We Did OK

5
676
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Well, we ended the month close to not being in the red. Things did pick up during the last week of Feb., though – so I’m hopeful we’ll make up the shortfall as March gets rolling.

You may have noticed the new ads. If they don’t “Google” us – chump change for prime advertising space – we’ll keep them up.

If not, not.

A note to new Subscribers: Please post something. A comment… doesn’t need to be elaborate. Just something that indicates you’re a real person and not a spam bot.

And those among you who do post who are not registered as Subscribers, please register! It will make life easier for everyone. Your posts will not get hung up in the Moderation queue, waiting for approval. We (that’s myself and Dom) won’t need to spend our time moderating posts from people whose posts should just go live automatically.

Finally, an appeal: Please help us expand the EPautos audience. You can do this by posting snippets of articles that appear here along with a link back to here on other web sites. Mention the site to friends, co-workers. As our audience grows, the less we have to rely on larger individual donations and the stronger our position as far as making pitches to prospective advertisers.

Thanks again to all of you for making this site what it is – and what I hope it will become!

E

Share Button

5 COMMENTS

  1. It is a great relief that this site is doing OK. Everyone should consider giving what they can to help this community to grow.

    Because we are the ones with the knowledge and the ability to change the world.

    Because we understand the power and the potential of the Zero Aggression Principle:

    The Zero Aggression Principle:
    Can the following morality heuristics really change our world?

    The Zero Aggression Principle (ZAP) says…

    Don’t tread on anyone.

    This means….
    Don’t threaten or initiate force
    Limit force to defensive purposes only

    You already do this in your personal life, but too many people make an exception for “the government.”

    They think it’s okay to use “the government” to make others obey their preferences.

    It isn’t.

    Delegating the dirty work to politicians doesn’t make it moral to tread on people.

    Be consistent. Make “the government” obey the Zero Aggression Principle too.

    Initiated Force
    Gunpoint by proxy
    Initiated force is like throwing the first punch. But it’s more than that…

    It includes using threats of violence to gain submission.

    Criminals do this without trying to justify it. But the most adept gangsters — politicians — make excuses. They claim their terrorism is needed to achieve indispensable goals. Notice how twisted this is. You would never….
    Point guns at people
    Threaten to cage people
    Shoot people for resisting
    But that’s exactly how politicians use the “gunpoint proxy” you give them.

    They act in your name, if not at your direction
    Their “policies” threaten violence
    You must obey and pay, or armed agents will harm you
    Politicians hide this brutality behind weasel-words like “unintended consequences” and “collateral damage.” But the victims are real.

    We aim to “zero-out” this harm.

    The Zero Aggression Principle will encourage people to…

    Look for the gun behind every “government” action
    Feel empathy for the victims
    End initiated force

    Promote Zero Aggression. Withdraw your “gunpoint proxy.”

    Zero Aggression is NOT Pacifism
    Defensive force is NOT Aggressive
    The Zero Aggression Principle does not equal pacifism.

    It does not even require zero assertiveness.
    Neither does it prohibit defensive force used for self-protection, the defense of others, or for criminal justice.
    The Zero Aggression Principle only forbids the initiation of force.

    Help to create a society that only permits defensive force.

    Empathy
    The Foundation of Civilization

    You imagine how others…
    want to be treated, and you deal with them that way (the Golden Rule)
    don’t want to be treated, and you respect their boundaries (the Zero Aggression Principle)
    We’ve just described Empathy.

    It was Empathy that motivated us to create a legal system. We did this because we recognize that none of us wants to be…
    Threatened
    Robbed
    Murdered
    We also support due process and the presumption of innocence because of empathy. You imagine your innocent self in the shoes of the accused.

    Thus, your rights actually exist in the self-interest of others. Your neighbor could menace, steal from, or slaughter you. You could do the same to him. Instead, you each recognize that…

    Empathy for others feels good, achieves good, and returns good.

    This makes empathy a better social strategy than bullying force. Empathy fosters positive reciprocity. By contrast, the “government”…

    Threatens and initiates force
    Is funded by violent means
    These practices negate empathy. They replace positive reciprocity with political warfare. If I lose, then you impose on me, and vice versa.

