Additional viewpoints/perspectives on open state borders debate between Larken and Lauren at Anarchapulco2018

1. Intro

If you are unfamiliar with voluntaryism and libertarianism, this article might be difficult to comprehend for you. If you are open-minded and willing to entertain arguments without subjugating yourself to feelings, you might win something out of it regardless.
Lauren Southern recently uploaded here debate with Larken Rose (@larkenrose) at Anarchapulco2018 about (open) (state) borders. You can watch it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=eCv1glJx5b4

I don’t want to go through minute by minute and point by point which was made in the debate. That would be boring, only for the often criticized ‘theoreticians’ and anyway not why I am writing this.
I wish to bust open the frame of the debate, which already is established by the title, open borders. Open state borders or not, migration or not or to which degree. This frame has many shortcomings and I wish to present other perspectives. For some new, for some repetition of rarely (or maybe often) heard approaches. This may help to bridge over some disagreements between „members of the different camps“.
It also helps me personally to integrate my thoughts and the thoughts/ideas of various different authors, be they scholars or entrepreneurs.

1.1 overview of arguments in the debate

I’d like to give an overview of the general approach and arguments that were made by the different sides. Please consider this is my way of formulating it.

Larken:

• The NAP (non-aggression principle) is all that counts for an anarchist/voluntaryist. It is the foundation of moral principles and our action should always be reasoned from those first principles.
• State borders are imaginary/artificially created by states and as there should be no state, there shouldn't be any state borders.
• Every (true) anarchist would be happy, when a state collapses and this includes the structure of a state apparatus which is the welfare state.

Lauren:

• Purist [description of Larken], we need to be practical. That includes argue for what the existing state should do and advocate for what would be right by the state to do.
• Closed borders prevent the collapse of western civilization, offer the only chance to evolve into a free (private) society, prevent further institutionalized theft (welfare) and other cults wishing to rule (Islam) from accessing state power in our region.
• She regards being happy of the collapse of the welfare state as naive.
• Demographics matter. So do the mentalities of immigrating people (wish to rule and wish to harm others which don’t obey the rules of their cult (Islam) as well as to leech off other peoples work (welfare).)
• Regarding the latter she made a concrete example. A further example was that of a drowning boy in a pool on a neighbor property and the rescuing father violating the NAP for it (and this to be an alleged analogy to the topic). I will make comments on these examples.

1.2 A quote by Hans-Hermann Hoppe regarding the topic from 1998 (!)

Full article: https://mises.org/library/case-free-trade-and-restricted-immigration-0

[...] Do the principles underlying free trade imply that this policy must be one of conditional “free immigration?” They do not. There is no analogy between free trade and free immigration, and restricted trade and restricted immigration. The phenomena of trade and immigration are different in a fundamental respect, and the meaning of “free” and “restricted” in conjunction with both terms is categorically different. People can move and migrate; goods and services, of themselves, cannot.

Put differently, while someone can migrate from one place to another without anyone else wanting him to do so, goods and services cannot be shipped from place to place unless both sender and receiver agree. Trivial as this distinction may appear, it has momentous consequences. For free in conjunction with trade then means trade by invitation of private households and firms only; and restricted trade does not mean protection of households and firms from uninvited goods or services, but invasion and abrogation of the right of private households and firms to extend or deny invitations to their own property. In contrast, free in conjunction with immigration does not mean immigration by invitation of individual households and firms, but unwanted invasion or forced integration; and restricted immigration actually means, or at least can mean, the protection of private households and firms from unwanted invasion and forced integration. Hence, in advocating free trade and restricted immigration, one follows the same principle: requiring an invitation for people as for goods and services.

(Emphasizes in cursive in the original, in fat by me.)

Furthermore the meme physically remove communists https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=ZJ5zOEkD2Lg (video by truediltom).

2. The state, it’s a tax farm.

It’s been a long time since I read Animal Farm by George Orwell. It (surprisingly?) was in school. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Farm I wanted to mention it here. My description won’t be entirely similar to it, though.

