Welcome to Truth, FREEDOM OR ANARCHY,Campaign of Conscience. , is an alternative media and news site that is dedicated to the truth, true journalism and the truth movement. The articles, ideas, quotes, books and movies are here to let everyone know the truth about our universe. The truth will set us free, it will enlighten, inspire, awaken and unite us. Armed with the truth united we stand, for peace, freedom, health and happiness for all
War drums are beating again, and fairly seriously, it seems. And so I’d like to make a few points before things get out of hand. Because once the bodies start piling up, instincts will be overloaded, and reason will be difficult.
So, here are a few things to think about ahead of time:
#1: War is failure. And if we get a war now based upon an uncertain attack leaving a fairly small number of casualties, it’s beyond failure; it is lunacy. Thousands die in wars, sometimes a thousand in a day. And the current situation poses no significant threat to the US, Canada, Britain, France, etc. But as of today, they’re striding toward multi-national war. One mistake could ignite it. They are madmen in suits.
#2: War fever is real and mind-bending. If war comes, the news outlets will devote themselves to stoking fear, anger, and nationalism in every viewer they can reach. All of it will be emotion based and persistently manipulative. And once people get into that groove, they’ll be slow to pull themselves out of it. After all, pulling out of war fever means admitting that you got a little crazy.
#3: The cheerleaders will remain aloof from the bleeding and dying. It’s Bobby from Nebraska and Pat from Alabama who will be killed and dismembered, not the crazed old men on TV.
#4: The people on the “other side” will be dehumanized. Insert your own commentary here.
#5: Government will be given carte blanch to do whatever it wants. That means more debt, more wild profits to political “donors,” more insane regulations, and a still worse police state.
What to Do?
If you want to help others, start making points like the above, so people have a chance to work them into their minds.
You can also create an alternative to the insanity. Turn off the TV. Read books. Let people call you weird. Build a new culture. Use future-friendly technologies like cryptocurrencies.
But more than anything else, improve yourself. Be kind, benevolent, curious, and honest. Persist in these lines of development.
And if the bloody insanity does come, don’t try to convert people in the grip of war fever. Just love them and wait for them to come to you.
Whatever complaints we may have about the US Constitution, it’s hard not to appreciate this phrase in its preamble:
[to] secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity…
The problem of course is that the word “liberty” has been so abused that it no longer has a clear meaning. It’s used as a “hooray for us” term and not a great deal more[1]. Still, I like the phrase in the Constitution, and so I’d like to substitute a fresh term: panarchy. The improved phrase runs like this:
to secure the blessings of panarchy to ourselves and our posterity
That is meaningful, even within the storm of distraction and distortion that is our modern world.
Political Freedom
For those of you who are unfamiliar with panarchy, it refers to a condition of “live and let live,” explicitly including political choices. In other words, panarchy means freedom of choice, including political choice.
A condition of panarchy is one where you can choose what kind of government you will be ruled by, or choose to be ruled by none at all. That’s actual free choice… as opposed to the political version of free choice, which means, “Choose between the options we give you.”
The truth is that none of us in the modern West enjoys political freedom. We are permitted to fight about political details, but we’re not free to choose ways of life other than the ones provided to us. It’s because of this that political powers blather on and on about “liberty.” It deflects attention from the true state of affairs.
Bear in mind, please, that panarchy and political freedom hearken directly back to John Locke’s Second Treatise on Government and his definition of mankind’s natural state:
To understand political power aright, and derive from it its original, we must consider what estate all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of Nature, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man.
Also bear in mind that this was the foundation of the American Revolution. Among other things, Jefferson held Locke to be one of the three greatest men who ever lived, and Samuel Adams wrote this about him in 1771:
Mr. Locke has often been quoted in the present dispute between Britain and her colonies, and very much to our purpose. His reasoning is so forceful that no one has even attempted to disprove it.
Panarchy in Practice
Panarchy delivers political freedom, in addition to physical and economic freedom. Here are the kinds of choices that are available to us all under panarchy:
Do you think a constitutional republic is the best model of human organization? Great, go ahead and set one up.
