Comment: The Anarchist’s Constitution

(See in situ)

The Anarchist’s Constitution

1. There is no Sovereign Immunity. Any Person (or Persons) who commits force, fraud, or trespass against any other Person’s life, body, or property is liable for restitution to repair the victim to their original condition.
2. The Right to be left alone is Absolute. Any Person (or Persons) may deny the use of their life, body, or property to anyone else without any necessity to justify the reasons for their denial.
3. There are no exceptions to these 4 rules.
4. These rules being observed,… do whatever you will.

Is this sufficient for an Anarchist society? Probably not,... but I do believe these four rules are necessary for any such society to work. Ayn Rand, and others, have insisted that there are no unchosen duties, except the duty to leave others alone. Progressives insist that this duty alone is not sufficient for any civil society to function. I think most people would agree. The way I would suggest to resolve this conundrum is that when a person reaches an age where they want to be regarded as an adult, they would sign a contract specifying under what standards of criminal and civil law they would agree to be bound by. Also consider that many problems of arbitraging trade agreements and conflicts largely go away today in the face of the Internet and our ubiquitous communication devices.

Try this experiment with a group of people (think of it as a new party game for political junkies). It would help to have a fairly wide diversity of opinions, but this needs some Liberals/Progressives to really spark. Get a White Board and put the suggested Anarchist Constitution on it. Of course there will be objections it can't work. Good! Now you have all you need to get a very interesting discussion going.

Have your Liberal/Progressives participates put up whatever additional duties they believe should be required. Strongly suggest these additional rules should be universal and timeless; ie., not dependent on current circumstances, but, instead, these rules should be reasonable, understandable, and enforceable at any time and place in history. Now here is where it gets fun to be a Libertarian. Remind your audience that these additional rules/duties are only enforceable under THREAT OF VIOLENCE. I know this is always uppermost on Libertarians' minds, but EVERYONE else tends to run past this real fast, pretending it's not important. We know better. Remind folks that they are not going to be the ones enforcing the rules, but instead, it will most often be people they don't know, don't trust, and don't even like. To really clarify this, you might like to explicitly state that it will ALWAYS be those people your audience is most suspicious of who will be enforcing these given rules. You might think of this as a Libertarian thought experiment to put beside (

I have always found that reminding people that, first, society's rules require violence to enforce them (Government ain't Santa Clause, it's Freddy Kruger!), and second, they don't get to personally pick who is running their government (often, if not usually, or even always, it will be people you really don't want to be making decisions for you, your family, or anyone else you genuinely care about).

Anyway, I offer this thought experiment for your examination. It's purpose is to help you get the Liberal/Progressive advocate away from simply answering all questions with the maxim, "Sovereignty should be based upon Good Intentions, and that's all you need"! Have Fun! Remember to play nice!

Here is the killer come back... a Libertarian will NEVER initiate violence to get their way; every other political ideology HAS to initiate violence to get their way.

"The dearest ambition of a slave is not liberty, but to have a slave of his own."
Sir Richard Burton

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe