Author Topic: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution  (Read 19103 times)

Offline Boston

  • FSW Founder
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,174
  • FSW Rifleman
    • Javelin Press
The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« on: September 22, 2009, 12:30:35 PM »
The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
http://georgedonnelly.com/agorism/early-plan-peaceful-evolution

Much food for thought here, which also syncs nicely with Wyoming and FSW culture, especially:


Quote
3. Virtualize Your Organization

Open source means that we organize in a loose fashion. There are no formal leaders, there is no chain of command, there are no elections or orders handed down. Individuals work together or not as they see fit. Individuals organize for “ops”, do the job and disperse. The exact same teams may not work together more than once. Even among libertarians there are diverse interests, priorities and comfort levels.

Some areas which we could improve upon:

Quote
5. Coopetition not Competition
Everyone who opposes the state is our ally. Perhaps even those who oppose just this state are our allies (up to a point). We will work in a space where we can simultaneously grow our effort and accelerate our growth as we complete with each other. Consider the Visa card system as an analogy. Banks’ credit card offerings compete against each other while all sharing the Visa payment system. As the competing banks grow, the shared Visa platform grows, and vice versa.

6. Don’t Fork the Insurgency
We can not allow major disagreements to become more important than our shared vision. In other words, no infighting. The kind of organization contemplated here is so ephemeral, you don’t have to work with anyone you don’t want to. There are no votes to be won or lost that you can’t simply walk away from. It’s a free market; forking it is dumb because the more participants in the market the more efficient it will be. People who lack tact or common courtesy, who start pointless arguments should be ostracized.

8. Self-Replicate
Self-replication is about making more of yourself. In other words, persuade more people to abandon aggression and embrace voluntary interaction. Anything that leverages people, that multiplies a person’s productivity is also included. Videotaping your productive activism is an example of this, since it can put you on the computers of potentially millions of people. Effective use of social media can be self-replication. Pamphleting, campaigning and other face-to-face activities can also qualify. Sharing how to duplicate your ops is also self-replication

A great essay which will benefit all freedom-lovers!
 ~W~
Boston




Offline jubal

  • FSW Member, In Wyoming
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,007
    • Marksmans Box
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2009, 02:38:57 PM »


   Sounds good. I like it. It'll work in any place for whatever.
"
When planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not hereditary".
 Thomas Paine

Offline SteveM

  • FSW Member, Wyoming Bound
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2009, 04:00:11 PM »
It is a great essay because it works on so many levels.  It should be clear by now that we are not going to change things by voting out incumbents.  We only replace them with incumbents-in-training.  For all the excitement that Ron Paul generated and all the money he raised his vote totals were still in the Mike Gravel range throughout the primaries.  Even if we had Ron Paul as president and a supportive Congress there are many millions who would not know how to live in a libertarian country.  No welfare, no food stamps, no Medicare, no Federal "aasistance" for education, roads and the like.  Take Win Bear's problems assimilating in The Probablility Broach and multiply it by a couple hundred million and I think we get a sense of the problem.
 
This approach functions on the level of the individual without the need for organizations, political parties, government permission, or a central leader.  While you hope it might produce people like John Wayne Preston (Molon Labe for those who might not have read it) it does not depend on them to succeed.  It depends on the individual's efforts to be free.  Then self replication and connecting with others to spread freedom.  And that may be the major key to this because so many don't understand what it is to be free.   Several people I work with were/are big Obama supporters and simply could not understand the interest that Ron Paul was creating, especially the concern with freedom.  In their opinion we are already free.  Apparently the ability to go to the mall, eat cheese dogs and buy designer jeans means we are free.  Without jumping into issues around the Federal Reserve, statism, there really only be one Republicrat party, and so on, I asked how a free society should operate.  Want to get married - need a govt license for it to be legal, want to own a car - got to be licencsed by govt, want to drive the car - need another kind of license, want to hunt or fish - another license, want to own a dog or cat - another license, want to go to a gun shop and buy a gun - need govt permission, want to own a business - another license, want to build a house -  many licenses, want to add on to your house - more govt permission, and on it went.  I asked if that was their idea of a free society.  Their opinion was this is what government is supposed to do, tell you what you can and can't do.  To them that's freedom.  That kind of thinking isn't going to change at the ballot box and would wilt or worse in a revolution.  At best it may be that this is a way to reach many of them, at worst a way to connect with others of like mind and resist quietly.

