Big Brother is WWWatching You

There is a really good series on YouTube call The Rap News. The series consists of very well done videos discussing actual consequences of current news stories in a light hearted manner. Needless to say the latest video covers the surveillance state and fucking nails it:

The Internet is the last place where a truly open exchange of ideas can occur. Technology makes it too easy for the state to track down printing presses and radio transmitters so those options are no longer available. On the other hand the Internet is a global communication system where users can remain anonymous so long as they use the right tools. Yet the state continues to legislation the Internet, trying to kill it as they know it’s a threat to their power based. We must keep the Internet free of state intrusion at all costs. If we lose it we’re truly sunk because then the state will be able to have almost complete control over everything being said.

Let’s heed George Torwell’s advice.

To the Rest of the World, I’m Sorry

Although there was no doubt it’s officially official now, Barack Obama has been nominated as the presidential candidate for the Democratic Party meaning the next president of the United States will be a war monger.

I just want the rest of the world to know that I’m sorry. There’s nothing more I can offer than my condolences as I’m powerless to stop the American war machine from murdering your people. All I can say is that there are many of us living in this country that don’t support what the United States government is doing and we are working as hard as we can to stop them.

Good luck to the rest of the world and may Odin have mercy on our souls.

Getting Things Done

If there’s one thing the United States is good at it’s killing people overseas:

29 dead in a little over a week. Nearly 200 gone this year. The White House is stepping up its campaign of drone attacks in Yemen, with four strikes in eight days. And not even the slaying of 10 civilians over the weekend seems to have slowed the pace in the United States’ secretive, undeclared war.

But remember, they hate us for our freedom.

Carrying Multiple Guns

I had an interesting conversation with one of my friends regarding carrying multiple firearms. My friend is a big proponent of the “Two is one and one is none” philosophy and, as you can guess, he carries multiple firearms. Meanwhile I generally only carry my Glock 30SF. Carrying a gun or multiple guns is really an issue of risk mitigation.

The reason I carry a firearm is to give myself a fighting chance should another individual wish to initiate violence against me or mine. When I assess risk I determine that the chance of being violently attacked is greater than any detriment inflicted on my person from carrying a firearm. In all seriousness I’ve been carrying a firearm for so long that I don’t even notice it’s there. My holster prevents any sharp corners on my pistol from poking me and the most discomfort I get when carrying is sweat buildup under my holster in the summer (which I generally mitigate by switching to an outside-the-waistband holster and covering it with an untucked shirt). I also carry two additional magazines on my person because the risk of a magazine failing or being attacked by numerous assailants is higher than the discomfort of carrying the additional magazines (I wear 5.11 Covert Cargo pants that have two pistol magazine pouches in the front concealed pockets so there is no discomfort wrought from carrying additional magazines). What I generally don’t carry is an extra gun.

I do own a backup gun, a Ruger LCP, but carry it mostly in the front pocket of my coat during the winter (I wear a military surplus Swiss greatcoat in the winter and am unable to quickly access the Glock 30SF on my hip). There are also a few occasions where I’ve carried my LCP because maximum concealment was my primary concern (one case was at my grandfather’s funeral where the sight of any firearm would have caused unnecessary hysterics as many members of my extended family are hoplophobic). Needless to say my LCP gets quite a bit of use, just not as a backup gun. I haven’t found a method of carrying a backup gun that doesn’t involved discomfort. While I recognize there is a risk of my primary firearm failing so catastrophically that is becomes entirely useless it is fairly low. Glock pistols (along with most modern combat pistols) are generally known for their reliability. The chances of me being attacked are low but not low enough that I forego carrying a firearm. The chances of me being attacked and my carry gun failing are extremely low and I can’t justify the added discomfort of carrying another pistol for such a low risk.

During our conversation my friend admitted that the risk is low but asked if it was low enough to bet my life on. It is. There are other risks that are so low that I’m willing to bet my life on them. I don’t carry a rifle because the risk of being attacked by individuals clad in body armor is quite low, much too low to justify lugging around my LR-308 everywhere I go. Speaking of body armor, I don’t wear any. The risk of being shot do not outweigh the constant discomfort I would have to suffer if I wore body armor 24/7.

