politics. – JZ, 1.8.75. – That was then my kind of wishful thinking. – JZ, 3.9.08, 16.5.11.

WORKERS PARTY: The rule of laissez-faire, laissez passer would exclude all political action – except that of the W.P. and would thus set you free. – JZ, 1.8.75. – Such a radical alternative should only have been offered panarchistically and tolerantly, i.e., for volunteers only. – JZ, 3.9.08.

WORKERS PARTY: The W.P. would not take any taxes from you but merely insist on payment of fees for services rendered. It would also leave you free to buy from other suppliers and professionals. – JZ, 11.2.76. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARY TAXATION, FEES FOR SERVICES, USER PAYS PRINCIPLE

WORKERS PARTY: The W.P. would set even the socialists free – to rule themselves – not others. – JZ, 1.8.75. – SOCIALISM, STATE SOCIALISM, SECESSIONISM, PANARCHISM

WORKERS PARTY: The Workers Party Gives You a Choice. – All other parties really fight for more taxation, more government, more regulations, more jobs for the boys and less freedom for you. So, this time, you do have a choice, the W.P. We offer you less taxes, less government and more freedom. We will not attempt to bribe you with your own money. We offer you as few and as low taxes, as little government and as few laws and as much freedom as you are willing to accept, individually, while not objecting at all and in any way to volunteers restricting their liberties and rights as much as they like – at their own expense and risk, in various social, economic and political experiments of their own. – JZ, 12/75, 3.9.08. – PANARCHISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM, VOLUNTARISM, INDIVIDUALISM, SECESSIONISM

WORKERS PARTY: The Workers Party proposes that a man relate to his fellows without force, without fraud and without coercion.” – Bob Cowin, 2/75.

WORKERS PARTY: The WP will arrange a prison break for everyone – but the criminals. – JZ, 1.8.75.

WORKERS PARTY: The WP will let you pay for your own welfare and take the others of your shoulders. – JZ, 1.8.75.

WORKERS PARTY: Through direct and indirect taxes you work half of your time and more for the government – like a government serf for his feudal lord. The W.P. would free you of this imposed tribute burden. – JZ, 2.8.75, 3.9.08.

WORKERS PARTY: Time is up for the looters, parasites and bureaucrats. – JZ, 1.8.75. – Alas, they are firmly in the saddle, still. – JZ, 2.9.08. – After the federal Workers Party in Australia split up, the State branches adopted the vague term Progress Party, which did not clearly enough state in which direction its progress would advance. It concerned itself mainly with relatively minor matters of concern to many voters and put the big problems in their “too hard” trays. That was my impression of them. – JZ, 7.2.12.

WORKERS PARTY: To each his own – including full exterritorial autonomy for all those, who want it for themselves. – JZ, 2.8.75, 17.4.11.

WORKERS PARTY: We are liberals for free enterprise rather than liberals or socialists for a mixed economy. – JZ, 13.12.75. – However, as panarchists we also favor full exterritorial autonomy for all kinds of socialist volunteers. – JZ, 3.9.08.

WORKERS PARTY: We are simply a group of people who want a chance to live our lives as free people – From a 1976 N.S.W. State W.P. introduction. - We are simply a group of people who want a chance to live our lives as free people, as free or as unfree as we want to be, at whatever level we are able to or want to achieve through our own efforts. - On the underlined part I was one of its few dissenters. - JZ, 17.4.11.

WORKERS PARTY: We are sinking progressively into State feudalism. Only the W.P. intends to reverse this trend. – JZ, 2.8.75, 3.9.08.

WORKERS PARTY: We are the political party to end all political parties. – JZ, 4/76. – Through individual and group secessionism and by recognizing full exterritorial autonomy under personal laws for all communities of volunteers: panarchism or polyarchism. – JZ, 3.9.08. – PANARCHISM, POLYARCHISM

WORKERS PARTY: We do not offer any benefits or handouts but a relief from imposed burdens. – JZ, 6.4.76.

