Voluntary Governance, Rights, Progress

Libertarian International Organization

Libertarian * Libertario * Libertaire|Non-Partisan Advisory Network for Dialogue of Rights, Science & Reform|Libertarianism & Liberal Portal|10+ million participant homes worldwide. All-volunteer. We neither accept nor donate funds: Participation is free.



US Gary Johnson Campaign Praised: KEY WINS, DATA @ Libertarian Poll Data (LPD) Workgroup Facebook

Posted on September 2, 2017 at 1:40 AM

 RE: https://www.facebook.com/groups/736882696414329/ Above: Viral LPD meme.

LIO Fans from Afghanistan to Zambia are delighted at the success of the Gov. Gary Johnson/Gov. Weld www.lp.org USA Campaign in setting a goal for creating one in their countries, and for now an easy way of entering Libertarianism into the dialogue. Non-political libertarianist think tanks and groups generally experienced a worldwide surge in interest as well.

During the campaign a workgroup supervised by the LIO curator, his son and daughter current co-ordinators in training, and followed by statisticians in several countries--the Facebook LPD Libertarian Poll Data Workgroup--garnered attention for in-depth poll analyses only LIO d-base data can provide, and accurately seeing through widespread poll manipulation to predict a massive breakthrough for Johnson and a Trump victory.

For reports and more see: https://www.facebook.com/groups/736882696414329   The group has 2000+ users from 120+ countries. Other activities include meme production, data retention, a 'Great Libertarian' of the past semi-regular post, and much data and news provided by users...A final report on the Johnson/Weld campaign is being prepared, and the group follows both elective and activist campaigns by libertarians in many countries.

33: A CHALLENGE FROM KENNON GILSON: 33 per MM in Libertarian-interested Public Official Project with LIBERTARIAN PROGRAM

Posted on July 17, 2017 at 2:05 AM


Kennon Gilson, son of the LIO curator and 5 times Libertarian public official as a teenager, networks 1000+ past and present libertarian and -interested public officials worldwide. In college he studies philosophy, film-making, and education, and his professional association co-founded with David Nolan, Libertarian Program/GOAL, says the focus is on meeting the needs of anyone from pledged Libertarian to just interested in Libertarian-interest tools, and also non-partisan and especially appointive-board or neighborhood council local office where citizens can most easily participate. Kennon hopes to be an educator, counselor and art-filmmaker helping youth in poverty.

It is time for pro-Libertarians to wake up worldwide, whatever their party. We’re missing 10,000 pro-libertarian public officials in the USA of 310 MM voters.


I challenge serious pro-libertarians IN EVERY COUNTRY and all local parties or independents to meet, set a goal of 33 officials per million voters, and get people in local office low-/no-cost. Tools and how-to’s are at the website above.


That is 264,000+ officials around the world advising on voluntary tools and rights.


It’s been known since late USLP director Ron Crickenberger studied the results of the US LP’s first 20 years: Dedicated pro-libertarians were occupying after some years of effort 33 public offices, high or low, per 1 MM citizens ( or 300,000 regular voters). We’ve seen this in NH, Vermont, Costa Rica, Pinellas in Florida.


It is immaterial if the official is a famed Senator or caring neighborhood council member. A pro-libertarian in office is a pro-libertarian in office is a pro-libertarian in office as far as the voter is concerned. Having served is a great calling card.


Their study, re-confirmed in 2002, also revealed:


>>Pro-libertarians in 50+% of the cases LEAD the bodies that they serve, typically elected by their colleagues for their calm, strong knowledge, and consensus approach.

>>Many in appointed public offices—95+% of offices in the USA—who go on to elected office get (as Gary Johnson did) 95+% of their support/votes from those in other parties and independents, about evenly split. This is decreasing as more re-vote for libertarian-type candidates. In the US, the major parties are trying to attract the ‘libertarian vote’ and get endorsements from local LP leaders.

>>Pro-libertarians get into public office as or increasingly more easily than those of other parties as their reputation spreads. The biggest growth constraint of the USLP is (2017) lack of trained pro-libertarians to seek office.


In countries like Costa Rica where local pro-libertarians have put in a lot of presence, they have more in office-to-population than the US or many US states.


Don’t waste your time attacking officials of other parties. The public is seeing pro-libertarians as healers who bring rights/voluntary/Green -sensitive ideas to the table that both conservatives and progressives can use. Focus on showing how that is so.


My group, LIBERTARIAN PROGRAM, urges focus on getting those numbers in primarily non-partisan, appointive/neighborhood, local office (primarily) for interested LIO fans. We use no money and no weapon beyond asking folks where we can help with these tools. As formal libertarian-direction party projects like the www.IALP.org expand, I challenge local groups and families to set that 33-per-million first target.

--July 17, 2017


ALBUM: Libertarios Liberales Latinos: Adelante to A Latin Beat

Posted on May 10, 2016 at 12:50 AM

Now in every nation there  with LIO users, autonomous think tanks, and a growing number of 'Partidos Libertarios' a review of some of the photos sent us of the amazing enthusiasm in discussing Libertarian Philosophy and applied philosophy in daily life and service areas...

(Above)  Latin American Women like artist-petitioner Ester Mendez Delgado of Costa Rica set a new beat as Latin Libertarian-Liberals in a new generation leave the think tanks to Hit the Streets for open dialogue on ballot access, crime and corruption data transparency, and natural co-operatives.

Other organizing issues include proposals for more neighborhood governance and  'libertarian community areas' plus voluntary governance privatizations that actually work--and a free immigration and free trade treaty of the regions, then the Americas.

 the "Abraham Lincoln of Latin America" LIO curator, philosopher, 1904-5 revitalization co-founder  after whom the current curator is named: Michael Francis Lemos, who co-founded the Brazilian Republic, co-designed its flag, tried to turn positivism to libertarian pathways, and led the peacful emancipation of the slaves...

 Argentina and Brasil activists meet...

 Ecuador conference...Libertarians there are working on reviving the free immigration pact for the Americas--the San Lorenzo treaty...




 Costa Rica



 Rep. Mireya Zamora Alvarado







 Hispanos en EE. UU.

Never Waste Your Vote: One Way to Always Vote for a Great Candidate

Posted on March 4, 2015 at 4:35 PM


Past Deputy Public Defender Nicholas Sarwark has a Facebook group for Libertarian-interested lawyers. He's 2014-16 US Libertarian Party Chair @   www.lp.org

I would like to urge fans of the Libertarian International Organization to consider running for political office in their country. Also, you can consider involvement in local non-partisan office such as the many neighborhood and advisory boards (contact your local municipal clerk, or search your city or local website, for information).


How many times have you gone into the voting booth only to be disappointed that there wasn't a Libertarian-interested and rights-loving candidate to vote for? How many times have you been stuck wasting your vote, when you really wanted to vote for someone like you? How many times have you seen 1-3 things that can easily be done, yet are ignored?


 The best way to make that happen is to be that candidate. The US Libertarian Party offers many free e-tools for you, to get you started, regardless of party. Just go to: www.lp.org/campaign-resources . These really work.


So be the person that you want to vote for. It’s a great way to meet people, better things, and brings you many benefits. Your successful public service gives philosophers, teachers, academics, activists something concrete and positive to point out—so the effect will last long after you’re gone. Don't waste your vote this time. Step up to run for office.


Libertarian Catholic Saint? LIO Fellow Dorothy Day

Posted on March 1, 2015 at 10:40 AM

The Big-L Libertarian spirit: Dorothy Day.

with MG

At a time when we again learn of new extremisms, vast atrocities, and official conspiracies... it's wise to take heart of the LIO Libertarian spirit--and a great proponent now on-track to Catholic Sainthood, my dear mentor--and frequent and often hilarious lunch companion--LIO Fellow and Old Liberal-Libertarian League associate Dorothy Day.

Day worked on three key tools--a non-punitive or restorative approach; the ideal that people should have an inalienable and untaxed homestead of a few acres as a secure base to use economic systems (sometimes called Catholic distributism: She rejected using legislation, however, or attempting to impose the optional approach on all); tolerance based on a loving heart. Her co-operative/intentional community effort while not a cure-all was essential to social life impervious to political manipulations of the economy, and a fund for good deeds. Her Libertarian 'Catholic Anarchism' Movement is still there and a great resource--and more important, many of her proposals are becoming increasing accepted or adapted.

Thus, many people are sharing the tools building eco-community 'prepper' networks, sustainable homes with their own personal social programs, working on de-criminalization and restorative justice, working on interfaith and secular-faith co-operation, etc. During the world economic crisis, many LIO fan/Libertarianist households weathered it all and were able to help others out mirroring her self-reliance concepts.  Above all, she understood as an Aristotle fan that for an action to be moral it must be in input benign, process benevolent, and in result actually beneficent. (Compare to 'our intentions were good, but it failed when we tried to force people.') She was grounded in the benign voluntary approach, started always with an assumption of good will and careful study, and urged people to focus on results that then arose from often easy but powerful changes. Dialogue: Is there something here that your home, extended family, or community network can use?

Day understood that capitalism/communism, selfishness/altruism, reason/caring, theory/action are false choices transcended with a holistic and rights/voluntary approach. She perceptively analyzed many evils of her time, worked in the trenches and lived the value of simple labor, and kept a high-minded and no-nonsense attitude that inspired many. There is no reason to wait for official sainthood to draw emotional, practical, and other inspiration from this Libertarian voluntarist hero of heroes.

Tools: Some useful if not always accurate links to get familiar/start dialogue. Enjoy!

Operation Saturation: What You Should Do

Posted on December 13, 2014 at 1:25 AM

Libertarian Individuals Mean Community Progress.

  1. Verify and meet your local ~500-home district and share e.g. the Quiz, invite to a meeting to share suggestions to create to-do for voluntary-based local betterment.
  2. From respondents develop a 1-5 home non-partisan informal group of SMILE-aware homes working on the to-do list, conviviality, and improving awareness. Consider involvement/development in neighborhood boards, appointive public office, mutual-help ( e.g. senior/babysitting, community garden or watch co-op), coalition initiatives. Note problem homes--sources of criminal offense or totalitarian ideology--for dialogue. In a positive spirit meet with local leaders so they can help and are aware. This we call clear and secure. Use our tools for ideas and inspiration.
  3. Keep us aware of your wins, and repeat process every few years. That's it.


Since 1969, this is how we've reversed the fall of civilization into totalitarian eco-disaster. This is how civilization is maintained. 7 favorite LIO fan projects:

  1. Make homes prepped, non-abusive, a team
  2. Teach logic/critical thinking, entrepreneurship, applied comparative ethics in schools
  3. Workshops in democratic activism, LIO ideas, family finance and savings
  4. Community trips/suppers with speaker on science/practical topic
  5. Coercive tax elimination with low-cost service choice/expansion
  6. Community: Garden, policing-watch, meals, book exchange, foodshare
  7. Brainstorm 50 voluntary-based improvements in mass meeting and have at it.

By doing this in due course every home on earth will be aware of LIO tools/libertarian help.

--Your local Libertarian International Organization fans. www.libertarianinternational.org


Re-posted 2015. Please link, translate, share--and/or photocopy, politely hand out to 1000 surrounding homes.

Ralph Swanson's Last Article: Our Libertarian Future

Posted on February 1, 2013 at 11:25 AM


'There's Work to Do!'--So says LIO Honorary Chair emeritus Colonel Dr. Ralph Swanson, here online at LIO HQ in 2011 with world Libertarians and LIO fans. Swanson was retired from US intelligence where he debriefed fascist prisoners, aided in the creation of the UN Rights Declaration and www.liberal-international.org , and co-founded the Florida Libertarians with MG starting 1969.


See also: https://www.facebook.com/notes/libertarian-international-organization/our-libertarian-future-there-is-work-to-do/293008820742263  


I’m delighted to write this overview for the Costa Rican and other world Libertarian youth. I so enjoyed trips in past years to these lovely, important countries. By absorbing best practices in the US to not repeat errors, Costa Rica is setting an example. I hope this article is inspirational, and I’ve added useful key resources. Pages have been formatted in PDF to make handouts for each subject, and feel free to link and translate!




Understanding International Libertarianism…




Modern Libertarianism is a world movement for betterment through rights-based voluntary, and preferably open and non-authoritarian, solutions. In recent decades there’s been great focus on voluntary solutions in public administration and law. The LIO operates as core network of senior and local activists in every area of betterment who help drive, improve, and inspire activity, both short- and long-term. After starting with a few people in a few countries by the early 1970’s, by 2005 the modern Libertarian-interested groups were in every country and many territories. Massive changes in public orientation we drove (even the US tested in 1970 some 40% Fascist and 5% Libertarian-receptive, now the figures are more like 10/30) opened society and reversed the decline towards tyrannical political systems, though obviously there is plenty to do in addressing abuses while raising peer-to-peer awareness of the many wonderful voluntary options and tools from co-operatives to markets to free universities to new forms of social encounter and entrepreneurship.




International sites that drive and rally world interest:



>the LIO (www.Libertarian-International.org ) showcases inspirational and instructive Libertarian-Liberal leadership, and has started a book club/community building project with translations to come in major languages.



>Other groups with vast world resources, low-cost international conferences, and student information and organizing: www.fee.org, www.ISIL.org, http://studentsforliberty.org/college/groups/



>…and in the free market/basic freedoms think-tank area, www.mises.org www.cato.org and http://atlasnetwork.org/global-network-directory/ have many valuable Libertarian-interest resources in many languages . Libertarians are working more every day as a joint global force on e.g. immigration, cultural diversity, family abuses, free trade, and peace.



In the (I paraphrase) words of a senior official (to me) of the Democratic Party USA: “We’re realizing that whatever our plans, if we don’t include voluntary options Libertarians will derail those plans, and very often have some excellent points on why those plans will self-destruct. And Libertarians have some very good options to start us all thinking. Any legislator who doesn’t consult Libertarianism will be in future decades seen as an incompetent. They’re a constituency for rights and choice.”



In understanding Libertarianism, never confuse it with its applications—limited, small or no government; mini-archism, socialism, anarcho-whatever, or other forms of organization; etc. All work for someone!--and the key is to understand they are tools for what is voluntary, proactive and rights-aware, and non-punitive.



In the words of a great Libertarian: “…so long as it is voluntary.”



Rise of Modern Libertarianism…my perspective...


Liberalism (reduction of government/official abuses and more rights) and Libertarianism (development of local voluntary based community and eventual general social attitudes, guided by pledged Libertarians) work together and always have been so intended. I’m the last survivor of key meetings and initiative projects of the last 70 years for both of these. Myself a youth participant at first, I note our movement always aggressively welcomed bright youth. Leaders have set the example. I was first startled into the movement when, after working for civil rights in as a teen in 1939, the young LIO co-ordinator Paul Gilson appeared at my door step and pledged me ( the pledge is one’s commitment to support rights and voluntary solutions); his son, Michael Gilson-De Lemos at 15 swore in the first pledges according to his outline platform essentially adopted by Libertarian groups; and his son has, at 17, been in several public offices and leads a project to promote Libertarians in public administration and community leadership. The USLP, UK Libertarian Alliance and Red Libertaria of Spain were begun around the early 1970’s by teenagers and young people. In Costa Rica many young activists were involved.



