I’m a kun. I’ve been in the party for over 6 months, but still no tyan. How do I romance a little libertarian tyan?

anonymous question

I feel your pain, bro!

The hardest part about romancing a libertarian girl is actually finding one. If you already have someone in mind, ninety percent of the task is done. After that, you just need to study her consumer preferences and understand at what cost you will be able to satisfy them… no.
Of course, describing such things in the language of economics would be wrong.

I can assume that if the girl is a libertarian, she will appreciate how well your libertarian rhetoric matches your actual actions. How you keep your agreements. How you respect self-ownership—especially, of course, her self-ownership. How economically independent you are. How ready you are to accept her cultural agenda.

Having common interests will help a lot, and if you don’t have any yet, the ability to present your own attractively or sincerely engage in hers. Nothing brings libertarians together like the joint achievement of complex, interesting goals.

But, most likely, you won’t find a ready-made libertarian girl within a reasonable timeframe and reasonable vicinity, and you’ll have to indoctrinate whichever girl comes your way. To increase your chances of success, pay attention to those who tend to use logical argumentation in disputes, love reading long-form articles, and don’t too actively project to the outside world that everyone in life owes them something.

How can party membership help with all this? Well, unless your local branch organizes various team-building events. Involving girls in them eases indoctrination, but increases the probability that the girl will find a more interesting libertarian, and in fair competition, the market will decide.

Romanced her and won’t let go

Misha Svetov’s position is that borders should be closed, but will this apply to developed countries like the USA, EU, Japan, etc.? With them, it is actually profitable to have the easiest borders possible.

anonymous question

As I have already written, in the dispute between Svetov and Kichanova, I am more on the girl’s side, but I generally understand Misha’s position, and I think I will be able to clarify the issue that concerns you.

Mikhail defends the visa regime as a protection of freedom of association. That is, entry for anyone is prohibited by default (this is a manifestation of the freedom not to associate), but if there is an invitation from a citizen of the country, the visa must be issued unconditionally; otherwise, this is again a violation of the freedom of association. The inviter shares responsibility for the behavior of the invitee along with the invitee themselves—this is a standard institution of suretyship. Thus, the right to decide who to let into the country and who not to let in is held not by an official, but by a specific citizen, and he is the one accountable to other citizens for how he exercised this right.

I don’t recall Mikhail publicly stating his position exactly in this form, but this seems to me the only interpretation that does not contradict libertarianism. In general, such rules of access to the territory of a country would not be shameful for even a state that has firmly set itself on the path of minarchist reforms to adopt as a temporary solution.

awaiting suretyship

Who will you choose: a tyan or a kun?

anonymous question

Murmur! A series of cute questions about personal relationships has started! I’ll answer with pleasure.

I am very, very much lacking tyans. In the best case, they make up about ten percent of the total roster.

Tyans rarely interest themselves in firearms. This is a terrible, unforgivable mistake! With your own shotgun, you’ll be the star at any shooting range, and with your own carbine at 23, you’ll strike any kun dead without any violation of the NAP, so get your first gun right at 18.

Tyans rarely interest themselves in bitcoins. They can actually be understood here: because even under the new law, a tyan will retire a couple of years earlier than a kun, which means her bitcoins won’t grow as much. But, girls, why be so petty?

Tyans rarely interest themselves in economics. It’s terrible, but it’s true. You’d think it’s forgivable for a kun to think that money is bred in a bedside table, but we should know about all these matters much more fully. Girls, fuck the etatist mainstream, study the Austrian school of economics—there’s none of that nasty, nasty mathematics!

But the strangest thing is that tyans rarely interest themselves in politics. You should have heard how Yabloko-tyan lit up the stage at the rally on July 29! The whole square just melted!

Politics is kawaii.

This is the kind of tyan that’s missing

Yes, you’ve noticed that now you can donate bitcoins to me not only by a direct transfer to the wallet 1A7Wu2enQNRETLXDNpQEufcbJybtM1VHZ8, but also simply via bank card? Everything for you!

Got anything?

Guys, I’m very glad that you read and like my posts, but I want to remind you: the only thing that allows me to regularly delight you with new texts is that you ask questions. I don’t make them up myself.

Ask about things that interest you. Ask about things that you think will be interesting to others. Ask just for fun—sometimes strange questions can lead to damn successful answers.

Love you all!

I am a girl, and I’ve fallen in love with you, LPR-chan; how will protection against homophobia work under ancap?

anonymous question

That’s so sweet! ❤️

Protection from homophobia isn’t necessary. Anyone has the right to be afraid of us, since we’re so scary. Protection is needed from violence. When we choose an insurance plan, we’ll need to mention that we’re in a same-sex union; perhaps the insurance will be a bit more expensive. But if we wear a badge with the insurance company’s logo and a built-in tracker, there should be a discount. If we get weapons, the discount will increase.

