The Forgotten Power of Leadership

December 26, 2011 in Evolution with 0 Comments

I‘m always surprised when people don’t grok the concept of leadership. I don’t know why but I seem to regularly “get it” on an instinctual basis. So it’s like having a sixth sense. It baffles me when others don’t share that sense experience with me.

What do I mean by leadership? Leadership is not about electing or appointing people to give orders that others are obligated to follow. Leadership is about stepping forward when everyone else wants to step back. It’s about putting your neck out there with an idea and a plan of action. It’s about following through on that plan – with action! It’s about showing others how their impossible dreams actually are possible, and now. Leadership is entirely voluntary and mutual. You can have as many leaders as you want and only pay as much attention to each as you desire. You can be a leader to as many people as you can honestly manage to satisfy.

Leadership is a service and it is provided in a marketplace. Leadership is essential to our quest for freedom and justice. Without it, we are simply a slew of individuals in the same physical, mental or spiritual space. With it, we can be an organized mastermind (see Napolean Hill) working wonders beyond the mere sum of our individual parts.

To the rugged atomizer individualists who say, “Poppycock!” to any talk of people working together mutually with other individuals towards a common goal, I offer this quote as my final thought on the relationship between the individual and the group:

“We can­not live only for our­selves. A thou­sand fibers con­nect us with our fel­low men.” -Her­man Melville

This one is also relevant:

“It is literally true that you can succeed best and quickest by helping others to succeed.” – Napolean Hill

How to Develop Leadership?

But if you don’t feel like a leader, how do you develop the leadership sense? Find something you really care about. An issue, a person, a country, a world. Research the issue. Make sure you care about it a lot. How much? So much so that you can’t imagine not neutralizing the threat. Start writing about it. You will find other, like-minded individuals. Now talk to them about what can be done. Collect ideas. Keep searching for your own inspiration. Take a shower, go for a run or do whatever else gets your creative brain into gear.

Now do something. Start small. Build up. Take risks. But make sure you know your risk profile. Don’t go overboard early on in a search for internet fame. This is a long term struggle. It’s a game of chess. Take it slowly and think (a lot) before acting.

But, whatever you do, don’t fall into the trap of thinking individual action alone is enough. It simply is not. Don’t kid yourself. Did Gandhi make the British Empire step back on all his lonesome? No. He put his leadership out there and worked with millions of people. Did Martin Luther King or Malcolm X or Rosa Parks achieve their victories all on their own? Absolutely not! It took many many people working together in concerted action with a leadership marketplace.

Sure, it takes an individual spark or sparks to start a fire. Such as what Rosa Parks did. Such as what Julian Heicklen does. And that is leadership! But it’s not enough. Where would Rosa Parks be without the many who joined her? Where would Julian Heicklen be without the videographers, the call flooders and the journalists?

So when I post something like this to my Facebook profile:

If someone hasn’t already organized an effort to boycott movie theaters (over SOPA) then one of my anarchist comrades should do it.

And get responses like these:

George, to boycott them assumes we are currently going to see movie now! lol It’s been well over a year since I’ve been to a theater as too much of what’s make just plain sucks.

I’ve been boycotting theaters for years. I haven’t supported the industry in years.

[And I see this attitude over and over again when working with We Won't Flyers.]

It’s a little frustrating. I didn’t ask you to be a follower of a boycott or to pound your chest about your years-long boycott. I asked you to ORGANIZE a boycott. I invited you to be a leader. I invited you to build power. Power is what wins political battles. For those of us not in the 1%, that means leadership. It means organizing. It means a lot of smart, but also hard, work. Power will not flow your way until you are willing to earn it. And without power, you can forget about moving your issue forward or protecting a person, a country or a world.

