The Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) Regulation stands as a pivotal cornerstone in global product compliance standards. Its reach extends not only within the European Union (EU) but also significantly impacts companies operating beyond its borders, compelling compliance with a myriad of stringent REACH requirements to facilitate product sales within the EU market.
Supply Chain Sustainability Unveiled
Supply chain sustainability embodies the holistic assessment of an organization's footprint on various stakeholders, including employees, local communities, and the environment. It transcends the confines of individual corporate entities, shedding light on the transparency and accountability of supply chains, urging companies to assume responsibility for the practices of their suppliers, even those embedded deep within their operational networks.
Research conducted by the United Nations underscores the profound impact of supply chains, attributing up to 90 percent of a manufacturer's environmental and social footprint to these intricate networks. This revelation underscores the pressing need for manufacturers to fortify their supply chain sustainability initiatives to align with investor expectations, regulatory mandates, and evolving consumer preferences.
The Intersection of REACH and Supply Chain Sustainability
The symbiotic relationship between REACH compliance and supply chain sustainability crystallizes in two distinct facets:

1. Fostering a Sustainable Supply Chain: REACH mandates the establishment of supply chains rooted in sustainability principles, emphasizing the expeditious dissemination of information pertaining to goods to support clients' sustainability endeavors.
2. Delivering Sustainable Products: A sustainable supply chain inherently prioritizes the delivery of safe and environmentally-friendly products. REACH underscores this imperative by advocating for the substitution of substances of very high concern (SVHCs) in products, thereby catalyzing the proliferation of sustainable offerings in the market.

REACH's Evolution in the Era of EU's Green Deal
The EU's ambitious Green Deal heralds a paradigm shift towards a more sustainable economic model, envisioning Europe as a frontrunner in climate neutrality and ecological sustainability by 2050. Embedded within this transformative agenda lies the pivotal role of the REACH Regulation, instrumental in safeguarding human health and the environment from the perils posed by hazardous chemicals.
The evolution of REACH under the auspices of the EU's Green Deal underscores its indispensability in facilitating the transition towards sustainable manufacturing practices. REACH serves as a linchpin for policymakers, facilitating a deeper understanding of chemicals' ramifications within the supply chain while nurturing a conducive environment for innovation aimed at developing safer alternatives.
REACH Compliance: A Catalyst for Sustainability
REACH compliance epitomizes a proactive stance towards sustainability, encapsulating a triad of imperatives:

1. Adherence to Authorized Usage: Manufacturers are mandated to eschew unauthorized applications of substances subject to authorizations, thereby mitigating potential risks to human health and the environment.
2. Restriction Compliance: Striving for compliance necessitates refraining from utilizing substances for restricted purposes, further underscoring the commitment towards sustainable practices.
3. Thorough Reporting: Complete and comprehensive reporting on all Candidate List substances underscores a commitment to transparency and accountability, pivotal tenets in fostering a sustainable economy and planet.

Empowering Sustainability Through REACH Compliance Solutions
In navigating the intricate landscape of REACH compliance, organizations can leverage cutting-edge solutions tailored to streamline regulatory adherence while bolstering sustainability initiatives. Acquis's REACH solution stands at the vanguard of this transformative journey, offering a robust framework for deep-mapping supply chains to identify and mitigate risks at granular levels.
Backed by a cadre of subject matter experts, Acquis's REACH solution empowers organizations to navigate regulatory complexities with ease, automating data acquisition, validation, and management through an intuitive, cloud-based interface. By reallocating resources towards strategic endeavors, organizations can engender a culture of sustainability while fortifying their competitive edge in a rapidly evolving marketplace.
Conclusion
In essence, the synergy between REACH compliance and supply chain sustainability heralds a new era of conscientious manufacturing practices, underpinned by a shared commitment to environmental stewardship and societal well-being. As stakeholders continue to embrace the imperatives of sustainability, the transformative potential of REACH regulation emerges as a potent catalyst for driving meaningful change within the global manufacturing landscape.

Intro

It’s not much of a stretch to say that violence is the primary form of interaction in video games. With a handful of exceptions, most video games involve guys whacking other guys, with varying degrees of brutality. Even chill games fall into this - Stardew Valley has sections with combat in them! Considering the pervasiveness of violence in video games, there has been a ton of amateur and academic commentary on the topic. However, while this is a well-established school of thought, I haven’t seen people try to apply this to Fire Emblem specifically.
So, let’s do that now! In this post, I’ll be exploring how violence in Fire Emblem is implemented - what limitations are placed on violence, how it warps wider game and narrative design, and what it implicitly says and does not say. I hope this post doesn’t come off as too early-2010s “makes you think”-y, but I do think there are multiple interesting things worth talking about here!
Despite the length of this post, "a brief discussion" is an appropriate title, as we won't be able to go into depth on everything. After all, video games are holistic works, so the attitude towards violence is relevant to every aspect of their design. However, I have managed to wrangle some of these threads into the following structure: first a discussion on the fundamental mode of interaction in Fire Emblem, then how stories are constructed with regards to violence, and ending with the aesthetics of violence and how they relate to characters. Also, as FE is a huge series, be aware that I am gonna be making some broad statements which may not apply to each individual plot point of every game. I actually planned to write 3 case studies around Thracia 776, Fates, and Three Houses (which have the most interesting attitudes to violence in the series IMO) which point out these deviations, but this post is way too long and full of tangents already. If people are interested, I’ll make a followup to this post which goes into them in more detail. Also also, because of the nature of this post, I’ll actually give a useful TL;DR for once:
TL;DR: Nintendo games must be fun mechanically, and they can’t be too uncomfortable narratively. If you try to provide a counterpoint by saying “oh this Kirby final boss is super dark it eats 100 morbillion galaxies”, you do not deserve rights. IntSys has to keep to this as a 2nd party publisher, but they also have to deal with the fact that their games are at least nominally about ‘war’ (or at least they put their toes into that particular thematic pool). This conflict between making a fun video game for children/teens and the wider framing of the narrative leads to interesting narrative and aesthetic tensions. also fun is cringe, misery is based

“Do you like hurting other people?” (or The Fundamental Mode of Interaction)

OK LISTEN I KNOW I LITERALLY JUST SAID THAT I DIDN’T WANT TO COME ACROSS AS A EARLY 2010s “VIOLENCE IN VIDYA BAD :O????” PERSON BUT I SWEAR I’M GOING SOMEWHERE WITH THIS
The best place to start when talking about violence in video games is to think about the primary form of interaction in said game. In the case of Fire Emblem, this is in the in-chapter gameplay. Sure, in objective terms the player moves arbitrary objects across a 2D grid which perform subtraction on arbitrary objects controlled by the computer, but this is always framed as controlling a squad of soldiers to engage in (typically lethal) combat with enemies (who are normally also soldiers). When you’re not doing this in-chapter gameplay, you are preparing for the next chapter of combat. This involves surveying the area of combat, preparing weapon loadouts, etc, however more recent entries also include light life-sim-esque elements. To summarize, Fire Emblem’s interactivity involves ordering violence as well as the preparations to order said violence.
For players, this strategic thinking is extremely fun and is the primary draw of the series! You have all these tier lists of who’s better at killing, discussion of the maps where you do the killing, complaints about the length of gameplay sections where you don’t do killing, etc. This is by design, as while I don’t know the core brand tenets of Nintendo, I imagine the Reggie quote “If it isn’t fun, why bother?” is carved into a solid gold statue of Mario in the office lobby. This then is enforced on all associated studios, including IntSys and so Fire Emblem. While I would disagree with that Reggie quote (especially the bit where he says “If it’s not a battle, where’s the fun?” which is a wild statement to make about an entire medium), this approach to making games is ultimately fine, and so IntSys tailored the strategic gameplay to be satisfying to your dopamine receptors. You could analyse what the normalisation of violence even in ‘just for fun’ games says about wider gaming culture, but I won’t get into that here. In any case, let’s dig into a few specifics of FE’s interactivity.
One thing that’s interesting with regard to strategy games is the detached perspective of the player. You order units and observe the resulting violence, but it’s not tactile, you don’t directly swing the sword or shoot the bow or cast the spell like with action games. This adds a layer of separation between the player and what fundamentally happens, at least within the framing that the game provides. It’s not like Call of Duty, where your relationship to the violence is very visceral, where you view everything down the barrel of a gun. OK, I probably shouldn’t use a series that I have very little personal experience with (I only listen to the supplementary lore material, so let’s talk about Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice. While you’re not directly in the driver’s seat, John Sekiro reacts to your every input with extreme responsiveness, so overcoming the game’s challenges i.e. stabbing people is incredibly visceral and satisfying. While this violence is fantastical in nature, there is sufficient blood and explicit sword-action to clearly say “oh yeah you are violently killing all of those bozos with a katana”. Coming back to FE, not only are you far more detached from the violence, it is presented in an extremely cartoony manner… but let’s not get ahead of ourselves here, we’ll get to the aesthetics later. Point is, Fire Emblem gives the viewpoint of a stoic commander, who Does What Needs To Be Done™, and not the viewpoint of an actual soldier who has to do the actual killing.
Now let’s view the player’s perspective on violence from a different angle. Fire Emblem intends for its combat to be relatively relaxed on the player side of things - the turn-based nature allows the player to calmly think through all of their moves, and you typically have perfect information on the enemies. The only exceptions to this are Fog of WaSame Turn Reinforcements, which are rare and typically unpopular amongst the fanbase. This leans into ‘combat as sport’, where (going back to the Reggie quote) you have a fun time picking apart a puzzle with the tools you have, and we all collectively enjoy this! This is a valid way of designing strategy games, and I like what IntSys has done. However, it’s not the only way of making these games - for example, in Total War you have to juggle all your battalions in real time whilst the enemy is bearing down on you, and the XCOM games always have Fog of War and limited information on the enemies, with you never knowing what kind of awful new monster is going to suddenly charge at you. Don’t get me wrong, neither of these follow ‘combat as war’, the principle that violence should properly mimic the stress, tension and unfairness of actual conflict. Hell, neither of them are particularly mature either - Total War is the strategy game equivalent of smashing action figures together, and XCOM emulates a pulp sci-fi alien invasion story. However, the additional pressures these games have make them hew slightly closer to actual conflict, putting you more in that mindset in a way that the clean fun Fire Emblem doesn’t really do. Again, I want to say FE’s approach to violence in in-map gameplay is fine, but when all three of these franchises have an explicit narrative framing of ‘warfare’, it does make Fire Emblem’s narrative a little more… stretched.
Finally, I want to briefly mention the maps. To steal from a brilliant Jacob Geller video, these are Worlds Designed For Violence. At least outside of the Kaga games, the maps you fight on are primarily designed around how the player interacts with them, i.e. fights on them. While I imagine the narrative designers and artists at IntSys are involved throughout the map design process, the gameplay flow probably takes precedence most of the time. Maps are not designed to resemble realistic places that you have to fight through, they are instead designed primarily to provide fun gameplay experiences before being dressed up by the artists to look realistic/fit the specific story beat. This is a more consistently entertaining approach to map design - heaven knows we have a lot of Kaga castle assault maps which are as fun as actually assaulting an entrenched position IRL - but this lack of friction could potentially take the bite out of the intended vibe, neuter any commentary on violence throughout the story.
You may have noticed that we’ve only talked about the “in-map” gameplay for now, when there’s an entire second half of these games, i.e. all the gameplay between the maps. Don’t worry, we’ll get to all of that, but this may fit better in:

Something something “ludonarrative” something something (or Narrative Implications)

(To clarify, here I’m going to talk about the wider plots and narrative structure as opposed to characterisation, as that fits more into the aesthetics of the series)
It’s not bold to say that the narratives of games have to warp around the core gameplay structure. Especially in AAA video game production, the narrative designers usually have to take a back seat to the systems and level designers, at least outside of the initial rough outline they provide in the original game pitch. In this case, the job of the writer is to form vaguely coherent connective tissue between individual levels, setpieces and expensive pre-rendered cutscenes. This must be a very difficult job, and is probably the reason why most video game stories are the way they are. I am not privy to IntSys internal meetings, but I imagine they abide by this paradigm, trying to give a reason for why you fight 20 battles which roughly align with plot beats that were decided years ago.
Put another way, the writers of Fire Emblem must contrive a reason why the characters fight a vast number of violent battles in a strategic manner. This has a pretty easy solution - war! We have found something it’s good for, as whenever the gameplay designers decide that an extra map is required, the writers can just insert “oh no there’s a blockade of enemy soldiers in the way, guess you gotta kill them all”. This is the case for almost all the games and is a fair enough narrative choice, as it’s frankly one of the few scenarios where you could reasonably contrive so many battles, but it’s worth examining this in a bit more detail.
Even in the framing of warfare, there are still a lot of skirmishes, which sometimes the narrative or tone fails to support - or at least, their presence means that violence isn’t taken that seriously. Let’s take an example from early in Awakening: Emmeryn sends the Shepherds to negotiate an alliance with Regna Ferox. On the way, they are ambushed by Risen on the Northroad (1), have to fight the border guards who think Chrom is a bandit I think??? (2), and then after arriving they need to take part in Regna Ferox’s ritual combat to secure their alliance (3). These beats aren’t necessarily bad, and I actually think Awakening uses these opportunities quite well: the Risen are established as a constant threat to the world (except not really in the main story but that’s a whole other thing), “Marth'' gets more development, we set up Regna Ferox as fighty people who like to fight, and while the middle encounter is very tenuous it does set up a funny joke in Cynthia’s paralogue. However, I want to communicate that if the map/encounter designers need X maps between plot points A and B - in this case, needing low-stakes trials in the tutorial period - then there’s gonna be a fair bit of narrative filler. That is to say, there must be multiple combat encounters that kinda just happen, which makes violence a lot more casual in the narrative. See also the myriad examples of “oh shit random bandits attack!”, used to have a lower stakes map, with bandits appearing and vanishing as needed. This works fine enough in the context of ‘combat as sport’, allowing your favourite scrunglo to build up a triple-digit body count, but this casual attitude circumvents potentially interesting ideas with regards violence. Taking the example further, banditry and its causes are never seriously explored, as bandits are just treated as a filler enemy (except in Based As Hell Thracia 776).
Another narrative consequence of needing so many fights is that… you need to fight. That is to say, any anti-war sentiment or appeal to diplomacy in the series is fundamentally undercut by a) strategic combat being a core appeal of the series and b) narrative beats needing to be structured around fighting enemies. It’s a struggle to have moments of diplomacy and reconciliation when you had a fight within 3 minutes of said moment, lest some people start screaming that things are getting boring. This also makes any appeals to pacifism kinda moot. Xander’s quote about “war bad” in Conquest is utter bullshit, as a huge part of the marketing around that route focuses on the coolness of the tactical combat and its challenge. Eirika and Ephraim can never be equal, because Ephraim’s “fighting is fucken awesome” is encouraged by the gameplay, and Eirika can NEVER save 11037 because we need a final boss and no-one else fits the bill.
Speaking of, in video games it’s best practice to have a big bad guy you fight at the end of the story, the toughest mechanical challenge coinciding with the narrative climax. In Fire Emblem, you have one grand final battle which decides the fate of the war and/or world, before cutting to a brief wrap-up and then credits. This is an attempt to make these games satisfying, which is fine, but this is at odds with an anti-war message (which FE often gestures towards) - that is, actual wars tend to be deeply unsatisfying in a narrative sense! Oftentimes, after a decisive battle, things just kinda keep going for a little while afterwards with casualties continuing to pile up until peace terms are agreed. In the few cases where there is a final battle, it’s more of a formality as the decisive moment occurred months ago. See World War 1 and… World War 2 for examples of each, not to mention a whole host of war-related books and films. The problem with doing this in a video game is that it would require having multiple one-sided fights past the most climatic fight, which would be unfun, and we return to that fucking Reggie quote again. While video games can effectively explore this anti-war narrative space - This War of Mine is a fantastic example - it just doesn’t gel with the fun games that IntSys wants to make. I bring this up in the context of FE because Fire Emblem has such an aesthetic focus on warfare compared to other video games, so it sticks out even further. Even in FE6/FE9 where the war is effectively over in the final few maps, the enemies still remain extremely challenging, because if they didn’t things would be boring.
A few minor things that didn’t fit in above before we wrap up this section. First of all, in making an action packed story, Fire Emblem neglects an important aspect of army life in warfare - the “hurrying up and waiting”. In the majority of cases, the breaks between fights is under 10 minutes, it’s just glossed over. Fire Emblem Three Houses is the exception to this, but there it’s more framed as school life. Some people may say “what’s the point in having large amounts of timewasting where nothing happens in my game about war” and to that I would say fuck you, I want to play Jarhead Emblem. Next, Fire Emblem involves fighting people AND monsters, but these targets are typically given equal narrative weight, outside of maybe a funny line of dialogue about someone being afraid of monsters. In 99% of cases, enemy soldiers you fight have no more humanity than literal monsters. The death of any of your beloved soldiers is a tragedy with big sad death quotes, the death of those poor fuckers is quite literally a statistic which is proudly used to rank how well your guys have done at the end of the game. Finally, the limited scope of the violence the series can show limits the potential impact of scenes. In some cases, this is good as the implication is enough, e.g. the ‘Monica’ scene in Sacred Stones is wonderfully grim and would be weakened by anything explicit. However, a number of other scenes are neutered by the limitations on violence. This fundamentally relates to the aesthetics of the series:

insert prozd tweet/skit here (or Aesthetics, Tone, and Characters)

