Publisher's Note: As most everyone is aware, I am not a Christian nor an atheist yet I am surrounded by friends and neighbors who tend to this religionist disposition.  While I think some of the Christian beliefs in the system are used to excuse or rationalize the state, there is a small but growing number of Christians who are genuinely seeking freedom in this mortal coil and using their scripture to do so.  Steve is one of those. -BB

...And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free... As a Christian Voluntaryist who resides in the land of the 'fee' and the home of the 'slave', I have a great interest in knowing the Truth. We all know that every person has their own selfish idea as to what true freedom and liberty consists of, and this equally true among Christians. I wish to examine the idea of Anarchist Christians, whether such a breed even exists on earth, or if the Neo-conservative 'utopia' purported is ultimately Heaven on Earth. "They hate us for our freedom," was a past President's mantra and to this I retort that there is no one more hopelessly enslaved than those that falsely believe they are free. Counterfeiting 'government' is big business as we already know. Please explain the labyrinth of Man-made Federal, State and Local 'Laws' that one must know in order to stay out of prison, and how that somehow makes us free? Orwell's "Slavery is Freedom" rings a familiar tone. This author had a close brush with the law when such sent an item to Canada in exercising free commerce. Well, unbeknownst this was a no-no as such item is regulated under a not-so-well-known list of Federal restrictions regulating export. A knock on the door ensues and I was happily introduced to the DHS / Customs Enforcement. Fortunately, after many days of toil and nights of worry, this issue was resolved after a simple phone call to the agent. Why all of the drama you wonder? It all happened because I did not have firm grasp of the litany of Federal Laws requiring a license to export said item. If this is freedom, I consider it to be a pretty lousy version. Others have not been so fortunate. Some are still staring at the innards of a Federal pen with 8 years left to go. And with special thanks to USA Inc. and the Corrections Corporation of America, there are still vacancies for all those who wish to visit. It is my hope that we can all start this discussion with the basic understanding that Anarchy is synonymous with Abolitionism or Voluntaryism. This is the abolishing of the centrist State and that the virtue of self-ownership and accountability is the highest moral virtue. Let us at once dispense of the distorted view of Anarchy as representing nothing more than mass hordes of out of control thugs aimlessly throwing Molotov cocktails at innocents. I believe with every fiber of my being that anarchism is the only life path to follow as a believer in Jesus Christ. In fact going further, it is the ONLY philosophy that I can see that is consistent with Scripture. It is a fact that most of the Evangelical Christians in America vote on the Right side of the ticket. They will even vote for the mythical lesser of two evils. What kind of testimony is it when a Christian votes for a lesser, evilcandidate? What makes him an authority on evil? What credibility is there? What is being stated in essence is we will not steal, but will only kill. Is it 'less' evil to only invade two countries as opposed to three, believe that abortion is wrong, EXCEPT in instances of rape? Or even, pro-death penalty for that matter? It is better to let 3 guilty men go free, than to convict and execute one innocent man. Thanks to the disinformation arm of the Government, a large number of Christians now want the U.S. to invade Iran. Remember the command to love thy neighbor as thyself? Apparently, many modern Christ-followers do not consider Iran to be their neighbor and therefore does not apply. My Bible does not except us from this obligation and is applicable to all peoples of all religions and races. Christians would be a better testimony if they (we) were consistent in our dealings with other people. We may actually win others to Christ when we apply Anarchism to our lives. In the Garden of Eden, The devil cast a semantic war of words upon the first man and woman. He employed a manipulative Neurolinguistic Programming-style, positive thinking approach in stating," Yea, hath God said...? upon Eve. Within the final conflict of humanity we see that in order for folks to be deceived on a massive scale, there must be a war on the meanings of words and / or information. A twisting of words, if you will. The books '1984' and 'Brave New World' proposed two different plans of attack. The former was a restricting of information and the latter was such an onslaught of information, so much so that one could not effectively wade through the vast ocean of words and definitions to make sense of it all.