    Don’t you prefer empathy to political warfare?

    Reciprocity
    Make all your actions golden
    You have a choice…

    How will you relate to others and acquire what you need?
    Will it be positive reciprocity or coercive force?
    Most of us choose Golden Rule-like reciprocity. You…

    Treat others as you want to be treated
    Don’t tread on others so they won’t tread on you
    You practice this kind of positive reciprocity every day.

    Empathy constantly motivates you to do things for others, and to avoid causing harm. You find that positive reciprocity is a better social strategy than bullying force. But then…

    Some politician comes along, offering to solve problems, using the destructive methods of initiated force. He makes it seem easy. But he always neglects to mention the victims his use of force will create.

    Don’t you think positive reciprocity is a more efficient way to build a society?

    Conscience
    How much should you respect it?
    Thomas Jefferson said it was sinful to make a man fund what his conscience hates. This should be a universal principle.

    If a man hates a war, must he support it?
    If a woman is offended by the teachings at “government” schools, must she pay for them?
    Are you willing to be the armed person who shows up at their door to collect, or do you want to be the kind of person who respects individual conscience in all things?

    Do you favor initiated force to impose your preferences, or empathy-motivated Zero Aggression?

    Pre-Constitutional Rights
    Human rights existed before the Constitution
    The Declaration of Independence announced a universal principle…

    Human beings have inalienable rights.

    Some of these rights are named in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights, but the Ninth Amendment concedes that no such list can be complete. The rights that governments must honor are innumerable. As empathy evolves and expands, we discover more rights.

    This concept of rights was not original to the Founders, but building a government based on it was. Please notice that the idea came first, and the government second. Therefore…

    You do NOT get your rights from the Constitution.

    Your rights existed BEFORE the Constitution was written. Human rights are “pre-constitutional rights.” If you believe these rights require governments to obey the Zero Aggression Principle, please work with us.

    Sociopathic Politics
    No empathy.
    A sociopath feels no empathy. Now consider people’s political behavior. They . . .

    Vote for politicians who initiate force
    Delight when their partisan enemies lose
    Feel no sympathy for people who must submit to policies they hate
    Endorse “government” actions they would normally consider criminal

    In short, voters feel no empathy for the losing side. Instead, they actually feel joy when force is initiated against the minority view. This is sociopathic.

    Reject this depravity. Embrace empathy-based Zero Aggression.

    Crime
    Call similar actions by the same name . .
    If you initiate force against others, you’re committing a crime
    It’s equally a crime if “the government” does it
    Reject double-standards. Call all initiated-force by the same name: crime.

    For example, “the government” commits the crimes of….
    Assault and kidnapping, when it arrests people who have initiated no force or fraud
    Murder, if such an arrest leads to death
    Counterfeiting and theft, when it inflates the currency

    Sadly, our so-called government rarely uses force properly, in a defensive way only. Nearly everything it does involves initiation, and is therefore criminal. These crimes create victims — real human beings who suffer real harm.

    Show your empathy for the victims of “government” crime.

    Consenters
    Are You a Passive Consenter to “Government” Criminality?
    Politicians get ALL their power from Consenters, because as Thomas Jefferson said…

    “All government rests upon the consent of the governed.”

    Politicians presume your consent for all their deeds,, including their crimes. After all, they are…

    From your community
    Supported and elevated by people like you
    Reverenced — treated like privileged leaders rather than servants
    Obeyed

    Are you part of this support system for politicians? Are you a “sheep-like” by-stander when politicians initiate force against others? Do you feel zero empathy for the victims? Have you passively consented to “government” criminality?

    Start denying consent today.

    Stockholm Syndrome
    Making Excuses for “Government” Criminality
    Captives who sympathize with their captors are said to suffer from Stockholm Syndrome. This is exactly how most people behave towards “governments.”