WORKERS PARTY: Whether you work with your hands, your mind or your savings, the Workers Party works for you. – John Curver’s election leaflet, 1976. – A few election leaflets and advertisements were not enough to change a whole public opinion mind-set, established over many decades. – Only the effects of full experimental freedom could achieve that and public opinion was not ready to accept experimental freedom for volunteers in the sphere of political, economic and social systems and is not yet ready for it, today, either. – Nor was John Curver himself – after my discussions with him. In other words, I was not a good enough salesman for liberty towards an intelligent businessman and freedom lover like him. - JZ, 3.9.08. - I do not know whether it still exists under the later adopted name of "Progress Party". - Even this party helped only to turned me off all attempts to work for and through any territorialist political party. - JZ, 17.4.11.

WORKERS PARTY: Why settle for less than full liberty? Why choose any other party than the W.P.? – JZ, 31.7.75. – At least then and there I did not think and write sufficiently as a panarchist. But to talk with W.P. members about panarchism was as much in vain as trying to do so with the average voter for any of the other parties. – JZ, 3.9.08.

WORKERS: a nation which fosters its good-for-nothings will end by becoming a good-for-nothing nation.” – Herbert Spencer, Reflections, p.2. – Territorial nations are always good for nothing that is really positive. But they are good for lots of negative effects. – JZ, 22.4.09. – TERRITORIALISM, NATIONALISM, GOOD FOR NOTHINGS, WELFARE STATE

WORKERS: All that he asks of the state is, not to be disturbed in his toil, and to be secure in his earnings.” – Tocqueville, Democracy in America, p.261, quoted in THE FREEMAN, 1/76, p.27. - Also to become a sovereign consumer when it comes to his choices of goods and services as well as laws, systems and institutions offered by anyone or any group and, potentially, an entrepreneur, free to establish any enterprise together with other volunteers, even a whole new society or community, nation- or world-wide, as long as he and they do not claim any territorial monopoly. - JZ, 17.4.11. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY, VOLUNTARISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, FREEDOM TO EXPERIMENT

WORLD CITIZENSHIP: I am a citizen, not of Athens or Greece, but of the world.” – Socrates, 469 – 399 B.C. - COSMOPOLITANISM, INTERNATIONALISM, MANKIND, HUMANITY

WORLD CITIZENSHIP: I am not a German or an Australian but a cosmopolitan who is, unfortunately, still subjected to a territorial State. – JZ, 19.9.03. – And so are all other genuine peace- freedom- and justice lovers. – JZ, 23.10.07. - COSMOPOLITANISM

WORLD FEDERALISM & PANARCHISM: As many panarchistic world federations as would please the various world federalists. All valid only for themselves. - JZ, 23.9.04.

WORLD FEDERALISM: Since a government cannot run a national currency properly then it could far less run an international one. – If a government cannot run internal trade better than the market does, then it could far less run all international trade properly. – If a government cannot stop local crime then how in the world could any government hope to be able to cope with world-wide crime? – Is there even a single ruler in the world who rules himself optimally, in every respect? And yet each of the world federalists hopes that world rulers could rule thousands of millions of other people effectively and optimally, better than they could themselves! - - There are no necessary and rightful tasks which only a world government could fulfill. - - National territorial sovereignty is, indeed, definitely wrong. ‘But this requires its abolition and not another vain attempt to create a single, world-wide and still only territorial counterforce. Revolutions, military insurrections, putsches and civil wars, which are often the most uncivilized kinds of fighting, will then still occur. Although the world federation might always win – which is rather unlikely after the invention of nuclear mass murder devices – the price paid for this victory will be too high, once again, as it was, in WW I, WW II, the Korean and in the Vietnam and many of the following wars. - - Where to could one escape from a world dictatorship or a corrupt world government? - - Rather let all world federalists etc. set up their own organizations on a voluntary basis and without any territorial powers. Then they would be rather harmless. They would even help to break down the territorial borders. But every exclusive territorial world federation would compound the nationalist errors and wrongs and apply them world-wide. The worst would get to the top, there, too, the worst people of the world! – Who rules himself, properly, in every respect? – And yet there are some who believe themselves to be capable to properly rule and control all other people in the world! – That alone indicates that they are mental cases. – There are no necessary and rightful tasks that only a world government could and should undertake. - JZ, n.d. & 31.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, Q.

