Darn Those Libertarians

Dan Agin, writing in HuffPo, is upset at libertarians, and thinks that because we live in a State-dominated society, that it is wrong to use its "services," for which we are forced to pay through the nose. Typical Prog, in other words. He is right, of course, to see that some plutocratic elements use libertarian rhetoric to advance their domination. However, his comparison of today's libertarians to violent, nihilistic "anarcho-communists" of the 19th century is an outrage, typical of what Tom Woods calls the "commissar left." These types want to send us to the camps. It doesn't matter that real libertarianism--Rothardian anarcho-capitalism--is the political philosophy of non-aggression: We hold that the use of  violence or the threat of violence against the innocent is never permissible. Our crime lies, for fascists, communists, conservatives, and progressives, in refusing to love the god of the State.

Yet the State is distilled violence, a "gang of thieves writ large," as Murray said. And a murderous one. How many millions of people has the US killed in its career of wars and foreign interventions? Mr. Agin wants us to love the predator State and think the real threat to all that is good and decent is libertarian anarchists (and Ron Paul) who agree with Jesus Christ, that it is the peacemakers who are blessed, and who seek to employ the Golden Rule, even for the official Other--Muslims, these days. Mr. Agin wants us to happily accept being patted down and robbed for the sake of the banksters, big pharma, and the military-industrial complex. No thanks.

But he is right to worry. Now is the crisis for the giant gang of thieves. Never has a State been bigger or richer or more powerful or more inept than the US. Never has a State been more susceptible to non-violent resistance. Indeed, all we need do, as a first principle, is withhold our consent, as a 16th century anarchist argued. DC can become Ozymandias. (Thanks to Mickey Hobart)