by Quinton on March 20th, 2016

    In the past I've talked about another site I run called www.crowdfreedom.com. With that site my intention has always been to create a movement towards creating a free society without government. I understand that this is a big movement and a big goal. So to help explain this vision a bit more I've spent the last few years putting together a book which outlines how I see something like this working.

    The book is completely free and can be read for free online at www.crowdfreedom.com/book. If you have some free time I would appreciate any feedback and thoughts on the book.

    Thanks!
    Quinton

     Filed under: Books / Documents, Free Society

    25 Comments

    Tarheel: Sure

    I will read it and render my feedback/thoughts.

    Terran resistance: instead of government

    have you thought about a robocracy? also i have a an idea why dont we find a way to turn mercury into gold to prop-up third world countries. with price of gold fixed fixed to a currency, theres a limit that people can have in turns of money so that theres little inflation, no system of debt as well to limit inflation, and money system is turned into a meritocracy where people earn by what they are worth to society. my system would be with govenment one part demarchy and one part democracy with no party affliations and people like engineers and scientists and economists are elected instead of politicians. the demarchy pass the laws, the elected bunch implement them, up until we reach a singularity in techonology where a robocracy is installed.

    Quinton: I've thought about this. That

    I've thought about this. That's similar to what they want to do with the Venus Project. I am not particularly a fan of that for a number of economic and moral reasons but I think it's cool if people want to go for it.

    My main thing is this: Different people want to live differently. In America right now there is a big divide between people who like the government and people who do not. Why does everybody need to be under 1 system? Why can't people choose their own system? Why can't I start a new country that people who don't like government can live in? Why can't people who like government, robocracy or anything else start their own? I think people need to work towards creating new societies the way they want rather than transforming their current government into something that everybody has to be unwillingly subject to. It's just outdated technology and thinking. We need to start building new ways of living outside of the current governments we have, not within.

    Terran resistance: i can understand that

    then surely by dividing up countries into partitions is a step in the right direction? like if say i wanted a robocracy because i think that humans are not capable of making rational judgements, then everyone would flock to that area, and say if one partition of a country wanted no money, people would flock to that area of the world, but the problem comes from distribution of resources. You would need an isolationist policy to a certain degree for certain concepts such as a system without money. what we need to do is find a quick an easy way to make resource abundance obselete only way to do that is to make it that everyone gets the same amount of resoruces so that anyone can live under any system they want. investments banks across the world are needed to prop up infrastructure permanently.

    i was watching videos on al bielek and he said that time travelers from the future left records behind showing the flaws in their systems of governance so that we could learn from them and not repeat the same mistakes. However hes deceased now unfortunately, i liked the guy.

    Quinton: The problem is no country in

    The problem is no country in the world wants to give up power and let people leave. No government in the world will be like, oh you guys want to create your own society and stop paying taxes, cool, good luck!

    Why would you not want money? I understand Alex Collier talks about it and the As don't use it, but why wouldn't we want to use money? I understand not using money created and controlled through a central body like the Federal Reserve. But money is simply a medium of exchange. And what is wrong with exchange?

    What is wrong with resource abundance?

    So if somebody finds a way to create more resources than somebody else they should be forced to give their surplus to somebody else who has less? That's communism and economically speaking it doesn't work.

    Tarheel: This is where

    This is where I start to migrate away from your ideology-not fully but partially. Money starts the darkness and we all know it. We would have to come up with something other than money for me to subscribe. I do NOT know what the answer is, though....perhaps some sort of barter system where you can barter away unwanted resources...I just don't know.
    I respectfully disagree with any system where money is the medium of exchange.

    Terran resistance: also

    they tried a system without government in belgium as an "experimement" to see if the eu could govern, it literally went for a couple of years without a government, government needs to be devolved not taken out at this stage in humanity. The british model is far from perfect but they devolve all power to countires within the uk, except for defence and the budget. Ron paul believes in state government and nigel farrage and i think they are right... For the time being of course.

    Terran resistance: by nigel farrage

    by nigel farrage i mean devolving power to parilements in different countries in the uk such as wales, england northern ireland, except the english dont have their own parliment as of yet and the rest of us are allowed to vote on their isssues which is unfair. Wales isnt even on the union flag which i think is wrong. what we should be doing is renogotiating with the irish for exhange for northern ireland we have a joint military and budget. the monarchy needs to go as well. in the uk we have the fabian society and the bullingdon club, while america has scroll and key and skull and bones. two tier systems of control and two party politics which acts as a snare.

