 So there was an announcement made before that there will be a group photo, but we decided against that it's too much of a hassle So don't Don't appear there at 8 for the group photo There is no group here and and I will of course continue with my Comedy show satire Whatever you might want to call it. I should also mention Because I briefly said something about at the beginning of this conference There is there is also now on Has made made available on my website and I think also on the PFS website a longer essay on Part of which I presented as the introductory lecture to the Mises University this year The full essay Is a more philosophical piece With the title of the proper study of man Reflections on methods so you can see this article It's a lengthy article also on my website and I think it's also on the PFS side I'm not quite sure where Stefan Kitzler put it up in any case So my topic is now on centralization decentralization and self-defense Some of the questions that were Raised during the first lecture I gave I think I might give a more detailed answer also in this Presentation that is now to follow States Regardless of their constitution are not economic enterprises in contrast to economic enterprises States do not finance themselves By selling products and services to customers who voluntarily pay But by compulsory levies by taxes collected through the threat and the use of Violence and of course also through the production of paper money, which they can literally create out of thin air Significantly Economists have therefore referred to governments. That is the holders of state power as stationery bandits Governments and everyone on their payroll live off the loot stolen from other people They lead a parasitic existence at the expense of a subdued host population Now a number of further insights emerge from this fundamental insight immediately naturally stationery bandits Prefer larger loot to smaller loot This means that states will always try to increase their tax revenue and Further increase their spending by issuing more paper money The larger the loot the more favors they can do for themselves their employees and their supporters But there are natural limits to this activity On the one hand their bandits have to be careful not to burden the hosts With whose work and performance make their parasitic extensive existence possible so much that the letters simply stop working and On the other hand, they have to fear that their hosts That is the one that they exploit and especially the most productive among their hosts might migrate from their dominion from their territory and settle elsewhere and Against this background a number of historical tendencies and processes becomes understandable First of all it becomes understandable why there is a tendency toward territorial expansion and political centralization With this states succeed in bringing more and more hosts under their control and Making it at the same time more difficult for them to emigrate to foreign territories This is expected to result in a larger amount of loot and It becomes clear why the end point of this process The establishment of a world state While certainly desirable from the standpoint of the ruling gang Would by no means be a blessing for all of mankind As it is often claimed many people think that that's the ideal thing the world state Because one simply cannot emigrate from a world state and hence There exists no possibility of escaping state looting by emigration It is therefore to be expected that with the establishment of a world state the scope at extent of state exploitation Indicated among other things of course by the level of state income and state expenditure by monetary inflation by the number and volume of so-called public goods and The number of persons people employed in the public sector for public service That that will continue to increase beyond any previously known level And that is certainly not a blessing for the host population that has to fund this state super structure second a central reason for the rise of the west to become the world's leading economic scientific and cultural region becomes understandable in Contrast to China in particular Europe was characterized by a high degree of political decentralization With hundreds or even thousands of independent Dominions from the early Middle Ages up until the present past recent past some historians have described this state of affairs as ordered anarchy and It is now common among economic historians to see in this quasi anarchy state a key reason For the so-called European miracle Because in an environment with a large variety of independent small-scale Territories in the immediate vicinity of each other. It is comparatively easy For subjects to vote with their feet and escape the robberies of state rulers by immigration To avert this danger and to keep local Producers in line these rulers under are under constant pressure to moderate their exploitation and this moderation in turn promotes economic entrepreneurship scientific curiosity and cultural creativity third in Combining these two insights the grand course of modern history becomes intelligible Territorial expansion requires wars Wars between rival gangs and of stationary bandits But the conduct of war requires means requires economic resources and bandits Do not produce anything They parasitically draw on the means produced and provided by others They can themselves of course Influence the overall volume of production and the size of their own loot indirectly however Through the treatment of their host population Other things being equal the more liberal the more the less Exploitative the