• Peaceful Anarchy: Imagine A Society Without the State

    Email Print

    by Gary D. Barnett: Voting:
    The ‘God’ That Failed!



    am an anarchist. I suppose you came here, the most of you, to see
    what a real, live anarchist looked like. I suppose some of you expected
    to see me with a bomb in one hand and a flaming torch in the other,
    but are disappointed in seeing neither. If such has been your ideas
    regarding an anarchist, you deserved to be disappointed. Anarchists
    are peaceable, law-abiding people. What do anarchists mean when
    they speak of anarchy? Webster gives the term two definitions – chaos
    and the state of being without political rule. We cling to the latter
    definition. Our enemies hold that we believe only in the former."
    ~ Lucy Parsons

    we look at the record of mass murder, exploitation, and tyranny
    levied on society by governments over the ages, we need not be loath
    to abandon the Leviathan State and … try freedom." ~ Murray N. Rothbard

    Anarchy in
    its purest form is based on peaceful behavior and voluntaryism in
    a stateless society, while government is based on aggression, theft,
    force, and deceit. These two systems are completely opposite. The
    only moral social system worth having has to adhere to the ideas
    of non-aggression, private property, free and voluntary exchange,
    and self-responsibility. This ideology is based entirely on the
    individual as sovereign. A political order where the individual
    is not sovereign, such as what we have now in this country, is the
    type of system that eventually leads to tyranny and serfdom. We
    are already far along in that process.

    In my opinion,
    peaceful anarchy as a near perfect social system must go unchallenged,
    because anarchy is based on the truism that the individual is sovereign.
    Philosophically, anarchy is the only workable system if freedom
    is the desired goal. All other political systems are based on a
    top-down structure, with those in charge holding power over all
    others. This type of structure, which is our current political system,
    is simply one of force, and force is the antithesis of liberty.

    While to me
    this seems to be not only simple but also logical, to most others
    this thinking is blasphemous. The mere mention of anarchy causes
    grave reactions from those from the "elite" class to the
    common laborer. No one it seems understands the simple concept of
    anarchy, and certainly can't grasp the concept of anarchy as a viable
    social system. This says a lot about the "success" of
    the government indoctrination prisons called "public"
    schools. Obviously, the worship and acceptance of the State is now
    the primary driver in the American thought process. This is unfortunate.

    Those who believe
    that anarchy is chaos without justice fail to understand that anarchists
    simply want to be left alone. The fact that they want to be left
    alone should naturally convey that they also don't want to infringe
    upon the liberty of others. Self-rule means that one's life is directed
    from within instead of being controlled from without. This concept
    should not be foreign to any man who desires to enjoy a free life.
    But it is this simple notion that escapes so many.

    simple humans are a mixture of good and bad, so believing that a
    stateless society will remedy all ills is silly. The idea of anarchy
    assumes that most will not aggress against others, and that voluntary
    cooperation will be a primary factor for success. This of course
    seems impossible given our circumstances today, but any critical
    thought should help to relieve the fears of most.

    If we all were
    self-reliant and self sufficient, if no forced welfare existed,
    if taxation was abolished, if positive law was not a part of society,
    would the manner of men change? If no standing armies were allowed,
    would wars cease? If the only act of force tolerated were for self-defense,
    would crime lessen? If none could benefit at the expense of another,
    would cooperation replace extortion? If no man ruled another, would
    there be incentive for peaceful and voluntary behavior? In my view,
    the answer to all these questions is a resounding yes! Would this
    kind of society be perfect … Of course not, because people are not
    perfect. No societal system can be perfect. But a system without
    the state would at least offer us the best chance for a long and
    peaceful existence, and one without the chains of governmental tyranny.

    Our society
    has long been force-fed the propaganda that we cannot survive and
    prosper without the State. Our training in such matters begins at
    a very early age and continues throughout our lives. The transformation
    from a somewhat free society to our current one of servitude has
    taken a long time, but it has happened nonetheless. Now, most in
    this country are knowingly or unknowingly dependent on the government
    in one fashion or another, but many more thrive exclusively on government
    largess, and due to government protectionist practices. Did this
    happen accidentally or did it happen by design? I think the latter
    is the obvious answer to this question.

    Given that
    the masses of people in this country believe so strongly in "their"
    government, what has that government done to deserve this confidence?
    What has the state brought us? What has been accomplished due to
    our political system these past two hundred plus years?

    • Standing
    • Continuous
      war and mass murder
    • Massive
      progressive taxation
    • State-sponsored
    • Eminent

    • Central
      banking and the Federal Reserve
    • Destruction
      of our money
    • The "War
      on Drugs"
    • The largest
      prison system in the world with the highest incarceration rate
    • Government
    • FDA
    • EPA
    • TSA
    • NSA
    • CIA
    • FBI
    • Military
      Commissions Act
    • Killer Drones
    • Guantanamo
    • Torture
    • Rendition
    • Police brutality
    • Imperialism
    • Wiretapping
      and spying
    • Illegal
    • Bailouts
    • Monopoly
    • Recessions
    • Depressions

    I could of
    course go on and on as this is a partial list, but I think the picture
    is clear. If this is what the State produces, how could a stateless
    society be worse? As I see things, it could not! Just imagine how
    different life would be if all the horrible things mentioned above
    were removed from our society. Imagine peace? Imagine a country
    of non-aggressive individuals working strictly through voluntary
    efforts? Imagine that all your property, including your own body,
    is yours and yours alone to do with as you see fit? Just imagine?

    N. Rothbard
    was one of the staunchest defenders of a stateless
    society, and presented here
    a great argument for anarchism as a social system. Once those skeptical
    souls who hunger for authority instead of freedom are shown the
    way to clear those imaginary anarchy hurdles, progress has a chance
    to flourish. This is no easy task, but if enough are shown the way,
    could it happen? Could it be successful? I think that it could,
    but major obstacles would first have to be removed.

    obstacles I speak of are those that allow one to prosper at the
    expense of another. If all government forced welfare were eliminated,
    all would then be forced to take care of themselves and their own.
    This alone would make a huge difference in the minds of the masses.
    Immediately, self-reliance and self-responsibility would become
    necessary for life to continue. When the majority of society is
    self-responsible, liberty is the natural result, and becomes the
    driving force of that society.

    Accepting the
    idea of sovereignty of the individual brings much responsibility,
    but that responsibility leads to a freer society. A freer society
    leads to a society based upon voluntary cooperation. Voluntary cooperation
    is the basis for free markets. Voluntary cooperation and free markets
    leads directly to prosperity.

    It is time
    to break the chains of government and try freedom. It is time to
    throw off rule by the few for rule by self. Government has failed
    and failed miserably every time it has been tried. Why then continue
    along this path of failure? Why continue to allow rule over of the
    many by the few?

    A stateless
    society has not the power to destroy the individual. I say abolish
    the State!

    1, 2011

    D. Barnett [send him mail]
    is president of Barnett Financial Services, Inc., in Lewistown,

    Best of Gary D. Barnett

    Email Print
  • Political Theatre

  • LRC Blog

    LRC Podcasts