Do you think a monarchy is best? No problem. Set one up. No one will oppose you.
Would you prefer a voluntaryist arrangement? Go for it.
Want to build an anarco-syndicalist system? Whether or not most of us think that’s a great idea, you remain free to try.
There’s only one limitation for any set of arrangements: You can’t force anyone into your plan. We all remain free to choose, with no one forcing or forbidding.
“But It Can’t Work!”
What this really means is, “I must kill that concept.” It’s seldom more than a knee-jerk opposition to something outside the status quo.
The wild thing about this is that the people who object have no way of knowing what they’re saying is true: Nothing but the system they idolize is permitted, and this has been the case for a long, long time.
The last time we had a chance to experiment with political freedom in the West was in parts of North America during the 18th and 19th centuries, before alternatives to the system were violently suppressed. And that went pretty well for those who stayed westward of power… even in wild country.
As for working out the practical details, that’s simple enough. The problem is that political types instantly demand a full, foolproof plan, covering every detail. That’s not only silly, but the plan would become obsolete on the second day.
The solution is simply to get out of the way and let people act on their own. That’s what free markets do, isn’t it? And they usually work quite well.
The demand for a perfect plan in advance is, first of all, impossible. Second of all, it would be almost useless if it were possible. Thirdly and most directly, it’s a delaying tactic; its true purpose is to freeze people in place.
Panarchy is moral. It’s a better model. It delivers actual liberty.
Panarchy would secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, and if not perfectly (nothing is going to be perfect at this stage of human development), it would certainly be better than the political systems that killed 262 million people in the 20th century.
The bar for panarchy to surpass is frightfully low. All that truly stands in its way is superstition.
It is easy to say that Trump is failing on the one thing I thought made him a better candidate than most others two years ago and that is on the issue of war and empire. Well, that and he was a great stick in the eye of those who work hard to control the narrative.
I must admit, in many ways he is turning out even better than I had hoped…well, if we all (literally) survive his time in office.
Internationally, can you think of a time in your lifetime when the United States government so consistently and widely – and openly – made itself a pariah? For the Europeans, it is the Iran nuclear deal; for East Asians, it is North Korea; for Arabs not associated with the Kingdom…well, that’s pretty much the same as always, but Nikki Haley has a way of putting an exclamation point on it, doesn’t she.
On trade it’s the TPP, NAFTA, China dumping, etc. Every action drives allies away and drives all players to find ways to circumvent or avoid US markets, the US Dollar, US technology, etc.
Nationally…the election itself made clear the divide in America – the red counties vs. the blue counties; the deplorables vs. the “civilized.” We have the NFL and the flag – America, love it or leave it has come back in vogue. All thanks to the Donald.
Trump is doing more to accelerate the decentralization of the empire and the decentralization of the country than any other president in my lifetime. As libertarianism in theory is decentralization in practice – and as I suggested a year ago – I think Trump is the most libertarian president of my lifetime.
Does this end with the end of his presidency? I don’t think so. These trends are all inevitable; we can only thank God that the right man showed up at the right time to accelerate the process. Whoever comes next won’t matter (although if the deplorables don’t get what they want this time, the civilized might look longingly back on the days of Trump), because the direction is inevitable and won’t be reversed.
Speaking of the end of his presidency, it seems to me that Trump is setting up for a smashing victory in the upcoming mid-terms. I have suspected for quite some time that he (along with a subset of Republicans in Congress and some in the administration) are lining up their investigative actions and news leaks to come exploding full-tilt on the scene about four weeks before the November elections.
We know the news already and that it will be bad for the Democrats. Trump is merely orchestrating the timing. Talk about tearing the country apart, I think we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
Like I said, the most libertarian president of my lifetime.
Your inboxes might be flooded with privacy policy emails. Have you read any of them?
Getty Images
"We're updating our Privacy Policy." "Updates to Our Privacy Policy." "Announcing updates to our privacy policy." "Your data privacy: Please take action!"