ruling gang the more productive will be the host population and Parasitically drawing on a more productive host population then it is Internally liberal gangs that tend to win out in war and drive the centralization process I have called this in some of my works as the paradox of Imperialism that is to say internally liberal regimes tend to conduct a more aggressive foreign policy and are the central promoters of Imperialism This helps to understand not only the rise and long-lasting economic and financial supremacy of the collective west over the rest It helps in particular also to understand the sequence and the progressive stages of Western imperialism from a sizable Spain and Portugal as leading imperialist powers But eventually of course broke powers The center of economic gravity Moves would move to the small liberal low countries that is the Netherlands And it is from there that the next major imperialist ventures are launched The low countries then were cut to size set back and surpassed as a leading imperial power by a liberal Britain With some worldwide Empire and finally after more wars Britain's former colony the breakaway United States Takes over and expands on Britain's erstwhile role Owing to its ultra liberal in comparison at least to other countries internal policies US America grows to become the world's greatest economic power and sitting and drawing on such cushy economic foundation The US government then has risen to become the world's foremost Imperial power with a worldwide network of military bases and of foreign vessels and A US paper dollar that functions as the international reserve currency Which allows the US gang to have a free lunch to spend and consume at foreigners expense force These imperialist ventures may initially have some liberating effects a Relatively more liberal that is less Exploitative or more capitalist regime may be Exported to a comparatively less liberal society however, the furs are the process of imperial expansion of and of political Centralization advances that is the closer one gets to the ultimate goal of a one-world Government with a global central bank Issuing a single universal fiat currency the less pressure is there on the ruling gang to Continue in its former internal liberalism Internal exploitation taxation inflation and regulation will increase an economic crisis stagnation or even impoverishment and decline will result and with economic and with the economic failure of political Centralization becoming increasingly obvious and increasingly dramatic then the opposite tendency toward Decentralization key decentralization gains in strengths the lesson of the European miracle are remembered and the vision of a radically Decentralized world brought about by means of territorial this session the very antithesis of the world state gains in popularity the vision of a world made up of thousands upon thousands of lichtensteins and I was the one who coined this Mame That we want a world of thousands and thousands of lichtensteins many people have now adopted the same name But I was the inventor of it I should mention that because we have some lichtensteins here or the Americans who cannot say lichtenstein They would have lichtensteinians so I Was thinking the vision of a world made up of thousands upon thousands of lichtensteins Swiss cantons and independent free holds or dominions all linked by free trade and an International gold standard and all seeking in competition with other places to retain and attract productive people with favorable local conditions Now one central regularly present the challenge to this Sessionist project the challenge that I will take up now in the following is this The session implies that a larger territory is split up into two or more smaller parts Yet how are small and increasingly smaller units to protect and defend themselves Against the imperialist desire on the part of some larger state neighbors Are not small states run by small gangs in constant danger of being conquered and taken over by larger states and larger gangs and Isn't the only lasting safety and security To be found then as part and parcel of a large state and ultimately a world state and Similarly and directed especially against anarchists in particular it is asked How can a stateless Territory possibly defend itself against an invasion by some neighboring state Isn't a state necessary in order to defend against another state and does this not show then the inevitability of states and statism Now first off Not withstanding all political centralization going on in the contemporary world There are still many small or smaller states side by side with larger or Or large or really huge states and they live in peaceful coexistence Why hasn't France taken over Monaco or Germany Luxembourg or Switzerland Liechtenstein Or the US Cuba or Costa Rica or Brazil, Uruguay and the reason is certainly not That the leaders of the larger gangs have any scruples regarding conquest Confiscation imprisonment or even killing of innocent victims They owe their very own position as gang leaders to such acts and they continue to perform them on a daily basis Rather what constrains the conduct of the gang leadership and Prevents it from giving in to its imperialist desires and going to war is public opinion These this is an insight that was first made by a Tian De La Boite then repeated by David Dume also as Explicated further than by Ludwig von Mises and by on my own teacher Murray Rothbard Unlike the good old days When rival gang leaders went mano a mano To fight it out in public with their own weapons in modern wars The gang leadership stays protected behind outside the battlefield