Slogans 20N by aKZIvl2


									Slogans N sorted 28 2 09
Updated 26 3 09

My program refused to sort alphabetically entries starting from: “NATURAL LAW: … “,
where the three dots indicated that something was left out. To overcome this, I eliminated
the first three … and then start the rest of the quote with a small letter. Then the sorting
worked again! Thanks, Microsoft! – As if I had not enough other jobs! - J.Z., 26.3.09.

NADER: Nader, it must be said, is changing. After this was written, he told the
Consumer Federation of America to “redirect their efforts away from legislation and
strive instead to changes that would allow consumers to protect themselves without
depending on government bureaucrats. – Cornuelle, Demanaging America, p.20. - &
NAIVETY: Dare to be naive.” - R. Buckminster Fuller - This Buckminster Fuller's
thought needs to be somewhat developed still. – J.Z., n.d. – Compare the advice: Doubt
and question everything at least once! – J.Z., 22.2.09.
NAMES: … things should be called by their right names and seen as they are. – Tolstoy,
quoted in Sprading, 318. - WORDS, DEFINITIONS, LANGUAGE, TERMS
NARROW-MINDEDNESS: Even most libertarians suffer from it. Their lack of broad
visions, disinterest in great libertarian projects, requiring the active participation of
thousands to ten-thousands, prevents them from discovering solutions for their remaining
problems, ways out from threatening disasters, even when they are standing before them
or they see them in print. Like other ideologies they often remain stuck on the wrong
tracks, on fixed ideas, sometimes even on popular prejudices, e.g. those on one form of
the gold standard only and, generally, on territorialism. If they are interested in individual
rights at all then their interest is usually confined to governmental declarations of them,
in spite of their flaws and omissions as well as misinterpretations. – I have seen no signs
that this situation has improved during the last 30 years. – Have you? Has the Internet
really made them more enlightened, better informed, and given them a wider interest and
vision? – They remained largely blind to the micrographic freedom options and have still
not fully utilized e.g. their floppy disk and CD publishing options as well as publishing
options via e-mail attachments upon prepaid orders. – Most still remain stuck to print on
paper. - J.Z., 8.12.76, 23.1.08. – See also PEACE PLANS 20 on this. - TUNNEL
NATION BUILDING & PANARCHISM: … a large number of the leaders of new
nations, who are egged on by an almost endless procession of „nation-building‟ political
scientists, and „missions‟ composed by international „experts‟ of unbelievable dreariness
and overweening self-confidence. (*) At least the older type of missionary stayed for
more than five weeks in a country before thinking that he could prescribe a solution to
national problems. - - Now this is a false view of the situation, as some governments are
beginning to discover. The very attempt, made by a government, to achieve national unity
is often seen by minority groups as constituting a threat to their existence or to their way
of life. (**) Thus by following a dynamic policy of national (***unification, a state may
well bring upon itself that very disintegration which it was the purpose of the policy to
avoid. … But so far as distinct associations and multiple loyalties exist within a single
political entity (****) it behooves the government to recognize their existence and allow
(*****) these groups as much freedom to arrange their own affairs as is compatible with
peace and order.” (******) – David Nicholls, The Pluralist State, chapter Conclusion,
p.121. - - (*) Although these “scientists” know and appreciate nothing else but territorial
political institutions. - - (**) Federations that would allow all minorities to secede and
recognize exterritorial autonomy for their voluntary communities, would be quite another
matter. But they are, mostly, not even discussed by most political scientists in their
conferences and seminars and not at all by practical politicians in their “summit
conferences”. - - (***) territorial! - - (****) This is already an unjustified and
territorialist assumption. - - (*****) Who gave them that right? Another territorialist false
premise. – (******) Who is to define what constitutes order in these cases? - J.Z.,
26.1.08. – However, Karl Renner, an Austrian politician, in the first half of the 19th
century, proposed a kind of non-territorial federalism and a few years ago a conference
by political scientists was conducted on this, as Gian Piero de Bellis pointed out to me. –
Sufficient details are not yet known to us. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - DIS., PANARCHISM,
NATION STATE: Man is compelled to belong to organisms too vast to be human but too
narrow to be universal. These are the nations, the States, the Modern Societies, all at
grips with one another and as ruthless with those they claim to defend as with those they
wish to destroy.” – Welling, probably Woody Welling, and in THE CONNECTION.
Date? Number? – States & nations were so far not “organisms”, naturally grown and
based upon individual and minority group consent but rather enforced and wrongful
territorial collectives, based upon conquests, repression or manjority despotism. Their
governmental pretences or popular beliefs about them should be distinguished from their
realities. – J.Z., 24.2.09. – TERRITORIALISM VS. PANARCHISM.
NATION STATE: Perhaps, future generations, pondering on these facts, would
consider our personal freedom under the nation state on the par with that of the serfs
under the feudal system, that is very limited indeed.” - Gian Pietro de Bellis, in his
new, 2002 book manuscript on Polyarchy, 2002. - FEUDALISM & SERFDOM,
NATION STATE: Since the very nature of the nation-state is its call for total „service‟
and its ability to make war in its own interest, obviously no free society can long survive
the rigors of nation-statehood.” – Reeves/Hess, The End of the Draft, p.154/55.
NATION STATE: The anarchist – although he believes that man is good – says that
whether man is, in fact, good or evil, the nation-state is an abomination.” – Karl Hess,
interview by PLAYBOY, 7/76. - - MAN, GOOD, EVIL, STATE, ANARCHISM
NATION STATE: The later Proudhon believed that the nation State was such a threat to
individual liberty that only constitutional safeguards could protect the citizen from losing
all his rights. …” Stewart Edwards, Proudhon, p.28. – In which country have
constitutional safeguards of the conventional kind preserved freedom sufficiently against
the political and territorial power-mongers? At least a comprehensive declaration of
individual rights and liberties, an ideal and autonomous militia of volunteers for their
protection, the right of individual and groups of dissenters to secede and organize
themselves under personal laws in full exterritorial autonomy, many economic rights,
especially monetary and financial freedom rights must be included, the compulsory
taxation must be abolished and also the decision-making monopoly on war and peace,
armament and disarmament and international treaties. – J.Z., 24.2.09. –
NATION STATE: The Nation state is … bound to make war.” - Reeves/Hess, The End of
NATION STATE: The nation state is the limit to the size of the pack within which killing
is murder.” – Gorer – WAR, MURDER
NATION STATE: The people have been asked so often to die for the national state. It is
just possible that now the people may ask the national state to die, for the people.” -
Reeves/Hess, The End of the Draft, p.43.
NATION STATE: The State is concentric, but the individual is eccentric.” - R. A.
Wilson, Masks of the Illuminati, p.40. - TERRITORIALISM, CENTRALISM,
NATION STATE: They have become places to provoke and organize the final holocaust:
Mutual annihilation by ABC mass murder devices. – J.Z., 31.12.99. -
NATION: And the idea of the nation is one of the most powerful anaesthetics that man
has ever invented. Under the influence of its fumes the whole people can carry out its
systematic program of the most virulent self-seeking without being in the least aware of
its moral perversion – in fact, feeling dangerously resentful when it is pointed out.” –
Rabindranath Tagore, Nationalism, New York, 1917, p. 57, quoted in: Rudolf Rocker,
Nationalism and Culture, p.252. - - Quoted also in Lysander Spooner, No Treason, VI,
Shiveley‟s introduction, p. 4, (40?) Works I. – Also in Boyd C. Shafer: Nationalism,
Myth and Reality, N.Y., 1955, 215. - - The whole nation is rarely ever involved. Often it
may be only a small minority – but a very powerful one. – J.Z., 25.1.08.
NATION: The nation is not the cause but the result of the state. It is the state which
creates the nation, not the nation the state. Indeed, from this point of view there exists
between people and nation the same distinction as between society and the state.” –
Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, 200. – It is also a question of voluntarism vs.
compulsion and of exterritorial autonomy vs. territorial domination. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - &
NATION: The nation, on the other hand, is the artificial result of the struggle for
political power, just as nationalism has never been anything but the political religion of
the modern state.” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.201. –
NATIONAL AFFAIRS: There are no national affairs and national aims – just ambitions
territorial politicians and their false pretences and wrongful aims and powers. – J.Z., Nov.
92, 24.1.08. - NATIONAL AIMS
NATIONAL ANIMOSITIES: … No one can grasp America as a whole.” – Chad Walsh,
From Utopia to Nightmare, p.128. - COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, ANTI-
NATIONAL BUDGET: The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be
reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to
foreign governments must be reduced. If the nation doesn‟t want to go bankrupt, people
must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.‟ – Marcus Tullius
NATIONAL CORPORATIONS: To the extent that they do not enjoy any privileges or
subsidies from governments and, apart from their confinement to providing only a limited
range of consumer goods and services, they are already somewhat exterritorially
organized but not yet completely autonomous, as they could and should be. I would
expect at least some of them to transform themselves completely into panarchies of
various kinds. – J.Z., 14.1.99. - & INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONS,
NATIONAL CULTURE: … there is no national culture; in fact, there are only
cultures developing from a dazzling plurality of contributions from individuals in
near or far away places and from current or far remote times. - Gian Pietro de Bellis,
in his new, 2002 book manuscript on Polyarchy, 2002.
NATIONAL DEBT: Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt.” –
Herbert Hoover. - If they were not compulsorily mis-educated in the public school
system then they would repudiate the public debt and thus liberate themselves from tax
slavery. First steps for them might be the liberation from the "educational" slavery of
compulsory schooling and from the military slavery of conscription. Then the liberation
from tax slavery might follow. And with it most of the regime of public debts would
NATIONAL DEBT: By the year 2012, projected outlays for entitlements and interest on
the national debt will consume all tax revenues collected by the federal government …
There will not be one cent left over for education, children‟s programs, highways,
national defense, or any other discretionary program.” – Bipartisan U.S. Commission on
Entitlement and Tax Reform. - So from at least that year we should expect a galloping
inflation of the USA State's paper money. - J.Z., 26. 11. 06. - GOVERNMENT
NATIONAL DEBT: Is it "our" national debt? It is your own debt and that of people,
who, like you, agree to the issue of national debt certificates, i.e., to investments in
nationalized tax slaves. As a nationalized tax slave, I am under no moral obligation to pay
that imposed debt or any imposed taxes. - Full emancipation means also: voluntary
taxation and voluntary State membership as well as personal instead of territorial
constitutions, laws and jurisdictions. - J.Z., 5.8.91, 27.8.02. - TAX SLAVERY,
NATIONAL DEBT: National debts paying interest are simply the purchase, by the rich,
of the power to tax the poor.” – Ruskin, in Tucker‟s Catalogue, p.60. - Except in cases
where these “securities” are revealed as “insecurities” and rendered almost worthless to
their holders by the government‟s inflation of its exclusive and legal tender paper money.
– Another error in the statement is that he overlooked that the poor are not the only tax
NATIONAL DEBT: Regarding the repudiation of the national debt, undertaken in your
name but without your individual consent, and to do so individually and only for
yourself, work towards the freedom to opt out or secede from any territorial government
or State and to associate with like-minded people, even under full exterritorial autonomy.
– Only then, in such a voluntary community, could you still be rightfully charged with
your share in the public debts of that voluntary community to which you formerly
belonged and which was taken up during the time of your membership, even after you
had seceded from it. Practically, this could be expressed in the number and value of your
shares or bonds in that community, which you had to subscribe to during your
membership. Part of these you might have to surrender, to cover the public debts
occurred while you were a voluntary member, as a contractual condition of your
membership. – J.Z., 18.5.05, 31.10.07. - Today one could argue that no one is obliged to
contribute to the payment of the national debt, because it amounts to an investment in tax
slaves and almost no one was explicitly a voluntary member in territorial States, simply
because he was never given the choice, unless he is an immigrant. But the immigrants
could argue that they were only given the choice of a lesser evil. – J.Z., 22.2.09. -
NATIONAL DEBT: The national debt is not MY debt! – J.Z., 5.10.98. - It is an
investment in tax slaves and tax slaves could and should liberate themselves. However,
those who signed for them and those who did not repudiate them, while they were in
power, should be held responsible for them with all their possessions and those of their
wives. The exploited tax payer have the first claims upon remaining governmental capital
assets, not the holders of government securities or insecurities based upon further
coercive taxation. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - PUBLIC DEBT, REPUDIATION
NATIONAL DIFFERENCES: It is not “national differences” which lead to the
formation of the various states; it is the states which artificially create national
differences and further them on principle, for these have to serve the states as moral
justifications for their own existence.” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.273.
– DIS.
NATIONAL ECONOMIES: National economies are nothing but legalized and anti-
economic interferences with economic freedom in a world-wide market. – J.Z., 26.4.95,
NATIONAL ECONOMIES: Territorial governments are turning national economies into
national disaster areas. They will continue to do so until governments become completely
separated from the economy i.e., deprived of all their economic powers. – J.Z., 12.12.92.
– Probably the best way to do so would be to confining them to exterritorial autonomy
over volunteers only. This could be done, in some cases, best through corresponding
governments in exile. Then they would have to compete with other communities that
have more freedom and even with those who realized full economic freedom for their
members. Imagine the attraction of a community without e.g. compulsory taxes. And
with full employment for all new members. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - TERRITORIAL
NATIONAL ECONOMY: … in spite of nationalistic and isolationist experiments, the
economy of the whole world constitutes a unified totality; …” - Balvé, Economics. –
Which is now attacked by various protectionists under the term “globalization”. Various
“national” policies, laws, measures and institutions prevent the natural and market-like
unification and free exchange between all people, world-wide. – J.Z., 23.1.08.
NATIONAL ECONOMY: I don‟t want to run the national economy! I want your
national economy runners to leave me alone!” – Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, 285. –
NATIONAL ECONOMY: National economics or national economic policies are a
nation-wide crime. – Only Free trade would partly abolish them and generally,
exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers would. – Protectionism,
compulsory taxation and monetary despotism are only parts of this crime. - J.Z.,
14.11.76, 23.1.08.
NATIONAL ECONOMY: National economies and national taxation and government
spending programs are the opposite of genuinely economic policies. – J.Z., 23.1. 08. –
NATIONAL ECONOMY: The jackboot economy! The politician‟s, bureaucrat‟s, judges
and policeman‟s economy, with producers and consumers as their suppressed and
exploited victims and at their mercy, unless they can afford to buy a degree of freedom
and exemptions from this territorial protection racket. – J.Z., 27.7.93, 24.1.08.
NATIONAL ECONOMY: There is no national economy but only nation-wide anti-
economics or neo comics, to use terms coined by Dr. H. G. Pearce, Sydney, who was
both, a Georgist and a Laissez Faire advocate. – J.Z., 19.8.75.
NATIONAL FREEDOM: … they tell you in so many words that you and your life, your
family and your children, amount to nothing, that you are stupid and subservient, that
one can do with you what one pleases. They do not promise you personal freedom, but
national freedom. They do not promise you human self-confidence but respect for the
state, not personal greatness, but national greatness.” – Wilhelm Reich, Listen, Little
NATIONAL FREEDOM: National freedom isn‟t individual freedom. On the contrary! –
NATIONAL FREEDOM: Though the concept of national freedom is analogous to that of
individual freedom, it is not the same … it has often provided the pretext for ruthless
restrictions of individual liberty of the members of minorities.” – Hayek, The Constitution
of Liberty. – Because it was wrongly and unnecessarily tied to territorialism. – Free
choice for individuals, whether statists or freedom lovers, among all kinds of
exterritorially autonomous communities, offered like free or cooperative enterprises or
utopias to all their potential customers or members. – J.Z., 6.4.89, 26.1.08. - &
NATIONAL GUILT ASSUMPTION: We must think of people not as a conglomerate
mass, not conveniently, indiscriminately, as a faceless nation: we must always remembers
that a nation is made of millions of little human beings, just as we are, and to talk about
national sin and guilt and wickedness is to be willfully blind, unjust and un-Christian …”
- Alistair McLean, The Last Frontier, p.202. - & COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY
NATIONAL INCOME: It is impossible … to arrive at a precise, scientific, objective, or
absolute measurement of the national income in terms of dollars. But the assumption that
we can do so has led to dangerous policies, and threatens to lead to even more
dangerous policies.” – Henry Hazlitt.
NATIONAL INDEPENDENCE: National independence and national sovereignty are not
substitute for individual independence and individual sovereignty. On the contrary, they
tend to reduce rather than increase individual rights and liberties and put more or less
arbitrary, prejudiced and self-interested rule by politicians and bureaucrats in their place,
with a strong tendency towards despotism, absolutism and even totalitarianism. – J.Z.,
NATIONAL INTEREST: … the fallacy that the Federal Government is all wise and acts
only in the “national interest”, when in fact it operates only for the benefit of those in
government – mainly the big bureaucracies.” – Lang Hancock, 1975. –
NATIONAL INTEREST: … the national interest must include the interests of the
individual and not be limited to the self-interest of the ruling group or any other
organization exercising power on behalf of a sectional interest.” – H. R. H. Prince Philip,
in QUADRANT, 1/78.
NATIONAL INTEREST: For any action to be in the national interest, it has to be in the
rational interest of or benefit every individual in the community. If it isn‟t, the claim is
false. It usually is.” – John Curvers, THE LIBERTARIAN NEWSLETTER, 1976, No. 2.
NATIONAL INTEREST: Foreign policies are not built on abstractions. They are the
result of practical conceptions of the national interest.” - Charles Evans Hughes once
noted when he was Secretary of State, They keyword of course is practical. Like the flag,
the national interest can mean many different things to different people. The term in itself
is the classical abstraction. It has virtually no inherent meaning. It acquires meaning
only through interpretation. Those who play the role of interpreting the national interest
are the priests of the modern state. Their values, their analysis of events, and their faith
in the future determines what is deemed to be in the nation‟s interest and how it is to
respond to the world political environment.” – Richard J. Barnet, in the anthology
NATIONAL INTEREST: The alleged community of national interests does not exist in
any country; it is nothing more than a representation of false facts in the interest of small
minorities.” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.264.
NATIONAL INTEREST: The requirement of the “national interest”? If there is such a
thing as a “national interest” achieved by sacrificing the interests of individual citizens,
then Louis XIV acquitted himself superlatively. The greater part of his extravagance was
not “selfish”: he did build France up into a major international power – and wrecked
her economy.” – Ayn Rand, Let Us Alone!, in: “The Ayn Rand Column”, revised edition,
1998, p 25/26, Second Renaissance Books, New Milford, Connecticut, - VS. THE INTERESTS OF INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS
NATIONAL INTEREST: The supreme national interest lies always in the protection of
individual rights and liberties, never in the aims, policies, treaties and actions of the
official suppressors, oppressors, controllers and “regulators” of these rights and liberties.
– J.Z., 6.7.91,. 26.1.08.
NATIONAL INTEREST: What is usually advanced as being in the national or public
interest is really against them – at least until all nations are constituted only of volunteers
and this requires the reduction of collective, centralized, coercive territorial monopolies
to exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities under personal laws. – J.Z., 18.1.99,
NATIONAL ISSUES: It‟s surprising how many „national issues”, problems that “cry
out” for government intervention, wouldn‟t even exist if there were not governments.” –
Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom, p.97. – STATISM, GOVERNMENTS,
NATIONAL LAND MONOPOLY CLAIMS: National land holdings and national land
grabs (conquests and occupations) remain a problem, causing oppression, terrorism, civil
wars and wars, poverty and hunger. Compared with them Exterritorialism (exterritorial
autonomy for volunteer communities) is road to peace, freedom, justice and prosperity. -
There is no just, sound and lasting territorial solution to territorial problems.
Nevertheless, almost all people and writers and politicians assume that oneself and others
can be free, fully free, only under territorial institutions and laws, no matter how often
such attempts have led and are leading to oppression and massacres of dissenters and
different ethnic groups. - This intolerant and despotic approach was, in most countries,
discarded in the sphere of religion, after decades of bloody struggles, but it is still and
unquestioningly adopted by the vast majority, even of intellectuals, for political,
economic and social laws, systems and institutions. - I would like to see it publicly
questioned and discussed - in our supposedly free and unprejudiced press and other mass
media. If it were given the same space as the territorial non-solutions are given, the case
for exterritorial autonomy for volunteers would, sooner or later and almost inevitably win
this discussion against territorial sovereignty imposed upon all dissenters and minorities
in a country. - The inviolability of borders means the violability of the borders around
free individuals. - J.Z., in a letter to THE AUSTRALIAN, 29.4.93, revised 04. –
NATIONAL LIBERATION: Nationalities are not liberated by confining them to
territories, deportation zones, reservations, ghettos and internment or refugee centers or
by any new territorial divisions. Even achieving the status of national domination in a
territory, for a minority group that was formerly suppressed there, does not achieve
national liberation. Any leash has two ends. It does not establish a mutual convenience
relationship. - J.Z., 21.6.92, 14.1.93.
NATIONAL LIBERATION: We talks of „national liberation‟ when we really mean the
supplanting by terrorism of one elite by another.” – Stephen Haseler, QUADRANT,
NATIONAL LIBERTY: … national liberty without individual liberty is pure fraud.” –
Leopold Kohr, Weniger Staat, S.64. ( Less State. ) - VS. INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY,
NATIONAL POLICIES: My thought is that if we mange our smaller, more intimate
affairs on right principles then, as a matter of course, we shall manage our great,
national affairs on right principles.” – John Leitch, Man to Man, p.140. - In both cases,
those of central or federal governments and that of States or local governments, the
supposedly sound foundation, taken for granted, is territorialism, with all its wrongs and
flaws! –On this unsound foundation we can only, somewhat, and this quite insufficiently,
manage local and small affairs. All the large government programs, measures and
“solutions” are in mess and will remain so under territorialism and this quite inevitably
so. – Genuine solutions can be expected only from sovereign individuals and their
voluntary & quite autonomous groups, e.g. from governments in exile with their different
platforms, all exterritorially quote autonomous and all only for volunteers they have now
and hope to gain in the future. - J.Z., 23.1.08. – Are there national affairs or only
territorialist interventions that mismanage whole populations and countries? – J.Z.,
NATIONAL RESOURCES: Private ownership of “national resources” puts them to
national use as well, doesn‟t it? ( If not, we‟d better ask the Government to grab all our
national resources. By the way, are you a national resource? Watch out! )” – Terry
Arthur, 95 % Is Crap, p. 130.The alternative of “open coops” for natural resources
remains still to be publicly and widely discussed. – J.Z., 23.1.08. –
NATIONAL SECURITY: … no one in the Department of Defence could define
“national security”. - Dr. Laurence J. Peter, Why Things Go Wrong or The Peter
Principle Revisited, George Allen & Unwin, 1971, 119. – A special committee of the UN
worked for 5 years to define “aggression” and finally gave up. – No wonder: Look at its
human rights declaration to understand how little it comprehends human rights and
human liberties. – J.Z., 20.9.07. – DEFENCE, AGGRESSION, PUBLIC INTEREST,
NATIONAL SECURITY: I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will
come to America in the name of national security.” - Jim Garrison - & FASCISM
NATIONAL SECURITY: National security as usually defined, i.e., territorially, and
practised, is among the greatest threats to rightly and rationally defined common interests
of whole populations. – J.Z., 16.4.95, 24.1.08.
NATIONAL SECURITY: The American right today seems characterized by a smallness
of spirit and by vast insecurities. This tragic fearfulness causes the right to abandon its
traditional standards of self-reliance at the mere mention of the term national security.
So while conservatives will speak out against the increasing centralized power of the
Federal Government generally, they support the increasing centralized power of the
military and the police.” – Karl Hess, in PLAYBOY Interview, 7/76. –
NATIONAL SELF-DETERMINATION: For we mean not mere “national self-
determination”, a metaphorical cloak for the tyranny of some over others, but individual
liberty for all the peoples of the world.” – Roy A. Childs, Jr., Liberty Against Power, Fox
& Wilkes, San Francisco, 1994, p.12. – National self-determination, too, must become
confined to exterritorial autonomy for communities of volunteers. Only the territorial and
pretended “national” self-determination or compulsory “unification” must be done away
with while the liberty of individuals and groups to choose for themselves a condition of
voluntary slavery must become respected as another aspect of individual choice: freedom
to be as unfree as one wants to be. Perhaps there is no better long-term cure for that statist
condition and subordination urge than allowing people to suffer under it as long as they
can and want to stand it. – J.Z., 5.10.07. - PANARCHISM, STATISM, VOLUNTARISM
NATIONAL SERVICE: National Service” means national servitude towards the new
feudal lord, the nation, mostly quite wrongly or insufficiently “represented” by a
territorial parliament and executive. – J.Z., n.d., & 28.2.09. – CONSCRIPTION,
NATIONAL SERVITUDE: End national servitude.” – Button slogan. – In e.g.
conscription, taxation and subordination to territorial rulers. – J.Z., 26.1.08. -
NATIONAL SOCIALISM: … the union of the anti-capitalist forces of the Right and of
the Left, the fusion of radical and conservative socialism …” – F. A. Hayek, The Road to
Serfdom, XII.
NATIONAL SOCIALISM: It is simply collectivism freed from all traces of an
individualist tradition which might hamper its realization.” – F. A. Hayek, The Road to
Serfdom, XII.
NATIONAL SOCIALISM: National socialism is a common form, where the state
becomes the dispenser of loot collected by force. The recipients lose their self reliance in
the process and come to feel indebted forever to the collective for their very lives. They
have by then become enslaved.” – F. A. Hayek, Of Freedom and Free Enterprise. -
NATIONAL SOCIALISM: National Socialism means advance from socialism to
barbarism.” – Source? – State socialism is already a form of barbarism. – J.Z., 23.2.09.
NATIONAL SOCIALISM: National Socialism, although one of the worst totalitarian
ideologies, did also have some exterritorial notions and practices: “Volksgenossen: Heim
ins Reich!” - with Germans still considered to be Germans after living for many
generations and also naturalized in foreign countries. Under it, the Tyrol Landsturm, still
electing its leaders, was serving as occupation force in Norway. The Nazis used
censorship and terror precisely because they knew that most Germans are quite different
from the "Arian ideal" The greatly diverse Germans would rather make up their own
minds and go their own and different ways. Thus they put so much stress on their
assertion: “One people. One empire. One leader!“ ( „Ein Volk! Ein Reich! Ein Fuehrer!“
) Under the imposed conditions few dared to contradict it and other such slogans in
public and to resist the regime. - J.Z., 17.9.04. - PANARCHIST ASPECTS
NATIONAL SOCIALISM: Now, as a rule, “we”, or, rather, our supposedly democratic
and representative governments, no longer fight the essence of national socialism but,
instead, welcome it with open arms. –. – Apparently, not yet enough deterrent examples
of it have been set. – Or most people still manage to ignore them because they do not
check their statist and territorialist premises. - J.Z., 1976, 28.1.08, 29.2.09.
NATIONAL SOCIALISM: The organization of the unemployed by the work-shy.” –
Oswald Spengler, quoted in NEWS DIGEST INTERNATIONAL, 9/77.
NATIONAL SOCIALISM: With irrefutable evidence and driving logic, he accuses the
Federal Government of converting the American economy to national socialism and
turning American workers into Federal peons. With facts and figures he shows how,
when, and why …” - From the over of Schiff: The Biggest Con. - FEDERAL
NATIONAL SOLIDARITY: What transpires is that these appeals for national solidarity
are intended eventually to facilitate an encroachment on the liberty of others.” – S.
Hutchinson Harris, The Doctrine of Personal Right, 384. - COLLECTIVISM, LIBERTY,
NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY: National sovereignty is not substitute for individual
sovereignty and voluntary self-government institutions or non-governmental societies and
communities of volunteers. – J.Z., 25.8.98, 24.1.08. - VS. INDIVIDUAL
NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY: Unity Spleen in the face of Diversity, Intolerance - all
politically organized. - J.Z. 26.7.92. Individual secessionism and associationism could be
our best break-out methods to escape the territorial nation State prisons. Emigration
means largely only breaking into or being transferred to another nation-wide State prison.
NATIONAL STRENGTH: National strength, in form of territorial statism, means largely
individual enslavement spread nation-wide. – J.Z., 14.9.82, 28.1.08.
NATIONAL STRENGTH: The way to national strength, was not through centralizing
power, but by giving it back to the people.” – Jim Fryar, speaking for the local Progress
Party, THE GYMPIE TIMES, Tuesday, August 10 (16?) 1977. – CENTRALIZATION,
NATIONAL SURVIVAL: You're little boys playing a game, … This isn't an exclusive
American problem. This is a human problem that involves every nation on Earth." - "…
National survival," she said. "But it's our survival as a species that's at stake!" – I failed
to mark down the source! Some SF novel. – J.Z. - NATIONAL SURVIVAL?
NATIONAL TERRITORIALISM: Rather than still more territorial and national
independence declarations we need individual and minority independence declarations,
all on the basis of voluntarism and full exterritorial autonomy and personal laws, none
confined to any territory. – J.Z., 5.8.92, 24.1.08. - & COLLECTIVIST
NATIONAL TRUST: The National Trust keeps Australia looking shabbily: It is
preserving all too many old and outdated buildings! – And this at the expense of the
taxpayers. - J.Z., 13.2.76, 28.1.08. – The National Trust has none of my trust and gets my
money only by extortion. – J.Z., 5.9.75. – COERCIVE PUBLIC CONSERVATIONISM
NATIONAL UNITY: National unity is one of the greatest and most dangerous fictions. It
can be realized only exterritorially among like-minded volunteers, never territorially, for
any large territory, because of the reality of natural diversity among human beings even
in one nation or people. – J.Z., 27.1.08.
NATIONAL UNITY: No unified state has thus far opened new outlooks to cultural
aspirations, but has always led to the degradation of all higher cultural forms. …
national unity has never yet established the freedom of a people, but has always merely
reduced its implicit slavery to a definite norm, which is then proclaimed as freedom.” -
Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.426.
NATIONALISM & CULTURE: With the victory of the German national state begins
also the decline of German culture, the trying up of its creative forces, and along with
this collapse the triumph of Bismarckism, as Bakunin has styled the senseless
combination of militarism and bureaucracy. Nietzsche was quite right when he said:
„When the Germans began to interest the other peoples of Europe it was because of a
culture which they no longer possess, yes, which they have, with blind zeal, shaken off as
if it were a disease; and yet they knew of nothing better to put in its place than the
political and national delusions.‟ - ( Nietzsche, Works, V/79 )” - Rudolf Rocker,
Nationalism and Culture, p.433.
NATIONALISM & MANKIND: Our true nationality is mankind.” – H. G. Wells, The
Outline of History, 1920, 1921, 40.1. – COSMOPOLITANISM, MANKIND
NATIONALISM & NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How much longer can we afford to
remain “united” and yet separated into territorial nation state? J.Z., 1/75, after reading the
editorial remark in ANALOG 8/74: “How much longer can we afford to remain
separated into nation states?” – We do already largely survive only by exchanging our
products for those of other countries. – Tourism has become the world‟s largest industry.
Music, arts and writings are already largely shared world-wide. Do we have to remain
organized into targets for mass extermination devices and as victims for collective
responsibility notions based upon the wrongs committed by some people, but mainly our
territorial governments, as our all too powerful, unwise, prejudiced and irrational main
decision-makers? – J.Z., 24.1.08. – TERRITORIALISM, COSMOPOLITANISM,
NATIONALISM & PATRIOTISM: How can this patriotism, whence came human
suffering incalculable, sufferings both physical and moral, be necessary, and be a
virtue?” – Tolstoi, on Civil Disobedience and Nonviolence, p.109.
NATIONALISM & PATRIOTISM: My country, right or wrong, is a thing that no patriot
would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying „My mother, drunk or
sober‟.” – G. K. Chesterton, 1874-1936. – Andrews Quotes, 335.
NATIONALISM & PATRIOTISM: Nationalism – an outcome of governmental
interference with business, as will be shown in this book. …” - Mises, Omnipotent
Government, p.1.
NATIONALISM & PATRIOTISM: One nation is formed at the expense of another.”. –
quoted as an Italian proverb by Proudhon, in C. S. Edwards, Proudhon, p.190.
NATIONALISM & PATRIOTISM: Patriotism is the passion of fools and the most
foolish of passions.” – Arthur Schopenhauer, The American Freeman. – in G. Seldes, The
Great Quotations. – FOOLISHNESS, PASSION
NATIONALISM & PATRIOTISM: There is nothing patriotic or noble about allowing
yourself to become a slave just to keep others company.” – From an advertisement in
REASON, Oct. 74, for a “New Country” attempt.
NATIONALISM: (God) save us from economic nationalism run mad.” – Mr. C. R.
Kelly, MP for Wakefield, S. A., GOOD GOVERNMENT, 2/71. – PROTECTIONISM
NATIONALISM: … begin to question … the difference between a great nation and a
free people.” – Reeves/Hess: The End of the Draft, p.32. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: … damn these „nations‟ … where but on old Earth would people
subdivide their planet and think the subdivisions meant anything.” – ANALOG 5/78, p.
NATIONALISM: … he believes that the customs of this tribe are the laws of nature.” -
Robert Heinlein, Requiem, 208. - FAITH, BELIEFS, CUSTOMS, TRADITIONS,
NATIONALISM: … he was compelled to believe that all the religions of the world were
so many geographical insanities.” – Robert Owen in his discussion with Rev. J. H.
Roebuck at Manchester. – Replace “religions” with nationalistic beliefs and statist
ideologies. 1.11.86. At least for religions we have largely come away from territorialism.
For faiths in political, economic and social systems territorialism is still rampant and has
all too many victims. – And still we do not class these persecutions with the Inquisition
and do not demand freedom for them to secede and do their own thins for or to
themselves, in their own communities of volunteers, the equivalents to religious liberty or
religious tolerance. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - & RELIGION, TERRITORIALISM,
NATIONALISM: … know that at one time the world was divided into warring nations,
and before that into fiercely patriotic States; and before that human beings owed their
loyalties to towns? Will we always have such fools to contend with? Well-meaning fools,
who understand nothing of political, social or vital economy, and are perpetually victims
of their own and undisciplined desires and emotional incoherencies.” – A. E. Van Vogt,
The Proxy Intelligence, p.132. - ECONOMICS, PROTECTIONISM,
NATIONALISM: … men pitching about rudderless, not knowing where to turn, fall into
the trap of nationalism, the doctrine that, in the absence of right, we might just as well
respect might.” – R. V. Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, p.69. – MIGHT, RIGHT,
NATIONALISM: … nationalism has been the prime cause of aggression.” – Workers
Party, platform draft, 1975. – Territorial nationalism – yes. Exterritorial nationalism – no.
– After so many centuries of wars we should finally show some interest in what really
causes war and what can cause peace, namely, exterritorial autonomy for communities of
volunteers, none of them confined to any particular territory on this planet. – J.Z.,
NATIONALISM: … nationalism produces a queer myopia. The African chief said: “If I
steal another man‟s wife, that is good. If he steals mine, that is bad.” – Henry Meulen,
NATIONALISM: … nationalism, the most important cohesive element in modern
society, …” - Silvert, Man‟s Power, p.50. – As long as its subjects or victims are not free
to secede from it, forming their own and genuine societies and communities of
volunteers, under full exterritorial autonomy, nationalism should not be wrongly
described as a cohesive element but, rather, as a coercive one. And territorial statism has
little if anything to do with any free society. For man, seen from a cosmopolitan point of
view, it is the greatest divisive element, one that can and is being exploited by various
power addicts. – Once individuals and groups will be free to secede from territorial
coercers, their differences will be not greater and no greater threats to peace and free
exchange than are the differences between golfers and cricketers, soccer and tennis fans,
painters and poets, musicians and writers. – Nationalism is rather used as a cover to hide
our differences. - J.Z., 24.1.08. - DIS.
NATIONALISM: … not a nation but a family quarrel.” – Ursula K. Le Guin, The Left
Hand of Darkness, p.12. – It was mostly a long time ago that “nations” were merely
tribes that really constituted a large family or part of a large family. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - &
NATIONALISM: … since patriotism is necessarily equated with necrophilia, in that the
loyal citizen is expected to rejoice every time his government comes up with a newer
gadget for mass-producing corpses. …” - Poul Anderson, Conquests, p.70. -
NATIONALISM: … superficial (*) divisions of people into nations and creeds (**) –
meaningless divisions based not on comprehension of reality and truth, but on prejudice,
myth, wishful thinking, and unreason.” – James P. Hogan, Endgame Enigma, p.272. - -
(*) territorial – - (**) And how often have these creeds been changed, even coercively? –
Not to speak of coercive border changes. - J.Z., 25.1.08.
NATIONALISM: … that most influential of latter-day paganism. …” - Abrabanel. –
What is wrong with paganism, to the extent that it does not demand human sacrifices or
other senseless rituals? – J.Z., 24.1.08. – Territorial States demand enormous sacrifices –
and even enforce them. – J.Z., 24.2.09. – PAGANISM, TERRITORIALISM, STATISM,
NATIONALISM: … the nation, all, man nothing.” – Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and
Culture, p.178. & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: … the paranoid economic nationalism which inspired the venture.” –
H. W. Arndt, in QUADRANT, “Sept. 75, on the Loan Affair. – & PATRIOTISM,
NATIONALISM: … the planet is divided into a number of watertight compartments
composed of individuals who deny entry to individuals from other „compartments‟ and in
many cases even deny their fellow citizens the right to emigrate to foreign
„compartments‟. – This partitioning of the planet inevitably creates the further evil of
„national security‟ or „defence of the realm‟ by force, as a basic function of government
and those who rebel against such a system are branded as anarchists in the sense that
such an appellation implies chaos, but can anyone conjure up anything more chaotic
than the system engendered by present day governments? – F. J. Branagan, GOOD
NATIONALISM: … the relations between States during all eras of so-called
Nationalism is essentially one of hostility between predators.” – L. Labadie, What Is
NATIONALISM: … the War to End War has produced a hundred narrow economic
nationalisms, each of them full of the germs of future wars.” – Ernest Benn, Honest
Doubt, p.147. – Pre-existing nationalism, territorialism, protectionism, taxation and
monetary despotism as well as the decision-making monopoly on war and peace are
among the many factors that made this war and its consequences possible. – J.Z., 24.1.08.
NATIONALISM: … those accustomed villainies which are always the outcome of
patriotism.” – Tolstoi, quoted in On Civil Disobedience and Non-Violence”, Signet Book,
p. 61. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: … unthinking patriotism, child of habit and not of reason, which
mistakes government for liberty, and law for justice.” – Wendell Phillips: Orations,
Speeches, Lectures and Letters, published 1863. – in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. –
NATIONALISM: … with taxation at its present level the State is probably the largest
shareholder in the (*) undertaking.” – Ernest Benn, This Soft Age, 101. - (*) In any
business, factory or other enterprise. – It even extracts rich dividends without having
invested anything. Instead it has imposed costly obstacles, that reduce productivity. - J.Z.,
24.2.08. – The whole picture of all restrictions and prohibitions is so vast that no single
mind can fully encompass all of them and all of their disastrous consequences. No more
so than anyone can still read and comprehend all of the flood of statist laws in a country.
– J.Z., 24.1.08. – Turn all territorial States into mere diverse share companies or coops or
corporations, all only for their volunteers! – To gain the support for this idea, we should,
perhaps, first of all propose this for all large corporations, especially the multi-nationals.
– That would immediately lead to voluntary taxation and free trade for their members. No
present territorial government is willing to offer that much to its subjects. - J.Z., 24.2.09.
NATIONALISM: A Scot‟s mother, praying for her son during the Napoleonic Wars, was
reminded, that many a French mother was praying as fervently for French Victory. (*)
She said: “Do ye think th‟Almighty would be understandin‟ siccan gibberish?” – A.
Andrews Quotations, p. 72. –. - - (*) Usually they only pray for the survival of their own
NATIONALISM: A silly cock crowing on its own dung hill.” – Richard Aldington. – And
our national representatives and “leaders” treat us like shit, too or, at best, as their
property, to be used or abused according to their discretion. – J.Z., 24.2.09.
NATIONALISM: A true culture cannot develop on a nationally limited soil.” – Van de
Velde, EUROPÄISCHER BEOBACHTER, 1946, Nr. 5, p.7. – Published by K. H. Zube,
later micro-fiched by me. - CULTURE
NATIONALISM: A whole population, very diverse, subjected to territorial taxation,
laws, bureaucracy and institutions not of their own free individual choice, under local,
state or federal powers, “represented” by “representatives” that do not really represent all
of them and who often act against the real common interests. Seen thus, nations and
nationalism are merely propaganda fictions, false pretences, at best based upon popular
errors and prejudices, really only for the benefit of those in the saddle, in the top
leadership positions. – Voluntary taxation, and voluntarism regarding all government
spending, together with freedom for individuals and communities of volunteers to secede
from them would reveal how hollow their false pretences and slogans are and how few
people fully agree with their policies and measures. But already the relatively small
membership in its political parties does indicate how unpopular the supposedly popular
democratic territorial governments really are. – J.Z., 30.7.98, 24.1.08. - ONE NATION
NATIONALISM: Advancing the novel thesis that nationalism stands basically opposed
to culture, Rocker argued that the nation is not a natural growth arising from the social
actions of a people but a whole artificial one which is in effect imposed upon them by a
political minority. “The nation is not the cause, but the result, of the state,” as Rocker put
it. – Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.478. – STATE & NATION-BUILDING,
NATIONALISM: All these people have fought for the right to national independence;
there is not one that is not denying the right to national independence. If every Britain
has its Ireland, every Ireland has its Ulster.” - Norman Angell, Human Nature and the
Peace Problem, 1925, p.63. – Why stop at territorial divisions? We do not consider them
to be significant in economics, in religion, in philosophy, in literature, in art,
architectures, technology, science, biology and ideology. Nor in movies, music, poetry.
Why should these or other human aspects and relations or organizations be confined to a
territorial “bed of Procrustes”? – J.Z., 22.2.09. - INDEPENDENCE, TERRITORIAL,
NATIONALISM: All this was a cause of deep offence to the people of the country. They
regarded their country as a temple, and all strangers as impure.” – Winwood Reade, The
Martyrdom of Man, p.35. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Although nationalism unites inwardly, it is outwardly dividing,
dehumanizing human beings as aliens or foreigners. We have had two world wars to
prove it.” – Donald L. Barnes, THE HERALD, Dec. 19th, 1973. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Among the religions that will be cast aside or profoundly altered is
nationalism, a creed that has ruined many civilizations.” - Frederick C. Thayer, An End
to Hierarchy! An End to Competition! Organizing the Politics and Economics of
Survival. – New Viewpoints, N.Y. 1973, p. 123. - Only territorial nationalism is to be
discarded. As voluntary and exterritorial nationalism it is harmless and can be continued
as long as some people, for want of any better ideas, still go on liking it. It also embraces
the myth of the chosen people, because that gives the individual member a feeling of
value which otherwise he has no good reason to have. – J.Z., 26.3.09. – RELIGIONS,
NATIONALISM: Among the religions that will be cast aside or profoundly altered is
nationalism, a creed that has ruined many civilizations.” - Frederick C. Thayer, An End
to Hierarchy! An End to Competition! Organizing the Politics and Economics of
Survival. – New Viewpoints, N.Y. 1973, p. 123. - Only territorial nationalism is to be
discarded. As voluntary and exterritorial nationalism it is harmless and can be continued
as long as some people, for want of any better ideas, still go on liking it. It also embraces
the myth of the chosen people, because that gives the individual member a feeling of
value which otherwise he has no good reason to have. – J.Z., 26.3.09. – RELIGIONS,
NATIONALISM: An English Lady on the Rhine, hearing a German speaking of her
party as foreigners, exclaimed: „No, we are English! It is you that are foreigners!‟.” –
Ralph Waldo Emerson, A. Andrews Quotations, p.152. – JOKES, PATRIOTISM,
NATIONALISM: Any territorial domination by any majority or minority is not a
liberation for the minorities or the other minorities remain thus suppressed. – J.Z., 1.7.92,
NATIONALISM: Aristotle advised Alexander to deal with the Greeks as a leader and
with the Persians as a master. – But Alexander rejected the advice, certainly for practical
reasons, and perhaps also for idealistic reasons. He “acted in the spirit of the policy
afterwards enunciated by Eratosthenes [an Alexandrian scholar of the next century] who,
„refusing to agree with men who divided mankind into Greeks and barbarians …
declared that it was better to divide men simply into the good and bad.‟” - Walter
Lippmann, The Public Philosophy, A Mentor Book, 1955, p.82. – It is still better to let
people make their own and individual divisions – into the kind of voluntary communities
they like for themselves, as long as they do not claim any territorial monopoly for them. –
NATIONALISM: As present headlines demonstrate once again, small scale territorial
nationalism ( apart from long established mini-states and some neutral States like
Switzerland and Sweden ), can be locally just as brutal, murderous, destructive and
wrong as were and are large scale States, empires and federations. Not the size of
territorial States but the intolerant beliefs and intolerant actions of the population seem to
be decisive and the inherent intolerance of territorialism, of collective sovereignty
institutions and of collective responsibility notions, combined with ignorance of and
disinterest in the full range of individual rights and liberties. In some respects larger
States are even more tolerant, as long as their subjects largely obey their laws and pay
their taxes. – Local majorities in smaller States, especially new ones, can be more
intolerant - unless there exists already a long standing tradition of tolerance. - J.Z., 1.7.92,
NATIONALISM: As the strongest form of social organization, national community
throbs with threat and promise. (*) Even in its most sublime manifestation, when it
assures all members of the community equality before the law, (**) nationalism carries
the danger of destructiveness.” – Silvert, Man‟s Power, p.128. - - (*) Its compulsory
territorial membership and subordination has little to do with society & much with
coercion and monopoly. It is wrong to describe it as a genuine community or society. –
(**) Still leaving the great divide between law makers and the subjects of laws. - J.Z.,
NATIONALISM: Australia is not one nation. It is about 150 different “nationalities”,
ethnic, cultural, racial groups, not to speak of the thousands of religious, anti-religious
and ideological ones, to which people voluntarily adhere, without any constitutional,
legal, juridical or police compulsion. All can or do peacefully coexist to the extent that its
territorial governments do not favor one or the other group among them or repress the
autonomy of one or the other. All its diverse voluntary groups have the right to full
exterritorial autonomy – if they wish to practise it. Not even democracy or a “limited”
government can be rightly imposed upon them territorially. All such impositions are not
obligatory for peaceful individuals and groups of volunteers. – However, presently all of
them are forcefully subjected to territorial governments, their legislation and institutions,
at the federal, state and local government levels, which extort from their subjects more in
involuntary tribute payments than absolute kings ever did before. - J.Z., 29.7.98, 24.1.08,
NATIONALISM: Besides, individuality greatly outweighs nationality and in any given
human being deserves a thousand times more consideration. National character, since it
has to do with the crowd, will never be anything fairly to boast about. It is rather that
human limitation, perversity and baseness appear in every country in a different form,
and we call this the national character. Disgusted by one of them, we praise another until
this, too, has earned our disgust. Every nation speaks scornfully of every other – and they
are all right.” – Arthur Schopenhauer, quoted in: Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and
NATIONALISM: BOUNDARY, n. In political geography, an imaginary line between two
nations, separating the imaginary rights of one from the imaginary rights of the other.” –
Ambrose Bierce, The Devil‟s Dictionary. – FRONTIERS, BORDERS, BOUNDARIES,
NATIONALISM: But every country has its madmen. Some countries have more than
others. And when you give such men a licence to kill they are not always particular about
the way they kill. But, I‟m afraid, that the rest of their fellow countrymen remain human
beings.” - Eric Ambler, Journey into Fear, in a Heineman/Octopus, 1978 edition of his
NATIONALISM: But every country has its madmen. Some countries have more than
others. And when you give such men a licence to kill they are not always particular about
the way they kill. But, I‟m afraid, that the rest of their fellow countrymen remain human
beings.” - Eric Ambler, Journey into Fear, in a Heineman/Octopus, 1978 edition of his
NATIONALISM: But today, in an age threatened with nuclear war, overpopulation, and
resource depletion, nationalism worsens our most dangerous problems.” – Ben Bova,
ANALOG, 8/74. – He should have said: territorial nationalism. – J.Z., 1/75. – Is the
“age” threatened with nuclear war or are we? On resource depletion and population he is
or was as ignorant as, alas, all too many science fiction writers still are. – J.Z., 27.1.08. -
NATIONALISM: Cannibalism – Militarism – Nationalism.” – Georg Kaiser. -
NATIONALISM: Cities have all the Ik characteristics. They defecate on doorsteps, in
rivers and lakes, their own or anyone else‟s. They leave rubbish. They detest all
neighboring cities, give nothing away. They even build institutions for deserting elders
out of sight. – - Nations are most Ik-like of all. No wonder the Iks seem familiar. For total
greed, rapacity, heartlessness, and irresponsibility there is nothing to match a nation.
Nations, by law, are solitary, self-centered, withdrawn into themselves. There is not such
thing as affection between nations, and certainly no nation ever loved another. They bawl
insults from their doorsteps, defecate into whole oceans, snatch all the food, survive by
detestation, take joy in the bad luck of others, celebrate the death of others, live for the
death of others.” – Lewis Thomas, The Lives of a Cell, p.129. – A bit exaggerated but,
partly, all too true. – J.Z., 27.1.08. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Did the ancient murderous religions ever require as many human
sacrifices and sacrifices of blood, limbs, labor and wealth as the modern statist, territorial
and nationalistic religions do, in the Moloch cult of the territorial State? – J.Z., 28.12.93,
NATIONALISM: Do most of us still believe in “inherited” enemies? – J.Z., 24.2.09. –
NATIONALISM: Do not expect nations to take the initiative in imposing restrictions
upon themselves.” – Alexander Hamilton. – Nations are mere abstracts. The power-
holders, who pretend to represent a “nation”, do not like any restrictions upon their power
addiction and power urges. – J.Z., 27.1.08. - & PATRIOTISM, DIS.
NATIONALISM: Earth is my country, my nation, the human race, mankind, is my
people and I am my own government or free society – together with like-minded
volunteers, all content with full exterritorial autonomy under personal laws. – J.Z.,
NATIONALISM: Even marriages that are love matches, quite voluntarily engaged in, do
often last only for a few years instead of a life-time. They frequently lead to separations,
divorces and marriages with other partners, sometimes to something that might be classed
as serial polygamy. Yet we expect compulsory and coercive lifetime partnerships with
millions of other people, most of them quite unknown to us and a few quite abhorrent to
us, to last for our lifetime, without love or friendship or close work , business
relationships, sports and hobby relationships and this while being dominated by a few
powerful people and the floods of laws they have passed. And this subordination and
inmateship is supposed to make us happy or content, grateful, obedient and well off,
regardless of how many of our rights and liberties are remaining repressed and how much
we are exploited via coercively levied tributes. A happy territorial “nation” or “people” is
much more utopian than a happy and lifelong marriage. At least from marriages we can
part via separation and divorce. We have no equivalent right ( secession and voluntary
and exterritorially autonomous re-association with others ) for our state or nation-
membership, while remaining in our the country we were born in. At best we are allowed
to leave and accepted in other countries somewhat better. The voluntary marriage and
divorce system and re-marriage system or “free love” or that of de-facto marriages has
still to be introduced regarding political, economic and social systems, although it should
already be implied in freedom of contract and freedom of association. – J.Z., 10.7.86. -
NATIONALISM: Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud,
adopts, as a last resource, pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and glad
to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own
inferiority.” – Arthur Schopenhauer, Aphorismen zur Lebensweisheit, tr. by T. Bailey
Saunders, in George Seldes, The Great Quotations, p.509. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Every nation derides the others, and they are all correct.” - ( Jede
Nation spottet ueber die andern, und alle haben recht. ) – Arthur Schopenhauer, Parerga
und Paralipomena, 1: Aphorismen zur Lebensweisheit, Kap. V; Paraenesen und
Maximen, A. – Another translation: “Every nation ridicules other nations, and all are
right.” - JOKE
NATIONALISM: Every national border in Europe marks the place where two gangs of
bandits got too exhausted to kill each other anymore and signed a treaty. Patriotism is
the delusion that one of these gangs of bandits is better than all the others.” – R. A.
Wilson, The Earth Will Shake, p.100. - BORDERS, FRONTIERS, WARS,
NATIONALISM: Exaggerations of nationalism are symptoms of a sickness.” – H.
Keyserling. ( “Auswuechse des Nationalismus sind Krankheitssymptome.” )
NATIONALISM: Fénelon … has written that a historian ought to be neutral between
other countries and his own, and he expected the same discipline in politicians, as
patriotism cannot absolve a man from his duty to mankind.” - Lord Acton, Lectures on
the French Revolution, ed. by Figgis & Laurence, MacMillan, 1932, p.4. -
NATIONALISM: For hundreds of years, people have lived under the yoke of huge
nation-states that kill, tax, loot and destroy in a relentless attempt to control and exploit
everybody and everything.” – Editorial in LIBERTARIAN ANALYSIS, Winter 1970,
NATIONALISM: For what precise and definite object are all the citizens today to be
stamped, like the coinage, with the same image? … On what basis would they be cast in
the same mold? And who will posses the mold? A terrible question, which should give us
pause. Who will posses the mold? … Is it not simpler to break this fatal mold and
honestly proclaim freedom?” – Bastiat, in G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man
Alone, p.249. – To each individual and to each community of volunteers the own mold! –
NATIONALISM: Globalism as well as world federalism, and nationalism or patriotism
should be as voluntary and individualized as our shopping preferences are. Consumer
sovereignty and free enterprise offers in everything – but, e.g. mass murder devices. But
under full freedom who would want them? People would be free to mind their own
business in every respect and would not have to be afraid of becoming territorially over-
powered by other beliefs, people, customs, traditions, laws, ideologies. Each group would
be free to do its own things, for or to itself, but each member of each group would be free
to change his or her membership and allegiance. – J.Z., 24.2.09. –
NATIONALISM: He loves his country best who strives to make it best.” – R. G.
Ingersoll, Speech in New York, May 29, 1882. – Best by what standard? – J.Z., 25.1.08.
NATIONALISM: Hess proclaimed if we did not have nation states, Hitler would have
been a mere bully in his neighborhood, and Nixon would have been a little pest.” – NEW
LIBERTARIAN WEEKLY, 65, 13. March 87. - on Karl Hess. - NATION STATES
NATIONALISM: How was he to know, in this area, if the man was Greek, Macedonian
or Bulgar? As he recalled, the nationalities blended into each other at this point to such a
degree that even borders made precious little difference.” - Mack Reynolds, Time of War,
IF SF, Nov. 65. - The borders make all the difference for those aware of their minority
differences and aspirations and subjected to whoever rules territorially nevertheless. Let
them sort themselves out - with each group of volunteers ruling itself, regardless of the
associations and organizations of others in the same area, which they prefer for
themselves. - It works for religious differences, for sports, hobbies, crafts, arts, choice of
professions and trades, technological and scientific preferences and associations. Only
outlawing, territorially, individual choices in politics, economics and social arrangements
causes troubles. In all other spheres we have already avoided them by allowing individual
sovereignty. It works, everywhere, well enough. It would work here, too, if only we
allowed it to. Harmony isn't impossible. It is merely territorially outlawed. - J.Z. -
NATIONALISM: I am not opinionated in favor of any territorial government. – J.Z.,
10.4.87. – Well, maybe some mini-states and neutral States excepted. – But even they are
still far from the ideals they could and should be, as merely voluntary communities, not
confined to any territory and yet fully exterritorially autonomous. - J.Z., 25.1.08. - &
NATIONALISM: I am, your are, we are all Australians and we are, mostly, proud to be
Australians.” However, how can one be proud to be as unfree as Australians still are by
now? – J.Z., 6.4.94. As a nation of immigrants we, through our supposed representatives,
have introduced immigration restrictions and deported people or put them into
concentration camps. For our governments do not know how to cope with unemployment
and so further immigrants are unpopular. Should we be proud of this ignorance and this
response to it, too? – J.Z., 24.1.08. - DIS., Q.
NATIONALISM: I have never understood why one‟s affections must be confined, as
once with women, to a single country.” – J. K. Galbraith, A Life In Our Times, 1881. – I
never thought I would have any reason to quote him! – J.Z., 26.1.08. – Why should one
have to love only one woman or one man or one country? – Free choice & voluntarism in
everything! - J.Z., 24.2.09. - & WOMEN, MONOGAMY, MARRIAGE, POLYGAMY,
NATIONALISM: I look on all men as my fellow-citizens, and would embrace a Pole as I
would a Frenchman, subordinating this national tie to the common and universal one. …
Nature has given us to the world free and unfettered; we imprison ourselves in certain
narrow districts. …” - Michael Montaign, in Paul Eldridge: Montaigne. - &
NATIONALISM: I love my country far too much to be a nationalist.” – Unknown -
NATIONALISM: I want to work only for the benefit of my own “nation”, my own
sovereign self. – J.Z., 10/73. – And this at the same time for the benefit of all my trading
partners - through free exchange with all other sovereign individuals and all other
voluntary associations. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - VS. INDIVIDUALISM & INDIVIDUAL
NATIONALISM: I was once, involuntarily, a German, born into that country, when it
was under Nazi rule. Would or should that have turned me into a German nationalist or a
Nazi? Or, rather, into a cosmopolitan? With the limited choices available to me later on, I
became an Australian, but still not an Australian nationalist but simply one who
appreciates whatever limited liberties exist here and still hating all wrongful impositions
upon me and others. – J.Z., 9.6.98, 24.1.08.
NATIONALISM: If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom;
and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that,
too.” – Somerset Maugham - FREEDOM & SECURITY
NATIONALISM: If it breaks up a nation-state or an empire, I‟m for it.” – Mike Marotta,
NATIONALISM: If the American desires the greatness and prosperity of the States
before all nations, and the Englishman desires the same for his nation, and the Russian,
Turk, Dutchman, Abyssinian, Venezuelan, Boer, Armenian, :Pole, Czech, each have a
similar desire; if all are convinced that these desires ought not to be concealed and
suppressed, but, on the contrary, are something to be proud of, and to be encouraged in
oneself and in others; and if (*) one‟s country‟s greatness and prosperity can be obtained
only at the expense of another, or at times of many other countries and nations – then
how can war not be?” – Tolstoi, On Civil Disobedience and Nonviolence, 106. – (*) it is
NATIONALISM: If the human race is to survive then we must subordinate national
pride to internationalist thinking. A nation has its place in the international order (*), but
when it puts its own interests over those of the international order then this becomes
dangerous. ( „Wenn die menschliche Rasse ueberleben soll, mussen wir den
Nationalstolz dem internationalen Denken unterordnen. Eine Nation hat ihren Platz in
der internationalen Ordnung, aber wenn sie ihre eigenen Interessen ueber die der
menschlichen Gemeinschaft stellt, wird es gefaehrlich.“ ) – Sarvepalli Radkrishnan, Rede
anlaesslich der Verleihung des Friedenspreises des Deutschen Buchhandels, am
22.10.1961 in Frankfurt am Main. - - (*) Yes, but not in the form of a territorial
monopoly. – J.Z., 25.1.08. – Practised with a territorial monopoly claim it only leads to
numerous disorders. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - PRIDE, ARROGANCE, SPECIAL INTERESTS,
NATIONALISM: Ignorant of and disinterested in better ideas nationalists champion
territorial nationalism and, finally became slaves and enslavers under the banner of
territorial unity and nationalism. - J.Z., 28.2.89, 3.4.89.. – J.Z., 28.2.89. – I always
disliked how tame elephants had been used to capture and also enslave wild elephants. –
NATIONALISM: Into the cultural and technological system of the modern world, the
patriotic spirit fits like dust in the eyes and sand in the bearings. Its net contribution to
the outcome is obscuration, distrust, and retardation at every point where it touches the
fortunes of modern mankind. Yet it is forever present in the counsels of the statesman and
in the affections of the common man, and it never ceases to command the regard of all
men as the prime attribute of mankind and the final test of the desirable citizen. It is
scarcely an exaggeration to say that no other consideration is allowed in abatement of
the claims of abatement of the claims of patriotic loyalty, and that such loyalty will be
allowed to cover any multitude of sins.” – Thorsten Veblen, The Nature of Peace, 1919,
in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: It is a poor and narrow-minded ideal to write merely for one nation.
For a philosophical head this limit is quite intolerable.” – Schiller in letter to Koerner. (
Es ist ein armseliges, kleinliches ideal, fuer eine Nation zu schreiben; einem
philosophischen Geiste ist diese Grenze durchaus unertraeglich. ) – All great works
deserve to be translated. They address mankind, not just the people of one language area.
– J.Z., 22.7.86, 25.1.08. - & COSMOPOLITANISM
NATIONALISM: It is dreadful to say so, but there is not, nor has there been, any
conjoint violence of one people against another which was not accomplished in the name
of patriotism.” – “Tolstoi in “Civil Disobedience and Nonviolence”, p.80. - &
NATIONALISM: It is not true that our "nation" is endangered but that the very existence
of our "nation", in exclusive, territorial and coercive form, endangers US and OTHERS.
Nothing but what is voluntary deserves the name of "national", according to Mary
Chisholm. ( Caroline Chisholm? My memory! ) What is voluntary does rarely make
enemies and it can be defended much easier and with much more justification. – J.Z.,
NATIONALISM: It is of the utmost significance that modern nationalism does not spring
from love towards one‟s own country or one‟s own people. On the contrary, it has its
roots in the ambitious plans of a minority lusting for dictatorship and determined to
impose upon the people a certain form of the state, even though this be entirely contrary
to the will of the majority. Blind belief in the magic power of a national dictatorship is to
replace for man the love of home and the feeling of the spiritual culture of his time; love
of fellow man is to be crushed by “the greatness of the state”, for which individuals are
to serve as fodder.” – Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.243. - Under monetary
despotism and territorialism which makes it possible, it often springs mainly from fear of
unemployment and fear of foreign competitors, leading to immigration restrictions,
protectionism and hatred of foreigners.
NATIONALISM: It is peculiar that nationalistic zealots are not even natives of the
countries they allegedly wish to glorify: Alexander was not a Greek, Napoleon not a
Frenchman, Hitler not a German, and Stalin not a Russian. – Dagobert D. Runes, A Book
of Contemplation, p.93.Also in: A Dictionary of Thought, p.78. – That gives them an
extra strong motive for their lies and pretences. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - & LEADERSHIP
NATIONALISM: It is remarkable that jealousy of individual property in land often goes
along with very exaggerated doctrines of tribal or national property in land. We are told
that John, James, and Williams ought not to possess part of the earth‟s surface because it
belongs to all men; but it is held that Egyptians, Nicaraguans, or Indians have such right
to the territory which they occupy, that they may bar the avenues of commerce and
civilization if they choose, and that it is wrong to override their prejudices or expropriate
their land … the notion that the race owns the earth has practical meaning … for the
latter class of cases.” – W. G. Sumner, What Social Classes Owe To Each Other, p.45. –
NATIONALISM: It is surely carried to excess when men think only of the power and
glory of their State and forget what they are to mankind at large.” – J. Bryce, University
NATIONALISM: It is the deliberate and discerning love of our nation that appeals to
me, not the indiscriminate love that assumes that everything be right and righteous
because it bears a national label.” - Thomas Masaryk. - & PATRIOTISM,
NATIONALISM: It is the religious urge which still lives in men today, although the
forms of faith have changed. The Crusader‟s cry, “God wills it!” would hardly raise an
echo in Europe today, but there are still millions of men who are ready for anything if the
nation wills it! Religious feeling has assumed political form, and the political man today
confronts the natural man just as antagonistically as did the man of past centuries who
was held in the grip of the church‟s dogmatism.” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and
NATIONALISM: It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize
that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation …
that the higher interests involved in the life of the whole must here set the limits and lay
down the duties of the interests of the individual.” – Adolf Hitler. - STATISM,
NATIONALISM: It seems like the less a statesman amounts to, the more he loves the
flag.” – Anonymous. - Doesn't the same apply to the subjects of territorial rulers? - J.Z.,
24. 11. 06.
NATIONALISM: Love your country but fear its government." - N.E. folk wisdom &
NATIONALISM: Madness among individuals is rare but among groups, parties, peoples
and times it is the rule.“ – ( Der Irrsinn ist bei Einzelnen etwas Seltenes - , aber bei
Gruppen, Parteien, Voelkern, Zeiten die Regel. ) – Nietzssche, Jenseits von Gut und
Boese, 4, 156. ( Beyond Good & Evil. ) – Let individual and reasonable people opt out
from the masses, to do their own things, but also let fools be foolish at their own expense
and risk. Thus enlightenment and rehabilitation will become speeded up. – J.Z., 22.7.86,
25.1.08. – An English translation by someone else: “In individuals, insanity is rare, but in
group, parties, nations and epochs it is the rule.” – F. W. Nietzsche: Beyond Good &
Evil, 1886. – Thus individuals ought to remain free and choosy about their national
association. – J.Z., 10.7.86. - & PANARCHISM, MOBS, MASSES, MASS
NATIONALISM: Malraux distinguishes between nationalism as “volunté d‟hégemonie”
and nationalism as „volunté de conscience nationale‟.” - Only the former is dangerous
for international relations.” - PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS JOURNALS, entry
28930. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Maybe Australians can be proud of their country and their own
achievements, but can they be proud of their politicians and bureaucrats and what these
rulers have done to them and taken of them? – J.Z., 13.3.87, .1.08.
NATIONALISM: Modern man … is educated to understand foreign languages and
misunderstand foreigners.” – G. K. Chesterton, 1874-1936. - & PATRIOTISM, WAR,
NATIONALISM: Modern nationalism is based on defending land, not people.” – Marc
Eric Ely Chaitlin, THE CONNECTION 140, p.74. - How valuable is a country filled with
radioactive dust? – Should we be grateful if our great misleader survive, in the safest
bunkers? - J.Z., 25.1.08. – It is rather based upon protecting the ruling government than
its subjects. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - & TERRITORIALISM, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT,
NATIONALISM: Modern nationalism is only will-toward-the-state-at-any-price and
complete absorption of man in the higher ends of power.” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism
and Culture, p.243. – Higher ends or lower or lowest ends? – J.Z., 25.1.08. – The power
addiction of a few leads to the systematic victimization of the many. Even in
democracies. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - POWER ADDICTION
NATIONALISM: Morally, the territorial type of nationalism was never justified.
Historically it is a relatively modern development: "Among the Romans the censor was
an inspector of public morals, but the public morals of modern nations will not bear
inspection!”- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary. "The new creed is nationalism, the
doctrine which expresses and contains the self-adulation of the power unit, the nation
state, its sacred absolute authority." - Gregory Raines in: "Good Government", June 72. -
There are totalitarian traits even in democracies: "… In effect, a government at war tells
its people: 'Forget that you are workers fighting against fellow workers; that you are
students fighting against fellow students; that you are Christians fighting against fellow
Christians. Remember only that you are Britishers or Germans, or Japanese. That is your
supreme allegiance'." - W. Macmahon Ball in the anthology: "Paths to Peace", compiled
by Victor Wallace. - - "Nationalism means nothing anyhow. Take the British: In France a
Briton is perfidious, in America he's a silly ass with a monocle, in Italy a gaunt,
cold-blooded aristocrat, in Germany a bony pipe-sucking child starver." - Eric Knight,
"This Above All", p.121, World Distributors, London. - - The world will not see peace
until we have abolished the collectivism and coercion inherent in all existing nationalist
movements and institutions and have reduced the nationalists to voluntaristic
communities which, as such, could have all the autonomy they desire. - Caroline
Chisholm was right where she said: "Nothing but what is voluntary deserves the name of
national". ( I found these words quoted but not yet the text in which they occur. - J.Z.,
16.10.01. ) - One nationality becomes as voluntaristic and individualistic as church
membership - it will become as harmless. - - Geographically defined nations are by their
very definition nuclear targets. Thus we can no longer afford to be organized in this way.
- - Voluntary and exterritorially autonomous nationalism, according to any person's free
and individual choice, is the answer. This reorganization would do away with all the war-
promoting tendencies of territorial nationalism. - - If some nations would not want to
accept certain members, then the newcomers would still have no cause to resort to war,
for they would remain free to set up similar nations without this exclusiveness, anywhere
but without any monopoly claims to the whole territory in which they come to live and
work. It would all be a question of private contracts with private owners, who might
belong to different panarchies. – From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War. -
NATIONALISM: Most kinds of nationalism tend to be also a kind of state socialism,
national socialism or state capitalism, at least in many spheres, not only that of the post
office, jurisdiction, legislation, administration and defence and central banking. Even
when approved by the majority, they tend to exploit or suppress some peaceful and
productive minorities, at least the anarchists and libertarians of various colors and shades.
– J.Z., 24.9.87, 26.1.08.
NATIONALISM: Most nationalists never seriously considered: a.) the international
origins of races, cultures and civilizations, b.) how much of their air and water comes
from across the borders, c.) how much of their own bodies comes from the food they
imported from abroad, d.) how much of their bodies is covered by foreign textile fibers,
e.) how much of their “own” language consists of terms adopted from foreign languages,
f.) how much of their “own” technology and science is influenced by that of other
countries, g.) how many of their “own” ideas originated in foreign heads. – J.Z., 6.11.78,
NATIONALISM: My country is the world! My countrymen are all mankind. – W. L.
NATIONALISM: My country is the world, and my religion is to do good.” – Thomas
Paine: The Rights of Man, V, 1791. – Doing good? Altruism? Self-sacrifice? He did best
by upholding the rights of man, as far as he knew them. Only relatively recently did I
finally come across his human rights draft and included it in my collection of over 130
private drafts of human rights, offered by me in PEACE PLANS 589/590, revised and
supplemented edition, digitized, so far only as email attachment from me, upon request.
Anyone is invited to put it online or on a CD. – But so far not one has done it, which is
not a good sign. - J.Z., 25.1.08. - PATRIOTISM & COSMOPOLITANISM, MANKIND,
NATIONALISM: My country right or wrong" is like saying, "My mother drunk or
sober." - G. K. Chesterton
NATIONALISM: My country right or wrong: if right, to be kept right; if wrong, to be set
right.” – Carl Schurz: Speech in the Senate, Jan. 17, 1872. – ( Cf. STEVEN DECATUR,
ante, 1816. - Can one set a territorial State right while leaving it as a territorial power? –
NATIONALISM: My country, right or wrong!”? – It‟s not my country or my
government, or my people, to the extent that they are wrong and, nevertheless, continue
to pretend to also represent me and other dissenters to their laws, policies and institutions,
while they do not permit me and other dissenters to secede from them. – J.Z., 24.11.99,
NATIONALISM: National agreement” is a contradiction in terms and also one of the
great and dangerous fictions. – They are binding only for those who did sign them or
would have been prepared to sign them. – J.Z., 10.6.98, 24.1.08. - NATIONAL
NATIONALISM: National differences, and antagonisms between peoples, are daily
more and more vanishing, owing to the development of the bourgeoisie, to freedom of
commerce, to the world-market, to uniformity in the mode of production, and to the
conditions of life corresponding thereto.” – Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, The
Communist Manifesto, 1848. – A bit optimistic, for its times., but one of the few of their
better observations and predictions. – J.Z., 10.7.86
NATIONALISM: National hatred is something peculiar. You will always find it
strongest and most violent where there is the lowest degree of culture.” – J. W. Goethe,
Conversations with Eckermann, March 14, 1830. – I think that it is not so much culture
and civilization that are involved but, rather, knowledge of, appreciation and degree of
realization of freedom, justice and, especially, of individual rights and liberties. – J.Z.,
24.1.08. – Naturally, one could consider them to be the most important parts of any
genuine culture and civilization. But which culture and civilization has fully known and
realize them as yet or shows even a sufficient interest for them? – That e.g., poems,
songs, compositions, plays, paintings, sculptures, architecture and religions and certain
books have been appreciated on both sides of a border has not yet prevented any war to
my knowledge. – Are territorial monopoly claims part of culture and civilization or rather
remainders or barbarism? - J.Z., 24.1.08. – ( The full passage, first in my English, then in
German: “National hatred: On the whole national hatred is a peculiar thing. At the
lowest stage of culture you will find it strongest and most violent. But there is a stage
where it disappears altogether and where one stands, so to speak above all the nations
and where one feels the happiness and the woes of a people in one‟s neighborhood as
strongly as those of the own.” - - ( Nationalhass. Ueberhaupt ist es mit dem Nationalhass
ein eigenes Ding. Auf den untersten Stufen der Kultur werden Sie ihn immer am
staerksten und heftigsten finden. Es gibt aber eine Stufe, wo er ganz verschwindet und wo
man gewissermassen ganz uber den Nationen steht und wo man ein Glueck und eine
Wehe seines Nachbarvolkes empfinded, als waere es dem eigenen begegnet.“ ) –
Eckermann, Gespraeche mit Goethe, 14.3.1830. ) - & COSMOPOLITANISM,
NATIONALISM: National land monopoly claims have led and are leading to the greatest
crimes. – J.Z., 15.8.93. - TERRITORIALISM & LAND MONOPOLY
NATIONALISM: National States are a social invention of the past three centuries.” –
PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS JOURNALS, entry 28936. – Rather an anti-social
invention. – J.Z., 24.2.09 - & PATRIOTISM, STATES, TERRITORIALISM.
NATIONALISM: National territorial claims are as criminal as are the exclusive turf
claims of the mafia and other organized crime groups. – J.Z., 10.8.96, 24.1.08. -
NATIONALISM: Nationalism and any other faith or ideology can also be practised
tolerantly, freely and efficiently without exclusive possession of any territory. On the
contrary: The exclusive territorial claims bring many difficulties that could and should be
avoided. They maximize rather than minimize resistance to them and render the
achievement of self-government, self-determination or self-management in many cases
impossible or may delay it for decades to centuries. Thus, in desperation, members of
national, religious, social, ethnic or ideological minorities, unaware of their exterritorial
and rightful possibilities in their opinion, are, in their opinion, "driven" towards terrorist
actions. - J.Z., 11.12.03. - Most terrorist movements would soon collapse if most of the
members were given the option of exterritorial autonomy for themselves and if, at last, a
world-wide enlightenment campaign were started and carried out against the principle
and practice of "collective responsibility". - J.Z., 17.9.04. - NATIONALISM DOES NOT
NATIONALISM: Nationalism and Power Policy. – This approach is the more dangerous
in that it favours the return to nationalism and power policy which is nowadays perhaps
the gravest danger threatening us after communism. Since power policy is a
reaffirmation of force as right, a western return to power policy is in itself a victory for
communism.” – Salvador de Madariaga, The Blowing Up of the Parthenon, 39, point 7. -
NATIONALISM: Nationalism is a chronic state of Fascism.” – T. F., in “St. John‟s
Bread”, n.d. – & PATRIOTISM, FASCISM
NATIONALISM: Nationalism is a form of blank check racism.” T. F., in “St. John‟s
Bread”, n.d. – & PATRIOTISM, RACISM
NATIONALISM: Nationalism is a silly cock crowing on his own dunghill.” - R.
Aldington. – Sent by C. B. - CHAUVINISM, PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Nationalism is all too much either a blood sport or a protectionist and
restrictionist poverty promoter. – J.Z., 22.6.92, 26.1.08.
NATIONALISM: Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind.” -
Albert Einstein, 1879-1955, to George Sylvester Viereck, 1921, quoted in: Bernard
Berenson, 1865-1959, Lore and Maurice Cowan, compilers, The Wit of the Jews, Leslie
Frewin, London, 1970, p.30. – The disease consists only in territorial nationalism. The
nationalism of communities of volunteers only, confined to territorial autonomy and
personal laws, is rightful and harmless, might even be beneficial for its members and
trading partners. E.g., the term “Made in Germany”, first possibly imposed as a method
to encourage an international boycott of German goods, became a sign for quality and
boosted exports. It also appealed to German nationalism and pride. Did it do anything
wrong? Compare it with the stupid and short-sighted slogan: “Buy Australian!”, as if
quality and price did not matter and as if imports did not lead to corresponding exports. –
J.Z., 24.1.08. – His remark is true for territorial nationalism. Not for cultural and
language or ideological preferences of individuals and societies of volunteers. – J.Z.,
NATIONALISM: Nationalism is compulsory Apartheid on an international scale. – J.Z.,
9.10.88. - & APARTHEID
NATIONALISM: Nationalism is our form of incest, is our idolatry, is our insanity.
“Patriotism” is its cult.” – Erich Fromm, The Sane Society, 1955, p.3. – Patriotism may
merely be the attempt to help make one‟s nation not worse but as good or even better
than other nations. Then it is a positive incentive and force for progress and
enlightenment. – It need not lead to protectionism or a nuclear arms race or any other
mere power struggle. - J.Z., 25.1.08. - DIS.
NATIONALISM: Nationalism is the country-wide and even international equivalent to
parochialism. – J.Z., August 88. – It limits and confines our horizons all too much. – J.Z.,
NATIONALISM: Nationalism leads to moral ruin because it denies universality, denies
the existence of a single God, denies the value of the human being as a human being; and
because at the same time, it affirms exclusiveness, encourages vanity, pride and self-
satisfaction, stimulates hatred and proclaims the necessity and the rightness of war.” –
Aldous Huxley, Science, Liberty and Peace, p.34. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Nationalism lives only as an ideology of hate, envy, and thirst for
power; …” - Leszek Kolakowski, ENCOUNTER, 12/78, p.84.
NATIONALISM: Nationalism means nothing anyhow. Take the British: In France a
Briton is perfidious, in America he‟s a silly ass with a monocle, in Italy a gaunt, cold-
blooded aristocrat, in Germany a bony pipe-sucking child starver.” – Eric Knight, This
Above All, World Distributors Ltd., 36 Great Russell St., London WC 1. - &
NATIONALISM: Nationalism means the physical and moral destruction of man.” –
Georg Kaiser. ( Nationalismus bedeutet die physische und moralische Vernichtung des
Menschen. ) - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Nationalism should be recognized to be the sentimental but extremely
dangerous nonsense that it is. I most emphatically do not advocate a conventional
Religious Revival, but what I do urge is that people recognized, more widely than they do
now, that they are primarily responsible to their own consciences, irrespective of their
particular traditions of wisdom, if any, upon which they draw to supplement the fruits of
their own experience.” – Abrabanel – I wish he had the “conscience” aspect more
concretely expressed, e.g. via a proposal for an improved declaration of genuine
individual rights and liberties. We need more blueprints for liberty rather than general
calls for something better or progress or self-improvement or responsibility. – The
territorialist pretences and assertions of nationalism would be shown up as largely false
once all dissenters are free to secede from any “nation” State and to peacefully compete
or simply coexist with its remaining members, then all volunteers, on the basis of full
exterritorial autonomy. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - CONSCIENCE, TRADITIONS,
NATIONALISM: Nationalism: denial of the similarities between one people and its
neighbors, of the possible superiority of other people.” – Thomas Szasz, Heresies, p.78.
NATIONALISM: Nationalities are not liberated by confining them to any limited
territory. Deportation zones, reserves and ghettos are not centers of liberty but resemble
prisons or concentration camps much more. Even the usual territorial national domination
of one particular national, religious, racial, ethnic or ideological group or community,
whether it constitutes a majority or minority, over all the others in a territory does,
obviously, not amount to genuine and full liberation for all. Any leash has two ends. –
J.Z., 21.6.92, 24.1.08. - LIBERATION & PANARCHISM
NATIONALISM: Nationwide thinking, nationwide planning and nationwide action are
the three great essentials to prevent (*) nationwide crises for future generations to
struggle through.” – Franklin D. Roosevelt, speech, New York City, April 24, 1936. – (*)
Rather, to create! – J.Z., 28.10.85. – People as ignorant and prejudiced still have the
chance to become and to remain presidents of great or small territorial nations for all too
NATIONALISM: Never was patriot yet, but was a fool.” – John Dryden, 1631-1700,
NATIONALISM: No exclusive national territory has any foundation in morality or
economics or necessity. A sufficiently developed culture and civilization, and, most
importantly, peace, freedom and justice for all, in accordance with the own and varied
individual standards and aims, can only be achieved without them. – J.Z., 2.10.93,
NATIONALISM: No man can be a patriot on an empty stomach.” – W. C. Brann, The
Iconoclast, in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: No man has the right to fix the boundary of the march of a nation; no
man has the right to say to his country – this far shalt thou go and no further.” – C.S.
Parnell, 1846-1891, quoted in A. Andrews Quotations, p.314 – This can be taken two
ways: Either as a reference for expanded borders or for the abolition of all of them. – J.Z.,
NATIONALISM: No national literature, philosophy or science has sufficient knowledge
and wisdom on its own. Only world literature, world philosophy, and world science can
satisfy our requirements. – J.Z., 25.9.93. – However, a world State or a world federation
could satisfy us even less than an present State, federation or local government could. It
would be as useless, wrongful and harmful as the biggest ABC mass murder devices are.
– All national and world-wide organizations and other associations and communities
should be confined to their own volunteers and their own personal laws and institutions. -
NATIONALISM: No real science fictioner can be a “100% American”; we‟re too aware
that the human race is a larger cause.” – John W. Campbell in: The John W. Campbell
Letters, vol. 1, 1985 Eds.: Perry A. Chapdelaine, Sr., et al., AC Projects Inc., ISBN 0-
931150-16-7, p. 378. - - And that of all reasonable beings is a much larger one still. –
NATIONALISM: Nothing but what is voluntary is deserving the name of national.” –
Ascribed to an Australian pioneer woman, Caroline Chisholm. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Nothing is more egotistical than nationalism, nothing more scrupulous
than the desire for unified government.” – Proudhon, in S. Edwards, Proudhon, p.190. -
NATIONALISM: Nuclear nationalism is genocidal and suicidal madness. – J.Z., n.d. -
NATIONALISM: One is a Nationalist‟, says Professor Corradini, one of the prophets of
Italian sacro egoismo, while waiting to be able to become an Imperialist.‟ He prophesies
that in twenty years „all Italy will be Imperialist‟. – Quoted by Mr. T. L. Stoddard in an
article on the Italian Nationalism, in the FORUM, Sept. 1915.” - Norman Angell, Human
Nature and the Peace Problem, 1925, p.17/18. - IMPERIALISM, TERRITORIALISM
NATIONALISM: One is trained to think of himself as a member of his nation just as one
is trained to think of himself as a member of a church. “National states are political
church organizations; the so-called national consciousness is not born in man, but
trained into him. It is a religious concept; one is a German, a Frenchman, an Italian, just
as one is a Catholic, a Protestant, or a Jew.” Those who actively advance the cause of
the nation know exactly what they are doing when they cultivate the belief among the
people that the citizen has a duty to the state that is similar to his duty to God, Rocker
charged.” - Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.478/79. - & PATRIOTISM, RELIGION
NATIONALISM: One of the childhood diseases of mankind.” – J.Z., 14.2.87. –
Compare: “Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind.” – Albert
Einstein, to George Sylvester Viereck, 1921. - Did I read and partly remember this
remark? I do not know. – J.Z., 25.1.08.
NATIONALISM: One of the great attractions of patriotism – it fulfills our worst wishes.
In the person of our nation we are able, vicariously, to bully and to cheat, Bully and
cheat, what‟s more, with a feeling that we are profoundly virtuous.” – Aldous Huxley,
Eyeless in Gaza, 1936. - & PATRIOTISM, CHAUVINISM
NATIONALISM: Only if, when and to the extent that it is right - is it my country or my
government. And how often and how extensively does that occur? – J.Z., 1.10.92,
24.1.08. - COUNTRY
NATIONALISM: Our country is the world – our countrymen are all mankind.” –
William Lloyd Garrison, Motto of the LIBERATOR, quoted in George Seldes, The Great
NATIONALISM: Our country is wherever we are well off.” – John Milton, 1608-1674,
Letter to Peter Heimbach, Aug. 15, 1666. ( Cf. Aristophanes, ante, 408, B.C. ) –– Who is
we? Even in the poorest countries some people are rich, with riches rightly or wrongly
acquired. The personal wealth might be acquired through fraud, robberies, monopolies
etc. As an unqualified standard this is not good enough. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - - Compare: The
country of every man is that one where he lives best. – Aristophanes, ex Ponto, I, c. 5. –
NATIONALISM: Our country! In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always
be in the right, but – our country, right or wrong!” – Stephen Decatur, 1816, quoted in C.
Bingham, Men & Affairs, 316. - - Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept
right; when wrong, to be put right.” – Carl Schurz, 1829-1906, Speech in the Senate, Jan.
17, 1872. ( Cf. Stephen Decatur, ante, 1816. ) - & PATRIOTISM, DIS.
NATIONALISM: Our patriotism is to the human race, … This is no longer a matter of
nation, religion or hemisphere. It is a matter of species survival.” – The War Book, ed. by
NATIONALISM: Our true nationality is mankind.” – H. G. Wells, The Outline of
History, - Quoted in George Seldes, The Great Quotation. – & PATRIOTISM,
NATIONALISM: Panarchism, voluntarism, exterritorial autonomy & tolerance for
peaceful coexistence between very diverse communities of volunteers, none of them with
a territorial monopoly. even globalism & anti-globalism or local customs, traditions &
laws could prevail – for their volunteers only. – J.Z., 24.2.09.
NATIONALISM: Patriot Act”, USA, supposedly only against terrorism. What an act! –
What a false pretence! In reality one of the most anti-patriotic ones ever passed. – Almost
everyone treated like a potential criminal as a result. And still more excess power in the
hands of the government. - J.Z., 27.1.08. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is a kind of religion; it is the egg from which wars are
hatched.” – Guy de Maupassant, My Uncle Sasthenes. – in G. Seldes, The Great
Quotations. – Only if it leads to hatred, disregard and suppression or aggression. It may
lead merely to proud high productivity and progress in competition with other peoples,
e.g. in the arts and in sports. One can try to be better than other people, without wanting
to dominate or conquer them. - This is a very superficial view of wars, which have many
different causes, the main one being territorialism and all that it implies. – J.Z., 25.1.08. -
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is a lively sense of responsibility. Nationalism is a silly cock
crowing on the its own dunghill.” – Richard Aldington, 1892-1962, The Colonel‟s
Daughter, 1931. – Andrews Quotes 235. - & PATRIOTISM, RESPONSIBILITY,
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is a pernicious psychopathic form of idiocy.” – George
Bernard Shaw, L‟Esprit Français, Paris, – in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. - &
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is a survival of barbarism.” – Tolstoi, on Civil
Disobedience and Nonviolence, 109. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is often an arbitrary veneration of real estate above
principles.” George Jean Nathan, Testament of a Critic, – in G. Seldes, The Great
Quotations. - - It does not mean a genuine love for all the inhabitants of a territory. – J.Z.,
27.1.08. – How nationalistic is the person who loves only the country itself and not all or
most of its population? – J.Z., 24.2.09. - & PATRIOTISM, TERRITORIALISM, Q.
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is slavery.” – “Tolstoi on Civil Disobedience and
Nonviolence”, p.79. - - I would add: “loved”, to make it: “Patriotism is slavery – loved.”
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” – Dr. Samuel Johnson,
1709-1784, in Boswell‟s Life of Johnson, April 7, 1775, – in G. Seldes, The Great
Quotations. – “In Dr. Johnson‟s famous dictionary patriotism is defined as the last resort
of a scoundrel. With all due respect to an enlightened but inferior lexicographer I beg to
submit that it is the first.” – Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914. – Andrews Quotes, 335. - &
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.” – Oscar Wilde ( in conversation
). – in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. – It is not necessarily vicious but can be quite
ruthless, especially when operating righteously on the supposed principle of “collective
responsibility” of subjects for the crimes of their rulers. – Think especially of the air raids
from WW II onwards and of nuclear mass murder devices. – J.Z., 27.1.08. - &
NATIONALISM: Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all others
because you were born in it.” – George Bernard Shaw, 1856-1950. – Andrews Quotes,
NATIONALISM: Patriotism varies, from a noble devotion to a moral insanity.” –
William R. Inge, in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. - PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: People are all too ready to fight “for” “their” country, regardless of
that “their” country is for or against, or, rather, which way its leaders mislead it. –
Nationalism means readiness to do something destructive and murderous under the
pretence that it would be good for your country. – Patriotism means to do something
creative and constructive, knowing that it will benefit your country and all the world. –
J.Z., 19.7.87.
