Uncategorized · War

Um. Grow Up. We Want The Warlords To Rule. The Entire Militia of Them. ;)

But Wouldn’t Warlords Take Over?


Warlords MUST take over. That’s the whole point. The question is only their number. A militia of warlords constitutes a distributed dictatorship under which only markets governed by natural law are possible.

Anarchism? A lot of optimistic bullshit. Go live in Ukraine. in Belarus. In Russia (at least outside of moscow or st Petersburg.) Ukraine (the borderland) is where Jewish separatism of Rothbard was envisioned, under the protection of lithuanian, or polish, or russian empires, allowed financial and commercial gangsterism, while prohibiting physical retaliation. It was a system of organized predation upon the people just as today’s financialism consists of organized predation upon the people while preventing juridical defense from it, and physical retaliation against it.

And that’s Ukraine today. The pretense of order. But 40+ Gangsters (warlords) we call Oligarchs (Private Property Rulership) with enough money and arms to (a) stack and buy the courts, (b) stack and buy the government, who have their own militaries, and who cannot be displaced, because they can too easily turn the rest of ukraine into a civil war zone like the east, leaving the only option Russian invasion and enforced order – which was exactly the plan all along.

The reason ukraine is weak, is that it has no militia. Period.

Rothbardianism consists of nothing but optimistic juvenile platitudes sold to reproductively, socially, economically uncompetitive males, as a wishful separatist movement, so that they might beg not to contribute to a commons that makes the market order possible, and instead, may parasitically exploit it without contribution. ie: separatism. Rothbardian ghetto ethics of intersubjectively verifiable property

There is only one source of liberty: the organized use of violence to obtain, hold, and advance territory, resources, population, institutions, and capital – by a militia of sufficient scale that they cannot be opposed by any cost effective means, or by any concentration of power. How is that possible: only under genetic, cultural, and institutional homogeneity.


How do you create liberty (permission)? As a byproduct of creating sovereignty in fact. How do you create sovereignty in fact? By organizing a corporation (franchise) of warriors – all of whom obtain a share (dividend) from the market produced by their distributed dictatorship of individual rule.

But those warriors must be kin or to prevent organization by other than kin selection. A genetically and culturally homogenous population in the ruling class – the militia – must exist for liberty to exist.

Sorry. Thats western history in a nutshell.

Rothbard was just a commons marxist (Free Rider) just like Marx was a private property free rider. Just as the Neocons are a political market free riders.

Monarchy and nobility (aristocracy) didn’t oppress. They domesticated the animal man. And clearly failed to domesticate the borderlands – where parasitic separatists allied with the state to prey upon the people, while preventing their retaliation against them.

So grow up. Libertarianism is for boys. Men fight. they take. They rule. They profit from rule. They profit from rule by the incremental suppression of every means of profit possible other than productive, fully informed warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externality in the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production of goods, services, and information, and production of commons, institutions, and political orders.

Men fight. Boys beg from mommy and daddy authority of whatever scale they must.

Men are sovereign in fact. Boys have a little pretense of liberty by permission.


Government (Insurer of Last Resort) · Sovereignty and Agency · Uncategorized · War · Western Uniqueness

It All Begins With A Militia


**Rule of Law, by Natural Law, with Universal Standing, and Universal Applicability: A contractual corporation consisting of a distributed dictatorship of sovereign militia (men). **

A constitution of natural law creating a distributed private government, each member with one share ownership, purchasable by reciprocal insurance of all other members.

With an independent judiciary, and and a hereditary monarchy providing a judge of last resort.

Under such a corporation, under such a form of management, under such a contract, we have only productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of negative externality, in markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production private of goods, services, and information, commons of goods, services, and information, and the production of polities themselves, ad the means by which to cooperate.

Government without discretion. Rule of Law between men, not over men.

( I have to substitute ‘militia’ for men, or the entire chain of reasoning is lost. )

Uncategorized · War

Of Course We Can Demand Reciprocity


Yes we can create a market for truthful (non false, non-parasitic) political speech. In fact, it was the state that ended our market for truthful speech. Why?

Isn’t science an ongoing discovery process? doesn’t it function as a market for information, with career ending punishments for violators?