I’ve been talking a lot about ‘the violence committed’, and this might have seemed a bit weird to you. It’s a true statement, but because the violence is mostly cartoony and abstracted - bad guys disappear into nothingness, there’s no blood, etc - it’s hard to think of it in that way. It’s basically impossible to place Fire Emblem in the same artistic sphere as, say, All Quiet on the Western Front. This aesthetic sense was partially tech-limited in the early NES and SNES games, which was grandfathered into the more graphically complex titles, but it’s also related to how the aesthetics unavoidably warp the tone of the work. IntSys needs their games to be relatively lighthearted and unconcerned with the consequences of its violence, as one of the core appeals of these games is the charming cast of characters. As you would expect, it would be a lot harder to appreciate your goofy blorbos and their lighthearted chats about nothing if you could see the brutal consequences of their triple digit body counts. If violence was more realistic, there would be a lot less “ooh I like training and/or this one hyperspecific food” or “I like peace, but I guess violence may be possibly needed sometimes” and there would have to be a lot more trauma and dourness. There are also age rating concerns, as you can’t exactly sell Come And See Emblem to pre-teens. And once more, to clarify: Fire Emblem as it exists now is fine! I like the lighthearted tone of this series, and I like the characters that reside within it. However, a few problems do arise from IntSys’s approach to violence, as occasionally they brush up against darker ideas but (due to similar reasons to the above) they can never commit to them, which neuters their potential impact. This is especially troublesome with regards to characterisation, as the little dudes are a core appeal, so if something is off that could cause problems. In a sense, at points we have severe aesthetic tension.
A fairly useful case study to see how this affects characterisation is with Mozu in Fire Emblem Fates. Mozu is a charming character, a genial country bumpkin with a bit of an edge at times, who has fond memories of her hometown. This lines up with the lighthearted tone of her recruitment paralogue, where (checks notes) her entire village gets massacred by inhuman monsters, with her mother literally being murdered right in front of her, and she joins up with Corrin’s party because there is literally nothing left of her old life. I understand that people who experience extreme trauma do still manage to live meaningful lives, and that IntSys wouldn’t want to have a character who is a barely functional traumatised mess for 90% of the campaign. However, this doesn’t explain the sheer dissonance between the relatively normal and well-adjusted Mozu who quietly remembers her lost loved ones, and the fact that her village got My Lai’d a handful of weeks ago in the game’s timeline. IMO this would work a lot better if there were a few survivors (instead of literally everyone else dying), with Mozu actively choosing to leave her old life to help others instead of being forced to leave by circumstance. This reduction in scope would mitigate the dissonance between the character and what actually happens to her. This is by far the most extreme example in the series, however I’m sure you can think of others. My issue here is not with having ‘normal’ characters, or with them suffering tragedies, my issue is the dissonance between the two when viewing the scope of said tragedies. This is just one way the series wants to get into darker territory, then swiftly backing off instead of delving into the consequences.
This aesthetic restriction also affects the potential impact of dramatic scenes in the main story, limiting what the focus of these scenes can actually be. This little bit will involve heavy spoilers for Genealogy of the Holy War and Spec Ops: The Line (I KNOW THESE GAMES ARE VERY DIFFERENT WITH VERY DIFFERENT INTENDED DEMOGRAPHICS IN VERY DIFFERENT CULTURAL CONTEXTS, SHUT UP). Both have a very important narrative moment around their midpoints, involving fire magic/white phosphorus respectively. In each game, the deaths that occur are utterly horrific when you think about them. In FE4 the focus is on the drama of the plot twist and effects on the characters, with the actual effects of the violence being left to implication. We don’t know if this was the original intent of Kaga and the team, or if this was enforced by various tech- and publisher-related restrictions, but in either case we do not see anything explicit. In any case, in Spec Ops: The Line, the horror and graphic nature of the violence is completely inescapable, and therefore forms the core of the turning point of the story. The specifics of the violence itself are crucial - the game does not work if you don’t see the consequences of the white phosphorus - and it leads beautifully to the complete descent of its endgame. You may be saying “of course you couldn’t show that violence in FE, it’s a kids game” which is true, and in any case the scene in Genealogy is very good, even without showing the violence. I imagine if we get a remake in the year 202X we wouldn’t see anything explicit anyway, partially due to the publisher but also because the scene doesn’t necessarily need it. The point I am trying to make is that the aesthetics form a limitation on what Fire Emblem can explore, narrative space that the series fundamentally cannot reach.
One more thing, and this isn’t really about the games themselves but the impressions leading into them, and how the aesthetics can affect that. Do you guys remember when the intro cutscene of Three Houses was released a few weeks before release? I do, and I also remember the collective shock of the community when seeing the early previews. It was so drastically different to everything that had come before, and consequently was really intriguing - you can see a lot of speculation in the above comments. To clarify, I don’t want to pretend that 3H is some kind of super mature ultra gritty war story, or that blood = good game, but that beginning cutscene gave one hell of a first impression. Even though the game isn’t that much darker than any other FE game, the sheer unexpectedness put people off-kilter in a kinda awesome way. Does the game actually deliver? YMMV, but I think this (and some of the later cutscenes, such as the mid-game Dimitri one) work quite well. Sometimes, a little injection of harsher violence can go a long way.

Conclusion

Frankly I don’t really have a conclusion, sorry. As you can see, there are so many disparate strands, I can’t possibly make one grand thesis statement. Maybe the inherent contradictions of having warfare in a family friendly video game weakens the potential end result? I guess, but I don’t want to imply that what we have now is bad, as it is pretty good tbh. So, uhh…
…
OK, if I had to say something, it’s more about the process of making this. Having to try and think about how violence intersects with a video game you like takes you in a number of different directions. Ultimately, this process was really fulfilling for me, and I would recommend that you do the same (for FE or anything else)! Trying to analyse something you enjoy from a perspective not usually applied is pretty neat. If you guys have any thoughts (on the points above or your own), I’d be very interested to hear them!
Also, if people are interested, I’ll try to make a few case studies. I would focus on Thracia 776, Fates, and Three Houses, as (when thinking on this topic) I found that these games were consistently the most intriguing, with the most interesting relationships to violence. This would probably take a while though, as I am gonna be very busy in June, and I probably won’t have time this month either.

It's okay for BINI's music to be listened to, it's okay that people admire the eight girls - but at this point, they should not be the standard of PPOP.

1. In principle, BINI (and BGYO) should not be part of the "PPOP Rise" to begin with. They are from a major network who often overshadows small artists who intended to bring new color and flavor to the industry. It is a straight up manipulation to claim BINI introduce PPOP to general public. The public already knew PPOP, it just took time for them to catch up - and the reason traces back on how mainstream media would portray PPOP as inferior to foreign music, or even to other OPM genres. "PPOP Rise" is a grassroot initiative, it should ultimately lift those groups that are from small/independent companies/management, rescue them from mismanagement, exploitation. Even if we consider how BINI brings visibility of PPOP to the mainstream channel, the manner and nature of visibility should still be interrogated (which are points 2 and 3). Otherwise, it will be just like K-POP/Hallyu that is so glorified, that people would not care about exploited individuals that the system caused (note that PH is not as rich as South Korea, exploitation will be much worse.)
2. BINI's brand of musicality is mediocrity. Their fans would conceal their music as "authentic OPM sound" when in reality, it is just formulaic, repetitive, typical, mediocre sound in the OPM industry. At best, their ppop-ness is a compromised version to appeal the general public - which is often a bad thing because it disincentivize people to look deeper (why should people look deeper, when it is already repackaged to suit their preference. Why give up the comfort of being adjusted to, to be the one adjusting, right?). Realize that a movement would not require everyone (not even majority of people) to subscribe to it, it just needs a level of tolerance and acceptance, that PPOP is not "bad" or "evil", that it should not be a subject of disgust, that it is a "valid" and "good" choice of music too. That the government (!!!) should support it too. Bottomline, the mediocre-sounding PPOP can at best water down the hate [-probably a strong word], but not necessarily facilitating genuine tolerance and acceptance. It offers an "acceptable" version, but leaves the "hated" still hated, or worse.
3. BINI's strategy is to get attention, and not necessarily to build a sustainable community. Their marketing strategy has always been to get attention first and foremost, whether it's negative or positive. The troll machinery often works for them (Side note: it's interesting how the group suddenly blew up when KathNiel broke up.), they would divert narratives whenever necessary, incite fan wars to make sure of the group's visibility to public. Good strategy? Yes. Respectable strategy? No. This cultivates a culture of music appreciation only on the surface level, gain followers that only bandwagon but never really understand the movement in principles. (ehem. "Kakampink" becoming a status symbol than a real social movement).

The PPOP movement is for individuals who were deprived of opportunities to be recognized because of how the elitist entertainment industry (a) gatekeeps, and (b) sets absurd standards to music appreciation. The PPOP movement should offer new sound and themes to its listeners (local or foreign). PPOP should be an extension of [and it should broaden] OPM music, and not mere derivative works. Lastly, in order for PPOP to "rise", it should establish a core community (regardless of its size) that will consistently advocate for fairness and development, not a community that concedes its inferiority to others or that boasts itself to be "best" without any principles.

Welcome to our comprehensive guide on Economics Exam Help preparation! Economics is a complex and multifaceted field of study that encompasses a wide range of concepts, theories, and principles. Whether you're a student preparing for a high school economics exam, a college student facing a challenging economics course, or someone seeking to deepen their understanding of economic concepts, this guide is for you. In this blog, we'll provide expert guidance and tips to help you excel in your Economics Exam Help and achieve academic success.
Understanding Key Economic Concepts
Before diving into exam preparation, it's essential to have a solid grasp of key economic concepts and principles. We'll review fundamental topics such as supply and demand, elasticity, market structures, fiscal policy, monetary policy, international trade, and economic indicators. By understanding these core concepts, you'll be better equipped to tackle exam questions and demonstrate your knowledge effectively.
Effective Study Strategies
Preparing for Economics Exam Help requires strategic planning and effective study techniques. We'll explore proven study strategies such as creating study schedules, organizing study materials, utilizing active learning methods, practicing problem-solving, and seeking clarification on challenging topics. Additionally, we'll discuss the importance of regular review and self-assessment to reinforce learning and identify areas for improvement.
Practice Questions and Mock Exams
Practice makes perfect, especially when it comes to exam preparation. We'll provide a variety of practice questions and mock exams covering different economic concepts and exam formats. Practicing with these questions will help you familiarize yourself with exam content, improve your problem-solving skills, and build confidence for the actual exam day.
Time Management Tips
Time management is crucial during exams, ensuring you allocate sufficient time to each section and complete the exam within the allotted timeframe. We'll share time management tips and strategies to help you prioritize tasks, pace yourself effectively, and avoid running out of time during the exam. Additionally, we'll discuss techniques for managing exam stress and maintaining focus under pressure.
Exam Day Preparation
On the day of the exam, proper preparation is key to performing your best. We'll provide tips for ensuring you arrive at the exam venue on time, bring all necessary materials, read and understand exam instructions carefully, allocate time wisely across different sections, and review your answers before submitting. By following these exam day tips, you can approach the exam with confidence and maximize your chances of success.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, preparing for economics exams requires dedication, discipline, and effective study strategies. By understanding key economic concepts, implementing proven study techniques, practicing with practice questions and mock exams, managing your time effectively, and preparing thoroughly for exam day, you can achieve academic success in economics. Remember to stay focused, stay organized, and stay motivated throughout your exam preparation journey. With expert guidance and diligent effort, you can conquer your economics exams and achieve your academic goals.

I recently watched an insightful video by Alex Hormozi where he emphasizes the profitability of selling to rich people.
With this approach in mind, I'm exploring business ideas that cater specifically to the wealthy demographic in Indonesia—a country with a big luxury market.
Hormozi suggests that businesses with high customer lifetime value and high margins are key. What business models do you think would resonate with the wealthy Indonesian clientele, aligning with Hormozi's principles?
Here are some concepts I'm considering:
Bespoke Travel Experiences: Curating exclusive and personalized travel packages for luxury destinations within and beyond Indonesia.
High-End Real Estate Concierge: Offering a service that manages all aspects of property buying, selling, and management for affluent clients.
Luxury Automotive Club: Creating a membership-based club offering access to a fleet of luxury vehicles for personal use or events.
Private Wealth Management Firm: Specializing in investment advice and financial planning services tailored for the rich.
Elite Event Planning Services: Organizing lavish events from weddings to corporate galas with an exclusive client list.
Given Hormozi's advice, what other lucrative business opportunities do you think could thrive in Indonesia’s luxury market?
Any insights or additional ideas would be greatly appreciated!

In today's dynamic and competitive business landscape, the role of strategic leadership has never been more crucial. Organizations worldwide are recognizing the significance of cultivating leaders who not only navigate complexities but also steer their teams towards success with vision and clarity. Strategic leadership training emerges as a powerful tool in this endeavor, empowering individuals with the skills and mindset necessary to excel in leadership roles.

Understanding Strategic Leadership

Before delving into the nuances of strategic leadership training, it's essential to grasp what strategic leadership entails. At its core, strategic leadership revolves around the ability to align organizational objectives with innovative strategies, inspiring and mobilizing teams towards shared goals. It involves forward-thinking, decisiveness, and the capacity to anticipate and adapt to change swiftly.

The Need for Strategic Leadership Training

In today's fast-paced environment, traditional leadership models often fall short in addressing the complexities and uncertainties businesses face. Strategic leadership training bridges this gap by equipping leaders with the tools to navigate ambiguity, make informed decisions, and drive sustainable growth. It fosters a strategic mindset that enables leaders to anticipate challenges, identify opportunities, and chart a course for long-term success.

Key Components of Strategic Leadership Training

1. Visionary Thinking: Strategic leaders possess a clear vision of the future and effectively communicate this vision to inspire and motivate their teams. Training programs focus on honing this visionary thinking, helping leaders articulate compelling visions that resonate with stakeholders and drive organizational success.
2. Strategic Planning: Strategic leadership involves crafting and executing effective strategies to achieve organizational objectives. Training modules delve into the intricacies of strategic planning, teaching leaders how to assess market dynamics, analyze competitive landscapes, and develop actionable plans that capitalize on opportunities and mitigate risks.
3. Decision-Making Skills: In today's complex environment, leaders are often faced with high-stakes decisions that impact the organization's trajectory. Strategic leadership training emphasizes the development of sound decision-making skills, equipping leaders with frameworks for evaluating alternatives, weighing risks, and making informed choices aligned with strategic priorities.
4. Change Management: Adaptability is a hallmark of effective leadership, particularly in times of change and uncertainty. Training programs address the principles of change management, empowering leaders to lead their teams through transitions seamlessly, foster resilience, and cultivate a culture of innovation and continuous improvement.
5. Effective Communication: Communication lies at the heart of leadership, facilitating alignment, collaboration, and engagement within the organization. Strategic leadership training emphasizes the importance of effective communication skills, including active listening, persuasive communication, and the ability to tailor messages to diverse audiences.

The Impact of Strategic Leadership Training

Investing in strategic leadership training yields numerous benefits for organizations, including:

• Enhanced Strategic Alignment: Leaders equipped with strategic leadership skills can align organizational efforts with overarching goals, ensuring synergy and coherence across departments.
• Improved Decision-Making: Training empowers leaders to make informed decisions that drive sustainable growth and competitive advantage, fostering a culture of agility and innovation.
• Heightened Employee Engagement: Effective leadership inspires and motivates teams, fostering a sense of purpose and belonging that enhances employee engagement and retention.
• Greater Resilience: Equipped with the tools to navigate challenges and capitalize on opportunities, organizations become more resilient in the face of adversity, maintaining a competitive edge in volatile markets.

Conclusion

In a rapidly evolving business landscape, strategic leadership is indispensable for organizational success. Strategic leadership training serves as a catalyst for developing leaders who can navigate complexity, inspire innovation, and drive sustainable growth. By investing in strategic leadership development, organizations can cultivate a pipeline of visionary leaders capable of steering them towards a brighter future.
In today's dynamic and competitive business landscape, the role of strategic leadership has never been more crucial. Organizations worldwide are recognizing the significance of cultivating leaders who not only navigate complexities but also steer their teams towards success with vision and clarity. Strategic leadership training emerges as a powerful tool in this endeavor, empowering individuals with the skills and mindset necessary to excel in leadership roles.

