Column for the Second Number of “Fronde”

Just submitted an article to the editorial board for the third issue of “Fronda”. And if that’s the case, why not make your own column from the second issue, dedicated to democracy, publicly available? Here it is, please enjoy:

Lessons of Freedom

Hello everyone, it’s Anka-tyan with you again, and today we’re talking about the lessons that a social structure like democracy gives us.

Lesson of Resolution

Ancient Greek democracy began with tyrannicides. Since then, killing a tyrant is considered good manners and a pretty decent prelude to establishing a more free political order. Most tyrants have drawn this lesson, so they try to maintain the outward appearance of democracy. Let’s draw the same lesson for ourselves:

The most direct way to establish democracy is to destroy the tyrant… Destroying an army or an economy is a much more roundabout and unreliable way. Negotiating with a tyrant about his peaceful departure is even less reliable.

Lesson of Vigilance

Fighting for democracy, people don’t want democracy itself. They want freedom from tyranny – that is, from a regime in which they are arbitrarily subjected to violence. Democracy is just a family of various compromise social structures designed to prevent a recurrence of tyranny. The common thing in all stable democracies is the principle of separation of powers. No one owns all power! Tyranny of the popular assembly is just as tyrannical as the tyranny of one person. Let’s formulate our lesson as follows:

Construct a system of self-government so that your community doesn’t give anyone the opportunity to seize power. No expansive interpretations of norms! No extraordinary powers! Any holder of power is a potential tyrant. Be vigilant!

Lesson of Distinguishing Goals and Means

Coordination in a community implies working to ensure it. Someone needs to do this work. We need to find and involve someone in this. How to look for them? In modern democracies, everything usually comes down to two mechanisms: an official is appointed by a higher authority, or they are elected by vote. Voting is just one of the possible meansof achieving a compromise solution in selecting candidates from a group, and it has a lot of drawbacks. There are many other means. The most unbiased means was originally considered lots. There are also exams and other types of competitions, there’s the purchase of positions, there are tenders, there is volunteering… Democracy doesn’t reduce to voting. The lesson is obvious here:

Don’t substitute goals with means. Don’t try to use a tool for everything, even if it’s very fashionable. Use what is simpler, more reliable, and that solves the specific task that has been set.

Lesson of Breaking Out of the Vicious Circle

Как ни распределяй власть, какие ни внедряй сдержки и противовесы, как ни связывай власть имущих законами, система со временем деградирует. Деградировав, она порождает новых тиранов, а потом по их головы приходят новые тираноборцы… Что может помешать соблазну сконцентрировать власть? Только одно: отсутствие того, что можно сконцентрировать.

Если координация происходит добровольно, в этом процессе нет места для того, кто принуждает. Чем больше места занимают добровольные отношения, тем меньше места занимают властные. Отсюда простой урок:

Если вам что-то нужно от других, спрашивайте, что хотят взамен. Не считайте, что вас должны обслужить даром. Если от вас что-то требуют, называйте свою цену. Не считайте, что вы должны обслуживать других даром. Согласны сотрудничать – сотрудничайте. Не согласны – не сотрудничайте. Всякий претендующий на власть должен понимать: принуждать людей себе дороже. Будут саботировать и искать удобного случая ударить исподтишка. Никому не хочется войти в историю в качестве свергнутого тирана.

Подведём итог

С одной стороны, демократия – это способ не дать немногим всю полноту власти над большинством. С другой стороны, демократия это возможность для большинства получить общественные блага дешевле, чем они бы стоили на рынке. Это большой соблазн, но надо отдавать себе отчёт в том, что это тоже тирания, только тирания большинства. Переход к рынку вместо принуждения – это нравственный выбор людей, которые сознательно отказываются быть тиранами. Только этот путь ведёт к настоящей свободе.

The Psychology of *Homo Sapiens*: Why Your Brain Is Stronger Than Your “Want”

There is one thing that really irritates our skeptics: they accuse us of “biological determinism” when we say that violence and aggression can be effectively contained by influencing the mechanism of inhibition of violence. They are outraged: “How is that possible? If a person wants to commit violence, it’s profitable, carries no risks, and nothing prevents it, do you really believe that some neurobiology will stop him?” Of course, it will stop him! Because this isn’t “some neurobiology,” it’s the genuine biological barrier that even the most iron willpower cannot breach.

