? Editing: Post:21.body Save Delete Cancel
Content changed Sign & Publish new content

Agora

Interpreting Worldwide News from an Agorist Perspective

Follow in NewsfeedFollowing

Latest comments:

Tiny Crack Appears In China

9 hours ago

Original:

The backlash is growing against Xi Jinping in China and around the world

Material wealth has a marginal diminishing return. When you live in poverty every new dollar you receive makes a relatively big difference to your circumstances. Once wealthy, as the saying goes, 'how many yachts can you water-ski behind?'. The transitions and adaptions to these new circumstances are one of the things that make life interesting and challenging. China has clearly undergone a transition. At the same time it's wholehearted adoption of the Statist philosophy has always been patent.

chinese_statism.jpeg (275x183)

But, with the help of Western financiers, it has added material wealth in the familiar Statist two-step of managing the benefits of freedom for the purposes of theft, in the form of taxation, with political dominance, to ensure those benefits only serve to expand State power and control. Then it's just a question of narrative management to ensure the State comes out looking like the champion for 'freedom' ('we made you wealthy didn't we?') or 'the oppressed' ('where would you be without us?') according to the particular political requirements of the moment.

Xi Jinping epitomizes this Chinese State as you might expect. If his image ceases to fulfill the role of representing the sacrifice of personal responsibility and development to the 'greater good' of the State, he will be replaced by another symptom, who perhaps reflects it in a slightly less unflattering (to the individual) light. However distinct most commentators would have you believe they are, Statists are still Statists at heart:

trump_and_xi_are_the_same.jpeg (290x174)

Until ordinary people confront the Statist within themselves it makes little difference what puppet happens to be the repository for all their hopes and dreams (and delusions). If some are perhaps finally questioning the pervasive centralization of power in the form of one man, it might be worthwhile considering what the true source of that power really is. Restoration in the belief in personal, individual judgement and the strength to ignore those who claim power and control over you will take more than a mere face change at the top.

Monero_-_XMR.png (64x64)
4422YVpH6wdb7BvtvCvUF7GSbRpXrwtB6AWWiAVyWnMJhKXe5k6sM1pP4rHWmutLzzFhJ8cVVUjA5SWBqXsGaqQbP1PdJge

BC_Logo_.png (64x64)

1QAJsWSospHreu479y5TAAJFhjnEhqwoV8

Read more

State Robs Private Company Of $5bn Then Delivers Sermon On 'Appropriateness'

1 day ago

Original:

Facebook data scandal: Social network fined $5bn over 'inappropriate' sharing of users' personal information

daylight_robbery.jpeg (273x184)

We're conditioned to believe that our State 'Big Brother' knows best. When changes take place in society and there is a degree of uncertainty and confusion it's harder for many to override the programming and place the new changes into their proper context. A context in which the State, which controls how we are all 'educated', isn't perceived as the solution to all our problems.

So it is with technology. New technology represents an enormous paradigm shift for society. It presents new opportunities and challenges and disrupts old ways of thinking and doing things. Figuring out what's 'right' and 'wrong' in these circumstances might appear overwhelming. But actually it's not at all. Technology is just a tool. A powerful one, but merely a tool none the less. It doesn't change the fundamental relation between Man and State. That is, the historic struggle for Man to rid himself of the State. Once it is understood that a violent extortion racket is a poor basis (in principle and practice) for the advancement of Man's condition, putting technology's relation to it in context becomes a great deal more straightforward.

The State is often said to be 'behind', 'slow to adapt' etc. to rapidly changing technological circumstances, but here we see it nimbly taking advantage of the lack of awareness of how State power extends itself and confusion regarding 'privacy' to not only take a huge dip into the profits of this company (which ultimately translates to higher consumer prices) but deliver a lecture on what it deems 'appropriate' behavior at the same time. Facebook is not a State. No representative from Facebook has ever appeared at my doorstep threatening to rob and cage me because I don't subscribe to their services. Facebook has never sent me threatening correspondence coercing me into conforming to it's corporate code of conduct. I am free to ignore Facebook and I do.

If you are concerned about the activities of any organization you freely trade with (tech or otherwise) you are free to stop your patronage according to the contract you have freely made with them. You are in control. You call the shots.

