Автор: Анкап-тян

What do you think about the protests on the 6th?

Is it worth going out to them, or will they lead to nothing? Why is no one spreading information about them or calling for people to go out?

nvi us (the question is accompanied by a donation of 1 ANCAPCHAN)

To put it very briefly, it is not worth going to rallies in Russia; it is an irrational waste of strength. A public appearance against the regime today is considered treason to the motherland in Russia and is punished with prison terms of up to fifteen years. But, as they say, if you’re going to be hanged for stealing a lamb, you might as well steal a sheep. A campaign of civil disobedience implies far more than just taking to the squares. It implies total sabotage of the state.

As I suggested earlier, you can burn down military recruitment offices. These are poorly protected targets containing a mass of paper personal files of conscripts. Their destruction will seriously hinder mobilization. If you work as a system administrator in one government institution or another, you can delete, corrupt, or leak databases and other important information into the public domain, leaving an Anonymous team business card on the screen—let them think it was hackers. You can embezzle any state property you can get your hands on, and even if you are caught, theft carries a lighter sentence than treason to the motherland. You can make calls reporting bomb threats.

One can and should savor all stories of such sabotage and spread rumors about it to the widest possible audience. If a “vatnik” only receives information that new sanctions are being introduced from the outside, he may rally around the flag. But if he receives a constant stream of rumors that a partisan war against the regime is underway in Russia—that citizen A had their tires slashed for the letter Z, that citizen B was beaten up, that the republican administration has gathered for a secret meeting on the topic of seceding from Russia—then his morale will be undermined much more effectively.

There is no point in telling regime supporters that the war was condemned by someone like Chichvarkin. He is already a traitor; what can be expected from him. On the other hand, it is useful to tell them that people like Abramovich have condemned the war. As in, look how smart people act: they’ve fled far away themselves and are atoning for their sins before the West. And tomorrow, slightly less smart guys, who have stolen not billions, but hundreds of millions, will do the same. And the day after tomorrow, the head of a city FSB office will flee and ask for political asylum. Only the most incorrigible idiots will support the regime until the end—they are the ones who will be appointed as scapegoats. Though, an idiot might not live to see that moment because he will go to the front and be killed there.

And such defeatist talk is far more effective than various stupid rallies. Leave the rallies to the diaspora; they can do it much more safely and with much more positive media coverage. For instance, we have a rally tomorrow at 14:00 in Podgorica; if you are already in Montenegro and have Sunday off, then come. People are actively coordinating in local chats, so you’ll figure out the most convenient way to get there.

Another important direction of effort for the diaspora is helping everyone fleeing the war. This is useful first and foremost not even to the refugees, but to the volunteers themselves. Just think about the fact that the proportion of Ukrainians among Russian-speaking emigrants will grow sharply, and all these people will be damn angry. Do not give a reason to direct this anger at Russian expats. Let’s make it clear that Putinism is strictly limited to the territory where Putin’s tanks graze and is powerless to penetrate beyond its borders. And here live the “right” Russians, who saw that Putin roughly in the same place as the Russian warship.

Anti-Russian post 2

As you can see, my imagination is not very rich when it comes to headlines. Usually, the authors of the questions provide them for me, preventing me from revealing my inadequacy.

A march in support of Ukraine’s defenders took place in Podgorica today. Unfortunately, I work without days off, and I couldn’t find a replacement, so I didn’t attend; I only watched the videos. By my estimates, there were between five hundred and a thousand people. Considering that it is currently the off-season for tourism, this means that a very large proportion of the Russian-speaking diaspora showed up. In local chats, statements from those who approve of the war are literally solitary. People have split into those discussing how to help the victims of the attack, and those who snort irritably at the discussion of politics, after first assuring that they, of course, deeply sympathize with the Ukrainians, but the topic is simply off-topic for the chat.

Several people who had previously expressed interest in the Montelibero project in the vein of “I should visit you in the summer and have a look” have now changed their tone to “I’m urgently gathering my documents and moving to you for good.” I recommend you join their ranks as soon as possible. You need a foreign passport, a diploma or certificate, a police clearance certificate, a Tinkoff Bank card, and the standard COVID kit that grants the right to cross borders. There are no direct connections between Russia and Montenegro; for now, the most reliable route is via Istanbul. If possible, bring cash Euros. If this is difficult (I fully admit that there may be unjustifiably large spreads when buying currency in Russia now), bring bitcoins. Dollars are not needed here at all.