and The actual fighting is done by other people with other people's means with other people's money and property I should mention that we have examples in history Where the decision who one and who lost in a war was fought out by one king against another and then whoever one The war was over. They sent their armies home and that was it I wish that would be again take place Selensky against Putin. I think that might be an interesting fight to watch So it is not but it is not sufficient that the leadership calls for war then Other many others From the military high command up high all the way down to the soldier pulling the trigger And the worker producing tanks and ammunition They must be willing to execute the orders of the supremo and For such obedience to become possible a reason a Justification must be given by the gang leadership There must be some sort of provocation on the part of the takeover target Some outrageous conduct allegedly or truly outrageous conduct Misconduct that can be presented at home as a justification for an invasion Moreover in addition to domestic and international public opinion the gang leaders are constrained of course in their Imperialist desires and their willingness to go to war by the defensive capabilities of The to be conquered and subjected rival gang The stronger and better armed the rival gang the higher are the costs of war and The better must appear the reasons to go to war nonetheless In light of this Two guiding principles must be followed by small states and even more so by secessionist movements Whether leading to another smaller state or a stateless territory that is an anarchic order first do not provoke and second be armed and I will take up and elaborate on both requirements From the viewpoint of the larger gang The session is in and of itself a provocation and the sessionist deserve to be crushed But it can crush the secessionist and go to war against it its own people only if it has public opinion on its side in order to prevent this and To help bring about instead a public opinion that is favorable sympathetic or at least neutral to their cause There's a sessionist should declare their independence in the least provocative way To that purpose There's a session should be presented as a separation only and solely from the larger Government gang and as motivated by some particular grievance against this gang But it should not be presented And by no means also as meaning to be a separation from the people Residing in the territory controlled by the larger gang With the people you want to have normal steady Peaceful economic and social relationships To further help their causes and to justify and emphasize their declaration of independence as a Universal human right The sessionist are advised to explicitly allow also for the session from the session is territory Most of the sessionist movements that are currently underway Don't consider this idea at all what it is of utmost importance That is people within the session is territory should be permitted also for instance to stay with the old larger gang and Continue to subscribe and submit to its legal framework if they so desire As for the sessionists to declare their independence is to declare that the rules and regulations of the ruling gang Do no longer automatically apply also to the session is territory Many old Traditional rules may be kept by the sessionist such as much or even most of Existing private law including criminal law But other rules or commands mostly public law provisions may be rejected Changed or nullified in any case to minimize the risk of a violent reaction from the ruling gang The separation should occur in a decidedly peaceful manner in in a cooperative spirit That is for instance The session is should not touch the properties within its territory that are claimed as their own By the central government gang such as offices administrative buildings and so forth Independence only implies that central government agents Working within the session is territory are no longer permitted to perform any Executive function at the places where they are This may lead to a relocation of some such agents They simply leave the country and go someplace else Or else it may lead to a change in their employer or their occupation all of it peacefully Moreover to further help avoid any possible provocation There's a sessionist should declare their commitment to a policy of non intervention Regarding the internal affairs of the rest territory which they had been leaving and Declare that they are committed to free and unhempathed Interregional trade and they should make it clear That they are prepared to pay for the use of any goods or services Provided by the larger gang on and off its territory such as water supply electricity and so forth Streets also and they should be willing to pay the same price for the use of these types of services Based on the same itemized bill that are also that also domestic residents must pay As far as the capital endowment is concerned the session is supposedly had already Contributed their part to it before the preceded After the session then only the current usage of such goods and services can be built Further in order to minimize the risk of violent crackdown by the central gang it is advisable also to abstain from any internal policies that could be construed as provocations a Prohibition of the session from the sessionists for instance may be easily construed as such as such a provocation By the smitten central gang However more generally and more interestingly it is a very institution of a state Even a small state, but nonetheless even small states have Territorial