“All men dream but not equally.  Those that dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that is was vanity; but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dream with open eyes to make it possible.”

– T.E. Lawrence

I maintain a catalog of inspirational speeches and they speak to me like the epochal union of literature in music and literature in opera or the powerful poems that set fire to our hearts. I love great speeches and have a collection of some of my favorites whether Shakespeare’s Henry V homage to the “band of brothers” or Charlie Chaplain’s speech or Churchill’s magisterial speech condemning the Amritsar massacre in India in 1919 which may very well have paved the way tangentially for the liberation of Eire from the English manacle in 1922. It may have been Churchill’s most masterful speech.

John Brown’s short but powerful and poignant speech is one of the finest in English letters and helped to set the world on fire in the worst way when instead of liberating the slave, the Lincolnian war on Southern secession put every human in the tax jurisdiction known as the USA in shackles that have grown heavier and more oppressive by the decade since. I don’t hold John Brown personally accountable for the tragic conflict from 1861-65 in the USA. Like all history, the causes and effects and the eddying concourses from many sources that joined to effect those very things make a complex tapestry especially in retrospect and professional hindsight.

John Brown fought a fundamentally different fight from the abolitionist campaigns of the likes of Garrison and Douglass. John Brown took a violent fight to an evil so great in his mind that all his campaigns against the slave power were justified. He was that most dangerous man that TE Lawrence spoke of: a visionary who dreamed during the day. Hence, the following speech by John Brown at his trial before he was hanged. Brown was the kind of man you simply don’t find in humanity today. Many would applaud his absence but I would think more men like Brown would inspire the changes that need to be made now. Brown was neither a military genius nor a competent rabble-rouser who could inspire others to follow his lead and actually spark the change.


Barbed_wire.svg.hiBack in February, I was invited to speak at the Liberty Forum sponsored by the Free State Project in NH. I did this talk and two more on Zero Government and the Police State USSA respectively, I will post these once production and publishing is complete by LF. I will be speaking at PorcFest in June. I will be giving three speeches and a seminar on Irregular Warfare.

Here is the video of my first speech.

I Am Simon Jester

I spend considerable time talking about non-violent resistance and its utility in the coming Endarkenment in the USSA. My experience in the Legions during most of my adult life gave me significant insight on the mechanics and landscape of violent resistance and rebellion. I have a good idea of what works and what doesn’t. America is not a free country and the entire legal system is rigged against freedom of expression when it comes to discussing defensive mechanisms and the dominant ecology of the SLAVFOR (as opposed to FREEFOR) so that information remains safely tucked in my skull until the glass needs to be broken during the inevitable national emergencies the future holds for all of us.

Prepare, steel your mind for the coming unpleasantness and realize it is not a matter of if but when the political ruler’s Janissaries will be pounding on your door or stealing you in the middle of the night. SLAVFOR will not stop until their Orwellian vision is fulfilled.

You may not be interested in they way they work or stick your head in the sand but they are paying very close attention to you through the vacuuming of every conceivable electronic transaction including this screed you are reading right now. They use association matrices to tip off who and how humans will be targeted.

It all comes down to the decision you make on the price of your obedience and what you are willing to pay to stand on your refusal.

John has a long mustache and the chair is against the wall sooner than you think.

Notes in the Margin:I continue to recover from my heart attack in April but am now nearly 100% recovered from that surprise pre-extinction event. I take very good care of myself but in this case, I lost the genetic lottery which is a predictor for 50-80% of your physical ailments. I have just completed chapter 10 of my novel (roughly one third complete) called The Cancer Club which goes to the editor in September. The book is about a cranky group of widowers with terminal diseases who decide to make their deaths a bit more festive to strike a blow against leviathan. -BB

Resist. Rinse. Repeat.

“The police cannot protect the citizen at this stage of our development, and they cannot even protect themselves in many cases. It is up to the private citizen to protect himself and his family, and this is not only acceptable, but mandatory.”

– COL Jeff Cooper

Befehl ist befehl means orders are orders which is the usual explanation given for barbaric behavior by Nazis on trial after WWII. The malefactors were hanged who attempted this defense yet this quaint notion is the bedrock of all US police behavior and explanation for its excess.

Officer safety is part of the evil trifecta that enables much of the police violence and I have taken all these things to task in past essays, so I won’t bore you with the details. The remaining legs in this are police unions and qualified immunity, which many in the commentariat have handled with alacrity.

It bears repeating, absent police forces, no political bad actor can deny one freedom or erase any liberty from any individual or group. The police exist to serve and protect their political rulers no matter how much they naysay to the contrary. The aforementioned trifecta is the deal with the devil to ensure that the police have a license to kill and guarantee all investigations are conducted by themselves on themselves. Imagine how the economically illiterate bedwetters on the left would scream if corporations were left to investigate their own supposed transgressions. This is why police, robed government employees and their sycophants in the entire legal system are immune to justice, a moral compass and restitution to victims of the wretched system in place in the USSA.