    Terran resistance: also

    it has come to my attention that eu needs ireland and scotland so they have a back door to the uk, scotland is pro eu for this reason because that is where our nuclear arsenal is, the eu is hell bent on breaking up the uk, also the US has nukes in ireland aimed at us just like they have nukes in iran aimed at israel if just in case.... just like we have nukes in canada aimed at america, hence why the army there was forced to swear an alleigiance to the queen to keep them loyal because the uk is still expansionist and still dreams of an empire when america belly flops which they are counting on so they can expand upon their commonwealth idea which is quite a popular idea with countries always wanting to join. So there is where the future lies with the UK. I wouldnt be surprised if the council of 300 which is situated in the uk is planning on building a new empire.

    Tarheel: UK is "counting on it" ?

    1)The UK is doing everything in their power to undermine us. Gross understatement-"the UK is expansionist".
    2)Thomas Paine was RIGHT ! The quicker we gtf away from those lizards, the better off we'll be.
    3)I support the EU if their vision is truly to break up UK.

    Terran resistance: i think it will be great

    i think that it will be great when america collapses because then other countires can start exporting their culture more and there will be less wars.

    Tarheel: I wouldnt wager on it either way.

    Too many people have too much to lose. I mean, who else is going to pay exorbitant prices for overvalued products/services ? Plus the country (monetarily) is nowhere near as bad as stated. Most of the deficit is interest on money we gave to pvt banks to lend back to us. When the American peeps wtfu & find that out, some heads are gonna roll.

    We should give Quinton's proposal a try. It certainly would outperform the current HHS.

    I'm on Ch 3 of "How to Create a Free Society WITHOUT Gov't".

    Terran resistance: mercury to gold

    roisicurianism which is in the uk such as very famous alchemists have tried to turn merucry to gold for centuries, the problem is all the gold is in china, and everytime they want to invest in africa the americans put dictaors in like robert mugabi who coincidentally of course want to kick out all the foreigners like the chinese hence why there are so much anti-communist sentiment in africa. the chinese have trillions of dollars of american paper and they are not allowed to invest it. They need natural resources the africans should be more than welcome to take the money when they need it to invest in infrastructure. countries like nigeria cant even get their oil out of the ground because certain governments keep inspriring corruption in their elite. Tariffs should be taken off of all african goods. but the eu and america are corrupt hence why they need the commonwealth. Which as it states, is common-wealth. The american dream of the north african union will never happen because britain has canada and the americans are not willing to create an amero printed seperately from the federal reserve bank and do so in a way that all the wealthy lose money and its equally distributed to the rest of the 99% and they dont have the balls to tell china that their money will become useless that they hold because they are so highly dependent on goods from china. China is not being held hostage at all which optimistic americans seem to think so, you dont think they have their own secret space program? they have thousands of ships. China has all the gold from the silk road from roman times. the gold under the world trade center in now in germany to back the euro. the eu is also raiding southern european countries for natural resources to be paid is they cant pay back their debts hence why they were allowed to join in the first place they are called the pigs. Portugal, ireland, greece, spain. If ireland knows any better they would join the uk again. Hence why greece didnt collect on its taxes its been infiltrated by germany. I wouldnt be surprised if the gold in fort nox or whatever is in germany as well.

    Terran resistance: what happens when america cant pay its troops

    when america cant finally pay its troops thats when the shit is going to hit the fan, lots of veterans which are gun-ho returning to america. What do you think is going to happen? They are going to bring in UN troops because they need people without a bias against the american public, they need to shoot to kill, hence why they are trying to overide the constistution of america with un law and will try to take away the guns, by then it will be to late, because they have placed a gun shop on every ghetto and every angry poor person is going to take to the street and every american poltician is going to be hung, unless they can start a third world war. This isnt a jewish conspiracy, this is a nazi conspiracy that started with operation paperclip and ends with the eu and america attempting to join forces to bring i quote george bush senile i mean senior, a thouands years of illumination. i.e a thousand year reich, a thousand years of satan, a thousand incarnations of vishnu. But it has aleady been predicted by aliens that there wil be a revolution and i quote "along the sclafnen where the cans flow" a crow told me.

    Truth And Knowledge: Everybody seems to be stumped

    Everybody seems to be stumped on the whole "money" concept. Our money, being that it is now a fiat currency, is nothing more than a series of steps with a pre-set pay range for each step. Whatever the person who holds the money decides is how much money gets released into the economy. There is no actual "debt" all of the so called "debt" is owed to the men who already have more money than they could ever possibly spend. "Money" is no different to them than a piece of paper. Imagine it like this, I am the president, of the freakin' whole wide world, I say you all are allowed to print as much money from your printers as you want and use it legally as tender to purchase anything you want or need...Do you really give a shit about who owes you what anymore? Or would you rather print out some money quick to go buy yourself a Maybach, maybe go on a nice trip to the Bahama's? Go grab yourself 3 of the finest looking women and get yourself a luxury suite and some good ole MDMA and...well you get the point. Money doesn't mean anything to them, our obedience based on fear and a hard working attitude is what means something. Money is only a measurement of the value one puts on his time.

