Freedom Feens 24-7 streaming link. Bookmark it! Whee:
Also, if you want to listen to the latest episode only, on your mobile chromed robot turd, click the image below to use Stitcher:
Guns, cats and liberty, oh my!
Freedom Feens 24-7 streaming link. Bookmark it! Whee:
Also, if you want to listen to the latest episode only, on your mobile chromed robot turd, click the image below to use Stitcher:
Posted in Liberty and Anarchy.
– July 20, 2012
My friend in Prague, Václav Navrátil, wrote to me:
that is very difficult to say. RSS was designated as a way for syndication of content (I don’t know if you remember the big disputes few years back if RSS Feed should contain Full article or just the Lead paragraph), but Podcast RSS in fact Atom is the main way of publishing of the podcast and I think it should include all the episodes.
Some podcasts need to be ordered from the oldest to the newest (books), some from the newest to the oldest (Freedom Feeens) and some just need to publish last three episodes (weather forecast).
To support my argument, imagine a user which finds your podcast on some Podcast catalog, iTunes for example… The user has no chance easily (few clicks on their device) get the rest of the podcast to their device and to the podcast playing software. It is an inconvenience so big that it will discourage most of the users from listening to the older episodes.
RSS was designate to bring people on your site to consume the content there. Podcasts are consumed elsewhere. The feeds should reflect that. And it doesn’t bring any significant extra cost.
You are an experienced podcaster and I’m only a theorist which might be missing some important part of the riddle but this is how I see it.
P. S.: I don’t want to start any pod beef over pod feed.
One issue is that some podcatchers will not download and process an RSS feed that is over 250 k. The Feens one is currently 237 k, if I included all episodes, it would be about a meg.
I’ll ask Evo if that limit has changed with time, and what his current opinion of it is. My feeling is that if someone wants all the episodes, they can grab them fairly easily from FreedomFeens.cz.
I wrote Evo and asked him:
– July 16, 2012
I didn’t delete any comments here. I moved my blogs this week over from DreamHost (too many problems) to HostGator (who rock). In doing so,
all many of the comments disappeared on all many posts on all my blogs and podcasts. I’m trying to recover them, but this is a thing that happens. I’m working on it, but none of the workarounds I’ve tried so far have worked.
If anyone’s had this problem, and found a solution, I’m all ears.
Also, if you’re previously had a comment approved, you may have to get re-approved to post a comment again. So don’t worry if your comment doesn’t show up immediately.
Posted in Michael's stuff.
– July 6, 2012
An open letter to Marc Stevens on why his ” No-State Project” show probably does more harm than good.
I am, like you, a liberty lover and liberty media activist. I’m the co-host of two podcasts syndicated on The Liberty Radio Network as is your own “No-State Project.” My podcasts are “Freedom Feens” and “Anarchy Gumbo.” I also directed the film Guns and Weed: The Road to Freedom.
You and I have never spoken, but we have a lot of the same friends.
I am, like you, a fan of civil disobedience. I believe flexing rights with cops is good, and I believe it has its place with judges. I have respect for people who know the dangers, weigh the options and choose to do that on their own. But advising your “clients” (your word, not mine), who just want to stay out of jail, to go piss off the judge, especially in felony cases, is not helping anyone’s personal liberty. It’s doing quite the opposite.
I know that on your website you state that you are not an attorney (though you do charge $100 an hour for phone consultations). But people calling in on your show may not know that you are not an attorney, as you seem to present yourself as an attorney. Therefore people may place their trust in you and act upon your advice based upon a mistaken understanding.
I’ve listened to your show before, and I listened to your talk with Jillian the other day. (Local copy of MP3 here.) I know Jillian. I posted some of her bail when she was busted in Texas recently. I speak with her frequently. The Freedom Feens podcast has also, for several month, given free ad time for her confectionery company on our Sunday live show, ad time that we also sell to other people. In short, she’s a friend, and I care about her.
I was pretty appalled by some of your advice to her. Some of your advice might make sense to someone who was willing to grandstand in court to make a point, didn’t mind doing some jail time, didn’t have a kid, had money for a lawyer as a backup if needed, and was only facing misdemeanor charges in their home town. It was not helpful advice for a young mother with no money trying to stay out of prison and facing two drug felonies outside her home state. Particularly when the charges are pending in Texas, and after Jillian told you that the judge already hates her.
By the end of your talk with Jillian, she was saying “That makes sense!” and cheerfully saying “Thank you!” In short, she sounded like she thought you were the solution she was looking for. She’s smart, but you confidently present yourself as having some basis for being able to give advice.
You even said to Jillian on the show “We’re very confident of the material on this show.”
