Adam Kokesh for Not President 2020

in #anarchy6 years ago (edited)

31E8B696-A882-4CBA-A798-93319362F275.png

I met Adam Kokesh in Miami January 17th, 2017. He had come to my hometown to debate Christopher Cantwell. I went to troll the Cantwell because of the racist rhetoric he’d been spewing online on his Radical Agenda show, masquerading as a libertarian.

While I was there to troll Cantwell, Adam impressed me with his concepts of Voluntarism; but admittedly, I wasn’t convinced by that one event. I took one of his “FREEDOM” books, which he graciously autographed for me. I read it and the concept of true self ownership was intriguing; but I’ve been so wrapped up in the historical concept of imperial conquest, which is the basis of all governments who rule by force of arms, and is still the basis that title companies use to claim ownership of our lands and homes today. I wasn’t ready yet to be Free to say the least.

But now I am ready. Are you?

Why Vote for Adam Kokesh for Not President? Because he’s a voluntarist and as such doesn’t believe in slavery.

He’s the only candidate I’ve seen with the Integrity to stay true to the Ideals of libertarianism. One who won’t sell out (once elected) to the special interests to keep the current paradigm in place. As we’ve seen time and time again.

He’s the moral choice promising to dismantle the nation’s immoral institutions who spend our extorted revenue and plans to curtail its ability to prosecute wars and conquests by force of arms for the empire that should have never been built in the first place.

This blog entry is to educate the people who seem to have been indoctrinated into believing in the concept of conquest which is the concept by which our government claims both its morality and legitimacy. But! As Adam points out, “We are a free and beautiful people”; who have been turned into slaves of the empire.

Taxation is Slavery. It is the result of our being conquered by force of arms. We eliminated slavery based on genetics only to reintroduce it with Income Taxation and the 16th Amendment.

Personally, I don’t see doing away with all aspects of government and I don’t think he does either. But don’t stop reading here because I said that... Humanity needs rules, not rulers. With rules comes a need to enforce them but in a tax-less society the market will have to figure that out naturally without codified statutes or written codes, excepting codes that will restrict government itself.

I’m not going to opine on how a voluntary tax-less society can work because how doesn’t matter. Slavery is an abhorrent institution and must be abolished simply for that fact regardless of the benefits the violence it exerts over us, to the economy and/or beneficial public works projects.

There are plenty of Anarchist books that delve into how to make a free society work that I’m not going to get into here.

Basic natural morality and respect for other people’s lives, property and treasure must be the basis of any free society and we must make it work with these tenets.

I see three basic things our society needs to restrict government from doing that will accomplish or rather result in becoming a voluntary society; a society with rules but no rulers.

Again, If you want more information on what that means get a copy of Adam’s book FREEDOM. Again, That’s not what this blog entry is about.

This entry is focused on the main restrictions on government that we need implemented to be free. There maybe more but these are concepts that society at large needs to be enlightened with.

1. Taxation, because it’s the result of slavery. What is important for society to understand is that the initiation of the use of force is a moral evil. With that in mind, we can approach the problem of Public Services and Works Projects more clearly and how they can be accomplished privately and morally.

First of all, public works projects are currently funded through the initiation of force to collect taxes. The use of violence is the central issue, not what might potentially happen in the absence of violence or the benefits of the violence itself. Does anyone really want to defend the benefits of violence?

Again, Slavery was abolished without regard for the economy and taxation must be abolished for the same reasons also without regard for the consequences.

All attempts to describe how to alleviate the negative consequences of eliminating taxation are pointless. Once the rule is set, the market will adapt itself voluntarily; Like no one could have anticipated or planned.

2. Dispute Resolution. (Courts). In addition to ending involuntary taxation. Our society can stilll exist on a voluntary basis with a voluntary, elected but privately funded courts. ( think user fees).

Humanity will always need a civil structure to resolve disputes and claims to property and to keep the peace. Society needs rules and a framework to enforce the ability for private parties to prosecute crimes against each other; to be made whole of injured. But the state cannot be allowed to be a complainant/victim. That’s counter productive.

How to authorize or elect judges without providing for salaries will be solely be resolved at the local level.

3. No Public Property and Money. Existence as a society with no public treasury or national coinage of money; No Exchequer to manage and no official national or stately participation in foreign bodies like the United Nations; eliminating borders and border control and ending the concept of building national empires.

I see everyone’s minds racing with foreign invasion of nefarious armies who have sworn fealty to each other to our detriment, But we Already have that problem internally. I think that’s something a society who prides itself now on having a second amendment can resolve voluntarily.

But in closing, how we can exist in a truly free society cannot be planned. We simply must introduce the concept of zero tolerance for taxation; “No Slavery” indelibly into our consciousness as “Free and Beautiful Human Beings”.

Follow the White Rabbit.

https://steemit.com/anarchy/@adconner/are-you-ready-to-be-free

7F34220F-7E5F-4E5C-B05E-BC75EBC96825.jpeg

Sort:  

By what means would Adam acquire authority to determine centrally which resources go where (as per his platform)? As voluntaryists, we know that “majority consensus” and Federal elections are not means by which to acquire authority/consent.

Don’t wait for the tapeworm to bite. Be proactive and take the blue pill until the red pill becomes the norm.