National Socialism died in Germany in 1946 at the Nuremberg trials but the key components of the trials that enraged so many humans planet-wide at the conclusion of the War to Save Josef Stalin was the insistence of both low and high ranking Nazis alike that they bore no responsibility for their actions because they were merely following orders. The original trials started in 1946 but were followed by other trials:

All of these Allied legal trials very specifically targeted the barbaric behavior of the Nazis while excusing any such behavior of the Allies such as the gruesome and murderous strategic bombing campaigns world wide by the Allies. The duplicity and wink and nod to Soviet crimes was especially nauseating but at least the Germans were held to account in spite of the double standard imposed by the West.


Publisher’s Note: Jim Klein wrote this short but pithy response to this essay published on STHF: https://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/the-reason-why-there-will-be-a-second-american-civil-war-american-citizens-are-soon-to-become-an-endangered-species_05012014. I highly recommend SHTF as a website source. Jim is the Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at zerogov.com and the senior graybeard. Enjoy. -BB

Obama has almost nothing to do with any of this.  How could he…he’s got almost nothing to do with anything.  You could say he’s single-handedly the Commander-in-Chief, and so theoretically has sole control over the strongest military in the world, but even that doesn’t amount to so much these days, for the reasons the author noted.  Besides, that guy could no more command a military than I could design a space shuttle.

We’re here because virtually everyone wants us to be here.  If you took a sincere vote door-to-door, nearly every person would say, “I don’t really want this and I know there’s some deep problem, but the idea of doing anything differently is so overwhelming and frightening, that I choose to stay the course.”

That’s it, isn’t it?  As uncomfortable as people are, they’re more afraid of what it could be otherwise.  That’s what keeps them going.  That’s what happens when you’re emotionally driven—the fear is greater than the want.

What gets me is the plain denial.  It’s no secret what Tyranny is, and it’s no secret to where it leads.  Always.  No exceptions.  How could it not?  Even if we had no evidence, the logic of it is plainly clear…Tyranny can’t stop, for then at some point it would be defeated.  It must grow.  Since the essence of Tyranny is to incentivize thuggery–thuggery on behalf of the State where it gets removed from Individual Responsibility–how could it not continue to grow?  What in the world would cause it to stop?

That’s the logic of it.  It stands on its own, but unsurprisingly the evidence supports the logic 100%.  Evidence always will, when the logic is tight.  Correspondence, we might call it.

So most everyone knows where this goes, and everyone even knows that the next time is inevitably worse than the last time.  We can pull data point after data point to demonstrate in plain reality what has happened.  We know about the lack of production, we know about the unfunded liabilities, we know that there is an immense force sucking away every drop of production that’s left, into the service of the “Public.”  We know who does the actual sucking and what they actually do with that wealth; we know about the contracts and the subsidies and the Free Shit Army and the retirees and on and on and on.  It never ends with places to distribute the loot.  Even now, they’re working on ever more, from immigration to more war on terrorism, to starting WWIII.  Anything to keep the Machine ever-growing.

But none of that matters to people.  What matters is what they feel, and what they feel is terror…the kind of terror that freezes you into inaction.  Terror, terrorism, Tyranny…it’s all the same; it’s a way to incapacitate free-willed thinking humans.  It’s done by denying the “thinking” and enhancing the “feeling.”  And by doing that, it causes otherwise rational people to ignore what they know and go with what they feel instead.

I think that for an organism that has a mind capable of abstracting the nature of the reality in which it finds itself, that’s a huge error…one that can only possibly, at some point in time, lead to the death of that organism.  Seems to me that the choice amounts to, “Wake the fuck up and do something about it,” or “Ignore the facts and try to pass the time feeling as comfortable as possible, and wait to see how death will come.”

Publisher’s Note:   I welcome Travis’ energetic and scintillating attempt to refine the definitions of the stateless society he and I are trying to make a concrete idea for humanity. I use the term abolitionist now but he makes a string case for his choice. Enjoy. -BB

I have been thinking about the meaning of these words and of their reaction in society lately. There seems to me to be a very large majority of people who have a negative connotation to two of them and not so much knowledge of the last. So it is here that I will begin.

What Anarchy is and what it is not.

The vast majority of the public will react negatively to the use of the word anarchy. Through false description and definition imposed on them through government run schools and reinforced by media and social entertainment they have been lead to believe that only bad things could happen in a world with no government. Thunder Dome would become reality in their minds. Would it really though, would they allow that to happen in their presence, would everyone just go around murdering and looting?

“Anarchy is all around us. Without it, our world would fall apart. All progress is due to it. All order extends from it. All blessed things that rise above the state of nature are owed to it. The human race thrives only because of the lack of control, not because of it. I’m saying that we need ever more absence of control to make the world a more beautiful place. It is a paradox that we must forever explain.”