WORLD FEDERATION: A world federation of all minority groups, aiming at full exterritorial autonomy for all of them, could become the most powerful federation of all and this very fast. – JZ, n.d., & 30.10.07. - & MINORITIES

WORLD FEDERATION: All territorial federal governments are constitutional, legalized and juridically sanctioned - armed and organized conspiracies - against all those of their subjects who have not given them their individual consent. – JZ, 20.5.91, 31.8.08, 17.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM

WORLD GOVERNMENT: A world-wide free market and full exterritorial autonomy for all who want it for themselves would, obviously, be much more fruitful than any world government or world federation could possibly be. – JZ, 20.5.91. – UN

WORLD GOVERNMENT: Any world government, like any multi-national corporation, should only be one of many, competitive ones, confined to voluntary members, investors and customers and limited to exterritorial autonomy only, under its own personal laws. Only then can it be rightful and will it be relatively harmless or even a service organization for its subscribers, like world churches or world religions are. – We do have already thousands of international organizations. None of them should have a monopoly or the power to dominate any of the others. – Cosmopolitanism does not require political organization. - JZ, 16.6.94, 1.9.08. – PANARCHISM, COMPETING WORLD GOVERNMENTS & WORLD FEDERATIONS

WORLD GOVERNMENT: If a world political society is some day founded, it will be by means of freedom.” - Jacques Maritain, Man & The State, ed. by Richard O’Sullivan, London, Hollis & Carter, 1954, p.189. - And then it will not be a single and uniform society for all but one of several frameworks for diverse societies, all peacefully competing to satisfy their own volunteers, just like there will be more than one sports club, one theatre society, one concert society, one scientific congress or one world university for all for all the people in this world. – The unity notion should not be driven to the heights of absurdity. Globalization, to the extent that it should take place, should be quite voluntary and step by step done with individual consent only and that of voluntary communities and other groups. – To each the progress, stagnation or backwardness that he wants for himself! – I for one am still without a mobile phone and likely to remain so. I am even without a TV, for years now. – And I certainly would not want just one TV station for the whole world. Or a single air line. Would you? – The world-wide postal monopoly is bad enough. - JZ, 29.9.07. – At least email, telephones and faxes, as well as social networks like Facebook, have already largely taken over the personal communication business from the P.O. – JZ, 28.8.12. - WORLD SOCIETY, WORLD FEDERATION, WORLD STATE, COSMOPOLITANISM & FREEDOM, GLOBALIZATION

WORLD GOVERNMENT: If all constructive activity could be concerted to the end of achieving human felicity, everyone would be under the sway of the concerting force. It would be totalitarian whether the concerting force was some world-wide government, the people, or an idea. Whether it would produce felicity or not would be a moot question, for there would be no independent judgment to determine whether it was felicity or universal torment. It is the very condition of independence that one not be completely concerted. The advancement of the idea, then, it the advancement toward totalitarianism.” – Clarence B. Carson, “World in the Grip of an Idea”, THE FREEMAN, Jan. 77. - What applies to a world government does also apply to any territorial national government. - JZ, 17.4.11. - TERRITORIALISM, INDEPENDENCE, GENUINE SELF-GOVERNMENT, TOTALITARIANISM, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & LIBERTIES

WORLD GOVERNMENT: If we accept the proposition that present-day governments are likely to be riddled with corruption at every level, what could we expect from the biggest, richest, most powerful government of all time?” – Brian Wilshire, The Fine Print, published by Brian Wilshire, PO Box 209, Round Corner, NSW 2158, Australia, 1992, p.39. - & CORRUPTION, TERRITORIALISM, Q.

WORLD GOVERNMENT: If we didn’t have any national territorial governments then we would not, obviously, “need” any world-wide organization to subdue them. So, instead of creating a countervailing force in form of a world government, a super-empire government, we should try to get rid of national territorial governments or render them harmless by reducing their power to that over voluntary members and exterritorial autonomy only. – JZ, n.d. & 1.9.08. - The same kind of territorialist wrong and mistake is involved as occurred, historically, when feudalistic aristocracies were replaced by absolute monarchies. – Just like one of the fundamental mistakes of the Marxists, who want to replace a multitude of private capitalists by a single one. – There are about 10 to 20 million employers in the USA, who are still somewhat competing with each other and thus giving job seekers a choice, however limited this still is under monetary and financial despotism, also imposed by the State. – Complete State Socialism would reduce the “choice” of job seekers to one boss and that of consumers to one producer. Under State socialist “pricing” chandeliers were paid for by their weight. So the factory, which produced them, made them so heavy that they pulled down some ceilings. - JZ, 17.4.11, 28.8.12. – STATE SOCIALISM, PLANNING, JOKES