Let us immediately note: ethology – it’s not just about animals. *Homo sapiens*, man, is as much an animal as any other. Yes, we are proud that we can build rockets and write philosophical treatises. But under the hood, the same “animal firmware” sits there. Although, due to highly developed neocortexes, we are capable of building extremely complex representations of the world, our behavior is often governed by deeply hidden neurobiological mechanisms to which consciousness reaches with enormous difficulty. Or doesn’t reach at all.

Let’s provide a short list of what controls your inner “biology,” or a kind of “ethological stack”:
– Violence and its inhibition
– Depression, anxiety, and fears
– Attachment to children and partners
– Food behaviour and thirst
– Sexual attraction
– Sleep, wakefulness, and biological clocks
– Body temperature
– Tendency towards risk and adventure
– Motivation and apathy.

And now let’s conduct a thought experiment. Imagine that a man really wants physical intimacy with a woman, but his body “doesn’t want it.” Well, this happens. And the question arises: can he, using only the force of thought, make himself want it? As they say, “let’s not name a specific brand,” but everyone knows that in such a situation special medications are indispensable. Why? Because consciousness doesn’t directly control neurobiology. And its influence on actual reactions and behavior goes through that very animal “firmware.”

Let us now offer an open challenge to the skeptics: when you can lower your body temperature by a couple of degrees solely with willpower – come, let’s discuss it and consider a scenario in which the neurobiological inhibitor of violence suddenly “doesn’t work” on a mentally healthy and non-psychopathic person who is inherently programmed to experience strong internal rejection of inflicting harm on people. And until then, let us acknowledge: biology often proves stronger than reason. This isn’t fatalism, but a sober assessment of what we actually are. It’s understanding our natural limits and possibilities, as well as seeking ways to influence them. And ultimately, awareness of one’s biology is the true path to freedom!

P.S. I’ll admit honestly – interest in ethology appeared in me long before the launch of our project on violence inhibitor and it was connected with a personal history of my childhood friend, who got a serious illness because of “wrong design” of one neurobiological mechanism mentioned above in the list (it has nothing to do with violence at all). It’s necessary to understand and accept that evolution produces traits (mechanisms) always with compromises and “workarounds,” which, unfortunately, can be inevitable and unavoidable. Probably there is something similar in our violence inhibitor too. However one must always look at the ratio of benefit/harm and not reject a mechanism giving huge benefit for suppressing most people’s non-violent cooperation between them, but possibly negatively influencing the fate of one person out of a million. This also applies to other mechanisms mentioned above. It’s easy to criticize, but try to develop from scratch the same violence inhibitor or something else from “ethological stack” on other principles, without compromises that natural selection took? Too complicated? Let’s appreciate what nature gave us, because even with compromises it is better than nothing at all!

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Thomas Paine: The First Libertarian—Before It Was Mainstream

If Thomas Paine lived today, he’d definitely have not just a Telegram channel, but a full-blown podcast, YouTube channel, and potentially a significant block of bans from Roskomnadzor. Because Paine disliked the state, monarchs, and anyone who sought to dictate how others should live. But why is he so important for libertarianism? It’s considered that “libertarianism” – a modern term. However, already in the 18th century, Paine championed ideas that would today garner thousands of likes in libertarian social media groups:

– State power must be limited to the maximum extent. The less bureaucracy, the better.
– Natural rights of man are paramount. Freedom of speech, property, and religion – no one has the right to deprive anyone of them.
– Government is “a necessary evil,” therefore, the less there is of it, the less evil there is. It was a remarkably radical view for his time!

But who exactly *is* this Thomas Paine? An English youth from a modest family who initially worked as a tax collector (yes-da, an official), but then realized he was pursuing the wrong path. And once it became clear to him that British authority resembled an interminable television series with poor actors, he swiftly relocated to America and unleashed his considerable energy.

His pamphlet *Common Sense* achieved genuine bestseller status. People simply couldn’t believe someone had finally stated plainly and without political correctness that the king was merely a common man wearing a crown, and monarchy represented outdated nonsense detrimental to people’s freedom.