Don’t we protect against fraud and deceit in the market for goods and services – and provide special protections that PROHIBIT us from defending the market for information against fraud and deceit?

Didn’t we, for millennia, protect against libel(written) and slander(spoken), and don’t we grant special privileges that prevent us from using the course to protect ourselves from libel and slander – especially in large scale media? In other words, doesn’t the state PROHIBIT us from self defense against falsehoods?

Why is it that we cannot in private advocate for conspiracy (theft), yet in public can advocate for conspiracy (theft) as long as the majority of conspirators approve of the theft?

Why is it that we used to be able to protect the environment,and the commons via the judiciary, but the state removed our juridical defense?

Why is it that the state removed our juridical defense against members of the bureaucracy, the government, the academy, and the media?

Are you going to try to advocate that reciprocity (natural law) is not, in cooperation, the equivalence of truth (decidability)?

Or are you saying specifically that people should be able to violate reciprocity and violate truth in order to use large numbers to impose thefts using the violence of the government, in order to obtain by non-reciprocity and deceit, that which they might obtain by voluntary exchange, thereby depriving those who have one thing from obtaining another thing in exchange?

Just because you can’t figure out how to create law of information regarding political speech (forcible coercion) such that it holds to the same standards as market speech (goods, services, and information) doesn’t mean it can’t be done. In fact. it was done for millennia.

The question is why did the state take it away, and why can we not restore it?

Uncategorized · War

We? Who are ‘We’?


We are the people who fight, kill, ostracize, punish, perform restitution upon those who act as parasites upon the polity, upon the commons, or upon the private production of people like ‘us’. And if you wish to engage in political, institutional, normative, informational, commercial, or interpersonal parasitism, we will force restitution, punishment, ostracization, murder, or war upon you.


War: The Fragility Spectrum

When you are small you cannot fight to defend, fight to stop, fight to exit. There are only so many fragile regions on the human body, the human organization, the human polity, the human state, that you can attack with all your might, and end it’s agility(knees), action (jaw), thought (neck-arteries), air(throat), vision(eyes). The body is hard to kill. But a thing that cannot sense or move, can be killed with ease. The head and the knees on man, the money and the leadership of organizations, the information systems and illusion of control by the polity, the need for economic velocity of the state. Order is achieved largely by habit and self interest. Disorder is achieved by the simple fact of creating uncertainty and deprivation of information and energy (electricity).


Weapons of Chaos – and Revolution

The best weapons in an urban skirmish are mace – to buy you opportunity, hardened and weighted knuckles – to give you extra mass and minimize absorption of shock, a lighter and lighter fluid – to create uncertainty, and area of effect damage, molotovs – artillery at a distance, and a motorcycle helmet for defense. You cannot be identified easily, your weapons are impossible to find easily, and and your opponent can be disabled (mace), routed (fire), ranged( molotovs) and killed (fists). Yet you preserve your mobility, and ability to sprint into attacks, maneuver, and to disappear. This supplies weapons at long, medium, close, and short range.

Understand that you are not trying to win so much as provoke escalation to the point where there is sufficient confusion and opportunity that you can bring real weapons to bear.

It is nearly impossible for a state to defend against mobile infantry that relies upon fire, because fire is far more dangerous than you are, and its effects far longer lasting.

Revolution today requires fire, ending power and data transmission, slowing commercial road and rail traffic, and overwhelming first responders. Once first responders are overwhelmed they become the next target of action. At that point the state must admit defeat call in the military, and all one need to is move action from on urban environment to the next.

Uncategorized · War

The Steppe Way of War = Urban Today

The steppe way of war practiced by our earliest ancestors, and practiced by muslims today, is superior to the interregnum method of war, relying upon a concentration of forces. That means: RAIDS. Conduct of many small raids costs little but creates great uncertainty and costs the host thousansd of times as much in defense. In our past, we could retreat via horse, retreat to our forests, and the muslims could retreat to the deserts, or today retreat into slums and favelas. The value of armies is looting. The value of raiders is in imposing costs. One can, as has ISIS, graduate from raiding to looting, to decimating. But this destroys capital, and ensures your eventual defeat if you attempt to hold an economy and profit from it.