What this implies is taking responsibility for one's own life and choices. What that means to you is up to you and I'm not about to succumb to my conditioning and start delivering a self-righteous sermon of my own. I'm going to assume you know best for yourself, what's best for yourself - something the State will never allow unless they've already painted you into a false dichotomy of their own making (e.g. voting).

The technology is new, but the age old frighten, coerce and plunder routine has the flexibility to adapt to it very successfully. Similarly technology alone won't save us from falling for the same old tricks if we don't start to question our own assumptions about what the State is (a delusion) and what it's role should be (non-existent).

Read more

Inside Another State: What Do Statists In One Location Think Of Statists In Another?

2 days ago

Original:

Inside Iran: What Iranians think of stand-off with US?

ordinary_iranians.jpg (924x608)

People are the same everywhere. They live in fear of, and are deluded by, the State. It's true that the Western States are deliberately provoking and undermining the lives of people in Iran. That is what States do. They feed off conflict. They need an 'enemy'. They did it in the process of establishing themselves as the State in first place and it is only logical for them to continue doing it once 'in power'. "Who's not suffering?" asks one man rhetorically, referring to US sanctions. But what are 'US sanctions'? They're restrictions of free trade by a Statist power. People in Iran are just as accustomed to the State interfering in their trading relationships as the people in the US. Conflict enables the State to distract it's local population from the realities of their own oppression and focus on some external 'threat'. This is so well known that it is merely a platitude. However, people fall for it every time because it creates an 'acceptable narrative' within their own society. "'Iran' is furious" declares the article. As if a collective delusion can have an emotion like fury. It's the equivalent of saying 'Christmas is furious' as festive sales drop. 'Iran', like the 'U.S' or 'the West', is a man made construct. If I were to open a lemonade stall at the edge of a market in Tehran and a State official closed it down I might well be furious. This is because there is a principle at stake. He is using the delusion of State power to justify violent coercion to interfere with free and consensual trade between people. It is not a question of scale. My local State official doesn't suddenly become a righteous savior as a function of 'external' threats from even bigger bullies. Not understanding the true source of one's individual 'fury' can easily lead to channeling it into well established estuaries of thought that suit the Statist agenda. We're told "They were already on the margins before sanctions" and 'the economy is slumping', but reasons as to why aren't covered in this article. Suffice to say briefly here that the relationship between Statist interference and 'economic slump' is manifest.

So the 'People' slip into the simple narrative that 'their' State has prepared them for "I'm not sure what Donald Trump gains by hurting us," - the answer is the same thing he, and many, many others gain by hurting you (and the people of the US) - power and control.

It takes a Statist stooge to complete the delusion in case the 'People' haven't fully conformed to their programming:
"There is not going to be a war. Of course, it's possible somebody will make a mistake. But we do not want a war." How easily such a diplomatic statement would sit with the diplomatic jargon of earlier conflicts. Understood as a giant stack of Statist delusions it becomes clearer how each individual justifies his perspective without having to challenge the essential mindset that has created the tinderbox. In other words the diplomat who said this genuinely believes it and is sincere about not wanting to go to war. As are the vast majority of ordinary people. But, given pause for reflection, an ordinary person comes out with:

"Maybe it would even be better for us if a war happens," she said.

I asked: Why would someone want war?

"It might actually lead to a change in our ruling system. It might lead to a better situation. But if it's going to lead to a civil war then no, it's not going to be good at all," she replied.

Just as you might expect from any ordinary U.S./Western person she has forgotten that the real power lies with her and ticked all her Statist master's boxes: 'War could be good', 'I feel the oppression', 'but any kind of internal change is out of the question'.

These guys know that such a line of thinking can easily be harnessed to their purposes:

iranian_statists.jpg (925x610)

Bleating about 'oppression' is not a problem.

Same for these guys:

trump_and_the_military.jpeg (329x153)

As the BBC puts it:

'But when Iran is confronted by America, most Iranians, conservative or liberal, will put their country first.'

So the answer is that they will think whatever their Statist masters want them to think, which is essentially not to think at all - merely to obey. That is no 'mistake', it is setup that way by design. The only mistake you can make is to fall for it ... (again) ...