Life is risky and we must each assess the risk we face and mitigate it as much as we feel necessary. Some people feel the risk of being attacked and having their primary sidearm fail is high enough to warrant carrying a backup gun. Soldiers in foreign countries believe the risk of being shot is high enough to justify wearing body armor at all times, even in the desert. Most people seem to believe the risk of getting into an automobile accident are high enough to warrant wearing a seat belt. Ultimately we much each assess the risk we face and determine what methods are justifiable to mitigate that risk. There are no right or wrong answers and you and only you know the risks you face and what measures are justifiable to mitigate it. Gun control advocates make the mistake of believing they know what is justifiable for other people. They believe the chances of being attacked are so minor that nobody is justified in carrying a firearm. Are they right? No, because they do not know what risks each individual faces and therefore cannot know what is and isn’t justifiable to mitigate those risks.

Bang Up Job America

Obviously the Middle Easterners hate Americans for their freedom:

A U.S. drone strike targeting al Qaeda suspects in Yemen killed 13 civilians, including three women, three security officials in the restive Middle Eastern country said.

A United States drone killed 13 civilians and didn’t even manage to hit the target. Let that sink in for a moment, 13 innocent individuals were snuffed out by a United State drone. How would the average American react if 13 innocent people in their country were killed by a Yemen drone strike? They would probably demand war with Yemen as payback. Guess what? People in the Middle East aren’t any different than people in America, when their fellow people are murdered they want to make those responsible for the murders pay.

What compounds the issue is the reaction:

“This was one of the very few times when our target was completely missed. It was a mistake, but we hope it will not hurt our anti-terror efforts in the region,” a senior Yemeni Defense Ministry official told CNN. The official asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the issue.

Yup, that’s it, the strike was merely a mistake. The only thing that’s actually important, according to the sociopath quoted, is that the anti-terror efforts in the region aren’t hurt.

Go ahead, explain to me how the Middle Easterners hate America because of its freedom and not because of the mind boggling number of hellfire missiles it rains down upon them.

For the Record, I Don’t Belong to the Government

A video shown at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) made a claim that I object to, a claim that we all belong to the government:

Most Americans believe there are overarching ideals that unite them, such as liberty and freedom. However, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) says otherwise. According to their latest video, “government is the only thing that we all belong to.”

I just want it stated for the record that, as an anarchist, I do not belong to the government. What the government does it does in spite of me. No sanction was ever given by me to steal, kidnap, or commit murder. In fact I oppose the government precisely because it does such things.

If you want to be apart of this country’s government go ahead but I can’t, in good conscious, be a member of an organization that I find morally reprehensible.

It’s Good to See the Democrats Aren’t Failing to Disappoint

After the Republican National Convention (RNC) it appeared as though the Republican Party would be claiming a near monopoly on targeting specific demographics for state hostilities. Thankfully the Democratic Party appear to have come through at the last minute and returned balanced to an unbalanced equation:

The Democrats’ approach to gun control is far too timid and needs a boost of courage to be effective, some leading gun-control advocates are charging.

The draft language of the Democrats’ 2012 platform — set for a final vote this week in Charlotte, N.C. — argues that current safeguards protecting the public against gun violence are insufficient and urges “an honest and open conversation about firearms.”

The document also calls for “reasonable regulation” governing guns, including laws banning assault weapons and requiring all gun sellers — not just licensed dealers — to perform background checks on potential buyers.

While the Republican Party continues its crusade against homosexuals the Democratic Party continues its crusade against gun owners. I refuse to condemn my gay friends to a state that is hostile towards them and I refuse to condemn myself and my gun owning friends to a state that is hostile towards us. This is where I would make some quip about no longer being willing to vote for either party but I crossed that bridge a long time ago.

Isn’t it funny how politics always ends with one side gaining at the expense of another?

