So my niece asked me to sponsor her daughter’s cheerleading team in Ascension Parish, for the Lake Elementary School Cheerleading Squad upcoming 2026–2027 season. I went ahead and did the Gold Sponsorship. So they will be displaying the Property and Freedom Society Podcast and logo on the team sign and on the team sponsor shirt. nb @propfreedom
Now this is how you make new libertarians, people! Activism!! FYMNR!
Gotta help them gals out, shah!
https://t.co/sShQBqXoCM
2026-2027 Lake Cheer Sponsorship Form
Dear Potential Sponsor,
The Lake Elementary School Cheerleading Squad is currently raising funds for our upcoming 2026–2027 season. Cheerleading can be costly, and many of the expenses fall directly on the families of our athletes. We are reaching out to local businesses and individual supporters to help make this season possible. Any donation—large or small—will help support the team and offset the costs associated with our activities.
The Lake Elementary Cheerleaders proudly represent our school at numerous events throughout the year, including football and boys’ and girls’ basketball games, as well as other school sporting events. The team also participates in clinics that promote safety and proper cheer techniques. In addition, our cheerleaders play an active role in school assemblies and events while maintaining high academic standards as student-athletes.
Beyond supporting our school, the squad competes at both State and Regional competitions with the goal of earning a bid to the UCA Nationals in Orlando, Florida. Over the past five years at UCA Nationals, our team has achieved remarkable success, including two 4th-place finishes and an 8th-place finish. In 2025, our cheerleaders made school history by winning their first National Championship. They continued that success during the 2025–2026 season by becoming back-to-back National Champions.
We are excited to build on this momentum and strive for continued excellence in the upcoming 2026–2027 season. Our program is dedicated to inspiring young women to be outstanding student-athletes—demonstrating leadership, discipline, and pride both in the classroom and on the competition mat.
Thank you for considering supporting the Lake Elementary Cheerleading Squad. Your generosity helps our athletes continue to grow, compete, and represent our school with pride.
Sincerely,
Lake Elementary Cheerleading Squad
BRONZE SPONSOR – $100 – $249
Your business name on our team sponsor shirt.
A personal Thank-You Card from our team.
SILVER SPONSOR – $250 – $499
Your business name on our team sign. The sign will be displayed at all Lake Elementary home sporting events or in front of the school.
Your business name on our team sponsor shirt.
A personal Thank-You Card from our team.
GOLD SPONSOR – $500+
Your business name and logo on our team sign. The sign will be displayed at all Lake Elementary home sporting events or in front of the school.
Individual thank you social media post with logo.
Your business name on our team sponsor shirt.
A personal Thank-You Card from our team.
Please consider donating to the Lake Elementary School Cheerleading Squad. We look forward to representing Louisiana and the communities of Ascension Parish!
Friday Lecture: ‘Adjudicating over Anarchy: Judicial Remedies, Compliance and Enforcement in International Law’ – Prof Geraldo Vidigal, University of Amsterdam Without the ability to mobilise coercive measures, international adjudicators must rely on their authority to influence real-world outcomes. This lecture considers the origin and conceivable uses of the authority of international adjudicators. International courts’ influence relies on their ability to mobilise, through mere authoritative communications, the different internal and external forces that shape state behaviour, influencing the views of individuals within states and shaping mutual expectations of cooperative and sanction-worthy behaviour. For this, international courts have at their disposal a variety of communicative instruments: their judicial remedies. Though all judicial remedies are, at their core, modalities of interpretation and application of norms, their varied focuses allow adjudicators to calibrate the exercise of their authority. The lecture develops on concepts outlined in Dr. Vidigal’s 2026 monograph, Adjudicating over Anarchy: Judicial Remedies, Compliance, and Enforcement in International Law (Cambridge University Press). The book establishes a fourfold typology of international judicial remedies – Mere Adjudication, Declaration of Breach, Consequential Duties, and Permissible Responses – each targeting a specific element of the international normative framework. Through different remedies, adjudicators interpret the normative framework, establish violations, and determine conduct required to restore lawful relations. The fourth category of remedies, often left untapped, encompasses judicial determinations of permissible responses to breach: what measures other actors may take to respond to violations, compelling wrongdoers to comply with their obligations and provide redress for injury. If fully explored, this fourth category might reshape the prevailing understanding of the relationship between international adjudication and coercive enforcement.
Geraldo Vidigal is Associate Professor at the University of Amsterdam, where he coordinates the LL.M. in International Trade and Investment Law. He is Editor-in-Chief of Legal Issues of Economic Integration, sits on the Editorial Boards of the Journal of International Economic Law and the Latin American and Caribbean Journal of International Law, and is a member of the Executive Council of the Society of International Economic Law. He holds a PhD in Law (University of Cambridge), a Master’s in International Law and International Organisations (Sorbonne – Paris 1), and a Bachelor’s in Law (University of São Paulo). He has been a Senior Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute in Luxembourg, and a Jean Monnet Fellow at the European University Institute, and a Dispute Settlement Lawyer at the World Trade Organization. Besides Adjudicating over Anarchy, he is co-editor (with Kathleen Claussen) of The Sustainability Revolution in International Trade Agreements (Oxford University Press, 2024).
My appearance on Bitcoin Infinity #225, With Knut Svanholm.