Of course, the rate will become absolutely ridiculous if we choose the right neighborhood to live in, but those are capital investments, and we need to look closer—such paranoia might not pay off. On the other hand, the atmosphere there is friendlier, which is even more important than saving on premiums. Regular medical check-ups, first aid courses, and other ways to save on the insurance price—well, if we aren’t too lazy; most likely, we’ll manage without them.

And once we’re strolling together, having taken all these measures—then why should we, as ancaps, care? Let the homophobes be afraid; it’s very funny 👩‍❤️‍👩

Ancap insurance is the best remedy for fear! Of course, for this, you need ancap money. Send money here: 1A7Wu2enQNRETLXDNpQEufcbJybtM1VHZ8

Rallies of July 29, results of the day

Today, 5,700 people attended the rally in Moscow. Before the rally began, the police prevented the banners from being mounted on the stage, and immediately after it ended, they detained the organizers.

The Kemerovo rally was also disrupted: the organizer was detained even before it started. They were released and given a summons for Tuesday, accused of illegal campaigning for an unauthorized action, although there had been a court decision ordering the action to be coordinated.

In Chelyabinsk, instead of an unauthorized rally, single-person pickets were held; activists were detained, their statements were taken, and then they were released.

In Yaroslavl and Rybinsk, it went without incident, but it wasn’t very crowded.
In other words, we are already being noticed, but not yet feared.

It was already clear that the April rally for Telegram was a great stroke of luck: they managed to apply before everyone else, received approval, and interested Durov.

Now it is clear that against the general backdrop of protest, when literally every social movement is holding its own action, it will not be possible to stand out as brightly. And many continue to believe that the intensification of state robbery is, for some reason, not their business.

Anyway, politics is not just occasional super-efforts, but also routine work. We will continue to convey our ideas.

Rally in Moscow

Update. The organizers of the Moscow rally have been released; they are charged with violating the rules for conducting mass events, court date is August 2

Why is the LPR not cooperating with the Confederation of Labour of Russia on the issue of pension reform?

anonymous question

I believe it is for roughly the same reason that the Confederation of Labor of Russia does not cooperate with the LPR on the issue of pension reform. Each of the organizations has a large enough number of allies to organize protest actions independently, and the inevitable friction caused by significantly different approaches to the style of the actions would create more difficulties than advantages from cooperation.

There is one more point. It is never known in advance which action will be approved by the authorities, which will be sent to the outskirts of the city, or banned altogether. Therefore, it is more reliable if applications come from a wide variety of organizations.

At the same time, libertarians attend rallies organized by the confederation; usually, no one drives them away or forces them to roll up their posters. Similarly, members of various left-wing movements attend rallies organized by the conditional liberal wing of the opposition.

Putin has not yet succeeded in achieving the unification of the opposition, but now he is closer to it than ever.

In the photo, members of the LPR at a trade union rally on June 16 in Novosibirsk

You can donate bitcoins for the needs of the channel here: 1A7Wu2enQNRETLXDNpQEufcbJybtM1VHZ8

On what principle will no-man’s land be privatized? Will there be democratic voting among the former population of this state to allocate land by majority vote, or will the principle of “whoever cultivated it first, the land is theirs” actually be applied?

anonymous question

I have already been asked on what principle nuclear bombs will be privatized, but with this low-liquidity commodity, things are indeed different, because off the top of my head, I can think of only two useful applications for a nuclear bomb specifically as a bomb, and both boil down to burying it deep in the ground in the right place—and blowing it up. First, this would make it possible to register seismic vibrations at different points on the planet and use them to refine information about its structure. Second, this allows for the release of seismic tension in seismically hazardous areas, so that instead of rare large earthquakes, there will be a series of frequent small ones.

But anyway, the question is about land. Land, unlike a nuclear bomb, has a vast number of useful applications, and therefore competition for it can be quite substantial.

Privatization scenarios will, of course, differ greatly depending on how great the mentioned competition is in a specific case, and how developed the mechanisms of self-governance are in that location.

Where competition is lower, homesteading is more likely. Whoever hustle first takes the best plot. Whoever is a bit later takes the adjacent one. The latecomers take a couple more, and the rest figure that they won’t get the cream of the crop here and go look elsewhere.

Where competition is high and local self-governance is weak, the plot will be seized by the first person to hustle, and then a stronger subject will arrive and declare: dude, you’ve gotten too arrogant, get the hell off my field right now! The arrogant dude will haggle a bit to save face, perhaps receive symbolic compensation—and get the hell out.