Am I being unreasonable? Am I asking too much? Are some of us born leaders, born persuaders and the rest of us doomed to a secondary status by birth, unable to step forward, unable to muster courage, take risks and persuade others? NO! This is an excuse. Recognize it as such and TRY. Try to be a leader. Keep trying, don’t give up and you will meet with success. If you give up, then I will know that you don’t really care all that much about your issue, your people, your country or your world. Is that what you want others to think of you?

No man is an island. And why would anyone want to be? If you are reading this article, you want a better world. You want more freedom and more justice. Leverage the network effect. Become a leader. Make something happen. Don’t rest on your imaginary laurels. Step up. If you don’t know how – and have a burning desire to be a leader – contact me and I will mentor you.

My Beef with Capitalism, in a Nutshell

November 30, 2011 in Libertarian with 9 Comments

‘Capitalism’ is a funny word. It means so many different things to so many different people, that it’s become entirely useless as a basis for any kind of rational or constructive communication. For some, it is a vessel to romanticize and to pour all their dreams into. For others, it is a trashcan they fill with their complaints and most cynical expectations for the future. But what is capitalism, at its root?

Some will mention wage labor, others exploitation and yet others will talk of free trade. But I think the defining feature is the ability to accumulate lots and lots and lots of stuff (capital). And then, most importantly, to have a third party protect your ability to control that stuff even when you’re not using it. That third party, of course, is the state (the government).

(Does it have to be a state? No. But I don’t think a non-aggressive organization will go to the same lengths as the state to protect property.)

Without this ability to accumulate and have your title to said stuff protected at little to no cost to yourself, things like wage labor, exploitation and managed trade could not happen. These all depend on the power imbalances that stem from the state protecting capitalists’ control of their property.

I don’t think capitalism would survive without the state. In a stateless society, people would be freer to rise up against people who attempt to control more property than they actually use. Acting in concert, great numbers of people could, in the worst case, purchase arms, form a defense force and fight capitalists on a more level playing field. Squatters, worker-owned cooperatives and similar direct actors would take control of more of the capitalists’ property. In the process, their power would be eaten away.

To those who say that capitalism is free trade, nothing more and nothing less, that is not its defining characteristic. Free trade can happen under many different ideological systems. Free trade is blooming right now in China in the midst of an ostensibly socialist system. Free trade can happen in an anarchist society. I don’t doubt that free trade even happened in the Soviet Union, where some may have bartered vodka for bread (or the opposite), for example.

Neither is exploitation a defining characteristic of capitalism, since it can happen anywhere there is an imbalance of power, including under socialist, communist, democratic or plain old totalitarian regimes. In other words, exploitation is not unique to capitalism.

So that’s my problem with capitalism: that some privileged people get to accumulate tons of stuff at other’s expense by using the government to shield them from market action. By market action, I mean homesteading of property the capitalists aren’t themselves using.

So, I’m not high on capitalism (anymore). What am I into? I like the idea that people’s possessions should be respected. These are the things an individual uses on a regular basis to live his life. I would include all the tools and toys a person uses in their home and business, including a reasonable amount of land to live on, to use for recreation and producing food; and everything that goes with their business.

If a person prospers legitimately, I have no basis to challenge any accumulation of wealth. But I take issue with absentee control of things, especially natural resources. There is an argument that the earth is the common heritage of all people. I find this convincing. So for one person to deny others the reasonable use of this common heritage is not legitimate.

For example, if someone fences off 1,000 acres of land but consistently uses only 2, I don’t consider that legitimate. Simply being first to fence is not a solid foundation for denying this common heritage to others. If someone needed land and had a solid intention to use it to sustain his life, I would support that person in any attempt to homestead a reasonable parcel out of the 1,000 acres.

A capitalist might argue that the the first-fencer mixed his labor with the land or registered title and so it was now “a part of him” (which sounds a little too mystical for my tastes). But the first-fencer only mixed his labor with the 2 acres he is using and the thin strip of land the fence is on. What about the other ~998 acres? He hasn’t done anything there. So I don’t even think the homesteading principle supports the first-fencer’s actions.

