They say that on the thirtieth full moon of the year, for two seconds right after midnight, the poll creation button on Facebook slightly opens, but it hasn’t opened for me yet, so I can’t say anything about the audience there.
Overall, I’m happy for the Twitter users, although it’s generally logical to expect that in a social network blocked in the RF, the proportion of active participants living outside the RF will be slightly higher.
But, one way or another, there are quite a lot of people remaining in the RF, and I want to understand the spectrum of your excuses.
Почему вы остаётесь в РФ? (опрос для тех, кто в РФ)
After the Russian State Duma yesterday, in “special operation mode,” passed a law stating that every citizen of the RF has already received a summons, and if they don’t see it, that’s their problem, my news feeds across all social networks naturally exploded with screams of “run.”
Instead, I would like to understand if there is any point at all in urging my audience to do things that may have long been irrelevant to them. So, I set up a poll; it’s been a while since there were any polls here, quite a lapse.
And, taking the opportunity, I congratulate everyone on Cosmonautics Day. A kind of greeting from a peaceful life.
At the end of my book on ancap, I have carefully collected definitions of the concepts from the libertarian lexicon discussed in the book. I will take the necessary ones from there:
Non-Aggression Principle – no one has the right to the unpunished initiation of violence.
Property Right – a claim to the exclusive or preferential use of an object, recognized by others.
The NAP has been observed by people since the deepest antiquity and is based on the concept of justice. Let me remind you how I define it:
Justice – a feeling of proportionality between the damage caused and the value of the object of conflict.
The sense of justice was actually passed down to us from pre-human ancestors; at least, its presence has been experimentally confirmed in monkeys.
So, we can state with reasonable confidence that the non-aggression principle is implicitly embedded in human nature through evolution. On the other hand, historically, the number of people to whom the non-aggression principle applied and whose private property was respected was limited to the inner circle. The more foreign a person feels, the less others care about their claims, and consequently, about their rights.
Any thief knows that stealing from one’s own is the lowest thing to do. What stops him? Certainly not respect for private property—he is already a thief. Nor fear of retribution—he successfully overcomes that when committing risky crimes against the property of strangers. What stops him is precisely the sense of community. These are “their own.” Don’t touch. It’s beneath one’s dignity. In short, ethics versus morality (you know where to look for the definitions).
What, then, made people begin to respect the rights of complete strangers? First and foremost—the development of global trade.
Historically, trade was long considered a contemptible occupation because a trader was perceived primarily as a fraudster and an extortionist. Secretly find out where it’s cheaper, praise the goods to people, sell them for more—fraudster. Or buy while the goods were plentiful, then sell high when the goods became scarce—extortionist. Therefore, it is always psychologically more comfortable for a trader to sell overseas curiosities rather than local consumer goods. No one knows the purchase price of those, meaning they won’t be caught in fraud, and they are always in short supply; people have no memories of this same product being sold significantly cheaper, and therefore the trader is not perceived as an extortionist. It’s simply an expensive, premium segment product.
The higher the trade volumes, the less the trader trembles over maximizing profit from every penny-transaction, and the more they value the throughput of their retail points. And suddenly, they no longer haggle over every bunch of radishes, but publicly state fixed prices for the entire range. Similarly, purchases are conducted under increasingly long-term contracts. An honest merchant’s word begins to be valued in the widest circles, which further reduces trade costs and expands world trade even more.
For a person living in a closed society, it is enough to observe moral norms within their own circle and perceive strangers as natural enemies toward whom everything is permitted. For a trader, everyone turns out to be a potential client, or a potential advertising agent. This reshapes their morality. Those who rely on deceiving strangers lose in the long run to those who care about their reputation.
And now, after all these reflections, I can briefly formulate what ensures the observance of the NAP and the protection of private property. They are ensured by evolutionarily developed mechanisms of human adaptation to life in a global world.
In this regard, it is not surprising that those who wage wars today do so precisely under the banner of fighting globalism.
The fraudster and extortionist, the engine of progress
Quite interesting results are shown by research into a number of remedies popular in the “non-traditional” medicine of several Asian countries (Japan, China, Korea) used for the therapy of nervous system disorders. The practice of their application and laboratory tests demonstrate a strong anti-aggressive effect. And we are talking not only about a general sedative effect. These remedies seem capable of restoring the correct functioning of the violence inhibition mechanism.
The first of these remedies is kamishoyosan (or Jia Wei Xiao Yao Wan), which is a blend of 10 herbs very frequently prescribed in Asian countries for certain disorders. A recent study of its application in mice demonstrated a clear anti-aggressive effect, which is linked to the activation of serotonin 1A receptors and an overall improvement in the functioning of the serotonergic system responsible for the inhibition of violence. Of course, the exact mechanism of such an effect is not yet known; this needs to be clarified in future research. However, shogaol, which is contained in ginger—one of the components of the mixture—acts as a partial agonist of 1A receptors (a drug that activates them).