WORLD GOVERNMENT: One only instead of xyz, all only for their xyz volunteers? – JZ, n.d. OR WORLD FEDERATION, Q.

WORLD GOVERNMENT: Regardless of the kind of global system that is to be imposed: Monopoly Capitalist, Free Enterprise, Socialist or whatever, the bigger and more distant a government becomes, the harder it will be for its subjects to control it.” - – Brian Wilshire, The Fine Print, published by Brian Wilshire, PO Box 209, Round Corner, NSW 2158, Australia, 1992, p.40. – World Governments would far exceed the optimal size for any government with involuntary subjects. If there is such an optimum for such governments. I believe it to be: zero subjects or 1 person, or volunteers only, all of them at the same time subjects and self-rulers. An optimum size would also tend to be maintained by governments, communities and societies that have all only voluntary subjects, with any and all of them remaining free to secede and to join or establish alternative exterritorially autonomous self-government systems. – Not only most federal but also most State and local territorial governments have long exceeded their optimum sizes and toward involuntary subjects they are always unjust. – Let individuals decide for themselves how large or small their society, community or competing government is going to be or to remain. No more conquests of territories and their populations. No more involuntary members and subjects and thus no more targets, motives and means for mass extermination devices. - JZ, 1.10.07. & ITS SUBJECTS, OPTIMUM SIZES

WORLD GOVERNMENT: Traditional nationalism cannot survive the fissioning of the atom. One world or none.” – Stuart Chase. – A world government would be almost certain to lead to still more civil wars and they would be carried out with nuclear “weapons”. – I rather fear a world government or world empire even more than and territorial national government. It would be even more dangerous to individual rights and liberties. – JZ, 8.7.91, 1.9.08. – DIS, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, CIVIL WARS, WORLD EMPIRE

WORLD LAW: We prefer world law in the age of self-determination – we reject world war in the age of mass extermination.” – John F. Kennedy. – He ignored that the imposition of uniform territorial laws over large territories is the major cause of armed conflicts. – Word law in his sense would also mean that every future war would be a civil war and a world war. He, too, represented a warfare State and under him the nuclear arsenal of the USA, i.e. its mass murder devices, were doubled. I for one am not prepared to forgive him for that or his opponents for they did not get rid of him for that reason. – Self-determination of a genuine type, namely for individuals and communities of volunteers, is precisely what is prevented through territorial “self-governments” like his. A genuine self-government is what would be left of any existing territorial government once all its peaceful dissenters are free to secede from it and all who wanted to had already made use of this right and liberty. - JZ, 8.7.91, 12.7.92, 2.9.08, 28.8.12. - SELF-DETERMINATION, SELF-GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM, DIS., UN

WORLD MOVERS: Let him that would move the world, first move himself.” – Socrates. – Recognize individual sovereignty and individual and group secessionism and you would see world-wide improvements resulting as fast as humanly possible through the experimental freedom and the practical demonstrations of successful new experiments to the rest of the world, then quite free to follow these examples through individuals joining them or whole other groups of volunteers imitating them. Territorial politicians and bureaucrats are unlikely to adopt improvements fast enough. – Voluntary associationism can achieve what compulsory and territorial associationism can’t. - JZ, 1.9.08, 28.8.12. - SELF-IMPROVEMENT, INDIVIDUALS, MINORITIES, PANARCHISM

WORLD SAVING: The “world” saves itself, given freedom. Free human beings will, sooner or later, solve their own problems, as well as possible, in their own and various ways. They do at least have the right to try to do so – at their own expense and risk. That means also, that they should become free to secede and to reorganize themselves in various societies and communities, all of volunteers only and none of them claiming or needing any territorial monopoly and involuntary subjects for their experiments. “Release all creative energies!” – as Leonard E. Read frequently demanded. – JZ, 9.10.96, 8.9.08, 7.4.11. – It makes more sense to me when one replaces “world” with “mankind”, “man” or “human beings”. In reality, almost only individuals or small minorities do innovate and do the pioneering jobs, later merely copied by many of the others. – JZ, 7.2.12.

