-By Jordan Freshour

A Cop Blocker in Kettering warns drivers of an OVI checkpoint

“Southwestern Ohio is the center for civil disobedience activism in the world right now.” – Mark Edge, Free Talk Live, April 1st, 2015.

Wait, what? Not New Hampshire with the Free State Project? Not in the Middle East, where protests and civil war are still erupting years after the Arab Spring? Not in DC, a Mecca for civil demonstrations and home to hundreds of national and global non-profit headquarters? Not in places like Los Angeles or Texas, where a new era of technological innovation is bursting forth?

While it’s difficult to accurately compare the efficacy of various methods used by groups to promote social change, Mark Edge did not speak out of context in lauding this specific region of the United States. In the radio segment mentioned above, he was interviewing Virgil Văduva about his own acts of civil disobedience. In particular, Văduva’s intentional violation of an anti-panhandling ordinance in the nearby city of Xenia. When asked if he agreed with Mark’s assessment, he said:

“I do agree. I have friends who live in California who complain that they are the lone activist in their large town and are unable to grow the liberty community. In essence they are alone in the middle of a crowd. I’m not sure what is causing this phenomenon here in SW Ohio, but I remember just a few years ago being the only Cop Blocker within 100 mile radius. Since then the number of activists and libertarians has exploded. While I would love to take credit for some of the growth, the reality is that there have been quite a few events in the area that served as catalysts for the message of freedom. Ohio Open Carry, the shooting of John Crawford and Tamir Rice have been huge factors in bringing new activists on board, and the recent shooting at the University of Cincinnati was another reminder of a growing police brutality problem. The police alone are responsible for the growth in the numbers of local activists. In essence they are the largest creators responsible for building our community.”

Văduva isn’t the only Ohio activist who believes the police have directly contributed to the local growth in activism. Micah David of Yellow Springs, Ohio – writer, editor, and designer for Counter Current News – shares similar thoughts:

“Yes, I think Ohio is ground zero in terms of police abuse, brutality and racism. A lot of times people will assume coastal cities, or a large midwestern city like Chicago would be the focal point of such police abuses. But Ohio has a unique history with regards to racism and injustice, as law enforcement and government reacted in very deliberate ways to the influx of freed-men and women who came across the Kentucky border. As such, many so-called minority communities know Ohio to be little more than an extension of the south, with some of the most segregated communities in the nation. On top of that, the middle-American nature of Ohio suburbs has lent to a particular flavor of Ohio activism, and reaction by law enforcement and the government, even going back to the Kent State Massacre during the Vietnam War.

So in a sense, activists come after the situation that is created sociologically in Ohio – they are borne from it. And at the same time, the law enforcement response to activism in Ohio is borne out of the sociological “Northern South” vibe that is Ohio. It is that vibe, or climate that leads to incidences such as the shooting of John Crawford, Tamir Rice and Sam Dubose, or even earlier, Timothy Thomas.”

To get closer to the target of racial police abuse, I spoke with Talis Gage (also from Yellow Springs), an activist and organizer with Black Lives Matter Miami Valley and the Ohio Organizing Collaborative. He said everything “jumped off” after the murder of John Crawford III in Beavercreek, Ohio. Talis echoed Micah’s assessment when answering if police targeting has been a catalyst for uniting the black community:

“In Yellow Springs it definitely has, because there really isn’t a black community here. So we are now all working together collectively in different ways – on the radio, on HRC [Human Relations Commission], and I was running for village council. I would say [the shooting] made different organizations more active and much more aggressive in the black communities. The Ohio Student Association was very active in getting the Beavercreek police to release the tapes from the Wal-Mart shooting. They were also outside of the Beavercreek police station for days protesting. We tag teamed with them to shut down Wal-Mart, and then the Beavercreek Mall.”

Outcry over the murder of Crawford isn’t the only response from leaders in the nearby black community. Talis went on to explain how BLM Miami Valley has quickly become a group which works with others to feed the poor and homeless, provide clothes to those in need, clean up the neighborhood, educate their neighbors, and host potlucks for the public.  “Everyone is doing all they can within their organization to wake up the black community to stand strong as the Kings and Queens they originally were,” said Talis.