Jeffrey Tucker

It is generally described to be a world with no government. The term goes deeper than that though. It leaves a world with no central government and not without rules. Rules would still be in effect throughout the world, it would only be the enforcement of those rules that would change. Webster defines Anarchy in the typical false way as its main definition (: a situation of confusion and wild behavior in which the people in a country, group, organization, etc., are not controlled by rules or laws). This is the definition that most people are taught as the truth but further definitions by the same source state (a: absence of government //b: a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority//c: a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government) These are definitions that most self-proclaimed anarchist would somewhat agree upon.

The automatic connotation of Anarchy being a bad thing is something we must overcome. The changing of definitions is something that must be done through actions rather than words. So how do we expand the idea of peaceful anarchy and destroy a negative connotation to the word? To be sure this is a monumental task and one that would require the utmost care in its expansion. The idea that there are no rulers but rules still remain isn’t an easy sell for most people. The idea of self-reliance and self-control frightens people, and it should. They have lived in complete servitude to a government for too long. By relying on an outside entity to control the personal and economical habits they have castrated themselves from the ideas of freedom, free will, free choice, personal responsibility, and self- sufficiency.

Anarchy doesn’t have to mean the things that it is believed to mean now, and it will take some real positive work to bring a positive thought to the word. Through peaceful cooperation and discovering new ways to subvert the power of the state in our everyday lives we can bring the world to anarchy and not be a fearful thing.

Are you libertarian enough?

Within libertarianism there seems to be a litmus test that some will use to determine ones placement in the vast collection of the term. It is truly a broad term and a very much inclusive term and as such most people have a hard time defining it or determining their place within it. Libertarians believe for the most part in smaller government, some believe in constitutional government some do not. The term generally includes both Voluntarists and Anarchists in the definition, though there is some debate on that in my mind as well as others. But I like to leave that topic to self-discovery and the subjective view of the issue. The degree of your libertarianism is of much debate and discussion among other self-described libertarians and the actions and theory that you portray has a great deal to do with how you are perceived.

Some will say that certain traits within libertarianism are dangerous to modern life; Non-intervention foreign policies, pro-choice on abortion, ridding the country of drug laws and allowing uninhibited use of hard drugs, open borders. Those are the types of issues most Neo- Conservatives and Neo-Liberals will vehemently attack with illogical fallacies and hyper sensitive emotional responses. Now everyone is entitled to their opinions, I would have to recommend further education in these issues to gain a better understanding of the positions held by Libertarians.

Libertarianism is popular, and this can be a bad thing. Why do I say this? It has been increasingly apparent that some people will do whatever it takes to grasp or remain in power, even so much as to pretend to hold beliefs they certainly do not. It doesn’t take much looking to see the false prophets of the liberty movement and the libertarian creed. Now the Libertarian I am talking about is the philosophy, not the party. The party is just a vehicle for those who hold the philosophy, and of course those that falsify their claim to it.

Leaning libertarian. This is one of those terms that make no sense to me at all. I just don’t see how anyone can lean in the direction of philosophy but not accept it or live by it. I feel that those that claim to be “leaning” are those that are merely using the followers to their own self gain, what that gain may be is different among people, but the use of the followers remains the same.

I believe in a Voluntary Society.

What is Voluntarism? It is the belief that all actions of individuals should be free from coercion or force, they should be voluntary. The creed of Voluntarism is to allow all voluntary means so long as they do not interfere or impede on the rights of others and so long as the actions are not forced or coerced in any way.

Voluntarism does allow for governments to be formed but they may not touch or try to overtake those that reject their influence or control. This is a hard concept for many. True voluntarism should not prohibit those that wish to be governed to their choice. Those that wish to be governed and those they elect or choose to be the governors should have no say over the lives, property or actions of those that choose to live outside of that governance. Someone told me once that this is just a copout, an easy way to not address the issue, but I say this, if everyone chose to define themselves and their philosophy around the voluntary acts of individuals we would see the downfall of most forms of political control and governments around the world, with no need to say that these aspirations are anarchistic at all, and well beyond the goals of most libertarians.

So why say Voluntarism instead of Anarchy or Libertarianism?

From prior experience using all of these words I have found the greatest ability to progress the ideas and message of individual liberty by not using the word Anarchy for the simple reason as it invokes an automatic negative thought in the minds of the masses. The same is true of the word Libertarian. In the minds of Democrats and Republicans alike there is a negative connotation associated with the word. To be able to speak to those who hold these feelings against these words or labels we must move past the blockade of the definitions, we must find another route.

By choosing to use the word Voluntaryist rather than Anarchist or Libertarian it lends the speaker the chance to express the ideas without the over shadowing of the connotations of the latter two words. This is one way that we can progress conversation with others on like-minded goals or solutions to current problems. This is how we can influence the progress to goals and see real change in the power structures around the world.