NATIONALISM: Power worship is presently sectarianized along nationalistic lines. The
hope of its devotees is a single ritual for all peoples, a centralized church, a universal
hierarchy; only in that way can the vestiges of the heresy of freedom be eradicated. In the
meantime each nation guards its orthodoxy.” – Chodorov, Out of Step, p.182. -
NATIONALISM: Race and nationality are catchwords for which rulers find that their
subjects are willing to fight, as they fought for what they called religion 400 years ago.”
– William R. Inge, quoted in George Seldes, The Great Quotations. - & PATRIOTISM,
NATIONALISM: Seeing how much we or our supposed representatives have messed up
our “fates”, when acting collectively legally and territorially, there is no reason for us to
be proud “to belong” to any particular nation or ethnic, religious, ideological or religious
group. – J.Z., 2.12.88, 25.1.08.
NATIONALISM: Settled by the people of all nations, all nations may claim her for their
own. You cannot spill a drop of American blood without spilling the blood of the world.
… We are not a nation, so much as a world.” - Herman Melville Redburn: His First
Voyage, 1849. p.90. – And now the older immigrants or their descendents restrict the
inflow of new immigrants! They haven‟t, sufficiently, understood what makes them well
off and thus could effectively not export these freedom ideas and practices to the rest of
the world. – J.Z., 11.10.07. - INTERNATIONALISM, AMERICANISM
NATIONALISM: Such ambitions, aims and practices “… meant only the growth of
taxes.” – Harold J. Laski, page 12 of his introduction to “A Defence of Liberty Against
NATIONALISM: Territorial nationalism can now trigger extreme stupidities and crimes,
like nuclear war. Thus we cannot afford it any longer. It has to become reduced to the
self-government of various voluntary communities and societies or even “competing
governments” all confined to their volunteers, their personal laws and exterritorial
autonomy only, i.e., panarchism or polyarchism. – Within these limits they can “shine” as
much as they can. – J.Z., 1.10.85, 25.1.08. - TERRITORIALISM NUCLEAR WAR
NATIONALISM: Territorial nationalism is a mental disease with the most violent and
wrongful consequences. – AT times it is also a very infections and fast spreading disease,
an epidemic, against which only very few are immune. And it lasts usually all too long –
for its survivors. – J.Z., 24.11.99.
NATIONALISM: Territorial nationalism, i.e. the relatively new State religion, turns
relatively peaceful and productive people into territorial oppressors, exploiters and
killers, in democracies as well as in dictatorships, in normal times as well as during
revolutions, civil and international wars. J.Z. 10.9.92, 4.1.93. – With the confinement of
States, societies and communities to volunteers and exterritorial autonomy only their
territorial powers and abuses would disappear. – J.Z., 24.1.08, 28.2.09. - &
NATIONALISM: The abolition of the external State must be preceded by the decay of
the nations which breathe life and vigor into that clumsy monster.” – Victor Yarros,
quoted in Bliss, Encyclopedia of Social Reform. – Only territorial nations have to become
abolished. Those based upon volunteers, personal law and exterritorial autonomy should
be free to be continued indefinitely by their members. They are harmless and ethical
association, even if while others do not share their beliefs, convictions or opinions and do
not appreciate their institutions and laws. – J.Z., 27.1.08. – STATE, ANARCHISM,
NATIONALISM: The Austrian poet Franz Grillparzer, to be sure, said his famous words
about development going from humanitarianism through nationalism, toward
bestialism.” – Source? – At what stage, when and were, had we truly reached
humanitarianism? – J.Z., 27.1.08. – PATRIOTISM, Q.
NATIONALISM: The battle in which these specimens are engaged is almost planet-
wide. It appears to us that they have carefully divided the planet into imaginary units,
and groupings of these units are systematically endeavoring to destroy one another. …
the groupings are temporary.” – John Morressy, The Empanty and the Savages, OMNI,
NATIONALISM: The cheapest sort of pride is national pride; for if a man is proud of
his own nation, it argues that he has no qualities of his own of which he can be proud;
otherwise, he would not have recourse to those which he shares with so many millions of
his fellow-men.” – Arthur Schopenhauer, Position, 1851. - & NATIONAL PRIDE,
NATIONALISM: The Citizen of the World. … Such a one, my friend, is an honour to
human nature; he makes no private distinctions of party; all that are stamped with the
divine image of their Creator are friends to him; he is a native of the world; and the
emperor of China may be proud that he has such countrymen.” – Oliver Goldsmith, The
Citizen of the World, 62. – One can be too indiscriminate with one‟s choice of friends.
E.g.: Should one be too friendly with cannibals, totalitarians and tyrants or madmen? –
J.Z., 25.1.08. – World citizenship or world federalism does not require a single world
state or world federation. It could have several ones of each and also several non-statist
word-wide societies or communities, just as it has in the sphere of religion. For instance,
each ideology could have its world-wide society of volunteers, not subject to any other
ideologies. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - VS. COSMOPOLITANISM, NATIVE OF THE WORLD,
NATIONALISM: The control of international trade is characteristic of tendencies
toward both nationalism and socialism. … There is nothing extraordinary in this, since
nationalism inevitably leads to socialism, and socialism to nationalism. Practically every
socialist regime has to be nationalistic, and vice versa: in either case what is involved is
simply a form of totalitarianism.” – Ballvé, Economics, p.89. - & STATE SOCIALISM,
NATIONALISM: The country of every man is that one where he lives best.” –
Aristophanes, ex Ponto, I, c. 5. – And that country may still be only a lesser evil, because
it is still dominated by a territorial government. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - COUNTRY,
NATIONALISM: The DAILY MIRROR does not believe that patriotism has to be proved
in blood. Especially someone else‟s blood.” - DAILY MIRROR leader on the Falkland
War, April 1982.
NATIONALISM: The direct use of force is so poor a solution to the problem of limited
resources and diverse ends that it is rarely employed save by small children and great
nations.'' - David D. Friedman, Law's Order. – Children often fight about one toy - while
each of them has, often, literally hundreds of others. So do nations that are misguided by
power-mad, ignorant and prejudiced rulers, unaware of or disinterested in numerous
freedom options. Great nations are not great when they let themselves be led by
nincompoops, or anyone, by their noses and when they are imagining that they constitute
a single nation with a collective national purpose. Large-scale territorial powers make
people, individuals, small and powerless, often even more so than do local governments.
- J.Z., 29.10.02. - Most “reasons” or “motives” for wars are just as poor as those are of
children who fight. – J.Z., 3.1.08. - - I can only agree with D. F: “Nations”, i.e. many to
most of a population, do sometimes behave just as irrationally, unjustly and violently as
small children? – Or, often, just the thoughtless and unthinking and highly emotional
“mass-psychology” of masses or mobs is involved, often most strongly expressed by their
“great” leaders, much in touch, in this respect, with the irrational masses. – The picture of
Pakistanis dancing in the street, upon the news that their government, too, did now have
mass murder devices, has not left my mind. – Apparently, they did not see themselves as
potential targets for such devices, although they are obviously anti-people “weapons”
rather than tyrannicide arms. - J.Z., 5.1.08. - The large territorial governments often do
not bother you about small details – but local governments often do. They are meddlers in
details of our lives. – All territorial governments are far removed from genuine self-
government. - J.Z., 24.2.09. & FORCE, TERRITORIALISM, JOKES, WAR,
NATIONALISM: The folly of forcing peoples together who would rather live apart.” –
NATIONALISM: The French woman says: I am a woman and a Parisienne, and nothing
foreign to me appears altogether human.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1903-1882. – A.
Andrews Quotations, p. 180. & PATRIOTISM & FOREIGNERS
NATIONALISM: The gross forms of nationalist self-determination uproot, bludgeon and
kill thousands and millions of the common people who have no concept of nationalism
save their family, no concept or government save taxes and military service, and no
concept of military glory and power save their own death and injury.” – Jack Robinson,
in FREEDOM, anarchist weekly, 1.3.75. – & PATRIOTISM, WAR, TAXES,
NATIONALISM: The idea that portions of the planet must be appropriated for the
exclusive use of a community of people calling themselves a nation has persisted for
many millennia, an idea perpetuated no doubt by the fact that the fastest means of
transport was the horse.” – F. J. Branagan, GOOD GOVERNMENT, 2/71. – &
NATIONALISM: The large territorial nation State usually goes beyond moral and
common sense, rights, reasons, liberties, at the leadership level as well as that of its
subject-citizens, turning even “democratic” governments into nuclear “powers” for mass
murders and mass destruction. – J.Z., 3.11.99, 24.1.08.
NATIONALISM: The less justified man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the
more ready is he to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy
cause.” – Eric Hoffer, The True Believer, p.23. - RACISM, RELIGION, HOLY CAUSE,
NATIONALISM: The most pervasive form of semantic stupidity consists of confusing the
local ( tribal ) reality map with the all of reality.” – Robert Anton Wilson, The Illuminati
Papers, p.136.
NATIONALISM: The nation, being in effect a licensed predatory concern, is not bound
by the decencies of that code of law and morals that governs private conduct.” –
Thorstein Veblen, Absentee Ownership, I, 1923. – I am not sure whether he meant that as
a criticism or as an excuse for territorial nationalism. J.Z., 10.7.86, 24.1.08.
NATIONALISM: The national government‟s broken down, ain‟t – hasn‟t it? – Not
exactly. It has just stopped mattering, that is all.” – Poul Anderson, Brain Wave, p.62. –
Constructively it has never really mattered. Destructively it still does. – J.Z., 13.10.78. -
NATIONALISM: The nationalistic, racial, political, religious and other ideological
hierarchies, now enforced over whole territories, must become a matter for individual
choice or disassociation. - J.Z., 3.4.89. – TERRITORIALISM, HIERARCHIES,
NATIONALISM: The new creed is nationalism, the doctrine which expresses and
contains the self-adulation of the power unit, the nation state, its sacred absolute
authority.” – Gregory Haines, in GOOD GOVERNMENT, June 72. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: The new territorial nations will lead to even more wars and civil wars,
revolutions, riots, terrorism and unrest – unless all their members and subjects become
free to opt out and rule themselves under personal laws and full exterritorial autonomy,
under their own kinds of constitution and jurisdiction and other institutions. – Shopping
centers should also offer political, economic and social system membership as consumer
services to be purchased or subscribed to. – Consumer sovereignty and free enterprise,
freedom of contract and free markets also in this respect. - J.Z., 26.8.91, 24.1.08. - &
NATIONALISM: The problems of territorial nationalism outweigh whatever advantages
it may have. – J.Z., 1/75. – After reading: “the problems of nationalism now outweigh the
advantages.” – Ben Bova in ANALOG, 8/74.
NATIONALISM: The proper means of increasing the love we bear our native country is
to reside some time in a foreign one.” – William Shenstone, 1714-1761. – Andrews
NATIONALISM: The release from the bonds of nationalism will not be achieved
through congresses and arbitration treaties but through economic interests.” – ( Die
Entfesselung aus den Banden des Nationalismus aber wird nicht sowohl durch Kongresse
udn Schiedsvertraege geschehen als durch wirtschaftliche Verstaendigung. ) - Rathenau,
Kritik der Zeit. - - Special economic interests have the tendency to become raised and
favored again and again. I would rather expect irrational and extremist nationalism, in its
various forms to cease, gradually, once it is confined to volunteers, and thus purified
from all involuntary subjects, i.e., once all kinds of dissenters are free to secede from
territorially organized nationalism and statism and to form their own kinds of voluntary
communities, none of them confined to any territory and all of them exterritorially
autonomous. Then we would get all kinds of voluntary integration and voluntary
segregation and also all other kinds of desired varieties of free human societies. Only e.g.
coercive integration and coercive segregation would be ended. – E.g.: Free trade will only
become secured when individuals can freely chose it for themselves, while protectionist
would still remain free to impose it upon themselves. - J.Z., 25.1.08.
NATIONALISM: The same sense of chauvinism is there, and a roiling muck of
nationalistic fantasies.” – Dean A. Koontz: A Darkness in My Soul, Daw Books, N.Y.,
1972, p.77. - & CHAUVINISM
NATIONALISM: The selfish spirit of commerce knows no country and feels no passion
or principle but that of gain.” – Thomas Jefferson, in A. Andrews Quotations, p.231. –
As if all countries would not greatly benefit thereby. – J.Z., 27.1.08. - PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: The Sensual and the Dark rebel in vain, // Slaves by their own
compulsion! I mad game // They burst their manacles and wear the name // Of freedom,
graven on a heavier chain!” – Bastiat, quoted in G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A
NATIONALISM: The silent colossal National Lie that is the support and confederate of
all the tyrannies and shams and inequalities and unfairness that afflict the peoples – that
is the one to throw bricks and sermons at.” – Mark Twain, 1835-1910, in Andrews
Quotes, 253. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: The son of Martin Borman, Hitler's private secretary & power
monger, was written up in GOOD WEEKEND, 5.2.05 and reported a question to his
father and his father's reply: "What exactly is national socialism?" - "National socialism
is the will of the Fuehrer. Full stop." - STATISM, HITLER, LEADERSHIP
NATIONALISM: The triumph of culture is to overpower nationalism.” – Emerson,
Uncollected Lectures: Table-Talk. – Regarding music, art, raw materials and international
trade we are already to a large extent internationalists – J.Z., 24.2.09. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: The world is parceled out into some fifty-odd administrative units,
calling themselves nations. In each of these nations there is a state religion – namely the
worship of the nation regarded as the supreme value, or God.” – Aldous Huxley,
Science, Liberty and Peace, p.34. – & PATRIOTISM, RELIGION, STATE RELIGION,
NATIONALISM: There are people who don‟t believe this. Some of these people are just
bad. They steal. Some of these people are “nationalistic” and think it‟s okay to take
things from other people if they live more than a peach toss away or speak another
language or have a different religion or look funny.” - P. J. O‟Rourke, Eat the Rich, A
Treatise on Economics, Picador, 1998, p.237. - NOT BELIEVING IN FREE MARKETS
NATIONALISM: There is a hopeful symbolism in the fact that flags will not wave in a
vacuum; our present tribal conflicts cannot be sustained in the hostile environment of
space. Whether we like it or not, our children will find new loyalties when they set foot on
the moon, on Mars, or the satellites of the giant planets. – Arthur C. Clarke, ANALOG,
NATIONALISM: There is nationalism and nationalism. The word nevertheless has a
bad connotation. It would be preferable to find another for a new nationalism which is
not aggressive, which connotates only auto-determination, the right to conduct one‟s own
business in peace. We could use the word “canton” (district), the basic local unit of the
Swiss confederation; since many new nationalists use Switzerland as a model of
decentralized structure this would not be inappropriate, but it seems somehow contrived.
I prefer something more closely related to the old word, a term more identifiable with the
force of a nation. What about “nationism‟, “Nationist”? – Michael Zwerin, A Case for
the Balkanization of Practically Everyone, p.42. - - Should we forget about the bloody
infighting in the Balkans, because there, too, territorial separatism cannot be carried far
enough, not more so than it can be in the sphere of religion. - In a Los Angeles
Libertarian Dinner Club meeting which I attended, ca. 1990/91, when discussing South
African ideas about decentralization on the Swiss canton model, the question was raised:
What about one person cantons? The speaker and the audience were very sympathetic to
that suggestion but details were not discussed. From this individual sovereignty and
individual secession notion to multiple person “cantons”, all of volunteers only, not of
them claiming any cantonal or other territorial monopoly, all claiming only exterritorial
autonomy, not only in one or all cantons but all over the world, for all their own
voluntary members, is but one step. Alas, not enough people have taken it as yet. – J.Z.,
26.1.08. Compare the writings of R. Long on “virtual cantons”. J.Z., 224.2.09. - NEW
NATIONALISM: There is something terrible about a great man when fools are proud of
him.” – Goethe. ( Es ist etwas Schreckliches um einen grossen Mann, auf den sich die
Dummen was zugute tun. ) – The fools are proud of them and no longer indifferent
towards them – after the great men have been generally recognized for their greatness. –
NATIONALISM: This planet is for the use of all and the result of the denial of this
premise is the division of mankind into races and nations with its consequent
superstitions arising from the superiorities, hatreds, jealousies, loyalties, patriotism, and
sycophancies.” - F. J. Branagan, - & PATRIOTISM GOOD GOVERNMENT, 2/71. –
NATIONALISM: This world will not see peace until we have abolished the collectivism
and coercion involved in all existing nationalist movements and have reduced the
nationalists to voluntary groupings which as such have all the autonomy they desire. –
NATIONALISM: Throughout recorded history, men have been told that they have no
right to live their own lives but must surrender their minds and bodies to emperors, kings,
mythical deities, priests, witch doctors, tribes, communities and nation-states.” – Stan
Lehr and Louis Rossetto Jr., THE NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE, Jan. 10, 1971. - &
NATIONALISM: To be a worshipper of one of the fifty-odd national Molochs is,
necessarily and automatically, to be a crusader against the worshippers of all the other
national Molochs.” – Aldous Huxley, Science, Liberty and Peace, 34. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: To make us love our country, our country ought to be lovely.” -
Edmund Burke. – Never mind if a country is ugly, as long as it has no wrongful and
irrational laws against individual rights and liberties. Then even its deserts can be made
to bloom. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - PATRIOTISM, COUNTRY
NATIONALISM: To me, it seems a dreadful indignity to have a soul controlled by
geography.” - George Santayana, 1863-1952, Andrews Quotes, 335. – Sent also by C. B.
NATIONALISM: To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire;
they make a solitude and call it a peace.” - Tacitus, Complete Works, edited by Moses
Hadas, p.596. - In other versions I have read: “They make a desert and call it peace.” -
Most of North Africa, in historical times, was once a rather fertile country - but frequent
wars and civil wars, in which farmers and their families were murdered, irrigation dams
and channels were destroyed, crops burned, fruit trees chopped down and farms
destroyed, and whole tribes exterminated, under "collective responsibility", turned much
of it into desert areas and they have remained deserts to our days. This kind of warfare is
still on record, e.g., in the Old Testament and “scorched earth” "policies" happened even
in our times. It was also practised by Mussolini's hoods against his opponents and their
agricultural coops in Italy, just because they were mostly run by his political opponents.
ABC mass murder and mass destruction devices are just the modern versions of such
"warfare" and "strength". - J.Z., 25.1.02, 24.2.09. - EMPIRES, GREATNESS, PEACE,
NATIONALISM: To see the earth as it truly is, is to see ourselves as riders on the earth
together.” – Archibald MacLeish, after Apollo 8. – READER‟S DIGEST, June 78, 31. –
NATIONALISM: Voluntary vs. compulsory nationalism. Exterritorial vs. coercive
nationalism. Liberating vs. oppressive nationalism. Nationalism without majority
despotism. Nationalism for all minorities. - & PANARCHISM
NATIONALISM: War is a national bad temper.” – Lawrence Meynel, The Man No One
Knew, Collins, London, 1951. - & PATRIOTISM, WAR
NATIONALISM: War never leaves where it found a nation.” – Edmund Burke, Letters
on a Regicide Peace, No. 1. – Rather: War is founded upon nations. Where a nation is
founded war never leaves – at least not civil war, whether open or camouflaged. – J.Z.,
3.7.82. - It usually finds it motivated by territorialism and authoritarianism and leaves it
as such, but also diminished and impoverished. – Territorial monopoly claims by diverse
groups for the exclusive possession of the same territory lead inevitably to clashes
between these groups. – Just like two farmers would fight, when both claim the same
land, or two cattle men or two sheep herders. - J.Z., 27.1.08. - & PATRIOTISM, WAR,
NATIONALISM: We are all tattooed in our cradles with the beliefs of our tribe; the
record may seem superficial, but it is indelible. You cannot educate a man wholly out of
the superstitious fears which were implanted in his imagination, no matter how utterly his
reason may reject them.” - Oliver Wendell Holmes, 1809-1894. - TRIBALISM,
NATIONALISM: We must stop talking about the American Dream and start listening to
the dreams of Americans.” – G. R. Askew, quoted in The Peter Plan by L. J. Peter, p.189.
NATIONALISM: We speak of national interests, national capital, national spheres of
interest, national honor, and national spirit; but we forget that behind all this there are
hidden merely the selfish interests of power-loving politicians and money loving business
men for whom the nation is a convenient cover to hide their personal greed and their
schemes for political power from the eyes of the world.” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism
and Culture, p.253.
NATIONALISM: What is the use of a disarmament or a World Economic Conference so
long as the people of each nation are deliberately encouraged by their leaders to indulge
in orgies of group-solidarity based on and combined with self-congratulation and
contemptuous hatred for foreigners?” – Quoted by Aldous Huxley, Brave New World …,
chapter Appreciation, p.436.
NATIONALISM: What kind of truth is it which has these mountains as a boundary and
is a lie beyond them? - Montaigne, Apology for Raimond de Sebonde, in Essays (1580-
NATIONALISM: What rascals we should be if we did for ourselves what we do for our
country.” – Cavour, quoted in C. Bingham, Men & Affairs, p.316. – The term “for our
country” is a cover term for “to our country” and “to our population”. – J.Z., 23.1.08. –
Also: “to other countries” and “to other populations”. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - Compare: “Right
or wrong – my country!” & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: When a dog barks at the moon, then it is religion; but when he barks at
strangers, it is patriotism.” – David Starr Jordan: Cardiff, What Great Men Think of
Religion, – in G. Seldes, The Great Quotations. - & PATRIOTISM & RELIGION,
NATIONALISM: When even marriages fail, how can territorial nations succeed?–
Separation and divorce option keep the disasters of unhappy marriages within some
tolerable bounds. There are so far no such safeguards for nations. They remain stuck
within their prescribed territorial framework that at best will satisfy only the majority –
which itself has its factions. Even if one is free to emigrate and immigrate, other
territorial nations states have their own kinds of chains, although they might be softer and
less numerous. – J.Z., 10.7.86, 25.1.08. - TERRITORIALISM, PANARCHISM &
NATIONALISM: Where Liberty dwells, there is my country.” – Benjamin Franklin,
Letter to B. Vaughan, March 14, 1783. – More accurately, he should have said: Where at
least some liberty exists, there is my country. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - PATRIOTISM &
NATIONALISM: Where liberty dwells, there is my country.” – John Milton, 1654. –
Someone added: Where it is suppressed, there is mine. – According to the first remark no
one has any country as yet. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - & PATRIOTISM
NATIONALISM: Where liberty is, there is my country!” – ( Ubi libertas ibi patria. ) –
The personal motto of James Otis. – And since no full liberty exists as yet anywhere,
none of the freedom lovers really has any country for himself, so far. Anyhow, we have
also to recognize the right of the sheep or sheeple to remain in their condition voluntarily,
as long as they want to. But their votes and the opinions of their herdsmen should not be
allowed to territorially lay down the law for all others. Personal laws & systems, self-
chosen, rather than territorially imposed ones! – J.Z., 24.1.08. - Where there is no liberty,
there is mine. – replied someone. - Thomas Paine? – In which country have its people
really and fully established liberty, so far? – Should we be satisfied with only a fraction
of all individual liberties and rights? - J.Z., 24.2.09.MY COUNTRY, PATRIOTISM,
NATIONALISM: Why do people speak of great men in terms of nationality? Great
Germans, great Englishmen? Goethe always protested against being called a German
poet. Great men are simply men.” – Albert Einstein, Article in the New York Times, 1926.
– Not simply or simple men but great men of and for the whole world, based on real
achievements rather than great powers and their abuse. – J.Z., 24.1.08.
NATIONALISM: With regard to nation or collectivity, let every man act as his needs
and conscience dictate – but if in the process he loses himself, his own soul, whatever he
does will be worthless.” – Hermann Hesse, Zarathustra‟s Return, 1919. - &
NATIONALISM: You belong to your country as you belong to your own mother.” – E. E.
Hale: The Man Without a Country, 1863. - - All children, who do survive their childhood,
do grow up some day and become self-supporting and independent decision-makers.
Then they are no longer to be considered as the property or under guardianship of their
parents. – So why should whole populations or nations become the wards of the State?
Anyhow, politicians and bureaucrats make bad parents and bad educators and set very
bad examples. Where are the successes of governmental paternalism? – Do most people
still believe in “Big Brother”? - J.Z., 25.1.08. - DIS., PANARCHISM, DIS.,
NATIONALISM: You can't be a Real Country unless you have a beer & an airline. It
helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons, but at the very
least you need a beer.” - Frank Zappa – Even with regard to beers – many beer drinkers
have become internationalists and let their individual taste buds decide rather than the
locality where the beer was produced. – J.Z., 22.2.09. - JOKES, TERRITORIALISM,
NATIONALISM: You‟ll never have a quiet world till you know the patriotism out of the
human race.” – George Bernard Shaw, 1856-1950, O‟Flaherty,o‟Flaherty V.C., – in G.
Seldes, The Great Quotations. – What is true for territorial patriotism is not necessarily
true for patriotism confined to exterritorial autonomy and volunteers. – J.Z., 27.1.08. – &
NATIONALITY & CULTURE: Identity is also imposed upon individuals by a
system of cultural indoctrination, when the ruling clique forces on everybody the
acceptance of the same language and laws. As a matter of fact, the national
identity is essentially a manufactured identity, obtained by crushing local
cultures, rather than a real common bond joining people living next to each
other.” - Gian Pietro de Bellis, in his new, 2002 book manuscript on Polyarchy,
NATIONALITY: I am a citizen, not of Athens or Greece, but of the world.” – Socrates,
469-399 B.C., quoted in Plutarch, De Exilia. – Hyman Quotations, p.375. -
NATIONALITY: Nationality becomes something obnoxious when the words roots
and identity are attached to it with mystically charged implications.” - Gian Pietro de
Bellis, in his new, 2002 book manuscript on Polyarchy, 2002.
NATIONALITY: Nationality is not and should not be something a person finds
imposed upon him at his birth unless it is simply a birth note stating the place and
time the event happened. Nothing more.” - Gian Pietro de Bellis, in his new, 2002
book manuscript on Polyarchy, 2002. - BIRTH
NATIONALITY: The person is not a tree attached to the soil by order of a nation
state. The freedom of anybody as world citizen to move and settle anywhere on the
earth should not be limited other than by logistic matters or personal wishes.” - Gian
Pietro de Bellis, in his new, 2002 book manuscript on Polyarchy, 2002. -
NATIONALITY: The term nationality, in its etymology, simply means that a person
is born (natus) in a certain place. Nothing more, nothing less, and certainly nothing
to fight or die about.” - Gian Pietro de Bellis, in his new, 2002 book manuscript on
NATIONALITY: Under the nation state, a person from birth to death is put under a
category (English, French, Italian, etc.) from which it is not easy to escape. This
ascribed imposed label is like the branding of cattle by the owner, to keep and control
it within a fence (fixed borders).” - Gian Pietro de Bellis, in his new, 2002 book
manuscript on Polyarchy, 2002.
NATIONALITY: Wherever intellect speaks nationality and race vanish like mist before
the wind, and it would be a senseless undertaking to try to judge a social idea, a religion
or a scientific theory by its national content or according to the racial characteristics of
its leaders.” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.459 - & RACE IN THE EYES
NATIONALIZATION: … any government that controlled the whole economic future of
its subjects, thereby acquired an irresistible control over adverse criticism: the prudent
man does not criticize the official on whom he depends for his employment and his whole
economic future.” – Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, 2/77, p.5. – STATE
NATIONALIZATION: … denies that State ownership can end in anything other than a
bureaucratic despotism.” – Noam Chomsky, For Reasons of State, p.161.
NATIONALIZATION: … how would we like our groceries to be delivered by the same
people who deliver our mail?” - Walter E. Williams, More Liberty Means Less
Government. Our Founders Knew This Well, Hoover Institution Press, 1999, http://www- – p.219.
NATIONALIZATION: … nationalized industries represent a standing temptation for
politicians to throw good money after bad, as can be seen from the colossal waste of
taxpayers‟ funds over the years in coal and railways.” – Russell Lewis, Right Turn, p.56.
– “The clear conclusion must be that the less nationalization there is the better.” – Ibid,
NATIONALIZATION: … one lasting contribution of the Russian writer Solzhenitsyn,
author of “The Gulag Archipelago”, will be found to have been made to the world in his
assertion that things went wrong in Russia not with Stalin, nor even with Lenin, but with
Karl Marx himself who first really set the world afire with the belief, totally erroneous,
that the State, by nationalizing the “means of production” could rationalize economics
and bring into the world the just society.” – Frank McEachren, PROGRESS, 6/77.
NATIONALIZATION: … seeking subsidies and monopoly privileges which are the
essential buttress of nationalized non-enterprises.” – Ralph Harris, 1985, p. 12. –
NATIONALIZATION: … the growth of nationalisation is damaging – it centralizes
power in the state and it destroys outlets for individual ambition.” – Boyson, Goodbye to
Nationalization, V.
NATIONALIZATION: … the private capitalist normally serves the public far better
than the government could if it took over his property.” – Henry Hazlitt, The Conquest of
Poverty, p.211.
NATIONALIZATION: … with few exceptions the financial return on investment has
been consistently lower in each nationalized industry in every year over the past decade
than the average for private industries. The return on investment … in nationalized
industries has been running at about half that on investment in private companies.” –
George Polanyi, Comparative Returns from Investment in Nationalized Industries, 1968,
quoted in Ralph Harris and Arthur Seldon: Not From Benevolence, p.151.
NATIONALIZATION: A government that nationalizes efficient industries producing for
the world market and then mismanages them not only hurts the interests of its own people
but also those of other nations living in a world community. - - These international
conflicts are inherent in the system of interventionism and socialism (*) and cannot be
solved unless the systems themselves are abolished. The principles of national welfare as
conceived by our progressive planners conflict with the principles of international
cooperation and division of production.” – Hans F. Sennholz, quoted in Free Man‟s
Almanach, for December 7. – (*) State socialism! – J.Z.
NATIONALIZATION: A man‟s home may be his castle, but that does not keep the
government from taking it.” – United States v. Hendler, 952 F2d 1364 (Fed Cir 1991)
NATIONALIZATION: As Gibbon majestically put it, “The spirit of monopolists is
narrow, lazy and oppressive” and nationalised industries are all of that.” – Russell
Lewis in Right Turn, p.55.
NATIONALIZATION: But what use is a machine without a master? A government could
order machines around all day, till it was blue in the face, and nothing would happen. …
A machine is operated by people. A machine is a man-made instrument, created by man,
built by man, and without man it would cease to function. – The „means of production‟ is
you. Your brain, your hands, they make the world go round. „Government ownership and
government control of the means or production‟ means government ownership and
„Socialism‟ is just a nice word for it. …” - Mark Tier, THE AUSTRALIAN, 12.10.74. - -
NATIONALIZATION: Can anyone imagine”, Sumner asked, “that the masterfulness,
the overbearing disposition, the greed of gain, and the ruthlessness of methods, which are
the faults of the master of industry at his worst, would cease when he was a functionary
of the State, which had relieved him of risk and endowed him with authority? Can anyone
imagine that politicians would no longer be corruptly fond of money, intriguing, and
crafty when they were charged, not only with patronage and government contracts, but
also with factories, stores, ships and railroads?” – Jonathan Marshall, W. G. Sumner,
quoting Sumner, “Absurd Effort in War”, 206/7, J.L.S., Fall 79.
NATIONALIZATION: Every nationalization means domination. The small influence of
those dominated upon the ruling functionaries is not effective enough and in practice
individuals as well as large groups are largely disfranchised thereby. – K.H.Z. Solneman,
NATIONALIZATION: General nationalization means: mismanagement, misallocation of
resources, waste, low incentives, low productivity. Many to most of all enterprises do not
make a profit, do not cover their costs but run up losses and deficits instead. Who or what
is to cover these losses? The few profitable ones. Sometimes sale or consumption of pre-
existing wealth, forced labor, confiscations in kind or delivery quotas imposed or
inflation or government debts, for a while and also a low general standard of living, An
extensive black market develops in which some free exchanges are still possible.
Production of wealth declines, poverty spreads, except among those who are in charge. –
J.Z., 10.3.81.
NATIONALIZATION: Government does not really own anything except a formal title
for control, while real control and exploitation is appropriated by politicians, bureaucrats,
unionists and other powerful lobbies, all active in their turn or sphere of interests to turn
government “assets” into liabilities for the tax payers, all pretending to represent the
public, the people, the common interest, the common good, while only taking care of
their own interests, at the expense of all others. – I dread the day when all old age
security assets will be administered by former trade union officials. – They might waste
them almost as badly as the Nazis did. - J.Z., 23.4.89, 26.1.08.
NATIONALIZATION: Government never has and never will administer any industry as
efficiently as free enterprise.” – Gary Sturgess, GOLD COAST BULLETIN, 23.9.77. –
In his conclusion he states: In 1972, in an egg glut, the Government recommended the
dumping of 79 million eggs in the sea! - - More recently they‟ve solved the problem of
oversupply by ordering the slaughter of thousands of birds. … Besides incompetence, the
Government has a tendency to outgrow rational proportions. In NSW there are 700
bureaucrats regulating 1000 poultry-men. – And the fairness of the Government
regulation is illustrated by the quotas system operating at present in the Queensland milk
industry where some producers are paid 89 c and others 29 c for the same (*) milk.” –
Gary Sturgess, ibid. – (*) quantity of! – J.Z.
NATIONALIZATION: I do not believe in government ownership or anything which can
with propriety be left in private hands, and in particular I should most strenuously object
to government ownership of railroads.” – Theodore Roosevelt, Speech in Raleigh, N.C.,
Oct. 19, 1905. - Did he abolish the Post Office, replace the standing army of the US by a
self-governing militia of citizen volunteers and protectionism by free trade? Did he
introduce voluntary taxation and voluntary State membership? – He was another “Uncle
Sam as Monopoly Man”. - J.Z., 24.1.08. – Either hold them to their words or ignore them
or secede from them. They should be judged not by their words but by what they are
doing to us or fail to omit for us, simply by removing their obstructions and those set up
by their predecessors. – J.Z., - PRIVATE PROPERTY
NATIONALIZATION: I remember that a wise friend of mine did usually say, "That
which is everybody's business is nobody's business." - Izaak Walton, The Compleat
Angler, I, 2. – Complete? – J.Z. - PUBLIC INTEREST, PUBLIC PROPERTY,
NATIONALIZATION: If brothels were nationalized instead of merely legalized,
prostitution would inevitably die out.” – Brigit Batlow, letter to Daily Telegraph,
19.9.1979. – Sensible occupation forces saw to it that brothels were established in the
occupied areas to at least reduce the incidence of rapes of local women by soldiers of the
occupation forces. – J.Z., 27.4.09. – PROSTITUTION, JOKES
NATIONALIZATION: If no single person can own property, then, necessarily, no group
of people can own property. An attribute not residing in the individual does not suddenly
pop into existence by renaming him “a member of society”. Thus, in addition to the
practical difficulties involved in collective ownership ( like the fact that I may not take
very kindly to the socialist nationalizing my farm, my house or my factory ), the socialist
who condemns individual ownership faces the hopeless ethical problem of negating the
moral basis for all ownership.” – Dr. Duncan Yuille, Human Rights, a pamphlet written
for the Workers Party of Australia, ca. 1975.
NATIONALIZATION: If there is no national property then the nation fares best. – J.Z.,
NATIONALIZATION: If you like the post office, you‟ll love a nationalized oil
company.” – Texas bumper sticker. – TIME, 21.4.80.
NATIONALIZATION: If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert,
in 5 years there‟d be a shortage of sand.” – Milton Friedman , MONOPOLIES,
NATIONALIZATION: In a country in which the only employer is the State, opposition
means a slow death by hunger. In the place of the old principle: “Whoever does not work
will not get to eat”, we now have a new one: “Whoever does not obey will get nothing to
eat.” – Trotzki. – Another version: In a country where the sole employer is the State,
opposition means death by slow starvation. The old principle, who does not work shall
not eat, has been replaced by a new one: who does not obey shall not eat.” – Trotsky, p.
76, quoted in Anthony Flew, The Politics of Procrustes, p.135.
NATIONALIZATION: In nationalized industries, as in state welfare services, the public
do not get a look-in: as consumers they are confronted with no alternative sources – of
coal, postal services, rail travel, refuse removal, health services, schools; as workers they
may face a monopoly employer; and as owners they have no choice but to finance capital
investment ( and losses ) through the tax treadmill. Does anyone believe the Post Office
serves the public better than Marks and Spencer?” – Ralph Harris, 1985, p.15.
NATIONALIZATION: Is that the property of the people which gives the citizen no other
right than to pay taxes to cover a deficit?” – Bertrand de Jouvenel, Problems of Socialist
England, 1849, p.212. - PUBLIC PROPERTY
NATIONALIZATION: Is that the property of the people which gives the citizen no other
right than to pay taxes to cover a deficit?” – Bertrand de Jouvenel, Problems of Socialist
England, 1849, p.212. - PUBLIC PROPERTY
NATIONALIZATION: Is that the property of the people which gives the citizen no other
right than to pay taxes to cover a deficit?” – – Bertrand de Jouvenel, Problems of
Socialist England, London, The Batchworth Press, 1949, p.212. - PUBLIC PROPERTY,
NATIONALIZATION: It is the task of Individualists to show that almost every extension
of state control over industry leads to loss, which loss has to be made good by the
taxpayer. High taxes make more and more industry unprofitable, enterprisers will then be
unwilling to invest, and this will strengthen Labour‟s conviction of the need for „a major
extension of public ownership‟.” – FINANCIAL TIMES, 14.9.76, quoted by Henry
Meulen in THE INDIVIDUALIST, 10/76, p. 50.
NATIONALIZATION: It so happens that the permitting of competition will destroy
„nationalization‟.” – Antony Fisher: The Case for Freedom, p.52. - COMPETITION
NATIONALIZATION: Michael Polanyi was probably correct when he observed that a
worker in a nationalized mine no more felt that he ‟owned‟ the mine than he felt that he
owned the Royal Navy.” – David DeLeon, in H. J. Ehrlich et al, Reinventing Anarchy,
p.317. – Ownership implies control. Almost everyone is aware of how little power of
control lies in his single vote among millions. – Even the directors of share companies get
away with allocating huge salaries and pensions to themselves, often quite
disproportionate to the value of their services. - J.Z., 27.1.08. – OWNERSHIP, PRIVATE
NATIONALIZATION: National security has replaced patriotism as the last refuge of a
scoundrel.” – Tom Morrison, San Francisco, Cal., in PLAYBOY, Sept. 73. – Maybe even
the first. – J.Z.
NATIONALIZATION: Nationalization always lowers production.” – J. F. Revel, The
Totalitarian Temptation, quoted by Joan Kennedy Taylor, in a review of Revel in
NATIONALIZATION: Nationalization has not brought the expected smile to the face of
the worker.” – Sir Ernest Benn, The State the Enemy, from the inside cover. - A for me
typical example. The kind of bookshop that was run by two people in West Germany was
run by 12 to 20 employees in East Germany, I was told. Consequently, productivity and
thereby wages and living standard had to be correspondingly lower under State Socialism
or State capitalism. – China has an army of 46 million bureaucrats. But with regard to its
population the percentage of these bureaucrats is still relatively low. But then China had
managed, for a long time, to be ruled by one Mandarin for ca. 20 000 people. And even
he was often paid by merchants not to rule over them. – Supposedly “free and
democratic” States in the West have often a much higher percentage of bureaucrats. -
J.Z., 24.1.08.
NATIONALIZATION: Nationalization should be called monopolization,
bureaucratization or politicalization, for this is what happens under it. – J.Z., 26.2.07,
NATIONALIZATION: Nationalization won‟t necessarily mean the end of the world.
We‟ll just be much less free.” – Fletcher Byron ( of Koppers Co. ). – And much poorer,
too, than we would otherwise be. – J.Z., 25.2.09. - SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN
NATIONALIZATION: Nationalization” is a Communist manoeuvre to take the power
out of the hands of the people. “Ownership” through political nominees means nothing.
Any business that is not a monopoly may be owned privately but control of it will lie with
the public. If they do not like its services, it will go out of business or be forced to supply
something that is wanted. – Antony Fisher: The Case for Freedom, p.43.
NATIONALIZATION: Nationalize the power companies.” - Well, let‟s put it this way:
Would you want your electricity to be delivered by the U.S. Postal Service?” – Arch
Booth, 3/75, DIS.
NATIONALIZATION: Nobody now believes that a Government run enterprise is
necessarily a worker‟s paradise. On the contrary, it is more likely to be the opposite.” –
Gough Whitlam, a former Labor Party Prime Minister of Australia. THE SYDNEY
MORNING HERALD, 27.11.76. – Quoted in Bob Howard & John Singleton, Rip Van
Australia, 232. - But this insight did not cure him of his statism. – J.Z. -
NATIONALIZATION: One of the things the government can‟t do is run anything. The
only things our government runs are the post office and the railroads, and both of them
are bankrupt. – Lee Iacocca - MUNICIPALIZATION, STATE SOCIALISM,
NATIONALIZATION: Only a little careful thought is needed in order to understand
clearly the complete powerlessness of the individual in the presence of the one employer
and one owner of everything. … (4) Because, it would divide the nation into two bitterly
opposed classes - those who rule, and those who are ruled; and in endeavoring to remove
by violent methods the inequalities of wealth, that exist between rich and poor, it would
introduce into every part of life the worst form of inequality - the inequality that exists
between those who force their own opinions and interests upon others and those upon
whom such opinions and interests are forced - the inequality that exists between the
compeller and the compelled.” - Auberon Herbert, A Voluntaryist Appeal. - - STATE
NATIONALIZATION: The economic record of the nationalized industries judged by the
return on capital invested is about one-third of that of private industry despite the
periodic and massive writing-down of capital in the nationalised concerns.” – Dr. Rhodes
Boyson, Goodbye to Nationalization, p.4.
NATIONALIZATION: The fact that the industries were publicly owned did not thereby
ensure that they would not act like and be subject to the temptations of monopolies
throughout the ages.” – Sir Norman Chester, The Nationalisation of British Industry,
NATIONALIZATION: The government, quite wrongfully, acts like a territorial landlord
or even a cattle baron or feudal master and taxes and regulates as if we were its private
property. – J.Z.., 25.2.09.
NATIONALIZATION: The only safeguard is the scrutiny of parliament, which as we
shall see later is inevitably intermittent, inefficient and post hoc.” - Dr. Rhodes Boyson,
Goodbye to Nationalization, p.16.
NATIONALIZATION: The ultimate political danger. Despite this formidable tally of
economic weaknesses, the most serious objection to nationalization is political. By
adding economic to political power it leads to an increasing concentration of central
authority. It is dangerous for democracy that so many millions of work-people are
dependent on the government for their jobs. Indeed, if the socialist goal of complete
nationalization of the economy were ever achieved, the only opposition could come from
civil servants; they would be lucky to get away with being told to keep a civil tongue in
their heads! In addition, the government would be the sole owner of all the media of
communication, TV, radio, the newspapers, the publishers, the printers, the halls suitable
for public meetings. Once competition in the market is suppressed, what chance would
there be for effective dissent short of revolution. The spectacle of the countries of eastern
Europe points to the ultimate danger.” – Russell Lewis in Dr. Rhodes Boyson, editors,
Right Turn, p.56.
NATIONALIZATION: There are certainly a thousand books in circulation telling us all
about the evils of capitalism. We have no lack of information as to the cheating that went
on under a system of private enterprise. It might, however, now be remarked that while
some private capitalists may have cheated one another, the government capitalist cheat
everybody, and that the business of cheating has indeed been completely nationalize. …”
- Sir Ernest Benn, The State the Enemy, p.94. - STATE SOCIALISM, STATE
NATIONALIZATION: To-day we are getting an interesting effect from this theory that
the boss works for himself only. The workers in the nationalized industries have been told
that they are the bosses now. They are wasting no time in trying to cash in on the
privileges they always thought the boss enjoyed, to the neglect of their services to the
public.” - Antony Fisher: The Case for Freedom, p.39.
NATIONALIZATION: Universal experience attests that government establishments
cannot keep pace with private enterprise in matters of business – ( and the transmission
of letters is a mere matter of business )” – Lysander Spooner, The Unconstitutionality of
the Laws Prohibiting Private Mails.
NATIONALIZATION: Unrealistic pay increases are granted in the nationalized
industries to both the labour force required and that which is surplus to requirements.
The resultant losses of these basic industries are then described as the consequences of
subsidies to the consumer.” – Prof. Ilersk, quoted in GOOD GOVERNMENT, 4/76.
NATIONALIZATION: We have a government-owned airline, railway and broadcasting
system, to name a few, and daily we see them at work ( or non-work, or make-work )” –
From and advertisement for the Canadian OPTION in Laissez Faire Books, catalogue,
May 74.
NATIONALIZATION: We know firsthand what happens when the state runs business.”
– OPINION, Canadian Libertarian Magazine, quoted in LAISSEZ FAIRE BOOKS
catalogue, May 74. – Whether that knowledge is applied or not is another matter. – J.Z.
NATIONALIZATION: When property consisted almost entirely of land and cattle and
natural products there was a suspicion of a case for public ownership, but to-day when
property and wealth are 95 per cent. brains and 5 per cent. nature, public ownership is
the road to the end of our civilization. - - Before wealth or property can be owned it has
to be made, and nobody will suggest that society can make anything. The making of
wealth is beyond any question the exclusive function of the individual. …” - Ernest Benn,
NATIONALIZATION: Why should ONE boss be better than 100 000 or even millions to
chose from or better than self-employment? – J.Z., 14.2.86, 24.1.08. – QUESTIONS.
NATIONALIZATION: Workers in nationalised industries have tended to regard
consumers as persons who have no option but to take the product and must pay the price
fixed by the producer.” – R. Kelf-Cohen, 20 Years of Nationalization. – Nationalized
enterprises, e.g., power plants and water works, play favorites to their consumers, too, at
the expense of the general taxpayer. The kind of things that they cannot produce is
market services and market goods at market prices and optimal consumer and producer
satisfaction. J.Z., 5.4.89.
NATIONALIZATION: Would you want the Post Office to deliver your baby? – Fight
Nationalized Health Care.” – SOUTHERN LIBERTARIAN MESSENGER, 4/79. –
NATIONALIZED CURRENCIES: Of all the wrongs and mismanagement of
governments, those of their monopolized and coercive currencies are usually among the
worst. They cause most economic, social, political and military troubles and they do
worsen them rather than prevent and mitigate them. - J. Z., 19.8.92, 1.5.97. – CENTRAL
NATIONS: … a huge obscuring force stalks the night of mankind. It is the boundary, the
sickness called nations.” – T. Marshburn, THE MATCH, vol. 3. no. 3., Jan. 72. –
Nationalism is the statist and territorialist equivalent of a country-wide religious spleen. It
too for most the place of a God in which they no longer believed in. They certainly have
not yet arrived at a knowledge of and belief in individuals and their individual rights and
liberties. – J.Z., 24.2.09.
NATIONS: … a world of narrow and coercive political concerns.” – LIBERTARIAN
ANALYSIS, Winter 1970, editorial, p. 3. – That applies only to territorial nations with
compulsory membership. Nations of volunteers only and confined to exterritorial
autonomy, can be as authoritarian as they like, towards their own volunteers, without
thereby constituting a threat towards the members of all other communities. They would
just do their own things, as e.g. nuns and monks do, boxers and wrestlers and football
club members. – J.Z., 28.1.08. - PANARCHISM
NATIONS: … every country was a group of people living a common myth.” - Robert
Anton Wilson, The Earth Will Shake, 207. - Actually, all of them do not even have a
single myth in common but the majority of them do share all too many myths. - J.Z.,
NATIONS: … the nation state impossible to defend … but old habits persist.” – H. N., in
review, PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS JOURNAL, Ref. No. 33957. – I finally
discontinued subscribing to it when I concluded that it is too poor in positive suggestions
for peace making. – It just abstracted the popular views, including popular errors and
prejudices, without criticizing them sufficiently. - J.Z., 28.11.07.
NATIONS: A nation is a society united by a delusion about its ancestry and by common
hatred of its neighbors.” – Dean William R. Inge.
NATIONS: A Nation is merely an area in modern Europe, enclosed by frontiers that are
geographical limit of a Government‟s use of force.” – Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery
of Freedom, 139. – Not only in Europe and only in peace time, which was always only a
temporary armistice, with extensive preparations for the next war, with the exception of
the mini-states and, in more recent times, of neutral states like Switzerland and Sweden. –
J.Z., 28.1.08. – The territorial warfare States do certainly not always confine their
aggressive and interventionist actions to their subjects, living within their territorial
borders. – J.Z., 25.2.09. - FORCE, VIOLENCE, COERCION, AGGRESSION,
NATIONS: A nation, after all, is just a society for hating foreigners, a sort of super-hate-
club.” – Olaf Stapledon, Odd John, p.76. - & FOREIGN NATIONS, CHAUVINISM,
NATIONS: A really free nation or people or community does not have to be “led” or
“run” or “built”. To the extent that this is still done, what results is not really a nation, far
less a free nation, instead, to that very extent, it is unfree. – All such false pretences are
advanced by power-addicts. - J.Z., 6.10.04, 22.10.07. - MINORITIES, PANARCHISM,
NATIONS: All „nations” and “peoples” are despotic which coercively and
monopolistically “embrace”, rule over and exploit all those dissenters and their voluntary
associations, societies and communities, that would rather secede and organize their own
affairs under personal laws, i.e. full exterritorial autonomy. – J.Z., 15.8.95, 24.1.08. -
NATIONS: All nations are wholesale corrupters of youth.” – Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus
VI(? – J.Z.), p.113. – Not that older people remain uncorrupted by national spleens,
myths, errors and prejudices. – J.Z., 25.2.09. ( Typing and scanning errors are easy to
include but not so easy to eliminate. – J.Z. )
NATIONS: Although Spooner‟s principles of law and reason may seem somewhat
narrow and literal, his point is nevertheless valid: nationalists can define “nation” only
through vague metaphysical qualities. Although obscure in origin, results are clear: the
idea of nation always supports force and power – particularly that of the army.” –
Shiveley‟s introduction, p.4 (40?) of Lysander Spooner, No Treason, VI, Works I.
NATIONS: And to-day, instead of the nation being, as of old, a means of security, it has
become a centre of hidden warring interests, a fact of disorder, in which the natural
factors and the artificial factors are confused in such a way that they cannot be
disentangled.” – Henri Follin, according to Hutchinson Harris, The Doctrine of Personal
Right, p.373. – They could become disentangled not via a world federation but, rather, by
individual secessionism and voluntary communities, all merely exterritorially
autonomous and not confined to any territory. – I do not know to what extent Follin
pondered that option. – He must have, at least in his letter exchanges with Ulrich von
Beckerath, of which the Beckerath collection was lost in an air raid in Nov. 1943. Was it
preserved on the side of Follin and his heirs? Who knows? - J.Z., 25.1.08. –
NATIONS: Any territorial "nation" consists out of a ruling class or group, its favorites
and temporary supporters and a number of conquered, oppressed and exploited minority
groups, however camouflaged this relationship has been. As a result, each nation
resembles an overheated boiler without a safety valve. Individual secessionism and
exterritorial autonomy for all minorities could provide the needed safety valve and would
leave much more unified and agreeable and genuine nations behind, also merely
exterritorially autonomous and to that extent rightful and harmless. - J.Z. 18.4.92,
NATIONS: Are our nations today comparable to closed monasteries? How long did it
take before monks gained the right to opt out of their monasteries? - J.Z., 17.5.92. - AS
NATIONS: Beware of young nations. Their nationalists are young and energetic fools. –
J.Z., 5.7.85.
NATIONS: But under the cover of the nation everything can be hid. The national flag
covers every injustice, every inhumanity, every lie, every outrage, every crime. The
collective responsibility of the nation (*) kills the sense of justice of the individual and
brings man to the point where he overlooks injustice done, where, indeed, it may appear
to him a meritorious act if committed in the interest of the nation.” – Rudolf Rocker,
Nationalism and Culture, (*) ? Rather, the notion & practice of collective responsibility.
NATIONS: Caged animals … have been seen to destroy themselves utterly … Overt
fighting has led to about 60 million deaths since 1820. … Has man caged himself in an
artificial environment analogous to that of captive animals?” - H. N., in a review in
PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS JOURNAL, Ref. No. 8658. – Prof. Rudy Rummel
has indicated that the number of victims, of territorial politics, even apart from the war
victims, is much higher, for the 20th century alone, over 200 million. – J.Z., 28.1.08.
NATIONS: Each territorial nation began as a dream and ended up as a nightmare. – J.Z.,
3.12.90, at least for some of its subjects. – J.Z., 24.1.08.
NATIONS: Every nation is today split by various trends of thought into dozens of parties
whose activity destroys the feeling of national unity and brands as a lie the fable of the
community of intellectual interests of the nation. Each of these parties has its own party
program, in pursuit of which it attacks everything which threatens it and adores whatever
…” - Rudolf Rocker, Nationalism and Culture, p.269. - & PARTIES
NATIONS: Every nation ridicules other nations - and all are right.” – Arthur
NATIONS: Every national border in Europe marks the place where two gangs of bandits
got too exhausted to kill each other anymore and signed a treaty. Patriotism is the
delusion that one of these gangs of bandits is better than all the others.” - Robert Anton
Wilson, The Earth Will Shake, p.100. - BORDERS, FRONTIERS, TERRITORIALISM,
NATIONS: Human zoos under centralized mismanagement. Alas, with the consent of all
too many of their victims. – J.Z., 19.4.93, 24.1.08. – Also nation-wide maximum security
prisons. – J.Z., 24.1.08. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM
NATIONS: I loathe all nations equally.” – Robert Anton Wilson, Masks of the Illuminati,
p.40. - One cannot really hate a non-existent and only imagined nation but only the idea
of it and intolerant actions and institutions that are coercively upheld in accordance with
that idea. – J.Z., 28.1.08.
NATIONS: It is not so much that our nation is endangered but that the very existence of
our nation in exclusive, coercive and territorial form endangers us. Nothing but what is
voluntary deserves the term national. Whatever is only voluntary rarely makes enemies
and if it does, it can be easily defended. But not with nuclear “weapons”, but, rather, by
mobilizing our secret allies on the other side and making an alliance with them, over the
heads of their rulers. – J.Z., 1.3.86, 24.1.08. - PANARCHISM
NATIONS: It is the state which creates the nation, not the nation the state.” No
individual, on this view, naturally holds a place within the nation as he holds a place
within his family or tribe, for there is no basic social tie which binds him to the political
body. “Belonging to a nation is never determined, as is belonging to a people, by
profound natural causes; it is always subject to political considerations and based on
those reasons of state behind which the interests or privileged minorities always hide.” –
Rudolf Rocker, Partisans of Freedom, p.478. – STATE, GOVERNMENTS,
NATIONS: Like Christ and his miracles, “Nations” are only “myths”. (p.42) “On
general principles of law and reason”, they do not exist anywhere.” – Lysander Spooner,
quoted by Chiveley, in his introduction to No Treason, VI, p. 5 of Works I. - “That is to
say, neither the whole people of England, for example, nor any open, avowed,
responsible body of men, calling themselves by that name, ever, by any open, written, or
other authentic contract with each other, formed themselves into any bona fide legitimate
association or organization. … “ – ( Spooner, p. 42. )
NATIONS: National character is bad, … - Which national character? – The character of
all nations.” – Hans Habe, Aftermath, p.47. – Just consider the numerous wrongful and
often even beastly actions which the national leaders have committed against the own
subjects and the subject of other national leaders. – The statist and territorialist, often
even slavish submissiveness of most of their subjects also does not indicate much that
could be counted as good character traits. – Being good warriors, marchers and flag
wavers and shouters of wrongful and stupid slogans and all to submissive tax slaves just
is not good enough. - J.Z., 25.2.09. - NATIONAL CHARACTER
NATIONS: Nations are not equivalent to persons. They are composed of persons - and
the government often equated with "the country" is seldom, if ever, equivalent to the
people of the country. If the people of a country, or some of them, are being bullied by
their own government, might intervention be as much justified, perhaps even morally
demanded, as in the case of the bully in the schoolyard?” - Stanley Schmidt, editorial,
Internal Affairs, ANALOG, 2/89, pp 6 & 8. - & GOVERNMENTS VS. PERSONS OR
NATIONS: Nations have been born in war and expire in peace.” – Yates Sterling, quoted
in George Seldes, The Great Quotations. – But since we never had as yet a complete
peace but only armistices, with preparations for the next war, they still persist, as
creatures of mythology, ignorance, stupidity, old habits and traditions, and popular errors
and prejudices and also e.g. via the “peaceful” coercion against free trade, free migration,
free investments and that of compulsory levying of taxation or tributes, supposedly via
representative consent. – What would remain of “nations” could only be seen after
individuals and dissenting minorities had been free to secede for a while. - J.Z., 28.1.08.
NATIONS: Nations, presently, but not necessarily so – all people more or less coerced
into one territorial organization, for an indefinite time, by one government. In reality,
rightfully, morally, no more than an association of volunteers with at least one common
background or motivation or interest or degree of tolerance and no exclusive claim to any
territory at all but, at least potentially, fully autonomous, exterritorially and thus
peacefully coexisting with other kinds of communities, national and other ones. Caroline
Chisholm‟s saying applies: “Nothing but what is voluntary deserves the name national.”
NATIONS: No nation is fit to sit in judgment upon any other nation.” – Woodrow
Wilson, Speech in N.Y., April 20, 1915. – No nation exists. If it did, it could not sit
together. If it did, it would, as such an organization, have no judgment. Those few sitting
“in judgment” know, primarily, only their power addiction. Judge them by the results of
their addiction. – J.Z., 24.2.09. - COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY
NATIONS: No one can move freely enough as long as he remains bound or in chains or
incarcerated in nation-wide territorial prisons, under more or less absolute and
authoritarian rulers, with some minority or even majority support. - Minorities and
majorities have only the right to rule over themselves and any aggressors against them, as
far as this is necessary, but not over any peaceful dissenters doing their own things
merely to or for themselves. - So far not even religious liberty or religious tolerance is
fully recognized everywhere, although it has made its peaceful case in many countries
already for centuries. – J.Z., Pan A Z j to r 28. 6. 06. - NATION-WIDE TERRITORIAL
NATIONS: Only weak nations have strong governments.” – CNT, Solidaridad Obrera,
Barcelona), 1936, in “Smash the State”, p.43. – WEAKNESS, STRENGTH,
NATIONS: Peace cannot be based on territorial nations. – J.Z., 9.10.79. – PEACE. – Nor
can genuine and full freedom and justice. – Only some approximations to both can be
thus achieved, none of them going far enough. For that complete voluntarism ( apart from
aggressors and other criminals with victims ) is required, combined with full exterritorial
autonomy under personal laws. – J.Z., 28.1.08.
NATIONS: Playboy: But what if the Christians are right and humans are basically evil,
unready to go it alone socially or metaphysically? Hess: In that sad case it would be even
more imperative to avoid the nation state, because then a basically flawed individual
would be invested with the greatest possible power.” – Karl Hess, interview by
PLAYBOY, 7/76.
NATIONS: Since the world has been divided into nations too great to admit of being well
governed, …” - Jean-Jacque Rousseau, Discourse on Political Economy, p.30. – How
small would “nations” have to be to be well governed? The Greek city states were,
obviously, already too large, so are modern city states, like Berlin, Bremen, Singapore,
Hong Kong, even when they are better governed than still larger States. I hold that only
governments or societies of volunteers can be “well governed”, at least by the standards
of their own voluntary members. All others are at best only instances of lesser evils being
chosen by individuals in the absence of choice of something better and lack of freedom to
establish something better. – J.Z., 28.1.08. – Q.
NATIONS: The are the spooked “horror houses” of horror films, that threaten to
exterminate all of us. – J.Z., 12.2.87. - TERRITORIAL STATES, NUCLEAR WAR
NATIONS: The couple hundred nations of this planet do not fight each other; they have
no reason to.” - Kevork Ajemian, The Fallacy of Modern Politics, Books International,
PO Box 6096, McLean, Virginia 22106, 1986, Tel. (703) 821-8900, p.146. – Alas, they
can be forced, by their territorial governments, to fight each other – for the benefit of
these “leaders”. – J.Z., 7.10.07. - WARS, LEADERSHIP VS. SUBJECTS,
NATIONS: The essential flaw in the doctrine of national self-determination is that there
exists nowhere in reality such a singular entity as a “nation” or a “people” which can be
treated as if it were a single unit possessed of a single mind or a single purpose.” – Dr.
Duncan Yuille, on nationalism, ca. 1975.
NATIONS: The indigenous people of Hawaii, said to amount to 20% of the population,
have recently claimed independence, being dissatisfied with their status merely as
members of another U.S. state. Sympathizing with some of the Red Indians aspirations,
they aim at independence via a nation within the nation agreement, according to radio
news that I just heard. - J.Z. 14.1.93. - I know of no encouraging precedent for
exterritorial autonomy among volunteers from Red Indians, Eskimos or minority groups
of Asians. At most they want toleration for their religious rules. A lot of their newspapers
and journals are microfilmed but I do not know them. During my U.S. trip I had no
contact with Hawaii natives or reservation Indians. I would have liked to see whether
some of the latter would be ready e.g. for a small scale monetary revolution via their own
shop currency. - J.Z., 14.1.93, 25.2.09. - NATIONS WITHIN NATIONS
NATIONS: The modern Bastille is the nation-state, no matter whether the jailers are
conservative, liberal or socialist. That symbol of our enslavement must be destroyed if we
ever want to be free again. The great revolution for the liberation of man has to be fought
all over again.” – Emery Reeves. – STATE, TERRITORIALISM, COMPULSORY
NATIONS: The Nation is nothing at all but a simple force. Not in a single Nation are the
people of one race, one history, one culture, nor the same political opinion or religious
faith. They are simply human beings of all kinds, penned inside frontiers which mean
nothing whatever but military force. - - The only thing that permits any of these Nations
to exist, is the belief in the minds of almost all the persons penned inside these frontiers,
that Government naturally controls their business, their work, their communications,
their travels, their sale and tobacco and windows, and ( to a greater or less extent ) their
newspapers, their public meetings, their theatres, their religion, and their personal
habits. Workers have always been obliged to have permits to work, traders to trade,
manufacturers to produced goods; communication and transportation have always
belonged to Government; a new bathtub or a window in anyone‟s house has always been
Government‟s affair; every contract between individuals must always be registered in a
Government office ( and taxed ); a police agent always sits inside every apartment house
or hotel entrance ( and locks the doors at the evening hour set by the police chief ) for
Government must know everyone‟s comings and goings and callers. (*) - Rose Wilder
Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.139/40. - - In some respects it is not as bad any more,
in others it is worse, at least in some countries. – (*) Now there are ca. 5 million
surveillance cameras in England alone. - J.Z., 28.1.08.
NATIONS: The nations must be redefined and reorganized from uniform and territorially
exclusive and oppressive collectivist, centralized, monopolistic and coercive
organizations with involuntary members and subjects into exterritorial communities and
societies of volunteers only, all confined to exterritorial autonomy under personal laws
and no borders to fight over and not confined to any territory, either. – They could, e.g.
establish several world-wide communities or federations. - J.Z., 13.2.92, 24.1.08. - &
NATIONS: The prison of the 19th and 20th century: the nation state.” – Source? Every
territorial nation State is a prison – at least for some freedom lovers. – J.Z., 74. – But
usually also for many other minorities and the majority is also subjected to a kind of
prison discipline – and all too many love it, as territorialist statists, even when they are
thereby victimized, without becoming aware of this. – J.Z., 28.1.08.
NATIONS: The radical and revolutionary view of the future of nationhood is, logically,
that it has no future, only a past – often an exciting one, and usually a historically useful
one at some stage. But lines drawn on paper, on the ground or in the stratosphere are
clearly insufficient to the future of mankind.” – Karl Hess, Death of Politics, p.14.
NATIONS: The so-called “rise” or growth of nations is actually their decline. – J.Z.,
24.1.88. – “Like an anvil under one hammer, // United will all Germany stand, // …” -
George Herwegh, long before WW I and WW II and their consequences. – J.Z., 26.1.08.
NATIONS: There are no nations, but only persons.” – Boris Pasternak, Dr. Shivago,
Fontana Pocketbook, p. 126. – Alas, not all persons are personalities or free and
responsible individuals as yet. – J.Z., 25.2.09.
NATIONS: There is no more natural and sensible reason for any Nation in Europe, than
there is a reason why any State in this Union should be a nation. Germany is no more a
German Nation than Wisconsin is, and Louisiana is a French Nation if France can claim
to be. Normans and Gascons and Bretons and Provencals never mean France when they
say, “my country”; they mean Normandy and Gascony and Brittany and Provence.
Bavarians have not as much in common with Prussians as they have with Czechs, and
Sicilians and Tuscans and Venetians and Neapolitans never have been Italians to each
other.” - Rose Wilder Lane, The Discovery of Freedom, p.139.
NATIONS: They have lawyers only to fight other lawyers, the way they have nations and
governments to fight other nations and governments. – J.Z., 28.8.76. – LAWYERS,
NATIONS: Twentieth century political thinking is incredibly primitive. The nation is
personified as a living being with passions, desires, susceptibilities. The National Person
is superhuman in size and energy but completely sub-human in morality … Men, who in
private life behave as reasonable and moral beings, become transformed as soon as they
are acting as representatives of a National Person into the likeness of their stupid,
hysterical and insanely touchy tribal divinity.” – Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means, 1937,
NATIONS: We have thought of ourselves as members of supremely meaningful and
valuable communities – deified nations, divine classes and what not – existing within a
meaningless universe. And because we have thought like this, rearmament is in full
swing, economic nationalism becomes ever more intense, the battle of rival propaganda
grows ever fiercer, and general war becomes increasingly probable.” – Aldous Huxley,
p. 274/75 of Addresses, 1967, first published 1937.
NATIONS: While rejecting the artificial State and the atomistic society of capitalism,
Landauer saw the nation as a peaceful community of communities: “Every nation is
anarchistic, that is, without force; the conceptions of nations and force are completely
irreconcilable.” – Peter Marshall: Demanding the Impossible, .p.411. - FORCE &
NATION-STATE: … we shall be called upon to invent wholly new political forms (*) or
„containers‟ to bring a semblance of order to the world – a world in which the nation-
state has become, for many purposes, a dangerous anachronism. (**) - Alvin Toffler,
The Third Wave, Pan Books & Collins, 1980/81. - - (*) Or to rediscover, develop and
apply suitable old and proven ones. - - (**) There are already several States that are,
obviously, “nations” of immigrants from dozens to hundreds of nations or tribes, and this
within the history of modern times. If one goes far enough back, then all present
territorial nations are really also nations of immigrants, more or less mixed with native
tribes, if any already existed there. – There are only very few supposedly pure-blooded
natives left, e.g. on some of the Andaman Islands. – Underlining by me. - J.Z., 24.9.07. -
NATIVE TITLE: We have all been wronged, for many generations, by many different
territorial governments. Against whom can we now raise claims for indemnification? And
we are still daily and greatly wronged e.g. as tax slaves or tribute payers or serfs of
legislative, executive and juridical lords of the realm and their bureaucrats. – J.Z.,
NATIVE: A non-White inhabitant of a region whose ancestors dispossessed the previous
lot.” – Satirical definition by Poul Anderson, There Will Be Time, p.30. – Often the
previous lot had also dispossessed the previous etc. - back into times unknown to us. –
J.Z., 28.1.08. – Natives have also been all too active exterminators of each other. For a
long time they also used each other as a food reserve. – Who is to indemnify whom
among their descendants? - J.Z., 25.2.09. – DIS., JOKES
NATURAL FREEDOM: … what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of
perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as
they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending
upon the will of any other man.” – John Locke, Second Treatise on Civil Government, in
Sir Ernest Barker, ed., Social Contract, New York: Oxford University Press, 1962, sec. 4,
p.4. – Alas, that idea is still not fully understood and realized. – J.Z., 10.10.07. -
NATURAL GOVERNMENT: It is what E. C. Riegel has called “the natural government
of man”. It governs the affairs of men in precisely the way that most people hope for from
man-made governments.” – Harry Browne, You Can Profit from a Monetary Crisis, p.27.
– Most people, or the majority, is just not good enough to govern anyone but themselves.
Mostly they are the most ignorant and prejudiced people. All peaceful minorities do have
the right to govern themselves – but they, too, do not have the right to claim any
territorial monopoly for themselves. – J.Z., 28.1.08. – GENUINE SELF-
NATURAL LAW: A law against Natural Law is void.” - James Otis. ( Quoted in Read:
Elements of Libertarian Leadership, p.90. )
NATURAL LAW: All men's natural rights are co-extensive with natural law, the law of
justice; or justice as a science. This law is the exact measure, and the only measure, of
any and every man's natural rights. No one of these natural rights can be taken from any
man, without doing him an injustice; and no more than these rights can be given to any
one, unless by taking from the natural rights of one or more others.” - Lysander Spooner,
A Letter to Grover Cleveland, Works I, p.97.
NATURAL LAW: All systems of preference or of restraint, being thus completely taken
away, the obvious and simple system of natural liberty establishes itself of its own
accord.” – Adam Smith, quoted in JLS, Fall 77, p.301. – NATURAL LIBERTY,
NATURAL LAW: And Anarchy began with the observation that the sole purpose of
State legislators was to violate Natural Law.” – SEK3, NEW LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug.
NATURAL LAW: And yet, C. S. Lewis, the Rational Christian, deduces Natural Law
from precisely the amazing amount of agreement between various codes for human
behavior deduced by completely different cultures around the world.” - SEK3, NEW
LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug. 85, p.10. - - I wish that a similar agreement had already been
achieved upon all individual rights and liberties, not just some of them. – J.Z., 26.1.08. -
NATURAL LAW: Any kind of thing existing in nature, a plant, a dog, a horse, has its
own natural law, that is, the normality of its functioning, the proper way in which, by
reason of its specific structure and specific ends, it “should” achieve fullness of being
either in its growth or in its behavior.” – Jacques Maritain, Man & The State, ed. by
Richard O‟Sullivan, London, Hollis & Carter, 1954, p. 78/89. - HUMAN RIGHTS FOR
NATURAL LAW: As to the nature of law, (Jo ) Labadie held that "The best laws, the
safest laws, and ... the only laws necessary for the guidance of human action are natural
laws." Natural laws, according to him, are self-enforcing and require no political
machinery to give them effect ...” - Reichert: Partisans of Freedom, p.324.
NATURAL LAW: Based upon the premise of “natural law” one can never arrive at the
wrongs and absurdities of majoritarian direct or representative democracies. – J.Z.,
15.1.00, 11.9.08.
NATURAL LAW: Bastiat spelled out his concept of moral law ( frequently referred to as
natural law) as the source of all life and progress - and thus the proper basis for all
relationships among men.” - Dean Russell: Bastiat, 3.
NATURAL LAW: Black‟s Law Dictionary defines the natural law in a purely
rationalistic and non-theological manner: “Jus Naturale, the natural law, or law of
nature; law, or legal principles, supposedly to be discoverable by the light of nature or
abstract reasoning, or to be taught by nature, i.e. in advance of organized governments
or enacted laws.” ( 3rd. Ed., p. 1044). – Professor Patterson defines the natural law
cogently and concisely as: “Principles of human conduct that are discoverable by
„reason‟ from the basic inclinations of human nature, and that are absolute, immutable
and of universal validity for all times and places. This is the basic conception of
scholastic natural law … and most natural law philosophers.:” – Edwin W. Patterson,
Jurisprudence: Men and Ideas of the Law (Brooklyn: The Foundation Press, 1953), p.
333.” – Annotation under Notes, No. 2, in Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, p. 7.
NATURAL LAW: But we can conquer Nature only by obeying her laws, and in order to
obey those lows we must first learn what they are.” - Winwood Reade, The Martyrdom of
Man, p.78
NATURAL LAW: By reason ... I do not think is meant here that faculty of the
understanding which forms trains of thought and deduces proofs, but certain definite
principles of action from which spring all virtues and whatever is necessary for the
proper moulding of morals ... reason does not so much establish and pronounce this law
of nature as search for it and discover it ... Neither is reason so much the maker of that
law as its interpreter.” - John Locke, Essays on the Law of Nature, 1676, ed. W. von
Leyden, Oxford, 1954, p.111, quoted in F. A. Hayek: The Confusion of Language in
Political Thought, p.23.
NATURAL LAW: Clearly, not just any rules will do; for no authority could be long
sustained which clearly affronted its subjects' conception of natural right.” - William D.
Burt, THE FREEMAN, April 75.
NATURAL LAW: Don't try to improve on the natural order of things. It always
backfires.” - Bob Howard, "free enterprise”, 2/76.
NATURAL LAW: Edicts of kings, votes of legislatures, or even the vote of all the people
in the world could not establish natural law. Justice could be reached only through
reason. Most men erred in their reasoning because they were encumbered by selfish or
limited interests. Being free of encumbrances, Spooner believed he had reached the truth.
Having mastered the natural law, he vowed to advocate it whenever or wherever he
could find an audience, because natural law should rule all men in or out of office.” -
Chiveley, comment to Spooner, Works I, p.40, referring in the last part to Spooner to
George Bradburn, 5.12.1847.
NATURAL LAW: Even a minority of one, if grounded upon a sound recognition of
nature's laws, will prevail against an overwhelming majority.” - Prof. Carl J. Friedrich,
The New Belief in the Common Man, p.126. – The question is: WHEN? Soon enough?
Under panarchism it could simply opt out to do its own things – immediately. Why
should it be under the control of the majority until it has convinced the majority that it is
right? – We do not apply such a senseless rule in our daily lives. Why should we apply it
in spheres which governments have so far monopolized? Surely no individual can
rightfully declare a war upon a whole society or other State or nation and oblige all his
countrymen to join him. However, private criminals commit such acts against their
countrymen and foreigners all the time and territorial governments are only rarely able
and willing to prevent them and to protect or indemnify the victims of these crimes. The
excuse, that territorial governments are rightful and efficient protectors and defenders has
long been proven to be invalid, in the eyes of any somewhat objective observer. – J.Z.,
NATURAL LAW: Every non-invasive and non-aggressive individual and minority group
has the individual and natural right to insist upon his and its full exterritorial autonomy.
This becomes established via individual and minority group secessions and voluntary
associationism. - J.Z. 8.3.91, 14.1.93. - INDIVIDUAL & MINORITY RIGHTS
NATURAL LAW: For the reasons now given, the simple maintenance of justice, or
natural law, is plainly the one only purpose for which any coercive power - or anything
bearing the name of government - has a right to exist.” - Spooner, A Letter to Grover
Cleveland, p.4. – Which territorial government has ever sufficiently fulfilled this duty? –
J.Z., 25.2.09. – Q.
NATURAL LAW: Freedom, as well as reason, which serves it as a torch, is all the
wider and more perfect, the more it agrees with the order of nature, i.e. with necessity.” -
( “Die Freiheit ebenso wie die Vernunft, die ihr im Menschen als Fackel dient, is um so
groesser und vollkommener, als sie mehr mit der Ordnung der Natur, d.h. mit der
Notwendigkeit, uebereinstimmt.” ) - Proudhon, 1846.
NATURAL LAW: His hope rested not in lawyers themselves but in natural law - a
subject available and self-evident to all people (*) Once the people awoke to their rights,
they would kill their rulers. If natural law was fully understood, revolutionaries when
brought to trial could appeal beyond the government officials, beyond the legislatures,
and beyond the judges, to the people sitting in the jury boxes.” - Charles Chiveley,
introduction to Lysander Spooner, Collected Works, I, p.56. (*) Micrographic and
electronic text reproductions could help to make it so. – So far their enlightenment
options are still vastly under-utilized. - J. Z.)
NATURAL LAW: His system admittedly depended on the existence of a natural law.
Today we are rather skeptical of such law; our behaviorists and psychoanalysts have
shown how seldom men follow principles of reason. Before rejecting Spooner's ideas of
natural law, we might ponder carefully his alternatives : either there are normative
standards making justice possible, or there are no standards but force and violence. He
laid it out clearly: - - "If there be, in nature, no such principle as justice, there is no
moral standard, and never can-be any moral standard, by which any controversy
whatever, between two or more human beings, can be settled in a manner to be
obligatory upon either; and the inevitable doom of the human race must consequently be
to be forever at war; forever striving to plunder, enslave, and murder each other; with no
instrumentalities but fraud and force to end the conflict." (Lysander Spooner, Natural
Law, p.15) - Chiveley's Introduction to Spooner, works, I, p.55.
NATURAL LAW: Honesty, justice, natural law," he writes, "is usually a very plain and
simple matter, easily understood by common minds." Justice becomes perverted only
when "laws" are „passed‟." - Charles Chiveley's introduction to Spooner's Works I, p.4.
NATURAL LAW: How could a physician hope to deal successfully with a case if he was
told first, to lay aside all the general principles of health and disease; the laws affecting
the temperature and the nutrition of the body; the circulation; the general course of the
disease, its accompanying and its resulting dangers? Both astronomer and physician
possess their power, such as it is, simply in virtue of the laws which, as they have
discovered, are invariably behind the facts. Facts not reduced to law can be of no
practical service either to astronomer or physician. How can a politician dream that he
exists in a different world from the physician and astronomer, and that it is given to him
to use the facts which concern his trade, without understanding or caring to understand
the laws of which they are but the expression?” - Auberon Herbert, Mack edition, p.134.
NATURAL LAW: If every citizen could be brought up to appreciate the beauty and
harmony of the laws inherent in nature, he would bees incapable of establishing a
tyranny as of enduring one. The society in which he lived would automatically be a
natural society, a society of free consent, in which law and liberty are but two aspects of
the same reality.” - From :"Social Relation and Freedom”, Modern Publishers Indore,
NATURAL LAW: If you drive out nature with a pitchfork it will, nevertheless, return.” (
Naturam expellas furca, tamen, usque recurret.“ - - „Verjage die Natur mit der
Mistgabel, sie kehrt doch wieder.“ ) – Horaz, Episteln, 1, 10, 42.- Compare: Destauches,
Le Glorieux, III, 5: Vertreibt die Natur; sie kehrt im Galopp zurueck.“ ( Drive out nature
and she will return galloping. ) - NATURE, FORCE, COERCION, LEGISLATION,
NATURAL LAW: If, finally, you shall find no such law, anywhere, nor be able to
conceive of any such law yourself, I take the liberty to suggest that it is your imperative
duty to submit the question to your associate legislators; and, if they can give no light on
the subject, that you call upon them to burn all the existing stature books of the United
States, and then to go home and content themselves with the exercise of only such rights
and powers as nature has given to them in common with the rest of mankind.” – Lysander
Spooner, conclusion of Letter to Thomas Francis Bayard, II, Boston, May 27th., 1882,
Works I.
NATURAL LAW: In fact, the legal principles of any society can be established in three
alternative ways: (a) by following the traditional custom of the tribe or community; (b) by
obeying the arbitrary, ad hoc will of those who rule the State apparatus; or c) by the use
of man‟s reason in discovering the natural law – in short, by slavish conformity to
custom, by arbitrary whim, or by use of man‟s reason. … Here we may simply affirm that
the latter method is at once the most appropriate for man at his most nobly and fully
human, and the most potentially “revolutionary” vis à vi and given status quo.” – Murray
N. Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, p.17. – Here he has certainly not the diverse
alternatives of divers panarchies of volunteers into consideration. – - A fourth way
consists in allowing individuals to secede from the territorial law community they are
living in and to choose or establish for themselves and other such secessionists another
one, under personal laws and full exterritorial autonomy, corresponding to their own
insights or prejudices. – J.Z., 26.1.08.
NATURAL LAW: In the following passage, legal scholar George Padoux ( preface to
LEANG KI-TCHAO, 1926 ) summarizes the general philosophy of life that underlay the
Chinese system of law and-justice. 'Since the dawn of its history, China has believed in
the. existence of a natural order of things, or law of Nature, including all parts of the
universe and adjusting them harmoniously with one another. This order of Nature was
not made, it exists and is its own reason for existence. Humanity is a part of it, and must
conform to it ... This natural law does not yield precedence to positive law, i.e., laws
representing human experience and wisdom. ... ' - A Chinese will regard as binding a
rule promulgated even by doubtful constitutional authority if he deems it conformable to
'the edicts from on high'; and he will deem himself free to disregard it if he finds it in
disaccord with the natural law ...” - LE-FEVRE'S JOURNAL, Winter 1975.
NATURAL LAW: It is significant that he quotes from Vattel‟s Principles de la Loi
Naturelle in the course of his argument. When he writes that „there can be no
prescription old enough to supersede the law of nature and the grant of God Almighty,
who has “given all men a right to be free”, he has really abandoned the logic of English
constitutional law for the revolutionary logic of a higher and diviner law.” – Sir Ernest
Barker, Traditions of Civility, p.303, on James Otis.
NATURAL LAW: It is the science which alone can tell a man what he can, and cannot,
do; what he can, and cannot have; what he can, and cannot, say, without infringing the
rights of any other person.” – Lysander Spooner: Natural Law.
NATURAL LAW: Later thinkers noticed that human beings always live fuller, more
satisfied lives when free than when enslaved. They called this regularly a natural law,
too.” – Jeff Riggenbach, NEW LIBERTARIAN, 15, August 85, p.15. – FREEDOM,
NATURAL LAW: Lawmakers, as they call themselves, might just as well claim the right
to abolish, by statute, the natural law of gravitation, the natural laws of light, heat, and
electricity, and all the other natural laws of matter and mind, and institute laws of their
own in the place of them and compel conformity to them, as to claim the right to set aside
the natural law of justice, and compel obedience to such other laws as they may see fit to
manufacture, and set up in its stead.” – Lysander Spooner, A Letter to Grover Cleveland,
NATURAL LAW: Laws- just laws, natural laws - are not made, they are discovered.” -
Albert Parsons, on being sentenced to hang, 1886.
NATURAL LAW: leaving out of account the law of family, Duguit finds only three
fundamental rules and no more - freedom of contract, the inviolability of property, and
the duty to compensate another for damage due to one s fault.” - Hayek, The Constitution
of Liberty, p.454. – Why do so many writers attempt to reduce all natural laws or human
rights to a few only, which can be expressed in a single sentence or paragraph? Is the
topic not important enough to be expressed in sufficient detail? How many, have
concluded so far, from the above general terms, upon the right of individuals and
minorities to secede and to rule themselves under personal laws, exterritorially
autonomous, under their own personal laws? How many have derived all the economic,
monetary and financial rights from such wordings? Why should we be prepared to fill
many pages upon the purchase of a car or some real estate but not take man‟s individual
rights and liberties serious enough to go to some lengths and details to describe them? –
NATURAL LAW: Libertarianism, then, is based squarely on what used to be called the
tradition of natural rights, holding that every human being has the right to life, liberty
and justly acquired property - property acquired by transforming un-owned natural
resources by their own effort or by engaging in peaceful exchange of their own thought
and labor for that of others ...” -Roy Childs, Liberty Against Power, p.7.
NATURAL LAW: Locke‟s description of the state of nature as a place where men enjoy
“perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions as they think fit,
within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave or dependency upon the will
of any man”. – JLS, Fall 77, p.147/48.
NATURAL LAW: Man can work with natural laws, but he cannot possibly direct,
change or inflict his will against nature without disastrous results.” - Dr. J. A. S. Sage:
Live to Be 100, p.109.
NATURAL LAW: Natural law and nature‟s laws rather than “God‟s” laws or man‟s
laws. – J.Z., 6.5.93, 24.1.08.
NATURAL LAW: Natural Law is historically the power in oppressed person‟s defence
against established churches and States.” - SEK3, NEW LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug. 85.
NATURAL LAW: Natural Law is simply conceptualization of the objective workings of
human action.” - SEK3, NEW LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug. 85, p.10.
NATURAL LAW: Natural Law is the science of men's rights. .. It is impossible that men
can have any right ( either in person or in property), in violation of Natural Law. - For
natural law is justice itself ... the nature of justice can no more be altered by legislation
than the nature of numbers can be altered by the same means.” – Lysander Spooner.
NATURAL LAW: Natural Law or The Science of Justice: A Treatise on Natural Law,
Natural Justice, Natural Rights, Natural Liberty, and Natural Society; Showing That All
Legislation Whatsoever Is An Absurdity, A Usurpation, And A Crime.” – Lysander
Spooner. – Title of one of his best essays. - J.Z. - NATURAL LAW VS. LEGISLATION,
NATURAL LAW: Natural law, in regard to all human rights, is capable of being
ascertained with nearly absolute certainty.” - Lysander Spooner, Poverty, p.63.
NATURAL LAW: Natural Law, is it obligatory for all or optional for individuals and
volunteer groups in their self-concerned activities? - "...any act of any individual or any
government inconsistent with natural justice and men's natural rights is unlawful and
invalid. Under Spooner's definition of law, legislation and law-making is necessarily
subject to natural law and natural justice. The idea that government of any majority of
people have the inherent right to restrain others from the exercise of their natural rights -
by way of lawmaking - 'is as sheer an imposture as the idea of the divine right of kings to
reign ...' - And the idea of any necessary or inherent authority in legislation, as such, is
an equal imposture. - 'If legislation be consistent with natural justice ... it is obligatory', if
not, not." - Carl Watner, on Spooner, in Holterman, Law in Anarchism, p.124, quoting
Spooner, The Unconstitutionality of Slavery, p.8. - All this is right but only for territorial,
coercive, monopolistic and sovereign States and laws. One should distinguish between
imposed (at least upon involuntary victims and upon dissenters) constitutions, laws and
governments, judges and courts, administrations an police forces etc. and individually
chosen or agreed upon ones. Furthermore, one should distinguish laws, conditions and
institutions to which one remains constitutionally bound to one's former choices, or those
of one's ancestors, even when one has changed one's mind or the conditions have
changed, and a state of affairs where individuals can freely opt out of what they formerly
found attractive and voluntarily contracted for. Spooner's and Watner's kind of absolutist
approach and interpretation, understandable with regard to the imposition and coercive
maintenance of any kind of slavery, has, by being indiscriminately applied, so far
prevented most anarchists and libertarians from comprehending and approving
panarchism and from achieving it and thus achieving anarchism for anarchists,
libertarianism for libertarians and archism for archists only. A principle or dogma should
never be insisted upon so absolutely that it ignores or demolishes our realistic self-
liberation rights, liberties and opportunities and those of others, who are at different
stages of personal knowledge and development, just because these rights, liberties and
opportunities are not absolutistic, perfect and fully claimed and realized by and for all.
One should also realize that e.g. criminals, whether individual or organized ones, may not
want and have contracted rightful and suitable controls over their criminal activities
against others (against their victims), but they do, nevertheless, have to be resisted and
controlled, forcefully, if necessary, to the extent that this can be rightfully and effectively
done, never minding their dislikes and protests. - J.Z. 15.1.93, 17.9.04. - &
NATURAL LAW: Natural law, notice, is not claimed as Invention. It is discovered, not
invented. It is immutable to the subjective whims of the State‟s Rulers.” - SEK3, NEW
LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug. 85, p.1
NATURAL LAW: Natural laws have no pity.” - Robert Heinlein, Notebooks of Lazarus
Long. - J.Z.: Those applying between rational human beings have something much better,
namely the justice resulting from the realization of human rights, those fitting the nature
of human beings and their relations with each other. - J.Z., 24.11.05.