“Waking up” individuals to the reality of the classist warfare waged by the government is a major challenge for activists of all stripes. Constant mobile connectivity to one another has been the single greatest tool for the nonconformist in infiltrating the minds of others with new ideas. Heather Lucas – an Awakened Cincinnatian, and council member for Unite Ohio – has worked with more than a dozen Ohio groups, linking them to each other. The Militia, Ohio Patriot Bikers, libertarian chapters, Pin Ups for Patriots, NORML, 3% Militia, and Columbus Anonymous are but a few allies. She credited social media for the success of networking and growth among like-minded people, saying:

“Activism in my opinion has become much easier for everyone due to social media. I think for one the instant access to stories, info, and causes have caused “normal” people to have to look at things they wouldn’t have normally. So they join a group, or start their own.”

Having instant access to information is vital to spreading the word about events and ideas, but social giants such as Facebook are only one element in the Buckeye dissenter’s tool kit. The effectiveness of Heather’s endeavors to unite various Ohio efforts increases with the availability of new technology designed to facilitate counter culture. Apps such as Bambuser, Wickr, and Cell 411 can be found on the smartphones of revolutionaries statewide, the latter having been developed by Văduva specifically for the use of activism. Virgil (a cryptology professional) believes advances of this kind are precisely the silver bullet for government tyranny:

“As a crypto-anarchist, it’s evident to me that technology is making the ideas of liberty virtually impregnable to government tyrants, and that’s an empowering realization. This is why I am focusing on building even more tools to empower people to subvert the state, whether it’s through adopting currencies like Bitcoin, embracing free markets, or subverting State surveillance. We are barely toddlers in this world and we are just now learning how to use technology to be truly free.”

It should be noted these kinds of technology are available across the world, but southwest Ohio has a unique environment. It is a place where innovators are focusing their implements on freedom, and the principles of the people living there are predisposed to take advantage of inventions which empower the individual. Where similar movements in other areas fragment due to infighting between egos, those in Ohio have learned how to use ego to their advantage. Justin King, journalist, and editor for The Fifth Column opines:

“Ohio’s activists seem to have adopted an informal cellular structure. There are hundreds of small groups that are self contained. Each of these groups does a great job of making the other groups aware of their actions. This means everybody supports each other. The small group sizes allow more people to have egos. If there is one large group there are only so many top positions. People of influence end up arguing. Small groups allow people of influence to abstain from an event they don’t agree with without destroying the overall movement. It cuts down on infighting because the “cells” are free to do as they choose. Nobody is jockeying for position.”

Justin has a fitting resume for a gonzo journalist, having been a military contractor, bodyguard, a “smuggler,” a federal inmate, and so on. He offers a unique set of skills for other activists. “I’ve been waterboarded, I’ve conducted counter-surveillance for activists, I’ve investigated dirty politicians for groups, and basically anything that requires a bit of playing dirty. I [..] bring tactical experience to the movement.” Justin knows to maximize his own impact, strategically aligning with specific people and events is important. “…it boils down to choosing your battles carefully,” he said. “Let’s say somebody is done wrong by a police department, but they have a massive criminal record. Ideologically it’s still an offense, tactically don’t waste the resources on a person that isn’t relatable to the rest of America.”

That last statement might be controversial in other circles of activism. But it’s not in Ohio. When activists there see a cause they like, they support it. When activists disagree about a cause, they don’t support it. And when activists think there is a better way of doing something, instead of criticizing others, they form the solutions themselves. Such is the story of Awakened Cincinnatians. Richard Brewster, an AC member, touched on this when I inquired to how the group had formed:

“Actually I started it. I loved the idea of Anonymous: How everyone can be one. I went to a few Occupy Cincinnati events and saw how they couldn’t get along – the left stayed to the left, the right stayed to the right. There was really nothing for us Awakened People, who don’t fall for the left/right nonsense. After arguing and being kicked out of the local Occupy [Cincinnati], and all the Patriot groups, I decided we needed our own. I made the group on Facebook. […] Once numbers were decent we [began holding meetings]. Ever since we have kept the ball rolling picking up new people with every event we do.”