The powers that shouldn’t be see the world, and act accordingly, as a number of various tax farms. All citizens beneath them are their cattle. Sadly, most people see themselves as such as well. They don’t see themselves as free people. They beg and argue their farmers to improve their conditions. They may wish to become farmers themselves, though they may confuse employee with owner.
Actually the analogy limps a bit, as the momentary systems are usually not those of owners like monarchs or barons but rather leasers, of temporary owners (which makes it even worse in most of the cases.) But I digress.

The hamster wheel and the use of ‘sheep’ for law-abiding citizens are similar analogies to the farm.

Farming can take different forms. You can cage your animals into unpleasant conditions like in industrial livestock farming, feed them rubbish, sedate them and pump them full with medication against pain, regulate their free running outdoors and squeeze every bit of product they can deliver out of them. You can also keep them as eco-animals, grant them much free time, let them scrub themselves, feed them rich food, please them and keep them happy.
Of course, every animal, when it could see the options I presented, wishes for the latter. The situation for it is observably better. Still, they remain livestock.

This is also important about farming: The farmer always remains the ruler. It all depends on his arbitrary will. No matter how well arranged your animal life has become, how convenient habits have established. The despotism remains the predominant feature. Just to mention it: The farmer can’t conjure you from the stall to the outside, he still has to harass you.
This is important, because the states primary function is not to protect private property. He grants it, allows it, licenses it, tolerates it. He protects it and his citizens only in so far, as he deems them resourceful cattle he can suck the blood out.

2.1 Some wonderful things states can do, to improve the keeping

• Lower taxes.
• Cut state spending.
• Make the financial realm free (no more central banks or any other licenses for banking).
• Make the educational realm free (no state indoctrination or ‘research’).
• Abolish the concept of intellectual property. No patents, no copyrights.
• In general, remove his power and control from his citizens, let them be more free.

2.2 Some wonderful things states can do, to improve the horrors of the migration crisis.

• Close borders (example Hungary).
• Offer monetary rewards for departure (example Israel).
• Cut/abolish any welfare services for new immigrants (example Switzerland).
• As it is supposedly law, enforce it and stop human trafficking towards the Mediterranean (will safe some thousands migrants lives as well).
• Only let people in with passports (or something similar).
• Age verification, fingerprints, declare state of emergency (example France).
• Actually enforce its laws or enforce justice, like jailing and pursuing murderers and rapists and don’t harass people for free speech etc.
• Cut all the regulations around Hartz IV (German last welfare system) to free resources in the judicial system.
• Open up the security and safety markets, allow self-defense (including weaponry) again.
• Ah, of course, stop waging wars and stop war mongers from operating from state territory (US Africom in Ramstein).

3. Everything horrific leading up to the immigration debacle was caused or helped by states.

I will mention the consequences of state influence which I considerable most impactful and relevant for this essay as brief as I can.

3.1 Wars

Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen all put into war by European and US state military in the past two decades and their allies like Saudi Arabia, Israel, others. Propaganda by state media and media with close ties to the state apparatus all the time.

3.2 Poverty and the welfare state

Poverty caused by the central banking system, wars of the military, taxation, regulation and the incentives made to built a permanent underclass as well as declining quality in and more costly medicine via the welfare states.

3.2 Arbitrariness and despotism

Rule of law is to a large degree a fabrication (see also (last paragraph of) tax farm above). Freedom of speech - supposedly a basis of every western democracy - is being eroded in nearly every one of them with so-called hate-speech laws. Germany becoming part of the EU was unconstitutional, as was the ESM and everything similar like the EFSF following the ‘banking, housing and financial crisis' 2008/9.

Vast majority of policemen and judges show their true color again: They are primarily order followers and not ‘guardians of justice’ or ‘peace’. Cracking down on people making facebook or twitter posts but let robbers, thieves and rapists run free. Very often we read a murderer was already known for heavy crimes. So why wasn’t he in prison then? And furthermore, why we hear of cases where established rapists or cases of manslaughter have been set free?
The biggest known cover-ups and cooperation with crime by the police and judicial system are probably the ‘grooming-gang scandals’ (child and youth molestation) in England, like that in Rotherham.

The banking secret was lifted in Germany and you don’t own your house or land, you always have to pay taxes for it.

