Podcast appearances and mentions of wendy mcelroy

Any donation is greatly appreciated! 47e6GvjL4in5Zy5vVHMb9PQtGXQAcFvWSCQn2fuwDYZoZRk3oFjefr51WBNDGG9EjF1YDavg7pwGDFSAVWC5K42CBcLLv5U OR DONATE HERE: https://www.monerotalk.live/donate TODAY'S SHOW: In this episode Douglas Tuman speaks with Brandon from the Agorist Network about Agorism, cryptocurrency, and privacy-focused economic systems. Brandon explains that agorism is fundamentally about trading freely outside state control and creating voluntary societies. He discusses founding the Agorist Network and working with notable figures like Wendy McElroy. The conversation explores the intersection of Monero with Agorist principles. Brandon shares his experience running a mango farm in Mexico since 2021, where he has planted 40-50 Adolpho mango trees. The discussion also covers the upcoming Monerotopia conference in Mexico City and the potential for selling agricultural products through XMR Bazaar using Monero. Throughout the conversation, they discuss the importance of privacy coins, with particular focus on Monero's technical advantages including its tail emission and ring signatures. TIMESTAMPS: (00:04:21) Brandon's Journey Intro to Agorism and Starting Agorist Nexus (00:14:21) Living an Agorist Life (00:17:45) Discussion on Mexico as a Hub for Agorist Community (00:19:14) The Importance of Financial Privacy, Why Monero is the Best Option (00:22:20) Differences Between Bitcoin and Monero in Terms of Decentralization and Adaptability (00:30:21) Monero Topia Conference and Marketplace Expansion (00:43:32) Agorism in Action, Brandon's Farm in Mexico (00:49:25) Potential Government Adoption of Cryptocurrency and Its Implications (00:56:41) Building a Decentralized Agorist Network (01:03:04) Closing thoughts, Future Initiatives LINKS: https://x.com/agoristn Purchase Cafe & tip the farmers w/ XMR! https://gratuitas.org/ Purchase a plug & play Monero node at https://moneronodo.com SPONSORS: Cakewallet.com, the first open-source Monero wallet for iOS. You can even exchange between XMR, BTC, LTC & more in the app! Monero.com by Cake Wallet - ONLY Monero wallet (https://monero.com/) StealthEX, an instant exchange. Go to (https://stealthex.io) to instantly exchange between Monero and 450 plus assets, w/o having to create an account or register & with no limits. WEBSITE: https://www.monerotopia.com CONTACT: monerotalk@protonmail.com ODYSEE: https://odysee.com/@MoneroTalk:8 TWITTER: https://twitter.com/monerotalk FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/MoneroTalk HOST: https://twitter.com/douglastuman INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/monerotalk TELEGRAM: https://t.me/monerotopia MATRIX: https://matrix.to/#/%23monerotopia%3Amonero.social MASTODON: @Monerotalk@mastodon.social MONERO.TOWN: https://monero.town/u/monerotalk

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 420. From the recently-concluded Seventeenth Annual (2023) Meeting of the PFS, Bodrum, Turkey (Sep. 24, 2023). The slide presentation is streamed below (ppt). Video is also below. Also podcast as Property and Freedom Podcast PFP265; see also the panel discussion later in the day (video below). Kinsella talk: https://youtu.be/QEmRgapffNQ Panel discussion: https://youtu.be/aEryCGV2oWU Slides: Notes from the slides: Stephan Kinsella C4SIF.org • StephanKinsella.com @nskinsella Property and Freedom Society 2023 Annual Meeting Bodrum, Turkey September 24, 2023 Overview ►       Spoken about intellectual property (IP) before here (in 2010 and 2015), but today I'd like to talk about how I came to my current views §   And how figuring this out required coming to a deeper understanding and more clarity about the foundation and nature of rights, and property rights, in general ►       I came to the conclusion years ago that all IP law—patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret, and others—are completely illegitimate and should all be abolished ►       I started publishing articles on various aspects of libertarian theory in the early 1990s—rights and punishment theory, inalienability, legislation, and so on Against IP ►       In 2001 I published “Against Intellectual Property” in the Journal of Libertarian Studies. §   Original title: “The Legitimacy of Intellectual Property” §   Hoppe suggested I change it, just like he suggested the title of today's talk ►       The article was controversial and influential, so I became well known in libertarian circles as being “the IP guy” §   Even though it's not my only area of research §   E.g., Legal Foundations of a Free Society (2023) [LFFS] IP Man How I got here ►       Libertarian since high school, initially influenced by Ayn Rand ►       Never satisfied with her case for patent and copyright ►       Initially practiced oil and gas law (1992) but decided to switch to patent law (1994) ►       Around the same time I was learning patent and IP law as a lawyer, I tried to come up with a better argument for IP ►       Finally I came to my current IP beliefs §   I was trying to justify the unjustifiable ►       Heavily influenced by the work of Hoppe (on scarcity and property), and Tom Palmer & Wendy McElroy (on IP) §   Hoppe was instinctively against IP from the beginning ►       Because I understood IP law very well, I put together what I had learned and published “Against Intellectual Property,” and many articles since How I got here ►       I kept encountering different objections to my basic argument, so developed further arguments to explain their errors ►       Summarized in “Against Intellectual Property After Twenty Years: Looking Back and Looking Forward,” in LFFS ►       Sorting out the basic case against IP and responding to various objections required rethinking and clarifying other aspects of libertarian theory, namely the nature and purpose of property rights, contract theory, and so on ►       Figuring out IP and finding ways to explain it to others improved my understanding of other areas of libertarian theory ►       I've lost track of how many people have written me or told me that my IP work opened their eyes. That's gratifying for a writer. §   See “My IP Odyssey” Absurd Arguments for IP ►       “Thank goodness the Swiss did have a Patent Office. That is where Albert Einstein worked and during his time as a patent examiner came up with his theory of relativity.” —Patent attorney Gene Quinn ►       “It is true that other means exist for creative people to profit from their effort. In the case of copyright, authors can charge fees for reading their works to paying audiences. Charles Dickens did this, but his heavy schedule of public performances in the United States, where his works were not protected by copyright, arguably contributed to his untimely death.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 420. From the recently-concluded Seventeenth Annual (2023) Meeting of the PFS, Bodrum, Turkey (Sep. 24, 2023). The slide presentation is streamed below (ppt). Video is also below. It will also be podcast later on the Property and Freedom Podcast, as well as the panel discussion later in the day (video below). Kinsella talk: https://youtu.be/QEmRgapffNQ Panel discussion: https://youtu.be/aEryCGV2oWU Slides: Notes from the slides: Stephan Kinsella C4SIF.org • StephanKinsella.com @nskinsella Property and Freedom Society 2023 Annual Meeting Bodrum, Turkey September 24, 2023 Overview ►       Spoken about intellectual property (IP) before here (in 2010 and 2015), but today I'd like to talk about how I came to my current views §   And how figuring this out required coming to a deeper understanding and more clarity about the foundation and nature of rights, and property rights, in general ►       I came to the conclusion years ago that all IP law—patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret, and others—are completely illegitimate and should all be abolished ►       I started publishing articles on various aspects of libertarian theory in the early 1990s—rights and punishment theory, inalienability, legislation, and so on Against IP ►       In 2001 I published “Against Intellectual Property” in the Journal of Libertarian Studies. §   Original title: “The Legitimacy of Intellectual Property” §   Hoppe suggested I change it, just like he suggested the title of today's talk ►       The article was controversial and influential, so I became well known in libertarian circles as being “the IP guy” §   Even though it's not my only area of research §   E.g., Legal Foundations of a Free Society (2023) [LFFS] IP Man How I got here ►       Libertarian since high school, initially influenced by Ayn Rand ►       Never satisfied with her case for patent and copyright ►       Initially practiced oil and gas law (1992) but decided to switch to patent law (1994) ►       Around the same time I was learning patent and IP law as a lawyer, I tried to come up with a better argument for IP ►       Finally I came to my current IP beliefs §   I was trying to justify the unjustifiable ►       Heavily influenced by the work of Hoppe (on scarcity and property), and Tom Palmer & Wendy McElroy (on IP) §   Hoppe was instinctively against IP from the beginning ►       Because I understood IP law very well, I put together what I had learned and published “Against Intellectual Property,” and many articles since How I got here ►       I kept encountering different objections to my basic argument, so developed further arguments to explain their errors ►       Summarized in “Against Intellectual Property After Twenty Years: Looking Back and Looking Forward,” in LFFS ►       Sorting out the basic case against IP and responding to various objections required rethinking and clarifying other aspects of libertarian theory, namely the nature and purpose of property rights, contract theory, and so on ►       Figuring out IP and finding ways to explain it to others improved my understanding of other areas of libertarian theory ►       I've lost track of how many people have written me or told me that my IP work opened their eyes. That's gratifying for a writer. §   See “My IP Odyssey” Absurd Arguments for IP ►       “Thank goodness the Swiss did have a Patent Office. That is where Albert Einstein worked and during his time as a patent examiner came up with his theory of relativity.” —Patent attorney Gene Quinn ►       “It is true that other means exist for creative people to profit from their effort. In the case of copyright, authors can charge fees for reading their works to paying audiences. Charles Dickens did this, but his heavy schedule of public performances in the United States, where his works were not protected by copyright,