Another remedy with a similar effect is yokukansan (or YiganSan), which is a blend of 7 herbs. In its case, it has already been determined that the anti-aggressive effect is provided by the Uncaria herb, specifically its component—geissoshizinin methyl ether. This substance also works as an agonist of serotonin 1A receptors. The application of the mixture itself, as well as the herb extract and the active substance separately, showed no influence on the activity of the test subjects despite a significant anti-aggressive effect; that is, it is certainly not a matter of a simple general sedative effect.
The idea of pharmacological therapy for violent behavior through the restoration of the correct functioning of the serotonergic system and the violence inhibition mechanism has long revolved around the use of serotonin 1A and 1B receptor agonists. And it is possible that this therapy could be achieved even without synthesizing new chemical compounds, since such compounds are already present in a whole range of natural medicinal plants; it is only necessary to study their influence on the violence inhibitor.
In one of these or another natural remedy, there should be a substance that provides a sufficiently selective anti-aggressive effect without affecting unrelated neurophysiological functions. It is also possible that some of these remedies could be used without extracting a specific active substance, but in the form of an extract, tincture, or decoction, and this would be sufficient to produce a selective effect. Of course, all this still needs to be experimentally verified, but research in this direction has good prospects for the development of anti-aggressive agents, while also significantly reducing their cost and simplifying the process.
Furthermore, such research could once again confirm the concept of the violence inhibitor and greatly popularize it among the masses. Let us not forget that millions of people suffer daily from domestic and family violence, and in many cases, the source of the violence lives with them. This means the problem of victims of domestic violence could be solved quite simply—by adding tinctures and extracts of readily available herbs to the perpetrator’s food and drinks. If such an approach proves effective, these remedies could generally become widely used in the therapy of violent behavior.
It has been, dare I say, six months since the previous issue, so this will be less of a news update and more of an overview of the project’s current state.
Montelibero has entered a fairly mature phase where many previously intuitive practices are being codified. If you browse through the Sunday posts in the main Montelibero Telegram channel (by searching for the #sundaypost tag), you’ll see constant updates like “offer for such-and-such token published,” “terms of such-and-such program changed,” and so on. The project has gathered the low-hanging fruit from when people invested based on raw enthusiasm and is now refocusing on more thoughtful investors who require conventionally formatted documents, without which investments look dubious.
Construction in MTL-City is moving slower than planned—in the last issue, I wrote that the first multi-apartment building was promised by the New Year; well, now they promise it by summer. It is fully built and is currently being finished. Four apartments owned by the fund have already been promised for rent to two families of project participants (what can you do, these are very small apartments, which is why two were taken per family), and a fifth apartment has been put up for sale to settle with equity investors—after all, one cannot hand them half a square meter of housing in kind. Additionally, the construction company began buying back tokens, from the sale of which it funded the construction, at 40% above the placement price. This leaves me with mixed feelings. Of course, it’s good that investors were allowed to make a profit, but it’s lousy that housing is becoming quite expensive for the end consumer. Because of this construction boom and the Bitcoin dip, I no longer have the opportunity to build for myself.
Each studio here will cost the end buyer more than 30 thousand euros (and these are fully market prices, which is the most annoying part)
Concrete road, drainage gutter, electricity, lighting. Fiber optics are also hanging on these poles now; the photo is just older
Nevertheless, news that all utilities in MTL-City are fully completed, down to the provision of fiber optic internet, cannot help but be pleasing. By May, they also promise to finalize a large reservoir, which will allow water to be purchased in bulk and distributed throughout the settlement. All utilities are promised to be tokenized, with meter readings almost being written to the blockchain.
A tank with a capacity of 60 cubes; something similar exists in the ruins of Old Bar.
And just to fully touch the hearts of tech novelty enthusiasts, one of the project participants, Ralf, who, by the way, represents us in the German diaspora (the second largest after the Russians), has started producing hot water using a Bitcoin miner. The prototype has already been assembled; scaling is expected next. There is hope that, as a result, hot water can be obtained cheaper than if heated independently with a standard domestic boiler.
Boiler prototype
The club, which I wrote about a lot in recent issues and which has become the center of life for all Bar-based project participants, has also been tokenized. Buying club tokens allows anyone to support the project and provides access to a closed chat where further development paths are discussed. The club has not yet reached break-even, but at least the creator managed to recoup a significant portion of their initial investment through the sale of tokens.
On March 20, the club celebrated its anniversary. About fifty people attended the buffet in honor of the event, and we had a wonderful time; I even won a free cocktail in a quiz on the club’s history, sharing the victory with another Montelibero elder, eleven-year-old Saveliy, who arrived in Montenegro just three days after me.