What else did he become renowned for? Here are some of his key works:

– *Rights of Man*: in this work, he confidently explained that rights belong to every individual from birth, not “granted” by monarchs or officials. This sounds commonplace today, but in 1791 it was a major trend. Incidentally, within this pamphlet, Paine skillfully and ruthlessly dissected the arguments of conservative Edmund Burke who opposed the French Revolution, defending the established order and monarchy. Paine believed Burke simply failed to grasp how genuine freedom operates.

– *The Age of Reason*: here he completely lost control and criticized religion, explaining that reason is more important than blind faith. Consequently, he was, understandably, subject to “cancellation” and accused of all mortal sins, but would such figures ever relent? It was within this work that Paine advocated for the complete separation of church and state and freedom of thought from any religious dogma. For him, religion was a personal matter, not an instrument for the state to manage people.

– *Agrarian Justice*: here lies a controversial point for contemporary libertarians. Paine proposed implementing a small tax on the inheritance of large landowners in order to fund something akin to a basic income for others. Today we would challenge Thomas over a cup of coffee, yet his logic was straightforward: all people are born with rights to Earth’s resources. Thus, an early Georgist libertarian.

So was Paine a pure libertarian? No, of course not. That word appeared much later. But the point wasn’t in labels, but in the spirit that permeated his work: man is more important than the state, freedom above authority, reason stronger than dogma.

What would Paine say to us today? He was probably delighted to see how many of his ideas are now taken for granted. Ironically, he died almost forgotten – there were only six people at his funeral. That’s how it sometimes happens with true revolutionaries: they anticipate their time so much that their contemporaries simply can’t keep up. But his ideas live on, inspiring new generations to disagree with stupidity and authoritarianism.

The main conclusion is this: Paine reminded us that real freedom is not a gift from the state, but our natural state. Today it sounds banal, but perhaps precisely because people like Paine made these ideas popular and understandable. Well, we have left us with Paine’s main rule: “My country is the world, and my religion is to do good.” Good philosophy, right?

Voluntaryist, Bitarch

Libertarian theory of war, section 3.2.3 completed.

Finished chapter 3.2, which describes waging war in the event that a group attacks. The most interesting scenario is analyzed — when a group attacks a state.

For the sake of brevity, I preferred to limit myself to considering the situation where you are in the attacking group, rather than when some outsiders are trying to destroy your beloved state. Perhaps I will still need to write this subsection later, but I will try to do without it.

Things are either feast or famine for me: new posts are coming out quite frequently in November, and poor Bitark doesn’t even have a chance to get a word in. Another article from the old archives is on the way, as well as one answer to a subscriber’s question.

Stephan Molynieux, The Practical Anarchy, translation of chapter 26 of 29

The final edited translation of another chapter from Stephan Molinari’s book Practical Anarchy has been posted—about how a stateless society solves the problem of issuing reliable money. The text was written shortly before the appearance of Bitcoin, and therefore it does not concern how a stateless society can ensure reliable money despite the will of governments, but merely how it all could work in the absence of state opposition.

Nevertheless, the text is by no means useless. In essence, it describes the prospects of what the tokenomics of Montelibero could turn into if it were to achieve significant scale. We already have a fairly developed system of private monetary obligations of varying liquidity, but overall our monetary market is still too small for there to be economic sense in the emergence of complex clearing systems. Our private money largely takes the form of obligations backed by goods and services offered by the issuer, and the issuance represents a form of obtaining a loan to launch or maintain the production of these very goods and services. Accordingly, the more widely a service is demanded, the more liquid the monetary obligations issued for it become.

Molinari will soon be finished, and it is not a given that I will take on new large projects for translation. Firstly, people do not read long texts very often. For example, during the entire time a volunteer-translated draft of the chapter on money was on my site, no one complained that a page of text was simply missing from the middle. Secondly, if a person needs to tackle a text in a foreign language, they search for a translation less and less often, and more and more often trust the on-the-fly translation tools built into the browser. Yes, neural networks produce a mediocre semi-finished product, but for simple texts this is enough, and in the case of complex ones, the reader usually has a good understanding of the subject and understands what the author wanted to say, even based on a poor translation of individual difficult parts.

Fuel for Violence: The Hidden History of Ethyl Gasoline

Представьте себе – кто-то изобретает вещество, которое полезно на практике, но также крайне токсичное и оказывает на людей серьёзные негативные эффекты, включая проблемы со здоровьем, психические расстройства и даже насильственность. Впрочем, создатель этого вещества, несмотря на полную осведомлённость о таких последствиях, решает скрыть эту информацию, и тем самым отравить весь мир. История кажется фантастической, однако это то, что когда-то произошло в действительности.

В 1921 году инженер Томас Миджли обнаружил, что вещество под названием тетраэтилсвинец (ТЭС) можно использовать как антидетонатор для существенного улучшения свойств топлива. После этого крупнейшие американские корпорации «Дженерал Моторс» (на которую работал Миджли), «Дюпон» и «Стандарт Ойл» создали совместное предприятие для производства и продажи антидетонатора с ТЭС, который получил простое название «Этил». И в последующие несколько десятилетий основная доля транспорта в США и во всём мире начала пользоваться так называемым этилированным бензином.

Казалось бы, мир получил отличное топливо, и все должны от этого выиграть. Только вот от общественности решили скрыть важный факт – ТЭС чрезвычайно токсичен для человеческого организма. Уже в 1924 году произошёл инцидент, когда на одном из предприятий погибло 5 человек и 35 стали инвалидами в результате отравления. Мало того, в этом же году отравился даже сам Миджли, из-за чего ему пришлось уйти в длительный отпуск. Однако он решил скрывать этот факт и заявлял на публику, что контактировать с ТЭС абсолютно безопасно и не причиняет организму никакого вреда.

Конечно же, со временем опасность становилась всё более очевидной для общественности. Первым забил тревогу геохимик Клэр Паттерсон, который в 1940-х годах обнаружил, что абсолютно вся поверхность Земли, включая воздух, оба полюса и воды мирового океана загрязнены продуктами сгорания ТЭС. Позже он также собрал данные о том, что содержание свинца в организмах людей повысилось в десятки и сотни раз по сравнению с уровнем, наблюдаемым в останках тех, кто умер до массового использования ТЭС.

Разумеется, после множества исследований, доказывающих серьёзную опасность этилированного бензина, он постепенно был выведен из производства во всём мире. Однако катастрофические последствия ещё долго давали о себе знать. В 1970-х годах исследователь Герберт Нидлман обнаружил, что повышенный уровень свинца в организме детей связан со сниженной академической успеваемостью. Производители ТЭС пытались всячески дискредитировать его исследования, ставя под сомнение их научность, однако со временем его репутация была очищена.

Though lead is toxic to many organs of the human body, particular attention has been paid to its influence on the brain. And this is not just about lowering intelligence and mental disorders. Researchers have noted a significant increase in the level of violence in industrialized countries, and as a result, they even developed a lead theory of crime. It was found that the curve of violent crime practically repeated the curve of ethylated gasoline usage with a delay of 22 years. The conclusion was simple – toxic exposure to lead in childhood leads to committing violence in adulthood, and during the popularity of ethylated gasoline, this happened exactly.

All of this could have been avoided if manufacturers of CHP plants hadn’t spread blatant and immoral lies, including Mizly who himself seriously suffered as a result of his actions, but decided to hide it. This once again reminds us how important transparency and independent expert evaluations are. Moreover, modern researchers would undoubtedly assess such a story as a result of corporate psychopathy, when personalities with psychopathic predispositions are ready to consciously inflict harm on other people and benefit from it for their own gain. This is a danger that everyone should be aware of in order to notice it in time and effectively counter it.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

While officials fear it, genes break down: why deregulation of biotech is a question of humanity’s survival

Представь, что ты едешь по трассе на старой машине, и внезапно понимаешь, что тормоза давно не работают. Сначала кажется, что всё в порядке: ты просто спокойно катишься, скорость не очень высокая, погода хорошая, ветерок в лицо. Но впереди – огромная бетонная стена, и с каждым метром она ближе. Примерно так сейчас выглядит ситуация с генетикой человека.