“Various sexual acts are traded for money or other goods across the world. Ethical positions on sex work may depend on the type of sex act traded and the conditions in which it is traded, there are for example additional ethical concerns over the abrogation of autonomy in the situation of trafficked sex workers. Sex work has been a particularity divisive issue within feminism. Some feminists may regard sex work as an example of societal oppression of the sex workers by the patriarchy. The ethical argument underlying this position is that despite the apparent consent of the sex worker, the choice to engage in sex work is often not an autonomous choice, because of economic, familial or societal pressures. Sex work may also be seen as an objectification of women. An opposing view held by other feminists such as Wendy McElroy is that sex work is a means of empowering women, the argument here being that in sex work women are able to extract psychological and financial power over men which is a justified correction of the power unbalance inherent in a patriarchal society. Some feminists regard to sex work as simply a form of labor which is neither morally good or bad, but subject to the same difficulties of other labor forms. If sex work is accepted as unethical, there is then the dispute over which parties of the contract are responsible for the ethical or legal breach. Traditionally, in many societies, the legal and ethical burden of guilt has been placed largely on the sex worker rather than consumers. In recent decades, some countries such as Sweden, Norway and Iceland have rewritten their laws to outlaw the buying of sexual services but not its sale (although they still retain laws and use enforcement tactics which sex workers say are deleterious to their safety, such as pressuring to have sex workers evicted from their residences[44]).” --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/antonio-myers4/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/antonio-myers4/support

Matt Zwolinski reviews 200 years of libertarian intellectual history.Follow @IdeasHavingSexx on Twitter.Today's book: The Individualists: Radicals, Reactionaries, and the Struggle for the Soul of LibertarianismFind Matt on Twitter and Substack.Matt's Recommendations: The Elements of Justice by David SchmidtzThe Structure of Liberty by Randy BarnettIndividualism and Economic Order by F.A. HayekFree Market Fairness by John TomasiLibertarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know by Jason BrennanRadicals for Capitalism by Brian DohertyThe Debates of Liberty by Wendy McElroy

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 387. This is a classic debate on intellectual property between Wendy McElroy and J. Neil Schulman† at the Libertarian Supper Club in Westwood (Los Angeles), California, in 1983. McElroy takes the anti-IP side and Schulman argues for IP. I don't appear in this episode but I thought my listeners might find it of interest. https://youtu.be/-_Nyaav6Js0 I wrote about this on Mises Daily, as “The Great IP Debate of 1983,” Mises Daily (July 18, 2011), which concerns the then recently-found audio of that debate, which was put up as a Mises podcast and is now also hosted at Mises.org. It's a fascinating listen. As the Mises blurb about it reads, "In this wonderful debate, we find the whole of the theoretical apparatus of the anti-IP case presented with precision and eloquence." This was near the beginning of the modern libertarian anti-IP movement, pioneered by McElroy and Sam Konkin (see references below). Related (by me unless noted otherwise): McElroy: “On the Subject of Intellectual Property”: this appears to match at least part of Wendy's initial presentation in the debate Schulman, "My Unfinished 30-Year-Old Debate with Wendy McElroy" McElroy, "Contra Copyright, Again" Classical Liberals and Anarchists on Intellectual Property (discussing LeFevre) The Four Historical Phases of IP Abolitionism The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism KOL208 | Conversation with Schulman about Logorights and Media-Carried Property “Introduction” and chapter “Conversation with Schulman about Logorights and Media-Carried Property” [both available here] in J. Neil Schulman, Origitent: Why Original Content is Property (Steve Heller Publishing, 2018) Libertarian Sci-Fi Authors and Copyright versus Libertarian IP Abolitionists Replies to Neil Schulman and Neil Smith re IP Query for Schulman on Patents and Logorights On J. Neil Schulman's Logorights Kinsella v. Schulman on Logorights and IP Schulman: “If you copy my novel, I'll kill you” Schulman: Kinsella is “the foremost enemy of property rights” Reply to Schulman on the State, IP, and Carson

