John David Garcia
Transcript to john-david-garcia-61min-mp3-speech-libertarians-eugene-oregon-1991
Hello. My name is John David Garcia. There follows a 50 minute speech I gave to the Libertarian Party in Eugene, Oregon on March 30, 1991. The speech is on the incompatibility of democracy and libertarianism. After the speech, there follows Democracy and libertarianism are inherently incompatible.
The reason for this is that a large majority of the adult population in all countries puts a higher value on illusions of security than on personal liberty, let alone on the liberty of others. Both democracy and libertarianism, as currently formulated, are value systems with some false assumptions. I will discuss the ethics and the assumptions underlying these systems and then give you a third alternative, which produces a libertarian society as a side effect, not as the central goal. At the core of any civilization is a system of values or ethics together with assumptions about reality. The European European civilization, out of which America emerged as a new civilization, had at its core the natural hierarchical order of things, Christian ethics, and a notion of the hereditary superiority of some people over other people.
Only the Christian ethics seem valid. This system was highly compatible with the hierarchical order of the Catholic Church extending beyond this world all the way to God, but less so with the new products and sects, which claimed and occasionally tolerated respect for individual conscience, so long as this conscience was compatible with the prevalent interpretations of a locally accepted Protestant Bible. The Scientific Revolution, which began about the same time as the reformation and had a common cause behind it, showed any rational person that religious authority was wrong about nearly everything in the natural world from astronomy to zoology. Therefore, it was reasonable to assume that religious authority was probably also wrong about the psychosocial and ethical world as well. Therefore, rational people began to look for to reason and science to guide them in moral philosophy, ethical behavior, as well as in natural philosophy, physical and biological science.
The pioneers in this approach were humanists, such as Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes in England, and Michel de Montaigne and Rene Descartes in France. The culmination of this new approach was achieved in Holland, the most libertarian society in the world at that time, in the ethics of Benedictus de Spinoza. Spinoza was to moral philosophy what his contemporary Isaac Newton was to natural philosophy. Spinoza was the first true libertarian philosopher. Jesus was the first libertarian mystic.
As a consequence, Spinoza, the son of Jewish refugees from Spain, was excommunicated by the Jews of Holland and persecuted by Jews, Catholics, and Protestants. It seems he has something to offend everyone. He was condemned by religious authorities up to the present time, an excellent indicator that he was correct. Bertrand Russell, another libertarian philosopher, referred to Spinoza as the noblest and most lovable of all the great philosophers. Ethically, he is supreme.
Russell also said that in a democracy, the only people who can get elected to office are those who are stupid, hypocritical, or both. I'm not quite that extreme, but it might explain why in the United States, in spite of the obvious ethical and intellectual superiority of the libertarian candidates, they consistently and collectively receive less than 7% of the popular vote. Voters prefer those who share their prejudices. This is an important reality that all libertarians should carefully consider. The democratic ethical and political philosophy grew out of the distortion of Spinoza's libertarian philosophy.
Spinoza was among the most profound of thinkers, and although he defined all his terms, he wrote in direct opposition to Spinoza's own definitions. There are but which are in direct opposition to Spinoza's own definitions, thereby making him even more difficult to understand. However, enough of Spinoza's true meaning still comes across, even in the poor translations, to have deeply influenced such eminent thinkers as Goethe, Einstein, Russell, Konstantin Brunner, and many other libertarians who acknowledge their debt to Spinoza. Libertarianism is clearly more a state of mind than it is a political system or a party. A major distortion of Spinoza's ethical and political philosophy was produced by the line of thinkers, Locke, Hume, Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, and others, leading to Thomas Jefferson.
Jefferson is probably the most States. He he, not Washington, is the moral father of our States. He he, not Washington, is the moral father of our country, although Tom Paine might have been the midwife. Yet although Jefferson clearly wanted a libertarian society, and he and his two closest disciples were presidents for 24 consecutive years, he produced serious distortion of Spinoza's philosophy was produced by the philosophers Leibniz, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Engels, etcetera, leading to Lenin and undemocratic socialism, which includes the racist national socialism of Adolph Hitler, ethic says that the greatest good is that which makes for the greatest liberty or welfare ethic says that the greatest good is that which makes for the greatest liberty or welfare for the greatest number. It is right and proper for a sufficiently large majority to take away the liberty or welfare of a sufficiently small minority if it will greatly increase the alleged liberty or welfare of the majority.
