Who wants to start an anarchist micronation?

[popcorn1]

very very hard to run a country without government
just need a leader that wont fill his own pockets
see i always used to say why don.t they pay the leader well more money because there on about 200k a year may be a bit less
compare to a actor or footballer then they might live by the book instead of taking back handers off the rich
for a policy or a contract
what we should do is say the president gets 1 million a year then he as been paid 5 million for his 5 year term
 then what we do is have a vote and if he been a good president and we all vote to say yes he as been a good president then he get another 5 million bonus so it gives him the incentive to be a good president

because i reckon we the people loose more than that in taxes of the super rich and contracts in your area
and stupid projects we know nowt about and the policies of the super rich
 lets face it as long as we need money to make are lives happy then even leaders can be bought for a price
its all about the money baby
but anyway good luck with your micronation might come for a holiday if you got any beaches

[TPTB_need_war]

ok so how would your state work then if you had no welfare system how would all your people work and gain a wage so they can live happy..
don.t forget you say you cannot give welfare benefits to your people so what happens when i loose my job how do i pay the bills.... my house and food..
so who gives me this money to help me if no TAXES
plus you keep saying property what if i don.t own any property can i still live in your state..
so if you say yes well who gives me this house do i go knock on peoples doors begging because you have no government so who do i see
 micronation what would your laws be who do i see if i have a problem

For one thing, we wouldn't interfere with your ability to grow your own food, which our modern nanny-state governments highly regulate and restrict making it too costly to do.

So there you (your wife probably while you are doing analytical work such as reengineering the barn) are growing your own food, making sex with your wife, producing offspring. You'd have to have enough capital to begin with to purchase land otherwise you wouldn't be joining our project. Thus you'd already demonstrated the ability to be responsible and produce. And assume you would thus be responsible and educate your offspring so they can produce also. Your wife might even be a home schooling mother perhaps in conjunction with other families in the neighborhood. This is what women really want to do and what really makes them happy.

I bet we'd also be donating non-compulsory educational programs as well, to encourage a literate society that can be self-reliant via production.

As for those in the world now who are stuck, we'd probably be using our great wealth to reach out and offer education and work opportunities abroad. Trade is an important aspect of commerce and productivity.

This great lie of "democracy" and "socialism" has been foisted upon the world. The main problem humans faced was protection from attacking armies and also technological and organizational (high fixed capital) problems with production (e.g. roads, problems with pandemics, etc).

We have a lot more technology now, and the question is are we going to let the 0.001% enslave us with it, or are we going to empower humanity to use it?

I think one of the key distinctions is that these days even Khan Academy (one guy making educational videos) can change the world. The information age reduces the fixed capital requirements required to help people improve.

That is not to say it would be perfect, but it would be better than the abysmal trajectory the world is headed now...

What is the point of this life if you can't help and see other humans happy? Some sociopaths want all the power, but really that is a very lonely and unnatural goal. It exists only because we empower those sociopaths with our inane foolishness to think that "democracy" and "socialism" are in our best interests.

[popcorn1]

ok so how would your state work then if you had no welfare system how would all your people work and gain a wage so they can live happy..
don.t forget you say you cannot give welfare benefits to your people so what happens when i loose my job how do i pay the bills.... my house and food..
so who gives me this money to help me if no TAXES
plus you keep saying property what if i don.t own any property can i still live in your state..
so if you say yes well who gives me this house do i go knock on peoples doors begging because you have no government so who do i see
 micronation what would your laws be who do i see if i have a problem

For one thing, we wouldn't interfere with your ability to grow your own food, which our modern nanny-state governments highly regulate and restrict making it too costly to do.

So there you are growing your own food, making sex with your wife, producing offspring. You'd have to have enough capital to begin with to purchase land otherwise you wouldn't be joining our project. Thus you'd already demonstrated the ability to be responsible and produce. And assume you would thus be responsible and educate your offspring so they can produce also. Your wife might even be a home schooling mother perhaps in conjunction with other families in the neighborhood. This is what women really want to do and what really makes them happy.

I bet we'd also be providing educational programs as well, to encourage a literate society that can be self-reliant via production.