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 387. This is a classic debate on intellectual property between Wendy McElroy and J. Neil Schulman† at the Libertarian Supper Club in Westwood (Los Angeles), California, in 1983. McElroy takes the anti-IP side and Schulman argues for IP. I don't appear in this episode but I thought my listeners might find it of interest. https://youtu.be/-_Nyaav6Js0 I wrote about this on Mises Daily, as “The Great IP Debate of 1983,” Mises Daily (July 18, 2011), which concerns the then recently-found audio of that debate, which was put up as a Mises podcast and is now also hosted at Mises.org. It's a fascinating listen. As the Mises blurb about it reads, "In this wonderful debate, we find the whole of the theoretical apparatus of the anti-IP case presented with precision and eloquence." This was near the beginning of the modern libertarian anti-IP movement, pioneered by McElroy and Sam Konkin (see references below). Related (by me unless noted otherwise): McElroy: “On the Subject of Intellectual Property”: this appears to match at least part of Wendy's initial presentation in the debate Schulman, "My Unfinished 30-Year-Old Debate with Wendy McElroy" McElroy, "Contra Copyright, Again" Classical Liberals and Anarchists on Intellectual Property (discussing LeFevre) The Four Historical Phases of IP Abolitionism The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism KOL208 | Conversation with Schulman about Logorights and Media-Carried Property “Introduction” and chapter “Conversation with Schulman about Logorights and Media-Carried Property” [both available here] in J. Neil Schulman, Origitent: Why Original Content is Property (Steve Heller Publishing, 2018) Libertarian Sci-Fi Authors and Copyright versus Libertarian IP Abolitionists Replies to Neil Schulman and Neil Smith re IP Query for Schulman on Patents and Logorights On J. Neil Schulman's Logorights Kinsella v. Schulman on Logorights and IP Schulman: “If you copy my novel, I'll kill you” Schulman: Kinsella is “the foremost enemy of property rights” Reply to Schulman on the State, IP, and Carson

Feeling a bit of trepidation as the election draws closer? You're not alone. Now that members of the far left and far right have been shot dead in the streets, we've crossed a threshold of sorts. Chris Hedges has a pretty solid analysis of America's bloodlands and why, historically, violence escalates when the opposing sides can claim martyrs. If you've wondered just how controlling and craven much of our media has become, the sensationalized and distorted reporting on the Sturgis bike ralley, and broken Covid-19 models are pretty good examples. Ethan Yang spells it out for those who have eyes to see. While we're dividing ourselves up into various warring tribes, some interesting stereotypes have emerged. Robert E. Wright has a great piece describing the various LARPers and how each of us fits into the cast of characters. Not so many years ago, rancher Cliven Bundy was denounced for stating a truth less eloquently than Dr. Walter E. Williams did: "The welfare state has done to black Americans what slavery couldn't do….And that is to destroy the black family." Wendy McElroy has a great article that describes the incredible harm done to the black community by politicians, civil rights leaders and academics. Subscribe to the podcast Become a WrongThinker Patron Sponsors: Fire Steel The Staples Turner team at Patriot Home Mortgage --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/loving-liberty/support

Follow our hosts: David Bond: https://www.youtube.com/user/hellodavidbond Daniel Kelman: https://twitter.com/danielkelman Roger Ver: https://twitter.com/rogerkver Donate to CashFusion: https://www.bitcoin.com/cashfusion-fund/ Remember to subscribe to our Youtube channel and hit the bell "

LEIA o artigo narrado aqui: - http://foda-seoestado.com/justica-criptografada-nao-esmague-o-estado-o-contorne/ ------------------------------------------------

Today is election day. I'll be washing my hair instead of voting yet again. Don't legitimize the bastards! What's in the News with stories on John Gatto dies, government murder, Julian Assange update, cannabis in Mexico, bad cops, and free societies. And, an Ancap Apps segment on Smartcash, the latest advertiser on The LAVA Flow. This episode is brought to you by ZenCash, now known as Horizen, a cryptocurrency that infuses privacy, anonymity, and security, done right. Also, brought to you by SmartCash, an easy to use, fast, and secure cryptocurrency that supports everyday use for everyday transactions.   WHAT'S RUSTLING MY JIMMIES Today is election day, 2018. The day you can make your voice heard, or so we're told. Around this time, two years ago, my episode was called "To Vote or Not to Vote." I made the case there that, for the first time in my adult life, I would not be going to the polls, even to vote for a very good friend of mine, Darryl W. Perry, for President of the United States. You can listen to that episode at thelavaflow.com/48. Going back to that episode myself, I can clearly see the evolution of my thoughts on voting. And, if our thoughts aren't evolving, then we are stagnant. And now, two years later, my thoughts have evolved more. Now, I am solidly in the non-voting category. A lot of that evolution is because of the work of Carl Watner, Wendy McElroy, and Goerge H. Smith in the newsletter The Voluntaryist at Voluntaryist.com and the book "Neither Bullets Nor Ballots: Essays on Voluntaryism." I had the honor of narrating the audiobook for that book and you can get a copy at thelavaflow.com/nbnbaudio.    WHAT'S IN THE NEWS In sad news, John Taylor Gatto has passed away. In government murder news, a US airstrike killed a family of five in a Syrian border town. In Julian Assange news, he says that Ecuador is trying to kick him out of its London embassy and hand him over to the US. In cannabis news, Mexico's Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that an absolute ban on recreational use of marijuana was unconstitutional, effectively leaving it to lawmakers to regulate consumption of the drug. In bad cops news, San Diego police creepily forced strippers to pose for photos, now the city is paying $1.5 million. In free societies news, a cryptocurrency millionaire wants to build a utopia in the Nevada desert. ANCAP APPS As you guys likely heard last week, I have a new advertiser on the show, SmartCash. This is a product I have recently heard about and have become very excited for. When I first talked to one of the staff over at SmartCash, Chris K., at Freecoast Festival a couple of months ago, I knew I wanted to be involved in this project. So, I bugged the hell out of Chris so they would sponsor this podcast to help get the word out! Why am I so excited about SmartCash? For a lot of reasons. They have taken ideas from several different cryptos, put them together, and made them better. And, they are working hard to be an actual currency system, very similar to Dash, instead of just a place to store wealth. Check it out at thelavaflow.com/smart

