 
What the reader needs to know about Liberty Defined.

Greetings reader, I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of every day routine- the security of the familiar, the tranquility of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any of you. But in the spirit of commemoration, thereby those important events of the past usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, a celebration of a nice holiday, I thought we might mark this particular day, which you chose to pick up this work, by taking some time out of our daily lives to have a little chat.

There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Well, because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth.

The truth is, there is something terribly wrong with humanity, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression; and where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have sensors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission.

How did this happen? Who is to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you are looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid.

Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease; there are a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear and ignorance got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now blatantly corrupt rulers of your land. They promised you order, peace, security, and all they demanded in return was your silent obedient consent.

With this work I want to help humanity to see what it overlooks; to see the strengths it has; to help each individual see the power and authority that only they have over themselves. For more than two thousand years we have built upon the works of everyone before us, one generation at a time. Each successful generation reminded the next that hope, fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words, they are perspectives.

So if you have seen nothing, if the crimes of your governments remain unknown to you then I would suggest you allow this work to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek to stand up and do what is befitting a free man or a free woman then, continue reading and together we can make government an antiquated idea of a less civilized period in human history.

(This little piece was greatly inspired by the 'Speech to London' in the 2005 film V for Vendetta.)

Liberty Defined

By Jim Limber Davis

Copyright 2013 Jim Limber Davis

Smashwords Edition

~~~

Smashwords Edition, License Notes

Thank you for downloading this ebook. You are welcome to share it with your friends. This book may be reproduced, copied and distributed for non-commercial purposes, provided the book remains in its complete original form. If you enjoyed this book, please return to Smashwords.com to show your support to its author by purchasing a full copy. While the goal of this work is to teach liberty to others, remember that such endeavors are further encouraged with financial rewards.

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter 01  
The Seed: Liberty Defined

Chapter 02  
The Planting: Property Rights

Chapter 03  
Tilling and Watering: Growing Liberty

Chapter 04  
Cultivating More Seeds: Building the Pinnacle of Civilization

Chapter 05  
The Self Proclaimed Harvest Master: Government

Chapter 06  
Fencing In the Farm: Slavery Through Debt

Chapter 07  
Hiding the Fences: Indoctrination, War, and Nationalism

Chapter 08  
Outgrowing the Fences: Liberty Through Anarchy

Chapter 09  
Aiding the Fence Builders: Showing Kindness to the Proponents of Slavery

Chapter 10  
Planting Seeds Everywhere: From the Shire to Coruscant

Chapter 11  
Afterthoughts: Giving Back

Chapter 12  
Afterthoughts: Slavery and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)

Chapter 13  
Why I am who I am

Chapter 14  
Thank You

Introduction

If the reader is like me, then a constant nagging and irritating presence called government is likely the norm. It seems that we cannot escape the constant looming worry that we might do something that offends another. We worry they will in turn call the authorities; thus wrecking our already unstable lives to the point of complete chaos. Somehow we seem to think that an authority of sorts is what we need to maintain peace, order, and harmony.

What we really need is to be taught how to think critically. When I realized that the majority of my self induced problems were rooted in my inability to think critically, I struggled to make a change. I made my change and now the problems I face are largely those outside of my direct sphere of influence. Other people justifying their ill acquired rights to lay claim over my life and the lives of others, through government, now dominates the bulk of problems in my life and the lives of countless others.

People want to be able to live. More often than not people want to do more than just live; they want to enjoy their lives and occasionally excel at something worthy of being noted in history. I want to do more than just live. I want to live comfortably. I also want to do what I can with what I have to help make the world I was brought into a better place; a better place for my daughter and any grandchildren that I may be blessed with. To be upfront and direct with the reader, I want to make something very clear.

The ideas I have put into this volume were inspired by my devotion to my family; to my wife and adopted daughter. I am not interested in any way of being an intentional burden on my local fellows, countrymen, or brothers and sisters around the world. I am serious about making a positive influence that will lead to a change for the betterment of humanity. Of course, while I can do this and make everything I share with the world free, I am interested in receiving at least some compensation for the time I have spent thinking and laboring to bring these ideas to the front of the war. The war we are waging to be free of tyranny; to make freedom from tyranny the status quo.

Undoubtedly you have noticed the copyright information at the front of this work. In order to abide by the rules of my publisher, and the distributers partnered with my publisher, I am required to put that information there. However, I have made the large majority of this work available to be read for free. Download it, read it, share it and help encourage the definitions of liberty and wealth to be known to the world. If you are serious about encouraging liberty's triumph over tyranny please consider purchasing this work in full.

I do not expect to be made into a millionaire nor is that my goal. I want to live comfortably and provide for my family. After being the victim of a couple of layoffs due to government meddling in the economy, I struggle to provide for my family. I could take government handouts and receive thousands of dollars a month to pay my rent, put food on my table, and acquire additional training to work skilled jobs that may provide a great source of income to my family. I refuse those handouts on the principle that anything the government has first must be taken from someone else; or must be acquired through loans that are promised to be paid in full by taking from people in the future.

I have no intention to perpetuate a system of such thievery and dishonesty. The ends do not always justify the means when the means are always based on coercion. I am absolutely dedicated to only voluntary interactions with others. If this work is shared and I make no financial gains then I will still be satisfied if the world changes for the better before I depart it. If I gain financially then I will be able to provide with greater ease for my family. Beyond that I will use any extra resources to continue sharing what I have learned about liberty, wealth, nonaggression, voluntarism, and how these four ideas work together; how they can, not only set humanity free but, open up a path to a kind of prosperity that we cannot even fathom yet today!

Chapter 01

The Seed: Liberty Defined

Liberty. What is it? It's a word most of us in western civilization use quite frequently. Many times when we discuss liberty we use the phraseology of individuals long since perished from this earth. Many times we even try to explain it. A very popular definition is "to do what I want without restrictions." That sounds pretty good but it always is accompanied by some party crasher who says, "You can't do anything you want because things like murder are wrong!"

That is very true. It is morally wrong to kill another person without very, very, very, good justification. Such justification would require defending your own life from immediate danger. That general definition of liberty doesn't really answer the question though. What do reference materials have to say about liberty?

Merriam-Webster's online dictionary defines liberty as the quality or state of being free; the power to do as one pleases; freedom from physical restraint; freedom from arbitrary or despotic control; the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges; the power of choice; a right or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant; and permission especially to go freely within specified limits. Those are very interesting descriptions of liberty.

Dictionary dot com defines liberty as freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control; freedom from external or foreign rule; independence; freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc, according to choice; and freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint.

Both of these reference materials define liberty as being free from arbitrary or despotic control. Dictionary dot com goes further and defines liberty as freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc. That is the definition that most closely resembles what I am about to share with you. So what is liberty?

Liberty is the ability to provide the four basic necessities of life without unwarranted restrictions and regulations being imposed upon the individual.

That is absolutely what liberty is all about. It is such a simple definition. It seems so silly to be hemming and hawing while mentally searching for a definition to a word used so frequently. This definition is so simple that it seems almost not possible for it to be correct. It almost resembles what people often say liberty is as defined by "to do what I want without restrictions!" Liberty as we have been taught in the United States by government authority is a dangerous and complicated concept. Liberty is not complicated or difficult. Liberty is simple to understand. What is complicated is how people choose to interact with one another through coercive means. The biggest system of coercion used is government.

By the time I figured this out I felt so sheepish. I was almost embarrassed to share this definition with friends and family; but when I did I was shocked. They didn't chastise me in a joking way at all. They didn't make fun of me. They didn't even giggle at my new found understanding. Most just let the idea wash over them. They were just as awe struck as I was. Well, at least those being serious about desiring real liberty were.

Among those who do want real liberty, I almost always received the same response. Often I was asked, "What are the four basic necessities of life?" The answer to that question is what I had to figure out first. Once I understood that, the definition of liberty was easy to figure out. In fact the entire process of how I figured out what liberty really is took over ten years. I had to reverse engineer everything I did. I had to question everything I did. I had to almost completely unlearn what I was taught. It sounds cliché, I know; but that is why it took me so long to grasp this concept.

When I did this, I understood the entire goal of everything I do in life is centered about the four little things liberty is concerned with. The first is the acquisition of food. The second is the acquisition of shelter. The third is the acquisition of security. The fourth is the pursuit of happiness. That... is... it! Everything we do can be traced to these things. Everything!

The first three things mentioned are the most important. They bring a kind of stability to our lives that those of us with a vast amount of creature comforts rarely take time to understand. We forget about the hardships we may have endured to acquire the abundance of the first three necessities or we never had to struggle. Not understanding how to acquire those things makes understanding liberty difficult. Those of us with numerous creature comforts don't often go hungry. We don't really worry about shelter from the elements. As far as security goes, that is about the only basic necessity that we often identify with a little bit on a daily basis. It is easy to forget about the things we don't worry about.

I'm not trying to demean western civilization at all. The point I'm trying to explain is rooted in the history of how we got to where we are now. Food and shelter from the elements are relatively easy things for us to acquire because our ancestors educated themselves enough and built upon the ideas they were taught. Technology has made the growing of food so easy that a handful of people can produce enough to sustain a very large city. Likewise, building techniques have evolved so that houses may stand for centuries unless war visits them or the earth's fury is directed towards them.

Now we come to security. At first we required security from wild predators. We banded together and created simple weapons. In part that was what shelter was about. With protection from wild predators now all but a glimmer of the past, protection from one another is more pressing. We have been taught by government that liberty is dangerous because people want to hurt us. While there is some truth to that, such a concept is mostly a perversion.

If people choose to work together then the possibility of acquiring greater supplies of food and better shelter will lead to more time to designate to other activities. Full stomachs and warms places to sleep are the best deterrent for thievery. Unfortunately this line of thinking is lost to many or never explored honestly. This is what continues the need for security from one another as opposed to threats from the wild. People choose to steal from others the things that are necessities of life. They do this because they don't understand, choose to not do for themselves or (as is the case for most under the authority of any government) are restricted in some way for doing for themselves.

Once upon a time this was food. Today in western civilizations what is stolen are goods that improve the quality of life; goods that bring or amplify our happiness. Without getting into the particulars about such things as drugs or similar vices, it is sufficient for this understanding of liberty to consider such things which improve the quality of their user's / owner's lives. If such things did not bring the desired effect to the individual then the individual would not voluntarily possess / use them. (Regardless of one's moral stance, I must say to each their own until it actually impacts one's life beyond mere threats. To dictate policies that forbid certain vices is to legislate morality at gun point in the name of security. That is the society in which most of us live now. That is the root of the noble intent of government; and one in which history gives us numerous examples of why it doesn't work as it should; but more on this topic later.)

When an individual steals a good such as a stereo or a piece of furniture, what is being stolen? The objects in question are objects that hold a particular value to their respective owners. These objects bring some kind of worth to their owner by means of their usefulness. A stereo system plays music that an individual may enjoy which makes his or her quality of life that much better. It doesn't matter even if it is only temporary. A chair brings an element of comfort to the individual's life by allowing a resting position of sorts to either continue for greater duration a particular productive activity or for the purpose of relaxation.

When an individual steals these things they are taking away part of the victim's liberty. Provided of course the victim honestly acquired these items, the thief is infringing upon the victim's liberty. This particular infringement was the pursuit of happiness; or the improvement of his or her quality of life. Certainly such a theft seems so insignificant because these things are easily acquired though honest means. Well, if these things are so easily acquired then why didn't the thief go honestly acquire them? The simple answer is because of ignorance. Now whether the ignorance is because the thief doesn't know better or is being intellectually dishonest is another matter. The point is that such an infringement of liberty is important to understand. Regardless of moral perceptions, the unwarranted removal of such items by force or deception from another who honestly acquired them is a transgression of the owner's liberty.

If the thief took food from the individual's refrigerator instead of taking a stereo or chair would that matter? Of course it would matter say some. Some people may argue that the individual can afford to allow the loss because he or she is very well fed, sheltered, and secure for the most part. That argument is wrong, plain and simple. It justifies the theft of property belonging to another. This is the basic argument for the collection of taxes. I will get to that in a later chapter.

This idea of interacting with one another through coercive measures is what makes liberty difficult. To prevent these coercive measures government is introduced as a justification to initiate force against others in order to maintain peace. As George Carlin so (in)famously put it, "Waging war for peace is like screwing for virginity."

Liberty doesn't require violence to be maintained. Liberty requires intellectual honesty to be maintained. "Blah, blah, blah, blah, people aren't honest so blah, blah, blah with your naive and childish fantasies." Unfortunately that is the general response I am met with by those individuals choosing not to think of a positive solution for all while striving to remain focused on the problem. Sadly people with that mindset will always exist. There are some people who just don't want to do for themselves.

That mindset, like any other, must be taught. The problem with western civilization, and humanity for that matter, is not that tyranny is running amuck with the most devious, cunning, and intelligent villains of all time! The problems we face today, I believe, are rooted in humanity's general failure to understand what liberty really is AND how to protect it.

Chapter 02

The Planting: Property Rights

The strength of tyranny, or the idea that might makes right, seems to rein supreme now-a-days because of a horrible lack of liberty's defense. Now that liberty has been defined we can begin the process of defending it. As I stated previously, my path to understanding liberty is founded in my reverse engineering of my daily activities. Just like the vast majority of people comprising westernized civilizations, I labor to acquire the basics of life; food, shelter and security. Whatever I have left over I apply to a savings jar for the future and to a few creature comforts that boost my happiness.

For most of us this means we have jobs of some kind which pay us money. The money we earn is what we use to trade for the basics of life. Those of us whom are responsible will use the earned money to acquire the basics before the things that make us happy. Sadly not everyone does this. This failure to do so is where people tend to run into trouble. This failure leads to hunger, homelessness, and other life threatening dangers. The failure to be responsible is often covered up with some humdrum about equality. The idea that food, shelter, and security should be basic rights is a perversion of the understanding of liberty.