As for those in the world now who are stuck, we'd probably be using our great wealth to reach out and offer education and work opportunities abroad. Trade is an important aspect of commerce and productivity.

This great lie of "democracy" and "socialism" has been foisted upon the world. The main problem humans faced was protection from attacking armies and also technological and organizational (high fixed capital) problems with production (e.g. roads, problems with pandemics, etc).

We have a lot more technology now, and the question is are we going to let the 0.001% enslave us with it, or are we going to empower humanity to use it?

You'd have to have enough capital to begin with to purchase land otherwise you wouldn't be joining our project. Thus you'd already demonstrated the ability to be responsible and produce.

this is what you say..  so what if i got all my money of mummy and daddy and all i ever done was party
how do i grow a carrot
and i never learned at school because i am stinking rich and i want a slave to do it i throw him a few shillings to clean my pool and grow my veg is this ok in your state

What is the point of this life if you can't help and see other humans happy? Some sociopaths want all the power,

is this not you.... think about it for a 1min
if your trying to make humans lives happy well how will you make mine happy if i got no money to buy land in your eyes i am worthless
so does that not make you the same as most governments your already telling me if i got no money to buzz off

[TPTB_need_war]

this is what you say..  so what if i got all my money of mummy and daddy and all i ever done was party
how do i grow a carrot
and i never learned at school because i am stinking rich and i want a slave to do it i throw him a few shillings to clean my pool and grow my veg is this ok in your state

The key is to destroy usury which I assert the Knowledge Age does (c.f the OP of the Economic Devastation thread). So this unproductive brat will end up destitute soon enough and his wealth will have been transferred to those who are productive.

Eliminating the high fixed capital component of production is the main reason we can now jettison democracy and socialism. The technology has changed what society can be.

if your trying to make humans lives happy well how will you make mine happy if i got no money to buy land in your eyes i am worthless
so does that not make you the same as most governments your already telling me if i got no money to buzz off

By reaching out to you abroad with educational opportunities to better yourself and earn enough to join in. Donations if you really need it, to help you bridge the gap. But if you are determined to just be a leech on society's best faith attempts to help you, then yes you will be ignored and perish as it should be for any pest or parasite.

[TPTB_need_war]

just need a leader that wont fill his own pockets

Read the OP of this thread again. We propose no revenue generation and no power for any leader.

[TPTB_need_war]

Would The Philippines respect your sovereignty if someone bought one of the islands on the "margin" (remote)?  Bet they would not,

I did not propose to attempt to take territory from a powerful, large state. The Philippines has a population exceeding 100 million.

bet they would not respect UN rulez (technicalitiez) re "stateless people".

The Philippines ratified it in 2011 after signing it 50 years ago. So apparently they are very much willing to abide by it. In my experience, the Philippines would. You could go on TV Patrol to garnish local sympathy.

It is (story link below) a British Overseas Territory, so might not be for sale.  Would guess NOT.

The islanders are not desperate right now. You'd have to wait for the coming economic implosion. You could migrate there by the dozens and gain enough political power to help set policy, which I think is more realistic than trying to overtly buy them out in one move. The best would be a gradual infiltration and convincing (with money galore to help in the convincing). I could not accomplish that by myself. With perhaps 5 other like-minded guys and their extended families migrating there, we could probably accomplish it. The UK would fight us, but fuck them. As I explained earlier, there are limits to what they can do. Did you see the rape case on the island? The UK couldn't even put them in prison for a long time. The governor of the island was involved.

Looks kind of nice actually...

I would go crazy there. Especially they don't have fiber optic cable so the internet is atrociously slow (Tahiti has it some 1000 miles away). There is no way to land a plane there, so it is 3 days by boat to the nearest island that has air access (the other island under their nation could handle an airport but the UN declared it a private wildlife refuge  ). The island is pretty damn small. Be okay if you like the people a lot and enjoy being around them.

I'd say if we could upgrade the infrastructure, and accomplish our goal, it might be worth trying?

We'd have to invest some time living there. We couldn't just waltz in and take over in one week. This would be a disruption to our lives. Is it worth it?

Also we'd really have to maintain the lives of the people there and what they love. I think they are essentially already anarchists, but they have some socialist needs.