The Real Labor Movement

Yesterday I briefly discussed the primary issue with the labor movement, namely is the movement’s blaming of employers instead of the state. While the employers often treated their employees poorly the workers were put at a disadvantage by the state’s monopolization of money, land, tariffs, and ideas. Today I want to briefly discuss the real labor movement, that is what workers can do to improve their working conditions. Anybody who has read my blog for any length of time can likely guess where I’m going to go with this:

Yes, I’m going to discuss how agorism can be used by workers to improve the conditions they work under. As I discussed yesterday, the state has put workers at a disadvantage. In order to keep themselves free of the state’s cages workers must pay taxes, fines, and other fees issued by the state in the state’s currency. The state, through its monopoly on money, ensure that employers are the first receivers of state issued currency. As the state maintains a monopoly on land and grants monopolies on ideas workers are unable to build a competing business to their current employer. Finally the state also prevents workers from utilizing foreign production of goods that compete with their current employer due to tariffs. When combined, these monopolies ensure workers are left with few options, at least if they want to remain legal.

What if workers didn’t care about remaining legal? In that case a whole work of possibilities would open up to them. Negotiating with an employer would become entirely unnecessary to those running their own businesses. Workers who were unsatisfied with the conditions under which they were working could start producing goods and services themselves and eliminate their dependency on an employer. In essence decentralization allows individuals to become more independent (I know, that’s a crazy idea but bear with me).

If you study economics for any length of time you may come across the philosophy of distributism. Distributism is an economic system based on Catholic teachings, namely the teaching of subsidiary. In Catholicism subsidiary is the idea that the smallest social unit that can perform a function should perform that function. As you can expect distributism advocates small businesses over large corporations. While I don’t agree with distributism (it also advocates a tax system to redistribute wealth, which I oppose on the grounds that such actions require a coercive state) the idea of many small businesses should appear to workers. Not only does it give more options to workers (if you don’t like your current employer you can apply with any number of different employers) but such a work environment necessarily requires the state to interfere minimally in economic matters, which allows workers to start their own businesses easier. Because of this distribusim has many ideas that should appeal to workers and agorism can make those ideas a reality.

Agorism, I believe, will lead to the creation of many small businesses as opposed to a handful of large businesses. This is because a large business would have a hard time avoiding the eye of the state whereas a small business can easily do so. The more customers served by a single business the more likely it is that one of those customers will either intentionally or unintentionally alert the state to its existence and that would likely be the business’s end. Due to this fact agorism encourages decentralization and encourages individuals to be their own bosses, effectively weaken employers’ power. Workers not wanting to start a business will still gain an advantage as there will be more employers for them to chose from and workers who want to become producers themselves can directly improve their working conditions instead of using coercive methods against an employer.

Agorism has the potential not only to destroy the state that has given employers an unfair advantage but it also the potential to improve the negotiating power of workers.

Only Do Business with Those You Trust

Today’s life lesson is this: only do business with those you trust. If you do business with those you can’t trust then you may find yourself missing large quantities of money:

An invite-only online hedge fund that promised lucrative returns for investors called the Bitcoin Savings & Trust has shut down, and with it have disappeared the service’s administrator — a user known in the digital currency community as pirateat40 — as well as millions of dollars’ worth of the cryptocash, currently valued at around $11 USD per coin.

Pirateat40 claimed that Bitcoin Savings & Trust had collected from investors roughly 500,000 worth of the currency, or around $5.49 million in US dollars, but not before disappearing off the face of the Web. The virtual hedge fund went offline this month following pirateat40’s announcement that the site would be shutting down soon, but the investors that had their own Bitcoins tied up in BS&T say that they think the e-bankster in charge has bolted with their money.

From what I can gather nobody involved with the ponzi scheme actually knew who Pirateat40 was. Why would you trust a person you’ve never met with your money? More importantly, why would you trust a person whose identity is concealed from you with your money? The answer to both questions is you shouldn’t.

Socialism Appears to be Working as Expected in France

Earlier this year France elected a socialist as their new president, which I predicted would end badly for the country. Needless to say the unemployment rate hasn’t improved:

The number of French unemployed has broken through the 3-million barrier for the first time since 1999, the country’s leaders say.

The latest total adds pressure on President Francois Hollande, whose administration is under attack for doing not doing enough to fix the economy. France’s unemployment rate is currently 10 percent.

Perhaps the new socialist president has been too busy ordering the confiscation of property from French gypsies to address current economic issues. Either way, things aren’t looking good for those living in France.