NATURAL LAW: natural rights are supposed to receive protection, not to provide it. …
The function of natural law is not to protect any claims, but rather to tell us which claims
deserve protection.” - Roderick T. Long, The Nature of Law, IV. - While this is true for
most classical human rights, it is hardly true for those rights which are intended to help
protect other rights, like the right to resist, revolt, commit tyrannicide, to help liberate
innocents, the right to individually secede from oppressive regimes, the right to refuse to
accept deteriorated government money and to issue and accept sound and competitive
private currencies instead, the right to bear arms for the protection of individual rights
and to militarily organize and train oneself for the protection of individual rights. - J.Z.,
1.2.02. - HUMAN RIGHTS
NATURAL LAW: Natural rights are those which grow out of the nature of man.” -
Black's Law Dictionary. – MAN, HUMAN NATURE, RIGHTS
NATURAL LAW: Nature never breaks her own laws.” - Leonardo da Vinci.
NATURAL LAW: Nature, as far as I know, is not personified and dos not object to how
much of it is understood, used or misused. If natural law is understood and cooperation
ensues, nature will favor the cooperator. If misunderstanding or misuse ensues,
unpleasant consequences may follow. But in the latter case, the individual brings the
difficulty on himself; there is no natural (*)supernatural interventionist of which I am
aware.” – Robert LeFevre, NEW LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug. 85, p. 12. – A society of free
individuals will cooperate with the natural law individuals and resist the aggressors
against natural law. – (*) or? – J.Z., 29.4.89.
NATURAL LAW: Nature's laws are always enforced.” - Prof. Carl J. Friedrich, The New
Belief in the Common Man, p.126. – Alas, the natural laws between human beings are
only indirectly enforced, namely through the disastrous consequences of them being
ignored or suppressed. All of recorded history is a lesson for this. - J.Z., 24.11.05. – But
all of these lessons have to be sufficiently written up still – primarily in an ideal
declaration of all individual rights and liberties. Or do you know anyone who is fully
aware of all of them? – J.Z., 25.2.09. – Q., IDEAL HUMAN RIGHTS DECLARATION
NATURAL LAW: Oh, these grand, immutable, all-wise laws of natural forces, how
perfectly they would work if human legislators would only let them alone! But no, they
must be tinkering.” - Andrew Carnegie, quoted in SATURDAY REVIEW, 10.7.76. – Are
those passing laws most familiar with natural laws and individual human rights and
liberties? – J.Z., 25.2.09. - LEGISLATORS, LAWS, PARLIAMENTS, LAWYERS,
NATURAL LAW: one unalterable law indicated by nature herself." - by ?
NATURAL LAW: Only natural law is stable.” - J. G. Seume, Autobiography, p.96. -
(The laws of legislators are forever changing and mostly unjust, i.e., contrary to natural
law and human rights. - J.Z., 24.11.05.) Compare: “Die Natur macht keine Spruenge.” –
author? ( Nature does not jump. ) – Apart from e.g. mutations and some nuclear
phenomena. But it produced some pretty good jumpers, like e.g fleas. – And sudden and
spectacular “shorts”, like “lightening”. - J.Z., 25.2.09.
NATURAL LAW: Otis advances the view that an act of parliament against any of God‟s
natural laws, which are immutably true, would be contrary to truth, equity, and justice,
and consequently void; and he proceeds to the conclusion that it has been – and still, by
implication, should be – the function of the judges to declare the nullity of any such act.”
– Sir Ernest Barker, Traditions of Civility, p.302, on James Otis. – Ulrich von
Beckerath‟s view was that an ideal militia of volunteers for the protection of individual
rights and liberties – still to be established, even to be fully discussed, would be the
ultimate arbiter and sovereign force to uphold these rights, independent of any
government, society or jurisdiction. It would involve all citizens sufficiently enlightened
and interested in this respect. I share this view. – He also asserted that Robert Owen, on
his death bed would have stated that without an ideal militia the required social reforms
could neither be achieved nor maintained. – He got this information from one of the
biographies of R. O. which was, probably, burnt with his library in Nov. 1943. – I have
not found this reference as yet. – The wonders of the Internet: A quick Google search of
“Robert Owen” + militia brought me the “chance” to look at 3240 references and showed
up only the first page of them. Now I will not take the time to peruse them. Some of his
descendants were involved with militias. - J.Z., 26.1.08. – I wish all sensible discussions
of ideal militias were pulled together, at least electronically, in an anthology. That
wrongfully organized and motivated and commanded militias have done much wrong and
could still to much wrong, I do not deny. – There are so many writings on statist military
forces – and so few on rightful and voluntary military organizations. One of the reasons
for this is, naturally, that there were so few of them and these were still not sufficiently
enlightened. - J.Z., 25.2.09. & MILITIA, LAWS, NULLIFICATION, INDIVIDUAL
NATURAL LAW: Responding spontaneously to the laws of social economy and moral
right which are independent of any man or legislative power, Proudhon argued, man is
free, for 'it is the individual's privilege to recognize these laws (*), his honor to obey
them'. (**) Obviously, Proudhon belongs to that school of natural right which holds that
there is an order implicit in nature that is greater in wisdom and compassion than any
man-made institution or system of justice can ever hope to be, and that a viable social
order, therefore, can only be established where the basis of that order springs from man's
'natural constitution' rather than an artificial order dependent upon some political
charter. (***) - What Proudhon has in effect proposed here is a theory of laissez-faire
that is faithful to the spirit of that theory as it was presented by Adam Smith and other
eighteenth century thinkers of the Enlightenment. Convinced that man is a social as well
as an economic being, and that men, therefore, have the capacity of settling their
differences equitably without help from outside, the Enlightenment stood ready to discard
the institution of the state and rely wholly upon the social instincts of men for the
purposes of self-government. The inevitable consequence of a society organized after the
principle of laissez-faire is bound to be serendipitous, according to Proudhon, because it
draws upon the full range of human potentiality for social progress." - W. O. Reichert, in
Holterman, Law in Anarchism, P.143/144. - Voluntary laws, laws for volunteers only,
may contain arrangements contrary to natural justice. But individuals remain free to
withdraw from them and their restrictions of individual rights, at any time (as long as
they have committed no offences against individual rights). They are to that extent
voluntary slaves but only as long as they want to be. –– (*) Or, internally, among and
with like-minded people, to disobey them! - - (**) or not! – - (**) Nothing wrong with
such charters, as long as they remain exterritorially confined to volunteers! – J.Z., 1.7.92,
NATURAL LAW: Society … only exists if the Natural Right derived from Natural Law is
respected. Each and every violation is a corrosion of Society until is ability to self-repair
is overcome and Hobbes‟ War of All Against All ensues.” – SEK 3, NEW
LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug. 85, p.15. - & SOCIETY
NATURAL LAW: Spontaneously evolved theory and practice of law to fill in the gaps of
the natural rights theory.” – George Smith, 8.1.91. – That, too, remained largely a utopia,
I believe. However, we might approach it via long-term and free competition between all
the various panarchies which free men would form for themselves and like-minded
people. – J.Z., 25.2.09. – PANARCHISM, LAWS, JUDGES, LAWYERS
NATURAL LAW: Statute law is not based on natural law; they are the antithesis of
each other.” - Sprading: Liberty and the Great Libertarians, p.20. - LAWS
NATURAL LAW: the conclusion, reached by individuals in virtually all nations, races,
climes and conditions of life that there are certain types of behavior which people ought
to have and still other types which the people ought not to have.” - SEK3, NEW
LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug. 85, p.12.
NATURAL LAW: The distinguishing doctrines of the Physiocrats were that a so-called
natural condition or order exists in society, the violation of which causes all the evils
suffered by man; that in this natural order man has a fundamental and inalienable right
to freedom of person, opinion, property, contract, or exchange.” - Bliss, Enyclopedia of
Social Reform, Physiocrats.
NATURAL LAW: the fact that natural law theorists derive from the very nature of man
a fixed structure of law independent of time and place, or of habit or authority or group
norms, makes that law a mighty force for radical change.” – Murray N. Rothbard, The
Ethics of Liberty, p.19. – The progress will be faster when all are free to progress towards
that ideal only at their own speed, in accordance with their own beliefs, convictions and
experiences, helped by what they are willing and able to learn from the experiences of
others, all around them, also doing their own things. If the most advanced community
tried to enforce its ideal territorially upon the rest, it would maximize resistance and
opposition and might end up defeated, without its ideal constitution or conditions. – J.Z.,
NATURAL LAW: the idea of the limitation of the sovereignty of parliament by „natural
laws which are immutably true‟ is an idea based on the dictum of an English judge of the
seventeenth century, Hobart, who had declared in 1614 (*) that an act of parliament
against natural equity is void in itself, for „jura naturae sunt immutabilia,‟ and they are
„leges legum‟. ( On the other hand, this dictum of Hobart stands solitary and
unparalleled, except for the statement of a similar view by Camden in the House of Lords
in 1766; and though Otis affirms the contrary, it seems never to have been applied by any
English court. ) The proposition of Otis also looks forward, in the sense that the idea of
judicial disallowance of legislative acts which are contrary to a higher and overriding
law is a herald and forerunner of the power which the federal Supreme Court eventually
came to assume after 1787.” (**) – Sir Ernest Barker, Traditions of Civility, p.302. - - – -
(*) I believe that the idea of natural law goes back much further, even to the ancient
Greeks and Romans. – But will not presently spend time to confirm that belief by
corresponding quotes. - - (**) Well, have the Supreme Courts of any country so far
shown sufficient knowledge and respect for natural law and individual rights and
liberties? I would like to see some evidence for that. - J.Z., 26.1.08.
NATURAL LAW: the language of statutes and constitutions shall be construed, as
nearly as possible, consistently with natural law.” - Spooner, Trial by Jury, Works II,
NATURAL LAW: The law of nature is perceptible to the eye of reason.” - Maurice
Cranston, Political Dialogues, p.38, ascribing this view to Locke.
NATURAL LAW: The law of nature, being co-eval with mankind, and dictated by God
himself, is superior in obligation to every other. It is binding all over the glove, in all
countries, and at all times; no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this, and such
of them as are valid derive their force and all their authority, mediately or immediately,
from the original.” - Blackstone.
NATURAL LAW: The laws of physics, chemistry and mathematics are not a good idea.
They are immutable natural laws. The laws of economics are not a good idea. They are
immutable natural laws. The laws of economics are nto a good idea. They are immutable
natural laws. There is nothing wrong with these natural laws and only fools attempt to
'improve' them.” - GOOD GOVERNMENT, April 83, then edited by W. A. Dowe, p.1.
NATURAL LAW: The liberty of man consists solely in this, that he obeys the laws of
nature, because he has himself recognized them as such, and not because they have been
imposed upon him externally by any foreign will whatsoever, human or divine, collective
or individual.” - Bakunin, God and State. ( Seldes, p.562)
NATURAL LAW: the philosophy of natural law defends the rational dignity of the
human individual and his right and duty to criticize by word and deed any existing
institution or social structure in terms of those universal moral principles which can be
apprehended by the individual intellect alone.” – John Wild, Plato‟s Modern Enemies,
p.176, quoted in Rothbard, The Ethics of Liberty, p.18. – Not only the subscribers to
Natural Law are entitled to their own communities of volunteers, as long as they do not
infringe the natural law rights or individual rights and liberties that members of other
communities claimed for themselves. I envision a great variety of statist, libertarian and
anarchist panarchies and polyarchies, but also a strong tendency towards more and more
freedom in all those, which have not already realized within their community all known
liberties and rights. Let them advance at their own speed, or stagnate or regress at their
own risk and expense. – J.Z., 26.1.08.
NATURAL LAW: The physical world, like the cave‟s flickering images, is untidy,
shifting and out of focus. But there is order and purpose in the confusing kaleidoscope.
Thinks happen according to immutable laws – laws governing life on earth, laws
governing movement in the heavens, laws of logic governing thoughts, and moral laws
governing behavior. None of these laws can be seen or touched; yet they are real
nonetheless – more real, essentially, than the objects they govern. If Plato had known
Newton‟s law of gravity, he would have considered it more real than any falling apple. –
From an article on Greece. Author and periodical presently unknown to me. – J.Z.
NATURAL LAW: the principal lasting modernizing effect of the sixteenth- and
seventeenth-century natural-law theorists was their limitation of the social impact of
religious belief. By arguing that all men are equal before the natural law, and that all
institutions are to be submitted equally to the same criteria concerning their conformity
to this law, they postulated equally applicable sets of measures to man and his social
doings. To hold that natural law is the same for all is not to argue that all men are
empirically equal before that natural law, but at least it opens the door for thinking that
all men are touched with grace, and so takes a step toward removing religion as a
measure of worth determining a man's secular position. In addition, these theorists
established a basis for reconciling individual with social good by proposing identical
criteria for the ethical judgment of each.” - Silvert, Man's Power, p.120.
NATURAL LAW: The question before the human race is, whether the God of nature
shall govern the world by his own laws, or whether priests and kings shall rule it by
fictitious miracles.” - John Adams, To Jefferson, June 20, 1815. - The laws of human
nature or the laws religions & powerful politicians impose upon men? – J.Z., 25.2.09. -
NATURAL LAW: the right which a man has to do the things which are fit for his
enjoyment.” - Quesnay, Le Droit Naturel. – Are pleasure or enjoyment to be the supreme
standard? – J.Z., 25.2.09. – UTILITARIANISM, HEDONISM
NATURAL LAW: The rules of justice discernable by right reason.” - Source unknown
to me. - J.Z. – Compare: The law of nature is perceptible to the eye of reason.” - Maurice
Cranston, Political Dialogues, p.38, ascribing this view to Locke.
NATURAL LAW: The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old
parchments or musty records. They are written as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume
of human nature, by the hand of Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by
human power. This is what is called the law of nature, which being coeval with mankind
and dictated by God himself, is, of course, superior in obligation to any other. No human
laws are of any validity if contrary to this. It is binding over all the globe, in all
countries, and at all times.” - Alexander Hamilton.
NATURAL LAW: The world is so constituted, socially and economically, that if you
allow the natural law to function then you will get not only a free society but a rich one
and a just one, in which, in the long run, revolution and war would make no sense, and in
which, … men would breathe freely. It is no exaggeration to say that all the seemingly
intractable economic problems of modern society born both of the social maladjustments
referred to and of the very misguided attempts to deal with them, would disappear.” –
Frank McEachran, PROGRESS, 6/77.
NATURAL LAW: There are some writers ... contending that the code of Nature exists in
the future and is the goal to which all civil laws are moving, but ...” - H. J. S. Maine:
Ancient Law, p.43. – I am still very much under the impression that most “positive” laws
go in the opposite direction. – Under the personal laws of panarchism this trend might
become reversed. – J.Z., 25.2.09. – LAWS, PANARCHISM VS. STATISM
NATURAL LAW: There demonstrably are social laws which must be obeyed in the
same sense that the law of gravity must be obeyed by willful human beings. That is,
driving off a cliff with my car and demanding the result to be that I reach the other side
as in an animated cartoon, is a violation of the Law of Gravity. (*) Similarly, defrauding
my trading partners in an agora and expecting the agoric relations to continue
unaffected is a violation of socio-economic Natural Law. If I am discovered, it will go,
particularly badly for me, but even if I am not (punished?- J.Z.), the general collapse of
trust necessary for ease of exchange will grow, to my increased annoyance and
frustration.” – SEK3, NEW LIBERTARIAN 15, Aug. 85, p.15. - - (*) Not that of humor.
– J.Z.
NATURAL LAW: there is and can be, correctly speaking, no law but natural law. There
is no other principle or rule, applicable to the rights of men, that is obligatory in
comparison with this, in any case whatever. And this natural law is no other than that
rule of natural justice, which results either directly from men‟s natural rights, or from
such acquisitions as they have a natural right to make, or from such contracts as they
have a natural right to enter into.” – Lysander Spooner, “What Is Law?” – Chapter I of
Part I of The Unconstitutionality Of Slavery, 1845.
NATURAL LAW: There is plenty, and for all, he maintains, if production and trade
were freed from the shackles of institutions founded on ignorance of the natural laws of
economics. In this respect - his insistence that natural laws obtain in the realm of
economics even as they do in the physical sciences - he traces his intellectual lineage
back to the classicists, or old-fashioned liberals.” - Frank Chodorov: Out Of Step, on
Henry George, p.62.
NATURAL LAW: Therefore, the difference between Natural Law and government law is
that Natural Law demands freedom, while government law demands that certain men
obey other men.” – Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p.32. – LAW, HUMAN
NATURAL LAW: This impossibility of any man's delegating any legislative power
whatever necessarily results from the fact that the law of nature has drawn the line, and
the only line - and that, too, a line that can never be effaced nor removed - between each
man's own inherent and inalienable rights of person and property, and each and every
other man's inherent and inalienable rights of person and property. It, therefore,
necessarily fixes the unalterable limits, within which every man may rightfully seek his
own happiness, in his own way, free from all responsibility, to, or interference by, his
fellow men, or any of them.” – Lysander Spooner, Letter to Thomas Francis Bayard,
1882, Works I, p.5.
NATURAL LAW: those unalterable relations which Providence has ordained that every
thing should bear to every other. These relations, which are truth itself, the foundation of
virtue, and, consequently, the only measures of happiness, should be likewise the only
measures by which we should direct our reasoning. To these we should conform in good
earnest; and not to think to force nature, and the whole order of her system by a
compliance with our pride and folly, to conform to our artificial regulations. It is by a
conformity to this method we owe the discovery of the few truths we know, and the little
liberty and rational happiness we enjoy. We have somewhat fairer play than a reasoner
could have expected formerly; and we derive advantages from it which are very visible.”
- Sprading, on Edmund Burke, p.61.
NATURAL LAW: Those who want to command nature must learn to know its law and
its laws and they can profit only by using them to their own advantage and that of their
associates, trading partners, clients or customers. – Not only our bodies and minds are
subject to natural laws but also our institutions and relationships are subject to natural
law. We cannot get away from the consequence of trying to ignore these laws and this
law. - J.Z., n.d., & 24.1.08. -NATURAL LAWS
NATURAL LAW: True law is right reason conformable to nature, universal,
unchangeable, eternal, whose commands urge us to duty, and whose prohibitions restrain
us from evil … This law cannot be contradicted by any other law, and is not liable either
to derogation or abrogation. Neither the senate nor the people can give us any
dispensation for not obeying this universal law of justice. It needs no other expositor and
interpreter than our own conscience. It is not one thing at Rome, and another at Athens;
one thing to-day, and another to-morrow; but in all times and nations this universal law
must forever reign, eternal and imperishable.” - Cicero, On the Commonwealth, ( De re
publica ), tr. in Bohn‟s Classical Library, London, Belle and Daldy, 1872. - - Did such
thoughts induce Cicero to dare call for the abolition of slavery, anywhere, at any time? –
NATURAL LAW: Under Natural Law which is embodied in Common Law and
enshrined in the Constitution, your right to your life, your liberty, your property and the
pursuit of your own happiness, is ABSOLUTE. The only valid function of government is
the protection of these Natural Law rights (*); anything else is usurpation and
oppression. - - “… to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” – Declaration of
Independence - - Government, according to the Constitution, has only those rights and
powers delegated to it by its citizens. (**) Any right not possessed by the individual (***)
cannot be delegated. Since I have no right to your life, liberty or property, there is no
way I can delegate that right to any government I may create. And there is no way our
government can legally or morally arrogate to itself rights and powers not specifically
possessed by its citizens nor delegated to it.” - - Source? - Lysander Spooner: Natural
Law? - - (*) Is that really a working function of any territorial government? – - (**)
Individually, not collectively! - - (***) Underlined by me. - J.Z., 28.1.08. –
NATURAL LAW: What David Hume called the "three fundamental laws of nature, that
of the stability of possession, of transference by consent, and of the performance of
promises." – Quoted where?
NATURAL LIVING: claimed they lived as an integral part in “Nature‟s Plan”. … she‟d
observed that intelligent life always forces nature to operate according to its plans. …
Nature‟s „plan‟ for mankind, … is that we should still be shivering in damp cave on Earth
somewhere, gnawing wormy berries, sandy tubers, and raw meat, and dying of old age
before we turn thirty.” – L. Neil Smith, Taflak Lysander, p. 95, Avon Books, New York,
NATURAL MONEY: So the people must choose between political money, of which they
may try another issue or series, and natural money.” - Sennholz, THE FREEMAN, 2/75.
NATURAL MONOPOLY: A situation in which you are so appropriate to the needs and
desires of your customers, friends, or lover that competition is relatively powerless to
affect the relationship.” – Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom, p.391. – Here he did
not define those natural monopolies that people have mostly complaining about, e.g. an
ideal location for a hydroelectric dam. Hertzka‟s “open cooperatives” are probably still
the best way to deal with them. – J.Z., 28.1.08.
NATURAL MORAL LAW: Natural Moral Law is comprehensive in that it can assign
one of three values – good – neutral, or evil – to any human action, simply by posing the
question: has anyone been coercively harmed? And then using judgment plus the facts to
answer yea or nay. ( For moral good, we ask: has anyone been benefited and by whom?
)” – Fred Foldvary, THE CONNECTION 115, p.91.
NATURAL ORDER: Let things fall into their natural order, let society govern itself, and
the sovereign function of the State will be to protect nature in the execution of her own
law.” – Lord Acton, Lectures on the French Revolution, ed. by Figgis & Laurence,
MacMillan, 1932, p.11/12, on the French economists. - - If society is really allowed to
order itself then a territorial State will be found to be superfluous – and also too
dangerous to be allowed to exist. The territorial statist utopia has never fulfilled its
promises or the hopes and expectations it aroused. - – J.Z., 10.10.07. - NATURAL LAW,
NATURAL ORDER: With his usual admirable net clarity, M. Henri Follins has
diagnosed the disease from which the State now suffers, and has delineated the cure, in
Principes Sociaux de l‟Ordre Naturel (1921). (*) Apart fro a few handfuls of ambitions
and intriguing people who love above all things to dominate those around them, he
reminds us, apart from a few handfuls of simple idealists and sophists who propose to
model the world according to their heart‟s desire, humanity is everywhere composed of
individuals who only ask to live, to work, to enjoy, or to suffer in peace, according to the
opportunities that fate affords them. Natural Order is to allow one‟s neighbour to attend
to his own affairs, and not to be jostled by him. It is also not to be regimented, either from
choice or compulsion, in groups whose principal raison d‟être is to interfere in their
neighbours‟ lives, provided that these do not interfere with their own lives. Natural Order
is to be responsible for one‟s own acts and one‟s own engagements, and not to have
eternally to pay, to busy one‟s self, and to bleed, owing to the stupidity and folly of
others. Natural Order is to associate with those to whom this appears desirable in order
to defend their legitimate interests, and not to associate with anyone to attack the
legitimate interests of others. Natural Order, in a word, is the abolition of artificial
tyrannies; the tyranny of manners, of traditions, of prejudices, of fashions, the tyranny of
institutions, of governments, of spiritual cults, whether national or social; the tyranny of
parties, of clans, of castes, and of groups.” – S. Hutchinson Harris, The Doctrine of
Personal Right, p.368/69. - (*) I would like to see Follin‟s work it in a German or English
translation. He was a long-term friend of Ulrich von Beckerath, they were both members
of the same cosmopolitan peace organization and Follin also advocated individual
secessionism, at least in later years. – J.Z., n.d. - ORDER, NEIGHBORS,
NATURAL RESOURCES: 28.) Property - Every rational being has the right to acquire,
hold and dispose of property, alone as well as in association with others. This right is
unlimited only with regard to earned, inherited, won or donated property. It cannot be
claimed for natural resources such as land, mineral deposits, sources of energy, lakes,
rivers, seas and oceans, air space and space, nor of socially essential services and
structures like railways, streets, and canals (nor for mere discoveries of natural structures,
like genes, which it took nature billions of years to develop. - J.Z., 27.10.01), because this
would establish particularly harmful monopolies. - - It includes the right freely to dispose
of all property by last will and testament except that required to secure a minimum
standard of living to one's dependents. - - No one may be deprived of his property except
in cases of evident public necessity, legally ascertained, and on condition of a previous
just indemnification. In an emergency the indemnity has to be settled immediately
afterwards. - - 29.) Natural Resources - Every rational being has the right to participate
a) in the exploitation of all natural resources like land, mineral deposits, energy
resources, rivers, lakes, seas, and oceans, air space and space, and b) in the
administration of all institutions, installations and structures beneficial, to all, if they
possess some kind of inherent monopoly as do railways, streets, canals, hydroelectric
dams and telephone networks. - - Comment: Private or national ownership would
monopolize them and thus infringe right 27. Therefore, such monopolies should be
rendered harmless by the above right. It could be realized by open cooperatives, open
because everybody could join as a working member, investor or as a councilor and voter
in its general meetings and because there would be no business secret. The members of
an open cooperative like that of any other would share their earnings according to their
work and their invested capital. The enforced sharing of monopoly profits and of the
decision making power would reduce the monopoly profits practically to naught. – From
the Human Rights draft in PEACE PLANS No. 4.
NATURAL RESOURCES: Because we can expect future generations to be richer than
we are, no matter what we do about resources, asking us to refrain from using resources
now so that future generations can have them later is like asking the poor to make gifts to
the rich.” - Julian Simon - – & THEIR ARTIFICIAL
NATURAL RESOURCES: But people are the only resource that matters, because
human ingenuity creates all the rest.” – James P. Hogan, Endgame Enigma, p.141.
NATURAL RESOURCES: Free enterprise, including productive cooperatives, especially
open cooperatives, financial and monetary freedom, freedom in transport and trade,
would make all of them available everywhere, at competitive prices and also fast enough
and it would also promote their multiplication and supplementation by other resources as
fast and as far as possible. Ultimately, many of the natural resources of the universe are at
our disposal, beginning with those of this solar system. Most of our development options
have not yet been taken up. Even rubbish and waste heat can be made to serve as a
natural resource. – J.Z., 5.4.95, 24.1.08.
NATURAL RESOURCES: In asserting its right or arbitrary dominion over that natural
wealth that is indispensable to the support of human life, it asserts its right to withhold
that wealth from those whose lives are dependent upon it. In this way it denies the natural
right of human beings to live on the planet. It asserts that government owns the planet,
and that men have no right to live on it, except by first getting a permit from the
government. - - This denial of men‟s natural right to take possession of and cultivate
wilderness land is not altered at all by the fact that the government consents to sell as
much land as it thinks it expedient or profitable to sell; nor by the fact that, in certain
cases, it gives outright certain lands to certain persons. Notwithstanding these sales and
gifts, the fact remains that the government claims the original ownership of the lands;
and thus denies the natural right of individuals to take possession of and cultivate them.
In denying this natural right of individuals, it denies their natural right to live on the
earth; and asserts that they have no other right to life than the government, by its own
mere will, pleasure and discretion, may see fit to grant them. - - In thus denying man‟s
natural right to life, it of course denies every other natural right of human beings; and
asserts that they have no natural right to anything; but that, for all other things, as well
as for life itself, they must depend wholly upon the good pleasure and discretion of the
government.” – Lysander Spooner, A Letter To Grover Cleveland, 34, Works I. -
NATURAL RESOURCES: Individualism is only logically and consistently possible if it
starts with the postulate that all men must, to begin with, have free and equal access to
the common gifts of nature. – Grant Allen. - - Even rainwater has to be collected and
stored to be of much use and even breathing the air requires a muscle effort. Ores have to
be dug up and refined. Almost all resources are offered refined and classified on a free
market to anyone able and willing to pay. - TANSTAAFL! – J.Z., 26.2.09. -
NATURAL RESOURCES: It claims to be concerned with preserving the natural
resources of the nation for the benefit of future generations, but it has consistently
ignored the need to preserve the most important natural resource of all in this
generation: the energy and enterprise of the people in the country who are productive,
inventive, innovative and energetic. As the numbers of such people decline, as assuredly
they are declining in the face of heavy taxation and confiscatory laws, the wealth
generating capacity of the nation also declines.” – Morris Shumiatcher, THE
NATURAL RESOURCES: it does not matter who „controls‟ a given resource, so long as
it can be bought at the market price.” – Joseph P. Martino, ed.: Defending a Free Society,
NATURAL RESOURCES: It is not enough that men should vote; it is not enough that
they should be theoretically equal before the law. They must have liberty to avail
themselves of the opportunities and means of life; they must stand on equal terms with
references to the bounty of nature. Either this or Liberty withdraws her light! Either this,
or darkness comes on, and the very forces that progress has evolved turn to powers that
work destruction. This is the universal law. This is the lesson of the centuries. Unless its
foundations be laid in justice the social structure cannot stand.” – Henry George,
Progress and Poverty, 1879. – It is not up to a territorial government, for instance, to
grant one licence to one miner and to refuse it to all others. – J.Z., 28.1.08. - - The
“bounties” of nature do usually require a lot of work, ingenuity and capital investment to
become useful and available to all of us – at their free market prices. – J.Z., 26.2.09. -
NATURAL RESOURCES: Natural resources are a very minor factor in wealth.” – Prof.
Jan Narveson, 25.7.04. – Clean water and air are important parts of free and civilized
lives – and they are everywhere largely interfered with. We also live in a kind of soup of
artificial radiation. Are e.g. energy sources as unimportant as he states here? – To some
extent natural resources are territorially and monopolistically withheld from us. – Free
trade and free enterprise do not yet fully exist in this sphere. - J.Z., 22.2.09. - – Soil,
water, air and sunshine are natural resources for human beings. We could not even
survive without them. But they alone do certainly not make us prosperous or even rich. –
NATURAL RESOURCES: No national or private monopoly for natural resources!
Instead: Free access even for individual, to all natural resources, even if this means free
movement into existing enterprises. - The dissolution of geographic nations by individual
secession, the replacement of territorial law by personal law, would mean, at least in the
long run, free access fore all to all natural resources. This can be realized by means of the
institution of "open cooperatives (as described in several works by Theodor Hertzka, i.e.,
associations which accept all comers, either as workers or investors, and do reward them
according to their contributions. - No more wars for the exclusive possession of oil
bearing areas. No more civil wars fomented by the land hungry. No more exclusive
national land tenures which forcefully exclude some people from the better endowed
areas of this planet. Invaders drove e.g. the Hopis and the Eskimos into the wilderness. -
Free access to exploit the natural resources of the world would also turn all into
proprietors, although not exclusive ones, and would thus make all people more reluctant
to willfully destroy any part of the world. - It surprises me that the conservationists and
ecologists or "greenies" have not yet rediscovered this organizational and management
approach. - Free access for all people, as decision-makers, to deposits of radioactive
materials, would mean that the majority of people could then effectively organize
themselves and decide to make these minerals still less accessible for their use, i.e., under
present conditions, under territorialism, their abuse, e.g. for nuclear weapons and
reactors. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War. - & OPEN COOPERATIVES
NATURAL RESOURCES: No state, racial, ethnic, religious or voluntaryist community
can lay exclusive claim to any natural resource beyond their own bodies, capability and
rightfully acquired products. To that extent territorialism and national monopolies as well
as unlimited private land-ownership must be abolished, in the long run. Transitionally
this can be peacefully and gradually achieved via purchases through "open cooperatives"
which do reward all their voluntary members in accordance with their work and
investment contribution, regardless of their political or other affiliation. Donations and
voluntary mergers with such open cooperatives could speed up the process. But in the
meantime and until this ideal is voluntarily accepted, the existing legal land tenure and
mining system and various competing and freely chosen and non-coercively practised
other systems, should all competitively coexist for their voluntary supporters, in a kind of
panarchistic competition. It may well happen that this kind of competition will continue
indefinitely or re-occur now and then, to the extent that other models than the "open
cooperative" one do remain or become popular and voluntarily supported. Business- and
market-like transitions from one to the other system are always preferable to imposed
solutions, based upon expropriation and legislation for all, even if an ideal is aimed at,
because as disagreeable critters as human beings are, they are only all too likely to rather
fight a civil war than submit involuntarily to an unaccustomed and suspected alternative
land tenure and mining system. Free choice and competition are the answer here, too and
provide the maximum chance to any supposedly ideal system for its wide-spread or even
general realization. - J.Z., 1.4.89. - LAND MONOPOLY, OPEN COOPERATIVES
NATURAL RESOURCES: Not even natural resources lend themselves to coercive
monopolization in a free economy. Not even mining is immune from the dynamics which
militate against the establishment of a viable coercive monopoly. Branden cites the
example of International Nickel of Canada which produces more than two-thirds of the
world‟s nickel yet prices its products as though it had a great many competitors by virtue
of the fact that it does face competition with a variety of other metals and metal alloys. In
other words, the free market is self-policing in this area. (*) “The seldom recognized
principle involved is that no single produce, commodity or material is or can be
indispensable to an economy regardless of price. A commodity can be only relatively
preferable to other commodities.” (**) A commodity can be only relatively preferable to
other commodities.” – O‟Neill, Ayn Rand, p.59 - - (*) Completely, sufficiently? – - (**)
But that relative monopoly can leave a considerable margin for monopoly pricing. – J.Z.,
NATURAL RESOURCES: Simon pointed to historical evidence of a long-term decline
in the real price of resources, arguing that it would continue into the future. An article in
Science presenting this view let to a now-famous wager with the leading population
explosionist, Paul Ehrlich, and two other scholars with similar views on the likely change
between 1980 and 1990 in the average real price of five metals – chrome, copper, nickel,
tin, and tungsten. Simon won the bet hands down, and the Ehrlich group, when
challenged to continue that or a similar wager, withdrew.” – Richard A. Easterlin, in
Foreword, p.XV of: Julian L. Simon, The Great Breakthrough and Its Cause, The
University of Michigan Press, 2000 – 2003. - SCARCITY & POPULATION GROWTH
NATURAL RESOURCES: South America, taken as a whole, has more natural resources
than does North America taken as a whole. China and much of the Soviet territory are
fully comparable. Indeed, a very large part of the United States has never been especially
fertile. – Thus we can look at similarly well-to-do nations which had a meager
inheritance from nature, such as the Scandinavian & Low Countries, Switzerland,
Austria or Japan. Until approximately the nineteenth century most of them were for the
most part miserably poor. – The argument that they got rich by exploiting overseas
empires won‟t stand up, because most of them never had colonies, and as for the rest,
most studies have shown that those with colonies were always net economic liabilities,
not assets.” – Poul Anderson, Past Times, p.141. - & WEALTH, NATURAL WEALTH,
NATURAL RESOURCES: the absolute right of each person to own previously unused
natural resources which they have in some way occupied or transformed.” - Carl Watner,
JLS, Fall 77. - No size limit? No location limit? Compare the agreements miners
themselves made on surface mining rights. – An absolute right to own a hydroelectric
dam location, a narrow pass through a mountain chain? - J.Z., 28.1.08. - DIS.,
NATURAL RESOURCES: The critics say that the freedom, riches and power of the
United States are ill-gotten gains from the ruthless exploitation of lavish natural
resources and that we should be ashamed of them. The truth is that a great many other
countries, including Russia, are much richer in natural resources than the United States
has ever been. In proportion to our population, we have slightly less than our fair share
of such natural resources as land, forests and water power. We have a great deal less
than our share of such things as natural rubber, tin, nickel and a long list of vital basic
minerals. Natural resources have had little if anything to do with the accumulation of
wealth, freedom and power in the United States. …” - Clarence Manion, The Key to
Peace, p.50. – DIS.
NATURAL RESOURCES: There are no finite resources, only finite thinking.” – James
P. Hogan, Mind, Machines & Evolution, p.65. – Also in “Endgame Enigma”, p.281. Just
tell me, which particular elements are we continuously and permanently losing from this
planet, apart from those in various space vehicles that do not return to us? – In small
meteors we probably gain more than we thus lose. - J.Z., 26.2.08.
NATURAL RESOURCES: There‟s more than enough for everyone.” – Lee Correy,
Manna, ANALOG 5/83.
NATURAL RESOURCES: We might glance at Great Britain, … whose chief patrimony
was merely coal, and how it became affluent. … We might glance at Germany, smashed
flat in WW II, afterwards split into a pair of nations – and contrast the standard of living
as between East and West. – It seems obvious to me that what has made the difference
has been people: their institutions, attitudes, ways of going about things. What else could
it be? Possession of natural resources at home was doubtless helpful in some cases, but
appears to have been neither necessary nor sufficient.” – Paul Anderson, Past Times,
p.141/142. – As especially Julian L. Simon has pointed out, in several books, people are
the greatest natural resource, to the extent that they are ingenious and free. – J.Z.,
26.1.08. - & WEALTH
NATURAL RESOURCES: What matters is not the allocation of portions out of a fund
presented to man by nature. The problem is rather to further those social institutions
which enable people to continue and to enlarge the production of all those things which
they need.” - Ludwig von Mises. – Natural resources that are not natural monopolies are
best shared by free competition from other such owners. If they are natural monopolies
then the optimal solution would probably exist in open cooperatives competitively
established over them. Once so transformed they are individualistically socialized. See
the writings of Theodor Hertzka & Ulrich von Beckerath on this. – J.Z., 26.12.07.
NATURAL RESOURCES: When politics are used to allocate resources, the resources
all end up being allocated to politics." – P. J. O'Rourke. – Not all but all too many. –
E.g., under governmental “pricing” most publicly supplied water, even in dry continents
like Australia, was just flushed down the toilets. - J.Z., 2.1.08. – Their water-availability
charge is up to ten times higher than the charge for the amount of water consumed. The
same goes for sewage connection charges. So there is little interest in saving water
because the bill is hardly reduced thereby. – That applies at least to where I life, in the
Southern Highlands of N.S.W. - J.Z. 26.2.09. - & POLITICS
NATURAL RESOURCES: You are not a natural resource.” – John A. Goodson, New
Jersey Libertarian Party. – Yes, you are, but you own! No one else can rightfully claim
you as his natural resource. – J.Z., 28.1.08. – DIS.
NATURAL RIGHT: the late Professor Leo Strauss was in essential accord with
Proudhon's argument that the individual is fully equipped by virtue of his basic social
nature to grasp the outline of natural right without assistance from church or state or any
other outside structure. As Strauss put it, 'It is man's natural sociality that is the basis of
natural right in the narrow or strict sense of right. Because man is by nature social, the
perfection of his nature includes the social virtue par excellence, justice; justice and right
are natural.' When anarchists express a total disregard for legal systems, it is not because
they oppose law and order that they do so but because, like Strauss and Proudhon, they
believe that law and order are generated by the individual as he perfects his social nature
in small communities in which he - and he alone - is responsible for observing right.
Where men have turned this task over to the state, justice becomes a chimera." - W. O.
Reichert in Holterman, Law in Anarchism, p.139. - Within exterritorial and autonomous
communities of volunteers, as anarchistically organized as possible and desirable, some
turning over of tasks, some division of labor, in upholding justice as well as in other
trades, is not only possible but desirable. - J.Z. 1.7.92. - To the extent that any individual
is always fully self-responsible and does not interfere with any of the rights and liberties
of the other voluntary members, or of outsiders, he can be and will be left quite alone.
However, whenever he has become an offender against the agreed-upon rights and
liberties of the members of his community, to which he had himself voluntarily
subscribed, or the rights and liberties claimed for themselves by members of other
communities and internationally recognized as individual rights, then and precisely then
he is not always sufficiently able and willing to be a correct judge in his own case and
must, to that extent, be subjected to the internal or the international arbitration system that
he had previously agreed to abide by. - J.Z. 14.1.93. - Not really a "slogan" for liberty,
either, but rather a lot of interlinked thoughts. - J.Z. - HUMAN NATURE, LAW,
NATURAL RIGHTS: A conservation and secure enjoyment of our natural rights is the
great and ultimate purpose of civil society.” – Lord Acton, Lectures on the French
Revolution, ed. by Figgis & Laurence, MacMillan, 1932, p.30. - CIVILIZED SOCIETY
NATURAL RIGHTS: All schemes having their roots in natural rights are based on the
desire to free man from bondage to social institutions of compulsion in order that he may
attain the consciousness of his humanity and no longer bow before any authority which
would deprive him of the right to his own thoughts and actions.” – Rudolf Rocker,
Nationalism and Culture, p.143. - - The compulsion inherent in territorialism is usually
overlooked, although it belongs to the most common formal definition of States. –
Thoughts are still largely free, even in totalitarian States, unless one is under torture. But
the public expression of thoughts as well as freedom of information is all too much
restricted and both these restrictions do also infringe somewhat free thinking. - J.Z.,
NATURAL RIGHTS: Are all of the genuine individual political, economic and social
rights sufficiently expressed by governments, in their constitutions and human rights
declarations? Did these declarations ever convey enough knowledge and respect for
individual human rights? - Has government-controlled education provided sufficient
knowledge and appreciation of these rights? Obviously not. Nevertheless, anarchists and
libertarians have so far shown quite insufficient knowledge of and interest in private
human rights declarations and in attempts to provide still better and more complete and
consistent ones. Why? Because even among them the opponents to the rights concepts
and declarations are all too numerous? But then what about the rest? Why are they,
mostly, content to advocate only one or the other of the governmental human rights
declarations? Why do they write so much about human rights – without attempting to
provide better human rights declarations? This is still a riddle to me. – Compare my
digitized collection of private drafts of this kind in the enlarged PEACE PLANS 589/590.
NATURAL RIGHTS: In forming the body politic men do not renounce any of their
natural rights. On the contrary, they whole end of association is to extend the enjoyment
of these rights. – View ascribed to Dr. Quesnay, 1765 & Mercier de la Reviere, 1767. -
NATURAL RIGHTS: Look up and reach up for all your rights and liberties. Make sure
they are all clearly included in a complete bill of rights declaration. Use all your
reasoning powers to become fully aware of all of them and their potential uses. And then
use them as well as you can, in your own interests. – J.Z., 13.2.07, 25.10.07. - HUMAN
NATURAL SELECTION: Mutation is random; natural selection is the very opposite of
random.” - Richard Dawkins - & MUTATIONS
NATURAL SOCIETY: I now plead for natural society against politicians and for
natural reason.” – Edmund Burke, A Vindication of Natural Society, p.52.
NATURAL SOCIETY: It is a misfortune, that in no part of the globe natural liberty and
natural religion are to be found pure, and free from the mixture of political adulterations.
Yet we have implanted in us by Providence ideas, axioms, rules of what is pious, just,
fair, honest, which no political craft, no learned sophistry, can entirely expel from our
breasts. By these we judge, and we cannot otherwise judge of the several artificial modes
of religion and society, and determine of them as they approach to, or recede from this
standard.” – Edmund Burke, A Vindication of Natural Society, 35.
NATURAL STATE: The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges
every one.” – John Locke, Two Treatise of Government. - NATURAL LAW
NATURAL VS. ARTIFICIAL? There are many natural things that should be stamped
on, hard – and much that is artificial that should be given the utmost encouragement.” –
Arthur C. Clarke, Profiles of the Future, Book Club Associates, London, 1983, P.13. –
NATURAL: … very little is “natural” to man, and that sometimes what is natural –
murderous rage, for example – is not what is best.” – Walter Block, Defending the
Undefendable, p.209. (204?) & RAGE, ANGER, TEMPER, LACK OF SELF-
NATURAL: Anything which exists is natural – I don‟t really believe that there is any
distinction between nature and the artificial. (*) Not all things which are natural are
good: typhoid is also a natural thing, so are mosquitoes. I don‟t go in for nature worship,
which regards the great benevolent Mother Nature as being mucked up by man. The
automobile is a species just like the horse only it has a more complicated sex life. (**) –
Kenneth Boulding, 1982 interview by SOCIAL ALTERNATIVES, Oct. 82. - - (*) No
difference at all between natural laws, individual human rights and liberties and man-
made laws that offend against them? – Monopolies, that some people get legalized,
should be considered to be also natural ones, as natural products of these men? - - (**)
Sex life or origin and multiplication process? – Would he also speak of the sex life of
houses, while at most the sex drives of their owners and tenants are involved? - J.Z.,
26.1.08. – DIS.
NATURAL: Let nothing be called natural / In an age of bloody confusion / Ordered
disorder, planned caprice. / And dehumanized humanity, lest all things / Be held
unalterable!” – Berthold Brecht, prologue, The Exception and the Rule, 1937, tr. Eric
Bentley. DIS.
NATURAL: Natural Law or The Science of Justice: A Treatise on Natural Law, Natural
Justice, Natural Rights, Natural Liberty, and Natural Society; Showing That All
Legislation Whatsoever Is An Absurdity, A Usurpation, And A Crime.” – Lysander
Spooner. – Title of one of his best essays. J.Z. - LAW VS. LEGISLATION, NATURAL
NATURALIZATION: Australian territorial totalitarianism is expressed e.g. in the
attempt to Australianize all immigrants – at least from the 2nd generation. – J.Z., 5.6.77. –
Morally the attempt is not any better than would be that of Australian Aborigines trying
to turn all later comers as closely as possible into Australian Aborigines. – To all
immigrants their own institutions and laws for themselves, as long as they do prefer them.
- J.Z., 5.6.77, 28.1.08. - PANARCHISM
NATURALIZATION: Only those who will be loyal to our institutions, who are here in
conformity with our laws, and who are in sympathy with our national traditions, ideals,
and principles should be naturalized.” – Republican National Platform, 1928. –– The
others should be free to have their own exterritorially autonomous associations and
personal laws, possibly cosmopolitan ones, their own ideals and principles, customs and
traditions and should be free to practise them except on the properties of others. In the
latter case they are bound by the restrictions inherent on polite guests and the laws of
hospitality. – E.g. a protestant or sectarian cannot freely start to preach in a Roman
Catholic church, unless he is invited to do so. The white etc. immigrant to North America
did not adopt the traditions, laws, institutions and principles of the Red Indian natives,
either but, instead, realized their own. – J.Z., 3.11.85, 10.7.86, 25.1.08. - - As if their
ideals would have to be those of all the citizens in a country. Do the Republicans even
fully agree among themselves? Do the members of any party? They have their factions,
too, at least a right wing, a left wing and a center. – According to this those not
naturalized would have to pay the same kind of taxes but without even a right to vote
contrary to the principle of the “Founding Fathers”: No taxation without representation! -
NATURE & FREEDOM: Against nature and within nature there is no freedom.” -
Ludwig von Mises
NATURE LOVERS: Some love nature to the exclusion of man, but he is one of God‟s
creatures, too.” – Dagobert D. Runes, A Book of Contemplation, p.86. – Nature‟s
creature! – J.Z. - - Let us prevent further wars and despotisms first. Then we can much
more efficiently and rapidly tackle the remaining problems that man has made for himself
and nature still makes for him. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - CONSERVATIONISTS, ECOLOGISTS,
NATURE: Chase nature away, and it returns at a gallop.” – P. N. Destouches: Le
glorieux, IV, 1732. - NATURAL LAW, & NATURAL LAWS
NATURE: Drive out nature with a whip and she will return nevertheless.” – Horaz,
Episteln, I. 10, 24. ( „Naturam expellas furca, tamen usque recurret.“ – „Verjage die
Natur mit der Peitsche, sie kehrt doch zurueck.“ )
NATURE: Give nature a chance, with regard to human rights and liberties as well. – J.Z.,
13.2.07. – Respect e.g. individual sovereignty and individual secessionism as well as
voluntary associationism under personal laws. – J.Z., 25.10.07. - & HUMAN RIGHTS,
NATURE: Let us permit nature to have her way; she understands her business better
than we do.” - Michel de Montaigne. - NATURAL LAW, NATURAL RIGHTS,
NATURE: Man, being the servant and interpreter of nature, can do and understand so
much and so much only as he has observed in fact or in thought of the course of nature:
beyond this he neither knows anything nor can do anything.” - Francis Bacon, Novum
Organum, Aphorism i. - & MAN
NATURE: Man, singular, is Creation‟s (*) finest image. His destiny is the improvement,
now and forever, of this image in order that he may increasingly share in Creation.
Man‟s purpose is a realization of his unique, creative potentialities. Man requires, above
all else, not to be smothered – that is, he requires an absence of restraints against
creative release. He needs „room to breathe‟, as we say.” – Leonard E. Read, Let
Freedom Reign, p.118. – (*) Nature‟s! – J.Z. - MAN, HUMAN NATURE, HUMAN
NATURE: Nature acts without masters.” – Hippocrates – But it has its “masters” in its
genetic blueprints. – J.Z., 23.1.08. – It also has its leading bulls and pecking orders. – But
its followers are usually volunteers. They do not make exclusive territorial claims. - J.Z.,
NATURE: Nature does not jump.” ( Natura non facit saltus. - Die Nature macht keine
Spruenge. ) – Linué, Philosophica Botanica.
NATURE: Nature has neither kernel nor shell; she is everything at once.” - Johann
Wolfgang von Goethe. - – Panarchism copies that
characteristics of nature, just like the free production and free exchange of consumer
goods and services does. To each the government or non-governmental society of his
dreams or choice. – J.Z., 12.1.08. - PANARCHISM
NATURE: Nature is commanded by obeying her.” – Source? – Another version: “Nature
to be commanded, must be obeyed.” This version is ascribed to Francis Bacon.
NATURE: Nature is often hidden; sometimes overcome; seldom extinguished.” - Francis
Bacon, Essays, Of Nature in Men. – But our territorial governments are still trying – with
mass murder devices, which they call “defensive weapons”. – J.Z., 26.2.09. – NUCLEAR
NATURE: Never does nature say one thing and wisdom another.” - Juvenal. - &
NATURE: officials in the Soviet-Union are now convinced that games against nature
have a higher payoff than conquest.” – Jerry Pournelle, A Step Farther Out, II, p.198. -
NATURE: the wonders of Nature – of a Nature that “never went to college‟, as Kettering
observed.” – Leonard E. Read, NOTES FROM FEE, 1/77, on C. F. Kettering. – ORDER,
NATURE: Where man is not, Nature is barren.” – William Blake. – At least from the
human point of view. – J.Z., 28.1.08. – MAN AS ULTIMATE VALUE FOR MAN.
NATURE: You may drive out Nature with a pitchfork, yet she still will hurry back.” -
Horace [Quintas Horatius Flaccus], Epistles, I, x, p.24.
NAVY: John Kenneth Galbraith could joke that a meeting of free enterprisers held in
Switzerland after World War II broke up in disagreement over the question of whether
the British Navy should own or lease its battleships.” – PLAYBOY 11/73. – But
seriously, now: Why should there be a British Navy at all, now? Against whom? It is
certainly not needed to fight any pirates or to resist peaceful immigration - which the
government does not want, because it cannot solve the unemployment and the housing
problem, problems which it has caused in the first place. – Which foreign navies threaten
England now?” - J.Z., 29.1.08. – QUESTIONS
NAZI PLATFORM: We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of
providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living. The
activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the
community, but must take place within its confines and be for the good of all. Therefore,
we demand: … an end to the power of the financial interests. We demand profit sharing
in big business. We demand a broad extension of care for the aged. We demand … the
greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchases of national, state, and
municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and industrious
[citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of
leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our entire system
of public education … We demand the education at government expense of gifted
children of poor parents … The government must undertake the improvement of public
health – by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor … by the greatest
possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of youth. We combat
the … materialistic spirit within and without us, and are convinced that a permanent
recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of the common
good before the individual good.” – From the political program of the Nazi Party,
adopted in Munich, February 24, 1920 – NAZI PLATFORM POINTS NOW
NAZIS: All military type firearms are to be handed in immediately ... The SS, SA and
Stahlhelm give every respectable German man the opportunity of campaigning with them.
Therefore anyone who does not belong to one of the above named organizations and who
unjustifiably nevertheless keeps his weapon ... must be regarded as an enemy of the
national government." - SA Oberfuehrer of Bad Tolz, March, 1933. - TOTALITARIAN
NAZIS: As rightist, nationalistic socialists the Nazis attacked what they perceived to be
"plutocracy" and interest-slavery as much as the leftist state socialists and nationalists
attacked "capitalism", "corporations", "profit", "dividends", "unearned income" and
international corporations and, nowadays, "globalization". Both, Nazis and Leftists were
opponents to free trade and free migration, internally and externally. Both favored and
abused monetary despotism and were enemies of a laissez faire economy and laissez faire
politics (panarchism). Both were territorialists and suppressed individual secessionism
and exterritorial autonomy within their territories. - J.Z., 23.9.01, 1.2.02. - AS A
NAZIS: Fascism is an attempt to fight communism with its own weapons." – Antony
Fisher, The Case for Freedom, p.59. – The “weapons” or, rather, methods involved are
those of totalitarian and territorial statism, very much alike among such competitors for
territorial power. – J.Z., 29.1.08. - DIS. - FASCISM, COMMUNISM, STATE
NAZIS: In Germany, for example, a minority of the voters favored Hitler when the
president of the Weimar Republic called on him to form a cabinet, and he had to form a
coalition government. His was the largest single party, but there were many parties; and
most of those who did vote for Hitler had no conception of the loss of freedom that
awaited them. They were far from fastidious about the liberties of others, but they did not
crave liberation from their own freedom. Their motives included resentment of the Treaty
of Versailles and of the inability of democratic statesmen to get it altered; fear of
Communism; dreams of national glory; and hatred of Jews. But no combination of these
motives would have brought Hitler close to power if the republic had not been
undermined by economic disaster.” – Walter Kaufmann: Without Guilt & Justice, p.6. – -
Each of its great economic crises, its Great Inflation, 1914-1923 and its Great Depression
in the thirties, cost Germany economically as much as did World War I. And both crises
had been made possible for Germany through governmental interventionism, especially
in the monetary sphere. For 100 years, under various princes and kings and the emperor,
Germany had not known such severe crises. Thus the Weimar Republic was blamed for
them ( in a sense it was rightly blamed, for it was all too state-socialistic and
interventionist in its “economics” ) and a new and strong leader was widely desired,
equivalent to the former monarchs, under the false assumption that their strengths could
cope with economic crises. The mentality of the German population on economic
problems was not all that different from that of the Parisians, during the French
Revolution, who captured the King in Versailles and triumphantly led him back to Paris,
shouting the slogan: “Now that we have the King, we will no longer be short of bread!”
Hitler appealed successfully to these masses of unemployed and their dependents, with
remarks similar to some F. D. Roosevelt made: The machines and factories, the raw
materials, the food and clothing as well as the people willing to work are there. Somehow
it must be possible to bring them together. We do not know how but we will experiment
& will learn from our experiments until it is done. – That seemed plausible, and
attractive, in the USA as well as in Germany. But the former statist interventionism,
mainly the monetary despotism of central note-issuing banks, which had made inflation,
deflation and mass unemployment possible and likely in the first place, was not
discontinued. ( And this in spite of the fact that in Germany it was introduced, from
Banking Commission of 1908 onwards, with the declared intention to help finance a
future war. ) Only further statist measures were tried by the Nazis, public works, forced
labor, conscription and an armament build up ( financed with old age social insurance
funds ) and political opponents and other scapegoats of the Nazis were imprisoned or
otherwise persecuted, while the remaining few economic and general liberties of the
Weimar Republic were rapidly abolished. According to researches by Prof. Heinrich
Rittershausen, other European countries recovered from the Great Depression faster than
Germany did under the Hitler Regime. – The same kind of ignorance on the main causes
of mass unemployment persists today in most heads. – In Australia it has led to
concentration camps for illegal immigrants. – Through ABC mass murder devices or
anti-people “weapons” Nazi ideas are still dominant in the heads of democratic and other
nuclear powers, and their supporters. - J.Z., 29.1.08.
NAZIS: Nazis are not rational beings. They do thus not have the natural rights of rational
beings. – J.Z., 8.3.87. – The same applies to any other totalitarians. – J. Z., 25. 1. 08.
NAZIS: The communists and the Nazis are merely two variants of the same evil notion:
collectivism. But both should be free to speak – evil ideas are dangerous only by default
of men advocating better ideas.” - Ayn Rand, The First Amendment and “Symbolic
Speech”, in: “The Ayn Rand Column”, revised edition, 1998, p 118, Second Renaissance
Books, New Milford, Connecticut, - - That is correct but does not
go far enough: Their freedom of action is also harmless – once it is confined to their own
voluntary victims. If, under that freedom of action, they would largely wipe themselves
out, I would not weep over them. Those among them able to learn from their own
experience and the experiences of other communities will sooner or later adopt the better
systems for themselves as well. No one should be obliged to stick with flawed ideas and
actions. They, too, would have the right to secede from their totalitarian communities. –
NAZIS: The idea is: To achieve human felicity by concerting all efforts towards its
realization, to root out and destroy the cultural supports of individualism and the pursuit
of self-interest, and to use government to concert all efforts on behalf of a general felicity
…” - Clarence B. Carson, Germany: Ideology Contends for Power, 1918-1930, THE
NAZIS: The Nazi‟s “blood and soil” notions were just exaggerated notions of all too
popular nationalistic and even chauvinistic ideas. – J.Z., 16.2.82, 29.1.08. -
NAZIS: The Nazis always had been pretty funny – fat Hermann pretending he was a
young Siegfried. As blond as Hitler, as slim as Goering, and as tall as Goebbels. …” - C.
M. Kornbluth: Two Dooms, p.307. – But their methods of gaining and retaining power
and organizing and financing aggression, exploitation and mass murder were not funny.
Territorial powers and their actions rarely are. – J.Z., 29.1.08.
NAZIS: There is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates from it.” – Hitler, in
Hitler Speaks, p.134. – Both were totalitarian and territorial regimes, operating on the
leadership principle and the suppression of individual rights and liberties. Both were
strongly interventionist in economics. Both had central banks and “managed” foreign
trade. Both had many concentration camps. Both had conscription. Both had a powerful
secret police. Both had censorship. – A complete list might be interesting. – J.Z., 24.1.08.
NAZIS: They were and are all merely consistent territorial statists, consistent in their
advocacy and practice of totalitarian territorial power in the hands of the State. – J.Z.,
NAZIS: To the Christian doctrine of infinite significance of the individual human soul, I
oppose with icy clarity the saving doctrine of the nothingness and insignificance of the
human being.” – Hitler, quoted in Clarence Manion, The Key to Peace, p.37. – Hitler
stressed, though, the importance of one individual, one only, namely the leader, himself,
in the “leadership principle”, which is still all too popular in democratic States. It was
radically expressed in their slogan: “One people, one empire, one leader!”. ( „Ein Volk,
ein Reich, ein Fuehrer!“ ) He had potential other political leaders assassinated and made
public criticism of himself & his movement extremely dangerous in Germany, which
indicated that he was well aware that not all Germans stood unified behind him. He used
terror to give the false impression of national unity. He did not rely on volunteers but on
conscription. – J.Z., 29.1.08. - NATIONAL SOCIALISM, DIS.
NAZIS: Whatever our own sins, Fascism was a gigantic going-backwards. It was against
every instinct that ever prompted any good act of mine. Whatever the betrayals
subsequent to victory, they would be preferable to the Fascist alternative.” - Eric
Lambert, Glory Thrown In, 93. - & FASCISM
NAZIS: World War II was the clash of socialist titans. It was ignited by revolutionary
socialism ...” – Clarence B. Carson, THE FREEMAN, 1/78. – It was, rather, another
clash about conflicting exclusive territorial claims. How many volunteers would these
movements had got and how many would they have retained after a while, if they had all
depended upon voluntary support only and would have had to compete, exterritorially,
with all kinds of other communities of volunteers, some of them quite free ones and thus
having really worthwhile reforms to offer to their members? – J.Z., 29.1.08. – Q.,
NAZISM: The rise of Fascism and Nazism was not a reaction against the socialist trends
of the preceding period, but a necessary outcome of those tendencies." - F. A. Hayek, The
Road to Serfdom. - When people know only of and attack only "state socialism" then they
should say so. Common features of all three are territorialism, i.e. suppression of
individual secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteers, compulsory taxation,
monopolized and centralized decision-making on war and peace, unjust war and peace
aims, non-recognition of most individual rights, monetary despotism. Fascists and Nazis
as well as the totalitarian communists simply went further in the direction of despotism.
All democracies with such totalitarian traits are already to that extent totalitarian States,
even while they class themselves as anti-fascist, anti-nazi, anti-socialist or anti-
communist. - J.Z., 5.4.89, 8.4.89. - FASCISM, STALINISM & TERRITORIALISM,
NECESSARY EVIL: As soon as we do evil, the evil appears as a sort of duty.” – Simone
Weil, 1909-1943. – A. Andrews Quotations, p.314. – DUTY
NECESSARY EVIL: But, it may be objected, taxation is necessary. How can something
which is necessary be evil?” – “It can‟t. And therefore, since taxation is evil, it cannot be
necessary. – The necessity of taxation is an illusion, like its inevitability. There is not
such thing as a necessary evil. - - The very phrase is a contradiction in terms. No evil can
ever be necessary, and no necessity can ever be evil. It is essential to grasp this point.
Once a thing is found to be evil, it must be repudiated. It cannot be clung to as a
necessary evil. Moral law is not something you can cheap.” – Paul Lepanto, Return to
NECESSARY EVIL: Government at its best is a necessary evil, and at its worst, an
intolerant one.” – Thomas Paine. The concept of "necessary evil" is much abused in
order to cover many quite unnecessary evils, e.g. territorial rule. - J.Z., 22. 11. 06. -
NECESSARY EVIL: Once we assuage our conscience by calling something a
“necessary evil”, it begins to look more and more necessary and less and less evil.” –
Sydney J. Harris, READER‟S DIGEST, 11/63. - - “There is no such thing as a necessary
evil.” – Tannehill. - - A necessary evil is necessarily evil. – J.Z., 9/72. – DIS., MORAL
NECESSARY EVIL? Nuclear mass murder devices are not necessary evils, either; they
are absolutely evils. There is no such thing as a necessary evil. - DEFENCE, EVIL,
STRENGTH, WEAPONS. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War. -
NECESSITIES: Food, clothing, heating, rent, taxes, decency and children. Nothing else
can remove these millstones from the neck of a man than money. And the mind cannot
rise before these millstones are removed.” – George Bernard Shaw, only in my
retranslation from the German version. – J.Z. – Is “decency” really a millstone in that
position? – Only a shortage of food or an excess food consumption can be. - J.Z., 26.2.09.
– Shaw in his very long life, never discovered that full economic freedom is most helpful
in making these costs of living affordable. – J.Z., 26.2.09. - NEEDS, PRIORITIES,
NECESSITY OF: Freedom is not a luxury for a few wealthy nations; as many of our
liberal pundits try to tell us, but a necessity for the poor and hungry.” – Edward P.
NECESSITY: Any excuse will serve a tyrant.” - Aesop. - NEED, EMERGENCY
NECESSITY: Inevitability is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” – J. Neil Schulman, The
Rainbow Cadenza, p.178. – The pretence of necessity or fate or inevitability or
impossibility of anything else might be the first not the last refuge of a scoundrel. Only
fools would quietly accept such assertions. – J.Z., 26.1.08. - FATE, HISTORY,
NECESSITY: Necessity is an evil, but there is no necessity for continuing to live subject
to necessity.” – Epicurus, Vatican Sayings, 3rd. c. B.C., g, in Letters, Principal Doctrines
and Vatican Sayings, R. Russel M. Geer. – That can be interpreted as an advice to
commit suicide or as one to become more productive. Necessities cannot be abolished but
they can be relatively easily satisfied by very productive people. According to some
reports already in the Middle Ages one productive person could support up to 15 people,
not very well, admittedly, but according to the standards of the time. – J.Z., 25.1.08.
NECESSITY: Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the
argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt, the Younger, 1759-1806,
Speech in the House of Commons, 18 Nov. 1783. – Quoted in SOUTHERN
NECESSITY: Necessity never made a good bargain.” – Benjamin Franklin, Poor
Richard‟s Almanack. – It all depends upon the quantity of the supply. We need to breathe
and drink, at least water and they can be abundant and cheap. Bread can be abundant and
cheap, too, under freedom. – J.Z., 25.1.07. - DIS.
NECESSITY: Necessity, as the proverb says, is the ”mother of invention” – if, and only
if, men with ideas and vision are free to follow through.” – Bettina Bien Greaves, THE
FREEMAN, 9/78.
NECESSITY: No government could ever justify the suspension of law, even in times of
national emergencies. “There can never be any Necessity For Injustice”, wrote Sharp.
“No necessity, therefore, whatever, can justify the adoption of an unrighteous or unjust
measure, by any legislature upon earth.” - THE DANDELION, Fall 1979, p.23, quoting
Granville Sharp, Address 46.
NECESSITY: The excuse for the destruction of liberty is always the plea of necessity –
that there is no alternative. If indeed, the economy were in a state of crisis, of a life-and-
death emergency, and if controls promised a sure way out, all their evil social and moral
effects might be a price that would have to be paid for survival. But not even the
gloomiest observe or the economic scene would describe it in any such terms. Prices
rising at 4 per cent a year, unemployment at a level of 6 per cent – these are higher than
we would like to have or than we need to have (*), but they are very far indeed from
crisis levels. On the contrary, they are rather moderate by historical standards. And there
is far from uniform agreement that wage and price controls will improve matters. I
happen to believe that they will make matters worse after an initial deceptive period of
apparent success. Others disagree. But even their warmest defenders recognized that
they impose costs, produce distortions in the use of resources, and may fail to reduce
inflation. Under such circumstances, the moral case surely deserves at least some
attention.” – Milton Friedman, An Economist Protests, p.34. - There or also in his essay
“Morality and Controls.” - (*) ??? An unwarranted assumption of Keynesians. – J.Z.,
NECESSITY: The web of this world is woven of Necessity and Chance. Woe to him who
has accustomed himself from his youth up to find something necessary in what is
capricious, and who would ascribe something like reason to Chance and make a religion
of surrendering to it.” - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe - –
There is also creativity and innovation, not always subject to necessity and chance only.
Territorial States restrict them most. – J.Z., 12.1.08. - & CHANCE, LUCK,
NECESSITY: With necessity, the tyrant‟s plea, excused his devilish deeds.” – John
Milton, Paradise Lost, IV, 1667. – An older version: “So spake the Fiend, and with
neccessitie, // The Tyrants plea, excus‟d his devilish deeds.”
NECK: Behold the turtle: he makes progress only when he sticks his neck out.” – James
NEED & CENTRAL BANKING: Primarily it considers its own needs, powers and
advantages, then the needs of its supporters and its favorites. All others it preys upon
parasitically, under the pretence of serving them. It does not cater to the needs of those it
drives into bankruptcy and poverty, into unemployment or underemployment, into
crimes, terrorism, civil war, revolutions and national wars. Totalitarians like Karl Marx
advocated it as a means to gain power for themselves and their despotic system. This,
their "need", led to the murder of dozens of millions, whose needs, rights and liberties
were ignored under the pretence of providing them with the greatest possible economic
opportunities. Lenin knew he needed the power of the central bank. It was one of his first
revolutionary acts to occupy the central bank in Petersburg. From then on he was the only
one always able to pay, even if only with legal tender and soon inflated paper money. His
opponents never questioned this power base of his, never aimed at a monetary liberation
and revolution. As Ulrich von Beckerath put it: Even if they wanted to pay their
secretaries they had to come to him for wage payment means. During the East German
uprising of 17 June 1953, the East German central bank refused all bank credits in
insurrectionist areas, i.e., wages and salaries could not be paid. That was probably a more
effective way to suppress those who were unaware of their monetary freedom options
than the use of Soviet tanks was. Under central banking a government has the whole
economic life and almost every individual on its leash, only barter exchanges and black
market transactions somewhat excepted. But even the latter still depend, in most cases,
upon the government's legal tender. Monetary despotism greatly increases the number of
the needy; its needy and exploited and oppressed victims, and the ones who need it to
survive in power and position, the politicians and bureaucrats. - J. Z., 11.5.97. -
NEED: … the mere existence of a need for a service or good does not imply a right to it.”
– Garvan F. Kuskey, THE FREEMAN, 11/73. - RIGHTS, DUTIES
NEED: A distribution according to needs – to the extent that it not altogether impossible
– has as a precondition an organization of rule that in all essentials agrees with the
statist one and is, therefore, anti-anarchistic. A distribution really according to the needs
is impossible because these are always greater than that what exists for distribution,
especially since needs increase and are supplemented by news ones. … Since in this
distribution not everybody can serve himself in accordance with his actually felt or only
asserted needs, others have to decide upon the distribution in an authoritarian allocation
system. These others cannot really judge what is a real or only asserted need. That leads
in the best cases to an irrational compulsory equalization but as a rule to the kind of
waste, corruption and other defects that we know from “centrally planned and directed”
economies. If you consider this to be an ideal constitution, you should not be hindered to
realize it for yourself and all your followers, as long as you are pleased by it. But this
pleasure is likely to disappear soon.” – LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, No. 5, p.13. – Needs
often increase the more they are satisfied. – J.Z., n.d., & 29.1.08.
NEED: a distribution based solely on need is certainly going to be an unequal
distribution, since there is a great deal of variation in even our most basic needs from
individual to individual; and what is necessary to meet them.” - Prof. Lauchlan Chipman,
To Each His Own, CIS Conference, 1977, p.35. To each his own government or society
as well! Full consumer sovereignty in this sphere is rightful and is needed to avoid many
wrongs and other problems. – J.Z., 26.2.09. - INEQUALITY, DISTRIBUTION,
NEED: A man said to the universe: Sir, I exist!” – “However”, replied the universe,
“The fact had not created in me a sense of obligation.” – Stephen Crane, War IS Kind,
part IV. – To me this titles is absurd. – J.Z., 29.1.08.
NEED: A morality that holds NEED as a claim, holds emptiness – non-existence – as a
standard of value; it rewards an ABSENCE, a defect: weakness, inability, incompetence,
suffering, disease, disaster, the lack, the fault, the flaw – the ZERO.” – George Hardy,
The Doom of the Welfare Society. – Should one hold that idea against insurance and
credit contracts or mutual aid societies? – J.Z., 30.1.08.
NEED: A: “After all, monseigneur, I must live!” B.: “I don‟t see the necessity for it.” –
The protest was made by a priest accused of publishing libels; the answer was by the
Count d‟Argenson (1696-1764), one of the ministers of Louis XV. - - It is certainly not
necessary to make a living through libel. – But the attitude of rulers towards the right to
life of their subjects is also clearly expressed by this anecdote. – Are Rulers necessary?
Are territorial States necessary? Do we have to monopolize war and peace decisions? - I
would place this kind of monopoly with an ideal militia of volunteers for the protection
of individual rights and liberties. Alas, it does not exist as yet. Nor does an ideal
declaration of all these rights & liberties. Moreover, there seems to be no rush to provide
either. ) - J.Z., 24.1.08, 26.2.09. - & NECESSITY, RULERS & SUBJECTS, IDEAL
NEED: an emphasis upon needs, as opposed to wants, gives purchase to those who see
themselves as experts, qualified both to determine what the needs of others are, and to
prescribe and enforce the means appropriate to the satisfaction of those needs.” –
Anthony Flew, The Politics of Procrustes, p.120.
NEED: And so a society develops that has boundless needs and no one (*) to pay for
them. … - - Since nature doesn‟t provide medical care, it must come from other human
beings. So one person‟s right to medical care is nothing more than a claim upon some
other person‟s time, energy, money, or knowledge. - - The man on whom this claim will
be made is B, the forgotten man. The politician offers free medical care, but he never
says, “You will have free medical care because we are going to force B to pay for it.” –
Harry Browne, New Profits from the Monetary Crisis, p.33. - - (*) Able and willing to
pay for them, except within the limits of private insurance, credit and mutual aid
contracts. – J.Z., 29.1.08. )
NEED: Another point should be made clear. Even if our government is the richest in the
world, it does not have an endless supply of resources. ( I‟m sorry, Jerry Rubin,
everything can‟t be free yet. ) What does this mean? Simply that the programs you think
Congress should adopt will take governmental dollars away from someone else‟s project.
The guy telling you we can‟t do without better, safer highways is merely trying to get
more tax dollars for this cause taken out of the total pie. The Senator rapping about
necessary school construction is also fighting for a part of that pie. When any body tells
you we absolutely need something, watch out. He‟s merely using a hard-sell argument to
copy a bigger piece of the tax revenue.” – Angus Black, A New Radical‟s Guide to
NEED: As social animals, we need freedom.” - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, IX.
- Once this is achieved we can, usually, satisfy our most urgent needs, as determined by
ourselves, through free production and free exchange. – J.Z., 29.1.08.
NEED: But as we know from our experience with balancing the family budget, it is
simply not possible to have everything one wants – without working harder to earn more
income to pay for the limitless increasing new „needs‟.” - George Hardy, The Doom of
the Welfare Society, p.4. – BUDGETS
NEED: But people have to eat, someone says, so the government must help the farmers.
Manufacturers have to have steel, so the government must help steel makers. Kids have to
be educated, so the government must help out schools. Children have to get vitamins, to
the government must provide free milk. - - If you ask enough people what we need and
who the government should help, you will soon end up with a list covering every industry
and occupation and person that exists in this country. Since the number of tax dollars in
any one year is not only limited but is coming out of our pockets, you know that our
government cannot subsidize everything.” - Angus Black, A New Radical‟s Guide to
Economic Reality, 108/109. - TAXATION, SUBSIDIES, WELFARE STATE
NEED: Do not cry that you need us. We do not consider need a claim.” – Ayn Rand,
Atlas Shrugged, P.937. – It is a claim, but not a rightful one, not one that it is your duty to
NEED: Do they justify the rapist and the robber? – Hitler, Stalin and Mao had great
needs to be leaders. So have our politicians and they need our earnings and liberties and
via taxes and laws they do take them. Are they justified by their needs, to satisfy them at
the expense of our rights, our liberties, our own and self-determined needs? - J.Z., 5.4.85,
NEED: Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you
nothing. It was here first.” - Mark Twain. , WANTS, CLAIMS, RIGHTS TO AS
NEED: Freedom doesn‟t need you or me any more than wisdom needs us. It‟s the other
way around! The need for freedom, no less than wisdom, is mine; and this goes for you,
too, whoever you are.” - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.116. – “But there‟s
more to it than just my need; we need freedom! And it is important that there should be a
reasonably wide recognition of our need for freedom; I believe this plural need has a
deep social significance.” - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, 144. – Is there a better
way to publicize this need than to finally draft and publish a complete and clear
declaration of all individual rights and liberties? Who has so far clearly recognized this
need and is willing to help bring such a declaration about? I made my kind of start
towards it by an anthology or over 130 private human rights declarations, in PEACE
PLANS 589/590, so far only available from me as an email attachment, upon request,
until it appears online or on a disk. If freedom lovers are not sufficiently interested in
such declarations, and still better one, what hope is there for us? – J.Z., 29.1.08.
NEED: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”, says Fran,
“is not a decision I care to leave to politicians.” – Justin Raimondo on Fran Lebowitz‟s
Metropolitan Life, in LIBERTARIAN REVIEW, 9, 78. – Must we class the politicians
and the bureaucrats among the able or among the needy? Obviously, they are not self-
supporting. – Thus their advocacy of the “needy” is rather self-serving, economically, not
only with regard to their addiction to power. - J.Z., 29.1.08. - POLITICIANS, ABILITY,
NEED: From the able to the needy!” means all too often: from the productive to the
wastrels. – How many of those supported by the public give up e.g. smoking, drinking,
betting? – J.Z., 30.1.08.
NEED: He offers the following criticism of those who think the way I do. He says we are
depriving people of their 'needs'. It's just not true. Denying government benefits does not
deprive anyone of any particular good or service available in a free market. It only
denies them the means to acquire that good or service through coercion.” - Llewellyn H.
Rockwell, Jr., 03, 02, 01. - COERCION, WELFARE STATE VS. MARKET
NEED: Human consciousness is such that only the individual concerned is aware of his
needs and wants and what priorities they have. Life on this earth is of a character that
requires that in many instances he must look after himself. He must look before he
crosses the street lest he be run over. He must take care what he puts in his mouth lest he
ingests some harmful substance. Even roses have thorns, and he who would pick them
must be careful that he not be stuck with them.” – Clarence B. Carson, THE FREEMAN,
NEED: human freedom is a higher moral objective than the arbitrary fulfillment of
certain people‟s needs and desires. – – Fortunately, however, the history of America is
replete with hard evidence that the freer and more prosperous the society, the greater
people‟s desire to give. And, although the creation and possession of great wealth does
not need to be defended on the basis of the charitable acts of the wealthy (*), the fact is
that it is the wealthiest families who have given the most to the “poor” and disabled.
There are some 12.000 private foundations in existence that donate hundreds of millions
of dollars yearly to causes they deem worthy. Among some of the more prominent ones
are the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Corp. of New York, and the
Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. – Andrew Carnegie alone contributed some 350 million to
various philanthropic causes, including more than 2800 libraries in the U.S. and
Canada. John D. Rockefeller, founder of the family fortune, gave away more than $ 530
million. His projects included the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, the General
Education Board ( which helped to establish schools for Negro teachers and children ),
and the Rockefeller Foundation ( “to promote the well-being of mankind throughout the
world” ).” - Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p.168/69. - - (*) By increasing free
production and exchanges they did and do much more good! – J.Z., 29.1.08. – DESIRES,
NEED: If it were more generally believed that the way out of poverty is not “from each
according to ability, to each according to “need”, but, rather, to each according to
production, the feathering of the nests of some at the expense of others would be at an
end.” – Leonard E. Read, Having My Way, p.91.
NEED: If the globe is not to burst asunder, every man must be given what he needs for a
really human life.” – Martin Buber, The National Home and Our Policy in Palestine. –
1.) There is no such thing as a national home, unless one goes very far back and considers
Africa as the home of all human beings. – 2.) A welfare State rather impoverishes people,
than enriches them. What every man and woman needs is rather the rights and liberties
required to take care themselves of their own needs, rather than becoming altogether
dependent upon the remaining productivity of others. Every human being, apart from
babies and infants and those very severely handicapped or ill or old, is, potentially, a very
productive human being, able to support himself and, later, several others. There are
insurance options for the exceptions. Let us free all people of every restriction upon their
productivity and allow others to provide stable value and high interest-bearing credits to
provide these “biological productive machines” also with enough mechanical helpers to
make them even more productive. – Handouts are not the solution but merely create
masses of dissatisfied parasites and trouble makers. A real human life for adults must, as
a rule, be based upon the own efforts. – 3.) Moreover, Earth will not burst apart if man is
foolish enough to extinguish or impoverish and starve himself by irrational and unnatural
restrictions and powers. – I had expected better thoughts from Martin Buber. – J.Z.,
NEED: If you want something, work for it.” - Peter F. Hamilton, Judas Unchained, SF,
2005, McMillan, p.274. – And if work is not available or not very rewarding, find out
about all the legal restrictions which bring this condition about and then do something
about them. Ignore them, revolt or secede and do your own things, together with like-
minded people. At least potentially human beings are the most productive machines. It
takes much government interventionism to make many of them poor. – J.Z., 25.3.09. -
NEED: If you want something, work for it.” - Peter F. Hamilton, Judas Unchained, SF,
2005, McMillan, p.274. – And if work is not available or not very rewarding, find out
about all the legal restrictions which bring this condition about and then do something
about them. Ignore them, revolt or secede and do your own things, together with like-
minded people. At least potentially human beings are the most productive machines. It
takes much government interventionism to make many of them poor. – J.Z., 25.3.09. -
NEED: In the current political vocabulary, “need” means wanting to get someone else‟s
money. “Greed”, which used to mean what “need” now means, has come to mean:
wanting to keep your own. “Compassion” means the politician‟s willingness to arrange
the transfer.” - Joseph Sobran, Back to First Principles, in: Llewellyn H. Rockwell, ed.,
The Economics of Liberty, Mises Institute, 1990, p. 169. - & GREED, LANGUAGE USE
NEED: It is impossible to satisfy limitless needs with limited resources.” – George Hardy,
The Doom of the Welfare Society, p.22. – However, the actual needs of human beings are
limited, while the resources, intelligently used, are almost unlimited. For instance: We
can eat only so much. Eating more does do us harm. – Food producers, at least in modern
times and almost anywhere always complain about their lack of customers. - J.Z.,
NEED: It seems to me that Harry Brown is saying that the free market is not only the best
suited for the economic needs of man‟s existence, but that the free market is best suited
for all of man‟s needs.” – Jerry P. Starzinski, reason, 9/74. – Yes, if it is understood to
include voluntary communities that are only exterritorially autonomous: Panarchies or
Polyarchies. – J.Z., 30. 1. 08.
NEED: Knowledge is the greatest need of mankind.” – NZ. RATIONALIST AND
HUMANIST, Nov. 74. – KNOWLEDGE. – Are you entitled to withhold it from mankind
via copyrights? Or should you, rather, let it be shared free of charge, e.g. electronically?
Actually, at least for freedom writings it was found out that offering them free of charge
online does increase rather than diminish the sale of the same texts in print. – We have
still not taken all the steps required to make all knowledge of mankind readily, easily and
cheaply accessible to anyone interested in any aspect of it. – Well, knowledge of how to
build mass extermination devices should not be so spread. - J.Z., 30.1.08. – Is the need
for rightful knowledge sufficiently strong to induce its supply or its publication, if it does
already exist somewhere? – J.Z., 26.2.09. – LIBERTARIAN LIBRARY, COMPLETE
NEED: Let those with a “need” to help “needy” people help these people – but don‟t
force independent people to help the dependent ones. – J.Z., 17.5.75. - ALTRUISM,
NEED: Many more needs can be rightfully satisfied through free production and free
exchange than could ever be satisfied through charity, altruism and a welfare state‟s
coercive redistributionism. – J.Z., 30.1.08.
NEED: Money or need for money, rather than need, is the mother of invention. – J.Z. &
D.Z., 20.8.77. – Need alone or need for money alone, rarely lead to inventions. – If that
were the case, no poor people would be left on earth, under primitive conditions. – J.Z.,
NEED: Naïve idealists convinced the voters that all their justified needs should and can
be satisfied by the community: - that is, by „someone else‟.…” – George Hardy, The
Doom of the Welfare Society, p.2.
NEED: Necessary and basic in the Judeo-Christian Ethic is the recognition of the
enduring nature of Moral Law. (*) The essence of this moral law is summed up in the
“Golden Rule”, and it derives from the fact that humans need one another. (**) –
Without other human beings, we cannot be born, cannot be reared, cannot prosper; and
to have the cooperation of other humans – to avoid the conflicts which would be suicidal
for humans – we must follow the “Golden Rule”. When we apply it in practice, we find it
is the unifying principle of those commandments that refer to the relations between the
individual and his fellows. “Thou shalt not steal.” Thou shall not kill” and “Thou shalt
not bear false witness.” – Now, it should be clear that obedience to Moral Law means
voluntary cooperation and freedom.” – Source not noted. L. E. Read? - (*) Please note,
that neither religion has so far bothered to produce a complete declaration of individual
rights and liberties! – (**) Thus they should trade, freely. - - The Ten Commandments
and other general ethical rules and the assumption that they would be of divine origin or
inspiration got in the way of attempting to provide something much better. - J.Z., 29.1.08.
NEED: Need‟ now means wanting someone else‟s money. "Greed" means wanting to
keep your own. "Compassion" is when a politician arranges the transfer.” – Joseph
Sobran, columnist. - - If you really needed it, why did you spend your money on cable
NEED: No one gets it if there ain‟t any.” – From film: The Incredible Bread Machine. –
NEED: No politician knows better what I need than I do and no politician produces
anything towards my needs but merely takes away the returns from goods and services
produced by others in their attempts to cater to their own needs. – It is the needs of
politicians that should be most or totally neglected – except by their voluntary subjects. -
J.Z., 18.6.92, 26.1.08. - POLITICIANS
NEED: Now it may very well be true that the needs or merits, or social value or whatever
of the potential beneficiary are vastly greater than mine, but why does that oblige me to
meet them? The fact that I have the capacity to meet them is not the slightest support for
the proposition that I have an obligation to meet them; if I acquired that capacity by
violating their rights, that would be a different story.” – Prof. Lauchlan Chipman, To
Each His Own, CIS 1977 Conference, p.41.
NEED: Or, suppose a powerful country invades a weaker one for lebensraum ( “living
space” ). It needs the territory for its growing population and for industrial expansion (
so claimed Germany when it invaded Poland and Japan when it invaded China ). Is the
invading country justified in committing this action? Does it have a “right” to the land of
another country because it is in need?” – The Incredible Bread Machine, p.110. – Its
needs could be much better satisfied through free enterprise, free trade and quite freed
exchange, including full monetary and financial freedom. – J.Z., 30.1.08.
NEED: Or, suppose that you work for three straight summers in order to earn enough
money to bicycle through Europe. The State seizes your savings in order to feed a needy
family. Should it have the right to do that, because there is a need? … The point is simply
this: need does not establish the right to violate the rights of others.” - The Incredible
Bread Machine, p.108.
NEED: our romantic socialists fail to realize that no community, no group, no family can
afford to satisfy the UNLIMITED NEEDS of their members – even if there are strong
pressures which „justify‟ them.” - George Hardy, The Doom of the Welfare Society, p.10.
NEED: Ours is the only society in history that ever went around actually looking for
people‟s needs in order to satisfy them. That‟s the only way companies can exist and
succeed in a free system. Many people earn their livings just trying to find large numbers
of people who need something … marketing research people looking for needs that can
be satisfied through the capabilities of their companies.” – Joan Marie Leonard, THE
FREEMAN, March 77. – Welfare State politicians also look around for “needs” that they
can satisfy at the expense of the general taxpayer and to further their own political career,
thus buying votes and this, usually, without losing the votes of the unenlightened
involuntary taxpayers. – J.Z., 30.1.08.
NEED: People who in their corporate capacity abolish the natural relation between
merits and benefits will presently abolish themselves.” – Herbert Spencer. – MERIT,
NEED: Remember, though, that this explosion of governmental “aids” and “services” is
called for by “the people”; it is meant to answer to perceived social needs. But this
brings us back once more to the main point. The government acts to meet the needs which
are imagined to arise from some mythical collective. Individual liberty or individual will
is not its main concern, or even its tertiary concern. In fact, individual liberty or freedom
of expression (*) The atmosphere in which it moves is not one of concrete, tangible
realities, but of steamy vapors and myths, simplistic formulas, bromides and shibboleths.
Being closely immersed in this system it is not easy to see how we may be deceived by it (
as we can easily see how the language of Marxism and Leninism cozens the Russians),
but if we expect our liberties to survive, we must be careful to see that we do.” – George
H. Douglas, in THE FREEMAN, 12/74. - - (*) Much more is involved than merely that
liberty. – J.Z.
NEED: The idea of “need” is dangerous because it strikes at the heart of the practical
argument for freedom. That argument depends on recognizing that each person is best
qualified to choose for himself which among a multitude of possible lives is best for him.
If many of those choices involve “needs”, things of infinite value to one person which can
be best determined by someone else, what is the use of freedom? If I disagree with the
expert about my „needs‟, …” - David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom, p.66.
NEED: The mischievous idea that all public needs should be satisfied by compulsory
organization and that all the means that individuals are willing to devote to pubic
purposes should be under the control of government, is wholly alien to the basic
principles of a free society.” - Friedrich Hayek, Law, Legislation and Liberty. - PUBLIC
NEED: The Nazis, Soviets, Maoists, Idi-Amin & Castro followers, the Japanese imperial
warriors, the child molesters, rapists, kleptomaniacs and other habitual or professional
criminals have their “needs”, too. Why should we respect them? – J.Z., 29.3.00, 24.1.08.
– Q.
NEED: The Need Is Mine: Freedom no more needs me than does righteousness or
wisdom; it‟s the other way around: I need freedom: Recognition of that need is my
motivation. Few will give thought to preserving freedom who think the need is not theirs.
Self-need explained.” – Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, VIII, point 14, in his
summary of chapter 14, beginning on p.115.
NEED: The present tendency of both sexes is to contemplate citizens as having claims in
proportion to their needs – their needs being habitually proportionate to their demerits;
and this tendency, stronger in women than in men, must, if it operates politically, cause
amore general fostering of the worse at the expense of the better.” – Herbert Spencer,
The Principles of Ethics, par. 383. – WOMEN, VOTING, WELFARE STATE.