monopolists of law and order so it should be taken care of that the session entails Reasons or gives reasons and grounds for complaints that can always be used against it Whether by a well-intentioned party such as some anarchist or by an Intentioned one such as a ruling central gang Even the most liberal small states has a monopoly of Jurisdiction and taxation and thus cannot but create some victims who Properly stylized as victims of human of human rights May provide the excuse for an invasion and As for the actual world there are countless of victims and of the oppressed To be found everywhere and they may even be paid to cry out loud for outside help and intervention Far more difficult for a central gang then to find fault and to discover a reason for a violent reaction against the Sessionists if these do not institute another state however small But a free territory a stateless private law society Under the session is territory all sorts of social relations of Hierarchies and rank orders can exist there exist a multitude of private households Enterprises and associations each with its own internal rules and there are also services and institutions such as police insurance and arbitration in place, but importantly There exists no territorial monopolist of ultimate decision-making That could issue Commands that were binding on all of the territories resist residents and private properties any fault any Provocation or aggression to be discovered in a private law society by a ruling central gang then is someone's private fault Private provocation and private aggression and as such cannot be used to justify and an attack on the Collective the sessionists instead if and to the extent that there are Provocative and aggressive acts committed in the session is territory These are most likely the acts of criminals of con artists seas burglars rapists murderers or plain frauds and Criminals will of course be treated as criminals in a private law society To especially in the private law society and they will be swiftly and effectively punished there and This result then the treatment of criminals as criminals and the effective Containment or reduction of crime then is almost impossible for a central government gang to portray To its home public as a provocation and a good enough reason for Invasion of the session is territory Now what however if the larger gang still decides to attack All accommodating efforts and peace offerings on the part of the session is not withstanding Now in that case Especially when there's a sessionist are small in number and they are confronted with a huge and mighty gang It might be best to simply give up and to surrender and hope for a better times That way at least no deaths and destruction occurs the motto rather dead than red Or more generally rather dead than being conquered and the fighting spirit that it implies May be appropriate sometimes and for some people But at other times in particular Whenever not only the fighters own life But also that of his family and friends is at stake It may be plain stupid and irresponsible Simply an empty heroism Even if sometimes advisable however Surrender is by no means the only option Available to the sessionist vis-a-vis a big neighboring gang intent upon retaking its lost territory They can of course also arm themselves and thus increase the cost of war for an attacker What then make what then makes for deterrence For one there is certainly strengths in numbers The larger the number of the sessionists the more difficult to beat them into submission But more important than sheer members Where sheer numbers is a cohesion of the sessionists. It is not diversity that gives strengths to the sessionists Or the independence of the inhabitants of independent small states, but homogeneity linguistic and cultural commonality a culture of reciprocity mutual trust and community spirit Still more deterrence can be built up by the sessionist if they allow and promote the institution of an armed citizenry and the establishment of a people militia organized and led by military professionals trained and providing training especially in the conduct of partisan and guerrilla warfare To further strengthen their defensive capabilities and make for still more deterrence There's a sessionist may also join or form alliances with various external providers of logistic and military intelligence assistance services and equipment in This endeavor however great care must be taken not to lose control over one's own destiny to some other foreign entity or Institution that is there's a sessionist should stay strictly away from what Thomas Jefferson warned long ago as entangling alliances Any permanent alliance that may involve or implicate them in foreign quarrels Conflicts or wars that are not and are not regarded by them as their own quarrels outlines Our conflicts or wages Should the wars should be avoided NATO for instance is for instance the perfect example of an entangling of an entangling Alliance there's drawing other people into the war precisely because you are a member of NATO Just look at the aggressive talks that you find done by polls for instance and by members of the pop Baltic states because they have the big bully Standing behind them the United States that they hope will come to their rescue and if you know that if you are in an Entangling alliances you tend to be aggressive you provoke these people are provoking and they are provoking because They have not normal alliances They are in an entangling alliance Coupled coupled with a big big guy in the background that might come to their help if something goes Something goes wrong things like that must be avoided