“We have a weapon more powerful... than any in the whole arsenal of the British Empire! That weapon... is our refusal!”  - Michael Collins
The police in America have proven once again that they are above the law and have a license to kill as the charred remains of Christopher Dorner were cooling in the cabin in California.  The more thuggish aspects of the constabulary were on the mainstream news despite the twisted and sycophantic relationship of the press in lionizing tyranny everyday in the hero worship of the thin political black and blue line. The readers who have read my essays over the years are aware of the case I have made for why cops are the primary danger to all individual freedom and liberty in any tax jurisdiction on Earth. No political bad actor in any account of human history could deprive anyone of liberty or enforce tyranny absent a police force.   The vicious and nonsensical drug war has so retarded human progress with the caging and maiming and killing of hundreds of thousands of Americans and permeated the entire American society with laws piled on laws to do everything from making every financial transaction transparent to the rulers for “money laundering” to the creation of a legal system whose only sense of justice is in name only, I am surprised America even continues to chug along.. Two important questions have surfaced after the Dorner tragedy; first, have the police in California stepped over a Rubicon with the summary execution of Dorner in broad daylight? The increasing militarization of police and the literal criminalization of everything has seen the rise of the fabled and dreaded Orwellian state where no one is safe and if one pays close attention to what just happened in the mountains of California, you discover that all judicial processes and civil rights niceties were overlooked and the police immediately murdered Dorner by burning him alive.  They were even so brazen as to casually issue the orders to fire the cabin most likely under the guise of officer safety, the curious mantra that gives the police their license to kill and get away with it.  The officer safety conceit releases them from all responsibility that saddles the averages citizen in self-defense thus the hundreds of thousands of videos on the internet and written and oral testimonials of victims of this officer safety madness.  Will Grigg, the most able chronicler of police misbehavior in America, has already made the rock solid case of just how risk-free and safe is the occupation of the praetorians in America.

The Los Angeles Police Department is in the grips of a challenging moment as it seeks to eliminate, read kill, one of its own gone rogue, Chris Dorner.  The curious thing concerning this incident is the one undeniable fact, mainstream media has no choice but to cover an event they would prefer to fade to black.  The cops and media are both caught in a conundrum.  It is not the fact this guy is on a rampage of murder and mayhem, but he is not a right-wing bitter clinger.  How do the cops, cop apologists and main stream media spin this left-wing racist, socialist government supporter, anti-gun cop killer into someone they can use to confiscate lawful citizens weapons? The first question is what set this loon off on his killing spree.  He posted his manifesto on Facebook for all to see and analyze.  https://wap.myfoxla.com/w/main/story/84473837/  I find it intriguing he posted this on my birthday.  A small present perhaps to me showing what one dedicated man can do to established authoritarian rule if willing to sacrifice his life?  I issue my thanks for letting me see the results though I do not agree to his tactics.  Killing innocents is not the approach of a libertarian such as me, but I digress.  Mr. Dorner states in his manifesto, “ In 8/07 I reported an officer (Ofcr. Teresa Evans/now a Sergeant), for kicking a suspect (excessive force) during a Use of Force while I was assigned as a patrol officer at LAPD's Harbor Division. While cuffing the suspect, (Christopher Gettler), Evans kicked the suspect twice in the chest and once in the face. The kick to the face left a visible injury on the left cheek below the eye. Unfortunately after reporting it to supervisors and investigated by PSB (internal affairs investigator Det. Villanueva/Gallegos), nothing was done. I had broken their supposed "Blue Line". Unfortunately, It's not JUST US, it's JUSTICE!!! In fact, 10 months later on 6/25/08, after already successfully completing probation, acquiring a basic Post Certificate, and Intermediate Post Certificate, I was relieved of duty by the LAPD while assigned to patrol at Southwest division. It is clear as day that the department retaliated toward me for reporting Evans for kicking Mr. Christopher Gettler. The department stated that I had lied and made up the report that Evans had kicked the suspect.