Implicit advocating and eventually getting a strong bill of rights to protect ethical minorities from unethical majorities in government in general. Yet the history of the United States is the history of ever growing power of government and the destruction of individual liberty for the alleged benefit of the majority. This began with the toleration of slavery in the United States for 4 score in 7 years, followed by government imposed racial segregation for 5 score more years. Democracy led to the military draft, the income tax, the blatantly unconstitutional detention of Japanese Americans in concentration camps during World War 2, the allegedly anti communist witch hunts of the McCarthy era, the nurturing of a huge parasitical military industrial complex, and finally, to the outright confiscation of private property and the gross government interference with private voluntary behavior, again, for the alleged benefit of a willing, frightened majority. In a libertarian society, there are no victimless crimes.
The most extreme form of confiscation of private property is done in the name of protecting the environment, but it is done without compensating the property owners for their losses as is provided for in the constitution while actually accelerating environment is to privatize the Earth within the context of an ethical libertarian society. Current governments are more likely to exacerbate our problems than to solve them. The current environmental tyranny is simply a tactic by which special interests often steal other people's property rights for their own benefit through laws approved by an ignorant, manipulated, fearful majority that is manipulated by lies and self serving propaganda by a notorious minority. Of the majority of the majority to impose a police state on everybody. This is done through majority consent while selectively protecting the monopoly position certain elements of organized crime.
The war on drugs greatly expands the market for the particular drugs that controlled by the while attacking the Western Mafia's competitors within organized crime in other parts of the country and abroad. It is clear that a majority of the electorate learned nothing from prohibition. It is almost as if it never happened. This is what democracy has brought us. Libertarianism is based not on maximizing the liberty of a majority at the expense of a minority, but on the recognition of certain unalienable rights that are common to all humans.
To To libertarians, all existing governments have always been evil. That is why only that government, which governs least, governs best. For Libertarians, it is not the function of government to do us good, for governments are singularly incompetent at doing anyone good. In a libertarian society, we must each seek our own good according to the dictates of our own conscience, and not depend on government or the exploitation of our neighbor. The best we can hope of government is that it not do evil.
A main legitimate function of government is to help the unalienable rights of each individual from all minorities and majorities, including the government itself. Within a libertarian society, the basic protection of human rights is the responsibility of the individual and voluntary associations of individuals, not of the government. That is why the Bill of Rights says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The purpose of a militia, a voluntary self defense association, is to protect individuals from government as well as other enemies. The main legitimate function of government is to assist willing individuals in protecting themselves from enemies that are too powerful, mobile, or subtle for local militias, for example, foreign invaders, ecological aggression, or infectious epidemics.
Almost every other action of government is an imposition on the human rights of individuals, even if some mistakenly believe that they are otherwise being held by government. Government must be the complete servant of all its ethical citizens and a master of none of them. This is the libertarian ideal from which the United States has been retreating since its inception. If someone as brilliant, ethical, and creative as Jefferson failed, it was because there was no previous libertarian model to follow, and the philosophy of Spinoza was 100 of years ahead of its time and difficult to fully grasp even today. Jefferson clearly saw the Constitution of the United States as the first experimental approximation to a libertarian society, which would require many radical corrections, including periodic armed revolts.
In Jefferson's own words, and I quote him directly here, and what country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance. What signify a few lives lost in a century or 2? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. There has never been a popular uprising in the United States because the government was taking away too much liberty.
Indeed, the most popular forms of protest and political direction are always related to demands that the government take away more liberty and give us in exchange more services at the cost of our neighbor. This extends from the Civil War in which the Southerners demanded the right to continue to enslave their neighbors and protect their state rights from incursions from the North to the current demands that a police state be imposed on the people of the United States to protect them from drugs and related violence. The American Revolution was a minority revolution in which the majority of the inhabitants did not wish to pay for the greater liberty by risking their lives in rebellion effective central government, Thomas Jefferson and the other founding fathers compromised on the issues of individual liberty and formed a democratic public for reasons outlined in the Federalist Papers of Hamilton, Madison, and Jay. Socrates, Spinoza, the is what we have today. In spite of the evidence before them, Jefferson and the other founding fathers fooled themselves into believing that fallacious assumption which stemmed from ethical men projecting their own liberty.
This was a fallacious assumption which stemmed from ethical men projecting their own beliefs and values into people who do not share them. 2 centuries of democratic self government have shown that what motivates the vast majority of all people in all countries is not liberty in general or even the maximization of their own religions, fear of other races and other nations, fear of drugs and violence, fear of oppression by the strong, and fear of economic insufficiency for the weak. This was true of the United States at its inception. It is even more true of the United States today. The overwhelming motivation for the tens of millions of immigrants that came to the United States was not greater liberty, but rather the economic opportunity that comes from liberty.