These all are neither markers of a free society nor of rule of law, where supposedly the law and constitution, guaranteeing basic freedom and rights stand above the actions and will of politicians, police men and so on.

3.3 Immigration crisis itself is a creation by states

States all over the world have institutionalized an all-encompassing system of passports and visa in the 20th and 21th century. This system is still in place but now arbitrarily lifted with no basis in so-called democracy or supposed rule by the people.
People all over Africa come to Europe, paying at least 2.000 € to get trafficked. Are they allowed to pick a flight for like 500 bucks? No, they have to travel through the desert, some of them dying on that way to the Mediterranean, where they are picked up by tugs/smugglers, some dying here again.
Here, again, the supposed law and the perpetrators are known. The enforcement is pretty arbitrarily. As it is with the passports. Thrown away, not required anymore. Murderers use their prove as being a murderer to become asylum-seekers. Terrorists are let in.

Refugee camps were built around Syria and then the food-supply cut in December 2014. Nothing better to start a crisis[1].

It’s all to the caprice of powers that shouldn’t be.

• To accelerate the narrative of the war on terror.
• To create conflict, acting against its ‘citizens’ and by setting on people at each other(s throats).
• To impose more surveillance and more of a police state.

4. The situation is actually superb for libertarians.

As macabre as it may sound, the situation is actually superb for libertarians.

A) The states faults become better visible. It is very useful to show the despotism, maliciousness and hypocrisy of the state, especially in its supposed core metiers like (stability) rule of law, security and safety, protection of private property. And how could a free person who wishes to abolish tyranny/slavery/the state now actually not twist the knife in the wound?

B) Possibilities in the market of security have risen, due to the need for more/a higher demand and the inflexibility as well as complicity of the state, playing the role of accelerator and enabler. There is a reaction by the market (the people). Libertarians could work towards facilitating these creations of services, could seize the moment to establish free market infrastructure in the supposed core elements of the state (security and safety).

C) Energy for rebellion against the state as well as lack of trust in the state is there and riper than ever.
As a consequence, not pointing out the contradictions of the state but rather shouting for more state involvement, is... weird. It’s like the cattle begging for improving the keeping conditions (tax farm) and shows not the attitude of free human beings.

Furthermore, far more sad is, that it is a huge missed chance to give helpful advice how to protect your own safety and property(, point out existing services and discuss their quality and sustainability), to nourish the spirit of resistance and rebellion against the state and especially creating enterprises in the core domains of the state (security, protection).

5. Larkens pinnacle of work „The most dangerous superstition“

Here is a pdf of it: https://www.mensenrechten.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/the-most-dangerous-superstition-larken-rose-20111.pdf
Here it is read as an audiobook:

So, this book will play a huge role in my approach to comment Larkens and Laurens arguments. It is about the belief in authority.
I will pick only one specific part of it and lay it out in my own words in understanding.

The paradoxical, a bit funny thing is: Lauren employs the argument in my opinion better than Larken in the debate. (Again: In my mind, it is Larken who introduced me to the idea/argument.)

5.1 Anarchists as atheists of the state.

So, the argument I want to talk about, is, that the state doesn’t exist. That sounds ridiculous in the first moment, doesn’t it? Especially after what I’ve written up to these lines now. But hold on and read on.

Atheists don’t believe in (the existence of) god. They reject for example the religion or cult of Christianity. That won’t make them deny the existence of churches, cathedrals, bibles and theological books, priests and crusaders though.
They know that there are people who believe(d) in god and those wrote and built all this stuff and live entrenched in structures manifested by themselves and other believers in god.

Although god doesn’t exist (for atheists), all these works are made and all these actions are taken inspired by a believe in god.

For anarchists it is kind of the same way. State doesn’t exist. What exists are people who believe that some people have the right to impose violence on peaceful people (for whatever reason). This makes all the state buildings built, the books with regulations written and imposed, the institutionalized theft happen, wars happen. The believe in the state is for anarchists another kind of cult or religion.

Although state doesn’t exist (for anarchists), all these works are made and all these actions are taken inspired by a believe in state.