If the US is capable of anything, it is the author of an imperfect future in which the best of intentions always seems to yield bad fruit. In order to project the potential consequences of what the American defeat in Afghanistan will look like, it is instructive to reflect on the US involvement in Vietnam. History certainly does not repeat itself but it certainly rhymes over time. Could the United States have secured a free South Vietnam?  Did the United States have all the necessary political and military capital to prosecute a major land conflict in Southeast Asia and create a self-sustaining nation neutral or beneficial to American security interests in the area?  I would suggest the United States did not and will not for the foreseeable future have the capability to answer the latter in the affirmative and therefore the answer to the former question is a definitive no.  America, despite it formidable might with no technological peer will lose. The Vietminh in Saigon accidentally gunned down LTC A. Peter Dewey of the office of Strategic Services (OSS) in September 1945.  What is important to know from this solitary death is that Ho Chi Minh and his Vietminh regretted this and did what they could to atone. Uncle Ho had his finger on the international pulse both within the ranks of the small and large C comintern and the importance of crafting and staying on message first and consistently. Dewey would not be the first American to fall there.  He would be followed by tens of thousands of other dead and hundreds of thousands of physically and mentally injured Americans during the long American night in Vietnam that would emerge within a generation. The North Vietnamese and its attendant unconventional legions were tough, resourceful, well-trained and consistently had their eyes on the end-state Ho Chi Minh sought - a unified ideological peninsula with like-minded neighbors that suborned all colonial influence to self-determination.
  45 human beings legally disarmed the state of New York under the leadership of the Governor Cuomo.  A state with a population of 19 million people has been disarmed in a significant fashion for those foolish or sheepish enough to comply with the law.  The country is bombarded with media propaganda on a continuous basis on the moral high ground and fairness of democratic processes. In one fell swoop, the rulers of the tax jurisdiction of New York have proven not only the folly and charade that is representative democracy but abridged the most fundamental right of all – the right to self-defense.  Ironically, the legislators had accidentally disarmed the only ones who should be subject to total disarmament in the prosecution of their duties – the police.  This was quickly remedied by the worthies in Albany and all is well with the continuing weaponization of the police. As I have mentioned before, absent the police, no political bad actor in history has any power to deny rights or exploit tyrannical rule. None. This would be a reason why the politicos would behave in a most uncharacteristically efficient manner to correct that oversight. Now the governor and his entourage will continue to have heavily armed private praetorians at their beck and call to provide security much like the Private Security Detachments (PSD) that protect VIPs and general officers overseas and in the combat zones in America’s neo-imperialist quagmires around the globe. As with so much in government, what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the mundanes that dot the fruited plain and have their wealth and resources filched at gunpoint on a perennial basis. Not only is there a tremendous government animus toward any aspect of self-reliance as I discussed earlier but there is a very real fear of the general population having a peer competitive capability to defend themselves at the same level of a government's military offensive capability. I will leave it to others to drone on endlessly about the Constitutional Second Amendment and its mystical and sanctified capability to keep Americans in arms.  The evidence would prove otherwise with the endless parade of legislation and laws that have effectively removed modern military analogs such as fully automatic firearms and crew served weapons and suppressors and grenades and mortars and the list is endless on what you cannot legally possess without going through a government probe search that would make the NKVD blush in admiration.  Most of these items are simply prohibited. I believe the “20,000 gun laws" is a canard and that 300 may be nearer the number according to the Brookings Institution: All 300 or whatever the true number may be certainly infringe in a substantive and material way on the ability of the common folk to maintain a peer armory and capability against their oppressors.