Most Americans will tolerate and perhaps even value liberty so long as it does not interfere with their security or violate their prejudices. Very few Americans will risk risk life or fortune for liberty. That is why democracy has led to an ever greater erosion of liberty. The and other of the many early colonists originally came to America not so much to get away from religious persecution, but to be free to persecute their neighbors who did not conform to the religious prejudices or were otherwise nonconformist. Take, for example, the Blue Laws and the witch trials in early New England.
Again, consider the toleration of slavery and the internment of innocent ethical Japanese Americans during World War 2. A true libertarian will never take away the freedom of any ethical being in order to benefit him or her self. Only people driven by fear will take away liberty in order to induce illusions of security. We can show that true cannot cannot create. Fear is an illusion.
Fear is an illusion we choose for ourselves when we are punished for being creative. Any society that is best, social incompetence at worst, evil misfits. This is what is happening today. Creative geniuses are often considered, at best, social incompetence, at worst, evil misfits. Creativity is, the process by which we produce works of art, invent machines, discover scientific laws, and help others do the same.
In my books, I show that the most creative thing we can do is to help maximize the creativity of another. In the process, we maximize our own creativity. More formally, creativity is any process by which we increase truth for someone without decreasing truth for anyone. Truth, according to the scientific paradigm, is any information, which when we believe it, increases our ability to predict and control in the objective world, physical, biological, and or psychosocial. Conversely, falsehood is any information which, when we believe it, decreases anyone's ability to predict and control in any part of the objective world.
Creativity is an interaction of intelligence and ethics. Creativity is, total environment. True information is one of many components in intelligence. The only common denominator in the evolutionary process from the Big Bang to us is ever increasing intelligence. This is clearly shown in the evolution of the biosphere, which is nucleated cells.
Vertebrates are more intelligent than invertebrates. Amphibians are more intelligent than fish. Reptiles are more intelligent than amphibians. Mammals are more intelligent than reptiles. Finally, humans are more intelligent than all other mammals.
Furthermore, this is the order in which the biosphere evolved. Creativity, the highest form of intelligence, seems to be largely concentrated in the human species, because humans, unlike all other animals, have intelligence about their own intelligence. Humanity can predict and control its own ability to predict and control. This produces a natural scientific ethics that grows out of the evolutionary process, but which is also compatible with many important mystically based systems of ethics, particularly Judeo Christian and spinozistic ethics. True mysticism, ethics, science, art, and creativity are all interrelated.
Evolutionary ethic implies that only actions which increase creativity for at least one person without decreasing creativity for any person are ethical. This is the meaning of good. Any action which decreases any person's creativity is unethical, no matter how many other persons are allegedly to be benefited by the sacrifice. This is the meaning of evil. The evolutionary ethic is that we must do our best to maximize creativity.
This is the ethic of Spinoza, which he called the intellectual love of God. If we are to maximize creativity, one of the things we must do is to be fully scientific in our mysticism and thoroughly mystical in our science. Just as liberty is not enough to defend liberty, neither our science or democratic ethic, which is my books. The democratic ethic, which is the foundation of the new civilization that has evolved in the United States of America, is that the greatest good is that greatest good is that which makes for the greatest freedom for the greatest number, even if in the process we must decrease the creativity of a few individuals. In my end up with neither end up with neither freedom nor creativity.
The temp the democratic ethic leads to a self contradictory system. This is apparently beginning to become obvious, except to those ethically blinded by fear. The greatest want for the greatest number. This ethic grew from the democratic ethic as well as from the line of thinkers that led to both Leninism and Nazism, but it is even further removed from the Evolutionary Ethic than the Democratic Ethic. It also led to its own contradiction by producing in communist nations societies that eventually had neither material security, freedom, nor creativity.
Majority the all forms of socialism are unethical because they all justify the use of unethical means to decrease creativity of their ethical citizens by forcibly confiscating the fruits of their creativity and redistributing them to their least creative citizens, which eventually become an ever growing majority of the population. It is unethical to nurture parasites. No society which tolerates the destruction of even a single person's creativity can remain ethical or viable. The only concept of government which does not seem to lead to self annihilation through logical necessity and is compatible with the Evolutionary Ethic is ethically based libertarianism. Ethically based libertarianism.
