The Free Agents Network is a network of individuals from across the globe united by a desire to promote liberty through activism, information technology, and voluntary cooperation.
We oppose coercion in all its forms.
Unlike the contemporary left, we do not see government as the solution to social problems. We see the market as a beautiful and indispensable institution, and demand it be set free. Unlike the contemporary right, we are not apologists for the coercive actions of corporatist firms. We oppose nationalism, war, and the use of force to advance ones own conception of morality.
Our membership includes many anarcho-capitalists, left-libertarians, agorists, minarchists, and classical liberals. Many of us reject electoral politics altogether and choose to advance liberty through civil disobedience and peaceful cooperation despite the diktats of the state. Others fight for liberty in the political sphere; running for office and advocating change in government policy. We recognize that the road to a free society is not clearly marked and see this diversity as a virtue. We would like to see a thousand tactics bloom.
We have no central source of funding or organizational structure, and encourage anyone to use the Fr33 Agents label to advance freedom in whatever way they see fit.
Fr33agents tech facilitator Mike Gogulski is a stateless ex-American living in Bratislava, Slovakia, who renounced his US citizenship in 2008. He blogs at 
I actually to a degree, need to disagree, while I agree that we need to be radicals in our agenda, I do not believe that we can throw out these calls for freedom with the snap of a finger. America has incrementally become a closed society over time and while I do not want to see America take equally as long to become an open and free society again, I do believe there is a need for a degree in incrementalism. We speak at the common peoples level and speak about generalities first and than in a process of education go deeper and deeper, leading them to the radical themselves. That way we cease to appear as “radical” because we have incrementally ‘radicalized’ the general populace, in an incremental way.
“We speak at the common peoples level….”
Who are these “common peoples” and where are they? Are they the same as “the working man”?
Also, how far do we dumb down our conversations to their level?
Is there some kind of guide to identify and communicate with the “common peoples”?
I’m afraid that I have been talking to people as if they are intelligent adults and I have not been hiding my agenda too well. I hope not many of them were “common peoples” because I surely wouldn’t want to be considered radical.
Regarding ICBMs I like how the Revolutionary Agorist Cadre handled it in Alongside Night. If memory serves me they put fake suitcase nukes in several countries and alerted those countries to their locations and let it be known that there were more, real nukes that could be remotely detonated. They also invited the press to view the detonation of a nuclear warhead on some Pacific atoll or something.
It’s definitely worth a read for any that have not yet read it.
If you believe some sources, Blair and Bush said God instructed them to invade Iraq.
Not at all hard to believe, considering God’s track record.
An added benefit is the ability for the electronic smoker to smoke in virtually any place or any environment. Pubs, Clubs, restaurants, theaters
The Americans back in 2006 voted in the Democrats in the hopes that they would somehow be able to end the war in Iraq. Ha. Politicians in the major parties are beholden to the corporate interests that benefit from war. It is as true in the UK and Europe as it is in the US. The struggle for freedom is truly a global phenomenon. And, to be honest, until the entire world, or at least the western world, figures out that free markets are a better answer to the problems we face than any answers government can come up with, we are destined to be involved in war and other disagreeable activities.
I’ll just re-summarize my main point from the Ning discussion. Your definition of “Libertopia” is not universal. New Hampshire is a great place for people with certain styles and goals, but not everyone is interested in surrounding themselves with and immersing themselves in pro-freedom activism. Some of us just want to live our lives peacefully, and that doesn’t necessarily depend on being around a lot of libertarian-types so much as it may depend on being around few statist-types. To paraphrase Mal, “I’ve got no need to beat the state. I just want to go my way.” I encourage those who share that sentiment to keep other options (I’m partial to Montana), both in the United States and outside of it, on their short lists. New Hampshire is great for a lot of people, but it’s not the only place that pro-freedom people can thrive.
In response to Curtis over at ning:
When did we start talking about Missouri (MO)? I’ve been there. It sucks. Not on my list.
Montana (MT), however, is currently edging out New Hampshire (NH) in my mind due to the vast open spaces and the much lower cost of living. The absence of people, to me, is desirable regardless of such peoples’ political leanings. It being not half a continent away from my family is really both good and bad, depending on which family members I’m thinking about and what my current mood is. Being nowhere near the wet of the ocean is also both good and bad as I rather like dry weather, but love the snow.