One thing is the locals are not reproducing (youngest child is a 12 year old girl, next youngest is a 19 year old man) and many want to leave. So they would I think over time wither away in political control, if our offspring and immigrations were significant.

It is a lot of effort to undertake. I would not even consider it, unless I was sure we had a plan to outnumber the existing population.\

Edit: let me add that I am not interested to destroy the lives of the people there. I would only migrate there if I felt I could uplift their lives.

[popcorn1]

this is what you say..  so what if i got all my money of mummy and daddy and all i ever done was party
how do i grow a carrot
and i never learned at school because i am stinking rich and i want a slave to do it i throw him a few shillings to clean my pool and grow my veg is this ok in your state

The key is to destroy usury which I assert the Knowledge Age does (c.f the OP of the Economic Devastation thread). So this unproductive brat will end up destitute soon enough and his wealth will have been transferred to those who are productive.

Eliminating the high fixed capital component of production is the main reason we can now jettison democracy and socialism. The technology has changed what society can be.

if your trying to make humans lives happy well how will you make mine happy if i got no money to buy land in your eyes i am worthless
so does that not make you the same as most governments your already telling me if i got no money to buzz off

By reaching out to you abroad with educational opportunities to better yourself and earn enough to join in. Donations if you really need it, to help you bridge the gap. But if you are determined to just be a leech on society's best faith attempts to help you, then yes you will be ignored and perish as it should be for any pest or parasite.

:-\so is that not a type of benefit system then
so you don.t like giving money to the government to pay for welfare but you will give me money if i live in another country to buy a house  
so what about all my friends they got no money will you help them too or just me 1 person
don.t you see the problem not everyone in life can make money because if it was so easy we would all be rich
there will always be more poor than rich so who helps the poor
i always say health education food and a roof over your head is what every government needs taxes to pay for if you got no money
i don,t expect a car or a holiday or money to eat out or go to the fair i don.t expect government to pay for those things if i am poor
but health shelter food yes if i fall on hard times

[TPTB_need_war]

popcorn1, you didn't understand my replies, so I will not clutter this thread with more replies that you wouldn't understand. Best to you.

[TPTB_need_war]

"what’s called libertarian in the United States, which is a special U. S. phenomenon, it doesn’t really exist anywhere else — a little bit in England — permits a very high level of authority and domination but in the hands of private power:  so private power should be unleashed to do whatever it likes.  The assumption is that by some kind of magic, concentrated private power will lead to a more free and just society...

just a call for some of the worst kinds of tyranny, namely unaccountable private tyranny."

Please point out to the senile Noam Chomsky that he is describing democracy, where the 0.001% (the unaccountable private owners of the governments) convince the 99% to tax the 1%, which is really a tax on the 99.999%.

Any inane socialist pigheaded questions?

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/16385

I was in Australia when they were proposing the Luxury Tax. They got the people to vote for higher taxes by lying to them. The slogan was they were going to tax the rich with their “Ferraris, Fur Coats, and French Wines.”  Everyone cheered – ya! Get the bastards! When the tax was passed, suddenly the dumb public discovered ALL electrical products were included. You could not buy a clock radio without the Luxury Tax.

People get what they deserve from government – lie, lies, and more lies, and empty pockets to show for it.

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/35453

Governments promised that they would never use E-ZPass [toll booth elimination] technology for speeding tickets, but they lied. A friend received a speeding ticket in the mail from Virginia, stating that they drove through the E-ZPass lane 10 mph above the speed limit. I remain skeptical about government because they are simply not trustworthy.

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/23950

Earn just US$100,000 and you have made it to the hated top 1% that they argue deprive the 99% without exactly explain why it is such people rather than governments.

Taxes have been increasing exponentially and this has reduced new job creation from small business because in many developed countries, savings are still at rock bottom levels after the tax burden. This is just glaringly obvious when we look at Western Europe. The growth since 2007 in the sheer the volume of financial assets that have been accumulated is down by about 50% on average whereas Germany has been hit even harder as wealth has fallen to just 40% of the pre-crisis level. Germans on average now pay more than 50% in taxes and with the pending confiscation of 10% of their asset to bailout banks and an additional 5% tax to bailout the municipal governments, this trend in Germany may wipe out its ability to even create wealth moving into 2032.

Strangely, even with the French-elite socialist inspired IMF proposal to just confiscate 10% of everyone’s bank accounts in Europe, it appears that the majority of people do not pay attention to the financial news. In Europe, bank deposits are still the investment of choice, whereas long-term investments, including equities, are still being avoided as evil and untrustworthy since 2007. This has contributed to the historic low in retail participation in the stock market that is only furthering the gap between the “rich” and the “poor”. Money is just being “parked” rather than invested and this is clearly a major concern for any downturn from here will have even less wealth to provide a cushion for the middle class. Consequently, the next downturn appears to be far worse than anything previously. This is at odds with individuals facing retirement when the governments have unfunded liabilities and keep turning to higher taxes rather than looking at the problem long-term.

The rising disparity between the “rich” no one wishes to actually define and the “poor” who is defined as having less than the “rich”, is impacted by the rising taxation that is also reducing job creation and sending interest in borrowing for investment in Europe to record lows. That trend will hit the US shores starting in 2016.

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/archives/26331

The socialists love to tout that 1% of the world’s population will own more wealth than the other 99%. From the socialists’ viewpoint, this justifies stealing from one group to give to another, despite this model failing in the past. It is also in clear violation of the Ten Commandments. But why does this trend even happen? Is it that the 1% suppress the 99%? Or could it be that government suppresses the 99%?

The 99% cannot get richer because government robs them every day. What should have been put into savings and investments, was squandered as usual by politicians. So is it the fault of those who actually invest on their own? The socialists want to blame the rich and rob them, handing more and more assets to the political class who waste it on themselves.

The 99% need to wake up. It ain’t the 1% – It is those who pretend to be on your side who deprive you of your real right to economic freedom.

[blablahblah]

The islanders are not desperate right now. You'd have to wait for the coming economic implosion. You could migrate there by the dozens and gain enough political power to help set policy, which I think is more realistic than trying to overtly buy them out in one move. The best would be a gradual infiltration and convincing (with money galore to help in the convincing). I could not accomplish that by myself. With perhaps 5 other like-minded guys and their extended families migrating there, we could probably accomplish it. The UK would fight us, but fuck them. As I explained earlier, there are limits to what they can do. Did you see the rape case on the island? The UK couldn't even put them in prison for a long time. The governor of the island was involved.

Looks kind of nice actually...

I would go crazy there. Especially they don't have fiber optic cable so the internet is atrociously slow (Tahiti has it some 1000 miles away). There is no way to land a plane there, so it is 3 days by boat to the nearest island that has air access (the other island under their nation could handle an airport but the UN declared it a private wildlife refuge  ). The island is pretty damn small. Be okay if you like the people a lot and enjoy being around them.

I'd say if we could upgrade the infrastructure, and accomplish our goal, it might be worth trying?

We'd have to invest some time living there. We couldn't just waltz in and take over in one week. This would be a disruption to our lives. Is it worth it?

Also we'd really have to maintain the lives of the people there and what they love. I think they are essentially already anarchists, but they have some socialist needs.

One thing is the locals are not reproducing and many want to leave. So they would I think over time wither away in political control, if our offspring and immigrations were significant.

Chickenshit All talk, no action.
If self-flagellation and voluntary imprisonment, to avoid the spectre of government of course, is your thing then go for it.

What's the difference between a remote "sovereign" island, and a remote "prison" island? The name.

You're probably making it far too complicated btw. Couldn't you just sue the Brits for negligently putting Pitcairn in the path of your expensive container ship?

Then buy them out as part of the settlement.

Redecorate the ship with a landing strip. Problem solved! Until the next storm...

It would probably be a waste of your skills though. Get back to programming. Stop caring so much about imaginary monsters. Make some apps to help people. You've fallen into the trap of being an "expert", who tries to improve the world while forgetting that you're the one learning.

It is a lot of effort to undertake. I would not even consider it, unless I was sure we had a plan to outnumber the existing population.