I forwarded the episode to a lawyer friend for his opinion. This guy, Randy England:
Randy is a former prosecutor and currently a privately practicing attorney, with decades of criminal law experience, a lot of it with drug charges. He’s also a philosophical anarchist. He was taken aback by your advice. He said, “I believe that required licensing for anything is tyrannical. But this guy Marc Stevens is a poster child for everyone who believes that required licensing for lawyers is a good thing.”
Randy said that in most states, if Jillian retains a criminal defense lawyer, or even the public defender, she’s unlikely to get jail time, since it’s her first felony and drug possession offense. He said if Jillian takes your advice, acting pro se, and challenges the judge by asking “Where do you derive your authority?” and “Do you honestly think I can get a fair trial here?”, Jillian will almost certainly end up in a cage in Texas for a long time.
Yet your “knowledge” of the law is such, Marc, that you sought Jillian out, you contacted her, and offered to her: “I can help with court stuff.”
That sort of “ambulance chasing” would be considered unethical for an actual attorney.
You read her statement here
wherein she said “I am not equipped to fight this financially”, and “I’m so frightened thinking of the violence that may come in the near future from the state against me…”
Her fears notwithstanding, you still suggested she skip the public defender and act pro se and antagonistically challenge the judge.
You said, “This has worked in Texas for traffic tickets.” (Emphasis added.) But Jillian is not facing a traffic ticket. She’s facing two drug felonies.
You went on and on with this “question and challenge the judge” defense theory for your whole long talk with Jillian. This theory is largely what you promote on all your shows, and in your seminars, books, workshops, web forum, etc.
I’ve heard you similarly advise other people who are not trying to “make a stand” but simply trying to serve the least amount of jail time as possible. In doing so, I feel that you are making people pawns in your plan of how to fight the system.
Occasionally on your show you make self-deprecating comments like “Hey take my advice or don’t!” (usually followed by a laugh, like you’re joking). But that’s sadly lacking as a disclaimer, in my opinion. You make those jokes, then launch right back into pretending to know what you’re talking about, and give advice on how to “fight the man” to people who are just trying to stay out of jail. Your pet theory isn’t even particularly good advice for someone wanting to fight the man.
I have no ethical problem with someone practicing law without a license, if they’re good at it. But I don’t think you are good at it. One reason licensed, practicing attorneys are often much better at it then even the good “jailhouse lawyers” is that practicing attorneys have actually spent a lot of time in courtrooms in a wide variety of cases, and that’s where a lot of knowledge of the law comes from. They know the courts, the judges, and the (often persnickety) local rules. You can’t get it all from books.
In my opinion, you have a difficult time reconciling your vision of “how things should be in a perfect world” with how things are in reality. Your vision of “how things should be” has parallels to mine. You and I both believe that there should be private police and courts who actually have to earn their keep and only process real crimes, rather than the monopolistic tyrannical system of “justice” we have now.
But by providing your “clients” with bad advice, advice that comes out of some sovereign citizen-esque fantasy of “how things should be”, and your faulty belief that magic words make tyrants melt in fear, I believe you are doing more harm than good.
I’m looking at your Facebook page right now, and reading a note to you from a woman who had her 18-year-old daughter try your “legal advice” by asking the judge “Do you really believe I can get a fair trial?” It didn’t help and the woman seemed astonished that the judge didn’t dismiss the case on the spot.
There is no profit to me in railing on you. I love liberty media, and want there to be as much of it out there as possible. I spend hours each week giving free technical advice to people wanting to start or improve their podcasts and filmmaking. I get great joy from helping people create liberty media. Before today I would never have considered telling anyone “You should stop doing what you’re doing.”
I’m no fan of Ronald Reagan but he had some good quotes. One was his “11th Commandment”: “Never speak ill of a fellow Republican.”
I feel it’s an equally unwritten rule to not speak ill of fellow liberty activists. And your ideas about liberty are good. But when a fellow liberty activist is doing podcasts, radio, seminars, workshops, forums and books convincing people to do things that may endanger their liberty, without sufficient disclosure, I have to speak up.
Your legal advice would likely be solid if you were “practicing law” in a Heinlein novel. But in our current reality, much of your advice is not solid, and is more likely to hurt than to help. I wonder how many people are in jail or prison from following your advice.
I think your show, books, website and seminars are likely doing far more harm than good. I wish you’d do something productive instead. You’re a smart guy, and could certainly excel at many things that would not inadvertently harm others.
At the very minimum, I think you should add a pre-recorded disclaimer with every caller and guest on your show, something like “Marc Stevens is not an attorney. And any advice he gives is aimed at activists who want to ‘fight the man’, not folks whose primary concern is to stay out of jail.”