Events arranged and promoted by the Awakened Cincinnatians have taken the Queen City by storm, attracting mainstream media attention, and the support of the most widely-known organization to focus on police accountability: Cop Block. At a recent September 19th protest – organized by AC to call attention to the murder of Sam DuBose – several Cop Block journalists were in attendance, including Ademo Freeman, CB’s co-founder. As one of the most influential anarcho-activists in the country, I was curious to his take on the Ohio brand of activism. When asked what surprised him the most from his time spent there, Ademo articulated the volume of hard-working individuals:

“Whether it be CopBlocking a checkpoint, running websites, creating videos or smartphone apps, someone in Ohio is doing it. I would say that they’ve all energized, inspired and provided hope to me in some form. From their energy, tactics and the diversity of such, it has been most beneficial to myself – and hopefully to those who view our/their work/efforts.”

Freeman is no stranger to the work being done in Ohio. Upon leaving New Hampshire a year ago to spread the message of police accountability nationwide, he made a temporary base in Cleveland in preparation for the rest of his journey. “I’ve been lucky enough to work with and meet many, some I knew before arriving – like Valerie and DEO; while others like Virgil, Micah and some of the CB offshoots (Dayton CB, Greater Cleveland folks and so on) I’ve gotten to know while CopBlocking,” he said. During his time visiting the state, new chapters were formed in Dayton and Beavercreek. Other chapters, such as Ohio Valley, Columbus, and Zanesville were strengthened by his collaboration with Columbus activist, Valerie Petrichor, whom with I also spoke.

Valerie has been involved with Cop Block since it’s inception, forming multiple chapters in and near her suburban Columbus home. Working for police accountability before Cop Block had evened formed, her efforts are reflected (in part) by a hometown which suffers far less police misconduct than cities of comparable size. I asked her a similar question as I did the others, “Is there anything you believe makes Ohioans more receptive to the message of freedom?”

“Individual thought. People who think on any level other than unique individual thought will typically not understand the need for freedom or accountability. The exception being those who believe they are part of some “movement”. Finding like-minded individuals who want to work toward shared goals is great – necessary, even. However, believing in a “movement” is just a way to continue groupthink passively and avoid truly unique thought. In Ohio we have what is probably one of the strongest, if not the strongest, [group of] activists in the US.”

Being one of the few women planted in the trenches of the fight against police brutality, I wondered if Valerie thought her femininity was a trait she considered a strength. Oddly enough, she didn’t. “It’s just a circumstance,” She said, playing down the question. “If anything, it makes what I do easier than it would be for a man. People tend to respect me and my gender is probably part of the reason. I think being female causes me to be perceived as less of a threat.” 

Though it may be true the police underestimate the strength of a principled woman, fellow Ohio activists do not. Individuals such as Heather and Valerie are not only freedom fighters in the public arena, but also in the home raising the next generation of world-changers. In wrapping up my case for Ohio being ground zero for activists, I wished to unearth that lesser-seen side of activism. Knowing where to look, I asked Jamie Văduva (married to Virgil), if she would round out my story. She obliged.

Jamie is a member of Libertarians of Southwest Ohio, artist, caretaker of her family’s farm, mother of four, and a homeschooler. Though not as visible as other activists, her efforts to promote freedom are the most selfless of type. As principled and hard-working as any liberty-minded person, she labors to raise her children as lovers of freedom and humanity, while spreading a message of love and kindness to those around. She offered the story of Christopher McCandless as one inspiring tale which shaped her values as teacher, Mom, and wife:

“I just started reading books about survival and people living simpler lives: Christopher McCandless, Henry David Thoreau, Everett Ruess and many others. Extreme stories that challenged my thinking. We gave away most of our furniture, and sold our new cars and 5-year-old house to get an old house in the country. All because God and family were what mattered. Not things, not money and mortgages, but our time together. And to be able to experience having animals and grow food, have bees, et cetera – that lifestyle goes with living a liberty or Voluntaryist life very much.”

