The world is run by two major factions: tyrants and willing slaves, the two in my very rough estimation comprising about 99.5% to 99.9% of the world's population. Some small dreg of the remainder is comprised of those very few humans who do not share the mindset of either controlling interest, but are in fact free men.
There is much to discuss on these matters, yet so little of value has been put forth that is worthy of pursuit, architecting, tuning, and realization.
The vast majority of humanity are, in their minds, willing slaves to those who presume to lord over them. They are do deeply hoodwinked, so blinded to the greater truth regarding proper human relations, there is little to no hope that they can be brought around to the veracity of their innate status as free beings.
Such people, the vast majority of all humanity, are bred and trained to fear, and consequently hate actual freedom. They have been long marinated in the mental swill that bends their thoughts and perceptions to the will and convenience of the tyrant. And so it has gone for thousands of years to ever growing advantage of the would-be lords of humanity as the body of man's knowledge has grown, hitting what currently appears to be at least the beginning of an asymptotic stride upward such that even a single man can now wield nearly unimaginable degrees and sorts of control over vast populations.
The oddly paradoxical element in all this, however, is that those of the tyrant class are every bit the inmates as those over whom they presume their false authority as valid, the only differences lying in the dimensions and appointments of their respective prisons. Theye are every bit as trapped in their roles as tyrants as are those who willingly submit to the various and manifestly cruel oppressions. In this way, the slaves are not only willing participants in the play that is human politics, they hold an oblique brand of odd authority over the tyrants as well, the practical upshot being that Theye are as shackled as are the rest.
The result is a system of mutually reinforcing authoritarianism whose truer nature is belied by the superficial differences between the respective roles. Theye only think they are in charge in some gestalt manner, suffering under the symmetric delusion that the proles have no power over them. This, however, is in itself deeply delusional, for Theye have no more access to freedom than do those of the slave class.
The moment one is able to realize this truth, the machinations of the so-called "elites" become mostly droll with punctuations of hilarity. Hilarious and boring it would all be, were it not fo the fact of Theire murderous natures, but that is a topic irrelevant to this far more fundamental topic.
The ruler and the ruled form a gestalt, a whole. Each has devolved in such manner that each can no longer live without the other, even though they both seem, statistically speaking, to believe that each is somehow better or more important than the other. They are, in fact, equally corrupt and responsible for the grand and miserable fiasco that is the human race.
But what of the one percent of the one percent; that small handful of men who not only see themselves as free, but who act in accord with that very belief to the greatest degree possible, which does not bring the wrath of master and slave alike upon them and those dear? Those are the people to whom my concern and affections turn, for they are the only examples of the human animal worthy.
What, indeed... Given the Gordian Knot of mutually fortifying corruption between ruler and ruled, is there a social architecture that allows for meaningful freedom in the vast oceans of putrescent tyranny? I am not sure, but I have given this much thought over the decades. The older I get and the more clearly I see the hopelessness for the greater wad of humanity, the clearer it becomes to me that the ideal of anarchy is currently unworkable in any population other than those of trivial proportions.
In my opinion and based on my observations of contemporary human societies, humans were not designed to do well in the large populations we currently see. Rather, they appear to better flourish in comparatively tiny groups that are more akin to extended families than great undifferentiated wads of fungible units. This truth seems to eliminate anarchy as a viable option for the human world as it currently exists.
Barring a "reset event", one that is so deeply disruptive of daily reality as to present every living man with a set of clear and immediate choices that bear on their abilities to survive from one moment to the next, the future for ideal and proper human freedom appears bleak. All, however, is not lost.
The next best thing, which so far as I can see may be configured so as to be nearly indistinguishable from non-formalized anarchic life, is what some call "minarchy". I am not particularly fond of this moniker as it carries certain baggage that appears to lead to little better than endless bickering precisely due to the typically poor habits of language and, thereby, thought of far too great a plurality of humans.
The best I have been able to concoct for my own purposes is "panarchy", suggestive of the fact that governance is the responsibility of every man, rather than some elite subgroup upon whom personal responsibility is pimped by the corrupted masses who wish to be free of their personal obligations pursuant to the proper conduction of daily commerce between men.