WORLD SOCIETY: If their senses were not dulled by their idolatry, the one-worlders could draw a sound conclusion from these two examples; namely, that the only way to a world society is through free trade. (*) This does not mean that free trade alone would guarantee world peace, for there are other political institutions that make for frictions; but, it would go a long way. After all, if the customer is always right, how could he be an enemy?” – Frank Chodorov, Fugitive Essays, p.127. - (*) If it included e.g. fully free migration, full monetary and financial freedom as well and full freedom of association and of disassociation or individual and group secessionism and autonomy. – But I for one would welcome a world-wide federation of quite rightful local militias, all of volunteers and for the protection of all genuine individual rights and liberties only, to the extent that free individuals do want to apply them among themselves. That, too, should not be obligatory. Your right to free speech, to freedom of press and assembly does not mean that you have to make use of them every day or every week or ever, if you do not want to. - JZ, 1.9.08. - If he had been a chess player, would he have considered only ONE move among his many options? Even in the single sphere that he considered, namely Free Trade or Protectionism, he took territorialism for granted and ignored the possibility of Free Trade for Free Traders and of Protectionism for Protectionists only. There are many different answers, choices, actions and experiments. Let each one choose his own - at the own risk and expense. I doubt that he would have favored e.g. a Free Trade or a black market trade in mass extermination devices. - JZ, 17.4.11. - NWT, DIS., VOLUNTARISM, SECESSIONISM, EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. TERRITORIALISM

WORLD SOCIETY: One World – One Marketplace – One worldism is not an impossible ideal; but, it is not attainable through the medium of political power. On the contrary, the organization of the world into a single society – which is what the one-worlders really want – can be accomplished only if people can rid themselves of the fetish of authoritarianism.” – Frank Chodorov, Fugitive Essays, p.124. - Rather, of territorialism or monopolism. If volunteers are foolish enough to grant authoritarian powers over themselves to an individual or a small group among them, then that is their problem. Each new generation, is a new invasion of barbarians, as someone once said, should see not only attractive but also deterrent examples for life's diverse choices. - JZ, 17.4.11. - AUTHORITARIANISM, WORLD STATE, WORLD MARKET, COSMOPOLITANISM, TERRITORIALISM, GLOBALISM

WORLD STATE & PANARCHISM: As many world States as some people like for themselves - but all only at their own expense and risk. From my point of view most of the empires of the past were already much too large and bad enough. But, to each his own! - JZ, 3.9.04.

WORLD STATE: A territorial world State would be a world-wide threat to freedom and individual rights. National bureaucracies are bad enough. – However, exterritorially autonomous and competing World-States, world federations, world monarchies, world republics etc. and all kinds of federations of voluntary communities, all without any territorial monopoly claims and without any compulsory subjects, would be quite another matter. – JZ, 5.5.95. – Let them compete for members like the world religions do. – JZ, 31.8.08. – As a territorial monopoly State for the whole world it would exaggerate the wrongs and evils of any country-wide State and would be even harder to get rid of. – JZ, 7.2.12. – UN, WORLD FEDERATION, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM

WORLD STATE: Have the actions and discussions of the UN left the impression that either of them was always very rational, wise, and just? Or were they usually just as unjust, irrational and prejudiced as those of most territorial governments? – Just look at their very flawed “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” of 10.12.1948! – Have the troops under the command of the UN always acted much better than any other national government troops? - JZ, 31.8.08. – The UN represents nothing more and nothing better than the rather dis-united territorial governments. It even represents obviously criminal regimes. None of the world's population did even get a single "equal" vote among 6,000 million people potential voters, for the election of any of the UN's "representatives". - They are just appointed by territorial governments and as such represent merely legalized criminal gangs with involuntary victims. - JZ, 17.4.11. - UNITED NATIONS, UN, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM.

