My Personal and Continually Evolving Philosophic Ideology

(About 16 short paragraphs plus endnotes, Revision Five, copyleft Peter Voluntaryistic Walker 06-04-2016)

I conclude most* of us individual humans are all to some extent Self-Refilling Poison Containers (SRPCs), ever instinctively attempting to overflow onto other people as a way of relieving emotional pain:

1.a. “Jiddu Krishnamurti … constantly stressed the need for a revolution in the psyche of every human being and emphasised that such revolution cannot be brought about by any external entity, be it religious, political, or social.” –

1.b. I partially agree with Jiddu but add we humans are an overwhelmingly instinctual social species and thus to remain extant can’t exclude the external entities of other people; Jiddu himself demonstrating this by being a life-long teacher. As a mostly non-SRPC *he did no further harm* as a teacher and to the contrary had an open agenda that *genuinely progressed* our species from the bottom-up rather than the condescending attempt to do so top-down.

1.c. I consider myself more non-SRPC than not because I’ve done much productive personal psyche overhaul work; my point being even Jiddu probably had a minuscule but nonetheless existing element of socially engineered poison remaining in him and thus none of us are above scrutiny in proportion to the amount of ideas we present for consideration by others. I observe many if not most people attracted to the social institution of politics are more SRPC than not and are thus oriented toward political agendas of win-lose rather than win-win:

1.d. Two examples from opposite ends of the traditional political spectrum are Ayn Rand at the right and Karl Marx at the left. Both said, to paraphrase, the win-win was the end goal, but the win-lose was the means to it:

1.d.1. Ayn presented the idea of the individual being the smallest minority and the most critical to protect, yet she agreed with the USA intervention in Vietnam to the point of giving the commencement speech saying so to the 1974 West Point graduating class.

1.d.2. Karl presented the idea that the ruling class/classes is/are a reality, but he also advised violence as a solution with the caveat to him, to paraphrase, the rulers had already initiated violence and thus he was advising violent self-defense rather than aggression. I disagree with the caveat because it was a false-flag claim and was top-down rather than bottom-up as I describe several paragraphs below.

1.d.3. I appreciate and agree with some of Ayn’s and Karl’s ideas, but not all of them. I have nothing against SRPCs *presenting* ideas; rather my problem is with such persons using hidden (even to themselves) agendas and non sequiturs (intentionally or unintentionally); and with others not catching the hidden agendas and non sequiturs. Additionally, Ayn and Karl presented ideas others with hidden agendas could easily twist such as Lenin lopping off the anarchy part of Marxism and those bankers/corporatists/politicians who are parasites; e.g., Alan Greenspan lopping off the voluntary part of Randian capitalism.

2. Despite strawman accusations, I personally belong to no group ideology/philosophy; rather my personal ideology is an eclectic collection continually evolving. One of my continually evolving foundations is a bottom-up approach to social issues; that is, an individual can’t *morally* advise/demand of others if the individual hasn’t mostly overcome his/her own hang-ups and therefore most people politically advising/demanding are doing so immorally. Other foundation parts include quality over quantity, do no further harm, self-ownership, and by extension of self-ownership, private property and the *non-initiation* of fraud/violence.

2.a. As this relates to politics, political science is finding win-win social solutions; political religion is the self-righteous false moral high ground of lose-win, I-can-only-win-when-others-lose.

2.a.1. Problems occur at symptom and root levels, and a key win-win word is “actionable” — the opposite of Orwellian Two Minutes Hate type activity traps such as the left-right paradigm. An example of being actionable at the symptom level is beginning charity at home and working outwards, donating labor to local charity activities, and donating money to organizations focused mostly on the win-win such as Amnesty International. I say “mostly” because due to the human condition of being imperfect, there’s no one person or organization with whom I completely agree.

2.a.2. I conclude root-cause level solutions to social issues are multi-generational because we as a species are presently evolving out of our inter-subjectivity phase into our inter-objectivity phase. To enable this next phase, root-level solutions include the social institutions of peaceful parenting, cohesive extended families, freed education, freed media, and cohesive communities extending to us as a species interdependent with all the others.