Really, it’s just going to come down to what’s easiest and will allow me to get out from under the structure of having to work for someone else. Since you couldn’t get me to participate in politics without pointing a gun at me before I can draw my own, you’d have to explain to me why my presence would help the FSP or any other community. Actually, could you explain your view on that? That might help me (and some other folks) understand the FSP’s intentions better.
“Really, it’s just going to come down to what’s easiest and will allow me to get out from under the structure of having to work for someone else”
Then if your only choices are NH and MT (sorry MO) I’m willing to bet you already realize NH is the correct choice. Support network, agorist network(s), more opportunities.
And seriously, there arent too many people in NH. There are no crowding complaints, and many many people, liberty loving or otherwise, live their lives in peaceful seclusion, free from the intrusions of neighbors or over-bearing agents of the State.
Why would your presence be desirable in NH, when you are anti-political? Well you’ve already said you’re Pro-Agorism, and thats so much better than being Pro-politics in my book. Come to Keene (or Grafton, much less populated, but lots of Agorists as a percentage of the population) and help along the emergence of the voluntary society. “Liberty activism” in NH is not all about voting, campaigning, etc. In fact, thats just one “branch” of three (that I’ve identified). You’ve got your politicos, which neither of us are, and you’ve got the civ-dis crowd, which I dabble in, and then you’ve got the non-participation/outside-the-system-Anarchist/Voluntaryist/Agorist “crowd”.
The goal of the politicos is a minarchist government through electoral reform.
The goal of the civ-dis crowd is uncertain/split/individually-unique.
And the goal of the final crowd is either to be left the hell alone, and/or the creation of a voluntary society.
Curtis is right. There is a lot of agorist activity in NH. You don’t see that much anywhere else, as far as I can tell. How many agorist clubs or groups are there in the US? There are at least 2 in NH. Ooops I guess I shouldn’t have said that.
Then if your only choices are NH and MT (sorry MO) I’m willing to bet you already realize NH is the correct choice. Support network, agorist network(s), more opportunities.
See this is the kind of attitude I have to call bullshit on- one size fits all for everyone. What exactly do you know about support networks, agorism, and other opportunities in Montana? When was the last time you visited here? I can tell you that a lot of what goes on here in Montana is based on tried-and-true methods of getting to know people before you invite them into your networks and do business with them. Just because people aren’t spouting their private business all over the internet doesn’t mean that things aren’t happening. Discretion goes a long way in sustaining agorism if that’s what you’re looking for. On the other hand, if you’re looking for a confrontation with government, putting it all out there is a good idea.
By the way, how often does New Hampshire’s legislature meet? Montana’s only meets every other year. 2010 happens to be one of the many years we won’t be getting fucked by busybody legislators and their meddling constituents.
“By the way, how often does New Hampshire’s legislature meet? Montana’s only meets every other year”
Seems a silly thing for a supposed Anarchist to be concerned with. If you want to debate the minarchist qualities of each state, I’ll let someone else take the pro-NH stance.
I admit that I make assumptions about a better support and agorist network. I stand by those assumptions, but they are just assumptions. The opportunity claim I stand by as its common sense…
Seems a little silly for someone pushing the supposedly “obvious” superiority of New Hampshire for pro-freedom people to gloss over the rate at which anti-freedom legislation is passed. And how is it common sense to just assume New Hampshire has a better support network and better agorist opportunities when you know little to nothing about the alternative you’re comparing it to? Just stating that it’s common sense doesn’t make it so.
If the alternatives are so great and so many people are plugging in, how come we don’t hear about it? It’s all a big secret? I’m not buying that.
I looked hard at “Free State Wyoming” for awhile before setting on New Hampshire. FSW has no annual events now. They have no publicized activism going on. One time I got to question one of their leading members about it, the person got very defensive. All I wanted to know is what is going on there that would motivate me to move. Apparently nothing.
I don’t want to malign FSW or its many fine members. I know and highly appreciate several of them. I’m just saying that nothing serious appears to be going on.
And if that’s true of WY, where they’re more organized than anything happening in MT, then the appeal of MT is even less.
Contrast this with NH – 2+ big annual events. The counters for early movers and pledge signers are constantly moving. There are all kinds of small events going on. Et cetera.
I just recently settled on NH and I did a lot of research, so I have to concur: NH is where it’s at for liberty lovers.
How is it common sense there are more opportunities on the East Coast? Seriously?