Когда-то естественный отбор беспощадно отсекал вредные мутации — сурово, конечно, но эффективно. Если твои гены были совсем уж плохи, то детей у тебя, скорее всего, не было. Так человечество поддерживало здоровье поколений веками. Потом мы построили цивилизацию, создали медицину и сделали прекрасную вещь: теперь выживает почти все. Но у этой прекрасной медали есть обратная сторона — генетический груз. Каждое поколение накапливает всё больше мелких мутаций, которые раньше бы природа просто не пропустила. Теперь же они спокойно передаются дальше. Ты и не заметишь этого сразу: дети пока рождаются вполне здоровыми. Но статистика уже фиксирует медленный, но верный рост наследственных заболеваний.

Например, сто лет назад диабет 1-го типа был приговором, сейчас — не более чем неудобством. Замечательно? Да! Только вот гены, ответственные за болезнь, теперь свободно гуляют в наших потомках. Мутации растут с каждым поколением как снежный ком. Пока что это не критично, но через сотню-другую лет можно прийти к тому, что каждая новая жизнь станет лотереей с плохими шансами. Сюжет фильма «Идиократия» станет реальностью.

Посмотри на породистых собак — пример вырождения наглядный и печальный. Когда люди решили «отключить» естественный отбор и занялись селекцией по внешнему виду, здоровье пород пошло под откос. Бульдоги задыхаются, у такс спины ломаются от минимальной нагрузки, а лабрадоры страдают от артритов и ожирения. Нам стоит задуматься, хотим ли мы такого же будущего для человечества.

Есть ли решение? Конечно, есть. Генная инженерия и биотехнологии уже готовы нам помочь. Генная терапия — это уже не фантастика, а реальность. С её помощью уже сегодня спасают детей от редчайших смертельных болезней, таких как спинальная мышечная атрофия и серповидно-клеточная анемия. И это только начало: потенциально, с помощью генотерапии можно исправлять десятки наследственных заболеваний прямо в клетках уже живущего человека. Но если мы смотрим дальше в будущее, то самое перспективное направление — это редактирование генов эмбрионов. Представь, что можно не просто лечить болезнь у отдельного человека, а полностью исключить её из генофонда навсегда. Одно точечное исправление в зародыше — и больше никакой проблемы не будет ни у ребёнка, ни у его потомков. Такие технологии уже успешно тестируются на животных, и технически они полностью готовы к применению на человеке.

But here, the state enters the game – or, as it should be called correctly, “stationary bandit.” The state decided: no, friends, don’t rush. Let’s put ten thousand bans, regulations, licenses, and bureaucratic filters on all biotechnology. Want to get treated? Get medications for a million dollars per injection, even if its production cost is negligible. Want to correct a genetic error in advance, at the embryonic stage? No, wait, it’s “unethical,” not the time for this. The result is absurd: humanity is rushing headlong into a wall, but the only mechanic capable of fixing the brakes has been locked up in a garage with ten padlocks – and that’s just the beginning. Instead of giving science and business freedom, the state chooses to over-insure. Just in case it gets worse. Although it already does every year.

Why should we wait decades while bureaucrats and officials allow scientists to use gene technologies for the benefit of all? Why do we agree to let the only arbitrator of our future be an endless ethics commission, which doesn’t even have its own vision of the future?

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Economics, Law, and Neuroslop

Because of my new job, I don’t have a lot of free time right now, but there is still a little left for entertainment. Since I’ve been asked to promote some of these activities, I think I’ll share my plans for the coming month.

On November 3rd, I’m setting aside time for Adam Smith Readings. Traditionally, on this day, instead of long-form posts, I will have many short notes throughout the presentations. I will definitely post them on Telegram; as for Huitter and Nostr, we’ll see depending on the circumstances. The organizers promise nine speakers. My favorites in terms of anticipation for exciting and non-trivial presentations are Kapelyushnikov and Vatoadmin; Morozov will probably trigger me, Bazhenov will likely put me to sleep, Ali’s presentation topic looks like a box-ticking exercise, Kynev’s topic looks like a story about some alternative universe, and I don’t know Salnikova and Troparevsky. They won’t bring in an English-speaking speaker, which is understandable—Mordor is for orcs. Overall, my expectations are quite high. I hope there are no internet outages on the Russian side.