Fearlessness is better than a faint-heart for any man who puts his nose out of doors. The length of my life and the day of my death were fated long ago.
For Scirnis

Offline Boston

  • FSW Founder
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,174
  • FSW Rifleman
    • Javelin Press
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2009, 06:17:44 PM »
Quote
Even if we had Ron Paul as president and a supportive Congress there are many millions who would not know how to live in a libertarian country.  No welfare, no food stamps, no Medicare, no Federal "aasistance" for education, roads and the like.  Take Win Bear's problems assimilating in The Probablility Broach and multiply it by a couple hundred million and I think we get a sense of the problem.
Yes, and well put!
And they'd just vote back in all the crap.
We're outnumbered (nationally).  Always were; always will be.

Boston

Offline Paul Bonneau

  • Member, In Wyoming
  • Administrative Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,480
    • Wyoming Liberty Index
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2009, 07:45:45 PM »
This sentence left me cold:

Quote
In traditional voluntaryist fashion, Iím convinced we need to liberate 6 billion minds worldwide simultaneously.

An obvious impossibility. The rest of the article made sense though.

Quote
Even if we had Ron Paul as president and a supportive Congress there are many millions who would not know how to live in a libertarian country.  No welfare, no food stamps, no Medicare, no Federal "aasistance" for education, roads and the like.

I have been pushing the line of thought recently, that it is not necessary to convert all these people who are supportive or dependent on the state. It's a very long row to hoe to get them to accept freedom. However, it is a much smaller job to get them to leave us alone.

Many leftists, for example (paradoxically) have the view that they are non-violent. Now, one tack would be to belittle this belief, and try to point out how absurd it is. But is that the best course? Why not instead, take advantage of this view of theirs, and use it to our advantage. Say to them, "Since you don't approve of violence, then I assume you won't get violent with me if I choose not to participate in your version of political paradise. If you let me opt out, I will then stop agitating against your views. We can live in peace. This means of course that you cannot tax me or force me to do this or that, because force implies violence. But you are non-violent so you should have no problem with that, right?"

A free world would not be completely free. There will never be such a place. A free world would have pockets of different varieties of freedom, and different varieties of statism, each letting the other go its way. Then people will simply move to the kind of community that suits them.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2009, 07:47:18 PM by Paul Bonneau »
Laws turn men into slaves.

Offline Future/Now

  • Social Type
  • ****
  • Posts: 216
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #5 on: September 25, 2009, 12:21:45 PM »
I have been pushing the line of thought recently, that it is not necessary to convert all these people who are supportive or dependent on the state. It's a very long row to hoe to get them to accept freedom. However, it is a much smaller job to get them to leave us alone.

Many leftists, for example (paradoxically) have the view that they are non-violent. Now, one tack would be to belittle this belief, and try to point out how absurd it is. But is that the best course? Why not instead, take advantage of this view of theirs, and use it to our advantage. Say to them, "Since you don't approve of violence, then I assume you won't get violent with me if I choose not to participate in your version of political paradise. If you let me opt out, I will then stop agitating against your views. We can live in peace. This means of course that you cannot tax me or force me to do this or that, because force implies violence. But you are non-violent so you should have no problem with that, right?"

Well, you could certainly try that, although it's debatable how far you'd get. Lefties are generally nonviolent only as long as you "play nice" and agree with all their bullshite. Better to just leave 'em without a word, move as far away as possible and be done with it.

To them, things like logic, reason, independence, etc are unequivocally foreign concepts. In fact, the mere mention of them is a mortal threat to their way of life slavery, which they've collectively shown time and again they will defend at any cost with damn near religious zeal. Freedom lovers might as well be parasites that only want to suck away every last drop of the brainwash potion that courses through their veins. Without that vital nourishment, how could they possibly sustain themselves? :o When faced with the possibility of actually getting a clue, and having to decide (for themselves, naturally) between that and perpetual cluelessness, their heads might explode! Not that the loss would really be all that great, mind you....>:D
Hey! Y'all got curb service?