Read more

You Will Be Put In A Cage If You Make Allegations Against Extortion Racket Enforcers

on Jul 12, 2019

Original:

Police slam ‘untrue, baseless' allegations that checks at MRT stations target Malays

We all know that otherwise potentially delinquent, irresponsible and dangerous youths (in other contexts) are suddenly transformed into paragons of virtue by the simple application of a costume and their arming with deadly weapons. However, this is hardly new:

hitler_youth.jpg (612x394)

and is unlikely to change over time. What is important is how these young minds are managed and to what end. Youngsters, quite naturally, have a tendency to see the world in less nuanced, more black and white terms. Part of growing up is, of course, coming to terms with reality that doesn't always match our expectations. The cognitive dissonance that results from such episodes can be quite unpleasant and most people therefore try to avoid it. It's comforting to 'know' that your gang is better, more noble, more courageous etc. than who/whatever it is you've been setup to oppose. Simple, comforting but actually quite dangerous if unchecked. History is replete with examples, too numerous to mention here, of the worst atrocities and injustices being committed as a result of an arrogant certainty in the 'righteousness' of one particular idea/race/cause (insert whatever here).

So what do we do about it? Not easy. What you don't do is imbue these young minds with a sense of invincibility and moral superiority. Growing up in a world in which riding one's electric scooter at 11km/hr is deemed worthy of criminal sanction it must come as quite a revelation that, by the simple application of a costume and the blessing of the Elders, it is not possible for anyone to even allege that you have done anything wrong. Of course, such a circumstance has been contrived by the gang Elders in the first place: 'Don't worry, we've got your back' they can re-reassuringly explain to their young charges; and to prove their total confidence in the arrangement, deadly weaponry will be issued to each and every one of them 'just in case'.

When a gang with a monopoly on violence promotes 'peace, harmony and respect' what it really means is 'shut up' if you dare to question our right to rule over you. Imagine I'm a Jew in 1930's Germany and I am beaten up by a gang of SA outside my shop. I go to the 'authorities' and 'allege' that a crime has been committed against me. However, I am put in a cage for 'stirring up racial conflict'. Make sense? Depends who's shoes you're in. From the perspective of the State it makes perfect sense. It justifies it's existence to the 'People' by providing 'protection' services. To the Jew? Which one do you identify with most? Who benefits from this arrangement?

When you cannot allege, you have no voice. When you have no voice, you do not exist. If you do not exist then what difference does it make what is done to you?

Who's touting this dangerous idea? Perhaps a more 'grown up' approach would be to demonstrate to these young men that anyone is entitled to allege, but it is the evidence that counts in the end. Taking that to it's logical conclusion is something the 'Elders' are not quite so keen to promote. It takes the shine off the honor and nobility PR tools that allow the whole scheme to justify it's existence ( in contrast to yours).

Read more

Agitating For War Will Not Cease

on Jul 11, 2019

Original:

Iranian boats attempt to seize British tanker in Strait of Hormuz

British_tanker.jpeg (1200x675)

Violent aggression lies at the foundation of the State. Any State, however good it is at dressing itself up in philosophical verbiage. It is entirely dependent upon it. If you disagree simply consistently refuse to pay tribune (they call it 'tax') to your State of choice and wait for your armed reality check to eventually visit. Keep going and you can experience the thrill of armed conflict for yourself.

War, whatever form it takes, is simply the logical extension of this underlying reality. We're conditioned to oppression via the extortion of our property so some may be inclined to believe it is 'natural'. Conflicts of interest are, of course, an inevitable part of life. From squabbles as children on up. We've all learnt to resolve them in one way or another. Distinguishing between your interests and those of people who have much to gain from widespread conflict is, I suggest, an important issue to contemplate, unless you wish to live in complete ignorance.

There is no reason to believe that the violent and aggressive bully that demands tribune from you is operating in your best interests when it utilizes the resources of destruction that you have equipped it with to conjure up conflict elsewhere. This is as true, of course, for the people of Iran as much as for the US, UK or almost anywhere else you could care to mention.

When these States knock up against each other, discerning all the minutiae of the latest contrivances is unnecessary for you to make a determination. The investigative journalists, diplomats, spies, conspiracy theorists etc. will do their thing, well intended or otherwise, but it's frankly absurd for you, me or the vast majority of people to sift through all the nuances of international relations and honestly expect to have a clear grasp of the entire landscape. We need to understand what lies at the heart of it all, in our own experience.

Neither an Iranian, Venezuelan nor Russian has ever attempted to extort me personally. If I gave them the opportunity, perhaps they would, but you have to deal with the problems in front of you, not those that have been manufactured by your local Statist spokespeople for the extension of their power and 'authority'. If I were to move to any of those countries I expect the Statist officials would be quick to ensure I paid their form of tribune. That is a problem. But it's not one that's going to be solved by taking sides in a game of who can be the most violently aggressive entity on the larger stage of world affairs.