Referencing Thoreau’s message of simplicity, only what’s truly important matters in her home. She proudly sees herself as an activist for “the little things in every day life.”  She added, “[Our kids] get to see first hand voluntary interactions between friends and acquaintances. Helping others and they help us…we have each other’s backs or do things to help because we care. Each person has something different to offer.”

Activists are stereotyped in many ways, often in a cold manner. However, those in southwest Ohio come off as the most devoted  – and caring – humans I have encountered. This may be the secret to the robust and diverse community of liberty-lovers in the Buckeye State. In closing, Jamie speaks directly to what I believe is the essence of these people:

 “I can only be myself which is someone who is drawn toward the positive. I don’t pretend everything is perfect. But my place here is to keep reminding everyone to have good hearts, and to try to bring out the softer side in people. To make them smile, and see it’s all about being free and happy with the people you love and care about. Live…just be yourself and do the things you love. Don’t be afraid to stand up for what you believe in. And remember to be a nice person. Sometimes something as simple as a smile can change someone’s world and you don’t even realize it.”

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

A Michigan family which had dreams of camping during the summer in the great outdoors was horrified when state officials seized their six children simply because they were temporarily living in tents, Off The Grid News has learned.

The nightmare experience for Christopher and Antonia Hernandez began May 19 when Otsego County Sheriff deputies and a CPS official took their children, and ended June 10 when their children were returned after the parents won a court ruling based on the fact the mother and children are eligible for enrollment in the Tlingit Native American tribe. The federal Indian Child Welfare Act makes it more difficult for state officials to separate Native American families. Michigan has a similar state law.

If the family had not had the Tlingit link, the case still would be ongoing, with the children still in foster care.

But the removal never should have taken place, Christopher and Antonia told Off The Grid News, which has read the court documents – one of which criticizes the family for not having electricity or a water source. The family was near a state park and had purchased a pass to shower and bathe there. The parents also had a generator.

They had been living in the tents for nine days when police arrived.

“The government has tried to standardize what a home is and what a home must have, without consideration for if the children’s needs are being met or not,” Christopher and Antonia said in a joint statement. “This was not a case of neglect, but a case of the government telling us how we have to raise our children — that we must have running water, we must have electricity and we can’t stay in a tent for the summer. To the government it makes no difference if the children are happy and healthy. We need to conform to their idea of normal or they can take your children away.

They added, “Taking children from families needs to be limited to clear cases of neglect and abuse. It should be every parent’s right to raise their children as they see fit, unless the government can prove that what the parent is doing is actually harming the child.”

The children, ages seven months, 2, 4, 6, 15 and 17, had been living in the three tents – two of which were large nine-person tents – when the controversy began.

“Our family decided to go camping for the summer to a 10-acre property we are buying,” Antonia said, noting they do own a house. “We had intended to stay the summer while we finalized plans on what we were going to do with our lives. We cannot say we would have stayed the whole summer due to the fact Christopher is donating a kidney to his mother and we may have been called home to do the surgery at any point. If this were to happen we planned to return home for the duration of the surgery and the recovery period however long that was.”

The parents simply “wanted our children to experience the outdoors” – and perhaps see if they wanted to live off-grid permanently.

“We purchased several chickens, a couple of turkey and a couple of ducks so we could try and provide a portion of our food needs,” Antonia said. “… We set up one tent as storage for our tools, as I do a lot of woodworking. Another tent was set up as a closet to house our clothes and diapers, etc. As you can imagine, with six children we have a lot of clothes and other miscellaneous items. Our third tent was set up as a kitchen.”

The family also had:

• A natural gas stove the parents converted to propane for cooking food and heating water.
• Six five-gallon containers of water they refilled at the local Walmart. They also were collecting rainwater.
• Several solar lights.
• A generator.

On May 19, the parents left the property to do laundry at a laundromat, as well as to buy food and some fencing for the animals. The younger children were left in the care of their 15-year-old son, who is nearly 16.

“When we arrived back, the Otsego County Sheriff’s Department was at the property claiming to have received a report of squatters on the land,” Antonia said. “We provided documentation of our right to be on the land, which was verified the next day by the land owner.”