You talk to the Brits first, because bureaucracy is fascinating, and use your social skills with the locals later.

[TPTB_need_war]

You talk to the Brits first, because bureaucracy is fascinating, and use your social skills with the locals later.

I rather instead fancy letting the Brits occupy a remote island, but unlike the Falklands where they had the support of the local population, in this case where the citizens are in absentia accused of being stateless persons and refugees in other countries (those host countries bound by a UN Convention on Stateless Persons). A standoff of sorts.

The point was let them violate the sovereignty of Pitcairn if they want to, under the watchful eye of the people of the world. Let them try to spin their propaganda on the airwaves, while the truth leaks out through 100s of anonymous blogs on the new anonymous internet. Let the Brits destroy the peaceful lives of the descendants of the original settlers.

Maybe along the way, hackers (such as Anonymous) with new untraceable drone technology that sinks every British supply ship that tries to resupply their occupying troops.

You are highly underestimating the power of programmers and math in this coming Knowledge Age.

If ever 100,000 programmers and mathematicians turn against the 0.001%, the 0.001% will be burnt toast.

I think also you perhaps ignored the part of the OP that talks about trying to negotiate treaties with the competing claimants on sovereignty, e.g. some treaty by which the Brits retain some influence if they back off from a direct confrontation. TPTB have to calculate their potential losses from a direct confrontation. The point is to make it less costly for them to accede some sovereignty than for them to try to bully their way.

Imagine the lone student standing in front of the tanks at Tiananmen Square that led to the fall of the Iron Curtain in China.

[TPTB_need_war]

43 year old Litvinenko drank tea containing a fatal dose of radioactive polonium during a meeting in London in 2006.

Mr Emmerson alleges that The Kremlin wanted Mr Litvinenko dead and provided the poison used to kill him.

But Russia are the good guys because they provided safe habor for Snowden right?

Wrong! The axis powers are in bed together.

Just do a little research on how Larry Summers was over there in Russia after fall of the Iron Curtain helping to redistribute nationalized assets to oligarchs. Follow the money trail to Goldman Sachs, LTCM, the collapse of Russian bonds, Edmond Safra, Martin Armstrong, etc...

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/armstrong-economics-behind-the-curtain-the-full-monty-0110.pdf

http://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/looking-behind-the-curtain4909.pdf


Btw, there was Goldman again writing derivatives to help Greece hide its fiscal negligence so it could be fully bankrupted in the coming conflagration.

It is one big 0.001% club, and you the 99% people ain't in it.

[blablahblah]

You are highly underestimating the power of programmers and math in this coming Knowledge Age.

If ever 100,000 programmers and mathematicians turn against the 0.001%, the 0.001% will be burnt toast.

What do you mean "if"? Don't they routinely use Project Fridays / 20% time for wholesale subterfuge anyway? Somebody has to work on all those large FOSS projects that mysteriously keep-up with the likes of MS Office, Photoshop, or Google Maps. Or maybe I'm being overenthusiastic. (I'm still thinking about the economics there.)

You could... guide people in that department. As for having a sovereign island/principality, you seem to be reacting to some kind of fear. (I heard that Australia has at least one of those, so you could probably just speak with them and find out what the issues are). The fear of big bad government is controlling you. Maybe you're legitimately onto something, but you need to be able to present your story in a way will inspire and cut through the average person's scepticism. I've heard you complain along those lines before, inviting others to "do the explaining". Well, write a book. If you don't know how, try it out. Disguise it as science fiction. Why suffer trying to 'convince' people, when you could plant ideas that take on a life of their own?

[popcorn1]

popcorn1, you didn't understand my replies, so I will not clutter this thread with more replies that you wouldn't understand. Best to you.