So if you're young or old—welcome. In improvement of public administration, key items have been:



>The Liberal Paris-Oxford Process. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Manifesto ) I inter-acted with H. G. Wells and many others to bring about the UN Rights Charter and with my friends Salvador Madariaga and G. Ferraro in what’s today the Liberal International (www.liberal-international.org and see: http://www.liberal-international.org/editorial.asp?ia_id=1117 ) and Alliance of Democrats. ( http://www.allianceofdemocrats.org/ ), and visioning the critical Sister-City programs that puts foreign policy in the hands of individual citizens: http://www.sister-cities.org/ (Libertarians are encouraged to participate courteously in all groups, such as the IDU and global Greens). These are increasingly informed by Libertarian-direction think tanks around the world. Libertarians focus on transparency, localism, and direct democracy for rights, including ballot access with low barriers, and coalition dialogue such as the World Democracy NGO’s like: http://www.wmd.org/ critical in many developing countries.



>The Libertarian Program & Pledge Initiative: This began in 1970 for voluntary solutions of each UN right with Lib think tanks, parties and networks in each country. Key: Think-tanks in many countries, and spreading the concept of voluntarism through activist networks. In coming years we will see new parties and non-partisan groups of interested officials in every country, along with book-action clubs and more!



>The Best Practice Projects: In 2000 LIO with other groups began review to assist Libertarian-direction parties and groups worldwide (Besides the Libertarian Program project, see the many RESOURCES at our sites and those we portal). Libertarian management consultants began promoting self-certification and bottom-up & best-practice open management via groups such as www.ISO.org and http://www.idea.int/ Libertarians would like to see 3 rights-focused parties/groups in each jurisdiction: at least one centrist Liberal-Libertarian directional one to promote core rights (the ACT NZ, USLP, Costa Rica LP, and more Lib-oriented Swiss FDP, Norway Progress, and UK Liberal Democrats have much to study and admire); a non-parliamentary and citizen initiative “hard Libertarian” or program-focused one ( the Transnational Radicals and former Irish Progressive Democrats are a good example) ; and a local-based dialogue team of non-partisan officials on LIO suggested issues.



Goal: Libertarian-Liberal parties or non-partisan public administration mentor projects in every nation.





Lib Youth go worldwide…


Even as I wrote this in Summer 2011 a major US newspaper, USAToday, carried an article on how parents should react to questions by their Libertarian youth! Lib Youth are essential to the process. In recent years there’re new efforts championed by US or Latin youth, who enjoy resources we only dreamed (try organizing with expensive postal rates and calls to neighboring cities treated as long-distance, no literature sources, and spending half your time fending off extremist and organized crime spies in your group ):


>Late USLP lead founder David Nolan noted: it always begins with the youth. What is different today is that a new generation is on the move that views Libertarian tools as normalized and the logical start point… this is increasingly influencing the older groups such as: http://iflry.org/ Recently, again, the continental newspaper USA Today ran a piece on how parents should address their youngster’s enthusiasm for Libertarianism!


>Students for Liberty has started college teams and gone worldwide…


>LIO initiatives such as the Activist Facebooks, co-edited by young Libertarians, as bases for dynamic world activists sharing projects…


Some suggestions--


>In cultural change know your type: People are basically thinkers, doers or networkers, and so prefer discussion, immediate action, or development. Working with LIO and ISIL, Libertarians there set up respective think tanks, parties, and a variety of networking projects so people could better divide labor; and have had great success with concrete best practice goals: moving a bit every year towards 20 + people in public office per million population; monthly outreach to schools and similar events; and win lists.


>USE the wealth of Libertarian infrastructure and successes to adapt that simply did not exist a generation ago and took a generation of work to build: Books, think tanks, and Libertarian-helped changes such as cell phones and the web so people work as a global team. In outreach, don’t re-invent the wheel: use what is there and point people to the examples.



Libertarian Future: Success, Challenges…


If you wish to see Libertarian/Libertarian-inspired successes—typically the result of Libertarians piloting projects, citizen diplomacy, or rights coalitions to end legal blocks-- look around you. The PC, cell phones, and web; global move for democracy of low tax rates; the fall of Communist, Latin and now mid-East dictators...are just some of the things Libertarians have helped create through encouraging coalitions, futurist conferences, and grueling action to remove blocking laws. One challenge in coming years is to document our successes, invite people to get involved, and provide a ‘safe space’ --Key:



>Libertarianism begins at home: There’s no point praising rights if you have no self-regard, abuse your family, or act like a financial idiot. Many books by Libertarians can really help: My favorites are the Art of Selfishness (Seabury); Breaking Free (Branden); Harry Browne’s financial books.


>Libertarianism is primarily non-political: Libertarianism is about justice and self-empowerment. Most Libertarian books deal with personal finances, relationships, tools such as home schooling and more. Live Libertarianism now, and to this end we have a link at LIO site with regular new items on futurist themes called SMILE: voluntary ap[proaches in space, sea and garden earth democratic communities, machine servants/management tools, life extension, empowering Libertarian community. . .


>Don’t neglect simple informational or appointive work: If you’re organizing a Libertarian political effort, in most countries the majority of public offices are non-partisan elective or 95% appointive advisory. This is where change occurs.


Also, as your group advances…



>Build networks starting with the top 2%: Where can they be found? Not just networks of professionals such as educators, doctors, or attorneys; but bright people at science fiction, collectors, futurist, and activist groups.


>Don’t under or over expect: Get away from the rhetoric of promoting small or limited government. Say: “We present voluntary solutions proven or promising, and encourage dialogue and experimentation.” If in a community per 1 million, you get 1-2 people in public office, grow in your d-base every year with 1%-5% are doing projects, you’re doing great.


>Above all, don’t believe the voices of hate or a false ‘libertarianism’ that attacks others or democracy with the excuse that liberty is being destroyed. The XXth century under Liberals and Libertarians saw world triumph of freedom and responsive governance. We’re now making continuous improvement normal with a simple message:


Libertarianism in brief? “With voluntary alternatives, things improve!”. ..


We’re a process, not an event. We protect the free process and expand it so people can come to personal and often very different solutions in a peaceful way...Where to begin? Job #1: Discover the free web tools. Use or adapt the free or low-cost tools on-web to get started: If you get familiar, read or use the tools; have a card or bumper-sticker on your vehicle; and hand out items like the quiz every week to people you meet, you’ll be doing the job. I guarantee this: You’ll discover empowering ideas, and amazing and fun people working worldwide for betterment.



You’re Part of Something Noble…


Libertarianism did not begin over a cup of coffee this morning. It is a received and disciplined approach to betterment. Its leaders think in terms of both centuries and immediate improvement. Libertarianism is a tool that alone consciously champions rights for all; harmless behavior as technology and culture permit to embryo, animal, and foreigner; encourages non-punitive solutions, the end of prisons and penalties, above all using voluntary tools to prevent and not react to the problem: Prosperous economies, an end to poverty, bringing knowledge to all, and more. It defends the defenseless and humbles the bully with wisdom and foresight.



While modern Libertarianism is a few decades old, it is solidly part of a long process reaching back to the anarchistic communities of ancient Greek philosophers, the wisdom of Taoism, and tribal lore.



It is noble because it asks you to encourage the noble. There is a wonderful statement by Thomas Moore (I paraphrase) that summarizes the mind set: I harm none, I think harm for none, and wish well for all. I have always kept in mind how Jefferson explained the Liberal goal of cultural tolerance and good governance by a world confederacy of town-hall, localist direct democracies of informed citizens with universal franchise, jury common and secular law, of liberal education. Our novel contribution is to re-affirm that these may take any economic form; to present rights to voluntary solutions in each area of public administration to empower all in every land; to start a small but growing world corps of citizens pledged to encourage betterment with better rights via voluntary, proactive, non-punitive solutions as core civic guardians, resources, and guides.



In the words of Dr. Randall Holcombe, former chief economic advisor to the Governor of Florida: “We’re winning by helping people win.”



The freedom of the world has progressed enormously. Ills from official racism to fascism to ill-functioning markets due to legally induced consumer ignorance are on the retreat. The moral revolution of the Libertarian pledge among community leaders and general conversancy with voluntary Libertarian solutions are the great tools of additional and continual improvement. If you see something that needs improving, saying “I’m an LIO supporter” and getting familiar with tools and what similar people do that work for your situation is all you need to start—because seeing something you can resolve is the universe’s way of saying the solution is you.




What do you wish to do? Better your knowledge, your home, or your workplace? Share a personal or social entrepreneurship project? Address stupid and backfiring official measures effectively? Share the good word? Get in appointive/non-partisan public office? Find self-empowering tools? Meet great people?



My only regret is I will not witness the enormous advances ahead. True, we have many ignorant critics. We do not serve the critics. We have many distorters and enemies. One by one they become our supporters. When things get crazy, never whine but remember: there is work to do.





Dr. Ralph Swanson first participated in the Libertarian International Organization, then the League, in 1939 and at the nomination of H. G. Wells an LIO advisor, then was chief advisor for many years. Co-founding and chairing US state & national parties, he was instrumental in the creation as well of the modern Liberal & Civil Rights movement. He computerized the first Libertarian state, national and world d-bases. He remains interested in local affairs as a Libertarian and resource for world Libertarians. This article began as a joint article with the late David Nolan and John Hospers, and was adapted for Costa Rica & Latin American Libertarian youth published in Summer 2011. A slightly updated version is published here.










http://www.libertarianbookclub.org /




There you’ll find a structured reading program we created and additional items in different languages users recommend—along with these key tools for organization:




> The standard USLP Platform (a canonical LIO redaction with readings approved by Mr. Nolan is forthcoming) outlines the Libertarian system of improvement and explicates the Libertarian pledge. It was personally championed and overseen by originary authors M. Gilson-De Lemos, Dr. Hospers, and T. Nathan as part of an international project to summarize the best starting guide points for Libertarian-direction coalition legislation based on activist experience in the coherent Libertarian public administration system. A short 1 page “Executive Summary” for public officials, candidates and citizen-educators is at the front. This is intended as simultaneously a great program, learning, and coalition building tool; the body, while short compared to most party platforms, is not meant for candidate platforms except as an idea guide; a short 4-line candidate platform will be included in the LIO edition.



>A strategic toolkit incorporating goals and proven ideas for continuing group or party growth was created by over 1000 US and world activists for general guidance: The LIO over the next few years is setting up support projects for these goals and missions to build Libertarian/SMILE-interested community in each major city and college, free and accessible to all.



>Standard start-up readings in many languages including the book for all ages “Jonathan Gullible” and the “Liberty Flash” are linked as well as a growing/approved set of reading lists to start with many free e-books.






>Libertarian groups are adapting into their own languages the Quiz-both how-to and award programs at www.TheAdvocates.org and http://libertarianawards.com/winners/2007-2 (Yes, that’s me, and I did it in a wheelchair; here is one to columnist Jason Pye, so believe me, anyone can do it and find the time: http://www.jasonpye.com/2011/06/lights-of-liberty-award/ ). These are powerful and low-cost tools. Please share your work product with them and everyone else.



>Please adapt and translate this summary to hand out to new people as a discussion guide. Send us a photo-link of your activity via the LIO Facebook!



>Finally, if there is one great piece of advice, NEVER assume Libertarians aren’t doing it in some form, it’s just theory, or it can’t be done. Chances are, what Libertarian scholars are saying is already a few years old—keep alert to what is happening by staying in touch with activists and social entrepreneurs.






Note: The following was published by LIO Friends and Latin groups in 2011. Delayed LIO 2013 publication to 2015.


New LIO Group Head Appointed

Posted on August 15, 2012 at 4:25 PM

Attorney Laura Mascaro Rotger succeeds Attorney Hon. Geraldine Ferraro as counsel of LIO Group, which networks senior  retired and promising  diplomatists and officials  mediating pro-active democratic, voluntarist and public safety dialogue, and addressing by voluntary means threats to humanity.

Attorney, Balearic local rights stateswoman and democratic advocate, and unscooling/home-schooling author and child-rearing public issues educator (article: When Thinking is Punishment http://es.paperblog.com/cuando-pensar-es-castigo-por-laura-mascaro-rotger-619817/ )  Laura Mascaro Rotger was appointed July 17 to succeed Geraldine Ferraro as counsel and facilitator of LIO Group an LIO advisory network.

Ferraro met LIO curator 'MG' in the mid-80's during her campagn for US Vice-President and succeeded LIO Fellow William P. Rogers, both a long-time LIO Fellow and boon schoolboy companion of past co-ordinator Paul Gilson. Ferraro for several years developed LIO concerns on gender equality, international discussion of the problem of domestic abuses, popularizing moving parties to a rights posture, and international peace and scientific co-operation in the unstable post-Communist/fascist era.

Past LIO Fellows Chair Dr. Ralph Swanson had been faciliitating ad interim after Ferraro's unwelcome death, and after a search he nominated her as the obvious choice. The Group for the first time in history exceeded its desired goal of 2 participants per country under him. Group members were helping mediate recent vast changes towards democracy for all nations, but many have passed away in the last 2 years.

Mascaro Rotger, who recently attended the national Homeschool Conference in Spain--which ironically moved from a pro-home-school to anti-home-school 'memory hole' era and is now swinging back again, influencing both Europe and Latin America-- is expected to help integrate legalizing un-/home-schooling as key to the non-abusive and modern household, integrate the embryo association of world public office libertarians and libertarian users, and continue to help encourage promising or retired cultural mediators in every country with special interest in alumni of Sister Cities.  

One effort will be an LIO Group website, which will direct citizens to self-empowering and best-practice information.

Group derives from a project to get lawyers working to unite lawyers to bring actual international common law independent of any state apparatus and mediate proactively towards increased local autonomy originally begun by the Lemos freeholder council in the 1500's. It was by tradition outlined Esteban Boethius who was a factor for their interests in France at that time. Revived under Henriette Lemos, who appointed William Humboldt as new Counsel assisted by his globe-trotting brother the famed scientist. For many years-- to assure  more secure communication--elementary knowledge in the rarely known Basque language was encouraged. Counsels and interested participants in Group are encouraged to become conversant with Boethius' Discourse on Servitude and Humboldt's Limits of State Action--along with re-reading Don Quixote as a libertarian text, recommended to all LIO fans.  Attorneys who are also educators are often appointed as Counsel to assure confidentiality in the autonomous advisory network.

In a summary "...Group functions as a set of informal separate networks to share expertise, contacts and data on unusual or cultural public safety issues; and defuse problem situations by bringing people together. We're sensitive to the twin tensions of global or other over-centralization vs local provincialism. Contacts may not be used for unprofessional or self-dealing agendas. Focus is on better democracy, public service choice, and statutes that block citizen solutions. The Group participants at various times helped drive adoption of the Kellog Pact, the UN Declaration, defused the Cold War, and much more..."

Below in Spanish is a recent interview with LIO Group Counsel L. Mascaro Rotger.