2.b. Once an individual has overcome his/her hang-ups, he/she will have educated him/herself in a sound philosophic and scientific grounding in critical thinking. The next step up is the practicing of healthy relationships in one’s own life. Thus win-win political scenarios begin with Robinson Crusoe and Friday type scenarios and work their way up to society levels, checking for hidden agendas and non sequiturs at each level. Most if not all SRPCs demonstrate ideologies beginning at the large society scenario level and working down to winner individuals forcing other individuals to be losers:

2.b.1. Karl objected to the Robinson Crusoe scenario, while Ayn claimed it but evidently it didn’t apply to Vietnamese children. Each SRPC has his or her personal motivations which may forever remain unknown even to him or herself, but the motivations probably include an incompetence/impatience to check for non sequiturs, using non sequiturs as one of other manipulative methods, or as in Lenin’s case, using non sequiturs to reinforce agreements with other SRPCs.

2.b.2. People more SRPC than not generally demonstrate a preoccupation with abstract labels such as those ending with ian, ism, ist, etc.; thus I now go by “Voluntaryistic” for my new middle name, but Facebook says I’ve changed my nickname too many times to update — an example of The Establishment resisting any individual from self-evolving.


This mini-essay posted at and

Title – “Philosophic Ideology” –

Paragraph 1.:

– “I conclude” –

– *“most” – Example exception are (1) persons raised in a counter-culture of peaceful parenting, cohesive extended families, freed education, freed media, and cohesive communities; and (2) persons who’ve reasonably repaired their psyche from the damage done by mainstream culture(s).

– “Self-Refilling” – I often hyphenate two words when together they create, according to me, a noteworthy third meaning.

Para 1.a. – “…”

– You probably already know three periods in a row are ellipses, meaning part of a quote exists but me or whomever as a repeater of the quote has for brevity or other reasons not included that part. I make this point to add I sometimes use ellipses to ensure I don’t misquote someone, and I sometimes write run-on sentences when I don’t want to be taken out of context because once one puts a period at the end of a sentence it becomes an independent statement. I’m not using ellipses in these endnotes because I’m not going to misquote myself.

– I sometimes write in third person for brevity; sometimes speakers/writers use it to intentionally omit information, set-up strawmen, etc., e.g., “It has been said…”

– I prefer plain text publishing format and thus rather than *bolding* or *italics* I use asterisks.

– “open agenda” – The other two types are automatic, i.e., subconscious, and hidden.

– “instinctual” –

– “genuinely progressed” – The word revolution often means to go in circles, whereas evolution usually means to steadily change in a direction that increases flourishing.

Para 1.c.:

– “productive work” – Or allegedly according to me productive; I continually update judgments about myself and constructive feedback is welcome.

– “socially engineered poison” – aka unhealthy culture aka social engineering aka The Matrix aka Pink Floyd’s The Wall aka L. Frank Baum’s The Man Behind the Curtain, etc.

Para 1.d.2.

– I often use slashes (/) when two or more words overlap in their individual meanings to communicate a multiple meaning or possibility.

– “Self-Refilling” – I often hyphenate two or more words when their combination creates one single meaning.

– “Self-Refilling Poison Container” –

– I consider myself SEBIR (pronounced seebeer, only a coincidence…): Socially Engineered But In Recovery.

Para 2.:

– “approach to social issues”:

— I conclude there are three core types (simple, complex, issues) and two core levels (symptom and root-level) of problems per aka

– “morally” – To me *moral* meaning without double-standards; i.e., I do my best to be considerate of others because I desire vice-versa.

– “mostly” – Because no human is perfect; my choice is perfection as a target to continually get closer to.

– “*non-initiation* of fraud/violence” – Fraud/violence in self-defense being moral; the caveat being the distinction between offense and defense in a world full of false-flags.

Para 2.a.2. – “intersubjectivity” –

Para 2.b. – “philosophic and scientific” – I conclude the two fields overlap and can no longer productively exist without each other as a check-and-balance.