You could also say this believe is what all the structures of the state makes come to life, what made it manifest and further maintains its existence. Like the existence of ‘the church’ came to life and stays alive.
Its about people who believe in rule and the ruled (slavery). In tax farmers, their farms and their cattle.

For simplicity, I’ll remain talking about the state, politicians, military and so on and not for example talking about people who believe in murder (war) being righteous when they deem it, someone told them so, some writing told them so (military people).

5.2 How that played a role in the debate, example one.

Larken said at some time, he would be happy, when the welfare state collapses (and implied anarchists should be happy when the state collapses in any way).

Of course anarchists would be happy, if their state or all states collapsed. But we see how this doesn’t really make sense, when we regard what I’ve just written in 5.1.

Lauren was a bit puzzled by this but didn’t really go the way to point out what this would mean, what would happen, what are the difficulties.

So, when the state of the US collapses, this might/probably will result in anomy. Though to a degree chaos provides opportunities, the biggest problem however is: The vast, vast majority of people will not stop believing in the state. A new state will emerge (maybe different factions will violently vie for it and a civil war break out) and the way to it will probably be pretty tyrannical, more tyrannical as before. A more tyrannical structure of institutionalized violence (=state) cannot be what anarchists wish for. (I believe Lauren mentioned Venezuela.)

Thus the collapse of the state might not be preferable in itself unless free people (voluntaryists/anarchists) have prepared for this moment and seize it to secede and implement a free private property society. The power vacuum and thereby resulting opportunity of such a collapse, is, what is actually bright about it.

I, personally, don’t really see that work of preparation done at this moment, although projects similar to the FSP could certainly work towards this goal. Ethno-staters of the alt-right aren’t so far by the way either, though some of them, like James Allsup, are also talking about secession.
We will come back to the point of secession later though, as Lauren saw one herself with Orania and how limited it came out into being (no Volkstaat).

Also I wanna mention a possible market approach (without the need of state collapse beforehand) towards this with the ‘free private cities’ project by Titus Gebel and for German readers (or really interested readers who wish to put it through a translator like DeepL or else) I wish to mention here „Praxeologie für Ordnung und Sezession“ von Norbert Lennartz (Buch am Ende des Auszugs als pdf): https://www.misesde.org/?p=12304

5.3 How the ‘atheist argument’ played a role in the debate, example two.

I’m gonna combine two parts of the video here now. First, a point which was addressed by Lauren during the debate and then, because it matches, a question made by @unblogd which you can find in the video embedded at the end of his article https://steemit.com/anarchy/@unblogd/en-open-borders-are-not-anarchist and the answers of Lauren and Larken to it. (Larkens answer came later. You can find it in the full video, which is also linked in the article.)

Lauren made the point: Closed state borders or regulated immigration prevent the collapse of western civilization. She doesn’t wish it to be destroyed or eradicated. Furthermore, western civilization is the only civilization which offers the chance to evolve into a free (private) society.
The majority of migrants wish to live on welfare and are not capable, in the current economical situation, to live on anything other but the welfare state (a part of the institutionalized theft structure of the state, where migrants would be consumers at the end). They also are/grow more and more dependent of the state. (Several political parties use this as a racket to gain votes from immigrants. (Other interests are ingrained here as well of course.))
A lot of the migrants are (non-secular) muslims, which believe in an additional way of rule, import their own ideology/cult of dominion, which is a further hindrance to freedom (inside the tax farm) and a free society.

My comment: I think her observations are correct. For example we see beliefs of a considerable amount of people (specific muslims), who regard unveiled, uncovered women as sluts/prey/loot, dirty animals to punish and abuse.

@unblogd asked from a perspective of a German Lauren what would be a realistic solution to the mass immigration and accompanying islamic problem in Europe.
Lauren mentioned Schengen and answered open borders lead to more state influence and a realistic solution would be to enforce and close the borders.
(Short interlude: The Schengen area includes Hungary and Poland. They closed their borders.)
Larken (48:20) answered (you may say somewhat angrily): Have an armed populace and for that, disobey the state and get a gun.