WORLD STATE: If we want to avoid the Ultimate Totalitarian State, a world State, we cannot merely rethink government, we must exist without it!” – An unnamed anarcho-capitalist, quoted in THE VOLUNTARYIST, No. 89, Dec. 1997, in a letter by “A Grateful Subscriber.” - All we will have to do is living without any territorial governments. That would not be any loss but, rather, a great gain for most of us. - JZ, 17.4.11. – Just think of the savings in direct and indirect taxes and in hassles with bureaucrats. – JZ, 28.8.12.

WORLD STATE: Now, if the business of the state is to cause friction within any given segment of society, any one country, by what logic can it be shown that a world-state will prevent friction? If a small state is an evil, as the one-worlders insist, why should a big state be a good? Can an institution that is essentially antisocial be made pro-social by enlargement? No matter how high the totem pole it is not God.” – Frank Chodorov, Fugitive Essays, “One Worldism”, p.125. - STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, MONOPOLISM, COERCION, COMPULSION VS. VOLUNTARY MEMBERSHIP.

WORLD STATE: The breaking down of economic barriers does not require a political unification but, rather, the abolition of territorial political powers. – JZ, 31.8.08. – TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM, FREE TRADE VS. PROTECTIONISM

WORLD STATE: The World State is the application of the fundamental Marxist error on private enterprises, as monopolies, which ought, according to the Marxists, to be replaced by a country-wide public enterprise monopolist, and this time on a world-wide scale. Nationalization on a world-wide scale is obviously not the answer. Even more power to a single government for the world is one of the worst things that could be done. It just does not make any sense, especially at a time when management science for large enterprises does, finally and only all too gradually, discover the benefits of decentralization, delegation of decision-making, internal group work and contracting and forms of self-management, partnerships, employee-shareholding etc. – However, let there be as many multinationals as can make a living without any fraud, coercion and legalized monopolies. – And let us try to discover the optimal sizes for all kinds of human organizations. Bigger is not always better, beyond certain limits. This world is not dominated by elephants or whales. - JZ, 27.11.95, 31.8.08, 17.4.11, 28.8.12.

WORLD STATE: The world State suggestion is as wrong and absurd as well as harmful as would be the suggestion to transfer all economic activities to a single world corporation. Political corporations need fully free competition with them, from volunteers, exterritorially organized, of all kinds, and thereby they should themselves become reduced to communities of volunteers. To build up territorialism into a worldwide monopoly would be one of the greatest wrongs and absurdities. It would increase rather than reduce the problems of majoritarian territorialism and also those of minorities, which cannot even achieve local territorial majority status. – JZ 30.11.95. – Imagine the situation when e.g. religious multi-millions of Indians or ideologically motivated Chinese could outvote, via a world State, all others in the world. That could lead to numerous civil wars. – JZ, 31.8.08, 28.8.12. – PANARCHISM, COMPETING GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM, CENTRALIZATION

WORLD STATE: This attempt to carry the pattern of centralization a stage further inspires no confidence whatever in the light of our study of the mechanisms which determine individual conduct. The greater the degree of power, and the wider the gap between governors and governed, the stronger the appeal of office to those who are likely to abuse it, and the less the response which can be expected from the individual. Super-governments have succeeded, as the Roman Church succeeded for a while, when they could appeal directly to the mores of the public. Public social sense, which transcends frontiers, is a fact, and it persists, but it has so far failed to restrain local governments from aggressive actions. Who is to repress the world authority when it too falls into the wrong hands?” – Alex Comfort, Authority and Delinquency, p.85. - Unfortunately, even most SF writers have envisioned nothing better than whole planets or their territories under a single system or organization. - I would like to hear about all the exceptions. - JZ, 17.4.11. TERRITORIALISM AT ITS EXTREME, CENTRALIZATION, POWER, STATISM

WORLD STATE: Whatever the merits of a World State in relation to the preservation of peace – and those merits have been greatly exaggerated, especially when we recall that some of the bloodiest conflicts have occurred within nation states – it is probable that it would tend to demand of us that unqualified obedience which consciences rightfully could not give. Its thrust to oligarchy and bureaucracy would no doubt resemble that of the nation state (although the absence of external “enemies” might restrict this tendency in some measure) and this thrust could be checked, in the end, only by readiness not merely for legal dissent but also for civil disobedience.” – Mulford Q. Sibley, The Obligation to Disobey, p.97. - TERRITORIALISM