Offline Paul Bonneau

  • Member, In Wyoming
  • Administrative Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,480
    • Wyoming Liberty Index
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #6 on: September 26, 2009, 07:24:51 PM »
Quote
Well, you could certainly try that, although it's debatable how far you'd get. Lefties are generally nonviolent only as long as you "play nice" and agree with all their bullshite
.

However far one would get with this, it is certain that one would get farther than arguing they should become free.

Anyway, it is not hopeless. On that homeschool list in Oregon I used to post on, we got into a discussion about gun control. One woman, who is a Quaker and therefore of course nonviolent, was a proponent of gun control because "guns mean violence", etc. I carefully and respectfully pointed out that her stand was a violent one, because it involved government agents attacking anyone who refused to give up their guns. She finally came around - not to the point that she wanted to be a gun owner, nor even to the point that it was OK that other people were gun owners. But she did get to the point of admitting gun control was violent, and said (in effect) she would no longer support it. And she said she would pray for the time I gave up my guns voluntarily.  :)

It helped that she and I saw eye to eye on things like homeschooling and Imperial foreign policy (i.e., constant war).

Quote
To them, things like logic, reason, independence, etc are unequivocally foreign concepts.

It's funny, I've heard "liberals" and leftists make exactly the same comment about conservatives and libertarians.  :D
Laws turn men into slaves.

Offline elk

  • Needs To Get Out More
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,479
  • We never had to take any of it seriously, did we?
    • Downrange TV
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #7 on: September 27, 2009, 08:22:17 AM »
Quote
Quote
To them, things like logic, reason, independence, etc are unequivocally foreign concepts.

It's funny, I've heard "liberals" and leftists make exactly the same comment about conservatives and libertarians.  Cheesy

Problem is something else altogether.  Problem is that reason as a word has been bastardized, it has had its meaning subverted, modified, changed, removed and replaced...  Reason has been lobotomized by the brainwashers in politics and bureaucracy.  Reason can mean reason, or it can mean the ability to compromise out of cowardice or some other form of fear.  Indeed, "reasonable" has been changed to mean "amenable."  Interesting how the "neue sprache" has come into being as per Eric Blair's vision (some of you know him by his pen name, George Orwell.)

Rather than see reason as a cause and effect and understanding thereof, they see reason as being able to give in to the demands of bandits or thugs in order to minimize conflict.

I side with Heinlein here... "peace is overrated."  If the price of peace is eternal slavery... I'd sooner fight.  Not die, mind you, but sooner fight, suffer and then WIN.  A life lived in slavery to creatures I dearly detest with every part of my mind that I can be aware of, is not a life, but an lasting conscious death.  A life spent fighting, at least animates the mind, and the body.

Or to put it in feminine terms, "if the price of peace, is submitting to rape, on demand by the rapist, whenever, and wherever and on whatever terms the rapist desires, then no, I would rather fight, even if the penalty for failing to win is death.  Not fighting is certain death by a thousand cuts (or in this case, rapes)... no thanks to that.

-----------------------

To put it in terms one can understand... I had surgery some years back.  A fairly harmless procedure to clean up some damaged tissue, which then required a drain "fuse" (a fairly large one, and some stitches... 2 sessions worth, plus removal.)

Doc then tells me "you have to remove the fuse yourself, once it stops draining, after a few days, unless you want to pay for an extra visit, during which I will remove it, and then let it sit for another day, unhindered to dry up a little, then come in to get stitched up."

So after wandering about with a bloody bandage pouring out blood and... serum from the wound, I had to pull it out.  I tried removing it, and discovered it was a bandage in a tender area with wounded tissue... very painful.  The wound was still raw, and i had friends and family offering to help me remove it.  I cowered for days pondering how to remove it once it stopped draining.

And then I had to make a choice.  Be fearful of a quick bit of pain, or let that bandage rot in there, cause me further infection and perhaps a far more invasive procedure to cut out far more meat than I had lost in that small procedure.  So I steeled myself, closed my teeth in case I might bite down and catch my tongue, and YANKED.  And it hurt like hell!  Sharp, agonizing pain.  And since there was almost 2 feet of gauze stuffed into a 2 to 3 inch hole in my muscle, I proceeded to YANK again.  After I was done pulling the bloody 'fuse' out... I was PROUD of myself.  I didn't ask for anyone else's help.  I did it myself.  Therein lies the difference, to me reason wasn't the lack of pain in the process of making myself healthy.  Reason was the ability to understand that short temporary pain, beats a permanent recurring infectious issue.  So I was willing to suffer once to not suffer repeatedly in the future.  This is what the collectivists don't get.  If there wasn't a doctor there, or if I couldn't afford the extra visit, then being able to undergo pain at my own hands to avoid reinfection or further complications is an application of reason.