NEED: The principle of consumption according to needs establishes a right to the
product of the labor of others. – K. H. Z. Solneman, LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, Nr. 2, p. –
And it establishes thus a clear-cut case of exploitation – unless this property transfer is
freely and individually contracted. – J.Z., 26.5.80.
NEED: the values of the sick … are sick values.” – Peregrine Worthorne, THE
AUSTRALIAN, 7.11.74.
NEED: The word “need” should be eliminated from the vocabulary of political
discourse. It is inextricably bound up with a dangerous oversimplification of reality – the
idea that there exist certain values infinitely more important than all others, things I
need, rather than merely want, and that these „needs‟ can be determined objectively.” –
David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom, p.65.
NEED: To say that you ought to help those in need is one thing, but to say that you must
is quite another, for it contradicts the very meaning of freedom. – There is virtually no
difference in principle between forced collection of money to support welfare programs
and involuntary servitude. In either case the individual is compelled by force to serve
others. – In a free society the individual is not compelled to serve others. He is not
compelled to give up the products of his life to the King or the Church or to the rich or to
the poor. Whether or not one chooses voluntarily to help those in need is a question only
the individual can answer. In a free society it is not the proper function of government to
impose that decision by force.” - The Incredible Bread Machine, p. 110.
NEED: We begin with the observed fact that men want things and go after them. All men
are needy and all men are active. The economically rich are, upon the whole, more full of
needs than are the poor. The necessitous poor are characterized not by the fact that they
are in need but that they are unable to satisfy the basic needs of decent human life. Nor
are the idle rich noted for being idle but for the fact that their activities are not under the
constraint of economic necessity.” - Dr. H. G. Pearce, Value, p.24. – In their earnings and
spending the rich remain under economic incentives but not those of basic survival needs.
– J.Z., n.d. – Most of the needy have not realized as yet that they need especially more
economic rights and liberties in order to satisfy their needs themselves by their own
efforts. – J.Z., 26.1.08. ) - & NECESSITY, THE POOR & THE RICH
NEED: We have one test, and one only, for what private citizens really wish to do: those
things they will do voluntarily! It is plain that they wish telephones, printing presses,
automobiles, air service, refrigeration, houses, corn flakes, gas and electric service;
indeed, a million things could be listed. And they get them – voluntarily! But here‟s the
rub: There are those who believe we do not know of all the things we want or, at least,
are unaware of what is good for us. (*) These “needs”, invented for us – going to the
moon, old-age “security”, the Gateway Arch, or whatever – have no manner of
implementation except by coercion. In a word, these people who would be our gods can
achieve the ends they have in mind for us only as they gain control of our agency of
force: government.” – Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom Reign, p.67/68 – Needs invented by
others for us, at our expense, should be distinguished from self-felt and self-expressed
needs, which one is able and willing to work or pay for. - (*) As if we were not
bombarded with millions of advertisements and propaganda efforts! – J.Z., J.Z., 29.1.08.
NEED: We know better the needs of ourselves than of others. To serve oneself is economy
of administration.” - Dr. Jamrach Holobom – Quoted in: Ambrose Bierce, The Devil‟s
NEED: What is desirable is not always necessary, while that which is necessary may be
the most undesirable. Perhaps the measure of a man is the ability to tell one from the
other … and act on it.” - Randall Garrett, The Measure of a Man, ANALOG –
ASTOUNDING SF 8/60, p. 83, the motto of the story. – NECESSITY, DESIRABILITY
NEED: When a government seizes your money in order to pay for programs that support
others, how has its action differed from that of a thief? – “But wait!” you protest. “This
is different! The beneficiary of government welfare is in need!” - - Need. Does this really
alter the situation? - - Suppose, for example, Mr. Jones is dying from a diseased kidney.
The State seizes you against your will and removes your kidney for transplant. Did the
State have the “right” to do it? Did Mr. Jones‟ need for a new kidney justify the State
taking yours without your explicit permission?” - The Incredible Bread Machine, p.107. –
NEED: When my rights are not recognized then others can dispose of what is mine,
according to their power and needs. – J.Z., 4.11.85, 25.2.09. - RIGHTS & PROPERTY
NEED: When need is the standard, every man is both victim and parasite. As a victim he
must labor to fill the needs of others, leaving himself in the position of a parasite whose
needs must be filled by others.” – Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, p.958. – See:
NEED: When the able must work for the needy then the needy become more numerous
and less productive while the able and productive become less numerous and less
productive as well and everybody is worse off in the average. Productivity and lastly
wealth is greatest and most wide-spread when everybody single person becomes
responsible for himself or herself and every family for itself. That was the experience
among the first American pioneers, among whom many died from hunger and disease
while they lived under communism and whose “fate” was only turned around when they
finally introduced self-responsibility and private property rights or capitalism and free
enterprise and free exchange. It is summed up in their proverb: “Root, hog or die!” - That
has been a universal experience for all of recorded history. - I, too, would prefer idleness
or going slow and more leisure activities if greater work efforts brought no higher
personal rewards and others would assure my survival. So would most other people. –
The protestant work ethic does not work very well under communism. - J.Z., 25.2.00,
NEED: When the individual replaces the beehive as the ultimate goal, that is, when the
need is construed to be the individual‟s rather than society‟s, the means implicit in
achieving such a goal must be radically different.” - Leonard E. Read, Let Freedom
Reign, p.84.
NEEDS: Isn‟t it strange how want becomes need when the taxpayers are footing the bill?
- John Laws, Book of Uncommon Sense, PAN, 1995, p.29. - WANTS & TAXATION
NEGATIVE GOVERNMENT: One more bit of evidence to support my thesis that
socialism is intuitive, not acquired (*), is my experience with ex-socialists and ex-
communists. I have known a number of them and, with one exception, though they had
dropped theoretical socialism, they were all for government intervention; even that one
exception was for our undertaking a “preventive war” with Russia. (**) All of them were
intellectually honest men (***) and rejected Marx on the basis of evidence and the
dictates of logic; all of them were revolted by the immoralities of Sovietism. (****) Yet
they could not accept wholeheartedly the principles of laissez-faire economics (*** ***),
nor could they subscribe to the idea of negative government. (*** ****) They held to the
notion that government ought to intervene in the marketplace, for the “social good”, that
political power could be exercised for the benefit of mankind. They were socialists in
spite of themselves. – Frank Chodorov, Fugitive Essays, p.139. - - (*) I hold that it is
acquired through thousands to ten thousands of popular errors, myths and prejudices,
which are nowhere systematically and encyclopedically collected and refuted and swamp
more or less almost everyone‟s clear thinking on reality, just like formerly xyz
superstitions and demon cults. Even religious spleens are still predominant today, not to
speak of those in the political, economic and social spheres. – Degrees of territorial
statism can still be found among most libertarians and of territorialism among most
anarchists. - - (**) Rather than merely a police action against its mis-rulers! How can one
liberate captive people e.g. with ABC mass murder devices? - - (***) But not thorough
enough intellectuals. - - (*****) Not that expressed e.g. by central banking, progressive
taxation, inheritance taxes and conscription. - - (*** ***) No wonder, since they are
nowhere fully realized in the West and were, probably, never fully realized anywhere in
the past. Such a realization is only to be expected from voluntary communities that are
exterritorially fully autonomous, so that they can freely realize also this radical
alternative and thus set a convincing example for the world. - - (*** ****) Not a very
happy formula: For who really knows “positive governments”, “good government” or
“ideal governments” and what else but negative governments, in the sense of wrongful,
irrational and prejudiced governments, committing enormous wrongs and doing endless
harm, have we experienced so far? – J.Z., 30.1.08. - ANARCHISM, LAISSEZ FAIRE,
NEGATIVE VS. POSITIVE THINKING: You've got to think negative (as well! - J.Z.).
If you always have your eyes on the stars you don't see the pitfalls under your feet.” -
Michael F. Flynn, The Washer at the Ford, ANALOG, 6/89, 49. – OPTIMISM,
NEGLIGENCE: So nobody is as negligent as one who believes all actions to be totally
ordained.” - Damien Broderick, The Judas Mandala, p.67. - & DETERMINISM
NEGLIGENCE: Yet, as government continues to undermine personal freedom,
individuals live complacently under the delusion that they are still blessed with liberty.
The patriots of 1776 clearly recognized that their traditional freedoms were threatened
by the British Crown. The spirit of „Seventy-Six was the spirit of vigilance. The spirit of
today is that of negligence. In Democracy in America, we see how there is an ever-
present tendency for men to seek security and safety at the expense of freedom: “Our
contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions; they want to be led,
and they wish to remain free: as they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these
contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once.” – Robert G. Bearce, in
THE FREEMAN, quoting Tocqueville, Democracy in America. - INDIFFERENCE,
NEGOTIATIONS: If you were being raped, would you ask for negotiations or immediate
withdrawal?” – Graffiti – JOKES.
NEGOTIATIONS: Let us be sure that we talk together man to man, nation of people to
nations of people. Not through our political commanders, but directly.” – Charles R.
NEGOTIATIONS: Let us never negotiate our of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.”
– John F. Kennedy, Inaugural Address, 20.a.1961. – But never negotiate with the
oppressors. Negotiate only with the oppressed. – J.Z. 8.7.82. – He, too, wanted to
continue the governmental monopoly for international negotiations, treaties, conferences.
A true democrat would have allowed his subjects to negotiate and make their own
contracts and treaties. – Moreover, under his presidency the nuclear arsenal, the number
of the US government‟s mass murder devices was doubled. Did he not fear the possibility
of a nuclear war? If not, then he was ignorant and a fool and certainly immoral. – J.Z.,
21.11.85, 24.1.08. - People to people negotiations rather than summit conferences! And
should one not fear nuclear arsenals? J. F. K. doubled the nuclear arsenal of the USA, i.e.
its readiness to commit mass murder. What could the captive nations of the world expect
from such a “liberator” – or the supposed “proletarians” of the West from a Communist
“liberation” by means of such devices? – J.Z., 30.1.08. – Should we not fear e.g. nuclear
war & seriously negotiate how to avoid it, without any territorialist false assumptions and
conclusions? – J.Z., 26.2.09. – FEAR, NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, PANARCHISM,
NEGOTIATIONS: Negotiations between rulers to eliminate war are as senseless as
meetings between leading criminals to eliminate crime. Morally and rationally there is
nothing to negotiate about nuclear strength. Only nuclear disarmament of the unilateral
kind makes sense. Why wait with getting rid of a liability until someone else does so too?
- - Negotiations between the peoples themselves, over the heads of their rulers, are
required for this. Only they can inspire the necessary trust and would, lastly, and rather
soon, lead to an all-round nuclear disarmament, unilaterally initiated and continued. - -
When and wherever prolonged peace negotiations between the peoples are rendered
difficult to impossible by the regime on one side, e. g. by the restrictions imposed by a
dictator, then the people on the other side must, one-sidedly, publicize as acceptable
appeals and offers, and this in a quite trustworthy way, that they would convince, without
arguments, the peoples on the other side. - - Such appeals could be made on the basis of a
unilateral nuclear disarmament, the declaration of rightful war aims, the recognition of
rightful governments in exile, the welcoming of refugees and deserters, freedom for the
establishment of all kinds of panarchies and by full publicity for the appeals, declarations
and rightful war aims. In broadcasts almost all possible objections could be anticipated
and answered. See: Appeals, Broadcasting, Decision, Declarations, Democracy,
Diplomacy, Enemy, Exterritorial Imperative, Leadership, Liberation War, Military
Insurrections, Multilateral Nuclear Disarmament, Minority Autonomy, Open Air
Speaking, People, Propaganda, Publicity, Referendum, Revolutions, Secrecy, Secret
Allies, Secret Diplomacy, Separate Peace, Summit Conferences, Trust, Unilateral
Nuclear Disarmament, War Aims, Weapons. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War.
NEGOTIATIONS: Some governments are too weak or perfidious for reliable
negotiations.” – THE BULLETIN, 26.4.74. – Replace “some” by “all” or at least “almost
all”. – J.Z., 10/76. – Who has any good reasons to trust diplomats, leaders, politicians or
bureaucrats? Even mere policemen are largely mistrusted. Negotiations directly between
all kinds of “captive nations”, more importantly even, only between communities of
volunteers, all of them exterritorially fully autonomous, and between quite rightful militia
forces, for the protection of individual rights and liberties, organized on both sides. They
could soon achieve mass fraternization on the basis of quite rightful war and peace aims.
NEGOTIATIONS: The enemies of freedom do not argue; they shout and they shoot.” -
W. R. Inge, The End of an Age. – Only talking to and negotiating with their subjects and
victims makes sense, over the heads of their rulers, preferably by governments in exile,
already practising their platforms, but all only for their kinds of volunteers. Experimental
freedom, under voluntarism and full exterritorial autonomy, even for one‟s opponents.
That would tend to more effectively disarm and calming them down than “loving” them
or trying to persuade them. – J.Z., 26.12.07. - MEETINGS, CONFERENCES,
NEGOTIATIONS: When a bear decides to claw you, it's hard to change his mind by
appealing to his logic and common sense.” - Fritz Leiber, A Specter is Haunting Texas,
GALAXY SF, Sep. 68, p.176. - Have you ever tried to argue with a drunk or a very angry
and prejudiced man? - J.Z., 9.2.02. - REASONING, SELF-DEFENCE, FORCE, NON-
NEGRO OR NEGRO GHETTO BANK OF ISSUE: Neither forced integration nor forced
segregation are the answer to all the problems of any racial minority. But full autonomy
for ANY self-help efforts is: Already the drug laws are not fully enforced in ghetto areas.
Let some more sensible free market activities be started there ( and among Negroes
elsewhere ), to overcome unemployment of racial minorities in ghetto areas and outside
of them. They would gather more sympathies than e.g. drug running or armed gangs
could gather. Perhaps even as much as their musical, dancing and sports activities
achieved for them so far. And it would be nice if descendants of former slaves
emancipated themselves from the slave mentality of the voluntary victims of monetary
despotism before most of its other victims did. - J. Z., 27.5.97. - Their new "Makuta"
value standards could be as good or better than those used by their ancestors in Africa. -
J. Z., 10.9.02. – The silver Maria Theresia Thaler, too, as well as reproductions of them,
served in Africa for a long time as an alternative private value standard. -
NEGROES: To view this matter through the lens of liberty is to see an entirely different
sort of picture; it is to see the challenge of actually liberating black Americans from state
control, letting them, if anything, have special assistance in cutting through red-tape, in
blasting apart the restrictions of labor unions, business and zoning codes and, above all,
constant police surveillance over their daily lives. It would mean, for instance, giving
more than lip-service to the idea of local control of local schools – a supposedly
conservative idea which went up in smoke the moment it was desired not by white
Americans, but by black Americans. - - The same instinct which led some conservatives to
defend the right of some schools to teach and practice bias, in accordance with
community control of the school, should certainly have led them to support black control
of schools in black neighborhoods, even if the community wanted to teach Swahili, black
supremacy or whatever.” – Karl Hess, The Lawless State, p.20/21. - - Alas, Hess was not
consistent enough to advocate for Negroes and all other communities of volunteers full
exterritorial autonomy to do their own things for or to themselves. That would also apply
to a minority of voluntary integrationists and one of voluntary segregationists. – J.Z.,
NEIGHBORHOODS: Gandhi … was the first great spokesman for the neighborhood.
His notion was that the world is composed of neighborhoods – a breathtaking
perception.” – Karl Hess, PLAYBOY Interview, 7/76. – Few friends and like-minded
people live in the neighborhood. One is in many ways more closely connected to them
than to neighbors. Thus with them, rather than merely with neighbors, should one be free
to live under personal laws or exterritorial autonomy. – J.Z., 30.1.08. – PERSONAL
NEIGHBORHOODS: I favor a world of neighborhoods in which all social organization
is voluntary.” – Karl Hess, PLAYBOY Interview, 7/76. – To achieve complete
voluntarism exterritorial autonomy is required, for voluntary communities under personal
laws. – J.Z., 26.2.09. – PANARCHISM, VOLUNTARISM
NEIGHBORHOODS: Our campaign is based on the premise that we have been living
under the delusion that government can solve the social problems of the people. Only the
people can solve their own problems. … The neighborhoods have to right to control their
own affairs.” – Norman Mailer in a speech quoted in the NEW YORK TIMES, May 2,
1969. – Quoted by Jerome Tuccille: Radical Libertarianism, p.39. - That would still
mean only rule by the local majority, which can be very prejudiced and authoritarian.
One does not confine friendships and trade relationships or scientific interests to those
people living in one‟s neighborhood. One is often mentally closer to a person on the other
side of the world than to one‟s next door neighbor. - J.Z., 30.1.08. - LOCAL
NEIGHBORHOODS: Power to the Neighborhoods. … Achieve local control of
Education, Housing, Sanitation, Parks and Police … Kiss of the Boredom of the
Democratic Machine …‟ - Excerpt from the campaign literature of Norman Mailer and
Jimmy Breslin during the New York mayoralty race, 1969. – Jerome Tuccille, Radical
NEIGHBORHOODS: Power to the neighborhoods.” – YAF Convention slogan. – Power
only over the own affairs, not those of neighbors. That would be quite un-neighborly! –
J.Z., 30.1.08. – POWER, DIS.
NEIGHBORS: Don‟t waste your crocodile tears on me, I‟m doing fine and on the whole I
enjoy my lifestyle. If you think grim desperation motivates me, you‟re way off beam. I‟d
love to have GOOD NEIGHBORS, i.e. libertarians. Could you send me a couple dozen?
Or do you mean I should cozy up to whoever happens to live next (*) me? I follow “”100
Ways to Disappear & Live Free”: “Your neighbors are the most dangerous people you
know … Be superficially „nice‟ to your neighbors, but have as little as possible to do with
them. Ideally, you don‟t want them to know ANYTHING about you … J. Edgar Hoover
stated many times that fully 90 % of all arrests by the FBI are due directly to the “helpful
cooperation” of neighbors and relatives.” - - If that makes me paranoid, so be it. Once I
was dept. manager in a bank, on the track to VP & suburbia. Now, 4 years and many
hassles later, I still think dropping out was the best decision I ever made. I may never
actually achieve much. But I don‟t think I‟ll ever regret having tried. It amazes me what
people will do to have a flush toilet. I don‟t give a shit.” – Jim Stumm to Eric North,
LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION 56, 8/1175. –When I visited him about 15 years later,
he did live, simply in suburbia and did have a flush toiled. – He was then a small scale
libertarian publisher, Xeroxing his output. I do not know how he made his living. But I
did like his logical libertarian mind. By now I have not hear of him for years. – (*) to? -
J.Z., 30.1.08.
NEIGHBORS: in every sensible enterprise of humankind, you don‟t go to the President.
You go to your neighbors.” – Karl Hess, PLAYBOY Interview, 7/76. - PRESIDENTS &
NEIGHBORS: In today‟s world, who are my neighbors? Only those who work, not for,
but with me as if it were a pleasure? Only those who are on a first-name basis and live
nearby? - Actually, my neighbors are all over this world – millions of them, those who
produce and exchange with me. Mostly, we have never heard of each other. I mention this
fact, to emphasize the extent to which we have become social beings, neighbors one and
all. To know one‟s self requires a recognition of this brand new relationship, which is a
product or liberty and the means to our survival.” – Leonard E. Read, Castles in the Air,
NEIGHBORS: The average man of each new generation has said to himself more clearly
and consciously than his predecessor: “My neighbor is not my enemy, but my friend, and
I am his, if we would but mutually recognize the fact. We help each other to a better,
fuller, happier living; and this service might be greatly increased if we would cease to
restrict, hamper, and oppress each other.” – Benjamin R. Tucker, Relation of the State to
the Individual, p.35.
NEIGHBORS: The capacity for getting along with our neighbor depends to a large
extent on the capacity for getting along with ourselves. The self-respecting individual will
try to be as tolerant of his neighbor's shortcomings as he is of his own.” - Eric Hoffer -
NEIGHBORS: Those who embrace such offerings without giving much thought to their
meaning should understand that the most important quality we hold in common with our
neighbors is a need to defend one another‟s individuality.” - Butler Shaffer, The Wizards
of Ozymandias, chapter 82. - INDIVIDUALISM, TOLERANCE, EQUALITY
NEIGHBORS: When your neighbor‟s house is afire your own property is at stake.” –
Horace, Epistles I, c. 5 B.C. – At least when houses are next to each other or very close to
NEIGHBORS: Your life and your death are with your neighbor.” – Yes, to the extent that
some necessary and mutual protection and help is involved. But un-neighborliness begins
with any degree of mutual meddling with private affairs and be it only indirectly, through
“the” free vote. In other words, the actions of neighbors, like those of anyone else, can be
right or wrong. Even throwing some things over the fence is still all too often practised.
One need not love one‟s neighbor or expect brotherly love from him but one owes him
justice in all interrelationships and may expect it from him. – J.Z., 21.4.89. – J.Z. – DIS.
NEO-IMPERIALISM: … the real imperialists – the state marketing monopolies and the
governments that sanction them.” – Paul Craig Roberts in reason, Aug. 73. -
NETWORKING: The networks of the Aquarian Conspiracy – self-organizing forms that
allow both autonomy and human connection – are at once both the tools for social
change and the models of a new society.” – M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy,
p.224. – Nothing less than free individual secessionism and full exterritorial autonomy
for voluntary communities will do. The limited autonomy granted to us by Western
bureaucrats is good enough only for some research and publicity and for all too limited
NETWORKING: We have talked about the power of the network, the form of catalyzing
and mobilizing people all over the world.” – M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy. –
To organize international lobbies is helpful but not enough. Nor is organizing
demonstrations via mobile phones. What we need, rather, than mere lobbying, is
exterritorially autonomous communities for innovations, peacefully coexisting and
competing with each other. Also sufficient collaboration on large enlightening projects
that require the participation by many people. Not just on some additional general
encyclopedias, like the WIKIPEDIA and its more recent competitors. – Not even a
common list for all kinds of libertarian projects proposed or already under way to some
extent, seems to exist so far. Not to speak of many kinds of additional reference works
that would be very helpful but could hardly be effectively and economically compiled
and published on paper. - Have the internet options, websites, email, fax, phones, mobile
phones and electronic text messaging developed the networking options sufficiently as
yet, to being all those interested in particular changes sufficiently together for productive
cooperation. I have not yet seen enough signs for that. – Telegrams used to be important
but expensive and were discontinued. So was ordinary and cheaper overseas mail per
ship, at least for Australia, although it was cheaper than air mail. – 6.4.89, J.Z., 26.1.08.
NETWORKING: What panarchism adds to "networking" is full autonomy for all net
workers who desire it. - J.Z., 3.4.90. - What panarchism adds to “networking” is full
exterritorial autonomy, if it is desired by net workers. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - &
NETWORKS: ... THE POWER OF THE PERSONS, inherent in the transformative
process - the discovery that any of us is 'the difference in the world'. We have talked
about THE POWER OF THE NETWORK, the form of catalyzing and mobilizing people
all over the world." - Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, p.241. - Not just catalyzing
and mobilizing but individualizing, exterritorializing and autonomizing under personal
laws and cooperating, institutionally, with like-minded volunteers. Plus the organization
of ideal local volunteer militias for the protection of individual rights and liberties! To
organize mere international lobbies is sometimes helpful but is certainly not enough.
What we need, rather than mere lobbyists, are AUTONOMOUS INNOVATORS,
properly motivated, armed, trained and organized. Then they will hardly ever have to
fight. Their mere existence and their mentality and the liberties they have already
protected will be the strongest deterrent. - J.Z., 6.4.89, 8.4.89, 12.12.03. –
NETWORKS: Networks, especially mere information and exchange networks, may be
still too loose, so far, to serve as protective voluntary associations against the remaining
powers of territorial States and of other intolerant and coercive associations, like
churches or sects made up largely of fanatics and zealots. It may very well be that, once
ideal local militias for the protection of individual rights do exist, then they might be
enough but until then we need various competing panarchies as counter-weights. - J.Z.,
16.10.88, 3.4.89. – PANARCHISM, MILITIA
NETWORKS: Networks, which are developed according to what is known as the
honeycomb model, have many decision-makers, who take decisions on the basis of the
consent principle. (*) The organizing principle here is coordination. (**) This model has
a multiplicity of centers, so that power is distributed (***); in the spider's web model, on
the other hand, everything is concentrated in one center, in order to centralize power.
Networks consist of elements, which are connected with one another (principle of
complementation). (****) This recognition of the co-existence of various possibilities is
called the principle of reciprocal delineation of boundaries. (*****) This should not be
confused with an elaboration of the tolerance notion. (*** ***) In pyramid structures,
tolerance will be used opportunistic: since people are placed in positions of authority
and subservience, it can be good for image building to be tolerant (repressive tolerance).
(*** ****) The mighty in the top of the pyramid (**** ****)) can be 'tolerant'. This
corresponds to the spiders' web-model as structuring elements, which are bound to one
another through the centre. (***** ****) The elements in networks develop as self-
organizing systems." - Holtermann, Law in Anarchism, p.38. - - If you have not yet been
confused on this subject before, this paragraph and my comments should help! – - (*)
That applies to panarchism with its diverse panarchies, too.) – - (**) J.Z.: Under
panarchism it is voluntarism and exterritorial autonomy. Coordination is not "organized"
or not necessarily so, no more so than the provision of communication channels is or the
order achieved by freedom of contract, free pricing, free trading, market relationships. - -
(***) In panarchies is not distributed in the sense that each shares in the total power but,
instead, each is completely autonomous or powerful over the own affairs and has none
but defensive powers against aggressors, over members of other panarchies. - - (****)
Panarchies have only communication, arbitration, trade and volunteer militia forces in
common. - - (*****) In panarchism and its panarchies, individuals draw their own
boundaries around themselves and their voluntary groupings. - - (*** ***) He seems to
have an odd notion of tolerance in mind. - - (*** ****) Even this territorial tolerance by
rulers for some actions of their subjects is of some value and is not a "repressive
tolerance", which seems to me to be a nonsensical term, if ever there was one. What they
do not grant, as a rule, is exterritorial autonomy and the mutual tolerance that this
implies. But who can blame them for this when even most anarchists and libertarians
remain addicted to the territorial model? - - (**** ****) and those liberated and
organized in diverse and exterritorially autonomous groups of volunteers - - (***** ****)
This applies also to panarchies under panarchism. - J.Z., n.d. - TOLERANCE &
NETWORKS: The networks of the Aquarian Conspiracy - self-organizing forms that
allow both autonomy and human connection - are at once both the tools for social
change and the models of a new society.” - M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy,
P.224. - Nothing less than full exterritorial autonomy for volunteers will do. The limited
autonomy granted to us by Western bureaucrats is only good enough for some research
and publicity - apart from trivialities. - J.Z., 6.4.89, 8.4.89. - PANARCHISM
NETWORKS: Whatever their stated purpose, the function of most of these networks is
mutual support and enrichment, empowerment of the individual, and co-operation to
effect change. Most aim for a more humane, hospitable world. In its rich opportunities
for mutual aid and support, the network is reminiscent of its forebear, the kinship
system." - Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, P.232. - They still depend upon territorial
power institutions or confine themselves merely to charitable and benevolent or
informational efforts. Instead, they should strive for full exterritorial autonomy for all
minority groups, from all governments, on the basis of free individual choices. - J.Z.,
NEUTRAL MONEY: As a freely and competitively supplied exchange medium with a
freely chosen value standard, free market-supplied, market rated, optional exchange
media and value standards will never be quite neutral. They will have a positive effect,
provide a needed service, are helpful and mediating, just like tools and yard sticks or
other measures. It will only be neutral in this respect, that it will not coercively intervene,
as an exclusive currency that is forced by legal tender ( compulsory acceptance and
compulsory value ) upon people not free to issue or accept sound alternatives to it. Thus
it will not distort the general price level or lead to monetary crises of the inflation,
deflation or stagflation type. It will facilitate and multiply free market transactions and
tend to reduce rather than increase prices, but not in a deflationary way. If that is meant
with proposals of neutral money, then I am all in favor of it. – J.Z., 8.12.06. –
NEUTRAL MONEY: Money should facilitate transactions, not disturb or distort or
prevent them. Otherwise it could be neutral, for all I care. Complete clearing of all
transactions would not only neutralize money but make it altogether unnecessary. But
this is an ideal which not only overlooks the taxation threat that is involved with making
thus all transactions all too visible to the taxers, but also that all forms of money help to
bring about a form of clearing and that for some minor transactions they are superior to
involving bookkeeping or electronic checks, records, transfers and settlements. - J. Z.,
NEUTRAL MONEY: Something that is as essential to the existence and functioning of a
really free market as the exchange media and value standards of monetary freedom
cannot be considered as neutral. They would be extremely effective & beneficial, in the
same way was free contracts and free prices and free trade are, in a free market. They are
a moral and necessary part of freedom of contracts, free pricing and free trade. Free
money is no more neutral than freedom of expression and freedom of information are,
free enterprise, free competition, free cooperation, and freedom for all transport
enterprises. But the monies and value standards of monetary freedom would be insofar
neutral as it would not DISTURB free market transactions. It would neither cause
inflations, deflations, stagflations, credit restrictions or credit expansions (beyond those
the trade requires), depressions nor mass unemployment. It would be extremely elastic to
adapt fast to all changes in the supply of goods and services. As a facilitator of exchanges
and of sound value reckoning, it would not be neutral at all but the most essential factor
in all economies based on division of labor and free exchange. - As opposed to this, the
monies of monetary despotism are not neutral but oppressive, distorting, interventionist,
expropriating and destructive and preventative of many peaceful and productive
exchanges, definitely not "neutral" or helpful. - J. Z., 28.6.94, 22.4. 97. – MONETARY
NEUTRALITY: Atomic destructive devices, by their very nature, ignore the right to
remain neutral in arguments between governments. But neutrality alone is not security
enough against nuclear devices. It is helpful only to the extent that it is respected by one
or both of the main contestants: "A country can only remain neutral if it is allowed to be
neutral," - said Prof. Jeffrey Blaines, in a radio interview, 28/1/74. - An armed neutrality,
based on volunteer militias and revolutionary warfare training, would be the safest. - To
adopt a neutral a stand in the face of nuclear devices would be a crime of omission -
unless it goes beyond this to the advocacy of exterritorial autonomy for all dissenters, on
all sides, who are now coercively embraced, oppressed, exploited, enslaved or sacrifice
by the contending territorial governments. "In the struggle against such horrors as these,
how dare you be neutral?" asked Henry Schoenheimer in THE AUSTRALIAN, 26.6.73,
regarding the nuclear holocaust. - - Any neutral country could invite followers of all of
the main beliefs or convictions, which are struggling through their statist territorial
organizations, to establish themselves peacefully, tolerantly in the neutral country, in
form of exterritorial and autonomous organizations, on a voluntary basis. This kind of
peaceful coexistence could then soon become the declared war aim of all contestants. - -
Deserters from all sides could be offered asylum and protection, as well as political,
economic, social and personal freedom, of the kind they like for themselves. An
alternative and peaceful way of living would become visible to soldiers all both sides,
particularly if full use is made of free broadcasting to spread the message. - - See:
Appeals, Asylum, Broadcasting, Coexistence, Communism, Competing Governments,
Decision, Defence, Desertion, Employment, Exterritorial Imperative, Governments,
Governments in Exile, Immigration Restrictions, Liberation Wars, Militia, Monetary
Freedom, Peace Declarations, Publicity, Refugee Problem, Resistance, Revolutionary
Warfare Secession, Sovereignty, States, Targets, Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament, War
Aims, Weapons. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War. - RIGHT TO REMAIN
NEUTRALITY: Courage of commitment. Rumanian-born writer and Holocaust
survivor Elie Wiesel, accepting the 1986 Nobel Prize: “Take sides. Neutrality helps the
oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” –
READER‟S DIGEST, 11/89, p.77.
NEUTRALITY: Even to conserve neutrality you must have a strong government.” –
Alexander Hamilton, address, Constitutional Convention, June 29, 1787. That is the usual
error of territorial statists. If there were no strong territorial governments around you,
with their frequent squabbles, you would not even have to adopt a neutral stand towards
their struggles. – J.Z., 30.10.84. - - A well developed and self-governing militia of
volunteers for the protection individual rights and liberties would suffice. But it would
not be remaining neutral towards massive offences against human rights and liberties,
even when they take place in another country and other peoples or individuals. – J.Z.,
NEUTRALITY: Freedom knows only pro and contra with no neutrality in between.” -
Dagobert D. Runes, "A Dictionary of Thought". - If one considers only territorial
conditions of freedom or oppression, then in any particular territory any liberty, for any
place, time and people and conditions, may either legally exist or not, or exist illegally or
not. However, under exterritorial autonomy, all could contract for themselves
constitutionally, legally and juridically precisely the kinds of liberties and rights, and
degrees of them, which they, among themselves would find most attractive. And people
would also be free to remain neutral towards certain liberties or offences, like abortion or
homosexuality or gambling etc. The "all or nothing rule" is thus closely tied to
territorialist thinking. Free choice for all in all spheres. Release all creative energies and
allow all people to make their own mistakes at their own expense and risk, even in
adopting for themselves restrictions or denials of their own individual liberties, as long as
they want them and can stand them. Freedom of choice means much more than freedom
between two options only. The menus of political, economic and social liberties and self-
restrictions could and should be as diverse as the menus in restaurants are, musical,
sports, entertainment and travel and fashion and gardening and jewelry choices, at least
until all significant choices and experiments have been thoroughly tried and recorded.
Why not, when they are our most significant choices for a just, free, peaceful, prosperous
and progressive existence? - J.Z. 26.7.92, 8.1.93, 10.12.03. - PRO & CON OF
NEUTRALITY: Neutrality declarations by individuals & minority groups. They are a
particular applications of individual & group secessionism, to the problem of war and
peace, denying a central territorial government the authority to make life and death
decisions for them, rather upholding individual responsibility in this sphere.” – J.Z., n.d. -
NEUTRALITY: Neutrality is at times a graver sin than belligerence.” – Louis D.
Brandeis, The Words of Justice Brandeis, edited by Solomon Goldmann, 1954. – Seldes,
The Great Quotations.
NEUTRALITY: Never forget that no nation in the world today could afford the luxury of
neutrality if it were not for the power of the United States.” – Richard M. Nixon, THE
READER‟S DIGEST, December 1965.
NEUTRALITY: On which side are you neutral on? On which side does your neutrality
stand? – Free after a saying in a film, - J.Z., 31.1.93. - RED.
NEUTRALITY: One cannot be neutral in the conflict of falsehood and truth.” – Robert
Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative, p.268. – Nor in the conflict between right and wrong.
– J.Z., 30.1.08.
NEUTRALITY: Sooner or later one has to take sides, if one wants to remain a human
being.” – Greene. - MAKING A STAND, BEING A MAN – Which Greene?
NEUTRALITY: The big business in times of war.” – Paul Tabori. – Does there exist a
close study of how “neutral” e.g. Sweden and Switzerland were during the last war? On
Switzerland I know that they refused to let in Jews whose passports were somehow
marked by the Gestapo to indicate that they were Jews. Switzerland was also a hiding
place for many of the robbed riches of leading Nazis. – J.Z., 30.1.08. – WAR,
NEUTRALITY: The hottest place in hell is reserved for those undedicated citizens who
in time of moral crisis maintain their sickening neutrality.” – Dante Alighieri (1265-
1321). – Quoted in THE JUSTICE TIMES, 10/78. – Another version says: – “The hottest
places in Hell are reserved for those who in time of great moral crises maintain their
neutrality.” - Leonard E. Read, Who‟s Listening? p.159 quotes it as: “The hottest places
in hell are reserved for those who, in a period of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.”
– This version is also quoted in The Free Man‟s Almanac and in Admiral Ben Moreell,
Log II, p.128 - - How unrealistic the religious images are. How long would it take before
somebody is cooked or fried to death in hell? The hotter their spaces would be, the
quicker their death, the less prolonged their suffering. – In a nuclear flash it would be all
over in a fraction of a second, i.e. before the nerves can convey a pain signal. - J.Z.,
NEUTRALITY: To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it.” - Ayn
NEUTRALITY: To remain neutral as between the Gulag Archipelago and a constitution
that can remove a sitting President is illiterate.” – Stephen Haseler, QUADRANT, 7/77.
– Should we forget that on both sides there were over-kill stockpiles of mass murder
devices, at the disposal of the top men? In this respect there was despotism on both sides.
– J.Z., 30.1.08.
NEUTRON BOMB: A bomb that killed people and left buildings intact was crazy, pure
and simple. If they could refine it so it killed only generals, he might be interested.” - Jack
C. Haldeman II, We, The People, 89 in ANALOG Mid-Sep. 83. - TYRANNICIDE,
NEW & SECULAR PROTESTANTISM: The Catholic and territorial aspirations and
practices of all States, as secular hierarchies, ought to be replaced by protestant,
competing, exterritorial and voluntaristic ones, or, in other words, by humanistic, ethical,
atheistic and rationalistic groups which correspond to the real and extensive diversity of
beliefs and disbeliefs that exist among individual people and their favorite choices. - J.Z.,
9.10.88, 1.4.89, 11.12.2003. – PANARCHISM, A NEW PROTESTANTISM VS.
NEW AGE: All our high priests – doctors, scientists, bureaucrats, politicians,
churchmen, educators – are being defrocked at once. (*) Rushing in where angels fear to
treat, we are challenging old laws (**), proposing new ones (***), lobbying and
boycotting, wise now to the hidden powers of democracy. (****) “We are challenging the
legitimacy of entire systems” said Willis Harman. “The citizen grants legitimacy to any
institution – or withholds it.” (*****) - M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, p.246. -
- (*) I wish that were already the case. They are only largely challenged, with some
alternatives to them being opened up. The lawyers in and out of parliaments are still all
too much in charge. So are central banks and the employer-employee relationship and
government “defence” and police forces. Not even the postal monopoly has been
completely done away with by various new alternatives. – - (**) The governmental
declarations of human rights remain to be still sufficiently challenged by better private
ones, with the best such still to be cooperatively developed through electronic
networking. See my collection of over 130 such drafts, digitized but still not online or put
on a disk – for lack of interest & time and skill on my side. I offer it as an email
attachment but get no requests for it! – - (***) Still more or rather more law repeals? –
(****) Perhaps rather wise to the powerlessness it imposes upon individuals with
unpopular ideas and opinions. - - (*****) Here he speaks as if panarchism were already
realized. – J.Z., 26.1.08. - & PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUALISM VS.
NEW AGE: The new politics will speak for the millions – one by one.” – Theodore
Roszak, quoted by M. Ferguson, The Aquarian Conspiracy, p.232. – So far, to my
knowledge, it has not done this clearly and explicitly enough. Its secessionism, as far as I
know, is till confined to territorial decentralization. – J.Z., 26.1.08. - It should not only
speak but act for them in this way, i.e. panarchistically. - J.Z., 8.4.89. - &
NEW DEAL: More of the same old wrongful, costly, wasteful and inefficient statism,
exploitation and parasitism. – J.Z., .6.2.95, 24.1.08.
NEW DEAL: The New Deal began, like the Salvation Army, by promising to save
humanity. It ended, again like the Salvation Army, by running flop-houses and disturbing
the peace.” – H. L. Mencken. - But has the Salvation Army been as wrong and harmful?
At least it provided cheap entertainment and cheap opportunity shops. - J.Z., 22. 11. 06. -
NEW DEAL: The New Deal Court essentially told Congress: It doesn‟t matter what the
Constitution says or what limits on government it establishes, you are empowered to
spend money on whatever you please. And so Congress does, even though its profligacy
has placed the nation in great economic peril.” – Stephen Moore, Director of Fiscal
Policy Studies at the Cato Institute, March, 1997 - D. ROOSEVELT & CONGRESS
NEW ECONOMICS: The New Economics – a primitive lust for power.” – Leonard E.
Read, THE FREEMAN, 4/73.
NEW FRONTIERS: The new frontiers to be conquered are mainly in the convolutions of
the cortex.” - Arthur Koestler - – Libraries, copyrights,
patents, bookshops, mass media, the existing reference works and even the Internet, with
its automatic search engines, are still poor substitutes for a comprehensive market for
ideas and talents. - J.Z., 12.1.08. - MINDS, CHANGES OF IDEAS, MODELS,
NEW GENERATION: each new generation born is in effect an invasion of civilization
by little barbarians, who must be civilized before it is too late.” - Thomas Sowell -
NEW THINGS: Nothing is new except the arrangement.” – W. Durant. – And still there
is a great difference between a rock and a beautiful sculpture, some scribbling and a work
of art, some sounds and a symphony. We, too, are merely an arrangement of atoms and
molecules. Does that depreciate our value for ourselves and others? – J.Z., 11.9.07. -
NEW WAYS: There have to be new ways, there have to be better ways, and we all know
it.” - Alexei Panshin, How Can We Sink When We Can Fly? .335, in Isaac Asimov et al,
“The future I”, Fawcett Crest, 1981. - BETTER WAYS
NEW WORLD LIBERTIES: Our government, taxes, and ideas of freedom are already
duplicates of the Old World. Our politicians determine how we should live our lives –
and our individual liberties are sacrificed for the benefit of the Fatherland.” – Harry
NEW WORLD ORDER: The case must be made not for a New World Order but for a
Free World Order.” - OR FREE WORLD ORDER?
NEWS & TRUTH: that which is true is not new and that which is new is not true.” –
Quoted in Free Enterprise, 6/76, without indicating the source.
NEWS: "Truth and news are not the same thing." - Katharine Graham, owner of THE
NEWS: Can anything be more misled, selective, prejudiced and incomplete than the daily
news? – J.Z., 18.11.92. - PRESS, MASS MEDIA
NEWS: Complete coverage” and “total coverage”. - Heard on Capital TV, 28.1.92. This
really means: Our own biased selection, mostly of trivia and superficial images of
happenings, in ignorance of and without interest in what is truly significant. – J.Z.,
NEWS: Confined to TV glimpses and a few words and all too short discussions, news
cannot lead to sufficiently informed moral and rational views. – Besides, being almost
showered with short news the single drop is hardly noticed or no time is left to ponder it.
Newspapers and periodicals are better in this respect that radio and TV news. But not
enough better. - J.Z., 6.5.92.
NEWS: Early in life I had noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a
newspaper." – George Orwell - MASS MEDIA
NEWS: History in a news account? Preselected at an editorial conference, digested and
excreted by prejudice.” - Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse Dune, p.306, ascribed to: Darwi
NEWS: Instead of watching “the news” watch for what does not “make the news”. – J.Z.,
NEWS: More people are misinformed rather than properly informed by the news as
provided today. – J.Z., 1.2.87, 25.1.08.
NEWS: News are largely news of old and new government meddling, without awareness
of the consequences of such meddling. – J.Z., 7.12.93, 2.1.08. - PRESS, MASS MEDIA
NEWS: News reports bring all too often mere facts, observations or opinions of wars,
revolutions, civil wars, terrorism, but without sufficiently discussing their motives, causes
and the institutions which make them possible or even likely. They do not or not
sufficiently report the alternative institutions, principles, rights and liberties which would
make most of the man-made disasters and their news reporting impossible. It would
prevent such “events” or news altogether or would reduce them to quite rightful policing
actions against real war criminals and terrorists only. The “free” mass media are rather
upholding the ideas, institutions, opinions, errors and prejudices which make territorialist
political violence possible and assure that it will occur again and again. They do not
sufficiently enlighten themselves or their readers, listeners and viewers. Insofar they
support the main war criminals and terrorists, even while they complain about them. – If,
instead, they reported all the relevant rightful and rational ideas, institutions, principles,
actions and plans sufficiently, and were no longer supporting territorial warfare States
and their “sovereignty”, then they might actual promote peace rather than wars & other
forms of violence. – Alas, for them, bad news sell better than good news. - J.Z., 15.8.06,
NEWS: One or the other biased selection of news, misinformation and propaganda
releases. Never the whole picture. Never the real reasons why. Personal rather than causal
thinking prevails. The individual rights and liberties involved, the wrongful laws and
territorial institutions, are almost always neglected. – J.Z., 2.4.97, 24.1.08. -
NEWS: Radio and television news rain down upon us so many different news and their
statements are so fleeing, incomplete, misleading, uninformed or superficial that they
prevent or squash thought and criticism rather than encourage them. With newspapers
and periodicals one can at least take the time out to ponder particular news or
observations, postponing or ignoring the rest of the news as unimportant or uninteresting
for oneself. – J.Z., 9.3.93, 24.1.08. - MASS MEDIA, RADIO & TV
NEWS: Radio and TV give much time to news that are of no interest to you and that you
would rather not hear or see. In newspapers you are at least free to pick and choose in
accordance with your own individual interests, thus saving time, especially when only a
few of their items, if any, do interest you. – J.Z., 30.11.99.
NEWS: Reading, listening to or viewing the news: It‟s all a matter of how much bias,
either explicit or implied, how many false premises, errors and prejudices and
propaganda lies or false pretences and misleading words and definitions in the reports,
one is able and willing to put up with. Especially, when they follow each other in quick
succession in broadcasts. At least with newspapers and magazines one can easily ignore
and skip whatever is uninteresting, trivial or wrong in them, subjectively to oneself or
objectively. And one is given time to ponder any item of interest, without being distracted
by further verbal news input. News for public consumption are usually badly selected,
opinionated, prejudiced and insufficiently informative. The most important aspects and
the causes leading up to news events are usually ignored or only superficial judgments
are offered. Objective reporting is rare. – Even rulers are often and habitually
misinformed by their informants. – Journalists often ask very many questions but only
rarely the right ones. And they all too often jump to the wrong conclusion. Overall, they
represent personal rather than causal thinking in most cases. E.g. their excessive concern
with political leaders and their campaigns. – How can it be otherwise, as long as there are
ten-thousands of popular prejudices in the heads of leaders and their subjects? - J.Z.,
1.2.87, 25.1.08.
NEWS: the all too incomplete, prejudiced and ignorant “coverage” of many of the trivial
and few of the significant events, mostly without a sound explanation for the latter. – J.Z.,
18.4.92, 27.1.08.
NEWS: The mass media often assert that they would provide complete coverage – as if
this would fit even into a 24 hour news service or even the thickest newspaper. What
percentage of facts and happenings does really ever reach them and what fraction of this
fraction do they broadcast or print? The only estimate of this that I have found did assert:
They get 1 % of the news and of this 1 % they publish a selection of 1 %. - J.Z., 9.9.92. –
But then the ability of their customers to view, listen and read is also severely limited and
they do have to adapt themselves to this fact. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - PRESS, MASS MEDIA,
NEWS: The mass media, now including the Internet, advertising, the number of strangers
one can encounter now, all overload us with so much information that it becomes
difficult to impossible for most to judge which are the truthful and significant items in
this flood. Thus the best ideas and facts, discoveries, inventions and insights can be lost
to most in the crowd of other information. Judgment, time and energy to sort them out
remain rare. – J.Z., 26.12.99, 24.1.08. - & INFORMATION OVERLOAD, MEDIA,
NEWS: The news services for the masses, being manned by the ignorant and prejudiced,
ignore or bury most of the really important news, either on their own “initiative” or upon
command from higher-ups. – However, years ago I found a hint that at least one of
Churchill‟s speeches was also censored for the printed record of parliamentary speeches
and this in the case where he made a statement on the wrongness and threat of nuclear
war. – When even he does not enjoy full freedom of speech and press, and this in
Parliament … - J.Z., 25.1.08. - PRESS, MASS MEDIA
NEWS: The really important news would be good and new ideas. Instead, we get news
on reenactments of ancient errors, prejudices and myths, over and over again. The actors
change, the play is the same. – J.Z., 38.11.82, 30.1.08. - MASS MEDIA, JOURNALISM
NEWS: The Russians, I think, say it best in one of their proverbs: "There is no news in
the truth and no truth in the news." & TRUTHS
NEWS: The same old and wrong opinions, proposals and actions, over and over again, in
99 % of the cases – and reported without sufficiently informed criticism and judgment. –
J.Z., 7.2.95.
NEWS: The supposed “news” are usually too repetitive for me to bother keeping up with
them. The most significant events, actions or ideas are often not reported in the mass
media at all or only all too distorted or misunderstood. Instead, relative trivia are offered
in abundance. – J.Z. 14.9.07, 22.10.07.
NEWS: There are “news” of events that never happened. There are omitted news of
events that did happen. There are wrongful reports of events that happened and there are,
sometimes, rarely in the mass media, correct reports of news as they happened. – J.Z.,
11.6.98. – The really significant facts and ideas are often not seen or reported. – J.Z.,
11.6.98. – At least with the Internet news reporting is no longer a monopoly of relatively
rich publishers of large newspapers, radio- and TV stations. – J.Z., 23.1. 08. – For
instance: When did you last see in a newspaper a report on the growth of the circulation
of the forced and exclusive currency of the government‟s central bank and this, for the
last few decades, compared with the rise of the price level, expressed in this depreciated
money? – A third entry might e.g. be the price level expressed in gold weight units. - J.Z.,
NEWS: There is little of value to be found in all the daily mass media news reports. The
same problems are reported in different localities and at different times, at various
degrees of seriousness. All are following from the same prejudices, errors, myths and
wrongful ideas, laws, institutions and actions. - J.Z., 3.12.00. - Even the libertarian news
reports on the Internet, sent via e-mail, become all too repetitive and concerned with
relative trivia, rather than with really significant ideas and events. Their news value to
some libertarians may be high, but their libertarian ideas contents is usually small or rare.
G. Chr. Lichtenberg once wrote that for a book that contained on every page a significant
new idea he would be prepared to crawl on his knees from Goettingen to Hamburg.
Where are such books, even among the libertarian and anarchist ones? They have still not
produced a large and ever growing freedom encyclopedia, library, information service
and Ideas Archive, not even a comprehensive bibliography, abstracting, review and
indexing service, far less established comprehensive libertarian publishing and library
services and do not even seem to realize the need for them - and how much they could, as
individuals, contribute to if only they made a concerted effort to establish such facilities,
with affordable alternative media, like microfiche, audio and video tapes, floppy disks,
CD-ROMs or, if they wanted to, online. - They haven't even made the fullest possible use
of the photocopying options, - apart from the limited offers by Jim Stumm. - J.Z., 2.2.02.
NEWS: They are almost all about ignorant and prejudiced people acting against other
ignorant and prejudiced people or, supposedly, for their benefit. The real facts, issues,
options, principles involved and sound alternatives remain unknown or uninteresting to
both the reporters and the readers. It is still mainly “panem & circenses” ( bread and
circus performances ) or welfare hand-outs and entertainment, just like among the ancient
Romans, while all the usual abuses, taxes, tributes, slavery, despotism and wars, were
continued under “glorious” territorial imperialism. Inflations, deflations, mass
unemployment, bankruptcies, wars and economic crises are reported as if they were not
government-caused but natural catastrophes. And government controlled education,
together with the mass media, support this ignorance, prejudice and lack of interest. –
The Internet in most of the website information that it offers, has still too much in
common with the mass media. - J.Z., 20.7.87, 26.1.08.
NEWS: Truth and news are not the same thing.” – Katharine Graham, owner of THE
NEWS: We need to get to the truth behind the news, not just to the news. - The news is
what the government says it is. - Truth is what lies behind the news." - Bill Moyers
Former Press Secretary to Vietnam War US President LBJ (Lyndon Johnson) at - Often the
most important “news” are actually the principles, doctrines and assumptions behind the
events. But they are rarely sufficiently reported and examined. It is impossible to
photograph them, too. – J.Z., 5.1.08. - & TRUTHS
NEWS: With our internet-driven obsession with breaking news – where the importance
of a story is determined purely by how recently it happened – we spend too little time
reflecting on the news sensations of the not so distant past.” – Ross Gittins, THE
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 7.4.03. – I assume this vice has been copied from the
previous practice of the mass media. Mass media and the Internet tend to stress mere
news much more than really important ideas, discoveries and developments. – J.Z.,
21.10.07. Compare e.g. their detailed reports about leadership struggles, in which
significant positive ideas and proposals remain unmentioned, mostly because neither of
the contenders has any to offer. – J.Z., 3.11.07. - MERE NEWS & ADDICTION TO
NEWSPAPERS: Advertisements contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper.”
- Thomas Jefferson. – Well, even advertisements are not always truthful. – J.Z., 26.2.06. -
NEWSPAPERS: If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the
newspaper you are misinformed." --American author and humorist Mark Twain (1835-
NEWSPAPERS: If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the
newspaper you are misinformed." --American author and humorist Mark Twain (1835-
NEWSPAPERS: If you don't read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the
newspaper, you are misinformed.” - Mark Twain - From Monica Cellio homepage. -
NEWSPAPERS: News is not what you read today but what happened today.” – Dagobert
D. Runes, A Book of Contemplation, p.96. - PRESS
NEWSPAPERS: One of the principal marks of an educated man … is the fact that he
does not take his opinions from newspapers. … On the contrary, his attitude toward them
is almost always one of frank cynicism, with indifference as its mildest form and contempt
as its commonest. He knows that they are constantly falling into false reasoning about the
things within his special knowledge – that is, within the narrow circle of his special
education – and so he assumes that they make the same or even worse errors about other
things. …This assumption, it may be sad at once, is quite justified by the facts.” –
NEWSPAPERS: Tell me, why don‟t you enjoy any newspaper? – I do not love them, they
serve the times.” – Goethe, Epigrammattisch. – J.Z. tr. of: A: “Sag‟ mir, warum dich
keine Zeitung freut?” – B: “Ich liebe sie nicht, sie dienen der Zeit.” - PRESS, MASS
NEWSPAPERS: The basis of our government being the opinion of the people (*), the
very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we
should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without government, I
should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man
should receive those papers, and be capable of reading them.” – Jefferson, in Sprading,
p.84. – - The ability to read is not good enough when not accompanied by sufficient
knowledge and judgment. Neither are usually imparted by governmentally controlled
education and by more or less managed or influenced mass media. - - Anyhow, why
should there be only these two choices for free individuals? - - (*) That is true only for
communities of volunteers – that are exterritorially quite autonomous and under their
own kind of personal laws only. – J.Z., 30.1.08. - PRESS, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
NEWSPAPERS: The London newspapers had ceased to be impartial vehicles of news
(*); they omitted, they mutilated, they misstated. They were no better than propaganda
rags.” – H. G. Wells, Men Like Goods, p.197 of first paperback issue, 1922, 1970, 197. -
- (*) Were they ever really impartial? – J.Z., 13.9.07.) - PRESS, MEDIA
NEWSPAPERS: The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he
who reads them; inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to the truth than he whose
minds is filled with falsehood and errors.” - Thomas Jefferson, quoted from: Philip Kerr,
editor, The Penguin Book of Lies, Viking, 1990, p.5. - PRESS, MASS MEDIA, PAPERS,
NEWSPAPERS: The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who
reads nothing but the newspapers.” – Thomas Jefferson. - At least the US has some
freedom newspapers. Even some broadcasting stations with pro-freedom programs! -
NEWSPAPERS: Why do people believe newspapers?” - H. L. Mencken, Prejudices, First
Series, p.170.
NEWSPAPERS: Why do people believe newspapers?” - H. L. Mencken, Prejudices, First
Series, p.170.
NEWSPAPERS: With newspapers, there is sometimes disorder; without them there is
always slavery.” - Benjamin Constant (1767-1834) - Quoted in editorial, SAN
FRANCISCO CHRONICLE. - The existence of some newspapers has not led to the
immediate abolition of all slavery. Matter of fact, we have a few dozen millions of slaves
or near-slaves even now and have instituted part-time educational and military slavery,
on top of the traditional tax slavery. Most of these forms of slavery are widely defended
in the newspapers. - J.Z., 26.11.02. - & SLAVERY
NIBBLING AWAY, SALAMI TACTICS: The true danger is when liberty is nibbled
away, for expedients, and by parts.” – Edmund Burke. - EXPEDIENTS & LIBERTY
NIGERIA,: In the DVD movie “Tears of the Sun”, undated on its case, it is mentioned
that Nigeria, at least then, had already 120 million people and that they were divided into
over 250 different ethnic groups, often so antagonistic to each other that people were
murdered merely for going to a different church. The people of missions and whole
villages were indiscriminately slaughtered. Forcing all these people under one territorial
regime was, certainly, a recipe for atrocities. But no “liberation” or decolonization effort
or current political conference considered the exterritorial autonomy alternative for
voluntary communities. The price for this omission by territorialists is paid daily, in
blood, rape, torture, destruction or looting, hunger, unemployment, poverty and sickness.
– Whoever does not think sufficiently will have to take the consequences and should
become aware of them. – These victims, obviously, were not free to decide upon their
own living conditions but were rather subjected to the decisions of others – who simply
had no other use for them than extreme abuse. - J.Z., 21.3.05. - TERRITORIALISM,
NIGHT WATCHMAN STATE: Locke reintroduced the Erasmian concept of „minimum
Christianity‟ and added to it his own vision of the night-watchman state, in which the law
protected life, property and a reasonable order but did not indulge in positive
Utopianism. The law, moral and civil, merely held the ring, and within Renaissance Man
was free to seek fulfillment, guided solely by the dictates of an informed conscience.” –
John Freeman, The Tyranny of Politics, QUADRANT, 6/78. - Should we ignore the fact
that even a monopoly police force does not provide the best kind of police protection? –
To what extent did or do the all too numerous laws actually protect property rights, rather
than infringing them in many ways? - J.Z., 30.1.08, 26.2.09.
NIHILISM: A nihilist is a man who bows not before any authority, one who without a
previous examination does not accept any principle, no matter how much it is generally
respected.” - ( Ein Nihilist ist ein Mensch, der sich vor keiner Autoritaet beugt, der ohne
vorgaengige Pruefung kein Prinzip annimmt, und wenn es auch noch so sehr in Ansehung
steht, ... ) - Iwan Turgenjew, Vaeter und Soehne, Roman. (Fathers & Sons.) - &
NIHILISM: Being brilliant is no great feat if you respect nothing.” - Johann Wolfgang
von Goethe - - There is so very much that does not really
deserve any respect. On the contrary, much of what is legalized and institutionalized now
or quite customary and traditional deserves the greatest disrespect – unless it is continued
only among volunteers and this at their own expense and risk. – J.Z., 12.1.08. – But
Disrespect for what deserves respect shows not brilliance at all. – J.Z., 23.1.08. – Perhaps
many 16 year olds imagine themselves to be a genius. Later they get to know themselves
and their limitations much better. – J.Z., 26.2.09. - DISRESPECT, BRILLIANCE IN
NIHILISM: Nihilism is useless." - T-shirt slogan quoted in: W. T. Quick, Bank Robbery,
NINETEENTH CENTURY: … let us study Croce‟s recent philosophic survey of the
much-maligned nineteenth century, one of the most creative and emancipating eras in the
history of mankind.” – G. P. Gooch, Dictatorship in Theory and Practice, p.48.
NINETEENTH CENTURY: Like many of his contemporaries, he believe that the spread
of capitalist institutions and industrial methods of production had, by the early nineteenth
century, caused widespread misery. This belief is still common. It is based on
questionable history and far more questionable logic. - - Many people, reading of the
long work days and low salaries of nineteenth-century England and America, consider
the case against capitalism and industrialism already proven. They forget that those
conditions seem intolerable to us only because we live in an enormously richer society
and that our society became so productive largely through economic progress made
during the nineteenth century under institutions of relatively unrestrained laissez-faire
capitalism.” – David Friedman, The Machinery of Freedom, p.36. – DIS. -
NINETEENTH CENTURY: The nineteenth century never saw more than 5 per cent. of
the national income in the public purse. Nineteen shillings out of every sovereign of the
income of the nation was fructifying in the pockets of the people, one shilling in the
pound was the limit of political money. On that simple plan the nineteenth century built
up our industries, established a standard of life here far higher than anywhere else, made
us the wealthiest country in the world, the world‟s bankers, enabled us to finance the
development of the whole world including North America, and put us into such a position
that when the Great War came we were able to shoulder practically the whole of the
financial responsibility.” – Ernest Benn, Honest Doubt, p.44. – He should have
mentioned at least the extensive but not completely free trade in the second half, the
absence of immigration and emigration restrictions, the absence of most compulsory
licensing requirements. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - TAXATION, LAISSEZ FAIRE, CAPITALISM,
NINETEENTH CENTURY: Under the economic conditions of the nineteenth century, no
institutions, socialist, capitalist, or anarcho-capitalist, could have instantly produced
what we would regard as a decent standard of living. The wealth simply was not there. If
a socialist had confiscated all income of all capitalist millionaires and given it to the
worker, he would have found the workers little better off than before. The millionaires
made far more than the workers, but there were so many more workers than millionaires.
It required a long period of progress to produce a society rich enough to regard the
conditions of the nineteenth century as miserable poverty.” – David Friedman, The
Machinery of Freedom, p.36. – DIS.
NO GOVERNMENT: And on the other hand, take the Jewish people, the aristocracy of
the human race – how is it they have kept their place apart, their poetical halo, amid
surroundings of coarse cruelty? By having no State to burden them. Had they remained
in Palestine, they would long ago have lost their individuality in the process of their
State‟s construction, like all other nations.” – Ibsen, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the
Great Libertarians, p.52 – - While they had no State of their own for many centuries,
weren‟t they subjected to the misgovernment of all the States in which they lived, and
this although they tried to integrate themselves politically and economically, although not
completely socially and religiously? Some said that precisely because of their many
persecutions they tended to keep their identity, their different way of life and beliefs.
Organized in the form of a territorial State they tend to behave just like other territorial
States do. – J.Z. 31.1.08. – JEWS, ISRAEL, ANTISEMITISM.
NO GOVERNMENT: and until yee have secured and settled the Common-wealth in
solid peace and true freedom, which is the end of the primitive institution of all
governments.” – Petition of March 1647, quoted in A. L. Morton, Freedom in Arms, 96. –
NO GOVERNMENT: For upwards of two years from the commencement of the
American war, and a longer period in several of the American states, there were no
established forms of government. The old government had been abolished, and the
country was too much occupied in defence to employ its attention in establishing new
governments; yet, during this interval, order and harmony were preserved as inviolate as
in any country in Europe. (*) There is a natural aptness in man, and more so in society,
because it embraces a greater variety of abilities and resources, to accommodate itself to
whatever situation it is in.” – Thomas Paine, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great
Libertarians, p.76. - - (*) We should not forget the expropriation and persecution of the
royalists, most of whom fled to Canada. – As tolerant enough freedom lovers they should
have recognized monarchism for the monarchists and claimed a republic or other kind of
free society only for themselves. – Alas, they were also territorial monopolists, although
of the limited government and constitutionalist kind. – Not that the royalists were more
tolerant. – The precedent set by religious liberty or religious tolerance was not followed.
Thus even the USA had its Civil War and numerous other wars. How would it have
developed if it had recognized full exterritorial autonomy to Negroes and Red Indians
and to any other group of dissenters? – How would that have affected world history? -
NO GOVERNMENT: From the Garrisonian viewpoint, Wendell Phillips had attacked
Spooner‟s arguments in an 1847 pamphlet, Review of Lysander Spooner‟s Essay “The
Unconstitutionality of Slavery”. Phillips argued that “Mr. Spooner‟s idea is practical no-
governmentalism. It leaves every one to do what is right in his own eyes.” ( p. 10. )“–
Charles Chively, in introduction to Spooner, Works, I, p.39. – ANARCHISM,
NO GOVERNMENT: government should stay out of religion, out of education, out of
management-labor matters … out of EVERYTHING – i.e. … there should be no function
left for government to perform, and hence there need be no government at all …” – View
attacked by John Hospers in reason, May 73. - VS. LIMITED GOVERNMENT,
NO GOVERNMENT: I am convinced that those societies ( as the Indians ) which live
without government, enjoy in their general mass an infinitely greater degree of happiness
than those who live under the European governments. Among the former, public opinion
is in the place of laws, and restrains morals as powerfully as laws ever did anywhere.” –
Thomas Jefferson, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians, P.84/85. –
Compare also Jefferson‟s views on newspapers and governments. – PUBLIC OPINION,
NO GOVERNMENT: In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that
which was right in his own eyes.” – Bible. – Where in it? – ANCIENT ISRAEL,
NO GOVERNMENT: Is it realized that the ultimate ideal is absence of government?
Otherwise, the straight will become the crooked, and the good will revert to evil. Verily,
mankind have been under delusion for many a day!” – Lao Tzu, in the translation of
NO GOVERNMENT: Men have sought for ages to discover the science of government;
and lo! here it is, that men cease totally to attempt to govern each other at all! … (*) –
Stephen Pearl Andrews, quoted in Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.84. - - (*) Or they
attempt to do so only in communities of like-minded volunteers, under their own personal
laws and full exterritorial autonomy. – J.Z., 30.1.08. – Reichert omitted the rest of that
segment: … that they learn to know the consequences of their own acts, and that they
arrange their relations with each other upon such a basis of science that the disagreeable
consequences shall be assumed by the agent himself. – Probably from: The Science of
NO GOVERNMENT: No Government Whatever.” – Voltairine de Cleyre, Anarchism
and American Tradition, p.127. – Should volunteers not be free to form their own
communities, societies and governments for themselves? In their way anarchists can be
authoritarians as well. – J.Z., 26.2.09.- TOLERANCE FOR THE CHOICE
NO GOVERNMENT: The "no government" philosophy is the most radical philosophy
against the threat of nuclear war. "No government" is here used as meaning: no
government that is not fully based on individual consent. - See: Action, Alternative
Institutions, Anarchism, Autonomy, Competing Governments, Consent, Experimental
Freedom, Exterritorial Imperative, Government, Individualism, Libertarianism, Panarchy,
Parallel Institutions, Personal Law, Pluralism, Secession, Sovereignty, Statism, Territorial
Organization, Voluntarism, War Aims. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War.
NO GOVERNMENT: The growth of government on all levels causes a concomitant rise
in crimes and trespasses if all types among the general populace. In a condition without
government, we chance being harmed. With government, we are certain to be plundered,
and chances are greater of being injured by another individual the more government
grows and diminishes individual value systems. It seems absurd to expect value
improvement among people when lack of values radiates from „above‟ – from the so-
called „authorities‟. I‟ll take my chances without government.” – D. E. Smith in
NO GOVERNMENT: The notion of Government is succeeded by that of Contract. The
course of history inevitably leads mankind to adopt new practices. Economic criticism
has already noted that under the new system political institutions must disappear within
industrial organization. Let us therefore fearlessly conclude that the revolutionary slogan
can no longer be Direct Legislation, Direct Government, Simplified Government. It must
be NO MORE GOVERNMENT. - - There must be no monarchy, no aristocracy, no
democracy even, insofar as this implies a government acting in the name of the people
and claiming to be the people. No authority, no government, even if it be popular
government, this is the Revolution.” – Proudhon, quoted in S. Edwards, Proudhon, 98/99,
quoting from P.‟s work on Revolution, 1851, p.199. - - Why not be tolerant towards all
forms of government that are continued only under personal laws and exterritorial
autonomy among their followers? – This kind of tolerance might promote tolerance for
all kinds of anarchists and all kinds of libertarians as well and at least will reduce the
opposition to as tolerant advocates of freedom or free choice, including free choice for
individuals among political, economic and social systems. - J.Z., 30.1.08. –
NO GOVERNMENT: There‟s No Government like No govt.” – Mini-sticker or button
NO GOVERNMENT: Therefore ask no further questions as to what we would have
instead of government, nor what will become of society when there are no longer
governments. I warrant that in future it will be easier to conceive of society without a
government than it will be to conceive of society with one.” – Proudhon, 1851,
Revolution., pp. 302/3, in C. S. Edwards, Proudhon, p.100.
NO GOVERNMENT: What is at stake is the fundamental principle of the compact
theory of government, enunciated in John Locke‟s Second Treatise of Government, and
incorporated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence: that governments
are instituted among men for certain ends; that among these are life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness; that whenever a government becomes destructive of those ends, it is
the right of people to alter or abolish it.” – Howard Zinn, Disobedience and Democracy,
p.118. – Underlining by me. – J.Z. – At least those no longer believing in territorial
governments or wanting other forms of governments or societies for themselves, should
be free to abolish a territorial government – as far as all their own affairs are concerned
and run their own voluntary communities as they like, under personal laws and full
exterritorial autonomy. – J.Z.,. 30.1.08.
NO GOVERNMENT: Why suppose that there cannot be tribunals without violence?
Trial by people trusted by the disputants have always existed and will exist, and needs no
violence. We are so depraved by long-continued slavery that we can hardly imagine
administration without violence. And yet, again, that is not true. Russian communes
migrating to distant regions, where our government leaves them alone, arrange their own
taxation, administration, tribunals, and police, and always prosper until government
violence interferes with their administration. And in the same way, there is no reason to
suppose that people could not, by common consent, decide how the land is to be
apportioned for use.” – Tolstoy, quoted in Sprading, Liberty and the Great Libertarians,
NO IMPOSITIONS: Panarchies are no impositions upon anyone but just extremely
liberal and at the same time moral and utilitarian frameworks for everyone's favorite
options. They allow everyone's options to be tolerantly and freely practised, among
volunteers, on the basis of exterritorial autonomy, i.e. without interference by ? (non-
members?) – J.Z., n.d.
NO LIMITS: No limits for voluntary and self-responsible actions. – J.Z., 7.4.93.
NO LIMITS: There is no limit to the ingenuity of man if it is properly and vigorously
applied under conditions of peace and justice.” – Winston Churchill, - By now we have
many more technical and quite affordable opportunities to gather and widely publish the
best ideas, formulas, facts and talents. Alas, these opportunities, e.g. CDs, DVDs. Blue
Light Disks and HDs for long text compilations, remain still largely unused. - J.Z., 23.
NO MONEY: I have no money, they have no money, we have no money.” - Common
thoughtless expression. - What KIND of money don't you have? WHY is it in short
KINDS OF MONEY?? WHY are you not free to ISSUE YOUR OWN? - J. Z., n.d.,
NO SIMPLE SOLUTIONS: There is no underlying simplicity to war and politics, much
as Marxists and others dream of finding one.” – David Brin, ANALOG, April 27, 1981,
p.154. - Territorialism and Compulsory membership are two such single and simple
factors. Collective responsibility notions and practices are a third one. Monopolization of
war and peace decisions is another. So is monetary despotism, as opposed to monetary
freedom and the suppression of human rights instead of their realization. Also collective
responsibility notions and practices. – Imagine our kind of bread or cake or drink would
be centrally prescribed for all, under threat of treason trials if we dared to make our own,
to our own satisfaction. At most we would have one vote among millions on which kind
of nourishment is to be imposed upon all for the next territorial government period. Do
not try to tell me that such territorial interventionism would not cause much friction. We
have therefore abolished it for millions of private decisions, alas, without abolishing it as
well in the few but significant spheres where territorial decision-making still causes
major troubles, even endangers the very survival of man. If people were open-minded in
every respect, really motivated by major problems, able and willing to see, here, read and
study, they would soon come to want to look at the other side of the coin, that which
shows territorial sovereignty on the one side, that is before them, face up. They would
want to explore, rather than continue to ignore their exterritorialist and voluntary options,
the other side of this coin. Alas, most of us are descendants of slaves or serfs and just try
to make the best out of our present situations, even if that means “dancing at the edge of a
volcano”. – We can‟t do much, as yet, about the eruptions of volcanoes but we could do
much to prevent the frequent eruptions of territorial statism and the constant stench and
poisons emanating from them. – J.Z., 11.1.99, 7.9.04. – STATISM, TERRITORIALISM,
NO: A mere “no!” is not enough, no matter how loudly, how often and by how many
people it is shouted. It is merely the expression of wishful thinking, with no more chances
to succeed than a prayer has, of the “bae” sounds of sheep herded to the abattoir.
Especially when most people still say, in effect, yes – to territorial nationalism, taxation,
inflation, public debts and collective responsibility notions and are fully of errors, myths
and prejudices and statist attitudes that make wars and despotism possible to likely. –
NO: A no at the proper time spares much trouble.” - ( Ein Nein zur rechten Zeit / Erspart
viel Widerwaertigkeit. ) – Proverb.
NO: Almost all human beings are slaves for the same reason which the Spartans found
for the servility of the Persians: They could not express the word “No”. – Nicolas
Chamfort, Maximen und Gedanken. ( Beinahe alle Menschen sind Sklaven aus dem
Grunde, den die Spartaner fuer die Knechtschaft der Perser fanden: sie koennen das
Woertschen „Nein“ nicht aussprechen. )
NO: Be your own man (woman). All you have to do is to say: “No!” – Disney Show on
Channel I, 20.4.80.
NO: But there is no reward at all for dong what other people expect of you, and to do so
is note merely difficult, but impossible. It is easier to deal with a footpad than it is with
the leach who wants “just a few minutes of your time, please – this won‟t take long.”
Time is your total capital, and the minutes of your life are painfully few. If you allow
yourself to fall into the vice of agreeing to such requests, they will quickly snowball to the
point where there parasites will use up a hundred percent of your time – and squawk for
more! - - So learn to say No – and to be rude about it when necessary. - - Otherwise you
will not have time to carry out your duty, nor to do your own work, and certainly no time
for love and happiness. The termites will nibble away your life and leave none of it for
you. - - ( This rule does not mean that you must not do a favor for a friend, or even a
stranger. But let the choice be yours. Don‟t do it because it is “expected” of you.)” –
Robert Heinlein, The Notebooks of Lazarus Long.
NO: Freedom always includes the right to say No. – DIAGONAL RELATIONSHIP,
NO: He who refuses nothing will soon have nothing to refuse.” ( Quisquis nil negat,
fellat. ) – Martial, Epigrams, Bk. xii, ep.79.
NO: I guess I‟ll have to begin from the A-B-Cs. We have never sought power. We have
sought to disperse power, to set men and women free. Everybody‟s free. The slave is free.
The ultimate weapon isn‟t this plague out in Vegas, or any new super H-bomb. The
ultimate weapon has always existed. Every man, every woman, and every child owns it.
It‟s the ability to say No and take the consequences. (*). „Fear is failure.‟ „The fear of
death is the beginning of slavery.‟ „Thou hast no right but to do they will.‟ … Socrates
took the hemlock to prove it. Jesus went to the cross to prove it. It‟s in all history, all
myth, all poetry. It‟s right out in the open all the time.” – Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus III,
p.142/43. - - (*) Not to “take” the consequences but to sufficiently prepare to cope,
successfully, with the consequences. – That requires many more thoughts than merely the
expression of a short word. – And most people are for some reason or the other not
prepared to undertake that thoughtful labor. They rather believe in the effectiveness of a
single word and play a martyr when that word fails to achieve their objective and to save
them. - J.Z., 30.1.08.
NO: If they once said no! then they and many others would be helped. But the braying of
jackasses says “yes” to everything.” – ( Sagten sie einmal nein! waere ihnen und vielen
geholfen; / Aber das Eselsgeschrei schreit zu allem: ja. ) – Fallersleben, Gedichte. - Nein.
– The ultimate „No!“ is expressed by individual secessionism and the reorganization,
together with like-minded volunteers, under full exterritorial autonomy, including
personal constitutions and laws. – J.Z., 21.7.86, 25.1.08. SAYING NO INSTEAD OF
NO: it will also be necessary to liberate the individual from dependence upon the
collectivity for his identity so that he becomes able to say “No” to Power. – R. V.
Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, XXIV. – Merely saying “no” is not enough, as long as
one is not free to secede as an individual or as a member of a minority group that will
turn itself into an exterritorially autonomous community of volunteers under personal
NO: Nay has the same number of letters as aye. ( Tantae Letras tiene un no como un si. )
– Cervantes, Don Quixote, Pt. I, ch.22.
NO: NO‟ is the most important word in the language and it is the most difficult word of
all to say.” – Sir Ernest Benn, Confessions of a Capitalist, p.153.
NO: Of all the time-saving techniques ever developed, perhaps the most effective is the
frequent use of the word no. You cannot protect your priorities unless you learn to
decline, tactfully, but firmly, every request that does not contribute to the achievement of
your goals.” – Edwin C. Bliss, Getting Things Done, Bantam Books.
NO: One made the observation of the people of Asia that they were all slaves to one man,
merely because they could not pronounce that syllable No.” – Plutarch, Morals: Of
NO: Say no to them all.” – NEW BANNER adv. in OUTLOOK, Oct. 72.
NO: The whole task of good men consists in teaching the people to say „NO‟. (*) The
king‟s fool asked the vital question: „What would you do, sire, if, when you say yes,
everyone said no?” Let the people say this „No‟. Nothing else is necessary, nothing else
will do. – R. V. Sampson, The Discovery of Peace, p.102 on Proudhon. - - (**) While it is
almost impossible to teach all people anything really worth knowing, it is possible to
teach communities of volunteers to say not to those things that they do dislike most. On
that basis they can freely confederate with other communities of volunteers, who said
“no” to other things, as far as their own affairs are concerned. A federation of these “no”-
sayers could soon become more powerful than all the all too obedient “yes” sayers in
combination. – - (*) That merely the saying of “no” would be required is wishful
thinking. – All those, who agree among themselves, must also organize themselves to
practise their beliefs among themselves and become tolerant towards all voluntary
communities of others who do their things for or to themselves. Only then will they
become more powerful than the present rulers of territorial States. Among other things,
they will also have to organize themselves militarily for the protection of all their
individual rights and liberties, to the extent that they want to claim and practise these
rights among themselves – and that requires first a sufficient interest in a complete
declaration of individual rights and liberties. – Alas, these preconditions are not yet
fulfilled. – There may be quite a few others, too. - J.Z., 30.1.08.
NO: To think is to say no.” – Alain, Le Citoyen contre le pouvoirs, 1925. – Correct
towards the mere commands of power-holders, but insufficient, if not combined with
sufficient will, strength, knowledge and organization to effectively resist them. Incorrect
e.g. towards the facts of nature and its laws, also the natural laws for men or their
individual rights and liberties. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - & THINKING
NOBEL PRIZES: Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded
the Nobel Peace Prize. – Tom Lehrer. Since that satire was accepted without comment or
change in public opinion, obviously, many more such cases have to happen and become
fully understood. Even popular and at first seemingly truthful slogans and statements
ought to become closely examined, e.g. with "argument mapping", to eliminate, at least
gradually their remaining errors and wrong conclusions. - Isn't it curious how many
former politicians become somewhat wise in their utterances once they are out of office?
Also, how many of them make sensible public statements - and then act quite contrary to
them, while they have to power to do so? - J.Z., 23. 11. 06. - POLITICAL SATIRE,
NOBLENESS: Be noble – and the nobleness that lies in other men, sleeping, but never
dead, will rise in majesty to meet thine own. – James Russel Lowell, Sonnet IV, 1840. – A
lot of wishful thinking is also part of that remark. – J.Z., 30.1.08. - NOBILITY,
NOBODY: Don‟t blame me, I voted for NOBODY. Nobody is the perfect candidate!
Nobody keeps his campaign promises! Nobody can legislate freedom for you! Nobody
can be trusted with power! Nobody deserves to tax your earnings.” – Election sticker by?
When? –Another version of the same kind of very small red sticker, with black print: “On
Election Day VOTE FOR NOBODY. NOBODY keeps his campaign promises! NOBODY
can legislate freedom for you! NOBODY deserves to spend your earnings!” – VOTING,
NOBODY: I was also attracted to Nobody, represented by Col. Hugh Romney (USAF-
ret.) a.k.a. Wavy Gravy a.k.a. Nobody‟s Fool. I liked the campaign stickers that said:
“Nobody will cut your taxes”, “Nobody can represent you better than you can represent
yourself”, “Nobody makes better apple pie than Mom”, “Nobody is perfect”, and so on.
– Robert Anton Wilson, Right Where You Are Sitting Now, p.136.
NOBODY: Nobody for president” … after all, Nobody lowered your taxes, and Nobody‟s
qualified & Nobody keeps his campaign promises.” – Lorn Strider, column Honk …
NOBODY: Nobody is good enough to rule another man without his consent. – Source?
NOBODY: Nobody keeps his promises. Nobody deserves to live off your taxes. Nobody
should run your live. Nobody deserves your vote.” – Slogan reported by Ron Chusid in
NOBODY: Nobody keeps his promises. Nobody deserves to run your life. Nobody can
represent you better than you can represent yourself. – Vote for Nobody, he‟ll leave you
alone.” – From the Nobody Campaign of Wavy Gravy and the Hog Farm, 1600
Woolsey, Berkeley, Cal., GREEN REVOLUTION, 10/78.
NOBODY: TIR campaigned for this result with about one hundred “Nobody for
President” posters planned around the U-M Central Campus and dorms. They had
several lines such as “Nobody keeps his promises; Nobody deserves to live off your
taxes; Nobody should run your life; and Nobody deserves your vote.” Other lines
included “The lesser of two evils is still evil” and “Don‟t vote … it only encourages
them.” As usual on an election day, I wore my “Everyone votes for a dictator” T-shirt.” –
Campaign Drek ‟76 - Ron Chusid, THE CONNECTION 66.
NO-GOVERNMENT: No-government is good government.” – The Preacher, THE
CONNECTION, 133, p.91.
NOISE: Noise and Quietness: Every rational being has the right to cause noises during its
work, travel or spare time activities but it may not cause undue noise because at the same
time every rational being has the right to quietness and rest. – From the human rights
draft in PEACE PLANS No. 4, article15. - & HUMAN RIGHTS
NOISE: the sense-assaulting decibels of electronic music paralyzing the brains of its
listeners. – Robert Ardrey, The Social Contract, p.290. – Also often permanently
damaging their hearing capacity. – Thinking requires a minimum to a maximum of
quietness. - J.Z., 31.8.08. - MODERN MUSIC, DISCOS
NOMINALISM: Some are satisfied when they hear it, some when the see it, and others
stop when they have a Greek word for it, only too few go beyond the word.” – Dagobert
D. Runes, A Dictionary of Thought. - WORDS, DEFINITIONS, MEANINGS,
NOMINALISM: There is no need to commit the nominalist fallacy that to name is to
create. – Silvert, Man‟s Power, p.82. – Or that to give a name to something means to
accurately describe something. Names often contain more imagined abstracts than
observations of the diverse reality of something. E.g. the terms “human being” & “limited
government”. – J.Z., 31.1.08.
NOMOS: It is instructive to remember that the conception of law in the sense of nomos (
i.e. of an abstract rule not due to anybody‟s concrete will, applicable in particular cases
irrespective of the consequences, a law which could be „found‟ and was not made for
particular foreseeable purposes ) has existed and been preserved together with the ideal
of individual liberty only in countries like ancient Rome and modern Britain, in which the
development of private laws was based on case law and not on statute law, that is, was in
the hands of judges or jurists and not of legislators. Both the conception of law as nomos
and the ideal of individual liberty have rapidly disappeared whenever the law came to be
conceived as the instrument of a government‟s own ends.” – F. A. Hayek, The Confusion
of Language … p.17. – But the clear formulation of natural law in form of declarations of
individual rights and liberties, left also much to be desired, not only in the various such
drafts and laws by governments but also in the private formulations of freedom lovers.
See my digitized collection of over 130 private such drafts in PEACE PLANS 589/590,
several times updated. So far only available as email attachment from me, until it finally
appear online or on CD, for completion and discussion by others, on the road to an ideal
declaration of this kind. – J.Z., 31.1.08. - LAWS, NATURAL LAW, COMMON LAW,
NON COMBATANTS: Seeing the facts and consequences of forced labor and also the
powerful direction of labor into armament industries by means of inflationary central
bank credits granted to armament industries, while peaceful enterprises are largely
refused further production or turnover credits, and seeing that all merely conscripted
enemy soldiers are also our potential allies, if only we have quite rightful war and peace
aims, directed only against their despotic regime, we should consider these
noncombatants and these conscripts both as largely innocents and as our potential and
secret allies, whom we ought to treat as such, as much as possible. We should also give
them as many chances as possible to desert or defect from their regime – to any
government in exile, one of their own individual choice, none claiming a territorial
monopoly and rule over others than volunteers, and inform them as much as possible
about the techniques of rightful military uprising and liberating revolutions. As Eugene
Lyons pointed out in at least one book, the captive peoples are our secret allies. We
should not systematically bomb or otherwise exterminate these potential allies but rather
treat them as much as possible already during the war as allies rather than as enemies.
The usual military strategies and tactics drive them into the arms of their victimizers and
exploiters. – Our defensive war efforts should be directed only against the real war
criminals on the other side. - J.Z., 17.7.87, 26.1.08.
NON COMBATANTS: You may consider non-combatants as enemies to be killed, too,
as present or future (children) armament producers or you could attempt to spare them, as
much as possible and thereby give the enemy government‟s conscripts less reason to
obey them and to fight you and more reasons to rise against their regime, to desert to your
side and even to become your allies. Especially if you proclaim quite rightful war and
peace aims in a quite believable way, e.g. via various governments in exile, already now
being free to do their things for their voluntary members, like they would for all their
future voluntary members. It would be an important step towards reducing the
“defensive” aggression on our side and achieving the overthrow of the aggressive enemy
regime. – By targeting also the non-combatants we might turn them from indifferent
subjects or even enemies of the regime into its loyal or at least obedient supporters. - J.Z.,
17.7.87, 26.1.08.
NON CONFORMISM: Any attempt to impose conformity on human beings through
political means is an attempt to destroy what it is that makes them essentially and
gloriously human.” – Roy Childs, Liberty Against Power, p.8. – MAN, HUMAN,
NON CONFORMISM: The desire to be different from the people we live with is
sometimes the result of our rejection - real or imagined - by them.” - Eric Hoffer -
NON-AGGRESSION: According to Block, the purpose of the book is to explore and
justify the consistent application of the moral rule that every consenting adult has the
right to do just as he pleases, provided he doesn‟t interfere with the identical rights of
others. “I wanted to come to grips with the view that all non-aggressive, noninvasive
behaviour is legitimate.” – Richard Lubbock, in MERCURY, 1/79, on Block‟s work:
“Defending the Undefendable”. - LEGITIMACY
NON-AGGRESSION: Expecting the world to treat you fairly because you're a good
person is like expecting a bull to not charge you because you're a vegetarian. -
(anonymous) - King Wen of China, ca. 2,000 B.C., is supposed to have ruled so well that
neighbouring rulers, intending to plunder the wealth of his kingdom, could not get their
soldiers to fight him. They rather deserted and asked him to rule them as well. Where are
such shiny examples now? - J.Z., 29.10.02. - NON-INVASIVENESS, TOLERANCE,
NON-AGGRESSION: Non-aggression pacts between governments are unreliable, to say
the least, All too often the governments concerned consider it as being in their interest to
break them. Only few have never been broken. - Since they leave the powers making for
war unchanged, they are usually no more than a temporary window-dressing. Instance:
The non-aggression pact between the Nazis and Stalin's regime, which led to the
aggression against and division of Poland and started off World War II. - See: Alliances,
Decisions, Governments, Leadership, Madness, Peace Declarations, People, Politicians,
Referendums, Rulers, Secret Diplomacy, States, Treaties, Trust, War Aims. - From: J.Z.,
An ABC Against Nuclear War. - NON-AGGRESSION PACTS
NON-AGGRESSION: The initial premise underlying the philosophy of libertarianism (
and of this book ) is that each man owns his own life and therefore has the right to do
anything he wishes with that life, so long as he does not forcibly interfere with the life of
any other man. (*) This forms the basis for what we will hereafter refer to as Natural
Law. Natural law also may be properly thought of as the “law of nonaggression”; i.e.,
even though a man has the right of self-choice, self-choice does not include the right to
commit aggression against others.” – Ringer, Restoring the American Dream, p.30. - -
(*) For the sake of brevity, I often will leave off what I call the “libertarian tag” when
referring to Natural Law, the libertarian tag being “so long as he does not forcibly
interfere with the life of any other man” ( or similar qualifying statements of this kind ).