It feels like the Russian leadership has frightened the whole world quite a bit, and under the influence of panic, people are prone to impulsive actions. Pavel Durov almost closed the Russian segment of Telegram. European countries are stopping the issuance of visas to citizens of the Russian Federation. There are rumors about crypto-exchanges blocking Russian wallets. In short, in every “watchman,” there awakens a desire to immediately close some entrance or exit, because something must be done, given what a fucking disaster is happening.

Therefore, if you have so far neglected the recommendations to store savings in non-custodial bitcoin wallets, it is quite likely that you have suddenly become significantly poorer. This also means that if you rush abroad right now, you will find yourself there completely unprepared. Do not hesitate to ask for help, but also do not assume that anyone owes you anything. As I have written repeatedly about social welfare under ancap — the main virtue of the poor is to be sweet and grateful.

If you decide to stay in Russia — it is difficult for me to give detailed recommendations here; I am no longer well-oriented in the situation and do not know where it is more dangerous — in a conditional Moscow or in a conditional village. I will be very surprised if Russia does not see a wave of reports about the mining of various government institutions, or even defense enterprises, as well as cyberattacks. Actual terrorist attacks are more likely in the border zone. Try not to end up in the troops; that is the stupidest thing you can do right now. If the military enlistment office becomes interested in you, do not try to sue or count on alternative civilian service (AGS); just get out, at least by moving to another district outside your registered address. They are unlikely to be ceremonious with you now, so do not contact the state more than necessary.

Final paragraph — for those who want to be heroes in this war. Burn down the military enlistment offices. It is hard to think of a more effective peaceful anti-war action. The recipe for a Molotov cocktail is publicly available, and enlistment offices are usually not in residential buildings, so in a nighttime arson, the probability of casualties is minimal, while the benefit is obvious: destroying the infrastructure for conscription undermines mobilization capabilities. With literally a couple of liters of gasoline and a liter of oil, you are capable of saving several hundred human fates. In the worst-case scenario, you will ruin your own, so try not to get caught stupidly.

Anti-Russian post

Sorry that I didn’t cancel Bitarch’s scheduled post; it completely slipped my mind with everything going on, and the publication was somewhat out of place. Now, let’s get to the point.

In a recent post about mercantilism, I pointed out that today it is a tool not for achieving wealth, but for war. The market is a tool for peaceful people, and economic sanctions are the flip side of that tool. Specifically, if you, the reader, can find any way to make the Russian state poorer, I will be glad if you apply it. I will be even gladder if you can do this without danger to your life, and if it doesn’t hit your own wallet too hard—after all, the resources of a peaceful person and a state differ greatly, and it’s better to avoid clearly suicidal actions, unless, of course, you believe you can achieve some truly important goal for yourself this way.

If you go out onto Russian streets to protest the war, try not to get arrested. If you do get arrested, at least try not to pay the fines afterward. If there is an opportunity to emigrate immediately (for example, if you have remote work, you are not burdened by real estate, sick relatives, and so on), do it. Even if you continue to work remotely for some Russian enterprise, at least you won’t be paying consumption taxes to Russia. If you are burdened by things like clothes, cats, or studying political science, I hope you will soon rethink the priorities in your life, although you certainly know best.

Montenegro remains visa-free for Russians for now, so for some time it will still be possible to get here relatively freely. One of the MonteLibero participants has already issued a statement that they are ready to help free of charge in obtaining a residence permit for everyone who is forced to leave Ukraine for Montenegro and asks for help. I cannot formulate a similarly broad offer for everyone wishing to urgently ditch Russia on my part, but I will certainly help with advice on settling in.

Even if you are thrilled that Putin is finally cracking down on Ukrainian Nazis, I still hope that you leave Russia, but preferably far away from me.

In general, the best thing that could happen to Russians in the coming years is if they completely lose their own statehood and scatter across the world. Change my mind.

I reread what I wrote and see that it came out terribly dry. That’s why I love texts. You can write three paragraphs of emotion and pathos, exhale, and erase them.

And tell us about the mercantilists in plain language

And why do many believe that such state economic policy leads to an increase in citizens’ welfare? And why are they actually mistaken?

Top Kripto #FreeNavalny

I’m being nudged here to speak out on the Ukrainian issue, but I’d rather answer this one instead.