Understanding Strategic Leadership

Before delving into the nuances of strategic leadership training, it's essential to grasp what strategic leadership entails. At its core, strategic leadership revolves around the ability to align organizational objectives with innovative strategies, inspiring and mobilizing teams towards shared goals. It involves forward-thinking, decisiveness, and the capacity to anticipate and adapt to change swiftly.

The Need for Strategic Leadership Training

In today's fast-paced environment, traditional leadership models often fall short in addressing the complexities and uncertainties businesses face. Strategic leadership training bridges this gap by equipping leaders with the tools to navigate ambiguity, make informed decisions, and drive sustainable growth. It fosters a strategic mindset that enables leaders to anticipate challenges, identify opportunities, and chart a course for long-term success.

Key Components of Strategic Leadership Training

1. Visionary Thinking: Strategic leaders possess a clear vision of the future and effectively communicate this vision to inspire and motivate their teams. Training programs focus on honing this visionary thinking, helping leaders articulate compelling visions that resonate with stakeholders and drive organizational success.
2. Strategic Planning: Strategic leadership involves crafting and executing effective strategies to achieve organizational objectives. Training modules delve into the intricacies of strategic planning, teaching leaders how to assess market dynamics, analyze competitive landscapes, and develop actionable plans that capitalize on opportunities and mitigate risks.
3. Decision-Making Skills: In today's complex environment, leaders are often faced with high-stakes decisions that impact the organization's trajectory. Strategic leadership training emphasizes the development of sound decision-making skills, equipping leaders with frameworks for evaluating alternatives, weighing risks, and making informed choices aligned with strategic priorities.
4. Change Management: Adaptability is a hallmark of effective leadership, particularly in times of change and uncertainty. Training programs address the principles of change management, empowering leaders to lead their teams through transitions seamlessly, foster resilience, and cultivate a culture of innovation and continuous improvement.
5. Effective Communication: Communication lies at the heart of leadership, facilitating alignment, collaboration, and engagement within the organization. Strategic leadership training emphasizes the importance of effective communication skills, including active listening, persuasive communication, and the ability to tailor messages to diverse audiences.

The Impact of Strategic Leadership Training

Investing in strategic leadership training yields numerous benefits for organizations, including:

• Enhanced Strategic Alignment: Leaders equipped with strategic leadership skills can align organizational efforts with overarching goals, ensuring synergy and coherence across departments.
• Improved Decision-Making: Training empowers leaders to make informed decisions that drive sustainable growth and competitive advantage, fostering a culture of agility and innovation.
• Heightened Employee Engagement: Effective leadership inspires and motivates teams, fostering a sense of purpose and belonging that enhances employee engagement and retention.
• Greater Resilience: Equipped with the tools to navigate challenges and capitalize on opportunities, organizations become more resilient in the face of adversity, maintaining a competitive edge in volatile markets.

Conclusion

In a rapidly evolving business landscape, strategic leadership is indispensable for organizational success. Strategic leadership training serves as a catalyst for developing leaders who can navigate complexity, inspire innovation, and drive sustainable growth. By investing in strategic leadership development, organizations can cultivate a pipeline of visionary leaders capable of steering them towards a brighter future.

Are you looking to transform your home interior in Kuwait into a stylish and inviting space? Look no further than Istore Q8, the ultimate destination for all your interior design needs. With years of experience and a passion for creating beautiful living spaces, Istore Q8 is the best choice for bringing your design dreams to life.
"Istore Q8" likely refers to a specific interior design company or firm based in Kuwait. Without specific information about this company, it's challenging to provide details about their interior design services or style.
However, interior design firms typically offer a range of services tailored to their clients' needs. These services may include:

1. Residential Interior Design: Creating personalized and functional living spaces for homeowners, including living rooms, bedrooms, kitchens, and bathrooms. This may involve space planning, furniture selection, color schemes, and decorative accents.
2. Commercial Interior Design: Designing interior spaces for commercial establishments such as offices, retail stores, restaurants, hotels, and healthcare facilities. This often involves creating layouts that optimize workflow, customer experience, and brand identity.
3. Hospitality Design: Designing interiors for hotels, resorts, restaurants, and cafes with a focus on creating welcoming and memorable environments for guests. This may involve selecting durable and stylish furnishings, lighting design, and creating ambiances that enhance the overall guest experience.
4. Office Design: Designing functional and ergonomic workspaces for businesses to promote productivity, collaboration, and employee well-being. This may include workspace planning, furniture selection, lighting design, and incorporating elements that reflect the company's brand and culture.
5. Retail Design: Designing interior spaces for retail stores and showrooms to attract customers, enhance the shopping experience, and showcase products effectively. This may involve creating visually appealing displays, optimizing traffic flow, and integrating branding elements.
6. Turnkey Solutions: Some interior design firms offer turnkey solutions, where they handle every aspect of the design and implementation process, from concept development to construction management and final installation.

If you're interested in learning more about the specific services and style of Istore Q8, I would recommend visiting their website or contacting them directly for more information.
Interior design involves the skillful balance of artistry and scientific principles to transform indoor spaces into more attractive and conducive environments, promoting the well-being and satisfaction of its inhabitants. It involves the manipulation of spatial volume, as well as surface treatment, to create a functional and visually appealing setting.
Interior designers work with a variety of elements including color, furniture, lighting, texture, and layout to create spaces that are both beautiful and functional. They often consider the needs and preferences of their clients, as well as the purpose of the space, to develop designs that meet specific requirements.
Interior design can encompass a wide range of spaces, from residential homes and apartments to commercial offices, retail stores, restaurants, hotels, and more. Designers may specialize in a particular area, such as kitchen design or sustainable design, or work across multiple sectors.
Key aspects of interior design include:

1. Space planning: Determining how to best utilize the available space to meet the functional needs of the occupants while maintaining a sense of balance and harmony.
2. Color palette: Choosing appropriate colors for walls, floors, furnishings, and accessories to create a desired atmosphere and mood.
3. Furniture selection: Selecting furniture pieces that are both stylish and functional, and arranging them in a way that maximizes comfort and usability.
4. Lighting design: Planning the placement of lighting fixtures to enhance the ambiance of a space, as well as to provide adequate illumination for tasks and activities.
5. Client consultation: Understanding the client's needs, preferences, budget, and timeline is the first step. This involves discussing the purpose of the space, any specific requirements or constraints, and the desired style or ambiance.
6. Texture and materials: Incorporating a variety of textures and materials, such as wood, metal, glass, and fabric, to add visual interest and tactile appeal to a space.
7. Accessories and decor: Adding finishing touches such as artwork, rugs, pillows, and other decorative elements to personalize the space and tie the design together.

Overall, interior design is about creating environments that not only look good but also support the well-being and functionality of the people who inhabit them.
Why Choose IStore Q8 for Interior Designing?
When it comes to interior designing in Kuwait, Istore Q8 stands out as a premier choice for several reasons. Their team of skilled professionals has a wealth of expertise in creating stunning, customized interiors that perfectly reflect your style and personality. Whether you're looking to refresh a single room or redesign your entire home, I store Q8 has the knowledge and creativity to exceed your expectations.

What Services Does Istore Q8 Offer?

Istore Q8 offers a wide range of interior designing services to cater to all your needs. From concept development and space planning to furniture selection and styling, their team will guide you through every step of the design process with precision and care. Whether you prefer a modern, minimalist look or a more traditional aesthetic, Istore Q8 has the skills and resources to bring your vision to life.

The Istore Q8 Experience

At Istore Q8, client satisfaction is always the top priority. Their dedicated team will work closely with you to understand your design goals and preferences, ensuring that the final result exceeds your expectations. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to quality craftsmanship, Istore Q8 delivers interiors that are not only beautiful but also functional and sustainable.

Expertise and Authority in Interior Designing

With a proven track record of successful projects and satisfied clients, Istore Q8 has established itself as a leader in the field of interior design in Kuwait. Their team's deep knowledge of design principles, materials, and trends enables them to create interiors that are both timeless and on-trend. When you choose Istore Q8, you can trust that you're working with a team that has the expertise and authority to bring your design vision to life.
In conclusion, if you're looking to elevate your home interior in Kuwait, Istore Q8 is the go-to destination for all your interior design needs. With a talented team of professionals, a range of services, and a commitment to excellence, I store Q8 will help you create a space that truly reflects your style and personality. Contact Istore Q8 today and turn your design dreams into reality.
In conclusion, interior design in Kuwait reflects a blend of cultural influences, modern trends, and functional considerations. With a booming economy and a growing population, there’s a heightened demand for innovative and personalized interior design solutions across residential, commercial, and hospitality sectors.
Kuwait's interior design scene embraces a diversity of styles, ranging from traditional Arabic motifs to contemporary and minimalist aesthetics. Interior designers in Kuwait often prioritize creating spaces that balance functionality with elegance, incorporating luxurious materials, intricate detailing, and cutting-edge technology to meet the discerning tastes of clients.
In Kuwait's residential sector, there's a focus on creating homes that offer comfort, privacy, and a sense of luxury. Open-plan layouts, high-end finishes, and integrated smart home systems are becoming increasingly popular, catering to the lifestyle preferences of affluent residents.
In the commercial and hospitality sectors, interior design plays a crucial role in creating memorable experiences for customers and guests. Retail spaces emphasize immersive and interactive environments, while restaurants and hotels focus on creating ambiance, atmosphere, and brand identity to stand out in a competitive market.
Sustainability and eco-conscious design are also gaining traction in Kuwait, with a growing emphasis on energy-efficient solutions, natural materials, and environmentally friendly practices.
Overall, interior design in Kuwait is characterized by a dynamic and evolving landscape, driven by innovation, creativity, and a commitment to delivering spaces that inspire, delight, and enrich the lives of those who inhabit them.
Are you looking to transform your home interior in Kuwait into a stylish and inviting space? Look no further than Istore Q8, the ultimate destination for all your interior design needs. With years of experience and a passion for creating beautiful living spaces, Istore Q8 is the best choice for bringing your design dreams to life.
"Istore Q8" likely refers to a specific interior design company or firm based in Kuwait. Without specific information about this company, it's challenging to provide details about their interior design services or style.
However, interior design firms typically offer a range of services tailored to their clients' needs. These services may include:

1. Residential Interior Design: Creating personalized and functional living spaces for homeowners, including living rooms, bedrooms, kitchens, and bathrooms. This may involve space planning, furniture selection, color schemes, and decorative accents.
2. Commercial Interior Design: Designing interior spaces for commercial establishments such as offices, retail stores, restaurants, hotels, and healthcare facilities. This often involves creating layouts that optimize workflow, customer experience, and brand identity.
3. Hospitality Design: Designing interiors for hotels, resorts, restaurants, and cafes with a focus on creating welcoming and memorable environments for guests. This may involve selecting durable and stylish furnishings, lighting design, and creating ambiances that enhance the overall guest experience.
4. Office Design: Designing functional and ergonomic workspaces for businesses to promote productivity, collaboration, and employee well-being. This may include workspace planning, furniture selection, lighting design, and incorporating elements that reflect the company's brand and culture.
5. Retail Design: Designing interior spaces for retail stores and showrooms to attract customers, enhance the shopping experience, and showcase products effectively. This may involve creating visually appealing displays, optimizing traffic flow, and integrating branding elements.
6. Turnkey Solutions: Some interior design firms offer turnkey solutions, where they handle every aspect of the design and implementation process, from concept development to construction management and final installation.

If you're interested in learning more about the specific services and style of Istore Q8, I would recommend visiting their website or contacting them directly for more information.
Interior design involves the skillful balance of artistry and scientific principles to transform indoor spaces into more attractive and conducive environments, promoting the well-being and satisfaction of its inhabitants. It involves the manipulation of spatial volume, as well as surface treatment, to create a functional and visually appealing setting.
Interior designers work with a variety of elements including color, furniture, lighting, texture, and layout to create spaces that are both beautiful and functional. They often consider the needs and preferences of their clients, as well as the purpose of the space, to develop designs that meet specific requirements.
Interior design can encompass a wide range of spaces, from residential homes and apartments to commercial offices, retail stores, restaurants, hotels, and more. Designers may specialize in a particular area, such as kitchen design or sustainable design, or work across multiple sectors.
Key aspects of interior design include:

1. Space planning: Determining how to best utilize the available space to meet the functional needs of the occupants while maintaining a sense of balance and harmony.
2. Color palette: Choosing appropriate colors for walls, floors, furnishings, and accessories to create a desired atmosphere and mood.
3. Furniture selection: Selecting furniture pieces that are both stylish and functional, and arranging them in a way that maximizes comfort and usability.
4. Lighting design: Planning the placement of lighting fixtures to enhance the ambiance of a space, as well as to provide adequate illumination for tasks and activities.
5. Client consultation: Understanding the client's needs, preferences, budget, and timeline is the first step. This involves discussing the purpose of the space, any specific requirements or constraints, and the desired style or ambiance.
6. Texture and materials: Incorporating a variety of textures and materials, such as wood, metal, glass, and fabric, to add visual interest and tactile appeal to a space.
7. Accessories and decor: Adding finishing touches such as artwork, rugs, pillows, and other decorative elements to personalize the space and tie the design together.

Overall, interior design is about creating environments that not only look good but also support the well-being and functionality of the people who inhabit them.
Why Choose IStore Q8 for Interior Designing?
When it comes to interior designing in Kuwait, Istore Q8 stands out as a premier choice for several reasons. Their team of skilled professionals has a wealth of expertise in creating stunning, customized interiors that perfectly reflect your style and personality. Whether you're looking to refresh a single room or redesign your entire home, I store Q8 has the knowledge and creativity to exceed your expectations.

What Services Does Istore Q8 Offer?

Istore Q8 offers a wide range of interior designing services to cater to all your needs. From concept development and space planning to furniture selection and styling, their team will guide you through every step of the design process with precision and care. Whether you prefer a modern, minimalist look or a more traditional aesthetic, Istore Q8 has the skills and resources to bring your vision to life.

The Istore Q8 Experience

At Istore Q8, client satisfaction is always the top priority. Their dedicated team will work closely with you to understand your design goals and preferences, ensuring that the final result exceeds your expectations. With a keen eye for detail and a commitment to quality craftsmanship, Istore Q8 delivers interiors that are not only beautiful but also functional and sustainable.

Expertise and Authority in Interior Designing

With a proven track record of successful projects and satisfied clients, Istore Q8 has established itself as a leader in the field of interior design in Kuwait. Their team's deep knowledge of design principles, materials, and trends enables them to create interiors that are both timeless and on-trend. When you choose Istore Q8, you can trust that you're working with a team that has the expertise and authority to bring your design vision to life.
In conclusion, if you're looking to elevate your home interior in Kuwait, Istore Q8 is the go-to destination for all your interior design needs. With a talented team of professionals, a range of services, and a commitment to excellence, I store Q8 will help you create a space that truly reflects your style and personality. Contact Istore Q8 today and turn your design dreams into reality.
In conclusion, interior design in Kuwait reflects a blend of cultural influences, modern trends, and functional considerations. With a booming economy and a growing population, there’s a heightened demand for innovative and personalized interior design solutions across residential, commercial, and hospitality sectors.
Kuwait's interior design scene embraces a diversity of styles, ranging from traditional Arabic motifs to contemporary and minimalist aesthetics. Interior designers in Kuwait often prioritize creating spaces that balance functionality with elegance, incorporating luxurious materials, intricate detailing, and cutting-edge technology to meet the discerning tastes of clients.
In Kuwait's residential sector, there's a focus on creating homes that offer comfort, privacy, and a sense of luxury. Open-plan layouts, high-end finishes, and integrated smart home systems are becoming increasingly popular, catering to the lifestyle preferences of affluent residents.
In the commercial and hospitality sectors, interior design plays a crucial role in creating memorable experiences for customers and guests. Retail spaces emphasize immersive and interactive environments, while restaurants and hotels focus on creating ambiance, atmosphere, and brand identity to stand out in a competitive market.
Sustainability and eco-conscious design are also gaining traction in Kuwait, with a growing emphasis on energy-efficient solutions, natural materials, and environmentally friendly practices.
Overall, interior design in Kuwait is characterized by a dynamic and evolving landscape, driven by innovation, creativity, and a commitment to delivering spaces that inspire, delight, and enrich the lives of those who inhabit them.

Ever feel like your brilliant content is just not getting the eyeballs it deserves? You might be missing a crucial piece: the hook. A compelling hook is your secret weapon for capturing attention instantly. Here's how you can craft hooks that not only grab attention but also hold it, based on timeless principles from experienced marketers.

1. Start with a Bang! Begin your piece with a statement that sparks curiosity or provokes thought. For instance, "What if I told you that the most successful marketing campaigns shared one hidden secret?" This kind of opening makes the reader pause and think, "I need to know more!"
   