I say ethically based libertarianism because libertarianism is not, by itself, the because liberty is not enough to preserve liberty. The necessary and sufficient conditions for any society to evolve forever and, in by seeking to maximize creativity, thereby following the evolutionary ethic. If you wish to maximize liberty and or material security, stop fearing the possible loss of liberty and or material security, and seek solely to maximize creativity. You will then maximize both liberty and material security for yourself and others indirectly. Otherwise, we evolutionary ethic is that means which are not ends are never ethical.
Liberty is a means which is not an end. It is the absence of unwanted interference in our private lives. Ultimately, people who are focused on liberty are as driven by fear as those who focus on security, namely strong, whether it was the strength of an anarchic mob or driven by fear of the strong, whether it was the strength of an arctic mob or the strength of a Caesar. That was why the founding fathers created a government with divided powers and checks and balances. It was hoped that it would be strong enough to protect us from both anarchy at home and military tyranny abroad, while sufficiently divided that no American Caesar would ever come to power.
This balancing act was clearly unstable. It led to a tyranny of the majority. The fear of anarchy was so strong that our government became a tyranny of a majority, which is manipulated and controlled by a fearful unethical minority. This minority today spent 1,000,000,000 of dollars to tell the electoral majority the lies they wish to hear. It uses their fear and prejudices to keep them ignorant and compliant.
The major instrument for keeping them the democratic majority ignorant is the government controlled educational system. The major instrument for keeping them compliant is the mass media, which has for many years been for sale to the highest bidder. Today, the media are controlled by an extremely anti libertarian oligopoly. That is why libertarians and their positions are largely ignored by the mass media. The government controlled education system not only keeps the electoral majority ignorant, it also destroys their creativity their creativity by punishing those who in any way question the status quo.
It rewards the rest with praise, grades, scholarships and well paid positions at universities and their government and corporate affiliates. It rewards those who are docile, conformist and who regurgitate the information that has been instilled in them with no creative ideas of their own. Through destructive reward and punishment in our schools and mind numbing entertainment in the mass media, the American electorate majority has become convinced uncreative electoral majority that they must protect themselves from the nonconformist creative minority by confiscating their wealth and redistributing it among themselves. This creative minority is constantly denounced by the most successful politicians. That is why so many libertarians cannot win elections.
That is why libertarianism is incompatible with democracy. In all nations, political power concentrates in those whose main goal is power. What creative people most want is not power, but rather to be creative and not have anybody interfere with anybody else's creativity. Libertarians never want to control others. They only want to control themselves.
That is why almost all creative people are libertarians, although, obviously, not all members of the Libertarian party are necessarily ethical or creative. However, it is unethical to vote for anyone we know not to be an ethical libertarian. What destructive people most want is to control others creative people in particular, because they are driven by fear and have no confidence in their own creativity. Since creative people tend to seek solely creativity and tend not to pursue power, in every society that has ever existed, eventually its creative members end up with no power and all power is concentrated in the least creative, most fearful people a society can produce. People are destructive and evil only because they are afraid.
This is why all civilizations have always collapsed. This is why our civilization is collapsing today. The current collapse of Communist countries is merely a preview of what is happening more slowly to the social democracies, which include the United States. Consider how the power is distributed in the United States. How many of our presidential candidates, senators, representatives, judges, governors, millionaires, union leaders, ministers, or even teachers have ever produced a work of art, discovered a scientific law, invented a machine, or helped others do this.
Today, there are much fewer creative leaders than in the past. The trend is clear. Our system of government leads to the concentration of not worse in every other country, but there is hope. It is unethical to give up hope because it is unethical to be certain. The Libertarian party has shown that perhaps 5% of the nation is sufficiently ethical and creative that they will vote for Libertarian candidates out of principle, knowing that they will not win.
This creative minority must become the nucleus for a second American Revolution, which can serve as a counter example to the current destructive trends, which are not only impoverishing the country, but are also leading to its self annihilation. Libertarians should continue the political activity as part of a larger program of ethical education for the public, without fear of loss or expectation of ever winning public office. The most effective form of education is through example. In my latest book, I have presented a technique for amplifying individual creativity, as well as helping people work together creatively by mutual, 100% consensus, or creative. This is possible solely for voluntary networks of small autonomous societies of not more than 4 families.
I call these independent groupings of 4 men and 4 women octets. Octets can agree by 100% consensus to cooperate with each other on mutually desirable projects, where each octet voluntarily agrees to fulfill certain contingent obligations. Each octet has its own sovereign territory, perhaps as small as one hectare, where it has right to do as it wishes so long as it does not impose undeserved harm on anyone else. Each octet may function alone as a sovereign nation. In a network of octets, the main legitimate function of government is to protect octets from each other and from outside aggression.