Those who demand that the basics of life should be understood as rights almost always want something for nothing. There are a few who demand this without wanting a handout; but it is still a perverted view of liberty if such demands are executed through the coercive means of central economic planning. (I will discuss how this relates in a later chapter.) Liberty should always be understood as the ability of an individual to acquire honestly, peacefully, and voluntarily the basic necessities of his or her life. To insist or demand that such things are rights is to encourage the subjugation of others into forced servitude or slavery. How is that possible?

Such a path is inevitable because of how wealth is created. I know I have just answered one question with what will be another; but it is important to understand what wealth is first in order to defend liberty. So what is wealth?

Wealth is any good, service, or idea that is found desirable by any individual for the purpose of sustaining and or improving his or her quality of life.

Remember how simple the definition of liberty turned out to be? Again, it is almost embarrassingly silly to not have been able to come up with this before I reached my early thirties. The moment I understood this a little voice in my head which sounded like Gru, from the popular Despicable Me movie franchise, said "light bulb!" Okay, that's a little silly but it is how I like to remember that particular epiphany. That was my moment and it snowballed into the question asking how wealth is created.

Once I established the definition of wealth I needed to understand how it is created. Of course it should be understood that the basic creation of wealth is by a sheer desire for the acquisition of a good, service, or idea which contributes to the maintenance and or improvement of life; but it is how such a good, service, or idea is obtained that requires a little understanding. So before we can proceed to completely defend liberty we need to know how wealth is created.

Wealth is created by acknowledging first the concept of self ownership! We each own ourselves and the three natural resources we all have from the moment we reach some stage of intellectual maturity. This stage is up for debate as to a specific age in relation of the individual's ability to reason and recognize the need to provide and or acquire the first three basic necessities of life without the aid of another. (I know, "what about those incapable of providing for themselves?" That is for you on an individual basis to decide. I aid others through various charities when I can as I believe it is the morally correct thing to do. Beyond that I receive yet another sense of purpose for my life.) Self ownership is important. Without it we are not responsible for the acquisition of the basic necessities of life or any good, service, or idea that may improve our lives.

(This is where I eventually part ways from a large majority of religious individuals. I could have added an entire chapter on this subject alone. Instead I will leave my statement at this: My personal belief is that religion, like government, is unnecessary in the protection of liberty. However, religion may be of use, provided it is peaceful, voluntary, and non-coercive, in the pursuit of personal happiness. I believe most are founded in the preservation of peace. I believe in a higher power which in some way granted me the ability to learn to think critically; thus I am self aware and able to manipulate my surroundings to the benefit of my life and its improvement without necessarily having to rely upon another.)

This concept is what brings us to the understanding that if we reject self ownership then we embrace slavery as the slave and not the master. If we own ourselves then others must acquire our voluntarily given permission-free of coercion- to command or take from us the things that we use to sustain and improve the quality of our lives which are in our possession. So how do we acquire things to be in our possession that are not in our possession or are in the possession of others? Asked differently, how do we acquire wealth?

The first is to create. My experience of the general answers people give when asked to create something is often "but I need things to create things with!" That is true but it can be a misleading answer. It may be the root of the phrase "you need to spend money to make money!" As I previously stated we are all equipped with three natural resources. The first is time. The second is intellect. The third is the ability to labor.

Time is often considered one of the most valuable resources we have since it is so limited. Time is not really limited so much as is the generally understood segments of it that we enjoy as living sentient beings. It is entirely possible that we may eventually find a way to live forever thus changing our perspective of time. What we can do with what we have is to manage it better.

Managing our time better requires our intellect. I remember frequently, as a child, my parents harping on me to manage my time better. I'm sure they probably gave me some pointers and guidelines to doing that but I don't really remember them or any specific example. This is a skill that I struggled to learn myself and now struggle to teach my daughter. It is not an easy skill to teach for many and to learn it seems to take a lifetime. It is through the process of thinking that we create ideas. The continuation of the creation of these ideas that build upon previous ideas is a form of refinement.

How quickly we create and refine ideas is what we often call brain storming. I associate this as a version of critical thinking. The ability to create and refine ideas is an important skill to have. This skill is responsible for the greater and easier acquisition of food, shelter, and security. When early humans were hungry the acquisition of food required the expenditure of precious calories. (If the idea of divine creation is getting in the way of understanding this then by all means put this book down and simply walk away. You may not be ready to learn this just yet. However, if you can entertain an idea without succumbing to it then read on and I promise you won't be disappointed! If you can't, well good luck with your self-made barrier.) If hunting meat, which was the most efficient means of acquiring lots of calories, was made easier then the expenditure of calories devoted to hunting could be diverted to other activities.

The refinement of hunting techniques eventually birthed better weapons and the domestication of animals. The same is true of foraging berries, nuts, and other vegetation for sustenance. The refinement of these ideas birthed farms, orchards, and gardens. Intellect is just one of three of our infinite natural resources available to us. However, it is not always enough to sustain life to think of ideas. They must be put into action.

This is where labor comes into play. Just as we all have the capacity to think we all have the capacity to labor. How well we refine our ideas directly contributes to how industrious we are when we labor. The spears thrown at wild animals in the beginning didn't just magically hit their targets. These early hunters had to figure out how to throw spears after creating them. The constant refinement of ideas through trial and error is what evolved into the critical thinking and brainstorming today!

The product, regardless of its refinement, of every bit of time, intellect, and labor fused together to create a good, service, or idea is a piece of wealth. It is a piece of wealth because it is desirable for the sustaining and or improving of the quality of life. The refinement of our time, intellect, and labor does not always create a tangible product. The refinement of these natural resources could result in the creation of an idea to gather tangible natural resources. Such an idea would be the collection of twigs, branches, and fallen trees to sell or trade to others for the acquisition of goods or services they create and or provide that we may find valuable in our struggle to maintain our lives and improve them.

Of course the continuous creation, refinement, and implementation of these ideas are all first used to sustain life and then improve it through creature comforts and entertainment. When we create and refine an idea the idea belongs to us until we let it slip past our tongues or finger tips. However, that doesn't mean that another individual won't come up with the same idea. This is where the concept of intellectual property rights pops up. This is a dangerous idea to liberty.

While it is true that an idea created, refined, and implemented by one individual is likely unique to that person, to ask others through patent laws and force (government) to not use that idea, stolen or completely created with innocent ignorance of another who created it, only serves to hinder the possible progression of ideas which may expand the amount of time not required in acquiring the first three basics necessities of life by those with access to the refinement and implementation of that idea. (Phew! That was a mouthful!) Encouraging intellectual property rights or patents hinders the ability of individuals to explore means of improving their quality of life.

Yes, I am well aware of the idea of intellectual espionage. I completely understand that concept. That is partly the reason I am offering the majority of this work for free. Of course if I can help teach others these ideas by making the bulk of this work free then I will gain by the process in the long run. At least that is my goal. Even if I do not benefit from others understanding and teaching these ideas then I pray my daughter and grandchildren might.

Ultimately intellectual property rights only infringe upon the masses' liberty to provide from themselves. If more than one individual or company is able to use an idea to produce a good or service which sustains and or improve the quality of its customers' lives then the constant competition to acquire the monetary wealth of potential customers will drive greater innovation. I'm not picking on the Apple Company, creator of the line of iPhones and such; but I dislike the way they make so many of their gadgets proprietary and are sticklers for suing other companies for getting "kind of sort of maybe close" to one of their ideas. However, I digress.

So to answer the question: the creation of wealth is the refinement of an individual's time, intellect, and labor to produce a good, service, or idea desirable in the sustaining or improvement of the quality of life.

Such wealth is translated into property in relation to the individual who created it or voluntarily interacted with another for its acquisition. This is why individuals such as Thomas Jefferson and Ron Paul put the protection of economy (the creation and exchange of wealth) before nearly everything else in the defense of liberty. So, if we do not understand what wealth is then we cannot honestly understand how it is created. Therefore if we fail to understand what wealth really is then we succumb to the tyranny of a few making straw man arguments which we inevitably eat up and give our allegiance to!

"But what about money? Why don't ya talk about money!?" That is actually the next step in the evolution of wealth creation. Money seems to do for liberty what adding different levels in the game board will do for a two person chess game. So perhaps we should talk more about wealth.

Chapter 03

Tilling and Watering: Growing Liberty

Money seems to change the game and how it is played but it doesn't always do the things we think it does. There is nothing mystical or magical about money. It is just a tool. So what is it that money does which seems so important to the understanding of economics? In reality there is only one thing. Money increases the availability and possibility of goods and services to be exchanged more directly into the hands desiring them from the hands creating or providing them at the fastest possible rate voluntarily.

Money negates the necessity of having to be a jack of all trades. This works to accommodate the people with the goods and services each individual requires in their struggle to provide the basics and extra creature comforts desired. Money really cuts out the bulk of the middle men in the system of bartering for goods or services with goods or services. The benefit is really seen when the desired goods or services require numerous transactions before the desired goods or services can be acquired. What money does is make it so that an apple farmer doesn't have to trade his apples for crates of sweaters that his dentist may want in return for a cavity cleaning. The absence of money makes the apple farmer a sweater salesman also. Effectively that makes the dentist a sweater salesman too, because his services may require hundreds of sweaters if he doesn't like apples in order for a trade to be made possible. Money removes the complications from the old barter system.

However, money as we think of it today is also something else. The paper dollars we call money are not real wealth. My understanding of real wealth is anything that is desirable by consumption or acquisition to sustain and or improve the quality of life. Apples, music, soap, nails, bricks, computers, video games, bread, seeds, tools, cars, batteries, guns, bullets, and paper are all items that have a specific purpose which directly satisfies one or more of the four basic necessities of life in some capacity; a capacity that goes beyond mere exchange. Some of these things can be eaten to satisfy hunger. Some of these things can be used to make shelter. Some of these things can be used to protect us thus satisfying our need for security. Other things bring happiness which improves our lives. Still other things are designed to free us from the labors of acquiring food, shelter, and security thus also improving our lives by allowing us greater time to seek happiness or further refine the ideas to acquire the basics. That is what real wealth is.

Fiat money, the paper dollars we often use today does none of that. Money makes the acquisition of such things possible if a person either cannot make these things or cannot acquire through traditional bartering of the goods or services from an individual who can make or acquire these things. That is how we should think of money today. The paper money we use today doesn't really have any value that can directly sustain or improve our lives. It does have value as an item that may be exchanged for goods and services that do have direct value.

This value is either real where it can directly sustain and or improve the quality of life or it is artificial; where it is useful in the acquisition of goods and services through trading that can sustain and or improve the quality of life. Money hasn't always been this way though. Money has been many things over the years. Most notably it has been coins made of precious metals, gems, and gold dust. Other forms have been bread, tobacco, wheat, sugar, and salt and even whales' teeth.

Gold has held real value since day one of its discovery because it improves the quality of life for some through esthetics. More recently gold has become valuable in the creation of goods such as computers. Gold and other precious metals hold real value and are great for exchange for the acquisition of other items because of its finite sources. Of course the moment some modern day alchemist discovers how to efficiently reorganize electrons in an atom that will probably change; or we discover a planet made of gold.

For now though gold is an amazing type of money because it is very limited and has use beyond mere exchanged. That is why it holds the value it does. Remember that wealth is anything desired for the sustenance and or improvement of the quality of life. Gold is useful in the preservation of life and in the improvement of life through medical, entertainment purposes, and esthetics. That makes gold more valuable than our paper dollars. Since gold is finite in a manner of speaking that translates into making it more difficult to manipulate by inflating and deflating its quantity through creation.

(Gold can still be manipulated by hoarding it or taking it out of circulation. This is why it is dangerous to rely solely upon a single currency regardless of its type. Hoarding a particular currency for the purpose of inflating its market value to resell at a higher profit is akin to a stock broker misleading others into purchasing a particular stock for the purpose of reselling at a higher profit. In fact that is in part why the infamous Gordon Gecko, of the movie Wall Street, was prosecuted. Miraculously the federal government has made itself immune to being prosecuted for its manipulation of the money supply. In addition, being reliant on a single paper currency that may be manipulated by a centralized bank is just as dangerous. This will be discussed again at a later point in relation to taxation.)

Regardless of what money is people should understand what real wealth is in relation to artificial wealth. Sadly people don't. People are under the impression far too often that the money we have today in our pockets is the key to being successful; thus modern money is real wealth. There is only so much money that can be created at any given time in one form or another before dramatic negative effects take place that adjust the prices of goods and services to the disadvantage of the low wage earners first. Somehow the idea that wealth is finite is applied to the reasoning for interjecting special programs or for whatever benefit to supposedly level the playing field among the average individuals.

I'm not really certain where that idea came from. What I am certain of is that wealth is not finite based on the ideas I put forth in the previous chapter about how to create real wealth. Wealth can only become finite when it is no longer being produced or it is being produced at the exact same rate it is being consumed. At least that is how I understand it. (Even if we did find that planet of gold, refined it all and injected it into the economy it might not be enough to cause the same problems we have today with fiat money. That is likely to be the case because the population of humanity will probably be far greater than just several billion people to divide such a find among.)

If everyone able to create anything useful in the maintenance and or improve of life and can trade it for the other things required then wealth has the potential to be infinite. The problem may lay in the laws of supply and demand. If more people are growing food then the competition to earn tradable wealth (money) to purchase houses with will be difficult and slow. So, if few people are building houses in the face of overwhelming demand then the value of houses will go up. That makes the ability of those farming to acquire money to purchase a house more difficult unless they either sell more or get into a profession that earns more based on the current market demand.

There is always enough wealth to go around so long as people understand what real and artificial wealth is and how it is created. The finite pie of wealth works well with force based authorities such as government which always somehow finds a way to scare people into believing some things should be regulated and controlled by a single group or individual; which miraculously always knows best. No one can know what anyone is thinking all the time let alone what everyone is thinking some of the time. Yet they continue to swear they can and try.

With my understanding of what wealth is and how it is created and obtained, I occasionally think about the super heroes and villains in various movies released now-a-days. Among my favorites is probably the Marvel series of super hero movies; particularly the Iron Man series and the Avengers movie. If you are familiar with the super abilities of these heroes consider the things they may do with their skills to create wealth.