2. Use Numbers or Surprising Facts Numbers help quantify your message and offer a tangible grasp of your topic. A hook like "95% of marketers agree—this strategy triples your engagement" is both informative and intriguing.
   
3. Ask a Compelling Question Questions provoke thought and invite interaction. A question like "Do you know the most underutilized tactic in digital marketing today?" can lead readers to engage with your content to find the answer.
   
4. Paint a Picture with Vivid Descriptions Visual hooks can be incredibly powerful. Describe a scene or outcome vividly to draw readers into your narrative. For example, "Imagine achieving your yearly sales target in just one quarter."
   
5. Leverage Storytelling Start with a brief but engaging story to illustrate your main point. Stories create a personal connection and make your content relatable. "Last year, a small startup turned their last $500 into a $5 million revenue stream. Here's how they did it."
   

Why is mastering the art of the hook critical?
In our fast-paced world, the first few seconds of your content decide whether someone will scroll past or stop and engage. By crafting an irresistible hook, you not only increase the chances of your content being read but also enhance its impact.
We’d love to hear your thoughts or see examples of your favorite hooks! Let’s discuss what you think works and what doesn’t.

https://mises.org/mises-daily/society-without-state
In attempting to outline how a “society without a state” — that is, an anarchist society — might function successfully, I would first like to defuse two common but mistaken criticisms of this approach. First, is the argument that in providing for such defense or protection services as courts, police, or even law itself, I am simply smuggling the state back into society in another form, and that therefore the system I am both analyzing and advocating is not “really” anarchism. This sort of criticism can only involve us in an endless and arid dispute over semantics. Let me say from the beginning that I define the state as that institution which possesses one or both (almost always both) of the following properties: (1) it acquires its income by the physical coercion known as “taxation”; and (2) it asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defense service (police and courts) over a given territorial area. An institution not possessing either of these properties is not and cannot be, in accordance with my definition, a state. On the other hand, I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of an individual. Anarchists oppose the state because it has its very being in such aggression, namely, the expropriation of private property through taxation, the coercive exclusion of other providers of defense service from its territory, and all of the other depredations and coercions that are built upon these twin foci of invasions of individual rights.
Nor is our definition of the state arbitrary, for these two characteristics have been possessed by what is generally acknowledged to be states throughout recorded history. The state, by its use of physical coercion, has arrogated to itself a compulsory monopoly of defense services over its territorial jurisdiction. But it is certainly conceptually possible for such services to be supplied by private, non-state institutions, and indeed such services have historically been supplied by other organizations than the state. To be opposed to the state is then not necessarily to be opposed to services that have often been linked with it; to be opposed to the state does not necessarily imply that we must be opposed to police protection, courts, arbitration, the minting of money, postal service, or roads and highways. Some anarchists have indeed been opposed to police and to all physical coercion in defense of person and property, but this is not inherent in and is fundamentally irrelevant to the anarchist position, which is precisely marked by opposition to all physical coercion invasive of, or aggressing against, person and property.
The crucial role of taxation may be seen in the fact that the state is the only institution or organization in society which regularly and systematically acquires its income through the use of physical coercion. All other individuals or organizations acquire their income voluntarily, either (1) through the voluntary sale of goods and services to consumers on the market, or (2) through voluntary gifts or donations by members or other donors. If I cease or refrain from purchasing Wheaties on the market, the Wheaties producers do not come after me with a gun or the threat of imprisonment to force me to purchase; if I fail to join the American Philosophical Association, the association may not force me to join or prevent me from giving up my membership. Only the state can do so; only the state can confiscate my property or put me in jail if I do not pay its tax tribute. Therefore, only the state regularly exists and has its very being by means of coercive depredations on private property.
Neither is it legitimate to challenge this sort of analysis by claiming that in some other sense, the purchase of Wheaties or membership in the APA is in some way “coercive.” Anyone who is still unhappy with this use of the term “coercion” can simply eliminate the word from this discussion and substitute for it “physical violence or the threat thereof,” with the only loss being in literary style rather than in the substance of the argument. What anarchism proposes to do, then, is to abolish the state, that is, to abolish the regularized institution of aggressive coercion.
It need hardly be added that the state habitually builds upon its coercive source of income by adding a host of other aggressions upon society, ranging from economic controls to the prohibition of pornography to the compelling of religious observance to the mass murder of civilians in organized warfare. In short, the state, in the words of Albert Jay Nock, “claims and exercises a monopoly of crime” over its territorial area.
The second criticism I would like to defuse before beginning the main body of the paper is the common charge that anarchists “assume that all people are good” and that without the state no crime would be committed. In short, that anarchism assumes that with the abolition of the state a New Anarchist Man will emerge, cooperative, humane, and benevolent, so that no problem of crime will then plague the society. I confess that I do not understand the basis for this charge. Whatever other schools of anarchism profess — and I do not believe that they are open to the charge — I certainly do not adopt this view. I assume with most observers that mankind is a mixture of good and evil, of cooperative and criminal tendencies. In my view, the anarchist society is one which maximizes the tendencies for the good and the cooperative, while it minimizes both the opportunity and the moral legitimacy of the evil and the criminal. If the anarchist view is correct and the state is indeed the great legalized and socially legitimated channel for all manner of antisocial crime — theft, oppression, mass murder — on a massive scale, then surely the abolition of such an engine of crime can do nothing but favor the good in man and discourage the bad.
A further point: in a profound sense, no social system, whether anarchist or statist, can work at all unless most people are “good” in the sense that they are not all hell-bent upon assaulting and robbing their neighbors. If everyone were so disposed, no amount of protection, whether state or private, could succeed in staving off chaos. Furthermore, the more that people are disposed to be peaceful and not aggress against their neighbors, the more successfully any social system will work, and the fewer resources will need to be devoted to police protection. The anarchist view holds that, given the “nature of man,” given the degree of goodness or badness at any point in time, anarchism will maximize the opportunities for the good and minimize the channels for the bad. The rest depends on the values held by the individual members of society. The only further point that need be made is that by eliminating the living example and the social legitimacy of the massive legalized crime of the state, anarchism will to a large extent promote peaceful values in the minds of the public.
We cannot of course deal here with the numerous arguments in favor of anarchism or against the state, moral, political, and economic. Nor can we take up the various goods and services now provided by the state and show how private individuals and groups will be able to supply them far more efficiently on the free market. Here we can only deal with perhaps the most difficult area, the area where it is almost universally assumed that the state must exist and act, even if it is only a “necessary evil” instead of a positive good: the vital realm of defense or protection of person and property against aggression. Surely, it is universally asserted, the state is at least vitally necessary to provide police protection, the judicial resolution of disputes and enforcement of contracts, and the creation of the law itself that is to be enforced. My contention is that all of these admittedly necessary services of protection can be satisfactorily and efficiently supplied by private persons and institutions on the free market.
One important caveat before we begin the body of this paper: new proposals such as anarchism are almost always gauged against the implicit assumption that the present, or statist system works to perfection. Any lacunae or difficulties with the picture of the anarchist society are considered net liabilities, and enough to dismiss anarchism out of hand. It is, in short, implicitly assumed that the state is doing its self-assumed job of protecting person and property to perfection. We cannot here go into the reasons why the state is bound to suffer inherently from grave flaws and inefficiencies in such a task. All we need do now is to point to the black and unprecedented record of the state through history: no combination of private marauders can possibly begin to match the state’s unremitting record of theft, confiscation, oppression, and mass murder. No collection of Mafia or private bank robbers can begin to compare with all the Hiroshimas, Dresdens, and Lidices and their analogues through the history of mankind.
This point can be made more philosophically: it is illegitimate to compare the merits of anarchism and statism by starting with the present system as the implicit given and then critically examining only the anarchist alternative. What we must do is to begin at the zero point and then critically examine both suggested alternatives. Suppose, for example, that we were all suddenly dropped down on the earth de novo and that we were all then confronted with the question of what societal arrangements to adopt. And suppose then that someone suggested: “We are all bound to suffer from those of us who wish to aggress against their fellow men. Let us then solve this problem of crime by handing all of our weapons to the Jones family, over there, by giving all of our ultimate power to settle disputes to that family. In that way, with their monopoly of coercion and of ultimate decision making, the Jones family will be able to protect each of us from each other.” I submit that this proposal would get very short shrift, except perhaps from the Jones family themselves. And yet this is precisely the common argument for the existence of the state. When we start from the zero point, as in the case of the Jones family, the question of “who will guard the guardians?” becomes not simply an abiding lacuna in the theory of the state but an overwhelming barrier to its existence.
A final caveat: the anarchist is always at a disadvantage in attempting to forecast the shape of the future anarchist society. For it is impossible for observers to predict voluntary social arrangements, including the provision of goods and services, on the free market. Suppose, for example, that this were the year 1874 and that someone predicted that eventually there would be a radio-manufacturing industry. To be able to make such a forecast successfully, does he have to be challenged to state immediately how many radio manufacturers there would be a century hence, how big they would be, where they would be located, what technology and marketing techniques they would use, and so on? Obviously, such a challenge would make no sense, and in a profound sense the same is true of those who demand a precise portrayal of the pattern of protection activities on the market. Anarchism advocates the dissolution of the state into social and market arrangements, and these arrangements are far more flexible and less predictable than political institutions. The most that we can do, then, is to offer broad guidelines and perspectives on the shape of a projected anarchist society.
One important point to make here is that the advance of modern technology makes anarchistic arrangements increasingly feasible. Take, for example, the case of lighthouses, where it is often charged that it is unfeasible for private lighthouse operators to row out to each ship to charge it for use of the light. Apart from the fact that this argument ignores the successful existence of private lighthouses in earlier days, as in England in the eighteenth century, another vital consideration is that modern electronic technology makes charging each ship for the light far more feasible. Thus, the ship would have to have paid for an electronically controlled beam which could then be automatically turned on for those ships which had paid for the service.
Let us turn now to the problem of how disputes — in particular disputes over alleged violations of person and property — would be resolved in an anarchist society. First, it should be noted that all disputes involve two parties: the plaintiff, the alleged victim of the crime or tort and the defendant, the alleged aggressor. In many cases of broken contract, of course, each of the two parties alleging that the other is the culprit is at the same time a plaintiff and a defendant.
An important point to remember is that any society, be it statist or anarchist, has to have some way of resolving disputes that will gain a majority consensus in society. There would be no need for courts or arbitrators if everyone were omniscient and knew instantaneously which persons were guilty of any given crime or violation of contract. Since none of us is omniscient, there has to be some method of deciding who is the criminal or lawbreaker which will gain legitimacy; in short, whose decision will be accepted by the great majority of the public.
In the first place, a dispute may be resolved voluntarily between the two parties themselves, either unaided or with the help of a third mediator. This poses no problem, and will automatically be accepted by society at large. It is so accepted even now, much less in a society imbued with the anarchistic values of peaceful cooperation and agreement. Secondly and similarly, the two parties, unable to reach agreement, may decide to submit voluntarily to the decision of an arbitrator. This agreement may arise either after a dispute has arisen, or be provided for in advance in the original contract. Again, there is no problem in such an arrangement gaining legitimacy. Even in the present statist era, the notorious inefficiency and coercive and cumbersome procedures of the politically run government courts has led increasing numbers of citizens to turn to voluntary and expert arbitration for a speedy and harmonious settling of disputes.
Thus, William C. Wooldridge has written that

Wooldridge adds the important point that, in addition to the speed of arbitration procedures vis-à-vis the courts, the arbitrators can proceed as experts in disregard of the official government law; in a profound sense, then, they serve to create a voluntary body of private law. “In other words,” states Wooldridge, “the system of extralegal, voluntary courts has progressed hand in hand with a body of private law; the rules of the state are circumvented by the same process that circumvents the forums established for the settlement of disputes over those rules…. In short, a private agreement between two people, a bilateral “law,” has supplanted the official law. The writ of the sovereign has cease to run, and for it is substituted a rule tacitly or explicitly agreed to by the parties. Wooldridge concludes that “if an arbitrator can choose to ignore a penal damage rule or the statute of limitations applicable to the claim before him (and it is generally conceded that he has that power), arbitration can be viewed as a practically revolutionary instrument for self-liberation from the law….”2
It may be objected that arbitration only works successfully because the courts enforce the award of the arbitrator. Wooldridge points out, however, that arbitration was unenforceable in the American courts before 1920, but that this did not prevent voluntary arbitration from being successful and expanding in the United States and in England. He points, furthermore, to the successful operations of merchant courts since the Middle Ages, those courts which successfully developed the entire body of the law merchant. None of those courts possessed the power of enforcement. He might have added the private courts of shippers which developed the body of admiralty law in a similar way.
How then did these private, “anarchistic,” and voluntary courts ensure the acceptance of their decisions? By the method of social ostracism, and by the refusal to deal any further with the offending merchant. This method of voluntary “enforcement,” indeed proved highly successful. Wooldridge writes that “the merchants’ courts were voluntary, and if a man ignored their judgment, he could not be sent to jail…. Nevertheless, it is apparent that … [their] decisions were generally respected even by the losers; otherwise people would never have used them in the first place…. Merchants made their courts work simply by agreeing to abide by the results. The merchant who broke the understanding would not be sent to jail, to be sure, but neither would he long continue to be a merchant, for the compliance exacted by his fellows … proved if anything more effective than physical coercion.”3 Nor did this voluntary method fail to work in modern times. Wooldridge writes that it was precisely in the years before 1920, when arbitration awards could not be enforced in the courts,

It should also be pointed out that modern technology makes even more feasible the collection and dissemination of information about people’s credit ratings and records of keeping or violating their contracts or arbitration agreements. Presumably, an anarchist society would see the expansion of this sort of dissemination of data and thereby facilitate the ostracism or boycotting of contract and arbitration violators.
How would arbitrators be selected in an anarchist society? In the same way as they are chosen now, and as they were chosen in the days of strictly voluntary arbitration: the arbitrators with the best reputation for efficiency and probity would be chosen by the various parties on the market. As in other processes of the market, the arbitrators with the best record in settling disputes will come to gain an increasing amount of business, and those with poor records will no longer enjoy clients and will have to shift to another line of endeavor. Here it must be emphasized that parties in dispute will seek out those arbitrators with the best reputation for both expertise and impartiality and that inefficient or biased arbitrators will rapidly have to find another occupation.
Thus, the Tannehills emphasize:

If desired, furthermore, the contracting parties could provide in advance for a series of arbitrators:

Arbitration, then, poses little difficulty for a portrayal of the free society. But what of torts or crimes of aggression where there has been no contract? Or suppose that the breaker of a contract defies the arbitration award? Is ostracism enough? In short, how can courts develop in the free-market anarchist society which will have the power to enforce judgments against criminals or contract breakers?
In the wide sense, defense service consists of guards or police who use force in defending person and property against attack, and judges or courts whose role is to use socially accepted procedures to determine who the criminals or tortfeasors are, as well as to enforce judicial awards, such as damages or the keeping of contracts. On the free market, many scenarios are possible on the relationship between the private courts and the police; they may be “vertically integrated,” for example, or their services may be supplied by separate firms. Furthermore, it seems likely that police service will be supplied by insurance companies who will provide crime insurance to their clients. In that case, insurance companies will pay off the victims of crime or the breaking of contracts or arbitration awards and then pursue the aggressors in court to recoup their losses. There is a natural market connection between insurance companies and defense service, since they need pay out less benefits in proportion as they are able to keep down the rate of crime.
Courts might either charge fees for their services, with the losers of cases obliged to pay court costs, or else they may subsist on monthly or yearly premiums by their clients, who may be either individuals or the police or insurance agencies. Suppose, for example, that Smith is an aggrieved party, either because he has been assaulted or robbed, or because an arbitration award in his favor has not been honored. Smith believes that Jones is the party guilty of the crime. Smith then goes to a court, Court A, of which he is a client, and brings charges against Jones as a defendant. In my view, the hallmark of an anarchist society is one where no man may legally compel someone who is not a convicted criminal to do anything, since that would be aggression against an innocent man’s person or property. Therefore, Court A can only invite rather than subpoena Jones to attend his trial. Of course, if Jones refused to appear or send a representative, his side of the case will not be heard. The trial of Jones proceeds. Suppose that Court A finds Jones innocent. In my view, part of the generally accepted law code of the anarchist society (on which see further below) is that this must end the matter unless Smith can prove charges of gross incompetence or bias on the part of the court.
Suppose, next, that Court A finds Jones guilty. Jones might accept the verdict, because he too is a client of the same court, because he knows he is guilty, or for some other reason. In that case, Court A proceeds to exercise judgment against Jones. Neither of these instances poses very difficult problems for our picture of the anarchist society. But suppose, instead, that Jones contests the decision; he then goes to his court, Court B, and the case is retried there. Suppose that Court B, too, finds Jones guilty. Again, it seems to me that the accepted law code of the anarchist society will assert that this ends the matter; both parties have had their say in courts which each has selected, and the decision for guilt is unanimous.
Suppose, however, the most difficult case: that Court B finds Jones innocent. The two courts, each subscribed to by one of the two parties, have split their verdicts. In that case, the two courts will submit the case to an appeals court, or arbitrator, which the two courts agree upon. There seems to be no real difficulty about the concept of an appeals court. As in the case of arbitration contracts, it seems very likely that the various private courts in the society will have prior agreements to submit their disputes to a particular appeals court. How will the appeals judges be chosen? Again, as in the case of arbitrators or of the first judges on the free market, they will be chosen for their expertise and their reputation for efficiency, honesty, and integrity. Obviously, appeals judges who are inefficient or biased will scarcely be chosen by courts who will have a dispute. The point here is that there is no need for a legally established or institutionalized single, monopoly appeals court system, as states now provide. There is no reason why there cannot arise a multitude of efficient and honest appeals judges who will be selected by the disputant courts, just as there are numerous private arbitrators on the market today. The appeals court renders its decision, and the courts proceed to enforce it if, in our example, Jones is considered guilty — unless, of course, Jones can prove bias in some other court proceedings.
No society can have unlimited judicial appeals, for in that case there would be no point to having judges or courts at all. Therefore, every society, whether statist or anarchist, will have to have some socially accepted cutoff point for trials and appeals. My suggestion is the rule that the agreement of any two courts, be decisive. “Two” is not an arbitrary figure, for it reflects the fact that there are two parties, the plaintiff and the defendant, to any alleged crime or contract dispute.
If the courts are to be empowered to enforce decision against guilty parties, does this not bring back the state in another form and thereby negate anarchism? No, for at the beginning of this paper I explicitly defined anarchism in such a way as not to rule out the use of defensive force — force in defense of person and property — by privately supported agencies. In the same way, it is not bringing back the state to allow persons to use force to defend themselves against aggression, or to hire guards or police agencies to defend them.
It should be noted, however, that in the anarchist society there will be no “district attorney” to press charges on behalf of “society.” Only the victims will press charges as the plaintiffs. If, then, these victims should happen to be absolute pacifists who are opposed even to defensive force, then they will simply not press charges in the courts or otherwise retaliate against those who have aggressed against them. In a free society that would be their right. If the victim should suffer from murder, then his heir would have the right to press the charges.
What of the Hatfield-and-McCoy problem? Suppose that a Hatfield kills a McCoy, and that McCoy’s heir does not belong to a private insurance, police agency, or court, and decides to retaliate himself? Since under anarchism there can be no coercion of the noncriminal, McCoy would have the perfect right to do so. No one may be compelled to bring his case to a court. Indeed, since the right to hire police or courts flows from the right of self-defense against aggression, it would be inconsistent and in contradiction to the very basis of the free society to institute such compulsion.
Suppose, then, that the surviving McCoy finds what he believes to be the guilty Hatfield and kills him in turn? What then? This is fine, except that McCoy may have to worry about charges being brought against him by a surviving Hatfield. Here it must be emphasized that in the law of the anarchist society based on defense against aggression, the courts would not be able to proceed against McCoy if in fact he killed the right Hatfield. His problem would arise if the courts should find that he made a grievous mistake and killed the wrong man; in that case, he in turn would be found guilty of murder. Surely, in most instances, individuals will wish to obviate such problems by taking their case to a court and thereby gain social acceptability for their defensive retaliation — not for the act of retaliation but for the correctness of deciding who the criminal in any given case might be. The purpose of the judicial process, indeed, is to find a way of general agreement on who might be the criminal or contract breaker in any given case. The judicial process is not a good in itself; thus, in the case of an assassination, such as Jack Ruby’s murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, on public television, there is no need for a complex judicial process, since the name of the murderer is evident to all.
Will not the possibility exist of a private court that may turn venal and dishonest, or of a private police force that turns criminal and extorts money by coercion? Of course such an event may occur, given the propensities of human nature. Anarchism is not a moral cure-all. But the important point is that market forces exist to place severe checks on such possibilities, especially in contrast to a society where a state exists. For, in the first place, judges, like arbitrators, will prosper on the market in proportion to their reputation for efficiency and impartiality. Secondly, on the free market important checks and balances exist against venal courts or criminal police forces. Namely, that there are competing courts and police agencies to whom victims may turn for redress. If the “Prudential Police Agency” should turn outlaw and extract revenue from victims by coercion, the latter would have the option of turning to the “Mutual” or “Equitable” Police Agency for defense and for pressing charges against Prudential. These are the genuine “checks and balances” of the free market, genuine in contrast to the phony check and balances of a state system, where all the alleged “balancing” agencies are in the hands of one monopoly government. Indeed, given the monopoly “protection service” of a state, what is there to prevent a state from using its monopoly channels of coercion to extort money from the public? What are the checks and limits of the state? None, except for the extremely difficult course of revolution against a power with all of the guns in its hands. In fact, the state provides an easy, legitimated channel for crime and aggression, since it has its very being in the crime of tax theft, and the coerced monopoly of “protection.” It is the state, indeed, that functions as a mighty “protection racket” on a giant and massive scale. It is the state that says: “Pay us for your ‘protection’ or else.” In the light of the massive and inherent activities of the state, the danger of a “protection racket” emerging from one or more private police agencies is relatively small indeed.
Moreover, it must be emphasized that a crucial element in the power of the state is its legitimacy in the eyes of the majority of the public, the fact that after centuries of propaganda, the depredations of the state are looked upon rather as benevolent services. Taxation is generally not seen as theft, nor war as mass murder, nor conscription as slavery. Should a private police agency turn outlaw, should “Prudential” become a protection racket, it would then lack the social legitimacy which the state has managed to accrue to itself over the centuries. “Prudential” would be seen by all as bandits, rather than as legitimate or divinely appointed “sovereigns” bent on promoting the “common good” or the “general welfare.” And lacking such legitimacy, “Prudential” would have to face the wrath of the public and the defense and retaliation of the other private defense agencies, the police and courts, on the free market. Given these inherent checks and limits, a successful transformation from a free society to bandit rule becomes most unlikely. Indeed, historically, it has been very difficult for a state to arise to supplant a stateless society; usually, it has come about through external conquest rather than by evolution from within a society.
Within the anarchist camp, there has been much dispute on whether the private courts would have to be bound by a basic, common law code. Ingenious attempts have been made to work out a system where the laws or standards of decision-making by the courts would differ completely from one to another.7 But in my view all would have to abide by the basic law code, in particular, prohibition of aggression against person and property, in order to fulfill our definition of anarchism as a system which provides no legal sanction for such aggression. Suppose, for example, that one group of people in society holds that all redheads are demons who deserve to be shot on sight. Suppose that Jones, one of this group, shoots Smith, a redhead. Suppose that Smith or his heir presses charges in a court, but that Jones’s court, in philosophic agreement with Jones, finds him innocent therefore. It seems to me that in order to be considered legitimate, any court would have to follow the basic libertarian law code of the inviolate right of person and property. For otherwise, courts might legally subscribe to a code which sanctions such aggression in various cases, and which to that extent would violate the definition of anarchism and introduce, if not the state, then a strong element of statishness or legalized aggression into the society.
But again I see no insuperable difficulties here. For in that case, anarchists, in agitating for their creed, will simply include in their agitation the idea of a general libertarian law code as part and parcel of the anarchist creed of abolition of legalized aggression against person or property in the society.
In contrast to the general law code, other aspects of court decisions could legitimately vary in accordance with the market or the wishes of the clients; for example, the language the cases will be conducted in, the number of judges to be involved, and so on.
There are other problems of the basic law code which there is no time to go into here: for example, the definition of just property titles or the question of legitimate punishment of convicted offenders — though the latter problem of course exists in statist legal systems as well.8 The basic point, however, is that the state is not needed to arrive at legal principles or their elaboration: indeed, much of the common law, the law merchant, admiralty law, and private law in general, grew up apart from the state, by judges not making the law but finding it on the basis of agreed-upon principles derived either from custom or reason.9 The idea that the state is needed to make law is as much a myth as that the state is needed to supply postal or police services.
Enough has been said here, I believe, to indicate that an anarchist system for settling disputes would be both viable and self-subsistent: that once adopted, it could work and continue indefinitely. How to arrive at that system is of course a very different problem, but certainly at the very least it will not likely come about unless people are convinced of its workability, are convinced, in short, that the state is not a necessary evil.

[Murray Rothbard delivered this talk 32 years ago today at the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy (ASPLP), Washington, DC: December 28, 1974. It was first published in The Libertarian Forum, volume 7.1, January 1975, available in PDF and ePub.]

https://mises.org/mises-daily/society-without-state
In attempting to outline how a “society without a state” — that is, an anarchist society — might function successfully, I would first like to defuse two common but mistaken criticisms of this approach. First, is the argument that in providing for such defense or protection services as courts, police, or even law itself, I am simply smuggling the state back into society in another form, and that therefore the system I am both analyzing and advocating is not “really” anarchism. This sort of criticism can only involve us in an endless and arid dispute over semantics. Let me say from the beginning that I define the state as that institution which possesses one or both (almost always both) of the following properties: (1) it acquires its income by the physical coercion known as “taxation”; and (2) it asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defense service (police and courts) over a given territorial area. An institution not possessing either of these properties is not and cannot be, in accordance with my definition, a state. On the other hand, I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of an individual. Anarchists oppose the state because it has its very being in such aggression, namely, the expropriation of private property through taxation, the coercive exclusion of other providers of defense service from its territory, and all of the other depredations and coercions that are built upon these twin foci of invasions of individual rights.
Nor is our definition of the state arbitrary, for these two characteristics have been possessed by what is generally acknowledged to be states throughout recorded history. The state, by its use of physical coercion, has arrogated to itself a compulsory monopoly of defense services over its territorial jurisdiction. But it is certainly conceptually possible for such services to be supplied by private, non-state institutions, and indeed such services have historically been supplied by other organizations than the state. To be opposed to the state is then not necessarily to be opposed to services that have often been linked with it; to be opposed to the state does not necessarily imply that we must be opposed to police protection, courts, arbitration, the minting of money, postal service, or roads and highways. Some anarchists have indeed been opposed to police and to all physical coercion in defense of person and property, but this is not inherent in and is fundamentally irrelevant to the anarchist position, which is precisely marked by opposition to all physical coercion invasive of, or aggressing against, person and property.
The crucial role of taxation may be seen in the fact that the state is the only institution or organization in society which regularly and systematically acquires its income through the use of physical coercion. All other individuals or organizations acquire their income voluntarily, either (1) through the voluntary sale of goods and services to consumers on the market, or (2) through voluntary gifts or donations by members or other donors. If I cease or refrain from purchasing Wheaties on the market, the Wheaties producers do not come after me with a gun or the threat of imprisonment to force me to purchase; if I fail to join the American Philosophical Association, the association may not force me to join or prevent me from giving up my membership. Only the state can do so; only the state can confiscate my property or put me in jail if I do not pay its tax tribute. Therefore, only the state regularly exists and has its very being by means of coercive depredations on private property.
Neither is it legitimate to challenge this sort of analysis by claiming that in some other sense, the purchase of Wheaties or membership in the APA is in some way “coercive.” Anyone who is still unhappy with this use of the term “coercion” can simply eliminate the word from this discussion and substitute for it “physical violence or the threat thereof,” with the only loss being in literary style rather than in the substance of the argument. What anarchism proposes to do, then, is to abolish the state, that is, to abolish the regularized institution of aggressive coercion.
It need hardly be added that the state habitually builds upon its coercive source of income by adding a host of other aggressions upon society, ranging from economic controls to the prohibition of pornography to the compelling of religious observance to the mass murder of civilians in organized warfare. In short, the state, in the words of Albert Jay Nock, “claims and exercises a monopoly of crime” over its territorial area.
The second criticism I would like to defuse before beginning the main body of the paper is the common charge that anarchists “assume that all people are good” and that without the state no crime would be committed. In short, that anarchism assumes that with the abolition of the state a New Anarchist Man will emerge, cooperative, humane, and benevolent, so that no problem of crime will then plague the society. I confess that I do not understand the basis for this charge. Whatever other schools of anarchism profess — and I do not believe that they are open to the charge — I certainly do not adopt this view. I assume with most observers that mankind is a mixture of good and evil, of cooperative and criminal tendencies. In my view, the anarchist society is one which maximizes the tendencies for the good and the cooperative, while it minimizes both the opportunity and the moral legitimacy of the evil and the criminal. If the anarchist view is correct and the state is indeed the great legalized and socially legitimated channel for all manner of antisocial crime — theft, oppression, mass murder — on a massive scale, then surely the abolition of such an engine of crime can do nothing but favor the good in man and discourage the bad.
A further point: in a profound sense, no social system, whether anarchist or statist, can work at all unless most people are “good” in the sense that they are not all hell-bent upon assaulting and robbing their neighbors. If everyone were so disposed, no amount of protection, whether state or private, could succeed in staving off chaos. Furthermore, the more that people are disposed to be peaceful and not aggress against their neighbors, the more successfully any social system will work, and the fewer resources will need to be devoted to police protection. The anarchist view holds that, given the “nature of man,” given the degree of goodness or badness at any point in time, anarchism will maximize the opportunities for the good and minimize the channels for the bad. The rest depends on the values held by the individual members of society. The only further point that need be made is that by eliminating the living example and the social legitimacy of the massive legalized crime of the state, anarchism will to a large extent promote peaceful values in the minds of the public.
We cannot of course deal here with the numerous arguments in favor of anarchism or against the state, moral, political, and economic. Nor can we take up the various goods and services now provided by the state and show how private individuals and groups will be able to supply them far more efficiently on the free market. Here we can only deal with perhaps the most difficult area, the area where it is almost universally assumed that the state must exist and act, even if it is only a “necessary evil” instead of a positive good: the vital realm of defense or protection of person and property against aggression. Surely, it is universally asserted, the state is at least vitally necessary to provide police protection, the judicial resolution of disputes and enforcement of contracts, and the creation of the law itself that is to be enforced. My contention is that all of these admittedly necessary services of protection can be satisfactorily and efficiently supplied by private persons and institutions on the free market.
One important caveat before we begin the body of this paper: new proposals such as anarchism are almost always gauged against the implicit assumption that the present, or statist system works to perfection. Any lacunae or difficulties with the picture of the anarchist society are considered net liabilities, and enough to dismiss anarchism out of hand. It is, in short, implicitly assumed that the state is doing its self-assumed job of protecting person and property to perfection. We cannot here go into the reasons why the state is bound to suffer inherently from grave flaws and inefficiencies in such a task. All we need do now is to point to the black and unprecedented record of the state through history: no combination of private marauders can possibly begin to match the state’s unremitting record of theft, confiscation, oppression, and mass murder. No collection of Mafia or private bank robbers can begin to compare with all the Hiroshimas, Dresdens, and Lidices and their analogues through the history of mankind.
This point can be made more philosophically: it is illegitimate to compare the merits of anarchism and statism by starting with the present system as the implicit given and then critically examining only the anarchist alternative. What we must do is to begin at the zero point and then critically examine both suggested alternatives. Suppose, for example, that we were all suddenly dropped down on the earth de novo and that we were all then confronted with the question of what societal arrangements to adopt. And suppose then that someone suggested: “We are all bound to suffer from those of us who wish to aggress against their fellow men. Let us then solve this problem of crime by handing all of our weapons to the Jones family, over there, by giving all of our ultimate power to settle disputes to that family. In that way, with their monopoly of coercion and of ultimate decision making, the Jones family will be able to protect each of us from each other.” I submit that this proposal would get very short shrift, except perhaps from the Jones family themselves. And yet this is precisely the common argument for the existence of the state. When we start from the zero point, as in the case of the Jones family, the question of “who will guard the guardians?” becomes not simply an abiding lacuna in the theory of the state but an overwhelming barrier to its existence.
A final caveat: the anarchist is always at a disadvantage in attempting to forecast the shape of the future anarchist society. For it is impossible for observers to predict voluntary social arrangements, including the provision of goods and services, on the free market. Suppose, for example, that this were the year 1874 and that someone predicted that eventually there would be a radio-manufacturing industry. To be able to make such a forecast successfully, does he have to be challenged to state immediately how many radio manufacturers there would be a century hence, how big they would be, where they would be located, what technology and marketing techniques they would use, and so on? Obviously, such a challenge would make no sense, and in a profound sense the same is true of those who demand a precise portrayal of the pattern of protection activities on the market. Anarchism advocates the dissolution of the state into social and market arrangements, and these arrangements are far more flexible and less predictable than political institutions. The most that we can do, then, is to offer broad guidelines and perspectives on the shape of a projected anarchist society.
One important point to make here is that the advance of modern technology makes anarchistic arrangements increasingly feasible. Take, for example, the case of lighthouses, where it is often charged that it is unfeasible for private lighthouse operators to row out to each ship to charge it for use of the light. Apart from the fact that this argument ignores the successful existence of private lighthouses in earlier days, as in England in the eighteenth century, another vital consideration is that modern electronic technology makes charging each ship for the light far more feasible. Thus, the ship would have to have paid for an electronically controlled beam which could then be automatically turned on for those ships which had paid for the service.
Let us turn now to the problem of how disputes — in particular disputes over alleged violations of person and property — would be resolved in an anarchist society. First, it should be noted that all disputes involve two parties: the plaintiff, the alleged victim of the crime or tort and the defendant, the alleged aggressor. In many cases of broken contract, of course, each of the two parties alleging that the other is the culprit is at the same time a plaintiff and a defendant.
An important point to remember is that any society, be it statist or anarchist, has to have some way of resolving disputes that will gain a majority consensus in society. There would be no need for courts or arbitrators if everyone were omniscient and knew instantaneously which persons were guilty of any given crime or violation of contract. Since none of us is omniscient, there has to be some method of deciding who is the criminal or lawbreaker which will gain legitimacy; in short, whose decision will be accepted by the great majority of the public.
In the first place, a dispute may be resolved voluntarily between the two parties themselves, either unaided or with the help of a third mediator. This poses no problem, and will automatically be accepted by society at large. It is so accepted even now, much less in a society imbued with the anarchistic values of peaceful cooperation and agreement. Secondly and similarly, the two parties, unable to reach agreement, may decide to submit voluntarily to the decision of an arbitrator. This agreement may arise either after a dispute has arisen, or be provided for in advance in the original contract. Again, there is no problem in such an arrangement gaining legitimacy. Even in the present statist era, the notorious inefficiency and coercive and cumbersome procedures of the politically run government courts has led increasing numbers of citizens to turn to voluntary and expert arbitration for a speedy and harmonious settling of disputes.
Thus, William C. Wooldridge has written that