My comment: Laurens answer is to me a non-answer. An answer of 2.2. An answer of „vote harder, vote harder!“ (James Corbett).
It has nothing do to with what I and people could do and are doing (the market). This puzzles me, especially as she mentions just some seconds later the Defend Europe mission in which she assisted, which was a way of resisting and rebelling against statist agenda and showing the hypocrisy of the state concerning supposed rule of law and protection of life and property. And especially, because she has seen the solutions people, the market provide in (South) Africa.
Shouting and begging for the state, politicians will only use as a pretext to install more of a police state, as we see with Seehofer in Germany but also in the same way in the US (https://steemit.com/immigration/@dbroze/e17luc17).

A market-oriented approach will come up now more and more often.

5.4 Demographics, safety, NAP and market approach

At another point in time in the debate, Lauren makes the concrete example of hostile minded people settling down in the region around where Larken lives and what he would do. (She alludes to ghettos in Europe.)
Larken answers something in the fashion of, as long as they are peaceful, he wouldn’t do anything. The NAP counts always.
Lauren is amused by that, as she considers the hostility against Larken will rise until a point in time where he will be seriously afflicted and cannot do anything about it, however many guns he might have, simply because of the sheer outnumbering of people.

As much pre-crime state scenarios terrify, I also however believe security and safety firms will be/are already to a degree as much as possible about prevention and deescalation. Security and safety are two sought after services as any others and looking at it from a market perspective is much more helpful than looking at it from the NAP.

5.5 The NAP and the drowning boy

Lauren makes the example Larkens boy would (have gone not allowed to the neighbors garden, fallen into the pool and) be drowning in the neighbors pool. Would he trespass the private property (implicit: although the neighbor does not wish to allow it) and thus violate the NAP?
Larken would.

To take this as an analogy (after all we are talking about private property and human life) for state borders was (imo) pretty weak by Lauren and an inconsistency by herself. She didn’t use the chance to possibly demolish Larken or at least use this example in-depth, so I will do it here in short.

Exchange the boy with a dog. So, the dog is in Larkens neighbor pool, cannot come out and will drown in the next hours. The neighbor hates dogs and Larkens dog especially. He comes out with a gun, refuses Larken to access his premises and also wants to let the dog drown (hours long).

So, we have in law and judicial decisions the concept of appropriateness and denial of assistance. Denying help for the dog and not letting a non-threatening Larken the possibility to rescue his dog would be inappropriate. Appropriate would be a compensation for the nuisance and possible damages by the dog (and Larken).

I point that out, because conflict resolution and contractual law emerge as well as security providers through the market. The NAP is not everything when you regard the right to live as a natural right for human beings. That doesn’t make the NAP not very helpful as a guideline for free human beings though.

6 Market approach. What people come up with

So, as you may have recognized, my main focus is on the individuals, the people, the market and not the ominous entity state. This is also how I wish to conclude with the last chapters.

An example outside the topic: In one of my posts I wrote, how pewdiepie argued concerning the upload-filters by the new EU directive, that people will distort a picture before uploading in a way that it looks like the original but isn’t - as they’ve already done with audio before. Such solutions appear (the market provides), concerning the obstacles laid in our ways by governmental regulators.

6.1 How Lauren saw, experienced and reported it (market reactions/solutions) all

Security is an elastic variable and when people see their surrounding world become more and more unsafe, they take measures.

Lauren reported in Farmlands and videos around it how people put up fences, hide guns below their pillows, lock their doors around their premises and inside their houses several times.
She showed people using WhatsApp groups for the purpose of helping out and warn of criminal activity.
She showed the actual preparation for a civil (race based) war of the South African group Suidlanders.
She showed us Orania.
South Africa has made headlines that the private security forces have grown so much that they have more men-power than the army.[2]

6.2 Examples from Germany

Somewhere I stumbled upon an article where a police man was saying people are taking more and more anti-burglary measures. A bicycle-company in Amsterdam is offering bringing stolen bicycles back (guarantees it or a new), using their tracking service. Aware people accompany their children. I mean, you can imagine yourself what people are doing when crime’s up!
Interest in martial arts as well as weaponry, so far pepper spray weaponry or similar (for information for Germans look for example here https://steemit.com/deutsch/@carolinmatthie/schreckschusswaffen-fuehren-meine-5-goldenen-regeln) has grown.
The 120db campaign was after all about a customary alarm.

