D. Pratt Tseramed - page 5

D. Pratt Tseramed has 42 articles published.

Competitive Governance?

in Opinion/Poor Pratt's Almanack
What governance are you going to choose, if any?

Continuation, with minor edits for clarity, of a fascinating and intellectually challenging dialog with Matt Sands from England, the creator of the ‘Nations Of Sanity’ NAP law initiative (

David Pratt Demarest – Matt Sands :

Matt, thanks for your contact information and your ‘Nations of Sanity’ NAP law creative efforts!

The problem is, who is going to pass the NAP law of our choice? If we have a voluntary choice on governance systems (competitive governance), some will choose stronger NAP confirmation, some less. When each of us can choose whether to legitimize that particular NAP governance offering, an attempt to force a uniformly acceptable NAP confirmation on everyone suffers from from the inherent force versus choice dichotomy.

The key concept is legitimacy. Laws, regardless of their merit, are legitimized only when they are accepted by all they apply to. Under Voluntaryism, Anarcho-Capitalism, or Panarchy, all would have a choice of which competitive form of governance to accept.

The likelihood of every one of us accepting just one form of governance in an instantaneous gestalt is nil. By contrast, however, the good news is that convergence on the NAP is predictable through free market competition. May the most effective implementation of the NAP win. That is the Voluntaryism free market way.

Better to put our efforts into building a form of governance that will out-compete through exampleship other forms of governance with less emphasis on the NAP. I expect such a competitive scenario will occur regardless of what you and I do, but why not lead the way through exampleship. We can build a better ‘mousetrap’, a form of governance that will accrue legitimacy as a superior competitive product in the free market of governance.

In closing, I would note that free markets, the only human institution that has never failed over the entire history of mankind, will lead the way. Free markets are not just for products and services with a tangible financial value. Free markets cover all human actions and decisions including relationships and the rules for relationships that constitute governance.

I propose or add my voice in support of a bold new concept. competitive ‘FREE MARKET GOVERNANCE’. Governance is just another social service that benefits from free-market competition. Competition, along with self interest, are the over-arching attributes that characterize not only all life but all of existence.

Matt, let’s work together with Voluntaryists, Anarcho-Capitalists, Panarchists, and the broader Libertarian movement to build a better form of governance on a sound foundation of free-market governance competition, self-interest, and the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP).


D. Pratt Tseramed – October 30, 2019

Gun Law Facts We Can’t Ignore

in Opinion/Poor Pratt's Almanack
Who Benefits From Disarming Innocent Victims?

The politically motivated hysterical rush to take guns away from citizens and disarm innocent victims deserves an objective examination. Here are some questions that strike me as obvious no-brainers ignored by both the media and those that make political hay and seek more personal power by jumping on the bandwagon of disarming not just criminals but also the rest of us that might threaten their political power ambitions:

1. How can we ignore the fact that gun violence continues to steadily decline?

2. How can we ignore the fact that most mass shootings take place in gun-free zones?

3. How can we ignore the fact that it is impossible to disarm bad actors without resources and manpower required for an oppressive police state that would be a far worse threat to our freedoms than the shooters that the power seekers purportedly want to protect us from?

4. How can we ignore the fact that providing adequate official protection in gun-free zones would require a police state that we cannot afford either financially or politically not to mention the inevitable and far worse threat to our freedoms?

5. How can we ignore the fact that disarming innocent victims will only create more victims?

6. How can we ignore the fact that the only practical means to protect innocent victims are concealed-carry and arming ourselves?

7. How can we ignore the fact that gun laws are not intended to protect us and are merely a smoke screen for self-aggrandizement by power-seeking authorities?

8. How can we ignore the fact that protecting us from ourselves is the standard excuse used by power seekers, dictator wannabees, and all forms of collectivism around the world?

Shame on them for trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Shame on us for being gullible.


1 3 4 5
Go to Top