Therefore, whenever I make a statement to the effect that “man has the right to do
anything he pleases”, the libertarian tag should automatically be assumed.” – Ringer‟s
note. – The very formulation, every man has the right or self-choice does already imply
non-aggression. Every man has the right of self-choice. This implies non-aggression. –
J.Z., n.d. - - Natural Law will always be largely misunderstood until it becomes clearly
expressed in as many clauses as necessary in an ideal declaration of individual rights and
liberties, still to be discussed and developed, taken into consideration the best precedents
for such a draft that were so far offered. – J.Z., 31.1l.08. - Compare: NON-INITIATION
NON-ASSOCIATION: How does it become a man to behave toward his American
government to-day? I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. It
cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the
slave‟s government also.” – Thoreau, Civil Disobedience. – GOVERNMENT,
NON-ASSOCIATION: If I own my own life, then it follows that I am morally free to
associate with whom I please and not to associate with whom I please. If I own my own
mind and abilities, it follows that I may ask any compensation I wish for using them to
assist another.” – Dr. Duncan Yuille, in his human rights pamphlets, written for the
Workers Party, ca. 1975. – Few draw the conclusion from owning their own life or self-
ownership, that this would also entitle them to withdraw from a territorial State and
establish, if they want to, an exterritorially autonomous community of like-minded
volunteers, living under their own personal laws, but making no exclusive territorial
claims. – or that freedom of association and disassociation, freedom of contract, freedom
of action and experimentation as well as voluntarism can and should go as far. - J.Z.,
NON-COERCIVE GOVERNMENTS: Do such non-coercive governments ( towards
outsiders ) exist? For precedents you have to look no further than to your nearest Rugby
League or Rugby Union Clubs. They do all organize violence- but by members and to
members only, and to members of voluntarily competing clubs, who similarly subscribe
to violence as a "game", a violence that leaves non-combatants unhurt. - Tennis players,
golfers swimmers and other sportsmen are not conscripted. They have sorted themselves
out according to their preferences and in this respect they are already panarchists,
although unconscious ones and do keep the peace with practitioners or viewers of other
sports. - Is there something fundamentally different between football clubs and coercive
governments? I see their only fundamental difference as consisting in voluntary
membership, which also means non-territorial rule ( apart from ownership or lease of
playing fields ) and which leads, automatically, to voluntary taxation or dues and fees.
Coercive governments are just bigger football clubs with COERCIVE membership which
use us as footballs and tax slaves and a whole country as their playing fields and do not
make escape easy or dependent upon their discretion. Moreover, territorial governments
attack their own subjects with police forces, laws, courts, bureaucrats or and other
governments and their subjects militarily. Football clubs confine their violence to
volunteers on football fields. But mind you, governments, internally, only abuse
dissenters and nonconformists in this way. For their voluntary members they offer jolly
good shows and they should be recognized by as such FOR THEM. However, their
voluntary members should no longer be granted any powers, monopolies and privileges
over dissenters that opted out form under them. - Panarchists merely want states and free
societies to be run as differently and tolerantly as sports clubs are: Football for some,
cricket, tennis, golf gymnastics, weight lifting, running or swimming, etc. for others, each
according to the own preferences. – J.Z., n.d. - VOLUNTARISM, VOLUNTARY
NON-COMBATANTS: Don't make war against anyone but the aggressors. Spare the
noncombatants, spare civilians, particularly women and children, and even conscripts,
whenever this is possible. This is a basic rule of the international laws of warfare and it is
the one most offended against by ABC weapons. Because with nuclear weapons one
cannot fight combatants only. They are mass murder and mass destruction devices or
anti-city, anti-country and anti-people "weapons". Thus they are not really weapons,
which one can direct and use against a real enemy only, but merely senselessly
destructive and murderous devices, devices which must be destroyed unilaterally, in full
recognition of this fact. - See: Air Raids, Asylum, Civilians, Defence, Desertion, Enemy,
Indiscriminate Warfare, Mass murder, Militia, Neutrality, Nuclear Strength, Open Cities,
Refugees, Revolutionary Warfare, War Aims, Weapons. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against
Nuclear War.
NON-COMPLIANCE: La Boetie contends that freedom isn‟t gained from violent action,
but rather from not complying with the existing power structure.” – From blurb for his
book, put out by Free Life Editions. – VIOLENCE, COERCION, COMPULSION.
NON-CONFORMISM: (a) Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “Whoso would be a man must be
a non-conformist.” Do you agree or disagree? – (b) Would you prefer to conform on
important matters, or on unimportant matters? - - (a) A non-conformist is not the same
thing as an anti-conformist. Non-conformism connotes freedom to choose one‟s own
values – anti-conformism, the urge to be different, leaves us living in terms of others‟
values just as much as conformity does. Therefore, using this definition we would agree
with Emerson that living fully as a human being involves being a non-conformist. - - (b)
If by conforming we mean living in terms of others‟ values, the issue in question (
whether important or unimportant) is less crucial than the fact of compromising the
freedom of one‟s values. Conformism would be unacceptable. - - It is possible to “go
along” with things one does not agree with without altering one‟s values. Possible
motivations for this would include convenience, avoiding social friction, etc. Certainly
this “going along” would be better done in less rather than more important matters. We
suspect this type of activity could, over a period of time tend to erode one‟s values,
however.” - Glen G. Cooper in “Contemporary Realism”, p.24. - - Panarchism or
polyarchism, as opposed to territorial statism, offer the “compromise” to each of free
choice between various political, economic and social systems, without having to
compromise in such choices. – J.Z., 27.1.08.
NON-CONFORMISM: A free-lance thinker.” – L. L. Lewins on Webster: Unafraid
Dictionary. ( I have not yet seen it. – J.Z., 30.1.08. ) - NONCONFORMIST,
NON-CONFORMISM: And they are no longer willing to conform. - These rising forces
feel instinctively that the coming events require a political structure that is capable of
guaranteeing law and justice. They sense, often subconsciously, that the Jacobin regimes
created by the French Revolution are incapable of doing so, as they continually lead to
an arbitrary exercise of power. The search for new concepts has begun. ..." - Otto von
Habsburg, The Social Order of Tomorrow, p.39.
NON-CONFORMISM: But this liberty, too, naturally only at the expense and risk of
those nonconformists, who want to do their own things to or for themselves. How long it
would take them to learn from their own mistakes would also be up to them. Their fate
should be in their own hands – not in the hands of any outsiders, whom the
nonconformists have left alone. – J.Z., 12.1.99. - OF EVERY KIND & DEGREE FOR
NON-CONFORMISM: Conformity is the philosophy of indifference.” – Dagobert D.
Runes, Treasury of Thought, p.23. – Does the attitude of the indifferent, apathetic person
even deserve to be called a “philosophy”?- J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-CONFORMISM: Do not choose to be wrong for the sake of being different.” –
Lord Samuel, 1870-1963.
NON-CONFORMISM: Every society honors its live conformists and its dead
troublemakers.” – Mignon McLaughlin. – IDEAS ARCHIVE & TALENT CENTRE,
NON-CONFORMISM: He who would be a man must be a nonconformist. – Ralph
Waldo Emerson, 1803-1882, philosopher, poet, mystic, essayist, publisher, USA. - Also
towards well formulated individual rights and liberties? – J.Z., 25.1.08. – What about
conforming to the play of team-mates in sports teams, properly collaborating with them?
– J.Z., 26.2.09. - “The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own
good, in our own way as long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede
their efforts to obtain it.” – John Stuart Mill, 1906-1973, philosopher, essayist, England.
– But only a few drew panarchistic or polyarchic conclusions from such general
statements. – J.Z., 25.1.08. – Q., DIS., NIHILISM, ETHICS, MORALITY, VALUES,
NON-CONFORMISM: If there is anything the nonconformist hates worse than a
conformist it‟s another nonconformist who doesn‟t conform tot the prevailing standards
of nonconformity.” – Bill Vaughan. – Territorialist notions make even the nonconformists
intolerant. Under exterritorial autonomy, personal laws and voluntarism, all kinds of
conformists and statists, as well as all kinds of nonconformists and radicals or mere
reformers could quite peacefully coexist. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - INTOLERANCE
NON-CONFORMISM: In other times there was no advantage in their doing so, unless
they acted not only differently, but better. In this age, the more example of non-
conformity, the mere refusal to bend the knee to custom, is itself a service.” – J. S. Mill,
quoted in Sprading, The Great Quotations, 140.
NON-CONFORMISM: In this, his last book, Frank Chodorov, who literally fought his
way up in the Lower East Side of New York City, delineates the ideas which made him a
life-long and brilliant nonconformist, wanting no part of a regimented society where
men‟s minds are condition to “non-thinking”. – Cover sheet to his book: The Income Tax
NON-CONFORMISM: Most people are just different types of conformists. Conforming
with nothing means nihilism. The ultimate non-conformism in our unfree society means
conformity as far as is humanly possible to the best interpretation of the moral law that
has so far been achieved. This amounts, in the Kantian sense, to the rational individual as
his own lawmaker. The ultimate nonconformist conforms only to his own highest moral
standards, rationally arrive at. – J.Z., 25.4.87.
NON-CONFORMISM: Most persons are conformists; they follow, they never create; the
non-conformist alone is a creative person.” – Grant Singleton, in letter to George Seldes.
NON-CONFORMISM: The greatest drawback in history has always been conformism.”
– D. R. Runes, Treasury of Thought, p.23. – It is not so much a drawback as an obstacle,
if the majority conforms to territorial law and institutions, i.e., does not allow the
innovators to do their things for or to themselves, under full experimental freedom,
freedom of action or exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. – If dissenting minorities
had consistently demanded and worked for that freedom, they would, probably, have
achieved it long ago. But so far this freedom has not even penetrated the heads of most
anarchists and libertarians. – J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-CONFORMISM: the opposite of conformism is not individualism but non-
conformism, individualists conform to many things, especially the principles they all
agree upon. Compulsory non-conformism is, in fact, irrational.” – Howard Samson,
reason, 9/72. – Compulsory instead of “compulsive”! – Also add: “as irrational as
compulsory conformism.” – J.Z., 12/74. – INDIVIDUALISM, CONFORMISM,
NON-CONFORMISM: The result of non-conformity is progress. The main reward may
well be ridicule, even abuse. – But to conform is to die. Not to conform is to live.” – John
Singleton with Bob Howard, Rip Van Australia, p.184.
NON-CONFORMISM: To require conformity in the appreciation of sentiments or the
interpretation of language, or uniformity of thought, feeling, or action, is a fundamental
error in human legislation – a madness which would be only equaled by requiring all to
possess the same countenance, the same voice or the same stature.” – Josiah Warren,
NON-CONFORMISM: When we lose the right to be different, we lose the privilege to be
free.” - Charles Evans Hughes – It is not a privilege to be free but a basic right for all
rational, peaceful and tolerant people. – J.Z., 8.8.08. - DIVERSITY, INDIVIDUALISM,
NON-CONFORMISM: While to the claims of charity a man may yield and yet be free, to
the claims of conformity no man may yield and remain free at all.” – Oscar Wilde, The
Soul of Man Under Socialism. – Quoted in Seldes, The Great Quotations.
NON-CONFORMISM: Whoso would be a man, must be a non-conformist.” – Emerson,
Essays, First Series: Self-Reliance. – Compare: “Be yourself!” – common saying. –
MAN, MATURITY, GROWING UP. – Sprading, The Great Quotations, p.144,
continues this quote with: “He who would gather immortal palms must not be hindered
by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be goodness.”
NON-CONFORMISM: Why should we be in such desperate haste to succeed, and in
such desperate enterprises? If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it
is because he hears a different drummer.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden. – Quoted in
George Seldes, The Great Quotations. – In his time there was no urgency to get rid of
totalitarian regimes, and totalitarian “weapons” like ABC mass murder devices.
Unfortunately, most people still hear only different drummers and follow them. – J.Z.,
NON-CONFORMISM: You shall no longer take things at second or third hand, nor look
through the eyes of the dead, nor feed on the specters in books.” – Walt Whitman, Song
of Myself. – Not even the specters in W. W.‟s writings? – J.Z.
NON-CONFORMISM: You won‟t skid if you stay in a rut.” – Frank McKinney Hubbard
( “Kin Hubbard” ) - VS. CONFORMITY
NON-CONTRADICTION: No concept man forms is valid unless he integrates it without
contradiction into the sum of his knowledge.” - Ayn Rand - CONCEPTS, IDEAS,
NON-COOPERATION: Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as cooperation with
NON-COOPERATION: Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as is cooperation
with good. – Mohandas Gandhi. - WITH EVIL, DISOBEDIENCE, DUTY, EVIL,
NON-COOPERATION: Tucker did not believe that the ballot box or any armed
rebellion would free society, asserting that only non-cooperation with the state would
succeed. He endorsed enlightened selfishness and egoism as essential concomitants to
liberty …” - LIBERTARIAN HANDBOOK 1973, on Benjamin R. Tucker. - But then
Tucker had no experience with totalitarian regimes. He lived in what was then probably
the most free country in the world. – J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-COOPERATION: We need not to act. We merely need to cease cooperating and
then the State will be condemned to powerlessness.” – John Henry Mackay, Abrechnung,
S.153. ( Wir brauchen ja gar nicht zu handeln. Wir brauchen einfach nicht mehr
mitzumachen und der Staat sieht sich zur Ohnmacht verurteilt. ) – Obviously, Mackay
overlooked here how many people are on the State‟s payroll and that many of them are
armed, organized, trained and dangerous, when it comes to defend their own livelihood.
Taxation is not a voluntary action. Tax payment is all too effectively enforced. Tax
strikers are lucky not to get killed in the process but merely imprisoned and losing their
property. Refusing to recognize the right and, sometimes, the duty, to resist forcefully
and armed, can only perpetuate victimization. If it were so easy to persuade policemen
and soldiers no longer to obey the State, their paymaster, then such appeals should be
directed primarily to them. Otherwise, better jobs should be offered to these people, via
the introduction of full monetary and financial freedom, which would be possible,
perhaps, through a well planned and organized monetary and financial revolution, at a
suitable crisis point. Then, temporarily, the liberators should also take over the payment
of the salaries of policemen and soldiers – until these people have taken up better jobs.
And the non-cooperation should then also include to refuse to accept government
monopoly money and the ability and readiness to replace this money with better privately
or cooperatively issued competing currencies. – Progress towards full liberation is not as
simple to achieve as is often assumed. - J.Z., 31.1.08. – PASSIVE RESISTANCE, NON-
NON-COOPERATION: Why Tolstoy? He, as well as the Russian anarchist Prince
Kropotkin, took an absolutist position – no cooperation with any state control which used
force.” – Gregory Benford, Reactionary Utopian, FAR FRONTIERS, Winter 85, p.221. -
NONE OF THE ABOVE: I have been working with a gang of friends in Hawaii to get a
“none of the above” place on the ballot. I view that as a step towards secession, as a
matter of fact. Once people become conscious of how silly most political personality
choices are they may be come conscious of how very silly most remote politics are in
general … As for a national movement which, in fact would encourage communities to
act as though they had seceded, I see a strong need and response. Perhaps both things go
together.” – Karl Hess, Letter to Martin Shepard. – I found this somewhere reproduced. –
Here he seems to have in mind only geographical secessionism and local self-
government. - J.Z., 15.6.92. - SECESSIONISM, VOTING, PANARCHISM
NON-INTERFERENCE: … government should always refrain from interfering with
market processes.” – Opinion ascribed to Mises in FREE ENTERPRISE, July-Aug. 76,
NON-INTERFERENCE: All individuals can freely live as they choose as long as they
don‟t forcibly interfere with others.” - Stormy Mon, The Libertarian Principle. – This
requires that the renounce all territorial claims for themselves and do no longer recognize
them in others. – J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-INTERFERENCE: and by no means seize occasion for interfering with natural
adjustments.” – W. G. Sumner, What Social Classes Owe to Each Other, p.104.
NON-INTERFERENCE: How presumptuous of anyone to imagine that he has the right
to interfere with his neighbour, to tell others how to live their lives! If we are asked for
advice, we can give it. Otherwise we should leave well alone.” – IPA FACTS, 12/68.
NONINTERFERENCE: I believe that every individual is naturally entitled to do as he
pleases with himself and the fruits of his labor, so far as it in no way interferes with any
other men‟s rights. – Abraham Lincoln. - What Lincoln thought and did not add: As long
as he obeys me, as leader of the Federal government and supreme commander of its
armed forces, regardless of how I abuse these powers, in a country to be unified, in my
opinion, under my rule. - At his time and in his position he was the greatest
interventionist with men's rights, liberties and properties. Just look at the blood price to
be paid for his policies. His power meant much more to him than the abolition of slavery,
granted only late in the Civil War. - J.Z., 22. 11. 06. - RIGHTS, LIBERTIES
NON-INTERFERENCE: If he preferred, he could do nothing at all. No one would
interfere with him, and the one law of the village was that he must interfere with no one.”
– Lloyd Biggle Jr., Still, Small Voice, ANALOG, April 61, p.150.
NON-INTERFERENCE: In this country the party which is “in” always interferes, and
the party which is “out” favors non-interference. (*) The system of interference is a
complete failure to the ends it aims at, and sooner or later it will fall of its own expense
and be swept away.” – W. G. Sumner, What Social Classes Owe to Each Other, p.85. - -
(*) It may also aim as still more interference, like e.g. the State Socialists of his time. – -
What he calls “interference” is also inherent in territorialism. - J.Z., 31.1.08. - -
NON-INTERFERENCE: Leave all things to take their natural course, and do not
interfere.” – Lao Tzu, in Lionel Giles translation. – But, when you see cannibals
preparing one of their feasts, with one of their victims … - Or when you see a child
molester, doing what comes natural to him, picking another victim … - J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-INTERFERENCE: Provided then, that we, as individuals (*) do not forcibly
interfere with other people, we should be left free to conduct our own lives as we see fit.”
– Source? - - That should also include full exterritorial autonomy under personal laws for
all communities of volunteers. - (*) or in groups! – J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-INTERFERENCE: The concept of justice held by the common man could be
summed up as: “I have the right to do anything I damn well please that will improve my
life and my enjoyment of it, so long as I don‟t interfere with anyone else‟s similar right. If
the law gets in my way, I‟ll just ignore it.” – Jim Andrews, in FREEDOM TODAY,
NON-INTERFERENCE: The rational individualist knew that his needs could best be
served by dealing with other men as traders, meaning that all men had to be free (*);
therefore he did not believe in interfering in the lives of his neighbors. …” - Ringer,
Restoring the American Dream, p40. - (*) Not all men. It will suffice and spread from
there, when the free traders are free. – J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-INTERFERENCE: There can be no fairer order than one which gives absolute
freedom to all conscious life gained only by one law: „No conscious being may interfere
with another being‟s exercise of free will.” – Stan & Louise Deyo, West Australian Texas
Trading, 1978. – Some animal lovers would concede e.g. conscious life to at least some
of their pets, and, in spite of their love for them, do interfere with them, treating them as
their property. Pigs are supposedly even more intelligent than are dogs. Horses have at
least horse sense. Wolves hunt intelligently in packs. Let‟s settle the question of human
individual rights first. – J.Z., 31.1.08. – LIBERTARIANISM, FIRST PRINCIPLES.
NONINTERFERENCE: Tolerant people "make a religion of not interfering with each
other." - J. R. Wilson, The Side of the Angels, Collins, London, 1968, p.86.
NON-INTERFERENCE: We don‟t pretend to know how you should best live your life.
We are not in the business of enforcing our value judgments. We say – you live your life
how you want to. Do whatever you like. But respect other people‟s equal freedom.” –John
Singleton with Bob Howard, Rip Van Australia, p.185. – EQUAL FREEDOM,
NON-INTERVENTION: … confusion … results from government intervention in any
commodity market. Gluts and shortages appear which necessitate more violent
correction than would have been needed if the market had been allowed freely to make
the daily or hourly changes.” – Henry Meulen, THE INDIVIDUALIST, 8/75.
NON-INTERVENTION: Four fifths of all our troubles in this life would disappear, if we
would only sit down and keep still.” - Calvin Coolidge. - Do nothing wrongful and
harmful, rather abstain from action than act upon the maxim: "Something must be done!'
- and then repeating mistakes that have been made again and again over centuries. Knee-
jerk reactions do more harm than good. For instance: Wage controls, price controls, rent
controls, interest rate controls, protectionist controls, monetary despotism. - J.Z., 21.8.02.
NON-INTERVENTION: Goodman was outspokenly critical of those young militants of
the Left who would radicalize people against the Establishment by deliberately
maneuvering them into crowd situations wherein they come to have their heads broken by
the batons of the police. “It is Anarchist for people to act on principle and learn, the hard
way, that powers that be are brutal and unjust,” he wrote, “but it is authoritarian for
people to be expended for the cause of somebody else‟s strategy.” Like Benjamin Rucker
and other earlier libertarians, he insisted that non-invasion is the essential principle of
all anarchist thought and that no action can have good results that does not conform to
that spirit.” – Reichert, Partisans of Freedom, p.573, quoting Paul Goodman. – NON-
NON-INTERVENTION: Great crimes should be responded to, even if they happen
beyond a national border – but not by the commission of still larger crimes. – J.Z.,
NON-INTERVENTION: Intervention: short-term public disturbance of long-term
private planning.” – Ralph Harris, quoted in GOOD GOVERNMENT, 12/72.
NON-INTERVENTION: Non-Intervention is not a libertarian principle.” – Jarret B.
Wollstein, “Freedom and Foreign Policy”, INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, April 1981,
reprinted in LIBERTARIAN LOGOS, May 1, 1984. – Are all these old libertarian
magazines digitized by now as they should be? – Sometimes even the publishers or
editors do not have a complete set left! – J.Z., 25.1.08. - & LIBERTARIANISM
NON-INTERVENTION: Non-Intervention with rightful actions is right but intervention
with wrongful actions is also right. – J.Z., 23.3.03. – “Territorial integrity”, “national
territorial independence” “national territory” and “national unity” are four of the major
dangerous fictions. Integrity has nothing to do with territorial monopolies, domination
and the suppression of the rights of individuals and minorities or even of the majority. –
NON-INTERVENTION: Non-invasion of the noninvasive individual.” – R. A. Wilson,
Masks of the Illuminati, p.77.
NON-INTERVENTION: Since beneficial general prescriptions can always be eroded
case by case, we should learn from the wisdom of Dicey that without a strong
presumption in favor of non-intervention a drift towards collectivism becomes
irresistible.” – Milton Friedman, in the anthology: Down With The Poor, p.24.
NON-INTERVENTION: the blessings derived from individual creativity and voluntary
association can never be harnessed by or replaced by government intervention.” – Robert
NON-INTERVENTION: The more schemes, the more arrangements, the more
intervention in free exchange, the greater the distortions which will occur, rendering
society poorer on net balance.” – G. C. Roche III, Frederic Bastiat, A Man Alone, p. 223.
NON-INTERVENTION: The people of the United States are more prosperous than the
inhabitants of all other countries because their government embarked later than the
governments in other parts of the world upon the policy of obstructing business. –
Ludwig von Mises, THE FREEMAN, Nov. 73. – BUSINESS, WEALTH, AMERICA,
NON-INTERVENTION: war is the malignancy resulting from the grown of
interventionism, which invariably becomes uncontrolled, once started. Without
interventionism – starting way back with things like garbage service – war simply cannot
happen.” – E.W. Dykes, THE FREEMAN, 1/64. The precondition of all interventionism
is the territorial monopoly or territorialism. It opposite is exterritorial autonomy –or
personal law – for all communities of volunteers. – J.Z., 31.1.08.
NONINTERVENTION: What do you do when your brothers are oppressed? Modern
American Liberals will tell you that, with the single exception of right-wing authoritarian
regimes, any time a gang of murderous social deviants manages to seize power it
instantly becomes a Sovereign States, and as such is immune to “interference”. - - No
matter if the head of state kills his enemies and eats them ( Idi Amin ), or murders half his
people ( Pol Pot ), or merely condemns his fellows to a life of endless want and anomie (
any Communist regime ), a sovereign state is sacred, and nothing justifies the
intervention of a foreign power in its affairs. - - Do you believe that?” – JPB ( Jerry
Pournelle & Jim Baen ), in their introduction to John Dalmas, Opening Move On Egil‟s
World, FAR FRONTIERS, Vol. IV, Winter 1985, p. 70. - INTERFERENCE,
NON-INTERVENTION: What is Washington‟s solution to all this? More regulation,
more controls, more new agencies, more bills, more lawyers, more committees – more
scientific illiterates asking the incompetents to do the unnecessary.” – Eugene Guccione,
The Government‟s Energy Crisis, THE FREEMAN, 9/75, p.545. – REGULATIONS,
NON-INVASION: Nobody is property. Noninvasion of the noninvasive individual. Non
serviam. - R. A. Wilson, Masks of the Illuminati, p.77. - NON SERVIAM, SELF-
NON-INVOLVEMENT: The man who is expending his energy wholly on private affairs,
refusing to take the trouble about public affairs, praising himself on his wisdom in
minding his own business, is blind to the fact that his own business is made possible only
by the maintenance of a healthy social state and that he risks losing all by defective
government arrangements. – Herbert Spencer. – PUBLIC AFFAIRS, DISINTEREST,
NON-JOINERS: the freedom of joining – or not joining ... should be cherished; … Dean
Smith, Conservatism, p.136. – And it should be applied to all territorial States – and to all
alternative societies, all only exterritorially autonomous, that should replace all territorial
states, with all of them made up only of volunteers. – Alas, most Conservatives want to
conserve territorialism, unaware how despotic it tends to be. – J.Z., 31.1.08. –
NON-MANIPULATION: a non-manipulative society cannot be achieved by
manipulative means … - Solidarity, London: As We Don‟t See It, p.19. – Does a good
liberation, defence, revolution or military insurrection program or one for a complete
privatization of all government assets, or one to achieve permanent full employment and
the avoidance of inflations, deflations and economic crises - amount to a wrongful
manipulation? – J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-NUCLEAR: As if anything but a total vacuum could be non-nuclear. – J.Z, 6.2.08.
– DIS.
NON-PARTICIPATION: Freedom from exploitation is perhaps the easiest freedom to
get. All you have to do is to stop participating in any relationship – of any kind – that
does not suit you. – Harry Browne, How I found Freedom, p.276/77. - - As if
participation were already altogether optional. Territorialism and its laws, powers and
institutions say otherwise. – Was he really unaware that e.g. taxation and conscription are
not as voluntary as he here makes them out to be? – - As if it were merely a matter of
finding it, picking it up and keeping it! - It seems that not only religious people are all too
faithful, hopeful and dogmatic. - J.Z., 31.1.08. – INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY,
NON-PARTICIPATION: Right to Refuse Participation in an Unjust War. - Every
rational being has the right and duty to refuse participation in an unjust war and to defend
this right. - - Comment: This right implies e.g. the right to decide directly, by voting in
plebiscites ( compare 38 ) and in meetings of a volunteer militia ( compare 50) about war
and peace, armament and disarmament, furthermore, the right to revolt against a
government which prepares an unjust war. - - It is infringed as long as conscription and
weapons for mass-extermination ( nuclear, germ and poison weapons ) exist. These
weapons would inevitably kill noncombatants and conscripts, even secret friends and
allies and offend therefore against the human rights and natural rights of rational beings.
The mere existence of such weapons is a threat to these rights. - - Every rational being
has therefore the right to participate directly in the destruction of all such weapons and
the means by which they are produced and to search all suspicious localities for hidden
weapons of this kind. The right to resist supercedes here the right to inviolability of one's
home or rather the latter does not include a right to hide mass extermination weapons. - -
Conscription is unwarranted because only rational beings are entitled and obliged to
resist. Rational beings would resist conscription or desert from those who conscripted
them and rather fight against them than for them. Rational beings would voluntarily join
a militia of the above (50) indicated kind. Since unreasonable beings do not possess all
rights, those they do have must be protected by others, rational citizens. They, too, may
not be conscripted as mere things. For a volunteer peace force of the above indicated kind
they would anyhow be more of a burden than an asset. - - In future the recognition and
realization of the right to secede from all unnatural associations would frustrate all
attempts to uphold or introduce conscription. – From the human rights draft in PEACE
NON-RESISTANCE: Quite evidently the ideal of non-resistance would, if literally and
consistently followed, abandon the world to the predatory.” - Walter Lippmann, The
Public Philosophy, A Mentor Book, 1955, p.116. - NON-VIOLENCE, PASSIVE
NONSENSE: It‟s incredible how much intelligence is used in this world to prove
nonsense. – Friedrich Hebbel, quoted in ANALOG, May 89, p.192. - RED., PROOFS &
NONSENSE: Unless we consciously resist, nonsense does not pass by us but into us. –
Leonard E. Read, Then Truth Will Out, XI. – Armed, organized and trained resistance
might be required, by ideal militia forces. – As for errors, fallacies, prejudices, myths
etc., they are so numerous that individuals cannot all tackle them successfully quite on
their own, from case to case. They need an encyclopedic aid for that purpose, in the form
of a comprehensive collection of them, combined with the best refutations so far found.
Not everybody can be an individual communicator like Michael Cloud. And he had to
train himself for a long time for this job. And he is also collecting tips for successfully
resisting nonsense, optimal responses to it. He could provide much towards an
encyclopedia of the best refutations. But input from others is needed as well. – J.Z.,
31.1.08. - RESISTING IT
NON-SERVIAM: I will not serve. – Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus I, p.87. – We are the
people who have said “non serviam”, and we‟re trying to teach others to say it. –
Wilson/Shee, Illuminatus III, p.145. – How many soldiers, who refused to obey or tried
to desert, were shot in WW I and II? - If a taxpayer absolutely refused to pay further
taxes, he would end up dead. – Merely pronouncing slogans, as if they were effective
magical formulas, is just not good enough. - J.Z., 31.1.08.
NON-SMOKING: Long live the non-smokers and non-drinkers. At least they give
themselves a chance to survive longer. – J.Z., 19.12.86. – At least the smoking may drive
some mosquitoes away. But there are probably less harmful ways to do that. In recent
years it has been asserted that moderate alcohol consumption is beneficial. I am still in
doubt about that. Certainly, moderate use of other disinfectants has also some value. And
being food derived, e.g. wines and beer may still contain also some beneficial substances.
But is it the alcohol contents that does the good? In Germany, many decades ago,
someone was convicted of fraud for selling wine without alcohol contents. Apparently,
most of his customers did not notice this deficiency. – He should have been rewarded for
this invention. – Imagine e.g. France full of sober wine drinkers! - J.Z., 26.1.08. – Then it
might still be the top ranking nation! – J.Z., 26.2.09. - ABSTINENCE FROM
NON-VIOLENCE: A good example is an employer or supervisor, in a period of high
unemployment, who tells a female worker: “put out, or get out!” That is a non-violent
reprisal for refusing his sexual demands, which would be devastating, and is, therefore,
coercive. – Joe Fulks, THE CONNECTION, 138, p. 24. – A mere sit-down in a public
road can prevent people to get to work or to a hospital in time. A sit-down in an office
can stop the work there. All the different non-violent methods have not yet been
sufficiently criticized and compared for their offences against individual rights and
liberties and be it “only” private property rights. –. – A skillful sabotage act, also non-
violent towards persons, can put hundreds of people out of work. - That all of them
merely qualify as “non-violent” is just not good enough. – A good enough and largely
objective survey of all of them is long overdue - J.Z., 25.1.08. - CAN BE COERCIVE
NON-VIOLENCE: A non-violent revolution is not a program of seizure of power. It is a
program of transformation of relationships, ending in a peaceful transfer of power.” –
Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violence in Peace and War, 1948, 2.8. – Underlining by me.
– If only power transfer is involved then this method is not any better than territorial and
collectivist voting. - So much ado is made about his use of non-violence, towards a non-
totalitarian colonialist regime, which had promoted much progress and enlightenment in
India and also provided a common language at least for its intellectuals. Gandhi, alas,
remained a territorial nationalist. Territorial power was still his objective and his kind of
territorial independence led to territorial divisions of India, to civil war mass murders,
terrorism, wars and nuclear armament of Pakistan and India and numerous assassinations,
including his own. He did not recognize the nature of territorial States as warfare States,
in most cases of the larger States. – J.Z., 21.1.08.
NON-VIOLENCE: A total commitment to non-violence is for me as wrong, irrational,
impractical and even self-defeating as is a total commitment to violence, be it in form of
a totalitarian state or ABC mass murder devices. – J.Z., 5.12.86, 25.1.08. - VS.
NON-VIOLENCE: After discovering the effect of a smile, a greeting, a handshake a
discussion, a contract negotiation and good will, some people wrongly conclude that they
and similar actions are powerful enough for all practical occasions. They simply have not
enough imagination to conceive of situations where they will not work at all. – J.Z.,
14.1.88, 26.1.08. – Each mechanical problem, too, requires a suitable tool. Neither curses
nor polite words do help. Although, sometimes, even a kick will do – for a while. – J.Z.,
NON-VIOLENCE: All non-violent resistance efforts are stumbling towards individual
secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for volunteers - unless they, too, aim to
intervene with the affairs of others. - J.Z., 6.9.87. - Small scale examples of this trend are
a) conscientious objection to military service and b) the limited tax strikes so far
practised, c) the all too limited "opting out" of dissatisfied youths, sometimes merely
going to radical language, other dances, music, dress and hair styles, retreatism, drug use
etc. - J.Z., 6.9.87 & 26.1.02. – PANARCHISM, INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY,
NONVIOLENCE: All right, go ahead and destroy all nuclear weapons, on both sides,
nonviolently! – J.Z., 21.3.86. - AGAINST THE NUCLEAR WAR THREAT? DIS.
NONVIOLENCE: Concerning nonviolence, it is criminal to teach a man not to defend
himself when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks.” - Malcolm X - SELF-
NON-VIOLENCE: Costa Rica disarmed and was invaded; the Beothuks in
Newfoundland were wiped out by English settlers, although they did not resist. Political
action should be not only virtuous but also effective. – H. P., in PEACE RESEARCH
NON-VIOLENCE: Fight for non-violence.” – Seen on a foot path. - Mentioned by Don
Maclean, READER‟S DIGEST, 8/72. - JOKES
NONVIOLENCE: Have I not repeatedly said that I would rather India became free even
by violence rather than she should remain in bondage? – Mahatma Gandhi, March 1922.
– How much did he know and understand about political, economic and social freedom.
In economics he wanted to go back to primitive spinning and weaving tools. - - What
good has political independence so far done for India? All the positive changes that have
developed are rather due to some economic liberties and technological and scientific
progress, as far as I know. Are the really significant innovators in India now any more
free than they were before or still under territorial domination by those full of popular
prejudices and all too little knowledge and moral restraints? – J.Z., 26.1.08. - &
NON-VIOLENCE: He does not understand, Chris. He‟s an idealist. To him the end will
never justify the means. - - He‟s a fool. He‟d pat a tiger on the head while it ate him. –
And that, I thought sadly, was the bloody truth. – Marie Jakober, The Mind Gods, p.112.
NON-VIOLENCE: I do not oppose non-violence and pacifism as a whole but merely its
extremist positions as the supposedly only moral, rational and practical ways. This
position is almost as wrong and dangerous as that of territorial interventionism, namely
that everything could be solved by such a use of force. – J.Z., 1986. On the other hand, I
do take some extreme positions myself, e.g. against all ABC mass murder devices and
against nuclear reactors as potential nuclear weapons factories. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - &
NON-VIOLENCE: I find a total commitment to non-violence, even against an aggressor
or criminal, to be as absurd as a total commitment to violence, for initiated coercion or to
the “principle” of collective responsibility. One should not put oneself into the power of
mere words or ideas, no matter how flawed or limited they are. – J.Z., n.d., & 31.1.08. –
In a response to THE VOLUNTARYIST.
NON-VIOLENCE: In some cases non-violence requires more militancy than violence. –
Cesar Chavez. & MILITANCY
NON-VIOLENCE: It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put
on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. – Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violence
in Peace and War (1948), 1.240. – The rightful use of defensive force is not violence. The
violence of terrorism against innocent people, when one feels otherwise violent, may be
in our heart, but is not justified or rational. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - & VIOLENCE
NON-VIOLENCE: It is not fighting as such that is always the greatest evil nor is non-
violence resistance always the greatest good or quite justified. It always depends what for
and against what or against whom one is fighting or using non-violent resistance. It is
decisive whether one fights, violently or non-violently for a quite just cause, for the own
cause, especially as a volunteer, or, instead, as a military slave for the unjust and
irrational aims of others, whether one fights liberatingly or as a mere tool of a
dictatorship or tyranny, for its continued domination, whether one fights liberatingly or as
a mere tool whether one fights or non-violently resists while fully respecting the liberties
and rights of non-aggressive people or not. Much depends upon how and with what
means one fights or resists and against whom, e.g. real enemies or only imagined ones or
those set up as targets by propaganda lies and whether one fights together with the
victims of a real enemy against this enemy only or against his victims as well, or even
mainly e.g. against his conscripts and non-combatant forced laborers and tax slaves. –
When the correct enemy target is quite clearly defined then suitable means, weapons and
fighting or non-violent resistance methods, that are effective, will almost suggest
themselves. Then one will not indiscriminately resort e.g. to mass murder devices or anti-
people “weapons”, to carpet bombing, free fire zones etc. and accept all too much in
“collateral damages” and “friendly fire” victims. Withholding food & water, electricity,
gas, medicines, milk for babies etc. from insurrectionist areas is also a non-violent means
but obviously wrongs and harms also innocents. – Violently eliminating a mad shooter
does also promote non-violence. - J.Z., 30.9.04, 22.10.07, 27.2.09. - & FIGHTING
NON-VIOLENCE: It is possible and quite common to non-violently and successfully
“fight” for the realization of all too many wrong principles, procedures and institutions.
Which ones do institutionalize compulsion, coercion, violence and which provoke
counter-violence or forceful resistance. – J.Z., 27.2.86.
NON-VIOLENCE: It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of
vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion.” – Dean W.R. Inge, D.D.,
1860-1954. – Andrews Quotations.
NON-VIOLENCE: It isn‟t arms that make for violence but inclination towards it.
Unarmed combat can be very violent, short and deadly. But I would except ABC mass
murder devices from this rule. They are a threat hanging over all of us and in the long
run, while they exist, they will be used for mass murders. They are not really weapons
that can be used rightfully and defensively only. – How can the people disarm them, quite
non-violently, when they are protected by soldiers of a government? How can one
persuade these protectors of anti-people weapons to destroy them themselves? How far
can one get with non-violence against armed and determined opponents? - J.Z., 27.3.92,
27.1.08, 27.2.09.
NON-VIOLENCE: Killing no one is as senseless as killing everyone. Some aggressors
have to be eliminated. – J.Z., 26.4.87. - VS. AGGRESSORS, DEATH PENALTY,
NON-VIOLENCE: Many types of non-violence do also provoke or at least result in
violence. – J.Z., 27.8.85, 26.1.08.
NON-VIOLENCE: Morality and rationality are more important than the refusal to use
any force of violence, even defensively, or preventatively. – J.Z., 5.12.86, 25.1.08. – But
with the rule: Non-initiation of force one can already go far, although it, too, does not
fully cover all cases. Preventing, forcefully, a child or a teenager or a depressed adult, all
of them not in their right frame of mind, from committing suicide, does not do wrong to
them in their presently irrational and desperate condition and state of mind but does right
by them as the rational, moral, mature and potentially successful personalities they could
be soon, again, or could become. – For the same reason one should prevent abortions as
far as possible without merely relying upon prohibitions and penalties. – J.Z., 25.1.08.
NON-VIOLENCE: Non violent action includes such activities as … boycotts ( of
elections, segregated buses, foods with harmful additives, goods from countries with
repressive governments ) … squatting in empty buildings – refusal to pay taxes, rates or
rents … resistance to military conscription; refusal to obey orders … setting up
alternative institutions and establishing widespread loyalty towards them. – Brian
Martin, Changing the Cogs, p.20.
NON-VIOLENCE: Non-violence among reasonable and moral people does not require
forceful support. But their peaceful relationships require often forceful defence against
violent interventionism, by private or official criminals. – J.Z., 3.2.88. 26.1.08. -
NON-VIOLENCE: Non-violence as a moral absolute will tend to provoke violence.
Violence, in turn, generates nonviolence as a response. – Josh the Dill ( Robert Shea? ),
NO GOVERNOR, Spring 76, p. 27. – Often the violence used to uphold a wrong creates
merely wide-spread apathy or even terror. But even under the Nazi regime there were at
least 47 tyrannicide attempts against Hitler. He would, probably, not have survived 100
such attempts. How many million lives would have been saved by a successful
tyrannicide act or execution attempt against him? – J.Z., 27.2.09. – TYRANNICIDE.
NON-VIOLENCE: Non-violence isn‟t a very practicable means of individual liberty.
Apart from educational efforts, offers of amnesty, autonomy, arbitration, contractual
relationships to replace territorial ones, peace negotiations by peoples and armed forces
over the heads of the rulers, the declaration of quite rightful war and peace aims,
desertion and defection. But all such actions help only to reduce the need for forceful
defence or liberation efforts and do not abolish the need for the rightful use of force
altogether, against the main criminals, aggressive and oppressive governments. – J.Z.,
11.2.77, 31.1.08.
NON-VIOLENCE: Non-violence under the rule of a Pax Britannica was a little luxury
which many could afford. Under totalitarian regimes it has little of value for one‟s
survival. And how defensive is it against IBMs equipped with nuclear war heads? Merely
passive resistance is a resistance which does not resist. – J.Z., n.d. & 31.1.08.
NON-VIOLENCE: Non-violently as far as possible. – With force as far as justified and
necessary. – J.Z., 28.11.86. – FORCE, RESISTANCE, ARMS IN THE DEFENCE OF
NON-VIOLENCE: Pacifism can work but only when faced with a rational opponent,
who listens to your words. – Fritz Knese, THE CONNECTION, 127, p.105.
NON-VIOLENCE: Rather than trying further nonviolent confrontations between
territorial warfare States and their victims we should dismantle the power and violence
inherent in these States so that afterwards even most nonviolent confrontations would be
unnecessary - because the dissenters would be free to rule themselves and their own
affairs. – J.Z., 17.8.93.
NON-VIOLENCE: Some would have preached non-violence even to those who managed
to forcefully break out of Nazi extermination camps or out of Stalin‟s concentration
camps for involuntary slave labor imposed upon people his regime distrusted. – J.Z.,
19.9.96, 24.1.08.
NON-VIOLENCE: Stress on non-violent defence prevents many from considering how
to effectively cut the roots of war in order to make both, forceful and non-violent defence
unnecessary in most instances. – J.Z., 3.1.97. - NON-VIOLENT DEFENCE:
NON-VIOLENCE: the cult of non-resistance” or total „non-violence”. – Irving Louis
Horowitz, War & Peace …, p.180. – “Individual heroism cannot withstand the force of
an atomic blast.” – Ibid. - NON-RESISTANCE, HEROISM, NUCLEAR WAR
NON-VIOLENCE: The main plank of anarchism is the removal of violence from human
relations.” – Errico Malatesta, La Questione Sociale, November 25, 1899. – Removal of
compulsion rather than of violence. For sometimes violent or forceful defence of rights
and liberties against aggressors is required. Any voluntary society that favored e.g. duels,
boxing, wrestling, karate fights and forms of rather violent football would still fit into an
anarchist-panarchist and voluntarist framework. No one is compelled to participate in
such practices or to watch them. – J.Z., 23.6.93, 24.1.08. - OR VOLUNTARISM?
NON-VIOLENCE: The right to resist goes beyond non-violent resistance. Extreme cases:
Resistance against mass extermination camps and against nuclear weapons and their
production facilities. Victim disarmament encourages criminals and aggressors. I would
not be surprised to find out that non-violence advocates are partly and anonymously
financed by crime syndicates, dictators and totalitarian regimes. – J.Z., 7.5.86, 26.1.08. -
NON-VIOLENCE: The violent regimes, those of Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc., do owe all
other peoples in the world non-violence. They do also owe it to their own subjects and
victims. We do not owe non-violence to them, at least not, until they introduce it first. –
NON-VIOLENCE: There are types that lead to armed and violent responses, as well as
disarming and peace-promoting types. Research and publications should clearly
distinguish the two types. E.g., under present conditions, tax payment refusals that are
absolute will soon lead to the use of armed force against these tax strikers. And there are
other types that do not matter at all, except perhaps as circus performances for
entertainment purposes, they are so ineffective towards their objectives. Alas, most of the
advocates of non-violence do not sufficiently distinguish between these 3 types. The least
explored one may be the refusal to accept any government money any further – except
for tax payments, when these are still made – and the issue and acceptance of alternative
optional and market rated currencies, using stable value standards, for all one‟s
exchanges. So far, individual secessionism on a small scale would either be ignored or
suppressed by the police. But then, under certain conditions, the police force and all the
other armed forced might secede themselves and the more complete that secession of
armed and organized people would be, the more non-violent it could be. The mere
proclamation of quite rightful war aims could also prevent a war. So could the unlimited
acceptance of refugees and deserters. Think about the instance of the Berlin Wall, how it
became suddenly ineffective, perhaps only as a result of a misunderstanding among its
guards at the few gateways. As far as I know this change was totally non-violent and
unexpected. If it had been up to me, I would have rather initiated the digging of a
thousand tunnels under it or its blasting at a thousand places. – J.Z., 26.1.08.
NON-VIOLENCE: There may come a time when the lion and the lamb will lie down
together, but I am still betting on the lion.” – Henry Wheeler Shaw, 1818-1885. – Since
men like to eat sheep, rather than lions, there are now many less lions or other man-eaters
and many more sheep around. – J.Z., 26.1.08, 27.2.09.
NON-VIOLENCE: This program does advocate many non-violent steps to prevent
nuclear war - but it does not advocate them exclusively. It does not advocate non-violent
submission or only non-violent "resistance" against dictatorships, totalitarians and
terrorists but, rather, more rightful and rational resistance and liberation steps, methods
and institutions. - See: Amnesty, Appeals, Asylum, Autonomy, Broadcasting, Cultural
Revolution, Decision, Declarations, Desertion, Disobedience, Enlightenment,
Exterritorial Autonomy, Free Trade, Geothermal Power, Immigration, Individual
Responsibility, Militia, Negotiations, Open Air Speaking, Panarchy, Peace Declarations,
Publicity, Questions, Referendums, Resistance, Revolutions, Secession, Separate Peace,
Sun Power, Tidal Power, Tolerance, Voluntary Taxation, Wind Power. - From: J.Z., An
ABC Against Nuclear War. - NON-VIOLENT
NONVIOLENCE: Those who beat their swords into plough shares shall plough for those
NON-VIOLENCE: To eliminate the violence inherent and consequent upon our statist
territorial organizations, within them and between them, we ought, first of all, to make
state membership as voluntary as church membership is or ought to be. - J.Z., 3.9.91,
NON-VIOLENCE: To eliminate the violence inherent within our territorial States and
between such States, we should, first of all, make state membership and subordination as
voluntary, competitive, and peacefully coexistent as is church and sect membership
already - in most countries. – J.Z., 3.9.91, 24.1.08. - & PANARCHISM
NON-VIOLENCE: Turn the other cheek only when it is iron. – D.Z., 16.3.77. – Under a
helmet or grid iron? – J.Z., 27.2.09.
NON-VIOLENCE: We are nonviolent with people who are nonviolent with us.” -
Malcolm X
NON-VIOLENCE: What kind of non-violence could destroy nuclear weapons bases? –
J.Z., 20.7.87. – Q.
NON-VIOLENCE: While non-violence is not always the most moral and efficient way,
all attempts should be made to confine the aggressive use of force (violence) to a
minimum, using non-violence as far as it goes, whenever possible and primarily and
otherwise the defensive force required. - J.Z., 6.9.87.
NON-VIOLENCE: While nonviolent resistance is generally better than violent
resistance, violent resistance is better than no resistance at all.” – Ascribed to Gandhi,
by Brian Martin, Canberra Peace Makers. Later author of many pacifist writings, while
lecturer at Wollongong University. - Gandhi did not have to confront any totalitarian
regime. – J.Z.
NON-VIOLENCE: While panarchism favors non-violence and voluntarism, it does not
declare them to be absolute values in all situations. It distinguishes between violence and
voluntarism used in aggression (acts against genuine individual rights and liberties) from
rightful force, defensively used against aggressors, and, as far as possible, against
aggressors only, whether the aggressors like that or not. It is the aggressors who ought to
become non-violent and who ought to try to spread their ideas only by voluntary means.
It is obvious that for all creative, productive, innovative attempts one should use only
voluntary supporters and towards others only persuasion. But defensive actions in support
of basic rights and liberties – and still respecting the basic rights and liberties of those not
participating in an aggression, may use rightful force, rightful weapons discriminatingly
used. Not e.g., mass murder devices or methods. Territorial governments are wrong in
using violence aggressively against dissenters in what these governments claim to be
their territorial monopoly. Such claims can be rightly resisted also by defensive force.
However, such force should only be used as a last resort and, as far as possible, non-
violent means like public secession declarations, appeals to the armed forces of a
territorial regime, the proclamation of quite rightful peace aims, tax strikes, monetary
revolutions, alternative and parallel institutions could and should be utilized to reduce
armed clashes to a minimum and, ideally, avoid them altogether. – J.Z., 14. & 17.1.05. -
NON-VIOLENCE: Who benefits if the masses regard violence as a taboo? – Pyrrho,
NON-VIOLENCE: You can shoot the tiger, or stay out of his way, but you cannot
pronounce him a vegetarian.” - Richard Mitchell. - "Die Katze laesst das Mausen nicht!"
( Cats won't give up going after mice!)
NON-VIOLENCE: You cannot shake hands with a clenched fist.” – Indira Gandhi.
NON-VIOLENCE: You should start teaching non-violent behavior to criminals and
aggressors. Then, if you succeed, you might try also to persuade the innocent, moral,
non-criminal and non-aggressive people to behave non-violently. But precisely then this
will not longer be necessary, because there will be no occasions for them to do so. – Until
you do try this and until you do succeed with this – do not bother me again. Unless, of
course, you should discover a non-violent method to effectively ward off e.g. tribute
gatherers, despotic laws and actions, military aggression and private criminals. Then your
fortune would soon be made, too. – J.Z., 23.4.89, 26.1.08.
NON-VOTING: Ignoring the State is what most Americans do during their voluntary
elections, by not voting or running for office. If they were given the voting options
regarding taxation then many of them might go the whole way in ignoring the State while
doing their own thing among and to themselves. - J.Z. 29.11.92, 3.1.93. - Let them make
their own decisions at the own expense and risk. Obviously, decision-making by
territorial politicians and bureaucrats only is very risky and very expensive. - J.Z.,
NORMAL: Playboy: Let‟s see if we can keep track: Before hooking up with Goldwater,
you‟d been, among other things, a Socialist and a gun runner; now you‟re an anarchist
and a tax resister. Were you ever normal? - Hess: I think I was normal for a brief period
around the mid-Fifties. It was a harrowing experience.” – Carl Hess in PLAYBOY
NORMAL: Situation Normal, All Fucked Up – he repeated. That really sums it up. That
really says it.” – Wilson/Shea, Illuminatus I, p.147. – SNAFU was a popular word during
WW II. – J.Z.
NORMAL: The normal is that which nobody quite is.” – R. A. Wilson, Schroedinger‟s
Cat II, p.66.
NORTH KOREA: Its government stand seems to be: If you do not like us getting more
nuclear weapons and try to prevent us from getting them, we will nuke you now, with the
few we already have. – J.Z., 16.7.03. – Which is the right response to such governments?
Certainly not using nuclear weapons against them or their nuclear installations or against
their all too helpless subjects. – Or mere diplomacy or international recognition for them
and their “territorial integrity”. – But, e.g., a quite rightful revolution, military
insurrection and liberation program might help, if e.g. broadcast and provided online,
especially when supported by xyz governments and societies in exile, representing
present refugee volunteers and future voluntary members or subjects and fully recognized
as such, in their exterritorial autonomy under personal laws. – Such models, made known
and understood, could melt the “ice” of territorial despotism & tyranny like sunshine and
warm winds do. - J.Z., 23.10.07. - NORTH KOREAN GOVERNMENT & NUCLEAR
NOTE ISSUE & QUANTITY THEORY: Note issue and inflation have nothing to do
with each other. - Popular point of view. - Yes, in the same way as the number of mink
coats on the market has nothing to do with their prices and the quantity of sand available
has nothing to do with the price of sand. - Try your theory out during your next birthday
party. Cut the cake into 20 pieces and then issue 40 tickets for the birthday cake. - J.Z.,
n.d. - The quantity theory applies only to exclusive and forced currency. Other, optional
and competitive currencies are self-limiting. They cannot be multiplied beyond the
requirements of trade and cannot drive up the prices and wages expressed in other and
sound value standards and paid for in other currencies. At most competing currencies can
be depreciated by the issuers and taken out of circulation by their issuers or be driven out
of it by other people refusing to accept them any longer. An over-issue of tickets to one
cinema does not depreciate all other tickets. And if I were to issue an avalanche of tickets
with the impression: "This ticket is good enough for nothing or valued only by fools" -
then I could not inflate all prices and wages in a country with them, unless this country is
filled exclusively by complete fools. However, if my IOUs were given exclusive currency
status and legal tender then I could cause an inflation corresponding, sooner or later, to
my issues. - The central banks, which inflate the currencies by their note issues, want us
to believe that their note issues have no effect upon prices and wages that have to be paid
for and expressed in its exclusive and forced currency. But their wish should not be our
command or become a pillar of our monetary faith. - J. Z., 2.4.97. – MONETARY
NOTE ISSUE MONOPOLY: Another error of the ruling theory I find classically
expressed by Heilfron, Geld-, Bank- und Boersenrecht, II. Aufl, S. 26, where H. says:
"The Note issue privilege gives the bank authorized with it the option to acquire capital
by the issue of banknotes, capital for which it has not to pay any interest to the note
holders." - As many errors as there are words! Accurately expressed it should say: A note
issuing bank gives its CUSTOMERS the option to mobilize their credits, i. e., to use them
as means of payment in small transactions, (e.g., in retail trading ). - Ulrich von
Beckerath, in correspondence. ( With? date?) – CENTRAL BANKING, MONETARY
NOTE ISSUE MONOPOLY: Without the note issue monopoly one cannot cause a
deflation.” - Ulrich von Beckerath, 25.1.52.
NOTE ISSUE WITHOUT CAPITAL - Surely, this is an extreme enough example to
challenge people to engage in such a mind-game and, if they become convinced it would
be theoretically possible to do so, at least some of them would begin to act upon this
conviction. - The freedom principle involved is: Everyone should be free to set himself
up, alone or in association with others, in the business of issuing notes, without a licence
and without capital. - But upon what basis could he do so, when he himself has nothing to
cover them with? - Let him look around, in most of the somewhat developed countries.
There is an abundance of ready for sale goods, services and labor, waiting desperately for
more buyers with purchasing power. The purchasing power in all countries is provided
ultimately (as a backing for non-cash payments and clearing accounts) by the central
bank only. Let him teach his local suppliers of goods and services and the local
unemployed that their readiness to accept is the soundest possible basis for a local
currency issue. Let him and them study the technical details such issues would require -
and then start their monetary emancipation, providing more easy sales for their goods,
services and labor. – For at least the unemployed own their own labor force and are
entitled and willing to sell it. Over a life-time, in somewhat developed countries, their
total wages and salaries amount to a considerable capital. But in note issues they could
anticipate only a fraction of it, namely their wage or salary claims for the near future, at
most a few weeks or months ahead. One such example, almost flawlessly and unhindered
practised anywhere in the world, and thus rapidly successful, within days, in some
extreme cases, within hours, could be reported and become known and soon imitated
world-wide, within days. – Moreover, during the last few decades and all over the world
there were annually ca. 30 - 90 armed conflict in which many people risk their lives for
much less worthy freedom objectives. With the same determination but without
bloodshed, they could organize a monetary revolution. But they would first have to
bother to inform themselves sufficiently about this option and to become aware that it
even exists and of how much it could help them. - To convince the doubting Thomases in
the local business community they might have to start small. They might e.g., suggest
that for Christmas bonus payments, for gift vouchers and for pay increases the local
business men issue common shop tokens, through a common local issuing centre. On a
still smaller basis, they might begin merely with a local token that is directed mainly at
the tourist trade and the market for such tokens among coin collectors. But these tokens
could already be accepted by local shops for their goods, not only sold by them, as one of
their goods offers. Since one does only rarely want to have a run-in with the law at all, by
challenging it directly and publicly, one might try to play all the rules of private and
competitive issues of exchange media and free choices among possible and desired value
standards, in well designed corresponding mere games between the future participants of
a conventional bank of issue or among those who intend to agitate for sufficient support
for a shop foundation or other kind bank of issue in the local community. Before that is
sufficiently prepared, at least locally sufficient literature should be provided, in
affordable form, e.g., on microfiche, floppy disks, and on-line, if not already in
comprehensive reference works and libraries, e.g. on text-only CD-ROMs. – J.Z., n.d. –
To understand the basic possibility of individual note issuers without any other capital
than their own readiness and willingness to work productively, once should imagine a
perfect clearing system in which people could freely make all the exchanges that they are
capable and willing to make. – J.Z., 27.2.09. – MONETARY FREEDOM, PERFECT
NOTE ISSUES: Naturally, this should be done only to the extent that voluntary acceptors
for such alternative monies are prepared to accept them at all and this at par with their
nominal value, expressed in sound and self-chosen or self-accepted value standards. That
means that e.g. goods stocks for the consumption of the next 2 to 11 months, like grains
stored in silos, should not already now become monetized as well but only those goods,
for which there is an immediate or very near future demand, and for whose purchase the
potential acceptors are willing to hold some corresponding cash or certificates at their
disposal. ( Who would, e.g., accept or buy some electronic telephone credit cards beyond
his immediate and near future needs? ) Nor does it mean that all capital assets and capital
securities could or should also be monetized although, in their capital market sphere they
are also partly and readily sold every day. In their sphere their kind of issue- and
acceptance as well as choice of value standard freedom should also prevail. - Essentially
only those consumer goods and services that are in daily demand and whose
consumption, under free exchange is almost as regular as clockwork, can be effectively
privately or cooperatively monetized without leading to a depreciation of such currencies
against sound value standards. ( But, for instance, dividend coupons, soon to be
redeemed, have in the past, in some cases, also served well enough as exchange media.
They are then being used as clearing certificates, making cash payments unnecessary for
both sides. Their owners can use them as purchasing power even a few days before they
are due. To that extent they are to him superior to cash, which he would otherwise get, if
at all, only when the coupons are due.) Free experimentation with private or
cooperatively issued exchange media, clearing certificates and clearing accounts will
soon tend to reconfirm old experiences of this kind and lead to correspondingly
responsible issues and sufficiently informed acceptances and refusals or discounts for
competitively supplied exchange media. - In the absence of legal tender and the issue
monopoly the good money would drive out the bad. - It is the scandal of the present law
and political institutions that this is not permitted and, instead, the all too flawed
monopoly money of the government is forced into and kept in circulation, in spite of all
its flaws and its almost constant depreciation. – J.Z., 27.9.08. - FREEDOM OF NOTE
NOTE ISSUES: Rightly issued, competitive and optional notes, freely market rated,
using sound value standards, fully publicized, must essentially be vouchers, warrants,
cheques or clearing certificates or assignments upon the own immediate goods and
service supply capacity, not a future one, or such capacity of those with whom we
voluntarily associated for our note issues. Government paper money can be considered (if
taxation is considered acceptable) as only an assignment upon taxes "owed" to the
government or as tax receipts issued in advance and then to be paid in or cleared as
credits when the taxes fall due. They are, thus, indirectly, representing government
services or disservices, paid for with them. They also represent the pay cheques for the
huge bureaucracy more or less mismanaging all government services and disservices. But
as forced currency (exclusive currency with compulsory acceptance and enforced value),
used in payments for services and goods, against other victims than taxpayers, it is
always wrong, even though many of the victims can pass these bucks on to the taxpayers.
Its use for welfare State payouts cannot make it right. - J. Z., 28.1.95, 20.3.97.
NOTE ISSUING BANKS: 1.) Their notes must not acquire an issue monopoly. They
must always be exposed to free competition. 2.) Their notes must never become legal
tender in general circulation. But they must be legal tender towards the issuing bank itself
and, by contract, towards its debtors. 3.) No capital loans (medium or long term loans)
should be granted with their turnover credit notes - unless some note holders return them
to the bank as savings and want them so invested on terms agreeable to all concerned. 4.)
The business with any particular firm should never exceed 10% of the total banking
business. 5.) The business of the bank of issue should be confined to business with local
firms, firms within a certain circumference. 6.) To avoid over-issues, the notes should not
be granted tax foundation, i.e. the tax authorities should not be obliged to accept them at
their face-value (i.e., "at par" with their nominal value) but only at their market rate, if
that has sunk below its par value. 7.) No notes are to be issued upon capital assets. 8.) All
issues are to be based upon short-term securities that represent goods already produced
and sold at least to wholesalers or ready for sale service or labour capacity. 9.) Primarily,
the issues of such a bank should be used as means to pay local wages and salaries with -
if employees are finding them acceptable for this. 10.) A redemption by the issuer in
gold, silver or platinum is not to be offered. 11.) The bank is to point out which stores
and businesses are ready to accept its notes are par - redeeming them with their goods and
services. 12.) The bank must always be prepared to accept its own notes at par, at least
within their limited circulation period. 13.) If the bank receives other means of payment
then it should utilise these a) for its own payments due in these means of payment and for
the purchase of its own notes on the free market, at par, when and wherever its notes
suffer a discount. It should also exchange notes of other banks of issue with the other
banks for its own notes. 14.) Further issues have to cease while locally the notes suffer a
discount of 1% or more. 15.) When debts owed to the bank are paid in other means of
exchange than the own notes, then the bank may charge a small fee: In order to withdraw
its own notes faster and more thoroughly and in order to cover any costs involved in
utilizing the notes of others. 16.) Its notes should clearly state their limited circulation
period, usually 3 months and never more than 12 months. A limited usability, e.g. for the
payment of overdue debts, might be proclaimed for notes that are presented after their
period of validity. 17.) Although the administrative and insurance costs for turnover-
credits granted with the own notes are low, a considerable interest should be charge for
them, one to be increased when repayments are late. Part of that additional interest may
be distributed as a premium among those who repaid their debts to the bank early. -
These are not thoroughly pondered and worded bank statutes but just some of the rules
which stuck in my mind. For well drafted bank statutes for banks of issue see especially
the writings of Ulrich von Beckerath, 1882-1969. - J. Z., 3/97. – THEIR DON'TS, LIMITS & SOUND ISSUE & REFLUX
NOTHING: Nothing for nothing.” – 18th century proverb. – Hyman, Quotes p. 273. ( Ex
nihil – nihil. ) - - “Nothing for nothing.” – James J. Davis, Secretary of State for Labor,
quoted as supposedly the guiding principle of America, in Ernest Benn: Confessions of a
Capitalist, p.183. - - Nobody gets nothing for nothing in this world.” – John Singleton,
THE AUSTRALIAN, 29.11.75. - - States and nations do not really exist. Thus nothing
positive can come out of them. Alas, as institutionalized fictions, granted too much power
by their victims, they can do all too much wrong and harm. – J.Z., 31.1.08. –. Compare:
“A fair trade is no robbery.” - AMERICANISM, FREE EXCHANGE, MONETARY
NOVELS: The trouble with most novelists is that they have the medium and may even
use it masterfully, but they do not have messages that are important, in most cases. – J.Z.
16.6.87, 25.1.88.
NOW: The word “now” is like a bomb through the window, and it ticks.” – Arthur
Miller, After the Fall, 1964. – I would replace the “and it ticks” by “and it should consist
in fast, rightful and rational action.” – Or: The word “now should be like a bomb thrown
through the window and it should start off fast and quite rightful liberating actions. Alas
… J.Z., 22.6.92, 27.2.09. - A well developed and publicized libertarian revolution,
military insurrection and liberation program could achieve that. But, so far, who except
me has tried to compile one? See - Is there already
one offered on the Internet? I have not yet searched for it. – I just did: Under “ libertarian
militia program” I got just one reference, not of interest to me. Under “libertarian
liberation program”, “libertarian revolution program” and “libertarian military
insurrection program” I got zero references from Google. – J.Z., 26.1.08. Is anyone else
more successful with such searches? – J.Z., 27.2.09.
NTH-POWER PROBLEM: Already one government possessing nuclear weapons is one
too much. Now there are at least six known to have them: USA, USSR, UK, France,
China and India - and dozens more could easily get them by using their nuclear reactors.
A further spread must be prevented, at almost any cost, seeing how much this would
increase the likelihood of nuclear war. Any kind of commando raid and sabotage effort
would be morally justified in that cause. A nuclear attack would not be. - See: Accidental
War, Arms Race, Atomic Energy, Decision, Desertion, Disarmament, Espionage,
Military Insurrections, Militia, Resistance, Research, Revolutions, Secrecy, Separate
Peace, Treason, Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament, Uranium Mining, War Aims. - From:
NUCLEAR AGE: Robert Oppenheimer, the scientific director of the Manhattan Project
which created the atomic bomb, remarked in later life that in time this nuclear age would
be seen as a phase in human history that was transitory, dangerous and degrading.
Either it would be understood in this way or there would be no one there to make the
judgment. – Gwyn Prins, editor, in: The Choice: Nuclear War vs. Security, XVII
NUCLEAR AGE: The nuclear age is an age where many of us are not likely to reach a
ripe old age. – J.Z., 24.1.08.
NUCLEAR ARMS RACE: At Hiroshima we underwent a sea change: the nuclear blade
entered our very souls. Thirty-four years later, we lead the world's weapons race; but it
could as well be said that the weapons race leads us. The weapons lead our leaders. The
weapons grow wise and oracular, they dictate foreign policy and domestic spending. Our
true sanctuaries and synagogues are now the bunkers and Trident bases and Strategic
Air Command fields. In them, the high priests of our destiny assemble: the money moguls,
the political shamans, the generals incanting exorcisms against our enemies. They
surround their idol, the bomb, they invoke a tribal god-on-our side, they pour the bowls
of blood: the blood of the poor, the blood of soldiers, of civilians, of women and children,
of the ill, the aged. They pour the blood of the unborn. They pour healthy blood and
tainted; a great and growing flood of the latter pours out, cancerous blood, blood of the
fallout." - Daniel Berrigan, THE AUSTRALIAN, 7.8.79. - If mere incantations could
help ... - J.Z.
NUCLEAR ARMS RACE: Precisely because of the enormous expenditure of human and
material resources which it requires, the arms race has been described as 'an act of
aggression which amounts to a crime for even when they are not used, by their cost
alone, armaments kill the poor by causing them to starve‟.” Joseph Camilleri in article,
p.32 of John Hinchcliff: Confronting the Nuclear Age. - Driving the Soviet regime to
bankruptcy and collapse was actually the declared intention of the US government since
the fifties, according to Fred J. Cook, The Warfare State, 1963. Only it took decades
longer than expected until the US succeeded and all the time the threat of nuclear war,
even if only by accident, continued and was even increased, since the number and power
of nuclear weapons was multiplied, in the case of the popular J. Kennedy it was doubled
during this reign. When I heard of his assassination I thought at first that this was in
response to his nuclear strength policy. - Moreover, the self-delusion, that these devices
constitute "strength" rather than a terrible weakness, was so long upheld that it lead to the
continuance of over-kill nuclear weapons stocks in the US as well as in the new Russia. -
J.Z., 1.5.06.
NUCLEAR ARMS RACE: Since 650 B.C., there have been 1656 arms races, only 16
of which have not ended in war. The remainder have ended in economic collapse. - US
Naval Institute Proceedings. - "OPEN ROAD", Summer 82.
NUCLEAR ARMS RACE: The nuclear arms race amounts to a conspiracy to commit
mass murder. And it isn't even kept a secret one! - J.Z., 8.6.82.
NUCLEAR ARMS RACE: Three decades after Hiroshima, we have by no means
renounced that crime. Indeed, we are fervently preparing to destroy more than a distant
city. The nuclear stakes have risen; we are now preparing simply to end the world. We
are proceeding on this mad course with a persistence, skill, investment of resources,
income and scientific talent incomparably greater than is expended an housing or
schooling or health or good, or all of these taken together." - Daniel Berrigan, THE
AUSTRALIAN, 7.8.79. - It's easy to blame governments but is there one publication by
any voluntary association that is continuously open to all suggestions on how to prevent
nuclear war??? - J.Z.
NUCLEAR ATTACK: The fear of such an attack is the main driving force behind the
nuclear arms race and the deterrence policy. To overcome this fear, some effective
alternative defensive methods must be convincingly described and put into operation.
Some of these are mentioned under: Defence, Desertion, Disarmament, Free Migration,
Militia, Monetary Freedom, Revolutionary Warfare, Sabotage, Secession, Tax Strike,
Tyrannicide. - Once certain rightful war aims are believably proclaimed and certain
appeals and public declarations made in a trustworthy way, by the people themselves,
then every dictatorship (every government from which such an attack might come),
would be rendered so shaky that any new & large wrong that it would commit could
topple it and its rulers would realize this. The threat of well organized and popular
revolutions and military insurrections, as well as of liberation wars and tyrannicide, is
probably the most effective deterrent for them. - See: Appeals, Declarations,
Governments-in-Exile, Guaranties, Liberation War, Military Insurrections, Militia, Peace
Declarations, People, Revolution, Secession, Surrender, Trust, War Aims. - From: J.Z.,
NUCLEAR DEFENCE: we will not operate on the basis that half the population, or
three quarters of it, is expendable. Leaders with such notions are criminally
irresponsible". - A. E. Van Vogt: The Wizard of Linn, 81. - Yet none of them ended in
prison - or was assassinated for that reason! Let all the would-be victims have their free
say in the matter! - J.Z., 3.8.82.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: For honourable members opposite the deterrent is a phallic
symbol. It convinces them that they are men." - S. Silverman, 1895-1968, A. Andrews
Quotations, p.400.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: Historians have blamed the military staffs of the European
powers before 1914 for rigging their mobilization schedules and planned responses to an
adversary‟s mobilization in such a way that limited military intervention by one power in
an accidentally triggered local conflict automatically engulfed all those nations, within a
few weeks, in one of history‟s most destructive wars. But he situation today may be even
worse, or could soon become so. Today, some government leaders and strategists have
become so possessed by the idea that everything ought to depend upon deterrence that
they press for military preparations that make the preparations of 1914 look prudently
flexible and rationally cautious. – Fred Charles Ikle, Every War Must End, 1971,
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: I admire your faith in the ultimate good sense of your
species. History, however, does not bear you out.” - Thomas N. Scortia, Earth Wreck,
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: If ever the world was presented with a saying of the highest
wisdom and deepest truth, it was when we were told not to do evil that good might come.
All the fighters, from the unscrupulous politician of a low type, who consents to trick or
flatter for the advantage of himself or his party, up to the dynamiter, who seeks to
terrorise society for the sake of views of which he himself has but a slight understanding,
are all fighting together in one vast army to render true progress impossible. Progress
can never be won by the weapons of trickery, flattery, or terrorism. The use of all such
weapons only means the wearisome passage from one set of evils to another." - Auberon
HERBERT, Mack ed., p.197.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: I'm scared! I don't know whether the world is full of smart
men bluffing ... or imbeciles who mean it." - Morrie Brickmen, in The Peter Plan by L. J.
Peter, p.83.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: Is there no moral revulsion in you against the so-called
nuclear deterrent or nuclear strength policy? – J.Z., 25.1.97. - NUCLEAR STRENGTH,
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: It is a tragic paradox of our age that the highly humane
objective of preventing nuclear war is served by a military doctrine and engines of
destruction whose very purpose is to inflict genocide.” - Fred Charles Ikle, Every War
Must End, Columbia University Press, N.Y., London, 1971, p.130.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: Jonathan Schell … dismissingly compared SALT to an
aspirin administered to a patient with a terminal disease.” - Strobe Talbot, TIME,
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: Most men die of their remedies, not of their diseases. –
Moliere, The Imaginary Invalid, 1673, 3, tr. John Wood.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: People love peace so much that governments had better get
out of their way and let them have it. - President Eisenhower, quoted only from memory.
- Governments are, obviously, quite untrustworthy as disarmers and unwilling to permit
sufficient arms controls or to arrange for them. - J.Z., 1.5.06. – Did President Eisenhower
get out of the way? – J.Z., 31.5.08.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: The deterrent efforts are largely in vain, in the long run.
They do not sufficiently deter those people who are immoral and irrational enough built
such mass murder devices in the first place and do keep them in readiness, while they are
safely sheltered themselves. Enough of them have already declared that they are prepared
to use them. Apparently, these "people" or top decision-makers in territorial States are
still insufficiently deterred. - - "… a host of Cold War warriors devoted to the proposition
that safety is to be found only          in the perfection of weapons that will more
efficiently destroy the world." - Fred C. J. Cook, "The Warfare State", p.247. - - "… the
grim determination of the warriors to match megaton with megaton, power with power
to the final and inevitable collision." - Fred C. J. Cook, ibid, p.251. - J.Z., 27 5 06, NWT
manuscript. – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: The language in which the strategy of deterrence is being
discussed tends to obscure the fact that this strategy is based on a scheme of totally
unprecedented cruelty. Various abstractions and metaphors – which remain necessarily (
and fortunately ) untested by reality – help to insulate the design against the wrath of the
innocents who are its targets. Owing to these metaphors, a scheme that would have been
rejected as abhorrent in the Dark Ages by kinds and the common people alike, appears to
reflect the human ideals of modern civilization. …” - Fred Charles Ikle, Every War Must
End, Columbia University Press, N.Y., London, 1971, p.130.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: The possibilities for the outbreak of a nuclear war that
cannot be blocked by mutual deterrence are broader than the risk of an accidental
weapons launch. Deterrence is based on the premise that people in control of nuclear
weapons wish their country to survive. Yet there has never been a period in history
without men acquiring positions of power who were willing to die, and to see others die,
for causes that they themselves invented and which were espoused by only a few of their
henchmen. In several countries the political process is such that leaders can come to the
top who consider it a virtue, or perhaps part of their “revolutionary” creed, to live
dangerously. Vivere pericolosamente was one of Benito Mussolini‟s favorite slogans. - -
One is reminded of the almost total lack of forethought that Hitler and his military staff
gave to the decision to declare war against the United States. … - Fred Charles Ikle,
Every War Must End, 1971, p.127.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: The tragedy lies in the fact that the deliberately threatened
execution of millions and millions of people, strenuously prepared so that it might not all
below some level of “assured destruction”, can serve to prevent only those nuclear wars
that would be initiated by a calculated decision to attack. It is crucial, of course, that this
contingency be blocked. But should nuclear war nonetheless break out, the desperate
logic go the Great Deterrent offers not the slightest mercy for humanity. It is
foreordained by today‟s exclusive reliance on deterrence that nuclear fighting – should it
ever start – cannot end without killing, the systematically prepared killing, of most of the
people in the nations whose misfortune it was to collide in a war.” - Fred Charles Ikle,
Every War Must End, Columbia University Press, N.Y., London, 1971, p.131.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: There has been too much careless talk about the "nuclear
deterrent", but it has not deterred our leaders from stockpiling these anti-people
"weapons" and declaring that they are ready to use them, once they consider this to be
"necessary", against what they consider to be rightful targets, namely, us! (Directly or
indirectly!) - Nuclear "deterrence" has so far always only meant: Not yet! - Even if no
malicious and mad leaders were involved: There are always miscalculations and
accidents. - J.Z., NWT 27 5 06.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: To every Idi Amin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other terrorist
his own "nuclear deterrent?" - J.Z., 17.11.78. – DIS.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: We have crated a glittering armada of rockets, warheads
and electronics, controlled by the unfathomable workings of the minds of a few frightened
men. From all over the world there is the muttered protest of people who perceive this as
a technological monstrosity. America's march up the nuclear mountain was made in the
name of peace. the time for a courageous march down, under the same banner, may be at
had - if the other side is willing. - Hugh Sidey, in TIME, March 29, 1982. (Sidney?)
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we
in agreement." - Bible, Isaiah, A. Andrews Quotations, p.128.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: Why kill Russians? They are the victims of their own
government. It seems bizarre that we attempt to deter the slave masters (by?) threatening
to kill the slaves.” - Joseph P. Martino, Defending a Free Society. - And almost never
seriously attempting to really liberate those we declare to be living under dictatorships or
trying to encourage a revolution or military insurrection against such regimes. - The
Soviets, on the other hand, aimed clearly at world revolution, ostensibly to liberate the
proletariat - while, actually, threatening to obliterate it with their nuclear devices. - These
contradictions were, to my knowledge, never sufficiently and publicly discussed. - J.Z., 1.
5. 06.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: Yet the fact that a thing is horrible does not make it
impossible, as the inhabitants of Hiroshima discovered." - Arthur C. Clarke, Profiles of
the Future, p.95.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: You are a willing participant in an international game of
'chicken' between governments which ultimately will probably result in nuclear
holocaust.” - George Kysor, LIBERTARIAN CONNECTION 68-27. – He does have a
very interesting blog! – J.Z., 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE: You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. -
NUCLEAR DEVICES: It's my spaceship (Earth), too - and you do not have my consent
for any nuclear explosion or reactor on it or near it. - J.Z., 29. 3. 84.
NUCLEAR DEVICES: That a Hitler, a Stalin, and a Mao could gain and retain power for
many years, makes all territorialist political institutions suspect and unsafe - and least to
be entrusted with nuclear powers. Usually, they cannot even be trusted with normal
government powers. - J.Z., 10.2.77, 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR DEVICES: That the peaceful atom can be separated from the warlike atom
is an illusion. If we don't phase out nuclear power, it is likely to phase us out." - Kenneth
Brower, in OMNI, 4/80, p.128. - NUCLEAR REACTORS
NUCLEAR DEVICES: They don't really deserve the name of 'weapons' or 'arms'! - J.Z.
NUCLEAR DEVICES: Why are large standing armies, treasures and taxing powers
dangerous in the hands of rulers? Because the danger of their abuse amount, in the long
run, to a certainty. The same applies to nuclear weapons and radioactive materials ( also
to B. & C 'weapons' ), apart from all other moral and rational objections one might raise
against them. - J.Z., 17.11.78, 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: Astonishingly, 40 years into the Atomic Age Scientists
are just discovering the unforeseen, catastrophic global consequences of nuclear war.
Nuclear explosions, particularly ground bursts, lift enormous quantities of fine soil into
the atmosphere, causing what is commonly referred to as nuclear winter. … - Bernard
Lown and Evgueni I. Chazos, in OMNI, 9/86, p.6. – DIS.
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: called not just for a freeze but for dismantling of all
nuclear weapons, citing them as “an affront to our Christian beliefs and commitments.” –
American Baptist minister, quoted in PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL, Nov. 82. -
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: Can‟t make scientific progress go away!” – Imagine an
enemy regime‟s H-bomb being already planted under each of our cities by enemy agents.
Should we not try to find and disarm them? Would it really be impossible to induce a
dictator‟s military forces to destroy their nuclear devices if we offer them a separate
peace with quite rightful and attractive peace aims, offering them much more than their
dictator can offer them? – Haven‟t we done away with the “progress” involved in
enslaving other people? Are we still using all the torture instruments ever invented?
Haven‟t government schools succeeded in reducing literacy? Hasn‟t the FDA postponed
or prevented medical progress? Are we obliged to utilize and keep in readiness every
mass murder device ever invented?- J.Z., 17.4.91, 26.1.08. - DIS.
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: How is it possible that a quarter of a century of arms
negotiations involving more than 7,000 sessions, has not resulted in the dismantling of a
single major nuclear weapons system? In large part the absence of results relates to the
very process of disarmament negotiations. They are carried out in secret by the wrong
people in a snail-paced, piecemeal wary. (*) – Bernard Lown and Evgueni I. Chazos, in
OMNI,           9/86, p. 6. - One explanation is that these disarmers take territorialism and
monopolistic decision-making powers of a few top people for granted. And these top
people have very good reasons not to trust each other. Only the disarmament of quite
wrongful governments and quite wrongful “weapons” by the people themselves, their
targets, optimally by ideal militias of volunteers, for the protection of all individual rights
and liberties, would have a good chance to achieve that aim, soon. But not a single such
militia exists as yet to my knowledge. And the people as a whole are still ignorant,
prejudiced and disinterested in real solutions, just like their mis-leaders. – J.Z., 25.1.08.
(*) They are well paid and don‟t want to make themselves superfluous. – J.Z.
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: Nuclear Disarmament of nation States is one of the
highest political goods which we can obtain.” - David Hart, 1978.
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: President Johnson, in his television address to the nation
on 21 January 1965, … said: “Disarmament is not merely the Government‟s business,
but everybody‟s business.” - … But how much concerned with disarmament is
“everybody”? One hopes that this is not another case of “What is everybody‟s business
is nobody‟s business”. Of course, all of us should be concerned about disarmament, since
the policies adopted by the government may determine whether we will live out our
natural lives or be burned up, buried under rubble, radioactivated, or perish in some of
the other horrid eventualities that will rise if the arms race runs on uncontrolled and the
nations continue to rely on ever-increasing armed force for security.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M.
Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.178. – But how much say do the nations and their
individuals have on such subjects? At present dissenters are not even free to secede from
nuclear-armed territorial governments and to engage in their own kind of “foreign” policy
of making allies or friends or staying neutral. – Territorial States or, rather, their
governments, still have a decision-making monopoly on such questions and that
constitutional or usurped authority is only rarely questioned. Thus their subjects become
targets for mass murder devices. They are considered merely as property of territorial
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: The general flaw of nuclear disarmament proposals was
that it was entrusted to territorial governments, i.e., essentially, to warfare States! That is
like entrusting crime-fighting to the Mafia. - - Under international "controls" by
governments and their international institutions nuclear proliferation is continuing and
even terrorists get some chances to arm themselves with such "weapons". - - We have
even reached the absurd condition where more "democratic" governments possess these
mass murder devices than dictatorial ones! At least at present they seem to have them
also in much greater numbers. - - Who and where are the people, who constitute the
targets for these "weapons"? - These are anti-people "weapons" not weapons suitable to
execute or capture tyrants. They are the most anti-democratic "weapons" that can be
imagined. - They are quite unsuitable for the defence of democracies and for the
liberation of captive peoples. - Blind militarism, believing only in "big bangs" remains,
obviously, even after decades, still ignorant of these facts. - Governments unable to
enforce gun control towards violent criminals should not be expected to be successful in
their attempts to achieve nuclear disarmament of criminal governments, especially when
they themselves are criminal enough to have armed themselves with nuclear mass murder
devices rather than e.g. tyrannicide weapons or policing weapons only. - - Atomic
"weapons", not to speak of chemical and bacteriological "weapons", can all too easily be
hidden - and governmental inspectors are unlikely to find them all or even most of them.
NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: The remedy is to eliminate all nuclear weapons, and
particularly to keep them out of space. – “A Step Further Out”, in FAR FRONTIERS,
Fall 85, p.9. - It might be easier to destroy Soviet nuclear “weapons” with the help of
Russian soldiers and other captive peoples in the USSR than to destroy such “weapons”
in the hands of our own rulers. - J.Z., 1989/90. – DIS.
NUCLEAR ENERGY: A special tax or insurance contribution might be demanded of all
advocates and practitioners of nuclear power, to help clean up the messes they will cause,
at least to the extent that this can be done. They should also have to put their lives and
health on the line in the cleaning up process. Call it compulsory indemnification or
insurance charges and levies, rather than taxes, if you like. – J.Z., 19.11.93, 24.1.08.
NUCLEAR ENERGY: The peaceful atom is a violent myth. – Button-slogan. -
NUCLEAR ENERGY: you could not dispute the fact that nuclear energy, in whatever
form and for whatever purpose, meant the possibility of nuclear weapons.” - Poul
Anderson, Orion Shall Rise, p.131. - & NUCLEAR WEAPONS
NUCLEAR FREE ZONES: Nuclear Free Zones are a basically sound idea, but badly
worded, since all dead and living matter is made up of atoms or nuclear matter. Only the
scope of the suggestion is much to small, revealing parochial rather than world-wide
thinking. In an age IBM's no area is absolutely safe, even when it is declared to be a
"nuclear-free zone". Admittedly, if it has no nuclear installations, or installations
subsidiary to nuclear warfare, like some communication bases for e.g. nuclear armed
submarines, then it is correspondingly less likely to be attacked with nuclear devices. The
old idea of nuclear-free-zones has been especially outmoded by the development of
nuclear submarines and nuclear weapons placed in space - i.e., in formerly nuclear-free
zones. - To offer full safety there ought to be only one Nuclear Free Zone, one
encompassing the whole Earth and space around it. They must all become free of nuclear
weapons - and of installations for their production, including nuclear power plants. -
Otherwise, it will be almost as ineffective as "gun control", a disarmament which disarms
the honest citizens and leaves the criminals armed against them. It has thus been aptly
called: "victim disarmament". - - To initiate a world-wide Nuclear-Free-Zone and achieve
at least a moderate degree of increased security, any democratic people could and should
initiate a unilateral nuclear disarmament. - - See: Decision, Declarations, Defence,
Disarmament, Governments-in-Exile, Liberation War, Military Insurrections, Militia,
Monetary Freedom, Nuclear Strength, People, Revolution, Surrender, Tax Strikes,
Tyrannicide, Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear
NUCLEAR POWER: and strontium 90 (although normally associated with atmospheric
testing, strontium 90 escapes during the normal operation of every nuclear reactor).
Because of its chemical similarity to calcium, strontium 90 lodges in bones and organs
and is a potent carcinogen. The nuclear industry does not include strontium 90 in its
analysis of radioactive release from nuclear reactors and states that its presence in the
atmosphere is a result of weapons testing. The fact is that the strontium releases at
nuclear plants are so high that, according to Dr. Ernest Sternglass, professor of
radiological physics at the University of Pittsburgh, "for the people who live around the
nuclear reactors, weapons testing has never stopped." - PENTHOUSE
NUCLEAR POWER: In the nuclear industry money is mentioned more often than
morals. … An accident in a nuclear reactor is referred to as an "excursion"; a nuclear
bomb is called a ‟device‟.- James Schlesinger, secretary of energy, has gone so far as to
call the nuclear plant a "comfortable neighbor". - PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL,
NUCLEAR POWER: Nuclear power is power to pollute. J.Z., 1.5.06.
NUCLEAR POWER: Nuclear power is unclean power. - J.Z., Nov. 77.
NUCLEAR POWER: Nuclear power was first used to make weapons of total destruction
for use against military enemies (*), but today it even imperils citizens in their own
country, because there is no fundamental difference between atoms for peace and atoms
for war. (**) – Robert Jungk, The Nuclear State, John Calder, London, 1979, page VII. -
- (*) The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not military targets but victims of
governmental terrorism against civilians. – J.Z., 19.9.07. - - (**) To speak in this way of
atoms does not make sense at all, because even the most peaceful people are built up of
atoms. Moreover, life on Earth depends largely on the single relatively safe nuclear
reactor in this planetary system, namely the sun. – J.Z., 19.9.07. - NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR POWER: Sen. Mike Gravel, former chairman of the defunct Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy, describe the atomic establishment as a "multi-billion-dollar alliance
of government and industry, inflated with taxpayer dollars and protected by the military
secrecy of the AEC." This alliance has spent billions in order to produce 10 percent of
the nation's electricity at no demonstrable saving to the consumer. Fission-generated
electricity, produced by a controlled atomic explosion, is one step in the nuclear fuel
cycle. Each step in the fuel cycle creates dangers to all living things. The atomic
establishment has shown a systematic and relentless disregard for medical and scientific
findings showing the hazards of the fuel cycle to the world today and to the future. -
NUCLEAR POWER: The atomic establishment has deliberately underestimated the
exposure of workers to radiation by from 500 to 2,000 times. - PENTHOUSE
NUCLEAR POWER: We pay twice for nuclear power - once in federal taxes that finance
DOE research benefiting commercial nuclear ventures and once again in our utility
rates. PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL, 8/78, article "Death Wish". – Then we pay for
it with out health and finally we pay endlessly for decommissioning these power-plants
and trying to keep their radioactive wastes safe. – J.Z. 31.5.08.
NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION: Congressman Clarence D. Long, in October 1974,
claimed America is turning the world into an 'atomic time bomb' by supplying small
countries with nuclear materials. "We've already sold nuclear reactors to 33 foreign
governments' he writes, "reactors that produce plutonium, the key ingredient in atomic
weapons." - Jack Stoneley: CETI, p.164.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: All the advocates of nuclear power production should be
prepared to sacrifice their lives and fortunes for the clearing up of nuclear reactor
accidents like that at Chernobyl. Even such an effort would, probably, not be enough. –
J.Z., 29.1.93. – How many nuclear reactors are there by now, how many accidents have
we had so far with them and how soon is another and major one likely? – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: By the time you decommission a nuclear power station, the
cost of its electricity is treble that from conventional sources.” - Ian Stewart, Wall of
Death, ANALOG, 10/90, 108.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Can you assure us and guarantee that your descendents – in up
to 10 000 generations – will still as carefully guard your nuclear waste dumps – as you
might be able and willing to do so now? – J.Z., 23. 4. 89. – Or that they will forgive you
for your or your government‟s or some corporation‟s careless handling of radioactive
material, which you have not managed or cared to prevent? – Do our governments and
our large corporations always adopt the long-term view or do they have their eyes mainly
on the short-term bottom-line, at most only a few years ahead? - J.Z., 26.1.08. – Q.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Chernobyl … I can feel it in my bones.” – Button slogan. –
Alas, we can‟t feel it, until the cancer breaks out, but we ought to know that the potential
for it is there. – J.Z., 4.8.92, 26.1.08, 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Disregarding overwhelming medical and scientific evidence,
government and business stumble blindly toward nuclear disaster.” - Corinne Browne
and Robert Munroe, in PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL, 8/78.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Due do the pollution, accident, sabotage, bombing and
terrorism threat and the fact that they produce the raw material for still more nuclear
bombs, nuclear reactors should not be built or continued in operation unless they have
been approved by all the people living several hundred miles around them. People
sufficiently informed on this subject will refuse to permit such power production. – J.Z.,
n.d. - Due to the pollution, accident, sabotage and war danger, the establishment of any
nuclear reactor should be made dependent upon a referendum of people living around it
in a circle with the radius of at least 100-500 miles. - I am aware that wind and rain could
carry radioactive dust, liquids and gasses much further still! - J.Z., n.d.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Earth is flat, pigs can fly and nuclear power is safe.” – Button
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Even if they were safe in peace time, they would not be so in
war time - since they would then constitute prime targets. - J.Z., 28. 5. 84.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: False hopes, expectations, promises and prophecies were
attached to them. “Deus ex machina!” This always meant either self-deception or the
willful deception of others. They, too, are either government property or government
subsidized and controlled projects. We never hear about their true costs and risks from
their advocates, their limited life spans, their decommissioning costs and about their
ongoing costs and risks for many thousands of years or about the limited amounts of
uranium available for them. Anyhow, the energy production costs do not matter very
much. It is mostly the transmission costs that do matter. Moreover, insurance costs should
be fully included in the price of the electricity they provide. – Furthermore, at least all
those of the people, who are living for hundreds of kilometers around them, should be
free to decide whether they such plants be built or continued. – For they have to bear their
main risks. - J.Z., 30.3.05, 24.10.07.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Fusion reactors ought to be prevented or destroyed - after
corresponding referendums. From the fusion reactor to the fusion bomb is but a step. A
step which man is still irresponsible enough to take. One does not let children play with
hand guns or politicians and generals with hydrogen bombs. - J.Z., 27.9.79.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: How many nuclear reactors will have to become constructed
from the materials of supposedly peaceful nuclear reactors before these reactors are
finally recognized as at least potential nuclear weapons factories? – J.Z., 7.8.03. -
NUCLEAR REACTORS: How many people would buy nuclear power at its true price, if
alternative powers could be freely offered to them and if they were to leave themselves
open to damage suits as accessories? - J.Z., 76/82. – I am not in favour of subsidizing
alternative power sources but at least they should not be taxed. – J.Z., 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Mutate now. Avoid the rush!" - Graffiti, shown in the
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Nuclear energy is the latest and most dangerous form of
energy which man has identified." - TIME & LIFE series.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Nuclear power is 'modern', 'scientific' and 'progressive' and
promises unlimited energy - but so do wind, tide, geothermic, sun power and numerous
other alternatives - and none of the latter carry any of the risks and dangers of nuclear
power. - J.Z., 1977.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Nuclear power plants may present as great a threat to the
survival of life on earth as does nuclear war.” - Dr. Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Madness,
Autumn Press, 1978, 106. – Actually, even all supposedly alternative energies are
indirect results of the energy supplied by the only relatively save nuclear reactor in this
planetary system, namely the Sun. It‟s just as well that this reactor is not subject to
human manipulation and, hopefully, it will never be. – Obviously, seeing the natural
catastrophes that are also, indirectly caused, by this vast and distant nuclear reactor, it is
not quite safe, either, for human beings. Think of floods, draughts, storms, earthquakes,
ultraviolet light burns, skin cancer. - J.Z., 23.2.09. - & NUCLEAR WAR THREAT
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Nuclear reactors produce plutonium and enriched uranium as
raw material for still more nuclear destructive devices. The governments running or
supervising them may also secretly stockpile these materials "to keep their options open".
Thus referendums should initiate the destruction of all these camouflaged nuclear arms
factories. - Due also to the pollution, accident and sabotage risk involved and through
their being primary targets in a nuclear war, the people, those living up to 500 miles
around them, should become free to veto, by referendum, the establishment and the
continuance of any such power plant. - See: Atomic Energy, Peaceful Use, Referendum. -
From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: People tend to live longer than nuclear reactors, even when
they are already somewhat poisoned by them. But can they safely live in a nuclear
garbage dump or former reactor zone? – J.Z., 9.6.92, 26.1.08.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Plutonium 239 is a murderous substance - a tissue destroyer.
It emits alpha particles that are dangerous if inhaled or ingested. A microgram of
plutonium can cause cancer in an animal, and a few micrograms are certain death to a
human being. One pound of plutonium represents enough poison to give 9 billion people
lung cancer. - Plutonium is extremely hard to manage, because its toxicity will not be
reduced to "safe" levels for almost a half-million years. There is no safe or permanent
way of storing it and no way of disposing it. There is not way to get rid of it. It is here to
stay, on the soil, in the water, in the air, and in our lungs. - However, officials of the
United States Department of Energy in Washington, CC., describe plutonium in terms
that make you want to cuddle it: 'Silver gray and warm to the touch from the energy of
alpha radiation". The claim that nuclear reactors, each of which produces some 500
pounds of plutonium annually, are necessary for the production of safe, clean and cheap
energy.” - Corinne Browne and Robert Munroe, in PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL,
8/78. - Plutonium is also handy for the production of still more nuclear "weapons". - J.Z.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: Small nuclear plants can be relatively safe.” – Karl Hess. –
Yes, but when they are produced and used by the hundreds of millions? Radiation
exposure beyond the natural background level has been compared to the exposure to
machine gun fire. The only safe exposure is none. All modern steel produced contains
already, for quality checks, a small quantity of radioactive isotopes. Many years ago,
when isotopes were used to provide constantly luminous dials for watches, I read that
from that source alone the wearer could already get half of what was then considered to
be a still tolerable dose during his life time. Aeroplanes flying through the atmospheric
remains of nuclear tests, spread all over the world, had to be regularly washed down to
remove particles that adhered to them – I also read, years ago. And by now we have xyz
smoke detectors in homes, sometimes even made compulsory, all containing a small
quantity of radioactive materials. It all adds up. The danger from exposure to cathode
tube computer displays has been ignored for decades. At least they are now largely
displaced by other kinds of screens which seem to be safer. But, in the long run? At least
the exposure at X-Rays at medical examinations has been somewhat diminished and,
partly, replaced, by magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound imaging. Whether these
alternatives are safe enough, in the long run, remains to be seen. I spoke with one of the
ultrasound examiners I encountered in one of my examinations of this kind, about the
safety of ultrasound producing gadgets to ward off insect pests, birds on the roof and
dogs and cats around my place. He warned me against using it! What did he know about
this exposure danger? – Mostly we are now using lead-free petrol. But I read recently a
warning about some of its ingredients. Any spillage on one‟s skin should be immediately
and carefully washed off because of the long term health hazard involved, it said! There
are even warnings about electromagnetic effects from lamps, xyz household gadgets, by
now also including computers, mobiles, games modules etc., etc., in endless proliferation
and also of high tension power cables. So what does “relative safety” mean in the long
run? – Will the response to some such potential or real dangers be as belated as that to
Asbestos and to compulsory mass ex-rays to detect tuberculosis? - J.Z., 25.1.08. –
Imagine cars, trucks and trains as well as air craft being driven by small nuclear reactors
and the consequences of their crashes. Already many ships and submarines are so
powered. And some of them still get lost at sea. – J.Z., 27.2.09. - DIS., RADIATION
NUCLEAR REACTORS: The only nuclear reactor that is safe enough for is the one
placed ca. 150 million km away from us. And even from it one can get sun burn and sun
stroke and skin cancer. – J.Z., n.d. & 24.1.08. – The only nuclear reactor safe enough for
human beings in this whole solar system is – the sun. – J.Z., 21.4.97.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: The only safe fast breeder is a rabbit!" - FREEDOM,
NUCLEAR REACTORS: The police cannot protect the lives and health of the people
against nuclear reactors but it can well protect the nuclear reactors from the population.
– Wilfried Thomsen, Radicalauer. ( Die Polizei kann zwar nicht die Sicherheit der
Bevoelkerung vor Kernkraftwerken garantieren, wohl aber die Sicherheit der
Kernkraftwerke vor der Bevoelkerung.“ ) – As long as the people are unarmed,
unorganized and untrained for this. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - POLICE & PEOPLE
NUCLEAR REACTORS: The relative high cost of nuclear power means it would
provide only an additional 2 per cent of the world‟s electricity supply by 2030, and
“safety, weapons proliferation and waste remain as constraints”. – Marion Wilkison &
Deborah Smith, in THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, May 5/6, 07.
NUCLEAR REACTORS: The sun is a nuclear reactor that is safe enough - but only by
being far enough away. -J.Z., 10.2.77. - And as everyone knows, one can get burnt even
by it. - J.Z., 20.9.02.
NUCLEAR SCIENCE & RESEARCH: Nuclear science and research should be stopped
for the same reasons that research into torture methods and "scientific" investigations of
Nazi doctors in extermination camps, using involuntary human guinea pigs, were finally
stopped. – See: Peaceful Use, Research, Scientists. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear
NUCLEAR SCIENTISTS: To me, no atomic physicist is completely responsible and
trustworthy.” - Frank Herbert, Hellstrom's Hive, p.134. - ATOMIC SCIENTISTS,
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Americans are now capable of vaporising every living being
on earth some 17 times over; our opposite number can dispose of every one of us some
eight times over. Enough? Will the generals and their henchmen in the labs and think
tanks and Congress declare a standoff, hang up their bombs and go fishing? Like hell
they will." - Daniel Berrigan, THE AUSTRALIAN, 7.8.79. - OVERKILL
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: And I suppose he was telling himself he must destroy in order
to save - a common enough view among the small-minded." - Isaac Asimov: Waterclap,
World of If, 4/70.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Atomic warfare is bad enough; biological warfare would be
worse; but there is something that is worse than either. The French can tell you what it
is; or the Czechs, or the Greeks, or the Norwegians, or the Filipinos; it is subjection to an
alien oppressor.” - Elmer Davis, "No World, if Necessary", 1946. - Another mind that is
captured by its own rhetoric. Obviously, the referred to victims of dictatorship did not all
fight to the death or commit suicide. But our rulers do not seem to be satisfied with
misruling us, they believe, that they have to murder us as well, directly or indirectly. -
J.Z., n.d. & 1.5.06. - Compare: "Rather dead than red". And "Rather red than dead"
with: What's wrong with being neither red nor dead? - "It is better to be neither. As the
history of our time amply demonstrates, some who choose the latter (red) have not
avoided the former. Avoidance of both sickening alternatives is the moral good which
determines deterrence, and deterrence alone, effects.” - TIME, March 29, 1982. Whoever
is the author seemed to be unaware that nuclear deterrence amounts also to an extreme
statist collectivism and a totalitarian decision-making over the survival of not just one
nation but several ones. Some of the fanatic, ignorant and prejudiced anti-communists
were and are as much of a threat as were and are the Chinese communist totalitarians,
whom the Australian government is now providing with uranium. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. – DIS.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: atomic weapons are (*) very little use against an underground.
- Robert Heinlein, Requiem, p.240. - Nuclear "weapons" can hardly be used defensively
against a ground attack against their sites by revolutionary or insurrectionist forces,
unless those in charge are inclined towards suicide rather than surrender. – (*) of? - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Caricature, source not noted, and unsigned, showing one
uniformed fat "gentleman" talking to another fatso, with the inscription: Did I have a
nightmare last night! I dreamed they had a billion missiles and we had only a million.” -
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Defence using nuclear weapons is rather like sitting on a box
of gelignite with a hammer in your hand. Use it and you'll get rid of the enemy without
any trouble - but you'll blow yourself up in the process." - TARGET, October 1964.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Do you believe that Jesus would take part in a war fought with
atomic and bacteriological weapons?" - A. J. Muste: "How to Deal with a Dictator." – Q.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Do you know that the Jugoslavian Nomirsky wrote a book
describing what will remain after World War III is thru with us? It consists out of while
leaves.” - JOKES
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Earth, this unassuming small planet, became the playball of
statism. Robert Oppenheimer saw this as follows: We can be compared with two
scorpions in a bottle. Each is able to kill the other but only by risking the own life.” -
Translated by J.Z. from "LERNZIEL ANARCHIE, Nr. 3. ( Have our leaders, all of them,
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Even most advocates of "limited governments" still favor
unlimited nuclear strength and do not notice the contradiction. - Nuclear strength means
absurd strength: It holds the victims rather than the culprits responsible. The culprits
might survive, in the safest bunkers. - To defeat a dictator much less destructive weapons
than nuclear devices are required. Otherwise his victims maybe completely wiped out
instead and their oppressors may well be the only survivors. - - Nuclear strength means:
If anything goes wrong, all goes wrong and we have had it. - - "A nuclear armed nation is
like a mouse with detonator teeth and a nitroglycerine- soaked tongue" - suggested D.Z.,
7. 12. 73, when he was ten. - All nuclear strength policies remind me of the words of a
rowing boat captain to his crew: "It's not all brute strength and stupidity!" - - Nuclear
strength is an invitation to disaster: It makes us a primary nuclear target for others. - -All
in all it amounts not to an extreme strength but an extreme weakness in national and
individual security. Security can only be achieved when nobody has any nuclear strength
left. To possess only a suicidal strength does indicate an extreme military weakness,
probably the most dangerous of all. - - "1945 gave us a whole new situation. Up to then it
was people who ran out of time. Now there's always the chance that time will run out of
people first." - William Garner, "The Us or Them War", end of ch. 27. Don't let time run
out of people! would be a shorter version. - - Nuclear strength means wide-spread
individual powerlessness, since nuclear power in the hands of a few renders all others
impotent. ( One might well ask whether most of those with nuclear potency want to make
up for sexual impotence due to their age. ) - - Admittedly, nuclear strength in everyone's
hands would make everybody even more insecure and probably would reduce our
survival chances to hours or even minutes only. - - Only the power to destroy all nuclear
powers ought to be in everybody's hands. The only rightful and sensible conclusion is not
a further monopolization of nuclear power but general decision that nobody ought to be
allowed any ABC mass murder devices. That is the only “gun control” we really need. It
would be impossible to effectively control anybody's nuclear strength with complete
safety, if he is left in possession. - - But all nuclear strength could be destroyed. This
process of destruction can be controlled although not by governments, no matter how
"strong" they are. It could be achieved by people properly armed, organized, trained and
motivated for this, best in ideal militia forces. - - No moral or rational aim: can be
achieved with nuclear strength. What is usually called "nuclear strength" is nothing but a
scientific preparation for mass murder. If you want to make friends with the innocents
you have first of all to cease threatening them, indiscriminately, together with their
oppressors. - - A chain reaction induced among the enemy's conscripts, dissolving his
military forces by desertion or turning them against him en bloc, is a much more effective
approach to peace than any nuclear chain reaction and it is also a way to avoid nuclear
war. - - Secede from all nuclear powers and associate against them on an exterritorial
basis, which does not offer them any nuclear targets. - - Real strength instead of the
fiction of nuclear "strength", would lie e.g. in the following measures and preparations:
Outlawry and tyrannicide of all who retain or build nuclear mass murder devices. - -
Induced mass desertions from the enemy's forces. - - Alliances with governments in exile.
Public declaration of quite just war aims. - - Revolutionary warfare, Leading e. g. to
military uprisings among the enemy's forces. - - Separate peace treaties with the enemy's
armies. - - Establishment of militias for the protection of human rights - largely with
deserters from the enemy regime's military forces. - - Highly discriminating destructive
warfare measures, like destruction of furnaces and ball-bearing industries only - but
without nuclear weapons. - - Respect fur the human rights even of the enemy's soldiers
and civilians. - - Proper clarification of who the real enemy is. - - Appeals and
declarations which could and would be trusted even by the enemy's soldiers. - - See:
Accidental War, Acuteness of Danger, Arms Race, Backfiring, Decision, Collective
Responsibility, Defence, Deterrence, Disarmament, Control, Doomsday Bomb, Enemy,
Fail-safe, Exterritorial Imperative, Madness, Overkill, Politicians, Power, Responsibility,
Sleeplessness, Strength, Surrender, Targets, Terrorism, Unilateral Nuclear Disarmament,
Tyrannicide, War Aims. - From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War. - GOVERNMENTS
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Every nuclear destructive device in its use or even by the
threat of its mere existence, is an extreme example of initiated coercion - for, inevitably,
it would always kill or harm noncombatants, civilians, innocents, children, even secret
allies, quite indiscriminately, either directly or through its side-effects. Moreover, it does
provoke retaliation with similar wrongful devices. - J.Z., n.d. & 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: He made a good case that all official thinking about nuclear
weapons has been close to, if not actually, insane. …” - Daniel Kagan in PENTHOUSE
INTERNATIONAL, Nov. 82, on Jonathan Schell: The Fate of the Earth. - &
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby
become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: How do you argue with a terrorist high-jacker who threatens
to detonate a nuclear bomb in the center of New York or London?" - Jack Stoneley,
CETI, p.166. - Indeed, how do you argue with any government which does that? - See:
PEACE PLANS 16-17 & 61-65. - J.Z. - These are two books which no territorial
government is likely to read but which all their victims ought to read. - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: How much of the Anti-Americanism now existing in the world
is due to the USA government being the first and largest nuclear power? And also,
largely, a “Christian” one – Who does not feel threatened by such a power? It has first
and only been used against Asians. Who will be next? – Which race, ideology or creed? –
The dislike of Americans may be stronger among subjects than rulers, because the rulers
have the safest shelters. - J.Z., 22.6.86, 26.1.08.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: In 1965, the US had 1,600 nuclear missile warheads. By 1974
it had 6,000. The Russian total increased from 262 to about 2,200. By 1977, the
American total will be … - Jack Stonely, CETI, p.162.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: in the end we made them proud that they too could slaughter
people by the millions. Look at me, everybody! I can make babies come deformed, same
as you can!” – John Brunner, Tation, FAR FRONTIER, Spring 85. - PROLIFERATION
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: it amounts to a loaded gun held at the head of every man,
woman and child on the globe.” – Robert Heinlein, Solution Unsatisfactory. – With the
exception of those, who are the few decision makers. All the others are only their victims.
The decision-makers might survive a nuclear war, at least for a while, in the safest
shelters. – How do we deal with hostage takers, who do this only to a handful of people?
These high-jackers have high-jacked whole populations and so far got away with this. –
J.Z., 18.7.87, 26.1.08.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Mass murder devices or ABC "weapons" are glorified or seen
as the only options, as modern and scientific "defence weapons", while e.g. tyrannicide
and other rightful liberation and defence efforts, fraternization between conscripts,
desertion from and revolutions and military insurrections against dictatorships are
maligned or otherwise hindered. J.Z., 5.2.02, 11.2.02.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Most people also overlook the reply to Marcus Cato, made by
Publius Scipio Nasica, which he as persistently advanced: "In my opinion, Carthage must
be spared!" - Judging from hindsight: Who of the two was right? - J.Z., 4.8.82.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Never before in the history of mankind has the problem of men
killing each other reached the proportions where they can kill everything that exists.” –
David Harris, husband of folk-singer Joan Baez, quoted in Ron Kimberling, THE
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: None of us lost too much sleep over the threat of imminent
annihilation of the human race and our responsibility for this state of affairs.” - Frances
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Now that I'm a cranky, constipated old man, I can afford to
say that the younger generation of scientists makes me sick to my stomach. Short-order
fry cooks of destruction, they hear through the little window the dim order: 'Atom bomb
rare, with cobalt sixty!' and sing it back and rattle their stinking skillets and sling the
deadly hash - just what the customer ordered, with never a notion invading their smug,
too-heated havens that there's a small matter of right and wrong that takes precedence
even over their haut cuisine." - C. M. Kornbluth: Gomez, The Best of OAK, by F. Pohl,
107. - Who is the "customer" here? The involuntary taxpayer and involuntary subject,
disfranchised in this respect and extensively lied to! - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Nuclear strength is actually an extreme weakness. - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Nuclear Strength" is the modern and exaggerated version of
"Carthaginem esse delendam!": Not only one but all cities and other population centres
“ought” to be destroyed with efficient, modern and cheap devices for mass extermination
and destruction! – Or so they want to make us believe. - J.Z., 3.7.82, 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Nuclear strength: It is neither right nor cheap nor harmless but
threatens everything we hold dear - except for those struck blind by faith in "modern
scientific progress" as guided by governments. - J.Z.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Once the 'strategic necessity' of planning the deaths of
hundreds of millions of people is accepted, we begin to live in a world in which in which
morality and action inhabit two separate, closed realms. All strategic sense becomes
moral nonsense, and vice versa. … - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth. -
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Our National Death Wish.” - Heading of article by Corinne
Browne and Robert Munroe in PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL, 8/78.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Progress does not consist in being able to exterminate the
primary victims of your enemies en masse. – J.Z., 30.3.84. – NUCLEAR STRENGTH IS
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Right now the US nuclear arsenal contains the equivalent of
615,000 Hiroshima-sized bombs. That's enough to annihilate every major Russian city 36
times over. The Russians are not quite so well supplied. They have only the capacity to
annihilate every major American city 11 times. As of last count, the USSR was adding
one new nuke every 48 hours, the US one every 8." - Frederick Pohl, DESTINIES, 2/4, p.
28. - The bombs are not "Hiroshima-sized" but can be carried in a bomber or a rocket.
And "the Russians" were and are made up of over 100 ethnic groups, many of them
considering Russians as foreign invaders with a foreign religion and ideology. - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: So much money, thought and labor have been invested in the
wrongful principles, practices and aims that are based on territorialism and collective
responsibility notions and so little thought, money and labor have been directed - in a
rightful and sensible way - against the real enemy, namely tyrannical regimes and all
regimes that are tyrannical to the extent that they are territorial. - J.Z., 4.2.02, 7.2.02. -
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: So now," I said, "you've made your tests and done your
exploring, and you've found that while we can mix together a little of this and that and
make a big bang, emotionally and philosophically we're still ignorant savages. That
we've made a little progress in the physical sciences, but in the humanic sciences we are
still determined not to make any progress, I suppose you' ..- uh/-ah- quarantine us? See
to it that we don't get out beyond our solar system?" - Mark Clifton: When They Come
From Space, p.141. – Humanist, human? J.Z.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: State and war are the same. „ - Romain Rolland, in
"Clerambault". - Nuclear strength and nuclear war are also identical in the long run. Even
during formal peace times our lives are partly taxed away to maintain this threat against
us. - J.Z., 31. 10. 82, 1. 5. 06. - & THE STATE
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: The 'ideal' of nuclear war is the complete automation of
slaughter.” PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS, 33 443.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: the 'insane' non-future of nuclear armament. Each nuclear
weapon, be it ordered, manufactured, or acceded to, further jeopardizes the human race.
With each weapon, the ante is raised."- James Reston, Jr., OMNI, 1/82.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: The Kranians ... Thank God they are not sufficiently
enlightened to wish to blow themselves to bits." - Edmund Cooper: Tomorrow Came,
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: The military powers flexing their muscles like impotent beach
boys.” - From James Bond movie: "Diamonds Are Forever".
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: The nuclear arms race has no military purpose. Wars cannot
be fought with nuclear weapons. Their existence only adds to our perils." - Earl
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: The symbols of a destruction so great as to be beyond the
comprehension of all but the demonically insane." - Allen Drury: Come Nineveh, Come
Tyre, p.402.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: The time came, when there were more than 25 000 of them on
the planet, ten for every city.” - Carl Sagan, Contact, p.184. – Referring to the
governmental stockpiles of nuclear “weapons”. And in some countries, like Australia,
already 90 % of the population live in the cities. – J.Z., 8.9.07. - NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: The total helplessness of being in the hands of madmen armed
with all means of destruction, while you are completely unarmed against their murderous
madness. Madmen to whom your life counts as zero. Who would kill you with the same
indifference that they would kill any other animal." - Enrico Arrigoni: The Totalitarian
Nightmare, p.196.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: The weak shall inherit the earth - or nobody! - J.Z., 1.6.78.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: there are nuclear missiles targeted on a hundred cities.” - Ian
Stewart, Wall of Death, ANALOG, 10/90, p.109.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Think of what else they‟ve made people believe. They‟ve
persuaded us that we‟ll be safe if only we spend all our wealth so everybody on Earth can
be killed in a moment – when the governments decide the time has come.” - Carl Sagan,
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: This belief in the supreme strength is a fatal sickness. - J.Z.,
1.6.78. - And morally it is also sickening! - J.Z. - 3.8.82.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: This is too much power to be confined to one man or group
with the hope they'll administer wisely." - Frank Herbert: Committee of the Whole, The
Worlds of Frank Herbert, p.47.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Threats in the way you mean them are a thing we no longer
can indulge in.” - Frank Herbert, Committee of the Whole, p.39 in "Worlds of Frank
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Typical of man's genius is the way he develops a bomb
designed to drive us into the cellar about the time he starts building homes without any
cellars.” - Homer King in Hemet, Calif. News, quoted in READER'S DIGEST, Oct. 54.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: We have approximately 31.000 atomic devices from artillery
shells to giant ballistic missiles, in the US and the NATO nations. It is estimated that
Russia has an equal stock-pile. The firepower from these two arsenals is sufficient to
destroy each antagonist 40 times over." - Paul McIlvaine, CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
MONITOR, 10.3.80. - And people believe in it and promote it as 'defence' and 'national
security''. - J.Z., 18.3.80. - To that extent "nuclear strength" is a fruit of "representative"
democracy but not of direct democracy. - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: We shall replace the state with the free market, and men shall
for the first time in their history be able to walk and live without fear of destruction being
unleashed upon them at any moment – especially the obscenity of such destruction being
unleashed by a looter armed with nuclear weapon and nerve gases.” – Roy A. Childs, Jr.,
Liberty Against Power, Fox & Wilkes, San Francisco, 1994, p. 156. - MARKET VS.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: What he felt, he told himself, was scorn and a hopelessness - a
crystal-clear recognition of the doom of a world where the potentials of learning were
siphoned from easy-going savants by tribal headmen wielding the fruits of wisdom with
the same indifferent abandon as a Neanderthaler using a club.” - Ernest Hill, Tip of the
Iceberg, in GALAXY, May 71.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: What life expectancy has mankind when it still questions the
right to life of e.g. fetuses? And also what life expectancy have ordinary citizens, who are
more or less opposed to governments armed to over-kill rates with nuclear mass murder
devices or anti-people "weapons"? - J.Z., 1972, 1.5.06. - & LIFE EXPECTANCE OF
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: While the Nazis tried to keep their mass murder preparations
and procedures secret, we proudly show off ours by turning e.g., IBM sites into tourist
attractions! - That it stood publicity so long does not make it right. The principles behind
it have never been properly aired yet! - J.Z., 26.6.78.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Why bother building any more nuclear warheads until we‟ve
used the ones we have? – Anonymous. - The fact that many advanced their ideas only
anonymously does indicate that even in the supposedly free countries no full freedom of
expression does as yet exist. Reprisals from the power addicts are still to be feared. - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: Why place all our bets - to a total of 180,000 million dollars
(just the increase of the US nuclear arsenal for the next few years) - on nuclear strength
and none at all on rightful and effective alternative defence methods? ( As described e.g.,
in PEACE PLANS 16-17 and 61-63.) - J.Z., 6.10.81.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: You cannot persuade a man while he thinks you wish to hit or
coerce him.” – Aylmer Maude, Tolstoy and his Problems, p.23.
NUCLEAR STRENGTH: You're an old-timer if you can remember when setting the
world on fire was a figure of speech." - Franklin P. Jones, quoted in READER'S
DIGEST, 4/63.
NUCLEAR TARGETS: All taxpayers are held collectively responsible, even in States
that imagine themselves to be anti-communistic and opposed to State-socialism. All
citizens living in nuclear target areas are also held collectively responsible for the actions
of their governments. And the "nuclear strength" policy of their governments runs under
the misnomer: "defence of freedom", leaving unstated: "via mass-murder devices!"
Coercive collective responsibility is one of the essences of enforced territorial
collectivism. - J.Z., 27.10.78 & 1.5.06. - TAXATION & COLLECTIVE
NUCLEAR UMBRELLA: We are all living in a fool's paradise, the nuclear "umbrella".
Whosoever believes in the effectiveness of the nuclear umbrella has not yet realized what
radioactive rain means and the hard and heat radiation from a nuclear explosion or the
following fire storm - otherwise he would not use this analogy. Nuclear devices simply
are no defensive means nor effective enough deterrents. There are no effective umbrellas
against the nuclear war threat. - - When attacked or threatened with nuclear devices -
because one hasn't taken. the necessary preventive steps in time - it is far preferable to
surrender immediately than undertake or let one's ally resort to a nuclear counterstrike.
This way some more people are likely to survive and altogether less nuclear devices will
be used. - - See: Alliances, Communism, Counter-Terror, Defence, Deterrence, Nuclear
Strength, Red / Dead, Retaliation, Surrender. From: J.Z., An ABC Against Nuclear War.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: ... must realize that this may be the spark that puts
civilization to the torch, ..." - Michael McCollum, ANALOG, 4/79, p.31. - McCallum?
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: ... there are enough psychopaths in high places on both
sides of the cold war as to make the odds for annihilation an almost sure bet.” - L.
Labadie, Selected Essays, p.61.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: … retaliation is one of the least justified actions ever
contemplated, being wholly pointless.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.152. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: 1.) Better red than dead. 2.) Better dead than red. 3.)
Neither dead nor red. ( Unless an individual wants either for himself. ) 4.) Better the reds
dead. (A collective responsibility notion making for nuclear war.) 5.) To every
enlightened person, and to every under-informed or stupid person just the system that he
wants for himself and like-minded people. Under that condition no one has to be afraid of
dissenters and revolutionaries or governments any longer, because all would be engaged
with volunteers only. The few who would still try to dominate others would then
encounter the combined resistance of all others, the vast majority, just like formerly well-
poisoners and known kidnappers and child molesters or child torturers or child
sacrificers. There was at least that kind of progress in the world. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. - FALSE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: 180 billion US $ planned for upgrading the US nuclear
deterrence, but not even a million dollars for thoughts and ideas to make nuclear weapons
superfluous. - J.Z., on news reported in THE AUSTRALIAN, 5.10.80. – Apparently, the
vested interest involved in preparing for a general nuclear holocaust is enormous. – J.Z.,
28.4.88. – And not one US taxpayer had his say on this use or abuse of his contribution
or, rather, enforced tribute. – J.Z., 30.5.08, 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: 29 nuclear weapons accidents happened in the US Navy
within a year.” – Radio news, 1.6.86.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: a cure precisely comparable to shooting the patient. ...” -
James Blish: Get out of my Sky, p.24.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A desperate, mad, frustrated world. And why? Because
humanity has been hijacked. Literally this is what has happened, as all men are in fact
hostages in their own countries. … We are hostages, because we are powerless as
individuals, in view of the fact that we have placed ourselves in an indefensible position
or at the mercy of those who trade in power.” - Kevork Ajemian, The Fallacy of Modern
Politics, Books International, PO Box 6096, McLean, Virginia 22106, 1986, Tel. (703)
821-8900, p.197.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A friend once sent me a Christmas card that he had made.
It depicted a man in a gas mask standing on a cliff shouting through a megaphone “I‟m
sorry, I‟m sorry, I‟m sorry …” across a plain filled with dead and dying people and
animals. “I‟m sorry…” – Elizabeth Sigmund, Rage Against the Dying, p.102. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: a host of Cold War warriors devoted to the proposition that
safety is to be found only in the perfection of weapons that will more efficiently destroy
the world.” - Fred J. Cook, The Warfare State, Jonathan Cape, 1962, p.247. – “…the grim
determination of the warriors to match megaton with megaton, power with power to the
final and inevitable collision.” – Ibid, p. 251. And their military unintelligence has so far
failed, for at least 30 years, to discover e.g. my 1977 handbook against nuclear war, even
though it has been online, too, for many years. – Our fate is still in the hand of ignorant
and prejudiced people prepared to commit unlimited mass murders. - J.Z., 6.10.07. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A mass extermination weapon isn't private and inviolable
property and for that reason property on which it is situated isn't inviolable! - J.Z., 10.2.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A new word is needed to hit hard enough at those willing to
use nuclear "weapons". Murderers, butchers, even mass murderers - are still too soft and
not descriptive enough terms. Neither devils nor beasts will do. Indiscriminate mass
killers. Rationalizers of holocausts, doomsday guarantors. Dr. Strangelove. They, who
love the bomb. Name these beasts properly and you have half killed them already. - Only
extraterrestrials and irreconcilable enemies would arm themselves with nuclear weapons
against humans. - Push-button murderers. Bomb barons. Those, who now decide whether
mankind is to continue to live or not. Genocide artists. Genocide technicians and
scientists. None of the old derogatory terms is really strong enough, to my knowledge. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A nuclear war between the superpowers using only
strategic weapons would take about half an hour to complete. The weapons on the
submarines off the coast of the United States and the Soviet Union need only 10 minutes
to a quarter of an hour to reach their targets. According to the Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency, there are enough weapons to target every town and city with a
population of 10.000 people or more. Nuclear reactors are also targeted. Inside each
thousand megawatt nuclear reactor there is as much long-lived radiation as would be
released by 1000 Hiroshima-sized bombs. - - The National Academy of Science did a
study in 1975 which reported that if the superpowers used only 10 per cent of their
nuclear arsenal, that could destroy 50 to 80 per cent of the ozone layer in the northern
hemisphere and 30 to 40 per cent in the southern hemisphere because of the nitrous oxide
released in the explosion.” - Helen Coldicott, in John Hinchcliff's, ed., "Confronting the
Nuclear Age", p.26. - Just goes to show how "effective" the bureaucratic ACDA has been
and any other governmental disarmament effort. - J. Z., 1. 5. 06. – NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A nuclear war had destroyed all life on earth, save two
microscopic algae, hidden in a cleft of rock. They surveyed the ruin dismally. Said one to
the other: 'I suppose we shall have to start this evolution business all over again. But this
time, remember, no brains.' - Henry Meulen's THE INDIVIDUALIST, 4/75. - It is not
the presence of brains that caused this trouble but, rather, the non-use of brains to prevent
it. - J.Z., n.d. & 1.5.06. - JOKES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A nuclear war is survived, if at all, only by the defeated on
both sides. J.Z., free after Hans Habe, Leben fuer den Journalismus, Bd. 4, p.37. - Better:
There are no victors after a nuclear war. - It was already doubtful in WWI & II and in the
Korean War and the Vietnam War whether there were any genuine victories, so great
were the losses on both sides. In the Vietnam War the formal winners were worse off
than they were before this war. No real victory was achieved. The US allies merely
withdrew. - The communist “liberation” ended in the usual communist economic failures
& political dictatorship. Only to the extent that these economic policies were discarded
were there some limited economic successes. – J.Z., 20.6.92, 26.1.08. - WAR,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A nuclear war will, of course, make nonsense of
everybody's predictions.” - Aldous Huxley: Brave New World Revisited, p.274.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A physical and mental addiction to the power-high arising
from the possession of mass murder devices is the worst, the most dangerous addiction of
all times. It has driven territorial statism to the pinnacle of destructiveness,
murderousness and absurdity. – J.Z., 10.7.88, 30.5.08. – DRUG ADDICTIONS,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A program for people who don‟t have a death wish, don‟t
love nuclear strength and who are able and willing to reject many popular prejudices and
accept new ideas, especially to those not committed to territorialism and its centralized
and coercive rule. To me it is obvious that it is required. For decades it was available on
microfiche. For years it has been online. And even there it remains widely ignored. So
what can we expect for our future? – See: & - J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A reciprocal insanity ( involving nuclear armaments ) is at
work in the world.” – Norman Cousins.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A resolution to avoid an evil is seldom framed till the evil is
so far advanced as to make avoidance impossible.” – Thomas Hardy, Far From the
Madding Crowd, 1874, 18. – Maddening? – J.Z.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A second principle in the nuclear common world would be
respect for the earth. This is nothing but a full realization of the ecological principle,
according to which the earth‟s environment is seen not merely as a surrounding element
in which it is more or less pleasant to life but as the foundation of human as of other life.
The oneness of the earth as a system of support for life is already visible around us. …” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.177. - RESPECT FOR THE EARTH & FOR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A thermonuclear war cannot be considered a continuation
of politics by other means (according to the formula of Clausewitz). It would be a means
of universal suicide." - Andrei Sakharov: Progress, Coexistence and Intellectual
Freedom, p.32. – It is just more mass murderous than territorial politics usually is - and
follows directly from its false premises. - J.Z., 30.10.02. - “Suicide” when less than one
in a million has any say on war and peace, armament and disarmament? The careless use
of language has led to the construction of nuclear “weapons” in the first place! – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A weapon is an enemy even to its owner.” – Turkish
proverb. – At least it can be. I believe it applies to all of the ABC mass murder devices. –
And this enemy should and could be disarmed by its potential victims, i.e., the peoples
themselves, not by their territorial governments. I say easily, although not yet legally. -
J.Z., 30.5.08. – It would be even more easy for the military forces of a dictatorship, once
they have got reasons to trust the rightful peace promises, made by the subjects of their
supposed enemy regimes, not its foreign ministers, prime ministers and diplomats, more
than they can trust their own rulers. – J.Z., 27.2.09. – WAR AIMS, PANARCHISM,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: a West Coast correspondent for THE NATION in the fall of
1958. He wandered into a press conference held by the head of the West Coast branch of
an Eastern Seaboard company manufacturing instruments vital to rocket and missile
production. The president of the firm, which derived 75 % of its business from war
contracts, was in a jovial mood. He could see no threat, he said, of any cutbacks in
government defense appropriations.- - - "You've got a big future in rockets and missiles,"
the reporter remarked conversationally.- - - "Tremendous," the president agreed. - - -
The reporter wondered whether this wasn't an uncertain and risky business. Didn't it
depend a lot on politics, on international affairs? - - -"Well, of course, our business
would mushroom in an international crisis," Mr. Big said. - - -"Like what?" asked the
reporter. - - - “War." - - - "What would happen to your business in a war between the
United States and Russia?"- - - "As I said," Mr. Big re-explained patiently, "business
would mushroom." - - -         "For how many hours?" asked the reporter." - Fred J. Cook
(11) (“The Warfare State” ) – JOKES.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: A. S. Suvorin mentions a passage of the novel
(Dostojewski: Karamasow) in which Ivan Karamasov speaks to his saintly brother about
the case of the general, who set his dogs to hound a peasant boy to death before they eyes
of his mother; he asks Alesha whether he would want the general to be killed for this.
Alesha, after a tormented silence, says, that he would. 'Bravo', says Ivan.” - Isaiah Berlin,
Russian Thinkers, p.305. - What else should we do with the nuclear weapons politicians
and generals, who threaten to hound all of us to death, under the pretence of protecting
us? - J.Z., 8. 11. 82. - & TYRANNICIDE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Abandon, ye people, all those chiefs who have their fingers
hovering over nuclear war buttons and who are thus prepared to use anti-people mass
murder devices. Outlaw them or secede from them. Grant them amnesty and anonymity
only once they abdicated and surrender or destroyed at least one nuclear “weapon”. – We
must leave them such a way out or they will attack like a cornered rat. - J.Z., 7.10.85,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Abolish the nuclear war “hot seats” and with them you
would indirectly abolish the nuclear war threat, too. Allow no one to decide for nuclear
war and allow everyone to secede from rulers thus armed with anti-people “weapons or
mass murder devices. – 7.8.03. – And allow everyone to participate in the destruction or
disabling of all such devices in the hands of anyone. – J.Z., 18.10.07. - & THE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Abolition of WMD‟s in the hands of everyone, no
exceptions – but no restrictions upon rightful weapons in the hands of peaceful volunteers
for the protection of individual rights and liberties? Can you imagine protecting e.g.
freedom of speech and press with nuclear “weapons” or other mass murder devices? –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Accidental nuclear war? There is only one fail-safe way to
prevent it: The destruction of all atomic weapons. Even after 100 years of attempts to
develop quire “fail-save” processes and systems one has still to expect some accidents
and some could be disastrous. The danger of an accidental nuclear war is so great that it
alone would already suffice to justify even unilateral nuclear disarmament. – J.Z., n.d.,
ca. 1964.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: After all it is setting a high value upon our opinions to
roast men and women alive on account of them.” - Michel Eyquem de Montaigne. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: After several centuries of bringing a variety of nightmarish
futures into existence, we have now invented one so unbelievable and overwhelming that
it (our future – J.Z.) cannot now come to pass at all.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the
Earth, p.143. – In this respect almost all human beings are in an automatic survival mode
which psychologist call an attempt to escape from reality. For thinking of it constantly
would drive us mad. – Especially if we do not see any way out or any sensible action for
ourselves against this threat. Few are aware of the radical changes required and that, to
achieve them, they have first to achieve a degree of freedom of action and choice for
themselves that so far they almost never dreamed of. – J.Z., 21.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: After the great destructions / Everyone will prove that he
was innocent.” – Guenter Eich, “Think of This”, 1955, tr. Vernon Watkins.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Agreement or destruction? The choice is simple.” - J.
Hunter Holly, The Grey Aliens, p.119. - The choice is not so simple under territorial
governments, which have monopolized all such decision-making and maintain
themselves in power largely using force - and popular prejudices, myths and errors as
well as misleading propaganda. We are compulsory producers and consumers of "nuclear
strength" and also compelled to be its victims. Institutions that would permit us free
choice, in this and all other spheres, have still to be established and they are the opposite
of the presently predominant territorial and more or less centralized States. - So far there
was e.g. no referendum on nuclear armament or disarmament and, probably, there were
only rare cases in which the building of a nuclear reactor was made dependent upon its
approval by a referendum among the people living hundreds of km around it. - J.Z., 1. 5.
06. – Let us panarchistically and tolerantly as well as freely competitively disagree, each
to do the own things only to himself and like-minded people, always at the own risk and
expense. See under PANARCHISM. – J.Z., 31.5.08. - NEGOTIATIONS,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Aiming at “victory”, we would wind up extinct.” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.203. - & VICTORY, WAR AIMS, WARFARE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Alas! regardless of their doom the little victims play." - T.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Alert and realistic conservatives, … would see that
everything that anyone might wish to conserve is threatened by nuclear weapons, and
would recognize in them a threat not only to “the old values” but to any values
whatever.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, 160. - CONSERVATIVES &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: All leading politicians should, perhaps, be tied to stakes or
displayed in cages or stocks at the point zeros of all nuclear targets. Instead, we tolerate
them sitting in the safest bunkers, with their fingers on nuclear “weapons” buttons, all too
ready to use these mass murder devices against whole cities and peoples. – Hitler would
have loved to be in such a powerful position. - J.Z., 12.3.06, 29.10.07. - & ITS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: All lovers of liberty and peace should take note how slow
governments are to destroy their anti-people mass murder devices accumulated during the
cold war under the pretence of nuclear strength and deterrence, even after the cold war
has become largely a defunct cold war. – J.Z., 1.1.93, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: all nuclear weapons immoral … the world leadership
collectively insane.” - James P. Hogan, Endgame Enigma, 230. - & LEADERSHIP,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: All people under 37 now were born into a world with
nuclear weapons, never had a choice or say in the matter. Their fate is presently still
decided by some older fools. - J.Z., 4.8.82. – DECISION-MAKING MONOPOLY,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: All the earth fears an atomic war and would do anything to
avoid it, yet all the earth fears that an atomic war is inevitable.” – Isaac Asimov, Breeds
There a Man …? – The Earth as such can‟t fear or do anything. It‟s peoples could e.g.
consider their exterritorial autonomy, monetary freedom, and voluntary taxation
alternatives and ways how to realize them, as well as all other alternatives to the existing
territorial monopolies and coercion. They could study their ideal militia options, produce,
finally, an ideal declaration of individual human rights and liberties, agree on quite
rightful war and peace aims as well as genuine and quite rightful defence, liberation and
revolution methods, rather than amusing or entertaining themselves, enjoying their little
luxuries and engaging in various sports ( mainly only as observes ) and committing
themselves to hobbies and crafts while mankind approaches more and more its
extermination by its territorial rulers. They do not even seriously consider individual and
group secessionism from all the misleaders who lead them towards nuclear war and,
possibly, the extinction of mankind. – They still “dance at the edge of a volcano” about to
erupt. – J.Z., n.d. & 24.1.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: All the horrors of the nuclear war threat, even when
described by many and the best writers, will not suffice to reverse the trend toward
nuclear war it until the possibilities of peaceful, free and tolerant societies are also clearly
enough described by many writers. – So far there is not even an agreement between them
on the cause of wars, far less on the possible cures. - J.Z., 1.5.98, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: All too many territorial governments are armed against the
people of the world with nuclear or anti-people “weapons” or, rather mass murder
devices, while pretending that they are only armed to protect the people of the world.
Nuclear weapons are obviously unsuitable to be used only against aggressive
governments rather than their victimized and exploited subjects. – J.Z., 19.10.06,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Alliances with nuclear powers are alliances with
governments that are prepared to commit mass murders. – J.Z., 12.2.88. – Yet the crimes
acts clauses on conspiracy to commit murder are not applied to any of these governments.
– They got away with this for decades. – And the diverse peoples of the world are still
helpless pawns or clay in their hands. - J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Almost all nations are now too big, „beyond the safety
point‟," (*) and ought to be decentralized to make them less exposed targets for
destructive and mass murderous ABC devices. Ultimate safety against the use of such
devices lies only in the recognition and realisation of individual sovereignty everywhere,
which, socially, means exterritorial autonomy for all volunteer groups or their self-
determination under personal laws. – (*) Sir Ernest Benn, Confessions of a Capitalist. -
J.Z., 22.5.82, 4.8.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Almost all of the still all too numerous statists support their
territorial governments in their “Russian Roulette” games with the nuclear war threat. –
J.Z., 8.11.03, 26.10.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Almost everyone has acknowledged on some level that the
peril exists, but the knowledge has been without consequences in our feelings and our
actions, and the superpowers have proceeded with their nuclear buildups, in the recent
words of George Kennan, “like the victims of some sort of hypnotism, like men in a
dream, like lemmings heading for the sea.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Already merely from the position of psychological warfare
we should realize that the "balance of terror" - continually playing at "soldiering" with
"super-weapons", which might end in a general holocaust, cannot be a permanent
solution but is a continuing vast problem. It does not win any friends but multiplies
enemies. The offer of full experimental freedom, on the basis of exterritorially
autonomous communities of volunteers, on the other hand, would multiply friends and
neutrals and minimize enemies almost to zero. Thus this is, possibly, the most moral,
rational and suitable "weapon" against the threat posed presently by nuclear weapons,
nuclear deterrence and nuclear strength or "the balance of terror". - J.Z., 19. 9. 82, 1. 5.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: although no one had decided to establish a doomsday
machine, people had to act as though one were in place. They had to assume that one
misstep could be the misstep that ended the world.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the
Earth, p.208. – - Alas, none of the peoples, anywhere in the world, has so far any say or
any freedom of action in this sphere. Their territorial governments have deprived them of
both of these very important liberties. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - & THE DOOMSDAY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Although other issues have diverted our attention, the
possibility of a cataclysmic war remains so long as national defence is based upon
atomic threat and mutual deterrence systems. Today, when a war might wipe out the
entire human race, we need effective international law and peace-keeping procedures to
make war impossible. . (*) - Taking an active part in the solution of the problems of
peace is a moral duty which no conscientious man can shirk." - Dr. Laurence J. Peter,
The Peter Prescription, p.234. – (*)We need, rather, human organizations that, by their
very nature, as opposed to territorial warfare States, keep the peace rather than prepare
for and conduct wars, exploitation and oppression. and that do not commit all too many
aggressive actions even during their “defence”, as usually territorial governments do.. –
Obviously, the leaders know nothing better and cannot be taught anything better. Their
advisors tend to share their prejudices and wrong premises. E.g., none of them has so far
considered the exterritorial and voluntary alternatives to their territorial internal and
external policies, laws and institutions. J.Z., 26.4.06, 27.5.06 - PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: although, scientifically speaking, there is all the difference
in the world between the mere possibility that a holocaust will bring about extinction and
the certainty of it, morally they are the same, and we have no choice but to address the
issue of nuclear weapons as though we knew for a certainty that their use would put an
end to our species.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.95. – To take an example
that in size is more comprehensive: While one has the right to gamble away one‟s own
life, one has not the right to gamble with all the lives of one‟s family. – J.Z., 21.9.07. –
Moreover, since one has obligations to one‟s family, at least as it has dependent
members, one is morally not even entitled to gamble with the own life. – Can there be a
sufficient insurance for the loss of a father? - J.Z., 23.3.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: America's mood reminds Keegan of the eve of Pearl
Harbour. "Our people', he says, 'still believe that nuclear war is unthinkable. To Soviet
leaders, however, nuclear war is both "thinkable" and "winnable". And they are
preparing for just such an eventuality!' - Philip C. Clarke: National Defence and the
Soviet Threat. - Now we have a range of other territorial rogue regimes striving to obtain
this dishonourable and mass murderous power or to maintain it. - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: An American IBM going wrong, was destroyed in the
Pacific, ca. 500 miles from its target. This was the second occurrence of this kind within
a month for the US alone. – Radio News, 13.7.87. – If all of them, always, missed their
targets then there would be at least something good about them. Apart from the
radioactive pollution involved, the best thing would be that they would explode upon
being started or that they could not be sent at all. - When the first rocket strike was made,
in the war against Saddam Hussein‟s Iraq regime, some of the rockets, according to some
reports, landed in the wrong country! But the propaganda asserted that they could be
directed against his palaces only. Will we ever get a correct statistics on hits and misses?
But these above-mentioned real cases indicate also that we cannot sufficiently rely on
computers in this respect. – J.Z., 26.8.08. - & ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: An ant hill on my own driveway and one on my neighbor‟s
reminded me of the wrongful, stupid and self-destructive territorial behavior organized,
established and maintained by human beings. We have likewise placed ourselves right
into the roadway of destructive ABC mass murder devices by organizing ourselves as
territorial targets for them. Will the ants learn from their experience? Will we, in time? –
J.Z., 7.12.95, 24.1.08. - & TERRITORIALISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: an eye for an eye fails in an age of A-bombs.” - Eric B.
Lindsay, "GEGENSCHEIN", 18.7.76.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: anarchism or annihilation.” – Murray Bookchin, Post
Scarcity Anarchism, P.40. – How flawed his economics must be – is already indicated by
his notion that scarcity is something we have already overcome. As a matter of fact all
economics is based on the reality of scarcity of the things man needs or wants and of the
scarcity and costs of natural resources, labor, intelligence and management, machines,
buildings etc. that are required to produce things relatively cheaply and in quantities. –
The communist or collectivist anarchism that he represents lead also to a dead end. - J.Z.,
24.1.08. - & ANARCHISM, DIS.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: And extinction by nuclear arms would not be the Day of
Judgment, in which God destroys the world but raises the dead and then metes out
perfect justice to everyone (*) who has ever lived; it would be the utterly meaningless and
completely unjust destruction of mankind by men. To imagine that God is guiding our
hand in this action would quite literally be the ultimate evasion of our responsibility as
human beings - a responsibility that is ours because ( to stay with religious interpretation
for a moment ) we possess a free will that was implanted in us by God.” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.127. - - It would also be the ultimate “blasphemy”. –
However, there are precedents for such “divine” crimes, on the principle of collective
responsibility, in the Bible. As if an omniscient and supposedly benevolent being could
think of nothing better than applying the principle of collective responsibility to whole
populations for the crimes of a few. – J.Z., 10.10.07. – If only too many people did not go
on believing in a God as a good man or a good woman! Thus they never seriously think
about doing something themselves to avoid major catastrophes. – But then most of the
atheists do not think seriously about such matters, either. In other words: They have even
less excuses for their behavior. – J.Z., 23.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: And if enough people in the world make up their minds they
will have nothing to do with politicians or with governments who are moving towards
military decisions, they will have a good chance of preventing such decisions from being
made.” - Jean Skuse, p.103 of: "Confronting the Nuclear Age", edited by John Hinchcliff.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: And the concept of nationhood that allowed us to think we
had the right to build such things as nuclear bombs. …” - Whitley Strieber and James
Kunetka, War Day. It lasted thirty-six minutes – and devastated the world, p.199. – The
concept of territorial nationhood, combined with the principle of collective responsibility
of all subjects of a territorial government for the misdeeds of that government, are the
major culpable notions in almost everybody‟s head. - J.Z., 13.9.07 & 10.10.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: And what is quite certain, as my father writes, is that no
country has the right to threaten to use weapons which may destroy uncommitted peoples
all over the world. This, surely, is even more certain than that we have no right to
threaten our “enemy” with such weapons.” - Phililp Toynbee, The Fearful Choice, p.94.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: and when there's a madman at your door with an atomic
bomb it's later than your think.” - Chad Oliver, The Edge of Forever, ASTOUNDING
SF, Dec. 1951, p.71.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: And when, … politicians let us know of their desire for a
“place in history”, it is not only their swollen vanity that invites anger but their
presumption in trying to reserve a place in a history whose continued existence their own
actions place in doubt.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.160. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Any weapon that can bring about irreversible ecological
damage to large portions of the earth, untold genetic damage for countless generations to
come, and that can destroy in the most horrifying manner massive noncombatant
populations is a colossal evil and totally immoral. The very real possibility of the
destruction of all life on our planet is above all a religious and moral issue.” - John
Quinn, Roman Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco. - TIME, March 29, 1982.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Apart from all other considerations of survival and so on,
we dishonour ourselves by even contemplating the use of nuclear bombs.” – Mr. Morton,
quoted in Phililp Toynbee, The Fearful Choice, p.83.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Apathy can be even more harmful than antipathy to the
human condition. They are loath to risk discomfort for the common good of mankind.
They are more disposed to risk mankind." - L. J. Peter, The Peter Plan, p. XI. - ( I
remember filling a wall in the old anarchist cellar in Oxford St., Paddington, with jokes
and caricatures on the nuclear war threat. They were removed one day and disappeared -
to make room for LSD posters! - A "response" by "anarchists" to the greatest threat from
territorial States! Drug yourself and forget about it! – When I questioned one of the
druggies, who was still semi-conscious, asking him what about their efforts to promote
anarchy – his reply was: “You don‟t understand, mate! This IS anarchy!” - J.Z. )
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Are all of us in a prolonged shock from the nuclear war
threat? - J.Z., 19. 9. 82. - At least in this respect most of us seem to be even paralyzed. -
J.Z., 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Are we such fools that we are willing to play games with
the survival of the whole human race?!” - Marc Stiegler, A Simple Case of Suicide,
ANALOG, May 83, p.159. – Q.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Aren't we still sacrificing our innocent and defenceless to
the dragons?” - J.Z., 10.2.77. – Q.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As a species, we have as yet done nothing to save
ourselves. The slate of action is blank. We have organizations for the preservation of
almost everything in life that we want but no organization for the preservation of
mankind.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.185. – The situation is even worse.
Those organizations that could save us, like panarchies or polyarchies, are outlawed and
this largely with the approval of most of the public! – J.Z., 21.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As Carl Sagan put it, it is like two men in a gasoline soaked
room. One has 150 matches and the other has 160 matches. It really makes little
difference who has the most matches.” – Woody Welling, THE CONNECTION 116, p.
72. – Our “leaders” have not even comprehended that analogy. – J.Z., 30.5.08. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As far as nuclear weapons, I, like you, fear our own leaders
as much as I do the Soviets.” – Woody Welling, THE CONNECTION 116, p.72. – Not as
much but almost as much, at least with regard to miscalculation and accidents. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As far as possible, never stake your life, limbs, security,
freedom and rights on computer hardware and software of e.g. the minister for defence
and on his defence department or rely upon such and other people sufficiently
functioning or acting as they should, as moral beings, at least not under the present
territorialist conditions and beliefs. – J.Z., 23.2.06, 29.10.07. – Compare e.g.: “Might is
right!” and ”My country, right or wrong!” - & DECISION-MAKING POWER ON WAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As in the case of the retaliatory strike in deterrence theory,
we encounter the disparity between the supposed rationality of threatening the use of
nuclear weapons and the irrationality of actually using them if the threat should fail. For
while it arguably makes sense to deter the foe (*) from some action with the threat of a
holocaust, it can never make sense to launch the holocaust if the foe is not deterred, since
there is no human purpose that can justify extinction. And yet the success of the
deterrence doctrine depends on the credibility of the threat of this unjustifiable use.
Would Carter – a dedicated Christian – have risked extinction in the attempt to hold on
to Middle Eastern oil? When he made his threat, did he consider his obligation to all
mankind and to the numberless future generations of human beings? Would he have
plunged the world into the “vast unknown”? And did Brezhnev consider those
obligations when he jarred the peace of the world by sending his armies across Soviet
borders to subjugate one of the earth‟s sovereign peoples? Would Brezhnev, who has
stated that to launch a nuclear holocaust would be “suicide”, commit that suicide if he
believed that the West was about to gain control of Eastern Europe? Would Deng
Xiaoping take that risk to keep hold of a piece of Inner Mongolia? Did Khrushchev weigh
the importance of the earth and the human species when he sent into Cuba missiles
capable of carrying nuclear warheads? And did Kennedy weigh the importance of those
things when he blockaded Cuba and then, according to his brother, waited to find out
whether events over which “he no longer had control” would lead the world into a
holocaust? These are the questions that hang in the air over our nuclear world, leaving
us perpetually uncertain whether the next moment many not be the world‟s last.” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.213/14. - - (*) Who the “foe” or “enemy”
actually is remains undefined, also by this author. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - DETERRENCE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As long as nuclear "weapons" can be "sold" by power-
hungry politicians to unwilling customers via taxation and the threat which powerful
territorial politicians do represent, there will be a nuclear war threat. Minimum
requirements for it are compulsory taxation and territorial subordination. - J.Z., 14. 9. 82.
Even I forgot to mention here the belief in collective responsibility. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As long as politics fails to take up the nuclear issue in a
determined way, it lives closer than any other activity to the lie that we have all come to
live – the pretense that life lived on top of a nuclear stockpile can last.” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.161. - DETERRENCE HYPOTHESIS &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As long as the nuclear war threat exists and in the interest
of the survival of nations and man, all national frontiers would best be done away with
and replaced by those around individuals, according to their own individual choices. That
would do away with nuclear targets. What worked in the religious sphere, namely
religious liberty or tolerance, as well as in numerous private activities, would also work
well with regard to the different political, social and economic systems which individual
prefer for themselves. To each the system of his dreams and choice. No one‟s
governmental or societal dream or nightmare is to be coercively applied to anyone but
like-minded people. – J.Z., 1.10.85, 25.1.08. 0 & PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: as long as we continue to accept the underlying
assumptions of this strategy we will be condemned to go on sketching “scenarios” for
futures that must never be, while neglecting all planning for futures that can be and that
would permit us to be.”- Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.196. - & STRATEGIC
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As mankind stands at the gates of space, with one foot on
the threshold of immortality, it has the other foot in the grave ...” - ISFSC leaflet: "The
Road to Freedom".
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As the physical reality of this destructive potential became
more and more lethal for the whole world, the state of mind of responsible people became
rather less anxious.” - Fred Charles Ikle, Every War Must End, 1971, p.120. – Are the
decision-makers on these questions really responsible people? Do they have really full
freedom of action any more than most of their potential victims? They had decades to
destroy these devices, even unilaterally. Instead they multiplied them and made them
more powerful. – Does territorialism give them any other options? - J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: As Thomas Schelling, the economist and noted nuclear
theorist, has put it, in “The Strategy of Conflict”, a book published in 1960, once
instability is introduced on either side, both sides may reason as follows: “He, thinking I
was about to kill him in self-defense, was about to kill me in self-defense, so I had to kill
him in self-defence”. Under deterrence, military “superiority” is therefore as dangerous
to the side that possesses it as it is to the side that is supposedly threatened by it. (
According to this logic, the United States should have heaved a sigh of relief when the
Soviet Union reached nuclear parity with it, for then stability was achieved. ) All these
conclusions follow from the deterrence doctrine, yet they run so consistently counter to
the far simpler, more familiar, and emotionally more comprehensible logic of traditional
military thinking – not to mention instinct and plain common sense, which rebel against
any such notion as “assuring” our own annihilation – that we should not be surprised
when we find that the deterrence doctrine is constantly under challenge from traditional
doctrine, no matter how glaring at odds with the facts traditional doctrine may be.” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.200. - DETERRENCE & SELF-DEFENCE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: At present there is no greater danger in the world than that
of atomic war. Sooner or later deterrence will fail, and if we stick to our policy of first
use of nuclear weapons under those circumstances, Western civilization will presumably
be destroyed.” – Robert McNamara, US Defence Secretary from 1961 to 1968 and
former President of the World Bank. – STERN, Hamburg, No. 17/1982.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: At present, according to Cheney, 16 nations, including
Libya and North Korea, have missiles with ranges of up to 24-hundred kilometers.” –
Brian Wilshire, The Fine Print, published by Brian Wilshire, PO Box 209, Round Corner,
NSW 2158, Australia., 1992., p.85. – And such powers are still generally believed to be
“defensive” ones! – J.Z., 23.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: At present, most of us do nothing. We look away. We
remain calm. We are silent. We take refute in the hope that the holocaust won‟t happen,
and turn back to our individual concerns. We deny the truth that it is all around us.
Indifferent to the future of our kind, we grow indifferent to one another. We drift apart.
We grow cold. We drowse our way toward the end of the world. But if once we shook of
our lethargy and fatigue and began to act, the climate would change. …” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.230. - INDIFFERENCE, HOPES, INACTIVITY,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: At these moments – the Berlin crisis, the Cuban missile
crisis, the American mining of Haiphong Harbor in 1972, the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan in 1979, among others – the world suddenly glimpses how far the
superpowers are ready to go in pursuit of their interests. When calm returns, however,
we are permitted to forget this ugly fact about the nuclear world, and to indulge
ourselves again in the illusion that we possess nuclear arms solely in order to prevent
their use.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.211. - NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: At this stage, even if they're using hydrogen bombs instead
of sticks and rocks, you're basically dealing with Stone Age characters.” - Robert Anton
Wilson, "The Illuminati Papers", p.87. – POLITICIANS, DECISION-MAKING
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: attention to the possibility of nuclear war by miscalculation
is at least as important as to deliberate attack." - Fred C. Iklé, Under Secretary of
Defence for Policy. He "does not rule out the possibility of a nuclear Pearl Harbor". -
TIME, March 29, 1982. - & MISCALCULATION
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Ballistic missile submarines patrolling close to the
American coast have shortened our warning drastically, probably to under 7.5 minutes, a
response time so short that it invites errors which could annihilate our two nations.” -
Newt Gingrich, Window of Opportunity, A Blueprint for the Future, p.244. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Because most libertarians cannot intellectually grasp and
categorise the nuclear threat, they act as if it did not exist. In this they are hardly better
than the average man but, because of their freedom knowledge (which offers the
solution), their behaviour is all the less to be excused. - J.Z., 10.2.77.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Belief in nuclear strength demonstrates nuclear blindness,
immorality and madness. – J.Z., 5.11.86.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Better active than radioactive.” - Demonstration banner
shown in SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 6.8.77.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Blood cannot be washed out with blood.” – Persian
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Both constitute disasters of an enormous scale, waiting to
happen. – J.Z., 30.7.93. – We are well prepared and institutionalized to produce these
disasters but not to cope with their consequences or to prevent them. – J.Z., 24.1.08. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Both sides won … Neither survived!” – Jack Williamson,
Brother to Gods, ANALOG, Dec. 78, p.23.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Britain (said Mr. Khrushchev) could be completely
destroyed by three hydrogen bombs and France by four. Japan would probably need
another four. - George Mikes, The Land of the Rising Yen, p.150. - Are there already 4
people in either country that are seriously interested, so far, in the panarchistic
alternative? - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Burn not your house to fright away the mice.” – Thomas
Fuller, M.D., Gnomologia, 1732, 1024.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But an answer to the question of whether wars can any
longer be regarded as just is not the end of it. If a thermonuclear war will result in the
nearly total destruction of just and unjust alike, the question of which side has the just
cause, and which the unjust –becomes irrelevant; the problem is not to distinguish
between causes for which a thermonuclear war is to be fought, but to prevent it
happening.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.225. – JUST WAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But Earth had always persecuted anyone who
demonstrated intelligence and gumption, systematically punishing success and rewarding
failure – then putting the human results of that process of “unnatural selection” in
charge of nuclear explosives. – L. Neil Smith, The Wardove, p.67. - LEADERSHIP
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But if the arms race continues, that is, if a high proportion
of the best scientific brains in all advanced nations are employed intensively in the search
for new and more effective weapons systems, offensive and defensive, it would be a very
bold prediction to say that no new discovery will be made which could upset the balance.
The achievements in space, in electronics and in information-gathering devices must
make us wary of writing down any development is impossible.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns,
Megamurder, 1966, p.241. – NUCLEAR POWER BALANCE, NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But if the master morality lived on in a few people, just a
few, and they had access to thermonuclear weapons ..." - THE DIAGONAL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But now our responsibilities as citizens in the common
world have been immeasurably enlarged. In the pre-nuclear common world, we were
partners in the protection of the arts, the institutions, the customs, and all “perfection” of
life; now we are also partners in the protection of life itself.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But now, before the exhaustion of either party can be
reached, everyone will be dead, and all human aims – the aims pursued in the “war” and
all others – will have been nullified.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.191. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But revolutionary realism, for an anarchist in an age of
atom bombs, is pacific: the bomb is now the symbol, not of anarchy, but of totalitarian
power. It is only to be released from the hands that hold it with the kiss that, in
Dostoevsky's parable, the Prisoner gave the Grand Inquisitor.” - H. Read: Anarchy and
Order, p.81. - The kiss of love or the kiss of death? - J.Z., 4.8.82. – LOVE?
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But the drive for invulnerability leads to total vulnerability.
A valid concept of national security should ensure life and a healthy future for the human
race. Instead, the Pentagon scenario of national security through mutually assured
destruction assures our annihilation.” – Dr. Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Madness, Autumn
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But the real moral point was made by Mr. Alex Comfort,
when he wrote that we should no longer talk of dying to the last man but of killing to the
last child. I would say, of torturing to the last child.” - Phililp Toynbee, The Fearful
Choice, p.108. – The fearful choices arise mostly only when we are not given enough free
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But there was nowhere to retreat.” – Stephen Baxter, Flux,
p. 23.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: But, no matter how one phrases it, the fact, which is rarely,
if ever, mentioned, either in the cold, abstract language of the theorists or in the ringing
tones of the statesmen, is that the nuclear powers put a higher value on national
sovereignty than they do on human survival, and that, while they would naturally prefer
to have both, they are ultimately prepared to bring an end to mankind in their attempt to
protect their own countries.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.210. – Rather,
their own territorial power positions. – J.Z., 22.9.07. – Can we afford such “leaders” any
longer? – J.Z., 10.10.07. – We permit the greatest stupidities & wrongful acts to our
“leaders”, while we do not even sanction the smallest stupidities and wrongful acts to our
children in primary schools! – What shall we think of the reason, morality and maturity
of the adults who think and act like this? “Nuclear giants and moral infants” General
Omar Bradley called them. - J.Z., 23.2.09. - & NATIONAL TERRITORIAL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: By growing to actually rely on terror, we do more than
tolerate its presence in our world: we place our trust in it. And while this is not quite to
“love the bomb”, as the saying goes, it decidedly is to place our faith in it, and to give it
an all-important position in the very heart of our affairs. Under this doctrine, instead of
getting rid of the bomb we build it ever more deeply into our lives.” - Jonathan Schell,
The Fate of the Earth, p.201. - - And this happens even while the main terrorists, the
official ones, the territorial leaders, are engaged in a world-wide campaign against private
terrorists, who at least so far have at most murdered by the thousands, while the territorial
leaders, in their terrorist war actions, have murdered by the millions and still pretend that
they are our protectors. At least the private terrorists act indiscriminately murderously,
also on the “principle” of collective responsibility, without this false pretence. – J.Z.,
22.9.07. - & TRUST IN TERROR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: By the end of 1976 nineteen countries had nuclear
reactors, including fifteen non-nuclear weapons countries. By 1984 twenty-eight non-
nuclear-armed nations are expected to have reactors. Their combined potential annual
production of plutonium will amount to 30 000 kilograms – enough to produce 10 atom
bombs a day.” – Dr. Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Madness, Autumn Press, 1978, p.77.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Can man be dissuaded from unleashing a nuclear war?" -
Sean McBride, quoted in SYDNEY MORNING HERALD, 8.3.78. – It is not “man” to
be persuaded, but territorial governments, which have to become forced to give up their
mass-murder devices or anti-people “weapons” – J.Z., 11.2.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Can one interest the hundreds of book- and the thousands
of article writers against nuclear war in a rightful, rational and practical program against
this threat? So far I have not seen any evidence for this. All “think” only along the lines
of conventional flawed premises and assumptions and flawed statist ideas. – In my own
2 peace books I thought otherwise – that‟s why both remained non-sellers and
uninfluential, even when put on the Web. Mere readers are even less thoughtful and
creative in this respect. - J.Z., 21.9.07. - PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Can the human race still be dragged back from racial
suicide, the way they are ignorantly, disinterestedly and blindly harrying themselves into
the nuclear fire, singing and playing and otherwise amusing themselves while all the
preparations are made for their extermination and that of everyone else? - J.Z., 3. 5. 83, 1.
5. 06. – I abused the term “suicide” here myself. What really threatens us is not suicide
by all of mankind by mass murder of mankind by a few, a mere handful of people in
territorial power. – J.Z., 11.2.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Can you tell me a single rightful target anywhere on Earth
for any nuclear weapon? – 17.7.95, 24.1.08. - & RIGHTFUL TARGETS FOR THEM, Q.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Certain crimes have already set precedents for the greatest
crimes! - Racine, Phèdre, 4.2. ( „Quelques crimes toujours précèdent les grands crimes."
– “Ein schwer Verbrechen sieht sich den Weg schon gebahnt.“
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Certainly, there is no need for anyone to strain to be
irrational, as Kahn suggests, or out of control, as Schelling suggests: a world that has
embarked on a holocaust is in its nature irrational and out of control.” - Jonathan Schell,
The Fate of the Earth, p.206. – Neither the world nor any of its many diverse peoples
have so embarked. Only their territorial misleaders did, alas, without their territorialist
subjects and victims sufficiently protesting or resisting them, for they, too, know of
nothing more rightful and rational than the territorial warfare States. – J.Z., 22.9.07,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Civilizations used to be destroyed by invasions of
barbarians from without. This time it is threatened by barbarians from within grown up
among us, tolerated and even praised by us for their "leadership" towards the nuclear
holocaust, all under the pretence of protecting or defending us and preventing nuclear war
by their nuclear deterrent. Whoever subscribes to mass murder devices, under any
excuse, is one of the worst and most dangerous barbarians. Compared with them the
suicide bombers of Palestine are relatively harmless idiots and criminals. - J.Z., 14. 11.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Clausewitz writes: War can never be separated from
political intercourse, and if, in the consideration of the matter, this is done in any way, all
the threads of the different relations are, to a certain extent, broken, and we have before
us a senseless thing without an object.” War can, for example, decline into a mere
looting or banditry or some other form of aimless violence. But of all the “senseless
things” that can ever occur when war‟s violence ( its means ) is severed from its political
purposes ( its ends ), a nuclear holocaust is the most senseless. To call this senseless
thing “war” is, in fact, simply a misnomer, and to go on speaking of “nuclear war”, and
the like, can only mislead and confuse us. Thus, while the Soviet Union and the United
States (*) are perfectly free to fire their thousands of nuclear weapons at one another
(**), the result would not be war, for no end could be served by it. It would be
comprehensive destruction – a „senseless thing‟.”. - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the
Earth, p.191. - - (*) governments – - (**) Rather, at their subjects – it is, alas, not a duel
with pistols only between heads of governments! – J.Z. - & RIGHTFUL WAR AIMS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Compared to continuing to incur a constant risk of the
destruction of the human race, all other evils are lesser evils. Anyone who finds one of
these lesser evils intolerable can always contract out by committing suicide. But it is
unreasonable that we should also bring the whole human race to an end, because most
human beings, now and in the future, would undoubtedly prefer the lesser evil.” – Dr.
Arnold Toynbee, in Philip Toynbee: The Fearful Choice, p.80. - Apparently, neither of
these thinkers considered opting or contracting out of all territorial States. – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Compared with the present war preparedness for
unconditional destruction and mass murder, the senseless surrender demand of WW II
was moderate and rational! In other words, leaders have become even more mad and
powerful since then. – J.Z., 2.4.87, 25.1.08. - & UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Conclusion of an archaeological report in the year 10,000
on earth, written by?: 'For some unknown reason or the other, the population of Earth
committed mass suicide, using simultaneously various mass extermination devices with
an overkill 'safety factor' of 10 to 200 times. What they were afraid of we will probably
never know.' - Source unknown. - Suicide is the wrong term for a situation in which most
people are quite disenfranchised in this respect, since such decision-making is
monopolized. However, most people do not oppose even this monopoly! To that extent
they gave their consent to mass murder, even their own murder! - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: consider how a war would end before becoming entrapped
in those processes through which fighting, once started even at a low level of violence,
tends to prolong itself.” - Fred Charles Ikle, Every War Must End, 1971, p.108. – And to
extend itself, resorting to ever more atrocious means. – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: continuing to struggle for advantage in nuclear arms is
futile and increasingly dangerous.” - Gwyn Prins, ed., The Choice: Nuclear War vs.
Security, p.243.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Damn it, why should a billion people die because some
inventor had a brain that couldn't see an inch into human nature?” - Van Vogt: The
Weapon Makers, p.118.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Dangerous implements should not be entrusted to
children.” - S. A. Coblentz, The Men Without Shadows, SF ADVENTURE CLASSICS,
July 72.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Dare we imagine a different future for our world than the
one which is being imposed on us by our government, by international alliances, and by
the principalities and powers which are working towards the destruction of the whole
human race? - Jean Skuse, p.103 of: "Confronting the Nuclear Age", edited by John
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Defence, yes, but not with nuclear weapons - because with
them a true defence is not possible. J.Z., 23. 3. 85. Only a reverse aggression or quite
wrongful and misdirected retaliation is possible with them. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. - DEFENCE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Defenders of nuclear strength and the nuclear deterrent are
morally and intellectually so corrupt and limited that nothing rightful and positive can be
expected of them. – J.Z., 5.7.86, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Der Untergang des Abendlandes, he thought grayly.
Spengler foresaw the collapse of a top-heavy civilization. He didn't foresee atomic
bombs, radioactive-dust bombs, bacteria bombs, blight bombs - the bombs, the senseless
inanimate bombs flying like monster insects over the shivering world. So he didn't guess
the extent of the collapse.” - Poul Anderson, The Book of Poul Anderson, p.10. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Despite achieving the ultimate in a deterrence system, the
world has never been more unstable. A nuclear cataclysm can be provoked by a
temporary irrationality of leadership, a misunderstanding between the antagonists, a
malfunctioning of equipment, a spreading of misinformation within the military, or the
result of panic.” - Ralph Summy, SOCIAL ALTERNATIVES, June 82. – Add to this the
fact that the decision-makers will be in the safest shelters, while their victims will be
largely unsheltered. – J.Z.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: despite all the progress made by science and education in
ensuring that children are healthier, the world‟s children are threatened with extinction
before they reach middle age. – Keith Suter, quoted by Ralph Summy, SOCIAL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Destroying civilization, always a task for fools, was
relatively easy with the tools constructed for the purpose in the 20th. century.” - Edgar
Pangborn: The Children's Crusade, p.133, in "CONTINUUM", No. 1.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Did you come out to destroy my world? Return to your
cave!“ – Sabbath, 33b. – From a collection of Jewish Wisdom. – But how can one make
the powerful, mad and monopolistic decision-makers return to their caves? – Some
people still seem to believe in word-magic. - J.Z., 31.5.08. - NUCLEAR SCIENTISTS,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Different from the more intelligent rats, human beings join
or remain on the sinking ship of the territorial State. They even shout for or make more
holes, to make it sink faster, although they will go under with it. – J.Z., 17.8.86, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Disaster or paradise are predetermined by the means we
employ now. What is the inevitable end of the current means? - J.Z., 21. 11. 82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Do we wait until … the bombs start falling?” - Deborah
Wheeler, Jaydium, p.300. – Q.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Don't be deceived when they tell you things are better now.
Even if there's no poverty to be seen because the poverty's been hidden. Even if you ever
got more wages and could afford to buy more of these new and useless goods which
industries foist on you and even if it seems to you that you never had so much, that is only
the slogan of those who still have much more than you. Don't be taken in when they
paternally pat you on the shoulder and say that there's no inequality worth speaking of
and no more reason to fight because if you believe them they will be completely in charge
in their marble homes and granite banks from which they rob the people of the world
under the pretence of bringing them culture. Watch out, for as soon as it pleases them
they'll send you out to protect their gold in wars whose weapons, rapidly developed by
servile scientists, will become more and more deadly until they can with a flick of the
finger tear a million of you to pieces.” - Jean Paul Marat - Emailed in by C.B. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Don't be deceived when they tell you things are better now.
Even if there's no poverty to be seen because the poverty's been hidden. Even if you ever
got more wages and could afford to buy more of these new and useless goods which
industries foist on you and even if it seems to you that you never had so much, that is only
the slogan of those who still have much more than you. Don't be taken in when they
paternally pat you on the shoulder and say that there's no inequality worth speaking of
and no more reason to fight because if you believe them they will be completely in charge
in their marble homes and granite banks from which they rob the people of the world
under the pretence of bringing them culture. Watch out, for as soon as it pleases them
they'll send you out to protect their gold in wars whose weapons, rapidly developed by
servile scientists, will become more and more deadly until they can with a flick of the
finger tear a million of you to pieces.” - Jean Paul Marat - Emailed in by C.B. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: E. M. Forster told us “Only connect!‟ Let us connect. (*)
Auden told us, “We must love one another or die.” (**) - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the
Earth, p.227. - - (*) Let us rather secede, individually and in groups, and let us connect
and associate only on a voluntary basis and exterritorially, each under those personal law
associations preferred by him or her. – J.Z., 1982, 23.9.07. - - (**) To do justice to each
other is enough. Often it already suffices to leave each other alone. – J.Z., 23.9.07. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Each day there are incidents that could lead to the
holocaust. Each month we escape Final Confrontation by ever narrower margins.” –
Marc Stiegler, A Simple Case of Suicide, ANALOG, May 83, p.146. – Mankind is not a
single entity and only a few powerful men have had so far any say on war and peace,
armament and disarmament, international conferences and treaties. – For them it might be
classed “suicide” but, certainly, not for the rest. – J.Z., 27.2.09. DIS.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Each time a politician raises his voice to speak of making a
better world for our children and grandchildren (*) ( and this is an intrinsic part of what
politics is about, whether or not it happens to be explicitly stated ), the peril of extinction
is there to gainsay him with the crushing rebuttal: But there may be no children or
grandchildren.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.160 - (*) As if they knew how
to do this, with their “means” and methods. What they have so far proven is only that
they can make matters much worse and have done so for centuries. All progress that we
experienced came in spite of them, not through them. – J.Z., 21.9.07. – How many more
proofs of their immorality, ignorance and prejudices as territorial politicians and of the
great wrongs and harm they can do to whole populations, do we need, before we adopt
the exterritorial alternatives to them, which would wrong and harm only their own kinds
of volunteers? – J.Z., 23.2.09. - & POLITICIANS, TERRITORIALISM VS.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Einstein was only one among many far-seeing people to
express an understanding of this fundamental mismatch of strengths when he stated, in
1950, as he contemplated the likely detonation of a hydrogen – or thermonuclear – bomb
… that “radioactive poisoning of the atmosphere and hence annihilation of any life on
earth has been brought within the range of technical possibilities.” – Jonathan Schell,
The Fate of the Earth, p.12/13.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Either men will learn to live like brothers, or they will die
like beasts.” – Max Lerner, “The Gifts of the Magi”, Action and Passions, 1949. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Eliminating the nuclear war threat will require many
different and radical steps. I listed about 500 of them alphabetically in But here are some of them: 1.) Eliminate the means,
the anti-people “weapons” by a disarmament carried out or controlled by the people, even
unilaterally. best through an ideal militia of volunteers for the protection of individual
rights and liberties. 2.) Eliminate the nuclear targets by voluntaristic and exterritorially
autonomous communities of volunteers - replacing territorial States with compulsory
membership or subordination. 3.) Repeal the monopolistic decision-making power of
governments on war and peace, armament and disarmament and international treaties and
alliances. 4.) Eliminate the financial power for the financing of a nuclear arms race by
replacing compulsory taxation, through well organized tax strikes, leading to voluntary
taxation, the replacement of financial despotism by financial freedom, and of monetary
despotism by monetary freedom, in a monetary and financial revolution, including
refusals to accept inflated government paper money altogether or at par, so that finally
sound and optional exchange media and value standards can drive out the bad ones. 5.)
Offer all working in the nuclear arms race industries other and better jobs. That would be
possible under full monetary and financial freedom. 6.) Eliminate the motives for war by
panarchism: To each the government or non-governmental society of his or her choice,
starting, perhaps, with recognizing corresponding governments in exile. 7.) Deterrence
through outlawry & tyrannicide, combined with amnesty and asylum for those destroying
or surrendering mass murder devices. 8.) Removing the motives for war by declaring
quite rightful war and peace aims in a believable way, by the people themselves, quite
publicly. 9.) Removing secrecy: Everyone a spy for peace or disarmament inspector. 10.)
Removing all despotic regimes through libertarian revolutions and military insurrections,
supplying and publishing the best programs for this, which include exterritorial majority
and minority autonomy for all the diverse groups, so that no one has any longer to be
afraid of any of the others. 11.) Separate peace treaties with captive peoples, unilaterally
offered, also with insurrectionist armies, and welcoming any number of deserters and
refugees - offering them not incarceration but well paid jobs, made possible by full
monetary and financial freedom. Exterritorial autonomy for them and all others, if they
want it. 12.) A new and complete declaration of all genuine individual rights and
liberties, also offered as the basis for a new kind of international law. 13.) Local militias
for the protection of individual rights and liberties – and nothing else – internationally
federated. 14.) Free Migration, Free Trade, Free Movement of Capital, free from taxation
and under value-preserving clauses. 15.) Spread of property incentives through
businesslike purchases of enterprises by their employees, on terms, ultimately paid off
with part of the additional productivity that would be achieved by people clearly working
for themselves. – J.Z., 31.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: End the nuclear arms race, not the human race.” – Slogan
of nuclear war protestors, reported in TIME, 5.5.82. – Alas, the “how” is left to territorial
governments, so this “armament” goes on. – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: England and the USA are prepared to commit mass murder
with nuclear devices, at any time. At least that accusation one cannot as yet raise against
Canadians, South Africans, New Zealanders and Australians among the English speaking
States. – J.Z., 1.2.07, 25.10.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Enjoy yourself. It's later than you think.” - Chinese
proverb. - – Proverbial wisdom is not always very wise.
Should we really forget e.g. about the nuclear war threat? Psychologically this is a natural
reaction but, rationally & morally? – J.Z., 12.1.08. - PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, DIS.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Essentially, the city populations of the world are taken
hostage, in the largest and most extended hostage taking that has ever happened.
And in this supposedly enlightened and civilized age this is still seriously considered to
be a rightful, rational and in the long run practicable "policy", the all too imbalanced
"balance of terror". - - Moreover, with "nuclear strength" and "nuclear deterrent" and
"nuclear defence" preparations the nuke-mad governments threaten to mass-murder
these hostages. Compared with them most private terrorists were so far relatively
harmless creatures! And yet these worst terrorists of all conduct what they pretend to be
an effective war against terrorism! - - With their future planned and well prepared mass
murders of these hostages and with even "limited" nuclear wars possibly resulting in
"nuclear winter" consequences, threatening the health or survival of the rest of the world
population, only mental defectives can conceive it, prepare for it and carry it out. - -
Some even seriously proposed technical "doomsday" devices, thus exposing their own
extreme immorality and ignorance of rightful alternatives. - - That is the kind of "war
games" that they play with our lives, so far only on their war games tables and
computers, but all too ready, all too much prepared and motivated to put these "games"
into mass murderous practice - at any time. - How many minutes or even seconds
warning time would you get in your country, if any? - J.Z., NWT 27 5 06. – Q.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: even conventionally armed nations have the potential of
blowing the world up, for they may draw the superpowers into one of their wars.” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.215.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Even the greatest horror and the strongest language is not
enough if some alternative proposals or projects or institutions do not offer the hope for a
genuine solution of this problem. – J.Z., 3.10.92. – PANARCHISM,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Even today, the official response to the sickening reality
before us is conditioned by a grim fatalism, in which the hope of ridding the world of
nuclear weapons, and thus of surviving as a species, is all but ruled out of consideration
as “utopian” or “extreme” – as though it were “radical” merely to want to go on living
and to want one‟s descendants to be born. And yet if one gives up these aspirations one
has given up on everything.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.185.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Eventually - and it's a dead race with time - we must take
over and make certain that baby never plays with matches.” - Robert Heinlein,
Assignment in Eternity, p.63. – We have learnt to control babies – but not yet territorial
governments. – J.Z., 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Every day in which the bombs are not loosed is another day
in which we can learn to avoid that catastrophe.” - Deborah Wheeler, Jaydium, p.249. –
But who does really want to learn about that? My book: An ABC Against Nuclear War,
remains a record non-seller and few look it up online, as far as I know, because I have
never got a response to this online publication or to that of my other peace book. – The
“death wish” seems to be stronger than the survival instinct. - J.Z., 16.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: every man not a fool steps off the railroad track when he
sees a train approaching.” – Source? – However, when it comes to the nuclear war
threat, we are not allowed to step of the track the territorial governments are on. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Extinction is not something to contemplate, it is something
to rebel against.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.184. - & EXTINCTION,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Extinction, being in its nature outside human experience, is
invisible, but we, by rebelling against it, can indirectly make it visible. No one will ever
witness extinction, so we must bear witness to it before the fact. And the place for the
rebellion to start is in our daily lives. … And this turnabout in the first instance can be as
simple as a phone call to a friend, a meeting in the community.” - Jonathan Schell, The
Fate of the Earth, p.227. – It is high time for people to finally make a stand against the
existence of anti-people mass murder devices in anyone‟s hands, especially in the hands
of the own government and of any foreign government and against all the ideas,
institutions and constitutions that led to this situation. Territorial governments, here as
well, are not the solution but the problem. – J.Z., 23.9.07. – Government have slid,
unintentionally, into WW I and WW II. They could, unintentionally, also slide into WW
III, a nuclear war. Just compare how e.g. the Sep. 11 terrorist act has led to two
conventional wars, still going on in Afghanistan and in Iraq. The machinery of territorial
warfare States is easy to start, for the men in power, but difficult to stop. – J.Z., 10.10.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Extreme remedies are very appropriate for extreme
diseases.” – Hippocrates, Aphorisms, c. 400 B.C., 1.6. – But for what are nuclear
“weapons” an extreme remedy, unless you consider all human beings to be mere pests?
