Samuel Francis argued that the problems of managerial state extend to issues of crime and justice. In 1992, he introduced the word “anarcho-tyranny” into the paleocon vocabulary.[14] Francis argued that this situation extends across the U.S. and Europe but especially the UK. While the government functions normally, violent crime remains a constant, creating a climate of fear (anarchy) and the UK has a history of this and it continues to this day. He says that “laws that are supposed to protect ordinary citizens against ordinary criminals” routinely go unenforced, even though the state is “perfectly capable” of doing so. While this problem rages on, government elites concentrate their interests on law-abiding citizens. In fact, Middle America winds up on the receiving end of both anarchy and tyranny.[14] Other paleos have expanded upon Francis’ original idea. Paleolibertarian Lew Rockwell extended it to foreign policy, saying that the U.S. military unleashed this condition on the Iraqis.[15] Fleming argues that the breakdown of the American system leaves a "country with a civilized elite class sitting on top of a powder-keg of anarchic welfare-dependents who can defy the government." This gives "encouragement to our own domestic rabble," endangering Middle America: >>Does anyone remember the Rodney King riots? Watts? What happens every time a big city wins or loses a Superbowl [sic] or NBA championship? The next time you are in a large crowd – at a downtown pop concert or metro station – look around and imagine how many people on the street, if the lights went out and the cops disappeared, would be pulling the gold fillings out of the teeth in your dead body.[16] Jerry Pournelle provides his own variation on this theme: >>We do not live by rule of law, because no one can possibly go a day without breaking one or another of the goofy laws that have been imposed on us over the years. No one even knows all the laws that apply to almost anything we do now. We live in a time of selective enforcement of law.[17] **Francis argues that anarcho-tyranny is built into the managerial system and cannot be solved simply by fighting corruption or voting out incumbents. In fact, he says that the system generates a false “conservatism” that encourages people to act passively in the face of perpetual revolution. He concludes that only by devolving power back toward law-abiding citizens can sanity be restored.[14]** In addition, Thomas Fleming describes anarcho-tyranny as "law without order: a constant busybodying about behavior that does not at all derive from a shared moral consensus."[18] He suggests stoicism as a survival skill. He wrote, the only response to this regime is to follow the boxing referee's advice: protect yourself at all times… The only freedom we have is the moral freedom that even ancient slaves enjoyed. Read Epictetus.[18]