Boethius and Humboldt wrote privately circulated works expressing commonalities that arose in Salon discussions of what is today LIO.


martes, 23 de agosto de 2011Entrevista a Laura Mascaró Rotger, madre homeschooler.

Para padres (que están pensando en educar en casa, tengan dudas acerca del tema o simplemente quieran ampliar su panorama) y público en general, les dejo la siguiente entrevista a Laura Mascaró Rotger tomada de El Blog Alternativo está muy completa y me pareció importante transmitirla.

¿Es la escuela tan imprescindible, sagrada, perenne e intocable como creemos –o nos han hecho creer-?

¿Por qué más de un millón de familias en EEUU, 25.000 en el Reino Unido, 3.000 en Francia y 2.000 en España educan a sus hijos en casa –homeschooling-?

¿Cómo son esos niños? ¿Serán personas de provecho? ¿Qué lleva a los padres a desertar del sistema educativo y del modelo social imperante? ¿Cómo educan?

Para contestar a estas preguntas y nuestras dudas sobre esta opción tan radical hemos entrevistado a Laura Mascaró Rotger, abogada, articulista, bloguera veterana en Tarkus Kids, madre de un hijo de 5 años a quien educa en casa y autora del libro “Educación y libertad”.

A lo largo de 30 preguntas, Laura nos desvela todo lo que hay que saber sobre el homeschooling – la escuela en el hogar para que tengamos información seria al respecto, y ofrece útiles consejos para las familias interesadas en este tipo de educación.

La entrevista se divide en 6 capítulos:


Prejuicios sociales


Situación Mundial

Consejos, bibliografía y webs

Libro “Educación y libertad”

Y las respuestas se pueden leer a continuación:


1. Muchas personas desconocen que existe la opción de educar en casa. Empecemos entonces por el principio: ¿qué es y en qué consiste el homeschooling?

El homeschooling consiste, fundamentalmente, en hacerse cargo de forma integral de la educación de los hijos, en no delegar esta importantísima función en terceros.

Lo que varía son tanto los motivos por los que se elige esta opción educativa como las formas de llevarla a cabo. Hay tantas maneras de hacerlo como familias que lo hacen. Y también hay casi tantos motivos como familias.

Ahora bien, defender el derecho de educar en casa no significa necesariamente estar radicalmente en contra de la escolarización, creo que es un matiz importante.

2. ¿Cuáles son las VENTAJAS de educar en casa?

La principal ventaja es que cada familia puede organizarse como mejor le convenga. No hay horarios pre-establecidos más allá de los que la propia familia se auto-imponga.

No hay objetivos curriculares marcados por una escuela o un ministerio. Los niños (y los padres) no tienen la presión de saber que necesariamente deben aprender determinada materia en determinado plazo. No hay deberes y no hay exámenes.

No hay un timbre que marque el ritmo de estudio. Uno no tiene por qué dejar una actividad con la que está disfrutando, en la que está concentrado, sólo porque se haya terminado la hora dedicada a esa materia.

De hecho, ni siquiera hay materias en el sentido de asignaturas escolares. ¡El mundo no está dividido en asignaturas! Por eso, muchas familias deciden trabajar a través de proyectos de modo que lo que serían las asignaturas escolares se estudian de forma transversal. Y otras familias deciden hacer “unschooling”, es decir, aprenden de la vida misma, aprenden las cosas haciéndolas y las hacen porque quieren hacerlas.

3. ¿Y cuáles son las desventajas o DIFICULTADES de esta opción?

Yo hablaría de dificultades más que de desventajas.

3. 1. La primera se presenta antes incluso de desescolarizar o, en su caso, de tomar la firme decisión de educar en casa: es la duda sobre si la decisión que estamos tomando es correcta o no.

Creo que el miedo a la equivocación es inherente a la maternidad/paternidad, pero también estoy convencida de que aún conservamos un instinto, un saber ancestral, que nos va guiando; sólo que algunos lo han olvidado y no lo escuchan.

3. 2. La segunda es la soledad. El homeschooling es muy desconocido (en España, al menos) y, aún cuando es conocido, es muchas veces incomprendido. Que tu familia y tus amigos te apoyen es fundamental. Es suficiente con que respeten tus decisiones. Si, además, te comprenden y comparten tus ideas sobre educación, entonces la situación ya es prácticamente perfecta.

Y, además, es importante contar con una red de apoyo, aunque sólo sea a nivel virtual; una red de otras familias homeschoolers, con niños de las edades de los tuyos, que apliquen métodos parecidos a los tuyos, que críen de un modo similar, que tengan tus mismos intereses, o tus mismas dudas…

Si la red de apoyo la tienes físicamente cerca y te permite hacer encuentros informales, organizar actividades conjuntas, salidas recreativas, visitas culturales, etc, entonces vas a tener, prácticamente, un camino de rosas.

3. 3. La tercera desventaja es que hay que dar explicaciones. Gente no siempre bien intencionada va a hacerte preguntas y a cuestionar tus decisiones. La paradoja es que cuando más te lo preguntan, es cuando menos preparado estás para responder.

A medida que pasan los meses y los años, la experiencia de la educación en casa te va dando seguridad y confianza, cada vez tienes más datos, tanto teóricos como empíricos, pero también cada vez la gente va aceptando con normalidad que tus hijos no están escolarizados… y dejan de preguntar. ¡Justo cuando tú tienes toda una artillería de respuestas para ellos!

3. 4. La cuarta desventaja, en España, es la falta de reconocimiento legal explícito del homeschooling. Aunque, en mi opinión, es una desventaja relativa.

4. ¿Qué criticáis o qué tratáis de evitar de la educación convencional en una escuela?

Es difícil generalizar porque cada familia tiene sus propios motivos para no escolarizar y no todas ellas están necesariamente en contra de la escuela.

La vida no es más que una continua sucesión de elecciones. Y, con cada elección, estás dejando pasar miles de otras opciones. Es decir, que en un momento determinado decidas que la escuela no es la mejor opción para tus hijos, no significa necesariamente que consideres que la escuela puede ser perjudicial para ellos. Quizás la elegirás en otro momento. O quizás no.

Ahora bien, es innegable que el sistema educativo no está cumpliendo su función de educar. Sólo hace falta ver los datos sobre el fracaso escolar en nuestro país y ver la falta de valores (y de modales) de nuestros jóvenes. Que la escuela no educa es un hecho.

Por supuesto, la educación que pretende ofrecer el sistema educativo es sólo intelectual, académica, y obvia por completo la educación a nivel emocional, espiritual, social e incluso físico. Éste es uno de los motivos por los que algunas familias no contemplan a la escuela como una opción válida para sus hijos.

Los niños escolarizados se despiertan a golpe de despertador. Son obligados a pasar cinco, seis o más horas al día en compañía de otros 25 niños de su misma edad, segregados en función de un criterio tan arbitrario como es el año de su nacimiento.

Son obligados a estudiar materias que quizás no son de su interés y que, desde luego, no les son de utilidad. Y son obligados a cambiar de materia a golpe de timbre. Lo que el timbre enseña es que no hay nada en la escuela que merezca la atención de ser terminado.

Luego están los EXÁMENES. Los exámenes sirven para poner en evidencia lo que el niño no sabe. No importa que, a los cinco minutos, ya haya olvidado toda la materia teóricamente aprendida. Sólo importa dar con la respuesta correcta para conseguir una puntuación suficiente para no tener que volver a dedicar ni un minuto a ese tema. Y lo hacen bien, ésa es la verdad. Los estudiantes se convierten en estrategas, como diría John C. Holt: aprenden las estrategias necesarias para que el profesor les deje en paz. Lo demás, no importa.

Y hay asuntos aún más graves, como el hecho de que algunas guarderías y escuelas infantiles se nieguen a cambiar los pañales a sus alumnos. Un niño de, por ejemplo, dos años, que tiene el pañal sucio, tendrá que esperar a que su maestra se dé cuenta, a que avise a su madre y a que su madre pueda dejar lo que sea que está haciendo y pueda llegar hasta el centro. Ese niño puede estar, por tanto, más de media hora con sus necesidades encima. Eso es, cuando menos, anti higiénico, por no decir que es una absoluta falta de respeto hacia el niño.

También hay escuelas que se niegan a suministrar medicamentos a sus alumnos, incluso medicamentos prescritos para tratar enfermedades crónicas. Conozco el caso de una niña asmática que, cada vez que tenía una crisis estando en la escuela, debía esperar a que llegara su madre con el inhalador. Ese tiempo de espera podría haberle costado la vida.

Por cosas como éstas, cada vez más familias buscan alternativas. Algunos optan por escuelas libres. Otras, por el homeschooling.

5. ¿Cómo son los padres que educan en casa? ¿Qué tenéis en común?

No hay una “familia tipo” que eduque en casa. Los padres y madres tienen formación académica y trabajos de lo más variado. Hay actores, empresarios, abogados, médicos, músicos, pintores, escritores, jardineros, comerciantes, peluqueros, terapeutas, trabajadores sociales… Y también hay profesores.

Lo único que todos tenemos en común es que educamos en casa. A partir de ahí, la variedad es tan grande como el mundo mismo. Algunos comparten motivos para no escolarizar. Otros comparten métodos de crianza y de educación. Otros comparten religión. Otros comparten aficiones. Otros, simplemente, comparten vecindad. Y otros no comparten absolutamente nada más allá del hecho de educar en casa.

Creo que hay que ir desmontando el tópico de que las familias que educan en casa son hippies, de izquierdas, anti católicos, vegetarianos, que no vacunan, que paren en casa, que portean al bebé, que lo amamantan por largo tiempo, que no castigan, etc. O, en el otro extremo, que son ultra-religiosos y no quieren que sus hijos se mezclen con gente diferente.

En realidad, somos gente corriente.

6. ¿Un homeschooler nace (se decide desde el principio) o se hace (se desescolariza a los hijos)? ¿Por qué motivos abandonan la escuela algunas familias?

Algunos lo deciden desde incluso antes de tener hijos, lo cual es admirable. Algunos saben de antemano que la escuela no va a darles lo que quieren para sus hijos, de modo que disponen de mucho tiempo para informarse y para prepararse.

Otros desescolarizan tras un largo proceso durante el cual tienen problemas con el colegio pero quizás no dan el paso de desescolarizar por falta de información o por miedo.

Hay muchos casos de niños que no supieron/pudieron adaptarse al sistema (niños con altas capacidades y niños con necesidades educativas especiales, por ejemplo) y el sistema, obviamente, no supo tampoco adaptarse a ellos y cubrir sus necesidades. Muchos niños se aburren en el cole porque no tienen el nivel medio, están por encima o por debajo y, por tanto, se sienten fuera de lugar.

También hay niños que son criados con apego por sus familias y que no consiguen acostumbrarse al tipo de disciplina de la escuela; estos niños no comprenden por qué existen determinadas normas (como que sólo puedan beber agua a la hora del recreo, por ejemplo) o no comprenden con qué autoridad el profesor puede imponerles un castigo si sus propios padres no los han castigado jamás (no porque les dejen hacer lo que quieran, sino porque utilizan otros métodos de disciplina positiva). En general son niños libres a los que el sistema no consigue doblegar.

7. ¿Existe el arrepentimiento o malas experiencias en educar en casa? ¿Se puede volver al colegio después sin problemas de adaptación?

Sí, se puede volver. Y los motivos, una vez más, son de lo más variado.

Hay quien matricula a sus hijos en algún curso de la ESO para que puedan obtener el título a la misma edad que los otros niños. Hay quien escolariza por una cuestión de organización familiar, a veces a causa de un divorcio y, otras veces, porque los dos progenitores tienen que trabajar fuera de casa a jornada completa. También se dio el caso de una familia que educaba en casa a sus dos hijos adoptados, tras una pésima experiencia del mayor en la escuela infantil.

Cuando iniciaron los trámites para adoptar al tercero, el hecho de estar educando en casa fue motivo de peso suficiente para no conseguir el certificado de idoneidad (lo cual, a mi parecer, es una decisión de dudosa legalidad).

Para ese matrimonio, en ese momento, resultó más importante el hecho de adoptar un tercer hijo que la posibilidad de educarlos en casa. Tuvieron que elegir.

En España, durante toda la etapa de educación obligatoria (Primaria y Secundaria) puedes reintegrar a los niños en el sistema educativo en el curso que les corresponde por edad. Algunas familias solicitan que los asignen a un curso inferior para facilitar su adaptación pero, en muchas ocasiones, el nivel académico de los homeschoolers es superior al de los niños escolarizados.

8. ¿Cuáles son los resultados a largo plazo de esta opción educativa? ¿Pueden ir estos niños a la universidad con normalidad?

Por supuesto, pueden ir a la universidad. Yo destacaría el hecho de que los niños educados en casa, en general, aprenden a tomar decisiones razonadas con mucha más madurez que los escolarizados. Son niños, por tanto, que suelen tener bastante claro a qué quieren dedicar su tiempo y a qué no, y ello incluye los estudios formales. Algunos deciden que quieren ir a la universidad y se preparan para ello.

Sandra Lara, por ejemplo, estudió a distancia, se licenció en la Open University de Londres y, con tan sólo 17 años, fue admitida en la Universidad de Barcelona para realizar un máster de física.

Otros deciden que la universidad no es para ellos, como tampoco lo fue el colegio.


9. Existen varios prejuicios sobre educar en casa ¿qué hay de cierto o no en ellos?

9.1 Estos niños pasan demasiado tiempo encerrados en casa y NO SE SOCIALIZAN

Para empezar, conviene aclarar que educar en casa no significa literalmente educar “dentro de casa”. En segundo lugar, habría que determinar qué entendemos por “Socializar”. Lo que suele preocupar a la gente es la supuesta incapacidad de los niños homeschoolers de hacer amigos.

Bien, aquí van algunas de las formas en que lo hacen: a parte de sus familiares (hermanos o primos, por ejemplo) conocen a los hijos de los amigos de sus padres, conocen a otros niños educados en casa, conocen a los niños de su barrio (sobre todo si viven en sitios pequeños), conocen a los niños de su parroquia, a los de su agrupación scout y a sus compañeros de actividades “extraescolares”.

Además, los niños homeschoolers suelen acompañar a sus padres prácticamente a todos lados, por lo que aprenden a relacionarse con gente de todo tipo y de todas las edades. Aprenden que uno no tiene el mismo trato con una vecina de confianza, que con el vecino nuevo, que con el banquero, que con el frutero, que con el panadero, que con el hijo adolescente del vecino. En mi opinión, esto es precisamente “socializar”.

9.2 Se educa en una BURBUJA, fuera de la realidad social

Lejos de educarse en una burbuja, se educan en el mundo. La escuela sólo es una pequeñísima parte de la realidad social. Los niños que van a la escuela, supuestamente, se están preparando para el futuro. Los niños que se educan en casa, en cambio, están viviendo la vida. Aquí y ahora.

9.3 Demasiado ANARQUÍA, los niños deben aprender a obedecer y cumplir normas

Educar en casa no significa no tener normas. Las normas dependen exclusivamente de cada familia, escolarice o no: tener muchas o pocas, muy estrictas o más flexibles, son cosas que decide cada familia.