Each architect does its best to be self sufficient in education, economics, health, self defense, and everything else in this order of priority. All projects requiring more than 1 octet are engendered through voluntary interactions through 1 100% consensus. Both education and economics are organized so as to maximize creativity rather than on the accumulation of indirectly by seeking to maximize creativity, best maximized indirectly by seeking to maximize creativity with no consideration of wealth or knowledge except as resources, not as ultimate goals of accumulation. This type of society will probably appeal solely to a very small minority of today's adults, although it would probably be very attractive to most children and to almost all creative adults. It will function solely for those who can make a full commitment to the evolutionary ethic and regard all other goals as at best marginal.
I call such a society in the state of mind of people who seek to create such a society an ethical state. There is still enough liberty in the United States and a few other countries to create an ethical state in spite of and independently of the governments. In an ethical state, majority rule is rule is replaced by unanimous consensus within and between octets. Remember, if you are a true libertarian, the main thing you demand of any government is that it not infringe on the liberty of any ethical person. By using some techniques I have developed experimentally and described in my most recent book, although there may be better ways, it is relatively easy for small groups of cooperative people to become maximally creative while creating a true libertarian society for themselves.
A few of my associates and I have already begun this for ourselves. It is clearly easier to do this in the United States than in other countries, but it is still feasible even in some police state tyrannies. We should all stop trying to sell libertarianism to those who do not want it by trying to convince them that libertarianism economically optimal, which it is. It seems only people who value creativity more than happiness will make a commitment to take all the steps necessary to create a libertarian society, which can only be the indirect consequence of creating an ethical state. The steps evolutionary ethic by doing your best to maximize creativity for yourself and others.
This is the only step you can take entirely alone. 2, recognize that the only ethical meaning of love is the desire to and the act of helping another person maximize his or her creativity, then seek to love as many people as possible, including your enemies, but not fewer than the other 7 people who join in your arkette. 3, recognize that for humans, fear is the belief we cannot create and that fear is an illusion that can be overcome in ourselves by understanding the nature of fear, recognizing fear in ourselves and others, then rejecting fear as a motivator of our actions and doing that which we believe will maximize creativity, irrespective of how much fear we feel. Our ability to reject fear as a motivator and substitute ethical action and love in its place is what makes us human. No subhuman animal can do this.
We always win and never lose by increasing creativity. 4, do your best to create an entirely voluntary of 4 men and 4 women to include yourself, who are also committed to these 4 points, then see how you can best communicate with one another so that you collectively maximize each other's individual creativity. This collective form of eight way communication and self enhancing creativity, I call autopoiesis. 5, finally, do your best individually as an octet and as a network of octets to become self sufficient in education, economics, health, self defense and so on in that order of priority, while having as few transactions as possible with non libertarian forms of government. If you have taken the previous four steps to even a slight degree, you will find this self sufficiency and the natural resulting libertarian society very easy to achieve.
So easy to achieve in fact, that the whole process may appear more mystical than scientific to those who engage in it. All libertarians want to be part of a libertarian society. It seems to me that you will never get a fear driven democratic majority in any current nation state to choose libertarianism for themselves. Therefore, create it for yourself on a smaller scale. If you cannot create a libertarian society among 8 willing adults, you should never expect that you could create it for millions of fear driven people.
It seems that there is still enough liberty in the United States to start a libertarian society among 4 men and 4 women that expanded. I have written 4 4 books on this subject, what I have given you here is only the briefest of introductions to the process of creative transformation, which I believe is the only way that a libertarian society will ever come about. Our democracy already seems too degenerate to produce even the very limited version of libertarianism proposed by the Libertarian party in the United States. In fact, a truly libertarian society where the only legitimate function of government is to help coordinate the mutually desirable activities of many autonomous architects with an entirely voluntary network of free receive much less than the small support of the electorate that the Libertarian Party currently has. The Libertarian could achieve political power only by becoming as ethically and politically corrupt as the Democratic and Republican parties, which would, at best, be a pyrrhic victory.
However, we do not need majority approval of the rest of the electorate to create an ethical state and a libertarian society among ourselves, any more than the founding fathers and the patriots who risked and gave their lives for our liberty needed the support of the Tory majority, who at best stood on the sidelines and did nothing, or at worst aided the British tyranny. What we do need is a sense of our own creative power, ethical obligations, and freedom. Freedom and security come from within, never from without. Freedom, according to Tom Paine and Tom Jefferson, is something we receive from God, the God of Spinoza, not from any human other than ourselves. Both creativity and freedom are gifts from god we need only take.
