Alongside Night
In my continuing research into what I refer to as a Laissez Faire Stateless Society, I have encountered a lot of new terms attempting to redefine anarchy, which has such a negative connotation in the minds of sheeple. One of them is ‘Voluntaryist.’ I have discovered an interesting and informative website, with the simple URL of voluntaryist.com. Friday evening, I was perusing a section of it entitled, “How I Became a Voluntaryist,” which consists of personal testimonials. While reading Ben Speers’ biographical, “Conscience of a “Former†Conservative,” I encountered:
This idea, that people should be free to do whatever they want apart from initiating violence, crystallized in my mind. Soon I realized that there could be no ethical justifications for exceptions to this rule. This immediately led me to a conclusion that shocked me to the core, for I had never considered it before. The conclusion that I came to was that there was no moral justification for any violence-based government, which is to say any government at all based on the popular definition of government. Logically, the only road left to me was anarchism.
Bingo… welcome to my world! He continued:
SECTION 5: Paradise Found
Once again, I threw myself into research, this time studying anarchy. I came to see that the conflation between anarchy and chaos was a false one. In fact, I became suspicious that the term “anarchy†had been intentionally hijacked by statists looking to smear the one ideology that could really threaten statism. My initial immersion into anarchy was fraught with irony. I discovered the truth of Proudhon’s statement that “Anarchy is order.†And I was very pleasantly surprised, excited even, to discover that numerous ancient Chinese philosophers, including the legendary founder of Daoism, were essentially proponents of anarchy. In fact, Proudhon’s famous postulate is really just an echo of what Lao Tzu is purported to have said thousands of years ago: “I do nothing, and people become good by themselves. I seek peace, and people take care of their own problems. I do not meddle in their personal lives, and the people become prosperous. I let go of all my desire to control them, and the people return to their natural ways.†There is an elegant symmetry in the concept of spontaneous order, just as there is eternal irony in the fact that violence-based ‘order’ always ends up causing massive disorder.Through the miracle of the internet I was able to reach out to what I had previously considered to be the anarchic fringe of libertarianism, which I eventually discovered was really the beating heart of libertarianism. I was ecstatic to learn that there were other people who shared my views. I found that there was even a name for the view on rights which I had previously feared to be held only by me. It was called the non-aggression principle. And people like me, who applied this principle consistently, were calling themselves voluntaryists.
My journey into anarchy is far from over. There are many more subdivisions and factions of anarchism than I had imagined there would be, but I have learned something valuable from all of them, especially agorism and anarcho-tribalism…
Whoa… “agorism?” That was a new one on me, so I looked it up:
Agorism is a libertarian social philosophy that advocates creating a society in which all relations between people are voluntary exchanges by means of counter-economics, thus engaging in a manner with aspects of peaceful revolution. It was first proposed by libertarian philosopher Samuel Edward Konkin III in 1975, with contributions partly by J. Neil Schulman.
Reading the rest of the Wiki article, I discovered that Neil Schulman had written a dystopian science fiction thriller, “Alongside Night” to showcase agorism back in 1979, which received good reviews by names I admire and trust. It was even made into a movie in 2014. Ready for some fiction for a break, I went to Amazon and found the Kindle version of it was only $2.99, so I didn’t even bother with the sample, I went ahead and bought it and started reading it. Big mistake… it is a well-written page turner, and I finally forced myself to stop reading it, and going to bed at 3 AM.
I finished it before midnight Saturday evening, and of course I highly recommend it to anyone interested in libertarian thought. Alas, instead of going to bed at a decent hour, I followed a link in it to the author’s website, where I stumbled across the announcement that the movie is now available for free viewing on Amazon Prime. Like a dummy, being a Prime member, I had to go watch it, and now it is 3 AM again. I suspect most of my readers would also like the movie (Trailer); but as is usually the case, I would highly recommend reading the book first. 🙂 â—„Daveâ–º
Dave, This is a fine notion for the motivated, the educated and the responsible. In other words, those who already get it and do not need our help. Sadly, most of us (today) are simply not prepared to be truly free.