Tony Stark, also known as Iron Man, is a brilliant individual who created a new direction for his company to produce wealth; more specifically, he created cheaper and more abundant energy. Captain America was engineered to have super human strength and reflexes. He could create and acquire wealth through manual labor positions that would be relatively easy for him in comparison to the difficulty faced by an average individual. But if we look at the villains we see something else; or do we?

The villains seem to have much greater strengths. The villains see fit to destroy what others have to enslave them into lives of wealth creation for the masters' benefits. They use force and coercion to scare the people into submitting only to be enslaved. That is essentially the same thing governments do to us today with events such as the War on Terror. These villains would be much better off by rendering services at better and faster rates than the "inferior" humans ever could.

Ah, but there is another set of villains in another universe that do something a little different. The Joker as played by Heath Ledger doesn't desire to control others as much as he does to send a message of fear. The same is true of Bane, the villain in the final Batman movie with Christian Bale. At one point in the movie one of the individuals partnered with Bane was crossed by Bane. The threatened individual offers Bane lots and lots of money. Bane responds with something like this, "you think that gives you power over me?"

That was one hell of an awesome line. What Bane is referring to is the power transfer of economic choice that comes with money. That is the real power behind money; the power to acquire goods and services from others for an exchange of such economic power for real wealth. Money also grants its current owner the ability to acquire goods and services that might not otherwise be available because of personal moral codes. (This is the reason money is often considered to be the root of all evil. Unfortunately that is a wrong assessment. Since money only equates to an amount of power defined by market prices it is ultimately the weakness of the individual desiring money that is the problem.) Furthermore, think about the ability to create wealth as I have explained in this work. The acquisition of wealth through trading doesn't mean as much as does the ability to acquire it through creation.

That is a pretty amazing concept and a bit of a jewel to find in a movie such as The Dark Knight Rises. People desiring power and control over others through coercive and deceptive means rarely want the general population to understand what wealth is all about. The line Bane speaks in that particular movie is very important. I find it has a lot in common with another set of lines in a Star Trek movie.

In First Contact, Captain Picard takes aboard his starship a young woman from earth living in the twenty-first century. She asks Captain Picard how much the starship she was on costs. Picard explains that money no longer exists in the twenty-fourth century and that people work to better themselves. What isn't explained so much is why.

In the Star Trek universe in the twenty-fourth century they have these devices called replicators. With my limited understanding of the Star Trek universe I take them to be used for mostly food creation as that is what I have learned by watching a few dozen episodes of the Next Generation. With the acquisition of food being nothing more than an a discomfort to be satisfied with a spoken command more time is freed up for the acquisition of shelter, security, and other pursuits.

That is another miraculous concept. Today we have 3D printing technologies becoming a reality. 3D printed guns and shower heads are only just the beginning. If this technology continues then the creation of better and better technologies will ensue. Such technologies have been built upon other ideas made possible by constantly refining the ideas we have that make the acquisition of the first three basic necessities of life easier and easier. Should we ever come to a point where the acquisition of food is no more than that of a spoken word at a Star Trek style replicating device then, humanity can be free from starvation with greater ease than it can be done today. (Yes it can be done today if we simply end government regulations of transportation, and production. Rules, regulations, and poor or no understanding of economics is what causes starvation.)

The result of such a thing will free up more of our time to pursue shelter and then security. We need not wait to understand how to pursue such things with fanciful technologies. We can do that now through a couple of other ideas. Unfortunately people what immediate satisfaction and they want it before the words in their heads reach their tongues!

Having such devices as the Star Trek replicators would be a huge game changer. Unfortunately I doubt that money will ever be made obsolete. There will likely always be some form of it even if it is not paper dollars, gold coins, or virtual currency. People will always desire anything that satisfies the four basic necessities of life without having to know how to create them; because spending time learning how to create the necessities of life means less time is available to be spent refining an area of expertise that can be built upon by others to advance the knowledge of whole of humanity's understanding of the universe. What people cannot obtain through their own labors they will try to obtain from someone else. How the general population decides what forms of acquisition are acceptable determines the amount of peace and prosperity that will be experienced.

Chapter 04

Cultivating More Seeds: Building the Pinnacle of Civilization

With everything I have discussed so far the best way to acquire the time to enjoy one's self today is to labor for the acquisition of money in some way to trade for other goods and services of real value; value which contributes directly to the maintenance and improvement of one's quality of life. All of that is done through voluntary means. In other words we only make trades for the things we want by agreeing on what we think is fair.

Once upon a time this was done on a one on one basis with the grower or producer of the real wealth we desired. Then it turned into a shop keeper with lots of goods from different producers. Today it is often with a variety of growers, manufacturers, and craftsmen who seek to sell their goods in big box stores where there is little haggling for the price of goods and services. The haggling we do is by spending our money somewhere else.

There are a lot of reasons why this particular model has come about. Many are because of consumer demands directing all in one locations into existence. Other reasons allow such things to be because of force based authorities' intervention into our means to exchange goods, services, and money with one another. There will be more on that in the next chapter. For the time being it is the consumers choices of goods and services required for the maintenance and improvement of the quality of life that have allowed this.

Most of these all in one big box stores have made our lives easier to a degree by putting everything we usually want into a single location for convenience. That frees up our time to do other things such as acquire additional money and real wealth for the continuation of an easier life years later. Doing that gives us time to refine our ideas further as well as enjoy ourselves.

I have no doubts that eventually we will have replicators of sorts not all that unlike from those featured in Star Trek. We have 3D printers already and their evolution is surprising very quick. No real restrictions as of yet have been enforced on such technology but it hasn't quite been accepted by the general public either. At least this is the case for the United States. Such refinements of ideas, practices, and endeavors always frees up more time to pursue other interests.

Most of the other interests pursued are creature comforts. The two things that drive innovation the most are necessity and comfort. When these two things are both driving innovation in perfect harmony there is no limit other than our current understanding of how the universe works as to what we can be accomplished. Without regulations, rules, laws, and other intrusive actions the desires of people to acquire real wealth to sustain and improve their lives will be endless. There is no reason why we shouldn't be at a greater level of technological achievement than where we are today! As a child I absolutely loved the Back to the Future trilogy starring Michael J. Fox and Christopher Lloyd. The current year (at the time I'm writing this) is 2013 and we are at the back half of that year. In the second movie of the Back to the Future trilogy the Doc and Marty arrive in the future on October 21st, 2015. That's just over two years from the date I'm writing this particular chapter.

By the movie's projection we should have regularly affordable flying cars, various devices integrated with hover technology, and an economy that is doing very well despite the seemingly monstrous rise in prices. Hilariously though we should have weather forecasts that are exponentially more accurate than the post office. Well, that one might still come true!

The point is not that we should have these things but that we won't have these things because of the self imposed restrictions on our ability to exchange goods, services, and enact ideas. The more goods, services, and ideas that exchange hands the greater the benefit each of us receives both directly and indirectly. If we exchange goods, services, and ideas ourselves then we directly benefit; otherwise we wouldn't have made the exchange. We either choose to exchange for a benefit voluntarily and free of coercion or we do not make an exchange at all. Whatever it is we are trading must be worth less than the good or service we desire.

The greater the faith people have in exchanging goods, services, and ideas the stronger the so called collective becomes. The faith of that society is empowered to continue such activities because they work to each individual's benefit. Not counting on regulations, requirements, rules, and other restrictions, people generally become wealthier when they trade with one another. Remember that real wealth is any good or service that sustains and or improves the quality of life. We don't trade because we want to deteriorate our lives. We trade because we want to improve them. When we trade our dollars for a good or service obviously we, even if we don't consciously think about it, find the good or service more valuable than the dollars. That makes us wealthier in terms of real wealth than before the trade. Of course that also means we are poorer in terms of widely accepted monetary wealth.

(Although an argument could be made for such things as drugs; but those would be vices and they improve the quality of their users' lives because their users' say so. Provided their actions while under the influence do not negatively affect others then who is to argue that such things are bad other than the user? If the user is pushed away by loved ones then the user must choose between keeping loved ones in his life who obviously benefit him in some way or the drugs. Which brings greater improvement to his life? Is it the drugs or the loved ones?)

Ultimately we trade to improve the condition of our lives. The sad part is that we often trade for the wrong things. A fair example of this understanding can be found in one of the episodes of Star Trek the Next Generation. Captain Picard talks about how the acquisition of wealth is no longer a concern for people of the twenty-fourth century.

If he understood wealth to mean what I have explained it to be then he might retract that statement. This is not to knock the writers of the Star Trek Next Generation series but rather to show how we as a society misunderstand what wealth is. I could be wrong about Picard's understanding of wealth but the topic at hand in that particular episode was about money.

Today's money is wealth but it is not real wealth that can be consumed directly to sustain and or improve the quality of life. It is a tool used in the exchange of goods and services; a tool used to acquire real wealth. Money is a peaceful means to a faster end. If we take away money we revert back to the barter system. Going from the use of widely accepted money to direct and indirect bartering for real wealth is the equivalent of dropping to the speed of sound from the speed of light. The wheels of the economy will still turn without money, but at a slower rate.

That is important if we are to understand how to advance in technology. Such advancements in technology require very specific specializations within other already extremely specialized fields of study. Such specializations are not entirely possible on the scale they currently exist without money. This is why governments of the past and present tend to tell us they need to do this kind of research. The free market will do this research and maintain this specialization without government when there is a real desire for such an allowance. If we cannot free up enough time from acquiring the first three basics necessities of life then we cannot specialize in any field of study let alone evolve very quickly technologically. Why is this important?

This is important because the more minds there are freed up to enjoy themselves the more minds there will be free to explore the things we don't already understand. This is in addition to refining the ideas about things that we do understand. It is not an absolute that the more minds freed from the requirement of multiple specializations to acquire the first three basic necessities of life will always yield some who find the exploration of advancement enjoyable or desirable. We can force people to study such things but that doesn't guarantee such endeavors will yield the desired outcome either. A perfect example of this is forcing children to go to school!

Voluntary interactions that have promises of returns which enrich the lives of the laborer produce far more results than coercive means. This occurs on the grounds that people like to own things that make their lives easier and comfortable. That translates into wealth. The voluntary chains people create and use to voluntarily connect with one another are what build peaceful and wonderful things. Such interactions provide us today with what people yesterday would consider miracles. Money is the perfect tool for such voluntary interactions.

People like to say that without government's military funding the internet never would have come into existence. I don't believe that for one moment. The desire to communicate ideas faster and faster and faster is something that people have always desired even if they didn't quite realize it. To share an idea that benefits even just one person has the potential to benefit everyone just a little bit. That idea will be shared and the benefits it may bring can be exponential if people understand what liberty really is.

If an idea enables a person to grow more apples faster and more frequently then more possibilities are opened up with the greater production of apples. More people can enjoy apple juice, apple sauce, apple bread, apple chips, and whatever other products can be made from apples. The greater production of apples not only improves the ability of the apple farmer to sustain his life by consuming apples but the lives of others by trading them so they may consume the apples.

The sad part is that other apple farmers might not be doing as well as this farmer with his amazing idea. This is where we run into problems with people choosing not to accept logic and reason. Just because one apple farmer acquired an idea (The means of its acquisition do not matter at this time.) to produce more apples faster than other apple farmers doesn't mean he is a bad guy because he was able to undercut his competitors.

If this apple farmer can produce more apples faster than his competitors then he can sell his product cheaper thus showing a greater prospect that he will likely sell more apples than his competitors. That enriches both him and everyone who buys from him. He wins obviously because he acquired a refined idea about apple farming and is selling more apples because he can afford to sell them at a lower cost. Provided he sells enough apples he should be able to recoup what profits he would have made if he didn't sell his apples cheaper; and hopefully make a little more profit too!

Those trading or buying his apples win too because they are purchasing apples at a cheaper rate than they would otherwise. That means they have more money or goods and services to trade for more apples or to trade for other goods and services. What the apple farmer with the ideas for greater production is doing is creating more wealth. It could be easy to see that the apple farmer is creating more wealth in apples thus cheapening the value of apples; but the fact is that apples are perishable. They will go bad. The farmer may be cheapening the value of the apples but he is also enriching the lives purchasing from him as well as his own. He will likely continue farming apples until another apple farmer acquires a better idea or he decides to quit.

Unfortunately, the chains that we create to voluntarily trade with one another by selling our goods, services, and labor to others are used against us. When we apply for employment at a local mom and pop business or a big box store we are attempting to sell our labor and time and occasionally our intellect. We agree to work at a predetermined set of tasks which should be designed by the employer to create a good or provide a service to others which acquires monetary wealth. The employer then gives us a predetermined about of that acquired monetary wealth and keeps the rest for himself to maintain the remainder of his business.

That's pretty cut and dry. Honestly there is not much more to that entire concept. Like the understanding of liberty, wealth, and wealth creation, selling our labor to a potential employer really is that simple. Where such things become complicated is usually where one can find that someone is either not understanding that concept, a violation of the contract has occurred, or there is some unwarranted interjected coercion involved.

Typically this kind of unwarranted coercion is from a force based authority such as government. That is what slows down and at times absolutely stops the progress of creating and exchanging wealth. In fact it is government intervention that destroys more wealth after halting its creation entirely. That is where we get the understanding that "we cannot have nice things because of government!" It is government that destroys the means to peaceful prosperity thus greatly hindering our ability to further the pinnacle of human civilization.

Chapter 5

The Self Proclaimed Harvest Master: Government

People make mistakes all the time. There is good reason to worry about making mistakes when one's life is on the line. Our lives are always hanging in the balance for one reason or another; but it doesn't ever have to be so do to any need for sustenance, shelter, or security on account of manmade problems. It should now be clear as to what liberty is all about. In a nutshell liberty is about honestly, peacefully, and voluntarily creating wealth that is beneficial in the maintenance and improvement of the quality of life by and for each individual with his or her own respective time, intellect, and labor. The troubles we experience are generally often rooted in not understanding this.