So long as we believe that our freedom, our ethics, or our creativity creativity and our ethics that make us free. We need only recognize this to become free. To become free. To become collectively free as a people within the ethical state, we need a second declaration of independence, which builds upon the truths of the first declaration of independence and extends them with the knowledge of the last 2 15 years. I'll now conclude and summarize what I have said said by giving you a second declaration of independence as Thomas Jefferson might have written it if he could have survived until today.
It is a message from the future with Jefferson's own words from the past. 2nd declaration of independence, inspired by Thomas Jefferson, unanimously agreed to by all citizens of the ethical state. Within the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political band which has connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and sovereign station to which the laws of nature and of nature's god entitle them, a decent respect for the opinions of humanity require that they should declare the causes which entail them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self evident, that humanity is equal before God and being endowed by the creators with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the maximization of creativity according to dictates of one's own conscience that to secure these rights, governments are instituted on humanity deriving their just powers from the consent of the government and that whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to maximize creativity.
Sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accepted. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations pursuing invariably the same object, evisances are designed to reduce them under any form of subject of this government, and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former system of government. The history of the free people free people. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. The welcome of the United States, in collusion with the vassal governments of states, The government of the United States, in collusion with the vassal governments of states, counties and municipalities, have usurped the power originally granted by God and the Constitution of the United States to the people and imposed destructive taxation, an inequitable legal system, an oppressive compulsory elected officials have repeatedly lied to and misled the public in elected officials have repeatedly lied to and misled the public in order to obtain their support and further reducing their liberty.
A majority of the electorate has repeatedly shown itself willing and anxious to be deceived by voting for the most deceitful of the political candidates before them. States candidates and voters have shown that the United States system of government is a failed ideology, which leads to the concentration of power in the hands of the most destructive liars that the society can produce. Possibility that all other systems of government have in the past been even worse does not justify any form of destructive tyranny. We seek the best possible form of government and not merely the lesser of popular evils. The Government of the United States has shown its moral bankruptcy by squandering the wealth of its people in supporting some of the most corrupt, destructive tyrannies in history.
Among these have been the governments of the Soviet Union between 1941 and 1945, the Republic of China, now in Taiwan since 1941, the Vietnam from 1954 to 1975, the samosa dictatorship in Nicaragua from 1933 until 19 79, the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines from 1966 to 1986, many despotic Islamic Islamic states in the Middle East, Pakistan, and other parts of the world from 1948 to the present, plus many evil, destructive dictatorships in Africa, Asia, and Latin America whenever it seemed politically expedient during most of the latter half of the 20th century and still today. This destructive expediency has been practiced to allegedly inhibit the deleterious spread of even greater evils, particularly communism. But it is self evident that unethical means can never achieve ethical ends. Confiscatory socialism and other evils have steadily spread and become worse through the unethical acts of the United States government. This government, in its any time in history.
The government, in its alleged attempts to defend its people, has taken away their liberties and has almost succeeded in destroying them along with the rest of the world. The government and the majority of the electorate of the United States have engaged in gross fiscal mismanagement. They have produced an ever growing national debt of over $13,000 for each man, woman, and child in the nation, whose 10% per year compound growth rate is accelerating and ruining the nation. At the same time, they have impoverished the creative people of the United States by confiscating their wealth and redistributing it to the most the creativity of the nation. The government of the United States has constantly expanded its police powers through the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Drug Enforcement Agency, and other bureaucracies to spy upon and harass its ethical citizens with police state methods while selectively aiding and abetting the ever more destructive organized crime syndicates at home and the tyrannies abroad.
In gross violation of the civil and human rights, the government has made it increasingly difficult for ethical citizens to honor and defend themselves, while simultaneously contributing to the proliferation of vicious criminals by supporting and expanding a legal system that punishes the ethical and rewards Supreme Court, which constantly take away individual liberty for the benefit of the police bureaucracies and for political expediency by catering to popular fear and prejudice, while protecting criminals at the expense of the innocent. The legal system itself is dominated by parasitical lawyers who corrupt the law to serve solely their own power seeking and money making purposes by constantly eliminating all vestiges of truth and justice from the legal replacing them with legal technicalities, bureaucratic procedures, and the deceit and manipulation of ignorant fearful jurors. In the current legal system, a combination of wealth, deceit, and or a clever unscrupulous lawyer can always prevail over truth and justice. The government the government of the United States, with the criminally negligent acquiescence of an electoral majority, has plundered the wealth of its citizens, imposed upon an ever growing oppressive government, destroyed the creativity of its youth through a malignant educational bureaucracy, and made it ever more difficult for individual creativity to express itself.