– “peaceful parenting, cohesive extended families, freed education, freed media, and cohesive communities” – I’ve written an introductory mini-essay to the first ( aka and haven’t yet but will do the same for the others.

– “Voluntaryistic”:

— “My new middle name, eventually to be filed with my owners through the social institution of The State, is ‘Voluntaryistic’; to me meaning atheistic and anarchistic. I don’t have beliefs because I only have conclusions subject to change.” –

— aka

– “The Establishment” – I capitalize The Establishment, The State, etc. because they’re religions with agendas of maintaining inter-subjectivity and repressing inter-objectivity. I conclude most self-alleged theists, agnostics, and atheists in reality worship The State above anything or anyone else and I reject the social institution of Worship.

Posted in article-link, essays-mini-essays, meme, vid | Leave a comment

The Word “Philosophy” Versus the Word “Ideology”

I’m linking this here because it represents part of my core self.

The Word “Philosophy” Versus the Word “Ideology”

Posted in essays-mini-essays | Leave a comment

Easy Rider – Jack Nicholson about freedom Dennis Hopper Peter Fonda.3gp

Easy Rider – Jack Nicholson about freedom Dennis Hopper Peter Fonda

Posted in meme, quote, vid | 1 Comment

The Word “Philosophy” Versus the Word “Ideology”

(I’m posting this link on my personal page because it shows part of how I do introspection.)

The Word “Philosophy” Versus the Word “Ideology”

Posted in article-link, essays-mini-essays | Leave a comment

Brainbinding – How Mainstream Cultures are the Parent Addiction and Others are Really Subaddictions

(I’m posting this link on my personal page because it shows part of how I do introspection.)

Brainbinding – How Mainstream Cultures are the Parent Addiction and Others are Really Subaddictions

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Selfishness Versus the Altruism/Self-Care Blend (five very short paragraphs plus endnotes)

(I’m posting this link on my personal page because it shows part of how I do introspection.)

Posted in article-link, essays-mini-essays | Leave a comment

Philosophy/Spirituality Versus Science?

(I’m posting this link on my personal page because philosophy, science, and spirituality are approximately the primary and equal parts of my personal core.)

Science Versus Despite the Recovery-Industrial-Complex’s Traditional Superstition Baggage

Posted in article-link, pic | Leave a comment

The Peaceful Parenting Model (Why I Posted It On My Personal Site is the First Comment)

(Revision Two, approximately fifteen short paragraphs/one-liners and endnotes; copyleft Peter Voluntaryistic Walker 3-27-2016.)

In this mini-essay I describe the *what* rather than the *how* of The Peaceful Parenting Model; but I provide further references for the how. Parenting begins with highly qualified parents, meaning self-study and self continuous improvement. I highly recommend the ten question yes-or-no self-survey that took me about 10 minutes to do, free from; with the caveat that for every yes answer, the frequency and intensity also needs to be considered, and if the issue has yet to be resolved, to accept formal or informal help to do so. There are also self-quizzes such as There’s also,,, (how to fight wars without actually having to do battle).

“Peaceful Parenting” is an informal and non-technical term publicized mostly by Stefan Molyneux. There are also books with “Peaceful Parent” and similar terms in the title. The concepts are similar to or the same as Nonviolent Communication as founded by Marshall Rosenberg, and Taking Children Seriously as founded by David Deutsch and Sarah Fitz-Claridge; but it’s easier and more popular to say “peaceful parenting”. It’s main concept is abuse/fraud/neglect/violence is not only unnecessary for parenting and educating, but:

– Reduces IQ.

– Teaches coercion in place of negotiation.

– Is a if not the primary root-level cause of man’s inhumanity to man (,

– Teaches win-lose rather than win-win, aka common preference, relationships.

– Proportionately increases the probability of poverty and almost all health/behavioral maladies.

— By “proportionally”, I mean the more and more intense the abuse/fraud and neglect, the higher the probabilities.

