Choosing the Battleground

in #politics7 years ago (edited)

Those who still hope to achieve freedom via petitions, elections and legislation are not only doing something that has no chance of success, they are essentially dooming themselves by letting tyrants and crooks choose the field of battle, and letting them choose the rules of engagement.

The philosophical debate of statism versus voluntaryism—authority versus self-ownership, government power versus non-aggression—is now drastically one-sided. I’ve been an anarchist for two decades now and I can attest to the recent exponential increase in how many people are actually questioning their authoritarian indoctrination, down to its roots. In all sorts of forums and formats (outside of the mainstream media, that is), people are now questioning and abandoning the political mythology they were taught, and instead learning and embracing the principles of non-aggression, self-ownership and voluntaryism. And what are the sociopathic control freaks doing about that? They don’t have any sort of logical or moral rebuttal, so they don’t even try that approach. Their attempts to justify their own power basically come in two forms: “If we weren’t here ruling you, scary things would happen!” and “Everyone knows that government is necessary!” But other than fear-mongering and baseless assertions, they have no argument to offer in favor of the Divine Right of Politicians. Because there isn’t one. When it comes to rational debate and discussion, the control freaks and politicians have pretty much walked off the field of battle.

On the philosophical battleground, authoritarian collectivists are unarmed buffoons, which is why those in power want so badly for the discussion to be about campaigns and elections, not principles and ideas. They are constantly and desperately trying to drag the battle onto their home turf: the pointless circus known as “politics.” As long as the argument is over WHO should sit on the throne, the tyrants have nothing to fear. That is their game, played under their rules. “Politics” is a system of the control freaks, by the control freaks, and for the control freaks. It always has been, and always will be.

That is why it is so frustrating to watch alleged freedom advocates eagerly jumping onto that battlefield, where they pointlessly and impotently whine about how Tyrant A might be slightly less bad than Tyrant B, or how maybe even Tyrant C has a chance of winning. “If you don’t vote for my guy, that’s like voting for the other guy!” Such short-sighted, unprincipled stupidity is precisely and exactly what those in power want. Why do you suppose “the powers that be” push so hard to get people to vote, even sometimes talking about making voting mandatory? Would they do such a thing if they thought elections posed any threat at all to their power? Of course not. They want the fight to happen on the battleground of choosing political masters, because they already know the outcome. As the saying goes, “Whoever the people vote for, government will be elected.”

Indeed, the ridiculous spectacle of “democracy” is the best trick tyrants have ever come up with. Allowing the slaves to vote is an amazingly effective way to drain even pro-freedom people of their time, money, energy, enthusiasm and hope, without giving them the slightest chance of achieving actual freedom. They obsess over the race, scream at each other, and then, after smashing their heads against that brick wall one more time—and after a new set (or the same set) of political puppets takes the throne—the subject class meekly crawls back into subservience, exhausted and discouraged. “Well, you can always try again in another four years.” Pathetically, most of them will do just that, falling for the exact same scam the next time around, too.

(For those who haven’t seen it yet, my video called “The Jones Plantation” should make voters appropriately uncomfortable.)

If your goal is freedom, do not set foot on the battlefield of elections and politics. Do not vote, do not campaign, do not petition. Do not even pay attention to that absurd puppet show. What matters is not the stupid rituals and appointments of political parasites. What matters is what the people understand and believe in. Neither the problem nor the solution exists in Washington DC; it exists between eight billion pairs of ears. Do not get dragged onto the field of politics. You will lose. Every time. Keep the battle on the field of ideas. That is the only place where freedom will ever be won.


True. Not to mention the media is controlled and the information we get is what we are allowed to get... therfore making an "informed decision/vote" is almost impossible!

I have often wondered if this is why we get half the news we do get. Transgendered bathrooms etc..... just to obscure the real goings on. Crazy world.

You WONDER? I, for one, am sure that is the case.

It makes me wonder exactly how much is twisted and changed before we get it... 25%, 50%, 90%? Scary stuff...

I'm quite sure that that's the case. I mean, would that kind of stuff even make the news in a sane world?