And where lawlessness has long been eradicated by the local community, the most likely scenario is the hiring of an auctioneer, who will prepare the land lots for sale, conduct an auction, and then distribute the proceeds, minus their own commission, among all the local residents who also claimed the land but were not ready to pay too much for it.

The scenario you mentioned—”let’s democratically vote on who gets a tasty piece of the pie for free, which any of us is smart enough to want as private property”—seems less likely to me: if I receive no compensation, why on earth would I agree to vote for someone else? In such a vote, it is most logical for everyone to vote for themselves, and this would lead to the need to form a joint-stock company with equal shares for the voting participants. Then, the person who needs it more will gradually buy out the shares of those who need it less, and we will arrive at the same model as simply selling the plot as a single lot with subsequent compensation to the losing participants.

Dividing the pie

Look at that, Bitcoin is on the rise again! That’s what life-giving competition for rare resources does! Now, of course, donations from you have become slightly less likely, but just in case: 1A7Wu2enQNRETLXDNpQEufcbJybtM1VHZ8

A statist in the eye, or to become a leftist once?

anonymous question

Despite the playful nature of the question, it is easy to see that it contains a very serious and interesting hint at the kinship between libertarian and AUE ideologies. Nuacho — in both cases, there is a sharp rejection of cooperation with the state and their own clear system of concepts regarding ethics and law — in short, thanks for noticing 🍴

Nevertheless, despite fairly aggressive anarchist rhetoric, a libertarian is mostly quite unobtrusive in their actions toward the state. There is no talk of the violent overthrow of the state at all, because Koschei’s death is not in the palace — the state must first be expelled from the head.

In current reality, the state rarely presents a person with the specified dilemma in advance. More often, it simply pokes, so to speak, the statist in the eye for an unenthusiastic mindset, manifestations of which include, for example, reposting something oppositional. A person in such a situation usually tries to change their environment to a less toxic one as quickly as possible — for instance, several party members of mine fled abroad to avoid state sanctions.
But if the dilemma is posed directly and harshly — for example, put your signature here under a harmful statist decision, or we will initiate a case for such-and-such contrived violations — then libertarian ideology does not dictate any rigid guidelines to the person. Decide for yourself, bear the responsibility yourself; the mindfulness of actions is more important than dogmatic adherence to a single correct teaching. Imagine what will change if you don’t sign, and whose life will worsen if you do. Weigh your personal costs, consider which course of action you personally will regret more — and act. Other libertarians may perceive this act differently. There is no directive stating that if you’ve gone leftist once, you’re a leftist forever. If you caused harm to people — you can agree on compensation. But there is also no reverse directive that self-interest is a justification for any bullshit. It doesn’t matter if it’s a mortgage; that’s no reason to go “over there” to Donbas.

What’s up, boys, AUE?

Donations in bitcoins, bypassing the banking system, is a viable way to avoid a statist “zashkvar” even by the strictest standards, so feel free to send money: 1A7Wu2enQNRETLXDNpQEufcbJybtM1VHZ8

How do you feel about Saakashvili?

anonymous question

Saakashvili is not a libertarian, but he provided political cover for Bendukidze’s libertarian reforms, which is why he earned the respect of the entire global libertarian community.

He is a lawyer, like Putin, but treats current norms and procedures with much greater respect; therefore, he acknowledged his party’s defeat in fair parliamentary elections and stepped down peacefully. This was a risky move; specifically, he and his party colleagues were subsequently subjected to political persecution, and some even to criminal prosecution. Nevertheless, during his rule, public sentiment changed so significantly that now, in this parliamentary democracy, ministers resign under the pressure of public opinion, as in any decent European country. And this is the merit not of Bendukidze, but of Saakashvili himself.

It would be strange not to mention Saakashvili’s Ukrainian epic. He didn’t succeed there. But no one did. He was far from the only foreigner attracted by the prospects that opened up for the country after the Revolution of Dignity, and all of them, after some time, were pushed out of Ukraine, whether softly or harshly. So I would not hold this failure against him: Saakashvili is not a magician, but simply a clever market-oriented person who respects the rule of law, is skilled in both administration and street activism, but is not very adapted to weaving bureaucratic intrigues.

It would be great to invite him to speak at the Adam Smith Readings. While the venue was provided by HSE, such an opportunity did not exist, but now I have more room to maneuver.

Mikheil Saakashvili

For more room to maneuver, the girl could use some bitcoins: 1A7Wu2enQNRETLXDNpQEufcbJybtM1VHZ8