Twitter: @patriotpapers



Publisher’s Note: It appears my notoriety as an anti-government zealot has come to the attention of the rulers and they use both me and my site as an exemplar of non-violent anti-government writing and speaking. I may be the subject of a number of classes for the government’s cop-roach enforcers at all levels. If this turns out to be the case, I wear the badge proudly and hope against hope that some of the mandarins who read my screeds discover a burr in their intellectual saddle or the tiniest seedling of doubt planted in their minds on the wrong-headedness of maintaining and expanding totalitarianism on the North American continent much less the collectivist impulse that makes America an armed and dangerous agent of the state disease planet-wide.

Zero government is not a wild-eyed notion of fantasy. A world without rulers but abundant with rules in a voluntary society riffs off human nature in a far more effective and moral way than any self-professed statist government. The true fantasists are the long train of psycho- and sociopathic rulers and their collaborators who insist that initiated violence and the creation of prison states is the only proper way to organize society and serve humanity. Throughout the ages, from the Stoics to Wilberforce to the abolitionists and the modern abolitionist movement in small pockets of humanity, the notion has been both simple and elegant: how can a man be free if his choices of not harming others ultimately puts him in jail or worse? It is no harder than that.

The world is at a tipping point where the forces of statist darkness are gathering strength while the brotherhood without banners fights a constant rearguard action as it retreats into insignificance in the face of totalitarian ambition.

Your choice is clear: either you are a slaver or not. -BB

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”

-Lysander Spooner


Slavery was codified in the founding documents of America in deeply flawed and tyrannical instrument called the Constitution. The abolitionist spirit in America as exemplified by Garrison and Douglass were a tremendous boon to awakening Americans to the cause but it never took despite the alleged reasons for the War of Northern Aggression being fought to free the slaves which became a cynical Lincolnian calculus to boost flagging efforts to get the North behind the eradication of the South.

The Constitution simply guaranteed the “peculiar institution” in the US and the addition of the Fugitive Slave Act in 1850 weaponized the Federal government’s ability to maintain the institution of chattel slavery. The post-war amendments abandoning slavery were nice window-dressing but simply drove the overt impulse to chattel ownership underground into a more under-handed and devious form of slavery to make the proceeds from servitude more palatable to the masses and the twentieth century would provide the progressives and collectivists with the tools they would need to make slavery more profitable for the rulers than they ever imagined.

There are a number of markers of true freedom but the most telling is the ability to opt-out of the chained condition once harnessed. So what is slavery by definition?

The Oxford English Dictionary (American) put it thus: A person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them. If you doubt in modern America, you are not a slave, be advised you are delusional.

The US government owns you in so many ways, you haven’t a shred of self-determination short of suicide. Many in the commentariat to include myself have detailed ad nauseum the tremendous tax burden in the US for producers, the leasing of employees by the Federal government to employers at a terrific burden to the efficacy and virtue of any above-ground American business and the raft of regulations and rules that make every American a felon in their day to day life. If you run a business and have not been paralyzed from the neck up in a skiing accident and become a collectivist, the truth is crystal clear. If you are simply a salaryman, one look at your tax liabilities once “paid” should further clarify your status as a slave.

After years of government schooling, I am still investing thousands of hours to deprogram myself from the nonsense and dig myself out of the epistemological hole that the entire wretched system is designed to bury us. Civics is nothing more than a clever moniker for government obedience training. A system that celebrates slavery as freedom and peace as war in a war that would embarrass both Huxley and Orwell.


Publisher’s Note: This guest post draws on a guerrilla tactic known as social trolling to diminish and destroy government psychological operations directed against captured populations whether a result of invasion or the occupation of land masses by the usual  suspects to organize and regulate tax cattle farms. Make no mistake that governments are merely the vampire writ large and various defenses need to be erected to disorient and eventually disrupt their ability to initiate and use violence to organize society. While I don’t agree with everything, his thesis is thought-provoking and gets people pointed in the right direction. -BB

Events in America occur so rapidly that to believe any one person can ever find the full truth about any single event is truly laughable.  We strive, daily, to maintain control of our surroundings; perceived knowledge gleaned from the various sources at our disposal helps us to believe that we possess control of ourselves and the environment we live in.  Are we concerned enough, or perhaps paranoid enough, however, to read through the information that is fed to us in search of a motive?  While I certainly do not promote paranoia or distrust of anyone, I do promote the premise that at this point in history we are being deliberately misled.  I suggest we place less credibility and importance in the social messages presented by media until we can reestablish our own beliefs and our own reality as a people of this nation.  We can accomplish this by examining how media serves to enrage and divide an otherwise cohesive country, taking an honest look at what is happening while we center ourselves around public distractions, discussing traditional attempts to change our direction and how they can be co-opted by division, considering methods of change that have shown signs of success, how we can modify these methods to specifically target the problem of a divisionary message, and what these efforts might accomplish in the larger scale of American social practice.