But you can’t live life without property, say the capitalists. Yes, you can. You can live life with possessions, the things you control and use. You absolutely can live life without those things that you don’t use but control (property). If you don’t use them, that right there shows that you do not need them in order to live.

I invite reasoned criticism of my comments here. Anything else I do not tolerate.

Property Issues not Clear-Cut in Occupy Wall Street Zuccotti Park Eviction

November 15, 2011 in Libertarian with 9 Comments

In the latest attack by governments on free people, Michael Bloomberg of New York City has ordered his police to evict Occupy Wall Streeters from Zucotti Park. If this wasn’t bad enough, I noticed a libertarian friend post this today:

My thoughts regarding the clearing out Zucotti Park: Good! Zucotti Park is privately owned, therefore, no one has the right to engage in activities its owner deems unsuitable. The property owners were trespassed upon and the protesters initiated force against the property owners. Therefore, the property owners have every right to retaliatory self-defense.

This, sadly, is glib, reactionary and characteristic of the worst kind of right-libertarian thinking. Do any clear-thinking Ayn-Randians recognize the context-dropping that is evident in the above paragraph? Let’s take a closer look.

1. How did they come by it?

First, how did the current owner (Brookfield Office Properties Inc.) become owners of record for it? Did they use state privilege to get it? To earn the money they used to buy it? Or was it some kind of gift from the state?

According to Wikipedia, Zucotti park was created when US Steel wanted to build a building in New York City a little higher than what government officials would allow. In return for government permission, US Steel created the park.

So far I have been unable to find when or how the current owner acquired the park.

US Steel and Brookfield Office Properties Inc. are large corporations. They have benefited from, at the very least, government-granted limited liability protection. This enables them to escape complete accountability for their actions.

Brookfield Office Properties Inc. is a real estate company. It is likely that it benefited from the recent government-created real estate bubble. It may also benefit from various government incentives routinely granted at the local level for construction of arenas, large buildings, etc. Finally, real estate often requires large bank loans. Banks are chartered by the state. They use a state-controlled and -manipulated currency. And banks have the exclusive privilege of using fractional reserve banking to issue more loans than they likely could in a freed market. Finally, the government, through the Federal Reserve, keeps interest rates low. This makes it cheaper for those who borrow, such as real estate companies, and less rewarding for those who save, such as individual workers.

It’s been some time since I have studied the history of US Steel but it wouldn’t surprise me to find that it had benefited from tariffs on imported steel and other bailouts, price controls and/or war contracts.

In conclusion, the park has its origins in state privilege and state control. State power, as readers of this blog will know, is used by some to disadvantage others. It is unfair and illegitimate. Thus you can hardly claim that the current owners have a solid claim to control the park.

2. Do the owners of record use the property?

Second, do the owners of record use the property? When was the last time? Who is actually using the property?

There is an idea called usufruct. Among other meanings, this is the concept that those who use an item of property are the rightful owners, or at least their right to use it should be respected. And this makes sense to me. Any owner of record who doesn’t use their property is a specie of absentee landlord. Why should someone who never uses something have control over it and the people who do actually use it? This makes no sense to me.

Historically, absentee landlordism is a known evil. We can talk about the Irish example, the indigo farmers in India that Gandhi helped or sharecropping in the Southern US after the civil war. But none of them are pretty. Absentee landlordism is a way for some people to control others’ use of natural resources – the earth that is our common human heritage.

3. Did the occupiers agree to abide by the owner of record’s rules?

Third, are there signs posted to the effect that the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) people are not wanted? Were they told they weren’t wanted there? Did the OWS people voluntarily agree to any certain conditions regarding their use of the space?

I haven’t been to Zucotti park, so I don’t know what signs are posted. But I have read that it is exempt from the city government’s nightly curfew. I don’t know if the occupiers were warned about the pending eviction. But I highly doubt that any occupier freely signed a legitimate contract that set any terms for their use of the space.