    Truth And Knowledge: It is also a means to kill

    It is also a means to kill human beings unsuspectingly through various means. Like war, starvation and homegrown terrorism to name a few. Truly though, we need to learn to control ourselves better. We cannot ignore the overpopulation issue forever. We cannot keep destroying this planet otherwise many humans have to die and I believe they will to save the species in the long run by first saving the planet from our overpopulated destructive behaviors.

    Tarheel: Thoughts after Chapter 1

    You kicked it in the ass, which is exactly what we need. Thanks for having a set and firing a RPG at the matrix.
    I will put your mug on the new version of Mt Rushmore we create. You'll look good beside Thomas Paine & company.
    I will be reading the rest.... a very compelling read.

    Quinton: Thanks Tarheel. There's also

    Thanks Tarheel. There's also an audiobook version if you prefer listening to reading:

    Truth And Knowledge: I think this is a good idea BUT...

    To be clear, I regard your intellectual and good intent quite highly Quinton so I hope any criticism is taken more or less just as my own opinion and not with intent to insult. That said, I think you may be over reaching. Your ideas are pretty solid but I don't think most are willing to jump into a new society that has been pre-created by ANY individual. The models used today have been built over the course of a long period of time. The key to getting them started was a basic framework that was able to be built upon over the years. If you wanted to get this going (and freakin' hell, I hope you do) I think you should make it a bit more basic and employ a true democratic system (a voting system based online that would count all individual votes and get a final tally to determine the outcome of any given issue). You must remember that often times people want the same thing but all it takes is one word to throw people off of your true meaning (ie. you may phrase a solution to an issue in a manner that coincides with someone else's belief but if you phrase it in such a way that they don't understand then it leaves it open to their own interpretation). The only way I see to counter such a thing is to employ a crowd voting system and keep the points as clear cut as possible. It seems to me many may find their own ways to interpret some of your solutions and it may not be in your favor regardless of your well placed intent. Just my two cents, Good Luck man, I am rooting for an improved system. We have reached our limits on the one's we have now and it's about time we start cherry picking the concepts that have worked and tossing the one's that don't.

    Quinton: Thanks for the response TAK :

    Thanks for the response TAK :) Appreciate the reply.

    "Your ideas are pretty solid but I don't think most are willing to jump into a new society that has been pre-created by ANY individual."

    This doesn't need to be for most people. Only the people who want it.

    "The models used today have been built over the course of a long period of time. The key to getting them started was a basic framework that was able to be built upon over the years."

    Yes, and I'm talking about the same thing: a basic framework of property rights and non-violence.

    "If you wanted to get this going (and freakin' hell, I hope you do) I think you should make it a bit more basic and employ a true democratic system (a voting system based online that would count all individual votes and get a final tally to determine the outcome of any given issue)"

    I think democracy is worse than direct voting with your money. Why group people's decisions together if you don't have to?

    "You must remember that often times people want the same thing but all it takes is one word to throw people off of your true meaning (ie. you may phrase a solution to an issue in a manner that coincides with someone else's belief but if you phrase it in such a way that they don't understand then it leaves it open to their own interpretation)."

    Which is why it would make more sense not to use Democracy where confused people could force their decision on another person.

    "The only way I see to counter such a thing is to employ a crowd voting system and keep the points as clear cut as possible. It seems to me many may find their own ways to interpret some of your solutions and it may not be in your favor regardless of your well placed intent."

    This isn't about my solution or the right solution. It is about giving every person the freedom to make their own choices.

    "Just my two cents, Good Luck man, I am rooting for an improved system. We have reached our limits on the one's we have now and it's about time we start cherry picking the concepts that have worked and tossing the one's that don't."

    Agreed. I appreciate the response :)

    Truth And Knowledge: We see things slightly different

    "This doesn't need to be for most people. Only the people who want it."

    Seems to me that without a decent sized backing you will always run the risk of getting wiped out. I do believe i many concepts, non-violence in regard to being an aggressor, check, but if someone sends police force with the intent to destroy a superior society that I have set up for others then I believe it would be necessary to try and defend this society. Seems with all the evil in high places right now, one must have a means of formal defense as I believe the USA would treat such a think as an uprising and see it as a threat and probably try and stomp it out early. I suppose some of this is conjecture on my part though.

    "I think democracy is worse than direct voting with your money. Why group people's decisions together if you don't have to?"

    You can currently make votes with you money in all of the governmental systems. Try explaining this concept to others, does't work out so great. Unfortunately, and I mean no offense to the general public but I do thing they need things simplified to a degree due to people who have different interests in life and may not be too keen on understanding economics.