People calling in to your show don’t know your whole deal. When people are facing the horror of actual prison time, and cannot afford an attorney, they are very vulnerable. You seem to offer a solution, but you don’t give them the full terms of what your “solution” entails.
I’m even willing to professionally record that disclaimer for you, for free, if you’d use it
I’m going to be reading this letter next week on the Freedom Feens podcast, and will also be posting it on my blogs, LibertarianPunk.com and MichaelWDean.com, and elsewhere
Feel free to read this letter and reply on your podcast. I’d also like to offer you the opportunity to come on my podcast and respond. If you’d prefer to respond via e-mail I will print your response on my blogs and read your reply on the podcast.
Michael W. Dean
(This was e-mailed to Marc.)
Marc’s response is here:
Marc and Michael discussing this on Free Talk Live is here.
– June 27, 2012
Conceived and created by Václav Navrátil.
No copyright, feel free to reuse anywhere any time in any way. (You can get printable sticker sheet layouts for these in the folders here.)
Link to scan bar for FreedomFeens.cz:
Link to another scan bar for Freedom Feens:
This one links to the RSS feed for Freedom Feens. Users have the option to subscribe directly from their phone:
– June 26, 2012
DOWNLOAD PDF HERE. This is the foreword and chapter one AND CHAPTER TWO of Michael W. Dean’s self-help book, A USER’S MANUAL FOR THE HUMAN EXPERIENCE, translated into Portuguese. Tradução para Português por Ana “Kneazle” Ferreiro. The rest of the chapters will be coming later.
Topics: evitar o stress, ser feliz, ser uma boa pessoa, bloquear trolls da internet, lidar com idiotas, Limpar a sua vida de pessoas nocivas, como posso ser feliz, como posso fazer vida da arte, odeio música alta, aprender a ser um trabalhador independente, aprender a ser feliz, auto-ajuda libertária , viver uma vida boa, vida amorosa, vizinhos barulhentos, princípio da não-agressão, recuperação, auto-ajuda, parar o vício sem reuniões.
WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT THIS BOOK:
“Part intellectual memoir, part self-help book. Michael W. Dean’s Practical Emotional Self-Defense (PESD) techniques flow from a wealth of life experiences, both positive and negative. ‘The Only Two Rules in Life’ have some radical, refreshing implications.”
–Jason Sorens, Ph.D. (Assistant Professor, University at Buffalo, SUNY), founder of the Free State Project
“You owe yourself the opportunity to step outside your comfort zone and put yourself in the court with this modern-day Socrates.”
–Pastor Kenneth V. Blanchard, Sr., author of Black Man with a Gun
“I knew Michael Dean back in the day, when he was a 19-year-old punk rocker with an appetite for self-destruction. I honestly didn’t think he’d live to be 30. But guess what? It turns out that Michael isn’t just a survivor; he’s a survivor who’s learned how to enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness after recovery. For everyone who wants to know how to stay sane, develop a great work ethic, and make a mark on the world, Michael Dean has a great story to tell.”
–Professor Michael Bérubé, Ph.D. (Penn State), author of What’s Liberal About the Liberal Arts? and Life as We Know It
. This is Chapter, 1, FOREWORD and Chapter One, Greetings Eager Seeker
FOREWORD by Pastor Kenneth V. Blanchard, Sr, author of BLACK MAN WITH A GUN. This foreword is read by the good pastor. A hip Baptist preacher tells you why you don’t have to be afraid of Michael Dean, even though Michael doesn’t believe in Christ. And you also needn’t be afraid that Michael believes in SOMETHING if you believe in NOTHING. This ain’t about changing your mind, it’s about improving your life. CHAPTER ONE, Greetings Eager Seeker, read by the author, Michael W. Dean. Michael explains what you’re in for (it’s all good!), how he teaches (more like a friend sitting next to you than like a textbook), and what this book is about (cutting deadwood out of your life, getting rid of bad patterns, habits, and people. Then we teach you how to work smarter once you’ve cleaned house).
Creative Commons Attribution – Licença Não Comercial 3.0.
Get the audio book in English, here.
Get the PDF in English, here.
Posted in Portugues.
– June 11, 2012
Guest blog post by Cash Newmann
I’ve seen a lot of posts on FM micro-transmitter systems, but they’re all lacking in this detail or that. For instance, a lot will say “make sure you’re using a low-pass filter”, but then don’t say how, or where to set it up in your gear chain, or specifically what adapters you need. I made this post to fill a void. This post includes details of ALL parts needed, links on where to order them, and how to set them up and configure them, as well as a lot of related information based on experience.