Lo que los niños deben aprender, en mi opinión, es a diferenciar las normas auténticamente necesarias, las que se fundamentan en un principio o valor, de aquellas meramente arbitrarias que no suponen sino una forma de control sobre los demás. Las normas típicamente escolares, como levantar la mano para pedir permiso, y pedir permiso para hablar, beber o ir al baño, no son normas que los niños necesiten verdaderamente aprender.

Lo natural es beber e ir al baño cuando uno lo necesita. ¡Son funciones vitales! En cuanto a pedir permiso para hablar, tiene sentido en situaciones en las que se han de organizar los turnos de palabra debido a la cantidad de gente que va a participar en la conversación. Pero ésas situaciones, en la vida real, no son las más habituales. Imaginemos a un grupo de diez o doce adultos sentados a la mesa de un bar, tomando un café después de comer. Imaginemos que charlan animadamente sobre cualquier cosa: su trabajo, sus vacaciones, la actualidad política o el tiempo. Imaginemos que, antes de hablar, levantan la mano esperando que se les de permiso para intervenir. ¡Resulta una escena chocante!

Pero los niños, a base de observar a los adultos en situaciones reales, aprenden cómo han de comportarse en cada momento. Hace falta que confiemos más en ellos. Y en nosotros. Porque nosotros somos el ejemplo del que ellos van a aprender.

9.4 Educar en casa es UN LUJO sólo al alcance de unos pocos

En algunos casos, educar en casa es una necesidad que te obliga a replantearte tus decisiones anteriores y tus necesidades creadas. Elegir una forma u otra de educar no es una cuestión de tiempo ni de dinero. Es una mera cuestión de prioridades.

¿Realmente necesitas vivir en la ciudad? ¿Realmente necesitas tener una casa en propiedad y pagar una hipoteca mensual de mil euros? ¿Realmente necesitas comer fuera de casa dos veces por semana? ¿Realmente necesitas tener dos coches? ¿Realmente necesitas trabajar ocho horas diarias y añadirle dos horas de transporte? ¿Realmente necesitas televisión por cable? ¿Realmente necesitas viajar cada verano? ¿Realmente necesitas renovar tu vestuario cada seis meses? Algunas necesidades te las has creado tú mismo, no son auténticas necesidades vitales. Y el precio que estás pagando, es la educación y crianza de tus hijos.

Por otro lado, para educar en casa no hace falta reproducir la escuela. No hace falta comprar muchos libros, material deportivo, material de laboratorio, etc. Cada familia es libre de decidir cuánto dinero quiere gastar en la educación de sus hijos. Y hay muchos recursos gratuitos (o casi gratuitos): bibliotecas, museos, internet, intercambios con otras personas, etc. Pero es esencial estar abierto a nuevas formas de aprendizaje y ser imaginativo.

9.5 Educar en casa en ILEGAL Y PELIGROSO. Te pueden quitar la custodia de tus hijos.

A nadie en España, que yo sepa, le han quitado la custodia de sus hijos por educarlos en casa. Otra cosa es que, además de no tenerlos escolarizados, tampoco los estés educando y, por tanto, el Estado considere que están en situación de abandono o desamparo, pero eso ya no tiene nada que ver con el homeschooling.

Es ilegal aquello que está prohibido por la ley. Ninguna ley en España dice que educar en casa esté prohibido. Lo que sucede es que tampoco hay ninguna ley que reconozca expresamente esa posibilidad. Por tanto, los homeschoolers nos amparamos en normas de rango superior, como la Constitución Española o la Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos, que establecen la libertad de educación y el derecho de los padres de elegir la educación que consideren más adecuada para sus hijos.

Ahora bien, es cierto que, en ocasiones, la administración pública activa los protocolos de absentismo cuando tiene conocimiento de que un niño no está escolarizado. En esos casos, se limitan a comprobar que no exista abandono del menor y emiten un informe que pueden remitir a la fiscalía de menores.

Cuando esto sucede, se abren diligencias previas para tratar de esclarecer cuál es la situación real del menor, si hay o no abandono o desamparo y si se le está proporcionando o no una educación. Estos casos siempre terminan resolviéndose a favor de las familias. Por tanto, el riesgo que corremos es relativo: es cierto que puede abrirse un expediente en servicios sociales y que éste puede terminar en un juzgado, pero también es cierto que no pueden multarnos ni imponernos condena alguna, porque no hay pena sin ley. Es decir, no pueden condenarte por un hecho que no está tipificado por la ley.


10. ¿Cómo funciona un día normal educando en casa?

No hay dos familias iguales. Incluso dentro de la misma familia, puede no haber dos días iguales. Hay familias que tienen un horario de estudio académico más o menos regular y otras que son más flexibles.

En mi casa, por ejemplo, no tenemos horarios de acostarnos ni de levantarnos. Una mañana cualquiera puede incluir un paseo, un rato de tele, juegos de mesa o de ordenador, alguna manualidad, leer en voz alta, cocinar, hacer la compra o algún otro recado, etc. Para mí, las actividades y los materiales no se dividen en didácticos y lúdicos. Cualquier cosa puede ser didáctica y cualquier cosa puede ser lúdica.

11. ¿Tenéis casas muy grandes?

No necesariamente. De hecho, hay familias que se mudan a casas más pequeñas para reducir gastos. Hay quien vive en el campo, o en pueblos y hay quien vive en ciudades. Para educar en casa no hace falta un entorno específico. Obviamente, cada familia sabrá cuál es su ideal de vivienda, pero eso es así se eduque en casa o no.

12. ¿Educan los dos padres o sólo uno?

Educan los dos padres y, sobre todo, se educa el propio niño. Si nos referimos a las familias que realizan un estudio más académico, dirigido, entonces sí, muchas veces el padre es el que trabaja fuera de casa y la madre es la que les ayuda en sus tareas. Pero en las familias que no siguen un currículum y, especialmente, en las que hacen unschooling, lo que marca la diferencia es la capacidad de ver el aprendizaje en todas partes. Es decir, hay una diferencia fundamental entre “enseñar” y “aprender”.

13. ¿Y cómo se compagina con las tareas del hogar? ¿No es demasiado tiempo en casa?

Cuando educas en casa no estás todo el día, literalmente, dentro de la casa. Sales para hacer recados de todo tipo; sales para ir a actividades, digamos, “extraescolares”; sales para ir a jugar al parque; sales para visitar a los amigos o familiares, etc.

Con las tareas del hogar sucede lo siguiente: si tus hijos están en casa contigo, en vez de estar en el cole, verán cómo haces las tareas domésticas. Entonces, según cómo sea tu actitud antes esas tareas, así será la percepción que ellos tendrán. Si tú odias limpiar el baño, pero aún odias más tener el baño sucio, y lo limpias con buen humor, con alegría, con ganas, eso es lo que trasmitirás a tus hijos y, quizás sorprendentemente, ¡van a querer ayudarte! Obviamente, van a querer hacer “eso” que su madre hace tan a gusto, ya sea limpiar el baño, cocinar o sacar la basura.

De todos modos, creo que ninguna madre homeschooler antepone las tareas del hogar al tiempo de sus hijos. Que la casa no esté perfectamente ordenada y limpia es secundario. Lo importante es vivir.

14. ¿Cuál es la formación de los padres? ¿Suelen ser ex-profesores o profesores en activo?

En Estados Unidos hay un alto porcentaje de padres que educan en casa que son o han sido profesores. Pero, en general, no lo son. No hace falta serlo puesto que no estamos trasladando el formato cole a la casa. Como dije antes, hay padres y madres con todo tipo de formaciones y de profesiones.

15. Una cosa es educar a un niño antes de los 6 años (edad en que comienza la educación -que no escolarización- obligatoria) y otra primaria y secundaria. ¿Cómo lo hacéis? ¿Tenéis conocimientos de todas las materias?

No hace falta tener conocimientos de todas las materias. Tú eres su madre, no su profesora.

En mi opinión, tampoco hace falta que estudie todas las materias tal como se estudian en el cole o en el instituto. Aún así, si quiere hacerlo o tú quieres que lo haga, lo que necesitas es saber a quién acudir. Puedes matricularlo en una escuela extranjera a distancia y, una vez obtenido el título del otro país, lo convalidas por el español.

En España hay dos: Clonlara y Epysteme.

Y hay muchos otros recursos. Internet, las bibliotecas, los museos, las academias, etc. En otros países, existe una opción educativa llamada “FLEXISCHOOL” que consiste en combinar la educación en casa con la escolarización, de modo que sólo escolarizas para determinadas materias.

16. ¿Qué TIPOS de homeschooling existe? En los colegios existen varias líneas que podríamos resumir en educación convencional, alternativa tipo Waldorf y libre tipo Summerhill. ¿Ocurre lo mismo en casa?

Hay familias que adaptan ese tipo de pedagogías para aplicarlas en casa: Waldorf, Montessori, Charlotte Mason, educación clásica, etc. Hay familias que se juntan y crean espacios llamados “escuelas libres”, aunque no son escuelas en sentido estricto, puesto que no están homologadas.

Algunas familias cogen lo que les interesa de cada estilo pedagógico y hacen su propia versión. Hay familias que compran un currículum y lo siguen en casa como si estuvieran en la escuela.

La “flexischool”, lamentablemente, no es posible en España, pero confío en que eso cambie en un futuro no muy lejano.

Y luego hay unschoolers, que no siguen ningún aprendizaje dirigido sino que aprenden de la vida.


17. ¿Cómo funciona legalmente el homeschooling en el mundo? ¿Qué países tienen más tradición?

A nivel internacional, el homeschooling se fundamenta jurídicamente en base a la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos, cuyo artículo 26.3 otorga a los padres el “derecho preferente a escoger el tipo de educación que habrá de darse a sus hijos”. En un segundo nivel, las Constituciones modernas reconocen, también, el derecho a la educación y la libertad de enseñanza. A partir de ahí, cada país tiene su propio desarrollo de este derecho fundamental.

Los Estados Unidos, como es sabido, son pioneros en el reconocimiento legal del homeschooling, aunque cada estado tiene su propia regulación. Sólo en seis estados hay requisitos bastante estrictos, como la obligatoriedad de seguir el currículum, de registrarse, de presentar informes periódicos, etc.

Países como India, Corea del Sur, Botswana, e Indonesia reconocen el homeschooling y otorgan un alto grado de libertad para su ejercicio. En Japón, Colombia y Chile, como en España, la situación es de VACÍO LEGAL, por lo que es una opción posible pero poco habitual dada la inseguridad jurídica que conlleva.

El caso de Finlandia merece mención aparte, al igual que Japón. En Finlandia la educación en casa es legal y no se exige ningún tipo de requisito ni de control. Sin embargo, su sistema educativo está tan fuertemente arraigado que el homeschooling no es una opción para nada habitual.

Con más o menos requisitos, lo cierto es que todos los países permiten el homeschooling, excepto Alemania, donde está expresamente prohibido y los padres se exponen a penas de multa, de cárcel y de retirada de la patria potestad.

Quiero recalcar el hecho de que una excesiva regulación en cuanto a los requisitos exigidos puede desvirtuar la esencia misma del homeschooling. Por eso, muchas veces digo que el vacío legal español no es tan malo como a priori pudiera parecer.

Por otro lado, considero que los gobernantes deberían reflexionar acerca de la escuela como institución y evitar sacralizarla puesto que, ni es tan antigua, ni tan necesaria, ni tan efectiva como se nos ha hecho creer. Con ello no quiero decir que deba dejar de existir, pero que se obligue a todos a usarla me parece, cuanto menos, contraproducente.

18. ¿Qué diferencia existe entre homeschooling y UNSCHOOLING?

Hay muchas formas de educar en casa, y el unschooling no es más que una de ellas, quizás la más radical, la más desconocida y la más difícil de comprender. No es un modo de educar, sino una concepción del aprendizaje. Diría más, incluso: es una filosofía de vida y, por tanto, de crianza.

Se ha dicho que el unschooling se define por lo que no es: no es un método educativo, no se sigue un currículum, no se divide el conocimiento en asignaturas, no se utiliza material típicamente escolar como los libros de texto, no se enseña en formato clase, y las horas no se dividen en lectivas y no lectivas. Se trata de ver que el aprendizaje está en todas partes. Incluso cuando parece que no estás haciendo nada, estás aprendiendo porque ¡es imposible no aprender nada!

Cuando el unschooling hace “clic” en tu interior, ya no eres capaz de concebir el aprendizaje de otro modo. Pero tratar de hacer unschooling sin haberlo comprendido verdaderamente es muy peligroso. Se corre el riesgo de pretender dejar que los niños aprendan solos y no es eso.

Hay que acompañarles, hay que darles tiempo y atención, hay que estar disponible y hay que saber respetar los procesos internos de cada niño. Suelo decir que un “por cierto” es suficiente. Cuando tu hijo pregunta algo o, de algún otro modo, muestra interés por algo, puedes hablarle de ese tema, podéis investigarlo juntos, podéis tener conversaciones, etc. Pero hay que tratarlos igual que trataríamos a un amigo y no ponernos en la posición de superioridad del profesor ante el alumno.

Quiero matizar el asunto de los libros de texto y de las clases: si un niño unschooler quiere usar un libro de texto es muy libre de hacerlo y eso no significa que deje de ser unschooler. Un libro de texto es un recurso tan válido como una serie televisiva o como una excursión al campo o como una visita a un museo o como un curso en una academia de baile, de judo, de informática o de cualquier otra cosa.

19. ¿Es cierto que las universidades de Harvard y Yale tiene reservadas plazas para alumnos que hayan sido educados en casa? ¿Por qué motivos?

Sí, es cierto. Estas universidades aceptan a los homeschoolers a veces incluso con preferencia a alumnos de los institutos. Los jóvenes que son educados en casa tienen un elevado grado de motivación por hacer lo que hacen, ya sea dedicarse a la música, a las artes plásticas o estudiar en la universidad. Esta motivación, sumado a la libertad con la que han podido probar y elegir diversas técnicas y métodos de estudio, es lo que hace que sus resultados académicos, en no pocas ocasiones, superen al de los que han sido escolarizados

20. ¿Cuántas niños son educados en casa en España?

Al no haber registro obligatorio, es difícil dar una cifra, pero se habla de más de dos mil niños.

21. ¿Qué personajes famosos, históricos y actuales, estudiaron en casa?

Históricos hay muchos, precisamente por lo que antes comentaba, que la institución de la escuela no es tan antigua; en otras épocas no muy lejanas, lo habitual era educarse en casa, ¡es lo que se ha hecho desde la prehistoria! Pensemos, por ejemplo, en Mozart, Alexander Graham Bell, Albert Einstein o Thomas Edison. Algunos presidentes de los Estados Unidos, como Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt (los dos), Washington o Wilson.

También Chaplin, Tolstoy, Mark Twain y Agatha Christie, entre otros. Y, cuanto más te remontas en el tiempo, más fácil es encontrar gente que fue educada en casa y que ha pasado a la historia. ¡Jesucristo fue homeschooler!