I’m not so keen (pardon the pun) to move to New Hampshire but Tristan’s statement that it “has the closest thing to an actual concentration of libertarians” seems pretty spot on to me.
We all have to make our own choices, though.
I wasn’t demanding that EVERYONE must go there; I was mostly just tooting my horn and saying what I would like to do when I get there. For those who don’t want it, so be it. The “Libertopia” comment was hyperbole.
Mostly, Tristan, you started an excellent discussion on alternatives which is no different than competition. For both places to improve, there needs to be competition so this is a very good thing. I, for one, would like to thank you for starting the discussion.
Come to the AltExpo during Liberty Forum and you will find inspiration and folks to trade with. I am moving my family in a couple months. Good luck.
I frankly lean towards the opinion that everyone should move because I think we can progress faster as individuals when we have like-minded folks nearby.
Wish I could, but I cannot. If there will be a presence at PorcFest I might be able to come.
You bet AltExpo will be at PorcFest. Hope you can make it.
I honestly think that a place like the Dominican Republic seems more like my idea of Libertopia.
Why is that?
I really enjoyed living in Colombia and found it freer than what I was used to in the US (except for guns and money matters, among other things) so I’m curious.
I’ve lived in or visited most of Latin America (my ex-wife/mother of my child is Panamanian) and I definitely felt freer there. I was really close to opening a beach-side bar in the Dominican Republic at one time. The things I needed were staff, a building, alcohol and pretty much nothing else. In most of those places $20 gets you out of a ticket, for example.
They may not have the supposed Constitutionally-guarantee liberties that many “Western democracies” have but their governments don’t have the resources to impose themselves on their populaces that the US has, for example. When I lived in Panama’ (1990-1993 roughly) you could open carry without a permit. You can gamble, open a restaurant with a smoking section, have a bar open past 2am, and a myriad of other things.
In some of those places (and it is getting worse) you have to worry about kidnapping but I’m sure that most Agorists worry about state-sponsored kidnapping anyway.
Plus the ladies are insanely beautiful and the people generally just have a very good outlook on life.
I’m not dissing on American ladies, though… Just saying… haha
Very cool! Colombia is one of the kidnapping capitals of the world, yet I a blue-eyed gringo never got kidnapped, never was even attacked or stolen from. The kidnappers mainly focus on government and multinational corporation people.
Phoenix is one of the kidnapping capitols of the world, too. I don’t want to make light of kidnapping as it is a very serious problem in some of those places but their children do not get sent off around the world to kill or be killed as often as ours do, either.
Wow, gives thanks a bunch m8
You must write more about mistress!
How do you know I’m not mistress
LICK MY BOOTS SLAVE!!!
Kirsten–What’s your motive in showing your stupidity? If you have a husband,do you serve him hard concrete brick sized slabs and pass them off as fresh bread. Jews are noted for being patholigical liars–look at the mess America/Europe is in.
Please do us a favour–get a real “He”man, that can satisfy your inner most pleasure.
My best click-flick-just for Ms. Kirsten-Real man is waiting for you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cw2IIU0a9qw&feature=related
And for raw content there is http://libertyactivism.info and http://twitter.com/libertyactivism
Wow, the battle between the states wages on!
Here’s a little experiment I often find illuminating: Which of you can find the best argument *against* moving to your prefered state? If you can’t argue against your prefered position, it’s time to rethink your opinons as they seem to be more idealized than realistic.
I disagree. For those of us who have moved to our respective homes, we obviously can recognize the disadvantages without deeming them reasons not to move here.
I’m very up front about things I don’t like about my state, but what qualifies as a reason not to move here depends on who you ask. Were the liquor laws here reason for me not to move here? I miss being able to buy hard liquor at Safeway, but no. For someone who wants to open a bar legally, the liquor laws would almost certainly be prohibitive unless that person were pretty rich. The state tavern association has essentially legally locked down new licenses here so the only way to get one is to buy one from someone who already has one. I’ll leave the economics as an exercise for the reader.
Do you want a long growing season? Montana is probably not your place. Are you willing to start your plants indoors, pick short season varieties, etc.? That will work here. I actually grew tomatoes indoors all winter long my first winter here. Or maybe you don’t garden at all and don’t give a crap.
Are you building your own home, renting, buying, or doing the PT thing? That may make a difference in whether building permits are something you care about. I understand that some places in Montana where you can legally build yourself a mansion with no permissions but a septic permit.