    People don’t judge criminal actions committed by “governments” the way they normally would — they apply a double standard
    They make excuses for “government” criminality, and even encourage it
    And they fail to empathize with the victims “government” creates

    If you want to help people…..
    Restore their empathy
    Overcome their Stockholm Syndrome

    Embrace and promote the Golden Rule and the Zero Aggression Principle.

    Democracy
    Can majorities determine morality?
    Democracy has no magic power to make wrong become right.

    How many votes does it take to make murder morally permissible? What about rape, assault, or theft? There is no such number, is there?

    Criminal acts remain criminal, even when a majority endorses them.

    Might does not make right, not even the might of a majority.

    We rightly rejected the divine right of kings, but now too many of us believe in a divine right of majorities and pluralities. We wrongly assume that no empathy is required for minority viewpoints, provided a vote was taken.

    But fundamental moral principles, like the Zero Aggression Principle, cannot be voted out of existence. Even the “Great-God” Democracy must bow down before them.

    If you want to help, do your part to cure the public’s confusion about democracy,

    The Nuremberg Principle
    It applies to crimes large and small
    The Nuremberg Trials established that . . .

    Legislation is not the same as law
    Legislation must be moral to be lawful
    “Government” actions that violate moral rules are criminal

    This applies not only to the large crimes committed by villains like the Nazis, but also to the smaller crimes committed by your own “government.”

    Whenever “the government” threatens or initiates force against innocent people, it violates the moral law, no matter what the legislative “law” may say. To show empathy for the victims of this criminality, start applying the Nuremberg Principle where you live.

    Share this idea with others. Practice the Zero Aggression Principle and recruit your friends.

    Government: A Definition
    Not all institutions that call themselves government actually are.
    Governments are supposed to fight crime, deter invaders, adjudicate disputes, promote order and foster security.

    Therefore, any institution that…
    Threatens innocent people to extort their submission
    Initiates force
    Treads on personal conscience
    Commits crimes
    Fosters disorder….
    …CANNOT be a government.

    Initiating force negates the very function of government
    True governments must only use force defensively
    This means it will often be more accurate to put the word “government” in scare quotes. Better yet, use the alternative name for government in our heuristic titled The State.

    Help promote empathy and Zero Aggression through linguistic clarity.

    True Governments
    The Zero Aggression Approach
    Let’s drive home some points implied by our previous heuristics…

    True governments don’t initiate force — doing so is criminal and negates the idea of government
    True governments only use force defensively
    True governments never rule, they only serve

    Take action and promote empathy, Zero Aggression, and true governments.

    The State
    When an institution claiming to be a government initiates force it becomes something monstrous…The State

    The State is a monopoly that initiates force under the pretense of governing
    The State compels obedience on matters far beyond the scope of true government
    The State uses threats of violence to extort submission
    The State uses actual violence to harm people who resist its dictates
    All of this is crime, not governance.

    You will avoid contradictory thinking if you distinguish between government and The State.

    Governing is a service that protects your rights by only using force defensively
    But The State initiates force in nearly everything it does, and is therefore NOT a government
    This constant use of initiated force means that The State is really an organized criminal gang

    There is a long habit of NOT thinking about The State in this way, but we must stop using a double standard. We must come to judge The State by the same moral principles we apply to all other human institutions.

    To promote empathy, Zero Aggression, and true government, you must oppose The State.

    Pro-Government and Anti-State
    The logical position
    It’s time again to drive home the points made in our previous heuristics…

    Because The State initiates force in nearly all it does…
    The State is actually the negation of government
    This means that to be pro-government you must be anti-state
    This is required if you wish to commit to Zero Aggression…

    You must be pro-government and anti-state.

    A society based on empathy and Zero Aggression entails being pro-government and anti-state.

    Statists and Statism
    The Modern Religion
    You’re a Statist if you advocate Statism.

    This is the faith that

    The State…
    Must often use bad means to achieve good ends
    Can initiate force to achieve social goals
    Can morally do things that would be criminal for others

    Statism is anti-social and anti-community. It rejects empathy, The Golden Rule, the Zero Aggression Principle, and individual conscience. It favors initiated force over cooperation and persuasion. It practices sociopathic politics and criminality at the expense of true government.