i do understand its you who thinks you can make a better system than our UK system
see what is stopping you from doing what you want ..go live on some island and make a new system that you think is fair..
your not looking at the bigger picture you only care for people with money other wise why say i need to buy land I GOT NO MONEY TO BUY ANY

now if you tried to build a micronation with your rules you need to invite people for free now do you get it
free house free education and a job for me to earn a crust
then i might come and live in your land of rules

see you need to think about population explosion.. will start off all good and well but as time goes on then what..
say we have a drought and my carrots don.t grow
say population rate grows how do we keep every one in a job
say i invent a robot and wipe half the jobs out
then what do the people do on our new island of new rules with not many jobs left
your not thinking about the negatives only the positives how do you cope with all the negatives
it takes 100s of years to make a good system and as time goes by you make more rules to fit the time
if life is all about money then many will suffer
some people in life are stronger and cleverer than most people they end up with the money
so what about the weak do you kill them or help them
well if you help them have you not just become a nanny state

how did USA get its people they give away land for free to farm
how did Australia  get it people they offered free land to farm

[countryfree]

Edit: also note I was also describing a safe way to become a stateless person.

The world already suffers from having too many nations, governments and other non natural entities. Please, let's not start another one. Better destroy all the existing nations. Actually, this may prove unnecessary as they're all crumbling down. USA and Europe are built on deficit. Countries only exist because simple minds believe in them.

That is why we are also working on an anonymous Knowledge Age:

One does not simply "vote" for anarchy.

Well I am arguing at the linked thread, that some balance between perfect anarchy and the world we current live in will be required to get any practical achievement.

Edit: I have not forsaken the orthogonal concept of an anonymous Knowledge Age so as to be defacto sovereign individually without any vote nor group affiliation. Remember we still have a physical body thus we are always physically present in some jurisdiction. The linked post above addresses this reality of our physicality.

You shall avoid at all costs to become stateless, that should kill your right to travel. I like more the idea of an anonymous knowledge age. Somehow, I kinda live in it already, with my passport in my pocket. I'm physically present in a country, and I'm even working there despite not having the right to work, but there isn't the slightest link between me and that country. I shall leave before one occurs.

[criptix]

betting 100€ that it wont work out


micronations especially one like this will for always be only a dream.

[TPTB_need_war]

Why suffer trying to 'convince' people, when you could plant ideas that take on a life of their own?

I am only convincing those people who matter, because as Linus Torvalds explained well, "most people are morons" and thus they can never understand.

popcorn1 is apparently a prime example because he can't seem to comprehend that rewarding habitual, willful failure is a human eugenics (potentially extinction) paradigm, due to the resiliency that is only attainable with Taleb's Anti-fragility, i.e. not overcommitting to egregious error which all collectives/politics inherently do.

And actually I am not trying to convince in this thread. I am just gathering a poll and feedback on how many people rationalize similarly to myself. Also to brainstorm potential solutions and dismiss non-solutions and impractical ideas.

It is also serves to be an "in your face" middle finger to socialist pigs. I get a kick out of that, but I wouldn't start a thread just to annoy socialists. I need to have some real work achievement goal in mind. This thread is gathering data. Everyone who contributes to the thread is appreciated (popcorn1 included), despite diametrical philosophical and political views expressed.

The political strategy is to make politics (collectivized resource appropriation) less relevant so people are more in tune with what benefits them, i.e. Welcome to the Knowledge Age.

Some people refer to this transformation as an Inverse Commons:

http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/magic-cauldron/magic-cauldron-5.html

Somewhere in the following video Linus explains for example how the technology of decentralized version control eliminates the politics over whom gets commit rights:

https://youtu.be/4XpnKHJAok8?t=488 (haha)

https://youtu.be/4XpnKHJAok8?t=1114 ("most people are morons")  <------ Edit: this one and the next one apply to my point

https://youtu.be/4XpnKHJAok8?t=1648 ("most of you are incompetent", "there are some few who are outstanding", "hey that person is smarter than I am")

Again increases in degrees-of-freedom doesn't have to be selfish even if it is physical. For example, if remove that obstacle that makes us all walk further than we need to.

You don't need to change the will of all the people, just the people who matter economically.

I figure those people who don't want to prioritize working with me already fail that test., lol  

No the real problem is providing a way for the people who want to productive to separate themselves from those who want to perish.

Convincing people to change is a waste of time.

Individual responsibility is only motivated by not providing a nanny state.

[TPTB_need_war]

The world already suffers from having too many nations, governments and other non natural entities. Please, let's not start another one. Better destroy all the existing nations. Actually, this may prove unnecessary as they're all crumbling down. USA and Europe are built on deficit. Countries only exist because simple minds believe in them.

