77 votes

An Anarchist's Frustration

You believe that war is just when an American flag is present on the battlefield. I do not.

You say that taxation is the price we pay for civilization. I disagree.

You claim that men with guns and badges have a higher claim on my life and property because they were elected, or appointed, to a position of power. I am offended.

You think that an organization who has the final say in any disagreement, even involving itself; a monopoly on aggressive force; the sole power to declare legal tender; and the ability to fund itself through involuntary means isn't going to abuse this power? I know better.

Yet somehow, I am the idealist?


I know many liberty lovers are not anarchists, as I am, but surely you understand my frustration when someone claims, "Oh, you're just being idealistic."

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You ignored my question

You ignored my question entirely. Try again.

You didn't really ask a question

You made the assertion that anarchism is pacifism, and I was pointing out that it isn't. You implied anarchy had been described to you in the past that way, and welcomed clarification on the subject. So I addressed justifiable violence in a free society. If you have another question you want me to address, you will need to ask it.


Damn, and here I thought the question mark denoted a question.

No one has the authority to govern, so who has the authority to stop people from governing?

I am a Minarchist and a Deist.

it just seems obvious to me that we humans do need to cooperate together in an organized fashion.
it also seems obvious to me that we humans tend to create and want for there to be a "GOD"

if we simply follow the political concepts that are our common heritage. there can be peace. and we can all get along.

I am an American and we were founded on the political concepts of Natural Law and Liberty

America founded on liberty?

That is a lie believed by way to many.
Remember slavery? America condoned slavery by law.
America murdered indians by the millions.
America was based on force and the initiation of violence against the majority by the minority.

sure sure

our roots are grass roots.

The 13 independent colonies came together to fight off a common enemy. The number one american original political concept everyone forgets is fractured and competing power centers.

move back from the constitution though, lets go back to the originals. The declaration of Independence and the articles of the confederation. These independent colonies fought the worlds greatest empire under the articles.

Only big government types claim the articles didn't work! Of course they didn't work for the statists! Then they conveniently miss labeled them selves the federalists. Never should have allowed the power to get centralized.

Now we have a standing army looking for place to fight in time of peace. Not literally, but the Masters of War sure know how to keep the money flowing to them. Seriously give them a read, they aren't bad.



close all the bases, Mouth ball ever Plane at Tuscon, Cut every ship into Scrap steel, empty every land based missile silo...the only thing you can keep are the nuclear warhead subs until everyone else agrees to disarm.

This is hilarious.

Someone said the word "anarchy" and some of you guys are losing your shit.

Btw, Rockwell, Woods, Murphy, Dilorenzo, et al. are ALL libertarians. They just happen to be AnCaps instead of Minarchists.

what is an AnCap please.

I hope you don't answer anarco-capitalist.....

Yes, that's right.

Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, Bob Murphy, and even Judge Napolitano are all Anarcho-capitalists!

Perhaps even the good doctor himself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoUrrlbDoVs

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com

"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

You got it.

You got it.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton Forest Dutton, MD, in his 1916 book whose subject is origin (therefore what all healing methods involve and count on), simple and powerful.

I am NO anarchist, not of any

I am NO anarchist, not of any stripe. I'm a constitutionalist, and the constitution up to amendment 20 or so, except for maybe two amendments, exhibits libertarianism, the condition liberty, whose name in nature is freedom, the dominion of being -- of thinking and acting -- free.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton Forest Dutton, MD, in his 1916 book whose subject is origin (therefore what all healing methods involve and count on), simple and powerful.


Where we are now is a logical and inevitable progression from where we started. You cannot give power to people without that power being abused and then used against the masses.
History is completely clear on this fact.

I couldn't disagree more with

I couldn't disagree more with your first premise.

To believe your first premise is to believe mankind, including you, stockoneder, is corrupt. I think you are not corrupt, stockhoneder. Not only do I think man isn't corrupt and that I think man is good, I acknowledge something you probably know but for some reason omitted in your comment: the banksters.

Until anarchists discuss the banksters, whose leader I think is Rothschild, which is to discuss history instead of pleasant-but-false stories influencing Americans to think so wrong about their country (and the world, consequently) that they enslave themselves, the anarchist's argument and activity play into the control, not influence but control, of the banksters. Moving from one extreme to the other is the recipe for failure, particularly if that movement is without ending what compelled, what caused, it.

stockoneder, I hope you rethink your liberty prescription. The Constitution is the cure. Perhaps long after the United States has settled into normalcy, the American populace by then entrenched in liberty would move into anarchism, but it probably wouldn't.