6.3 Conclusion and the real pity about libertarians and the debate

Basically you could read my conclusion already in 4.

The real pity is how much energy was wasted about this and similar debates amongst libertarians (see also very last sentence).

The real pity is that at the emergence of the crisis we didn’t talk endlessly about how

• on one hand the states themselves and people using the state architecture for their own mischievous purposes (e.g. Soros) are using it to engineer this crisis, perpetrating and allowing murder and robbery and (imo far more important)
• on the other hand focus on what we individually could do, how people could organize themselves and what the market could deliver.
  Even (non-libertarian) Sergeant Meinungsfrei was in the talk with Hyperion (@Hyperionlebt) (in German[3]) more helpful than libertarians in pointing out a tiny bit of a solution on an individual basis. Meaning what I and nearly everyone else can actually do and achieve in his own life, self-defense.

We are talking about cryptos as a new and better form of (fiat) money, why shouldn’t we talk about market offered security services? Their useful aspects and shortcomings. Maybe found one yourself with the help of people knowledgeable in self-defense and deescalation, e.g. martial arts teachers, Krav Maga groups (example in Australia: Avi Yemini).

For example, there was also talk about militias in several German cities and Switzerland. I think libertarians could reason that militias are probably a worse solution then forming a profit-oriented private security company. Militias are less likely to instill the service to costumers (and potential costumers) idea in themselves and to constantly work towards self-improvement as well as more likely to feel and act like they are the new boss in town and dissipate abruptly due to strain and lack of reward.

Sicher ohne Staat https://www.amazon.de/exec/obidos/ASIN/197340124X/wwwoliverjani-21 (sadly only as an e-book on amazon in German so far) by Oliver Janich (@oliver-janich) is talking about this subject of security/safety without the state (this is what translates the title too). So, his written work goes in this direction. (I am not, for example, talking about his video concerning unblogds question at Anarchapulco.)

There are several platforms to organize yourself in your neighborhoods, be it myneighborhood.com, helpyourneighbor.com, nebenan.de or any other. Derrick Broze is working in this realm with his concept of freedom cells. (Peter Müller from freiwilligfrei in his private life in Germany as well.[4])

Maybe built a company which uses Telegram-groups like the mentioned WhatsApp groups in South Africa (6.1) for an alarm in need with location (for neighbors, families, friends, or people inside the network which are in the surrounding area) and market an easy to use button-like tool for only this alarm purpose for old people who don’t use the internet in any way. Old people are more likely to fall and seriously injure themselves, so it could be about more than crime. Build a helpful addition to the security and medical+care market, both highly distorted by state infrastructure.

A thing worthwhile talking about, don’t you think so?
And, maybe, if you are knowledgeable and passionate about a niche, found an enterprise yourself. Always remind people that markets (people voluntarily interacting with each other) provide better solutions than the state.
After all, that’s a lot/all was is Bitnation about. This is a lot what the blockchain enables (e.g. smart contracts). Make notaries superfluous. Sorry, I digressed!

Services by companies like Telegram which mock the state and its surveillance apparatus[6].

6.4 Nourish acts of resistance and spirit of rebellion against the state infrastructure

I mentioned it already at some point, nourish the spirit of resistance toward the state and support resistance against the state in every way. Resistance against race wars, culture wars, gender wars. Against the surveillance state and institutionalized theft. Let’s show the hypocrisy and evilness and withdraw our lifeblood and capital from the state, provide solutions towards more personal liberty (e.g. staatenlos.ch).

Missions like Defend Europe and the alpine missions by GI which Lauren supported, had at least a piece of rebellious spirit against the state and the spirit of taking matters into our hands, not helplessly begging state representatives for everything.
So do the Ramstein protests to a even lesser extent. If this is the first and only tiny bit of rebellious spirit against the rulers, then nourishing this is helpful imo.
The protests in Germany doesn’t look like in South Korea[5] where people apparently put up with a lot less, but this is what we have to start working with. I find „Merkel muss weg“ (Merkel must go) pretty worthless, „Widerstand“ (resistance) is decent, using the hunger games sign[5] (happened in South Korea) or other messages from movies or with resemblance to historical acts of peaceful as possible and successful rebellion would be an improvement.