But central to the notion of anarchic or panarchic life is the concept of autodiathism, which is nothing fancier than the idea that people hold the right and the corresponding responsibilities of self-determination. The freedom to choose for oneself how to live and what to do on a moment by moment basis is inherent to men. There exist none of the falsely concocted "societal" obligations forwarded and in many cases foisted by master and slave alike. The only obligation of one man to his fellows is that he refrain from violating the equal claims of others. The rubric of the Free Man is the canon of the Golden Rule itself. It is simple, clear, complete, and correct, requiring no modification of any sort.
This all said, what then is the practicable solution for free men? Separation, plain and simple. Physical separation is very helpful, but mental and "spiritual" or "attitudinal" segregation are paramount, as is that of deeply ingrained habit that comes only through endless repetition and refinement such that these qualities become one's first nature.
To this end, territorial secession becomes a deep practical necessity, particularly in the absence of a binding and unifying sense of the sacred such as that found in various religious communities such as those of fundamentalist Jews. But even that is not a good replacement for physical territories wherein the inhabitants are nominally safe from the violent predations of the tyrant. Consider those same Jewish communities in places such as New York City. There is great cohesion within the Lubavitcher community, and yet they are not quite properly free a they remain beholden to the violative ordinances of the municipality, the so-called "Sullivan Laws" coming immediately to mind, which prohibit them from keeping and bearing arms for defense of the individual and the community at large. This sad truth leaves those people and all like them in a degraded state where either they comply with the "law" or risk severe repercussions if they choose not to comply with the possession of a firearm without the approval of the "state". In my opinion, this is no way to live. It is certainly not a free man's living.
And so it would appear that given the current circumstances, the best practical base step is to secede as a group in physical and legal possession of a territory and establish a conceptually separate entity that has well defined physical borders and a properly architected social order upon which all residents are in sufficient agreement such that everyone is able to live as he pleases so long as he does not engage in violations of the equal prerogatives of his neighbors.
Furthermore, and contrary to the common wisdom of the so-called "left" or "progressives", "socialists", "communists" and other mentally unsound sorts, if the new society is to survive, much less flourish, a clear, sufficient, and faithfully applied set of rules must be set into place that controls those borders, as well as who is allowed to cross them. Americans knew and accepted this as intuitively obvious until comparatively very recently in their history. Today, the progressives prattle on endlessly about how we as Americans are absolutely obliged to admit any and all comers to this land of opportunity, regardless of their political biases against the dominant culture, their hatred of the people of this land, any wildly communicable diseases they may carry, and so forth. This, of course, is raving, suicidal madness. It is of interest to note how those same people appear to have no issue whatsoever with other nations controlling their borders, often in what might be viewed as draconian fashion.
To summarize, the best and most practically viable path toward the establishment of a place in which free men are allowed to exercise their full prerogatives as such are as follow:
- Begin at the beginning, which involves the identification of the set of rules by which the residents of the free land will comport themselves without coercion, but rather with understanding and the eagerness that arises therefrom.
- Inculcate the members with the spirit and specifications of the Freeman. Teach them to recognize, distinguish, and understand the differences between Freemen and Weakmen. Teach them to value the Freeman and to pity and despise the sadly corrupted Weakman who poses endless dangers to himself and everyone around him.
- Teach to deep understanding and appreciation the centrally vital role that language plays in the life of the Freeman, ensuring that everyone as a matter of basic culture understand how lost they are without profound skills in the art and science of verbal communication; that they are little more than an empty shells without a well and sharply tuned facility of spoken and written language. The importance of this cannot be overstated.
- Render aware the two-edged nature of freedom, benefits and costs, rights and responsibilities.
- Render aware that which freedom demands of a man, specifically:
- Intelligence
- Smarts (intellect developed into practical knowledge and skill)
- Courage
- Integrity
- Generosity
- Inculcate and attitude of eagerness for those demands, such that they regard them as great things to which to aspire, rather than as things to be dreaded and avoided at nearly any cost.
- Self-respect
- Respect for others
- Value in one's relationships
- Rights: what they are, their characteristics, how they work and, equally importantly, how they do not.
- Respect for property
- The beauty and value of love
- Identify a territory, such as a county-sized region, and settle it with large numbers of like-spirited cohorts. Attempting to secede on a statewide basis is likely too ambitious.
Unlike pretty slavery, freedom is difficult. As much as it is exhilarating, is can be exhausting and terrifying because it demands much, while offering no guarantees whatsoever. The things it does offer, however, are opportunity and, ... itself!
Until next time, please accept my best wishes.