Wooldridge adds the important point that, in addition to the speed of arbitration procedures vis-à-vis the courts, the arbitrators can proceed as experts in disregard of the official government law; in a profound sense, then, they serve to create a voluntary body of private law. “In other words,” states Wooldridge, “the system of extralegal, voluntary courts has progressed hand in hand with a body of private law; the rules of the state are circumvented by the same process that circumvents the forums established for the settlement of disputes over those rules…. In short, a private agreement between two people, a bilateral “law,” has supplanted the official law. The writ of the sovereign has cease to run, and for it is substituted a rule tacitly or explicitly agreed to by the parties. Wooldridge concludes that “if an arbitrator can choose to ignore a penal damage rule or the statute of limitations applicable to the claim before him (and it is generally conceded that he has that power), arbitration can be viewed as a practically revolutionary instrument for self-liberation from the law….”2
It may be objected that arbitration only works successfully because the courts enforce the award of the arbitrator. Wooldridge points out, however, that arbitration was unenforceable in the American courts before 1920, but that this did not prevent voluntary arbitration from being successful and expanding in the United States and in England. He points, furthermore, to the successful operations of merchant courts since the Middle Ages, those courts which successfully developed the entire body of the law merchant. None of those courts possessed the power of enforcement. He might have added the private courts of shippers which developed the body of admiralty law in a similar way.
How then did these private, “anarchistic,” and voluntary courts ensure the acceptance of their decisions? By the method of social ostracism, and by the refusal to deal any further with the offending merchant. This method of voluntary “enforcement,” indeed proved highly successful. Wooldridge writes that “the merchants’ courts were voluntary, and if a man ignored their judgment, he could not be sent to jail…. Nevertheless, it is apparent that … [their] decisions were generally respected even by the losers; otherwise people would never have used them in the first place…. Merchants made their courts work simply by agreeing to abide by the results. The merchant who broke the understanding would not be sent to jail, to be sure, but neither would he long continue to be a merchant, for the compliance exacted by his fellows … proved if anything more effective than physical coercion.”3 Nor did this voluntary method fail to work in modern times. Wooldridge writes that it was precisely in the years before 1920, when arbitration awards could not be enforced in the courts,

It should also be pointed out that modern technology makes even more feasible the collection and dissemination of information about people’s credit ratings and records of keeping or violating their contracts or arbitration agreements. Presumably, an anarchist society would see the expansion of this sort of dissemination of data and thereby facilitate the ostracism or boycotting of contract and arbitration violators.
How would arbitrators be selected in an anarchist society? In the same way as they are chosen now, and as they were chosen in the days of strictly voluntary arbitration: the arbitrators with the best reputation for efficiency and probity would be chosen by the various parties on the market. As in other processes of the market, the arbitrators with the best record in settling disputes will come to gain an increasing amount of business, and those with poor records will no longer enjoy clients and will have to shift to another line of endeavor. Here it must be emphasized that parties in dispute will seek out those arbitrators with the best reputation for both expertise and impartiality and that inefficient or biased arbitrators will rapidly have to find another occupation.
Thus, the Tannehills emphasize:

If desired, furthermore, the contracting parties could provide in advance for a series of arbitrators:

Arbitration, then, poses little difficulty for a portrayal of the free society. But what of torts or crimes of aggression where there has been no contract? Or suppose that the breaker of a contract defies the arbitration award? Is ostracism enough? In short, how can courts develop in the free-market anarchist society which will have the power to enforce judgments against criminals or contract breakers?
In the wide sense, defense service consists of guards or police who use force in defending person and property against attack, and judges or courts whose role is to use socially accepted procedures to determine who the criminals or tortfeasors are, as well as to enforce judicial awards, such as damages or the keeping of contracts. On the free market, many scenarios are possible on the relationship between the private courts and the police; they may be “vertically integrated,” for example, or their services may be supplied by separate firms. Furthermore, it seems likely that police service will be supplied by insurance companies who will provide crime insurance to their clients. In that case, insurance companies will pay off the victims of crime or the breaking of contracts or arbitration awards and then pursue the aggressors in court to recoup their losses. There is a natural market connection between insurance companies and defense service, since they need pay out less benefits in proportion as they are able to keep down the rate of crime.
Courts might either charge fees for their services, with the losers of cases obliged to pay court costs, or else they may subsist on monthly or yearly premiums by their clients, who may be either individuals or the police or insurance agencies. Suppose, for example, that Smith is an aggrieved party, either because he has been assaulted or robbed, or because an arbitration award in his favor has not been honored. Smith believes that Jones is the party guilty of the crime. Smith then goes to a court, Court A, of which he is a client, and brings charges against Jones as a defendant. In my view, the hallmark of an anarchist society is one where no man may legally compel someone who is not a convicted criminal to do anything, since that would be aggression against an innocent man’s person or property. Therefore, Court A can only invite rather than subpoena Jones to attend his trial. Of course, if Jones refused to appear or send a representative, his side of the case will not be heard. The trial of Jones proceeds. Suppose that Court A finds Jones innocent. In my view, part of the generally accepted law code of the anarchist society (on which see further below) is that this must end the matter unless Smith can prove charges of gross incompetence or bias on the part of the court.
Suppose, next, that Court A finds Jones guilty. Jones might accept the verdict, because he too is a client of the same court, because he knows he is guilty, or for some other reason. In that case, Court A proceeds to exercise judgment against Jones. Neither of these instances poses very difficult problems for our picture of the anarchist society. But suppose, instead, that Jones contests the decision; he then goes to his court, Court B, and the case is retried there. Suppose that Court B, too, finds Jones guilty. Again, it seems to me that the accepted law code of the anarchist society will assert that this ends the matter; both parties have had their say in courts which each has selected, and the decision for guilt is unanimous.
Suppose, however, the most difficult case: that Court B finds Jones innocent. The two courts, each subscribed to by one of the two parties, have split their verdicts. In that case, the two courts will submit the case to an appeals court, or arbitrator, which the two courts agree upon. There seems to be no real difficulty about the concept of an appeals court. As in the case of arbitration contracts, it seems very likely that the various private courts in the society will have prior agreements to submit their disputes to a particular appeals court. How will the appeals judges be chosen? Again, as in the case of arbitrators or of the first judges on the free market, they will be chosen for their expertise and their reputation for efficiency, honesty, and integrity. Obviously, appeals judges who are inefficient or biased will scarcely be chosen by courts who will have a dispute. The point here is that there is no need for a legally established or institutionalized single, monopoly appeals court system, as states now provide. There is no reason why there cannot arise a multitude of efficient and honest appeals judges who will be selected by the disputant courts, just as there are numerous private arbitrators on the market today. The appeals court renders its decision, and the courts proceed to enforce it if, in our example, Jones is considered guilty — unless, of course, Jones can prove bias in some other court proceedings.
No society can have unlimited judicial appeals, for in that case there would be no point to having judges or courts at all. Therefore, every society, whether statist or anarchist, will have to have some socially accepted cutoff point for trials and appeals. My suggestion is the rule that the agreement of any two courts, be decisive. “Two” is not an arbitrary figure, for it reflects the fact that there are two parties, the plaintiff and the defendant, to any alleged crime or contract dispute.
If the courts are to be empowered to enforce decision against guilty parties, does this not bring back the state in another form and thereby negate anarchism? No, for at the beginning of this paper I explicitly defined anarchism in such a way as not to rule out the use of defensive force — force in defense of person and property — by privately supported agencies. In the same way, it is not bringing back the state to allow persons to use force to defend themselves against aggression, or to hire guards or police agencies to defend them.
It should be noted, however, that in the anarchist society there will be no “district attorney” to press charges on behalf of “society.” Only the victims will press charges as the plaintiffs. If, then, these victims should happen to be absolute pacifists who are opposed even to defensive force, then they will simply not press charges in the courts or otherwise retaliate against those who have aggressed against them. In a free society that would be their right. If the victim should suffer from murder, then his heir would have the right to press the charges.
What of the Hatfield-and-McCoy problem? Suppose that a Hatfield kills a McCoy, and that McCoy’s heir does not belong to a private insurance, police agency, or court, and decides to retaliate himself? Since under anarchism there can be no coercion of the noncriminal, McCoy would have the perfect right to do so. No one may be compelled to bring his case to a court. Indeed, since the right to hire police or courts flows from the right of self-defense against aggression, it would be inconsistent and in contradiction to the very basis of the free society to institute such compulsion.
Suppose, then, that the surviving McCoy finds what he believes to be the guilty Hatfield and kills him in turn? What then? This is fine, except that McCoy may have to worry about charges being brought against him by a surviving Hatfield. Here it must be emphasized that in the law of the anarchist society based on defense against aggression, the courts would not be able to proceed against McCoy if in fact he killed the right Hatfield. His problem would arise if the courts should find that he made a grievous mistake and killed the wrong man; in that case, he in turn would be found guilty of murder. Surely, in most instances, individuals will wish to obviate such problems by taking their case to a court and thereby gain social acceptability for their defensive retaliation — not for the act of retaliation but for the correctness of deciding who the criminal in any given case might be. The purpose of the judicial process, indeed, is to find a way of general agreement on who might be the criminal or contract breaker in any given case. The judicial process is not a good in itself; thus, in the case of an assassination, such as Jack Ruby’s murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, on public television, there is no need for a complex judicial process, since the name of the murderer is evident to all.
Will not the possibility exist of a private court that may turn venal and dishonest, or of a private police force that turns criminal and extorts money by coercion? Of course such an event may occur, given the propensities of human nature. Anarchism is not a moral cure-all. But the important point is that market forces exist to place severe checks on such possibilities, especially in contrast to a society where a state exists. For, in the first place, judges, like arbitrators, will prosper on the market in proportion to their reputation for efficiency and impartiality. Secondly, on the free market important checks and balances exist against venal courts or criminal police forces. Namely, that there are competing courts and police agencies to whom victims may turn for redress. If the “Prudential Police Agency” should turn outlaw and extract revenue from victims by coercion, the latter would have the option of turning to the “Mutual” or “Equitable” Police Agency for defense and for pressing charges against Prudential. These are the genuine “checks and balances” of the free market, genuine in contrast to the phony check and balances of a state system, where all the alleged “balancing” agencies are in the hands of one monopoly government. Indeed, given the monopoly “protection service” of a state, what is there to prevent a state from using its monopoly channels of coercion to extort money from the public? What are the checks and limits of the state? None, except for the extremely difficult course of revolution against a power with all of the guns in its hands. In fact, the state provides an easy, legitimated channel for crime and aggression, since it has its very being in the crime of tax theft, and the coerced monopoly of “protection.” It is the state, indeed, that functions as a mighty “protection racket” on a giant and massive scale. It is the state that says: “Pay us for your ‘protection’ or else.” In the light of the massive and inherent activities of the state, the danger of a “protection racket” emerging from one or more private police agencies is relatively small indeed.
Moreover, it must be emphasized that a crucial element in the power of the state is its legitimacy in the eyes of the majority of the public, the fact that after centuries of propaganda, the depredations of the state are looked upon rather as benevolent services. Taxation is generally not seen as theft, nor war as mass murder, nor conscription as slavery. Should a private police agency turn outlaw, should “Prudential” become a protection racket, it would then lack the social legitimacy which the state has managed to accrue to itself over the centuries. “Prudential” would be seen by all as bandits, rather than as legitimate or divinely appointed “sovereigns” bent on promoting the “common good” or the “general welfare.” And lacking such legitimacy, “Prudential” would have to face the wrath of the public and the defense and retaliation of the other private defense agencies, the police and courts, on the free market. Given these inherent checks and limits, a successful transformation from a free society to bandit rule becomes most unlikely. Indeed, historically, it has been very difficult for a state to arise to supplant a stateless society; usually, it has come about through external conquest rather than by evolution from within a society.
Within the anarchist camp, there has been much dispute on whether the private courts would have to be bound by a basic, common law code. Ingenious attempts have been made to work out a system where the laws or standards of decision-making by the courts would differ completely from one to another.7 But in my view all would have to abide by the basic law code, in particular, prohibition of aggression against person and property, in order to fulfill our definition of anarchism as a system which provides no legal sanction for such aggression. Suppose, for example, that one group of people in society holds that all redheads are demons who deserve to be shot on sight. Suppose that Jones, one of this group, shoots Smith, a redhead. Suppose that Smith or his heir presses charges in a court, but that Jones’s court, in philosophic agreement with Jones, finds him innocent therefore. It seems to me that in order to be considered legitimate, any court would have to follow the basic libertarian law code of the inviolate right of person and property. For otherwise, courts might legally subscribe to a code which sanctions such aggression in various cases, and which to that extent would violate the definition of anarchism and introduce, if not the state, then a strong element of statishness or legalized aggression into the society.
But again I see no insuperable difficulties here. For in that case, anarchists, in agitating for their creed, will simply include in their agitation the idea of a general libertarian law code as part and parcel of the anarchist creed of abolition of legalized aggression against person or property in the society.
In contrast to the general law code, other aspects of court decisions could legitimately vary in accordance with the market or the wishes of the clients; for example, the language the cases will be conducted in, the number of judges to be involved, and so on.
There are other problems of the basic law code which there is no time to go into here: for example, the definition of just property titles or the question of legitimate punishment of convicted offenders — though the latter problem of course exists in statist legal systems as well.8 The basic point, however, is that the state is not needed to arrive at legal principles or their elaboration: indeed, much of the common law, the law merchant, admiralty law, and private law in general, grew up apart from the state, by judges not making the law but finding it on the basis of agreed-upon principles derived either from custom or reason.9 The idea that the state is needed to make law is as much a myth as that the state is needed to supply postal or police services.
Enough has been said here, I believe, to indicate that an anarchist system for settling disputes would be both viable and self-subsistent: that once adopted, it could work and continue indefinitely. How to arrive at that system is of course a very different problem, but certainly at the very least it will not likely come about unless people are convinced of its workability, are convinced, in short, that the state is not a necessary evil.

[Murray Rothbard delivered this talk 32 years ago today at the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy (ASPLP), Washington, DC: December 28, 1974. It was first published in The Libertarian Forum, volume 7.1, January 1975, available in PDF and ePub.]

Vertex Resource Group (TSXV: VTX) stands out as a leading provider of Environmental Tech Solutions across North America, specializing in two key domains: environmental consulting and environmental field services.
As worries about carbon emissions grow and ESG principles become more popular, the timing is perfect for $VTX as the Solutions segment as it is set to dominate the Environmental Technology market. See these stats below:

• Environmental Technology market was valued at USD 552.1 billion in 2021, projected to reach USD 690.3 billion by 2026 (CAGR of 4.6%).
• The Solutions segment was valued at USD 471.4 billion in 2021 and is expected to hit USD 586.7 billion by 2026 (CAGR of 4.5%).