Not to mention how we are suppose to believe the central banks are the employees while they are the ones writing the checks to the Governments

True, nice point

I had actually never seen this Jones Plantation video before Larken, so thanks for posting! It is great, like all your other videos!

very much agree! He creates amazing videos like this one as well as my favorite--- message to the voting cattle... Cheers

Beautiful post as always. Never had any real exposure to anarchism/voluntaryism before steemit and I am grateful for it (the exposure not the delay lol). Thanks as always

I've been wondering how many people are first encountering these ideas on Steemit, and what their responses have been. Good to see at least one person answer that question. :)

Glad to hear. I can say it's a world I always a bit seperate from... Unable to grasp the reasoning used etc. I'm glad to hear I'm not just the lone weirdo lol

Good post again and thank you for the thoughts you shared with us. Valuable info for many. Namaste :)

Every time I see an online petition with hundreds of thousands of e-signatures on it, I just have to laugh. God alone knows what those people think they're achieving. An utter lack of understanding on how anything real works is dooming us. The death of common sense is also to blame, though I am not sure now that it ever was alive, to begin with.

What I think every time I hear about such a petition: "Wait, do you really think that the politicians didn't KNOW that you don't like this? Do you really think they CARE that you don't? Do you really expect them to suddenly say, 'Oh, gee, we thought you WANTED this! So sorry! We will change it right away!'?" You might as well send a petition to a car-jacker, asking him not to steal your car.

How many such forms have they filled out and received a form letter reply? Do they read it. How often does the form letter thank them for standing behind their "representative" in their support of the thing they are against? "I am filling out this petition in defiance of X". FORM LETTER: "Thank you for contacting your representative. It is good that you care about your community enough to get involved. You are truly a great citizen. I am so glad that you stand behind me in my support of X, and together we can make truly great things happen."

If they talk to anyone else that also "protested" and signed a petition they will see that person received the same letter. They move on, feeling as though their actions made a difference. They tell their neighbors "I complained about this to our representative! You should too! I even received a response back."


Fifteen years ago, when online petitions weren't as common and a thousand signatures represented significant effort, I hand delivered a petition with 1500 signatures to the office of my "representative." I was led into an office where a very nice lady was answering the phones. People were calling with their concerns, and she wrote down what they said on a small piece of paper, and then put the paper in a drawer.

I waited for a lull in the phone calls, then told her what the petition was about. She listened very attentively and politely, thanked me for bringing the issue to her attention, then took the thick printout and put it in the same drawer.

At that point I realized that wad of papers represented a complete waste of time.

The weasel voted the opposite of what the petition requested. I doubt he was ever informed that it even existed.

What I especially love is those petitions that people send out to the entire country to deal with a local issue. Yeah, like the rulers in Podunk Mississippi really care about what people in Podunk Georgia think.

It gets better when you see some spread globally and targeting something Putin is doing. Like Putin is going to care what anyone, in or out of Russia, is bleating about. You'll notice very few Russian signatures on those petitions, too. They know better. And they don't want to end up in jail for acute petitionitis.


you do have the second amendment right to actually do something about it, but you've never used that right ... you're just as much part of the problem as the government itself

look up; the execution of Ceausescu; he was shot by an insider, not some YouTube philosopher

That's absurd. You do not have a responsibility to commit suicide by cop just because you might end a few tyrants. Violent means rarely have the desired effect. Often they make things worse.

Larken is doing a very good job of educating those willing to have their beliefs challenged (and encouraging those of us in the choir). I'd rather he stayed alive to continue doing that.

I don't mind that he's trying to spread awareness, but as long the awareness doesn't include that the only way to stop violent tyrants is with violence ... we're never going to get rid of them

it's not that there might be a possibility of violent tyrants taking over the government, that's what already happened on day 1

this while I do hope that projects like steemit will lead to an open market solution that we can use to replace the government with

so, I don't expect him to join the militia and lead the charge on his own, as ideas and insights are also important, but I do expect him to include the possibility of violence being needed into that insight, otherwise is just ideological nonsense

keep in mind; the tyrants already initiated the violence!