Personajes actuales podemos citar unos cuantos: hay muchos actores, como Elijah Wood (Frodo Bolsón), Jennifer Love Hewitt (“Entre fantasmas”;), Miley Cirus (Hannah Montana), etc. Y otros personajes, como Christopher Paolini, el autor de “Eragon”, el arquitecto Frank Lloyd Wright. Por otro lado, educan a sus hijos en casa Will Smith, John Travolta, Garth Brooks, Chuck Norris y Jimbo Wales, entre otros.

Pero hay que tener cuidado al buscar este tipo de información en internet, porque no siempre es fiable.


22. ¿Qué 10 consejos darías a las familias que contemplen esta opción?

Informarse, leer mucho y tratar de contactar con otras familias. Esto es básico.

Además, hay que estar preparado para un cambio de mentalidad y hay que estar dispuesto establecer prioridades y a tomar decisiones en base a esas nuevas prioridades. Hay que ser flexible, hay que prepararse para dar explicaciones y, en cuanto a los niños, hay que ser imaginativo y buscar recursos.

23. ¿Qué asociaciones existen sobre este tema?

En España hay únicamente una asociación a nivel nacional, llamada Asociación por la Libre Educación cuyo principal objetivo es conseguir el reconocimiento legal del homeschooling en nuestro país.

A nivel autonómico, ha habido dos intentos de crear asociaciones en Aragón y en Valencia que no han llegado a buen término. La única que subsiste es la Coordinadora Catalana Educar en Familia que cuenta, creo, con unos cincuenta miembros.

24. ¿Cuáles son los autores de referencia sobre homeschooling?

Sin duda, John Holt, John Taylor Gatto y Sandra Dodd. También Ivan Illich es un clásico.

Conceptualmente, me quedo con Gatto. Pero Sandra Dodd tiene la experiencia de haber educado a sus tres hijos en casa, haciendo “radical unschooling”, así que tiene un enfoque más constructivo que Holt y Gatto, que son más anti-escuela.

25. ¿Qué libros recomendarías en castellano e inglés para profundizar en esta educación?

En español apenas hay literatura homeschooler. Existen dos libros editados por ALE. El primero de ellos, titulado “Razones para educar en familia” es un compendio de relatos de experiencias perosnales. El segundo, “Educar en casa día a día” es una obra más elaborada e incluye varios informes realizados en otros países.

Ana Mª Redondo, profesora de Derecho, publicó un libro titulado “Defensa de la Constitución y enseñanza básica obligatoria” en el que defiende la legalidad del homeschooling en base a la norma constitucional.

Por último, está mi libro “Educación y libertad. Una defensa del homeschooling como máxima expresión de la libertad educativa”, publicado en abril de este mismo año y al que seguirá mi segundo libro “Enseñar a Pescar. Educando en casa” que es un recopilatorio de artículos conjugado con parte de mi blog personal, donde relato mi propia experiencia educando en casa.

En inglés sí hay muchos libros sobre el tema, algunos, imprescindibles. John Holt y John Taylor Gatto son dos básicos (el “Dumbing Us Down” de Gatto es un libro que, literalmente, me cambió la vida). También el “Education. Free and compulsory” de Murray Rothbard me parece esencial para comprender de qué hablamos cuando hablamos de educación y de escolarización.

Para una primera aproximación, recomendaría el libro de Jan hunt “The Natural Child”, acerca de la llamada crianza a natural, que dedica un capítulo a la educación en casa.

Tammy Takahashi tiene un libro titulado “Deschooling Gently” que es una especie de guía para padres que desescolarizan y ahora acaba de publicar otro titulado “Zenschooling” en el que desarrolla este concepto, acuñado por ella misma y que es, en la línea del unschooling, una filosofía de vida aplicada a la educación.

Y sobre unschooling hay que leer a Sandra Dodd y “The unschooling unmanual” de Jan Hunt.

Después uno puede leer (o debería leer) sobre pedagogías y filosofías varias, pero eso ya es harina de otro costal.

26. ¿Qué webs recomendarías de familias que estudian en casa o sobre información general?

En español, sin duda, hay que recomendar el blog de Madalen Goiría que tiene recopilada muchísima información sobre el tema, aunque le falta la experiencia de haberlo vivido.

El blog de ALE es quizás más ecléctico pero por ello más vivo, al igual que el de Clonlara School.

Epysteme, aparte de su blog más oficial, tiene otro donde comparten los proyectos realizados por sus alumnos, así que es una buena fuente de recursos e ideas.

Para hacerse una idea de cómo es el día a día de una familia homeschooler, cualquiera de los blogs personales sirve (hay muchísimos) y, sobretodo, recomendaría darle una leída al Carnaval de Blogs que tiene una periodicidad mensual.

En inglés, es imprescindible el blog de los Cate, “Why homeschool”. “The Thinking Mother” es otro que vale la pena leer. Hay tanta variedad, con tantos estilos distintos, que lo mejor es ir de uno a otro a través de los enlaces o de los blogroll y que cada uno se quede con los que más le inspiren.


(Pinchar la imagen para ampliarla y poder leer la contraportada)

27. ¿Por qué el título “Educación y libertad”?

“Educación y libertad: una defensa del homeschooling como expresión de la libertad individual” es el título de la ponencia que presenté en el I Congreso de Economía Austríaca celebrado en 2008 en la Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, organizado por el Instituto Juan de Mariana.

De ahí nació la idea del libro, que no salió hasta dos años después. El enfoque no era exactamente el mismo, por eso cambié ligeramente el título. Y no se trata tanto de defender el homeschooling en si mismo como de defender la libertad educativa.

28. ¿Qué te ha llevado a escribir un libro de una modalidad tan minoritaria en España?

He escrito el libro que me habría gustado leer cuando empecé a plantearme educar en casa. Obviamente, no lo he escrito para ganar dinero, para eso tendría que escribir una novela al estilo de “La catedral del mar”…

Pero creo que es importantísimo que se le de difusión a esta opción educativa, que se conozca es el primer paso para que se normalice, primero a nivel social, cultural y, después, a nivel legal.

29. ¿Qué puede el lector encontrar en tu libro?

Es una aproximación general a la educación en casa. Trato de responder a las cuestiones más frecuentes: el por qué se hace, el cómo se hace, etc. Y también respondo a las clásicas objeciones que hace la gente desinformada: cómo socializan, cómo aprenden, cómo vas a enseñarle algo que tú no sabes, etc.

Por supuesto, aclaro cuál es la situación legal en España y en otros países. Y, finalmente, incluyo tres anexos: uno, escrito por mí, se compone de breves biografías de personajes que fueron educados en casa; el segundo, escrito por María Antonia Gomila, madre de tres niñas educadas en casa, es una reflexión sobre el tipo de educación que queremos dar a nuestros hijos; y el tercero, es un compendio de entradas de blogs que participaron en el Carnaval de Homeschooling.

Con ello creo que el lector de puede llevar una idea bastante precisa de la gran variedad de familias y de modos de educar en casa que existen.

30. ¿Dónde se puede encontrar?

Ahora mismo sólo se puede comprar en internet y en tres librerías de Menorca.

Muchas gracias por esta completa y útil información y seguiremos atentamente tus pasos y todas las novedades de la educación en casa en España.

Sitio oficial de Laura Mascaró: Sin escuela y Tarkus Kids

Más entrevistas a Laura Mascaró: Diari Menorca y Revista Namaste

Más información sobre homeschooling en los medios: La Vanguardia, El País, El Mundo, El Diario Vasco

En El Blog Alternativo: Artículos sobre educación

High Schoolers: Libertarian President Inevitable, Desirable

Posted on July 25, 2012 at 2:00 AM

Libertarian-supportive youth such as this election fairness team in Latin America influence attitudes, say peers.

A survey conducted by volunteers of LIO has determined that over 60% of high schoolers in the US, Mexico and Costa Rica believe that a Libertarian President and members of the Supreme Court is inevitable and desirable 'within two generations'...and a large group (over 30%) that some form of no-less government or voluntary government system' should be generally tried, especially (over 55%) at the local level, and was likely 'inevitable at least locally.'

Most said they were not aware of the problems with ballot laws and third parties and thought that removing such laws while putting more libertarian-based people in local office was therefore paramount. A near-majority said the same for Green candidates--in many countries the Greens are widely supported by those identifying as Libertarians.


Over 20% said they would vote for a 'qualified and experienced libertarian candidate with a record of results', 5% for 'a libertarian candidate not experienced as a libertarian,' and over 50% for 'an experienced libertarian candidate that I knew or was working on my favorite issues who was qualified and experienced with a record of results.' There was little difference among respondent subgroups.

Over 70% said they 'would like to see some Libertarians in local' public office, especially appointive boards 'working on specific issues.' They identified Libertarians as focused on rights, choices, data and correct process, and being fair. Over 50% of these thought the main value of Libertarians in public office was 'helping me in protecting consensus and social gains in rights and choice' and over 30% 'starting new specific voluntary programs or ideas and protecting the defenseless.' Over 20% thought Libertarians were the go-to people for seeing 'the law and fairness were followed.'

Of the 60% over half thought they would see a Libertarian President as 'most of the Libertarian ideas were already put into place' and 30% when 'there were more local libertarians making change' to which voters could refer. Over half of these thought a Libertarian 'would be great in a severe national crisis' such as an invasion or ending an extremist takeover. This comports with pro-Libertarian Presidents abroad arising after leading anti-Communist popular revolutions.


Over 60% agreed that legislators were 'living in the past' and 'should not block libertarian initiatives among people who want to use them.' many cited legislation on drugs, sexuality, small business, and the web as irritants. Many noted that the web was becoming an engine of change and agreed 'people are increasingly doing as they please whatever institutions say.'

Among those saying libertarians were inevitable a majority felt the world was improving, among those who self-identified as anti-libertarian most thought the world was getting worse. The libertarian inclined were less optimistic about Libertarian inevitability and the progressive most optimistic.

Respondents tested about 30% each libertarian, progressive and conservative inclined, and  under 10% authoritarian. Over 3% in the US and Mexico and 10% in Costa Rica self-identified as 'consciously libertarian or pro-libertarian' and of those chose 'modernist and voluntary choice/rights oriented' as a libertarian description  in over 50% of the cases, with 'tolerant/less or no government' as the next most favored by some 30%. This means most people who vote Libertarians do not see themselves as necessarily Libertarian but like what libertarians are doing. In addition, 21% in the US and Costa Rica self-identified with Libertarian, though half had generalized sense of the approach.

Over 70% agreed that 'voluntary communities of libertarian character or law-waiver options that would allow me to choose libertarian alternatives' e.g. that allowed complete personal and market freedom should be legal or tried more. A similar number of those who said they were aware of media and academic portayals of libertarianism or libertarians thought they were for over 30% often too grossly incorrect and did not 'even know basic facts' and over 40% thought fair but 'too general and infrequent.'

In addition, over 80% agreed that 'having Libertarian candidates improve the race' more than any other candidates with Greens next;  and 'help me even if they lose by showing where people support more choices and defining the issues.' This comports with staements by opponents that libertarian candidates forced them to be better candidates, document specifics and consider or implement libertarian-direction policy. Of these, over 90% said laws limiting small parties were 'wrong and should be abolished,' and 'harm the right to a fair choice of the voter' comporting with large majorities supporting the view when put to a vote.


In Mexico, a Libertarian-oriented party candidate recieved some 2% of the vote, and in Costa Rica a growing Libertarian-Liberal themed centrist party regularly clocks in over 5% vote totals and has some 10% of the legislature. In the US Libertarians are strong at the local level, and in 2002 the USLP identified as a major problem that not enough people could be trained as libertarians to meet demand. The LIO has registered a project to promote use of Libertarian tools by all officials and mentor Libertarians interested in non-partisan adlective (e.g. appointive advisory boards ) office, with an emphasis on local work. 

Both self-identified libertarians and libertarian-leaning reported less use of drugs than conservatives and guns than progressives, suggesting the trend continues where libertarians are simply more self-disciplined and rights-focused than others. Those saying they were from minority, working class/union, or low-income backgrounds tested both with higher self-reported  IQ's and more libertarian, suggesting a growing social shift.

Of those who self-identified as libertarians, over 50% said they were aware of libertarian publicity or for libertarian ideas but came based on a communication from a friend, teacher, or handout. The rest were about divided between those who learned from a campaign or were 'in a libertarian-aware' family or circle, with the first somewhat higher in Costa Rica.


Finally, 10% of the Libertarian-inclined respondents said they would consider getting involved in local public office, and 20% in social entrepreneurship or community volunteering at some point. This suggested opportunities in asking people to start in office or volunteering as opposed to merely asking for their support in long term growth.

Over 2300 respondents were surveyed in each country in 2 independently run studies of over 1100 respondents each. Questions were formulated based on pre-survey of focus groups. The data is suggestive that as Libertarian concepts spread they acquire increased acceptance, and the massive and rapid growing cultural change wrought by LIO supporters and libertarians in general...and what Libertarian-oriented or direction contact groups can expect in their own countries as they organize interest.

 In 1970 LIO volunteers tested US respondents and found most people rated as fascists/authoritarian (over 40% for more intrusive government and less economic and civil rights' and of which most agreed that  'some form of dictatorship would be best for the US' ). A similar study by the University of Michigan isolated similar data. That number is now under 10% suggesting a strong change towards participation and away from authoritarian cultures in all areas.

A study for India and China is underway. Ranges are rounded down to country minimums and for purposes of ease of presentation. We thank the volunteers  who helped arrange the study.

Libertarian Re-Privatization Spreads, Now In All Countries

Posted on May 16, 2012 at 2:25 AM

Re-privatization, first popularized by LIO Fellow Philosopher, Legalist, and ManagementConsultant Peter Drucker is in all nations including N.Korea, but some confusion exists on the term.

Some 4 decades after introduction by LIO thinkers, the use of re-privatization of public services is now confirmed by LIO in every country in some form, with new actions announced daily, e.g. a recent push by Uzbeklistan to privatize some 500 agencies.

First popularized in Peter Drucker's Age of Discontinuity in 1969,  LIO curator Michael Gilson outlined a complete program after consultation with him for all areas tied to UN Rights about that time that influenced Libertarian-direction platforms, and soon many groups were working to spread the concept. (As a consultant Gilson was also involved in many pioneering re-privatizations from Zoos to school systems). There is some confusion as the concept spreads, and LIO uses 3 stages to migrate from complete coercive control by government entities, usually in the form of state monopolies or favored oligopolies:

  1. Private provider use. Caution must be exercised lest this devolve into fascism or crony capiatalism. Home and small group self-provider options are key.
  2. Legalization of optional providers with right of refusal.
  3. Public entities that are non-taxa/non-monopoly based called community entities.

In no sense is the necessary sell-off of public assets to private entities part of the approach, though it may be indicated. In general transfer to autonomous and user-friendly trusts of public government entities is preferred; improper government and public assets should not be conflateded. Libertarian privatizatiuons must be conducive to rights: to use a popular example among Libertarians, purported slavery privatizatuiion would be of doubtful value. In addition, Libertarians encourage an array of voluntary entities with preference to volunteer providers and co-ops.