Read more

Genuflect To The 'Holocaust'

on Jul 10, 2019

Original:

US high school principal removed after refusing to say Holocaust was 'factual historic event'

holocaust_denial.jpeg (259x194)

I only have to say the Word and I can feel the tension rising in the reader's mind. What if someone happens to peer over your shoulder whilst you're reading this on some obscure 'censorship resistant' website? How long before you've traveled down the slippery slope and we have another Christchurch type situation on our hands? Even if you're not so easily manipulated yourself, just think of the millions who are!

On almost any article you read at this point you will get a series of qualifiers re-assuring the reader of the writer's humanitarian credentials. Why? We already know that psycho/sociopaths make up approximately 1% of the World's population. So you have hundred to one chance that I, or the vast majority of people you talk to, are not one of them. They are often looked upon favorably by the State. However, this blog is explicitly anti-Statist, so such qualifiers and genuflecting should hardly be necessary. I don't believe in burning people alive and in any of the (de-humanizing) world views regarding other people necessary for bringing such a state of affairs into existence. The first part of that sentence is hardly controversial. The second part is where all the disagreement occurs. How does one go about 'de-humanizing' another? That could be a long discussion, but I suggest it would touch, at some point, on our human ability to communicate our thoughts and feelings.

What was the thought expressed by this 'public school official' that led to the destruction of his career? He 'told the parent that he must remain “politically neutral” on the issue'. Obviously a fanatic.

What he probably doesn't realize is that the State is the natural and logical locus for psychopathy and to 'serve' it is simply not good enough to 'remain neutral'. State employees must actively embrace the psychopathy of the State to prepare society for it's next 'Holocaust', whatever form that eventually takes, notwithstanding all the 'good intentions' on the way.

He has sacrificed his career for his intellectual integrity. If nothing is learned from this others will sacrifice far more ...

Read more

People Are Killing Each Other - Who's Right? Who's Wrong?

on Jul 09, 2019

Original:

Yemen Houthi rebels attack airport, power plant in Saudi Arabia

yemen_houti_rebels.jpeg (300x168)​​​​​​​

Like me you're probably aware that the War in Yemen hasn't received much mainstream media attention so far. I presume this is due, in part at least, to lucrative weapons industry interests. Anyway, the gist to-date has been that Saudi Arabia has been seeking to influence the internal politics of Yemen with military strikes. This is the first report I've seen that demonstrates any kind of push back from one of the factions negatively impacted by Saudi's actions. So now there are two 'sides'. Not just aggressors and victims, but victims on 'all sides of the conflict'. These 'Yemen Houthi rebels' probably haven't considered how the Western media dynamic of their conflict may have suddenly changed in the hands of Western media manipulators. Hardly surprising given their circumstances. However, I suggest that it's now possible for any principle underlying their struggle to be relativised out of existence by whomever is in the most powerful position to do so. Has the Truth changed for anyone involved? No, just perceptions swirling in the media and fed to whichever consumer wants to channel it into his existing, often self-serving, world view.

So what can I do about it? Study the history and background to the conflict? Deeply appreciate all the subtle religious nuances over hundreds, and even thousands, of years? Admirable you might say. But am I honestly going to do that on a Tuesday morning, when I have work to do and bills to pay? Even if I did, why exactly should anyone take any more notice of my 'insights' than anyone else? Why focus on Yemen? Why not S-E Asia, Brexit or Russia?

What's useful, I find, in such circumstances is the consistent application of a principle. It's possible today to scour Wikipedia and peer back over history in a relatively efficient fashion. At each juncture of conflict has one side initiated physical violence to force it's worldview on another? Once someone/group is being violently imposed upon it would be perverse for them not to physically defend themselves.

Such a 'simplistic' approach is hard for many people to countenance for a very good reason: It brings into question our own condition. For anyone living under the purview of a State and paying tax tribune 'protection' money the threat of physical violence for 'non-believers' is ever present. Of course, it isn't perceived that way which is why it's so much easier to flick through headlines like the one above, shake one's head at the 'madness' in the World, and get back to doing far more work than necessary to keep the violent conflict from our own front door.