Even then you should not forget about the birds, the bees and the butterflies. – J.Z.,
30.5.08. – Would the destruction of all of them be really an “extreme” measure or
remedy? – J.Z., 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Fight the nuclear society!" - ? This is not a society. It is a
coercive and coerced collective that is producing and asking for mass murder devices,
because, being governmentally mis-educated and also lied to, it does not know anything
better. - J.Z., 5. 9. 82, 1. 5. 06. – DIS., FIGHT
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For governments, still acting within a system of
independent nation-states, and formally representing no one but the people (*) of their
separate, sovereign nations, are driven to try to defend merely national interests (**)
with the means of destruction that threaten not only international but intergenerational
and planetary doom.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.188. – - (*) Not “the”
people but some to many people in the territory over which they claim exclusive
territorial sovereignty. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (**) The national interest is usually only the
propaganda fiction advanced by the power addicts and power-mad leading politicians
hiding behind this false pretence. – The real national interest demands the abolition of
their territorial monopolies and exclusive territorial powers. With that abolition the threat
of war would be gone. But these leaders and their faithful subjects would be the last to
recognize that. – J.Z., 10.10.07. - & He should rather have titled it: The fate of mankind –
in the hands of territorial governments. – J.Z., 23.2.09. - TERRITORIAL NATION
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For if we try to guarantee our safety by threatening
ourselves with doom, then we have to mean the threat; but if we meant it, then we are
actually planning to do, in some circumstance or other, that which we (*) categorically
must never do and are supposedly trying to prevent – namely, extinguish ourselves. (*)
This is the circularity at the core of the nuclear-deterrence doctrine; we seek to avoid our
(*) self-extinction by threatening to perform the act. According to this logic, it is almost
as though if we (*) stopped threatening ourselves (*) with extinction, then extinction
would occur.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.201. - - (*) Remember, that
only our incredibly under-informed and power-madness-driven top territorial leaders are
involved in such decision-making! We are completely disfranchised in this respect,
although, supposedly, possessing “the” vote. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - & THE DETERRENCE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For statism it is true today, more than ever before:
Whoever reaches for the atomic bomb will die by the atomic bomb!” - LERNZIEL
ANARCHIE, Nr. 3. - He might be reached by a knife before he can reach for the bomb! -
J.Z., 4.8.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For the doctrine‟s central claim – that it deploys nuclear
weapons only in order to prevent their use – is simply not true. Actually, it deploys them
to protect national sovereignty, and if this aim were not present they could be quickly
dismantled.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p. 217. - & THE DETERRENCE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For the unavoidable outcome of the tendencies now in
operation are either the slavery of totalitarianism or complete annihilation.” - L.
Labadie, Selected Essays, p.46. - One might add that in the long run totalitarianism would
not prevent annihilation, either. - J.Z., 11.6.80.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For to build this machine at all was a mistake of the hugest
proportions ever known – without question the greatest ever made by our species. The
only conceivable worse mistake would be to put the machine to use. Now deterrence,
having rationalized the construction of the machine, weds us to it, and, at best, offers us,
if we are lucky, a slightly extended term of residence on earth before the inevitable
human or mechanical mistake occurs and we are annihilated.” - Jonathan Schell, The
Fate of the Earth, p.217. - THE DETERRENCE MACHINE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For us to permit others to build, store and keep in readiness
“nuclear weapons” is like us permitting others to bring TNT by the tons into our homes
and to play with it, or to allow children to play with sticks of gelignite. I know how you
would react it I tried to do that to you, as a visitor, with children, threatening the survival
and that of your family. Well, governments are doing it to all of us, with their nuclear
strength “policy”, and overkill nuclear power, coming to the equivalent of x tons of TNT
per head of the population. What can you do about this? Begin at least to think what you
should be able to do about this! – J.Z., 13.1.88, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For while the aim of survival causes statesmen to declare
regularly that no purpose could ever be served by a holocaust, and that the aim of
nuclear policy can only be to prevent such insanity, the pursuit of national objectives
forces them to declare in the next breath that they are unwaveringly resolved to
perpetrate exactly this unjustifiable and insane action if some nation (*) threatens a
“vital interest” of theirs.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.210. – Not the
“nations” threaten but their rulers do and against them e.g. military insurrections,
revolutions, tyrannicide, tax strikes, refusals to accept their paper money etc. are much
more rightful and rational means than nuclear suicide preparations. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For while the doctrine relies for its success on a nuclear-
armed victim‟s resolve to launch the annihilating second strike, it can offer no sensible or
sane justification for launching it in the event.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: For while the events that might trigger a holocaust would
probably be political, the consequences would be deeper than any politics or political
aims, bringing ruin to the hopes and plans of capitalists and socialists, rightists and
leftists, conservatives and liberals alike. Having as the source of its strength only the
spontaneously offered support of the people of the earth, it would, in turn, respect each
person‟s will, which is to day his liberty.” (*) - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
p.229. – (*) Primary for this individual liberty would be the choice among political,
economic and social systems for each and everyone, just as they are already largely free
to choose their religion, their jobs, their insurance contracts, their marriage partners, their
sports & hobby activities, their friends and associates, their goods in their shopping carts.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Force could be rightfully used to occupy nuclear weapons
stores in preparation for the destruction of these devices. With nuclear weapons they
cannot be defended against conventional weapons, unless the protectors of these devices
are inclined towards suicide. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. - & VIOLENT OR FORCEFUL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Formerly only young and fit men were conscripted to be
slaughtered in battlefields, in trenches, planes, ships etc. all for undisclosed or senseless
war aims. Now almost all are conscripted into the open nuclear “weapons” fire zones, to
be mass murdered upon the whims of a few powerful men and their or all too obedient
henchmen. – J.Z., 31.10.85, 30.5.08. – TERRITORIALISM PROVIDES THE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Formerly, the future was simply given to us; now it must be
achieved. We must become the agriculturalists of time. If we do not plant and cultivate
the future years of human life, we will never reap them. This effort would constitute a
counterpart in our conscious life of reason and will of our instinctual urge to procreate.”
- Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.174. & MAN‟S FUTURE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Four-star retired Admiral Noel Gayler, veteran of three
wars, had the courage to state flatly: “Nuclear weapons have no military usefulness.” -
Rosalie Bertell, No Immediate Danger. Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth, The Women‟s
Press, 1985, p 344. - NUCLEAR WEAPONS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: From my analysis, the only way to avoid the threat of
atomic war is in the abolition of governments.” - Laurance Labadie, Selected Essays,
p.59. - Whoever seriously analyses the voluntarist alternatives will find that this means in
practice: to everyone the government or non-governmental free society of his dreams or:
panarchism. - J.Z., 4.8.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Generally, I am hopeful when discussing the Arms Race
with those who embrace the Augustinian version of the Just War. They can be reasoned
with, because there is the essential requirement that in any declaration of war there must
be the right intention to secure a good after-effect. They understand that total
annihilation is not good after effect. As Eisenhower said: "In a nuclear war there can be
no victors, only losers." (*) They recognize that if they were to survive, it would be
difficult to live wit the guilt of having morally condoned mass murder, a greater evil than
the Nazi gas chambers.” - John Hinchcliff: Confronting the Nuclear Age, p.85. – (*) Put
in bold by me. - J.Z.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: George Bernard Shaw warned that a nuclear exchange
would not establish who was right but who was left.” - John Hinchcliff: Confronting the
Nuclear Age, p.84.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Gigantic cracks can now be seen running throughout the
entire American social edifice; and unless the people revolt and take back the power
illegally wrested from them, our society and our way of life will not long survive.” - René
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Give me Liberty or give me death.” - Patrick Henry, 1776. -
This old saying has acquired a new meaning in our times. For lack of sufficient liberties
to prevent nuclear war, we may all suffer a nuclear war death. So far most seem to be
prepared to passively wait for nuclear war, rather than struggle to gain the liberties and
rights to prevent it. - Too many of us were descended from obedient slaves! - "Don't rock
the boat!" & "Don't make waves!" seem to be among their leading "principles". - Liberty
is not something to be given but something to be taken, if necessary with rightful arms
and rightful military organizations, from those, who try to withhold it. - After all, the
American Revolution started with some rightful militia actions and so did the French
Revolution. - But neither were conducted only quite rightfully. In both the remaining
loyal monarchists were badly treated and in both forced paper currencies and the
following price controls incapacitated the revolutionaries and in France even led to a
terror regime. - Neither had quite rightful war aims and warfare methods. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: God must have been pleased when our moral awareness
reached sufficient sensitivity for us to abolish slavery. God will be pleased now with the
long-overdue recognition of women's rights, the rights of the handicapped, of the poor,
the rights of the unborn, even the rights of the whales. Nature is included in the process:
It is not just a tool-box. So it is not a question of creating human unity, but one of
affirming it. It used to be that this part of the globe could not protect itself against the
other parts. The whole is the target of future war now. The whole world lives on the
target. So we are forced to affirm the ancient religious belief that we all belong to one
another.” - James Reston, OMNI, 12/81. - The best that can be said about some religious
people now is that, at last, they have become somewhat interested in the nuclear problem.
Naturally, most of them still only pray, march and protest and few have started to think
and act in the right direction. But it is a beginning and the non-religious people have not
really been shining examples of morality and rationality in this respect, either. - J.Z.)
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Governments are not directly threatened by mass
extermination "weapons" but their subjects are. Governments could come to survive for
years, perhaps for decades, in the safest shelters. They would "merely" have lost their
numerous subjects and victims. - J.Z., 29. 3. 84 & 1. 5. 06. - & THE PEOPLE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Guided nuclear missiles only guide us to mutual nuclear
annihilation. - J.Z., 17.11.78.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Hand guns in the hands of citizens are good enough against
those, who hold nuclear holocaust devices ready for use against citizens. - J.Z., 7. 11. 82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Has Nazism been defeated or has mass extermination for
“defensive” purposes now become the almost universal policy? – J.Z., 13.4.86. - NAZIS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Have we rejected reason and humanity altogether? Are we
so accustomed to living under the mushroom cloud that we no longer believe that a just
and peaceful society is possible or even desirable? If we have come to that, we have
committed the sin against the Holy Spirit, and we are damned irrevocably to a hell on
our own planet.” – Morris West, Proteus, p.68. – PANARCHISM, JUSTICE, PEACE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: He believed in slow progress, made only by minorities, if
only they do not destroy each other.” - Isaiah Berlin, Russian Thinkers, p.292, on
Turgenjev. - Give minorities their exterritorial autonomy chance to their kind of progress
and there would no longer be a threat of nuclear war nor would their progress and the
resulting all-over progress be slow. - J.Z., 8. 9. 85 & 1. 5. 06. – PANARCHISM, FULL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: He had heard how hijacked airline passengers identified
with their captors, came to hate those outside who tried to help them. It had happened to
him. … He was almost one of those soldiers now - who questioned nothing, who simply
followed orders, and left the niceties of Armageddon to their superior officers.“ - Craig
Thomas, Snow Falcon, p.107. - Not only soldiers but also civilians get brainwashed and
imprinted by mass murderers. - J.Z., 7.11.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: He has made his weapons his gods. / When his weapons
win he is defeated himself.” – Rabindranah Tagore, Stray Birds, 1916, p.45.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: He said that in the event of “general war”, that is, all-out
nuclear war, no defensive measures could reduce American fatalities much below eighty
million.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.142, on a remark by Mr.
McNamara, to the House of Representatives Armed Servce Committee on 18.2.1965.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: he still clung to the idea that things would somehow return
to normal if only he believed it hard enough. - Douglas Reeman, "To Risks Unknown",
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: He that plants thorns must never expect to gather roses.” –
“The Ignorant Physician”, in Fables of Bidpai, ca. 750.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: He was game - for astrology, for I Ching, for LSD, for
demons, for whatever Simon had to offer as an alternative to the world of sane and
rational men who were sanely and rationally plotting their course toward what could
only be the annihilation of the planet.” - Wilson/Shea: Illuminatus I, p.116.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: He was twelve when nuclear thunderbolts slew two cities
and man‟s last innocence.” – Paul Anderson, There Will Be Time, p.20. – If that is an
autobiographical note then P.A. would be about my age. – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Heat not a furnace for your foe so hot / That it do singe
yourself.” – Shakespeare, Henry VIII, 1612-13, 1.1.140.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: hideous weapons … are dangerous as long as the insane
may obtain power. - Marc Stiegler, A Simple Case of Suicide, ANALOG, May 83, p.159.
- - Why not attack the problem from the other end, namely, by destroying the territorial
State system, which permits insane people to acquire excess powers? – J.Z., 25.1.08. - -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Hitherto man had to live with the idea of death as an
individual; from now on mankind will have to live with the idea of its death as a species.”
– Arthur Koestler. – And still there are people more concerned about the survival of a
beetle, frog, plant or snail species than that of man. – How unselfish can you get?
However, they do not consider that most of the other species will also be extinguished
together with man. – J.Z., 25.1.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How can one condemn Nazi extermination camps, which
took many months to murder a million people, but not e.g. Hydrogen bombs, which,
when dropped on a city, could murder a million people in a few seconds? – J.Z., 29.9.05,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How can one peacefully coexist with the owners of nuclear
weapons, who keep them in readiness? By going on to ignore them, until they are used? -
J.Z., 20.11.02. – Q.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How can you have a Happy Birthday when the whole world
may blow up any minute? - Card greeting, quoted by Arthur C. Clarke, The Lost Worlds
of 2001, p.23.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How does one "fight" the nuclear war threat non-violently?
By inducing those, who built and guard them and keep them in readiness - to destroy
them themselves. To achieve that will take some thinking and preparations. Certainly,
those now guarding the nuclear weapons stores must realize that they are prime targets
and the sooner they cease to be such … - J.Z., n.d. & 1. 5. 06. - NONVIOLENT
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How far behind are the politicians? A decade? A
generation? A century? How far behind can we afford to have them, when they have their
fingers on the buttons of H-bomb-armed ICBMS?” - Editorial, ANALOG, 8/74. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How is it possible to cultivate an ethical sense while you
are simultaneously making fission bombs? The two are not only incompatible, they are
actively hostile.” - James Blish: Get Out Of My Sky, p.56. - At least as taxpayers,
obedient citizens or allies we are all involved in this crime! - J.Z.)
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How many angels can dance on a nuclear warhead? -
OMNI, Aug. 82, p.80.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: How many children live now in nuclear target zones, under
threat of nuclear extermination? - J.Z., 19. 2. 83. - It has often happened, in school essay
competitions, describing what children imagined would happen when they grow up, that
the children wrote IF, in stead of WHEN! - What a world we have left to our children and
grandchildren! - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. – CHILDREN, ALSO AS NUCLEAR TARGETS!
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: However the Air Force had control of all the nuclear
weapons. But because of traditional rivalries and jealousies the Army and the Navy had
to have the weapons also. So it was decided to develop a Triad of nuclear weapons, and
the arms race really began in earnest. Also, it was decided to nuclearize all forms of
conventional weapons. So now there are atomic bombs in torpedoes and in land mines,
and men who go into battle with 18-inch howitzers on their shoulders carry with them
atomic bombs. - - America now has some 30,000 - 35,000 hydrogen bombs. The Soviet
Union has some 20 000 hydrogen bombs which are bigger than the American bombs but
they are less accurate. - - I've heard people say that America lags behind Russia in the
arms race. I don't understand that statement. How can one be behind or ahead when both
countries can kill each other many times over?” - Helen Coldicott, in John Hinchcliff's
"Confronting the Nuclear Age, p.26. - Calling them "weapons" makes military men
continue in their mistaken belief that they are really weapons. If only it were up to
"countries"! For they cannot act at all! - J.Z., 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: human history becomes more and more a race between
education and catastrophe.” - H .G. Wells.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Human history becomes more and more a race between
education and catastrophe.” – H. G. Wells, 1866-1946, Outline of History, 1920. - -
Perhaps because what now counts mostly as “education”, but amounts rather to mis-
education, is already a catastrophe on its own. – J.Z., 9.9.07. - HISTORY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I also find a process of weapons development by which the
leaders of states are being given less and less time to make decisions on whether or not to
press a fatal button.” - Herb Feith in John Hinchcliff's, ed., "Confronting the Nuclear
Age", p.59.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I am afraid of the people who are not afraid of it. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I am sorry to say that there is too much point to the
wisecrack that life is extinct on other planets because their scientists were more
advanced than ours.” – John F. Kennedy, address, Washington, D.C., Dec. 11, 1959. –
Never forget that he doubled the nuclear arsenal of the USA and engaged in nuclear
brinkmanship, too. – J.Z., n.d. - JOKES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I am sure that the lines on which we ought to be thinking
are the depoliticization of the issue of the destruction of humanity.” – Stephen Spender, in
Philip Toynbee, The Fearful Choice, p.59. – Ending territorial politics and replacing it
with individual secession and exterritorial autonomy options for individuals and
minorities, would depoliticize nuclear weapons and make them obviously wrong and
useless. Or can you imagine e.g. the Pope being armed with nuclear weapons? Wherever
he would explode them, he would also kill Catholics or possible converts to Catholicism.
Thus he would not even dream of acquiring such mass murder devices, except in
nightmares. – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I believe that (even if you hate war and nuclear war
especially), you believe in most of the things that make nuclear war inevitable, at least in
the long run. (I, definitely, do not believe in these things!) Therefore you do, willy nilly,
and contrary to your own good intentions, help to bring about nuclear war. Only once you
become aware of that guilt and show a serious interest in the peace-promoting
alternatives to the present territorialist and thus inherently oppressive and aggressive
systems and institutions is there any hope for us. Don't try to blame others for their
disinterest and ignorance and prejudices. Blame your own. I do. - J.Z., 1. 8. 82, 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I can't see how anybody can't see the risk of not being
enlightened on nuclear war. – D.Z., 7.1.77.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I don't care if we all die. - From film: "Strike Force". - That
seems to be one of the predominant sentiments of our days. - J.Z., 19. 11. 82. – So little
love is there for the own life, the lives of one‟s family, relatives and friends, not to speak
of the lives of “foreigners”! – J.Z., 28.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I don't count a bomb as an arm, you can't point it at a
person's head.” … Robert Heinlein, Podkayne of Mars, p.155. - One might add: unless
you are a mad or fanatic terrorist and do you want to be in that class? - J.Z., 10/78.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I don't think it's pessimistic to face the reality of a world
situation and prepare to meet it.” - Don Crick, The Different Drummer, p.76.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I feel a bit like Cassandra at times - seeing how people
react to the nuclear war threat. - J.Z. 22/8/75. - And to the panarchistic solution of it! -
J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I have read numerous stories and books in which either
gangsters or some right-wing officers of Western military forces were going to use
nuclear "weapons" and similar devices for mass extermination - but hardly any in which
communists would do the same. The bias expressed by most writers is the same as that in
most films depicting businessmen as baddies. Yet, the Soviets are best prepared for
nuclear war! - J.Z. - 27/1/82. - They might have started it off, might have "won" it and the
survivors, who would write or read history, if they still could, would blame "capitalism",
the "profit-motive" etc., but territorialism: the coercive division of the Earth surface and
populations into territorial segments, as such ruled in a more or less totalitarian way, and
constituting targets, under notions of "collective responsibility" for the decisions of a few
monopoly decision-makers, would remain un-blamed - as it is, today, still very widely
unrecognised as the main factor making for wars with ABC mass murder and mass
destruction devices. - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I have said elsewhere ( see Jerry Pournelle and Dean Ing,
Mutual Assured Survival, Baen Books 1984, ISBN 0-671-559223-0 ) that mankind‟s best
hope is for the United States, and Western Civilization, to get off the weary treadmill of
the MacNamara strategy of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) and adopt a new
strategy of Mutual Assured Survival. Such a new strategy may not automatically give us
the libertarian utopia hinted at in “The Ungoverned”, but without Assured Survival we
will most assuredly lose what liberties we have.” – Jerry Pournelle and Jim Baen in
introduction to Vernor Vinge, The Ungoverned, p.10 of FAR FRONTIERS, Vol. III, Fall
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I have said that we do not have two earths, one to blow up
experimentally and the other to live on; nor do we have two souls, one for reacting to
daily life and the other for reacting to the peril to all life. But neither do we have two
wills, one with which we can intend to destroy our species and the other with which we
can intend to save ourselves. Ultimately, we must all live together with one soul and one
will on our one earth.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.198. – - But that desire
or ideal and will must be quite tolerant, much more tolerant that we have ever been
before, towards all kinds of diversity, tolerantly practised only among volunteers. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I have seen the science I worshipped and the aircraft I
loved, destroying the civilization I expected them to serve.” - Charles Lindbergh, 1974,
quoted by Stormy Mon, "A Liberty Book", p.72. - & INDISCRIMINATE AIR RAIDS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I hold strongly to my personal liberty and it is precisely
because of this that I insist that no one has the right to force his decisions on another.
Mr. Buckley chooses to be dead rather than Red. So do I. But I insist that all men be
allowed to make that decision for themselves. A nuclear holocaust will make if for them.”
(*) – Ronald Hamowy, quoted by Murray N. Rothbard, For a New Liberty, revised
edition, p. 294, Collier Books, 1978, ISBN 0-02-074690-3. – Rothbard, ibid, continues:
“To which we might add that anyone who wishes is entitled to make the personal decision
of “better dead than Red”, or “give me liberty or give me death” What he is not entitled
to us to make these decisions for others (**), as the pro-war policy of conservatism would
do. What conservatives are really saying is: “Better them dead than Red”, and “give me
liberty or give them death” – which are the battle cries not of noble heroes but of mass
murderers. - - In one sense alone is Mr. Buckley correct: in the nuclear age it is more
important to worry about war and foreign policy than about demunicipalizing garbage
disposal, as important as the latter may be. But if we do so, we come ineluctably to the
reverse of the Buchleyite conclusion. We come to the view that since modern air and
missile weapons cannot be pinpoint-targeted to avoid harming civilians, their very
existence must be condemned. And nuclear and air disarmament becomes a great and
overriding good to be pursued for its own sake, more avidly even than the
demunicipilization of garbage.” – (*) Ronald Hamowy and William F. Buckley, Jr.,
National Review: Criticism and Reply” - NEW INDIVIDUALIST REVIEW, Nov. 61, p.
9, 11. - (**) territorially! – NUCLEAR WAR THREAT, FOREIGN POLICY &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I only feel sorry for your kids and a few people like myself.
But you, your parents and grandparents have chosen to take the road to the general
nuclear war death, directly or indirectly. – You have not even demanded a say in that
matter for yourself but have blindly and thoughtlessly followed your misleaders. - You
will not only get this death but will deserve to get it, for that reason, unless you are lucky
to die before that event. - J.Z., 17.8.86, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I really can't see any way to manage a nuclear war." -
Stanford University Physicist and Arms Control Expert Sidney Drell, TIME, 29. 3. 82,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I remember them as men - ordinary men in an
extraordinary world of their own making. Men with fast brains and slow hearts; with the
gift of creation in their dreams and the impulse of destruction in their fingers.” - Edmund
Cooper: Tomorrow Came, Panther Books, 1963, story: Judgement Day. - This description
ignores that most men are not free to follow their creative urges - while some men are
allowed to follow their destructive ones. - J.Z., 4/8/82. - Our territorialist non-thinking
and territorialist institutions, constitutions, laws and jurisdictions give them that
"authority". - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I see "Panarchy" as defined by P. E. De Puydt as the main
way to prevent nuclear war. (Compare his essay "Panarchy" in the appendix to PP 16-17
& on my main website and on ) J.Z., 4.8.82.
- But how many others do, so far, among the total world population. In this respect a
wilful and culpable mental blindness prevails still. - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I sometimes can't blame people if they wish all scientists
were lined up and shot. If it were possible to wave a wand and make fission impossible -
fission of any kind - I would quickly wave the wand. I have a total conviction - now - that
nuclear weapons should not be used under any circumstances. At any time. Anywhere.
Period. If I were king. If the Russians bombed New York. I would not bomb Moscow.” -
John McPhee: The Curve of Binding Energy, p.87.- “The Russians” had and still have no
say on nuclear weapons. Carelessness in thoughts and expression led us to the nuclear
war threat. – J.Z., 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I trust and believe, we will awaken to the truth of our peril,
a truth as great as life itself, and, like a person, who has swallowed a lethal poison but
shakes off his stupor at the last moment and vomits the poison up, we will break through
the layers of our denials, put aside our fainthearted excuses, and rise up to cleanse the
earth of nuclear weapons.” (*) - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.231. – -
Secede, individually and in whole groups, from all the nuclear bomb makers and stock-
pilers and thereby, directly and indirectly, and one person after another, gradually to fast,
eliminate all nuclear targets. – Imagine all the top decision-makers finally left sitting
alone on their beloved stockpiles of mass murder devices! - Naturally, long before that
the secessionists would have organized the destruction of these devices. Territorial
governments are unwilling to part with all of them, still imagining them to be rightful and
useful. In their contexts they are, to some extent. That is why all such governments must
be abolished and replaced by voluntary and competing governments or societies, none of
them with any territorial monopoly. - J.Z., 12.9.82, 23.9.07. - - (*) And of all ideas,
institutions, constitutions, laws and juridical decisions that made the production,
stockpiling and use of ABC mass murder devices possible and likely. – Jonathan Schell‟s
“The Fate of the Earth” is one of the best peace books that I know of. Alas, it still lacks a
sufficiently clear peace program. –It constitutes mainly only a general wake-up call, with
some general suggestions, some flawed and some, still all too general, going in the right
direction. - J.Z., 23.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I wish that I could say that thirty-three years of 'peace' (
i.e., no A- or H- or C- or N- or X-bombs dropped ) indicates that we really have nothing
to fear from such weapons, because the human race has sense enough not to commit
suicide. But I am sorry to say that the situation is even more dangerous, even less stable,
than it was in 1946.” - Robert Heinlein: Expanded Universe, p.146.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: ICBM warfare is automatically total warfare. - So is
strategic bomber warfare, … with nuclear weapons.” – Hank Searls, The Penetrators. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If a decision were to be reached while the “defeated” party
held potentially decisive means of violence in its possession, then that decision would be
not “by arms” but by something else. We have to imagine that this power would accept
its defeat while knowing that the use of its bombs could reverse it. (*) A current example
illustrates how little willingness there is among nuclear powers to accept such an
outcome. For some time, it has been widely believed that the Soviet Union enjoys a
preponderance in conventional forces over the NATO powers in Europe, and the United
States has reserved for itself the right to resort to nuclear weapons in Europe rather than
accept a conventional defeat there. Thus, the United States has already publicly
discarded the notion of abiding by any rules of “limited war” if those rules should prove
to mean a defeat for the United Sates. That being the likely state of things, there seems
little chance that a conventional war between nuclear powers should stay limited. And
this means that a conventional war between nuclear powers must not even be begun,
since it threatens the same holocaust that the limited use of nuclear weapons threatens.
As a practical matter, this rule has up to now been followed by the statesmen of the
nuclear world. Disregarding theoretical treatises on the possibility of “limited war”
between nuclear powers, including “limited nuclear war”, they have held back from any
war; thus, in our thirty-six years of experience with nuclear weapons no two nuclear
powers have ever entered into even conventional hostilities. The same cannot be said, of
course, of hostilities between nuclear powers and non-nuclear powers, such as the
Vietnam War or the Soviet-Afghanistan war. These remain possible – although, for
reasons that I shall not go into here, they are not, it would seem, profitable.” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.192. - - (*) At least some of its leading and nationalistic
officers would think so and disobey their governments. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - LIMITED WAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: if both sides have enough warheads to inflict "unacceptable
damage", then terms like superiority have no practical meaning. More warheads would
only sift the dust finer. - Senator George McGovern, in PLAYBOY article: "The End of
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If even some libertarians advocate a nuclear "deterrence" or
"defence" and want to have it themselves, then how much sense can one expect from
others, e.g. those, who now have their fingers on the nuclear buttons and there are, by
now, thousands if not ten-thousands of them. - J.Z., 23. 8. 82. - & LIBERTARIANS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If I were a cockroach I would not worry about nuclear war
either. But are you one? J.Z., 1986. – Cockroaches are supposed to be able to survive
exposure to 100 000 Roentgen units. – J.Z., 25.1.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If man will not serve, Nature will try another experiment.” -
G. B. Shaw. – Is that a sufficient consolation for us? – J.Z., 31.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If most of us were not descendants of slaves and serfs, we
would not tolerate ABC mass murder devices in anyone's hands. - J.Z., 7.7.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If my “An ABC Against Nuclear War” would be a
bestseller then there would still be considerable hope for us. But so far, and for decades,
it has been one of the least-sellers. – While all those book authors, who do pretend to
bring good or sufficient answers to this threat – really do not. – Should they be forgiven
because they do not know and do not want to know? - J.Z., 29.9.05, - 29.10.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If nuclear war is entirely immoral and illegitimate, the
military officers, scientists, administrators and armaments manufacturers engaged in
preparing for that war are all in anti-social employment.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns,
Megamurder, 1966, p.224.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If our economy were to produce a wonderful abundance of
silverware, glasses, and table napkins but no food, people would quickly rebel and insist
on a different system. The world‟s political arrangements, which now aim at providing
some accoutrements of life but fail to lift a finger to safe life itself, are in no less drastic
NEED OF REPLACEMENT.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, P.161. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If our species does destroy itself, it will be a death in the
cradle – a cause of infant mortality.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.182.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If the human race wants to go to hell in a basket,
technology can help it get there by jet. It won‟t change the desire or the direction, but it
can greatly speed the passage.” – Charles M. Allen, “Unity in a University”, speech at
Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, N.C., April 25, 1967. - Alas, everyone of the
human race is not given a choice or even a say on this matter. – Probably less than two
dozen decision-makers are still involved. Can they and do they represent all mankind in
this respect? - J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If the Nazis had won the war, they would probably have
declared that they did so only thanks to their “Final Solution”. – J.Z., 4.7.86. – Alas, the
survivors of Nazi onslaughts had nothing better than mass murder devices in mind for
their future “defence” efforts. To that extent the Nazi, with their mentality, have won
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If the world could barely tolerate a dozen killer nations,
how could it survive thousands of psychotics with rad bombs and war plagues?” – p.52
of Vernor Vinge, The Peace War, in ANALOG, 8/84. - It is not "nations" or "peoples"
that are organized as mass murderers but their territorial governments. - J.Z., 17.8.02. –
Most of the private mass murderers and terrorists are by-products of territorial
governments. – J.Z., 27.2.09. - NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION, NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If there be fuel prepared, it is hard to tell whence the spark
come that shall set it on fire.” – Francis Bacon, “Of Seditions and Troubles”, Essays,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: if there is to be any defence in the nuclear age, it is
essential to find a means of ensuring that these weapons will not be used. The penalty for
failing to find such a means will be the destruction of civilized life on a major portion of
the earth.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.140. – As long as they are
still considered as “weapons” they will, sooner or later, be use or, rather, abused. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If they continue to think and act in the patterns on which
air war has developed into nuclear war, they will have fallen away from their true
function as protectors of the civil population, and will have delivered them over to mass
slaughter.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.223. – How often have
territorial military forces really only acted as protectors of the rights of civilians? – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If this proliferation of nuclear power should occur, it would
follow that the nuclear arm would indeed become “conventional”, in the sense that it
would be regarded as one of the kinds of armament that would be normal to employ in
warfare. And, as has been argued in previous pages, and is contended by most writers on
the subject, once nuclear weapons are used, in a “tactical” situation, there is no cut-off
point in size. There is nothing to stop the successive use of more and more powerful
weapons, until the largest and most powerful are brought into play, and there is all-out
nuclear war.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.240. – In other words,
causes for wars, targets, enemies and weapons are still not sufficiently defined when it
comes to “nuclear weapons” and thus the threat continues. Any minor government that
also has some nuclear mass murder devices is thereby also already a “super-power” and
thus super-dangerous. – And that is what all too many of them still desire to be – because
they are territorial powers. Can you imagine the Pope or the Anglican Church or any
football club or association of such clubs being armed with nuclear mass murder devices?
- J.Z., 10.10.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If we can risk nuclear war, then we can risk nuclear
disarmament.” – Dangerous Buttons, No. 516.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If we cannot trust computers even in small things, like the
rounding up or down of bills to be paid, to the nearest 5 cent sums, how can we rely on
them in the big things, like the survival of mankind regarding the threat of nuclear war? –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If we have to learn to live with the bomb, then only under
conditions where it won‟t be governmentally mass produced, tested, stored and kept in
readiness of its “military” use, upon the decision of some ruler or government or the
other. When there are no longer military aims, motives and means for them, when
consent is 99.9 % against them, when they have been reduced in public opinion to a
criminal menace and its delivery mechanisms for earth targets have been dismantled,
their radioactive cores are guarded by ideal militia forces, perhaps for future use in
spaceship drives or as a defence against comets, then we could begin to relax regarding
them. – J.Z., 15.7.87, 25.1.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If we should all perish in the nuclear holocaust … it would
be because the consensus of stupidity has prevented man from seeing reality.” – Erich
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If you can keep your head while all about you are losing
theirs, you're probably not paying attention.” - Franklin Jones, quoted in READER'S
DIGEST, 7/85.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If you come to think of it and to really evaluate the anti-
people mass murder devices of governments, called ABC “weapons”, then you would
have, thereby, fully discredited all governments building them, holding them in readiness
or allying them with nuclear armed governments, at least in your own eyes. The same
objections apply to governments ready or engaging in “conventional” area bombing and
scorched or poisoned earth policies or those mass murdering their opponents by poison
gas, shootings or systematical starvation. – J.Z., 4.8.92, 26.1.08. – WEAPONS,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If you do not think about the future you cannot have one.”
– John Galsworthy, Swan Song, 1928. - & THINKING
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If you favour the nuclear war threat then I know that you
are going to hell anyway, so I don't have to wish you on your way. What worries me is
only that you are likely to drag me into it, too. - J.Z., 4.8.82. - Twenty years later nuclear
"weapons" are still accepted in the hands of the "goodies" and only objected to in the
hands of some of the "baddies"! And still there is no interest in the changes of principles
and structures that are required to end this threat! - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: if you‟re the President, what if you have to push the button!
Could he have done it? Could he have decided that the security of his country required
the death of thousands – millions – of other human beings? Probably not, he judged. He
was too good a man for that.” - Tom Clancy, The Sum of all Fears, p.211. Should anyone
be placed in that position and given that power over dozens to hundreds of millions of
lives, perhaps even the survival of mankind on Earth? Long before it could come to such
a decision we should question and abolish all the powers and facilities for it. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If your neighbor produced and stored nuclear mass murder
devices then you would be inclined to try to do something about this threat. – Why do
you think it is quite different and right if your government does the same? – J.Z., 19.8.05.
- Q.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If your weapons are too good, you'll kill off all the game.” -
Evelyne E. Smith, GALAXY No. 53
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: If you've seen one nuclear war, you've seen them all.” -
Bob Muron, Appalachia, Va., in OMNI, 1/80. - JOKES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Illich then asks how we can participate in debates I which
the degree of acceptance of genocide is discussed. He likens programs for gradual
nuclear disarmament to a hypothetical Nazi official who goes to Hitler and expresses
opposition to the death camps, then proposes that one death camp be closed per year
until all are closed. We immediately see how self-contradictory, how irrational such
“reasonableness” would be. The abolitionists who strain toward reasonableness as s/he
works with a mass movement, can find herself supporting the genocidal framework itself,
today‟s framework of the war system.” – George Lakey, From Crisis Response to
Abolition of War, in SOCIAL ALTERNATIVES, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1982. – At least the
immediate closing of all death camps and dismantling of all nuclear “weapons” would be
a very significant step. To abolish all wars one would have to know all its causes and
motives and abolish them or make them quite impractical. Then one should start with the
aggressors. And here we find that even the definition of aggression is not yet widely
agreed upon. The UN tried, in vain, for years. – J.Z., 26.1.08. - DISARMAMENT,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: I'm scared! I don't know whether the world is full of smart
men bluffing or imbeciles who mean it. - Morrie Brickman, in READER'S DIGEST,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In 1946, the McGraw-Hill book Co. published a
compilation of essays under the title, One World or None …” A Report to the Public on
the Full Meaning of the Atomic Bomb.” In the book, more than 16 academics and nuclear
experts, including Albert Einstein, J.R. Oppenheimer and Walter Lippman, expressed
their fears for the survival of civilization unless the concept of national self-defence were
abandoned in favor of an internationalist approach to security.” - Brian Wilshire, The
Fine Print, published by Brian Wilshire, PO Box 209, Round Corner, NSW 2158,
Australia., 1992., p.6. – Alas, these experts, too, did not realize that it is territorial
nationalism and organization that constitutes the threat and that exterritorial autonomy for
all kinds of communities of volunteers, everywhere, locally, nationally or internationally
federated, according to their own preferences, constitutes the largest part of the solution,
for then everybody except criminals and aggressors with victims could get the
government or non-governmental society of his or her dreams, thus producing genuine
self-governments everywhere and a healthy and peaceful competition between them,
based on full consumer sovereignty, in the sphere of public services ( or presumed public
services ) as well. – Nuclear weapons require territorial motives, targets means and ideas,
combined with the notion of collective responsibility. – J.Z., 1.10.07. – One should
imagine that when one system has caused one problem after the other, one crisis after the
other, one war after the other, one tax after the other, and this for thousands of years, that
then, finally, enough of its victims would begin to seriously think about the opposite to
territorial states, namely freely competing societies of volunteers only, all under
exterritorial autonomy and personal laws. Alas, this has still not occurred. – J.Z.,
10.10.07. - PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In 1980 an integrated circuit chip the size of a dime was
twice responsible for putting America on nuclear alert. The three-minute alert was
enough for an unarmed command and control plane to be in the air before the military
realized no bombs were headed our way. Pentagon technicians replaced a faulty circuit
chip worth 46 cents which had relayed the misinformation from a computer below
Colorado‟s Cheyenne Mountains to command centers around the world. - - Another false
alarm lasted about six minutes when the same computer was inaccurately fed information
simulating conditions of a nuclear attack.” - Dr. Laurence J. Peter, Why Things Go
Wrong or The Peter Principle Revisited, George Allen & Unwin, 1911, p.147. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: in a common political endeavor, reaching across national
boundaries … the aim of the endeavor would be to hold the gates of life open… to every
living person… it would not seek to derive any rights to dictate to the generations on
hand. … Intellectually and philosophically, it would carry the principle of tolerance to
the utmost extreme.. It would attempt to be as open to new thoughts and feelings as it
would be to the new generations that would think those thoughts and feel those feelings.
Its underlying supposition about the creeds and ideologies would be that whereas without
mankind none can exist, with mankind all can exist.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the
Earth, p.227. – But who does conclude from such general statements upon the
exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities which is advanced by panarchists and
polyarchists? Not even Ayn Rand did, although she made similar general statements. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In a nuclear conflict between the United States and the
Soviet Union – the holocaust – not only the adversaries but also the world‟s bystanders
will vanish. In this “war”, instead of one side winning and the other losing, it is as
though all human beings lost and all the weapons won.” Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the
Earth, P.191.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In a world that sits not on a powder keg but on a hydrogen
bomb, one begins to suspect that the technician who rules our world is not the master
magician he thinks he is but only a sorcerer's apprentice who does not know how to turn
off what he turned on - or even how to avoid blowing himself up." - Joseph Wood Krutch,
Wilderness as a Tonic, THE SATURDAY REVIEW, 8.6.1963, p. 15. - Don't blame the
results of your own stupidities, prejudices, wrong premises and lack of interest on any
God or ruler! - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In August, 1945, when … the bomb was made known
through its first use … Hiroshima, there lay ahead an interval of decades which might
have been used to fashion a world that would be safe from extinction by nuclear arms,
…” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.183. – How many more decades do people
believe that we will still have to deal effectively with this threat? – J.Z., 21.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In late 1981, for example, the Soviet government printed a
booklet in which it stated, “The Soviet Union holds that nuclear war would be a universal
disaster, and that it would most probably mean the end of civilization. It may lead to the
destruction of all mankind.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.6.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In my opinion, Carthage must be spared!" - the constant
reply of Publius Scipio Nasica to Cato. - Compare the constant struggle of Israel to
preserve its existence and that of the Palestinians to obtain a territorial existence. Now, if
both were organized exterritorially, they could coexist and territorial targets and countries
to conquer or defend would disappear - as they once disappeared for the churches in
Europe. - J.Z., 4.8.82. – Jews having been often the victims of “collective responsibility”
actions should actually be the foremost opponents of applyin it in theory and in action.
Nevertheless, they too, in Israel, as territorial statists “armed” themselves with mass
murder devices. Each can be compared to a Nazi extermination camp in a small package.
And by now they have an estimated 200 to 300 of them. Even the Nazis did not have as
many extermination camps! The total losses that could be inflicted with such “weapons”,
largely upon non-combatants, civilians in cities, could easily be larger than the total of
the Holocaust mass murders the Nazis committed. – One does not defeat the Nazis of this
world by acting like them. – J.Z., 27.2.09. - ISRAEL & ARAB STATES,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In our present-day world, in the councils where the
decisions are made, there is no one to speak for man and for the earth, although both are
threatened with annihilation.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.188. &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In passing, we should note that the purpose of war is not to
harm the enemy as much as possible. It is to make him submit to our policy; and the
principle of economy of force dictates that ideally we should only harm him to the extent
necessary to cause him to submit. I say “ideally”, because, of course, war is not a
science in which means are precisely adjusted to ends, but a “terrible and impassioned
drama” in which men, even in the highest political councils, act more through passion
than by reasons. – Perhaps I should amend the tense in the above paragraph that is,
“The purpose in war was …” This amendment is because if nuclear weapons are used in
war ( as they almost certainly will in any conflict between the two great world powers )
the cost in death and destruction will outweigh any gain that could be expected from
obliging the enemy to conform to our policy. And, looking at the proposition from the
opposite, or Soviet Union side, the same thing is true.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In supposing that the world (*) had found a political means
of making international decisions, I made a very large supposition indeed – one that
encompasses something close to the whole work of resolving the nuclear predicament,
for , once a political solution has been found (**), disarmament becomes a merely
technical matter, which should present no special difficulties. (***) And yet simply to
recognize that the task is at bottom political, and that only a political solution can
prepare the way for full disarmament (****) and real safety for the species, is in itself
important. The recognition calls attention to the fact that disarmament in isolation from
political change cannot proceed very far.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
p.225. - - (*) Some individuals and that these had succeeded to actually reach the world
with their ideas. - - (**) It must not only be found but also sufficiently widely recognized
and realized, so that it can, from then on, spread, rather fast, by voluntary acceptance, to
all others. - - (***) The solution must include full employment for all the soldiers and
other public servants who would become superfluous as such in the process. - - (****)
not e.g. or rightful policing weapons and self-defence weapons. - The political solution
would, essentially, consist in allowing almost all political solutions to be applied among
volunteers, with voluntarism assured by individual secessionism and the exterritorial
autonomy of such communities to be limited by the fact that they have to bear the costs
and risks their political, economic and social experiments themselves. Only such
governments would be truly “limited” governments, without any of the wrongful and
harmful features of territorial governments, however limited these would otherwise be.
Only individually backed international relations and policies can be rightful and effective
as well as peace-promoting, as peace promoting e.g. as individual and group tourism and
free trade and free enterprise and free productive cooperatives for all, who do want them
for themselves. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - POLITICS & NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, A
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In the battle of strength between a genuine social sciences
and mass murderous nuclear strength preparations these social sciences can and ought to
win. – J.Z., 1.6.86. – Alas, so far these social sciences are still very weak and ill prepared.
Certainly not push-button ready for operation. – J.Z. 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: in the context of nuclear weapons, the enemy is not the
Soviet Union, and it is not the U.S. It is the nuclear weapons themselves. Our common
interest is to get rid of them, not to seek some unilateral advantage.” – Noel Gayler, in:
Gwyn Prins, editor, The Choice: Nuclear War vs. Security, p.236. - & ENEMIES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In the future, if nuclear weapons are unleashed, there will
be no front and no rear.” - Nikita S. Khrushchev, Speech in Moscow, Aug. 1961.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In these circumstances, public opinion in the free countries
would have to represent public opinion in all countries, and would have to bring its
pressure to bear, as best as it could, on all governments.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of
the Earth, p. 230. - - When even in democratic countries individuals and groups of
volunteers are not yet free to secede from their territorial governments and to establish
exterritorially autonomous communities, then the best way to exert pressure upon foreign
despotic governments would be to pressurize the own democratic governments to
concede these rights to the own citizens and to the former subjects of the foreign
dictatorships, who have managed to escape them. This would mean, full freedom for
them, to establish their own kinds of governments in exile as alternatives to the despotic
regimes and as ideals for all the opposition groups remaining under these criminal foreign
regimes. These free an tolerant examples, set in relatively free countries, would inspire
rightful revolutionary, military insurrection and putsch attempts and prevent infighting
between all such groups, simply by giving them a common ideal of mutual tolerance and
peaceful coexistence in diversity, upon the basis of exterritorial autonomy under personal
laws. Only once this freedom is practically demonstrated, first in the presently democratic
countries, will public opinion pressure also become effective upon despotic regimes and
their victims. Freedom must not only be talked about but practically demonstrated, even
in its most radical and tolerant versions. Otherwise it will remain doubtful for or even
feared by all too many. – J.Z., 23.9.07. – Governments have mostly made sure that their
voters are unarmed and unorganized and untrained to protect their individual rights and
liberties against their territorial rulers. They made even sure that they know very little
about these rights, as far as they could, with their flawed and incomplete bills of rights
and with their “education” systems and monopoly for armed organizations. – J.Z.,
23.2.09. ENLIGHTENED PUBLIC OPINION? Whatever there is of it as yet,
governments do not have to take it serious as yet. They get away with simply ignoring it
or even with simply remaining unaware of it. Territorial governments cannot provide rule
by enlightened people. – J.Z.,23.2.09. – TERRITORIALISM, POLITICIANS, RULERS,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In this almost fateful balance between extinction and non-
entity which is our world, money is the chief thing whose essence remains profoundly
human - an aspiration toward freedom, a flight toward us and away, a merry insistence
on pattern and value in all doings ...” - Herbert Gold: The Prospect Before Us. ( But can
one raise enough of it to spread enlightenment sufficiently to make nuclear war
impossible? - J.Z. )
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In this book, I have not sought to define a political solution
to the nuclear predicament – either to embark on the full-scale reexamination of the
foundations of political thought which must be undertaken if the world‟s political
institutions are to be made consonant with the global reality in which they operate or to
work out the practical steps by which mankind, acting for the first time in history as a
single entity (? – J.Z.) , can reorganize its political life. I have left to others those
awesome, urgent tasks, which, imposed on us by history (?- J.Z.), constitute the political
work of our age. Rather, I have attempted to examine the physical extent, the human
significance, and the practical dimensions of the nuclear predicament in which the whole
world now finds itself. This predicament is a sort of (territorialist – J.Z. ) cage (*) that
has quietly grown up around the earth, imprisoning every person in it, and the
demanding terms of the predicament – its durability, its global political sweep, its human
totality (**), constitute the bars of that cage. However, if a description of the
predicament which is the greatest that mankind has ever faced, cannot in itself reveal to
us how we can escape, it can, I believe, acquaint us with the magnitude and shape of the
task that we have to address ourselves to. And it can summon us to action.” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.219/20. - - (*) One with many national or statist sub-
cages! And with no release, parole or escape for anyone of its victims. Their staff are also
victims of this system, not only victimizers and beneficiaries. - - (**) Rather, its inhuman
territorial totalitarianism! – J.Z., 22.9.07. - POLITICS, UTOPIAS, PANARCHISM,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: in this nuclear age – where overkill of the world‟s
population is a possibility – security cannot be achieved through ever-higher levels of
potential mutual destruction.” - Dr. Laurence J. Peter, Why Things Go Wrong or The
Peter Principle Revisited, George Allen & Unwin, 1911, p.129. - DEFENCE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: In this timid, crippled thinking, “realism” is the title given
to beliefs whose most notable characteristic is their failure to recognize the chief reality
of the age, the pit into which our species threatens to jump; …” - Jonathan Schell, The
Fate of the Earth, p.161. – It isn‟t jumping but is being pushed – by its territorial masters.
– J.Z., 10.10.07. - & “REALISM”, DIS.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: in today‟s system the actual weapons have already retired
halfway from their traditional military role. They are “psychological” weapons, whose
purpose is not to be employed but to maintain a permanent state of mind-terror in the
adversary. Their target is someone‟s mind, and their end, if the system works, is to rust
into powder in their silos. And our generals are already psychological soldiers – masters
of the war game and of the computer terminal but not, fortunately, of the battlefield.” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.222. – If that is already the case, then why not
choose the alternative of debating and finally publishing quite rightful war- and peace
aims, and already realizing them, in the own countries, among the own voluntary
communities and thus demonstrating them, believably, to the rest of the world? They
must be so attractive that only madmen would still oppose them and these madmen would
then no longer find hordes of followers. If our aims are quite rightful and attractive then
“enemy” soldiers and officers would rather desert or rise against their government than
fight us. Then these armed forces would become our most important allies. At least they
would then declare themselves neutral. Famous precedent: The convention at Tauroggen,
where the Prussian forces at first declared that they would not longer fight for Napoleon
but declared themselves neutral. Later they even resolved to fight against him. Quite
rightful and attractive war and peace aims would establish something like a military jiu-
jitsu defence that would turn the real enemy‟s forces against him. – Just and attractive
ideas could be our most effective “weapons”. Compare the slogan: To each the
government or non-governmental society of his or her own free choice! – Who would
fanatically oppose these free choices? – With such ideas sufficiently launched, we could
even afford unilateral nuclear disarmament and a temporary occupation by the
conscripted soldiers of dictators. They would then not be the obedient soldiers of their
dictators much longer. - J.Z., 22.9.07. - WEAPONS & PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Indeed, if we are honest with ourselves we have to admit
that unless we rid ourselves of our nuclear arsenals a holocaust not only might occur but
will occur – if not today, then tomorrow; if not this year, then the next. We have come to
live on borrowed time: every year of continued human life on earth is a borrowed year,
every day a borrowed day.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.183/84. - THE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Indeed, the connection between sovereignty and war is
almost a definitional one – a sovereign state being a state that enjoys the right and the
power to go to war in defense or pursuit of its interests.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Intellectually, we recognize that we have prepared
ourselves for self-extermination and are improving the preparedness every day, but
emotionally and politically we have failed to respond.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the
Earth, p.151/52. - - One of the reasons for this is that the power to respond to that threat
has been taken from us. We have neither achieved, as yet, decision-making power in this
sphere nor freedom of action, including e.g. individual secessionism, exterritorially
autonomous communities nor ideal militia forces to defend our individual rights and
liberties. As a result we feel helpless and, mostly, rather think about something else, the
minor things of life that we can already do something about. – J.Z., 10.10.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Is a nuclear weapon really more powerful for the
achievement of any rightful defensive purpose than e.g. a pistol, a dagger, a telescopic
rifle, a guided model plane full of explosives? The former cannot be rightly used against
real enemies. The latter can be – against the few decision-makers for aggressive wars. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Is all this to end in trivial horror because so few are able to
think of Man rather than of this or that group of men?” – Bertrand Russell, Man‟s Peril,
in Peter Mayer, editor, The Pacifist Conscience, a Pelican Book, paper back, 1966, p.321.
– As I see it, the peril lies in most people being only able to think in terms of territorially
“united” groups of men, instead of in terms of only exterritorially united groups of men,
all volunteers, who might be spread all over one or several countries or all over the world,
all ruling themselves under their own preferred person laws and to that extent having no
disagreement with any other such group of volunteers. – The former organizes them in
territorial warfare States, the latte in various free societies, free to do all their own things
for and to themselves only and having thus little reason to hate the members of any other
groups or any strong motive to go to war against any of the other groups, also very little
power and opportunity to do so. Just like most churches and sects have by now given up
any serious attempt at world domination. – J.Z., 11.9.08. – PANARCHISM,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Is any man good enough to be authorized to decide whether
millions of others are to die? – J.Z., n.d.. – DECISION ON WAR & PEACE.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Is it too much to (hope) that mankind could preserve
freedom without killing the other half of its own race?” - Dany Celer Majer, HONI SOIT,
26. 7. 82. - As if mankind were altogether free. As if it were equipped with nuclear
weapons and the power to decide to use them. University students should be more careful
in their language use. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Is there really enough of a difference between a
"democratically" elected president or prime minister with his finger on the nuclear button
and, e.g., a power-mad North Korean dictator or an Iranian dictatorial & fanatical guru? -
Should we risk mankind's survival on this difference? - Not to speak of the private
terrorist madmen, who do also strive to gain nuclear power over dissenters. - J.Z., NWT
27 5 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It amounts to “scorched earth policy” and universal
hostage-taking on a genocidal or universal holocaust scale. Each government “armed”
with ABC mass murder devices has in effect high-jacked the whole population
territorially subjugated by the regime it opposes and threatens to murder these hostages
by the hundred-thousands of millions. They hold these victims but not their territorial
governments, responsible for the actions of their governments, while the guilty
governments would be able to survive, at least for years, in the safest shelters. Compared
with these high-jackings the conventional high-jackers and terrorists are innocent babies.
– J.Z., 12.2.88, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is a characteristic of wisdom not do to desperate things.”
– Thoreau, “Economy”, “Walden”, 1854. – But each war creates many desperate
situations of: “kill or be killed!” – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is a commonplace that our civil defense is, and must
always be, hopelessly inadequate to cope with the slaughter and destruction which would
be brought about by thermonuclear bombardment … It seems a reasonable guess that for
every “megacorpse” caused by blast, fire and radiation, there would in a few weeks be
another megacorpse caused by the epidemics and starvation resulting from the
breakdown of transport and industrial production. No drugs, no drains, no food.
“Fortitude” or “the will to resist” under thermonuclear bombardment would be as much
use as swordsmanship against a heat wave.” – Wayland Young ( Lord Kennet ): Strategy
for Survival, 1959, quoted in: John Brunner, Talion, FAR FRONTIERS, Spring 85.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is another nonsensical feature of the nuclear
predicament that while each side regards the population of the other side as the innocent
victims of unjust government, each proposes to punish the other government by
annihilating that already suffering and oppressed population.”- Jonathan Schell, The
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is desperately important today, that we look the reality of
nuclear war courageously in the face, that we announce one to another what we have
seen there. Even if the sight turns us to stone - the sight not only of apocalyptic horrors,
but also the sight of ourselves, a people, who seriously, with forethought, are preparing
their own demise. The first fruits of our skill and over-skill, the people of Hiroshima, are
long dead. A few, on this anniversary, still cling to the tree of life, scarred and ailing. But
there will be also a second harvest as a greater storm shakes that tree. We shall live to
feel it." - Daniel Berrigan, THE AUSTRALIAN, 7/8/79. - Rhetoric will not help the
victims enough, no more so than prayers, as long as they are without the saving ideas and
without arms, organization and training against the nuclear armed monster State
organizations. - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is folly to punish your neighbor by fire when you live next
door. – Publilius Syrus, Moral Sayings, 1st c. B.C., 910, tr. Darius Lyman.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is high time that the race of man recognize that many,
perhaps most, of its rulers have been mad. The course of events charted by these
psychotics in power has been a dirty, cruel, bloody road along with men, essentially
decent men, have been led to horrible suffering, starvation and pointless, premature
deaths. - - This book is intended to be a polemic, an evangelistic tract to preach the
doctrine that all rulers should be looked upon as potentially crazy, and that mankind
must guard against them if it is to survive.” – Russell V. Lee, M.D., The Menace of
Madness in High Places, R.V.L., Palo Alto, 1977, in the Foreword.- THREAT &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is impossible, except for theologians, to conceive of a
world-wide scandal or a universe-wide scandal; the proof of this is the way people have
settled down to living with nuclear fission, radiation poisoning, hydrogen bombs,
satellites and space rockets.” – Mary Mc Carthy, “The Fact in Fiction”, On the Contrary,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is ironical that in an age when we have prided ourselves
on our progress in the intelligent care and teaching of children we have at the same time
put them at the mercy of new and most terrible weapons of destruction.” – Pearl S. Buck,
What America Means to Me, 1943, p.12. - EDUCATION, CHILDREN
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: it is my thesis that we shall never eliminate or contain the
omnipresent threat of nuclear warfare until ordinary people fully comprehend – both
cognitively and viscerally – two aspects of the arms problem: firstly, the full extent to
which the human species is endangered by continuing to stockpile weapons of mass
extermination and develop the concomitant technology; and secondly, why supposedly
sane leaders, supported by the majority of their constituents, persist in the pursuit of
arms policies that any detached observe with a long vie would clearly perceive as „mad‟.
– Unless the peace movement is able to bring the public to grips with these two
interrelated issues, the downward slide towards sui-genocide seems inevitable.” – Ralph
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is my view that there is no sensible military use for
nuclear weapons, whether „strategic‟ weapons, „tactical‟ weapons, „theatre‟ weapons,
weapons at sea or weapons in space. – Noel Gayler, in The Choice: Nuclear War vs.
Security, P.16, ed. by Gwun Prins. – So why continue to call them ”weapons”? I prefer:
“mass murder devices”. – J.Z., 13.7.94.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is no longer a question of 'choosing' a good or better s y
s t e m, but a question of whether life on earth will continue.” - Laurance Labadie:
Selected Essays, P.66. - It is precisely a question of choosing between territorial systems
and exterritorial ones, i.e., also coercive and voluntaristic systems, between hierarchical
systems and self-managing ones, between monopolistic and competitive ones. - Alas,
even an individualist anarchist like L. L. could remain blind to such distinctions and
arrive at despair rather than the solution. - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is no longer true that wars begin in the minds of men (*);
they can now start in the circuits of computers. (**) – Arthur C. Clarke, editorial in
ANALOG, 7/83, p. 164. - - Deterrence may work for a while – but not forever. - - (*) Not
all men are involved. Just a few powerful decision-makers, so mad that they imagine to
be able to lead their nation or even mankind into a better future, while most of the ideas
in their heads are popular prejudices and this is the main reason why they rose to power
with the majority of votes. - - (**) It may, actually, be only the malfunction of a single
computer which brings nuclear war about. - - Has you own computer never played up? -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is no overstatement to say that if any society organized
its affairs in this way, giving to each citizen the power to kill all the others, it would be
regarded as deranged.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.216. – Societies of
volunteers would not do this. However, finally freed peoples, everywhere, might one day
resolve to give all their surviving leaders the chance to establish such a “society” or last
“summit conference” and deterrence policy “safety” for themselves, in an exclusive club
of their own, and to maintain themselves there, as long as they can, somewhere in a
remote, infertile or even desert-area, where their wipe-out would not harm any other
people. They would not need nuclear devices for this. High explosives would serve just
as well. Since, for all too long, the leaders have forced such a situation upon the whole
population of the world, it would only be just to sentence these “statesmen” to such an
imprisonment, as long as it can last. – Thus getting rid of all of them at the same time
would justify the expense of providing them, for their last days or weeks or even years,
with all the personal luxuries that they are accustomed to. But not with any personal
servants, unless some of them volunteer for this. – Their goodies could be delivered by
automated transport, e.g. a small field railway, without endangering any other life.
Remote controls could be used to ensure that their “deterrent” is still functioning. – A
temporary and luxurious asylum for all the leading insane people. - Good riddance to bad
rubbish! - J.Z., 22. 9.07. – Was there ever as yet a quite sane territorial society or State? –
The most insane ones seem to be in charge of the territory-wide nut-houses. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is often said that nuclear arms have made war obsolete,
but this is a misunderstanding. Obsolescence occurs when a means to some end is
superseded by a new and presumably better means – was (occurring? – J.Z. ) when it was
discovered that vehicles powered by internal combustion engines were more efficient
than vehicles pulled by horses at transporting people and goods from one place to
another. (*) But war has not been superseded by some better means to its end, which is to
serve as the final arbiter of disputes among sovereign states (**) On the contrary, war
has gone out of existence (***) without leaving behind any means at all – whether
superior or inferior – to that end. (****) The more than three decades of jittery peace
between the nuclear super-powers which the world has experienced since the invention of
nuclear weapons is almost certainly the result of this lack. There is no need to “abolish
war” among the nuclear powers; it is already gone. The choices don‟t include (*****)
war any longer. They consist now of peace, on the one hand, and annihilation, on the
other. And annihilation – or “assured destruction” is as far from being war as peace is,
and the sooner we recognize this the sooner we will be able to save our species from self-
extermination.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.192/193. - - (*) Actually,
horses are internal combustion engines as well, although only of the biological kind. –
J.Z. - - (**) That would require the realization of individual and group secessionism from
territorial States and the freedom for these dissenters to establish their various
communities of volunteers only, all under full exterritorial sovereignty or personal laws,
whereby they could peacefully realize their own rightful aims while those States from
which they have seceded would not be interfered with in the pursuit of their rightful aims.
– No rightful cause or motive for a just war would remain for either of these groups. –
J.Z. - - (***) That is putting it too strongly. Only to some extent has it gone out of
existence, while all the preparations for the next war go on and arms races do mostly end
in wars. - - (****) Moral reasoning and the ideas of panarchism or polyarchy do exist but
are not applied in this case but, rather, ignored, preferring instead the old territorialist
notions and prejudices. The real solutions, quite rightful war and peace aims, including
these tolerant options, are not even publicly discussed, except among a handful of people
in the whole world. – Schell does not seem to be aware of this alternative, either. - this
kind of – J.Z., 22.9.07. – Are e.g., campaigns against slavers, pirates and tyrants no
longer warranted, if justly conducted only against them? – 23.2.09. - & NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is one thing to die for your country. It is another to die
with your country.” - Toynbee. Quoted in: John Hinchcliff: Confronting the Nuclear Age,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is predicted that within 30 days after nuclear exchange
90 per cent of American human beings will be dead. As Nikita Khrushchev said years
ago, in the event of a nuclear war, the living will envy the dead. President Carter
stockpiled huge quantities of opium in case of nuclear war - for euthanasia. - Helen
Coldicott, in John Hinchcliff's, ed., "Confronting the Nuclear Age", p.27
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is right and much easier to hit, without nuclear devices,
but with ordinary weapons, instead ( i.e., genuine weapons, that can be used
discriminately ), only those real enemies, who are in power to decide upon the use of
nuclear weapons and are prepared for their use against millions of innocent people,
equipped with them even to the extent of “over-kill” or genocide, risking the survival of
all of mankind, e.g. via a “nuclear winter”. They are even worse terrorist means than the
worst kind of unofficial terrorists have so far used. – J.Z., 7.10.97, 24.1.08. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is the result of failure to properly define important terms
like weapons, enemies, defence, aggression, warfare, strength, collective responsibility,
territorial integrity, consent, self-government, people, democracy, individual rights and
international law. See my ABC Against Nuclear War in - J.Z., 17.1.00.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It is useless to ban the Bomb. What we must ban is the (*)
ideology of war, which means the ideology of government omnipotence of aggressive
nationalism, of intervention run riot.” – William H. Peterson, THE FREEMAN, 8/76,
p.453. - (*) territorialist … And such an ideology cannot be banned but must be
sufficiently refuted. – I wish all suitable slogans, definitions, quotes, jokes and
refutations, ideas and wordings on this threat and how to counter it should be put
together. Perhaps under “Slogans for Survival!”? - Keyboards of PC‟s and their words
might, after all, become more powerful than nuclear “weapons” - J.Z., 14.1.93, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It makes sense only to adopt non-violent practices among
the advocates of non-violence, i.e., panarchistically, not towards the actions of coercers
around them and against such peaceful communities, because the others have adopted the
“value” of violence not only against violent people but also against non-violent ones and
only respect effective defensive force. – J.Z., 9.12.87, 26.1.08. - & PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It means something that we call both pornography and
nuclear destruction “obscene”. In the first, we find desire stripped of any further human
sentiment or attachment – of any “redeeming social value”, in the legal phrase. In the
second, we find violence detached from any human goals, all of which would be engulfed
in a holocaust – detached, that is, from all redeeming social value.” - Jonathan Schell,
The Fate of the Earth, p.158. - - Already most conventional wars are without any rightful
war and peace aims. Nuclear war and its “weapons” are without any moral, rational or
sensible aims at all. Only territorial power addicts would even dream of building,
stockpiling and using them. – Already all their territorialist assumptions are insane.
Nuclear war preparations and actions heap another kind of insanity upon that insanity,
among the leaders as well as among their voters. – J.Z., 21.9.07. - PORNOGRAPHY,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It supposes that the cataclysmic power in the possession of
each side could be directed and used, in a situation where tensions would be
immeasurably greater than in any previous state of war or threat of war, with the cool
detachment and iron control of a successful gambler at cards or in the stock market.
Does all or any of this appear likely?” – View ascribed to Mr. Waskow in: Lt.-Gen. E. L.
M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p. 207. – Even many gamblers and stock market traders
lose their “cool”. – J.Z., 1010.08. - DETERRENCE HYPOTHESIS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It was a pleasant night, provided one didn't think too
deeply about man-made suns in brief blossom over defenseless cities.” - Bob Shaw,
Ground Zero Man, p.38.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It was easy to say, as many did, that in a nuclear world
mankind had to live in peace or perish; it was a far different matter to make actual
political sacrifices (*) that would permit the nuclear peril to be lifted. The present-day
United Nations is the empty husk of those irresolute good intentions. But, whatever
people said, or ineffectually hoped for, the world (**) in fact chose the course of
attempting to refashion the system of (***) sovereignty to accommodate nuclear
weapons.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.194. - - (*) Not “sacrifices” are
needed but merely quite rightful, peaceful and mutually beneficial changes. Only very
flawed “ideals” would have to be “sacrificed”, namely the quite utopian ones that are all
built on the assumption that statist paradises of various kinds can be built upon a
territorial basis, as regimes not only over voluntary but also over involuntary members,
who are neither criminals nor aggressors. – That kind of “sacrifice” is as much a
“sacrifice” as giving up the burning of witches, heretics and widows. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - -
(**) The world and its population has not any say in the matter. Territorial governments
have monopolized this kind of decision-making, among all too little protest against this
among their subjects. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (***) They simply have not seriously considered
the refashioning or change of territorial sovereignties, of the relatively few now ruling
territorial governments, into mere exterritorial autonomy for the multitude of all the
diverse communities of volunteers that would result – once former mere subjects become
free to opt out, as individuals or in whole groups, free also to associate in whatever statist
or non-statist communities they want to associate among themselves, under full freedom
to do so and to rule all their internal affairs, those of all their volunteers, quite
independently from all other communities. Territorial States, from which one can so
secede and within which – and across all former borders – one can establish “States
within States” but only within the limits of personal laws for volunteers, would thereby
themselves turned into remnants that would consist only of their remaining volunteers
and their exterritorial autonomy would also remain untouched. – For instance, the Kurds
are now subjects to three adjacent territorial States and not free in any one of them or in
all of them to associate under full exterritorial autonomy. Naturally, their national identity
is not the only thing that Kurds possess. They, too, have the usual religious, and
ideological other divisions among themselves and these would, under full freedom for
alternative institutions, lead also to diverse Kurdish communities of volunteers, all of
them exterritorially autonomous, but, perhaps, forming one Kurdish federation or several.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It was not unless one lifted one‟s gaze from all the
allegedly normal events occurring before one‟s eyes and looked at the executioner‟s
sword hanging over everyone‟s head that the normality was revealed as a sort of mass
insanity. This was an insanity that consisted not in screaming and making a commotion
but precisely in not doing these things in the face of overwhelming danger, as though
everyone had been sedated.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.151.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It will cease once people stop believing in absurdities and
act accordingly. Absurdities like "nuclear strength", "nuclear deterrence", "nuclear
weapons", "monopolistic decision-making" by "leaders", "collective responsibility",
"national sovereignty", "territorialism", "rights granted by governments", "avalanches of
laws", "the monies of monetary despotism", the "welfare based upon tribute payments",
"representation" by collective voting, giving only majorities a chance, etc., etc. There are
ten thousands of these errors, myths and prejudices that only their encyclopedic treatment
could come to effectively deal with them. - J.Z., 16. 11. 82, 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It would indeed be a tragedy if the history of the human
race proved to be nothing more than the story of an ape playing with a box of matches on
a petrol dump.” – David Ormsby Gore.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It‟s an old problem, … We‟ve always had a hard core of
imbeciles subscribing to the let‟s-get-it-over-with theory of mutual destruction. You‟d be
surprised how hard they pushed it in the late „49‟s. We and we alone had The Bomb. The
Russians and Chinese were at our mercy … - Tom Ardis, This Suitcase is Going to
Explode, p. 93 of ??? - WAR HAWKS, WAR MONGERS:
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: It's hard to explain to kids why a nation that spends billions
for nuclear bombs is still trying to outlaw firecrackers.” LEBANON (Ind.) REPORTER.
- The explanation is simple: More people are really concerned about the small
firecrackers than the big ones being in the wrong hands. The threat posed by the big ones
in the hands of the Big Ones is incomprehensible to them and still more
incomprehensible to them is what they could and should do about the big threat posed by
the big men in power. - J.Z., 25. 3. 84. - It is almost as if the democratic revolutions had
not happened at all. Our "representative" rulers have more power than the absolutist kings
ever had - and, nevertheless, we still submit to them, quite tamely, and even elect them
into their offices, again and again. - J.Z., 1. 4. 06. – FIREWORKS, NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Jacques Chirac says France (*) is prepared to launch a
nuclear strike against any country that sponsors a terrorist attack against French
interests…. “Against a regional power, our choice is not between inaction and
destruction”, he said. “The flexibility and reaction of our strategic forces allow us to
respond directly against the centres of power. … (**) All of our nuclear forces have been
configured in this spirit.” … The International Institute for Strategic Weapons in London
says France has 348 nuclear weapons…” - Molly Moore, in Paris, in: “Chirac sounds
nuclear warning to terrorists, France will retaliate if attacked.” – THE SYDNEY
MORNING HERALD, 21/22 Jan. 06. - - As if in any country all of the people - or at
least the majority - had any say at all on terrorist attacks or ordinary military aggressions.
– Immoral and power-mad people like Chirac might unleash a world-wide nuclear war,
simply because they cannot think straight. - - How many people in capitals are actually
the decisive men on terrorist attacks, already presuming that these attacks are
government-organized and not undertaken by a private terrorist radical movement, which
their government vainly tried to suppress. How would the French government know the
difference? The more suitable weapons against these few governmental decision makers
would still be small bombs, poisons, daggers, rifles, pistols and even bow and arrow.
These would also be suitable weapons against the terrorists. Conventional armies and
nuclear mass murder devices are quite unsuitable against them. See the current
experience in Afghanistan and Iraq. It is the height of idiocy to employ a nuclear device
to eliminate one or a few criminals. – A government might as well “respond” in this way
against shooters of university student or school pupils or against murderous bank robbers.
– French people once took the lead in the process of enlightenment. That was a long time
ago. Excessive wine drinking does apparently go on, there, from childhood on and it
seems to have burnt out some brains. - J.Z., 31.10.07. – In practice most terrorists cannot
even be found to be arrested, sent to court or executed. Devastating a whole city or
country and all its people because the anti-terrorists can‟t cope with that manage does not
make any sense at all. – (*) he! – (**) Remember, the location of Bin Laden is still
unknown, years later! – J.Z., 23.2.09. - TYRANNICIDE, TERRORISM &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist Jerome D. Frank, who shares
many of Andreski‟s views, is convinced that a major nuclear exchange is inevitable
unless nations stop building nuclear arsenals. „Nothing is more certain and inexorable
than the laws of chance‟, Frank writes in “Sanity & Survival”, his recent study of human
aggression. „Present policies involve a continuing risk‟ of nuclear war; the longer the
risk continues, the greater the probability of war; and if the probability continues long
enough, it approaches certainty.‟ ” – TIME, March 9, 1970, p. 48. – ACCIDENTAL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Just as we (*) have chose to make nuclear weapons, we can
choose to unmake them. (**) Just as we have chosen to live in the system of sovereign
states, we can choose to live in some other system. (***) To do so would, of course, be
unprecedented (****), and in many ways frightening, even truly perilous (*****), but
it is by no means impossible.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.219. - - (*) The
territorially subjected peoples were never given a choice in this matter. Our territorial
governments have made that choice for us or, rather, against us. That decision was made
secretly, a secret kept not only from the totalitarian regimes of the time but also from the
subjects of the democracies. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (**) Actually, only the people themselves,
sufficiently enlightened, trained, organized and armed, are able to carry out an effective
nuclear disarmament. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (***) We are not yet freed enough of territorial
governments to do so but we should liberate ourselves to that kind of freedom of choice,
action and experimentation. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (****) Exterritorial autonomy for
volunteers has a very long tradition with some remnants still alive, like personal law for
civil affairs, diplomatic immunity and the recognition of some churches and orders as
being sovereign regarding their own affairs. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (*****) Would it really be
frightening and perilous to live with like-minded people under the institutions and laws
that one prefers for oneself? - Alas, Schell does not go into the details. Are e.g. tennis-,
chess and cricket clubs and thousands of other voluntary associations frightening and
really perilous for their voluntary members? Naturally, stupid, careless and fanatic people
can be a danger to themselves and others in every sphere. But if mankind were only
constituted out of such fools then it would have wiped itself out long ago. – J.Z., 22.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Just ask those favouring anti-people weapons to wipe out
foreign cities and countries: How many of you are at the same time opposed to
tyrannicide and how many of them would consider the mere possession of nuclear
destructive devices an indication of tyranny? Aren't those favouring guided missiles
usually misguided fools, at least in this respect? If they also favour tyrannicide then ask
them whether they really need and would be justified using nuclear weapons for this
purpose. - J.Z. 78/82
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Just killing for the hell of it." - source unknown. Not a bad
definition of nuclear war. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Knowledge is the deterrent.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of
the Earth, 223. – Rather, sufficient knowledge of the right kind could be the best
deterrent. Not only the knowledge of the extent and limits of tyrannicide and of quite
rightful military revolutions and military uprisings and how best to finance them.
Knowledge also of all individual human rights and liberties, including individual
secessionism and exterritorial autonomy for voluntary communities, the knowledge to
end and avoid deflations, inflations and mass unemployment and involuntary poverty.
The knowledge that the people themselves, properly organized and trained, would be the
most efficient disarmament inspectors for the destruction of all ABC mass murder
devices. Knowledge of quite rightful peace aims, very attractive to soldiers and officers
on the other side. Knowledge of how to treat POWs and deserters as allies or neutrals
rather than as enemies. I compiled ca. 500 such points in my second peace book,
alphabetically. It is online and I do not want to repeat myself too often. – Only on the
basis of all such knowledge, once it is at least somewhere applied, would it become true
what Schell says, ibid: “All human beings would join in a defensive alliance, with nuclear
weapons as their common enemy.” J.Z., 22.9.07. - DETERRENT, KNOWLEDGE AS A
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Let not the atom bomb be the final sequel // In which all
men are cremated equal.” – Chapman Pincher, Dirty Tricks, p.73.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Let us be clear. The possibility of total annihilation in a
nuclear war is real. Such a catastrophe will be the work of governments, not of their
subjects. The depression and the economic disorder of the 1970s are equally the work of
governments and not of their subjects. The solution seems obvious and is difficult: to
reduce and confine the power of governments.” - H. S. Ferns: The Disease of
Government, p.118. - Any territorial power going beyond privately or cooperatively
owned real estate goes too far and leads to nuclear "strengths" and nuclear targets. - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Let us initiate the unilateral disarmament of the Red Army
by a separate peace treaty offer with so attractive terms that they can hardly refuse to
accept it and act upon it by destroying their regime's nuclear "weapons" first. - J.Z., 18. 4.
83. - Then we should follow suit, without hesitation. - - Actually, I believe we could and
should have risked, even unilaterally, disarming ourselves as far as ABC mass murder
devices are concerned. Thereby we would clearly have proven how wrong and false the
communist propaganda was and that we pose no threat to the Russian people. Anyhow, I
doubt that more than a tiny fraction of the Red Army consisted of fanatical communists.
These could then have been overpowered rather fast and easily. And on our side we
should have been sufficiently prepared for a rightful and quite effective libertarian
revolution or resistance against any occupying force and its regime, together with the
occupying force and the military forces remaining in the country of the regime.
Authoritarian and totalitarian regimes are more afraid of such resistance to them than of
all foreign military forces and their weapons. As it is, the authoritarians and totalitarians
are preparing for their kinds of revolutions, insurrections and subversions everywhere,
but the supposedly free and freedom-loving countries and their peoples make no
preparations for their kind of revolutions to overthrow the remaining dictators. - J.Z., 1. 5.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Let us picture what is going on here. There are two
possible eventualities: success of the strategy or its failure. If it succeeds, both sides are
frozen into inaction by fear of retaliation by the other side. If it fails, one side annihilates
the other, and then, the leaders of the second side annihilate the “society as a whole” of
the attacker, and the earth as a whole suffers the consequences of a full-scale holocaust,
which might include the extinction of man. In point of fact, neither the United States nor
the Soviet Union has ever adopted the “mutual-assured-destruction” (*) doctrine in pure
form; other aims, such as attempting to reduce the damage of the adversary‟s nuclear
attack and increasing the capacity for destroying the nuclear forces of the adversary,
have been mixed in. Nevertheless, underlying these deviations the concept of deterring a
first strike by preserving the capacity for a devastating second strike has remained
constant.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.197. – (*) It was even officially
abbreviated into “MAD”. Sometimes our leaders give their game away. – J.Z., 23.2.09. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Libertarian, anarchistic and panarchist utopianism vs. the
nuclear warfare State and nuclear war threat. – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Life does not exist for the sake of the governments. …” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.170. – Nevertheless, to preserve their existence
with mass-murderous and also suicidal means, or, rather, to assure their mutual
destruction, territorial governments are now prepared to risk even the survival of
mankind. – J.Z., 21.9.07. - LIFE & TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENTS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Life is full of contradictions. There are people who talk of
cooperation in the conquest of outer space, about flights to the moon, and who at the
same time ( fortunately, in words only ) are prepared to blow up this poor planet because
they cannot reach agreement with others about the status of sectors of one city. The age-
old habit of settling disputes by force of arms today impels various States to equip
themselves with atomic weapons. In my youth it used to be said that one cannot live
beside a powder-barrel; today we live close to far more dangerous barrels. Scientific
knowledge has outstripped wisdom.” – Ilya Ehrenburg, Post-War Years, p.164, in For
Freedom, an anthology by Davis-Poynter.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Life today is like a horror show. For a while everything
seems quiet and normal – but real horrors may be just minutes away or just around the
corner. – They are all too well prepared and even financed via tribute levies upon all
subjects of nuclear powers. - J.Z., 13.3.87, 25.1.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Like a kindhearted executioner, the bomb permitted its
prospective victims to go on living seemingly ordinary lives up to the day that the
execution should suddenly and without warning be carried out.” - Jonathan Schell, The
Fate of the Earth, p.150.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Like all those who are inclined to suicide, we approach the
action in two capacities: the capacity of the one who would kill and that of the one who
would be killed. As when we dream, we are both the authors and the sufferers of our
fate.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.152. – If mere words, describing the
horror of it, could prevent nuclear war, then this would be the book to do it. Alas, positive
alternative ideas are also required – and they must be widely accepted to become
effective. Alas, even books containing such ideas, like my own two, remain largely
ignored, although they are online. – A genuine information revolution – in enough heads
– has still to happen! – J.Z., 2.2.09. - See: & - J.Z., 10.10.07. - & SUICIDE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Like any sane person, I saw the nuclear arms race as the
ultimate insanity, but it was all academic to me. The chances were that I would be long
dead before the big bank finally came, and so I did not feel personally threatened by a
staggering escalation in weaponry.” – Herbert Birkholz, The Sensitives, p.43. - Guild
Publishing, London, 1987. – If the “sane” are as insane, what can one expect of the rest?
– J.Z., 10.9.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Live by the bomb. Die by the bomb.” - Nuclear Freeze
slogan, 1983.- How can one live by the bomb? Did the slogan mean that the politics of
nuclear terror was at least temporarily effective? – J.Z., 28.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Look what happened to Hilda Murrell, finding out about
nuclear weapons in Thatcher‟s armada.” - Ian Watson, Oracle, p.126. – Was there ever a
more trivial war aim on both sides? Giving the few inhabitants their individual choice of
government affiliation, English or Argentinean, was, obviously, not considered by either
side. And this clash might, nevertheless, have lead to nuclear war! – J.Z., 11.9.07. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Maine sailed out to keep the peace through the threat of the
most inhuman forced known to man. … But it worked, had worked, probably would
continue to work for a lot more years.” - Tom Clancy, The Sum of all Fears, p.649. – But
NOT indefinitely. - J.Z. - NUCLEAR DETERRENT
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Major wars can never again win anything but desolation
over the whole earth. Such war has ceased to be a usable instrument of national policy.”
- R. M. MacIver, Power Transformed, p. 86. MACMILLAN, 1964. - WAR, WORLD
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Make no bones about it, we are on the countdown.” - Bob
Green, in FREEDOM, 17. 12. 83.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Make no mistake. There is no such thing as a conventional
nuclear weapon.” - Lyndon B. Johnson, Speech in Detroit, 7. Sept., 1964.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Man - his own greatest enemy, and as it were, his own
executioner. - Sir Thomas Browne. – It is rather the territorial State which is prepared to
become man‟s executioner. – J.Z., 11.2.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: man has undebatably (*) achieved the ability to destroy
himself, and his world as well. This capacity alone should serve to make it clear that the
time has now come for us to cease to behave like a lot of irresponsible children letting off
fireworks in a crowded hall. It was always stupid; now it has become too dangerous.” -
John Wyndham, Web, p. 17/8. – (*) indubitably? – J.Z.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Man has used every weapon he has ever devised. … it takes
no crystal ball to perceive that a nuclear war is likely sooner or later.” - Ronald Regan,
quoted in THE NATIONAL TIMES, 23. to 29. 9. 83. - & DETERRENT THEORY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Mankind being some millions of years old, the nuclear
deterrent only about 63 years, do you seriously believe that what so far worked for 63
years will continue to work for millions of years? – Fear and horror have not deterred
dozens of conventional wars every year since Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Since then we
have always lived at the edge of a general nuclear holocaust. - J.Z., 17.9.87, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Mankind is confronted with a choice: we must halt the
arms race and proceed to disarmament, or face annihilation. … It is vital that we see
modern weapons of war for what they are - evidence of madness.” - Archbishop of
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to
mankind.” – John F. Kennedy, address, United Nations General Assembly, Sept. 25,
1962. – Apparently, he did not realize that he, his office and his actions, were part of the
problem. – J.Z., 27.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Men soon get accustomed to the evils of their condition,
particularly if there is nobody in particular to blame. The inaction or negligence or
shortcomings of great numbers assume the appearance of a law of nature, or of repeated
failures or attempts at the impossible. The apparent difficulties of reform, except by
catastrophe or revolution, begets either despondency or over-cheerfulness.” - E. L.
Godkin, "Unforseen Tendencies of Democracy", p.47.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: military objectives, in the event of a nuclear war stemming
from a major attack on the Alliance, should be the destruction of the enemy‟s military
forces, not on his civilian population.” - Mr. McNamara, quoted by Lt.-Gen. E. L. M.
Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.202. – It too our great leaders and experts a long time to
make this distinction between governments and their subjects, even in cases of
totalitarian regimes imposed upon whole populations. They still do not make it as a rule.
For it does not take a nuclear “weapon” to get rid of a ruling dictator tyrant or small
despotic clique. These “weapons” are always directed more against their victims than
against these victimizers. – J.Z., 10.10.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Millions for defence, but not one cent for survival.” –
Alfred Bester, The Stars My Destination, p.189. – Billions for mutual mass murder by
governments of the subjects of other governments. Not one cent for survival, except for
the high cost of putting such mass murderous rulers, in the safest shelters. – As for the
shelters built for ordinary civilians: Nuclear war is likely to come so sudden that most
will be outright killed or exposed to deadly radiation before they reach their shelters. And
what are the survivors to eat in the future? Highly irradiated food? And to grow it and
harvest it, they will have to expose themselves to high radiation as well. - J.Z., 1.2.92,
26.1.08, 28.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: mindless promotion to oblivion.” - Laurance J. Peter and
Raymond Hall, The Peter Principle, 1969ff, p.156.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Minds sick enough to design and build doomsday devices
and keep them in readiness are also sick enough to use them, sooner or later- Only into
such heads could personal doomsday devices be rightfully implanted, that would all go
off automatically with the first explosion of an ABC mass murder device. – J.Z., 31.5.06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: modern warfare, supported as it is by the blind devotion of
super-patriotism and the consciousless demands .... in which the masses play a passive
but crucial role, is not only a conspiracy against life by the few but it is also a form of
collective madness ...” - Reichert: Partisans of Freedom, p.587.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Moreover, mere deterrent intentions cannot prevent nuclear
war by accident or miscalculation or misinterpretation of some signals. - "… Some fifty
such accidents or near-accidents with nuclear armed missiles and aircraft occurred
between 1945 and 1960. In the same period there were a number of false radar reports
which, had they been accepted and acted upon, would have plunged us within minutes
into all the horrors of World War III. - Fred C. J. Cook, "The Warfare State", p. 31. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Most people would rather die in a nuclear war than think
about its prevention and what they themselves could possibly do to help prevent it. – J.Z.,
6.11.03, 26.10.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Most Randians forgot that "reason" is man's supreme tool
of survival. - J.Z., 24. 3. 85. - Not the largest nuclear mass murder devices, like most
statists believe, even advocates of "limited" territorial governments. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Mr. Grimond asks me whether my position is a pacifist one,
and to this Mr. Gosling answers for me by saying that everyone except a maniac is at
least partly a pacifist. I am, I suppose, very nearly a complete one, not because I think it
wrong to kill in any circumstances but because I feel sure that any large scale war in the
future is capable of turning into a nuclear war and that nuclear war is beyond the bounds
of what I feel to be tolerable. Some correspondents have pointed hopefully to Korea,
Indo-China and the Berlin blockade as examples of Russian refusal to use nuclear
weapons when a firm stand was made against them by conventional means. But three
examples are totally inadequate as a reassurance. - Phililp Toynbee, The Fearful Choice,
p. 95.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Mr. Kennan has said that anything would be better than a
policy which led inevitably to nuclear war. But surely anything is better than a policy
which allows for the possibility of nuclear war. – Philip Toynbee, The Fearful Choice,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Must we acknowledge that the civilized nations of the world
can only be restrained from attacking one another by the threat of an immediate hell on
earth?” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.221. – Nations do not attack
each other. Their territorial governments do. There is nothing right and civilized about
territorial governments! – J.Z., 10.10.08. - DETERRENCE HYPOTHESIS,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Must we see the world in ruins around us and most of us
dead - before we get interested in the ideas which could prevent such a disaster? - J.Z.,
28.6.77. - My 1975 handbook on the prevention of nuclear war was the opposite of a best
seller! Of its mere 1,000 copies you could still get hundreds from me and I know still of
no better one! Only its binding and print are atrocious. - J.Z., 4.8.82. Now you can even
get it free of charge online in a more legible copy. But how few, if any, have so far read it
there or downloaded it and read it on their computer screen or after they had printed it out
themselves? Offhand I cannot remember having received a single comment to its
“publication” there. . Our survival instinct is
dysfunctional in this respect! - J.Z., 20.11.02.)