More black balloons than gold ones, that’s about me
As I feared in the last issue, the flow of Russian emigrants to Montenegro has slowed down. Moreover, Montenegro itself continues to complicate the conditions for obtaining a residence permit, which also does not contribute to optimism. And just today, the old president lost the elections (actually, it is very correct when an incumbent loses an election), and the new one strongly wants to pull the country into the EU, which inevitably should lead to increased regulatory pressure. It is a pity that Milo Đukanović ran in the elections personally, unable to entrust it to some sufficiently popular like-minded person. What, there are none? Well, then they deserve it, however bitter that may sound from the lips of foreigners. However, Montenegro is a parliamentary republic, and parliamentary elections will be in a couple of months. We will see then what the ruling coalition looks like; I hope it’s a fragile one.
There is one fact: the vast majority of people do not commit and take no part in violent crime. Despite the prejudices that some people hold toward representatives of other ethnic and linguistic groups, peoples, races, sexual and other minorities, it is pointless to argue with this fact even in their case. However, why do such prejudices arise in the first place, who is to blame for them, and whom should liberals seeking to eradicate them focus on first?
The proportion of people involved in violent crime is very small relative to society as a whole, but through their actions, they cause a great deal of harm and thereby attract an enormous amount of attention. With such behavior, a minority of violent offenders ruins the reputation of entire groups of people to which they themselves belong, in the eyes of representatives of other groups and society in general. Therefore, liberals dreaming of building a harmonious multicultural society should first and foremost pay attention to these violent offenders, since their presence only creates problems and hinders the achievement of an open, tolerant society with a normal attitude toward the peaceful representatives of minorities, who constitute the vast majority among them. Mere accusations of others of racism and other vices can do little to help them in reality, as long as the real root of the problem they wish to solve is simply ignored.
In considering this problem, we cannot do without an understanding of the theory of the violence inhibition mechanism, according to which individuals capable of committing violent attacks simply suffer from a disorder that prevents them from experiencing aversion and resistance to causing harm to other people. Of course, such a disorder requires the development and application of an effective therapy that restores inhibitory control over aggression. But until such therapy exists, it is at least worth separating violent individuals from everyone else. For example, societies that freely accept migrants should, both for their own good and for the good of the majority of the migrants themselves, test them for malfunctions in the violence inhibitor and the capacity to commit violence, and not admit that smaller portion of them in whom such issues are discovered.
There are no “bad peoples,” “criminal peoples,” “violent peoples,” or other such nonsense that can be heard from people with racist views. But in any people, unfortunately, a minority of people capable of easily committing violence is still present in one quantity or another. And it is this minority that attracts the most attention and most severely damages the reputation of their own peoples. Therefore, liberals should begin to solve the problem of prejudice toward minorities precisely with them. And, of course, it would also be helpful to communicate to everyone the fact that the vast majority of people do not commit violence and that the problem lies only in a small number of violent offenders.
In my book about ancap, there is a chapter that I have to reference most often—the one about conflicts, morality, and law. And it looks like I will be correcting it slightly soon.
You know, for a long time now, I have been bothered by the tendency, well-known among libertarians, to call those who initiate violence “NAP violators.” Especially, of course, those who call the NAP a contract.
Let me recall my formulation of the NAP: no one has the right to initiate violence with impunity. This principle is primarily about the fact that there are no privileged individuals who have the right to initiate violence with impunity. So, who violates it? It is violated by those who give people such a right.
Let me recall my definition of rights: rights are claims that have been accepted. In other words, NAP violators are those who have accepted the claims of certain individuals to initiate violence with impunity. To put it bluntly: it is not Putin who violates the NAP, but those who believe that he has the right to give orders for killings.
The only one who has the right to cancel punishment for the initiation of violence without any judicial proceeding is the victim of the violence. Only the victim can forgive the attacker—after compensation for damages or simply so. But even the victim of violence cannot, without violating the NAP, claim that the attacker had the right to attack. Yes, they attacked, and then a reconciliation between the parties occurred. This does not create a precedent. The next attack will similarly require punishment. From everyone who agrees with the NAP.
This is precisely where the roots of libertarian morality lie.
Hi, here’s the situation. I’m currently reading a couple of recent books on ancap in English — “White, Right and Libertarian” and “A Spontaneous Order: The Capitalist Case for a Stateless Society” (I started with the first one because of the meme title and Hoppe, who wrote the foreword, but then decided to start the second one since it came out earlier and it seems better to read them in order of release). At first, I was just reading, but then, to keep from losing my mind in current conditions, I decided to do a written translation (and to start developing my English more thoroughly). My proposal is: post the translations on your website. What do you think?
Anonymous question
I have nothing against it; send them chapter by chapter as you translate, and I will publish them. Include your wallet, and then readers can donate to you for the translation if they wish, although I cannot guarantee that. I don’t rule out that I might feel the urge to make some edits.