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 253. I spoke today on “A Libertarian's Case Against Intellectual Property,” at the Federalist Society, University of Berkeley-California. It was well-organized and there was a perceptive and interesting critical commentary by Professor Talha Syed. This is the audio I recorded on my iPhone; video below; line-mic'd audio here. The youtube version (audio here) and the line-mic'd version both truncate about 30 seconds too early. My own iphone version (which is used for this podcast) includes those extra comments, and this is included in the transcript as well, below. Transcript below. My speaking notes pasted below. Youtube: https://youtu.be/EWM39RyMNaM   SPEAKING NOTES A Libertarian's Case Against Intellectual Property Stephan Kinsella Kinsella Law Practice, Libertarian Papers, C4SIF.org with critical commentary by Professor Talha Syed UC-Berkeley Law School Federalist Society Oct. 11, 2018 General background: A Selection of my Best Articles and Speeches on IP Intellectual Property: Legal rights enforced by law having to do with products or creations of the mind, the intellect patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret semiconductor maskwork, boat hull designs, database rights, moral rights, right to one's “likeness,” reputation rights (defamation, libel and slander, law) punishment for depicting religious figures in drawings “cultural appropriation” Why IP? Ayn Rand "Patents are the heart and core of property rights." … "Intellectual property is the most important field of law." US Commerce Dept. Study 2012 purporting to show that “intellectual Property-Intensive Industries” Contribute $5 Trillion, 40 Million Jobs to US Economy” [USPTO/Commerce Dept. Distortions: “IP Contributes $5 Trillion and 40 Million Jobs to Economy”] 2018 Nobel Laureate in Economics Paul Romer: economic growth — and the technological innovation it requires — aren't possible under perfect competition; they require some degree of monopoly power [patents] [Douglas Clement, Creation Myths: Does innovation require intellectual property rights?; Some studies: patent trolls alone cost $29 billion and total costs much higher globally ($1 Trillion/year, or more, given the “cumulative” effect of innovation) [Reducing the Cost of IP Law;Costs of the Patent System Revisited] US continually foisting higher patent and copyright protections on other countries via trade agreements and treaties, e.g. NAFTA, USMCA, TPP (“IP Imperialism”) Copyright distorts culture and threatens Internet freedom (censorship, takedown notices) [“Death by Copyright-IP Fascist Police State Acronym”; “SOPA is the Symptom, Copyright is the Disease: The SOPA Wakeup Call to Abolish Copyright,” “Where does IP Rank Among the Worst State Laws?”, “Masnick on the Horrible PROTECT IP Act: The Coming IPolice State” ] It's important to get this issue right I'm an IP lawyer and also a libertarian since high school (1982) [How I Became A Libertarian] My IP struggle: problems with Rand, researching the issue Tom Palmer, Wendy McElroy, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Mises Finally realized IP is unjustified around the time I passed the patent bar (1994) Given my knowledge of IP law I spoke and wrote more and more on this topic, even though I'm more interested in other areas of libertarian legal theory But I've found that sorting out this issue is crucial and helps sort out many other legal and policy issues property and rights theory, Contract, fraud, causation and the law, and the nature and source of wealth and human prosperity [See my upcoming book, Law in a Libertarian World] The question is not "Is IP a good idea?" or "What kind of IP protection should we have?" but rather What type of laws should we have; what laws are just, or justified? Purpose of law and property The question is not “is IP a good idea?” or “what kind of IP law should we have?

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 253. I spoke today on “A Libertarian’s Case Against Intellectual Property,” at the Federalist Society, University of Berkeley-California. It was well-organized and there was a perceptive and interesting critical commentary by Professor Talha Syed. This is the audio I recorded on my iPhone; video below; line-mic'd audio here. My speaking notes pasted below. Youtube: *** A Libertarian’s Case Against Intellectual Property Stephan Kinsella Kinsella Law Practice, Libertarian Papers, C4SIF.org UC-Berkeley Law School Federalist Society Oct. 11, 2018 General background: A Selection of my Best Articles and Speeches on IP Intellectual Property: Legal rights enforced by law having to do with products or creations of the mind, the intellect patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret semiconductor maskwork, boat hull designs, database rights, moral rights, right to one’s “likeness,” reputation rights (defamation, libel and slander, law) punishment for depicting religious figures in drawings “cultural appropriation” Why IP? Ayn Rand "Patents are the heart and core of property rights." … "Intellectual property is the most important field of law." US Commerce Dept. Study 2012 purporting to show that “intellectual Property-Intensive Industries” Contribute $5 Trillion, 40 Million Jobs to US Economy” [USPTO/Commerce Dept. Distortions: “IP Contributes $5 Trillion and 40 Million Jobs to Economy”] 2018 Nobel Laureate in Economics Paul Romer: economic growth — and the technological innovation it requires — aren't possible under perfect competition; they require some degree of monopoly power [patents] [Douglas Clement, Creation Myths: Does innovation require intellectual property rights?; Some studies: patent trolls alone cost $29 billion and total costs much higher globally ($1 Trillion/year, or more, given the “cumulative” effect of innovation) [Reducing the Cost of IP Law;Costs of the Patent System Revisited] US continually foisting higher patent and copyright protections on other countries via trade agreements and treaties, e.g. NAFTA, USMCA, TPP (“IP Imperialism”) Copyright distorts culture and threatens Internet freedom (censorship, takedown notices) [“Death by Copyright-IP Fascist Police State Acronym”; “SOPA is the Symptom, Copyright is the Disease: The SOPA Wakeup Call to Abolish Copyright,” “Where does IP Rank Among the Worst State Laws?”, “Masnick on the Horrible PROTECT IP Act: The Coming IPolice State” ] It’s important to get this issue right I’m an IP lawyer and also a libertarian since high school (1982) [How I Became A Libertarian] My IP struggle: problems with Rand, researching the issue Tom Palmer, Wendy McElroy, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Mises Finally realized IP is unjustified around the time I passed the patent bar (1994) Given my knowledge of IP law I spoke and wrote more and more on this topic, even though I’m more interested in other areas of libertarian legal theory But I’ve found that sorting out this issue is crucial and helps sort out many other legal and policy issues property and rights theory, Contract, fraud, causation and the law, and the nature and source of wealth and human prosperity [See my upcoming book, Law in a Libertarian World] The question is not "Is IP a good idea?" or "What kind of IP protection should we have?" but rather What type of laws should we have; what laws are just, or justified? Purpose of law and property The question is not “is IP a good idea?” or “what kind of IP law should we have?” Garden of Eden Scarcity, conflict [Hoppe, TSC, chs. 1-2; Of Private, Common, and Public Property and the Rationale for Total Privatization”] All rights are property rights [Rothard, Human Rights as Property Rights] Law is a set of rules enforcing property rights To permit conflict-free use of resources

