Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 17:51:10 -0800 From: FWO Subject: Responding to Information #2 To: Friends of Freedom From: Frederick Mann I'm a practicing anarcho-capitalist. I not only advocate anarcho-capitalism, I also live anarcho-capitalism and do business as an anarcho-capitalist. This is another way of saying I'm a "sovereign individual" and I'm involved with "sovereign businesses." The safest way to be a practicing anarcho-capitalist is to tell as few people as possible that you operate that way. That tends to minimize the risk. Nevertheless, I believe that in my personal case, it's safe enough to shout to the world over the Internet that I'm a practicing anarcho-capitalist, and also to provide others with information and opportunities to become successful practicing anarcho-capitalists. I believe that if the terrocrats (terrorist bureaucrats or coercive government agents) are to be defeated, it will come about as a result of a wide range of strategies and tactics. I welcome any strategy, tactic, or project that increases the freedom, power, and effectiveness of individuals and/or reduces the power and influence of terrocrats. I regard the practice of anarcho-capitalism as a powerful strategy because it can provide substantial rewards to individuals, while at the same time withdrawing support from terrocrats, particularly the financial support on which they so crucially depend. Practicing anarcho-capitalism requires certain knowledge, skills, and methods -- particularly on how to organize your affairs to minimize the risk of terrocrat attacks. You may also need a few "tricks of the trade" so that, should terrocrats attack you, you can quickly demonstrate to them that it would be more productive for them to go after "easier targets." I call this practical knowledge, methods, and skills "Freedom Technology." Much of it is available to you free of charge at the Free World Order Website http://www.buildfreedom.com. Freedom Technology could also be called "formulas for avoiding tyranny." At 08:58 PM 3/21/97 -0700, Attorney "Craig J. Bolton" wrote: > >What I have in fact written is >two things: (1) there are no formulas for costlessly avoiding tyranny by >filing a document or muttering some magic words and (2) there is a >fundamental principle in economics called "the division of labor". This >principle states that we are all better off specializing in one thing and >buying the other things we want to consume. > Mr. Attorney is part of "the system." It's in his interest that "the system" be perpetuated. And he needs clients who are "subjects" of "the system." He specializes in "bankruptcy law" -- helping people escape their responsibilities? [In an anarcho-capitalist world "bankruptcy" might not provide relief to debtors.] He uses arguments he regards as appropriate to achieve his purpose. Developing your thinking skills is an important aspect of learning to live free as an anarcho-capitalist. One of these thinking skills is to learn to recognize appropriate and inappropriate arguments. A key question: Who or what is this argument appropriate for? There are also standard forms of argument used to persuade. One such is the "straw man" argument. You introduce a point which is really irrelevant to the issue, but you clothe it so that hopefully your audience won't notice. Let's examine lawyer argument #1, "(1) there are no formulas for costlessly avoiding tyranny by filing a document or muttering some magic words." Answer: So what?; Who says "there are no formulas for costlessly avoiding tyranny..." Mr. Attorney. But the naive reader will assume that Mr. Attorney's opponent has said the opposite of (1) or believes the opposite of (1). (1) is an appropriate argument for a lawyer. It may not be appropriate for anyone else with different purposes. It's similar to a doctor saying, "there are no costless ways of getting healthy... therefore you have to subscribe to medical insurance and come to me for health care." There are no costless ways for anything. The minimum cost is the time you spend on something. The "no costless ways" point is irrelevant -- the "straw man." Whatever action you take has a cost and carries a risk, and may offer a potential benefit. It's up to each of us to choose actions which minimize cost and risk, while maximizing benefit. The ruthless doctor doesn't want you to consider alternatives because he wants your money. He uses whatever argument he thinks appropriate to capture and keep you as a client. A variation of argument (1) would be: There is no silver bullet. You shouldn't listen to Frederick Mann because he can't have a "silver bullet." You shouldn't buy a golf club because the manufacturer can't guarantee a hole-in-one every time you hit the ball! You shouldn't go to the doctor because he can't guarantee a cure. And what do lawyers do? Answer: They file documents and mutter magic words! So I could argue that you should never go to a lawyer because "(1) there are no formulas for costlessly avoiding tyranny by filing a document or muttering some magic words." Now let's look at lawyer argument #2, "(2) there is a fundamental principle in economics called "the division of labor". This principle states that we are all better off specializing in one thing and buying the other things we want to consume." So the ruthless doctor says, "Don't spend time trying to educate yourself about healthy diet, exercise, etc. Just come to me when you feel bad, and I'll cure you. Division of labor, you know. I specialize in health; you must specialize in other things." The "division of labor" argument here is a "straw man." It applies to organizing a factory. To some extent, specialization applies to what you do to qualify yourself for your career. But to what extent does it apply to life in general? Maybe, in some respects, it pays off to be a generalist. Doctors depend for their livelihood on people being unhealthy. If everyone were perfectly healthy, most doctors would be out of a job. It's in the interest of doctors that people generally suffer poor health. (Interesting that doctors themselves are among the least healthy with the shortest life expectancy!) It's in the doctor's interest that his clients be ignorant concerning what they need to do to maximize their health. The same applies to many lawyers. The more ignorant the client, the more money the lawyer can make. Maybe it's worthwhile for anybody who wants to be healthy and free to learn something about both health and law. Could it be that, more than anything else, what prevents you from being free -- living and doing business as an anarcho-capitalist -- is "the law" -- more precisely, what you think of "the law" -- and of course, your relative ignorance of "the law" -- and your ignorance of Freedom Technology, the means to beat "the law." Mr. Attorney wants you to be ignorant of "the law" so he can make more money off you. So he'll use an argument appropriate for him, like "division of labor." To further strengthen their positions, both doctors and lawyers operate monopolies. They don't want anybody else to "muscle in on their action." Guess which two "professions" are most notorious for exhorbitant prices and questionable results? By the way, the Freedom Technology I offer is available free of charge. You can download it from the website below. --------------------------------------------------------- "The [one] who knows what freedom is will find a way to be free" -- Robert LeFevre "The Fountains of Freedom have many Sources and run along many Tributaries and Streams into the Ocean of Liberty" -- Frederick Mann. Free World Order Website -- http://www.buildfreedom.com