Is it possible to buy advertising on your channel?
Administration of the “SPL” telegram channel
I work for donations. You can always send whatever amount you deem appropriate and ask a question like “tell me your opinion about the SPL telegram channel,” or “such-and-such a post came out on the SPL telegram channel, what do you think of it?” or something along those lines. The point is that instead of a standard advertising text, my own unique post with a personal opinion would appear in the channel, which is much cooler.
Recommend works where the author criticizes ancap throughout the whole book from any position.
Potaro
Of course, Anarchy, State, and Utopia by Robert Nozick. Throughout the book, the author proves that even if ancap were to suddenly appear for some mysterious reason, it would immediately, according to the logic he describes, begin to mutate into a state.
On March 9 of last year, I celebrated the first arson of a military enlistment office since the beginning of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Yesterday, the arsonist was sentenced to 13 years in a penal colony.
As far as I can understand from the article, the arson took place the day after my publication suggesting that military enlistment offices should be burned; that is, theoretically, Kirill Butylin could have been inspired by it, although it is far more likely that the idea occurred to him independently.
According to the article, Kirill was detained at the border between Lithuania and Belarus on the day of the publication of video materials he had filmed on the Vatahunters channel. It is unlikely that he was tracked down based on these materials; it seems that he nevertheless left traces directly during the process of the sabotage.
I am forced to admit: I underestimated the danger of sabotage against the regime. It seems that it is capable of conducting investigations against internal enemies quite effectively—at least until its technical base and the motivation of its employees have degraded sufficiently.
Kirill’s chances of being released before the dismantling of the Russian regime are slim. Unless Ukraine, during its long-announced offensive, manages to capture enough prisoners to redeem all captured Ukrainians and still have an exchange fund left for Russian collaborators. As you understand, the probability is vanishingly small, as Russia’s exchange fund is enormous: hundreds of thousands of civilians alone, and anyone can be made a hostage at any moment.
In general, the only piece of advice regarding the war that remains timelessly relevant is emigration. Countries that still admit Russian citizens still exist, although it seems that it will be harder for each subsequent wave. Do not delay.
When a person adheres to certain views regarding the social order, desires specific social changes, and especially engages in practical activities aimed at their popularization and implementation, they may encounter certain risks and threats. I think it is unnecessary to remind you that oppositional views are very often persecuted by the established political power. Even in fairly liberal and democratic societies of the Western world, human rights and freedoms are still limited, and views that do not align with the government agenda are suppressed. And what can be said about non-liberal and non-democratic societies? In them, one can receive severe punishment, or even lose one’s life, simply for expressing an opinion that does not coincide with the “official” point of view.
Activity that questions the established social system is obviously dangerous and risky. But does this problem apply to absolutely all such activity? Let’s look at a few striking examples that allowed it to be successfully avoided.
One such example is the emergence and spread of the internet. This led to previously unseen informational freedom, the effective uniting of people sharing the same interests, and the free organization of various activities, including those aimed at achieving social changes. A very important role in the formation of a free internet specifically was played by the fact that stationary bandits (states) simply underestimated its potential. Many conservative “experts” in the past were extremely skeptical of the internet and believed that it would not have a significant impact on social and economic life.
Imagine what would have happened if governments had understood the potential of the internet from the start. They would surely not have allowed such freedom, introducing many laws regulating its operation long before its wide distribution. Perhaps the creation of any internet resources would have been subject to direct regulation and licensing by government agencies. Also, internet providers would have been required from the beginning to technically design the network’s operation in a way that prevented the emergence and functioning of resources not approved by the government.
Of course, nothing of the sort happened. Governments seriously began to regulate the internet only when access to it was already in the hands of almost every person, countless resources had been created within it, and it had become an integral part of economic activity. They and their “experts” turned out to be fools, unable to understand a fundamentally new informational tool.
A similar story happened with cryptocurrencies. States explicitly forbid using anything as a medium of exchange and payment other than the money they themselves issue. But initially, cryptocurrencies were barely perceived as money by anyone; they were treated as a toy, a diversion for a small number of “geeks.” And only when they acquired huge scales did governments undertake their regulation. Most likely, if governments had realized the potential of cryptocurrencies from the start, they would have simply introduced laws banning any such means. Now, it is too late to introduce a complete and abrupt ban.
One can conclude that it is safest to participate in the promotion and implementation of those ideas aimed at achieving social changes which no governments will initially take seriously. And such activity has the best chance of actually changing the world, since governments, due to their own lack of understanding and lack of interest, will not ban it or punish the people associated with it.
Perhaps those who are still engaged in activity that is quite clear and absolutely comprehensible to stationary bandits should switch to other ideas that are underestimated by them despite their enormous potential? For example, such an idea could be the complete eradication of violence as a tool for achieving any goals and as a method of interaction between people, which is what is promoted on this channel.