A tax boycott in the numbers (up to 5 million people refuse according to some sources) of the GEZ boycott (German state media fees) would be a tough task to work on, but one severely hampering the state theft racket. Of course at the same time addressing the responsibility and possibility which comes with an accompanying likely decline and cut-down of state „services“.

7. In the future. Secession, state collapse, Orania and the FSP.

I addressed this already in 5.2. We need to have visions, imaginings, how to evolve into and how to build a free private property society. People in organizations which considerably influenced the Arab springs and the color revolutions had a plan for the coming power vacuum in mind. So had the people who established Orania[7].

So need we, for using a situation of state collapse, a financial system collapse. A vacuum of power provides a great opportunity. People prepared will know what to do and people will tend to people who are prepared, have solutions and a vision. Though the FSP (free state project) in New Hampshire exists, I, from afar, don’t see it concretely envisioning and working towards a secession and everything that will have to come with such a secession and detachment of the state structure. I could be wrong though.

Although we can see the (small) success of Orania, we can also see its limitations. It obviously didn’t develop into the far larger community striven for, named Volkstaat. So we can learn from it and make improvements.
Maybe this was a good thing though. A state may have developed, because of people lusting for power and people not understanding the harmfulness of a state structure.

For German readers, I mention again „Praxeologie für Ordnung und Sezession“ von Norbert Lennartz (Buch am Ende des Auszugs als pdf): https://www.misesde.org/?p=12304. The crucial parts can also be found in a playlist read here, (imo) especially in the 3rd video: https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=idU2QOFemL4&list=PLxln64J5dIZUiemz5bEZAQKZ5ywmAbWyU

8. In the future. Another solution? Free private cities.

You could already see the influence people like Hoppe, Janich or Heuermann (staatenlos.ch, flag theory, but I don’t want do digress again) had on me. So, another market approach like Bitnation (Tarkowski Tempelhof, Vollstädt) which makes hopeful for a free (private property) society, is free private cities, passionately represented by Titus Gebel. You can find an article about the idea here: https://steemit.com/voluntaryism/@startupsocieties/free-private-cities-the-future-of-governance-is-private-by-titus-gebel and Germans can watch a video by @grossefreiheittv with him about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=Ross6IXW-r8.

9. Strawman, analogy, last sentence

This whole debate: Are you for open (state) borders or not? feels like a strawman question to me.
It’s like asking: Are you for a speed limit on the Autobahn or not?
Neither, I am for a free private property society and in such a society enterprises provide offers and costumers choose offers, including how streets are accessed and used.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/world/europe/world-food-program-syrian-aid.html German: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/syrien-fluechtlinge-uno-streicht-nahrungsmittelhilfe-a-1006043.html (both sources relatively arbitrarily chosen)
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=RD9OtrH1jTQ
S.Africa crime fears feed private security boom AFP 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=vx-lRV3p3PY
Bigger than the army South Africa s private security forces CNN 2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=TufZVbhUkkI
Private security firms protecting against car jacking in South Africa, Unreported World 2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=ygi310QdDcw
Jeff Berwick and Luke Rudkowski in Somalia
[3]https://steemit.com/deutsch/@hyperionlebt/31ul3f5k
[4](in German) https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=veOHjff2WwA (3:06)
[5]https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=r_VLWeIgOlA
South Koreans are great at protesting
https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=FrAcrBc2n9c
South Korean protests (seoul 2016.11.12 )
https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=aWPWHU8x6kE
The Hunger Games: District 11 Riot Scene (HD)
[6](in German) https://www.nzz.ch/wirtschaft/telegram-gruender-durow-will-die-geschichte-besiegen-ld.1378493
[7]https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=mix0RGvf1aY
Orania a Safe Haven in South Africa | President Carel Boshoff