This is not an answer to the question. The blue pill is the antithesis of the red pill in this analogy anyway. As for being proactive, I believe I am, as are many others. Again, though, I am not sure I understand your comment. Could you answer the question I posed directly?

By what means would Adam acquire authority to determine centrally which resources go where (as per his platform)?

He’s not. But how do you unrig it without pretending as if the voters or electoral college really have the authority to give him?

Yes, he is. He has already claimed directly:

I would...have no authority whatsoever, EXCEPT in the, you know, DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROPERTY...

~ Adam Kokesh at the 12:25 mark of THIS VIDEO. (emphasis mine)

There are other direct quotes as well. He will have authority, but whence derived?

The glaring problem is, for voluntaryists, authority cannot be acquired via federal “majority consensus.”

This not only is not a voluntaryist position, it also perpetuates the statist myth: If we just get the right guy to use the immoral system, we can make things right. This is why we Voluntaryist base everything on ISO, the market, and property rights, and not arbitrary assignments of power.

So, again: By what means would Adam acquire authority to determine centrally which resources go where (as per his platform)?

I Agree with you. Here is the paradigm as in illegitimate operation but in operation none the less. This territory has been conquered by force of arms. The current illegitimate ruler defends its sovereignty by force of arms but also respects the rules it set up for itself. Congress is the current ruler however their own rules allows for and demands change only be made by congress. Therefore participation in this illegitimate system is required to dismantle it and make it all voluntary. Currently no one can disobey without criminal charges.... only congress can change the way it is without incurring criminal charges as illogical as they are.

Adam, it seems, isn’t content for congress to change things and will usurp its power by executive order. No less illegitimate than congess itself but may work. It’s worth a shot.

Therefore participation in this illegitimate system is required to dismantle it and make it all voluntary.

Ends do not justify means, and violence is not required to end violence. Violating the ISO of peaceful individuals, and assigning arbitrary, non-private property based power to as "leader" is not worth a shot in the eyes of Voluntaryist principle.

He should, for the sake of accuracy, drop the title.

So how do we create a voluntary society given the fact that everyone is being indoctrinated with the belief that the current US System is not only Moral and Legitimate, it is the culmination of fixing history’s mistakes..... ???

I'm happy to see @adamkokesh on Steemit, who knows maybe all the presidential nominees will be here duking it out! Along with @abc, @cnn, @nbc, @foxnews. That will be exciting times. @ironshield

I appreciate your use of “Voluntarism”! I called Adam out on the use of “voluntaryism” and he agreed and said he wouldn’t use it if he was a professor, but it’s simpler for the masses...
As a philosopher, I think the words we use are important...so thanks for promulgating the appropriate usage!!!

Regardless of spelling what is most pressing in my estimation is the fact that his platform is antithetical to the voluntaryist principle of individual self ownership in that it relies on a a claim of authority based on “majority consensus.”

You can’t go from 0 to 60 in one step...Adam is not being inconsistent or antithetical to principle. His goal is to serve as a mechanism for decentralization which will promote/lead to a condition where individual self ownership is realized as actual.

Didn't I just read the other day that he said something like "There will always be a government?"

“Anarchy” doesn’t mean no rules...it means no rulers.

There is government here on SteemIT...people like your stuff or they don’t or they even downvote...reputation goes a long way in the free market.

The difference between governance and government is understood by Adam. One rules over people with special protections and double standards while the other does not.

Government should not exist. Period.

Steemit has governance, not government. Voluntaryists seek rules without rulers and governance, not government. There are very important differences between those terms.

I will absolutely concede to you the distinction between “government” and “governance.” Well said.

You can’t go from 0 to 60 in one step...

Would you make this argument 200 years ago if we were talking about slavery?
“But who will pick the cotton!?”
Immoral is immoral.

Adam is not being inconsistent or antithetical to principle.

He stated openly in our debate that his plan was not a voluntaryist one, and that it is not in line with voluntaryist principle. It’s a “compromise.” Oddly enough a compromise that blatantly violates the foundation property norm of Voluntaryism.

He also toyed with/suggested the idea that under his “custodial leadership” individual might be fingerprinted in order to homestead unowned land.

This is not a voluntaryist position in any sense.

Absent armed rebellion you can’t unrig the game without pretending as if the voters and electoral college really have the authority to give him?

I don’t believe that unsubstantiated assertion to be true. I respect that that is your opinion. Even if your claim here were true—that it’s either armed rebellion or election (as if the ruling class will magically give up just because politics were used)—it doesn’t change the fact that Adam’s platform is contradictory to the foundational Voluntaryist tenet of individual self-ownership. Why? Numerous reasons, the most critical of which is that property ownership and assignments would be made by an illegitimate centralized authority, and not via individual property rights and the market.

Always loved the way @adamkokesh uses 'not' before his (if) future presisdency. That one word actually explains the whole idea.

It doesn't make what he's doing consistent however.

You can find the live countdown here

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

Great work Adam, with a voluntary currency anything is possible. Keep on going, your going to make history.

Congratulations @adconner! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of comments
Award for the total payout received

Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!

Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard!


Participate in the SteemitBoard World Cup Contest!
Collect World Cup badges and win free SBD
Support the Gold Sponsors of the contest: @good-karma and @lukestokes


Do you like SteemitBoard's project? Then Vote for its witness and get one more award!

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.30
TRX 0.11
JST 0.031
BTC 68541.87
ETH 3868.83
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.63