Division amongst the American people serves to keep us at odds with each other while fear ensures that we stay dependent on our government.  John Avlon at The Daily Beast wrote, “As news of a new ‘credible’ threat swept across the nation on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, Americans were abruptly reminded that terrorism is always one bad day away from being issue No. 1.”  Messages of terrorism plots both overseas and at home in the states are a staple of daily news reports.  We are constantly reminded that the next “bad guy” is just around the corner.  Meanwhile, the Trayvon Martin controversy, built in part by a month long media feeding frenzy that has yet to completely subside, set a new standard for building tension among races. If we look closely at our news and media, we will notice that every issue presented has two sides, and two sides only.  It has always been black or white, liberal or conservative, terrorist or citizen, consumer or dangerous individual, good guys or bad guys.  We notice that in the 2012 elections Dr. Ron Paul chose to forego the libertarian title in favor of the republican banner to receive any notice at all.  In the political and social scheme of modern day America independent parties and mindsets that step outside of the carefully erected parameters quickly become silenced.

Meanwhile, as the media presents us two different cages which we may inhabit, outside of the standard press we discover that an incomplete list, found at Wikipedia, with 134 total citations, displays over 63 cases of police brutality between 2001 and 2011 that have gone unreported and unemphasized.  If we follow independent news sources we discover that, on average, a new case of police brutality or a violation of constitutional rights is occurring on a regular, almost daily, basis.  While it would be remiss to state that these cases receive no coverage, most people can agree that they do not receive the same attention as “The Royal Wedding in 2011,” for example.  Most would argue that they should receive equal if not more coverage than such frivolous events.  More startling yet is the signing of the National Defense Authorization Act that occurred under cloak of night on December 31st 2011. “It allocates funding for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but also includes “counter-terrorism” provisions which would allow the military to detain anyone on US soil indefinitely, without needing to guarantee a trial,” wrote one contributor at The Open Globe. During the first week of 2012 we may have heard a few talking heads on the radio voice their disgust regarding the bill that finally legalized indefinite detention sans trial or lawyer, but if we did it was brief.  The true coverage came from independent news sources which were mostly comprised of online articles and YouTube videos.  By January 17th 2012, the general public was content to go about their lives as displayed by Thetvaddict.com, which listed NCIS, Last Man Standing, and Glee as the top rated television programs for that day.  What is the point in all this? When our media wants us to pay attention to an issue, it is everywhere.  Real issues that actually affect us as a people are glossed over summarily.

Some people, however, observe issues in our society and political system and strive to do something about them.  We have all paid witness to, through one media or another, concerned citizens’ attempts to “Wake people up” or “Change things”.  These attempts usually come on the heels of some perception gained from mainstream media.  These perceptions may include our party based political system, race tensions, religion, or any of the other myriad conceptualized “Issues” gripping our times.  We have all seen how protests have gained attention only to fall unnoticed in their due time, how verbal disagreements have led to violence thus creating  new issues, and how racial tensions serve to further divide us as people.  It seems that our attempts to work within the box to solve our nation’s problems are ultimately futile, if not destructive.  A great example is found in the firestorm of the “Occupy Movement” in 2011.  Michael Calderone at The Huffington Post wrote in his article aptly titled, “EXCERPT – OCCUPY: Why It Started. Who’s Behind It. What’s Next.”, “Occupy Wall Street’s amorphous, seemingly leaderless, and non-partisan movement presented unique challenges for journalists experienced in covering protests with clear demands and cable talking heads accustomed to neatly categorizing dissent as either good or bad for one political party or the other.”  What happened next was only to be expected.  We see the divisionary tactics of the media coming a mile away, and do nothing to hedge against being discredited.  What started as a unified people coming together, regardless of political boundaries, eventually developed into a left-wing jubilee, complete with singing hippies and “Down with capitalism!” workshops.  While we strive so hard to overcome division and make a difference in our country, our efforts eventually end in being co-opted and dismantled.

Other forms of protest and activism seem to have taken a more significant turn.  We begin to edge closer to what I feel is the ultimate solution to ineffective activism when we analyze the anomalous “Anonymous.”  Emil Protalinsky at ZDNet.com points out that vote by vote, the Anonymous collective was voted TIME Magazine’s most influential person for 2012.  Anonymous was the greatest supporter of if not among the arbitrators of the Occupy Wall St. Movement.  How then, are they so influential with their greatest accomplishment torn asunder by the repetitious efforts of divisionary media?  We can answer this question by looking closely at their techniques.  In viewing any of hundreds of YouTube videos or “Pastebins” issued by the hacker collective, one message is clear: Anonymous is leaderless, it is decentralized, it has no specific message, and no specific agenda.  When the media failed to categorize the collective into a political or social group, they initiated a vilification campaign.  Upon that initiative, Anonymous launched a collective effort to destroy corruption and undo censorship.  Within weeks we saw corrupt security firms’ sites defaced and their records published.  We saw companies like Sony and MFGlobal as well as firms like the FBI having their network presence effectively diminished in light of censorship and unconstitutional investigation.