The list of updated privacy policies in my inbox goes on and on -- and if you've signed up for any online service in the last decade, these emails are most likely in your inbox, too.
It's no coincidence, this sudden surge of activity by tech companies. The flood of privacy policy updates is actually coming because of a new European Union law kicking into effect. The General Data Protection Regulation aims to change how tech companies collect and use data from millions of people every day.
The data privacy law, which passed in 2016, allowed two years for companies to whip themselves into shape. Even with all that time to make their adjustments and notify users, the majority of these emails came in the run-up to Friday, the GDPR's deadline.
The crux of the new privacy policies follows the same idea: GDPR now requires companies to explicitly ask to collect your data and allow you to delete any information they collect on you.
So, with this rush of new legalese storming everyone's inboxes, we need to ask an important question: Is anyone actually reading this?
And even though the GDPR now requires privacy policies to be written in "clear and plain language," as it turns out, they've gotten even more complicated.
The Wall Street Journal discovered that privacy policies for Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn all actually became lengthier in their GDPR-compliant updates. Experts told The Washington Post these changes would likely make privacy policies more complicated, despite the EU's regulations.
A reason these updated policies are much longer than their predecessors could be that companies have been rushing to meet the deadline, said Adrienne Ehrhardt, a partner at the law firm Michael Best, which is focused on privacy and cybersecurity.
"So, understandably, the approach may be to put in all the required information, and being transparent may equate to overinforming, which leads to very long privacy notices," she said.
Zuckerberg took a stab, at least, at telling EU lawmakers how Facebook would comply with the GDPR.
Facebook isn't alone, of course. A privacy advocacy group in the UK sued Google for $4.3 billion over collecting browser data without people's consent -- the data harvesting happened from 2011 to 2012, but the lawsuit just went to trial on May 21.
But back to you and those privacy notices.
A 2008 study found that it would take average Americans 244 hours a year to read through privacy policies for all the services they use. It's likely that would take even longer with the GDPR's lengthier changes, especially with the influx of new tech in the last 10 years. The Pew Research Center found in 2014 that half of Americans don't even know what a privacy policy is.
"Let's be honest, few Americans can decipher or understand what this contract means," Sen. Kamala Harris, a Democrat from California, said during a May 16 Senate hearing with Cambridge Analytica's whistleblower Christopher Wylie.
With that in mind, experts are skeptical that anyone is really taking the time to dig through all these updates.
"I don't expect many consumers will read a single privacy policy update, let alone the dozens that are showing up in our inboxes over the last couple of weeks," Brian Vecci, a technical evangelist at data protection firm Varonis, said. "But it's a good reminder that every email they get is another company that has at least some of their personal data."
If you do skip these updated privacy policies though, you'd be unaware of all the new data protections that GDPR gives. Here's a quick cheat sheet. You're now able to:
Ask a website to delete data that it holds on you
Download all the data that a company has stored on you
Find out how that company is using your data
Any firm that doesn't comply could face fines of up to 4 percent of its global profits.
Just because no one is reading though a privacy policy, doesn't mean there isn't any real change, experts say. Even if only a small handful of people are reading it, they would be able to highlight all the issues that come with it, said Jeffrey Sanchez, the security and privacy managing director at consulting firm Protiviti.
"We have seen examples of people using social media to highlight companies with inappropriate privacy policies," he said.
Erik Charlton, CEO of smart light switch company Noon Home, was on the founding team at Nest and helped write the smart device maker's original privacy policy. He believes that the unread privacy updates still hold weight. Even if consumers aren't reading them line by line, he said, the new regulations will give them a better chance to control their data.
"I think the biggest value is a sense of confidence that they'll have a recourse should they need it," Charlton said.
While he has faith that these updated policies are protecting people, he's skeptical people are looking through the fine print.
"There have been a slew of new user agreements in the past few days, and I'm curious who's reading all of these updates."
'Hello, humans': Google's Duplex could make Assistant the most lifelike AI yet.
Cambridge Analytica: Everything you need to know about Facebook's data mining scandal.