The hardships life naturally brings us are more than enough means to teach us the lessons of survival without complicating things further. Unfortunately all government does is consume, destroy, and hinder wealth creation. Since wealth is any good or service that is useful in the maintenance and or improvement of the quality of life any hindrance of such creation and or use ultimately endangers lives. Most of the time these regulations are simple acts that only demand a fine or tax of sorts. A building permit, a license to fish, a certificate to sell hotdogs, or even a sales tax that increases the amount paid for a good or service by a seemingly trivial amount. Of these things the one that is different is taxation.

Taxation of course is the coerced action of acquiring wealth, often times this is money in one form or another, to be redistributed among those working under the authority of government and its proponents. Taxes are among one of the more deceptive practices by government due in large part to the general public's misunderstanding of what money is. Recall that money, whether real, artificial, or both, is a means to exchange power through economic choice in the acquisition of other forms of wealth; most notably real wealth. Government asserts its authority by stealing what was peacefully created by individuals seeking to find common ground in completely voluntary trades; and perverts the use of money to increase its power. Many will sneer at those getting worked up over such tiny thefts. The truth is that we should despise every theft.

At first glance these small things seem relatively harmless. The claim is often centered around the protection of individuals from those who would try to cheat others with faulty construction, greedily over fishing a body of water, a notice that tells the customers of a hotdog stand that the owner understands certain safety guidelines, and of course a small fee that goes to compensate the people working with government authority who issue such permission slips and notices. Of course there are other things that government does which it tells us requires compensation too.

Sadly, the things that government does are already performed by the market place; by people seeking to find the best possible deal for the product of their time, intellect, and labor; for their money. People have always had the ability to research a seller before buying even if they didn't know how. People will self regulate when they know that those whom they cheat are not held back from protecting their property. With the various communications technologies available today this practice is so incredibly easy that there is no reason for someone not to research a buyer or seller before engaging in any interactions with him or her. In fact the market place does the same thing government does, does it better, and for nearly always a fraction of the total cost.

By engaging in these aggressive policies of taxation all government is doing is legitimizing its right to steal and scaring people into feeling dependent on an authority other than themselves. When we purchase goods and services we often dislike the associated taxes. Most of us capable of thinking for ourselves would rather not pay the taxes at all. The same goes for needing permits for building structures, fishing to be fed, and operating businesses to acquire monetary wealth.

Before 1913, in the United States, people constructed buildings of all shapes and sizes -considering the technologies available-, fished, hunted, grew crops, and even operated businesses. While it is true that many animals were set on the verge of extinction, many buildings were poorly constructed by today's standards, and many business owners did cheat their customers such are things necessary from time to time to remind the producers and consumers of wealth how to behave lest they risk a fate more terrible than death; public opinion. Before 1913, the idea of having any kind of permission slip to do these things would have been unthinkable for most, laughable if discussed, and revolted against when attempted for the most part until 1865.

Before then people often created their own money if they operated a large store, handled credits, and traded gold and silver coins like we trade cotton fiber denominations of paper and coins made of zinc, steel, copper, nickel, and other less precious metals. Technological achievements were abundant when people were freed from the majority of responsibilities to feed, shelter, and secure themselves. People freed themselves up from these responsibilities, not by taking handouts but, by working hard to put away both real and artificial wealth for the future. They planned ahead.

When nature was acting in their favor they had more time to do as they pleased. Some of these people were smart and prepared even more just in case. Many of the greatest visionaries created vast business empires that, if maintain properly, could benefit their families for generations to come; thus granting a secure means to satisfy the first three basic necessities of life and leaving ample remaining for the pursuit of happiness in other mediums. Then along came government. Taxes were applied heavily to a few and a few things. They were disliked but paid for because saying no was not allowed anymore.

Until 1865 revolting against taxation was acceptable in the United States. There was always a means to say 'no!' Not so after the Union waged war against a group of seceded states. I know this won't be a very popular topic for many but the truth absolutely hurts when lies are all that is known growing up. The truth about the American Civil War is one that is rooted in the federal government's desire to collect taxes above everything else. Taxes are typically collections of monetary wealth. Much of the monetary wealth collected by the federal government in the years leading up to the war was spent on infrastructure and variants of corporate welfare that benefitted Northern interests more than Southern interests. The bulk of the revenue collected was at Southern ports through importation tariffs. By artificially increasing the prices of the imported goods, the federal government was stealing wealth from anyone who purchased these goods. In addition this policy discouraged the purchase of imported goods from foreign manufacturers.

It could be agreeable if foreign producers could not create goods to sell, including shipping costs, which are cheaper than domestically produced goods. What is not agreeable is the fact that domestically produced goods desired to be purchased by domestic consumers were not competitive with foreign produced goods, which included shipping costs, unless additional fees were added to them. That is dishonest and an act of intentional economic manipulation at the hands of government.

Such manipulation continues today with different variants. A plethora of rules, regulations, taxes, and permission slips to do anything always involves some form of economic interaction. The problem with this is that everything involves economics in one way or another. Economics is the science of wealth creation, exchange, and acquisition. As I have already explained, wealth is anything that is desirable in the satisfaction of one or more of the four basic necessities of life. Since wealth, both real and artificial, is a necessity of life and the improvement of life then that makes the worst part about government the taxation.

Why taxation and not the other regulations? Simply put, because without a means of voluntarily encouraging people to do things they wouldn't otherwise do without coercion the government can masquerade as a benevolent thief at worst and a necessary evil at best. The truth is that none of us, who are completely being honest with ourselves, enjoy paying taxes. The continuous stream of disinformation that perpetuates the arguments in favor of government is always based on coercive acts.

If an action is not voluntary, or there is coercion involved to encourage a specific action, then there is something wrong. As a parent I struggle with the continuous problem of using forms of violence or aggression as punishment versus reason and logic. I was punished by various means of physical violence and verbal aggression. I hated that as a kid. What I wanted was a reasonable explanation more and more as I got older. I remembered the things I preferred as kid and the things I hated. In my teenage years I tried numerous methods to logically reason with my father. He disciplined me how he was taught discipline should be. His father was physically and verbally aggressive and so he was the same with me.

He was taught that by his father who was taught that by his father and both were taught that by the societies they grew up in. I was taught that too but was conflicted with what certain elements of society were telling me. I broke the mold, for the most part. At nine years old my daughter has received no corporal punishment for her behavior. She has endured some yelling done only in the moment of a fit of anger. She knows I love her and that I would do anything for her. I talk to her as if she is a young adult in training. I reason with her. I explain concepts to her. We even research historical facts together at times. We are making our world a better place by actively working to control the hostile emotions that encourage the overriding of logic and reasoning. I am working with her to explain that violence is only a last resort if a life is unjustly at stake and or if logic and reasoning are being vehemently rejected. With her I have broken the mold set by my grandfather; but I digress.

Is the reader beginning to notice a pattern here? Always the government is acquiring wealth through coercive means. It complicates this by consuming wealth without actually providing any service that we would likely voluntarily pay for at the costs it is being forced upon us at. Many will argue that there can be no price issued on the value of a life. While I agree that human life cannot necessarily have a value affixed to it, people must still be given a choice lest they are silently enslaved by a desire to avoid the greater of two evils; thus settling for the lesser. Taxation is a huge problem and goes beyond those simple little permits, licenses, and sales taxes.

Ultimately regulations, rules, and permits imposed by government are silent taxes that are forced upon us by the trickling down of increased costs that businesses (and individuals) will ultimately have to pay when ever government decides upon a new set of safety regulations. In a market free of coercion from a centralized authority, businesses will reinvest accordingly to the benefit of its customers which will transfer to the benefit of the business's wallet. If not people will go elsewhere.

Always such interventions are proclaimed to be for the safety of the citizenry but they are, at best, ill perceived for what they encourage and not what they discourage. Regulations, permits, and other mandates are sworn to be designed to discourage poor safety standards and other practices that will hurt or kill consumers. What such government actions also do is to discourage consumers taking responsibility in their hands for themselves. It is a shirking of responsibility that is led by the thief spending the taxes it collected to make itself look like the good guy. (It's the perverted idea of giving back to the community. There will be more on this in a later chapter.)

In the end any action, regardless of noble intent, that interferes with the individual's ability to acquire and keep the real wealth necessary for the maintenance and or improvement of life through creation and or voluntary interactions with others is an infringement of the individual's liberty. Unfortunately, there is something else that taxation does which has caused a crippling of our economy today. While money has the ability for its owner to avoid being a jack of all trades to depend on it entirely with no skills of wealth creation is dangerous. This is especially true when such an idea is complicated by taxation, regulation, and money-with no value of real wealth attached to it- becomes the exclusive means of exchange with no other competition to maintain honesty or credibility.

It is a path riddled with terror and fright and is maintained by whoever controls the money supply. By now the reader should know and begin thinking about why the idea of having no understanding of what wealth is is a ridiculously risky path to walk in life. There are risks, with or without government, concerning dependency based on monetary acquisition without maintaining any skills which aid in the creation of real wealth in any capacity. Such dependency can completely destroy a person's livelihood. This is the line of thinking that created stock brokers' positions, Wall Street as we know it today, and other forms of capital investment. These are all forms of wealth acquisition but not wealth creation per se. This is the concept that most in government do not understand.

Investing in a business via stocks and the like does not create real wealth as much as it shifts the artificial wealth of money from one person to another in their gamble to acquire as much as possible to later trade the money for real wealth to sustain life. To be clear money is not the problem. The problems are any regulations of an individual's ability to create or peacefully acquire real wealth. These regulations only compound the severity depending on artificial wealth (money) acquisition through trades and gambles without having any skills that create real wealth. Unskilled laboring positions such as factory line work fall under this category. A dependency on working unskilled positions is not a bad thing entirely. Such positions will always be available but to invite or allow any intervention of the unskilled laborer's ability to negotiate for himself and freely to spend his earnings to sustain his life is dangerous to his liberty. This is why so many starved during the great Depression. This is why so many went homeless during the Great Depression. This is why so many people today suffer from hunger and homelessness. They either do not know how to create real wealth or they are prevented from creating real wealth by various government regulations.

Once again money is important today because it is so useful in the acquisition of real wealth. The value of money is bolstered ever further in importance with the understanding that it is required for us to specialize in particular fields of study for the advance of the refinement of ideas that contribute to our abilities to sustain and improve life. When money is manipulated intentionally or unintentionally it causes disruptions in its value affecting the ability of individuals to maintain their specializations. These become threatened first before any other profession. That pursuit of a specialized profession then is downgraded by the individual as less important and the acquisition of the basics of life in a more direct or stable way more important. That is why so many jobs are lost when there is any kind of economic turmoil. People spend their entire lives specializing and saving only to have it taken away by some suit pretending to be an economic deity. The fear people experience boils down to the need for financial security which eventually translates into the preservation of life as we currently understand it.

What people don't generally understand is that life doesn't stop because we run out of money. The rate at which we are able to please ourselves slows down and then, if we are responsible to begin with, our ability to feed, shelter, and secure ourselves slows down. That is why service sector jobs and entertainment positions are often the first to fee the crunch in a sick economy. If we are not responsible then our ability to feed, shelter, and secure ourselves slows down first. Regardless, life goes on. There are plenty of happy people all around the world who have far less in possessions than we do in the United States. That doesn't make us terrible people. It just makes us ignorant or more nicely put, less aware of the real problem. If we don't know what the real problem is then we will never find the correct solution except by pure chance. Finding a solution by pure chance is not a solution because it is unlikely that it will be seen for what it is.

The problem is that we don't collectively understand liberty, wealth, and how the two relate to one another. This leads to modern government being able to use scare tactics against us. If we look at the root of the economic scare tactics that the federal government and most other governments have used against their people we see that taxation is the root of the problem. Taxation was bad enough before the creation of the centralized banking institution we know today as the Federal Reserve Bank. In England it is the Bank of England and just about every nation on Earth has a centralized bank too!

The problem with each and every single one of these banks is the exclusive control they have over printing their respective nations' currencies. In the United States we have the Federal Reserve Notes most people call dollars. (I won't get into explaining how centralized banks work. However, if you wish to know more there are plenty of great resources out there. I suggest starting with the book END THE FED by Ron Paul.) These dollars are printed and then borrowed by the federal government. The federal government spends these dollars into the economy. In the beginning they are used sparingly but over time they caught on. These dollars were spent in conjunction with gold and silver.

Eventually the federal government began demanding payment of taxes in only dollars after it passed a law to confiscate and ban citizens from owning gold. This demand gave artificial value to the dollars it borrowed from the Federal Reserve Bank. Where does this artificial value come from? It comes from us clamoring to acquirer as many of these dollars as we can to pay our taxes so we might avoid becoming indebted to the government for payment of back taxes or have our other property confiscated and or if be imprisoned. That is one hell of a way to give value to a single currency.

The fact that gold and any other precious commodities are not linked in any way directly to the value of the dollars in our pockets makes the Federal Reserve Bank a very dangerous entity. By simply residing in the jurisdiction claimed by the federal government we must pay taxes when we engage in most economic transactions; because of that we rely upon the use of these dollars and when the Federal Reserve Bank decides that it wants to begin destroying or massively creating new dollars it severely interferes with our ability to provide the basics necessities of life.

For those individuals whom have skills that create real wealth, such as farming, they have an advantage when the economy becomes sour over those who have more specialized skills or none at all. Since people are not as likely to diversify their artificial wealth with other forms of money they suffer and often lose everything at the whim of some suit in Washington D.C. or the Federal Reserve Bank.

## Government is entirely the problem. The little bit of good that government does is greatly over shadowed by the massive destruction it causes to the liberties of each individual. LtC Sir Arthur James Lyon Fremantle, HM Coldstream Guards, said in his book, THREE MONTHS IN THE SOUTHERN STATES, that "the universal practice of carrying arms in the South is undoubtedly the cause of occasional loss of life, and is much to be regretted. On the other hand, this custom renders altercations and quarrels of very rare occurrence, for people are naturally careful what they say when a bullet may be the probable result.

## I like to modify that statement as follows concerning the rejection of government in favor of nonaggression and voluntarism which reads like this:

## The

universal practice of nonaggression will undoubtedly be the cause of occasional loss of life, and is much to be regretted. On the other hand, this custom will render altercations and quarrels of very rare occurrence, for people will naturally become careful of what they say and do when another feels justly inclined to consider an irresponsible individual's rights, up to and including his right to life, forfeit!