According to the LIO curator, "The model is to move from censorship with one public library towards  free speech with many private bookstores and a true public library maintained e.g. by an endowment, not coerced taxes.Keep that in mind and you won't get confused by programs touted as privatization that are really shifting control to political cronies." For this reason, many Libertarians use 're-privatization' to indicate focus on legalizing private and private-public options with right of refusal, not necessarily selling programs to corporations. The term 'personalization' to indicate more consumer and personal options was introduced by consultants working with LIO in 1985.

Consultants involved say that typically Libertarian-direction privatizations initially lower costs, increase quality/choice, and better other desirables as safety by a factor of 10. In many cases, such as the interenet and PC's, government takeovers were discontinued or prevented after laws that blocked development were removed or modified--such as prohibitions on having computers connect to phone lines.


Regular reports on privatization progress are maintained at www.reason.org and experts say that there is no public program that has not, somewhere, been re-reprivatized on a voluntary or more choice-friendly basis. Unusual or instructive examples are also tracked at the co-editor blog at www.TheLibertarian.Info See: http://libertariansmile.wordpress.com/category/all/topics/privatization/  (We suggest you read from the bottom).

10 Powerful Libertarian Citizen Tools Bring Safer Community

Posted on April 27, 2012 at 1:10 PM


LIO Libertarians are encouraging expanded use of once controversial and now increasingly standard “anarcho-capitalist’ or user-driven more non-coercive/user-run tools that have been key in dramatically cutting offenses, targeting corruption and reducing conflict--but are concerned governments are attempting to co-op the methods that provide an option to centralized and unaccountable systems.(Above: Volunteer neighborhood watches, the Hand program, citizen arbitrators, , simplified crowdsourcing crime-stopper alerts, peer standards for police, rehabilitative-restorative ;prison;' system in Belize)

First proposed in LIO workshops starting in the 70's, the tools are spreading worldwide driven by citizens increasingly realizing justice is a consumer good best provided without officious monopolies, or simply seeking responsive, participative, and accountable options that they can choose.(Most libertarian economists reject public-good or similar economic justificaytions for restrictions as logically incoherent and self-serving; the issue is becoming moot as volunteer groups confound so-called classical economics with libertarian comprehensive solutions focused on low-cost and wide coverage for all). They address the 'cycle of conflict' from beginning to end by emphasizing prevention, pro-action, non-punition and citizen choice--coupled with focus on increasingly non-punitive handling actual harms, not lifestyle regulation. They include in input-output order:

1. Proactive Anti-bullying and anti-hitting campaigns to short-circuit coercive habits in youth derived from the Libertarian non-coercion and rights-respect pledge

2. An anti drug and other prohibition police movement to end use of the bad example of prohibition rackets

3. Citizen involvement such as volunteer unarmed neighborhood watches and stopper's programs; in due course a return to unarmed private and community-based policing

4. Citizens targeting actual harms for action with public safety providers ("broken windows") in conjunction with mentoring programs

5. Non-punitive dispute resolution run by neighbor mediator volunteers

6. Legalization of citizen law education and simplified contracts for most activities free or at low cost. Development of rapid attorney mediators and small-claims courts; including via legalization of attorney advertisements and comparison data by citizens

7. Private certification to assure police standards by peers from other departments (www.CALEA.org ) –most police departments still cannot meet the basic standards. This contrasts with coerced official certification/regulation that often disguises statutes to drive options out and entrench corrupt monopolies or bureaucracies, say Lib economists

8. Legalization of low-cost or free police specials, private security, citizen patrols, and user-directed community policing

9. A growing citizen worldwide judge and Copwatch movement to both target misbehavior and address opportunities for betterment

10. Restorative justice approaches focused on short sentences, compensation and rehab, and eventual prison abolition--and not clogging the system with the insane, charge-stacking victims, lifestyle or passion offenses, etc. often more amenable to social worker intervention; als: often rates are jimmied by officials to justify expenditure increases not target problem reduction.Cross-comparison by citizen groups across borders and demand for open and measurable data by offici

LIO activists warn against misuse of the tools to e.g. increase sentences, create a witch-hunt atmosphere, or bogus programs meant to divert attention from official misdeeds or push religious, bigoted or commercial agendas. A good f irst step is to determine what offense rights actually are and develop common ground action items with local groups.

TOOL: Meet with local neighbors and officials to discuss how options can be brought in and kept in user control.

Libertarian Anti-Draft Movement Increasingly Victorious

Posted on April 26, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Countries in Red still enforce the practice of enslavement by conscription. Those in blue or orange do not or only in emergencies, or are moving towards abolition.

LIO Libertarians are pleased at the advances in rolling back coerced conscription to militaries or to so-called 'national service,' a project spearheaded by LIO Fellow Nobelist Milton Friedman--and are spreading the word to continue the process that began in the 1970's.

Dr. Friedman headed a commission that greatly reduced the 'draft' in the US, and met with many leaders and local groups to encourage the best practice that has moved the world from near-universal drafts to their abolition or decline in many countries.

LIO encourages dialogue to end all forms of forced service, which many Libertarians feel creates an atmosphere of official bad example in the need to respect rights, in all nations.


RESOURCES: Present status



Conscription by country — Examples Country Land area (km2)[49] GDP nominal (US$M)[50] Per capita

GDP (US$)[51] Population[52] Government[53] Conscription[54]

China, People's Republic of 9,326,410 $5,745,000 $2,459.43 1,336,718,015 Communist State No, Legal under Constitution but has not yet been practiced in history

India 2,973,190 $1,099,000 $972.68 1,147,995,904 federal republic No

United States 9,161,923 $14,620,000 $45,958.70 313,232,044 federal republic No[106] Draft abolished in 1975 by President Gerald Ford; however Males between 18-25 need to register with the U.S. Selective Service System.

Indonesia 1,826,440 $695,100 $1,844.53 245,613,043 republic sources differ

Yes, selective conscription (FWCC[69])


Brazil 8,456,510 $2,024,000 $6,915.40 203,429,773 Federal Republic Yes

Pakistan 778,720 $174,800 $872.88 187,342,721 federal republic No

Bangladesh 133,910 $100,100 $481.36 158,570,535 Parliamentary Democracy No

Russia 16,995,800 $1,290,000 $9,124.49 140,702,096 federation Yes (Alternative service available[citation needed])

Japan 374,744 $5,391,000 $34,402.26 126,475,664 constitutional monarchy with a parliamentary government No

Mexico 1,923,040 $1,004,000 $8,218.88 113,724,226 federal republic Yes

Philippines 298,170 $188,700 $1,582.17 101,833,938 republic Yes. Legal.[94] Practiced selectively and only rarely.[95] However, military training (known as Citizenship Advancement Training or CAT, formerly known as Citizen's Army Training) is required as a prerequisite for graduation from high school. CAT is considered a subject in high school that lasts up to 2 hours per week.

Egypt 995,450 $127,900 $1,592.08 81,713,520 republic Yes

Germany 349,223 $3,306,000 $40,315.05 81,471,834 federal parliamentary republic No (suspended for peacetime by federal legislature effective from 1 July 2011[78])

Turkey 770,760 $729,100 $9,322.83 78,785,548 republican parliamentary democracy Yes

Iran 1,636,000 $337,900 $4,497.11 77,891,220 theocratic republic Yes

Thailand 511,770 $312,600 $3,776.0 66,720,153 constitutional monarchy Yes

France 640,053[76] $2,555,000 $35,240.62 65,102,719 republic No (suspended in 2001[77])

United Kingdom 241,590 $2,259,000 $45,626.38 62,698,362 constitutional monarchy and Commonwealth realm No (except Bermuda Regiment[105])

Burma 657,740 $35,650 $285.60 53,999,804 Military Junta sources differ

Yes but not enforced as of January 2011[update].[64][65][66][67][68]

No (FWCC[69])

South Africa 1,219,912 $354,400 $6,423.04 49,004,031 republic No (ended in 1994, formalized in 2002)[99]

Korea, South 98,190 $986,300 $19,514.81 48,754,657 republic Yes

Spain 499,542 $1,375,000 $35,576.37 46,754,784 parliamentary monarchy No (abolished by law on December 31, 2001[100])

Argentina 2,736,690 $351,000 $8,662.99[56] 41,769,726 Republic No. Voluntary; conscription may be ordered for specified reasons; per Public Law No.24.429 promulgated on 5 January 1995.

Poland 304,459 $470,000 $10,911.71 38,441,588 republic No[96]

Algeria 2,381,740 $159,000 $3,948.01 34,994,937 Republic Yes

Canada 9,093,507 $1,564,000 $42,886.91 34,030,589 constitutional monarchy that is also a parliamentary democracy and a federation No

Nepal 143,181 $15,110 $333.09 29,391,883 democratic republic No

Malaysia 328,550 $219,000 $7,513.71 28,728,607 constitutional monarchy No

Venezuela 882,050 $285,200 $9,084.09 27,635,743 federal republic Yes[107][108]

Saudi Arabia 2,149,690 $434,400 $13,622.68 26,131,703 monarchy No

Korea, North 120,538[84] $28,000[84] $1,800.00[84] 24,457,492[84] Communist state one-man dictatorship[84] Yes[84][85]

Taiwan (Republic of China)[102] 32,260 $427,000 $16,768.11 23,071,779 multiparty democracy Yes (alternative service available[103])

An all-volunteer force is planned by the end of 2014, but conscription will remain in practice thereafter.[104]


Romania 230,340 $158,400 $7,451.95 21,904,551 republic No (ended in 2007[97])

Australia 7,617,930 $1,220,000 $44,474.51 21,766,711 Federal Parliamentary Democracy No (abolished by parliament in 1972[57])

Syria 184,050 $59,630 $1,954.98 19,747,586 republic under an authoritarian military-dominated regime Yes

Chile 748,800 $199,200 $10,058.50 16,888,760 republic Yes

Netherlands 33,883 $770,300 $46,389.35 16,847,007 constitutional monarchy No. Legal, suspended since 1997 (except for Curaçao and Aruba[citation needed]).[93]

See also: Conscription in the Netherlands

Ecuador 276,840 $56,500 $3,211.76 15,007,343 republic Yes

Angola 1,246,700 $85,810 $5,003.43 13,338,541 Republic; Multiparty Presidential Regime Yes

Cuba 110,860 $57,490 $4,000.34 11,087,330ã Communist state Yes

Greece 130,800 $302,000 $29,384.60 10,760,136 parliamentary republic Yes

Belgium 30,278 $461,300 $43,648.01 10,431,477 Federal Parliamentary Democracy under Constitutional Monarchy Conscription was abolished as of 1 January 1994 under the so-called Delacroix Bill of 6 July 1993[59])

Suspended (conscription suspended as of 1 January 1994)[citation needed]

Rwanda 24,948 $5,693 $335.10 10,186,063 republic; presidential No

Bolivia 1,084,390 $19,180 $1,446.41 10,118,683 Republic Yes (when annual number of volunteers falls short of goal[61])

Hungary 92,340 $132,300 $13,901.01 9,976,062 parliamentary democracy No (Peacetime conscription abolished in 2004[79])

Austria 82,444 $366,300 $45,598.77 8,217,280 Federal Republic Yes (Alternative service available)[58]

Switzerland 39,770 $522,400 $56,111.06 7,639,961 a confederation only in name, legally and structurally a federal republic Yes (Alternative service available[101])

Israel 20,330 $201,300 $25,191.86 7,473,052 parliamentary democracy Yes

Bulgaria 110,550 $44,840 $5,409.09 7,093,635 Parliamentary Democracy No (abolished by law on January 1, 2008[63])

Libya 1,759,540 $77,910 $9,451.85 6,597,960 Caretaker government as of October 2011[update][89] Yes

Jordan 91,971 $27,130 $2,644.89 6,508,271 constitutional monarchy Yes. The government decided in 2007 to reintroduce conscription, which had been suspended in 1999.[83]


El Salvador 20,720 $21,800 $2,931.75 6,071,774 republic No. Legal, not practiced.

Denmark 42,394 $311,900 $57,039.71 5,529,888 constitutional monarchy Yes (Alternative service available[72][73][75])

Finland 304,473 $238,000 $46,769.47 5,259,250 republic Yes (Alternative service available)

Singapore 682.7 $233,900 $35,427.12 4,740,737 parliamentary republic Yes

Norway 307,442 $413,500 $84,595 4,691,849 constitutional monarchy Yes

Bosnia and Herzegovina 51,197 $16,320 $3,246.78 4,622,163 Emerging Federal Democratic Republic No (Abolished on January 1, 2006.[62])

Croatia 56,414 $59,920 $11,430.32 4,483,804 presidential/parliamentary democracy No (abolished by law in 2008[70])

Moldova 33,371 $5,357 $978.36 4,314,377 republic Yes

New Zealand 268,021 $138,000 $31,124.18 4,290,347 parliamentary democracy No, Conscription Abolished in December 1972.

Lebanon 10,230 $39,150 $6,276.90 4,143,101 Sources differ[88] No (abolished in 2007)[87])

Lithuania 65,300[90] $35,730 $10,725.96 3,535,547 parliamentary democracy No (Suspended on September 15, 2008[91])

Albania 27,398 $11,800 $2,949.57 2,994,667 Parliamentary Democracy No (abolished in 2010[55])

Jamaica 10,831 $13,740 $4,032.18 2,868,380 constitutional parliamentary democracy No

Kuwait 17,820 $117,300 $44,421.22 2,595,628 constitutional emirate Yes

Macedonia, Republic of 24,856 $9,170 $3,646.55 2,077,328 parliamentary democracy No (abolished in 2006)[92]

Slovenia 20,151 $46,440 $22,933.99 2,000,092 parliamentary republic No[98]

Gambia, The 10,000 $1,040 $386.77 1,797,860 republic No

Swaziland 17,203 $3,165 $2,591.20 1,370,424 monarchy No

Trinidad and Tobago 5,128 $21,200 $19,590.99 1,227,505 parliamentary democracy No

Cyprus 9,240 $22,750 $27,014.79 1,120,489 republic[71] Yes (Alternative service available[72][73][74])

Qatar 11,437 $126,500 $74,688.97 848,016 emirate No

Djibouti 22,980 $1,139 $1,694.29 757,074 republic No

Bhutan 47,000 $1,397 $561.89 708,427 Constitutional Monarchy No[60]

Luxembourg 2,586 $52,430 $104,451.69 503,302 constitutional monarchy No

Malta 316 $7,801 $18,460.73 408,333 republic No

Maldives 300 $1,433 $2,842.58 394,999 republic No

Belize 22,806 $1,431 $4,327.67 321,115 Parliamentary Democracy No. Military service is voluntary.

Bahamas 10,070 $7,538 $21,547.17 313,312 Constitutional Monarchy with a parliamentary system of government No

Vanuatu 12,200 $721 $2,146.52 224,564 parliamentary republic No

Grenada 344 $645 $6,557.67 108,419 parliamentary democracy No (no military service)

Tonga 718 $301 $1,873.06 105,916 constitutional monarchy No

Seychelles 455 $919 $10,621.21 89,188 republic Yes

Aslam Effendi Remembered as Afghan, Pakistani Libs Help Target Crime, Conflict Reduction, & Corruption

Posted on April 25, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Activists are standing room only at workshop with LIO Friends in Afghanistan on tools for rights by the AELSO which sponsors legal and market studies.