A CPS representative also was on the property, and had concerns about the living conditions. CPS made four allegations, according to the official court document:

• The family was not in a “stable living environment.”
• The family had no electricity or water source, and was using kerosene as a means of heat.
• The children were playing in the woods, cared for by a 15 year old.
• The youngest child had a diaper rash.
• The 17-year-old girl, who has Cerebral Palsy, was cold.

Antonia told Off The Grid News she knew of the diaper rash and it had been healing. The 17-year-old girl had a temperature of 96, but Antonia said this was after sheriff deputies and CPS “had the tent flap completely open for at least an hour and a half.” When she was admitted to the hospital it was 97.7.

“I witnessed her without covers for at least part of that time,” Antonia said. “I was told by her case worker that the doctor who examined her said she was very well taken care of.”

As for the children playing outside in the cold, “none of the children were displaying any signs of being cold — shivering or teeth chattering. As a matter of fact, they kept taking off their coats, which to me indicates that they were not cold.”

None of the allegations, he said, warranted removal of the children.

“We were given no other option to either return to the house we own or to obtain a hotel room until we could go to court,” she said. “By law, they are required to a reasonable effort to prevent or eliminate the need for removal as required by law.”

The case is now closed, and with their children back in their care, the parents have decided not to return to the property.

“It is a sad that they were out of our care for 21 days because we were camping,” she said.

Published by our friends from Off The Grid News.

by Ryan Griggs

Julie Borowski addresses why she isn’t an anarcho-capitalist in a June 12 post. She thinks that theorizing about how a private ownership society would work amounts to guesswork, that even minarchy is a dream, and that libertarian radical debate over things that don’t involve current events is “petty” and “unrealistic.” She ends her piece with a cop-out by appealing to a live and let live content creation philosophy (you do you, radicals). I respond below.

Some people who endorse limited government (minarchists) really dislike radicals who endorse abolishing government (anarchists). The minarchist rationale is never to find a fault in anarchist logic or philosophy. Borowski herself has “read [anarchist Murray] Rothbard” and she even thinks he “made a lot of sense.” But thorough, rigorous logic does not satisfy the ardent minarchist. To the minarchist, the anarchist position is only worth adopting if evidence of its viability can be observed.

Typical of the minarchist position, Borowski writes that despite her agreement with Rothbard, she still has a few questions on “how such a [free] society would work in practice.”

She does not provide any examples to clarify the statement. Perhaps she hasn’t read the literature. Hans Hermann Hoppe has addressed the concept of private production of defense. Bob Murphy elaborated on law outside of the state. In fact, Murray Rothbard, who Borowski claims to have read, has laid out the economic rationale as to how the production of all goods and services takes place in an unhampered market. The Seasteading Institute has even put together a report on how services typically thought of as “public” would be provided in a free, Floating City in the future.

None of this is good enough for Borowski. In fact, living in a free society is “farrrrrr (sic) from being a reality here. Heck, even minarchy is pretty much a dream.” What is Borowski’s evidence of this claim?

Typical of a minarchist, she thinks it’s because libertarianism isn’t popular in politics. It shouldn’t be surprising that a philosophy that condemns aggressive violence as immoral is unpopular in an institution that exists to employ aggressive violence.

But this insight is immaterial to Borowski. She cites the view that Mitt Romney lost in 2012 due to the fact that he was viewed as too libertarian (Borowski leaves out who exactly viewed him this way). Her second–and last–piece of evidence that the masses have a poor view of liberty is that Harry Reid chided 2013 Tea Party Republicans as anarchists.

The mainstream-DC opinion of a war-profiteering financier as too libertarian and the whining of a lifetime political hack is not sufficient to evidence the claim that most people are “no where close” to adopting minarchism or libertarian-anarchism. Regardless, convinced that the masses are pre-disposed to disdain libertarianism, Borowski is on a mission to persuade them of the benefits of incremental tip-toeing away from totalitarianism. In this way, philosophical depth is sacrificed for popular breadth.