Shownotes:
Stephan Kinsella joins the Bitcoin Infinity Show to talk about why you can’t legally own Bitcoin, what the difference between ownership and possession means for self-custody, and whether the July 2026 Coldcard hack was really theft. Knut and Stephan dig into Austrian economics, libertarian contract theory, why fractional reserve banking is harder on a Bitcoin standard, and how Bitcoin could limit the state’s ability to borrow and tax. They also look back at the Property and Freedom Society’s 20th anniversary in Bodrum, Murray Rothbard’s centennial, Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s split with the Mises Institute, and their Austrian economics panel at BTC HEL in Helsinki. [continue reading…]
It started out as an in-joke among us here at TLS; now it’s set to become part of Internet lore, as ubiquitous on Web forums as LOL and “all your base are belong to us” jokes: FYLR!
Initialism for “FUCK YEAH LEW ROCKWELL!”
An exclamation of delight at some wondrous gift bestowed upon the world by the magic of the free market, or triumph at the erosion of some bullshit government department or program, in the form of a winking, semi-serious attribution to the ongoing efforts of heroiclibertarian educator and advocate Lew Rockwell.
Alternatively, an informal pseudonym to be used when making adoring reference to Lew.
More generally, an exclamation in celebration of any occasion of total overwhelming pwnage, such as Lew consistently delivers.
Properly used with exclamation point, no matter where found in a sentence.
FYLR! is gonna be interviewed on Colbert next week, FYLR!!!!!
We’ll know this meme has truly arrived when it merits its own entry on Encyclopedia Dramatica (NSFW). In the meantime, say it with us: FYLR!
That said, the question of Brexit it seems to me is a different one. I was leery of Brexit because one thing I like about being in the US is any young person in any state has the whole country open to him–to move to to work—and this was what a young British person had with the EU. He could move to and work in Spain or France or Amsterdam whatever if he wanted to. Sort of like in the US. So if I was a young person in Britain I would have opposed Brexit. Yes, yes, despite all the problems with centralization and Brussells.
That said, the question of Brexit it seems to me is a different one. I was leery of Brexit because one thing I like about being in the US is any young person in any state has the whole country open to him–to move to to work—and this was what a young British person had with the EU. He could move to and work in Spain or France or Amsterdam whatever if he wanted to. Sort of like in the US. So if I was a young person in Britain I would have opposed Brexit. Yes, yes, despite all the problems with centralization and Brussells.
nb @GabbSean
Fascinating recent lecture by Dr. Luke Dimitrios Spieker at Cambridge on the theory of democracy as interpreted by the CJEU, the Court of Justice of the European Union, where it considered Malta’s institutionalized “golden passport”/citizenship-by-investment scheme (the 2020 Citizenship by Naturalisation for Exceptional Services by Direct Investment scheme) and ruled that it violated EU law.
Abstract
The CJEU’s decision in Commission v Malta marks the summit of a long-standing, highly controversial debate in European legal scholarship. Considering the Maltese practice of “golden passports” incompatible with EU law, the Court expanded the reach of EU law and established constraints for the conferral of the Member States’ nationalities. At its heart, the decision developed a shared concept of nationality based on a “special relationship of solidarity and good faith”. To justify this bold step, the Court mobilized EU values: “Union citizenship” – we are told – “is based on the common values contained in Article 2 TEU”. In this talk, we will explore how EU values may require a shared concept of nationality and justify the genuine link-requirement established by the Court. At its centre are the notions of democracy and trust, solidarity and belonging. Ultimately, it seems that the Court embraced a communitarian understanding of citizenship – one that builds on belonging.
Biography: Dr Luke Dimitrios Spieker is a postdoctoral researcher at Humboldt University Berlin and a Senior Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law. His research explores EU law’s constitutional foundations, including its common values and structural principles as well as Union citizenship and fundamental rights. He has been awarded several prizes, such as the Heinz Meier-Leibnitz-Prize of the German Research Foundation, the UACES Best Book Prize, or the Common Market Law Review Prize for Young Academics.
In its Grand Chamber judgment of 29 April 2025 in Commission v Malta (Case C-181/23), the CJEU held that by operating a scheme that granted Maltese nationality (and thereby Union citizenship) in exchange for predetermined payments or investments—essentially commercializing nationality—Malta failed to fulfill its obligations under Article 20 TFEU (Union citizenship) and Article 4(3) TEU (sincere cooperation). The Court found that such transactional naturalization does not establish the required “special relationship of solidarity and good faith” between the state and its nationals. [continue reading…]
This is my conversation on Liquid Zulu’s Twitter Space (@PunishedZulu), recorded Oct. 12, 2026. Topics discussed include why property rights require scarcity, the case against IP as non-consensual negative servitudes, critiques of Locke, Rand, and utilitarian arguments, Objectivism and Atlas Shrugged, AI training and copyright liability, international IP treaties, and whether Bitcoin can be owned.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with the shadow on the wall. Speak what you think [90]now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict everything you said to-day.—”Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.”—Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras[186] was misunderstood, and Socrates,[187] and Jesus, and Luther,[188] and Copernicus,[189] and Galileo,[190] and Newton,[191] and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood. 1
Join us for a live conversation with renowned libertarian legal scholar, patent attorney, and author Stephan Kinsella. We dive deep into the foundations of libertarian legal theory, the fundamental flaws of Intellectual Property (IP), and how genuine property rights are rooted in natural rights and Austrian Economics. [continue reading…]
Recent Comments