A bit about $VTX's history: the company has been around since 1962 which gives them 60 years of expertise in the field. Specifically, $VTX is known for its modern approach to providing integrated environmental solutions, as well as integrating ESG considerations into every aspect of their service delivery.
In terms of industries they serve, a big thing to highlight is that while they have a diverse customer base serving many in-demand sectors (Energy, Utilities, Mining & Industrial, Government, and Agriculture & Forestry) no single customer contributes more than 10% of sales. This strategic advantage ensures that Vertex is not overly dependent on any single client, mitigating dependency risks and potential revenue fluctuations.
Vertex provides a wide array of services to customers operating in the sectors they serve, from initial site selection, consultation and regulatory approval, through construction, operation and maintenance, to conclusion and environmental cleanup. Also, $VTX aligns closely with ESG principles. Their services are tailored to support sustainable development, clean energy solutions, emissions reductions, and carbon compliance.
With a dual focus on environmental consulting and environmental field services, $VTX has a significant opportunity to further capitalize on the growing Solutions market. Supported by their solid foundation of expertise and commitment to relentless execution, Vertex is well-positioned to thrive in this ever-evolving environmental landscape.
Link to Website
Disclaimer: This is not financial advice please do your own research before investing.

Christian Libertarianism is a philosophy that merges Christian ethical teachings with the principles of libertarian political philosophy. Essentially, it emphasizes individual liberty, personal responsibility, and limited government, all within the context of Christian values.

1. Individual Liberty and Free Will: Christian libertarians hold that individuals should be free to make their own choices as a fundamental aspect of God's creation of humans with free will. This freedom is seen as essential for personal moral development, as it allows individuals to choose good over evil.
   
2. Limited Government: According to this philosophy, the role of the government should be minimal, emphasizing that the state should protect the rights of individuals but avoid overreach into personal lives and economic activities. The government’s duties are seen as providing justice for wrongs, protection from aggression, and the maintenance of peace, rather than controlling various aspects of life.
   
3. Personal Responsibility and Stewardship: There is a strong focus on personal accountability and stewardship in Christian Libertarianism. Individuals are expected to manage their resources, talents, and lives in a way that honors God, which includes charitable behaviors and looking after the welfare of others voluntarily, rather than through enforced state welfare.
   
4. Non-Aggression Principle: This principle, which is core to libertarian thought, holds that individuals are not to initiate force against others. Christian libertarians may extend this to a broader ethical teaching against violence, reflecting the pacifist teachings of Jesus Christ in some interpretations.
   
5. Social and Economic Freedoms: Christian Libertarians advocate for both social and economic freedoms, arguing that a free market economy best allows for human flourishing under the natural laws set by God. They often see capitalism, when it operates under Christian ethics, as the most effective system for producing wealth and allowing ethical stewardship of resources.
   

This blend of beliefs advocates for a society where Christian virtues are practiced willingly by free individuals rather than being imposed by governmental authorities.

One of the first things when you learn to invest is to be really careful, especially when you are short selling. There is the potential of infinite losses. This is a fundamental principle, yet some big hedge funds are acting like the rules and common sense do not apply to them.
They feel overconfident, having the support of the banks and thinking that they have superior insight and control of the software systems that move the market. They also seem to believe they can manipulate them without consequences, seeing as their movements and accounts are barely supervised and regulated. So overconfident, that they've already lost a gamble, trying to take advantage of the pandemic while short selling companies like AMC and GME. Taking for granted that the individual investors - the people - wouldn't be able to see what they are doing.
Do not underestimate the people. We are getting used to surviving at least one pandemic every century, we have built the pyramids and also expressed our anger as in the French revolution. This time, the individual investors, without any organization, are at their own risk, risking the food for their families and the shelter of their rented apartments, are investing in our future, the people's future… Back in 2008 the big banks were playing dangerous games with the real estate market and their mistakes destroyed a lot of jobs, putting our people in the street. Some of us even lost loved ones because they felt that the society they lived in no longer had a place for them anymore.
Now we are saying to the big hedge funds: You don’t know how to invest the money healthily, each one of us can do it better.
They control many mainstream media sources and have a multitude of tricks at their disposal, creating unnecessary complexity and delaying the final outcome. However, we are still here enduring and reaching the final question that needs an official answer:
Is the United States market - the biggest market of the world and the key reference point for global markets - free and healthy or undermined and manipulated?
Meme stocks... We are not going to disappear in two weeks, we are making history. This is not investment advice, this is a change of rules call, a health check to the market, a well needed wealth redistribution. We have the possibility to send a message to the system: in the current world the people are aware.
We are all distracted with our complex and busy lives. So if this message catches you at the right moment and you want to be part of this movement, join The Apes in Reddit. That adds another pair of eyes to catch the next trick that they have prepared for us.
We will hold, my friend, until they run out of tricks, until the 🌑

One of the first things when you learn to invest is to be really careful, especially when you are short selling. There is the potential of infinite losses. This is a fundamental principle, yet some big hedge funds are acting like the rules and common sense do not apply to them.
They feel overconfident, having the support of the banks and thinking that they have superior insight and control of the software systems that move the market. They also seem to believe they can manipulate them without consequences, seeing as their movements and accounts are barely supervised and regulated. So overconfident, that they've already lost a gamble, trying to take advantage of the pandemic while short selling companies like AMC and GME. Taking for granted that the individual investors - the people - wouldn't be able to see what they are doing.
Do not underestimate the people. We are getting used to surviving at least one pandemic every century, we have built the pyramids and also expressed our anger as in the French revolution. This time, the individual investors, without any organization, are at their own risk, risking the food for their families and the shelter of their rented apartments, are investing in our future, the people's future… Back in 2008 the big banks were playing dangerous games with the real estate market and their mistakes destroyed a lot of jobs, putting our people in the street. Some of us even lost loved ones because they felt that the society they lived in no longer had a place for them anymore.
Now we are saying to the big hedge funds: You don’t know how to invest the money healthily, each one of us can do it better.
They control many mainstream media sources and have a multitude of tricks at their disposal, creating unnecessary complexity and delaying the final outcome. However, we are still here enduring and reaching the final question that needs an official answer:
Is the United States market - the biggest market of the world and the key reference point for global markets - free and healthy or undermined and manipulated?
Meme stocks... We are not going to disappear in two weeks, we are making history. This is not investment advice, this is a change of rules call, a health check to the market, a well needed wealth redistribution. We have the possibility to send a message to the system: in the current world the people are aware.
We are all distracted with our complex and busy lives. So if this message catches you at the right moment and you want to be part of this movement, join The Apes in Reddit. That adds another pair of eyes to catch the next trick that they have prepared for us.
We will hold, my friend, until they run out of tricks, until the 🌑

In the annals of gaming history, few titles command the reverence and adoration as the legendary Doom franchise. Born from the minds of John Romero, John Carmack, Adrian Carmack, and Tom Hall, Doom would go on to lay the foundations for just about every modern video game that exists. It was a true tour de force, a success story few could scarce ever imagine.
Released in 1993, Doom was an immediate smash hit, thanks in no small part to its shareware format, which allowed users to experience the first few levels of Knee Deep In the Dead, and then order the full game via the phone number included. Players could then share the floppy disk with their friends, and so on, and so on. It was a truly revolutionary system, and within a single year, Doom had sold over 2 million copies.
The history of the Doom franchise is one of innovation, ultra violence, and controversy (1999's Columbine High School Massacre), and that reputation is one that continued with 2016's DOOM. DOOM was officially revealed at Quakecon 2014, ten years after Doom 3. Players had long resigned to Doom being considered a dead franchise. A reboot had been in the works for a number of years prior, but never got released, having been quietly cancelled by id in 2010. The future was bleak, but the 30 second long teaser ignited a spark that had been burning dimmer every passing year.
Then came E3 2015.
The hype was unreal. The trailer had everything that fans could possibly want. Gore, intense violence, insane run n gun gameplay, a rip-roaring soundtrack and the MFING CHAINSAW. But fans had been let down before. Would it really hold up its promises?
Yes. Yes, it would.
PART I: Presentation
When DOOM burst onto the scene in 2016, it did so with a visual and auditory spectacle that left players awestruck. From the moment the game boots up, players are made aware that this is not your average shooter. You are greeted with a deep, commanding voice. "Rip and tear, until it is DONE."
Immediately, players are greeted with a scene of carnage and the Doom Slayer chained to a table, which, of course, he instantly breaks free from. A zombie attempts to relieve the Slayer of his life but is beaten to the punch with a prompt skull smashing. After putting the other zombies to rest, he interacts with the panel in the corner, is greeted by one Dr. Samuel Hayden, who attempts to justify the outbreak, and decides he would rather kill shit than listen to excuses and destroys the monitor.
That is the introduction to this game. It never wastes the player's time. We aren't here to listen to long droning monologues or watch MGS style cutscenes. id Software knew their audience, and knew what that audience wanted, and they deliver in spades. This introduction sets the tone for the entire experience: relentless action, unapologetic violence, and a protagonist who is as unstoppable as he is uncompromising. The Doom Slayer's disdain for exposition and his single-minded focus on annihilating demons resonate with players who crave a pure, unadulterated gaming experience.
By eschewing lengthy cutscenes and exposition-heavy dialogue in favor of fast-paced gameplay and visceral action, id Software delivers a game that respects the player's time and delivers exactly what they came for: non-stop demon-slaying action. In an era where many games are criticized for padding their runtime with unnecessary filler, DOOM stands out as a shining example of how to create a focused and engaging experience that keeps players coming back for more.
Rather than bombarding players with lengthy exposition or intrusive cutscenes, DOOM opts for a more environmental storytelling approach. Throughout the game, players can discover audio logs, read text-based terminals, and observe environmental details that provide context and background to the events unfolding around them.
The story of DOOM revolves around the Doom Slayer's mission to stop a demonic invasion unleashed by the Union Aerospace Corporation (UAC) on their Martian facility. As players progress through the game, they uncover details about the UAC's experiments with Hell energy, the origins of the demonic invasion, and the Doom Slayer's own mysterious past.
While the story may not be front and center in DOOM, it nonetheless adds depth and richness to the game world, enhancing the overall experience for players who choose to engage with it. And for those who prefer to focus solely on the action, the story remains secondary, allowing them to enjoy the game on their own terms.
That's all well and good, but what about the actual gameplay? Simply put, it is exhilarating. From the moment you are given control of the Slayer, players are thrust into a frenzy of blood and violence, and it never lets up. At its core, DOOM is a first-person shooter that harkens back to the genre's roots while injecting it with a healthy dose of modern flair. The gameplay is fast-paced, frenetic, and utterly unapologetic in its brutality. You're not just a player – you're the Doom Slayer, a force of nature hell-bent on eradicating every last demon in your path.
Central to the gameplay experience is the game's combat loop, which revolves around a delicate balance of aggression and strategy. In DOOM, there's no hiding behind cover or waiting for your health to regenerate – you're constantly on the move, strafing, dodging, and leaping across the battlefield as you unleash a torrent of bullets, rockets, and plasma upon your enemies.
Weapons include the iconic shotgun, heavy assault rifle, plasma rifle, rocket launcher, and the devastating BFG 9000, among others. Each weapon offers different firing modes, such as single shot, burst fire, and continuous beam, providing players with tactical options in combat. A key aspect of combat is the Glory Kill system, which allows players to perform brutal finishing moves on staggered enemies. Glory Kills not only provide health and ammo but also contribute to the flow of combat by encouraging aggressive play. It is incredibly satisfying to watch the Slayer rip an imp in half or stomp their head into the pavement, and doing so rewards you with a large return of health.
The Chainsaw mechanic is another integral part of combat, allowing players to instantly kill most enemies and gain a large amount of ammo in return. However, Chainsaw fuel is limited and must be managed carefully. Like Glory Kills, watching the chainsaw tear demons apart is incredibly satisfying. Certain demons require more fuel but provide the player with more ammo in return. Balancing which demons you chainsaw and which ones you choose to Glory Kill is an important part of combat.
Exploration is key to progression and is rewarding to those players who choose to do. Hidden throughout the levels of the game are Argent Cells, Praetor Tokens, and Rune Trials. Each of these provide upgrades to your health/shield/ammo, suit, and passive abilities respectively. Also hidden throughout the game are levers that lead you to classic levels from Doom 1 and Doom 2, which then unlock the full level of its respective game, playable from the main menu. You can also find toy models of the Doom Slayer, which unlock various character models to view. On some of these models, the Doom Slayer will perform a unique action when picking it up, such as fist bumping the classic Doomguy. It's a nice and cute little touch added by the developers that does a little to add character to the Slayer, who is a silent protagonist.
id Software masterfully blends modern game design with a deep reverence for the classics, paying homage to the series' storied history while introducing new elements that propel the franchise forward. Central to this approach is the game's character design, which strikes a delicate balance between nostalgia and innovation. At its core is the iconic protagonist, the Doom Slayer, whose design pays homage to the original Doom Marine while incorporating modern updates that make him feel both familiar and fresh. With his battle-worn armor, imposing stature, and silent demeanor, the Doom Slayer is the embodiment of raw power and unrelenting rage.
The game's roster of enemies is a veritable who's who of classic Doom foes, reimagined for the modern era. From the lowly possessed soldiers to the hulking Cyberdemon, each enemy is lovingly crafted to capture the essence of its 1990s counterpart while introducing new mechanics and behaviors that keep players on their toes. Whether you're facing off against the agile Revenants, the relentless Hell Knights, or the grotesque Cacodemons, every encounter is a nostalgic trip down memory lane, punctuated by the satisfying sound of demon flesh being torn asunder.
But the main story is not where it ends. DOOM has an arcade mode, where players can run through the levels again, this time trying for high scores and medals while collecting 1 Ups. It's important to move fast and have accurate aim; the more kills you chain together, the bigger your score is. Getting hit reduces your score. At the end of the level, your score is tallied against others on a leaderboard. It's a great way to incentivize players to keep playing, in order to get a better and better score.
There is also multiplayer, where players compete in various game modes such as classic deathmatch, warpath and free for all. Players can become demons by collecting runes on the battlefield and this gives them a distinct advantage; demons are larger, stronger and more resilient. Players are bizarrely restricted to only two weapons and a loadout in multiplayer, which blew my mind. Loadouts. In a DOOM game. The demons are also massively unbalanced and if one team manages to get a particularly powerful demon such as a baron of hell, then it's a guaranteed win. All in all, the multiplayer just isn't great. You are better off replaying the story or arcade mode, or even SnapMap.
SnapMap is id Software's proprietary level editor, and it puts every other editor on the market to shame. SnapMap is an incredible, intuitive, easy to learn system allowing players to create their own multiplayer, co-op and single player maps. There is an extensive tutorial system that teaches users the basics, and goes up in depth, covering how to use AI triggers, switches, combinations, object layering, actions, recalls, audio cues, etc. Never have I ever seen such an in-depth interface on a console game before. While it is only surface level in the grand scheme of things, SnapMap is a great introduction to teaching users how game development works, and I urge everyone to try it out at least once.
Part II: The Music
In DOOM, the music isn't just a background accompaniment – it's a driving force that propels players forward, electrifying every moment of the gameplay experience. Composed by the incredibly talented Mick Gordon, the soundtrack of DOOM is a relentless onslaught of metal and electronica that perfectly complements the game's fast-paced action and visceral combat. From the moment you boot up the game, you're greeted by the iconic strains of the main theme, a haunting melody that sets the tone for the epic journey that lies ahead. As you traverse the game's environments, the music shifts seamlessly between atmospheric ambience and pulse-pounding metal.
But it's not just the composition of the music that makes it so memorable – it's also the way it's integrated into the gameplay itself. Mick Gordon's dynamic scoring system ensures that the music evolves in real-time based on the player's actions, ramping up in intensity during combat encounters and dialing back during quieter moments of exploration. This creates a sense of momentum and flow that enhances the overall pacing of the game
One of the standout features of the soundtrack is its use of unconventional instrumentation and sound design. Mick Gordon's signature sound combines distorted guitars, pounding drums, and industrial noise to create a sonic palette that is as brutal and unforgiving as the game itself. From the deep, guttural growls of the synth bass to the ear-shredding shrieks of the guitar solos, every element of the music is designed to evoke a sense of chaos and destruction, mirroring the relentless carnage unfolding onscreen.
Of course, no discussion of the music in DOOM would be complete without mentioning the iconic tracks that have become synonymous with the game. From the adrenaline-fueled "Rip & Tear" to the bone-crushing "BFG Division," each track is a masterpiece of composition and production, perfectly capturing the essence of the DOOM experience and elevating it to new heights. Mick Gordon's composition for the DOOM soundtrack is a tour de force in heavy metal and industrial electronica, meticulously crafted to evoke the essence of the game's frenetic gameplay.
The backbone of the soundtrack is the distorted guitar, which provides the driving force behind many of the tracks. Gordon's use of extended-range guitars and custom-tuned instruments gives the music its signature low-end punch, while his aggressive playing style adds a raw, visceral energy to the sound. In addition to guitars, Gordon incorporates a wide range of electronic and synthetic elements into his compositions, including synthesizers, drum machines, and sampled sounds. These elements are used to create atmospheric textures, rhythmic patterns, and dynamic effects.
One of the most innovative aspects of Gordon's sound design is his use of audio manipulation techniques, such as granular synthesis and spectral processing. These techniques allow him to deconstruct and manipulate audio in real-time, creating complex textures and effects.
Perhaps the most revolutionary aspect of Mick Gordon's composition for DOOM is his dynamic scoring system, which adjusts the music in real-time based on the player's actions. This system, known as "MIDI-controlled dynamic music," allows the music to seamlessly transition between different layers and variations depending on the intensity of the gameplay. Gordon achieves this dynamic effect by dividing each track into multiple stems or layers, each representing a different element of the music (e.g., drums, guitars, synths). These stems are then triggered and mixed in real-time using MIDI data generated by the game engine, allowing the music to adapt and evolve dynamically as the player progresses through the game.
Part III: Building a Legacy
All too often in this industry, legacy franchises are either left in the dust to be forgotten, or brought back to a limp fanfare, only to be thrust back into the shadows of the past. This happens for a myriad of reasons, and I believe the biggest one is that they don't respect their legacy, and they don't respect the players who engage with them.
At its core, DOOM is a game that understands what players want: fast-paced action, engaging gameplay, and a sense of empowerment. By focusing on these core principles, id Software created an experience that resonated with players old and new, capturing the spirit of the original games while pushing the series forward. Central to this approach is the game's unwavering commitment to respecting the player. From its minimalist storytelling and streamlined level design to its intuitive controls and dynamic difficulty system, DOOM prioritizes the player's experience above all else, ensuring that every moment of the game is engaging, immersive, and satisfying.
One of the most notable ways that DOOM respects the player is through its approach to difficulty. Rather than imposing artificial barriers or punishing players for their mistakes, the game encourages experimentation and mastery through its responsive gameplay mechanics and adaptive enemy AI. Players are given the freedom to approach encounters in their own way, whether it's through brute force, cunning strategy, or a combination of both.
Another key aspect of DOOM's player-centric design is its emphasis on accessibility. From its difficulty settings and intuitive user interface to its robust accessibility features, such as colorblind modes and customizable controls, the game ensures that players of all skill levels and abilities can enjoy the experience without feeling excluded or overwhelmed.
But perhaps the most important way that DOOM respects the player is through its commitment to fun. At its core, DOOM is a game that prioritizes the player's enjoyment above all else, delivering a seamless and exhilarating experience that keeps players coming back for more. Whether you're blasting demons with a shotgun, exploring hidden secrets, or rocking out to Mick Gordon's pulse-pounding soundtrack, DOOM is a game that never stops prioritizing YOU.
DOOM's legacy is one of respect – respect for the player, respect for the franchise, and respect for the medium of video games as a whole. By prioritizing fun, accessibility, and player agency, id Software created an experience that not only honors the legacy of the original games but also sets a new standard for what a modern first-person shooter can be. And for that, we owe them a debt of gratitude.