Ahem. Sorry you are living in a fantasy of your own irrational choice. The nation-states will crumble into a one-world reserve currency and governance as planned/implemented by those owners of the world who will benefit.

I urge someone to email this to Martin Armstrong and ask him to get a grip on reality. He still thinks the USA and Russia are enemies, lol.

...

That movie/documentary (is there a vocabulary word?) is accurate to some extent as to the difficulties one can face during an economic collapse and especially in war, but it is not exactly the reality we face, primarily because we must grasp that TPTB (the core most people behind the curtain of those 147 transnational corporations that own and run the world) do not want to lose control of their ownership.

...

Rather the goal of TPTB is to eliminate their competition and threats to their economies-of-scale and profits, i.e. those pesky smaller sovereigns (nations, local governments, upstart millionaires, etc) that get in the way of their monopolies. They use the crisis they create in order to grab more power, as you can see they are doing in both Ukraine and Greece now.

...

Simultaneously they can take out the weaker gun rights advocates by sending the IRS after them, Civil Asset Forfeiture and numerous others means of picking off the weak from the herd to weaken the herd.

...

Note according to MA's computer models of repeating cycles, we may see a pandemic starting in 2017 and peaking 2018, and this is a wild card because TPTB may not be able to entirely control the effects of a rapid spread. The severity, death rate, speed of death, and mode of transmission are unknown, so we can't yet estimate the effects. However, maybe we can look to the Spanish Flu epidemic in the early 1900s for clues. The government did not lose control. People became more dependent on the government to enforce quarantines and isolation wards (warehouses filled with sick). You see the government has been building detention camps all over the USA, so maybe they are prepared.

...

[TPTB_need_war]

You shall avoid at all costs to become stateless, that should kill your right to travel. I like more the idea of an anonymous knowledge age. Somehow, I kinda live in it already, with my passport in my pocket. I'm physically present in a country, and I'm even working there despite not having the right to work, but there isn't the slightest link between me and that country. I shall leave before one occurs.

And in the coming global economic conflagration when your citizenship country cancels your passport to force you home to stop you from avoiding taxation?

And proceeds to quarantine you in a detention camp due to the global pandemic:

Note according to MA's computer models of repeating cycles, we may see a pandemic starting in 2017 and peaking 2018, and this is a wild card because TPTB may not be able to entirely control the effects of a rapid spread. The severity, death rate, speed of death, and mode of transmission are unknown, so we can't yet estimate the effects. However, maybe we can look to the Spanish Flu epidemic in the early 1900s for clues. The government did not lose control. People became more dependent on the government to enforce quarantines and isolation wards (warehouses filled with sick). You see the government has been building detention camps all over the USA, so maybe they are prepared.

Why do people love to convince themselves that they are okay? Is it because most people can't deal with the painful realities?

You are not okay. You are not prepared. You are a sitting duck waiting to be harvested.

Rights are bullshit. You have no rights.

Your only insurance that you can travel is your preparations to be sure you can travel even without a passport.

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
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? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."— Thomas Jefferson

[TPTB_need_war]

your not looking at the bigger picture you only care for people with money other wise why say i need to buy land I GOT NO MONEY TO BUY ANY

...

how did USA get its people they give away land for free to farm
how did Australia  get it people they offered free land to farm

The "free"[1] land was useless to those who didn't work 16 hours a day to make sure they survived the first winter, in Australia's case the droughts.

Nature culls those who are not willing to make their best effort.

It is not the responsibility of the minority to solve every problem for the majority.

Each person has to be responsible for his or her own life, otherwise you end up with complete failure of the human race which is exactly the result of all that socialism bullshit you are doing over on your side of the pond. You don't tie your shoelaces to a mountain when you try to walk!

Notwithstanding that rich anarchists would be proud to provide many opportunities for education, commerce, and apprenticeship to the less fortunate who are willing to work hard. But we won't be giving shit to whining lazy ass prima donnas who deserve to perish.

[1] The government didn't pay your transportation, costs of security, etc.. One can argue the land was worthless and the migrants added all the value.