Mercantilism is any policy based on the idea that free trade is unacceptable and should be regulated. In the past, one of the justifications for such a policy was the notion that trade is a war where one party loses and the other profits, and if the profiteering trader is not kept in check, he will rot everyone else while gorging himself on the people’s blood. This strange view of trade was accompanied by a belief in the harm of competition: supposedly, under competition, a merchant or craftsman cannot concentrate on one assigned area of activity, and due to meaningless fighting among themselves, there will be complete chaos in production and trade. Finally, this was accompanied by the idea that low prices for goods are harmful, just as high prices for labor are harmful—because there are “fair prices,” and every producer or trader is obliged to observe them.

It is no surprise that where such notions were strictly followed, humanity had little chance of becoming wealthy or developing technology. But this was also accompanied by the postulate of the benefit of poverty for the salvation of the soul, so no problem was seen in this.

Finally, mercantilism implied that it was extremely foolish for a ruler to allow people to buy foreign goods with money, because it was far more useful to accumulate money in the treasury—it would always come in handy for buying luxury items, but most importantly, for paying for wars. And this meant that trade should be subject to the highest possible tariffs.

A more or less systematic explanation of the errors of mercantilist views was provided by Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations, which Pushkin reported to us when describing education in the early 19th century: he scolded Homer and Theocritus, but read Adam Smith and was a deep economist, that is, he knew how to judge how a state becomes wealthy, and what it lives by, and why it does not need gold when it has simple products. The ground was finally pulled from under mercantilism during the marginalist revolution (a conference honoring the 150th anniversary of this event was recently held in Moscow), when the pricing mechanism was explained through subjective preferences rather than cost, which finally made it clear why a voluntary transaction improves the position of both parties involved.

https://youtu.be/Z59nPehJBSE

Why then, 246 years after the publication of The Wealth of Nations and 150 years after the marginalist revolution, is mercantilism still alive in people’s heads and actively applied in politics?

Because politics is war. It is a zero-sum game where those who gain power diminish the power of others. But fighting hot wars has become a faux pas, and instead, trade wars are actively used. Want to tell another regime “to hell with you”—introduce trade sanctions against it.

Politics is not only external but also internal. Fighting hot internal wars is even more of a faux pas, but representatives of certain industries can lobby for trade preferences for themselves and restrictions for their competitors, both inside the country and abroad. The slogan of protecting the domestic producer is as effective as the slogan of protecting the homeland, and it leads to the same consequences: the domestic consumer becomes poorer.

Moreover, take even the quite libertarian Montelibero project. We also primarily try to hire project participants rather than freelancers for the project’s work. Mercantilism is psychologically comfortable: you give up a bit of personal gain, but you do a good deed for a neighbor from whom you buy a more expensive product, ignoring cheaper analogues from those you dislike. Similarly, agorists may fundamentally trade only with those who do not pay taxes, even if the effect of scale and the cost of security measures would make it cheaper to deal with taxpayers. But then the state won’t get a single agorist penny.

So what is the difference? Why do libertarians consider their own behavior moral, but state regulations criminal? Of course, it’s a matter of voluntariness. You personally have every right to sacrifice profit for the sake of moral superiority. But to demand the same from others by force—that’s a no-no!

What if a monopoly has a larger economic cushion and can operate at a loss for several years?

How do you plan to fight it? How will small companies, even those with large investors, be able to withstand a giant, and will investors even take such risks by investing money in small companies? Yes, I know the arguments that monopolies cannot arise, but what if it happens anyway, and moreover, I understand that ancap is not planned to be built from scratch, but on an existing market where large producers already exist.

Anonymous question

A monopoly is the desired and most comfortable state for any business. Under the conditions of centralized political power, large businesses are economically motivated to engage in lobbying to ensure a privileged position in the market through regulatory capture. Small businesses are economically motivated to create associations and engage in lobbying through them. In a country with a sufficiently diversified economy, this creates a situation where most entrepreneurs, one way or another, feed politicians, regulations become more complex, exceptions to the rules multiply, and business, having spent a lot of effort acquiring the regulator’s favor, in the best case remains where it started. If strategic industries are singled out in a state, then all is lost: this means the guaranteed infringement of other industries.

And so, according to the problem’s conditions, we have managed to gradually move from this depressing situation to a free market, primarily free from political power. Let’s assume this happened quite quickly, and we inherited a skewed market where some enterprises are disproportionately large, even up to monopolies in certain industries. What does this mean? If they are larger than is economically feasible, it means they produce their goods with higher costs than if they were smaller. At the same time, they have serious reserves and prevent the emergence of small competitors by supplying their goods at a loss. This only means that some small (and therefore more economically efficient than the monopoly monster) entrepreneurs will constantly try to enter this market, thereby creating pressure on the monopolist, preventing it from relaxing and raising prices to a comfortable level. Speculators will stockpile its goods by buying them cheaply, and as soon as the monopolist raises the price, the stockpiles will be sold for a profit, forcing the monopolist to lower the price again. This will continue until the monopolist’s shareholders replace the directors with more sensible ones, because they want stock growth and dividends, not all of this.