    Those who have empathy and display Zero Aggression oppose Statists and Statism.

    Left-Statists and Right-Statists
    Truth in Labeling

    Initiating force against the individual conscience is neither liberal nor conservative. These labels should never be used to described any kind of Statist.

    Socialists likewise advocate the most anti-social means to impose their supposedly benevolent ends on their unwilling victims. Their beliefs refute their self-chosen name.

    And the label progressive presumes something that is instantly negated by the “progressive’s” love of State violence. Initiated force is inherently regressive, not progressive.

    In the end, these groups are more united by their love of State-initiated force, than they are divided by their differing goals. Thus, it makes more sense to call them…

    Left-Statists and Right-Statists

    Promote empathy and Zero Aggression. Step outside the circular firing squad created by the sociopathic politics of the Left-Statists and Right-Statists.

    The State is NOT the Country
    It is merely one institution among many

    Many people think the words “government” and “state” are synonyms for . . .
    Country
    Community
    Society
    Culture
    People
    Territory

    But when regimes disappear all those other things remain. Likewise, millions have lived under criminal rulers they hated, while still loving their countries. Neither thing could be possible if the words government, state, and country all describe the same entity.

    In reality . . .
    The State is NOT the society, the community, the country, the culture, the territory, or the people
    The words “state” and “government” are NOT synonyms for all those other words
    Instead, a government is merely an institution — a service provider, like Exxon or Microsoft. As such it should only serve, and never rule.

    True governments do not belong at the top of a social hierarchy. Instead, they should operate in a completely subservient position, nestled inside a network of competing institutions.

    If you love your country, but not The State, then you are already one of us.

    Society and Community
    Another Statist Misconception
    Because Statists mistakenly assume that The State is the country, they also misunderstand society and community.

    Society and community are words that describe peaceful, voluntary relationships
    But The State requires the opposite of this

    To optimize society and community we must move away from initiated force. We must feel empathy for others, and respect individual conscience. We must reject Statism.

    If you’re pro-social and pro-community, then you should practice the Zero Aggression Principle.

    Cooperation
    Initiated-force negates cooperation.
    Statists misunderstand cooperation for the same reason they misunderstand society and community.

    They see The State as a form of cooperation. But The State initiates force as its main tool of action. This negates cooperation.
    Cooperation is win-win. It relies on empathy and respects individual conscience. Initiated force is win-lose. Cooperation must be voluntary, otherwise it’s merely submission.

    If you favor cooperation over initiated force, join us and follow the Zero Aggression Principle.

    Persuasion
    What the pro-social person uses instead of initiated force.

    Statists have the same response to every problem…
    Legislate
    Dictate
    Command
    Control

    This approach initiates force to impose speculative, untested, single-sized schemes on all of society. This is immoral and anti-social.

    A society based on the Zero Aggression Principle would replace initiated force with voluntary cooperation and peaceful persuasion.

    If you have an idea for solving a social problem, test it in a pro-social way. Don’t ask The State to initiate force against people.

    Instead…
    Use persuasion
    Appeal to empathy
    Take direct action

    Why waste time lobbying Congress to impose your scheme by force, when you can persuade people to start executing your idea instantly, voluntarily?

    If you prefer persuasion to initiated force, join with us and our community based on Zero Aggression.

    Selfishness and Greed
    Statism is un-generous
    Selfishness and greed are self-punishing…

    Selfish people lack friends in times of need
    Greedy people lose customers
    But Statist greed is self-rewarding.

    Statists…
    Call other people selfish when they want what those people have
    Use The State to initiate force to take things from others
    Dictate not only the recipients of aid, but also the means of providing it
    Praise their own violence-based approach to “generosity”

    This is arrogant and evil. True generosity is peaceful, voluntary, cooperative, pro-social, and empathetic. It builds bonds of community. Statism does the opposite.

    Start opposing statist greed and selfishness and promoting Zero Aggression Cooperation.