    I wasn't actually thinking about Democracy quite the same as it is in the current sense. More so that the elected officials representation level of the process would actually become then final outcome. Meaning that everyone cast their vote independently on any given subject and the votes get tallied and this final tally determines outcome of decision on any given issue and on and on for issues to come, allow periodic revisionary voting, we as a people evolve and it would seem to me that an ideal system would need to evolve as well, along side the people.

    This isn't about my solution or the right solution. It is about giving every person the freedom to make their own choices.

    Ah, this is where we truly differ. I believe that if everyone is left to do as they please then we tend to reproduce too much causing overconsumption of non-renewable resource. I think man will always pursue technology and the more people using that tech, the more factories, more blah, blah...you get it. I don't blame anyone, I believe it is ingrained in our nature to consume but as with human decency laws...ie. don't kill one another, don't cook your neighbor and eat his flesh, you know...don't be a dick. Theres always one that is ready to mess things up for the rest of the people. I think laws need to be put into place to protect the planet so future is possible for our species. At our current rate, I'm not so sure the planet will put up with our ever expanding and overly consuming population. As for shit like victim-less crimes and the whole war on drugs. Throw that shit out. I mean, freedom always comes at price, and I think the cheapest price anyone can possibly get it at is by making an agreement with Mother Nature herself.

    Quinton: "Seems to me that without a

    "Seems to me that without a decent sized backing you will always run the risk of getting wiped out. I do believe i many concepts, non-violence in regard to being an aggressor, check, but if someone sends police force with the intent to destroy a superior society that I have set up for others then I believe it would be necessary to try and defend this society. Seems with all the evil in high places right now, one must have a means of formal defense as I believe the USA would treat such a think as an uprising and see it as a threat and probably try and stomp it out early. I suppose some of this is conjecture on my part though."

    So first of all, you can use force for defense, just not offense. So the initiation of force is not allowed. Defensive force (with guns or whatever else) is allowed.

    But I totally agree with you on the concern of another nation taking over. In my book I list this as 1 of the 3 main challenges. It is a very real challenge. But I think there are things that can be done to help alleviate this.

    "You can currently make votes with you money in all of the governmental systems. Try explaining this concept to others, does't work out so great. Unfortunately, and I mean no offense to the general public but I do thing they need things simplified to a degree due to people who have different interests in life and may not be too keen on understanding economics."

    If the general public is too stupid for a free society then they don't need to live there. They can continue supporting the government that they currently support. Like I said earlier, it's not for everyone.

    "I wasn't actually thinking about Democracy quite the same as it is in the current sense. More so that the elected officials representation level of the process would actually become then final outcome. Meaning that everyone cast their vote independently on any given subject and the votes get tallied and this final tally determines outcome of decision on any given issue and on and on for issues to come, allow periodic revisionary voting, we as a people evolve and it would seem to me that an ideal system would need to evolve as well, along side the people."

    I follow you. And I agree the Democratic process could be greatly improved. But I still think there is a better process for choices than Democracy. That's why I advocate free markets. Anything we currently do Democratically can be done in the free market. I don't think we need to all pool our choices together into one aggregate. I think people should have the freedom to make individual choices on their own. I think there are better ways than Democracy. I mean, even the founders of America talked about this. America isn't even supposed to be a Democracy, it is a Republic.

    "Ah, this is where we truly differ. I believe that if everyone is left to do as they please then we tend to reproduce too much causing overconsumption of non-renewable resource. I think man will always pursue technology and the more people using that tech, the more factories, more blah, blah...you get it."

    We probably do differ here. I see technological improvements as making our lives better, more safe, making the environment cleaner, feeding more poor people, alleviating sickness, etc. This is what technology has done historically and continues to do. I'm sure we could go back and forth on this and if you'd like to we can.

    "Theres always one that is ready to mess things up for the rest of the people. I think laws need to be put into place to protect the planet so future is possible for our species."

    You will have laws in a free society. And because it is done through the free market and not the government it will be cheaper and better than how we do it now. We can have private courts, private police, private prisons, etc. Anything the government currently does we can do privately. We just don't normally think that way. It can be a bit weird to bend your mind that way at first. But I contend the more you think about it the clearer it will become.

    Thanks for the response :)

    Winter Snow: I agree 100%

    Government is all about control and genocide...fk em...I've always been against them and will never comply with a thing

    harrison orono: Freedom

    Quinton,I got your book and I will comment after reading it thanks and welcome.

    You must be logged in to comment

    Site Statistics

    Posts
    17,972
    Comments
    31,693
    Members
    20,867

    Currently Active Users 1 member