Violence is not the only way. I don't expect anyone to just lay back and take it; self defense is justified. But if enough of us just say no, and are willing and able to defend that no, there's nothing they can do about it. Very little actual violence will be necessary.

sure ... but it cannot be excluded

keep in mind; so far, they're winning, we're losing ... and there's a reason for that

Freedom of speech, democracy, and vote all these inventions of the government for manipulation with people. Belief suggestion that it that means - its voice has weight. I agree with you. The battlefield has to take place in ideas to change the world to the best. I not voting. (I understand that my voice has no weight). It is possible to take Japan in an example - the president holds a post in it 1 year. For a year of service if it will not manage to bring them into bright future and to keep the promises. It changes. But how occurs at us? 4 years big term. Generally, re-elect that he managed to complete that he already began but was not in time. They as always to assure us that now it will consult. But when it will appear again at a wheel - everything will return to place. I want to tell that people have to solve this problem. But that to make it it's necessary to be uniform. To be one harmonious mechanism in the fight ​slavery. I have an idea - if all citizens of the country do not go to elections that will be? Magic.:) Again will win strongest.

This is beautfiully and precisely written. The state is NOT going to stand down, and therefore we need to deny the state any and all validity.

Intellect, moral and the ability to reason logically are totally absent from the political landscape. Sadly, society inherently mimicks this behavior, totally incapable of delivering anything reminiscent of a genuine idea.

This is a war for our minds.

The philosophical debate of statism versus voluntaryism—authority versus self-ownership, government power versus non-aggression—is now drastically one-sided.

Is there really a debate between two sides? Or is it more like one small group of people talk to themselves and another do things, completely unaware of a small group talking to themselves?

One of the problems is that masses are used to, 'trained' to be managed in groups (teams, factions, states, nations...).
Having no Politicians or no Government would require the masses to be much better human beings with a much higher sense of discipline, right/wrong. Masses will feel lost without group heads.

A new generation would need to be educated differently, from birth, to be able to understand how to live without politicians.

Education is a huge factor. We are not trained to solve the world's problems or live in a humanitarian and forward-moving fashion. We're only trained to respond to the needs of management.

Check out John Taylor Gatto if you haven't already. He lays out the flaws & intentions of the education system with impeccable accuracy.

A small town mayor asks Putin who he think will win in the next election?
Putin : "What do you mean WHO will win, isnt it obvious?
The mayor: "I mean the American election
Putin: "Ah, those elections, well i think that.... that it doesnt matter"

Politics is the Crack Cocaine of modern society. I have to admit that I get tempted to take a hit occasionally. Thanks to guys like you I quickly regain my senses.

Mmhmm. Politicians are only concerned with what they -can- do, not with what you want them to do, or what they're allowed to do, or anything of that nature. Government is not your friend, and it -won't- set up anything that will ultimately help you. So if you think something that was arranged by the government is a good idea, might want to re-examine that.

Yeah this article makes a lot of strong but completely baseless claims.

The number of people questioning statism is a drop in the ocean. Insignificant. The vast majority of people cannot comprehend society existing without government. It never occurs to them not even as an thought experiment.

And statists bring plenty of so called moral arguments for themselves. Like how you have what you have because of government, like freedom means a chicken in every pot etc. The philosophical debate is far from over. The fact that you see the arguments as baseless is not relevant in the grand scheeme of things. Most people do not see them so, and for them they are strong arguments.

Most arguments may not be rational but they don't need to be. Most people are not rational about politics and morality.

Making such strong claims like these can work in a bubble, preaching to the coir kind of situation but would lose 99.9% of listeners. Especially the authoritative tone which these claims are made.

I upvoted your post on accident and seemingly am unable to remove my vote. Anyway, I believe you've completely misinterpreted the concept of this article and are approaching it at the wrong angle.