## This may not be the absolute perfect system of self governance; but since humanity is imperfect there can be no perfect system to govern imperfect creatures when there are no perfect creatures available to govern. At least under a system where there are rules through the understanding of nonaggression, there are no rulers to create mandatory policy for everyone just or evil. Unfortunately, the system we have today has us trapped.

## The debts that the entity which claims jurisdiction over us has acquired since the year 1913 are shackles that may be difficult to break. These debts are not only acquired from a single centralized bank but from many nations around the world. To default on these loans is to invite possible war. The critics of antigovernment people suggest that we ought to at least pay off these debts before revolting.

## While that does sound noble, the federal government has been acquiring more and more debt every year with no sign of slowing down. Worse is the fact that it uses promises to steal from us future taxes to repay these loans with. Are you upset yet? Liberty, wealth, nonaggression, and voluntarism are insanely simple in comparison to the inner machinations of government stupidity. We either risk the wars with other nations by revolting in as peaceful a manor as possible or we do nothing and risk more than mere default on loans; we risk utter destruction, economic turmoil, and a collapse that could last for more than a single generation. It doesn't have to be that way if we just stop contributing to those who wish to exploit us through coercive measure.

Chapter 06

Fencing In the Farm: Slavery Through Debt

People often believe that slavery is far more difficult to endure than freedom. Nothing could be further from the truth. The trouble with this particular perception is that we, in first world countries, see only the images that coercion based authorities want us to see or the images around us without putting them into any context that includes what we don't immediately perceive. While there are numerous examples of how slavery is harsh, what we understand to be slavery in the United States is tainted unfairly with only a relatively few images and stories told with incomplete contexts.

While slavery is about control the single greatest motivator for its perpetuation is wealth. People directly owning other people do so for the specific purpose of social statuses. Social statuses are almost always based on wealth. Recall that each individual is naturally equipped with three resources; time, intellect, and labor. To possess property rights to other people is to own the additional time, intellect, and labor that can be used to free up the master's time, intellect, and labor. The practice of slavery is an economic practice akin to the other economic fallacies such as the broken window fallacy presented to the world by Frederic Bastiat.

In short this economic philosophy states that if a baker's shop window is destroyed a job is created. While it is true that the broken window, which now needs to be repaired or replaced, will provide work for a window maker the baker is now out the cost of the tradable wealth (money) to purchase other items. Instead of purchasing a new suit which would create a job for the purpose of creating additional real wealth, not replacing destroyed wealth, he now must purchase the refinement of the window maker's time, intellect, and labor. The window that was destroyed was a form of wealth in the terms that it provided the baker with something of value. It allowed people to see into his shop and allowed light into it. At the same time the window kept out nasty weather which was a beneficial service to the baker since the window prevented nature from damaging the other forms of wealth inside his shop.

In this scenario, the baker must now choose between protecting the remainder of his wealth from the elements by purchasing a new window of sorts or run the risk of not purchasing the window maker's services. To risk not purchasing the window maker's services is to risk having his other wealth damaged to the point where it must also be repaired. That is the broken window fallacy. To make sure it's connection with slavery is clear one must understand that any loss from intentional destruction or confiscation of wealth designed to benefit another at the expense of the victim is a form of slavery. This is due to the intentional act of coercion that removes, from one individual's possession to either another's or no one's possession, real or artificial wealth useful in the satisfying of the four basic necessities of life.

It was through the discovery of Frederic Bastiat's Broken Window Fallacy that I began to understand what wealth really was. That helped me further my understanding of liberty. As I have explained liberty is the ability for the individual to peacefully and honestly acquire the four basic necessities of life by refining his or her three natural resources, time, intellect, and labor; and or by voluntarily engaging in only interactions free of coercion with others to peacefully and honestly acquire wealth.

And here is where we find the true difficulty of liberty. Life as we know it today didn't just pop into existence. What we know as the world today was created by billions, if not trillions, of hands since the dawn of humanity. What was begun by the very first generation was built upon by the next and so on. When the first hunters decided to use sticks to stop their prey their actions likely did not turn out quite as they may have planned.

Probably through thousands of refinements of techniques and trials the first good spear was crafted. Eventually someone thought up the idea to throw the spears from a distance. Another few thousand trials were probably undertaken and such corresponding refinements were completed. In time such refinement of ideas led to herding prey, simple domestication, and eventually into breeding and livestock farms. The same was true of gathering berries, nuts, and other fruits and vegetables until farming was developed.

These techniques enabled their users to allocate greater resources of time, intellect, and labor to other activities. Naturally, other motivated individuals opted to further develop hunting and gathering ideas while others pursued sheltering techniques and various forms of security against less ideologically and technologically developed people. (Of course it should go without saying that sometimes the more developed people attack the less developed.)

By now I trust the reader understands where this is going. Liberty appears easier than slavery because of all of the centuries of refinement that we have embraced by our parents' and grandparents' generations before us. It is such an easy thing to overlook. Liberty is a long and eternal process that is used to create the marvelous civilizations we have today! It is why slavery exists in part but never whole. Without liberty slavery cannot exist; but liberty can exist without slavery. The idea of slavery is one that is rooted in the desire of one to control for the benefit of his or her liberty another. Slavery is a perversion of the voluntary system of exchange. The whips and brutal beatings that are often associated with slavery by people within the United States of America are not entirely accurate for an overall description of slavery.

Slavery is any act in which a person is intentionally being coerced into producing wealth for the benefit of another against the producer's will. Remember that coercion is any act that uses unwarranted violent or verbal force and or intentional deception to achieve a specific behavior or action. Therefore, the taxes that we are coerced into paying make us slaves since the payment of such things is punishable by laws that translate into acts of violence as retribution for noncompliance.

Taxes are the portions of wealth that are confiscated from us by government authorities. Morally speaking, the end purpose of why taxes are coercively collected makes no difference in the argument about their collection. The truth remains that taxation is an act of coercion. It is theft in far more cases than not; and by this I mean taxation is ALWAYS theft because it is not voluntary. If taxation were voluntary there would be no underlying threats of violence to gain compliance with such a practice. There are some who believe taxes are required and they willingly pay. That is their prerogative. Where the arguments for taxation go wrong is the mindset of those who do pay that states: everyone should be made to give some because doing so helps the greater good!

Coercing specific behavior from anyone is a poor means of creating any situation that is for the greater good. This is and has always been the problem with the concept of any government, even noble and benevolent government. At first the taxes collected by governments are enough to sustain its desires to rule. In time the people often become agitated by excessive taxation. The government, not likely to desire a violent revolt, finds a means of acquiring wealth elsewhere; much of the time it is by acquiring loans.

These loans come from either other nations, by floating bonds, or by creating artificial wealth. Today the last option is what we often call printing money. When a government prints money it is really just increasing the cost of living on everyone using the money being printed excessively. The increase in the amount of money being injected into the economy tends to raise prices as there is more money available.

As for the floating of bonds and acquiring loans, well both are, for sake of argument, essentially the same things. These loans must be repaid. Again they are acquired atop the collateral offered which is a promise of the government acquiring the funds to be repaid by taxing people in the future. Governments are bad enough on the grounds that they coerce individuals into giving them money to operate in order to provide things that people might not otherwise be willing to pay for directly or at the costs governments provide them. To allow a government to acquire loans is to allow a greater evil to lay claim to the future refinements of our time, intellect, and labors. Too many loans are an evil which will successfully lay claim to the lives of the unborn also! This is why national debts are despised so much by many small government champions.

The problem of enslavement is not to just end the acquisition of debt by governments but to end the belief that governments are necessary for the continuation, let alone the prosperity, of humanity. If we end government we end the monopoly on coercive entities. This doesn't necessarily mean that we will be ruled by lots of little coercion based entities. What it means is that we will actually have a chance to stand up to the entities attempting to limit our liberties. The best part about being able to stand up to those who would seek to leech off our liberties through coercive means is that we could actually hire others for any amount of voluntarily agreed time to protect us in much the same way we do for pest control companies.

Just as we can call a company to spray our homes and businesses to prevent termites, ants, and other creepy crawlies we can go to local shops and purchase various do-it-yourself items. Without government we can do the same concerning the protection of our liberties. We can still band together if we want or we can go solo. We can hire companies to protect us and arbitrate for us. We can go purchase guns and ammunition and get karate lessons and protect ourselves. What we don't need are governments to do such things for us. Having any blanket policy that is based on coercing an entire society is going to cause more problems than not.

When a single entity can make its own rules without fear of being challenged then those within its jurisdiction are slaves to it until they successfully stop its interference in their lives.

Chapter 07

Hiding the Fences: Indoctrination, War, and Nationalism

With all the complexities created by one government official or another and whether innocent or malicious these are not enough to hinder those who think critically. The sad truth is that so much more is needed to cow people into believing government is a necessity. I seriously doubt there is a single individual holding all the chips or even a small group holding most of the chips while directing the policies of the United States' government. There are likely a few small groups that hold a lot of power but they do not hold anything remotely close to all the chips. They never can hold all the power so long as there is at least someone thinking about how to create and trade wealth for the purpose of sustaining and improving life.

I do believe there are individuals who seek to subjugate the government through various means but such actions will not always consume the entire entity of government; for when that happens it will be plain for all to see how vile an institution government can truly be. At that point the "jig will be up!" People will absolutely be forced into making a decision. There will be no fair weather patriots. There will be those standing to fight and those fleeing for their lives. In order for the government to continue, especially as it exists in the United States for a few to steal from many, there must always be some illusion of control projected onto the masses.

Voting is a perfect example of this. The theories are probably endless concerning how to cheat the system. The problem is that regardless of how honest the system really is the concept of forcing a choice onto an individual, who does not agree is just plain wrong . This action is only compounded in how wrong it is when the individual being forced to comply with the majority rule is not, has not, and has no intentions of infringing upon the rights of others without just cause in defense of his own life and property. Government does not ask for obedience. Government demands obedience and the illusion with American government is that because we vote we can be part of the solution. The fact is that because we vote we are enabling the system to continue stealing and legislating morality at gun point; but the system tells us that we are exercising our rights to have a say in how we collectively make changes for the betterment of all mankind.

"Yes we can" to mimic a familiar phrase. Yes we can make a change and that change is not entirely for the better of all of mankind. Voting is a seemingly noble idea. It does give people a choice in determining what things might be done. The problem is that voting is best kept at the most local levels. It is easier to come to a unanimous agreement among fewer people than it is for larger groups. That is the only fair way of reaching a conclusion collectively. People must be in complete agreement. That rarely happens except in the case of political wolves agreeing which lambs to have for dinner. I understand that the system of American government was never intended to be a pure democracy. It was never intended to be a consolidated republic either! The right to say no and back that up by walking away through secession was meant to keep those in the federal government honest in their dealings with other member states.

It is a terrible thing that we are where we are in some respects; but we didn't get here over night or by entirely voluntary choices. We got to this point because of sleight of hand tactics, blind obedience, and the acceptance of things that would require payment in blood to change. No one wants to ever be the first casualty in a conflict; let alone a casualty at all. So we accepted the fate handed to us, whether we knew or not that we played a part in its creation. Such a decision was rewarded by the indoctrination of our children in government run schools and nationalistic propaganda about how much better our system of coercion-called government- is than others around the world. With each passing generation the governments throughout and including that of the United States taught greater depths of obedience to our children turning them against the free thinkers and the lesser obedient citizens.

Agree or disagree the federal government on someone's orders made it so that certain things would be taught. One of the most infiltrating things taught to our children is the Pledge of Allegiance. The problem is not the use God in the pledge. The problem is the pledge itself. The simple fact is that children raised in schools throughout the Union are instructed to recite something that entirely goes against the grain of what the Union's Founding Fathers were fighting for. Why is reciting the Pledge of Allegiance acceptable while the pledges made to Hitler by his youth corps despicable?

I can understand the desired patriotic sentiment being bestowed by reciting the pledge. I understand the desire to get people to be patriotic about their country; but there is a very real difference between patriotism and nationalism. This is something many anarchists will argue over; but to me patriotism is meant to be the voluntary defense of any cause where nationalism is blind obedience to the cause of government power disguised as responsibility to the greater good of all. These two ideas are routinely interchanged in the United States. I suspect that to be the case around the world too!

The Pledge of Allegiance is particularly dangerous to the understanding of liberty in the United States on the grounds that it suggests that the United States is not divisible. Put differently, secession is illegal; the right to peacefully say no to infringements of one's liberty is illegal. Perhaps that was not the intent behind Francis Bellamy's words in 1904 when the pledge was written but that is what it has come to signify among many free thinkers. Nationalism is a dangerous concept that should be watched very carefully and questioned relentlessly. It always results in the protection of government and not country. These two things are not the same and should never be regarded as such since people can exist in peace and war with or without government.

Nationalism is what helped usher in the conflicts of the American Civil War for both sides regrettably. Nationalism is responsible for the senseless killing of so many people. It is nothing short of suggesting to the people beneath other governments that 'my government is better than yours!' "My masters are better than your masters!" Worse yet, the crimes of our now long dead ancestors are no reason to fly a flag into battle. What is done is done and cannot always be undone. The hatreds of old and long dead enemies are carried on today but why?

They linger on because we don't take the time to learn differently or we cling to some absurd stereo type. The moment we ignorantly learn that someone did something that remotely matches a stereo type we cast an instant and full judgment on them. That is what nationalism helps us do! My birth location or adopted home and flag are better than yours because of your crappy history! What kind of stupid nonsense is that? Yes people do terrible things but why is it fair to criticize Germans today born well after the end of World War II for the crimes their parents and grandparents may have committed? The same holds true for Americans and everyone else! Even during the days when people committed terrible crimes only some of them did. There were many who did not but cowered in fear of being the next victim because of the overwhelming peer pressure fighting against their will to stand up and say no.