Gun owners are second-class citizens in America viewed with severe derision and contempt by the elites in both the halls of political and media power in the US.  Much like rednecks and pit-bull members, they are rhetorical punching bag that gets knowing sneers from the freedom-phobic salons at the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Department of Fatherland Security alike.  They have been tucked into a rhetorical cubbyhole with preppers, private food gardeners and other such miscreants for whom self-reliance is a watchword if not a lifestyle. The modern American gun owner is in the same position as the Irish and blacks of yore who not only suffered official sanction as less than equal but were subject to penalties up to death in both government and private hands. ALL governments despise private gun ownership because it is not only a primary threat to their ability to control and harness subject populations but existentially all collectivist are perversely uncomfortable with the atomistic ability to not only a threat but to make that neutralization lethal.  The battle at Lexington and Concord that inaugurated the divorce from Great Britain was over weapons and munitions ownership – nothing less and nothing more.  Not only was the fight about guns, it was about that ultimate divorce proposition marrying guns and secession.  One can suppose that the rulers in America have an abstract fear of the individuated ability to defend and also project power but the true fear on their part is the self-reliant aspect.  If the singular American can defend himself then the most important cog in any political machine, the cop, becomes irrelevant if not an anachronism and without cops, no nation can sustain tyranny and enforce bad laws. James Yeager, an outspoken gun trainer in TN, recently had his CCW suspended because he dared to exercise his free speech rights.  The police spoke-mouth was priceless:
James Yeager, 42, had his permit suspended based on a "material likelihood of risk of harm to the public," the department said in a statement.  Col. Tracy Trott of the Tennessee Department of Safety said it didn't take him long to reach a decision after viewing the comments on the Internet. "I watched it twice to make sure I was hearing what I thought I heard," Trott said.  "It sounded like it was a veiled threat against the whole public. I believed him. He had a conviction in his voice, and the way he looked into the camera, I believe he's capable of a violent act," Trott said. 
This from a privileged and badged member of the praetorians for the nomenklatura yet this is the modus operandi for cops everyday.  The current discussion on guns is a curious house of mirrors where the individual American gun owner must be wary day after day for new depredations against his right to defend himself yet the talking heads make no mention of the sanctioned government murder of innocents on a daily basis by cops in America and the imperial machine abroad. The other irony is not only that Yeager is a former small town police chief himself but this great advocate of revolution and tactical savvy submitted and compromised by getting the permit in the first place so the line in the sand may be more mercurial than he lets on.
The mass shooting by the evil predator in Connecticut on Friday in the federal and state mandated gun-free zone at the government school is a tragedy.  Like so many of the shootings, the thousands of wrong-headed and hoplophobic regulations that promote disarmament of “non-credentialed” citizens has left thousands dead and more wounded.  The usual suspects among the government supremacists are dancing on the graves of the children by calling for more restriction on individual protection and seeking to disarm greater swaths of the population that don’t meet the approval of the government.  Mind you, this will not disarm the greatest threat to individual safety, the police nor will it disarm the greatest threat to world peace, the American military.  The legislation and regulation will only target the “law-abiding”, that vast population of earning cattle that roam the tax jurisdiction called the United States. Not only will the plantation dwellers be stripped of arms and the articles of self-defense, they will be forced to make convincing noises about why that makes everyone safe including, of course, the children. Many observers have made the case for the absurdity of all of this far more ably than I, whether concerning the Second Amendment, criminal fear of armed citizens and the ocean of statistics that can be manipulated by both sides of the weapons debate.  That is not the distillate of what I am asking. The central question remains:  is there a consistent meme in the government-media complex case for weapons disarmament and prohibition.  There is and it is rather simple.  The government’s primary war is one it has waged and will fight through eternity for its very existence.  Whether democratic, communist or socialist or every difference in between; the state must extinguish individual self-sufficiency wherever it finds it. The urban incubation of collectivist ideas is part of the reason.  City folk pride themselves on their lack of self-sufficiency.  They proudly open small refrigerators containing merely condiments and empty larders and brag about the sheer number of restaurants and cuisines available to them just a short jaunt away on government transit of one type or another.  Collectivism finds a natural germination here because one of the real societal divides is between urban folk and ruralites.
 
Why secession and why New Hampshire?