    Free Riders
    Signs of affluence and generosity
    Free riders are people who benefit from things paid for by others. Statists use them as an excuse to initiate force. They claim that certain goods may not be provided unless everyone is forced to pay for them.

    But there are many examples to disprove this, including…
    Lighthouses
    Volunteer activities
    Free Internet services
    Private fireworks displays

    In reality, people create things they value, even when they can’t persuade everyone who benefits to pay for them.

    Statists counter-argue that funding will be insufficient in some cases, but…
    The amount of something a society needs is always a matter of personal opinion. So…
    The “insufficiency” argument is just another example of Statists trying to impose their personal preferences.
    The widespread existence of free riders actually indicates an affluent, generous, empathetic society with a strong commitment to Zero Aggression.

    Help foster such a society.

    Cargo Cult Statism
    Justifying Violence
    Statists justify initiated force by pointing to some good it achieves. But this is like the South Sea Cargo Cults that linked wealth with cargo-planes.

    In reality…
    It would be stunning if The State did nothing positive with the vast wealth it controls.
    It would simply have to do some good, even if only by accident.
    The ends do not justify the means. The moral costs of initiated force trump any claimed benefit.
    There are non-violent alternatives to every good The State provides.

    We should reject Cargo Cult Statism. Instead, we must set ourselves the empathetic task of always finding ways to deliver the cargo using Zero Aggression.

    If you want to use only good means to achieve good ends, start practicing the Zero Aggression Principle right now.

    How to Evaluate The State
    You must learn to count all the costs
    Statists fail to evaluate The State correctly. They consistently neglect to count all the costs of initiated force,

    including…
    The moral costs of using force to oppress individual conscience
    The opportunity costs, which are the alternative uses to which the same resources could have been put
    The substitute benefits that could have been had by using only peaceful means
    The superior performance inherent to efforts controlled by consumers vs efforts controlled by politics
    The risk cost of giving any human institution a monopoly power to initiate violence

    If you want to promote empathy and Zero Aggression, then you must learn how to evaluate The State correctly.

    Start counting all the costs of initiated force, and hold statism accountable for all of them.

    The Constitution
    Can The State be controlled?
    The Constitution has NOT controlled The State’s criminality. It may once have shamed and slowed politicians in their quest for greater dominance over you and your neighbors. Now, it doesn’t even do that.

    Wasn’t this inevitable? How can you control an institution that has the power to initiate force? Won’t its privileged members naturally seek to expand their dominance?

    It may be hard to accept, but the Constitution either . . .
    Created the criminal State we now have, or . . .
    It was impotent to prevent it

    However, this document still has an important power. It’s a moral tool and historical example. It vividly illustrates the corruption and inevitable failure of a system that permits any person or institution the right to initiate coercive force.

    We can still make effective use of it, because it speaks to principles. The Bill of Rights is wonderful, for example. These principles can be used to shame and embarrass those who seek criminal power.

    If you love the commitment to empathy and Zero Aggression demonstrated in the Bill of Rights, but you’ve lost faith that words on paper can control The State, you’re ready to become one of us.

    Against Anarchy
    Why The State is anarchistic
    Some people claim the Zero Aggression Principle is anarchistic. To most people, “anarchy” means no governing institutions, with violence and chaos to follow.

    In truth . . .
    Congress and the President best fit the popular understanding of anarchy.

    These sons and daughters of anarchy…
    Cannot be ruled — the electorate lacks real power to restrain or direct them
    Break laws, starting with the Constitution
    Routinely commit crimes, including theft, murder, counterfeiting, kidnapping, extortion, and fraud

    We want to counter this Statist Anarchy by promoting non-state institutions of governance that COMPETE to serve customers. This means we want MORE institutions of governance. And what anarchist wants more governments?

    Non-State Governance
    Voluntary Institutions of Order

    The State’s cultural dominance has left us largely blind to institutions of NON-STATE Governance and order. These institutions are completely voluntary. They don’t initiate force or use criminal means. They serve rather than rule.