Collectivists can't do that.  Pain scares them, risk scares them.  They scare all of us, but a man of reason will not run away from risk, or from pain.  Because a man of reason understands the greater implications of things.  A collectivist or "amenable" man will surrender the moment the risk for pain, or the risk for loss is implied.  He will also surrender the moment he is told to, because he is a coward.  Cowards, as one says, die every day.  A brave man only dies once.  A wise or powerful man gets to pick when and where, and the TRULY powerful one figures out what the rest of us are still struggling with... that being, the process to not dying at all, or making death inconsequential to that individual.  Not a single one of these will occur to the collectivist weakling, because he dies everyday, and yet still fears death, pain, or harm, despite subjecting himself to them every single day... willingly, out of his sheer fear of actually LIVING.

Meanwhile, I have dealt with having pain from a surgery and the process in cutting, stuffing, unstuffing, suturing and removing said sutures... and it did hurt, some parts more than others.  I'm not afraid of it any longer... that's for sure.  The collectivist cowards, afraid of a bit of minor pain, will let anyone else fight for them, and will only fight if "its safe."  They fear shedding blood, even of their food, but are ok if someone else shoulders that burden.  Collectivists of all stripes are merely the latest breed of insanity plaguing those of us having a go at being sane and living life... each his own life...
Trading privacy for security is stupid enough; not getting any actual security in the bargain is even stupider.  ~ Bruce Schneier of Cryptogram fame (www.schneier.com)

Remember always that the only thing they required of us was our moral sanction. You lost when you accepted their moral code.

Offline MamaLiberty

  • FSW Founding Member, In Wyoming
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,520
  • Self ownership/ personal responsibility
    • The Price of Liberty.org
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #8 on: September 27, 2009, 01:31:45 PM »
Very good, elk. Well said.
It's not that people are dumber, it's that stupidity used to be more painful.

Offline SteveM

  • FSW Member, Wyoming Bound
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2009, 07:51:48 PM »

I have been pushing the line of thought recently, that it is not necessary to convert all these people who are supportive or dependent on the state. It's a very long row to hoe to get them to accept freedom. However, it is a much smaller job to get them to leave us alone.

Many leftists, for example (paradoxically) have the view that they are non-violent. Now, one tack would be to belittle this belief, and try to point out how absurd it is. But is that the best course? Why not instead, take advantage of this view of theirs, and use it to our advantage. Say to them, "Since you don't approve of violence, then I assume you won't get violent with me if I choose not to participate in your version of political paradise. If you let me opt out, I will then stop agitating against your views. We can live in peace. This means of course that you cannot tax me or force me to do this or that, because force implies violence. But you are non-violent so you should have no problem with that, right?"

If this would work I'm all for it.  But can they leave us alone?  I wonder.  They may profess non-violence but what they mean is they are too squeamish to commit violence themselves.  So they pay others to do it for them as long as they don't actually have to witness it.  The left and the neo-cons just can't leave anyone alone who aren't like them.  It's a phobia as though the existence of anyone free is an utter repudiation of everything they believe and are.  I hope I'm wrong about this but I believe in the end they just can't.
Fearlessness is better than a faint-heart for any man who puts his nose out of doors. The length of my life and the day of my death were fated long ago.
For Scirnis

Offline Paul Bonneau

  • Member, In Wyoming
  • Administrative Staff
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,480
    • Wyoming Liberty Index
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2009, 10:33:02 PM »
I didn't say it would be easy. I just say it is easier than the alternative, of making them free. What other alternative is there? Are you going to wait for the revolution and just kill them all?  ::)

The problem you state is simply their knee-jerk reaction. However there is some material to work with here, once we get past the knee-jerk. There are contradictions in their position. If you can gently point out those contradictions, you may make progress.