Afghan libertarians and democracy activists, galvanized by LIO Fellow Aslam Effendi, restored basic democracy by reviving the loya jurga or traditional national assembly of household and clan representatives and elders in defiance of the US planners who called the country 'unready' despite 'democracy creation' propaganda, said critics.

LIO Friends in Afghanistan and Pakistan are focused on basic open democracy; spreading ideas on market choices and tools so citizens can combat terrorism, crime and corruption through education and community self-help; and developing networks of leaders to encourage dialogue--and working wonders despite skepticism.

Key projects are centered around initiatives such as Afghanistan's AELSO group, which is doing yeoman work in helping make laws, historical stuidies and basic tools available, and the Alternate Solutions group in Pakistan, which is also developing interest in more advanced voluntary approaches.

As these groups have held recent well-attended events, world Libertarians are recalling a catalyzing figure: LIO Fellow Aslam Effendi.

Called the Gandhi of that region, the advocate of voluntary and conscious solutions and alternatives wrote best-sellers, poetry quoted through both countries and worked tirelessly on the ground to spread tools for organization. The US invasion unfortunately derailed efforts to oust religious extremists, he felt., but people are continuing the long term work. His work was highly influential in his studies of non-governmental (in the comon sense ) customary legal systems.

When the US proposed that Afghanistans were not ready for democracy despite claims it was sending in troops to 'build freedom,' Effendi began a campaign that resulted in use of a traditional assembly or jurga which set forth a pathway to change everyone could support. Effendi pointed out that change is often 3 steps forwards and 2 backwards, and as education spread people would perfect the system from below and local communities, or federalism. Effendi advocated a non-punitive legal system and pointed to many local tribes that successfully used such methods by focusing on mentoring and prevention.

An effort by LIO Observer Benazir Bhutto was temporarily halted with her assasination, but her party continues democracy efforts (LIO supports no parties per se but maintains connections with many interested leaders)...but the efforts of any party or group are deeply dependent on the work of educational and research groups so citizens can take better direct action.

Those interested in bringing young leaders to Libertarian non-partisan conferences should contact www.isil.org which has a program for the purpose and e.g. profiled the ASI good work: http://www.isil.org/resources/fnn/2004spring/pakistan-activity.html  


OPERATION DIGNITY: As Libertarian Tools Help Crime, Poverty Plummet, Some Experts Claim Bafflement

Posted on April 21, 2012 at 1:15 PM

LIO fellow Mayor Art Olivier used libertarian tools to drive statistics down over 40% and energize a North American movement for citizen crime watches and non-punitive mediation and intervention.

In the 1970's LIO sponsored a series of confidential workshops and roundtables with activists and public leaders to focus on offense and poverty reduction. It sent advisories to many scholars and news outlets outlining what was happening that were typically ignored. Now, as offense statistics nosedive and the UIN poverty reduction goals are being rapidly exceeded, some  'experts' claim bafflement as they drone on about how libertarianism will lead to a crime-ridden gangster society of corporate-market induced poverty.

Think again. The roundtables focused on these key steps:


Encourage citizen teams to get open metrics and crime data, meet with officials, and target the bad example of widespread police abuses and offical corruption, and:

  1. Empower citizens to know the data: actual law, use contracts and community projects, and have access to attorney advertising and small claims or mediative courts; de-emphasize lifestyle offenses while targeting minor 'broken window' real harms that fester into 'crime waves' for prompt location and corrective action such as domestic abuse, schoolyard bullying, and delinquent attacks on property then being ignored by officials. Promotion of anti-bigotry, mediation volunteers, and meetings to defuse tensions that might express as offenses; study of how simple architectual or other design might induce offenses.
  2. Focus on non-punitive and proaction options such as alternate sentencing, rehab, and at-risk mentoring while ending prohibition-based offical 'legal rackets' based on prohibitions of e.g. gambling, drugs, lifestyle behavior, and use of petty laws; promote citizen watchdogs on correct police and  judicial behavior and procedure, and actual policing results with use of technology to monitor intersections and police vehicles and reduce false tickets etc. by police.
  3. Introduce non-coercive and responsive community alternatives--community policing, private police specials, volunteer police and unarmed watches, etc; re-empowered community monitors: juries (e.g. ability to take notes) with clearer judicial instructions to juries,   neighborhood associations, neighborhood mediation and dispute resolution. 

The result has been to shift from unaccountable officials focusing resources on bigotires and punition away from actual work while keeping citizens in the dark  to citizen choice and involvement to prevent the problems in the first place. 


Encourage citizen teams to focus on reducing the conditions, not just effects of poverty typically created by officials themselves by restricting private action--and setting goals and info share to empower, not 'help' the poor while refocusing public programs on efficient income help, not politicized bureaucracy, including:

  1. Job one: moving from dictatorial styles to democratic feedback and more market- and especially small entrepreneur- friendly laws (or better yet, removal of hindering laws). Example: reducing time to get small business authorization from 3 years to near-zero or removing the regulation entirely. At the same time, massive reductions in product costs as politicized and coercive central regulations are removed that in many cases raised prices over 900% with poor quality: Cheaper food, air and public travel; etc.
  2. Empowering unions and consumer associations through transnational information exchange focused not on seeking officialized coercive benefits but actual co-operative results through e.g. open barganing.
  3. Removing legal traps on the poor and peer assistance: Laws prohibiting international private and peer help or loans; easing home ownership and micro-lending; easing mutual help communities and co-op ventures; ending tax rat/inflation traps (as inflation pushes people to higher tax brackets, the poor and iddle class are paying rates meant initially for millionaires) ; numbing application procedures and arbitrary standards and prevent people from getting public or private help; ending regulations in public assistance programs that tax any serious self-improvement at in some cases 150% rates, etc. --while proposing more voluntary programs. We encourage greater use of voluntary endowments that provide basic income and pre-paid health, school, etc..

Emblematic of what is going on may be the current Libertarian-led efforts in the USA to expose how the homeless are being created or harmed by stautes e.g. preventing people from helping the homeless with food or free homeshares, regulations prohibiting homeless-initiated co-ops and tent cities; deliberately making applications for help difficult, etc. while a temporary surge has been created with what critics denounce as legal interference in normal foreclosure procedures coupled with ignoring fraudulent paperwork by large 'Too Big to Fail"  banks in turn getting large sums of government money to 'help the foreclosed.'

 The LIO continues to encourage group and solo activists worldwide to suggest these lines of dialogue in bringing these matters to effective zero, what may be called Crime Abolition and Poverty Abolition--with increasing use of proactive and voluntary user tools.


Form a local team to get pertinent data and begin dialogue for common ground improvement areas.


Past LIO Advisory Chair:Memoirs, Articles for Coming Years

Posted on April 21, 2012 at 2:20 AM

 Dr.Ralph Swanson helped found Sister Cities, worked on the UN Declaration with H.G. Wells, and marched with Martin Luther King Jr. Having joined LIO's predecessor organization--the Libertarian-Liberal League-- in 1939 as a teen to combat racism in Florida, he knew key figures and those who had known LIO figures of the XIXth and early XXth century--such as Miguel Lemos, air pioneer and developer of Gilsonite Samuel Gilson, Robert H. Goddard, Ramon Franco plus  principals in  influential LIO Fellow projects such as the Personal Rights Association , the Liberal International, the British Interplanetary Society, and many others.

Past LIO Advisory Chair Dr. Ralph Swanson shared on his Facebook today that he is done editing or approving extensive notes for his memoirs, some 200 articles, and thinkpieces on the civic movement to be published in future years. These include several articles with David Nolan, Dr. John Hospers, and others; suggested pre-posts by the hundreds for LIO blogs; and expose of improper activity by bad actors in the libertarian rights movement coupled with advice to budding groups worldwide.

He has been retired in recent years which, though handling various age-related health issues, has given him time to work on the materials, he said. He is on a local citizen advisory council but no longer makes public appearances..Over the years he played key roles in founding and administering many groups. Dr. Swanson worked for many years in engineering and in intelligence interrogation matters, and was active in the destruction of the once predominant Ku Klux klan which at the time had a massive influence in the US.

The memoirs are centered around what he sees as 10 key meetings in the last 70 years--including a meeting with Eisenhower and JFK for demilitarization and Sister Cities, planning of Libertarian rights parties, and the recent LIO OPERATIONS DEMOCRACY & DIGNITY.  The LIO and other projects he has designated will see to final format of the materials, including introductions to several LIO-based activist manuals and more, at this website.

Quips the twinkling octagenarian to LIO fans: "Stay Vertical! There is work to do."

LIO: Libertarian Candidate & Public Official Standards

Posted on March 30, 2012 at 8:50 PM

LIO Fellows in appointive non-partisan public office such as Julie Chorgo, Dr. Ralph Swanson, and Dr. R. Holcombe have helped bring and spread homeschooling, in-home 'manage your mail' post e-offices and private 'public parks', and massive tax relief  combined with service improvements respectively--through high-minded approaches, courtesy, and presenting the many Libertarian-interest options to start dialogue. Now all LIO supporters can continue--and lead-- the worlwide process in a more systematic and unified way that also improves public service and engages all public officials as it raises public expectations--and interest in voluntary public programs.

LIO: Libertarian Candidate & Public Official Standards

The LIO re-isues the following  standards for candidates and public officials seeking to apply its Libertarian approaches and as guide for proponents of voluntary alternatives conducive to rights in public administration, and those interested in improved public service.


These have been approved by the founders of the modern movement, and LIO is registering a non-partisan public administration arm with a sister peer association for those generally interested in Libertarian approaches in public  programs.  

It should be remembered that LIO sees change as happening primarily through peer-to-peer and opinion-leader/catalysts public awareness, direct democracy and the fruitful dialogue it brings, and market or jury action; however, public office models and pilots are needed and stabilize change. This personal arm of the movement founders curated by LIO is being developed but people are joining here: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Libertarian-Program-Government-Officials-Association-on-Libertarianism/221275797927517  Resources useful to this approach will be uploaded there from time to time, along with appropriate best practice shares..


The LIO encourages citizen involvement, and for those supportive of Libertarian-based programs or community in particular all candidates to first concentrate on adlective direct (volunteer or small group appointment) or appointive office; and if for election to focus on e.g. running by petition to meet and listen to the people and so run low-to-no budget non-attack campaigns; and so avoid unseemly contributions, including from public entities. Dialogue towards public offices that are volunteer and unpaid is encouraged.

We encourage all Libertarian supporters to seek volunteer public service, then appointive public office or board monitoring leading to that at a minimum. Libertarian governance occurs when those conversant with libertarianism, guided by pledged libertarians, are in those positions supportive of those developing change on a private or private of public character basis.


Libertarian supporters come from all walks of life with a tendency towards women and minorities; and the very young or elderly. Studies show Libertarians in elections draw equally from all political leanings but also bring out mostly new voters from independents or the center.

In general, 1 Libertarian in public office influences 300+ of his or her peers in public offices.Libertarians typically soon lead or serve in leadership positions in the boards or bodies they serve given collaborative voluntary approach; iron courtesy and refusal to take slight;d often superior sense of market, legal and parliamentary processes; and ability to mediate as a neutral figure with something in common with all views.


In general, our  and USLP studies have determined that elective:

  • Candidatesmust run 3-4 times before winning, Libs slightly less so
  • Candidates focused on proven concrete voluntary/rights solutions do well
  • Candidates with record of community involvement and appointive boards do best
  • 1%-10% of Libertarian groups are in public office, so Libertarians have participation and electability rates 30 or more times higher than other parties.

In other words, trained Libertarians are actually more electable than opponents or the general public: and even if they lose build formidable support groups that soon drive policy thanks to several runs, especially by petition seeking contact info. They continue to do well maintaining good contact and attacks on them backfire against the support.


LIO encourages dialogue on devolution or legalization of formal service governance to local and voluntary entities respectful of rights; of sound endowment fund management;  of methods for non-use of services, and of open, participative process.

Examples would be based on proprietary or intentional communities, town-hall "Jeffersonian" democracy, and local associations welcoming voluntary and usewr driven optioons. In such communities most public office is adlective direct--volunteers set by the common meeting--or adlective appointive from those. Ideally there should be little competition for offices and they should be volunteer. Elective offices should be few and focused on competent appointment, fair public hearings, and opportunities to better rights through e.g. devolution.

'Informal societies' dialogue and implenetation such as on an anarchist co-op model as is being increasingly done, or unincorporated entities using a variety of market vendors is also encouraged.


LIO encourages dialogue on primary action to open the elective access and democratic transparency and particpation. In most cases, this should be the prime task as an appointive "farm team" is built. Direct Democracy/DDIR is included in this focus, especially as allowing direct constitutional initiative and plebiscite review of legislation.. In this rergard the Swiss and Florida USA models have much to adapt for those seeking models. Partisan Elective candidacies not supporting this initial task or general education while good should not become distractions as has happened in many cases, and are not even particularly germane in some countries and jurisdictions.

For example: We encourage dialogue that all Elective offices should be free of ballot requirements not directly germane to the office such as candidate fees; or also that especially small parties not acting as mass parties of social mediation should seek to be able to register at will with full control over adherents.

In cases such as the US where the Electoral College has been 'captured' by older parties due to legislative tricks in most states, proportional election of Electors as exists in some state is suggested as a key focus, along with MMP.

Public endowment or unrestricted private financing of elections that is voluntary is welcome; yet still should be avoided by LIO supporters and advocates of rights in general for reasons of focus as explained below. Parties have experienced problems with 'moles' or opportunists seeking funds, mis-applying them, and attracting offical scrutiny and disruption.Candidates who make it their business to meet the public, speak at campuses and community bodies, etc. tend to do best in terms of electability and quality of their service.


Over 95% of public offices in the world are adlective appointive: Citizen task forces, appointive advisory boards, neighborhood associations, judges and the like. Many high offices e.g. the US Presidency are technically appointive.. Appointive offices are a logical start, involve modest time and non-frightening to most people; and an excellent way to get involved in the process. As they are in close popular and community leader contact, "What the legislature proposes the appointive disposes."

We encourage general community involvement by all citizens, and for LIO supporters to in general focus first on locating and serving well in public service volunteer, then appointive, then if desired preferably non-partisan elective office.Those in elected should continue their good work in appointive.


We encourage a posture that is non-partisan and consensus in manner and offices sought, or non-confrontational MMP if elective (i.e. these at-large legislators do not take from other parties but attract Libertarian-interested non-voters as was seen in a Florida test in 2002). Attacks are not encouraged: LIO dialogue is to focus on the problem, not the person. No criticism of a program should be made without a Libertarian-interest and preferably voluntary solution at hand as an alternative that a) has public momentum, and/or b) defends a minority rights-group working alongside. 