— provides references, and more are at and at

Other Peaceful Parenting main points:

– A parent’s primary responsibility is to deliver a functionally happy adult to the child’s adult self.

– Involuntary circumcision is abuse, causes long term trauma, and is a scam.,

– Peaceful parenting is not about allowing children to be unaccountable for socially unacceptable behavior or allowing them to pursue anything unhealthy/unsafe.

— It is about establishing a home of win-win negotiations by providing options as sets of conditions and consequences. “Gentle, positive, or peaceful parenting is a conscious shift away from the traditional authoritarian, from-the-top-down style of parenting, to one based on connection and mutual respect. L.R. Knost describes it beautifully as ‘guiding instead of controlling, connecting instead of punishing, encouraging instead of demanding. It’s about listening, understanding, responding, and communicating.'” –

— At younger ages such as pre-seven (depending on the individual), unhealthy and unsafe choices aren’t an option. Although not intended to be an option with older children either, with age comes the ability to choose more options than provided by parenting.

— As a child becomes older and has more freedom, the Peaceful Parenting up to that point will as a rule result in the child or adult choosing correctly.

— Exceptions to the rule are reasons such as being born with a mental chemical imbalance or being the victim of trauma such as natural or man-made disasters. Even so, those in the position of being exceptions will have an infinitely better chance of coping and transcending than those raised without peaceful parenting.

– Peaceful parenting is extremely time consuming and for most parents requires a large education investment; but is part of the moral commitment made when bringing a child into the world or taking over parenting responsibility from another.

– Euphemisms such as “discipline” and “spanking” (meaning to hit) fraudulently candy-coat negligence and abuse.

– Peaceful parenting is one of if not the most actionable things for those wanting to reduce man’s inhumanity to man. For instance, most people and groups can’t directly change unhealthy human institutions such as war and corrupt economic systems, but man’s inhumanity to man can be greatly reduced or even mostly eliminated over generations the way Western Civilization’s (no offense to other civilizations) abolition movement took two to three hundred years to begin and then change the majority public moral perspective of chattel slavery, which had *previously gone unchanged since the beginning of human history*.



1. “Everybody is born a genius. Society de-geniuses them.” – Richard Buckminster Fuller

2. By “Model” in the context of the title, I mean a scientific model; an imperfect or idealized representation of a physical system. Such representation can be in the form of a flow chart, schematic, equation, or in this case a written summary. This mini-essay’s summary is imperfect as compared to the physical reality because the reality is carried out by individuals who all vary in doing so.

3. I wrote the above as *part* of an answer to the blog question “1.) What is the practical goal or purpose of voluntaryism?” I numbered my initial answer as follows, and then committed to write mini-essays on the paras 1a and 3 subjects. My next mini-essay is The Voluntaryist Education Model.

1a. With the caveats presented in below paragraphs 1b through 1d, it’s presently expanding one’s own intellect and habits/lifestyle to transcend unhealthy cultures, peaceful parenting, independent education as opposed to mainstream indoctrination/schooling, and continuous personal growth mostly through alternative information and social channels; all towards living a happier present life and future generations finding their own better solutions to individual and society problems. This importantly and possibly most importantly includes the option to further develop and choose alternatives to the social institution of the state.

1a1. The state is a monopoly of a minority of rulers over a majority of ruled. Monopolies only last when they’re violently enforced and because they’re monopolies, expand until they collapse under their own weight; so far in history the start-expand-collapse-start cycle simply repeats.

1a2. From 1900 to 2000, the state murdered over a quarter billion people, incarcerated and tortured millions, practiced eugenics and involuntary medical experimentation, caused and continues to cause tens of thousands to unnecessarily die daily from starvation and disease, and leaves the rest of us with shortened and degraded lives. It continues this century.

1a3. We as a species have the technology and resources to provide ourselves and most other species with a reasonable quality of life; the obstacles are cultural. By “reasonable” I mean other species mostly left alone in their natural habitat and our species as individuals, not just the lucky ones, born into flourishing families and communities all allowing each other to flourish.

