(Video also available on Bitchute.)
A recent article by Jon Miltimore over at FEE about Russell Brand’s demonetization got me thinking about this phenomenon. I think we’re all aware that there are some very shady people who really want to pull the strings of society, but even so I feel like Neo-Feudalism is one of those terms that gets treated as whack-job but really isn’t when you think about it.
All it means is that some people want to be the “owners” and have everyone else pay them rent. Basically, it’s rent-seeking writ large, and everybody agrees that rent-seeking is a real thing, right?
Anyway, in the video I summarize the article by Miltimore and try to expand on it a bit. First off, I note that one major issue raised by this flurry of demonetizations is that the government should not be powerful enough to coerce corporations this way. The fact that the state can use economic “regulations,” peculiarities in the tax structure, and the bludgeon they call “anti-trust,” among other methods, already means that the state is too big and too powerful to even have a chance at being a positive influence.
Second, I reiterate that there are plenty of ways to curtail the efforts of these would-be feudal lords, and among them are creating parallel economies, organizing in opposition of cancel culture, and improvements in privacy, anonymity, and encryption.
I put forward another idea for the first time here: some liberty-minded lawyer should really create a template or example of more “fair” terms of service and/or terms of use. Right now, the reigning versions of these documents give users and customers almost no protections. There is room, I suspect, for a new type of TOS that is written to lock in some rights of the end user. For instance, I suggest that updates to the TOS be locked in to future updates of software/services only, and that those old versions be maintained in usability for those who disapprove of the TOS changes.
Finally, this is a thing I keep harping on, but if we’re going to prevent these wannabe tyrants from owning everything, we have to try to own as much as possible. That means living frugally and investing in real assets like real estate and/or bonds and equities–stuff that can provide a passive income.
I also suggest that owners should try to resist selling to large conglomerates and instead curate their sales to people who aren’t trying to tyrannize everybody else, even if it means selling for a little less. Private ownership of the means of production is vital, because economic and civil liberties are inseparable. When a small few own all the printing presses, freedom of the press will die. When everyone submits to a Chinese-style social credit system, a whole lot of other freedoms die, too.
Right now, the government gives favors to a small, particular club, and we aren’t in it. That club is dedicated to ensuring that the government has as much control as possible, and will gladly follow orders to stay in the club. If those people are allowed to simply buy everything out there, then we end up in a socialist nightmare.