In 2011, at the apex of their hacktivist effort we saw “Operation Syria” which was the first time we had seen an activist group of any kind take on an entire government.  The following was written by an anonymous poster on a Wikipedia page designed to display a timeline of the group Anonymous’s accomplishments: “In early August, Anonymous hacked the Syrian Defense Ministry website and replaced it with a vector image of the pre-Ba’athist flag, a symbol of the pro-democracy movement in the country, as well as a message supporting the 2011 Syrian uprising and calling on members of the Syrian Army to defect to protect protesters.”  We can look at groups like Anonymous and acknowledge their accomplishments.  We can believe in what they do or we can dispute their efforts as being morally wrong; they do not care either way.  Of this I am assured.  What then, can we learn from them if we choose to take on efforts of our own?  If we look at their beginnings, it becomes clear that everything started for this group on the internet and spread henceforth.  Their efforts have always been anchored in aggravation, shock humor or “lulz”, intentional irritation with the end goal resting on enlightenment, or in short, trolling.

According to Paul Gil, who writes for About.com, “An internet ‘troll’ is an abusive and obnoxious user who promotes hate and disharmony in online communities.”  That is an abrasive assessment to be certain, though there is some truth to it.  While many communities find trolling to be an offensive activity that disrupts their otherwise peaceful online encounters, not all trolling is enacted with those purposes in mind.  In many cases trolling will occur with the intention to help people come to conclusions on their own regarding various moral, religious, or political opinions.  Generally, when this happens the troll in question will set out with that goal in mind and will search until he has found an environment that is conducive to his “lessons”.  Though other users will almost always be offended and angered in the process, if they think about something they might have not thought of without the trolls intervention, then the troll has done his job.  The chance of a troll on a website having any sense of morality to his purpose is probably fifty-fifty, but in this modern day, when it seems that the whole world is up in arms with a message to convey, the chances are increasing.  Jared Newman from TIME Techland (a subsidiary of TIME Magazine’s online site) reports that “Being obnoxious on the Internet may soon cease to be a fundamental right in Arizona, where lawmakers approved a measure that effectively makes trolling illegal.”  With this measure setting a precedent in Arizona, and the group Anonymous, being effectively hunted down and arrested by our own FBI, we can make the assumption clearly that trolling and online activism have been raising some eyebrows and stirring the social-political pot.

We know that trolling works and we decide to follow the guidelines that took a group of hackers to international levels of effectiveness, where do we go next?  To look at it simply, I recommend we do just what Anonymous did: take it to the streets.  What does that mean exactly?  Shortly after several successful online campaigns, Anonymous helped organize Occupy Wall Street.  They stepped out from behind their computers, donned “Guy Fawkes” masks, and marched into the streets to stand up for what they believed in.  They committed to traditional protests and demonstrations.  We have shown already how the traditional protest no longer works: it becomes divided and cast into obscurity.  Had they followed their proven online tactics into the public and physical arena, I would not be writing about this topic and “Social Trolling” would be a household name.

Social Trolling, as recommended by this writer, is the act of using the divisive and frightening messages presented to us by our media, and applying it aggressively to the public, in a way that will dull the messages impact thus diminishing the effects of division and fear.  This is not a new concept.  Linda Kiltz with ICMA Publications referred to flash mobs when she wrote, “Generally, flash mobs are groups of people who congregate in public spaces to carry out incongruous acts and leave after a brief period of time.  We have seen such groups on YouTube and television advertisements doing everything from dancing and singing, to freezing in place and chirping like birds.” Traditional protests are also a form of social trolling, though we are familiar, by now with the path they take.

When implemented correctly, social trolling should make people nervous without anyone approaching them.  It should offend people.  The best troll will do his work based off of that week’s news reports.  In 2010, a friend and I set to coughing and sneezing in a crowded gas station.  To the resentful looks of the patrons therein we responded only, “Damn swine flu!”  Exercised correctly, social trolling will lead to laughter, making new friends, and the broadened views of the masses.  Exercised incorrectly will land trolls in jail.  The beauty of the method is that, in the end, everyone involved should appreciate the other individual; the message to be delivered above all others is simple: “I love you because you are a human being, just like me.” This message in and of itself can complicate the masses quickly.  It is the most dangerous thing that someone can say at this place and time in history.  Even if we did away with the “trolling” aspect altogether and simply told people with whom we are unfamiliar that we loved them, the upset over time would be immeasurable.  The message is legitimate if we believe in the goodness of other people and have faith that division will dissolve when we remind them of our shared humanity.  If we choose not to love people or choose not to convey that message, then simply disturbing peoples’ sensibilities can be fun as well; at that point however, we diminish the effectiveness of the act considerably.