1b. There are many spokespersons for anarchism/voluntaryism such as Lew Rockwell, Stefan Molyneux, Larkin Rose, Adam Kokesh, Gary Chartier, and Wendy McElroy; each would probably answer your question differently.

1c. “Practical” requires defining otherwise it’s vulnerable to True Scotsman Fallacies such as “That’s not what I call practical.” So in this context, I define it as “The property of having more or better benefits than its alternatives.”

1d. The alternatives to voluntaryism are almost infinite in number and include but are not limited to most political ideologies (aka philosophies); for instance some religious doctrines also contradict voluntaryism.

1d1. Pacifist ideologies differ from voluntaryism because voluntaryism doesn’t exclude self self-defense.

1d2. Ideologies/philosophies contradicting voluntaryism are those rationalizing or justifying the *initiation* of fraud/violence. For instance some religions have a doctrine that you either convert or die. Most political ideologies are based on the alleged social contract or the equivalent that because you’re born in a geographic location, you’re in debt to is the government of that area even though you never agreed to be born there and you never agreed to any social contract.

“2.) What specific course of action does voluntaryism suggest?”

2a. Para 1a above.

“3.) Why should we expect this course of action to further the goal enumerated in your answer to question 1?”

3a. Valid and verifiable expectations are only result of research, and the documentation of peaceful parenting and the other subjects are available; suggested starts:

– Peaceful parenting: Bomb in the brain series by Stefan Molyneux –

– Independent education and expanding one’s own intellect:

4. “Religion” is a euphemism for superstition and it and other forms of indoctrination are immoral; excepting many don’t know it’s immoral, and it’s moral if not indoctrinating your child will get your family killed by the primitive tribe, etc. Religion also differs from spirituality and church:

4a. Spirituality is an individual rather than group pursuit and can be secular.

4.b. Religion differs from the social institution of the “church” which is really the extended extended family, or family/extended family for those without family or extended family; and this extended extended family is also called “support group”, “club” (as in a serious motorcycle club), etc.; for all practical purposes churches. There’s also the UU ( and possibly some other churches where the point is individual spiritual discovery.

Posted in essays-mini-essays | 1 Comment

Why I Add “ic” to Three Hated Words

(Five short paragraphs, Revision Two 5-31-2016, copyleft Peter Voluntaryistic Walker.)
Mark Twain (aka Samuel Clemens) said “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.” The right word can also make the difference between freedom and incarceration or worse; especially in cases of public panic or martial law.
Some may feel offended or otherwise negative if I call myself an anarchist, and to such people my number one point is I don’t and am not. My number two point is I do and plan nothing of social impact other than (a) some discrete harmless charity activities and (b) exercising freedom of speech in win-win ways; that is, I may be critical of some people’s activities, but it’s constructive criticism that can only improve their interests the way detox improves the interests of a methamphetamine addict.
A third point is my use of the word “anarchistic” is in the context of rules-without-rulers, *not* no-rules. A ruler is by definition a person or group who initiates fraud/violence against others to coerce them into being ruled. Rulers are also by definition partially or fully exempt from rules.
A fourth point is I reluctantly benefit from social realities paid for through taxes, and taxes are by definition theft (involuntary resource transactions). Thus being a 100% anarchist would require me to get and stay off The State Grid; in my case a form of suicide. Being on the grid also equates to me having relationships that are less than 100% two-way voluntary; therefore, even though I strive towards the voluntary society, I’m not *yet* a 100% voluntaryist — and if you’re reading this neither are you — you are on The Grid.
Now for atheism. I’m atheistic rather than 100% atheist because I concede it’s (mega-giga-zeta remotely) possible some form of deity created what we humans call “the universe”, “reality”, etc. Some say I’m “agnostic”, but technically I’m a provisional deist; much closer to the typical atheist than the typical agnostic.
This mini-essay posted at and
Posted in essays-mini-essays | Leave a comment

Internet Archive is a non-profit library of millions of free…  Internet Archive is a non-profit library of millions of free books, movies, software, music, and more.

Posted in article-link | Leave a comment