“Flight Grounded” is Now Free!

Featured

First off, welcome to my blog, where you can read about freedom, philosophy, and the future in both fiction and factual form!

And you heard right, I am giving away my latest novella! You can now read my 2016 dystopian thriller “Flight Grounded” for free, just by signing up for my email list.

I’m not going to send you many emails, only when I actually have something new to share with you. Expect an email about once a week, and try not to be too disappointed if I miss a week because I’m off gallivanting in Lithuania.

Continue reading

30 Tactics of “How to Win Friends and Influence People”

Turns out, actually being a genuinely good person is the easiest way to have influence over others, and get them to like you.

In 1936 Dale Carnegie wrote How to Win Friends and Influence People after intense study of effective leadership, the psychology behind why people like each other, and how to approach tough situations without giving offense.

Far from being sneaky ways to get what you want, or sleazy selling tactics, the methods Carnegie describes about how to properly interact with others would make the world a better place if universally adopted. You could recognize one of these tactics being used on you, and still feel no ill will towards the person employing it.

Much for my own benefit and reference, this is an overview of the key takeaways from How to Win Friends and Influence PeopleRead the whole book to get the most benefit from Carnegie’s lessons.

Think of How to Win Friends and Influence People, as oil for the gears of society.

1. “Don’t criticize, condemn, or complain.”

It just makes people defensive and breeds resentment. Criticizing and condemning makes it harder for someone to admit they are wrong, because they now feel the desire to justify their actions or thoughts. Even if they change their ways, it will not be lasting.

2. “Give honest and sincere appreciation.”

Everyone wants to feel needed and important. Those who fulfill this craving for others will be held in high esteem. But it is easy to tell shallow flattery from actual recognition of good qualities and hard work. Look for qualities worthy of commending. Continue reading

Lord of the Rings: Right and Wrong Don’t Change Because of Strange Times

Last summer I wrote a series of posts on Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, describing how Tolkien’s classic trilogy uses the ring as an allegory for the evils of government power; that is, a power unrestrained by natural law. Continue reading

Flight Grounded: A Novella By Joe Jarvis

My second major work of fiction has been published! A fast paced dystopian thriller, Flight Grounded follows a Vermont man named Jake Evans as he flees from agents of the state in an attempt to escape to Canada after being accused of carrying out a terrorist attack. Continue reading

Lord of the Rings: Let’s Use the Power for Good!

‘True hearted men, they will not be corrupted. We of Minas Tirith have been staunch through long years of trial. We do not desire the power of wizard-lords, only strength to defend ourselves, strength in a just cause. And behold! in our need chance brings to light the Ring of Power. It is a gift, I say; a gift to the foes of Mordor. It is mad not to use it, to use the power of the enemy against him…’

‘And they tell us to throw it away!’ he cried. ‘I do not say destroy it. That might be well if reason could show any hope of doing so. It does not.’ Boromir, Lord of the Rings, The Fellowship of the Rings

Essentially Boromir is saying that all we need is the right people in positions of power, and everything will be fine. But he leaves out the important part about how we will make sure only good men are in positions of power, especially when power attracts the worst type of men.

Boromir’s folly is that he trusts men, even himself, with power. And how tempting it can be! If I was dictator of earth right now, I could create a paradise! But would I? Reason suggests such is impossible. As noble as I know myself to be, I cannot predict what that sort of power would do to me. Would I, would anyone, really be able to give up that type of power of force? Slowly the control would take over, and we would make excuses for ourselves as to why we needed to continue our rule. Just around the corner would always be the goal that if reached, surely we would give it up!

What I love is that Boromir admits that destroying the ring would be the best option, but that it is impossible to do so. I often hear people tell me that anarchy sounds good in theory, but reason shows no hope of attaining such freedom. So instead, they say, agreeing with Boromir, we must wield power in order to eradicate the world of evil… and then maybe we can destroy the ring.

This is sort of the same thing the communists said. We don’t want to keep the power once there is a dictatorship, we just need to eliminate the evil exploiters of the proletariat, and then control will be abolished, and everyone will live on in peace and equality forever. But people like Lenin and Stalin never destroyed the ring, they kept in and wielded it for either, just as all had before them.