I had no idea how far back the history of asset forfeiture goes. Find out all about it in this episode. Also, What's in the News with stories on private disaster relief efforts, cops getting off with murder, Motel 6 is a bootlicker, kindergartner suspended for imagination, and Maine nullifying federal food laws. I also discuss a new contest I'm running that you can win, and a new podcast project I've released for Pax Libertas Productions that you don't want to miss. This episode is brought to you by Tom Woods's Liberty Classroom, helping you to become a smarter and more informed libertarian than ever before, for just 24 cents a day. WHAT'S RUSTLING MY JIMMIES One thing I talk a lot about on this show is government theft. Taxation is theft, but so is forfeiture, both civil and criminal. I didn't realize how far back the history of asset forfeiture went until I found an article in the book I Must Speak Out: The Best of The Voluntaryist that was selected and edited by Carl Watner. There is a link to the free ebook version of this book in the show notes to this episode at thelavaflow.com/71. I found this book while doing research for my latest podcast project called Essential Libertarianism, which I'll be talking about a bit later in this episode. The article in the book is titled "'Sweat Them at Law with Their Own Money': Forfeitures and Taxes in American History" and it goes into detail on the history of this evil perpetrated by our government.  WHAT'S IN THE NEWS In private disaster relief news, there have been numerous accounts of private groups working to help with the disasters created by the various hurricanes we've seen recently, from the Cajun Navy to the Liberty Coalition for Disaster Relief, a group of anarchists working to crowdfund disaster relief and volunteer coordination. Check out their Facebook group. They are a great organization showing "Without government, who would help people in need?" The link is in the show notes to this episode. On this topic, several cruise companies sent ships to the Caribbean following some of these hurricanes, lending their massive ships to the relief effort, transporting provisions and picking up stranded tourists.  Interestingly enough, FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, uses a private company as a benchmark for how things are on the ground during a disaster.  It's called the Waffle House Index and it's a three-color rating that uses green to denote that the local Waffle House restaurant is fully open, yellow for if it's just serving a limited menu (suggesting that it can't get the supplies it needs), and red for closed (a very rare occurrence for the 24-hour chain). In screw the government news, mere hours after Hurricane Irma, Miami-Dade County was ticketing residents for building code violations on their wrecked properties. In we investigated ourselves news, the US Department of Justice has decided they will not charge six Baltimore police officers in the death of Freddie Gray. The Department of Justice has been investigating the case since 2015, when Gray, a 25-year-old, black Baltimore resident, died of injuries he sustained while in police custody. In boot licking companies news, two Motel 6 locations in Phoenix, Arizona are routinely sending in leads to immigration agents when they suspect guests of being undocumented. While an investigation by the Phoenix New Times was unable to get confirmation from Motel 6 headquarters, employees at the motels in question said that collaboration with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is standard practice: "We send a report every morning to ICE—all the names of everybody that comes in," a front-desk clerk told the New Times. But this isn't anything new for Motel 6. In 2015, the ACLU released a statement of other nationwide collaboration with police and the government. In government indoctrination centers news, a 5-year-old imaginative boy's parents are speaking out after they say their son was suspended from school for telling a teacher that he had a bomb in his backpack. In nullification news, Maine Governor Paul LePage signed a Food Sovereignty Bill into law, guaranteeing the rights of Maine towns to regulate food production locally, rather than submitting to federal regulation. Don't miss signing up for the new October The LAVA Flow contest by signing up at http://thelavaflow.com/email. PAX LIBERTAS PRODUCTIONS TRAILER I have a new podcast project that just released over the weekend and I think you will want to check it out. It's called Essential Libertarianism and you can get it wherever you get your podcasts including iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play and many others. Check it out at EssentialLibertarianism.com. Essential Libertarianism IS voluntaryism, and that is the basis for this show. A few months ago I picked up an old book from the early 80's called Neither Bullets Nor Ballots: Essays on Voluntaryism by Carl Watner, George H. Smith, and Wendy McElroy. After reading this book, I had a much better understanding of voluntaryism as a whole and it renewed my commitment to this philosophy. I began digging down the rabbit hole of content at Voluntaryist.com, the website for Carl Watner and The Voluntaryist newsletter which has been publishing continually since 1982, which led me to reach out to him about this project. He agreed to let me do it and he is excited about it as well!  