The government has greatly endangered the very survival of humanity and life on earth. The political leaders of the United States and those who vote for or in any way support them have shown themselves unwilling recognize that the we recognize that the government of the United States is among the least evil governments on earth. But just as the United States was originally created, when an ethical minority of its inhabitants revolted against what was then the least evil and most powerful government on earth in order not to be forced to accept the lesser of evils, so now must the new ethical minority revolt against the least evil and most powerful government of today. For evil government all current governments are inherently evil. Only that government which governs least, governs best.
We have used the remaining liberty in the United States to warn our American brethren of these dangers through our words and our actions. We have given alternatives. They have chosen to continue on the path of self destruction. We, the people of the ethical state, choose life over death. We choose creation over destruction.
In ethical self defense, we declare ourselves a free and sovereign people, no longer bound by any ties to any government other than our own. We welcome those who and the god who created all, we declare ourselves an ethical state, and the god who created all, we declare ourselves an ethical state dedicated to the maximization of creativity and bound by no other law. We declare liberty of every human being to do and say what he or she pleases as long as he or she does not impose undeserved harm on others. We declare that harm to another is deserved only when necessary in self defense against the person harmed. A person's life and property belong entirely to him or herself.
No one has a right to any part of another person's life or property. Only mutually voluntary transactions by 100% consensus can never be ethical or creative. The tyranny of state, swear eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of any ethical being. We declare all persons ethical until proven otherwise. On these principles, we shall henceforth govern ourselves and interact with others.
We shall do our best to maximize creativity. For this God inspired end, we and all future citizens of the ethical state pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor. This is all in my books, and I have other literature here. Yeah. Go ahead.
Sorry. I wanna say, first of all, I certainly appreciate your presentation and the kind of thought that I'm gonna have that? Yeah. Okay. Intuitively, creativity is a process by which we discover scientific laws, invent machines, produce works of art, and help others do the same.
So productivity might come out of that if they're producing works of art, discovering scientific laws, or inventing machines. So productivity is doing something over and over again that is not creative. Creative is to do something that's original, not a more abstract and formal definition is that creativity is the process by which we increase truth for at least 1 person without decreasing truth for any person. When we have increased truth for 1 person in the entire universe and have not decreased the truth for any other person, then we have done a creative act. And truth, truth, I repeat, is information, which when we believe it, enhances our ability to predict and control in the objective world, physical, biological, and psychosocial.
False of this information, which when we believe it, decreases our ability to predict and control in the objective world. That's a scientific paradigm. And remember, I come across very scientific, but I'm also mystic. Go ahead. Why a person in that unit?
Well, that's a long story. But, groups much larger than 8 tend to become hierarchical and bureaucratic, and it becomes they they fall under the control of people who can manipulate the majority as a rule or powerful personalities. Groups much smaller than 8 have a tendency not to have enough varieties of viewpoints and they have a tendency to accept common self delusion. So at 8, it seems to be an optimal process by which in groups of 8, we end up with people who can give each other feedback and can know each other personally and a a pattern in nature of which this is an extrapolation. If you look at the whole evolutionary process going back to the time of the big bang, you will see that quantum leaps in evolution are made by complementary pairs.
I'll give you a little bit of this. For example, a hydrogen atom is a complementary pair of an electron and anode proton. In order to make the next quantum leap in atomic evolution, you fuse 4 complementary pairs of hydrogen atoms. Four hydrogen atoms, when fused together, make a helium atom, which is the next leap in evolution. When you fuse helium atoms, you get a carbon atom.
Carbon is the only atom which is completely generalized and consists of 4 complementary pairs of electrons and protons. Furthermore, carbon so 4 complementary pairs again. Furthermore, carbon is the basis of the evolution of chemicals into life. When carbon evolves into cell producing molecules, these are adenine, cytosine, thymine, and guanine, which make up the nucleic acids, therefore complementary pairs also. I postulate that the first cells were made of 4 complementary pairs of DNA and protein.