I have friends considering moving to Montana but they are used to burning deciduous wood for heat whereas Montana is predominantly evergreens. I don’t think that’s a deciding factor for them, but it’s clearly in the equation.
I have a friend from Arizona who considers anything under about 85 degrees F to be chilly. That alone seems to have disqualified Montana (and a lot of other places) from his list. I’ve heard him talk about possibly expatriating to Costa Rica or Belize.
How do you feel about the Border Patrol? You have a lot of options outside of the 100-mile Constitution-free zone in Montana, but the entire state of New Hampshire lies within it. Do you care about that or no? Depending on your priorities, that may or may not be a factor for you.
Etc. The possibilities are endless. There’s just not a one-size-fits-all standard you can address that by. Each person needs to make his or her own list of priorities, do some research, and make those judgments for himself or herself.
I’m not sure what’s to disagree with. I stated that I have found a particular intellectual exercise illuminating and that’s not arguable unless you’re either me (you’re not and I’m fairly certain you’re both already aware of that and greateful for it) or psychic and since I don’t believe in psychics of that kind, I have to assume you’re not one.
I also stated that if one can’t argue against their own position then they should reevaluate their position. That’s obviously an opinion but it is based on the sound debating principal that if you can’t argue against your own position then you don’t know what arguments your opponent will use. It also comes from idea that a position based on one-sided understanding is, in essence, blind faith. The fact that it’s an opinion makes it possible to disagree with the opinion but one can’t disagree that I hold that opinion (see the two discounted exceptions above).
I think what you’re suggesting is that you feel such a bias towards your position that you don’t feel comfortable arguing the con side of the issue (acting as though you feel the opposite of what you really do). That’s understandable, and even commendable on some levels, but to some of us it means the position might be suspect.
As an example, I despise government and would gladly push the button to end it. I am more than capable, however, of arguing in favor of government quite eloquently and would likely be able to convince several fence-sitters that they’d be much worse off without it. The idea of doing so is abhorrent to me but in order to prove my understanding of the nuances of the debate I could do so.
I wonder what the arguments Curtis could come up with against NH might be. I’ll be very interested to hear his anti-side.
“I wonder what the arguments Curtis could come up with against NH might be. I’ll be very interested to hear his anti-side.”
Well if you believe the government/society is going to SPECTACULARLY collapse into “anarchy” (lol), and you’ll be forced to defend against a wave of collectivist “zombies”… for your own peace of mind, you’ll not want to live anywhere near the most densely populated area (Boston – DC) in the nation. This is (IMO) the “best” argument against moving to NH, and one that cannot be readily countered. But as I’ve pointed out, the people who really believe this will happen, AND feel that once they move to NH, they cant just move again, are few.
The most PROLIFIC argument against a liberty loving activist moving to NH is “No! Move to my state instead!” LOL.
Curtis, what are your thoughts about the entire state of New Hampshire being contained within the 100-mile Constitution-free zone?
Constitution-free sounds like a great idea to me!!
You like the idea of the Border Patrol stopping travelers, searching them, and stealing their property, not subject to any sort of Constitutional limitation? That’s what that phrase means in this context. More info from the ACLU here.
My numerous experiences with the Border Patrol and colluding agencies in the southwest, as well as the reported experiences of others with those agencies, were a major factor in my relocation decision. When I bought my house in Three Points, Arizona, it was a peaceful haven away from the city of Tucson where I worked. By the time I left, I had been stopped, harassed and physically endangered numerous times as I drove the gauntlet of up to twenty enforcement vehicles on any given one-way drive between my home and place of employment. That doesn’t fit my idea of a Libertopia.
Kirsten, I just don’t think you’re on the same wavelength as Curtis and I. I get the sense you’re into small government, am I right? You’re not an anarchist, yes?
Well, Curtis and I are so we have a less-inhibited way of looking at these things. You might examine the laws and the legal climate. We might examine how much real resistance is going on.
That’s because I for one am confident that ink and paper doesn’t bring your freedom or any protection from state aggression.
You’d be wrong. However, last I checked, being an anarchist didn’t magically put a force field around me whereby LEOs somehow can’t bother me.
Let’s say you come to a Border Patrol checkpoint, or some other checkpoint of the sort that Terry at CheckpointUSA came across wherein local LEOs were colluding with Customs or BP or whatever it was. What’s your plan for that? How does being an anarchist help you in that situation? Do you think that once you politely inform the enforcers that you are an anarchist, they will kindly step aside and send you on your way?