We live in a "rape culture," according to many feminists these days, in which men are by definition rapists and in which rape is encouraged and considered normal. In fact, rape is punished severely and some people's lives have been ruined because they were assumed to be guilty when they weren't, so what could this all be about? Wendy McElroy, author of a new book on the subject, joins me to shed some light.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 208. See also KOL387 | The Great IP Debate of 1983: McElroy vs. Schulman. [Transcript available here.] A conversation about intellectual property and libertarian and property theory with my old friend J. Neil Schulman.† We discussed our differing views on IP, as a result of my comments on a recent post Patrick Smith: Un-Intellectual Property. Hey, I tried my best, but we never quite saw eye to eye. For further information, see Neil's posts Human Property, The Libertarian Case for IP; and Media-Carried Property (MCP). See also the comments here to The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism and My Unfinished 30-Year-Old Debate with Wendy McElroy. For further material about Schulman's logorights theory, see: Query for Schulman on Patents and Logorights; Kinsella v. Schulman on Logorights and IP; Schulman: “If you copy my novel, I'll kill you”;  Replies to Neil Schulman and Neil Smith re IP; Schulman: Kinsella is “the foremost enemy of property rights”; On J. Neil Schulman's Logorights; Reply to Schulman on the State, IP, and Carson. For some related material discussed, see Classical Liberals and Anarchists on Intellectual Property (discussing LeFevre) The Four Historical Phases of IP Abolitionism The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism (on Konkin) The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 208. [Transcript available here.] A conversation about intellectual property and libertarian and property theory with my old friend J. Neil Schulman. We discussed our differing views on IP, as a result of my comments on a recent post Patrick Smith: Un-Intellectual Property. Hey, I tried my best, but we never quite saw eye to eye. For further information, see Neil's posts Human Property, The Libertarian Case for IP; and Media-Carried Property (MCP). See also the comments here to The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism and My Unfinished 30-Year-Old Debate with Wendy McElroy. For further material about Schulman’s logorights theory, see: Query for Schulman on Patents and Logorights; Kinsella v. Schulman on Logorights and IP; Schulman: “If you copy my novel, I’ll kill you”;  Replies to Neil Schulman and Neil Smith re IP; Schulman: Kinsella is “the foremost enemy of property rights”; On J. Neil Schulman’s Logorights; Reply to Schulman on the State, IP, and Carson. For some related material discussed, see Classical Liberals and Anarchists on Intellectual Property (discussing LeFevre) The Four Historical Phases of IP Abolitionism The Origins of Libertarian IP Abolitionism (on Konkin) The Death Throes of Pro-IP Libertarianism.

Mike talks to entrepreneur, author, director and former adult film star Candida Royalle about her career and the upcoming documentary about her from director Sheona McDonald, While You Were Gone.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 038. [Update: see my post Wenzel the Werewolf] Blogger Robert Wenzel and I had a "debate" earlier today about IP, to be jointly put up on my podcast and his Economic Policy Journal "podcast" (it's on his site at Kinsella Crushed!! and Initial Report on Debate, and mentioned ahead of time several times as linked below). Bob is an Austrian libertarian (I think) blogger but has been criticizing me and Jeff Tucker's anti-IP views for a few years now (see links below), so we decided to discuss it. (( Note: I failed to record the audio at my end until 1:07:10, but my audio quality was better. So I spliced in the better second half from my recording. So starting at 1:07:10 you can hear better audio quality at my end, and no worse at Wenzel's. )) The transcript is available here. Youtube: Backup copy: The discussion went on for over 2 hours. It went about as I expected: he tried to dwell on side points, he refused to—was unable to—even attempt to define IP much less provide a coherent justification for it. He repeatedly engaged in question-begging: calling using information you learn from others "stealing," which presupposes that there is some owned thing that is stolen. He started out with several bizarre, off-point attacks: for example challenging my claim in my 2001 piece Against Intellectual Property that Rothbard was one of the original libertarian opponents of IP. The entire criticism by Wenzel is bizarre because whether or not I am right in listing Rothbard as an opponent of patent and copyright has nothing to do with whether IP is justified. Further, later in the paper I have an extensive section dealing with Rothbard's attempt to come up with some kind of contractual scheme that emulated some aspects of IP, which he confusingly calls "copyright." Some libertarians, like Wenzel, apparently think Rothbard did support copyright (though Wenzel repeatedly equivocates on whether he is talking about state copyright or Rothbard's private "copyright" scheme), or patent, or something in between, and others say he didn't. For example  David Gordon writing on LewRockwell.com, in Sam Konkin and Libertarian Theory, observes: ... anti-IP views were very much in the air thirty years ago: Wendy McElroy stands out especially in my mind as a forceful and effective critic of IP. Even earlier, Rothbard had in Man, Economy, and State (1962) favored the replacement of the state system of patents and copyrights with contractual arrangements, freely negotiated. (If one moves outside modern libertarianism, Benjamin Tucker rejected IP well over a century ago as Wendy McElroy has documented in an outstanding article. Rothbard did not take this "contractual copyright" idea very far and indeed I believe it contradicts other aspects of his thought such as his contract theory (ch. 19 of Ethics of Liberty), his opposition to reputation rights/defamation law (ch. 16), and his explicit opposition to patents (ch. 16, also Man, Economy, and State and Power and Market, Scholars Edition, pp. liv, 745-54, 1133-38, 1181-86). But anyway, what does it matter? It's a bizarre appeal to authority. I am quite sure that Rothbard would have agreed with us anti-IP libertarians if he had had more time to sort it out; as I noted, it's implied in all the structure of his political theory. This is why Hoppe easily saw this by integrating Rothbardian  and Misesian political economic ideas (Hoppe on Intellectual Property). But so what if he would not have? Then he would have been wrong. And so what if I had been wrong in listing Rothbard as an early libertarian opponent of IP (though he arguably was; although as the paper explained later on, his position was not fully fleshed out and/or had ambiguities). How does this prove IP is legitimate? It does not, but Wenzel has no good argument for IP which is why he for over two hours refuses my repeated requests that he provide one—after all,