New Hampshire is our home. The Granite State has a "Live Free or Die" state motto and it suits us perfectly. NH is a very independent-minded state with about 41% of its voters being "undeclared" (they're not registered with any political party). We feel this creates the best intellectual climate of any state for discussing important federal issues that negatively effect the people of the states.
While the list of reasons to declare our independence seems never-ending, one very basic concept that all NH citizens can understand is money. NH is consistently one of the biggest donor states, every year. As you know, a "Donor State" is a state that pays more to the Federal Government than it receives. From 1986-2005, New Hampshire was ranked as a Top 5 donor state out of the 50 states, every single year for 20 years. NH citizens consistently pay more to Washington DC than they receive. Independence will mean we can keep our money right here at home rather than begging Washington DC for part of our money back.

What are your prospects for success?

Success to us will mean that enough NH citizens will be informed about the benefits of independence to make a very real impact on the direction of NH. Since we're a non-profit, tax deductible foundation, success to us will not necessarily be legislative success. If NH citizens are educated on the issues and talking about them with their friends, family members, co-workers, and classmates, we'll be successful.
I have discovered most political solutions are unworkable if more liberty and freedom is the desired outcome. I do reserve judgment on secession as a last political act they yield positive results. What are your thoughts?
 Personally, I feel as though, historically, liberty has increased through multiple strategies. Politically, there's the example of the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution, which instantly increased the freedoms of American blacks. Acts of peaceful civil disobedience - like that of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Lysander Spooner's American Letter Mail Company - have increased awareness and led to increased liberty. Jury nullification, like the kind that's happening in NH, has also been very effective. I feel as though people should engage in the activism that they feel is most effective and that they're most comfortable with. However, people must learn liberty before they can become activists in the area of their choice. We feel that's the area where our Foundation can help.
What is the advantage of the non-profit status under the IRS and does that restrict your activities in any fashion?
Certainly our official tax-deductible, 501(c)3 status (which is currently under initial IRS review) has helped us already by adding credibility to our efforts and stressing the seriousness of our Foundation. By taking this route, we're saying "we're not just a Facebook group; we're serious". We've already been interviewed by multiple sources and more are on the way.

 

One of the reasons why our nation has prospered is that we have been able to capitalize on our individual abilities, abilities that are diverse and unequal. It’s the differences and “unequalness” among people that allows for innovation, invention, new technology, growth, prosperity and progress. To enforce equality upon the populous is not only unnatural (equality does not exist in nature), but it prevents the very prosperity we all desire, resulting in class warfare. It’s no accident. As more “equalizing and redistribution legislation” becomes the law of the land, more poverty and class warfare develop. This will continue until the populous empirically learns the hard way that the State, no matter which party is in power, is their enemy and learns to withhold their consent at the voting booth by abstaining. Most people hate monopoly power (even the non-coercive variety), but the populous gives the State the monopoly on the use of force without even a whimper. With such power over the individual, the State will use that monopoly power to enslave us until we collapse into the Orwellian dark ages or war annihilates us all. Most people know about the danger of stepping into the lion’s den or getting burned when they play with fire, but to most people these are only allegories with no relevance in their own lives. However, all voters assume a similar great danger when they step into the voting booth. They are collaborating with their own enemies who present them with lots of goodies to lure them in, but eventually make them offers they can’t refuse, “Godfather” style. To add insult to injury, the voters revere those very same enemies with donations to their elections, and name buildings and bridges after them and build statues of their likenesses in the public parks all over the land. As long as the populous values equality over freedom and relies upon the voting booth to try to establish that equality, the societal deterioration will continue, as can be seen in today’s climate of unrest, unemployment, despair and insecurity.