The small players, who all this time were simply doing something else where there was no monopoly, will then breathe a sigh of relief and flood the newly opened market. And the consumer, all the time while the goods were sold at a loss, was happy and had no reason to be outraged by the monopolist’s behavior. So why fight a dumping monopolist? He is doing great; this is what socially responsible business looks like under ancap.

What will happen to abandoned buildings under ancap?

1) Youth often sneak into an abandoned building, which displeases many city dwellers: you never know what might happen. Can they, and in what way, organize its security, fence it off, or demolish it entirely? Would the installation of a fence by a concerned public be a restriction of the freedom of urban exploration enthusiasts?
2) A group of squatters has settled in an empty cinema, arranged their own electricity (finding people on the free market who agreed to connect them), and lives there, organizing non-conformist concerts right in the cinema hall and inviting hitchhikers for overnight stays. Some believe this negatively affects property values in the area. Can anything be done about them?
3) A developer saw an unfinished business center and wanted to complete it and put it into operation. The last owner of the unfinished building is either unknown, unresponsive, or has already been dissolved as a legal entity. What should the developer do?
4) An initiative group of citizens wants to demolish an abandoned building and create a park in its place; many district residents have signed in support of the idea. However, the squatters living there do not want to move. They appeal to the right of the property they have acquired and the lack of rights to it by outside citizens, while the activists appeal to the illegality of the squatters’ settlement and their lack of any rights to such housing. Who is right and what is to be done?

Stalker

So, we have a city, which is a fairly dense settlement where the rights of its inhabitants to certain spatial objects are complex, mutually conditional, mutually overlapping, and constantly enter into minor collisions, and this is perceived as the norm. A person pays for developed infrastructure not only with money, but also by the fact that they are constantly bothered to some extent by their neighbors. Sometimes collisions become significant, and then they require a resolution.

Let me remind you of the principles of legitimate acquisition of property rights under ancap: homesteading, exchange, restitution, production. How can sufficiently clear property rights to an abandoned building be acquired in the complex conditions described above? Squatters quite logically apply the first method and occupy an empty building simply because no one before them used this method. What will protect them from indignant neighbors appearing on their doorstep tomorrow, waving the Lockean proviso? Only the other three methods of acquiring property rights.

  1. Voluntary exchange. Squatters can agree with other city residents on what specific benefits they will provide in exchange for the recognition of their right to the squat. For example, organizing those very concerts, providing shelter for the homeless, maintaining the neat appearance of the building, or paying utility bills.
  2. Restitution. Squatters could stand on the threshold of their new property with guns and declare that those who contest their ownership can only take it from their cold dead bodies. The willingness to bear the costs of war to protect one’s property has always been a very strong argument in favor of recognizing property rights, provided that someone else’s rights do not appear more compelling (and in the case of an abandoned building, no one has more compelling rights than the squatters). Squatters could also announce that as restitution for seizing the property (and thus for taking away the right to seize the same property from other potential claimants), they are ready to donate a certain amount to a city improvement fund. Agreement to accept the money would mean recognition of the legitimacy of the squatting.
  3. Production. Squatters can begin converting the seized building for their own needs, and then anyone who might claim an alternative use for the abandoned building will calculate that if they had, for example, forcibly evicted them a month ago when they first moved in, and the squatters had sued, they would have received at most the price of a hostel rental for a couple of nights. But today, they would already be demanding reimbursement for all the effort and resources invested in the squat.

I have outlined what the squatters should do. But what should the citizens do if they really do not want abandoned buildings to end up in the hands of just anyone? Simply avoid their formation whenever possible. For example, utility service contracts could include a clause stating that if the owner of the serviced object loses their right without terminating the service agreement, then until a new owner takes possession, the provider continues service at the latest applicable rates as a loan secured by the object. Thus, squatters find themselves in a situation: this house belongs to no one; it is collateral for the companies providing water, electricity, internet, sewer services, and waste removal. If any one of these companies needs the house, it will squat it itself (but it will have to negotiate a buyout with the others). And if none of them need it, they will all be happy with anyone willing to take the building on their balance sheet and pay off the utility debts.