Read more

At a time of discord, Pride celebrations remind us the world is moving in the wrong direction

on Jul 08, 2019

Original:

"At a time of discord, Pride celebrations remind us the world is moving in the right direction"

gay_pride_2019.jpeg (275x183)

There is nothing to celebrate about being an unusual sexual misfit. Why is anyone's sexuality of any particular interest outside of their own personal life? I can't think of a single way my life has been enhanced by the existence of unusual sexual behavior throughout history. Is it wrong? Who am I to judge? Should it be stopped? How exactly could I enforce that even if I wanted to? Via physical violence? That would clearly violate the non-aggression principle (a rule of thumb, not an 'absolute truth'). Vicariously via the State apparatus? That would be dishonest and cowardly. I could vote for a bigot or, more straightforwardly, I could leave the decision to a 'strong leader'. All great ways to pray at the alter of self-serving bigotry and irresponsibility.

So how many of the participants of gay pride are going to focus on the extent to which the support of these ideas (voting, strong leaders) is just a tad hypocritical? Very few I suspect.

What these 'celebrations' remind us of is how easily distracted we are from things that actually do affect our lives e.g. voting and 'strong leaders'. In virtually every transaction we make we pay tribune (e.g. sales tax) to someone else's idea of a 'good' leader. Or even our own idea of a 'good' leader if we were stupid and irresponsible enough to have voted.

How do we move away from such bigotry and prejudice 'at a time of discord' (i.e. any given moment in history). Can I suggest that instead of prancing about in the streets pretending that you are 'free', you take a closer look at what 'freedom' actually is when it applies to everyone and not just a quirky minority who are a useful distraction for those who are busily, and in many ways successfully, moving the world very much in the wrong direction.

Read more

Agora Chronicles

on Jul 08, 2019

Inspired by Caitlyn Johnston and Daniel Richter to be a little more pro-active I am going to write a blog a day on a particular news article from an Agorist perspective (as I understand it). I hope it encourages discussion, debate, criticism etc. The title of each blog will be what the headline should have read (in my opinion) and then I will provide the original and link as reference. Here goes ...

Read more

Stun Cuff World

on Apr 17, 2019

stuncuffs.jpg (300x263)

In a world in which your 'facts' must be Government approved it's worth taking stock of what's in store for those whose 'facts' might fall just short of what's acceptable in 'polite, civilized' Government ministerial circles. The same people who will murder someone in cold blood for providing the opportunity/choice to another to indulge in momentary pleasure get to decide if your 'facts' neatly fit their self-serving narratives. If they don't it's a fact that they have every 'Right' to adjust your thinking.

Read more

Tempting Carrots

on Mar 28, 2019

carrotandStick.jpeg (288x175)

The State uses it's stolen booty to consolidate and extend it's power. I've written before about the many 'sticks' (mental/physical) it has at it's disposal for obtaining that booty in the first place; but how about the 'carrots'?

I came across this website today that offered tempting prospects to the 'freedom loving' and technically inclined.

The OTF masquerades as 'Supporting Internet Freedom' but is in fact sustained by grants from the BBG, which is now the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which itself is under the supervision of the State Dept. The USAGM was replaced with a single appointed chief executive officer as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (not a freedom loving document).

Whether you are a technologist or working in some other industry I suggest you research the background behind these front organizations. If it seems too good to be true ... it probably is ...

Read more

Don't Vote

on Nov 06, 2018

Voting, as it currently functions within the State, is a key component in turning the myth of State authority into what appears, for many, to be 'reality'. The only 'reality' that arises from it is a dangerous mental delusion that it is perfectly normal, and acceptable, to use violent extortion against innocent people.

Many imagine that, at the moment of voting, they have exercised their 'power' and that the politicians live in fear of their collective will. At the moment of voting people give up all their power.

voting.jpeg (275x183)

They have publicly stated that their entire contribution to the politics of the world we live in consists of endorsing a politician salivating over the prospect of wielding the power that comes from harnessing the mass delusion.

hilaryandkissenger.jpeg (318x159)

If you want a better world you can start by not reinforcing the myth in the minds of armed men, who you do not control,

copsyoudontcontrol.jpeg (800x559)

that they are representing your best interests and then discovering that they do not.

Before decrying everyone else for their 'dumb' voting decisions, take a look in the mirror and think about your own next 'smartest' move. If it involves endorsing the next violent extortionist (no matter how well intentioned he/she appears) by voting, then you only have yourself to blame for the results.