Some argue that it is not equality that the voters seek but equality of opportunity. There is no such thing as real equality of opportunity since we are all born unequal. Take two people, for example, Bill Gates and myself. We were born with equal “legal opportunity” but actually we were born with reality-based unequal opportunity. By birth we started out in this world with unequal opportunity by virtue of the fact that Gates was born smarter, more committed to his goals, and able to take greater risks than I. I had the same “legal opportunity” to accomplish what Gates accomplished but I failed to do so. Our inequality illustrates the difference between Gates’ accomplishments and my accomplishments. Does that make Gates an undeserving evil exploiter of us all? On the contrary, Gates’ success made life better for me as it did for everyone else on the planet. The same holds true for Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt and J.P. Morgan, most of who were born extremely poor, but with great intellectual abilities. They didn’t invent or create poverty, since poverty is a natural condition of all life. They helped cure poverty for millions of people. Where the average person sees no opportunity, these great benefactors of mankind saw opportunity and were willing to take extreme risks that most of us are not willing to take.

When one analyzes the motives of the “true believers” in “equality,” we see that what they really want is equal results, which is beyond utopian. An ideology of equal results is insane and immature, an ideology that can only be implemented by law, (at the point of a gun). The one who points the gun in fact creates immediate conflict between himself and the victim, and a multitude of conflicts have flared up right before our eyes over the past 50 years. Government means guns and the more government, the more guns and the more guns, the more conflicts. It’s no coincidence that as government has grown since WWII, we have found our country involved in external and internal conflicts at a continually increasing rate. When one nation aims its guns at another nation it is considered an act of war. When one’s own government points its guns towards its own unarmed citizens, in the attempt to coerce equality it is just as much an act of war. At least countries at war have the ability to agree on a truce and the fighting will stop. However, within a nation, a truce is never offered since the guns of the law are forever present. They hang over the necks of all of us just waiting for someone to step out of line in order to rationalize its use. Like the Sword of Damocles we now all live with a sense of foreboding engendered by a precarious situation, especially one in which the onset of tragedy is restrained only by a delicate trigger or chance. Presently our precarious situation involves our economic system veering closer to the edge of a cliff. While this very dangerous situation continues, the legislators call for more equality and redistribution legislation, condoned and sanctioned by most of the population. The delicate trigger in this case is continuing on the same path of coercive legislation.
“The IDF was not ready for this war.”
-         The Winograd Report
Now that Israel has declared war (again) on Gaza, its last foray in 2006 against Lebanon bears closer examination.
Hezbollah occupied an emerging intermediate spectrum capability between irregular and conventional conflict through careful preparation, intense knowledge of the threat they faced and a careful examination of past behavior to influence stratagems employed to defeat the Israeli enemy. Hezbollah employed a dual strategy to literally rain terror on Israeli settlements proximate to the Lebanese border and draw the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) into a quagmire to establish their stalemate or defeat.
The small number of non-state actors who conducted the fighting numbered at approximately seven thousand against a modern first world army and air force numbering orders of magnitude greater.  Hezbollah sought to own the operational fight and most likely succeeded beyond their wildest expectations. COL John Boyd would contend that the Hezbollah architects of the conflict compromised the enemy’s decision cycle and never let go.
Hezbollah had several advantages:
  •  They owned the defensive turf and made judicious use of years of intense preparation of the killing fields to drive home their advantage.
  •  Conducted a dual-purpose stratagem to terrify Israeli civilians through rocket attacks to draw a response and lure the forces in to isolate them and destroy in detail.
  •  Intense training and a keen doctrinal knowledge of IDF tactical behavior both mounted and dismounted.
  •  Clausewitzian friction would ensure that the un-forecasted benefit to Hezbollah would be the severe doctrinal dissonance and confusion that would cripple the IDF at the operational level.
  •  A very sophisticated information operations campaign to amplify every victory and use every setback as a means to emphasize the underdog position of the victims of the “invasion”.
The IDF had fought a self-identified successful counterinsurgency (COIN) campaign against the Palestinians in the contiguous problem areas to Israel.  Its entire force had fallen to exclusively orienting the forces to irregular warfare efforts while ignoring the full spectrum operations implications of atrophied training in conventional mechanized and armor warfare much less the basic notions of light infantry tactics beyond the practice of call for fire.  This continues to plague most Western armies even after the morbid lessons that the IDF provided for military observers around the world in 2006.