The constitution and laws and statutes are all in the end just ink and paper. They’re good for starting a fire but otherwise entirely useless.
Government is just another corporation with a great PR scheme. So a judge or cop or state legislator can break the law and violate your “rights” anytime they see fit. Your only protection is a social network made up of folks who really get liberty and are willing to come out, confront the tyrants and demand they cease their aggression against you. IOW, libertarian friends. There are a lot of those kinds of folks in New Hampshire. And we see them in online videos coming out all the time. Got anything like that in Montana? If so, please show us the evidence.
btw Terry’s strategy seems to work just fine. There is only one of those checkpoints in NH anyway, and rarely manned. The 100 mile constitution-free zone was an ACLU scare tactic.
I’m not sure how Terry’s strategy “seems to work fine.” I guess if you think it is fine to spend significant sums of money and upwards of seven years of your life engaged in a court battle all the while being harassed increasingly by more and more antagonized LEOs with their hands never far from their weapons. I have to think that being under that kind of stress for that long has to take a toll as well. While it has been well-intended and certainly has had a lot of useful educational effects, it has not worked very well at all for the purpose of putting an end to or even reigning in this kind of behavior. Over those seven years, those abuses have greatly increased locally and spread around the country.
Terry’s a really good guy, up against a lot of really bad people. Shortly after his initial incident, I had a chat with him about where all this was going. He told me at that time one of his purposes was to go through the system “by the book” and test the system to see if it works as intended. Today- seven years later- not only has he not gotten relief on his specific dispute, but those sorts of violations have only expanded. That doesn’t seem fine to me. I guess I have higher standards for what I consider “fine.”
I don’t think a piece of paper protects me. But it certainly does influence how TPTB act. Looking at the situation just today, there is no Border Patrol checkpoint anywhere outside of the 100-mile zone in Montana, and not even one to my knowledge anywhere in the state but the actual border. That leaves me with a pretty good buffer zone which is highly important to me after having traveled daily for several years through what can only be described as the police state of southern Arizona.
And as these checkpoints expand, where are they going to be set up first? Likely into the places where the government has already given itself carte blanche to operate, including New Hampshire. I imagine it will be something like the frog in boiling water effect. When did this Border Patrol checkpoint come into existence?
Now, of course, that’s not as high a priority to everyone as it is to me, and that’s fine. Other factors, such as ones mentioned elsewhere in the post and comments, may be more important to other people. Everyone is within his or her right to make those decisions for themselves, and I don’t see any need to disrespect anyone simply for having different priorities. However, it’s certainly one of the many factors that come into play for a lot of freedom-loving people, and on that score (as well as others) moving to New Hampshire is not an open-and-shut, no-brainer case like a lot of people seem to want to portray it.
That’s not to say that there isn’t a good case for moving to New Hampshire for many people. It’s just to say that New Hampshire isn’t the one and only obvious choice for everyone, just as Montana isn’t, nor is Costa Rica nor New Zealand nor seasteading nor any other option, a one-size-fits-all answer for everyone who is pro-freedom.
If you think paper has value then consider how the NH constitution recognizes the right to revolution. Does your Montana paper have that?
It’s not about respect. It’s about cold hard facts. New Hampshire is where it’s at. If you disagree, it’s customary to give reasons why and/or refute the case Curtis and I have made.
Otherwise libertarians looking for a place to move aren’t going to take your location seriously, which will in the long run doom it.
Just to be clear, George, are you really intending to say that there is one and only one place all pro-freedom people should be on planet earth and that is New Hampshire?
Yes. Was that clear enough?
Yes, thank you. I think New Hampshire is a great place for you, and I’m sure you are or will be very happy there.
I’m not sure what’s to disagree with.
Because one person’s reason for NOT moving someone may be the same as another person’s reason FOR moving there. There is no one size fits all standard. And obviously if I moved here, or if someone else moved to New Hampshire, neither of us had a good reason for ourselves NOT to move here or there otherwise we wouldn’t have moved here or there. How is that unclear?
I’m pretty confused right now…
Maybe if my first sentence was grammatically correct that would help. It should have said: Because one person’s reason for NOT moving somewhere may be the same as another person’s reason FOR moving there.
It’s unclear because you’re saying you disagree with something that’s never been said. It’s also unclear because you seem to be either avoiding my point or completely misunderstanding it. Since you seem intellegent and fairly reasonable, I’ll assume you’re misunderstanding my point because I’m not explaining it correctly or because you don’t have a background in standard debating techniques.