Troy
You are undoubtedly correct, Troy. I recall the profound difficulty the ungrateful East Germans experienced, in dealing with even limited freedom during Reunification, after the Berlin Wall came down. As long as the sheeple stay convinced that the purpose for their pens is to keep the wolves out, they will remain eternally grateful to their shepherds for them. They would surely regard opening their gates as an act of cruelty.
That said, it is estimated that only 3% of Colonists actually participated in the American Revolution. What if they had concluded that their Loyalist neighbors weren’t yet ready for Liberty? Can you imagine them just continuing to suffer the ever-increasing “long train of abuses and usurpations” until more complaisant sheeple could be “educated?” If not, why must we?
The premise of the book was that America was experiencing rampant hyperinflation, and collapsing. The Agorists were fomenting an entirely peaceful revolution, by promoting and participating in an underground black-market economy, based on gold. In the process, the workings of an entirely free-market society, performing the usual functions of government with private enterprise, rather than coercion, are ably demonstrated. Again, like Atlas Shrugged, it is a good read and not nearly as long or pedantic. I promise you would enjoy it. So would J9. 😀 â—„Daveâ–º
I agree with you but never forget that the Founders did construct a system of government and, by intent, only extended the voting franchise to “freemen”.
Giving the sheeple anything other than firm yet fair leadership is a recipe for disaster.
Troy
Not exactly, troy. At first, they merely freed their individual Colonies from the tyranny of the Crown. Common Law and local governments managing local affairs, simply carried on as before. I would have little grief dealing with the society extant at the end of the Revolution in 1783, even with the mutual aid compact known as the Articles of Confederation. At least the busybodies in one ex-colony didn’t have any way to interfere with the personal lives of the residents of another. If one yearning to be free found local rules too stifling, one was free to move to a place more conducive to Liberty, including the lawless frontier.
The mischief by the Federalists in Philadelphia in 1787, to abandon the Articles for a new Constitution, giving much more power to a Federal government, was opposed by many known as the Anti-federalists. It is essentially a product of our own indoctrination in our youth, and that it was infinitely better than the Progressive/socialist tyranny we now suffer, that we regard their work product with reverence. That so many of us have proudly sworn an oath to defend it, is a testament to how easy it is to brainwash the lambs of complaisant sheeple, before they develop the critical thinking skills to honestly critique its value.
Trust me, even though I eventually attained such skills, and have applied them liberally to this topic of late, it still causes me much discomfort to publicly articulate, my apparently unpatriotic conclusions. As Ron Paul famously said, “Truth is Treason in the Empire of Lies.” I have proudly called myself a Patriot all my life; but I must admit that I value Liberty and Truth above Country. C’est la vie… 🙁 â—„Daveâ–º
As far as a Stateless Society goes Laissez Faire or otherwise it appears that genie is out of the bottle never to be returned IMO.
The world is too large and over populated I am afraid.
I did watch the movie … you might be right about reading the book first as I felt somehow there was something I missed. Why I am not quite sure since the plot was fairly straight forward and simple.
Yeah, I was afraid someone might go watch the movie, without having read the book. The author, like Ayn Rand, chose to use engaging fiction to impart a complicated philosophical message, which the average person would not bother to read a textbook to absorb. An action movie plot is made to entertain, and the dialog between characters is generally inadequate to portray the big picture the author of the book was painting.
I have no illusions that a peaceful stateless society could happen in my lifetime. I suspect a chaotic stateless society will result whenever the sheeple finally realize that the almighty dollar is completely worthless. The question then, for me, is how will society’s remnants choose to organize themselves on the other side? After a LOT of careful research and reflection, I think anarchy along the lines of this book, would be the best alternative. 😉 â—„Daveâ–º