Another aspect of this is that this whole circus of electioneering, politicking, and all that, just distract people from what the real problems are. Western ranchers being murdered or held as political prisoners by the federal government? Sorry, we don't have time for that. We have to focus on electing the least awful candidate to be our next President. U.S. drone strikes killing innocent civilians in other countries? Sorry, we don't have time for that either. We have to make sure that the right person becomes President so that we can be protected from those madmen terrorists that come to kill us!

This will help folks understand even more... see the post FOR THE MASSES OF ASSES - JUST TRYING TO FIX STUPID

@larkenrose I am curious about what your stance is on widespread technology taking over the majority of the workforce? Are you completely against mass organization whether it is decentralized or centralized? Whenever I read your articles I get the feeling you are advocating people to live locally and to be good in nature. I have no problem with that as I have unplugged from society for months at a time before. It feels like each local group would live independent of each other, and if that is the case what prevents one group from amassing power and pushing their ways on another?
A part of me feels like we are becoming a eusocial society with the aid of technology that supplements our inherent flaw when it comes to organization skills. Individuals of a eusocial society seem to sacrifice being an individual for the sake of the whole.

I'm not against organization at all. The "feeling" you get is only that. In a free society some would choose to live a simple, back-to-nature life, and many would like massively complex, specialized types of commerce and coexistence. As long as it is all VOLUNTARY organization, I don't care.

Thank you for clearing that up. One last thing is our would you prevent violence if some individuals so choose it?

I'm all in favor of DEFENSIVE force, to STOP aggressors. And doing that is legitimate without any badge, "law" or "authority" saying so. And when people don't believe in "government," they don't imagine aggression to be legitimate.

@larkenrose in the interest of Voluntaryism, we should also allow for those who just cannot adjust to real freedom to have a state or a few states around the world, so long as they don't aggress against the freepersons outside their borders, or refuse to allow their Citizens to opt out.

I think they would dwindle and die out over time seeing how things work outside their plantation.

That is a great allegory Larken.

I am a big believer in the inclusive idea that is "yes and". Your truth is beautiful and obviously deeply meant. I myself, see the "birthplace" of ideas as the place where freedom is always won. We all turn to our own past experiences to inform our futures, but that birthplace is just our beginning. In the end, it takes participation from all sorts of people with a spectrum of contributions to pull off real change. Great minds should be heard and supported by others who are willing to fight for a better tomorrow from every possible position. Beware of engaging in intellectual purity at the expense of a broader, more inclusive approach to achieving something we can all believe in.

Simply Great Information and Presentation

Good video @larkenrose I hadn't watched that particular one before.

Thanks, Larken. This is the right way to frame the battle for freedom. I hadn't seen this video before. It is one of your best.

wow awesome

Many years ago, I wrote lots of letters to my US Representatives and Senators. They almost always wrote back, with a form letter, with a stamped signature. Sometimes the form letter even had something to do with the topic of my letter. Well, what could I expect? A US representative claims to represent six hundred thousand people (except the one representative of Wyoming, since there aren't that many people in the state). That's absurdly impossible. Even if he wanted to, nobody could do that.

I deregistered to vote in 2008, after Ron Paul was basically excluded from the Republican Presidential Convention. I have not voted since.

like @larkenrose said politics is of the control freaks by the control freaks for the control freaks so glad you haven't voted since Ron Paul and i haven't voted since than either and don't plan on it :)

Petitions used to seem so polite and mature and civilized to me. Nowadays I see them with different eyes, like an expression of the weakness of the individual. A group of people pandering to a supposed authority, begging for approval from an father-figure while appealing to the myth of democracy: "But if a lot of people want it you have to give it to us!" It implies that an individual has no rights, only when he is part of a large enough group to actually stand outside a government building and be visible on Google earth does he have even a vague shot at acquiring the right to choose what he will do or what will be done to him.

Very well put and it inspires a thought:
If some consider the bulk of the population to be sheeple who follow almost any advertised whim, what is the Ancap message missing to get the kind of traction it merits ?

More great content from Larken! Message to the voting cattle (20 min version) Is by far one of the best litterature/video I have ever laid my eyes on!

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.21
TRX 0.06
JST 0.026
BTC 27840.35
ETH 1767.49
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.93