In either case, it’s not that important. Suffice it to say you don’t have the wherewithall to debate the con and therefore I have to suspect your pro arguments as being primarly due to personal bias. That’s not a fault, merely a note.
On the flip side, the same must be said of Curtis after his fall-back to fictionalism and “prolific” arguments. C’est la vie. I guess folks here are pretty single-minded on these subjects. That’s to be expected. People often are very loyal to their hometowns, especially when those hometowns are adopted.
I’m not trying to debate or avoid. I’m trying to discuss. I guess I don’t understand your point, or you don’t understand mine, or both.
You seem to be asking me to make the case for you NOT to move to Montana. Is that correct? If so, I’m saying that’s not possible for me to do because I have only a very, very vague idea based on assumptions I’m making from your presence at Fr33 Agents what your values and standards are. And even those may be wrong.
The case TO move or NOT TO move to Place X will be different for different people.
For example, Montana has a growing wolf population.
Perhaps you love wolves. Maybe you are a wildlife biologist for whom studying wolves is your life’s passion. That Montana has a growing wolf population may be a reason TO move to Montana.
On the other hand, perhaps you despise wolves. You were afraid of canines to begin with. But since that time in Alaska when you were attacked by a pack of wolves and had to drag yourself to safety on your elbows because they got both your legs, you’ve been having horrific wolf nightmares on a regular basis. You’re trying to practice better living through chemistry, but the drugs only do so much. If you so much as hear about a wolf, you are gripped by a panic attack. If that’s the case, that Montana has a growing wolf population may be a reason NOT TO move to Montana.
In both cases, you are presented with the same fact. But unless someone knows something about your feelings about wolves, they can’t know if it is a pro point or a con point in your mind.
Great article, and many thanks for taking the effort to publish it; I’m positive otheres benefited as wel. It really opened my eyes for some new perspectives that I hadn’t thought of before.
Okay, we’ve determined that politicians are douchebags and lying scoundrels.
Since that is now settled.
No, the “electorate” won’t wake up.
Electing somebody will NOT create more freedom (even a saviour like ron paul)
What will you do about this?
Doesn’t matter what you say Kirsten, I know for a fact that those buildings were imploded on 9/11/2001.
Szandor, when you wonder why it is “taboo” to discuss 9/11, maybe you could also ask yourself why such discussion is taboo among the so-called “truth” community. As this poster has indicated, facts and analysis are irrelevant to their pre-determined conclusion and cannot be used to change their mind.
I remember another story of Andrew’s, where a cop got physical with him, and he stopped the altercation by telling the cop that he ought to be ashamed of himself. The cop was ashamed, and he backed off. Won’t work with permanently power-damaged cops, the only cure for them is a bullet, but it worked with that one.
Check out: http://www.republicoflakotah.com/about-us/faq/
Hey guys! I have been watching this site but i have yet to see a bot so i figured I would share the one I found. I tested the beta and it looks pretty awesome. He doesn’t have a system installed on the beta but he says he has a solution. So check it out, he’s very promising.
I recently listened to a debate on of Democracy Now over the Boycott, Divest from, and Sanction Israel movement. Are you familiar with it? I’m interested in some other folks’ take on the subject. I find myself highly undecided, at least as regards the boycott and divest from parts. I don’t quite get what sanctions could mean in a non-government context which I think was supposed to be the whole point of the movement.
Well, it turns out that the Central Asia Institute will be getting $100K of the prize money after all as it is one of the charities Obama will be donating the award money to: Obama picks charities to which he’ll donate Nobel prize cash award
Hello. This is kind of an “unconventional” question , but have other visitors asked you how get the menu bar to look like you’ve got it? I also have a blog and am really looking to alter around the theme, however am scared to death to mess with it for fear of the search engines punishing me. I am very new to all of this …so i am just not positive exactly how to try to to it all yet. I’ll just keep working on it one day at a time Thanks for any help you can offer here. London,UK
Get copies of any legal and financial records you need.
Brilliantly written post about something very inspiring.
As a side note, some of us who don’t believe in altruism still believe in the greatness of doing good works. We just think good works are done for different reasons: feeling good about one’s self is an excellent selfish motive for doing good works.
Probably nothing better than this:
http://www.mises.org/rothbard/agd.pdf