Yet people buy into this nationalism junk! People eat that crap up! People sign up for some supposed great duty and honor to serve the greater good and often times all they get is a body bag; a flag draped coffin and forty plus years shaved off their lives. Nationalism is a terrible thing. I can understand willingly signing up under the command of a respected military leader to repel invaders; but to sign up to travel to a foreign land and kill people over there is almost unthinkable; but to do it in the name of freedom...well, freedom for whom? To sign up because such a thing puts food on the table, clothes a child's back, and gives an opportunity to pay for school is a pretty weak argument. Additionally nationalism only fuels the fires of war and war only destroys real wealth. Anything received from government was first taken from someone else via taxes; or the loan acquired by government to pay such a salary was made with collateral consisting of the fruits of our future labors being confiscated. That extends to every other individual's labor living within the jurisdiction of the government collecting the taxes.

A handful of individuals behind closed government doors want the poor to sign up for military service because it makes their regime look good! Military service artificially lowers unemployment and also enables soldiers' lives to be put on the line for conflicts that distract from issues at home. People like John McCain who served numerous tours in Vietnam should remember the horrors he faced. One would logically conclude that he would wish those fates on no one else and thus be a terrific proponent for peace, peace, and more peace. However, that must be difficult to do when the government he is part of is so fantastically huge that no one ever knows for certain what other parts of it are really doing.

That is what government does to us. When it can't control its cash cows it sends them off to be killed or distracted by some national emergency. With the seemingly endless supply of money it receives from taxes and loans there is no reason why the United States, or any other government, should stop waging war. It is a wonderful tool for those in power to keep us eternally distracted from the real issue; that government is an antiquated idea for intellectually honest people and self aware people.

It is amazingly convenient to be able to conscript people into service too! While a draft hasn't taken place so far in my lifetime I know people who have been drafted, dodged the last draft, and fought against it by taking a jail sentence. I also understand that people want to kill us. The entire world doesn't hate us because of our freedoms alone. Many hate us because we allow our soldiers the freedom to kill them over there. With every individual killed anywhere a mother, father, brother, uncle, sister, friend or loved one becomes a potential enemy to us.

Not everyone can be reasoned with but that doesn't mean we should be everywhere shooting in all directions. Government sends us into constant wars for some supposed noble purpose. It is more likely that a few are pulling the strings intentionally to get us into more and more conflicts; to wear us down or outright kill the dissenters. Who might these dissenters be?

These people are likely those who have figured out that all the borders, taxes, regulations, rules, permits, and permission slips combine together to form one thing. We are all slaves in different tax farms with different colored banners. Who are the masters of the plantations? I don't really know but I speculate they are the people behind the centralized banks across the globe.

Regardless of who these people are and what they are doing they cannot exist without us believing government is a necessity for the preservation of liberty. Government is a perversion of the free market of exchange between peaceful individuals seeking to protect themselves. Government's only ability is the use of force. Government's entire existence is built around using force to dictate behavior and actions pending the laws chosen to be enacted. Government is an unnecessary idea for honest and peaceful people. Government creates nothing of value to the mainstream populations of anyone seeking to acquire honestly and peacefully the basic necessities of life.

Real wealth is created by individuals seeking to provide the basics of life. By taking away or restricting any of this government or any coercion based entity is interfering with our abilities to sustain our lives. Rather than create or voluntarily trade to acquire wealth, these coercion based entities take from others through blatant theft called taxation or through monetary manipulation by first inflating and then deflating the quantity of money in circulation required for the payment of taxes.

If the reader recalls, the action of taxation artificially boosts value in whatever currency is being confiscated as a tax. People tend to seek the acquisition of that taxed currency for the payment of the tax. When that currency is manipulated in quantity it greatly affects the general public's ability to voluntarily exchange the manipulated currency with one another for the goods and services they require to sustain their lives in addition to paying those taxes to avoid jail time. Furthermore this limits the abilities of individuals to specialize in a particular field of study for the purpose of technological advancements which further refine ideas that satisfy the four basic necessities of life; sustenance, shelter, security, and happiness.

Chapter 08

Outgrowing the Fences: Liberty Through Anarchy

There are a lot of ways to get around the negative actions of government. We know that it is an obsolete and illegitimate entity. It is based on the justification and use of force outside of the realm of self defense to dictate specific behavior from those in its self proclaimed sphere of influence. Over the years governments have learned, forgotten, relearned, and forgotten again that if they give the people, they claim authority over, a little more freedom then the people are a little more productive in terms of wealth that can be confiscated.

People interact with one another through voluntary means. When people exchange goods or services they do so to gain a benefit. Whatever is being traded must be worth less in value to the individual trading it than the item desired to be traded for. This benefit is always something that satisfies one or more of the four basic necessities of life and or gives greater economic power. Of course this economic power is one which can later be used to acquire something that satisfies one or more of the four basic necessities of life. This makes each individual richer either with a combination of real wealth and or artificial wealth.

For the most part those transactions happen without much involvement from some all seeing entity that knows what is fair and not. People make exchanges all the time for what they believe is fair. If they believe they benefit then they trade. If they don't believe a trade is beneficial or as beneficial as it could be then they don't trade. The problem for most people is that some entity comes along and asserts its self proclaimed rights to take a little of the wealth in each transaction. These are typically called taxes. Whenever money exchanges hands a government is there to help themselves to the exchange.

When we purchase food we are taxed. When we purchase water from the utility company we are taxed. When we purchase lumber to build a house we are taxed. When we purchase a house we are taxed. When we sell our labor to a buyer (employer) we are taxed. So much is taken from us every single day we exchange money that we ought to be absolutely furious. Some of us are. Some of us just want better deals on goods and services.

These taxes actually create new market places that are intent on hiding from government. This doesn't make these venders bad people. It just means they are sick of being controlled and stolen from. (Well, at least a good portion of these market places are anyway. I understand there are some things that are 'less than moral' going on. Those will happen with or without government; but they happen with a vengeance because of government's attempts to legislate morality.) All of these voluntary trades take place not because of government but in spite of government. People want to trade because trading makes life easier in many regards.

When people cannot create the goods and services they desire they will find a way to obtain them; usually through voluntary means first. These 'black' or 'underground' markets go around the laws put in place. These laws act like fences. People who obey laws do not think for themselves or are afraid of government retribution and will not seek a means around or past these fences. They then become subjected to the whims of the law makers and the enforcers of those laws. (This is why police and military are often demonized. They may not be evil people but because they enforce laws that ultimately interfere with peaceful and honest people's ability to provide for themselves they typically earn such titles.) Indoctrination sponsored by the governments building these fences is responsible for much of the fear and ignorance people have concerning the maintenance of these fences.

However, as we exchange ideas more frequently people are beginning to understand that many of these laws are impeding the average individual's ability to provide the basic necessities of life on their own merits. Government is being seen as more of a nuisance than a benefit. In fact I am certain government is now being seen more as a dominate face of the enemy of liberty than ever before. This is exactly why some members of governments wish to censor the internet.

I have regularly labeled government as an antiquated idea of societies that do not understand liberty, wealth, and the connection between them. I stand by that label and understand that the best means to protect liberty is through nonaggression. Nonaggression is simply the rejection of the initiation of coercion outside of the realm of self defense. No deception, violence, or threats should ever be initiated lest the individual initiating such acts is prepared to have those same acts or equivalent acts done in return. It is similar to an eye for an eye law but with logic and reasoning applied.

There will inevitably be situations where someone infringes upon the rights of another unintentionally. This already happens all the time. People usually come to some sort of agreement in how to correct the situation in a peaceful manner. When blatant acts of infringements occur people often have to make a choice. Allow the infringement or take immediate action against it. In a society where most people are likely to be equipped with a firearm of sorts such blatant infringements will not be as likely. The consequences of being caught infringing upon someone else's rights with intent to injure, steal, or cause distress can and will be met with the victim considering all of the assailant's rights, up to and including the right to life, forfeit.

That is a very tough punishment. However, if there is to be a means to enforce the rights of the individuals then those means are best kept with each individual according to his or her preference and within reason. Such reason includes only targeting the individual(s) responsible for the infringement(s). The practice of carrying firearms will result in accidents happening and that is absolutely terribly. The custom of carrying such things will stave off frivolous hostilities since people will be more cautious as to what they say and do knowing that their lives could be ended by another not interested in dealing with an unwarranted threatening outburst. That sounds very chaotic and uncivilized; but is it any worse than depending on some armed government agent whose primary concern is his safety before the public's safety?

(That is not always a fair assessment of law enforcement; but police are not trained or likely to be John McClain of the Die Hard series of movies starring Bruce Willis. Additionally when they are, the damage they cause is of no consequence to them because people should have insurance and governments typically don't lose lawsuits. When they do lose, who really loses? The money granted to the victims of destruction caused by government actions doesn't really come from government. It comes from the whole of the people whom the government stole money from under the guise of taxation. That's not a punishment for government. That's a punishment for the general public. Under private security firms their lively hood depends on the ability to provide great service. Great service doesn't involve destroying have of a city. In fact such blatant destruction at the hands of a private security firm will undoubtedly lead to its going out of business due to distrust from the general public.)

People ought to be cautious of their words and actions regardless of how well armed others may or may not be. That may no longer be common sense but it is good sound logic. This is how the Founders of the American Union dealt with one another. This is how the supposed Wild West was. People were armed and courteous of one another or acted the fool on their own luck. People will gladly be willing to reason with others because any loss of life is a tragedy. There will always be the one individual who just doesn't give a damn; without a government to protect this fool the likely hood that greater loss of life and distress caused will be less.

All the rules crafted by government are unnecessary for those interested in the complete preservation of their abilities to refine their three natural resources into wealth that satisfies the four basic necessities of life. Voluntary interactions with one another, free of coercion, nullify the only noble intent behind the evil necessity people call government. The market place created by the countless peaceful transactions between individuals seeking goods and services is purely a creation of actions that do not require the existence of government. Apart from the occasional thief or liar the only coercion is that which is brought by governments' theft of wealth and demands of obedience.

Remove all government intervention from the market place including all forms of taxation and there are now no 'black' or 'underground' markets. No one is a criminal any longer or a victim because of laws based upon the right of a single entity to steal from us. There is no need for such coercion to maintain good ideas. Coercion is only required for ideas that people do not want to embrace willingly. Through the practice of voluntary interaction defended by nonaggression we can make our country, and the reader can make his or her country, a shining beacon on the hill for the world to see! We can be the beacons of hope for the world.

We, the people of the United States, are among the most industrious people in the world, as is evident in our history, and can easily be the most industrious. Our empire didn't get to be the policeman of the world because we remained unproductive slaves. The American empire got to be as powerful as it is because it stole from us many of the fruits of our labors and built a mighty military with them. And while it stole from us we worked even harder to produce more in spite of the blatant thefts. We need not work harder for any entity that is working against our individual pursuits to provide for ourselves.

If we as individuals living on the North American continent in what is now called the United States can produce enough to provide for ourselves and for a thief as indulgent as the government of the United States then, imagine what we can do with all the wealth we can create after we rid ourselves of our slave driving thief of a self proclaimed master? Imagine what all the people of the world can do if they truly understand liberty, wealth, and the relationship between the two! Imagine what all the people of the world can do if they truly understand these things in relation to voluntary interactions and nonaggression!

This is no pipe dream. This is something that is already a reality in part. We already interact voluntarily with one another and defend ourselves through various understandings of nonaggression. If we rid ourselves of government and teach nonaggression, a standard understanding of it will rise above all others in time. We don't need any centralized authority to enforce the laws. We know what the rules are and we don't need rulers other than our individual selves.

Chapter 09

Aiding the Fence Builders: Showing Kindness to the Proponents of Slavery

What about the people who entered into a contract with government for years of service already provided? What about those who paid into the system for years on the promise of being taken care of in retirement and on disability? What will they have to show for their labors if government is abolished? What about the debts owed to other countries?

We can take care of those promised certain benefits by government. Voluntary donations can be offered by the general public based on the generosity of the people donating. Private charities can be set up to do all sorts of wonderful things for those living off a government retirement programs after years of service. What the donations grant versus what the contracts promised maybe different but people will be willing to help out so long as it is voluntary and the recipients are not acting like complete brats. Certainly good people will be put into distress by the breaking of government promises. Under a system which routinely breaks promises for selfish political and financial gains, the breaking of promises to free, not the majority of people but the vast majority of people is a reasonably understood goal. Those people will just have to understand that everything they were receiving was being stolen or borrowed on the premise that it would be repaid with stolen money in the future. That's going to take a lot of work, no doubt about it.

The same can work for those living on social security. Getting rid of government doesn't mean destroying the lives of the good people working for it. Not everyone is a terrible individual who works for a coercion based entity. The contracts for military personnel can be fulfilled in part or whole by voluntary donations also. Charity is often endless when it is actually charity; voluntary. People don't go hungry in places where people respect the value of hard labor and voluntary interactions. People give because they know, even if they can't explain it, that the more minds and able bodies there are in the world the greater the overall prosperity of mankind has a chance to be. Additionally, those receiving charity from completely private entities will accept the charity with the terms and conditions befitting real free men and free women or they will go without. The terms and conditions of such voluntary charity often require individuals to perform certain actions to show those giving voluntarily that they are attempting to better themselves or are at least truly grateful for the assistance.

People really need to understand what liberty and wealth are and how they relate to one another. This can be taught easily when it is figured out. I'm certain there must be someone before me whom figured all this out. I've never come across this individual or his or her work but it must exist somewhere. If not then I'm that much prouder of my accomplishments. If it has then I am proud to have figured out these things out on my own and remain glad to share them with the world.

These lessons can be taught and if we are perceptive will find them being taught everyday in the free market. Under a system where there are so many rules, regulations, and taxes these lessons may seem difficult to find if not completely elusive all together. Strip away these unnatural and crippling actions and the market is a wonderful place that produces miracles every day of the week. People are fed with produce Tuesday evening that was harvested in a field Tuesday morning from the other side of the world. Less than 60 years ago the total drive space of the best computer totaling barely 212 megabytes might have cost more than a million dollars. Today we can purchase flash drives that can hold sixty-four gigabytes of data for as little as twenty dollars. Those are the miracles of the free market. Those are the miracles of liberty; the miracles of people not hindered in their personal desires to refine their three natural resources.