Boromir is noble, yet before the first book is over he has attempted to take the Ring of Power from Frodo by force. Its allure is too strong for him. Even though he truly desires the Ring to protect Gondor and Middle Earth from Mordor, even outside his possession the Ring manifests evil through him. He was willing to steal from Frodo, to violently rob him at least, in order to gain power, the power of force.

As treacherous and unattainable as it may seem to destroy the Ring, it is the only option for lasting good to reign. If any remnant of legitimized force remains, then it is only a matter of time until Sauron rises again. This is why any bit of government that exists will eventually grow itself into evil that dominates all it touches.

We must start from the position that force is never okay, but only agreement and mutual benefit. Never can a peaceful individual who has harmed no one be deprived of his labour, life, or freedom. It must be recognized that anyone who inflicts such damage on him, even under the guise of government, through taxes, or “the greater good”, must be punished accordingly based on his transgression.

Destroy the Ring, destroy the power of force, for it is the only option if we are to hence forth recognize any aggression as wrong. No “necessary” evil, no brutal force to make the trains run on time, no local authority with the power of force, under the excuse that it is too small to ever become evil.

Force itself is evil, and it must never be given an excuse, or a disguise in the form of government.

Press Release: Anarchy in New England

Local author writes first novel examining an anarchist society

Hopedale resident Joe Jarvis, 26, has written his first novel, a futuristic account of a peaceful anarchist society and those who attempt to seize power through lies, intimidation and murder.

The novel, published by Free Press Publications, is entitled Anarchy in New England. It is the culmination of years of research and writing on politics, which led Jarvis to the conclusion that the best government is actually no government at all.

“Anarchy in New England introduces people to a radical shift from standard political thought. I want to change the debate from, ‘How much government do we need?’ to ‘Do we need government?’” Jarvis said.

The book is available on Amazon.com in both print and e-book formats.

Jarvis, who grew up in Hopedale was always interested in politics and has volunteered on several local campaigns. Jarvis earned a bachelor’s degree in Sociology from Framingham State University and has written a daily political blog, JoeJarvis.me, since 2012. During that time, however, his political philosophy shifted from conservative to anarchist, and he searched for an engaging medium to share his views.

“I remember thinking that I wanted someone to make an anarchist TV show, just to showcase how society would function without government, without having to explain it in confusing or boring terms,” Jarvis said.

“I couldn’t really produce a TV show, but I could write, so I decided it was better to start writing a book to showcase how that sort of society would function. The conflict in the book naturally grew out of people’s first reaction to hearing about an anarchist society: what if someone tries to take over?”

Set in New England in the year 2115, Anarchy in New England introduces the reader to a thriving society that has rebuilt itself a century after economic and societal collapse. Two corrupt businessmen, whose companies are failing, are looking to return that society to an earlier form that benefits them: one in which there is a government and in which they are in charge. They employ hitmen and drug addicts, shut down communications systems and storm security companies to seize control. But a team of freedom-minded individuals, led by an investigative reporter, seek to expose the pair and stop their coup before it is too late.

While Anarchy in New England is a fictitious thriller meant for entertainment, Jarvis said he hopes it will expose people to the idea of anarchy as a viable option for society and expose the downsides of the current system.

“I want people to start seeing the difference between economic and political power,” he said. “Economic power comes from agreement, from mutual benefit, and from serving your fellow man. You can’t get his money without offering something valuable in exchange for his money. Political power comes from force. You take what you want.”

In a free market, he continued, “no one can force you to buy their product. You can disassociate with whomever you like. That is crucial, the freedom of association. Let people organize themselves, and the elements in society that you don’t like, you don’t have to deal with.”

For someone who was originally a registered Republican, Jarvis said it took him some time for his viewpoints to transition first to a libertarian mindset and then complete anarchist. The stunning, war-zone-like security he experienced trying to get near the Republican National Convention in 2012 helped add to his disillusionment about the Republican Party.

Later, a week at the Porcupine Freedom Festival in Lancaster, New Hampshire put him in touch with like-minded people who espoused the non-aggression principle, which Jarvis sums up as not initiating force against another person. Anarchy is the logical position when subscribing to this principle, Jarvis said.

“I am proud that I have made a transition across a political spectrum, because that is more than a lot of people can say. It isn’t changing just for change’s sake though, it is adopting what can be objectively classified as truth, and rejecting lies, errors and fallacies,” Jarvis said.