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast, Episode 038. [update: I have just updated the mp3: I forgot to record it at my end until about 1:07, but my audio quality was better. So I spliced in the better second half from my recording. So starting at 1:07 or so you can hear better audio quality at my end, and no worse at Wenzel's.] Blogger Robert Wenzel and I had a "debate" earlier today about IP, to be jointly put up on my podcast and his Economic Policy Journal "podcast" (it's on his site at Kinsella Crushed!! and Initial Report on Debate, and mentioned ahead of time several times as linked below). Bob is an Austrian libertarian (I think) blogger but has been criticizing me and Jeff Tucker's anti-IP views for a few years now (see links below), so we decided to discuss it. The discussion went on for over 2 hours. It went about as I expected: he tried to dwell on side points, he refused to—was unable to—even attempt to define IP much less provide a coherent justification for it. He repeatedly engaged in question-begging: calling using information you learn from others "stealing," which presupposes that there is some owned thing that is stolen. He started out with several bizarre, off-point attacks: for example challenging my claim in my 2001 piece Against Intellectual Property that Rothbard was one of the original libertarian opponents of IP. The entire criticism by Wenzel is bizarre because whether or not I am right in listing Rothbard as an opponent of patent and copyright has nothing to do with whether IP is justified. Further, later in the paper I have an extensive section dealing with Rothbard's attempt to come up with some kind of contractual scheme that emulated some aspects of IP, which he confusingly calls "copyright." Some libertarians, like Wenzel, apparently think Rothbard did support copyright (though Wenzel repeatedly equivocates on whether he is talking about state copyright or Rothbard's private "copyright" scheme), or patent, or something in between, and others say he didn't. For example  David Gordon writing on LewRockwell.com, in Sam Konkin and Libertarian Theory, observes: ... anti-IP views were very much in the air thirty years ago: Wendy McElroy stands out especially in my mind as a forceful and effective critic of IP. Even earlier, Rothbard had in Man, Economy, and State (1962) favored the replacement of the state system of patents and copyrights with contractual arrangements, freely negotiated. (If one moves outside modern libertarianism, Benjamin Tucker rejected IP well over a century ago as Wendy McElroy has documented in an outstanding article. Rothbard did not take this "contractual copyright" idea very far and indeed I believe it contradicts other aspects of his thought such as his contract theory (ch. 19 of Ethics of Liberty), his opposition to reputation rights/defamation law (ch. 16), and his explicit opposition to patents (ch. 16, also Man, Economy, and State and Power and Market, Scholars Edition, pp. liv, 745-54, 1133-38, 1181-86). But anyway, what does it matter? It's a bizarre appeal to authority. I am quite sure that Rothbard would have agreed with us anti-IP libertarians if he had had more time to sort it out; as I noted, it's implied in all the structure of his political theory. This is why Hoppe easily saw this by integrating Rothbardian  and Misesian political economic ideas (Hoppe on Intellectual Property). But so what if he would not have? Then he would have been wrong. And so what if I had been wrong in listing Rothbard as an early libertarian opponent of IP (though he arguably was; although as the paper explained later on, his position was not fully fleshed out and/or had ambiguities). How does this prove IP is legitimate? It does not, but Wenzel has no good argument for IP which is why he for over two hours refuses my repeated requests that he provide one—after all, it's supposed to be a debate about IP. In fact in my opening statement I explained that the burden of proof is on ...

The insanity of war and statism... Poll: Most oppose closing Gitmo http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-06-01-gitmo_N.htm The "war on terror" is really about fear, not significant risks 'Supermax' prison draws attention in Gitmo debate http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-06-03-supermax_N.htm SamIAm update (after clp70 was recorded): http://freekeene.com/2009/06/09/breaking-news-sam-kicked-out-of-jail/ http://freekeene.com/2009/06/04/trial-scheduled-for-sam-615-130pm-et/ Statists like to impose their stupid views known as "laws" on rights-respecting people Historically, those in governmental militaries have terrorized civilians far more than non-statist terrorists Dying To Win: The Strategic Logic Of Suicide Terrorism by Robert Pape http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1400063175/qid=1123148762/ The collectivistic "we" makes despicable actions seem okay; groupthink fosters irresponsible and evil acts Statist memes promoted by the mainstream media discourage people from thinking critically The bromides about Americans' "freedoms" have hoodwinked people into embracing the tribal premise and collectivism Early advocates of individualism knew better: American Anarchism -- 19th century individualist anarchism by Wendy McElroy http://www.wendymcelroy.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.149 The Origins of Individualist Anarchism in the US by Murray N. Rothbard http://www.mises.org/story/2014 Only by seeing yourself as an independent individual can you free your mind from statism Fear-mongering can only be counteracted by reason and emotional awareness Once people surrender to the "authority" of statism and militarism, they run roughshod over others' rights Functional Rights: The Elephant in the Parlor, Part II by Scarmig http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/scarmig/scarmig2.html Rights are universal; they apply equally to all rights-respecting individuals everywhere "Rights: Not granted or protected by any state, God or magical hoodoo monster. What we call rights are reciprocal agreements negotiated on the fly between individuals..." George Potter Respect is simply reflected in peaceful negotiation of reciprocal agreements (which occur implicitly and explicitly among individuals on a daily basis) Those in the U.S. military violate simple market principles of respect, and thus generate widespread conflict in the form of death and destruction Most people are encouraged to be collectivistic, rather than individualistic, in their patriotism Reason, Individualism, and responsibility resolve conflict best Government breaks the order of an orderly society and causes people to denigrate rights There is no such thing as collective authority; there are only individuals who choose to do good or bad Cops are slaves to their system of employment, and they are masters in irresponsibility ("it's the law!")--with psychological problems galore Protecting those in charge and doing their bidding is the name of the statist game (as well as self-sacrifice), from police to military employment Liberties are publicly acknowledged and reciprocated claims of rights Government equals domination and authoritarianism, by definition Private property enables sensible and clear negotiations of agreements; "public property" enables people to get shoved around and violated We learn to acquiesce to domineering and authoritarian (i.e., rights-violating) third parties known as governments, mainly from our early experiences with our parents As a parent, it's important to enable little people to flourish, grow, and make their own choices; children need freedom and respect, which will be returned in kind How to get kids to do boring (but necessary) tasks - http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/half_full/?p=836 1. Show empathy 2. Offer meaningful rationales 3. Imply that they have a choice rather than of using "controlling language" Incidentally, all three of these are violated by governmental employees in relation to rights-respecting individuals (because they are "public") "Public property" is controlled by those in charge, so naturally, rights-respecting people suffer and die in this domain Traditional education subverts the natural exercise of the child's will and expression of his/her rights Whenever someone says they have a right to something, always ask "At whose expense?" Case in point: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ Individual rights and property rights are inextricably, conceptually intertwined The authority to make final, impartial, honest decisions can only be attained in a free market of private property rights Any form of statism infringes on individual rights, even the rights of those who supposedly desire or simply acquiesce to it (e.g., minarchists and socialists--via aggression, collectivistic "jurisdiction," and preventing the choice to opt out) Government, in principle, doesn't recognize peoples' right to be left alone; "choosing" statist masters is a non sequitur In a complete liberty society, there are potent incentives to resolve conflicts with minimal cost bumper music "World Comin' Down" by Billy Idol http://billyidol.ning.com/  http://www.myspace.com/billyidol http://www.amazon.com/Very-Best-Billy-Idol-Yourself/dp/B0018TLRTK/ to comment, please go to http://completeliberty.com/magazine/category/91697  