November 7th is a memorable date for all extremists, so I’m dedicating it to an extremist event: the press conference of the Association of Arbitration Courts, where the courts belonging to the Association will, among other things, sign a memorandum on the framework of cooperation. I was invited there by the organizer of this whole movement, since the offer for my own court has been posted in the public domain for quite a while. I already have experience judging within the Association, so we will develop the cooperation.

Also, theoretically, the MTL-fest is supposed to take place in Podgorica on November 27th, but I have a very strange attitude toward it right now. The first one was in MTL-City, and its main goal was to brag about how ancaps know how to build roads. The second was in Bar, and its main goal was to bring in Pozharsky to speak, since Svetov was brought to the first fest. The third will be in Podgorica, in English, and its main goal will be to show that Montelibero is just another harmless NGO and shouldn’t be crushed by the state’s boot. It’s not very clear how much I need to be there, or how much they need me. But I’m keeping it in mind anyway.

And it’s not all just talk. Valera asked me to mention his media project RoninRoker, where he posts multi-genre songs on the theme of freedom. These are, of course, neural network creations, but they are certainly no more embarrassing than Bitarkh’s articles. Three versions are provided for each song: Russian, English, and Serbian. Valera also performs these live, which further blurs the line between human and machine creativity. In terms of mood, with the onset of the rainy season, “Neon Freedom” felt closest to me, so I’ll attach it here as an illustration.

Harry Potter Yudikovsky – this is freedom from traditions and mysticism

If you suddenly hear someone say to you: “Read a Harry Potter fanfic,” you can be skeptical of the idea, especially if you have little time for wands and spells. But after opening the first pages of “Harry Potter and Methods of Rational Thought” by Eliezer Yudkowsky, you’ll likely understand: this is exactly what I was missing.

Imagine what it would be like if Harry were raised not by conformist *muggles*, but by real scientists. Here, magic is a puzzle that can be solved through scientific experiments instead of “magic just happens because Joan Rowling said so.” Instead of obedience to authority – healthy skepticism and the desire to find the truth yourself. This isn’t just a retelling of the famous story; it’s a deep and witty critique of traditional thinking, bureaucracy, and blind adherence to rules.

So what’s libertarian about this? Well, almost everything!

Rationality here opposes mysticism and authority, and the main character of the book, Harry-the-scientist, constantly asks uncomfortable questions. “Why does this rule work?” “How do you know it’s true?” and, most importantly, “Can I check it myself?” Such questions are a nightmare for any authoritarian regime. Because when people start thinking for themselves, they’re much harder to manipulate. Yudkowsky here reminds us of Ayn Rand, who warned: “Where there is mysticism, there is always tyranny.” Harry literally shows us that magical thinking (even in the literal sense!) breeds obedience and stagnation.

Harry from this work doesn’t agree with being told how to think and act. He acts independently and autonomously, choosing his own friends, ideas, and rules to follow. And when he’s told, “You can’t change it, that’s the way it’s always been,” Harry responds: “What if you could?” This is a pure libertarian dream – a person who refuses to live by imposed templates. He’s like a character from Ayn Rand’s novel – not a “second-rater” but someone who creates their own reality.

And remember the Ministry of Magic? In this book, it’s even worse than in the original. This government isn’t just inefficient—it’s cruel, conservative, and downright inhumane. Harry is shocked by the existence of Azkaban and Dementors. His reaction isn’t to accept it but to find a way to change things. As if Lisander Snape were at Hogwarts and decided to overthrow the local government simply because it violates the natural rights of *wizards*.

Yudkowsky also mercilessly mocks the pointless veneration of traditions. The magical world in this book is so attached to established customs that Harry regularly experiences a mixture of bewilderment and irritation. Why write with a quill on parchment when you have pens? Why follow ridiculous rules when they are clearly outdated? This reminds us of an old joke: “That’s how it’s always been done” – the worst argument possible.

And the brightest and boldest theme of the book – fighting death. Wizards for centuries had reconciled themselves to the fact that people die, even though they literally had a cure for death in their hands. Harry doesn’t accept this order of things and plans to use the Philosopher’s Stone to grant immortality to everyone. This is straight up modern techno-libertarians who believe in technology freeing us – from illness, violence, and even the state.