I’ve experimented with the transmitters below, so this is from first-hand experience. But I did it on a boat, 200 miles from shore, in international waters. I do not own any of this gear, I sold it to some church folk at a gun show after I was done testing it. And I am not currently transmitting from my house or anywhere else. I’m just passing on information, in a theoretical capacity, for educational purposes only. Nothing here is legal advice, I am not a lawyer. I take no responsibility for anything you do or anything that happens as a result of doing anything listed below. ALL OF THIS IS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. DO NOT DO ANYTHING SHOWN HERE.
First question: WE HAVE THE INTERNET. WHO NEEDS RADIO?
– May 18, 2012
Regarding all the “How would the courts and policing work in LibPar (libertarian paradise)?” in many discussions I have, it comes down to the same arguments as “But who would take care of the roads without the government?” and “But who would feed grandma and starving children without the government?” ……
I’m really fond of something Stefan Molyneux said on this subject, I think it’s dead-on correct, better than anything else I’ve heard or come up with on my own, and it’s my new go-to argument in these situations….I’m paraphrasing, but it’s basically this:
Worrying about “How would it work” isn’t the real argument. The real argument is “Government is immoral, because government is based on aggression.” Dismissing a desire for the absence of government because of “How would it work?” is like someone in 1850 America saying “I’d like to get rid of slavery, but we can’t because the cotton won’t get picked.” No, you get rid of slavery because it’s the moral thing to do. Then the cotton gets picked anyway. People find a way.
I would add this: We don’t really KNOW how any of this would work in the absence of government, because they won’t let us try. They have a monopoly on all this stuff. I hate simplifying it to “the free market would take care of it”, but think about how computers were when only the government had them: they were slow, unreliable, required a team of scientists to run them, they cost millions of dollars and filled a building. Then the free market got a hold of computers, many great minds worked on them, and now the cheap iPhone that fits in your pocket is a far better computer then the giant government computers of 1955. Computers are the one major piece of technology that the government has had the least amount of monopoly involvement in. Cars haven’t advanced nearly that much, because the government so closely controls their production.
There is plenty of good conjecture of how cops and courts would work in LibPar, in fiction written by Heinlein or L. Neil Smith. But I think that worrying about the minutia of “how would it work?” is intellectual masturbation. It’s fun intellectual masturbation, and I’ve done a lot of it. But it’s not the really important thing.
The really important thing is teaching as many people as possible (especially young people) that all government is immoral, and teaching them why government is immoral (all nanny laws and all taxes are enforced with the threat of the gun and the cage, and you can’t opt out). That’s the basic nut of it. Once they get that, you can follow with examples of how things would work better without the government. But the moral argument is the most important part.
We need many more minds on the side of non-aggression before we can draw up the detailed blueprints for LibPar.
I only ever “debate” statists (including minarchists) if I think there’s a chance they may be statists only because of their schooling and that underneath they’re not. (Like I was.) If they cling to their statism, I don’t want to even be in the same room with them, let alone be in business with them. They are advocating theft, fraud and murder. I can’t hang with people like that.
I am not embarrassed that I was a “libertarian Republican” before becoming an anarchist. It allows me to speak to people who still believe in some state. It’s similar to how a recovering alcoholic does not hide his past, because it allows him to speak to the active drunk who’s still suffering and say “I’m not some doctor or priest or judge looking down at you, I AM you.”
Here’s the quote from AA that would also apply to the statists you can’t reach with logic: “Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path. Those who do not recover are people who cannot or will not completely give themselves to this simple program, usually men and women who are constitutionally incapable of being honest with themselves. There are such unfortunates. They are not at fault; they seem to have been born that way.”
In short, I’m done yammering with people about “how would roads (defense/police/etc.) work without the government?”. If you really need to hear my opinion on it, there’s hours of me talking about it in the older episodes of Freedom Feens. But repeating myself is a waste of energy, especially with people who won’t accept the basic fact that, no matter what, they’re advocating theft, fraud and murder by defending ANY amount of state.
–Michael W. Dean
– May 1, 2012
Anarchy Gumbo Podcast
Insomniac anarchist chat and chatter from Freedom Feen Michael W. Dean and a rotating cast of nifty guests
JODIE EMERY, wife of incarcerated political prisoner MARC EMERY talks about censorship, 2 Live Crew, helping marijuana lobbyists in America and Canada, Marc’s arrest, life in federal prison, conjugal visits, how to help the marijuana re-legalization effort, Advice for Aspiring Activists, BC Marijuana Party, the DEA, all-issue activism vs. single-issue activism, Ron Paul, Canada’s conservative government, friendly fascism, Geo Prison, Health Canada, medical marijuana in Canada, marriage, love, and hope for the future in a troubled world.
Prince of pot documentary:
Cannabis Culture Magazine:
Posted in Liberty and Anarchy.
– April 13, 2012