As ever, Larken Rose manages to press the point home ...

Read more

FAANG Alternatives

on Oct 01, 2018
Internet_Censorship.jpeg (730x400)
Just a quick list I hope you might find useful ...
Google Search -> Duckduckgo, Startpage, Searx
• Gmail ->Tutanota
• Google Maps → Openstreetmap
• Youtube -> Bitchute, peerTube, LBRY, Newpipe(android)
• Google Calendar -> Lightning Calendar, Nextcloud
• Google+/Facebook → Minds, Diaspora, Mastodon
• Google Photos -> Cryptee
• Chrome → Brave, Tor, Firefox
• Play Store → F-Droid, Aurora
• Google Drive → Nextcloud, Syncthing
• Android OS/ iOS → LineageOS, PureOS (soon)
Read more

Seize The Narrative

on Sep 06, 2018

Seize_narrative.jpg (960x569)
"Your account is locked"

I have just been locked out of diaspora*

I re-joined only recently (last two weeks) with an #agorism tag and a link to one article

Diaspora was founded by this guy (with one other)

In the past (an earlier account I had) I used it to help write about journalists like Serena Shim and others who I would never have heard of otherwise.

These are the less well known cases (compared to e.g. Michael Hastings)
This is an ongoing trend that can only get worse: Corbett Report - Reddit

Just to clarify ... the 'original' diaspora* was an effective alternative to Facebook and was gaining a lot of traction. It was then hit by a lot of 'technical' issues and eventually resurfaced as this new, 'improved' version (full of NASA propaganda) and other sanitized posts. I've now been locked out of this new version (along with many others I expect).

As Corbett has pointed out elsewhere the answer to YouTube et al censorship is not to equate these businesses with public utilities and demand the State steps in to intervene to uphold free speech (as if that would ever be a 'solution' anyway). It is simply to remove one's business and turn to alternative, de-centralized, channels (such as this one or Steemit).

Caitlyn Johnstone is good at explaining how our current mainstream absurd narratives are cooked up and spewed out in detail and James Corbett also gives excellent background and catchup info.

How long before they attempt to shut these guys down as well?

Unless we take back control of these narratives oppression, destruction and death will be 'sold' to the public as it has so many times in the past.

Update: 26 Jun 2019:

The times we live in: Make sure you're not emotionally affected or motivated by deep sympathy for any narrative that falls outside of State approval.

Read more

Am I A Statist?

on Aug 20, 2018

police_state_irs.jpeg

Rather than bemoaning the state of the world let's ponder, for a moment, on our own beliefs. The following are 14 questions that I hope you will find interesting. Try to answer in order and come to a definite conclusion before moving on to the next:

1. Is it ever good to break the law?

2. Can you think of a current example of a law that is already wrong? i.e. That it would be right for you not to obey?

3. Do you think it's right that you be forced to do things you are opposed to?

4. Is there something the gov does with money that you do approve of?

5. If someone e.g. doesn't have any children, don't need, don't want education, what should happen to them if they refuse to pay?

6. If you would allow them to refuse to pay tax would you extend that Right to everyone?

7. Would you apply this to everything on the list of things that people do/don't want? i.e. don't get the service, don't have to pay.

8. Is there any situation where gov should make people pay for their version of a service?

9. Do you agree it's bad to initiate beating someone up and stealing their money?

10. Do you agree people have the Right to defend themselves against someone trying to rob them (including hiring people to defend them)?

11. Do you agree there's anything the gov has the Right to do that normal people don't have the Right to do?

12. Does morality right/wrong apply the same to people with badges as to those without?

13. When it comes to gov, would it even be gov if it doesn't have special rights and powers? i.e. If we're all equal is it even gov any more?

14. Can you name anything that you want gov to do that you don't have the Right to do yourself (not ability, Right)? i.e. Anything that would be wrong if you did it?

(inspired by, but with no direct link to, Larken Rose's "Candles in the Dark/Mirror" projects).

Only you know for sure ... If you're not (a Statist) you may find these questions a good starting point for discussion with others ...

Read more
Add new post

Title

21 hours ago · 2 min read ·
3 comments
Body
Read more

Not found

Title

21 hours ago · 2 min read

0 Comments:

user_name1 day ago
Reply
Body
This page is a snapshot of ZeroNet. Start your own ZeroNet for complete experience. Learn More