What could happen if this message got out?  What might take place if everyone decided that race, gender, sexual preference, religious preference, political affiliation, or potential to inflict harm did not matter?  Imagine if one day the new trend was to allow the nightly news to continue reporting its normal content but to take its messages with a grain of salt when it came time to make conclusions about other people.  The social landscape could be permanently altered.  Cornelius Holtorf wrote in his Museum International article “Ironic Heritage: overcoming divisions between communities through shared laughter about the past,” “In this situation, celebrating a non-existent common national heritage means celebrating the existing divisions within civil society that threaten social cohesions” in reference to an area in which a minority of residents are not native to said area.  I retain and submit that U.S. citizens want to love their fellow citizens.  It is not in the true nature of any person to automatically fear or hold suspicion for another human being.  Division and fear are taught.  Division and fear can be done away with.

We have looked at how fear and division is implemented in our country, what other events may be occurring that we could be paying more attention to, what others have tried and why it has or has not been effective, what methods have had success, how we can use these successful methods to specifically promote social cohesion, and what the effects might be if we were to succeed.  It has become common knowledge that our system is failing.  We have put too much trust in our leaders and forgotten about our fellow man.  In 2012, we can look at our country with fresh eyes and work, under the premise of love instead of hate and fear, towards rebuilding what we have lost.  We started as a nation of the people.  We recognized the power of unity.  Reclaiming that power is the only trick we have not tried.  It is the only method that will work.

Works Cited

Holtorf, Cornelius. “Ironic Heritage: Overcoming Divisions Between Communities Through
Shared Laughter About The Past.” Museum International 62.1/2 (2010): 91-95. Academic Search Premier. Web. 3 May 2012.

Kiltz, Linda. “Flash Mobs: The Newest Threat to Local Governments” ICMA Publications.
ICMA Publications, Dec. 2011. Web. 3 May 2012.

OpenGlobe. “Obama signs controversial NDAA bill into law” The Open Globe. The Open
Globe, 1 Jan. 2012. Web. 3 May 2012.

Newman, Jared. “Arizona Looks to Outlaw Internet Trolling” TIME Techland. TIME Magazine,
3 Apr. 2012 Web. 3 May 2012.

Anonymous. “List of Cases of Police Brutality in the United States” Wikipedia.
Wikipedia Foundation Inc., 5 Mar. 2012. Web. 3 May 2012.

theTVaddict. “TV Ratings: Tuesday January 17 2012 (Viewership Steady Amidst CBS Reruns)”
TheTVaddict.com. theTVaddict.com, 18 Jan. 2012. Web. 3 May 2012.

Protalinski, Emil. “Time Magazine readers name Anonymous ‘most influential person’” Zero
Day.  CBS Interactive, 18 Apr 2012. Web. 3 May 2012.

Anonymous. “Timeline of events associated with Anonymous” Wikipedia. Wikipedia
Foundation Inc., 17 Feb. 2012. Web. 3 May 2012.

Avlon, John. “Forty-Five Foiled Terror Plots Since 9/11”  The Daily Beast. Newsweek, 8 Sep.           2011. Web. 3 May 2012.

Calderone, Michael. “EXCERPT – OCCUPY: Why it Started. Who’s Behind It. What’s Next.”

The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, Inc, 11 Jan. 2012. Web. 3 May 2012.
Gil, Paul. “What is an Internet ‘Troll’? How Should I Deal With Trolls?” About.com.  About.com,  ND. Web. 3 May 2012.


“The tragedy of modern war is that the young men die fighting each other – instead of their real enemies back home in the capitals.”

-Edward Abbey

Question obedience and not authority, the rest will follow. As individual human beings, we come into the world naked and leave on a slab or in a coffee can in the same condition barring what was in the mind, heart and soul at the conclusion of the life lived. Volumes of books have been written on the life worth living and millions of solutions offered to live the good life or the examined life or the other life on and on. Some use philosophical or religious justification for their achievement or sloth.

Unfortunately, the world is filled with far more shirkers than workers and consistent misidentification and conflation of activity with productive work.

We live in a world dominated by a government supremacist mindset that impoverishes the imagination of the poor and elites alike. A world where the human has become so cowed by law, star stuck by regulation and strangled by taxation, it appears forward progress to the promise of our youth is stunted and nigh impossible.

Look around you. Are you acquainted with grown men who spend all their non-work (or is it activity?) hours in a masturbatory dalliance with electronic friends in an insipid game or bathed in the ghost-light of the glass teat for six or more hours every day? Do you have friends or family whose fascination with a sport or sports team is so morbid they cannot talk of anything else? Are friends or neighbors who can barely get out of their own way in a race to exceed their height by their girth through indiscipline, gluttony and simply bad eating decisions in your social circle?