I have provided only one possible mechanism, but there could be any others, including a city fund for abandoned buildings, to which citizens donate funds so that it can be the first to squat abandoned buildings, create groups for discussing their best use, search for investors, and so on. And if people who do not inspire enthusiasm among the citizens have already moved into a particular abandoned building, this same fund could act as a negotiator to change the format of the squat’s use or pay the squatters a buyout to move out.

Montelibero Tokenomics. Part 1, theoretical.

Everything related to “crypto” is a hype topic, and moreover, a source of endless disputes between adherents of different development paths for the fashionable crypto industry. I would like to bring a bit more clarity to how this is organized here in Montelibero, so that you can make informed decisions about whether it is worth investing in us, and if so, exactly what to invest in.

What is tokenomics? It is the economics of tokens, that is, the structure of the market in which they circulate, the rules, traditions, and (importantly) the purpose of their circulation.

What are tokens? Applied to our situation, these are information objects that circulate instead of the real objects that the tokens symbolize. A company share is a token of ownership in a company. A futures contract for a barrel of oil is a token for the obligation to deliver a barrel of oil. The British pound was a token for a pound of silver. More accurately, it used to be, but then it scammed, and now it continues to circulate without its previous commodity backing.

Tokens are not cryptocurrencies. We will not even try to define what cryptocurrencies are here, because people tend to understand this as too broad a class of objects. Therefore, we simply state that there are some cryptocurrencies on the basis of which it is convenient to issue one’s own tokens. For the tokenomics of Montelibero, the Stellar blockchain was initially chosen, in which its own cryptocurrency called Lumen circulates. There were exclusively technical reasons for this:

  • transactions are very cheap
  • the transaction language is quite advanced
  • there is a decent set of tools for managing tokenomics based on Stellar
  • among the participants of the Montelibero project, there are people who understand these tools

Why did we decide to create tokenomics around Montelibero? In principle, there are precedents for the creation of collective projects where there is simply an initiative group that does the work, volunteers can join them, and donations can be made to them. You can also buy the product of their activity or futures for it.

But this is all a rather opaque story. If you buy from us a promise for a piece of land, and the record of this is stored somewhere in the history of our correspondence or on our website, you will reasonably fear that tomorrow this record may disappear, and you will have no way to prove it was there. If the tokens of all our public promises lie on a blockchain that we do not control, we cannot pretend they do not exist, although nothing still prevents us from reneging on the promises, despite the undeniable fact of their existence. Unfortunately, not even insurance companies provide a hundred percent guarantee, and here you (and we) will have to rely primarily on the institution of reputation.

The goal of the Montelibero project is the wide implementation of libertarian practices in Montenegro. For this, we need many successful libertarians to appear in Montenegro, acting in accordance with their principles. To achieve this, we need to ensure this very success for the libertarians relocating to Montenegro.

Therefore, the key token in the tokenomics of Montelibero is the token of the eponymous investment fund, called MTL. The funds raised from the issuance of these tokens are invested by us in the development of the infrastructure necessary for the settlers, invested in their business, as well as invested in the business of libertarians outside Montenegro, if we expect to receive income from this. Or we simply save it for future targeted investments. Buyers of MTL tokens, accordingly, receive the right to regular dividends, the size of which is not fixed and is determined solely by the profit received from the fund’s investments.

In what are the dividends paid? Allow me to introduce the second key token of the system – the stablecoin EURMTL… Stop. Now I need to speak in more detail about stablecoins.

Stablecoins are private money with stable purchasing power, usually pegged to certain state currencies. Why money should be private, and how the stability of the exchange rate will be ensured, can be read briefly in Friedman’s Free to Choose in the chapter The Market for Money. Many stablecoins circulate in the world, but mostly they are pegged to the dollar, while the euro is used in Montenegro. Therefore, we made our own and issued it on the same blockchain as all our other tokens. Now it is the main unit of account for our entire tokenomics, for which any asset traded within the project can be acquired. But not only that.

Furthermore, EURMTL can be exchanged 1:1 for cash euros with any of our guarantors in Montenegro. Therefore, those of us who have already relocated to Montenegro use EURMTL among ourselves as cashless euros, for example, in situations where it is necessary to split a check in a coffee shop. This is much more convenient than transfers between bank accounts. We hope that over time the network of users of our stablecoin will expand enough to begin significantly influencing the economy of Montenegro, and this competition will spur local clumsy banks to improve the quality of their services.