WORLD STATE: Whether or not there exists a supernational authority with an international parliament is of minor importance. The real need is to abandon policies detrimental to the interests of other nations. (*) No international authority can preserve peace if economic wars continue.” Ludwig von Mises, Omnipotent Government, p.6. - (*) Also any "policies" which are contrary to involuntary members of the own "nation". Only volunteers can form a genuine national society and for that they do not need any territorial monopoly. - JZ, 17.4.11.

WORLD STATE: While, indeed, national territorial States should get out of our diverse ways, a new World State or world-wide empire should not get into our ways. Free Trade, Free Migration, freedom in transportation, freedom for investments, monetary freedom, the free flow of information and the recognition of all other genuine individual rights and liberties - would unite mankind much more than any World State, World Government or World Federation possibly could. People do not have to become politically and territorially organized and regulated. On the contrary: They require the absence of any intervention by any territorial government. – JZ, 1.9.08, 17.4.11, 7.2.12. – VOLUNTARISM UNDER EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY VS. ANY FORM OF TERRITORIALISM.

WORLD WAR III: One could make an interesting list of the predictable wrongs and mistakes of WW III. It might help in avoiding them. By avoiding them we might even prevent WW III. This list is in no way complete or optimally formulated. Hundreds of other points should be added and better formulations should be substituted. Think about it. Your life and that of all those, whom you love, are at stake as well. Do you really love your life and them, if you can’t be bothered to ponder such problems? - 1.) Finance by taxation and confiscation. 2.) Finance by forced loans. 3.) Finance by inflation. 4.) Conscription. 5.) All too vague or no quite rightful war aims declared in time and in believable form. 6.) Demands for unconditional surrender. 7.) Indiscriminate warfare. 8.) Even deserters and conscripts treated as prisoners of war and irreconcilable enemies. 9.) No systematic tyrannicide attempts. 10.) No systematic attempts to induce the soldiers of a dictatorship to desert or to rise against it. 11.) No attractive governments in exile set up and fully recognized for their present and future volunteers. 12.) No systematic efforts to induce a military insurrection or popular revolution on the other side! 13.) Use of misleading or quite false war propaganda. 14.) Suppression of individual rights and liberties and of civil liberties. 15.) No separate peace treaties allowed. 16.) Opponents prosecuted as traitors. 17.) Conscientious objectors shot or imprisoned. 18.) Indiscriminate use of mass murderous “weapons”. 19.) No election and recall for officers. 20.) Decision on war and peace, international negotiations and treaties remaining monopolized. 21.) Military obedience remaining strictly enforced. 22.) Rights and liberties of soldiers not recognized and respected. 23.) Seniority system of promotions. 24.) Information through “proper” and nationalized channels only. 25.) Price controls and rationing. 26.) Centrally planned and directed economies. 27.) Rights of neutral groups and individuals not respected. 28.) International warfare conventions not abided by or not even made sufficiently known. 29.) Economic warfare instead of continuing peaceful trade as much as possible. 30.) Psychological warfare only in the sense of merely demoralizing the other side. 31.) Appeals mainly only to nationalistic and territorialist emotions and prejudices. – JZ, n.d. & 1.9.08, 17.4.11. For some more details see my two peace books on - NWT.

WORLD WAR III: We shall not find it possible to learn from World War III because there would not be enough left.” – Dean Rusk, Address, to the American Legion national convention, Portland, Oregon, 24.8.1965. – People like him and a few other territorial leaders, as well as their all too submissive territorial subjects, the primary targets for any nuclear war, have made all too sure of that. – JZ, 1.9.08. – NWT.