When we have a space that is not being used by its owner of record but is being used by the public, isn’t it a de facto commons? I think so. Even under current US law (in some areas at least), if one abandons a property and others take up its use, under certain conditions the new users can become the owners of record. If it is a commons, or is de facto owned by the public, whatever Brookfield Office Properties Inc. has to say is null and void. The current users get to make the rules.

If everyday patrons of the park are being denied their normal ability to enjoy the space by the occupiers, then that would be a legitimate cause for action – by a legitimate arbitrator or defense force.

4. Did the owners of record ask the cops to clear it?

Fourth, did the owners of record ask the cops to clear it?

One month ago, they did just that. But they withdrew that request the next day.

According to Michael Bloomberg, mayor of the New York City government, it was his decision alone to evict the occupiers this morning.

5. Are the cops a legitimate defense force for the owners of Zucotti Park?

Fifth, are the cops a legitimate force to be used for defense against trespassers on “private” land?

No, they are not. Those who are current on Occupy Wall Street news know that the cops are agents of aggression, not defense. They have been caught pepper-spraying and otherwise initiating attacks against occupiers since practically the beginning of this occupation. An aggression force is the opposite of a defense force. An aggression force can not be taken seriously when it claims it is being used in defense. That is more akin to propaganda.

Conclusion

The occupiers and the general public who patronize Zucotti Park are the legitimate owners of the park, no matter what the local government or corporations say. The police have no legitimate authority to evict the occupiers from the park. Not even the owner of record is on record as having a pending request for any eviction.

This eviction is simple another attack by government on free people perpetrated by an aggressive police force with notorious aggressors in its ranks. There is nothing legitimate, admirable or righteous about the actions of the local government in this matter.

Rap News #9 Parodies Ron Paul and the Zeitgeist Project

September 28, 2011 in Libertarian with Comments Off

This is really funny. I highly encourage you to watch it. Sure, he gets some things not quite right about Ron Paul but he also hits home – hard – on a lot. Both Ron Paul and the Zeitgeist project are phenomena close to my political heart. I’ve been watching both for some time. Both have interesting and insightful things to say about our modern condition. Have a good laugh and pass it along.

Agora I/O For Sale

September 28, 2011 in Activism with Comments Off

Agora I/O Laozi went well last weekend, with 1400 unique viewers across the 3 days and a steady 20-60 concurrent viewers on the video stream. We had a steady stream of folks chatting and asking questions of the speakers as well. Although I didn’t invest as much work into this Agora I/O as I did with the first, it still went off well and provided value to the community.

That said, I am selling Agora I/O. The domain, the website and social media presences are included. Make me an offer via email to me@georgedonnelly.com.

Why am I selling? Because I’m refocusing what I spend my time on. I’ve decided that I need to focus on career, my son’s unschooling and my writing. In order to do that, I’m cutting my activism profile radically.

Shield Mutual is also for sale. You get a website that’s ready to go with a nice design and logo. The concept is spelled out nicely and it’s a good domain name.

You’re Not Ready for Liberty

September 26, 2011 in Libertarian with 8 Comments

You say you want liberty. You complain about police, tickets, regulations, rules, abuses, corruption, politicians and bankers. You know the problem forwards and backwards. You’re an expert on the Federal Reserve. You’ve studied at Mises U. You’ve read Rothbard and watched Molyneux. People even go out of their way to read your critiques and respond to your rants. You talk about the presidential candidates with an air of expertise. You speak about anarcho-capitalism with confidence. You know who will build the roads in a stateless society and who will take care of whom. You believe in freedom.

But you’re not ready for liberty. You want the government to back off or just go away. But you haven’t stepped up your game to fill in the territory you want the state to abandon. How do you expect a (r)evolution to happen if you won’t lift a finger to to build it?

You want to end welfare. But what have you built to replace it?

You want food safety regulations to go away. But how many food safety watchdog organizations have you founded?

You want people to trust in freedom and each other. What have you done to build trust with your next door neighbors?