under all circumstances moreover Almost totally ignored and forgotten today In an atmosphere of heightened militancy and belligerence Manufactured in connection with the war in the Ukraine the small Can also defend themselves against the big by means of civil disobedience Provided there's a session is and more generally the small Have the will to be free of the conquerors The effectiveness of civil disobedience as a defense strategy can hardly be overestimated The disobedience can take many forms and some and come in countless degrees It can range from ostentatious acts of defiance to some completely unobtrusive conduct such as allowing almost everyone to participate in the defense in the defensive effort The courageous and the timid the young and the old the leaders and the followers One may publicly Refuse to obey certain laws or evade and ignore them One may engage in sabotage obstruction negligence or simply display a lack of diligence One may openly scoff at orders were comply only incompletely Tax payments may be refused or evaded There may be demonstrations sit-ins boycotts work stoppages or plain slacking off The conquerors may be maltreated molested cheated ridiculed laughed at or simply Ostracized and never assisted in anything In any case all of this contributes to the same result namely to render the conquerors increasingly powerless The conquerors will have to leave or they will be absorbed and assimilated by the conquered Last but not least there's a sessionist the small May defend themselves against some bigger invader and raise the level of deterrence for him also in being ready for retaliation and counter-attack Any such retaliation should never be directed against the people That is their citizenry Residing in the territory controlled by the invading gang While the gang leadership itself is considered of limits however as is the current practice and leading Opinion these people are considered to be holy. We cannot attack them We can just kill normal people but not those people who are responsible for the whole thing That is a standard legal practice that is in practice in nowadays Rather to the contrary in order to be effective as a deterrent any retaliation should be explicitly Exclusively directed against against the gang leadership The leadership from the king president and prime minister up high on Successively downward should come to fear wherever they are that they may be personally Targeted as aggressors and be brought down by long or short-range precision precision weapons assassination commando's or secretive poisoning at the same time all Collateral damage to the property of innocent civilians should be avoided under all circumstances Or should be at least minimized to the extent it possible so as to raise Sympathy for the sessionist the small and to sow doubt and skepticism Regarding the war policy of once big home gang potentially engender in dangering the gang leadership's legitimacy in the public mind and thus bringing about a Situation to be averted at all costs for them Now contrary to popular popular opinion, then the unitary top-down command structure of a state is not necessarily a strength in war But it leaves an Achilles heel open to any adversary Once the top are toppled the war is essentially over or can be brought to a quick end So whenever under attack and unwilling to surrender Again keep in mind. I didn't say that if you have to defend yourself under all circumstances Sometimes it is advisable that you simply say I give up There was once a Danish politician I forgot the name Said when he was asked What do we do if the Russians attack us that we have a telephone and they say attack us I take the telephone at what does we give up? Yet So whenever under attack and unwilling to surrender go for the tap top of the attacking gang Yet this does not just hold for the small attack But also for the big attacker He too will go for the top of the sessionist that is the small to accomplish his conquest or reconquest And the institution of a state is also the Achilles heel in the defense of the sessionists That is the small gang small people against the takeover by the big ones And it is once again the anarchic So-called no state private law society that turns out as offering the best protection and Defense against such a contingency if there's a session is Institute another smaller state on a smaller territory rather than a private law society The decision of how to defend against an invasion by some bigger neighboring gang Will fall to the leadership of the sessionist state As a monopolist of ultimate decision-making the leadership of the new smaller gang decides Bindingly for everyone on the session is territory Whether to resist or not and if to resist whether in the form of civil disobedience of armed resistance Or some combination thereof and if of armed resistance of what form If it decides to put up no resistance There may be that that may be a well-meaning decision Or it may be the result of bribes or threats by the invading state But in any case it will be contrary to the will of many who would have liked to resist and Who are thus put in double jeopardy? Because as resistors they now disobey their own state as well as a state of the invaders And on the other hand if the state decides to resist This again may be a well-meaning decision or it may be the result of pride or fear But in any case it too will be Contrary to the preferences of many who would have liked not to resist or to resist by different means and Who are now entangled as accomplices to the state's schemes and Subjected to the same collateral fallout of and victor's Justice as everyone else Now weakened