LIO supporters and public officals in general should use the 3 C's:

  • >Character: Honesty including care of public funds and courtesy.
  • >Community: Low-budget campaigns, running by petition,  community advocacy
  • >Competence: Understanding of office sought, its local policy history and enviroment, presentation of range of Libertarian-interest options for user choice


Candidates may focus on these 3 areas of LIO interest:

These promote accountable and participative  democracy, market and community choice, and legalizing or easing choices of model Lib-based communities respectively. We recommend books such as Seamless City (Baker) Voluntary City (Beito) and Art of Community (MacCallum) respectively as good for orientation; and www.governing.com and www.reason.org and Lib community best or promising practices shared via LIO for respective policy tools, many already underway and adaptable to all communities.

The platform if for elected office should be simply "I will work courteously with all to uphold rights and better programs, seeing that voluntary and Libertarian programs receive a fair hearing where we can cut taxes while bettering choice and quality." (Or equivalent.)

We encourage an additional 1-3 issues as may enjoy public momentum involving voluntary-interest tools specific to that public office.What is most important is after illustrating how voluntary solutions might work, the best platform is dialogue based on the recommendations or statements of need by the public that can be solved by bettering rights, voluntary choices, or particpation.


These will be comprehensively issued later ( a version is under testing with select people in public office) but the format is one of dialogue improvement, organic and usabke by all public officials in a collaborative fashion: The 'Gilson 3 R's' in wide use--namely for all public programs officials will read the measure under study and budget line by line and with colleagues:

  • Review: For legality, need user/home friendliness and comprehensiveness
  • Remove: Legal blocks to voluntary dual action from volunteers to co-ops to firms
  • Revise: Continual improvement by open choice, refusal waiver and citizen review

An example would be what LIO Friends and supportive libertarians have done so far in Florida:

  • Reviews empowering home schools and parent-boards in public schools; capture of efficiencies leading to better teacher pay by sharing tools;
  • Removing many blocks to private and home-based options and life learning/co-programs such as joint High School/College learning and credit by exam;
  • Revisions as funding scholarships with a dedicated lottery and review by home school boards of the parents themselves with an effective schooling waiver by user directed standards; and free form simplified standards for all private schools along with encouragement of e.g. union or  industry-based certification.

Candidates or officials--or citizens-- are urged to use the 3 R's as a brainstorming framework on general betterment and voluntary/rights options and building consensus.


LIO encourages supporters to get involved in public offices here ranked by level of importance and value to dialogue and social stabilization, and legalization or use of voluntary policy (the first 5 are generally adlective and mostly appointive):

  1. Informed citizen/public board watchdog; Juror-Elector/Election Monitor
  2. Neighborhood Association or Local Board; Charter, constitution etc. task force
  3. Services Board: Libraries, Roads, Parks, Postal, Housing, Scool etc.
  4. Mediation: Sister City, License, Zoning, Magistrate, Advisory...
  5. Service Officer: Constable, Elections, District Attorney...
  6. Non-partisan Elected or local elected e.g. Soil & Water, School, City...
  7. Partisan/High Elective or advisory



Under 1-2 participants in public office per year per 1.3 million population, 90+% in non-partisan elective suggests something is being done incorrectly. People in multiple political offices are encouraged.

Certain things assist the process:

  • Lib Peer sharing and co-training/mentoring is highly valuable along with continued updates to relevant publics; Sharing Libertarian-interest sites and materials with non-Lib peers in public office is critical.
  • Political attacks are never recommended and should be phased out as distracting from implementation and consensus-building.
  • Bargaining against oneself by proposing "moderate" solutions or diversion into constitutional or populist issues is not germane to this process: Focus should be on the Dallas protocol ("Dallas Accord") of presenting the range of Libertarian solutions from modest to complete and letting dialogue find the way based on user needs.Removal of an agency is not per se Libertarian (though it may be relevant as to directional debate); voluntarization by removing coercive components such as secrecy, coercive taxes or statutory monopoly or advantage is.


These standards work by starting dialogue and self-assessment. Please print out and review with your team to circle areas of action and improvement, and devise action items.Please share your successes in public office with your world peers at the Facebook or direct to its facilitators.

The LIO encourages dialogue centered on mediation by rights and localism parties or civic groups that are attentive to voluntary models, but endorses no party or candidate but welcomes all interested in the dialogue for betterment.


The LIO through registered projects will expect use of these standards by those advocating LIO eco-community or civic platforms set by the curator; and they're strongly recommended to all advocates of libertarian-conversant or general liberal federal democracy as maintaining a high- minded, participative, best-practice and therefore effective approach. Those not using the standards will in due course be outflanked by those who do, especially as they see that public information tending to demand for accountability, particpation, and choice increases.

Candidates or officials may evidence that they will work with the standards as best they can by linking here or to sites to be set to the purpose.

NOTE: The foregoing was reviewed by Mr. Gilson, Dr. Hospers, Mr. Nolan, and Dr. Swanson; and builds on a working paper for iimited distribution of Mr. Gilson and Dr. Rothbard, and a review by LP Political Director R. Crickenberger.


I LOVE Libertarians! 'The Libertarian' World Lifestyle Blog Up

Posted on February 21, 2012 at 6:00 PM


Starting with 1400 hits in a sneak preview for the humorous-but-serious LIO blessed Libertarian Lifestyle Blog The Libertarian

  • The BLOG shares SMILE news items, movement perspectives and recondite history, and Lifestyle tips premised on the LIO long-range view that 'Libertopia' is spreading--and will accelerate as readers share the blog links and items, along with those of the many resource links to interest friends and one's circle--and better one's life.The format is link plus amusing (one hopes) or provocative comment; the idea is for LIO fans and others to get something useful a day with a chuckle and a little inspiration in a worldwide, pro-multicultural, positive Lib  atmosphere.
  • Many pro-Libertarians have complained of over-political, US centered, or attack-based sources and expressed the need for one to serve as core for a sense of world Libertarian-liberal community Living. After initial positive comments on our Twitter, the blog was underway. Additional features for sharing work in other languages and LIO Fellows at work are under review.
  • The Twitter (  https://twitter.com/LIBIntOrg ) will continue to share additional user SMILE-interest retweets plus LIO bulletins, while an associated Facebook "I Love Libertarians" allows additional reader-driven sharing for potential inclusion and immediate reader use.
  • Regular features will include  'awards' for self-defeating legislation and ridiculous anti-Libertarian attacks vs cultural influence, and challenges to cultural mis-information;  periodic focus on TED and other cultural tools of interest--and focus on inspirational world Lib activists, personalities with great SMILE tools, and LIO Friends or fans in public office
  • The Libertarian continues the inspiration of  late LIO Fellow William Sidis. Libertarian champions David Nolan and John Hospers were key in developing initial stories and format. Perspectives do not necessarily present LIO views, but are there to ease sharing of beneficial information; and the venture is independent.
  •  It is free, and we hope you will click it daily, share and as we like to say: Enjoy!

Libertarian John Zube, anti-Nazi activist, in 1st Gilson Award

Posted on September 7, 2011 at 4:10 PM

 John Zube and little friend acclaimed by world praise.

Berlin-born Australian John Zube, a modest workingman who faced Nazi persecution, tirelessly preserved and shared rare Libertarian-interest documents, and mentored a budding modern movement, has been honored with the 1st Paul Gilson Memorial Award, with the honorary rank of Most Senior Libertarian advisor and LIO Fellow.

A Palm Leaf Strand of Peace will be preserved at LIO records in commemoration.

The honor is named after the father of the current curator, the well-connected and affable Paul Gilson, who led the first US Troops into the Nazi  concentration camps at Ohrdruf, was decorated at the Battle of the Bulge, proposed an array of programs from Sister Cities to disarmament for space exploration, and helped lead the LIO predecessor, the Libertarian-Liberal League, to growing if discreet influence in the tumultuous XXth century--aided by cronies or supporters such as John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Mildred Loving, Salvador Madariaga, H. G. Wells, and boon companion William P. Rogers.. Mr. Gilson expressed the desire for an eventual honor exemplifying an LIO motto: Silentes, silentes, silentes.

The honor is  recommended  by a confidential group of senior LIO Felows after consultation with peers to be bestowed at least once every 6 years on Libertarian leaders retired from public life who've safeguarded the movement's ideals  at great personal cost. The honor has especial poignancy as Hitler singled out the Libertarians of the day along with Jews for attack in his woirk Mein Kampf as inimical to his socialist fascism.

Zube toiled for years painstakingly copying and tracking documents at his own cost, preserving them on microfiche, delighting with his singular perspectives, and always urging Libertarian supporters to new heights. He shares:

" My main interests are panarchy, as proposed by De Puydt, 1860. Many relevant texts are on www.panarchy.org  & some on www.butterbach.net

Full monetary freedom, as proposed by the Swiss, Jewish & German school, partly represented on www.reinventingmoney.com  - I am working on A to Z compilations on both subjects, towards handbooks.

An ideal declaration of all genuine individual rights and liberties. Towards it I compiled an anthology of over 130 private human rights drafts.

Peace through the realization of all genuine individual rights and liberties. My 2 books on this and one by my father, Kurt H. Zube, 1905-1991, are on www.butterbach.net

Speeding up the process of enlightenment, by and among libertarians. a digitized book draft of this from Jan. 2010, is available from me as email attachment. 1779 PEACE PLANS issues on microfiche. Wish to see all freedom, peace & justice titles published on external H.D.."

Mr. Zube has microfiche items for interested libraries and researchers at basically cost. He may be reached via Facebook.



LIO Advisor John Perry, 9/11 Martyr, Recalled

Posted on September 7, 2011 at 7:30 AM

African-American Libertarian Civil Rights attorney and activist , admired Police Officer, ACLU board member John Perry died saving lives during the September 11, 2001 attacks at the World Trade center.


We respectfully remember posthumous senior Libertarian International Organization board advisor John Perry, whose death was hailed as "emblematic" on national TV among the 9/11 martyrs.


Officer Perry was last seen charging up the stairs to the rescue while others urged him to turn back seconds before the building fell. He was 38.




He wasn't even on duty. He was leaving the police to continue his legal and activist work in his growing interests in civil rights, malpractice issues, Libertarian education, and citizen diplomacy for Islamic-Western and other topics of world peace in what friends called a remarkable career. He had stopped in to see to paperwork when he was advised there was an emergency and volunteered to help. It is not thought he was even aware that the attack was associated with Islamic religious extremists.


Perry was a beloved figure in Libertarian local circles, working at a Libertarian book store and emphasizing the non-political and cultural aspects; he had just advised on a pamphlet for LIO on Libertarian concepts A to Z, an example of how he gave readily of his time. His interests in art included impromptu skits and acting roles on TV's Law & Order. The kind but firm attorney, amateur linguist, sports and science enthusiast, and cryonics publicist was also a close friend of another LIO advisor-observer no longer with us, John Kennedy, Jr. He was well-admired for his incorruptible reputation and was recognized for his heroism by the police department.


A scholarship fund has been set up by friends:  http://www.raiseyourvoice.com/Perry-index.html


Article: http://www.odmp.org/officer/15820-police-officer-john-perry


Since 2002 this article is re-posted every year.




LIO: Libertarian OPERATION DEMOCRACY in Mid-East, Elsewhere Driving Problem Nation Change

Posted on September 1, 2011 at 1:45 AM

LIO fan and former Libertarian  in the Costa Rica Congress Otto Guevara, left, meets recently with Chinese officials to examine better free trade and other common ground affecting Central America and Asia.

Fall 2011 Update: On July 17th, 2010, with the expansion of LIO friends, many pro-LIO activists with Libertarian and Liberal supporters began “Operation Democracy” with 3 dialogue goals:

1. Move the 41 remaining problem nations to federalist secular democracy options

2. Start Lib book clubs, Libertarian-interested communities, parties in all countries

3. Direct Democracy (DDIR), jury rule, and voluntary choice in all nations

LIO Operation Democracy builds on the prior and ongoing LIO Trident initiative begun in the 1950’s with Ezra Benson, and re-oriented in the late 1970’s, to encourage in all countries:

1. Citizen Diplomacy through Sister City Boards, core open democracy standards

2. Starting with ISIL and Atlas , Libertarian-oriented and LIO think tanks

3. World workshops and info-shares on using technology to street organize

The LIO curator advises—as always-- that all action and demonstrations be peaceful, respectful of public officials and forgiving of any wrongs, and work initially through solidarity/awareness-raising via personal and union/professional networks. Appeals to foreign help are not condoned, except for medical supplies. Purely defensive small arms in extreme cases sanctioned by the UN, while understood, are not helpful or advised, as these tend to attract big-power interference, terrorists, or military-industrial complexes. The LIO Friends helps share activist key items.

Much initial work was facilitated by the late David Nolan, lead founder of the US Libertarian Party. Unitarian and other lines of contact were explored. Relevant LIO Public Safety Group participants met simultaneously with leaders or their representatives in problem countries starting December 21, 2010 in a show of firmness to advise errant officials their time was up and suggest avenues of exile or reconciliation. 500,000 sheets or communications on organizing were distributed by community leaders; other civil society groups were discreetly encouraged to move forward. The aim was as a first milestone massive change in the Mid-East by the anniversary of 9/11 and the previous LIO ‘push’ that eased the fall of coercive Communism and many right-wing dictators.

As of September 2011, progress is ongoing and satisfactory, as LIO Friends and supporters at our Facebook and Twitter, many doing the work, are aware: Besides the autonomous and natural long-term work of the think-tanks and others, many have started or joined with e.g. social and phone network communication projects touching an estimated 2 million opinion-leader users in 51 countries. In no sense is LIO or users intervening in the affairs of other countries, but making people aware of voluntarist approaches and lines of dialogue to users secured UN Rights as a non-partisan resource. The curator and LIO cultural board, while aware, manage no details.

No action was taken in nations such as China except already continuing improvement, given current policy of eventual federalism, more market choice, and full democratization. Protests should address specifics working with officials in a frank and fraternal fashion wherever democratic processes are underway, and focus especially on system betterment.

Work will continue until all goals are achieved: Recent attacks by media and bloggers ridiculing or portraying Libertarians as: against democracy, oblivious to current protests, anti-Muslim, ineffective, helps fanatic radicals, creates chaos as in Somalia, etc. or that protests are driven by the CIA (presumably some are), are a triumph of US or extremist aid, etc. are disinformative.



> http://www.libertarianinternational.org/apps/blog/show/6084703-lio-libertarians-in-1st-international-conference-to-help-open-last-authoritarian-countries

> http://www.libertarianinternational.org/apps/blog/show/5590381-islam-libertarians-lead-charge-

> http://www.libertarianinternational.org/apps/blog/show/6130254-libertarian-dialogue-direct-democracy-in-all-nations

> http://www.libertarianinternational.org/apps/blog/show/6533908-foreign-policy-2111-x-prize-projects-as-nasa-eyes-stars

> http://www.libertarianinternational.org/apps/blog/show/2943173-lio-head-libs-drive-citizen-foreign-policy-

> http://www.libertarianinternational.org/apps/blog/show/5492930-libertarian-romanians-ended-communism-lead-reforms