Look at the gun control debate. 20 years ago it looked like we were going to be disarmed, no question. Now who thinks that? I believe the point finally got across to many of them, that shame was not going to work to get us to voluntarily give up our guns, when we all thought we were being virtuous in having them. Nor was respect for law, a law we believed would be completely illegitimate and unconstitutional. That meant that we would have to be forced. Well, that didn't bother all of them, but it bothered some!

The same is true of socialism. What if we point out that we don't want anything to do with it. If they want socialism, they should go ahead and have it, but just don't include us. They should not really mind, as long as they are getting what they want. Of course, socialism depends on having a productive class to parasitize, so there is an incentive for them to want to impose it on us. But for someone of that mind, it is also an admission that socialism can't make it on its own without dragooning unwilling others. That's quite an admission, and a good percentage of them won't want to go that far.

Note, this business about them wanting to force it on us largely derives from the usual political picture, noted by Lenin, of "who does what to whom". But if we don't want to make them free, that factor is largely gone. It's like that effect I noticed with homeschoolers. Before they were homeschoolers, they were constantly battling over what curriculum was used in government schools. As soon as they pulled their kids out of those schools, they didn't much care what the curriculum was. As a result, people who previously hated each other with a passion, could relate to each other just fine on the homeschool discussion lists. They no longer had a horse in that government curriculum race, and could use any curriculum they pleased, or none at all.

Leftists in particular, believe they are tolerant. That does not mean they appreciate what others do, but it does mean they don't mind what others do, or mind enough to use violence at any rate. Well, let's take advantage of that belief.
Laws turn men into slaves.

Offline SteveM

  • FSW Member, Wyoming Bound
  • ***
  • Posts: 195
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2009, 03:35:57 PM »
You may be right Paul.  Perhaps some of these folks are smarter than I give them credit for being and I'm just older and more cynical these days.  Which brings us back to the original point of this thread.  Voluntary cooperation among like minded folks outside the mainstream system.  Many in the left talk about the "evolution" of the human race, the individual, and human culture.  Certainly it can be argued that the next step in any human evolution is toward personal freedom and responsibility, voluntary cooperation and association, and away from collectivism.  How can anything evolve without being free to make the choices necessary to grow.
Fearlessness is better than a faint-heart for any man who puts his nose out of doors. The length of my life and the day of my death were fated long ago.
For Scirnis

Offline Boston

  • FSW Founder
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,174
  • FSW Rifleman
    • Javelin Press
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #12 on: October 05, 2009, 09:28:14 AM »
Good points, Paul, thanks.

As long as we have alternatives to go to (as with homeschooling),
the tensions won't mount too extremely.  However, take away those
peaceable alternatives . . .

Boston

Offline SunDog

  • FSW Member, In Wyoming
  • ****
  • Posts: 235
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #13 on: October 05, 2009, 12:49:01 PM »

Of course, socialism depends on having a productive class to parasitize, so there is an incentive for them to want to impose it on us.


This offers another means to bring the socialist system down. The socialist system depends on taking from the productive to give to the unproductive, with the lie that the "gift" will be available to all. Unless there are enough "givers" to provide for the "takers" the system fails. If enough people refuse to give and insist on taking, the system fails. Since the leftist system is married to income taxes, then people can stop "giving" by reducing their "taxable" (i.e., traceable) income to a low enough level. And they can sign up for all the benefits, to maximize their "take." They can encourage others to sign up, perhaps even "Chicago voters." Sooner or later the system collapses - though the problem then becomes how to establish a freer state to replace it, rather than a more oppressive one.

Offline MamaLiberty

  • FSW Founding Member, In Wyoming
  • ****
  • Posts: 9,520
  • Self ownership/ personal responsibility
    • The Price of Liberty.org
Re: The 11 Principles of Open Source Peaceful Evolution
« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2009, 01:34:13 PM »
And they can sign up for all the benefits, to maximize their "take." They can encourage others to sign up, perhaps even "Chicago voters."

Do you really want to become one of the thieves? Theft is not justified, regardless of who is being robbed - or why.

Refuse to be robbed, by all means. But it is unethical to encourage anyone to become a receiver of stolen goods.
It's not that people are dumber, it's that stupidity used to be more painful.