If nothing else, stockoneder, promote constitutionalism as the step to anarchism, the middle ground between statism and anarchism; although I think you and I can agree constitutionalism is close to anarchism. After all, the constitution is a defensive instrument, an instrument of restraint, on the federal government and an excellent reference for state governments if their constitutions don't already display freedom's principles. Because, going right to anarchism while life is how it is will produce misery eternally for everyone except the controllers, the banksters. Their control is inordinate. (Research, please, and allow the dots and connections among them materialize, and let where a void is speak for itself. There're enough dots and connections to deduce what should occupy the voids. The research is long, deep and wide, but it does exist.)

Government isn't bad, the Rothschilds and their henchmen are bad. As the months go by, stockoneder, pay attention to whether your fellow anarchists discuss the banksters and how they, the anarchists, do if they do. Do they advocate nothing less than imprisoning the banksters? Or do those like minded people of yours just not talk about the banksters? Be objective, let your environment inform you of itself, let those people in your circle show you their knowledge and intents.

Believing the congregation of people named government is bad without addressing how today's government came to fruition consigns one's self to slavery, misses the obvious in life and dismisses what you talked favorably about, history, the study of mankind's events, and all other studies, all other endeavors.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton Forest Dutton, MD, in his 1916 book whose subject is origin (therefore what all healing methods involve and count on), simple and powerful.

Taxation is "legal" under the

Taxation is "legal" under the constitution. Do you believe any group of people should be able to take property, for the 'greater good' or otherwise? Granted if the constitution had the power to limit the State, it would be tolerable, but so far it has been in capable of doing so.

"War is a Racket" - Maj. General Smedley Butler


nope, you're right on all counts...

but fabian socialism was enacted over many years. and i dont think we're going to convince many people of the present generations of the practicality of a stateless society. Ron Paul has essentially said the same thing. But we can convince people of the wisdom of the founder's vision and the original intent of the constitution. we need some reverse-fabianism- along with newly asserted state and local home rule. im for succession, nullification- all of the above!

Visit https://soundcloud.com/politics-of-freedom for all recent Ron Paul interviews, speeches, debates, forums, panels, press conferences, news coverage, and Texas Straight Talk updates!

"Terrorism is the war of the poor, while war is the terrorism of

you dont

Sound like an anarchist. You sound like you want life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness .

That's what an anarchist is,

That's what an anarchist is, a lover of individual rights, property rights, non-aggression, and the upholding of contracts.

This is true despite the ignorant comments thrown out by those who haven't even read into any anarchist literature.

If you think that an anarchist is the type of person depicted in The Ramones' "Anarchy in the U.K." then you have succumb to state propaganda.

It is funny that a political ideology that rejects the initiation of violence is dubbed as violent.

Anarchy=Chaos is a fine example of newspeak.

We were

saying the same thing there. I was just saying how alike they are.

Anarchy in the UK was the Sex

Anarchy in the UK was the Sex Pistols, stupid ass.

Hmm, why the downvotes?

When you're right, you're right.

Political beliefs aside for a moment; why do you choose to respond with such hostility in this thread? Why not treat others how you'd like to be treated?

Perhaps I've answered my initial question...

A signature used to be here!

That's funny. Perhaps you

That's funny. Perhaps you should actually look up some anarchist literature and history.

Your clearly the ignorant one on this.

You have links! There are 50 of us hear that can't figure out what you are talking about. The Anarchists from High School History propaganda, were a fiction made to create people like you.

Prove me wrong and I will apologize.

Free includes debt-free!

I don't need to post links

I don't need to post links study yourself. A simple "anarchist history" on google might get you started. Unlike you I know my history and I also know how to think rationally. Which obviously you don't.

My studies indicate that you are ignorant and abusive.

Not to mention a tendency towards megalomania.

You have nothing to say and give nothing but excuses.

Free includes debt-free!

That's what Anarchists do, misportray themselves.

That's what Anarchists do, pretend that Anarchy leads to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

They're two faced liars who just want to get rid of Government because it stands between them and their hopes to create a free market of violence where they can take life, take liberty, and serve their happiness without the fear of facing justice.

Your are either a fruitcake or a droid.

Either way you come across as inhuman.

Your shooting blanks.

Free includes debt-free!

exactly. They want to be the

exactly. They want to be the big boss and they think some guise of anarchy will get them there. They're so sad that they can't get their thugs and take anything they want.

Yeah, who is this

Yeah, who is this they?

Murray Rothbard, one of Ron Paul biggest influences, is an anarchist.

So? Does that mean he agrees

So? Does that mean he agrees with everything he says? Do you think if Ron Paul would have been elected he would completely abolish the government or even think that was a wise choice? His ideology is to follow the founders. And wait a minute, yup the founder's weren't stupid enough to believe some fantasy.

Actually the Federalist wanted a Constituion to pay war debts.

The Anti-Federalist where opposed to their plan, preferring the Articles of Confederation which denigrated central control of the kind espoused by Alexander Hamilton and later promoted by Marx and Lincoln.

Free includes debt-free!