You want to end the wars. What have you done to build understanding among different cultures and nations?

You want liberty. But you’re not ready for it. You expect a (r)evolution to “happen” any day. You dream of collapse, the fall of the dollar, the destruction of the consumer society. But what have you done to prepare their replacements? Freedom does not just happen. It requires diligent, sustained intelligent work to build the organs of a free society.

Don’t aimlessly pine for collapse. Find the strength inside yourself to build the future. Start now. Be diligent. Stick with it. It takes a long time and a lot of tears to build a new society. Failure to act? Maybe you don’t really believe what you say you believe.

Forget the Labels and Focus on the Solutions

September 22, 2011 in Libertarian with 1 Comment

Are you so hung up on labels like capitalist, communist, socialist, progressive, conservative, libertarian and anarchist that it stops you from finding common cause with other people? Then you’ve fallen victim to ideology.

Has it occurred to you that maybe communists aren’t so scary? That capitalists use that term to mean something other than the state-run capitalism we see today? Have you considered that conservatives and socialists could live together quite contentedly as neighbors and friends, if only they could get past these divisive labels?

What are these labels, anyway? They’re generalizations. Labels are stereotyping. As such, they can, and often do, become a form of collectivization. Collectivization subsumes the differences of individuals into a collective and homogenous stereotype. All socialists want handouts. All capitalists want to exploit me. All communists want to reproduce the Soviet Union. Conservatives are heartless executioners.

The worst part is when ideological adherents take on these stereotypes and attempt to emulate them. This can lead to fundamentalism. What’s a libertarian. Oh, it’s X, Y and Z. Oh ok, that’s who I’ll become then. I’ll study up on the top authors in the field and become as much like them as possible. Because I’m a libertarian and that’s what a libertarian does.

Wrong. You are a human being first and foremost. You have been honed through millions of years of evolution to find common cause with your fellow human beings. To engage in mutual aid. To be compassionate. To help each other. To find solutions without other people’s ideologies getting in your way.

Next time you run into someone who doesn’t share your label, find out what their solutions to any given problem are. If they focus on government solutions, recognize that most people today have been conditioned to ignore most solutions that fall outside the sphere of government action. Give that person time to overcome this. Don’t rush into judgment. And you may be surprised at some unexpected compatibilities that emerge.

Remember that, more important than left vs. right, conservative vs. progressive, communist vs. capitalist, is authoritarian vs. libertarian. Anyone with any label can make the shift to libertarian and find ways to enact their solutions without hurting other people. Our job is not so much to judge but to facilitate, form friendships, listen and be good human beings. Humanity over ideology!

TL;DR

Libertarian people can practice socialism, communism, capitalism and a dozen other things in the same day. They are not mutually exclusive. Socialism can be non-governmental. Socialism can be voluntary. In my family, we practice socialism and let me tell you, it works just fine.

We will never reach freedom if we let our labels get in the way of building the alliances we need in order to end the current system. This is the shortsightedness I see over and over ad nauseam in the libertarian community.

I’m Experimenting with the Esselstyn Vegan Diet

September 6, 2011 in Green with 4 Comments

Last week I started experimenting with a vegan diet. My inspiration is Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn, his research on stopping and reversing heart disease, and related research. For at least 28 days, I am giving up meat, dairy, extracted oils and most sugar. I’m eating fruits, vegetables, whole grains and legumes almost exclusively. A lot of what I am eating is raw, in the form of huge salads, sliced fruit on my morning oatmeal and snack fruits throughout the day. I’m even giving up fruit juices and eating the whole fruits instead.

I’m doing this primarily for health reasons but I’m also concerned about the ethics of eating fellow earthlings and the sustainability of how most meat and dairy is produced. I’m not trying to push veganism on you. I’m experimenting. I’ve gotten some great results already and I hope you will get something out of this as well! Please check out the video above and let me know what you think.

Page 1 of 5412345»...Last »