    These forms include . . .
    Self-governance
    The family
    Churches
    Contractual covenants
    Professional societies that set standards
    Testing agencies like Underwriter’s Laboratory that provide industry regulation
    Security firms
    Arbitrators

    And if we expand the idea of order to include social services or charities, then the institutions of non-state governance becomes truly vast.

    These kinds of institutions — true governments – will be the foundation of a ZAP-based society.

    Non-State Forms of Regulation
    The Power of Social Norms

    There are non-state forms of regulation, just as there are non-state forms of government. One example is the most powerful regulation in America’s history — the prohibition against speaking the N-word.

    This rule….
    Ends careers and destroys fortunes when violated
    Was never passed by any legislature
    Is not enforced by police or courts
    Is the most honored and obeyed rule in history

    This example points the way to the future . . .
    Future regulations will tend to be social norms or business services, not legislative dictates
    These rules will have non-state origins and non-state enforcement

    Through empathy and Zero Aggression we will begin to promote more effective non-state forms of regulation.

    Consumer vs Voter
    Where does your greater power lie?
    Consumer vs voter — who wins?

    As a consumer…
    No business has ever pointed a gun at you
    You can fire any company at any time without risk of harm
    You can even complain and get your money back

    Now compare this with your lot as a voter and taxpayer……
    Complaints do little
    You need the permission of a voting majority to change anything
    You will be harmed if you try to withdraw your patronage

    Where does your greater power lie?
    Consumers are kings
    Voters are captives

    Don’t you prefer being a Consumer King to a Captive Citizen?

    Violence-based Funding
    The root of the rot

    Kings called it tribute rather than theft. Politicians prefer the word tax. But all of these words describe a violence-based funding system. Pay or suffer violence. This system is the root of the rot from which The State suffers.

    Violence-based funding is inherently criminal and corrupt
    It removes the need to satisfy customers, leading to waste and incompetence

    The alternative is . . .
    Consumer sovereignty
    Consumer-controlled funding
    Consumer-controlled governments
    You should decide how much government you pay for — granting or denying funding so as to exert control.

    If you prefer consumer control to violence-based funding oppose statism and promote Zero Aggression.

    Consumer Controlled Governments
    Against monopoly

    Consumer controlled governments will begin when violence-based funding ends. You will set your own budget for government and choose your own providers. We will create a culture of choice.

    Choices like these . . .
    Habitat for Humanity vs. HUD
    Underwriters Laboratories or NSF International vs. OSHA and the FDA
    A personal security firm vs. tax-funded police
    A politically managed centralized military vs. decentralized approaches

    You can fire and replace consumer controlled institutions. If you want to rule government, rather than having The State rule you,
    Governmental services will need to work the same way.

    Sufficient Funding?
    A consumer controlled budget
    Will voluntary means provide sufficient funding for government services?

    The question is backwards!

    The amount of government needed should be defined by what consumers are willing to pay for…
    NOT by what a parasitic political class forces you to accept

    Government services should be funded with Zero Aggression. Don’t you prefer to set your own budget for government? Don’t you empathize with the desire of others who wish to do so?

    Transforming the State
    . . . into a true government

    When The State rejects initiated force it will cease to be a criminal gang. It will cease to be a State.

    We will have succeeded in transforming The State into a true government — a non-state form of government that will have to compete with all other forms. This will instantly improve performance.

    But the greatest benefit will be moral . . .
    You will cease to live in a violence-based society
    You will begin to live in a society based on empathy and Zero Aggression
    There will be no more State coercion against personal conscience
    The institutionalized criminality will end
    We will only use good means to achieve our good ends

    Wouldn’t you like to assist in transforming The State into a true government?

    Not Utopia
    Utopia is NOT an Option
    A society based on the Zero Aggression Principle won’t be perfect. But it will be better than the statist system we have now.

    There will still be crime. But crime will be slashed, because the largest criminal gang, The State, will be replaced with true governments.

    There will still be external threats. But these threats will shrink, because The State will no longer be in the enemy creation business.