And if you do not live in Montenegro yet, but participate in our tokenomics, we also guarantee you the possibility to exchange EURMTL for Lumens at the current exchange rate of the euro (for this, we keep open orders to buy EURMTL for Lumens on the Stellar exchange built into the system, automatically recalculating the rate according to the fluctuations of the euro price). Then, with the Lumens received, you can go to any exchange you trust and change them into state money of your choice (including the money of the state of El Salvador, i.e., Bitcoins).

What does the fund primarily invest in? Since we are preparing infrastructure for settlers, the fund has acquired a hectare of land and is now improving it. This hectare was also tokenized, so the third important token in our tokenomics is MTLCITY. Some of these tokens were bought by settlers or those planning to move to Montenegro in the near future. In accordance with their share in the total mass of MTLCITY tokens, their owners will receive ownership of their land plots when the land is prepared for privatization. This token is no longer traded on the primary market and is only used for accounting as to who is entitled to what area of land. Immediately before privatization, we will conduct a final offsetting, when those whose number of tokens is excessive for the real plot they claim will sell them at par to those whose number of tokens is insufficient.

Another important direction of the fund’s investments is the GPA tokens – the business of one of our first settlers, specializing in offline trade directly in Montenegro, as well as the MTLBR tokens – a construction company that is currently engaged in the improvement of the land acquired by the fund, but plans to enter a wider market over time.

I will not list all the tokens in the Montelibero system in this article – at the very least, I don’t know them all. Generally speaking, anyone can issue their own token; the other matter is to ensure its circulation. For example, I also have a token ANCAPCHAN, but, as you can see, its liquidity cannot be called outstanding. With its help, I merely recorded my debt to the fund, which spent money on my naturalization in Montenegro, and then after some time repaid it.

In the next article, I intend to give practical instructions for those who decide to dive into all this machinery, and I want to dedicate the third article to the latest promising developments at the intersection of tokenomics and cryptocurrencies, which I will not even pretend to fully understand myself.

Legal systems that differ greatly from ours. Translation of the chapter on Jewish law.

Having had my fun with Iceland: The Age of Sagas, I continued the translation of Friedman’s book on legal systems that differ greatly from our own, proceeding in order, so the fourth chapter is next. It is perhaps the longest in the entire book, as it is dedicated to the law of the chosen people, who have accumulated an absolute abyss of various legislative material throughout their long history.

As usual, I will deal with the translation of the footnotes and the final formatting of this chapter for e-books later; for now, I want to present what I have to your attention as is, without polishing it. As usual, I am transparently hinting that it would be nice to donate.

Next up is Islamic law, and I am curious in advance what place well-known practices, such as apologizing without trousers, hold within it.

Ancap and the Imperfect World

Summarized the first section of the second part of my book about ancap: in the first two chapters, I covered the problems caused by the imperfection of the world, and now I’ve added a chapter about how ancap overcomes this family of problems. The chapter is short, but I’ve packed into it the main approaches from Friedman’s talmud The Machinery of Freedom, which first required me to tackle said talmud—something I suggest you do as well, as it’s far more interesting than my work.

Further, I plan to proceed in a similar manner with the family of problems caused by the imperfection of humans and the imperfection of human society.

Georgia is closing

Two and a half years ago, I seriously considered Georgia as a suitable country to settle in and build a pleasant local ancap community around myself. All the sadder I am now to realize that Anton Epikhin was right when he conducted an analysis of where it would be easiest to start building a libertarian community, and ruled out Georgia.

Long ago, under the president before the last one, Georgia responded to Russian sanctions by opening its doors even wider for Russians, offering them the freedom to arrive, settle, purchase property, and start businesses. Now it is beginning to restrict political immigration, and even simple temporary entry into the country for those who publicly declare principles slightly more liberal than those of the current Georgian government.

Going to a country where a former president, who nominally stood on the side of freedom, is in prison is a stranger decision than going to a country where the president is in opposition to the prime minister, and both are desperately barking at each other, but there is no talk of imprisonments. Going to a country that does not allow political emigrants from Russia is a stranger decision than going to a country that does not extradite them to Russia. In essence, all that Georgia and Montenegro have in common today are the mountains, the sea, and the lack of direct flights from the RF.

I hope that those Russian libertarians who have already moved to Georgia manage to get out of the country before they suddenly decide to deport them to the RF. There are too few of us to waste people.

For my part, I can only promise that I will continue to build a convenient platform for receiving those who will come to us in Montelibero.

And yet, it was nice there…