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Mutate now and beat the rush.” – Graffiti in Los Angeles.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: My experience with my book ( An ABC Against Nuclear
War, ) on how to avoid nuclear war, was: Most
people would rather accept the risk of nuclear war than, at least, merely read a book on
how to avoid it. – J.Z., 28.10.04. – This inclination they would have in common with our
apish ancestors. – J.Z., 22.10.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: My friends, I‟m not going to tell you sweet words. The
situation in the world is not just dangerous, it isn‟t just threatening, it is catastrophic.” –
Solzhenitsyn, Words of Warning to the Western World. – Formally, the most powerful
totalitarian regime is gone – but its totalitarian weapons remain. – J.Z., 1.7.92.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: my sense of protest against this silent acceptance by the
people of the East and the West of a fate that is all too likely to destroy our children‟s
world, if it does not destroy ours.” – Samuel Pisar, Of Blood and Hope, p.267.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: national interests – in the pursuit of which extinction my
now be brought about unintentionally, or semi-intentionally, as a „side effect‟.” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.187. - & NATIONAL INTEREST, I.E.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: national security produces national insecurity.” - R. A.
Wilson, "The Illuminati Papers", p.125. - & NATIONAL SECURITY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Never before, he imagined, had humanity been so
completely frivolous about its own survival.” - Allen Drury, A Shade of Difference.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Never put a sword in a madman's hand.” - James Kelly,
Scottish Proverbs, p.64.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: new doctrines of "counter-force" and "tactical nuclear
forces" and partly of the development of new weapons like the neutron bomb, whose use
is more thinkable than that of other nuclear weapons. These doctrines and weapons
reflect the fact that the superpower strategists have become increasingly concerned with
ways of fighting nuclear wars and winning them rather than with preventing their
occurrence.” - Herb Feith in John Hinchcliff's, ed., "Confronting the Nuclear Age", p.59.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Next time China threatens to rain nuclear missiles on our
West Coast cities – as they‟ve been doing every day now for months – I „d offer to shower
them with presents, just like their imperial treasure fleet did long ago.” - L. Neil Smith,
Lever Action, A Mountain Media Book, 2001, p. 143. - - …the worst enemies of China‟s
government are China‟s people …” - ibid, p. 143. - - The worst or the best of enemies?
Our secret allies! They, especially the “people‟s army”, could get rid of this despotic
regime almost without any bloodshed, especially if it adopted a panarchistic or polyarchic
liberation platform, applicable even to its present rulers, for even the worst governments
have still some voluntary followers. Let them have them! They deserve no better
followers and these followers deserve no better government! – J.Z., 10.10.07, 23.2.09. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No annihilation powers to anyone. - J.Z., 30. 10. 82. No
mass extermination powers to anyone! - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. - & POWER TO ANNIHILATE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No annihilation without representation.” – Arnold
Toynbee. – But what good would an individual, a minority vote or even a majority vote
do, when the actual decision-making still lies in the hands of a few individual, from
presidents down to technicians? And if the majority approved of nuclear weapons and
reactions, would that make them any safer and prevent nuclear wars by accidents,
miscalculation or power abuse? – Whom or what does any nuclear weapon represent? –
J.Z., 26.1.08. - & REPRESENTATION
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No deal with the xyz government but any decent, honest,
freedom, peace and justice promoting deal with the xyz people themselves. - J.Z., 12. 3.
83, 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No deals with any governments that threaten to destroy the
world! - J.Z., 15. 3. 83. - And yet, while they have nuclear weapons, we should rather
surrender than try to fight them, promising them the world, but fully prepared for
effective revolutions and insurrections, together with the occupying forces and the
military in their homeland, once they have occupied us, and this based on the best
revolution and military insurrection programs that can be devised and widely published.
Moreover, if one such “beast” can prove that he destroyed at least one nuclear weapon, or
points out where it is hidden or surrenders it, his life should be spared and protected in
anonymity and with amnesty. Taking his life in every case might mean further ten-
thousands to millions might die. So in that case let him keep and even protect his
otherwise to us quite worthless life. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No defensive firearms for peaceful and rational people- but
nuclear and other mass murder devices for politicians and generals? What do you expect
to result from such a policy? - J.Z., 27.8.78.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No good cause - however good in itself - is worthy of bad
weapons.” - Auberon Herbert, The Ethics of Dynamite, Mack edition, p.197.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No nations – no nukes!” – Carol Moore, THE
CONNECTION, p.77. – No territorial nations – no nukes! There would no longer be any
targets for them. People of all ideologies and systems would live intermixed in the same
countries, under different governments or administrations or personal law rules, customs
or traditions. Motives, finance and volunteers to service these mass murder devices and
keep them in readiness would also disappear. – J.Z., 28.2.09. – PANARCHISM, PEACE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No president, prime minister or chancellor and no
parliament, house of representatives of congress to be entitled to involve a whole country
and all its people in a war, in a treaty or alliance or to be given the exclusive position and
power to make peace! – J.Z., 21.1.04. – It is really scandalous that we have put up with
this for so long. As if it had been a precious inheritance from the times of our absolute
kings and emperors, one which we are not entitled to refuse or shake off, and should not
even question. As if we had to remain stuck with it, even in supposed democracies and
republics, until the top criminals finally wipe us off the face of this planet. Actually, as
Kant pointed out, any government with such powers is still merely a despotic regime. –
Alas, he only wanted to transfer this power to “representatives” popularly elected. – But
can we really entrust these politicians with our lives any more than with our other rights
and liberties? - J.Z., 31.10.07. - WAR-MAKING, PEACE-MAKING, DECISION-
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No sane man aware of the facts wants to destroy the world;
but who, nowadays, is sane, and who has all the facts? - Allen Drury, A Shade of
Difference, p.77.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No sense blowing yourself up while trying to erase an
enemy force on your doorstep, and even the smallest atomic device isn't all that
selective.” - Laurence M. Janifer, Knave in Hand, p.113.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: No weapon is ultimate - when it cannot be directed against
the real and main enemy ONLY. - J.Z., 16.5.00. The supposedly scientific, modern super-
weapons are so primitive that they still apply and even embody the "principle" of
"collective responsibility", of genocide, of scorched earth, and thus the indiscriminate
mass murder of millions. In this they are even more indiscriminately murderous than
were the "Final Solution" mass murders of the Nazis, who picked and choose their
victims "only" among certain segments of the population. - J.Z., 2.2.02. - ENEMY,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: None of us has lost much sleep over the threat of imminent
annihilation of the human race and our responsibility for this state of affairs.” – Frances
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nor is there any exoneration from complicity in this
slaughter in the theoretical justification that we possess nuclear arms not in order to use
them but in order to prevent their use, for the fact is that even in theory prevention works
only to the degree that it is backed up by the plausible threat of use in certain
circumstances. Strategy thus commits us all to actions that we cannot justify by any
moral standard. It introduces into our lives a vast, morally incomprehensible – or simply
immoral - realm, in which every scruple or standard that we otherwise claim to observe
or uphold is suspended.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.153. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Not even a collapsing world looks dark to a man who is
about to make his fortune.” – E. B. White, “Intimations”, One Man‟s Meat, 1944. –
Almost all still try to make a fortune while all too few do seriously ponder and doubt the
territorialism, which is one of the foundations for nuclear war power. – J.Z., 20.11.85,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of
themselves.” – F. Nelson, quoted in: Dr. Laurence J. Peter, The Peter Prescription, p.222.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Now we are sitting at the breakfast table drinking our
coffee and reading the newspaper, but in a moment we may be inside a fireball whose
temperature is tens of thousands of degrees. Now we are on our way to work, walking
through the city streets, but in a moment we may be standing on an empty plain under a
darkened sky looking for the charred remnants of our children. (*) Now we are alive, but
in a moment we may be dead. Now there is human life on earth, but in a moment it may
be gone.” (**) - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.152. - - (*) Actually, we would
be gone too, with them, largely into gas and tiny particles. – - (**) This might still take
hours to years and not very pleasant ones at that. - J.Z., 21.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear “weapons” are “weapons” for mass murderers but
not against mass murderers. – J.Z. - DECISION-MAKERS VS. THE PEOPLE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear “weapons” are not really weapons to hit back at
the guilty aggressors, the decision-makers. They are simply mass murder devices. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear arms ruin war by making the decision by arms
impossible. The decision by arms can occur only when the strength of one side or the
other is exhausted, or when its exhaustion is approached. But in nuclear “war” no one‟s
strength fails until both sides have been annihilated. – There cannot be a victor without a
vanquished, the collapse of whose military efforts signals the end of the hostilities,
permitting the victor to collect his spoils. But when both adversaries have nuclear arms
that moment of collapse (*) never comes, and the military forces – the missiles – of both
countries go on “fighting” after the countries (**) themselves have disappeared.”
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.190. – (*) this kind of collapse – (**) their
populations – J.Z. - WAR & VICTORY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: nuclear deterrence is almost exclusively a threat to hurt the
enemy‟s homeland, not to ward off or overwhelm his military force.” – Fred Charles Ikle,
Every War Must End, 1971, p.28.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear Holocaust, n. A War to end all wars.” – L.A.
Rollins, Lucifer‟s Lexicon.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: NUCLEAR ISRAEL. Jerusalem: Israel is ranked sixth
among nations with nuclear weapons, according to the US Department of Energy. It says
Israel has 300 to 500 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium, enough for at least 250
nuclear warheads. Russia ranks first with 140 tons; the United States second with 85
tons.” – Ross Dunn, THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD,, 11.10.99.
- - In other words, the people that were subjected to one of the worst mass murders in
history are now, through their territorial government, ready, organized and armed to
commit some mass murders of their own. While they were in the Diaspora, dispersed all
over the world, they could at least not be exterminated with such weapons. What will
happen to the Jews remaining in the rest of the world, when Israel does use its nuclear
“weapons”? Why assemble and maintain a territorial Jewish State that can be wiped out
with a few nuclear weapons by its enemies? And why be so foolish to so assemble after
the first nuclear weapons were developed and used? Territorialism seems to affect the
power of judgment and the moral sense. – J.Z., 24.1.08. – One good thing done by the
State of Israel: Twice it has destroyed nuclear reactor buildings before they were finished
to produce more nuclear weapons that could be used and were likely to be used against
Israel. But, on the other hand, Israel built its own nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons to
keep them in readiness for its mass extermination “actions”. – J.Z., 31.5.08. – There are
still idiotic territorial governments and other terrorists who want to be the first or at least
“players” in this idiotic and extremely immoral and mass murderous “game”. – Where
are the rightful targets e.g. for Obama‟s nuclear “weapons”? - J.Z., 28.2.09. - OF
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: nuclear madness as the common enemy of East and West. -
Richard Owen, THE WEEKEND AUTRALIAN, 23. - 24. 7. 1983. - The common enemy
of all sides! J.Z., 1. 5. 05.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear reactors and nuclear "weapons" have put still more
destructive and deadly power into the hands of the territorial State. - J.Z., 23. 3. 85.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war “would destroy the world – in order to save
it!” – J.Z., 14.4.87. – Source of the quote?
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war can only occur when people are not free
enough to prevent it - by rightfully pursuing their own interests. - J.Z., 19. 6. 85. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war gives the power to destroy mankind and the
world but not the power to liberate its people from oppressive rulers. For every leading
oppressor killed by a nuclear weapon it will probably murder 10 000 to 100 000 or even
millions of his victims. - J.Z., 2. 4. 85, 1.5.06. - & LIBERATION
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war has been misnamed the "suicide of mankind".
But mankind has had so far no say at all on such decisions. It is not organized as such for
this kind of decision-making. Not even its various national, ethnic, religions or
ideological constituents, already living very much intermixed with each other, are freely
organized for such decision-making. - - We are all put into territorial & collectivistic
straightjackets, cages or state-wide prisons and have men with all too fixed, wrong and
irrational ideas run these territorial-wide or national asylums, concentration camps or
kinder gardens, under minimum to maximum "security". - They call it "leadership". Alas,
too many of their victims still believe that it is, instead of realizing the enormous
insecurity and mass murders which their leaders have prepared for them. Often these
"leaders" are themselves the worst and most dangerous madmen and criminals,
particularly with regard to their nuclear "security", "deterrence" and "defence" "policies".
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war has not been prevented yet. It has only been
postponed.. It may still occur at any time. Already the preparations of it have cost and
will cost hundred-thousands of lives, according to Linus Pauling, through water and air
pollution, apart from the vast tax funds wasted upon them and their mental and moral
effects of people under this continuing threat. – J.Z., 25.4.89, 26.1.08. - NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: nuclear war is a destructive thing, but still in large part a
physics problem." - Paul Nitze, Reagan's appointee to the Arms Control & Disarmament
Agency. - He said that, probably, under the delusions of a Star Wars defence system. - It's
rather a problem of moral, political and economic knowledge to stop this absolute
menace. - J.Z., 7. 9. 85.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war is bad for business.” – W. K. Thomson, The
Efficiency Expert, ANALOG 11/85, p.60. – Let us, therefore, put it and ALL preparations
and preconditions for it, out of business. – J.Z., 14.11.85.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war is not an acceptable instrument of national
policy." - John J. McClay, public statement as chairman of the US General Advisory
Committee on Disarmament. And yet, preparation for it is almost everywhere national
policy! - J.Z., 4.8.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war is not only wicked; it is pointless.” - Phililp
Toynbee, The Fearful Choice, p.78.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war is the continuance of territorial politics with
other means. Territorial politics is the continuance of mass murder wars with other
means. - J.Z., 30.10.02. – POLITICS, TERRITORIALISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war is the father of total peace. – Ron Kritzfeld. (
Atomkrieg: Vater des totalen Friedens. ) – Yes. the “peace” of the world-wide battlefield,
where unburied corpses rot away. – J.Z., 28.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war means mass murder instead of tyrannicide. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war turns every city into at least a potential if not
already an "accomplished" extermination camp. - J.Z., 18. 12. 82, 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear war will not happen as the result rational decision,
based on reasonable and moral premises. But then all other wars have not been due to
rational decision-making, either. – J.Z., 17.2.86.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear War would be a crime against God, man and all
creation. – Presbyterian minister, quoted in PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL, Nov. 82.
– If God survived it then it would not be a good enough crime. If he or she existed, then
he or she would deserve to be nuked! – Only rational and moral beings are entitled to all
rights and liberties. All of creation is not rational and moral. – Rationality and morality
are rather rare. From this one can hardly conclude upon much rationality and morality in
any ultimate creator – if he or she existed at all. - J.Z., 28.2.09. – GOD, CREATION,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear wars do not liberate proletarians but annihilate
them, too. Nor do they liberate the captive nations but, instead, they threaten them with
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons are an extreme example of action upon
the principle of collective responsibility. - J.Z., 30. 10. 82. - & COLLECTIVE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons are no defence against nuclear weapons. -
J.Z, , 1.12.81.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons are not in my line; unfortunately, I am in
their line.” - E. M. Forster, b. 1879, Andrews Quotations, p.302.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons are not the cause of the power of States,
but the result. - PRAJ, 32155. – They are the consequences of territorial rule. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons are obviously unsuitable for tyrannicide.
Since they cannot be used exclusively against the real political and war criminals, they
are, obviously, not proper weapons but merely mass murder and mass destruction
devices, that will inevitably lead to the murder of many more innocent people than are
executed thus as guilty ones. – J.Z., 14.5.98. – They are the terrible result of the non-
thinking involved in territorial nationalism and in collective responsibility notions. – J.Z.,
24.1.08. - & TYRANNICIDE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons are progressive in only one way: They
make indiscriminate mass murder cheaper, more likely and faster. – J.Z., 8.2.95, 24.1.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons cannot be un-invented.” – Tom Clancy,
The Sum of all Fears, 1030. - The Inquisition was. Absolute monarchism was. Torture as
a common practice was. Many once common torture instruments are no longer used. The
official burning of widows & witches was largely done away with. And we are close to
abolishing the victory celebrations of territorial conquests. Open dictatorships and
tyrannies have also been diminished in number. The Berlin Wall was destroyed. The Iron
Curtain fell, at least from the Eastern side. State socialism is no longer so popular as it
once was. Pollution is now largely frowned upon or even penalized. Apart from
compulsory fluoridation, well-poisoning was largely discontinued. We have no longer
capital punishment for 200 different offences. Religious human sacrifices have been
largely abolished. Only to territorial rule are still all too many human sacrifices made or
taken. Governments do at least try to excuse their actions towards the public. – J.Z.,
14.9.07. – DIS.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons create too risky and explosive a situation.
They are always in the wrong hands, directed against the wrong targets and this for the
wrong reasons or motives. Morally they can‟t be justified at all. A single bullet or dagger,
correctly placed, can be more helpful to mankind than all of these “modern & scientific”
“weapons”. The same applies to biological and chemical mass murder devices. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons do inevitably hit more innocents than
guilty ones, even among the uniformed and armed subjects of an enemy regime, while,
usually, sparing that regime itself. They are, therefore, not “weapons” but merely “mass
extermination devices” that wipe out most of our potential secret allies, the captive
peoples of the world. – J.Z., 29.8.87. Our governments and ourselves have not even fully
recognized their existence by recognizing governments in exile for all of them, all of
them only for volunteers, the present refugees and deserters as well as all their future
volunteers, and all confined to exterritorial autonomy under personal laws. With such
recognitions the existing despotic territorial regimes would come close to their almost
non-violent collapse via military insurrections or revolutions with a good enough
liberation program that would sufficiently unite the opposition forces against their
oppressors, exploiters and abusers, including the military forces of the regime. – All
nuclear threats from out side must cease and become replaced by sensible tyrannicide
policies, combined with unilateral nuclear disarmament. Our “nuclear weapons” were
never directed against the real enemies but, rather, their victims. – J.Z., 29.8.87, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons make the surgical removal of a national
cancer, like tyranny or dictatorship, impossible. They inevitably attack its victims, the
patient, the nation, the people, too, as if they were collectively responsible for the crimes
of their ruling criminals. – J.Z., 14.10.95, 24.1.08. - & TYRANNICIDE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons should be dismantled.” - Mises Institute,
Daily article, 24 11 06, by L. H. Rockwell, Jr. – Even unilaterally! – I am glad to find out
that L. H. R. Jr. is in this respect, too, an heir of some of the best thinking of Murray N.
Rotbhard, e.g. in his essay: War, Peace and the State. – J.Z., 26.12.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: nuclear weapons surpass the boundaries of legitimate self-
defence.” – John Cardinal Krol of Philadelphia. – Those still holding them in readiness
are not intelligent enough to realize even that. And our survival does, so far, depend upon
these people! – J.Z., 25.1.08. – SELF-DEFENCE& SELF-DEFENCE, SELF-DEFENCE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: nuclear weapons, if they were ever used in large numbers,
would simply blow war up, just as they would blow up everything else that is human.” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.189. - - Their mere existence is already an
almost incredibly inhuman characteristic for our present territorial States, demonstrating
their wrongfulness and irrationality to any objective observer. – J.Z., 23.9.07. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Nuclear weapons: They products of scientifically guided
insanity, have been produced, have already been used and will be used again - unless we
stop this madness. - J.Z., 6/82, 28.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Obviously, no one who believes in a just God can believe
that it is his intention that the human race shall be immolated in a thermonuclear war.” -
Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.225. – GOD, RELIGIONS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Of all the crimes against the future, extinction is the
greatest. It is the murder of the future.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.168. –
It amounts to the total disfranchising of all otherwise possible future voters. – Is that a
reasonable and “democratic” action? - J.Z., 21.9.07. - & THE FUTURE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: On 16th December 1991, a Time magazine article
headlined: “Soviet Nukes on the Loose” surmised that some Soviet commanders could
peddle tactical nuclear arms to foreign governments or terrorist gangs - - and quoted
Soviet historian Vladelen Sirotikin as saying: “Give me a million bucks and I‟ll have a
nuclear-tipped missile stolen for you and delivered any place you want.” – Brian
Wilshire, The Fine Print, published by Brian Wilshire, PO Box 209, Round Corner, NSW
2158, Australia., 1992., p.85/86.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: On 27 August [1964], … Deputy Secretary of Defense
Cyrus E. Vance pointed out that the typical “tactical” nuclear weapon had several times
the yield of the atomic bomb that had destroyed Hiroshima. “Small” and “conventional”
were dangerously misleading and totally inappropriate adjectives when applied to any
nuclear weapon.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.238. - TACTICAL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: On paper an ultimate catastrophe brought about by man
seems 85 per cent likely. I live for the other 15 per cent.” - Leo Szilard, who died in 1964,
quoted by Robert Jungk: The Everyman Project, p.21.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: On the one side stands (*) human life and the terrestrial
creation. On the other side stands a particular organization of human life – the system of
independent, sovereign nation-states. (**) Our choice so far has been to preserve that
political organization of human life at the cost of risking all human life. (***) - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.218. - - (*) unfree …- J.Z. - - (**) I would rather call it a
system of territorially sovereign State governments that have subdued and exploited their
subjects. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (***) When and where was that ever the subject of a
referendum? And if a national majority were in favor of it, it would still not have the right
to impose its preference territorially upon all “its” minorities. With all minorities,
including individuals, the smallest minority, freed, via individual and group secessionism,
to do their own things but only for and to themselves, some would soon set enlightening
examples and this kind of majority would thus shrink, slowly or even fast. – J.Z., 22.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: once again ... truth is too terrible for some people to
believe." - Robert Cox, editor of the BUENOS AIRES HERALD, READER'S DIGEST,
6/82, p.238.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Once an instrument exists, there is a tendency to use it -
regardless of the consequences.” - James R. Preston, Law of the Instrument, ANALOG,
5177 (5/77?), p.52. – What are these instruments or devices for - except mass murder and
mass destruction? Calling them weapons or instruments is very misleading. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Once the “strategic necessity” of planning the death of
hundreds of millions of people is accepted, we begin to live in a world in which morality
and action inhabit two separate, closed realms. All strategic sense becomes moral
nonsense, and vice versa, and we are left with the choice of seeming to be either strategic
or moral idiots.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.195. & “STRATEGIC
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: once we learn that a holocaust might lead to extinction, we
have no right to gamble, because if we lose the game will be over, and neither we nor
anyone else will ever get another chance.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.95.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: One cannot solve the nuclear war problem out of context
with everything that makes for war. - J.Z., 29. 10. 89.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: One certainly cannot liberate e.g. "proletarians" or others,
more or less unfree, with nuclear missiles. - J.Z., 18. 3. 84, 1. 5. 06. - LIBERATION,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: One of the advantages of nuclear warfare is that all men
are cremated equal. - AUSTRALSIAN POST, Jan. 22, 1981. - JOKES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: One of the strangest human paradoxes is that we fear
human censure and loss of job more than we fear nuclear extinction.” – Rosalie Bertell,
No Immediate Danger. Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth, The Women‟s Press, 1985, p
344. - - It is incomprehensible to most, just like the idea of their immediate death.
Moreover, they feel their helplessness in their present territorialist situation and thus
prefer not to think about that threat and to act as if it did not exist. They should ponder
how to gain freedom of action in this sphere as well but, as statists, they don‟t. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: One strategic thinker, in a striking inversion of the usual
understanding of ethical obligation, has said that an “iron will” is required if one is to
recommend the slaughter of hundreds of millions of people in a nuclear attack – a point
of view that is uncomfortably close to that of Heinrich Himmler, who told the
commanders of the SS that in order to carry out the extermination of the Jews they had to
be “superhumanly inhuman”. In both statements, it is not obedience to our moral
feelings but resistance to those feelings that is presented as our obligation, as though
moral feeling were a siren call that it would be weak to give in to and that it is our duty
to resist.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.195. - “STRATEGIC THINKERS”
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Only complete insanity would produce the final war and
aren't enough of us already insane enough? - J.Z., 1.4.80, after: "... the insanity that
produced the final war" - by Alfred Bester, The Demolished Man, p.86.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Only if we abolish nuclear weapons and permanently halt
the nuclear power industry can we hope to survive. To achieve these ends, it is vital that
people be presented with the facts. Today more than ever, we need what Einstein referred
to as a “chain reaction of awareness”: “To the village square”, he wrote in 1946, “we
must carry the facts of atomic energy” Once presented, the facts will speak for
themselves. “– Dr. Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Madness, Autumn Press, 1978, p.84. - -
Better ideas and forms of social, political and economic organization could, but mere
terrifying facts do rarely enlighten enough. – J.Z., 19.1.05, 24.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Only insane people would seriously consider the use of
nuclear “weapons” to murder other peoples en masse. But, as a matter of fact, there are
actually dozens of supreme commanders and thousands of their officers who have nuclear
weapons at their disposal and only wait for a government command or a computer
malfunction or misinterpretation to use them. That is the kind of “protection” that we do
get from our territorial governments. – J.Z., 9.9.04, 22.10.07. – PROTECTION,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Only technology has permitted us to put a city to the sword
without quite realizing what we are doing.” – Joseph Wood Krutch, If You Don‟t Mind
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Only those stricken with incurable blindness will fail to
recognize that the continuation of imperialist power politics and the old game of
hegemonies must in the age of the atom bomb and the prodigious development of modern
technique lead inevitably to the end of all human civilization.” - Rudolf Rocker,
Nationalism and Culture, p.547, in the Epilogue. - HUMAN CIVILIZATION,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Only tiny “minds” would “think” of indiscriminate mass
murder devices or methods as tools to achieve anything rightful and positive. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Only when you think, sufficiently, of the worst can you
help to prevent the worst from happening. - J.Z., 16. 3. 85.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Originally a means to protect national interests, war today
can assure the death of a nation, the decimation of a continent.” – Vice-President
Humphrey, in his address before the “Pacem in Terris” conference in New York on 17
February 1965, quoted in: Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.252.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Others may try to emotionally motivate people to resist this
threat. But once they are so motivated they would still need a rightful, rational and
workable program. - J.Z., 18. 12. 82, 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our ability to kill each other and ourselves is growing
much faster than our productive capacity. - E. Reimer: The School is Dead, p. 50. - Well,
the over-kill production of nuclear "weapons" grows even faster than our kill-capacity,
since we can kill each other only once. - J.Z., 20.11.02. – And our reasoning and moral
capacity and action potential seems to stop short of these mass murder devices. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our fathers and ourselves sowed dragon‟s teeth. / Our
children know and suffer the armed men.” – Stephen Vincent Benét, Litany for
Dictatorships, 1935.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our generation … has seen what can be done by a
HITLER, and it still lives in the knowledge that a handful of psychopaths could bring
human history to an end. –ALEX COMFORT, “Authority and Delinquency. A study in
the psychology of power”, 1950, 1970, p.107, a book largely on the delinquency of
authority. – Alas, kept out of print & off the Web for all too long. - J.Z., 15.5.06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our great leaders, in their kind of penis envy, do want to
possess and use the ultimate big dick: nuclear rockets and bombs - against all of mankind,
raping it to death and the thought of this atrocity seems to give them their greatest "high".
Most of them are already old men and, probably, impotent. - Psychologists assert that it is
not sexual pleasure that most rapists are after but, rather, the power they feel in the
process. Thus even castrated rapists have been reported to have attempted rape. Their
attempts were, probably, even more dangerous for their victims. - - The rape attempts
with "nuclear strength" or potency would be even more deadly for millions if not
thousands of millions of victims. - - And what do most of the intended victims of nuclear
"armed" and power-mad "leaders" think and do? - - They either manage to ignore this
threat, merely waiting for their final day, or, at best, shout "Ban the Bomb" slogans and
march, carrying such signs, while avoiding to think seriously and long enough about the
problem. "Dancing at the edge of a volcano!" - is still common practice. - By this
behavior they are almost as much to blame as their all too power-mad and ruthless
territorial rulers. - - An old proverb says it all: "For every tyrant - a thousand ready
slaves." - Source unknown to me. - -Even if they are protesting slaves but not yet actively
resisting and rebelling ones. - - We are still all too close to our apish ancestors. - - Or
even below them in this respect: For ape leaders of e.g. the Pavians, do really risk their
lives to save one of their young and would not dream of constructing, keeping in
readiness and using "nuclear weapons". - - Nor would otherwise all too faithful and loyal
dogs. - Or would even mere dogs put up with a condition in which they would realize that
their masters reserve to themselves the "right" to wipe them out, at any time? - ( I
wonder: How many of the "stray dogs" are really escapees, who have been mistreated by
their masters?) - J.Z., NWT 27 5 06. - POWER ADDICTION, POWER MADNESS,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our intelligence sources tell us 40 tactical nuclear weapons
are missing.” – James Dale Davidson, The Capitalist Manifesto, 1995, 128 pages, p. 70. –
A very misleading title since, in the main, it offers only information on its associated
financial services and newsletter. – J.Z., 8.10.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our last war was thirteen centuries ago. It was an atomic
war. We nearly destroyed ourselves. It taught us that we must love one another or die.” –
Edmund Cooper, Tomorrow Came, p.34. – Rather, that we must be just or tolerant to one
another, even without loving each other. – I find it terrible that after almost 2000 years
most people have nothing better than “love” to offer as a solution to all problems. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: our reliance on “terror” to provide “safety”, and on the
threat of “annihilation” to provide “survival”. For it is in an effort to strengthen and
shore up the terror and make annihilation more certain that the strategists and statesmen
are forced into these appalling postures. Their problem is to find a way of appearing
“inexorably” resolved to do things that can never make any sense or ever be justified by
any moral code, and irrationality and uncontrol fulfill the requirements for the very
reason that they represent the abandonment of morality and sense. Adopted as a policy,
they lend credibility to actions that are – conveniently for strategic purposes, if not for
the safety of mankind – immoral and insane.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
p.205/6. – Apparently, territorialists cannot come up with anything rightful and rational
in this respect, even after trying, for decades! – J.Z., 22.9.07. - DETERRENCE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our safety is not in blindness, but in facing our dangers. –
Schiller, “The Sublime”, 1793.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We
have guided missiles and misguided men.” – Martin Luther King, Strength to Love, 1963.
- Compare General Omar Bradley: “Nuclear giants and ethical infants.”. Why is it that
the Peter Seller film parody on nuclear strength, “Dr. Strangelove”, is not to be found in
video shops? – J.Z., 26.1.08. – Today I finally got a copy of it, after ordering it ca. 2
weeks ago through a local video store. – 44 years ago it had motivated me to start my
PEACE PLANS series. – J.Z., 11.2.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our situation is in fact bluntly stated in the title of one of
Fuller's books, Utopia or Oblivion. What we need to realize is that utopia is just as likely
as oblivion. It all depends on where we put our energy, our money, our beliefs, and our
efforts. … 1967: total smallpox victims, 2,500, 000. 1976: total smallpox victims, 40. - -
Robert Anton Wilson, ILLUMINATI PAPERS, p.52. - - On the other hand, the figures
for malaria victims, after DDT was outlawed, show just about the reverse of the above-
mentioned trend. Not that I favor DDT. Are there really no effective alternatives to it, that
do not do a great ecological damage? - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. - & UTOPIA
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our use of nuclear weapons and other means of mass-
destruction during WW II was the greatest moral abdication of the Western powers. – S.
Feldman and C. Osgood, reviewing an article by S. Hayakawa, Ref. 14143, PRAJ.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: our weapons now threaten to destroy us.” – John C.
Polanyi in: The Choice: Nuclear War vs. Security, p.71. – Rather, our territorial political
organizations – or the ideas they are based on, threaten to destroy us – if we subscribe to
them any longer. – J.Z., 13.7.94.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Our world seems to find it easier to split atoms than to
smash the dangerous errors, myths false premises and prejudices which lead to nuclear
war. - J.Z., 19. 6. 85, 31.5.08. - & POPULAR PREJUDICES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants." -
General Omar Bradly. - I just had my 5 year old granddaughter on the phone, because she
wanted to make a phone call. - I can't talk with her sensibly about this threat - nor can I
with the vast majority of all adults that I know! - Just like an ant, we ignore the
possibility of being stepped on by a man - or here by any of the territorial governments
that are so armed. - We are conditioned to accept total helplessness in this respect, as a
natural and inevitable condition and so we do, mostly, not even to consider how we could
gain the power for self-help against the nuclear war threat and for the prevention of
nuclear war. My two books on this have certainly not turned into best-sellers but are still
record-breaking non-sellers! - J.Z., 20.11.02.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Outlawing all atomic weapons would be a magnificent
gesture. However, it should be remembered that Gettysburg had a local ordinance
forbidding the discharge of firearms.” – Homer D. King. - LAWS, PROHIBITIONS &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: over Cuba, when the USA and USSR played "chicken" with
world war just a hair's breadth away.” - Ross Bradshaw in: "From Protest to
Resistance". - & CUBA
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Panarchism is the only political philosophy and practice
that can drag us out of the nuclear mess. Nevertheless, some libertarians manage to
ignore it and the nuclear threats and thereby confirm the worst myths and fears of
collectivists. With nuclear “weapons” one cannot commit tyrannicide, i.e., hold criminals
individually responsible, without also killing thousands to millions of his victims. The
ABC mass murder devices, by their very nature, when used, apply the wrongful
“principle” of collective responsibility. To use an analogy: It is as if the police, in the
pursuit of some armed bandits within a city were to use heavy artillery bombardment or
area bombing against those city districts in which they suspect the criminals to hide. To
re-examine their nuclear faith, I would like these “libertarians” and “defenders” of liberty
to at least read Murray N. Rothbard‟s short essay: War, Peace and the State, if not my
own ABC Against Nuclear War, in PEACE PLANS 16/17. If panarchism were to mean
that we would have to permit all the fans of ABC mass murder devices and of nuclear
power plants to build and keep them, then I would come to oppose panarchism myself.
Fortunately, it is the best means to release and organize all the anti-nuclear energies, to
destroy the powers, motives and fears making for nuclear war between territorial States
and panarchies would even destroy obvious targets for nuclear weapons and the secrecy
required to build them and keep them in readiness. Under panarchism nuclear “strength”
or strength in other indiscriminate mass murder devices would become one of the
characteristics by which “leaders” would be defined as tyrants, which invite and justify
tyrannicide. – J.Z., n.d. & 7.1.99. - & PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Passengers on a ship who are eating, sunning themselves,
playing shuffleboard, and engaging in all the usual shipboard activities appear perfectly
normal as long as their ship is sailing safely in quiet seas, but these same passengers
doing these same things appear deranged if in full view of them all their ship is caught in
a vortex that may shortly drag it and them to destruction. Then their placidity has the
appearance of an unnatural loss of normal human responses – of a pathetic and
sickening acquiescence in their own slaughter.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Peace with a cudgel in hand is war.” – Portuguese proverb.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People are as shit-scared and cowardly as ever, and still
waiting for orders. Nothing can change humanity. Jesus couldn't do it. Jefferson couldn't
do it. Even Hubbard can't do it. People are hopeless." - R. A. Wilson, Schroedinger's Cat
II: The Trick Top Hat, p.105. - People as parts of territorial collectives: Yet those few
people, thinking as individualists, forced to live among "the people" and according to
their rules, are not as indifferent and hopeless cases. However, they, too, have not yet
bothered to compile a program for their effective resistance and regime change. Many are
e.g. more concerned about the history of their movement than about its future. Or they
engage with gusto in mere scholastic debates and controversies. - J.Z., 1. 5. 06. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People are too much involved in their own little problems
to know where they are going and how they may end." - Free by J.Z. after a remark in a
Japanese SF film on TV, 18.2.78. - Words were so far all too weak "weapons" against the
nuclear strength powers, decision-makers, fanatics and fools, their errors and wrong
premises and assumptions - and the disinterest and submissiveness of their victims. - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People can do something about nuclear war only once they
become fully aware how little they can do about it right now and why, that they resemble,
indeed, the condemned man waiting in a death cell, for the execution date to be fixed.
Aware of their missing options, they can then begin to work with determination towards
self-determination, towards the vote and freedom of action in this most important sphere.
Compared with that freedom the current franchise is as nothing, nay, even of negative
value. - J.Z., 4.8.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People cannot for long place confidence in institutions that
fail even to recognize the most urgent requirement of the whole species, and it is
therefore not surprising that, more and more, people do actually look on politicians with
contempt, though perhaps without having quite figured out why.”- Jonathan Schell, The
Fate of the Earth, p.152. - POLITICS & POLITICIANS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People pay taxes, presumably for their own benefit – while
governments build e.g. anti-people mass murder devices with these means and reserve to
themselves the right to do so and to use them if they consider this to be justified and
necessary. – J.Z., n.d. & 24.1.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People refuse to believe in annihilation" - - "Naturally",
Felix stared at the Director. "Does that surprise you? Everyone lives with the knowledge
of his own death. Telling him it may be a little closer or more widespread doesn't make it
any more dreadful. To any thinking being, personal death is the most dreadful thing there
can be. If he can live with that knowledge, how can you hope to frighten him with
anything else?" - - "But no one admits, consciously at least, that he is going to die," said
Gloria. - - "Agreed, but he knows that he is living a lie and still he manages to ignore it.
Against that armor you don't stand a chance. Personal death is, after all, a certainty. The
ultimate war is only a probability." - E. C. Tubb, "Window on the Moon", in NEW
WORLDS SF, 6/63, p.117/118. - So we might need longevity or even immortality to
make people really interested in the nuclear war threat! - J.Z., 24. 5. 80. - DEATH,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People who hold or build mass extermination weapons
should be as automatically at-tacked and rendered harmless as those mentally and
physically defectives are who would assault small children in public. Indeed, the nuclear
child molesters do it, indirectly, on a massive scale and are thus much more dangerous,
although only few of them would ever assault a child directly. - J.Z., 3.6.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People who meekly submit to much of their income being
stolen from them, by taxation, will also meekly submit to their survival being threatened
by "nuclear strength" policies. No tax, no bomb! - J.Z., 5. 11. 82. - & TAXATION
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: People who permit their governments to force monopolistic
and inflated money upon them, who let themselves be subjected to tribute payments,
called "taxes" with their consent, and also permit themselves being snowed under by
numerous laws and governmental disservices, in the name of genuine laws,
representation and public services, and still assume that thereby they receive genuine
public services, will also tend to thoughtlessly accept governmental preparations for the
general holocaust, as if they were defence preparations or preparations for liberation
efforts. They have to come to opt out from their servility and all too great obedience, first
with their minds and then with their bodies. - J.Z., 5. 11. 82 & 1. 5. 06. - MONETARY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Perry emphatically tells us that “war has become as never
before in the world‟s history, an imminence of catastrophe, while peace has become not
only an ideal good, but an absolute and paramount necessity.” … Individual heroism
cannot withstand the force of an atomic blast.” - Irving Louis Horowitz, War and Peace
in Contemporary Social and Philosophical Theory, a Condor book, 1957, 1973, Chapter
12: Ralph Barton Perry: Universal Individualism, p. 180. - - We should remember that
since 1945 no more nuclear weapons have been used in wars, although numerous wars
were conducted since then. But they might be used at any time. Thus rightful
organizations and arms , as well as all other suitable means should be organized and
prepared to deal effectively with conventional aggressors and to prevent, as far as
possible, their aggressions and to achieve the total destruction of all mass murder devices.
A “war” against the war-mongers & their total war preparations only could be in practice
be a minor and quite rightful police action. But are we as yet prepared for this? So far we
are not even sufficiently prepared for quite rightful tyrannicide. – Individual human rights
are still not fully recognized and rightful militias and quite rightful societies for their
realization and defence even less. - J.Z., 29.9.07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: perseverance in the pursuit of peace is not cowardice, but
courage, that restraint in the use of force is not weakness, but wisdom. …” - Vice-
President Humphrey, in his address before the “Pacem in Terris” conference in New
York on 17 February 1965, quoted in: Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Politicians don't know how to use police forces and
conventional military forces properly. Far less do they know how to use nuclear power.
And even the wisest person would not be able to solve that task! - J.Z., 6.7. 85. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Politics, … is fully stuck with the glaring absurdity that
with one hand it builds for a future (*) that with the other hand it prepares to destroy.” -
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.160. - (*) I deny that territorial politics does that
or can do that or that it can do that better, more cheaply and without great risks than
private and voluntary self-help efforts could. – J.Z., 21.9.07. ) – In all their Summit
Conferences they never discussed the moral and rational alternative of exterritorial and
voluntaristic politics. Most of them are either totally ignorant or prejudiced against it. –
Their powerful and well financed secret services are also unable to dig up this public
secrets for them! – Our fate is in the hands of the stupid, ignorant, prejudiced and
interested people, all of them addicted to territorial power. - J.Z., 23.2.09. - & POLITICS,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Power does not equal security. Political power does not
equal military power. Military power does not equal nuclear weapons. - Gwyn Prius, ed.
The Choice: Nuclear Weapons vs. Security, p.XV. Published by A. S. Collins.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Power over other men, accompanied with quite insufficient
power over the own life, has finally led us to nuclear holocaust power and keeps us under
its threat. More territorial government power cannot lead us out of it. Only the abolition
of all territorial political power over non-consenting individuals could. Individuals have
to regain the kind of power required to resist the current few and exclusive power holders
and the power to run their own lives in accordance with their own ideas, convictions or
faith or their own preferred and free experiments, systems, communities and institutions,
always at their own expense and risk. - J.Z., 30. 10. 82, 1. 5. 06. - & POWER, GENUINE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: President Dwight Eisenhower wrote in a letter in 1956 that
one day both sides would have to “meet at the conference table with the understanding
that the era of armaments has ended, and the human race must conform its actions to this
truth or die.” – Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.6. – But mankind has been
given no vote on this matter. Only the territorial power addicts have been given that vote
and none of the nuclear power addicts has, so far, destroyed all his nuclear mass murder
devices – and the masses have meekly submitted to this situation. – J.Z., 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Pro football is like nuclear warfare. There are no winners,
only survivors.” – Frank Clifford, Sports Illustrated, July 4, 1960.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Professor Bernard T. Feld, Secretary General of the
Pugwash Conference on Science and World Affairs, comes to the frightful conclusion
that 'the odds are around one in three that a nuclear weapon will be used in conflict before
the year 1984.' He puts the chances of such a holocaust occurring before the end of the
century at fifty-fifty. - Writing in NEW SCIENTIST, the professor bases his assessment
on the uneasy world political climate, the willingness of the major powers to share their
nuclear technology in exchange for raw materials or political influence, and the abject
failure to control the arms race.” - J. Stoneley: CETI, p.162.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Quite different from the "Sword of Damocles", the nuclear
war threat hangs over every head! - J.Z. 27. 9. 83.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Rabbi Oshaya said: God was charitable to Israel when he
dispersed the Children of Israel among many nations.” – Pesahim, 87b. – This can be
interpreted in two ways: Firstly, it dispersed some intelligent people among other nations.
Just compare e.g. the contributions which Jews made to the culture of Arabs and of
Germans. Secondly, with regard to the nuclear war threat, not all Jews, are any longer
concentrated in nuclear weapons targets. Only a fraction of them thus exposed
themselves in Israel. - - While there are still nuclear mass murder devices around all
nations should seek their own Diaspora or should exterritorially decentralize into
communities of volunteers, all kinds, whose member live mixed with each other but all
under their own personal laws and institutions. No more large territorial targets for mass
extermination devices used under the misconception of collective responsibility of
territorial subjects for the crimes of their rulers. – J.Z., 2.3.83, 26.1.08. – DIASPORA,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: radioactive poisoning of the atmosphere and hence
annihilation of any life on earth has been brought within the range of technical
possibilities.” – Albert Einstein, after the detonation of the first Hydrogen Bomb. – He
should have thought of that beforehand! – Scientists are often morally as irresponsible as
are ordinary citizen and subscribe, unthinkingly, to the quite unscientific “principle” of
collective responsibility”. - J.Z., 23.2.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Reach for the Stars, Not the Bomb.” – Found on the back of
a subway seat, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, July 6, 976. – Used as motto in David
Alexander Smith, Marathon, A parabola in time, Ace Books, 1982. - STARS, NIVERSE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Reach for the Stars, Not the Bomb.” – Found on the back of
a subway seat, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, July 6, 976. – Used as motto in David
Alexander Smith, Marathon, A parabola in time, Ace Books, 1982. - STARS, NIVERSE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: recognize the peril, dismantle the weapons, and arrange
the political affairs of the earth so that the weapons will not be built again.” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.122. - & PANARCHISM, NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Refusal to threaten a fellow human being is an absolute
requirement in the day that has just dawned on us." - Frank Herbert, Committee of the
Whole, GALAXY, 4/65, p.22. - Are tyrants and all who possess nuclear "weapons" -
"fellow human beings"??? - J.Z.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: relying on this contradictory system for our survival is our
present half-numb, half-terror-stricken world, in which growing mountains of nuclear
weapons are supposed to improve the world‟s safety, and in which we do not know from
one moment to the next whether we will survive or be exploded back into our original
atoms. Reflecting on the frightful effects of this arrangement – effects that, even without a
holocaust, corrupt our lives, - we are led to wonder why it should be necessary to seek
safety in terror, survival in annihilation, existence in nothingness, and to wonder why we
shouldn‟t resort to the more straightforward measure of disarmament: of seeking
survival by banning the instruments of death.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
p.209. – I see in the underlined section the weakest part of this otherwise excellent book
on the dangers we ought to face and abolish. For what effective technical, means,
organizational forms, training and suitable weapons do the people have, anywhere, now,
to “ban” and disarm and destroy nuclear weapons in the hands of their own governments
and in the hands of foreign governments? They, including their intellectuals, have no
program and training for such a revolutionary act. They are so apathetic, helpless and
ignorant and also disinterested in this sphere that they expect their territorial
governments, i.e., the warfare States themselves, to do this job for them, as if territorial
governments could point out any great successes in any of their efforts. It‟s like
entrusting crime fighting to the Mafia. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - THREAT, DETERRENCE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Responding to one mass murder of innocents by another
mass murder of innocents is no solution, no defence, no liberation but just another case of
nuclear war madness. – J.Z., 15.8.04. - RETALIATORY STRIKES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Robert McNamara, who served as Secretary of Defense for
seven years under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, defined the policy in his book “The
Essence of Security” (*), published in 1968, in the following terms: “Assured destruction
is the very essence of the whole deterrence concept. We must possess an actual assured-
destruction capability, and that capability also must be credible. The point is that a
potential aggressor must believe that our assured-destruction capability is in fact actual,
and that our will to use it in retaliation to an attack is in fact unwavering.” Thus
deterrence “means the certainty of suicide to the aggressor, not merely to his military
forces, but to his society as a whole.” (**) - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
p.196. - - (*) ( It should have been entitled: “The Essence of Nuclear Insecurity”! – J.Z.,
22.9.07. - - (**) Simply overlooked is here the fact that the top decision-makers are not
identical with the nation, the people and the military forces. They are only a few
monopolists and, in this regard, they are extreme tyrants. Against tyrants has existed, for
thousands of years, a policy of tyrannicide. As tyrannicide weapons nuclear weapons are
quite unsuitable. Tyrannicide strikes against the real war-mongers and war criminals
would be much more sensible, easier and cheaper than to organize and finance “nuclear”
“weapons” against the victims of these tyrants. Nevertheless, this alternative path and
also the path to prevent any tyranny from arising, via recognizing all individual rights
and liberties, including individual secessionism, exterritorial autonomy and monetary
freedom and the replacement of collective responsibility by individual responsibility, was
not taken or even seriously and quite publicly discussed, so far. The territorialist popular
religion has prevented this discussion. – J.Z., 22.9.07. – Most people are even
unconscious of it, as they are of their support of collective responsibility. They simply
take both to be self-evident and take them, quite tacitly, for granted. – J.Z., 23.2.09. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Rogue's Gallery: The strangler strokes his silken cord, The
mugger loves his knife. The poisoner makes his victims twitch, And thrash away their
life. The passionate choose bullets, Or perhaps a heavy club, While some are more
inventive, They electrify a tub. But the ones that give me nightmares, And destroy my
aplomb, Are those smiling men in politics, With their damned atomic bomb.” - P. M.
Ferguson, p.54 of ANALOG, 6/85. - Murderers threaten and kill only some people. Mass
murderers, like politicians, threaten to kill everyone. - J.Z., 17.8.02. - NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Rothbard's arguments refuting the interventionists are
solidly grounded in hard-core libertarian theory and not refutable. "Liberty must be the
highest political end, and in the same way, peace and avoidance of mass murder must be
the highest end of foreign policy." - NEW LIBERTARIAN WEEKLY, 23.10.77.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Saddam Hussein is not fit to have a finger on the nuclear
trigger. And once we stop to think, nor is anyone else.” – Michael Foot, THE TIMES,
Quotes of the Week, p.39, January 2, 1999. - NUCLEAR STRENGTH, NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Safety will be the sturdy child of terror, and survival the
twin brother of annihilation.” – Churchill, in the House of Commons, 1955, quoted in:
Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, 197. – A word play, covering up insanity by
pretending that it would always assure survival, no matter for how long this kind of
“policy” or “strategy” is pursued and quite ignoring the danger of accidentally caused
nuclear war. – J.Z., 19.9.82, 22.9.07. - DETERRENCE, TERRORISM & SURVIVAL,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Sakharov envisages a world quickly descending into chaos
and, in all probability, total nuclear destruction. The forces which man now controls are
so pervasive, their potential so cataclysmic, that without the broadest scale collaboration
and utilization of man's capacity for social management, he will inevitably destroy
himself. Sakharov's view of the brink on which mankind stands, is one shared by most
thoughtful scientists of the western world - a belief that our potential for destruction has
grown so radically that the odds upon the world arriving at the year 2,000 may be stated
in the negative. - After-word by H. E. Salisbury to: A. D. Sakharov: Progress,
Coexistence and Intellectual Freedom. - But are even these few thoughtful scientists
prepared to objectively look at all alternative policies proposed to the ones now pursued
and making for nuclear war? There is not even one place collecting all these alternative
views - apart from my own all too limited single-handed efforts. Most people are strong
only in rejecting ideas which do not agree with their own. - J.Z. 4/8/82. -- Neither showed
any comprehension of the exterritorial imperative, voluntarism, individual sovereignty
and individual secessionism as preconditions for the solution of this problem. - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Scalping a man is a hell of a poor way to cure his
dandruff.” - Robert Heinlein, Assignment in Eternity, p.53.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Scan the last sixty years of war, hot and cold; wars to end
wars, each serving only as a prelude to larger wars, And, today, we worldlings, in angry
and hateful moods, stand tense and poised to strike out at each other, not with
shillelaghs, pistols, hand grenades and cannons, but with mass exterminators of the germ
and atom types, types that only a people of surrendered principles could concoct.” -
Leonard E. Read: Having My Own Way, p.61. - Alternatively, one might ask, upon what
'principles' are nuclear reactors and bombs permissible? - J.Z.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Scrawled upon one of many metal boxes, produced by the
firm “Krone”, and covering electrical connections, sitting on the footpaths in the streets
of Germany, near the curb: “Nuclear war bunker for one person. Nr. C 3470961. – I
know what I want. (A).” – JOKES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Secede from all nuclear “Popes” or powers. – J.Z., 13.9.89,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara … remarked
before the House Armed Services Committee in 1963, … that once the first tactical
nuclear weapon had been used the world would have been launched into „a vast
unknown‟.” – The vastness of the unknown existed already beforehand – in the heads of
our “leaders”. – Do not forgive them – for they do not know what they are doing to us, do
it nevertheless and do not care about that. – But they still want your vote – and your taxes
and obedience and, all too often, still get them! - J.Z., 23.2.09. - Jonathan Schell, The
Fate of the Earth, p.31. - & TACTICAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS, STATISM,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: See especially my second peace book: “An ABC Against
Nuclear War.” - Panarchism would abolish the major preconditions for all wars, civil
wars and revolutions. - "Perhaps most important of all, panarchism would do away with
the threats arising from the mere existence of ABC mass murder or anti-people devices
and of territorial governments able and willing to use them. E.g. no nuclear targets would
remain nor any war and peace making monopoly. Motives and means for conducting
international wars would tend to disappear and almost everybody would gain a personal
interest in becoming also a disarmament inspector against the build-up of ABC mass
murder devices by anyone, anywhere and at any time. Imagine the almost general outcry
of all kinds of religious and non-religious people if the Roman Catholic Church and the
Protestant Churches tried to arm themselves with nuclear "weapons" against each other.
Everybody would realize that his own fate would then be at stake and that of mankind.
No nuclear strength advocates would then get far with such an aspiration. Most religious
people, today, would not even entertain such a notion in the first place. It would be too
obviously wrong, self-defeating and absurd. - J.Z. to Joe Toscana, March 96. - Man must
now be organized in a way to minimize the risk of nuclear war. Panarchism provides that
organizational framework. It does not restrict any rightful aspirations, not even any
wrongful and useless or destructive ones - provided, they are so only within the own
sphere, among volunteers, i.e. at their own cost and risk only. – J.Z., n.d. - &
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: See one nuclear war – and you‟ve seen them all.” –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Senator Barry Goldwater wrote a book, published in 1962,
whose title was “Why Not Victory?” To this question the strategists of deterrence have a
decisive answer: Because in the present-day, nuclear world “victory” is oblivion. From
this recognition flows the conclusion, arrived at by Brodie in 1946, that the sole purpose
of possessing nuclear strategic arms is not to win war but to prevent it. The adoption of
the aim of preventing rather than winning war requires the adoption of other policies that
fly in the face of military tradition. One is abandonment of the military defense of one‟s
nation – of what used to be at the center of all military planning and was the most
hallowed justification of the military calling. The policy of deterrence does not
contemplate doing anything in defence of the homeland; it only promises that if the
homeland is annihilated the aggressor‟s homeland will be annihilated, too. In fact, the
policy goes further than this: it positively requires that each side leave its population
open to attack, and make no serious effort to protect it. … According to this logic, the
safety can be only as great as the terror is, and the terror therefore has to be kept
relentless. If it were to be diminished – by, for example, building bomb shelters that
protected some significant part of the population – then safety would be diminished, too,
because the protected side might be tempted to launch a holocaust in the belief that it
would “win” the hostilities.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.199. - One of the
many absurdities of this situation is that the populations, which cannot be effectively and
lastingly protected against this threat, have no say in the matter, whilst the relatively few
top decision-makers might continue to live for a long time in safe and well provisioned
shelters, while their populations are already mutually exterminated by them. The
innocents are wiped out, the guilty ones, the mass murderers, survive, at least for a long
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Should we allow our government or any other government
to build any mass extermination camps against any section of any population? If not,
should we then permit our government or any other government to build and keep in
readiness at least equivalent mass extermination devices, directed largely and almost
exclusively against the population of whole cities and even countries, under any excuse
or pretence? - Couldn't we come to any better arrangement with the potential victims than
threatening them with the ultimate and a suicidal holocaust, i.e., people, who do not
themselves and directly threaten us? They are, presently, just the playthings in the hands
of their rulers, much like we are now in this respect in the hands of our rulers. - J.Z., 12.
2. 83, 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Should we not do more than merely "wait for the bombs" to
rain down upon us, in over-kill quantities? (3) - J.Z., NWT 27 5 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Should we supply totalitarian or dictatorial regimes with
nuclear weapons, nuclear raw materials, scientific advice and equipment, all quite
"freely", perhaps government-subsidized or on indefinite and cheap credit terms or at all?
The Australian government is currently supplying Red China with uranium. Numerous
corporations were found to have supplied dictatorships with the equipment to make their
own nuclear weapons. All to make friends with such criminals or profit from supplying
them! - J.Z., n.d. & 1. 5. 06. - FREE TRADE, URANIUM MINING & EXPORT, Q.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Since Aristotle, it has often been said the two basic aims of
political association are, first, to assure the survival of members of society ( that is, to
protect life ) and, second, to give them a chance to fulfill themselves as social beings (
that is, to enable them to lead a noble or a good life ). The threat of self-extermination
annuls both of these objectives, and leaves the politics of our day in the ludicrous
position of failing even to aim at the basic goals that have traditionally justified its
existence.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.160/61. - POLITICS, STATES,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Since deterrence depends fully as much on one‟s
adversary‟s perception of one‟s “unwavering” will to retaliate as on one‟s technical
ability to do it, an acknowledgment that retaliation is senseless would in a way amount to
unilateral disarmament by verbal means. The doctrine of nuclear deterrence thus deters
debate about itself, … The commonest solution to the problem of the missing motive for
retaliation is to suggest that the policymakers try to cultivate an appearance of unreason,
for if one is insane one doesn‟t need to supply any motive for retaliating – one might do it
simply out of madness.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.204. – Or out of spite.
– J.Z., 22.9.07. – It seems that many of them do not find it difficult to appear
unreasonable. – But will their counterparts be reasonable enough to recognize that? - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Since in a holocaust the consequences may be the same for
the aggressor, its punisher, and bystanders, the distinction between friendly and hostile
nuclear forces has lost most of its meaning, and the nuclear arsenals of the world are
effectively combined by policy into one great arsenal (*) , which is looked to by all
powers (**) equally for their „safety‟.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
p.215/15. - - (*) of anti-people “weapons” or mass murder devices, whose use cannot
distinguish between friends and enemies. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (**) By all territorial power-
mongers and power addicts, regardless of how much they endanger their territorial
subjects. Alas, the victims of this policy do not complain or resist this disfranchisement.
If they had a say on these “weapons” and the organizations and weapons to do so, they
would sooner or later destroy them, even unilaterally, no longer waiting for their
governments to do so. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - ENEMIES & ALLIES OR NEUTRALS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Since there were many captive people victimized by the
Soviets, including most of the Russian people, the Western nuclear weapons threatened
these people rather than the Soviets. If there had been many workers exploited by
capitalists in the West ( “proletarians” ), then the Soviet nuclear weapons did threaten
mainly these victims with death, rather than their governments or their exploiters. –
Curiously enough, this contradiction of the ideological split was never publicly and
widely discussed to my knowledge. The wrongful, false and territorial identification of
diverse peoples with their mis-rulers, based on the “principle” of collective responsibility
or peoples considered as property of governments, continues to this day. It led to the
ABC mass murder devices. – J.Z., 28.7.87, 30.5.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Since we have not made a positive decision to exterminate
ourselves but instead have chosen to live on the edge of extinction, periodically lunging
toward the abyss only to draw back at the last second, our situation is one of uncertainty
and nervous insecurity rather than of absolute hopelessness. We know that we may fall
into the abyss at any moment, but we also know that we many not. So life proceeds – what
else should it do? But with a faltering and hesitant step, like one who gropes in darkness
at the top of a tall precipice.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.151. – What an
abuse of the term “we”, as far as merely us, the territorial subjects are concerned, in this
respect the mere property or slaves of territorial power addicts and monopoly-decision-
makers! – J.Z., 10.10. 07.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Sir Alec Douglas-Home, then Prime Ministers of the UK, in
reply to Chairman Khrushchev‟s message of 31 December 1963 proposing the peaceful
settlement of territorial disputes, ended by saying that the principal task of statesmen
today is to assure that nuclear war will not break out. How are the statesmen going about
that task; what ideas guide them in it?” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966,
p.199.“ - Neither the “statesmen” nor their advisors realized so far that territorial disputes
cannot be territorially settled but merely exterritorially. The attempt to settle them
territorially will always lead to wars, civil wars, oppression, revolutions and terrorism. I
am also convinced that none of the “great leaders” or their famous advisors has ever read
peace books like my own two ones and that their secret services, supposed to look out
after the security of whole nations or populations have also either not discovered such
publications and their open secrets or have not comprehended them. They are as far as
ever from exterritorialist ideas, thinking, tolerance and actions. – J.Z., 10.10.08. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: So far too many men are still proud of their "nuclear
weapons". We ought to make them ashamed of them! - J.Z., 25. 7. 83. - THE MORAL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: So far, alas, most people would rather continue risking a
nuclear war than “risking” reading, pondering and discussing a book on how to prevent it.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: So we have the two super-powers deterring each other from
any armed aggression against themselves or their allies by the ultimate threat of mutual
slaughter of eighty to a hundred million of their citizens. This could perhaps be described
as deterrence under the threat of Mutual Megamurder.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns,
Megamurder, 1966, p.206.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Some fifty such accidents or near-accidents with nuclear
armed missiles and aircraft occurred between 1945 and 1960. In the same period there
were a number of false radar report which, had they been accepted and acted upon,
would have plunged us within minutes into all the horrors of WW III. …” - Fred J. Cook,
The Warfare State, Jonathan Cape, 1962, p.31. - … the incredible risks of daily nuclear
roulette today, … ibid, p.33. - ACCIDENTAL NUCLEAR WAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Some people object against exaggerated claims of
protesters, arguing that it would not be absolutely certain or even likely that the survival
of man would be risked by nuclear war. - How many millions, dozens of millions or
hundreds of millions victims do they consider to be "acceptable" risks? At what
percentage of mankind sacrificed in "defence" would they become prepared to resist such
"defence" efforts? - J.Z., 17. 12. 82, 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: sooner or later a nuclear war will happen. Possibly all life
will end. If that's possible, we have to act on the assumption that it's true. We have to
avoid ever finding out.” - TIME, March 29, 1982, p.18.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Sooner or later you will learn there are situations where
you cannot quit. You run out of places to hide." - Alistair McLean: Caravan to Carracas.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Split States panarchistically, i.e. voluntaristically and
exterritorially, thus quite decentralized and intermingled – and you remove nuclear
targets for mass murder devices and also motives and means for building, maintaining
and using them. – J.Z., 5.6.92. – PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: States that cannot even keep drugs out of prisons are not
good enough institutions to prevent the smuggling in and placement of nuclear mass
murder devices. – I have seen that fact pointed out by several authors, among them
Michael S. Rozeff on – J.Z., 24.9.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Strategic war is so obviously catastrophic to all engaged in
it that it is only under enormous political stress, provocation and escalation - probably
from lower levels of conflict - that it has any chance of happening.” - Said former
Defense Secretary Harold Brown. Adds James Schlesinger: A nuclear war would
probably get started only by miscalculation. – Source? - & MISCALCULATION
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Stumbling, once again, towards another world war, one that
will be a generalized holocaust, with no understanding of and proclamation of quite
rightful war and peace aims on either side. The law of the biggest “club” offers no
solution at all, in this case, either. It amounts to mutual mass murder preparations that
will finally end in general nuclear war, in which only the most guilty ones, the top
decision-makers, may survive for a while, while the rest die luckily either an instant or a
more prolonged and painful death. – Hitler, too, believed in such “wonder-weapons”.
Luckily, he did not get them. But the “democratic” victors did, and multiplied them on
and on into absurd quantities. – Already by this alone they demonstrated that they do not
rightly represent anybody but themselves, as people prepared to commit mass murder. -
J.Z., 17.8.86, 30 5.08. – LEADERSHIP, DEMOCRACY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Submission to the nuclear policy means death, whether we
or they plan it that way or not. - J.Z., 11.2.77.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Suicide is never the answer to a problem, it's only at best a
compromise with it.” - J. T. McIntosh, First Lady, GALAXY, Vol. 3, No. 8. – If the
suicide attempt succeeds then one does not survive this “compromise”, while the aim of
most “compromises” seems to be survival. – J.Z., 28.2.09. - DIS.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Suicide should be subject to individual, not collective or
leadership-decision-making. - J.Z., 30. 10. 82, 1. 5. 06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: suppose, for a moment, that the world had established a
political means of mankind international decisions and thus had no further need for
nuclear or any other weapons.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.221. – The
effective means would be individual choice for all political associations, including
individual secession upon disappointment, i.e., a kind of consumer sovereignty for all
political “services”. That would make nuclear completely and conventional military
weapons largely superfluous but not protective associations, armed with police weapons,
against private criminals with victims. – J.Z., 22.9.07. – PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Tactical nuclear war would quickly become strategic or
total war for small nations and the local populations over whose fields and cities nuclear
weapons are exploding. Hiroshima, after all, was destroyed by what is considered to be
one small tactical nuclear weapon in today‟s arsenal.” – Gwyn Prius, ed. The Choice:
Nuclear Weapons vs. Security, p.31. Published by A.S. Collins.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: technical knowledge, in the absence of wisdom and
discipline, merely gives us more efficient weapons of collective suicide. Butler‟s fantasy
of the machines which men have made acquiring a mind of their own, and then rounding
upon their masters and destroying them, has very nearly come true. If some new force,
like the release of atomic energy, had been discovered during this war, and applied ( as
Mr. Wells has imagined it being applied ) to bombs that would go on exploding without
cessation for a week or two, we know that passions ran so high that both sides would
have used them, as both sides in the next war will use super-poison gas and disease
germs. Not only the destruction, therefore, but the passion and the ruthlessness, the fears
and hates, the universal pre-emption of wealth for „defence‟ perpetually translating itself
into preventive offence, would have grown. Man‟s society would assuredly have been
destroyed by the instruments that he himself had made, and Butler‟s fantasy would have
come true.” - Norman Angell, Human Nature and the Peace Problem, 1925, p.127. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Terminate the terminators! – J.Z., 19.10.06.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Territorial “nations” are in fact preparations for genocide.
Whatever benefits they might offer, they are not worth that price. Moreover, these real or
imagined benefits could also be provided by full exterritorial autonomy for them. - J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Territorial governments built the bombs, kept the bombs,
directed against whole peoples, forcefully and territorially organized into State-sized
targets. – J.Z., 22.4.86. – And the “sheeples” hold still. – J.Z., 30.5.08. – PEOPLES,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: Territorial governments have developed into the greatest
threat to the survival of the human race. Yet they are still being voted into office or
tolerated in power. - J.Z., 6. 4. 84. - & GOVERNMENTS, TERRITORIALISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: That most libertarians, to my knowledge, have so far not
responded to Rothbard‟s “War, Peace and the State”, indicates their intellectual
stagnation or cowardice. - J.Z., 9.6.86, – But then I must admit to not having made a web-
search on the subject. – Perhaps there are already thousands of positive responses to this
excellent essay of his and I have just not noticed them. – Finally, today, I have repaired
that omission. Google provided me with 626 references to this essay, upon ( Rothbard +
“War, Peace and the State” ), mainly reproductions and translations or remarks on it. I
downloaded the first 94 selected from these hints by Google and just browsed through
these short references, without downloading their full text. Mea culpa! My fault! My
ignorance, my neglect! There were as many responses. Some other libertarians have
recognized the value of this outstanding article as well. – I am happy about that. This
work will continue to be read and induce more thinking. But have most readers as yet
taken a fully consistent stand against all nuclear weapons and for the alternatives to them
and for the panarchistic institutions that would render nuclear weapons impossible,
superfluous and abhorrent to most people? Was Rothbard himself converted to
panarchism by this essay? – Naturally, he discussed many other points in this essay. –
J.Z., 30.6.09.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: That was the trouble with the world. too many people were
content to leave the very survival of the race to those few...” - E. C. Tubb. NEW WORLD
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The “ideal” of nuclear war is the complete automation of
slaughter.” – Frances Hoffer, in PEACE RESEARCH ABSTRACTS JOURNAL, entry
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: the actions we take will decide whether intercontinental
missiles or space ships lift off Earth ...” - Edmund Cooper, The Overman Culture, p.189.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The age of over-kill and under-think. – Source?
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The Atomic Age is here to stay – but are we? – Bennett
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The barbarism of our time is the more appalling because so
many people are not really appalled by it. - Herbert Muller. - & APPALLING
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The best defense against the atom bomb is not to be there
when it goes off ...” - BRITISH ARMY JOURNAL, 1949. – As if these devices could not
be deconstructed or politics could not be changed so much that their targets would
disappear and they would become obviously useless and superfluous. – J.Z., 8.8.08. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: the best way to prevent a holocaust is to prevent any kind
of nuclear war in the first place.” - Michael Mandelheim, Harvard University, in TIME,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The bombs were of the kind described, in the insane jargon
of the age, as 'clean'. This meant simply that they killed more people by impact and fire
than by a poisoning of the atmosphere that the senders of the bomb might have found
inconvenient - for they had persistent delusions about staying alive while they defended
freedom or whatever the hell they were doing. I suppose all through history people have
imagined that giving horror a pretty name makes it no longer a horror.” - Edgar
Pangborn: The Company of Glory, p.14.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The bottom line is that this country needs a powerful,
secure defence, but not one that will lead to our blowing ourselves up.” – Henry Kendall,
PENTHOUSE INTERNATIONAL, Nov. 82. – Ourselves? The blowing up would be
generously done, free of charge, by the opposing nuclear powers. That these powers, or,
rather, their direct victims, their subjects, would also be blown up would not be a
sufficient consolation. – J.Z., 25.1.08, 27.2.09. - & DEFENCE
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The capacity to kill more people than there are
Pentagonese.” - source? - OVERKILL DEFINITION
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The cause of liberty becomes a mockery if the price to be
paid is the wholesale destruction of those who are to enjoy liberty.” – Mohandas K.
Gandhi, Non-Violence in Peace and War, 1948, 1.272.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The central proposition of the deterrence doctrine – the
piece of logic on which the world theoretically depends to see the sun rise tomorrow – is
that a nuclear holocaust can best be prevented if each nuclear power, or bloc of powers,
holds in readiness a nuclear force with which it “credibly” threatens to destroy the entire
society of any attacker, even after suffering the worst possible “first strike” that the
attacker can launch.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.196. - - Typically, our
official and territorialist “expert” military strategists have come up with nothing quite
moral and rational. – J.Z., 10.10.07. - & DETERRENCE HYPOTHESIS
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The charge of being naïve should be leveled against those
who believe peace can be achieved by spending $ US 500 billion promoting the game of
chicken with civilization. The strategists who sit at their tables in the Pentagon or
Kremlin and plan limited nuclear wars, with so many 'mega-deaths' and 'collateral
casualties' before getting on the hot line to call it off, are not realists. they are naïve and
out of touch with reality.” - John Hinchcliff: Confronting the Nuclear Age, p.86/87.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The danger posed by the local bank robber is minor when
compared to the threat posed by a massive military arsenal capable of immense
destruction.” - Sy Leon: None of the Above, p.144.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The death penalty for individual crimes has been largely
abolished but the "death penalty" for whole populations, even for mankind, has been
introduced, prepared and maintained by territorial governments, our pretended
"protectors", still all too widely believed in, in spite of all their criminal actions. - J.Z.,
24. 2. 83, 1. 5. 06. - & THE DEATH PENALTY:
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: the deliberate killing of innocent persons is “murder” (
according to international law, noncombatants, i.e. the entire civil population, are
considered to be “innocent persons” ). Thus an atomic war would lead to mass murder
more surely than the type of mass bombings hitherto employed. Even those moral
theologians who still refrain from defining the atomic weapon as “bad in itself” do so
only so long as its effects can be controlled, i.e. restricted to military targets.” –
Franciskus Stratmann, O.P., quoted in: Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The destruction of cities or the threat of it will neither
promote stability, security, liberty, peace nor justice - on the contrary! - J.Z., 3.7.82.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The dissidents know, as Solzhenitsyn has taught, that the
Soviet system depends upon the lie; that the foundations of Soviet power are threatened
more by truth than by the cruise missile.” - Terry Quist, NEW GUARD, July-August
1978. - - Is it a lie or is it the truth? I hold with the latter, in the case of any dictatorship. -
Perhaps he has meant that as well. But then he should have said something like: "…
depends upon great lies. These and the Soviet system are threatened more by the spread
of truths than by cruise missiles in the hands of Western allies. The cruise missiles
threaten the victims of dictators more than the dictators themselves. - Inaccuracy in
thought and expression is a strong contributing factor towards nuclear war. - J.Z., 1. 5.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The Doomsday Bomb is the ultimate madness in a world
filled with all too many madmen in power and with the nuclear strength arsenals already
having come all too often all too close to being used. – J.Z., 25.6.86.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: the emperor of national security has no clothes!” - Herb
Feith in: John Hinchcliff, ed. of "Confronting the Nuclear Age, p.54. - & NATIONAL
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The entire planet is a human time-bomb.” - Edmund
Cooper, Kronk, p.186.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The extreme limit to which one may tolerate atomic
armament is its being set up as a deterrent. … [If] the opposition should nevertheless
start a war, in my opinion, uncontrollable atomic weapons may even then not be used in
defense, because this means is bad in itself. And the end does not justify the means. The
principle laid down by Catholic moralists … that the good to be expected from the
defensive war must outweigh its enormous damage, cannot be realized by a defence
carried out with atomic weapons.” - Franciskus Stratmann, O.P., quoted in: Lt.-Gen. E.
L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.226. - NUCLEAR RETALIATION TO A
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The facts remain obdurately what they are: an attack of
several thousand megatons will annihilate any country on earth many times over, no
matter what line of argument the strategists pursue; and a “nuclear exchange” will, if it
is on a large scale, threaten the life of man.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The feeling of unreality that present strategic thinking
arouses is compounded by the fact, itself a unique feature of life in the nuclear world,
that the strategist must incessantly plan for future attacks and counterattacks whose
prevention is supposedly the planning‟s whole purpose. Strategic thinking thus refers to a
reality that is supposed never to come into existence. Therefore, not only is morality
deliberately divorced from “thinking” but planning is divorced from action. The result of
all these novel mental operations is a fantastic intellectual construct – the body of
strategic theory built up over more than thirty years – in which ratiocination,
unrestrained either by moral feelings or by facts, has been permitted to run wild in a riot
of pure theory. (*) On this “thinking” almost no bounds are set, and the slaughter of
whole populations and the extinction of man become all too “thinkable”. - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.152. - - (*) ( hypotheses! – J.Z. ) - & STRATEGIC
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The first is to save the world from extinction by eliminating
nuclear weapons from the earth. Just recently, on the occasion of his retirement, Admiral
Hyman Rickover, who devoted a good part of his life to overseeing the development and
construction of nuclear-powered, nuclear-missile-bearing submarines for the United
States Navy, told a congressional committee that in his belief mankind was going to
destroy itself with nuclear arms. (*) He also said of his part in the nuclear buildup that
he was “not proud” of it, and added that he would like to “sink” the ships that he had
poured so much of his life into. And indeed, what everyone is now called on to do is to
sink all the ships, and also ground all the planes, and fill in all the missile silos, and
dismantle all the war-heads. The second aim, which alone can provide a sure foundation
for the first, is to create a political means by which the world can arrive at the decisions
that sovereign states previously arrived at through war. These two aims, which
correspond to the aims mentioned earlier of preserving the existence of life and pursuing
the various ends of life, are intimately connected. If, on the one hand, disarmament is not
accompanied by a political solution, then every clash of will between nations (territorial
governments! – J.Z. ) will tempt them to pick up the instruments of violence again, and so
lead the world back toward extinction. If, on the other hand, a political solution is not
accompanied by complete (nuclear, biological and chemical) disarmament, then the
political decisions that are made will not be binding, for they will be subject to challenge
by force.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.221. - - The alternative institutions
that are required would simply grow from realizing individual secessionism and free
associationism under full exterritorial autonomy. Such institutions have not need or
super-weapons or reasons or motives to fear other such institutions, all being free to do
their own things. They would have not use for ABC mass murder devices and would
collaborate to destroy all of them as fast as possible. The kinds and shapes, means and
ends of their voluntary communities would be entirely up to them. Their growth and
decline would be determined by individuals being attracted to them or by leaving them
because of disappointment with them. – J.Z., 22.9.07. - - (*) Rather, territorial
governments will do this job, against the wishes and will of mankind. – J.Z., 22.9.07. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The first principle of life in the new common world would
be respect for human beings, born and unborn, based on our common love of life and our
common jeopardy in the face of our own destructive powers and inclinations. This
respect would grow out of each generation‟s gratitude to past generations for having
permitted it to exist. Each generation would look on itself as though it were a delegation
that had been chosen by an assembly of all the dead and all the unborn to represent them
in life.” - Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.177. - & RESPECT FOR HUMAN
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: the fundamental logic of the strategy of both sides is, in
McNamara‟s words, to hold not just the military forces of the other side hostage, but also
its „society as a whole‟.” – Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.33. – Actually, for
many years cities were much more targeted than military targets. – J.Z., 21.9.07. –
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The gods visit the sins of the fathers upon the children.” –
Euripides, Phrixus, c. 412 B.C., 970, tr. H. Morgan. – Nuclear “weapons” were actually
designed upon such “thoughts” about religion. Which religion and which modern
political theory does quite radically reject all notions and practices of collective
responsibility? – J.Z., 30.5.08. – COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The great Carthage conducted three wars. It was still
powerful after the first, still inhabitable after the second one. When the third was over, it
could be found nowhere." - Bertolt Brecht, 1951quoted by Ruth Coleman in John
Hinchcliff's, ed., "Confronting the Nuclear Age", p.45. – Another version: “The Great
Carthage conducted three wars. After the first it was still powerful. After the second it
was still inhabitable. After the third it could no longer be found.” - Sign at a German
demonstration: "Das grosse Karthago fuehrte drei Kriege. Nach dem ersten war es noch
maechtig, nach dem zweiten, noch bewohnbar, nach dem dritten war es nicht mehr
auffindbar.“ - CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, 12. 9. 83. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The Hiroshima‟s people‟s experience … is a picture of
what our whole world is always poised to become – a backdrop of scarcely imaginable
horror lying just behind the surface of our normal life, and capable of breaking through
into that normal life at any second.” – Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.33.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The Holocaust is not a little war for the soldiers and the
history books. It is our greatest enemy, no matter where we stand on the political
spectrum.” - John Hinchcliff: Confronting the Nuclear Age, p.84. - THE ENEMY
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The horror of the human condition - any human condition -
is that one soon grows used to it.” - Sanders, quoted in Poul Anderson: After Doomsday,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The human race could not survive mass death technology
so widely spread. - Vernor Vinge, The Peace War, in ANALOG 7/84, p.137. - Not under
territorialism and the belief in collective responsibility. - J.Z. - NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The human race is in deadly danger, and I refuse to argue
with anyone who plots and schemes for advantage under such circumstances. Men must
mature or die.” - A. E. van Vogt, The Wizard of Linn, p.45.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The Human Race: Fellow travelers on a tiny spaceship
spinning through infinite space. We can wreck our ship, we can blow the human
experiment into nothingness; and by every analogy of practical life, a quarrelsome ship's
company and many hands on the steering gear is a good recipe for disaster.” - Adlai
Stevenson, at UN, NYC, 26. 1. 65. - Not so tiny that each could not enjoy almost full
autonomy with like-minded people in his own cubicles, under his own laws. - One
steering wheel for all, in spite of the great diversity of aims, is a good recipe for disaster.
It is asking for battles to control the wheel. - J.Z., 14. 3. 84. - Anyhow we cannot steer the
course of planet Earth, at least not yet. But what we should be able to steer, quite freely,
is the course of our own lives, together with like-minded people, and always at our own
risk and expense. Territorial governments have made that largely impossible in very
important spheres. Only in those sphere they consider to be trivial or of no interest to
them have they left us some autonomy. - J.Z., 15. 3. 84, 1.5.06. - HUMAN RACE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The hydrogen bomb is a suicide bomb.” - Allan Watts,
PLAYBOY, in interview with A. C. Clarke. – At least he should be able to distinguish
between suicide and mass murder. – J.Z., 11.2.08.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The idea of the territorial “state, not society is responsible
for the design, development and utilization of the atomic bomb.” – Felix Morley, State
and Society, in Templeton, The Politization of Society, p.82. – I only added the 5 words at
the beginning. – J.Z., 54.6.92.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The International Institute for Strategic Studies in London,
the most respected defence institute in the West (*), has released a report stating
unequivocally that there is no such thing as a limited nuclear war. Any nuclear war
would (*) escalate into a world-destroying holocaust.” – Daniel Kagan in PENTHOUSE,
INTERNATIONAL, 11/82. - - (*) Has it also explored the possibilities for an ideal
militia of volunteers for the protection of all individual rights and liberties? And that of
exterritorially autonomous communities of volunteers, with some of them practising full
monetary and financial freedom and proclaiming only quite rightful war aims and
alliances with all kinds of governments in exile, all only for volunteers? Has it developed
a libertarian defence and liberation program, one for the initiation of a military
insurrection against a dictatorship? I very much doubt this. - - (*) It could, and that is bad
enough. – J.Z., 25.1.08. - LIMITED NUCLEAR WAR, MILITIA
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: the invention of political means by which the world can
peacefully settle the issues that throughout history it has settled by war.” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, 227. – Religious wars were settled merely by giving the
world religious liberty or religious tolerance, i.e., individuals and their voluntary groups
the choice of their religious or non-religious activities. Wars for artificial monopolies,
e.g. over the customers in a particular countries, can be avoided via free trade. To the
extent that protectionists continue to religiously believe in their dogmas and prejudices,
they can and should be granted their preferred kind of protectionism for their own
volunteers and at their own expense and risk. At the same time, the believers in Free
Trade should be left to their free trade deals and communities or federations. Sports, arts,
literary and food & clothing supply competitions do already peacefully exist almost
everywhere. The same kind of tolerance and peaceful coexistence can be and must be
achieved for political, economic and social systems. None of them should be granted a
territorial monopoly with territorial government power and territorial laws. Only then
would such systems no longer automatically clash with each other. Such a system does
not have to be invented. It has long existed in history and merely became largely
forgotten or suppressed. All the constitutional, legal, juridical and institutional barriers
against it merely have to be removed, by no longer recognizing and respecting their
territorial monopoly claims and allowing self-help, individual choice, free enterprise,
consumer sovereignty, free associationism, free contracts, free federalism and individual
secessionism in these spheres as well. Then most of the current “issues” or “conflicts”
that lead to wars would simply disappear. Artists, poets, sportsmen, fashion-designers,
gardeners, hobbyists, inventors of one kind or the other do not battle each other in the
street but simply do all their own things, quite peacefully, at their own expense and risk.
The same is possible in the last few spheres in which territorial monopolies remained so
far upheld by territorial governments. Such governments are not only superfluous but the
very cause of ABC mass murder devices, their development, stockpiling and their
ultimate use. – J.Z., 23.9.07. - PANARCHISM
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The irrelevance of military victory in terms of total war." -
Alex Comfort - Authority and Delinquency, p. 02. – VICTORY?
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: the latest refinements of science are linked with the
cruelties of the Stone Age.” – Sir Winston Churchill, speech, London, March 26, 1942. –
Apparently, he had not read his Shakespeare, Henry V.: When lenity and cruelty fight for
a kingdom, the gentler gamester is the soonest winner. – ( Quoted from my flawed
memory only. – J.Z., 30.5.08. ) - He was one of those, who made sure of that. – But then
he seems to have been almost always “under the influence.” – Thus his originally almost
photographic memory did not always help him and he fell back into stone age emotions.
– “When wine is in, wit is out!” It is even worse for harder drinks. – Not that his
counterpart, Hitler, was any better in any respect, although he was a vegetarian, non-
smoker and teetotaler. But he was addicted to other drugs and syphilis had already
deteriorated his brain. Both were ruthless territorialists and acted on the biblical
“principle” of collective responsibility. – That reminds me of an old joke: “A summit
conference plane, carrying Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt, does crash.
Who is saved? None of them! But Europe is!” -J.Z., 30.5.08. - JOKES
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The machinery of destruction is complete, poised on a hair
trigger, waiting for the “button” to be “pushed” by some misguided or deranged human
being or for some faulty computer chip to send out the instruction to fire. That so much
should be balanced on so fine a point – that the fruit of four and a half billion years can
be undone in a careless moment – is a fact against which belief rebels.” - Jonathan
Schell, The Fate of the Earth, p.182.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The main point of my comment was an attempt to start a
discussion with Zube on why he things the mere possession of nuclear weapons would
justify assassination. (*) I consider this an interesting point with implications beyond the
specific issue.” – Ely Chaitlin, THE CONNECTION 138, p.13. – Nuclear weapons are
small, handy, economical mass extermination camp packages, built and maintained to be
used international, or used by accident or miscalculation – upon the principle of
collective responsibility of whole cities, populations & countries for the criminal actions
of a few people, mostly the monopolistic decision-makers in power. With them millions
of people, whole populations of whole territories, are taken hostage or considered as mere
expendable property of their rulers. Even when used with the intention to deter a
government from committing aggression, they do not deter only these ruler but rather
threaten to exterminate their subjects, while the rulers might survive, in the safest
bunkers. The are not suitable means for liberation efforts or for inciting the oppressed to
rise in revolutions or military insurrections. On the contrary, the make them prefer even
the worst government of their own to such a threat and its execution. They make enemies,
not friends or allies out of our secret allies, the oppressed people. The leave life and death
decisions for millions in the hands of those foolish, ignorant or power-mad rulers who
image that they could use such devices rightly, wisely, deterringly or defensively in the
long run. They, constructing them, keeping them in readiness for use, characterize more
than anything else tyranny and tyrants. (*) One should also distinguish tyrannicide from
assassination of people who cannot be rightly classed as tyrants. – J.Z., n.d. & 25.1.08. -
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The means by which we live (*) have outdistanced the ends
for which we life. Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. (**) We have
guided missiles and misguided men.” (***) - Martin Luther King, Jr., Strength of Love,
1963, 7.3. – He was one of the misguiding forces, babbling about love instead of
discussing individual rights and liberties. The Bible is full of collective responsibility
notions. Nuclear “weapons” are just handy means to put such notions into practice. – J.Z.,
30.5.08. - (*) Are nuclear weapons means by which we live? – (**) Are indiscriminate
mass murder devices scientific devices for moral and sensible aims? – (***) Would a real
scientist ignore the consequences of his actions? – Soft thinking by soft heads won‟t get
us out of our difficulties. - J.Z., 30.5.08. – COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY, LOVE,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The means prepare the end, and the end is what the means
have made it.” – John Morle, 1871-1908, “Carlyle”, in Critical Miscellanies
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The mere existence of nuclear “weapons” is a dire threat to
all human beings, their rights, their liberties, their lives. – J.Z., 22.9.05.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The mere existence of nuclear weapons was the most
revealing symptom of what was out of balance about the past. Two societies (territorial
States!- J.Z.), in varying degrees acceptable or unacceptable to one another, were so
interested in their differences that they came to hate their common good. That obsession
was as a cancer in the mind and heart of the old world, which spread cruelty and
blindness through the whole enormous body, and finally killed it. … If only we had
gained wisdom from the fire. If only we can accept how alike we all are, one and another.
…” - Whitley Strieber and James Kunetka, War Day, p.514& 515. In this book it lasted
thirty-six minutes – and devastated the world,– - Those alike should “embrace” or
tolerate each other in their own structures and leave at the same time and sufficiently
alone all those who are different and chose a different structure for themselves.
Territorialists find that very difficult to do or even merely to think about. They want to
reshape all others in accordance with their own ideals and this leads, inevitably to
clashes, for the others have different ideals and also want to impose them upon dissenters.
Only exterritorially, as voluntary and free experimenters, could they leave each other
sufficiently alone. But it takes a major effort to get that simply idea into their heads,
blocked by territorialist notions. In their private lives they already practise it, taking it for
granted. But in public affairs their minds are still welded to the territorial model. – J.Z.,
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The military profession derived whatever respect it enjoyed
because it was supposed to protect the lives and property of the non-combatant
population. Now, in the conception of nuclear war, the armed forces of each side take the
civilians of the other side as their targets, and are unable to safeguard the lives of their
own people. In 1907 it was declared to be against the laws of war for armed forces to
take hostages whose lives would guarantee submission. Now the whole populations are
hostages.” - Lt.-Gen. E. L. M. Burns, Megamurder, 1966, p.3.
NUCLEAR WAR THREAT: The military should realize that the greatest threat to the
survival of democracy is no longer the Russians or the Chinese or any other country
professing anti-d