Reflections on the Origin and the Stability of the State by Hans-Hermann Hoppe http://www.lewrockwell.com/hoppe/hoppe18.html The Hobbesian State remains in a perpetual state of nature Who governs the governors? It's turtles all the way down... The State itself isn't bound by any outside enforcer, so no external 3rd party exists to hold it accountable; the State is in a state of anarchy! The State as the mafia with a flag, the organization of authoritarian sociopaths who live off productive people The procedures of government are just public relations bs The basic structure of all government comes from the desperation of the authoritarian sociopathic personality within any given community realizing that they have nothing of value (no product or service) to offer their neighbors in voluntarily trade Those in government love the idea of forcing others to provide for them The mainstream media's complicity, and government schools' as indoctrination camps supplemental reading: The Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm The gravity well of governmental coercion and corruption You don't need to steal to provide a product of service Fear of productiveness and the hatred of the good for being the good http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/envyhatredofthegoodforbeingthegood.html The cover-up: collectivistic and altruistic propaganda, and the ethics of sacrifice http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/sacrifice.html Governmental employees true motives are the opposite of their rhetoric If you have to deal with a governmental bureaucrat, ask them this pointed question: Other than the threat of physical violence, what is the nature of the relationship between you (and your violent organization) and me? Making coercive thugs pay a spiritual price, just by asking some simple questions and making some simple ethical observations The State is a legal fiction; thus, there can be no crimes against the State An alternative pledge of allegiance: I pledge allegiance to the logic of my own life and my own well-being and to my own happiness for which it stands, one mind independent, purposeful, with liberty and justice for me Neither bullets nor ballot: Violence, including the vote, cannot bring liberty by Wendy McElroy   http://www.wendymcelroy.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.165 "Benjamin Tucker maintained that one could no more attack government by electing politicians than one could prevent crime by becoming a criminal" No one has the right to a position of power over others; something Ron Paul Revolutionaries need to integrate Most people are conflicted philosophically, so their integrity suffers Essentially, voting is violence "Anarchism analyzes the State as an institution whose purpose is to violate rights in order to secure benefits to a privileged class...Thus, the political anarchist must explain why he aspires to an office he proclaims inherently unjust" The contradictory ideas and behavior of most Free State Project members (http://freestateproject.org) Rationalizing taking governmental jobs... Another question for governmental employees: If what you're doing is so valuable to the community, why don't you offer it on a voluntary basis? Exposing a contradictory code of ethics Various Free Staters' bad plan of joining the mafia and convincing their fellow coercers that putting down the guns will be a good thing Exposing the psychological, emotional, landscape... Transitioning mentally to the ethics of complete liberty; the growing snowball of awareness Making people aware of their fear of good ideas Message to Free Staters: Joining a criminal gang in order to get rid of criminality won't achieve freedom Freeing your personal life from statist mentalities, and then strategizing a plan to free your political life from statist mentalities Getting personal with those who seek to rule over you Signs of Autumn by B.R. Merrick http://www.strike-the-root.com/82/merrick/merrick5.html The violence of elections taken to its logical conclusion--guns pointed at you One reason that political anarchism (or any form of minarchism) will never work: Productive and respectful people will never want to get involved with the insanity and evil of politics Ron Paul's contradictions You "win" in politics by being a very crafty, deceiving, equivocating coercer--Obama as icon for this sociopathy bumper music "Bomb the World" from Everyone Deserves Music album by Michael Franti http://www.spearheadvibrations.com/listen.php to comment, please go to http://completeliberty.com/magazine/category/91697  

Early experiences with bad adult behavior Fear of authority and feeling a lack of authoritativeness It all starts with agreeing to the "invisible apple" A Transcript of Freedomain Radio Podcast 70: “The Parable of the Apple – or, How to control a human soul...” by Stefan Molyneux http://www.freedomainradio.com/Traffic_Jams/how_to_control_a_human_soul.mp3 also in the book Real-Time Relationships: The Logic of Love by Stefan Molyneux http://freedomainradio.com/free/#RTR Psychology of Education http://www.logicallearning.net/libertyeducation.html Between Parent and Child - The Bestselling Classic That Revolutionized Parent-Child Communication by Haim Ginott http://tinyurl.com/598j76 The "normal" talk that drives kids crazy "Sanity depends on trusting one's inner reality," noted Ginott Honoring the volitional capacity of the child Parents' and teachers' love of dominion (as noted by Herbert Spencer) Misbehavior doesn't usually emanate naturally from the child "The child has a teacher within," noted Maria Montessori The Secret of Childhood by Maria Montessori http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=8977399 Respecting the will of the child, allowing the psychic energy to flow Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience http://www.amazon.com/Flow-Psychology-Experience-Mihaly-Csikszentmihalyi/dp/0060920432 Optimal Experience by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Isabella Selega Csikszentmihalyi http://books.google.com/books?id=lNt6bdfoyxQC&dq=flow&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology) The Secret of Childhood: Normalization and Deviations-lecture given by Dr. Rita Shaefer Zener http://www.michaelolaf.net/lecture_secret.html There can't be familial harmony when there's love of dominion going on The early deviations fostered by adults Four characteristics of personality that signal normalization: love of work; concentration; self-discipline; sociability Statecraft 101 by Brad Spangler How do I start my own country? http://www.bradspangler.com/blog/archives/1021 Human beings bullying others both politically and parentally Bringing war upon individuals, courtesy of those in government The Thin Blue Lie by Wendy McElroy http://www.wendymcelroy.com/news.php?extend.1698 The police are the enemies of freedom; they enforce unjust laws, are paid through extortion (taxes), and work for a coercive monopoly Why you should never talk to cops without a lawyer (video of lawyer and cop making this point) http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/342.html San Diego Plays 'Sophie's Choice' for Fascists by Lawrence M. Ludlow http://www.strike-the-root.com/82/ludlow/ludlow1.html "Law" as an opinion backed by a gun Law must be based on human well-being and happiness--to be objective and valid, it must adhere to the principles of individual rights, self-ownership, and property Cooking Stimulated Big Leap In Human Cognition http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/12/2036254 bumper music "Love Will Set You Free" by Starchaserhttp://www.myspace.com/starchaserofficial to comment, please go to http://completeliberty.com/magazine/category/91697