Most reaction was very positive: smiles, thanks, change of body language to indicate a dropping of defenses.

Sign for the Biedronka supermarket in Gryfów Śląski

Those who refused to accept my little gift, by and large, tended to be working in wage employment. Marketplace vendors, sole traders and so on were delighted. The lovely young woman wearing a boring gray knit corporate shirt behind the counter at the KFC, and the security guard there, didn’t want anything to do with ladybugs.

The ladybug (Polish: biedronka, Slovak: lienka) has positive associations in people’s minds in this area, at least in Poland and Slovakia. Killing a ladybug is considered bad luck, at the very least, which leads a lot of folks to consider seeing one as good luck.

And my luck seems to be increasing.

Right near the beginning of the discussion, I asked group members to indicate if they were criminals, by raising their hands, and led off by sticking mine up first.

Eventually, and rather quickly, every hand went up.

There is honor among thieves, though the “thievery” in play here is of the legal kind, not the moral kind (think: mp3). This represents and opportunity for building community among libertarians, which is largely ignored by the mainstream libertarian movement.

Camp attendees who are following my blog are encouraged to read “The penalty is always death” (which I presented in abbreviated form in several sessions anyway), and the linked “Clown suit defense” articles.

Answers varied wildly. The exercise, as constructed, was great, because I didn’t know this answer for myself until doing it.

My answer: Compassion. Compassion is my highest value.

Next: What’s your vision for expressing/achieving/maximising that value?

My answer: End all legal privilege. Smash the state.

Next: What is your unique ability to contribute to making that happen? Where is your comparative advantage?

My answer: Crypto/web tech to support the growth of peaceful black and gray markets.

Agora! Compassion! Action!

With a single exception, attendees responded with words evoking free markets, individualism, free association, self-determination, respect for property, the ability to create and retain wealth, no interference in peaceful trade, ideological consistency, and so on.

I then told them that they are all absolutely right. And at the same time absolutely wrong.

I said: Capitalism is an exploitative system of privileges granted to wealthy interests to the detriment of the poor.

And that definition is also right, because it lives in the minds of billions.

Discuss.

There’s at least one meow in the recording, courtesy of Henry, and the mix toward the end is less than perfect. Nevertheless, I hope you enjoy.

Download (mp3, 21m37s, 19.7MB)

I hold that institutions of property relations to mass-energy are essential for regulating peaceful interactions among sophonts comprised, themselves, of mass-energy. Just as I have the right to say “This is my aorta, and I will shoot you if you try vigorously enough to deprive me of my use of it,” I hold that I also have the right to say “This is my atom, my molecule, my widget, my asteroid, and, should my claim achieve social legitimacy by virtue of my homesteading and non-abandonment, shoot you if you try vigorously enough to deprive me of my use of it.”

By looking at this cookie cutter, you hereby agree that should you ever make a cookie in the shape of a revolver for other than your personal use, it'll be okay for me to shoot you.

I also hold, in direct opposition to intellectual “property”, that patterns are information, and that information cannot be a subject of legitimate property. Information is intangible and infinitely replicable. By extracting the information pattern from a physical subject of legitimate property — a DVD, a book, a widget — and then using that information for my own purposes, I deprive nobody of their property. Steal my DVD, my book, my widget, and I have grounds to resist that action by any means, up to and including the application of lethal force. Take a stab at expropriating my aorta and I’ll fight you to the death, and expect my neighbors to come to my aid.

In a truly free society, in a freed market, I hold that an inventor has a moral right to credit for that output of their mind which has enough social value to be replicated. If Kevin invents a fantastic new potato-slicer and Bob copies the device and runs around marketing it as his own creation, Bob is a jerk and ought to be treated as such. However, if Kevin now comes along and tries to shoot Bob for doing this, Kevin is a criminal, and I and other free people will come to Bob’s aid in repelling Kevin’s attack.

See also the terms of use for this website at “… and you agree“.

Purchase the revolver cookie cutter from Cakes Cookies & Crafts Shop.

From the opening post:

Patri Friedman puts forth a quibble with agorist theory which is worth addressing in Indirectly Improving Institutions: Agorism and Civil Society.

Let us consider one of the largest black markets in the world, the market for illegal drugs, which has been thriving for decades. Has this resulted in market demand for protection agencies to replace the government? Um, no. It has resulted in exactly the opposite – a strengthening of the monopoly provider of security and law. It has given us the militarization of policy, legalized theft via civil asset forfeiture, and a well-funded DEA.

[...]

I believe in a different indirect path: global competition between governments. Let’s hit states where they are weak – at providing good services to their customers, not where they are strong – at holding onto territory with violence. We can do this by competing for citizens and capital, not for territory. Whether this is done through seasteading, free zones, or some other method entirely, I think it is a far more plausible route to indirectly improving political institutions.

In the end, Patri’s focus seems to be that there might be greater value in devoting effort and resources to projects like the ones he mentions, in preference to counter-economics. At the end of things, he might be proven right. Meanwhile, I say, “let a thousand tactics bloom” for liberty. The agorist crowd and the seasteading crowd might have differences of emphasis and approach, but from what I have seen out of both camps they are natural allies. Let’s run our experiments, let hard reality (ie: the market) reward what works, and where we see a benefit in changing tactics in order to advance freedom, let us not be blinkered by devotion to barren ideology of any sort. Amen.

Orthodox Konkinite Brad Spangler responds with “Misconception: agorism is solely a word for black market” and A3 comrade Royce Christian chimes in too with “Agorist response to a Libertarian criticism“, both of which approach the discussion from interesting and distinct angles and are well worth a click and a read.

Veteran counter-economist Jim Davidson also replies to Patri’s blog post with a direct challenge:

You wrote, “the market for illegal drugs, which has been thriving for decades. Has this resulted in market demand for protection agencies to replace the government?”

The answer is yes, it has. And most drug dealers provide their own protection, often in concert with other dealers in their area. These private protection agencies are referred to as “gangs” and their leaders as “drug lords.” They employ violence to enforce contracts, control territory, and defend the sovereignty of their members.

And that’s all for the lesson.

Well gee whiz!

Buy your thingamajings and whatchamacalits today! Our prices are innnsaaaaaaannne!!!!!

A New Libertarian Ally does not follow a tactician or strategist, but rather “buys” their argument and expertise. Anyone offering a better plan can replace the previous planner. Tactics and strategy should be “bought and sold” by the Allies like any other commodity in consistent agorist fashion.

–SEK3, NLM