Please remember that the men of today are nothing like the men of yesteryear. One can find modern conveniences and advancements in science and engineering to make for a marvelous new civilization. Right now, no other generation in the entire planetary history of humanity has more information been available horizontally and vertically at the disposal of every person alive. Ever.


The state calls its own violence ‘law,’ but that of the individual ‘crime’.”

~ Max Stirner

The state is driven by the notion that it can commit immoral acts to achieve moral ends. Absent terroristic styles of governance, it has no authority to exact the shaping of society it desires. Terrorism is the politically motivated threat or use of violence against innocents and non-combatants.

The government practices this in wartime and in times of peace. The basis of all forms of anything other than self-governance in shaping society by the state involves institutions of violence most moral human beings would find repugnant. Most decent men and women would no more beat a man into submission or shoot a dog in fear for their lives absent the very protection the political classes and their praetorians enjoys as special prerogatives. The causal everyday violence of statist employees whether armed or not is apparent everyday whether in your own personal encounters to the flood of news reports that show that the police are simply not in the business of being moral beings but wholly owned subsidiaries of evil political will.

I have written extensively on police violence and just finished a five part series on the growing murder culture of American policing and the tidal wave of reports substantiating the militaristic and occupation trend of cop behavior in America is well documented.

The US is an occupied nation by an alien totalitarian culture emanating from DC and its subsidiary political apparatchiks throughout the docile state units of the massive government parked in North America. The usual suspects in the media and the house totalitarian organs like the Washington Post and New York Times go out of their way to justify the enormous surge in police and government violence throughout the land.

“One would be hard-pressed to find one of the badged waddlers not retreating to the “following orders” shtick so chic among the constabulary in America. Much like patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, the excuse of simply following orders is the last refuge of the human refuse acting as police officers throughout America. They also enjoy snickering that they only enforce the law and don’t make it therefore excusing themselves from any moral judgment in executing immoral laws.


“Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

– Hanlon’s Razor

If government had a working axiom, it would be this: To pursue and defend mediocrity wherever it is found and to institute it where it is absent.

The larger a government, the more idiotic and destructive its behavior appears to both the casual and educated observer. Historical hindsight provides legions of examples of government not only doing stupid things daily and reinforcing failure but creating advance extinction events that spell their doom as they happily march to their own funeral.

One can suppose that a confirmation bias exist in its functionaries and bureaucrats that make them immune to common sense and inevitability. A large percentage of government officials and a little less so their apparatchiks peppering the thousands of agencies in the US seem oblivious to the sheer lack of efficacy and effectiveness in accomplishing anything they set out to do. A small percentage of those, larger among elected officials, are psychopaths and sociopaths whose very life trajectories demand the subordination of others through threats or actual violence; government legitimizes criminal violence in the minds of the actors and the half-witted supporters of government supremacism. The state is the world’s leading provider of rationales for using immoral means to achieve moral ends and every sober observer can see how that has ended. Whether the slow and sclerotic death of vital commerce systems like the Keystone Keynesian recipe for national economic seppuku so popular with the mandarins in DC or the naked economic illiteracy of the Keynesian cousin in Marxism, the results are the same. The formation of vast prison states where every human transaction is vertically and horizontally regulated through taxation, regulation and police violence.

Historically, the only liberation that occurred has been the death knells of these systems as they were riven by war, collapsed of their own contradictions, like the USSR or simply crushed every incentive through moronic regulation, excessive taxation and iatrogenic effect like the US and the EU.

The freed market has a severe disciplinary function that culls bad business and removes poor entrepreneurs; the price signals dictate who continues to purchase goods and service now and into the future. Bad business simply ceases to attract consumers who vote through purchase and the ineffective firm dries up and blows away to make way for a more effective competitor.

Governments don’t do that nor do they have the incentives to do. The state works on perverse incentives that collectivizes risks and privatizes reward to politically connected mechanisms. This is one of the reasons the franchise at the atomistic level makes zero rational sense in any meaningful way and why focused and targeted lobbying of elected interests and their tentacled regulatory agencies are hypersensitive to political fortunes and trade winds. In other words, the single vote cast by a human in an election in America has an extraordinarily low percentage of effectiveness while the focused purchasing of political influence through lobbying has tremendous benefits. One need only look at the money spent to win the crime family position in the White House to see the results. Obama and Romney each spent approximately one billion a piece to seize control of a potential budget exceeding 3.8 trillion dollars in acknowledged spending.  One can see the cold logic in spending that amount of money to gain control over the Federal purse strings and the huge violence apparatus it wields over the tax cattle known as citizens.

I employ the term acknowledged because the government clearly cooks the books as evidenced by scandal after scandal and the sheer ineptitude and incompetency of the DoD accounting infrastructure as an example.