And similarly, the first metazole are made of first 4 complementary pairs of cells, and the first nervous system is made of 4 complementary pairs of neurons. As we go up in the evolutionary scale till we get to the top, to us, we find that what makes us uniquely human is the human brain, and the human brain itself consists of 4 common complementary pairs. We have 4 brains. We have the neo cortex, which is a purely human brain. We have the mammalian cortex, which we share share with all other mammals.
We have the reptilian complex, the center of rage and biological drives, which are sold to the reptiles, and then we have the fish brain, which is the rest of the nervous system, and that consists of all complementary pairs. So logical extrapolation of that is that at the human level, what are the complementary pairs? Obviously, men and women. And men and women have complementary brains. The male and the female brain differ far more from each other in a complementary fashion than the rest of the body.
So if you wanna make the next quantum leap in evolution, aside from what I first told you, this is another reason why you should do it. So I'm sorry I went on a little long, but it's it's an extrapolation of of a trend. You have any other questions? Yes. I I I can derive everything I've told you without mysticism, but you will not maximize creativity without mysticism.
And by god, I mean god in the same sense as Spinoza. When Einstein was asked to be believed in god, he said I believe in the god of Spinoza. I also believe in the god of Spinoza, an impersonal god that is not in conflict with science. I see god as a process, not as a person, and God is a process of ever increasing creativity within the universe. When that aspect of the universe which makes creativity exist because creativity is almost a mystical thing.
How can we see what everyone else has seen and think what no one else has thought? How does that come about? Where do our original ideas come from? And, my model reality is mystical if that's is where that comes from. And that's why the great mystics like Jesus, Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster, etcetera, while the great mystics were able to correctly, through mystical insight, come up with true ethical systems.
Ethical systems that we don't know why we follow them. They just seem right. So we have a way in which we can tap an infinite source of truth, and that infinite source of truth is what the great physicist David Bohm called the implicate order. Quantum mechanics indicates that there is a parallel universe to ours which is filled with true information. This is what Jung intuitively, a mystic, call the collective unconscious and that we can tap that universe, and that's where all our original ideas come from.
That is the cause for quantum phenomena. And what I've discovered is a way of tapping that universe at will and using that infinite truth to invent machines, create, new works of art, invent, teach others, etcetera. K? One of the consequences, one of the trivial side effects of that in your world is that it enables you to live a libertarian life because we have an infinite source of truth at our disposal at all times. No one can take that away from us.
That's mystical. Yes. Go ahead, Joan. I was The next step from the family. The family is a natural is a natural instinctive It's because they and it does next step.
Most families don't rule, don't learn themselves. No. No. And in in practice, we tried to achieve consensus among much more than so many, even among 2 people typically, to achieve consensus. However, the process that we develop helps helps.
Yeah. But a fam that's what's wrong with family. In other words, an ethical family that sees maximize the creativity of all its members will operate by consensus. Now consensus doesn't mean that you let other people in focus on and basically one family. Any child should have the right to leave anytime he wants, not be forced by law to stay within the family.
They didn't wanna be a part of it. So the family works by consensus. However, I'm an ethical family, anyway. But 2 people in the family produce almost all income and they risk risk off of them. So when you're living off of someone else's creativity, you gotta do what they say.
And if you don't like it, you get out of the situation. And similarly in an octet, if all the people in the octet don't make equal contributions, the people who make unequal contributions would have they would probably. In other words, it wouldn't be the other people who would leave. It would be the people who felt that they weren't getting an adequate return on their investment who would leave. So, NOCTAD is a voluntary association.
You might see it as a corporation in which people might have different amounts of stock. And it doesn't mean that any one individual would have a majority of the stock, but the people who have more stock are probably more important. But, yes, you listen to everyone, and everyone has a veto of everyone else. And the people who don't like the situation get out of it. And that would normally be the opposite of those who produce more wealth rather than those who produce less wealth would be the opposite of an individual family who would be getting out of it often.
So, so this is but, see, all of this goes back to the notion of how do you maximize great tuning. That's the only thing that keeps driving everything here. And, what we have shown, I think, experimentally and quite convincingly from a scientific point of view is that we're more creative in the market of people who cooperate voluntarily with another Up to this time, all human organizations have decreased individual creativity. It is being forced to conform to the structures of a classical organization that destroys creativity. And that's why individuals, as a rule, are far more creative outside of organizations than within organizations.
And so what we come up with is an organization that amplifies creativity rather than restriction. K? And it's complex how that works. It's not a simple thing. And so that's what my book is about.
How do you make that work? How do you organize it? How do you how do you function your bill? Any other questions? Okay.
Thanks very much.