How many trees have been saved because people email documents or store them on flash drives? How many people can a single wheat farmer feed because of technology? How many people have been spared back breaking laborious jobs because someone spent their free time figuring out how to make the better proverbial mouse trap? Such free time isn't created for the average individual because of government. Extra time spent not acquiring the basic necessities of life is time spent improving it or specializing in a field of study that will ultimately benefit all of humanity.

Often times what isn't considered under the umbrella of government is what is not created because it is discouraged through various regulations. More than a year and a half before I began writing this book I was unemployed. I was let go from two separate jobs. The first was from the airline industry. Numerous mergers and excessive government regulations encouraged the merger for the survival of the company. Since 2001 after the creation of the Transportation Security Administration (the TSA) business at airports began to drop.

That was the same time when new federal rules prevented non-ticketed individuals from seeing their loved ones off at the departing gate. That effectively took potential business from the shop keepers in the now secured areas. A drop in business certainly for those poor souls depending on revenue from passengers and loved ones alike was a difficult blow to take. Now many airport terminals and concourses are more often barren. Fewer shops are kept and many of the ones remaining are likely staffed with a skeleton crew.

The second job I lost was working for a mom and pop business. At the end of 2011 I was let go in part because of the fear the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) put into place. My employer decided that it would be best to cut now and save more while doing more of the work himself. What work I have now while writing this book is barely above minimum wage. It's not much but it is what I can find in a small town. I'm not upset or angry at my employer. I'm upset and angry at the governments claiming jurisdiction over me. I could have created a business to operate myself but was strongly discouraged by local and state regulations.

The winter and spring of 2012 I was looking into creating a food cart to operate. I wanted work but was unable to find anything that would allow me the flexibility to work and take care of my daughter. I was happy to see that the little I had left in savings would cover the cost of the food cart and quite a bit of product to sell. Then I realized the cost of the permits and licenses. I figured I could probably go ahead with the cart and earn the money to pay for these things afterwards but fear got the best of me. I didn't want some agent of the law shutting me down for running an illegal operation because I didn't pay the tribute demanded by law. Of course these things are supposed to be in place to protect the consumers but they often times only protect the businesses already in operation and keep those whom are poor in place.

To be fair it should be known that I did accept unemployment for a short time from May of 2010 until April of 2011. I want to continue but with looming lawsuits being put in place against some collectors of unemployment and the typical crowds of those collecting I couldn't do it anymore. Instead I decided to do things on my own. I wanted more than to just work for someone else. I wanted to work for myself.

So I began thinking more and more about what the problems I was facing were all about. By the time I found work again during the summer of 2012 I had read hundreds of books by a great many television personalities and relatively unknown authors. I read books by people I had never previously heard of and reread old books after discovering new ideas. I figured out how to defined liberty and wealth because I was intent on understanding what was wrong. I knew that government was the problem but I wanted to do more than know. I wanted a comprehensive answer.

Now that we understand how to define liberty and wealth we need to teach others. As we teach others we need to ensure they understand that the free market is the entity that we must never allow to be controlled or influenced by any force based authority ever again. The free market will provide all the security we need against foreign threats. It will provide shelter and sustenance. The free market will entertain us and it will take us where ever we want to go. The market place, free of coercion, will do these things because anyone who creates wealth through the refinement of their three natural resources is actively engaging in the free market. Such individuals may not be trading their creations with one another but they are creating desirable wealth that can be used to satisfy one or more of the four basic necessities of life. Just doing that shows others that the producers have valuable skills that they can benefit from if they can provide something the producers may desire.

With no government to intervene in the production of goods and services people will be free to create and trade as much as their hearts are content to do. Yes some people will try to create terrible things but others will create things to neutralize them. Sometimes the good guys will win and sometimes the bad guys will win. At least without a government that dictates how we may provide for ourselves and how we may defend ourselves until it arrives we won't have to worry about some bureaucrat messing up our lives if we choose to defend ourselves or start a new business.

The best part about all of this kind of freedom is that those who were previous building fences and laws to keep us producing don't have to suffer because they were ignorant of the liberty killing goals their employer may or may not have knowingly been working towards. With no regulations or armed agents of government to stop us we can easily create plenty of opportunities for ourselves. We already understand voluntarism and nonaggression we just have to have faith in one another. We put faith in paper money so why shouldn't we put a little more faith in one another?

Chapter 10

Planting Seeds Everywhere: From the Shire to Coruscant

Wondrously boundless freedom to live a life of honest self earned wealth and comforts can be had by everyone. Sure the critics will tell us that other nations will come and pounce on us. They may try. They may succeed. I don't know that they will try or that they will succeed. We can speculate but we will never know until we set ourselves free. No one will bring us liberty and we cannot bring anyone else liberty; especially not by any acts of coercion.

We can lead and teach others by the example of the miracles we produce individually or through the voluntary cooperation with one another. Each individual must recognize their right to provide for his or herself. The greater the number of individuals who understand what liberty is the greater the numbers of individuals who will produce real wealth enabling humanity to flourish. This can't be done by at bayonet point.

When the soldiers who wear the Stars and Stripes on their uniforms, or any soldiers employed by any government, go and liberate other people in other lands today they do nothing more than create further turmoil. This isn't to demean them at all. The truth is that U.S. soldiers are occupiers in foreign lands and do not leave quickly. U.S. soldiers have been stationed in Japan alone for the last 60 plus years. They have a presence everywhere around the world. The claim is that the government of the United States sends them everywhere to spread freedom and liberty. But what are U.S. soldiers freeing these people from?

Something cannot be given that does not first belong to the giver. Everyone is meant to be free but they must understand that concept first. What good does it do to kill someone's oppressor if the oppressed doesn't understand what is going on? This was true of the federal government's war tactic to end slavery in the seceded Southern States during the War against Southern Independence (1861-1865) and this is true of the people throughout the Middle East under tyrannical rulers. Liberty must be taught.

People want freedom but they only desire the freedoms that they understand. They want to provide for themselves and they want their lives to be easier and easier; but they do not always understand the connection between these two things. People often complicate these two things for everyone by demanding one or the other or parts of both be subsidized by government. We must always remember that nothing the government has ever comes about because of labors of government created wealth. Anything all governments have is always taken from the people or it is created by loans acquired on the promise that they will be repaid by stealing wealth created from the future labors of the people it claims jurisdiction over. (Or worse, government creates artificial wealth-money- and then forces the population it claims jurisdiction over to use it for trade AND the payment of taxes.)

Understanding liberty, wealth, nonaggression, voluntarism and how these four ideas create prosperity is the first step. Ridding ourselves of the antiquated idea of government is the second step. We can do that by understanding and sharing the definitions liberty and wealth and how they relate to one another. (I would personally appreciate you, my reader, sharing my work. Give them a copy of this work and I will be pleased. Encourage them to purchase a copy of this work and I will be encouraged to do more!) Third we can ensure that we have a chance to secure our liberty through only voluntary interactions. We can say no and we can back it up with the full faith of the practice of nonaggression. We already do this concerning many aspects of our lives today.

While many of us depend solely on the government's paid police for protection, many of us protect ourselves with our own guns and bravery when a nongovernment thief comes about. We only need to do the same concerning government thieves when they refuse to listen to sound logic and reason. I don't mean necessarily start shooting at the government. I mean refusing to pay taxes. People are already doing this and they are going to jail.

One or two examples are not enough. Hundreds of thousands of people need to tell their governments no. We don't have to immediately take on the federal government. We can start small at the local levels. Make small towns or city governments obsolete. Organize and create businesses that maintain the roads and offer fire services and police services. The free market is more than capable of doing this. People just have to have faith in one another. The same people already doing the jobs of firemen and law enforcement may easily be transferred to doing these jobs under a free market model. They don't have to be stoned to death because they are/were government employees. They should be embraced for the skills they have and brought into the free market. Chances are in time they can make a hell of a lot more money and be real heroes propped up with the true voluntary support of their communities.

If a small town is ever completely and successfully privatized in all aspects then that will be the shining example for the rest of our country. I don't mean government. I mean the people who comprise the United States of America. We can have the same amenities without any levels of organized thieves taxing us. The most agrarian people can live in harmony with the most industrial based cultures. Voluntary interaction and the acceptance of no for an answer is all it takes. We must have faith and respect one another in order for us to walk such a path.

Just as the empire of consolidated American states didn't get to be as large as it is without us laboring away so it could take what it wanted, we won't get to see the next pinnacle of civilization without continuing to work harder and smarter without government. The fantastic technologies of the Star Trek universe may never be known unless we work for ourselves first. Just look at how far civilization has come since the first contact between English settlers and the various Indian tribes met on North America. There were lots of conflicts but there were also lots of voluntary interaction too! When government wasn't involved the livelihoods of both the settlers and the natives were generally more peaceful. Trades were made for hunting, harvesting, and building privileges. Not all settlers just started shooting nor did all Indian tribes collect scalps because they could. The problem was always government intervention. This was usually on behalf of a few settlers asking their government to initiate force.

The trading of real wealth is what promotes the progress needed to find solutions, not the initiation of force. Trade may seem to take a long time to accomplish things but to avoid initiating violence is always to the benefit of humanity even if people are stubborn. That gives us time to both simmer in hatred and cool off. Most people cool off and figure out the errors of their ways in time through acts of kindness by others. If we can better one another's lives then we can work together to create something even better than what we have now. From the most agrarian shires to the greatest of industrial centers that WILL comprise entire planets we can make what we have even better.

All we have to do is teach the definition of liberty and wealth, how liberty and wealth work together, that all interactions should be voluntary, and how to accept no for an answer through the practice of nonaggression. From the Hobbits' agrarian shire of Middle Earth to the massive industrial planets part of the Star Wars universe we can push the pinnacle of humanity's achievements farther and farther. We can absolutely do this is if we are vigilant in our remembrance that real wealth is never finite until people are prevented from creating it. It is only through restrictions on the creation and exchange of real wealth that people die of hunger, homelessness, and are killed by others seeking real wealth to satisfy the basics of their lives because limitations are placed on the creation of real wealth.

The movie industry's portrayal of apocalyptic fates for humanity always places society's future around the idea of breaking down and hunting one another for the few precious resources that remain. Rarely does it seem that people dig in their heels, pull up their sleeves and figure out a solution. One movie I loved growing up was the Postman starring Kevin Costner. The big movie critics hated it but I loved it for the story. There were some towns which fell victim to the nasty horrible warring groups such as the Holnists. Others were more peaceful and created wealth for themselves.

Groups like the Holnists fed off the labors of those that created while doing very little to really create for themselves. Rather than digging massive quarries and building armies they could have tilled the earth and planted crops creating a surplus of food to trade with. However, in the end the Holnists were defeated in a fairly civilized manner. The last stop for the Postman was a place called Bridge City, where the mayor proudly proclaimed that guns were not allowed. (Of course that goes again securing liberty.)

Interestingly enough in the final battle an army was raised of the people living in the villages with guns outside of Bridge City, where they didn't allow guns, separating it from the army of Holnists. Those whom maintained their arms protected those who did not. The actions of those within Bridge City were undoubtedly protected by those with guns.

Not all apocalyptic fates that we believe we are destined to experience have to end in complete tragedy. We will rebuild and grow strong again; but we will never do so in manner that is suitable for a civilization that will span across the heavens darting from galaxy to galaxy as we today move from town to town without changing our perspective on how to define liberty.

Chapter 11

Afterthoughts: Giving Back

The idea of giving back to the community is something that people, often well known people, like to portray as a means to bolster their positive image. Many times those individuals who enjoy a great amount of financial success will use this idea. The Holly Wood elite seem to do this quite often as do big business CEOs. MY favorite example though is fictional.

In the second Tim Burton installment of the Batman franchise starring Michael Keaton as Batman a ruthless and cunning business tycoon takes center stage for a while. Max Shrek is the owner of a power plant and is exceptionally wealthy. In the beginning of the movie he makes a short and simple speech. It goes something like this:

"Santa Clause, 'fraid not! I'm just a poor shmoe who got lucky; and sue me if I want to give some back! I only wish I could hand out more than expensive baubles. I wish I could hand out world peace and unconditional love wrapped in a big bow."

It's such a cliché speech. It's filled with grandiose promises that can never be fulfilled by any small group of people let alone a single individual; and it starts off by pulling on the heart strings of the audience. It makes the connection to the audience by implying that through only the exclusive labors of the audience was the speaker able to achieve what he did. In other words without the audience providing for the speaker the speaker would be nothing.

Even that explanation seems as if the speaker's life was dependent on the audience. It's a concept that can be very deceiving to understand. The truth is that unless the business owner voluntarily asked for donations to aid his business then he wouldn't owe anything to the audience for his success. The speaker created a business and provided services that were compensated for with an exchange of money. Each individual who entered into agreement with this business owner must have decided such an act was fair or at least beneficial or they wouldn't have taken such an offer.

Every interaction that involved an exchange that enabled the creation of such a business would not have happened without equal exchanges; unless of course there was some form of coercion involved. In that case, which is most likely what happens today with governments, is that a special permit to operate without competition, for an often undisclosed time, is granted. Of course special tax breaks, exclusive rights to do this or that are granted and a plethora of cherry picked options are opened up.

This happens a lot in the cable television industry in the United States. Only one kind of cable provider may operate lines in a certain predetermined set of boundaries. That greatly stifles competition of course. People do recognize this and understand it to be a form of coercion to give money to that particular company over others. The noble intent, so says government, is to prevent hundreds of wires and the like from becoming a public nuisance. Sure lots of wires may become a problem but if people are willing to live with that then let them live with that. If they are not then they will make it clear by choosing with their money.

So when a person says he or she wants to give back what are they really saying? Well, unless the individual desiring to give back what he or she took from the people through coercive means, with or without government's help, then they are simply asking the people to be distracted. (Of course this opens up the ideas that the individual asking to give back may entirely be completely ignorant of how he or she is perpetuating a system of corruption too.)

If the individual wanting to give back took nothing except through mutually voluntary exchanges then there is nothing to give back. That makes the individual's words inappropriate. Instead, he or she ought to just say to the community that he or she would like to donate whatever it is they desire and be done with it. There is nothing to give back in this case.