Book of Boys Club ($BOBC). If you're tired of the same old meme coins with no real purpose, then $BOBC might just be the breath of fresh air you've been waiting for.
What is Book of Boys Club?
Book of Boys Club is not just another meme coin. It's a community-driven project with a mission to make a positive impact in the world while having fun along the way. Founded on the principles of transparency, community engagement, and giving back, $BOBC aims to be more than just a speculative asset—it's a movement.
The $BOBC Token
Ticker symbol: $BOBC
Contract renounced: Yes
Transparent team: Absolutely
At the heart of $BOBC is its native token, $BOBC. With a total supply of 1,000,000,000 tokens and a deflationary mechanism in place, $BOBC rewards holders while also incentivizing long-term investment. Plus, with the contract renounced and a transparent team, you can trust that $BOBC is in safe hands.
Our Vision
So, what sets Book of Boys Club apart from the myriad of other meme coins out there? It's simple: our vision. We believe that cryptocurrency has the power to change lives for the better, and we're committed to leveraging that power to support meaningful causes and initiatives.
Community Engagement
At Book of Boys Club, community is everything. We believe in the power of collective action and the strength of unity. That's why we actively engage with our community members, listening to their feedback, and incorporating their ideas into the development of the project.
Giving Back
But it's not just about us—it's about giving back. A portion of every transaction fee generated by $BOBC is allocated to our charity wallet, which is used to support various charitable organizations and initiatives. By investing in $BOBC, you're not just investing in a cryptocurrency; you're investing in a brighter future for those in need.
Roadmap
Our journey is just beginning, and we have big plans for the future. Here's a sneak peek at what's to come:
* Marketing Campaigns: We'll be launching targeted marketing campaigns to raise awareness about $BOBC and attract new investors to the project.
* Partnerships: We're actively seeking strategic partnerships with other like-minded projects and organizations to further our mission and expand our reach
So, what are you waiting for? Join the Book of Boys Club today and become a part of something bigger than yourself. Together, we can make a difference in the world while having fun and reaping the rewards of our investments.
CONTRACT : 0x2f6f04c0c9241c85139c93506cf39e0fd7d963a8
TG @ BOBC_ETH
TWITTER : https://twitter.com/bookofboysclub_
WEBSITE : https://bookofboysclub.io

9-minute read.

France welcomes the latest round of negotiations between foreign ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan in Kazakhstan

FM Mirzoyan said the negotiations in Kazakhstan were held in a constructive environment and referred to the statement made after the meeting.
PARIS: France stresses the importance of both sides confirming their commitment to the Almaty Protocol of 1991 and to mutual recognition of each other’s territorial integrity as the core of this process, following the quadripartite meeting in Prague on 7 October 2022.
France calls to continue the delimitation of the border on the basis of the principles agreed in the declaration of April 19, 2024, and as an extension of the first demarcation work carried out on the ground. At the same time, it calls for continuing discussions with a view to signing a peace treaty between the two countries.
France welcomes the initiative of the Kazakh authorities to facilitate the holding of these talks.
France continues to work together with its partners to establish just and solid peace in the South Caucasus in accordance with international law. //
source, source, source, source,

OSCE: Reaching stable and comprehensive peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan remains a priority for us

OSCE Chair-in-Office Ian Borg visited Armenia on Monday.
BORG: The only way to ensure comprehensive and stable peace is through diplomacy. The steps made towards border delimitation between Armenia and Azerbaijan are the actions needed to reach peace. //
Pashinyan and Borg discussed the AM-OSCE cooperation and the peace talks.
BORG: The OSCE is committed to supporting stable peace, solving all conflicts in the OSCE area, and applying the organization’s mandate to ensure regional peace and stability. //
source, source,

opposition activists detained and released after briefly shutting down several streets in Yerevan

Last week the protest organizers, led by Archbishop Bagrat and MPs representing pro-Russian parties, called for strikes and road closures on Monday. They demand PM Pashinyan's resignation. The opposition parties have not yet disclosed when they plan to launch the impeachment process in the parliament. They likely have the minimum number of MPs to launch the impeachment but they'd still need dozens of ruling party MPs to join them for the motion to succeed, which is unlikely.
On Monday over 170 people were detained and released after blocking roads, including with the use of trash cans and hay. A red beret pushed a journalist out of his way while running up the stairs, sending him to the ground. Another journalist fainted during a clash between police and protesters. In the morning, Yandex Maps showed the traffic congestion in Yerevan at Level 5 on a scale of 1-10, a "usual workday".
In one instance, an angry driver got out of his car and pushed the trash can out of the street, while other cars proceeded to drive through the sparse group of protesters. Video.
ARF MP Garnik Danielyan, a co-organizer of the protest, engaged in a dispute with a driver. The angry driver told the MP to go "siktir", while the MP called him "chatlax". Video.
One protester suggested catching and "putting down" police officers one by one while they are alone, "because they feel good in large numbers." Video.
A psychotic incident was recorded between a protester and a bystandedriver who was presumably trying to open the road. The protester hit the man and called him "Nikol's trash". The police intervened to push the protesters out of the road.
During an encounter between a protester and one resident, the protester asked the latter if he was a Christian:
PROTESTER: Քրիստոնյա՞ ես
RESIDENT: Հա
PROTESTER: Հա ու համփ արա [suck my dick]
The resident pushes the protester, and the protester spits on him. Several people got off the buses and urged the protesters to leave or to "go protect the borders" instead. The red berets arrived within minutes and removed the trash cans and the small number of protesters from the road. video, video, video,
While the ARF has long been viewed as the voice of diaspora, other movements have emerged to challenge its dominance. The Armenian Movement of France has organized a change.org petition that calls to encourage Armenia's independence and Euro-Atlantic integration, to keep the church and state separate, and not take any destabilizing actions.
KHURSHUDYAN: They [ARF and protest organizers] are attempting to convince the diaspora to join them by influencing various organizations like the Lemkin Institute. It is strange that the Lemkin Institute released a statement accusing PM Pashinyan's Genocide statement of containing "victim blaming" only now, during these protests, several weeks after Pashinyan made that statement. It took a lot of effort for these forces to lobby and create the impression that the diaspora as a whole is on their side. //
The BEVER (Sasna Tsrer) party leaders said they are cooperating with the pro-Russian former regime parties but only on the issues of removing Pashinyan and stopping the border delimitation process.
BEVER (Ara Papyan): If Pashinyan resigns now and pro-Russian forces win the elections democratically, it will be the population's fault, not ours. // video
As you know from Sunday news digest, the pro-Russian forces and a group of ex-diplomats led by Kocharyan's Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian, are against using the 1991 Almaty declaration as the basis for delimitation. Foreign Minister Mirzoyan was asked to comment on Monday.
MIRZOYAN: The Deputy PMs of Armenia and Azerbaijan, who are in charge of border commissions, have come to an agreement to launch the delimitation process taking into account the 1991 Almaty Declaration. This was welcomed by numerous states and international organizations. The foreign diplomats you mentioned are deserters who fled their duties while Armenia was under physical attack in 2021. I can no longer treat them seriously. That is the most civil language I can use toward them. In reality, by torpedoing the Almaty Declaration and the peace process based on Almaty, these ex-diplomats continue to torpedo the sovereignty, statehood, and territorial integrity of Armenia. In the best-case scenario, they do this without understanding, and in the worst-case scenario, they are following the orders of a foreign state. I don't have further comments. //
Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan said they will not hold daily meetings at Republic Square anymore, and that smaller gatherings will be held near the St. Anna church every evening to wrap up the day and discuss future plans. Yesterday Arman Babajanyan revealed a meeting between church officials. On Monday, Archbishop Galstanyan confirmed that he indeed met Catholicos on Sunday. Galstanyan was asked whether he plans to "transfer" the "leadership" of the movement to political parties. He said he is open to that idea: "Թող գան, վերցնեն, ով ցանկանում է:"
source, source, source, source, source, source, source, source, source, source, source, source, source,

Executive Vice President of the European Commission for Economic Affairs, the EU Trade Commissioner, will visit Armenia this week

Valdis Dombrovskis will meet Armenian and EBRD officials and take part in an annual meeting of the EBRD Board of Governors.
source, source,

PM Pashinyan is in Denmark for the "Copenhagen Democracy Summit"

Nikol Pashinyan will take part in the discussion on “From the frontline: Armenia’s defense of democracy.”
source,

Armenia will bring its consumer protection legislation in line with European standards

The head of Armenia's Competition Protection Commission visited Poland to participate in ICPEN (International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network).
They spoke about unfair business practices and how to combat them, online taxi service regulations, online casinos, discounting policies used by businesses, etc.
GEVORGYAN: Armenia is going through an important phase in terms of protecting the interests of consumers. Discussions are underway to align Armenia's consumer protection legislation with EU standards. It is necessary to use digital technologies and train skilled experts in this field.
source,

Russia begins withdrawing border agents near the border village Nerkin Hand: residents

The villagers noticed that the Russian soldiers were no longer observing the traffic from the observation post and that they were packing some of their stuff.
source, source,

anti-corruption: Patrol Police officer is charged with accepting a bribe from a driver

INTERIOR MINISTRY: In early March, two officers pulled over an Indian driver on Kievyan St. One of the officers demanded a ֏20,000 bribe to ignore the fact that the vehicle didn't pass a tech inspection. They negotiated it down to ֏7,000. The officer was charged with felony bribery. He confessed. The case is in court. //
source,

Yerevan Mayor Avinyan had a lightbulb moment

The city has purchased 6,000 LED lights producing 4000K white light. Mayor Avinyan instructed the department to install them only on roads and to purchase weaker 3000K bulbs for condo backyards in order not to disrupt sleep.
Last month the city replaced 8.6 kilometers of cables. The Mother Armenia statue and the Opera building will have new գեղարվեստական lighting.
source, source, video,

Yerevan implements GIS (geographic information system) to collect data from various sources and make targeted decisions based on visualized data: VIDEO

MAYOR AVINYAN: The Municipality and all the district offices are switching to a new management style with the introduction of GIS. Every department will join it, phase by phase. We are talking about digital maps which we must learn to use. This is going to significantly simplify some of the work done by departments.
OFFICIAL: This is part of the digitization strategy. This unified GIS platform will collect information from the cadastre, transport, Active Citizen app, utility services, construction, etc., and make them accessible in one place. The visual data allow us to carry out analysis and make fact-based decisions.
For example, we created a cadastre GIS by using a satellite image as the base layer, then integrated it with the cadastre database. This map shows in detail the boundaries of properties, the purpose and status of each land plot, etc.
Another example is a map of air pollution, prior records, and analytical tools.
The GIS map for the Active Citizen app allows us to see the submissions and the completed work, their locations on the map, and how well the city responds to issues reported by citizens. You can filter the issues by category. For example, you can show only the reports about illegal dumping, click on the report and see the image shared by the citizen, then click to see the status and the outcome of city's response. The tools allow you to analyze the data and the performance rate.
Another map shows the 3D image of the city with its buildings and green areas. Here we can calculate the capacity of bus stops, etc. Drones can be used to create a very detailed digital 3D copy of specific buildings.
You can click on a land plot and it'll pull up the ownership information, the permit records, etc.
Connecting two dots shows you the altitude differences and other data that you can use, for example, during the installation of irrigation pipes.
This is less than 1% of its potential. We plan to train employees next week.
MAYOR AVINYAN: We should make some of this data public, like the air quality map or certain maps that did not require financial resources to create [քձիբ խոզ]. This is a revolutionary change in the municipality. We need to speed up the work with the use of digital tools.
video,

Yerevan begins planting hundreds of adult "high-value" trees and thousands of bushes near the new promenade/park around the Yerevanyan Lake: VIDEO

video,

Central Bank chief was invited to Parliament to discuss economy and expenditures

MP: Regarding CB's report on the efficiency of service vehicles used by state agencies. The state buildings scheduled to receive solar panels should also be equipped with EV chargers so the service vehicles can use the energy generated by the panels. I requested information from Yerevan Municipality about the service vehicle expenditures and it shows that EVs are not only cheaper because of electricity, but also because they are overall more affordable to maintain. We are talking about large savings.
CB CHIEF: Our estimates show that EVs are 2x-3x more affordable compared to combustion engine vehicles, even if we factor in all the adjacent expenses. In Yerevan, we have [state] buildings with solar panels on roofs but [connecting them to EV chargers in the parking lot] will be very difficult because these are old and sometimes "historical" buildings. They also have problems with air conditioning, plumbing, etc. At the same time, we are trying to implement this solar panel project in the newer buildings, for example, in Dilijan, where we have EV chargers for service vehicles in the parking lots.
video,

Central Bank chief spoke about the deflation in Q1

RULING MP: It is great for our residents' pockets that the prices have fallen but what is its effect on the economy and exports? What is the best inflation rate to maintain a "balance"?
CB CHIEF: During the discussions with our colleagues from IMF, regarding regional and global events, we agreed that countries develop when the inflation is low and manageable. It encourages investments. In this regard, the overall microeconomic stability and the fiscal policy of Armenia create a very good environment for this predictability. This is one of our "cards" in our relations with foreign entities.
During each CB session, we discuss several market and inflation scenarios. Under one scenario there is a risk of inflation becoming too high, while under other scenarios it could remain low. We are trying to find the most balanced option and thank God we have been able to continuously lower the [refinancing] rates, which helps the state. //
Ըստ զեկուցողիդրամավարկային քաղաքականության ծրագրում ներկայացվող սցենարների համաձայն 2024 թվականի կարճաժամկետ հորիզոնում գնաճը կպահպանվի նպատակային ցուցանիշից ցածր մակարդակում` տարեվերջին այն կկազմի 1,3%-1,5%:
video, source,

Central Bank chief spoke about the refinancing rate, the rate at which the state borrows from banks, copper prices, etc.

video,

how did the family of Ilham Aliyev's security chief obtain so many properties in the United Kingdom?

Offshore companies owned by Eyyubov’s wife and daughter spent $114 million on real estate in the United Kingdom. The family, including Eyyubov himself, also own over $46 million in properties in Dubai.

OCCRP report,

growing concerns in Abkhazia that Putin might have secretly "sold" them to Georgia as a confederation in exchange for Georgia's neutrality between West and Russia

video,