Minarchists might ask themselves what this type of shallow analysis will do when the time comes to implement a free society. Is it possible to convince an independent that marijuana should be legal to consume? Sure. Is it very likely that the same person will be convinced that all education services should be privately provided? Doubtful. Suppose the minarchist tinkerers successfully convince all average Joes and Janes of the easy stuff, like marijuana legalization, but never bring up the “petty” and “unrealistic” issue of private education. The result of this minarchist activist program is simply to make semi-socialists out of independents. Precisely zero progress toward bringing about a free society is achieved with this strategy, even if it is successful.

Minarchists in general and Borowski in particular are guilty of an important contradiction. They don’t see the point in engaging in anarchist theorizing, yet they bemoan the fact that there are no current, obvious examples of successful anarchist societies. Why is this a contradiction? In order to establish a free, private law society, individuals must come up with ideas as to how this society would work. This dirty work (or as Borowski calls it, petty and unrealistic work) is done by anarchist theorists. Thus, Borowski and other minarchists object to the requisite anarchist theorizing necessary to bring about the anarchist societies that they claim are required evidence in order to adopt the anarchist position.

Given this contradiction, it is clear that minarchists and Borowski actually do not want to live in a free society. They want to live in an un-free society. Un-free (state) societies generate plenty of material in the form of minuscule policy proposals and regulation tinkering for profitable blog posts and articles for minarchists. This should be unsatisfactory to anyone who genuinely desires to live in a free society.

Anarchist radicals will be the ones with comprehensive systems of thought to be adopted when the opportunity to create a free society arises (either through Free Cities, Seasteads, Micronations, secession, etc.). Undoubtedly, minarchists will leap on the bandwagon. Let it be known though that while they floundered about offering shallow analysis of what’s politically acceptable in this dark age of state oppression, serious critics denounced their petty dismissal of radical theorizing.

This essay will not end with banal truisms like; “I’m incapable of producing content that everyone is going to like;” and, “Content creators are going to have different communication styles and that’s perfectly fine because people have different preferences.” You don’t say.

Instead, readers are encouraged to reject the state and withdraw any previous support for a limited government. The minarchist program of activism, even if successful, is utterly ineffective in bringing about a free society. Demanding examples of anarchist societies while simultaneously dismissing anarchist theorizing necessary to bring about anarchist societies is contradictory. Rigorous logical consistency should be the only requirement for adopting a political philosophy. Libertarian anarchism fits the bill. Minarchism does not.

Who will end the violence first? Will the agents of the state lay down their arms and refuse the immoral orders of their paymasters? Will people realize that murder does not solve the issue, and only serves to increase the disconnection between the enforcer class and the proletariat?

Every time an agent of the state harasses, murders, rapes, brutalizes, extorts, kidnaps, commits or helps assist with democide and lies (in a supposedly impartial court of law) it serves only to drive a wedge deeper between those that want accountability and protection and those that want obedience and compliance.

I fear the day is fast approaching when these types of actions will become commonplace. Open hostilities between those that will no longer be subjugated, and those who refuse to relinquish their arbitrary and illegitimate authority, will one day be an everyday occurrence. Anyone who is paying attention can see it ramping up with millions of dollars in military hardware being given to towns and municipalities across this “country.” As the federal government simultaneously moves to prevent the individual from effectively protecting themselves in their own perceived and necessary fashion.

When my daughters fear to go to school, not because of a bully or a bad neighborhood, but because they know and see that their teacher is one of those illegitimate authorities, will they be ostracized by their peers? Will my daughters be charged as terrorists for refusing to say a pledge of allegiance? Will their mother be taken away from them for choosing how to educate them?

For those of you who still believe might makes right, and that laws (arbitrary edicts) passed down by individuals living thousands of miles away from you are legitimate, bear in mind that for you to understand this you will have to glimpse the gun in the room with your own eyes. You will have to experience CPS kidnapping your children. You will have to experience police brutality first hand. You will need to have a loved one extorted. I am torn between my fear and love for you, dear reader, and my hope that you will understand my message. Will you question your own beliefs? Will you strive to better yourself? I hope so.

These questions and more should be topics at every American dinner table.