    We will still need welfare. But the need will be smaller, because The State will no longer use violence-based funding to subsidize poverty. Welfare will be consumer controlled. This will increase the bonds of community, and provide more personalized, nurturing service.

    There will still be fraud. But the fraud will shrink, because we won’t have to listen to political promises anymore!

    David Bergland once wrote, “Utopia is not one of the options.”

    But if you want a realistically better society, reject statism and embrace Zero Aggression.

    Sovereign Law
    Three social norms
    Will society still need some source of ultimate authority? The answer is yes. That authority will come from three ZAP-based social norms.

    The first two social norms are what the Richard Maybury calls The Two Laws . . .

    Do all you have agreed to do
    Do not encroach on other persons or their property

    If you violate one of these laws then your guilt or innocence, and the compensation you must pay, will be determined by the third social norm — The Jury.

    These three norms will be the sovereign law of a ZAP-based society. If you want such a society, starting behaving according to natural empathy and not according to violent statism.

    Post-statism
    A forward-looking label.
    Statists advocate initiated force. They come in liberal, conservative, green, libertarian, and socialist varieties. None of these labels truly fit those of us who believe in voluntary order and consumer-controlled government.

    We call ourselves Post-Statists.

    The post-statist …
    Doesn’t long for a lost Edenic time, when things were allegedly better
    Envisions a day when political domination is held in low regard, like communism and the divine right of kings presently are
    Sees The State as an illegitimate provider of governmental services, due to its threatening and violent behavior
    Considers empathy to be the future of civilization
    Wants to create new institutions for a better future, based on reciprocity and the Zero Aggression Principle

    In a post-statist society each person will be free to pursue their dreams and do what their conscience tells them is right. A post-statist culture will shun violence or threats of violence to achieve any personal or social goal, no matter how noble-sounding the objective.

    If this vision of post-statism inspires you, join us and learn these morality heuristics.

    Join with us and proceed according to empathy and the Zero Aggression Principle.

  2. Dear Eric,

    Today is my birthday; happy birthday to me!

    Just a note to say that the ‘EPautos donate’ is working well now. I just donated $20 and it went thru okay this time.

    I greatly appreciate what you are doing for us all. I understand that it gets EXTREMELY frustrating at times, trying to keep the trolls out and the donations coming in, but you are doing everyone who lingers here a great service.

    You have my moral support, and financial support as long as my $$$ keeps coming in.

    Linda

  3. I’ve been trying to register for some time now, since I’m a $5/month donor. I finally realized what was going on this morning and checked my spam folder. Hey, there it is!

    If you’ve been having trouble registering and use Gmail or other popular mail clients, check the spam folder for the confirmation message.

    In the mean time, this is yet another reason for getting off my butt and setting up my own mail server. Just need to get a static IP address and do a little legwork:

    http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/how-to-run-your-own-e-mail-server-with-your-own-domain-part-1/

    • If the people don’t want Great free superlative journalism all they need to do is abandon epautos.com. Then they can search for crap written in Indonesia that speaks to the merits of the new 1.6 Mitsu Lancer., from the 3rd World perspective. Whatever. Let’s fire up the debate.

      Let the “Eman” know what cars you want poop on. Then he can communicate directly to the manufacturer and suddenly the “Emeister” will flog that sled and let you know if it is worth your COIN!

      To be bored is to be boring. This site rocks. We need the regulars to step up. A monologue is not a Forum. We have a Forum and knuckleheads like me can have the podium. Love or hate me I am humpin’ to please.

      Let’s get the conversation moving and Thank you all for supporting Eman’s sponsors. Without these resources the doors would close. Unlike an Evangelical show on TV with an 800 number all Eric asks it that you love cars and motorcycles and tell us your stories good or bad as they are – Always interesting.

      What do you folks think about the guy on TV who revives all the junkyard Mopars, but they needed a serious mechanic in 1970 and now they cost 70,000 dollars a copy. What tha … Oh well. Give me a 2015 Mustang GT 500 (Or whatever they call it these days), and for 50 G’s you drive a World Class car!

      How do you roll? Let us know. Jills Uncle

LEAVE A REPLY