WORLD WAR III: When I die the world ends.” – This is the title of a science fiction story. Many human beings now could say this truthfully. But, do they think and act accordingly, as yet? – JZ, n.d., & 1.9.08, 17.4.11. - NWT, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM, OBEDIENCE

WORLD: It’s hard to realize that you live in a world of your own – bounded by your own knowledge, your own perception, your own ways or reasoning, your own set of standards. (*) And that the other person doesn’t reside there. (**) He lives in his own world. – Sometimes your worlds will overlap; with some people, they’ll overlap often. But most of each person’s world is different from yours. What is obvious to you may seem very strange to him. You can base a plan on making him see the light, but the plan can very easily go astray. – And if it’s difficult to influence just one person, think what you’re up against when you hope to change the prevailing views of a whole society of people. - Do you know what you face? Do you understand each of the individual natures of the thousands of millions of people you’d have to convert to make your ideal society possible? (***) Will your statement of the truth be sufficient to make each of them give up his own way of seeking happiness and follow your way? - This doesn’t mean that the world never changes – for better or for worse (****) It changes constantly. But what we see as a changing world is the result of millions of individual changes that add up to a net change in the General Market. (*****) The general change is a result of many specific individual changes.” – Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom, p.116. - (*) Alas, we are not fully free to do that! – (**) Neither is he as free, as yet, apart from private thoughts and actions. – (***) Democracies, with their majority voting, are certainly not the best way to achieve that. – (****) But it means, even today, that it still changes all too slowly and often still for the worse! – (*****) System changes can, as a rule, not be achieved by individuals under territorialism. - Alas, Harry Browne did not arrive at panarchist conclusions from such considerations, although in most other spheres he was a free marketeer, laissez-faire and free contract advocate. He wrote books on how to profit from inflations and deflations, rather than on how to stop and prevent them. – JZ, 31.8.08. - PANARCHISM, CHANGE, INFLUENCE, TOLERANCE, VOLUNTARISM, EXPERIMENTAL FREEDOM EXTERRITORIAL AUTONOMY, SECESSIONISM

WORRYING: Ain’t no sense in worrying about things you got control over, ‘cause if you got control over them, ain’t no sense worrying. And there ain’t no sense worrying about things you got no control over, ‘cause if you got no control over them, ain’t no sense in worrying about them.” – Mickey Rivers. – Not being in control over our own affairs should become our greatest worry. – JZ, 5.8.92. - DIS., SELF-GOVERNMENT, PANARCHISM, SELF-DETERMINATION, VS. TERRITORIALISM & POLITICS AS USUAL

WORSHIP: The most preposterous notion that homo sapiens has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes, wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures, can be swayed by their prayers, and becomes petulant if He does not receive this flattery. Yet this absurd fantasy, without a shred of evidence to bolster it, pays all the expenses of the oldest, largest and least productive industry in all history.” – (Somehow the name of the author got lost here! – JZ) Mankind had rulers, declared to be Gods and wanting to be worshipped, prayed to, flattered etc. Mankind had all too much experience with such guys – and simply transferred such notions, customs and practices to the later visions and myths of a single and almighty God, wishing to the treated like the human ruler-gods wished to be, and also having the same human frailties, in spite of, supposedly, being a perfect being, one quite independent of his creatures. The “divine” rulers have probably existed for more thousands of years than the notion of an invisible and all-powerful single God and creator. Man has largely become conditioned by such notions and practices, errors, myths and false assumptions. – Logic, facts and consistency never played any large role in that sphere. – JZ, 7.9.08. - The divinity spleen of and for rulers, with its authoritarianism, has also led to territorialism and all its crimes. - JZ, 17.4.11. - PRAYERS, GOD, CHURCHES, FAITH, RELIGION, STATISM, TERRITORIALISM, LOYALTY, OBEDIENCE, ALLEGIANCE, DIS.

WRONGS: Territorial governments also inflict many more wrongs than mere individual could, even with the worst intentions. – And they do not let individuals and minorities secede from them. – The consequence of this right and free competition from exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, with the former territorial States, then reduced to societies of statist volunteers, would be quite rightful and well deserved “punishment” for them. Maybe this would even serve to rehabilitate them. - JZ, 31.8.08. - PANARCHISM

WRONGS: The world is full of large wrongs to be righted. Alas, most people are only concerned about the continuance of their own minor and wrongful privileges or even about the continuance of all of the great wrongs of territorial States! – JZ, 17.6.84, 31.8.08. – RIGHTS, HUMAN RIGHTS, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS



[Home] [Top]