However, if the individual received aid that was given on voluntary terms then the phrase 'giving back' would be appropriate. That is the only circumstance in which such a phrase would be appropriate. Every other use is either an intentional calculation to make the individual using it look more favorable in the minds of his audience or is being misused. For most companies using such phraseology it is an intentional calculation. When celebrities use such a phrase it is likely for both reasons.

The worst part about the misuse of this phrase is the subtle yet dangerous idea that it plants in the minds of the people. When people begin to believe that everyone must rely upon everyone else to secure liberty directly, we often create a culture that increasingly rejects individuality in favor of some collective. I doubt there is a master mind behind such deceptive verbiage. Misuse of words takes place every day; sometimes for the good and sometimes for the bad. Unfortunately, because people are not taught to think critically as often as they are taught to regurgitate ideas such misuse of ideas is becoming more and more commonplace.

This particular essay is not meant to be an attack on people so much as it is my observation of what part of the overall problem is concerning our loss of liberties.

Chapter 12

After thought: Slavery and the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)

Most people at first glance will likely react to such a title with a "What the F***!" perplexity in their mind. The way I perceive today's politics in the United States is that the ACA or Obamacare is today's equivalent issue of slavery. It is one of the biggest and most divisive issues of today for the United States. It is claimed to be for the good of all people yet the means in which it is going to be enforced is doing more to harm the liberty of the general public than to not implement this at all.

Regardless of personal feelings about why people shouldn't be enslaved or why people should be given access to healthcare at the coerced expense of others, the fact remains that such ideas are emboldened by the very existence of government. Just as the practice of slavery was protected by the Constitution of the United States government for some 78 years; the seemingly lopsided power of insurance companies, ever increasing costs of healthcare, and decreasing rate of life saving medicines being made available to people within the United States is being sanctioned by the federal government today.

The very existence of government perpetuates bad ideas in the name of peace and prosperity built on a foundation of coercion. This is true since government is not an entity that individuals may singularly opt out of without a fight. Government, its ideas, and its actions are all violently forced upon everyone inside a predetermined set off boundaries called national borders. The ends do not justify the means when government does anything for good or ill. If an idea must be forced upon any individual then there are three possible problems.

The first is that the idea is obviously bad for liberty. Not everyone is equally intelligent and will not always see the possible paths of governments' actions accurately; but some people will. The proponents of government know this. That's why they often seek to "pass bills to find out what is in them!" When there is opposition to such absurdity then governments will do what governments do best and that is initiate force against those in disagreement with its methods.

The second problem is that an idea is not adequately explained. Governments are not well known to explain any idea, especially beginning in the last century, honestly to gain legitimate support. Often government and its proponents tell the general public what it wants to hear and a little of what it doesn't want to hear while tugging on the public's heart strings. Effectively, such speech pits those who do not think entirely for themselves or who become slaves to their emotions against those who do think a little and against those who think a lot. (Of course blind emotional rage is among the largest problems concerning the defense of liberty.)

The third problem of course is that the individual is just a bad person. These people will exist regardless of how much legislation or freedom humanity allows itself to have. Under a system based on coercion such people will become greater in numbers because of how government naturally restricts the abilities of the honest and peaceful to provide for themselves. While part of a system based on mutual respect through nonaggression and voluntarism, absent of unwarranted coercion, people are not coercively limited in any way to provide for themselves honestly and peacefully.

When people may provide for themselves without endangering their lives by upsetting others they are generally happier. Happier people create more wealth. The more the wealth that is created the fewer the people who suffer from hunger, homelessness, and insecurity concerning their right to life. The same is true about people enslaved and people seeking healthcare.

In the United States hundreds of thousands of people with no direct or relatively close indirect connection to the practice of African slavery were killed by actions of the federal government. Millions more were negatively affected by those violent actions. While it is true that such a practice of slavery, as that which existed in Antebellum America, is terrible, it was a practice perpetuated by a minority of people. For the most part only financially wealthy individuals owned slaves; and of those, few owned them.

Had the federal government not entered into the realm of slavery one way or another, and remained neutral, the practice of slavery would have died out with no assistance from Uncle Sam. It was the actions of flip flopping on the issue of slavery throughout the years that increased the hostilities of those strongly in favor of slavery and those strong against slavery. Here it is important to remind the reader that most of the population didn't care one way or the other as the practice of slavery didn't generally affect them.

When it did affect them it was typically due to government taxation to pay for the collection of individuals reported to be the property of another. Of course this encouraged dishonest behavior from some who resorted to kidnapping for profit. Would that have happened without government? Probably, but without government the reward wouldn't first be stolen by means of taxation from the general public to begin with.

Naturally, the idea of slavery as we understand it today is polarizing and filled with emotion fueled debates. Freedom 150 years ago was abundant but to listen to the speeches of some today one will easily come to the conclusion that slavery was the law of the land and everyone could become subjected to such a terrible fate. This emotional argument is not all that indifferent to the arguments about the ACA today.

President Obama and his entourage are continuously trying to scare us into accepting his vision of universal healthcare by telling us horror stories about greedy insurance companies, dishonest doctors scamming the system, and why we all have a collective responsibility to help one another. The truth is that while there are greedy insurance companies, we as consumers must understand that these companies are not charities. They are for profit organizations. Whatever contract we enter into with them we must do so by being responsible on our parts as well. That doesn't mean we can sign a document without reading it. That also doesn't mean that we should allow such an entity to bully us either. We wouldn't have the bulk of the problems we have today if we were able to choose health insurance companies in the same way we do car insurance companies. Because of the federal McCarran-Ferguson Act (1945) the individual state governments may regulate health insurance purchases across stateliness.

If we were allowed to purchase health insurance across state lines carte blanch then we would be able to pick and choose our favorite companies with greater immunity thus forcing insurance comapnies to compete with one another by being more honest and better at their chosen profession than others. That will eliminate the greatest bulk of fraud on the companies' part. As a result of this the insurance companies will also be more inclined to work with the doctors who now must compete with one another instead of making such great demands on the insurance companies to cut their costs. In a market place free of coercion the doctors will opt to work with the private insurance companies over the government insurance programs simply to ensure being paid. Under the current heavily regulated government systems in the United States doctors often go unpaid as has been reported by John Stossel throughout his twenty plus year career as a television journalist.

The problems with government choosing to end slavery and create a national healthcare plan for everyone are rooted in the government's meddling with these institutions. By attempting to interfere with any institution government creates enemies and always suggests that it must acquire a little more power and authority to ensure its solutions work. To end slavery, that the federal government perpetuated, six hundred thousand lives were lost and millions more were brought suffering. In order to create a healthcare system for everyone, the government built its case on the woes it created by interjecting itself in the people's ability to negotiate with health care providers on their own terms for at least the last 68 years.

The trend is quite clear. The problem is government itself. Bad people are going to do bad things but to invite government to help correct the troubles that are being created by an incredibly small portion of the general population is to ask for greater trouble than is ever possible by private hands. Much of this is evident by the arguments in favor of or against both issues. The arguments rarely mention the fact that such practices are perpetuated by government policies to begin with. Most arguments attack their opponents' method of how government is to handle the issues, instead of addressing the fact that government is involved in the first place.

Chapter 13

Why I am who I am.

I didn't become the individual I am today because of a few books that found their way into my possession. I was coerced into the care of a force based authority for the purpose of education just as so many others have been. The original intent of such an education was and struggles to be noble. The more intelligent a society of people the more peaceful they should be. That's the noble intent; but it is based on coercion. If parents don't send their children to school in the United States, or show they are abiding by a government approved set of homeschooling guidelines, an agent of government may come around and take the children away from the parents.

After being coercively sent to a government operated school by government agents for a number of years I was sent to a private school. My parents struggled to pay that bill and it proved too much for them to handle when I was deemed ready for high school. By the time I reached high school and was back in the hands of government educators I could tell a difference in my thought process. Where the private school was difficult in the beginning and only challenging when I left two years later, the government run high schools I attended were easy by comparison.

What is worse is that I attended several different high schools. The first couple I attended was due to government bickering and financial policy. Attendance lines were redrawn and I was sent to a school that required bussing when I could have continued to walk the one and a half miles to the original school I was districted for. The last school I attended was chosen because we moved from one side of the city to another. I must confess that I could have remained in the previous school but chose to move on. I was scared for my life most days in the first couple of high schools I attended.

As I entered the real world through the workforce I learned a different truth than what was taught to me growing up by school teachers. It didn't seem so bad. Then reality hit me. Life hit me so hard I got scared again. I made my way back into my parents' care. That lasted only so long before I rediscovered my desire to try again on my own. I wasn't sure what I was looking for other than independence; but independence from what?

When I returned to my parent's care I may have returned home but I wasn't really home. I wasn't innocent anymore but I knew I was ignorant. I made my way again out in the world. One hard lesson after another beat me and beat me and beat me. Friends were hard to come by. I had skills that were of no value to the majority of the world it seemed; or the ones that were of value were overly abundant in the work force. I learned to work harder, smarter, and longer than others with my skills and made my way to middle management in a couple of businesses. I was proud of what I had accomplished despite what others were harping on me to do. The lessons I learned and the way I learned them were not without their costs. I was growing tired faster with each passing day.

Something was still wrong. There was something I didn't understand. I thought working hard and being honest were enough to make a life for myself. I was wrong. I needed to understand something else. I didn't know it at the time but I began searching for an answer to a question I hadn't asked yet. When I realized in late 2001 that the federal government could collect me and ripped me away from everything and everyone I loved, I knew something was terribly wrong. That was my wake up call.

It was a slow wake up process. I had been ripped away from my family when I was but a small child and taught to do things my parents didn't entirely agree with. No, I wasn't kidnapped per se. Instead I was sent to a government run school because my parents feared being jailed for not complying with the law. In time they either accepted some of lessons I was taught or gave up teaching against others. Whatever the reason I don't really know but I can guess. Like so many others out there they decided to press on and accept the things they could not change individually. I felt like that as a teenager and young adult for very long time.

Whether or not my parents or others in this world felt like this I suspect that they also had some kind of nagging feeling about the whole picture of events past, present, and future. When I had this particular epiphany about my parents I began to suspect it about others as well. I knew there was more to securing my independence than just going to work every day, paying my taxes, and abiding by laws I didn't understand. I started to understand why I needed to know the events of the past. I began looking at the events of the present and piecing the puzzle together.

I might very well have continued to live my life not caring to know much more than I did and would have turned out just like so many others who live lives of repetition for the sake of paying taxes and making ends meet. I wanted more than just that but not before I had a reason to want it.

In early 2004 I met the woman who would become my wife. I adopted her daughter and fell in love with them more and more with each passing day. It was the thought of having a daughter growing up in a world filled with uncontrolled and unnecessary hardships that I found motivation to understand the world with a fiery passion. It sounds so generically cliché and sappy but it is the truth I know. It was and is my reality. I began to read, research, reread, think and finally it hit me. I needed to refine my ability to critically think. What I was taught in government run schools was not critical thinking but rather critical regurgitation.

I don't know if such a phrase has been coined before now but that is how I think of my education in government operated schools. It's not a fair assessment entirely because there are teachers who care; but just as there are bankers who care they perpetuate a system which works against liberty by continuing the cycle of indoctrination by choosing to remain employed through their government careers. Bankers do this too by continuing bad economic policies of the Federal Reserve through fractional reserve banking.

So I kept going with my studies. So many friends were lost over the years and I feel terrible about that. I have seemingly put family ad odds with me though I never intended for such things to ever happen. I began walking a dangerous path. This path is fraught with dangers not because of average thugs and common thieves but because of the information I was seeking. While it doesn't appear to be dangerous information to the individual not currently able to think critically, this information, if spread, will aid in the creation of government as an antiquated idea humanity clung to in its early years of evolution.

I have no doubt that those currently in power do not wish this information to be released. I will certainly be painted as a traitor by proponents of the current status quo; and those closest to me will be fearful of my actions even though they are all peaceful. No one wants to be among the first casualties of any conflict; let along a casualty at all. Mark Twain once commented, "In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him. For then it costs nothing to be a patriot."

I am not Edmond Dantes. I am not V. I am not Frodo Baggins. I am not Jefferson Davis or Robert E. Lee.

I am Albert Mondego. I am Eve Hammond. I am Samwise Gamgee. I am Jim Limber Davis.

And I do the very least that is befitting of a free individual. I think!

Chapter 14

Thank You!

If you have purchased this work, thank you! At the time I wrote this last chapter the current estimated earnings I would acquire, after publisher fees, distributor fees, and of course taxes, is roughly forty percent. The price I set for this work was just under five U.S. Dollars. My cut ends up being just shy of two dollars per copy sold.

Again, thank you very much for helping me continue rejecting the status quo of big government despite its confiscation of the products of the refinement of my time, intellect, and labor. If you are in general agreement with the direction this work is taking the fight for liberty, please share it, encourage your friends and family to purchase copies of their own; and with a little luck perhaps I will get a chance to go head to head with the big talking heads of television and government. If enough sales are made then the big talking heads of television will take notice.

We can make peace and prosperity the status quo. Freedom from tyranny is dependent on learning, understanding, and teaching liberty, wealth, voluntarism, and nonaggression. We can make the world a better place if we stop allowing the smallest of transgressions and offering a different path than immediate violence to each transgression. Coercion is never the answer all the time but violence is not to be shunned in our defense of our liberties either.

A little courage is necessary if we are to forge a world of peace and prosperity. Those who encourage the status quo of tyranny are not all intentional proponents of liberty's destruction. As Gandalf the Grey told Bilbo Baggins, "true courage is about knowing not when to take a life but when to spare one." The best way to spare the most lives in the end is through voluntary education.

We can do more than leave a better world for our children. We can leave better children for our world!

Thank you again for your support!

Sincerely,

Jim Limber Davis (JLD)

-JLD

~~~

If you are interested in discussing this work, the ideas presented within it, or would like to ask a question of this work's author find out more by visiting facebook.com/LibertyDefined or @JimLimberDavis on Twitter.