Why should you read it? Yudkovsky gives us a powerful manifesto of intellectual freedom, rationality, and critical thinking. Yes, formally it’s a fanfic. But essentially – it’s a classic Enlightenment novel disguised as fantasy. It’s a story where rationality, freedom, and individualism triumph over dogmatism, bureaucracy, and authoritarianism. As Milton Friedman said: “Concentrated power is dangerous, even when its creators were motivated by the best intentions.” Harry Potter by Yudkovsky demonstrates this to us on the example of a magical world that had been living in an illusion of traditions and obedience for far too long.

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Food vs. Violence: How to Fix a Domestic Tyrant Through the Stomach

Someone might find themselves in the following situation: they come home from work, their face like brick, looking for an excuse to quarrel. There are plenty of minor grievances that can turn a house into a real hell within ten minutes. Who’s to blame? Stress, fatigue, temperament, childhood trauma? Okay, maybe. But what if it’s much… prosaic? Like, on the plate.

Let’s pay attention to the “corn theory” of crimes. Back in the 70s, researchers Anthony Moulton and Kit Jacobs surprised the scientific community with a simple yet unsettling observation: in societies where people were overindulging in corn, there was a higher incidence of murders. The core problem is straightforward: in a diet where corn constitutes the primary food source, there’s a deficiency in tryptophan. Lack of tryptophan – no serotonin. No serotonin – no mood, impulsivity and dysfunction of the mechanism inhibiting violence.

Today we know more. Contemporary large-scale studies confirm that problems with mood, irritability and aggression often hinge on elementary nutrients. Omega-3, B vitamins, fiber – and suddenly, instead of roaring at home, there’s coziness again, conversation, and even smiles.

How does this work in practice? Imagine you have a hidden tyrant lurking within your house who transforms every minor matter into a drama. You could spend years trying to persuade him, undergoing therapy or hypnosis. But you can… more cunningly. Simply prepare the “correct food.” Without bombastic declarations and gloomy lectures.

Here’s the secret weapon against domestic violence and aggression:

1) Fatty fish (salmon, mackerel, sardines). Omega-3 in it works almost magically, reducing irritability. Try replacing one or two dinners a week with something fishy. You can say you’re doing it for your health – fewer suspicions!

2) Eggs and dairy products labeled “rich in omega-3/DHA.” A concealed supplement that no one would suspect. Ideal if fish provokes dissent.

3) Oats, bran, chia seeds. The more fiber – the better for bacteria in the gut producing tryptophan, and therefore the better for the person. Seriously, the gut microbiome significantly influences our mood and even mental health.

4) Walnuts. An ideal snack. Simply place a bowl of nuts on the table. Right next to the TV show. It works reliably.

5) Carbohydrates with a low glycemic index (whole grain bread, legumes, berries), preventing sugar spikes, and therefore mood swings.

What shouldn’t be given? A lot of sugar and simple carbohydrates (sweets, white bread), excess alcohol (no explanation needed here), and, of course, a monotonous “corn” diet or any mono-diet.

Does this actually work? Current research shows that even a simple supplement of omega-3s can reduce the level of both reactive (impulsive) and proactive (deliberate) aggression by 30%, and this works among representatives of any groups of people. Similarly, with tryptophan – according to studies, it reduces hostility and aggressiveness, as well as increases trust and generosity.

And what about sweet tooths and fast food? It’s not necessary to refuse completely, but you can cleverly replace harmful things with more useful ones: homemade desserts with a minimum amount of sugar, fruit instead of sweets, dark chocolate with a high cocoa content. The main thing is to ensure an abundance of vegetables, fruits, fish, milk and meat in the diet.

This approach is also fully compatible with libertarian philosophy. See, no one is forcing anyone. You simply put the right dishes on the table and give freedom of choice. Want – eat, don’t want – don’t. No violence or pressure. This isn’t the notation “what to eat in order not to be a psychopath.” It’s a quiet, inconspicuous and unobtrusive way to change the atmosphere in the family. And then – it’s everyone’s choice.

So the next time a domestic quarrel looms on the horizon, try first to fry some fish, and then already reach for diplomatic talents. Who knows, maybe the best prevention of violence is not the police, not the state and even not psychotherapists, but simply a plate of tasty and healthy food.

Well, let’s check it out?

Voluntarist, Bitarch