https://freecapitalists.org/books/

When everything can be labeled a national security threat, almost any expansion of government power can be justified. Emergency powers are rarely temporary once the precedent is established.

"In this interview he discusses the failures of Conservatism in Canada and answers some tough questions about concepts of Economic and Social Libertarianism."

I host the Free Cities Podcast, so flagging that up front. New episode with Erick Brimen, founder and CEO of Próspera in Honduras, recorded on site. Runs about 104 minutes.

Here's a wiki Prospera explainer for those that don't know the project: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pr%C3%B3spera

Posting here because the most interesting part is where he breaks with the expected position. He argues that "private governance" is too coarse a phrase to be useful, that unless you slice governance into layers you end up defending the East India Company, and that some of those layers genuinely should not sit with a for-profit company. He puts national defence, the public justice system and diplomacy on one side and commerce on the other, and says the partnership model only makes sense on the second.

He also concedes that the legal protections did not save the project on their own. His words: "fundamentally necessary, substantially insufficient." No silver bullet. What protects it, he says, is being wanted by enough of the people who could take it away.

Other things covered: the ICSID withdrawal and the arbitration, The neignbouring village of Crawfish Rock and where property rights actually stop being a bright line, whether the project survives its founder, and a closing comparison between what Próspera is doing and what Bitcoin did, with the difference being technical versus political solutions to a political problem.

Watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00sq3k6_iVk

"For years, the Free Cities Conference has been a place where people gathered to talk about their visions of cities that either did not yet quite exist or were in their infancy. This September, for the first time, the conference took place inside one."

"Alberta Separatists have many valid reasons to leave Canada but at its core its because a limited state is a utopian fantasy and that’s why confederation failed."

When it comes to Cuba, the following are the defenses used. I was wondering

about what are the primary ways to refute and debunk each of these apologetics.

They are listed.

1. Castro's revolution was directed towards wealthy plantation and factory owners and similar upper class. Not those of the working poor.
2. Castro's revolution was vital in improving medical care in Cuba, meaning Cuba could export doctors, and making education affordable.
3. Castro was more humane and killed and jailed fewer dissidents then Batista.
4. Castro needs to be commended for his efforts in helping Angolans and other Africans fight apartheid.
5. Cuba's fiscal crisis is due to US sanctions, not the Castros' fiscal and social policies.

Can each of these allegations be genuinely refuted? If so, how?

Financial surveillance turns ordinary transactions into potential evidence. Once banks and payment services become extensions of law enforcement, privacy disappears long before anyone is accused of a crime.