by various internal divisions and opposing forces Infections then the central gang may be able to crush the secessionists and retake its lost territory With just one surgical strike or one decisive victory over the sessionist government gang Once this gang is defeated The entire secessionist movement is finished at least for the time being and Matters are distinctly different. However, if the secessionist establish instead a private law society on the seceded territories There is no government No central gang in place that makes one all binding decisions on matters of war and peace Instead, there are numerous Interconnected individuals and institutions who choose their own defense strategy Each in accordance with their own risk assessment Consequently the attacking gang has far more difficulties conquering the territory It is no longer sufficient for the attacker to know the secessionist government and to win one decisive Victory over it to end the war because in a private law society There exists no one central decision maker and hence there exists from the perspective of the attacker No one clearly identifiable enemy But there exists instead a multitude of mostly unknown private parties Some big some small some hostile some friendly or neutral Some armed and insured and others not and in this situation There is simply no reason to be found to sell to once invading Soldiers or to the public at home that have to finance the whole endeavor As to why a collective war must be waged against the secessionist if after all These are just a bunch of independent private parties associations and institutions Then as noted already before a case can possibly be made for the punishment of some particular party But nothing constituting a casus belly could ever arise out of such a constellation Instead were indeed faced with some neighboring free country Free territory the abandoned central ruling gang may well be happy to keep control of the territory That it still has and not to lose too many productive people to the secessionist due to immigration Rather than engage in the violent Reconquest of some lost territory and thereby running the risk of losing all of its Legitimacy in the eyes of the general public at home as well as abroad Now to sum up From the nature of the state as a parasitic gang Attendancy toward political centralization can be deduced as well Based on a few elementary economic considerations the paradox of Imperialism and the dialectic of Centralization or it can be good and turns bad can be explained That is the fact that political centralization reduces Interregional competition and hence tends to lower economic welfare and yet that Centralization in so far as it is driven by the most liberal gang leadership can have a liberating effect at first and Only eventually the closer a ruling gang comes to the position of a global shows its true colors of increasing oppression social strife economic crises in civilizational decline Having reached about this point or being close to it in the meantime The opposite tendency toward political decentralization has increasingly gained in popularity in recent times Consequently the prospects of the sessionist movements were analyzed There are difficulties what mistakes to avoid and how best to defend against the foreign takeover in conclusion as Confirmed also empirically by the long-lasting peaceful coexistence of small and large states and by multiple examples of peaceful succession think of the Breakup of the Soviet Union think of Czechia and Slovakia would Joseph was talking about before the separation of Malaysia in Singapore The separation of England from the European Community the Brexit There are examples there is all Central gang objections not withstanding no principal argument to be made against a process of Successively progressing the session to the contrary The furthest is process advances and the larger the number of independent territories The better for the all-around economic well-being of mankind Nor is there any principal argument against the complete Dissolution of the state and the establishment and the successful defense of a private law society as The logical end point of the process of the session and of political decentralization after all a private law society Exemplified by hierarchically ordered families and by every small family centered face-to-face community logically and temporarily preceded any state and all political centralization and Notwithstanding all distortions and perversions of private law brought about in the meantime by state legislation and so-called public law the common private and criminal law notions of right and wrong have not been wiped out entirely and forgotten hence the establishment of a private law society Via the lengthy detour of a history of statism is like a return to normal To something old and familiar from a long period of aberrations or Byte a return on a different level of social and economic development now That is of course. We are no longer in the Middle Ages. Lots of things have changed but in any case While we find ourselves in a completely different situation now The process of state formation and political centralization when it took off way back in history We can return to a normal normality because people still know What is right and wrong? Most people do know what is right and wrong and they can distinguish between peaceful relationships and Relationships based on coercion and violence in every small village you can still see that our Natural natural law as it would call it our Consciousness of natural law is still alive and can be Reenlivened if we only want to do it. Thank you very much